Published September 26, 2014 | Version v1
Taxonomic treatment Open

Abyssorchomene De Broyer 1984

Description

Abyssorchomene De Broyer, 1984

(Fig. 1)

Abyssorchomene De Broyer, 1984: 198.— Barnard & Karaman, 1991: 507 (in part).— Lowry & Stoddart 2003: 281 (catalogue).

Type species. Orchomenopsis chevreuxi Stebbing, 1906, original designation.

Included species. Abyssorchomene includes eleven species: A. abyssorum (Stebbing, 1888); A. charcoti (Chevreux, 1912); A. chevreuxi (Stebbing, 1906); A. distinctus (Birstein & M. Vinogradov, 1960); A. gerulicorbis (Shulenberger & Barnard, 1976); A. musculosus (Stebbing, 1888); A. nodimanus (Walker, 1903); A. pelagicus (Birstein & M. Vinogradov, 1960); A. plebs (Hurley, 1965); A. rossi (Walker, 1903); A. scotianensis (Andres, 1983).

Diagnostic description. Antenna 1 peduncle article 1 without anterodistal lobe; accessory flagellum with an elongate article 1 (at least twice as long as article 2) partially covering callynophore. Antenna 2 with brush setae. Mandible molar setose with a triturating surface. Maxilla 1 outer plate a well developed 7/4 crown. Maxilla 2 inner plate slightly to significantly shorter than outer plate. Gnathopod 1 subchelate or parachelate; coxa 1 large, about as long as coxa 2, subrectangular with concave anterior margin or adze-shaped; ischium short (length less than 2 × breadth); carpus compressed; propodus margins subparallel. Uropod 2 inner ramus not constricted. Telson moderately to deeply cleft.

Remarks. Abyssorchomene is most similar to Koroga. Both genera have subchelate first gnathopods with a compressed carpus. However, Abyssorchomene has a moderately to deeply cleft telson (notched in Koroga). Both genera are scavengers with wide-spread distributions.

D’Udekem d’Acoz & Havermans (2012) include A. plebs and A. rossi in the tryphosine genus Pseudorchomene Schellenberg, 1926 based on molecular evidence. Abyssorchomene plebs and A. rossi are morphologically dissimilar to P. coatsi (Chilton, 1912), the type species of Pseudorchomene, Schellenberg, 1926, but very similar to species usually assigned to Abyssorchomene. D’Udekem d’Acoz & Havermans (2012) did not test the molecular affinities of the other ten species of Abyssorchomene against Pseudorchomene before moving these species. Transferring A. rossi and A. plebs to Pseudorchomene confounds the morphological concept of both genera. Therefore based on the maxilla 1 setal-tooth arrangement and the morphology of the first gnathopods we prefer to retain these species within Abyssorchomene until such time as affinities of the entire Abyssorchomene / Pseudorchomene complex have been tested.

Abyssorchomene abyssorum Stebbing, 1888, A. gerulicorbis (Shulenberger & Barnard, 1976) and A. scotianensis (Andres, 1983) are extremely similar morphologically. The only character difference we see is the first coxa which is rectangular in A. gerulicorbis and subtlety adze-shaped in A. scotianensis. We leave them as separate species for the moment. The species recorded as A. abyssorum by Barnard & Ingram, 1990 and by Birstein & Vinogradov, 1960 from the tropical Pacific Ocean look more similar to each other than either does to the A. abyssorum of Stebbing, 1888 from the south-western Atlantic.

Distribution. Cosmopolitan.

Key to Abyssorchomene species

[A. abyssorum, A. gerulicorbis and A. scotianensis are difficult to separate in this key]

1. Gnathopod 1 parachelate............................................................................... 2

- Gnathopod 1 subchelate................................................................................ 3

2. Gnathopod 1 coxa rectangular with straight anterior margin; ischium not enlarged; propodus palm slightly obtuse. Pereopod 7 basis posterior margin with distal concavity........................................................ A. charcoti

- Gnathopod 1 coxa adze-shaped; ischium enlarged; propodus palm transverse. Pereopod 7 basis posterior margin entire.............................................................................................. A. nodimanus

3. Uropod 3 innerramusabout 2/3 aslongasouterramus.................................................. A. plebs

- Uropod 3 inner ramus slightly shorter (reaching base of article 2) or subequal to outer ramus........................ 4

4. Epimeron 3 posteroventralcornersubquadrate.......................................................... A. rossi

- Epimeron 3 posteroventralcornerbroadlyrounded.......................................................... 5

- Epimeron 3 posteroventralcornernarrowlyrounded........................................................ 6

5. Gnathopod 1 propodus palm convex............................................................. A. distinctus

- Gnathopod 1 propodus palm straight........................................................... A. musculosus

6. Urosomite 1 with straight boss not projecting over urosomite 2....................................... A. pelagicus

- Urosomite 1 withroundedbossslightlyprojectingoverurosomite 2............................................. 7

7. Gnathopod 1 coxa weakly adze-shaped. Uropod 3 inner ramus just reaching base of outer ramus article 2... A. scotianensis

- Gnathopod 1 coxasubrectangular. Uropod 3 ramisubequalinlength........................................... 8

8. Gnathopod 2 palmstraight............................................................................. 9

- Gnathopod 2 palmexcavate........................................................................... 10

9. Maxilla 2 innerplatesignificantlyshorterthanouterplate................................................................................................. A. abyssorum (of Barnard & Ingram 1990, Birstein & Vinogradov 1960)

- Maxilla 2 inner plate slightly shorter than outer plate............................... A. abyssorum (of Stebbing 1888)

10. Gnathopod 2 dactyluswithoutsetalbasket......................................................... A. chevreuxi

- Gnathopod 2 dactyluswithsetalbasket......................................................... A. gerulicorbis

Notes

Published as part of Lowry, J. K. & Kilgallen, N. M., 2014, A generic review of the lysianassoid family Uristidae and descriptions of new taxa from Australian waters (Crustacea, Amphipoda, Uristidae), pp. 1-92 in Zootaxa 3867 (1) on pages 6-8, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3867.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/5585734

Files

Files (7.2 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:e3b7516a32c80c1821e3b0e7eabf2e58
7.2 kB Download

System files (43.3 kB)

Name Size Download all
md5:485e7d81b2379b58db1758176dfd934c
43.3 kB Download

Linked records

Additional details

Biodiversity

Family
Uristidae
Genus
Abyssorchomene
Kingdom
Animalia
Order
Amphipoda
Phylum
Arthropoda
Scientific name authorship
De Broyer
Taxon rank
genus
Taxonomic concept label
Abyssorchomene Broyer, 1984 sec. Lowry & Kilgallen, 2014

References

  • De Broyer, C. (1984) Evolution du complexe Orchomene Boeck (Amphipoda Lysianassidae). Annales de la Societe Royale Zoologique de Belgique, 114, 197 - 198.
  • Barnard, J. L. & Karaman, G. S. (1991) The families and genera of marine gammaridean Amphipoda (except marine gammaroids). Records of the Australian Museum, Supplement, 13, 1 - 866. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.3853 / j. 0812 - 7387.13.1991.367
  • Lowry, J. K. & Stoddart, H. E. (2003) Crustacea: Malacostraca: Peracarida: Amphipoda, Cumacea, Mysidacea. Vol. 19.2 B. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 531 pp.
  • Stebbing, T. R. R. (1906) Amphipoda. I. Gammaridea. Das Tierreich, 21, 1 - 806.
  • Stebbing, T. R. R. (1888) Report on the Amphipoda collected by H. M. S. Challenger during the years 1873 - 1876. Report on the Scientific Results of the Voyage of H. M. S. Challenger during the years 1873 - 76. Zoology, 29, 1 - 1737, pls. 1731 - 1210.
  • Chevreux, E. (1912) Deuxieme Expedition Dans L'antarctique, Dirigee Par Le Dr Charcot, 1908 - 1910. Diagnoses D'Amphipodes Nouveaux. Bulletin du Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 4, 1 - 12.
  • Shulenberger, E. & Barnard, J. L. (1976) Amphipods from an abyssal trap set in the North Pacific gyre. Crustaceana, 31, 241 - 258. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.1163 / 156854076 x 00035
  • Walker, A. O. (1903) Amphipoda of the ' Southern Cross' Antarctic Expedition. Journal of the Linnean Society of London, Zoology, 29 (187), 38 - 64, pls. 37 - 11.
  • Hurley, D. E. (1965) A re-description of some A. O. Walker types of " Southern Cross " Lysianassidae (Crustacea Amphipoda) from the Ross Sea. Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Zoology, 6, 155 - 181.
  • Andres, H. G. (1983) Die Gammaridea (Crustacea: Amphipoda) der Deutschen Antarktis-Expeditionen 1975 / 76 und 1977 / 78. 3. Lysianassidae. Mitteilungen aus dem Hamburgischen Zoologischen Museum und Institut, 80, 183 - 220.
  • D'Udekem d'Acoz, C. & Havermans, C. (2012) Two new Pseudorchomene species from the Southern Ocean, with phylogenetic remarks on the genus and related species (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Lysianassoidea: Lysianassidae: Tryphosinae). Zootaxa, 3310, 1 - 50.
  • Chilton, C. (1912) The Amphipoda of the Scottish National Antarctic Expedition. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 48, 455 - 520, pls. 451, 452.
  • Barnard, J. L. & Ingram, C. (1990) Lysianassoid Amphipoda (Crustacea) from deep-sea thermal vents. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 499, 1 - 80. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.5479 / si. 00810282.499
  • Birstein, J. A. & Vinogradov, M. E. (1960) [Pelagic gammarids from the tropical Pacific Ocean]. Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Trudy Instituta Okeanologii, 34, 165 - 241. [in Russian]