Glossobius impressus (Say, 1818), 2018

Glossobius impressus (Say, 1818)

( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 g–i).

Cymothoa impressa Say, 1818: 397 .—De Kay, 1844: 48.

Ceratothoa linearis Dana, 1853: 752 , pl. 50 (fig. la–d).—Gerstaecker, 1882: 260.— Stebbing, 1893: 354.—Richardson, 1900: 221; 1901: 529.

Ceratothoa exocoeti Cunningham, 1871: 499 , pl. 59 (fig. 5).—Gerstaecker, 1882: 260.

Glossobius linearis .— Schiöedte & Meinert, 1883: 301, pl. 12 (figs 1–9).—Hansen, 1895: 18, pl. 2 (fig. 2a–d).— Brian & Dartevelle, 1949: 176.

Ceratothoa impressa .—Richardson, 1905: 234–236, figs 236–240; 1913: 2, 6.—Fowler, 1912: 292–293, pl. 83.—Tattersall, 1921: 214.—Stephensen, 1948: 43–44, fig. 9.— Schultz, 1969: 155–156, fig. 233.—Anonymous, 1971: 16–17.—Lincoln, 1971: 103–104, pl. 90; 1971b: 184.—Trilles, 1972: 7–9, pl. 5, 6 (figs 3–24); 1973: 1253–1255, pl. 2 (figs 14–16).— Bowman, 1978: 217.— Kussakin, 1979: 287, fig. 153.— Kurochkin, 1980: 289.

Meinertia impressa .— Nierstrasz, 1915: 89–90; 1918: 119.

Codonophilus impressus .— Nierstrasz, 1931: 131.

Glossobius impressa .—Avdeev, 1981: 1160, 1164; 1982a: 70.

Glossobius impressus .— Avdeev, 1982 b: 65–67, fig. 2 (4); 1985: 89.— Bruce & Bowman, 1989: 22–26, figs 15–17.—Kensley & Schotte, 1989: 183–185, fig. 83b.— Williams & Williams, 2000: 155.—Luque, Vieira, Takemoto, Pavanelli & Eiras, 2013: 1449–1470. Martin, Bruce & Nowak, 2015: 339–344, figs 1–3.— Vigneshwaran, Ravichandran & Rameshkumar, 2018b: 1–5, fig. 1.

Not Ceratothoa impressa .—Berkeley & Houde, 1978: 636 [= Glossobius hemiramphi Williams & Williams, 1985 ].

Type and type locality. The holotype Glossobius impressus , held at the Academy of Natural Sciences Museum, Pennsylvania ( ANSP 1608). Type locality is Cape May, New Jersey from an unknown host ( Bruce & Bowman 1989).

Remarks. The Indian specimen of Glossobius impressus , redescribed by Vigneshwaran et al. (2018b). This species can be identified by the body subparalle; pereonite 1 not encompassing cephalon, pereonites 1 and 2 with prominent lateral lobes, pereonite 2 with similar flanged lobe formed from coxae; posterior margins of pereonites 3–5 without a median point; coxae 2–7 anteroventral margins similar in size to posteroventral margins; pleotelson wider than pereonite 7, posterior margin sinuate; pereopod 3 slender, long and weakly twisted dactylus, pereopods 6 and 7 merus with bulbous protrusion; and pleopods with strongly convexed lateral margins. Glossobius auritus differs from G. impressus in having body subparallel, pereonites 1 and 2 without bulbous lateral lobe; pereopod 3 dactylus no longer or larger than other dactyli ( Vigneshwaran et al. 2018b).

Size. Bruce & Bowman (1989) observed: ovig. females 24–40 mm, pre-ovig. females 28–39 mm, mature males 8–11 mm.

Colour. Cephalon to pereonites 1–3 and appendages appearing dark brown to black, gradually lightening towards posterior; pleon, pleotelson, and pereopods 6 and 7 virtually without chromatophores similar to that observed by Bruce & Bowman (1989) and Martin et al. (2015).

Distribution. The species G. impressus has been known to distribute in widely. For locality details see Martin et al. (2015) and Vigneshwaran et al. (2018b).

Host. The known hosts include seven species of Exocoetidae . For fish host species details, see Martin et al. (2015) and Vigneshwaran et al. (2018b).