Abstract

A wide ranging western Atlantic species of Ogyrides having a crest of 3-14 postrostral spines is recognized as 0. alphaerostris (Kingsley) after reassessment of the authenticity of its type-specimen in the U.S. National Museum of Natural History. A companion species having a single postrostral spine, long erroneously known as 0. alphaerostris, is recognized as a new species, 0. hayi. A short review of each species includes synonymy and diagnosis. Eleven species of the caridean genus Ogyrides (family Ogyrididae) are currently recognized from around the world. Four have been described from American Atlantic waters: Ogyris alphaerostris Kingsley, 1880 (Virginia), Ogyris occidentalis Ortmann, 1893 (Para River, Brazil), Ogyrides yaquiensis Armstrong, 1949 (Dominican Republic), and 0. limicola Williams, 1955 (North Carolina). Coelho and Ramos (1972) listed Ogyrides sp. from Amapa, Para, Pernambuco, Alagoas, and Sao Paulo, Brazil. The taxonomic status of these nominal American species is unclear, and the purpose of this paper is to resolve the problem. Before describing 0. limicola, I (1955) discussed the doubtful status of O. alphaerostris, showing that neither Kingsley's description nor its accompanying figure agreed with either of two species then known from North Carolina. Kingsley showed no spines on the carapace in his illustration whereas both of these species have such. He figured the antennal scale as somewhat truncate and slightly broadened distally whereas both species have it tapered distally with the mesial border forming a more or less regular arc. He stated that the carpus of the second leg is triarticulate, although it is clearly formed of four articles in both of these species. Hay and Shore (1918) made apology for his statement by noting that his specimen was in poor condition and there are three joints separating the four articles, although Kingsley used triarticulate on the page following the description of 0. alphaerostris with respect to the carpus of the second leg of Virbius which is composed of just three articles. Most perplexing, the typespecimen, the authenticity of which I doubted, was thought almost certainly to belong to the newly described 0. limicola. Kingsley (1880) described 0. alphaerostris from a unique specimen in poor condition that was found among decapods in the collection of Prof. H. E. Webster, Union College, N.Y. The Union College collection was subsequently given to the U.S. National Museum of Natural History (USNM). Though designated by Kingsley as No. 407 in Webster's collection, a slip of paper in the USNM vial containing this holotype bears the pencilled number 417, and that number also appears on the list of material associated with the collection in the USNM archives. I now know that the handwriting on both the vial specimen label and the list is that of M. J. Rathbun, not Kingsley, although the pencilled 417 on the slip in the vial is in an unrecognized handwriting.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call