Platythelphusa denticulata Capart, 1952

Reed, Sadie K. & Cumberlidge, Neil, 2006, Brachyura: Potamoidea: Potamonautidae, Platythelphusidae, Deckeniidae (), Zootaxa 1262 (1), pp. 1-139 : 1-139

19. Platythelphusa denticulata Capart, 1952 (Fig. 191, plate XIX)

Platythelphusa denticulata Capart, 1952: 48–50 , figs. 2, 7b; Marijnissen et al., 2004: 530. Potamonautes (Platythelphusa) denticulata — Coulter, 1991: 253, 255, Table 9.XXI. Platythelphusa conculcata —Cumberlidge et al., 1999: 1504 (part only, not figs.).

Diagnosis. Epibranchial tooth large spine; anterolateral margin of carapace behind epibranchial tooth with three sub­equal spines; carpus of cheliped with two large carpal teeth and large pointed articular tooth; external margin of carpus of cheliped with row of small teeth.

Distribution. Endemic to Lake Tanganyika, known only from Tanzanian waters.

Remarks. Capart (1952) provided a brief description and illustrations of this species based on the holotype, a single adult female specimen (cw 46 mm), but expressed uncertainty as to its identity. Later, Coulter (1991) combined Capart’s (1952) taxonomy with that of Bott (1955, 1970) and treated this taxon as Potamonautes (Platythelphusa) denticulata , which he assigned to the family Potamonautidae , the genus Potamonautes and the subgenus Platythelphusa . Cumberlidge et al. (1999) treated P. denticulata as a junior synonym of P. conculcata on the basis of the figure provided by Capart (1952, fig. 2). This shows a distinctive cheliped carpus with two large subequal carpal teeth, a sharp and pointed articular tooth and an outer margin that is lined by a row of long, thin distinct spines. Marijnissen et al. (2004) examined the holotype of P. denticulata and concluded that it should be removed from synonymy with P. conculcata . The latter workers recognized both P. conculcata and P. denticulata as valid species.

Natural history and conservation status. The conservation status of Platythelphusa conculcata is categorized as vulnerable (VU) ( Table 4) because of its limited geographic range (it has a narrow extent of occurrence and a narrow area of occupancy), and because of its potentially low population levels (based on low representation in museum collections and the scarcity of recent additional material) ( IUCN 2004).