Remarks on Inachoididae Dana, 1851, with the description of a new genus and the resurrection of Stenorhynchinae Dana, 1851, and recognition of the inachid subfamily Podochelinae Neumann, 1878 (Crustacea, Decapoda, Brachyura, Majoidea)

Abstract

A new inachoidid genus Paulita n. gen. is established for Paradasygyius tuberculatus (Lemos de Castro, 1949), from thewestern Atlantic. Paulita tuberculata (Lemos de Castro, 1949) n. comb. differs from Paradasygyius depressus (Bell,1835), from the eastern Pacific, the type species and only remaining species of Paradasygyius Garth, 1958, by a numberof characters mainly related to the carapace, thoracic sternum, abdomen, and first gonopod. Paulita n. gen. shares the di-agnostic characters of Inachoididae Dana, 1851, in particular the latero-external parts of pleurites 5–8 that extend beyondeach side of the carapace and are calcified and ornamented like the carapace, resulting in the insertion of the carapace intoa setting gutter. Stenorhynchus Lamarck, 1818, is transferred from Inachidae to Inachoididae, and the subfamily Steno-rhynchinae Dana, 1851, is resurrected. Inachoididae now consists of at least two subfamilies: Inachoidinae Dana, 1851,and Stenorhynchinae, whereas the status of Salaciinae H. Milne Edwards & Lucas, 1842, remains uncertain. The status ofseveral other American genera traditionally included in Inachidae is discussed, leading to the recognition of the followingsubfamilies besides the Inachinae emend.: Podochelinae Neumann, 1878, which is here resurrected, Anomalopodinae Stimpson, 1871, and perhaps also Eucinetopinae Števčić, 2005.

The systematic position of Ergasticus (Decapoda, Brachyura) and allied genera, a molecular and morphological approach

“…wyvillethomsoni should not be placed within the Inachidae, although they did not suggest a new placement, stating that ‘future investigations should check their taxonomic status’. In a review of the Inachoididae Dana, 1851, Guinot () has also proposed changes in the generic composition of the Inachidae. She advocated the transfer of Stenorhynchus Lamarck, 1818, from Inachidae to Inachoididae (resurrecting Stenorhynchinae Dana, 1851) and also suggested a reappraisal of Inachidae to reinstate the subfamilies Inachinae Macleay, 1838, Podochelinae Neumann, 1878 and Anomalopodinae Stimpson, 1871.…”

“…They proposed that P. wyvillethomsoni should not be placed within the Inachidae, although they did not suggest a new placement, stating that 'future investigations should check their taxonomic status'. In a review of the Inachoididae Dana, 1851, Guinot (2012) During a recent visit to the Natural History Museum (NHM) in London, one of the authors (FP) was able to review the adult morphology of several Inachidae genera available in the NHM collections. The shape of the male first gonopod, which is commonly used as a key character in majoid systematics, had never been described in Ergasticus.…”

Coevolution of post‐Palaeozoic arthropod basibiont diversity and encrusting bryozoan epibiont diversity?

“…Podotreme crab classification follows Karasawa et al (2011Karasawa et al ( , 2014, Davie et al (2015), and Schweitzer et al Thoma et al (2014), and Davie et al (2015). For the classification and arrangement of superfamilies, families, subfamilies and genera within the Majoidea, we follow Guinot (2011Guinot ( , 2012 and Windsor & Felder (2014). Classification of Pinnotheroidea follows Davie et al (2015) and Theil et al (2016).…”

“…(). For the classification and arrangement of superfamilies, families, subfamilies and genera within the Majoidea, we follow Guinot (, ) and Windsor & Felder (). Classification of Pinnotheroidea follows Davie et al .…”

Extraordinary majoid crabs: the genus Esopus A. Milne-Edwards, 1875 in the new subfamily Esopinae subfam. nov., and erection of Paulitinae subfam. nov. (Crustacea, Decapoda, Brachyura, Majoidea, Inachoididae Dana, 1851)

“…Within the monophyletic Majoidea Samouelle, 1819, a superfamily that comprises almost 1000 species in more than 200 genera (Ng et al 2008, updated) and whose relationships between the Esopus deserves its own subfamily, Esopinae subfam. nov., alongside the already existing subfamilial taxa, for the most part actually not currently implemented: Collodinae Stimpson, 1871, Dasygyiinae Holmes, 1900, Inachoidinae Dana, 1851, Salaciinae Dana, 1851, for which updated diagnoses are provided; and one recently recognised, the Stenorhynchinae Dana, 1851 (Guinot 2012).…”