Eocyzicus breviantennus Tippelt & Schwentner,, 2018

Rogers, D. Christopher, 2020, Spinicaudata Catalogus (Crustacea: Branchiopoda)., Zoological Studies 59 (45), pp. 1-44 : 25-26

Eocyzicus breviantennus Tippelt & Schwentner,

2018

= Eocyzicus lineage S Schwentner et al., 2013

Comments: South Australia, Australia. Known only from the type locality: 26°59'48.9"S, 133°24'55.2"E.

Eocyzicus careyensis Tippelt & Schwentner, 2018

= Eocyzicus lineage R Schwentner et al., 2013

Comments: Known only from the type locality. Australia: Western Australia, Lake Carey, 29°10'S, 122°20'E.

Eocyzicus consors ( Daday, 1914)

= Caenestheria consors Daday, 1913b nomen nudum

= Caenestheria consors Daday, 1914: 66

= Caenestheria immsi Daday, 1913b nomen nudum

= Caenestheria immsi Daday, 1914: 78

= Caenestheria skorikowi Daday, 1913b nomen nudum

= Caenestheria skorikowi Daday, 1914: 82

Comments: The type locality for consors is modern Uzbekistan. This species should be compared with E. sahlbergi and E. davidi . This species is reported from Uzbekistan through northeastern India. Daday (1914) commented on the close similarity of all these forms; their differences appear to be very slight.

Eocyzicus davidi ( Simon, 1886)

= Caenestheria davidi ( Simon, 1886)

= Caenestheria bouvieri Daday, 1914: 100

= Caenestheria bouvieri Daday, 1914

= Caenestheriella kawamurai Uéno, 1926

= Eocyzicus kawamurai ( Uéno, 1926)

= Eocyzicus mongolianus Uéno, 1927

= Eocyzicus laiyangensis Hu, 1985 , fide Naganawa & Orgiljanova, 2000

= C a e n e s t h e r i a s h i q u a n i c u s H u, 1 9 9 1, f i d e Naganawa & Orgiljanova, 2000

= Eocyzicus shiquanicus ( Hu, 1991)

Comments: The type locality is given as “ China, Peking ” for both E. davidi and E. kawamurai . Additional records are from arid China (Tibet, Inner Mongolia) and Mongolia ( Sars 1901; Gurney 1906; Hu 1993a). It is figured by Daday (1914: 73, 100) and Dong et al. (1982: 11). Brtek (1997) synonymised E. bouvieri with E. davidi ; it should be pointed out that C. bouvieri is not the same as E. bouvieri . Eocyzicus mongolianus was described from two female specimens collected from near Mukden, now called Shenyang, in Liaoning Province (also partially figured in Dong et al. 1982), and E. yanzhouensis , E. shiquanicus , and E. laiyangensis are each only known from their respective type localities in Shandong Province. All four were reported from north eastern China, between Mongolia and the Korean Penninsula. Eocyzicus laiyangensis may be conspecific with E. orientalis based on general morphology ( Rogers et al. 2017); however, Naganawa and Orgiljanova (2000) treated it as E. davidi , along with E. kawamurai , and E. shiquanica . However, it does not appear that any material was examined by them ( Rogers et al. 2017). Simon (1886) and Sars (1901) separated E. davidi from E. sahlbergi using highly variable characters: carapace outline, growth line number, first antennae form, and second antennal flagellae number of antennomeres. This species needs to be closely compared with E. orientalis .