Monospilus daedalus Kotov & Sinev, 2011
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.214313 |
|
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5680445 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03B687AA-FF97-5A62-25DC-999BFE78FC21 |
|
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
|
scientific name |
Monospilus daedalus Kotov & Sinev, 2011 |
| status |
|
19. Monospilus daedalus Kotov & Sinev, 2011 View in CoL
Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25
Synonymy. Monospilus daedalus Kotov & Sinev, 2011 , p. 276–280, Figs 3–4 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4 .
Type locality. "Mouth of the Tom' River” (Kotov & Sinev 2011), Amur Area, Russia. Locality in Korea. 12 (see Fig. 1 and Table 1 View TABLE 1 ).
Parthenogenetic female. Body rounded, very high, moulting incomplete ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 A). As dorsally, body relatively compressed laterally, with lateral projections in anterior half of the valves of first instar ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 B). Sculpture with numerous shallow depressions, more expressed in dorsal portion. Rostrum short, compound eye absent, ocellus large. Head shield with step-like incisions on each side in antero-lateral portion, rostrum wide, with four tubercles; single, relatively small major head pore in posterion portion, lateral pores absent ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 C). Setae on ventral margin of valve short, unilaterally setulated ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 D–E). Postabdomen short, its length 2–2.5 of width. Preanal margin straight; preanal angle distinct, obtuse; anal margin concave, postanal angle obtuse, massive; postanal margin almost straight, almost no projection for postabdominal claw ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 F). On postanal and anal margin, 3–6 strong, single postanal teeth, groups on smaller teeth on anal margin. Laterally, several row of spinules. Postabominal claw massive, with two pectens, in proximal pecten distalmost denticle shorther than the second one. Basal spine long, 3–4 thin setules at its base ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 F–G). Antenna I short, its length 2.5 times of width; antennular sensory seta located somewhat distally to middle, its length subequal to antenna I length; 8 terminal and single lateral easthetascs ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 H–I). Antenna II short, with two sensory setae at coxal portion; basal segment with a short spine distally ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 J). Antennal formula: setae 0-0-3/0-1-3, spines 1-0-1/0-0-1. Spine on proximal segment of exopod very long, more that 1.5 times longer than next segment; spines on apical segments about 1.5 times longer than these segments. Six pairs of limbs as it was described by Kotov & Sinev (2011), ODL with a single seta armed with short setules distally; IDL with two setae of subequal size and a third rudimentary seta. ( Fig. 25 View FIGURE 25 K). Size in our material 0.34 mm.
Notes. The species, known from a single locality in the Amur basin (Kotov & Sinev 2011), clearly has a wider range. Illustrations and descriptions of the Chinese and Japanese populations ( Chiang & Du 1979; Mizuno & Takahashi 1991) are not detailed enough for evaluating their species status. After the description of M. daedalus , all previous identifications of M. dispar Sars, 1862 from the Far East, including Korea ( Yoon & Kim 1987; Yoon 2010), need to be re-checked.
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.