taxonID	type	description	language	source
E24987F8794DF920FF6D2BBFFCF4D884.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Australia, GBR, Lizard Island area — 1 ovigerous female (pcl. 3.0 mm), 1 non-ovigerous female (pcl. 2.8 mm), 1 male (pcl. 2.5 mm) (QM W 33500) — McGillivray reef, wall, LI 10 - 073, 14 ° 39.509 ’ S 145 ° 29.561 ’ E, 10 m, on Goniopora sp., coll. I. Marin, 0 4 Sept. 2010; 3 ovigerous females (pcl. 4.1, 4.1, 4.0 mm), 3 males (pcl. 2.7, 2.5, 2.3 mm) (QM W 33501) — Mermaid Cove — Little Vicky, patch reef, LI 10 - 055, 14 ° 38.852 ’ S 145 ° 27.150 ’ E, 10 – 12 m, on Goniopora sp., coll. I. Marin, 0 2 Sept. 2010; 1 ovigerous female (pcl. 5.0 mm, tl. 16 mm), 5 ovigerous females (pcl. 4.6, 3.6, 3.4, 3.2, 3.0 mm), 4 males (pcl. 3.0, 2.8, 2.5, 1.5 mm) (QM W 33502, W 33503) — reef on the left side of Bird Islet, LI 10 - 105, 14 ° 41.571 ’ S 145 ° 27.986 ’ E, 0.5 – 1 m, on Goniopora sp., coll. I. Marin, 0 8 Sept. 2010; 1 ovigerous female (pcl. 4.6 mm) — reef on the left side of Bird Islet, LI 10 - 105, 14 ° 41.571 ’ S 145 ° 27.986 ’ E, 0.5 – 1 m, on Turbinaria sp., coll. I. Marin, 0 9 Sept. 2010.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F8794DF920FF6D2BBFFCF4D884.taxon	description	Description. Medium-sized pontoniine shrimp species with smooth subcylindrical body. Carapace swollen, smooth, with antennal tooth, without hepatic tooth. Rostrum long, compressed, acute distally; dorsal rostral carina well developed reaching to 1 / 3 of the carapace length, rostral formula 1 – 2 + 5 – 7 / 0 (Fig. 1 a – d); ventral rostral carina feebly developed, toothless. Orbit well developed, deep, unarmed; inferior orbital angle bluntly rounded. Abdominal somites smooth; pleura of abdominal somites I – V rounded (Fig. 1 a). Telson (Fig. 1 e) about 4 times as long as proximal width, narrow medially and distally, with 3 pairs of medium submarginal dorsal spines at 0.6, 0.75 and 0.9 of telson length; distal margin of telson armed with two hook-like projections (teeth) and distinct notch medially, notch covered with numerous simple setae. Eyes well developed, large, with cylindrical eyestalk and with ovate cornea. Antennule well developed; basal segment about twice longer than wide, with distolateral angle bearing large acute tooth and small medial convex projection (lobe); with small ventro-mesial tooth. Antenna well developed, basicerite large, about twice as long as wide, without distoventral tooth; scaphocerite wide, about twice as long as maximal width, with well developed acute distolateral tooth not reaching the level of the distal margin of the blade. Pereiopod I with slender unarmed segments; carpus about 6 times as long as wide, about twice length of chela and slightly longer than merus; propodus cylindrical, about twice longer than wide; fingers slender, equal to palm, with straight, smooth cutting margins. Pereiopods II similar in shape and unequal size (Figs. 1 a). Major pereiopod II (Fig. 1 a, f) with relatively robust and smooth segments; carpus triangular, flaring distally, overlapping carpo-propodal articulation, with smooth distal margin (Fig. 1 f, g); palm (Fig. 1 f) cylindrical, about 4 times as long as wide, slightly swollen in central part; fingers robust, 3 times as long as wide, about 3 times shorter than length of the palm; fixed finger (pollex) with two large teeth in central part; movable finger with large medial tooth. Minor pereiopod II (Fig. 1 g) similar to major in proportions but smaller in size and more slender, especially in males (Fig. 1 d). Pereiopod III with smooth robust proximal and slender distal segments; carpus about 2.5 times longer than wide, about half of length of propodus and merus; propodus relatively slender, about 6 times as long as proximal width, with smooth unarmed margins; dactylus simple, with simple, slender, curved unguis. Pereiopods III – V similar. Uropods slender, slightly exceeding telson; distolateral margin of uropodal exopod rectangular with small movable distolateral spine, fixed tooth absent.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F8794DF920FF6D2BBFFCF4D884.taxon	discussion	Remarks. The examined specimens are clearly similar to the original description of the species given by Bruce (1970). For the difference from other species of the genus see below. Coloration. Females. Generally body and appendages transparent; cornea and eyestalk brightly white; antennula and antenna transparent with white transverse bands; carapace with medium uniformly white spot situated behind orbital angle, with large dorsal patch consisting of red or orange centrally fringed with white broad band; similar dorsal patches on each of abdominal somites I – III and, sometimes, on abdominal somite IV; pleura and ventral margins of abdominal somites I – IV with large white spots; abdominal somite VI with proximal white transverse band; telson and uropods transparent with distal white markings; chelipeds and ambulatory pereiopods generally transparent with numerous transverse broad white bands and small violet or red dots between the bands. Some color variation is observed for the specimens of the species from the different localities. Thus, two ovigerous females from Taiwan (Fig. 2 A, B) have large circular orange-white patches on the dorsal surface of abdominal somites I, III and IV while specimens from Australia (Fig. 2 D – F) mainly possess more narrow bicolor or uniformly white patches on abdominal somites I – III and only a small white marking presents on abdominal somite IV (Fig. 2 C). At the same time, form of dorsal patches, their coloration and intensity significantly vary in specimens collected from the Lizard Island area (Fig. 2 C – G). Specimens collected from shallow water (about 1 m depth) colonies of Goniopora sp. are mainly transparent (Fig. 2 G) while specimens from deeper dwelling colonies of the same coral possess brighter coloration. Probably transparent coloration is related to the problem of concealment of brightly colored body on the surface of shallow water corals; brightly colored animals are probably more visible for predators. Males. Body and appendages transparent; cornea and eyestalk brightly white; antennula and antenna mainly transparent with several white spots; carapace with large dorsal patch red or orange in the center, fringed with a white band and large white spot situated behind the orbital angle; with similar dorsal patches on abdominal somites I, II, III; pleura and ventral margins of abdominal somites I – IV with large white spots and bands, respectively; abdominal somite VI with white proximal band; telson transparent with distal white band; chelipeds and ambulatory pereiopods generally transparent with numerous transverse white bands and tiny red dots. Coloration of males also varies from very intensive with well marked dorsal and lateral white patches and bands (Fig. 2 H, I) to less colored (Fig. 2 J) and completely transparent. Immature individuals are always completely transparent.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F8794DF920FF6D2BBFFCF4D884.taxon	description	Measurements. The largest collected ovigerous female has pcl. 5.0 mm, tl. 16 mm; the largest male — pcl. 3.0 mm, tl. 12. Host. The species was found in association with different species of the genus Goniopora de Blainville, 1830 (Hexacorallia, Scleractinia, Poritidae) (Fig. 14 Ab, B, 15 A, B) and once on the surface of a coral of the genus Turbinaria Oken, 1815 (Hexacorallia, Scleractinia, Dendrophyllidae). Other macrosymbionts found on the surface of Goniopora spp. in the observed area are pontoniine shrimp Periclimenes gonioporae Bruce, 1994 (Marin & Caley 2011) and syngnathid fish of the genus Bulbonaricus (Pisces, Syngnathidae), probably belonging to undescribed species.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F8794DF920FF6D2BBFFCF4D884.taxon	distribution	Distribution. The distribution of the species needs verification as many records of H. corallicola belongs to H. fungicola sp. nov. (see below) or possibly undescribed species associated with actinian host (see above). Presently, the presence of the species is confirmed from Hong Kong (the type locality), Taiwan and the Great Barrier Reef of Australia; probably widely distributed Indo-West Pacific species.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87948F92EFF6D2F1FFC85DA1D.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Australia, GBR, Lizard Island area — Holotype, ovigerous female (pcl. 5.2 mm, tl. 19 mm) (QM W 33504), allotype male (pcl. 5.2 mm, tl. 21 mm) (QM W 33520) — Lagoon between Palfrey Island and south, near Channel, patch reef, LI 10 - 051, 14 ° 41.927 ’ S 145 ° 27.007 ’ E, 8 m, on Heliofungia actiniformis, coll. I. Marin, 0 1 Sept. 2010; 1 ovigerous female, dissected (pcl. 5.8 mm), 4 males (pcl. 4.0, 4.0, 3.0, 2.7 mm) (QM W 33505) — Lagoon, Channel, patch reef, LI 10 - 039, 14 ° 41.229 ’ S 145 ° 27.296 ’ E, 10 m, on Heliofungia actiniformis, coll. I. Marin, 31 Aug. 2010; 1 ovigerous female (pcl. 6.2 mm, tl. 24 mm) (QM W 33503) — Mermaid Cove, North Point, back reef, LI 10 - 047, 14 ° 38.883 ’ S 145 ° 27.003 ’ E, 6 – 8 meters, on Heliofungia actiniformis, coll. I. Marin, 0 1 Sept. 2010; 1 ovigerous female (pcl. 5.1 mm), 1 male (pcl. 2.5 mm) (QM W 33507) — Lagoon, patch reef, LI 10 - 059, 14 ° 41.973 ’ S 145 ° 26.919 ’ E, 6 m, on Heliofungia actiniformis, coll. I. Marin, 0 2 Sept. 2010; 1 ovigerous female (pcl. 3.5 mm), 1 male (pcl. 4.0 mm) (QM W 33508) — High Rock, back reef, LI 10 - 085, 14 ° 49.435 ’ S 145 ° 33.161 ’ E, 10 – 12 m, on Heliofungia actiniformis, coll. I. Marin, 0 6 Sept. 2010.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87948F92EFF6D2F1FFC85DA1D.taxon	description	Description. Large-sized pontoniine shrimp with cylindrical slightly depressed body. Carapace swollen in central part, smooth, with large antennal tooth, without hepatic or supraorbital teeth (Figs. 4). Rostrum slender, compressed, pointing distally, turned forward, reaching to distal margin of the second antennular segment; rostral formula 1 – 2 + 4 – 5 / 0 (Fig. 4); dorsal rostral carina well developed reaching to distal third of carapace length, with small dorsal teeth; ventral rostral carina poorly developed, unarmed; proximal lateral rostral lamina feebly developed (Fig. 4 b). Orbit well developed, deep, unarmed; inferior orbital angle bluntly produced distally. Pterygostomial angle produced, bluntly rounded distally. Abdominal somites smooth; pleura of abdominal somites I – V rounded (Fig. 1). Telson (Fig. 5 d, e) relatively stout, about 2.5 times as long as proximal width, narrow medially and distally, with 3 pairs of medium submarginal dorsal spines at 0.6, 0.8 and 0.95 of telson length; distal margin of telson armed with two hook-like projections (teeth) turned downward, with distinct notch medially, notch covered with numerous simple setae (Fig. 5 d, e). Eyes well developed, large; eyestalk smooth, cylindrical, about 1.5 times as long as wide; cornea well developed, medium, subovate (Fig. 4 b). Antennula (Fig. 5 a) well developed; basal segment stout, about 1.5 times longer than wide, with well developed slender acute stylocerite, distolateral angle with large acute triangular tooth and small rounded lobe medially (Fig. 5 b); ventromedial tooth small; intermediate segment stout, about as long as wide; distal segment stout, as long as wide, equal to previous segment length; proximal part of upper antennular flagellum with 7 or 8 segments, shorter ramus with more than 15 segments; about 7 or 8 groups of aesthetascs present. Antenna (Fig. 5 c) well developed, basicerite about 1.5 times longer than wide, smooth, without distoventral tooth; scaphocerite wide, about twice longer than maximal width, reaching distal margin of antennular peduncle (Fig. 4 b), distolateral tooth well developed, acute, small, not reaching to distal margin of blade. Mouthparts characteristic for the genus and previously described species. Maxilliped III (Fig. 5 f) with slender unarmed segments; ischiomeral sement about 6 times longer than wide; antepenultimate segment about 3.5 times longer than wide; penultimate segment tapering distally, about 2.5 times longer than wide. Pereiopod I with relatively slender segments, without specific features; coxal segment as long as wide, with distoventral lobe; basis as long as wide; ischium about 3 times longer than wide; merus slender, about 3 times as long as wide; carpus about 5 times as long as wide, slightly shorter than carpus; propodus about 5 times longer than wide, about twice longer than chela, slightly flaring distally; palm cylindrical, about 2.5 times longer than wide; fingers slender, about 4 times as long as wide, with straight, smooth cutting margins and simple tips. Pereiopods II similar in shape and size (Figs. 3, 6 a); with robust and smooth segments; coxal segment as long as wide, with small distoventral lobe; basis as long as wide; ischium about 3 times longer than wide; merus robust, about 3 times longer than wide, with straight lateral margins; carpus triangular, stout, flaring distally, overlapping carpo-propodal articulation, with smooth distal margin (Fig. 6 a); palm (Fig. 6 a) cylindrical, smooth, about 4 times as long as wide, with straight margins; fingers relatively slender, about twice shorter than palm, about 4 times as long as wide; fixed finger (pollex) compressed, about 3 times longer than wide, with two medial teeth situated on proximal third of length, with simple sharp curved tip, with small medial depression opposite to tooth on movable finger; movable finger (dactylus) slender, compressed, with large tooth situated on proximal third of the cutting margin, with simple curved tip (Fig. 6 b). Pereiopod III with smooth slender unarmed segments (Fig. 6 c); coxal segment as long as wide, unarmed; basis as long as wide; ischium robust, about twice longer than wide; merus slender, about 5 times as long as wide; carpus about twice longer than wide, about third of the length of propodus and merus; propodus relatively slender, about 6.5 times as long as proximal its width, with smooth unarmed margins, without ventral or distoventral teeth; dactylus simple, with basal part about 1.5 times as long as wide, with simple slender and curved unguis (Fig. 6 d). Pereiopods III – V similar. Pleopods normal, without specific features. Uropods slender, slightly exceeding telson; distolateral margin of uropodal exopod rectangular with small movable distolateral spine, fixed tooth absent. Males are morphologically similar to females, but smaller in size, with more developed equal pereiopods II (Fig. 3 b). Differential diagnosis. The species clearly differs from its congeners in having larger size, equal large and stout pereiopods II both in females and males, slender and large fingers of pereiopods II, different proportions of distal segments of pereiopod III. The distinctive coloration and association with different host coral also clearly separate the species from the congeners. Coloration. Body, appendages, telson and uropods generally transparent covered with numerous tiny red dots; two irregular large uniform whitish-green patches covering dorsal and lateral surfaces of carapace and abdominal somites II – IV, respectively (Fig. 7 A – E). Males possess smaller and less marked dorsal patches; young individuals completely transparent (Fig. 7 F). The new species is clearly distinguished from H. corallicola by mainly transparent appendages covered with tiny red dots and the presence on only two large uniformly white or creamy white patches on carapace and abdomen. For other color differences of the species from the congeners see below. Measurements. The largest collected ovigerous female has pcl. 6.2 mm, tl. 24 mm; the largest male — pcl. 5.2 mm, tl. 21 mm. Host. Mature individuals (ovigerous females and large-sized males) were found exclusively in association with anemone-like fungiid coral Heliofungia actiniformis (Quoy & Gaimard, 1833) (Hexacorallia, Scleractinia, Fungiidae) (Fig. 15 E); numerous probably non-mature transparent individuals or, possibly young males, were usually observed on the surface of large mushroom corals like Fungia spp, Herpolitha sp. or Ctenaspis echinata (Pallas, 1766) (Fungiidae). Other macrosymbionts found on Heliofungia at the Lizard Island are pontoniine shrimp Cuapetes kororensis (Bruce, 1977) (Marin & Caley 2011) and an unidentified species of the pontoniine shrimp genus Ancylomenes Okuno & Bruce, 2010.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87948F92EFF6D2F1FFC85DA1D.taxon	etymology	Etymology. The species is named after its association with mushroom corals of the family Fungiidae (Hexacorallia, Scleractinia), mainly Heliofungia actiniformis (Quoy & Gaimard, 1833).	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87948F92EFF6D2F1FFC85DA1D.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Probably widespread Indo-West Pacific species; numerous photos of the species are published on the WWW from different localities through the Indo-West Pacific region. In this paper the species reported from the Great Barrier Reef of Australia (type locality) only.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87947F930FF6D2F41FAD5DB51.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Australia, GBR, Lizard Island area — Holotype, ovigerous female (pcl. 4.0 mm, tl. 15 mm), 1 male (pcl. 3.2 mm, tl. 15) (QM W 33509), 2 males (pcl. 3.2, 3.5 mm) (QM W 33521) — Lagoon, Channel, bommies and patch reef, LI 10 - 001, 14 ° 41.317 ’ S 145 ° 27.835 ’ E, 10 – 12 meters, on Physogyra lichtensteini, coll. I. Marin, 26 Aug. 2010; 2 ovigerous females, dissected (pcl. 4.1, 3.8 mm), 2 males, dissected (pcl. 4.0, 2.7 mm) (QM W 33510) — Lagoon between Palfrey Island and southern patch reef, LI 10 - 051, 14 ° 41.927 ’ S 145 ° 27.007 ’ E, 8 m, on Physogyra lichtensteini, coll. I. Marin, 0 1 Sept. 2010; 2 ovigerous female (pcl. 3.0, 2.8 mm), 5 males (pcl. 3.0, 2.5, 2.2, 2.2, 2.2 mm) (QM W 33511) — McGillivray Reef, wall, LI 10 - 073, 14 ° 39.509 ’ S 145 ° 29.561 ’ E, 12 – 15 m, on Physogyra lichtensteini, coll. I. Marin, 0 4 Sept. 2010.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87947F930FF6D2F41FAD5DB51.taxon	description	Description. Medium-sized pontoniine shrimp with cylindrical slightly depressed body. Carapace swollen and smooth, with large antennal tooth, without hepatic or supraorbital teeth (Fig. 9 c – g). Rostrum long, slender, distally acute, compressed, reaching to distal margin of second antennular segment; rostral formula 2 + 4 – 5 / 0 (Fig. 9 c – g); dorsal rostral carina well developed reaching to distal third of the carapace length, with small dorsal teeth; ventral rostral carina poorly developed, unarmed; proximal lateral rostral lamina feebly developed (Fig. 9 b). Orbit well developed, deep, unarmed; inferior orbital angle bluntly produced distally. Pterygostomial angle produced, bluntly rounded distally. Abdominal somites smooth; pleura of abdominal somites I – V rounded (Fig. 8). Telson (Fig. 10 e – h) about 3 times as long as proximal width, narrow in central part, with 3 pairs of medium sized submarginal dorsal spines at 0.5, 0.7 and 0.85 of telson length; distal margin of telson armed with two hook-like projections (teeth) turned downward and distinct notch medially, notch covered with numerous simple setae (Fig. 10 e – h). Eyes (Fig. 9 b) well developed, large; eyestalk smooth, cylindrical, about 1.5 times as long as wide; cornea well developed, large, subovate. Antennula (Fig. 10 a, b) well developed; basal segment relatively slender, about twice longer than wide, with well developed slender acute stylocerite, with distolateral angle bearing large acute triangular tooth and small medial lobe; ventromedial tooth small (Fig. 10 b); intermediate segment stout, about 1.5 times as long as wide, with lateral margin slightly produced; distal segment stout, as long as wide, equal to previous segment; proximal part of upper antennular flagellum with 5 or 6 separate segments, shorter ramus with more than 15 – 20 segments; about 7 or 8 groups of aesthetascs present. Antenna (Fig. 10 c) well developed, basicerite about 1.5 times longer than wide, smooth, without distoventral tooth; scaphocerite wide, about 2.5 times longer than maximal width, overreaching antennular peduncle, distolateral tooth well developed, acute, not reaching to the distal margin of the blade. Mouthparts characteristic for the genus and previously described species (see Bruce 1970, fig. 3 for H. corallicola). Maxilliped III (Fig. 10 d) with slender segments; ischiomeral segment about 4.5 times longer than wide, antepenultimate segment about 4 times as long as wide; penultimate segment slender, about 2.5 times as long as wide. Pereiopod I (Fig. 11 a) with relatively slender segments; coxa as long as wide, with distoventral lobe; basis as long as wide; ischium about 3.5 times longer than wide; merus slender, about 3.5 times as long as wide; carpus about 5.5 times as long as wide, slightly shorter than carpus; propodus about 5.5 times longer than wide, about twice as long as chela, slightly flaring distally; palm (Fig. 11 b) cylindrical, about 2.5 times longer than wide; fingers slender, about 4 times as long as wide, with straight, smooth cutting margins and simple tips (Fig. 4 B). Pereiopods II similar in shape and slightly unequal size (Figs. 8). Major pereiopod II (Fig. 11 c, d) with relatively robust and smooth segments; coxa as long as wide, with small distoventral lobe; basis as long as wide; ischium about 3.5 times longer than wide; merus robust, about 3 times longer than wide, with straight lateral margins; carpus triangular, stout, flaring distally, overlapping carpo-propodal articulation, with smooth distal margin (Fig. 11 d); palm (Fig. 11 d) cylindrical, smooth, about 5 times as long as wide, slightly swollen in central region; fingers robust, about 3.5 times shorter than palm; fixed finger (pollex) (Fig. 11 e) relatively stout, compressed laterally, about 2.5 times longer than wide, with two medial teeth and simple sharp curved tip, with small medial depression opposite to tooth on movable finger; movable finger (dactylus) stout, compressed, with large tooth situated on proximal third of cutting margin, with simple curved tip. Minor pereiopod II generally similar in proportions and structure to the major pereiopod II; about 1.5 times smaller in size than major pereiopod II (Fig. 11 f – h). Pereiopod III with smooth slender unarmed segments (Fig. 11 i); coxal segment as long as wide, unarmed; basis as long as wide; ischium robust, about 2.5 times longer than wide; merus slender, about 4.5 times as long as wide; carpus about 2.5 times longer than wide, about half of length of propodus and merus; propodus relatively slender, about 5.5 times as long as proximal width, with smooth unarmed margins, without ventral or distoventral teeth; dactylus simple, with basal part about 1.5 times as long as wide, with simple slender, curved unguis (Fig. 11 j). Pereiopods III – V similar. Pleopods normal, without specific features. Uropods slender, slightly exceeding telson; distolateral margin of uropodal exopod rectangular with small movable distolateral spine, fixed tooth absent. Males are morphologically similar to female, but smaller in size, with better developed and unequal pereiopods II (Fig. 8 b, 12). Differential diagnosis. The new species is mostly related and morphologically similar to Hamopontonia corallicola Bruce, 1970. Both species clearly differ from H. fungicola sp. by unequal pereiopods II (vs. equal in H. fungicola). From H. corallicola the new species can be mainly separated by deeper dorsal rostral carina (see Fig. 9), different coloration (see below) and association with the different coral host. Additional minor morphological differences between H. corallicola and the new species are: 1) more slender chelipeds in H. corallicola than in H. physogyra sp. nov., especially in males (see Figs. 1, 8) and 2) stouter fingers of pereiopods II in H. physogyra sp. nov. (see Figs. 1 f, g; 11 e, h). Coloration. Females. Generally body and appendages transparent; cornea brightly white, eyestalk transparent; antennula and antenna transparent fringed with white and small blue dots; carapace with large dorsal patch consisting of small white dots in the centre fringed with broad white band; similar dorsal patch situated on dorsal margin of abdominal somites III, pleura and ventral margins of abdominal somites III with large white markings; pleura of others abdominal somites with numerous small blue and white dots; telson and uropods transparent, fringed with blue and white dots; chelipeds and ambulatory pereiopods generally transparent covered with numerous white and blue dots. Coloration of the specimens also varies from specimens with well marked large dorsal patches (Fig. 13 A, B) to mostly transparent specimens (Fig. 13 E, F); in some specimens (Fig. 13 C, D) only a single dorsal patch on carapace presents. Coloration of males is generally similar to coloration of females. Body and appendages transparent; cornea brightly white, eyestalk transparent; antennula, antenna, appendages and telson transparent fringed with white and blue small dots; carapace with large dorsal patch consisting of small white dots in the centre fringed with broad white band; similar dorsal patch situated on dorsal margin of abdominal somites III (Fig. 13 G); immature individuals (Fig. 13 H) completely transparent with small white and blue dots on body and appendages. The new species clearly differs from congeners by its unique coloration having 1) body and appendages covered with numerous white and blue dots (vs. covered with white broad bands and tiny reds dots in H. corallicola and generally transparent covered with tiny red dots in H. fungicola sp. nov.); 2) coloration of dorsal patches consisting of small white spots forming a kind of ornamentation in the centre of the patch fringed with broad white or creamy band (vs. dorsal patches red or orange in the centre fringed with white band in H. corallicola and uniformly white or creamy in H. fungicola sp. nov.) and 3) by telson and uropods generally transparent fringed with a row of small white and blue dots (vs. completely transparent in H. corallicola and H. fungicola sp. nov.). From H. corallicola the new species also differs by the absence of white spots behind the orbits of carapace. The presence of these white lateral spots on carapace is characteristic only for H. corallicola. Measurements. The largest collected ovigerous female has pcl. 4.0 mm, tl. 15 mm; the largest male — pcl. 3.2 mm, tl. 15. Host. The species was found exclusively in association with caryophyllid grape bubble coral Physogyra lichtensteini Milne-Edwards & Haime, 1851 (Hexacorallia, Scleractinia, Caryophyllidae) (Fig. 15 C). The other species found inhabiting the same host is Vir smiti Fransen & Holthuis, 2007 (Marin & Caley 2011) but both species have never been seen inhabiting the same host together.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87947F930FF6D2F41FAD5DB51.taxon	etymology	Etymology. The species is named after its association with caryophyllid coral of the genus Physogyra Quelch, 1884 (Hexacorallia, Scleractinia, Caryophyllidae), P. lichtensteini Milne-Edwards & Haime, 1851.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
E24987F87947F930FF6D2F41FAD5DB51.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Presently known from its type locality, Lizard Island, the Great Barrier Reef of Australia only.	en	Marin, Ivan (2012): The “ Hamopontonia corallicola ” Bruce, 1970 species complex (Crustacea, Decapoda, Palaemonidae): new records and new species from the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Zootaxa 3272: 35-56, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.208881
