Globopactes senex (Budde-Lund, 1893)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2007.00286.x |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03858799-4209-FFDC-9BAB-7F8AAA12FD9D |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Globopactes senex |
status |
|
GLOBOPACTES SENEX View in CoL (BUDDE- LUND, 1893)
Scleropactes senex Budde-Lund, 1893 View in CoL .
Sphaeroniscus senex View in CoL – Budde-Lund (1904); Van Name (1936 *); Leistikow & Wägele (1999 *); Jeppesen (2000 *); Schmalfuss (2003 *).
Not: Sphaeroniscus senex View in CoL – Vandel (1952).
Material examined
Types: One ♂, one ♀ (distorted), one ♀ m (broken), syntypes ( Venezuela, Merida, 8°35′ N, 71°08′ W, coll. Staudinger, MNHN-Is5722) GoogleMaps .
Description ( Figs 148–153 View Figure 148 View Figure 149 View Figure 150 View Figure 151 View Figure 152 View Figure 153 )
The description is based on three syntype specimens.
Female with marsupium, cephalothorax 2.36 mm wide, with 20/20 ommatidia. Male, cephalothorax 2.44 mm wide, 21/21 ommatidia. The third specimen, a female, has 20/19 ommatidia. Colour not preserved. Budde-Lund (1893) in the original description did not mention the colour.
Cephalothorax with frontal shield covering the transverse groove except for its lateral parts. Upper margin of frontal shield in dorsal view weakly curved caudally, in frontal view medially straight, lateral parts also straight, but separated from the median part by obtuse angles. Transverse furrow deep; lateral parts just behind frontal shield have rounded frontal edge. Linea supraantennalis strongly upcurved near the middle, and interrupted in the middle. Coxal plate 1 simple, with a sharp posterior corner. Lateral margin of coxal plate 2 weakly concave, that of coxal plate 3 strongly incised. Female marsupium with one cotyledon each on sternites 2–5.
First antenna three-jointed, second article shortest. Apical article with group of irregularly placed aesthetascs (minimum six) and two larger apical aesthetascs (broken off, but insertions are visible). Second antenna not preserved in any of the three specimens.
Mandibles: right mandible with pars incisiva of four cusps, lacinia mobilis with two acute distal cusps and one more proximal, rounded cusp, hairy lobe with scales and one hairy seta. One hairy seta between hairy lobe and pars molaris (the latter broken off). Left mandible with pars incisiva of four cusps, lacinia mobilis with two cusps and larger than on right mandible. Hairy lobe with scales and two hairy setae. One hairy seta between the hairy lobe and the pars molaris, which is represented by a tuft of numerous hairy setae. Outer face of both mandibles with scales and scale setae. First maxilla lateral endite laterally fringed with hairs (pectinate scales?) along slightly less than distal half. Distal margin with lateral group of four stout tooth setae, a smaller, triangular lobe (or seta), and a slender seta with hairy tip; mesal group of six more slender setae, at least four of them cleft. (Whether small, subapical setae are present on the caudal face could not be seen: the putative insertions are obscured by dirt.) Mesal endite distally with two hairy penicils (one lost, but insertion is visible), laterodistal corner rounded. Second maxilla apically bilobed; lobes of approximately equal size. Mesal lobe with row (or field?) of sensilla and densely covered with hairs; lateral lobe less densely covered with hairs, between both lobes with two larger sensilla. Maxilliped composed of a small coxa, a large base covered with scales and scale setae, an epipodite, endite and palp. Endite roughly rectangular, distal margin convex, covered with hairs (many of them broken in the drawn specimen), with a small seta on caudal face and a stout penicil on distal face. Maxilliped palp proximal article with a single large seta near the median margin; distal portion too much damaged to allow a description.
Male pereiopod 1 with slightly enlarged carpus covered with scales, including the antennal brush, on the frontal face. Also propodus with large scale-field extending from ventral to dorsal margin. Merus and ischium also with ventral scale-fields. Male pereiopod 2 similar to pereiopod 1 except for carpus, which is slightly narrower and has no distinct antennal brush, but is entirely covered with scales. Male pereiopod 3 with scale-fields as the preceding, but somewhat less extended and with carpus not enlarged. Pereiopods 4– 6 without conspicuous scale-fields. Male pereiopod 7 with long ischium with weakly concave ventral margin, merus with ventroproximal tubercle and distally adjacent groove; both groove and tubercle covered with scales. Pereiopod dactyli with slightly curved ungual seta, about half as long as outer claw, dactylar seta apically fringed with setules, one smaller seta on frontal face, and a number of scales and/ or setae (more details are not preserved).
Pleopod exopodites 1 and 2 with delimited smooth fields, exopodites 3–5 without any distinct or delimited respiratory structures. All exopodites with rather small marginal setae. Male pleopod 1 endopodite straight, with row of> 25 small spine-like setae (part of the row is obscured by a bundle of sperm). Exopodite 1 wider than long, with obtuse apical margin. Male pleopod 2 endopodite distinctly exceeding the exopodite. Male pleopod 5 exopodite with transverse strip of small pectinate scales. Pleopod 3–5 sympodites with long and acute median lobes.
Reproduction
In the tube with the syntype specimens there is only one female with marsupium; 14 eggs were found, some of which had fallen out of the broken specimen. Therefore, it cannot be stated with certainty that no eggs had been lost, but according to the egg size, the number of 14 seems to fit, and the real number cannot have been much higher.
Remark
After the original description by Budde-Lund (1893), which was not provided with illustrations, no other author re-examined the type material. According to Budde-Lund, the specimens were in the ‘Staatliches Museum für Tierkunde Dresden’. The samples in that museum were destroyed during World War II. The geographical distance between the type locality and the place where the specimens identified by Vandel (1952) had been collected raised doubt concerning the conspecificity of these samples, although the original description also fits Vandel’s samples.
Recently, I discovered a tube with three specimens in the MNHN Paris which, according to the data on the label, which had been written by Budde-Lund himself, have to be considered as syntypes. Budde- Lund received them from the Staudinger collection (‘Mus. Staudinger’). Re-examination of these specimens revealed that they represent a species distinct from those identified as Sphaeroniscus sexen by Vandel .
MNHN |
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle |
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Globopactes senex
Schmidt, Christian 2007 |
Scleropactes senex
Budde-Lund 1893 |