Paralimnadia Sars, 1896

Timms, Brian V. & Rogers, D. Christopher, 2020, Fig. 5 in Paralbunea dayriti, Zoological Studies (Zool. Stud.) 59 (38), pp. 1-10 : 8

Paralimnadia Sars, 1896 , sensu Rogers et al., 2012

Diagnosis: (modified from Rogers et al. 2012). Populations composed of males and females (1:1); male amplexes female on posterior carapace margin, keeping body in line, single file, behind female. Rostrum variable, from blunt to acute, long or short, in both sexes. Angle between rostrum and frons 100° to 80°. Occipital notch and condyle absent. Frontal organ pedunculate. Frontal organ length 0.5 to 1.5 times distance between base of frontal organ and base of ocular tubercle. Second antenna with ~12 antennomeres per flagellum. Carapace dorsal margin smooth, lacking carinae, hinge line arcuate, rarely sinuate. Carapace intervals smooth. Umbone absent. Carapace with or without pigmentation. Muscle scar angle 10° to 80° from normal. Thoracic segments with dorsoposterior ridge margined with spines or setae. Male first two thoracopods with endopod bearing apical suctorial organ. Endite IV typical for family, although sometimes broadly transverse or bearing dense, apical setal field. Eggs attaching to prolonged exopods of thoracopods IX and X, X and XI, or XI and XII. Telson without spiniform projection on ventroposterior angle, anteriad of cercopod base. Telson posterior margin spine rows confluent dorsally, with confluence projecting or not. Each row averaging 5–25 spines. Caudal filament originating between spine rows at third, fourth, or fifth spine from confluence, born on a mound. Cercopod with proximal portion cylindrical, distal portion narrowing. Cercopod medial surface with longitudinal row of setae along proximal 40–60%. Setae plumose, sometimes long or short. Setal row terminates with one spine. Cercopod with subapical, dorsal cirrus, extending 10–50% of cercopod length. Eggs 100–170 μm in diameter, spherical to subspherical in shape. Eggs with large rectilinear polygonal depressions separated by ridges, occasionally with lamellar or setaform spines at polygon ridge line confluences. Australian ( Australia, New Zealand) and Oriental (Sulawesi) bioregions.

Many authors, e.g., Martin (1989), Martin and Belk (1989), Rogers et al. (2012), Reed et al. (2015) have proposed that Eulimnadia is in need of revision. Major problems centre around variability among individuals within and between populations (e.g., Straškraba 1964, Belk 1989), inadequate description and illustration of species, mainly prior to the 1980s, and problems in the morphological definition of Eulimnadia (e.g., Sars 1895, Daday 1925, Mattox 1954, Webb and Bell 1979, Martin 1989, Belk 1989, Brtek 1997, Pereira and García 2001).