Tanidromites sculpta (Quenstedt, 1858)

Klompmaker, Adiël A., Starzyk, Natalia, Fraaije, René H. B. & Schweigert, Günter, 2020, Systematics and convergent evolution of multiple reef-associated Jurassic and Cretaceous crabs (Decapoda, Brachyura), Palaeontologia Electronica (a 32) 23 (2), pp. 1-54 : 30-32

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.26879/1045
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:3A934459-9088-4AAB-8CAA-53787046FA17
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/BF7AFE1F-1110-1C1F-FC78-DCB65C45FC13
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Tanidromites sculpta (Quenstedt, 1858)
status

Treatment

Tanidromites sculpta (Quenstedt, 1858) View in CoL

Figure 17 View FIGURE 17

1858 Prosopon sculptum Quenstedt , p. 778, pl.

95.48.

1858 Prosopon lingulatum von Meyer , p. 61.

1860 Prosopon lingulatum (von Meyer) ; von Meyer,

p. 205, pl. 23.17.

1939 Prosopon wuergauensis Kuhn , p. 492, pl.

15.41.

1988 Pithonoton lingulatum (von Meyer) ; Wehner, p.

77, pl. 5.6, 5.7.

2008a Tanidromites lingulata (von Meyer) ; Schweitzer and Feldmann, p. 140, pl. 6, fig. I-J.

2011 Tanidromites sculpta (Quenstedt) ; Schweigert and Koppka, p. 229, fig. 7A-B, 7D-E (non fig.

7C).

2013 Tanidromites sculpta (Quenstedt) ; Starzyk, p.

182, figs. 3, 7.

2016 Tanidromites sculpta (Quenstedt) ; Starzyk, fig.

Diagnosis. See Starzyk (2013, p. 183).

Material studied. NHMW 1990/0041/0004a, 1990/ 0041/0144, 1990/0041/0689, 1990/0041/3181, 1990/0041/3985, 1990/0041/4030, 1990/0041/ 4196, 1990/0041/4397a, 1990/0041/4561, 1990/ 0041/4677, 1990/0041/4857, 1990/0041/5065, 2014/0194/0313: Late Jurassic (Tithonian) specimens from coral reef limestones of the Ernstbrunn at the Ernstbrunn quarries, Austria (Google Earth coordinates: 48.54, 16.35) (Schweitzer and Feldmann, 2009d; Schneider et al., 2013); I-F/ MP /248/ 1495/08: Late Jurassic (Oxfordian) specimen from sponge-microbial limestones at Niegowonice, Poland (Google Earth coordinates: 50.23, 19.26).

Occurrence. Late Jurassic (Oxfordian-Tithonian) of Central Europe ( Austria, Germany, and Poland).

Dimensions. (In mm) NHMW 1990/0041/0689: max. length excl. rostrum (L)=> 6.3, max. width (W)=5.4; 1990/0041/3985: L=~9.4, W=7.4; 1990/ 0041/4196: L=9.7, W=7.4; 1990/0041/5065: L=7.5, W=5.8; 2014/0194/0313: L=-, W=4.3; I-F/MP/248/ 1495/08: L=-, W=6.3.

Description. See Starzyk (2013, p. 183). Additional details based on new material: Dorsal carapace moderately vaulted longitudinally and transversely; rostrum triangular, with flared margins and fairly sharp tip. Augenrest flat to slightly concave. Flanks tall, at ~90° angle from center dorsal carapace surface. Posterior margin rimmed, with pronounced concavity axially. Cuticle and internal mold without ornamentation. Appendages, ventral surface, and abdomen not known.

Remarks. These specimens represent the species Tanidromites sculpta without much doubt because they conform well to the holotype (Schweigert and Koppka, 2011, figure 7A, B). The only possible difference between the Tithonian Ernstbrunn specimens versus the Oxfordian (Starzyk, 2013, figure 7; Figure 17I View FIGURE 17 ) and Kimmeridgian (Schweigert and Koppka, 2011, figure 7A, B, D, E) specimens is the groove depth that seems shallower in the Tithonian specimens for internal molds for fair comparison (as groove depth is usually shallower when cuticle is preserved). Quenstedt (1858, p. 777-778) did not describe the species in detail (translated from German): “The sculpture is best seen in fig. 48 from Nollhaus, although it may be only an internal mold. The lateral sides are vertical, the groove for the palm [=augenrest] is oriented at a high angle. Since at the same time it has a somewhat different habitat, one might perhaps distinguish it [from Prosopon rostratum ] as Prosopon sculptum .” The species name most likely refers to the well-defined grooves rather than the ornamentation because the holotype is an internal mold or steinkern and is said not to contain any ornamentation (Schweigert and Koppka, 2011, p. 229). Specimens herein ascribed to T. sculpta do not contain any ornamentation on the cuticle.

The second pair of muscle scars above those at the base of the mesogastric region (Starzyk, 2013, figures 2, 3) are not confirmed based on the Ernstbrunn material, which applies, too, for the hepatic pits and mesogastric groove tubercles. The posterior margin is not often preserved, giving many specimens a proportionally wider appearance than in reality. Limited intraspecific variation is observed, but the direction of the lateralmost portion of the cervical groove in dorsal view may vary somewhat. The small size range with specimens up to ~ 10 mm in length and the lack of very small specimens does not allow to assess possible ontogenetic changes.