Spicomacrurus kuronumai ( Kamohara, 1938 )

Iwamoto, Tomio, Nakayama, Naohide, Shao, Kwang-Tsao & Table, Hsuan-Ching Ho, 2015, Synopsis of the Grenadier Fishes (Gadiformes; Teleostei) of Taiwan, Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences 62 (3), pp. 31-126 : 103

publication ID	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11512126
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11512354
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/039F87BD-FF92-1116-AB64-E2DAFCB1FC9B
treatment provided by	Felipe
scientific name	Spicomacrurus kuronumai ( Kamohara, 1938 )
status

Treatment

Spicomacrurus kuronumai ( Kamohara, 1938) View in CoL

Hymenocephalus kuronumai Kamohara, 1938:70 View in CoL , fig. 40 (Mimase, Kochi Pref., Japan; neotype: BSKU 4333, invalid according to ICZN).— Shao et al., 2008: table 2 ( 1 spec., NET, 100–650 m; first record from Taiwan).

Hymenogadus ( Spicomacrurus) kuronumai View in CoL : Okamura, 1970:64–67, pl. III, text-figs. 25, 26–28 ( 79 spec., 143–200 mm TL; Pacific coast of s. Japan, in about 350–450 m) .

Hymenogadus kuronumai : Okamura in Masuda et al., 1984:94, pl. 80–I (compiled). Okamura in Okamura and Kitajima , 1984:203, 359, fig. 144 (p.202) ( 3 spec., 135–194 mm TL, Okinawa Trough [ East China Sea], 400–510 m.

Spicomacrurus kuronumai View in CoL : Iwamoto et al., 2011:513–530, fig. 1A–C (subgenus elevated to genus).

MATERIAL EXAMINED ( 2 spec.).— NET: ASIZP 65232 View Materials (1, 165 TL) , Da-xi. ASIZP 70247 View Materials (1, 97 TL) , Da-xi.

DISTINGUISHING FEATURES.— 1D II 9–12; P i18–i22; V 8; inner GR-I 12–15 total; pyl. caeca 11–18. Snout depressed, nasal bones developed into three horizontal platelike processes; body subcylindrical; outer V ray produced and expanded distally. Attains 240 mm TL.

DISTRIBUTION.— Pacific coast of s. Japan, and ne. Taiwan. in 350–650 m.

REMARKS.— Shao et al., (2008: table 2) first recorded the species from Taiwan based on ASIZP 65232. The species is apparently relatively abundant off Japan, as suggested by the 95 specimens ( 143–211 mm TL) recorded by Okamura (1970 b:4, table 1), who treated it as a subgenus of Hymenogadus . Kamohara (1961) designated a neotype for the species but not in a revisory work, which renders the designation invalid ( fide Eschmeyer 1998:852).