Ulloaia perpusillia Glassell 1938: 434 Haig 1960: 230 Haig 1962: 191 Gore & Abele 1976: 26 An annotated and illustrated checklist of the porcelain crabs of Panama (Decapoda: Anomura) Ferreira, Luciane Augusto De Azevedo Anker, Arthur Zootaxa 2021 2021-09-27 5045 1 1 154 f8d6b24f-7f98-42ed-a9ba-f2df69a279db Glassell, 1938 Glassell 1938 [151,556,223,250] Malacostraca Porcellanidae Ulloaia GBIF Animalia Decapoda 135 136 Arthropoda species perpusillia  ( Fig. 86)      Ulloaia perpusillia Glassell 1938: 434, pl. 33, fig. 3;  Haig 1960: 230, fig. 11, pl. 37, fig. 2;  Haig 1962: 191;  Gore & Abele 1976: 26.   Material examined.  Panama[ Pacific]: 1 male, cl 2.1, cw 1.7 ( MZUSP 40073),  Isla Venao, 08°52’48.6”N, 79°35’36.9”W, no further details, leg. L.R.L. Simone,  01.02.2006. Extra-limitalmaterial.  Costa Rica[ Pacific]: 1?male, cl cw indet. ( MZUCR 5098-03), Area de Conservación Guanacaste, Golfode  Santa Elena, Bajo Rajada, depth  21 m, among loose rocks, leg. R. Vargas, G. Ampie& Y. Vega,  07.06.2016[examined and identified by R. Vargas Castillo].  Previous records from Panama. Gore & Abele (1976).   Distribution. East Pacific: Mexico, Costa Ricaand Panama(Isla Venao, Las Perlas Is.) ( Haig 1960, 1962; Gore & Abele 1976; present study).   Ecology. Intertidal and subtidal, more common in the subtidal, known depth range: 0–21 m; among rocks, sand, gorgonians, sponges and bryozoans ( Glassell 1938; Haig 1960, 1962); the specimen from Taboga I. was “washed from sponge”; the one from Contadora I. (Las Perlas Is.) was collected on “stones, sand, 8–10 fathoms [ 14–17 m]” ( Haig 1962).   Remarks.  Ulloaia perpusilliais a rarely collected porcelain crab, which is probably due to its cryptic life style (possibly associated with sponges) and very small size. Haig (1962)noted that the female from Taboga I. was only 2.1 mmlong, but fully mature; a previously reported female was only slightly larger, at cl 2.9 mm. The specimen from Venao I. is a male with cl 2.1 mmand is thus similar in size to other specimens of  U. perpusillia. Haig (1962)also observed that in the Taboga I. specimen, “the front is less deflexed and partially visible in dorsal view”, whereas in the juvenile specimen from Contadora I. at cl 1.4 mm, “the front is much less sharply deflexed and the rostral process is fully visible in dorsal view.” This observation could explain the difference seen at first glance between the front of Glassell’s male holotype( Fig. 86A), in which the front is deflexed and not visible in dorsal view, just like in the male specimen from Venao I., and the specimen from Guanacaste, Costa Rica( Fig. 86B), in which the rostral process is well visible in anterodorsal view. [405,1109,428,455] MZUSP Pacific Panama Panama 135 136 MZUSP 40073 1 1 2006-01-02 Venao & L. R. L. Simone Iceland 8.880167 Extra-limital 1 -79.59358 135 136 1 MZUCR Pacific Costa Rica Golfo Area de Conservacion 135 136 MZUCR 5098-03 1 Guanacaste 2016-07-06 R Bajo Rajada & R. Vargas & G. Ampie & Y. Vega Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha 21 Vargas Castillo 135 136 1