Minibiotus diversus, Roszkowska, Daniel Adrian Ciobanu Milena & Kaczmarek, Łukasz, 2015

Roszkowska, Daniel Adrian Ciobanu Milena & Kaczmarek, Łukasz, 2015, Two new tardigrade species from Romania (Eutardigrada: Milnesiidae, Macrobiotidae), with some remarks on secondary sex characters in Milnesium dornensis sp. nov., Zootaxa 3941 (4), pp. 542-564 : 550-558

Minibiotus diversus sp. nov.

http://www.tardigrada.net/register/0019.htm ( Figs 15 – 31 , Tables 3 – 4 )

Material examined: Holotype, 100 paratypes, three exuvia and five eggs.

Description of the adults ( Figs 15 – 16 ) (measurements in µm, pt ratios and statistics in Table 3 ): Body white/yellowish (in live specimens) or transparent (after fixation in Hoyer’s medium). Eyes present. Entire cuticle covered by numerous round or oval pores (0.6 – 4.8 Μm in diameter). Pores are distributed randomly on dorsal side of the body or arranged in more or less regular rows (lines) on ventral side ( Figs 15 – 16 and 19 – 20 ). Large, circular dorsal pores include: 3 – 6 pores (2.2 – 3.2 Μm in diameter) on head region ( Fig. 22 ) and 3 – 5 pores (2.2 – 3.2 Μm in diameter) caudally, just above IV pair of legs ( Figs 23 – 24 ). Large pores (3.1 – 4.8 Μm in diameter) also present on external side of legs I–III (one on each leg) ( Fig. 29 ). Pores on ventral side less densely distributed and arranged in loose bands of 4 – 5 larger pores with smaller pores between ( Fig. 19 ). On ventral side of head a triangular shape is formed by two rows of pores (three pores in first row and two or single pore in second) ( Fig. 21 ). Overall, pores are larger on caudal end, head segment and on external side of legs I – III. A ring of pores around the mouth opening absent. Cribriform areas not visible. A fine granulation on all legs present ( Figs 25 – 28 ).

Mouth antero-ventral. Bucco-pharyngeal apparatus of the Minibiotus type ( Fig. 17 ). Oral cavity armature absent or not visible under PCM. Buccal tube with poorly visible ventral lamina and with an anterior and a posterior bend (both visible in lateral view only). Buccal tube walls just below stylet attachments thickened ( Fig. 17 ). Pharyngeal apophyses triangular or round; close to the first macroplacoid. Three granular macroplacoids and a minute microplacoid present in the round pharyngeal bulb. Septulum absent. All macroplacoids similar, almost identical in size and the macroplacoid length sequence: 1=2 ≅ 3 ( Fig. 17 ).

Claws of the Macrobiotus type ( Figs 18 and 25 – 28 ). Primary branches of claws with thin accessory points. Smooth lunules present on all legs. Bars and other cuticular thickenings on legs absent.

Eggs (all measurements in Table 4 ): White, laid free, spherical and without areolation ( Figs 30 – 31 ). Processes screw-like, each surrounded by a separate membrane ( Fig. 31 ). On the egg circumference 21–22 processes present. Surface between processes smooth under PCM ( Fig. 30 ).

Locus typicus: 47°41'19.6''N, 26°57'36.6''E; 147 m asl: Romania, Botoşani County, Suliţa village, Cozancea Monastery, deciduous forest ( Fagus sylvatica L., Quercus robur L. and Q. petraea L.), moss from tree.

Etymology: In Latin ‘ diversus’ means ‘diverse’ referring to the fact that this species has several different types of pores in the cuticle.

Type depositories: Holotype (slide: MC1-1), 54 paratypes (slides MC1-2, MC1-3, MC1-5, MC1-6, MC1-7, MC1-8, MC1-13) and three eggs (slide MC1-4, MC1-13) are preserved at the Department of Animal Taxonomy and Ecology, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Umultowska 89, 61–614 Poznań, Poland. Additionally, 17 paratypes (slides: MC1-11, MC1-14) and one egg (slide MC1-16) are deposited at Natural History Museum of “Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University from Iaşi, Romania (Bd. Independenţei No.16, 700101), 29 paratypes (slides: MC1-9, MC1-10, MC1-12, MC1-17) and one egg (slide MC1-15) are deposited at collection of Peter Degma, the Department of Zoology, Comenius University, Bratislava, Slovakia.

Differential diagnosis. The new species, in the arrangements of cuticle pores, are most similar to M. gumersindoi Guil & Guidetti, 2005 and in adults and eggs morphology to M. weglarskae Michalczyk et al., 2005 , but it differs from:

M. gumersindoi by: different arrangement of pores on the dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in an undefined number of transverse bands in M. gumersindoi ), the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the absence of triangle/ pentagonal-like formation of pores on legs I – III, presence of granulation on legs, presence of eyes and by slightly longer macroplacoids (mI/mII: 1.1–1.7 Μm; mIII: 1.2–1.7 Μm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs all 1.0 Μm in M. gumersindoi ).

M. weglarskae by: arrangement of pores on the dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in 10 transversal bands in M. weglarskae ), absence of bi-, trilobed and starshaped pores, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of large pores on the external side of legs I – III, stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [54.5–59.6] in M. weglarskae ), a smaller pt of buccal tube internal width ([2.1–3.0] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [4.0–4.7] in M. weglarskae ), slightly larger diameter of eggs without processes (44.9 – 47.8 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 40 µm in M. weglarskae ), slightly larger diameter of eggs with processes (51.5 – 53.9 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 50 µm in M. weglarskae ), slightly smaller number of processes on the egg circumference (21 – 22 in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 24 in M. weglarskae ), shorter egg processes (3.1 – 3.6 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. v.s 5.0 – 5.5 µm in M. weglarskae ), smaller diameter of the distal disc of the processes (3.0 – 3.8 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 5.0 – 5.5 µm in M. weglarskae ) and slightly larger distances between processes (3.6–4.8 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 3.0 µm in M. weglarskae ).

M. diversus sp. nov. is also very similar in some aspects of the adult and/ or egg morphology to: M. bisoctus ( Horning et al. 1978) , M. eichhorni Michalczyk & Kaczmarek, 2004 , M. formosus Zawierucha et al. 2014 , M. furcatus ( Ehrenberg, 1859) , M. harrylewisi Meyer & Hinton, 2009 , M. jonesorum Meyer et al., 2011 , M. keppelensis Claxton, 1998 , M. orthofasciatus Fontoura et al., 2009a , M. poricinctus Claxton, 1998 , M. pustulatus ( Ramazzotti, 1959) , M. ramazzottii Binda & Pilato, 1992 , M. vinciguerrae Binda & Pilato, 1992 and M. xavieri Fontoura et al., 2009b , but it differs from:

M. bisoctus by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in undefined number of transverse bands in M. bisoctus ), absence of bi-, trilobed and starshaped pores, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of large pores on the external side of legs I – III, stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in the new species vs ca. [60.3] in M. bisoctus ) smaller pt of macroplacoid row ([22.3–25.8] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. [31.0] in M. bisoctus (according to Claxton 1998)).

M. eichhorni by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in six transverse bands in M. eichhorni ), absence of star-shaped pores and four pores around the mouth opening, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the presence of large pores on the external side of legs I – III, a different macroplacoid sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in the new species vs 2<3<1 Μm in M. eichhorni ), slightly smaller body size (147 – 200 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 204.3–389.5 µm in M. eichhorni ), shorter buccal tube (19.8 – 23.9 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 24.7 – 34.2 µm in M. eichhorni ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [65.4–70.6] in M. eichhorni ), smaller external width of buccal tube (1.3 – 1.7 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 1.9 – 3.3 µm in M. eichhorni ), shorter placoids (mI/mII: 1.1–1.7 Μm [5.5–7.2]; mIII: 1.2–1.7 Μm [6.0–7.1]; mi: 0.4 – 0.7µm [2.0–3.0] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs mI: 2.9–4.3µm [10.3–12.5]; mII: 1.9–3.1 µm [6.9–9.2]; mIII: 2.4–3.4 µm [9.3–10.6]; mi: 1.1–1.9 µm [4.6–6.1] in M. eichhorni ) and shorter external claws I–IV (I: 4.6–6.0µm; II: 4.7–6.6 µm; III: 4.5–6.2µm; IV: 4.8–7.0 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs I: 6.7 – 10.5 µm; II: 6.7 – 11.4 µm; III: 7.6 – 11.4 µm; IV: 8.6 – 14.3 µm in M. eichhorni ).

M. formosus by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in 9 – 10 transverse bands in M. formosus ), the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of triangular formation of pores on ventral side of the head, the presence rows of pores between the legs, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in M. diversus vs 2<1<3 in M. formosus ), larger single pores on legs I–III (3.1 – 4.8 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2.1 – 2.9 µm in M. formosus ) and different shape of egg processes (screw-like processes within a membrane in M. diversus sp. nov. vs single tip cones without a membrane in M. formosus ).

M. furcatus (according to the re–description, Binda & Pilato 1992) by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in undefined number of transverse bands in M. furcatus ), absence of tri- and quadrilobed cuticular pores, the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, present of large pores on the external side of the legs I–III, presence of granulation on legs, absence of the oral cavity armature, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in M. diversus vs 2<3<1 in M. furcatus ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus vs ca. [68.4] in M. furcatus ) and a different shape of egg processes (screw-like processes within a membrane in M. diversus sp. nov. vs single tip cones without a membrane in M. furcatus ).

M. harrylewisi by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in 10 transverse bands in M. harrylewisi ), absence of tri- and quadrilobed cuticular pores, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2≤3<1 in M. harrylewisi ), slightly smaller body size (147 – 200 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 200.3 – 386.6 µm in M. harrylewisi ), narrower external buccal tube (1.3 – 1.7 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 1.9 – 3.4 µm in M. harrylewisi ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [61.4–67.6] in M. harrylewisi ), shorter placoid row (5.3 – 6.9 µm [25.3–29.3] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 10.4 – 34.7 µm [34.6–46.0]) in M. harrylewisi ) and a different shape of egg processes (screwlike processes within a membrane in M. diversus sp. nov. vs single tip cones without a membrane in M. harrylewisi ).

M. jonesorum by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in 10 transverse bands in M. jonesorum ), absence of tri- and quadrilobed cuticular pores, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in the new species vs 1<2<3 Μm in M. jonesorum ), the presence of eyes, smaller body size (147–200 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 205.9–276.7 µm in M. jonesorum ), slightly shorter buccal tube (19.8 – 23.9 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 24.4 – 29.6 µm in M. jonesorum ), smaller buccal tube external width (1.3 – 1.7 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2.1 – 2.6 µm in M. jonesorum ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [63.0–65.6] in M. jonesorum ), shorter macroplacoids II and III (mII: 1.1 – 1.7 µm [5.5–7.2]; mIII: 1.2 – 1.7 µm [6.0–7.1] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs mII: 1.9 – 2.3 µm [7.1–8.8]; mIII: 2.4 – 2.6 µm [8.4–9.9] in M. jonesorum ), shorter macroplacoid row (4.5 – 6.0 µm [22.3–25.8] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 7.0 – 8.4 µm [27.0–34.4] in M. jonesorum ), the presence of a microplacoid and slightly shorter primary and secondary branches of external claws I–IV (see Table 2 below and Table 2 in Meyer et al. 2011 for the exact differences in dimensions of claws).

M. keppelensis by: lack of red pigmented granules, arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in 10 transverse bands in M. keppelensis ), presence of a few larger pores on dorsal side of the head segment and caudal end, presence of triangular formation of pores on ventral side of the head segment, the presence of rows of pores between the legs, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2=3<1 in M. keppelensis ), slightly shorter buccal tube (19.8 – 23.9 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 24.9 – 28.4 µm in M. keppelensis ) slightly larger pt of buccal tube external width ([6.3–7.6] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. [5.8] in M. keppelensis ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. [60.6] in M. keppelensis ), shorter macroplacoid row (4.5 – 6.0 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 7.0 – 7.6 µm in M. keppelensis ), and different shape of egg processes (screw-like processes within a membrane in M. diversus sp. nov. vs short cones with pointed apices in M. keppelensis ).

M. orthofasciatus by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in 11 transverse bands in M. orthofasciatus ), absence of tri- and quadrilobed cuticular pores, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the presence of large pores on the external side of legs I – III, the presence of rows of pores between the legs, the presence of granulation on all the legs, stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [66.5–67.8] in M. orthofasciatus ), shorter macroplacoids I and III (mI: 1.1 – 1.7 µm [5.5–7.1]; mIII: 1.2 – 1.7 µm [6.0–7.1] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs mI: 1.9 – 3.1 µm [9.5–13.7]; mIII: 1.9 – 2.4 µm [9.5–10.7] in M. orthofasciatus ), slightly shorter macroplacoid row (4.5 – 6.0µm [22.3–25.8] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 6.1 – 7.4 µm [30.7–34.1] in M. orthofasciatus ), slightly lower number of processes on egg circumference (21–22 in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 24 in M. orthofasciatus ), shorter egg processes (3.1 – 3.6 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 4.2 – 4.5 µm in M. orthofasciatus ) narrower process bases (1.2 – 1.8 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2.3 – 2.7 µm in M. orthofasciatus ).

M. poricinctus by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in eight transverse bands in M. poricinctus ), the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of rows of pores between the legs, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2=3<1 in M. poricinctus ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. [59.5] in M. poricinctus ), slightly shorter macroplacoid row (4.5 – 6.0 µm [22.3–25.8] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 6.0 – 8.9 µm [ca. 30.9] in M. poricinctus ), smaller diameter of eggs with processes (51.5 – 53.9 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. ca. 60.0 µm in M. poricinctus ), shorter egg processes (3.1 – 3.6 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 6.5 – 7.0 µm in M. poricinctus ) and smaller diameter of the distal discs of the processes (3.0–3.8 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 5.5 µm in M. poricinctus ).

M. pustulatus by: absence of triangular and polygonal pores, smaller pores on dorsal side (2.2 – 3.2 Μm in diameter on frontal and caudal end in M. diversus vs 4 – 5 Μm in diameter on frontal side and 6 – 7 Μm in diameter on caudal end in M. pustulatus ), the presence of triangular formation of pores on ventral side of the head, the presence of rows of pores between the legs and a different shape of the egg processes (screw-like processes within a membrane in M. diversus sp. nov. vs single tip cones without a membrane in M. pustulatus ).

M. ramazzottii by: arrangement of pores on dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in undefined number of transverse bands in M. ramazzottii ), the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the presence of large pores on legs I – III, the presence of rows of pores between the legs, absence of the oral cavity armature, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in the new species vs 3<2<1 Μm in M. ramazzottii ), shorter buccal tube (19.8 – 23.9 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 35.5 µm in M. ramazzottii ), smaller total buccal tube width (0.5 – 1.7 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 4.1 µm in M. ramazzottii ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [68.2–68.3] in M. ramazzottii ), shorter placoids (mI/mII: 1.1–1.7 µm [5.5–7.1]; mIII: 1.2–1.7 µm [6.0–7.1] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs mI: ca. 5.0 µm [14.0]; mII: ca. 4.7 µm [13.1]; mIII: 4.6 µm [12.8] in M. ramazzottii ), smaller microplacoid (0.4–0.7 µm [2.0–3.0] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 2.3 µm [ca. 6.4] in M ramazzottii ) and shorter external primary branches of claws I, II, (I: 4.6–6.0 µm [20.3–26.6]; II: 4.7–6.6 µm [23.5–28.4] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs I: 10.7 µm [30.0]; II: 12.5 µm [35.2], in M. ramazzottii ).

M. vinciguerrae by: the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of triangular formation of pores on ventral side of the head, the presence of large pores on the external side of legs I – III, the presence of rows of pores between the legs, absence of the oral cavity armature, a different macroplacoid length sequence (1=2 ≅ 3 in the new species vs 2<3<1 Μm in M. vinciguerrae ), smaller body size (147 – 200 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 380 – 520 µm in M. vinciguerrae ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [66.1–68.18] in M. vinciguerrae ), shorter macroplacoids (mI/mII: 1.1–1.7 µm [5.5–7.1]; mIII: 1.2–1.7 µm [6.0–7.1] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs mI: ca. 4.4 µm [ca. 12.4]; mII: ca. 3.6 µm [ca. 10.13]; mIII: ca. 3.6 µm [ca. 10.33] in M. vinciguerrae ), shorter microplacoid (0.4–0.7 µm [2.0–3.0] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs mi: ca. 1.9 µm [ca. 5.4] in M. vinciguerrae ), shorter placoid row (5.3 – 6.9 µm [25.3–29.3] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs ca. 15.4 µm [ca. 43.8] in M. vinciguerrae ), shorter primary branches of external/anterior claws II, III, IV (II: 4.7 – 6.6 µm [23.5–28.4]; III: 4.5 – 6.2 µm [22.5–27.8]; IV: 4.8 – 7.0 µm [24.0–30.2] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs II: ca. 12.3 µm [ca. 35.1]; III: ca. 12.6 µm [ca. 36.0]; IV: 14.6 µm [ca. 41.6] in M. vinciguerrae ) and a different shape of egg processes (screw-like processes within a membrane in M. diversus sp. nov. vs cones without a membrane in M. vinciguerrae ).

M. xavieri by: arrangement of pores on the dorsal side of the body (randomly arranged pores in M. diversus sp. nov. vs pores arranged in nine wide transverse bands in M. xavieri ), the absence of trilobed pores, the presence of differently sized pores (all pores of similar size in M. xavieri ), the presence of large pores on the frontal and caudal end, the presence of triangular formation of pores on the ventral side of the head, the presence of rows of pores between the legs, the presence of granulation on legs, a different macroplacoid sequence (1=2⊋ ≅ 3 in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2<3<1 Μm in M. xavieri ), smaller body size (147–200 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 275–410 µm in M. xavieri ), a shorter buccal tube (19.8–23.9 µm in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 27.5–32.7 µm in M. xavieri ), a narrower buccal tube (1.3 – 1.7 µm [6.3–7.6] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 2.4 – 3.1 µm [8.3–9.8] in M. xavieri ), stylet supports inserted in a more anterior position ([50.5–52.9] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs [66.1–67.9] in M. xavieri ), shorter macroplacoids (mI/mII: 1.1–1.7 µm [5.5–7.1]; mIII: 1.2–1.7 µm [6.0–7.1] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs mI: 3.6 – 4.5 µm [12.7–13.8]; mII: 2.9 – 3.6 µm[10.3–11.1]; mIII: 3.0 – 3.9 µm [10.9–11.9] in M. xavieri ), a shorter macroplacoid row (4.5 – 6.0 µm [22.3–25.8] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 9.8 – 12.6 µm [35.6–38.5] in M. xavieri ), smaller microplacoid (0.4 – 0.7 µm [2.0–3.0] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 1.5 – 2.0 µm [5.0–6.2] in M. xavieri ), shorter placoid row (5.3 – 6.9 µm [25.3–29.3] in M. diversus sp. nov. vs 10.9 – 13.9 µm [39.6–43.3] in M. xavieri ), different lengths of external/anterior and internal/posterior claws II – IV (see Table 3 below and Table 2 in Fontoura et al. (2009b) for the exact differences in dimensions of claws) and different shape of egg processes (screw-like processes within a membrane in M. diversus sp. nov. vs long cones with bi- or multi-tipped tips and without a membrane in M. xavieri ).

Figures

FIGURES 15 – 16. Minibiotus diversus sp. nov. habitus: 15 — dorsal view; 16 — ventral view.

FIGURES 17 – 18. Minibiotus diversus sp. nov.: 17 — buccal apparatus (ventral view); 18 — claws IV.

FIGURES 19 – 24. Minibiotus diversus sp. nov.: 19 — pores arranged in rows between legs I and II; 20 — pores on dorsal side; 21 — triangle – like formation of pores on ventral side of head segment; 22 — large pores on frontal side of the body (dorsal view); 23 – 24 — large pores on posterior side of the body (dorsal view).

FIGURES 25 – 29. Minibiotus diversus sp. nov.: 25 – 28 — granulation on legs I – IV; 29 — large pores on external side of the legs II – III (lateral view).

FIGURES 30 – 31. Minibiotus diversus sp. nov.: 30 — egg; 31 — egg processes.

Tables

TABLE 3. Measurements and pt values of selected morphological structures of fifteen specimens from the type population of Minibiotus diversus sp. nov. mounted in Hoyer’s medium (N—number of specimens / structures measured, RANGE refers to the smallest and the largest structure among all measured specimens; SD—standard deviation).

CHARACTER	N	RANGE	MEAN	SD	Holotype
		µm pt	µm pt	µm pt	µm pt
Body length	15	147–200 739–862	173 784	15 35	200 862
Buccal tube
Length	15	19.8–23.9 -	22.1 –	1.3 –	23.2 –
Stylet support insertion point	15	10.0–12.4 50.5–52.9	11.5 51.8	0.8 0.8	12.0 51.7
External width	15	1.3–1.7 6.3–7.6	1.5 6.8	0.1 0.4	1.5 6.5
Internal width	15	0.5–0.7 2.1–3.0	0.6 2.6	0.1 0.3	0.6 2.6
Ventral lamina length	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
Placoid lengths
Macroplacoid 1	15	1.1–1.7 5.5–7.1	1.4 6.3	0.2 0.5	1.6 6.9
Macroplacoid 2	15	1.1–1.7 5.5–7.2	1.4 6.5	0.2 0.4	1.6 6.9
Macroplacoid 3	15	1.2–1.7 6.0–7.1	1.4 6.5	0.1 0.4	1.6 6.9
Microplacoid	15	0.4–0.7 2.0–3.0	0.6 2.6	0.1 0.4	0.7 3.0
Macroplacoid row	15	4.5–6.0 22.3–25.8	5.3 24.0	0.4 1.2	5.9 25.4
Placoid row	15	5.3–6.9 25.3–29.3	6.1 27.7	0.5 1.3	6.8 29.3
Claw 1 lengths
External base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
External primary branch	14	4.6–6.0 20.3–26.6	5.3 24.2	0.5 1.8	5.8 25.0
External secondary branch	12	3.0–4.2 14.9–19.3	3.6 16.3	0.4 1.2	3.9 16.8
Internal base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
Internal primary branch	13	4.2–5.9 19.7–26.1	5.2 23.5	0.5 1.9	5.5 23.7
Internal secondary branch	11	3.0–3.9 12.9–16.8	3.3 15.2	0.3 1.3	? ?
Claw 2 lengths
External base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
External primary branch	14	4.7–6.6 23.5–28.4	5.7 25.7	0.5 1.6	6.6 28.4
External secondary branch	14	3.3–4.6 15.0–19.8	3.9 17.8	0.4 1.3	4.6 19.8
Internal base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
Internal primary branch	14	4.8–6.0 21.6–26.4	5.4 24.6	0.4 1.5	5.7 24.6
Internal secondary branch	13	2.9–4.5 13.7–20.2	3.7 16.8	0.5 1.9	? ?
Claw 3 lengths
External base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
External primary branch	14	4.5–6.2 22.5–27.8	5.7 25.6	0.4 1.7	6.2 26.7
External secondary branch	11	2.9–4.6 14.5–20.6	3.9 17.5	0.5 2.0	4.4 19.0
Internal base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
Internal primary branch	14	4.8–5.8 21.1–26.6	5.4 24.1	0.3 1.4	5.6 24.1
Internal secondary branch	13	2.9–4.1 12.4–19.2	3.6 16.3	0.4 1.9	? ?
Claw 4 lengths
Anterior base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
Anterior primary branch	12	4.8–7.0 24.0–30.2	6.0 27.4	0.6 2.1	7.0 30.2
Anterior secondary branch	12	3.6–5.4 17.1–23.3	4.3 19.4	0.5 1.8	5.4 23.3
Posterior base	0	? ?	? ?	? ?	? ?
Posterior primary branch	12	5.1–7.1 24.7–31.8	6.1 27.7	0.6 1.9	6.5 28.0
Posterior secondary branch	12	3.2–5.0 16.0–22.4	4.2 19.3	0.5 1.8	4.9 21.1

TABLE 4. Measurements of Minibiotus diversus sp. nov. eggs mounted in Hoyer’s medium (N—number of specimens / structures measured, RANGE refers to the smallest and the largest structure among all measured specimens; SD—standard deviation).

CHARACTER	N	RANGE	MEAN	SD
Diameter of egg without processes	3	44.9–47.8	46.1	1.5
Diameter of egg with processes	3	51.5–53.9	52.8	1.2
Process height	9	3.1–3.6	3.3	0.2
Process base width	9	1.2–1.8	1.5	0.2
Process base/height ratio	9	39%–51%	44%	5%
Terminal disc width	9	3.0–3.8	3.5	0.3
Distance between processes	9	3.6–4.8	4.3	0.4
Number of processes on the egg circumference	3	21–22	21.3	0.6