Cymothoa indica Schiöedte & Meinert, 1884

Ravichandran, S., Vigneshwaran, P. & Rameshkumar, G., 2019, A taxonomic review of the fish parasitic isopod family Cymothoidae Leach, 1818 (Crustacea: Isopoda: Cymothooidea) of India, Zootaxa 4622 (1), pp. 1-99 : 22-23

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4622.1.1
publication LSID	urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:4537BB46-452F-4E0C-A444-4AA5E12A64E7
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8397524
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/E129637E-FF8F-A455-FF47-FA4FFAC2FA38
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Cymothoa indica Schiöedte & Meinert, 1884
status

Treatment

Cymothoa indica Schiöedte & Meinert, 1884 View in CoL View at ENA

( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 a–c)

Cymothoa indica Schiöedte & Meinert, 1884: 250 View in CoL , tab. VIII (Cym. XXVI), figs 1–4.

Cymothoa indica View in CoL .— Chilton, 1924: 887.— Hale, 1926: 212, fig. 8a–k.— McNeill, 1926: 318.— Nierstrasz, 1931: 133, pl. 10 (figs 1, 5–8 View FIGURE 5 View FIGURE 6 View FIGURE 7 View FIGURE 8 ).— Avdeev, 1978b: 282; 1982 b: 69.— Trilles, 1975: 981, pl. I ( figs 6 View FIGURE 6 , 7); 1994: 144; 2008: 23.— Veerapan & Ravichandran, 2000: 1.— Kensley, 2001: 232.— Bruce, Lew Ton & Poore, 2002: 175.— Rajkumar, Santhanam & Perumal, 2004: 113.— Rajkumar, Perumal & Trilles, 2005a: 87, figs 1, 2.— Rajkumar, Vasagam, Perumal & Trilles, 2005b: 269.— Trilles & Bariche, 2006: 223, figs 1–3.—Ravichandran, Balasubramanian & Kannupandi T. 2007: 45–50, fig. 2.— Ravi & Rajkumar, 2007: 251, fig. 2.— Jones, Miller, Grutter & Cribb, 2008: 477.— Trilles, Ravichandran & Rameshkumar, 2011: 446.—Rameshkumar, Ravichandran & Sivasubramanian, 2013a: 88–94.—Rameshkumar, Ramesh, Ravichandran & Trilles, 2014c: 940–944, fig. 1 (c).— Rania & Rehab, 2015: 400–420, figs 9–16 View FIGURE 9 View FIGURE 10 View FIGURE 11 View FIGURE 12 View FIGURE 13 View FIGURE 14 View FIGURE 15 View FIGURE 16 . — Martin, Bruce & Nowak, 2016: 28–29.

Uncertain identity

Cymothoa View in CoL sp. Monod, 1934: 14, pl. 28a, b, 30d.

Cymothoa indica View in CoL .— Panikkar & Aiyar, 1937: 429.— Rameshkumar & Ravichandran, 2010: 67, fig. 1.— El-Shahawy & Desouky, 2010: 107, fig. 1a, b.— Al-Zubaidy & Mhaisen, 2014: 58, figs 1, 2.

Type and type locality. The syntypes Cymothoa indica (1 ovig. female, 20 mm; 1 immature male, 9 mm) were collected from Bangkok, Thailand ( Schiöedte & Meinert 1884) from an unknown host.

Material examined. 3 ovig. females (22–27 mm), Parangipettai, 13 June 2017, from Sphyraena obtusata Cuvier, 1829 , coll. G. Rameshkumar & S. Ravichandran ( CAS / MBRM C- 97– C- 99).

Remarks. Cymothoa indica is recognised by the subtriangular cephalon and broadly truncate anteriorly in dorsal view; pereonite 1 indistinct or very little produced on each antero-lateral side. Coxal plates of pereonites 2–3 inconspicuous, those of 4–7 visible in dorsal view; pereon widest at fifth and sixth pereonites; pereopods gradually increasing in size, all without spines; uropods reaching the almost distal margin of pleotelson; rami subequal in length, curved and apically rounded.

C. indica distinguished from C. parupenei in having: moderately or strongly wide amphicephalic processes of pereonite 1, semi-circular cephalon anterior margin; uropods reaching posterior margin of the pleotelson; endopod mesial margin deeply oblique and distally straight, lateral margins deeply convex, with proximal margins extending beyond peduncle. C. indica resembles C. frontalis Milne Edwards, (1840) in the poorly developed or undeveloped amphicephalic processes of pereonite 1. C. frontalis is identified by the non-linear posterior margins of pereonites; pereonites posterolateral margins convex; and dactyli of pereopods 1 and 2 slender and long, and nearly touching the merus.

Martin et al. (2016) regard the two records of C. indica from the Red Sea ( El-Shahawy & Desouky 2010; Al-Zubaidy & Mhaisen 2014) as doubtful. El-Shahawy & Desouky (2010) provided figures of only pereopod 7, “showing the characteristic lobe on the postero-angle of the ischium”, however, the figures portray a distinct protrusion on the merus and not the ischium, which is not seen in C. indica . Al-Zubaidy & Mhaisen’s (2014) specimens (reported from Moolgarda seheli (Forsskål, 1775) would appear similar to C. eremita in the subtruncate cephalon and pereonite 1 reaching half the length of the cephalon.

Colour. Pale yellow to dark brown ( Martin et al. 2016).

Size. Ovig. females 15–30 mm; males 6–15 mm ( Martin et al. 2016).

Distribution. Reliable records are entirely from Pacific and Indian Ocean: Bangkok, Thailand ( Schiöedte & Meinert 1884), Beirut ( Trilles & Bariche 2006), India ( Chilton 1924; Veerapan & Ravichandran 2000; Rajkumar et al. 2004, 2005a, 2005b; Ravi & Rajkumar 2007; Trilles & Bariche 2006; Trilles et al. 2011), Australia ( Hale 1926; McNeill 1926; Jones et al. 2008; Martin et al. 2016), Indonesia ( Nierstrasz 1931; Trilles 2008) and Vietnam ( Trilles 1975).

Hosts. Cymothoa indica from a wide range of host families: Bagridae : Mystus gulio (Hamilton, 1822) ; Belonidae : Strongylura strongylura ( Rajkumar et al. 2004) ; Carangidae ; Ulua aurochs , Carangoides hedlandensis ( Martin et al. 2016) ; Cichlidae : Etroplus maculatus (Bloch, 1795) , Etroplus suratensis (Bloch, 1790) ( Panikkar and Aiyar 1937) ; Cynoglossidae , Cynoglossus sp. ( Martin et al. 2016); Clupeidae : Nematolosa nasus ; Gobiidae : Oxyurichthys macrolepis ( Ravi & Rajkumar 2007) , Glossogobius giuris (Hamilton, 1822) ( Chilton 1924; Panikkar & Aiyar 1937); Latidae : Lates calcarifer (Bloch, 1790) ( Rajkumar et al. 2005a) ; Siganidae : Siganus javus ( Rajkumar et al. 2005b) ; Sparidae : Pagellus erythrinus ( Trilles & Bariche 2006) ; Sillaginidae : Sillago sp. and Sillago ciliate ( Martin et al. 2016) ; Sphyraenidae : Sphyraena chrysotaenia ( Trilles & Bariche 2006) , Sphyraena obtusata ( Veerapan & Ravichandran 2000; Trilles & Bariche 2006); Synodontidae : Synodus myops (previously rachinocephalus myops (Forster, 1801) ( Veerapan & Ravichandran 2000; Trilles & Bariche 2006); unknown eel ( Martin et al. 2016).