Notoixys ovata, Kim & Boxshall, 2020
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/megataxa.4.1.1 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5728085 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03C487CB-ED55-3832-FCEF-F858FD79F84F |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Notoixys ovata |
status |
gen. et sp. nov. |
Notoixys ovata gen. et sp. nov.
( Figs. 344 View FIGURE 344 , 345 View FIGURE 345 )
Type material. Holotype ♀ (dissected and mounted on a slide, MNHN-IU-2014-21391 ) from Aplidium millari Monniot C. & Monniot F., 1994 (Type MNHN-IT-2008- 556 = MNHNA1/APL.B/295), EPOS 3 Stn 235, Weddell Sea, Antarctic Ocean (75°09.1’S, 27°34.7’W), depth 407 m, 31 January 1989. GoogleMaps
Etymology. The name is derived from the Latin ovat (=egg-shaped), referring to the ovate prosome of the new species.
Descriptionoffemale. Body ( Fig. 344A View FIGURE 344 ) straight, slightly depressed, 2.11 mm long. Prosome inflated, oval, 1.76 mm long: greatest width of prosome 1.25 mm, at posterior third. Cephalosome ( Fig. 344B View FIGURE 344 ) short, defined from metasome; dorsal cephalic shield with paired lateral horn-like processes ( Fig. 344C View FIGURE 344 ). Metasome lacking any trace of articulation. Free urosome ( Fig. 344D View FIGURE 344 ) small, indistinctly 5-segmented; articulations between somites obscure, representedbyweakconstrictionsand faintsuture lines. Genital somite short, characteristically bearing short, broad hood-like flap of cuticle along posterodorsal margin ( Fig. 344B View FIGURE 344 ). Caudalramus ( Fig. 344E View FIGURE 344 ) small, shorter than anal somite and about 2.7 times longer than wide (82×31 μm), tapering in distal third, ornamented with several setules; caudal setae not distinguishable from setules.
Rostrum ( Fig. 344F View FIGURE 344 ) well-developed, longer than wide, slightly tapering proximally and strongly taperingdistally towards angular apex. Antennule ( Fig. 344G View FIGURE 344 ) tapering, 225 μmlong, indistinctly 8-segmented; armatureformula 2, 15, 7, 3, 2, 2, 2, and 7+aesthetasc; third segment subdivided; all setae small, setule-like. Antenna ( Fig. 344H View FIGURE 344 ) 4-segmented; proximal 3 segments unarmed; terminal segment (second endopodal segment) 2.7 timeslongerthan wide (68×25 μm) and longerthan firstendopodal segment: armedwith 7 setae (arranged as 2, 2, and 3) plus terminal claw half as long as segment.
Labrum weak, easily damaged during dissection. Mandible ( Fig. 344I View FIGURE 344 ) with 3 small teeth and short pectinate margin on coxal gnathobase: basis with broad setaon medial margin: exopod with 4 equally large setae and 1 short outer seta half as long as others: endopod with 1 and 6 setae on first and second segments, respectively. Maxillule ( Fig. 344J View FIGURE 344 ) armedwith 6 setaeon arthrite, 1 on epipodite, 2 on basis, 4 onexopodand 3 on endopod; setae on endopod longer than those on exopod; coxal endite absent. Maxilla ( Fig. 344K View FIGURE 344 ) 5-segmented; syncoxawith 3, 1, 2, and 2 setae on first to fourth endites, respectively; basis with short claw plus 2 unequal setae; endopod with 1, 1, and 2 setae on first to third segments, respectively. Maxilliped ( Fig. 344L View FIGURE 344 ) as unsegmented, elongate lobe bearing 5 naked setae distally.
Legs 1–4 ( Fig. 345 View FIGURE 345 A-D) with incompletely 3- segmented rami. Protopod obscurely segmented in legs 3 and 4. Endopods slightly shorter than exopods in legs 1 and 2, but distinctly shorter, half as long as exopod, in legs 3 and 4. Inner coxal seta present in legs 1 and 2, absent in legs 3 and 4. Setae on rami small, markedly smaller inlegs 3 and 4. First exopodal segments of legs 3 and 4 lacking inner seta. Second endopodal segment of leg 2 bearing 2 inner setae. Second endopodal segment of leg 3 lacking inner seta. Armature formula for legs 1–4 as follows:
Coxa | Basis | Exopod | Endopod | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Leg 1 | 0-1 | 1-1 | 1-1; 1-1; 7 | 0-1; 0-1; 6 |
Leg 2 | 0-1 | 1-0 | 1-1; 1-1; 8 | 0-1; 0-2; 6 |
Leg 3 | 0-0 | 1-0 | 1-0; 1-1; 8 | 0-1; 0-0; 6 |
Leg 4 | 0-0 | 1-0 | 1-0; 1-1; 7 | 0-1; 0-1; 3 |
Leg 5 | absent. |
Male. Unknown.
Remarks. Notoixys ovata gen. et sp. nov. can readily be differentiated from its congeners by the following features: the ovoid, slightly depressed body shape, the presence of the posterodorsal hood-like flap on the genital somite, the presence of only 2 setae on the third endopodal segment of the maxilla, the absence of leg 5, and the characteristic setation of legs 1–4.
The new species is superficially similar in body shape to Mesoixys otaria Illg & Dudley, 1965 , but the genus Mesoixys may distinguished from Notoixys gen. nov. (and other genera) by the styliform coxal gnathobase on the mandible and by the lack of the maxilliped.
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.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |