Unknown

Dataset Information

0

Taxonomic evaluation of eleven species of Microcyclops Claus, 1893 (Copepoda, Cyclopoida) and description of Microcyclops inarmatus sp. n. from America.


ABSTRACT: Description and meristic analysis of eleven species of Microcyclops recorded in America were performed based on the examination of type specimens and fresh material. Microscopic analysis of oral appendages, such as the shape and armature of the distal coxal endite of the maxilla, the ornamentation on the caudal surface of the antenna, and the intercoxal sclerites and armament of the inner basis of all swimming appendages, were characteristics that allowed the differentiation between species. Among these species, our study confirmed the synonymy of Microcyclops diversus Kiefer, 1935 with Microcyclops ceibaensis (Marsh, 1919). The results of our observations showed that Microcyclops alius (Kiefer, 1935) is a junior synonym of Microcyclops dubitabilis Kiefer, 1934; the latter being confirmed as a valid species. Also, it is proposed that the records of Microcyclops rubellus (Lilljeborg, 1901) and Microcyclops varicans (Sars, 1863) in America should be revised as there are serious doubts about their distribution in America. The analysis suggested that Microcyclops anceps pauxensis Herbst, 1962 is distinct from Microcyclops anceps var. minor Dussart, 1984 and that both are likely different from Microcyclops anceps anceps (Richard, 1897). Finally a full morphological description of adult females of Microcyclops inarmatus sp. n. is presented.

SUBMITTER: Gutierrez-Aguirre MA 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4978000 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

Taxonomic evaluation of eleven species of Microcyclops Claus, 1893 (Copepoda, Cyclopoida) and description of Microcyclops inarmatus sp. n. from America.

Gutiérrez-Aguirre Martha Angélica MA   Cervantes-Martínez Adrián A  

ZooKeys 20160706 603


Description and meristic analysis of eleven species of Microcyclops recorded in America were performed based on the examination of type specimens and fresh material. Microscopic analysis of oral appendages, such as the shape and armature of the distal coxal endite of the maxilla, the ornamentation on the caudal surface of the antenna, and the intercoxal sclerites and armament of the inner basis of all swimming appendages, were characteristics that allowed the differentiation between species. Amo  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC3332005 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4329397 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6663938 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3338805 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4283631 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6218533 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC4740846 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC4851252 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC3837492 | biostudies-literature