identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
270F87BBFF8DFFC30ECC0714FBB5F3C4.text	270F87BBFF8DFFC30ECC0714FBB5F3C4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Maliithipon Cottarelli & Bruno 2021	<div><p>Genus Maliithipon gen. nov.</p> <p>zoobank.org:act: 3C6CE0CB-4E60-4257-8C14-4C2FF804DBB2</p> <p>Diagnosis. Body elongate, cylindrical, slightly depressed dorsoventrally and slightly tapering distally. No distinct separation between prosome and urosome. Cephalotorax approximately quadrangular, larger than somites, longer than the following two somites, with sensilla and several dorsal pores. Dorsal pores present also on the remaining somites. Genital complex of female: genital field small, transversally oval, ventrally at half length of the double genital somite which lacks dorsal suture; P6 reduced to two small arched chitinous plates, apparently not fused; genital pore near the distal margin of the genital field, below the P6. Penultimate somite with well-developed quadrilobate pseudoperculum. Caudal rami approximately cylindrical, tapering distally in lateral view, apparently with six setae. Seta I missing (or not discernible), seta III and VI enlarged and pointed, unipinnate in the distal third on the outer (seta III) or inner (seta VI) margin. Distal setae (IV and V) variable in shape, peculiarly transformed in short fusiform structures in some specimens; seta VII dorsally inserted at 2/3 of the ramus length, biarticulate at base. Rostrum small, triangular, fused to cephalothorax, with two sensilla. Antennule 8-segmented in female, with large aesthetasc on segment four and small easthetasc on segment eight. Antennule 7-segmented in male, short, subchirocer, aesthetasc on segments V and VII. Antenna 4-segmented; coxa and basis without ornamentation, enp-1 with strong pinnate abexopodal seta, enp-2 armed with eight elements; exopod 1-segmented with two lateral setae and one or two distal ones, the longest one pinnate. Mandible with uniramous and 2-segmented palp comprising basis, 1-segmented endopod with four setae or three setae and one spine. Coxal gnathobase long, with dorsal seta; cutting edge with a row of thin and pointed teeth along the distal margin, with a stronger tooth at the inner and outer corner. Maxillula: praecoxal arthrite with strong lateral seta and 5-6 distal spiniform setae; coxa with one or two distal setae, basis with one or two to three apical setae; exopod and endopod missing. Maxilla large, with reduced chaetotaxy; syncoxa with three endites: proximal and median ones with one seta, distal one with two or three pinnate setae; basis produced into strong claw; endopod fused with basipodite, carrying four setae, one or two of which are claw-like. Maxilliped: subchelate, syncoxa bare; basis elongate and bare; endopod 1- or 2-segmented. P1: coxa large and bare, basis without outer basal seta, with strong inner seta; rami 2-segmented, endopod slightly longer than exopod, or of about equal length; exp-1 with long pinnate outer seta, exp-2 with four setae; enp-2 with two geniculate apical setae. P2-P4 laterally displaced but coxa and basis not fused and not markedly produced laterally; basis with outer seta. P2 basis with inner setular row in females; exopods 3-segmented, with two spiniform setae on distal segment; endopods absent. P5 very reduced in both sexes, partly incorporated in somite. In females, baseoendopod represented by a lobe with a lateral seta, exopod reduced to a minute subrectangular lobe with two bare and one pinnate setae or exopod reduced to a lobe with one seta. In males, baseoendopodal lobe with one seta, exopodal lobe with two setae or reduced to a small lobe without armature. P 6 in male reduced to two asymmetrical round plates with one or no seta.</p> <p>Type species. Maliithipon wellsi gen. et sp. nov. (by original designation).</p> <p>Other species. Apodopsyllus aberrans Mielke, 1984a = Maliithipon aberrans (Mielke, 1984a) comb. nov.; Apodopsyllus aberrans Mielke, 1984a in Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor &amp; George (2016) = Malliithipon cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984a).</p> <p>Etymology. The generic name is derived from two Tagalog (the official language of the Philippines) words: “maliit” meaning small, and “hipon” meaning shrimp. Gender: masculine.</p> <p>Relationships. Based on the existing classifications, M. wellsi sp. nov. could have been included in the genus Apodopsyllus, as we did when we first examined our specimens, and as it had occurred for the specimens collected from the locus typicus and the Azores (Packmor et al. 2015; Packmor &amp; George 2016). In fact, M. wellsi sp. nov. lacks the endopods of swimming legs P2–P4, as is typical of Apodopsyllus. However, members of the latter genus have the coxa and basis of P2–P4 fused forming a fusiform segment that is much longer than wide. To our knowledge no author noticed that in A. aberrans the coxa and basis are not fused, are wider than long, and that the exopods are inserted laterally. The same conditions occur in the new genus; the P2–P4 of this type are morphologically and functionally different from those of the remaining species of Apodopsyllus, possibly providing a very different locomotion modality. A similar type of swimming legs are present in Leptopsyllus Scott, 1894 and Wellsopsyllus Kunz, 1981, which include species similar to the new ones established in this work (see below). The presence of this type of legs could therefore be a synapomorphic character, shared with other genera, however, Maliithipon gen. nov. has a set of exclusive (autapomorphic?) characters related to the mouthparts, P5 and caudal rami, the most significant being the following:</p> <p>i) Mandibular palp: uniramous and 2-segmented, i.e. composed of basis and endopod, armed with few setae. Cutting edge of coxal gnathobase with long, thin and pointed teeth, the innermost and outermost ones being longer and stronger.</p> <p>ii) Maxillule of simple structure, coxa and basis with few setae, exopod and endopod missing.</p> <p>iii) Maxilla with three endites with reduced armature, the proximal endite can be reduced to a seta; the endopod is 1-segmented and fused to the basis, which is unarmed, at least one of the apical endopodal setae is claw-like. The maxillae are very large compared to the other mouthparts; in lateral view, they typically protrude from the cephalothorax.</p> <p>iv) P5 very reduced in both sexes: in M. aberrans comb. nov. (only females are known for this species) each P5 is represented by two small adjacent plates (one is the baseoendopod, the other the exopod), inserted laterally and carrying respectively one and three setae; in M. cf. aberrans the exopod has three setae in the female but only two in the male, and the endopodal lobe in the male is partly fused with the exopodal lobe to form a structure similar to the one of Wellsopsyllus (Intermediopsyllus) smirnovi. The P5 can be further reduced: in M. wellsi sp. nov. the female has only one lobe (with a small incision, probably representing the boundary between baseoendopod and exopod) with one seta (missing in some specimens), and the male has a single, smaller lobe without setae.</p> <p>v) Pseudoperculum with multilobate posterior margin.</p> <p>vi) Caudal rami always with six setae, with peculiar transformation of setae III and VI.</p> <p>All the above-mentioned characters are absent in the remaining species of Apodopsyllus (A. aberrans excluded), which share with Maliithipon gen. nov. only the morphology of P1, the absence of P2–P4 endopods, and the morphology of P2–P2 exopods. These similarities could be due to parallel evolution; however, the morphology of P2–P4 coxa and basis differs between the two genera. Both genera also share the number of setae on the caudal rami, but setae III and VI are not transformed in Apodopsyllus, which also has a different shape and ornamentation of the body, caudal rami, and genital field.</p> <p>In summary, the unique combination of the above-listed characters does, in our opinion, characterize the new genus and separates it from Apodopsyllus; as a consequence the two species of Apodopsyllus which indeed share such set of characters, i.e. A. aberrans and A. cf. aberrans, are transferred to the new genus Maliithipon as M. aberrans (Mielke, 1984a) comb. nov. and M. cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984a), respectively.</p> <p>As regards the genera Wellsopsyllus and Leptopsyllu s, the affinities with Maliithipon gen. nov. can be found with some species whose generic attribution is uncertain, according to their authors. As we discussed for Apodopsyllus, there are two unusual species among these genera, i.e. Leptopsyllus (Leptopsyllus) platyspinosus and Wellsopsyllus (Intermediopsullus) smirnovi, which, according to us, have more morphological characters in common with Maliithipon gen. nov. than with their respective congeners. The same applies, but to a lesser degree, to Leptopsyllus (Leptopsyllus) typicus, Wellsopsyllus (Wellsopsyllus) antarcticus Kottmann &amp; Veit-Köhler, 2013, and Biuncus ingens. In Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus the mandible has a uniramous, 2-segmented palp, including an unarmed basis and a 1-segmented endopod carrying four setae; the morphology of the coxal gnathobase and cutting edge are also similar to those of the new genus. The maxillule and maxilla are very similar to those of the new genus (see Mielke 1984b: Fig. 23). The maxillipedal endopod is 2-segmented, there is a pseudoperculum with a bilobate rather than a quadrilobate posterior margin, the P4 has a 1-segmented endopod, the P5 has a reduced baseoendopod and small exopod, carrying three setae, and the genital field and shape and armature of the caudal rami are very similar to those of Maliithipon gen. nov. Leptopsyllus (L.) typicus has not been redescribed according to modern standards, and only the females are known. Nonetheless, the mandibular palp is uniramous, being represented by the basis and the endopod, and the structure of the maxilla (endites with reduced armature, basis prolonged into a claw, a second claw originates from the partially fused endopod) and maxilliped (with 1-segmented endopod) are characters which indicate a degree of affinity with the new genus. The morphology of the maxilla, pseudoperculum and P5 are unknown for this species, the caudal rami differ in shape and ornamentation and the body size of this species is very large (700 μm). Wellsopsyllus (I.) smirnovi has the same transformation/reduction of the mouthparts as in Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus, but the three maxillary endites have more setae than the taxa discussed so far, and the P5, “a small plate with three setae, middle lobe not noticeable” (Kunz 1992), is morphologically similar to the one of the new genus but even simpler: it is reduced to a very small exopod, completely fused to the somite, carrying only two setae. Setae III and IV of the caudal rami are not characteristically transformed, the pseudoperculum seems to be missing but it could have been overlooked by Kunz (1992) who, for the male, described only the subchirocer antennule and did not provide any information on the P5 and P6. This species is remarkably long (510 μm). Wellsopsyllus (W.) antarcticus (1) has a 1-segmented antennary exopod, a uniramous (but 3-segmented) mandibular palp, a maxillule without endopod or exopod and the size and armature of the maxilla are similar to those of Maliithipon gen. nov. Differences with the new genus are expressed in the P2–P4 which have retained the endopod, the genital field with a different structure carrying two setae, the P5 which is not reduced in either sex, the absence of a lobate pseudoperculum and the morphology of the caudal rami. Biuncus ingens is a large species, known only from males, and was included by Huys (1995) in the group of species related to Leptopsyllus based on the mandibular palp (which in Biuncus is simple but retains the exopod, represented by a seta, and the endopod is 2-segmented), the structure and size of the maxilla, and the presence of a lobate pseudoperculum. The analysis of all the above-listed taxa, which are morphologically close to Maliithipon gen. nov., underlines that only the species of this genus share all the above-mentioned characters. These same characters can be present in other Paramesochridae, but never all of them combined in one species.</p> <p>1 We underline that Kottmann et al. (2013) provided some interesting remarks on the “uncertainties” regarding the systematic and morphology of this genus and subgenera with which we fully agree.</p> <p>Particularly relevant to solving some systematic issues in the Paramesochridae is the analysis of the morphology of mouthparts, P5 and caudal rami. This view is supported by Kottman et al. (2013) who, while discussing affinities among species of Wellsopsyllus, remarked how “at present, the classification is mainly based on the segmentation of the swimming legs, but there are other important characteristics to be considered (e.g., mouthparts, furcal rami)”. More recently, Back &amp; Lee (2017a) discussed the genus Leptopsyllus, underlining how most of the recent classifications for this genus are based on leg characteristics (reduced or absent), and the complete descriptions of mouthparts are lacking for many species. Veit-Köhler (2004, 2005) gave similar remarks for the genus Kliopsyllus (now Emertonia). Already Kunz (1981) stated that in very specialized Paramesochridae with reduced pereiopods, such as Apodopsyllus and Leptopsyllus, the original components of the mouthparts are still recognizable. Later on, Huys (1987) remarked that Wellsopsyllus, Leptopsyllus and Apodopsyllus have undergone paedomorphic evolution and “can easily be included in a morphological series with increasingly pronounced larval characters”. The new genus Maliithipon gen. nov. can be added to this “morphological series” but the species included in the latter and the above-discussed species to which it is most closely related (mainly Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus) can represent a further step which characterizes and separates them from the other components of the evolutionary lineages hypothesized by Huys (1987). Possibly, further studies based also on a molecular approach will allow including them in a phylogenetically-valid group.</p> <p>The discussion of the taxonomic position of Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus and W. (I.) smirnovi is outside the scope of this paper. We, however, suggest that these two species should be considered incertae sedis, as already proposed by Wells (2007) for W. (I.) smirnovi. When and if Wellsopsyllus (I.) smirnovi will be redescribed with more details (the original drawings of Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus are still adequate), it will be possible to include these two species in a taxonomic unit close to Maliithipon gen. nov., or possibly in the same genus appropriately reviewed and divided into subgenera. In fact, it is difficult to suppose that complicated structures as those described above could have evolved independently but in a similar way in different genera. It is worthy to remember that Kunz (1992: 90), while discussing the affinities of W. (I.) smirnovi, stated that “these observations suggest to separate L. platyspinosus, S. smirnovi and S. minutus as a phylogenetically-related group”.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/270F87BBFF8DFFC30ECC0714FBB5F3C4	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	Cottarelli, Vezio;Bruno, Maria Cristina	Cottarelli, Vezio, Bruno, Maria Cristina (2021): Interesting interstitial Paramesochridae (Copepoda: Harpacticoida): Maliithipon wellsi gen. et sp. nov. from the Philippines, M. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) comb. nov from Panama, and M. cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) from the Azores. Zootaxa 5051 (1): 68-93, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5051.1.7
270F87BBFF8AFFCA0ECC0434FE56F3C4.text	270F87BBFF8AFFCA0ECC0434FE56F3C4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Maliithipon wellsi Cottarelli & Bruno 2021	<div><p>Maliithipon wellsi sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 1–5)</p> <p>zoobank.org:act: 89A4C254-A4EA-4E91-A89B-FE2F5045216B</p> <p>Type locality. Philippines, Batangas Province, Verde Island. Station 1 (13°31’36.03”N, 121°04’45.68”E), beach in Saint Agapito Village. Station 2 (13°34’02.65”N; 121°03’56.64”E) on the opposite side of the island, on <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.065735&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=13.567403" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.065735/lat 13.567403)">Mahabang Buhangin</a> beach, in the <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.065735&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=13.567403" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.065735/lat 13.567403)">Barangay area</a>, near <a href="http://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=121.065735&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=13.567403" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 121.065735/lat 13.567403)">San Augustin village</a>.</p> <p>Type material. Holotype: female, undissected, mounted on one slide labelled: Maliithipon wellsi, holotype female (reg. no. NHMUK 2019.1002), Isla Verde, station 1, 4/VIII/1995. Paratypes: one male, undissected, mounted on one slide labelled: Maliithipon wellsi, paratype male (reg. no. NHMUK 2019.1003), Isla Verde, station 1, 4/VIII/1995. One female dissected, mounted on slide labelled: Maliithipon wellsi, paratype female (reg. no. NHMUK 2019.1004), Isla Verde, station 1, 4/08/1995. Two females, undissected, each one mounted on one slide labelled: Maliithipon wellsi, paratype female (reg. nos NHMUK 2019.1005–1006), Isla Verde station 1, 4/VIII/1995. Two females, undissected, each one mounted on one slide labelled: Maliithipon wellsi, paratype female (reg. nos NHMUK 2019.1007–1008), Isla Verde station 2, 4/VIII/1995. Two females, undissected, each one mounted on one slide labelled: Maliithipon wellsi, paratype female (DIBAF), Isla Verde station 1, 4/VIII/1995.All material collected by V.C.</p> <p>Etymology. The new species is named in honour of Prof. John B. J. Wells, in appreciation of his outstanding contribution to the study of copepods. The specific epithet is a noun in the genitive singular. Gender masculine.</p> <p>Description of female (holotype). Habitus (Fig. 1A): body elongate, cylindrical and slightly depressed dorsoventrally, naupliar eye absent. Length: 300–350 μm; n = 5, mean = 331 μm. Length of the holotype: 349 μm. Last urosomites tapering posteriorly; prosome to urosome ratio: 0.90; free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by well-developed arthrodial membranes. Integument weakly sclerotized, cuticle finely pitted dorsally (Fig. 2D). First pedigerous somite and dorsal cephalic shield fused forming cephalothorax representing about 25% of the total body length. Cephalothorax and somites with few sensilla and several pores on dorsal, lateral and ventral surfaces (pores were difficult to observe, their pattern could not be precisely determined) (Figs. 1A, 2D). Second and third urosomite completely fused to form genital double-somite (Figs. 2A–C).Penultimate body somite without sensilla, carrying a fine, well developed lobate pseudoperculum (Figs. 1A, 2D, 3A–B). Anal somite small, with pair of dorsal sensilla (Fig. 3A–B); anal operculum not visible. Genital field (Fig. 2A–C) small, ellipsoidal, located mid-ventrally and slightly above the mid-length of the genital double-somite, surrounded by eight pores of different size; P6 (Fig. 2B–C) reduced to two small arched plates not fused to each other; copulatory pore opening below them.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 1A, 2D). Elongated, slightly tapering posteriorly and slightly divergent, three times the length of the last urosomite; length: 31 μm; length/width: 2.7. Armature represented by six setae (seta I apparently missing): seta II short and very thin; seta III stout and pointed, unipinnate in approximately one/fifth of the distal outer margin; seta IV very small, bare, enlarged in the first half and thin in the second half; seta V unipinnate, enlarged in the first half and thin in the second half; seta VI as seta III but shorter; seta VII bare, bi-articulate at base and arising distally at two/third of the ramus.</p> <p>Rostrum (Fig. 1A). Small, approximately triangular, with round tip, fused to cephalic shield, armed with two sensilla.</p> <p>Antennule (Figs. 1A, 3E). Short, robust, 8-segmented. First segment longest, without armature, with a row of inner spinules. Second segment with three pinnate and one bare seta on the inner margin, one long seta on the outer margin. Third segment provided with three pinnate and two bare setae. Inner distal corner of fourth segment forming a sub-cylindrical process provided with a group of one long slender bare seta, one short spindle-like pinnate seta, one long and thick aesthetasc, fused at base with a long slender seta. Fifth segment smallest, with one pinnate and one bare seta arising from a sub-cylindrical inner outgrowth. Sixth segment with five bare setae; seventh segment with five bare setae, the longest and strongest one originating from a ventral cylindrical outgrowth. Last segment wider than long, furnished with seven bare setae and a lateral acrothek formed by a slender aesthetasc and a seta fused at base. Armature formula: 1–[0], 2–[2 bare + 3 pinnate], 3–[2 bare + 3 pinnate], 4–[2 bare + 1 pinnate + ae], 5–[1 bare + 1 pinnate], 6–[5 bare], 7–[5 bare], 8–[7 bare + acrothek].</p> <p>Antenna (Fig. 3C–D). 4-segmented; coxa small and bare; basis approximately three times longer than wide, without any surface ornamentation; exopod (Fig. 3D) 1-segmented, with a constriction at half-length (trace of segmentation?), two bare setae laterally, one bare and one pinnate seta apically. Endopod 2-segmented, proximal segment with one pinnate abexopodal seta; distal endopodal segment ornamented with two groups of spinules on lateral margin and armed with one bare spiniform seta sub-distally, four long and geniculate setae, two shorter bare ones.</p> <p>Mandible (Fig. 4A). Coxa with well-developed gnathobase bearing one pinnate seta at dorsal corner; cutting edge provided with one long pointed tooth on outer corner, four apical long needle-like teeth, and one pointed, strong tooth on inner corner, half as long as coxal length. Palp reduced, 2-segmented, comprising basis with distal pinnate seta, 1-segmented endopod with two distal setae of subequal length, two short lateral pinnate setae.</p> <p>Maxillule (Fig. 4B). Praecoxal arthrite well developed, quadrangular, with one pinnate proximal seta on lateral margin, three thin bare setae, three pointed teeth at distal margin. Coxa prolonged in a cylindrical endite with apical pinnate seta; basis with one subapical unipinnate seta and one apical unipinnate spiniform seta. Exopod and endopod missing.</p> <p>Maxilla (Fig. 4C). Overall very large compared to the other mouthparts; syncoxa with three endites, proximal one reduced to a large pinnate seta, median endite with one apical pinnate seta, distal coxal endite with one bare and one pinnate apical seta. Allobasis prolonged into strong denticled claw; endopod fused to basis and armed with one claw-like unipinnate seta and four naked setae distally.</p> <p>Maxilliped (Fig. 4F). 3-segmented, comprising syncoxa, basis, and 1-segmented endopod; syncoxa bare, basis more than twice the length of coxa and bare, length/width: 2.9; endopod small, with one small subapical spine, one strong claw-like pinnate seta and two thinner bare ones distally.</p> <p>P1 (Fig. 4G). Intercoxal sclerite long and thin, slightly concave; coxa bare, well-developed and pyramidal; basis without outer seta, with bare inner seta at half length of the inner margin; exopod and endopod 2-segmented, exopod slightly shorter than endopod. First exopodal segment longer than the second one, with spinular row along outer margin, strong pinnate seta on distal outer corner; second segment with spinular row along outer margin, four distal pinnate setae, the innermost is the longest. First endopodal segment bare, 2.5 times longer than the second one, with spinules along inner and outer margin; second segment with spinules along the distal part of the outer margin, two long geniculate apical setae.</p> <p>P2–P4. (Fig. 5A–C). Intercoxal sclerites long and thin. P2 basis without outer seta and with a proximal inner row of hair-like spinules; P3 and P4 basis with outer pinnate seta. Exopods 3-segmented, first, second and third segments with spinular row along outer margin; first segment with outer unipinnate, curved spine at distal corner; third segment also with long geniculate apical seta. Endopods missing. Setal formula provided in Table 1.</p> <p>P5 (Fig. 2A–B). Reduced to a lobed plate, with one short seta (ancestral baseoendopodal seta) and a tiny tip.</p> <p>Description of male (paratype). Habitus (Fig. 1B) General body shape and ornamentation as in female, but slightly smaller and more slender than in female, body length 252 μm; largest width measured at posterior margin of cephalic shield: 44 μm; prosome to urosome ratio: 0.83. Cephalothorax representing about 26% of total body length. Antenna, Mdb, Mxl, Mxpd, P1–P4 as in female, sexual dimorphism in separation of genital somite, A1, Mx, P5, and P6, P2 basis ornamentation and P3–P4 basis armature.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 3F). Shape and armature as in female but proportionally longer (lenght/width = 3.2).</p> <p>Antennule (Fig. 5E). Strong, short, subchirocer, 7-segmented. Armature cannot be described since some of the setae are damaged or missing in the only existing specimen. First segment apparently without distal seta. Fifth segment enlarged, square, with longer and thinner aesthetasc than in female; seventh segment with thin distal aesthetasc, two of the observable four setae are small.</p> <p>Maxilla (Fig. 4D). Structure and ornamentation as in female, but endopodal setae all bare.</p> <p>P2. Basis without proximal row of hair-like spinules.</p> <p>P3–P4. Basis with outer bare seta.</p> <p>P5 (Fig. 5D). Extremely reduced, represented by a small round lobe without armature.</p> <p>P6 (Fig. 5D). Two asymmetrical (the right one is larger) roundish plates without armature.</p> <p>Spermatophore (Fig. 5F). Ellipsoidal, slightly longer than the somite carrying the P5.</p> <p>Variability. In one female paratype the caudal seta V is reduced in size (it equals seta IV) and there is a pore near seta VII (Fig. 3B). In a second female paratype, the maxillary endopod carries one seta less (Fig. 4E). In a third female paratype the P5 is unilobed and unarmed and the number and position of pores on the ventral surface of the genital somite differ (Fig. 2C).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/270F87BBFF8AFFCA0ECC0434FE56F3C4	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	Cottarelli, Vezio;Bruno, Maria Cristina	Cottarelli, Vezio, Bruno, Maria Cristina (2021): Interesting interstitial Paramesochridae (Copepoda: Harpacticoida): Maliithipon wellsi gen. et sp. nov. from the Philippines, M. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) comb. nov from Panama, and M. cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) from the Azores. Zootaxa 5051 (1): 68-93, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5051.1.7
270F87BBFF83FFCA0ECC0434FEE7F198.text	270F87BBFF83FFCA0ECC0434FEE7F198.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Maliithipon aberrans (Mielke 1984) Cottarelli & Bruno 2021	<div><p>Maliithipon aberrans (Mielke, 1984a) comb. nov.</p> <p>This species was described as Apodopsyllus aberrans by Mielke (1984a) based on three female specimens collected in two sandy beaches on the Pacific Coast of Panama: “ Isla Naos” (two specimens) and “ Isla Melones” (one specimen). The description and the drawings clearly show how this species shares all the characters listed for Maliithipon gen. nov. This species can be distinguished from the type species M. wellsi sp. nov. by several characters (Table 1), some of which are easy to observe, such as the shape and size of caudal rami (shorter and wider in M. aberrans, length/ width: 1), the structure of P5 (more reduced in M. wellsi sp. nov.). To expand the comparison of the two species, we report here the antennulary armature deducted from Mielke’s (1984a: 227) original drawings: 1–[0], 2–[3 bare + 5 pinnate], 3–[3 bare + 3 pinnate], 4–[1 bare + 1 + ae], 5–[1 bare], 6–[1 pinnate], 7–[4 bare + 1 pinnate], 8–[4 bare + ae (acrothek?)].</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/270F87BBFF83FFCA0ECC0434FEE7F198	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	Cottarelli, Vezio;Bruno, Maria Cristina	Cottarelli, Vezio, Bruno, Maria Cristina (2021): Interesting interstitial Paramesochridae (Copepoda: Harpacticoida): Maliithipon wellsi gen. et sp. nov. from the Philippines, M. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) comb. nov from Panama, and M. cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) from the Azores. Zootaxa 5051 (1): 68-93, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5051.1.7
270F87BBFF83FFC80ECC07C8FD91F0DC.text	270F87BBFF83FFC80ECC07C8FD91F0DC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Maliithipon aberrans (Mielke 1984) Cottarelli & Bruno 2021	<div><p>Maliithipon cf. aberrans (Mielke 1984a) = Apodopsyllus aberrans Mielke 1984a in Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor &amp; George (2016)</p> <p>(Figs. 6–11)</p> <p>Material examined. Two male and four female specimens, each one undissected and mounted on one slide labelled respectively: Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female. Prainha, ST 1/3 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female, Prainha, ST 1/4 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult male. Prainha, ST 1/6 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult male. Calheta, ST1/1 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female, Puerto Santo Island East, ST 3/6; Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female, Puerto Santo Island East, ST 3/6. Details on the collecting methods, collecting sites and dates in Packmor et al. (2015).</p> <p>Description of female. Habitus (Fig. 6A). Body unpigmented, elongate, cylindrical and slightly depressed dorsoventrally, naupliar eye absent. Length 228 μm, n = 4, mean = 229 μm. Last urosomites tapering posteriorly. Free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by well-developed arthrodial membranes. Ventrolateral margin of first, second, and fourth free thoracic somites with row of denticles (Fig. 6B). Integument weakly sclerotized, without cuticular pits. First pedigerous somite and dorsal cephalic shield fused forming cephalothorax representing about 26% of total body length. Cephalothorax and somites with few sensilla and several pores on dorsal, lateral and ventral surfaces (pores were difficult to observe, their pattern could not be precisely determined). Second and third urosomite completely fused to form genital double-somite. Penultimate body somite without sensilla, carrying a fine, well developed lobate pseudoperculum (Figs. 6A, 7C). Anal somite small, with pair of dorsal sensilla (Fig. 7B); anal operculum not visible. Genital field (Fig. 6C–D) small, ellipsoidal with two small lateral lobes, located mid-ventrally and at mid-length of the genital double-somite, surrounded by eight pores of different size; P6 not discernible (morphology probably as in M. wellsi).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 7 °–B). Parallel, slightly longer than the last urosomite; length: 14 μm; length/width: 1.8. Approximately rectangular in shape, slightly tapering posteriorly, the distal outer corner is prolonged in a ventral cuticular outgrowth; armature represented by six setae (seta I apparently missing): seta II short and very thin, seta III stout and pointed, unipinnate along approximately one/fifth of the distal outer margin; seta IV unipinnate, seta V bare and very reduced; seta VI as seta III but shorter; seta VII bare, bi-articulate at base and arising distally at two-thirds of the ramus length.</p> <p>Rostrum (Fig. 6A, 8A). Small, approximately triangular, with round tip, fused to cephalic shield, armed with two sensilla.</p> <p>Antennule (Fig. 8A–B). Short, robust, 8-segmented. First segment longest, without armature; second segment with ten setae, four of which pinnate, the one on the outer distal corner longest. Third segment provided with two pinnate and five bare setae. Inner distal corner of fourth segment forming a sub-cylindrical process carrying a long and thick aesthetasc fused at base with one long bare seta, and two short, basally-enlarged setae, the outer one pinnate. Fifth segment smallest, with one bare seta. Sixth segment with two bare setae; seventh segment with one bare and one pinnate seta. Eighth segment with seven bare setae and one pinnate and acrothek formed by a slender aesthetasc and a seta fused at base. Armature formula: 1–[0], 2–[6 bare + 4 pinnate], 3–[5 bare + 2 pinnate], 4–[1 bare + 1 pinnate + (1 + ae)], 5–[1 bare], 6–[2 bare], 7–[1 bare + 1 pinnate], 8–[8 bare + 1 pinnate + acrothek].</p> <p>Antenna (Fig. 8C–D). 4-segmented; coxa small and bare; basis approximately twice longer than wide, without any surface ornamentation; exopod (Fig. 8D) 1-segmented, with two bare setae laterally, one pinnate seta and one short spine apically. Endopod 2-segmented, proximal segment with one pinnate abexopodal seta; distal endopodal segment armed with two subdistal bare spiniform setae, distal margin carrying three bare geniculate setae and three bare normal setae, one of which very short.</p> <p>Mandible (Fig. 8E). Coxa long and narrow, with well-developed gnathobase bearing one bare seta at dorsal corner; cutting edge provided with three apical needle-like teeth, one long pointed tooth on inner and on outer corner, one tooth has double the size of the other. Palp reduced, 2-segmented, comprising roundish basis, 1-segmented endopod with one seta, one pinnate spiniform seta, and one spinule distally, and one lateral unipinnate spiniform seta.</p> <p>Maxillule (Fig. 8F). Difficult to discern. All setae bare. Praecoxal arthrite roundish, with one seta at half of the lateral margin (marked with asterisk in Fig. 8F), two thin and two stronger setae at distal margin. Coxa prolonged in a cylindrical endite with two apical setae; basis with one apical seta. Exopod and endopod missing.</p> <p>Maxilla (Fig. 9A). Overall very large compared to the other mouthparts (in lateral view, it projects from the cephalothoracic margin); syncoxa with three endites, proximal one small with one apical pinnate seta, median endite small with one apical pinnate seta, distal coxal endite with two apical bare setae. Allobasis prolonged into strong denticled claw; endopod fused to basis and armed with four strong setae distally.</p> <p>Maxilliped (Fig. 9C). 3-segmented, comprising syncoxa, basis, and 1-segmented endopod; syncoxa bare, basis slightly longer than coxa and bare; endopod short, distally one normal and two slightly geniculated bare setae.</p> <p>P1 (Fig. 9D). Intercoxal sclerite long and thin, slightly concave; coxa bare, well-developed; basis without outer seta, with bare inner seta at half length of the inner margin; exopod and endopod 2-segmented, exopod slightly shorter than endopod. First exopodal segment longer than the second one, with spinular row along outer margin, strong pinnate seta on distal outer corner; second segment with spinular row along outer margin, four distal pinnate setae, the innermost is the longest. First endopodal segment bare, 2.5 times longer than the second one, with spinules along outer margin; second segment with spinules along the distal part of the outer margin, two long geniculate apical setae.</p> <p>P2–P4. (Figs. 9E–F, 10A). Intercoxal sclerites long and thin. P2 basis with small bare outer seta and with a row of spinules on inner margin; P3 and P4 basis with outer pinnate seta. Exopods 3-segmented, first, second and third segments with spinular row along outer margin and outer unipinnate, curved spine at distal corner, longest in P4 exp-2; third segment also with apical long geniculate pinnate seta. Endopods missing. Setal formula provided in Table 1.</p> <p>P5 (Fig. 6C). Reduced to two adjacent lobed plates laterally inserted; the outermost plate with a pinnate seta (ancestral basal seta), the innermost plate, roundish, with three setae, the longest middle one unipinnate.</p> <p>Description of male. General body shape and ornamentation as in female, but slightly smaller and more slender, body length 220 μm; prosome to urosome ratio: 0.85. Last urosomites tapering posteriorly. Cephalothorax representing about 25% of total body length. Antenna, Mdb, Mxl, Mx, Mxp, P1–P4 (Figs. 10D, 11–C) as in female. Sexual dimorphism in separation of genital somite, A1, P5, and P6, ventrolateral margin of free thoracic somites without row of denticles; P2 basis ornamentation, P3–P4 basis armature; P4 exp-2 armature.Anal somite small, anal operculum and dorsal sensilla of the anal somite not visible.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 11E). Shape and armature as in female but proportionally longer and thinner (length/width = 2).</p> <p>Antennule (Fig. 10C). Strong, short, subchirocer, 7-segmented. First segment without distal seta, as in female; second segment with long lateral seta, as in female, two short pinnate lateral setae, five bare setae. Third segment with four bare setae of different lengths, one short pinnate seta. Fourth segment small, with two short setae; fifth segment enlarged, square, with long aesthetasc fused at base with long seta. Fifth segment with lateral tubercle carrying one thick esthetasc and two setae of same length; inner distal corner produced in a tubercle carrying one bare seta and three shorter ones, the middle one is enlarged in the first half and pinnate. Sixth segment with one long and three short setae, one of which pinnate; seventh segment with eight bare setae and one small seta fused to aesthetasc to form apical acrothek. Armature formula: 1–[0], 2–[6 bare + 2 pinnate], 3–[4 bare + 1 pinnate], 4–[2 bare], 5–[4 bare + 1 pinnate + (1 + ae)], 6–[3 bare +1 pinnate], 7–[8 bare + acrothek].</p> <p>P2 (Fig. 11A). Basis without inner row of spinules.</p> <p>P3 (Fig. 11B). Basis with outer bare seta.</p> <p>P4 (Fig. 11C). Basis with outer bare seta; exp-2 with distal spine of normal size.</p> <p>P5 (Fig. 10E). Similar to female but the two lobes are merged, smaller, and with bare setae; the exopod is merged with the somite and carries two setae (one less seta than in the female).</p> <p>P6 (Fig. 11D) represented by two asymmetrical (the right one is larger) roundish plates with one seta, the one on the right is longer.</p> <p>Spermatophore (Fig. 11D). Ellipsoidal, approximately as long as the somite carrying the P5.</p> <p>Variability. In one female paratype the maxillary distal endite is longer and carries three setae instead of two (Fig. 9B). In a second female paratype the P5 exopod carries one seta less (Fig. 10B) and setae IV and V on the caudal rami are normally developed (Fig. 7C). In one male seta V is normal on the right caudal ramus, and extremely reduced on the left caudal ramus (Fig. 11F).</p> <p>Remarks. Since the description of the new genus Maliithipon is based exclusively on morphological characters, M. cf. aberrans can be included in the new genus (Table 1). Females and males of M. cf. aberrans can be distinguished from those of M. wellsi sp. nov. by easily-observable characters, e.g. the caudal rami, P5 and P6. The distinction of M. cf. aberrans from M. aberrans comb. nov. is more difficult, mainly due to the lack of males in the type series of M. aberrans. As a consequence, the males collected in the Azores, initially listed as A. aberrans in Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor &amp; George (2016), cannot be compared with males of the type series, and could potentially belong to a different taxon. However, because the females collected in the Azores share the main discriminant features with M. aberrans, but differ in some minor features which are more difficult to observe (Table 1), we have chosen to be more conservative in the attribution of the taxonomic status to this population of Maliithipon, and not to follow Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor &amp; George (2016). The discovery of new populations, or the availability of new knowledge on the taxonomy of the existing populations (based for instance on scanning and/or confocal laser scanning microscopy; developmental study, molecular analysis) will hopefully allow to attribute a final taxonomic status to this taxon.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/270F87BBFF83FFC80ECC07C8FD91F0DC	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	Cottarelli, Vezio;Bruno, Maria Cristina	Cottarelli, Vezio, Bruno, Maria Cristina (2021): Interesting interstitial Paramesochridae (Copepoda: Harpacticoida): Maliithipon wellsi gen. et sp. nov. from the Philippines, M. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) comb. nov from Panama, and M. cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) from the Azores. Zootaxa 5051 (1): 68-93, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5051.1.7
