Grandidierella bonnieroides Stephensen, 1947

Grandidierella bonnieroides Stephensen, 1947 View in CoL

Figs. 1C View FIGURE 1 , 8–10 View FIGURE 8 View FIGURE 9 View FIGURE 10

Grandidierella bonnieroides Stephensen, 1947: 12 View in CoL , fig. 3.

Grandidierella megnae View in CoL — Chilton, 1921: 548 (in parts), fig 10.— Stephensen 1933: 434.— Shoemaker 1935: 70.

Unciolella lunata View in CoL — Schellenberg 1928: 669, fig 207.

Grandidierella bonnieri View in CoL — K.H. Barnard 1935: 299.— Panikkar & Aiyar 1937: 294.— Schellenberg, 1938: 215.— Shoemaker 1948: 11, fig 3.—K.H. Barnard 1951: 708; 1952: 279, fig 1.— Ruffo 1958: 58, figs 8, 9.— Nayar 1959: 38, pl. 14, figs 1–5; 1966: 161, fig 17f. — Ledoyer 1967: 137, fig. 28a; 1968: 287, fig 25b.— Griffiths 1973: 283; 1974a: 228.

Grandidierella bonnieroides View in CoL — Myers 1970: 141, figs 1–2.— Myers 1972: 790; 1981: 218.— Ledoyer 1973: 40.— Griffiths 1974b: 282.— Asari & Myers 1982: 252, figs 9–10.—Lowry & Stoddart 2003: 70 (catalogue).— Lo Brutto et al. 2016: 521 View Cited Treatment , figs 3–6.

Diagnosis

Male pereonite 1 with a small sternal spine, gnathopod 1 carpus proximal end V shaped and gnathopod 1 dactylus broad near the base and gradually decreasing toward the distal end.

Material examined

India • 3 ♂, 4.0–5.0 mm , 1 ♀, 4.0 mm; Sutrapada , Gujarat; 20°50'27"N, 70°27'55"E; 8 Jan 2024; D. R. Thacker leg. GoogleMaps ;

LFSC.ZRC-286.

Ecology type. Collected from muddy substratum. Salinity 35±2 PSU.

Description. Based on male 4.5 mm.

HEAD. Eyes small, round, well-developed.

ANTENNA 1 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). Peduncular articles slender, about 1.4 × the length of antenna 2; length ratio of peduncular articles 1–3 1:1.14:0.41; primary flagellum 1.3 × the length of peduncle; accessory flagellum absent.

ANTENNA 2 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). Stout, length ratio of peduncular articles 3–5 1:2.49:2.49; flagellum short with 4 articles, article 2 to 4 each with a robust spine.

MAXILLA 1 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). Outer plate with several apical robust setae, palp article 2 with 5 apical robust setae.

MAXILLA 2 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). Inner plate apically setose, a long oblique row of setae present; outer plate apically setose.

MAXILLIPED ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). Inner plate with several plumose setae; outer plate with four apical robust setae and five robust marginal setae; palp article 2 longest; article 4 with apical nail.

PEREONITE 1. With very small sternal spine visible only after removal of gnathopod 1.

GNATHOPOD 1 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Basis subrectangular twice as long as broad with few setae on posterior margin; ischium small, subrectangular; carpus large, elongate, 2.9 × the length of propodus, 1.7 × longer than broad, posterodistal corner produced into a medium sized triangular tooth, a small robust seta on posterior margin and a small conical tooth on distal margin; propodus subrectangular, anterior margin convex; dactylus length subequal to propodus, inner margin smooth with few small hairs, proximally expanded.

GNATHOPOD 2 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Basis 3.5 × longer than broad, anterior margin sparsely setose with small setae; ischium small subquadrate; merus 2 × as long as broad; carpus 2.5 × longer than broad, anterior margin sparsely setose, posterior margin densely setose; propodus subrectangular, 2.1 × longer than broad, anterior margin sparsely setose, posterior margin densely setose; dactylus subequal to palm, inner margin serrated.

PEREOPOD 3–4 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Both similar; basis around 1.7 × the length of merus; ischium small, subrectangular; merus subequal to propodus, both margins with few setae on each side; carpus with one or two small setae on anterior margin, few simple setae on posterior margin; propodus slender, 1.3 × the length of dactylus, with a single seta on anterior margin; two to four setae on posterior margin, anterodistal corner with a tuft of few small simple setae; dactylus slender.

PEREOPOD 5 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Shorter than pereopod 4; basis anterior margin with very few small setae, posterior margin with one to two small setae; ischium small with a single seta at anterodistal corner; merus subequal to propodus with one seta on anterior margin, anterodistal corner with two setae; carpus with one single seta on anterior margin, posterior margin with three small to medium sized spines, anterodistal corner with one long thick and one small setae; propodus anterior margin with two small setae, posterior margin with four small to medium sized spines, anterodistal corner with two thin setae; dactylus short, 0.6 x the length of propodus.

PEREOPOD 6 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). 0.8 × the length of pereopod 7; basis subrectangular, anterior margin with five small robust setae, posterior margin with five robust setae and sparsely placed setae; ischium longer than broad with one small seta on anterior margin; merus 3.7 × longer than broad, anterior margin with few small setae, posterior margin with one small thin and two long thick setae, anterodistal corner with one robust seta, posterodistal corner with one thin long and one small robust setae; carpus 0.6 × the length of merus, anterior margin with one seta, posterior margin bare; both distal corners with a thick seta; propodus 0.8 × the length of basis, posterior margin with three setae, anterior margin with three spines; dactylus 0.5 × the length of propodus.

PEREOPOD 7 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Basis anterior margin with four small robust setae, posterior margin sparsely four to five small robust setae and densely placed long plumose setae; ischium small with two setae on anterodistal corner; merus 0.9 × the length of basis, anterior margin with a single seta, posterior margin with several setae, anterodistal corner with one simple and one robust setae, posterodistal corner with one long robust seta; carpus 0.8 × the length of merus; propodus subequal to basis, posterior margin with few small setae, anterior margin with five robust setae; posterodistal corner with a tuft of long setae; dactylus 0.4 × the length of the propodus.

EPIMERA. 1 & 3 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). Ventral margin bare and anterior and posterior corners rounded.

EPIMERA 2 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). Posteroventral corner with a single seta.

UROPOD 1 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Peduncle 1.5 × longer than both subequal rami; inter ramus spine 0.3 × the length of rami.

UROPOD 2 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Peduncle 0.9 × the length of exopodite; exopodite 0.76 × the length of endopodite.

UROPOD 3 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 ). Uniramous; ramus almost 1.7 × the length of peduncle.

TELSON ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 ). 1.6 × as broad as long, laterodistal corner each with one long and one short setae.

Female (sexually dimorphic characters).

GNATHOPOD 1 ( Fig. 10 View FIGURE 10 ). Basis subrectangular, 2.5 × longer than wide; carpus 0.88 × as long as basis, anterior margin with one seta, posterior margin densely setose; propodus 0.8 × as long as carpus, anterior margin with three setae, posterior margin densely setose and three robust setae present in a row behind palm, palm very short; dactylus inner margin with three to four small spines.

GNATHOPOD 2 ( Fig. 10 View FIGURE 10 ). Basis 2.8 × longer than broad, anterior margin with 8 small setae; carpus subequal to propodus, anterior margin with three setae, posterior margin densely setose, anterodistal corner with two setae; propodus subrectangular, both margins weakly setose, palm very small; dactylus subequal in length to palm, inner margin with three to four small spines.

Remarks

Stephensen (1933) first recorded a species as G. megnae on the basis of materials collected from the Islands of Bonaire, West Indies. Later on, he revised his diagnosis and referred this material along with further material collected from Bonaire and Curaçao, salt water as a new species, G. bonnieroides . Stephensen (1947) differentiated G. bonnieroides from G. bonnieri Stebbing, 1908 by characters, such as—gnathopod 1 carpus parallel sided (oval in G. bonnieri ) and three spinal processes on gnathopod 1 carpus (only one spinal process in G. bonnieri ). Stephensen (1947) also differentiated G. bonnieroides from G. bonnieri reported by Barnard (1935) from Kerala, India, by the following characters—absence of spine on pereonite 1 and 2. After comparing his materials with both reports of G. bonnieri, Stephensen (1947) concluded that his materials from Bonaire and Curaçao are close to G. bonnieri Stebbing, 1908 , but definitely not the same species and described his material as a new species— G. bonnieroides , and also suspected that his materials are not close with the specimens of G. bonnieri reported by Barnard (1935).

Later, Myers (1970) examined materials of G. bonnieroides from several locations from the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico and observed a considerable variation in the relative development of the sternal spine of pereonite 1 and 2. He observed that the spine was usually present on pereonite 1 and sometimes well-developed, whereas the spine on pereonite 2 was usually absent but sometimes well-developed. He also observed similar kinds of variations in antenna 2, where sometimes it was robust and sometimes slender, and also with intermediate forms. Keeping these variations in consideration, Myers (1970) concluded that all the specimens are conspecific and considered them as a single species, G. bonnieroides . Thus, he synonymized G. bonnieri , reported by Barnard (1935) with G. bonnieroides .

The specimens examined here have a pereonite 1 spine that is relatively well developed and the pereonite 2 is lacking the spine. Moreover, it has three spinal processes on gnathopod 1 carpus, which makes the specimens examined here identical to G. bonnieroides reported by Asari & Myers (1982) collected from the Vellar-Coleroon estuarine complex, Porto Novo, Tamil Nadu, India.

Distribution

Chilika Lake, Odisha, India ( Chilton 1921); Suez canal ( Schellenberg 1928); Etang Saumâtre, Haiti ( Shoemaker 1935); Njarackal, Cochin, Kerala, India (K.H. Barnard 1935); Adyar, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India ( Panikkar & Aiyar 1937); Brazilian coast ( Schellenberg 1938); Curaçao; Bonaire ( Shoemaker 1948; Stephensen 1933; 1948; Lowry & Stoddart, 2003); Durban Bay, Durban, South Africa; Richards Bay, Kwa Zulu-Natal, South Africa (K.H. Barnard 1951; 1952); Soalara, Madagascar ( Ruffo 1958); Madras, Tamil Nadu, India ( Nayar 1959); Tuticorin, Tamil Nadu, India; Mandapam, Tamil Nadu, India ( Nayar 1966); Tulear, Madagascar ( Ledoyer 1967; 1968; 1973); Gran Roque, Los Roques Islands, Venezuela; Marguerita Island, Venezuela; Tortola Island, British West Indies, Caroni Swamp, Trinidad; Port St. Joe, Florida; Salt Spring, Marion, Florida; Williams, Lake Pontchartrain, Louisiana; Riviera Beach, Baffin Bay, Texas; Sta. Marta Island, Colombia; Msasani Bay, Tanzania ( Myers 1970); Madagascar (Mayers, 1972); Mozambique ( Griffiths 1973); Natal, Brazil ( Griffiths 1974a); Cape Province east of Cape Agulhas ( Griffiths 1974b); Lizard Island, Queensland, Australia ( Myers 1981); Lagoons Dawhat as Sayh, Arabian Gulf, Saudi Arabia ( Myers 1981); Vellar-Coleroon estuarine, Porto Novo, Tamil Nadu, India ( Asari & Myers 1982); Gulf of Aqaba, Red Sea ( Lyons & Myers 1990); Bonaire, Netherlands Antilles, Caribbean Sea ( Myers 2009); Israel coast, Mediterranean Sea ( Lo Brutto et al. 2016) and Sutrapada, Gujarat, India (Present study). In the present study this species is first time reported from Gujarat State, India.