identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03CA87CAFFCAC81E00A2F990FDA6B1C1.text	03CA87CAFFCAC81E00A2F990FDA6B1C1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Callianassidae Dana 1852	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Family  Callianassidae Dana, 1852</p>
            <p> Remarks. Ghost shrimps are usually strongly heterochelous. Only a few taxa have subequal chelipeds, such as eucalliacine genera  Calliaxina Ngoc-Ho, 2003; and  Eucalliax Manning &amp; Felder, 1991 . The chelipeds (P1) of callianassid shrimps are laterally flattened and are subject of intraspecific variation as well as sexual dimorphism (or even polymorphism) (e.g. Manning &amp; Felder 1986; Felder &amp; Lovett 1989; Schweitzer Hopkins &amp; Feldmann 1997; Swen et al. 2001; Mourik et al. 2005; East 2006). Manning &amp; Felder (1991) turned attention to the characters on chelipeds, although they discussed extant American taxa only. The taxonomic importance of the chelipeds in systematics of callianassid genera was emphasized also by Ngoc-Ho (2003) when comparing genera within the subfamily  Eucalliacinae . Such studies are considered of great importance for palaeontologists working with incompletely preserved individuals. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87CAFFCAC81E00A2F990FDA6B1C1	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	Hyžný, Matúš;Gašparič, Rok	Hyžný, Matúš, Gašparič, Rok (2014): Ghost shrimp Calliax de Saint Laurent, 1973 (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) in the fossil record: systematics, palaeoecology and palaeobiogeography. Zootaxa 3821 (1): 37-57, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3821.1.3
03CA87CAFFCBC81F00A2FF12FCCEB7F2.text	03CA87CAFFCBC81F00A2FF12FCCEB7F2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Eucalliacinae Manning & Felder 1991	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subfamily  Eucalliacinae Manning &amp; Felder, 1991</p>
            <p> Remarks. Discussion of the fossil record of the subfamily was provided by Hyžný &amp; Hudáčková (2012) and Hyžný (2012). Sakai (2011) reconsidered  Eucalliacinae and elevated it to familial level. Moreover, he added the monogeneric Calliapaguropinae Sakai, 1999, to the  Eucalliacidae . Following De Grave et al. (2009), the  Eucalliacinae is treated here as subfamily. For a listing of all extant species of  Eucalliacinae with the taxonomic history of their generic assignment, reference is made to Hyžný (2012: table 1). Since then, Sakai &amp; Türkay (2014) erected another genus and species,  Calliaxiopsis madagassa . </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87CAFFCBC81F00A2FF12FCCEB7F2	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	Hyžný, Matúš;Gašparič, Rok	Hyžný, Matúš, Gašparič, Rok (2014): Ghost shrimp Calliax de Saint Laurent, 1973 (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) in the fossil record: systematics, palaeoecology and palaeobiogeography. Zootaxa 3821 (1): 37-57, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3821.1.3
03CA87CAFFCBC81200A2FB07FACCB745.text	03CA87CAFFCBC81200A2FB07FACCB745.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Calliax de Saint Laurent 1973	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Genus  Calliax de Saint Laurent, 1973</p>
            <p> Type species. —  Callianassa (Callichirus) lobata de Gaillande &amp; Lagardère, 1966 . </p>
            <p> Extant species included. — Three species (including one referred species but not formally named):  Calliax doerjesti Sakai, 1999 (Figs 3A–B);  Calliax lobata (de Gaillande &amp; Lagardère, 1966) (Figs 3C–D);  Calliax sp. sensu Taviani et al. (2013). </p>
            <p> Fossil species included.–  Calliax michelottii (A. Milne Edwards, 1860) comb. nov. More fossil occurrences in open nomenclature are recognized (see Table 1). </p>
            <p>Diagnosis. Carapace lacking dorsal oval; rostrum short, with blunt tip, rostral spine absent. Pleonal segment 2 longest, no lateral tufts of setae on segments 3–5. Telson slightly wider than long, lateral margin curved, posterior margin straight or slightly convex. Eyestalk about twice as long as wide, slightly flattened dorso-ventrally; cornea small, weakly pigmented. A1 peduncle shorter than that of A2. Mxp1 epipod tapering anteriorly. Mxp2 with small, leaf-like epipod. Mxp3 subpediform (sensu Ngoc-Ho 2003), propodus and dactylus rounded, exopod absent. P1 unequal, dissimilar. Major P1 propodus rectangular, usually longer than high, fixed finger shorter than manus, with a double ridge accompanied by a furrow extending onto manus and parallel to the lower margin of propodus. Fixed finger as long as dactylus in major P1, shorter than dactylus in minor P1, with wide proximal gap and large triangular proximal tooth on cutting edge. Major P1 carpus shorter than high, distinctly shorter than propodus. Major P1 merus longer than high, keeled, lower margin armed with small spines. P3 with small proximal heel on propodus, P5 subchelate. Paired arthrobranch on Mxp3 and P1–4. Male and female Plp1 uniramous male and female Plp2 biramous, all lacking appendix interna, male Plp2 with appendix masculina overreaching endopod. Plp3–5 biramous, foliaceous, appendix interna finger-like in both sexes. Uropodal endopod and exopod slightly longer than telson, with rounded posterior margin; exopod with dorsal plate terminating in short distal setal row [emended from Ngoc-Ho (2003: 489) with characters on major P1].</p>
            <p> Remarks on the taxonomy.  Calliax has a complex taxonomic history. The genus was erected by de Saint Laurent (1973) with  Callianassa lobata de Gaillande &amp; Lagardère, 1966 , as the type species. Since then the concept of the genus has been changed several times (cf. Manning &amp; Felder 1991; Sakai 1999, 2005, 2011; Ngoc- Ho 2003; Hyžný 2012; see also Dworschak 2007). Here the view of Ngoc-Ho (2003) and Sakai (2011) is adopted, and thus, only two formally described extant species are recognized. Discussion on distinguishing  Calliax from related taxa based on soft-part morphology was provided by Ngoc-Ho (2003) and will not be repeated here. </p>
            <p> When dealing with chelipeds the two known extant species of  Calliax can be characterized by unequal and dissimilar chelae, from which the minor one has „fixed finger shorter than and separated from the dactylus by a wide gap, bearing a large triangular proximal tooth (Ngoc-Ho 2003: 490)“. This morphology approaches a subchelate cheliped state. Comparison of the illustrated major P1 propodus of  C. lobata (de Gaillande &amp; Lagardère 1966: fig. 2a; de Saint Laurent &amp; Božić 1976: fig. 23; Ngoc-Ho 2003: fig. 17D),  C. doerjesti (Sakai 1999: figs. 28, 29b) and  Calliax sp. (Taviani et al. 2013: fig. 8) clearly shows consistency in its general shape, i.e. propodus is rectangular and usually longer than high and on its lateral surface the fixed finger possesses two ridges accompanied by furrow (or furrows) parallel to the lower margin of propodus and extending onto manus. The ridges are visible especially when viewing under low angle light (Fig. 2C). There are several distinct setal pores (accompanied by tubercles) arranged obliquely across the lateral surface of propodus. In  Calliax the major P1 carpus is always much shorter than manus, with rounded proximo-lower margin (Fig. 3). The merus is longer than high with a distinct meral keel and its lower margin is usually armed with small spines. The above mentioned combination of the characters of minor chela and major propodus, carpus and merus is unique for  Calliax ; thus, the genus can be identified on the basis of chelipeds alone. </p>
            <p> The number of spines on the lower margin of P1 merus may vary between respective members of  Calliax and may help in distinguishing taxa at the species level, although possible variation has not been studied in detail yet. Regarding the number of meral spines, there are discrepancies in the literature. Sakai (1999: 114) in the description of  C. doerjesti mentioned that the lower margin of the merus was “armed with three interspaced denticles”. One of the figures (Sakai 1999: fig. 29b) indeed shows three small spines, however, in the other one (Sakai 1999: fig. 28) depicting the same specimen (holotype) the merus is armed with seven spines (Fig. 3a). Ngoc-Ho (2003: fig. 17D; note that the published figure depicts the right major chela, whereas the caption refers to it as the left one) figured the holotype (male) of  C. lobata with seven spines on the merus and de Saint Laurent &amp; Božić (1976: fig. 23a) figured a female specimen of  C. lobata also with seven spines.  Calliax cf.  C. lobata , examined and figured herein (Figs 2, 3E–F), possesses only four blunt spines, presumably mirroring its small size (Fig. 4). </p>
            <p> Remarks on the fossil record. Articulated chelipeds are relatively sparse in the fossil state and often only isolated propodi are at hand. In this respect, the major P1 propodus of  Calliax is distinct enough to be differentiated from all other ghost shrimp genera. It must be stressed, however, that the more cheliped elements are found, the more secure assignment at the genus level can be provided. </p>
            <p> The best preserved and most numerous remains of  Calliax in the fossil record belong to species originally described as  Callianassa michelottii (Figs 5–10). It is discussed in detail below. </p>
            <p> Feldmann et al. (2005) reported several isolated cheliped elements from the Miocene of the Navidad Formation of Chile as Callianassoidea sp. 1. Although the authors stated that it does not resemble any callianassoid genus (Feldmann et al. 2005: 431), the figured material (Feldmann et al. 2005: fig. 2A) exhibits striking similarities with  Calliax as discussed herein. Interestingly,  Callianassa szobensis Müller, 1984 , which is herein considered a junior subjective synonym of  C. michelottii (see below) and hence a member of  Calliax , is mentioned by Feldmann et al. (2005) as similar to their Callianassoidea sp. 1. The same locality also yielded another specimen which has been identified as Callichirus sp. The figured propodus (Feldmann et al. 2005: fig. 2A) shows a relatively short manus; however, the fixed finger with ridges and a furrow indicates its affinities to Callianassoidea sp. 1 (Feldmann et al. 2005: fig. 2D). Both specimens are treated here as  Calliax sp. 1 . </p>
            <p> Feldmann et al. (2011) reported fragmented material from the Miocene of Tierra del Fuego (Argentina) as “Cheliped Form B” of indeterminate callianassoid. As already noted by Hyžný &amp; Hudáčková (2012: 13), the minor chela exhibits remarkable similarities to  Calliax , (Feldmann et al. 2011: fig. 5E) showing a fixed finger shorter than the dactylus and separated from it by a wide gap with a proximal tooth (cf. Ngoc-Ho 2003: 490). The major P1 propodus (Feldmann et al. 2011: fig. 5B), however, does not possess the ridges on the fixed finger. It is fairly likely that the two specimens do not belong to the same taxon, as they were not found associated with each other. For the purposes of this contribution only the minor chela is referred to here as  Calliax sp. 2 . </p>
            <p> Charbonnier et al. (2013) reported a single near-complete propodus from the Paleocene of Pakistan identified as a minor chela of  Calliax . Indeed, the specimen shows all features typical for minor chelae of the genus (Charbonnier et al. 2013: fig. 2) as discussed above. This occurrence is considered the oldest confirmed fossil record of the genus, treated here as  Calliax sp. 3 . </p>
            <p> Callianassa whiteavesi Woodward, 1896 from the Campanian of Canada (Woodward 1896; Feldmann &amp; McPherson 1980; Schweitzer et al. 2003) was assigned to  Calliax by Schweitzer et al. (2003). The material is rich and sufficiently preserved to reconstruct both chelipeds (Feldmann &amp; McPherson 1980). The species differs markedly from any  Calliax species. It does not possess the typically shaped minor cheliped as discussed above, nor has it parallel ridges on the base of the fixed finger. Moreover, some specimens exhibit a rather deep dactylus, a character not observed in  Calliax . As a result, the species is excluded from  Calliax herein. Until the type material is restudied we suggest to keep the species under  Callianassa sensu lato . </p>
            <p> Swen et al. (2001) reported a single fragmentary right propodus from the Maastrichtian of the Netherlands as “  Calliax ? sp.”. The material is too fragmentary for resolving its generic status. The oblique development of the ridge at the base of fixed finger (Swen et al. 2001: fig. 5.3), however, points to closer affinities to  Eucalliax or  Calliaxina rather than  Calliax . </p>
            <p> Van Bakel et al. (2006) listed in a table of Cenozoic decapods from Belgium the presence of  Calliax in the Miocene strata. The material was recently described as a new member of the family  Axiidae (Fraaije et al. 2011) . </p>
            <p>Occurrence and distribution. Paleocene–Holocene. Two formally described extant species are known from West Atlantic (Florida) and Mediterranean (Sakai 2011). Based on the reports discussed above (Feldmann et al. 2005, 2011), the geographical distribution of the genus was much wider during the Miocene than today, and the genus was apparently also present in the East Pacific (see below). All occurrences are reviewed in Table 1.</p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87CAFFCBC81200A2FB07FACCB745	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	Hyžný, Matúš;Gašparič, Rok	Hyžný, Matúš, Gašparič, Rok (2014): Ghost shrimp Calliax de Saint Laurent, 1973 (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) in the fossil record: systematics, palaeoecology and palaeobiogeography. Zootaxa 3821 (1): 37-57, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3821.1.3
03CA87CAFFC6C81700A2FEE5FBF2B745.text	03CA87CAFFC6C81700A2FEE5FBF2B745.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Calliax michelottii (A. Milne Edwards 1860) Hyžný & Gašparič 2014	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Calliax michelottii (A. Milne Edwards, 1860) comb. nov.</p>
            <p>(Figs 5A–D, 6A–L, 7A–M, 8A–L, 9A–I, 10A–B)</p>
            <p> Callianassa Michelotti A. Milne Edwards, 1860: 341 , pl. 14, fig. 3; A. Milne Edwards, 1860: 210, pl. 14, fig. 3. </p>
            <p> Callianassa michelotti — Schweitzer et al., 2010: 35. </p>
            <p> Callianassa Michelottii — Fritsch, 1871: 691, pl. 17, figs. 5–13; Noetling, 1886: 84, pl. 5, fig. 4; Crema, 1895: 667, fig. 3; Glaessner, 1928: 167–168; Glaessner, 1929: 84. </p>
            <p> Callianassa michelotii — Beurlen, 1931: 111–112. </p>
            <p> “  Callianassa ”  michelotti — Polkowsky, 2005: 17, figs. 8–13, pl. 1, figs. 1–8. </p>
            <p> Callianassa cf. michelottii — Moths &amp; Montag, 2002: 7, pl. 4, fig. 3. </p>
            <p> ʻCallianassaʼ  szobensis Müller, 1984: 53 (partim), pl. 7, figs.3–4. </p>
            <p> Callianassa szobensis — Schweitzer et al., 2010, 37. </p>
            <p> „  Callianassa “  szobensis — Hyžný, 2011: table 2. </p>
            <p> Callianassa sp. —Houša in Špinar et al., 1965: 734, figs. X-184–185. </p>
            <p> ?  Calianassa Michelotti — Wagner-Klett, 1919: 107, pl. 2, fig. 1. </p>
            <p> ? ʻCallianassaʼ  szobensis Müller, 1984: 53 (partim); pl. 7, figs. 5–6. </p>
            <p> ?  Callianassa sp. — Philippe &amp; Secretan, 1971: 128, pl. C, figs. 13–14. </p>
            <p>? Eine nicht bestimmbare Hand— Lőrenthey, 1907: 212, 222, pl. 1, fig. 5.</p>
            <p> non  Callianassa cf. michelottii Müller, 1993: 7 , fig. 3A. </p>
            <p>Diagnosis. Major cheliped massive; merus longer than high (L/H=2.2) with convex upper margin, carpus higher than long (L/H=0.45), about half the length of manus or shorter, upper margin straight, proximolower margin regularly rounded and smooth in outline; propodus rectangular, longer than high, exhibiting two morphotypes (L/ H=1.1–1.2; 1.3–1.5); outer lateral surface of manus smooth, adorned with several tubercles; fixed finger shorter than manus, triangular, with two parallel ridges extending onto manus, lower (less developed) ridge positioned close to the lower propodal margin; occlusal margin of fixed finger serrated and adorned with a blunt tooth pointing up and forward; dactylus slender, with serrated occlusal margin and pointed tip.</p>
            <p>Description. Major cheliped massive. Merus longer than high (L/H=2.2), with prominent keel along the midline; upper margin unarmed, convex; lower margin concave, serrated. Carpus higher than long (L/H=0.45), upper margin straight or concave, proximolower margin regularly rounded and smooth in outline. Propodus rectangular, longer than high (L/H=1.1–1.5), distinctly longer than carpus; upper and lower margins straight, parallel to each other, forming distinct keels on the inner sides, rounded proximally; distal margin straight, parallel to proximal margin, the base of the fixed finger may form a notch. Outer lateral surface of manus smooth, adorned with several tubercles (at the bases of setal pores) lying in a row positioned obliquely. Inner lateral surface of manus concave, with distinct depression at the base of fixed finger. Fixed finger shorter than manus, triangular, with two ridges extending onto manus, lower (less developed) ridge positioned close to the lower propodal margin, upper one (strongly developed) accompanied with several tubercles proximally; occlusal margin serrated and adorned with a blunt tooth pointing up and forward. Dactylus slender, with serrated occlusal margin and pointed tip.</p>
            <p> Variations. Major propodi of  Calliax michelottii comb. nov. exhibit a certain degree of variation. When examining a large number of specimens, one can observe differences in the manus length/height ratio attaining values in two intervals, i.e. 1.1–1.2 (shorter morph) and 1.3–1.5 (longer morph). Unfortunately it is difficult to state whether it is intraspecific variation or if it mirrors sexual dimorphism. Polkowsky (2005) tentatively interpreted two morphotypes of  C. michelottii as sexual dimorphs. Some propodi may possess a relatively well developed notch at the base of the fixed finger. Its development seems to be at least partly correlated with the size, but as already pointed out by Polkowsky (2005), the notch in the longer morphotype is usually better developed. </p>
            <p>Development of the ridges is a stable character, i.e. there are always two ridges present, and the lower one is rather faint. What differs in various propodi is the shape of the upper ridge in its proximalmost part. In some specimens it is straight, but in others it is curved downwards. The development of tubercles accompanying the upper ridge also varies, depending on the size of the animal.</p>
            <p>Glaessner (1928) reported strong ornamentation on the isolated propodi from Jarenina, Slovenia (Figs 8A–B). This can, however, be ascribed mainly to preservational aspects. Specimens from Želiezovce, Slovakia (Špinar et al. 1965: fig. X-184; refigured here as Fig. 8L) and Szob, Hungary (Müller 1984: pl. 7, figs. 3, 4; refigured here as Figs 8J–K) exhibit a similar pattern of ornamentation, although not so pronounced as in the material from Jarenina. Possibly it is related to calcification of the cuticle. Experimental data, which are lacking at this point of time, would help in elucidating this issue.</p>
            <p> Major P1carpus may have a concave upper margin (Fritsch 1871: pl. 17, fig. 9; refigured here as Fig. 6E). A similarly concave upper margin was also observed in extant  Calliax doerjesti (Sakai 1999: fig. 28, 29; Fig. 3A). This feature may be related to age and/or size of the individual. For resolving this issue in  Calliax michelottii comb. nov. more preserved carpi must be examined. </p>
            <p> Material examined. Only remains of major chelipeds have been examined: the holotype of  Callianassa michelottii from Superga at Turin, Italy (MNHN-F-B32690; Fig. 5); 21 fragmentary propodi and one carpus (NHMW 1874/0029/1154 a–v) from Sternberg, Germany (Fig. 7); one isolated propodus from Pinnow bei Schwerin, Germany (NHMW 1874/0029/1155; Fig. 7I); one right propodus articulated with dactylus from Pucking, Austria (NHMW 2003/0026/0913; Fig. 8C); entire articulated right cheliped from Neuhofen bei Tettenweis (NHMW 2010/0089/0001; Fig. 8I); two isolated left propodi (RGA / SMNH 0773, 0779), two isolated right propodi (RGA / SMNH 0754, 0864), four articulated chelae consisting of propodus and dactylus (RGA / SMNH 1075, 1187) and even carpus and merus (RGA / SMNH 1069, 1191) from Kamnik-Košiše, Slovenia (Figs 9A–H); right isolated propodus from the unknown site at Kamnik (Stein in Krain), Slovenia (GBA 2009/014/0027; Fig. 9I); two isolated propodi from Jarenina (Jahring), Slovenia already reported (but not figured) by Glaessner (1928) (UMJGP 77873–77874; Figs 8A–B); one right fragmentary propodus from Rohožník, Slovakia (KGP-MH RO- 001; Figs 8D–H); holotype of  Callianassa szobensis from Szob, Hungary (M.2004.158.1; Figs 8J–K). </p>
            <p>Occurrence. Oligocene (Rupelian)–Middle Miocene (Serravallian) of Europe. The oldest occurrence of the species is known from the Rupelian of the Mainz Basin, Germany (Fritsch 1871; Figs 6A–G). The youngest one is from the Middle–Late Badenian (Serravallian) of Slovakia (herein). All confirmed occurrences are summarized in Table 2. For details see text below.</p>
            <p> Remarks.  Callianassa michelottii was originally described based on isolated propodi (Fig. 5) from the Miocene of Superga hill near Turin, Italy (A. Milne Edwards 1860). A. Milne Edwards (1860: p. 211) noted that the presence of the keel on the fixed finger accompanied by the tubercles above it is unique not only for fossil species, but this character distinguishes the species from all extant callianassids known at that time as well. Indeed, the type species of  Calliax was described more than a century later by de Gaillande &amp; Lagardère (1966). Crema (1895) reported  C. michelottii from the Middle Miocene of nearby localities in the Turin hills. </p>
            <p> Fritsch (1871) reported  C. michelottii from the “Middle” Oligocene (Rupelian) “Septarienthon” of the Mainz Basin (W Germany). Interestingly, Fritsch (1871: pl. 17, figs 5–13) reported and also figured a small chela preserved together with the major P1 propodus (Fig. 6G). He tentatively interpreted it as remains of P2, but it in fact represents a minor P1 chela. The description of Fritsch (1871: 696) is very clear in this sense (“Der bewegliche Finger steht auf einem weit nach vorn vorspringenden Theil des Ballens. Vom unbeweglichen Finger ist nu rein ganz geringer Theil sichtbar, warscheinlich war derselbe indess kurz, die hervortretenden Leisten desselben Gliedes der Vorderhand fehlen.” English translation: Dactylus is located on the manus portion projecting forward. Only very small portion of the index is visible. It was probably short, although the tip is missing.) Fritsch (1871: 692) mentioned also the presence of the cephalothorax (“Wohl liegt ein Exemplar vor, an welchem man Theile des kleinen dünnschaligen Cephalothorax und der seitlich zusammengedrückten hinteren Fusspaare erkennt, doch is dasselbe für eine Charakteristik des Thieres zu ungenügend erhalten.” English translation: There is a sample in which the individual shows the preserved small cephalothorax with thin cuticle and the laterally compressed “rear” pereiopod. However, the preservation of both characters is insufficient.), but he did not figure it. The material of Fritsch (1871) was reexamined by Beurlen (1931); he confirmed much of what was already done in the original work. </p>
            <p> Noetling (1886: pl. 5, fig. 4; refigured here as Figs 6H–K) reported the species from the Late Oligocene “Sternberger Gestein”of Kobrow, Germany. The latest contribution on  Callianassa michelottii from this facies is that by Polkowsky (2005) who discussed at length the variation of the species as well as its geographic distribution. </p>
            <p> Lőrenthey (1907: pl. 1, fig. 5; refigured in Fig. 6L) reported and figured undetermined isolated propodi from the Miocene of Cagliari, Sardinia. With two parallel ridges on the fixed finger, the specimen shows affinities to  Calliax michelottii comb. nov. , but possesses rather convex upper propodal margin, which is unusual for  Calliax , although the character itself may reflect mere intraspecific variation. The material (collection of Lovisato) is considered lost (De Angeli &amp; Garassino 2006); thus, the re-examination of the material is not possible. As a consequence, we treat the occurrence as questionable. </p>
            <p> Wagner-Klett (1919) reported  Callianassa michelottii from the Oligocene Septarienton of Wiesloch, Germany. The figure he provided (Wagner-Klett 1919: pl. 2, fig. 1), however, does not conform to the diagnosis of the species. The specimen consisting of an articulated carpus, propodus, and dactylus shows no ridges on the fixed finger. The material was either not properly figured or it represents a different species. </p>
            <p>Glaessner (1928) reported the species from the Helvetian (Early Miocene) of Jahring (today's Jarenina, Slovenia) in the Styrian Basin. He, however, did not provide figures. The re-examination of the material by the senior author confirms the identification of the material (Figs 8A–B).</p>
            <p> Beurlen (1939: 143) when discussing affinities of  Callianassa brevimanus Beurlen, 1939 , (currently recognized as a member of  Lepidophthalmus Holmes, 1904 ; see Hyžný &amp; Dulai in press) briefly mentioned  C. michelottii as coming from the Oligocene of the Mainz Basin and Miocene of Italy and the Vienna Basin, however, without any further reference. It is supposed here that Beurlen (1939) mentioned the occurrence from the Vienna Basin erroneously, as there is no such published report known to the authors. He might have been referring to the published occurrence from the Styrian Basin by Glaessner (1928). </p>
            <p> Several chelae from the Middle Miocene (“Badenian”) of Želiezovce (Slovak part of the Danube Basin) figured by Houša in Špinar et al. (1965: figs. X-184–185, refigured herein as 8L) as  Callianassa sp. can be clearly assigned to  Callianassa michelottii . Unfortunately, the repeated search for the material was unsuccessful, thus, it is herein considered lost. </p>
            <p> Philippe &amp; Secretan (1971) reported 10 fragmentary propodi from the Burdigalian of SE France. The figured specimens (Pl. C, figs. 13, 14) show the keeled fixed finger accompanied with furrows, thus, pointing to attribution of the material to  Calliax . The age and location of the specimens would speak for indentification as  C. michelottii . Without personal re-examination of the material, however, we are reluctant to treat the specimens as conspecific with  C. michelottii . </p>
            <p> The description and figures of “  Callianassa ”  szobensis Müller, 1984 from the Middle Miocene (Badenian) of Hungary fit the diagnosis and variations of  C. michelottii . The propodus is longer than high, the fixed finger possesses two ridges parallel to one another, and there are tubercles on the lateral surface of the propodus (Figs 8J–K). As a consequence, “ C. ”  szobensis is considered a junior subjective synonym of  C. michelottii . </p>
            <p> From the Miocene of Spain (Catalonia), Müller (1993: fig. 3A) reported and figured an isolated propodus of a callianassid shrimp. He classified it as  Callianassa cf. michelottii . The specimen, however, is rather dissimilar to  C. michelottii ; it does not possess a double ridge on the fixed finger and has the upper margin converging proximally, which is very atypical for the latter species. </p>
            <p> Calliax michelottii n. comb. is morphologically very close to its extant congeners. The upper margin of the major P1 merus is, however, more convex in  C. michelottii n. comb. (Fritsch 1871: pl. 17, fig. 9; see also Figs. 8I), whereas it is rather straight in both extant species,  C. doerjesti and  C. lobata (Fig. 3A and Fig. 3C, respectively). The development of spines on the lower margin of the major P1 merus in  Calliax michelottii comb. nov. is closer to that of  C. lobata . The tooth formula of the occlusal margin of the fixed finger looks different in all three species, but this may be a matter of variation and is not considered taxonomically important here. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CA87CAFFC6C81700A2FEE5FBF2B745	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	Hyžný, Matúš;Gašparič, Rok	Hyžný, Matúš, Gašparič, Rok (2014): Ghost shrimp Calliax de Saint Laurent, 1973 (Decapoda: Axiidea: Callianassidae) in the fossil record: systematics, palaeoecology and palaeobiogeography. Zootaxa 3821 (1): 37-57, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3821.1.3
