identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03DD87DAFFBF124628EEFB6187611FAD.text	03DD87DAFFBF124628EEFB6187611FAD.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lyphira Galil 2009	<div><p>Lyphira Galil, 2009: 300 .</p><p>Type species. Philyra heterograna Ortmann, 1892, by original designation.</p><p>Remarks. Galil (2009) separated Lyphira from Phylira Leach, 1817 (type species Cancer globus Fabricius, 1775) by its members possessing an ovate exopod of the third maxilliped, a transversely narrow male first pleonal somite of with only somite 1 free and somites 2–6 fused, with a subterminal denticle present on somite 6, the male telson is free and the G1 has a short apical process. The fused second to sixth male pleonal somites of Lyphira, with a shallow suture between somites 5 and 6, and with a distal tubercle medially easily distinguish it from Philyra s. str., which has no visible suture between the fused male pleonal somites and there is also no subdistal tubercle on somite 6.</p><p>Galil (2009) separated the four species of Lyphira she recognised using the degree of granulation on the carapace, proportions of the exopod of the third maxilliped, strength of the endostomial spine, and proportions of the cheliped merus. In addition to her characters, we also use the shape of the posterior carapace margin, width-length ratio of the P5 merus, structure of G1 and vulva to separate taxa. Ten species are now included in Lyphira: L. heterograna (Ortmann, 1892), L. acutidens Chen, 1987, L. natalensis Galil, 2009, L. ovata Galil, 2009, L. perplexa Galil, 2009, L. georgei Trivedi, Soni &amp; Vachhrajani, 2016, L. chomel n. sp., L. ngankee n. sp., L. linda n. sp., and L. bellagrana n. sp.</p><p>Comparative material. Philyra globus (Fabricius, 1775): 1 male (17.3 × 18.0 mm) (ZRC 2014.0054), Kasimedu Fish Landing, Chennai, eastern India, coll. Z. Jaafar, 23 November 2004. Philyra samia Galil, 2009: 1 male (19.1 × 20.6 mm), 1 female (16.7 × 17.5 mm) (ZRC 2022.1030), South Africa, coll. Oceanographic Research Institute, through S. Fennessy, 8 December 2006. Lyphira perplexa Galil, 2009: 1 male (23.3 × 23.3 mm), 1 female (20.7 × 20.4 mm) (ZRC 2010.00871), Karachi Fish Harbour, Pakistan, coll. Q. Kazmi, 9 September 1976 ; 4 males, 3 females (ZRC 2001.0904), Tranquebar, Tamil Nadu, southeastern India, coll. N.K. Ng &amp; A.S. Fernando, 16–24 March 2001; 1 male (ZRC 2014.0061), station B, Iraq, Persian Gulf, coll. M. Almalicky, 2010; 1 male (ZRC 2014.0079), off Basra, Iraq, Persian Gulf, coll. M. Naser, 2009 .</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87DAFFBF124628EEFB6187611FAD	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo;Ng, Peter K. L.	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo, Ng, Peter K. L. (2024): On the genus Lyphira Galil, 2009 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Leucosiidae), with descriptions of four new species from the West Pacific. Zootaxa 5476 (1): 358-392, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29
03DD87DAFFBC124228EEFEE5803F1CEB.text	03DD87DAFFBC124228EEFEE5803F1CEB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lyphira heterograna (Ortmann 1892)	<div><p>Lyphira heterograna (Ortmann, 1892)</p><p>(Figs. 1A‒D, 2, 3A‒C, 6A, 7A‒C, 9A, 10A, B, 11A, B, 13A, 14A, 15A–C, 16A, B, 17A‒G, 21A)</p><p>Philyra heterograna Ortmann, 1892: 582, pl. 26, fig. 17; Ihle 1918: 315; Balss 1922: 128; Urita 1926: 38; T. Sakai 1937: 158, text fig. 33; Uchida 1949: 717, fig. 2075; Miyake, 1961 b: 171; Miyake et al. 1962: 127; T. Sakai, 1965: 48; 1976: 111, pl. 32, fig. 3, text fig. 63a; Serène 1968: 46; Takeda &amp; Miyake 1970: 230; Kim 1973: 306, pl. 77, fig. 67a, b, text fig. 99; T. Sakai 1976: 111, text fig. 63a, pl. 32 fig. 3; Takeda 1982: 101, fig. 297; Dai et al. 1986: 78, fig. 39.2, pl. 9.7; Chen 1987: fig. 2; Dai &amp; Yang 1991: 86, fig. 39.2, pl. 9.7; Takeda 1993: 56; Muraoka 1998: 19; Komai 1999: 82; K. Sakai 1999: 18, fig. 1b, pl. 7C; Ng et al. 2001: 9, fig. 3a; Chen &amp; Sun 2002: 379, text fig. 169I, pl. 14.4; Takeda et al. 2006: 191; Ng et al. 2008: 93; Galil 2009: 300 (in part).</p><p>Philyra pisum . — Nobili 1903: 11. (not Philyra pisum De Haan, 1841 = Pyrhila pisum (De Haan, 1841)) .</p><p>Philyra peitahoensis Shen, 1932: 18, pl. 1.1-2, text figs. 10–12, 16b; Serène 1968: 46.</p><p>Philyra anatum .— Rathbun 1910: 312. (not Cancer anatum Herbst, 1783).</p><p>Lyphira heterograna .— Ng et al. 2017: 48.</p><p>Type material. Lectotype: male (12.4 × 12.2 mm), MZS Cru 3191 (specimen number Ortmann 658), Tokyo Bay, Japan, coll. L. Döderlein, 1880–1881.</p><p>Other material examined. 1 male (16.5 × 16.9 mm), KPM NH 0130526, 1 male (15.2 × 15.9 mm) KPM NH 0130527, Mikawa-Isshiki, Aichi, Japan, ca. 50 km south of Nagoya City, central Japan, T. Odawara collection, coll. 20 November 1958 . 14 males (16.4 × 16.3 mm, 16.4 × 16.6 mm, 16.5 × 17.6 mm, 16.6 × 17.0 mm, 16.6 × 17.2 mm, 17.1 × 17.6 mm, 17.2 × 18.1 mm, 17.5 × 17.9 mm, 17.6 × 17.5 mm, 17.7 × 18.7 mm, 18.1 × 18.4 mm, 18.4 × 18.9 mm, 18.9 × 20.0 mm, 1 broken), 5 females (14.9 × 15.0 mm, 16.8 × 17.3 mm, 17.4 × 17.6 mm, 17.5 × 17.6 mm, 17.5 × 17.6 mm), KPM NH 0103043, Isshiki, Aichi, central Japan, coll. T. Sakai, 1967 ; 2 males (8.8 × 9.5 mm, 8.8 × 9.3 mm), NHM 1930.11.14.5–6 (paratypes of Philyra peitahoensis Shen, 1932), Pei-Tai-Ho, Peichihli Bay, northern China, coll. S.S. King, summer 1926 ; 2 males (14.2 × 14.4 mm, 14.0 × 14.4 mm), 2 females (13.5 × 13.7 mm, 11.7 × 11.7 mm), NHM 2006.558–561 (ex 1912.12.15.31–43), Chusan, South Korea, 10–14 fathoms (18–25 m), coll. P. Basset-Smith, no date .</p><p>Diagnosis. Carapace approximately as broad as long, or slightly longer than broad, dorsal surface covered with small and minute granules, large, more prominent granules on cardiac, branchial and intestinal regions, sparse granules on hepatic region (Figs. 1A, 2A, B, 3A–C, 6A); frontal margin granulated; postfrontal lobe slightly convex with slight concave medially (Figs. 1B, 11A, B); endostomial spine low, barely visible from dorsal view (Figs. 1A, B, 2A, B, 13A, 14A); lateral margin of carapace with row of small granules interspersed by larger granules; posterior margin gently convex, with large granule medially and on each posterolateral border (Figs. 1A, 2A, B, 3A–C, 6A); posterior carapace margin sinuous, with large granule medially and on each posterolateral corner, with margin between them gently concave to almost straight (Figs. 1A, 2A, B, 3A–C, 6A, 10A‒B). Third maxilliped exopod 2.9 times as long as broad, forming petaliform structure with convex outer margin (Figs. 1C, 2D, 11A, B, 17A). Chelipeds subequal; merus, carpus and chela surfaces smooth or covered with low, small rounded granules (Figs. 1A, 2A–C, 3A–C); chela stout, palm surface smooth, large granules on lower outer surface; fingers longer than length of palm; pollex slightly bent, cutting edge lined with denticles; dactylus 1.4 times as long as palm, row of small granules on upper margin, cutting edge with median large tooth, remaining of edge with small denticles (Fig. 15A–C). P2–P5 slender, short (Figs. 1A, 2A‒C, 3A, B); merus distinctly longer than carpus and propodus, dactylus longer than propodus, lanceolate; fourth leg shortest, with merus 4.3 times as long as broad, margins lined with small granules, more prominent on ventral margin (Fig. 16A, B). Thoracic sternites transversely narrow (Figs. 2D, 7A–C). Pleon narrow, slender, long; somites 2–6 fused, forming elongate trapezoidal plate, shallow suture just visible between somites 5 and 6, surface smooth; somite 6 longitudinally subrectangular, surface with one granule medially; telson triangular, longer than wide (Figs. 7A–C, 17B). G1 elongate, slender, slightly dilated on distal area; apical process long, very slightly bent, with blunt tip (Fig. 17C–G). Female pleon broad, convex, smooth, somites 2‒6 fused, suture between somites 2 and 3; telson shorter than its basal width (Fig. 9A); vulvae spaced far apart on sternite 6, each opening weakly crescent-shaped, relatively short, without opercular cover (Fig. 21A).</p><p>Description. Carapace approximately as broad as long, or slightly longer than broad (Figs. 1A, 2A, B, 3A‒C, 6A); most regions indistinct, branchio-cardiac grooves just visible, hepatic, cardiac and intestinal regions distinct, swollen; dorsal surface of carapace covered with minute and small granules, large, more prominent granules on cardiac, branchial, and intestinal regions, sparse granules on hepatic region. Frontal margin granulated, postfrontal lobe slightly convex with slight concave medially (Fig. 1B, 11A, B).Antennules folding transversely.Antennae short, longitudinally inserted between antennular fossa and base of ocular peduncle. Orbits small, rounded, upper orbital margin entire. Eyes short, retractable. Endostomial spine low, barely visible from dorsal view (Figs. 13A, 14A). Hepatic facet indistinct, rows of granules on lower margin continuing to distal part, almost reaching frontal margin; upper margin with sparse low granules. Lateral margin of carapace with row of small granules interspersed by larger granules; posterior margin gently convex, with large granule medially and on each posterolateral border (Figs. 1A, 2A, B, 3A–C, 6A). Posterior carapace margin sinuous, with large granule medially and on each posterolateral corner, with margin between them gently concave to almost straight (Figs. 1A, 2A, B, 3A–C, 6A, 10A, B). Pterygostomial region granulated; sub-branchial region almost smooth.</p><p>Third maxilliped exopod 2.9 times as long as broad, approximately as broad as basal part of endopod, forming petaliform structure with convex outer margin, with submarginal row of low to very low granules along inner margin; endopod with completely fused basis-ischium, distinctly longer than merus, with shallow submarginal sulcus near inner margin; merus triangular with blunt tip, margins unevenly granulated; palp on inner surface, dactylus longest (Figs. 1C, 2D, 11A, B, 17A). Coxa prominent, forming curved plate.</p><p>Chelipeds subequal; merus subcylindrical, surface granulated, larger granules on proximal area and along margins; carpus smooth but with granules along margin (Figs. 1A, 2A‒C, 3A‒C). Chela stout, palm surface smooth, upper and lower margins with row of granules, longitudinal row of relatively large granules on lower outer surface of palm; fingers longer than length of palm, surface with longitudinal sulcus flanked by row of small granules; pollex slightly bent, cutting edge lined with denticles; dactylus 1.4 times as long as palm, row of small granules on upper margin, cutting edge with median large tooth, remaining of edge with small denticles (Figs. 15A‒C).</p><p>P2–P5 slender, short (Figs. 1A, 2A‒C, 3A, C); merus distinctly longer than carpus and propodus; dactylus longer than propodus, lanceolate, terminating in corneous tips; second and third legs longest, fourth leg shortest, with merus 4.3 times as long as broad, margins lined with small granules (more prominent on ventral margin) (Fig. 16A, B).</p><p>Thoracic sternites transversely narrow (Fig. 7A‒C), surface finely granulated, larger granules laterally; sternites 1–3 completely fused without trace of sutures; sternite 3 separated from sternite 4 by shallow groove. Sternites 4–7 progressively narrower sternite 8 narrowest.</p><p>Male sternopleonal cavity deep, reaching to proximal distance between fused thoracic sternites 1–3; pleonal locking mechanism formed by lateral emargination of thoracic somite 5 and pleon (Fig. 7A–C).</p><p>Male pleon narrow, slender, long; somite 1 longitudinally narrow, wide; somites 2–6 fused, forming elongate trapezoidal plate, shallow suture just visible between somites 5 and 6, surface smooth; somite 6 longitudinally subrectangular, surface with one granule medially; telson triangular, longer than wide (Figs. 7A‒C, 17B).</p><p>G1 elongate, slender, slightly dilated on distal area; apical process long, very slightly bent, with blunt tip (Fig. 17C‒F); G2 small, apical process blunt (Fig. 17G).</p><p>Female sternopleonal cavity reaches distal part of sternite 1 (Fig. 9A). Female pleon broad, convex, smooth, somites 2‒6 fused, suture between somites 2 and 3; telson shorter than its basal width (Fig. 9A); vulvae spaced far apart on sternite 6, each opening weakly crescent-shaped, relatively short, narrow, without opercular cover (Fig. 21A).</p><p>Colour. Pale orange on dorsal surfaces (Sakai 1976: pl. 32 fig. 3).</p><p>Remarks. Komai (1999: 82) first reported on Ortmann’s (1892) type material in MZS from Tokyo Bay, listing five males and eight females as syntypes. Galil’s (2009: 300) comments on the type material are as follow: “ Syntypes: Japan. Tokyo Bay, 1880–1881, id. Ortmann, 1 ♂ cl 12.2 mm, 5 ♀♀ cl 10.8–17.0 mm (Musée zoologique, Strasbourg, reg. no. 658).—Same data, 4 ♂♂ cl 18.4–20.0 mm (Musée zoologique, Strasbourg, reg. no. 149) (the ♂ cl 12.2 mm is here designated the lectotype and the remaining specimens are now considered to be paralectotypes).” She did not state that she examined this material, and no figures of the types were provided. In the paper, she also synonymised Philyra peitahoensis Shen, 1932, and Philyra acutidens Chen, 1987, under L. heterograna . We, however, regard Philyra acutidens Chen, 1987, as a good species (see remarks for the species later).</p><p>There are two specimens of “ Philyra heterograna ” in the NHM (catalogue number NHM 1930.11.14.5–6) had been identified as “ Philyra tuberculata Stimpson ” by C. J. Shen and appear to have been deposited there before 1932. All his original labels are there, and they agree what he later describes as P. peitahoensis Shen, 1932 . The data matches the material he listed as types of P. peitahoensis and the specimens are clearly paratypes. The holotype of P. peitahoensis was stated to a male from with a catalogue number of 2032 (Shen 1932: 22). These specimens agree very well with what is here defined as L. heterograna s. str. and we agree with Galil’s (2009) action. As for P. acutidens, we prefer to recognise it as a separate species (see discussion for next taxon).</p><p>Galil’s (2009) concept of the species is somewhat confusing. She had material from Japan, China, East China Sea, Korea, Philippines, Malaysia (Pontian and Malacca) and Thailand, and she figured the overall dorsal and ventral habitus of one male specimen (NHM 1900.10.22.340–345) (Galil 2009: fig. 14) and its G1 (Galil 2009: fig. 12B); noting that it was from Indonesia. The specimen with this catalogue number, however, is from Malaysia; she actually did not list any material from Indonesia. We have examined her Malaysian material but not been able to find her specimens from the East China Sea and Philippines (they have not been returned at the time of writing). In her diagnosis of L. heterograna as well as her key to the species in the genus, she states that the endostomial spine of the species is not prominent (Galil 2009: 301 314). It is indeed the case for all the specimens from Japan, northern China and Korea (Figs. 13A–D, 14A–B) as well as some specimens we have examined from Singapore and Malaysia (Figs. 3E‒G, 13D, E). But this is not the case for specimens we have from southern China and Hong Kong, as well as most of the material from Thailand and Singapore, all of which have well developed endostomial spines (Figs. 13F‒L). Galil (2009: 301, 314) also states that L. heterograna has the exopod of the third maxilliped relatively narrow and “lozenge-like” or “paddle-shaped” but most of the specimens from southern China, Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore actually have proportionately much wider and expanded exopods (Figs. 11D‒J, 12). Only those from Japan, northern China and Korea, and some from Malaysia and Singapore have proportionately narrower exopods (Figs. 11A‒C, 17A, H). Detailed comparisons of all the material we have on hand shows that East and Southeast Asia has six different species under the name “ Lyphira heterograna ”, four of which are undescribed. They differ not just in the strength of the endostomial spines and third maxilliped exopod proportions but also in other characters.</p><p>Lyphira heterograna s. str. is distinct and is known for certain from Japan, Korea, Taiwan and northern China; all the specimens from this region, including the lectotype, have weak endostomial spines, the carapace is often longer than broad, the posterior carapace margin is usually sinuous and divided into two concave lobes by three large granules, the exopod of the third maxilliped is more slender, the chela are relatively longer, the cutting edges of the fingers of the chela are lined with low teeth and denticles, the ambulatory merus is relatively slender, the distal process of the G1 is relatively longer and gently curved, and the vulvae are spaced apart with the opening small (cf. diagnosis). Sakai (1976: text fig. 63a) depicts the distal part of the G1 of a specimen from Japan; it agrees very well with the present material from that country (Fig. 17C–F).</p><p>The carapace shape of L. heterograna s. str. varies slightly, with most of them longer than broad, although this is more pronounced in males. The proportions of the fingers on the chelae and ambulatory legs, however, do not vary. The carapace shape is a useful character to distinguish the various species in the L. heterograna species-group, but it is not always reliable as it does vary in L. heterograna s. str. to some degree. It is nevertheless important to note that for the other taxa in the species-group, the carapace shape is always more rounded and are never longer than broad.</p><p>Nobili (1903: 11–12) had three male specimens from Yokohama in Japan which he identified with P. heterograna but left it under his heading for Philyra pisum, presumably because he regarded the two species as very close and not easily separated. Ng et al. (2001: fig. 3a) shows a dried specimen ostensibly from Kaohsiung in Taiwan that has all the features of L. heterograna s. str., with the carapace proportionately more elongate and the chelae with the fingers as long as the palm, not inflated and without large cutting teeth. No other specimens from Taiwan are known.</p><p>The two males from South Korea (NHM 2006.558–561) (Figs. 3C, 7C, 11B, 16B) are probably L. heterograna s. str. They differ from specimens from Japan in that the dorsal surface of the carapace is distinctly smoother and is slightly higher and more convex in frontal view (Figs. 3C, 11B), and the ambulatory merus is also relatively stouter and shorter (Fig. 16B). The endostomial spines, chelae, G1s and vulvae of the Korean specimens, however, agree with the Japanese material. In one male, the granules on pleonal somite 6 are rather low while in the other it is distinctly higher; in the larger male, pleonal somites 1 and 2 are clearly fused but in the smaller one, somite 2 appears more distinctly demarcated with the suture deeper, although it is still functionally fused.</p><p>Type locality. Tokyo Bay, Japan .</p><p>Distribution. Japan, Korea, northern China and Taiwan, at 0–30 m depth.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87DAFFBC124228EEFEE5803F1CEB	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo;Ng, Peter K. L.	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo, Ng, Peter K. L. (2024): On the genus Lyphira Galil, 2009 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Leucosiidae), with descriptions of four new species from the West Pacific. Zootaxa 5476 (1): 358-392, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29
03DD87DAFFB8124E28EEFBBC87BE1EA1.text	03DD87DAFFB8124E28EEFBBC87BE1EA1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lyphira acutidens (Chen 1987)	<div><p>Lyphira acutidens (Chen, 1987)</p><p>(Figs. 3D, 6B, 7D, 9B, 10C, 11C, 13B, C, 14B, 15D, 16C, 17H–L, 21B)</p><p>Phylira acutidens Chen, 1987: 201, fig. 1; Chen &amp; Sun 2002: 381, text fig. 170, pl. 15.1; Ng et al. 2008: 93.</p><p>Lyphira heterograna .— Galil, 2009: 300 (part). (not Philyra heterograna Ortmann, 1892).</p><p>Material examined. 1 male (8.9 × 8.6 mm), 1 female (13.4 × 12.9 mm), ZRC 2002.0504, station 4027, Yellow Sea, coll. Institute of Oceanography, Chinese Academy of Science, 9 December 1958 .</p><p>Diagnosis. Carapace slightly broader than long, dorsal surface of carapace covered with closely spaced minute granules, hepatic and intestinal regions with larger, more prominent granules (Figs. 3D, 6B). Frontal margin granulated, postfrontal lobe slightly convex (Figs. 11C, 13B, C). Endostomial spine absent (Figs. 13B, C, 14B). Lateral and posterolateral margin of carapace with row of small granules interspersed by several larger granules (Fig. 3D, 6B); posterior carapace margin gently concave with row of larger granule, medially slightly produced (Figs. 3D, 10C). Third maxilliped exopod 2.9 times as long as broad, as broad as basal part of endopod, forming petaliform structure with convex outer margin, endopod with completely fused basis-ischium, as long as merus, with shallow submarginal sulcus near inner margin (Figs. 11C, 17H). Chelipeds subequal; merus, carpus and chela surfaces smooth or covered by closely spaced, small rounded granules (Figs. 3D, 6B); chela stout, fingers longer than length of palm, surface with longitudinal sulcus flanked by row of granules; pollex slightly bent, cutting edge lined with denticles; dactylus 1.2 times as long as palm along upper margin, row of small granules on upper margin, cutting edge with median large tooth lined with denticles, remaining of edge with small denticles (Fig. 15D). P2–P5 slender, short; merus distinctly longer than carpus and propodus; dactylus longer than propodus, lanceolate, terminating in corneous tips (Figs. 3D, 6B); fourth leg shortest with merus 4.1 times as long as broad, margins lined with small granules, more prominent on ventral margin (Fig. 16C). Thoracic sternites transversely narrow, surface finely granulated, larger granules laterally (Fig. 7D). Sternopleonal cavity deep, reaching to proximal distance between fused thoracic sternites 1–3. Pleon narrow, somites 2–6 fused, somite 6 longitudinally subrectangular, surface with one low granule medially, lateral margins gently convex; telson triangular (Figs. 7D, 17I). G1 elongate, slender, same size from proximal to distal area; distal process bilobed, tip rounded (Fig. 17J‒L). Female pleon broad, convex, smooth, somites 2‒6 fused, suture between somites 2 and 3; telson as long as its basal width (Fig. 9B); vulvae positioned closer to median part of sternite 6, each opening prominently crescent-shaped, relatively long, without opercular cover (Fig. 21B).</p><p>Colour. Not known.</p><p>Remarks. Chen (1987) described Philyra acutidens from a large series of specimens from the East China Sea and Yellow Sea (87 males and 101 females), and she compared it with P. heterograna, noting that it can be distinguished by its slightly smaller adult size (largest carapace length 16.5 mm versus 18.5 mm), slightly longer carapace, the presence of more granules on the carapace, the third maxilliped exopod is slightly narrower, the proportionately shorter fingers of the chela, the cutting margin of the fingers lacking a large tubercle, male pleonal somite 6 with median tooth, and the female telson is longer than broad. She figured a specimen of what she regarded was L. heterograna s. str. (Chen 1987: fig. 2) but did not state where it was from. From her figures, Chen’s (1987: fig. 2) “ Philyra heterograna ” agrees well with L. heterograna s. str. as defined here.</p><p>Galil (2009) commented that L. acutidens is a junior synonym of L. heterograna, arguing the differences observed were only due to their subadult nature. This is not the case; the species is not small, with the holotype male measuring 15.0 × 16.0 mm and allotype female 11.9 × 12.0 mm. The present male specimen (ZRC 2002.0504) is relatively small (8.9 × 8.6 mm) and does not appear fully adult; but the slightly larger female (13.4 × 12.9 mm) has the pleon round and domed and is clearly adult. Their characters, however, agree in most aspects with Chen’s (1987) detailed descriptions and figures.</p><p>We are of the opinion the two species are distinct. The differences in the adult size observed by Chen (1987) are actually not significant, and carapace proportions alone is not enough to justify recognizing two species. The authors have on hand two non-type topotypic specimens from the Yellow Sea but are part of Chen’s (1987) original series, and they do show the other differences highlighted by her. Most marked are the denser concentration of granules on the dorsal surface. The median tubercle on male pleonal somite 6 of L. acutidens is slightly sharper than those of L. heterograna and is slightly more subdistal in position, just behind the distal margin (Figs. 7D, 17I) whereas in L. heterograna, it is positioned a bit further back (Figs. 7A‒C, 17B). Chen’s (1987) figure of the male pleon is slightly inaccurate, the median tubercle on somite 6 is not distal in position (Chen 1987: fig. 1.3) but is actually subdistal. Also significant is that the vulvae are differently structured, with the opening in L. heterograna is short and weakly crescent-shaped (Fig. 21A) whereas it is slit-like and distinctly more crescent-shaped in L. acutidens (Fig. 21B). As such, we believe it is better to recognize L. acutidens as a distinct species for now.</p><p>Type locality. Yellow Sea, North China Sea .</p><p>Distribution. Bohai Sea, Yellow Sea and Northern China Sea.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87DAFFB8124E28EEFBBC87BE1EA1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo;Ng, Peter K. L.	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo, Ng, Peter K. L. (2024): On the genus Lyphira Galil, 2009 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Leucosiidae), with descriptions of four new species from the West Pacific. Zootaxa 5476 (1): 358-392, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29
03DD87DAFFB4125628EEFDE9875B1D99.text	03DD87DAFFB4125628EEFDE9875B1D99.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lyphira chomel Rahayu & Ng 2024	<div><p>Lyphira chomel n. sp.</p><p>(Figs. 3E‒G, 6C, 7E, 9C, 10D, 11D, 12B, C, 13D, E, 14C, 15E, 16D, 17M‒R, 21C)</p><p>Lyphira heterograna . — Galil, 2009: 300 (part), figs. 12B, 14. (Not Philyra heterograna Ortmann, 1892)</p><p>Type material. Holotype: male (10.1 × 10.3 mm), ZRC 1999.0798, off Pontian, western Johor, Malaysia, coll. dredge, T.H.T. Tan &amp; D. Vandenspiegel, 1992 . Paratypes: 1 ovigerous female (9.6 × 9.7 mm), ZRC 1985.0099, station Sig 3/11, on muddy substrate, off Bedok, Singapore, 16.5 m (9 fathoms), coll. dredge, D.S. Johnson, 1960s; 4 males (8.8 × 9.0 mm, 10.4 × 10.3 mm, 10.5 × 10.6 mm, 12.6 × 12.8 mm), 1 female (11.2 × 11.2 mm), 1 partially crushed female (13.5 × 13.4 mm), ZRC 1985.0091 – 0096, station B77, on mud, off Bedok, Singapore, 16.5 m (9 fathoms), coll. dredge, D.S. Johnson, 1960s ; 1 ovigerous female (11.4 × 11.1 mm) ZRC 1985.0098, station B78, mud substrate, off <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=104.13333&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.35" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 104.13333/lat 1.35)">Tanjung Stapa</a>, Pengerang, southeastern Johor, Peninsular Malaysia, 1°21'00.0"N 104°08'00.0"E, 31 m (17 fathoms), coll. dredge, D.S. Johnson, 1960s; 3 males (12.5 × 11.3 mm, 12.7 × 12.7 mm, 13.0 × 12.9 mm), 2 female (11.6 × 11.4 mm), NHM 1900.10.22.340–343, on mud, Malacca, Peninsular Malaysia, 1–2 m, coll. F. P. Bedford &amp; W.F. Lanchester, 1899–1900.</p><p>Diagnosis. Carapace approximately as broad as long or slightly longer than broad, dorsal surface of carapace covered with closely spaced minute granules, hepatic and intestinal regions with larger, more prominent granules (Figs. 3E‒G, 6C). Frontal margin granulated, postfrontal lobe slightly convex (Figs. 11D, 13D, E). Endostomial spine absent (Figs. 13D, E, 14C). Lateral and posterolateral margin of carapace with row of small granules interspersed by larger granules; posterior carapace margin gently convex with row of larger granules (Figs. 3E‒F, 10D). Third maxilliped exopod 2.5 times as long as broad, slightly narrower than basal part of endopod, forming petaliform structure with convex outer margin, endopod with completely fused basis-ischium, longer than merus, with shallow submarginal sulcus near inner margin (Figs. 11D, 17M). Chelipeds subequal; merus covered by large rounded granules (Figs. 3E, 6C, 9C); surfaces of carpus and propodus covered by closely spaced small granules; chela slender, fingers longer than length of palm, surface with longitudinal sulcus flanked by row of granules; pollex slightly bent, cutting edge lined with denticles, large tooth subproximally; dactylus 1.5 times as long as palm along upper margin, row of small granules on upper margin, cutting edge with median large tooth lined with denticles, remaining of edge with small denticles (Fig. 15E). P2–P5 slender, long; merus distinctly longer than carpus and propodus; dactylus longer than propodus, lanceolate, terminating in corneous tips (Figs. 3E); fourth leg shortest with merus 5.6 times as long as broad, margins almost smooth, lined barely with small granules (Fig. 16D). Thoracic sternites transversely narrow, surface granulated, larger granules laterally (Fig. 7E). Sternopleonal cavity deep, reaching to proximal distance between fused thoracic sternites 1–3. Pleon narrow, somites 2–6 fused, somite 6 longitudinally subrectangular, surface with one low granule subdistally, lateral margins gently convex; telson triangular (Figs. 7E, 17N). G1 elongate, slender, same size from proximal to distal area; distal process gently curved, with blunt tip (Fig. 17O‒R). Female pleon broad, convex, smooth, somites 2‒6 fused, suture between somites 2 and 3; telson as long as its basal width (Fig. 9C); vulvae positioned closer to median part of sternite 6, each opening relatively broad, ovate, without opercular cover (Fig. 21C).</p><p>Colour. Not known.</p><p>Etymology. The named is derived from the Malay word for small and cute, “chomel ”. The name is used as a Latin noun in apposition.</p><p>Remarks. Lyphira chomel n. sp. is a very distinct species. Its short and poorly developed endostomial spines, and the relatively narrow third maxilliped exopod allies it with L. heterograna s. str. and L. acutidens, but L. chomel n. sp. can immediately be distinguished by its prominently slenderer and elongate ambulatory meri (Fig. 16D) and the granules on the merus of the cheliped being evenly spread out, reaching to the distal surfaces (Fig. 3E). In L. heterograna s. str. and L. acutidens, the ambulatory meri are distinctly shorter and stouter (Fig. 16A‒C) and the distal surfaces of the merus of the cheliped are relatively smoother with only scattered granules present (Fig. 3A‒D). The G1s of L. chomel n. sp. and L. heterograna s. str., however, are similar, with the apical process longer and gently curved (Fig. 17C‒F, O‒R). On the basis of published data, L. chomel n. sp. is also the smallest species, with male specimens as small as 10 mm in carapace width already mature and females of a similar size already ovigerous. Lyphira heterograna s. str. and L. acutidens both reach larger sizes (smallest adult female averages 12 mm carapace width) (cf. Chen 1987; Chen &amp; Sun 2002; present data).</p><p>Galil’s (2009: 300) stated she examined several specimens of “ L. heterograna ” from Peninsular Malaysia: four males and two females from Malacca (NHM 1900.10.22.340–345) and one male from Pontian (ZRC 1999.0798). Galil (2009: figs. 12B, 14) figured a male specimen (15.1 mm carapace length, NHM 1900.10.22.340–345) (incorrectly stated as from Indonesia). Her figures agree very well with the holotype male of L. chomel n. sp. (which is here based on her Pontian male), including the pattern of granules on the merus of the cheliped, relatively slenderer P2–P5 and structure of the G1.</p><p>In Singapore, L. chomel n. sp. is sympatric with L. linda n. sp., but they appear to have slightly different habitats. Although both are intertidal to subtidal, L. chomel n. sp. appears to prefer more muddy substrates, whereas L. linda n. sp. likes area which are sandier.</p><p>Type locality. Pontian, Peninsular Malaysia .</p><p>Distribution. Southern Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87DAFFB4125628EEFDE9875B1D99	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo;Ng, Peter K. L.	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo, Ng, Peter K. L. (2024): On the genus Lyphira Galil, 2009 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Leucosiidae), with descriptions of four new species from the West Pacific. Zootaxa 5476 (1): 358-392, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29
03DD87DAFFAC125728EEFCB187691921.text	03DD87DAFFAC125728EEFCB187691921.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lyphira ngankee Rahayu & Ng 2024	<div><p>Lyphira ngankee n. sp.</p><p>(Figs. 1E–J, 5A, B, 6D, 8A, 9D, 10E, 11E, 13F, G, 14D, 15F, 16E, 18A‒E, 20A‒D, 21D)</p><p>Philyra tuberculosa .— Shen 1931: 185, text figs. 1, 2, 4; Shen 1932: text fig. 11e, f. (not Philyra tuberculosa Stimpson, 1858 = Philyra carinata Bell, 1855).</p><p>Philyra globosa .— Shen 1940: 216 (not Cancer globosus Fabricius, 1793 = Cancer globus Fabricius, 1775).</p><p>Philyra cf. laminata . — Hill 1982: 199, pl. 3C. (not Philyra laminata Doflein, 1904 = Heteronucia laminata (Doflein, 1904)) .</p><p>Philyra heterograna .— Blackmore &amp; Rainbow 2000: appendix 1. (not Philyra heterograna Ortmann, 1892).</p><p>Lyphira heterograna .— Wong et al. 2021: 20, fig. 30a–c, pl. 6C. (not Philyra heterograna Ortmann, 1892).</p><p>Type material. Holotype: male (20.8 × 21.8 mm), ZRC 1999.0456, Nanao Island, Gianjing fish port, Guangdong, coll. N.K. Ng &amp; Y. Cai, 12 November 1998 . Paratypes: 5 males (largest 20.7 × 21.3 mm), 2 females (larger 18.8 × 18.8 mm), ZRC 2022.0628, station W2, southeast of <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=113.9095&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=22.215433" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 113.9095/lat 22.215433)">Lantau Island</a>, Hong Kong, 22°11.264'N 113°51.358'E – 22°12.926'N 113°54.570'E, 10.0–11.6 m, coll. Hong Kong University Trawl, 27 August 2012 .</p><p>Diagnosis. Carapace approximately as broad as long, rounded (Figs. 1E, 5A, B, 6D); dorsal surface of carapace covered with closely spaced minute granules, hepatic, branchial and intestinal regions with slightly larger, more prominent granules;. Frontal margin granulated; postfrontal lobe slightly convex with slight concave medially (Figs. 11E). Endostomial spine strong, produced, visible from dorsal view (Figs. 1F, 13F, G, 14D). Lateral margin of carapace with row of small granules interspersed by larger granule; posterior margin gently convex (Figs. 5A, B, 6D). Posterior carapace margin with row of granules, slightly larger granule medially and on each posterolateral corner, with margin between them gently convex (Figs. 10E). Third maxilliped exopod 2 times as long as broad, wider than basal part of endopod, forming petaliform structure with strongly convex outer margin, with submarginal row of low to very low granules along inner margin; endopod with completely fused basis-ischium, distinctly longer than merus, with shallow submarginal sulcus near inner margin (Figs. 1G, 11E, 18A). Chelipeds subequal; merus, carpus and chela surfaces smooth or covered with low, small rounded granules (Figs. 5A, B, 6D); merus subcylindrical, symmetrical along entire length, surface granulated, large granules on proximal area and along margins, minutes granules distally; carpus smooth, unarmed; chela stout, palm surface smooth, upper and lower margins with row of granules, longitudinal row of relatively large granules on lower outer surface of palm; pollex slightly bent, cutting edge lined with denticles; dactylus 1.4 times as long as palm along upper margin, row of small granules on upper margin, cutting edge with median large tooth lined with denticles, remaining of edge with small denticles (Fig. 15F). P2–P5 slender, short; merus distinctly longer than carpus and propodus, dactylus longer than propodus, lanceolate, terminating in corneous tips (Figs. 5A, B, 6D); fourth leg shortest with merus 3.8 times as long as broad, margin lined with small granules, more prominent on ventral margin (Fig. 16E). Thoracic sternites transversely narrow, surface finely granulated, larger granules laterally (Fig. 8A). Male sternopleonal cavity deep, reaching to proximal distance between fused thoracic sternites 1–3. Male pleon narrow, slender, long; somite 1 longitudinally narrow, wide; somites 2–6 fused, forming elongate trapezoidal plate, shallow suture just visible between somites 5 and 6, surface smooth; somite 6 longitudinally subrectangular, surface with one granule submedially, lateral margins gently convex; telson triangular, longer than wide (Figs. 1H, 8A, 18B). G1 elongate, slender, slightly dilated distally; apical process short, bent at an angle of 60º along the longitudinal axis, with blunt tip (Figs. 1J, 18C‒E, 20A‒D). Female sternopleonal cavity reaches distal part of sternite 1; female pleon broad, convex, smooth, somites 2‒6 fused, suture between somites 2 and 3; telson shorter than its basal width (Figs. 1I, 9D); vulvae spaced apart on sternite 6, each opening weakly crescent-shaped, relatively short, without opercular cover (Fig. 21D).</p><p>Colour. Light grey on dorsal surfaces.</p><p>Etymology. The species is named after the late Ng Ngan Kee, an esteemed colleague and very good friend, departed all too soon in 2022. She was a leader in varunid systematics and also an avid educator and field scientist; the holotype specimen was actually collected by her during one of her many forays throughout Asia. The name is used as a noun in apposition.</p><p>Remarks. The difference in the shape of carapace, the P5 merus and the G1 between L. ngankee n. sp. and L. heterograna are well defined. In L. ngankee n. sp., the carapace is relatively more rounded and more convex, the endostomial spine is strongly produced, clearly visible from dorsal view, the P5 merus leg is short, only 3.8 times as long as broad, the exopod of the third maxilliped is broad, strongly convex, and the apical process of G1 short, broad and bent at an angle of 60° along the longitudinal axis (Figs. 1E–G, J, 5A, B, 6D, 13 F, G, 14D, 16E, 18A, C‒E). Lyphira heterograna s. str. has the carapace usually slightly longer than broad, the endostomial spines are short, the P5 merus is relatively longer 4.3 times as long as broad, the exopod of the third maxilliped is narrower, not as convex, and the G1 with apical process long, very slightly bent (Figs. 1A–C, 2A, B, 3A, B, 13A, 16A, B, 17A, C‒F).</p><p>Lyphira ngankee n. sp. is perhaps most similar to L. linda n. sp., sharing the characters of a strong endostomial spine and a wide exopod of the third maxilliped. The differences between the two are discussed under the remarks for the latter species.</p><p>Lyphira ngankee n. sp. and L. linda n. sp. are superficially similar to L. ovata, described from one male specimen from Sri Lanka. Lyphira ovata, however, can easily be separated from these two species in having the dorsal carapace surface more densely covered with granules and the anterolateral margin is almost straight in dorsal view (cf. Galil 2009: fig. 16A). In L. ngankee n. sp. and L. linda n. sp., there are distinctly fewer granules on the dorsal carapace surface and the anterolateral margin is distinctly convex in dorsal view (Figs. 4, 5A, B). Galil (2009: 303) did not figure the G1, only describing it as “with apical process digitate, squat”, suggesting it is similar to the condition observed for L. ngankee n. sp. and L. linda n. sp., in which the distal process is short and not prominently elongate (Figs.18D, E, O, P, 20A‒D, E‒M).</p><p>The wide exopod of the third maxilliped of L. ngankee n. sp. similar to those of L. georgei and L. perplexa, but differences can be seen in the more rounded carapace in L. ngankee n. sp. (Figs. 1E, 5A, B, 6D) (longer than broad in L. georgei and L. perplexa), the presence of strong endostomial spines in L. ngankee (Figs. 13F, G, 14D) (absent in L. georgei and L. perplexa), and the P5 merus is proportionately shorter in L. ngankee, 3.8 times as long as broad (Fig. 16E) (proportionately longer, being 4 times in L. perplexa but much shorter in L. georgei, 3.2 times as long as broad) (cf. Galil 2009: fig. 17A, B; Trivedi et al. 2016: figs. 1a, b). Their colours in life are also different, with L. ngankee n. sp. being greyish white overall while the carapace of L. georgei and L. perplexa are orange to purple (cf. Trivedi et al. 2016; unpublished data).</p><p>Type locality. Nanao Island, Guangdong, China .</p><p>Distribution. Nanao Island, Guangdong, and Hong Kong.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87DAFFAC125728EEFCB187691921	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo;Ng, Peter K. L.	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo, Ng, Peter K. L. (2024): On the genus Lyphira Galil, 2009 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Leucosiidae), with descriptions of four new species from the West Pacific. Zootaxa 5476 (1): 358-392, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29
03DD87DAFFAD125128EEF969807318AF.text	03DD87DAFFAD125128EEF969807318AF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lyphira linda Rahayu & Ng 2024	<div><p>Lyphira linda n. sp.</p><p>(Figs. 4, 6E, F, 8B‒D, 9E, F, 10F‒H, 11F‒H, 12D‒F, 13H‒L, 14E, F, 15G, H, 16F‒I, 18L‒P, 20E‒M, 21E, F)</p><p>Philyra globosa .— Lanchester 1900: 764 (p.p.). (not Cancer globosa Fabricius, 1793 = Philyra globus (Fabricius, 1775)) . Philyra heterograna .— Wee &amp; Ng 1994: 82. (not Philyra heterograna Ortmann, 1892).</p><p>Philyra heterograna .— Galil 2009: 300 (in part).</p><p>Type material. Holotype: male (18.4 × 18.2 mm), ZRC 1981.9.2.7, East Coast Lagoon, Singapore, from fishermen nets, coll. P. K. L. Ng, March 1981 . Paratypes: 2 males (20 × 19.5 mm, 21 × 21.4 mm), 1 female (15.5 × 16.1 mm), ZRC 1981.9.2.8-10, same locality as holotype; 2 young females, ZRC 1990.7355 – 7356, off Pulau Tekong, Singapore, coll. dredge, Reef Ecology &amp; Research Team, 26 March 1987; 4 males (7.6 × 7.2 mm – 17.1 × 16.7 mm); 1 female (14.0 × 13.9 mm), ZRC 2022.1001, specimen SEA 3978, station DR276, muddy-sandy substrate, between <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.93954&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.4031833" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.93954/lat 1.4031833)">Ketem</a> and Pasir Ris, Singapore, 01°24.399'N 103°56.139'E – 01°24.191'N 103°56.372'E, 15.3–16.9 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 17 January 2014 ; 1 female (10.0 × 9.5 mm), ZRC 2022.1002, station DW129, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=104.070816&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.3179166" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 104.070816/lat 1.3179166)">Johor Strait</a>, Singapore, 01°19.075'N 104°04.249'E, 21.7‒22.5 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 30 October 2012 ; 1 female (14.6 × 14.0 mm), ZRC 2022.1003, specimen JS0606, station DW86, on mud, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.99983&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.3921499" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.99983/lat 1.3921499)">Johor Strait</a>, Changi Park, Singapore, 01°23.581'N 103°59.593'E – 01°23.529'N 103°59.990'E, 5.6–14.7 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 25 October 2012 ; 1 male (14.2 × 13.9 mm), ZRC 2022.1004, specimen SEA 3930, station DR277, between <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.94&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.4040333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.94/lat 1.4040333)">Ketem</a> and Pasir Ris, Singapore, 01°24.126'N 103°56.568'E – 01°24.242'N 103°56.400'E, 14.4–14.8 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 17 January 2014 ; 1 male (17.3 × 17.2 mm), ZRC 2022.1005, station DW28, east of <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.99408&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.4215833" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.99408/lat 1.4215833)">Chek Jawa</a>, Singapore, 01°25.295'N 103°59.645'E, 8.2‒9.6 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 12 October 2012 ; 1 female (14.5 × 14.3 mm) ZRC 2022.1006, station DW36, off <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.9332&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.4090834" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.9332/lat 1.4090834)">Pulau Serangoon</a>, Singapore, 01°24.545'N 103°55.992'E, 16.8–18.6 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 19 October 2012 ; 1 female (15.5 × 15.3 mm), ZRC 2022.1007, specimen SEA 5374, station DR333, in front of <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.96066&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.42145" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.96066/lat 1.42145)">Noordin Beach</a>, Pulau Ubin, Singapore, 01°25.248'N 103°57.898'E – 01°25.287'N 103°57.640'E, 7.9–9.3 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 20 March 2014 ; 1 male (11.4 × 11.0 mm), ZRC 2022.1008, station DW40, opposite <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=103.97919&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.3966167" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 103.97919/lat 1.3966167)">Changi Radar station</a>, Singapore, 01°23.797'N 103°58.751'E, 13.4–24.7 m, coll. Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey, dredge, 19 October 2012 . Others: 1 male, 1 female, ZRC 1995.0547, East Coast, Singapore, coll. dredge, D. Vandenspiegel et al., 1990s ; 1 juvenile male (badly damaged), ZRC 1995.0546, East Coast, Singapore, coll. dredge, D. Vandenspiegel et al., 1990s ; 1 male (18.4 × 19.0 mm), ZRC 1985.1631, Changi Point, Singapore, coll. P.K.L. Ng, 9 May 1982 ; 1 juvenile male (12.7 × 12.4 mm), ZRC 1985.0090, station B77, on mud, off Bedok, Singapore, 16.5 m (9 fathoms), coll. dredge, D.S. Johnson, 1960s ; 1 juvenile male, ZRC 1990.8405, station 6, Kallang Basin, Singapore, coll. Reef Ecology &amp; Study Team, dredge, 23 February 1989 ; 1 juvenile male (crushed), ZRC 1990.8329, station 6, Kallang Basin, Singapore, coll. Reef Ecology &amp; Study Team, dredge, 22 February 1989 ; 1 juvenile male, 1 juvenile female, ZRC 1989.2943 – 2944, Southern Islands, Singapore, coll. dredge, P.K.L. Ng, 12 May 1987 ; 1 male (spiny type, 18.9 × 18.7 mm), 4 females (largest 16.8 × 16.4 mm), ZRC 1999.0507, near <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=104.01273&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.40365" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 104.01273/lat 1.40365)">Pulau Sajahat</a>, Singapore, 1°24.219’N 104°00.764’E, 15 m, coll. dredge, L.W. Loh et al., 5 August 1997 ; 1 male, 2 ovigerous females, ZRC 1985.1442 – 1444, Mersing, eastern Johor, Peninsular Malaysia, coll. C. Leong, 5 March 1969 ; 1 juvenile male (12.6 × 12.7 mm), ZRC 1985.0097, station B78, mud substrate, off <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=104.13333&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=1.35" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 104.13333/lat 1.35)">Tanjung Stapa</a>, Pengerang, southeastern Johor, Peninsular Malaysia, 1°21'00.0"N 104°08'00.0"E, 31 m (17 fathoms), coll. dredge, D.S. Johnson, 1960s ; 1 male (18.00 × 17.7 mm), ZRC 2011.0646, fishing port, Pattani, Thailand, coll. 28 August 2003; 25 males (smooth type, 18.4 × 18.6 mm photographed), 19 males (spiny type, 17.4 × 17.1 mm photographed), 7 females (smooth type), 3 females (spiny type), ZRC 2003.0107, Pattani Fishing Port, Gulf of Thailand, southern Thailand, coll. D.C.J. Yeo et al., 20 February 2003 ; 4 males (smooth type, largest 21.5 × 22.1 mm), 14 males (spiny type), 3 ovigerous females (spiny type, 17.7 × 17.7 mm – 18.6 × 18.1 mm), ZRC 1999.0317, Pattani Fishing Port, Gulf of Thailand, southern Thailand, coll. H.H. Tan et al., 25 October 1998 ; 2 males, ZRC 2003.0623, Pattani Fishing Port, Gulf of Thailand, southern Thailand, coll. P.K.L. Ng, 16 October 2003 ; 5 males (largest 19.7 × 19.9 mm), 7 females (largest 15.5 × 15.5 mm), ZRC 2003.0609, Sakom Crab Landing Port, Songkhla, Gulf of Thailand, southern Thailand, coll. P.K.L. Ng et al., 15 October 2003 ; 1 male (16.7 × 17.0 mm), ZRC 2015.0439, Angsila Fishing Port, Gulf of Thailand, eastern Thailand, coll. Z. Jaafar et al., 21 November 2003 ; 4 males (20.1 × 20.0 mm – 22.9 × 21.4 mm), 1 female (16.4 × 15.6 mm), ZRC 2014.0191, Nghe An, Cua Lo Beach, northern Vietnam, coll. 27 July 2007 .</p><p>Diagnosis. Carapace approximately as broad as long or slightly broader than long, more or less rounded (Figs. 4, 6E, F); dorsal surface of carapace covered with closely spaced minute granules or corneous spinules, hepatic, branchial and intestinal regions with slightly larger, more prominent granules. Frontal margin granulated; postfrontal lobe slightly convex with slight concave medially (Figs. 11F‒H). Endostomial spine broad, strong, produced, visible from dorsal view (Figs. 13H‒L, 14E, F). Lateral margin of carapace with row of small granules interspersed by larger granules; posterolateral margin gently convex with large granule medially (Figs. 4, 6E, F). Posterior carapace margin gently convex, with row of small granules, slightly larger granule medially (Figs. 4, 10F‒ H). Third maxilliped exopod 1.5‒1.8 times as long as broad, broader than basal part of endopod, forming petaliform structure with strongly convex outer margin, with submarginal row of low to very low granules along inner margin; endopod with completely fused basis-ischium, distinctly shorter than merus, with shallow submarginal sulcus near inner margin (Figs. 11F‒H, 12D‒F). Chelipeds subequal; merus, carpus and chela surfaces smooth or covered with low, small rounded granules (Figs. 4, 6E, F); merus surface granulated, large granules on proximal area and along margins, minutes granules distally; carpus smooth, unarmed; chela stout, palm surface smooth, upper and lower margins with row of granules; fingers longer than length of palm, surface with longitudinal sulcus; pollex bent, cutting edge with broad, large subproximal tooth lined with denticles, remaining of edge with small denticles; dactylus 1.6 times as long as palm, with row of small granules on upper margin, cutting edge with subdistal large tooth lined with denticles, remaining of edge with small denticles (Fig. 15G, H). P2–P5 slender, short; merus distinctly longer than carpus and propodus; dactylus longer than propodus, lanceolate, terminating in corneous tips; fourth leg shortest, with merus 4 times as long as broad, margins lined with small granules, more prominent on ventral margin (Fig. 16F‒I). Thoracic sternites transversely narrow, surface granulated, larger granules laterally (Fig. 8C, D). Male sternopleonal cavity deep, reaching to mid distance between fused thoracic sternites 1–3. Male pleon narrow, slender, long, edge granulated; somites 2–6 fused, shallow suture just visible between somites 5 and 6, surface smooth; somite 6 longitudinally subrectangular, surface with one low granule medially, low, short sulcus subproximally, lateral margins straight; telson triangular, longer than wide (Figs. 8C, D, 18G). G1 elongate, slender, same size from proximal to distal area; distal process, stout, bilobed, with bent, rounded tip (Figs. 18H‒V, 20E‒M). Female sternopleonal cavity reaches distal part of sternite 1; female pleon broad, convex, smooth, somites 2‒6 fused, suture between somites 2 and 3; telson shorter than its basal width (Fig. 9E, F); vulvae spaced apart on sternite 6, each opening weakly crescent-shaped, relatively long, without opercular cover (Fig. 21E, F).</p><p>Colour. Brownish grey to dirty white, merus of cheliped yellow.</p><p>Etymology. The species is named after the late Linda Goh. She was an Assistant Director at the National Parks Board and was overseeing the Comprehensive Marine Biodiversity Survey for the government. She was instrumental in making sure the project progressed smoothly and ensured its success. Beyond this, she was a good friend and a lovely person to work with. Her sudden passing in 2021 was a tragedy for both the agency and conservation in general. The name is used as a noun in apposition.</p><p>Remarks. The variation in the smoothness of the carapace and pereopods of L. linda n. sp. is surprising. While, most specimens have smooth and unarmed carapaces, chelipeds and legs, with the granules present rounded and smooth (e.g., Fig. 4A‒C); the same surfaces of several specimens are covered with short corneous spinules to various degrees, even on the thoracic sternum and pleon (Figs. 4D‒F, 6F, 8C, D). These spiny specimens, however, agree with the smooth ones in all other diagnostic characters, including the structures of their endostomial spines, third maxillipeds and G1s. In addition, there are many specimens with intermediate characters, e.g., only some parts of the carapace are spinous, only some legs or some articles of the legs are spiny, only one cheliped is spinous with the other smooth etc. (e.g., see Fig. 4D, E). In some specimens, there are only a few scattered spinules on the carapace or pereopods, with remaining of the surfaces smooth. These variations are independent of sex. All juvenile and subadult specimens are of the smooth type, suggesting spination is associated with adulthood. These adult specimens with varying degrees of spination can be collected together from the same location. For example, in lot ZRC 2003.0107 from Pattani in the Gulf of Thailand, 32 specimens were of the smooth type, with 22 having at least some some spinules on some part of the body. This substantial variation is not known for any other known leucosiid species, with the possible exception of L. bellagrana n. sp. (see remarks for that species).</p><p>Spination aside, L. linda n. sp. and L. ngankee n. sp. are morphologically close; possessing prominent endostomial spines, a wide third maxilliped exopod and a slightly convex posterior carapace margin. The carapace of L. linda n. sp., however, is as long as broad (Figs. 4, 6E, F) (broader than long in L. ngankee n. sp.; Figs. 5A, B, 6D), the gastrocardiac grooves very shallow and barely visible (Fig. E, F) (grooves clearly visible and relatively deeper in L. ngankee n. sp.; Fig. 5A, B); the endostomial spines are slightly weaker and positioned further apart (Fig. 13H‒L) (spines stronger and positioned closer together in L. ngankee n. sp.; Fig. 13F, G); the third maxilliped exopod is somewhat more rounded, being 1.5 to 1.8 as long as broad (Fig. 18F, Q) (slightly longer, being 2 times as long as broad in L. ngankee n. sp.; Fig. 18A); the palm of the male cheliped is distinctly stouter with a longer dactylus, 1.6 times as long as the palm (Fig. 15G, H) (palm distinctly more slender with a shorter dactylus, 1.4 times as long as palm in L. ngankee n. sp.; Fig. 14F); and the G1 apical process is longer and bilobed (Fig. 18I‒K, M‒P, T‒V) (shorter and broader in L. ngankee n. sp.; Fig. 18D, E).</p><p>Type locality. Singapore .</p><p>Distribution. Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and southern Vietnam, 8.2‒22.5 m.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87DAFFAD125128EEF969807318AF	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo;Ng, Peter K. L.	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo, Ng, Peter K. L. (2024): On the genus Lyphira Galil, 2009 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Leucosiidae), with descriptions of four new species from the West Pacific. Zootaxa 5476 (1): 358-392, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29
03DD87DAFFA2125B28EEFBDC86AD18C1.text	03DD87DAFFA2125B28EEFBDC86AD18C1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Lyphira bellagrana Rahayu & Ng 2024	<div><p>Lyphira bellagrana n. sp.</p><p>(Figs. 5C, D, 6G, 8E, F, 9G, 10I, J, 11I, J, 13M, N, 14G, H, 15I, J, 16J, K, 19, 20N ‒P, 21G)</p><p>Type material. Holotype: male (15.7 × 15.0 mm), MZB Cru 5627, Sungai Tipoeka, Timika, Papua, 28 June 2000 . Paratypes: 2 males (7.6 × 6.7 mm, 15.6 × 14.8 mm), 6 females (12.8 × 11.8 mm ‒ 13.2 × 12.3 mm; one badly damaged), ZRC 2000.2077, (13.4 × 12.2 mm), 3 females (12.5 × 11.4 mm ‒ 13.7 × 12.6 mm), MZB Cru 5628, same locality as holotype .</p><p>Other material examined. All localities in Papua, Indonesia, collected by A. Darmawan. 1 male (11.0 × 10.6 mm), 1 female (11.0 × 10.6 mm), ZRC 2022.0750, station Mi, 5°01'20.89"S 137°05'42.73"E, 4 June 2021; 3 males (10.8 × 10.8 mm – 12.6 × 12.2 mm) 1 female (11.0 × 11.0 mm), MZB Cru 5629, same locality, 6 October 2021 ; 1 male (16.4 × 16.0 mm), 1 females (13.8 × 13.4) 1 ovigerous female (15.8 × 14.8 mm), MZB Cru 5630, same locality, 11 March 2020 ; 2 males (11.4 × 10.6 mm, 12.4 × 11.6 mm), MZB Cru 5631, station OT5, 5°06'33.91"S 137°14'32.47"E, 7 October 2021; 2 males (14.0 × 13.4 mm, 14.4 × 13.6 mm), 3 females (13.0 × 12.6 mm ‒ 16.2 × 15.6 mm), ZRC 2022.0745, station OT5, 5°06'33.91"S 137°14'32.47"E, 8 October 2020; 2 males (11.8 × 11.4 mm, 13.0 × 11.8 mm), ZRC 2022.0747, station EM 330, 4°48.900"S 136°38.731", 26 May 2021; 1 male (11.2 × 10.8 mm), ZRC 2022.1028, T5, 4°55'04.64"S 136°42'16.25"E, 9 June 2021; 3 males (11.6 × 11.1 mm, 12 × 11.6 mm, 11.3 × 11.1 mm), 1 ovigerous female (12.0 × 11.6 mm), MZB <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=137.0952&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-5.0379333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 137.0952/lat -5.0379333)">Cru</a> 5632, station Ma, 5°02'16.56"S 137°05'42.73"E, 8 October 2020 ; 3 males (12.0 × 11.5 mm, 12.2 × 11.6 mm, 11.5 × 11.1 mm), 1 ovigerous female (10.5 × 10.5 mm), ZRC 2022.1029, station <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=137.0952&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-5.0379333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 137.0952/lat -5.0379333)">Ma</a>, 5°02'16.56"S 137°05'42.73"E, 8 October 2020 ; 2 males, 2 females, ZRC 2022.0748, station A1, 4°57'49.75"S 136°49'47.53"E, 13 October 2020; 1 male, 2 females, ZRC 2022.0749, station T5, 4°55'04.64"S 136°42'16.25"E, 4 October 2021; 2 males (larger 12.4 × 11.9 mm), 4 females (largest 12.9 × 12.6 mm), ZRC 2022.0746, station K1, trawl, 4°º49'19.67"S 136°35'06.14"E, 21 March 2022; 1 male (12.7 × 12.4 mm), ZRC 2022.1031, station OT5, 5°06'33.91"S 137°14'32.47"E, 8 October 2020 .</p><p>Diagnosis. Carapace slightly broader than long (Figs. 5C, D, 6G); dorsal surface of carapace covered with closely spaced minute granules, gastric, branchial and intestinal regions with slightly larger, more prominent granules. Frontal margin granulated; postfrontal lobe slightly convex (Fig. 11I, J). Endostomial spines absent (Figs. 13M, N, 14G, H). Lateral margin of carapace with row of small granules, interspersed by large granules formed by group of small granules; posterolateral margin very slightly convex with large granule medially and on each posterolateral border (Figs. 5C, D, 6G). Posterior carapace margin almost straight, with larger granule medially and on each posterolateral corner, with margin between them almost straight (Figs. 5C, D, 10I, J). Third maxilliped exopod 2.3 times as long as broad, wider than basal part of endopod, forming petaliform structure with strongly convex outer margin; endopod with completely fused basis-ischium, as long as merus, with shallow submarginal sulcus near inner margin; (Figs. 11I, J, 19A, G). Chelipeds subequal; merus, carpus and chela surfaces smooth or covered with low, small rounded granules (Figs.5C, 6G); surfaces of merus, carpus and propodus covered by closely spaced small granules; merus subcylindrical, anterior and posterior margin with row of granules; carpus anterior margin with row of larger granules; chela stout, upper and lower margins with row of granules, longitudinal row of relatively large granules on lower outer surface of palm; fingers longer than length of palm; pollex slightly bent, cutting edge lined with denticles, shallow concavity submedially; dactylus 1.3 times as long as palm, with row of small granules on upper margin, cutting edge with median large tooth lined with denticles, remaining of edge with small denticles (Fig. 15I, J). P2–P5 slender, short; merus distinctly longer than carpus and propodus; dactylus longer than propodus, lanceolate, terminating in corneous tips; fourth leg shortest with merus 4 times as long as broad, lined with small granules on ventral margin (Fig. 16J, K). Thoracic sternites transversely narrow, surface finely granulated, larger granules laterally; sternites 1–3 completely fused without trace of sutures; sternite 3 separated from sternite 4 by shallow groove; sternites 4–7 progressively narrower sternite 8 narrowest (Fig. 8E, F). Male sternopleonal cavity deep, reaching to proximal distance between fused thoracic sternites 1–3, margin lined with granules, those on distal part proportionately larger. Male pleon narrow, slender, long (Figs. 8E, F, 19B, H); somite 1 longitudinally narrow, wide; somites 2–6 fused, forming elongate trapezoidal plate, shallow suture just visible between somites 5 and 6, surface smooth; somite 6 longitudinally subrectangular, surface with one low granule medially, lateral margins gently convex; telson triangular, longer than wide. G1 elongate, slender, slightly dilated in distal area; distal process moderately long, gently bent, with pointed tip (Fig. 19C‒F, I, J). Female sternopleonal cavity reaches distal part of sternite 1; female pleon broad, convex, margin densely tuberculate; somite 1, 2, covered by tubercle; somites 2‒6 fused, suture between somites 2 and 3; telson shorter than its basal width (Fig. 9G); vulvae positioned close to median part of sternite 6, each opening V-shaped, relatively short, narrow, without opercular cover (Fig. 21G).</p><p>Colour. Dorsal surface of carapace and chelipeds dirty white to pale yellow, with legs reddish brown.</p><p>Etymology. The name is derived from the Latin “ bellus ” for beauty and “ granosa ” for granules; alluding to the beautiful arrangement of sharp granules on the carapace of the species. It is also an indirect acknowledgement to the lady who revised Philyra and has contributed substantially to our knowledge of leucosiid systematics; our friend Bella Galil.</p><p>Remarks. Lyphira bellagrana n. sp. is very characteristic in having the lateral margin of the carapace lined with small tubercles interspersed by larger tubercles that are formed by a clustering of small tubercles. The morphological characters generally resemble L. heterograna s. str. in the absence of endostomial spines, and a very slightly bent distal process of G1 (Figs. 13A, B, M, N, 14A,G, H, 17E, F, 19E, F, J), but differences can be seen in the broader and more convex third maxilliped exopod, shorter P5 merus, shorter distal process of G1, stouter male pleon of L. bellagrana n. sp. (Figs. 11I, J, 16J, K, 19A, G, versus Figs. 11A, B, 16A, B, 17E, F).</p><p>There is one specimen of L. bellagrana n. sp. (ZRC 2022.1031) which is unusual in having corneous spinules on the carapace, chelipeds and third maxilliped, with the granules on the thoracic sternum and male pleon more developed (Figs.5D, 8F, 15J, 19G). This is something shared with L. linda n. sp. (see discussion earlier for that species). It agrees with typical specimens, however, in all other characters, including the diagnostic G1 structure (Fig. 19C‒F, I, J, 20N‒P). The G1 distal process is slightly longer (Figs. 19I, J, 20N) in this specimen than typical specimens (Figs. 19C‒F, 20O) but this difference is too slight to be considered significant. In addition, all the other specimens from the same area are of the typical form.</p><p>Type locality. Timika, Papua, Indonesia .</p><p>Distribution. Papua, Indonesia, 7‒ 15 m.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DD87DAFFA2125B28EEFBDC86AD18C1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo;Ng, Peter K. L.	Rahayu, Dwi Listyo, Ng, Peter K. L. (2024): On the genus Lyphira Galil, 2009 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Leucosiidae), with descriptions of four new species from the West Pacific. Zootaxa 5476 (1): 358-392, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5476.1.29
