taxonID	type	description	language	source
03931615EC77FFF6FEDFFC41FC52FA00.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Antennae 1 inserted on anterior surface of head; flagellum of males long and filiform, composed of enlarged first article (callynophore), usually with dense brush of aesthestascs medially, and a series of shorter distal articles; flagellum of females one­articulate. Antennae 2 also inserted on anterior surface of head; reduced to few articles, rudimentary or absent in females; in males flagellum is long, multi­articulate, similar to A 1 (rudimentary in male Phronima sedentaria). Pereopod 5 sometimes with large subchela. Developing eggs and young held in brood pouch underneath pereon, made up of oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5. Seven families: Phronimidae, Phrosinidae, Hyperiidae, Dairellidae, Lestrigonidae fam. nov., Bougisidae fam. nov. and Iulopididae fam. nov.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC78FFF9FEDFFD2CFBC9F97F.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length 10 – 40 mm, cuticle transparent. Head subconical, widest dorsally, narrowing and prolonged ventrally, about twice as deep as long. Eyes occupying most of head surface, divided into larger dorsal part and smaller ventrolateral part. Pereonites all separate (Phronima), or pereonites 1 & 2 partially fused (Phronimella). Coxae fused with pereonites. Antennae 1 reduced to two articles in females; in males composed of threearticulate peduncle, large callynophore with dense, two­field brush of aesthestascs medially followed by multi­articulate flagellum. Antennae 2 reduced to small tubercle in females; in males reduced to two small articles in P. sedentaria, multi­articulate in all other species. Mandibles without palp in both sexes; molar well developed. Maxillae 1 with palp and well­developed outer lobe; inner lobe absent. Maxillae 2 bilobed, welldeveloped. Maxilliped with slender outer lobes; inner lobe very reduced in Phronimella, about half­length (or longer) than outer lobes in Phronima. Gnathopods 1 & 2 weakly cheliform, or simple, with complex dactylus. Pereopods 3, 4, 6 & 7 simple; P 3 & 4 usually the longest. Pereopod 5 ending in distinct, broad subchela (Phronima), or less perfect, slender subchela (Phronimella). Uropods slender with articulated endopods and exopods. Uropod 2 smaller than others, rudimentary in female Phronimella. Telson very small, rounded. Gills on pereonites 4 – 6. Oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5. Two genera: Phronima and Phronimella. Remarks Shih (1969) has revised this family. Additions and modifications have been made by Laval (1968 b, 1970) and Shih (1971 a, 1971 b, 1991), and additional taxonomic information for the Australian fauna is provided by Zeidler (1978, 1992 a, 1998).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC79FFFBFEDFFDAEFBA6FD88.taxon	materials_examined	Type species	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC79FFFBFEDFFDAEFBA6FD88.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body moderately slender. Pereonites all separate. Pereonites 1 & 2 much narrower, and appreciably deeper, than following ones. Maxilliped with well­developed inner lobe, length about half, or more, than that of outer lobes. Gnathopods 1 & 2 weakly cheliform. Pereopod 5 with carpus markedly widened distally, forming strong subchela with propodus; anterior margin of basis to carpus smooth. Uropod 2 present in both sexes; endopod sometimes reduced but never absent. Ten species. Remarks Species of Phronima, especially immature specimens, can be difficult to identify. Shih (1969) provides basic keys, illustrations and biological information, and Shih (1991) provides the latest key to species. Zeidler (1992 a, 1998) provides additional taxonomic information. The phronimids are unusual amongst the Hyperiidea in that they are often found in transparent barrel­shaped “ houses ” that they have fashioned from tunicates (salps, doliolids and pyrosomes) and sometimes from siphonophores, or even heteropods (Firoloida). Laval (1968 b, 1978, 1980) provides more information on Phronima and its association with gelatinous ‘ barrels’. Additional biological information on Phronima is provided by Minkiewicz (1909 a, b), Laval (1968 b, 1980), Shih (1969), Repelin (1970, 1972), Laval and Lecher (1995), Land (1981, 1989, 1992), Vinogradov et al. (1982), Diebel (1988), Davenport (1994), Land et al. (1995) and Zelickman and Por (1996). In view of all the above information that is available in the literature, only minimal additional information is provided here. The synonymy follows that justified by Shih (1969, 1991) and is not discussed further here. Species of Phronima live in surface waters, and are relatively common in the tropical and subtropical regions of the world’s oceans, and rarely cross the Subtropical Convergence. Phronima sedentaria is an exception, having a circum­global distribution between 60 ° N and 60 ° S, sometimes occurring just south of 60 ° S (Shih 1971 a)	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7AFFFAFEDFFD7CFCF2FE00.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype of Cancer sedentarius is in the ZMUC (Forsskål coll.): in spirit. Type material of synonyms Type material of P. custos seems to be lost, although the ANSP has a female specimen embedded in a dried salp (CA 2689) from the Guérin­Méneville collection (No. 443) which may represent type material (see Zeidler 1997). Type material of P. borneensis could not be found at the BMNH or MNHN and is considered lost. Type material of P. novaezealandiae could not be found in any museum in New Zealand, or at the BMNH and is considered lost. Type material of P. spinosa could not be found at the SMNH, ZMUC or in Uppsala and is considered lost. The holotype of P. tenella is in the BMNH (89.5.15.205): mounted whole on a microscope slide. The holotype of P. affinis is in the Zoological Museum, Kiel University, Germany (Cr. 0318). Remarks This is the only species of Phronima in which the second antennae of the males are reduced. Females of this species can be confused with P. atlantica, especially when dealing with juveniles, but the pleonites of P. sedentaria possess a posterodistal spinose process which is absent in P. atlantica. It is also similar to P. solitaria, but males of that species have well­developed second antennae, and in females the carpus of pereopod 5 has a strong medial tooth adjacent to the anterior tooth.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7BFFFAFEDFFDF4FEF6F982.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Two syntype females of P. atlantica are in the ANSP (CA 2687), in the Guérin­ Méneville collection (No. 444): once alcohol preserved, now dry (see Zeidler 1997). Remarks The current citation for the original description of this species is contentious. In the past most authors have cited Guérin­Méneville 1836 b (p. 7 – 9; pl. 18, fig. 1) (e. g. Shih 1969; Spamer & Bogan 1992, 1994; Vinogradov et al. 1982), but next to P. atlantica, Guérin­Méneville refers to his 1836 a publication (pl. 25, fig. 4). The figures in both publications are the same, but the fact that Guérin­Méneville refers to his 1836 a publication in reference to P. atlantica indicates that this pre­dated his 1836 b paper and should therefore become the original citation for this species. That 1836 a was probably published well before 1836 b is supported by the fact that other species described in his 1836 b paper are not listed in 1836 a. Regarding the publication “ Iconographhie du Règne Animal de G. Cuvier … ” (Guérin­ Méneville 1836 a), Stebbing (1888) says, “ This work was published in livraisons between 1829 and 1844. The Plates containing Amphipoda probably all belong to the early part of 1836. An advertisement in the “ Quarante­cinquième livraison. Crustacés. Pl. 35., ” says, “ La 46 e et dernière livraison se composera du Texte descriptif de l’Iconographhie et paraîtra fin mars 1838 ”, but the promise was not, it appears, fulfilled till the end of 1843. The specific names, however, being given on the Plates, will carry the date 1836. ” The similarity of this species to P. sedentaria has already been discussed under that species.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7BFFFDFEDFF971FEF6FBD0.taxon	materials_examined	Type material of synonyms The holotype female of P. megalodus is in the BMNH (89.5.15.204): on two microscope slides. Remarks There is some doubt regarding the correct date for the citation of this species. Past reviewers (Vosseler 1901; Shih 1969, 1971) have cited Guérin­Méneville, 1836 a, and, although this is the correct date for the plates, the text was not completed until the end of 1843 (see remarks on P. atlantica). Phronima solitaria was not figured in any of the plates, and was only described on p. 21 of the text, which was not published until 1844! This should therefore be the date used when citing this species (e. g. Spamer & Bogan 1992, 1994). Incidentally, the reference given by Shih (1969) for the original description of this species refers to P. atlantica.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7CFFFDFEDFFB24FDBBF967.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of P. pacifica could not be found at the ANSP or USNM and is considered lost. Remarks The female of this species is easily distinguished from its congeners by the shape of pereopod 5. Males closely resemble P. colletti and in the past have been confused with it (Shih 1969), but the merus of pereopod 5 is distinctly wider than long, and the carpus is more trapezoid in shape.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7DFFFCFEDFFEE4FEC6FD3D.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The type of P. bucephala could not be found at the BMNH and is considered lost. Remarks This species is most similar to P. colletti (Laval 1970) and P. bowmani (see Shih 1991).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7DFFFCFEDFFD09FB65FAC0.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of P. colletti could not be found at the SMNH, ZMUC, or in Uppsala and is considered lost. Type material of synonyms Type material of P. diogenes and P. gasti could not be found at the ZMB or ZMH and is considered lost. Remarks This species is most similar to P. bucephala (see Laval 1970) and P. bowmani (see Shih 1991). Its similarity to P. pacifica has already been discussed under that species.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7DFFFFFEDFFA34FC96FE28.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of P. curvipes could not be found at the ZMB or ZMH and is considered lost. Remarks Females of this species can resemble P. solitaria but are readily distinguished by the characteristic reversed ‘ S’ curvature of the basis of pereopod 5, in lateral view. Males are similar to P. colletti and P. pacifica, but are distinguished by the details in the shape of pereopod 5, and by the reduced numbers of flagella articles of antennae 2 (7 – 9 versus 12 – 13 for P. colletti and 15 – 17 for P. pacifica).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7EFFFFFEDFFC44FCDDFAF5.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype female, allotype male and four paratypes are in the USNM (Cat. No. 250351 – 53): in spirit. Remarks This species is very similar to P. colletti and P. bucephala (see Shih 1991). It seems to be restricted to the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7EFFFFFEDFFA41FC3BF8F0.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype female, allotype male and 18 paratypes are in the USNM (Cat. No. 250354 – 56): in spirit. Remarks This species is very similar to P. stebbingii (see Shih 1991). It is found in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean ranging westward to about 150 ºW.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7EFFFFFEDFFE1CFBA9FCF0.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Several syntypes of P. stebbingii are in the ZMB (17294): in spirit. Remarks This species is very similar to P. dunbari (see Shih 1991) but is readily distinguished from all other congeners by having pleonite 1 longer than pereonite 7.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7FFFFEFEDFFEE3FD85FB3F.taxon	materials_examined	Type species	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7FFFFEFEDFFEE3FD85FB3F.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body and pereopods extremely slender. Pereonites 1 & 2 partly fused dorsally, not much deeper than following ones. Maxilliped with extremely reduced inner lobe, almost obsolete. Gnathopods 1 & 2 simple. Pereopod 5 with elongate carpus, only slightly widened distally, forming slender, imperfect subchela with propodus; anterior margin of basis to carpus dentate. Uropod 2 absent, or rudimentary in female; sometimes rudimentary in males, but usually with exopod and reduced endopod in mature specimens. Monotypic. Remarks Phronimella makes ‘ barrels’ from gelatinous plankton just like Phronima but the host species is not known (Laval 1980).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7FFFFEFEDFFEE3FD85FB3F.taxon	description	Phronimella is relatively common in the tropical regions of the world’s oceans and in the Mediterranean Sea.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC7FFFE1FEDFFB16FB7FFE50.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of P. elongata is considered lost (see above). Type material of synonyms Type material of A. hamatus could not be found at the ANSP or USNM and is considered lost. Type material of P. filiformis could not be found at the SMNH, ZMUC or Uppsala and is considered lost. Type material of P. hippocephala could not be found at the BMNH and is considered lost. Remarks Phronimella is morphologically similar to Phronima, but the body is generally more slender, and the pereopods are much more slender and elongate. In addition, uropod 2 is reduced to a small pointed process in females and juvenile males. In adult males uropod 2 is usually present in a reduced form, with a relatively well­developed exopod, but a small, or obsolete endopod. Occasionally adult males have uropod 2 reduced as in females.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC60FFE1FEDFFDA3FE46F907.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length 10 – 30 mm, rather compact with relatively thick cuticle, relatively transparent. Head large, globular, height more than length. Eyes large, occupying most of head surface. Pereonites all separate, or pereonites 1 & 2 fused. Coxae separate from pereonites. Antennae 1 reduced to two articles in females; multi­articulate, in males with enlarged callynophore, with aesthetasc brush composed of two asymmetrical fields located ventromedially and ventrolaterally. Antennae 2 rudimentary, or absent in females; multiarticulate in males. Mandibles with palp in males, without palp in females; molar welldeveloped. Maxillae 1 with palp and well­developed outer lobe, inner lobe absent. Maxillae 2 bilobed, well­developed. Maxilliped with slender outer lobes; inner lobe about halflength outer lobes. Gnathopods 1 & 2 simple. Pereopods 3 – 6 prehensile, or subchelate. Pereopod 5 the longest with large, denticulate subchela. Pereopods 5 – 7 with broad basis. Pereopod 7 reduced in size, sometimes with reduced number of articles. Uropods composed of single, foliaceous article. Telson small, not longer than half­length U 3. Gills on pereonites 2 – 6. Oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5. Three genera: Phrosina, Anchylomera and Primno. Remarks Species of this family are very distinctive, and are often present in plankton collections, sometimes in very large numbers. Phrosina and Anchylomera are monotypic, and Primno has been revised by Bowman (1978). Thus, only minimal additional information is provided here. The structure of the uropods, each consisting of a single leaf­like article, is a unique feature amongst the Hyperiidea. They may serve as effective locomotory organs as phrosinids are known to be active swimmers, and sometimes occur in large swarms (Lobel & Randall 1986).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC61FFE0FEDFFDA3FE52FA98.taxon	materials_examined	Type species	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC61FFE0FEDFFDA3FE52FA98.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length up to 30 mm for females; males usually smaller; average size about 8 mm. Head produced into two sharp, triangular, rostral points. Pereonites 1 & 2 fused. Pereopods 3 & 4 subchelate, with large tooth­like carpal process. Pereopod 5 broader than any other pereopod; carpus with anterodistal margin armed with large tooth­like processes, forming folding hand with dactyl­like propodus which is longer than carpus; dactylus absent, or fused with propodus. Pereopod 6 similar to, but much smaller than, P 5. Pereopod 7 reduced to broad basis and sometimes one additional, tiny article. Gills without folds. Monotypic.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC61FFE3FEDFFA71FD15FCC8.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of P. semilunata is considered lost (see above). Type material of synonyms The holotype female of P. nicaeensis is in the ANSP (CA 2682), in the Guérin­Méneville collection (number unknown): once alcohol preserved, now dry (see Zeidler 1997). Type material of P. longispina could not be found at the BMNH or MNHN and is considered lost. The two syntypes of P. pacifica are in the BMNH (89.5.15.238 – 239): in spirit. The holotype of P. australis is in the BMNH (89.5.15.240): in spirit. Remarks An examination of the types of P. nicaeensis, P. pacifica and P. australis has confirmed the monotypy of this genus. Whether or not this species is associated with gelatinous plankton has not been determined. Distribution A very common cosmopolitan species, favouring tropical and temperate regions. It often forms local concentrations near the surface but can occur down to 1000 m, rarely deeper (Vinogradov et al. 1982).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC62FFE3FEDFFC3CFE02F9EF.taxon	materials_examined	Type species	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC62FFE3FEDFFC3CFE02F9EF.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length up to 11 mm, but usually 6 – 8 mm. Head globular. Pereonites 1 & 2 fused. Pereopods 3 & 4 subchelate, with large tooth­like carpal process. Pereopod 5 with very broad articles; carpus with distal margin with short, rounded teeth, forming perfect folding hand with propodus. Pereopod 6 prehensile, with dilated carpus. Pereopod 7 reduced to basis and at least two additional articles, sometimes complete. Gills with folds. Monotypic.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC62FFE2FEDFF966FB76FAF8.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of A. blossevillei is considered lost (see above). Type material of synonyms Type material of A. hunterii could not be found at the MNHN or ANSP and is considered lost. Three syntype females of H. abbreviatus are in the ANSP (CA 2684), in the Guérin­ Méneville collection (no. 440): once alcohol preserved, now dry (see Zeidler 1997). Type material of C. messanensis could not be located at any major Italian museum (see acknowledgments) and is considered lost. Type material of A. purpurea and A. thyropoda could not be located at the USNM and is considered lost. Type material of A. antipodes could not be located at the BMNH or MNHN and is considered lost. Remarks This is a very distinctive species that is often found in great numbers and is known to form swarms (Lobel & Randall 1986, Young & Anderson 1987). Its association with gelatinous plankton has not been confirmed. Risso (1826) recorded it as an associate of pyrosomes and Harbison et al. (1977) record it as prey, not as a parasite, of the siphonophore, Forskalia tholoides. Distribution A very common cosmopolitan species favouring tropical and temperate regions.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC63FFE5FEDFFA4CFB77FA38.taxon	materials_examined	Type species Primno macropa Guérin­Méneville, 1836 by monotypy. The holotype is in the ANSP (CA 2685), in the Guérin­Méneville collection (No. 435): once alcohol preserved, now dry (see Zeidler 1997). Diagnosis Body length up to 21 mm, but usually about 10 mm. Head, quadrate with small rostrum. Pereonites 1 & 2 separate. Pereopods 3, 4 & 6 simple, with some teeth on margin of carpus and sometimes also merus. Pereopod 5 prehensile, entire anterior margin of carpus dentate, with several long teeth separated by groups of short teeth; propodus shorter than carpus; dactylus appears to be extension of propodus with limited articulation. Pereopod 7 with all articles present, but basis longer than remaining articles combined; dactylus digitiform, with ring of spinules at apex in female. Gills without folds. Six species. Remarks Bowman (1978) revised this genus and recognised four species previously lumped as P. macropa. Additional species have been described subsequently by Bowman (1985) and Sheader (1986). Species of Primno are often found in abundance in near­surface waters (e. g. Stephensen 1924, Yoo 1971, Thurston 1976, Tranter 1977, Young & Anderson 1987, Vinogradov 1991). Their association with gelatinous hosts remains to be established, and may be limited to juvenile stages. The adults are active swimmers, and larval development is more direct than in other hyperiideans, resulting in the release of active juveniles from the marsupium of females. Bowman (1978) suggests that the modified dactylus of pereopod 7 of females may be used to transfer juveniles from the marsupium to a gelatinous host, as has been observed in Vibilia (Laval 1963). The only record of an association with gelatinous plankton is that of Daniel (1973), who found “ Euprimno macropus ” within the posterior nectophores of the siphonophores Abylopsis tetragona and Sulculeolaria chuni. This record however, may not represent a true association as the position of the hyperiidean does not rule out the possibility of a passive introduction during sampling (Laval 1980). Bowman (1978) provides a summary of biological information on Primno and Yoo (1972), Ikeda (1995) and Sheader and Batten (1995) provide additional information.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC65FFE4FEDFFCB4FDC7F9C7.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype female of P. macropa is in the ANSP (CA 2685) (see above). Type material of synonyms The holotype female of P. menevillei is in the BMNH (89.5.15.244): on three microscope slides. A syntype female of P. antarctica is in the BMNH (89.5.15.245): in spirit. Remarks This is one of larger species of Primno, attaining lengths of up to 15 mm. It is very similar to P. abyssalis which, until relatively recently (Bowman 1985), was considered a synonym. Although Bowman (1978) presumed the type of P. macropa was lost, his studies of this species are confirmed by the examination of the type, which probably came from the subantarctic waters off Chile. The distribution of this species is restricted to the subantarctic biotic province.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC65FFE7FEDFF93EFC20FC20.taxon	discussion	Remarks This is one of the smaller species of Primno, with adults reaching only 6 – 10 mm in length. It is very similar to P. johnsoni, and Vinogradov et al. (1982) regard P. johnsoni as a junior synonym of P. latreillei. Amongst the Australian material examined (Zeidler 1992 a, 1998) there was considerable variation in the relative length of the basis of pereopod 7 compared to the remaining articles combined, ranging from slightly longer to about twice as long. This brings the specimens within the morphological range of P. johnsoni, which is probably synonymous with P. latreillei. The morphological variation found in pereopod 7 appears to be ontogenetic. Primno latreillei seems to have a scattered distribution having been recorded from the Tasman Sea, the North Pacific Ocean (off California), the Red Sea, the eastern Mediterranean Sea and the south­eastern part of the Gulf of Guinea.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC66FFE7FEDFFC14FDB8F985.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype female is in the USNM (Cat. no. 213613), and two female paratypes are in the collections of Scripps Institution of Oceanography: in spirit. Remarks This is the largest species of Primno, with adults reaching 21 mm in length. Bowman (1985) suggests that this species is derived from P. macropa, or its progenitor, which was originally limited to the southern hemisphere, but during the ice age ranged into the North Pacific. When the oceans warmed again the continuity was broken, leaving the North Pacific population isolated. Its distribution is now restricted to the subarctic province of the North Pacific Ocean.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC66FFE6FEDFF971FE23FDD8.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype and paratypes are in the USNM (Cat. no. 170203 & 4): in spirit. Remarks This is one of the medium sized species of Primno reaching lengths of 9 mm. It is distinguished (together with P. evansi) from its congeners by the short teeth on the anterior margin of the carpus of pereopod 5. It is very similar to P. evansi but seems to be restricted to the mid­Pacific. Bowman (1978) also records it from the southeastern part of the Gulf of Guinea, but this material may be referable to P. evansi, if these two species should be maintained as geographically isolated entities. However, I have also seen a female specimen from the Gulf of Guinea (Galathea stn. 66) which is referable to P. brevidens rather than P. evansi.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC67FFE6FEDFFB4EFCB1F9DD.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype and paratypes are in the BMNH (1984: 298 – 302): in spirit. Remarks This is the smallest species of Primno, with adults of about 6 mm in length. It is very similar to P. brevidens, and it is possible that it represents a North Atlantic form of this species. However, until more material becomes available it seems prudent to recognise this North Atlantic form as a separate species.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC67FFE6FEDFFD36FD64FBF0.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype and paratypes are in the USNM (Cat. no. 170234 – 41): in spirit. Remarks This is also one of the medium sized species of Primno, reaching lengths of 9 mm. Its similarity to P. latreillei has already been discussed under that species. Vinogradov et al. (1982) regard it a synonym of P. latreillei.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC67FFE9FEDFF951FAB8F957.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length 5 – 30 mm, rarely longer, generally with pigmented cuticle. Head large, spherical, without projections except in Pegohyperia. Eyes large, occupying most of head surface. Pereonites all separate. Coxae separate from pereonites. Antennae 1, four­articulate in females; multi­articulate in males, sometimes same as in female (e. g. some species of Themisto), with enlarged callynophore with two­field brush of aesthestascs medially. Antennae 2, four­articulate in females, multi­articulate in males. Mandibles with palp in both sexes. Maxillae 1 with palp and well­developed outer lobe; inner lobe absent. Maxillae 2 bilobed, well­developed. Maxilliped with relatively slender outer lobes; inner lobe well­developed, often longer than half­length outer lobes. Gnathopod 1 ranging from barely chelate to distinctly chelate. Gnathopod 2 chelate. Pereopods 3 – 7 simple. Pereopods 3 & 4 sometimes prehensile. Pereopod 7 subequal in length to, or slightly shorter than, P 6. Uropods with articulated endopods and exopods. Telson of moderate size but rarely longer than half of peduncle of U 3. Gills on pereonites 2 – 6. Oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC67FFE9FEDFF951FAB8F957.taxon	discussion	Six genera: Hyperia, Themisto, Hyperiella, Hyperoche, Pegohyperia and Laxohyperia. Remarks Only updated information is provided here as genera of this family have either been reviewed by previous authors (except for Hyperoche), or are monotypic.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC67FFE9FEDFF951FAB8F957.taxon	description	Key to the genera of the Family HYPERIIDAE	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC69FFEBFEDFFEE3FC1EFCB8.taxon	discussion	Remarks This genus has been revised by Bowman (1973), who provides a key and very useful illustrations for each species. Bowman recognised eight species, one of which, H. antarctica Spandl, 1927, is now regarded a synonym of H. spinigera Bovallius, 1889 (Thurston 1977). Two additional species have been described more recently; H. bowmani Vinogradov, 1976 and H. curticephala Vinogradov & Semenova, 1985. Recently, I established that Oniscus quadricornis Fabricius, 1775 is most likely H. medusarum (Müller, 1776), and that the description of Fabricius is based solely on drawings by Sydney Parkinson held in the BMNH (Zeidler 1995). This species was listed only once in the literature (Fabricius 1781) before Fabricius (1787) realised that his species might be the same as H. medusarum. This synonymy seems to have been accepted by later naturalists but, probably because O. quadricornis was an inadequately described species, it was not recognised as the senior synonym. Stebbing (1888) also accepted the above synonymy but, like his predecessors, did not realise that Fabricius’s species was first published in 1775 and thus has priority. Similarly Bovallius (1889) gives a list of synonyms of H. medusarum but erroneously cites O. quadricornis Fabricius, 1781. Although Fabricius’s name has priority his species cannot be determined with certainty and the name has not been in use since 1781 (Fabricius 1781). Hyperia medusarum, on the other hand, is a well­established species and the name should be maintained to conserve nomenclatural stability. Subsequently a syntype of Hyperia latreillii Milne­Edwards, 1830 (later corrected to H. latreillei) was discovered in the ANSP (CA 2697), in the Guérin­Méneville collection (No. 431) (Zeidler 1997). The specimen was identified tentatively as H. galba (Montagu, 1813), rather than the closely related species H. medusarum, with which H. latreillei has been synonymised in the past (Bowman 1973). Milne­Edwards (1830) gave the type locality of his species as the Bay of Biscay. But H. medusarum is a more northerly species than H. galba, being confined to the northern part of the North Sea (Schellenberg 1942), and extending south to about 52 ° N, off the west coast of Ireland, but with a single record at 48 ° N, southwest of Ireland (Stephensen 1924). Hyperia galba, on the other hand, extends farther south in the Atlantic than H. medusarum, reaching at least to the latitude of the coast of Spain (Alvarado 1955). Assuming that the locality data for H. latreillei, given by Milne­Edwards (1830), is correct then his species is more likely to be H. galba, as is supported by the examination of the syntype. Thus, in the absence of contrary evidence H. latreillei should be considered a synonym of H. galba rather than H. medusarum as has been assumed by Bowman (1973). Sars (1895), Norman (1900), Tattersall (1906) and Chevreux and Fage (1925) also regard H. latreillei a synonym of H. galba. The gelatinous plankton associates of Hyperia are summarised by Thurston (1977) and Laval (1980). Most are with medusae, and Laval (1980) even suggests that records of associations with other gelatinous plantation such as salps and ctenophores may be erroneous. However, the association of H. gaudichaudii Milne­Edwards, 1840 with the ctenophore, Beroe sp. has been confirmed recently, and previous records of similar associations should not be dismissed (Zeidler & Gowlett­Holmes 1998). Apart from Bowman (1973) and Laval (1980), additional biological information is provided for H. galba by Bowman et al. (1963), Metz (1967) and Dittrich (1987, 1988, 1992), for H. macrocephala by White and Bone (1972 – as H. galba), and for H. spinigera by Thurston (1977). Bowman (1973) and Vinogradov et al. (1982) provide distributional data for the species. Species: Hyperia medusarum (Müller, 1776); H. galba (Montagu, 1813); H. gaudichaudii Milne­Edwards, 1840; H. macrocephala (Dana, 1853); H. spinigera Bovallius, 1889; H. crassa Bowman, 1973; H. leptura Bowman, 1973; H. bowmani Vinogradov, 1976; H. curticephala Vinogradov & Semenova, 1985.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6AFFEAFEDFFC8CFD26FD68.taxon	discussion	Remarks This genus has provided much taxonomic confusion in the past. Its status has been in question being known alternately as Euthemisto or Parathemisto, sometimes with subgenera. Bowman et al. (1982) restored the genus Themisto, which up until that time was considered a junior homonym of the nudibranch Themisto Oken, 1815; a work rejected for nomenclatural purposes by the ICZN (1956). The uncertainty of the generic status combined with several ill­defined species, subspecies and varieties has made specific determination very difficult, despite the efforts of Bowman (1960), Sheader and Evans (1974) and Schneppenheim and Weigmann­Haass (1986). Vinogradov et al. (1982) recognise six species, but Schneppenheim and Weigmann­Haass (1986) demonstrated that northern hemisphere material, previously identified with T. gaudichaudii Guérin, 1825, is a separate species, T. compressa Goës, 1865. In view of the past confusion, and recent studies by Schneppenheim and Weigmann­Haass (1986), a new key to species is provided to assist future workers. The holotype of T. gaudichaudii was discovered recently in the Guérin­Méneville collection (No. 438), in the ANSP (Zeidler 1997). The correct citation for the original description of this species has been confused in the past with some authors citing Guérin, 1828 (eg. Schneppenheim & Weigmann­Haass 1986; Spamer & Bogan 1992, 1994). This has arisen because, although the genus and species was first described in 1825, Guérin (1828) more or less repeated his description in a separate memoir introducing them as new, and providing figures of the type. All species of Themisto are mainly free­swimming, and can occur in large numbers, particularly in colder waters where, like krill, they play a significant role as food for plankton­feeding predators. Although considered mainly free­living, species of Themisto are known to be associated with medusae and salps (Madin & Harbison 1977; Laval 1980), and specimens of T. australis have been collected from Salpa fusiformis from Tasmanian waters. Additional biological and ecological information is given by the following; Bary (1959), Kane (1963), Siegfried (1965), Gray (1967), Evans (1968), Semenova (1974), Sheader (1975, 1977, 1981, 1990), Sheader and Evans (1975), Williams and Robins (1981), Bowman et al. (1982), Hiroki (1988), Corey (1990), Semura et al. (1991), Percy (1993), Colombo and Vinas (1994), Koszteyn et al. (1995), Condon and Norman (1999) and Vinogradov (1999 b). Themisto has a bi­polar distribution with species restricted to the colder waters of the Arctic and Antarctic regions and occasionally venturing into cool­temperature waters.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6AFFEAFEDFFC8CFD26FD68.taxon	description	Species: as in the following key.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6CFFEDFEDFFEE3FE7DFD15.taxon	discussion	Remarks This genus has been revised by Bowman (1973) and Weigmann­Haass (1989), and includes three species, with a circumpolar distribution in the Antarctic Ocean. Very little is known about the biology of these species. To what extent adults are parasitic, or commensal, is not known although their morphology suggests a parasitic existence (Laval, 1980). Libertini and Lazzaretto (1993) provide some information on the karyotype morphology of H. dilatata Stebbing, 1888. Species: Hyperiella antarctica Bovallius, 1887; H. dilatata Stebbing, 1888; H. macronyx (Walker, 1906).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6CFFEDFEDFFCF1FED8FA6F.taxon	discussion	Remarks This genus is in need of a thorough taxonomic revision. The most recent review is by Vinogradov et al. (1982) who recognised seven species. Weigmann­Haass (1991) also reviewed the taxonomy and geographical distribution of H. luetkenides Walker, 1906 and H. capucinus Barnard, 1930 in the Antarctic waters of the Atlantic. The gelatinous plankton associates of Hyperoche are summarised by Laval (1980). Most are with ctenophores but H. medusarum (Kröyer, 1838) is mostly found with medusae. Additional biological information is provided by Bowman et al. (1963), Brusca (1970), Evans and Sheader (1972), Flores and Brusca (1975), Westerhagen (1976), Westerhagen and Rosenthal (1976), Harbison et al. (1977) and Cahoon et al. (1986). Vinogradov et al. (1982) and Weigmann­Haass (1991) provide distributional data for the species. Species (according to Vinogradov et al. (1982 )): Hyperoche medusarum (Kröyer, 1838); H. martinezi (Müller, 1864); H. cryptodactylus Stebbing, 1888; H. picta Bovallius, 1889: H. luetkenides (Walker, 1906); H. mediterranea Senna, 1908; H. capucinus Barnard, 1930.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6CFFECFEDFF9ECFCC9FE00.taxon	discussion	Remarks This is a very distinctive monotypic genus. Virtually nothing is known regarding its biology. It seems to be a relatively rare species having been recorded from the southeastern Atlantic Ocean (33 ° 07 ’ S, 4 ° 30 ’ E) by Barnard (1931, 1932); the Antarctic (65 ° 51 ’ S, 54 ° 16 ’ E) by Hurley (1960 a); the North Pacific Ocean (28 ° N, 155 ° W) by Shulenberger (1977), and the equatorial Pacific (13 ° 35 ’ N, 101 ° 145 ’ W) by Vinogradov (1990). Specimens from South Georgia (BMNH), the tropical south­eastern Atlantic and tropical north­ west Pacific (ZMUC), the North Pacific Ocean (USNM) and the Tasman Sea (ZMUC) have also been examined. In addition, there are several lots in the SAMA and USNM recently collected from Antarctic waters. Species: Pegohyperia princeps Barnard, 1931.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6DFFECFEDFFDF3FBA4FBD7.taxon	discussion	Remarks This monotypic genus is very similar to Hyperoche but is readily distinguished by the smaller size and the unique structure of the gnathopods. Virtually nothing is known regarding its biology, but its similarity to Hyperoche suggests that it may eventually be found in association with ctenophores. It seems to be a rare species having been recorded only three times in the literature. Vinogradov et al. (1982) had three females from the northern part of the South China Sea, Shih and Chen (1995) described a male, also from the South China Sea and Lima and Valentin (2001) record a male and some females from the South Atlantic Ocean, off Brazil. I have also seen specimens from the Tasman Sea (SAMA), the Gulf of Guinea (USNM), the North Pacific Ocean, off Baja California (USNM), the tropical South Pacific Ocean (ZMUC), the Arabian Sea (USNM), the tropical South Indian Ocean, near the Seychelles (ZMUC) and the eastern Mediterranean Sea (ZMUC). Species: Laxohyperia vespuliformis Vinogradov & Volkov, 1982.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6DFFEFFEDFFB2EFC56FC70.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length up to about 7 mm, but usually less than 5 mm. Integument generally pigmented but can be transparent. Head large, spherical to quadrate in shape. Eyes large, occupying most of head surface. Some anterior pereonites fused, usually 1 – 2 but sometimes up to 1 – 5; often more pereonites fused in female than male. Coxae fused with pereonites. Antennae 1, two­articulate in females (2 – 3 in Hyperioides); multi­articulate in males with enlarged callynophore, with two­field brush of aesthestascs medially. Antennae 2 reduced to one article in females; multi­articulate in males. Mandibles with palp in males, without palp in females; molar sometimes reduced. Maxillae 1 with palp and welldeveloped outer lobe (relatively less developed in species with maxilliped with reduced inner lobe); inner lobe absent. Maxillae 2 bilobed. Maxilliped with slender, or ovate outer lobes; inner lobe well­developed, about half­length outer lobes, or rudimentary. Gnathopod 1 simple, barely chelate, subchelate, or moderately chelate. Gnathopod 2 chelate. Pereopods 3 – 7 simple (prehensile in Phronimopsis). Pereopod 7 subequal in length to, or slightly shorter than, P 6. Uropods with articulated endopods and exopods. Telson rounded, often small, rarely as long as half of peduncle of U 3. Gills on pereonites 2 – 6. Oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5. Six genera: Lestrigonus, Phronimopsis, Themistella, Hyperioides, Hyperietta and Hyperionyx. Remarks Bowman (1973) has revised all of the genera of this family, except for Phronimopsis, which is considered to be monotypic. Thus, only updated information is provided here. Species of this family are difficult to identify with certainty without some specialist knowledge. The degree of fusion of the pereonites is a critical character used to distinguish species, and while this character is constant in adults, juveniles of some species may have more pereonites fused than in adults. Thus, it is necessary to examine characters other than the fusion of pereonites, when dealing with immature specimens (see Zeidler 1998). While Bowman’s (1973) keys work relatively well for females and most males, it is still difficult to identify species in which pereonites 1 and 2 are fused dorsally in males (i. e. the genera Lestrigonus, Hyperioides and Hyperietta). Thus, an additional key has been constructed to aid the identification of these species, but it should be used in conjunction with Bowman’s (1973) keys and excellent illustrations.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6EFFEEFEDFFBC4FAB8F99F.taxon	description	Key to male species of LESTRIGONIDAE with pereonites 1 – 2 fused (except Phronimopsis)	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC6FFFD1FEDFF94EFC62FDD8.taxon	discussion	Remarks Bowman (1973) recognised six species, one of which he described as new. One additional species has been described by Zeidler (1992 b). Very little is known about the biology of Lestrigonus. All records of associations with gelatinous plankton have been with medusae (Harbison et al. 1977, Laval 1980). Additional biological information is given for L. schizogeneios (Stebbing 1888) by Laval (1968 a, 1972). Distributional information for the species is provided by Bowman (1973), Bowman and McGuinness (1982) and Zeidler (1998). Species: Lestrigonus bengalensis Giles, 1887; L. schizogeneios (Stebbing, 1888); L. crucipes (Bovallius, 1889); L. latissimus (Bovallius, 1889); L. macrophthalmus (Vosseler, 1901); L. shoemakeri Bowman, 1973; L. ducrayi Zeidler, 1992.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC50FFD1FEDFFD2CFCDCFAC7.taxon	discussion	Remarks This genus is monotypic. It is easily recognised by the distinctively chelate second gnathopods and by the phronimid type of body of females. Virtually nothing is known regarding its biology, other than that it seems to be an epipelagic species (Thurston 1976), found in surface layers down to a depth of 300 – 500 m (Vinogradov et al. 1982). The only record of an association with gelatinous plankton is with the ctenophore Beroe forskalii (Krumbach 1911). The prehensile structure of pereopods 3 – 7 strongly suggests a parasitic existence. It is relatively uncommon, but widely distributed in tropical and temperate regions of the world’s oceans. It should be noted here that Claus (1878: 270) mentions Phronimopsis in a general paper on hyperiideans but does not provide any characters to distinguish it from other genera. Obviously Claus intended this paper to follow his diagnosis of the genus in 1879. As Claus (1878) did not diagnose the genus, and for the sake of nomenclatural stability, Phronimopsis should be credited with Claus (1879). Species: Phronimopsis spinifera Claus, 1879.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC50FFD1FEDFFA3EFC94F8ED.taxon	discussion	Remarks This genus is monotypic. It is characterised by the relatively long pereopod 5, the short telson and the upward bend of the dactylus of pereopods 6 and 7. Virtually nothing is known regarding its biology, and there are no records of associations with gelatinous plankton. It seems to be a relatively uncommon species, sparsely distributed in tropical waters of the world’s oceans. Although it is mainly a surface water species, individuals have been caught as deep as 720 m (Thurston 1976). Species: Themistella fusca Dana, 1853.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC51FFD0FEDFFC46FB5FFA25.taxon	discussion	Remarks Bowman (1973) recognised five species, three of which he described as new. Very little is known about their biology. Harbison et al. (1997) and Laval (1980) have found Hyperietta associated with polycystine radiolarians of the suborder Collodaria, and Brandt (1885) recorded hyperiids assigned to Hyperia, but referable to Hyperietta, as parasites of the radiolarians Myxosphaera coerula and Collozoum pelagicum. Distributional information for the species is provided by Bowman (1973), Bowman and McGuinness (1982), Vinogradov et al. (1982) and Zeidler (1998). Species: Hyperietta luzoni (Stebbing, 1888); H. vosseleri (Stebbing, 1904); H. parviceps Bowman, 1973; H. stebbingi Bowman, 1973; H. stephenseni Bowman, 1973.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC51FFD0FEDFFEE3FB5AFCCF.taxon	discussion	Remarks Bowman (1973) recognised two species of this relatively distinctive genus. Although both can be very abundant very little is known of their biology. Thurston (1976) provides some information on the vertical distribution and diurnal migration of H. longipes, and identified two size classes within a (presumed) single population. Shulenberger (1979) also provides some biological information for both species. Hyperioides longipes Chevreux, 1900 has been observed in association with the siphonophore Lensia conoidea (Laval 1980), but the host of the widespread, often abundant, H. sibaginis (Stebbing, 1888) is not known. It is suspected that it will prove to be a siphonophore that is also widespread and relatively common (Bowman & McGuinness 1982). Distributional information for species is provided by Bowman (1973), Bowman and McGuinness (1982), Vinogradov et al. (1982) and Zeidler (1998). Species: Hyperioides sibaginis (Stebbing 1888); H. longipes Chevreux, 1900.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC51FFD3FEDFFA11FC5CFE00.taxon	discussion	Remarks This genus is monotypic. It is readily distinguished by the relatively short pereopod 5, and in having pereonites 1 – 3 fused in both sexes. Virtually nothing is known regarding the biology, and there are not records of associations with gelatinous plankton. It seems to be a rare circum­tropical genus. It has been recorded from the Mediterranean Sea (Stephensen, 1924), the tropical Atlantic Ocean, off Florida (Yang 1960), the South Atlantic Ocean, off South Africa (Dick, 1970), the Gulf of Mexico (Stuck et al. 1980), the tropical Pacific Ocean, near Fiji (Hurley, 1960 b) and the Indian Ocean (Bowman & McGuinness, 1982). I have also seen specimens from the tropical south­west Indian Ocean (Galathea Stn. 230), the tropical South Pacific Ocean, near Panama (Dana Stn. 3960) and the Tasman Sea, off eastern Tasmania (SAMA). Species: Hyperionyx macrodactylus (Stephensen, 1924).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC52FFD2FEDFFDF3FEF9FAC0.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length of 4 – 8 mm. Body and pereopods covered with fine setae. Head large, round. Eyes large, occupying most of the head surface. Pereon broad. Pereonites all separate. Pereonite 1 with lateral, anteriorly pointed projection, just above coxa. Pereonites 2 – 7 raised into transverse, rounded folds. Coxae separate from pereonites. Antennae 1, four­articulate in females; multi­articulate in males, with enlarged callynophore, with twofield brush of aesthestascs medially. Antennae 2, three­articulate, or absent, or reduced to small knob on cuticle in females; multi­articulate in males. Mandibles without palp in females, with or without palp in males; molar reduced to broad plate with two small tubercles and row of small robust setae. Maxillae 1 with broad palp and slightly less­developed outer lobe; inner lobe absent. Maxillae 2 bilobed with robust setae. Maxilliped with slender, rounded outer lobes; inner lobe rudimentary, or absent. Gnathopod 1 weakly subchelate. Gnathopod 2 chelate. Pereopods 3 – 7 usually simple, rarely P 5 – 7 may be minutely subchelate. Pereopods 5 – 7 subequal in length. Uropods with articulated endopods and exopods. Telson triangular, about half­length peduncle of U 3. Gills on pereonites 2 – 6. Oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5. One genus: Iulopis. Remarks This family has been established to accommodate the genus Iulopis because it has characters that preclude it from the families Hyperiidae and Lestrigonidae, as defined here. The availability of the vast collections of the ZMUC, especially from the Dana expeditions, enabled me to examine more material than had previously been available to other researchers, particularly of the rare species, I. mirabilis. An examination of this material, especially of the antennae and mouthparts, resulted in a couple of unexpected discoveries. According to the literature (e. g. Bovallius 1889, Bowman & Gruner 1973, Vinogradov et al. 1982) males have a mandibular palp which is absent in females. However, it seemed likely that if the coxae are free from the pereonites, and all pereonites are separate, that Iulopis should belong with the family Hyperiidae, and that the females probably possessed a mandibular palp which had been overlooked. Thus, specimens of I. loveni Bovallius, 1887 (72 females, 41 males) and I. mirabilis Bovallius, 1887 (34 females, 22 males) in the ZMUC were examined to determine the presence or absence of a mandibular palp. Upon examining this material no mandibular palp could be found in either sex of I. loveni but was present in males of I. mirabilis! The mouthparts of Iulopis are relatively large (Fig. 3), so it is relatively easy to determine this character without dissection. Careful dissection of a mature male of I. loveni confirmed the absence of a mandibular palp in this species. This finding is very surprising as the presence / absence of mandibular palps is consistent in all other genera of Hyperiidea and can be one of the characters used to separate families. Bovallius (1889) clearly illustrates a mandibular palp for the male of I. loveni (pl. 7, fig. 5), and says of the female (p. 123) “ the mouth­organs are like those in the male ”. One can only assume that Bovallius confused his preparations of mandibles and illustrated one from I. mirabilis. In regard to the second antennae of females I found that in I. loveni they are absent, or at most represented by a small knob on the cuticle but in I. mirabilis they are three­articulate (Fig. 4)! Bovallius (1889) records females of I. loveni with second antennae with two small articles, but provides no illustrations. It seems unlikely that this character is variable, or that it is dependent on maturity, as several juveniles and ovigerous females were examined. It seems that Bovallius (1889) is incorrect in this regard, but his erroneous observation has unfortunately, been repeated in the literature. He did not have females of I. mirabilis. Iulopis loveni is a most unusual species as the absence of a mandibular palp in both sexes is a rare condition amongst the Physocephalata and this character, combined with second antennae absent in females, is only found in the family Dairellidae. On the other hand I. mirabilis most closely resembles the family Lestrigonidae in the morphology of the antennae and the mandibular palp. If it were not for the similarity in morphology of the pereopods, mouthparts and the body in general, one might have placed these two species in different genera if not families. dditional characters that distinguish Iulopis are the maxillipeds, which lack inner lobes, the mandibles, in which the molar is reduced to a broad plate and pereonites 2 – 7, which are raised into distinctive, transverse, rounded folds. The hirsute body is also unusual.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC53FFD5FEDFFA34FAB8FA3F.taxon	materials_examined	Type species Iulopis loveni Bovallius, 1887, designated by Bowman and Gruner (1973). Type material could not be found at the SMNH, ZMUC or in Uppsala and is considered lost (but see later). However, Iulopis is a readily recognisable genus.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC53FFD5FEDFFA34FAB8FA3F.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis The characters of the family are also those of the genus.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC53FFD5FEDFFA34FAB8FA3F.taxon	description	Two species. Sexual dimorphism As with most hyperiideans, the morphology of the antennae is the most useful means to differentiate the sexes. The antennae of males are multi­articulate, filiform, and much longer than the head and pereon, whereas in females the first antennae are much shorter than the head, and consist of only four articles, while the second antennae are absent in one species but three­articulate in the other species. Females also have a broader pereon, the uropods are relatively more slender with relatively longer rami and the telson is also relatively longer.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC53FFD5FEDFFA34FAB8FA3F.taxon	discussion	Remarks Iulopis is a very distinctive genus. It is rarely found in plankton collections and consequently very little is known about the biology of species. In the general structure of the gnathopods it occupies an intermediate position between Hyperia and Hyperoche.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC53FFD5FEDFFA34FAB8FA3F.taxon	description	Key to the species of the genus Iulopis	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC54FFD8FEDFFA16FEF4FDDF.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of I. loveni could not be found at the SMNH, ZMUC or Uppsala and is considered lost. However, the description and figures provided by Bovallius (1889) readily characterise this species. The type locality is the “ South Atlantic ” according to Bovallius (1887), but the only Atlantic record given for this species by Bovallius (1889) is 17 º 22 ’ N, 37 º 23 ’ W! Material examined (> 150 specimens) North Atlantic: 1 lot (BMNH), 2 lots (SMNH), 1 lot (USNM), 1 lot (ZMB), 7 lots (ZMUC), 18 specimens. South Atlantic: 3 lots (ZMUC), 4 specimens. Mediterranean: 1 lot (SMNH), 30 lots (ZMUC), numerous specimens. North Pacific: 5 lots (ZMUC), 26 specimens. South Pacific: 10 lots (BMNH), 1 lot (ZMUC), 24 specimens. North Indian: 5 lots (ZMUC), 11 specimens. South Indian: 6 lots (ZMUC), 14 specimens. Central Indo­Pacific: 1 lot (ZMUC), 3 specimens. Tasman Sea: 4 lots (ZMUC), 5 specimens. Diagnosis Body; length of sexually mature specimens 4 – 6 mm; very hirsute, even on head. Antennae 2 of female absent or reduced to small knob on cuticle. Mandibular palp absent in both sexes. Gnathopod 1 weakly chelate, carpal process forming small, triangular lobe, with single robust seta terminally. Gnathopod 2 with slender carpal process, almost as long as propodus, with single robust seta terminally. Uropod 1 & 2 of female with rami only slightly longer than respective peduncle. Uropod 3 of female with rami subequal in length to peduncle. Telson of female almost half­length peduncle of U 3. Remarks There is some confusion regarding the type locality for this species. Bovallius (1887) says the “ South Atlantic ” but, in his monograph (Bovallius 1889), he gives two different localities for this species, one from the North Atlantic (17 º 22 ’ N, 37 º 23 ’ W) and one from the Mediterranean Sea (36 º 20 ’ N, 4 º 30 ’ W). In the SMNH there is a registered specimen (No. 1749) from “ 35 ºN, 30 ºW ” (a male with the gnathopods missing from the left), and also four unregistered microscope slide preparations; two without locality data, one labelled “ 27 ºN, 45 ºW ” and the other “ Euiulopis 36 º 20 ’ N, 4 º 30 ’ W ng. ”. None of this material can be confirmed as representing type material, but it is very likely that Bovallius used it for his monograph, particularly the specimens from the Mediterranean Sea. This species closely resembles its only congener, I. mirabilis, but tends to be more hirsute, and females lack second antennae and males lack a mandibular palp. According to the literature in mature females pereopods 5 – 7 are prehensile, presumably for firm attachment to gelatinous hosts. However, an examination of a large number of specimens in the ZMUC (72 females, 41 males) revealed that only eight specimens have these pereopods so transformed (Fig. 1) including a juvenile female and three males! Thus, the reason for this transformation remains unclear, and seems unrelated to sex or maturity. Also, I could not find any additional morphological evidence to support the possibility that specimens with prehensile pereopods may represent another species. The only record of a gelatinous association is by Harbison et al. (1977) who recorded a female from the medusa, Pandaea conica. Although this species is rarely collected, it has been captured in reasonable numbers in the Mediterranean Sea (Stephensen 1924). Distribution This species is known from scattered records in the tropical regions of the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, and the warmer waters of the Pacific and Indian Oceans.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC59FFDCFEDFFD3CFABBFD30.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of I. mirabilis is in the SMNH (No. 1750). The type locality is the “ Pacific, Bay of Panama ” according to Bovallius (1887). Bovallius (1889) provides more detailed information: “ in the Bay of Panama; taken in 1882 by the author among the Isles de las Perlas, at San Jose, and in the Bahia de Tychs, Isla del Reg. ” Material examined (63 specimens) Types. Syntypic material from “ Panama Bay 1882 ”: male in spirit with G 1 & 2 and P 3 missing from the left; one microscope slide with mouthparts, antennae and G 1. Other material examined. North Atlantic: 2 lots (USNM), 10 lots (ZMUC), 19 specimens. South Atlantic: 1 lot (ZMUC), 1 specimen. North Pacific: 6 lots (ZMUC), 13 specimens. South Pacific: 2 lots (ZMUC), 2 specimens. North Indian: 4 lots (ZMUC), 7 specimens. South Indian: 14 lots (ZMUC), 16 specimens. Central Indo­Pacific: 1 lot (ZMB), 1 lot (ZMUC), 4 specimens. Diagnosis Body; length of sexually mature specimens 6 – 8 mm; less hirsute than I. loveni, only sparsely hirsute on dorsal part of head. Antennae 2 of female three­articulate. Mandibular palp present only in male. Gnathopod 1 subchelate, carpal process rounded, not produced, with scattered robust setae in addition to short, slender setae. Gnathopod 2 with triangular carpal process, produced to about middle of propodus, with scattered robust setae in addition to short, slender setae. Uropod 1 – 3 of female with rami about 0.75 x length of respective peduncles, with relatively long terminal setae on exopod of U 1 & 2 and on both rami of U 3. Telson of female about 0.7 x length of peduncle of U 3. Remarks This is an extremely rare species, and prior to this study was known from less than ten specimens worldwide. It is readily distinguished from its only congener, I. loveni, by the gnathopods, and in addition, males are distinguished by the presence of a mandibular palp and females by the presence of three­articulate second antennae. Specimens with pereopods 5 – 7 approaching the prehensile condition, found in some specimens of I. loveni, are not known. There are no records of this species in association with gelatinous plankton. Distribution Prior to this study, this species was only known from the North Atlantic Ocean (Bermuda) and from the tropical Pacific Ocean (off California, Bay of Panama, approx. 20 ºS, 81 ºW). Additional material, mainly from the Dana expedition (Jespersen & Tåning 1934), now extends the distribution of this species to the tropical and warmer waters of all the world’s oceans. However, unlike its congener, it is not known from the Mediterranean.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC5DFFDCFEDFFD04FE33F99F.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length 3 – 4 mm. Cuticle with polygonal markings. Head with small rostrum formed by dorsal, disc­like depression, and acute lateral process between A 1 & A 2. Eyes small. Pereonites 1 & 2 fused. Coxae separate from pereonites. Antennae 1, three­articulate in females; multi­articulate in males with enlarged callynophore, with two­field brush of aesthestascs medially. Antennae 2, one­articulate in females; multi­articulate in males. Mandibles with palp in both sexes. Maxillae 1 with broad palp and slightly less­developed outer lobe; inner lobe absent. Maxillae 2 bilobed. Maxilliped with relatively short outer lobes; inner lobes very short, or rudimentary. Gnathopod 1 subchelate with short carpal process. Gnathopod 2 chelate. Pereopods 3, 4, 6 & 7 simple. Pereopod 5 prehensile, or subchelate. Pereopods 6 & 7 subequal in length. Uropods with articulated endopods and exopods. Telson triangular, slightly longer than half of peduncle of U 3. Gills on pereonites 2 – 6. Oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5. One genus: Bougisia. Remarks This family has been established to accommodate the genus Bougisia because it has characters that preclude it from the families Hyperiidae, Lestrigonidae and Iulopidae as defined here.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC5DFFDFFEDFF979FA86FC5F.taxon	materials_examined	Type species	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC5DFFDFFEDFF979FA86FC5F.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis The characters of the family are also those of the genus. Monotypic. Sexual dimorphism The sexes are very similar, but as with other Phronimoidea, males are distinguished by the filiform, multi­articulate antennae. Females have a slightly broader pereon, uropod 2 is relatively shorter than in males, and the telson is longer, about two­thirds the length of the peduncle of uropod 3, whereas in males the telson is slightly shorter than half of the peduncle of uropod 3. Remarks Bougisia is a very distinctive genus. It seems to be extremely rare and has been recorded only three times in the literature (Larval 1966; Vicencio­Aguilar & Fernández­ Alamo 1995; Zeidler 1998). The morphology of the mouthparts, and the male antennae, are most similar to members of the family Hyperiidae. The small eyes are a unique character amongst the Phronimoidea and indicate that this may be a deep­water form, occasionally caught near the surface as a result of upwelling.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC5EFFDEFEDFFBB9FD74FE78.taxon	materials_examined	Type material The holotype male is in the MOM (No. 5296). The allotype female and a paratype male are in the collections of the Zoological Station, Villefranche­sur­Mer, France. The type locality is the Mediterranean Sea, near Villefranche­sur­Mer, France. Material examined (10 specimens) North Atlantic: 1 lot (USNM), 1 lot (ZMB), 9 specimens. Tasman Sea: 1 lot (SAMA), 1 specimen. Diagnosis Head slightly shorter than pereonites 1 & 2. Gnathopod 2 with carpal process extending to about middle of propodus (or slightly less). Pereopod 5 with long setae on anterior margin of basis to propodus. Pereopods 6 & 7 with relatively smooth margins. Remarks This is a very rare and distinctive species. Laval (1966) provides some biological information, and records it as an associate of Phialidium sp. (Leptomedusae). Distribution This species has only been recorded from the Mediterranean Sea (near Villefranchesur­Mer, France), the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (off Costa Rica) and the Tasman Sea (off Jervis Bay, New South Wales). There are also specimens in the USNM and ZMB from off northwest Africa (24 ºN, 17 ºW).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC5FFFDEFEDFFDCBFE2FF9A7.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis Body length up to 10 mm; highly transparent. Head large, broad laterally. Eyes large, occupying most of head surface, divided into dorsal and ventral groups of ocelli. Pereon very broad with much narrower pleon tucked underneath. Pereonites 1 & 2 fused. Coxae fused with pereonites (suture sometimes visible). Antennae 1, four­articulate in females; multi­articulate in males, with enlarged callynophore, with two­field brush of aesthestascs medially. Antennae 2 absent in females, or reduced to small knob on cuticle; multi­articulate in males. Mandibles without palp in both sexes; molar relatively well­developed. Maxillae 1 with palp and reduced outer lobe; inner lobe absent. Maxillae 2 consist of a relatively large, single, pear­shaped plate. Maxilliped reduced to simple plate barely covering one­third of Mx 2; inner and outer lobes fused or lost. Gnathopods and pereopods simple. Pereopods 3 – 7 subequal in length. Uropods with articulated endopods and exopods. Telson trapezoid, very small. Gills on pereonites 2 – 6. Oostegites on pereonites 2 – 5. One genus: Dairella. Remarks A most unusual feature of this family is the maxilliped, which is reduced to a single plate, a character shared only with the Paraphronimidae. However, the maxilliped only covers about one­third of the second maxillae, suggesting that the inner and outer lobes have been lost, and only the peduncle remains. In the Paraphronimidae there is a definite suture between the peduncle and the fused inner and outer lobes. Such a suture is absent in the Dairellidae.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC5FFFC1FEDFF99EFB3BF950.taxon	materials_examined	Type species	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC5FFFC1FEDFF99EFB3BF950.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis The characters of the family are also those of the genus. Monotypic. Sexual dimorphism The sexes are very similar, but the filiform, multi­articulate antennae readily distinguish males. Mature males also tend to have uropod 3 with relatively broader exopods and endopods, and the apex of the telson is often concave medially in females but is usually convex in males. Females also have a much broader pereon (Fig. 7 A), especially in mature specimens. Remarks Dairella is a very distinctive genus, readily distinguished by the relatively broad, dorsoventrally compressed pereon, and the simple gnathopods and pereopods. The genus seems to be uncommon, and very little is known about the biology. Following an examination of over 200 specimens I have found it impossible to distinguish between the two nominal species, D. californica (Bovallius, 1885) and D. lattisima Bovallius, 1887, and consider them synonymous. The material examined confirms that the characters used to distinguishing between the two species fall into the range of variation resulting from sex and age. Bovallius (1889), followed by Vinogradov et al. (1982), separate them as follows. In D. californica, pereopod 5 is only slightly longer than pereopod 4; the basis of pereopod 5 is slightly longer than the carpus, and uropod 3 has narrowly lanceolate exopods and endopods. In D. latissima, pereopod 5 is distinctly longer than pereopod 4; the basis of pereopod 5 is subequal in length to the carpus, and uropod 3 has broadly lanceolate exopods and endopods. These characters are subjective and have proved to be unreliable. In the material examined, which included numerous examples of both sexes, pereopod 5 was always only slightly longer than pereopod 4 (1.1 – 1.2 x) and the basis of pereopod 5 was mostly subequal in length to the carpus in mature specimens (about 1.2 x), but slightly longer in immature specimens (1.3 – 1.6 x). The endopods and exopods of uropod 3 vary considerably amongst females, usually being broader in larger and ovigerous specimens (Fig. 8). Juvenile males are more like females, although the rami of uropod 3 maybe slightly broader (Fig. 7 D), becoming even broader in mature specimens (Fig. 7 E). In males pereopod 5 is also marginally longer than in females.	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
03931615EC41FFC7FEDFFEE4FBFAFC90.taxon	materials_examined	Type material Type material of D. californica is considered lost (see above). In the SMNH there is one microscope slide of uropod 3 labelled “ Paraphronima californica ”, without locality data, which may represent type material. The description and figures of Bovallius (1889) readily characterise this species. The type locality is “ The Pacific ”, according to Bovallius (1885) and “ off the coast of South California ” (Bovallius 1887). Type material of synonyms Type material of D. latissima could not be found at the SMNH, ZMUC, or Uppsala and is considered lost. The species is characterised by the description and figures of Bovallius (1889). The type locality is the “ South Atlantic ” according to Bovallius (1887). Type material of D. bovalli is in the BMNH (89.5.15.201). It is in relatively good condition, and indistinguishable from that figured for D. latissima by Bovallius (1889). Bovallius’s (1887) description is misleading in regard to the relative lengths of the carpus and propodus of the gnathopods, and the peduncles of uropods 1 & 2; characters that Stebbing (1888) used to distinguish his species. Material examined (> 200 specimens) Types. Syntypes of D. bovalli from “ off St. Vincent, Cape Verde Islands ”, 16 º 49 ’ N, 25 º 14 ’ W, Challenger, 26 April, 1876: on six microscope slides. Other material examined. North Atlantic: 7 lots (USNM), 1 lot (ZMB), 27 lots (ZMUC), 58 specimens. South Atlantic: 12 lots (ZMUC), 46 specimens. Mediterranean Sea: 6 lots (ZMUC) 6 specimens. North Pacific: 3 lots (SAMA), 4 lots (USNM), 8 lots (ZMUC), 54 specimens. South Pacific: 22 lots (ZMUC), 67 specimens. South Indian: 1 lot (SAMA), 3 lots (ZMUC), 4 specimens. Central Indo­Pacific: 1 lot (SMNH), 1 lot (ZMUC), 2 specimens. Tasman Sea: 5 lots (ZMUC), 6 specimens. Remarks This seems to be a rare species, although Lorz and Pearcy (1975) found about 60 specimens off the Oregon coast. Very little is known regarding its biology. Laval (1980) found a sub­adult female attached to the siphonophore Forskalia edwardsi and a sub­adult male attached to the narcomedusan Cunina vitrea, both caught near Villefranche, France. Vinogradov (1988) records it as penetrating the host tissue, and burying the abdomen in a manner reminiscent of the behaviour of hippoboscid flies. Distribution This species has now been recorded from the warm waters of all oceans, including the Mediterranean Sea, but appears to be most common in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. However, it remains to be recorded from the North Indian Ocean. It is recorded here from the South Indian Ocean and the Tasman Sea for the first time. Vinogradov et al. (1982, in 1996 supplement) also record it from the subantarctic (40 º – 50 ºS, 158 ºW).	en	Zeidler, Wolfgang (2004): A review of the families and genera of the hyperiidean amphipod superfamily Phronimoidea Bowman & Gruner, 1973 (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hyperiidea). Zootaxa 567: 1-66, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.567.1.1
