Research Article |
Corresponding author: Wonchoel Lee ( wlee@hanyang.ac.kr ) Academic editor: Kai Horst George
© 2017 Jinwook Back, Wonchoel Lee.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Back J, Lee W (2017) Two new species of the genus Emertonia Wilson, 1932 from Korean waters (Copepoda, Harpacticoida, Paramesochridae). ZooKeys 718: 35-64. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.718.19959
|
Two new species of the genus Emertonia were found from the west coast of Korea. The first new species, E. koreana sp. n., is closely related to E. acutifurcata. However, the new species is clearly distinguished by the presence of two modified pinnate setae on the P5 baseoendopodal lobe. All body somites of the new species except for the last two urosomites have strongly developed hyaline frills forming quadrilateral lappets. The second new species, E. simplex sp. n., superficially resembles E. mielkei in the structure of antennary exopod (with five setae), and the shape of P5. However, this new species differs from its congener mainly by having a caudal ramus 3.5 times as long as width, and P1 enp-2 with two claw-like setae. In addition, a key to the worldwide species of Emertonia is provided.
Crustacea , Jeju Island, Kliopsyllus , Taxonomy, Yellow Sea
The family Paramesochridae consists of 13 genera and more than 150 species distributed worldwide. Within the family, the genus Emertonia Wilson, 1932 is seen to be the most species-rich genus. Despite the rich diversity, there are still many unidentified species to be regarded as new species within the genus (
In Korea, taxonomic studies on coastal benthic copepods are underway.
The sediment samples for Emertonia koreana sp. n. were collected from the Chulripo Beach in the west coast of the Korean peninsula. The sediment samples for E. simplex sp. n. were collected from a subtidal zone of Jeju Island. Samples were fixed with 5% buffered formalin and dissected specimens were mounted on several slides separately using lactophenol as mounting medium. Slides were sealed with transparent nail varnish. Observations of the specimens were carried out using an LEICA DM 6000 equipped with a drawing tube. Specimens were deposited in the Marine Biodiversity Institute of Korea (MABIK).
To prepare specimens for scanning electron microscope analysis (SU3500; Hitachi, in National Marine Biodiversity Institute of Korea), specimens were transferred to 100 % ethanol, dehydrated by t-BuOH freeze dryer (VFD-21S; Vacuum Device), mounted on stubs using double-sided tape, coated with gold-palladium, and then photographed.
The descriptive terminology was adopted from
A1 antennule;
A2 antenna;
ae aesthetasc;
exp exopod;
enp endopod;
exp (enp)-1 (2, 3) to denote the proximal (middle, distal) segment;
P1–P6 first to sixth thoracopod;
benp baseoendopod.
The Chulripo Beach, intertidal zone in the west coast of Korea, Yellow Sea (36°48'11.46"N, 126°08'58"E) by sand rinsing collected by J. Back on 14 May 2010 (
Holotype 1♀ dissected on 4 slides (MABIK CR00241565). Paratypes: 1♂ on 3 slides (MABIK CR00241566), and 5 ♀♀ (MABIK CR00241570 – 00241574), 3 ♂♂ (MABIK CR00241567 – CR00241569) in 70 % ethanol. 1♀ and 1♂ dried, mounted on stub, and coated with gold-palladium for SEM.
Female P5 deeply divided into two parts in the center of both P5 baseoendopods. Two setae of baseoendopod swollen near the base. Innermost seta of P5 exopods somewhat swollen at base, similar to setae of baseoendopod. Urosomites armed with rectangular frills, except for the last two segments.
Body. Length 330 µm (n = 6, mean = 325 µm); largest width measured at cephalic shield; 55 µm; cylindrical, slightly depressed dorsoventrally; whole body very hyaline; sensilla and pores on dorsal surface as figured (Fig.
Prosome (Fig.
Urosome (Fig.
Caudal ramus (Figs
Rostrum (Fig.
Antennule (Fig.
Antenna (Fig.
Mandible (Fig.
Maxillule (Fig.
Maxilla (Fig.
Maxilliped (Fig.
P1 (Fig.
P2, P3 (Fig.
P4 (Fig.
Armature formula as follows:
P5 (Figs
Body (Fig.
Antennule (Fig.
legs P1–P4 shape and setae formulae as in female (Fig.
P5 (Figs
P6 (Figs
The species name refers the type locality of new species, Republic of Korea.
The new species Emertonia koreana sp. n. is closely related with E. acutifurcata (Mielke, 1985). They share similar shape of caudal ramus. E. koreana sp. n. and E. acutifurcata only have sub-triangular caudal ramus. Within the genus Paramesochra, similar morphology of caudal ramus is observed in P. acutata acutata Klie, 1935, P. acutata hawaiiensis Kunz, 1981, and P. taeana Back & Lee, 2010. They also have same setal formula of P1–P5. E. koreana sp. n. can be easily distinguished from those species based on the following unique characteristics: 1) female P5 is deeply divided into two parts in the center of both P5 baseoendopods. 2) Two setae at the end of baseoendopod are swollen near the base. In addition, the base of the innermost seta of P5 exopods is swollen, similar to setae of baseoendopod. 3) There are rectangular frills, except for the last two segments of urosomite. This structure is similar to that of P. taeana, but has not been reported in the genus Emertonia yet.
A subtidal zone near the Seogwipo Port in Jeju Island, Korea (33°13'33"N, 126°34'39"E), and sampled by using a grab (surface area: 0.1 m2) on a fishing boat (
Holotype 1♀ dissected on 7 slides (MABIK CR00241575), and paratypes: 1♂ on 5 slides (MABIK CR00241576). Additional paratypes represented by 3 ♀♀ (MABIK CR00241577 ~ CR00241579) and 2 ♂♂ (MABIK CR00241580, CR00241581) in 70 % ethanol. 2♀♀ dried, mounted on stub, and coated with gold-palladium for SEM. All samples were collected from the type locality by J. Back on 4 June 2010.
Emertonia simplex sp. n. with four setae at P5 exopod in male, and one short Inner seta at P5 baseoendopod in female. Caudal rami rectangular, approximately 3.8 times as long as its width. Body armed with long dorsal sensilla.
Body cylindrical, slightly depressed dorsoventrally (Figs
Prosome (Fig.
Urosomites (Fig.
Caudal rami (Figs
Rostrum (Fig.
Antennule (Fig.
Antenna (Fig.
Mandible (Fig.
Maxillule (Fig.
Maxilla (Fig.
Maxilliped (Figs
P1 (Fig.
P2, P3 (Figs
P4 (Fig.
Armature formula as follows:
P5 (Figs
Smaller than female, body length 345 µm (n = 3, mean = 344 µm) (Fig.
Antennule (Fig.
P5 (Fig.
P6 (Fig.
The species name refers to the simple somites without hyaline frills forming quadrilateral lappets.
The second new species, Emertonia simplex sp. n., shares the general characteristics of other species like E. holsatica holsatica (Klie, 1929) and E. major (Nicholls, 1939), including segmentation and setal formula of swimming legs, rectangular caudal rami, and a well-developed P5 baseoendopod and separated exopod. However, E. simplex sp. n. has a combination of all the following characteristics: 1) exopod of antenna has five setae. This characteristic is found in eleven species of Emertonia, for instance E. regulexstans (Mielke, 1984b), and E. diva (Veit-Köhler, 2005), and 2) Two claw-like setae are present on the second segment of P1, which can be found in E. brevicaudata (Kornev and Chertoprud, 2008), E. californica (Kunz, 1981), E. insularis (Kunz, 1981), E. holsatica s. str., E. longifurcata (Scheibel, 1975), and E. unguiseta (Mielke, 1984). Of these, E. unguiseta is the species closest to E. simplex sp. n. since they share all of the characteristics mentioned above. However, differences between E. simplex sp. n. and E. unguiseta are as follows: 1) E. simplex sp. n. has four setae at P5 exopod in male, whereas E. unguiseta bears only three setae, 2) the new species has a shorter inner seta at P5 baseoendopod in female, whereas E. unguiseta bears two subequal setae, 3) the length of caudal rami is approximately 3.8 times as long as its width, whereas that of E. unguiseta is 3.2 times of the width. In addition, the new species has long dorsal sensilla. The major morphological characteristics of the genus Emertonia, including the two new species were summarized in Table
Species list and morphological comparison of the species in genus Emertonia Wilson, 1932 based on female.
Species | A1 | A2 | P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 | Caudal rami | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
number of seg. | exp setae | exp-1 | exp-2 | enp-2 | exp-2 | exp-3 | exp-2 | exp-3 | enp-1 | exp-2 | exp-3 | enp-1 | enp-2 | exp | benp | shape | |
setae | setae | width:lenth | |||||||||||||||
gracilis-group | |||||||||||||||||
E. gracilis Wilson, 1932 | 8 | 3 | 023 | · | 011 | 0 | 011 | 0 | 011 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | 3 | 2 | square | |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. pseudogracilis Krishnaswamy, 1957 | 7 | 2 | 122 | · | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | 3 | 1 | square | |
1:2.5 | |||||||||||||||||
laurentica-group | |||||||||||||||||
E. laurentica (Nicholls, 1939) | 7 | ? | 0 | 121 | 011 | 221 | · | 221 | · | 010 | 112 | · | 010 | 3 | 2 | square | |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
andeep-group | |||||||||||||||||
E. andeep (Veit-Köhler, 2004) | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 110 | 0 | 011 | 1 | 011 | 3 | 2 | square |
1:4 | |||||||||||||||||
E. minor (Vasconcelos, Veit-Köhler, Drewes & Parreira dos Santos, 2009) | 7 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 0 | 010 | ? | ? | square |
1:5 | |||||||||||||||||
coelebs-group | |||||||||||||||||
E. coelebs (Monard, 1935) | 7 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 1 | 011 | 110 | · | 3 | ?1 | square |
1:5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. psammophila (Noodt, 1964) | 8 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 1 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. furcavaricata Kunz, 1974 | 8 | ? | 0 | 121 | 011 | 1 | 112 | 1 | 112 | 010 | 1 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. atlantica (Kunz, 1983) | 7 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 1 | 011 | 110 | · | 3 | 1 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
holsatica-group | |||||||||||||||||
E. holsatica holsatica (Klie, 1929) | 7 | 4(5)2 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. holsatica varians (Kunz, 1951) | 7 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 110 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. holsatica longicaudata (Galhano, 1970) | 7 | 2(3)3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. constricta constricta (Nicholls, 1935) | 7 | 2(1)4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 012 (011)4 | 010 | · | 3 | ? | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. constricta orotavae (Noodt, 1958) | 7 | 2(3)5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. constricta pacifica (Mielke, 1984a) | 8 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. constricta egyptica (Mittwally & Montagna, 2001) | 8 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:4 | |||||||||||||||||
E. major (Nicholls, 1939) | 9 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. pygmaea (Nicholls, 1939) | 7 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 5 | 2 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. longisetosa (Krishnaswamy, 1951) | 7 | 2 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. arenicola (Krishnaswamy, 1957) | 7 | 2 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. capensis Krishnaswamy, 1957 | 7 | 1 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 0 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. minuta Krishnaswamy, 1957 | 7 | 3 | 0 | 122 | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 0 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. enalia (Krishnaswamy, 1957) | 8 | 1 | 0 | 022 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:4(?)6 | |||||||||||||||||
E. wilsoni (Krishnaswamy, 1957) | 7 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. pontica (Serban, 1959) | 9 | 3 | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. perharidiensis (Wells, 1963) | 7 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 110 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. psammobionta (Noodt, 1964) | 7 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3(2) | ? | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. idiotes (Wells, 1967) | 6 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 111 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. paraholsatica (Mielke, 1975) | 7 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. longifurcata (Scheibel, 1975) | 7 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. spiniger spiniger (Wells, Kunz & Rao, 1975) | 7 | 5 | 0 | 022 | 020 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 110 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:6.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. spiniger ornata (Kunz, 1981) | 7 | 5 | 0 | 022 | 020 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 110 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:9 | |||||||||||||||||
E. masryi (Bodin, 1979)7 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 012 | 0 | 012 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 3 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. californica (Kunz, 1981) | 7 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 020 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. debilis (Kunz, 1981) | 8 | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. insularis (Kunz, 1981) | 8 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. miguelensis (Kunz,1983) | ? | 3 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | ? | ? | square |
1:3.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. panamensis (Mielke, 1984a) | 8 | 2 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 111 | 010 | · | 3 | 1 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. regulexstans (Mielke, 1984b) | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2.3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. similis (Mielke, 1984b) | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. unguiseta (Mielke, 1984b) | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3.2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. acutifurcata (Mielke, 1985) | ? | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | subtriangular |
1:4 | |||||||||||||||||
E. chilensis (Mielke, 1985) | 8 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:2 | |||||||||||||||||
E. diva (Veit-Köhler, 2005) | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 011 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:5.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. brevicaudata (Kornev & Chertoprud, 2008) | 7 | 4 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:1.6 | |||||||||||||||||
E. schminkei (Veit-Köhler & Drewes 2009). | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:9 | |||||||||||||||||
E. clausi Pointner & Veit-Köhler, 2013 | 7 | 5(6)8 | 0 | 121 | 010 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:5.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. ingridae Pointner & Veit-Köhler, 2013 | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 010 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:4.5 | |||||||||||||||||
E. koreana sp. n. (This study) | 8 | 2 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | subtriangular |
1:3 | |||||||||||||||||
E. simplex sp. n. (This study) | 8 | 5 | 0 | 121 | 011 | 0 | 112 | 0 | 112 | 010 | 0 | 011 | 010 | · | 3 | 2 | square |
1:3.8 |
The family Paramesochridae is divided into nine genera based on segmentation, and setal formula of swimming legs. Two new species clearly belongs to the genus Emertonia, because of: 1) one-segmented endopods of P2–P4 with one seta each, 2) three-segmented exopods of P2–P4, and 3) the one-segmented exopod of antenna.
Paramesochridae. Body cylindrical, broad anteriorly, rather flattened; with distinct separation between prosome and urosome; rostrum small, fused at base. Operculum not developed. Caudal ramus with 6 or 7 setae, seta I small or obscure. Antennule 7- or 8-segmented in female. Antennary exopod 1-segmented with 1–5 setae. Mandible biramous; exopod 1-segmented with 2–4 setae; distal segment of endopod with several basally fused setae at apex. Maxilla with 3 endites on syncoxa, first endite bilobed; endopod 1- or 2-segmented. Maxilliped with elongate basis. P1 biramous, with 2-segmented endopod and 1-or 2-segmented exopod. P2–P3 biramous, with 2- or 3-segmented exopods and 1-segmented endopods; P4 biramous, with 1- or 2-segmented endopod and 2- or 3-segmented exopod.
Five distinctive groups within genus Emertonia can be recognized based on segmentation and setal formula in swimming legs: 1) gracilis-group, 1-segmented exopod of P1; 2) laurentica-group, 2-segmented exopod of P2–P4; 3) andeep-group, 2-segmented endopod of P4; 4) coelebs-group, P4 exp-2 with one inner seta; 5) holsatica-group, 2-segmented exopod of P1, 3-segmented exopod of P2–P4, 1-segmented endopod of P2–P4, and P2–P4 exp-2 without inner seta. However, more studies including the mouthparts, and the numbers and shapes of elements on the appendages will be necessary to confirm the phylogenetic relationships among the species of Emertonia.
1 | P1 exopod 1-segmented…(gracilis-group) | 2 |
– | P1–P4 exopod 2-segmented…(laurentica-group) | E. laurentica |
– | P1 exopod 2-segmented , P4 endopod 2-segmented…(andeep-group) | 3 |
– | P1 exopod 2-segmented, P4 exopod 3-segmented; P4 exp-2 with 1 inner seta (coelebs-group) | 4 |
– | Theses character not combined…(holsatica-group) | 7 |
2 | P2–P3 exp-3 with 2 setae/spines | E. gracilis |
– | P2–P3 exp-3 with 3 setae/spines | E. pseudogracilis |
3 | P4 enp-2 with 2 setae | E. andeep |
– | P4 enp-2 with 1 seta | E. minor |
4 | P2–P3 exp-2 with 1 inner seta | E. furcavaricata |
– | P2–P3 exp-2 without inner seta | 5 |
5 | Length of caudal rami 5 times as long as wide; P4 enp-1 with 2 setae | E. coelebs |
– | These characters not combined | 6 |
6 | P4 enp-1 with 1 seta; P4 baseoendopodal lobe with 2 setae | E. psammophila |
– | P4 enp-1 with 2 setae; P4 baseoendopodal lobe with 1 seta | E. atlantica |
7 | P2 exp-3 with 3 setae/spines | 8 |
– | P2 exp-3 with 4 setae/spines | 14 |
8 | P1 exp-2 with 5 setae/spines | E. minuta |
– | P1 exp-2 with 4 setae/spines | 9 |
9 | A2 exopod with 1 seta at most | E. capensis |
– | A2 exopod with 2 setae at least | 10 |
10 | A2 exopod with 2 setae and P5 baseoendopodal lobe with 3 setae | E. masryi |
– | These characters not combined…(E. constrictus s. str.) | 11 |
11 | A1 7-segmented and A2exp with 3 setae at most | 12 |
– | A1 8-segmented and A2exp with 4 setae | 13 |
12 | P1 enp-1 length 1.6 times longer than P1 exp, length of caudal rami 3 times as long as wide | E. constricta constricta |
– | P1 enp-1 length 1.2 times longer than P1 exp, length of caudal rami 2 times as long as wide | E. constricta orotavae |
13 | V-shaped baseoendopod of male P5 without setules | E. constricta pacifica |
– | Each side baseoendopodal lobe almost fused ornamented with row of setules | E. constricta egyptica |
14 | P4 exp-3 with 3 setae | 15 |
– | P4 exp-3 with 2 setae | 16 |
15 | A2exp with 2 elements and P5 baseoendopod with 1 seta | E. panamensis |
– | A2exp with 3 elements and P5 baseoendopod with 2 setae | E. idiotes |
16 | P4 enp-1 with 2 setae | 17 |
– | P4 enp-1 with 1 setae | 21 |
17 | P3 exp-3 with 3 setae | E. perharidiensis |
– | P3 exp-3 with 4 setae | 18 |
18– | Length of caudal rami more than 3.5 times as long as wide; penultimate somite normal | E. holsatica varians |
– | Length of caudal rami more than 5 times as long as wide | 19 |
19 | Penultimate somite normal; endopod of P4 with 2 pinnate setae | E. diva |
– | Penultimate somite elongated and ornamented 2 dorsal processes/spines; endopod of P4 with 1 bare and 1 brushlike setae | 20 |
20 | Length of caudal rami over 6–7 times as long as wide | E. spiniger spiniger |
– | Length of caudal rami over 9 times as long as wide | E. spiniger ornata |
21 | P5 exopod with 5 setae | E. pygmaea |
– | P5 exopod with 3 setae | 22 |
22 | Shape of caudal rami conical, sub-triangular | 23 |
– | Shape of caudal rami square | 24 |
23 | A2 exopod with 4 setae; median depression between baseoendopodal lobes shallow | E. acutifurcata |
– | A2 exopod with 2 setae; median depression between baseoendopodal lobes deeply | E. koreana sp. n. |
24 | A2 exopod with 1 seta | E. enalia |
– | A2 exopod with at least 2 setae | 25 |
25 | A2 exopod with 2 setae | 26 |
– | A2 exopod with 3 setae | 28 |
– | A2 exopod with 4 setae | 33 |
– | A2 exopod with 5 setae | 38 |
26 | Caudal rami with inwardly pointed spine and long seta V | E. longisetosa |
– | These characters not combined | 27 |
27 | End of P2–P3 enp globular; A2 exopod with 2 or 3 setae | E. holsatica longicaudata |
– | Shape of P2–P3 endopods normal; A2 exopod with 2 setae | E. arenicola |
28 | Distal segment of P3 exopod with 3 setae | E. major |
– | Distal segment of P3 exopod with 4 setae | 29 |
29 | Seta V of caudal rami consisted of two type elements, proximal half stout and distal half slender seta | E. miguelensis |
– | Seta V of caudal rami normal | 30 |
30 | A1 8-segmented; P1 endopod 1.3 times longer than exopod; length of caudal rami twice as long as wide | E. debilis |
– | These characters not combined | 31 |
31 | A1 7-segmented; P2 and P3 endopod with a single tiny spinule-like seta each; length of caudal rami 3 times as long as wide | E. wilsoni |
– | These characters not combined | 32 |
32 | Baseoendopod of P5 with two apical setae; male exp of P5 with 3 setae | E. californica |
– | Baseoendopod of P5 with one apical and one outer setae; male exp of P5 with four setae | E. psammobionta |
33 | Baseoendopodal lobes fused forming large plate; A1 8-segmented; male exp of P5 with four setae | E. insularis |
– | These characters not combined | 34 |
34 | A1 8-segmented; P1 enp-1 ornamented with long setules; length of P1 enp-1 1.6 times as long as P1 enp-2; male P5 exp with three setae | E. chilensis |
– | These characters not combined | 35 |
35 | Seta III of caudal rami blunt spine; apical seta of A2exp stout comparison with other three setae; Caudal rami length approx. 2.5 times as long as wide | E. longifurcata |
– | These characters not combined | 36 |
36 | Maxilliped enp 2-segmented; Caudal rami length approx. 1.6 times as long as wide | E. brevicaudata |
– | These characters not combined | 37 |
37 | Caudal rami length approx. 2 times as long as wide; length of P1 enp-1 7 times as long as P1 enp-2 | E. holsatica holsatica |
– | Caudal rami length approx. 3 times as long as wide; length of P1 enp-1 approx. 2.7 times as long as P1 enp-2 | E. paraholsatica |
38 | Baseoendopodal lobes fused forming large plate; P1 enp-1 and P1 exp equal in length | E. regulexstans |
– | These character not combined | 39 |
39 | Caudal rami length more than 5 times as long as wide | 40 |
– | Caudal rami length under 5 times as long as wide | 41 |
40 | Caudal rami length 9 times as long as wide; P5 exp with 1 pinnate and 2 bare setae, outermost longest | E. schminkei |
– | Caudal rami length 5.5 times as long as wide; P5 exp with 3 bare setae, innermost longest | E. clausi |
41 | P2–P3 enp apical seta length longer than enp | 42 |
– | P2–P3 enp apical seta length shorter than enp | 43 |
42 | P1 enp-2 with 1 seta | E. ingridae |
– | P1 enp-2 with 2 setae/spine | E. simplex sp. n. |
43 | Length of P1 enp-1 2.5 times as long as P1 exp; male P5 exp with 3 setae | E. unguiseta |
– | P1 enp-1 and P1 exp same length; male P5 exp with 4 setae | E. similis |
This research was supported by Evaluation of Marine Invertebrate Bioresources (MABIK 2017M00600) sponsored by the National Marine Biodiversity Institute of Korea. Authors express a hearty thanks to Raehyuk Jung (Hanyang University) for his help in English correction of the early version of manuscript. We are also very grateful to subject editor, Dr. Kai Horst George and the two reviewers, Dr. Elena Chertoprud, and Dr. Sung Joon Song, for their help in greatly improving this manuscript.