Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Laville, Thomas, Forel, Marie-Béatrice, Charbonnier, Sylvain
Format: Recurso digital
Language:
Published: Zenodo 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8421986
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866902046557339648
author Laville, Thomas
Forel, Marie-Béatrice
Charbonnier, Sylvain
author_facet Laville, Thomas
Forel, Marie-Béatrice
Charbonnier, Sylvain
contents <p><b>Genus <i>Paraclausocaris</i> gen. nov.</b></p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: BE0312F9-B192-4581-A2CB-3CC408857206</p><p><b>Type species</b></p><p><i>Paraclausocaris harpa</i> gen. et sp. nov. by monotypy.</p><p><b>Diagnosis</b></p><p>Thylacocephala with a well-developed optic notch restricted to the ventral margin, a sharp antero-ventral angle, small sinuous ridges on the shield and raptorial appendages 3 having spines on the second and third podomeres of the distal part.</p><p><b>Etymology</b></p><p>From the Latin ‘ <i>par</i>, <i>paris</i> ’ (‘close to’) and <i>Clausocaris</i> Polz, 1989.</p><p><b>Remarks</b></p><p><i>Paraclausocaris</i> gen. nov. has many similarities with <i>Clausocaris</i>: a cone-shaped shield in lateral view, a dorsal midline with sharp, short serrations and long, thin raptorial appendages relative to the shield. However, it also displays some differences, including a well-developed posterior margin and an anterior margin with an optic notch limited to the ventral part of the margin for <i>Paraclausocaris</i>, while in <i>Clausocaris</i> the posterior margin is absent and the optic notch occupies the whole margin. As a result of these differences, we erect <i>Paraclausocaris</i>.</p><p>One last morphological trait should also be discussed here: the number of posterior trunk appendages. In <i>Paraclausocaris</i> gen. nov., we recognize nine pairs of posterior trunk appendages. Arduini (1992) described eight posterior trunk appendages in <i>Clausocaris pinnai</i>, but based on pictures from Dalla Vecchia (2012), there may actually be nine as in <i>Paraclausocaris</i>. However, it is different from the number reported by Polz (1990) or Haug <i>et al.</i> (2014) for <i>Clausocaris lithographica</i>. They respectively reported 10 or 11 posterior trunk appendages for this species. Interspecific variation in the number of posterior trunk appendages is not uncommon among Thylacocephala (Schram 2014). However, it is quite unusual to find such variation among closely related forms: for instance, eight posterior trunk appendages are usually reported in <i>Concavicaris</i> species (Schram 2014). Thus, it will be necessary to revise <i>C. pinnai</i> to confirm its assignment to <i>Clausocaris</i>.</p>
format Recurso digital
id zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_8421986
institution Zenodo
language
publishDate 2023
publisher Zenodo
record_format zenodo
spellingShingle Paraclausocaris Laville & Forel & Charbonnier 2023, gen. nov.
Laville, Thomas
Forel, Marie-Béatrice
Charbonnier, Sylvain
Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Ostenocarididae
Paraclausocaris
<p><b>Genus <i>Paraclausocaris</i> gen. nov.</b></p><p>urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: BE0312F9-B192-4581-A2CB-3CC408857206</p><p><b>Type species</b></p><p><i>Paraclausocaris harpa</i> gen. et sp. nov. by monotypy.</p><p><b>Diagnosis</b></p><p>Thylacocephala with a well-developed optic notch restricted to the ventral margin, a sharp antero-ventral angle, small sinuous ridges on the shield and raptorial appendages 3 having spines on the second and third podomeres of the distal part.</p><p><b>Etymology</b></p><p>From the Latin ‘ <i>par</i>, <i>paris</i> ’ (‘close to’) and <i>Clausocaris</i> Polz, 1989.</p><p><b>Remarks</b></p><p><i>Paraclausocaris</i> gen. nov. has many similarities with <i>Clausocaris</i>: a cone-shaped shield in lateral view, a dorsal midline with sharp, short serrations and long, thin raptorial appendages relative to the shield. However, it also displays some differences, including a well-developed posterior margin and an anterior margin with an optic notch limited to the ventral part of the margin for <i>Paraclausocaris</i>, while in <i>Clausocaris</i> the posterior margin is absent and the optic notch occupies the whole margin. As a result of these differences, we erect <i>Paraclausocaris</i>.</p><p>One last morphological trait should also be discussed here: the number of posterior trunk appendages. In <i>Paraclausocaris</i> gen. nov., we recognize nine pairs of posterior trunk appendages. Arduini (1992) described eight posterior trunk appendages in <i>Clausocaris pinnai</i>, but based on pictures from Dalla Vecchia (2012), there may actually be nine as in <i>Paraclausocaris</i>. However, it is different from the number reported by Polz (1990) or Haug <i>et al.</i> (2014) for <i>Clausocaris lithographica</i>. They respectively reported 10 or 11 posterior trunk appendages for this species. Interspecific variation in the number of posterior trunk appendages is not uncommon among Thylacocephala (Schram 2014). However, it is quite unusual to find such variation among closely related forms: for instance, eight posterior trunk appendages are usually reported in <i>Concavicaris</i> species (Schram 2014). Thus, it will be necessary to revise <i>C. pinnai</i> to confirm its assignment to <i>Clausocaris</i>.</p>
title Paraclausocaris Laville & Forel & Charbonnier 2023, gen. nov.
topic Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Ostenocarididae
Paraclausocaris
url https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8421986