New littoral, shelf, and bathyal Paratanaidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Tanaidacea) from New Zealand, with descriptions of three new genera
Author
BIRD, GRAHAM J.
Author
BAMBER, ROGER N.
text
Zootaxa
2013
2013-06-17
3676
1
1
71
http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3676.1.1
journal article
10.11646/zootaxa.3676.1.1
11755334
5597797
7AB2D8F5-62F2-46D1-BDE4-BF91D6513797
Paratanais perturbatius
Larsen, 2001
Figures 40
–41
Paratanais perturbatius
: Larsen (2001)
: 372–375, figs 14–15, 16;
paratype
P.54480 figs 14 C–K,
15 in
part
non
maleficus
, =
A. malignus
.
Material examined.
Paratype
:
one non-ovigerous
♀
on microslides, P.54480 [see above]; five cited specimens, P.56434 – one non-ov.
♀
(
2.8 mm
) dissected on microslide.
Diagnosis.
Female:
with
carapace
entire; left
mandible lacinia mobilis
with serrate distal margin;
antennule
without cap-like terminal segment, with apical spur;
antenna
article-2 distally expanded, with inferodistal seta set on small apophysis, article-3 spine acute;
maxilliped
palp article-2 with serrulate spine;
cheliped
palm medial comb with two spines, with sinuate spine near dactylus, dactylus inferior margin with proximal spine;
pereopod-1
merus elongate;
pereopods 2–3
not decreasing in size, basis with superior seta;
pereopods 4–6
merus without seta, meral and carpal spines weakly serrate;
uropod
rami longer than peduncle, endopod two-segmented, exopod onesegmented.
Remarks.
This species appears to be compromised by a description that is almost certainly based on more than one species, which includes
A. malignus
.
The
paratype
examined here, P.54480, was used for Larsen’s figures 14c– k and 15, and is clearly
A. malignus
based on the antennal article-2 setation (Larsen: fig. 14d), shape of the spines on the cheliped palm (
Fig. 40A
) and maxilliped palp article-2 (Larsen: fig.14k), and stout uropod (Larsen: fig. 15i),
inter alia
. The dissected specimen here conforms in general terms to the size and shape of the
holotype
and is not the same species as
A. malignus
or
P. maleficus
. It does possess a cheliped palm sinuate spine and is distinguishable from both the other species by the inferodistal seta on antenna article-2 – similar in this character to the
NZ
P. puia
sp. nov.
While not definitive, in deficit of viewing the
holotype
itself, the figures and diagnosis given here may give a truer representation of
P. perturbatius
.