Annotated checklist of anomuran decapod crustaceans of the world (exclusive of the Kiwaoidea and families Chirostylidae and Galatheidae of the Galatheoidea) Part II – Porcellanidae

2013·0.82 MB·English

by  Osawa, Masayuki

THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2010 Supplement No. 23: 109–129
Date of Publication: 31 Oct.2010
© National University of Singapore
ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF ANOMURAN DECAPOD CRUSTACEANS OF THE
WORLD (EXCLUSIVE OF THE KIWAOIDEA AND FAMILIES CHIROSTYLIDAE AND
GALATHEIDAE OF THE GALATHEOIDEA)
PART II – PORCELLANIDAE
Masayuki Osawa
Research Center for Coastal Lagoon and Environments, Shimane University,
1060 Nishikawatsu-cho, Matsue, Shimane 690-8504, Japan
Email: [email protected]
Patsy A. McLaughlin
Shannon Point Marine Center, Western Washington University,
1900 Shannon Point Road, Anacortes, WA 98221-4042, USA
Email: hermit@fi dalgo.net
INTRODUCTION Porcellanidae Haworth, 1825
= Porcellaniens H. Milne Edwards, 1837
Ng et al. (2008) and McLaughlin et al. (this volume) referred = Porcellaniadae Randall, 1840
to the “windows” to the literature and the “springboards” for = Porcellanodea Henderson 1888
associating species with their scientifi c names that provided = Porcellainea Holmes, 1900
the foundations for subsequent brachyuran, paguroid and
lithodoid research. For the porcellanids, one treatise in
particular has provided a similar base upon which virtually all DESCRIPTIVE TERMS AND CURRENT STATUS
subsequent porcellanid reports have been patterned. Despite
its regional focus, Haig’s (1960) monograph of eastern General morphology. – The general body shape is crab-
Pacifi c species included 87 of the 225 species estimated to like and the carapace is well calcifi ed. Regions of the dorsal
be present worldwide at the time (Chace, 1951). During the integument are not usually well defi ned. The anterior margin
last half century the number of genera has increased from of the carapace is produced into a short rostrum or rostral
14 prior to Haig’s (1960) monograph to 30 and the number lobe. The eyes are pigmented; ocular orbits are sometimes
of valid species from 225 to 277. well developed and ocular acicles are absent. The antennules
have broad basal segments. The antennal peduncles are
four-segmented, with the distal three moveable; antennal
HISTORY OF CLASSIFICATION acicles are absent. The third maxillipeds each have a broad
and fl attened ischium; no crista dentata is developed. Gills
A. Milne-Edwards & Bouvier (1894) reviewed the early consist of 14 pairs of biserial phyllobranchiae, paired
placements of the family and despite their superficial arthrobranchs are present on each third maxilliped and on
resemblance to brachyuran crabs, the classifi cation of the pereopods 1–4; one pleurobranch is developed on body wall
Porcellanidae has had a much less convoluted path than seen above each pereopod 2–5.
for the lithodids and Lomis. By the time that Boas (1880)
completed his studies of the Decapoda, there was general The chelipeds are symmetrical or asymmetrical, usually
agreement that the Porcellanidae was correctly assigned to broad and dorsoventrally fl attened, but sometimes infl ated.
the Galatheoidea. That relationship has not been challenged, Pereopods 2–4 are developed as ambulatory legs; pereopod 5
even though other changes in the superfamily Galatheoidea is reduced, modifi ed, and frequently carried under carapace.
have been proposed (e.g., McLaughlin et al., 2007). The pleon is well developed, symmetrical, carried bent under
cephalothorax, and held against thorax. It is composed of
six pleomeres and a telson.
INFRAORDER ANOMURA MACLEAY, 1838
Adult males usually have well developed, paired pleopods
Superfamily Galatheoidea, extant family Porcellanidae on pleomere 2 that are modifi ed as gonopods; occasionally
Superfamily Galatheoidea Samouelle 1819 these are reduced, rudimentary or absent. Females usually
109
Osawa & McLaughlin: Checklist of world Porcellanidae
have paired pleopods on each pleomere 3–5, but those of Aliaporcellana telestophila (Johnson, 1958) [Polyonyx]
pleomere 3 are sometimes reduced or absent. The telson Allopetrolisthes Haig, 1960
and uropods are well developed; the telson is composed of = Allopetrolisthes Haig, 1960 (type species
5 or 7 segments. Porcellana angulosa Guérin, 1835, by original
designation; gender masculine)
Development. – Although early carcinologists considered Allopetrolisthes angulosus (Guérin, 1835) [Porcellana]
porcellanid larvae to be quite similar to brachyuran zoeae, = Porcellana carinata Kinahan, 1857
it would appear that the only characters shared by the two = Petrolisthes reissi Ortmann, 1892
groups are the reduced and somewhat rod-shaped antennal Allopetrolisthes punctatus (Guérin, 1835) [Porcellana]
endopod and the absence of a functional exopod on the = Porcellana cristata H. Milne Edwards, 1837
third maxilliped. Porcellanid zoeae are very distinctive and Allopetrolisthes spinifrons (H. Milne Edwards, 1837)
immediately recognized by their very elongate rostral and [Porcellana]
posterolateral carapace spines. Only two zoeal stages are Ancylocheles Haig, 1978
passed through prior to the molt to megalopa, except in = Ancylocheles Haig, 1978 (type species Porcellana
Petrocheles Miers, 1876 where fi ve zoeal stages have been gravelei Sankolli, 1963, by original designation;
documented. It is also only in this genus that uropods develop gender masculine)
in a zoeal stage. In all other porcellanids studied to date, Ancylocheles gravelei (Sankolli, 1963) [Porcellana]
uropods develop in the megalopal stage. Development of Capilliporcellana Haig, 1978
larval pleopods occurs in the second zoeal stage and these = Capilliporcellana Haig, 1978 (type species
pleopods become function in the megalopal stage, except Porcellana murakamii Miyake, 1942, by original
in Petrocheles, where pleopods never develop. However, designation; gender feminine)
pleopods are reduced or lost with the molts to early crab Capilliporcellana murakamii (Miyake, 1942)
stages. And in the cases of males, pleopods do not reoccur [Porcellana]
unless the second pair develops as gonopods, except in Capilliporcellana wolffi Haig, 1981
Novorostrum Osawa, 1998, and some species of Petrolisthes Clastotoechus Haig, 1960
Stimpson, 1858, where reduced or moderately developed = Clastotoechus Haig, 1960 (type species Petrolisthes
pleopods are seen on pleomeres 3–5. Egg-bearing pleopods do diffractus Haig, 1957, by original designation;
redevelop on pleomeres 3–5 or 4 and 5 in adult females. gender masculine)
Clastotoechus diffractus (Haig, 1957) [Petrolisthes]
Current status. – Among the phylogenetic analyses that have Clastotoechus gorgonensis Werding & Haig, 1983
been reported in the past quarter century, the Porcellanidae Clastotoechus hickmani Harvey, 1999
have remained aligned with the Galatheoidea; however, Clastotoechus lasios Harvey, 1999
the sister taxon varied between the Galatheidae (Martin & Clastotoechus nodosus (Streets, 1872) [Petrolisthes]
Abele, 1986; McLaughlin et al., 2007; Ahyong et al., 2009) Enosteoides Johnson, 1970
or the Chirostylidae (Pérez-Losada et al., 2002; Ahyong & = Enosteoides Johnson, 1970 (type species
O’Meally, 2004; Macpherson et al., 2005), with Morrison et al. Porcellana corallicola Haswell, 1882, by original
(2002) placing the Porcellanidae as sister to the Galatheidae- designation; gender masculine)
Chirostylidae pair. Although previous data indicated that Enosteoides lobatus Osawa, 2009
the Porcellanidae was correctly placed in the Galatheoidea, Enosteoides melissa (Miyake, 1942) [Porcellana]
Ahyong et al. (2009) found that the Porcellanidae nested Enosteoides ornatus (Stimpson, 1858) [Porcellana]
in a paraphyletic Galatheidae. Thus the true phylogenetic = Porcellana corallicola Haswell, 1882
relationship of this family to other galatheids is not as well Enosteoides palauensis (Nakasone & Miyake, 1968)
understood as heretofore believed. [Porcellana]
= Enosteoides hainanensis Yang & Sun, 2005
Euceramus Stimpson, 1860
CHECKLIST = Euceramus Stimpson (type species Euceramus
praelongus Stimpson, 1860, by monotypy; gender
Family Porcellanidae Haworth, 1825 masculine)
Euceramus panatelus Glassell, 1938
Aliaporcellana Nakasone & Miyake, 1969 Euceramus praelongus Stimpson, 1860
= Aliaporcellana Nakasone & Miyake 1969 (type Euceramus transversilineatus (Lockington, 1878)
species Porcellana suluensis Dana, 1852, by [Porcellana]
original designation; gender feminine) Eulenaios Ng & Nakasone, 1993 {2}
Aliaporcellana kikuchii Nakasone & Miyake, 1969 = Eulenaios Ng & Nakasone, 1993 (type species
Aliaporcellana pygmaea (De Man, 1902) [Porcellana] Polyonyx cometes Walker, 1887, by original
= Polyonyx pugilator Nobili, 1905 designation; gender masculine)
Aliaporcellana suluensis (Dana, 1852) [Porcellana] Eulenaios cometes (Walker, 1887) [Polyonyx]
{1}
= Polyonyx denticulatus Paul’son, 1875
= Polyonyx hexagonalis Zehntner, 1894
110
THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2010
Heteropolyonyx Osawa, 2001 = Porcellanides Nobili, 1901 (type species
= Heteropolyonyx Osawa, 2001 (type species Porcellanides festae Nobili, 1901, by monotypy;
Heteropolyonyx biforma Osawa, 2001, by original gender feminine) (preoccupied name)
designation; gender masculine) = Porcellanopsis Rathbun 1910 (type species
Heteropolyonyx biforma Osawa, 2001 Porcellana festae Nobili, 1901, by monotypy;
Heteroporcellana Haig, 1978 gender feminine) (replacement name) {5}
= Heteroporcellana Haig, 1978 (type species Megalobrachium erosum (Glassell, 1936) [Pisosoma]
Porcellana corbicola Haig, 1960, by original Megalobrachium festae (Nobili, 1901) [Porcellanides]
designation; gender feminine) {6}
Heteroporcellana corbicola (Haig, 1960) [Porcellana] = Porcellanides festae Nobili, 1901
Liopetrolisthes Haig, 1960 = Porcellanopsis festai (Nobili, 1901)
= Liopetrolisthes Haig, 1960 (type species Porcellana Megalobrachium garthi Haig, 1957
mitra Dana, 1852, by original designation; gender = Pachycheles rotundus A. Milne-Edwards &
masculine) Bouvier 1894 (nomen nudum)
Liopetrolisthes mitra (Dana, 1852) [Porcellana] Megalobrachium mortenseni Haig, 1962
= Porcellana spinosa Philippi 1860 Megalobrachium pacifi cum Gore & Abele, 1974 {7}
= Porcellana patagonica Cunningham, 1871 Megalobrachium peruvianum Haig, 1960
= Porcellana pulchellula Cano, 1889 Megalobrachium poeyi (Guérin-Méneville, 1855)
Lissoporcellana Haig, 1978 [Porcellana] {8}
= Lissoporcellana Haig, 1978 (type species = Megalobrachium granuliferum Stimpson, 1858
Porcellana quadrilobata Miers, 1884, by original = Porcellana robusta Torralbas, 1917
designation; gender feminine) Megalobrachium roseum (Rathbun, 1900) [Porcellana]
= ? Porcellanides Czerniavsky 1884 (type species Megalobrachium sinuimanus (Lockington, 1878)
Porcellana kriczagini Czerniavsky, 1884, by [Petrolisthes (Pisosoma)]
original designation; gender masculine) {3} Megalobrachium smithi (Glassell, 1936) [Pisosoma]
Lissoporcellana fl agellicola Osawa & Fujita, 2005 Megalobrachium soriatum (Say, 1818) (Porcellana]
Lissoporcellana furcillata (Haig, 1965) [Porcellana] {9}
Lissoporcellana miyakei Haig, 1981 = Megalobrachium walteri Rodrigues da Costa,
Lissoporcellana monodi Osawa, 2007 1968
Lissoporcellana nakasonei (Miyake, 1978) [Porcellana] Megalobrachium tuberculipes (Lockington, 1878)
(replacement name) [Pachycheles]
= Porcellana maculata Miyake, 1957 (preoccupied Minyocerus Stimpson, 1858
name) = Minyocerus Stimpson, 1858 (type species
Lissoporcellana nitida (Haswell, 1882) [Porcellana] Porcellana angusta Dana, 1852, by original
Lissoporcellana pectinata Haig, 1981 designation; gender masculine)
Lissoporcellana quadrilobata (Miers, 1884) = Porcellina Müller, 1862, (type species Porcellina
[Porcellana] stellicola by monotypy; gender feminine)
= Porcellana streptochirus White, 1847 (nomen Minyocerus angustus (Dana, 1852) [Porcellana]
nudum) = Porcellina stellicola Müller, 1862
= Porcellana streptochira Miers, 1884 = Porcellana rosamondae Boone, 1930
= Porcellana gaekwari Southwell, 1909 Minyocerus kirki Glassell, 1938
= Lissoporcellana paraquadrilobata Yang & Sun, Neopetrolisthes Miyake, 1937
1992 = Neopetrolisthes Miyake, 1937 (type species
Lissoporcellana spinuligera (Dana, 1853) [Porcellana] Neopetrolisthes ohshimai Miyake, 1937, by
(replacement name) original designation; gender masculine)
= Porcellana armata Dana, 1852 (preoccupied Neopetrolisthes alobatus (Laurie, 1926) [Petrolisthes]
name) Neopetrolisthes maculatus (H. Milne Edwards, 1837)
= Porcellana latifons Stimpson, 1858 [Porcellana] {10}
Lissoporcellana streptochiroides (Johnson, 1970) = Neopetrolisthes ohshimai Miyake, 1937 {10}
[Porcellana (Pisidia)] Neopetrolisthes spinatus Osawa & Fujita, 2001
Madarateuchus Harvey, 1999 {4} Neopisosoma Haig, 1960 {11}
= Madarateuchus Harvey, 1999 (type species = Neopisosoma Haig, 1960 (type species Neopisosoma
Petrolisthes vanderhorsti Schmitt, 1924, by bicapillatum Haig, 1960, by original designation;
monotypy; gender masculine) gender neuter)
Madarateuchus vanderhorsti (Schmitt, 1924) Neopisosoma angustifrons (Benedict, 1901)
[Petrolisthes] [Pisosoma]
Megalobrachium Stimpson, 1858 Neopisosoma bicapillatum Haig, 1960
= Megalobrachium Stimpson, 1858 (type species Neopisosoma curacaoense (Schmitt, 1924) [Pisosoma]
Megalobrachium granuliferum Stimpson, 1858, Neopisosoma dohenyi Haig, 1960
by original designation; gender neuter) Neopisosoma mexicanum (Streets, 1871) [Pachycheles]
111
Osawa & McLaughlin: Checklist of world Porcellanidae
Neopisosoma neglectum Werding, 1986 Pachycheles panamensis Faxon, 1893
Neopisosoma orientale Werding, 1986 = Pachycheles sonorensis Glassell, 1936
Novorostrum Osawa, 1998 Pachycheles pectinicarpus Stimpson, 1858
= Novorostrum Osawa, 1998 (type species Pachycheles pilosus (H. Milne Edwards, 1837)
Petrolisthes indicus De Man, 1893, by original [Porcellana]
designation; gender neuter) Pachycheles pisoides (Heller, 1865) [Porcellana]
Novorostrum decorocrus Osawa, 1998 = Pachycheles lifuensis Borradaile, 1900
Novorostrum indicum (De Man, 1893) [Petrolisthes] = Pachycheles fronto Melin, 1939
Novorostrum phuketense Osawa, 1998 {12} Pachycheles pubescens Holmes, 1900
Novorostrum securiger (Melin, 1939) [Petrolisthes] Pachycheles riisei (Stimpson, 1859) [Pisosoma]
{13} = Pisosoma riisei Stimpson, 1858 (nomen nudum)
Orthochela Glassell, 1936 = Pisosoma glabra Kingsley, 1880
= Orthochela Glassell, 1936 (type species Orthochela = Pisosoma reisei Young, 1900 (misspelling of
pumila Glassell, 1936, by original designation; riisei)
gender feminine) = Pisosoma risei Moreira, 1920 (misspelling of
Orthochela pumila Glassell, 1936 riisei)
Pachycheles Stimpson, 1858 Pachycheles rudis Stimpson 1859
= Pachycheles Stimpson, 1858 (type species = Pachycheles rudis Stimpson, 1858 (nomen
Porcellana grossimana Guérin, 1835, by original nudum)
designation; gender masculine) Pachycheles rugimanus A. Milne-Edwards, 1880
= Pisosoma Stimpson, 1858 (type species Porcellana Pachycheles sahariensis Monod, 1933
pisum H. Milne Edwards, 1837, by original Pachycheles sculptus (H. Milne Edwards, 1837)
designation; gender neuter) [Porcellana]
Pachycheles ackleianus A. Milne-Edwards, 1880 = Porcellana pisum H. Milne Edwards, 1837
= ? Porcellana parrai Guérin-Méneville, 1855 = Porcellana pulchella Haswell, 1882
Pachycheles attaragos Harvey & de Santo, 1997 = Pachycheles sculptus var. tuberculatus Borradaile,
Pachycheles barbatus A. Milne-Edwards, 1878 1900
= Pachycheles ornatus Bouvier, 1906 Pachycheles serratus (Benedict, 1901) [Pisosoma]
Pachycheles bellus (Osorio, 1887) [Porcellana] Pachycheles setiferous Yang, 1996
Pachycheles biocellatus (Lockington, 1878) [Petrolisthes Pachycheles setimanus (Lockington, 1878) [Petrolisthes
(Pisosoma)] (Pisosoma)]
= Petrolisthes (Pisosoma) gibbosicarpus Lockington, Pachycheles spinidactylus Haig, 1957
1878 Pachycheles spinipes (A. Milne-Edwards, 1873)
= Pisosoma aphrodita Boone, 1932 [Porcellana]
Pachycheles calculosus Haig, 1960 = Porcellana sollasi Whitelegge, 1897
Pachycheles chacei Haig, 1956 Pachycheles stevensii Stimpson, 1858
Pachycheles chubutensis Boschi, 1963 Pachycheles subsetosus Haig, 1960
Pachycheles crassus (A. Milne-Edwards, 1869) Pachycheles susanae Gore & Abele, 1974
[Porcellana (Pachycheles)] Pachycheles tomentosus Hendersson, 1893
Pachycheles crinimanus Haig, 1960 Pachycheles trichotus Haig, 1960
Pachycheles cristobalensis Gore, 1970 Pachycheles velerae Haig, 1960
Pachycheles garciaensis (Ward, 1942) [Pisosoma] Pachycheles vicarius Nobili, 1901
Pachycheles granti Haig, 1965 Parapetrolisthes Haig, 1962 {16}
Pachycheles greeleyi (Rathbun, 1900) [Pisosoma] = Parapetrolisthes Haig, 1962 (type species
Pachycheles grossimanus (Guérin, 1835) [Porcellana] Petrolisthes tortugensis Glassell, 1945, by original
Pachycheles hertwigi Balss, 1913 designation; gender masculine)
= Pachycheles balssi Miyake, 1943 Parapetrolisthes tortugensis (Glassell, 1945)
Pachycheles holosericus Schmitt, 1921 [Petrolisthes]
= Pachycheles holosericus Schmitt, 1918 (in Petrocheles Miers 1876 {17}
Nininger, 1918) (nomen nudum) {14} = Petrocheles Miers 1876 (type species Petrolisthes
Pachycheles johnsoni Haig, 1965 (Petrocheles) spinosus Miers, 1876, by subsequent
Pachycheles laevidactylus Ortmann, 1892 designation by Haig, 1964; gender masculine)
= Pachycheles haigae Rodrigues da Costa, 1960 Petrocheles australiensis (Miers, 1876) [Petrolisthes
{15} (Petrocheles)]
Pachycheles marcortezensis Glassell, 1936 Petrocheles spinosus (Miers, 1876) [Petrolisthes
Pachycheles monilifer (Dana, 1852) [Porcellana] (Petrocheles)]
= Porcellana rugosimanus White 1847 (nomen Petrolisthes Stimpson, 1858 {18}
nudum) = Petrolisthes Stimpson, 1858 (type species
Pachycheles natalensis (Krauss, 1843) [Porcellana] Porcellana violacea Guérin, 1831, by original
designation; gender masculine)
112
THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2010
Petrolisthes aegyptiacus Werding & Hiller, 2007 Petrolisthes galathinus (Bosc, 1802) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes agassizii Faxon, 1893 = Porcellana sexispinosa Gibbes, 1850
Petrolisthes amoenus (Guérin Méneville, 1855) = Porcellana danae Gibbes 1854
[Porcellana] = Porcellana egregia Guérin-Méneville, 1855
= Perolisthes serratus Henderson 1888 = Petrolisthes occidentalis Stimpson 1858 (nomen
Petrolisthes armatus (Gibbes, 1850) [Porcellana] nudum)
= Porcellana gundlachii Guérin-Méneville, 1855 = Petrolisthes occidentalis Stimpson, 1859
= Porcellana leporina Heller, 1862 = Petrolisthes brasiliensis S. I. Smith, 1869
= Petrolisthes similis Henderson, 1888 (nomen Petrolisthes gertrudae Werding, 1996
nudum) Petrolisthes glasselli Haig, 1957
= Petrolisthes iheringi Ortmann, 1897 Petrolisthes gracilis Stimpson, 1859
= Petrolisthes armatus var. pallidus Verrill, 1908 = Petrolisthes gracilis Stimpson, 1858 (nomen
Petrolisthes artifrons Haig, 1960 nudum)
Petrolisthes asiaticus (Leach, 1820) [Pisidia] Petrolisthes granulosus (Guérin, 1835) [Porcellana]
= Petrolisthes leporinoides Ortmann, 1892 = Porcellana striata H. Milne Edwards, 1837
= Petrolisthes yaeyamensis Miyake, 1937 Petrolisthes haigae Chace, 1962
Petrolisthes bifi dus Werding & Hiller, 2004 Petrolisthes haplodactylus Haig, 1988
Petrolisthes bispinosus Borradaile, 1900 Petrolisthes hastatus Stimpson, 1858
Petrolisthes bolivarensis Werding & Kraus, 2003 = Porcellana inermis Heller, 1862
Petrolisthes borradailei Kropp, 1984 = Petrolisthes tenkatei De Man, 1893
Petrolisthes boscii (Audouin, 1826) [Porcellana] Petrolisthes haswelli Miers, 1884
= ? Porcellana rugosa? White, 1847 Petrolisthes heterochrous Kropp, 1986
= Petrolisthes rugosus Miers, 1884 Petrolisthes hians Nobili, 1901
= Petrolisthes amakusensis Miyake & Nakasone, = Pisosoma fl agraciliata Glassell, 1937
1966 Petrolisthes hirtipes Lockington, 1878
Petrolisthes brachycarpus Sivertsen, 1933 Petrolisthes hirtispinosus Lockington, 1878
= Petrolisthes gracilis var. brachycarpus Siversten, Petrolisthes hispaniolensis Werding & Hiller, 2005
1933 Petrolisthes holotrichus Nobili, 1901
Petrolisthes cabrilloi Glassell, 1945 Petrolisthes japonicus (De Haan, 1849 [Porcellana]
= Petrolisthes cabrilloa Glassell, 1945 {19} Petrolisthes jugosus Streets, 1872
Petrolisthes caribensis Werding, 1983 Petrolisthes kranjiensis Johnson, 1970
Petrolisthes carinipes (Heller, 1861) [Porcellana] {20} Petrolisthes laevigatus (Guérin, 1835) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes celebesensis Haig, 1981 = Porcellana valida Dana, 1852
Petrolisthes cinctipes (Randall, 1840) [Porcellana] Petrolisthes lamarckii (Leach, 1820) [Pisidia] {23}
{21} = Porcellana dentata H. Milne Edwards, 1837
= Porcellana rupicola Stimpson, 1857 = Porcellana pulchripes White, 1847 (nomen
Petrolisthes coccineus (Owen, 1839) [Porcellana] nudum)
= Porcellana barbata Heller, 1862 = Porcellana speciosa Dana, 1852
= Petrolisthes nipponensis Miyake, 1937 = Porcellana bellis Heller, 1865
Petrolisthes cocoensis Haig, 1960 Petrolisthes leptocheles (Heller, 1861) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes columbiensis Werding, 1983 Petrolisthes lewisi (Glassell 1936) [Pisosoma]
Petrolisthes crenulatus Lockington, 1878 = Petrolisthes lewisi austrinus Haig, 1960 {24}
Petrolisthes decacanthus Ortmann, 1897 Petrolisthes limicola Haig, 1988
Petrolisthes desmarestii (Guérin, 1835) [Porcellana] Petrolisthes lindae Gore & Abele, 1974
= Porcellana acanthophora H. Milne Edwards & Petrolisthes magdalenensis Werding, 1978
Lucas, 1844 Petrolisthes manimaculis Glassell, 1945
= Porcellana dubia Kinahan, 1857 Petrolisthes marginatus Stimpson, 1859
Petrolisthes dissimulatus Gore, 1983 = Petrolisthes marginatus Stimpson, 1858 (nomen
Petrolisthes donadio Hiller & Werding, 2007 nudum)
Petrolisthes donanensis Osawa, 1997 ? = Porcellana Cessacii A. Milne-Edwards, 1878
Petrolisthes edwardsii (de Saussure, 1853) {25}
[Porcellana] {22} ? = Petrolisthes Cecoci Balss, 1914 (misspelling of
Petrolisthes eldredgei Haig & Kropp 1987 cessaci in fi gure legend)
Petrolisthes elegans Haig, 1981 Petrolisthes masakii Miyake, 1943
Petrolisthes elongatus (H. Milne Edwards, 1837) Petrolisthes melini Miyake & Nakasone, 1966 {20}
[Porcellana] Petrolisthes mesodactylon Kropp, 1984 {26}
Petrolisthes eriomerus Stimpson, 1871 Petrolisthes militaris (Heller, 1862) [Porcellana] {27}
Petrolisthes extremus Kropp & Haig, 1994 {20} = Porcellana annulipes White, 1847 (nomen
Petrolisthes fi mbriatus Borradaile, 1898 nudum)
Petrolisthes galapagensis Haig, 1960 = Petrolisthes annulipes Miers, 1884
113
Osawa & McLaughlin: Checklist of world Porcellanidae
Petrolisthes miyakei Kropp, 1984 Petrolisthes violaceus (Guérin, 1831) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes moluccensis (De Man, 1888) [Porcellana = Porcellana macrocheles Poeppig, 1836
(Petrolisthes)] Petrolisthes virgatus Paul’son, 1875
Petrolisthes monodi Chace, 1956 = Petrolisthes trivirgatus Ortmann, 1894
= ? Porcellana speciosa Osorio, 1889 Petrolisthes zacae Haig, 1968
Petrolisthes nanshensis Yang, 1996 Pisidia Leach, 1820
Petrolisthes nigrunguiculatus Glassell, 1936 = Pisidia Leach, 1820 (type species Cancer
Petrolisthes nobilii Haig, 1960 longicornis Linnaeus, 1767, by subsequent
Petrolisthes novaezelandiae Filhol, 1885 designation by ICZN Opinion 701, 1964; gender
= Petrolisthes stewarti Filhol, 1885 feminine)
Petrolisthes obtusifrons Miyake, 1937 = Streptochirus Stimpson, 1907 (type species
= Petrolisthes varicolor Osawa 1998 Porcellana serratifrons Stimpson, 1858, by
Petrolisthes ornatus Paul’son, 1875 subsequent designation by Haig, 1960; gender
= Porcellana (Petrolisthes) mossambica Hilgendorf, masculine)
1879 Pisidia bluteli (Risso, 1816) [Porcellana] {31}
Petrolisthes ortmanni Nobili, 1901 Pisidia brasiliensis Haig, in Rodrigues da Costa, 1968
Petrolisthes perdecorus Haig, 1981 Pisidia dehaanii (Krauss, 1843) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes platymerus Haig, 1960 Pisidia delagoae (Barnard, 1955) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes politus (Gray, 1831) [Porcellana] Pisidia dispar (Stimpson, 1858 [Porcellana] {32}
= Porcellana magnifi ca Gibbes, 1850 = Polyonyx carinatus Ortmann, 1892
Petrolisthes polymitus Glassell, 1937 = Porcellana rostrata Baker, 1905
Petrolisthes pubescens Stimpson, 1858 Pisidia gordoni (Johnson, 1970) [Porcellana (Pisidia)]
Petrolisthes quadratus Benedict, 1901 Pisidia inaequalis (Heller, 1861 [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes rathbunae Schmitt, 1921 {28} Pisidia longicornis (Linnaeus, 1767) [Cancer] {31}
= Petrolisthes rathbunae Schmitt, in Hilton, 1916 = Cancer hexapus Linnaeus, 1767
(nomen nudum) = Pisidia linnaeana Leach, 1820
Petrolisthes robsonae Glassell, 1945 Pisidia longimana (Risso, 1816) [Porcellana] {31}
Petrolisthes rosariensis Werding, 1982 Pisidia magdalenensis (Glassell, 1936) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes rufescens (Heller, 1861) [Porcellana] Pisidia serratifrons (Stimpson, 1858) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes sanfelipensis Glassell, 1936 = Porcellana spinulifrons Miers, 1879
= Petrolisthes felipensis Glassell, 1937 Pisidia streptocheles (Stimpson, 1858) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes sanmartini Werding & Hiller, 2002 Pisidia striata Yang & Sun, 1990
Petrolisthes scabriculus (Dana, 1852) [Porcellana] Pisidia variabilis (Yang & Sun, 1985) [Enosteoides]
{27} {32}
Petrolisthes schmitti Glassell, 1936 Polyonyx Stimpson, 1858
Petrolisthes squamanus Osawa, 1996 = Polyonyx Stimpson, 1858 (type species Porcellana
Petrolisthes teres Melin, 1939 {29} macrocheles Gibbes, 1850, by original designation;
= Petrolisthes inermis Haswell, 1882 (preoccupied gender masculine)
name) Polyonyx biunguiculatus (Dana, 1852) [Porcellana]
Petrolisthes tiburonensis Glassell, 1936 {33}
Petrolisthes tomentosus (Dana, 1852) [Porcellana] = Polyonyx parabiunguiculatus Yang, 1996
= Porcellana penicillata Heller, 1862 Polyonyx boucheti Osawa, 2007
= Porcellana villosa Richters, 1880 Polyonyx bouvieri Saint Joseph, 1900
Petrolisthes tonsorius Haig, 1960 Polyonyx confi nis Haig, 1960
Petrolisthes tridentatus Stimpson, 1859 Polyonyx gibbesi Haig, 1956 (replacement name)
= ? Porcellana affi nis Gray, 1831 = Porcellana macrocheles Gibbes, 1850 (primary
= Petrolisthes tridentatus Stimpson, 1858 (nomen homonym)
nudum) = ? Porcellana crepinii Müller, 1862 (nomen
Petrolisthes trilobatus Osawa, 1996 nudum)
Petrolisthes tuberculatus (Guérin, 1835) [Porcellana] = ? Porcellana (Polyonyx) creplinii Müller, 1870
= Porcellana lobifrons H. Milne Edwards, 1837 = ? Polyonix creplinii Ejchel, 1965 (misspelling of
= Porcellana tuberculifrons Nicolet, 1849 Polyonyx)
(misspelling of tubertculatus) = ? Polyonix creplini Ejchel, 1965 (misspelling of
Petrolisthes tuberculosus (H. Milne Edwards, 1837) Polyonyx)
[Porcellana] {30} Polyonyx haigae McNeil, 1968
= Porcellana affi nis Guérin, 1835 (preocccupied Polyonyx hendersoni Southwell, 1909 {34}
name) Polyonyx loimicola Sankolli, 1965
= Porcellana tuberculifrons H. Milne Edwards & Polyonyx maccullochi Haig, 1965
Lucas, 1843 (unnecessary replacement name) Polyonyx nitidus Lockington, 1878
Petrolisthes unilobatus Henderson, 1888
114
THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2010
Polyonyx obesulus Miers, 1884 {33} = Porcellana stimpsoni A. Milne-Edwards, 1880
= Porcellana obesula White, 1847 (nomen {37}
nudum) = ? Porcellana robertsoni Henderson, 1888
= Porcellana (Polyonyx) tuberculosa De Man, Porcellana sigsbeiana A. Milne-Edwards, 1880
1888 Porcellanella White, 1852
= Polyonyx parvidens Nobili, 1905 = Porcellanella White, 1852 (type species
= Polyonyx paucidens Nobili 1906 (misspelling of Porcellanella triloba White, 1852, by monotypy;
parvidens) gender feminine)
Polyonyx pedalis Nobili, 1905 Porcellanella haigae Sankarankutty, 1963
Polyonyx plumatus Yang & Xu, 1994 Porcellanella triloba White, 1852
Polyonyx quadratus Chace, 1956 = Porcellanella picta Stimpson, 1858
Polyonyx quadriungulatus Glassell, 1935 Pseudoporcellanella Sankarankutty, 1961
Polyonyx senegalensis Chace, 1956 = Pseudoporcellanella Sankarankutty 1961
Polyonyx sinensis Stimpson, 1858 (type species Pseudoporcellanella manoliensis
Polyonyx spina Osawa, 2007 Sankarankutty, 1961, by monotypy; gender
Polyonyx splendidus Sankolli, 1963 {34} feminine)
Polyonyx thai Werding, 2001 Pseudoporcellanella manoliensis Sankarankutty, 1961
Polyonyx transversus (Haswell, 1882) [Porcellana] Raphidopus Stimpson, 1858
Polyonyx triunguiculatus Zehntner, 1894 = Raphidopus Stimpson, 1858 (type species
= Polyonyx acutifrons De Man, 1896 Raphidopus ciliatus Stimpson, 1858, by monotypy;
Polyonyx tulearis Werding, 2001 gender masculine)
Polyonyx utinomii Miyake, 1943 Raphidopus ciliatus Stimpson, 1858
Polyonyx vermicola Ng & Sasekumar, 1993 Raphidopus indicus Henderson, 1893
Porcellana Lamarck, 1801 Raphidopus johnsoni Ng & Nakasone, 1994
= Porcellana Lamarck, 1801 (type species Cancer Ulloaia Glassell, 1938
platy-cheles Pennant, 1777, by monotypy; gender = Ulloaia Glassell, 1938 (type species Ulloaia
feminine) perpusillia Glassell, 1938, by original designation;
= Platycheles Billberg, 1820 (type species Cancer gender feminine)
platy-cheles Pennant, 1777, by tautonomy; gender Ulloaia perpusillia Glassell, 1938
masculine)
= Enostea Gistel, 1848 (unnecessary replacement
name for Porcellana; type species Cancer Incerta sedis
platycheles Pennant, 1777)
Porcellana africana Chace, 1956 {35} Petrolisthes costai Rodriguez da Costa, 1968 {38}
= Porcellana platycheles africana Chace, 1956 Pisidia melloleitaoi Rodriguez da Costa, 1968 {38}
Porcellana cancrisocialis Glassell, 1936 Porcellana mattosi Osorio, 1887 {39}
Porcellana caparti Chace, 1956 {36}
Porcellana corbicola Haig, 1960
Porcellana curvifrons Yang & Sun, 1990 NOTES
Porcellana elegans Chace, 1956 {36}
Porcellana foresti Chace, 1956 {36} {1} Aliaporcellana suluensis has variations in the
Porcellana habei Miyake, 1961 morphology of the carapace, host animals, and
Porcellana hancocki Glassell, 1938 coloration in life, which can be referred to species
= Porcellana hancocki Glassell, 1937 (nomen specifi c characters. Thus, the two species currently
nudum) considered synonyms of A. suluensis may prove to
Porcellana lillyae Lemaitre & Campos, 2000 be valid taxa.
Porcellana paguriconviva Glassell, 1936
Porcellana persica Haig, 1966 {2} The status of Eulenaios has not been satisfactorily
Porcellana platycheles (Pennant, 1777) [Cancer] {35} resolved. Ng & Nakasone’s (1993) establishment of
= Porcellana paivacarvalhoi Rodriguez da Costa, Eulenaios for Polyonyx cometes was not recognized
1968 {35} by Werding (2001). However, Osawa (2007a) has
Porcellana pulchra Stimpson, 1858 suggested that the validity of Eulenaios does have
Porcellana sayana (Leach, 1820) [Pisidia] support.
= Porcellana sayii Gray, 1831 (misspelling of
sayana) {3} Based on the author’s diagnosis, Haig (1978)
= Porcellana ocellata Gibbes, 1850 suggested that Czerniavsky’s (1884) Porcellanides
= Porcellana sagrai Guérin-Méneville, 1855 might be a senior synonym of Lissoporcellana because
= Percellana sagrai Von Martens, 1872 (misspelling the type species, P. kriczagini, from Singapore was
of Porcellana) likely to be a member of Lissoporcellana.
115
Osawa & McLaughlin: Checklist of world Porcellanidae
{4} Madarateuchus was established by Harvey (1999) {11} The generic status of Neopisosoma has been
as a monotypic genus for Clastotechus vanderhorsti. questioned since its establishment as was discussed
Although the molecular analyses by Rodriquez et al. by Gore (1970), Werding (1986), Werding & Müller
(2006) did not support the validity of the genus, it is (1990), Werding et al. (2001), and Rodríguez et al.
presently considered a valid taxon. (2004, 2005). Although Rodríguez et al. (2006) found
that Neopisosoma was supported as a genus distinct
{5} Porcellanopsis was proposed by Rathbun (1910) from Pachycheles based on molecular analysis, a
as a replacement name for Porcellanides Nobili, worldwide review of both genera will be required
preoccupied by Porcellanides Czerniavsky. Although to clarify their relationships.
Haig (1960) considered Porcellanopsis a synonym of
Megalobrachium, Rodriguez et al. (2006) suggested, {12} Since the generic gender is neuter, the name N.
based on molecular evidence, that Rathbun’s taxon phuketensis is emended to N. phuketense.
might actually be a distinct taxon.
{13} Osawa (1998a) treated N. securiger as a junior
{6} Haig (1957b) noted that the specifi c name festae synonym of N. indicum. Additional specimens from
must be spelled festai in accordance with current Taiwan and the Ogasawara and Ryukyu Islands,
nomenculatorical practice. And while it is true the western Pacific, have shown that the differences
the initial generic assignment, Porcellanides, is Osawa considered size related are actually species
masculine (ICZN Code, 1999), the name festae is specifi c characters. Melin’s (1939) species has been
a patronym, and as such does not change endings reinstated (Osawa & Chan, 2010).
with generic reassignments. Although the feminine
“e” rather than masculine “i” was used by the author {14} Although Pachycheles holosericus Schmitt, 1918 was
without explanation, that is his original spelling and cited by name in Nininger (1918) and presumably
is to be maintained. Nobili (1901) did not specify a accompanied by a fi gure, there was no description
dedication to Enrico Festa, thus it is possible that the and according to Haig (1960) the text fi gure was
dedication was meant for his wife. unrecognizable to species. Schmitt (1921) described
this taxon as a new species.
{7} Although Bulletin of Marine Science, 23(3) was
supposed to have been published in September of {15} Buckup & Bond-Buckup (1999) included Pachycheles
1973, the publication was delayed and that issue did haigae as a valid species in the Brazilian fauna,
not appear in print until early 1974. perhaps unaware that Harvey & de Santo (1996)
had placed this taxon in synonymy with Pachycheles
{8} Ng et al. (2008) cited the footnote by Evenhuis (2003: laevidactylus.
17) explaining the problem with correct citations
of the author Guérin-Méneville. Guérin added the {16} Parapetrolisthes was established for Petrolisthes
honorifi c suffi x “Méneville” to his surname in 1836 tortugensis on the basis of the shape of the fi ngers.
after his Encyclopédie Méthodique was completed. However, the molecular analyses by Hiller et al. (2006)
Ng et al. (2008) choose to cite authorship of all and Rodriguez et al. (2006) suggested that this species
taxa published by this author prior to 1836 simply should be grouped with the Petrolisthes galathinus
as Guérin and Guérin-Méneville from 1836 onward. complex. The validity of the genus and its postulated
We have followed this same protocol. relationship with the Galatheidae were not supported
by these molecular studies. Nonetheless, it is retained
{9} Based on their molecular analyses, Rodriguez et al. as a valid genus until such time as revisionary studies
(2006) suggested that Megalobrachium soriatum determine its proper affi liation.
contained a cryptic species.
{17} The developmental and morphological characters
{10} Haig (1965, 1979) considered Neopetrolisthes ohshimai of larvae and adults of Petrocheles suggest a close
a junior synonym of N. maculatus and pointed out relationship between this genus and some galatheids
that the Indian and Pacifi c Ocean populations of N. (Hale, 1927; Wear, 1965; pers. obs. of one of the
maculatus had different patterns of spots. However, present authors, MO). Molecular analyses of Hiller
Osawa & Fujita (2001) noted that both spot-patterns et al. (2006) and Ahyong et al. (2009) suggested that
occurred in the Ryukyu Islands, western Pacifi c. Nor Petrocheles should be excluded from the porcellanid
were the two species distinguishable from one other clade or that the Galatheidae might be paraphyletic
by morphological characters, thus supporting the on the basis of an internally nested Porcellanidae.
status of N. ohshimai as a junior synonym. It was
also found that N. maculatus had various spot sizes {18} The genus Petrolisthes is the most species-rich genus
and patterns of reddish purple, red, or brown color on in the Porcellanidae. Several informal species groups
the carapace and pereopods. Further ecological and have been distinguished in this genus based on the
genetic studies are needed before these variations are adult and larval morphology (e.g., Haig, 1960; Osawa,
fully understood. 1995; Fujita et al., 2002). Molecular phylogenies
116
THE RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2010
by Stillman & Reeb (2001) and Rodriguez et al. {26} Certain characters of P. mesodactylon suggest a
(2006) show Petrolisthes as currently recognized is possible relationship between this species and
paraphyletic on the basis of nested positions of species Novorostrum securiger. It is possible that further
of Allopetrolisthes, Clastotoechus, Liopetrolisthes, study will show that P. mesodactylon actually should
Megalobrachium, and Parapetrolisthes. be assigned to Novorostrum.
{19} Haig (1960) emended the spelling from cabrilloa {27} Two forms of both Petrolithes militaris and P.
to cabrilloi to conform with the ICZN rule for scabriculus have been found in the western Pacifi c,
the formation of specifi c names based on modern each differing in coloration and habitats. Further
surnames. investigation is needed to determine if one or both
represent more than one taxon.
{20} Miyake & Nakasone (1966) determined that the
specimens reported by Melin (1939) as P. carinipes {28} Although Petrolisthes rathbunae was cited by name
did not agree with Heller’s (1861) taxon and proposed in Hilton (1916) and presumably accompanied by
the name Petrolisthes melini for those specimens. a fi gure, there was no description and according to
Similarly, Lewinsohn (1974) found differences Haig (1960), the text fi gure was unrecognizable to
between Melin’s (1939) material and the type of P. species. Schmitt (1921) described this taxon as a new
carinipes, but did not describe Melin’s material as species.
a new species. Recent studies suggest that P. melini
as defi ned by Miyake & Nakasone (1966) agrees {29} Melin (1939) proposed the replacement name
more closely with P. extremus Kropp & Haig, 1994 Petrolisthes teres for Petrolisthes inermis Haswell,
than with P. carinipes. If further study shows that P. 1882, preoccupied by Porcellana inermis Heller, 1862
melini and P. extremus are conspecifi c, P. melini has (= Petrolisthes hastatus Stimpson, 1858). Although
priority. the types of Petrolisthes teres should have been the
material described as P. inermis by Haswell (1882),
{21} The correct date of publication of Randall’s paper Melin (1939) used his non-type material from the
in the Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences, Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands to describe P. teres. Re-
Philadelphia is 1840 (Melville & Smith, 1987) examination of some Melin’s (1939) specimens has
shown that they are actually P. japonicus (De Haan,
{22} Whereas Ng et al. (2008) elected to omit the honorifi c 1849). Judging from the photographs of the syntypes
“de” for all French authors, we have chosen to retain of P. teres (= P. inermis Haswell, 1882), there is a
it for those authors commonly cited in Anomuran small spine on the anterior margin of the third segment
literature; e.g., de Saussure, de Saint Laurent. of the antennal peduncle. Such spine is absent in
P. japonicus. Among other morphologically allied
{23} The taxonomic relationship of Petrolisthes lamarckii congeners, the spine is present in P. elongatus, P.
with its presumed synonyms is unsatisfactory. kranjiensis, P. limicola, as well as those ‘P. inermis’
Examination by one of the current authors (MO) has reported by Miyake (1943) and ‘P. teres’ reported by
shown that specimens from various western Pacifi c Johnson (1970). The exact identity of P. teres has yet
localities have exhibited considerable variations in to be determined.
certain signifi cant characters, in addition to variations
in living color. Further study will undoubtedly show {30} Haig (1960) discussed the confusion that had existed
that several distinct taxa have been confounded under among the names applied to Petrolisthes tuberculosus.
the name P. lamarckii. She pointed out that although Ortmann (1897) argued
that Porcellana affi nis Gray, 1831 was undefi ned, thus
{24} Hendrickx & Harvey (1999) indicated that the not a homonym of P. affi nis Guérin, 1835, Gray’s
subspecies austrinus and the nominal subspecies lewisi description albeit brief, was suffi cient to validate
were not distinct and considered P. lewisi austinus a it. Consequently, Guérin’s (1835) P. affi nis was not
synonym. available.
{25} Gore (1983) placed P. cessacii in synonymy with {31} The validity of Pisidia bluteli, P. longicornis and P.
P. marginatus on the basis of adult morphological longimana as distinct species has been the subject
characters, but cautioned that whether or not the of debate. Holthuis (1961) and Zariquiey Álvarez
eastern and western Atlantic populations of the (1968) clearly distinguished the three species. In
species were reproductively isolated remained to contrast, García Raso (1987) found what he believed
be determined. At that time Gore believed that the to be a morphological cline that existed between P.
answer might be found in a comparison of the larval longicornis and P. longimana, and d’Udekem d’Acoz
morphology of the different populations. With the (1999) discussed his belief that P. bluteli was not
advances being made in molecular determinations, distinct from P. longicornis. However, Koukouras
the answer well may be found in examinations of et al. (2002) found constant characters that separated
the populations’ DNA. the three.
117
Osawa & McLaughlin: Checklist of world Porcellanidae
{32} Pisidia dispar and P. variabilis differ considerably LITERATURE CITED
from other congeners in such characters as carapace
convexity, rostral structure and orbital angle. The Ahyong, S. T. & D. O’Meally, 2004. Phylogeny of the Decapoda
possibility exists that these species should be placed Reptantia: Resolution using three molecular loci and morphology.
Raffl es Bulletin of Zoology 52: 673–693.
in a separate genus.
Ahyong, S. T., K. E. Schnabel, & E.W. Maas, 2009. Anomuran
{33} The taxonomy of Polyonyx biunguiculatus and P. phylogeny: new insights from molecular data. In: Martin, J. W.,
K. A. Crandall, & D. L. Felder (Eds.). Decapod Crustacean
obesulus is still problematic (see Osawa, 2007b) and
Phylogenetics. Crustacean Issues, 18. CRC Press, Boca Raton,
a review of specimens hitherto reported as the two
FL, New York, London. Pp. 399–414.
species as well as their synonyms is needed.
Audouin, V., 1826. Explication sommaire des planches de Crustacés
de l’Egypte et de la Syrie, publiées par Jules-Cesar Savigny,
{34} Werding (2001) suggested that P. hendersoni and P.
member de l’Institu; Offrant un exposé des caracters naturels
splendidus represented a distinct genus, although no
des generes avec la distinction des especes. Desription de
formal action was taken. l’Egypte, ou recueil des observation et des recherches que ont
ete faites en Égypte pendant l’Expedition de l’armée francaise.
{35} Chace’s (1956) subspecies of Porcellana platycheles, Histoire Naturelle, 1: 77–98. Paris.
P. p. africanus, was considered a distinct taxon Baker, W. H., 1905. Notes on South Australian decapod Crustacea.
by d’Udekem d’Acoz (1999) and elevated to full Part III. Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of
specifi c rank. No additional subspecies have been South Australia, 29: 252–269.
described. Veloso & Melo (1993) also considered Balss, H., 1913. Ostasiatische Decapoden. I. Die Galatheiden
P. paivacarvalhoi to be a junior synonym of P. und Paguriden. In: Dofl ein, F., Beiträge zur Naturgeschichte
platycheles. Ostasiens. Abhandlungen der Mathematisch-Physische Klasse
der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften,
München, Supplement 2(9): 1–85.
{36} In her revision of Porcellana, Haig (1978) established
four new genera for nine species formerly assigned to Balss, H., 1914. Decapode Crustaceen von den Giinea-Inseln,
the genus. Nonetheless, the retention of certain species Süd-Kamerun und dern Congogebiet. Ergebnisse der Zweiten
Deutschen Zentral-Afrika-Expedition 1910-1911 unter Führung
in Porcellana is questionable. Haig mentioned that P.
Adolph Friedrichs, Herzog zu Mecklenburg, 1 (Zoologie):
caparti and P. elegans should perhaps be reassigned
97–108.
to Enosteoides and Capilliporcellana, respectively.
Barnard, K. H., 1955. Additions to the fauna-list of South African
She believed that P. foresti appeared to be related
Crustacea and Pycnogonida. Annuals of the South African
to Ancyclocheles. Until the type materials of all
Museum, 43: 1–107.
three taxa are reexamined, the questions of generic
Benedict, J. E., 1901. The anomuran collections made by the Fish
placement remain ambiguous. However, based on the
Hawk Expedition to Porto Rico. Bulletin of the U. S. Fish
structures of the carapaces and chelipeds, at least P.
Commission, 20: 129–148.
caparti and P. foresti appear clearly different from
Billberg, G. J., 1820. Enumeratio insectorum in Museo Gust. Typis
species of Enosteoides and Ancylocheles.
Gadelianis, Holmiae. 138 pp.
Boas, J. E. V., 1880. Studier over decapodernes Slægtskabsforhold.
{37} Porcellana stimpsoni was briefl y described by A.
Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskabs Skrifter,
Milne-Edwards (1880). The presumably differentiating
naturvidenskabelig og mathema tisk Afdeling, (5)6: 25–210.
characters of A. Milne-Edwards’ taxon were found
Boone, L., 1930. Scientifi c results of the cruises of the yachts
to be the result of abnormal development of the left
“Eagle” and “Ara”, 1921–1928, William K. Vanderbilt,
cheliped and frontal region in the type specimen.
commanding. Crustacea: Ano mura, Macrura, Schizopoda,
Consequently, P. stimpsoni cannot be distinguished
Isopoda, Amphipoda, Mysidacea, Cirripedia, and Copepoda.
from P. sayana, and is considered a junior synonym Bulletin of the Vanderbilt Marine Museum, 3: 1–221.
of the latter species. (B. Werding, in litt.; see Lemaitre
Boone, L., 1932. The littoral crustacean fauna of the Galapagos
& Campos, 2000).
Islands. Part II. Anomura. Zoologica, New York, 14: 1–62.
Borradaile, L. A., 1898. On some crustaceans from the South
{38} According to Veloso & de Melo (1993) and Rodriguez
Pacifi c. Part II. Macrura Anomala. Proceedings of the Zoological
et al. (2005), Petrolisthes costai Rodriguez da Costa,
Society of London, 1898: 457–468.
1968 and Pisidia melloleitaoi Rodriguez da Costa,
Borradaile, L. A., 1900. On the Stomatopoda and Macrura brought
1968 could not be confi rmed as valid species.
by Dr Willey from the south seas. In: Willey, A., Zoological
results based on material from New Britain, New Guinea,
{39} According to Chace (1956), until suffi cient material Loyalty Islands and elsewhere, collected during the years
is available, the true generic status of Porcellana 1895, 1896 and 1897. Part IV. Cambridge, University Press.
mattosi Osorio, 1887, cannot be determined. Pp. 395–428.
Bosc, L. A. G., 1802. Histoire naturelle des Crustacés, contenant
leur description et leurs moeurs, avec fi gures dessinées d’après
nature. 2: 1–296. Paris, Deterville.
Boschi, E. E., 1963. Sobre dos especies de Pachycheles de la
Argentina (Crustacea, Anomura). Neotropica, 9(28): 31–37.
118