identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03A387ACFFA9FF992686284E05F1567E.text	03A387ACFFA9FF992686284E05F1567E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gecarcinus Leach 1814	<div><p>Genus Gecarcinus Leach 1814</p> <p>Diagnosis. Carapace transversely oval with branchial regions inflated. Pterygostomian regions glabrous. Anterior part of lateral border marked by marginal line. Fronto-orbital border 1/2 or less than 1/2 greatest breadth of carapace. Front strongly deflexed, frontal edge horizontal, from 1/5 to 1/8 the greatest breadth of carapace. Orbits deep, not much wider than high, outer angle obtuse, not prominent, inner angle as stout angular tooth touching inferior angle of front; a deep U-shaped sinus next to it. Eyes nearly filling orbits (Rathbun 1918). Proepistome hardly discernible, inserted under lower margin of narrow front (Guinot et al. 2018). Epistomal edge sometimes covered by third maxillipeds. Oral cavity subcircular or rhomboid, wider in the middle, margins with dense strip of bristles; third maxillipeds separated, central opening rhomboid, exposing mandibles; ischium and merus broad, subequal in length, merus suboval, hiding short and robust palp, the latter articulated in the middle of anterior margin of merus. Exognath hidden behind ischium, without flagellum, shorter than ischio-meral articulation. Chelipeds sturdy, almost smooth, in adults can be slightly or evidently different in size and robustness (smaller and weaker in females); internal surface of palm of major chela with or without tuberculated longitudinal ridge. Robust ambulatory appendages, second pair longest, last 3 joints armed with spines, dactyli with 4-6 longitudinal rows. First male pleopod (G1) semi-cylindrical, terminal apical element more than 1/3 of G1 length, extending distally well beyond apex, as narrow, chitinous, semi-cylindrical structure, open with longitudinal furrow in lateral view, distal end widening in caudal and cephalic views. Main axis of G1 with suture mostly visible in mesial view, distal portion of cephalic surface, ending in finger-like projection, pointed and elongated or rounded and relatively short, directed apically or cephalically, ornamented with slender bristles extending distally (Fig. 3A, B) (Toledano-Carrasco 2019). In lateral view, distal portion of main axis excavated, ending in two projections, a corneous process and finger-like projection of cephalic surface; the former extending distally, rectangular, smoothly ribbed, ending obliquely with cephalic margin reaching beyond caudal one, the latter sharply triangular, about 1/2 as long as the former (Fig. 3C). In caudal view, excavation of G1 main axis evident, corneous process inclined mesially. In cephalic view, apical plate directed distolaterally, fused to distal end of lateral surface, apically concave; marginal suture along cephalic surface of main axis (Fig. 3A, B) (Toledano-Carrasco 2019).</p> <p>Sternal surface of carapace with bands of short setae between sternites 4–5. Sternite 1 as small triangular tooth, not separated by suture from sternite 2; sternite 2 semi-ovate or trapezoidal; suture 2/3 straight, weakly marked, or V-shaped and well-developed; sternites 3–4 completely fused with straight or convex, obliquely directed lateral margins, thus not restricted at level of first pereopods (P1). Sternites 5–7 with similar shape, sutures well defined. Sternite 8 totally hidden when pleon is folded (Figs. 2B, F; 3D, E, F), posterior emargination reaching sternite 7 at level of narrow median bridge situated at level of suture 7/8. Another weak median bridge present at level of suture 6/7 (G. ruricola) or traces of it (G. lateralis, G. quadratus). Male genital orifice completely sternal (Guinot, 1979). Sternites 3–4 with sterno-pleonal rim well-marked or rounded and slightly marked. Locking structure formed by button covered with setae in G. ruricola and G. quadratus (Köhnk et al. 2017; Guinot et al. 2018). Abdomen subtriangular in males, semi-circular in females, with 7 articulated somites in both sexes (Figs. 2B, F; 3D, E, F) (Toledano-Carrasco 2019). Margins of abdomen with dense tufts of hydrophilic setae, facing row of setae on adjacent portions of last sternites (Bliss 1963; Wolcott 1984), Müller’s channel absent (De Oliveira 2014).</p> <p>Remarks. Guinot et al. (2018) reexamined all gecarcinid morphological characters, and divided the family Gecarcinidae into two subclades. The first clade included: Cardisoma Latreille, 1828, Discoplax A. Milne-Edwards, 1867, and Tuerkayana Guinot et al., 2018; the second subclade, with a higher degree of terrestriality, included: Gecarcinus Leach, 1814, Gecarcoidea H. Milne-Edwards, 1837, and Johngarthia Türkay, 1970. Among the important characters shared by Gecarcinus and Johngarthia is the stridulatory apparatus, which is used to produce sounds when these crabs are disturbed in their retreats (Abele et al. 1973). The sound is produced when oblique rows of rugosities on the subhepatic region are rubbed against the tuberculated internal margin of the merus of the cheliped in G. quadratus, or against a longitudinal tuberculated ridge on the internal surface of the palm of the major cheliped in G. lateralis (Klaassen 1973; Abele et al. 1973).</p> <p>The ability to absorb water from the substrate is well developed in Gecarcoidea natalis (Pocock, 1889) and Gecarcinus lateralis, in which setal tufts extend along the first three pleonal somites and on the coxa of P5 to establish a connection with the pericardial sacs (Bliss 1963, 1968; Greenaway 1988). In Gecarcinus ruricola and Gecarcoidea lalandii H. Milne Edwards, 1837, the posterior margin of sternite 7 is lined with dense hydrophilic setae in contact with tufts of setae on the coxa of P5 and pleonal somites 1-3 (Guinot et al. 2018).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03A387ACFFA9FF992686284E05F1567E	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	Toledano-Carrasco, Ia Atzimba;Villalobos, José Luis;Álvarez, Fernando	Toledano-Carrasco, Ia Atzimba, Villalobos, José Luis, Álvarez, Fernando (2021): A morphological, phylogenetic and phylogeographic reappraisal of the land crabs Gecarcinus quadratus De Saussure, 1853, and G. lateralis Fréminville in Guérin 1832 (Decapoda: Gecarcinidae). Are they different species? Zootaxa 5048 (2): 215-236, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5048.2.4
03A387ACFFAFFF9F26862FE200F75274.text	03A387ACFFAFFF9F26862FE200F75274.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gecarcinus lateralis Freminville in Guerin 1832	<div><p>Gecarcinus lateralis Fréminville in Guérin, 1832</p> <p>(Figs. 1A; 2A-D; 3A, D)</p> <p>Gecarcinus lateralis Fréminville in Guérin 1832: 7, pl. 5, figs. 1, 1a–b.</p> <p>Ocypoda lateralis.— Fréminville 1835: 224.</p> <p>Gecarcinus lateralis.—H. Milne-Edwards 1837: 27, pl. 18, figs. 1–6. De Saussure 1858: 440.</p> <p>Geocarcinus lateralis.— Young 1900: 239.</p> <p>Gecarcinus lateralis.— Rathbun 1918: 355. Chace &amp; Hobbs 1969: 198.</p> <p>Gecarcinus (Gecarcinus) lateralis lateralis.— Türkay 1970: 337.</p> <p>Gecarcinus (Gecarcinus) lateralis.— Türkay 1973: 974.</p> <p>Gecarcinus lateralis.— Powers 1977: 139.</p> <p>Gecarcinus (Gecarcinus) lateralis lateralis.— von Prahl &amp; Manjarrés 1984: 158.</p> <p>Gecarcinus lateralis.— Abele &amp; Kim 1986: 661. Hernández-Aguilera 1996: 92. Schubart et al. 2006: 195. Ng e t al. 2008: 215.</p> <p>Felder et al. 2009: 1088. Low et al. 2013: 101. Perger &amp; Wall 2014: 97. Hermoso-Salazar &amp; Arvizu-Coyotzi 2015: 21.</p> <p>Guinot et al. 2018: 568-570. Toledano-Carrasco 2019: 18-22. Ng et al. 2019: 99-100.</p> <p>Material examined. MEXICO. Tamaulipas: 2 females, 1 juvenile, CCLEA C86–07182, Municipality San Fernando, La Laguna, Boca de Catán, Apr 04, 2014, coll. G. Rodríguez; 1 female, CCLEA, C86–07094, Municipality Soto La Marina, La Pesca, Oct 20, 2014, coll. G. Rodríguez; 1 male, 1 female, CCLEA C86–07094 jar D, same locality and collector data as previous, Sept 24, 2016.– Veracruz: 1 male, CCLEA C86–06601, Municipality Cazones, Barra de Cazones, Jan 24, 2015, coll. G. Rodríguez; 2 males, 1 female, CNCR 33942, Municipality Ángel R. Cabada, Río Prieto, coll. anonymous; 2 males, CNCR 33943, Municipality Catemaco, Barra de Sontecomapan, Apr 24, 2017, colls. I. Toledano, E. Moreno, J.L. Villalobos.– Tabasco: 1 male, CCLEA C86-06495, Municipality Paraíso, Playa Bruja, Oct 14, 2006, coll. G. Rodríguez; 1 male, 1 female, CCLEA, C86-06500, Municipality Paraíso, Chiltepec, Apr 06, 2007, coll. G. Rodríguez. – Campeche: 2 males, 1 female, CNCR 34011 Cayo Arcas, Apr 06, 2017, coll. anonymous; 1 female, CCY YUC-CC-255-11 - 001024, Municipality Progreso, Arrecife Alacranes, Aug 01, 2009, coll. C. Cinthya Delgado. – Quintana Roo: 1 male, 2 juveniles, CNCR 34010, Municipality Othón P. Blanco, Playa Mahahual, Mar 12, 2017, coll. Anonymous; 1 male, CNCR 30834, Isla Cayo Norte Menor, Banco Chinchorro, Mar 28, 2013, coll. anonymous.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Male abdomen triangular; telson campanulate, narrower than sixth abdominal somite, lateral margins slightly marked, tip rounded. Sixth somite with convex lateral margins, forming lateral shoulder (Fig. 2B). Female abdomen subcircular, completely or almost completely covering thoracic sterna; telson triangular, as wide as posterior margin of sixth somite, lateral margins straight, smooth (Fig. 3D). Antero-lateral margins of sternite 3 slightly convex, those of sternite 4 straight, with slight concavity (Figs. 2B, 3D). Shallow endostomial ridges delimiting efferent branchial channel, poorly defining this region. Third maxilliped with merus generally concealing epistome. Adult male chelae different in size and robustness; inner surface of palm of major chela with longitudinal tuberculated ridge, used as stridulatory plectrum.</p> <p>Description. Based on adult male with G1 well developed (54.3 mm CL, 71.7 mm CW). Carapace transversely oval, wider anteriorly, strongly arched at level of branchial regions, anterolateral margin incipient, posterior portion of external orbital angle slightly marked, armed with minuscule granules. Regions well defined, delimited by shallow grooves. Branchial regions prominent. Fronto-orbital margin about 1/2 of maximum carapace width (Fig. 1A). Front about 1/4 length of carapace, deflexed, surface slightly concave, occasionally straight, inferior margin granulated, raised from surface, straight, generally concealing basal segments of antennules; frontal lobes poorly defined (Fig. 2A).</p> <p>Orbits delimited by well defined, smooth superior border. Infra-orbital margin granulated, interrupted by deep notch, continued as triangular plate forming mesial lobe. Suborbital ridge well marked (stridulating crest of Guinot et al. 2018), extending from superior border of epistome to subhepatic suture. Surface of anterolateral wall of carapace reticulated (pars strident). Third maxillipeds not closing completely, leaving rhomboidal gap; merus covering epistome anteriorly, anterior border with medial notch, occasionally straight; ischium longer than merus, subequal in width. Palp short, hidden and articulated behind merus, directed laterally (Fig. 2A). Short exognath hidden behind ischium.</p> <p>Strong heterochely in males, subequal chelipeds in females; fingers longer than palm, with corneous tips; longitudinal rows of granules throughout surface; cutting margins bearing 6–8 irregularly spaced blunt teeth; dactyl slightly curved inwards; fingers gapping (Fig. 2D). Internal surface of palm swollen, with distinct longitudinal ridge along midsection, used as stridulatory plectrum, internal depression next to articulation with carpus. Carpus subtriangular, dorso-mesial margin smooth in large organisms, spinulous in small ones. Merus elongated, subtriangular, internal border granulated.</p> <p>Pereiopods (2–4) long, slender, with short setae; merus elongated, surface striated; carpus subtriangular, shorter than propodus, or almost of same length in fifth pair, dorsal margin toothed; propodus shorter than dactyl, dorsal and ventral margins formed by short, slender spines; dactyli armed with 4–6 rows of spines, those on lateral carina poorly developed to absent (Fig. 2C).</p> <p>Male and female abdomen as in species diagnosis.</p> <p>Male G1, as in genus diagnosis (Fig. 3A).</p> <p>Female (39 mm CL, 33–50 mm CW), with gonopore on sixth plate of thoracic sternum, protruding. Ring around operculum oval, with sharp edges; operculum a large, oval, protruding lobe.</p> <p>Coloration. Dorsal surface of carapace dark, lateral margins orange, posteriorly light cream. Chelipeds and lower portion of front orange (Fig. 1A)</p> <p>Measurements. Males: 28.6–49.1 mm CL; 33.9–64.5 mm CW. Females 27.3–39 mm CL, 33–50 mm CW.</p> <p>Remarks. The authorship of the species was attributed to Fréminville (1835) for many years who originally named organisms from the French West Indies: Marie-Galante, La Désirade, Guadeloupe and Martinique, as Ocypode lateralis. However, Low et al. (2013) reported that Guérin in 1832 had already used the name “ Gecarcinus lateralis Freminv. ” in his Iconographie du Règne animal by G. Cuvier and, hence, he must be recognized as the author of the species.</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03A387ACFFAFFF9F26862FE200F75274	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	Toledano-Carrasco, Ia Atzimba;Villalobos, José Luis;Álvarez, Fernando	Toledano-Carrasco, Ia Atzimba, Villalobos, José Luis, Álvarez, Fernando (2021): A morphological, phylogenetic and phylogeographic reappraisal of the land crabs Gecarcinus quadratus De Saussure, 1853, and G. lateralis Fréminville in Guérin 1832 (Decapoda: Gecarcinidae). Are they different species? Zootaxa 5048 (2): 215-236, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5048.2.4
03A387ACFFAEFF9C26862C0603E25707.text	03A387ACFFAEFF9C26862C0603E25707.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gecarcinus quadratus De Saussure 1853	<div><p>Gecarcinus quadratus De Saussure 1853</p> <p>(Figs. 1B; 2E–H; 3B, C, E)</p> <p>Gecarcinus quadratus De Saussure 1853: 360. Rathbun 1918: 358. Garth 1948:58.</p> <p>Gecarcinus (Gecarcinus) lateralis quadratus.— Türkay 1970: 338. von Prahl &amp; Manjarrés 1984: 155.</p> <p>Gecarcinus quadratus.— Ng et al. 2008: 215. Arzola-González et al. 2010: 187.</p> <p>Gecarcinus lateralis.— Perger &amp; Wall 2014: 97.</p> <p>Gecarcinus quadratus.— Guinot et al. 2018: 568-570. Toledano-Carrasco 2019: 22-26. Ng et al. 2019: 99-100.</p> <p>Material examined. MEXICO. Sinaloa: 8 males, 2 females, CNCR 362, Municipality Mazatlán, Isla Venados, May 30, 1974, colls. M.C. Chávez, C.A. Martínez.– Nayarit: 2 males, CNCR 33941, Municipality Bahía de Banderas, Punta de Mita, Apr 21, 2017, Coll. Anonymous; 1 male, CNCR 34012, Municipality Bahía de Banderas, Playa Higuera Blanca, Jul 07, 2017, coll. J.L. Villalobos. – Jalisco: 1 female, CNCR 3514, Municipality La Huerta, Playa La Rosada, Bahía de Chamela, Jun 16, 1984, coll. A. Cantú; 1 female, CNCR 3517, Municipality La Huerta, Salinas, Bahía de Chamela, Jun 15, 1984, colls. J.C. Nates, J.L. Villalobos, A. Cantú; 1 male, CNCR 34846, Municipality La Huerta, Estación de Biología Chamela, Instituto de Biología, UNAM, no date, coll. anonymous.– Michoacán: 1 male, CNCR 11736, Municipality Aquila, Playa de Maruata, Jun 20, 1990, coll. M.S. García; 2 females, CNCR 25629, Municipality Lázaro Cárdenas, Río Popoyuta, cerca desembocadura, Jul 12, 1986, coll. A. Raz Guzman; 3 males, 2 females, CNCR 6158, Municipality Aquila, Monte del Oro, km 175 carretera Tecomán-Playa Azul, Mar 03, 1986, coll. R. Lamothe, L.J. Rangel.– Guerrero: 1 male, 1 female, 1 juvenile, CNCR 19003, Municipality La Unión de Isidoro Montes de Oca, Playa Troncones, N of Zihuatanejo, Jan 01, 2001, coll. C. Candelaria. – Oaxaca: 1 male, 1 female, CNCR 34013, Municipality Santa María Tonameca, Playa Aragón, Jan 01, 2017, coll. anonymous; 1 male, 1 female, CNCR 3031, Municipality Santa María Colotepec, Playa El Carrizalillo, Puerto Escondido, Sep 08, 1983, coll. A. Cantú. – Chiapas: 2 males, CNCR 34630, Municipality Tonalá, Barra de Boca del Cielo, Mar 08, 2018, colls. J.L. Villalobos, I. Toledano, E. Moreno.</p> <p>Diagnosis. Male abdomen triangular; telson triangular, lateral margins straight continuous with those of sixth abdominal somite, slightly marked, tip moderately rounded. Sixth somite with posterior margin as broad as telson or slightly wider, lateral margins forming continued straight margin with telson (Fig. 2F). Female abdomen subcircular, not covering thoracic sternum completely; telson triangular, narrower than posterior margin of sixth somite, lateral margins slightly concave with faint vertical suture at middle (Fig. 3E). Antero-lateral margins of sternites 3-4 widely convex at junction of third maxillipeds, gently concave at level of articulation of first pereiopods (Figs. 2F, 3E). Endostomial ridges (Davie et al. 2015) delimiting efferent branchial channel. Third maxilliped with merus not reaching epistome.</p> <p>Description. Carapace transversely oval, wider anteriorly, strongly arched at level of branchial regions, anterolateral margin thin. Regions well-defined, delimited by shallow grooves. Branchial regions prominent. Fronto-orbital margin about half of maximum carapace width (Fig. 1B). Front about 1/4 length of carapace, deflexed, surface slightly concave; inferior margin lightly granulated, not raised from surface, straight, leaving visible basal segments of antennules; frontal lobes poorly defined (Fig. 2E).</p> <p>Orbits delimited by well defined, smooth, superior border. Infra-orbital margin granulated, interrupted by deep notch, continued as subrectangular or low subtriangular plate forming mesial lobe; area of contact between internal angle of front and mesial lobe of infraorbital margin of variable width (Perger &amp; Wall 2014), reaching superior border of epistome. Suborbital ridge softly marked, short, extending laterally from superior border of epistome, not reaching subhepatic suture. Third maxillipeds not closing completely, leaving rhomboidal gap; merus not reaching epistome, anterior border straight, occasionally with shallow emargination or discontinuity; ischium with scattered setae on mesial margin, subequal in width to merus, but longer than it (Fig. 2E). Palp short, hidden, articulated behind merus, directed laterally. Exognath hidden behind ischium, without flagellum, not reaching ischium-merus articulation.</p> <p>Chelipeds in both sexes subequal or similar, evident heterochely in largest males. Chelae with fingers longer than palm, with corneous tips, surface with longitudinal rows of pits and granules, more evident dorsally; cutting margins with distinct subacute tubercles along fingers length, dactyl slightly curved inwards, with 8-10 irregularly spaced small blunt teeth, largest tooth on proximal half; fixed finger with 11-12 irregularly spaced small blunt teeth, largest tooth on distal half; fingers gapping (Fig. 2H). Palm with internal surface smooth, swollen, without tuberculated longitudinal ridge, internal depression next to articulation with carpus. Carpus subtriangular, dorso-mesial margin smooth in large organisms or with spinules in small ones. Merus elongated, subtriangular, inner surface striated, used as stridulatory plectrum.</p> <p>Pereiopods long, slender with short setae; merus elongated, surface striated, dorsal ridge distally spinulated; carpus subtriangular, shorter than propodus, or almost of same length in fifth pair, distal half of dorsal ridge spinulated; propodus shorter than dactyl, dorsal, ventral and lateral ridges armed with short, thin spines; dactyli armed with 6 rows of spines (Fig. 2G), 5 rows in juveniles.</p> <p>Male and female abdomen as in species diagnosis.</p> <p>Male G1, as in genus diagnosis (Fig. 3B, C).</p> <p>Coloration. Dorsal surface of carapace dark purple, posterior and postero-lateral margins yellow or slightly orange, as well as the ambulatory appendages. Yellow or light orange patches above orbits, and on lower part of front. Chelipeds purple, carpus and merus darker (Fig. 1B).</p> <p>Measurements. Males: 35.8–54.3 mm CL; 44.9–71.7 mm CW. Females 33– 51.8 mm CL; 38.7–63.9 mm CW.</p> <p>Remarks. With the resurrection of G. quadratus as a distinct species and geminate analogue from the western Atlantic of G. lateralis, new morphologic and genetic analyses including the eastern Pacific G. nobilii are necessary. According to Perger &amp; Wall (2014), G. nobilii is distinguished from G. lateralis because the former has a particular coloration: carapace without lighter anterolateral and posterior patches on the light lateral margin, carpus and palm of chelipeds homogeneously red or white. Additionally, the frontal width is distinctly greater than the distance between the mesial ends of the suborbital cristae. Also, the width of the mesial lobe of the infraorbital margin at point of contact with the carapace front is longer than the shortest distance between the carapace front and the mesial end of the suborbital crista (Perger &amp; Wall 2014).</p> </div>	http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03A387ACFFAEFF9C26862C0603E25707	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	Toledano-Carrasco, Ia Atzimba;Villalobos, José Luis;Álvarez, Fernando	Toledano-Carrasco, Ia Atzimba, Villalobos, José Luis, Álvarez, Fernando (2021): A morphological, phylogenetic and phylogeographic reappraisal of the land crabs Gecarcinus quadratus De Saussure, 1853, and G. lateralis Fréminville in Guérin 1832 (Decapoda: Gecarcinidae). Are they different species? Zootaxa 5048 (2): 215-236, DOI: https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5048.2.4
