Demoixys Illg & Dudley, 1961

Kim, Il-Hoi & Boxshall, Geoff A., 2020, Untold diversity: the astonishing species richness of the Notodelphyidae (Copepoda: Cyclopoida), a family of symbiotic copepods associated with ascidians (Tunicata), Megataxa 4 (1), pp. 1-6 : 547

Genus Demoixys Illg & Dudley, 1961

Diagnosis. Body globular or stout. Dorsal cephalic shield with or without horn-like posterolateral processes. Free urosome small, 2- to 5-segmented. Caudalramus small, poorly defined from anal somite; caudal setae at most 5 in number or apparently absent. Rostrum distinct.Antennule small, unsegmented or at most 6-segmented.Antenna 3- or 4-segmented, with small terminal claw. Mandible bearing 3 to 6 teeth on coxal gnathobase; armed with 1 seta on basis, 2 to 5 on exopod, and at most 6 on 1- or 2-segmented endopod. Maxillule as in Doroixys or much reduced to bilobed appendage; coxal epipodite usually present, but coxal endite absent. Maxilla 3- or 4-segmented; syncoxa with 3 endites at most; basis withlarge claw; endopod 1- or 2-segmented, armed with total of 4 setae at most. Maxilliped as small lobe bearing 2 to 6 setae. Legs 1–4 variously reduced, weak, consistingof indistinctly 2- segmented rami, or further reduced to 2 small lobes or rudimentary knob. Leg 5 absent, or represented by outer lobe and tapering inner process, or represented by lobe.

Type species: Demoixys chattoni Illg & Dudley, 1961 , by original designation.

Remarks. The genus Demoixys was poorly defined in the original report of Illg & Dudley (1961) who differentiated between it and other notodelphyids by its weakly segmented, inflated body, its reduced antennular segmentation, and the highly modified mouthparts and legs. It can be distinguished from Mesoixys by the form of the mandible (which has a styliform coxal gnathobase in Mesoixys ), and by the 5-segmented maxilla (Humes & Stock, 1970). It can be distinguished from both Lobodelphys and Paralobodelphys Gotto, 1981 , because both of these genera lack a coxal gnathobase on the mandible.