Iphinoe inermis Sars, 1878

Iphinoe inermis Sars, 1879: 508–510, pl. 17–18; Carus, 1885: 458 (descr. male, female el latin); Stebbing 1913: 4 (redescr. male, female); Fage 1933: 166–169; Fage 1940: 3–4, fig. 1 I; Fage 1944: 113–114, fig. 1; Fage 1951: 46–47, fig. 39; Picard 1965: 174, 273; Gamulin-Brida 1974; 28, 75. Nodot et al., 1984: 152–153.

Material examined. 3 adult males, st. 2; 5 adult males, 2 preparatory males, st. 10.

Remarks. The Iphinoe inermis group is named after Iphinoe inermis (sensu Ledoyer 1965). This species group is characterized by having a shorter first antennae than body length in males. This trait is shared with I. meiotica, although I. inermis has pinnate setae on the uropod peduncle. Moreover, females are characterized by having a CL/ CD ratio of ≥2, a longer pereopod basis than the other articles put together, and a seta formula of 8; 4+11.

The adult females from station 10 have 7 setae and a terminal one on article 2 of the uropod, which were not reported by Ledoyer (1965). The pereopod basis shape is arcuate because it follows the sinuous anterolateral edge of the carapace.

Distribution and ecology. South-western Mediterranean (Sars 1879; Dauvin et al. 2017); north-western Mediterranean (Fage 1933,1951; Ledoyer, 1968; Desbruyères et al. 1972 –1973; Corbera & Cardell 1995); Atlantic Ocean, Canary Islands-Gran Canaria (Corbera et al. 2002); Adriatic Sea (Gamulin Brida 1974). Up to now the presence of I. inermis had been restricted to sectors 8 and 9 of the Bianchi (2004) classification (Marusso 2006), whereas we confirm the presence for area 9 (Table 3).

Iphinoe inermis was found on fine sand by Sars (1879) and Ledoyer (1965), in Cymodocea meadows and fine sand by Corbera et al. (2002), and on infralittoral fine sand by Gamulin Brida (1974). The specimens found in this study confirm a preference for sandy biocenosis.