identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
038F19445869FFAE829D1CFFFA51F887.text	038F19445869FFAE829D1CFFFA51F887.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaeidae Claus 1879	<div><p>Family LYCAEIDAE Claus, 1879</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length 5–16 mm, with slightly inflated pereon, especially in females. Head of females rounded, relatively large; slightly smaller in males but also rounded (Lycaea) or slightly pointed (Simorhynchotus); as long as first 3–5 pereonites. Eyes large, occupying most of head surface. A1 of females with 2-articulate peduncle, and enlarged first flagellar article (callynophore), followed by two small, terminal articles.A1 of males with 2-articulate peduncle, and enlarged, curved first flagellar article (callynophore) with two-field brush of aesthetascs medially, and three smaller, slender articles inserted on, or near, antero-distal corner. A2 absent in females. A2 of males with relatively short, slightly enlarged basal article, three slender articles folded back on one another and one short terminal article, tucked underneath head and pereon, between the pereopods. Mandibles with 3-articulated palp in males, absent in females. Maxillae 1 very reduced in size, consisting of tiny rounded lobes, or absent. Maxillae 2 absent. Coxae 1–6 not fused with pereonites, although suture with pereonites very faint or difficult to discern. Coxa of P7 seems to be fused with the pereonite. G1 and G2 simple, weakly chelate or sub-chelate. P5 the longest. P5 and P6 often with moderately enlarged basis, distinctly shorter than remaining articles combined, which are inserted terminally. P7 reduced in size, with full complement of articles, basis enlarged, longer than remaining articles combined. U1 usually with articulated rami; endopod rarely fused with peduncle. U2 endopod sometimes fused with peduncle. U3 endopod always fused with peduncle. Telson triangular, apex rounded, usually extending to about limit of U3, fused with double urosomite. Gills with folds on pereonites 2–6. Oostegites on pereonites 2–5.</p> <p>Genera. Lycaea Dana, 1852 and Simorhynchotus Stebbing, 1888.</p> <p>Remarks. The systematic limits of this family are in a state of flux, with some authors including such diverse genera as Pseudolycaea (= Lycaea), Tryphana, Brachyscelus and Thamneus, besides Lycaea (e.g., Bowman &amp; Gruner 1973, Shih &amp; Chen 1995). Authors who have accepted this arrangement usually place Simorhynchotus in the family Oxycephalidae, based on the erroneous assumption that the maxillae are present in Lycaeidae and absent in Oxycephalidae and Simorhynchotus. While the maxillae are not discernible in Simorhynchotus, this is also only true for two genera of Oxycephalidae: Oxycephalus and Rhabdosoma. In all other genera of Oxycephalidae, the first maxillae are reduced to a small rounded lobe, and the second maxillae are absent, or so reduced that they cannot be distinguished from the buccal mass, as found in Brachyscelus and Lycaea. Thus, there is no valid reason to include Simorhynchotus in the family Oxycephalidae based on the absence of maxillae. The same applies to Metalycaea, a junior synonym of Lycaea, which Nair (1993) resurrected as a valid genus of Oxycephalidae based on the absence of maxillae. In Thamneus the maxillae are present as small rounded lobes and in Tryphana the maxillae are relatively well developed (Zeidler 2016).</p> <p>Thus, following the review of Zeidler (2016), the family Lycaeidae is restricted to the genera Lycaea and Simorhynchotus. Simorhynchotus more closely resembles Lycaea, rather than any genus of Oxycephalidae, in the general habit and the morphology of A2 of males, and the gnathopods, pereopods, urosome and coxae. Also, in both Lycaea and Simorhynchotus, the A2 of males extend posteriorly for almost the entire length of the pereon. In Oxycephalidae the A2 of males usually extend posteriorly to about pereonite 2, and only in Tullbergella do they extend beyond pereonite 2, to about pereonite 5. Similarly, in other families of Platysceloidea the A2 of males do not extend posteriorly much further than about pereonite 2, except for some genera of Platyscelidae and Parascelidae where they can extend to pereonite 3 or 4.</p> <p>Clearly the family Lycaeidae is most closely related to Oxycephalidae. Browne et al. (2007) and Hurt et al. (2013), utilising molecular techniques, also found strong support for the inclusion of Lycaea within the Oxycephalidae.</p> <p>One of the unusual characters of this family is that the coxae are very difficult to discern in preserved specimens. Upon initial observation they seem to be fused with the pereonites or a very faint suture is present. In order to resolve this problem a specimen of L. bovallii was carefully dissected and cleared so that the pereopods remained attached to the pereonites. As a result, I was able to determine that, at least for this species, the coxae of G1 and G2 have a very faint suture, those of P3 and P4 a faint suture, and those of P5 and P6 a slightly more defined suture with the pereonites, while the coxa of P7 is fused with the pereonite and has a small posterior notch where a suture might have been. And this seems to be the condition of the coxae in all other species of Lycaea and Simorhynchotus.</p> <p>Key to the genera of the family LYCAEIDAE Claus, 1879</p> <p>- Gnathopods sub-chelate or simple. Head rounded in both sexes, or with slight anterior knob in some males.................................................................................................... Lycaea Dana, 1852</p> <p>- Gnathopod 1 simple. Gnathopod 2 sub-chelate. Head rounded in females, slightly produced and pointed in males................................................................................... Simorhynchotus Stebbing, 1888</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445869FFAE829D1CFFFA51F887	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F1944586FFFAA829D1AAEFA51F8FC.text	038F1944586FFFAA829D1AAEFA51F8FC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea Dana 1852	<div><p>Genus Lycaea Dana, 1852</p> <p>Lycaea Dana, 1852: 316.— Dana 1853: 1009, 1017.— Spence Bate 1862: 338.— Claus 1873: 468.— Claus 1876: 519.— Claus 1879: 178 (32) (key), 183–185 (37–39).— Carus 1885: 426.— Gerstaecker 1886: 485–486.— Claus 1887: 55 (key), 61– 62.— Stebbing 1888: 1563.—Chevreux &amp; Fage 1925: 427 (key), 429.— Pirlot 1929: 136.— Hurley 1955: 180 (incl. key).— Bowman &amp; Gruner 1973: 46 (incl. key).— Zeidler 1978: 26 (incl. key).— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 381/471 (key), 381–382/471.— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 170 (key), 170–171.— Vinogradov 1999: 1194 (incl. key).— Zeidler 2016: 48–49 (incl. key), 53.</p> <p>Pseudolycaea Claus, 1879: 178 (32) (key), 187 (41).— Carus 1885: 426.— Gerstaecker 1886: 486.— Claus 1887: 56 (key), 64.—Chevreux &amp; Fage 1925: 427 (key), 430.— Pirlot 1929: 138.— Bowman &amp; Gruner 1973: 46 (key), 47.— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 170 (key), 183.</p> <p>Metalycaea Stephensen, 1925: 183.— Nair 1993: 1172.— Nair 1995: 6 (key), 7.</p> <p>Type species. Lycaea ochracea Dana, 1853 by subsequent designation. Type material could not be found in any major North American museum and is considered lost (see Evans 1967). The type locality is the S.W. Pacific, north of New Zealand, near Sunday Island, April 1840. Although the description and figures of Dana (1853) readily characterise this genus they have been considered insufficient to determine the status of his species. Dana (1853) illustrated a male, probably immature, judging by his figure of A2. His figures characterise a species where the peduncle of U1 is relatively long and the callynophore of A2 of males has a postero-distal bulge. These two characters, combined with the morphology of G2, exclude it from all its congeners except L. vincentii and L. bovallii. Dana’s small illustrations, however, make it difficult to determine the length of the dactyls and the exact position of the bulge on A2. If anything, the dactyls seem short and the antennal bulge is near the distal margin. Thus, it is more like L. vincentii than L. bovallii. However, nomenclatural stability would not be served by re-introducing Dana’s name because his species has not been recorded since first described and the true identity of his species cannot be confirmed.</p> <p>Type species of synonyms. The type species of Pseudolycaea is P. pachypoda Claus, 1879 by monotypy. Type material could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. However, the description and figures of Claus (1879, 1887) readily characterise this species, which is considered to be insufficiently different from other species of Lycaea to warrant generic recognition (see Remarks).</p> <p>The type species of Metalycaea is M. globosa Stephensen, 1925 by monotypy. Three female syntypes are in the NHMD (84411, 86799, 86800). This species is considered to be a synonym of Lycaea serrata Claus, 1879 (see Remarks).</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body robust or globular. Head round, often enlarged in females. Eyes occupying most of head surface; grouped in one field on each side of head. A1 of males with 2-articulate peduncle; flagellum with large, crescent-shaped callynophore, with aesthetascs arranged in two-field brush medially, with or without antero-distal corner and small, rounded postero-distal lobe; with three smaller articles inserted on antero-dorsal corner. A1 of females with 2-articulate peduncle; callynophore narrowly rectangular, with two smaller articles inserted terminally. A2 absent in females. A2 of males 5-articulate, strongly zig-zagged, with most articles folded back on each other, extending anteriorly under head and posteriorly between the gnathopods and pereopods to pereonite 7; basal article distinctly inflated, about one-third the length of following article; following three articles of similar length; terminal article very short, not folded, pointing posteriorly. Mandibular incisor relatively broad, with several teeth, with small distal lobe medially; in males orientated more or less parallel to palp. Maxillae 1 consisting of tiny, rounded, plate-like lobes. Maxillae 2 absent. Maxilliped with inner lobes completely fused; medial margin of outer lobes with membranous fringe. G1 and G2 varying from almost simple to sub-chelate. P3 and P4 shorter than P5 and P6. P5 basis usually enlarged, length about 1.5–2.0 x maximum width, or relatively narrow and about 3.0 x as long as wide (L. serrata); articles 3–7 inserted terminally on basis. P6 basis also usually enlarged, length about 1.5–2.0 x maximum width; articles 3–7 inserted terminally on basis; dactylus retractile in some species. P7 reduced in size with large basis; all articles present; dactylus prehensile, rarely absent or vestigial. U1 endopod rarely fused with peduncle, sub-equal in length to exopod. U2 endopod sometimes fused with peduncle, exopod always shorter and more slender than endopod. U3 endopod fused with peduncle, exopod always shorter and more slender than endopod. Rami of U1–3 lanceolate, usually with serrated margins.</p> <p>Species. Lycaea pulex Marion, 1874; L. nasuta Claus, 1879; L. serrata Claus, 1879; L. pachypoda (Claus, 1879); L. vincentii Stebbing, 1888; L. bovallii Chevreux, 1900; L. lilia Volkov, 1982; L. intermedia sp. nov.; L. osbornae sp. nov. and L. proserrata sp. nov.</p> <p>Sexual dimorphism. Apart from the morphology of the mandibles and the antennae, females are more robust than males, especially in the pereon. Males are generally more elongate and have a relatively smaller head, and in males of L. nasuta the head is more bulbous and produced into a small anterior knob; a character that also occurs in mature males of L. lilia, L. osbornae sp. nov. and L. proserrata sp. nov. But see diagnosis of L. serrata for exceptional sexual dimorphism.</p> <p>Remarks. In the past the genus Pseudolycaea has been considered monotypic amongst the family Lycaeidae, because of the almost simple G1 and G2. In all other respects it resembles Lycaea. As the morphology of G1 and G2 of Lycaea can vary from strongly to weakly sub-chelate, as in L. serrata, the validity of Pseudolycaea seems unjustified, and, like Vinogradov et al. (1982, 1996), it is here regarded a synonym of Lycaea. Similarly, Metalycaea, which Nair (1993) resurrected as a valid genus of Oxycephalidae, is considered to be a synonym of Lycaea, because the type species, M. globosa, originally described only from female specimens, is indistinguishable from mature female specimens of L. serrata. Like Simorhynchotus, its inclusion in the Oxycephalidae on the presumed absence of the maxillae has been demonstrated to be invalid (Zeidler 2016). An examination of the type material of M. globosa has confirmed the synonymy, although it was not possible to examine the mouthparts for the presence or absence of maxillae. The specimens referred to by Nair (1993) have not been examined.</p> <p>Species of Lycaea have always been difficult to determine and a thorough revision of the genus is long overdue. Harbison &amp; Madin (1976) provide a useful key to eight species, that they tentatively consider valid. Of these eight species, Vinogradov et al. (1982, 1996) recognise only three, but they regard L. pauli considered synonymous with L. pulex by Harbison &amp; Madin (1976) as valid, and include L. pachypoda and L. lilia. Clearly the genus still presents many taxonomic difficulties that require resolution. In order to clarify the systematics of the group, it is necessary to review some of the morphological characters that have been used to distinguish species in the past.</p> <p>Uropod 1. The peduncle length can vary considerably but most species can be placed into two groups based on the ratio of the length of the peduncle to the length of the exopod. The first group, with a relatively short peduncle and relatively long rami, where this ratio is about 2 x, consists of L. pulex, L. pauli, L. serrata, L. pachypoda and L. osbornae sp. nov. In addition, the peduncle is widest distally. The latter three species are readily distinguished by additional distinctive characters but this character, together with possessing short dactyls, also distinguishes Lycaea pulex from its other congeners. Lycaea pauli is considered a synonym of L. pulex. The second group, with a relatively long peduncle and relatively short rami, where this ratio is about 3 x or more, consists of the remaining species, except for L. lilia, which seems to be intermediate. In addition, the peduncle usually has evenly convex margins and is widest medially. Amongst this group this character is not sufficiently variable to be useful to distinguish species.</p> <p>Uropod 2. Two species, L. nasuta and L. bovallii, have been recorded as having the endopod fused with the peduncle. This character has been used to distinguish these two species from all other congeners (e.g., Harbison &amp; Madin 1976). While L. nasuta is also readily distinguished by a number of other characters (see remarks for L. nasuta), L. bovallii is identical to L. bovallioides except for the urosome (Stephensen 1925, Harbison &amp; Madin 1976) and the same seems applicable for L. bajensis. An examination of more than 80 specimens with medium length dactyls, referable to L. bajensis, and more than 40 specimens with longer dactyls, referable to L. bovallii or L. bovallioides, revealed that in only a few specimens is the endopod of U2 clearly fused with the peduncle. In many specimens there seems to be a faint, or incomplete, suture between the endopod and the peduncle, depending on the angle of illumination under the microscope. Sometimes a faint suture is more evident on one side than the other in the same specimen. In all of the type material of L. bajensis available in the USNM, this suture is also faint. Thus, this character is unreliable and, in the absence of other distinguishing characters, L. bovallioides Stephensen, 1925 and L. bajensis Shoemaker, 1925 should be considered junior synonyms of L. bovallii Chevreux, 1900. Lycaea intermedia sp. nov. also has the endopod of U2 fused with the peduncle and is morphologically very similar to L. bovallii but is readily distinguished by the shorter dactyls and other minor characters, as defined in the key and diagnosis of species provided further in this contribution.</p> <p>Gnathopods. The morphology of G1 and G2 varies from almost simple to strongly sub-chelate. In most species the carpus is expanded distally, ending in a sharp, tooth-like postero-distal corner, often protruding just beyond the distal margin of the propodus. In L. pachypoda G1 and G2 are almost simple with the postero-distal corner of the carpus reduced and rounded, barely extending posteriorly (Fig. 12). In L. lilia the postero-distal corner of the carpus is rounded and in L. nasuta and L. osbornae sp. nov. the corner is less sharp than in other species. In L. serrata the distal margin of the carpus is obliquely excavate, forming an imperfect sub-chela with the propodus but the postero-distal corner usually ends in a sharp, tooth-like point. Regarding the postero-distal corner of the propodus, the species can be divided into three groups; those without, where the margins of the propodus taper gradually to the base of the dactylus (L. serrata and L. proserrata sp. nov.); those with a small rounded corner (L. lilia, L. nasuta and L. osbornae sp. nov.), and the remaining species in which the postero-distal corner of the propodus is prominent, often serrated and ending in a rounded or sharp point. These characters, in combination with others as detailed in the key, are most useful to distinguish species.</p> <p>Pereopod 5. Some species, such as L. vincentii and L. bajensis, have been recorded with minor serrations on the anterior margin of the propodus of P5. Harbison (1976) and Harbison &amp; Madin (1976) use this character, amongst others, to distinguish some species. However, apart from L. vincentii, L. serrata and L. proserrata sp. nov. I have been unable to determine, with certainty, the presence or absence of such serrations in any other species, including the types of L. bajensis in the USNM. Mostly P5 appears smooth under high magnification using a dissecting microscope and, even with a compound microscope, only very minor serrations can be observed/determined, especially for some specimens of L. vincentii. This character is used by Harbison &amp; Madin (1976) to distinguish L. bajensis from L. bovallii and L. bovallioides, adding that L. bovallioides “differs from L. bajensis only in the absence of serrations on the inner margin of the propodus of P3, 4 and 5”. However, they did not have any specimens that they could identify with L. bajensis or L. bovallioides and relied on the descriptions of Shoemaker (1925) and Stephensen (1925) to make their determinations. So, like the above, this character seems to be unreliable providing further support for the synonymy of L. bajensis and L. bovallioides with L. bovallii.</p> <p>Male first antennae. There are three variations of the occurrence of a bulge on the anterior margin of the callynophore. In those without a bulge, the anterior margin tapers gradually to the insertion of the distal flagellar articles, without forming a prominent antero-distal corner (Fig. 5). Most species of Lycaea, except L. bovallii (and junior synonyms) and L. vincentii, belong to this group. All of these species are distinguished by several additional characters as detailed under those species and in the key. There are two variations of a bulge that occurs on the anterior margin. In only one species, L. vincentii, the bulge occurs medially, and the anterior margin slopes distally to the insertion of the remaining flagellar articles without forming a prominent antero-distal corner (Fig. 21). This character alone distinguishes L. vincentii from its congeners but it is only useful for males. In the remaining nominal species, a bulge occurs on the antero-distal corner forming a right angle with the distal margin (Fig. 3). The anterodistal corner can be raised in some specimens, forming a slight “horn”. This group consists of the nominal species L. bovallii, L. bovallioides, L. gracilis and L. bajensis, tentatively accepted by Harbison &amp; Madin (1976). But slight variations of this character alone are not useful to distinguish these species and, in the absence of other distinguishing characters, the latter three species should be considered synonyms of L. bovallii.</p> <p>Pereopod dactylus length. Harbison &amp; Madin (1976) consider the length of the dactylus of P3–6 a good diagnostic character, especially of P3 and P4, and define three main types based on the length of the dactylus of P4 relative to the propodus. Those with a short dactylus are about 0.2 x; those with a moderate dactylus 0.2–0.4 x; and those with a long dactylus are greater than 0.4 x, the length of the propodus. Using this system, the nominal species of Lycaea, accepted by Harbison &amp; Madin (1976) fall into three groups: Lycaea nasuta, L. pulex, L. pachypoda and L. serrata with a short, almost stubby dactylus (L. lilia and L. pachypoda are also in this group); Lycaea vincentii with a moderate length dactylus; and L. bovallii (and its synonyms, L. bovallioides, L. bajensis and L. gracilis) with a long dactylus. The first group consists of species that are readily distinguished from each other by a number of other characters as defined in the following key and diagnosis of species. Amongst the latter group, L. gracilis Spandl, 1924 is considered a synonym of L. bovallii. It has not been recorded since its original description and Spandl’s (1924) illustrations of this and other species of hyperiideans (1924, 1927) are not always very accurate. The only character distinguishing L. gracilis from L. bovallii is the, apparently, rounded postero-distal corner of the propodus of G2. For the remaining three species with “a long dactylus”, the dactylus length seems to vary slightly from about 0.5 x to almost 0.7 x the length of the propodus. Those with a very long dactylus are otherwise indistinguishable from those with a slightly shorter dactylus, and often the tip of the dactylus seems very slender and fragile and may be prone to breaking off. Thus, the remaining three species of the “long dactylus” group cannot be distinguished on the basis of the dactylus length alone and, in the absence of other defining characters, should be considered synonymous. The last remaining species, L. vincentii, with a moderate length dactylus, is also distinguished from the long dactylus group by the structure of the callynophore of the first antennae of males and by the minor serrations on the anterior margin of the propodus of P5, as detailed above. Apart from these three characters, and that the endopod of U2 is always articulated with the peduncle, it is like L. bovallii. The three species described as new here all have P4 with a relatively short dactylus.</p> <p>In consideration of the above we are left with ten species of Lycaea considered valid in this review, including three described as new.</p> <p>Lycaea is a well-known associate of salps (Dana 1853, Marion 1874, Chevreux 1900, Harbison 1976, Harbison &amp; Madin 1976, Madin &amp; Harbison 1977). Harbison (1976) records the distribution of males, females and juveniles of L. pulex and L. vincentii on salp chains, and Madin &amp; Harbison (1977) provide more information on the parasitic behaviour of Lycaea on salp hosts and the distribution of species. From the available evidence, it seems that females may remain on the host, once settled, while males are more pelagic in habit, seeking out the settled females. The greater development of the pleon and urosome of the male supports this hypothesis.Also, the few light-trap samples that are available in museum collections consist almost exclusively of males, or usually in greater numbers than found in general plankton samples, suggesting that they are active swimmers attracted to the light.</p> <p>Lycaea appears to be wide-spread in tropical and temperate regions of the world’s oceans. Because of the confused taxonomy of species, it is difficult to determine specific depth ranges, and these are often not recorded, but most seem to be epipelagic in habit.</p> <p>Key to the species of the genus Lycaea Dana, 1852</p> <p>1. Gnathopods 1 and 2 more or less simple.............................................. L. pachypoda (Claus, 1879)</p> <p>- Gnathopods 1 and 2 strongly sub-chelate, or carpus obliquely excavate but ending in sharp, or slightly rounded, postero-distal corner.............................................................................................. 2</p> <p>2. Gnathopods 1 and 2; propodus without postero-distal corner, with margins tapering gradually to base of dactylus; dactylus length almost equal to propodus.......................................................................... 3</p> <p>- Gnathopds 1 and 2; propodus with distinct postero-distal corner, often serrated, or small and rounded; dactylus length 0.3–0.7 x (usually less than 0.6 x) propodus....................................................................... 4</p> <p>3. Gnathopods 1 and 2; carpus with oblique distal margin (especially G1), forming imperfect sub-chela with propodus; distal margin of merus obliquely V-shaped with anterior margin extending much further over carpus than its posterior margin. Pleonites with dorsal denticles. Uropod 1 peduncle length about 2 x exopod. Pereopod 5 of mature males (also very large females) with exceptionally broad merus and carpus......................................... L. serrata Claus, 1879</p> <p>- Gnathopods 1 and 2; distal margin of carpus relatively straight or only slightly oblique, forming sub-chela with propodus; distal margin of merus straight, not V-shaped. Pleonites without dorsal denticles. Uropod 1 peduncle length about 3 x exopod. Pereopod 5 of males with normal merus and carpus......................................... L. proserrata sp. nov.</p> <p>4. Gnathopods 1 and 2; propodus with small, rounded postero-distal corner. Gnathopod 2; propodus extends distally, well beyond postero-distal corner of carpus........................................................................... 5</p> <p>- Gnathopods 1 and 2; propodus with prominent, often serrated, postero-distal corner, extending posteriorly to dactylus. Gnathopod 2; propodus not reaching beyond postero-distal corner of carpus....................................... 7</p> <p>5. Gnathopods 1 and 2 similar, with propodus extending well beyond postero-distal corner of carpus..... L. osbornae sp. nov.</p> <p>- Gnathopod 1; propodus almost reaching postero-distal corner of carpus.......................................... 6</p> <p>6. Gnathopods 1 and 2; postero-distal corner of carpus ends in sharp tooth. Uropod 2 endopod fused with peduncle.............................................................................................. L. nasuta Claus, 1879</p> <p>- Gnathopods 1 and 2; postero-distal corner of carpus rounded, not produced into sharp point. Uropod 2 endopod articulated with peduncle............................................................................. L. lilia Volkov, 1982</p> <p>7. Uropod 2 endopod usually fused with peduncle............................................................. 8</p> <p>- Uropod 2 endopod articulated with peduncle................................................................ 9</p> <p>8. Gnathopods 1 and 2; postero-distal corner of carpus and propodus serrated. Pereopod 4 dactylus length about 0.5 x propodus, or longer. Pereonite 2 of females without dorsal hump. Antennae 1 of males; callynophore with anterior bulge on antero-distal corner, forming right angle with distal margin........................................... L. bovallii Chevreux, 1900</p> <p>- Gnathopods 1 and 2; postero-distal corner of carpus and propodus without serrations. Pereopod 4 dactylus length about 0.2 x propodus. Pereonite 2 of female with slight dorsal hump. Antennae 1 of males; callynophore without anterior bulge.......................................................................................... L. intermedia sp. nov.</p> <p>9. Uropod 1 peduncle length about 2 x exopod. Pereopods 3–6; dactylus stubby, very short, length about 0.2 x propodus or slightly less. Gnathopod 1; posterior margin of carpus slightly serrated. Antennae 1 of males; callynophore without anterior bulge..................................................................................... L. pulex Marion, 1874</p> <p>- Uropod 1 peduncle length 3 x exopod. Pereopods 3–6; dactylus slender, length about 0.4 x propodus, or slightly less. Gnathopod 1; posterior margin of carpus distinctly scalloped, especially towards postero-distal corner. Antennae 1 of males; callynophore with anterior bulge set back slightly from distal margin.................................. L. vincentii Stebbing, 1888</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F1944586FFFAA829D1AAEFA51F8FC	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445863FFA0829D1AAEFDA2FBA7.text	038F19445863FFA0829D1AAEFDA2FBA7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea bovallii Chevreux 1900	<div><p>Lycaea bovallii Chevreux, 1900</p> <p>(Figs 1–3)</p> <p>Lycaea Bovallii Chevreux, 1900: 157–159, pl. 18, fig. 3.— Stephensen 1925: 168–169, 230 (tab.).— Pirlot 1929: 136–137.— Belloc 1960: 21.</p> <p>Lycaea bovallii. — Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 169, fig. 3A.— Thurston 1976: 388–389 (tab.), 434.— Stuck et al. 1980: 366.— Vinogradov 1990: 75, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1993: 45 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1999: 1195 (key).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— LeCroy et al. 2009: 969 (tab.).</p> <p>Lycaea bovalli. — Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Vinogradov &amp; Semenova 1996: 615.—Gasca 2004: 997, 998 (tabs.).— Gasca 2007: 118 (tab.).— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2014: 75 (list).</p> <p>Lycaea bajensis Shoemaker, 1925: 46, figs 16–17.— Barnard 1930: 431–432, fig. 60.— Irie 1959: Table 4, 32 (tab.).— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 169, fig. 5c.— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 171 (key), 174–176, fig. 113.— Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Vinogradov &amp; Semenova 1996: 615.— Zeidler 1998: 101.— Vinogradov 1999: 1195 (key).— Lowry 2000: 326 (list).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Gasca 2003a: 308 (tab.).— Gasca 2003b: 118 (tab.).— Gates et al. 2003: 321.—Gasca 2004: 997, 998 (tabs.).— Gasca 2007: 118 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2008: 571.— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.), 91.— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).— Gasca et al. 2009: 1497, 1501 (tabs.).— LeCroy et al. 2009: 969 (tab.).—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2014: 75 (list).— Hereu et al. 2020: passim. NEW SYNONYMY.</p> <p>non [mis-identification].— Barnard 1931: 129–130.— Dakin &amp; Colefax 1940: 124, fig. 214. (= Lycaea vincentii).</p> <p>Lycaea gracilis Spandl, 1924: 30–32, fig. 6a-k.— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 169–170, fig. 4c-d.— Vinogradov &amp; Semenova 1996: 615. NEW SYNONYMY.</p> <p>Lycaea Bovallioides Stephensen, 1925: 169, 230 (tab.), fig. 63.</p> <p>Lycaea bovallioides. — Barnard 1930: 429 (key).— Evans 1961: 201.— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 169, fig. 5A.— Thurston 1976: 388–309 (tabs.), 434.— Madin &amp; Harbison 1977: 453 (tab.), 456.— Harbison et al. 1977: 470.— Laval 1980: 20 (tab.).— Stuck et al. 1980: 366.— Vinogradov 1990: 75–76, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1993: 45 (tab.).— Lin &amp; Chen 1994: 118 (list).— Lin et al. 1995: 118, 122 (tab.).— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 171 (key), 176, figs 114– 115.— Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Vinogradov &amp; Semenova 1996: 615.— Vinogradov 1999: 1195 (key).— Lowry 2000: 326 (list).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Gasca 2003b: 118 (tab.).—Gasca 2004: 997, 998 (tabs.).— Vinogradov et al. 2004: 16, 25 (tab.).— Gasca 2007: 119 (tab.).— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).— LeCroy et al. 2009: 969 (tab.).—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Nunes et al. 2013: passim.— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2014: 75 (list).—Ambriz- Arreola et al. 2018: 59–61. NEW SYNONYMY.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Lycaea bovallii is in the <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-45.416668&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=42.840553" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -45.416668/lat 42.840553)">Musée Océanographiqe</a> de Monaco, Monaco (MOM). A holotype was not designated but a male from Hirondelle stn. 16 is illustrated by Chevreux (1900). Specimens were collected by the L’Hirondelle from the N.E. Atlantic, near the Azores [38°06’N 29°18’W], stn. 16, surface, 3 August 1885 (MOM 37 0019, 2 females, 3 males, in alcohol) and the N.E. Atlantic [48°19’N 19°30’W], stn. 30, surface, 27 August 1885 (MOM 37 0025, one juvenile, in alcohol) and [42°50’26”N 45°25’W], stn. 148, surface, 28 July 1887 (MOM 37 0025, one juvenile, in alcohol).</p> <p>Type material of synonyms. The type material of Lycaea bajensis is in the USNM: the holotype male (USNM 52361) and 8 paratypes, 1 female, 7 males (USNM 52462). The type locality is the N.E. Pacific, Gulf of California. The holotype male (7 mm) and 8 paratypes are from off San Josef Island (“ Isla San José”). Shoemaker also lists additional material from this locality and from off Cape San Lucas (5) and from off Carmen Island (3) but most of these specimens could not be found in the USNM. However, there are two lots amongst the general collection, one male from Carmen Island (USNM 52463) and three poorly preserved specimens from Cape San Lucas (USNM 52464) that should be considered paratype material. Unfortunately, the latter lot has only one specimen, a male that could be referred to L. bajensis; the remaining two specimens are females that are more readily identified with L. pulex and L. vincentii. An examination of this material has confirmed the above synonymy.</p> <p>Several syntypes of Lycaea gracilis are in the Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, in alcohol (NHMW 20163). Several specimens were collected from the Red Sea; Pola stns. 22–25, 64, 82, 108, 118, 136, and a male is illustrated by Spandl (1924). The long dactylus of P4, the relatively long peduncle of U1, the morphology of G1 and G2, and of the male A1 are all characteristic of L. bovallii.</p> <p>Several syntypes of Lycaea bovallioides (4–5 mm) are in the NHMD, all labelled “Type”, in alcohol. Specimens were collected by the Thor from surface waters in the Mediterranean Sea, stn. 163 [37°52’N 26°22’E], 3 August 1910 (1 female, NHMD-83719, previously CRU-5875) and stn. 718 [36°13’N 13°53’E], 17 May 1913 (1 female, NHMD-86792, previously CRU-9293), and from the N.E. Atlantic, near Madeira, stn. 398 [36°48’N 14°22’W], 26 October 1911 (1 female, 1 male, NHMD-86789, previously CRU-9290); stn. 399 [34°23’N 15°31’W], 26 October 1911 (3 females, 3 males, NHMD-86790, previously CRU-9291) and stn. 400 [32°10’N 17°20’W], 30 October 1911 (12 males, NHMD-86791, previously CRU-9292). The figured male is from stn. 400 (Stephensen 1925) and is here designated the lectotype, the remaining syntypes become paralectotypes. An examination of this material has confirmed the above synonymy.</p> <p>Material examined. Type material of Lycaea bajensis and L. bovallioides as detailed above and the following. In NHMD: N. Atlantic, 9 females, 5 males (6 lots), Dana stns 1142 vii, 1145 vii (228137–8), 1231 v (228141), 4000 v (228231), and Thor stns 385, 399. S.W. Atlantic, 3 females, 1 male, Dana stn. 3997 v (228228). Indian Ocean, from Sumatra to South Africa, 18 females, 7 males (17 lots, all Dana), stns 3821 v, 3843 i, 3844 iii-iv, 3851 ii-iv (228175–9, 228181, 619434), 3854 i (228183), 3918 v (228189), 3920 viii, 3921 ii, 3921 vii (228193–5), 3928 iii (228203), 3931 iii (619436), 3937 ii (228216), 3959 iv (228223), 3843 iv (228255). Tropical Pacific, 20 females, 16 males (20 lots, all Dana), stns 3548 v, 3553 i (228143–4); 3561 x (228146); 3563 ii, 3569 I, 3569 iv, (228148–50); 3579 v, 3584 ii (228152–3); 3584 vi, 3584 vii (228155–6); 3585 v (228158); 3587 ix (228161); 3588 ii, 3588 iii, 3602 v, 3611 iv 3611 vi, 3626 iv, 3663 ix–x (228163–70). Tasman Sea, 1 female, Dana stn. 3665 iv (619246). Mediterranean Sea, 19 females, 11 males (11 lots), Dana stns 4050 xxi-iii, 4050 v (228233–6), and Thor stns 10, 143, 144, 163, 182, 183, 297. In SAM and SAMA (part): Meiring Naude collections from S.W. Indian Ocean, off South Africa, between Kosi Bay and just south of East London, 97 females, 63 males (53 lots), mostly 200–0 m, few 528–0 m. In SAM: S.W. Atlantic, off South Africa, 19 females, 8 males (7 lots). In SAMA: N.E. Indian Ocean, off northern Western Australia, Ningaloo Reef and Dampier Archipelago region, 8 females, 19 males (9 lots), C12558 –66. Tasman Sea, north of Sydney, 1 female, 1 male (2 lots), C5264–5. Japan, Ryukyu Islands, 2 females, 1 male (2 lots), C12567 –8. S.W. Atlantic, off Brazil [31°05’S 49°50’W], 2 males, C12569. In USNM: N.W. Atlantic from French Guiana in the south, north to Georges Bank, off Massachusetts, 38 females, 17 males (28 lots), 106183, 181803, 1154670, 1154682, 1171017, 1178027, 1198726, 1241233, 1241235, 1241238, 1241240, 1241242, 1241245, 1241286, 1242779, 1242784–5, 1242787, 1242793, 1242807, 1242810–11, 1246891, 1246972–3, 1246977–8, 1247116, 1247126. S.W. Atlantic, off <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-30.0&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-8.0" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -30.0/lat -8.0)">Brazil</a> [08°S 30°W], 3 females, 2 males (2 lots), 1246990, 1247117. N.E. tropical Pacific, off Costa Rica and Nicaragua, 5 females, 20 males (3 lots), 1242773, 1242776, 1242778. N.W. Pacific, Japan, Philippines and China Sea region, 12 females, 26 males (10 lots), 1242774–5, 1242777, 1242796, 1242798–800, 1242803–4, 1246961. N.W. Indian Ocean, near <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=62.235832&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=19.566668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 62.235832/lat 19.566668)">Mauritius</a> [19°34’N 62°14’09”E], 1 female, 1246891.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length up to about 5.0 mm for females and 7.0 mm for males, but ovigerous females of about 3.0 mm have been noted. Head of females relatively large, much deeper than long (about 1.5 x), as long as first 5 pereonites combined, sometimes slightly shorter or longer. Head of males more rounded, slightly deeper than long (about 1.3 x), almost as long as first 5 pereonites combined. Buccal mass barely protruded below head. Callynophore of A1 of males with acute antero-distal corner extending at right angles well above following article; postero-distal corner small, rounded, separated from following article by distinct notch. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, morphologically similar, G2 slightly longer than G1; basis of G1 slightly broader and shorter than G2; carpus rectangular with sharp postero-distal tooth, reaching just past base of dactylus; propodus with postero-distal corner produced posteriorly to dactylus; carpus and propodus with small serrations on distal and posterior margins; dactylus slender, length 0.5–0.6 (females), 0.6–0.8 (males) x propodus. P3–6 with relatively long, slender dactylus, those of P3 and P4 at least 0.5 x as long as propodus or longer. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus marginally inflated anteriorly, slightly longer than propodus, about 0.6 x basis; carpus length about 0.6–0.7 x propodus. P5 length about 1.2 x P 4 in females, 1.4 x P 4 in males and about 1.4 x P 6 in both sexes; basis rectangular, length about 2.4 x maximum width; merus marginally inflated anteriorly, slightly longer than propodus, about 0.6–0.7 x basis; carpus length about 0.7 x propodus. P6 basis oval-shaped, length about 2 x maximum width, slightly shorter than basis of P5; merus relatively narrow; merus, carpus and propodus similar in relative lengths to P5; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, wider in males with length about 1.5 x maximum width, in females length almost 2 x width, about 0.6–0.7 x basis of P6; remaining articles together very short, less than 0.2 x basis; propodus with small, rounded, antero-distal corner; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 peduncle relatively long, more than 3.0 x length of exopod; rami relatively slender, equal in length. U2 endopod usually fused with peduncle. Telson length about equal to width at base in males, slightly longer in females.</p> <p>Remarks. The validity of Lycaea bovallii has been in doubt in the past and Vinogradov et al. (1982, 1996) consider it a synonym of L. pulex, along with L. bovallioides and L. bajensis. However, like Harbison &amp; Madin (1976), it is here regarded a valid species, distinguished from L. pulex by the relatively longer peduncle of U1, in that the endopod of U2 is usually fused with the peduncle, and by the relatively longer dactylus of P4 (and other pereopods). Males are further distinguished by the morphology of the callynophore of A1 as detailed above. Lycaea gracilis, L. bovallioides, and L. bajensis, cannot be clearly distinguished from L. bovallii, as demonstrated above and are thus considered junior synonyms. However, this species is very similar to L. vincentii in the relatively long peduncle of U1 and in the morphology of the callynophore of A1 of males. Regarding the latter character, the main difference is in the position of the antero-distal bulge as detailed above. Apart from the relatively longer dactylus of P4 (and other pereopods), it is most readily distinguished from L. vincentii by the fused endopod of U2, although this is not always easy to determine. Also, the buccal mass is not protruded as much below the head and the remaining articles of P7, distal to the basis, are together relatively short, less than 0.2 x the basis length compared to 0.3 x, or more, for L. vincentii, although this character may be variable.</p> <p>In view of the above synonymy, especially that of L. bajensis, Lycaea bovallii has become one of the more common species of Lycaea in the N.W. Atlantic Ocean.</p> <p>Lycaea bovallii has been recorded with the following salps (as L. bovallioides), Cyclosalpa pinnata (Forsskål, 1775), Pegea socia (Bosc, 1802), P. confoederata (Forsskål, 1775), Iasis cylindrica (Cuvier, 1804) and S. maxima Forsskål, 1775 (Madin &amp; Harbison 1977). It has also been recorded with the pteropod Corolla spectabilis Dall, 1871 (Harbison et al. 1977).</p> <p>Distribution. Determining the distribution of this species is problematical, mainly because of its past confusion with L. pulex. Material in the USNM is mainly from the N.W. Atlantic Ocean, as might be expected. Considering the above synonymy, more reliable records are as follows. In the Atlantic Ocean: from about 40°N, throughout the tropical regions, and as far south as 31°S, off Brazil. In the Pacific Ocean: mainly from the tropics off Chile and Peru, the Gulf of California, the China Sea and near Japan, and the Tasman Sea, off eastern Australia. In the Indian Ocean: mainly from the tropical south-west and also the Red Sea. The SAMA also has several specimens collected from off the north-western coast of Western Australia. It has also been recorded from the Mediterranean Sea. Most of these records are from near the surface.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445863FFA0829D1AAEFDA2FBA7	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445866FFBC829D1E5AFD0EFD7B.text	038F19445866FFBC829D1E5AFD0EFD7B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea intermedia Zeidler 2021	<div><p>Lycaea intermedia sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs 4–5)</p> <p>Material examined. Holotype. Female, 5.7 mm (ovig.), NHMD-228206, Dana stn. 3931 iii, S.W. Indian Ocean, N. of Madagascar [12°09’S 49°34’E], 300 mw, 19 December 1929.</p> <p>Allotype. Male, 6.3 mm, NHMD-228225, Dana stn. 3964 v, S.W. Indian Ocean, S.W. of Madagascar [25°19’S 36°13’E], 50 mw, 15 January 1930.</p> <p>Paratypes. All from the following Dana stations. Central South Pacific: 1 male, NHMD-619243, 3561 x [04°20’S 116°46’W], 50 mw, 24 September 1928; 1 female, NHMD-228151, 3579 iv [20°56’S 160°03’W], 100 mw, 23 October 1928; 2 females, NHMD-228154, 3584 iii [10°51.5’S 168°40’W], 400 mw, 29 October 1928; 1 male, NHMD-228159, 3585 xi [11°S 172°37’W], 300 mw, 2 November 1928; 1 female, NHMD-228162, 3587 xiii [11°S 172°37’W], 50 mw, 2 November 1928; 1 female, NHMD-228172, 3748 ii [03°48’S 133°35’E], 150 mw, 10 July 1929. Indian Ocean: E. of Sumatra to South Africa: 1 female, NHMD-228173, 3815 vii [03°36’S 97°37’E], 500 mw, 10 September 1929; 2 females, NHMD-228180, 3851 iii [05°27’S 93°50’E], 200 mw, 15 October 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228182, 3851 iv [05°27’S 93°50’E], 100 mw, 15 October 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228185, 3916 v [01°45’N 73°03’E], 50 mw, 4 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228187, 3918 ii [00°35’N 66°09’E], 600 mw, 7 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228190, 3919 iii [00°07’S 63°56’E], 300 mw, 8 December 1929; 1 male, NHMD-228196, 3921 viii [03°36’S 58°19’E], 100 mw, 11 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228200, 3926 i [08°27’S 50°54’E], 600 mw, 16 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228205, 3930 v [11°55’S 49°55’E], 100 mw, 19 December 1929; 3 females, 1 male, NHMD-619435, 3931 iii [12°09’S 49°34’E], 300 mw, 19 December 1929; 1 male, NHMD-228208, 3931 iv [12°09’S 49°34’E], 200 mw, 19 December 1929; 3 females, 1 male, NHMD-228209, 3932 ii [11°35’S 48°45’E], 300 mw, 20 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228212, 3934 iv [11°24’S 52°05’E], 200 mw, 20 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228213, 3934 v [11°24’S 50°05’E], 200 mw, 20 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228214, 3935 ii [10°50’S 48°30’E], 400 mw, 21 December 1929; 1 male, NHMD-228217, 3938 ii [09°10’S 45°17’E], 400 mw, 23 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228220, 3951 iv [14°16’S 41°48’E], 50 mw, 7 January 1930; 1 male, NHMD-228224, 3964 iii [25°19’S 36°13’E], 300 mw, 15 January 1930. S.E. Atlantic: 3 females, 2 males, NHMD-228227, 3980 x [23°26’S 03°56’E], 50 mw, 17 February 1930. Tasman Sea: 1 male, NHMD-228171, 3665 iv [29°37’S 156°46’E], 100 mw, 25 February 1929.</p> <p>Other material. Indian Ocean: All but last lot from the following Dana stations, mostly in poor condition. 1 female, NHMD-228184, 3907 iii; 1 male, NHMD-228186, 3917 vii; 1 female, 1 male, NHMD-228188, 3918 iv; NHMD-228192, 3919 v; 4 females, NHMD-228197, 3924 iv; 1 male, NHMD-228199, 3924 v; 1 female, NHMD- 228201, 3926 iii; 1 male, NHMD-228202, 3927 iii; 1 female, NHMD-228204, 3929 vii; 2 females, NHMD- 228210–11, 3932 iii, 3932 x; 2 females, NHMD-228215, 3936 v; 2 females, NHMD-228218, 3948 ii; 1 female, NHMD-228219, 3949 iii; 1 male, NHMD-228221, 3958 ii. N.E. Atlantic: 1 female, NHMD-228139, 1145 ix, 1 male, NHMD-228140, 1145 x. South China Sea: 1 male, NHMD-228238, 4815. S. of Japan: 2 females, NHMD- 228237, Jutlandia stn. 4775.</p> <p>Description of holotype. Female, 5.7 mm (ovig.). Head relatively large, much deeper than long (about 1.6 x), almost as long as first 5 pereonites combined. Buccal mass protruded well below head. Pereonite 2 with slight dorsal hump. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, morphologically similar, G2 slightly longer than G1; basis of G1 slightly broader and shorter than G2; carpus rectangular with sharp postero-distal tooth, reaching just past base of dactylus; propodus with postero-distal corner produced posteriorly to dactylus; carpus and propodus without small serrations on distal and posterior margins; dactylus slender, length about 0.6 x propodus. P3–6 with relatively short, stubby dactylus, those of P3 and P4 about 0.2 x length of propodus. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus marginally inflated anteriorly, slightly shorter than propodus, about 0.5 x basis; carpus length about 0.7 (P3) or 0.8 (P4) x propodus. P5 length about 1.2 x P4 and about 1.4 x P6; basis oval-shaped, length about 2 x maximum width; merus sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.6–0.7 x basis; carpus length about 0.7 x propodus. P6 basis oval-shaped, length about 1.5 x maximum width, slightly shorter than basis of P5; merus with slightly inflated anterior margin, sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.5 x basis; carpus length about 0.6 x propodus; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with slightly bulging posterior margin, length about 1.8 x maximum width, about 0.9 x basis of P6; length of remaining articles together about 0.6 x basis; propodus with antero-distal corner produced into small, rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 peduncle relatively long, slightly more than 3.3 x length of exopod; rami relatively slender, equal in length. U2 endopod fused with peduncle. Telson slightly longer than width at base, with rounded tip.</p> <p>Description of allotype. Male 6.3 mm. Like holotype female except for the following. Head more rounded, marginally deeper than long, almost as long as first 5 pereonites combined. Buccal mass barely protruded below head. A1 callynophore without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, separated from following article by distinct notch. Pereonite 2 without dorsal hump. Dactylus of G1 and G2 slightly longer, almost 0.7 x propodus. P5 length about 1.4 x P4 and about 1.3 x P6; basis rectangular; merus length about 0.8 x propodus. P6 merus slightly shorter than propodus; dactylus retractile in small hollow at base of propodus. P7 basis broader, length about 1.5 x maximum width; length of remaining articles together slightly more than 0.4 x basis.</p> <p>Variations. Ovigerous females of Lycaea intermedia ranged in size from 5.0 mm (NHMD-228180) to 6.1 mm (NHMD-228185). Males seem to be mature at about 6.0 mm but the largest male recorded was 9.2 mm (NHMD- 228227), but this was probably an exceptional example because the next largest specimen was only 7.3 mm (NHMD- 228159). Whether or not the dactylus of P6 is retractile is difficult to determine unless it is at least partly retracted. In some specimens it is only partly retracted and sometimes only on one side. However, this character was recorded in several males apart from the allotype (NHMD-228171; 228196, 228224, 228227) as well as in several females (NHMD-228173, 228182, 228185, 228227).</p> <p>Etymology. Lycaea intermedia shares some characters with both L. bovallii and L. nasuta but is distinguished from them by a combination of several characters as detailed below. Hence it is considered to be somewhat “intermediate” between the two.</p> <p>Remarks. Lycaea intermedia was extracted from a lot labelled “ L. nasuta ” amongst the collections of Dana material in the NHMD. It was probably identified as such based on the morphology of U 2 in that the inner ramus is fused with the peduncle. This would now also include L. bovallii. However, only three lots were identified as L. nasuta, the remainder were determined as L. bovallii or L. intermedia. Vinogradov et al. (1982, 1996) erroneously describe and illustrate G1 and G2 of L. nasuta as being similar to L. pulex and it is likely that this reference was used to determine the Dana material resulting in the mis-identification.</p> <p>Lycaea intermedia is most similar to L. bovallii in the general habitus of both sexes, the relatively long peduncle of U1 and in that the inner ramus of U2 is fused with the peduncle, but is readily distinguished from it by the shorter, stubby dactylus of P3–6 and by the absence of serrations on the postero-distal corners of the carpus and propodus of G1 and G2. In addition, females of L. intermedia are distinguished by the small dorsal hump on the second pereonite, a character which is also shared with L. nasuta (also found in some specimens of L. lilia), and in males the callynophore of A1 is without an antero-distal hump, a distinctive character of L. bovallii and L. vincentii. In addition to the above, it also resembles L. nasuta in that P3–6 have a relatively short dactylus but differs in that the dactylus of G1 and G2 is relatively longer and the morphology of both is similar, whereas for L. nasuta the propodus of G2 extends well beyond the postero-distal corner of the carpus, unlike G1. In addition, the head of males is rounded, without the characteristic anterior knob found in L. nasuta. Another distinctive character of L. intermedia is the retractile dactylus of P6, a character not found in any other species except L. osbornae sp. nov. (infra) but it is not evident in all specimens and can be difficult to determine unless the dactylus is at least partly retracted.</p> <p>A salp associate has not been recorded for this species.</p> <p>Distribution. The Dana collections, as detailed above, indicate that this species is widely distributed in the tropical regions of the Pacific and Indian Oceans, with a few records from the Atlantic Ocean and the Tasman Sea. It seems to be most common in the Indian Ocean.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445866FFBC829D1E5AFD0EFD7B	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F1944587AFFB9829D1926FBD1FD47.text	038F1944587AFFB9829D1926FBD1FD47.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea lilia Volkov 1982	<div><p>Lycaea lilia Volkov in Vinogradov et al., 1982</p> <p>(Figs 6–7)</p> <p>Lycaea lilia Volkov in Vinogradov et al. 1982: 382 (key), 389–390, fig. 210.—Vinogradov et al. 1996: 472 (key), 480–482, fig. 210.— Lavaniegos &amp; Hereu 2009: 152 (tab.).— Gasca et al. 2010: 934, 938.—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.—Gasca &amp; Franco- Gordo 2014: 75 (list).— Espinosa-Leal et al. 2021a: passim.</p> <p>Type material. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-86.0&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-13.0" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -86.0/lat -13.0)">The</a> holotype female (9.0 mm) and some paratypes are held by the Pacific Ocean Scientific Research Institution of Fisheries and Oceanography (TINTRO). The type locality is the S.E. Pacific [08°S 90°W &amp; 13°S 86°W], 0–100 m.</p> <p>Material examined. In NHMD: S. Pacific: near Samoa, Dana stns 3558 ii (228124), 3584 vi (228126), 3584 vii (228129), 3588 iii (228130), 3 females, 2 males. China Sea: N. of Luzon, Dana stn. 3729 iii (228131), 1 female. S.E. Indian Ocean: S. of Sumatra, Dana stn. 3856 iv (228133), 2 females. S.W. Indian Ocean: N. of Madagascar, Dana stn. 3931 (228135), 1 female. In USNM: N.E. Pacific: 2 females, 3 males (1242788), “ Colombia, Port Utria, Chaco ”, R/ V Velero III, surface, 15 February 1934.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length up to about 9.0 mm. Head of females relatively large, rounded, much deeper than long (about 1.5 x), as long as first 3–4 pereonites combined. Head of males almost as long as first 3 pereonites combined, usually with small, anterior knob. Buccal mass protruded well below head. Pereonite 2 of females sometimes with slight dorsal hump. Callynophore of A1 of males without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, separated from following article by small notch. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, G2 slightly longer than G1. G1 basis slightly shorter than for G2; carpus rectangular with small, rounded postero-distal tooth, reaching just past base of dactylus; propodus with small postero-distal corner produced very slightly over dactylus; carpus and propodus with smooth margins; dactylus very short, stubby, length less than 0.3 x propodus. G2 carpus similar to G1 but distal margin only extends to about the middle of the propodus; propodus of males with few small serrations distally on posterior margin, otherwise similar to G1. P3–6 with very short, stubby dactylus, those of P3 and P4 about 0.2 x as long as propodus, or slightly less. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus marginally inflated anteriorly, slightly shorter than propodus, about 0.4–0.5 x basis; carpus length about 0.7 x propodus. P5 length about 1.4 x P4 and about 1.3 x P 6 in both sexes; basis rectangular, length about 2 x maximum width; merus marginally inflated, slightly longer than propodus, about 0.6 x basis; carpus length about 0.7 x propodus. P6 basis oval-shaped, slightly wider distally in males, length about 2 x maximum width, slightly shorter than basis of P5; merus distinctly inflated, maximum width slightly more than 0.6 x length, sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.5 x basis; carpus also slightly inflated, length almost 0.7 x propodus; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, wider in females, length about 1.5 x maximum width, in males length about 1.7 x maximum width, about 0.7 x basis of P6; remaining articles together relatively long, almost 0.7 x basis in males and almost as long as basis in females; propodus with antero-distal corner produced into small, rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 and U2; endopod not fused with peduncle. U1; peduncle relatively short, about 2.5 x length of exopod or only slightly longer; rami relatively slender, equal in length. Telson length about equal to width at base, relatively shorter and more rounded than for other species.</p> <p>Remarks. Lycaea lilia is readily distinguished from all its congeners, except L. nasuta and L. osbornae sp. nov. by the morphology of G 2 in that the carpus is relatively narrow so that the propodus extends well beyond the postero-distal corner of the carpus. It also shares two other distinctive characters with L. nasuta: the morphology of the head of males is similar and, in some females, the second pereonite has a small dorsal hump. Clearly the two species are closely related but L. lilia is readily distinguished by the morphology of U2 (peduncle and endopod not fused) and the morphology of G1 and G 2 in that the postero-distal corner of the carpus is relatively rounded and does not end in a distinct tooth. It is distinguished from L. osbornae sp. nov. as detailed under that species.</p> <p>The male of Lycaea lilia has not been illustrated previously in the literature and is unusual in that the head is produced into a small, rounded knob, anteriorly, similar to males of L. nasuta. Unfortunately, of the four males at hand, two are immature and the other two are recent moults so it is impossible to adequately describe the antennae.</p> <p>A salp associate has not been recorded for this species.</p> <p>Distribution. A relatively rare species known only from the tropical E. Pacific, the tropical S.E. and S.W. Indian Ocean and the China Sea as detailed above, and from off central Mexico (Gasca et al. 2010). It seems to prefer shallow waters with records from hauls of 100–0 m and with 50–600 mw.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F1944587AFFB9829D1926FBD1FD47	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F1944587FFFBA829D197AFE43FC7F.text	038F1944587FFFBA829D197AFE43FC7F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea nasuta Claus 1879	<div><p>Lycaea nasuta Claus, 1879</p> <p>(Figs 8–9)</p> <p>Lycaea nasuta Claus, 1879: 185 (39).— Bovallius 1887: 32.— Claus 1887: 62, pl. 18, figs 1–7.— Chevreux 1927: 140.— Barnard 1930: 430–431, fig. 59.— Barnard 1932: 291.— Hurley 1955: 180 (key).— Kane 1962: 310.— Siegfried 1963: 6 (list), 10.— Dick 1970: 67.— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 165–167, figs 1–2.— Madin &amp; Harbison 1977: 453 (tab.), 456.— Laval 1980: 20 (tab.).— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 382/472 (key), 385/475–477, fig. 207 (G2 is not of this species).— Vinogradov 1990: 74–75, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1993: 45 (tab.).— Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Barkhatov et al. 1999: 808 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1999: 1146 (tab.), 1194 (incl. key), fig. 4.138.— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Brusca &amp; Hendrickx 2005: 151 (list).— Browne et al. 2007: 819 (tab.), 825, fig. 4 (phylogenetic tree).—Garcia- Madrigal 2007: 155, 192 (list).— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Lavaniegos &amp; Hereu 2009: passim.— Zeidler &amp; De Broyer 2009: 71.— Hurt et al. 2013: 31 (tab.), figs 1, 2 (phylogenetic).— Espinosa-Leal &amp; Lavaniegos 2016: 150 (tab.).— Hereu et al. 2020: 9 (tab.), passim.— Lavaniegos 2020: passim.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Lycaea nasuta could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. The type locality is the W. Indian Ocean, off Zanzibar. Claus’s (1887) illustration of a male, although limited to the habitus, gnathopods and uropods, readily characterise this distinctive species.</p> <p>Material examined. In NHMD: tropical Atlantic, Dana stn. 3998 xi (228229), 1 male; Dana stn. 4000 iii (228230), 2 females. S. Pacific, Dana stn. 3561 iv (228145), 1 female. In USNM: N.W. Atlantic, from the Bahamas in the south, north to Georges Bank, off Massachusetts, 9 females, 5 males (6 lots), 10878, 1241181, 1241239, 12421289, 1246893., 1246974. S.W. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-35.166668&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-1.1" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -35.166668/lat -1.1)">Atlantic</a>, off Brazil [01°06’S 35°10’W], 1 female, 1247115. N. Pacific, off Hawaii [19.42°N 156.07°W], 1 female, 1196356.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length of mature females up to 8.0 mm and males up to 9.0 mm. Head of females relatively rounded, slightly deeper than long, as long as first 4 pereonites combined; the eyes more massive than in other species, wider than anterior pereonites in dorsal view. Head of males (when mature) with distinctive rounded knob anteriorly, relatively smaller than for females, slightly deeper than long, almost as long as first 4 pereonites combined. Buccal mass protruded only slightly below head. Callynophore of A1 of males without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, partly over-lapping following article. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, G2 slightly longer than G1. G1 basis slightly shorter than that of G2, inflated anteriorly with evenly rounded anterior margin; carpus rectangular with small, sharp, postero-distal tooth, reaching just past base of dactylus; propodus with small, rounded, postero-distal corner produced posteriorly to dactylus; dactylus relatively short, curved, length about 0.3 x propodus. G2 basis relatively slender; carpus narrow, postero-distal tooth only reaching to about 0.6 x posterior margin of propodus; propodus and dactylus like that of G1. P3–6 with relatively short, stubby dactylus, those of P3 and P4 slightly less than 0.2 x propodus. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus slightly inflated anteriorly, sub-equal in length to carpus, about 0.8 x propodus and almost 0.5 x basis. P5 relatively longer than for other species, about 1.5 x P4 and P6 (slightly less in males); basis rectangular, length slightly more than 2 x maximum width; merus length about 0.8 x propodus, almost 0.7 x basis; carpus length slightly less than 0.6 x propodus. P6 basis rectangular, length about 2 x maximum width, slightly shorter than basis of P5; merus slightly inflated anteriorly; merus, carpus and propodus similar in relative lengths to P5; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, length about 1.5 x maximum width, about 0.7–0.8 x basis of P6; length of remaining articles about 0.5 x basis, or slightly more; propodus with antero-distal corner produced into rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 peduncle relatively wider than for other species, length about 3.0 x exopod; endopod rarely fused with peduncle; rami relatively broad, equal in length. U2 endopod fused with peduncle. Telson slightly longer than width at base, with evenly rounded apex.</p> <p>Remarks. A combination of three characters distinguishes Lycaea nasuta from its congeners: i) the relatively short dactylus of P3 and P4; ii) the narrow carpus of G2, which is shorter than the posterior margin of the propodus; and iii) the fusion of the inner ramus of U2 with the peduncle. The morphology of G2 is similar to L. lilia and L. osbornae sp. nov., but in the former the postero-distal corner of the carpus is rounded and in the latter the carpus is more rectangular and the dactylus is more slender and longer; also the morphology of G1 and G2 is similar. Lycaea nasuta also bears some similarity to L. intermedia, as discussed under that species.</p> <p>Lycaea nasuta has, to date, only been recorded with the salp Cyclosalpa affinis (Chamisso, 1819) (Madin &amp; Harbison 1977).</p> <p>Distribution. Known only from a few records; from the Indian and Atlantic Oceans around South Africa, from the north and S.E. mid-Atlantic, and from the Pacific Ocean, in the south, near New Zealand to about 42°S, and in the north off the eastern coast of America, from California to Mexico and off Peru and Chile. Most catch records are from near the surface.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F1944587FFFBA829D197AFE43FC7F	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F1944587CFFB5829D1E22FDC9F823.text	038F1944587CFFB5829D1E22FDC9F823.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea osbornae Zeidler 2021	<div><p>Lycaea osbornae sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs 10–11)</p> <p>Material examined. Holotype: Female, 4.7 mm, USNM 1242790. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-68.058334&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=39.433334" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -68.058334/lat 39.433334)">North Atlantic</a>, Georges Bank, S. of Massachusetts [39°26’N 68°03’30”W], R/VAlbatross, surface, 31 August 1885.</p> <p>Allotype: Male, 5.2 mm (recently moulted), NHMD-228125, Dana stn. 3563 iv, S.E. Pacific, N.E. of Marquesas Is. [07°45.5’S 131°22’W], 100 mw, 29 September 1928.</p> <p>Paratypes 1: 1 female, 3.7 mm, USNM 1242790, collected with holotype. 2: 1 female, 3.3 mm, SAMA C12577, N.E. Pacific, off <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-126.666664&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=49.2515" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -126.666664/lat 49.2515)">Vancouver Island</a> [49°15.09’N 126°40’W], “LaPerouse and Line P Monitoring Program”, stn. A 4, 250 m, September 2009 (from M. Galbraith). On the salp Cyclosalpa bakeri Ritter, 1905. 3: 1 female 5.8 mm, NHMD-619242, collected with allotype. 4: 1 female, 4.4 mm, NHMD-228132, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=97.933334&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-9.983334" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 97.933334/lat -9.983334)">Dana</a> stn. 3843 iv, S.E. Indian Ocean, N. of Cocos / Keeling Is. [09°59’S 97°56’E], 200 mw, 9 October 1929. 5: 2 females, 6.1 and 6.5 mm, NHMD- 228242, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-80.55&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=6.8" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -80.55/lat 6.8)">Dana</a> stn. 1208 iii, N.E. Pacific, off Panama [06°48’N 80°33’W], 300 mw, 16 January 1922. 6: 2 males about 8.6 mm, NHMD-228248, Dana stn. 3563 v, same data as allotype but 50 mw.</p> <p>Description of holotype. Female, 4.7 mm. Head relatively large, rounded, much deeper than long (about 1.7 x), as long as first 3 pereonites combined. Buccal mass protruded well below head. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, G1 slightly shorter than G2. G1 with slightly inflated basis; carpus rectangular with small, pointed, postero-distal tooth, reaching to about the middle of the propodus; propodus with small, slightly serrated, postero-distal corner produced very slightly posteriorly to dactylus; dactylus slender, relatively long, length 0.5 x propodus. G2 similar to G1 except for basis which is more slender and longer (1.5 x that of G1) accounting for the extra length. P3–6 with very short, stubby dactylus, those of P3 and P4 about 0.2 x as long as propodus, or slightly more. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus marginally inflated anteriorly, marginally longer than propodus, about 0.5 x basis; carpus marginally shorter than propodus. P5 length about 1.2 x P4 and P6; basis rectangular, length about 2 x maximum width; merus marginally inflated anteriorly, sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.6 x basis; carpus length about 0.8 x propodus. P6 basis rectangular but slightly wider medially, length about 2 x maximum width, slightly shorter than basis of P5; merus with slightly serrated antero-distal corner, slightly inflated anteriorly, maximum width almost 0.6 x length, slightly shorter than propodus, about 0.5 x basis; carpus relatively wide but more or less rectangular, length about 0.6 x propodus; anterior and distal margin of carpus and anterior margin of propodus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, length about 1.7 x maximum width, about 0.7 x basis of P6; remaining articles together relatively long, almost 0.7 x basis; propodus with antero-distal corner produced into small, rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 and U2; endopod not fused with peduncle. U1 peduncle relatively short, about 1.7 x length of exopod or only slightly longer; rami relatively slender, endopod slightly longer than exopod. U2 endopod slightly longer than peduncle. Telson rounded, length marginally shorter than width at base.</p> <p>Description of allotype. Male, 5.2 mm. Like holotype female except for the following. Head relatively large, rounded, much deeper than long (about 1.5 x), as long as first 4 pereonites combined. A1 callynophore without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, separated from following article by distinct notch. Dactylus of G1 and G2 slightly longer, about 0.7 x propodus. P5 length about 1.3 x P4 and P6; basis relatively longer about 2.4 x width. P6 merus equal in length to propodus. P7 basis more rectangular, length about 2 x width; length of remaining articles together slightly less than 0.4 x basis. U1 peduncle slightly longer, about 2 x length of exopod. U2 endopod slightly shorter than peduncle.</p> <p>Paratype USNM 1242790. Female, 3.7 mm. This specimen is in poor condition but is like the holotype except for the morphology of G2 where the postero-distal corner of the carpus is relatively small, barely reaching to about one-third of the propodus (Fig. 10A). However, this may be a juvenile character as noted for stage iv of L. pulex by Harbison (1976). Also, the dactylus of G1 and G2 is relatively shorter and less slender than for the holotype.</p> <p>Paratype SAMA C12577. Female, 3.3 mm, recently moulted, immature. It is like the holotype in all respects except that the dactylus of G1 and G2 (Fig. 10B) and P3–6 are marginally longer and sharper. However, one might expect that the dactyls of recently moulted specimens might be less worn and hence slightly longer and sharper. Collected on the salp Cyclosalpa bakeri Ritter, 1905.</p> <p>Paratype NHMD-619242. Female, 5.8 mm. Morphologically identical to the holotype. The dactylus of P6, on the right, is partly retracted.</p> <p>Paratype NHMD-228132. Female, 4.4 mm. Like the holotype. The dactylus of G2 is marginally longer.</p> <p>Paratypes NHMD-228242. Two females, 6.5 and 6.1 mm. Both are like the holotype except that the dactylus of G2 is slightly longer and in the smaller specimen the postero-distal corner of the carpus of G1 and G2 is worn and both are more excavate, especially on the left side. The larger specimen is ovigerous.</p> <p>Paratypes NHMD-228248. Two males, about 8.6 mm, one with head detached. Both with mature antennae and head with rounded knob as occurs in mature specimens of L. nasuta (Fig. 9), otherwise like the allotype. One specimen with the dactylus of P6, on the right, fully retracted (Fig. 11).</p> <p>Etymology. I take great pleasure in naming this species for my colleague Dr Karen Osborn, Research Zoologist/ Curator, Department of Invertebrate Zoology, Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, Washington DC, in acknowledgement for her, and her team’s, research efforts investigating the evolutionary significance of vision and eye morphology in hyperiideans, and also for gaining the funds to enable me to spend two months at the Smithsonian in 2015, thus, in part, making this current review possible.</p> <p>Remarks. Lycaea osbornae is most similar to L. lilia based on the morphology of G2. It differs primarily in that the morphology of G1 is like that of G2 and in that the postero-distal corner of the carpus is pointed and the dactylus is relatively longer and slender (not stubby). In addition, the peduncle of U1 is relatively shorter, less than 2 x the length of the exopod (about 2.5 x or more in L. lilia) and the telson is wider and more rounded in L. lilia. Also, in Lycaea osbornae the peduncle of U2 is shorter than the endopod, a character only shared with L. pachypoda, L. pulex and males of L. serrata, all species from which L. osbornae is readily distinguished by the morphology of G1 and G2.</p> <p>An unusual character of this species is the retractile dactylus of P6 which has not been found in any other species of Lycaea except L. intermedia but, as for that species, it is not evident in all specimens and can be difficult to determine unless the dactylus is at least partly retracted.</p> <p>One paratype (SAMA C12577) from the N.E. Pacific was collected on the salp Cyclosalpa bakeri Ritter, 1905.</p> <p>Distribution. Known only from a few records, from the type locality, the north and S.E. Pacific and the S.E. Indian Ocean, as detailed above.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F1944587CFFB5829D1E22FDC9F823	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445870FFB3829D1AAEFE8DFE3F.text	038F19445870FFB3829D1AAEFE8DFE3F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea pachypoda (Claus 1879)	<div><p>Lycaea pachypoda (Claus, 1879)</p> <p>(Figs 12–13)</p> <p>Pseudolycaea pachypoda Claus, 1879: 187 (41).— Carus 1885: 426.— Bovallius 1887: 34 — Claus 1887: 64–65, pl. 20, figs 12–22.— Chevreux 1892: 33.—Chevreux &amp; Fage 1925: 430–431, fig. 420.— Stephensen 1925: 169–171, 230 (tab.), fig. 64.— Spandl 1927: 215–216, fig. 36.— Pirlot 1929: 138–139.— Pirlot 1939a: 43–44.— Pirlot 1939b: 70.— Evans 1961: 203.— Vinogradov 1962: 24–25.—Hure et al. 1969: 603, 605 (tabs.).— Dick 1970: 68, fig. 12 (part).— Tashiro &amp; Jossi 1972: fig. 8 (map), 20 (list), 33 (tab.).— Harbison et al. 1977: 470.— Shulenberger 1977: 379 (tab.).— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 183–185, figs 120–121.</p> <p>Lycaea pachypoda. — Hurley 1969: 33, pl. 19 (map 8).— Laval 1980: 19, 20, 23 (tabs.).— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 382/472 (key), 388–389/479–480, fig. 209.— Barkhatov &amp; Vinogradov 1988: passim.— Vinogradov 1990: 76, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— De Broyer &amp; Jażdżewski 1993: 118 (list).— Lin &amp; Chen 1994: 115, 118 (list).— Lin et al. 1995: 122 (tab.).— Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Zeidler 1998: 101–104, figs 58–59.— Barkhatov et al. 1999: 808 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1999: 1146 (tab.), 1194 (incl. key), fig. 4.139.— Lowry 2000: 326 (list).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Gasca 2003b: 118 (tab.).— Vinogradov et al. 2004: 16, 25 (tab.).— Brusca &amp; Hendrickx 2005: 151 (list).— Gasca 2007: 119 (tab.).— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).— Lavaniegos &amp; Hereu 2009: passim.— LeCroy et al. 2009: 969 (tab.).— Valencia &amp; Giraldo 2009: 268 (tab.), passim.— Zeidler &amp; De Broyer 2009: 65–66.—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Valencia et al. 2013: 51 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2014: 75 (list).— Lavaniegos 2014: passim.—Espinosa- Leal &amp; Lavaniegos 2016: 150 (tab.).</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Pseudolycaea pachypoda could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. The type locality is the Mediterranean Sea, near Messina, Italy and the western Indian Ocean, near Zanzibar. Claus’s (1887) illustration of a female readily characterise this distinctive species.</p> <p>Material examined. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=18.1&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-35.666668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 18.1/lat -35.666668)">In</a> NHMD: numerous specimens from the Dana and Thor expeditions and others, too many to list here, from all the World’s Oceans including the Mediterranean Sea. In SAM: S.W. Atlantic: off South Africa [33°S 17°19’E &amp; 35°40’S 18°06’E], 2 females (2 lots). In SAMA: S.W. Pacific, Tasman Sea, off central eastern Australia [about 34°–43°S], 22 females, 14 males (9 lots), C5265–73 and off eastern Tasmania [42°45 ’– 44°14’S], 15 females, 9 males (7 lots), C12570 –76. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-63.77&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.93" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -63.77/lat 31.93)">In</a> USNM: N.W. Atlantic, Bermuda [31.93°N 63.77°W], 1 female, extracted from 1153747. N.E. Pacific, off <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-109.533&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=14.517" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -109.533/lat 14.517)">Central America</a> [12°27’N 111°42’W and 14.517°N 109.533°W], 2 females, 1264034, 1264063.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length of females up to 6.0 mm, males up to 7.0 mm. Body of females more globular than other congeners. Head of females relatively small, almost 2 x as deep as long, as long as first 3 pereonites combined. Head of males more rounded than in females, marginally longer. Buccal mass protruded well below head. Callynophore of A1 of males without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, barely partly over-lapping following article. G1 and G2 almost simple, morphologically similar, G2 slightly longer than G1. G1 basis very broad, width about 0.5 x length, with inflated anterior margin; carpus sub-quadrate with slightly serrated postero-distal corner, extending slightly posterior to propodus; propodus with postero-distal corner produced posteriorly to dactylus; dactylus robust, length about 0.5 x propodus. G2 similar to G1 but basis more slender and longer, carpus slightly narrowed distally and postero-distal corner of propodus is smaller. P3–6 with relatively short, stubby dactylus, those of P3 and P4 only about 0.2 x propodus. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 marginally longer than P3; merus slightly inflated anteriorly, length sub-equal to propodus or slightly longer, about 0.5 x basis; carpus sub-equal in length to propodus. P5 only slightly longer than P6, about 1.3–1.4 x P4; basis rectangular, length 1.6 x maximum width (marginally less in males); merus marginally inflated anteriorly, slightly shorter than propodus, about 0.5 x length basis; carpus length about 0.8 x propodus. P6 basis relatively broad, length 1.4 x maximum width, almost as long as basis of P5; merus broader than for P5, maximum width about 0.6 x length, sub-equal in length to propodus, marginally longer than 0.4 x basis; carpus slightly inflated, length marginally less than 0.8 x propodus; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin (more proximally in females), length about 1.8 x maximum width, slightly more than 0.8 x basis of P6; length of remaining articles 0.5–0.6 x basis; propodus with antero-distal corner produced into rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 and U2; endopod not fused with peduncle. U1 peduncle length about 2.0 x exopod; endopod slightly broader than endopod, equal in length. Telson length about 1.4 x width at base, or marginally shorter.</p> <p>Remarks. Lycaea pachypoda is readily distinguished from all its congeners by the morphology of G1 and G2, which are almost simple. Prior to Vinogradov et al. (1982, 1996) this species was relegated to the monotypic genus Pseudolycaea Claus, 1879. However, apart from G1 and G2, it is very similar to other species of Lycaea and the generic distinction cannot be maintained.</p> <p>Like L. pulex, L. pachypoda has been recorded from the salp Salpa maxima and pyrosomes (Chevreux 1892, 1900; Chevreux &amp; Fage 1925; Laval 1980). It has also been recorded from the medusa Liriope tetraphylla (Chamisso &amp; Eysenhardt, 1821) (Harbison et al. 1977).</p> <p>Distribution. A relatively uncommon species but widely distributed in the tropical and temperate regions of all the world’s oceans, including the Mediterranean Sea, generally between the Subtropical Convergences. Vinogradov (1962) also records it from the Southern Ocean, off Australia, at about 45 °S. Most catch records are from nearsurface waters.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445870FFB3829D1AAEFE8DFE3F	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445875FF8C829D1BE2FA97F90B.text	038F19445875FF8C829D1BE2FA97F90B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea proserrata Zeidler 2021	<div><p>Lycaea proserrata sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs 14–15)</p> <p>Material examined. Holotype. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-44.0&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=8.0" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -44.0/lat 8.0)">Male</a>, 7.0 mm, USNM 1246984. Tropical W. Atlantic, N.E. of French Guiana [08°N 44°W], R/ V Gilliss, USNOO Expedition stn. 2-T1-C, trawl 10 feet, Farquhar, 20 January 1969.</p> <p>Allotype. Female, 6.2 mm, NHMD-228266, Dana stn. 3920 vii, S.W. Indian Ocean, N.E. of Seychelles [01°12’S 62°19’E], 600 mw, 9 December 1929.</p> <p>Paratypes. All from the following Dana stations. Indo-Pacific: 2 females, 1 male, NHMD-228250, 3734 iii [11°43’N 121°03’E], 300 mw, 27 June 1929; 5 females, 5 males, NHMD-228252, 3800 iii [07°53’S 116°18’E], 300 mw, 18 August 1929; 4 females, NHMD-288253, 3800 v [07°53’S 116°18’E], 50 mw, 18 August 1929. Indian Ocean, from Bali to South Africa: 1 female, 1 male, NHMD-228260, 3908 v [04°28’N 81°13’E], 100 mw, 22 November 1929; 1 male, NHMD-228264, 3918 iv [00°35’N 66°09’E], 300 mw, 7 December 1929; 2 females, NHMD-619991, 3920 vii [01°12’S 62°19’E], 600 mw, 9 December 1929; 3 females, 3 males, NHMD-228270, 3921 viii [03°36’S 58°19’E], 100 mw, 11 December 1929; 6 females, 3 males, NHMD-228271–2, 3924 iv–v [05°01’S 54°46’E], 100 &amp; 50 mw, 14 December 1929; 4 females, 4 males, NHMD-228273–4, 3925 iv–v [07°13’S 52°22’E], 100 &amp; 50 mw, 16 December 1929; 1 male, NHMD-228277, 3937 i [09°26’S 46°05’E], 500 mw, 22 December 1929; 1 female, NHMD-228279, 3938 i [09°10’S 45°17’E], 500 mw, 23 December 1929; 4 females, 1 male, NHMD- 228282–3, 3941 i–ii [07°24’S 41°51’E], 500 &amp; 400 mw, 24 December 1929; 2 females, NHMD-228286–7, 3942 ii, 3942 v [06°47’S 41°27’E], 400 &amp; 100 mw, 25 December 1929; 3 females, NHMD-228288–9, 3954 ii–iii [16°53’S 42°12’E], 300 &amp; 200 mw, 9 January 1930; 1 female, 1 male, NHMD-228290–1, 3957 ii, 3957 v [21°30’S 42°32’E], 300 &amp; 50 mw, 11 January 1930. Tropical Atlantic: 2 males, NHMD-228294, 3997 ii [11°S 07°36’W], 600 mw, 27 February 1930; 1 female, NHMD-228300, 3998 iv [07°34’S 08°48’W], 100 mw, 1 March 1930; 1 male, NHMD- 620067, 4001 iv [03°56’N 12°32.5’W], 100 mw, 6 March 1930. Additional male from S.W. Indian Ocean, off South Africa, SAMA C12600, Meiring Naude stn. SM 152D [30°13’30”S 31°27’30”E], 212 m, 17 May 1977.</p> <p>Other material: All from the following Dana stations, mostly in poor condition. Atlantic Ocean: 1 male, NHMD-228240, 946; 4 females, 4 males, NHMD-228295, 3997 iv; 1 female, NHMD-228299, 3997 v; 8 females, NHMD-228301, 3998 v; 5 females, NHMD-288302, 4000 iv; 1 female, NHMD-288303, 4000 x. Pacific Ocean: 1 female, 1 male, NHMD-228243, 1208 xiv; 1 female, NHMD-228249, 3620 v. Indian Ocean: 2 females, 2 males, NHMD-228246–7, 3556 v–vi; 1 male, NHMD-228254, 3804 iii; 2 females, 1 male, NHMD-228261, 3913 v; 1 female, NHMD-228265, 3918 v; 3 females, NHMD-228267, 3920 viii; 3 females, 1 male, NHMD-228269, 3921 vii; 4 females, NHMD-228278, 3937 iii; 1 female, NHMD-228281, 3939 ii.</p> <p>Description of holotype. Male, 7.0 mm. Head sub-spherical, with small rounded knob anteriorly, about 1.3 x as deep as long, as long as first 4.5 pereonites combined. Buccal mass barely protruding below head. Callynophore of A1 without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, partly over-lapping following article. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, G2 slightly longer than G1. G1 basis marginally inflated; merus with relatively straight distal margin, not v-shaped as in all other congeners; carpus sub-rectangular, about as wide as long, with small, sharp, postero-distal tooth; postero-distal corner of propodus not produced posteriorly to dactylus; dactylus relatively long and slender, almost as long as propodus. G2 very similar to G1 except carpus is more rectangular, slightly longer than wide. P3–6 with relatively short, slender dactylus, those of P3 and P4 about 0.2 x propodus, or slightly more. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 marginally longer than P3; merus not inflated anteriorly as in other species, sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.6 x basis; propodus length 1.2–1.3 x carpus. P5 length about 1.3 x P4, 1.2 x P6; basis rectangular, relatively slender, length about 2 x maximum width; merus sub-equal in length to propodus, almost 0.7 x basis; carpus length about 0.7 x propodus. P6 basis oval-shaped, with evenly convex margins, length about 1.5 x maximum width; merus length about 0.5 x basis, slightly shorter than propodus; carpus length about 0.8 x propodus; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis almost spherical, marginally longer than wide, length about 0.6 x basis of P6; length of remaining articles less than 0.3 x basis; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 and U2; endopod not fused with peduncle. U1 peduncle length about 3.0 x exopod; rami equal in length. Telson relatively narrow, length about 1.6 x width at base, with slight, but distinct, concavity on the margins, about one-third from the tip, apex evenly rounded, almost pointed.</p> <p>Description of allotype. Female, 6.2 mm. Like holotype except for the following. Head relatively deep, almost 1.7 x as deep as long, as long as first 4 pereonites combined, without anterior knob. Dactylus of G1 and G2 slightly shorter, about 0.8 x propodus. P7 basis more elongate, length about 1.5 x width. Telson without concavity on margins, length only 1.3 x width at base.</p> <p>Variations. The excavation of the carpus of G1 and G2 can vary slightly, sometimes approaching that of L. serrata, especially in some females, and the propodus is often extended slightly beyond the postero-distal corner of the carpus.</p> <p>Etymology. This species is named “ proserrata ” (from the latin “ pro ”, just as) to indicate that it closely resembles L. serrata in that G1 and G2 have a long dactylus and the propodus lacks the characteristic postero-distal corner, and in that the articles distal to the basis of P7 are together relatively short. The morphology of G1 and G2 sometimes approaches that of L. serrata.</p> <p>Remarks. It is with some hesitation that I describe this species as new to science but it has a number of characters that cannot be easily reconciled with any other species. The morphology of the male A1, lacking an antero-distal corner, alone distinguishes it from L. bovallii and L. vincentii. The morphology of G1 and G2 readily distinguish it from L. lilia and L. osbornae and also from L. pulex which have shorter dactyls and the propodus has a distinct, slightly serrated, postero-distal corner. Also, L. pulex is distinguished by the relatively short peduncle of U1. This species also bears some resemblance to L. nasuta but is readily distinguished from it by the longer dactylus of G1 and G2, the morphology of G2, the relatively longer and more slender telson and in that the endopod of U2 is not fused with the peduncle. Thus, L. proserrata is most similar to L. serrata and it is likely that the two have been confused in the past. However, in L. serrata the carpus of G1 and G2 is distinctly more excavate, and although this character can vary slightly with the excavation ranging from moderate to extreme, usually more extreme for G1, it is usually greater than found in L. proserrata. Also, males of L. proserrata are readily distinguished by the more slender habitus (compare figs 14 and 19) and are further distinguished from L. serrata by the following characters of that species: i) specimens of similar size, have a smaller head without an anterior knob; ii) the buccal mass extends well below the head; iii) some of the pereonites and pleonites are denticulate; iv) the merus and carpus of P5 are relatively broad (even in smaller specimens 5–6 mm); v) the dactylus of P7 is vestigial; vi) the peduncle of U1 is relatively short (only 2 x exopod); and vii) the telson is only marginally longer than wide; characters that are all at odds with L. proserrata. The long, relatively narrow, telson of L. proserrata males is especially distinctive, often with a slight concavity on the margins, about one-third from the tip. An unusual character noted for this species is that the distal margin of the merus of G1 and G2 is relatively straight, not v-shaped, over-lapping the carpus, which is characteristic of all other congeners. This character seems to be consistent in all the specimens examined and readily distinguishes this species. It is especially useful in distinguishing females from smaller (&lt;9 mm) specimens of L. serrata in which the pereonites and pleonites are often only slightly carinate. Large females of L. serrata (&gt; 9 mm) are easily distinguished by the inflated pereonites and the raised dorsal corners of the pleonites (fig. 18).</p> <p>This is one of the smaller species of Lycaea, with females mature at about 5–7 mm and males at 6–9 mm. One female (NHMD-228295) is ovigerous at 5.2 mm. A gelatinous associate has not been recorded.</p> <p>Distribution. The Dana collections, as detailed above, indicate that this species is widely distributed in the tropical regions of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans. It seems to be most common in the Indian Ocean.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445875FF8C829D1BE2FA97F90B	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F1944584AFF8E829D1D36FA85F89F.text	038F1944584AFF8E829D1D36FA85F89F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea pulex Marion 1874	<div><p>Lycaea pulex Marion, 1874</p> <p>(Figs 16–17)</p> <p>Lycaea pulex Marion, 1874: 13–19, pl. 2, fig. 2.— Bovallius 1887: 32.— Stebbing 1888: 1567.— Chevreux 1900: 156–157.— Spandl 1924: 30, fig. 5.—Chevreux &amp; Fage 1925: 429–430, fig. 419.— Stephensen 1925: 167–168, 230 (tab.).— Chevreux 1927: 140.— Pirlot 1930: 24–25.— Barnard 1937: 190.— Pirlot 1939a: 45.— Shoemaker 1945: 243.— Shoemaker 1948: 14.— Bulycheva 1955: 1048 (tab.).— Hurley 1955: 180 (key).— Reid 1955: 25.—Hurley 1956: 20–21.— Irie 1957: 10 (incl. tab.).— Pillai 1957: 62–63, fig. xvii, 4–8.— Irie 1959: Table 4, 32 (tab.).— Hurley 1960: 282, 284 (tab.).— Pillai 1966b: 224–225, fig. 14.—Hure et al. 1969: 603, 605 (tabs.).— Dick 1970: 67, fig. 12 (part).— Yoo 1971: 43 (list), 63.— Tashiro &amp; Jossi 1972: fig. 8 (map), 20 (list), 33 (tab.).—Harbison 1976: 153–160, figs 2–11.— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 167–169, figs 1B, 3C, 4E.— Madin &amp; Harbison 1977: 453 (tab.), 455–456, fig. 4.— Laval 1980: 19, 20, 23 (tabs.).— Brusca 1981: 44.— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 382/472 (key), 382–384/472–474, fig. 205 (part).— Macquart-Moulin 1993: 1158 (tab.), 1164, fig. 12 (distribution, part).— Lin &amp; Chen 1994: 118 (list).— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 171 (key), 171–173, figs 110–111.— Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Vinogradov &amp; Semenova 1996: 615.— Zeidler 1998: 104, figs 60–61.— Barkhatov et al. 1999: 808 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1999: 1147 (tab.), 1194 (key), 1194–1195, fig. 4.140.— Lowry 2000: 327 (list).— Gasca &amp; Shih 2001: 496 (tab.).— Lima &amp; Valentin 2001: 473 (list), 474 (tab.).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Gasca 2003a: 308 (tab.).— Gates et al. 2003: 320 (text fig.), 321–322.— Gasca &amp; Suárez-Morales 2004: 26 (tab.).— Brusca &amp; Hendrickx 2005: 151 (list).— Zelickman 2005: xvii (list), fig. 38a-d (pp. 234–241).— Garcia-Madrigal 2007: 156, 192 (list).— Gasca 2007: 119 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2008: 569 (tab.), 571–572.— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.), 91.— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).— Gasca et al. 2009: 1497 (tab.).— Lavaniegos &amp; Hereu 2009: passim.— LeCroy et al. 2009: 969 (tab.).—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Valencia &amp; Giraldo 2012: 1492 (tab.), 1497.— Valencia et al. 2013: 51 (tab.).—Gasca &amp; Franco- Gordo 2014: 75 (list).— Lavaniegos 2014: passim.— Zhang et al. 2014: 216.— Burridge et al. 2016: passim, table 2, fig. 1 (part).— Espinosa-Leal &amp; Lavaniegos 2016: passim.— Zeidler 2016: figs 18–20 (pp. 50–52).— Gasca &amp; Browne 2017: 3 (tab.), 6.— Lavaniegos 2020: 17 (tab.), passim.— Espinosa-Leal et al. 2021a: passim.</p> <p>Lycaea robusta Claus, 1879: 186 (40).— Carus 1885: 426.— Bovallius 1887: 32.— Claus 1887: 63, pl. 19, figs 2–10.— Norman 1900: 134.— Lo Bianco 1902: 425 (list), 448.— Lo Bianco 1904: 44, pl. 23, fig. 76.—Harbison 1976: 162.— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 169.— Laval 1980: 19 (tab.).</p> <p>Lycaea similis Claus, 1879: 185 (39).— Bovallius 1887: 32.— Claus 1887: 63, pl. 18, figs 8–14.— Walker 1909: 54.— Pirlot 1929: 138.— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 169.</p> <p>Lycaea pauli Stebbing, 1888: 1566–1567.— Barnard 1930: 430, fig. 58.— Hurley 1955: 180 (key).— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 169.— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 382/472 (key), 385/474–475, fig. 206.— Barkhatov &amp; Vinogradov 1988: 167, 168 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1990: 74, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1993: 45 (tab.).— Barkhatov et al. 1999: 808 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Shih 2001: 496 (tab.).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Zelickman 2005: xvii (list), fig. 39a-d (pp. 242–249).— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).— Lavaniegos &amp; Hereu 2009: passim.— Zeidler &amp; De Broyer 2009: 12, 66.— Valencia et al. 2013: 51 (tab.).— Lavaniegos 2014: 5 (tab.), fig. 5 (dendrogram).—Espinosa- Leal &amp; Lavaniegos 2016: 150 (tab.).— Espinosa-Leal et al. 2021a: passim.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Lycaea pulex could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. The type locality is the Mediterranean Sea, Gulf of Marseille. Despite the apparent loss of the type material, this is a relatively well known species, readily characterised by the description and figures provided by Marion (1874).</p> <p>Type material of synonyms. Type material of Lycaea robusta could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. The type locality is the Mediterranean Sea, off Naples and Messina. Claus’s (1887) illustrations of this species, especially of the male A1 and G1 and G2, confirm the synonymy, although the peduncle of U1 is illustrated as relatively long.</p> <p>Type material of Lycaea similis could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. The type locality is the tropical W. Atlantic, off Lagos. Claus’s (1887) illustrations of this species, especially of G1 and G2, the relatively short dactyls and U1, confirm the synonymy.</p> <p>The unique holotype male (7.6 mm) of L. pauli is in the NHM, London (89.5.15.248); on one microscope slide. The condition of the material is very poor and it is difficult to determine the species with certainty, but it is considered a synonym of L. pulex based on the short dactyls, the strongly sub-chelate G1 and G2 and the relatively shorter peduncle of U1. The type locality is the mid-Atlantic Ocean, off St. Paul’s Rocks [01°10’N 28°23’W], Challenger stn. 108, surface, 27 August 1873.</p> <p>Material examined. The holotype male of Lycaea pauli as detailed above and the following. In NHMD: tropical Atlantic near Bahamas and southern central, Dana stn. 1243 iii (228142), 1 female; Dana stn. 1165 iii (228241), 1 female. N.E. Atlantic, 8 females, 2 males, Thor stns 377, 399, 400. Mediterranean Sea, 9 females, 2 males (6 lots), Thor stns 10, 160-3, 186, 216. Central S. Pacific, Dana stns 3585 xi, 3587 viii (228160, 619244), 2 females. E. Indian Ocean, off Sumatra, Dana stn. 3817 iv (228174), 1 female. S. of Japan, Jutlandia stn. 4775 (228237), 2 females. In SAM and SAMA (part): Meiring Naude collections from S.W. Indian Ocean, off South Africa, between Kosi Bay and just south of East London, 11 females, 8 males (14 lots), 250– 45 m. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">In</a> SAMA: S.W. Pacific, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">Tasman Sea</a>, off central eastern Australia to eastern Tasmania [about 33° – 44°S], 16 females, 5 males (12 lots), C5274–82 (excl. 77) and C12578 –81, 250–0 m. S. Australia, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">Pearson Island</a>, 1 female, C12582. S.W. Atlantic, off Brazil [23°28’S 41°57’W], 5 females, 3 males, C12583. N.E. Pacific, region off BC Canada, 19 females 17 males (10 lots), C12584 –94 (excl. 92); off <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">San Francisco</a>, 1 female, C12595. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">In</a> USNM: N.W. Atlantic, from French Guiana in the south, north to <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">Georges Bank</a>, off <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">Massachusetts</a>, 17 females, 9 males (19 lots), 12873, 264108, 1178034, 1241232, 1241237, 1241243–4, 1241285, 1241287–8, 1242772, 1242786, extracted from 1242794, 1242808, 1246971, 1246976, 1246991, 1253862, 1277467. S.W. Atlantic, off Brazil, 6 females, 2 males, 10 juveniles (4 lots), 1246965, 1246982–3, 1247117. N.E. Pacific, off <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">Central America</a>, 1 female, 3 males (3 lots), 1242802, 1247124, 1253890. S.E. Pacific, off Chile [22°54’S 77°10’W], 1 female, 1246962; near <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">Galapagos Islands</a> [00°02’S 96°02’W], 75 males (night light), 1247123. Japan, <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=132.19167&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=31.316668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 132.19167/lat 31.316668)">Kyushu Island</a> [31°19’N 132°11’30”E], 6 males, extracted from 1242796.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length up to 9.0 mm. Head of females relatively large, deeper than long, as long as first 4 pereonites combined. Head of males more rounded, slightly deeper than long, as long as first 3.5 pereonites combined. Buccal mass protruded well below head. Callynophore of A1 of males without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, partly over-lapping following article. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, morphologically similar, G2 slightly longer than G1; basis of G1 slightly broader and shorter than G2; carpus rectangular with sharp postero-distal tooth, reaching just past base of dactylus, especially in males; propodus with postero-distal corner produced posteriorly to dactylus; carpus and propodus with small serrations on distal margin; dactylus slender, length about 0.5 x propodus. P3–6 with relatively short, stubby dactylus, those of P3 and P4 only about 0.2 x propodus. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus slightly inflated anteriorly, sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.5 x length basis; carpus length about 0.8–0.9 x propodus. P5 only slightly longer than P4 or P6; basis rectangular/oval, length 1.5–1.7 x maximum width; merus marginally inflated anteriorly, sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.6 x basis; carpus length about 0.7–0.8 x propodus. P6 basis length 1.5–1.7 x maximum width, more oval-shaped than P5 but equal in length; merus, carpus and propodus similar in relative lengths to P5; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, length about 1.5 x maximum width, about 0.8 x basis of P6; length of remaining articles slightly shorter than 0.5 x basis; propodus without antero-distal corner produced into rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 and U2; endopod not fused with peduncle. U1 peduncle length about 2.0 x exopod or slightly less; rami relatively slender, equal in length. Telson length about 1.5 x width at base.</p> <p>Remarks. Lycaea pulex is one of the larger species of Lycaea reaching maturity at about 9.0 mm or slightly less. It is best distinguished from its congeners by the relatively short peduncle of U1 (about 2.0 x length exopod) and the very short dactylus of P3–6. Amongst the ‘short dactylus’ group it is readily distinguished by the morphology of G1 and G2 alone; the relatively shorter peduncle of U1 also distinguishes it from the remaining two congeners, L. bovallii and L. vincentii. Harbison (1976) gives a more detailed account of this species. Many of the species of Lycaea recognised by Harbison &amp; Madin (1976) have, at times, been confused with this species. Most of this confusion is because of the poor descriptions and illustrations, generally, of species in the literature. Also, Vinogradov et al. (1982, 1996), in their illustration of L. pulex, borrow the figure of the habitus and male antenna from Stebbing’s (1888) illustration of L. vincentii that they regard a synonym but which is now considered a valid species. Hence, some of the species listed in the literature as Lycaea pulex, in the above list, may be mis-identifications.</p> <p>Of note is one relatively large (7.6 mm) female specimen from the central mid-Atlantic (NHMD-228241), with a very large head, almost as long as the pereon. Apart from the head it is like other specimens of L. pulex and has been determined as such for the time being.</p> <p>It has been recorded in association with a variety of salps, Cyclosalpa pinnata, Pegea confoederata (Harbison 1976); Cyclosalpa affinis, C. bakeri, C. pinnata, Helicosalpa komaii (Ihle &amp; Ihle-Landenberg, 1936), Ihlea punctata (Forsskål, 1775), Pegea socia, P. bicaudata (Quoy &amp; Gaimard, 1826), P. confoederata, Salpa cylindrica, S. maxima and Traustedtia multitentaculata (Quoy &amp; Gaimard, 1834) (Madin &amp; Harbison 1977). And, like L. pachypoda, it has also been recorded from Salpa maxima and pyrosomes (Chevreux 1892, 1900; Chevreux &amp; Fage 1925; Laval 1980). However, because of the confusion of this species with others in the past, it is likely that some of these associations refer to other species of Lycaea.</p> <p>Distribution. This is one of the most commonly recorded species of Lycaea but determining its distribution precisely from the literature is problematical because of the past confusion with other congeners. However, it seems to be relatively common and widespread in tropical and warm-temperate regions of all the world’s oceans, including the Mediterranean Sea. Most records are from the 0–500 m layer but it seems to prefer near-surface waters.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F1944584AFF8E829D1D36FA85F89F	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F1944584DFF84829D1AAEFED3FB73.text	038F1944584DFF84829D1AAEFED3FB73.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea serrata Claus 1879	<div><p>Lycaea serrata Claus, 1879</p> <p>(Figs 18–19)</p> <p>Lycaea serrata Claus, 1879: 185–186 (39–40).— Bovallius 1887: 32.— Claus 1887: 63, pl. 18, figs 15–20.— Stephensen 1925: 168, 230 (tab.).— Shoemaker 1945 b: 243, figs 38–39.— Dick 1970: 67–68, fig. 12 (part).— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 167, figs 3B, 4A-B.— Harbison et al. 1977: 470.— Tranter 1977: 649 (tab.), 651.— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 382/472 (key), 385–388/477–478, fig. 208.— Barkhatov &amp; Vinogradov 1988: 168 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1990: 75, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1993: 45 (tab.).— Barkhatov et al. 1999: 808 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1999: 1147 (tab.), 1194 (key), 1195, fig. 4.141.— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Gates et al. 2003: 322.— Brusca &amp; Hendrickx 2005: 152 (list).— Zelickman 2005: xvii (list), fig. 40a-c (pp. 250–255).— Garcia-Madrigal 2007: 156, 192 (list).— Gasca 2007: 119 (tab.).— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Lavaniegos &amp; Hereu 2009: passim.—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Valencia &amp; Giraldo 2012: 1492 (tab.).— Valencia et al. 2013: 51 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2014: 75 (list).— Lavaniegos 2014: passim.— Burridge et al. (2016): passim, table 2.— Espinosa-Leal &amp; Lavaniegos 2016: 150 (tab.).— Lavaniegos 2020: passim.—Véliz et al. 2121: passim.</p> <p>Metalycaea globosa Stephensen, 1925: 183–185, 230 (tab.), fig. 71.— Nair &amp; Jayalakshmy 1992: passim.— Nair 1993: 1171– 1176, figs 1–3.— Nair 1995: 7–8, pl. 1a, figs A1–A2; pl. 5a, 5b.— Vinogradov &amp; Semenova 1996: 616.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Lycaea serrata could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. The type locality is the Bay of Bengal. Claus’s (1887) illustration of a male readily characterise this distinctive species.</p> <p>Type material of synonyms. The three female syntypes of Metalycaea globosa are in the NHMD, all labelled “Type” in alcohol. The specimens were collected by the Thor from the Mediterranean Sea, stn. 112 [36°56’N 02°15’E], 25 mw, 27 June 1910 (NHMD- 84411, previously CRU-6567); stn. 118 [41°00’N 06°43’E], 65 mw, 30 June 1910 (NHMD- 86800, previously CRU-9301) and stn. 160 [35°59’N 28°14’E], 1000 mw, 1 August 1910 (NHMD- 86799, previously CRU-9300). The specimen from stn. 118 is illustrated by Stephensen (1925). An examination of this material has proven that it is indistinguishable from mature female specimens of L. serrata.</p> <p>Material examined. The type material of Metalycaea globosa as detailed above and the following. In NHMD: Mediterranean Sea, 9 males (7 lots), Dana stns 1123 iv, 4050 v, 4060 and Thor stns 134, 144, 183, 339. N.E. Atlantic, 5 females (3 lots) Dana stns 4001 iv (228304), 4004 v (228306), 4005 x (228307). S.W. Atlantic, 20 females, male (3 lots), Dana stns 1231 iv (228245), 3997 iv-v (620062, 228297); additional Dana material from the Atlantic, 12 females, 1 male (10 lots) from stns 1145 vii, 1189, 1239, 1320, 1364, 3978 x, 3997iii, 3998 iii, 4001 iv, 4010 ii. Indian Ocean from Sumatra to South Africa, 55 females, 26 males (43 lots), Dana stns 3814 i, 3850 i, 3850 iii, 3857 iii, 3893 iii, 3903 iv-v, 3915 iii, 3918 iii, 3919 iv, 3920 viii, 3921 ii-iii, 3921 vi, 3922 iii-iv, 3924 ii, 3925 ii-v, 3926 i, 3926 iv, 3928 i, 3928 v, 3929 iv, 3932 vi, 3937 ii, 3939 ii, 3938 ii, 3941 i-iv, 3956 iii, 3957 i, 3959 i-iii, 3962 iii, 3965 i-ii, 3971 ii-iii. Tropical Pacific, 22 females, 14 males (25 lots), Dana stns 3553 i, 3556 ii, 3558 vi-vii, 3561 v, 3563 ii, 3593 iii, 3616 v, 3620 iii, 3622 iii, 3623 iv, 3624 x, 3626 iv, vi, viii, ix, 3651 vi-vii, 3655 iv, 3722 iii, 3724 i, 3800 ii-iii, 3814 i. In SAM and SAMA (part), Meiring Naude collections from S.W. Indian Ocean, off South Africa, just north of East London, 4 females, 1 male (4 lots), 244–0 m. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=148.83333&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-42.797222" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 148.83333/lat -42.797222)">In</a> SAMA: Tasman Sea, off eastern Tasmania [42°47’50”S 148°50’E], 1100–0 m, 2 females, C12082. S.W. Atlantic, off Brazil [03°29.95’S 32°30.49”W], 5 juveniles (doubtful ID), C12601. In USNM: N.W. Atlantic, from French Guiana in the south, north to Georges Bank, off Massachusetts, 6 females, 3 males (8 lots), 108048–9, 1154681, 1241175–7, 1246985, 1246989. S.W. <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-24.983334&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-8.033334" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -24.983334/lat -8.033334)">Atlantic</a>, off Brazil [08°02’S 24°59’W], 64 m, 1 female, 1246981.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length of mature females up to 16.0 mm and males up to 9.0 mm. Head of females ovalshaped, almost 2 x as deep as long, as long as first 4 pereonites combined. Head of males relatively smaller than females, 2 x as deep as long, almost as long as first 4 pereonites combined. Buccal mass protruded well below head. Callynophore of A1 of males without antero-distal corner; postero-distal corner small, rounded, partly over-lapping following article. Mature females with pereonites inflated, resembling transverse rollers (as in Iulopis), progressively more raised dorsally; pleonites also with raised dorsal corners. Mature males and immature females with dorsal corners of pereonites 4–7 only slightly raised; pleonites 1–2 may also have slightly raised dorsal corners. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, G2 about 1.5 x as long as G1. G1 basis inflated anteriorly with evenly rounded anterior margin; carpus trapezoid, with obliquely excavate distal margin, with small, sharp, postero-distal tooth; postero-distal corner of propodus not produced posteriorly to dactylus; dactylus relatively long and slender, length about 0.8 x propodus. G2 carpus slightly less excavate than G1; propodus and dactylus like that of G1. P3–6 with relatively short, slender dactylus, those of P3 and P4 about 0.2 x propodus, or slightly less. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 marginally longer than P3; merus slightly inflated anteriorly, slightly longer than propodus and about 0.5 x length basis; propodus slightly longer than carpus, with slight postero-distal excavation and slightly serrated margin. P5 of very large females like that of males, otherwise as follows; length about 1.2 x P4, 1.3 x P6; basis rectangular, relatively slender, length slightly more than 3 x maximum width; merus relatively long and slender, length about 1.6 x propodus, almost 0.7 x basis; carpus sub-equal in length to propodus. P5 of males; length almost 1.4 x P4, about 1.3 x P6; basis rectangular, relatively slender, length almost 3 x maximum width; merus with distinct anterior bulge, especially in mature specimens, length 1.4 x propodus, slightly more than 0.6 x basis; carpus also with distinct anterior bulge, sub-equal in length to propodus; propodus with slight serrations on anterior margin. P6 basis pear-shaped, especially in females where the length is about 1.4 x maximum width; merus length about 0.5 x basis, about 1.2 x propodus; carpus length about 0.8 x propodus; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, length about 1.8 x maximum width, about 0.7 x basis of P 6 in males, almost as long as basis of P 6 in females; length of remaining articles less than 0.2 x basis; dactylus degenerative or absent. U1 and U2 endopod not fused with peduncle. U1 peduncle length about 2.0 x exopod in females, slightly less in males; rami equal in length. Telson slightly longer than width at base, with evenly rounded, almost pointed apex.</p> <p>Remarks. Lycaea serrata is the largest and one of the most distinctive species of Lycaea. Apart from the obliquely excavate carpus of G1 and G2, it is easily distinguished by a number of unusual characters. In particular, in mature females the pereonites are characteristically inflated resembling transverse rollers (similar to Iulopis) and the dorsal corners of the pleonites are also significantly raised. In mature males, and to a lesser extent in juvenile males and females, some pereonites (usually 4–7) and the first two pleonites are carinate. Also, in mature males and very large females the merus and carpus of P5 is distinctly inflated. In addition, the propodus of P3 and P4 has a slight postero-distal excavation; the basis of P6 is pear-shaped and the distal articles of P7 are together much shorter than the basis, with a degenerative dactylus. The degree of the excavation of the carpus of G1 and G2 can vary slightly but is always more extreme in G1. The discovery of L. proserrata amongst collections identified as L. serrata indicate that more species may be determined amongst the “ serrata ’ group with a more detailed analysis of the gnathopod morphology and other characters. Its similarity to L. proserrata is discussed under that species.</p> <p>A salp associate has not been recorded for this species.</p> <p>Distribution. This appears to be mainly a tropical species having been recorded from the tropical regions of all three oceans and the Mediterranean Sea. It has also been recorded from the warmer parts of the North Atlantic, as far as 41°N.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F1944584DFF84829D1AAEFED3FB73	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445842FF87829D1F2EFA59F84E.text	038F19445842FF87829D1F2EFA59F84E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea vincentii Stebbing 1888	<div><p>Lycaea vincentii Stebbing, 1888</p> <p>(Figs 20–21)</p> <p>Lycaea vincentii Stebbing, 1888: 1563–1566, pl. 199.— Stewart 1913: 262–265.— Barnard 1930: 429–430, fig. 57.—Harbison 1976: 160–161, fig. 13.— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 167–169, figs 1C, 3D, 5B.— Madin &amp; Harbison 1977: 456.— Schulenberger 1977: 379 (tab.).— Zeidler 1978: 27, fig. 27.— Laval 1980: 20 (tab.).— Stuck et al. 1980: 365–366.— Zeidler 1984: passim.— Young &amp; Anderson 1987: 717 (tab.), 721.— Young 1989: 715 (tab.).— Diebel 1992: passim.— Zeidler 1992: 119–120.— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 171 (key), 173–174, fig. 112.— Zeidler 1998: 104, 107.— Vinogradov 1999: 1195 (key).— Lowry 2000: 327 (list).— Lima &amp; Valentin 2001: 473 (list), 474 (tab.).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Gasca 2003a: 308 (tab.).— Gates et al. 2003: 322.— Gasca 2007: 119 (tab.).— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).— Gasca 2009c: 218 (tab.).— LeCroy et al. 2009: 969 (tab.).—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2014: 75 (list).</p> <p>Lycaea Vincentii. — Pirlot 1929: 137.</p> <p>Lycaea Vincenti. — Pirlot 1939a: 45.</p> <p>Lycaea vincenti. — Vinogradov 1990: 76, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— Lin &amp; Chen 1994: 118 (list).— Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Vinogradov &amp; Semenova 1996: 615.— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2008: 569 (tab.), 571–572.</p> <p>Lycaea bajensis.— Barnard 1931: 129–130.— Dakin &amp; Colefax 1940: 124, fig. 214. [mis-identification].</p> <p>Amphipronoe longicornuta Giles, 1888: 220–224, pl. 5. NEW SYNONYMY.</p> <p>Lycaea longicornuta. — Barnard 1930: 429.— Harbison et al. 1976: 169.</p> <p>Type material. The unique holotype male (about 5 mm) of Lycaea vincentii is in the NHM, London (89.5.15.309), on two microscope slides. The type locality is the N.E. Atlantic, off St Vincent, Cape Verde Islands [16°49’N 25°14’W], Challenger, surface, 26 April 1876.</p> <p>Type material of synonyms. Type material of Amphipronoe longicornuta, consisting of one female and one male (whole but dry), is in the NHM, London (1909.4.3.6), on one microscope slide. The type locality is the Bay of Bengal. Barnard (1930) suggested that this species may be synonymous with L. bajensis. Harbison et al. (1976), on the other hand, consider it to be near L. vincentii. An examination of the type material has confirmed the latter synonymy.</p> <p>Material examined. Type material of Lycaea vincentii and Amphipronoe longicornuta as detailed above and the following. In NHMD: S.E. Atlantic, off Angola, Galathea stn. 98 [08°52’S 11°09’E], 2820 m, 3 females, 6 males, “with salps”. Tropical Pacific, Dana stn. 3722 v, S.E. of Taiwan [25°11’N 122°35’E], 50 mw, 1 female; Galathea stn. 745, Gulf of Panama [07°15’N 79°25’W], 935 m, 2 females, 2 males. In SAMA: Coral Sea, Great Barrier Reef, north-east of Townsville, 44 females, 21 males (23 lots), C12622 –44. Tasman Sea, off eastern Australia [20°– 40°S], 13 females, 8 males (16 lots), C5283–99. In USNM: N.W. Atlantic, from the Sargasso Sea in the south, north to Delaware Bay, 8 females, 18 males (9 lots), 12880, 108144, 181802, 1178021, 1241178, 1246975, 1246980, 1242792, 1242794. S.W. Atlantic, off Brazil [02°07’N 44°02’W], 1 male, 1246987. N. Pacific, Hawaii [23°19’N 166°54’W], 1 male, 1242805. Japan, Colnett Strait, S.W. of Yaku Shima, 5 males, 1246963.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length up to 6.0 mm. Head of females relatively large, deeper than long, as long as first 4 pereonites combined. Head of males more rounded, slightly elongated, marginally deeper than long, almost as long as first 5 pereonites combined. Buccal mass protruded well below head. Callynophore of A1 of males with distinct antero-distal corner, set back slightly from distal margin; postero-distal corner small, acutely rounded, separated from following article by distinct notch. G1 and G2 sub-chelate, morphologically similar, G2 slightly longer than G1; basis of G1 slightly broader and shorter than G2; carpus rectangular with sharp postero-distal tooth, reaching just past base of dactylus; propodus with postero-distal corner produced posteriorly to dactylus; carpus and propodus with small serrations on distal margins, those on posterior margin of carpus of G1 prominently scalloped; dactylus slender, length about 0.6 x propodus, or marginally longer in females. P3–6 with relatively slender dactylus of moderate length, those of P4 about 0.3–0.4 x propodus. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus slightly inflated anteriorly, sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.6 x basis; carpus length about 0.6–0.7 x propodus. P5 slightly longer than P4 or P6; basis rectangular/oval, length 1.8–2.0 x maximum width; merus sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.6–0.7 x basis; carpus length about 0.7 x propodus. P6 basis more oval-shaped than P5 but almost equal in length, slightly broader in males with length 1.5 x maximum width (2.0 x in females); merus sub-equal in length to propodus, about 0.4 x basis; carpus length about 0.5 x propodus; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, more prominent in males, length about 1.4 x maximum width in males (about 1.7 x in females), length about 0.7 x basis of P6 for both sexes; length of remaining articles about 0.3 x basis; propodus with antero-distal corner produced into small, rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 and U2; endopod not fused with peduncle. U1 peduncle length 3.5 x exopod, or slightly more; rami relatively slender, equal in length. Telson as long as width at base in males, slightly longer in females.</p> <p>Remarks. In the past, Lycaea vincentii has been considered a synonym of L. pulex, but it is distinguished by the medium length dactylus of P3–6, and the relatively long peduncle of U1 (see Harbison 1976). Males are further distinguished by the distinctive antero-distal bulge of the callynophore of A1 which is absent in all other congeners except for L. bovallii. It is also a relatively smaller species reaching maturity at 5–6 mm, compared to 9 mm for L. pulex. Another distinctive character is that the posterior margin of the carpus of G1 is distinctly scalloped rather than serrated, a character not found in any other species except perhaps L. bovallii, but in that species the margin is more serrated than scalloped and is much less prominent. Clearly Lycaea vincentii is most closely related to L. bovallii but is distinguished by the characters as discussed under that species.</p> <p>Regarding Amphipronoe longicornuta Giles, 1888 the date given for this reference is often 1887 which would predate L. vincentii Stebbing, 1888 and create a potential nomenclatural problem. However, this species has not been reported since its original description and the volume containing Giles’s description was not published until 1888, the volume being “for the year 1887”.</p> <p>The only recorded associates are with the salps Salpa cylindrica and Thalia democratica (Forsskål, 1775) (Harbison 1976) and also Pegea confoederata (Madin &amp; Harbison 1977).</p> <p>Diebel (1992) provides some interesting information on the integumentary sensilla.</p> <p>Distribution. Difficult to determine because of the past confusion with other species. However, it is probably widespread in the tropical and temperate regions of the Pacific and Atlantic. It is relatively common off the eastern coast of Australia. Other reliable records are from the northern Atlantic, the N.E. Pacific and the South China Sea.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445842FF87829D1F2EFA59F84E	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445846FF80829D18EEFB74FBA4.text	038F19445846FF80829D18EEFB74FBA4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Daira depressa Dana 1853	<div><p>3. Daira depressa Dana, 1853: 992–993, pl. 68, fig. 4a-h.</p> <p>Dairinia depressa. — Spence Bate 1862: 310, pl. 50, fig. 5.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Daira depressa is considered lost (see Evans 1967). The type locality is the S.W. Pacific, west of Savaii, Samoa, 15 m, 15 March 1841. The description given by Dana (1853) is inadequate, and the figures too small, lacking in detail, to enable a determination of this species. Dana (1853) illustrates G1 and G2 with serrations on the posterior margin of the carpus, more typical of the genus Brachyscelus, but the description is more consistent with Lycaea, particularly in that Dana (1853) notes there are no serrations “on the palm”. Some species of Lycaea such as L. bovallii and L. vincentii have gnathopods with slight serrations on the posterior margin of the carpus but they are not as prominent as illustrated by Dana (1853).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445846FF80829D18EEFB74FBA4	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445846FF80829D1E06FDEAFA87.text	038F19445846FF80829D1E06FDEAFA87.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hyperia pupa Costa 1853	<div><p>4. Hyperia pupa Costa, 1853: 178.</p> <p>— Costa 1857: 234–235, pl. 4, fig. 11.— Carus 1885: 422.— Spence Bate 1862: 298–299.</p> <p>Hyperiella pupa. — Bovallius 1887: 20.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Hyperia pupa could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. The type locality is the Mediterranean Sea, off the coast of Naples. Costa’s description of this species is very inadequate and in 1857 he only illustrates a gnathopod and part of the pleon. Stebbing (1888) considered it a probable species of Lycaea.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445846FF80829D1E06FDEAFA87	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445846FF80829D1F66FA81F9BF.text	038F19445846FF80829D1F66FA81F9BF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lycaea stebbingi Bovallius 1887	<div><p>5. Lycaea stebbingi Bovallius, 1887: 33.</p> <p>— Harbison &amp; Madin 1976: 170.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Lycaea stebbingi could not be found in the NRS or NHMD and is considered lost. No precise type locality is given; just “tropical parts of Atlantic”. The description provided by Bovallius (1887) is very inadequate and there are no figures. Therefore, in the absence of type material, it is impossible to determine the status of this species. Vinogradov et al. (1982, 1996) consider it a synonym of L. serrata.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445846FF80829D1F66FA81F9BF	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445846FF80829D181AFB8CFD1C.text	038F19445846FF80829D181AFB8CFD1C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	oblongatum	<div><p>2. Onidium oblongatum</p> <p>—labelled drawing by Parkinson in NHM, London.— Zeidler 1995: 272–273, figs 5–6.</p> <p>Type material. As for the previous species. This figure was obviously not good enough for Fabricius to name the species in his 1775 work, and it has not been referred to by later naturalists. The illustration is very similar to the previous species and possibly represents a juvenile Lycaea or Brachyscelus.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445846FF80829D181AFB8CFD1C	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445846FF80829D1AE6FDA8FE40.text	038F19445846FF80829D1AE6FDA8FE40.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Oniscus gibbosus Fabricius 1775	<div><p>1. Oniscus gibbosus Fabricius, 1775: 298.</p> <p>— Fabricius 1781: 377.— Zeidler 1995: 272, figs 3–4 (see remarks).</p> <p>Gammarus gibbosus. — Fabricius 1787: 335.— Olivier 1791: 185, 189.— Fabricius 1793: 518.— Bosc 1802: 148.— Turton 1802: 761.— Bosc 1830: 115.— Milne-Edwards 1830: 396.</p> <p>Type material. Zeidler (1995) established that Fabricius (1775) based his original description of this species solely on drawings made by Sydney Parkinson, labelled “ Onidium gibbosum ”, now held by the NHM, London. An examination of these drawings suggest that this is most likely a species of Lycaea, but that the drawings, and description, lack sufficient detail to make a specific determination. The type locality is the Atlantic Ocean, near Portugal, inside a salp (Dagysas sp.).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445846FF80829D1AE6FDA8FE40	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445846FF83829D1C62FE89FABB.text	038F19445846FF83829D1C62FE89FABB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Simorhynchotus Stebbing 1888	<div><p>Genus Simorhynchotus Stebbing, 1888</p> <p>Simorhynchus Claus 1871: 156.— Claus 1879: 178 (32) (key), 188–189 (42–43).— Gerstaecker 1886: 486.— Claus 1887: 56 (key), 65.</p> <p>Simorhynchotus Stebbing, 1888: 1572.— Bovallius 1890: 46 (key), 48.— Spandl 1927: 178 (key).— Pirlot 1929: 161.— Hurley 1955: 182 (incl. key).— Yoo 1971: 63 (key).— Bowman &amp; Gruner 1973: 53.— Zeidler 1978: 30 (key), 31.— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 381/471 (key), 390–391/482–483.— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 212.— Nair 1995: 6 (key), 8.— Vinogradov 1999: 1194 (key), 1195.— Zeidler 2016: 48 (key), 53–56.</p> <p>Type species. Simorhynchus antennarius Claus, 1871 by monotypy. Type material could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. However, the description and figures provided by Claus (1871, 1879, 1887) for this species, readily characterise this genus.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body shape robust or globular.Head rounded in females, with slight rostrum in males. Eyes occupying most of head surface, except for rostrum; grouped in one field on each side of head. A1 of males with 2-articulate peduncle; flagellum with large, crescent-shaped callynophore, with aesthetascs arranged in two-field brush medially, with distinct antero-distal lobe and small, rounded postero-distal corner over-lapping following article; with three smaller articles inserted distally. A1 of females with 2-articulate peduncle; callynophore narrowly rectangular, with two smaller articles inserted terminally. A2 absent in females. A2 of males 5-articulate; strongly zig-zagged, with most articles folded back on each other; extending anteriorly under head and posteriorly between the gnathopods and pereopods to pereonite 7; basal article distinctly inflated, about 0.5 x or less the length of following article; following three articles of similar length; terminal article very short, not folded, pointing posteriorly. Mandibular incisor relatively broad, with several teeth, with small distal lobe medially; in males orientated more or less parallel to palp. Maxillae both absent. Maxilliped with inner lobes completely fused; medial margin of outer lobes with membranous fringe. G1 simple. G2 sub-chelate; carpal process knife-shaped, armed with microscopic teeth or setae. P3 and P4 distinctly shorter than P5 and P6. P5 distinctly longer than P6 basis slightly inflated, about 2 x as long as wide; articles 3–7 inserted terminally on basis. P6 basis wider proximally in males, about 1.5 x as long as wide; articles 3–7 inserted terminally on basis. P7 reduced in size with large basis; all articles present; dactylus hookshaped. U1 with articulated rami. U2 and U3; endopod fused with peduncle. Rami of all uropods lanceolate, usually with serrated margins.</p> <p>Species. Simorhynchotus antennarius (Claus, 1871).</p> <p>Sexual dimorphism. Apart from the morphology of the mandibles and the antennae, females are more robust than males, especially in the pereon, as is found in Lycaea. In addition, the head of males is produced into a short, slightly pointed rostrum.</p> <p>Remarks. In the past Simorhynchotus has often been placed in the family Oxycephalidae based on the absence of maxillae (discussed earlier) and the slightly pointed head of males. However, the length of the rostrum is no greater than that found in males of the families Pronoidae or Brachyscelidae, and in general body shape, and especially in the form of G2, Simorhynchotus resembles members of the family Lycaeidae. The pereopods, coxae and urosome are also more like Lycaeids than Oxycephalids. Thus, this genus is a link between the families Lycaeidae and Oxycephalidae.</p> <p>Very little is known about the biology of this genus. It has been recorded from the medusae Geryonia proboscidalis (Forsskål, 1775) (Laval 1980) and Liriope tetraphylla (Gasca et al. 2014), and Lima &amp; Valentine (2001) recorded it in the siphonophore Sulculeolaria quadrivalvis de Blainville, 1830, although this may be an accidental inclusion.</p> <p>The only species of Simorhynchotus, S. antennarius is widely distributed, with a preference for near-surface, tropical waters.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445846FF83829D1C62FE89FABB	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
038F19445845FF9F829D1F67FBD5FE3F.text	038F19445845FF9F829D1F67FBD5FE3F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Simorhynchotus antennarius (Claus 1871)	<div><p>Simorhynchotus antennarius (Claus, 1871)</p> <p>(Figs 22–23)</p> <p>Simorhynchus antennarius Claus, 1871: 156–157.— Claus 1879: 189 (43).— Bovallius 1887: 34.— Claus 1887: 65, pl. 17, figs 9–19.</p> <p>Simorhynchotus antennarius. — Stebbing 1888: 1572–1575, pl. 200.— Bovallius 1890: 48 (key).— Spandl 1924: 267.— Stephensen 1925: 185–186, 230 (tab.), fig. 72.— Spandl 1927: 211 (incl. key), fig. 32.— Pirlot 1929: 161.— Barnard 1930: 433.— Barnard 1931: 130.— Barnard 1937: 191–192.— Pirlot 1938: 366, (38).— Bulycheva 1955: 1048 (tab.).— Hurley 1955: 182.— Reid 1955: 28.— Fage 1960: 11–14, figs 1–3.— Grice &amp; Hart 1962: 300.— Hoenigman 1963: 593.— Siegfried 1963: 10.— Pillai 1966a: 171–173, pl. 1, fig. A; figs 1–2.—Hure et al. 1969: 603, 605 (tabs.).— Lewis &amp; Fish 1969: 9.— Dick 1970: 73, fig. 14 (part).— Yoo 1971: 64.— Yoo 1972: 175, fig. 7.— Tashiro &amp; Jossi 1972: fig. 9 (map), 20 (list), 35 (tab.).— Thurston 1976: 388–390 (tabs.), 439–440, 464 (tab.), fig. 24 (distribution).—Schulenberger 1977: 379 (tab.).— Tranter 1977: 649 (tab.), 651.— Zeidler 1978: 31, fig. 30.— Laval 1980: 23 (tab.).— Stuck et al. 1980: 367.— Brusca 1981: 32 (key), 45, fig. 22c-d.— Vinogradov et al. 1982 /1996: 391–392/483–484, fig. 211.— Zeidler 1984: passim.— Vinogradov 1990: 76, 94 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1991: 261 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1993: 45 (tab.).— Lin &amp; Chen 1994: 118 (list).— Montú 1994: 133 (list).— Lin et al. 1995: 120, 122 (tab.).— Nair 1995: 8–9, pl. 1a, fig. B; pl. 6.— Shih &amp; Chen 1995: 212–215, figs 140–141.— Lin et al. 1996: 230 (tab.).— Montú 1998: 601.— Zeidler 1998: 107.— Barkhatov et al. 1999: 808 (tab.).— Vinogradov 1999: 1148 (tab.), 1195, fig. 4.142.— Lowry 2000: 327 (list).— Gasca &amp; Shih 2001: 496 (tab.).— Lima &amp; Valentin 2001: 473 (list), 474 (tab.).— Escobar-Briones et al. 2002: 367 (list).— Gasca 2003a: 308 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Shih 2003: 95 (tab.).— Gates et al. 2003: 323.—Gasca 2004: 997 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Suárez-Morales 2004: 26 (tab.).— Vinogradov et al. 2004: 16, 25 (tab.).— Brusca &amp; Hendrickx 2005: 152 (list).— Zelickman 2005: xvii (list), fig. 41a-b (pp. 256–259).— Garcia-Madrigal 2007: 158, 192 (list).— Gasca 2007: 120 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2008: 569 (tab.).— Costa et al. 2009: 101, 196, fig. 184.— Gasca 2009a: 89 (tab.).— Gasca 2009b: 66 (tab.).— Gasca 2009c: 218 (tab.).— Gasca et al. 2009: 1497 (tab.).— Lavaniegos &amp; Hereu 2009: passim.— LeCroy et al. 2009: 969 (tab.).— Valencia &amp; Giraldo 2009: 268 (tab.), passim.— Mori et al. 2010: 6, 10 (lists).— Gasca &amp; Morales-Ramírez 2012: 229, fig. 3C.—Gasca et al. 2012: passim.— Valencia &amp; Giraldo 2012: 1492 (tab.).— Valencia et al. 2013: 51 (tab.).— Gasca &amp; Franco-Gordo 2014: 76 (list).— Gasca et al. 2014: 4 (tab.), 6.— Gómez-Gutiérrez et al. 2014: 1019 (tab.).— Lavaniegos 2014: 5 (tab.), fig. 5 (dendrogram).— Espinosa-Leal &amp; Lavaniegos 2016: passim.— Lavaniegos 2016: passim.— Souza et al. 2016: 344 (tab.).— Zeidler 2016: fig. 21 (p. 54).— Hereu et al. 2020: passim.— Lavaniegos 2020: passim.— Espinosa-Leal et al. 2021a: passim.— Espinosa-Leal et al. 2021b: passim.—Véliz et al. 2121: passim.</p> <p>Simorhynchus Lilljeborgi Bovallius, 1887: 34.</p> <p>Simorhynchotus Lilljeborgi. — Bovallius 1890: 48 (key), 52–54, text figs 25, 28, 34, 50, 67, 70, 76; pl. 1, figs 1–7.— Chevreux 1900: 160.</p> <p>Simorhynchotus lilljeborgi. — Spandl 1927: 211 (key), 212, fig. 33.— Dakin &amp; Colefax 1940: 125–126, fig. 215.</p> <p>Simorhynchotus Stebbingi Bovallius, 1890: 48 (key), 50–52.</p> <p>Type material. Type material of Simorhynchus antennarius could not be found in any major European institution and is considered lost. No specific type locality is given; just “Grosses Ocean” (the Pacific).</p> <p>Type material of synonyms. Type material of Simorhynchus lilljeborgi could not be found in the NRS or NHMD and is considered lost. However, the NRS has one, partly dissected, juvenile male (1632), labelled “ Guinea Cukten on Rolas R. Graeff”, that may represent type material. No precise type locality is given; just “tropical parts of Atlantic”. The figures of this species provided by Bovallius (1890) confirm the synonymy.</p> <p>Type material of Simorhynchotus stebbingi would be the same as Stebbing’s (1888) specimen of S. antennarius because Bovallius was just proposing a new name for Stebbing’s specimen which he believed to be different from S. antennarius of Claus (1871). The type locality is the tropical Atlantic, off Africa [11°05’N 18°15’W].</p> <p>Material examined. In NHMD: numerous specimens from the Dana and Thor expeditions, and others, too many to list here, from all the World’s Oceans including the Mediterranean Sea. In SAM and SAMA (part): Meiring Naude collections from S.W. Indian Ocean, off South Africa, between Kosi Bay and just S. of East London, 216 females, 111 males (88 lots), mostly 0–212 m, few 0– 360 m. In SAMA: Coral Sea, Great Barrier Reef, north-east of Townsville, 9 females, 5 males (11 lots), C12653 –63. S.W. Pacific, Tasman Sea, off central eastern Australia [about 31° – 35°S], 4 females, 4 males (6 lots), C5300–5. Bass Strait, Erith Island, 1 male, C12651. N.E. Indian Ocean, off northern Western Australia, Ningaloo Reef and <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-45.416668&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-24.633333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -45.416668/lat -24.633333)">Dampier Archipelago region</a>, numerous males (6 lots, night light trap), C12645 –50. S.W. Atlantic, off Brazil [24°38’S 45°25’W], 6 females, 7 males, C12603. N.W. Pacific, off Taiwan [21°01’N 123°E], 1 male, C12664; off Ryukyu Islands, Japan, 1 juvenile, C12665. N.E. Pacific, off California [33°02’N 122°03’W], 1 male, C12602. In USNM: N.W. Atlantic, from the Caribbean Sea in the south, north to Georges Bank off Massachusetts, 8 females, 8 males (12 lots), 108147, 224033, 1154666, 1154691, 1242790, 1243533, 1243537–43. S.W. Atlantic, off Brazil, off Sao Paulo &amp; Rio Grande Norte, 1 female, 4 males (2 lots), 1243536, 1246988. N.E. Pacific, off Central America, 5 females, 2 males (3 lots), 108412, 1243532, 1243535. N. Pacific, near Marshall Islands, 3 males, 1243544; Hawaii, 1 male, 1243552. S.E. Pacific, off Peru [04°21’S 81°59’W], 1 female, 1243545. N.W. Pacific, Japan and Philippines region, 5 females, 20 males (7 lots), 1242803, 1243534, 1243546–51. Arabian Sea [27°10’N 49°51’E], 1 female, 106436.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body length up to 7.0 mm, but ovigerous females of about 4.0 mm have been noted. Head of females rounded, length about 0.6 x depth, as long as first 4 pereonites combined. Head of males slightly pointed, almost as long as deep, as long as first 5 pereonites combined. Buccal mass relatively small, protruding slightly below head. G1 relatively slender, simple; basis relatively narrow, slightly longer than remaining articles combined, with slight medial bulge on anterior margin in males; carpus with few setae and slight medial bulge on posterior margin; propodus much narrower than preceding articles. G2 marginally longer than G1; also relatively slender except for sub-chelate carpus; basis like that of G1; carpus almost as wide distally as propodus is long, with rounded postero-distal corner, armed with few strong setae on posterior margin. P3–6 with relatively slender dactylus of moderate length, those of P4 about 0.3–0.4 x propodus. P3 and P4 morphologically similar, P4 slightly longer than P3; merus slightly inflated anteriorly, sub-equal in length to carpus, slightly shorter than propodus, slightly shorter than 0.5 x basis. P5 distinctly the longest pereopod, about 1.3 x P4 and 1.2 x P6; basis rectangular/oval, length 1.8–2.0 x maximum width, with few long setae on anterior margin; merus sub-equal in length to carpus, about 0.7 x propodus, about 0.6 x basis. P6 basis broader than for P5 but almost equal in length, much broader proximally in males with length 1.4 x maximum width (1.5 x in females); merus length 0.8 x propodus, about 0.5 x basis; carpus length about 0.5 x propodus; anterior margin of carpus and propodus, and sometimes also antero-distal corner of merus, slightly serrated. P7 basis with bulging posterior margin, more prominent in males, length about 2.0 x maximum width in males (about 2.2 x in females), length about 0.8 x basis of P6 for both sexes; length of remaining articles about 0.5 x basis; propodus with antero-distal corner produced into rounded lobe; dactylus sharp, hook-like. U1 with articulated rami; exopod marginally longer than peduncle, about 0.8 x endopod. U2 and U3; endopod fused with peduncle; exopod slightly shorter than peduncle, about 0.5 x length endopod. Telson slightly longer than width at base, slightly more narrowed distally in males.</p> <p>Remarks. Simorhynchotus antennarius is a relatively distinctive species, easily distinguished by the morphology of the gnathopods and urosome. The gelatinous associates are listed above.</p> <p>Distribution. A relatively common and widespread species, found mainly in tropical regions of all the world’s oceans, including the Mediterranean Sea. It seems to prefer near-surface waters.</p></div> 	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/038F19445845FF9F829D1F67FBD5FE3F	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	Zeidler, Wolfgang	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2021): Review of the hyperiidean amphipod family Lycaeidae Claus, 1879 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 5081 (1): 1-59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5081.1.1
