Metopa boeckii Sars, 1892

Tandberg, Anne Helene S., 2010, A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465, Zootaxa 2465 (1), pp. 1-94 : 10-11

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10537529

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117-FB0D-6676-FF26-ADE2FC7DBCD4

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Metopa boeckii Sars, 1892
status

 

Metopa boeckii Sars, 1892 View in CoL

Metopa boeckii Sars 1892: 252–54 View in CoL , fig. 88

Metopa bruzelii View in CoL —Boeck 1871, non Metopa bruzelii ( Goës, 1866) View in CoL : 522

Metopa borealis View in CoL — Sars 1885 (part)

Metopa boeckii View in CoL — Stephensen 1926: 68, Stephensen 1928: 164, pl. 30:13–15, Stephensen 1931: 186; Stephensen 1938: 173

Metopa boeckii View in CoL — Gurjanova 1951: 423–24, fig. 266

Metopa boeckii View in CoL — Oldevig 1959: 44; Bousfield 1973: 289

Material examined. Morphological examination: F13745 (collect G.O. Sars, Tjøtøy (Helgeland )). Female and male .

Type locality: probably Haugesund, (collected by Boeck and identified by Sars), or Tjøtø, North Norwegian coast .

See figures 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18

Morphological redescription of material collected by original author.

Head ( Fig. 14 View FIGURE 14 ): medium sized and rounded, epistome flat; eyes approximately 1/3 of head length, round, well defined. Antenna 1 ( Fig. 14 View FIGURE 14 ): long and slender, a little longer than half body length; peduncle article 2 longer than article 1; flagellum 12-articulate, longer than flagellum; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 ( Fig. 14 View FIGURE 14 ): subequal in length to antenna 1; peduncle double length of flagellum, articles 4 and 5 subequal in length; peduncle 12-articulate, naked. Mandible ( Fig. 15 View FIGURE 15 ): palp 2-articulate, oval in cross-section, two simple setae at apex; incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate; no molar. Maxilla 1 ( Fig. 15 View FIGURE 15 ): inner plate somewhat reduced, one simple seta; outer plate narrow, four simple setae at distal margin; palp 1-articulate with one tooth and four cuspidate setae at distal margin. Maxilla 2: this mouthpart was lost. Maxilliped ( Fig. 15 View FIGURE 15 ): long and narrow, naked; inner plates fused; outer plate totally reduced; palp slender, 4-articulate.

Pereon ( Fig. 14 View FIGURE 14 ): smooth. Pereopod 1 ( Fig. 16 View FIGURE 16 ): simple; coxa small, subquadrate; basis long and linear, somewhat flat at anterior margin; ischium subquadrate; merus distally not free, but the posterordistal margin produced a little, few long simple and pectinate setae; carpus elongate, several simple setae along posterior margin, few simple and pectinate setae at distal margin; propodus not as long as carpus but as wide as carpus, no palm, but area dactylus meets is delimited by a row of short simple setae; dactylus curved, few simple short setae at inner margin. Pereopod 2 ( Figs. 16 View FIGURE 16 (female) and 17(male)): coxa covering coxa 1, oval (male) to suboval (female), few simple short setae at posterior margin; basis linear; ischium subquadrate; merus spoonshaped, triangular (male) to elongate (female); carpus spoon-shaped, subtriangular, row of simple setae along distal margin; propodus subtriangular, palm oblique (wider angle in male than in female), serrate (more coarsely so in male) and lined with simple setae, palmar corner set off by a strong tooth and a cuspidate seta, hind margin subequal to palm length; dactylus curved, with a flat naked inner margin. Pereopod 3 ( Fig. 16 View FIGURE 16 ): coxa subrectangular, lined with simple short setae at distal margin; rest of leg thin and elongate with linear basis, very few and simple setae; dactylus simple, reaching 0.6x propodus. Pereopod 4 ( Fig. 17 View FIGURE 17 ): coxa subtriangular, rest of leg simple, slightly thicker than P3 and with more simple setae along posterior margin; dactylus curved and simple, reaching 0.75x propodus. Pereopod 5 ( Fig. 18 View FIGURE 18 ): coxa small, weakly produced posteriorly; basis slender; meral lobe reaching 1/3 of carpus; dactylus curved, thin and simple, reaching 0.6x propodus; anterior margin of leg with short simple setae. Pereopods 6 and 7 ( Fig. 18 View FIGURE 18 ): coxae small, coxa 7 produced towards posterior margin of basis 7; bases posteriorly expanded; meral lobes reaching 0.5x and 0.6x of carpus respectively; dactyli smooth, P7 dactylus curved slightly more than that of P6, both reaching 0.6x propodus; anterior margin of legs with simple setae, more dense in P6 than in P7.

Urosome ( Fig. 14 View FIGURE 14 ): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 ( Fig. 18 View FIGURE 18 ): posterodistal corner slightly acute angle. Uropod 1 ( Fig. 18 View FIGURE 18 ): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, rami subequal in length; very slender, few and simple setae both at peduncle and rami. Uropod 2 ( Fig. 18 View FIGURE 18 ): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, one simple seta at distal margin; rami subequal, outer ramus slightly shorter than inner, one simple seta on inner article. Uropod 3 ( Fig. 18 View FIGURE 18 ): uniramous; peduncle longer and wider than ramus, five simple setae along inner margin; ramus 2-articulate, articles subequal, one simple seta at inner article. Telson ( Fig. 17 View FIGURE 17 ): tongue-shaped, length slightly less than 2x width, two pairs of cuspidate setae.

Sexual differences: Gnathopod 2 is different in male and female, the male having a more coarsely serrate palm with a larger tooth at the palmar corner and the palm more oblique than the female.

Distribution: Arctic to Atlantic: Spitsbergen, Norwegian coast, SE Iceland, West Greenland, Gulf of St. Lawrence, see map Figure 64 D View FIGURE 64 .

Ecology: found at depths from 10–170 m.

The name boeckii refers to Axel Boeck, Sars’ colleague, for whom the species was named.

Other material. Material collected during cruises at Spitsbergen 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2009 has also been examined, and been found to be in compliance with the material from Sars.

Remarks. Sars (1892) comments that he earlier had confused this species with Metopa borealis , and that Boeck must have confused it with M. bruzelii , as his specimens were not in accordance with the specimens Goes had for M. bruzelii . He further mentioned that the slender antennae and the shape of gnathopod 2 (for both sexes) should help distinguish this species from the related species. Also the setation (armature) of uropod 3 and telson are mentioned as distinguishing characters.

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Arthropoda

Class

Malacostraca

Order

Amphipoda

Family

Stenothoidae

Genus

Metopa

Loc

Metopa boeckii Sars, 1892

Tandberg, Anne Helene S. 2010
2010
Loc

Metopa boeckii

Bousfield, E. L. 1973: 289
Oldevig, H. 1959: 44
1959
Loc

Metopa boeckii

Gurjanova, E. F. 1951: 423
1951
Loc

Metopa boeckii

Stephensen, K. 1938: 173
Stephensen, K. 1931: 186
Stephensen, K. 1928: 164
Stephensen, K. 1926: 68
1926
Loc

Metopa boeckii

Sars, G. O. & The Crustacea of Norway 1892: 54
1892
Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF