Genus Latreillia Roux, 1830

Latreillia Roux, 1830: unnumbered page, pl. 22. — Guinot & Richer de Forges 1981: 559. — Williams 1982: 232 (synonymy and references).

Proctor Gistel, 1848: ix (erroneously substituted for Latreillia [see Rathbun 1937: 73]).

Latreilla [sic] – Gosliner et al. 1996: 235.

TYPE SPECIES. — Latreillia elegans Roux, 1830 by monotypy. Gender: feminine.

DIAGNOSIS. — Total length of each last pair of pereopods (P5) greater than merus of fourth pair (P4) (Figs 6; 10; 12); propodus of each P5 shorter or longer than carpus; conspicuous, feather-like setae on both lateral margins, distal end not conspicuously broadened; dactyli forming subchelae or trailing without forming subchela.

REMARKS

Williams (1982), in separating Latreillia from Eplumula, placed more importance on the morphology of the last pair of pereopods (P5) than on the nature of the dactyli of the same. Although in the two species of Eplumula the dactylus forms a subchela, the same situation is present in three of the five known species of Latreillia ( L. elegans, L. metanesa and L. williamsi), while a trailing, nonsubchelate dactylus is present in the remaining two ( L. pennifera and L. valida). Although the presence of a unique, non-subchelate arrangement is of generic importance, similarities in other characters (i.e. total length, shape, and setation of P5) among the seven species are significant enough that they do not merit the separation of Latreillia into two genera.