Sphaeroma khalijfarsi, Khalaji-Pirbalouty, Valiallah & Wägele, Johann-Wolfgang, 2010

Sphaeroma khalijfarsi View in CoL sp. nov.

( Figs 1 – 5 View FIGURE 1 View FIGURE 2 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4 View FIGURE 5 )

Material examined. Holotype. Male (7.1 mm), Qeshm Island, Eastern coast, Northwest of Qeshm city, muddy-sand shore, beneath stones, 3 July 2009, 26°58’138”N, 56°15’391”E, coll. A. Behpouri and V. Khalaji ( ZMH –K– 42582).

Paratypes: 11 adult males (up to 8.5 mm, average size 6.5 mm), 9 females (up to 8 mm, average size 6 mm), same data as holotype ( ZMH –K– 42583). 4 females (5.5, 6, 7.2, 8.2 mm); 3 juveniles, Baddar-e-Kolahi, muddy-sand shore, 22 April 2008, 27°03’ N, 56°51’E, coll. R. Naderloo ( ZMH –K– 42584). 2 subadult males (5.5, 6 mm), 5 females (5, 5.5, 6, 6.2, 7 mm); Bandarabbas, Khour-e-shilat, muddy-sand shore, 29 Jun 2009, 27°11’55”N, 56°19’03”E, coll. A. Behpouri and V. Khalaji ( ZMH –K– 42585).

Diagnosis. Head dorsally with a pair of small tubercles on either side anteriorly. Pereonites 1–7 smooth, lacking tubercles. Pleon without prominent tubercles, bearing some small scattered tubercles. Pleotelson granulated, lateral and posterior borders upturned, apex broadly rounded. Maxilliped palp articles 2–4 bearing dense fringes of long fine-plumose setae on superior margin. Appendix masculina inserted basally, apically curved, extending well beyond endopod, with a row of cuticular spines on apex mesial margin. Penes rami with lateral and mesial margins bearing several small fine setae.

Description of male. Body about 1.8 times as long as greatest width, widest at pereonite 6 ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A). Head anterior margin with pair of weak sub-median tubercles, rostral process barely visible in dorsal view. Pereonites 1–7 dorsally smooth, posterior margin with fringe of fine setae, pereonites 2–7 with coxal plate sutures clearly visible on lateral sides( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 B); coxal plate 4 narrower than others, ventrally more rounded in pereonites 5–7.

Pleon ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A) dorsal surface bearing some small scattered tubercles.

Pleotelson ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A) wider than long, dorsal surface granulated with small scattered tubercles, posterior part excavated dorsally with upturned margins and broadly rounded, slightly truncated apex.

Antennule ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 C) article 3 slender and about 2.3 times as long as article 2; flagellum 12 – articled, articles 7 – 10 each bearing aesthetascs.

Antenna ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 D) peduncle article 5, about 2 times as long as article 1; inferior margin of articles 1–4 fringed with fine dense setae; flagellum 14 – articled, each article with an apical tuft of fine setae, posterior setae being smaller.

Epistome ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 E) with triangular and pointed apex, lateral margins near apex concave.

Left mandible ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 C, D) incisor with 4 cusps, lacinia mobilis with 3 cusps; spine row of 6–8 curved, serrate spines; palp article 2 as long as 1, article 2 and 3 distolateral margins with 17 and 22 biserrate setae.

Maxillule ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 A) lateral lobe with simple slender setae on mesial and lateral margins, distal margin with 8 robust, serrate and 2 simple robust setae, dorsal surface with 1 robust, long and apically serrate seta; mesial lobe with simple setae on inner margin, apical margin with 3 circumplumose robust setae (each of them with some small spines, particularly on apical part), and 2 shorter plumose setae.

Maxilla ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 B) lateral and middle endites with about 28 finely pectinate robust setae; mesial endite wider, with about 27 plumose setae.

Maxilliped ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 E) endite with some plumose setae, set in amongst fine simple setae in apical margin, mesial margin with single coupling hook, ventral surface with a row of about 10–12 long robust circumplumose setae; palp articles 2–4 bearing dense fringes of long fine-plumose setae on superior margin, articles 3–4 with some slender simple setae on inferodistal angle, article 5 about 1.2 time as long as article 4.

Pereopod 1 ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 A) basis about 3.3 times as long as greatest width, proximal superior margin fringed with dense fine setae; ischium 3.7 times as long as greatest width, superior margin fringed with numerous long plumose setae; merus, carpus and propodus inferior margins with dense fringe of short setae; propodus inferodistal angle with 1 biserrate and 1 nodular robust setae; rostral surface with transverse row of several long plumose setae. Pereopod 2 ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 B) ischium and merus with dense fringes of long plumose setae on inferior margins, carpus with 3 robust biserrate setae on inferodistal corner; merus, carpus and propodus inferior margins fringed with short setae. Pereopod 3 ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 C) similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 4 and 5 ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 D, 4A) are shorter than pereopods 1–3, ischium and merus with several long distally plumose setae in superior margins; Pereopods 6 and 7( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 B, 4C) are similar except in some details such as the number of serrate robust setae on distal margin of carpus. Pereopod 7 with inferior and superior margins of ischium to carpus bearing dense long simple fine setae; carpus distal margin with 13–15 biserrate setae.

Pleopod 1 ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 A) exopod and endopod with approximately 33 and 19 plumose marginal setae; exopod with a single stout seta on proximal lateral corner; sympod mesial margin with 3 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 B) exopod and endopod with approximately 33 and 26 plumose marginal setae; appendix masculina arising basally, curving laterally, extending well beyond endopod by about 1.7 as long as endopod, with row of cuticular spines on apex mesial margin; sympod with 3 distomesial coupling hooks. Pleopod 3 ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 C) exopod and endopod with approximately 31 and 19 plumose marginal setae; sympod with 3 distomesial coupling hooks, lateral margin with fringe of thin setae and 5 long simple setae on distolateral corner. Pleopod 4 ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 D) endopod with a pronounced and curved apical lob with a single stout seta on apex; exopod with about 15 slender setae on lateral margin; sympodite sympod with about 8 long slender setae on distolateral corner and a single simple seta on mesial margin. Pleopod 5 ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 E) exopod with 5 scale patches (3 distally and 2 proximal to transverse suture), lateral margin with approximately 35 slender marginal and sub-marginal setae.

Penial processes ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 D) each 1.8 as long as basal width, lateral margins covered with several small fine setae, distally bluntly rounded as illustrated.

Uropod ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 E) exopod lateral margin clearly serrate, with 4–5 teeth; endopod with rounded apex without dense marginal setae.

Female. apart from sexual characters similar to male, body size smaller than in male and pleotelson is shorter than male.

Individuals of this species show a variety of colours (polychromatic) from bright, black stripes to entirely black, even within a single population ( Fig. 11 A–C View FIGURE 11. A – C ).

Remarks. Sphaeroma khalijfarsi sp. nov. can be recognized by the smooth surface of pereonites, presence of some small scattered tubercles on the pleon dorsal surface, lacking of prominent tubercles on the pleon and pleotelson; granulated pleotelson, with well upturned lateral and posterior borders, the posterior margin of which is broadly rounded.

Of the known species of Sphaeroma , S. khalijfarsi sp. nov. is closely related to S. serratum Fabricius, 1787 . The type locality of S. serratum is unknown but the species has been recorded from Morocco and Tunisia (Monod 1932), the Gulf of Suez ( Monod 1933), Tunisia (Rezig 1977), South Africa, the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea (Kensley 1978), Romania, Greece, Italy, France, and Spain ( Jacobs 1987). Based on the drawings and comments provided by Monod (1932), Rezig (1977) and Jacobs (1978), and on examination of material (RMNH 7203 from Spain, USNM 138250 from Egypt, and ZMH K-16425), S. serratum clearly differs from S. khalijfarsi sp. nov. in having a pleotelson with smooth dorsal surface, without upturned borders, not extended and with broadly rounded apex, and by having a straight appendix masculina without an apical cuticular spine. Moreover, the shape and serration of the uropod rami differ between the species (Endopod has broadly rounded apex in S. khalijfarsi sp. nov. but it has narrow apex in S. serratum ; exopod has more serration in S. serratum ).

The new species differs from S. terebrans Bate, 1866 (reported from India to Australia), which has a transverse row of four prominent tubercles on pereonites 6 and 7, and a pleotelson with subtriangular apex. In addition, S. triste Heller, 1861 is readily distinguishable from S. khalijfarsi sp. nov. in having prominent tubercles on pleon and pleotelson and pereonites ridges. Examination of syntypes of S. sieboldii Dollfus, 1889 (type locality: Japan, from RMNH) shows that this species differs from S. khalijfarsi sp. nov., by having a more serrate uropodal exopod, a wider rostrum and a differently shaped pleotelson in ventral view.

Etymology. The name of this species comes from “Khalij-e-Fars”, the Persian name of the Persian Gulf (type locality).

Sphaeroma walkeri Stebbing, 1905 View in CoL ( Figs 6 – 10 View FIGURE 6 View FIGURE 7 View FIGURE 8 View FIGURE 9 View FIGURE 10 )

Sphaeroma walkeri Stebbing, 1905: 31 View in CoL –33, 61, pl. VII.; 1910: 220; 1917: 444. — Barnard, 1920: 360; 1936: 178; 1940: 405.— Omer-Cooper, 1927: 240.— Baker, 1928:49.— Nierstrasz, 1931: 192.— Monod, 1931: 36.— Monod, 1933: 198.— Larwood, 1940: 28. — Pillai, 1955: 132, pl. VI.— Loyola e Silva, 1960: 41, figs, 6–7.— Joshi & Ball, 1959: 61 –62.— Menzies & Glynn, 1968: 56, fig. 23.— Miller, 1968: 8 –11, fig. 3.— Glynn 1972: 286, fig. 5. — Carlton & Iverson, 1981: 31 –48.— Estevez & Simon, 1976: 288.— Harrison & Holdich, 1984: 279 –282, fig. 1.— Jacobs, 1987: 22 –24, fig. 6.— Mak et al., 1985: 75. — Kensley & Schotte, 1989: 235, fig. 101.— Kussakin & Malyutina, 1993: 1170.— Bruce, 1993: 156, fig. 1.— Ghani & Qadeer, 2001: 871 –872.— Galil, 2008: 443 –444.

Type locality. Jokkenpiddi Paar, Sri Lanka ( Stebbing 1905).

Material examined. Kish Island, Forest Park, beneath stones, 26 Jun 2006, 26°30’470” N, 54°02’677”E, 2 female (7.2 mm), male (8 mm) ( ZMH –K– 42586). Bustaneh, 26°30’N, 54°39’E, 2 January 2006, cobble beach under wood ( ZMH –K– 42587). Qeshm Island, Zayton Park, in tubes and small borrows in soft rocks, 8 May 2010, 26°55’414” N, 56°15’415” E, 3 male (6, 7.5, and 9 mm), 5 female (5.5, 6.2, 6.5, 7 and 7.5 mm) ( ZMH –K– 42588).

Diagnosis. A diagnosis to the species can be found in Stebbing ( Harrison & Holdich, 1984).

Additional characters. Head anterior margin with two sub-marginal projections. Appendix masculina extended well beyond endopod, row of cuticular spines present on mesial margin of the apex. Lateral and mesial margins of penial processes folded with several marginal small fine setae.

Description of male (from Kish Island, the Persian Gulf). Body about 2.0 times as long as greatest width, widest at pereonite 6. Head uneven, with 2 projections on frontal surface, rostral process developed, visible in dorsal view ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 A). Pereonites 2–7 with coxal sutures clearly visible on lateral sides; pereonites 2–4 each bearing two irregular transverse rows of low tubercles which gradually increase posteriorly; pereonites 5–7 and pleon with a transverse row of prominent tubercles.

Pleon ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 A) dorsal surface granulose, with a transverse row of prominent tubercles, posterior margin bearing two separate sutures on either side.

Pleotelson ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 A) wider than long, dorsal surface granulated with scattered tubercles, either side of midline bearing a longitudinal row of 5 prominent tubercles more posteriorly some smaller ones, flanked on either side by a longitudinal row of 3 prominent tubercles, posterior part dorsally concave subapically, with upturned and crenulated borders.

Antennule ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 C) article 3 elongate, slender and about 2.8 times as long as article 2; flagellum 16 – articled, articles 3 – 15 each bearing aesthetascs, extending to posterior margin of pereonite 1.

Antenna ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 D) peduncle articles 4 and 5 subequal in length, articles 1–3 shorter; flagellum 20 – articled, flagellum articles 1–9 with an apical tuft of long fine setae.

Epistome ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 E) with triangular apex, lateral margins concave and sublinear.

Left mandible ( Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 C, D) incisor with 3 cusps, lacinia mobilis with 2 cusps; spine row of 7–8 curved, serrate spines; molar process round, crushing surface ridged; palp article 2 as long as 1, article 2 distolateral margin with 20 biserrate setae; article 3 with 29 biserrate setae, terminal seta being longest.

Maxillule ( Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 A) lateral lobe with simple setae on mesial and outer margins, apical margin with 10 robust, serrate or biserrate and 2 simple robust setae, gnathal subapical surface with 1 robust, long and apically serrate seta; mesial lobe with simple setae on inner margin, apical margin with 3 circumplumose robust setae (each of them with some small spines, particularly on apical part), 2 shorter circumplumose, and a single short stout setae.

Maxilla ( Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 B) lateral and middle endites with about 28 pectinate robust setae; mesial endite with about 30 plumose setae.

Maxilliped ( Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 E) endite wide distally, with some plumose setae, set in amongst fine simple setae in semicircular distal margin, mesial margin with single coupling hook, ventral surface with a row of about 19– 20 long robust plumose setae; palp articles 2–4 bearing dense fringes of long fine-plumose setae on superior margin, articles 3 with some slender fine-plumose setae on inferodistal angle, article 5 about 1.4 as long as article 4.

Pereopod 1 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 A) basis proximal superior margin with dense fine setae; ischium superior margin fringed with numerous long plumose setae, proximal superior corner with single robust seta; merus, carpus and propodus inferior margins with dense fringe of short setae; propodus inferodistal angle with 1 biserrate and 1 nodular robust setae; rostral surface with transverse row of about 16 long plumose setae. Pereopod 2 and 3 ( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 B, 8C), slender, similar in shape as illustrated; pereopods 4 and 5( Fig. 8 View FIGURE 8 D, 9A) are shorter than pereopods 1–3, ischium to propodus inferior margins fringed with long fine dense setae; Pereopods 6 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 B) and 7 are similar except in some details such as the number of serrate robust setae on distal margin of carpus. Pereopods 7 ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 C) with inferior and superior margins of ischium to carpus bearing dense groups of long simple fine setae; carpus distal margin with 20–21 biserrate setae, propodus relatively long and curved.

Pleopod 1 ( Fig. 10 View FIGURE 10 A) exopod and endopod with approximately 42 and 24 plumose marginal setae respectively; exopod with a single biserrate seta on proximal lateral corner and 6–7 long simple setae on superodistal margin lower than marginal setae. Pleopod 2 ( Fig. 10 View FIGURE 10 B) exopod and endopod with approximately 43 and 32 plumose marginal setae respectively; appendix masculina arising sub-basally, extending well beyond endopod, with a raw of double cuticular spines on apex mesial margin; sympod with 3 distomesial coupling hooks. Pleopod 3 ( Fig. 10 View FIGURE 10 C) exopod and endopod with approximately 40 and 26 plumose marginal setae respectively; sympod with 3 distomesial coupling hooks, lateral margin with fringe of thin setae and 5 long simple setae on distolateral corner. Pleopod 4 ( Fig. 10 View FIGURE 10 D) endopod with a pronounced and curved apical lobe with a single stout plumose seta on apex, lateral margin with about 30 slender setae; exopod with about 22 slender setae on lateral margin; sympodite with about 8 long slender setae on distolateral corner and a single simple seta on mesial margin. Pleopod 5 ( Fig. 10 View FIGURE 10 E) exopod with 5 scale patches (3 distally of and 2 under the transverse suture), lateral margin with approximately 39 slender marginal and sub-marginal setae, sympod with about 7 slender setae on medial surface.

Penial processes ( Fig. 9 View FIGURE 9 D) each 1.5 as long as basal width, several small fine marginal setae present.

Uropodal ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 A, 11D) exopod slightly longer than endopod with 5–6 external teeth and an acute apex; endopod margins fringed with dense simple setae, narrowly rounded apex, dorsal surface bearing 2–3 prominent tubercles and an oblique ridge on the basal region.

Female. apart from sexual characters similar to male, body size principally smaller than in male, propodus of pereopod 7 relatively shorter and pleotelson shorter than in male.

Remarks. Sphaeroma walkeri has a worldwide distribution which probably has been transported by shipping. This species is a wood-borer, but it also burrows in to soft rock and can be found beneath stones or in cervices in rocky coasts (as in the present study).

The species can be recognized by the presence of an uneven pereonite 1, pereonites 2–4 each bearing two irregular transverse rows of weak tubercles, pereonites 5–7 and pleon with one transverse row of prominent, round and blunt tubercles. In addition the middle side of the pleotelson has two longitudinal rows of five prominent tubercles which flanked on either side by a longitudinal row of 3 prominent tubercles. Based on examination of the Persian-Gulf specimens and the other material from Brazil, in contrast to the previous descriptions and illustrations, S. walkeri has an irregular transverse row of tubercles on pereonite 2. In addition, the antenna flagellum articles are similar in all the examined material, bearing an apical tuft of long fine setae, but these setae were not shown in the original type description. Moreover, Stebbing’s description of S. walkeri mentioned 6 or 7 teeth on the outer margin of the uropodal exopod, whereas the respective illustration shows only 5 teeth. Stebbing doubtlessly counted the pointed apex of the exopod as a tooth. Most later authors (e.g., Pillai 1955, Harrison & Holdich 1984) mentioned five marginal teeth and an acute apex.