identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
E63A29373410BD32BFBEE592FD6EFA7E.text	E63A29373410BD32BFBEE592FD6EFA7E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Axiidea de Saint Laurent 1979	<div><p>Infraorder Axiidea de Saint Laurent, 1979</p> <p>Superfamily Callianassoidea Dana, 1852</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/E63A29373410BD32BFBEE592FD6EFA7E	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Komai, Tomoyuki;Yokooka, Hiroyuki;Henmi, Yumi;Itani, Gyo	Komai, Tomoyuki, Yokooka, Hiroyuki, Henmi, Yumi, Itani, Gyo (2019): A new genus for “ Neocallichirus ” grandis Karasawa & Goda, 1996, a ghost shrimp species (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) heretofore known only by fossil materials. Zootaxa 4604 (3): 461-481, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4604.3.4
E63A29373410BD35BFBEE6B2FCC5FF62.text	E63A29373410BD35BFBEE6B2FCC5FF62.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Laticallichirus Komai & Yokooka & Henmi & Itani 2019	<div><p>Laticallichirus n. gen.</p> <p>[New Japanese name: Oo-suna-moguri-zoku]</p> <p>Type species. “ Neocallichirus ” grandis Karasawa &amp; Goda, 1996. Gender: masculine.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Carapace with clearly defined dorsal oval (Figs. 1A, 2A). Rostral spine well developed (Fig. 2B). Pleomere 2 as long as pleomere 6 (Fig. 1C, E); pleomeres 3–5 without patterns of dorsal grooves and transverse setal rows (Fig. 1D). Telson wider than long (Fig. 1F). Cornea dorsal, subterminal, disk-shaped (Fig. 2B). Antennular peduncle longer and stouter than antennal peduncle, furnished with 2 rows of dense long setae along lower margin (Fig. 2B). Maxilliped 3 without exopod; ischium-merus broadly operculiform; ischium without crista dentata on mesial surface; distal margin of merus not projecting beyond articulation of carpus; propodus very broad, subovate; dactylus much longer than wide (Fig. 4A, B). Chelipeds greatly unequal in both males and females (Fig. 3). Major cheliped without meral hook, blade-like denticulate margin instead (Figs. 3B, 5B); upper margin of merus to propodus and lower margin of carpus to propodus smooth, unarmed. Minor cheliped with dactylus unarmed on upper margin. Male pleopod 1 consisting of 2 articles, distal article simple, rounded distally (Fig. 2C). Male pleopod 2 biramous, without appendix interna (Fig. 2D, E). Female pleopod 1 uniramous (Fig. 5C). Female pleopod 2 biramous, with subterminal digitiform appendix interna (Fig. 5E, F). Pleopods 3–5 foliaceus; appendix interna triangular and embedded in margin of endopod (Fig. 2G, H, I). Uropodal endopod elongate-ovate, longer than telson (Fig. 1E).</p> <p>Etymology. An arbitrary combination of the Latin word “ latus ” (= broad) and the generic name Callichirus. The name alludes the broadly operculiform ischium-merus of the maxilliped 3, one of the diagnostic features of the new genus.</p> <p>Remarks. The species identification of our specimens was rather challenging, because fossil callianassid taxa are almost always diagnosed by characters derived only from a major cheliped or at best from both major and minor chelipeds (Hyžný &amp; Klompmaker 2015). Careful comparison between our specimens and fossil chelipeds identified with Neocallichirus (or Grynaminna or Podocallichirus) grandis (cf. Karasawa &amp; Goda 1996; Obata &amp; Hayashi 2001; Karasawa et al. 2006; comparative material cited below) has shown that there are no significant differences. In particular, the following diagnostic points of the male major cheliped are well consistent between our specimens and the fossils: lower margin of merus strongly convex and denticulate, devoid of hook-like process or differentiated spine; carpus wider than long; palm approximately as long as wide; upper distal angle of palm slightly produced; distolateral margin of palm forming broad convexity; fixed finger bearing distinct tooth on occlusal margin (Fig. 3A, B versus Karasawa &amp; Goda 1996: fig. 1; Hyžný &amp; Karasawa 2012: fig. 1). The two locations where our specimens were collected, Suruga Bay and Tosa Bay, are within the known geographical range of the fossils (Kanto District to Kyushu Island, and Okinawa: Karasawa &amp; Goda 1996; Kato &amp; Karasawa 1998; Obata &amp; Hayashi 2001; Karasawa et al. 2006, 2014; Ando et al. 2016; Ando &amp; Kawano 2017). Considering further the known geologic range from the middle to late Pleistocene, we finally came to a conclusion that our specimens represent the fossil taxon described by Karasawa &amp; Goda (1996). As discussed below, “ Neocallichirus ” grandis is now reassigned to a new genus, Laticallichirus.</p> <p>The well-defined dorsal oval of the carapace (Figs. 1A, 2A) and the maxilliped 3 with a very broad, subovate propodus and slender dactylus (Fig. 4A, B) place the new taxon in the subfamily Callichirinae, as diagnosed by Manning &amp; Felder (1991). The complicated taxonomic history of the genus-level classification of Callichirinae was overviewed by Hyžný &amp; Karasawa (2012), Komai et al. (2015) and Hyžný (2016). Callichirinae currently contains the following 15 genera (for extant species) presently recognized as valid (Ngoc-Ho 2003; Hyžný 2016; WoRMS Editorial Board 2018; Komai et al. 2018): Balsscallichirus Sakai, 2011 [type species: Callianassa (Callichirus) balssi Monod, 1933], Calliapagurops de Saint Laurent, 1973 (type species: Calliapagurops charcoti de Saint Laurent, 1973), Callichiropsis Sakai, 2010 (type species: Callichiropis spiridonovi Sakai, 2010), Callichirus Stimpson, 1866 (type species: Callianassa major Say, 1818), Corallianassa Manning, 1987 (type species: Callianassa longiventris A. Milne-Edwards, 1870), Forestcallichirus Sakai, 2011 (type species: Callichirus foresti Le Loeuff &amp; Intès, 1974), Glypturoides Sakai, 2011 (type species: Callianassa trilobata Biffar, 1970), Glypturus Stimpson, 1866 (type species: Glypturus acanthochirus Stimpson, 1866), Grynaminna Poore, 2000 (type species: Grynaminna tamakii Poore, 2000), Lepidophthalmus Holmes, 1904 (type species: Lepidophthalmus eiseni Holmes, 1904), Michaelcallianassa Sakai, 2002 (type species: Michaelcallianassa indica Sakai, 2002), Neocallichirus Sakai, 1988 (type species: Neocallichirus horneri Sakai, 1988), Podocallichirus Sakai, 1999 (type species: Callianassa madagassa Lenz &amp; Richters, 1881), Sergio Manning &amp; Lemaitre, 1994 (type species: Callianassa guassutinga Rodrigues, 1971) and Thailandcallichirus Sakai, 2011 (type species: Callianassa ranongensis Sakai, 1983). Laticallichirus n. gen. is characterized by a combination of the following characters: (1) the rostrum is spiniform (Figs. 1A, 2B); (2) the antennular peduncle is distinctly longer and stouter than the antennal peduncle (Fig. 2B); (3) the maxilliped 3 is devoid of an exopod (Fig. 4A); (4) the ischium-merus of the maxilliped 3 is broadly operculiform (Fig. 4A, B); (5) the maxilliped 3 ischium is devoid of a crista dentata (Fig. 4B); (6) the major cheliped merus is devoid of a hooklike process or conspicuous spine on the lower margin (Figs. 3A, B; 5A, B); (7) the tergites of the pleomeres 3–5 are smooth, without conspicuous ornamentation (Fig. 1D); (8) the male pleopod 2 is biramous, its endopod is devoid of appendices interna and masculina (Fig. 2D, E); (9) the uropodal endopod is suboval in shape (Fig. 1E); (10) the telson is distinctly wider than long, with a shallowly concave posterior margin (Fig. 1E, F).</p> <p>Of the above diagnostic characters, the second character (the antennular peduncle is distinctly longer and stout- er than the antennal peduncle) is shared by Balsscallichirus, Callichirus, Callichiropsis, Grynaminna, Michaelcallianassa, Lepidophthalmus and Podocallichirus (Le Loeuff &amp; Intès 1974; de Saint Laurent &amp; Le Loeuff 1979; Manning &amp; Felder 1991; Sakai 1999, 2002, 2005, 2010, 2011; Poore 2000; Felder &amp; Robles 2015). Callichirus, represented by seven extant species (Manning &amp; Felder 1991; Felder &amp; Dworschak 2015; Hernáes et al. 2015), C. adamas (Kensley, 1974), C. garthi Retamal, 1975, C. islagrande (Schmitt 1935), C. kraussi (Stebbing, 1900), C. major (Say, 1818), C. santarosaensis Sakai &amp; T̹rkay, 2012, and C. seilacheri (Bott, 1955), is quite characteristic in having a strong pattern of grooves and integumental glands on the pleomeres 3–5 and the strap-like uropodal endopod (Manning &amp; Felder 1986, 1991). In addition, in Callichirus, no rostral spine is developed; the major cheliped has a meral hook (Manning &amp; Felder 1991). None of the species of Callichirus occur in the West Pacific.</p> <p>Balsscallichirus includes the following five extant species (Hyžný 2016): B. balssi (Monod, 1933), B. gilchristi (Barnard, 1946), B. guineensis (de Man, 1928), B. masoomi (Tirmizi, 1970), and B. tenuimanus (de Saint Laurent &amp; Le Loeuff, 1979). The genus differs from Laticallichirus n. gen. in the slender, pediform ischium-merus of the maxilliped 3 bearing a crista dentata on the mesial face of the ischium (versus operculiform without a crista dentata on the ischium), and the presence of a meral hook on the major cheliped (versus no meral hook is present on the major cheliped) (Tirmizi 1970; Sankolli 1971; Le Loeuff &amp; Intès 1974; de Saint Laurent &amp; Le Loeuff 1979; Hyžný 2016). None of the species of Balsscallichirus occur in the West Pacific, although only B. masoomi is known from the Arabian Sea (Tirmizi 1970; Sankolli 1971).</p> <p>The monotypic Callichiropsis, represented only by its type species C. spiridonovi Sakai, 2010 described from Tonkin Bay (South China Sea), differs from Laticallichirus n. gen. in the subrectangular ischium-merus of the maxilliped 3 and the telson being as wide as long (Sakai 2010). It should be noted that the two type specimens of C. spiridonovi might be juveniles because of the very small size (holotype cl 3.9 mm, paratype cl 4.0 mm) and the simple, non-articulated pleopod 1. Thus, further comparison with Callichiropsis is difficult.</p> <p>Grynaminna becomes again monotypic with the reassignment of Grynaminna grandis to the present new genus. Grynaminna is differentiated from Laticallichirus n. gen. by the obtuse rostrum (versus spiniform), the subrectangular, non-operculiform ischium-merus of the maxilliped 3 (versus operculiform), the presence of a crista dentata on the maxilliped 3 ischium (versus absent) and the possession of an appendix interna on the male pleopod 2 endopod (versus absent) (Poore 2000). Furthermore, the type species Grynaminna tamakii appears characteristic in having an elongate article 4 of the antennal peduncle, being approximately twice as long as article 5.</p> <p>Lepidophthalmus is represented by 16 species, distributed in the Atlantic, Indo-West Pacific and East Pacific (cf. Robles &amp; Felder 2015; Komai et al. 2018). It differs from Laticallichirus n. gen. in the presence of a minute exopod on maxilliped 3 (versus exopod absent), the subrectangular, non-operculiform ischium-merus of maxilliped 3 (versus operculiform), the presence of a hook-like projection or spine, associated with a blade-like lobe, on the lower margin of the major cheliped merus (cf. Hyžný &amp; Dulai 2014) (versus no meral hook or blade-like lobe) and the presence of an appendix interna on the endopod of the male pleopod 2 (appendix interna absent on male pleopod 2) (Manning &amp; Felder 1991; Lemaitre &amp; Rodrigues 1991; Felder &amp; Rodrigues 1993; Felder &amp; Manning 1997, 1998; Felder &amp; Staton 2000; Felder 2015; Felder &amp; Robles 2015; Komai et al. 2018).</p> <p>Michaelcallianassa, represented by M. indica Sakai, 2002 known from the Andaman Sea and M. sinica Liu &amp; Liu, 2009 from the South China Sea, is easily distinguished from Laticallichirus n. gen. by having a conspicuous ornamentation on the pleomeres 3–5, which consists of anteriorly converging longitudinal grooves and obliquely transverse or transverse rows of long setae on each somite and the narrowly subrectangular ischium-merus of the maxilliped 3, of which the ischium bears a crista dentata on the mesial face, and the uniramous male pleopod 2 (versus biramous) (Sakai 2002; Liu &amp; Liu 2009).</p> <p>Podocallichirus, presently represented only by P. madagassus (Lenz &amp; Richters, 1881) from the western Indian Ocean, differs from Laticallichirus n. gen. in the presence of a minute exopod on maxilliped 3, the subrectangular, non-operculiform ischium-merus of maxilliped 3, the presence of a prominent meral hook on the major cheliped, the spinose dactylus of the minor cheliped and the presence of a stout appendix interna on the endopod of the male pleopod 2 (Sakai 1999, 2005, 2011; Sakai &amp; Apel 2002, as Lepidophthalmus socotrensis). In particular, the presence of a row of spines on the upper margin of the dactylus of the minor cheliped is unique for Podocallichirus.</p> <p>The phylogenetic relationship between Laticallichirus grandis n. comb. and other 34 callichirine species from eight genera (cf. Table 1) inferred from Maximum Likelihood (ML) analysis of partial 16S sequences is shown in Fig. 7. The ML analysis suggests that Laticallichirus grandis n. comb. is the sister group to a clade of three species of Callichirus, although bootstrap support for major branches are generally low. K2P genetic divergence between Laticallichirus grandis n. comb. and the other callichirine species ranges from 18.8–27.2 %. The establishment of the new genus is consistent with the estimated relationships.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/E63A29373410BD35BFBEE6B2FCC5FF62	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Komai, Tomoyuki;Yokooka, Hiroyuki;Henmi, Yumi;Itani, Gyo	Komai, Tomoyuki, Yokooka, Hiroyuki, Henmi, Yumi, Itani, Gyo (2019): A new genus for “ Neocallichirus ” grandis Karasawa & Goda, 1996, a ghost shrimp species (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) heretofore known only by fossil materials. Zootaxa 4604 (3): 461-481, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4604.3.4
E63A29373417BD20BFBEE15AFB53FE6E.text	E63A29373417BD20BFBEE15AFB53FE6E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Laticallichirus Grandis (Karasawa & Goda 1996) Komai & Yokooka & Henmi & Itani 2019	<div><p>Laticallichirus grandis (Karasawa &amp; Goda, 1996) n. comb.</p> <p>(Figs. 1–6)</p> <p>Callianassa sp. –– Kato &amp; Koizumi 1992: 49, fig. 3-3. Calliax sp. –– Karasawa &amp; Tanaka 1994: 12, figs. 2-1–12. Neocallichirus sp. –– Karasawa et al. 1995: 128, fig. 2. “ Neocallichirus ” grandis Karasawa &amp; Goda, 1996: 1, fig. 1. –– Karasawa 1997: 33, pl. 5, figs. 1–4. Neocallichirus grandis. –– Kato &amp; Karasawa 1998: 5, pl. 2, figs. 7–16. –– Kato 2001: 40. –– Schweitzer et al. 2006: 115 (list). Grynaminna grandis. –– Obata &amp; Hayashi 2001: 46, figs. 3.1–12. –– Kato 2003: 159. –– Hyžný &amp; Karasawa 2012: 65, fig.</p> <p>1A–H. –– Karasawa et al. 2014: 59, fig. 5.1–5.3. –– Hyžný &amp; Klompmaker 2015: fig. 7A, 412 (Table 1). –– Ando et al.</p> <p>2016: 18, figs. 3.3–10. –– Ando &amp; Kawano 2017: 85, fig. 2.9–2.20. Podocallichirus grandis. –– Karasawa et al. 2006: 127, pl. 2, figs. 1–6. –– Kobayashi et al. 2008: 111. –– Schweitzer et al. 2010:</p> <p>39 (list).</p> <p>Recent material examined. CBM-ZC 15247, male (cl 18.2 mm, tl ca 69 mm), Inno River estuary, Numazu, Shizuoka Prefecture, 35°01.07’N, 138°53.14’E, 20–50 cm deep at low tide, 30 March 2017, yabby pump, coll. H. Yokooka; CBM-ZC 15248, 1 male (cl 12.7 mm, tl ca 50 mm), same data as CBM-ZC 15247; CBM-ZC 15249, 1 female (cl 16.1 mm, tl ca 65 mm; DNA voucher), same locality as CBM-ZC 15247, 18 March 2017, yabby pump, coll. R. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=133.43683&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=33.426334" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 133.43683/lat 33.426334)">Tagashira</a>; CBM-ZC 15250, 1 female (cl 14.5 mm), <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=133.43683&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=33.426334" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 133.43683/lat 33.426334)">Utsuga</a>, Tosa, Kochi Prefecture, 33°25.58’N, 133°26.21’E, 10–20 cm deep at low tide, 25 February 2016, yabby pump, coll. Y. Henmi.</p> <p>Fossil material examined. CBM-PI 0 0 288, fragments of major and minor chela, cliff at Sakurai, Kisarazu, Chiba Prefecture, 35°21.30’N, 139°55.21’E, Kioroshi Formation; CBM-PI 0 0 340, fragments of chela, cliff at Toyonari, Ichihara, Chiba Prefecture, 35°26.40’N, 140°04.43’E, Kioroshi Formation; CBM-PI 0 0 399, fragments of chelipeds, including 1 merus of major cheliped, cliff at Otake, Inba, Inba District, Chiba Prefecture, 35°47.17’N, 140°14.12’E, Kioroshi Formation.</p> <p>Diagnosis. See above generic diagnosis.</p> <p>Description. Body (Figs. 1, 6) elongate in general form.</p> <p>Carapace (Figs. 1, 2A, B) subequal in length to anterior 2 pleomeres combined; frontal margin with acute, narrowly triangular rostral spine flanked by bluntly triangular projection located just lateral to eyestalks; rostral spine straight, directed forward, reaching to midlength of eyestalks. Surface anterior to dorsal oval (just proximal to rostral base) without paired setae; dorsal oval well defined, smooth, length of oval about 0.7 carapace length; marginal groove of oval across anterior midline, deepest in posterior midline; cardiac region bulbous; hepatic region fairly sclerotized but without armature; branchiostegite otherwise soft, membranous; linea thalassinica extending over entire length of carapace; anterolateral margin deeply excavate at base of antenna.</p> <p>Thoracic sternite 7 (sternite of pereopods 4) (Fig. 1B) medially forming sub-rhomboidal, sclerotized shield; ventral surface having interrupted Y-shaped groove, surface anterior to obliquely transverse grooves convex, extending to sternite 6 between enlarged coxae of pereopods 4; areas lateral to median shield membranous.</p> <p>Eyestalks (Fig. 2A, B) contiguous, not reaching distal margin of article 1 of antennular peduncle; anterolateral margins convex, tapering to subacute distomesial projection; distinct, pigmented cornea located at anterolateral part of eyestalk, no extension of dark pigment seen in eyestalks.</p> <p>Antennular peduncle (Figs. 1, 2A, B) longer and stouter than antennal peduncle, 0.6 times as long as carapace. Article 1 dorsally invaginated to form statocyst occluded by setae, overlaid by eyestalk. Article 2 subequal in length to article 1, article 3 about 2.3 times length of article 2, gradually narrowing distally; articles 2 and 3 with dense, ventromesial and ventrolateral rows of long, anteroventrally directed setae. Upper flagellum slightly longer than article 3 of peduncle, subdistally with aesthetascs; lower flagellum slightly longer, with much denser and longer setation than upper flagellum, but subequal in general width to upper flagellum.</p> <p>Antennal peduncle (Figs. 1A, 2A, B) falling slightly short of midlength of article 3 of antennular peduncle. Article 1 with dorsolateral carina arched to form low lip just above excretory pore, dorsally with tuft of short setae and ventrally with tuft of longer setae. Article 2 with prominent tuft of long setae on laterodistal portion. Article 3 short, with numerous long setae, directed anteroventrally, on ventral surface. Article 4 longer than combined lengths of articles 1–3, laterally with few long setae, tufts of long setae on lateral surface proximally and subterminally. Article 5 subequal in length and slightly narrower than article 4, setation limited to few tufts of long setae on dorsal surface. Flagellum longer than carapace with sparse short to long setae arising chiefly at distal margin of each article.</p> <p>Mouthparts without distinctive features (not illustrated). Maxilliped 3 (Fig. 4A, B) without exopod. Ischiummerus broadly operculiform, 1.2–1.3 times as long as wide. Ischium subrectangular, broadened distally, distal width about 1.4 times of length measured along upper margin; upper margin sharply edged; lateral surface shallowly depressed proximally; proximal lower margin rounded, slightly produced; mesial surface with setose carina adjacent to upper margin, without even trace of crista dentata. Merus subrectangular, distinctly wider than long; upper margin arcuate; articulation with carpus slightly produced, exceeding broadly convex distal margin lower to carpal articulation. Carpus with gently convex upper and strongly convex lower margins, about 1.7 times as long as greatest width; lateral surface bluntly ridged along midline. Propodus large, subrectangular, 1.4 times as wide as long; upper margin slightly convex, while lower margin strongly convex. Dactylus slender, digitiform, slightly shorter than propodus, slightly curved; rounded terminus bearing numerous bristle-like, stiff setae.</p> <p>Branchiae limited to single rudimentary arthrobranch on maxilliped 2 and pair of arthrobranchs on maxilliped 3 and pereopods 1–4.</p> <p>Major cheliped located on left side in all specimens examined, shape and ornamentation sexually dimorphic. Major cheliped of male (Fig. 3 A–C) massive, proportionally larger than those of females. Ischium slender; upper margin noticeably sinuous; lower margin nearly straight, with row of small blunt spines increasing in size distally. Merus 1.5 times as long as high, with upper margin gently convex, bluntly carinate over entire length; outer face divided into 2 facets by blunt median ridge; inner surface nearly flat, upper distal angle forming a prominent condyle articulating to carpus; lower margin produced into strongly convex lobe, serrated with evenly spaced, triangular spines (those spines largest medially), but without hook-like process or differentiated spine. Carpus wide (height about 1.1 times length), subquadrate, upper and lower margins sharply keeled, nearly parallel, terminating in angular upper and lower corners; proximal margin broadly convex; outer surface gently convex, glabrous; inner surface medially faintly convex, with upturned upper and lower margins and with wide proximal concavity accommodating distal part of merus when cheliped flexed; few tufts of short setae on upper margin and row of tufts of longer setae on lower margin mesially. Propodus wide, heavy; palm as long as high and 1.2 times as long as carpus; outer surface smooth, with scattered tufts of short setae particularly around base of fixed finger; inner surface of palm smooth, almost glabrous except for few tufts of short setae; upper margin sharply carinate over entire length, flanked by rows of tufts of short setae, upper distal angle produced; lower margin sharply keeled, but not extending onto fixed finger, with rows of tufts of short to moderately long setae extending onto fixed finger; deep excavation present inferior to base of dactylus; outer distal margin at base of dactylus gently convex, minutely tuberculate. Fingers leaving distinct hiatus when closed. Fixed finger shorter than palm, slightly curving, with well-defined separation of inner and outer occlusal margins, inner margin unarmed but forming rounded carina extending slightly onto palm, outer margin bearing prominent subrectangular, molar-like tooth proximal to midlength. Dactylus 0.6 times as long as palm, terminating in gently curved tip crossing outer side of fixed finger; upper margin rounded, non-carinate, with row of tufts of stiff setae; occlusal margin with 1 prominent molar-like tooth proximally, separated from minutely denticulated distal margin by deep U-shaped notch.</p> <p>Major cheliped of female (Fig. 5A) less massive than that of male, armature generally weaker. Ischium with 1 small subdistal spine followed by row of faint tubercles on lower margin. Lower margin of merus less convex than in male, with weaker spines. Palm 1.1 times as long as high, slightly narrowing distally; fixed finger slightly shorter than palm, slightly curved, outer occlusal margin with triangular tooth proximal to midlength. Dactylus 0.8 times as long as palm; occlusal margin slightly sinuous, with faint denticles, with shallow notch corresponding to occlusal tooth on dactylus.</p> <p>Minor cheliped (Fig. 3D, E) distinctly smaller than major cheliped. Ischium with upper margin faintly sinuous; lower margin also faintly sinuous, with 1 tiny subdistal spine followed by row of minute granules. Merus unarmed; upper and lower margins gently convex; outer surface gently convex in general, but lower distal part shallowly depressed to accommodate proximal part of carpus when cheliped flexed. Carpus subtrapezoidal, slightly widened distally, as wide as long; upper margin non-carinate, with 2 conspicuous tufts of setae (1 distal and 1 middle), terminating in angular distal corner; lower to proximal margins sharply carinate, flanked by tufts of setae, terminating in subacute distal corner; outer surface gently convex, glabrous; inner surface also generally convex, glabrous. Palm slightly shorter than carpus, about as long as high, slightly narrowing distally; outer and inner surfaces similarly convex, glabrous; upper margin carinate in proximal two-thirds, rounded in distal one-third, with 2 rows of tufts of setae; lower margin (including fixed finger) slightly sinuous, sharply carinate to proximal half of fixed finger, flanked by rows of tufts of setae extending onto fixed finger. Fixed finger slightly curved, terminating in small calcareous claw; wide occlusal surface delimited by blunt carinae, proximal half forming deep concavity, bearing numerous tufts of stiff setae along outer and inner occlusal margins, outer occlusal margin with some denticles or tubercles proximally. Dactylus 1.6 times as long as palm, gently curving, terminating in small calcareous claw, crossing inner side of fixed finger; rounded upper surface with row of prominent tufts of setae; outer surface with row of tufts of long setae along adjacent to occlusal margin; outer occlusal margin unarmed, inner occlusal margin less clearly delimited, also unarmed.</p> <p>Pereopod 2 (Fig. 4C) chelate, strongly compressed laterally. Ischium short, lower distal corner produced. Lower margins of merus and carpus lined with dense long setae. Merus with upper margin straight in proximal 0.7, sloping in distal 0.3; narrow, flattened lower surface flanked by blunt ridges. Carpus subtriangular, about twice as long as high; upper margin with dense long setae, produced distally into short, blunt projection. Chela subtriangular; lower margin of propodus nearly straight, with long setae proximally and reduced in length distally, lower proximal corner rounded; occlusal margins of both fingers corneous, terminating in rounded, small corneous claws; upper margin of palm very short, convex, with tuft of long setae; dactylus about twice as long as palm, upper margin straight except for convex proximal part, with long stiff setae reducing in length distally.</p> <p>Pereopod 3 (Fig. 4D, E) with ischium short, lower margin slightly sinuous with produced distal corner. Merus length 2.5 times high; upper margin nearly straight in proximal 0.7, sloping in distal 0.3; lower margin slightly convex. Carpus subtriangular, distinctly widened distally; articulation to propodus located at middle of distal margin, either side of articulation truncate. Propodus outer surface with dense short setae upper to naked midline, with scattered tufts of short setae lower to midline; articulation with carpus located at middle of W-shaped proximal margin, lower distal margin weakly bilobate; distal margins of both lobes with dense fringe of stiff setae; subtruncate, lower proximal margin forming prominent “heel”, exceeding beyond lower margin of carpus. Dactylus broad, sub-rhomboidal, terminating in minute, corneous claw; upper margin with dense stiff setae; outer surface with few tufts of short stiff setae; lower margin nearly straight, with dense short setae.</p> <p>Pereopod 4 (Fig. 4 F–H) semichelate (cf. McLaughlin 1997). Ischium with produced lower distal angle. Merus with slightly convex upper and nearly straight lower margins. Carpus narrower than merus at base, widened distally; narrow, flattened lower surface formed by blunt ridges. Propodus subrectangular, with lower distal process conspicuous, deflexed, rounded apex with cluster of minute spiniform setae; lower margin sinuous, with dense brush of setae extending onto lower part of inner surface; outer surface with fields of dense setae on either side of naked midline. Dactylus tear-shaped; upper margin arched, terminating in short, outwardly directed corneous claw; outer surface with dense covering of setae, longest on lower side.</p> <p>Pereopod 5 (Fig. I, J) chelate. Ischium short. Merus slightly widened distally, slightly arcuate. Carpus elongate, widened distally, with convex upper margin. Propodus stout, widest at midlength, with dense field of long, close-set setae on distal two-thirds of outer, inner and lower surfaces; upper margin strongly arcuate; fixed finger not deflected, terminally pectinate. Dactylus minutely denticulate on terminal margin, extensor surface with dense setation. Both fingers terminally rounded, occlusal surfaces spooned.</p> <p>Pleonal somites (Figs. 1 C–E, 6) mostly smooth dorsally. Pleomere 1 wider posteriorly, subtriangular in dorsal view; tergite broadly trapezoidal, weakly sclerotized; membranous area of either lateral side without sclerite; sternite with posteriorly diverging, narrow lateral sclerites forming bases of pleopods 1; membranous parts without any pattern of small sclerites. Pleomere 2 distinctly wider than long, tergite and pleura entirely weakly sclerotized; posterolateral lobe below short, longitudinal sclerotized line bearing tuft of long setae posteriorly on surface; tergite entirely membranous. Pleomeres 3–5 tergites each with pair of finely setose, membranous, subcircular or suboval areas laterally, that of tergite 3 more posterolaterally positioned than in tergites 4 and 5, that of tergite 5 smallest; each ventrolateral margin forming weak shoulder (shoulder on pleomere 3 more posteriorly located than in pleomeres 4 and 5); lateral outlines of pleomeres 3–5 convex in dorsal view. Tergites of pleomeres 3 and 4 each with cluster of fine setae on posterolateral margins just mesial to posterolateral sutures, those of pleomere 5 each with tuft of short setae; posterolateral sutures of pleomere 3 bifurcate anteriorly, those of pleomeres 4 and 5 simple, converging anteriorly; posterolateral corners of pleomere 5 forming small condyle articulating to pleomere 6. Pleomere 6 subtrapezoidal in dorsal view, narrowing posteriorly; tergite convex, without lines of short setae anterior to posterolateral groove; posterolateral groove transverse, forming distinct notch on lateral margin; lateral margin anterior to lateral notch strongly convex; posterior dorsal surface with shallow median groove; posterolateral lobes each with prominent tuft of long setae adjacent to ventrolateral margin; posterodorsal margin with distinct notches separating posterolateral lobes, otherwise slightly convex with faint median notch, with 2 pairs of tufts of long setae.</p> <p>Pleopod 1 of male and female both uniramous, composed of 2 articles. In male, pleopod 1 (Fig. 2C) small, strongly compressed, directed anteromesially, about 0.4 length of pleopod 2; terminal article 0.7 length of proximal article, rounded distally, with several long setae on terminus to lower margin. In female (Fig. 5C, D), entire pleopod 1 sinuous, total extended length slightly shorter than that of pleopod 2; proximal article arcuate, bearing low convexity slightly proximal to midlength; distal article longer than proximal article, proximal half thickened, distal half flattened, flexible; both articles bearing long setae, sometimes forming tufts.</p> <p>Pleopod 2 of male and female biramous, with appendix interna on endopod. In male (Fig. 1 D–F), entire pleopod 2 strongly flattened; protopod subtriangular with obliquely truncate distal margin; exopod subequal in length to endopod but not reaching distal margin of exopod, almost naked except for few short marginal setae on outer margin, slightly curved inward, tapering to rounded apex; endopod about twice as wide as exopod, slightly curved inward, divided into two parts by obliquely transverse suture clearly visible on posterior surface; proximal part entirely naked; distal part with row of setae on outer margin, extending onto terminal margin; terminal margin slightly bilobed, outer lobe rounded, inner lobe subacutely pointed at inner angle, with tuft of long setae. In female (Fig. 5E, F), protopod subtriangular; rami subequal in length, although exopod falling slightly short of endopod; endopod divided into two parts by obliquely transverse suture extending from base of appendix interna; distal part triangular with narrowly rounded apex; appendix interna digitiform, widest at midlength, arising at about distal 0.2 of endopod; inner margin of endopod proximal to appendix interna slightly convex; exopod widest distal to midlength, terminal margin rounded.</p> <p>Pleopods 3–5 pairs (cf. Fig. 2G, H) forming large, posteriorly cupped fans when cross linked by hooked setae of appendices internae on opposed (mesial) margins of endopods. Protopods flattened, distinctly wider than long; distomesial margin truncate; proximomesial margin strongly concave; anterior (upper) surfaces each with small tubercle at condylar articulation with exopod. Endopods each subtriangular; stubby appendix interna (Fig. 2I) demarcated by sutures where embedded in endopod, offset slightly from mesial margin of endopod, with covering of hooked setae on subtriangular mesial face. Exopods each with pattern of simple or branched transverse sutures on anterior (upper) lateral surface; anterior (upper) surface distinctly ridged along midline; marginal area of posterior (lower) side with fine transverse sutures.</p> <p>Telson (Fig. 1E, F) subrectangular, widest at about level of midlength, 1.9 times as wide as long; lateral margin bluntly angular; posterior margin faintly concave, unarmed, with prominent tuft of long setae at rounded outer angles; dorsal surface with low transverse ridge armed with row of about 30 tiny spiniform setae and median tuft of long setae anterior to midlength and 1 pair of long setae anterolaterally.</p> <p>Uropod (Fig. 1E) with protopod unarmed, divided into two parts by transverse suture. Proximal article of exopod with 2 small spine or tubercle on upper surface. Endopod subovate, about 1.7 times as long as wide, just reaching distal margin of exopod, tapering to rounded terminus; posteromesial margin with fringe of setae extending to terminus and forming cluster. Exopod broad, with thick anterodorsal plate falling well short of distal margin; posterodistal edge of plate bearing spiniform setae increasing in length toward mesial angle and grading to thinner, dense, elongate setae of exopodal margin; anterior margin slightly sinuous, with setal row on lower side; junction between anterior and outer margins bluntly angular; outer margin broadly convex, with thick setae; inner margin faintly convex, glabrous.</p> <p>Color in life. Body and appendages generally white or yellowish white, yellowish digestive gland visible in pleomeres 1 and 2; cornea white or pale gray.</p> <p>Distribution. Our specimens came from only two locations of the mainland of Japan, Numazu, Shizuoka Prefecture (Suruga Bay) and Tosa, Kochi Prefecture (Uranouchi Inlet, Tosa Bay); shallow subtidal.</p> <p>Habitat. Three specimens from Inno River estuary, Numazu, Shizuoka Prefecture (Fig. 8A), burrowed deeply in the substratum consisting of muddy-sand mixed with gravel and fist-sized rock. The specimen from Utsuga, Tosa, Kochi Prefecture (Fig. 8B) was extracted from fine sand on the interior of a small bay. The species occurs in estuarine and inner bay environments.</p> <p>Remarks. Laticallichirus grandis n. comb. was originally described by Karasawa &amp; Goda (1996) as “ Neocallichirus ” grandis on the basis of material from Takamatsu, Akabane-cho, Aichi Prefecture (middle Pleistocene Toyohashi Formation, Atsumi Group; 0.44±0.18 Ma). The holotype consists of major right and minor left chelipeds; the paratypes consist of various fragments of major and minor chelipeds. In the original description, Karasawa &amp; Goda (1996) referred Callianassa sp. recorded by Kato &amp; Koizumi (1992) from the upper Pleistocene Shimosueyoshi Formation in Kanagawa Prefecture, and Neocallichirus sp. recorded by Karasawa et al. (1995) from the Pleistocene Ryukyu Group to their new species. They also noted the occurrence of the species in the Seto Inland Sea, off Hakatajima, Hakata-cho, Ehime Prefecture. Prior to this original description, Karasawa &amp; Tanaka (1994) reported the same species as Calliax sp. Subsequently, this species has been recorded from the lower to middle Pleistocene of various Japanese localities, ranging from the Kanto District to Tanegashima Island (e.g., Kato &amp; Karasawa 1998; Kato 2001; Obata &amp; Hayashi 2001; Karasawa et al. 2014; Ando et al. 2016; Ando &amp; Kawano 2017). In addition, Kato &amp; Karasawa (1998) and Obata &amp; Hayashi (2001) regarded the record of unidentified callianassid chelipeds from the Holocene Nanyo Formation, Aichi Prefecture (Tokay Fossil Society 1977) as representing the present species, although two different forms were recognized in those chelipeds. As seen in the given synonymy, the generic assignment of the species has been in the state of flux without information on soft parts not preserved in the fossils. We did not try to review those fossil records because it is beyond the scope of this study.</p> <p>In addition to the above mentioned characteristics for comparison with other callichirine taxa, Laticallichirus grandis n. comb. is characteristic in having a transverse row of minute spiniform setae on the dorsal surface of the telson. Among species of Callichirinae, similar trait is also seen only in Balsscallichirus balssi (cf. de Saint Laurent &amp; Le Loeuff 1979), although the number of spiniform setae is much fewer in the latter species.</p> <p>We have sampled infaunal decapods in various localities of the Japanese Archipelago, but only four specimens of Laticallichirus grandis n. comb. have been collected, from only from two locations, namely Suruga Bay and Tosa Bay. On the other hand, the fossil records suggest that the species was locally quite common in the Pleistocene. It is likely that the species prefers the subtidal zone, which is not easy to access for sampling.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/E63A29373417BD20BFBEE15AFB53FE6E	Public Domain	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.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Komai, Tomoyuki;Yokooka, Hiroyuki;Henmi, Yumi;Itani, Gyo	Komai, Tomoyuki, Yokooka, Hiroyuki, Henmi, Yumi, Itani, Gyo (2019): A new genus for “ Neocallichirus ” grandis Karasawa & Goda, 1996, a ghost shrimp species (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) heretofore known only by fossil materials. Zootaxa 4604 (3): 461-481, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4604.3.4
