taxonID	type	format	identifier	references	title	description	created	creator	contributor	publisher	audience	source	license	rightsHolder	datasetID
6A4F4946FFA8FF8AFF22132CFB39FEDE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/7381380/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7381380	FIGURE 3. Munidopsis exuta Macpherson & Segonzac, 2005. A, male, from Chapopote Knoll (CNCR 24857 = ULLZ 8861); B, ovigerous female, Chapopote Knoll (CNCR 24846 = ULLZ 8792); C, ovigerous female, Mid-Atlantic Ridge (CEAB CRU 2004-03); D, juvenile female and E, juvenile male, Florida Escarpment (CEAB CRU 2004-05); F, juvenile female, and G, ovigerous female, Bay of Biscay (CEAB CRU 2004-01). Scale bar = 10 mm in A, B, C, G; 5 mm in D, E, F.	FIGURE 3. Munidopsis exuta Macpherson & Segonzac, 2005. A, male, from Chapopote Knoll (CNCR 24857 = ULLZ 8861); B, ovigerous female, Chapopote Knoll (CNCR 24846 = ULLZ 8792); C, ovigerous female, Mid-Atlantic Ridge (CEAB CRU 2004-03); D, juvenile female and E, juvenile male, Florida Escarpment (CEAB CRU 2004-05); F, juvenile female, and G, ovigerous female, Bay of Biscay (CEAB CRU 2004-01). Scale bar = 10 mm in A, B, C, G; 5 mm in D, E, F.	2022-11-28	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique		Zenodo	biologists	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique			
6A4F4946FFA8FF8AFF22132CFB39FEDE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/7381382/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7381382	FIGURE 4. Morphological comparison between Munidopsis exuta and Munidopsis geyeri juveniles. CL = carapace length.	FIGURE 4. Morphological comparison between Munidopsis exuta and Munidopsis geyeri juveniles. CL = carapace length.	2022-11-28	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique		Zenodo	biologists	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique			
6A4F4946FFA8FF8AFF22132CFB39FEDE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/7381386/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7381386	FIGURE 5. Geographic distribution of A, Munidopsis exuta and B, M. geyeri. Numbers with circles represent specimens analyzed in this study, letters with triangles represent populations not examined on this study. See Table 1. Base map from UNINMAR (2020).	FIGURE 5. Geographic distribution of A, Munidopsis exuta and B, M. geyeri. Numbers with circles represent specimens analyzed in this study, letters with triangles represent populations not examined on this study. See Table 1. Base map from UNINMAR (2020).	2022-11-28	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique		Zenodo	biologists	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique			
6A4F4946FFADFF84FF221092FBFAFAF3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/7381382/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7381382	FIGURE 4. Morphological comparison between Munidopsis exuta and Munidopsis geyeri juveniles. CL = carapace length.	FIGURE 4. Morphological comparison between Munidopsis exuta and Munidopsis geyeri juveniles. CL = carapace length.	2022-11-28	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique		Zenodo	biologists	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique			
6A4F4946FFADFF84FF221092FBFAFAF3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/7381386/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7381386	FIGURE 5. Geographic distribution of A, Munidopsis exuta and B, M. geyeri. Numbers with circles represent specimens analyzed in this study, letters with triangles represent populations not examined on this study. See Table 1. Base map from UNINMAR (2020).	FIGURE 5. Geographic distribution of A, Munidopsis exuta and B, M. geyeri. Numbers with circles represent specimens analyzed in this study, letters with triangles represent populations not examined on this study. See Table 1. Base map from UNINMAR (2020).	2022-11-28	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique		Zenodo	biologists	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique			
6A4F4946FFADFF84FF221092FBFAFAF3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/7381388/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7381388	FIGURE 6. Munidopsis geyeri Pequegnat & Pequegnat, 1970. Specimens from A, Regab Pockmark site (Gulf of Guinea; CEAB CRU 2004-07) and B. Chapopote Knoll (Gulf of Mexico; CNCR 24856). C, lateral and D, dorsal view. Morphological features: E, distal part of cephalothorax, antennal spine; F, shape of rostrum; G, antennular peduncle, distolateral and distodorsal spines; H, anntenal peduncle; I, third maxilliped; J, thoracic sternite; K, carpus of cheliped; L, ischium of cheliped, dorsolateral spine; M, dactylus, strongly curved at the end of extensor margin, number of teeth on flexor margin; N, telson; O, gonopod 1 (G1); P, gonopod 2 (G2).	FIGURE 6. Munidopsis geyeri Pequegnat & Pequegnat, 1970. Specimens from A, Regab Pockmark site (Gulf of Guinea; CEAB CRU 2004-07) and B. Chapopote Knoll (Gulf of Mexico; CNCR 24856). C, lateral and D, dorsal view. Morphological features: E, distal part of cephalothorax, antennal spine; F, shape of rostrum; G, antennular peduncle, distolateral and distodorsal spines; H, anntenal peduncle; I, third maxilliped; J, thoracic sternite; K, carpus of cheliped; L, ischium of cheliped, dorsolateral spine; M, dactylus, strongly curved at the end of extensor margin, number of teeth on flexor margin; N, telson; O, gonopod 1 (G1); P, gonopod 2 (G2).	2022-11-28	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique		Zenodo	biologists	Gaytán-Caballero, Adriana;Escobar-Briones, Elva;Robles, Rafael;Macpherson, Enrique			
