The Marine Fauna of New Zealand: Isopoda, Aegidae (Crustacea)

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 

WATER AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH (NIWA) 

The Marine Fauna of New Zealand: 

Isopoda, Aegidae (Crustacea) 

Niel L. Bruce 

Marine Biodiversity and Biosecurity 

National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd 

Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie 

Wellington, New Zealand 

Present address: 

Museum of Tropical Queensland 

Queensland Museum and School of Marine and Tropical Biology 

James Cook University 

70–102 Flinders Street, Townsville 4810, Australia 

niel.bruce@qm.qld.gov.au 

NIWA Biodiversity Memoir 22 

2009

Cataloguing in Publication 

BRUCE, N. L. 

The marine fauna of New Zealand: Isopoda, Aegidae (Crustacea) / by Niel L. Bruce—Wellington: 

NIWA (National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd), 2009 

(NIWA Biodiversity Memoir, ISSN 74-0043; 22) 

ISBN 978–0–478–23284–4 

Series Editor: Dennis P. Gordon 

Copy edited and typeset by: Geoff Gregory, Word Therapy, Paraparaumu 

Printed and bound by: Graphic Press & Packaging Ltd, Levin 

Received for publication—12 March 2008 

© NIWA Copyright 2009 

2

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 

WATER AND ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH (NIWA) 

The Marine Fauna of New Zealand: 

Isopoda, Aegidae (Crustacea) 

Niel L. Bruce 

Marine Biodiversity and Biosecurity 

National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research Ltd 

Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie 

Wellington, New Zealand 

Present address: 

Museum of Tropical Queensland 

Queensland Museum and School of Marine and Tropical Biology 

James Cook University 

70-102 Flinders Street, Townsville 4810, Australia 

niel.bruce@qm.qld.gov.au 

AbstrAct 

The isopod family Aegidae of the New Zealand Exclusive Economic Zone is monographed. Six genera are present in the region: 

Aega Leach, 8 5 with eight species, Aegapheles gen. nov. with seven species, Aegiochus Bovallius, 885 with 6, Epulaega gen. 

nov. with two, Rocinela Leach, 8 8 with nine, and Syscenus Harger, 1880 with five species. Thirty-nine of the 45 species are 

named, including two new species of Aega, two new species of Aegapheles, nine new species of Aegiochus, six new species of 

Rocinela, and one each of Epulaega gen. nov. and Syscenus; all but seven species are new records for the New Zealand marine 

fauna. Sixteen of the named species, approximately 40%, are endemic, but that figure is likely to drop, as many other large 

species are known to have extended distributions. Three species are removed from the New Zealand fauna: Aega novizealandiae 

Dana, 853 and Aega cyclops Haswell, 1881 are regarded as nomina dubia and or misidentifications; Rocinela orientalis Schioedte 

& Meinert, 879b is regarded as an uncorroborated record. The Barybrotidae is reinstated to family rank. 

A phylogenetic analysis of Aega was conducted using PAUP*, and a new generic classification is proposed, with Aegiochus 

Bovallius, 885 revalidated, the subgenus Rhamphion Brusca, 983 placed in synonymy with Aegiochus, and two new genera, 

Aegapheles gen. nov. and Epulaega gen. nov., described. 

To allow clear characterisation of certain New Zealand species, it was necessary to partially redescribe some Southern 

Ocean species: Aegiochus crozetensis (Kussakin & Vasina, 982), Aegiochus uschakovi (Kussakin, 967), and Aega punctulata Miers, 

1881; descriptive notes and figures are also provided for Aega angustata Whitelegge, 90 , Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 895) and 

Syscenus intermedius Richardson, 1910. Supplementary description and figures are given for the Antarctic species Aegiochus 

antarctica (Hodgson, 9 0) and Aegiochus glacialis (Tattersall, 92 ). Placed in synonymy are: Aega edwardsii Dollfus, 89 (= A. 

punctulata), Aega giganteoculata Nunomura, 988 (= Aegiochus vigilans (Haswell, 88 )), Aega koltuni Kussakin, 967 (= Aegiochus 

antarctica (Hodgson, 9 0)) and Syscenus pacificus Nunomura, 98 (= Syscenus latus Richardson, 909); Aega tumida Nunomura, 

988 is considered to be indistinguishable from Aegiochus spongiophila (Semper, 867). Species brought out of synonymy are: 

Aega punctulata Miers, 88 and Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4. 

Keys are provided to the marine genera and to the named New Zealand species. 

Keywords: Isopoda, Aegidae, Aega, Aegapheles gen. nov., Aegiochus, Epulaega gen. nov., Rocinela, Syscenus, systematics, taxonomy, 

new genera, new species, phylogenetic analysis, New Zealand Exclusive Economic Zone, Southwest Pacific, Southern 

Ocean, Antarctic 

3

Frontispiece: 

Upper left: Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. Upper right: Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834. 

Lower: Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. 

4

cONtENts 

ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................................................3 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................................7 

THE NEW ZEALAND AEGID FAUNA ............................................................................................................8 

MATERIAL AND METHODS ............................................................................................................................9 

MORPHOLOGy .................................................................................................................................................. 

FOSSIL AEGIDAE ............................................................................................................................................... 5 

PHyLOGENy ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 

TAxONOMy .......................................................................................................................................................25 

Suborder Cymothoida Wägele, 989 ..........................................................................................................25 

Revalidation and diagnosis of Barybrotidae Hansen, 890 .....................................................................25 

Aegidae White, 850 ......................................................................................................................................26 

Key to the marine genera of Aegidae ......................................................................................................26 

Genus Aega Leach, 8 5 .............................................................................................................................27 

Key to the New Zealand species of Aega .............................................................................................28 

Aega falklandica Kussakin, 967 (Figs 8– ) .........................................................................................28 

Aega komai Bruce, 996 (Figs 2, 3) .....................................................................................................34 

Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834 (Figs 4– 8) .................................................................................37 

Aega semicarinata Miers, 875 (Figs 9–22) ..........................................................................................44 

Aega stevelowei sp. nov. (Figs 23–26) .....................................................................................................50 

Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4 (Figs 27–30) .............................................................................................55 

Aega whanui sp. nov. (Figs 3 –33) .........................................................................................................6 

Aega sp. .....................................................................................................................................................65 

Aegapheles gen. nov. ...................................................................................................................................65 

Key to the New Zealand species of Aegapheles ...................................................................................65 

Aegapheles alazon (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. (Fig. 34) ..........................................................................66 

Aegapheles birubi (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. (Fig. 35) ...........................................................................68 

Aegapheles copidis sp. nov. (Figs 36, 37) ................................................................................................70 

Aegapheles hamiota (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. (Fig. 38) ........................................................................73 

Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. (Figs 39–4 ) ...............................................................................................75 

Aegapheles rickbruscai (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. (Fig. 42) ...................................................................79 

Aegapheles umpara (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. (Fig. 43) ........................................................................8 

Genus Aegiochus Bovallius, 885 ..............................................................................................................83 

Key to the New Zealand species of Aegiochus ....................................................................................84 

Aegiochus beri (Bruce, 983), comb. nov. (Figs 44, 45) ........................................................................85 

Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov. (Figs 46–48) ..............................................................................................88 

Aegiochus coroo (Bruce, 983), comb. nov. (Figs 49– 0) ......................................................................93 

Aegiochus gordoni sp. nov. (Figs 52–55) ................................................................................................97 

Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. (Figs 56–60) ............................................................................................ 03 

Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. (Figs 6 –64) .................................................................................................. 09 

Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov. (Figs 65–68) ................................................................................................ 5 

Aegiochus laevis (Studer, 884), comb. nov. (Figs 69, 70).................................................................. 20 

Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov. (Figs 7 –74) ............................................................................................ 23 

Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. (Figs 75–78) ............................................................................................... 29 

Aegiochus pushkini (Kussakin & Vasina, 982), comb. nov. (Figs 79–83) ....................................... 34 

Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. (Figs 84–87) ................................................................................................. 4 

Aegiochus tara sp. nov. (Figs 88–90) .................................................................................................... 46 

Aegiochus vigilans (Haswell, 88 ), comb. nov. (Fig. 9 ) .................................................................. 50 

Aegiochus sp. .......................................................................................................................................... 5 

5

Epulaega gen. nov...................................................................................................................................... 5 

Key to the New Zealand species of Epulaega .................................................................................... 52 

Epulaega derkoma sp. nov. (Figs 92–95) ............................................................................................... 52 

Epulaega fracta (Hale, 940), comb. nov. (Figs 96–99) ....................................................................... 56 

Genus Rocinela Leach, 8 8 ..................................................................................................................... 6 

Key to the New Zealand species of Rocinela ..................................................................................... 62 

Rocinela bonita sp. nov. (Figs 00– 04) ............................................................................................... 63 

Rocinela garricki Hurley, 957 (Figs 05– 09) .................................................................................... 69 

Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. (Figs 0– 3) ............................................................................................ 74 

Rocinela pakari sp. nov. (Figs 4– 8) ................................................................................................ 78 

Rocinela resima sp. nov. (Figs 9– 22) ............................................................................................... 84 

Rocinela runga sp. nov. (Figs 23– 25) ................................................................................................ 89 

Rocinela satagia sp. nov. (Figs 26– 29) .............................................................................................. 93 

Rocinela sp. ............................................................................................................................................. 98 

Genus Syscenus Harger, 880 .................................................................................................................. 98 

Key to the New Zealand species of Syscenus .................................................................................... 99 

Syscenus kapoo sp. nov. (Figs 30, 3 ) ............................................................................................... 99 

Syscenus latus Richardson, 909 (Figs 32– 34) ................................................................................202 

Syscenus moana Bruce, 2005 (Fig. 35) ................................................................................................206 

Syscenus springthorpei Bruce, 997 (Fig. 36) .....................................................................................208 

Syscenus sp. ............................................................................................................................................2 0 

Uncertain status or records ........................................................................................................................2 0 

Aega cyclops Haswell, 88 ...................................................................................................................2 0 

Aega novizealandiae Dana, 853, nomen dubium ..............................................................................2 

Rocinela orientalis Schioedte & Meinert, 879 ....................................................................................2 

Species included in the Aegidae ................................................................................................................2 2 

Aega Leach, 8 5 ....................................................................................................................................2 2 

Aegapheles gen. nov. ..............................................................................................................................2 3 

Aegiochus Bovallius, 885 .....................................................................................................................2 3 

Alitropus Milne Edwards, 840 ...........................................................................................................2 4 

Epulaega gen. nov. .................................................................................................................................2 4 

Rocinela Leach, 8 8 ..............................................................................................................................2 4 

Syscenus Harger, 880 ...........................................................................................................................2 5 

Xenuraega Tattersall, 909 ....................................................................................................................2 5 

Ross Sea and Antarctic Islands (Balleny Islands) species ......................................................................2 6 

Aegiochus antarctica (Hodgson, 9 0), comb. nov. (Fig. 37) ...........................................................2 6 

Aegiochus glacialis (Tattersall, 92 ), comb. nov. (Fig. 38) .............................................................2 9 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................................................................................222 

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................................223 

APPENDIx . Invalid Aegid names ...............................................................................................................23 

APPENDIx 2. Extra-limital species ................................................................................................................232 

Aega angustata Whitelegge, 90 (Figs 39, 40) ...............................................................................232 

Aega punctulata Miers, 88 (Fig. 4 ) ................................................................................................235 

Aegiochus crozetensis (Kussakin & Vasina, 982), comb. nov. (Fig. 42) ........................................237 

Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 897), comb. nov. (Figs 43, 44) ..........................................................238 

Aegiochus uschakovi (Kussakin, 967), comb. nov. (Fig. 45) ...........................................................24 

Syscenus intermedius Richardson, 9 0 (Fig. 46) .............................................................................24 

APPENDIx 3. Other material examined ........................................................................................................244 

APPENDIx 4. Matrices .....................................................................................................................................246 

INDEx .................................................................................................................................................................249 

6

The isopod fauna of New Zealand has received little 

attention over the previous two centuries (Bruce 200 ; 

Poore & Bruce in press), with only two isopod families 

receiving monographic or revisionary treatment, the 

Sphaeromatidae by Hurley and Jansen ( 977) and the 

Haploniscidae by Lincoln ( 985). Within the Cymothoida 

the Aegidae have perhaps received least attention. 

The only documentation following the earliest 

carcinological accounts of Dana ( 852), Miers ( 876a; 

876b) and Thomson and Chilton ( 886) was the record 

of a beach specimen from the Kermadec Islands by 

Chilton ( 9 ), the incidental mention of a species by 

Hale ( 926: 233, of Aega cyclops ‘in New Zealand area’), 

description of a single species of Rocinela by Hurley 

(1957), a misidentification by Stephenson (1980), and, 

most recently, popular accounts of the family (Bruce 

2002, 2003). 

Given the low number of previously recorded 

species (four) from New Zealand, and the relatively 

low number of marine species known from Australia 

(28) (excluding subantarctic island territories such as 

Macquarie Island—including Bruce et al. 2002; Bruce 

2004a and those reported here) and South Africa ( ) 

it comes as a surprise that the New Zealand EEZ, with 

47 species, has the greatest number of aegid species of 

any region of the world (Australia can be said to have 

several regions such as Southern, Indian and Pacific 

Oceans, though only two species have been recorded 

from other than eastern coasts). The East Pacific (see 

Brusca 983; Wetzer 990; Brusca & France 992) with 

5 species and North Atlantic (see Kussakin 979; 

Brand & Andres 2008; Bruce 993a) with 8 species are 

relatively well documented and the recorded diversity 

is probably close to actuality. Australian aegids have 

received some attention (Bruce 983; 988; 997a,b; 

2004a; Bruce et al. 2002) and my own examination of 

museum collections in Australia has revealed numerous 

as yet undescribed species. In terms of area, New 

Zealand has the greatest diversity of Aegidae. 

The area loosely termed the ‘southwestern Pacific’, 

stretching from eastern Papua New Guinea, through 

the island nations arc to New Zealand and westwards 

to the Australian coasts is the region of greatest known 

diversity for the family Aegidae. Including ‘known 

undescribed’ species, there are 72 aegid species* from 

* Trilles and Justine (2004) recorded three species of Aega 

from New Caledonia. Two of these are misidentifications, 

the third is not identified to species but is possibly one 

of the species described by Bruce (2004b). These species 

are not included in the species totals given here. 

INtrOductION 

7 

this region, some 60% [the figures change as new 

records and species are discovered] of the species 

recorded worldwide. Museum collections that I have 

examined (e.g. USNM, Smithsonian Institution; The 

Natural History Museum, London; Muséum national 

d’Histoire naturelle, Paris; and Zoologisk Museum, 

Copenhagen) do not indicate that other regions would 

have a diversity as great and as yet undocumented. 

Collections held at various Australian museums, and 

material collected around New Caledonia, indicate 

that many species remain to be described from the 

southwestern Pacific. 

symbIOsEs 

Aegidae are well-known associates of fishes, almost 

exclusively attaching temporarily to the external 

surfaces. A small number of species are associated 

with other invertebrates, notably sponges. Klitgaard 

( 995) found that Aegiochus ventrosa used only one 

of eleven examined species of sponge sampled in the 

northeastern Atlantic. Aegiochus lethrina, an associate 

of coral-reef fishes, has also been recorded from 

sponges (Bruce 983). There is one record of an Aegiochus 

from the cloaca of an ascidian (Wetzer 990). In 

New Zealand, Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. is associated 

with hexactinellid sponges, and Epulaega fracta and 

Aegiochus spongiophila have also been recorded from 

hexactinellids (Nunomura 988a). Records of aegids 

attached to squid (e.g. Bruce 996) are regarded as 

unconfirmed at present. 

mIcrOprEdAtOrs Or pArAsItEs? 

Aegidae are here regarded as micropredators rather 

than parasites (see Bruce 2003, 2004a; Brusca 983). 

Parasites are, variously defined, symbionts (e.g. Rohde 

982, 2005), and are widely regarded as having some 

manner of perceived deleterious or harmful effect 

on the host. Generally a permanent trophic adult association 

is noted between the parasite and the host 

individual. Aegids do not fulfil these criteria, and while 

attacking and feeding on their victims they rarely form 

a permanent association with their ‘host’, but instead 

detach following their feed. 

In a few instances it is known that a species forms 

a more long-term attachment (e.g. Syscenus—see Ross 

et al. 200 ). Others, such as Aegiochus lethrina, appear 

to be feeding on fish mucus within the ‘host’ nasal 

passages, rather than blood or tissue. Wägele ( 990) 

gave a brief and incidental description of the mode of

feeding of Aegiochus antarctica in aquaria feeding on 

provided prey species (namely North Atlantic plaice), 

noting that the isopod spent most of the time inactive 

in a burrow, emerging only to search for prey. 

There is one reported instance of an aegid, Rocinela 

signata Schioedte and Meinert, 879a, attaching to the 

gills and inside of the mouth of the host (de Lima 

et al. 2005). Salmon under aquaculture have been 

reported as being attacked and killed by Rocinela belliceps 

by Novotny and Mahnken ( 97 ), and Nair and 

Nair (1983) reported that fish attacked by Alitropus in 

aquarium conditions became anaemic. Wing and Moles 

( 995) showed that under aquarium conditions Rocinela 

angustata preferentially attacks some prey species. 

There are few data available on the feeding habits 

of aegid isopods; they are here considered to be micropredators, 

and the fish that they have been recorded 

from as prey. 

dIstrIbutION 

Aegidae are distributed throughout the world oceans, 

from the tropics to polar waters. Broadly, Aegidae are 

marine with a depth range from shallow or surface 

depths (such as species attaching to shallow-water 

coral-reef fishes) to a depth of 4609 metres, although 

most species (depth data are not available for a substantial 

number of species) are recorded from the 

continental shelf and rise at depths from less than 00 

metres to approximately 200 metres. Twenty species 

are known from depths in excess of 200 metres, and of 

these six are from depths greater than 2000 metres. 

The large genera (Aega, Aegapheles, Aegiochus, Rocinela 

and Syscenus) are found throughout the world 

oceans. The genus Epulaega gen. nov. has an Indo- 

Pacific range with one species from South Africa, the 

remainder from the western Pacific. The monotypic 

genus Xenuraega is known only from the North Atlan- 

The two large genera Aega sensu lato and Rocinela 

have dominated the family and collections of aegids 

worldwide. Although Aega is here restructured to 

four genera, the New Zealand fauna has most species 

here recorded belonging to Rocinela and those genera 

that form the Aega clade. All of these genera may be 

relatively well represented at high latitudes. The genus 

Syscenus, mesopelagic fish micropredators, while 

possibly common (Ross et al. 200 ), is infrequently 

collected. Under the new classification presented here 

there are six genera occurring in New Zealand waters. 

The two remaining monotypic genera have not been 

recorded from New Zealand waters. Alitropus Milne 

Edwards, 840 is a tropical freshwater genus known 

thE NEw ZEAlANd AEgId FAuNA 

8 

tic. Alitropus, also monotypic, is restricted to freshwater 

habitats in the Indo-Malaysian region, extending at 

least to eastern Australia (Bruce 983). Two genera, 

Syscenus and Xenuraega, appear to be mesopelagic 

throughout their range. 

There appear to be no obvious endemic groupings 

except within Aega where those species belonging to 

the two clades of species related to Aega angustata and 

to Aega antennata (Fig. 6, p. 9) are both restricted to the 

western Pacific, with both described and undescribed 

species occurring from Japan to southern Australia and 

eastwards to New Caledonia and New Zealand. 

Individual species may be widely distributed, 

such as Aega monophthalma, occurring in the Atlantic, 

Indian and Pacific Oceans, and ranging from cold highlatitude 

water to the tropics, or Aegapheles alazon, which 

occurs from South Africa to New Zealand and north 

to tropical and subtropical locations in both the Indian 

and Pacific Oceans. While many species have restricted 

ranges such as the Tasman Sea or southwestern Pacific, 

local endemism is generally lower than for those 

families of free-living isopods such as the Cirolanidae 

or Sphaeromatidae. 

In the genus Rocinela the distributional pattern 

is somewhat different from that of the genera Aega, 

Aegapheles, and Aegiochus in that no species occurs in 

all major oceans, and no species has both Northern 

and Southern Hemisphere ranges. Most species are 

regional endemics, being largely restricted to a region 

such as New Zealand (all New Zealand Rocinela are 

endemic, though it is probable that some extend 

towards New Caledonia), northern Pacific, or East 

Pacific, for example. 

While species-level endemism of New Zealand’s 

Aegidae sits at 50% it is probable that this would 

drop lower with more complete documentation of the 

Aegidae of eastern Australia and southwestern Pacific 

island nations. 

from Indo–Australasia (Bruce 983; Ho & Tonguthai 

992); Xenuraega Tattersall, 909 is a blind, highly 

adapted bathypelagic genus, presently known only 

from the North Atlantic (Bruce 993a). Alitropus is 

absent from New Zealand waters, but Xenuraega is best 

considered to be of uncertain distribution, particularly 

as some pelagic and mesopelagic isopods do have 

worldwide distributions [e.g. Metacirolana caeca 

(Hansen, 9 6), Svavarsson & Bruce 2000], including 

some aegids such as Aega monophthalma Johnston, 

834; others, such as Aegapheles alazon Bruce, 2004 and 

several of the Southern Ocean species reported here, 

have extended Southern Hemisphere ranges.

mAtErIAl ExAmINEd 

Material examined includes that which was referred 

to in preparing descriptions (commenced in 2002). 

‘Also examined’ is used for comparative material of 

other species. ‘Additional material’ includes specimens 

belonging to a species that was identified subsequent 

to the preparation of the description. 

gEOgrAphIc lImIts 

The defining area for inclusion in this monograph is 

that of the New Zealand chart area, NIWA Chart No 

73 (CANZ 997), extending beyond the recognised 

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) (Fig. ). The boundaries 

of this region lie at approximately 24–57°S and 

57°E– 67°W, and as such potentially include records 

from the vicinity of the Australian territories of Lord 

Howe Island, Norfolk Island, and Macquarie Island. 

Aegids rarely occupy restricted coastal ranges, often 

being wide-ranging, so it is pertinent to include records 

from beyond territorial waters and the EEZ. 

dEscrIptIONs 

All descriptions were prepared using DELTA (Descriptive 

Language for Taxonomy: Dallwitz et al. 997). 

Separate data sets (suites of characters) are used for 

species within the Aega clade and the Rocinela–Syscenus 

clade and to diagnose the genera. Diagnoses are complementary 

to the description for higher taxa, and 

therefore the information is not repeated in the following 

description. Principal terms used in descriptions 

are shown in Figs 2 and 3. 

For integer numeric character states, the description 

may include a zero (0) rather than the more usual ‘without’ 

or ‘none’; similarly for some real numeric characters 

it may read ‘ .0 times as long as’ rather than the simpler 

‘as long as’. Minor details qualifying a coded character 

state are retained within parentheses. 

Colour has not been included in the descriptions 

owing to post-mortem changes and subsequent fading 

in preserved specimens. Live colour in aegids is rarely 

observed or photographed so there are few comparative 

data. Eye colour in aegids can be red, black, dark 

brown, light brown or bronze (‘golden’). Eye colour 

is not always consistent within species. Some aegids 

have a noticeable white perimeter to each ommatidium, 

giving the eye a reticulate appearance, but in others the 

centre of the ommatidium is white. 

The uropodal endopod of all Aegidae (and most 

families of Cymothoida) has, on the lateral margin, a 

heavily plumose articulating seta that is set in a small 

mAtErIAl ANd mEthOds 

9 

notch, usually at a position about the distal one-third 

of the length of the lateral margin. This seta defines 

the proximal and distal portions of the endopod lateral 

margin, and counts of robust setae are given in relation 

to this point. 

drAwINgs ANd dIssEctIONs 

Unless otherwise stated, all drawings except for the 

mouthparts were made using a Leica M 2.5 stereo- 

microscope, using both reflected and transmitted light. 

All appendages were dissected from the right-hand 

side of the specimen unless otherwise stated. Appendages 

were drawn without being flattened, and while 

perspective has been kept as consistent as possible, 

allowances must be made for some differences in the 

drawings from measurements given. Mouthparts were 

dissected and mounted unstained in lactic acid (88%) 

and examined and drawn using a Zeiss Axioskop 2plus 

compound microscope. Mouthparts of some small 

species were remounted in ‘Aquamount Improved’ 

Gurr, all other dissected appendages were placed into 

micro-vials and stored with the dissected specimen. All 

drawings were made using a camera lucida. 

Dissection of historical type material and fragile 

specimens was kept to a minimum (usually no dissection). 

Permission to dissect any material described 

wholly or in part by O. G. Kussakin was not granted, 

and the borrowed material was not accompanied by 

the dissected appendages. 

In order to maintain a reasonable brevity of text, 

some reduction of drawings and of description has 

been undertaken. In general, pereopods 2 and 3 are 

similar to each other as are pereopods 5–7. Pereopod 4 

is intermediate in form between anterior ( –3) and posterior 

(5–7) pereopods. For many species pereopods –3 

and pereopods 6 and 7 are illustrated, but pereopods 

3 and 6 are not described in detail. Similarly pleopods 

within genera are remarkably uniform, and for some 

species only pleopods and 2 are illustrated. 

The maxilliped palp is twisted obliquely and bent 

ventrally in relation to the plane of the base of the 

maxilliped. This makes it difficult to draw and to observe, 

in particular palp article 5 is often obscured. In 

small species the palp will flatten under a cover slip 

if cleared in lactic acid. In large species article 5 was 

observed directly and occasionally broken away from 

the palp itself. In most cases the number of robust setae 

is not critical in making a species identification and the 

accuracy of these counts, particularly for small setae, 

should not taken to be potentially indicative.

Figure 1. Map of the New Zealand Region (based on CANZ 977) showing boundary of the Exclusive Economic 

Zone (EEZ) and major place names. 

I do not consider the number of plumose marginal 

setae on the pleopods to be significant in differentiating 

species as it is likely to be size-dependent. For small 

species (< 0 mm), these differences may be informative, 

but the extent of the PMS (where the setae start on 

each margin) is more useful. For all species of a length 

greater than 5 mm, I have not given counts for the 

pleopod marginal setae. 

0 

mEAsurEmENts 

Whole specimens were measured in lateral view using 

a micrometer eyepiece, along the axis of the join 

between the coxae and pereonites. Owing to curvature 

of many specimens on fixation, dorsal views of 

specimens are often foreshortened. Many aegids are 

large, between 3 cm and 6 cm, and may stretch or

end on preservation, rendering apparently precise 

measurements meaningless. Therefore, lengths for 

specimens of 20 mm or more are given to the nearest 

millimetre. Pereopod measurements were made along 

the axis of the articles for the basis of pereopods –3 

and all articles for pereopod 7; for pereopods –3 the 

ischium, merus and carpus were measured along the 

inferior margin. 

tErmINOlOgy 

Words used in descriptions are shown in Figs 2 and 3. 

Setae, unless stated otherwise, are simple (following 

Watling 989). 

AbbrEvIAtIONs 

Institutional 

AK — Auckland Institute and Museum, Auckland 

AM —Australian Museum, Sydney 

BMNH — The Natural History Museum, London 

LACM — Natural History Museum of Los Angeles 

County, Los Angeles 

MNHN — Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, 

Paris 

MTQ — Queensland Museum, Museum of Tropical 

Queensland, Townsville 

NMV — Museum Victoria, Melbourne 

NIWA – National Institute of Water and Atmospheric 

Research Ltd, Wellington 

body 

Body lacking processes with rare exception, such as the 

males of Aegiochus vigilans (Haswell, 88 ) (see Bruce 

983) and Aegiochus webberi (Nierstrasz, 93 ). 

rostral point 

Present in all genera. In Aega this is usually a distinct, 

acute anteriorly directed process, in Aegiochus it is 

ventrally and posteriorly bent and in Epulaega gen. nov. 

it is minute and in dorsal view the head may appear 

to lack a rostral point. In Rocinela it is a large flat and 

anteriorly rounded process. In Syscenus and Xenuraega 

ranges from moderate to small in size. 

Eyes 

Range in size from small (infrequent), cirolanid-like 

proportions as in Aegiochus laevis (Studer, 884) to 

huge, filling the entire head as in many species illustrated 

here. It is notable that in many species the eyes 

are distinctly dorsal, with ommatidia not extending 

to the ventral surface, and not lateral as in cirolanids 

and many other Cymothoida. In Aega the surface of 

the eye is smooth, while in Rocinela the surface of each 

NMNZ – National Museum of New Zealand, Te Papa 

Tongarewa, Wellington 

NTM — Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern 

Territory, Darwin 

QFS — Queensland Fisheries Service (now part of DPI, 

Brisbane) 

QM — Queensland Museum, Brisbane 

SAM — South Australian Museum, Adelaide 

SafM — South African Museum, Cape Town 

USNM — National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian 

Institution, Washington DC 

ZIAS — Zoological Institute, Academy Sciences, Leningrad 

ZMA — Zoological Museum, Amsterdam 

ZMHA — Zoological Museum, Hamburg 

ZMUC — Zoologisk Museum, University of Copenhagen 

morphological 

BL— body length 

RS—robust seta/setae 

PMS—plumose marginal setae 

NAmEs 

mOrphOlOgy 

Names for new taxa other than place names and honorifics 

are derived from Biggs (1990) for Mäori names 

and Brown ( 956) for traditional classical names. 

Nomenclature for fishes has been sourced entirely 

from FishBase (Froese & Pauly 2002–07). 

ommatidium is distinctly rounded giving a nodular 

appearance to the eyes. 

pleon 

Relatively uniform throughout the family, all genera 

with five free (not fused) segments. Differences can 

be observed in the degree of prolongation of pleonite 

4 in Aega and the extent to which the posterolateral 

margins are acute. 

pleotelson 

Varies with regard to shape of the margins, setation 

and ornamentation. 

Antennule and antenna 

The antennule differs between genera in the degree of 

flattening of peduncular articles 1 and 2, the relative 

extension of the distolateral angle of peduncular article 

2, and the relative proportions of peduncular article 3; 

the length of the flagellum may separate species. The 

antennal peduncle is relatively uniform, with the first 

two articles always short; in Aega and related genera, 

peduncular article 3 is also relatively short; in Rocinela

Figure 2. Terms and positions used in descriptions: A, lateral view; B, dorsal head; C, ventral head; D, pleopod; E, 

pereopod ; F, pereopod 7; G, uropod. 

2

Figure 3. Terms used in descriptions for mouthparts; 

maxilliped palp article numbered. 

and Syscenus, this article is proportionally longer, about 

twice as long as the preceding article; flagellum length 

is variable, from longer than the body in Xenuraega to a 

little longer than the peduncle in some species. 

mouthparts 

The mandible is simple, with a narrow, distally acute 

uni- or bidentate incisor (occasionally weakly tridentate); 

the molar process is usually present as a small 

but distinct flat lobe, occasionally serrate (e.g. Aega 

vigilans, see Bruce 1983) and when small it is difficult 

to observe; the mandible palp is uniform throughout 

the family, but unusually seems to have the basal article 

arising from what appears to be a large articulated 

(non-cuticularised) area giving rise to the appearance 

of four distinct articles (as misinterpreted by Bruce 

983, 988). This area is considered to be part of the 

mandible. 

The maxillule is remarkably uniform, and consists 

of a short simple mesial lobe and the elongate lateral 

lobe which is provided with 5– 0 robust setae. These 

setae vary from broad-based triangular in shape to 

slender, and may be hooked, hammer-head or falcate; 

they are always terminally acute. The mesial lobe is 

small and often lost in dissection, even from large 

specimens; this lobe appears to be absent from Rocinela, 

Syscenus, and Xenuraega, but present or absent in Aega, 

Aegiochus, and related genera. 

The maxilla is elongate and flattened, with a small 

distomesial lobe (the basal endite of Brandt & Poore 

2003). The distal margin is twisted and bent ventro- 

laterally so that illustrations made from slide-mounted 

preparations never show the true shape. Setation is 

uniform with the lateral lobe having 3–5 hooked robust 

setae, the mesial lobe with 2–4, one of which is 

usually straight. 

The maxilliped palp varies in the number of articles, 

these differences being diagnostic for different genera. 

The palp is not flat, being twisted and bent ventrally. 

In Aega and Aegapheles, maxilliped palp article 5 is difficult 

to observe by light microscopy (as evidenced by 

frequent errors of interpretation in the literature) as it 

is either largely or wholly concealed by article 4, or can 

be viewed only from the side. A maxilliped endite is 

present in most genera, and is usually small, usually 

provided with small simple setae, occasionally larger 

with long circumplumose setae (e.g. Aegiochus riwha 

sp. nov.) similar to those of cirolanids. Critical differences 

in the setation of maxilliped palp article 5 were 

observed by Brusca ( 983), who used these differences 

in support of his proposed subgenera Aega (Aega) and 

Aega (Rhamphion). The subgenus Aega was defined as 

having ‘stout recurved spines’ on maxilliped article 5 

with Rhamphion having ‘long, stout, simple, setae, but 

rarely recurved spines.’ However, these differences 

have not been found to be sustained on closer examination. 

Maxillipedal palp article 5 in some species of Aega 

and Aegapheles appears partially fused to article 4; in 

some species all the robust setae are elongate, in others 

article 5 has both elongate and hooked robust setae. 

3

pereopods 

These are characteristically robust, as is so for most 

Cymothoida. The dactylus of the anterior pereopods 

(pereopods –3) is described as hooked or prehensile, 

and in most species the dactylus is strongly curved and 

.4 to .7 times as long as the propodus, but occasionally 

only as long as the propodus. In some species the 

dactylus is weakly prehensile (e.g. Epulaega derkoma 

sp. nov., Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. and Rocinela leptopus 

sp. nov.). The anterior pereopods generally have few 

slender and robust setae, the robust setae in some species 

being large. The propodus in both Aega and Rocinela 

may have a lobe or blade on the inferior margin, 

which in some species may be large. In Rocinela this 

lobe has prominent robust setae along the free margin. 

The posterior pereopods (pereopods 4–7) usually lack 

abundant slender setae and the inferior and distal margins 

are variously ornamented with robust setae. 

brood pouch 

Uniform throughout the family when details have been 

recorded, consisting of overlapping oostegites arising 

from coxae 2–5; without posterior pocket. 

penes 

Either sessile (i.e. opening flush with the surface of 

sternite 7) or in the form of low tubercles, only occasionally 

(e.g. Aegiochus vigilans) in the form of flat lobes as 

seen in many cirolanids or sphaeromatids. The penial 

openings are usually separate, occasionally adjacent 

to each other, occasionally united. 

pleopods 

Remarkably uniform throughout the family, with 

useful differences evident in the shape of the rami of 

pleopod , the extent to which the margins carry plumose 

setae and also the ornamentation of the peduncle; 

the margins of the rami are usually even or weakly 

serrate—in a few species there are prominent intersetal 

serrations, referred to as digitate in descriptions. 

The appendix masculina is basal in the Aega group of 

genera, sub-basal in Rocinela, and usually simple and 

straight, often shorter than the endopod, but occasionally 

longer (notably Aegiochus vigilans); it is sometimes 

sinuate or armed with cuticular scales (e.g. Aegiochus 

tiaho sp. nov. and Aegiochus kakai sp. nov.). 

uropods 

Flat and lamellar in all genera except Xenuraega which 

has a filamentous exopod and the endopod reduced to 

a stub (Bruce 993a). In most species the plane of the 

exopod and endopod are about the same, the exopod 

with the lateral margin weakly tilted dorsally; in Rocinela 

and species of Aegapheles gen. nov. the plane of 

the exopod can be strongly angled. Uropodal margins 

show a variety of setation patterns, with robust setae 

nearly always present on all margins in species of Aega, 

less evident in Rocinela and Syscenus. 

4 

sExuAl vArIAtION IN thE AEgIdAE 

In general, other than for the primary sexual characters 

(penial processes, appendix masculina, oostegites) 

there is remarkably little difference between males and 

females. In some species of Aega, females, particularly 

ovigerous females, may have wider body proportions 

than males, and the maxilla and maxilliped, in Aega, 

become covered in scale-setae, and the characteristic 

recurved or hooked robust setae are replaced by 

plumose setae; the characteristic shape of the male 

maxilliped article 5 is also not shown. For those species 

that have nodular or other such ornamentation it 

is more strongly developed in the male. The exception 

seems to be Rocinela, in which mature males may have 

a broader body shape, more setose maxilliped and, 

when it has been recorded, uropodal rami with dense 

marginal setae. Rocinela is also unusual that in some 

species eye size varies with maturity, small juveniles 

and mancas having proportionally larger eyes than 

do mature specimens. In some females of both Aega 

and Rocinela the robust setae of the anterior pereopods 

become more slender than in the males. 

sIblINg spEcIEs ‘FlOcKs’ wIthIN thE 

AEgIdAE 

Species of Aegidae have often, in the past, been differentiated 

using conspicuous morphological characters, 

and sibling species or ‘species swarms’ such as those 

of the ‘Cirolana parva-group’, or species of the sphaeromatid 

genus Oxinasphaera (e.g. Bruce 997b, 2004b), 

have not previously been reported for the family. 

Many species of Aegidae have been considered to be 

both variable and widely distributed. Recently, Bruce 

(2004a) showed that the supposedly globally distributed 

species Aegapheles deshaysiana (Milne Edwards, 

840) was a group of some 2 species, many of which 

proved, once described, to be distinctive, with only a 

few of those species being sibling species in the sense 

of being near identical. 

In describing species from the southwestern Pacific 

it has become increasingly apparent that groups of 

closely similar species exist within the genera of the 

Aegidae. It is implicit that an increasing level of fine 

morphological character discrimination will come into 

use in order to separate these species. Examples in the 

present work include the species pair of Aegiochus beri 

(Bruce, 983) and Aegiochus riwha sp. nov., the closely 

similar species centring around Aegapheles alazon 

(Bruce, 2004), the sibling species related to Aegiochus 

coroo (Bruce, 983) and Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov., 

and species related to Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 897) 

and Aegiochus ventrosa (M. Sars, 859). These are some 

examples, but there are more species groups of this sort. 

Elucidation of such complexes of species is confounded

y the fact that while some species do have regionally 

localised ranges, others may be found throughout the 

major oceans, and sibling species may also be at least 

partly geographically sympatric. 

Sibling species groups within the Aegidae have a 

characteristic near identical somatic morphology, antennules, 

antenna, frontal lamina and general appearance 

of the pleopods. Notwithstanding their overall 

similarity, these species can be discriminated and 

There are no unambiguous records of Aegidae in the 

fossil record. Recently Polz (2005) described and placed 

Brunnaega Polz, 2005 and the sole species B. roeperi 

Polz, 2005 into the Aegidae. The basis for assigning 

the specimen to the Aegidae appeared to be that the 

fossil specimen did not fit the diagnosis of Palaega 

Woodward, 870 (Cirolanidae), but no explanation was 

given as to why the family Aegidae was considered 

more appropriate than the Cirolanidae, Corallanidae or 

Tridentellidae. Most recently described fossil isopods 

of the Cymothoida that lack an obviously spinose pleo- 

ANAlysIs OF AegA 

The Aegidae is one of the large group of families now 

placed in the recognised paraphyletic Cymothooidea 

of Brandt and Poore (2003), this superfamily including 

those families generally known to associate with 

or parasitise fish during at least one phase of their 

life history (the Anuropidae being an exception). The 

relationship of the Aegidae to the other cymothooid 

families is not clear, some analyses (e.g. Brandt & Poore 

2003) placing the family as the sister group to the Cymothoidae 

plus ‘Epicaridea’, while molecular analyses 

suggest the Aegidae could be the sister group to the 

Cirolanidae (Dreyer & Wägele 2002) or to the Cirolanidae 

and Corallanidae (Dreyer & Wägele 200 ). Wägele 

( 989) also questioned the monophyly of the Aegidae, 

as the morphology of the maxilliped palp in the genera 

Rocinela and Syscenus is much the same as that of the 

Cymothoidae. The close relationship between the Cirolanoidea 

and several families of the Cymothooidea 

is emphasised by the several species of Aegidae, Corallanidae 

and Tridentellidae that retain the tridentate 

mandible incisor, one of the two identified apomorphic 

states for the Cirolanoidea. It is difficult to homologise 

lost or reduced morphological character states, and at 

FOssIl AEgIdAE 

phylOgENy 

characterised using morphological criteria. Consistent 

differences are to be found in: the details of pereopod 

proportions and setation; details, sometimes subtle, in 

the shape, proportions and setation (size and pattern) 

of the uropods; and the shape and setation of the posterior 

margins of the pleotelson. While some of these 

characters are of a finer resolution than previously 

used, they are usually found to be highly consistent 

and species-specific once identified. 

telson posterior margin have been placed in Cirolana 

(see Weider & Feldmann 992 for a detailed discussion), 

and consequently most cymothooid genera are 

placed in the Cirolanidae (e.g. Feldmann & Goolaerts 

2005; Wieder & Feldmann 992), or as ‘family uncertain’ 

(Brandt et al. 999). Brunnaega is better placed in 

the Cirolanidae as it agrees well with the form of both 

fossil and extant species of that family. At present the 

Aegidae is considered to be not known from the fossil 

record. 

present I regard the relationships of families within the 

Cymothooidea and Cirolanoidea as equivocal. 

Until this present revision, Aega was a large genus, 

comprising some 00 species including new species 

described here. In the course of preparing this monograph 

it was apparent that there were several ‘species 

groups’ within Aega. There is a large group of species 

related to Aegapheles deshaysiana (see Bruce 2004a) and 

a group of species related to Aega angustata and Aega 

komai; other perceived groups were those species with 

digitate pleopod margins (among other characters) 

such as Aegiochus coroo (Bruce, 983). 

Morphological observations suggested that there 

would be at least one major division within Aega sensu 

lato [as recognised by Brusca ( 983) when he established 

two subgenera], but it was subjectively entirely 

unclear to what extent other groups within Aega could 

be identified as monophyletic. The monophyly of Aega 

was assumed, although somewhat uncertain as most of 

the distinguishing character states usually used to define 

or key the genus, such as the 5-articled maxilliped 

palp, would generally be regarded as plesiomorphic, as 

derived reductions of the number of articles to three or 

5

two are known in the superfamily Cymothooidea only 

from the parasitic Cymothoidae, ‘Epicaridea’ and the 

presumably more derived genera of the Aegidae such 

as Rocinela and Syscenus. The sole unique apomorphy 

upholding the monophyly of Aega (sensu lato) was 

maxilliped palp articles 3 and 4 with large recurved 

(i.e. strongly hooked) robust setae. 

Fifty-seven species were included in the analysis, 

being all those fully described for the purposes of this 

monograph and those described by Bruce (2004a) and 

yu and Bruce (2006). Specimens of Aega antennata, 

A. maxima, A. psora, A. serripes, Aegiochus arctica, 

Aegiochus plebeia, Aegiochus ventrosa, and Epulaega 

nodosa were examined and coded directly to the data 

set. Species coded from the literature were: Aegiochus 

francoisae (Wetzer, 990), Aegiochus lethrina (Bruce, 

983) (and one specimen), Aegiochus leptonica (Bruce, 

988); and Aega falcata Kensley and Chan, 200 . All 

other species were considered inadequately described 

for purposes of this analysis. 

Outgroup 

A preliminary analysis of the genera of Aegidae, using 

key characters as character states, was run using the 

phylogenetic analysis program PAUP* 4.0b 0 (Swofford 

2004) in order to assess potential sister-group 

relationships. Results indicated that Aega sensu lato 

was the sister group to all other genera, with Rocinela 

+ Alitropus the sister group to Syscenus + Xenuraega, a 

plausible working hypothesis. The final analysis was 

executed with Tridentella as the outgroup, because 

that family is the sister group to the clade Aegidae– 

Cymothoidae–‘Epicaridea’ of Brandt and Poore (2003). 

A particular coding difficulty was that within the 

Aegidae only Aega (sensu lato) has a 5-articled maxilliped 

palp, and so the different maxilliped states for 

palp articles 4 and 5 could not be coded against any 

aegid genus. 

cladistic analysis 

The data set used was derived from the descriptive 

DELTA character set, and modified to code all 

characters as unordered (i.e. reversible); multistate 

characters were treated as polymorphic. Most proportional 

characters were omitted; details of robust 

setae on the posterior pereopods were largely omitted. 

Nexus files were generated using DELTA. The data set 

consisted of 58 taxa (including single outgroup taxon) 

and 75 characters. The analyses used PAUP* (version 

4.0b. 0, Swofford 2004). A heuristic search was run using 

the treespace search method (hs addseq=random 

nchuck=3 chuckscore= nreps=500 randomize=trees). 

Resolution of the resultant trees was achieved through 

the use of the ‘reweight’ using the same constraints. 

6 

Parsimony jacknifing method in PAUP* was used to 

assess relative support for major clades. 

Characters are largely discussed in the section 

‘Morphology’ (p. 10), and specific states given in the 

character list. 

results 

A total 5,042 equally parsimonious trees of tree length 

608 was obtained, with a consistency index of 0.2 22, 

homoplasy index of 0.7878 and retention index of 

0.66 7. The strict consensus tree (Fig. 4) and majority 

rule tree (Fig. 5) show two major clades, both with 

further resolution. The large number of trees generated 

is indicative of a high level of instability in the higher 

clades. The basal clades have a high level of stability 

with the three basal clades in the strict consensus (Fig. 

4) tree having jacknife support values of 98% (Aega + 

Aegapheles) and 83% (Aegiochus) 70% (Epulaega) respectively. 

The 50% majority rule tree (Fig. 4) shows that 

the major groupings are maintained, with significant 

further structure. Use of the reweight method of PAUP* 

resulted in a single fully resolved tree (Fig. 6), and the 

discussion of the clades focuses on the basal branches, 

the more terminal branches showing considerable 

instability. 

discussion of clades 

There is a basal division (clades and 2) of all species 

of Aega sensu lato that confirms the division recognised 

by Brusca ( 983). These two clades each split into 

two clades that are here recognised as Aega (clade 4), 

Aegapheles gen. nov. (clade 3), Aegiochus (clade 5) and 

Epulaega gen. nov. (clade 6). 

clade 1 is supported by four apomorphic states: 

the rostrum projecting anteriorly (Ch 3.2), antennule 

peduncle dorsoventrally flattened and expanded variously 

from weakly to strongly (Ch 8.2.3.4), maxilliped 

palp article 5 is wide (Ch 37.3) and pleopod endopod 

is subtruncate (Ch 53.2—with homoplasious occurrence 

in Aegiochus vigilans and Epulaega fracta). Most 

species in this clade lack a mandibular molar process 

(Ch 29.2) and have a relatively short antennule flagellum 

(Ch 2 .2). 

clade 2 has three defining apomorphies: the distal 

margin of the maxillule has three large robust setae and 

several small robust setae (Ch 30.3) with one homoplasious 

occurrence in Aega magnifica) and the principal 

robust setae are broad-based (Ch 3 .2), and the 

uropodal rami are acute (Ch 67.3); most species have a 

straight lateral margin of the uropodal exopod. 

clade 3 comprises the species here placed in the 

Aegapheles gen. nov., the defining apomorphies being 

the elongate point to the pleotelson apex (Ch 6.4) 

which also extends beyond the distal extremity of the 

uropodal rami. The uropodal rami are not coplanar (Ch

Figure 4. Clades in Aega: Strict consensus tree. 

7

64.2) with the plane of the exopod held at an oblique 

angle to the endopod (unique within clade , but with 

homoplasious occurrence with Rocinela). The uropodal 

endopod distolateral margin has 4 to 9 robust setae (Ch 

73.3). In addition the uropodal endopod lateral margin 

is excised, varying from weakly to strongly or ‘falcate’ 

Figure 5. Clades in Aega: 50% majority rule; jacknife values. 

8 

(Ch 69 2.3), but this character state occurs in clade 

(see discussion for clade ). 

clade 4 comprises the species here considered 

to belong to Aega sensu lato, the characterising 

apomorphies being the frontal lamina posterior 

margin not clearly defined (Ch 26.2) and having sub-

parallel lateral margins (Ch 28.2) or widest posteriorly 

(Ch 28.4). The former has some homoplasious 

occurrence in Aegapheles, namely in 

A. excisa, A. mahana sp. nov. and A. umpara. The latter 

character is reversed in the clade Aega antennata– 

Aega falcata. Clade 4 divides into three clades (clades 

8, 9 and 0), and these are discussed in detail below; 

see also ‘general remarks’ (below). 

clade 5 constitutes Aegiochus sensu lato, and is 

upheld by a single apomorphic character state—a 

serrate pleotelson posterior margin (Ch 5.3). Additional 

states are the carpus of pereopods 2 and 3 with 

or 2 large robust setae (Ch 46.2), and most species 

have an acute appendix masculina (Ch 58.2) although 

there are five apparent reversals, possibly owing to the 

males not being fully mature. 

Within clade 5 there is the single-species clade 

of Aegiochus vigilans, sister clade to Aegiochus. This 

clade could warrant the establishment of a monotypic 

genus for A. vigilans. The species shows the apparent 

retention of some cirolanid-like characters, such as 

the morphology of the frontal lamina and clypeus, a 

tridentate mandibular incisor and a relatively large molar 

process that has marginal teeth. The mature males 

develop three large processes, one being the rostrum, 

two arising from the anterior margin of pereonite . 

This character in conjunction with the extremely long 

appendix masculina set on a posteromesial lobe are two 

unique states within the family, but it is far from certain 

that they be considered as of generic level (rather than 

species-level). Cephalic and pereopodal processes in 

related families such as the Cirolanidae and Corallanidae 

have not generally proved to be of generic merit, 

and the appendix masculina is often of variable length 

within genera; these two characters are considered too 

weak to use as reliable generic apomorphies within 

the family Aegidae. There are numerous undescribed 

species of Aegidae, and the resolution of both major 

clades could change with further data; at this point a 

new genus is not proposed. 

clade 6 is Epulaega gen. nov., which is upheld by 

maxilliped palp article 5 being minute (Ch 37.4) and 

fused penial processes (Ch 49.3). 

clade 7 is Aegiochus sensu strictu, excluding 

A. vigilans, and is upheld by the rostrum separating the 

antennule bases in dorsal view (Ch 5.2) and maxilliped 

palp article 5 is subrectangular and longer than wide 

(Ch 37.2). In this clade the rostrum is either ventrally 

directed (Ch 3. —A. bertrandi–A. coroo clade) or ventrally 

directed and posteriorly folded (Ch 3.3—all other 

species). All species within this clade have one small 

robust seta on the inferior margin of the merus. 

clade 8 (and 9 and 10) includes the species here 

considered as Aega sensu strictu (excluding the species 

of clade ). The clade is upheld by one state, that of 

antennule peduncle article 3 being less than half as 

wide as article 2 (Ch 20.2). Clade 9 lacks explicit apomorphies, 

but within this group there are two welldefined 

species pairs, each of which represent several 

more described and undescribed species. The clade 

A. angustata–A. komai is highly distinctive, and supported 

by several apomorphic states, these being the 

distal longitudinal carina on the pleotelson (Ch 2.3), 

the deeply serrate pleotelson posterior margin (Ch 

5.4), pereopod merus thickened (with one homoplasious 

occurrence in A. falcata) (Ch 39.2) and deeply 

serrate uropod margins (Ch 74.3); all species also have 

short, flat penial lobes, although this is not unique. 

One other named species (Aega dofleini) and several 

undescribed species belong to this clade on the basis 

of these recognised apomorphies. The clade A. antennata–A. 

falcata is supported by the unique antennule 

morphology, with peduncle article being strongly 

anteriorly produced (Ch 9.2) and the rostrum not 

separating antennule bases (Ch 5. ) (the antennule 

bases are divergent). There are at least a further three 

undescribed species that belong to this clade. The sister 

clade to the A. antennata–A. falcata clade is the A. 

semicarinata–urotoma–angustata–komai clade, supported 

by the very large robust setae that oppose the dactylus 

of pereopod 2 or 2 and 3 (Ch 47.2). 

clade 10 is weakly characterised, with only homoplasious 

states (Ch 2.2, 8.3, and 58.2). 

clade 11 is potentially unstable—in all trees except 

for the reweighted tree (Fig. 6) clade clades with 

clade 3 (Aegapheles; see Figs 3–5). The character state 

that is shared with clade 3 is the falcate or excised lateral 

margin of the uropodal endopod. The species in 

clade lack the produced pleotelson apex (Ch 6.4), 

the posterior margin forming a caudomedial point 

(Ch 6.2); the uropodal rami are coplanar (Ch 64. ); 

and there are few robust setae on the uropodal endopod 

lateral margin (Ch 72. , 73. ). In the reweighted 

tree these species clade as the sister group to Aega. 

On present data I regard the generic placement of the 

species in clade as equivocal. 

general remarks 

There is strong support for the basal clades, and for 

the genera here recognised. This analysis can be regarded 

only as a first assessment, based on a relatively 

limited data set. It is possible that with description of 

additional species within clade 4 (Aega sensu lato) a 

greater clarification of relationships within that clade 

may be achieved. In particular, the highly distinctive 

clades A. antennata–A. falcata and A. angusta–A. komai 

each have several undescribed species. Further data 

may allow more confident resolution of the position 

of clade . Further resolution of clade 5 may also allow 

for the establishment of a new genus for Aegiochus 

vigilans (no similar but undescribed species exist to my 

knowledge), although the unity of clade 7 (Aegiochus) 

9

Figure 6. Clades in Aega: successively weighted; type species in bold. 

20

CharaCter List for AegA 

body characters 

. Dorsal surfaces: . smooth or polished; 2. punctuate; 

3. heavily pitted. 

2. Lateral margins: . ovate; 2. subparallel. 

3. Rostral point: . ventrally directed, not projecting, not folded; 

2. projecting anteriorly, not ventrally folded; 3. folded 

ventrally and posteriorly. 

4. Rostral point: . minute; 2. prominent. 

5. Rostral point: . does not separate antennule bases (in dorsal 

view); 2. separates bases (in dorsal view). 

6. Eyes: . small (separated by more than 40% width of 

head); 2. large, not medially united; 3. large, medially 

united. 

7. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle: 

. without produced point; 2. with small distinct 

produced point. 

8. Coxae 5–7, posterior margins: . convex; 2. straight; 

3. concave; 4. sinuate. 

9. Coxae 5–7, posterolateral angle: . acute (less than 45°); 

2. blunt (more than 45°); 3. rounded. 

0. Pleonite 4 posterolateral margins: . not extending to 

posterior margin of pleonite 5; 2. extending to but not 

beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; 3. extending 

clearly beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5. 

. Pleonite 5 posterolateral angles: . overlapped by lateral 

margins of pleonite 4; 2. free, not overlapped by lateral 

margins of pleonite 4. 

2. Pleotelson dorsal surface: . with longitudinal carina 

only distally; 2. without longitudinal carina; 3. with 

longitudinal carina. 

3. Pleotelson dorsal surface: . without submedian depressions; 

2. anteriorly with 2 submedian depressions; 

3. posteriorly with 2 submedian depressions. 

4. Pleotelson lateral margins: . convex; 2. straight; 3. sinuate. 

5. Pleotelson marginal ornamentation: . smooth; 2. crenulated; 

3. serrate; 4. deeply serrate. 

6. Pleotelson posterior margin: . evenly rounded; 2. converging 

to caudomedial point; 3. sub-truncate (including 

emarginate); 4. with elongate medial point; 5. with 

median excision. 

7. Pleotelson, maximal robust setae: . without RS; 2. with 2 

to 6 RS; 3. with 7 to 0 RS; 4. with to 4 RS; 5. with 

5 or more RS. 

Antennule and antenna 

8. Antennule peduncle articles 1 and 2: . slender, cylindrical, 

article 2 without distal lobe; 2. flattened, article 2 without 

anterodistal lobe or weak lobe; 3. flattened, article 

2 anterodistal lobe not extending beyond mid-point of 

article 3; 4. flattened, article 2 anterodistal lobe extending 

to end of article 3. 

9. Antennule peduncle articles 1 and 2: . not anteriorly produced; 

2. anteriorly produced. 

20. Antennule peduncle article 3: . more than half as wide as 

article 2; 2. less than half as wide as article 2. 

2 . Antennule flagellum: . ‘long’, extending posteriorly 

beyond head; 2. ‘short’, not extending posteriorly 

beyond head. 

2 

22. Antenna peduncle article 2 inferior surface: . without 

longitudinal suture; 2. with indistinct groove; 3. with 

distinct longitudinal suture. 

23. Antenna peduncle article 4: . without deep longitudinal 

groove; 2. with deep longitudinal groove. 

24. Antenna peduncle article 5: 1. not markedly wider or flatter 

than article 4; 2. flattened and expanded. 

25. Antenna flagellum: . ‘long’, extending beyond pereonite 

2; 2. ‘short’, not extending beyond pereonite 2. 

Frontal lamina and mouthparts 

26. Frontal lamina: . slender, reduced or absent; 2. posterior 

margin not clearly defined; 3. posterior margin clearly 

defined; 4. posterior margin free, forming a projecting 

‘blade’. 

27. Frontal lamina posterior margin: . posteriorly abutting 

clypeus; 2. not abutting clypeus; 2. with narrow posterior 

stem. 

28. Frontal lamina lateral margins: . diverging towards anterior; 

2. sub-parallel; 3. narrowing posteriorly; 4. widest 

posteriorly. 

29. Mandible molar process: 1. present, small distinct flat lobe; 

2. absent. 

30. Maxillule with: . several (6–8) distally hooked robust 

setae progressively increasing in size laterally; 

2. large and several (3–5) small straight 

or weakly hooked robust setae; 3. 3 large and 

several (3–5) small robust setae. 

3 . Maxillule principal RS: . narrow-based, slender, distally 

hooked; 2. wide-based, broad, distally acute or weakly 

hooked. 

32. Maxilla mesial lobe setae: . robust seta; 2. 2 robust setae; 

3. 3 robust setae; 4. 4 robust setae; 5. 5 robust setae. 

33. Maxilla mesial lobe setae: . simple; 2. both simple and serrate; 

3. serrate or plumose. 

34. Maxilliped article 3 robust setae: . narrow-based, elongate, 

straight or weakly curved; 2. broad-based, hooked. 

35. Maxilliped palp article 4 hooked RS: . all large or becoming 

progressively larger distally; 2. penultimate RS 

distinctly smaller than adjacent RS. 

36. Maxilliped palp article 5: . articulating with article 4; 2. 

partly fused to article 4; 3. wholly fused to article 4. 

37. Maxilliped palp article 5 shape: . longer than wide, distally 

rounded ; 2. longer than wide, sub-rectangular 

; 3. wider than long, distally 

convex; 4. small subcircular lobe. 

38. Maxilliped palp article 5 robust setae: . serrate (or simple 

and serrate), elongate, appearing flexible; 2. simple, 

stiff, weakly curved or straight. 

pereopods 

39. Pereopod 1 merus inferior margin: . not convex and thickened; 

2. convex and thickened. 

40. Pereopod 1 merus inferior margin: . with robust setae; 2. 

without robust setae. 

4 . Pereopods 2 and 3, merus inferior margin: . with large RS; 

2. with small RS; 3. RS absent. 

42. Pereopod 1 carpus inferodistal angle: . with RS; 2. without 

RS. 

43. Pereopod 1 (2 and 3) propodus inferior margin (palm): . with 

or more RS; 2. without RS.

44. Pereopod 1 propodal palm: . simple, without blade or distal 

lobe; 2. with small digitate distal lobe (no RS; rounded 

in sections); 3. with inferodistal margin produced (with 

RS); 4. with flat blade or broad lobe. 

45. Pereopod 2 merus inferior margin RS set as: . two (or three) 

discontinuous groups; 2. single row or rows. 

46. Pereopods 2 and 3 carpus inferodistal angle: . without RS or 

single small RS; 2. with or 2 large RS. 

47. Pereopod 2 or 3 propodus: . without large club-shaped 

distal robust seta; 2. with large club-shaped distal 

robust seta. 

48. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus: . with 

short robust setae; 2. with long acute robust setae. 

penes 

49. Penial processes or openings: . set apart; 2. mutually adjacent; 

3. fused or united. 

50. Penes: 1. low tubercles; 2. opening flush with surface of 

sternite 7; 3. short lobes. 

pleopods 

5 . Pleopod 1 exopod distally: . broadly rounded; 2. narrowly 

rounded, mesial margin weakly to strongly 

oblique. 

52. Pleopod 1 exopod mesial margin with PMS: . on distal onethird; 

2. on distal half; 3. on distal two-thirds; 4. on 

entire margin. 

53. Pleopod 1 endopod distally: . rounded; 2. subtruncate. 

54. Pleopod 1 endopod lateral margin with PMS from: . on distal 

margin only; 2. distal one-third; 3. distal half. 

55. Pleopod 1 endopod mesial margin with PMS on: . distal 

one-third; 2. distal half; 3. distal two-thirds; 4. entire 

margin; 5. distal margin only. 

56. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina: . with straight margins; 2. 

basally swollen. 

57. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina: . extending to or beyond 

distal margin of ramus; 2. not extending to distal 

margin of ramus. 

58. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina: . distally bluntly or narrowly 

rounded; 2. distally acute; 3. distally obliquely 

truncate. 

59. Appendix masculina: . without acute cuticular scales; 2. 

with acute cuticular scales. 

60. Exopods of pleopods 1–3 each with distolateral margin: . not 

digitate; 2. digitate. 

6 . Endopods of pleopods 3–5 each: . without distolateral point; 

2. with distolateral point. 

62. Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral margin: . without prominent 

acute RS; 2. with prominent acute RS. 

uropods 

63. Uropod peduncle posterior lobe about: . ‘short’ one-third as 

long as endopod; 2. one-half to two-thirds as long as 

endopod; 3. ‘long’ two-thirds or longer than endopod 

length. 

64. Uropod rami: . with endopod and exopod co-planar; 

2. not co-planar, exopod at angle of about 35° to 

endopod. 

22 

65. Uropod rami: . extending to pleotelson apex; 2. not 

extending beyond pleotelson; 3. extending beyond 

pleotelson. 

66. Uropod rami marginal setae: . in single tier; 2. in two or 

three tiers; 3. dense, in several tiers. 

67. Uropod rami apices: . narrowly rounded; 2. broadly 

rounded; 3. acute. 

68. Uropod rami apically: 1. not bifid; 2. bifid. 

69. Uropod endopod lateral margin: . without prominent excision; 

2. falcate; 3. with prominent excision. 

70. Uropod endopod lateral proximal margin: . convex; 2. 

straight. 

7 . Uropod endopod lateral distal margin: . convex; 2. straight; 

3. concave. 

72. Uropod endopod proximal lateral margin with: . 0 or robust 

setae; 2. 2 to 6 (or more) robust setae. 

73. Uropod endopod distal lateral margin with: . 0 or robust 

setae; 2. 2 or 3 robust setae; 3. 4 to 9 robust setae. 

74. Uropod endopod mesial margin: . even, weakly or strongly 

convex; 2. sinuate; 3. deeply serrate. 

75. Uropod exopod: . not extending to end of endopod; 2. 

extending to end of endopod; 3. extending beyond 

end of endopod. 

ANAlysIs OF AEgIdAE 

The Aegidae White, 850, is a long established family, 

the unity of which has rarely been questioned. Brandt 

and Poore (2003, p. 898) rightly mention that ‘though 

these families are relatively easily recognisable, undisputed 

synapomorphies are not revealed in the literature’. Wägele 

( 989, fig. 93) suggested that the family might be 

paraphyletic, referring to a ‘Gruppe Aega’ (consisting 

solely of the genus Aega), that being the sister group 

to a clade containing ‘Gruppe Rocinela’ together 

with the Cymothoidae and the Epicaridea. Brusca 

and Wilson ( 99 ) disagreed with that interpretation, 

which had been based on the reduction of the articles 

of the maxilliped palp, considering such reductions 

as a common homoplasious adaptation to parasitism. 

Brusca and Wilson’s analysis and matrix equally failed 

to identify synapomorphies to uphold the Aegidae (I 

accept that this was not their intention), the Aegidae 

coding identically to the Cymothoidae in that analysis. 

In the more recent analysis of Brandt and Poore (2003), 

the only apomorphic state identified that separates 

the Aegidae from the Cymothoidae is the presence 

of marginal setae on both rami of pleopods 3 and 4; 

this is a relatively weak character given that this is the 

state for the large families Cirolanidae, Corallanidae 

and also the Tridentellidae, and also that the Aegidae 

is polymorphic for that character, with many species 

having the setae on endopods of pleopods 3 and 4 

either reduced or absent. Loss of marginal setae on 

pleopods 3 and 4 is a highly homoplasious character 

in the Cymothoidae associated with both freshwater 

habitats (Cirolanidae) and commensal or symbiotic life 

history (other families).

Traditionally the Aegidae have been characterised 

in keys and diagnoses as having ‘prehensile’ pereopods 

–3, or pereopods –3 with hooked dactylus, and having 

‘hooks’ or hooked ‘spines’ on the maxilliped palp 

(e.g. Bruce 993b; Kensley & Schotte 989; Wetzer & 

Brusca 997), although Bruce ( 993b) also referred 

to the bilobed maxilla with a small mesial lobe. This 

character, the maxilla being a simple broad plate with 

a distomesial lobe, is unique to the Aegidae and Cymothoidae, 

with a single homoplasious occurrence in 

the sphaeromatoid genus Paravireia Chilton, 925 (see 

Brökeland et al. 200 ). The Aegidae, Cymothoidae and 

Tridentellidae also share an elongate maxillule that is 

terminated by prominent, flat, incisory robust setae, 

these often being referred to as hooked though that is 

rarely the case. 

What then does uphold the monophyly of the 

Aegidae? The Cymothoidae have prehensile dactyli 

on pereopods –7, but ambulatory pereopods 4–7 

would generally be regarded as the plesiomorphic 

state within the Cymothoidae. A principal uniting 

character remains the maxilliped palp of five to three 

articles, with articles 2–4 provided with prominent 

and usually recurved robust setae. The Cymothoidae 

have maxilliped palp articles and 2 indistinguishably 

fused, and the axis of palp article 2 is strongly oblique 

to article . In contrast the Aegidae have between 2 

and 5 maxilliped palp articles, with Syscenus being 

polymorphic with 2 or 3 maxilliped palp articles (see 

figures in Bruce 2005). 

Eye size was not a character considered in previous 

analyses (Wägele 989, Brusca & Wilson 99 , Brandt 

& Poore 2003), but the Aegidae with few exceptions 

have large eyes, in Aega and Aegiochus these often being 

imperceptibly united medially. Eye reduction or loss 

is a common convergent state among parasites, cave 

and groundwater crustaceans, and deep-sea fauna. Enlargement 

of the eyes is, in contrast, rare and cannot be 

dismissed as a convergent or homoplasious character 

state. Although this condition occurs in some species 

of Corallanidae (see Delaney 989) and Tridentellidae, 

it is most highly developed in the Aegidae, with those 

species with the smallest eyes having eyes considerably 

larger than, for example, those of cirolanids or 

sphaeromatids. 

The character states that support the monophyly 

of the Aegidae are therefore the unique large eye size, 

in conjunction with a styliform maxillule with mesial 

robust setae (only terminal robust setae in the Cymothoidae) 

and the maxilla having one basal endite. The 

characters of ‘prehensile’ pereopods –3 and hooked 

robust setae on the maxilliped palp are accurate but not 

unique to the Aegidae (both states effectively occurring 

in the Cymothoidae). 

23 

results 

A heuristic search was conducted, all characters unordered. 

The data set consisted of nine taxa (including 

single outgroup taxon) and 30 characters. A single fully 

resolved tree (Fig. 7) resulted. 

Epulaega presents as the sister group to the remainder 

of the Aegidae, the genus being upheld by the 

vestigial maxilliped palp article 5 (Ch 23.3) and the 

autapomorphic fused penial processes; the remaining 

genera are defined by having a dorsal rostrum (Ch 3.2), 

and separate into two clades, the Aegiochus–Aega–Aegapheles 

clade, which is supported by a large and acute 

rostrum (Ch 5.3) and the Alitropus—Xenuraega clade, 

upheld by numerous apomorphic states, notably the 

unicuspid (or absent) mandible incisor (Ch 7.3), lack 

of maxilliped endite (Ch 20.2), maxilliped palp with 

articles and 2 indivisibly fused, consisting of two or 

three articles (Ch 2 .2/3) with the major terminal article 

oblique to the axis of the maxilliped basal article, 

sub-basal appendix masculina (Ch 26.2), endopods of 

pleopods 3 and 4 smaller than exopods (Ch 27.2) and 

uropod rami distally rounded (Ch 29.2). 

Figure 7. Cladogram of the genera of Aegidae with 

Tridentalla as the outgroup.

The Aega–Aegapheles clade is upheld by the flattened 

antennule peduncle article (Ch 2.2), frontal lamina 

wide and posteriorly separate from the clypeus (Ch 

6.2), and the endopods of pleopods 3 and 4 with few 

setae at the distomesial angle only (Ch 28.2). Aegiochus 

is characterised by the quadrate maxilliped palp article 

5 (Ch 23.2) and the rostrum clearly separating the 

antennule bases (Ch 0.2). 

The Rocinela–Syscenus–Xenuraega clade is supported 

by antennule peduncle articles and 2 elongate (Ch 

.2), antenna peduncle article 5 longest (Ch 3.2), 

and the maxillule lacking small mesial robust setae 

(Ch 8.2). The clade Syscenus–Xenuraega is defined by 

the head not being laterally overlapped by pereonite 

(Ch 2.2), the pleon distinctly narrower than the pereon 

and pleonite 5 with the lateral margins entirely free 

(Ch 7.2). 

CharaCter List for aegidae 

. Body: . dorsally vaulted; 2. dorsally depressed. 

2. Head: . overlapped laterally by anterior angles of pereonite 

; 2. not overlapped laterally by anterior angles 

of pereonite . 

3. Rostral point size: . small, scarcely or not visible in dorsal 

view; 2. large, prominent in dorsal view. 

4. Rostral point position: . anteroventral; 2. dorsal. 

5. Rostral point apex shape: . narrowly rounded; 2. broadly 

rounded; 3. acute. 

6. Coxae 5–7: . as long or longer than respective pereonite; 

2. shorter than respective pereonite. 

7. Pleon: . not distinctly narrower than pereonite 7; 2. distinctly 

narrower than pereonite 7. 

8. Pleonite 5: . lateral margins largely or wholly overlapped 

by pleonite 4; 2. lateral margins free. 

9. Eyes: . normal in size ; 2. large, occupying 

50% or more of head; 3. absent. 

0. Antennules, peduncle article 1: . close set or together; 

2. separated by rostrum. 

. Antennule peduncle: , articles and 2 short ; 2, articles and 2 elongate . 

24 

2. Antennule peduncle articles 1 and 2: . cylindrical; 2. dorsoventrally 

flattened. 

3. Antennal peduncle: . articles –3 short, 4 and 5 longest; 

2. articles and 2 short, 5 longest. 

4. Antenna peduncle articles 4 or 4 and 5: . without long 

plumose setae; 2. with long plumose setae. 

5. Frontal lamina: . wide < 3 H long as wide to wider than 

long>; 2. slender, elongate. 

6. Frontal lamina: . posterior margin wide, against 

clypeus; 2. posteriorly wide, separate from clypeus; 

3. posteriorly narrow, forming stem. 

7. Mandible incisor: . tricuspid; 2. biscuspid; 3. unicuspid; 

4. lacking incisor. 

8. Maxillule: . with small and large mesial robust setae; 

2. without small mesial robust setae. 

9. Maxillule distal setae: . slender only; 2. broad-based triangular 

. 

20. Maxilliped endite: . present; 2. absent. 

2 . Maxilliped palp articles: . 5-articled; 2. 3-articled; 

3. 2-articled. 

22. Maxilliped palp articles 3 and 4: . without hooked RS; 

2. with hooked RS. 

23. Maxilliped palp article 5: . rectangular, longer than wide; 

2. distally rounded, wider than long; 3. vestigial, short 

lobe. 

24. Maxilliped palp: . article present; 2. article indivisibly 

fused. 

25. Penial processes: 1. flat lobes; 2. flush . 

26. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina: . inserted basally; 2. inserted 

sub-basally. 

27. Pleopods 3 and 4 endopods: . same size as exopod; 2. smaller 

than exopod. 

28. Pleopods 3 and 4 endopods: . with PMS; 2. with few PMS 

at distolateral angle only; 3. without PMS. 

29. Uropodal rami: . with distinct apex; 2. rounded, without 

distinct apex. 

30. Uropod rami : . coplanar; 2. exopod at oblique 

angle to endopod.

subOrdEr cymOthOIdA wägElE, 

1989 

Brandt and Poore (2003) provided a new classification 

for the non-asellotan isopods (the ‘former Flabellifera’) 

based on a thorough character analysis, and recognised 

the subordinal separation of, among others, the Cymothoida 

Wägele, 989 from the Sphaeromatidea Wägele, 

989, as had earlier been proposed by Wägele ( 989). 

That classification is followed here. 

rEvAlIdAtION ANd dIAgNOsIs tO 

bArybrOtIdAE hANsEN, 1890 

barybrotidae Hansen, 890 

Barybrotidae Hansen, 890: 66.– Monod, 934: 0. 

diagnosis: Body evenly vaulted. Eyes dorso-lateral, 

large. Antennae and antennule well developed; division 

between peduncle and flagellum distinct; flagellae 

multi-articulate. Antennule shorter than antenna. 

Frontal lamina present, abutting clypeus; clypeus and 

labrum present. Mouthparts forming buccal cone. 

Mandible incisor broad, incisor tridentate; molar process 

present, lamellar; lacinia mobilis and spine row 

absent, represented by or 2 setae. Maxillule styliform, 

with flattened terminal RS. Maxilla a simple minute 

lobe, lacking RS. Maxilliped endite absent; palp with 

4 articles, article 2 elongate, about 2.9 times proximal 

width, articles 2–4 with hooked RS. Pereopods robust; 

pereopods –3 with prehensile dactylus, about as 

long or longer than propodus; superior distal angles 

of ischium and merus strongly produced and setose. 

Pereopods 4–7 ‘natatory’, with flattened basis, with superior 

and inferior margins provided with continuous 

row of long plumose setae. Pleon with 5 free pleonites 

plus pleotelson. Pleopod rami lamellar, without ridges 

or folding, with plumose marginal setae on both rami 

of pleopods and 2, setation reduced or absent on 

endopods of pleopods 3 and 4; pleopod 5 endopod 

without setae. 

Composition: The family has one monotypic genus 

Barybrotes Schioedte & Meinert, 879a, the type species 

of which is Barybrotes indus Schioedte & Meinert, 

879a; other named species are junior synonyms of 

the type species. 

tAxONOmy 

25 

remarks: There are several character states that prevent 

Barybrotes Schioedte & Meinert, 879a, being placed 

in the Aegidae, and that require the reinstatement of 

Hansen’s ( 890) family. Prime among these is that the 

mouthparts, while reduced and probably used to feed 

from fish prey, do not show homologous character 

states with that of the Aegidae, nor the Corallanidae 

and Tridentellidae. In particular the maxilla is a minute 

single lobe lacking robust setae (similar to that seen in 

the Corallanidae), not wide and flat with a distomesial 

basal endite, and both maxilla lobes with hooked robust 

setae as occurs in all Aegidae and also Cymothoidae; 

the maxilliped is of a different form to that of the 

Aegidae, notably with only four palp articles, with 

article 2 elongate; and the mandible incisor retains 

the cirolanid form, being wide and tridentate, though 

somewhat narrower than seen in Cirolanidae. In the 

past the genus has been referred to the nominate family 

(e.g. Richardson 9 0; Thielemann 9 0; Monod 934) 

or subfamily (Nierstrasz 93 ), to the Corallanidae 

(Barnard 936) and more recently to the Aegidae (Pillai 

954, 967; Brandt & Poore 2003; Kensley et al. 2007). I 

have been unable to discover any published justification 

for placing Barybrotes in the Aegidae. 

There are numerous character states that strongly 

suggest that Barybrotes has evolved from a Natatolanalike 

cirolanid ancestor (Natatolana Bruce, 98 ; see 

Keable 2006), including the proportions of the peduncular 

articles of the antennule (articles and 2 short, 

3 long) and antenna (articles 3 and 4 subequal in 

length), presence of a prominent pappose robust seta 

at the distal margin of antennular peduncle article 2, 

flagellum of the antennule with short (‘ring-like’) articles 

that may form a callynophore in males, elongate 

frontal lamina, wide and tridentate mandible incisor 

(though narrower than in the Cirolanidae), pereopods 

–3 with the superior distal angles of the ischium and 

merus produced and provided with long slender setae, 

pereopods 5–7 with a flattened basis provided with 

long plumose setae on superior and anterior margins 

and along the mid-lateral margin. All these character 

states are typical of Natatolana. 

The diagnosis is based on an examined series of 

specimens from the Zoological Museum, Natural History 

Museum of Denmark, listed in Appendix 3. 

distribution: Indian Ocean from East Africa (present 

material) to Thailand; in the Pacific from Vietnam, 

Indonesia and Philippines.

Aegidae White, 850 

Aegidae White, 850: 68.– Dana, 852 : 304; 853: 765.– 

Hansen, 890: 3 5, 405.– Richardson, 905a: 66.– 

Menzies & Glynn, 968: 44.– Menzies & George, 972: 

9.9.– Kussakin, 979: 23 .– Brusca, 980: 229; 983: 

6.– Menzies & Kruczynski, 983: 6 .– Kensley & Schotte, 

989: 5.– Bruce, 993: 54.– Wetzer & Brusca, 997: 

30.– Roman & Dalens, 999: 228.– Bruce, Lew Ton 

& Poore, 2002: 59.– Keable, Poore & Wilson, 2002: 

unpaginated. 

Aeginae.– Menzies, 962: 7. 

diagnosis: Eyes large, often medially united. Mouthparts 

forming buccal cone; maxillule styliform, with 

terminal and mesial robust setae; maxilla with single 

distomesial basal endite; maxilliped palp with conspicuous 

recurved (‘hooked’) RS. Pereopods –3 robust, 

with dactylus as long as or longer than propodus, 

usually strongly recurved. 

desCription: Body evenly vaulted or dorsally depressed. 

Eyes lateral or dorso-lateral, usually large, sometimes 

contiguous or nearly so; occasionally absent. Antennae 

and antennule well developed; division between 

peduncle and flagellum distinct; flagellae multi-articulate; 

antennule shorter than antenna, peduncle 

4-articled; antennal peduncle 5-articled. Frontal lamina 

present, varied in shape, occasionally absent, usually 

not abutting clypeus; clypeus and labrum present, 

often indistinct. Mouthparts forming buccal cone. 

Mandible incisor narrow, small molar process present, 

occasionally absent, lamellar and triangular when 

present; lacinia mobilis and spine row absent. Maxillule 

styliform, with flattened terminal RS, may be distally 

hooked; mesial lobe present or absent. Maxilla with 

small distomesial basal endite joined to larger mesial 

lobe; each lobe with or more broad, usually apically 

curved (hooked) RS. Maxilliped endite present (Aega 

group of genera and Rocinela) or absent (Syscenus and 

Xenuraega); palp with 3–5 articles, at least articles 3 and 

4 with large hooked RS. Pereopods robust; pereopods 

–3 with strongly curved dactylus (i.e. prehensile), 

about as long or longer than propodus (occasionally 

weakly curved or shorter than propodus); with few 

slender setae. Pereopods 4–7 ambulatory, articles not 

compressed or flattened, basis without long plumose 

marginal setae; ischium to propodus inferior and distal 

margins with RS. Pleopod rami lamellar, without 

ridges or folding, with plumose marginal setae on both 

rami of pleopods and 2, setation variously reduced 

or absent on endopods of pleopods 3–5; pleopod 5 

endopod without setae. 

remarks: There are few unique character states that can 

be used to define the Aegidae (see ‘Analysis’ p. 22). 

There is a pagination error in this publication, with page 

304 printed as 204. 

26 

Within the Cymothoida the styliform maxillule, with 

terminal robust setae is a character shared with both the 

Tridentellidae and Cymothoidae, and a maxillule that 

has mesial (i.e. subterminal) as well as terminal robust 

setae is shared only with the Tridentellidae. The maxilla 

with a single distomesial endite is a character shared 

only with the Cymothoidae. The Tridentellidae have 

ambulatory pereopods –3 and lack hooked robust 

setae on the maxilliped, and are further characterised 

by having an elongate maxilliped endite. The Aegidae 

is the only family in which all but a very few species 

have greatly enlarged eyes, a state that is in general 

rare within the Isopoda. There are some Corallanidae 

that have large eyes, but in most species the eyes are 

similar in size to those of the Cirolanidae. The Corallanidae 

lack hooked robust setae on the maxilliped, 

pereopods –3 are ambulatory, and the family has the 

unique character states of strongly hooked maxillule 

and vestigial maxilla with no endites. The Aegidae, 

lack of wholly unique characters notwithstanding, can 

be readily identified by the combination of characters 

listed in the diagnosis. 

Key to the marine genera of aegidae 

A key to all genera was provided by Bruce ( 993a), 

which included the only estuarine and freshwater genus 

Alitropus (known only from tropical Australia and 

Asia). Regional keys have been given to the East Pacific 

by Brusca ( 983), the Caribbean (Kensley & Schotte 

989), and to northern cold-water seas by Kussakin 

( 979, in Russian). 

Although the marine genus Xenuraega Tattersall, 

909 has not been recorded from New Zealand it is 

included in this key. The true extent of the distribution 

of this genus is far from certain, but mesopelagic and 

pelagic isopods often have extensive distributions, 

sometimes in all oceans (e.g. Metacirolana caeca, see 

Svavarsson and Bruce 2000, and Aega monophthalma 

herein). For this reason it is considered entirely possible 

that Xenuraega could be taken in New Zealand 

waters. 

Pleonite abruptly narrower than pereonite 7; 

pleonite 5 lateral margins entirely free; eyes usually 

absent ...............................................................2 

– Pleonite not abruptly narrower than pereonite 7; 

pleonite 5 lateral margins partly or entirely overlapped 

by pleonite 4; eyes present, often large .3 

2. Frontal lamina present; maxilliped palp 3-articled; 

both uropod rami lamellar ........Syscenus [p. 98] 

– Frontal lamina absent; maxilliped palp 2-articled; 

uropodal rami with endopod stub-like, exopod 

filamentous................................Xenuraega [p. 2 5]

3. Body dorsally compressed; frontal lamina slender, 

shield-shaped or lanceolate; rostrum anteriorly 

widely rounded or truncate; maxilliped palp 3articled 

...........................................Rocinela [p. 6 ] 

– Body dorsally moderately to strongly vaulted; 

frontal lamina wide; rostrum narrowly rounded 

or acute; maxilliped palp 5-articled .....................4 

4. Rostrum anteriorly directed, acute; frontal lamina 

ventrally flat, antennule peduncle articles 1 and 

2 flattened; maxilliped palp article 5 wider than 

long, partly or entirely fused to 4 ........................5 

– Frontal lamina with free posterior margin and/or 

posteriorly narrow; antennule peduncle articles 

1 and 2 not flattened or expanded .......................6 

5. Uropod rami co-planar; uropodal rami to or beyond 

pleotelson apex; uropodal endopod lateral 

margin without distinct excision; pleotelson lacking 

distinct, usually produced point ............ Aega 

– Plane of uropod endopod at oblique angle to 

exopod, uropodal rami not extending to pleotelson 

apex; uropodal endopod lateral margin 

usually distinct excision; pleotelson apex forming 

distinct, usually produced point ............................ 

......................................................Aegapheles [p. 65] 

6. Rostrum bent ventrally or ventrally and posteriorly; 

maxilliped palp article 5 longer than wide, 

not fused to article 4 ...................Aegiochus [p. 83] 

– Rostrum minute, not projecting, not visible in 

dorsal view; maxilliped palp article 5 minute, less 

than 0.3 width of article 4...........Epulaega [p. 5 ] 

Genus Aega Leach, 8 5 

Æga Leach, 8 5: 369; 8 8: 549; Desmarest, 825.– Milne 

Edwards, 840: 238.– Dana, 852: 304*; 853: 747.– 

Gosse, 855: 34.– Harger, 880: 383.– Haswell, 882: 

284.– Bate & Westwood, 86 – 868: 276.– Miers, 876b: 

08.– Schioedte & Meinert, 879b: 334.– Hansen, 890: 

3 6.– Sars, 897: 58.– Richardson, 905a: 67.– Stebbing, 

905: 20.– Hodgson, 9 0: 7.– Stephensen, 948: 36. 

Aega.– Gerstaecker, 882: 227.– Barnard, 9 4: 36 ; 936: 

57.– Hale, 925: 68.– Wahrberg, 930: 8.– Nierstrasz 

& Schuurmans Stekhoven Jr, 930: e74.– Gurjanova, 

933: 429; 936: 70.– Holthuis, 956: 4 .– Menzies, 962: 

7.– Schultz, 969: 89.– Menzies & George, 972: 

7.– Kensley, 978: 56.– Kussakin, 979: 23 .– Brusca, 

983: 7.– Menzies & Kruczynski, 983: 62.– Bruce, 983: 

757; 996: 29.– Brusca & Iverson, 985: 40.– Kensley 

& Schotte, 989: 6.– Bruce, Lew Ton & Poore, 2002: 

60. 

Pterelas Guérin-Méneville, 836: VII.– Dana, 852: 204; Dana, 

853: 748. 

Æegacylla Dana, 854: 76. 

Aega (Aega).– Brusca, 983: 0. 

* There is a pagination error in this publication, with page 

304 printed as 204. 

27 

type speCies: Oniscus psora Linnaeus, 758 (= Aega psora 

(Linnaeus, 758); original orthography was Oniscus 

Pforá; by subsequent designation, Menzies ( 962). Aega 

emarginata (Leach, 8 5) is a junior synonym. Aega affinis 

Milne Edwards, 840 was regarded as a synonym 

of A. psora by Kussakin ( 979). 

diagnosis: Body moderately to strongly dorsally 

vaulted. Rostral point acute, anteriorly produced between 

antennule peduncles. Eyes present, often large, 

usually separate. Pleon not distinctly narrower than 

pereonite 7, pleonite not abruptly narrower than 

pleonite 2. Antennule peduncle articles 1 and 2 flattened, 

often expanded with anterodistal angle of article 

2 forming lobe, article 3 less than 0.3 H width of article 

2. Frontal lamina wide, posterior margin not clearly 

defined, lateral margins usually straight. Maxilliped 

palp 5-articled; article 5 wide, often fused to article 

4, distal margin convex, with slender setae; endite 

present. Coxae 5–7 as long as or longer than respective 

pereonite. Pereopods –3 merus inferior margin with 

large robust setae, usually set as one or more rows. 

desCription: Pleon not abruptly narrower than pereon; 

pleonites all visible, not posteriorly widest, pleonite 5 

laterally overlapped by pleonite 4; pleonites 3–5 posteriorly 

produced to an acute point. Pleotelson large, 

about as long as longer pleon, usually with PMS and 

RS. 

Mandible with uni- or bicuspid incisor; molar 

process present, reduced or absent. Maxillule with 5–8 

elongate, flat, narrow-based terminal and mesial RS. 

Maxilliped 5-articled, article wider than long, articles 

3 and 4 each with 2–6 stout recurved RS, article 5 with 

2–7 occasionally hooked RS; endite present, usually 

with –2 terminal setae. 

remarks: Under the revised concept Aega sensu strictu 

contains those species with a prominent, acute and 

anteriorly projecting rostrum, the antennule peduncle 

with articles and 2 strongly dorsoventrally 

compressed, sometimes with an anterolateral lobe, a 

slender peduncle article 3 (less than one-third as wide 

as article 2), and the uropod peduncle with an elongate 

mesial lobe that stretches most of the length of the uropodal 

endopod. Species within Aega sensu strictu lack 

a falcate uropodal endopod, although this is weakly 

expressed in the type species; most species have matte, 

punctate or pitted dorsal body surfaces. 

Three species, A. magnifica (Dana, 854), A. maxima 

Hansen, 897 and A. sheni yu & Bruce, 2006 lack the 

slender antennule peduncle article 3 and have a clearly 

falcate uropodal endopod, and approach some Aegapheles 

in the appearance of the antennule and uropodal 

endopod. These species are here regarded as incertae 

sedis (see discussion of clades, p. 6– 9).

Aega antennata Richardson, 9 0 and A. falcata 

Kensley & Chan, 200 are immediately distinguished 

from all other species (and all other Aegidae) by having 

antennule peduncle article strongly anteriorly 

produced. There are several other undescribed species 

similar to these two species that also have this unique 

character state. 

Thirty-six named species are included in the genus, 

those below, and those listed under ‘Species included 

...’ (p.2 2). The genus is represented in all oceans 

from shallow waters to a depths of 2 48 metres (Aega 

maxima). 

etymoLogy: The name could be derived from Greek 

mythology (e.g. Aega being described as a nursemaid 

to Zeus, and variously as the daughter of Olenos, of 

King Melisseus of Crete and of Helios). Alternatively 

the name could be derived from the Greek aeigis or the 

Latin aegis, meaning shield or cover. Another possibility 

is that the name was in allusion to the relatively 

large eyes of many species and is derived from Middle 

or Old English ēage. Leach ( 8 5) gave no clues 

as to his choice of name, and as it seems not to relate 

directly to mythological history, geographical location 

nor morphological attributes, the basis for his choice 

remains a mystery. 

Key to the new Zealand species of Aega 

Eyes large, medially united ..................................2 

– Eyes separate ..........................................................3 

2. Posterior margins of pereonites 6 and 7 and pleonites 

nodular; surfaces heavily pitted; pleotelson 

dorsally with distinct median longitudinal carina, 

posterior margin with distinct apical point; margins 

of pleotelson and uropods with conspicuous 

acute RS ....................... Aega monophthalma (p. 37) 

– Posterior margins of pereonites 6 and 7 and pleonites 

smooth; surfaces finely setose; pleotelson 

dorsally without median carina, posterior margin 

without distinct apical point; margins of pleotelson 

and uropods RS small ...................................... 

..............................................Aega stevelowei (p. 50) 

3. Pereopod 2 or 2 and 3 propodus with large clubshaped 

RS opposite base of dactylus; uropodal 

endopod lateral margin even ...............................4 

– Pereopod 2 or 2 and 3 propodus without large 

club-shaped RS opposite base of dactylus; uropodal 

endopod lateral margin falcate .................6 

4. Pleotelson and uropods deeply serrate; body 

elongate, more than 3 times as long as greatest 

width ...........................................Aega komai (p. 34) 

– Pleotelson and uropods not deeply serrate; body 

less than 3 times as long as greatest width .........5 

28 

5. Pleotelson dorsally with two sub-median depressions, 

posterior margin strongly concave; eyes 

narrowly separated ( by ~9% width of head) ...... 

..........................................Aega semicarinata (p. 44) 

– Pleotelson dorsally without depression, posterior 

margin subtruncate; eyes widely separated (by 

~29% width of head) .............Aega urotoma (p. 55) 

6. Body very wide ( .6 times as long as greatest 

width), dorsal surfaces distinctly pitted; eyes 

small, widely separated (by ~38% width of 

head) pereopods –3 dactylus about as long as 

propodus ................................. Aega whanui (p. 6 ) 

– Body wide ( .8 times as long as greatest width), 

dorsal surfaces smooth; eyes large, narrowly 

separated ( by ~ 0% width of head) pereopods 

–3 dactylus about .5 as long as propodus ......... 

.............................................Aega falklandica (p. 28) 

Aega falklandica Kussakin, 967 (Figs 8– ) 

Aega falklandica Kussakin, 1967: 227, figs 3, 4.– Kensley, 1980: 

159; 2001: 227.– Branch, Griffiths, Kensley & Sieg, 1991: 

12, fig. (not numbered). 

Aega (Aega) falklandica.– Brusca, 983: . 

materiaL examined: Holotype of Aega falklandica: ♀ 

(non-ovig. 3 mm), New Island, Falkland Islands, 2 

April 959, 0 m, coll. Slava. Zool Inst, Acad. Science, 

Leningrad RAN /46405. 

Non-type. ♂ (3 mm), Macquarie Ridge, 54°30–28’S, 

59°00’E, 5 February 967, Cr 27, stn 975, 443–549 m, 

coll. RV Eltanin (USNM 099250). 

Also examined: Holotype of Aega maxima Hansen, 

897, ♀ (non-ovig. 54 mm), off Cocos Island, off Panama, 

East Pacific, 26 February 1891, Albatross stn 3362, 

2056 m [as 25 fms] (USNM 20727). 

desCription: Body .8 times as long as greatest width, 

dorsal surfaces smooth and sparsely punctate, widest 

at pereonite 5, lateral margins ovate. Eyes large, 

not medially united, separated by about 0% width 

of head; each eye made up of ~27 transverse rows of 

ommatidia, each row with ~ 5– 7 ommatidia; eye 

colour dark brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with 

posteroventral angle with small distinct produced 

point. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; posterior 

margins sinuate, posterolateral angle acute (less than 

45°). Pleon with pleonite visible in dorsal view; pleonite 

4 with posterolateral margins extending clearly 

beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with 

posterolateral angles overlapped by lateral margins of 

pleonite 4. Pleotelson 0.8 times as long as anterior width, 

dorsal surface without longitudinal carina; lateral margins 

sinuate, smooth, posterior margin converging to 

caudomedial point, with 6–8 RS.

Figure 8. Aega falklandica Kussakin, 967. Holotype; all appendages drawn in situ (Leningrad, RN /46405). A, dorsal view, 

holotype; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, pereopod , distal articles; F, pereopod 2, distal articles; G, pleotelson posterior 

margin apex; H, uropod endopod, ventral view; I, left uropod, dorsal view. 

29

Figure 9. Aega falklandica Kussakin, 967. Eltanin specimen (USNM 099250). A, lateral view; B, antenna peduncle; 

C, antennule; D, mandible; E, mandible palp article 3; F, maxillule; G, maxillule apex; H, maxilla; I, maxilla apex; 

J, maxilliped; K, maxilliped palp; L, maxilliped palp article 5 (Leica); peduncle, dorsal view. 

30

Figure 10. Aega falklandica Kussakin, 967. Eltanin specimen (USNM 099250). A–D, pereopods , 2, 6 and 7 respectively; 

E, pereopod ischium, mesial surface; F, sternite 7 showing penial papillae. 

Antennule peduncle article 2 anterodistal lobe not 

extending beyond mid-point of article 3; articles 3 and 

4 0.5 times as long as combined lengths of articles and 

2, article 3 2.6 times as long as wide; flagellum with 12 

articles, extending to posterior margin of eye. Antenna 

peduncle article 2 inferior surface without distinct longitudinal 

suture; article 4 .6 times as long as wide, 0.9 

times as long as combined lengths of articles –3, with 

deep longitudinal groove, inferior margin plumose 

seta, and 0 short slender setae; article 5 not markedly 

wider or flatter than article 4, 1.1 times as long as article 

4, 2.2 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 6 

palmate setae; flagellum with 17 articles, extending to 

middle of pereonite . 

3 

Frontal lamina flat, as wide as long, lateral margins 

converging posteriorly, anterior margin rounded, with 

small median point, posterior margin not abutting 

clypeus. 

Mandible molar process present, minute; palp article 

2 with 7 distolateral setae (3 large biserrate, remainder 

smaller, simple), palp article 3 with 27 setae. Maxillule 

with 8 terminal RS (falcate). Maxilla mesial lobe with 

5 RS (3 stout, 2 distally biserrate); lateral lobe with 3 

RS. Maxilliped endite with 0 apical setae; palp article 2 

with 6 RS (1 hooked; with further fine marginal setae); 

article 3 with 6 recurved RS (5 hooked, long straight); 

article 4 with 7 hooked RS (5 large, 2 small); article 5

articulating with article 4, distally convex, with 6 RS 

(5 straight, curved). 

Pereopod 1 basis .9 times as long as greatest width; 

ischium 0.5 times as long as basis, inferior margin with 

0 RS, superior distal margin with 2 RS (and simple 

seta); merus inferior margin with RS (or 2), set as 

distal group, superior distal angle with 0 RS (2 slender 

setae); carpus 0.5 as long as merus, inferior margin with 

0 RS; propodus .3 times as long as proximal width, 

inferior margin with 0 RS, propodal palm with small 

distal lobe, dactylus abruptly hooked, .5 as long as 

propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with 

RS, superior distal margin with 3 RS (and slender 

seta); merus inferior margin with 6 RS (set as 4 + 2), set 

as two groups, superior distal margin with 0 acute RS 

(4 slender setae); carpus longer than that of pereopod 

, with inferodistal lobe, inferodistal angle with 0 RS, 

propodus without large club-shaped distal RS. Pereopod 

3 similar to pereopod 2 (7 or 9 RS); propodus without 

large club-shaped distal RS. Pereopods 5–7 inferior 

margins of ischium–carpus with short RS. Pereopod 6 

similar to pereopod 7 (slightly larger, inferior margins 

with more RS). Pereopod 7 basis 3.3 times as long as 

greatest width, inferior margins with 5 palmate setae 

(or more); ischium 0.5 as long as basis, inferior margin 

with 9 RS (set as , 2, 3 and 3), superior distal angle with 

6 RS, inferior distal angle with 7 RS; merus 0.8 as long 

as ischium, .9 times as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 9 RS (set as , 4 and 4), superior distal angle with 

0 RS (and 2 slender setae), inferior distal angle with 

8 RS; carpus 0.8 as long as ischium, 2.6 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 7 RS (set as 3 and 4), 

superior distal angle with 0 RS, inferior distal angle 

with 0 RS; propodus 0.6 as long as ischium, 3.0 as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as , 2 and 

2), superior distal angle with 2 slender setae, inferior 

distal angle with 3 RS. 

Penes low tubercles; penial openings separated by 

4% of sternal width. 

Pleopod 1 exopod .9 times as long as wide, distally 

narrowly rounded, mesial margin weakly oblique, 

lateral margin straight, mesial margin strongly convex, 

with PMS on distal two-thirds; endopod 2.5 times 

as long as wide, distally subtruncate, lateral margin 

strongly concave, with PMS on distal margin only, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal half; peduncle .9 times 

as wide as long, mesial margin with 8 coupling hooks. 

Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with straight margins, 0.8 

times as long as endopod, distally narrowly rounded 

(with small apical point). Exopods of pleopods –3 

each with distolateral margin not digitate; endopods 

of pleopods 3–5 each with distolateral point; pleopods 

2–4 peduncle distolateral margin without prominent 

acute RS. 

Uropod peduncle ventrolateral margin with 2 RS, 

posterior lobe about three-quarters as long as endo- 

32 

pod. Uropod rami with endopod and exopod weakly 

oblique, rami extending to pleotelson apex, marginal 

setae in single tier (dense), apices narrowly rounded. 

Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin proximally 

convex, with prominent excision (shallow), positioned 

about three-quarters along ramus, proximal lateral 

margin with RS, distal lateral margin with 3 RS, 

mesial margin weakly convex, with 6 RS. Exopod not 

extending to end of endopod, 3.3 times as long as 

greatest width, apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly 

convex, with 2 RS; mesial margin sinuate, proximally 

concave, with 3 RS. 

femaLe: Similar to the male, but for the sexual characters; 

no ovigerous females present. 

size: Present material 3 mm. 

Variation: The two specimens differ in a number of 

details, though without more material it is impossible 

to say whether this is regional variation or potentially 

specific differences. The robust setae on the merus of 

pereopods –3 present a constant pattern, although the 

number of robust setae varied with the holotype having 

only RS on the pereopod merus and the New 

Zealand specimen having 2, the merus of pereopod 2 

has 4+2 but pereopod 3 merus had 5+2 (holotype) or 

6+3 (New Zealand). 

The shape and proportions of the uropod are the 

same between the two specimens but there is a difference 

in the number of robust setae, notably on the 

uropodal endopod lateral margin with the holotype 

having a pattern of +3, the New Zealand specimen 

+2. Both specimens had somewhat damaged uropods 

so these numbers may be an artefact of that damage. 

remarks: Aega falklandica can be identified by the antennule 

peduncle articles 1 and 2 being flattened and 

expanded, uropodal endopod lateral margin being 

medially indented with the anterior portion conspicuously 

convex, by the short propodus with a simple 

palm and small distal lobe, and by the pattern and 

number of robust setae on pereopods –3. Similar species 

include Aega magnifica which is readily separated 

by pereopods –3 having a conspicuous blade on the 

palm of the propodus. 

There are two similar Pacific species: Aega acuminata 

Hansen 897 and Aega maxima Hansen, 897. The 

former has far smaller eyes than A. falklandica, the propodal 

lobe on pereopod is larger and the uropodal 

exopod is proportionally longer, extending just beyond 

the apex of the endopod (Brusca 983; Hansen 897). 

The principle differences between A. falklandica and 

A. maxima are, in A. maxima, slightly smaller eyes, the 

palm of pereopods –3 without any trace of a distal 

lobe, and the uropodal endopod distal margin appear-

Figure 11. Aega falklandica Kussakin, 967. Eltanin specimen (USNM 099250). A–E, pleopods –5 respectively; F, pleopod 

peduncle mesial margin; G, uropod; H, uropod exopod, ventral view. 

ing distinctly truncate and with only a weak excision on 

the lateral margin. The only known specimen of Aega 

maxima was taken at a depth 2 48 metres off Cocos 

Island, off Pacific Panama (Hansen 1897), considerably 

deeper that the holotype of A. falklandica ( 0 m) or the 

New Zealand specimen (maximum depth of 549 m). 

Kensley’s records are from 85 to 270 m. 

33 

prey: No records. 

distribution: Falkland Islands, South Atlantic, Marion 

Island, southern Indian Ocean and off southwestern 

New Zealand. At depths of 0 m (Falkland Islands) 

otherwise 85–270 m (Marion Islands) and 549 metres 

(New Zealand).

Aega komai Bruce, 996 (Figs 2, 3) 

Aega komai Bruce, 1996: 129, figs 1–4. 

Aega angustata.— Stephenson, 1980: 153, figs 1–5. 

[misidentification, not Aega angustata Whitelegge, 

90 ]. 

materiaL: ♀ (non-ovig., 26 mm), off Taranaki Bight 

region, 39°02.5’S, 73°55.5’E, 2 March 990, 86 m, on 

spiny dogfish snout, coll. J.B. Jones (NMNZ Cr.12000). 

2 ♂ ( 6.5, 8.0 mm), between Fannel Island and Barrier 

Island, Hauraki Gulf, 22 November 976, 86–97 m, 

Squalus blainvillei, off skin behind pectoral fins, coll. 

RV Ikatere (AK 4855). 

Additional material: ♀ (non-ovig., 23 mm), Taiwan, 

22° 8.6’N, 9° 4.8’E, 28 July 2000, stn CP , 262 m, 

coll. Bouchet, Richer de Forges and Chan (MNHN 

Is.5860). ♂ (29 mm), off Great Barrier Island, North 

Island, January 2006, old longline gear at ~500 m, coll. 

Steve Lowe (NIWA 23777). 

Also examined: Holotype of Aega angustata Whitelegge, 

90 . ♂ ( 4.3 mm), 5.5–6.5 km off Wattamolla, NSW, 

34° 0’S, 5 ° ’E, 22 March 898, stn 57, 08 m, coll. 

E.R. Waite on HMCS Thetis (AM G2 60). 

desCription of new zeaLand speCimens: Body 3.4 times 

as long as greatest width, dorsal surfaces polished 

in appearance, widest at pereonite 5, lateral margins 

subparallel. Rostral point projecting anteriorly, not 

ventrally folded. Eyes large, not medially united, separated 

by about 36% width of head; each eye made up 

of ~ 6 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with ~9 

ommatidia; eye colour pale brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 

2–3 each with posteroventral angle with small distinct 

produced point (ventral); coxae 5–7 with incomplete 

oblique carina. Pleon with pleonite visible in dorsal 

view; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins extending 

to but not beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 

5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped 

by lateral margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson 0.7 times as 

long as anterior width, dorsal surface with longitudinal 

carina on distal third; lateral margins weakly convex, 

deeply serrate (with 13–15 flat marginal spines), posterior 

margin subtruncate, with 3– 5 RS. 

Antennule peduncle article 2 anterodistal lobe extending 

to end of article 3; article 3 0.3 times as long as 

combined lengths of articles and 2, 3.0 as long as wide; 

flagellum with 6 articles, extending to mid-point of 

eye. Antenna peduncle article 2 inferior surface without 

distinct longitudinal suture; article 4 0.8 times as long as 

wide, 0.8 times as long as combined lengths of articles 

–3, with deep longitudinal groove, inferior margin 0 

plumose setae, and 0 short simple setae; article 5 flattened 

and expanded, 2.4 times as long as article 4, .7 

times as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 pappose 

setae, anterodistal angle with cluster of 5 short simple 

34 

setae; flagellum with 9 articles, extending to posterior 



converging posteriorly, anterior margin rounded, 

forming median angle, posterior margin not abutting 

clypeus. 


ischium 0.5 times as long as basis, inferior margin 

with 0 RS, superior distal margin with 2 RS (acute); 

merus inferior margin convex and thickened, with 0 

RS, superior distal angle with 2 RS; carpus 0.9 as long 

as merus; inferior margin with 0 RS; propodus .4 

times as long as proximal width, inferior margin with 

0 RS, propodal palm with small distal lobe (concave), 

dactylus abruptly hooked, .0 as long as propodus. 

Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with RS (stout), 

superior distal margin with 2 RS; merus inferior margin 

with 6 RS (and 2 slender setae), set as two groups (ill- 

defined), superior distal margin with 2 acute RS; carpus 

longer than that of pereopod , with inferodistal lobe, 

inferodistal angle with RS, propodus without large 

club-shaped distal robust seta. Pereopod 3 not similar to 

pereopod 2 (dactylus slender and claw-like); propodus 

with large club-shaped distal robust seta. Pereopod 6 

similar to pereopod 7 (but more robust with longer RS 

on inferior margins). Pereopod 7 basis 3.2 times as long 

as greatest width, inferior margins with 6 palmate setae 

(many missing); ischium 0.7 as long as basis, inferior 

margin with 9 RS (set loosely as , 4 and 4), superior 

distal angle with 5 RS, inferior distal angle with 0 

RS; merus 0.7 as long as ischium, 2.7 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 9 RS (set loosely as , 4 and 

4), superior distal angle with 6 RS, inferior distal angle 

with 6 RS; carpus 0.9 as long as ischium, 5.3 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 9 RS (set as 2, 2, , , 

2 and ), superior distal angle with 3 RS, inferior distal 

angle with 7 RS; propodus 0.8 as long as ischium, 7.4 

times as long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set 

as , , 2 and ), superior distal angle with slender 

setae, inferior distal angle with 4 RS. 



Uropod peduncle ventrolateral margin with 2 RS 

(and ~5 plumose setae), posterior lobe about threequarters 

as long as endopod. Uropod rami extending 

beyond pleotelson (lateral and mesial margins deeply 

serrate), marginal setae in single tier, apices acute. 

Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin straight 

(deeply serrate), without prominent excision, proximal 

lateral margin with 5 RS (margin not divided, with 5 

prominent flat spines), mesial margin straight (deeply 

serrate), with 2 RS (and 2 prominent flat spines). Exopod 

not extending to end of endopod, 3.2 times as long 

as greatest width, apically not bifid; lateral margin 

straight (deeply serrate), with 5 RS (and 5 prominent 

flat spines); mesial margin straight, with 1 RS.

Figure 12. Aega komai Bruce, 996. NMNZ female, except F and I. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; 

E, pleonites, lateral view; F, penial process; G, pleotelson and uropods; H, apex of pleotelson; I, sternite 7; J, antenna 

peduncle, showing deep groove. 

35

Figure 13. Aega komai Bruce, 996. NMNZ female. A–D, pereopods –3 and 7 respectively (pereopods 2 and 3 basis 

omitted); E, pereopod 2, mesial surface of ischium; F, dactylus, pereopod 3; G, antennule; H, antenna; I, uropod; J, uropodal 

exopod, ventral view. 

36

size: Female 26 mm, two males 6.5 and 8 mm; male 

holotype (Japan) 20.5 mm. 

Variation: There are only three specimens, and therefore 

the details here are of range only. Pleotelson RS 

3– 5, with parallel variation in the spines. Uropod 

endopod mesial margin 2 RS ( once), lateral margin 

always 5 RS; uropod exopod mesial margin , lateral 

margin 6–8 RS. 

Pereopod always without RS; inferior margin of 

merus of pereopods 2 and 3 each with 5–7 RS (these 

robust setae are difficult to observe without dissection, 

so the range may be narrower or greater than 

given here). 

The material from New Zealand agrees well with 

the description of the holotype, but there are a number 

of small differences. The lateral margin of the uropodal 

exopod in the holotype has a shorter proportion 

of the lateral margin serrate (56% of the length of the 

ramus) than the New Zealand material (64% of length 

of ramus). The holotype has partly damaged uropods, 

and without additional material is not possible to be 

certain if this is a consistent difference between the two 

populations. The proportions and setation of pereopod 

7 also vary slightly, suggesting the possibility that these 

are separate populations. 

remarks: Aega komai is can be identified by the following 

combination of characters: elongate body, antennule 

peduncle articles and 2 strongly compressed and 

expanded, antenna article 5 conspicuously flattened, 

deeply serrate uropod rami which extend beyond the 

posterior margin of the pleotelson and a deeply serrate 

subtruncate pleotelson posterior margin. 

There are three other similar species: Aega angustata 

Whitelegge, 90 , Aega dofleini Thielemann, 920, 

and an undescribed species from southern Australian 

waters. Aega angustata is readily distinguished by the 

produced pleotelson posterior margin, the uropod rami 

falling well short of the pleotelson posterior margin and 

the uropod exopod lateral margin not being serrate and 

provided with prominent robust setae on both margins. 

Aega dofleini has a produced pleotelson margin, with 

uropodal rami extending to the pleotelson apex; and 

the pleotelson and uropodal rami are figured as being 

weakly and irregularly serrate. The as-yet-undescribed 

species from southern Australia has the uropods extending 

to the pleotelson apex and the posterior margins 

of the pleotelson are distinctly angled and with 

smaller serrations and spines than A. komai. 

prey: The holotype was recorded from the mantle of 

the squid Loligo bleekeri Keferstein, although this may 

be a capture artefact. Squalus blainvillei (Risso, 827), 

Squalidae; dogfish and longnose spurdog (UK usage), 

grey-spiny or spiny dogfish (New Zealand usage). 

37 

distribution: Previously recorded from Japan. In New 

Zealand from Taranaki Bight and Hauraki Gulf, western 

and northeastern North Island respectively; also 

Taiwan; at depths of 86–262 metres. 

Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834 (Figs 4– 8) 

Æga monophthalma Johnston, 1834: 233, fig. 43a–b.– Milne 

Edwards, 840: 244.– Lütken, 859: 75.– Bate & 

Westwood, 1867*: 286, figure.– Sars, 1897: 62, pl. 26, fig. 

.– Norman, 904: 434; 905a: 94; 905b: 3.– Hansen, 

1916: 171.– Stephensen, 1948: 38, fig. 7 (8–9). 

Rocinela monophthalma.– White, 1850: 80; 1857: 253, pl. 14, fig. 

7.– Gosse, 1855: 134, fig. 233. 

Æga monopthalma.– Schioedte & Meinert, 879b: 365 

(lapsus). 

Aega monophthalma.– Gerstaecker, 882: 254.– Barnard, 9 4: 

362, pl. 3 B– Nierstrasz & Schuurmans Stekhoven, 930: 

77, fig. 14.– Nierstrasz, 93 : 83– Gurjanova, 933: 

430.– Stephensen, 1937: 7, 17.– Kussakin, 1979: 235: figs 

04, 05.– Ellis, 98 : 23.– Hemmingsen & MacKenzie, 

996: 37; 200 : 9.– Bruce, 200 : 2, photo.– Bruce, 

Lew Ton & Poore, 2002: 6 .– Tracey et al., 2005: 07, 

colour fig. 

Aega monopthalma.– Moreira & Sadowsky, 979: 08.— Treat, 

1980: 912, fig. 1 (lapsus). 

Aega monopthalmus.– Kensley, 1978: 57, fig. 24G–H; 2001: 

227. 

Aega (Aega) monophthalma.– Brusca, 983: . 

type LoCaLity: “Berwick on Tweed” (Johnston 834), 

Berwick Bay, Northumberland. Johnston had two specimens 

and two species, and stated that he described the 

larger specimen which is now in The Natural History 

Museum, London (holotype, BMNH 979:299: ). The 

smaller specimen is Aega stroemii Lütken, 859 [= A. 

bicarinata Rathke, 837, not A. bicarinata Leach, 8 8, 

according to Brusca ( 983)]. 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ (50 mm), Berwick on 

Tweed, Northumberland, on large codfish, White MS 

cat. No. 972a, coll. G. Johnston (BMNH 979.299. ) 

[penes close set but apart and not projecting.]. 

Non-type. New Zealand: ♂ (49 mm), Chatham Rise, 

42°45.68’S, 79°59.33’W, 2 April 200 , 920–77 m, coll. 

RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23755). ♀ (non-ovig. 62 mm), New 

Zealand, in fish pound after fish processed, Fisheries 

Research Division stn CO2/ 02/88 (NIWA 23756). 

♀ (ovig. 63 mm), South Norfolk Ridge, 33°22.6 ’S, 

70° 2.70’E, June 2003, 5 4–540 m, coll. NORFANZ, 

RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23757). Immature (28 mm), 

manca ( 8.5 mm), North Norfolk Ridge, 28°5 .2 ’S, 

67°42.53’E, 5 May 2003, 690–8 2 m, coll. NORFANZ, 

RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23758, 23759). Australia: ♂ (40 

mm), ♀ (48 mm), 758–84 m, east of Kiama, NSW, 

34°42–38’S, 5 ° 6– 8’E, 3 December 987, 760–855 m, 

* See Holthuis ( 977) for details of the dates of publication 

of Bate and Westwood’s book.

Figure 14. Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834. NIWA 23755. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, anterior 

view of frontal lamina; F, penial openings; G, antennule, dorsal view; H, antennule, ventral view; I, antenna, dorsal view; 

J, antenna, ventral view; K, pleotelson and uropods. 

38

Figure 15. Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834. NIWA 23755. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; C, maxillule; 

D, maxillule apex; E, maxilla; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped palp articles 4 and 5 (Leica); I, maxilliped palp 

articles –5. 

39

coll. FRV Kapala (AM P43978). & (56 mm), off Broken 

Bay, NSW, 33°26–29’S, 52°06–04’E, 5 July 980, 440 

m, coll. FRV Kapala (AM P3 9 8). 

Additional material. New Zealand region: ♀ (nonovig 

72 mm), off Great Barrier Island, North Island, 

24 April 2004, from Hyperoglyphe antarctica, longline 

at ~500 m, coll. Steve Lowe (NIWA 23760). ♀ (nonovig 

47 mm), off Great Barrier Island, North Island, 

October–November 2004, from Hyperoglyphe antarctica, 

longline at ~500 m, coll. Steve Lowe (NIWA 2376 ). 

♀ (non-ovig 63 mm), vicinity of West Norfolk Rise, 

33°4 ’S, 67° 4’E, 600 m, FV Jacquiline, stn 69, coll. 

D. Smith (NMNZ Cr. 335). ♀ (non-ovig 73 mm), 

Chatham Rise, 44°32. 9–34.04’S, 75°27.95–27.94’W, 

3 November 2005, 880– 022 m, commercial trawl, 

stn SWA050 /70, coll. P. McMillan (NIWA 23762). 

New caledonia: Manca (24 mm), 23° 9’S, 68°00’E, 2 

October 992, BERyx , stn. CP60, 590–600 m, coll. B. 

Richer de Forges (MNHN Is.5861). 


dorsal surfaces punctate (coarsely pitted, posterior 

margins of pleonites with coarse granules approaching 

nodular), widest at pereonite 6, lateral margins weakly 

ovate. Rostral point projecting anteriorly, not ventrally 

folded. Eyes large, medially united, anterior clear field 

8% length of head, posterior clear field 33% length 


ommatidia, each row with ~ 8 ommatidia; eye colour 

black. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with postero- 

ventral angle right-angled (small produced point; 

coxae 3 and 4 posteriorly rounded). Coxae 5–7 with 

entire oblique carina; posterior margins straight, posterolateral 

angle rounded. Pleon with pleonite largely 

concealed by pereonite 7; pleonite 4 with posterolateral 

margins extending to but not beyond posterior margin 

of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles 

overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson 

0.6 times as long as anterior width (with deep reticulated 

pits), dorsal surface with longitudinal carina and 

with 2 sub-medial depressions; lateral margins weakly 

convex, smooth, posterior margin subtruncate or with 

distinct short median point (somewhat sinuate), with 

44–48 RS. 


to end of article 3; articles 3 and 4 0.25 times 

as long as combined lengths of articles and 2, article 

3 2.3 times as long as wide; flagellum with 12 articles, 

extending to mid-point of eye. Antenna peduncle article 

2 inferior surface with distinct longitudinal suture; 

article 4 .5 times as long as wide, 0.8 times as long 

as combined lengths of articles –3, with deep longitudinal 

groove, inferior margin plumose setae, and 

2 short simple setae; article 5 not markedly wider or 

flatter than article 4, 1.5 times as long as article 4, 2.3 

times as long as wide, inferior margin with palmate 

40 

seta (distal), anterodistal angle with cluster of five short 

simple setae; flagellum with 22 articles, extending to 

posterior of pereonite . 

Frontal lamina flat, longer than greatest width, 

rectangular (lateral margins weakly concave, ridged), 

anterior margin with median point (downwardly directed, 

anteriorly recessed process), with prominent 

median point, posterior margin abutting clypeus. 


2 with 8 distolateral setae. Maxillule with 8 terminal 

and subterminal RS. Maxilla mesial lobe with 4 RS (2 

hooked, 2 weakly curved); lateral lobe with 4 RS. Maxilliped 

endite with 2 apical setae (long weakly CP); palp 

article 2 with 8 RS (small stiff setae/slender RS); article 

3 with 6 recurved RS (and simple straight RS); article 

4 with 7 hooked RS (4 large, 3 small); article 5 partly 

fused to article 4, distally convex, with 5 RS (partly 

fused with article 4; all setae short and simple). 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 2 RS (and 2 slender 

simple setae); merus inferior margin with 3 RS, set as 

two groups (of , 2 and distal simple setae), superior 

distal angle with 0 RS (2 simple setae); carpus 0.6 as 

long as merus, inferior margin with 0 RS; propodus . 

times as long as proximal width, inferior margin with 0 

RS (distally with 2 small simple setae), propodal palm 

with small distal lobe, dactylus smoothly curved, .5 as 

long as propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin 

with RS, superior distal margin with 2 RS (and 2 

simple setae); merus inferior margin with 5 RS (set as 

3 + 2 setae and distal simple seta), set as two groups, 

superior distal margin with acute RS; carpus similar 

in size to that of pereopod , inferodistal angle with 

RS, propodus without large club-shaped distal RS. 

Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2 (but longer, ischium 

inferior distal angle with 2 RS; dactylus markedly more 

slender than that of pereopods and 2); propodus without 

large club-shaped distal RS. Pereopods 5–7 inferior 


similar to pereopod 7 (with fewer RS on inferior margins 

of ischium–propodus). Pereopod 7 basis 3.2 times 

as long as greatest width, inferior margins with 0 palmate 

setae; ischium 0.6 as long as basis, inferior margin 

with 6 RS (set as , 2 and 3), superior distal angle with 6 

RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; merus 0.9 as long as 

ischium, 2. times as long as wide, inferior margin with 

6 RS (set as , 3 and 2), superior distal angle with 

RS, inferior distal angle with 9 RS; carpus 0.9 as long as 

ischium, 2.6 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 

5 RS (set as and 4), superior distal angle with 9 RS, 

inferior distal angle with 0 RS; propodus 0.6 as long 

as ischium, 3.5 times as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 4 RS (set as and 4), superior distal angle with 4 

slender setae ( acute RS and 2 simple and palmate 

setae), inferior distal angle with 3 RS.

Figure 16. Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834. NIWA 23755. A–E, pereopods –3, 6, 7 respectively; F and G, pereopod and 

2, ischium superior distal angle, mesial side. 

4

Figure 17. Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834. NIWA 23755. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; E, appendix masculina apex; 

F, uropod. 





lateral margin straight, mesial margin strongly convex 

(finely crenulate with minute simple setae present), 

with PMS on distal one-third; endopod 2.2 times as 

long as wide, distally subtruncate, lateral margin 

42 

strongly concave, with PMS on distal one-third, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal margin only; peduncle 2 

times as wide as long, mesial margin with coupling 

hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with straight margins, 

0.9 times as long as endopod, distally acute (with 

narrowed apical point; basally with lateral groove). 

Exopods of pleopods –3 each with distolateral margin 

not digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 each with dis-

Figure 18. Aega monophthalma Johnston, 834. NIWA 23755. A, uropod exopod, ventral view; B, uropod exopod, apex; C, 

uropod endopod, apex. 

tolateral point; pleopods 2–4 peduncle distolateral margin 

with prominent acute RS. 


(and continuous PMS), posterior lobe about as long as 

endopod. Uropod rami extending to pleotelson apex, 

marginal setae dense, in several tiers, apices broadly 

rounded. Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin 

proximally convex, without prominent excision, proximal 

lateral margin with 3 RS, distal lateral margin 

with 2 RS, mesial margin strongly convex or concave, 

with 7– 0 RS. Exopod extending to end of endopod, 

2.9 times as long as greatest width, apically not bifid; 

lateral margin convex, with 7– 8 RS; with 3–4 RS. 

femaLe: Eyes narrowly separated; ovigerous female 

ocular surface depressed, dorsal body surfaces not as 

nodular as male; uropodal margins lacking prominent 

RS; non-ovigerous female similar to male with the 

exception of sexual characteristics. 

size: Specimens from the southwestern Pacific: males 

from 40 to 49 mm, females 48 to 73 mm; single manca 

8.5 mm. 

43 

Variation: Only a small number (5) of specimens were 

available at the time of writing the description for this 

species, and the fact that the uropod and pleotelson 

apices are mostly damaged means that it is not possible 

to precisely detail the variation present. The pleotelson 

has from about 44 to 48 (22+22 to 24+24) robust setae. 

The uropod endopod lateral margin has 2– 7 RS, the 

mesial margin 7– 0 RS; the exopod lateral margin has 

6– 8 RS, the mesial margin 3–5 RS. The robust setae 

on the merus of pereopods –3 are constant: pereopod 

merus with +2, pereopod 2 merus with 3+2 and 

pereopod 3 merus to 4+2. 

The extent to which the antennule peduncle articles 

and 2 are produced varies, with the large specimen 

from off Great Barrier Island being less strongly produced; 

in some specimens the dorsal pitting is weaker 

than in others, and the robust setae on the uropods and 

pleotelson are not always as prominent as illustrated; 

uropod apices are also frequently damaged and regrowth 

may appear more rounded that in undamaged 

specimens. 

remarks: This spectacular and large isopod, at the time 

of first description only the seventh in the genus, is im-

mediately recognisable by the highly textured dorsal 

surface, heavily ‘spined’ pleotelson and uropods, the 

subtruncate pleotelson posterior margin with a welldefined 

median point, the pleotelson with a prominent 

longitudinal ridge, the antennule peduncle articles 

being flattened and expanded, the huge eyes which 

appear to be medially united and the characteristic 

shape of the frontal lamina. Juvenile specimens are not 

as nodular, and can be identified by the characteristic 

shape of the frontal lamina, and the shape, ornamentation 

and setation of the pleotelson and uropodal rami. 

The ovigerous female is slightly wider in body shape, 

and the prominent robust setae are missing from the 

margins of the pleotelson and uropods; the frontal 

lamina is the same as in the male, and the appendages 

are otherwise similar. Although the distribution is vast, 

there is no doubt that all the material identified here is 

the one species, and furthermore such a distribution is 

not unique (e.g. Metacirolana caeca (Hansen, 9 6), see 

Svavarsson & Bruce 2000), possible influenced by the 

Great Global Conveyer currents (e.g. see Manighetti 

200 ). 

A rather similar Aega sp. collected east of Heron 

Island, Queensland (NTM, unregistered, see p. 244) can 

be distinguished by the far smaller antennule peduncle 

articles 1 and 2, flat frontal lamina, more anteriorly 

rounded head, more and larger robust setae on pereopods 

–3, lack of large robust setae on the pleotelson 

and uropods, more rounded uropodal exopod, and by 

the different nature of the robust pitting on the pereon 

and pleotelson. 

prey: There are no recent prey identifications. Gadus 

morrhua and Scymnum microcephalum (= Scymno microcephalo), 

Somniosus microcephalus (= Greenland 

shark, Dalatiidae) (Schioedte & Meinert 879b); Centrophorus 

squamosus (gulper shark, Centrophoridae) 

(Kussakin 979); Hyperoglyphe antarctica [bluenose and 

matiri (New Zealand) or Antarctic butterfish, Centro- 

lophidae]. 

distribution: North Atlantic, South Africa and southwestern 

Pacific. Localities: Schioedte and Meinert 

( 879b) cite Iceland, Bergen, Floroe, Lodshagen and 

Farsun (all Norway), German Sea (= German Bight?) 

and Herne, Skagerak. South Africa (Barnard, 9 4); 

Bahamas (Treat 980); Hansen ( 9 6) cites the Færoe 

Islands and Jutland (Denmark) as regional records; 

Moray Firth and Shetland, Scotland (Norman 904). 

Present material is from the Chatham Rise, New Zealand, 

New Caledonia and from southeastern Australia 

off the mid- and southern New South Wales coast. 

Previously recorded at depths of 460–730 m, present 

material at depths between 440 and 022 metres. 

44 

Aega semicarinata Miers, 875 (Figs 9–22) 

Æga semicarinata Miers, 1875: 115.– 1879: 201, pl. 11, figs. 

1–1d.– Dollfus, 1891: 57, pl. 8, figs 2–2a.– Bouvier, 1911: 

39, pl. 2, fig. 1. 

Aega semicarinata.– Barnard, 9 6: 06.– Nierstrasz, 93 : 

83.– Hale, 937: 9.– Barnard, 940: 40 .– Stephensen, 

1947: 23.– Menzies, 1962: 118, fig. 38A–C.– Moreira 

& Sadowsky, 1979: 109.– Kensley, 1978: 57, fig. 24I–J; 

980b: 59; 200 : 227.– Kussakin & Vasina, 982: 264.– 

Branch, Griffiths, Kensley & Sieg, 1991: 26.– Bruce, Lew 

Ton & Poore, 2002: 62. 

Æga semicarinatus.– Stebbing, 920: 334. 

Aega bicavata Nordenstam, 1930, 547, fig. 11, Pl. 20, fig. 11. 

Aega (Aega) bicavata.– Brusca, 983: 0. 

Aega (Aega) semicarinata.– Brusca, 983: . 

type LoCaLity: Kerguelen, southern Indian Ocean (Miers 

875). 

types: At the then British Museum of Natural History, 

London, according to Miers ( 875). Not listed by Ellis 

( 98 ), though one unregistered specimen, labelled as 

‘type’ is held at The Natural History Museum, London. 

The type information states: ‘outside label destroyed at 

Godstone’ and the only other data is ‘HMS Sylvia’. 

materiaL examined: Holotype(?), ♀ (non-ovig 27 mm), 

‘outside label destroyed at Godstone’, HMS Sylvia 

(BMNH). 

New Zealand material: ♀ (74 mm ovig, previously 

dissected), I685, vicinity of Bounty Plateau, 48° 9.50– 

7.20’S, 79°29.50–40’W, 6 March 979, dredged, 722 

m and ♂ (35 mm), stn Z3, labels in tube: “Z3, 40F, A, 

8/63”; “?John Graham, Oamaru, “♂ of giant I685”; 

therefore presumably same data as I685 (NIWA 2377 

♀, 23772 ♂). ♂ (38 mm), Chatham Rise, 42°43.95’S, 

79°53.9 ’W, 8 April 200 , 076–990 m, coll. S. O’Shea 

on RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23773). ♂ (3 mm), Chatham 

Rise, 43°49.605’S, 78°29.284’E, 6 October 200 , 454 m, 

Agassiz trawl, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23774). ♂ (3 

mm), North Otago, 27.5 m, 962, coll. John Graham 

(NMNZ Cr. 20 6). ♀ (~4–5 cm, ovig, broken, two 

pieces), 44°4 .35’S, 72°34.0’E, 390–360 m, RV James 

Cook (NMNZ Cr.4969). 

Additional material: ♀ (63 mm, non-ovig), Juan 

Fernandez Islands, Chile, 920, A 463 (LACM 20- 

2. ). 2♀ (44, 38 mm), off Table Bay, South Africa 

(BMNH 93 . . 0. 8-20, part). ♂ (39 mm), Chatham 

Rise, 42.7 60–7 08°S, 80.0390–0297°E, 28 May 2006, 

935– 2 0 m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 25658). 

desCription: Body 2.6 times as long as greatest width, 

dorsal surfaces punctate, widest at pereonite 6, lateral 

margins subparallel. Rostral point projecting anteriorly, 

not ventrally folded. Eyes large, not medially 

united, separated by about 9% width of head; each 

eye made up of ~36 transverse rows of ommatidia,

Figure 19. Aega semicarinata Miers, 875. NIWA 23773. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, pleotelson posterior 

margin; F, penial openings; G, antenna; H, antennule; I, antenna peduncle, dorsal view. 

each row with ~ 8 ommatidia; eye colour dark brown. 

Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle 

rounded. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina (raised, 

forming distinct ridge); posterior margins convex, 

posterolateral angle blunt (more than 45°). Pleon with 

pleonite visible in dorsal view; pleonite 4 with posterolateral 

margins extending to but not beyond posterior 

margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral 

45 

angles overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4. 

Pleotelson 0.7 times as long as anterior width, dorsal 

surface with 2 sub-median depressions (and posterior 

median depression); lateral margins straight, crenulate, 

posterior margin emarginate, with 0 RS. 


extending beyond mid-point of article 3; articles 3 

and 4 0.4 times as long as combined lengths of articles

Figure 20. Aega semicarinata Miers, 875. NIWA 23773. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; C, maxillule; D, maxillule 

apex; E, maxilla; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped articles 2–5; I, maxilliped article 5 (Leica). 

1 and 2, article 3 2.8 times as long as wide; flagellum 

with 9 articles, extending to mid-point of eye. Antenna 

peduncle article 2 inferior surface without distinct 

longitudinal suture; article 4 .2 times as long as wide 

(dorsally with wide longitudinal depression), 0.8 times 

as long as combined lengths of articles –3, with deep 

longitudinal groove, inferior margin plumose setae, 

and 0 short simple setae; article 5 not markedly wider 

or flatter than article 4, 1.5 times as long as article 4, 2.7 

times as long as wide, inferior margin with 0 palmate 




46 

Frontal lamina flat, longer than greatest width, lateral 

margins converging posteriorly, anterior margin 

rounded, without small median point, posterior margin 

abutting clypeus. 

Mandible molar process absent; palp article 2 with 

8 distolateral setae, palp article 3 with 20 setae (proximally 

smooth, distally finely serrate). Maxillule with 

8 terminal and subterminal RS (proximal 3 falcate). 

Maxilla mesial lobe with 3 RS ( hooked 2 straight); 

lateral lobe with 4 RS (large). Maxilliped endite with 

0 apical setae; palp article 2 with 3 RS (with further 

fine marginal setae); article 3 with 5 recurved RS (and 

slender); article 4 with 5 hooked RS; article 5 partly

Figure 21. Aega semicarinata Miers, 875. NIWA 23773. A–E, pereopods –3, 6 and 7, respectively. 

fused to article 4, distally convex, with 7 RS (straight, 

2 lateralmost curved). 

Pereopod 1 basis 2.2 times as long as greatest width; 


0 RS, superior distal margin with RS (acute); merus 

inferior margin with 4 RS, set as two groups (of and 

3), superior distal angle with RS (small, acute); carpus 

0.7 as long as merus, inferior margin with 0 RS; 

propodus .8 times as long as proximal width, inferior 

margin with 0 RS, propodal palm with small distal lobe, 

dactylus smoothly curved, .2 as long as propodus. 

Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with 0 RS, superior 

distal margin with 2 RS (acute); merus inferior margin 

with 6 RS (set as 4 and 2), set as two groups, superior 

distal margin with 2 acute RS (short); carpus similar in 

size to that of pereopod , inferodistal angle with 0 RS, 


3 not similar to pereopod 2; propodus with large 

club-shaped distal RS. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins 

of ischium–carpus with short RS. Pereopod 6 similar to 

47 

pereopod 7 (but larger and more robust, basis 2.8 times 

as long as wide). Pereopod 7 basis 3.4 times as long as 

greatest width, inferior margins with palmate setae; 

ischium 0.5 as long as basis, inferior margin with 3 RS 

(set singly), superior distal angle with 3 RS, inferior 

distal angle with 4 RS; merus 0.9 as long as ischium, 2 


as , 2 and 3), superior distal angle with 6 RS, inferior 

distal angle with 5 RS; carpus . as long as ischium, 

3.0 as long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as , 

2 and 3), superior distal angle with 8 RS, inferior distal 



as and 2), superior distal angle with slender setae 

(palmate), inferior distal angle with 3 RS. 

Penes opening flush with surface of sternite 7; penial 

openings separated by 0% of sternal width. 


broadly rounded, lateral margin weakly convex, mesial 

margin strongly convex, with PMS on distal half; endo-

Figure 22. Aega semicarinata Miers, 875. NIWA 23773. except H. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; E, uropod; F, uropod 

exopod, ventral view; G, uropod apices (exopod to right); H, uropod, NMNZ Cr.4969. 

48

pod 2.2 times as long as wide, distally subtruncate, 

lateral margin strongly concave, with PMS on distal 

one-third, mesial margin with PMS on distal half; 

peduncle .6 times as wide as long, mesial margin 

with 0 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina 

with straight margins, 0.73 times as long as endopod, 

distally bluntly rounded. Exopods of pleopods –3 

each with distolateral margin not digitate; endopods 

of pleopods 3–5 each with distolateral point (minute); 

pleopods 2–4 peduncle distolateral margin with prominent 

acute RS. 


posterior lobe about two-thirds as long as endopod. 

Uropod rami not extending beyond pleotelson, marginal 

setae dense, in several tiers, apices broadly rounded. 

Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin straight, without 

prominent excision, proximal lateral margin with 

0 RS, distal lateral margin with 2 RS, mesial margin 

weakly convex, with 5 RS. Exopod extending beyond 

end of endopod (slightly), 2.7 times as long as greatest 

width, apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly convex, 

with 2 RS; mesial margin straight or convex (distally 

convex), with 7 RS. 

femaLe: Pereopod 3 lacks the distal robust seta on 

the propodus. Oostegites arising from the coxae of 

pereonites –5. Eggs are large, 2.8–3.5 mm diameter. 

Present data indicate that females may grow to a far 

larger size than do the males. 

size: Up to 75 mm for the largest female examined here 

making it the largest aegid species. Males are smaller, 

present material measuring from 27 to 38 mm. 

Variation: The small number (five entire) of specimens, 

the fact that the uropod apices are mostly damaged 

with the robust setae rubbed off and the presence of 

a dense fringe of plumose setae means that it is not 

possible to precisely detail the variation present. The 

robust setae on the merus of pereopods –3 present a 

constant pattern of two rows, although the number 

of robust setae varies: pereopod merus with +2 to 

+3, pereopods 2 and 3 merus with 4+2 to 5+2, one 

pereopod 3 with 3+2. Pereopod 3 has a large robust 

seta adjacent to the base of the dactylus on males 

NIWA23773, 23772 but this seta is absent or reduced 

in females and absent in the male NMNZ Cr.9269. It is 

not possible to say whether or not the absence of this 

robust seta is due to damage, although the presence or 

absence of such a prominent character would generally 

be considered to be significant. 

There is some variation in the shape of the uropod 

endopod with some specimens having a distinctly oblique 

mesial margin (Fig. 22E) in others it is subtruncate 

(Fig. 22H). The robust setae vary: uropod exopod lateral 

margin 0– 2, mesial margin 5–8; endopod lateral 

margin 2–3, mesial margin 5–8. 

49 

The specimen from Juan Fernandez agrees well 

with the description presented here with the exception 

that the frontal lamina is shorter and wider, the 

mesial margin of the uropodal exopod is slightly more 

convex than illustrated and the RS on pereopod 2 form 

a single row rather than two groups. The pleotelson 

indentation is a little shallower but this may be due to 

damage as it is clearly eroded and rubbed. Counts for 

the RS on the merus of pereopods and 2: P : +3, +2; 

P2: 5+2 (both). The uropod endopod mesial margins 

both have 9 RS, slightly higher than for New Zealand 

specimens. 

remarks: Aega semicarinata, one of the largest species 

of Aegidae, may be identified by the widely excavate 

and crenulated posterior margin of the pleotelson, the 

dorsal surface of which has two shallow submedian 

depressions and one median posterior depression. 

These depressions can give the impression of a weakly 

defined longitudinal ridge, presumably after which 

Miers named the species. The moderately expanded 

antennule, large but separate eyes, coxae prominent in 

dorsal view, simple propodus on pereopods –3 and 

pereopod 3 propodus usually with a large club-like robust 

seta all serve to further distinguish the species. 

A number of names have been placed in synonymy 

with this species — Aega bicavata Nordenstam, 930, 

A. punctulata Miers, 88 and Aega urotoma Barnard, 

9 4. Material from New Zealand provisionally identified 

as Aega semicarinata proved to belong to two similar 

but distinct species, here identified as Aega semicarinata 

and Aega urotoma, the latter proving to be the same as 

specimens of that species from South Africa. 

The synonymy of Aega bicavata with A. semicarinata 

was first proposed by Menzies (1962), and the figures 

and description provided by Nordenstam agree well 

with Miers’ ( 879) description as well with the specimens 

examined here, and that species is retained as a 

junior synonym. 

Aega punctulata should never have been placed in 

synonymy as Miers’ (1881) description and figures 

more than adequately describe the critical points of 

difference between the two species, including the 

smaller eyes and evenly rounded pleotelson posterior 

margin. 

The similar Aega urotoma, first placed into synonymy 

by Stebbing ( 920), has the antennule peduncle articles 

and 2 far more widely expanded, antenna peduncle 

article 5 flattened and expanded, smaller eyes, subtruncate 

or shallowly indented pleotelson which also lacks 

the prominent sub-lateral and posterior depressions 

seen in A. semicarinata (Table ). 

Another similar and very poorly characterised species 

is Aega webbii (Guérin-Méneville, 836) which is 

similar to A. semicarinata in eye size and in the emarginate 

shape of the posterior margin of the pleotelson. It

table 1. Comparison of Aega semicarinata with similar species of Aega. 

species references Eyes A2, articles 4 pereopod 2 pleotelson shape 

and 5 propodus 

A. semicarinata Present study Large, not Regular Without club-seta Emarginate, without 

medially united median point 

A. urotoma Present study Medium, Flat, expanded With club-seta Subtruncate, without 

widely separate median point 

A. chelipous Barnard 960 Large, not ? Without club-seta Subtruncate, with 

Barnard, 960 medially united median point 

A. concinna Hale 940 Small, Regular With club-seta Rounded 

Hale, 940 widely separate 

A. crenulata Kussakin 979 Eyes in contact Regular With club-seta Subtruncate 

Lütken, 859 

A. stroemii Kussakin 979 Eyes narrowly Regular ? Emarginate 

Lütken, 859 separated 

A. webbii Guérin- Schioedte & Medium, Flat? With club-seta Rounded, with 

Méneville, 836 Meinert 979b widely separate* median indentation 

is difficult to make detailed comparisons, but A. webbii 

differs in having antennule peduncle article 2 more 

strongly produced and a large robust seta opposing 

the dactylus of pereopod 2, character states lacking in 

both male and females of A. semicarinata. 

prey: The only record is that of Polyprion prognatus 

(Nordenstam 930). 

distribution: Straits of Magellan eastwards to New 

Zealand, all records are south of about 35° latitude. 

Localities: Straits of Magellan, Kerguelen; Falkland 

Islands (Stebbing 1920 — record not confirmed); Chile 

(Menzies 962); Juan Fernandez Islands (Nordenstam 

930); South Africa (Kensley 978); Kerguelen, and 

off the Crozet Islands in the southern Indian Ocean 

(Stephenson 1947 — record not confirmed), Marion 

Island (Kensley 980; Kussakin & Vasina 982); Macquarie 

Island (Hale 937). 

At depths between metres (‘amongst kelp’—Hale 

937) and 400 metres, material from New Zealand 27.5 

to 076 metres. 

Aega stevelowei sp. nov. (Figs 23–26) 

materiaL examined: Holotype: ♀ (non-ovig. 48 mm), off 

Great Barrier Island, North Island [~ 36.3°S, 75.5°E], 

October 2004, from Hyperoglyphe antarctica, longline at 

~500 m, coll. Steve Lowe (NIWA 7973). 

Paratypes: ♀ (non-ovig. 40 mm), same data as holotype 

(NIWA 7974). ♂ (31 mm), 45 km southwest of 

Beachport, Victoria, Australia, 37°45.00’S, 39°4 .00’E, 

24 October 98 , 390 m (NMV J277 4). 


dorsal surfaces punctate, widest at pereonite 5, lateral 

margins subparallel. Rostral point projecting anteri- 

50 

orly, not ventrally folded. Eyes large, medially united, 

anterior clear field 15% length of head, posterior clear 

field 43% length of head; each eye made up of ~24 

transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with ~8– 0 

ommatidia; eye colour black. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 

each with posteroventral angle rounded, or right-angled 

(pereonite rounded, coxae 2 and 3 quadrate). 

Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; posterior margins 

straight, posterolateral angle acute (less than 45°). Pleon 

with pleonite visible in dorsal view; pleonite 4 with 

posterolateral margins extending to but not beyond 

posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral 

angles overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 

4. Pleotelson 0.7 times as long as anterior width, dorsal 

surface without longitudinal carina; lateral margins 

weakly convex, crenulate (weakly), posterior margin 

at angle to lateral margins and converging to caudomedial 

point, with 3 RS. 





articles, extending to anterior of pereonite . Antenna 

peduncle article 2 inferior surface with distinct longitudinal 



deep longitudinal groove, inferior margin 0 plumose 

setae, and short simple setae (minute, distal); article 

5 not markedly wider or flatter than article 4, 1.3 times 

as long as article 4, 3.0 as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 0 palmate setae, anterodistal angle with cluster 

of 3 short simple setae (plus 1 palmate seta); flagellum 

with 27 articles, extending to pereonite 4. 

Frontal lamina flat, longer than greatest width, rectangular, 

anterior margin rounded, forming median 

angle, posterior margin abutting clypeus.

Figure 23. Aega stevelowei sp. nov. Holotype, except H and I, paratype NIWA 7974. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; 

D, frons; E, pleotelson; F, pleotelson, posterior margin; G, pleonites, alteral view; G, antenna; H, antennule; I, antenna peduncle, 

dorsal view. 

5

Figure 24. Aega stevelowei sp. nov. Paratype NIWA 7974. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; C, maxillule apex; 

D, maxilla; E, maxilla apex; F, maxilliped; G, maxilliped articles 2–5; H, I, maxilliped articles 4 and 5. 


3 distolateral setae (proximal 4 longest), palp article 3 

with 25 setae. Maxillule with 8 terminal and subterminal 

RS (proximal 2 hammer-head). Maxilla mesial lobe 

with 5 RS (2 lateral hooked, 3 mesial weakly curved); 

lateral lobe with 4 RS (proximal RS minute). Maxilliped 

endite with 2 apical setae (long CP); palp article 2 with 

0 RS (with 2 long straight simple setae); article 3 with 

3 recurved RS (small; and large curved RS); article 4 

with 7 hooked RS (5 large, 2 small; lateral margin with 

5 long straight RS); article 5 wholly (imperceptibly) 

fused to article 4, distally convex, with 6 RS. 

52 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 3 RS; merus inferior 

margin with RS (proximal), superior distal angle with 

2 RS; carpus 0.6 as long as merus, inferior margin with 



distal lobe, dactylus smoothly curved, .0 as long as 


RS, superior distal margin with 2 RS; merus inferior 

margin with 6 RS, set as two rows (of 4 + 2), superior 

distal margin with 2 acute RS (and 2 simple setae);

Figure 25. Aega stevelowei sp. nov. Holotype. A–E, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; D, distomesial margin, pereopod 7 

carpus. 

carpus similar in size to that of pereopod , inferodistal 

angle with RS, propodus without large club-shaped 

distal RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2; propodus 

without large club-shaped distal RS. Pereopods 

5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus with short RS. 

Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 3.3 

times as long as greatest width, inferior margins with 

3 palmate setae; ischium 0.5 as long as basis, inferior 

margin with 4 RS (set as , and 2, plus submarginal), 


with 8 RS; merus .3 as long as ischium, 3.5 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as and 3), 


with 5 RS; carpus .0 as long as ischium, 3.7 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as and 


with RS; propodus 0.6 as long as ischium, 3.7 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as , 

53 

and 2), superior distal angle with 4 slender setae ( 

distally plumose), inferior distal angle with 3 RS. 


broadly rounded, lateral margin weakly concave, mesial 

margin strongly convex, with PMS on distal half; 

endopod 2. times as long as wide, distally subtruncate, 

lateral margin straight, with PMS on distal margin only, 

mesial margin with PMS on distal half; peduncle .5 

times as wide as long, mesial margin with 0 coupling 

hooks. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with distolateral 

margin not digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 each 

with distolateral point; pleopods 2–4 peduncle distolateral 

margin without prominent acute RS. 


posterior lobe about three-quarters as long as endopod. 

Uropod rami extending to pleotelson apex, marginal 

setae in two or three tiers, apices acute. Endopod apically 

deeply bifid, lateral process prominent (apex with

Figure 26. Aega stevelowei sp. nov. Female paratype NIWA 7974, except B and J, male paratype, NMV J277 4. A–D, pleopods 

–3, 5 respectively; E, distomesial margin, pleopod 3 exopod; F, uropod endopod apex; G, uropod exopod, apex; H, uropod 

endopod, ventral view; I, uropod; J, sternite 7 showing penial openings. 

54

4 teeth), lateral margin straight, without prominent 

excision, proximal lateral margin with 2 RS, distal 

lateral margin with 2 RS, mesial margin sinuate, with 

7 RS. Exopod not extending to end of endopod, 3.0 as 

long as greatest width, apically sub-bifid, mesial process 

prominent; lateral margin weakly convex, with 8 

RS; mesial margin sinuate, proximally concave, with 

4 RS. 

maLe: Similar to female. Maxilliped palp setation similar, 

but line of fusion on palp article 5 is visible, and 

the distal margin of palp article 5 has 6 RS as does the 

female. Penes low tubercles; penial openings separated 

by 8% of sternal width. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina 

with straight margins, 0.9 times as long as endopod, 

distally narrowly rounded. 

size: Holotype 48 mm; paratypes female 40 mm, mature 

male 3 mm. 

Variation: Pleotelson with 3– 7 RS as 6+7 or 8+7; the 

specimen with 7 RS had one margin with 0 RS, an 

asymmetric distribution of RS, which is probably aberrant. 

Uropod exopod mesial margin with 4 RS, lateral 

margin with 6–9 RS; uropod endopod mesial margin 7 

(6 once) lateral margin with 2+2 (2+ once). Pereopod 

merus inferior margin all with single proximal RS, 

distally with 2 or 3 simple setae; pereopods 2 and 3 

merus inferior margin with 4+2 RS. The uropodal and 

pleotelson RS are generally small, difficult to observe, 

and if missing a socket is hard to detect. 

The maxilliped palp has article 5 wholly fused in the 

female, but a faint trace of the line of fusion (or former 

articulation) is visible in the male. 

The dorsal setae are easily rubbed away, and are 

far less evident in the older net-caught male specimen 

from southern Australia. 

prey: Hyperoglyphe antarctica [bluenose, matiri (New 

Zealand) or Antarctic butterfish, Centrolophidae]. 

remarks: This distinctive species can be recognised by 

the finely setose dorsal body surfaces in conjunction 

with large, medially united eyes, ventrally flat and 

elongate frontal lamina, apically bifid uropod apices 

(when entire), uropod endopod with a distinctly sinuate 

mesial margin, and the weakly crenulated pleotelson 

posterior margins being angled towards a median 

point of inflexion (but without a produced point). 

Pereopod is unusual in that the merus inferior 

margin is largely devoid of robust setae, with only 

a single proximal robust seta in comparison to pereopods 

2 and 3 which have 6. Similarly reduced setation 

occurs in Aega falklandica but in that species the 

pereopod merus has a single distal robust seta on 

the inferior margin. The maxilliped is also unusual 

55 

within the genus in having numerous setae along the 

mesial margin of palp article 4, and two prominent 

circumplumose setae on the endite, in both the male 

and the female. The robust setae of the uropodal and 

pleotelson margins are relatively small, and those of 

the pleotelson set in a marginal groove (as for species of 

Aegapheles), and are often obscured by setae rendering 

them difficult to observe. 

Only one other species of Aega, A. punctulata (see 

Appendix 2) has setose body surfaces, but that species 

is otherwise abundantly distinct, with small well- 

separated eyes, short anteriorly rounded frontal 

lamina, pereopod merus with large robust setae, 

and rounded pleotelson posterior margin. The form of 

the dorsal setae of A. punctulata differs from those of 

A. stevelowei, the former with prominent stiff setae, the 

latter with fine flexible setae. 

distribution: Off Great Barrier Island, northeastern 

New Zealand, and Victoria, southern Australia; recorded 

depths of 390 and 500 metres. 

etymoLogy: Named for Mr Steve Lowe of Leigh, Auckland, 

who collected and donated significant material 

to this study. 

Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4 (Figs 27–30) 

Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4: 367, pl. 32A.– Kensley, 200 : 

227. 

Aega semicarinata.– Barnard, 9 6: 06 (not A. semicarinata 

Miers, 875). 

Aega webbi.– Trilles & Justine, 2004: 228, figs 9, 0 

(misidentification, not A. webbi Guérin-Menéville, 

836). 

materiaL examined: ♀ (non-ovig. 34 mm), off southwestern 

South Island, 46°29.8’S, 66°02.3’E, 20 November 

986, stn AB /097/86 55 m, on ‘wing’ of Raja 

nasuta, trawl catch (NMNZ Cr. 20 7). 

Also examined: South Africa. ♀ (non-ovig. 44 mm), 

34°07’S, 25°54’E, 9 May 993, 0 m, coll. RV Africana 

(SafM A43 6). 2♀ (non-ovig. 36, 38 mm), south of 

Still Bay, 35° 7’S, 2 °32’E, 27 May 993, 6 m, coll. RV 

Africana (SafM exA43 3). ♂ (2 mm), off Table Bay, 

coll. S. African Mus. (BMNH 2003.23). 

Additional material: New caledonia. ♀ (non-ovig. 

30 mm), 22°55.7’S, 67° 7.0’E, 28 September 985, 

MUSORTOM IV, stn 2 5, 485–520 m, coll. B. Richer de 

Forges (MNHN Is.59 3). ♀ (non-ovig 20 mm), HALI- 

CAL 2, récolté sure un requin, Squalus melanurus, pêche 

a la palaugre, coll. Menon; (MNHN Is.59 4). 

desCription (of new zeaLand speCimen): Body 2.8 times 

as long as greatest width, dorsal surfaces punctate, widest 

at pereonite 5, lateral margins subparallel. Rostral 

point projecting anteriorly, not ventrally folded. Eyes 

small, combined widths less than 50% width of head,

Figure 27. Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4. Female 32 mm (NMNZ Cr.9268). A, dorsal view, holotype; B, lateral view; C, head; 

D, frons; E, pleotelson posterior margin; F, antennule; G, antenna; H, antenna peduncle article –4, ventral view, ventral view; 

uropod. 

separated by about 29% width of head; each eye made 

up of ~ 8 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with 

~ 0 ommatidia; eye colour dark brown. Pereonite 1 and 

coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle rounded, or 

with small distinct produced point (rounded with a 

small ventral point). Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique 

carina; posterior margins convex, posterolateral angle 

blunt (more than 45°). Pleon with pleonite visible in 

56 

dorsal view; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins extending 

to but not beyond posterior margin of pleonite 

5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles overlapped by 

lateral margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson 0.8 times as long 

as anterior width, dorsal surface without longitudinal 

carina; lateral margins straight, crenulate, posterior 

margin subtruncate, with 0 RS.

Figure 28. Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4. Female 32 mm (NMNZ Cr.9268). A, mandible; B, mandible palp, article 3; C, maxillule; 

D, maxillule apex; E, maxilla; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped palp; I, maxilliped palp article 5 (Leica). 


to end of article 3; articles 3 and 4 0.36 times as 

long as combined lengths of articles and 2, article 3 2.8 

times as long as wide (posterior margin with blade-like 

edge); flagellum with 8 articles, extending to mid-point 

57 

of eye. Antenna peduncle article 2 inferior surface with 

distinct longitudinal suture; article 4 .0 as long as 

wide, 0.8 times as long as combined lengths of articles 

–3, with deep longitudinal groove, inferior margin 0 

plumose setae, and 0 short simple setae; article 5 flat-

Figure 29. Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4. Female 32 mm (NMNZ Cr.9268). A–D, pereopods , 2, 6 and 7 respectively; E, uropod 

endopod, apex; F, uropod exopod, apex. 

tened and expanded, .6 times as long as article 4, .5 


setae, anterodistal angle with cluster of short simple 

seta; flagellum with 13 articles, extending to posterior 


Frontal lamina flat (lateral margins bent ventrally), 

as wide as long, lateral margins converging posteriorly, 

anterior margin rounded, with small median point, 

posterior margin not abutting clypeus. 


58 

5 distolateral setae (4 large, small), palp article 3 with 

24 setae. Maxillule with 8 terminal and subterminal RS 

(proximal 4 hammer-head). Maxilla mesial lobe with 

4 RS (2 recurved, 2 straight); lateral lobe with 4 RS 

(large hooked). Maxilliped endite with apical seta; 

palp article 2 with 2 RS; article 3 with 6 recurved RS ( 

being minute; with single simple seta); article 4 with 

6 hooked RS; article 5 partly fused to article 4, distally 

convex, with 6 RS (mesial 2 being hooked, remainder 

straight).

Figure 30. Aega urotoma Barnard, 9 4. Female 32 mm (NMNZ Cr.9268). A–E, pleopods –5 respectively; F, uropod; G, 

uropod exopod, ventral view. 

Pereopod 1 basis .6 times as long as greatest width 

(basis with prominent lateral carina); ischium 0.4 times 

as long as basis, inferior margin with 0 RS, superior 

distal margin with RS (small acute); merus inferior 

margin with 3 RS (with inferior lobe), set as two groups 

(of and 2), superior distal angle with RS (minute); 

carpus .0 as long as merus, inferior margin with 0 

RS; propodus . times as long as proximal width, 


59 

distal lobe, dactylus abruptly hooked, .3 as long as 


RS (round), superior distal margin with RS; merus 

inferior margin with 5 RS (set as 3 + 2), set as two 

groups, superior distal margin with 2 acute RS; carpus 

similar in size to that of pereopod , inferodistal 

angle with RS, propodus with large club-shaped 

distal RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2; ischium 

inferior margin with 2 RS, propodus with large club-

shaped distal RS. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins of 

ischium–carpus with short RS. Pereopod 6 similar to 

pereopod 7 (more robust, with fewer RS on inferior 

margins). Pereopod 7 basis 2.4 times as long as greatest 

width (inferolateral margin strongly carinate), inferior 

margins with 5 palmate setae; ischium 0.5 as long as 

basis, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as , 3 and ), superior 

distal angle with 5 RS, inferior distal angle with 

4 RS; merus 0.8 as long as ischium, 2.2 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as , 3), superior 

distal angle with 6 RS, inferior distal angle with 4 RS; 

carpus 0.7 as long as ischium, 2.2 times as long as wide, 

inferior margin with 3 RS (set singly), superior distal 

angle with 4 RS (short), inferior distal angle with 7 RS 

(short); propodus 0.6 as long as ischium, 2.9 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as , and 



Pleopod 1 exopod . times as long as wide, distally 

broadly rounded, lateral margin straight, mesial margin 

strongly convex, with PMS on distal half; endopod 

.8 times as long as wide, distally subtruncate, lateral 

margin strongly concave, with PMS on distal one-third, 






margin with prominent acute RS. 



Uropod rami not extending beyond pleotelson, 

marginal setae dense, in several tiers, apices broadly 


straight, without prominent excision, proximal lateral 

margin with RS, distal lateral margin with 2 

RS, mesial margin weakly convex, with 5 RS. Exopod 

not extending to end of endopod, 2.5 times as long as 

greatest width, apically not bifid (both rami with apical 

concavity); lateral margin convex, with 7 RS; mesial 

margin weakly convex, with 4 RS. 

Variation: The small number of specimens, only one 

from New Zealand waters, precludes precisely detailing 

the variation. The smaller specimens have the 

robust setae on the inferodistal angle of the ischium 

more acute than on large specimens. 

maLe.: Similar to the female. The single male specimen 

(South Africa, BMNH) was too brittle to dissect, 

but the penial openings are close-set but separate, 

and the appendix masculina is similar to that of Aega 

semicarinata. 

size: Present material 34 to 38 mm; Barnard’s specimen 

53 mm. 

60 

remarks: Aega urotoma bears a strong but superficial 

resemblance to Aega semicarinata, and has indeed 

been placed in synonymy with that species following 

the suggestion by Barnard ( 9 6) in a ‘Corrigenda’ 

that the two species were the same [followed by Stebbing 

( 920) and later authors]. The two species, with 

overlapping distributions, are similar in general body 

shape and appearance, in the pattern of robust setae 

on the anterior pereopods and have similarly shaped 

uropods. Close examination shows numerous points 

of difference between the two species, and there is no 

doubt that Aega urotoma should be regarded as valid. 

Notably, in A. urotoma, the pleotelson posterior margin 

is not emarginate and the dorsal surface lacks the 

submedian depressions; the antennule and antenna of 

A. urotoma are markedly dorso-ventrally compressed 

and expanded, particularly antenna peduncle article 

5 and this last character can be used to easily separate 

the two species. Further points of distinction are A. 

urotoma having smaller eyes, a prominent blade-like 

carina on the basis of all pereopods, pereopods 2 and 

3 are similar to each other, both bearing a club-like 

robust seta on the propodus, and the robust setae of 

pereopods 6 and 7 are noticeably shorter and stouter 

than in Aega semicarinata. 

Trilles and Justine (2004) recorded, and described 

in part, specimens that they misidentified as Aega 

webbii (Guérin-Méneville, 836). During a visit to the 

Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle in Paris, the 

specimens examined by Trilles and Justine (2004) could 

not be located, but I examined further material from 

New Caledonia which agrees entirely with material 

here being identified as A. urotoma. Aega webbii has 

never been described in detail, but the figures given 

by Guérin-Méneville ( 836) show clearly that the eyes 

are far larger that of the present material, and that 

the posterior margin of the pleotelson is emarginate, 

character states that A. webbii shares with A. semicarinata. 

Digital images of the holotype (ANSP CA2779; 

kindly provided by Paul Callomon) also support these 

differences. 

prey: The only records to date are from Squalus melanurus 

the black-eared spurdog (Squalidae) in New 

Caledonia and a trawl-caught Raja nasuta (Rajidae), 

the New Zealand rough skate (Rajidae). 

distribution: Cape Point (Barnard 9 4) and Cape 

Province (present material), South Africa; distribution 

is here extended to the southwestern Pacific, off South 

Island, New Zealand and off New Caledonia. The 

species has long been placed in synonymy with Aega 

semicarinata and it is possible that some records of that 

species may be of A. urotoma. It is likely that A. urotoma, 

recorded here for the first time beyond South African 

waters, will have a Southern Ocean distribution. At 

depths of 0 to 329 metres.

Aega whanui sp. nov. (Figs 3 –33) 

materiaL examined: Holotype. ♀ (ovig. 59 mm), Lord 

Howe Rise, 27°50.03’S, 62°48.06’E, 5 May 989, 250 

m, coll. FRV Franklin (AM P43982). 

Additional material. ♀ (non-ovig. 49 mm,), Iles 

Tanimbar, Indonesia, Timor Sea, 08°39’S, 3 °08’E, 5 

November 99 , 084– 058 m, KARUBAR stn CP89, 

coll. RV Baruna Jaya (MNHN Is.5862). 


dorsal surfaces coarsely punctate, widest at pereonite 

5, lateral margins weakly ovate. Rostral point projecting 

anteriorly, not ventrally folded. Eyes moderate, 

combined widths 50–65% width of head, separated 

by about 38% width of head; eye colour red (ommatidia 

not distinct). Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each 

with posteroventral angle right-angled. Coxae 5–7 

with entire oblique carina; posterior margins straight, 


pleonite largely concealed by pereonite 7; pleonite 4 

with posterolateral margins extending clearly beyond 


angles overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 

4. Pleotelson 0.6 times as long as anterior width, dorsal 

surface with 2 sub-medial depressions; lateral margins 

convex, serrate, posterior margin with distinct short 

median point, with 2 RS. 





articles, extending to anterior of pereonite . Antenna 

peduncle article 2 inferior surface without distinct longitudinal 



deep longitudinal groove, inferior margin 0 plumose 

setae, and 0 short simple setae; article 5 not markedly 

wider or flatter than article 4, 1.0 as long as article 4, 2.3 




of pereonite 2. 


margins parallel, anterior margin rounded, without 


clypeus. 


4 distolateral setae (plus row of 4 submarginal and 

scattered small simple setae; all finely biserrate), palp 

article 3 with 35 setae (all finely biserrate; distal 2 markedly 

longer than remainder). Maxillule with 8 terminal 

and subterminal RS (proximal 3 falcate). Maxilla lateral 

lobe with 3 RS. 



6 

RS (minute), superior distal margin with 0 RS ( slender 

seta); merus inferior margin with 0 RS, superior 

distal angle with 0 RS (4 slender setae); carpus 0.6 as 

long as merus, inferior margin with 0 RS; propodus 

.5 times as long as proximal width, inferior margin 

with 0 RS, propodal palm simple, without blade or 

process (concave), dactylus smoothly curved, . as 


with RS, superior distal margin with RS; merus 

inferior margin with 8 RS, set as single row, superior 

distal margin with acute RS; carpus similar in size 

to that of pereopod , inferodistal angle with 0 RS, 


3 similar to pereopod 2; propodus without large 

club-shaped distal RS. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins 


pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 3.2 times as long as greatest 

width, inferior margins with 4–8 palmate setae; ischium 

0.5 as long as basis, inferior margin with 9 RS (set as , 

2, , and 4), superior distal angle with 5 RS, inferior 

distal angle with 7 RS; merus 0.8 as long as ischium, 

.9 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 8 RS (set 


distal angle with 9 RS; carpus 0.8 as long as ischium, 2.3 

times as long as wide, inferior margin with 6 RS (set as 




, 2 and 2), superior distal angle with 3 slender setae, 

inferior distal angle with 3 RS. 




with PMS on distal two-thirds; endopod 2.0 times 

as long as wide, distally subtruncate, lateral margin 

weakly concave, with PMS on distal margin only, mesial 

margin with PMS on entire margin; peduncle .8 





margin without prominent acute RS. 


posterior lobe about as long as endopod. Uropod rami 

extending to pleotelson apex, marginal setae in single 

tier, apices narrowly rounded. Endopod apically not 

bifid, lateral margin proximally convex and distally 

concave, without prominent excision, proximal lateral 

margin with 3 RS, distal lateral margin with 3 RS, 

mesial margin weakly convex, with 6–7 RS. Exopod 

extending to end of endopod, 3.2 times as long as 



concave, with 5 RS (or 6). 

maLe: Not known.

Figure 31. Aega whanui sp. nov. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, pleotelson and uropods; F, 

pleotelson, distal margin; G, antenna peduncle; H antennule. 

62

Figure 32. Aega whanui sp. nov. Holotype. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; C, maxillule apex; D, maxillule; E, maxilla; 

F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped articles 2–5. 

size: Females at 49 to 59 mm. 

Variation: The specimen from the Timor sea is less 

wide ( .9 times as long as wide) than the holotype, has 

black eyes, and the frontal lamina has a small median 

point; each eye with ~ 8 transverse rows of ommatidia, 

each row with ~ 2– 4 ommatidia. 

remarks: Aega whanui sp. nov. is a large and notably 

wide-bodied species, easily identified by the small 

eyes, ovate body shape, long antennule flagellum, 

short dactylus on pereopods –3 (about as long as 

63 

propodus), proportionally long basis on pereopods 

–3 and setation of the pereopods and uropods. There 

are no closely similar species. Aega whanui has an 

unusual mandible morphology, with a near truncate 

distal portion which has the incisor reduced to a small 

triangular point. Whether this is also the case for the 

male is unknown, but the mandible incisor has not 

been shown to be sexually variable for any other aegid 

species. The weakly developed eyes of the holotype is 

presumably a preservation artefact. 

prey: Not known.

Figure 33. Aega whanui sp. nov. Holotype. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; D, pereopod propodus, later view; D, 

pereopod propodus, mesiodistal angle; F, pleopod ; G, uropod exopod, ventral view; H, uropod. 

64

distribution: Lord Howe Rise to the northwest of New 

Zealand, and Timor Sea, off the Tanimbar Islands, 

Indonesia; at depths from 084 to 250 m. 

etymoLogy: Whanui (pronunciation: ‘phanui’) is a 

Mäori word that means wide or broad (alluding to 

body shape). 

Aega sp. 

materiaL examined: 2 mancas (4.5, 5.0 mm), Wanganella 

Bank, Norfolk Ridge, 32°34.4’S, 67°3 .0’E, 29 January 

98 , 3 m, NIWA stn 0.63 (NMNZ Cr.487 ). 

remarks: The eyes are widely separate, the antenna is 

notably short, being only a little longer than the antennule, 

the body shape is elongate (similar to that of Aega 

alazon), the uropods are slender, with the distal margin 

of the exopod serrate. These two small mancas cannot 

be identified as any named species. The specimens are 

of uniform appearance, but given that many Aegidae 

will grow from four times to 0 times larger, it is not 

possible to be confident that apparent species-specific 

characters will not change with maturity. 

Aegapheles gen. nov. 

type speCies: Aega kixalles Bruce, 2004; here designated. 


vaulted. Rostral point acute, projecting anteriorly. Eyes 

present, large, usually medially united. Pleonite not 

abruptly narrower than pereonite 7; pleonite 4 with 

lateral margins extending beyond posterior margin of 

pleonite 5. Pleotelson produced to an acute, often elongate 

point. Antennule peduncle articles and 2 weakly 

flattened, not expanded; anterodistal article 2 weakly or 

not produced. Maxillule with –3 large broad-based RS, 

several small RS. Maxilliped palp article 5 wider than 

longer; endite present. Pereopods –3 merus inferior 

margin with large RS, usually set in one or more rows, 

pereopods 4–7 with long acute RS. Uropodal endopod 

lateral margin with weak to prominent excision; plane 

of endopod oblique, at angle of about 35° to that of 

pleotelson and exopod. 

desCription: Body moderately to strongly vaulted, 

about 2 to 4 times as long as wide. Head with eyes, often 

large, may meet at midpoint; anterior margin with 

median rostral point. Coxae of pereonites 4–7 longer 

than respective segment, posteriorly produced. Pleon 

not abruptly narrower than pereon; pleonite 5 laterally 

65 

overlapped by pleonite 4; pleonites 3–5 posteriorly 

produced to an acute point. 

Frontal lamina with posterior margin not abutting 

clypeus. Mandible with uni- or bicuspid incisor; 

molar process present, reduced or absent. Maxilliped 

palp 5-articled, article shorter than wide, articles 3 

and 4 each with 2–6 stout recurved RS, article 5 sub- 

rectangular, with long flexible terminal setae; endite 

present, usually with –2 terminal setae. Uropodal 

rami with marginal setae in single tier. 

etymoLogy: From the Greek apheles (smooth, even—all 

species are smooth-bodied) in conjunction with Aega— 

indicating family affinity; alludes to the blood-feeding 

micropredator genus of mosquito. Gender feminine. 

remarks: The group of species, referred to as the ‘Aega 

deshaysiana-group’ by Bruce (2004a) forms a well- 

supported clade and is here established as the new 

genus Aegapheles. The unique apomorphy is the pleotelson 

posterior margin forming an extended point and 

the uropodal rami not reaching the posterior margin 

of the pleotelson. The genus is further characterised 

by all species having very large eyes either meeting at 

the midline or separated by the width of only one or 

two ommatidia, the posterior pereopods with elongate 

robust setae, the uropodal exopod lateral margin with 

a usually very distinct excision (very weakly present in 

some species of Aega), the robust setae on the inferior 

margins of the merus of pereopods and 2 forming one 

or more continuous rows and the plane of the uropodal 

exopod is at an oblique angle to the endopod (this state 

also occurring in Rocinela). The frontal lamina of species 

of Aegapheles is usually flat, often not distinctly defined 

posteriorly and does not abut against the clypeus; in a 

few species the posterior border is clearly defined. 

Seventeen named species are included in the genus, 

those below and under ‘Species included ...’ (p.2 3). 

Key to the new Zealand species of AegApheles 

Although not directly used to key the species of Aegapheles, 

the number of marginal robust setae on the 

uropodal and pleotelson margins are useful to confirm 

identity. The number of pleotelson robust setae 

is given in parentheses for each species at the end of 

the couplet. 

Uropodal exopod extending posterior to endopod 

(i.e. longer than endopod) ....................................3 

– Uropodal exopod not extending posterior to endopod 

(i.e. as long as or shorter than endopod) .. 

..................................................................................2

2 Pereopod with propodal blade about as 

long as palm; frontal lamina anteriorly rounded, 

posteriorly narrow; pleotelson apex with 

distinct apical point (pleotelson with 8 RS) .......... 

......................................... Aegapheles copidis (p. 70) 

– Pereopod without distal propodal blade 

or lobe; frontal lamina quadrate; pleotelson 

apex produced, without distinct apical point; 

(pleotelson with 8– 0 RS) ........................................ 

........................................ Aegapheles umpara (p. 8 ) 

3. Eyes entirely united medially ..............................4 

– Eyes narrowly separate (pleotelson with 6–8 

RS) .....................................Aegapheles birubi (p. 68) 

4. Pereopods 5–7 superior margins of ischium to 

carpus without long setae .....................................5 

– Pereopods 5–7 superior margins of ischium to 

carpus with long setae (pleotelson with – 6 

RS) ..................................Aegapheles hamiota (p. 73) 

5. Frontal lamina ovate; pereopod propodal palm 

with prominent distal lobe; inferior margin of 

pereopods 2 and 3 merus with near continuous 

row of 2– 5 RS (pleotelson with 0 RS) ................ 

...................................Aegapheles rickbruscai (p. 79) 

– Frontal lamina anteriorly rounded; pereopod 

propodal palm with or without small distal 

lobe; inferior margin of pereopods 2 and 3 merus 

with 4–6 widely spaced RS ..................................6 

6. Frontal lamina lateral margins posteriorly narrowed; 

uropodal endopod with 2–4 RS proximal 

to lateral notch (pleotelson with 8– 0 RS) ............ 

.......................................... Aegapheles alazon (p. 66) 

– Frontal lamina lateral margins sub-parallel; uropodal 

endopod with 6 or 7 RS proximal to lateral 

notch (pleotelson with 4– 8 RS) ........................... 

........................................Aegapheles mahana (p. 75) 

Aegapheles alazon (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. (Fig. 34) 

Aega alazon Bruce, 2004: 156, figs 12–15, 62.– Poore, 2005: 6. 

materiaL examined: New Zealand: ♀ (non-ovig 3 mm), 

vicinity of the Snares, 47°20.0’S, 67°02,00’E, 0 October 

962, 74 m, stn B057 (NIWA 7930). ♀ (non-ovig 28 

mm), vicinity of the Snares, 48°46.00’S, 67°04.99’E, 3 

October 962, 43 m, stn B059 (NIWA 793 ). ♂ (25 

mm), vicinity of the Snares, 48°43.00’S, 67°3 .99’E, 

3 October 962, 6 m, stn B0593 (NIWA 7932). 

♀ (40 mm), west of Snares, 48°03.39’S, 66°45. 2’E, 

27 Feb 1993, 141–144 m, on fin of gemfish, coll. Tangaroa 

(NMNZ Cr. 2002). ♀ (non-ovig 2 mm), stn 

ABI/003/86, 46°00.0’S 70°42. ’E, 77 m, 5 November 

986, on gills of school shark, coll. B. Jones (NMNZ 

Cr. 20 8). ♀ (non-ovig. 58 mm), NW of McCauley Island, 

Kermadec Islands, 30°0 .5’S, 78°42.8’W, 30 Sept 

66 

993, 0 m, dropline (prey not recorded), coll. R Win 

on FV Te Maru 18 (AK 842 8). ♀ (non-ovig 28 mm), 

Z6 5, ex ling (dried at some point) (NIWA 7936). 2 

♀ (non-ovig 23, 33 mm), 7°25.00’S, 78° 0.00’E, 46 m 

(as 25 fms), 4/63, on horse mackerel, stn Z2 LH (NIWA 

7963). ♀ (non-ovig 35 mm), 7°25.00’S, 78° 0.00’E, 

79 m (as 43 fms), off ‘groper’, Z3 /64 (NIWA 7964). 

♂ (32 mm), 7°25.00’S, 78° 0.00’E, 42 m (as 23 fms) 

Z2 2/63, coll. J. Graham (NIWA 7965). ♀ (non-ovig 

38 mm), Z2/63, J. Graham (NIWA 7966). ♂ (3 mm), 

7°25.00’S, 78° 0.00’E [vicinity of Fiji], on gurnard, Z2, 

5/62, 436, coll. Graham (NIWA 7967). Note: There is 

some considerable doubt over the data for the specimens 

apparently taken at 7°S, the vicinity of Fiji (see 

comment Rocinela garricki, p. 69), as the host names 

are of New Zealand fishes. 

Additional material: south Atlantic: ♂ ( 4.2 mm), 

Discovery Expedition, Stn 87, from 2.2–0.8 miles S 

65ºE of South Hill, Inaccessible Is, Tristan Group, 8 

November 933, 35– 34 m (BMNH unreg). southwestern 

Pacific: Tonga: , (26 mm), 2° ’S, 75°27’W, 

6 June 2000, BORDAU 2, stn. CH 609, 385–405 m, 

coll. Bouchet et al. (MNHN Is.5879). New Caledonia: , 

8°55.48’S, 63°22. ’E, 7 August 992, BATHUS 4, stn. 

CP927, 452–444 m, coll. B. Richer de Forges (MNHN 

Is.5865). (27 mm) New Zealand, off Great Barrier 

Island, North Island, January 2006, old longline gear 

at ~500 m, coll. Steve Lowe (NIWA 23778). 

type LoCaLity: Off Port Elizabeth, South Africa (Bruce 

2004a). 

diagnosis (from Bruce 2004a): Eyes large, medially 

united, anterior clear field 21% length of head, posterior 

clear field 46% length of head; eye colour dark brown. 

Pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins extending clearly 



pleonite 4. Pleotelson .0– .2 times as long as anterior 

width, dorsal surface without longitudinal carina; 

lateral margins convex, smooth, posterior margin with 

6– 0 RS. 


extending beyond mid-point of article 3; flagellum extending 

to posterior margin of eye. Antenna peduncle 

article 2 inferior surface with indistinct groove; flagellum 

extending to posterior of pereonite . 

Frontal lamina flat, wider than long, lateral margins 



clypeus. 

Pereopod 1 merus inferior margin with 3 RS, set as 

two groups (of and 2), superior distal angle with 2 RS 

(slender); carpus inferior margin with 0 RS; propodus 


with 0 RS, propodal palm with small distal lobe, dac-

Figure 34. Aegapheles alazon (Bruce, 2004). A, dorsal view; B, head, dorsal view; C, frons; D, pereopod ; E, pereopod 2 (distal 

articles); F, pereopod 7; G, antennule; H, pleopods ; I, uropod. 

tylus smoothly curved, .2 as long as propodus. Pereopod 

2 merus inferior margin with 5 RS (set as 3 and 2), 

set as two groups. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins of 

ischium–carpus with long acute RS. Pereopod 3 similar 

to pereopod 2. Pereopod 7 basis 2.9 times as long as 


(or more); ischium 0.6 as long as basis, inferior margin 

67 

with 5 RS (set as , 2 and 2), superior distal angle with 

7 RS, inferior distal angle with 5 RS; merus 0.9 as long 


with 4 RS (set as , and 2), superior distal angle with 

5 RS, inferior distal angle with 7 RS; carpus 0.8 as long 


with 2 RS (set as single cluster), superior distal angle

with 3 RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; propodus 0.7 

as long as ischium, 5.8 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 2 RS (set as single cluster), superior distal 

angle with 2 slender setae ( simple, palmate), inferior 




Uropod peduncle posterior lobe about one-half 

as long as endopod. Uropod rami with apices narrowly 

rounded. Endopod apically not bifid, lateral 

margin proximally convex, with prominent excision, 

positioned about four-fifths along ramus, proximal 

lateral margin with 2 RS, distal lateral margin with 4 

RS, mesial margin strongly convex, with 3 RS. Exopod 

extending beyond end of endopod, 2.8 times as long as 




size: Previously recorded to 58 mm, the size of the 

largest specimen examined here. 

Variation: Most specimens examined were in relatively 

poor condition, and the indicative range for robust 

setae on the pleotelson appears to be from 5+5 to 7+7. 

Uropod exopod (n = 9) mesial margin with 3–5, with 

3 (74%) or 4 (2 %) most frequent, lateral margin with 

9– 2 RS with 0 (84%) most frequent; uropod endopod 

mesial margin (n = 2 ) with 4 (7 %) or 5 ( 9%) most 

frequent (7 occurred on one specimen only), the lateral 

margin (n = 20) with the proximal RS at 2–4, distal RS 3 

or 4, with 3+4 (52%), 2+3 ( 4%) and 3+3 most frequent 

(4+3, 4+4 and 2+4 all occurred once). 

Pereopod setation of the merus is highly consistent 

across its range with +2 RS (95%), 2+2 occurring 

only once; pereopod 2 merus with 4+2 RS (73%) or 3+2 

(27%) most frequent and pereopod 3 with 4+2 (95%) 

most frequent (not included are NMNZ Cr.9265 and 

AK 84218, identified after counts were made). 

This is less variation, particularly for the uropodal 

endopod, than was recorded by Bruce (2004a) for the 

species across its entire range, suggesting that if good 

data can be obtained, consistent regional variation or 

cryptic species may be found to exist. 

remarks: Aegapheles alazon is most similar to A. birubi, 

the differentiating characters being that A. alazon has 

medially united eyes and lacks a propodal lobe on the 

palm of pereopods –3. Most of the NIWA specimens 

are in poor condition, several having dried out at some 

time in the past. In many of the specimens the eyes 

seem to have shrunk and drawn away from the cuticle, 

making it impossible to see if the eyes are medially 

united. All specimens identified here lack a significant 

propodal lobe on the palm of pereopods –3. 

68 

prey: In New Zealand — Carangidae, probably Trachurus 

novaezelandiae Richardson, 843 [as horse mackerel]; 

Serranidae [as groper]; Rexea solandri (Cuvier, 832) 

(Gempylidae) [as gemfish]; Triglidae [as gurnard]; 

and Ophidiidae, probably Genypterus blacodes (Forster, 

80 ) [as ling]. 

distribution: Throughout New Zealand waters, extending 

north to New Caledonia, and northeast to Tonga. 

Previously recorded (Bruce 2004a) from South Africa 

(type locality), Tristan da Cunha, Seychelles, St Paul 

Is., southeastern Australia. Maximum recorded depth 

550 metres. 

Aegapheles birubi (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. (Fig. 35) 

Aega birubi Bruce, 2004: 166, figs 18–21, 63.– Poore, 2005: 7. 

materiaL examined: ♀ (non-ovig. 34 mm), Cook Strait, 

4 February 2000, 65 m, from cheek of barracouta, 

coll. Pierce Black (NMNZ Cr.9949). Manca ( .5 mm), 

outside Wellington Harbour, 20 May 979, on pectoral 

fin of Polyprion oxygeneios, coll. C. Roberts (AK 4978). 

diagnosis (from Bruce 2004a): Eyes large, not medially 

united, separated by less than % width of head; 

eye colour pale brown. Pleonite 4 with posterolateral 

margins extending clearly beyond posterior margin 



.0 as long as anterior width, dorsal surface without 

longitudinal carina; lateral margins convex, smooth, 

posterior margin with 6–8 RS. 

Antennule peduncle article 2 without anterodistal 

lobe; flagellum extending to mid-point of eye. Antenna 


longitudinal suture; flagellum extending to middle of 

pereonite . 




clypeus. 


two groups (of and 2), superior distal angle with 2 

RS (acute); carpus 0.5 as long as merus, inferior margin 

with 0 RS (with small lobe); propodus .4 times as long 

as proximal width, inferior margin with 0 RS, propodal 

palm with large distal lobe, dactylus smoothly curved, 

.7 as long as propodus. Pereopod 2 merus inferior margin 

with 6 RS (distal 2 on low lobe), set as single row, 

superior distal margin with 2 acute RS; carpus similar 


0 RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 5–7 

inferior margins of ischium–carpus with long acute 

RS. Pereopod 7 basis 2.8 times as long as greatest width, 

inferior margins with 7 palmate setae; ischium 0.6 as

Figure 35. Aegapheles birubi (Bruce, 2004). A, dorsal view; B, head, dorsal view; C, frons; D, antenna peduncle; E, antennule; 

F, pereopod (distal articles); G, pereopod 2 (distal articles); H, pereopod 7; I uropod. 

69

long as basis, inferior margin with 6 RS (set as , , 3 

and ), superior distal angle with 3 RS, inferior distal 

angle with 3 RS; merus 0.8 as long as ischium, .9 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as 2 and 


with 5 RS; carpus 0.8 as long as ischium, 2.6 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (single cluster), 


with 6 RS; propodus 0.7 as long as ischium, 4.5 times as 


superior distal angle with 3 slender setae (2 simple, 

palmate), inferior distal angle with 4 RS. 


openings separated by % of sternal width. 

Uropod peduncle ventrolateral margin with RS, 


Uropod rami with apices narrowly rounded. Endopod 

apically not bifid, lateral margin proximally convex 

and distally straight, with prominent excision, positioned 

about three-quarters along ramus, proximal 



extending beyond end of endopod, 3.0 as long as greatest 

width, apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly 



remarks: The characteristic setation of the anterior pereopods, 

which has the distal robust seta on the merus 

notably longer than the preceding robust seta, allows 

ready identification; the sub-rectangular frontal lamina, 

lack of a lobe on the propodal palm of pereopods –3, 

uropodal exopod not extending beyond the endopod 

and number of robust setae on the uropods are further 

characters by which the species can be identified. 

prey: Recorded from hapuku, Polyprion oxygeneios 

Schneider & Forster, 80 (Polyprionidae); previously 

from barracouta (Thyristes atun) (Bruce 2004a). 

distribution: From the eastern Australia coast at Broken 

Bay to Tasmania, eastwards to the Cook Strait; at 

depths between 20–73 metres. 

Aegapheles copidis sp. nov. (Figs 36, 37) 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ (22 mm), West Norfolk 

Ridge, 34°37.20’S, 68°57.03’E, 3 June 2003, 52 –539 m, 

coll. NORFANZ, RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23768). 


dorsal surfaces polished in appearance or sparsely 

punctate, widest at pereonite 5, lateral margins weakly 

ovate. Rostral point projecting anteriorly, not ventrally 


70 




dark brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle right-angled. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique 

carina; posterior margins concave, posterolateral 

angle acute (less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite largely 



of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, 

not overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson 

.0 times as long as anterior width, dorsal surface 

without longitudinal carina; lateral margins sinuate, 

smooth, posterior margin with 8 RS. 


lobe; flagellum extending to mid-point of eye. Antenna, 

flagellum extending to posterior of pereonite 1. 

Frontal lamina flat, wider than long, lateral margins 

converging posteriorly, anterior margin rounded, 

without small median point, posterior margin not 


Maxilliped endite with apical setae; palp article 2 

with 3 RS; article 3 with 3 recurved RS; article 4 with 5 

hooked RS (4 large and small); article 5 articulating 

with article 4, longer than wide, sub-rectangular, with 

4 RS (all straight). 




margin with 3 RS, set as distal group, superior distal 

angle with 2 RS; carpus 0.4 as long as merus, inferior 

margin with 0 RS; propodus .2 times as long as proximal 

width, inferior margin with 0 RS, propodal palm 

with wide blade, dactylus smoothly curved, 2.2 as long 

as propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with 


margin with 8 RS, set as two rows (distal paired rows 

of 3+3), superior distal margin with 2 acute RS; carpus 

similar in size to that of pereopod , inferodistal angle 

with RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 

5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus with long acute 

RS. Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 

2.9 times as long as greatest width, inferior margins 

with 2 palmate setae; ischium 0.5 as long as basis, 

inferior margin with 7 RS (set , 2, and 3), superior 


RS; merus 0.7 as long as ischium, 2.6 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as , and 3), 





with 8 RS; propodus 0.8 as long as ischium, 4 times as 


2), superior distal angle with slender seta, inferior 

distal angle with 3 RS.

Figure 36. Aegapheles copidis sp. nov. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head, dorsal view; D, frons; E, pleotelson 

posterior margin, dorsal view; F, maxilliped palp, article 5; G, maxilliped; H, pereopod ; I, pereopod 2. 


% of sternal width. 

Pleopod 1 exopod 2.7 times as long as wide, distally 

narrowly rounded with strongly oblique mesial margin, 

lateral margin weakly concave, mesial margin strongly 

convex, with PMS on distal one-third; endopod 2.6 

times as long as wide, distally subtruncate, lateral 

7 

margin weakly concave, with PMS on distal margin 

only, mesial margin with PMS on distal two-thirds; 

peduncle .2 times as wide as long, mesial margin with 

8 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with 

straight margins, 0.9 times as long as endopod, distally 

narrowly rounded. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with 

distolateral margin not digitate; endopods of pleopods

Figure 37. Aegapheles copidis sp. nov. Holotype. A, pereopod 7; B, pereopod 7, propodus and distal margin of carpus, mesial 

side; C, pleopod ; D, pleopod 2; E, uropod, in situ; H, uropod exopod, ventral view, in situ. 

3–5 each with distolateral point; pleopods 2–4 peduncle 

distolateral margin without prominent acute RS. 


posterior lobe about one-half as long as endopod. 

Uropod rami with apices narrowly rounded. Endopod 

apically not bifid, lateral margin proximally convex, 

with prominent excision, positioned about three- 

quarters of the way along ramus, proximal lateral margin 

with 2 RS, distal lateral margin with 4 RS, mesial 

margin weakly convex, with 6 RS. Exopod extending 

72 

to end of endopod, 3.9 times as long as greatest width, 

apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly convex, with 

RS; mesial margin sinuate, proximally concave, 

with 4 RS. 

femaLe: Not known. 

size: Holotype 22 mm, a mature male; females probably 

larger.

Variation: The left and right uropodal exopod lateral 

margins had 0 and robust setae. The robust setae on 

the posterior margin of the pleotelson are apparently 

uneven though some may be missing; the probable 

number is 0 or 2. 

remarks: Aegapheles copidis sp. nov. can be identified 

by the prominent propodal blade on pereopods –3 together 

with the wide frontal lamina, and the relatively 

slender uropodal endopod, the lateral margin of which 

is weakly excavate; in addition the pleotelson apex extends 

only a little way beyond the posterior of the uropods. 

There are three species of Aegapheles that have a 

propodal blade on pereopods –3. Aegapheles copidis has 

a longer propodal blade, shorter uropod exopod and 

weakly excised endopod lateral margin in comparison 

to A. kixalles Bruce, 2004; A. musorstom Bruce, 2004 has 

a symmetrically ovate frontal lamina, wide uropodal 

exopod which is longer than the endopod, pereopods 

2 and 3 with a single continuous row of robust setae 

on the inferior margin of the merus, and longer robust 

setae on pereopods 5–7. The tropical Aegapheles trulla 

Bruce, 2004 has a similar number of robust setae on the 

merus of pereopods –3 but these are not arranged in 

two rows; in addition the uropodal endopod lateral 

margin is weakly excised, uropodal exopod is very 

wide and the frontal lamina sub-circular. 

The single specimen was minimally dissected as, 

though very recently collected, high-grade absolute 

ethanol preservation had rendered it exceptionally 

brittle and fragile. The antenna, antennule, mouthparts 

and pleopods show few differences at species level, and 

direct observation suggests that these appendages are 

generally similar to those of other species of the genus 

(see Bruce 2004a). 


distribution: West Norfolk Ridge, northeastern New 

Zealand; 52 –539 metres. 

etymoLogy: The epithet is the Latin copidis (cleaver, 

kitchen knife), alluding to the wide propodal blade on 

the anterior pereopods. 

Aegapheles hamiota (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. 

(Fig. 38) 

Aega hamiota Bruce, 2004: 171, figs 22–25, 63.– Poore, 2005: 

7. 

materiaL examined: ♂ (24 mm), West Norfolk Ridge, 

32°36.49’S, 67°43.98’E, 29 May 2003, 699–707 m, coll. 

NORFANZ, RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23769). 

73 






posterolateral angles overlapped by lateral margins 

of pleonite 4. Pleotelson . times as long as anterior 

width, dorsal surface without longitudinal carina; 

lateral margins convex, smooth, posterior margin with 

– 6 RS. 


lobe; flagellum extending to mid-point of eye. Antenna 

peduncle article 2 inferior surface with distinct 

longitudinal suture; flagellum extending to posterior 


Frontal lamina flat, longer than greatest width, oval, 

anterior margin rounded, without small median point, 



three groups (of , 2 and 2), superior distal angle with 

7 RS (long acute); carpus 0.6 as long as merus, inferior 



with small distal lobe, dactylus smoothly curved, .3 

as long as propodus. Pereopod 2 merus inferior margin 

with 9 RS, set as single row (with separation of distal 

2), superior distal margin with 5 acute RS (long acute); 

carpus longer than that of pereopod , with inferodistal 

lobe, inferodistal angle with RS. Pereopod 3 similar 

to pereopod 2. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus 

with long acute RS, superior margins of 

ischium–carpus with long, stiff, acute setae. Pereopod 

7 basis 3.3 times as long as greatest width, inferior 


basis, inferior margin with 0 RS (7 long and 3 short), 

superior distal angle with 0 RS (5 stout lateral and 5 

long mesial), inferior distal angle with 0 RS (6 stout 

lateral and 4 long mesial); merus .0 as long as ischium, 

.9 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (9 

long and 6 short), superior distal angle with 5 RS (3 

stout lateral and 2 long mesial), inferior distal angle 

with 8 RS (3 stout lateral and 5 long mesial); carpus .0 

as long as ischium, 3.0 as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 0 RS (7 long and 3 short), superior distal angle 

with 0 RS (3 stout lateral and 7 long mesial), inferior 

distal angle with RS (4 stout lateral and 7 long mesial); 

propodus 0.8 as long as ischium, 3.5 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 6 RS (4 long and 2 short), 

superior distal angle with 6 slender setae ( plumose), 





(short), posterior lobe about three-quarters as long as

Figure 38. Aegapheles hamiota (Bruce, 2004). A, dorsal view; B, head, dorsal view; C, frons; D, antennule; E, pereopod (distal 

articles); F, pereopod 2 (distal articles); G, pereopod 7; H, uropod; I, pleopod . 

74

endopod. Uropod rami with apices broadly rounded. 

Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin proximally 

convex and distally convex, with prominent excision, 

positioned about two-thirds along ramus, proximal 



extending beyond end of endopod, .9 times as long as 


convex, with RS; mesial margin convex, with 4 RS. 

remarks: Agrees well with the description given by 

Bruce (2004a). The species is immediately recognised 

by the united eyes, broad uropodal exopod and, 

uniquely within Aegapheles, by pereopods 6 and 7 

with long setae on the superior margin of the merus 

and carpus. 

distribution: Newly recorded from the vicinity of New 

Zealand; previously New Caledonia and Queensland. 

At depths between approximately 500 to 700 metres. 

Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. (Figs 39–4 ) 

materiaL examined: All material from New Zealand. 

Holotype: ♂ (37 mm), Rumble V Sea Mount, 

36°8.38’S, 78° .77’E, 23 May 200 , 603–365 m, coll. 

RV Tangaroa (NIWA 7939). 

Paratypes: Broken (pleon and pleotelson missing, 

estimated size 6 cm), Rumble V Sea Mount, 36°8.35’S, 

78° .74’E, 24 May 200 , 520–367 m, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 7940). ♀ (non-ovig., broken c. 35 mm, dissected), 

Rumble V Sea Mount, 36°8.07’S, 78° 2.07’E, 

24 May 200 , 40–698 m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 

794 ). 

Additional material. ♂ (3 mm), vicinity of Chatham 

Island, 43°04.00’S, 78°38.99’W, 3 September 963, 549 

m, stn A09 0 (NIWA 7942). Manca (22 mm), South 

Norfolk Ridge, 33°22.6 ’S, 70° 2.70’E, June 2003, 

5 4–540 m, coll. NORFANZ, RV Tangaroa (NIWA 

7943). ♀ (non-ovig. 28 mm), South Norfolk Ridge, 

33°20.5 ’S, 70° 3.98’E, June 2003, 6 4–675 m, coll. 

NORFANZ, RV Tangaroa (NIWA 7944). ♀ (non-ovig. 

35 mm; all anterior pereopods broken), South Norfolk 

Ridge, 33°23.60’S, 70° 2.38’E, June 2003, 469–490 m, 

coll. NORFANZ, RV Tangaroa (NIWA 7945). 2 ♂ (32, 

42 mm), West Norfolk Ridge, 34°37.20’S, 68°57.03’E, 

3 June 2003, 52 –539 m, coll. NORFANZ, RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 7946). 


dorsal surfaces polished in appearance and sparsely 

punctate, widest at pereonite 4, lateral margins subparallel. 

Rostral point projecting anteriorly, not ventrally 




75 


dark brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle rounded. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique 

carina; posterior margins concave, posterolateral angle 

acute (less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite visible in 

dorsal view; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins 

extending clearly beyond posterior margin of pleonite 


lateral margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson .0 as long as 

anterior width, dorsal surface with longitudinal carina; 

lateral margins sinuate, smooth, posterior margin with 

6 RS. 


lobe; articles 3 and 4 0.7 times as long as combined 

lengths of articles and 2, article 3 3.2 times as long as 

wide; flagellum with 11 articles, extending to posterior 

margin of eye. Antenna peduncle article 2 inferior 

surface with distinct longitudinal suture; article 4 .9 

times as long as wide, .2 times as long as combined 

lengths of articles –3, without deep longitudinal 

groove, inferior margin 0 plumose setae, and short 

simple seta; article 5 0.9 times as long as article 4, 2.4 



setae; flagellum with 16 articles, extending to middle 





not abutting clypeus. 


2 with 6 distolateral setae (plus scattered small simple 

setae), palp article 3 with 24 setae. Maxillule with 8 terminal 

RS (large, falcate). Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 RS 

( hooked, straight); lateral lobe with 3 RS (hooked). 

Maxilliped endite with apical seta; palp article 2 with 

2 RS ( small); article 3 with 5 recurved RS (plus 

distal serrate slender seta); article 4 with 5 hooked RS 

(4 large, small); article 5 articulating with article 4, 

distally convex, with 3 RS (2 curved, straight, plus 3 

stiff slender setae). 

Pereopod 1 basis 2 times as long as greatest width; 


with 0 RS; merus inferior margin with 5 RS, set as 

two groups (of 3 and 2), superior distal angle with 2 

RS; carpus 0.4 as long as merus, inferior margin with 



distal lobe, dactylus smoothly curved, .5 as long as 

propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with 2 

RS; merus inferior margin with 6 RS, set as single row 

(weak separation of 4 and 2), superior distal margin 

with 2 acute RS; carpus longer than that of pereopod 

, with inferodistal lobe, inferodistal angle with RS. 

Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 5–7 inferior 

margins of ischium–carpus with long acute RS.

Figure 39. Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. Holotype, A–G, H–I, paratype NIWA 794 . A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, pleonites, 

lateral margin; D, head, dorsal view; E, frons; F, pleotelson, posterior margin, dorsal view; G, sternite 7 showing penial papillae; 

H, antennule; I, antenna; J, antenna peduncle articles –3, ventral view. 




margin with 7 RS (loosely set , 3 and 3), superior distal 

angle with 3 RS, inferior distal angle with 4 RS; merus 

76 

0.8 as long as ischium, 2.4 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 6 RS (as 2 close-set groups of 3 and 


with 7 RS; carpus .0 as long as ischium, 3. times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as and

Figure 40. Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. Paratype NIWA 794 . A, left mandible (broken); B, right mandible (broken) C, mandible 

palp article 3; D, maxillule apex; E, maxilla apex; F, maxilliped articles 2–5; G, maxilliped article 5 (Leica). 


with 6 RS; propodus 0.7 as long as ischium, 4.5 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as 2 and 2), 

superior distal angle with small slender seta, inferior 





narrowly rounded with strongly oblique mesial mar- 

77 

gin, lateral margin weakly concave, mesial margin 

strongly convex, with PMS on distal half; endopod 

2.3 times as long as wide, distally subtruncate, lateral 

margin weakly concave, with PMS on distal half, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal two-thirds; peduncle .4 

times as wide as long, mesial margin with coupling 

hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with straight margins, 

0.7 times as long as endopod, distally narrowly 

rounded. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with distola-

Figure 41. Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. Holotype, except G and H, paratype NIWA 794 . A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; 

D, pleopod ; E, pleopod 2; F, uropod; G, uropod; H, uropod exopod, ventral view. 

78

teral margin not digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 

each with distolateral point; pleopods 2–4 peduncle 

distolateral margin without prominent acute RS. 



Uropod rami apices narrowly rounded. Endopod 

apically not bifid, lateral margin proximally convex 

and distally straight, with prominent excision, positioned 

about three-quarters along ramus, proximal 



extending beyond end of endopod, 3.5 times as long 

as greatest width, apically not bifid; lateral margin 

straight, with 9 RS; mesial margin sinuate, proximally 


femaLe: Similar to the male, but for the sexual characters; 

no ovigerous females present. 

size: Males 3 to 42 mm (mean = 35.5); female 28 to 25 

mm; single manca (with pereopod 7 present but undeveloped) 

22 mm; from a large damaged specimen the 

species may reach an estimated size of up to 6 cm. 

Variation: All four type specimens have received at 

least some damage so it is not possible to quantify the 

range in number of the robust setae. The shape and 

proportion of the uropod rami is consistent between 

specimens. Pleotelson RS potentially ranging from 4 

to 8 (counted as 8+9, 7+9). Uropod exopod mesial 

margin with 4 or 5 RS, lateral margin 8 or 9; uropod 

endopod mesial margin varied from 3 to 6 RS, lateral 

margin 6+3–6, once 7+5. 

The robust setae on the merus of pereopods –3 

present a constant pattern, with pereopod with 3+2 

(all) pereopod 2 4+2 (all) and pereopod 3 merus had 

4+2, 4+3 and 5+2; in the largest specimen (NIWA 7940) 

the RS on pereopod 3 form a continuous row. 

Fresh colour is a rich orange–brown, with dark 

brown eyes; chromatophores not apparent. A conspicuous 

feature of all the freshly caught specimens was the 

dark brown colour of the robust setae on the pereopods, 

uropodal rami and pleotelson. 

remarks: Aegapheles mahana sp. nov. can be identified 

by the following combination of characters: large eyes, 

entirely united and extending almost fully to the anterior 

margin of the head; anteriorly rounded frontal 

lamina; pereopods –3 propodus palm without blade, 

with small distal lobe; inferior margin of pereopod 

merus with 3+2 robust setae, that of pereopods 2 and 

3 with 4+2 robust setae; and the relatively slender and 

distally acute uropodal rami with the exopod extending 

distinctly beyond the posterior of the endopod; and 

the lateral margin of the uropodal endopod with 6 or 7 

setae proximal (or anterior) to the lateral notch. 

79 

Similar species in the region include Aegapheles 

alazon Bruce, 2004, A. kixalles Bruce, 2004 and A. warna 

Bruce, 2004. Aegapheles kixalles, known from the vicinity 

of New Caledonia, is most similar in eye size and 

shape, and in the shape and setation of the pereopods 

and uropods, but is immediately distinguished by 

having a narrow propodal blade on pereopods –3. 

Aegapheles alazon is a widely distributed and sympatric 

species which differs in having smaller eyes with 

a much larger anterior clear field, pereopod 1 usually 

with +2 robust setae on the merus (compared to 3+2) 

and the uropodal endopod has only 2–4 robust setae 

anterior to the lateral notch; in addition the lateral margins 

of the frontal lamina are more strongly convex in 

A. alazon. Aegapheles warna presents a similar pattern of 

setation to the uropods, but the robust setae are larger, 

more numerous and the exopod is wider than that of 

A. mahana, extending only slightly beyond the endopod 

while in A. mahana the exopod extends well beyond 

the endopod apex and is noticeably more slender (3.5 

times as long as wide) than that of A. warna (2.9 times 

as long as wide). 


distribution: Northeastern New Zealand and in the 

vicinity of the Chatham Islands; potentially at depths 

between 365 and 40 metres (some dredge samples 

covered substantial depth ranges up the sides of the 

seamounts). 

etymoLogy: The epithet, mahana, is a Mäori word 

meaning warm, in reference to the volcanic activity of 

these sea mounts. 

Aegapheles rickbruscai (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. 

(Fig. 42) 

Aega rickbruscai Bruce, 2004: 196, figs 40–44, 64. 

materiaL examined: ♂ (44 mm), Cavalli Sea Mount, off 

northern North Island, 34°07.2 ’S, 74°05.64’E, 6 April 

2002, 554–549 m, NZOI stn Z 055, coll. S. O’Shea on 

RV Kaharoa (NIWA 3444). 









convex, smooth, posterior margin with 0 RS. 


lobe; flagellum extending to mid-point of eye. An-

Figure 42. Aegapheles rickbruscai (Bruce, 2004). A, dorsal view; B, head, dorsal view; C, frons; D, maxilliped palp article 5; 

E, maxilla apex; F, pereopod (distal articles); G, pereopod 2 (distal articles); H, pereopod 7; I, antennule; J, uropod. 

80

tenna peduncle article 2 inferior surface with distinct 

longitudinal suture; flagellum extending to posterior 


Frontal lamina flat, longer than greatest width, oval 

(rounded-ovate in shape), anterior margin rounded, 

with small median point, posterior margin not abutting 

clypeus. 


two groups (of 6 and 2), superior distal angle with 6 

RS (long acute); carpus 0.5 as long as merus, inferior 

margin with 0 RS (with distal flange); propodus 1.3 

times as long as proximal width, inferior margin with 

0 RS, propodal palm with large distal lobe, dactylus 

smoothly curved, .6 as long as propodus. Pereopod 2 

merus inferior margin with 2 RS, set as single row, 

superior distal margin with acute RS; carpus similar 



inferior margins of ischium–carpus with long acute 


inferior margins with 4 palmate setae (mesial and lateral 

margins with 5 and 9 respectively); ischium 0.6 as 

long as basis, inferior margin with RS (set as row of 

7 long and 5 short marginal RS), superior distal angle 

with 7 RS, inferior distal angle with 9 RS (2 long and 7 

short); merus 0.8 as long as ischium, .7 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 8 RS (3 long acute and 

short RS and 4 short submarginal RS), superior distal 

angle with 8 RS, inferior distal angle with 7 RS (3 short, 

4 slender and long); carpus 0.9 as long as ischium, 2.8 


as 3 long and 2 short), superior distal angle with 9 RS, 

inferior distal angle with 0 RS; propodus 0.8 as long 


with 5 RS (3 long and 2 short), superior distal angle 

with 7 slender setae (simple and palmate, including 

RS), inferior distal angle with 4 RS. 





Uropod rami apices with endopod narrowly rounded 

and exopod broadly rounded. Endopod apically not 

bifid, lateral margin proximally convex, with prominent 

excision, positioned about three-quarters along 

ramus, proximal lateral margin with 2 RS, distal lateral 

margin with 5 RS, mesial margin weakly convex (appearing 

straight), with 5 RS. Exopod extending beyond 

end of endopod, 2.5 times as long as greatest width, 

apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly convex, with 

RS; mesial margin convex, with 6 RS. 

remarks: Aegapheles rickbruscai can be identified by the 

huge eyes, with very little anterior free space on the 

head, the ovate and anteriorly acute frontal lamina and 

the continuous row of 6+2 robust setae on the inferior 

8 

margin of pereopod , 2– 5 robust setae on the inferior 

margins of the merus of pereopods 2 and 3; pereopods 

5–7 have easily observed long robust setae, the 

uropodal exopod is relatively broad and the posterior 

margins of the pleotelson lack robust setae. 

The most similar species in New Zealand waters is 

A. hamiota, that species being readily distinguished by 

having long, acute robust setae on the superior margins 

of the ischium, merus and carpus of pereopods 5–7. 

A. musorstom, presently known only from the vicinity 

of New Caledonia but may occur more widely, is also 

similar but readily separated by the presence of a conspicuous 

blade on the propodus of pereopods –3. 

distribution: Previously known from the vicinity of 

New Caledonia, the range is here extended southwards 

to New Zealand. 

Aegapheles umpara (Bruce, 2004) comb. nov. 

(Fig. 43) 

Aega umpara Bruce, 2004: 208, figs 49–52, 64.– Poore, 2005: 

7. 

materiaL examined: Specimen, vicinity of Kermadec 

Islands, 30.2530°S, 78.4033°W, 90 m, Challenger Centenary, 

May 994, stn K0837 (NIWA 3479). ♂ (29 mm), 

Lord Howe Rise, 3 °52.28’S, 59° 6.6 ’E, 23 May 2003, 

on Carcharhinus galapagensis, 68–9 m, coll. NORFANZ, 







posterolateral angles free, not overlapped by lateral 

margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson . times as long as 

anterior width, dorsal surface without longitudinal 

carina; lateral margins weakly convex (very), smooth, 

posterior margin with 8 RS. 


lobe; flagellum extending to posterior margin of eye. 

Antenna peduncle article 2 inferior surface without 

distinct longitudinal suture; flagellum extending to 

middle of pereonite 2. 

Frontal lamina flat, longer than greatest width, 

rectangular, anterior margin anteriorly truncate, with 


clypeus. 


two groups (set as and 2), superior distal angle with 

RS (and 2 simple setae); propodus .3 times as long 

as proximal width, inferior margin with 0 RS, propodal 

palm simple, without blade or process, dactylus 

smoothly curved (but strongly recurved), .5 as long

Figure 43. Aegapheles umpara (Bruce, 2004). A, dorsal view; B, head, dorsal view; C, frons; D, pereopod ; antennule; 

E, pereopod 2 (distal articles); F, pereopod 7; G, antennule; H, uropod. 

as propodus. Pereopod 2 merus inferior margin with 5 

RS (set as 3 and 2), set as two groups, superior distal 

margin with 2 acute RS; carpus inferodistal angle 

with RS (minute). Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 

2. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus 

82 

with long acute RS. Pereopod 7 basis 3.5 times as long 

as greatest width, inferior margins with 6–8 palmate 

setae; ischium 0.5 as long as basis, inferior margin with 

6 RS (set as , 3, and ), superior distal angle with 5 

RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; merus 0.7 as long


with 5 RS (set as 2 and 3), superior distal angle with 6 

RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; carpus 0.9 as long 


with 2 RS (single cluster), superior distal angle with 4 

RS, inferior distal angle with 7 RS; propodus 0.7 as long 


with 2 RS, superior distal angle with 2 slender setae 

(palmate), inferior distal angle with 2 RS. 


openings separated by 3.3% of sternal width. 

Uropod peduncle ventrolateral margin with RS 

(and 3 short setae), posterior lobe about two-thirds 

as long as endopod. Uropod rami apices narrowly 


proximally convex (weakly), with prominent excision, 

positioned about two-thirds along ramus, proximal 




greatest width; lateral margin weakly convex, with 8 


4 RS. 

remarks: The characteristic setation of the anterior 

pereopods, which has the distal robust setae on the 

merus notably longer than the preceding robust seta, 

allows ready identification; the sub-rectangular frontal 

lamina, lack of a lobe on the propodal palm of pereopods 

–3, the uropodal exopod not extending beyond 

the endopod and number of robust setae on the uropods 

are further characters by which the species can 

be identified. 

prey: Previously recorded from bony fish, sharks and 

rays (Bruce 2004a); here recorded from the Galapagos 

shark, Carcharhinus galapagensis (Snodgrass & Heller, 

905) (Carcharhinidae). 

distribution: From eastern Australia at Moreton Bay 

and the Solitary Islands to Elizabeth Reef, Norfolk 

Island and the Kermadec Islands; here recorded from 

Lord Howe Rise; depth range is relatively shallow, 

from a few metres to 75 metres, considerably shallower 

than most related species. 

Genus Aegiochus Bovallius, 885 

Aegiochus Bovallius, 885: 4. 

Aega (Ramphion) Brusca, 983: .– Kensley & Schotte, 989: 

6 (key) [type species Aega plebeia Hansen, 897; by 

original designation]. 

type speCies: Type species is Aega nordenskjoldii Bovallius, 

885, by monotypy; junior synonym of A. ventrosa 

M. Sars, 859. Four specimens of A. ventrosa (ZMUC) 

were examined. 

83 


vaulted. Rostral point separating antennule peduncles, 

appearing truncate in dorsal view, ventrally or 

ventrally and posteriorly directed. Eyes present, often 

large, sometimes medially united. Pleonite not 

abruptly narrower than pereonite 7; pleonite 4 with 

lateral margins extending to or beyond posterior margin 

of pleonite 5. Antennule peduncle articles and 2 

cylindrical, not flattened or expanded. Maxillule with 

–3 large broad-based RS, several small RS. Maxilliped 

palp article 5 longer that wide, subtruncate, with long 

setae; endite present. Pereopods –3 merus inferior 

margin with small RS, usually set as two groups. 


about 2 to 4 times as long as wide. Head with eyes, 

often large, may meet at midpoint; anterior margin 

with median (rostral) point. Coxae 4–7 longer than 

respective segment, posteriorly produced. Pleon not 

abruptly narrower than pereon; pleonites all visible, 

not posteriorly widest, pleonite 5 laterally overlapped 

by pleonite 4. 

Frontal lamina present, with free posterior margin 

or with posterior stem. Mandible with uni- or bicuspid 

incisor; molar process present, reduced or absent. Maxillule 

with single large, flat, broad-based RS, several 

small RS. Maxilliped palp 5-articled, article shorter 

than wide, articles 3 and 4 each with 2–6 stout recurved 

RS; endite present, usually with –2 terminal setae. 

Uropod rami with endopod and exopod co-planar, 

rami extending to or slightly beyond pleotelson apex, 

marginal setae in single tier, apices acute. 

remarks: The genus Aegiochus was established by 

Bovallius ( 885) on the basis of a biological misinterpretation. 

The holotype of Aegiochus nordenskjoldii was 

an intermoult specimen, this fact being quickly recognised 

by subsequent workers (e.g. Hansen 890; Sars 

899) who placed the genus into synonymy with Aega. 

The species was also quickly recognised to be a junior 

synonym of Aegiochus ventrosa (as Aega ventrosa). 

Brusca ( 983) recognised that there were two large 

‘groups’ within Aega, and established the subgenera 

Rhamphion and the nominate subgenus. Brusca’s 

subgeneric assignments were based on direct examination 

of 23 species and literature for a further 30 

species (of a then total of about 60 species), with the 

primary basis for distinguishing the two subgenera 

being the presence (or absence) of expanded peduncular 

articles on the antennule, presence or absence 

of a distinct rostrum, and presence or absence of 

recurved ‘spines’ (robust setae) on the ‘apex of the 

maxilliped palp’. Some workers initially followed 

the use of the subgenera (e.g. Bruce 983; Wetzer 

990; Kensley & Schotte 989) but later found that 

critical characters were inconsistently present within

the subgenera and could not apply the subgeneric 

concepts (e.g. Bruce 988, 996, 2004a; Kensley & Chan 

200 ). Notwithstanding, Brusca had recognised an 

evident division within the genus, one that the present 

analysis supports and validates, albeit using different 

and rather more character states. 

Brusca ( 983) was apparently unaware of some 

of the several older and available names that were in 

synonymy with Aega. Aega plebeia, the type species of 

Rhamphion falls within the genus concept and within 

the major clade that contains Aegiochus, so that name 

takes priority. 

Thirty-seven named species are included in the 

genus, those below, and those listed under ‘Species 

included ...’ (p.2 3). 

Key to the new Zealand species of Aegiochus 

Eyes large, medially united ..................................4 

– Eyes separate ..........................................................2 

2. Pleotelson entire .....................................................4 

– Pleotelson with quadrate median excision ........3 

3. Pereopod dactylus .4 times as long as propodus; 

coxae 5–7 dorsally weakly concave, posteriorly 

produced and acute ................................... 

................................................Aegiochus beri (p. 85) 

– Pereopod dactylus .0 times as long as propodus; 

coxae 5–7 dorsally convex, posteriorly 

weakly rounded ..............Aegiochus riwha (p. 4 ) 

4. Rostrum folded ventrally and posteriorly, appearing 

truncate in dorsal view; in contact with or 

overlapping anterior margin of frontal lamina ... 

..................................................................................7 

– Rostrum ventral or ventrally directed, not folded 

posteriorly, appearing subtruncate or absent in 

dorsal view, not overlapping anterior margin of 

frontal lamina .........................................................5 

5. Frontal lamina ventrally flat, pentagonal (‘cirolanid-like’); 

adult males with rostrum extended 

to form prominent process and pereonite with 

paired sub-lateral processes giving tri-horned appearance; 

eyes huge, largely occupying anterior 

margin of head ............Aegiochus vigilans (p. 50) 

– Frontal lamina short, with posterior stem, not 

ventrally flat; males and females without processes 

on head or pereonite ; eyes narrowly joined 

medially ...................................................................6 

6. Eye join medially narrowly (2 or 3 ommatidia); 

pereopods 2 and 3 carpus inferior margin distinctly 

lobed with prominent RS; average size 

approx. 4 mm .............Aegiochus bertrandi (p. 88) 

– Eye join moderately wide (3–5 ommatidia); pereopods 

2 and 3 carpus inferior margin not lobed, 

with only small RS; average size approx. mm 

............................................. Aegiochus coroo (p. 93) 

84 

7. Eyes separate ..........................................................9 

– Eyes medially united .............................................8 

8. Eyes moderate in size, occupying less than 40% 

head length; frontal lamina posterior margin 

concave; posteroventral angles of pereonite 

and coxae 2 and 3 acute, each with posteroventral 

point; appendix masculina straight. ...................... 

............................................Aegiochus kakai (p. 09) 

– Eyes large in size, occupying more than 60% head 

length; frontal lamina posterior margin straight; 

posteroventral angles of pereonite and coxae 2 

and 3 truncate, each without posteroventral point; 

appendix masculina sinuate ................................... 

......................................... Aegiochus kanohi (p. 4) 

9. Frontal lamina with distinct posterior blade; 

pereopod dactylus as long as or longer than 

propodus ............................................................... 0 

– Frontal lamina without distinct posterior blade; 

pereopod dactylus slightly shorter (0.9) than 

propodus .................... Aegiochus insomnis (p. 03) 

0. Pereopods –3 without distinct, triangular distal 

blade ....................................................................... 

– Pereopods –3 with distinct, triangular distal 

blade ...............................Aegiochus piihuka (p. 28) 

. Pleotelson without RS ......................................... 2 

– Pleotelson with 2 or more RS ............................. 3 

2. Adult size ‘small’ (average 7.7 mm males, about 

2.4 mm females); eyes separated by 7% head 

width; uropod endopod mesial margin usually 

with 3 RS; dactylus .4 times as long as propodus 

.............................. Aegiochus gordoni (p. 97) 

– Adult size ‘tiny’ (average 5.4 mm males, about 8.0 

mm females); eyes separated by 6% head width; 

uropod endopod mesial margin with or 2 RS; 

dactylus .2 times as long as propodus ................ 

......................................Aegiochus nohinohi (p. 23) 

3. Eyes large, separated by less than 5% head width; 

pleotelson with 0 or more RS .......................... 4 

– Eyes small, separated by 32% head width; pleotelson 

with 2 RS ...............Aegiochus laevis (p. 20) 

4. Eyes separated by 2% head width; anterior 

pereopods stout, propodus .7 times as long as 

wide; coxae not conspicuous in dorsal view, not 

posteriorly produced ............................................... 

......................................Aegiochus pushkini (p. 34) 

– Eyes separated by 4% head width; anterior 

pereopods slender, propodus 2.9 times as long as 

wide; coxae conspicuous in dorsal view; coxae 6 

and 7 posteriorly produced, acute ......................... 

............................................. Aegiochus tara (p. 46)

Aegiochus beri (Bruce, 983), comb. nov. (Figs 44, 45) 

Aega (Rhamphion) beri Bruce, 1983: 773, figs 11, 12. 

Aega beri.– Bruce, Lew Ton & Poore, 2002: 60.– Springthorpe 

and Lowry, 994: 39. 

materiaL examined: 3 ♂ (32, 23, 8 mm), imm. ♀ ( 9 

mm), east of Lord Howe Island, Tasman Sea, 30°3 .0– 

9.4’S, 6 °54.2–40.6’E, 29 December 975, 2 0 m, coll. 

J.E. Watson on RV Dmitry Mendeleev (NMV J8885). 

♂ (27 mm), 32°26.70’S, 6 °46.95’E, 25 May 2003, 

30– 47 m, coll. NORFANZ, R.V. Tangaroa (NIWA 

23766). ♀ (non-ovig. 2 mm), 34° 2. 8’S, 62°4 . 8’E, 26 

May 2003, 748–772 m, coll. NORFANZ, R.V. Tangaroa 

(NIWA 23767). ♀ ( 9 mm, non-ovig.), off Queensland, 

7° 9’S, 47° ’E, 2 May 986, 406 m, stn 30-2, coll. 

CIDARIS (QM W 3393). 

type LoCaLity: East of Port Jackson, NSW, 33°38.36’S, 

52° 5.09’E, at a depth of 945–972 m. 


dorsal surfaces polished in appearance, sparsely 


ovate. Rostral point folded ventrally and posteriorly. 

Eyes large, not medially united, separated by about 

0% width of head; each eye made up of ~ 6 transverse 

rows of ommatidia, each row with ~8 ommatidia; eye 

colour dark brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with 

posteroventral angle with small distinct produced 

point. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; posterior 

margins convex (weakly), posterolateral angle acute 

(less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite largely concealed 

by pereonite 7; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins 

extending to but not beyond posterior margin of pleonite 

5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not 


0.8 times as long as anterior width, dorsal surface 

without longitudinal carina; lateral margins convex, 

serrate, posterior margin with truncate median excision, 

with 3 RS. 

Antennule peduncle extending to posterior of pereonite 

. Antenna flagellum extending to middle of 

pereonite 3. 

Frontal lamina flat, as wide as long, diamond shaped, 

anterior margin acute, forming median angle, posterior 

margin forming narrow stem. 



0 RS (3 small submarginal simple setae), superior distal 

margin with RS; merus inferior margin with 3 RS, set 

as two groups (minute, set as 2 and ), superior distal 

angle with 0 RS (and simple and plumose setae); 

carpus 0.9 as long as merus, inferior margin with 

RS (minute); propodus 2.3 times as long as proximal 


85 

simple, without blade or process (concave), dactylus 

smoothly curved, .4 as long as propodus. Pereopod 

2 ischium inferior margin with RS, superior distal 

margin with RS; merus inferior margin with 4 RS (set 

as 2+2), set as two groups, superior distal margin with 

0 acute RS; carpus longer than that of pereopod , with 

inferodistal lobe (lobe weak), inferodistal angle with 


inferior margins of ischium–carpus with long acute RS. 

Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 3.0 as 

long as greatest width, inferior margins with 2 palmate 


4 RS (set loosely as 2, and ), superior distal angle with 

7 RS, inferior distal angle with 5 RS; merus .2 as long 


with 4 RS (set singly), superior distal angle with 5 RS, 

inferior distal angle with 8 RS; carpus . as long as 


3 RS (set as and 2), superior distal angle with 4 RS, 

inferior distal angle with 8 RS; propodus 0.9 as long as 


3 RS (set singly), superior distal angle with 3 slender 

setae, inferior distal angle with 4 RS. 

Penes opening flush with surface of sternite 7, or 

short rectangular lobes; penial openings separated by 

4% of sternal width, penial process 0.9 times as long 

as basal width. 


broadly rounded, lateral margin weakly convex, 

mesial margin strongly convex, with PMS on distal 

one-third; endopod 2 times as long as wide, distally 

rounded, lateral margin straight, with PMS on distal 

one-third, mesial margin with PMS on distal one-third; 

peduncle .9 times as wide as long, mesial margin 

with coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina 

with straight margins, 0.8 times as long as endopod. 


not digitate; pleopods 2–4 peduncle distolateral margin 

without prominent acute RS. 


posterior lobe about one-half as long as endopod. Endopod 

apically not bifid, lateral margin straight, without 

prominent excision, proximal lateral margin with 0 RS, 

distal lateral margin with 2 RS, mesial margin weakly 

convex, with 0 RS. Exopod 2.8 times as long as greatest 

width, apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly 



size: Males 8–32 mm, female 9 mm; male holotype 

45.3 mm. 

Variation: The number of robust setae on the pleotelson 

and mesial margin of the uropodal endopod 

are relatively inconsistent, including between the two

Figure 44. Aegiochus beri (Bruce, 983). A, male 32 mm (NMV J8885). A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; 

E, pleonites, lateral view; F, pleotelson posterior margin; G, sternite 7 showing penial position; H, penes. 

86

Figure 45. Aegiochus beri (Bruce, 1983). All figs NMNZ Cr.9260. A–C, pereopods 1, 2 and 7 respectively; D, pleopod 1; 

E, pleopod 2; F, uropod; G, uropod exopod, ventral view. 

87

sides of the one specimen. The pleotelson has – 6 

RS (with the largest male having the least setae). Uropod 

endopod mesial margin 7– 2 RS (mean 9), lateral 

margin always 2 RS; uropod exopod mesial margin 5 

or 6 RS, lateral margin 2 or 5 RS. 

The robust setae on the inferior margin of the merus 

are minute, and it was not possible to obtain accurate 

counts under the stereomicroscope. 

The holotype, the largest known specimen, was 

described as having the penial openings flush with 

sternite 7. There are three males in the present material, 

the largest of these with the penes forming short 

rectangular lobes, as illustrated. The smaller males 

have the penial openings flush. Whether this is related 

to age or sexual maturity is unclear. 

remarks: Aegiochus beri is one of two species in the region 

that have the apex of the pleotelson with a distinct 

rectangular notch. Aegiochus beri is further characterised 

by the following combination of characters: large 

but separate eyes, elongate coxae on pereonites 6 and 

7, the diamond-shaped frontal lamina with a distinct 

posterior stem, the relatively long dactylus on pereopods 

–3 (pereopod dactylus is .4 times as long as 

the propodus) and the straight appendix masculina 

which has a narrowly rounded blunt apex. 

The most similar species is Aegiochus riwha sp. 

nov. (p. 4 ), which is easily distinguished by having 

a much shorter dactylus on pereopods –3 (pereopod 

dactylus is .0 times as long as the propodus v. .4 

times as long for A. beri), coxae without acute points, 

the shorter coxae on pereonites 5–7 and males with a 

weakly spatulate appendix masculina. 

prey: Not known. 

distribution: Previously recorded off southeastern 

Australia. Present material from the Tasman Sea, east of 

Lord Howe Island and from the Coral Sea off Queensland. 

At depths between 748 and 406 metres. 

Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov. (Figs 46–48) 

materiaL examined: All material from southwest of New 

Caledonia, vicinity of Norfolk Ridge. 

Holotype: ♂ ( 6.0 mm), Norfolk Ridge, 9°04.0’S, 

63°27.50’E, 8 September 985, 260 m, MUSORSTOM 

IV, stn 0 84 (MNHN Is. 5903). 

Paratypes: 2 ♂ ( 2.3, 4.8 [dissected] mm), Norfolk 

Ridge, 24°42.26’S, 68°09.52’E, 27 October 986, 230 m, 

CHALCAL II, DW7 , coll. B. Richer de Forges (MNHN 

Is.5907). ♂ ( 5. mm), 20°4 .80’S, 67°00.20’E, 4 February 

989, 282 m, MUSORSTOM VI, DW399, coll. B. 

Richer de Forges (MNHN Is.5906). ♂ ( 3.4 mm), Banc 

Kaimon–Maru, Norfolk Ridge, 24°43’S, 68°09’E, 22 

June 200 , 227–232 m, NORFOLK , DW 676, coll. 

88 

Lazouet, Bouchet, Richer de Forges, N.O. Alis (MNHN 

Is.5902). ♀ (non-ovig. 2.8 mm), Banc Kaimon–Maru, 

Norfolk Ridge, 24°44’S, 68° 0’E, 22 June 200 , 228–240 

m, NORFOLK , CP 68 , coll. Lazouet, Boisselier, 

Richer de Forges, N.O. Alis (MNHN Is.5900). ♂ ( 8.0 

mm), Norfolk Ridge, 22°56.0’S, 67°20.0’E, 30 August 

985, 300 m, MUSORSTOM IV, 0227 (MNHN Is. 

5905). ♀ (ovig. 6.0 mm), Norfolk Ridge, 22°48.03’S, 

67°29.03’E, 2 May 993, 299–302 m, BATHUS 2, 

DW727, coll. B. Richer de Forges, N.O. Alis (MNHN 

Is.5899). 2 ♂ ( 4.4, 5.8 [telson damaged] mm), Norfolk 

Ridge, 23°4 .2’S, 68°00.5’E, 7 September 989, 280 

m, SMIB 5, DW76, coll. B. Richer de Forges (NIWA 

24007). ♀ (non-ovig. 5.2 mm), Norfolk Ridge, 23°38’S, 

67°42’E, 22 May 989, 448 m, SMIB 3, DW 3, coll. B. 

Richer de Forges (MNHN Is.5904). ♀ (ovig. 5.4 mm), 

Norfolk Ridge, 23°4 .5’S, 67°59.4’E, 23 May 989, 338 

m, SMIB 3, DW 8, coll. B. Richer de Forges, N. Vauban 

(MNHN Is.590 ). 

Other material (equivocal): ♀ (ovig. 5.6 mm), 

Norfolk Ridge, 22°20.0’S, 68°42.3’E, 3 September 

989, 255 m, SMIB 5, DW93, coll. B. Richer de Forges 

(MNHN Is.5908). 2, Lagon du nord, DW 074, 9°50.8’S, 

64°00.6’E, 28 m (MNHN Is.5909). 

desCription: Body dorsal surfaces smooth or polished 

in appearance, widest at pereonite 5, lateral margins 

weakly ovate. Rostral point ventrally directed. Eyes 

large, medially united, anterior clear field 21% length 

of head, posterior clear field 79% length of head; each 

eye made up of ~ 2 transverse rows of ommatidia, 

each row with ~7 ommatidia; eye colour pale brown. 


right-angled. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; 

posterior margins concave, posterolateral angle acute 

(less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite visible in dorsal 


to but not beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; 

pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped 

by lateral margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson 0.9 

times as long as anterior width, dorsal surface without 

longitudinal carina; lateral margins weakly convex, 

serrate, posterior margin converging to caudomedial 


Antennule peduncle articles 3 and 4 .03 times as 

long as combined lengths of articles and 2, article 3 

2.7 times as long as wide; flagellum with 13 articles, 

extending to posterior of pereonite . Antenna peduncle 

article 4 .5 times as long as wide, 0.7 times as long 

as combined lengths of articles –3, inferior margin 0 

plumose setae, and 0 short simple setae (anterodistal 

angle 5 simple + plumose); article 5 .5 times as long 

as article 4, 2.3 times as long as wide, inferior margin 

with palmate seta (at distal angle), anterodistal angle 

with cluster of 3 short simple setae; flagellum with 19 

articles, extending to pereonite 4.

Figure 46. Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov. A–H, holotype, remainder male paratype ( 4.8 mm, MNHN Is. 5907). A, dorsal view; 

B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons, anterior view; E, frons, ventral view; F, penial processes; G, antennule; H, antenna peduncle; 

I, pleonites, lateral view; J, sternite 7; K, pleotelson posterior margin. 

89

Figure 47. Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov. Male paratype ( 4.8 mm, MNHN Is. 5907). A, maxilliped; B, maxilliped articles 3–5; 

C, maxilla apex; D, maxillule apex; E, pereopod ; F, pereopod 2; G, pereopod 7. 

90

Figure 48. Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov. Male paratype ( 4.8 mm, MNHN Is. 5907). A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; E, uropod 

exopod, ventral view; F, uropod, dorsal view. 

Frontal lamina flat, as wide as long, diamond shaped 

or posteriorly rounded, anterior margin acute, without 


clypeus or forming narrow stem. 

Mandible molar process present, small distinct flat 

lobe. Maxillule with 4 terminal RS ( large, 3 slender; 

small triangular spines proximal to RS). Maxilla mesial 

9 

lobe with 3 RS ( hooked; 2 straight, serrate); lateral lobe 

with 3 RS. Maxilliped endite with 0 apical setae; palp 

article 2 with 2 RS (small); article 3 with 2 recurved RS 

(and 4 straight RS); article 4 with 4 hooked RS; article 

5 with 3 RS (all straight; serrate, 2 simple). 


ischium 0.4 times as long as basis, inferior margin with


margin with 2 RS, set as two groups, superior distal 

angle with 0 RS (2 simple setae); carpus . as long as 

merus, inferior margin with RS; propodus .8 times 

as long as proximal width, inferior margin with RS 

(distal), propodal palm simple, without blade or process, 

dactylus smoothly curved, . as long as propodus. 


distal margin with 2 RS; merus inferior margin with 

4 RS, set as two groups, superior distal margin with 0 

acute RS (3 simple setae); inferodistal angle with RS. 



similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 2.9 times as 

long as greatest width, inferior margins with 9 palmate 



RS, inferior distal angle with 2 RS; merus .2 as long 


with 4 RS (set as 2 and 2), superior distal angle with 9 

RS, inferior distal angle with 5 RS; carpus .0 as long 

as ischium, 3. times as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 3 RS (set as and 2), superior distal angle with 

2 RS, inferior distal angle with 8 RS; propodus .0 


margin with 6 RS (set as , , 2 and 2), superior distal 

angle with 2 slender setae (and RS and palmate 

seta), inferior distal angle with 3 RS. 





weakly convex (proximally angled), with PMS on 

distal two-thirds; endopod .8 times as long as wide, 

distally rounded, lateral margin straight, with PMS on 

distal margin only, mesial margin with PMS on distal 

half; peduncle .8 times as wide as long, mesial margin 

with 6 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina 

basally swollen, 0.9 times as long as endopod, distally 

acute. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with distolateral 

margin digitate (prominent, acute); endopods of pleopods 

3–5 each with distolateral point; pleopods 2–4 

peduncle distolateral margin with prominent acute RS. 



Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin straight, without 

prominent excision, proximal lateral margin with 

RS, distal lateral margin with 2 RS, mesial margin 

weakly convex, with 5 RS. Exopod not extending to end 

of endopod, 3.0 as long as greatest width, apically not 

bifid; lateral margin weakly convex, with 10 RS; mesial 

margin straight, distally convex, with 4 RS. 

femaLe: As for the male, but lacking sexual characters. 

92 

size: Males 2.3– 8.0 mm (mean = 5.0, n = 8), ovi- 

gerous females 5.4– 6.0 mm, non-ovigerous 2.8 and 

5.2 mm. 

Variation: Pleotelson (n = 2) always without RS. Uropod 

(n = 24, all margins) exopod mesial margin usually 

with 3 (8%) or 4 (92%) RS, lateral margin with 9 (each 

42%) or 0 (each 50%) RS ( occurring on one specimen); 

uropod endopod mesial margin with 4 ( 7%) or 

5 (83%) RS (one specimen with 3), lateral margin with 

+ ( 00%) RS. 

remarks: Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov. is best identified 

by the narrowly united eyes, weak rostral point in dorsal 

view, anteriorly acute frontal lamina, small robust 

setae on pereopod , the inferior margin of the carpus of 

pereopods 2 and 3 distinctly lobed with one prominent 

robust seta, pleopodal exopods with digitate margins, 

relatively wide and serrated pleotelson that lacks robust 

setae, pleotelson posterior margins converging to 

a distinct sub-acute apical point, and the characteristic 

shape and setation of the uropodal rami. 

This species is very similar to the sympatric Aegiochus 

coroo Bruce, 983, but differs consistently in a 

number of characters, including larger robust setae on 

pereopods –3, a distinct lobe on the inferior margin of 

the carpus of pereopods 2 and 3, narrower eye join (as 

few as two ommatidia), narrower pleotelson posterior 

margin, narrower (or more acute) uropod endopod 

which extends beyond the pleotelson, the uropodal 

endopod mesial margin has five robust setae (three 

or four in A. coroo) and the most distal notch on the 

uropodal exopod lateral margin always has a robust 

seta (slender setae only in A. coroo); A. bertrandi is also 

larger (male average length 5.0 mm) than A. coroo 

(male average length .4 mm). The counts for uropodal 

robust setae do not differ much between the two 

species but the differences are consistent. 

distribution: Not recorded from New Zealand nearshore 

waters to date, but is present within the northern 

New Zealand chart area (CANZ 997). The most southerly 

record is at 24°44’S on the Norfolk Ridge, most 

northerly at 9°S in the vicinity of New Caledonia; it 

is quite probable that the species is more widespread 

in the region. At depths of 230 to 448 metres. 

etymoLogy: Named for Dr Bertrand Richer de Forges, 

recognising his superb efforts in developing collections 

of marine invertebrates from the southwestern 

Pacific and his contribution to taxonomy of the decapod 

crustaceans.

Aegiochus coroo (Bruce, 983), comb. nov. 

(Figs 49–5 ) 

Aega (Rhamphion) coroo Bruce, 1983: 770, figs 9, 10. 

Aega coroo. Springthorpe & Lowry, 994: 43. – Bruce, Lew 

Ton & Poore, 2003: 6 . 

materiaL examined: New Zealand. ♂ ( 2.0 mm), ♀ 

(ovig. 2.5 mm), northwest of Taranaki, 38°37.99’S, 

72°40.99’E, 28 March 968, E908, 256 m (NIWA 24006). 

New caledonia and Norfolk ridge. 4 ♂ (8.5, 0.3, .7 

[drawn dissected], 3.0 mm), 4 ♀ (ovig. 2.5, non-ovig. 

4.2, 4. , 0.4 mm), Banc Eponge, Norfolk Ridge, 

24°56’S, 68°22’E, 23 June 200 , 533–545 m, NORFOLK 

, DW 688, coll. Lazouet, Boisselier, Richer de Forges, 

N.O. Alis (MNHN Is.5925). ♀ (non-ovig. 4.5 mm), 

Coral Sea, 20°06.084–0.6. 85’S, 60°23.544–22.835’E, 20 

October 2005, 490–550 m, DW26 9, (MNHN Is.59 9). 

♂ (9.0 mm), Norfolk Ridge, 24°06.960–0.6. 2’S, 

59°4 .270–4 .500’E, 8 October 2005, 350–400 m, 

DW2520, coll. (MNHN Is.59 8). ♂ ( 2.8 mm), Norfolk 

Ridge, 22°53’S, 67° 2’E, 28 June 200 , 403–429 m, 

NORFOLK , DW 734, coll. Lazouet, Bouchet, Richer 

de Forges, N.O. Alis (MNHN Is.5927). ♂ ( .5 mm), ♀ 

(ovig. 3.5 mm), Banc Eponge, Norfolk Ridge, 24°55’S, 

68°22’E, 23 June 200 , 508–54 m, NORFOLK , 

DW 684, coll. Lazouet, Bouchet, Richer de Forges, N.O. 

Alis (MNHN Is.5926 [small tube with female]). ♂ ( .0 

mm), Banc Branchiopode, Norfolk Ridge, 234°28’S, 

67°5 ’E, 2 October 2003, 37 m, NORFOLK 2, stn 2024 

(MNHN Is. 59 5). ♂ ( .5 mm), 24°56’S, 68°2 ’E, 2 

May 987, 505 m, SMIB 3, DW6, coll. Richer de Forges, 

N.O. Vauban (MNHN Is. 5944). solomon Islands. ♂ 

(~ 3 mm), 09°46.4’S, 60°52.3’E, 7 October 200 , 254– 

28 m, SALOMON , DW 856, coll. N.O. Alis (MNHN 

Is.5920). Indonesia. ♂ ( 2.5 mm), (non-ovig. 2.2 mm), 

Tanimbar Islands, 07°59’S, 33°02’E, 20 October 99 , 

84– 86 m, KARUBAR, DW50, coll. N.O. Baruna Jaya 

(MNHN Is.5922). ♂ ( .5 mm), Kai Islands, 057° 8’S, 

32°38’E, 24 October 99 , 246 m, KARUBAR, DW 4, 

coll. N.O. Baruna Jaya (MNHN Is. 592 ). 

Additional material. Southwest of New Caledonia, 

vicinity of Norfolk ridge. 5, 24°55’S, 68°22’E, 505– 

5 5 m, BIOCAL, DW66 (MNHN Is.5937). , 22° 5’S, 

67° 5’E, 440 m, BIOCAL, DW77 (MNHN Is.5936). 

3, 20°35’S, 66°54’E, 460 m, BIOCAL, DW83 (MNHN 

Is.5938). , 22°49.32’S, 66°44.68’E, 300–370 m, BATHUS 

2, DW73 (MNHN Is.5952). , 24°54’S, 68°2 ’E, 540– 

570 m, BERyx , CP08 (MNHN Is.595 ). , 24°52’S, 

68°22’E, 635–680 m, BERyx , DW09 (MNHN 

Is.5949). 4, 24°53’S, 68°2 ’E, 565–600 m, BERyx , 

DW 0 (MNHN Is.5950). , 24°44.6’S, 68°09.3’E, 230 

m, CHALCAL II, CP20 (MNHN Is.59 7). , 24°54.00’S, 

68°2 .0 ’E, 500 m, CHALCAL II, CP2 (MNHN 

Is.59 6). 20, 24°54.5’S, 68°22.3’E, 527 m. CHALCAL 

II, DW72 (NIWA 24005). , 9°04.0’S, 63°27.5’E, 

93 

260 m, MUSORSTOM IV, 0 84 (MNHN Is.5932). , 

22°5 .3’S, 67° 2.0’E, 405–430 m, MUSORSTOM IV, 

02 3 (MNHN Is.5933). , 22°52.5’S, 67° .8’E, 390–420 

m, MUSORSTOM IV, 0230 (MNHN Is.5934). 5, 24°56’S, 

68°22’E, 520 m, SMIB 3, DW (MNHN Is.5943). , 

24°53’S, 68°22’E, 530–537 m, SMIB 3, DW2 (MNHN 

Is.5945). 2, 24°55’S, 68°22’E, 5 3 m, SMIB 3, DW3 

(MNHN Is.5946). , 24°55’S, 68°22’E, 502–5 2 m, SMIB 

3, DW5 (MNHN Is.594 ). , 24°55.2’S, 68°2 .7’E, 5 – 

522 m, SMIB 8, DW 46 (MNHN Is.5947). 2, 24°55. ’S, 

68°2 .6’E, 5 0 m, SMIB 8, DW 48 (MNHN Is.5948). 

further lots from the region, not listed individually, 

MNHN, not registered). Eastern Australia. , northern 

Queensland, 7°53’S, 46°53’E, 96 m (QM W 8823). , 

southern Queensland, 28° 7.47’S, 58°37.89’E, 4 9 m 

(AM P74739). 5, East of Nobby’s Head, NSW, 32°53’S, 

52°35’E, 75 m, (AM P37503). , east of Long Reef, 

NSW, K85- 2-08, 9 December 985, 74 m, (AM 

P43977). , east of Long Reef Point, NSW, 33°46’S, 

5 °43’E, 75 m, (AM P375 0). 7, East of Long Reef 

Point, NSW, 33°43–44’S, 5 °46’E, 74 m, (AM P37506). 

, southeast of Moruya Point, NSW, 35°58’–36°03’S, 

50°30–27’E, 384 m, (AM P37522). 3, off Merimbula, 

NSW, 36°52.5’S, 50° 8. ’E, 52 m (AM P45309). , 

east of Bermagui coast, NSW, 37°26.5’S, 50° 7.0’E, 

coll. CSIRO (AM P375 3). 4, ‘7-5 50 (AM P375 9). , 

off Bermagui, SS 05/94/ 56, 5 September 994, 46 

m (AM P43969). 4, east of Bermagui, NSW, 37°25.2’S, 

50° 8.5’E, 220 m (AM P453 0). , transect east of Bermagui, 

NSW, 36°22.6’S, 50° 4.9’E, 8 September 994, 

277 m (AM P44 50). 

type LoCaLity: Off Sydney, New South Wales, 33°59’S, 

5 °35’E. 


dorsal surfaces polished in appearance, widest at 

pereonite 5, lateral margins subparallel. Rostral point 

ventrally directed. Eyes large, medially united, anterior 

clear field 23% length of head, posterior clear field 45% 

length of head; each eye made up of ~ 2 transverse 


colour dark brown, or pale brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 

2–3 each with posteroventral angle right-angled. Coxae 

5–7 with entire oblique carina; posterior margins concave, 

posterolateral angle acute (less than 45°). Pleon 

with pleonite visible in dorsal view; pleonite 4 with 

posterolateral margins extending to but not beyond 


angles free, not overlapped by lateral margins of 



convex, serrate, posterior margin converging to 

caudomedial point, with 0 RS. 


. Antenna flagellum extending to pereonite 4.

Figure 49. Aegiochus coroo (Bruce, 983). Male ( .7 mm, MNHN Is. 5925). A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frontal 

lamina, anterior view; E, frons, ventral view; F, penial processes; G, sternite 7; H, pleonites, lateral view; I, pleotelson posterior 

margin. 

Frontal lamina flat, as wide as long, diamond shaped 

or posteriorly rounded (depending on perspective), 

anterior margin acute, without small median point, 

posterior margin forming narrow stem. 

Mandible molar process present, minute. Maxillule 

with 3 terminal RS ( large, 2 slender; small triangular 

spines proximal to RS). Maxilla mesial lobe with 3 RS (2 

serrate, simple); lateral lobe with 3 RS. Maxilliped endite 

with apical seta; palp article 2 with 2 RS (straight); 

article 3 with recurved RS (weakly recurved and 2 

94 

straight RS); article 4 with 4 hooked RS; article 5 with 

2 RS ( large, serrate; slender, simple). 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 0 RS ( slender seta); 

merus inferior margin with 0 RS, superior distal angle 

with 0 RS ( slender seta); carpus .0 as long as merus, 

inferior margin with 0 RS (2 small nodules); propodus 


with 0 RS, propodal palm simple, without blade or

Figure 50. Aegiochus coroo (Bruce, 983). Male ( .7 mm, MNHN Is. 5925). A, maxilliped; B, maxilla apex; C, maxilliped articles 

3–5; D, maxillule apex; E, pereopod ; F, pereopod 2; G, pereopod 2 merus; H, pereopod 3, distal articles; I, pereopod 7. 

process, dactylus smoothly curved, .3 as long as propodus. 

Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with 0 RS, 

superior distal margin with 0 RS ( stiff seta); merus 

inferior margin with 3 RS, set as two groups ( +2), 

95 

superior distal margin with 0 acute RS (2 stiff setae); 

carpus similar in size to that of pereopod , inferodistal 

angle with RS (and 2 distinct nodules). Pereopod 3 

similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins

Figure 51. Aegiochus coroo (Bruce, 983). Male ( .7 mm, MNHN Is.5925). A, pleopods ; B pleopod 2; C, uropod, dorsal view; 

D, uropod exopod, ventral view. 

of ischium–carpus with short RS. Pereopod 6 similar 


greatest width, inferior margins with 8 palmate setae; 



distal angle with 2 RS; merus .6 as long as ischium, 2.9 


and 2), superior distal angle with 8 RS, inferior distal 

angle with 5 RS; carpus .6 as long as ischium, 3.2 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set singly), 


with 5 RS; propodus .3 as long as ischium, 4.2 times 


superior distal angle with slender seta, inferior distal 

angle with 3 RS. 




broadly rounded, lateral margin straight, mesial 

margin strongly convex, with PMS from distal half; 

endopod .6 times as long as wide, distally rounded, 

96 

lateral margin straight, with PMS on distal margin only, 



hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with straight 

margins, 0.8 times as long as endopod, distally narrowly 

rounded. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with 

distolateral margin digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 

each with distolateral point; pleopods 2–5 peduncle 

distolateral margin with prominent acute RS. 



Uropod rami extending beyond pleotelson (just a little). 

Endopod apically sub-bifid, mesial process prominent, 

lateral margin straight, without prominent excision, 

proximal lateral margin with RS, distal lateral margin 

with 2 RS, mesial margin weakly convex, with 4 

RS. Exopod not extending to end of endopod, 2.4 times 

as long as greatest width, apically sub-bifid, lateral 

process prominent; lateral margin weakly convex, 

with 9 RS; mesial margin straight, distally convex, 

with 3 RS.

size: Males 8.5– 3.0 mm (mean = .4, n = 3), ovigerous 

females 2.5– 3.50 mm, non-ovigerous 2.2– 4.5 

mm (mean = 3.8, n = 5). 

Variation: Pleotelson (n = 6) always without RS. Uropod 

(n = 32, all margins) exopod mesial margin usually 

with 2 ( 6%) or 3 (8 %) RS (4 once), lateral margin with 

8 or 9 (each 47%) RS (7 and 0 each occurring once); 

uropod endopod mesial margin with 4 (94%) RS (one 

specimen with 3), lateral margin with + (3 %) or 

+2 (69%) RS. 

remarks: Aegiochus coroo is a wide-ranging species, 

apparently common, at first glance similar to several 

other small species of the genus. The digitate pleopod 

exopods immediately separate it from most other 

Aegiochus species. Within that group of small-sized 

species that have digitate pleopods A. coroo is readily 

identified by the medially united eyes, lack of a rostral 

point in dorsal view, anteriorly acute frontal lamina, 

pereopod devoid of robust setae, small robust setae 

on pereopods 2 and 3, relatively wide serrated pleotelson 

posterior margin which lacks robust setae, and 

the characteristic shape and setation of the uropodal 

rami. The pleotelson is evenly serrated and typically 

there are, on either side, two sub-lateral notches that 

are a little wider than the remainder, each bearing 

three setae within the notch. Care is need in assessing 

the shape of the frontal lamina, which can appear 

posteriorly rounded or diamond-shaped depending 

on perspective. 

There are a few points of difference to the description 

given by Bruce ( 983). The present description corrects 

these and provides more detail for the pereopods, 

some mouthparts and the uropods. Bruce ( 983) stated 

that the vasa deferentia opened flush with the ventral 

surface of sternite 7; on the larger males examined here 

it is evident that a pair of low papillae is present. The 

figure of maxilliped palp (Bruce 1983, fig. 9k) omits article 

5, and that is here fully illustrated. There are some 

minor differences in details of setation, attributable 

to perspective and differences in microscope resolution. 

In all significant characters, the present material 

agrees well with the description and figures of Bruce 

( 983) and the species presents a consistent appearance 

throughout its geographical range. 

The sympatric species, Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov., 

is very similar, but has noticeably narrower join between 

the eyes, more slender uropodal endopod, more 

strongly angular pleotelson, larger robust setae on the 

inferior margins of pereopod –3, the inferior margin 

of the carpus of pereopods 2 and 3 is lobate, and the 

mesial margin of the uropodal endopod consistently 

has five robust setae (as opposed to consistently four 

97 

in A. coroo). The two species are otherwise nearly 

identical, and care is needed in identification. Other 

similar species in the New Zealand region are A. kakai 

sp. nov. and A. kanohi sp. nov., both of similar size to 

A. coroo, both with large, medially united eyes. Both 

these species have a blade-like frontal lamina, robust 

setae on the pleotelson and pleopods –3 exopods are 

not digitate. Those other New Zealand species which 

do have digitate pleopods all have separate eyes. 


distribution: Northern New Zealand, New Caledonia, 

Solomon Islands, eastern Australia, also Indian Ocean, 

Arafura Sea at Kei and Tanimbar Islands; potentially 

widespread in the western Pacific; recorded depths of 

230 to 600 metres in the Pacific; most shallow at 184 

metres in Indonesia. 

Aegiochus gordoni sp. nov. (Figs 52–55) 

materiaL: Holotype: ♂ (7.6 mm), Chatham Rise, 

42°45.89’S, 79°59. 6’W, 9 April 200 , 800–757 m, coll. 


Paratypes: 4 ♂ (7.5, 8.0, 8. dissected, 2.5 mm), 35 

♀ ( 3 ovig .0– 3.3 mm, 22 non-ovig. 8.0– 5.0 mm), 

same data as holotype (NIWA 23873). ♂ (7.5 mm), 7 

♀ (ovig. 0.5, .5, 2.2, 2.5 broken, non-ovig .0, 

2.5 mm), manca (6.5 mm), Chatham Rise, 42°45.76’S, 

79°59.29’W, 6 April 200 , 064–750 m, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 23874). 

Unmeasured. , Rumble V Sea Mount, 36°8.48–79’S, 

78° .70–53’E, 24 May 200 , 755–360 m, coll. RV 

Tangaroa (NIWA 23878); 2, Rumble V sea mount, 24 

May 200 , 36°8.07–40’S, 78° 2.07– .8 ’E, 40–698 

m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23879). chatham rise: , 

42°45.93’S, 79°59.34’W, 5 April 200 , 875–757 m, coll. 

R.V Tangaroa (NIWA 23875); , 42°45.68’S, 79°59.33’W, 

2 April 200 , 920–77 m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 

23876); 4, 42°42.84’S, 79°57.5 ’W, 8 April 200 , 980– 

893 m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23877); , J 2/7/85, 

rock cavities (NMNZ Cr. 2020); , 42.7 58–7 52°S, 

80.0378–0352°E, 4 June 2006, 985– 050 m, (NIWA 

25667). 


dorsal surfaces polished in appearance, widest at pereonite 

5, lateral margins ovate. Rostral point folded 

ventrally and posteriorly. Eyes large, not medially 

united, separated by about 7% width of head; each 

eye made up of ~ 2 transverse rows of ommatidia, 

each row with ~8 ommatidia; eye colour dark brown. 


right-angled. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina;

Figure 52. Aegiochus gordoni sp. nov. A–F, holotype, remainder male paratype (8. mm, NIWA 23873). A, dorsal view; B, lateral 

view; C, head; D, frons, ventral view; E, frontal lamina and rostrum, anterior view; pleotelson, posterior margin; F, sternite 7 

showing penial openings; G, pleotelson margins; H, antennule (distal flagellar articles missing); I, antenna peduncle. 

98

Figure 53. Aegiochus gordoni sp. nov. Male paratype (8. mm, NIWA 23873). A, mandible (broken); B, mandible palp article 

3; C, maxillule; D, maxillule apex; E, maxilla ; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped articles 2–5. 

posterior margins straight, posterolateral angle blunt 

(coxae 5 and 6, more than 45°) and acute (coxa 7, acute 

less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite largely concealed 


not extending to posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 



long as anterior width, dorsal surface without longitudinal 

carina; lateral margins convex, serrate (finely), 

posterior margin converging to caudomedial point, 

with 0 RS. 



99 


extending to pereonite 2. Antenna peduncle article 4 .9 

times as long as wide, 0.7 times as long as combined 

lengths of articles –3, inferior margin 2 plumose setae, 

and 4 short simple setae; article 5 .4 times as long as 

article 4, 2.8 times as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 3 palmate setae, anterodistal angle with cluster of 

2 short simple setae (and 2 pappose setae); flagellum 

with articles, extending to posterior of pereonite 3. 

Frontal lamina posterior margin free, downwardly 

projecting, blade-like, wider than long, triangular, anterior 

margin acute, forming median angle, posterior 

margin not abutting clypeus.

Figure 54. Aegiochus gordoni sp. nov. Male paratype (8. mm, NIWA 23873). A–E, pereopods –3, 6 and 7 respectively. 


lobe; palp article 2 with 3 distolateral setae (large serrate 

and 2 simple), palp article 3 with 6 setae (all serrate). 

Maxillule with 5 terminal RS (4 slender, large). 

Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 RS ( strongly serrate, 

hooked); lateral lobe with 3 RS. Maxilliped endite with 

0 apical setae; palp article 2 with 2 RS; article 3 with 3 

recurved RS (slender); article 4 with 4 hooked RS (and 

small slender; unevenly spaced with proximal 3 distal); 

article 5 with 4 RS (straight, of which serrate). 



with 0 RS, superior distal margin with RS; merus 

00 

inferior margin with RS (proximal, and long distal 

seta), superior distal angle with 0 RS (2 slender setae); 

carpus 0.9 as long as merus, inferior margin with RS; 

propodus 2. times as long as proximal width, inferior 

margin with 2 RS (small, close-set), propodal palm 

simple, without blade or process, dactylus smoothly 

curved, .4 as long as propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium 

inferior margin with 0 RS, superior distal margin with 

RS; merus inferior margin with 4 RS (distal RS large, 

remainder minute), set as two groups, superior distal 

margin with 2 acute RS; carpus longer than that of pereopod 

, with inferodistal lobe, inferodistal angle with 

RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2 (RS on merus

Figure 55. Aegiochus gordoni sp. nov. Male paratype (8. mm, NIWA 23873). A–E, pleopods –5 respectively; F, uropod; G 

uropod endopod apex; H, uropod exopod apex; I, proximal robust seta, uropod endopod mesial margin. 

0

and carpus larger, 5 RS on inferior margin of carpus). 

Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus with 

short RS. Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7 (shorter, 

with more and longer RS; carpus inferior margin with 

+ 2 RS). Pereopod 7 basis 2.8 times as long as greatest 

width, inferior margins with 9 palmate setae; ischium 



angle with 2 RS (small); merus .3 as long as ischium, 

2.5 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS 

(set as and ), superior distal angle with 3 RS, inferior 

distal angle with 2 RS; carpus .5 as long as ischium, 

3.3 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS 

(single cluster), superior distal angle with 9 RS (many 

biserrate), inferior distal angle with 6 RS; propodus .3 


margin with 2 RS (single cluster), superior distal angle 

with 4 slender setae ( RS, plumose and 2 simple), 






lateral margin weakly convex, mesial margin strongly 

convex, with PMS on distal half, with ~36 PMS; endopod 

.9 times as long as wide, distally rounded, lateral 

margin convex, with PMS on distal half, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal one-third, endopod with 

~2 PMS; peduncle .9 times as wide as long, mesial 

margin with 7 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 exopod with 

~43 PMS, endopod with ~27 PMS; appendix masculina 

with straight margins, .2 times as long as endopod 

(extending beyond distal margin of ramus), distally 

narrowly rounded. Pleopod 3 exopod with ~48 PMS, 

endopod with ~ 3 PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod with ~42 

PMS, endopod with ~8 PMS. Pleopod 5 exopod with 

~38 PMS. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with distolateral 

margin digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 

each without distolateral point; pleopods 2–4 peduncle 



posterior lobe about one-half as long as endopod. Endopod 

apically shallowly bifid, lateral margin proximally 

convex, without prominent excision, proximal lateral 

margin with 0 RS, distal lateral margin with RS, mesial 

margin straight, with 3–4 RS. Exopod extending to 


apically sub-bifid, mesial process prominent; lateral 

margin convex, with 8 RS; mesial margin convex, with 

3 RS. 

femaLe: Similar to males, but wider (2. times as long as 

greatest width at pereonite 6); the pleon is proportionally 

shorter ( 8% BL) than in the male (2 % BL). 

02 

size: Average lengths of type material: males 7.7 mm (n 

= 6), ovigerous females 2.0 mm (n = 6), non-ovigerous 

females 2.8 mm (n = 22); emergent mancas measured 

3.0–4.3 mm, and eggs measured .4– .6 mm. 

Variation: Robust setae: (n = 5) pleotelson always 

without RS. Uropod exopod mesial margin 3 (50%) 

or 4 (40%), 2 and 5 occurring, lateral margin 9 (83%), 

0 RS occurring once, 8 RS 3 times (possibly owing 

to damage); uropod endopod mesial margin with 2 

(20%) or 3 (73%) 4 and 5 occurring once each, lateral 

margin with only large RS distal to the pappose seta. 

There is no discernable difference between males and 

females. The most distal robust setae are often very 

fine and occasionally absent, accounting for most of 

the observed variation. 

The lateral margin of the uropodal endopod has 

a small robust seta set inside the bifid apex. This seta 

is largely obscured by the apical slender setae, and 

proved to be too small to observe by light microscopy 

and was not counted. 

The small size of the robust setae on pereopods 

and 2 precluded making accurate direct counts of pereopod 

robust setae using light microscopy. 

remarks: Aegiochus gordoni is characterised by having 

large but well-separated eyes, the antennule flagellum 

extending to pereonite 2 and a shield-shaped pleo- 

telson, which is finely serrate and totally lacking robust 

setae or notches; the uropods are provided with small 

and fine robust setae, the smallest of which are difficult 

to observe under light microscopy; the uropodal endopod 

lateral margin is markedly straight. The anterior 

pereopods are weakly ‘spined’ with the small robust 

setae close-set to the inferior margin, particularly on 

the propodus; the pleopods have the exopod disto- 

lateral margin with digitate serrations, and the appendix 

masculina extends well beyond the distal margin 

of the endopod. 

There are three Southern Ocean species which appear 

similar. All of these species are described from 

single specimens only, and most descriptions lack 

sufficient detail for accurate comparisons to be made. 

These species are Aegiochus crozetensis (Kussakin & 

Vasina, 982) (Crozet Islands, southern Indian Ocean, 

280 metres), Aegiochus pushkini Kussakin and Vasina, 

982 (Ob’ Bank, southern Indian Ocean, 4 0 m; here 

recorded from New Zealand) and Aegiochus uschakovi 

Kussakin, 967 (Drake Passage, Argentina, 95– 20 

m). All species share a similar appearance, but were 

described as having pleotelson ‘denticles’, taken here 

to mean robust setae. 

Aegiochus pushkini, redescribed herein, is nearly 

twice the size of A. gordoni, has narrower eyes, the pleopod 

rami lack marginal serrations and the pleotelson 

and uropods are provided with robust setae.

New figures of the holotypes of Aegiochus crozetensis 

and A. uschakovi are given (Appendix 2; Figs 4 , 45 

respectively). A. pushkini has a far shorter antennule 

flagellum, figured as extending only to the anterior of 

pereonite . Aegiochus uschakovi, at 8 mm, is substantially 

larger than A. gordoni, and is figured as having 

the posterior coxae far more strongly produced, the 

antennule flagellum with 15 articles (10 in A. gordoni), 

antennal flagellum with 19 articles (11 in A. gordoni) 

and the propodal palm as lacking setae. Examination 

of the type material of these Southern Ocean species 

confirms that they are all distinct from A. gordoni. 

The deeply serrate pleopod exopod is not unique 

to A. gordoni, and has been figured for several other 

New Zealand species, the most similar being Aegiochus 

coroo and Aegiochus laevis. Aegiochus coroo has the eyes 

united, and a more rounded and notched posterior 

margin to the pleotelson. There are further similarities 

between these three species in the unarmed pleotelson, 

a large molar process on the mandible, maxillule lateral 

lobe which has one prominently large and several small 

robust setae (in contrast to the more usual three large 

and several small terminal setae) and the anterior pereopods 

with very few and small robust setae. Aegiochus 

laevis is small, and readily separated from A. gordoni by 

having small eyes, somewhat similar in size to those 

of cirolanids. 


distribution: Recorded from the Chatham Rise to the 

east of South Island and Brothers Sea Mounts to the 

northeast of North Island; at depths from 360 to 40 

metres (the minimum depth was recorded from a haul 

that ran from 360 to 755 metres, all other records are 

from 698 metres or greater). 

etymoLogy: Named for Dennis Gordon, scientist, 

natural historian, biological enthusiast and untiring 

advocate for taxonomic research in New Zealand—in 

recognition of his huge direct and indirect contribution 

to knowledge of the New Zealand marine fauna. 

Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. (Figs 56–60) 

materiaL: Holotype: ♂ (6.9 mm) Poor Knights Islands, 

pass south of landing, 9 May 969, 33–37 m, from 

sponge and [bryozoa], SCUBA (AK 73308). 

Paratypes: 2 ♀ (ovig. 7.2, 7.8, 8.0 [dissected], 8.4, 9.0, 

9.5; non-ovig. 6.5, 6.8, 7.0, 7.5, 8.4, 9.0 [dissected] mm), 

same data as holotype (AK 73309; NIWA 28462 [2]). 



punctate, widest at pereonite 5, lateral margins ovate. 

Rostral point folded ventrally and posteriorly. Eyes 

large, not medially united, separated by about 23% 

width of head; each eye made up of ~ 0 transverse 


colour red. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle right-angled (point soft, not abrupt). 

Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; posterior margins 

straight and sinuate (coxa 7 is sinuate), posterolateral 

angle acute (less than 45°) (coxa 5 not acute). Pleon with 

pleonite largely concealed by pereonite 7; pleonite 4 

with posterolateral margins not extending to posterior 

margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral 

angles free, not overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 

4. Pleotelson 0.8 times as long as anterior width, 


convex, serrate, posterior margin evenly rounded, 

with 0 RS. 

Antennule peduncle articles 3 and 4 . times as 

long as combined lengths of articles and 2, article 

3 3.1 times as long as wide; flagellum with 8 articles, 


article 4 2.0 times as long as wide, 0.8 times as long 

as combined lengths of articles –3, inferior margin 0 

plumose setae, and 0 short simple setae (anterodistal 

angle with 5 long simple setae); article 5 .2 times as 

long as article 4, 2.6 times as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 2 palmate setae (at distal angle), anterodistal 

angle with cluster of 4 short simple setae (long simple 

setae, and 1 pappose seta); flagellum with 13 articles, 

extending to posterior of pereonite 2. 

Frontal lamina flat, longer than greatest width, diamond 

shaped, anterior margin acute, without small 

median point or forming median angle, posterior 

margin not abutting clypeus. 


lobe; palp article 2 with 5 distolateral setae (3 biserrate, 

2 simple), palp article 3 with 3 setae (serrate; distal 3 

markedly longer than remainder). Maxillule with 5 terminal 

RS ( large, 4 slender). Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 

RS ( biserrate); lateral lobe with 3 RS. Maxilliped endite 

with 0 apical setae; palp article 2 with 2 RS (slender); 

article 3 with 4 straight RS; article 4 with 4 hooked RS 

(and simple seta); article 5 with 3 RS ( large, and 2 

small slender). 




inferior margin with RS (plus 2 short and long 

simple setae), set as distal group, superior distal angle 

with 0 RS ( simple seta); carpus 0.8 as long as merus, 

inferior margin with RS; propodus 2.6 times as long 

as proximal width, inferior margin with 2 RS (set as 

minute and distally), propodal palm simple, without 

blade or process, dactylus smoothly curved, 0.9 as long 

as propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with 

0 RS, superior distal margin with RS; merus inferior 

margin with 3 RS (set as and 2; 2 simple setae), set 

03

Figure 56. Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. A–F, holotype, remainder female paratype (9.0 mm). A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; 

C, head; D, frons, ventral view; E, pleotelson, posterior margin; F, penial openings; G, antennule (terminal flagellar articles 

missing); H, antenna peduncle. 

04

Figure 57. Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. Female paratype (9.0 mm). A, mandible; B, right mandible, incisor and molar process; C, 

mandible palp article 3; D, maxillule; E, maxillule apex; F, maxilla; G, maxilla apex; H, maxilliped; I, maxilliped articles 2–5. 

as two groups, superior distal margin with acute RS 

(and 2 simple setae); carpus similar in size to that of 

pereopod , inferodistal angle with RS (and simple 

seta). Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2 (but merus 

inferior margin with 5 RS, and RS larger). Pereopods 

5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus with short RS. 

Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7 (but more robust, distal 

margins of merus and carpus with more numerous 

biserrate RS). Pereopod 7 basis 3.0 as long as greatest 


0.4 as long as basis, inferior margin with 3 RS (set 

singly), superior distal angle with 4 RS, inferior distal 

angle with 4 RS; merus . as long as ischium, 2.2 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 3 RS (set as and 

05

Figure 58. Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. Female paratype (9.0 mm). A–E, pereopods –3, 6 and 7 respectively. 



long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as , 

and 2), superior distal angle with 8 RS (5 biserrate), 

inferior distal angle with 6 RS; propodus .0 as long 



3 slender setae ( RS, plumose and 2 simple), inferior 




06 




convex, with PMS on distal half, with ~36 PMS; endopod 

.9 times as long as wide, distally rounded, lateral 

margin straight, with PMS on distal one-third, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal margin only, endopod with 

~ 6 PMS; peduncle .9 times as wide as long, mesial 


~37 PMS, endopod with ~ 8 PMS; appendix masculina 

basally swollen, .3 times as long as endopod, distally

Figure 59. Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. A, B, holotype, remainder female paratype (9.0 mm). A–D pleopods –3, 5 respectively; 

E, uropod; F, uropod endopod, apex; G, uropod exopod, apex. 

07

Figure 60. Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. Ovigerous female paratype 8.0 mm. A, maxilliped; B, maxilliped palp articles 3–5; C, 

oostegite, sternite 5 (anterior to top of page); D, setae from mesial margin of oostegite; E, setae from anterolateral margin of 

oostegite. 

acute. Pleopod 3 exopod with ~40 PMS, endopod with 

~6 PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod with ~37 PMS, endopod with 

~5 PMS. Pleopod 5 exopod with ~37 PMS. Exopods of 

pleopods –3 each with distolateral margin digitate; 

endopods of pleopods 3–5 each without distolateral 

point; pleopods 2–4 peduncle distolateral margin with 

prominent acute RS. 



Endopod apically deeply and equally bifid, lateral 

margin straight, without prominent excision, proximal 

lateral margin with 0 RS, distal lateral margin with 



greatest width, apically deeply bifid, mesial process 

prominent; lateral margin convex, with 7 RS; mesial 

margin convex, with 3 RS. 

femaLe: Similar to males, ovigerous females slightly 

wider and slightly larger. Brood pouch composed of 5 

pairs of oostegites arising from sternites –5, becoming 

progressively larger towards the posterior, oostegite 

5 extending to the posterior of sternite and bearing 

plumose seta on the mesial margin, stout simple setae 

along the posterior margin. 

size: The single male measured 6.9 mm; ovigerous 

females 7.2–9.5 mm (mean = 8.3 mm); non-ovigerous 

females 6.5–9.0 mm (mean = 7.5 mm). 

08 

Variation: Pleotelson (n = 2) always without RS. 

Uropod exopod mesial (n = 22) margin usually with 3 

(82%), or 2 ( 8%) RS, lateral margin (n = 24) with 7 (88%) 

or 8 ( 2%) RS; uropod endopod mesial margin (n = 24) 

with 0 (38%), (33%) or 2 (29%) RS, lateral margin with 

only (88%) or 0 ( 2%) RS distal to the pappose seta. 

There is no discernable difference between males and 

females. The distal robust setae are frequently small 

and fine. 

The relatively small size of the species precluded 

making accurate direct counts of the robust setae on 

pereopods and 2 although of the specimens examined 

the pattern, number and size appears consistent. 

remarks: Aegiochus insomnis sp. nov. is readily identified 

by the relatively small eyes, diamond-shaped and 

flat (‘Metacirolana-like’) frontal lamina, short pereopod 

dactylus (about as long as the propodus), deeply serrated 

pleopod exopods and the long acute appendix 

masculina. There are two similar species in New Zealand: 

Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov. and Aegiochus gordoni 

sp. nov. Both of those species have larger eyes, bladelike 

posterior margin on the frontal lamina and have 

a much longer dactylus on pereopod ( .2– .4 times 

as long as the propodus). 

prey: Not known.

distribution: Known only from the Poor Knights Islands, 

northern New Zealand. 

etymoLogy: The epithet insomnis (from the L. meaning 

sleepless; noun in apposition) is a play on the name of 

the type locality. 

Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. (Figs 6 –64) 

materiaL examined: Holotype. ♂ ( 4.2 mm), Chatham 

Rise, 42°43.20’S, 79°57.63’W, 2 April 200 , 0 2–890 

m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23863). 

Paratypes. All Chatham Rise. 4 ♂ ( 2.5 [damaged], 

3.6, 4.5 dissected, 6.0 mm), 5 ♀ (ovig. 5.0, 5.5; nonovig. 

2.5, 5.5, 24.5), same data as holotype (NIWA 

23864). 6 ♂ ( .0. .2, 2.2, 2.8, 3.5, 4.5 mm), 4 ♀ 

(ovig. 3.8, 5.0, 6.5; non-ovig. 6.5 mm), 5 April 200 , 

42°42.84’S, 79°57.5 ’W, 980–893 m, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 23865). ♀ (non-ovig. 8.5 mm), Chatham Rise, 

5 April 200 , 42°45.93’S, 79°59.34’W, 875–757 m, coll. 

RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23866); 2 ♀ (ovig. 4.5, 5.0 mm), 

6 April 200 , 42°47. 7’S, 79°59. 2’W, 993–900 m, coll. 


Non-type material, some not measured. ♀ (non-ovig.), 

7 April 200 , 42°48.24’S, 79°59.27’E, 0 3–93 m 

(NIWA 23868). 2 ♀ (ovig.), 2 April 200 , 42°42.76’S, 

79°54.45’W, 080– 008 m (NIWA 23869). ♀ (ovig.), 8 

April 200 , 42°47.27’S, 79°59.8 ’W, 042–880 m (NIWA 

23870). ♀ (ovig. 5.7 mm) 6 July 994, 43°5 .47’S, 

74° 7.08’W, 754 m (NIWA 23870). 2, 42.7275–7307°S, 

80. 0 0–0973°E, 7 June 2006, 000– 07 m, (NIWA 

25670, 2567 ). , 42.7 58–7 32°S, 80. 432–0480°E, 

4 June 2006, 950– 070 m (NIWA 25668). , 42.7627– 

7575°S, 80.0748–0773°E, 28 May 2006, 0 9– 08 m 

(NIWA 25656). 

desCription: Body 2. times as long as greatest width, 


5, lateral margins weakly ovate. Rostral point 

folded ventrally and posteriorly. Eyes large, medially 


clear field 44% length of head; each eye made up 

of ~ 6 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with 

~9 ommatidia; eye colour red, or dark brown. Pereonite 

1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle with 

small distinct produced point. Coxae 5–7 with entire 

oblique carina; posterior margins concave, posterolateral 

angle acute (less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite 

visible in dorsal view; pleonite 4 with posterolateral 

margins extending clearly beyond posterior margin of 

pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles overlapped 



longitudinal carina; lateral margins convex, serrate or 

notched, posterior margin converging to caudomedial 

point, with 8– 0 RS. 





article 4 2.9 times as long as wide, 0.9 times as long as 

combined lengths of articles –3, inferior margin with 

plumose seta, and 4 short simple setae (anterodistal 

3 simple + plumose); article 5 .0 times as long as article 

4, 2.7 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 3 

palmate setae, anterodistal angle with cluster of 3 short 

simple setae; flagellum with 15 articles, extending to 

posterior of pereonite 3. 


projecting, blade-like, wider than long, posterior 

margin concave, anterior margin anteriorly truncate 

(narrowly), forming median angle, posterior margin 



lobe; palp article 2 with distolateral setae (4 large 

and 5 small biserrate, 2 simple distally), palp article 3 

with 20 setae (all biserrate). Maxillule with 5 terminal 

RS ( large, 4 slender). Maxilla mesial lobe with 3 RS ( 

straight, 2 biserrate); lateral lobe with 2 RS (hooked). 

Maxilliped endite with 0 apical setae; palp article 2 

with 2 RS; article 3 with 4 recurved RS (2 slender, 2 

hooked); article 4 with 4 hooked RS; article 5 with 4 

RS (straight). 




margin with 2 RS (minute), set as two groups, superior 

distal angle with 0 RS (2 short slender setae); carpus 0.7 

as long as merus, inferior margin with RS; propodus 

2.3 times as long as proximal width, inferior margin 


process, dactylus smoothly curved, .4 as long as propodus. 


superior distal margin with RS; merus inferior margin 

with 4 RS (distalmost large, remainder minute), set as 

two groups, superior distal margin with acute RS 

(small plus 2 slender setae); carpus longer than that of 

pereopod , with inferodistal lobe, inferodistal angle 

with RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 

5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus with short 

RS. Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7 (but longer, with 

slightly more RS). Pereopod 7 basis 3.6 times as long 

as greatest width, inferior margins with palmate 


with 3 RS (set as , and ), superior distal angle with 




09

Figure 61. Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. A–G, holotype, remainder male paratype NIWA 23864. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, 

head; D, frons; E, frons, anterior view; F, pleotelson; G, pleotelson, posterior margin; H, sternite 7 showing penial openings; 

I, antennule; J, antenna peduncle. 

0

Figure 62. Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. Male paratype 4.5 mm, NIWA 23864. A, mandible; B, mandible palp, article 3; C, maxillule 

apex; D, maxilla; E, maxilla apex; F, maxilliped; G, maxilliped articles 2–5. 




RS (6 of which are biserrate), inferior distal angle with 

5 RS; propodus .0 as long as ischium, 4 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (seta as , 2 and 2), 

superior distal angle with 3 slender setae, inferior distal 


Penes opening flush with surface of sternite 7, mutually 

adjacent. 

Pleopod 1 exopod 2.0 as long as wide, distally narrowly 

rounded, mesial margin weakly oblique, lateral 

margin straight, mesial margin strongly convex, with 

PMS on distal half, with ~54 PMS; endopod 2.2 times as 

long as wide, distally rounded, lateral margin straight, 

with PMS on distal half, mesial margin with PMS on 

distal one-third, endopod with ~33 PMS; peduncle .8 


hooks. Pleopod 2 exopod with ~66 PMS, endopod with 

~43 PMS; appendix masculina basally swollen, . times 

as long as endopod (middle part with prominent cuticular 

scales), distally acute. Pleopod 3 exopod with ~75 

PMS, endopod with ~ 5 PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod with 

~70 PMS, endopod with ~ 0 PMS. Pleopod 5 exopod

Figure 63. Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. Male paratype 4.5 mm, NIWA 23864. A–E, pereopods , 2, 6 and 7 respectively. 

with ~60 PMS. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with 

distolateral margin not digitate; endopods of pleopods 




(and lateral), posterior lobe about one-half as long 

as endopod. Endopod apically sub-bifid, mesial process 

prominent, lateral margin straight, without prominent 

excision, proximal lateral margin with RS, distal lateral 

margin with 2 RS, mesial margin weakly convex, 

with 7 RS. Exopod extending beyond end of endopod 

2 

(slightly), 3.5 times as long as greatest width, apically 

sub-bifid, mesial process prominent; lateral margin 

convex, with RS; mesial margin straight, distally 

convex, with 4 RS. 

femaLe: Ovigerous females have the BL .8 times as 

long as the greatest width, with ovate lateral margins; 

otherwise similar in appearance to males other than for 

the sexual characters. Brood pouch of oostegites arising 

from the coxae/sternite of pereopods –5.

Figure 64. Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. Male paratype 4.5 mm, NIWA 23864. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; E, uropod 

endopod apex; F, uropod. 

size: Males .0– 6.0 mm (mean = 3.3 mm, n = ); 

ovigerous females 3.8– 6.5 mm (mean = 5.0 mm, 

n = 7); non-ovigerous females 2.5–24.5 mm (mean = 

7.5 mm, n = 5). 

Variation: Robust setae: pleotelson RS (n = 8) varies 

from 4+4 (22%) or 4+5 (39%) and 5+5 (28%) with 4+6 

and 6+6 each occurring once. Uropod exopod (n = 36) 

mesial margin most often with 4 (25%) or 5 (64%) or 

3

3 and 6 each occurring twice; lateral margin ( %) 

or 2 (6 %) or 3 (28%); uropod endopod (n = 36) 

mesial margin varied from 5 to 8 RS with 5 ( 4%), 6 

(25%) and 7 (58%) the most frequent, 8 occurring once, 

lateral margin with +2 (83%) with occasional damageinduced 

variations of + and 0+ ; one specimen had 

2+2. There is no discernable difference between males 

and females. 

Pereopods present a constant appearance, but no 

detailed counts were made owing to the difficulty of 

observing small setae under light microscopy without 

dissection. 

Recently (2006) collected and fresh material of this 

species from the Chatham Rise (NIWA 25656, 25668, 

25670, 2567 ) had bronze coloured eyes which are 

very narrowly (less than the width of an ommatidium) 

separated, this separation being less or not apparent in 

long-preserved specimens. 

remarks: The united eyes, acute and produced posterior 

margins of coxal plates 2–4, wide frontal lamina 

with the posterior margin forming a distinctly concave 

blade, distinctive long and straight appendix masculina 

in the males and the setation of robust setae on the 

uropods and pleotelson all allow ready identification 

of this species. 

Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. shares a great many characters 

with Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov., including the 

general appearance and setation of the antennule, 

antenna, pereopods, pleopods, uropods and posterior 

margin of the pleotelson. In particular the general 

morphology of the appendix masculina of the two species 

is similar, both being basally swollen and distally 

slender. Despite the overall similarity of appearance 

there are numerous clear-cut points of difference and 

the two species are easy to distinguish. Aegiochus kakai 

has the eyes meeting medially, but the eyes themselves 

are far smaller than in A. kanohi; the frontal lamina is 

far wider than in A. kanohi and the posterior margin is 

concave; the posteroventral angles of pereonite and 

coxae 2 and 3 are acute and produced (truncate in A. 

kanohi); and the appendix masculina is straight (sinuate 

in A. kanohi). There are further differences in the 

setation of the uropods and posterior margin of the 

pleotelson, which is detailed in the ‘variation’ section 

for each species. 

Other superficially similar species from the southern 

Indian Ocean are Aegiochus crozetensis Kussakin 

and Vasina, 982 and A. uschakovi Kussakin, 967, but 

these both have widely separated eyes. 

prey: Not known. One sample (NIWA 23864) had 

sponge tissue tangled up with the specimens suggesting 

the possibility of at least temporary association 

with hexactinellid sponges. 

4 

distribution: Recorded only from the Chatham Rise region, 

off eastern South Island, New Zealand; at depths 

from 757 to 080 metres. 

etymoLogy: Kakai is a Mäori word meaning to nibble 

or bite frequently; noun in apposition. 

Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov. (Figs 65–68) 

materiaL examined: Holotype: ♂ ( 4.8 mm), Chatham 

Rise, 42°45.89’S, 79°59. 6’W, 9 April 200 , 800–757 

m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 240 9). 

Paratypes: 7 ♂ ( 0.5, .0, .5, 2.0, 2.5 dissected, 

2.5, 3.0 mm), 2 ♀ (ovig. 4.0, 4.0, 5.0, 5.5, 5.5, 

5.6, 6.0; non-ovig. .6, 2.5, 5.0, 5.0, 6.0 mm), 

same data as holotype (NIWA 24020). ♀ (non-ovig 

0.5 mm), Chatham Rise, 6 April 200 , 42°45.76’S, 

79°59.29’W, 064–750, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 

2402 ). ♂ ( 2.0 mm), Chatham Rise, 5 April 200 , 

42°45.93’S, 79°59.34’W, 875–757 m, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 24022). 

Additional material: ♂ (9.5 mm), ♀ ( 3.0 mm ovig), 

manca (7.5 mm), north of Chatham Rise, 3 September 

963, 43°04.00’S, 78°38.99’W, 549 m, stn. A9 0 (two 

tubes) (NIWA 24023). ♀ ( 5.8 mm, ovig, v. poor condition), 

vicinity of Hikurangi Trough, 5 September 

987, 39°5 .90’S, 77°25. 9’E, 4 3 m (NIWA 24024). 

New caledonia: 2 ♀ (ovig. 2.0, 3.2 mm), 24°39.3 ’S, 

68°39.67’E, 29 October 986, 600 m, CHALCAL II, stn 

DW75 (MNHN Is.59 ). 2 ♀ (non-ovig. 9.9, 2.9 mm), 

New Caledonia, 24°54.5’S, 68°22.3’E, 28 October 986, 

527 m, CHALCAL II, stn DW72 (MNHN Is.59 2). 


dorsal surfaces smooth, widest at pereonite 5, lateral 

margins weakly ovate. Rostral point folded ventrally 

and posteriorly. Eyes large, medially united (very narrow 

gap present), anterior clear field 5% length of head, 

posterior clear field 28% length of head; each eye made 

up of ~ 5 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row 

with ~9 ommatidia; eye colour black. Pereonite 1 and 

coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle right-angled. 

Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina (coxae 5–7 dorsal 

margin concave); posterior margins straight, posterolateral 

angle acute (less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite 


margins not extending to posterior margin of pleonite 

5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped 



longitudinal carina; lateral margins convex, serrate or 

notched, posterior margin converging to caudomedial 

point, with 8– 0 RS. 

Antennule peduncle articles 3 and 4 .0 as long 

as combined lengths of articles and 2, article 3 3.4 

times as long as wide (narrowing distally); flagellum

Figure 65. Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov. J, K, male paratype 2.5 mm NIWA 24020, remainder holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral 

view; C, head; D, frons; E, pleonite, lateral view; F, pleotelson, setation on posterior margin; G, pleotelson apex; H, sternite 7 

showing penial openings; I, frons, anterior view; J, antennule; K, antenna peduncle. 

5

Figure 66. Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov. Male paratype 2.5 mm NIWA 24020. A, mandible; B, mandible palp, article 3; C, maxillule; 

D, maxilla; E, maxilla apex; F, maxilliped; G, maxilliped articles 2–5. 

with 3 articles, extending to posterior of pereonite . 

Antenna peduncle article 4 .9 times as long as wide, 

0.8 times as long as combined lengths of articles –3, 

inferior margin 0 plumose setae, and 5 short simple 

setae (anterodistal angle); article 5 . times as long 


with 2 palmate setae (at distal angle), anterodistal 

angle with cluster of 6 short simple setae (simple and 

2 pappose); flagellum with 16 articles, extending to 

posterior of pereonite 3. 


projecting, blade-like (weakly blade-like, not flat), 

6 

wider than long, diamond shaped, anterior margin 

acute, forming median angle, posterior margin not 


Mandible molar process present, small distinct 

flat lobe; palp article 2 with 9 distolateral setae (large 

biserrate, 3 short simple), palp article 3 with 6 setae. 

Maxillule with 6 terminal RS (5 slender, large). Maxilla 

mesial lobe with 4 RS (3 serrate, simple); lateral lobe 

with 4 RS (3 hooked, straight). Maxilliped endite with 

apical seta; palp article 2 with 2 RS (hooked); article 3 

with 6 recurved RS (3 recurved, 2 simple, biserrate);

Figure 67. Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov. A, B, holotype, remainder paratype 2.5 mm NIWA 24020. C, male paratype, remainder 

holotype. A–D, pereopods , 2, 6 and 7 respectively; E, pereopod 6, dactylus. 

article 4 with 4 hooked RS; article 5 with 4 RS (straight, 

3 short, long and serrate). 




margin with 0 RS, superior distal angle with 0 RS ( 

simple and plumose slender setae); carpus 0.6 as 

long as merus, inferior margin with 0 RS; propodus 

2.7 times as long as proximal width, inferior margin 


7

Figure 68. Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov. A, B, holotype, remainder paratype 2.5 mm NIWA 24020. A–D, pleopods –3, 5, 

respectively; E, uropod; F, uropod exopod, apex. 

process, dactylus abruptly hooked, .4 as long as propodus. 


superior distal margin with RS; merus inferior margin 

with 2 RS (minute, set as and ), set as two groups, 

8 

superior distal margin with 0 acute RS ( simple and 

plumose slender setae); carpus similar in size to that 

of pereopod , inferodistal angle with RS. Pereopod 3 

similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins


pereopod 7 (slightly longer with slightly more RS). 

Pereopod 7 basis 2.9 times as long as greatest width, 

inferior margins with 8 palmate setae; ischium 0.5 as 

long as basis, inferior margin with 2 RS (as and ), 




), superior distal angle with 6 RS, inferior distal angle 

with 5 RS; carpus . as long as ischium, 3.5 times as 



with 7 RS; propodus 0.9 as long as ischium, 4.7 times 


2), superior distal angle with 3 slender setae (2 slender, 

plumose), inferior distal angle with 3 RS. 






with PMS on distal half, with ~50 PMS; endopod 2. 

times as long as wide, distally rounded, lateral margin 

weakly concave, with PMS on distal one-third, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal one-third, endopod with 

~30 PMS; peduncle .6 times as wide as long, mesial 

margin with 6 coupling hooks (and 2 PMS). Pleopod 2 

exopod with ~65 PMS, endopod with ~38 PMS; appendix 

masculina basally swollen (sinuate), .2 times as long 

as endopod, distally acute. Pleopod 3 exopod with ~68 

PMS, endopod with ~ 8 PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod with 

~65 PMS, endopod with ~ 3 PMS. Pleopod 5 exopod 

with ~55 PMS. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with 

distolateral margin not digitate; endopods of pleopods 




(and single slender seta), posterior lobe about one-third 

as long as endopod. Endopod apically not bifid, lateral 

margin straight, without prominent excision, proximal 

lateral margin with RS, distal lateral margin with 


not extending to end of endopod, 3.0 as long as greatest 

width, apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly convex, 

with RS; mesial margin weakly convex, with 5 RS. 

femaLe: Ovigerous females’ BL is twice as long as the 

greatest width, with ovate lateral margins; otherwise 

similar in appearance to males other than for the sexual 

characters. Brood pouch of oostegites arising from the 

coxae/sternite of pereopods –5. 

size: Males 9.5– 4.8 mm (mean = 2.2 mm, n = 8); 

ovigerous females 3.0– 6.0 mm (mean = 5. mm, 

n = 7); non-ovigerous females .6– 6.0 mm (mean = 

4.0 mm, n = 5). 

Variation: Robust setae: (n = 20) pleotelson RS 4+4 (60%) 

or 5+5 (30%) with 4+5 occurring twice; apical pair of 

setae small; the pleotelson apex is often damaged. 

Uropod exopod (n = 37) mesial margin with 4 (27%), 5 

(49%) or 6 ( 9%) with 3 twice; lateral margin (27%) 

or 2 (68%), one specimen with 3; uropod endopod 

mesial (n = 38) margin varied from 5 to 8 RS with 6 

(45%) or 7 (36%) the most frequent, lateral margin with 

+ on all but one specimen. There is no discernable 

difference between males and females, nor does the 

number of RS increase with the size of the specimen. 

remarks: The united eyes, truncate posterior margins 

of coxal plates 2 and 3, noticeably slender pereopods, 

relatively narrow frontal lamina with the posterior 

margin forming a transverse ridge rather than a distinct 

blade, distinctive long and sinuate appendix masculina 

in the males and the setation of robust setae on the 

uropods and pleotelson all allow ready identification 

of A. kanohi. 

The only similar New Zealand species with large 

eyes is Aegiochus kakai sp. nov., and that species is immediately 

distinguished by having far smaller eyes, 

a wider frontal lamina, the clear space distal to the 

palmate seta on the uropod endopod lateral margin is 

straight (concave in A. kakai), the posteroventral angles 

of pereonite and coxae 2–4 each with prominent and 

acute points, and a straight appendix masculina. 

Other similar species are Aegiochus coroo (Bruce, 

983) from southeastern Australia and Aegiochus synopthalma 

(Richardson, 909) from Japan. The former 

lacks robust setae on the pleotelson, has more robust 

pereopods, pleopodal exopods are strongly digitate 

and the appendix masculina is shorter and straight. The 

latter species, known only from the female holotype, 

has a longer frontal lamina, the uropod endopod lateral 

margin has 4 robust setae (compared to 2 in A. kanohi 

sp. nov.) as well as having fewer robust setae on the 

uropodal exopod lateral margin (8 v. 2). 


distribution: Recorded from the Chatham Rise, off 

eastern South Island, and east of Hawkes Bay, North 

Island, New Zealand; also off southern New Caledonia; 

at depths from to 4 3 to 064 metres. 

etymoLogy: Kanohi is a Mäori word for ‘eye’; noun in 

apposition. 

9

Aegiochus laevis (Studer, 884), comb. nov. 

(Figs 69, 70) 

Cirolana laevis Studer, 1884*: 21, pl. II, fig. 8.– Hale, 1925: 

45.– Nierstrasz, 93 : 57.– Bruce, 98 : 96 . 

Aega novi-zealandiae.– Tattersall, 1921: 213, pl. IV, figs 11–14.– 

Hurley, 1961: 268 [misidentification]. 

Aega (Ramphion) laevis.– Brusca, 983: .– Bruce, 983: 763, 

figs 5, 6. 

Aega laevis.– Bruce, Lew Ton & Poore, 2003: 6 . 

materiaL examined: ♀ (ovig. 0.2 mm), off North Cape, 

2 March 968, 34°39.00’S, 72° 3.99’E, 2 6 m (NIWA 

23763). ♀ (ovig. 3.5 mm), 7 miles east of North Cape, 

New Zealand, bottom fauna, 28 m (as 70 fathoms), 

Terra Nova stn 96 (BMNH 92 . .29. 49 [Tattersall’s 

92 specimen]). 

type LoCaLity: ‘Ostlich von Queensland’ (Studer 

884). 

desCription: Body 2.0 as long as greatest width, dorsal 

surfaces smooth, widest at pereonite 5, lateral margins 

weakly ovate or ovate. Rostral point folded ventrally 

and posteriorly. Eyes moderate, combined widths 

50–65% width of head, separated by about 32% width 


ommatidia, each row with ~7 ommatidia; eye colour 

black. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle right-angled. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique 

carina; posterior margins concave, posterolateral angle 

acute (less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite largely concealed 

by pereonite 7; pleonite 4 with posterolateral 









. Antenna flagellum extending to posterior of 

pereonite 3 or pereonite 4. 


projecting, blade-like, wider than long, triangular, 

anterior margin with median point, posterior margin 


Mandible molar process present, minute. 

Pereopod 1 basis 2. times as long as greatest width; 


0 RS ( long simple seta), superior distal margin with 

RS; merus inferior margin with RS, set as distal group, 

superior distal angle with 0 RS; carpus 0.8 as long as 

merus, inferior margin with RS (large); propodus 

* The date for this publication is usually cited as 883, but 

the library volume held at the ZMUC had a the date of 

publication as 884. 

20 



process, dactylus smoothly curved, .2 as long as 

propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium inferior margin with 0 



margin with 2 acute RS; carpus similar in size to that 

of pereopod , inferodistal angle with RS. Pereopod 3 

similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins 









with 6 RS; carpus . as long as ischium, 2.7 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 3 RS (set as , 2), 



as long as wide, inferior margin with 3 RS (set as , 2), 

superior distal angle with 2 slender setae (and RS), 




strongly convex, with PMS from distal one-third, 

with ~50 PMS; endopod .6 times as long as wide, 

distally rounded, lateral margin convex, with PMS 

from distal half, mesial margin with PMS on distal 

margin only, endopod with ~24 PMS; peduncle .9 


hooks. Exopods of pleopods 1–3 each with distolateral 

margin digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 each with 

distolateral point; pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral 




Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin weakly 

convex, without prominent excision, proximal lateral 

margin with 0 RS, distal lateral margin with 2 RS, 

mesial margin weakly convex, with 4 RS. Exopod not 

extending to end of endopod, 2.3 times as long as greatest 

width, apically not bifid; lateral margin convex, 

with 8 RS; mesial margin convex, with 4 RS. 

remarks: Aegiochus laevis can be identified by the relatively 

small eyes, triangular frontal lamina with free 

posterior margin, relatively prominent robust setae on 

the inferior margins of pereopods –3, and the pattern 

of robust setae on the uropodal rami and posterior margin 

of the pleotelson. A. laevis is further characterised 

by the distolateral margins of the pleopod exopods, 

particularly pleopods –3, being digitate. 

The New Zealand specimens agree entirely with the 

redescription of the holotype given by Bruce ( 983),

Figure 69. Aegiochus laevis (Studer, 883). NIWA 23763. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head, dorsal view; D, frons; 

E, pleonites, lateral margin; F, pleotelson, posterior margin; G, pleopod ; H, pleopod 2; I, uropod peduncle, distolateral 

angle. 

2

Figure 70. Aegiochus laevis (Studer, 883). NIWA 23763. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; D, uropod. 

with close correspondence of the frontal lamina, antennule, 

antenna, pereopods, pleopods and uropods. The 

holotype was described as lacking robust setae on the 

posterior margin of the pleotelson, whereas one New 

Zealand specimen has two robust setae; it is common 

for such setae to be missing from old specimens and 

this is not here regarded as being definitive in the holotype. 

The North Cape specimen (BMNH) has a ‘rubbed’ 

pleotelson that lacks robust setae, though indentations 

suggest that it too may have had two robust setae. An 

abbreviated description is given here to allow ready 

identification. 

There are four other New Zealand species with 

digitate pleopods — A. insomnis sp. nov., A. nohinohi 

22 

sp. nov., A. gordoni sp. nov. and A. coroo (Bruce, 983) 

(and also Aegiochus bertrandi sp. nov, which is within 

the northern reaches of the New Zealand chart area). 

Of these, A. coroo has large medially united eyes, and 

all except A. nohinohi have relatively weak or minute 

robust setae on pereopods –3. Aegiochus nohinohi has a 

more slender body shape, larger eyes, the robust setae 

on pereopods –3 are smaller and the posterior margin 

of the pleotelson lacks robust setae. 


distribution: Northern New Zealand, northwards to 

Queensland, Australia; potentially widespread in the

southwestern or western Pacific; recorded depths of 

26 to 2 6 metres. 

Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov. (Figs 7 –74) 

materiaL examined: Holotype. ♀ (non-ovig. 9.0 mm), 

Rumble III Sea Mount, 35°44.5 –44.35’S, 78°30.20– 

29.75’E, 9 May 200 , 470–260 m, on scoria rubble, coll. 


Paratypes. 4 ♂ (4.9, 5.0, 5.2, 6.7 mm), 4 ♀ (non-ovig. 

6.4, 6.9 [dissected], 8.6 [dissected], 9.0 mm), manca (4.4 

mm), same data as holotype (all at least slightly damaged; 

NIWA 240 0). ♀ (non-ovig. 7.0 mm), Rumble 

III Sea Mount, 35°44.38–44.35’S, 78°29.85–29.44’E, 9 

May 200 , 420–200 m, on scoria rubble, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 240 ). ♀ (non-ovig. 7. mm), Rumble 

III Sea Mount, 35°44.40–44.7 ’S, 78°29.85–30.02’E, 9 

May 200 , 96–4 5 m, on scoria rubble, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 240 2). ♀ (ovig. 7.5 mm), Rumble III Sea 

Mount, 35°44.28–43.98’S, 78°29.89–30.03’E, 20 May 

200 , 340–300 m, on scoria rubble, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 240 3). ♂ (5.2 mm), manca (3.4 mm), Rumble 

III Sea Mount, 35°44.34–44.24’S, 78°29.74–29.53’E, 23 

May 200 , 200–500 m, on scoria rubble, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 240 4). 2 ♀ (ovig. 0.2; non-ovig. 9.0 mm), 

Rumble V Sea Mount, 36°08.70–40’S, 78° 2.07– .8 ’E, 

24 May 200 , 40–690 m, on scoria rubble, coll. RV 

Tangaroa (NIWA 240 5). 

Non-type. ♀ (ovig. 6.5 mm, crushed), Rumble III Sea 

Mount, 35°44.49–44.52’S, 78°29.84–29.40’E, 9 May 

200 , 426–270 m, on scoria rubble, coll. RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 240 6). 2 ♀ (ovig 7.7; non-ovig. 9.3 mm), coll. 

RV Kaharoa (NIWA 240 7). ♂ (6.4 mm), ♀ (ovig. 8.5, 

8.6, non-ovig. 6.0 mm), manca (3.8 mm), 43.0667°S, 

78.6500°E, September 963, 549 m (NIWA 240 8). 

♂ (6.2 mm), manca (5.0 mm), off Three Kings Island, 

34° 3.0’S, 74° .5’E, 9 Feb 974, BS 396, 256 m, coll. 

RV Acheron (AK 4604). 

?♂ (6.9 mm), east of Bermagui, New South Wales, 

Australia, 36°25.2’S, 50° 8.5’E, 5 September 994, 220 

m, coll. Southern Surveyor (AM P74738). 


dorsal surfaces polished in appearance, widest at 

pereonite 6, lateral margins subparallel. Rostral point 

present, folded ventrally and posteriorly. Eyes large, 

not medially united (just under 50%), separated by 

about 6% width of head; each eye made up of ~7 

transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with ~9 

ommatidia; eye colour red. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 

each with posteroventral angle rounded. Coxae 5–7 

with entire oblique carina; posterior margins convex, 



margins not extending to posterior margin 


free, not overlapped by lateral margins of pleonite 4. 

Pleotelson 0.8 times as long as anterior width, dorsal 

surface without longitudinal carina; lateral margins 

convex, serrate (weakly), posterior margin converging 

to caudomedial point, with 0 RS. 





article 4 2.2 times as long as wide, 0.8 times as long as 

combined lengths of articles –3, inferior margin with 

0 plumose setae, and 0 short simple setae (anterodistal 

angle with 4 long simple setae); article 5 .3 times as 

long as article 4, 2.8 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 2 pappose setae, anterodistal angle with 

cluster of 5 short simple setae (long SS, and 2 pappose 

setae); flagellum with 14 articles, extending to posterior 




margin concave; anterior margin with median point, 



lobe; palp article 2 with 4 distolateral setae (2 serrate, 

2 simple), 3 with 3 setae. Maxillule with 6 terminal RS 

( large, 5 slender). Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 RS ( 

biserrate); lateral lobe with 3 RS. Maxilliped endite with 

0 apical setae; palp article 2 with 2 RS; article 3 with 4 

recurved RS (all slender); article 4 with 4 hooked RS 

(and small slender; unevenly spaced with proximal 

3 distal); article 5 articulating with article 4, with 4 

hooked/straight RS (2 large, one of which is serrate, 

and 2 small slender). 




inferior margin with 0 RS ( long and short simple 

setae), superior distal angle with 0 RS ( simple seta); 

carpus 0.6 as long as merus; inferior margin with RS 

(large); propodus .9 times as long as proximal width, 

inferior margin with 2 RS (set as and distally), propodal 



2 ischium inferior margin with 0 RS, superior distal 

margin with RS; merus inferior margin with 3 RS 

(set as and 2 plus distal large simple seta), set as in 

two groups, superior distal margin with 0 acute RS ( 

simple seta); carpus similar in size to that of pereopod 

or longer than that of pereopod , with inferodistal 

lobe, inferodistal angle with RS. Pereopod 3 similar 

to pereopod 2. Pereopods 5–7 superior margins of 

ischium–carpus without setae. Pereopod 6 similar 

to pereopod 7 (with larger RS). Pereopod 7 basis 2.6 

times as long as greatest width, inferior margin with 


margin with 3 RS (set singly), superior distal angle with 

23

Figure 71. Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov. G, H, female paratype (8.6 mm, NIWA 240 0), remainder holotype. A, dorsal 

view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons, ventral view; E, frons, anterior view; F, penial openings; G, antenna peduncle; 

H, antennule peduncle. 



with 2 RS (single pair), superior distal angle with 7 


as ischium, 3.0 as long as wide, inferior margin with 3 

RS (set as and 2), superior distal angle with 6 RS (2 

biserrate), inferior distal angle with 6 RS; propodus . 

24 


margin with 2 RS (set singly), superior distal angle with 

slender seta (2 small simple and plumose setae), 



openings separated by 6% of sternal width.

Figure 72. Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov. Female paratype (8.6 mm, NIWA 240 0). A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; 

C, maxillule apex; D, maxilla ; E, maxilla apex; F, maxilliped; G, maxilliped articles 2–5; H, uropod exopod apex; I, uropod 

endopod apex. 

25

Figure 73. Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov. Female paratype (6.9 mm, NIWA 240 0). A–D, pereopods , 2, 6 and 7 respectively; 

E, dactylus unguis, pereopod 6; E, dactylus, pereopod 7. 

Pleopod 1 exopod .5 times as long as wide, lateral 

margin weakly convex, mesial margin strongly 

convex, with ~35 PMS; endopod .6 times as long as 

wide, lateral margin convex, mesial margin straight, 

endopod with ~ 7 PMS; peduncle .8 times as wide as 

long, peduncle mesial margin with 5 coupling hooks. 

Pleopod 2 exopod with ~36 PMS, endopod with ~ 8 

PMS; appendix masculina .2 times as long as endopod, 

distally acute. Pleopod 3 exopod with ~49 PMS, endo- 

26 

pod with ~ PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod with ~40 PMS, 


PMS. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with distolateral 

margin digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 each with 





Endopod apically deeply bifid, mesial process promi-

Figure 74. Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov. B holotype, remainder female paratype ([dissected] NIWA 240 0). A–E, pleopods –5 

respectively; E, uropod exopod, ventral view; F, uropod. 

nent, lateral margin straight, without prominent excision, 

lateral margin with RS, mesial margin weakly 

convex, with 2 RS (small). Exopod extending to end of 

endopod, 3.6 times as long as greatest width, apically 

deeply bifid, mesial process prominent; lateral margin 

weakly convex, lateral margin with 6 RS; mesial margin 

weakly convex, with 2 RS (small). 

femaLe: Similar to males, ovigerous females proportionally 

wider (2. times as long as greatest width). 

size: Males 4.9–6.7 mm (mean 5.4 mm, n = 5) ; ovigerous 

females 6.5– 0.2 mm, (mean 8.9 mm, n = 3), nonovigerous 

females 6.4–9.0 mm, (mean 7.7 mm, n = 7); 

one manca measured 4.4 mm, and eggs measured 

.0– .2 mm. 

27

Variation: Most specimens were damaged with uropods 

crushed or broken. Robust setae: (n = 3) pleotelson 

always without RS. Uropod exopod mesial (n = 9) margin 

0 ( 6%), 2 (42%) or 3 (36%), lateral margin 6 (56%) 

or 7 (44%); uropod endopod mesial margin (n = 9) with 

0 (42%), (37%) or 2 (2 %), lateral margin with only 

large RS distal to the pappose seta, twice without RS, 

possibly owing to damage. There is no discernable difference 

between males and females. The robust setae 

are small and fine. 

The small size of the species precluded making accurate 

direct counts of the robust setae on pereopods 

and 2 although of the specimens examined the pattern, 

number and size appears consistent. 

remarks: Aegiochus nohinohi sp. nov., at an average 

length of 5.4 mm for males, about 8 mm for females, 

is the smallest species of the genus in New Zealand 

waters. Aegiochus gordoni sp. nov. is similar in many aspects, 

but is distinctly larger (on average 43–66% longer 

BL than A. nohinohi). There are numerous morphological 

differences between these two species, including 

the eyes being smaller and more widely separated in 

A. nohinohi, uropod endopod mesial margin with fewer 

( or 2) and smaller RS (usually 3 in A. gordoni); pereopods 

–3 with more and much larger RS on the merus, 

carpus and propodus than does A. gordoni; pereopods 

–3 with a relatively shorter dactylus ( .2 as long as 

propodus for A. nohinohi v. .4 as long for A. gordoni), 

and the pereopods are in general more robust. These 

two species are distinguished from all other species in 

New Zealand by their small size, separate eyes, serrate 

pleopod exopods and weakly serrate shield-shaped 

pleotelson that totally lacks robust setae. 

Aegiochus perulis (Menzies & George, 972), known 

only from the female holotype from the East Pacific off 

Chile, is similar in appearance and size (9.2 mm), with 

relatively small and widely separated eyes, a similar 

frontal lamina and similar uropod and pleotelson 

shape. It differs in the body shape being more ovate 

and in having 2 robust setae on the posterior margin 

of the pleotelson. The brief description (Menzies & 

George 972) precludes further comparisons. 

A single specimen from off Bermagui, New South 

Wales (AM P74738) is provisionally included under 

this name. It agrees well with the New Zealand material, 

differing only in having the antennule and antenna 

proportionally longer (extending to the posterior of 

pereonites 2 and 3 respectively). 


distribution: Recorded from the Chatham Rise to the 

east of South Island, the Brothers Sea Mounts to the 

northeast of North Island and off Three Kings Island; 

possibly also southeastern Australia. 

28 

At depths from 360 to 40 metres (the minimum 

depth was recorded from a haul that ran from 360 to 

755 metres, all other records are from 698 metres or 

greater). 

etymoLogy: Nohinohi is a Mäori word that means small, 

this species being one of the smallest of those that occur 

New Zealand waters (noun in apposition). 

Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. (Figs 75–78) 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ (22 mm), northeast of 

Hawkes Bay, North Island, New Zealand, 37°0 .39’S, 

76°43.09’E, 20 Jul 998, 972– 207 m, Z9 8 , from hexactinellid 

sponge (NIWA 23775). 

Paratypes. New Zealand: ♀ (28 mm, dissected), 

Z9 8 , same data as holotype (NIWA 23776). ♂ ( 8.5 

mm), off Hawkes Bay, 40°0 .5’S, 78°03.3’E, 28 August 

986, from trawled sponge, 935 m (NMNZ Cr.5953). ♂ 

( 7.0 mm), off White Island, 37°23.7’S, 77°39.5–36.6’E, 

23 November 98 , 075– 00 m, FV USSR Kalinovo 

(NMNZ Cr. 20 9). 

Non-type material: Australia, Nsw: 5 ♂ ( 7.0, 7.5, 

8.0, 9.0, 9.5 mm), 6 ♀ (ovig. 27, 28, 29, 3 ; non-ovig. 

26, 30 mm) east of Cape Hawke, NSW, 32°06.02’S, 

53°08.09’E, 2 February 983, from sponge, 940–980 

m, coll. FRV Kapala (AM P347 3). 2 ♂ (20, 2 mm), 

east of Broken Bay, NSW, 33°32–39’S, 52°09– 2’E, 23 

August 983, 955 m, coll. FRV Kapala (AM P34709). 3 ♂ 

(20, 2 , 28 mm), east of Broken Bay, NSW, 33°39–37’S, 

52°06–07’E, 6 December 983, 006 m, coll. FRV 

Kapala (AM P34705). ♀ (ovig. 30 mm), many mancas 

(9.5– 0.5 mm), east of Broken Bay, NSW, 33°39–37’S, 

52°06–07’E, 6 December 979, 006 m, coll. FRV Kapala 

(AM P34706). Queensland: 3♂ ( 7.0, 8.5, 9.0 mm), 

2♀ (ovig. 23, 24 mm), Coral Sea, 7°0 .8’S, 5 °20. ’E, 

6 December 985, 800 m, coll. P.J.F. Davie on RV Soela 

(QM W 8829). New caledonia: ♀ (non-ovig. 34 mm), 

2 ° 5.0 ’S, 57°5 .33’E, 4 October 986, 970 m, MU- 

SORSTOM V (MNHN unreg). taiwan: ♂ (20 mm), 

22°20.98’N, 20°6.73’E, 2 November 200 , 690–700 m, 

Otter Trawl (Le Drézén type JUNEAUX), stn CD 32, coll. 

RV Ocean Researcher (MTQ W 3680). 

Unmeasured: Eastern Australia. 3♀ (ovig.), east of 

Cape Hawke, NSW, 32°09’S, 53°09’E, 8 July 984, 

052– 25 m, coll. FRV Kapala (AM P43976). ♂, east 

of Long Reef Point, NSW, 32°45–4 ’S, 52°00–03’E, 

October 984, 5– 005 m, coll. FRV Kapala (AM 

P37504). ♂, east of Broken Bay, NSW, 33°32–29’S, 

52°09– 2’E, 23 August 983, 955 m, coll. FRV Kapala 

(AM P34708). ♂, east of Broken Bay, NSW, 33°32–24’S, 

52°09– 2’E, 23 August 983, 955 m, coll. FRV Kapala 

(AM P34707, photographed). 2♀ (ovig), southeast of 

Newcastle, NSW, 33°05–04’S, 52°33–36’E, 5 May 

988, from glass sponge, 900–950 m, coll. FRV Kapala 

(AM P43980). 2♀ (ovig), east of Broken Bay, NSW,

33°47–44’S, 5 °59’– 52°0 ’E, from sponge, 987– 005 

m, coll. FRV Kapala (AM P43979). 2♀ (non-ovig), northeast 

of Tuncurry, NSW, 32°08’S, 53°09’E, 989, with 

bits of hexactinellid sponge attached, 034– 079 m (AM 

P4398 ). 94 specimens, off Tuncurry, NSW, 32°09–05’S, 

53°09’E, 2 June 988, ‘from tall sponge’, 066– 00 

m, coll. FRV Kapala (AM P43973). 

Additional material: vanuatu: MUSORSTOM, 8, 

coll. B. Richer de Forges: 3, 5°57.30’S, 67°27.73’E, 5 

October 994, stn. CP 080, 799–850 m (MNMN Is.5868); 

2, 8°57.70’S, 68°54.40’E, 29 September 994, stn. 

CP 037, 058– 086 m, (MNMN Is.5869); 3, 8°0 .00’S, 

68°48.20’E, 20 September 994, stn. CP 036, 920–950 

m (MNMN Is.5870); 3, 5°52.62’S, 67°20.36’E, 22 

September 994, stn. CP 082, 492–520 m, in sponge 

(MNMN Is.5871); 3, 6°00.73’S, 66°39.94’E, 0 October 

994, stn. CP 29, 0 4– 050 m, (MNMN Is.5872). New 

caledonia: , 2 °42.8 ’S, 66°4 .95’E, 20 March 994, 

HALIPRO stn. CP858, 000– 20 m, coll. B. Richer 

de Forges (MNHN Is.5873). 2, 25° 7’S, 70°24’E, 

November 996, HALIPRO 2, stn. BT25, 000– 348 m, 

from hexactinellid sponge, coll. B. Richer de Forges 

(MNHN Is.5874). 3, 2 °4 .80’S, 66°40. 0’E, March 

993, BATHUS stn. CP65 , 080– 8 m, coll. B. 

Richer de Forges (MNHN Is.5875). , 24°44.24’S, 

170°0.01’E, 24 Feb 1993, BATHUS 3 St. DW776, 770–830 

m, coll. B. Richer de Forges (MNHN Is.5877). 3, 24°43.49’S, 

170°07.07’E, 24 November 1993, BATHUS 3 stn. DW778, 

750–760 m, coll. B. Richer de Forges (MNHN Is.5878). 

Also examined: Comparative material of Aegiochus 

plebeia, see Appendix 2. 


dorsal surfaces sparsely punctate, widest at pereonite 

5, lateral margins weakly ovate. Rostral point folded 

ventrally and posteriorly. Eyes large, not medially 

united, separated by about 8– 0% width of head; each 

eye made up of ~8–9 transverse rows of ommatidia, 

each row with ~ 8 ommatidia; eye colour dark brown. 


with small distinct produced point. Coxae 5–7 with 

entire oblique carina; posterior margins straight and 

sinuate (coxa 6 sinuate, 7 straight), posterolateral angle 

acute (less than 45°). Pleon with pleonite visible in 

dorsal view; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins extending 

to but not beyond posterior margin of pleonite 




carina; lateral margins convex, notched, posterior margin 

converging to caudomedial point, with 2 RS. 



3.3 times as long as wide (narrowing distally); flagellum 

with 9 articles, extending to anterior of pereonite 

. Antenna peduncle article 4 2.0 as long as wide, 0.8 

times as long as combined lengths of articles –3, 

inferior margin 0 plumose setae, and 4 short simple 

setae; article 5 .0 times as long as article 4, 2.2 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 palmate setae, 

anterodistal angle with cluster of 5 short simple setae; 

flagellum with 21 articles, extending to posterior of 

pereonite 2. 


projecting, blade-like, wider than long, posteriorly 

rounded, anterior margin acute, forming median angle, 



lobe; palp article 2 with 8 distolateral setae (biserrate), 

palp article 3 with 25 setae (simple; distal 3 markedly 

longer than remainder). Maxillule with 7 terminal RS 

(three largest being weakly hooked). Maxilla mesial 

lobe with 3 RS (straight); lateral lobe with 4 RS. Maxilliped 

endite with 2 apical setae (minute); palp article 

2 with 2 RS; article 3 with 5 recurved RS (straight or 

weakly recurved); article 4 with 4 hooked RS; article 5 

with 6 RS (as 2 stout and 2 pairs of slender). 

Pereopod 1 basis 3.0 as long as greatest width; ischium 

0.5 times as long as basis, inferior margin with 

0 RS, superior distal margin with RS (and one short 

simple seta); merus inferior margin with RS (minute), 

superior distal angle with 0 RS ( simple seta); carpus 

0.7 as long as merus, inferior margin with RS (set on 

weak lobe); propodus 2.6 times as long as proximal 

width, inferior margin with RS, propodal palm with 

large distal lobe (with distal margin at right angles to 

axis of propodus), dactylus smoothly curved, .5 as 


with 0 RS, superior distal margin with RS (and 

simple seta); merus inferior margin with 4 RS (concave, 

distally lobed), set as single row or two groups, 

superior distal margin with acute RS; carpus longer 

than that of pereopod , with inferodistal lobe, inferodistal 

angle with 2 RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 

2. Pereopods 5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus 

with short RS. Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7 (but 

longer). Pereopod 7 basis 3.2 times as long as greatest 




angle with 3 RS; merus .3 as long as ischium, 2.6 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as 4 

clusters of , 2, and ), superior distal angle with 0 



with 4 RS (set as , 2 and submarginal), superior 


propodus .0 as long as ischium, 4. times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 6 RS (set as 3 loose clusters 

of 2 each), superior distal angle with 3 slender setae, 




29

Figure 75. Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. A–E, holotype; F, ovigerous female; remainder female NIWA 23776. A, dorsal view; 

B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, penial openings; F, dorsal view; G, antenna; H, antennule. 

Pleopod 1 exopod 2.0 as long as wide, distally narrowly 

rounded, mesial margin weakly oblique, lateral 

margin distally concave, mesial margin strongly convex, 

with PMS on distal two-thirds; endopod 2.0 as 

long as wide, distally rounded, lateral margin weakly 

concave, with PMS on distal margin only, mesial margin 

with PMS on distal half; peduncle .4 times as wide 

as long, mesial margin with 6 coupling hooks. Pleopod 

2 appendix masculina basally swollen (weakly), .0 as 

long as endopod, distally bluntly rounded. Exopods 

of pleopods –3 each with distolateral margin not digitate; 

endopods of pleopods 3–5 each with distolateral 

30 





Endopod apically sub-bifid, mesial process prominent, 

lateral margin straight, without prominent excision, 

proximal lateral margin with RS, distal lateral margin 

with 3 RS, mesial margin weakly convex, with 7 


as long as greatest width, apically sub-bifid, mesial 

process prominent; lateral margin convex, with 3 RS; 

mesial margin convex, with 5–7 RS.

Figure 76. Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. A, B, E, H I, male NMNZ Cr.5953, remainder female paratype NIWA 23776; A, mandible; 

B, mandible palp article 3; C, maxillule; D, maxillule apex; E, maxillule apex, oblique view; F, maxilla; G, maxilla apex; H, 

maxilliped; I, maxilliped articles 2–5; J, female maxilliped; K, female maxilliped articles 2–5. 

3

Figure 77. Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. Holotype. A–D, pereopods , 2, 6 and 7 respectively; E, dactylus unguis, pereopod 6; 

F, dactylus, pereopod 7; G, distolateral margin, pereopod 6 merus; H, distolateral margin, pereopod 6 carpus. 

32

Figure 78. Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. F, female paratype NIWA 23776; remainder holotype. A–E pleopods –5 respectively; 

F, uropod exopod, ventral view; G, uropod; H, uropod rami, apices; I, pleotelson, dorsal view. 

femaLe: Body 2.0 as long as greatest width, lateral 

margins ovate; otherwise similar to male. 

size: Males 7–28 mm (mean = 20 mm, n = 7); ovigerous 

females 23–3 mm (mean = 27 mm, n = 7); nonovigerous 

females 26–34 mm (mean = 28 mm, n = 4). 

Variation: Robust setae: (n = 4) pleotelson RS 6+6 (50%), 

5+6 (36%) and 5+5 ( 4%). Uropod exopod mesial margin 

5 (25%), 6 (50%), 7 (2 %) and 8 once, lateral margin 

2 (39%) or 3 (57%); uropod endopod mesial margin 

varied from 5 to 0 RS with 7 (26%), 8 (34%) or 9 (34%) 

the most frequent, lateral margin with +2 ( 0%), +3 

33

(64%). 2+3 ( 4%), and 2+2 (7%). There is no discernable 

difference between males and females, nor does the 

number of RS increase with the size of the specimen. 

The most distal RS on the uropodal endopod lateral 

margin (see Fig. 78H) is small and is usually lost with 

damage to the apex—this RS has not been included in 

the numbers given here. The most proximal RS on the 

uropodal exopod lateral margin is minute and could 

often be missed, and therefore the maximum number 

of RS could be one more than here stated. 

remarks: The morphology of pereopods –3 is unique. 

No other species has a similarly shaped distal lobe on 

the propodus, nor the inferodistal lobes of the merus 

and carpus of pereopods 2 and 3. This character is 

consistent for males, females and mancas, and serves 

to identify the species. The specimen from Taiwan 

agrees entirely with material from the southwestern 

Pacific, notably in the details of the propodus of pereopods 

–3, eye size, coxal shape, shape of the frontal 

lamina and the counts for the marginal robust setae 

on the pleotelson and uropods. The distribution of 

this species from New Zealand and Australia to Japan 

suggests that some records of Aegiochus plebeia may be 


Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 897), from the North 

and East Pacific (see Brusca 983), is perhaps the most 

similar species. Compared to Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. 

A. plebeia (Appendix 2, Figs 43, 44) has a weak distal 

lobe provided with a prominent and large robust seta 

on the propodus of pereopods –3; has larger eyes, 

each with a wider mesial margin; the coxae are more 

truncate, scarcely extending posteriorly; and the lateral 

margins of the pleotelson are more strongly convex 

with 8–10 robust setae. Brusca’s (1983) figures and 

description of pereopod are not in mutual agreement—being 

described as having a propodal plate but 

figured without such. Brusca’s figures agree well with 

those of Hansen ( 897) but there is the possibility that 

more than one species is being identified under the name 

of A. plebeia (note—this epithet is frequently misspelled, 

e.g. plebeja—Brandt & Poore 2003; Gurjanova 936; 

Nierstrasz 93 ; plebia—Wetzer 990). Other similar 

species are Aegiochus symmetrica (Richardson, 905b) 

(northwestern Pacific) and Aegiochus ventrosa (Sars, 

859) (North Atlantic), but both of these species lack the 

propodal lobe on the anterior pereopods. See Appendix 

2 for supplementary description of Aegiochus plebeia. 


distribution: Widespread in the western Pacific. Off 

northeastern North Island, New Zealand; also eastern 

Australia, New Caledonia, Vanuatu and Taiwan, 

frequently recorded from ‘glass sponges’ (Hexactinellidae). 

Most records are at depths from 700 to 25 

34 

metres in the southwestern Pacific, with single record 

of 492–520 metres off New Caledonia and 690–700 

metres off Taiwan. Frequency of collection suggests 

that this widespread species is common in the southwestern 

Pacific 

etymoLogy: The epithet, piihuka, a Mäori word meaning 

hook, alluding to the hooked anterior legs. 

Aegiochus pushkini (Kussakin & Vasina, 982), 

comb. nov. (Figs 79–83) 

Aega pushkini Kussakin & Vasina, 1982: 265, figs 7, 8.– Kensley, 

200 : 227. 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♀ (non-ovig. 15.3 mm), 

Ob’ Bank, southern Indian Ocean, Stn 2634/4 2 (inner 

label states 659/4 2). 52° 7.8’S, 4 °4 .9’E, 4 0 m, coll. 

Skif (ZIAS RAN No /7 625). 

New Zealand: ♂ ( 6.5 mm [dissected]), southwest 

of New Zealand, 53.9 67°S, 58.9 67°E, 25 November 

1961, 366 m, stn C734 (NIWA 24008). ♀ (non-ovig. 17.0 

mm), manca (crushed), also C734 (NMNZ Cr. 2003). 

south Atlantic: ♀ (ovig. 25 mm, non-ovig. 17.5, 16.0 

mm), off Bouvet Island, 54°22.49–54’S, 03° 7.58–2 ’E, 

25 November 2003, 34– 22 m, coll. ANT2 /2 BENDEx 

(ZMH K-4 228). 

desCription (of new zeaLand speCimen): Body 2.2 times 

as long as greatest width, dorsal surfaces smooth and 

sparsely punctate, widest at pereonites 5 and 6, lateral 

margins weakly ovate. Rostral point folded ventrally 

and posteriorly. Eyes large, not medially united, separated 

by about 2% width of head; each eye made up of 

~ 7 transverse rows of ocelli, each row with ~ 0 ocelli; 

eye colour pale brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each 

with posteroventral angle right-angled. Coxae 5–7 with 

entire oblique carina; posterior margins straight posterolateral 

angle blunt (more than 45°). Pleon with pleonite 



of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, 






Antennule peduncle article 3 and 4 .0 times as long 


times as long as wide; flagellum with 12 articles (articles 

2– with distal margin widest), extending to anterior 

of pereonite . Antenna peduncle article 4 2. times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with plumose seta (?); 

article 5 0.9 times as long as article 4, 2.6 times as long as 

wide (widest distally), inferior margin with pappose 

seta (?); extending to middle of pereonite 2.

Figure 79. Aegiochus pushkini (Kussakin & Vasina, 982). Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view (coxa of pereonite 3 damaged); 

C, head; D, frons, ventral view; E, pleotelson posterior margin; F, pereopods 3– , left to right, in situ; G, uropod, in situ. 



margin concave, anterior margin with median point, 



lobe; palp article 2 with 2 distolateral setae (all but 

biserrate), palp article 3 with 22 setae. Maxillule with 7 

terminal RS ( large, moderate and 5 slender). Maxilla 

mesial lobe with 3 RS ( straight, 2 biserrate); lateral 

35

Figure 80. Aegiochus pushkini (Kussakin & Vasina, 982). Male, NIWA 24008. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons, 

ventral view; E, penial openings; F, coxae 2–4, right side; G, antenna peduncle; H, antennule peduncle. 

lobe with 3 RS. Maxilliped endite with apical seta; palp 

article 2 with 2 RS (straight); article 3 with 2 recurved 

RS (and large serrate and straight setae); article 4 

with 4 hooked RS; article 5 with 4 RS (long serrate). 





angle with 0 RS ( slender seta); carpus .2 as long as 

merus; inferior margin with RS; propodus .7 times 

36 

as long as proximal width, inferior margin with RS 

(distal), propodal palm simple, without blade or process, 

dactylus smoothly curved, .2 as long as propodus. 


distal margin with RS; merus inferior margin with 

3 RS (set as +2, proximal seta minute), set as two 

groups, superior distal margin with 0 acute RS (3 slender 

setae); carpus similar in size to that of pereopod , 

inferodistal angle with RS (large). Pereopod 3 similar 

to pereopod 2 (but with single RS on propodal palm).

Figure 81. Aegiochus pushkini (Kussakin & Vasina, 982). Male, NIWA 24008. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; 

C, maxillule; D, maxillule apex; E, maxilla; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped articles 2–5. 

37

Figure 82. Aegiochus pushkini (Kussakin & Vasina, 982). Male, NIWA 24008. A–E, pereopods –3, 6, and 7 respectively. 

38

Figure 83. Aegiochus pushkini (Kussakin & Vasina, 982). Male, NIWA 24008. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; 

E, uropod, in situ. 



5 palmate setae; ischium .4 as long as basis, inferior 

margin with 3 RS (set as and 2), superior distal angle 

with 5 RS, inferior distal angle with 3 RS; merus .4 



with 0 RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; carpus .3 



with 9 RS, inferior distal angle with 5 RS; propodus . 


margin with 6 RS (set as 2, 2 and 2), superior distal 

angle with 2 slender setae (and robust seta), inferior 






strongly convex, with PMS from distal two-thirds, 

with ~60 PMS; endopod 2.2 times as long as wide, 

distally rounded, lateral margin weakly concave, with 

PMS from distal one-third, mesial margin with PMS 

from distal one-third, endopod with ~28 PMS; pedun- 

39

cle 2.0 as wide as long, mesial margin with 7 coupling 

hooks. Pleopod 2 exopod with ~75 PMS, endopod with 

~50 PMS (24 short PMS on mesial margin); appendix 

masculina basally swollen, 0.96 times as long as endopod, 

distally acute. Pleopod 3 exopod with ~78 PMS, endopod 

with ~ 8 PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod with ~76 PMS, 


PMS. Exopods of pleopods –5 each with distolateral 

margin not deeply serrate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 

each with mediodistal point; pleopods 2–5 peduncle 


Uropod peduncle posterior lobe about one-half 

as long as endopod. Uropod rami extending beyond 

pleotelson. Endopod apically not bifid, lateral margin 

straight, without prominent excision, proximal lateral 

margin with RS, distal lateral margin with 2 RS, mesial 

margin weakly convex, with 7 RS. Exopod not extending 

to end of endopod, 2.3 times as long as greatest 

width, apically not bifid; lateral margin convex, with 

3 RS; mesial margin convex, with 5 RS. 

femaLe: The single female, taken at the same station as 

the New Zealand male, differs in a number of minor 

characters, and its identity is here regarded as provisional 

(see ‘Remarks’). 

size: New Zealand material examined here 6.5– 7.0 

mm; specimens from Bouvet Island, 6.0–25 mm. 

Variation: Robust setae: pleotelson RS 4+4 (holotype) 

and 5+5 (New Zealand). The holotype had only one 

uropod, so no assessment was possible for uropodal 

robust setae. The robust setae of the pereopods were 

consistent between specimens, as illustrated (Figs 79F, 

82). The Bouvet Island specimens are in good condition, 

and have variable counts for robust setae: pleotelson 

RS 4+4, 5+5 and 7+7; uropodal endopod mesial margin 

7 (three times), 9 (twice) and 0 (once), lateral margin 

+2 (all); uropodal exopod lateral margin with 0– 2 

RS, mesial with 5 (twice) or 6 (four times). The coxae of 

pereonites 5–7 on the Bouvet Island specimens have a 

weakly concave posterior margin, while this is straight 

in the New Zealand specimens and the holotype. 

Bouvet Island specimens dorsally brown, laterally 

with patches of white chromatophores on all or some 

of pereonites 4–6. 

remarks: The mesially narrow eyes, rectangular posterior 

margins of coxal plates 2–4, wide and short frontal 

lamina with the posterior margin forming a distinctly 

concave blade, close-set penial openings in the males 

and the presence (and pattern and number) of robust 

setae on the uropods and pleotelson all allow identification 


40 

Aegiochus pushkini belongs with a group of Aegiochus 

species characterised by their relatively small size, 

the posterior margin of the frontal lamina forming a 

blade and relatively slender pereopods armed with 

small robust setae. Two of these, Aegiochus nohinohi sp. 

nov. and A. gordoni sp. nov., can be distinguished by 

the rami of pleopod and 2 being deeply serrate and 

lacking robust setae on the pleotelson. The remaining 

species with similar pereopodal, uropodal and pleotelson 

morphology can be separated by having the eyes 

united (Aegiochus kakai sp. nov. and A. kanohi sp. nov.) 

or by having the distal margin of the propodal palm of 

pereopods –3 expanded (A. piihuka sp. nov.). 

Other superficially similar species from the southern 

Indian Ocean are Aegiochus crozetensis (Kussakin & 

Vasina, 982), see p. 237, and A. uschakovi (Kussakin, 

967) see p. 24 . The former has far larger eyes and a 

narrower frontal lamina which has a convex posterior 

margin, while the latter also has a narrower frontal 

lamina and also has a far wider uropod endopod. 

The specimens from three widely distant locations 

show a degree of variation not usually observed within 

a species. The holotype and male New Zealand specimen 

agree closely, differing principally in the male 

having a wider frontal lamina and two distal robust 

setae on pereopod 2 merus. The female New Zealand 

specimen is in good condition and shows rather more 

differences that can be ascribed to sexual dimorphism. 

These differences include a more strongly serrated 

and posteriorly wider pleotelson margin, the antennal 

flagellum extending to the posterior of pereonite 

3 (it is more usual in dimorphic species that the male 

has the longer antennal flagellae), coxae 7 are slightly 

more acute. The specimens from Bouvet Island are in 

close agreement with the New Zealand female, but 

show considerable variation in pleotelson robust setae 

(from 8 to 4), the large female has the posterior margin 

of coxae 5–7 weakly concave and the small specimen 

is similar to the New Zealand material; the pereopod 

and uropod morphology seems identical in all of these 

specimens. Without a larger series of specimens from 

one location it is not possible to further assess the consistency 

of such differences. In view of these differences 

I consider the New Zealand male to be the same as 

the holotype, but the remaining specimens to be only 

provisionally determined as this species. 


distribution: Recorded from the southern Indian Ocean 

(Kussakin & Vasina 982); in the New Zealand region 

off southern South Island, Macquarie Ridge; off Bouvet 

Island (to Norway), South Atlantic; all localities 

between 52° and 54° South. At depths from 22 to 4 0 

metres.

Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. (Figs 84–87) 

materiaL examined: Holotype. ♂ (27 mm), west of North 

Island, New Caledonia Trough, 37°30.55’S, 72° 3.60’E, 

23 April 2000, sea mount, 000 m, coll. RV Kaharoa 

(NIWA 7933). 

Paratype. ♀ (33 mm), west of North Island, New Caledonia 

Trough, 37°30.3 ’S, 72° 3.68’E, 24 April 2000, 

sea mount, 060 m, coll. RV Kaharoa (NIWA 7934). 

Additional material: tasman sea: Crushed specimen, 

west of North Island, New Caledonia Trough, 

37°30.3 ’S, 72° 3.68’E, 24 April 2000, sea mount, 060 

m, (NIWA 7935). ♀ (non-ovig. 28 mm), West Norfolk 

Ridge, 34° 7.84’S, 68°25.82’E, 2 June 2003, 25 – 268 

m, coll. NORFANZ (NIWA 7937). ♀ (non-ovig. 38 

mm), West Norfolk Ridge, 34° 4.33’S, 68°2 . 8’E, 

3 June 2003, 95– 202 m, coll. NORFANZ (NIWA 

7938). pacific New Zealand: ♀ (crushed ovig.), 

Chatham Rise, Shipley Sea Mount, 4 .80 2–8005°S, 

80.5065–4967°E, 6 June 2006, 240– 275 m (NIWA 

25672). taiwan: ♂ (3 mm), off Taiwan, 22° 6.56’N, 

20°6. ’E, 22 November 2001, 736– 040 m, Otter Trawl 

(Le Drézén type JUNEAUX), stn CD 34, coll. RV Ocean 

Researcher (MTQ W 368 ). New caledonia, HALIPRO 

2, coll. B. Richer de Forges: 2♀ (34 mm non-ovig, 

damaged ~25 mm), 25°20’S, 68°55’E, 2 November 

996, stn. BT32, 697– 340 m (MNHN Is.5858); ♀ (ovig, 

40 mm), 25°04’S, 68°44’E, 7 November 966, stn. 

BT55, 098– 480 (MNHN Is.5859); ♂ (30 mm), ♀ (42 

mm, non-ovig.), 25°52’S, 68°44’E, 8 November 996, 

stn. BT60, 33– 280 m (MNHN Is.5857). 


dorsal surfaces smooth, sparsely punctate (finely 

pilose), widest at pereonite 5, lateral margins subparallel. 

Rostral point ventrally directed. Eyes large, 

not medially united, separated by about 0% width 


ommatidia, each row with ~9 ommatidia; eye colour 

black. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle rounded. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; 

posterior margins convex, posterolateral angle blunt 

(more than 45°). Pleon with pleonite visible in dorsal 


to but not beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 



long as anterior width, dorsal surface without longitudinal 

carina; lateral margins convex, serrate (weakly), 

posterior margin with truncate median excision, with 

– 2 RS (each set within serration). 




4 

extending to anterior of pereonite . Antenna peduncle 

article 4 .3 times as long as wide, 0.8 times as long as 

combined lengths of articles –3, inferior margin 0 plumose 

setae, and 0 short simple setae; article 5 .3 times 

as long as article 4, 2.6 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with palmate seta, anterodistal angle with 

cluster of 3 short simple setae (and 1 palmate); flagellum 

with 27–30 articles, extending to pereonite 4. 


with lateral margins converging posteriorly, anterior 

margin acute, forming median angle, posterior margin 

forming narrow stem. 


lobe; palp article 2 with 2 distolateral setae ( long, 

remainder short), palp article 3 with 34 setae. Maxillule 

with 0 terminal RS ( large, 9 slender). Maxilla mesial 

lobe with 3 RS (2 hooked, straight); lateral lobe with 3 

RS (hooked). Maxilliped endite with 4 apical setae (flat, 

blade-like, with CPS); palp article 2 with 4 RS (small 

hooked); article 3 with 8 recurved RS (4 hooked lateral 

and 4 long slender distal); article 4 with 4 hooked RS; 

article 5 with 4 RS (3 straight, hooked). 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 2 RS (acute); merus 

inferior margin with 2 RS (minute), set as proximal 

group, superior distal angle with 0 RS (2 slender 

setae); carpus 0.9 as long as merus, inferior margin 

with RS (minute); propodus 2. times as long as 

proximal width, inferior margin with 0 RS, propodal 




margin with RS; merus inferior margin with 4 RS, 

set as single row (widely spaced series), superior distal 

margin with acute RS; carpus similar in size to that 

of pereopod , inferodistal angle with 2 RS. Pereopod 3 





0.5 as long as basis, inferior margin with 3 RS (set as 


angle with 4 RS; merus . as long as ischium, 2.0 as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as 3 and ), 



long as wide, inferior margin with 3 RS (set as and 2), 


with 8 RS; propodus 0.9 as long as ischium, 3. times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 3 RS (set as 2 and 

), superior distal angle with acute RS (plus 3 slender 

setae), inferior distal angle with 2 RS. 


6% of sternal width.

Figure 84. Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. I, J male paratype, NIWA 7934; remainder holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; 

C, head; D, frons; E, frons, anterior view; F, pleotelson; G, pleotelson, posterior margin; H, sternite 7 showing penial openings; 

I, antennule; J, antenna peduncle. 


broadly rounded, lateral margin weakly convex, 

mesial margin strongly convex, with PMS on distal 

one-third; distally rounded, lateral margin strongly 

concave, with PMS on distal one-third, mesial margin 

42 

with PMS on distal one-third; peduncle .6 times as 

wide as long, mesial margin with 9 coupling hooks. 

Pleopod 2 appendix masculina distally widest, 0.9 times 

as long as endopod, distally bluntly rounded. Exopods 

of pleopods –3 each with distolateral margin not digi-

Figure 85. Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. Male paratype, NIWA 7934. A, mandible; B, mandible palp, article 3; C, maxillule; 

D, maxillule apex; E, maxilla; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped articles 2–5. 

tate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 each with distolateral 





Uropod rami extending beyond pleotelson. Endopod 

apically deeply bifid, mesial process prominent, lateral 

margin sinuate (very weakly sinuate), without 

prominent excision, proximal lateral margin with 0 RS, 

distal lateral margin with 2 RS, mesial margin strongly 

convex, with 9– 0 RS. Exopod extending beyond end of 

endopod (slightly), 2.7 times as long as greatest width, 

apically deeply bifid, mesial process prominent; lateral 

margin weakly convex, with 2– 3 RS; mesial margin 

straight (or very weakly concave, distally convex), 

with 5 RS. 

43 

femaLe: Similar to male. 

size: Specimens from the New Zealand region: males 

27–33 mm, non-ovigerous females 28–33 mm; largest 

size a 42 mm female from New Caledonia.

Figure 86. Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. C, male paratype, NIWA 7934; remainder holotype. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7, 

respectively; D, pereopod , inferior margin of merus and carpus. 

Variation: There were only two intact specimens 

available at time of description, therefore the details 

here are of range only. Robust setae on the pleotelson 

ranged from 0 or . Uropod endopod mesial margin 

8– 2 RS, lateral margin always 2 RS; uropod exopod 

mesial margin 5 or 6 RS, lateral margin 2 or 3 RS. In 

both specimens there were 3 minute RS set within the 

apical notch. 

remarks: Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. is most similar to 

A. beri, but has coxae that are more blunt, more robust 

pereopods with a shorter dactylus ( .0 times as long 

as propodus v. .4 times as long in A. beri), ventral 

surface of frontal lamina is flat (angled in A. beri), the 

uropod rami and pleotelson margins are weakly serrate 

(strongly serrate in A. beri), the appendix masculina is 

weakly spatulate and as long as the endopod (terminally 

acute and shorter than the endopod in A. beri) 

and the apices of the uropodal rami are more widely 

bifid that in A. beri (narrowly bifid). In addition A. riwha 

has all dorsal body surfaces covered by brown chro- 

44 

matophores (A. beri is without such both in holotype 

and Lord Howe material), although without access to 

fresh or freshly preserved material it is not possible to 

place much reliance on colour difference. Given the 

proximity of the locations for the two species and the 

possibility of their being sympatric in part, these differences 

are considered to be of species-specific value. 

The difference in coxal shape readily and easily 

distinguishes Aegiochus riwha from Aegiochus beri. The 

anteriorly truncate notch on the pleotelson posterior 

margin separates these two species from all other 

southwestern Pacific and Southern Ocean species. 

Aegiochus quadratisinus (Richardson, 903) (Bruce 983) 

is known only from Hawai’i but, while similar to A. 

riwha, has smaller eyes and the anterior margins of the 

frontal lamina are concave. 

The maxilla appears to have the mesial lobe fused to 

the larger lateral lobe, and I could not distinguish the 

point of join under stereomicroscopy nor compound 

microscopy using DIC light interference.

Figure 87. Aegiochus riwha sp. nov. C–E, male paratype, NIWA 7934; remainder holotype. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; 

E, uropod; F, uropod endopod, ventral view; G, exopod apex; H, endopod apex. 

prey: There are no records. 

distribution: Northwestern New Zealand, and the 

southern West Norfolk Ridge; also off New Caledonia, 

and in the northwestern Pacific from off Taiwan. 

Potentially at depths of 697– 480 metres. 

etymoLogy: Riwha is a Mäori word meaning cleft or 

notch, in reference to the excision in the pleotelson 

(noun in apposition). 

45

Aegiochus tara sp. nov. (Figs 88–90) 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♀ (non-ovig. 3 mm), 

West Norfolk Ridge, 33°42.45’S, 67°27.03’E, 28 May 

2003, 45 – 478 m, coll. NORFANZ, RV Tangaroa 

(NIWA 7947). 

Paratype. ♀ (non-ovig. 22 mm), Tasmania, 48 km east 

of Cape Toureville, 42°00.25’S, 48°43.55’E, 30 October 

980, 264 m, gravel with sandy mud, G.C.B. Poore & 

co. (NMV J277 2). 

Other material: Comparative material of Aegiochus 

plebeia, see Appendix 2. 





Eyes large, not medially united, separated by about 


rows of ommatidia, each row with ~22 ommatidia; 

eye colour dark brown. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each 

with posteroventral angle acute, posteriorly produced. 

Coxae 5–7 with incomplete oblique carina; posterior 

margins concave, posterolateral angle acute (less than 


4 with posterolateral margins extending to but not 



margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson 0.9 times as long as 

anterior width, dorsal surface without longitudinal 

carina; lateral margins sinuate (posteriorly weakly 

concave), smooth, posterior margin converging to 

caudomedial point, with 4 RS (estimated). 

Antennule peduncle articles 3 and 4 . times as long 


times as long as wide (narrowing distally); flagellum 

with 9 articles, extending to posterior of pereonite . 

Antenna peduncle article 4 2.5 times as long as wide, 

.2 times as long as combined lengths of articles –3, 

inferior margin 0 plumose setae, and short simple 

seta; article 5 .0 times as long as article 4, 3.0 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 0 palmate setae, 


flagellum with 20 articles (terminal article/s missing), 

extending to middle of pereonite 3. 


projecting, blade-like, wider than long, posteriorly 

rounded, anterior margin acute, forming median angle, 



lobe; palp article 2 with 7 distolateral setae (simple and 

biserrate; with distal submarginal row 7 simple setae), 

palp article 3 with 25 setae (simple; distal most short, 

next 3 markedly longer than remainder). Maxillule with 

6 terminal RS (three largest being weakly hooked). 

46 

Maxilla mesial lobe with 3 RS (2 simple, serrate); 

lateral lobe with 7 RS (4 hooked, 3 short and straight). 

Maxilliped endite with 0 apical setae; palp article 2 with 

3 RS; article 3 with 8 recurved RS (straight or weakly 

recurved); article 4 with 4 hooked RS; article 5 with 4 

RS (two longest of which are biserrate). 

Pereopod 1 basis 2.8 times as long as greatest width 

(narrowing distally); ischium 0.3 times as long as basis, 


RS; merus inferior margin with 0 RS, superior distal 

angle with 0 RS ( simple seta); carpus 0.7 as long as 

merus, inferior margin with 0 RS; propodus 2.9 times as 

long as proximal width, inferior margin with RS, propodal 

palm with small distal lobe, dactylus smoothly 

curved, .0 as long as propodus. Pereopod 2 ischium 


RS; merus inferior margin with 3 RS (all small), set as 

two groups, superior distal margin with 0 acute RS (2 

simple setae); carpus similar in size to that of pereopod 

, inferodistal angle with RS (large weakly curved). 



similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 4.4 times as long 

as greatest width, inferior margins with 23 palmate 


RS, superior distal angle with 4 RS, inferior distal 

angle with 5 RS; merus .7 as long as ischium, 3.5 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as 2, 2 


angle with 6 RS; carpus .3 as long as ischium, 3.7 times 


superior distal angle with RS, inferior distal angle 


as long as wide, inferior margin with 4 RS (set as , 

and 2), superior distal angle with slender seta (and 

RS), inferior distal angle with 2 RS. 




convex, with PMS on distal one-third; lateral margin 

strongly concave, with PMS on distal one-third, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal half; peduncle .7 times as 



not digitate; endopods of pleopods 3–5 each with 





Uropod rami extending beyond pleotelson. Endopod 

apically not bifid, lateral margin straight, without 

prominent excision, proximal lateral margin with RS, 

distal lateral margin with 2 RS, mesial margin weakly 

convex, with 7 RS. Exopod extending to end of endopod, 

3.0 as long as greatest width, apically not bifid; lateral

Figure 88. Aegiochus tara sp. nov. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons, ventral view; E, pleotelson; 

F, pleonites, lateral margins; G, antennule; H, antenna peduncle. 

47

Figure 89. Aegiochus tara sp. nov. Holotype. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; C, mandible incisor; D, robust seta, 

manidible palp article 2; E, maxillule; F, maxillule apex; G, maxilla; H, maxilla apex; I, maxilliped; J, maxilliped articles 2–5; 

K, largest seta, maxilliped palp article 5. 

margin weakly convex, with 2 RS; mesial margin 

weakly convex, with 4 RS. 

maLe: Not known. 

size: Female 3 mm. 

Variation: Most pleotelson robust setae are missing 

although the sockets are clearly distinct. The apices of 

the uropodal rami and the pleotelson are all damaged, 

and while counts appeared the same for all margins, 

the numbers can be regarded only as estimates. 

remarks: Although similar to the sympatric Aegiochus 

piihuka sp. nov., Aegiochus tara sp. nov. is readily iden- 

48 

tified by the large but separate eyes, small distal lobe 

on the propodus of pereopods –3, that lobe bearing 

a prominent robust seta, the acute and laterally expressed 

coxal plates, the sinuate margins to the pleotelson, 

the apex of which is relatively strongly produced, 

and also the proximal one-third of the lateral margin 

of the uropodal exopod is devoid of setae. 

Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 890), a species of uncertain 

distribution (see p. 238), is also similar. Examination 

of the types shows that A. tara has a much narrower 

uropod exopod, terminally more acute pleotelson apex, 

smaller distal robust seta on the propodus of pereopods 

–3 and the coxae are strongly splayed and acute (not 

splayed and posteriorly produced as in A. plebeia).

Figure 90. Aegiochus tara sp. nov. Holotype. A, pereopod ; B, pereopod 2; C, pereopod 7; D, uropod exopod, ventral view; 

E, pleopod ; F, pleopod 2; G, uropod. 

Aegiochus ventrosa (Sars, 859), a North Atlantic species 

(see ‘Remarks’ for A. plebeia, see p. 238) is another 

similar species. A. ventrosa has been figured both with 

and without a prominent robust seta and weak propodal 

lobe on the palm of the propodus of pereopods –3, 

but pereopods –3 are more robust (propodus twice as 

long as wide) than those of Aegiochus tara (three times 

as long as wide). 


distribution: Tasman Sea; east of Cape Toureville, 

Tasmania and the West Norfolk Ridge to the west of 

northern New Zealand; 264– 478 metres. 

etymoLogy: The epithet, tara, is a Mäori word meaning 

spine or spiny in relation to marine animals. 

49

Aegiochus vigilans (Haswell, 88 ), comb. nov. 

(Fig. 9 ) 

restriCted synonymy: 

Aega ommatophylax Stebbing, 905: 2, pls IV, VA. 

Aega dubia Richardson, 1910: 12, fig. 2. 

Aega (Rhamphion) vigilans.– Bruce, 1993: 762, figs 3, 4 (citations 

therein). 

Aega giganteoculata Nunomura, 1988a: 19, figs 1, 2 (new 

synonymy). 

type LoCaLity: Holborn Island, near Port Dennison, 

Queensland (Springthorpe & Lowry, 994: 64). 

materiaL examined: Manca (7.0 mm), off Great Barrier 

Island, North Island, January 2006, old longline gear 

at ~500 m, coll. Steve Lowe (NIWA 23779). ♀ (nonovig. 

3 mm), New Caledonia, 2 °03.680–03.997’S, 

60°44.766–44.874’E, 2 October 2005, DW2636, 254– 

27 m, coll. B. Richer de Forge (MNH Is.59 0). 

Also examined: ♀ (non-ovig. 6.5 mm), northwest 

of Bluff Point, Geraldton, Western Australia, 27°40’S, 

50 

3°03’E, 22 March 963, 28 m, CSIRO stn 3 (WAM 

2293-86). 4, 93 km west of Dongara, Western Australia, 

20°07’S, 3°57’E, 9 February 976, 0 m, stn 30 

(WAM 2282-86). Paratypes of Aega giganteocula, two 

lots, heavily dissected (body no longer intact), off Itoman, 

Okinawa, Japan, July 985, coll. Hideo Sekiguchi 

(TSM Cr7649, Cr7650). , off Singapore, 3 May 95 , 

39 m, coral, Galathea stn 355 (ZMUC unreg). 

remarks: A detailed redescription of this widely distributed 

species was given by Bruce ( 983). As the 

sole specimen from New Zealand waters is a manca, a 

detailed redescription is not given, particularly as mature 

adult males possess two large forward-projecting 

processes on pereonite , and the rostrum is also produced, 

giving these animals a striking ‘three-horned’ 

appearance, abundantly different from all other species 

in the genus. Females and immature specimens can 

be identified by the huge, black, united eyes filling 

the head in dorsal view, the characteristic scalloping 

of the posterior margin of the pleotelson, shape of the 

Figure 91. Aegiochus vigilans (Haswell, 88 ). From Stebbing ( 905). A, dorsal view; B, head, lateral view; C–E, pereopods , 

2 and 7 respectively; F, pleotelson and uropods, ventral view; G, pleopod ; H, pleopod 2; I, uropod.

uropods, and the elongate and flat (‘cirolanid-like’) 

frontal lamina. Comparison with specimens from tropical 

Australia (Australian Museum, Western Australian 

Museum) confirm the identity of this immature specimen, 

the most southerly record for the species. 

Aegiochus vigilans shows a number of unique character 

states these being, in addition to the strongly 

dimorphic ornamentation of the mature males, a flat 

and elongate frontal lamina, cirolanid-like spination of 

the mandibular molar process, large blunt robust seta 

at the inferodistal margin of the carpus of pereopods 

2 and 3, an extremely long appendix masculina (more 

than twice as long as the endopod), and paired narrow 

penial processes; the maxilliped palp differs from others 

in that article 4 is comparatively small. 

Examination of paratypic material of Aega giganteocula 

Nunomura, 998, shows that it agrees entirely 

with the description of Aegiochus vigilans given by 

Bruce ( 983); I have no hesitation in making the 

synonymy. 

distribution: One record from northeastern New Zealand. 

Commonly recorded within the tropics from India 

to eastern Australia and the Philippines (Bruce 983); 

from shallow water on coral reefs to a depth of 27 m, 

possibly deeper. Collections examined at the Muséum 

national d’Histoire naturelle in Paris indicate that the 

species is common in New Caledonian waters. 

Aegiochus sp. 

materiaL examined: ♂ (damaged, 9.5 mm), Parengarenga 

Harbour, 2 Feb 974, Zostera and sand, 6–9 

m, coll. RV Acheron (AK 4607). 

remarks: This specimen, unfortunately in very poor 

condition, appears most similar to Aegiochus nohinohi 

sp. nov. Both species have relatively small eyes, similar 

pattern of setation on the pereopods, serrate pleopodal 

endopods, and the pleotelson without robust setae. A 

number of differences suggest that this specimen may 

be a distinct species: the frontal lamina appears to be a 

ventrally flat triangle (similar to that of Aegiochus pushkini), 

pereopods 2 and 3 have prominent robust setae 

on the inferior margin of the merus, and the uropod 

exopod and endopod each have two prominent robust 

setae on the mesial margins. Given the very different 

habitats of the two species (Parengarenga Harbour is 

a largely enclosed marine estuary, while A. nohinohi is 

known from oceanic shelf habitats, 360 to 40 metres) 

it seems very unlikely that this specimen is A. nohinohi. 

Unfortunately the specimen is too badly damaged to 

describe, and additional specimens would be necessary 

to adequately characterise the species. 

5 

Aegiochus sp. 

materiaL examined: ♀ (ovig. 2.9 mm), Rumble 3 sea 

mount, 78°29.79’E, 35°44.30’S, 20 May 200 , scoria 

rubble, 939–250 m, coll. RV Tangaroa (NIWA 34807). 

remarks: This specimen is very similar to Aegiochus 

kanohi sp. nov., but differs notably in the shape of the 

frontal lamina, which does not have a blade-like posterior 

margin, pereopod 2 which has one robust seta 

on the propodal palm, and in having robust setae on 

the pleotelson posterior margins. These are diagnostic 

characters, but without more specimens, including 

mature males, the species cannot adequately be characterised, 

nor differentiated from other similar sympatric 

species. Until further material is available it remains 

identified as Aegiochus sp. 

Epulaega gen. nov. 

type speCies: Aega fracta Hale, 940, here designated. 

speCies inCLuded: In addition to type species— Epulaega 

derkoma sp. nov., Epulaega nodosa (Schioedte & Meinert, 

879), comb. nov., Epulaega lethrina (Bruce, 983) comb. 

nov. and E. monilis (Barnard, 9 4) comb. nov. 

diagnosis: Rostrum minute, not visible in dorsal view. 

Eyes large, united. Antennule and antenna peduncle 

articles not expanded or produced. Maxillule with single 

large broad-based and several small RS. Maxilliped 

palp 5-articled, article shorter than wide, article 5 

minute. Penial processes medially fused, with separate 

openings. 


about 2 to 4 times as long as wide. Eyes large, medially 

united. Rostral point ventral or anteroventral, minute. 

Coxae 4–7 longer than respective segment, posteriorly 

produced. Pleon not abruptly narrower than pereon; 

pleonites all visible, pleon not widest posteriorly, pleonite 

5 laterally overlapped by pleonite 4; pleonites 3–5 

posteriorly produced to an acute point. 

Frontal lamina present, ovate, not in contact with labrum. 

Mandible with uni- or bicuspid incisor. Maxillule 

with 1 large flat terminal broad-based RS, several small 

RS. Maxilla lateral lobe with 3–5 terminal hooked RS, 

endite with 2–3 hooked RS. Maxilliped palp 5-articled, 

article shorter than wide, articles 3 and 4 each with 

2–6 stout recurved RS, article 5 minute, vestigial. 

remarks: All species of Epulaega gen. nov. have large 

medially united eyes, lack an obvious rostrum in dorsal 

view, maxilliped palp article 5 is a vestigial lobe, 

and the penial papillae are medially fused. The latter 

three states are defining apomorphies for the genus.

Most species are loosely associated with sponges, but 

Epulaega lethrina is unambiguously but not exclusively 

a commensal of coral reef fishes (principally Serranidae 

and Lethrinidae) on the Great Barrier Reef (Bruce 

983). On present records the genus has an Indo-West 

Pacific distribution to approximately 42° South in New 

Zealand. 

etymoLogy: From the Latin epulo (guest at a banquet or 

feast), in combination with Aega to indicate the family 

affinity. Gender feminine. 

Key to the new Zealand species of epulAegA 

Posterior margin of pereonites without nodules; 

dorsal surfaces of pleotelson smooth .................... 

...................................................E. derkoma sp. nov. 

– Posterior margin of pereonites with small nodules; 

dorsal surface of pleotelson with scattered small 

spines .............................................E. fracta (p. 56) 

Epulaega derkoma sp. nov. (Figs 92–95) 

materiaL: Holotype: ♀ (ovig. 7.7 mm), South Norfolk 

Basin, 25 July 975, 32° 0.80’S, 67°2 . 9’E, 356 m, DR 

Stn I96 (NIWA 23862). 



5, lateral margins weakly ovate. Rostral point 

ventrally directed. Eyes large, medially united (line of 

separation present), anterior clear field 17% length of 

head, posterior clear field 20% length of head; each eye 

made up of ~9 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row 

with ~7–8 ommatidia; eye colour dark brown (chestnut). 

Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle right-angled; posterior margins of pereonites not 

ornamented (posterior of pereonites 2 and 3 with weak 

submarginal transverse ridge). Coxae 5–7 with entire 

oblique carina (weakly defined) posterior margins 

convex, posterolateral angle blunt (more than 45°). 

Pleon with pleonite largely concealed by pereonite 7; 

pleonites with lateral margin of pleonites 4–5 plate-like 

and flattened; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins 


5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped by 



carina; lateral margins convex, smooth, posterior margin 

converging to caudomedial point, with RS rubbed 

off, only remaining. 

Antennule peduncle articles 3 and 4 . times as long 


times as long as wide; flagellum with 9 articles (article 

0.9 times as long as peduncle), extending to anterior 

of pereonite . Antenna peduncle article 4 2.3 times as 

52 

long as wide, 0.9 times as long as combined lengths of 

articles –3, inferior margin with plumose seta and 

2 short simple setae (distal); article 5 .4 times as long 


with pappose seta, anterodistal angle with cluster 

of 1 short simple seta (and 1 pappose seta); flagellum 

with 2 articles, extending to posterior of pereonite 3. 






lobe; palp article 2 with 0 distolateral setae (in two 

tiers, 4 biserrate, 4 stout simple, 2 slender simple), 

palp article 3 with 20 setae (terminal less than twice 

as long as remainder). Maxillule with 6 terminal RS ( 

large, 3 slender, 2 minute). Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 

RS (circumplumose); lateral lobe with 2 RS (curved). 

Maxilliped palp article 2 fused to article 3; article 3 with 3 

straight RS; article 4 with 2 straight RS; article 5 wholly 

fused to article 4, with RS. 



RS (small), superior distal margin with RS; merus 

inferior margin with RS (plus 2 slender setae), set as 

distal group, superior distal angle with RS (small); 

carpus 0.4 as long as merus; inferior margin with 0 RS; 

propodus 2. times as long as proximal width, inferior 

margin with 0 RS, propodal palm simple, without 

blade or process, dactylus smoothly curved, .0 as 


with RS (large blunt), superior distal margin with 

RS; merus inferior margin with 5 RS (large, blunt; 

set as , 2 and 2), set as three groups, superior distal 

margin with 2 acute RS; carpus similar in size to that 


similar to pereopod 2. Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 

7. Pereopod 7 basis 3.0 as long as greatest width, inferior 


basis, inferior margin with 2 RS (set as and ), superior 


RS; merus 0.9 as long as ischium, .7 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set as and ), superior 


RS; carpus .0 as long as ischium, 2.0 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with RS, superior distal angle 

with 8 RS (5 biserrate), inferior distal angle with 4 RS; 

propodus . as long as ischium, 4.0 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set as single cluster), 

superior distal angle with slender seta, inferior distal 


Pleopod 1 exopod 2.0 times as long as wide, lateral 

margin weakly convex, mesial margin strongly convex, 

with PMS from distal half, with ~34 PMS; endopod 2. 

times as long as wide, distally rounded, lateral margin 

straight, with PMS from on distal margin only, mesial

Figure 92. Epulaega derkoma sp. nov. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, pleonites, lateral view; E, frons; 

F, antenna; G, antennule peduncle. 

margin with PMS from distal one-third, endopod with 

~ 7 PMS; peduncle .8 times as wide as long, mesial 


~46 PMS, endopod with ~ 9 PMS. Pleopod 3 exopod 

with ~53 PMS, endopod with ~ 2 PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod 

with ~52 PMS, endopod with ~ 2 PMS. Pleopod 5 

exopod with ~48 PMS. Exopods of pleopods –3 each 

with distolateral margin not digitate; endopods of 

53

Figure 93. Epulaega derkoma sp. nov. Holotype. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; C, maxillule; D, maxillule apex; 

E, maxilla; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped articles 2–5. 

pleopods 3–5 each with distolateral point; pleopods 

2–5 peduncle distolateral margin with prominent 

acute RS. 


(and 2 plumose slender setae), posterior lobe about 

two-thirds as long as endopod. Endopod apically not 

bifid, lateral margin straight, without prominent excision, 

proximal lateral margin with 0 RS, distal lateral 

54 

margin with RS, mesial margin strongly convex, 

with 3 RS. Exopod not extending to end of endopod, 

3.2 times as long as greatest width, apically not bifid; 

lateral margin weakly convex, with 7 RS; mesial margin 

weakly convex, with RS. 

maLe: Not known.

Figure 94. Epulaega derkoma sp. nov. Holotype. A–D, pereopods –3 and 7, respectively (pereopod 3 basis omitted; 

pereopod 7 dactylus missing). 

Variation: There being but a single specimen, variation 

remains unknown. 

remarks: Epulaega derkoma sp. nov. is a distinctive species, 

readily identified by the large and united eyes, 

antennule flagellum article 1 being as long as peduncle 

article 3, flattened and plate-like lateral margins of the 

epimera, short dactylus on pereopods –3, and pereopods 

2 and 3 with conspicuously large robust setae. 

The maxilliped of ovigerous females is usually similar 

to that of males, with the robust setae usually being 

more slender. As with most species of the Aegidae the 

shape and pattern and number of robust setae on the 

pleotelson and uropods is also diagnostic. 

55 


distribution: Known only from the South Norfolk Basin, 

north of North Island, New Zealand. 

etymoLogy: Adapted from the Greek derkomai, meaning 

to see clearly (in allusion to the huge eyes).

Figure 95. Epulaega derkoma sp. nov. Holotype. A–D, pleopods –3, 5, respectively; E, uropod. 

Epulaega fracta (Hale, 940), comb. nov. (Figs 96–99) 

Aega fracta Hale, 1940: 296, fig. 4.– Bruce, Lew Ton & Poore, 

2002: 6 . 

Aega (Ramphion) fracta.– Brusca, 983: . 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ ( 4.9 mm), off the 

Tasmanian coast, Australia, coll. FIS Endeavour (AM 

E6747). Specimen may have been dried at some point 

as pin holes are evident. 

56 

Non-type material. ♂ ( 5.5 mm), off Great Barrier 

Island, North Island, October 2004, from Hyperoglyphe 

antarctica, longline at ~500 m, coll. Steve Lowe (NIWA 

34806). ♂ ( 4.4 mm), Conway Rise, off Kaikoura, 3 May 

987, in Symplectella, 400 m, coll. E. Barbarel (NMNZ 

Cr. 20 5). ♀ (non-ovig 5.5 mm), Conway Rise, off 

Kaikoura, 2 September 984, in ‘organ pipe’ sponge, 400 

m, coll. Ted Forbes on F.V. Bar-K-Lin (NMNZ Cr.4970). 

Imm. ♂ ( 0.6 mm), manca (6.0 mm), J/ 6/28/84, inside

Figure 96. Epulaega fracta (Hale, 940). A, holotype AM E6747, remainder NMNZ Cr.9260. A, dorsal view, holotype; 

B, dorsal view, NMNZ Cr.9260; C, lateral view; D, head; E, frons; F, pleonites, lateral view; G, sternite 7 showing penial openings; 

pleotelson; H, spines, dorsal surface of pleotelson; I, antenna peduncle; J antennule; K, antenna flagellum, article 11. 

large orange sponge (NMNZ Cr. 200 ). ♂ ( 8.0 mm), 

New Zealand, stn J679 [station could not be traced] 

(NIWA 23764). ♂ ( 7.0 ), off Great Barrier Island, North 

Island, January 2006, old longline gear at ~500 m, coll. 

Steve Lowe (NIWA 23765). Queensland: ♀ (ovig. 3.0 

mm), Marion Plateau, 22° 4. – 0. ’S 58°3 .7–29. ’E, 

303-333 m, 9 November 985, stn 0685/ 5/6, from 

Hexactinella, coll. Soela (NTM Cr 4926). 

57

Figure 97. Epulaega fracta (Hale, 940). NMNZ Cr.9260. A, mandible; B, mandible palp, article 3; C, maxillule apex; D, maxilla 

apex; E, maxilla; F, maxilliped; G; maxilliped palp article 5. 

Also examined: 24 specimens (5 mature adults) of 

Aega monilis Barnard, 9 4, 3 °35’S, 6°30’E, 24 January 

995, 33 m, in sponge, coll. SAFRI Africana (SafM 

A43 7). 

type LoCaLity: ‘Off Tasmanian coast’ (Hale 940), southeastern 

Australia. 


dorsal surfaces sparsely punctate, widest at pereonite 

5, lateral margins subparallel. Rostral point ventrally 

directed. Eyes large, medially united, anterior clear field 

14% length of head, posterior clear field 44% length of 

head; each eye made up of ~ 3 transverse rows of ommatidia, 

each row with ~7 ommatidia; eye colour black. 


rounded; pereonite 2 with median curved transverse 

nodulose ridge; posterior margins of pereonites with 

58 

small nodules. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; 

posterior margins convex, posterolateral angle blunt 

(more than 45°). Pleon with pleonite visible in dorsal 

view; pleonites with small nodules along posterior 

margin; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins extending 

clearly beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; 

pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped 



longitudinal carina, with short acute spines; lateral 

margins convex, smooth, posterior margin with distinct 

short median point, with 4–6 RS. 





article 4 2. times as long as wide, 0.7 times as long 

as combined lengths of articles –3, inferior margin 0

Figure 98. Epulaega fracta (Hale, 940). NMNZ Cr.9260. A–D, pereopods , 2, and 7, respectively. 

plumose setae, and 0 short simple setae; article 5 .3 

times as long as article 4, 2.8 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 0 palmate setae, anterodistal angle 

with cluster of 8 short simple setae (and palmate); 

flagellum with 18 articles, extending to pereonite 4. 


anterior margin acute, forming median angle, posterior 

margin forming narrow stem. 


lobe; palp article 2 with 23 distolateral setae (stiff), 

palp article 3 with 22 setae. Maxillule with 5 terminal 

RS ( large, 4 slender, plus 2 stubs). Maxilla mesial lobe 

with 3 RS ( straight, 2 biserrate); lateral lobe with 3 RS 

(recurved). Maxilliped endite with 0 apical setae (endite 

large); palp article 2 with 2 RS (curved, slender); article 

3 with 4 RS (all slender, weakly recurved); article 

4 with 4 hooked RS; article 5 partly fused to article 

4, small subcircular lobe, with RS (biserrate; plus 

simple seta). 

Pereopod 1 basis 3.0 as long as greatest width; ischium 

0.4 times as long as basis, inferior margin with 

0 RS, superior distal margin with 2 RS (one stub-like); 

merus inferior margin with 3 RS, set as two groups 

(of 2 and ), superior distal angle with 0 RS ( short 

simple seta); carpus 0.9 as long as merus, inferior 


width, inferior margin with RS (opposite base 

of dactylus), propodal palm simple, without blade 

or process, dactylus smoothly curved, .0 as long as 




59

Figure 99. Epulaega fracta (Hale, 940). NMNZ Cr.9260. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; E, uropod; F, pleotelson posterior 

margin. 

margin with acute RS; carpus similar in size to that 




pereopod 7 (slightly larger). Pereopod 7 basis 2.8 times 

as long as greatest width, inferior margins with 8 palmate 



60 

RS, inferior distal angle with 4 RS; merus . as long 





with 3 RS (set as , and ), superior distal angle with 

4 RS (simple and biserrate setae), inferior distal angle 

with 7 RS; propodus .2 as long as ischium, 4.3 times




Penes medially united; penial process 0.4 times as 

long as basal width. 


broadly rounded, lateral margin straight, mesial 

margin strongly convex, with PMS on distal half, 

with ~58 PMS; endopod .9 times as long as wide, 

distally subtruncate, lateral margin weakly concave, 

with PMS on distal margin only, mesial margin with 

PMS on distal one-third, endopod with ~40 PMS; peduncle 

.7 times as wide as long, mesial margin with 

8 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 exopod with ~88 PMS, 

endopod with ~60 PMS; appendix masculina basally 

swollen, 0.7 times as long as endopod, distally acute. 

Pleopod 3 exopod with ~ 00 PMS, endopod with ~27 

PMS. Pleopod 4 exopod with ~90 PMS, endopod with 

~25 PMS. Pleopod 5 exopod with ~72 PMS. Exopods of 

pleopods –3 each with distolateral margin not digitate; 

endopods of pleopods 3–5 each with distolateral 



Uropod peduncle posterior lobe about three- 

quarters as long as endopod. Uropod rami extending 

to pleotelson apex, apices acute. Endopod apically not 

bifid, lateral margin straight, without prominent ex- 

cision, proximal lateral margin with 0 RS, distal lateral 

margin with 2 RS, mesial margin sinuate, with 7 RS. 

Exopod not extending to end of endopod, 3.0 times as 

long as greatest width, apically not bifid; lateral margin 

weakly convex, with 9 RS; mesial margin straight, 

distally convex, with 4 RS. 

femaLe: More ovate than male; lacks the transverse 

ridge on pereonite 2; lacks dorsal nodules except on 

the pleotelson, where they are present though smaller 

than in the male. 

size: Adults measure between 4.4 and 8.0 mm; the 

single manca was 6.0 mm. 

Variation: The small number (4) of mature adult specimens 

means that it is not possible to precisely detail 

the variation. The pleotelson has from about 4 to 6 RS. 

The uropod endopod lateral margin has 2 distal RS, 

the mesial margin 6 or 7 RS for adults (5 in the manca); 

the exopod lateral margin has 9 or 0 RS (8 and 9 in 

the manca), the mesial margin 4 RS (3 in the manca). 

The RS on the merus of pereopods –3 appear to be 

constant but could not be readily discerned in the two 

smallest specimens. 

Body shape varies a little, with the adult male from 

New Zealand having subparallel lateral margins (2.4 

times as long as wide), while the male holotype and 

non-ovigerous female were both wider and more ovate 

(2.3 times as long as wide). 

6 

remarks: This is a distinctive species, males being readily 

recognised by the fine nodules along the posterior 

margins of the posterior pereonites and pleonites, presence 

of numerous small spines on the dorsal surface 

of the pleotelson and medially fused penial processes. 

Females can be recognised by the presence of reduced 

spines on the pleotelson and the characteristic setation 

and shape of the uropod rami and posterior margin of 

the pleotelson. 

The shape of the eyes is unusual within the genus 

in that they are noticeably anterior in position (rather 

than ventral), appearing somewhat bulbous and almost 

entirely filling the anterior margin of the head in 

dorsal view. The propodus of pereopod is distinctive 

in having a prominent and acute robust seta opposing 

the base of the dactylus. In most Aegidae there is no 

such seta at this position. 

Epulaega monilis (Barnard, 9 4) is closely similar 

to Epulaega fracta, but can be distinguished by lacking 

spines on the dorsal surface of the pleotelson in 

both males and females, the nodules on the posterior 

margins of the pleonites are larger (particularly the 

median nodules) and extend to the anterior pereonites, 

and the uropodal exopod is as long as the endopod (a 

little shorter in E. fracta). 

prey: One specimen from Hyperoglyphe antarctica (Carmichael, 

8 9) [bluenose and matiri (New Zealand) or 

Antarctic butterfish, Centrolophidae]. 

distribution: Southwestern Pacific, off Tasmania and 

southern Queensland; off Great Barrier Island, North 

Island and Kaikoura, South Island, both on the east 

coast of New Zealand; at a recorded depth of 400–500 

metres. 

Genus Rocinela Leach, 8 8 

Rocinela Leach, 8 8: 349.– Desmarest, 825:304.– Milne 

Edwards, 840: 243.– Dana, 852: 304*.– Bate & 

Westwood, 867: 289.– Schioedte & Meinert: 879b: 380.– 

Gerstaecker, 882: 227.– Haswell, 882: 285.– Stebbing, 

893: 348; 905: 23.– Sars, 897: 65.– Richardson, 898: 

8; 905a: 90.– Barnard, 9 4: 368; 936: 59.– Hale, 

925: 82.– Menzies, 962: 8.– Menzies & Glynn, 

968: 45.– Menzies & George, 972: 2.– Kensley, 978: 

59.– Kussakin, 979: 25 .– Menzies & Kruczynski, 983: 

62.– Brusca, 980: 229.– Bruce, 983: 778.– Brusca & 

Iverson, 985: 42.– Brusca & France, 992: 236.– Kensley & 

Schotte, 989: 9.– Bruce, Lew Ton & Poore, 2002: 63. 

Acherusia Lucas, 849: 78.– Dana, 852: 304* (type species 

Acherusia dumerilii Lucas, 849). 

Acherousia.– Schioedte & Meinert, 879b: 380 (lapsus). 

Rocinella.– Bate, 878 : 65 (lapsus). 

Not Rocinela.– Bovallius 885: 4 (= Syscenus Harger, 880). 

type speCies: Rocinela danmoniensis Leach, 8 8, by 

monotypy. 

* There is a pagination error in this publication, with page 

304 printed as 204.

diagnosis: Body weakly dorsally vaulted. Head with 

posterolateral margins contained by anterolateral 

angles of pleonite ; rostral point blunt, overriding 

antenna and antennule peduncles; eyes present, often 

large, sometimes united, occupying more than 50% 

width of the head. Pleonite not abruptly narrower 

than pereonite 7. Frontal lamina present, small, narrow. 

Antennule much shorter than antenna, usually shorter 

than antenna peduncle. Maxilliped palp 3-articled; 

endite present. Pleopods 3–4 endopods without PMS. 

Uropodal peduncle mesial margin produced; rami 

lamellar, plane of exopod at strongly oblique angle to 

plane of endopod; pleotelson posteriorly rounded. 

desCription: Body moderately vaulted, about 2 to 4 

times as long as wide. Head with eyes, often large, may 

meet at midpoint; anterior margin with broad median 

(rostral) point. Coxae of pereonites 4–7 longer than 

respective segment, posteriorly produced. Pleon not 

abruptly narrower than pereon; pleonites all visible, 

not posteriorly widest, pleonites 2–4 with free lateral 

margins, pleonite 5 laterally overlapped by pleonite 

4; pleonites 3–5 laterally produced to an acute point. 

Pleotelson large, about as long or longer pleon, usually 

with PMS and RS. Pleonal sternite absent. 

Antenna peduncle articles 4 and 5 usually with 

long setae. 

Mandible with uni- or bicuspid incisor; molar process 

present, conspicuous; two scaled lobes present at 

base of incisor. Maxillule with 5–8 flat terminal robust 

setae; mesial lobe reduced or absent. Maxilla lateral 

lobe with 2–5 terminal hooked RS, mesial with –3 

straight or hooked RS. Maxilliped 3-articled, article 2 

with 2 or 3 stout recurved RS and article 3 each with 

or 2 stout recurved RS; endite present. 

Pleopods 3–5 endopods smaller than exopods, 

usually with thickened ridge; coupling setae present 

on peduncles of pleopods –4. Pleopods not extending 

beyond lateral margins of pleon. 

remarks: Rocinela is rather uniform in appearance, 

typically flat-bodied, relatively wide with a prominent 

wide and flat rostrum (or this could be interpreted as 

the rostrum absent and the anterior part of the head 

being produced and forming a process). Most species 

have large or very large eyes, in a few species the eyes 

meeting medially. Many species have a flat lobe or 

blade on the palm of pereopod –3 propodus, this blade 

always being provided with robust setae. Rocinela appears 

to have highest diversity in high latitudes with 

only 2 of the 42 species occurring within the tropics. 

The high-latitude diversity of the genus is maintained 

by the nine species present in New Zealand waters. 

These figures are probably due to under reporting as 

museum collections in Australia and those held at the 

Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle in Paris do have 

62 

significant numbers of undescribed species, notably 

from the tropical western Pacific region. 

Rocinela is one of the very few isopod genera, 

other than some cirolanids, known to attack humans 

(Garzon-Ferreira 990). 

Key to the new Zealand species of RocinelA 

. Pereopod propodus slender, 4.4 times as long as 

proximal width, without distinct propodal blade; 

eyes small, separated by 40% head width ..........2 

– Pereopod propodus robust, less than 2.0 times 

as long as proximal width, with distinct propodal 

blade or lobe; eyes large separated by less than 

30% head width .....................................................3 

2. Rostrum subtruncate, anterior margin of the head 

‘stepped’; pereopod propodal palm with 2 small 

distal RS, with small distal lobe; dactylus weakly 

curved, 0.8 times as long as propodus.. ................ 

......................................... Rocinela leptopus (p. 74) 

– Rostrum smoothly narrowed, rounded; pereopod 

propodal palm with minute RS, without distal 

lobe; dactylus distally curved, .0 times as long 

as propodus .......................Rocinela runga (p. 89) 

3. Pereopod propodal blade wide, approximately 

as long (0.9– . ) as palm, with more than 8 marginal 

RS, ...................................................................4 

– Pereopod propodal blade narrow, 0.5–0.7 as 

long as propodal palm, with 6 or less marginal 

RS ..............................................................................5 

4. Rostrum tri-cornered; eyes moderate, separated 

by about 3 % width of head; pereopod propodal 

blade with 8 or 9 marginal RS; mesial surface with 

numerous stiff simple setae .................................... 

.......................................... Rocinela garricki (p. 69) 

– Rostrum evenly narrowing to subtruncate anterior 

margin; eyes large, separated by about 2.5% width 

of head; pereopod propodal blade with 2 or 3 

marginal RS; mesial surface with single simple 

seta .......................................Rocinela pakari (p. 78) 

5. Pereopod blade about 0.7 as long as propodal 

palm, with 5 or 6 marginal RS, with abundant 

slender setae on mesial surface .............................. 

........................................... Rocinela satagia (p. 93) 

– Pereopod blade about 0.5 as long as propodal 

palm, with less than 6 marginal RS, without 

abundant slender setae on mesial surface ......... 6 

6. Rostrum subtruncate; eyes large, separated by 

about 4% width of head; pereopod propodal 

blade with 4 marginal RS ........................................ 

.............................................Rocinela bonita (p. 63) 

– Rostrum anteriorly truncate, turned upwards; 

eyes moderate, separated by about 28% width of 

head; pereopod propodal blade with 3 marginal 

RS ........................................ Rocinela resima (p. 84)

Rocinela bonita sp. nov. (Figs 00– 04) 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♀ (3 mm, non-ovig.), 

Bounty Trough, 44°26.89’S, 74°54.79’E, 25 October 

979, Stn S 44, 676 m, epibenthic sled (NIWA 2388 ). 

Paratypes. 3 ♂ (35, 22 mm and large male pleon and 

pleotelson), ♀ (22 mm, non-ovig.), 7 mancas ( –22 

mm, further 8 not measured), same data as holotype 

(NIWA 23882). 


dorsal surfaces smooth and polished in appearance, 

widest at pereonite 5, lateral margins ovate. Rostral 

point anteriorly subtruncate. Eyes not medially united, 


up of ~ 7 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row 

with ~ 0 ommatidia; eye colour dark brown. Pereonite 

1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle 

rounded; coxae 5–7 with incomplete oblique carina 

(on coxae 5–7). Pleon with pleonite largely concealed 



5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped 


times as long as anterior width, anterior dorsal surface 

without 2 sub-medial depressions, dorsal surface with 

short setae; lateral margins convex, posterior margin 

evenly rounded, with 6 RS. 

Antennule peduncle article 3 .0 times as long as 

combined lengths of articles and 2, 3.0 as long as wide; 

flagellum with 6 articles, extending to posterior margin 

of eye. Antenna peduncle article 3 .5 times as long as 

article 2, . times as long as wide; article 4 .5 times 

as long as article 3, .6 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 2 plumose setae, and 8 simple setae; article 

5 .3 times as long as article 4, 2.9 times as long as wide, 

inferior margin with 7 setae (2 plumose), anterodistal 

angle with cluster of 1 short simple seta; flagellum with 

7 articles, extending to posterior of pereonite . 

Frontal lamina longer than greatest width, anteriorly 

acute. 

Mandible molar process distinct flat lobe; palp article 

2 with 4 short marginal distolateral setae and 2 long 

distolateral setae; palp article 3 with 30 setae. Maxillule 

with 6 RS ( large, 5 slender, serrate). Maxilla mesial 

lobe with 2 RS; lateral lobe with 2 RS. Maxilliped palp 

article distomesial angle with 3 RS (short; 2 curved, 

straight); article 2 with 3 hooked RS; article 3 with 2 

hooked RS. 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 7 setae ( robust seta); 

merus inferior margin with 3 RS (set as +2), set as two 

groups, superior distal angle with 6 setae; carpus 0.7 

as long as merus, inferior margin with RS (minute); 

propodus .6 times as long as proximal width, propodal 

palm with blade, propodal blade 0.5 times as wide as 

palm, inferior margin with 4 RS; dactylus 2.0 times as 

long as propodus. Pereopods 2 and 3 similar to pereopod 

(but RS on merus longer). Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 

7. Pereopod 7 basis 3.9 times as long as greatest 



3, 2 and ), superior distal angle with 5 RS (and 2 setae), 

inferior distal angle with 3 RS; merus 0.6 times as long 






RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; propodus 0.5 as long 

as ischium, 4.0 as long as wide, inferior margin with 

2 RS (set singly), superior distal angle with 4 slender 

setae, inferior distal angle with RS. 

Pleopod 1 exopod .9 times as long as wide, lateral 

margin straight, mesial margin weakly convex, with 

PMS from distal two-thirds; endopod 2.6 times as long 

as wide, lateral margin weakly concave, with PMS 

from on distal margin only, mesial margin with PMS 

from distal one-third; peduncle mesial margin with 6 

coupling hooks. Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral 

margin with acute RS. 


posterior lobe about one-third as long as endopod. Exopod 

at angle of about 35° to endopod, rami extending 

to pleotelson apex, marginal setae in two tiers. Endopod 

lateral margin weakly sinuate, lateral margin with 8 



greatest width; lateral margin weakly convex, with 2 


RS; distal margin rounded. 

maLe: Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with straight margins, 

0.9 times as long as endopod, distally narrowly 

rounded. Otherwise similar to female, but with a more 

elongate body shape (as do immature specimens and 

mancas); the rostrum is more strongly produced than 

in the female, the robust setae on the pereopod palm 

of pereopods –3 are more slender and acute, and the 

lateral margins of the uropodal rami are more densely 

setose. 

size: Males 22 and 35 mm; females 22 and 3 mm; mancas 

–22 mm (mean = 8.3 mm, n = 8); the large pleon 

and pleotelson indicate that this species will reach a 

greater size than indicated here. 

Variation: Robust setae: Pleotelson (n = 2) RS 3– 7, 

with 4, 5 and 6 each at 25%. Uropod exopod (n = 24) 

mesial margin with (7 %) most frequent, 0 and 2 each 

occurring three times; lateral margin – 4 with 2 

63

Figure 100. Rocinela bonita sp. nov. Holotype; C, F, male paratype 35 mm, others as indicated. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; 

C, dorsal view, male; D, head; E, frons; F, head, paratype; G, head, manca, 20 mm; H, coxa 7; I, pleonites 4 and 5, lateral margins; 

J, sternite 7; K, penial processes. 

64

Figure 101. Rocinela bonita sp. nov. Male paratype 35 mm, others as indicated. A, mandible; B, antenna; C, antennule; 

D, mandible palp article 3; E, maxillule; F, maxillule apex; G, maxillule apex, non-ovig female, 22 mm; H, maxilla apex; 

I, maxilla; J, maxilla apex, non-ovig female, 22 mm; K, maxilliped; L, maxilliped palp; M, maxilliped palp articles 2 and 3, 

non-ovig female, 22 mm. 

65

Figure 102. Rocinela bonita sp. nov. Holotype, others as indicated. A–E, pereopods –3, 6, and 7, respectively; 

F, pereopod ischium, mesial surface; G, distal margin of carpus and propodus, mesial surface; H, I, male 35 mm: H, pereopod ; 

I, pereopod 2. 

66

Figure 103. Rocinela bonita sp. nov. Male paratype 35 mm. A–E, pleopods –5 respectively; F, pleopod peduncle mesial 

and lateral margins. 

(38%), 3 (33%) and 4 (20%) most frequent. Uropod 

endopod mesial margin varied from 2 to 5, with 4 (76%) 

the most frequent, 3 and 5 each occurring twice and 2 

once; lateral margin with 6–8, with 7 (48%) and 8 (43%) 

most frequent, 6 occurring twice. 

The setation of the pereopod palm is highly consistent 

with 4 robust setae on pereopods –3 with only 

one exception with 3 robust setae; no specimen had 

more than four robust setae on the palm. The robust 

setae count on the inferior margin of the merus was 

consistently +2, although some of these were missing 

and there may be some variation. 

There is no discernable difference in the number of 

robust setae between males and females, nor in relation 

to size—the smallest male ( 5.5 mm) and female 

( 6.5 mm) had similar counts for robust setae: pleotelson 

RS ( ), pereopods –3 (8 and 9) and uropods 

(endopod mesial with 2 and 3, lateral with 3). 

Eye size varies with size, small specimens having 

proportionally larger eyes than adult specimens; the 

eyes are separated by 2.5%, 5% and 24% in the manca 

(Fig. 00G), female holotype (Fig. 00D) and adult male 

(Fig. 00F) respectively. 

remarks: Rocinela bonita sp. nov. can be identified by 

the large but well-separated eyes, relatively narrow 

rostrum, narrow sub-rectangular blade on the palm of 

pereopods –3 that is consistently provided with four 

robust setae (stout in juveniles and females, slender in 

the mature male), evenly rounded pleotelson, pleotel- 

67

Figure 104. Rocinela bonita sp. nov. A, E, holotype, remainder male paratype. A, pleotelson and uropod; B, uropod; C, uropod 

endopod ventral view; D, uropod endopod, apex; E, pleotelson posterior margin. 

son anterior dorsal surface without submedian depressions, 

posterior margin of the pleotelson with 4– 6 

robust setae, uropodal endopod extending posterior 

to the exopod, broadly rounded uropod exopod and 

the uropod rami not extending significantly beyond 

the posterior margin of the pleotelson. In females the 

rostrum is anteriorly rounded, in the male it is more 

strongly produced and anteriorly subtruncate. 

Rocinela resima sp. nov. is the most similar species 

in New Zealand waters. R. bonita can be distinguished 

by pereopods –3 having more strongly produced propodal 

blade with four robust setae, longer and more 

slender robust setae on the merus, and the uropodal 

endopod lateral margin being sinuate with a narrowly 

68 

rounded distal point, whereas in R. resima the uropodal 

endopod lateral margin is evenly convex, the distal 

margin being broadly rounded. 

Rocinela juvenalis Menzies & George, 972 appears 

similar, but that species differs in having the uropodal 

exopod exceeding the posterior of the endopod, pereopod 

propodus palm being wider and in being much 

smaller in size (the holotype and presumably adult 

female of R. juvenalis measured mm, the mancas of 

R. bonita sp. nov. measure –22 mm). 

Rocinela modesta Hansen, 897 has a similar pereopod 

morphology (Brusca & France 992) but has an 

anteriorly rounded rostrum, smaller eyes, four robust 

setae on the inferior margin of the merus of pereopod

3, more strongly produced uropod peduncle posterior 

lobe (half as long as endopod versus one-third as long 

in R. bonita) and an evenly convex uropodal endopod 

lateral margin (sinuate in R. bonita). 

Rocinela cornuta Richardson, 898 is a poorly known 

species, superficially similar to both the present species 

and to Rocinela hawaiiensis Richardson, 903. Brusca and 

France ( 992) illustrated the dorsal view for the species 

but descriptive data otherwise rests with the original 

description. R. bonita differs in having a less ovate 

body shape and the propodal blade of pereopods –3 

provided with four (rather than three) robust setae. 

Rocinela major Brocchi, 877, is the only species 

that could not be specifically excluded as no figures 

exist and the description is not adequate by modern 

standards of species description. The species should 

be regarded as species inquirenda as, in addition to 

the lack of descriptive data, the location of the types 

is uncertain. If there is found to be no type material 

the species will have to be relegated to nomen dubium. 

Kensley ( 976) considered it as probably the same species 

as Epulaega monilis Barnard, 9 4. All other species 

are excluded by varying combinations of differences 

among the differential characters. 


distribution: Known only from the type locality, 

Bounty Trough, eastwards from the mid-coast of South 

Island; 676 metres. 

etymoLogy: From the Latin origin for bounty (as in the 

Bounty Trough) — bonitas, meaning good, plentiful. 

Rocinela garricki Hurley, 957 (Figs 05– 09) 

Rocinela garricki Hurley, 1957: 11, figs 39–49; 1961: 268.– Hicks 

et al., 99 : 6. 

materiaL examined: Holotype: ♂ (~ 5 mm, previously 

dissected, pleotelson missing), Cook Strait, 4 °3 .5’S, 

74°48.0’E, 9 January 956, 28– 46 m, beam trawl, 

station BOL, Vuz 43 (NMNZ Cr.365 ). 

Other material: ♂ ( 5.5 mm, dissected), Camp Bay, 

Endeavour Inlet, Queen Charlotte Sound, South Island, 

4 °08’S, 74°08.45’E, 0 May 967, off jetty, stn. 

Z 5 3, coll. Maria van Dooren (NIWA 23855). ♀ (22 

mm, ovig.; poor condition, dried out at some point), 

southern Bounty Trough, 46.0°S, 70.72°E, 75 m, 8 October 

962, NIWA stn B568 (NIWA 23854). ♀ (~22 mm, 

broken, poor condition), off northeastern South Island, 

42.7533°S, 73.50 7°E, 4 November 979, canyon coral, 

79 m (NIWA 23849). ♀ (non-ovig. 20, 9.5, 6.5 mm), 

New Zealand, without locality, Z2, ex groper, 22F, 

/63 (poor condition, possibly dried or in formalin 

for a long time) (NIWA 23852). ♂ ( 9.5 mm), Dunedin, 

South Island, 2 January 957, wharves, at night light, 

coll. R.K. Dell & J. Moreland (NMNZ Cr. 2004). Manca 

(5.5 mm), Cape Turakirae, 8 June 966, 42 m (NMNZ 

Cr. 2006). 

Not measured: ♀ (ovig.), New Zealand, no locality, 

Z2*, in poor condition (NIWA 23853). ♂ (~23 mm, 

pleotelson damaged), midway between Cape Jackson 

& Mana Island, North Island (Cook Strait), 4 °02’S, 

74°33’E, 6 March 976, 256– 86 m, RV Acheron (NMNZ 

Cr. 2005). ♂, off Kaikoura, South Island, 42.4384°S, 

74.7600°E, 20 June 96 , 00 m (NIWA 23848). ♀ 

(ovig., very damaged), south of The Snares, 48.0033°S, 

66.9500°E, 2 October 962, 55 m (NIWA 23847). 

♀ (ovig., poor condition), Chatham Rise, 44°30’S, 

76°00’W, 7 October 964, 92 m (NIWA 23850). ♂ 

(poor condition) ( 6.5 mm), New Zealand, no locality 

data, stn Z6 4 (NIWA 2385 ). 



margins ovate. Rostrum basally expanded, anteriorly 

rounded and tri-cornered. Eyes not medially united, 

separated by about 3 % width of head; each eye made 

up of ~ transverse rows of ommatidia, each row 

with ~8 ommatidia; eye colour pale brown. Coxae 2–3 

each with posteroventral angle rounded; 5–7 without 

oblique carina. Pleon with pleonite visible in dorsal 


clearly beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 

5 with posterolateral angles rounded. Pleotelson 0.9 

times as long as anterior width, anterior dorsal surface 

without 2 sub-median depressions, dorsal surface with 

short setae (posteriorly); lateral margins convex, posterior 

margin evenly rounded, with RS. 

Antennule peduncle article 3 0.7 times as long as 

combined lengths of articles and 2, 2.9 times as long as 

wide; flagellum with 6 articles (articles 1 and 2 longest), 


article 3 .4 times as long as article 2, .2 times as long 

as wide; article 4 .3 times as long as article 3, .6 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 0 plumose setae, 

and 2 simple setae (stiff); article 5 .5 times as long as 

article 4, 2.8 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 

seta (palmate), anterodistal angle with cluster of 3 

short simple setae; flagellum with 11 articles, extending 

to posterior of pereonite 2. 


acute. 


2 with 10 marginal distolateral setae (finely biserrate), 

69 

* Station ‘Z2’ (= Z0002) lists eight lots, mostly Aegidae, 

according to coordinates from the Fiji region. One lot 

includes an unpublished manuscript name of ‘timaruensis’. 

The data are clearly wrong for the material and the 

material is regarded as being New Zealand, no locality.

Figure 105. Rocinela garricki Hurley, 957. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, head; dorsal view; C, pleonites 3 and 5, lateral margin; 

D, pereopod , in situ; E, pereopod 2, in situ. 

and 3 long distolateral setae; palp article 3 with 5 setae 

(terminal 2 short, conical). Maxillule with 5 RS ( large; 

4 slender, of which 2 weakly serrate). Maxilla mesial 

lobe with hooked RS; lateral lobe with 2 hooked RS. 

Maxilliped palp article distomesial angle with RS 

(straight); article 2 with 3 hooked RS; article 3 with 

hooked RS. 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 5 setae ( robust seta); 

merus inferior margin with 3 RS (set as + 2), set as two 

rows, superior distal angle with 6 setae (all stiff); carpus 

0.7 times as long as merus, inferior margin with RS; 


palm with blade, propodal blade 0.9 times as wide as 

palm, with numerous setae, inferior margin with 8 RS; 

dactylus .6 times as long as propodus. Pereopods 2 and 

3 similar to pereopod (RS on merus longer). Pereopod 

70 

6 similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 4.0 as long as 

greatest width, inferior margins with 2 palmate setae; 



distal angle with 7 RS; merus 0.5 times as long as ischium, 

2. times as long as wide, inferior margin with 

RS, superior distal angle with 5 RS, inferior distal 

angle with 6 RS; carpus 0.6 times as long as ischium, 

2.9 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set 

singly), superior distal angle with 7 RS, inferior distal 



singly), superior distal angle with 3 slender setae ( 

palmate), inferior distal angle with 3 RS. 

Penes opening flush with surface of sternite 7. 


margin weakly convex, with PMS on distal one-third; 

endopod 2.6 times as long as wide, lateral margin

Figure 106. Rocinela garricki Hurley, 957. Male, 5.5 mm, Camp Bay, NIWA 23855. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; 

C, pleonites –5, lateral margin; D, head, dorsal view; E, antennule; F, antenna peduncle. 

straight, with PMS on distal margin only, mesial margin 

with PMS on distal two-thirds; peduncle mesial 

margin with 6 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix 

masculina with straight margins, 0.5 times as long as 

endopod (basally fused), distally bluntly rounded. 

Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral margin without 

acute RS. 





lateral margin weakly convex, lateral margin with 3 RS, 

mesial margin straight and distally rounded, with 3 RS. 


long as greatest width; lateral margin weakly convex 

(weakly serrate), with 8 RS; mesial margin convex, with 

0 RS; distal margin with distinct distal point. 

7 

size: Males from 5.5 to 9.5 mm; ovigerous females 

6.5–22.0 mm (mean 20 mm, n = 5); single manca 5.5 

mm. 

femaLe: Generally similar to the male, with the rostrum 

less strongly produced. 

Variation: The figures here include the holotype, therefore 

the uropod and pleotelson details are taken from 

the original description. Pleotelson (n = 8) RS 9– 2, with 

0 and most frequent, each at 38%. Uropod exopod 

(n = 4) mesial margin without RS in all specimens; 

lateral margin 7–9 RS with 8 (57%) most frequent, 7 

occurring 3 times and 9 once. Uropod endopod mesial 

margin (n = 3) varied from 0–5 to with 2 (3 %) and 3 

(39%) the most frequent, 0 occurring twice, 4 and 5 each 

occurring once; lateral margin (n = 4) with 2–5 with

Figure 107. Rocinela garricki Hurley, 957. Male, 5.5 mm, Camp Bay, NIWA 23855. A, mandible; B, mandible molar and 

incisor; C, mandible palp article 3; D, maxillule apex; E, maxillule; F, maxilla; G, maxilla apex; H, maxilliped; I, maxilliped 

palp articles 2 and 3; scales, mesial margin palp article ; K, frons. 

3 (36%) and 4 (43%) most frequent, 2 and 5 occurring 

once and twice respectively. 

The setation of the palms of pereopods –3 is highly 

consistent with 8 RS being the most frequent; pereopod 

palm (n = 4) with 8 (60%) or 9 (40%) RS, pereopod 2 

palm (n = 4) with 7 (27%) or 8 (73%) RS and pereopod 

3 (n = 3) palm 8 (93%), 7 RS occurring once. The RS 

on the inferior margin of the merus was consistently 

+2, although some of these were missing and there 

may be some variation. 

There is no discernable difference in the number of 


to size—the smallest male ( 5.5 mm) and female 

( 6.5 mm) had similar counts for robust setae: pleotelson 

RS ( ), pereopods –3 (8 and 9) and uropods 

72 

(endopod mesial with 2 and 3, lateral with 3 and 4, 

exopod mesial without, lateral 8). The characteristic 

shape of the rostrum is only evident in larger presumably 

mature specimens. 

remarks: A combination of characters serves to readily 

identify Rocinela garricki: the eyes are relatively widely 

separated, mature specimens have a distinctly tri- 

cornered rostrum, the anterior margin of which is often 

bent ventrally, the anterior pereopods usually have 8 

or 9 robust setae, the propodal blade is provided with 

numerous stiff simple setae (in contrast to the more 

usual single seta), the uropodal exopod has 8 robust 

setae on the lateral margin, none on the mesial margin, 

the uropodal endopod is relatively broad with 2 or 3

Figure 108. Rocinela garricki Hurley, 957. Male, 5.5 mm, Camp Bay, NIWA 23855. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; 

D, pereopod 7, distal margin of carpus, mesial RS; E, pereopod 7, distal margin of carpus, lateral RS. 

setae on the mesial margin, 3 or 4 setae on the lateral 

margin and the posterior margin of the pleotelson usually 

has 0 or robust setae. In addition, in mature 

specimens the anterior part of the head is depressed 

and there is an oblique longitudinal ridge that runs 

along the anteromesial margin of the eye. 

The most similar species is the potentially sympatric 

Rocinela satagia sp. nov., which has in common with 

R. garricki a tri-cornered rostrum and the blade of the 

anterior pereopods with numerous setae. Several differences 

allow separation of the two species, Rocinela 

satagia having eye-ridges on the posteromesial part of 

the eyes, the eyes being close-set, the pereopod blades 

are smaller with no more than 6 robust setae and a 

narrower uropodal endopod. 

One large specimen, in poor condition, from ‘North 

Otago’ (a 32 mm non-ovig. female; NMNZ Cr.4966) 

is provisionally identified as R. garricki, but excluded 

from the material examined as it is in poor condition 

with most pereopods incomplete. 

Hicks et al. ( 99 ) listed one syntype (NMNZ 

Cr.365 ) held at Te Papa. Hurley ( 957) examined 

only one specimen and, as the Victoria University 

label states ‘type’, that specimen is here regarded as 

the holotype. The specimen itself is heavily dissected, 

with the pleotelson and pereopods from one side all 

missing. The five slides mentioned in Hurley’s (1957) 

description have not been located and are presumed 

lost. 

distribution: Cook Strait and off the eastern coast of 

South Island to Dunedin; most locations are inshore 

and shallow, with recorded depths from the surface 

(at a night light) to 256 metres. 

etymoLogy: Named for Mr J. A. Garrick, presumably a 

productive collector at that time (Hurley 957). 

73

Figure 109. Rocinela garricki Hurley, 957. Male, 5.5 mm, Camp Bay, NIWA 23855. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; E, 

uropod; F, uropod exopod, ventral view; G, uropod exopod apex. 

Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. (Figs 0– 3) 

materiaL examined: Holotype: ♀ (34 mm, ovig.), off 

Pegasus Bay, South Island, 43° 4’S, 75°39’E, 27 September 

976, off steep wall, coral, 006–5 2 m, stn. 

S5559 (NMNZ Cr. 20 0). 


dorsal surfaces smooth or sparsely punctate, widest 

at pereonite 5, lateral margins ovate. Rostrum simple, 

74 

anteriorly subtruncate. Eyes not medially united, separated 

by about 40% width of head; each eye made up 

of ~ 2 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with 

~7 ommatidia; eye colour black. Coxae 2–3 each with 

posteroventral angle rounded; 5–7 without oblique 

carina. Pleon with pleonite largely concealed by 

pereonite 7; pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins 


5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles acute. Pleotelson 

0.8 times as long as anterior width, anterior dorsal

Figure 110. Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head, dorsal view ; D, frons; 

E, pleonites 2–5, lateral margin; F, antennule; G, antenna peduncle. 

surface without 2 sub-median depressions, dorsal 

surface smooth; lateral margins convex, posterior 

margin narrowly rounded, with 4 RS (distalmost RS 

ventrally directed). 

Antennule peduncle article 3 . times as long as 

combined lengths of articles and 2, 3.5 times as long 

as wide; flagellum with 6 articles, extending to anterior 

of pereonite . Antenna peduncle article 3 .4 times as 

long as article 2, . times as long as wide; article 4 .7 

times as long as article 3, .9 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 0 plumose setae, and simple seta 

(possibly with more setae as some are clearly missing); 

article 5 .2 times as long as article 4, 3.0 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 3 setae, anterodistal angle 


articles, extending to middle of pereonite . 


acute. 


2 with 2 marginal distolateral setae, and 2 long distolateral 

setae; palp article 3 with 24 setae. Maxillule with 6 

RS ( large, 5 slender, serrate). Maxilla mesial lobe with 

2 hooked RS; lateral lobe with 2 hooked RS. Maxilliped 

palp article distomesial angle with RS; article 2 with 

3 hooked RS; article 3 with 2 hooked RS. 


ischium 0.6 times as long as basis, inferior margin with 0 

RS, superior distal margin with 2 setae; merus inferior 

75

Figure 111. Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. Holotype. A, mandible; B, mandible incisor; C, mandible palp article 3; D, scales, 

mandible mesial margin; E, maxilliped palp articles – 3;E, maxillule apex; ; F, maxilla apex. 


angle with 5 setae ( RS, 4 simple); carpus 0.6 times as 

long as merus, inferior margin with RS; propodus 4.4 

times as long as proximal width, propodal palm with 

small distal lobe, inferior margin with 2 RS (distal); 

dactylus 0.8 times as long as propodus (weakly curved). 

Pereopods 2 and 3 not similar to pereopod (far more 

robust, with +2 RS on inferior margin of merus; propodus 

2.0 times as long as proximal width, with 3 RS; 

dactylus about as long as propodus, weakly curved). 



palmate setae; ischium 0.7 as long as basis, inferior 

margin with 7 RS (set as , 2, 2 and 2), superior distal 

angle with 5 RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; merus 

0.5 times as long as ischium, .6 times as long as wide, 

inferior margin with RS, superior distal angle with 

6 RS, inferior distal angle with 7 RS; carpus 0.6 times 


margin with 3 RS (set singly), superior distal angle 

76 

with 0 RS (and 2 setae), inferior distal angle with 6 

RS; propodus 0.5 as long as ischium, 3.6 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as , , and 





PMS on distal two-thirds; peduncle mesial margin with 

6 coupling hooks. 



Exopod at angle of about 35° to endopod, rami 

extending to pleotelson apex, marginal setae in two 

tiers. Endopod lateral margin weakly convex, lateral 

margin with 7 RS, mesial margin straight, with 3 RS. 


long as greatest width; lateral margin straight, with 8 

RS; mesial margin straight, distally convex, with 0 RS; 

distal margin with indistinct apex.

Figure 112. Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. Holotype. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; D, pereopod , distomesial margin 

of carpus; E, pereopod , dactylus and distal margin of propodus; F, pereopod 2, inferior margin of propodal palm; 

G, pereopod 7, distal margin of carpus, mesial RS; H, pereopod 7, dactylus and distal margin of propodus. 

size: The single specimen measures 34 mm. 

remarks: Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. is readily identified 

by the widely separated eyes, subtruncate rostrum, 

‘stepped’ anterior margin of the head, slender pereopod 

with an elongate propodus, pereopods –3 propodal 

palm without a blade, the propodal palm of pereopod 

lacking robust setae, that of pereopods 2 and 3 with 

widely spaced short robust setae and the dactylus of 

pereopods –3 being only weakly curved. 

Nearly all other species of Rocinela have pereopods 

–3 with a propodal blade and the propodal blade or 

palm with prominent robust setae. The Caribbean 

Rocinela signata Schioedte and Meinert, 879a lacks 

robust setae on the pereopod palm, as does Rocinela 

media Nierstrasz, 93 , known only from Indonesia, but 

in both these species the propodus is short and robust. 

Only Rocinela runga sp. nov., from the relatively nearby 

Antipodes Islands, has an elongate and unarmed propodus, 

and that species may be distinguished by the 

77

Figure 113. Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. Holotype. A, pleopod ; B, pleopod 2; C, left uropod, dorsal view; D, uropodal exopod, 

ventral view. 

longer propodus on pereopods –3, the broad, anteriorly 

rounded rostrum and the pleonite lateral margins 

being less produced and acute. 

The holotype, while in good condition, is somewhat 

brittle, the pleopods breaking up on dissection. In situ 

examination indicates that they are similar to others 

of the genus. 


distribution: Known only from the type locality, off 

the northeastern coast of South Island. 

etymoLogy: Adapted from the Greek words leptos (thin, 

slender, delicate) and pous (foot) alluding to the slender 

first pereopods. 

Rocinela pakari sp. nov. (Figs 4– 8) 


Chatham Rise, 25 October 979, 44°26.89’S, 74°54.79’E, 

676 m (NIWA 23888). 

78 

Paratypes. 4♀ (each 20 mm, non-ovig.), 8 mancas 

( 3, 4 mm, 6 unmeasured), same data as holotype 

(NIWA 23889). 

Additional material: ♀ (39 mm, non-ovig, poor condition, 

all but one anterior pereopod missing), (Fisheries 

Research Division) (NIWA 23890). ♀ (33 mm, ovig, 

poor condition, uropods and pleotelson largely absent), 

Chatham Rise, 44°34.00’S, 74°06.49’E, 29 October 979, 

863–9 0 m (NIWA 2389 ). 


widest at pereonite 4, lateral margins subparallel. 

Rostral point anteriorly subtruncate. Eyes not medially 

united, separated by about 2.5% width of head; each 

eye made up of ~ 6 transverse rows of ommatidia, each 

row with ~ ommatidia; eye colour black. Pereonite 1 

and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle rounded; 

coxae 5–7 without oblique carina. Pleon with pleonite 

largely concealed by pereonite 7, or visible in dorsal 


clearly beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite

Figure 114. Rocinela pakari sp. nov. A–E, holotype, F, G, I, J and K, 20 mm paratype, others as indicated. A, dorsal view; 

B, lateral view; C, head; dorsal view, male; D, frons; E, pleonites 4 and 5, lateral margins; F, dorsal view; head, paratype; 

G, coxa 7; H, head, 33 mm ovigerous female, S 64; I, head; J, antennule; K, antenna. 

79

Figure 115. Rocinela pakari sp. nov. Paratype 20 mm. A, mandible; B, mandible molar and incisor; C, mandible palp article 3; 

D, maxillule; E, maxillule apex; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilla; H, maxilliped; I, maxilliped palp articles 2 and 3. 

5 with posterolateral angles acute. Pleotelson 0.8 times 

as long as anterior width, anterior dorsal surface with 2 

sub-medial depressions, dorsal surface smooth; lateral 

margins weakly convex, posterior margin narrowly 

rounded, with 5 robust setae. 



as wide; flagellum with 5 articles (article 1 elongate), 

80 


article 3 .7 times as long as article 2; article 4 .3 times 


margin with 0 plumose setae, and 3 simple setae; article 

5 .5 times as long as article 4, 2.5 times as long as wide, 

inferior margin with 3 setae (palmate), anterodistal angle 

with cluster of 4 short simple setae; flagellum with 

9 articles, extending to middle of pereonite 2.

Figure 116. Rocinela pakari sp. nov. Holotype. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; D, robust setae on pereopod blade; 

E, pereopod ischium, mesial surface; F, pereopod 7 distal margin of carpus, mesial surface; G, pereopod , 33 mm ovigerous 

female, NIWA 2389 . 


acute. 


2 with 0 short, marginal distolateral setae, and 

3 long distolateral setae; palp article 3 with 25 setae. 

Maxillule with 6 RS ( large, 5 slender, serrate). Maxilla 

mesial lobe with 2 hooked RS (small); lateral lobe with 

2 hooked RS. Maxilliped palp article distomesial angle 

8 

with 2 robust setae (straight); article 2 with 3 hooked 

RS; article 3 with 2 hooked RS. 



0 RS, superior distal margin with seta (and 2 plumose 

setae); merus inferior margin with 3 RS, set as two 

groups, superior distal angle with 6 setae (plumose); 

carpus 0.7 as long as merus, inferior margin with RS;

Figure 117. Rocinela pakari sp. nov. Paratype 20 mm. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; E, pleopod 3 peduncle lateral margin; 

F, uropod; G, uropod exopod, ventral view. 


palm with blade, propodal blade . times as wide as 

palm, inferior margin with 3 RS; dactylus .8 times as 

long as propodus. Pereopods 2 and 3 similar to pereopod 

(RS on merus longer). Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 

82 

7. Pereopod 7 basis 3.7 times as long as greatest width, 


long as basis, inferior margin with 7 RS (set as , 2, 2 


angle with 4 RS; merus 0.6 times as long as ischium, 2.2

Figure 118. Rocinela pakari sp. nov. A, holotype, uropod in situ; B–D, ovigerous female, 33 mm: B, maxilliped; C, maxilliped 

palp; D, plumose setae, distal margin of lamina vibrans. 



angle with 4 RS; carpus 0.6 times as long as ischium, 

2.9 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set 


distal angle with 5 RS; propodus 0.6 as long as ischium, 

4. times as long as wide, inferior margin with 3 RS 

(set singly), superior distal angle with 3 slender setae 

( palmate), inferior distal angle with 2 RS. 


margin weakly convex, mesial margin weakly convex, 

with PMS from distal one-third; endopod 2.6 times 

as long as wide, lateral margin weakly concave, with 

PMS on distal margin only, mesial margin with PMS 

from distal one-third; peduncle mesial margin with 6 

coupling hooks. Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral 

margin with acute RS. 





lateral margin convex, lateral margin with 8 RS, mesial 

margin strongly convex, with 4 RS. Exopod extending 

to end of endopod, 2.3 times as long as greatest width; 

lateral margin convex, with 4 RS; mesial margin sinuate, 

proximally concave, distally convex, with 4 RS; 

distal margin rounded. 

83 

maLe: Not known 

size: Females 20 and 39 mm; mancas 3– 4 mm. 

Variation: Based on measured types only. Robust setae: 

Pleotelson (n = 7) RS 3– 7, with 4 (twice) and 5 

(three times) most frequent. Uropod exopod (n = 4) 

mesial margin with 0–4 with (2 %) and 2 (43%) most 

frequent, 0 and 4 each occurring twice, 3 once; lateral 

margin 2– 4 with 3 (50%) and 4 (36%) most frequent. 

Uropod endopod (n = 4) mesial margin varied 

from 4 to 6 with 4 (50%) and 5 (36%) most frequent, 6 

occurring twice (one specimen); lateral margin with 

6–8 with 6 (2 %) and 7 (64%) most frequent, 8 occurring 

twice. 

The setation of the pereopod palm is highly consistent 

with robust setae on pereopods –3, ranging from

to 4, with the following numbers (n = 4): pereopod 

with 2 (43%) or 3 (50%), once (smallest manca); 

pereopod 2 with 2 (50%), (three times), or 3 and 

4, each twice; pereopod 3 2 (64%) or 3 (three times) 

and 4 once; pereopod never had more than 3 robust 

setae on the propodal palm and no specimen had 

less than robust setae on any pereopod palm. The 

robust setae on the inferior margin of the merus were 

consistently +2. 

There was no difference between adults and 

mancas in the number of robust setae on the anterior 

pereopods. The rostrum is longer and straight in adult 

specimens whereas in mancas and small specimens it 

is bent slightly to the ventral. 

The single damaged ovigerous female had oo- 

stegites on sternites –5. The robust setae on the propodal 

palm of pereopods –3 are notably more slender 

and longer than those of immature specimens or 

non-ovigerous females; the number of robust setae on 

the palm of pereopods –3 is 3, as the most frequent 

number for the other specimens. 

remarks: Rocinela pakari sp. nov. can be identified by 

the wide propodal blade on pereopods –3 which is 

provided with – 4 robust setae in conjunction with 

well-separated eyes and a gently narrowed pleotelson 

posterior margin; in mature specimens the rostrum is 

relatively short, anteriorly rounded, and the lateral 

margins are very weakly stepped. 

Only four species of Rocinela have pereopods –3 

with propodal blade as wide as the palm and provided 

with more than eight robust setae. Of those that do, 

three have eyes that meet in the middle (these being 

R. affinis, R. kapala and R. oculata) and all of these have 

fewer than 0 robust setae on the pereopod palm; the 

fourth species, Rocinela niponia Richardson, 909, a 

species in need of redescription, has separate eyes, 

fewer robust setae on the pereopod blade ( 0, 8 and 

8 on pereopods to 3 respectively) and more robust 

setae (5) on the inferior margin of the merus. 


distribution: Known only from the Chatham Rise, 

eastwards from the mid-coast of South Island. 

etymoLogy: Pakari is a Mäori word that means strong 

(noun in apposition). 

Rocinela resima sp. nov. (Figs 9– 22) 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ (29 mm), Christabel 

sea mount, northeastern Macquarie Ridge, 5 °04.34’S, 

64°36.37’E, 4 April 2003, 065– 030 m, rubble, (NIWA 

23883). 

Paratypes: ♂ (20 mm, dissected), Chatham Rise, 

42°43.95’S, 79°53.9 ’W, 8 April 200 , 076–990 m 

(NIWA 23884). ♀ (non-ovig. 34 mm), 42°46.99’S, 

84 

79°59.64’E, 2 April 200 , 000–870 m (NIWA 23885). 

♂? (24 mm), Chatham Rise, 42° 46.07’E, 79°55.3 ’W, 

20-April 200 , 955–890 m (NIWA 23886). 

Non-type material. ♀ (30 mm, non-ovig.), same data 

as holotype (NIWA 23887). 

Additional material. Chatham Rise. ♀ (24 mm, nonovig.), 

42.7597–7557°S, 79.0 05–0 2°W, 28 May 2006, 

765–845 m (NIWA 25655). ♀ (2 mm, ovig.), 42.7885– 

7992°S, 79.9985–9982°E, 30 May 2006, 020– 054 

m (NIWA 25665). 2♀ (2 mm, one damaged, ovig.), 

42.7 70–7 65°S, 79.0420–0440°E, 3 May 2006, 957–985 

m (NIWA 25666). 

desCription: Body 2. times as long as greatest width, 

dorsal surfaces smooth, sparsely punctate, widest at 

pereonite 5, lateral margins weakly ovate. Rostrum 

turned upwards, anteriorly truncate (margins thickened). 

Eyes not mesially united, separated by about 


rows of ommatidia, each row with ~9 ommatidia; 

eye colour dark brown (bronze). Coxae 2–3 each with 

posteroventral angle acute, posteriorly produced; 5–7 

without oblique carina. Pleon with pleonite largely 


margins extending to, but not beyond, posterior margin 


rounded. Pleotelson .2 times as long as anterior width, 

anterior dorsal surface without 2 sub-median depressions, 

dorsal surface with short setae; lateral margins 

convex, posterior margin with distinct median point, 

with 4 RS. 


combined lengths of articles and 2, 3. times as long as 

wide; flagellum with 6 articles, extending to anterior of 

pereonite . Antenna peduncle article 3 2.3 times as long 

as article 2, .2 times as long as wide; article 4 .2 times 


margin with 0 plumose setae, and 2 simple setae (stiff); 

article 5 .6 times as long as article 4, 2.3 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 2 setae, anterodistal angle 


articles, extending to posterior of pereonite 2. 


acute. 


2 with marginal distolateral setae, and 3 long distolateral 

setae; palp article 3 with 20 setae (all distally 

bifurcate except distalmost 2 setae). Maxillule with 6 RS 

( large, 5 slender, serrate). Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 

hooked RS; lateral lobe with 2 hooked RS. Maxilliped 

palp article distomesial angle with 0 RS (with long 

seta and less long seta mid-margin); article 2 with 

3 hooked RS (2 distal, proximal and straight, stiff 

seta); article 3 with 2 hooked RS. 


ischium 0.4 times as long as basis, inferior margin with

Figure 119. Rocinela resima sp. nov. A–F, holotype; G, female NIWA 23885; H–J, male paratype NIWA 23884. A, dorsal view; 

B, lateral view; C, head; dorsal view; D, frons; E, pleonites 2–5 and uropod peduncle, lateral margins; F, sternite 7 showing 

penial papillae; G, head, pereonite ; H, antennule; I, setae, distal margin antennule peduncle article ; J, antenna. 

85

Figure 120. Rocinela resima sp. nov. Paratype NIWA 23884. A, mandible; B, mandible palp article 3; C, maxillule apex; 

D, maxillule; E, maxilla; F, maxilla apex; G, maxilliped; H, maxilliped palp articles 2 and 3; I, maxilliped palp articles 2 and 

3, NIWA 23885. 

0 RS, superior distal margin with 7 setae (including 

acute RS); merus inferior margin with 3 RS, set as two 

rows (of and 2), superior distal angle with 7 setae 

(long); carpus 0.6 times as long as merus, inferior margin 

with RS; propodus .6 times as long as proximal 

width, propodal palm with blade, propodal blade 0.5 

times as wide as palm, with single seta, inferior margin 

with 3 RS; dactylus . times as long as propodus. Pereopods 

2 and 3 similar to pereopod (but larger, meral 

RS larger). Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 

7 basis 3.5 times as long as greatest width, inferior 


basis, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as , , 2 and ), 


with 6 RS; merus 0.5 times as long as ischium, .9 times 

86 

as long as wide, inferior margin with RS, superior 


carpus 0.6 times as long as ischium, 2.4 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set as and ), 










PMS on distal two-thirds; endopod 2.6 times as long 

as wide, lateral margin straight, with PMS on on dis-

Figure 121. Rocinela resima sp. nov. A, pereopod , holotype; B, pereopod 2, holotype; C, pereopod 7, holotype ; D, pereopod 

, NIWA 23885; E, pereopod 2, NIWA 23885; F, pereopod , holotype; G, robust setae, carpus mesial margin, pereopod 7. 

tal margin only, mesial margin with PMS on distal 

two-thirds; peduncle mesial margin with 7 coupling 

hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with straight 

margins, 0.8 times as long as endopod, distally bluntly 

rounded. Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral margin 

with acute RS. 



Exopod at angle of about 35° to endopod, rami extending 

to pleotelson apex. Endopod lateral margin convex, 

with 6 RS; mesial margin weakly convex, with 2 RS. 

Exopod not extending to end of endopod, 3.0 as long 

as greatest width; lateral margin weakly convex, with 

0 RS; mesial margin sinuate, proximally concave, 

distally convex, with 0 RS; distal margin with indistinct 

apex. 

87

G 

Figure 122. Rocinela resima sp. nov. Paratype NIWA 23884. A–C, pleopods –3, respectively; D, holotype, uropod; E, holotype, 

uropodal endopod, ventral view; F, uropod, female paratype NIWA 23887; G, uropod endopod apex, female paratype NIWA 

23885. 

femaLe: Non-ovigerous specimens similar to the male 

but: body more elongate (2.5 times as long as wide), 

rostrum shorter, anteriorly narrowly rounded; all 

females and specimens of indeterminate sex with 

uropod exopod extending to just short of endopod 

apex; marginal setae less dense. Pereopods –3 palm 

with 2 large and small RS or 3 RS of approximately 

equal size (as in males); dactylus longer ( .4– .7 times 

88 

as long as propodus) than in males ( . times as long 

as propodus); eyes larger, separated by 6% width of 

head; maxillule RS more slender than in mature male; 

maxilliped lacking mesial plumose setae, with more 

strongly hooked RS on palp articles and 2. 

size: Males 20–29 mm; female 34 mm.

Variation: Based on the four type specimens. Robust 

setae: Pleotelson RS 4– 7. Uropod exopod mesial 

margin with 0 (all); lateral margin 0– 2. Uropod endopod 

mesial margin varied from 2–4; lateral margin 

(n = 0) with 5–8. 

The setation of the pereopod palm is consistent with 

3 robust setae on pereopods –3; variation occurs in 

the distal robust seta on the palm which in the mature 

males is equal in size to the other robust setae, but in 

the immature male and some of the females it is less 

than half the size of the other robust setae (this can vary 

within the individual). The robust setae on the inferior 

margin of the merus were consistently +2. 

remarks: Rocinela resima sp. nov. can be identified by 

the ovate body shape, strongly produced and upturned 

rostrum, relatively widely separated eyes, pereopods 

–3 with three robust setae on a small, rounded propodal 

blade, and relatively narrow uropodal rami with 

posteriorly rounded uropodal endopod. Males have 

upturned and truncate rostrum, and relatively short 

and robust dactyli on pereopods –3. 

In New Zealand waters Rocinela bonita sp. nov. is 

the most similar species. R. resima can be distinguished 

from that species by a number of characters including 

pereopods –3 having a less produced and more 

rounded propodal blade with three robust setae (v. 

sub-rectangular with four robust setae in R. bonita), 

shorter and more robust dactylus in mature males 

( .0 times as long as propodus v. 2.0 times as long as 

propodus in R. bonita), shorter and more stout robust 

setae on the merus, shorter robust setae on the inferior 

margins of pereopod 7, and the uropodal endopod 

with an evenly convex lateral margin and smoothly 

rounded distal margin (v. sinuate lateral margin, apex 

with distinct apical point), and a narrower uropodal 

exopod (3.0 times as long as wide v. 2.4 times as long 

as wide in R. bonita). 

There are two northern Pacific species, both showing 

some similarity to Rocinela resima sp. nov. Rocinela 

hawaiiensis Richardson, 903 is known from only two 

specimens (from Hawai’i and Pacific Mexico) and the 

adult male has not been described (Brusca & France 

992). The female of R. resima differs in having the distalmost 

robust seta on the propodal palm of pereopods 

–3 small, whereas in R. hawaiiensis all three robust 

setae are of equal length, and the pleotelson posterior 

margin of R. resima has a distinct median point while in 

R. hawaiiensis it is evenly rounded (Brusca & France 

992). The other similar species is Rocinela cornuta 

Richardson, 898, known from Alaska and Arctic waters 

(Kussakin 1979; Rafi 1985), a poorly known species 

for which few descriptive data are available. While 

the anterior margin of the head is similarly produced 

in mature males of both species, R. resima lacks the 

anterolateral projections on pereonite and has only 

three robust setae on the propodal palm of pereopods 

–3 rather than the four in R. cornuta; in addition 

Richardson (1898) figured the uropods of R. cornuta 

as extending well beyond the posterior margin of the 

pleotelson, whereas in R. resima the uropods reach only 

to that margin. Kussakin (1979) gave additional figures 

for the species, which correspond to neither those of 

Richardson ( 898) nor any other species. 

89 


distribution: All records from off southeastern South 

Island in the region of the Chatham Rise and south 

to Christabel Sea Mount on the northern Macquarie 

Ridge; at depths of 870– 076 m. 

etymoLogy: Adapted from the Latin resimus (turnedup 

nose; simus = pug-nosed) and alluding to the 

prominent, somewhat upturned rostrum in the adult 

males. 

Rocinela runga sp. nov. (Figs 23– 25) 


49°38. 0–04’S, 78°47.5 –26’E, off Antipodes Islands, 

23 April 2003, 03– 08 m (NIWA 23845). 


dorsal surfaces smooth and sparsely punctate, widest 

at pereonite 5, lateral margins weakly ovate. Rostrum 

simple, anteriorly rounded. Eyes not medially united, 


up of ~ 2 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with 

~9 ommatidia; eye colour dark brown. Pereonite 1 and 

coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle rounded; 

coxae 5–7 with incomplete oblique carina (weak). Pleon 

with pleonite largely concealed by pereonite 7; pleonite 

4 with posterolateral margins extending to, but 

not beyond, posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 

5 with posterolateral angles acute. Pleotelson . times 

as long as anterior width, anterior dorsal surface with 

2 sub-median depressions, dorsal surface with short 

setae; lateral margins weakly convex, posterior margin 

narrowly rounded, with 6– 8 RS (many missing). 


combined lengths of articles and 2 (in situ), 3.5 times 

as long as wide; flagellum with 6 articles, extending 

to anterior of pereonite . Antenna peduncle article 3 

2.8 times as long as article 2, .3 times as long as wide; 


as wide, inferior margin with 0 plumose setae, and 

simple setae; article 5 .3 times as long as article 4, 

3.2 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 4 setae 

(minute, widely spaced), anterodistal angle with cluster 

of 2 short simple setae (and 2 plumose setae); extending 

to posterior of pereonite 2.

Figure 123. Rocinela runga sp. nov. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head, dorsal view; D, frons; E, pleonites, 

oblique lateral view; F, antennule, in situ (dorsal view); G, antenna, in situ (ventral view). 

Frontal lamina as wide as long, anteriorly acute. 


2 with 2 marginal distolateral setae (all with distinctly 

bifurcate tips), and 2 long distolateral setae; palp article 

3 with 22 setae (all distally bifurcate except distalmost 

seta). Maxillule with 6 RS ( large, 5 slender, 2 of which 

serrate). Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 hooked RS; lateral 

lobe with 2 hooked RS. Maxilliped palp article distomesial 

angle with 2 RS ( short, straight, hooked); 

article 2 with 2 hooked RS; article 3 with 2 hooked RS 

(article 3 proximally fused to article 2). 



RS, superior distal margin with 7 setae (and acute RS); 

merus inferior margin with 2 RS (minute), set as two 

90 

groups, superior distal angle with 6 setae (all simple); 

carpus 0.7 times as long as merus, inferior margin with 

0 RS; propodus 4.4 times as long as proximal width, propodal 

palm simple, without blade or process, inferior 

margin with RS (distal; minute); dactylus .0 times as 

long as propodus (curved distally). Pereopods 2 and 3 

not similar to pereopod (more robust, with +2 RS on 

inferior margin of merus; propodus 2.6 times as long 

as proximal width, with 2 small RS; dactylus slightly 

longer ( .03) than propodus, weakly curved). Pereopod 

6 similar to pereopod 7 (but longer). Pereopod 7 basis 3.7 



margin with 7 RS (set as , 2, 2 and 2), superior distal 

angle with 4 RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; merus

Figure 124. Rocinela runga sp. nov. Holotype. A, mandible; B, mandible molar and incisor; C, mandible palp article 3; 

D, robust seta, mandible palp article 2; E, maxillule; F, maxillule apex; G, maxilla; H, maxilla apex; I, maxilliped; J, maxilliped, 

palp articles –3. 

0.6 times as long as ischium, .9 times as long as wide, 

inferior margin with 2 RS (paired), superior distal angle 

with 9 RS, inferior distal angle with 5 RS; carpus 

0.6 times as long as ischium, 2.4 times as long as wide, 

inferior margin with RS (and minute proximal seta), 

superior distal angle with 9 RS (4 short), inferior distal 



, 2 and 2), superior distal angle with 5 slender setae, 


Pleopods swollen and distended, not described; examined 

in situ, appearing similar to those of Rocinela 

leptopus sp. nov. 

9 



Exopod at angle of about 35° to endopod, rami not extending 

to pleotelson apex, marginal setae in two tiers. 

Endopod lateral margin weakly convex, lateral margin 

with 4 RS, mesial margin distally rounded, with 4 RS. 


long as greatest width; lateral margin weakly convex, 

with 8 RS; mesial margin straight, distally convex, with 

0 RS; distal margin with indistinct apex.

Figure 125. Rocinela runga sp. nov. Holotype. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; D, pereopod , merus, distal inferior 

margin; E, pereopod , propodus, distal inferior margin, F, pereopod 2 ischium, mesial angle; G, pereopod 7, distal margin of 

carpus, mesial RS; H, uropod; I, uropodal exopod, ventral view. 

Variation: The uropodal endopod mesial margin had 

4 and 6 robust setae, lateral margin 4 and 5 robust 

setae. 

remarks: Rocinela runga sp. nov. can be identified by 

the ovate body shape, relatively small and widely 

separated eyes, smoothly narrowed rostrum, very 

long (longer than pereopod 7) and slender pereopod 

92 

, pereopods –3 without a propodal blade and by the 

relatively narrow uropodal rami. 

Rocinela leptopus sp. nov. is the only other similar 

species, with a similar pereopodal, pleotelson and 

uropod morphology. The two species are readily separated 

by R. runga having a more elongate pereopod 

, pereopod dactylus distally curved (proximally 

curved in R. leptopus), more slender pereopods 2 and

3, and uropodal rami that are relatively wider (exopod 

3.4 times as long as wide) than in R. leptopus (exopod 

4.0 times as long as wide) and which fail to exceed the 

posterior margin of the pleotelson (just exceeding the 

posterior margin of the pleotelson in R. leptopus. 


distribution: Known only from off the Antipodes 

Islands, eastern Campbell Plateau, southeast of New 


etymoLogy: Runga is a Mäori word meaning south 

(location) alluding to the southern location (noun in 

apposition). 

Rocinela satagia sp. nov. (Figs 26– 29) 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ (25 mm) Chatham Rise, 

43°49.605’S, 78°29.284’E, 9 October 200 , 454 m, coll. 


Paratypes: 2♀ (non-ovig. 2 [dissected], 8.5 mm,), 

same data as holotype (NIWA 23857). ♀ (2 mm, 

non-ovig.), Chatham Rise, 43.7033°S, 79.9 7°E, no 

date, stn. Q4a, 398 m, medium Agassiz trawl (NIWA 

23858). ♂ (20 mm), eastern Chatham Rise, 44°09.60’S, 

79° 4.20’W, 7 March 978, 320 m, stn Q20 (NIWA 

23859). ♂ (2 mm), off East Otago coast, South Island, 

45°45.4’S, 7 °05.0’E, 6 August 955, 584 m, canyon 

B, M.V. Alert (NMNZ Cr. 2007). ♂ ( 8.5 mm), ♀ (ovig 

24 mm), manca (7.5 mm), eastern Chatham Rise, 

43°44.92’–44°0 .60’S, 79°00.34–0 .60’W, 8 September 

989, 397–399 m, stn V365, (NIWA 23860). Manca ( 2.0 

mm), eastern Chatham Rise, 44°05.50’S, 79°06.00’W, 

February 968, 322 m, stn G0327 (NIWA 2386 ). 

Other material: ♀ ( 9 mm, ovig., poor condition), c. 43 

km southeast of Cape Campbell, 4 °55.9’S, 4 °43.2’E, 

4 January 979, 454–424 m, stn BS668 (= NZOI stn 

R26), RV Tangaroa (NIWA 23880). ♀ ( 8 mm, ovig.), 

43.5328–5348°S, 79.6280–6257°E, 6 June 2006, 375–38 

m (NIWA 25669). ♀ ( 3.0 mm, non-ovig), Pegasus 

Canyon, Pegasus Bay, 43° 4’S, 73°39’E, 29 September 

976, BS559, 006–5 2 m, coral, coll. RV Acheron 

(NMNZ Cr. 2008). Manca? (8.5 mm, poor condition), 

Pegasus Canyon, Pegasus Bay, 43°30.0’S, 73°3 .3’E, 27 

September 976, BS558, 446 m, mud, coll. RV Acheron 

(NMNZ Cr. 2009). 



margins weakly ovate. Rostrum basally expanded, tricornered. 

Eyes not medially united, separated by about 



colour dark brown. Coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle right-angled (coxae 3 rounded); 5–7 without 

oblique carina. Pleon with pleonite largely concealed 



5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles rounded. Pleotelson 

0.8 times as long as anterior width, anterior dorsal 

surface without 2 sub-median depressions, dorsal surface 

smooth; lateral margins convex, posterior margin 

narrowly rounded, with 8– 0 RS. 



as wide; flagellum with 6 articles, extending to anterior 

of pereonite . Antenna peduncle article 3 .3 times as 

long as article 2, .2 times as long as wide; article 4 .5 

times as long as article 3, .8 times as long as wide, 

inferior margin with 0 plumose setae, and simple 

setae; article 5 .5 times as long as article 4, 2.9 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 setae (palmate), 


flagellum with 14 articles, extending to middle of 

pereonite 2. 


rounded. 


2 with 7 marginal distolateral setae (finely biserrate), 

and 3 long distolateral setae; palp article 3 with 6 setae 

(terminal 2 longest). Maxillule with 5 RS ( large, 4 

slender). Maxilla mesial lobe with 2 hooked RS; lateral 

lobe with hooked RS. Maxilliped palp article distomesial 

angle with 3 RS (slender, straight); article 2 with 

3 hooked RS; article 3 with hooked RS. 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 2 setae (and RS); 

merus inferior margin with 3 RS (set as + 2), set as two 

groups, superior distal angle with 4 setae (including 

RS); carpus 0.6 times as long as merus, inferior margin 

with RS; propodus .7 times as long as proximal width, 

propodal palm with blade, propodal blade 0.7 times 

as wide as palm, with numerous setae, inferior margin 

with 5 RS; dactylus .3 times as long as propodus. Pereopods 

2 and 3 similar to pereopod . Pereopod 6 similar 



(most rubbed away); ischium 0.8 as long as basis, 

inferior margin with 6 RS (set as , , , 2, ), superior 


RS; merus 0.5 times as long as ischium, 2.0 as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set singly), superior 


carpus 0.5 times as long as ischium, 2.4 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set singly), superior 

distal angle with RS, inferior distal angle with 7 RS; 

propodus 0.4 as long as ischium, 3.5 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (set singly), superior 

distal angle with 3 slender setae ( palmate), inferior 


93

Figure 126. Rocinela satagia sp. nov. A, C, D, H–I, holotype, remainder paratype 8.5 mm. A, dorsal view; B, dorsal view, 

paratype; C, head, dorsal view; D, frons; E, lateral view; F, pleonites 4 and5, lateral margins; G, head, lateral view; I, sternite 7 

showing penial papillae; J antenna peduncle; K, antennule. 

94

Figure 127. Rocinela satagia sp. nov. Paratype 8.5 mm. A, mandible; B, mandible molar and incisor; C, mandible palp 

article 3; D, maxillule; E, maxillule apex; F, maxilla; G, maxilla apex; H, maxilliped palp articles –3; I, maxilliped scales. 




margin weakly convex, mesial margin weakly convex, 

with PMS on distal two-thirds; endopod 2.9 times as 

long as wide, lateral margin straight; peduncle mesial 

margin with 6 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix 

masculina with sinuate margins, 0.8 times as long as 

endopod, distally acute. Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral 

margin without acute RS. 

Uropod peduncle posterior lobe about one-half as 

long as endopod. Exopod at angle of about 35° to endopod, 

rami extending to pleotelson apex, marginal 

setae in two tiers. Endopod lateral margin weakly con- 

vex, with –3 RS, mesial margin straight or distally 

rounded, with 3 RS. Exopod not extending to end of 

endopod, 2.6 times as long as greatest width; lateral 

margin weakly convex, with 9 RS; mesial margin convex, 

with 0 RS; distal margin rounded. 

size: Males 9–25.0 mm; ovigerous females 9–24 mm, 

non-ovigerous females 3–2 mm; mancas 7.5– 2 

mm. 

Variation: Pleotelson frequently damaged or rubbed 

(n = 8): RS 9– 0, with 0 most frequent at 50%. Uropod 

exopod lateral margin (n = 23) with 8 (8%), 9 (70%) or 

0 (22%) RS; mesial margin (n = 24) without RS with 

95

Figure 128. Rocinela satagia sp. nov. A, B, and D holotype, remainder paratype 8.5 mm. A–C, pereopods , 2, and 7, respectively; 

D, pereopod , propodal blade; E, pereopod 7, distal margin of carpus, mesial RS; F, pleonites 4 and 5, lateral margins. 

one instance of RS. Uropod endopod mesial margin 

(n = 23) varied from –4 RS with 3 (57%) and 4 (35%) 

most frequent, and 2 each occurring once; lateral 

margin (n = 24) with 3 (92%) RS most frequent, 4 occurring 

twice. 

The setation of the palms of pereopods –3 is highly 

consistent with 5 RS being the most frequent; pereopod 

palm (n = 23) with 5 (70%) or 6 (30%), pereopod 2 

palm (n = 24) with 5 (75%) or 6 (25%) and pereopod 3 

(n = 22) palm 5 (86%) or 6 (9%), 4 occurring once. The 

robust setae on the inferior margin of the merus was 

consistently +2. There is considerable variation in the 

presence of setae on the face of the propodal blade, 

some specimens having only one seta (as is common 

to nearly all species of the genus) other with a mass of 

96 

setae; the differences do not seem to be connected with 

the sex or size of the specimens. 

There is no discernable difference in number of 


to size—the smallest measured here (a manca) 

had similar counts to adults for robust setae. The 

characteristic ornamentation of the dorsal surface of 

the head is most developed in larger specimens, both 

males and females. 

remarks: Rocinela satagia sp. nov. can be identified 

by the following combination of characters: rostrum 

broad, strongly produced, eyes narrowly separated, 

adult specimens with prominent ridge along the posterior 

mesial margin of each eye, pereopods –3 with

Figure 129. Rocinela satagia sp. nov. A, B, E and F holotype, remainder paratype 8.5 mm. A–D, pleopods –3, 5 respectively; 

E, uropod; F, uropod exopod, ventral view; G, uropod exopod distal margin. 

5 or 6 robust setae on propodal blade and, in adult 

specimens, propodal blade with numerous setae. 

The most similar species is Rocinela garricki, which 

also has numerous setae on the propodal blade of pereopods 

–3. That species being readily distinguished 

from R. satagia by the far more widely separated eyes, 

a greater number of robust setae on the blade of pereopods 

–3 (8 v. 5 in R. satagia), and having propor- 

tionally wider uropodal rami, the exopod of which in 

R. garricki has a distinct distal point. 

distribution: Primarily off the eastern coast of South 

Island from the Cook Strait to off the Otago coast, and 

eastwards on the Chatham Rise; 330 to 584 metres. 

etymoLogy: Adapted from the Latin satagius (anxious, 

worried) alluding the ‘worry lines’ between the eyes. 

97

Rocinela sp. 

materiaL examined: ♂ (~28 mm), vicinity of Bounty 

Islands, 47°30’S, 78°45’E, 2 March 973, 39 m, stn 

I705 (NIWA 23846). 

remarks: This specimen is similar to Rocinela leptopus 

sp. nov., but differs in having a short rostrum with an 

upturned anterior margin, pereopods –3 with three 

prominent robust setae on the palm, each seta set on 

a small lobe giving the inferior margin an irregular 

appearance. The single specimen lacks evident penial 

openings, but pleopod 2 has a short appendix masculina. 

The specimen is intact, and an undescribed 

species, but the pleon, pleotelson, posterior pereopods 

and uropods are all badly crushed, so the specimen is 

unsuitable for description. 

Rocinela sp. 

materiaL examined: ♀ (15 mm, non-ovig.), Thompson 

Sound, Fiordland, South Island, 45° 3.00’S, 66°57.96’E, 

28 May 997, 350 m, gravel, sand, coral and mud, coll. 

RV Munida (NMNZ Cr. 20 ). 

remarks: The single specimen is most similar to Rocinela 

satagia sp. nov., but differs notably in having eyes that 

meet medially and the posterior margin of the pleotelson 

being narrowed. The setation of the uropods is 

similar to that of R. satagia but the propodal blade of 

pereopods –3 all have only four acute robust setae. 

Genus Syscenus Harger, 880 

Syscenus Harger, 880: 387.– Sars, 897: 66.– Richardson, 

905a: 2 2.– Stebbing, 924: 9.– Wahrberg, 930: 

24.– Nierstrasz & Schuurmans Steckhoven jr., 930: 

77.– Schultz, 969: 96.– Menzies & George, 972: 

2.– Kussakin, 979: 269.– Bruce, 997: 3.– Bruce, 

Lew Ton & Poore, 2002: 63. 

Harponyx Sars, 882: 60 (type species Harponyx pranizoides 

Sars, 882). 

Rocinela.– Bovallius, 885 (not Rocinela Leach, 8 8). 

Syscénus.– Stephenson, 948: 4 . 

type speCies: Syscenus infelix Harger, 880; by 

monotypy. 

diagnosis: Body dorsally vaulted. Head laterally free of 

pereonite ; rostral point weak; eyes absent or present. 

Pleonite abruptly narrower than pereonite 7. Frontal 

lamina present, slender, elongate. Maxilliped palp 

2- or 3-articled. Uropodal peduncle mesial margin 

not produced; rami lamellar. Coxae 5–7 shorter than 

respective pereonite. 

desCription: Body elongate, 3 to 4 times as long as 

wide. Head anterior margin with small median (ros- 

98 

tral) point. Eyes usually absent (present in two species). 

Coxae of pereonites 4–7 shorter than respective 

segment, not posteriorly produced. Pleon abruptly 

narrower than pereon, approx. 30% to 60% maximum 

body width; pleonites all visible, all with free lateral 

margins; pleonites 3–5 posteriorly produced. Pleotelson 

large, as long as or longer than pleon, usually with 

blunt or narrow caudomedial point (never acute or 

truncate). Pleonal sternite present anterior to pleopod 

peduncles. 

Antennule short, not exceeding antenna peduncle in 

length. Antenna peduncle articles 4 and 5 (or, either 4 

or 5) and proximal flagellum provided with long setae 

(most species). 

Frontal lamina usually present; labrum present. 

Mandible with unicuspid incisor; molar process and 

spine row absent. Maxillule with terminal RS. Maxilliped 

3- or 4-articled, article 3 with 2–3 recurved RS, 

article 4 with recurved RS; endite absent. 

Pleopod 3 endopod usually without PMS, pleopods 

4 and 5 endopods without PMS; endopod 3-5 usually 

not distinctly smaller than exopods; coupling setae 

present on peduncles of pleopods –5; pleopod 5 

without proximomesial lobe. Pleopods not extending 

beyond lateral margins of pleon. Uropods flat, both 

rami lamellar, endopod longer than exopod. 

remarks: Syscenus is best recognised by the coxae of 

pereonites 5–7 being shorter than the respective pereonite, 

pleon evidently narrower than the pereon, pleonite 

5 with free (not overlapped) lateral margins, and 

lack of a dorsal rostrum. Most species lack any trace of 

eyes, but two species, Syscenus karu Bruce, 2005 from 

Vanuatu and Syscenus peruanus Menzies and George, 

972 from off Peru, do have eyes. 

Syscenus is a small genus known from all oceans 

except the Southern Ocean. There are six named species 

(following S. pacificus Nunomura, 98 being here 

placed in synonymy), with a further two unnamed 

species from New Zealand recorded here. Most species 

are superficially similar in appearance. It is known that 

at least one species, Syscenus infelix Harger, 880, is a 

fish predator and possibly more host-dependent (Ross 

et al. 200 ) than noted for Aega or Rocinela. 

Most species of the genus are known from only a 

few locations. The exception is Syscenus infelix, which 

has been recorded from the North Atlantic, Mediterranean, 

northern and southwestern Pacific, and South 

Africa (Kensley 2004; Kensley & Cartes 2003). Kensley 

& Cartes (2003) considered that many of the records 

for S. infelix were ‘open to doubt’, and Kensley (2004) 

more specifically rejected Pacific records of S. infelix 

as misidentifications, an opinion with which I agree. 

However given that some isopod mesopelagic species 

are known to have an enormous range (e.g. Svavarsson 

& Bruce 2000), and that several species of the related

genus Aega (e.g. A. falklandica, A. monophthalma, A. komai 

and A. urotoma and others; all this study) also have 

extensive ranges, the possibility that some of those 

records are correct cannot be excluded. 

As most species are known from single or a few 

specimens, the range and pattern of character variation 

is not known. Despite the large amount of material 

recorded by Kensley and Cartes (2003) for Syscenus 

infelix and Syscenus atlanticus Kononenko, 988, no assessment 

was made of character variation in those two 

species, although variation in pleotelson and uropod 

shape was illustrated by Kensley and Cartes (2003). 

Most of the remaining species of the genus are in need 

of further revision. 

The genus is likely to be found in all tropical and 

temperate oceans, and has been recorded from depths 

as shallow as 70 metres in the North Atlantic (Kensley 

2004) to 4609 metres off northern Peru (Menzies & 

George 972); most records are between approximately 

500 and 2000 metres. 

Key to the new Zealand species of syscenus 

. Pereopods with blunt RS and numerous slender 

setae; pleotelson with caudomedial point ............ 

............................................S. springthorpei (p. 208) 

— Pereopods without numerous slender setae, without 

prominent blunt RS; pleotelson posteriorly 

rounded or subtruncate ........................................2 

2. Body wide, ovate; pleonite 5 with dorsal median 

spine (female) or point (male); rostrum weak, 

blunt ................................................ S. latus (p. 202) 

–- Body elongate, margins subparallel; pleonite 5 

without point or spine; rostrum narrow, projecting 

anteriorly, then ventrally ...............................3 

3. Antennal flagellum extending to pereonite 3; 

uropodal rami without RS ..................................... 

.............................................Syscenus kapoo (p. 99) 

–- Antennal flagellum extending to pereonite 6; 

uropodal rami with RS ........................................... 

...........................................Syscenus moana (p. 206) 

Syscenus kapoo sp. nov. (Figs 30, 3 ) 

materiaL examined: Holotype: ♀ (non-ovig. 2 mm), 

Norfolk Ridge, 26°25.94’S, 67° 0.87’E, 8 May 2003, 

750–774 m, NORFANZ (NIWA 23780). 



margins subparallel. Eyes absent. Rostrum simple or 

anteriorly narrow. Coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle with small distinct produced point; 5–7 without 

oblique carina. Pleon with pleonite largely concealed 



5 with posterolateral angles rounded. Pleotelson 

.0 as long as anterior width, anterior dorsal surface 

with 2 sub-median depressions (weak), dorsal surface 

smooth; lateral margins convex, posterior margin narrowly 

rounded, with 0 RS. 

Antennule peduncle as for the genus; flagellum with 

3 articles, extending to middle of pereonite . Antenna 

peduncle as for the genus; flagellum with 35 articles, 

extending to middle of pereonite 3. 


acute. 

Mouthparts as for the genus. 



RS, superior distal margin with 0 setae (4 simple and 2 

plumose setae); merus inferior margin with 0 RS, superior 

distal angle with 2 setae; carpus .3 times as long as 

merus, inferior margin with 0 RS; propodus .7 times as 

long as proximal width, propodal palm simple, without 

blade or process, without setae, inferior margin with 0 

RS; dactylus .4 times as long as propodus. Pereopods 2 

and 3 similar to pereopod . Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 

7. Pereopod 7 basis 3.5 times as long as greatest 


0.9 as long as basis, inferior margin with 0 RS, superior 

distal angle with 6 RS (and seta), inferior distal angle 

with 4 RS; merus 0.6 times as long as ischium, 2.3 times 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 5 RS (set as 2, , 

and ), superior distal angle with 22 RS (in two ranks 

of 6 major and ~ 6 slender), inferior distal angle with 

6 RS; carpus .0 as long as ischium, 6.4 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 8 RS (set as 2, , 3, and ), 

superior distal angle with 25 RS (in two ranks of 7 major 

and ~ 8 slender and robust setae), inferior distal angle 


as long as wide, inferior margin with 0 RS (2 minute 

submarginal), superior distal angle with 0 slender 

setae, inferior distal angle with 2 RS. Pereopods distal 

margins of ischium to carpus without setae; without 

strong carina on basis. 

Pleopods 1 as for the genus. 


posterior lobe about one-third as long as endopod. 


rami extending beyond pleotelson, marginal setae in 

single tier. Endopod lateral margin weakly convex, lateral 

margin with 0 RS, mesial margin straight, with 0 


as long as greatest width; lateral margin convex, with 0 

RS; mesial margin sinuate, proximally concave, distally 

convex, with 0 RS; distal margin rounded. 

remarks: The single specimen, though adult, is of uncertain 

maturity, and could not be identified as any of 

99

Figure 130. Syscenus kapoo sp. nov. Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head, dorsal view; D, frons; E, pleotelson 

and uropods; F, pleonites, lateral view; G, uropod exopod, ventral view; H, uropod. 

200

Figure 131. Syscenus kapoo sp. nov. Holotype. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; D, mesial margin of merus; E, mesial 

margin of carpus. 

the five other species known from the southwestern 

Pacific. Syscenus kapoo sp. nov. can be identified by the 

shape of the head which has convex lateral margins 

and a relatively weak rostrum, the acute coxae, evenly 

20 

rounded pleotelson posterior margin, antennal flagellum 

extending to pereonite 3, elongate pereopods 5–7 

with pereopod 7 extending posteriorly beyond the 

posterior margin of the pleotelson, and the uropods

which extend beyond the pleotelson, the exopod of 

which is shorter than the endopod and is proximally 

narrow. 

Comparison with the holotype of S. intermedius (see 

Appendix 2) shows that, in S. intermedius, the frontal 

lamina is narrower, the posterior legs are more robust, 

the uropod rami are roughly subequal in length, the 

coxae are posteriorly rounded and the pleotelson 

lateral margin has a distinct inflexion. Syscenus kapoo 

is also similar to the potentially sympatric S. moana, 

from which it differs in having a far shorter antennal 

flagellum (to pereonite 3 v. pereonite 6 in S. moana), 

the robust setae on the merus and carpus of pereopod 

7 are larger, and the uropods differ in lacking robust 

setae, the endopod being more slender, and the exopod 

is shorter than that of S. moana, and different in shape 

being wider distally as well as narrower proximally. 


etymoLogy: The epithet is a Mäori word meaning blind 

or without sight. 

distribution: Known only from the type locality, on 

the Norfolk Ridge. 

Syscenus latus Richardson, 909 (Figs 32– 34) 

Syscenus latus Richardson, 1909: 85, fig. 11.– Bruce, 1997: 

4.– Saito, Itani & Nunomura, 2000: 6 . 

Syscenus pacificus Nunomura, 98 : 5, fig .– Bruce, 

997: 4.– Saito, Itani & Nunomura, 2000: 6 (new 

synonymy). 

materiaL examined: Lectotype (here designated): ♀ (ovig. 

42 mm), at Tsurikake Saki Light, off Koshika Islands, 

Sea of Japan, Japan, 3 °39.5’N, 29°24.0’E, August 

906, 742 metres (USNM 39502). Paralectotype: ♂? ( 9 

mm), at Tsurikake Saki Light, off Koshika Islands, Sea 

of Japan, Japan, 3 °39.0’N, 29°20.5’E, August 906, 

742 metres (USNM 39906 — former syntype). 

New Zealand specimen: ♀ (non-ovig. 38 mm), Challenger 

Plateau, 40° 9.65’S, 70° 3.80’E, 9 March 98 , 

805–822 m, RV James Cook (NMNZ Cr. 20 2). 

Additional material: New caledonia, HALIPRO 

2, coll. B. Richer de Forges: (27 mm, non-ovig, sex 

uncertain), 23°59’S, 6 °55’E, 25 November 996, stn. 

BT96, 034– 056 m (MNHN Is.5881); (2 mm, nonovig, 

sex uncertain), 24°00’S, 6 °49’E, 25 November 

996, stn. BT97, 964– 03 m (MNHN Is.5882). Indonesia, 

KARUBAR: ♀ (33 mm, non-ovig.), region of Kei 

and Tanimbar Islands, Banda Sea, 05° 4’S, 33°00’E, 

25 October 99 , stn. CP2 688–694, coll. Baruna Jaya 

(MNHN Is.5883). 

desCription (based on lectotype and New Zealand 

female): Body 2. times as long as greatest width, 

202 


margins ovate. Eyes absent. Rostrum simple, anteriorly 

subtruncate. Coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral 

angle rounded; 5–7 without oblique carina. Pleon with 


margins not extending to posterior margin of 

pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles acute 

(in dorsal view). Pleotelson .2 times as long as anterior 

width, dorsal surface smooth; lateral margins convex, 

posterior margin evenly rounded, with 0 RS. 



as wide; flagellum with 14 articles, extending to pereonite 

2. Antenna peduncle article 3 .0 times as long 

as article 2, .3 times as long as wide; article 4 2.4 times 

as long as article 3, 3.0~ times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 2 plumose setae (probably simple, but 

may have dried at some point); article 5 .2 times as 

long as article 4, 4.0 as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 0 setae, anterodistal angle with cluster of 0 short 

simple setae; flagellum with 32 articles (articles 2–15 

with conspicuous cluster of setae at distal angle), extending 

to pereonite 6. 


acute. 


2 with ~30 marginal distolateral setae (setae multitiered); 

palp article 3 with 29 setae (distal 2 longest; 

marginal setae irregularly spaced). Maxillule with 6 RS 

(2 large, 4 slender). Maxilla mesial lobe with hooked 

RS (weakly hooked); lateral lobe with 2 hooked RS. 

Maxilliped palp article 3 with 2 hooked RS; article 3. 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 0 setae; merus inferior 

margin with 0 RS, superior distal angle with 4 setae; 

carpus 0.3 times as long as merus, inferior margin with 

0 RS; propodus 2.4 times as long as proximal width, propodal 

palm simple, without blade or process, without 

setae, inferior margin with 0 RS; dactylus .6 times as 

long as propodus. Pereopod 6 similar to pereopod 7. 

Pereopod 7 basis 3.3 times as long as greatest width, inferior 

margins with 0 palmate setae; ischium 0.8 as long 

as basis, inferior margin with 0 RS, superior distal angle 

with RS (and 2 simple setae), inferior distal angle with 

0 RS; merus 0.8 times as long as ischium, 3.4 times as 

long as wide, inferior margin with 7 RS (submarginal; 

short, slender, acute), superior distal angle with 0 RS 

(with about 6 slender setae in several tiers), inferior 

distal angle with 8 RS (acute); carpus 0.95 times as long 


with RS (minute, submarginal), superior distal angle 

with several; setae missing, inferior distal angle with 5 

RS; propodus .2 as long as ischium, 8 times as long as 

wide, inferior margin with 2 RS (minute; submarginal), 

superior distal angle with 0 slender setae (possibly

Figure 132. Syscenus latus Richardson, 909. A–E, holotype, remainder NMNZ Cr. 20 2. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; 

C, head, dorsal view; D, frons; E, pleonites, lateral view; F, antenna; G, antennule; H, antenna peduncle; I, dorsal view; 

J, frons. 

203

Figure 133. Syscenus latus Richardson, 909. NMNZ Cr. 20 2. A, mandible; B, mandible incisor; C, mandible palp articles 2 

and 3; D, maxillule; E, maxillule apex; F, maxilla; G, maxilla apex; H, maxilliped; I, maxilliped palp article 2. 

missing), inferior distal angle with RS. Pereopods 

distal margins of ischium to carpus without setae; 

without strong carina on basis. 



PMS on distal margin only; endopod 2.8 times as 

long as wide, lateral margin straight, with PMS on 

distal margin only, mesial margin with PMS on distal 

two-thirds; peduncle mesial margin with coupling 

hooks. Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral margin each 

without acute RS. 


posterior lobe about absent. Uropod rami with endopod 

and exopod co-planar, rami extending beyond 

pleotelson. Endopod lateral margin convex, lateral 

margin with 0 RS, mesial margin straight, with 0 RS. 


204 

long as greatest width; lateral margin convex, with 0 

RS; mesial margin sinuate, proximally concave, distally 


maLe: No male had been positively identified. 

size: From 9–42 mm; Nunomura ( 98 ) recorded 

females up to 46 mm. 

Variation: The New Zealand specimen has a frontal 

lamina, more strongly defined than in the lectotype, 

but similar to that of the paralectotype. The antennule 

flagellum extends to the middle of pereonite 2, the 

antennal flagellum to pereonite 6. 

remarks: Syscenus latus is readily identified by the 

prominent ocular lobes, pleonite 4 posterior margin

Figure 134. Syscenus latus Richardson, 909. NMNZ Cr. 20 2 except J, holotype. A–C, pereopods , 2 and 7 respectively; 

D, mesial margin of merus; E–H, pleopods , 2, 4 and 5 respectively; I, pleopod peduncle, mesial margin; J, uropod 

(holotype), in situ. 

205

with a distinct median point, pleonite 5 with a distinct 

median point or in the ovigerous female a short dorsally 

directed spine, slender dactylus on pereopods 

–3, slender distal articles on pereopods 5–7, all pereopods 

having few and small robust setae, the broadly 

rounded pleotelson posterior margin and the broadly 

rounded uropodal rami. No other species has an acute 

median point or dorsally directed spine on the posterior 

margin of pleonite 5. 

Nunomura ( 98 ), when describing Syscenus pacificus 

clearly believed that he was describing the second 

species of the genus, stating that ‘the genus Syscenus 

had hitherto been represented by the single species 

S. infelix’. Bruce ( 997a) questioned the validity of 

S. pacificus. Examination of the type material of 

Syscenus latus, also from Japan, and comparison with 

the description given by Nunomura ( 98 ) now confirm 

the synonymy. 

The large female is designated as lectotype. The 

smaller of the two syntypic specimens, both from the 

same locality, is in poor condition, with the posterior 

half appearing decomposed, and remains as paralectotype. 

While pleonite 5 has a short spine and the frons, 

antennule, pleotelson and uropods are similar to those 

of the larger specimen, the antennal flagellum is shorter 

in length, extending to pereonite 4 (rather than 6). 


distribution: In New Zealand known only from the 

single specimen from the Challenger Plateau to the 

west of northern North Island; here also recorded from 

New Caledonia, Lord Howe Rise and the Banda Sea, 

Indonesia; previous records from Japan; at depths of 

688– 056 metres (all records). 

Syscenus moana Bruce, 2005 (Fig. 35) 

Syscenus moana Bruce, 2005: 32, figs 1–4. 

diagnosis (from Bruce 2005): Body 2.7 times as long as 

greatest width. Rostrum anteriorly narrow, anteriorly 

truncate in dorsal view (apically bent ventrally). Eyes 

absent. Coxae 2 and 3 each with posteroventral angle 

with small distinct produced point; 5–7 without oblique 

carina. Pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins not 

extending to posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 

with posterolateral angles acute. Pleotelson 0.9 times as 

long as anterior width, anterior dorsal surface without 

2 sub-median depressions; lateral margins convex, 

posterior margin evenly rounded, without RS. 

Antennule flagellum with 8 articles, extending to 

anterior of pereonite . Antenna flagellum with 32 

articles, extending to middle of pereonite 6. 

Frontal lamina wider than long, anteriorly acute. 

206 

Pereopod 1 basis 2. times as long as greatest width; 


without RS, superior distal margin with 2 simple setae; 

merus inferior margin without RS, superior distal angle 

with simple setae; carpus .0 as long as merus, inferior 

margin without RS; propodus .3 times as long as 

proximal width, propodal palm simple, without blade 

or process, without setae, inferior margin without RS; 

dactylus .8 times as long as propodus. Pereopod 7 basis 

2.7 times as long as greatest width, inferior margins 

with 2 palmate setae; ischium 0.9 as long as basis, 

inferior margin without RS, superior distal angle with 

RS, inferior distal angle with 5 RS; merus 0.6 times 

as long as ischium, 2.0 as long as wide, inferior margin 

with 8 RS (set as 2, 2, 2, and ), superior distal angle 

with 9 RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; carpus 0.8 

times as long as ischium, 3.0 as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 8 RS (set as 2, , 2, , and ), superior 


RS; propodus .0 as long as ischium, 5.7 times as long 

as wide, inferior margin with 3 RS (very small, submarginal), 

superior distal angle with 3 slender setae 

(plumose), inferior distal angle with RS. Pereopods 

distal margins of ischium to carpus without abundant 

simple setae; without strong carina on basis. 

Penes opening flush with surface of sternite 7. 

Pleopod 1 exopod 2.0 as long as wide, lateral margin 

straight, mesial margin strongly convex, with PMS on 

distal one-third; endopod 2.5 times as long as wide, lateral 

margin weakly convex, with PMS on distal margin 

only, mesial margin with PMS on distal three-quarters. 

Pleopod 2 appendix masculina with straight margins, 0.5 

times as long as endopod, distally bluntly rounded. 


posterior lobe absent. Uropod rami with endopod and 

exopod co-planar, rami extending beyond pleotelson. 

Endopod lateral margin weakly convex, distolateral 

margin with 3 RS, mesial margin straight, without RS. 


long as greatest width; lateral margin convex, with 8 

RS; mesial margin evenly concave, without RS; distal 

margin rounded. 

remarks: Syscenus moana can be recognised by the acute 

coxae, antennal flagellum extending to pereonite 6 (not 

pereonite 3 as stated incorrectly in the original description), 

rounded margin to the pleotelson and uropods 

with robust setae. 

distribution: Single record from northern Norfolk 

Ridge. Species of Syscenus are mesopelagic fish predators 

or parasites, and it is quite likely that this species 

will occur more widely in northern New Zealand 

waters.

Figure 135. Syscenus moana Bruce, 2005. A, dorsal view; B, head, dorsal view; C, frons; D, pleotelson and uropods, dorsal 

view; E, antennule; pereopod ; F, pereopod ; G, uropod. 

207

Syscenus springthorpei Bruce, 997 (Fig. 36) 

Syscenus springthorpei Bruce, 1997: 114, figs 1–4.– Bruce, Lew 

Ton & Poore, 2002: 63. 

materiaL examined: ♂? (39 mm), Tui Oceanographic 

Cruise, Auckland University Zoology, AUZ 098 4 , 

locality not known, probable New Zealand EEZ; 

previously dissected (label in Hurley’s handwriting: 

“ex Kussakin: 23 , 269”); dissected appendages in fair 

condition but specimen seems to have subsequently 

deteriorated (NIWA 2378). 

desCription (after Bruce 997a): Body 3.0 as long as 

greatest width, dorsal surfaces smooth, widest at pereonite 

5, lateral margins subparallel. Eyes absent. Rostrum 

simple, anteriorly rounded. Coxae 2–3 each with 

posteroventral angle rounded; 5–7 without oblique 

carina. Pleon with pleonite visible in dorsal view; 

pleonite 4 with posterolateral margins not extending 

to posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral 

angles acute. Pleotelson .2 times as long as 

anterior width, dorsal surface smooth; lateral margins 

weakly convex, posterior margin with distinct median 



combined lengths of articles and 2, .6 times as 

long as wide; flagellum with 7 articles, extending to 

anterior of pereonite . Antenna peduncle article 3 2.5 

times as long as article 2, .5 times as long as wide; 


as wide, inferior margin with 3 plumose setae (long), 

and 0 simple setae; 2.7 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 10 setae (long, plumose); flagellum with 

20 articles (approximately), extending to posterior of 

pereonite 3. 


acute. 


2 marginal distolateral setae, and 3 long distolateral 

setae; palp article 3 with 9 setae. Maxillule with 5 RS (4 

large, apically curved, slender, straight). Maxilla mesial 

lobe with 0 hooked RS; lateral lobe with 2 hooked 

RS. Maxilliped palp article distomesial angle with 

RS; article 2 with 3 hooked RS; article 3 with hooked 

RS (and two short simple setae). 



0 RS, superior distal margin with 5 setae; merus inferior 

margin with RS (large, distal), superior distal angle 

with 2 setae; carpus .0 as long as merus, inferior margin 

with RS (with numerous simple setae); propodus 

.6 times as long as proximal width, propodal palm 

simple, without blade or process, inferior margin with 

RS (distal); dactylus .3 times as long as propodus. 

Pereopods 2 and 3 similar to pereopod . Pereopod 6 

208 

similar to pereopod 7. Pereopod 7 basis 2.4 times as 

long as greatest width; ischium 0.8 as long as basis, 

inferior margin with 0 RS, superior distal angle with 2 

RS (and numerous simple setae), inferior distal angle 

with 4 RS (and numerous simple setae); merus 0.6 times 

as long as ischium, .7 times as long as wide, inferior 

margin with 2 RS, superior distal angle with 6 RS (and 

~5 simple setae), inferior distal angle with 4 RS (and 

~4 simple setae); carpus .3 times as long as ischium, 

2.7 times as long as wide, inferior margin with 2 RS, 



as long as wide, inferior margin with RS, superior 

distal angle with 0 slender setae, inferior distal angle 

with RS. Pereopods distal margins of ischium to 

carpus with abundant simple setae; without strong 

carina on basis. 



Pleopod 1 exopod 2.0 as long as wide, lateral margin 

weakly convex, mesial margin weakly convex, with 

PMS on distal three-quarters; endopod 2.5 times as 

long as wide, lateral margin weakly convex, with PMS 

on distal margin only, mesial margin with PMS on 

distal three-quarters; peduncle mesial margin with 9 

coupling hooks. Pleopod 2 appendix masculina distally 

narrow, 0.9 times as long as endopod, distally acute. 

Pleopods 2–5 peduncle distolateral margin each with 

acute RS. 




rami not extending to pleotelson apex. Endopod lateral 

margin weakly convex, lateral margin with 0 RS, mesial 

margin weakly convex, with 0 RS. Exopod not extending 

to end of endopod, 3.7 times as long as greatest width; 

lateral margin weakly convex, with 0 RS; mesial margin 

convex, with 0 RS; distal margin rounded. 

femaLe: No female had been positively identified. 

size: Holotype 36 mm; New Zealand specimen 39 

mm. 

Variation: The New Zealand specimen is in poor condition 

and meaningful assessment is not possible. 

remarks: The single specimen is in very poor condition, 

appearing to have dried out at some point after it was 

dissected (the dissected appendages are in adequate 

condition) and also having suffered a mould infection. 

In addition, the locality of the specimen is not known, 

although, having been collected by the RV Tui, it will 

have been within the New Zealand region. For these 

reasons the descriptions and figures are taken from 

Bruce ( 997a).

Figure 136. Syscenus springthorpei Bruce, 997. A, dorsal view; B, head, dorsal view; C, frons; D, pereopod E, pereopod 2 

(distal articles); F, pereopod 7; G, antenna peduncle; H, antennule; I, uropod, in situ, dorsal view; J, pleotelson and uropods, 

ventral; view. 

Syscenus springthorpei can be identified by the relatively 

slender body shape, antennal flagellum extending 

to the posterior of pereonite 3, posterior margin 

of the pleotelson having a distinct median point, the 

uropodal rami not extending to the posterior margin 

209 

of the pleotelson, and the robust and setose pereopods 

that have conspicuous, blunt robust setae on the inferior 

margins. 

Characters separating this species from Syscenus 

infelix Harger, 880 are the pleotelson margins being

smoothly curved rather than sinuate (as figured by 

Harger 883), the presence of a blunt distinct caudomedial 

point (v. acute), and the uropods not extending 

beyond the posterior margin of the pleotelson (v. 

extending beyond the posterior of the pleotelson). 

The figures given by Kensley and Cartes (2003) show 

considerable variation in these characters, some of 

which appear similar to those of S. springthorpei, and 

furthermore the shape of the uropodal rami is near 

identical in both species. The pereopods differ in 

S. springthorpei having robust setae on the inferior 

margins of pereopods 4–7, these being absent in 

S. infelix (Kensley 2004). 

The type locality for S. infelix is Cape Cod, Massachusetts, 

northwestern North Atlantic, and without 

detailed reassessment of S. infelix based on the type 

material and from specimens collected geographically 

nearby, it is not possible to say if the western Atlantic 

species is the same as the eastern Atlantic material 

recorded under that name by Kensley and Cartes 

(2003), although the figured shapes of the pleotelson 

of western Atlantic and Mediterranean specimens do 

differ considerably. 


distribution: In New Zealand known only from the 

single specimen of uncertain locality; previous record 

from off New South Wales, Australia. 

Syscenus sp. 

materiaL examined: ♂ (23 mm), east of Mahia Peninsula, 

29 September 989, 39°40.5–43.5’S, 78°09.2–07.2’E, 

764–843 m, coll. RV James Cook (NMNZ Cr. 20 3). 

remarks: This specimen has one conspicuous and 

unique character — the superior distal angle of the 

ischium of pereopods 4–6 is strongly produced, over- 

iding the merus. Other character states include: dactylus 

of pereopods –3 longer than in S. springthorpei. The 

pleotelson and uropods are damaged, but the uropods 

do exceed the posterior margin of the pleotelson. The 

anterior of the head is ‘short’, the frontal lamina is 

anteriorly rounded; the antennule flagellum extends 

to anterior of pereonite 1, with a robust flagellum, the 

antennal flagellum extends to the posterior of pereonite 

4 (or anterior of 5) and the dorsum vaulted. The specimen 

is clearly an undescribed species, but is in poor 

condition, and at least one undamaged specimen is 

needed before it can be adequately characterised. 

2 0 

uNcErtAIN stAtus Or rEcOrds 

Aega cyclops Haswell, 88 

Aega cyclops Haswell, 88 : 92; 882: 285.– Hale, 925: 80, 

fig. 26; 1926: 233, fig. 20; 1937: 18; 1940: 298.– Bruce, 

983: 769, fig. 7O.– Springthorpe & Lowry, 994: 

43.–Bruce, Lew Ton & Poore, 2002: 6 . 

Aega (Rhamphion) cyclops.– Brusca, 983: . 

materiaL examined: “Possible syntype”; labelled as type 

by A.R. McCulloch, 905. ♂ ( 0.3 mm), Port Jackson, 

NSW, Australia (AM G5326). 

[Roger Springthorpe (Australian Museum, Sydney) states, 

in correspondence, that this specimen cannot be identified 

as the holotype with any degree of certainty. Haswell 

( 88 ) did not designate types and did not mention how 

many specimens he used in the original description. 

Hale ( 925) redescribed this specimen and assumed 

that it was the ‘type’ probably because McCulloch, in 

his somewhat cavalier fashion, had labelled it as such. 

Haswell’s original description lacks detail, for example 

it not mentioning the damaged pleotelson that Hale 

described. This specimen is similar in length to the 

original and may be a syntype. The origin of much of the 

Old Collection labelled as type material is confounded. It 

cannot be shown that this material was used by Haswell 

in his original descriptions. Material from Port Jackson, 

and some Queensland localities, for example, may have 

been collected after the date of publication by others such 

as Whitelegge, McCulloch, and Hedley.] 

remarks: Despite being relatively widely recorded 

(Hale 925, 926, 937, 940) off the coast of southeastern 

Australia the species remains poorly known 

and characterised. The holotype, a dry and dissected 

specimen, is held at the Australian Museum. All pereopods 

have lost their distal articles, and the uropods 

and pleotelson had been damaged and regrown prior 

to collection. There are two slides with an entire pereopod 

, pereopod 7, maxilliped and appendix masculina 

(detached from the pleopod). From this material there 

are several characteristics which distinguish Aega 

cyclops, these being the medially fused penial processes 

(a defining character state for Epulaega), the huge 

eyes with a very small posterior clear field, the short 

and smoothly curved dactylus on pereopod and the 

small, ovate frontal lamina. No other species has this 

combination of characters. 

Hale ( 926) reported the species from ‘South-east 

of Sydney, in “New Zealand area,” 75 faths.’ However, 

that species seems more likely to be Aegiochus coroo 

(Bruce, 1983) given the large posterior clear field on the 

head (Hale, 1926, figure 20), and that the record was 

provisionally included in the synonymy for that species 

by Bruce ( 983). Hale ( 940) later reported several 

more localities in southeastern Australia for A. cyclops, 

but those records are here regarded as unconfirmed. A

evision of the species based on good-quality material 

that can be identified by comparison to the holotype 

and existing slide material will clearly establish the 

identity of the species, but until that time I regard Aega 

cyclops as species inquirenda. 

Aega cyclops is not regarded as occurring in New 


Aega novizealandiae Dana, 853, nomen dubium 

Æga novi-zealandiae Dana, 1853: 767, pl. 51, fig 2a–c. 

Æga novae Zelandiae.– Lütken, 859: 77. 

Æga neo-zelanica.– Thomson & Chilton, 886: 53. 

Æga novae-zealandiae.– Hutton, 904: 262. 

Aega novae-zealandiae.– Miers, 876b: 08; Thomson, 9 3: 

246. 

Aega novae-zeelandiae.– Nierstrasz, 93 : 82. 

Aega novi-zealandiae.– Tattersall, 1921: 213, pl. 4, figs 11–14; 

Hurley, 96 : 268. 

Aega neozelandia.– Brusca, 983: . 

type LoCaLity: Bay of Islands, New Zealand. 

remarks: The identity of Aega novizealandiae Dana, 853 

(the spelling of the species name has been impressively 

inconsistent over time) is impossible to establish. It is 

uncertain that the family and generic placement are 

correct, this being noted by Dana himself. There are 

numerous Southern Ocean species of Aegiochus that 

are both characterised and distinguished by details 

of the frontal lamina, shape of the anterior pereopods 

together with details of the number and orientation 

of robust setae, and also details of the number and 

arrangement of robust setae on the pleotelson and 

uropodal rami. None of this information is available 

for Aega novizealandiae. Dana’s personal notes (unpublished; 

copy from the Smithsonian Institution) record 

the loss of the collections on the bar of the Colombia 

River, a notoriously dangerous crossing, as well as 

further accidental losses to the material in shipment 

and unpacking, so in the absence of types there is 

no chance to obtain data by which this species might 

be characterised. There are at least two small-sized 

and small-eyed species of Aegiochus in northern New 

Zealand waters, either of which may be Aega novizealandiae. 

Equally A. novizealandiae could belong to the 

Cirolanidae, Corallanidae or Tridentellidae. 

It seems that the identity of Aega novizealandiae can 

never be resolved and it is here placed in the category 

nomen dubium and henceforth excluded from the 

New Zealand fauna. 

2 

Rocinela orientalis Schioedte & Meinert, 879 

Rocinela orientalis Schioedte & Meinert, 879b: 395, pl 3, 

figs 1–2.– Gerstaecker, 1882: 260.– Miers, 1884: 304.– 

Stebbing, 905: 25, pl. VI.C; 9 0: 0 .– Richardson, 

1910: 17.– Chilton, 1911: 567.– Hale, 1925: 183, fig. 

27.– Nierstrasz, 1931:184, figs 75–77.– Monod, 1933: 

94.– Barnard, 936: 368.– Hurley, 96 : 268.– Pillai. 

1967: 279, fig. 7e–f, pl. II, 5.– Kensley, 2001: 227. 

type materiaL: Syntypes (MCZ 3 3 ) held at Museum 

of Comparative Zoology, Harvard, USA; type locality 

Calcutta, West Bengal, India. 

remarks: Recorded from a beached specimen on Raoul 

Island, Kermadec Islands by Chilton ( 9 ). The record 

would require confirmation given the recorded tropical 

distribution of South Africa and East Africa to India, 

the Philippines and eastern Australia. The identity of 

many earlier records also need confirmation, particularly 

as differences have been commented on, and it is 

now apparent that the genus is diverse (nine species) 

in the New Zealand region. The original description 

of R. orientalis gives minimal data and figures only the 

dorsal view and frons, and there is not sufficient detail 

to identify the species. Several records in the synonymy 

(e.g. Gerstaecker 882; Hurley 96 ; Kensley 200 ) 

are merely repeat citations and are not based on new 

material or records. At present it seems likely that the 

New Zealand record is a misidentification. 

Rocinela orientalis is regarded as not occurring in 

New Zealand.

Aega Leach, 8 5 

Aega acuminata Hansen, 1897; East Pacific off Galapagos 

Is. and off Costa Rica; 768– 353 m (Brusca 

983). 

Aega acuticauda Richardson, 9 0; Philippines; 245 m; 

(possibly the juvenile of A. antennata). 

Aega angustata Whitelegge, 90 ; New South Wales, 

Australia; 99–2 9 m (see p. 232). 

Aega antennata Richardson, 9 0; Philippines, between 

Gillolo and Kayoa Islands; 485 m; in need of redescription. 

Aega approximata Richardson, 9 0; Philippines, Palawan 

Passage; 689 m; in need of redescription. 

Aega bicarinata Leach, 8 8; type locality stated as 

‘Localité: inconnue’; northeastern Atlantic, 22 m 

(Holthuis 956; Kussakin 979); Holthuis ( 956) 

placed this name under synonymy with Aega 

rosacea (Risso, 8 6), but this synonymy was not 

accepted by Kussakin ( 979); A. rosacea is here 

considered as nomen dubium. 

Aega chelipous Barnard, 960; Madagascar, from Carcharinus; 

60 m; in need of redescription. 

Aega concinna Hale, 940; Australia, Tasmania; depths 

not recorded; in need of redescription. Both pereopods 

2 and 3 have large club shaped robust seta 

opposing the dactylus, and pereopod inferior 

margin is convex and swollen. 

Aega crenulata Lütken, 859; North Atlantic, Greenland, 

Iceland and Norway; 85–950 m; from the 

Greenland shark Somniosus microcephalus (Bloch 

and Schneider, 80 ) (Richardson 905a, Kussakin 

979). 

Aega dofleini Thielemann, 9 0; Japan, Sagami Bay; 

depth not recorded; in need of redescription. 

Whereabouts of the type material not known; apparently 

lost or destroyed in World War Two. 

Aega ecarinata Richardson, 898. Off Little Bahama 

Banks and off entrance to San Juan, 65–6 7 m; 

Puerto Rico (Kensley & Schotte 989); in need of 

redescription. 

Aega falcata Kensley & Chan, 200 ; Taiwan; 500 m. 

Aega hirsuta Schioedte & Meinert, 879b; Nice, Mediterranean 

France (no other data). Identity uncertain; 

possibly a junior synonym of A. tridens. 

Aega lecontii (Dana, 854); California, Monterey; a 

poorly known species of uncertain identity; 

whereabouts of the type material is not known 

to me; in need of redescription. 

spEcIEs INcludEd IN thE AEgIdAE 

This list is additive to those species treated in principal taxonomic account; entries are alphabetical by genus and 

species. 

2 2 

Aega magnifica (Dana, 853); both coasts of southern 

South America to Straits of Magellan; 0– 8 m 

(Bruce 2004a). 

Aega maxima Hansen, 897; near Galapagos Is.; 2350 m 

(Brusca 983). 

Aega megalops Norman & Stebbing, 904 (in Norman 

904); Portugal; 82 m; also South Africa (Barnard 

9 4; Stebbing 922); in need of redescription . 

Aega microphthalma Dana, 854; California, Monterey 

(Richardson 905a); the whereabouts of the type 

material is unknown; species inquirenda according 

to Brusca ( 983); in need of redescription. 

Aega nanhaiensis yu, 2007; South China Sea; 85– 

5 m. 

Aega platyantennata Nunomura, 993; Japan, Sea of 

Japan, off Himi city, Toyama Prefecture; from 

Lophius setigerus (currently Lophiomus setigerus 

(Vahl, 797), Lophiidae); depth not recorded; in 

need of redescription. 

Aega psora (Linnaeus, 758); type species; widely recorded 

in the North Atlantic, including Gulf of 

Mexico, and US coasts, Greenland, Iceland, south 

to Irish and British waters; 48– 280 m (Kussakin 

979, Richardson 905a); hosts include both bony 

and cartilaginous fishes. The record of this species 

from the Red Sea (Bakhrebah 2006) is a misidentification, 

the figures unambiguously showing a 

species of Aegiochus of unknown identity. 

Aega punctulata Miers, 88 ; Straits of Magellan, Falkland 

Islands, South Atlantic; depth range not 

recorded but presumed shallow (see p. 234). 

Aega rosacea (Risso, 8 6); Mediterranean, France; the 

brief description was accompanied by a single 

simple figure of the dorsal view. It is possible 

that the species is a the same as A. bicarinata, but 

on the basis of the existing description and the 

lack of types, the species can be considered as 

nomen dubium. 

Aega serripes H. Milne Edwards, 840; Australia, New 

South Wales, Victoria and South Australia; 8 m 

(Hale 925, Bruce 983). 

Aega sheni yu & Bruce, 2006; China and eastern Australia 

(Coral Sea); 300–435 m. 

Aega stroemii Lütken, 859; Lütken gave the distribution 

as Norway, Færoe Islands and England, and 

included A. monophthalma and A. bicarinata as 

junior synonyms. The name was used earlier as

a nomen nudum in a footnote, by Krøyer ( 843— 

an attributed date as actual date of publication 

is not clear; previously cited as 837). In need of 

revision. 

Aega tridens Leach, 8 5; poorly known; northeastern 

Atlantic, Britain, Færoes, Norway; to 200 m (Sars 

897, Kussakin 979). 

Aega truncata Richardson, 9 0; off North Mindanao, 

Philippines; 308–4 4 m, in siliceous sponges. 

This species is similar to Aega urotoma Barnard, 

9 4, but Richardson’s description provides little 

information on appendages. The propodus of 

A. truncata appears to lack the large distal robust 

setae opposite the base of dactylus of pereopods 

2 and 3 (it is not mentioned), and has more robust 

setae on the inferior margin of the merus (her 

description of the anterior pereopod reverses the 

carpus and merus). In need of redescription. 

Aega webbii (Guérin-Méneville, 836); Portugal; 00– 

300 m; this species remains poorly known, and 

subsequent records are all of uncertain identity or 

incorrect; the species is not recognizable from the 

original description; the type specimen is held at 

the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. 

Trilles and Justine’s (2004) record from New Caledonia 

is a misidentification of Aega urotoma (see 

p. 55); the species is in need of redescription. 

Aegapheles gen. nov. 

Aegapheles antillensis (Schioedte & Meinert, 879b), 

comb. nov.; Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico; 

70–240 m (Bruce 2004a). 

Aegapheles banda (Bruce, 2004), comb. nov.; Banda Sea, 

Indonesia and off northern Western Australia; 

290–4 6 m. 

Aegapheles deshaysiana (H. Milne Edwards, 840), comb. 

nov.; eastern North Atlantic and Mediterranean, 

from the Azores at approximately 38°N south 

to about 5°N; 00– 46 m, one record at 05 m 

(Bruce 2004a). 

Aegapheles excisa (Richardson, 9 0), comb. nov.; Philippines 

and Japan; 6 and 340 m (Bruce 2004a). 

Aegapheles japonica (Bruce, 2004), comb. nov.; Japan; 

20 m. 

Aegapheles kixalles (Bruce, 2004), comb. nov.; New Caledonia; 

540–545 m. 

Aegapheles kwazulu (Bruce, 2004), comb. nov.; off 

Natal, South Africa, western Indian Ocean; 

237 m. 

Aegapheles musorstom (Bruce, 2004), comb. nov.; New 

Caledonia; 475–6 5 m. 

Aegapheles trulla (Bruce, 2004), comb. nov.; Coral Sea off 

Australia and off Ontong Java, Solomon Islands; 

650–752 m. 

2 3 

Aegapheles warna (Bruce, 2004), comb. nov.; southeastern 

Australia from Tasmania to Victoria; 

33–5 8 m. 

Aegiochus Bovallius, 885 

Aegiochus arctica (Lütken, 859), comb. nov.; North 

Atlantic, Greenland and Iceland; 720– 500 m; 

from the Greenland shark Somniosus microcephalus 

(Bloch and Schneider, 80 ) (Richardson 905a, 

Kussakin 979); in need of redescription. 

Aegiochus australis (Whitelegge, 90 ), comb. nov.; Australia, 

New South Wales; 89– 02 m (Hale 925); 

the shape of the anterior margin of the frontal 

lamina and the small eyes are characteristic; the 

antennule peduncle is moderately compressed 

but not expanded; the species is in need of redescription. 

Aegiochus crozetensis (Kussakin & Vasina, 982), comb. 

nov.; southern Indian Ocean, vicinity of Crozet 

Is.; 280 m (this account, see p. 237). 

Aegiochus cyclops (Haswell, 882), comb. nov.; Australia, 

off New South Wales; species inquirenda (see 

Aega cyclops p. 2 0). 

Aegiochus dentata (Schioedte & Meinert, 879b), comb. 

nov.; Cuba (no other data); later figures (e.g. Kensley 

& Schotte 989) are taken from the original 

description; in need of redescription. 

Aegiochus dollfusi (Monod, 933), comb. nov.; Red Sea, 

Egyptian Gulf of Suez; depth not recorded. 

Aegiochus francoisae (Wetzer, 990), comb. nov.; Galapagos, 

off Fernandina Is.; taken from cloaca of an 

ascidian; 3 6 m. 

Aegiochus gracilipes (Hansen, 895), comb. nov.; North 

Atlantic, off northwestern Scotland and Gulf of 

Mexico; 335–2787 m (Richardson 905a, Kussakin 

1979); confirmation that the eastern and 

western Atlantic population are the same species 

is needed. 

Aegiochus incisa (Schioedte & Meinert, 879b), comb. 

nov.; Mediterranean (no other data); in need of 


Aegiochus leptonica (Bruce, 988), comb. nov.; western 

Atlantic, off Dry Tortugas, Florida; 048 m. 

Aegiochus longicornis (Hansen, 897), comb. nov.; East 

Pacific, off Galapagos Is.; 842 m; (Brusca 983); in 


Aegiochus perulis (Menzies & George, 972), comb. 

nov.; off Peru (8° 3’S); 927– 997 m; in need of 


Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 897), comb. nov.; East Pacific, 

near the Galapagos Islands (see p.238). 

Aegiochus quadratisinus (Richardson, 903), comb. nov.; 

Hawaii; 207– 459 m (Bruce 983); Richardson 

( 904b) published the description twice.

Aegiochus sarsae (Brandt & Andres, 2008), comb. nov.; 

North Atlantic, from the northern Mid-Atlantic 

Ridge; 346 m. 

Aegiochus spongiophila (Semper, 867), comb. nov.; 

Philippines, several localities; at least to 52 m 

(Miers 878; Richardson 9 0); in need of redescription. 

Aegiochus symmetrica (Richardson, 905b), comb. 

nov.; Alaska; 75– 96 m; Kussakin ( 979) given 

the maximum depth as 050 m. In need of redescription. 

Aegiochus synopthalma (Richardson, 909), comb. nov.; 

Japan; 354.6 m (Bruce, 983). 

Aegiochus tenuipes (Schioedte & Meinert, 879b); Cuba 

(no other data); see comments for A. dentata; in 


Aegiochus tumida (Nunomura, 988), comb. nov.; off 

Philippines; 400 m; from ‘Venus flower basket’ 

sponge, Euplectella sp. Probable junior synonym 

of Aegiochus spongiophila, a species also known 

from Euplectella. 

Aegiochus uschakovi (Kussakin, 967), comb. nov.; Chile, 

Drake Passage; 95– 05 m (this account, p. 24 ). 

Aegiochus ventrosa (M. Sars, 859), comb. nov.; type 

species. North Atlantic, including Greenland, 

Norway and Britain; (Norman 904; Richardson 

905a; Kussakin 997); 220–570 m. 

Aegiochus weberi (Nierstrasz, 93 ), comb. nov.; Indonesia, 

Celebes Sea; 450 m; described from three 

male specimens, one of which has a large pair of 

distally spatulate cephalic processes on the head, 

a character unique within the family. The figures 

suggest the possibility that the material consists 

of two species. 

Alitropus Milne Edwards, 840 

Alitropus typus H. Milne Edwards, 840; Indo- 

Malaysian region to eastern Australia; freshwater, 

attacks fishes (Bruce 1983). There are several other 

proposed names (see Ingle & Fernando 964), 

and also A. foveolatus Schioedte & Meinert, 879b, 

which are here all regarded as junior synonyms. 

Epulaega gen. nov. 

Epulaega lethrina (Bruce, 983), comb. nov.; Queensland, 

Great Barrier Reef, Coral Sea and Papua 

New Guinea; shallow to 0 m, likely deeper; 

occurs in nasal passage of some Serranidae and 

Lethrinidae, occasionally other fishes; also from 

sponges. 

Epulaega monilis (Barnard, 9 4), comb. nov.; South Africa, 

Table Bay to East London, 90–33 m (Kensley 

2 4 

978) (material examined under E. fracta, present 

study); in need of redescription. 

Epulaega nodosa (Schioedte & Meinert, 879b), comb. 

nov.; southeastern Australia; depths mostly 

not previously reported, to at least 40 m; (Bruce 

983). 

Rocinela Leach, 8 8 

Rocinela affinis Richardson, 904a; Japan to Australia 

(Bruce et al. 2002); 306 m; in need of redescription. 

Rocinela americana Schioedte & Meinert, 879b; western 

North Atlantic, Maine, USA; 55–287 m (Kussakin 

979). 

Rocinela angustata Richardson, 1904a; northern Pacific 

from Japan and Alaska, along the North American 

coast southwards to Baja California; 50–466 m 

(Brusca & France 992). Nunomura (2006) was 

apparently unaware of the redescription and 

designation of a lectotype by Brusca and France 

( 992), and made comments on numerous differences 

between his material, the original description 

and the redescription by Kussakin ( 979). The 

identity of Nunomura’s material cannot be readily 

elucidated from the description and drawings. 

Feeding and prey preferences in captivity have 

been reported by Wing and Moles ( 995). 

Rocinela australis Schioedte & Meinert, 879b; Straits of 

Magellan; shallow; in need of redescription. 

Rocinela belliceps (Stimpson, 1864); East Pacific from 

Alaska to Mexico; 59–284 m (Brusca & France 

992). Implicated in attacks on aquacultured 

salmon (Novotny & Mahnken 97 ). 

Rocinela cornuta Richardson, 898; Alaska; 43 m 

(Richardson 905a); 00– 200 m according to 

Kussakin ( 979). 

Rocinela cubensis Richardson, 898; Caribbean, 

Cuba; 262 m (Richardson 905a); in need of re- 

description. 

Rocinela danmoniensis Leach, 8 8; England 25– 250 m 

(Kussakin 979); in need of redescription. 

Rocinela dumerilii (Lucas, 849); Atlantic: South Africa 

(Kensley 978), Cuba and Mediterranean 

(Richardson 905a); 60–500 m; in need of re- 

description. 

Rocinela granulosa Barnard, 9 4; Western Indian 

Ocean, off Natal, South Africa; 80–200 m (Kensley 

978); in need of redescription. 

Rocinela hawaiiensis Richardson, 903; eastern Indo- 

Pacific (Hawai’i) to East Pacific (Baja California, 

Mexico) (Brusca & France 992); 766– 200 m; 

Richardson ( 904b) republished the description 

as new.

Rocinela insularis Schioedte & Meinert, 879b; Caribbean, 

Mississippi to Florida; 425–499 m (Richardson 

905a). 

Rocinela japonica Richardson, 898; Japan; 20–64 m (Kussakin 

979); in need of redescription. 

Rocinela juvenalis Menzies and George, 972; East Pacific, 

off Peru; 4506 m; in need of redescription. 

Rocinela kapala Bruce, 988; off Cape Moreton, Queensland 

to Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; 

450–765 m. 

Rocinela laticauda Hansen, 897; there are only two 

positive records for the East Pacific off Acapulco, 

Mexico and off California; 20–960 m (Brusca & 

France 992). 

Rocinela lukini Vasina, 993; Sea of Okhotsk; 753– 

480 m; recorded prey Raja binoculata and 

Hippoglossus sp. 

Rocinela maculata Schioedte & Meinert, 879b; Greenland 

and Vladivostok, Russia; 0–22 m (Kussakin 

979; Richardson 905a); in need of redescription. 

Rocinela media Nierstrasz, 93 ; Buton Strait, southern 

Sulawesi, Indonesia; 75–94 m; known from a single 

male specimen, in need of redescription. 

Rocinela modesta Hansen, 1897; East Pacific, off Bay 

of Panama, Panama; 848 m (Brusca & France 

992). 

Rocinela murilloi Brusca & Iverson, 1992; East Pacific 

from California to Chile; 786– 866 m (Brusca & 

France 992). 

Rocinela niponia Richardson, 909; Japan; 08 m; in need 

of redescription. 

Rocinela oculata Harger, 883; off Georgia, USA; 46 m 

(Richardson 905a). 

Rocinela orientalis Schioedte & Meinert, 879b; widely 

recorded from the tropical Indo-Pacific (see Hale, 

925, present account, p. 2 ); 22–500 m; in need 

of redescription. 

Rocinela patriciae Brasil-Lima, 986; off Rio Grande 

do Sul, Brazil; depth and precise position not 

stated. 

Rocinela propodialis Richardson, 905b; Admiralty Inlet, 

Port Townsend, Alaska; 27–48 m; in need of 


2 5 

Rocinela richardsonae Nierstrasz, 93 ; Banda Sea, 

Indonesia; 560 m; known from a single female 

specimen, in need of redescription. 

Rocinela signata Schioedte & Meinert, 1879b; East Pacific 

from California to Ecuador; western Atlantic and 

Caribbean from Florida to Brazil; intertidal to 68 

m (Brusca & France 992). 

Rocinela sila Hale, 925; Port Adelaide, South Australia 

(depths not stated). 

Rocinela tridens Hatch, 947; Washington State, USA; 

in need of redescription. 

Rocinela tropica Brasil-Lima, 986; Vitória, Espírito Santo, 

Brazil, 8°38’S, 39°34’W; depth not stated. 

Rocinela tuberculosa Richardson, 898; Gulf of California; 

5–33 m (Brusca & France 992). 

Rocinela wetzeri Brusca & France, 1992; East Pacific 

at Galapagos Islands and off Costa Rica; 57– 

2000 m. 

Syscenus Harger, 880 

Syscenus atlanticus Kononenko, 988; western North 

Atlantic; 730–200 m (Kensley 2004; Brandt & 

Andres 2008). 

Syscenus infelix Harger, 880; North Atlantic and Mediterranean; 

70–207 m (Kensley 2004). 

Syscenus intermedius Richardson, 9 0; to the south of 

Hong Kong, South China Sea, 20°37’N, 5°43’E; 

380–380 m, and Banda Sea, Indonesia (see p. 

24 ). 

Syscenus karu Bruce, 2005; southwestern Pacific, off 

Vanuatu, with prominently bulbous and faceted 

eyes; 480–455 m. 

Syscenus peruanus Menzies & George, 972; tropical 

East Pacific, off Peru, at approximately 7°S; the 

species is known from a single juvenile specimen, 

with faceted eyes present; atypically deep for the 

genus at 4526–4609 m. 

Xenuraega Tattersall, 909 

Xenuraega ptilocera Tattersall, 909; north- 

eastern Atlantic; 3 0– 250 m (Tattersall 9 , 

Bruce 993a).

Oss sEA ANd ANtArctIc IslANds (bAllENy IslANds) spEcIEs 

Aegiochus antarctica (Hodgson, 9 0), comb. nov. 

(Fig. 37) 

Æga australis Richardson, 906a: 87 (name pre-occupied, 

Aega australis Whitelegge, 90 ). 

Æga australis Richardson, 906b: 850. 

Æga australis Richardson, 1908: 4, figs 8–11. 

Æga antarctica Hodgson, 9 0: 7, pl. 2.– Richardson, 9 3: 

4. 

Aega antarctica.– Tattersall, 92 : 2 .– Monod, 926: 5.– Hale, 

937: 9; 952: 28.– Kussakin, 967: 224; 982: 74.– Amar 

& Roman, 974: 582.– Arnaud, 974: 647.– Jaramillo, 

1977: 60, fig. 1.– Schultz, 1978: 31, fig. 7.– Wägele, 

1990: 521.– Brandt, 1991: 221, figs 2–4.– Nunomura, 

2005: 68, fig. 4. 

Aega koltuni Kussakin, 1967: 228, figs 5, 6; 1982: 74.– Kensley, 

200 : 227 (new synonymy). 

Aega (Rhamphion) koltuni.– Brusca, 983: . 

materiaL examined: Paratype of Aega koltuni (c. 24 mm, 

head and pereonite missing), Elephant Island, South 

Shetlands, 6 ° 5’S, 57°48’E, 0 June 958, Ob’ stn 460, 

370–400 m, coll. Koltunin (LiN RAN 2 N46 4). 

Antarctic ross sea and balleny Islands: 2♀ (nonovig. 

8.5, 24 mm), 77°05’S, 64° 2’E, 24 January 

9 2, 256 m, Terra Nova stn 339 (NMNZ Cr. 093). ♀ 

(non-ovig. 23 mm), RV Tangaroa stn K0803/29 (NIWA 

24004). cape Adare: ♀ (non-ovig. or imm. 2.5 mm), 

7 °43.88’S, 7 °45.00’E, 5 February 2004, 45 m, gravel, 

small stones, shell, coral (NIWA 23660); ♀ (non-ovig. 23 

mm), 7 °43.67’S, 7 °44. 2’E, 5 February 2004, 397–389 

m, coral, rubble, shell (NIWA 2366 ); ♀ (non-ovig. 22 

mm), 72°08.04’S, 7 °26.92’E, 26 February 2004, 466–438 

m, coral and rubble (NIWA 23662). 2♀ (non-ovig. 8.0, 

2.5 mm), manca (9.5 mm), southern rookery, Cape 

Bird, February 97 , 83 m, sponge and hydroid bottom, 

coll. GSK & JKL (AM P4397 ). balleny Islands: ♀ 

(non-ovig. or imm. 5.0 mm), 67°25.07’S, 63°54.93’E, 

4 March 2004, 230–228 m, rubble (NIWA 23663); 2♀ 

(non-ovig. or imm. 2.0, ovig., damaged [head missing] 

~20 mm), 65°24.76’S, 60°53.22’E, 7 March 2004, 

4– 5 m (NIWA 23664). 

NIwA ‘old’ ross sea collections (specimens not 

measured). , Cape Armitage, McMurdo Sound, 20 

April 1957, fish trap on seabed under bay ice, 122 m, 

stn Z 509 (NIWA 23665); 4, stn 298, Cape Evans, 

77°38.0’S, 66°20.0’E, 23 February 958, beam trawl, 24 

m, stn Z 5049 (NIWA 23666); , SU 24*, 27 December 

958, Loc. E, eel trap, stn Z 5092 (NIWA 23667); (very 

poor condition), 3 January 959, Trap A, on surface 

(NIWA 23668); 2, A449, 77°05’S, 77° 2’E, January 

959, soft gritty mud, 362 m (NIWA 23669; two lots); 

2, A457, 77°35’S, 73° 8’E, 6 January 959, (NIWA 

23670); ~ 5 (2 lots, poor condition), A456, Pennell 

2 6 

Bank, 74°30’S, 79°40’E, 5 January 959, 238–30 m 

(NIWA 2367 ); , A464, 73°20’S, 73°00’E, 22 January 

959, 369–384 m, sand and pebbles (NIWA 23672); 2, 

A468, east of Beaufort Is, 76°59’S, 67°36’E, 26 January 

959, 0 m (NIWA 23673); 2, A47 , off Cape Evans 

and Barne Glacier, 77°37’S, 66°20’E, 6 February 959, 

65– 69 m (NIWA 23674); 2, A533, Cape Barne, 77°35’S, 

66° 0’E, 6 February 960, #27, 97– 83 m (NIWA 

23675); , south of Cape Armitage, McMurdo Sound, 

77°5 .90’S, 66°43.23’E, 2 November 96 , Dearborn 

loc. 6 D, trap, NIWA stn Z 5098 (NIWA 23696). , Cape 

Armitage, 5 February 957, from seal stomach, ‘stn’ 

379, Transantarctic (N.Z.) Expedition (NIWA 23676); 

, south of Hut Point, McMurdo Sound, 77°5 .23’S, 

66°39.02’E, 2 May 959, SU 26, Dearborn loc. M, 38 

m (D.S.T.), NIWA stn Z 5093 (NIWA 23677); , SU 7, 

4 January 960 (NIWA 23678); , SU 20, Cape Evans, 

22 January 960, Weddell seal stomach (NIWA 23679); 

, south of Hut Point, McMurdo Sound, 77°5 .23’S, 

66°39.02’E, 3 September 959, SU 8, Dearborn loc. M, 

38 m, NIWA stn Z 5094 (NIWA 23680); , off Arrival 

Heights, McMurdo Sound, 77°50.0 ’S, 66°35.92’E, 

26 November 959, SU 27, Dearborn loc. S, 64.5 m, 

NIWA stn Z 5095 (NIWA 2368 ); , off Hut Point, Mc- 

Murdo Sound, 77°5 .05’S, 66°37.50’E, 29 November 

959, SU 23, Dearborn loc. P, 57 m, NIWA stn Z 5096 

(NIWA 23682); , off Arrival Heights, McMurdo Sound, 

77°49.92’S, 66°34.692’E, 6 December 959, SU 2 , 

Dearborn loc. T, surface (NIWA 23683); , 3 June 96 

(NIWA 23684); , SN23, 29 June 96 , trap, ½ m net, 

Dearborn loc. 6 D, NIWA stn Z 5098 (NIWA 23685); 

, 3 August 96 , trap, Dearborn loc. 6 D, NIWA stn 

Z 5098 (NIWA 23686); , 28 September 96 , Dearborn 

loc. 6 D, trap, NIWA stn Z 5098 (NIWA 23687); 4, 

3 October 96 , Dearborn loc. 6 D, trap, NIWA stn 

Z 5098 (NIWA 23688); , southeast of Cape Armitage, 

McMurdo Sound, 77°5 .99’S, 66°43.23’E, 6 October 

96 , 278–290 m, Dearborn loc. 6 B, trap, NIWA stn 

Z 5099 (NIWA 23689); (2 lots), 26 October 96 , 

Dearborn loc. 6 D, trap, NIWA stn Z 5098 (NIWA 

*The SU prefix indicates the Stanford University Antarctic 

invertebrate studies carried out in the Ross Sea in the 

period 1958–61. However, the ‘SU’ prefix and number as 

recorded on the specimen labels do not relate to anything 

in the published station list (Dearborn 967). Similarly the 

dated numbers of the format ‘6 D’ could not be related 

with any confidence to stations in the former New Zealand 

Oceanographic Institute station list (Bullivant 967). 

The precise location of the material without coordinates 

remains unconfirmed.

Figure 137. Aegiochus antarctica (Hodgson, 9 0). All NIWA 2366 . A, head, dorsal view; B, frons; C, pleonites, lateral view; 

D, maxillule apex; E, bifid seta, distal margin of maxilliped palp article 5; F, maxilliped palp articles 4–5; G, pereopod 1; 

H, pereopod 2; I, pleopod ; J, uropod exopod, ventral view; K, uropod endopod, apex; L, uropod endopod, apex; M, uropod. 

2 7

23690); , 3 October 96 , Dearborn loc. 6 D, trap, 

NIWA stn Z 5098 (NIWA 2369 ); 2, Pennell Bank, 

74°20’S, 79°30’E, 3 February 960, A520#24, 20 –205 

m (NIWA 23692); , Cape Barne, 77°36.77–36.00’S, 

66°08.0– 2.0’E, A534#24, 380–366 m (NIWA 23693); , 

probably off Hut Point, McMurdo Sound, 77°50.95’S, 

66°37.72’E, 22 December, SU 22, Dearborn loc. Hole 

C, NIWA stn Z 5 00 (NIWA 23694); , off northwestern 

shore of Cape Armitage, 77°5 .42’S, 66°38.73’E, 3 

December 959, SU 25, Dearborn loc. W, 53 m, NIWA 

stn Z 5 0 (NIWA 23695). 

suppLementary desCription: Body 2.3 times as long as 

greatest width, with lateral margins subparallel or 


Eyes small, combined widths less than 50% width of 

head, separated by about 45% width of head; each eye 

made up of ~ 2 transverse rows of ommatidia, each 

row with ~8 ommatidia; eye colour black. Pereonite 

1 and coxae 2–3 each with posteroventral angle right- 

angled. Coxae 5–7 with entire oblique carina; posterior 

margins straight, posterolateral angle acute (less than 


4 with posterolateral margins extending to but 

not beyond posterior margin of pleonite 5; pleonite 

5 with posterolateral angles free, not overlapped by 

lateral margins of pleonite 4. Dorsal surface with weak 

longitudinal ridge; pleotelson lateral margins straight, 

serrate, pleotelson posterior margin with distinct short 

median point, with 0 robust setae. 

Antennule peduncle articles and 2 slender, article 

2 without distal lobe; flagellum extending to posterior 

of pereonite . Antenna flagellum extending to middle 



projecting, blade-like, wider than long, rectangular, 

anterior margin with median point, forming median 

angle, posterior margin not abutting clypeus. 


lobe; palp article 2 with 2 distolateral setae, palp article 

3 with 26 setae. Maxillule with 4 terminal RS (one large, 

3 slender). Maxilla mesial lobe with 3 RS; lateral lobe 

with 3 RS. Maxilliped endite with 0 apical setae; palp 

article 2 with 2 RS (slender); article 3 with 4 recurved 

RS (and 3 short slender); article 4 with 4 hooked RS; 

article 5 articulating with article 4, longer than wide, 

sub-rectangular, with 4 RS (and 1 bifid seta). 


distal margin with RS; merus inferior margin 

with 4 RS (and long simple seta), set as two groups 

(set as 2 and 2), superior distal angle with RS (and 2 

short simple setae); RS; propodus .9 times as long as 

proximal width, 2 RS, propodal palm simple, without 

blade or process, dactylus smoothly curved, .2 as 


2 8 


inferior margin with 4 RS, set as two groups (set as 2 

and 2), superior distal margin with 2 acute RS; carpus 

similar in size to that of pereopod , inferodistal angle 

with 2 RS. Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2; propodus 

without large club-shaped distal robust seta. Inferior 

margins with palmate setae; margin with 2 RS (in 2 

groups), superior distal angle with 4 RS, distal angle 

with 4 RS. 



strongly convex, with PMS from distal half; endopod 

2.0 as long as wide, distally narrowly rounded, lateral 

margin straight, with PMS from distal half, mesial 

margin with PMS on distal one-third; peduncle 2.0 as 


Pleopod 2 appendix masculina basally swollen, .3 times 

as long as endopod (Brandt 99 ), distally acute (with 

acute scales mid-length). 



Uropod rami extending beyond pleotelson, marginal 

setae in single tier, apices acute. Endopod apically subbifid, 

mesial process prominent, lateral margin proximally 

straight, without prominent excision, proximal 


RS (and in notch), mesial margin straight, with 4 RS. 

Exopod extending to end of endopod, 3.3 times as long 

as greatest width, apically deeply bifid or sub-bifid, 

medial process prominent; lateral margin weakly 

convex, with 8 RS; mesial margin straight, distally 


size: Recently collected material from the Ross Sea, all 

female, 2–24 mm; Brandt ( 99 ) recorded 0–20 mm 

for males, 7–30 mm for ovigerous females. 

Variation: Ross Sea specimens, collected 2004. Robust 

setae: pleotelson (n = 9) RS 8– 3 ranging from 4+4 to 

7+6 with 5+5 (33%), 5+6 (22%) and 6+6 (22%) most 

frequent. Uropod (n = 6) exopod mesial margin 3–5 

with 4 (50%) or 5 (44%) most frequent, lateral margin 

8– 0 with 8 (44%) and 9 (50%) most frequent; uropod 

endopod mesial margin varied from 5– 0 RS with 5 

(3 %) and 6 (25%) the most frequent, lateral margin 

variable, with 0+2, 0+3, +2 and +3; the most frequent 

counts were +2 (50%) and +3 (44%). 

remarks: Aegiochus antarctica is readily identified by 

the small eyes that are little larger than ‘cirolanid 

size’ in conjunction with a short pleotelson that has 

an ill-defined but distinct median longitudinal ridge. 

At the northern limits of its distribution the species 

may be sympatric with other congeners, but multiple 

characters of eye size, frontal lamina shape, presence of

flattened antennule peduncle articles, and pereopodal 

and uropodal details will separate those species from 

A. antarctica. 

Comparison of the type material of Aegiochus koltuni 

(Kussakin, 967) reveals no differences from Aegiochus 

antarctica. Kussakin ( 967) in describing A. koltuni made 

no reference to A. antarctica, comparing only with the 

rather more different Aega magnifica; A. koltuni is here 

placed in synonymy with Aegiochus antarctica. 

Nunomura (2005) recorded this species from 20°E 

off Antarctica (western sector of the southern Indian 

Ocean), and commented on a number of differences 

from other, unspecified, descriptions. While the 

identification is probably correct, unfortunately the 

illustrations in Nunomura’s account are of insufficient 

accuracy and detail to allow for comparison with material 

at hand from the Ross Sea or with other figured 

descriptions (e.g. Hodgson 9 0 or Brandt 99 ). 

The original date of publication has been somewhat 

confused, in part by Richardson’s ( 9 3) reluctance to 

accept that she was not attributed authorship of the 

new name published by Hodgson ( 9 0), and by the 

repeated publication of the description as a new species. 

Irrespectively, the correct name, and authority, is 

Aegiochus antarctica (Hodgson, 9 0). 

Wägele ( 990) documented the growth and reproductive 

biology of this species in captivity. 

distribution: A widespread and apparently common 

species, with numerous records from the Weddell Sea, 

the Ross Sea and subantarctic islands of the Southern 

Ocean; the northerly records are at about 60° South; at 

depths (present material) of 38– 300 m, with all but one 

record less than 450 metres; Brandt ( 99 ) recorded a 

maximum depth of 7 0 m. 

Aegiochus glacialis (Tattersall, 92 ), comb. nov. 

(Fig. 38) 

Aega glacialis Tattersall, 1921: 211, pl. 4, figs 1–10.– Monod, 

926: 5– Hale, 937: 9; 952: 28.– Kussakin, 967: 225; 

1982: 74.– Brandt, 1991: 216, fig. 1, 4 (tel 2). 

Aega (Ramphion) glacialis.– Brusca, 983: . 

materiaL examined: All ross sea: ♀ (non-ovig. 36 mm), 

7 °44. –88’S, 7 °44.00–43. 5’E, 5 February 2004, 

429–454 m (NIWA 23697); ♀ (non-ovig. 37 mm), Hut 

Point, McMurdo Sound, 30 January 960, 300 m (NIWA 

23698). 2 ♂ (2 mm, ~ 8 mm head missing), McMurdo 

Sound, RS 4 (NIWA 23699). 

NIwA ‘old’ collections (specimens not measured): 

SU 9*, 0 January 960, Dearborn loc. x, 35 m, 

trap (NIWA 23700); , southeast of Cape Armitage, 

*See comments concerning station data under ‘material 

examined’ for A. antarctica, p. 23 . 

2 9 

McMurdo Sound, 77°5 .99’S, 66°43.23’E, 8 July 96 , 

Dearborn loc. 6 B, 27 –290 m, trap (NIWA 2370 ); 

2, southeast of Cape Armitage, McMurdo Sound, 

77°5 .99’S, 66°43.23’E, 24 July 96 , Dearborn loc. 6 B, 

27 –290 m, trap (NIWA 23702); , southeast of Cape 

Armitage, McMurdo Sound, 77°5 .99’S, 66°43.23’E, 

8 August 96 , 27 –290 m, Dearborn loc. 6 B, trap 

(NIWA 23703); , 25 August 96 , Dearborn loc. 6 B, 

trap (NIWA 23704); , 4 September 96 , Dearborn 

loc. 6 D, trap (NIWA 23705); , 6 October 96 , Dearborn 

loc. 6 B, trap (NIWA 23706); 2, 6 October 96 , 

Dearborn loc. 6 B, trap (NIWA 23707). 

Also examined: ♂ (20 mm), Antarctica (Atlantic sector), 

75° 5’S, 26° 4’W, 29 January 909, 500 m, EPOS3, 

stn 229, GSN6, Petersen, Tendal & Schiøtte on RV 

Polarstern (ZMUC unreg). 

suppLementary desCription: Rostral point folded ventrally 

and posteriorly. Eyes large, not medially united, 


up of ~23 transverse rows of ommatidia, each row with 

~ 2– 6 ommatidia; eye colour black. Pleon with pleonite 

4 with posterolateral margins extending clearly 



margins of pleonite 4. Pleotelson 0.9 times as long as 

anterior width, dorsal surface with weak longitudinal 

ridge; lateral margins weakly concave, smooth, posterior 

margin with distinct short median point, with 

0– 4 RS. 

Antennule peduncle articles and 2 slender, 

article 2 without distal lobe; flagellum extending 

to pereonite 2. Antenna flagellum extending to middle 




margin concave (weakly), anterior margin rounded, 


Maxillule with 4 or 5 terminal RS (one large, 3 or 4 

slender). Maxilla lateral lobe with 3 RS. Maxilliped palp 

article 2 with 3 RS (slender); article 3 with 3 recurved 

RS (and 3 straight); article 4 with 4 hooked RS (and 

mesial short slender seta); article 5 articulating with 

article 4, longer than wide, sub-rectangular, with 6 RS 

(3 long, serrate, curved and 2 short). 


distal margin with RS; merus inferior margin 

with 3 RS (and one simple seta), set as two groups (of 2 

and ), superior distal angle with 0 RS; carpus inferior 

margin with RS (and simple seta); propodus .9 

times as long as proximal width, RS, propodal palm 

with small distal lobe, dactylus smoothly curved, .2 as 



inferior margin with 4 RS (distal RS large, proximal 

small), set as two groups, superior distal margin with

Figure 138. Aegiochus glacialis (Tattersall, 92 ). All NIWA 23697. A, head, dorsal view; B, frons; C, pleonite, lateral view; 

D, pereopod ; E, pereopod 2; F, maxillule apex; G, maxilliped palp articles 4–5; H, pleopod ; I, pleopod 2; J, uropod exopod, 

apex; K, uropod exopod, ventral view; L, uropod. 

220

0 acute RS (2 simple setae); carpus similar in size to 

that of pereopod , inferodistal angle with 2 RS (set 

on inferodistal lobe). Pereopod 3 similar to pereopod 2; 

propodus without large club-shaped distal RS. 

Penes low, mutually adjacent tubercles. 




with PMS from distal half; endopod 2.6 times as long 

as wide, distally narrowly rounded, lateral margin 

sinuate, with PMS from distal one-third, mesial margin 

with PMS on distal one-third; peduncle .8 times as 


Pleopod 2 appendix masculina basally swollen, .04 

times as long as endopod, distally acute (with acute 

scales mid-length). 



Uropod rami not extending beyond pleotelson, marginal 

setae in single tier, apices acute. Endopod apically 

sub-bifid, mesial process prominent, lateral margin 

sinuate, without prominent excision, proximal lateral 

margin with RS, distal lateral margin with 3 RS, 

mesial margin straight, with 7 RS. Exopod extending 

to end of endopod, 3.2 times as long as greatest width, 

apically sub-bifid, mesial process prominent; lateral 

margin weakly convex, with 2 RS; mesial margin 


22 

remarks: A full description of Aegiochus glacialis has 

been given by Brandt ( 99 ). The species is readily 

separated from A. antarctica, the only other Antarctic 

species, by the far larger eyes, the inferior margin of 

the carpus of pereopods 2 and 3 being lobate and the 

distal margin of the palm of pereopod being weakly 

lobed (compared to not lobed in A. antarctica); adult 

A. glacialis are also somewhat larger than A. antarctica 

with an adult size exceeding 30 mm (maximum here 

of 37 mm), while A. antarctica has not been recorded 

at a size greater than 24 mm. 

Aega australis Richardson, 906 is not a synonym 

of Aegiochus glacialis, contrary to the synonymy given 

by Brandt ( 99 ) for Aegiochus glacialis, but a junior 

homonym of Aega australis Whitelegge, 90 , a valid 

species, and a junior subjective synonym of Aegiochus 

antarctica [Brandt ( 99 ) did not give a synonymy for 

A. antarctica]. 

distribution: Multiple records from the Ross Sea and 

the Weddell Sea; the most northerly record is at approximately 

72° South (Brandt 99 —though not all 

station data are provided for Brandt’s material); depth 

range 5–700 m (Brandt 99 ).

This monograph was supported by Foundation for 

Research, Science and Technology (FRST) programme 

Biodiversity of New Zealand Aquatic Environments, contract 

FRST COx02 9 (200 –2005), and subsequently 

FRST C0 x0502 (July 2005–2007). 

Many of the specimens referred to in this monograph 

were obtained via the R.V Tangaroa, operating 

for diverse FRST and Ministry of Fisheries contracts 

under program and/or cruise management of Dr 

Steve O’Shea, Don McKnight, Dr Malcolm Clark, Dr 

Ashley Rowden, Dr Scott Nodder, Dr Helen Neil, Dr 

Anne-Nina Lörz, including the following programs in 

their various iterations: Ocean Ecosystems (C0 x0223, 

C0 x0027), Earth–Ocean Change (C0 x0203), Seamounts: 

their importance for fisheries and marine ecosystems 

(C0 x0224) and Biodiversity survey of the western Ross 

Sea (ZBD200303). Funding for the joint New Zealand–Netherlands 

research initiative (TAN0 6) was 

also provided ALW-NWO (subsidy 835.20.008 to Dr 

G.C.A. Duineveld, “Frontal Organic matter Governing 

ecosystem Structure FROGS”). 

I gratefully acknowledge being allowed long-term 

loans of material from: National Museum of New Zealand 

Te Papa Tongarewa (Rick Webber), the Australian 

Museum (Penny Berents), Museum Victoria (Gary 

Poore), Queensland Museum (Peter Davie), South 

Australian Museum (Wolfgang Zeidler), and Western 

Australian Museum (Diana Jones). 

I thank Drs Alain Crosnier and Danielle Defaye, 

and the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris 

for arranging and supporting my study visits in 2005, 

and 2007 that contributed new species and numerous 

distributional records; for assistance with collections 

and equipment, I thank, too, Dr Danielle Defaye, Dr 

Nguen Ngoc-Ho, Régis Cleva, Gabrielle Gadaleta (all 

AcKNOwlEdgEmENts 

222 

Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle); and, finally, 

thanks to Dr Bertrand Richer de Forges (Institut de 

Recherche pour la Développement, Nouvelle Calédonie) 

for bringing additional material to my notice and 

for managing the field acquisition of these excellent 

collections and providing recently collected samples 

at short notice. 

I thank all others who kindly lent material referred 

to or otherwise provided assistance in the preparation 

and completion of this monograph: Paul Callomom 

(Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia); Dr Alain 

Crosnier, Dr Danielle Defaye, Régis Cleva and Gabriel 

Gadaleta (all MNHN, Paris); Todd Landers (Auckland 

Institute and Museum); Ms Miranda Lowe (NHM 

London); Dr Noburu Nunomura (Toyama Science 

Museum); Marilyn Schotte, Cheryl Bright and the late 

Brian Kensley (USNM, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, 

DC); Dr Tin-yam Chan (Institute of Marine 

Biology, National Taiwan Ocean University); Dr Regina 

Wetzer (LACM, Los Angeles); Dr Jørgen Olesen, 

who sourced rare and obscure literature (Zoological 

Museum, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University 

of Copenhagen); thanks to Dr A.L. Vereshchaka 

(Institute of Oceanology, Moscow) who hand-carried 

types of Kussakin’s specimens from Moscow to New 

Zealand (and back). Dr Richard Taylor (Leigh Marine 

Laboratory, University of Auckland) and Mr Steve 

Lowe (fisherman, Leigh, Auckland) are thanked for 

supplying specimens. 

Sylvie Bruce (Brisbane) inked and lettered all the 

original illustrations, over several years, with patience 

and care, for which I thank her. Ms Denise Seabright 

(MTQ, Townsville) proof read the text and assisted 

with final figure scanning and preparation.

AMAR, R.; ROMAN, M.-L. 974: Invertébrés marins des 

xIIème et xVème expéditions Antarctiques Françaises 

en Terre Adélie. 4. Tanaidacés et isopodes. Tethys 5: 

56 –600. 

ARNAUD, P.M. 974: Contributions à la bionomie marine 

benthique des régions Antarctique et subantarctique. 

Tethys 6: 467–653. 

BAKHREBAH, A.O. 2006: Description of the Isopoda Aega 

psora (Linnaeus, 1758) infesting the Red Sea parrotfish 

“Scarus ferrugineus” in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Egyptian 

Journal of Aquatic Research 32(1): 450–456. 

BARNARD, K.H. 9 4: Contributions to the crustacean fauna 

of South Africa. 3. Additions to the marine Isopoda with 

notes on some previously incompletely known species. 

Annals of the South African Museum 10(11): 325–358a, 

359–442. 

BARNARD, K.H. 9 6: Contributions to the crustacean fauna 

of South Africa. 5.— The Amphipoda. Annals of the South 

African Museum 15(3): 05–302, pls. 26–28. 

BARNARD, K.H. 936: Isopods collected by R.I.M.S. “Investigator”. 

Records of the Indian Museum (Calcutta) 38(2): 

47– 9 . 

BARNARD, K.H. 940: Contribution to the crustacean fauna 

of South Africa. xII. Further additions to the Tanaidacea, 

Isopoda, and Amphipoda, together with keys for the 

identification of hitherto recorded marine and freshwater 

species. Annals of the South African Museum 32: 38 –543. 

BARNARD, K.H. 960: Isopoda parasitic on Madagascar 

fish. Institute Scientifique de Madagascar, Office de la 

Recherche Scientifique et Technique Outre-mers. Mémoires, 

série F, 3: 93–95. 

BATE, C.S. 878: Journal of the Royal Institute of Cornwall 5(19): 

65. [Cited in Neave, S.A. (Ed.) 939: Nomenclature Zoologicus: 

a list of the names of the genera and subgenera in zoology 

from the tenth edition of Linnaeus 1758 to the end of 2004. Vol. 

4, p. 79. Zoological Society of London, London.] 

BATE, C.S.; WESTWOOD, J.O. 86 – 868: A history of the 

British sessile-eyed Crustacea. John Van Voorst, London. 

536 p. 

BIGGS, B. 990: English–Maori Maori–English Dictionary. 

Auckland University Press, Auckland. 53 p. 

BIRSTEIN, ya.A. 973: Deep water isopods (Crustacea, Isopoda) 

of the North-Western part of the Pacific Ocean. 

Academy of Sciences of the U.S.S.R. 92: 69–224. 

BLEEKER, P. 857: Recherches sur les Crustacés de l’Inde 

Archipélagique. II. Sur les isopodes Cymothoadiens de 

l’Archipel Indien. Actes de la Société Indo-Neerlandaise, 

Batavia 2: 20–40. 

BOUVIER, E.L. 9 : Arthropodes marins. Annales de l’Institut 

Océanographique 3(3): 38–39. 

BOVALLIUS, C. 885: A new isopod from the Swedish Arctic 

Expedition of 883. Bihang til Kongeliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens 

Handlingar 10(9): – 2, pls , 2. 

rEFErENcEs 

223 

BOVALLIUS, C. 886: New or imperfectly known Isopoda 

Part II. Bihang til Kongeliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens 

Handlingar 11(17): – 8, pls , 2. 

Branch, M.L.; Griffiths, C.L.; KensLey, B.; sieG, J. 

1991: The benthic Crustacea of subantarctic Marion and 

Prince edward Islands: Illustrated keys to the species 

and results of the 1982–1989 University of Cape Town 

surveys. South African Journal of Antarctic Research, 21(1), 

3–44. 

BRANDT, A. 99 : Redescription of the Antarctic fish 

parasites Aega glacialis Tattersall, 92 and Aega antarctica 

Hodgson, 9 0 (Crustacea: Isopoda: Aegidae). Senckenbergiana 

Maritima 21: 2 5–232. 

BRANDT, A.; ANDRES, H.-G. 2008: Description of Aega 

sarsae sp. nov. and redescription of Syscenus atlanticus 

Kononenko, 988 (Crustacea, Isopoda, Aegidae) from the 

Mid-Atlantic Ridge. Marine Biology Research 4: 6 –75. 

BRANDT, A.; CRAME, J.A.; POLZ, H.; THOMSON, M.R.A. 

999: Late Jurassic Tethyan ancestry of recent southern 

high-latitude marine isopods (Crustacea, Malacostraca). 

Paleontology 42: 663–675. 

BRANDT, A.; POORE, G.C.B. 2003: Higher classification of 

the flabelliferan and related Isopoda based on a reappraisal 

of relationships. Invertebrate Systematics 17: 893–923. 

BRASIL-LIMA, I.M. 986: O gênero Rocinela Leach no 

litoral brasileiro, com descrição de duas espécies novas 

(Crustacea, Isopoda). Atas da Sociedade de Biologia do Rio 

de Janeiro 26: – 4. 

BROCCHI, G. 877: Liste des crustacés isopodes provenant 

de l’île Saint-Paul et déposés dan les galeries du Muséum 

d’histoire naturelle par MM. Vélain et de Lisle. Bulletin de 

la Société philomathématique de Paris (6), 11: 97– 0 . 

BROWN, R.W. 956: Composition of Scientific Words. Smithsonian 

Institution Press, Washington, DC. 863 p. 

BRÖKELAND, W.; WÄGELE, J.W.; BRUCE, N.L. 200 : Paravireia 

holdichi n. sp., an enigmatic isopod crustacean from 

the Canary Islands with affinities to species from New 

Zealand. Organisms, Diversity and Evolution 1(2): 83–98. 

BRUCE, N.L. 98 : Cirolanidae (Crustacea: Isopoda) of 

Australia: Diagnoses of Cirolana Leach, Metacirolana 

Nierstrasz, Neocirolana Hale, Anopsilana Paulian & Debouteville, 

and three new genera – Natatolana, Politolana 

and Cartetolana. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater 

Research 32: 945–966. 

BRUCE, N.L. 983: Aegidae (Isopoda: Crustacea) from Australia 

with descriptions of three new species. Journal of 

Natural History 17: 757–788. 

BRUCE, N.L. 984: A new family for the isopod crustacean 

genus Tridentella Richardson, 905, with description of 

a new species from Fiji. Zoological Journal of the Linnean 

Society 80: 447–455. 

BRUCE, N.L. 988: Aega leptonica, a new species of 

aegid isopod crustacean from the tropical western At

lantic, with notes on Rocinela oculata Harger and Rocinela 

kapala, new species. Proceedings of the Biological Society of 

Washington 101: 95– 0 . 

BRUCE, N.L. 993a: Redescription of the overlooked crustacean 

isopod genus Xenuraega (Aegidae, Flabellifera). 

Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United 

Kingdom 73: 6 7–625. 

BRUCe, n.L. 1993b: Two new genera of marine isopod 

crustaceans (Flabellifera: sphaeromatidae) from southern 

Australia, with a reappraisal of the sphaeromatidae. 

Invertebrate Taxonomy 7: 151–171. 

BRUCE, N.L. 996: Aega komai, a new species of marine isopod 

crustacean (Aegidae: Flabellifera) from Japan. Crustacean 

Research 25: 29– 36. 

BRUCE, N.L. 997a: A new species of Syscenus Harger, 880 

(Crustacea: Isopoda: Aegidae) from eastern Australia 

with a revised diagnosis to the genus. Records of the Australian 

Museum 49: 3– 20. 

BRUCE, N.L. 997b: A new genus of marine isopod (Crustacea: 

Flabellifera: Sphaeromatidae) from Australia and 

the Indo-Pacific region. Memoirs of the Museum of Victoria 

56(1): 45–234. 

BRUCE, N.L. 200 : Marine isopod crustaceans in New Zealand. 

Water and Atmosphere 9(3): 2– 3. 

BRUCE, N.L. 2002: Parasites or predators? New Zealand’s 

aegid isopod crustaceans. Biodiversity Update 5: 8. 

BRUCE, N.L. 2003: Giant marine bloodsuckers. Water and 

Atmosphere 11(3): 4. 

BRUCE, N.L. 2004a: Reassessment of the isopod crustacean 

Aega deshaysiana (Milne Edwards, 840) (Cymothoida: 

Aegidae) — a worldwide complex of 2 species. Zoological 

Journal of the Linnean Society 142(2): 35–232. 

BRUCE, N.L. 2004b: New species of the Cirolana ‘parva-group’ 

(Crustacea: Isopoda: Cirolanidae) from coastal habitats 

around New Zealand. Species Diversity 9(1): 47–66. 

BRUCE, N.L. 2005: Two new species of the mesopelagic 

isopod genus Syscenus Harger, 880 (Crustacea: Isopoda: 

Aegidae) from the southwestern Pacific. Zootaxa 1070: 

3 –42. 

BRUCE, N.L.; LEW TON, H.M.; POORE, G.C.B. 2002: Aegidae 

White, 850. Pp. 59– 63 in: Poore, G.C.B. (Ed.) 

Crustacea: Malacostraca: Syncarida and Peracarida: 

Isopoda, Tanaidacea, Mictacea, Thermosbaenacea, 

Spelaeogriphacea. (Zoological Catalogue of Australia Vol. 

19.2A). CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne. 

BRUSCA, R.C. 980: Handbook to the common intertidal invertebrates 

of the Gulf of California. 2nd edn. University of 

Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona. –5 3 p. 

BRUSCA, R.C. 983: A monograph on the isopod family 

Aegidae in the tropical eastern Pacific. The genus Aega. 

Allan Hancock Monographs in Marine Biology 12: –39. 

BRUSCA, R.C.; FRANCE, S.C. 992: The genus Rocinela (Crustacea: 

Isopoda: Aegidae) in the tropical eastern Pacific. 

Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 106: 23 –275. 

BRUSCA, R.C.; IVERSON, E.W. 985: A guide to the marine 

isopod Crustacea of Pacific Costa Rica. Revista de Biologia 

Tropical (Universidad de Costa Rica) 33(1): –77. 

224 

BRUSCA, R.C.; WILSON, G.D.F. 99 : A phylogenetic analysis 

of the Isopoda with some classificatory recommendations. 

Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 31: 43–204. 

BULLIVANT, J.S. 967: New Zealand Oceanographic Institute 

Ross Sea investigations, 958–60: general account 

and station list. New Zealand Oceanographic Institute 

Memoir 32: 9–29. 

CANZ. 997: New Zealand Region Bathymetry. NIWA 

Chart, Miscellaneous Series, No 73. Charting Around New 

Zealand Group (Carter, L.; Cook, J. D.; Foster, G. A.; 

Garlick, R. D.; Litchfield, N. J.; Mitchell, J. S.; Wright, J. 

C.), Wellington. 

CHILTON, C. 9 : The Crustacea of the Kermadec Islands. 

Transactions and Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute 

43: 544–573. 

CHILTON, C. 925: A new genus of Isopoda (Family Sphaeromidae). 

Records of the Canterbury Museum 2: 32 –326. 

CHILTON, C. 926: Zoological results of a tour in the Far 

East. The Tanaidacea and Isopoda of Tale Sap. Records of 

the Indian Museum 28: 73– 85. 

CLARK, P.F.; PRESSWELL, B. 200 : Adam White: The crustacean 

years. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 49(1): 49– 66. 

DALLWITZ, M.J.; PAINE, T.A.; ZURCHER, E.J. 997: User’s 

guide to the DELTA system. A general system for processing 

taxonomic descriptions. 4.08. CSIRO Division of Entomology, 

Canberra. – 60 p. 

DANA, J.D. 1852: On the classification of the Crustacea Choristopoda 

or Tetradecapoda. American Journal of Sciences 

and Arts 14(41): 297–3 6. 

DANA, J.D. 853: Crustacea. Pp. 696–805 in: United States 

Exploring Expedition during the years 1838, 1839, 1840, 

1841, 1842, under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N. C. 

Sherman, Philadelphia. 

DANA, J.D. 854: Catalogue and descriptions of Crustacea 

collected in California by Dr. John L. Le Conte. Proceedings 

of The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 7: 

75– 77. 

DEARBORN, J.H. 967: Stanford University invertebrate 

studies in the Ross Sea 958–6 : general account and 

station list. New Zealand Oceanographic Institute Memoir 

32: 3 –47. 

DELANEy, P.M. 989: Phylogeny and biogeography of the 

marine isopod family Corallanidae (Crustacea, Isopoda, 

Flabellifera). Contributions in Science, Natural Museum of 

Los Angeles County 409: –75. 

DE LIMA, J.; CHELLAPPA, S.; THATCHER, V.E. 2005: 

Livoneca redmanni Leach (Isopoda, Cymothoidae) and 

Rocinela signata Schioedte & Meinert (Isopoda, Aegidae), 

ectoparasites of Scomberomorus brasilensis Collette, Russo 

& Zavala-Camin (Ostheichthyes, Scombridae) no Rio 

Grande do Norte, Brazil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia 

22(4): 04– 08. 

DESMAREST, A.-G. 825: Considérations Générales sur la 

Classe des Crustacés, et description des espèces de ces 

animaux, qui vivent dans la mer, sur les côtes, ou dans 

les eaux douces de la France. F.G. Levrault, Libraire, 

Strasbourg, Paris. i–xix, –446, tables –5, pls –55.

DOLLFUS, A. 89 : Crustacés Isopodes. In: Mission Scientifique 

du Cap Horn. 1882–1883. pp F55–F76, pls 8a, 8b. 

Gauthier-Villars et fils, Paris. 

DREyER, H.; WÄGELE, J.-W. 200 : Parasites of crustaceans 

(Isopoda: Bopyridae) evolved from fish parasites: molecular 

and morphological evidence. Zoology 103: 57– 78. 

DREyER, H.; WÄGELE, J.W. 2002: The Scutocoxifera ta. 

nov. and the information content of nuclear ssu rDNA 

sequences for reconstruction of isopod phylogeny (Peracarida: 

Isopoda). Journal of Crustacean Biology 22(2): 

2 7–234. 

ELLIS, J. 98 : Some type specimens of Isopoda (Flabellifera) 

in the British Museum (Natural History), and the isopods 

in the Linnaean Collection. Bulletin of the British Museum 

(Natural History) 40(4): 2 – 28. 

FELDMANN, R.M.; GOOLAERTS, S. 2005: Palaega rugosa, 

a new species of fossil isopod (Crustacea) from Maastrichtian 

rocks in Tunisia. Journal of Paleontology 79: 

03 – 035. 

FILHOL, H. 885: Mission de l’île Campbell. Recherches 

zoologiques, botaniques et géologiques faites a l’île 

Campbell et en Nouvelle-Zélande. Recueil de Mémoires, 

Rapports et Documents relatifs a l’observation du passage 

de Vénus sur le soleil du 9 Décembre, 874. Libraire 

des Comptes Rendus des Séances de l’Academie des Sciences, 

Paris 3(2): 82, 35 pls, Atlas 55. 

FROESE, R.; PAULy, D. 2007: FishBase: World Wide Web 

electronic publication. 2006. www.fishbase.org 

GARZON-FERREIRA, J. 990: An isopod, Rocinela signata 

(Crustacea: Isopoda: Aegidae), that attacks humans. Bulletin 

of Marine Science 46(3): 8 3–8 5. 

GERSTAECKER, A. 882: Sechste Ordnung: Isopoda-Asseln. 

Pp. 8–278 in: Bronn, H.G. (Ed.) Die Klassen und Ordnungen 

des Thier-Reiches: wissenschaftlich dargestellt in Wort und 

Bild. C.F. Winter, Leipzig. 

GOSSE, P.H. 855: A Manual of Marine Zoology for 

the British Isles. Part I. John van Voorst, London. 

203 p. 

GRUBE, A.E. 864: Die Insel Lussin und ihre Meeresfauna: nach 

einem Sechswöchentlichen Aufenthalte. F. Hirt, Breslau. 

–75 p. 

GUÉRIN-MÉNEVILLE, F.-É. 836: Classe 7, Crustacés. 

Magasin de Zoologie, Sixième Année, chapitre un [pages 

without folios]. 

GURJANOVA, E. 933: Die marinen Isopoden der Arktis. Pp. 

392–472 in: Römer, F.; Schaudinn, F. (Eds). Fauna Arctica. 

G. Fischer Verlag, Jena. 

GURJANOVA, E. 936: Crustacées. Isopodes des mers orientales. 

Institut de Zoologie, l’Académie des Sciences de 

l’URSS, Faune de l’URSS, n. ser. no. 6: i–xii, –278. 

HALE, H.M. 925: Review of Australian isopods of the cymothoid 

group. Part I. Transactions of the Royal Society of 

South Australia 49: 28– 85. 

HALE, H.M. 926: Review of Australian isopods of the cymothoid 

group. Part II. Transactions of the Royal Society of 

South Australia 50: 20 –34, pls 26, 27. 

HALE, H.M. 937: Isopoda and Tanaidacea. Australasian 

Antarctic Expedition 9 – 4. Under the leadership of 

225 

Sir Douglas Mawson, O.B.E., B.E,. D.Sc., F.R.S. Scientific 

Reports, Series C.— Zoology and Botany 2 (Part 2): –45. 

HALE, H.M. 940: Report on the cymothoid Isopoda obtained 

by the F.I.S. “Endeavour” on the coasts of Queensland, 

New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, and South Australia. 

Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 

64(2): 288–304. 

HALE, H.M. 952: Isopoda. Families Cymothoidae and Serolidae. 

Pp. 2 –36 in: B.A.N.Z. Antarctic Research Expedition 

1929–1931, under the command of Sir Douglas Mawson, 

Reports—Series B (Zoology and Botany). University of 

Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia. 

HANSEN, H.J. 890: Cirolanidae et familiae nonnulae propinquae 

Musei Hauniensis. Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes 

Selskab Skrifter, Naturvidenskabelige og Mathematisk 

6(3): 237–426. 

HANSEN, H.J. 895: Isopoden, Cumaceen und Stomatopoden 

der Plankton-Expedition. Ergebnisse der Plankton- 

Expedition der Humboldt-Stiftung 2: – 05. 

HANSEN, H.J. 897: Reports on the dredging operations off 

the west coast of central America to the Galapagos, to 

the west coast of Mexico, and in the Gulf of California, 

in charge of Alexander Agassiz, carried on by the U.S. 

Fish Commission Steamer ‘Albatross’, during 89 , Lieut. 

Commander Z.L. Tanner, U.S.N. commanding. xxII. 

Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard 

College 31(5): 93– 29, pls –7. 

HANSEN, H.J. 9 6: The order Isopoda. Pp. –262 in: Crustacea 

Malacostraca. Danish Ingolf Expedition. Zoologisk 

Museum, Copenhagen. 

HARGER, O. 880: Report on the marine Isopoda of New 

England and adjacent waters. Report of the U.S. Commission 

for Fisheries 6: 297–462. 

HARGER, O. 883: Reports on the results of dredging, under 

the supervision of Alexander Agassiz, on the east coast 

of the United States, during the summer of 880, by the 

U.S. Coast Survey Steamer “Blake,” Commander J.R. Bartlett, 

U.S.N., commanding. xxIII. Report on the Isopoda. 

Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard 

College 11(4): 9 - 04, pls -4. 

HASWELL, W.A. 88 : On some new Australian marine 

Isopoda. Part I. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New 

South Wales 5(4): 470–48 , pls 6– 9. 

HASWELL, W.A. 882: Catalogue of the Australian stalk- 

and sessile-eyed Crustacea. Australian Museum, Sydney. 

–324 p. 

HATCH, M.H. 947: The Chelifera and Isopoda of Washington 

and adjacent waters. University of Washington 

Publications in Biology 10(5): 55–274. 

HELLER, C. 868: Crustaceen. Reise des Österreischen 

Fregatte Novara um die Erde 857, 858, 859 unter den 

befehlen der Commodore B. von Wüllerstorf-Urbair. 

Zoologischer Theil 2 (3): –280. 

HEMMINGSEN, W.; maCKENZIE, K. 996: A checklist of 

the protozoan and metazoan parasites reported from 

the Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua L. Bulletin of the European 

Association of Fish Pathologists 13(4): 34– 37. 

HICKS, G.R.F.; HUAKI, M.J.; WEBBER, W.R.; yALDWyN, 

J.C. 99 : Inventory of the cnidarian, pycnogonid and

crustacean type specimens in the National Museum of 

New Zealand. National Museum of New Zealand Miscellaneous 

Series 22: –23. 

HO, J.S.; TONGUTHAI, K. 992: Flabelliferan isopods 

(Crustacea) parasitic on freshwater fishes of Thailand. 

Systematic Parasitology 21(3): 203–2 0. 

HODGSON, T.V. 9 0: Crustacea Ix. Isopoda. Pp. –77 in: 

Harmer, S.F. (Ed.) National Antarctic Expedition 1901–1904. 

Natural History. 0 pls. British Museum (Natural History), 

London. 

HOLTHUIS, L.B. 956: Isopoda en Tanaidacea. Fauna van 

Nederland, Leiden 161: –280. 

HOLTHUIS, L.B. 977: The dates of publication of C. Spence 

Bate and J.O. Westwood’s `A history of British sessileeyed 

Crustacea.’. Crustaceana 33(3): 3 3–3 6. 

HURLEy, D.E. 957: Some Amphipoda, Isopoda and Tanaidacea 

from Cook Strait. Zoology Publications from Victoria 

University of Wellington 21: –20. 

HURLEy, D.E. 96 : A checklist and key to the Crustacea 

Isopoda of New Zealand and Subantarctic Islands. 

Transactions of the Royal Society of New Zealand (Zoology) 

1: 259–292. 

HURLEy, D.E. 990: Charles Chilton: the Phreatoicoidea and 

other interests of a phreatic pioneer from down under. 

Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde 60(3–4): 233–238. 

HURLEy, D.E.; JANSEN, K.P. 977: The marine fauna of 

New Zealand: Family Sphaeromatidae (Crustacea Isopoda: 

Flabellifera). New Zealand Oceanographic Institute 

Memoir 63: –95. 

HUTTON, F.W. 904: Index Faunæ Novæ Zealandiæ. Publ. for 

Philosophical Institute of Canterbury, New Zealand, by 

Dulan & Co., London. vii, 372 pp. 

INGLE, R.W.; FERNANDO, C.H. 964: On some fresh and 

brackish water crustaceans from Ceylon. Crustaceana 6: 

02– 09. 

JARAMILLO, E. 977: Aega antarctica Hodgson y Plak- 

arthrium typicum Chilton, en bahía South Antarctica 

Chilena (Crustacea, Isopoda). Serie Cientifica Instituto 

Antártico Chileno 5: 59–64. 

JOHNSTON, G. 834: Illustrations in British Zoology. Annals 

and Magazine of Natural History (ser. 1). 7: 230–235. 

KEABLE, S.J. 2006: Taxonomic revision of Natatolana (Crustacea: 

Isopoda: Cirolanidae). Records of the Australian 

Museum 58(2): 33–244. 

KEABLE, S.J.; POORE, G.C.B.; WILSON, G.D.F. 2004: [keys 

to the] Australian Isopoda: Families. Version 2 October 

2002. Australian Museum. http://crustacea.net (accessed 

June 2006). 

KENSLEy, B. 976: Isopodan and tanaidacean Crustacea 

from the St Paul and Amsterdam Islands, Southern Indian 

Ocean. Annals of the South African Museum 69(11): 

26 –323. 

KENSLEy, B. 978: Guide to the Marine Isopods of Southern 

Africa. South African Museum and The Rustica Press, 

Wynberg, Cape Town. 73 p. 

226 

KENSLEy, B. 980: Marine isopods from Marion, Prince 

Edward, and Crozet Islands (Crustacea, Isopoda). Annals 

of the South African Museum 82(5): 55– 85. 

KENSLEy, B. 200 : Biogeography of the marine Isopoda 

of the Indian Ocean, with a check-list of species and 

records. Pp. 205–264 in: Kensley, B.; Brusca, R.C. (Eds). 

Isopod Systematics and Evolution. Crustacean Issues 13. A.A. 

Balkema, Rotterdam. 

KENSLEy, B. 2004: Redescription and distribution of two 

species of Syscenus (Crustacea, Isopoda, Aegidae) in the 

North Atlantic. Sarsia 89(3): 60– 74. 

KENSLEy, B.; CARTES, J.E. 2003: Records and distribution 

of Syscenus infelix in the deep Mediterranean (Crustacea: 

Isopoda: Aegidae). Journal of the Marine Biological Association 

of the United Kingdom 83(4): 775–777. 

KENSLEy, B.; CHAN, T.-y. 2001: Two species of deep-sea 

flabelliferan isopods from Taiwan (Crustacea: Peracarida: 

Aegidae, Anuropidae). Journal of Natural History 35: 

48 –496. 

KENSLEy, B.; SCHOTTE, M. 989: Guide to the Marine Isopod 

Crustaceans of the Caribbean. Smithsonian Institution Press, 

Washington, DC and London. 308 p. 

KENSLEy, B.; SCHOTTE, M.; SCHILLING, S. 2007: World 

list of Marine, Freshwater and Terrestrial Crustacea 

Isopoda. National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian 

Institution: Washington DC. http://invertebrates. 

si.edu/isopod/ 

KLITGAARD, A.B. 995: The fauna associated with outer 

shelf and upper slope sponges (Porifera, Demospongiae) 

at the Faroe Islands, northeastern Atlantic. Sarsia 

80: –22. 

KONONENKO, A.F. 988: A new parasitic isopode Syscenus 

atlanticus n. sp. (Isopoda, Aegidae) from the Atlantic 

Ocean. Parazitologiya (Leningrad) 22: 266–269. 

KRØyER, H.N. 843– 845: Footnote. Pp. 40–4 in: Danmarks 

Fiske. Kjøbenhavn, S. Triers. 

KUSSAKIN, O.G. 967: Fauna of Isopoda and Tanaidacea 

in the coastal zones of the Antarctic and subantarctic 

water. Pp. 220–380 in: Andriyashev, A.P.; Ushakov, P.V. 

(Eds). Biological Reports of the Soviet Antarctic Expedition 

( 955– 958). (Issled Fauna Moreii). Akademii Nauk 

SSSR, Leningrad. 

KUSSAKIN, O.G. 979: Marine and brackishwater likefooted 

Crustacea (Isopoda) from the cold and temperate waters 

of the Northern Hemisphere. Suborder Flabellifera. 

Izdatel’stvo Nauka, Leningrad. Opredeliteli po Faune SSSR, 

Izdavaemye Zoologicheskim Institutom Akademii Nauk SSSR. 

472 p. [In Russian]. 

KUSSAKIN, O.G. 982: Supplement to the isopod crustacean 

fauna from the shelf zones of the Antarctic (from the 

material of the Soviet Antarctic Expedition 965– 968). 

Pp. 73– 05 in: Kafanov, A.I. (Ed.) Fauna and distribution of 

Crustaceans from the Southern and Antarctic Waters. Academy 

of Sciences of the USSR (Far East Science Center), 

Vladivostok. 

KUSSAKIN, O.G.; VASINA, G.S. 980: Additions to the 

marine Isopoda and Gnathiidae of Kerguelen Islands 

(Southern Indian Ocean). Tethys 9: 355–369.

KUSSAKIN, O.G.; VASINA, G.S. 982: Addition to the fauna 

of benthic Isopoda and Gnathiida (Crustacea) of sub- 

antarctic waters of the Indian Ocean. . Isopoda (Flabellifera 

and Anthuridea). Tethys 10(3): 26 –273. 

LANCHESTER, W.F. 902: On the Crustacea collected during 

the “Skeat Expedition” to the Malay Peninsula. Part 

II. Anomura, Cirripedia, and Isopoda. Proceedings of the 

Zoological Society of London 2: 363–38 . 

LATREILLE, P.A. 829: Crustacés, Arachnides et partie des 

Insectes. Pp. 29– 44 in: Cuvier, G. (Ed.) La Règne Animal 

distribuès d’après son organisation, pour servir de base à 

l’histoire naturelle des animaux et d’introduction à l’anatomie 

comparée. Deterville, Paris. 

LEACH, W.E. 8 5: A tabular view of the external characters 

of four classes of animals which Linné arranged under Insecta 

with the distribution of the genera composing three 

of these classes into Orders, and description of several 

new genera and species. Transactions of the Linnean Society 

of London 11: 306–400. 

LEACH, W.E. 8 8: Cymothoadées. Pp. 338–354 in: Cuvier, 

F. (Ed.) Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles. Strasbourg et 

Levrault, Paris. 

LILJEBORG, O. 85 : Norges, Crustaceer. Ofversigt af Konglige 

Vetenskaps-Akademiens Forhandlingar 8(2): 55–95. 

LINCOLN, R.J. 985: The marine fauna of New Zealand: 

deep-sea Isopoda Asellota, family Haploniscidae. New 

Zealand Oceanographic Institute Memoir 94: –56. 

LINNAEUS, C. 758: Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, 

seundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, 

diferrentiis, synonymis locis. (Edn. 0). –824 p. 

LOCKINGTON, W.N. 877: Description of seventeen new 

species of Crustacea. Proceedings of the California Academy 

of Sciences. Proceedings of the California Academy of 

Sciences 7: 44–46. 

LUCAS, H. 849: Histoire naturelle des animaux articulés. 

Premier partie. Crustacés, Arachnides, Myriapodes et 

Hexapodes. Exploration scientifique de l’Algerie pendant 

les années 1840, 1841, 1842, Sciences physiques. Zoologie 1: 

xxxv, 88 , 8 pls. 

LÜTKEN, C.F. 859: Nogle bemærkninger om de nordiske 

Æga-Arter samt om Æga-Slægtens rette Begrændsning. 

Videnskabelige Meddelelser fra den naturhistorisk Forening i 

Kjøbenhavn for Aaret 1858: 65. 

MAnIgheTTI, B. 2001: Ocean circulation: the planet’s great 

heat engine. Water & Atmosphere 9(4): 12–14 

VON MARTENS, E. 868: Ueber einige ostasiatische Süsswasserthiere. 

Archiv für Naturgeschichte 34: 09–279. 

MENZIES, R.J. 962: The zoogeography, ecology, and systematics 

of the Chilean marine isopods. Reports of the 

Lund University Chile Expedition 1948–49. C.E.K. Gleerup, 

Lund. 62 p. 

MENZIES, R.J.; GEORGE, R.y. 972: Isopod Crustacea of the 

Peru–Chile Trench. Anton Bruun Report. Scientific Results of 

the Southeast Pacific Expedition, Texas A & M Press: College 

Station Texas 9: – 24. 

MENZIES, R.; GLyNN, P.W. 968: The common marine 

isopod Crustacea of Puerto Rico. Studies on the Fauna of 

Curaçao and other Caribbean Islands 104: – 33. 

227 

MENZIES, R.J.; KRUCZyNSKI, W.L. 983: Isopod Crustacea 

(exclusive of Epicaridea). Memoirs of the Hourglass Cruises 

6(1): – 26. 

MIERS, E.J. 875: Descriptions of three additional species of 

Crustacea from Kerguelen’s Land and Crozet Island, with 

remarks upon the genus Paramoera. Annals and Magazine 

of Natural History (ser. 4) 4. 16: 5– 8. 

MIERS, E.J. 876a: Descriptions of some new species of Crustacea, 

chiefly from New Zealand. Annals and Magazine of 

Natural History 17: 2 8–229. 

MIERS, E.J. 876b: Catalogue of the stalk and sessile-eyed 

Crustacea of New Zealand. Colonial Museum and Geological 

Department of New Zealand, National History Publication 

10: i–xii, – 33. 

MIERS, E.J. 878: On species of Crustacea living within 

the Venus’s flower basket Euplectella and in 

Meyerina claviformis. Journal of the Linnean Society 

(Zoology) 8: 506–5 2. 

MIERS, E.J. 879 : Crustacea. In: An account of the petrological, 

botanical, and zoological collections made in 

Kerguelen’s Land and Rodriguez during the Transit of 

Venus Expeditions ... in the years 874-75. Philosophical 

Transactions of the Royal Society of London 168: 200-2 4, 

pl. . 

MIERS, E.J. 88 : Crustacea. Pp. 6 –80 in: Günther, Albert. 

Account of the zoological collections made during the 

survey of H.M.S. Alert in the Straits of Magellan and the 

coast of Patagonia. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of 

London 1881. pl. VII. 

MIERS, E.J. 884: Crustacea. Pp. 78–33 in: Report of the 

Zoological Collections made in the Indo-Pacific Ocean 

during the voyage of HMS ‘Alert’, 88 – 882 : 78-33 . 

MILNE EDWARDS, H. 840: Histoire naturelle des Crustacés, 

comprenant l’anatomie, la physiologie et la classification 

de ces animaux. Librairie Encyclopédique de Roret. Vol. 3: 

i–ii, –638. Roret, Paris. 

MONOD, T. 926: Tanaidacés, Isopodes et Amphi- 

podes. Pp. –67 in: Résultats du Voyage du S.y. ‘Belgica’ 

en 897– 899. Volume 4. J.-E. Buschmann, Anvers. 

MONOD, T. 933: Mission Robert Ph. Dollfus en Égypte. 

Tanaidacea et Isopoda. Mémoirs Institute Égypte 21: 

6 –264. 

MONOD, T. 934: Isopodes marins des campagnes du ‘Le Lanessan’. 

Notes de l’Institut Océanographique de l’Indochine, 

Saigon 23: –22, pls –45. 

MOREIRA, P.S.; SADOWSKy, V. 979: An annotated bibliography 

of parasitic Isopoda Crustacea: of Chondrichthyes. 

Boletim do Instituto Oceanográfico, Sao Paulo 27: 95– 52. 

NAIR, G.A.; NAIR, N.B. 983: Effect of infestation with the 

isopod, Alitropus typus M. Edwards (Crustacea: Flabellifera: 

Aegidae) on the haematological parameters of the 

host fish, Channa striatus (Bloch). Aquaculture 30(1–4): 

– 9. 

NIERSTRASZ, H.F.; SCHUURMANS STEKHOVEN JR, J.H. 

930: Isopoda genuina. Die Tierwelt der Nord- und Ostsee 

X.e2: 57– 33. 

NIERSTRASZ, H.F. 93 : Die isopoden der Siboga- 

expedition. Pp. 6–227 in: Siboga-Expeditie. E.J. Brill, 

Leiden.

NORDENSTAM, A. 930: Tanaidacea and marine Isopoda 

from Juan Fernandez. Pp. 525–552 in: Skottsberg, C. (Ed.) 

The natural history of Juan Fernandez and Easter Island. Vol. 

3. Uppsala, Almqvist & Wiksells, 20 pl. 

NORMAN, A.M. 904: British Isopoda of the families Aegidae, 

Cirolanidae, Idoteidae, and Arcturidae. Annals 

and Magazine of Natural History, Series 7. 12: 430–448, pls 

2, 3. 

NORMAN, A.M. 905a: Revised nomenclature of the species 

described in Bate and Westwood’s `British sessile-eyed 

Crustacea’. Annals and Magazine of Natural History ser. 7: 

7. 16: 77–95. 

NORMAN, A.M. 905b: III. Crustacea. Pp. –47 in: Musem 

Normanium or A catalogue of the Invertebrata of the Arctic 

and North Atlantic Temperate Ocean and Paloearctic Region 

which are contained in the collection of the Rev. Canon A.M. 

Norman. Thos. Caldeugh & Son, Durham. 

NOVOTNy, A.J.; MAHNKEN, C.V.W. 97 : Predation on 

juvenile Pacific salmon by Rocinela belliceps pugettensis 

(Crustacea: Isopoda). U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service 

Fishery Bulletin 69: 699–70 . 

NUNOMURA, N. 1981: Three species of flabelliferan isopods 

(Crustacea) from the East China Sea, including the 

description of a new species of Syscenus. Bulletin of the 

Toyama Science Museum 3: 3– 8. 

NUNOMURA, N. 988a: A new species of the genus 

Aega (Crustacea Isopoda) from the sea off Okinawa. Bulletin 

of the Toyama Science Museum 12: 9–22. 

NUNOMURA, N. 988b: A new aegid isopod (Crustacea) 

collected from a glass sponge. Bulletin of the Toyama Science 

Museum 12: 23–26. 

NUNOMURA, N. 993: A new species of the genus Aega 

from Toyama Bay. Bulletin of the Toyama Science Museum 

16: – 4. 

NUNOMURA, N. 2005: Marine isopod crustaceans collected 

from Breid Bay and Lützow-holm Bay, Antarctica, during 

JARE-26 cruise. Bulletin of the Toyama Science Museum 

28: 63–80. 

NUNOMURA, N. 2006: Marine isopod crustaceans in the 

Sagami Sea, Central Japan. Memoirs of the National Science 

Museum, Tokyo, 41: –42. 

PILGRIM, R.L.C. 2005: Chilton, Charles 860– 929. http:// 

www.dnzb.govt.nz/; date accessed, November 2005. 

PILLAI, N.K. 954: A preliminary note on the Tanaidacea 

and Isopoda of Travancore. Bulletin of the Central Research 

Institute, University of Kerala, India 3(1): –2 . 

PILLAI, N.K. 967: Littoral and parasitic isopods from Kerala: 

Families Eurydicidae, Corallanidae and Aegidae - 2. Journal 

of the Bombay Natural History Society 64(2): 267–283. 

POLZ, H. 2005: Zwei neue Asselarten (Crustacea: Isopoda: Scutocoxifera) 

aus den Plattenkalken von Brunn (Oberkimmeridgium, 

Mittlere Frankenalb). Archaeopteryx 23: 67–8 . 

POORE, G.C.B. 2005: Supplement to the 2002 catalogue of 

Australian Crustacea: Malacostraca — Syncarida and 

Peracarida (Volume 9.2A): 2002–2004. Museum Victoria 

Science Reports 7: – 5. 

POORE, G.C.B.; BRUCE, N.L. in press: Order Isopoda—slaters, 

fish lice and kin. In: Gordon, D.P. (Ed.) The New Zea- 

228 

land Inventory of Biodiversity. Volume 2: Kingdom Animalia 

— Chaetognatha, Ecdysozoa, and Ichnofossils. Canterbury 

University Press, Christchurch. 

RAFI, F. 985: Synopsis Speciorum. Crustacea: Isopoda et 

Tanaidacea. Bibliographia Invertebratorum Aquaticorum 

Canadensium 4: –50. 

RATHKE, H. 837: Beitrage zur Fauna der Krym. Mémoires 

présentes à l’Académie Impériale des Sciences, St Petersbourg 

par des Savants Étrangers du Académie des Sciences, St 

Pétersbourg 3: 29 –454, 0 pl. 

RICHARDSON, H. 898: Description of four new species of 

Rocinela, with a synopsis of the genus. Proceedings of the 

American Philosophical Society 38: 8– 7. 

RICHARDSON, H. 903: Isopods collected at the Hawaiian 

Islands by the U.S. Fish Commission Steamer Albatross. 

Bulletin of the United States Fish Commission 23(3): 

8 7–826. 

RICHARDSON, H. 904a. Contributions to the natural history 

of the Isopoda. Proceedings of the United States National 

Museum 27: –89. 

RICHARDSON, H. 904b. Contribution to the natural History 

of the Isopoda. VI. Isopods collected at the Hawaiian 

Islands by the U.S. Fish Commission Steamer Albatross. 

Proceedings of the United States National Museum 27: 

67 –68 . 

RICHARDSON, H. 905a: A monograph on the isopods 

of North America. Bulletin of the United States National 

Museum 54: vii–liii, –727. 

RICHARDSON, H. 905b: Isopods of the Alaska salmon investigation. 

Bulletin of the Bureau of Fisheries 24: 209–22 . 

RICHARDSON, H. 906a: Sur les isopodes de l’Expédition 

Française Antarctique. Bulletin du Muséum d’Histoire 

Naturelle, Paris 12(4): 87– 89. 

RICHARDSON, H. 906b: Sur les isopodes de l’Expédition 

Française Antarctique. Comptes Rendus des Séances de 

l’Académie des Sciences 142(14): 849–85 . 

RICHARDSON, H. 908: Isopodes. Pp. –22 in: Expédition 

Antarctique Français 1903–1905 commandée par Dr Jean 

Charcot. Pl I. Masson et Cie, Paris. 

RICHARDSON, H. 909: Isopods collected in the Northwest 

Pacific by the U.S. Bureau of Fisheries Steamer ‘Albatross’ 

in 906. Proceedings of the U.S. National Museum 37(1701): 

75– 29. 

RICHARDSON, H. 9 0: Marine isopods collected in the 

Philippines by the U.S. Fisheries steamer Albatross in 

907–08. Bureau of Fisheries Document 736: –44. 

RICHARDSON, H. 9 . Description of a new species of Aega 

from the Atlantic coast of the United States. Proceedings of 

the United States National Museum 40: 623–624. 

RICHARDSON, H. 9 3: Crustacés Isopodes. Pp. –24 in: 

Deuxième Expédition Antarctique Française 1908–1910 commandée 

par le Dr J. Charcot. Masson et Cie, Paris. 

RISSO, A. 8 6: Histoire naturelle des crustacés des environs de 

Nice. D’Hautel, Paris. 75 p. 

ROHDE, K. 982: Ecology of Marine Parasites. University of 

Queensland Press, Brisbane, Queensland. i–xvi, –245 p.

ROHDE, K. 2005: Marine Parasitology. CSIRO, Melbourne. 

–592 p. 

ROMAN, M.L.; DALENS, H. 999: Isopoda order (excluding 

Epicaridea), (Isopoda Latreille, 8 7). Pp. 77–278 

in: Traité de Zoologie: Anatomie, Systematique, Biologie. 

Tome 7, fascicule 3A: Crustacés Peracaridés, 

Musée Oéanographique, Monaco. (Mémoires de l’Institut 

Océanographique de Monaco). l’Institut Océanographique, 

Monaco. 

ROSS, S.W.; SULAK, K.J.; MUNROE, T.A. 200 : Association 

of Syscenus infelix (Crustacea: Isopoda: 

Aegidae) with benthopelagic rattail fishes, 

Nezumia spp. (Macrouridae), along the western North Atlantic 

continental slope. Marine Biology 138(3): 595–602. 

SAITO, N.; ITANI, N.; NUNOMURA, N. 2000: A preliminary 

checklist of isopod crustacean from Japan. Bulletin of the 

Toyama Science Museum 23: – 07. 

SARS, G.O. 882: Oversigt af Norges Crustaceer med 

foreløbige Bemærkninger over de nye eller mindre 

bekjendte Arter. I. (Podophthalmata–Cumacea–Isopoda– 

Amphipoda). Forhandlinger I Videnskabs-Selskabet I Kristiania, 

1882(18): – 24. 

SARS, G.O. 897: Isopoda. Part III, IV. Anthuridae, Gnathiidae, 

Aegidae, Cirolanidae, Limnoriidae. An Account of 

the Crustacea of Norway with Short Descriptions and Figures 

of All the Species. Bergen Museum, Bergen, Norway, 2: 

4 –80. 

SARS, G.O. 899: Volume II. Isopoda, parts 3, 4. An Account 

of the Crustacea of Norway with Short Descriptions 

and Figures of All the Species. Bergen Museum, Christiana. 

264 p. 

SARS, M. 859: Oversigt over de i den norsk-arctiske region 

forekommende Krebsdyr. Forhandlinger I Videnskabs- 

Selskabet I Kristiania 1858: 22– 63. 

SCHIOEDTE, J.C.; MEINERT, F. 879a: De cirolanis Ægas 

simulantibus. Commentatio brevis. Naturhistorisk 

Tidsskrift, Kjøbenhavn 3: 279–302, pls 3–5. 

SCHIOEDTE, J.C.; MEINERT, F. 879b: Symbolæ ad monographium 

Cymothoarum crustaceorum isopodum familiæ. 

I. Aegidæ. Naturhistorisk Tidsskrift, Kjøbenhavn 12: 

32 –4 4, pls 7– 3. 

SCHULTZ, G.A. 969: How to know the marine isopod crustaceans. 

Wm. C. Brown, Iowa. 359 p. 

SCHULTZ, G.A. 978: Nonasellote isopod crustaceans from 

Anvers Island and other Antarctic locations. Biology of 

the Antarctic Seas VIII. Antarctic Research Series 28(2): 

2 –4 . 

SEMPER, C. 867: Wiegmann’s Archiv für Naturgeschichte 33: 

84–89 [not sighted]. 

SMITH, W. 867: Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography 

and Mythology. http://www.ancientlibrary.com/index. 

php; date accessed, October 2006. 

SOUTHWELL, T. 9 5: Notes from the Bengal Fisheries Laboratory, 

Indian Museum, No. 2. On some Indian parasites 

of fish, with a note on carcinoma in trout. Records of the 

Indian Museum 11: 3 –330, pls26–28. 

SPRINGTHORPE, R.; LOWRy, J.K. 994: Catalogue of 

crustacean type specimens in the Australian Museum: 

229 

Malacostraca. Technical Reports of the Australian Museum 

11. Australian Museum, Sydney, – 34 p. 

STEBBING, T.R.R. 893: A History of Crustacea. Recent Malacostraca. 

The International Scientific Series. Kegan Paul, 

Trench, Trübner & Co. Ltd., London, xvii, 466 p. 

STEBBING, T.R.R. 905: Report on the Isopoda collected by 

Professor Herdman, at Ceylon, in 902. Report to the Government 

of Ceylon on the Pearl Oyster Fisheries of the Gulf of 

Manaar, 1905 Supplementary Report 4(23): 47–64. 

STEBBING, T.R.R. 9 0: Isopoda from the Indian Ocean and 

British East Africa. The Percy Sladen Trust Expedition to 

the Indian Ocean under the leadership of Mr J. Stanley 

Gardiner. Volume III. Transactions of the Linnean Society 

of London (Zoology) 14: 83– 22, pls 5– . 

STEBBING, T.R.R. 920: Crustacea from the Falkland Islands 

collected by Mr Rupert Vallentin, F.L.S—Part III. Proceedings 

of the Zoological Society of London: 327–340, pls. –5. 

STEBBING, T.R.R. 922: Isopoda and Amphipoda from 

Angola and South Africa. Goteborgs Kungl vetenskaps- och 

vitterhets-samhalles Handlingar 25: – 6, pls i–iv. 

STEBBING, T.R.R. 924, for 922: Crustacea of Natal. Union of 

South Africa, Fisheries and Marine Biological Survey, Report 

3 (Special Reports III): – 5. 

STEPHENSEN, K. 937: Marine Isopoda and Tanaidacea. 

Zoology of Iceland 27: –26. 

STEPHENSEN, K. 947: Tanaidacea, Isopoda, Amphipoda, 

and Pycnogonida. Scientific Results of the Norwegian Antarctic 

Expedition, 1927–1928 27: –90. 

STEPHENSEN, K. 948: Storkrebs IV. Ringkrebs. 3. Tanglus 

(Marine Isopoder) og Tanaider. Pp. – 87 in: Danmarks 

Fauna. G.E.G. Gads Forlag, København. 

STEPHENSON, A.B. 980: Aega angustata Whitelegge, 90 

(Isopoda: Aegidae), a new record for New Zealand 

waters. Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum 17: 

53– 55. 

STIMPSON, W. 864: Descriptions of new species of marine 

invertebrates from Puget Sound. Proceedings of the Philadelphia 

Academy of Sciences 16: 53– 6 . 

STUDER, T. 884: Isopoden, gesammelt während der Reise 

S.M.S. Gazelle um die Erde 874–76. Abhandlungen Koniglich 

Preussischen Akademis der Wissenschaften, Berlin 

1883(1): –28, 2 pls. 

SVAVARSSON, J.; BRUCE, N.L. 2000: Redescription of the 

cosmopolitan meso- and bathypelagic cirolanid Metacirolana 

caeca (Hansen, 9 6) comb. nov. (Crustacea, Isopoda). 

Steenstrupia 25(2): 47– 58. 

SWOFFORD, D.L. 2004: PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using 

Parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4.0b 0. Sinauer 

Associates, 42 p. 

TATTERSALL, W.M. 909: II. Amphipoda and Isopoda, with 

descriptions of two new species. Memoirs of the Challenger 

Society 1: 2 0–2 9. 

TATTERSALL, W.M. 9 : Die Nordischen Isopoden. Pp. 

8 –3 3 in: Apstein (Ed.) (Nordischen Plankton) Lipsiusand 

Tischer, Kiel and Leipzig. 

TATTERSALL, W.M. 92 : Crustacea. Part VI. Tanaidacea 

and Isopoda. In: British Antarctic “Terra Nova” Expe-

dition 9 0. Natural History Report, Zoology, 3(8). pp 

9 –258, pls. – . British Museum, Natural History, 

London. 

THIELEMANN, M. 9 0: Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Naturgechichte 

Ostasiens. Herausgegeben von F. Doflein. Band 

II. No. 9. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Isopodenfauna 

Ostasiens. Abhandlungen der Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen 

Klasse der K. Bayer. Akademia der Wissenschaften 

(suppl), 2(3): – 09, 2 pls. 

THOMSON, G.M. 884: Descriptions of new crustaceans. 

Transactions of the New Zealand Institute, Zoology 16: 

234–240. 

THOMSON, G.M. 9 3: The natural history of Otago Harbour 

and the adjacent sea with a record of the researches 

carried on at the Portobello Marine Fish-hatchery: Part 

. Transactions and Proceedings of New Zealand Institute 

45: 225–25 . 

THOMSON, G.M.; CHILTON, C. 886: Critical list of the 

Crustacea Malacostraca of New Zealand. Transactions and 

Proceedings of the New Zealand Institute 18: 4 – 59. 

TRACEy, D.; ANDERSON, O.F.; CLARK, M.R.; OLIVER, 

M.D. 2005: A guide to common deepsea invertebrates 

in New Zealand waters. New Zealand Aquatic Environment 

and Biodiversity Report 1. Ministry of Fisheries, 

Wellington, – 60 p. 

TREAT, S.A.F. 980: New record of Aega monophthalma Johnston 

(Isopoda: Flabellifera: Aegidae) in the tropical western 

Atlantic. Bulletin of Marine Science 30(4): 9 2–9 4. 

TRILLES, J.P.; JUSTINE, J.L. 2004: Une nouvelle espèce de Cymothoidae 

et trois Aegidae (Crustacea, Isopoda) récoltés 

sur des poissons de profondeur au large de la Nouvelle 

Calédonie. Zoosystema 26(2): 2 –233. 

VAN NAME, W.G. 924: Isopods from the Williams Galapagos 

Expedition. Zoologica, Scientific Contributions of the 

New York Zoological Society 5(18): 8 –2 0. 

VASINA, G.S. 993: A new species of the genus Rocinela 

(Crustacea, Isopoda, Flabellifera, Aegidae) from the Sea 

of Okhotsk. Biologiya Morya (Vladivostok) 1993(1): 40–43 

[In Russian]. 

WÄGELE, J-W. 989: Evolution und phylogenetisches System 

der Isopoda. Stand der Forschung und neue Erkenntnisse. 

Zoologica 140: –262. 

WÄGELE, J.-W. 990: Growth in captivity and aspects 

of reproductive biology of the Antarctic fish parasite 

230 

Aega antarctica (Crustacea, Isopoda). Polar Biology 10(7): 

52 –527. 

WAHRBERG, R. 930: Sveriges marina och lacustra Isopoder. 

Göteborgs Kunglinga Vetenskaps-och Vitterhets-samhälles 

Handlinger, Femte Följder, Ser B 1 (9): –76. pls – 8. 

WATLING, L. 1989: A classification concept for crustacean 

setae based on the homology concept. Pp. 5–26 in: Felgenhauer, 

B.E.; Watling, L.; Thistle, A.B. (Eds). Functional 

morphology of feeding and grooming in Crustacea. Crustacean 

Issues. A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam. 

WEIDER, R.; FELDMANN, R.M. 992: Mesozoic and cenozoic 

fossil isopods of North America. Journal of Paleontology 

66(6): 958–972. 

WETZER, R. 990: A new species of isopod, Aega (Rhamphion) 

francoisae (Flabellifera: Aegidae), from the cloaca of an 

ascidian from the Galapagos Islands. Proceedings of the 

Biological Society of Washington 103(3): 655–662. 

WETZER, R.; BRUSCA, R.C. 997: Descriptions of the species 

of the suborders Anthuridea, Epicaridea, Flabellifera, 

Gnathiidea, and Valvifera. Pp. 9–58, 0– 20 in: Blake, 

J.A.; Scott, P.H. (Eds). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna 

of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. 

Vol. 11. The Crustacea, Part 2: Isopoda, Cumacea and 

Tanaidacea. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, 

Santa Barbara. 

WHITE, A. 847: List of species in the collection of the British 

Museum. British Museum, London, i–viii, – 43 pp. 

WHITE, A. 850: List of the specimens of British animals in the 

collection of the British Museum. Part IV.– Crustacea. British 

Museum, London. 

WHITELEGGE, T. 90 : Crustacea. Part II. Isopoda. Part I. 

Scientific results of the Trawling Expedition of HMCS 

“Thetis”. Memoirs of the Australian Museum 1: 20 –24 . 

WING, B.A.; MOLES, D.L. 995: Behavior of Rocinela angustata 

(Isopoda, Aegidae), an ectoparasite of Alaskan marine 

fishes. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health 7(1): 34–37. 

WOODWARD, H. 870: Contribution to British fossil Crustacea. 

Geological Magazine 7: 493–497. 

yU, H. 2007: A new species of Aegidae (Isopod, Cymothoida) 

from the South China Sea. Crustaceana 80(8): 909–9 5. 

yU, H.; BRUCE, N.L. 2006: Aega sheni, a new species of Aegidae 

(Crustacea: Isopoda: Cymothoida) from southern 

China and Australia. Zootaxa 1224: 23–3 .

AppENdIx 1. INvAlId AEgId NAmEs 

Included here are species no longer in the family as a consequence of being junior synonyms, relegated to species 

inquirenda or nomen dubium, or having been transferred to other combinations or placed in other families. 

Aega affinis H. Milne Edwards, 840; no locality was 

given by Milne Edwards ( 840) for this species 

which, with only four lines of description, remains 

incertae sedis [Milne Edwards also used 

the ‘popular’ name of Aega voisine]; regarded as a 

junior synonym of Aega psora by Kussakin ( 979). 

This is not Rocinela affinis Richardson, 904a. 

Aega alaskensis Lockington, 877; now in Rocinela. 

Aega australis Richardson, 906b (and Richardson, 

908); junior homonym of A. australis Whitelegge, 

90 ; = Aega antarctica Hodgson, 9 0. 

Aega basalis Heller, 868; Corallana (Corallanidae). 

Aega belliceps Stimpson, 864; now in Rocinela. 

Aega bicavata Nordenstam, 930; = Aega semicarinata 

Miers, 875. 

Aega dubia Richardson, 9 0; = Aega vigilans Haswell, 

88 . 

Aega edwardsii Dollfus, 89 ; = Aega punctulata Miers, 

88 (present study, see Appendix 2, p. 235). 

Aega efferata Dana, 853; nomen dubium. 

Aega emarginata Leach, 8 5; = Aega psora Linnaeus, 

758. 

Aega entailee Latreille, 829; = Aega psora Linnaeus, 

758. 

Aega giganteocula Nunomura, 988a; = Aegiochus vigilans 

Haswell, 88 (present study, p. 50). 

Aega harfordi Lockington, 877; long placed in Cirolana 

Leach, 8 8 (Cirolanidae). 

Aega hirta White, 847; nomen nudum; subsequently 

cited by Hansen ( 890) and listed by Nierstrasz 

( 93 ); see Clarke and Preswell (200 ). 

Aega interrupta von Martens, 868; = Alitropus typus 

Milne Edwards, 840. 

Aega koltuni Kussakin, 967; = Aega antarctica Hodgson, 

9 0 (present study, p. 226). 

Aega loveni Bovallius, 886; = Aega ventrosa Sars, 

859. 

Aega macronema Bleeker, 857; now in Argathona (Corallanidae). 

Aega magnoculis Richardson, 909; = Aega plebeia 

Hansen, 897. 

Aega maorum Filhol, 885; = Pseudaega punctata (Thomson, 

884) (Cirolanidae). 

Aega meinerti Miers, 884; = Aega serripes Milne Edwards, 

840. 

Aega multidigita Dana, 853; now in Alcirona (Corallanidae). 

Aega novizaelandiae Dana, 853; nomen dubium (present 

study, p. 2 ). 

Aega ommatophylax Stebbing, 905; = Aega vigilans 

Haswell, 88 . 

Aega ornata Richardson, 9 ; now in Tridentella Richardson, 

905 (Tridentellidae Bruce, 984). 

23 

Aega schioedteana Bovallius, 885; = Aega deshaysiana 

(Milne Edwards, 840). 

Aega stroemii Lütken, 859; = Aega bicarinata Rathke, 

837. 

Aega tumida Nunomura, 988b; there is little to differentiate 

this species from the poorly known 

Aegiochus spongiophila (Semper, 867), the likelihood 

of A. tumida being a junior synonym being 

further strengthened by the fact that both species 

are known only from ‘glass’ sponges (Hexactinellidae). 

Acherusia rotundicauda Lilljeborg, 85 ; = Rocinela danmoniensis 

Leach, 8 8. 

Acherusia complanata Grube, 864; = Rocinela dumerilii 

(Lucas, 849) 

Aegiochus nordenskjoldii Bovallius, 885; = Aega ventrosa 

M. Sars, 859. 

Alitropus dimorphus Pillai, 954; = Alitropus typus Milne 

Edwards, 840. 

Alitropus foveolatus Schioedte and Meinert, 879b; = 

Alitropus typus Milne Edwards, 840. 

Harponyx pranizoides Sars, 882; = Syscenus infelix, 

Harger, 880. 

Rocinela aries Schioedte and Meinert, 879b; = Rocinela 

signata Schioedte and Meinert, 879 (see Brusca 

& France 992). 

Rocinela alascensis (Stimpson, 864); = Rocinela belliceps 

(Stimpson, 864). 

Rocinela deshaysiana Milne Edwards, 840; long placed 

in Aega; now in Aegapheles. 

Rocinela latis Southwell, 1915: 321, figs 12–15; a species 

of Nerocila, aegathoid stage, from Lates calcarifer. 

Rocinela lilljeborgii Bovallius, 885; = Syscenus infelix, 

Harger, 880. 

Rocinela major Brocchi, 877; southern Indian Ocean, 

St. Paul Island; the identity of this species is entirely 

unknown and there is no information on 

the whereabouts of any potential type material; 

here regarded as nomen dubium. 

Rocinela mundana Lanchester, 902; = Alitropus typus 

Milne Edwards, 840. 

Rocinela ophthalmica Milne Edwards, 840. Type locality 

Sicily. No further data than that given by Milne 

Edwards ( 840) are available. Milne Edwards 

stated that Aega deshaysiana (then as Rocinela 

deshaysiana) was very similar to this species, and 

it is possible that it is a species of Aega. Species 

inquirenda. 

Rocinela simplex Chilton, 926; = Alitropus typus Milne 

Edwards, 840.

Aega angustata Whitelegge, 90 (Figs 39, 40) 

Aega angustata Whitelegge, 1901: 232, fig. 21a–21f.– Hale, 

1925: 170, fig. 20.– Nierstrasz, 1931: 182.– Bruce, Lew 

Ton & Poore, 2002: 60. 

Aega (Aega) angustata.– Brusca, 983: 0. 

Not Aega angustata.– Stephenson, 980: 53, figs –5 

(misidentification, = Aega komai Bruce, 996). 

Not Aega angustata.– Trilles & Justine, 2004: 220, figs 6, 7 

(misidentification, = undescribed species). 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ ( 4.3 mm), 5.5–6.5 km 

off Wattamolla, NSW, 34° 0’S, 5 ° ’E, 22 March 

898, stn 57, 99– 08 m, coll. E.R. Waite on HMCS Thetis 

(AM G2 60). ♂ ( 7.0 mm), Bass Strait, 8 -HK- , stn 

48/29, from Raja (NMV J8878). ♂ ( 7.5 mm), BSS stn 

57 (NMV J8882). 


dorsal surfaces smooth or polished in appearance, widest 

at pereonite 5 or pereonite 6, lateral margins subparallel. 

Rostral point projecting anteriorly, not ventrally 

folded. Eyes large, not medially united, separated by 

about 30% width of head. Pereonite 1 and coxae 2–3 each 

with posteroventral angle rounded. Coxae 5–7 with 

entire oblique carina; posterior margins convex, posterolateral 

angle rounded. Pleon with pleonite largely 


margins extending clearly beyond posterior margin of 

pleonite 5; pleonite 5 with posterolateral angles free, 



with longitudinal carina on distal third; lateral margins 

weakly convex, deeply serrate, posterior margin with 

distinct short median point, with 0 RS. 

Antennule peduncle articles 1 and 2 flattened, article 

2 anterodistal lobe extending to end of article 3; articles 

3 and 4 0.3 times as long as combined lengths of articles 

1 and 2, article 3 3.1 times as long as wide; flagellum 

with 5 articles, extending to mid-point of eye. Antenna 


longitudinal suture; article 5 flattened and expanded, 

2.1 times as long as article 4 (in situ); flagellum with 8 

articles, extending to posterior of pereonite . 







AppENdIx 2. ExtrA-lImItAl spEcIEs 

The species included here are some of those in need of at least partial redescription because of their similarity to 

New Zealand species in the body of the monograph. Some of these have been placed in synonymy with older 

names at some point. For most species the descriptive notes are based solely on the type material. 

232 


margin convex and thickened, merus inferior margin 

with 2 RS (small), set as distal group, superior distal 

angle with 2 RS; carpus 0.7 as long as merus, inferior 


width, inferior margin with RS (distal), propodal 




margin with RS; merus inferior margin with 5 RS 

(set as 3 + 2), set as two groups, superior distal margin 

with 2 acute RS; carpus longer than that of pereopod 

, with inferodistal lobe, inferodistal angle with RS, 

propodus with large club-shaped distal RS. Pereopods 

5–7 inferior margins of ischium–carpus with long acute 



long as basis, inferior margin with 5 RS (set loosely as 

, , 2 and ), superior distal angle with 5 RS, inferior 

distal angle with 8 RS; merus 0.7 as long as ischium, 2.0 

as long as wide, inferior margin with 6 RS (set loosely 

as 3 and 3, 4 being submarginal), superior distal angle 

with 5 RS, inferior distal angle with 5 RS; carpus 0.9 



with 3 RS, inferior distal angle with 6 RS; propodus .0 



with slender seta, inferior distal angle with 4 RS. 

Penes short rectangular lobes; penial openings 

separated by % of sternal width, penial process 3.5 

times as long as basal width. 



weakly convex, with PMS on distal two-thirds; 

endopod .5 times as long as wide, distally narrowly 

rounded, lateral margin weakly concave, with PMS on 

distal half, mesial margin with PMS on distal one-third; 

peduncle .5 times as wide as long, mesial margin with 

6 coupling hooks. Exopods of pleopods –3 each with 

distolateral margin not digitate. 


posterior lobe about as long as endopod. Uropod 

rami with endopod and exopod co-planar, rami not 

extending beyond pleotelson, marginal setae in single 

tier, apices acute. Endopod apically not bifid, lateral 

margin proximally convex and distally convex, without 

prominent excision, proximal lateral margin with 0 RS,

Figure 139. Aega angustata Whitelegge, 90 . Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, pleonites, lateral 

view; F, pleotelson; G, sternite 7; H, uropod; I, antennule. 

233

Figure 140. Aega angustata Whitelegge, 90 . Holotype. A–C, pereopods , 3 and 6, respectively; D, pleopod . 

distal lateral margin with RS, mesial margin straight 

(deeply serrate), with 4 RS. Exopod not extending to 


apically not bifid; lateral margin weakly sinuate, with 

8 RS (prominent); mesial margin sinuate, proximally 


remarks: An abbreviated description of the holotype 

is given here to facilitate identification of this species. 

The specimen was not further dissected, consequently 

descriptive details were taken from pereopods 3 and 6 

rather than the usual 2 and 7. Aega angustata is readily 

234 

identified by the elongate body, antennule peduncle 

articles and 2 being strongly compressed and expanded, 

antenna peduncle article 5 expanded, pereopod 

3 with a large robust seta opposing the dactylus, 

the serrate pleotelson posterior margin, uropods with 

the rami not extending posterior to the pleotelson apex, 

the uropodal endopod with a truncate and irregularly 

serrate posterior margin and the lateral margin of the 

uropodal exopod with prominent robust setae. 

There are several similar species (see remarks for 

Aega komai, p. 37), and A. angustata is immediately 

separated from those species by the lateral margin

of the uropodal exopod lacking serrations and having 

prominent robust setae. Trilles and Justine (2004) 

figured a specimen from New Caledonia as having 

deeply serrate lateral margins to the uropodal endopod 

and exopod, those margins also lacking robust setae, 

indicating clearly that their material is not A. angustata 

(there are further differences in pleopod setation but 

the illustrations are not of a standard that permits 

confident interpretation). 

distribution: Known from southeastern Australia with 

records from off Sydney to the Bass Strait, Victoria. 

Aega punctulata Miers, 88 (Fig. 4 ) 

Aega edwardsii White, 847: 07 (nomen dubium; also nomen 

nudum, see Clark & Preswell 200 ). 

Æga punctulata Miers, 1881: 77, pl. 7, figs 10–12. 

Æga edwardsii Dollfus, 1891: F58, pl. VIII, fig. 3a–d (new 

synonymy). 

Aega punctulata.– Nierstrasz, 93 : 84. 

Aega (Aega) punctulata.– Brusca, 983: . 

?Aega edwardsi.– Kussakin & Vasina, 1980: 359, fig. 1 [identity 

uncertain, see ‘remarks’]. 

Not Aega punctulata.– Hale, 1937: 17, fig. 5.– Bruce, Lew Ton 

& Poore, 2003: 161 [misidentification, see ‘remarks’]. 

Not Aega cf. punctulata.– Barnard, 1960, 95, fig. 2 [identity 

uncertain, see ‘remarks’]. 

materiaL examined: Holotype: ♂ (non-ovig. 29 mm), 

Wolsely Sound, Straits of Magellan, H.M.S. Alert 

(BMNH 79. 8). 

Non-type: ♀ (non-ovig. 33 mm), Port Stanley, Falkland 

Is., from mullet’s gills, coll. A.G. Bennett (BMNH 

920.7.5.2). 

Aega edwardsii, ♂ (20 mm), ♀ (non-ovig. 26 mm), 

syntypes; label data: “type (Miss. Sc.du Cap Horn, 8:vi, 

Zool, Crust, p. 28, ’63)” (MNHN Is.2437). [Type locality 

is ‘Baie Orange, Cape Horn’ (Dollfus 89 ).] 

desCriptiVe notes: Eyes small, separated by 4 % width 

of head. Body dorsal surfaces coarsely punctate, with 

abundant stiff setae, these being most dense posteriorly. 

Frontal lamina anteriorly rounded, posterior 

margin abutting labrum. Pleotelson posterior margins 

angled, forming shallow median point, provided with 

0– 2 (as 5+5 or 6+6) RS. Antenna peduncle article 5 

slightly shorter than article 4. Pereopods –3 propodal 

palm with small distal lobe. Pereopod merus inferior 

margin with 2+3 and +3 RS; pereopod 2 merus inferior 

margin 4+5 RS, arranged as a single proximal row 

of 4 RS and distal double row; pereopod 3 similar to 

pereopod 4. Uropod rami extending slightly beyond 

posterior margin of pleotelson; dorsal surfaces with 

stiff setae; uropod endopod mesial margin with 7 or 8 

RS, lateral with +2 RS; uropod exopod mesial with 3 

or 4 RS lateral margin with 9 or 0 RS. 

235 

remarks: Aega punctulata can be immediately identified 

by the prominent, stiff setae over the dorsal body 

surfaces, these setae being longest on pereonites 6 and 

7, pleon and pleotelson; other distinguishing characters 

include the relatively small and widely separated 

eyes (of almost cirolanid proportions), short antennule 

(extending only to posterior of head), short antenna 

(extends to posterior of pereonite ), pattern of robust 

setae of the merus of pereopods –3, and the shape 

of the posterior margin of the pleotelson, which is 

indistinctly angled. 

The holotype is in poor condition, having lost the 

distal articles to all the anterior pereopods. The Port 

Stanley specimen is largely intact, but the uropods 

and pleotelson posterior margin are heavily rubbed 

and the specimen is fragile. The descriptive details 

provided here were therefore obtained through direct 

examination. 

Menzies ( 962) placed Aega punctulata into synonymy 

with Aega semicarinata without explanation. 

Earlier, Hale ( 937) had clearly considered the species 

to be valid. There are substantial differences between 

A. punctulata and A. semicarinata and indeed all other 

species of Aega, most particularly the prominently 

setose dorsal body surfaces, but also the shape of the 

pleotelson which in A. semicarinata is medially excavate, 

differences in the setation of pereopods –3 and 

in A. semicarinata much larger eyes. Aega urotoma is 

similar, but again lacks the setose body surfaces, has a 

subtruncate posterior margin to the pleotelson, which 

also lacks robust setae, has more strongly expanded 

antennule peduncle and antenna peduncle articles 4 

and 5, and has short robust setae on the merus of pereopods 

–3 in comparison to A. punctulata, these robust 

setae being arranged in a different pattern. 

Examination of the syntypes of Aega edwardsii 

Dollfus, 1891 allows confirmation that the species is 

a junior synonym of Aega punctulata. Although most 

dorsal setae are missing, enough setae remain and the 

presence of numerous setal sockets indicate that these 

specimens bear the unique setosity of A. punctulata. 

The synonymy is further confirmed by the eye size, 

frontal lamina shape, pleotelson, pereopod and uropod 

morphology and setation. 

Hale’s ( 937) record of this species from Maria 

Island, off Tasmania, is a misidentification. Hale specifically 

mentions that his specimens lack the setose 

body surfaces described by Miers ( 88 ) as well as 

having more strongly dilated antennule and antenna, 

and illustrated his material as having larger eyes, a 

clearly rounded and crenulated posterior margin to the 

pleotelson and a more elongate frontal lamina. In A. 

punctulata antenna peduncle article 5 is shorter than article 

4 while in Hale’s figure it is longer. The identity of 

a Hale’s record remains uncertain at present, although

Figure 141. Aega punctulata Miers, 88 . Holotype, except E and H (BMNH Port Stanley specimen). A, dorsal view; 

B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, frontal lamina; F, pleotelson and left uropod; G, pleonites; H, pereopods (right) and 

2 (left), in situ. 

his figures show a species similar to Aega semicarinata 

and Aega urotoma. 

The record of Aega cf. punctulata from Madagascar 

by Barnard ( 960) is of equally uncertain identity. Bar- 

236 

nard was aware that the shape of the frontal lamina 

appeared to be unique, commenting that it was ‘almost 

sufficient to justify the institution of a separate species’, 

but desisted in the absence of comparative material. At

present this record can only be considered as a generic 

record of an undescribed species. 

Kussakin and Vasina ( 980) recorded Aega edwardsii 

from the Kerguelen Islands. The descriptive information 

provided is of family or generic level only and is 

inadequate to confirm or reject their identification. Setose 

body surfaces are not mentioned, and pereopod 

is figured as lacking robust setae which is in contrast to 

Aega punctulata, which has robust setae on the inferior 

margin of the merus. 

White’s ( 847) name is included in the synonymy, 

although the real identity of this nomen nudum can- 

237 

not be established. There is nothing to indicate that 

this is the same species that was described by Dollfus 

( 89 ). 

distribution: Known from the Straits of Magellan, Falkland 

Islands and off Cape Horn, South America. 

Aegiochus crozetensis (Kussakin & Vasina, 982), 

comb. nov. (Fig. 42) 

Aega crozetensis Kussakin & Vasina, 1982: 264, figs 5, 6.– 

Kensley, 200 : 226. 

Figure 142. Aegiochus crozetensis (Kussakin & Vasina, 982). Holotype. A, lateral view; B, head; C, frons; D, pereopods –3 

(from right to left); E, uropod endopod, ventral view; F, uropod; G. posterior margin of pleotelson.

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ ( 8.5 mm), Crozet 

Island, southern Indian Ocean, 46°36.2’S, 50°40. ’E, 

29 November 970, 280 m, coll. Skif III. (ZIASL RAN 

/7 626) [Specimen damaged, pereonite 3 crushed; 

dissected P , left uropod, pleopods and 2 not with 

specimen]. 

desCriptiVe notes: Eyes separated by 6% width of head. 

Penial processes opening flush with ventral surface of 

sternite 7, separated by ~ 0% width of sternite. Frontal 

lamina anterior margin with median point, posterior 

margin rounded, not ventrally directed, not blade-like. 

Posterior margin of pleotelson weakly serrate at the 

points of insertion of RS, with 2 (6+6) RS. Uropod 

endopod mesial margin weakly serrate, with 8 RS, 

lateral with 0+ (or 0+2 RS, missing RS not clearly distinguishable); 

uropod exopod mesial with 8 RS, lateral 

margin with ~ 2 RS. Pereopodal robust setae: pereopod 

propodus without small, distal RS; carpus with 0 

RS; merus with 0+2 or +2 RS; pereopod 2 propodus 

with small distal RS; carpus with 2 distal RS, merus 

with 2+2 RS; pereopod 3 propodus with 2 distal RS; 

carpus with 2 distal RS, merus with 2+2 RS. 

remarks: Permission to dissect was not granted, and 

the specimen, which had been previously dissected, 

was not accompanied by the dissected appendages. 

Aegiochus crozetensis can be identified by narrowly 

separated eyes, shape of the frontal laminar with an 

anterior median point and wide and rounded posterior 

margin, pereopods –3 with small robust setae on the 

merus and a weakly curved dactylus, and the shape 

and setation of the uropodal rami and posterior margin 

of the pleotelson. 

Aegiochus kanohi sp. nov. is similar to A. crozetensis 

but that species has united eyes and the frontal lamina 

has a blade-like posterior margin. 

distribution: Known from the vicinity of Crozet Islands, 

southern Indian Ocean. 

Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 897), comb. nov. 

(Figs 43, 44) 

Aega plebeia Hansen, 1897: 105, pl. 2, figs 4a–d.– Richardson, 

904: 29.– Van Name, 924: 83.– Birstein, 973: 72. 

Aega magnoculis Richardson, 909: 80, fig. 7; 9 0: 7.– 

Nierstrasz, 93 : 8 .– Gurjanova, 936: 70, 259.– 

Kussakin, 1979: 247, fig 118. 

Aega plebeja.– Nierstrasz, 93 : 83.– Gurjanova, 936: 72. 

[lapsus]. 

Aega (Ramphion) plebeia.– Brusca, 1983: 19, figs 1b, 10, 11. 

materiaL examined: Syntypes, ♂ (23 mm), ♀ (non-ovig. 

30, ovig. 35 mm), off Cocos Island, off Panama, East 

238 

Pacific, 05°43’N, 85°50’W, 26 February 89 , Albatross 

stn 3363, 788 m (USNM 20726 [The non-ovigerous 

female has had all right-side appendages from P to the 

uropod dissected and the left-side antenna, antennule, 

mouthparts and uropod; labelling indicates dissection 

by Brusca.]). ♀ (non-ovig., 7.5 mm), 8°23’S, 7 ° 3’W, 

off Peru, 972, 00 m, coll. E. del Solar (USNM 89292 

[previously examined by Brusca 983]). ♀ (non-ovig 

9 mm, damaged, crushed), off Arica, Chile, 8°40.5– 

32.2’S, 70°36.0–29.8’W, 7 May 972, 768–968 m, 25’ 

otter trawl (LACM C29 6, Acc#BI72-5SIO Benthic 

Invertebrates, MV72-II-27). 

Additional material: New caledonia: Manca ( 3.0 

mm), Norfolk Ridge, 24° 9’S, 67°49’E, 2 September 

985, BIOCAL stn. CP62, 395– 4 0 (MNHN Is.5863). ♀ 

( 8.0 mm, non-ovig.), Norfolk Ridge, 23°52’S, 67°58’E, 

3 September 985, BIOCAL stn. CP69, 220– 225 m 

(MNHN Is.5864). 

desCriptiVe notes: Eyes separated by 7% width if head. 


3% of sternal width. Coxae not acute and posteriorly 

produced, posterior margins straight (2–4) or convex 

(5–7). Frontal lamina anterior margin with weakly 

produced median point, posterior margin rounded, 

blade-like, not ventrally directed. Posterior margin of 

pleotelson weakly serrate at the points of insertion of 

RS, with 2 (6+6) RS. Uropod endopod mesial margin 

weakly serrate, with 7 or 8 RS, lateral with 0+3 (or +3) 

RS; uropod exopod mesial with 4 RS, lateral margin 

with ~ 2 RS. Pereopodal RS: pereopod propodus 

with large, distal RS; carpus with small RS; merus 

with small distal RS; pereopod 2 propodus with 

large distal RS; carpus with large curved RS, merus 

with +2 small RS. 

Variation: Robust setae: Pleotelson – 4 (as 7+7, 

5+6 and 6+8). Uropodal exopod lateral margin 2– 4, 

mesial margin 4 (twice) or 5 (four times); uropodal 

endopod lateral margin 0+3 (twice) or +3 (ovigerous 

female), mesial margin 7 or 8 (three each). 

remarks: Among those species which have a posteriorly 

folded rostrum and frontal lamina with a free 

posterior margin, Aegiochus plebeia can be identified 

by the large and close-set eyes, pereopods –3 with a 

weak propodal lobe which is provided with a prominent, 

conspicuous robust seta, and the relatively wide 

uropodal rami. Aegiochus piihuka sp. nov. is immediately 

distinguished by the prominent propodal lobe on 

pereopods –3. Aegiochus tara sp. nov. is more similar, 

but has strongly laterally expressed and posteriorly 

acute coxae that are conspicuous in dorsal view and all 

of which have the posterior margin concave, posterior 

pereopods that are more slender, uropodal rami that

Figure 143. Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 897). Female syntype, 30 mm. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; 

E, maxilliped; F, maxilliped palp, articles 3–5; G, maxilla apex; H, maxillule apex; I, pleotelson posterior margin; J, pleonites, 

lateral margin. 

are more slender and acute, and the pleotelson lateral 

margins are noticeably sinuate with a more strongly 

produced and acute apex. 

Two specimens from the Norfolk Ridge (New 

Caledonia) are here identified as Aegiochus plebeia, 

239 

agreeing in all characters but two. The robust seta at 

the distal end of the propodal palm of pereopods –3 

is somewhat smaller than in the type material, and the 

uropodal endopod lateral margin has a robust seta pattern 

of +3. Such variation occasionally occurs in what

Figure 144. Aegiochus plebeia (Hansen, 897). Female syntype, 30 mm. A, right pereopod ; B, right pereopod propodus; 

C, pereopod 2, ischium–dactylus; D, uropod; E, uropod exopod, ventral view. 

are otherwise consistent characters, and at present I 

consider these differences to be regional variation. It 

would require a far larger series of specimens to determine 

if there are two populations of cryptic species. 

Aegiochus plebeia was revised by Brusca ( 983), 

who included Aega magnoculis as a junior synonym. 

The distribution of this species, based on existing 

identifications and records is somewhat disjunct, with 

several records from the tropical East Pacific, two from 

the Alaskan region, and four records from the northwestern 

and western Pacific from Indonesia to Japan 

(Brusca 983). The depth range is given as 688–2534 

metres (Brusca 983). In the light of the new species 

described in this publication, the characters given by 

Brusca ( 983) to distinguish A. plebeia no longer do so. 

Given that there are two other similar species in the 

240 

Pacific (A. piihuka sp. nov. and A. tara sp. nov.), that 

there are two similar species in the East Pacific (see below) 

and one in the Atlantic, and that the stated depth 

range is inconsistent with distribution patterns shown 

by most aegids, I would regard all determinations other 

than those made here and those from the tropical East 

Pacific as requiring confirmation. 

Three other species are similar in appearance to 

Aegiochus plebeia: 

Aegiochus ventrosa (M. Sars, 859)—also has pereopods 

–3 with a weak propodal lobe that is provided 

with a prominent, conspicuous robust seta (ZMUC 

specimens), although this has been inconsistently 

figured for the species (M. Sars 1897; Bovallius 1885, 

886; Kussakin 979). A. ventrosa has a wider frontal 

lamina, with subtruncate lateral margins and a straight

posterior margin (rather than convex), and more robust 

pereopods –3 than A. plebeia. Known distribution: 

northern Atlantic. 

Aegiochus francoisae (Wetzer, 990)—has acute 

points on all coxae and no lobe on the carpus and propodus, 

the penes are basally fused and the pleotelson 

has 4+4 robust setae. It may be that some records of 

A. plebeia are misidentifications of this species. Known 

distribution: the Galapagos region. 

Aegiochus symmetrica (Richardson, 905b)—is very 

similar to A. plebeia, but has no propodal lobe at all on 

pereopods –3 (and is therefore also very similar to 

A. francoisae). The recorded depth for this species is 

far more shallow than for A. plebeia. Known distribution: 

northeastern Pacific region (southeastern Alaska, 

Vancouver Island). 

distribution: Accepted records from the East Pacific: 

Panama and Chile; here provisionally recorded from 

the Norfolk Ridge, south of New Caledonia; at depth 

of 768– 788 metres. Likely to occur within the New 

Zealand chart area, the Norfolk ridge records being 

just on the edge of the distributional limit for this 

monograph. 

Aegiochus uschakovi (Kussakin, 967), comb. nov. 

(Fig. 45) 

Aega uschakovi Kussakin, 1967: 225, figs 1, 2. 

Aega (Rhamphion) uschakovi.– Brusca, 983: 2. 

Not Aega sp. (aff. uschakovi).– Nunomura, 2005: 70, fig. 5 [= 

Aega sp.]. 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♀ (ovig. 8.0 mm), Drake 

Passage, 55°45’S, 70° ’W, 6 June 958, Ob’ stn 45 , 

95– 05 m, (ZIASL RAN No /464 5). 

desCriptiVe notes: Eyes separated by 7% width of head. 

Frontal lamina triangular, posterior margin free, not 

downwardly directed. Posterior margin of pleotelson 

serrate at the points of insertion of RS, with 8 (4+4) RS. 

Uropod rami with margins distinctly serrate, most conspicuously 

on distal half of uropodal exopod. Uropod 

endopod mesial margin distinctly serrate, with 7 (both 

rami) RS, lateral with 2+2 RS (both rami); uropod exopod 

mesial with 6 RS (both rami), lateral margin with 

~ 2 RS. Pereopodal RS: pereopod propodus without 

RS; carpus with 0 RS; merus with 0+ RS; pereopod 2 

propodus with small distal RS, none on palm; carpus 

with small RS, merus with +2 RS. 

remarks: Permission to further dissect the type specimen 

was not given, and as it was not accompanied by 

the previously dissected appendages, a redescription 

of this poorly known species is not possible. Pereopods 

–3 on the left side are all damaged or missing; on 

24 

the right side pereopods and 2 were not in position 

suitable for drawing and pereopod 3 was obscured 

under pereopods 4 and 5; without dissection it is not 

possible to provide more precise detail of the setation 

of the anterior pereopods. 

The tentative identification of A. uschakovi by Nunomura 

(2005) is probably not correct. The figures 

given by Nunomura show that, in his material, the 

eyes are more widely separated, the pleotelson is more 

triangular in shape and the uropod endopod far narrower 

than in the type material. 

Aegiochus uschakovi can be identified by the relatively 

narrow eyes, which are clearly separated, the 

triangular frontal lamina, and the pattern and number 

of robust setae on the margins of the pleotelson and 

uropodal rami. 

distribution: Known from Drake Passage, Tierra del 

Fuego. 

Syscenus intermedius Richardson, 9 0 (Fig. 46) 

Syscenus intermedius Richardson, 1910: 17, fig. 16.– Bruce, 

997: 4. 

materiaL examined: Holotype, ♂ (26 mm), China Sea, 

20°37’N, 5°43’E, 8 August 908, 380–380 m, US 

Bureau of Fisheries Albatross Philippine Expedition, 

907–9, stn 530 (USNM 4 009). 

Additional material: ♂ (23 mm), Indonesia, off Tanimbar 

Islands, 08°42’S, 3 °53’E, 2 November 99 , 

stn. CP69, 356–368 m, coll. Baruna Jaya 1 (MNHN 

Is.5884). 

desCriptiVe notes: Anterior margin of head subtruncate, 

with obscure median point; dorsum of pereon 

somewhat vaulted; coxae each posteriorly rounded; 

pleotelson posteriorly rounded, lateral margins evenly 

convex, not inflected; frontal lamina wide, diamondshaped; 

antennule flagellum extends to middle of 

pereonite ; antennal flagellum extends to posterior of 

pereonite 4. Pereopod lacking RS; anterodistal angle 

of merus with about 6 simple setae. Pereopods 5–7 notably 

elongate, inferior margin of merus and carpus of 

pereopod 7 with 6 and 9 acute RS respectively; uropod 

exopod and endopod subequal in length. 

remarks: Syscenus intermedius can be identified by having 

a subtruncate anterior margin to the head, rounded 

coxae, a broadly rounded pleotelson, antennal flagellum 

extending to posterior of pereonite 4, few setae 

on the distal margins of the ischium to merus of the 

pereopods, and pereopods 6 and 7 elongate, with the 

inferior margins of the merus and carpus provided 

with 6 and 9 acute robust setae respectively.

Figure 145. Aegiochus uschakovi (Kussakin, 967). Holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, head; D, frons; E, pleonite; 

F, pleotelson; G, pleotelson posterior margin; H, uropod endopod, ventral view; I, uropod exopod, ventral view. 

Bruce ( 997a) and Kensley (2004) both stated incorrectly 

that the species was known from the Philippines, 

whereas station data indicate that it was in reality collected 

closer to Hong Kong. 

242 

G 

distribution: Known from the type locality, south of 

Hong Kong, South China Sea, here recorded from the 

Banda Sea, Indonesia. 

I

H 

Figure 146. Syscenus intermedius Richardson, 1910. All figs holotype. A, dorsal view; B, lateral view; C, pereopod 1; 

D, pereopod 7; E, pleonites, lateral view; F, head, dorsal view; G, frons; H, pleotelson. 

243

AppENdIx 3. OthEr mAtErIAl ExAmINEd 

This appendix lists identified specimens examined or identified in the course of preparing this monograph but 

not otherwise reported or cited in the text. 

1. species coded directly into AegA data set 

Aega antennata Richardson, 9 0: ♀ (non-ovig. 4 mm), 

eastern Indian Ocean, 29 m NW of Port Hedland, 

Western Australia, 8° 0’S, 8° 8’E, 0 October 

982, 298–300 m, coll. LMM on RV Soela (WAM 

2278-86). ♀ (non-ovig. 48 mm), eastern Indian 

Ocean, 29 m NW of Port Hedland, Western 

Australia, 8°26’S, 7°34’E, April 982, 4 8 m, 

coll. LMM on RV Soela (WAM 2275-86). 

Aega psora (Linnaeus, 758): ♂ (2 mm), ♀ (non-ovig. 

3 .5 mm), Disko, Godhavn, Greenland, December 

908, off Somniosus microcephalus (ZMUC 

unreg). 

Aega serripes Milne Edwards, 840: ♀ (34 mm), Australia, 

64 km west of Kingston South Australia, 

36°50’S, 39°05’E, 6 Aug 909, FIS Endeavour 

(AM P43984). ♂ ( 7.5 mm), ♀ (ovig. 39, non-ovig. 

30 mm), d’Entrecasteaux Channel, Tasmania, 

October 929, abt. 5 fathoms, presented Mel 

Ward (AM P 0682). ♀ (non-ovig. 36 mm), Bottle 

and Glass, Port Jackson, Sydney, 20 January 

934, Iredale and Whitley (AM P37508). ?♀ ( 7.0 

mm), Shellharbour, NSW, 29 April 926, coll. Mel 

Ward (AM P45438). ♀ (non-ovig. 38 mm), east of 

Wilsons Promontory, Victoria, 24 August 994, 

30 m, stn SS05/94/30 (AM P43965). 

Aegiochus arctica (Lütken, 859): ♂ (24 mm), ‘Greenland 

Island and Finmark’, no other data; specimen 

from H.M. Hale’s collections (AM P37520). 

Aegiochus maxima (Hansen, 897): holotype, ♀ (nonovig. 

54 mm), off Cocos Island, off Panama, 26 

February 89 , Albatross stn 3362, 2350 m [as 25 

fms] (USNM 20727). 

Aegiochus ventrosa M. Sars, 859: 3♀ (non-ovig. 8.5, 

20, 33 mm), Ingolf stn 95, 75 fvn, RT .70 (ZMUC 

unreg). ♂ (2 mm), 64°2 .5’N, 57°0 .5’W, Davis 

Strait, 2 December 992, 787–772 m, coll. Shinwa 

Maru (ZMUC unreg). 

Epulaega lethrina (Bruce, 983): ♂ (7.5 mm), north 

of Lord Howe Island, May 979, 23°58.00’S 

59°3.99’E, stn I738 (NIWA 34828). 

Epulaega nodosa Schioedte & Meinert, 879: ♂ ( 6.5 

mm), Bass Strait, 27 August 994, sled, 20 m, stn 

SS05/94/54 (AM P43966). 

244 

2. species examined or consulted in course of 

monograph preparation 

Alitropus typus H. Milne Edwards, 840: ♀ (non-ovig. 

3.5 mm), Dawson River, tributary of Fitzroy 

River, Queensland, June 959, from giant perch 

[Lates calcarifer], coll. C. Vallis (AM P375 6). ♀ 

(non-ovig. 3.5 mm), Northern Territory, Australia, 

#36 TMB0 - 7 (NTM unreg); 2♂ ( 2.0, 9.5 

mm), ♀ (non-ovig. 3.5 mm) 3 juveniles, Northern 

Territory, Australia, #36 TMB0 - 8 (NTM 

unreg). 

Aega australis Whitelegge, 90 . Syntypes; ♂ ( 2.5 mm; 

head detached, previously heavily dissected), ♀ 

(ovig. . mm; previously dissected), 8.0–9.5 km 

off Coogee, NSW, 33°57.0’S, 5 °2 .5’E, stn 44, 

91 m, fine sand, coll. E.R. Waite on HMCS Thetis 

(AM G228 ). Non-type: ♀? (non-ovig. 9.5 mm), 

.0– 2.5 km off Wollongong, NSW, 34°27’S, 

5 °04’E, stn 48, 02 m, sand, mud and rock, coll. 

E.R. Waite on HMCS Thetis (AM P9604). (Note: 

only two [?types] specimens not four as stated 

on label.) 

Aega concinna Hale, 940. Holotype; ♂ (33 mm), entrance 

to Oyster Bay, Tasmania, 30 July 909, 

42°40’S, 48°03’E (AM E6740). 

Aega aff. falcata: entrance of Otsuchi Bay, Japan, 39°2’N, 

42°0’E, 9 April 995, off Lophiomus setigerus 

(Vahl) (ZMUC unreg). 

Aega aff. monophthalma: ♀ (non-ovig. 50 mm), east 

of Heron Island, QLD, Australia, 2 ° 8.9’S, 

53°3 .7’E, 20 Nov 985, 502 m, coll. CSIRO Soela 

Cruise 0685, stn 8, AJB (NTM unregistered). 

Aega aff. semicarinata: ♂ (2 mm), South Africa, 6 km 

south of Cape Barracouta 3 December 929, 4 

m s Cap, 68 m, stn 50, coll. Dr. Th. Mortensen’s 

Java–South Africa Expedition (ZMUC unreg). 

Aega aff. semicarinata: ♀ (ovig. 53 mm), southeastern 

Atlantic, South Africa, 34°2 ’S, 7°57’E, 8 December 

929, 320 m, mud, coll. Dr. Th. Mortensen’s 

Java–South Africa Expedition (ZMUC unreg). 

Similar to A. semicarinata but lacking the large 

propodal RS, covered with short blunt glassy 

‘setae’ and wider body shape; the RS on anterior 

pereopods seem larger. Identity uncertain. 

Aegiochus aff. gracilipes Hansen, 895: ♀ (ovig. 24 

mm), Gulf of Guinea, Victoria–Banana, 02°00’N, 

09° 4’E, 2 December 950, 560 m, Galathea stn 

24 (ZMUC 2804).

Aegiochus aff. tara: ♀ (ovig. 27 mm), Western Indian 

Ocean, off Kenya, 04°00’S, 4 °27’E, 5 March 95 , 

55 m, Galathea stn 63 (ZMUC 2803). 

Aegiochus sp. ♀ (ovig. .5 mm), Japan, Okinawa, Sagami 

Sea, 2 July 9 4, 400 fv, coll. Th. Mortensen 

(ZMUC unreg). Not any species that I can recognise; 

eyes narrowly separate, no pleotelson RS, 

pleopods not digitate, but otherwise similar to 

A. coroo. 

Aegiochus sp. ♀ (ovig. .5 mm), Canada, British Columbia, 

‘W of Snake Island, between Snake Island 

and Gabriola Island, Straits of Georgia’, 4 June 

9 5, c. 63 m, from sponge, coll. Th. Mortensen 

(ZMUC unreg). Not any species I that I can recognise; 

eyes small, similar to A. laevis, but pleotelson 

RS, pleopods not digitate. 

Aegiochus sp. ♂ ( .5 mm), Indonesia, Java, 07°35’N, 

4°42’E, 0 April 929, 200 m, coll. Th. Mortensen 

(ZMUC unreg). Not any species that I can recognise; 

4 pleotelson RS, pleopods not digitate, no 

RS on propodal palm of P –P3, otherwise similar 

to A. laevis. 

Aegiochus sp. (nov.): ♂ (9.5 mm), 3 ♀ (non- ovig 2.0, 

ovig 9.3, 3.5 mm), Indonesia, Kei Islands, 2 May 

922, stn 59, 385 m, coral (ZMUC unreg). Not any 

species I can recognise; vaguely similar to A. coroo 

but pleopods not digitate, no pleotelson RS, males 

and non-ovig. with long RS P –P3, these being 

shorter in ovig female. 

Aegiochus vigilans (Haswell, 88 ): , Indonesia, Kei 

Islands, 2 April 922, stn 6, sand, Lithothamnion, 

Danske Exped. til Kei Islands, 922 (ZMUC unreg). 

, Indonesia, Kei Islands, 24 April 922, stn 

39, 60 m, sand, Lithothamnion, Danske Exped. til 

Kei Islands, 922 (ZMUC unreg). 

245 

Barybrotes species. At present it is accepted that the 

genus is monotypic, the single species being 

B. indus Schioedte and Meinert, 879a. No attempt 

is made here to reassess the identity or 

validity of other proposed names. ♀ (ovig. 2 

mm), Cauda, Nha-Trang, 5 May 929, Dana stn 

37 0 (ZMUC unreg); ♀ (ovig. with ova, 2 mm), 

5th Thai–Danish Expedition, 966, stn, 022, haul 

6, 4 – 966 m (ZMUC unreg); ♀ (non-ovig., 

6 mm), 5th Thai–Danish Expedition, 966, stn. 

025, haul 4, 8 – 966 m [7th leg present, no 

app. M.] (ZMUC unreg); manca ( .5 mm), 5th 

Thai–Danish Expedition, 966, stn, 022, haul 

9, 4 – 966 m [no 7th leg] (ZMUC unreg); ?( 5 

mm, may be male), 4°4 ’N, 98° 3’E, 9 Nov 929, 

Dana stn 3900 [pleopods too fragile to examine] 

(ZMUC unreg); ♀ (non-ovig., 7.5 mm), 4°20’N, 

98°47’E, 0 Nov 929, Dana stn 390 [7th leg 

present, no app. M.] (ZMUC unreg); manca (9.0 

mm), 4°4 ’N, 98° 3’E, 9 Nov 929, Dana stn 3900 

(ZMUC unreg); manca (7.2 mm), off Mombasa, 

Kenya, 22 Mar 95 Galathea stn. 259 [telson damaged] 

(ZMUC unreg). 

Rocinela ‘orientalis’: , Indonesia, Kei Islands, 9 May 

922, stn 53, 85 m, sand, coral, Danske Exped. til 

Kei Islands, 922 (ZMUC unreg).

1. matrix Aega species 

Polymorphic states: x = /2; y = 2/3; z = 2/4. 

AppENdIx 4. mAtrIcEs 

'Tridentella' 1111111111 1x11111111 1111111111 1??1??1111 x1111x1111 1111111111 1111111111 11x11 

alazon 1122131213 1211143211 2211232121 1412223211 1222111212 2413312111 2122211131 12313 

angustata 1122121133 2311421412 21?22222?? ????????22 1211212213 11133????1 2?31213111 11131 

antarctica 1x32211211 2212324111 1111142112 2321112111 211122111? 1313521221 2221313212 21212 

antennata 2122221223 1223131222 2311222121 1312123211 22212112?? 23322????1 2131113111 21122 

antillensis 1222131211 2213144211 2111232111 1312213211 1222111212 2433212311 2122211132 22313 

arctica 1132222123 1211353111 1111142312 2311112112 2111221112 1312111111 2121213112 21212 

banda 1222121x13 1211144211 12?11321?1 1??222?211 1222111212 2431312111 2122211131 22313 

beri x232222111 2211355111 11111331?2 2311112111 2121221113 1212112111 2121113112 21212 

bertrandi 1212231311 2211321111 1111133112 2321112111 2121221113 1211221212 2221113112 21211 

birubi 2222121113 1211143211 2121232121 1322233211 1222111212 2432112111 2122211131 22313 

copidis x222132311 2213143211 2?112321?? 1???211211 1224111211 2231412111 2122211131 22312 

coroo 1112231311 2211321111 1111133112 2321112112 2121211113 1311211212 2221113112 11211 

derkoma 1211131122 221112?111 1111132112 2231????11 12212111?? 13111????1 2221113112 11111 

deshaysiana 1222121213 1213143211 2211232121 1311?21211 1222111212 2433512111 2122211132 22311 

excise 1122121113 1211143211 2321222111 1312223211 12211112?? 24332????1 2122211131 12312 

falcate 2122221121 22211y1222 1121222121 1412113221 22212111?? 13311????1 11?11?2112 2??12 

falklandica x222122413 1213123312 2121222211 1522213211 1222211111 2231312211 2131111121 31211 

fracta 2111131123 2211122111 1111123112 2321124111 1221211131 1331122111 2231113112 21221 

francoisae 1232222111 1211323111 1111143?13 ?32?112111 3121?21131 1311211211 ?221111?11 11211 

glacialis 1232221123 2213324111 111?142312 2321112111 2113221121 2312121221 2221213212 31212 

gordoni 12322212x2 2211321111 1111142312 2221112111 2111221112 2313111212 1221313211 21112 

hamiota 2222132123 1211145211 2321232121 1312233211 1221111211 2431212111 2132212131 12313 

insomnis x232221z12 2211321111 1111223112 2221112111 2111211121 2312521212 1221113212 21111 

japonica x122131213 x211143211 2111232221 1422223x11 12221112?? 24332????1 2122211131 22312 

kakai 1232232313 1211323111 1111142312 2321112111 2111221122 2313121221 2221313212 31213 

kanohi 1232231212 2211323111 1111142312 2431112112 2111221112 2312121211 2211313112 21111 

kixalles x222131123 1213145211 2111232121 1322233211 12241212?? 24333????1 2122211131 22313 

komai 1122122131 2311435412 21222222?1 12121?3222 1221222213 111?312111 ??3131311? ?2?31 

kwazulu x222131113 1212143211 23112321?1 1???2???11 1221111212 2412312111 2122211132 22311 

laevis 1232211311 1211322111 1111142312 22?1112112 1111221112 1113511222 2221113111 21211 

leptonica x132132311 1213354111 1111133113 22?1112212 21212211?? 13131????1 2121113212 21212 

lethrina 1211131121 2211121111 2111132112 2111114212 3221?11131 1311111111 2221113211 21111 

246

magnifica 1122112411 2213124211 1311122223 1322223211 1224111112 2331211111 2131133121 22211 

mahana x122131313 1213145211 2311222111 1212213211 1222121212 2433312111 2122211131 22313 

maxima 2222122121 2211123211 1311122221 1512123211 12221111?? 23335????1 213x11x121 22212 

monophthalma 3222132231 1121135412 2321221211 141x123211 1222211111 2332511211 2231132111 22222 

musorstom 2222132x23 1211141211 2111232121 1322223211 1224111212 2431212111 212221x121 12313 

nodosa 1211131121 1212122111 1111132112 2311114211 122122113? 1311122111 1221313112 22211 

nohinohi 1132222122 2211321111 1211142112 2221112111 2111221112 2312121212 2221313212 21112 

piihuka 2232222z11 1211324111 1111142313 2321112111 2113221111 2211221111 2221113212 21211 

plebeian 1232221121 2211324111 1111142313 2221112112 2113221111 1311221211 2221313112 21212 

psora 21221212x1 2212123312 2211231221 1412111211 1221111112 2231211211 1131111121 21212 

pushkini x232222221 2211323111 1111142312 2321112111 2111221111 1312121211 2221313112 21211 

rickbruscai 1222132223 1211141211 2311232121 1412223211 1222121212 2431212111 213221x121 12313 

riwha x132221121 2211354111 1111133112 2321112112 2121121111 1112111111 2221313211 31213 

semicarinata 2122122121 1232231312 2121222221 1322223211 1222212112 1332212111 2221232112 11213 

serripes 3122121131 1222231212 2211222211 1512223111 1221111121 2231212111 2131212112 21212 

sheni 1222121??1 1211122211 2321122211 1412213211 1224111112 2231111111 213133x121 21212 

stevelowei 2222131211 1211225312 1321121221 152x233211 1222111111 1331212211 2131123212 22221 

tara x2322223x1 2213124111 1111142312 2321112112 21112211?? 22122????1 2221313112 31212 

trulla 1222131213 2213145211 2121232121 1422123211 12141212?? 24314????1 212221x121 22312 

umpara 1222131123 2211143211 2111122111 1322223211 1222211212 2432212111 2122211131 12311 

urotoma 2122112121 1212231412 2322222221 1412123211 1221212112 13322????1 2231232112 21211 

ventrosa 1232222311 2221324111 1111142312 2211112111 2113221122 1313121221 2211313112 2x212 

vigilans 1112131121 1211324111 1111131113 2211111211 1221221113 1331111211 1121213112 22211 

warna x222132213 1211144211 2311232121 1312213211 12211112?? 24312????1 2122212131 22313 

whanui 3222111223 1231324312 1121122221 x???????12 12221111?? 22314????1 2131111111 32212 

247

2. matrix Aegidae genera 

Polymorphic states: x = /2; y = /3; z = 2/3. 

Tridentella 1111111111 111111x111 1111111111 

Aega 1122311121 1211122111 1221211211 

Aegapheles 1122311121 1211122111 1221211212 

Aegiochus 11221111x2 1111132121 1121211111 

Alitropus 2112321121 1111233122 2--2222322 

Epulaega 1111311121 1111132121 1321211111 

Rocinela 2122211121 212123322x 2--2222322 

Syscenus 12111222y1 2122123222 z--2122322 

Xenuraega 1211122231 2122--4222 3--2--21— 

248

Aega, 7, 0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 27, 98 

Aega acuminata, 32, 2 2 

Aega acuticauda, 2 2 

Aega angustata, 7, 4, 37, 2 2, 232, 235 

Aega antennata, 7, 4, 27, 2 2, 245 

Aega approximata, 2 2 

Aega australis, 23 , 245 

Aega bicarinata, 2 2, 2 3 

Aega bicavata, 49, 50 

Aega chelipous, 2 2 

Aega concinna, 50, 2 2, 245 

Aega crenulata, 2 2 

Aega cyclops, 6, 210, 2 , 2 3 

Aega dofleini, 6, 27, 2 2 

Aega ecarinata, 2 2 

Aega edwardsii, 23 , 235, 236 

Aega falcata, 4, 27, 2 2 

Aega falklandica, 28, 32, 55, 98 

Aega fracta, 5 

Aega giganteocula, 5 

Aega hirsuta, 2 2 

Aega komai, 4, 28, 34, 37, 98, 233 

Aega lecontii, 2 2 

Aega magnifica, 27, 32, 2 2, 2 9 

Aega magnoculis, 239 

Aega maxima, 4, 27, 32, 33, 2 2 

Aega megalops, 2 2 

Aega microphthalma, 2 2 

Aega monophthalma, 7, 28, 37, 98 

Aega nanhaiensis, 2 2 

Aega novizealandiae, 211, 23 

Aega platyantennata, 2 2 

Aega psora, 4, 26, 2 2, 245 

Aega punctulata, 49, 50, 55, 2 2, 235, 244 

Aega rosacea, 2 2 

Aega semicarinata, 28, 44, 49, 50, 60, 235, 236 

Aega serripes, 4, 2 2, 245 

Aega sheni, 27, 2 2 

Aega stevelowei, 28, 50, 55 

Aega stroemii, 50, 2 3 

Aega tridens, 2 3 

Aega truncata, 2 3 

Aega urotoma, 28, 49, 50, 55, 60, 99, 2 3, 235, 236 

Aega ventrosa, 83 

Aega vigilans, 2 

Aega webbii, 50, 60, 2 3 

Aega whanui, 28, 61 

Aega sp., 245 

INdEx 

Principal taxonomic account is in bold font. Synonymic entries and material examined are not included; 

New Zealand, North Island and South Island are not indexed 

249 

Aegapheles, 7, 2, 4, 5, 27, 65 

Aegapheles alazon, 7, 3, 66, 68, 79 

Aegapheles antillensis, 2 3 

Aegapheles banda, 2 3 

Aegapheles birubi, 66, 68 

Aegapheles copidis, 66, 70, 73 

Aegapheles deshaysiana, 3, 4, 2 3 

Aegapheles excisa, 2 3 

Aegapheles hamiota, 66, 73, 8 

Aegapheles japonica, 2 3 

Aegapheles kixalles, 73, 79, 2 3 

Aegapheles kwazulu, 2 3 

Aegapheles mahana, 66, 75, 79 

Aegapheles musorstom, 73, 2 3 

Aegapheles rickbruscai, 66, 79, 8 

Aegapheles trulla, 73, 2 3 

Aegapheles umpara, 5, 66, 81 

Aegapheles warna, 79, 2 3 

Aegidae, 3, 5, 22, 26 

Aegiochus, 6, 7, 0, 2, 83, 2 

Aegiochus antarctica, 6, 23 , 216, 2 8, 220 

Aegiochus arctica, 4, 2 3, 245 

Aegiochus australis, 2 3 

Aegiochus beri, 3, 85, 88, 44 

Aegiochus bertrandi, 3, 88, 92, 97, 23 

Aegiochus coroo, 3, 8, 92, 93, 03, 9, 22, 2 0 

Aegiochus crozetensis, 02, 03, 4, 40, 2 3, 237, 238 

Aegiochus cyclops. See Aega cyclops 

Aegiochus dentata, 2 3 

Aegiochus dollfusi, 2 3 

Aegiochus francoisae, 4, 2 3, 24 

Aegiochus glacialis, 219, 22 

Aegiochus gordoni, 97, 08, 22, 28, 40 

Aegiochus gracilipes, 2 3 

Aegiochus incisa, 2 3 

Aegiochus insomnis, 103, 22 

Aegiochus kakai, 3, 97, 109, 9, 40 

Aegiochus kanohi, 97, 114, 40, 5 , 238 

Aegiochus koltuni, 2 9 

Aegiochus laevis, 2, 03, 120, 23 

Aegiochus leptonica, 4, 2 3 

Aegiochus lethrina, 6, 4 

Aegiochus longicornis, 2 4 

Aegiochus maxima, 244 

Aegiochus nohinohi, 08, 22, 123, 28, 40, 5 

Aegiochus nordenskjoldii, 83 

Aegiochus perulis, 28, 2 4 

Aegiochus piihuka, 6, 128, 34, 40, 48, 238

Aegiochus plebeia, 4, 6, 84, 34, 48, 2 4, 238, 239 

Aegiochus pushkini, 02, 03, 134, 40, 5 

Aegiochus quadratisinus, 44, 2 4 

Aegiochus riwha, 2, 3, 88, 141, 44 

Aegiochus spongiophila, 6, 2 4 

Aegiochus symmetrica, 34, 2 4, 24 

Aegiochus synopthalma, 9, 2 4 

Aegiochus tara, 146, 48, 238,240 

Aegiochus tenuipes, 2 4 

Aegiochus tiaho, 2 

Aegiochus tumida, 2 4 

Aegiochus uschakovi, 02, 03, 4, 40, 2 4, 241 

Aegiochus ventrosa, 6, 3, 4, 83, 34, 48, 2 4, 240, 245 

Aegiochus vigilans, 2, 3, 150, 52, 23 , 246 

Aegiochus webberi, 2 

Aegiochus weberi, 233 

Aegiochus sp., 5 , 245, 246 

Alaska, 89, 2 3, 2 4, 2 5, 240, 24 

Alitropus, 7, 26 

Alitropus typus, 2 4, 245 

Antarctic butterfish, see Hyperoglyphe antarctica 

Antarctica, 2 6 

Antipodes Islands, 93 

Anuropidae, 4 

Arafura Sea, 97 

Arctic, 89 

Argentina, 02 

ascidian (sea squirts), 6, 2 3 

Atlantic, 7, 2 3, 2 4, 2 5 

North Atlantic, 6, 7, 44, 34, 49, 98, 99, 206, 2 2, 

2 3, 2 4, 2 5 

South Atlantic, 33, 40 

Australia, 6, 7, 26, 36, 37, 44, 52, 55, 68, 70, 83, 88, 93, 

97, 9, 23, 34, 50, 5 , 57, 62, 2 0, 2 , 2 2, 2 3, 

2 4, 233, 235. See also individual States 

Azores, 2 2 

Bahamas, 44, 2 2 

Banda Sea, 206, 2 3, 2 4, 245 

barracouta, see Thyrsites atun 

barramundi, see Lates calcarifer 

Barybrotes indus, 25, 246 

Barybrotidae, 25 

Bass Strait, 235 

bathypelagic, 7 

Bay of Islands, 220 

black-eared spurdog, see Squalus melanurus 

bluenose, see Hyperoglyphe antarctica 

Bounty Trough, 63, 69 

Bouvet Island, 40 

Brazil, 2 5 

Britain, 2 3, 2 4, 2 5 

Brunnaega roeperi, 4 

California, 2 2, 2 3, 2 4 

Campbell Plateau, 93 

Cape Horn, 237 

Carangidae, 68 

250 

Carcharhinidae, 83 

Carcharhinus, 2 2 

Carcharhinus galapagensis, 83 

Caribbean, 77, 2 2, 2 5 

Celebes Sea, 2 4 

Centrolophidae, medusafishes, 44, 55, 161 

Centrophoridae, gulper sharks, 44 

Centrophorus squamosus, 44 

Challenger Plateau, 206 

Chatham Islands, 79 

Chatham Rise, 44, 03, 4, 9, 28, 84, 89, 97 

Chile, 50, 28, 2 3, 2 5, 24 

China, 2 2 

Cirolana, 4 

Cirolanidae, 7, 4, 25, 2 

Cirolanoidea, 4 

Cook Strait, 70, 73, 97 

Coral Sea, 88, 2 2, 2 3, 2 4 

Corallanidae, 4, 25, 2 

coral-reef, 6, 52 

Costa Rica, 2 2, 2 5 

Crozet Islands, 50, 03, 2 3, 238 

cryptic species, 3, 67, 238 

Cuba, 2 3, 2 4, 2 5 

Cymothoida, 6, 25 

Cymothoidae, 4, 22 

Cymothooidea, 4, 22 

Dalatiidae, sleeper sharks, 44 

Denmark, 43 

dogfish, see Squalidae 

Drake Passage, 03, 2 4, 24 . See also Tierra del Fuego 

Ecuador, 2 5 

endemism, 7 

England, see Britain 

Epicaridea, 4 

Epulaega, 7, 0, 151, 2 0 

Epulaega derkoma, 2, 5 , 152, 55 

Epulaega fracta, 6, 5, 52, 156, 6 

Epulaega lethrina, 5 , 52, 2 4, 245 

Epulaega monilis, 5 , 6 , 69, 2 4 

Epulaega nodosa, 4, 5 , 2 4, 245 

Euplectella, 2 4 

Færoe Islands, 44, 2 3 

Falkland Islands, 33, 50, 2 2, 238 

Florida, 2 3, 2 4 

Fossil Aegidae, 4 

France, 2 2 

Gadus morrhua, cod, 44 

Galapagos Islands, 2 2, 2 3, 2 4, 2 5, 24 

Galapagos shark, 9 

Gempylidae, snake mackerel, 67 

Genypterus blacodes, cusk eel, 67 

Georgia, USA, 2 5 

German Sea, 43 

Great Barrier Island, New Zealand 55, 6 

Great Barrier Reef, Australia 52, 6 , 2 4

Greenland, 2 2, 2 3, 2 5 

Greenland shark, see Somniosus microcephalus 

Gulf of Mexico, 2 2, 2 3 

Gulf of Suez, 2 3 

gulper shark, see Centrophorus squamosus 

Haploniscidae, 6 

hapuku, see Polyprion oxygeneios 

Hauraki Gulf, 37 

Hawai’i, 44, 89, 2 4, 2 5 

Hawke Bay, 9 

Hexactinellidae, glass sponges, 34, 23 

Hippoglossus, halibut, 2 5 

Hong Kong, 23 , 245 

Hyperoglyphe antarctica, 44, 55, 6 

Iceland, 43, 2 2, 2 3, 2 4 

India, 5 , 2 

Indian Ocean, 7, 25, 33, 49, 97, 02, 40, 2 4, 23 , 238 

Indo–Australasia, 7 

Indo-Malaysia, 6, 2 4 

Indonesia, 64, 77, 206, 2 2, 2 3, 2 4, 23 , 239 

Indo-Pacific, 152, 215 

Japan, 37, 206, 2 2, 2 4, 2 5, 239 

Juan Fernandez Islands, 50 

Kaikoura, 6 

Kerguelen Islands, 44, 50, 237 

Kermadec Islands, 6, 83, 2 

Lates calcarifer, 245 

Lethrinidae, rudderfishes, 152, 214 

Loligo bleekeri, 46 

longnose spurdog, see Squalidae 

Lophiidae, monkfishes, 212 

Lophius setigerus, sea devil fish, 212 

Lord Howe Island, 88 

Lord Howe Rise, 65, 83, 206 

Macquarie Island, 50 

Macquarie Ridge, 40, 89 

Madagascar, 2 2, 236 

Maine, 2 4 

Marion Island, 33, 50 

matiri, see Hyperoglyphe antarctica 

Mediterranean, 98, 2 2, 2 3, 2 4, 2 5 

mesopelagic, 6, 7, 98 

Metacirolana, 08 

Metacirolana caeca, 7, 26, 44 

Mexico, 89, 2 5 

micropredators, 6 

Mississippi, 2 5 

molecular analyses, 3 

Natatolana, 25 

New Caledonia, 6, 43, 60, 68, 75, 79, 8 , 92, 97, 9, 34, 

43, 45, 5 , 206, 2 2, 2 3, 239, 24 

New South Wales, 52, 33, 209, 2 0, 2 2, 2 5 

Norfolk Basin, 55 

Norfolk Island, 83 

Norfolk Ridge, 65, 73, 92, 45, 49, 202, 239, 24 

Norway, 442, 2 2, 2 3, 2 4 

25 

Ophidiidae, 68 

Otago, 97 

Pacific Ocean, 7 

East Pacific, 6, 7, 26, 28, 127, 133, 212, 214, 215, 231, 

238, 239 

North Pacific, 7 

southwestern Pacific, 6, 7, 13, 161, 198 

western Pacific, 7, 97, 134 

Palaega, 3 

Panama, 2 5, 240, 24 

Papua New Guinea, 6, 2 4 

parasites, 6 

pelagic, 7 

Peru, 99, 2 4, 2 5, 23 

Philippines, 5 , 2 , 2 3, 245 

Polyprionidae, wreckfishes, 50 

Polyprion oxygeneios, 68, 70 

Polyprion prognatus, 50 

Poor Knights Islands, 09 

Portugal, 2 2, 2 3 

Puerto Rico, 2 2 

Queensland, 75, 88, 23, 2 4, 2 5, 245 

Raja binoculata, big skate, 2 5 

Raja nasuta, rough skate, 60 

Rajidae, skates, 60 

Red Sea, 2 2, 2 3 

Rexea solandri, silver gemfish, 68 

Rhamphion, 2, 83, 84 

Rocinela, 6, 7, 0, 3, 4, 5, 8, 68, 161, 98 

Rocinela affinis, 84, 2 4 

Rocinela americana, 2 4 

Rocinela angustata, 6, 2 4 

Rocinela australis, 2 4 

Rocinela belliceps, 6, 2 4 

Rocinela bonita, 163, 67, 89 

Rocinela cornuta, 69, 89, 2 4 

Rocinela cubensis, 2 4 

Rocinela danmoniensis, 6 , 68, 2 4 

Rocinela dumerilii, 2 4 

Rocinela garricki, 169, 72, 73, 97 

Rocinela granulosa, 2 5 

Rocinela hawaiiensis, 69, 89, 2 5 

Rocinela insularis, 2 5 

Rocinela japonica, 2 5 

Rocinela juvenalis, 68, 2 5 

Rocinela kapala, 84, 2 5 

Rocinela laticauda, 2 5 

Rocinela leptopus, 2, 174, 77, 92, 93, 99 

Rocinela lukini, 2 5 

Rocinela maculata, 2 5 

Rocinela major, 69 

Rocinela media, 77, 2 5 

Rocinela modesta, 68, 2 5 

Rocinela murilloi, 2 5 

Rocinela niponia, 84, 2 5 

Rocinela oculata, 84, 2 5

Rocinela orientalis, 211, 2 5, 246 

Rocinela pakari, 178, 84 

Rocinela patriciae, 2 5 

Rocinela propodialis, 2 5 

Rocinela resima, 68, 184, 89 

Rocinela richardsonae, 2 5 

Rocinela runga, 77, 189, 92 

Rocinela satagia, 73, 193, 96, 98 

Rocinela signata, 7, 77, 2 5 

Rocinela sila, 2 5 

Rocinela tridens, 2 5 

Rocinela tropica, 2 5 

Rocinela tuberculosa, 2 5 

Rocinela wetzeri, 2 5 

Rocinela sp., 98 

Ross Sea, 2 4, 2 5, 2 8, 2 9, 220, 22 , 23 

rough skate, see Raja nasuta 

Russia, 2 5 

Scotland, 44, 2 4 

Scymnum microcephalum, 44 

Sea of Okhotsk, 2 5 

Serranidae, 68, 52, 2 4 

Seychelles, 68 

sibling species, 3 

Skagerak, Norway, 44 

Solomon Islands, 97, 2 2 

Somniosus microcephalus, sleeper shark, 44, 2 2, 2 3 

South Africa, 6, 7, 44, 50, 55, 60, 66, 68, 98, 2 2, 2 3, 

2 5, 234, 245, 246 

South Australia, 2 0 

South China Sea, 2 0, 239 

Southern Ocean, 9, 66, 207, 23 

Sphaeromatidae, 6, 7 

sponges, 6, 4, 34, 2 2, 2 3, 23 

Squalidae, 37, 60 

Squalus blainvillei, 37 

Squalus melanurus, 60 

Straits of Magellan, 50, 2 2, 2 4, 237 

Sulawesi, 2 5 

Symbioses, 6 

252 

Syscenus, 6, 7, 2, 3, 5, 7, 26, 198 

Syscenus atlanticus, 99, 2 5 

Syscenus infelix, 98, 99, 206, 209, 2 5 

Syscenus intermedius, 202, 2 5, 241 

Syscenus kapoo, 199, 20 

Syscenus karu, 98, 2 5 

Syscenus latus, 99, 202, 204, 206 

Syscenus moana, 99, 202, 206 

Syscenus pacificus, 98, 206 

Syscenus peruanus, 98, 2 5 

Syscenus springthorpei, 99, 208, 209, 2 0 

Syscenus sp., 2 2 

Taiwan, 37, 34, 45, 2 2 

Taranaki Bight, 37 

Tasman Sea, 7, 88, 50 

Tasmania, 70, 6 , 2 2, 2 3, 235 

Three Kings Island, 28 

Thyristes atun, 70 

Tierra del Fuego, 24 

Timor Sea, 65 

Tonga, 68 

Trachurus novaezelandiae, horse mackerel, 68 

Tridentellidae, 3, 2 

Triglidae, 68 

Tristan da Cunha, 68 

Vancouver, 24 

Vanuatu, 34, 23 

Victoria, Australia, 55, 2 2, 2 3, 235 

Washington State, 2 5 

Weddell Sea, 2 9, 22 

Western Australia, 2 2 

Xenuraega, 7, 2, 5, 26 

Xenuraega ptilocera, 2 5

The Marine Fauna of New Zealand: Isopoda, Aegidae (Crustacea)

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?