Coboldus chazaroi, Ortiz, Manuel, Winfield, Ignacio & Varela, Carlos, 2012
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.211989 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6168167 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5624DB2D-FFE2-8902-659A-FBEDA53F72A1 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Coboldus chazaroi |
| status |
sp. nov. |
Coboldus chazaroi View in CoL sp. nov.
( Figs. 1–5 View FIGURE 1 View FIGURE 2 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4 View FIGURE 5 )
Iphimedia View in CoL sp., Ortiz– Touzet (1974: 85–86); Ortiz et al. (2006: appendix).
Material examined. Holotype: mature female with oostegites and eggs; length 3.2 mm; northern coast of Cuba; 23°07’01”N and 82°26’18”W. The specimens are deposited at Centro de Investigaciones Marinas, Number CIM- 255. Paratype: young male; length 2.2 mm; collected with the holotype; number CIM-256. Date August 11, 2010. Specimens inhabited soft bottom.
Diagnosis. Head with circular eyes, small. Pereonal segment 7 with dorsal process. Pleonal segments 1–3 with dorsal processes bifid and equal in length. Coxa 1 ventrally acute and bifid. Article 5 of gnathopod 2 longer than 6, dactylus longer than palm. Posterior margin of pleonal epimeron 3 with 3 teeth. Mandibular palp article 2 with 1 subdistal plumose seta; molar poorly developed with 1 basal seta; lacinia mobilis present on left, rectangular and finely serrate. Uropod 1 with rami longer than peduncle, naked. Uropod 2 outer ramus half length as inner. Telson subquadrate, posterior margin concave, with a simple seta on each corner.
Description. Head: rostrum curved and elongate, 2/3 length of article 1 of peduncle of antenna 1 (holotype, female 3.2 mm), in dorsal view; anterior margin of head with a sharp downward projection ( Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 A, 1B, 1C).
Antenna 1: articles 2 and 3 subequal in length, much shorter than first; flagellum and accessory flagellum lost ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A).
Antenna 2: incomplete, peduncular article 5 and flagellum lost ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A).
Pereonal and pleonal segments: pereonal segment 7 with wide and separate posterior teeth, pleonal segments 1–3 distally bifid, in dorsal view ( Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 A, 2E).
Mandible: elongate and thin, base wide, distal margin slightly curved, two lines of small incisors; molar basal, with one seta; palp inserted below molar; articles 1 and 3 subequal in length; article 2 more than twice length of 1 and 3 combined, bearing one plumose seta; article 3 with distal half striate, one long and wide basal seta, two shorter ( Figs. 2 View FIGURE 2 A, 2C).
Maxilla 1: outer lobe developed, eight setae of which four are dentate on distal half, one distal thin and long seta, six short; inner lobe small, three equal distal setae; palp with a vestigial and basal article on outer margin of outer lobe ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 B).
Maxilla 2: outer lobe longer than inner; outer and inner lobes with 10 distal setae ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 D).
Lower lip: outer lobe excavated distally on inner margin; inner lobes absent; mandible lobes well developed ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 F).
Upper lip: ovoidal, slightly excavated on ventral margin ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 E).
Maxilliped: both lobes very elongate; outer lobe distally narrow, with distal setae, one subdistal and submarginal; inner lobe with a tuft of distal setae, two short at middle of inner margin; palp inserted subdistally on outer margin of outer lobe; article 2 with long distal setae, two on outer margin behind insertion of article 3; article 3 with a distal tuft of long setae ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 D).
Coxa 1: smaller than 2, with two teeth on posterior ventral angle ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A).
Gnathopods 1 and 2: subequal in length; gnathopod 1, article 2 as long as articles 3, 4 and 5 combined; article 7 inserted subdistally on 6, forming a bifid distal tip, several long and curved setae on both parts ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A).
Coxa 2: distally acute, shorter than 3, with anterior margin curved backward ( Fig.3 View FIGURE 3 B).
Gnathopod 2: subchelate, article 2 as long as articles 3, 4 and 5 combined; article 6 with palm forming an anterior lobe at a right angle, with long setae; article 7 clearly longer than margin of palm. Gill sac-shaped, shorter than article 2 of gnathopod. Oostegite as long as articles 2 and 3 of gnathopod 2 combined, truncated by long distal setae ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 B).
Coxa 3: similar to 2, longer and wider, one small cleft, one tooth on posterior ventral angle, almost half of the width of coxa 4 ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A).
Pereopod 3: article 2 narrow; article 4 slightly widened downward forming a minute posterior lobe ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 C).
Coxa 4: long and wide, anteriorly curved, acute downward forming a minute posterior lobe ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 A).
Pereopod 4: articles 2–4 subequal in width; article 4 distally wide forming a small posterior lobe ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 A).
Coxa 5: curved anterior margin; posterior margin forming a lobe that protects basal half of posterior margin of article 2 of pereopod ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 B).
Pereopod 5: article 2 widened forming an ample posterior lobe; article 4 with posterior lobe subquadrate. Oostegite as long as article 2 of pereopod 5, elongate with long setae ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 B).
Coxae 6 and 7: subquadrate, straight posteroventral angle ( Figs. 4 View FIGURE 4 C, 4D).
Pereopods 6 and 7: similar to 5, but 6 or 7 setae on posterior margin of article 2; pereopod 6 bigger than 5 and smaller than 7 ( Figs. 4 View FIGURE 4 C, 4D).
Uropod 1: long; peduncle with one robust basal seta, three lateral; rami equal, longer than peduncle, each with a subdistal cleft ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 A).
Uropod 2: a robust seta at middle of outer margin, another distal to peduncle, 3 robust subdistal setae on inner margin of peduncle; outer ramus longer than half of inner ramus, both with a subdistal cleft ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 B).
Uropod 3: rectangular peduncle, shorter than inner ramus; both without setae; outer ramus lost ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 C).
Epimerum 1: concave ventral margin, naked ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 E).
Epimerum 2: curved and naked, shorter than 1 and 3 ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 E).
Epimerum 3: curved and elongate towards back; 3 distal teeth of different length ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 E).
Male smaller than female, young male 2.2 mm (paratype); rostrum longer; eyes subtriangular, more developed; anterior margin of head with a downward projection; dorsal process of segment 7 of pereon more developed, shorter than other pleonal dorsal processes; epimerum 3 curved and elongate towards back, with three teeth posterodistal of different length.
Etymology. species named in honour to Sergio Cházaro Olvera, carcinologist and friend of the Facultad de Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Remarks. A morphological comparison between C. chazaroi sp. nov., and other species of Coboldus shows difference in the following characteristics: mandibular palp article 2 with one subapical plumose seta in C. chazaroi , instead of two simple setae in C. laetifucatus , and three in C. hedgpethi , C. nitior and C. orientalis . Dactylus of gnathopod 2 longer than palm in C. chazaroi , instead of dactylus as long as palm like others. Posterior margin of article 2 on pereopods 6–7 with six–seven setae in C. chazaroi , instead of finely serrated in C. hedgpethi and two–four notches, each with one simple seta in C. laetifucatus . Posterior margin of epimerum 3 with two big and a small tooth in C. chazaroi , instead of two large teeth in C. hedgpethi , C. laetifucatus and C. orientalis . Coxa 1 acute and bifid in C. chazaroi instead of rounded and entire like others. Pleonal segment 1–3 dorsal processs equals in C. chazaroi instead of pleonal segment 1 bigger than those on 2 and 3, in C. orientalis .
The type locality of C. chazaroi sp. nov., is Northwestern Cuba; C. laetifucatus is from Barbados, the Caribbean Sea; C. hedgpethi is from California; C. nitior is from the Mediterranean Sea, and C. orientalis is from Chigua Reef, Nansha Islands, China Sea.
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.