Archinotodelphys polynesiensis Monniot, 1986

Kim, Il-Hoi & Boxshall, Geoff A., 2020, A revision of the family Archinotodelphyidae Lang, 1949 (Copepoda: Cyclopoida Oithonida), with the recognition of 15 new species, Zootaxa 4801 (1), pp. 1-56 : 7

Archinotodelphys polynesiensis Monniot, 1986

Monniot (1986) noted variation in setal counts on several limbs within the material he used to describe A. polynesiensis . He interpreted this as intraspecific variation related to the utilization of different hosts; indeed, this variation was highlighted as a central theme of his paper. However, in the light of the much greater species level diversity available for this study and in the awareness of the relatively low variability in setal counts exhibited by copepods in general, we consider that A. polynesiensis is an unresolved complex of species. The holotype female of A. polynesiensis came from Ascidia archaia Sluiter, 1890 , the type host, collected off Tikehau (Tuamotou) in French Polynesia. However Monniot (1986) also mentions additional material from Herdmania momus (Savigny, 1816) (as Pyura momus ), as well as from Corella sp. collected at Moorea and Tikehau, and from Ascidia sp. collected at Tahiti, Moorea and Tikehau. Monniot documented substantial variation in many of the cephalosomic limbs in the material from these other hosts. In particular, he noted “enormous differences” in many appendages of the female from Herdmania momus , so he figured this female specimen separately. In the light of the new taxa studied here, we consider that there is now sufficient evidence to treat the copepod from H. momus as a distinct species, Archinotodephys momus sp. nov., which is diagnosed below. Huys & Boxshall (1991) examined one female of A. polynesiensis collected by Claude Monniot from a specimen of Molguloides vitrea (Sluiter, 1904) taken in The Philippines. They figured the mandible, maxillule, maxilla, maxilliped, fifth legs and genital double-somite of this specimen. There are significant differences between this specimen and the holotype female from Ascidia archaia but until new material becomes available there isn’t sufficient evidence to support the recognition of further separate species from this A. polynesiensis complex.