identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
931B5117FB006679FF26AF58FC2BBB4F.text	931B5117FB006679FF26AF58FC2BBB4F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa aequicornis Sars 1879	<div><p>Metopa aequicornis Sars, 1879</p> <p>Metopa aequicornis Sars 1879: 453; Sars 1885: 188, pl.15, fig. 5</p> <p>Metopa aequicornis — Stebbing 1906: 180</p> <p>Metopa aequicornis — Stephensen 1938: 174</p> <p>Metopa aequicornis — Gurjanova 1951: 429–30, fig. 273</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F1806 (det: G.O. <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=12.85&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=76.566666" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 12.85/lat 76.566666)">Sars Station</a> 343 Norwegian North Atlantic Expedition, 76°34’N, 12°51’E, 07.08.1874) Male. 6 mm. Holotype.</p> <p>The specimen had been dried out some time during its museum-history, and was quite flat.</p> <p>Type locality: St. 343 <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=12.85&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=76.566666" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 12.85/lat 76.566666)">Norwegian North Atlantic Expedition</a>: 76°34’N, 12°51’E, 1359 m, -1.2°C.</p> <p>See figures 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5</p> <p>Morphological redescription of male type material.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 1): epistome projected and rounded, cephalic lobe rounded; eye 1/4 of head length, round, well defined. Antenna 1 (Fig. 2): long and slender, almost as long as body length; second peduncle article slightly longer than first; flagellum 17-articulate, with minute seta on the articles; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 2): as long as A1; peduncle almost 3x length of flagellum; flagellum 12-articulate, naked. Labium (Fig. 2): rounded with minute setae at distal edge. Mandible (Fig. 2): mandibular palp 3-articulate, circular in cross-section, apical article well developed, middle article longer than first and third combined, long, thin, simple setae along middle and apical article; incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate and well developed; single row of raker setae; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 2): inner plate with one simple distal seta; outer plate with four cuspidate setae, two of which marginally serrate, two teeth at apical edge, approximately 10 thin simple setae along inner margin; palp 1-articulate, reaching 1.5x length of outer plate, with nine simple setae and one tooth apically, and deep serrations along the apical-inner margin. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 2): outer plate in normal position to inner plate; both plates with several simple setae (outer with 15 and inner with five). Labrum (Fig. 2): rounded and smooth. Maxilliped (Fig. 2): long and slim; inner plates separate, with few simple setae at distal margin; outer plate reduced, with a very small nob reaching less than 1/4 of first article of palp, which is 4-articulate; palp with several simple setae along inner margin of articles 1 and 2, article 3 with several simple and one type A seta (Tandberg &amp; Vader 2009) at distal margin, article 4 with a single row of short simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon: smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 3): subchelate; coxa rounded quadrate; basis linear, with a flat frontal margin with long simple setae; ischium subquadrate, with two simple setae distally; merus with posterodistal corner semi-free and with a row of long simple setae along distal margin; carpus subtriangular with a flat posterior margin lined with long simple setae; propodus subrectangular, slightly shorter and less broad than carpus, more than twice as long as broad, palm oblique with no distinct palmar corner, palm lined with short simple setae; dactylus inner margin with short simple setae, as long as palm. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 3): coxa covering coxa 1, directed forwards; merus posterior margin lined with a few simple setae, distal margin with a row of simple setae; carpus subtriangular with stridulatory knobs along anterior margin and a row of simple setae along posterodistal margin; propodus subrectangular, palm almost transverse, with a strong tooth at palmar corner, palm crenulate, and with a few short plumose and a few short simple setae; dactylus curved and smooth, almost as long as palm, not reaching the tooth at palmar corner. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 3): simple and slender; coxa subrectangular; dactylus 0.5x length of propodus, slim and simple. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 4): simple and slender; coxa subtriangular; a few simple setae along posterior margin of merus, carpus and propodus; dactylus 0.3x length of propodus, slim and simple. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 4): basis slender; meral lobe 1/4 of carpus; very few simple setae along anterior margin; dactylus slim and simple. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 5): coxae small, coxa 7 subcircular; basis posteriorly expanded; meral lobe short, less than 1/3 of carpus; very few simple setae along anterior and posterior margins, dactyli simple.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 4): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 4): posterodistal corner acute with rounded tip. Uropod 1 (Fig. 5): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle with several short simple setae, almost double length of rami, rami subequal in length; outer ramus with three small simple setae, inner ramus naked. Uropod 2 (Fig. 5): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, inner ramus longer than outer ramus; outer ramus with one small simple seta. Uropod 3 (Fig. 5): uniramous; ramus with two articles, peduncle shorter than article 1; peduncle with four short simple setae, inner article of ramus with one tiny seta. Telson (Fig. 5): rounded, tongue-shaped; three pairs of setules.</p> <p>Sexual differences: only one specimen was found in the museums collections, this was a male.</p> <p>Distribution: SV of Spitsbergen, deep basin (1360 m). Not registered from any other stations, see map Figure 63 A.</p> <p>Ecology: the specimen was found in cold water (-1.2°C), on clay.</p> <p>The name aequicornis refers to the antennae being of equal length.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB006679FF26AF58FC2BBB4F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB01667BFF26A8C2FEDFBC44.text	931B5117FB01667BFF26A8C2FEDFBC44.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa affinis Boeck 1871	<div><p>Metopa affinis Boeck, 1871</p> <p>Metopa affinis Boeck 1871: 142–43</p> <p>Metopa affinis — Sars 1892: 260–61, pl. 91, fig. 2</p> <p>Metopa affinis — Stebbing 1906: 176</p> <p>Metopa affinis — Stephensen 1926: 70; Stephensen 1928: 168, fig. 31: 16–19; Stephensen 1938: 172</p> <p>Metopa affinis — Gurjanova 1951: 421–22, fig. 262</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13832 (coll: A. Boeck, rev. G.O.Sars, no locality) male.</p> <p>This specimen was not registrered in type collection, but is the only specimen of this species in the collections, and is collected by the original author. The specimen was already dissected.</p> <p>Type locality: probably Christianiafjord (Oslofjord), SE Norway.</p> <p>See figures 6, 7 and 8.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of probable male type material.</p> <p>Head: not present in the tube with the dissected specimen. Antenna 1 (Fig. 6): broken in specimen. Naked, peduncle articles 1 and 2 equal size, flagellum broken; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 6): peduncle double length of flagellum, peduncle article 4 and 5 equal length; flagellum 6-articulate, each article with two small setae. Mandible (Fig. 6): palp 2-articulate (no inner article), fat, but with circular cross-section. The mandible palp was broken in the dissected specimen. Incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate and well developed; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 6): inner plate with one simple seta; outer plate with three simple, three pectinate and one cuspidate setae, six simple setae along inner margin; palp 1-articulate, a little longer than outer plate, four simple longer setae and two shorter, one tooth at apical margin. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 6): outer plate in normal position to inner plate; both plates with simple setae (outer with five and inner with four long and three short). Maxilliped (Fig. 6): long and slim; inner plate fully separated, one single seta at the apical margin; outer plate reduced; palp 4-articulate with a few setae along inner margin of article 1 and 2, article 3 with a "cushion" of setae at tip, article 4 with a single row of setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon: specimen in tube was dissected before the present examination, but earlier illustrations show this as smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 7): subchelate; coxa subquadrate; basis linear; merus distally free, posterior margin cushioned with short simple setae and distal margin lined with simple and pectinate setae; carpus slender, a few simple setae; propodus as long as but more slender than carpus (propodus length 4x width), palm transverse, palmar corner rounded, palm naked; dactylus curved, as long as palm, simple setae on anterior margin. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 7): coxa covering coxa 1, directed forwards, subrectangular, naked; basis linear; ischium subrectangular; merus triangular with one long and one short simple seta; carpus short, cupshaped, with a cushion of simple setae at posterior margin and a row of seta type A (Tandberg &amp; Vader 2009) along distal margin; propodus subrectangular, a little longer than broad, palm nearly transverse, smooth with simple setae, a clear tooth at palmar corner; dactylus smooth and weakly curved, as long as palm. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 7): coxa subrectangular, one small simple seta at distal margin; basis linear, slightly curved; rest of leg slim and simple, very few simple setae; dactylus simple and very little curved. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 7): coxa triangular; rest of leg simple, slightly thicker than P3 and a few more simple setae; dactylus with a little notch at tip. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 8): coxa small, produced a little anteriorly; basis slender with a little widening at distal end; meral lobe 1/3 carpus length; few simple setae in pairs along anterior margin of carpus and propodus; dactylus simple and smooth. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 8): coxae small, coxa 6 with a small production towards posterior part of basis; bases posteriorly expanded, naked; meral lobes small, reaching 1/3 and 1/4 of carpal length respectively; dactyli long and curved (dactylus of P7 broken in specimen).</p> <p>Urosome: specimen was dissected before this examination, but earlier illustrations show this as smooth. Epimeral plate 3: not present in the tube of dissected pieces. Uropod 1 (Fig. 8): biramous, naked, peduncle longer than rami, rami subequal, inner ramus longer than outer, but broken in the present material. Uropods 2 and 3: were not present in the tube with the dissected specimen, but according to Sars (1892) uropod 3 has a "somewhat lamellar" peduncle, and the length should be about the same as that of uropod 2. Telson: was sadly also not present in the tube, Sars (1892) describes this with length 2x width, rounded.</p> <p>Sexual differences: Sars (1892) suggests that the second gnathopod is of slightly different form in females, but does not elucidate what this difference consists of. He does not give any other examples of sexual differences.</p> <p>Distribution: Oslofjord, west Norway, Lofoten islands (north Norway). See map Figure 63 B.</p> <p>Ecology: no ecological information is known about this species.</p> <p>Remarks. The name affinis refers to it looking very much like closely related species, a fact Sars found "inappropriate" as he thought this species to be most distinct from all other known Norwegian species (Sars, 1892).</p> <p>Sars made, however, after examining the specimens that both Boeck and Hansen had collected, the suggestion that Metopa latimana Hansen (1888) was the same species as Boeck’s M. affinis. If this should be accepted, M. affinis should also occur in Greenland, where Hansen found his species. This view was, however, contested by Stephensen (1931, 1938), who claims Hansens specimen of M. latimana not to be identical with M. affinis; in that case M. affinis does not occur in Greenland. Sars noted that Hansens specimen "agreed closely in all essential characteristics", but also that - as Hansen had commented to him - there was "a slight difference in the form of the gnathopoda", a problem he explained with the examined specimens from Hansen and Boeck being of different sexes. Stephensen (1931) comments that M. affinis is "rather closely allied" to M. latimana but not the same species, citing Hansens words about the gnathopods, highlighting the propodus of gnathopod 1 of M. latimana to have "a rather broad oblique palm" and the propodus of gnathopod 2 to be "somewhat longer and narrower with the palm not dentate". Stephensen examined the type specimen of M. latimana (the only specimen Hansen had collected) and made the first illustrations of M. latimana. Hansens type specimen was examined recently, but only gnathopods 1 and 2 and a head without mouthparts were found, the original slides were sadly not found (Tandberg &amp; Vader 2009), gnathopods 1 and 2 were found to be in perfect accordance with the drawings of Stephensen (1931).</p> <p>When comparing the new illustrations and observations of Boecks specimen of M. affinis with both new illustrations of what has been found of M. latimana and Stephensens illustrations and Hansens descriptions of M. latimana the propodus of gnathopod 1 is longer and a little narrower in M. affinis than in M. latimana, both having a very short smooth palm, but the palm of M. affinis seems to be slightly more transverse than that of M. latimana, interestingly Sars (1892) illustrated the gnathopod 1 as even narrower, and with no visible palm, he calls this part "nearly linear in form" and does also in his text not mention the palm. Gnathopod 2 propodus is shorter and wider in the examined specimen of M. affinis than in M. latimana, and the tooth at the palmar corner is more pronounced. The coxa is also slightly more broad in M. affinis than in M. latimana. Pereopod 3 seems, based on the drawings in Stephensen (1931), to be more narrow and elongate both in coxa and dactylus in M. latimana than in M. affinis, pereopod 7 basis is more rounded in M. affinis and uropod 1 in M. affinis is missing the rather conspicuous cuspidate seta at the distal margin of the peduncle that M. latimana is illustrated with, but in the text Stephensen claims that uropods 1 and 2 do not have spines. It does, therefore, seem quite unclear if the two species should be synomymised or not, and the discussion should be ended by finding the rest of the type for M. latimana, if no fresh specimens can be found to test molecular characters. Without an examination of the mouthparts of M. latimana it is not possible to go further than to accept Stephensens claim that they are two different species.</p> <p>From the note by Sars that the type from Boeck was a male, and the fact that only one specimen was in the Oslo collection noted as collected by Boeck and examined by Sars, we propose this specimen to be moved to the type collection as the probable holotype for this species. The type locality in that case is "Christianiafjord" (Oslofjord).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB01667BFF26A8C2FEDFBC44	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB036675FF26AFC8FC1EBEA1.text	931B5117FB036675FF26AFC8FC1EBEA1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa alderii (Bate 1857)	<div><p>Metopa alderii (Bate, 1857)</p> <p>Montagua alderii Bate 1857: 137; Bate 1862: 57</p> <p>Montagua alderi — Goës 1866: 522</p> <p>Metopa spectabilis Sars 1879: 451-52; Sars 1883: 91; Sars 1885: 185, pl. 15, fig 4; Sars 1892: 251–52, pl. 87</p> <p>Metopa alderi — Schneider 1891: 76</p> <p>Metopa alderi — Sars 1892: 250–51, pl. 86</p> <p>Metopa spectabilis — Reibisch 1905: 175, Brüggen 1907: 223–24; Tesch 1916: 330–31</p> <p>Metopa alderi — Stephensen 1925: 65–66; Stephensen 1928: 160–62, fig. 30:7–8; Stephensen 1938: 170; Stephensen 1944: 57–58</p> <p>Metopa spectabilis — Stephensen 1925: 66; Stephensen 1928: 162–63, fig. 30:1–6; Stephensen 1931: 183; Stephensen 1938: 171</p> <p>Metopa spectabilis — Shoemaker 1930: 46; Schellenberg 1942: 119–120, fig. 97</p> <p>Metopa alderi — Schellenberg 1942: 119, fig. 96</p> <p>Metopa alderi — Dahl 1946</p> <p>Metopa alderi — Gurjanova 1951: 423, fig. 264</p> <p>Metopa spectabilis — Gurjanova 1951: 423, fig. 265</p> <p>Metopa alderi — Dunbar 1954: 729–30; Oldevig 1959: 43; Bousfield 1973: 88; Lincoln 1979: 182, figs. 81a–c, 82a–i</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13756 (coll by G.O. Sars, Norv. occid.) female, 5 mm.</p> <p>F13755 (coll by G.O.Sars, Norv. occid.) male, 5 mm.</p> <p>Material from UNIS AB321 cruise 2009, Hinlopen: 79°35.37’N, 18°51.98’E, both male (5 mm) and female (6 mm).</p> <p>Type locality: coast of Northumberland.</p> <p>Photo: F1804 (det: G.O.Sars, St 31, 343 Norwegian North Atlantic Expedition) Syntype of Metopa spectabilis.</p> <p>See figures 9, 10,11, 12 and 13.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of male and female material collected by Sars.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 9): Antenna 1 (Fig. 10): short (male) to medium length (female), thin and naked; peduncle shorter than (female) or slightly longer than (male) flagellum; flagellum 5 (male) to 10 (female) articles, naked except for two terminal simple setae; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 10): longer than</p> <p>A1; peduncle 3x as long as flagellum, articles four and five subequal; flagellum 8 articles. Labium (Fig. 10): rounded. Mandible (Fig. 10): palp 3-articulate, article 2 longest, article 3 minute, cross-section circular, a few simple setae along margin of article 2 and one apical seta; lacinia mobilis and incisor serrate and well developed; raker setae plump and serrate; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 10): inner plate narrow and elongate, one distal seta; outer plate square distally with one tooth, five cuspidate setae, one with serrations, a row of simple setae along inner margin; palp 1-articulate, distal margin serrate with five cuspidate setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 10): outer plate in normal position to inner plate; inner plate with four and outer plate with eight simple setae apically. Maxilliped (Fig. 10): long and slender; inner plates fused, but with a "keel" along the middle; outer plate reduced; palp 4-articulate, inner margin lined with longish simple setae, article 3 with a cushion of short simple setae at distal inner margin and two pectinate setae along distal margin, article 4 with a row of short simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon: smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 12): unclearly subchelate; coxa subtriangular, small, covered by coxa 2; basis linear, lined with simple setae at anterior margin; ischium quadrate; merus subtriangular, distally free, with a short-setaed cushion along posterior-distal margin and a row of simple and setae type A setae along distal margin; carpus triangular, posterior margin covered with simple and setae type A; propodus elongate rounded triangular, palm oblique, lined by tiny and a few larger simple setae, set off by a largish cuspidate seta at palmar "corner", hind margin "wavy" with few simple setae; dactylus curved, inner margin finely serrate, tip with several small simple setae. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 11): coxa suboval, directed forwards; basis straight; ischium short and squarish; merus cup-shaped triangular; carpus cup-shaped triangular, a row of setae type A along distal margin, female with short setaed cushion along posterior margin; propodus subrectangular with a nearly transverse palm with a deep incision at lower half of palm (male) or subtriangular with an oblique palm with a smaller incision at lower part of palm (female) both palms slightly serrate and setaed; dactylus curved, with a flat inner margin set off with short setae, not reaching tooth at palmar corner. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 12): coxa subrectangular, with a few setae along posterior margin; rest of leg slim and simple, few simple setae along anterior margin; dactylus smooth and curved. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 13): coxa subtriangular; rest of leg simple, a bit more robust than P3, simple setae along both anterior and porserior margin; dactylus falcate. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 13): coxa small, extended slightly posteriorly; basis linear, meral lobe 0.5x carpus length; short simple setae along anterior margin; dactylus falcate. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 13): coxae small; bases posteriorly expanded; meral lobe about 0.5x of carpal length; P6 with a bit more and shorter simple setae than P7; dactylus falcate.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 9): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 9): posterodistal corner right angled. Uropod 1 (Fig. 13): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami; rami subequal, outer ramus slightly shorter than inner, both peduncle and outer ramus lined with short setae. Uropod 2 (Fig. 13): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, outer margin with small setae; outer ramus little longer than inner. Uropod 3 (Fig. 13): uniramous; peduncle subequal to ramus, ramus with two articles, articles subequal; peduncle with five and inner article of ramus with one short setae. Telson (Fig. 13): tongue-shaped, tip slightly pointed, length 2x width; two pairs of tiny setules.</p> <p>Sexual differences: Gnathopod 2 in the male has a much wider and deeper excavation of the palm than in the female (see Fig. 11). Female size is larger than male, the body more "plump" and round. Antenna 1 is longer in relation to antenna 2 in female than in male.</p> <p>Distribution: coast of Northumberland (type location), Wales, Iceland, Norwegian coast (west to north), Spitsbergen both southwestern coast and north-eastern sounds (Tandberg et al., in press), Murman coast, Helgoland, Skagerrak, Bohuslän, East Greenland, the Gulf of St Lawrence, Ungava Bay, Northern Coast of Maine, see map Figure 64 C.</p> <p>Ecology: Sars (1892) mentions this species being found among hydroidae in colder waters. It has been found down to 50 m depth according to Stephensen (1938), but Lincoln (1979) has a depth range of 20– 750 m. Tandberg et al. (in press) found it living inside the mussels Musculus niger and M.discors, much like Metopa glacialis (Vader &amp; Beehler (1983); Tandberg et al. (subm)). It is also associated with medusae (Vader, 1972).</p> <p>The name alderii refers to J. Alder (Esq.) for whom Bate named the species.</p> <p>Other material. The type-material from Sars of Metopa spectabilis has also been examined, the difference being in size, with the excavation of the palm of male gnathopod 2 being more pronounced. Material from Hinlopen strait collected 2009 has been examined, and was found in perfect accordance with the older material from Sars.</p> <p>Remarks. Already Sars (1892) commented that his Metopa spectabilis was very close to Bates Metopa (Montagua) alderi, but the synonymization was not carried out until Dahl (1946) formalised it, discussing that M. alderi might be the younger/smaller form of the adult M. spectabilis.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB036675FF26AFC8FC1EBEA1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB0D6676FF26ADE2FC7DBCD4.text	931B5117FB0D6676FF26ADE2FC7DBCD4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa boeckii Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa boeckii Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa boeckii Sars 1892: 252–54, fig. 88</p> <p>Metopa bruzelii —Boeck 1871, non Metopa bruzelii (Goës, 1866): 522</p> <p>Metopa borealis — Sars 1885 (part)</p> <p>Metopa boeckii — Stephensen 1926: 68, Stephensen 1928: 164, pl. 30:13–15, Stephensen 1931: 186; Stephensen 1938: 173</p> <p>Metopa boeckii — Gurjanova 1951: 423–24, fig. 266</p> <p>Metopa boeckii — Oldevig 1959: 44; Bousfield 1973: 289</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13745 (collect G.O. Sars, Tjøtøy (Helgeland)). Female and male.</p> <p>Type locality: probably Haugesund, (collected by Boeck and identified by Sars), or Tjøtø, North Norwegian coast.</p> <p>See figures 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18</p> <p>Morphological redescription of material collected by original author.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 14): medium sized and rounded, epistome flat; eyes approximately 1/3 of head length, round, well defined. Antenna 1 (Fig. 14): long and slender, a little longer than half body length; peduncle article 2 longer than article 1; flagellum 12-articulate, longer than flagellum; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 14): subequal in length to antenna 1; peduncle double length of flagellum, articles 4 and 5 subequal in length; peduncle 12-articulate, naked. Mandible (Fig. 15): palp 2-articulate, oval in cross-section, two simple setae at apex; incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 15): inner plate somewhat reduced, one simple seta; outer plate narrow, four simple setae at distal margin; palp 1-articulate with one tooth and four cuspidate setae at distal margin. Maxilla 2: this mouthpart was lost. Maxilliped (Fig. 15): long and narrow, naked; inner plates fused; outer plate totally reduced; palp slender, 4-articulate.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig. 14): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 16): simple; coxa small, subquadrate; basis long and linear, somewhat flat at anterior margin; ischium subquadrate; merus distally not free, but the posterordistal margin produced a little, few long simple and pectinate setae; carpus elongate, several simple setae along posterior margin, few simple and pectinate setae at distal margin; propodus not as long as carpus but as wide as carpus, no palm, but area dactylus meets is delimited by a row of short simple setae; dactylus curved, few simple short setae at inner margin. Pereopod 2 (Figs. 16 (female) and 17(male)): coxa covering coxa 1, oval (male) to suboval (female), few simple short setae at posterior margin; basis linear; ischium subquadrate; merus spoonshaped, triangular (male) to elongate (female); carpus spoon-shaped, subtriangular, row of simple setae along distal margin; propodus subtriangular, palm oblique (wider angle in male than in female), serrate (more coarsely so in male) and lined with simple setae, palmar corner set off by a strong tooth and a cuspidate seta, hind margin subequal to palm length; dactylus curved, with a flat naked inner margin. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 16): coxa subrectangular, lined with simple short setae at distal margin; rest of leg thin and elongate with linear basis, very few and simple setae; dactylus simple, reaching 0.6x propodus. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 17): coxa subtriangular, rest of leg simple, slightly thicker than P3 and with more simple setae along posterior margin; dactylus curved and simple, reaching 0.75x propodus. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 18): coxa small, weakly produced posteriorly; basis slender; meral lobe reaching 1/3 of carpus; dactylus curved, thin and simple, reaching 0.6x propodus; anterior margin of leg with short simple setae. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 18): coxae small, coxa 7 produced towards posterior margin of basis 7; bases posteriorly expanded; meral lobes reaching 0.5x and 0.6x of carpus respectively; dactyli smooth, P7 dactylus curved slightly more than that of P6, both reaching 0.6x propodus; anterior margin of legs with simple setae, more dense in P6 than in P7.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 14): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 18): posterodistal corner slightly acute angle. Uropod 1 (Fig. 18): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, rami subequal in length; very slender, few and simple setae both at peduncle and rami. Uropod 2 (Fig. 18): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, one simple seta at distal margin; rami subequal, outer ramus slightly shorter than inner, one simple seta on inner article. Uropod 3 (Fig. 18): uniramous; peduncle longer and wider than ramus, five simple setae along inner margin; ramus 2-articulate, articles subequal, one simple seta at inner article. Telson (Fig. 17): tongue-shaped, length slightly less than 2x width, two pairs of cuspidate setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: Gnathopod 2 is different in male and female, the male having a more coarsely serrate palm with a larger tooth at the palmar corner and the palm more oblique than the female.</p> <p>Distribution: Arctic to Atlantic: Spitsbergen, Norwegian coast, SE Iceland, West Greenland, Gulf of St. Lawrence, see map Figure 64 D.</p> <p>Ecology: found at depths from 10–170 m.</p> <p>The name boeckii refers to Axel Boeck, Sars’ colleague, for whom the species was named.</p> <p>Other material. Material collected during cruises at Spitsbergen 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2009 has also been examined, and been found to be in compliance with the material from Sars.</p> <p>Remarks. Sars (1892) comments that he earlier had confused this species with Metopa borealis, and that Boeck must have confused it with M. bruzelii, as his specimens were not in accordance with the specimens Goes had for M. bruzelii. He further mentioned that the slender antennae and the shape of gnathopod 2 (for both sexes) should help distinguish this species from the related species. Also the setation (armature) of uropod 3 and telson are mentioned as distinguishing characters.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB0D6676FF26ADE2FC7DBCD4	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB0E6677FF26A838FBFBBA6F.text	931B5117FB0E6677FF26A838FBFBBA6F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa borealis Sars 1883	<div><p>Metopa borealis Sars, 1883</p> <p>Metopa borealis Sars 1883: 91, fig. 4; Sars 1892: 254–55, pl. 89–1</p> <p>Metopa borealis — Hansen 1888: 91–92, pl. III-4</p> <p>Metopa borealis — Reibisch 1905: 32; Chevreux &amp; Fage 1925: 126–27, fig. 124</p> <p>Metopa borealis — Stephensen 1926: 69; Stephensen 1928: 166–67, fig. 31:7–8; Stephensen 1938: 175</p> <p>Metopa borealis — Gurjanova 1951: 432–33, fig. 277</p> <p>Metopa borealis — Bousfield 1973: 298; Lincoln 1979: 184, figs. 81f, 83a–g</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13834 (coll G.O.Sars, Hjelmeland) female 4.5 mm and male 4 mm.</p> <p>Photo: F13738 (coll G.O.Sars Norv. Occid) Syntype.</p> <p>Type locality: west Norway.</p> <p>See figures 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of male and female material collected and identified by author.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 20): small and rounded, epistome flat; eyes 0.3x head length, round, well defined. Antenna 1 (Fig. 20): short and stout; slightly shorter than antenna 2, little more than 1/4 of body length; peduncle short, article 1 as long as articles 2 and 3 combined; flagellum almost double length of peduncle, 11 articles; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 20): slimmer than antenna 1; peduncle 1.5–2x length of flagellum, articles four and five subequal in length; flagellum consisting of eight articles, one simple seta at apex. Labrum (Fig. 20): rounded. Mandible (Fig. 20): palp 2-articulate, inner article short and subquadrate, article 2 suboval, few simple setae, palp cross-section oval; incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate and well developed, raker setae cuspidate; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 20): inner plate small and rounded, one simple seta; outer plate oval, distal margin with five thick simple setae and one tooth, a row of thin simple setae along inner margin; palp 1-articulate, distal margin coarsely serrate, with few short simple setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 20): outer plate in normal position to inner plate; inner plate with five and outer plate with six long simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 20): long and slender; inner plates fullly separate, two simple setae apically; outer plate reduced; palp 4-articulate, thinly setaed along inner margin, article 4 lined with a row of simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig. 19): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 21): simple; coxa small, subcircular; basis linear; ischium subquadrate; merus subtriangular, distally free, a row of simple setae and setae type A at distal margin; carpus subrectangular, several simple seate along posterior margin; propodus with flat posterior margin, no palmar corner, subequal in length to carpus, but less wide; dactylus simple, thin, straight. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 21): coxa subrectangular, covering coxa 1, directed forwards; basis simple and linear; ischium subquadrate; merus oval, cup-shaped; carpus triangular, cup-shaped, with a line of simple setae along distal margin; propodus subrectangular, palm oblique, serrate and lined with simple setae, palmar corner set off by small tooth, hind margin longer than palm; dactylus simple and curved, smooth. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 22): coxa suboval; basis linear, few simple setae along lower anterior margin; rest of leg slim and simple; dactylus simple and curved, reaching 0.5x propodus. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 22): coxa rounded triangular; rest of leg slim and simple, few simple setae along posterior margin of propodus; dactylus simple and curved, 0.5x propodus. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 22): coxa small, weakly extended posteriorly; basis slender; meral lobe reaching 0.5x carpus length; dactylus slightly curved and slender, 0.5x propodus. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Figs. 22 and 23): coxae small; bases posteriorly extended; meral lobes reaching 0.7x and 0.6x of carpal length respectively, both meri lined with simple setae posteriorly; dactyli simple and curved, reaching 0.6x and 0.5x propodus length; few simple setae along both legs.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 19): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 19): posterodistal corner right angled. Uropod 1 (Fig. 23): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, six cuspidate setae along proximal part of peduncle; rami subequal, outer ramus with two and inner ramus with one cuspidate setae. Uropod 2 (Fig. 23): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle slightly longer than rami; inner ramus shorter than outer ramus. Uropod 3 (Fig. 23): uniramous; peduncle slightly shorter and thicker than ramus, one cuspidate seta at distal margin; ramus 2-articulate, inner article longer than outer article, one small cuspidate seta on each article. Telson (Fig. 23): tongue-shaped, curled up a little along the edges in the weak copy of a boat-shape; one pair of minute cuspidate setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences observed.</p> <p>Distribution: Gulf of St. Lawrence, north-east Greenland, coast of Norway, eastern Murman coast, North Sea, Scotland, see map Figure 65 E.</p> <p>Ecology: it is registered at localities of 9–180 m depth (Lincoln (1979) mentions it only down to 50 m), in cold water. Stephensen (1928) mentions it being found on fine sand.</p> <p>The name borealis refers to the the northern distribution of the species.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB0E6677FF26A838FBFBBA6F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB0F6670FF26A9B7FDF6B8BF.text	931B5117FB0F6670FF26A9B7FDF6B8BF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa invalida Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa invalida Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa invalida Sars 1892: 267–69, pl. 94–2</p> <p>Metopa alderi (part)—Boeck 1871: pl. XVII fig 4 and 4k</p> <p>Metopa invalida — Stephensen 1938: 176; Gurjanova 1951: 429, fig. 272; Dunbar 1954: 733</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13733 (coll G.O. Sars, no locality on label) female.</p> <p>Type locality: probably sample F13732, coll G.O.Sars, locality Hammerfest.</p> <p>See figures 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of material sampled and identified by original author.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 24): small and round; cephalic lobe rounded; eye large, 0.5x head length, round, well defined. Antenna 1 (Fig. 25): short and mildly stocky; peduncle as long as flagellum, article 1 as long as article 2; flagellum 11-articulate, distal articles with 2 simple setae each; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 24): slightly longer than antenna 1; peduncle 2x flagellum length, article 4 and 5 subequal; flagellum 6- articulate. Labrum (Fig. 25): rounded. Mandible (Fig. 25): palp 1-articulate, short and stubby, one simple short seta at apex; incisor serrate; lacinia mobilis weakly serrate but well defined; raker setae strong and cuspidate; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 25): inner lobe small and rounded, one simple seta; outer plate distal margin flat, two long and one short cuspidate setae, two serrate setae, a row of 11 simple setae along inner margin; palp 1- articulate, one tooth and one cuspidate seta apically, distal margin serrate with simple setae in each nook, simple setae along margins. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 25): slender; outer plate in normal position to inner plate; inner plate with six and outer plate with six setae each. Maxilliped (Fig. 25): long and somewhat slim, but not as slim as those mentioned above; inner plates partially separate, with a rounded nook and three simple setae distally on each lobe; outer plate reduced; palp 4-articulate, inner two articles with minute setae along outer margin and simple setae along inner margin, article 3 with a cushion of short simple setae and a few pectinate setae at distal margin, article 4 lined with short simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig 24): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 26): simple; coxa subquadrate; basis elongate and slim; ischium subquadrate; merus suboval, cushioned with short simple setae along posterior margin and simple setae and type A setae along distal margin; carpus elongate subtriangular, long simple and type A setae along distal margin; propodus longer and slimmer than carpus, posterior margin lined with minute and longer simple setae, no palmar corner; dactylus 0.5x propodus length, curved, inner margin with some simple setae. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 26): coxa suboval, covering coxa 1, directed forwards; basis linear; ischium and merus subquadrate; carpus cup-shaped subtriangular, cushioned with short, simple setae at posterior margin and lined with type A setae at distal margin; propodus subrectangular, elongate, palm oblique, weakly crenulate with a few short simple setae, hind margin 1.5x palm length, with sets of two simple setae; dactylus simple and curved, as long as palm. Pereopod 3 (Fig 27): coxa subrectangular, with simple setae along posterior margin, slightly longer than coxa 2; rest of leg slim and simple; basis with several simple setae along both anterior and posterior margin; dactylus slim and simple, 0.4x propodus length. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 27): coxa rounded triangular, large; rest of leg simple and about as thin as P3, more setae than P3; dactylus 0.5x propodus length, slim, curved and simple. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 28): coxa small; basis slim, linear, lined with simple setae along both anterior and posterior margin; meral lobe 1/3 of carpus; simple setae along most of anterior margin of leg; dactylus 0.5x propodus length, curved and slim. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 28): coxae small, coxa 6 posteriorly expanded; bases posteriorly expanded, lined with simple setae along anterior margins; meral lobes reaching 0.5x of carpus for both legs; dactyli slim and simple, 0.7x and 0.5x of propodus, respectively.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 24): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 24): posterodistal corner right angled. Uropod 1 (Fig. 28): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, three simple setae along inner margin; rami subequal. Uropod 2 (Fig. 28): a little longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle shorter than inner ramus, three simple setae along inner margin; outer ramus shorter than inner ramus, inner ramus with several simple setae along inner margin. Uropod 3 (Fig. 28): uniramous; peduncle shorter than ramus, two simple setae along inner margin, peduncle wider than ramus; ramus 2-articulate, inner article slightly longer than outer article, inner article with one simple seta at distal margin. Telson (Fig. 27): elongate with length 2.5x width; tip rounded; naked.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences found.</p> <p>Distribution: North-Norwegian coast, among hydroids, Ungava Bay, see map Figure 65 F.</p> <p>Ecology: among hydroids, 70–80 m depth, cold water.</p> <p>The name invalida (weak/powerless) probably refers to the weak gnathopods.</p> <p>Remarks. The fact that the mandible-palp is 1-articulate and short takes this out of the clear definition of Metopa, which includes specifically a 2–3 articulate mandible-palp (Boeck, 1872; Barnard &amp; Karaman, 1991). A species with a 1-articulated mandible palp, but else in all characters like a Metopa would fall into Stenula Barnard (1962). As both the genrera Metopa and Stenula are being examined for their combined phylogeny (Tandberg &amp; Vader in prep), a possible move of M. invalida will not be suggested here. Even though the probable type-material was not dissected for examination here, the dissected material was collected by the original author.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB0F6670FF26A9B7FDF6B8BF	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB096672FF26AC92FBBFBD14.text	931B5117FB096672FF26AC92FBBFBD14.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa leptocarpa Sars 1883	<div><p>Metopa leptocarpa Sars, 1883</p> <p>Metopa leptocarpa Sars 1883: 91, pl. 4–3; Sars 1892: 265–66, pl. 93-2</p> <p>Metopa leptocarpa — Della Valle 1893: 639, fig. 59–53</p> <p>Metopa leptocarpa — Stephensen 1938: 173–74; Gurjanova 1951: 427–28, fig. 269</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13735 (det: G.O.Sars, no locality noted) Holotype, female. The specimen was already dissected.</p> <p>Type locality: from Sars (1892) it seems the holotype and single specimen in the Oslo collections must come from Kristiansund, north-west coast of Norway, depth 110–145 m.</p> <p>See figures 29, 30, 31 and 32.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of female type material.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 29): small and rounded, cephalic lobe acute, with a small and rounded lobe next to basis of antenna 2; eyes small, 1/3 length of head, and rounded, well defined. Antenna 1 (Fig. 29): short and stocky; peduncle article 1 broader and longer than rest of peduncle, as long as article 2; flagellum 8-articulate, as long as peduncle, two simple setae apically; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 29): broken in examined material; peduncle as long as all of antenna 1, peduncle article 4 and 5 subequal in length, all of peduncle slimmer than article one of antenna 1 peduncle. Labrum (Fig. 29): rounded. Mandible (Fig. 29): palp missing after dissection, but is drawn on the head-drawing in Sars (1892), even though no mouthparts are described in his text; incisor and lacinia mobilis crenulate but well defined; raker setae broad plates flat and serrate distally; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 29): inner plate rounded, one simple seta apically; outer plate flat distally, one tooth, two short and three long cuspidate setae, a row of minute simple setae along inner margin; palp 1-articulate, one tooth and one largish cuspidate seta distally, serrate inner margin lined with simple setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 29): outer plate in normal position to inner plate, rounded; four and six simple setae distally respectively. Labium (Fig. 29): pointed, lined with simple setae along inner margin. Maxilliped (Fig. 30): long and semislender; inner plates fully separate, two distal simple setae on each lobe; outer plate with a small elongation along inner margin, wider than palp; palp 4-articulate, inner margin of first two articles lined with simple setae, article 3 with a cushion of simple setae at inner distal margin, article 4 lined with simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon: smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 30): subchelate; coxa subquadrate, small; basis elongate, straight, lined with simple setae along anterior margin; ischium and merus short, merus subtriangular with a cushion of short simple setae along posterior margin; carpus elongate and very narrow, 2/3 length of basis and slightly narrower, a few simple setae along posterior margin; propodus narrow and elongate, length almost 4x width, which is slightly flaring at distal margin, palm transverse, smooth, lined with a few simple setae, palmar corner set off by one cuspidate seta; dactylus as long as palm, curved, inner margin naked, three simple setae along proximal outer margin. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 30): coxa suboval; basis straight and linear; ischium subquadrate; merus subtriangular; carpus cup-shaped and subtriangular with a cushion of short simple setae at posterior margin, distal margin with longer simpler setae; propodus subrectangular, palm oblique, smooth with simple setae, palmar corner set off by a tooth and two cuspidate setae, hind margin as long as palm; dactylus as long as palm before tooth, smooth and slightly curved. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 31): coxa subrectangular; basis slender and straight; meral lobe reaching 1/3 of carpal length, dactylus slim and curved, propodus 2.5x dactylus length. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 31): coxa rounded triangular; rest of leg simple; meral lobe reaching 0.4x carpus; dactylus simple and curved, 0.5x propodus. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 31): coxa subquadrate; basis slender and straight; meral lobe 0.6x carpus, two simple setae at distal margin of lobe; dactylus curved and simple, 0.4x propodus. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 32): coxae small and rounded, coxa 6 slightly elongated posteriorly; bases posteriorly expanded; meral lobes 0.6x and 0.7x carpal length, respectively; both legs with sparse setation of simple short setae mainly along anterior margin; dactyli simple and curved, both with a tiny notch at tip.</p> <p>Urosome: smooth. Epimeral plate 3: posterodistal corner acute. Uropod 1 (Fig. 32): slightly longer than uropod 2; biramous, peduncle almost 2x rami length, one simple seta at distal margin; rami slightly uneven in length, outer ramus a little shorter than inner ramus. Uropod 2 (Fig. 32): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle almost 3x rami length, one simple seta at distal margin; rami subequal, naked. Uropod 3 (Fig. 32): uniramous; peduncle shorter and wider than ramus, with a small extension at distal margin along ramus; ramus 2-articulate, the articles subequal in length; two setae at inner margin of peduncle and two setae distally at article 1 of the ramus. Telson (Fig. 31): rounded and tongue-shaped, rather broad with length less than 2x width, naked.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences are noted.</p> <p>Distribution: West Norway (Christiansund, type locality), SW of Iceland, Laptev Sea, see map Figure 66 G.</p> <p>Ecology: has been found at 20–1505 m depth.</p> <p>The name leptocarpa refers to the very long carpus on gnathopod 1.</p> <p>Remarks. This species is very easily distinguishable from other Metopa by the very elongate carpus of gnathopod 1, and to some degree also by the long peduncles of uropods 1 and 2.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB096672FF26AC92FBBFBD14	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB0A6673FF26AE78FCAEBCF1.text	931B5117FB0A6673FF26AE78FCAEBCF1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa longicornis Boeck 1871	<div><p>Metopa longicornis Boeck, 1871</p> <p>Metopa longicornis Boeck 1871: 63; Boeck 1872:460–62, pl. XIX - 1</p> <p>Metopa longicornis — Hansen 1888: 97, Tab. IV, fig. 1</p> <p>Metopa longicornis — Sars 1892: 259–59, pl. 90-2</p> <p>Metopa longicornis — Stephensen 1926: 68; Stephensen 1928: 167–68, fig. 31:13–15; Stephensen 1931: 188; Stephensen 1938: 174</p> <p>Metopa longicornis — Gurjanova 1951: 426–27, fig. 268</p> <p>Metopa longicornis — Dunbar 1954: 732; Shoemaker 1955: 20; Just 1980:48, fig. 46</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F2362, (det: G.O. Sars, Nansen Expedition, 78°29’N, 136°E, 24.10.1893) female, 4.5 mm.</p> <p>Type locality: Christianiafjord (Oslofjord).</p> <p>See figures 33, 34, 35 and 36.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of female specimen identified by Sars.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 33): small and rounded, cephalic lobe subacute; eyes small and round, well defined, 1/4 of head length. Antenna 1 (Fig. 34): longer than antenna 2, slender; flagellum longer than peduncle, peduncle article 2 longer than article 1, article 3 shorter than both articles 1 and 2; flagellum broken in examined material, but in photographed specimens (from same tube of samples as dissected material), the flagellum consists of 13 articles; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 34): also long and slender; flagellum slightly shorter than peduncle; peduncle articles 4 and 5 subequal in length; flagellum with eight articles, each with two short simple setae distally. Labrum (Fig. 34): evenly rounded. Mandible (Fig. 34): palp 3-articulate, third article tiny, second article long, first article as long as diameter, cross-section of palp circular, one seta at each of articles 2 and 3; incisor narrow and crenulate; lacinia mobilis similarly narrow but serrate; raker setae serrated and cuspidate; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 34): inner lobe elongate, one simple seta at distal margin; outer lobe broad and with straight distal margin, armed with three long and two short cuspidate and two long serrate setae, inner margin lined with simple setae; palp 1-articulate, with a tooth at apex, and a slightly serrate inner distal margin with a simple seta in each nook, minute simple setae along outer margin. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 34): outer plate in normal position to inner plate; inner plate with three long and four short setae and outer plate with seven long and seven short simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 34): long and narrow; inner plates fully separate, one tiny seta at distal margin of each lobe; outer plate completely reduced; palp 4-articulate, with very few setae before distal margin of article 3, which is cushioned with short simple setae, and inner margin of article 4, which is lined with simple setae.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig. 33): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 35): simple; coxa subquadrate; basis straight and naked; ischium subquadrate; merus oval and boat-shaped, cushioned with short simple setae along posterior margin, with three long simple setae at distal margin; carpus elongate, length 2x width, lined with simple setae at posterior margin; propodus simple, four very thin and simple setae along posterior margin; dactylus almost as long as posterior margin propodus, with a sharp curve at tip, smooth. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 35): coxa oval, covering coxa 1, directed forwards; basis slender and straight; ischium subquadrate; merus subtriangular, one type A seta at distal margin; carpus subtriangular, with a cushion of simple short setae along posterior margin and a row of simple setae and setae type A along distal margin; propodus subrectangular, palm oblique, weakly crenulate with alternating tiny and small simple setae, palmar corner set off by two longer cuspidate setae, palm subequal in length to hind margin; dactylus as long as palm, smooth and slightly curved at tip. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 35): coxa subrectangular; basis slim and straight, rest of leg slim and simple; dactylus 0.4 length of propodus, simple and slighty curved. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 36): coxa rounded triangular; rest of leg slim and simple, with a few simple setae along both anterior and posterior margins; dactylus 0.5x propodus length, smooth and slightly curved. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 36): coxa small; basis slender and straight; rest of leg simple and narrow; dactylus short, curved. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 36): coxae small; bases posteriorly extended; meral lobe 0.15x and 0.3x of carpal length, respectively; simple setae along both anterior and posterior margins of both legs; dactyli 0.5x propodus length in both legs, very weakly curved, and smooth.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 33): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 33): posterodistal corner acute. Uropod 1 (Fig. 36): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle 2x length of rami, rami subequal. Uropod 2 (Fig. 36): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami; outer ramus longer than inner. Uropod 3 (Fig. 36): uniramous; peduncle shorter than ramus; ramus 2-articulate, first article longer than second. Telson (Fig. 35): elongate, length almost 3x width, tip rounded, 3 pairs of tiny cuspidate setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences described.</p> <p>Distribution: Norwegian coast (Oslofjord (type locality) and Lofoten islands), NE Greenland, W Greenland, Ungava Bay, Davis strait, Alaska, Laptev Sea, see map Figure 66 H.</p> <p>Ecology: has been found at 30–110 m depth.</p> <p>The name longicornis refers to the antennae being long.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB0A6673FF26AE78FCAEBCF1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB0B666CFF26A812FCD4B951.text	931B5117FB0B666CFF26A812FCD4B951.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa palmata Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa palmata Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa palmata Sars 1892: 272–73, pl. 96–2</p> <p>Metopa palmata — Stephensen 1931: 182; Stephensen 1938: 170</p> <p>Metopa palmata — Gurjanova 1951: 420, fig. 259</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13739 (coll: G.O.Sars, Hammerfest) male. Holotype.</p> <p>Already dissected by Sars, no specimen to calibrate size against.</p> <p>Type locality: Hammerfest, north Norway.</p> <p>See figures 37, 38, 39 and 40.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of male type material.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 37): small; cephalic lobe rounded, and an extra lobe produced somewhat in front of antenna 2 peduncle article 2; eyes large, 1/2 of head length, rounded, defined. Antenna 1 (Fig. 37): thickset; peduncle slightly shorter than flagellum, article 1 longer than articles 2 and 3 together; flagellum 14-articulate with short simple setae; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 37): longer and thinner than antenna 1; peduncle longer than flagellum, article 5 slightly longer than article 4; flagellum 10-articulate, two simple setae on each article. Labrum (Fig. 37): rounded. Mandible (Fig. 37): palp 1-articulate, circular in crosssection, four simple setae along palp; incisor and lacinia mobilis (right mandible) serrate; raker setae flat with serrated tips; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 38): inner lobe small and narrow, one simple seta; outer lobe with flat distal margin, seven cuspidate and six simple setae; palp 1-articulate, one tooth, five cuspidate setae, three long simple setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 37): outer lobe in normal position to inner lobe; inner lobe with 17 and outer lobe with 13 setae. Labium (Fig. 37): rounded. Maxilliped (Fig. 38): small and slender; inner plates fully separate, three simple setae at distal margin; outer plates reduced; palp 4-articulate, third article with a cushion of short simple setae at inner distal margin, fourth article lined with short setae at inner margin, few simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon: the specimen was dissected by G.O.Sars, and so the pereon was not observed. From the illustrations in Sars (1892), the pereon is smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 38): simple; coxa small and subquadrate; basis narrow and linear; ischium subrectangular; merus elongate and narrow; carpus elongate, 1.5x propodus length; propodus narrow and linear, elongate; dactylus boat-shaped, lined with simple seta around edge, length 1.5x width, depth 0.5x width. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 39): coxa much larger than coxa 1, suboval, three simple setae along posterior margin, directed forwards, and so probably covering coxa 1; basis linear; ischium and merus subtriangular, lines of simple setae along distal margins; carpus short, a row of simple setae and type A setae along distal margin; propodus subrectangular, length 1.3x width, palm transverse, smooth and armed with long simple setae, palmar corner rectangular, hind margin 2x palm length, a brush of simple setae along posterodistal margin; dactylus strong and smooth, almost as long as palm, and folding in over the side of propodus before palmar corner. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 39): coxa subrectangular, three simple setae along posterior margin; basis slightly curved and not expanded; meral lobe 0.2x carpus length; rest of leg simple; dactylus slim and curved, 0.4x propodus length. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 39): coxa subtriangular, large; rest of leg more stocky than that of P3; meral lobe 0.3x carpus length; carpus and propodus with brushes of 2–3 short simple setae along posterior margins; dactylus stocky and curved, 0.6x propodus length, distal inner margin serrate. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 39): coxa small, slightly extended posteriorly; basis not expanded and straight, lined with minute simple setae along posterior margin; meral lobe 0.8x propodus length; merus, carpus and propodus lined with minute simple setae along anterior and posterior (merus) margins; dactylus slightly curved, tip with extra notch, length 0.5x propodus. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 40): coxae small, coxa 6 sligthly extended posterodistally; bases expanded anteriorly, subcircular; meral lobes as long as (P6) or 1.3x (P7) that of carpal length, dactyli with notch at distal margin, slightly curved, 0.4x and 0.5x propodus length respectively.</p> <p>Urosome: from Sars (1892) this is smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 40): posterodistal corner rounded sharp angle, approximately 60°. Uropod 1 (Fig. 40): approximately as long as U2 (from Sars (1892) it is much longer than U2); biramous; peduncle with a flat inner margin, longer than rami, armed with 11 simple setae along the edges of inner margin; outer ramus minutely longer than inner, two simple setae, inner ramus naked. Uropod 2 (Fig. 40): longer than U3; biramous; peduncle with flat inner margin, armed with five simple setae, longer than rami; rami subequal, outer ramus with two simple setae, inner ramus naked. Uropod 3 (Fig. 40): uniramous; peduncle shorter than ramus, armed with three simple setae along inner margin, broader than ramus, a minute flare at distal margin; ramus 2-articulate, inner article longer and broader than outer margin, two distal setae, outer article naked. Telson (Fig. 40): length 1.75x width, tip rounded, three pairs of cuspidate setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences described, in all very few specimens described. Sars (1892) only saw one "probably not fully mature" male, which is what was examined here.</p> <p>Distribution: Northern Norway and West Iceland, see map Figure 67 I.</p> <p>Ecology: The species has only been found at Hammerfest and Iceland.</p> <p>The name palmata ("webbed") is not commented by Sars, but it is very probable this is a comment on the dactylus of pereopod 1.</p> <p>Remarks. As with Metopa invalida we suggest this species might be moved closer to Stenula, since the mandible palp is 1-articulate. The boat-shaped dactylus of pereopod 1 is also supporting a move of this species to another genus. As with M. invalida this suggestion will wait until the phylogenetic analysis of the genera Metopa and Stenula (Tandberg &amp; Vader in prep).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB0B666CFF26A812FCD4B951	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB14666EFF26AAB2FF18BD41.text	931B5117FB14666EFF26AAB2FF18BD41.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa propinqua Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa propinqua Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa propinqua Sars 1892: 264–65, pl. 93-1</p> <p>Metopa propinqua — Stebbing 1906: 174; Brüggen 1909</p> <p>Metopa propinqua — Metopa propinqua Stephensen 1926: 67; Stephensen 1928: 170–71, fig. 32:7–9; Stephensen 1938: 168–69;</p> <p>Metopa propinqua — Shoemaker 1930: 263; Shoemaker 1955: 22</p> <p>Metopa propinqua — Gurjanova 1951: 434–35, fig. 280; Dunbar 1954: 725–27, fig. 7</p> <p>Metopa propinqua — Oldevig 1959: 45; Bousfield 1973: 289; Lincoln 1979: 190, figs. 81g, 86a–h</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13711 (coll: G.O.Sars, Trondheimsfjord) ovigerous female, 2.5 mm. Syntype.</p> <p>Photo: F13711, syntype.</p> <p>Type locality: Trondheimsfjord (at Bejan or Rødberget), Norway.</p> <p>See figures 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of female type material.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 41): small and rounded, cephalic lobe rounded; eyes small and round, less than 1/3 of head length. Antenna 1 (Fig. 42): thin, half body length; peduncle 0.7x flagellum length, article 1 as long as articles 2 and 3 together; flagellum 12-articulate, a minute seta at each article; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 42): as slender as antenna 1, slightly shorter than antenna 1; peduncle 1.2x flagellum, articles 4 and 5 subequal in length; flagellum with nine articles, each with a small simple seta. Labrum (Fig. 42): rounded. Mandible (Fig. 42): palp 2-articulate, round in cross-section, narrow, first article about as long as wide, second article almost 4x length of first, one simple seta at distal end; incisor and lacinia mobilis sharply serrate; raker setae with serrate edges; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 42): inner lobe small, narrow, one simple seta at apex; outer lobe with flat distal margin, four cuspidate setae and one type A seta; palp 1-articulate, tooth at distal margin, slightly serrate inner margin with one simple seta in each nook. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 42): outer plate in normal position to inner plate, inner plate with 10 and outer plate with 14 setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 42): long and slim; inner plates fully separate, one minute seta at each distal margin; outer plate reduced; palp 4- articulate, article 3 with a cushion of short simple setae at distal inner margin and some long simple and pectinate setae at distal margin; article 4 lined with short simple setae at inner margin, curved (the illustration shows this a bit stronger than in reality, this is an artefact of the orientation of the mouthpart on the microscopic slide).</p> <p>Pereon (Fig. 41): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 43): simple; coxa small and subquadrate; basis slim and straight; ischium subquadrate; merus subtriangular, with posterior margin cushioned with simple setae, distal margin lined with longer simple and pectinate setae; carpus elongate, posterior margin with long simple and pectinate setae; propodus 0.8x carpal length, simple, less wide than carpus, narrowing at distal end, posterior margin with long simple setae; dactylus strong, 0.7x propodus length, inner margin crenulate, lined with simple setae, curved at tip. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 43): coxa suboval, directed forwards, covering coxa 1; basis slim and straight; ischium subquadrate; merus spoon-shaped and slightly elongate with a few long simple setae at posterior margin; carpus subtriangular, carpal lobe wide and free, posterior margin cushioned with short simple setae, distal margin lined with setae type A and simple setae; propodus subtriangular, longer than wide, palm oblique, slightly crenulate, set with simple setae, palmar corner clearly set off by two thick and long setae, hind margin longer than palm; dactylus as long as palm, curved, flat smooth inner margin. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 43): coxa subrectangular; basis slim; meral lobe 0.2x carpal length; rest of leg slim and simple; propodus lined with thin setae along anterior margin; dactylus long and slim, 0.7x propodus length. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 44): coxa subtriangular, distal margin sinuate; basis slim and straight; meral lobe 0.3x carpal length; rest of leg simple with short simple setae along posterior margin; dactylus with serrate inner margin, slightly curved, 0.6x length of propodus. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 44): coxa small, slightly extended posteriorly; basis narrow and straight, with a flat posterior margin; meral lobe 0.7x carpal length; rest of leg simple, sets of type B setae (Tandberg &amp; Vader 2009) along anterior margin; dactylus slim, 0.6x propodus length, sharp notch at tip. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 44): coxae small; bases expanded posteriorly, P7 basis rounded; meral lobes 0.8x or as long as carpus respectively; both legs with short simple setae along both anterior and posterior margins; dactyli slim, curved at tip, which have notches, 0.7x propodus length in both legs.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 45): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 45): posterodistal corner slightly flared right angle, weakly rounded. Uropod 1 (Fig. 45): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle with flat inner margin lined with short setae, as long as rami; rami subequal, outer ramus with few simple setae at proximal margins. Uropod 2 (Fig. 45): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle with flat inner margin lined with short simple setae; outer ramus shorter than inner. Uropod 3 (Fig. 45): uniramous; peduncle shorter than ramus, slightly wider, simple setae along inner margin; ramus 2-articulate, articles subequal in length, inner article with two simple setae. Telson (Fig. 43): length more than 2x width, rounded tip, three pairs of thick setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: Brüggen (1909) described the male gnathopod 2 propodus as subrectangular, palm almost transverse, slightly crenulate, with a deep notch before palmar corner, producing a strong tooth at corner, and dactylus inner margin with minute setae. He further described the anterior margin of carpus as "sehr fein gesagt", a character that also Dunbar (1954) found in his male specimens, but in the examined female specimen from Sars there are no stridulation ridges. No other sexual differences recorded.</p> <p>Distribution: Norwegian coast, North Sea, Bohuslän, Firth of Forth, Barents Sea, Kara Sea, Ungava Bay, Gulf of St Lawrence, Alaska, see map Figure 67 J.</p> <p>Ecology: has been found on Thujaria, and often together with Cressa dubia Bate 1862 and often in subzero temperatures. The depth ranges are noted as between 50 and 130 m.</p> <p>The name propinqua refers to this species being close to other Metopa. Sars (1892) mentioned this species to be M. sinuata, with similarities especially in the shape of coxa 4; at the same time there are clear differences in the shape of the antennae, the second gnathopods, the merus of P3 and the strong setae on uropod 3 and telson.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB14666EFF26AAB2FF18BD41	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB16666FFF26AEC2FB30B951.text	931B5117FB16666FFF26AEC2FB30B951.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa pusilla Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa pusilla Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa pusilla Sars 1892: 256–57, pl. 90–1</p> <p>Metopa pusilla — Stephensen 1926: 68; Stephensen 1928: 167–68, fig. 31:9–12; Stephensen 1931: 188; Stephensen 1938: 174</p> <p>Metopa pusilla — Schellenberg 1942: 121–22; Gurjanova 1951: 421, fig. 261; Oldevig 1959: 44</p> <p>Metopa pusilla — Bushueva 1977: 288–89; Lincoln 1979: 188, Fig. 85a–h; Just 1980: 48, fig. 47</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13712 (coll: G.O.Sars, Haugesund), female, 1.5 mm, syntype.</p> <p>Photo: F13712 Syntype.</p> <p>Type locality: Haugesund, west Norway.</p> <p>See figures 46, 47, 48, 49 and 50.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of female type material.</p> <p>Head (Figs. 46 and 47): small and rounded, cephalic lobe rounded; eye very small and round. Antenna 1 (Fig. 47): almost half body length, slim; peduncle article 1 as long as articles 2 and 3 combined; flagellum with 10 articles and very thin setae at tip. Antenna 2 (Fig. 47): subequal in length to antenna 1 and even more slender; peduncle longer than flagellum, articles 4 and 5 subequal in length; flagellum with eight articles and very thin setae at tip. Mandible (Fig. 47): palp 2–3 articulate (discussion below), circular in cross-section, simple setae at distal margins; incisor and lacinia mobilis stongly serrate; raker setae with a plumose, serrate, flat tip; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 47): inner lobe small, one simple seta; outer lobe with flat distal margin, two serrate thick setae, one thick cuspidate seta, one seta type A and a tooth, simple setae along inner margin; palp 1-articulate, with simple setae along inner margin. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 47): outer plate in normal position to inner plate; inner plate with 10 and outer plate with eight simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 47): slim; inner plates fully separate, two small setae at distal margins; outer plate 0.3x palp article 1 length, one long seta at tip; palp 4- articulate, article 3 with a cushion of short simple setae at inner distal margin, article 4 lined with simple setae at inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig 46): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 48): simple; coxa small, subquadrate; basis slim and straight, as long as merus proximal margin to propodus distal margin; ischium subquadrate; merus suboval, distal margin free, posterior margin cushioned in short simple setae; carpus as long as propodus, slim, several long simple setae along posterior margin; propodus not as wide as carpus, narrowing towards distal margin, posterior margin straight; dactylus slightly curved, 0.6x propodus posterior margin. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 48): coxa suboval, directed forwards, covering coxa 1; basis slim and straight; ischium subquadrate; merus spoon-shaped and subtriangular; carpus subtriangular, spoon-shaped lobe cushioned in short simple setae at posterior margin, lined with setae type A along distal margin; propodus subtriangular, palm oblique, crenulate, with simple setae at the nooks of the crenulations, palmar corner clearly defined by a small tooth and a thicker seta, hind margin slightly longer than palm; dactylus curved, smooth, as long as palm. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 49): coxa subrectangular, three setae along posterior distal margin; rest of leg thin and simple; meral lobe 0.2x carpal length, dactylus thin and curved, smooth, 0.6x propodus length. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 49): coxa subtriangular, rest of leg simple, not as thin as that of P3 and with more setation, especially posterior margins of merus, carpus and propodus; meral lobe 0.3x carpal length; dactylus smooth and curved, 0.5x propodus length. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 50): coxa small, slightly extended posteriorly; basis slender and straight; rest of leg simple, with short simple setae along both anterior and posterir margins; meral lobe 0.25x carpal length; dactylus slim and curved, 0.6x propodus length. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 50): coxae small; bases extended posteriorly; rest of legs simple with simple setae along both anterior and posterior margins; meral lobes o.4x and 0.6x carpal lengths respectively; dactyli smooth and curved, 0.6x and 0.5x propodus length, respectively.</p> <p>Urosome (Figs. 46 and 48): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 48): posterodistal corner rounded right angle. Uropod 1 (Fig. 49): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle shorter than rami, naked; rami subequal. Uropod 2 (Fig. 49): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle shorter than rami, naked; outer ramus slightly shorter than inner ramus. Uropod 3 (Fig. 49): uniramous, slender; peduncle shorter than and almost as narrow as ramus, naked; ramus 2-articulate, articles subequal in length. Telson (Fig. 49): rounded tip, sides curved up, as in a weak boat shape, length 1.5x width of flattened telson, two pairs of cuspidate setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences noted.</p> <p>Distribution: Norwegian coast, Skagerrak, Bohuslän, Wales, Scotland, Spitsbergen, Franz Joseph-land, East Greenland, see map Figure 68 K.</p> <p>Ecology: specimen is fluorescent blue in glycerol under dissecting scope, and almost fluorescent purple in vivo (observation from sampling at Spitsbergen, 2005 and 2007). Sars (1892) also commented on the species being very easy to spot in its live form by the special colouring. Sars (1892) mentions this species from "comparatively shallow water", and among algae and hydroids, Lincoln (1979) mentions the depths to be 5– 50 m.</p> <p>The name pusilla refers to the specimens being very, very small.</p> <p>Other material. Material gathered from sampling at Spitsbergen in 2005 and 2007 has been examined. This new material fits the morphological description of the type-material, with the mandible-palps varying between 2-articulate and 3-articulate. The specimens were very small, adult specimens were found of 1–2mm length. The colour in live animals was a shimmering almost fluorescent purple, which made it quite easy to spot the animals despite their size, this also fits with the comments of Sars (1892).</p> <p>Remarks. The mandible palp being 2–3 articulate in this species can have many reasons, one of them being that the inner article on the left mandible palp was not seen due to its small size. When this is not proposed as the reason it is because smaller characters were easily seen from the same specimen, and even from the same parts, and because of the small size the pieces were translucent, and such it would be even less likely that an article was hidden under the main part of the mandible. It has also been shown in Tandberg &amp; Vader (2009) that the mandible palp in Metopa clypeata had in some specimens two mandible palp articles on one side and three on the other, whereas in other specimens it was three on both sides. Scanning electron microscope examinations of this character in M. clypeata showed that the innermost articulation of the palp clearly was visible in the interior structures, but the cuticle was entire, and thus no articulation present. This character of the inner articulation of the mandible palp might therefore be viewed as plastic.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB16666FFF26AEC2FB30B951	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB176669FF26AAA8FD79BE5F.text	931B5117FB176669FF26AAA8FD79BE5F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa robusta Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa robusta Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa robusta Sars 1892: 270–72, pl. 96-1</p> <p>Metopa robusta — Reibisch 1905: 177</p> <p>Metopa robusta — Stephensen 1925: 5; Stephensen 1926: 68; Stephensen 1928: 168–70, fig. 32:1–6; Stephensen 1931: 180; Stephensen 1938: 168;</p> <p>Metopa robusta — Gurjanova 1951: 417–420, fig. 258; Shoemaker 1955: 22</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13717 (coll: G.O.Sars, Bejan, Trondheimfjord) female. Syntype.</p> <p>Photo: F13717, syntype.</p> <p>Type locality: Trondheimsfjord (at Bejan), Norway.</p> <p>See figures 51, 52, 53, 54 and 55.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of female type material.</p> <p>Head (Figs. 51 and 52): small and somewhat tapering; eyes small and round. Antenna 1 (Fig. 52): subequal to antenna 2; peduncle shorter than flagellum, article 1 as long as articles 2 and 3 together; flagellum with 16 articles, each with a minute seta; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 52): peduncle more than twice as long as flagellum, articles 4 and 5 subequal; flagellum with nine articles. Mandible (Fig. 52): palp 3-articulate, with several simple setae along article 2 and one simple seta at tip of article 3; incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate; raker setae thick; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 52): inner lobe small and rounded; outer lobe flat at distal margin, one tooth, four cuspidate setae and a line of simple setae along inner margin; palp 1-articulate, a tooth at distal margin, serrate inner margin with simple setae in each nook of the serrations, outer margin with very thin simple setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 52): outer plate in normal position to inner plate; inner plate with seven and outer plate with 10 simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 52): long and slender; inner plates fully separate, a single simple seta at distal margin; outer plates very small; 0.2x palp article 1 length, one simple seta at tip; palp 4-articulate, lined with simple setae along inner margins, article 3 cushioned at inner distal margin with short simple setae, and a type A seta at tip, article 4 lined with short simple setae at inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig. 51): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 53): simple; coxa small and subquadrate; basis strong and linear, several simple setae along anterior margin; ischium subquadrate; merus short, almost round, distally free, posterior margin cushioned with very short simple setae, distal margin with several long simple setae; carpus elongate and slim, posterior margin with simple setae; propodus thin and elongate, shorter than carpus, no palm but several simple setae at posterodistal margin; dactylus boat-shaped, lined with short simple setae along ridge, length 1.5x width, depth 0.5x width. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 53): coxa suboval, directed forwards, covering coxa 1, five simple setae at posterior margin; basis straight, anterior margin flat with s few short simple setae; ischium subquadrate; merus triangular, posterodistal margin with long simple setae; carpus short and wide, posterodistal margin with long simple setae; propodus subrectangular, palm almost transverse, smooth with simple setae, palmar corner with small notch and strong tooth, hind margin 2x palm length; dactylus strong and curved, smooth. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 53): coxa subrectangular, five simple setae at posterior margin; rest of leg thin and simple, basis with many simple setae along anterior margin; meral lobe less than 0.1x carpal length; dactylus very thin and long, 0.8x propodus length, almost straight. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 54): coxa triangular, wide, distal margin sinuate; rest of leg simple, broader than P3; meral lobe 0.3x carpal length; dactylus strong, inner margin serrate with a notch at tip, slightly curved. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 54): coxa small, posteriorly slightly extended; basis slim, linear; meral lobe 0.5x carpus length; anterior margin of merus, carpus and propodus lined with pairs of simple setae; dactylus smooth, almost straight, 0.5x propodus length. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 55): coxae small, coxa 6 extended posterodistally; bases extended posteriorly, rounded; meral lobes 1.1x and 1.4x carpus length respectively; dactyli both 0.5x propodus length, slightly serrate and notched at tip, weakly curved.</p> <p>Urosome (Figs. 51 and 55): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 55): posterodistal corner acute, with rounded tip. Uropod 1 (Fig. 55): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, inner margin with five simple setae; outer ramus slightly longer than inner ramus, three simple setae. Uropod 2 (Fig. 54): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, few simple setae at inner margin; outer ramus slightly longer than inner ramus, two small setae. Uropod 3 (Fig. 54): uniramous; peduncle subequal in length but wider than ramus, two small simple setae; ramus 2-articulate, inner article longer than outer, one seta at distal margin. Telson (Fig. 54): boat-shaped, with sides curving up, rounded, length 2x width, two pairs of cuspidate setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences noted.</p> <p>Distribution: Norwegian coast (Trondheimfjord to northern Norway), Skagerrak, Scotland, Faroe Islands, West Greenland, Kara Sea, Tschukotsk Sea, Bering Sea, Alaska, see map Figure 68 L.</p> <p>Ecology: the species is noted by Sars (1892) to have been found among hydroids.</p> <p>The name robusta refers to the "robust" build of the species, and in particular gnathopod 2.</p> <p>Remarks. The gnathopod 1 dactylus being boatshaped like that of Metopa palmata suggests that this species, in spite of its 3-articulate mandible palp, also possibly should be removed from Metopa, but as the mouthparts follow the definitions by both Boeck (1872) and Barnard &amp; Karaman (1991), this is not suggested here. It is, however, clear that the phylogenetic placement of this species should be tested, and this will be done in a forthcoming paper (Tandberg &amp; Vader in prep). The peculiar shape of the pereopod 1 dactylus is a character that should be examined further.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB176669FF26AAA8FD79BE5F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB11666AFF26ADC7FA97BC44.text	931B5117FB11666AFF26ADC7FA97BC44.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa sinuata Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa sinuata Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa sinuata Sars 1892: 263–64, pl. 92-2</p> <p>Metopa sinuata — Stebbing 1906: 174</p> <p>Metopa sinuata — Stephensen 1931: 180; Stephensen 1938: 169; Stephensen 1944: 55</p> <p>Metopa sinuata — Gurjanova 1951: 422–23, fig. 263; Dunbar 1954: 724–25, fig. 6; Oldevig 1959: 45</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F1807 (det: G.O.Sars, Station 280, Bjørnøya, 04.07.1878, Norwegian North Atlantic Expedition) female. (20 eggs)</p> <p>F13864 (det: G.O.Sars, no locality) male.</p> <p>Photo: F13720 Syntype.</p> <p>Type locality: probably Kvaløy in Nordland, north Norway, the locality for the syntype F13720, and mentioned as the first locality in Sars (1892).</p> <p>See figures 56, 57, 58 and 59.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of female material identified by author.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 56): small and round; eyes small and round, 1/3 of head length. Antenna 1 (Fig. 57): shorter than 1/3 of body-length, stout; peduncle as long as flagellum, article 1 as long as articles 2 and 3 combined; flagellum 10-articulate, each with one simple seta; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 57): slightly longer than antenna 1; flagellum shorter than peduncle, peduncle articles 4 and 5 subequal in length; flagellum 9-articulate, the four most distal articles with simple setae. Mandible (Fig. 57): palp 1-articulate, broad at basis, three setae; incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate, raker setae narrow, no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 57): inner plate small and rounded, one simple seta; outer plate flat at distal margin, one tooth, three cuspidate setae, one serrate seta; palp 1-articulate, one tooth on distal margin, 10 small single setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 57): outer plate in normal position to inner plate, inner plate with three and outer plate with seven simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 57): long and narrow; inner plates fully separate, two simple setae distally on each; outer plates almost totally reduced, small knobs reaching 0.1x palp article 1, one long seta at each plate-knob; palp 4-articulate, with long simple setae along inner margins and short thin simple setae along ourter margins, article 3 with a small cushion of very short and thin setae at distal margin, article 4 lined with short simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig. 56): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 58): simple; coxa subquadrate; basis straight and narrow; ischium subquadrate; merus suboval, distally free, posterior margin cushioned with short setae, distal margin with three long type A setae and four simple setae; carpus elongate, long simple setae along posterior margin; propodus not as long as carpus and a little less wide, no palm, hind margin with seven straight simple setae; dactylus narrow and curved, naked. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 58): coxa suboval, directed forwards, covering coxa 1, five simple setae along posterior margin; basis straight with flat anterior margin; ischium subtriangular; merus spoon-shaped, distal margin with long simple setae; carpus subtriangular, distal margin lined with type A setae; propodus subrectangular, palm oblique, palm with simple setae and palmar corner with a small tooth and a thicker seta, hind margin longer than palm; dactylus strong, flat inner margin with small simple setae along middle. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 58): coxa subrectangular, four small simple setae along posterodistal margin; rest of leg slim and simple; meral lobe 0.1x carpal length; dactylus slim and slightly curved, 0.7x propodus length. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 58): coxa subtriangular, distal margin sinuate; rest of leg slim and simple, with more simple setae along both anterior and posterior margin than P3; meral lobe 0.2x length of carpus; dactylus curved and smooth, 0.6x propodus length. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 59): coxa small, posteriorly slightly extended; basis slim and straight; meral lobe 0.5x carpal length; dactylus smooth and curved at tip, 0.7x propodus length. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 59): coxae small; bases extended posteriorly, P7 basis almost round; meral lobes 0.8 and 0.7x carpal lengths respectively; dactyli smooth and curved slightly at the tip, 0.6x and 0.7x propodus lengths.</p> <p>Urosome (Figs. 56 and 59): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 59): posterodistal corner acute. Uropod 1 (Fig. 59): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, six setae along inner margin; rami subequal. Uropod 2 (Fig. 59): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami, six setae along inner margin; outer ramus shorter than inner ramus. Uropod 3 (Fig. 59): uniramous; peduncle longer than ramus, four setae along inner margin; ramus 2-articulate, inner article longer than outer, one seta distally. Telson (Fig. 59): rounded with somewhat pointed tip, three pairs of cuspidate setae; almost twice as long as broad.</p> <p>Sexual differences: gnathopod 2 propodus male with a more oblique and more setose palm, with palmar corner more strongly defined by thick setae, carpal lobe more free from propodus.</p> <p>Distribution: Ungava Bay, Greenland (west and east), Spitsbergen, Franz Joseph-land, Norwegian coast, Faroe Islands, North Sea, see map Figure 69 M.</p> <p>Ecology: known from cold water, Stephensen (1938) notes the species found on Diphasia fallax. Depths are usually littoral to sublittoral.</p> <p>The name sinuata refers to the sinuous distal edge of the coxa 4.</p> <p>Remarks. As M. sinuata, like M. invalida and M. palmata has a 1-articulate mandible palp it is logical to suggest that also this species should be considered removed from Metopa. As mentioned above, this will be examined in a forthcoming paper (Tandberg &amp; Vader in prep), for which this paper is a preparatory work.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB11666AFF26ADC7FA97BC44	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
931B5117FB12666BFF26AFC8FD6CBA21.text	931B5117FB12666BFF26AFC8FD6CBA21.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Metopa tenuimana Sars 1892	<div><p>Metopa tenuimana Sars, 1892</p> <p>Metopa tenuimana Sars 1892: 259–60, pl. 91-1</p> <p>Metopa tenuimana — Stephensen 1931: 189; Stephensen 1944: 58</p> <p>Metopa tenuimana — Gurjanova 1951: 433, fig. 278; Shoemaker 1955: 22</p> <p>Metopa tenuimana — Bousfield 1973: 289; Lincoln 1979: 188, fig. 85i–p; Just 1980: 49, fig 52</p> <p>Material examined. Morphological examination: F13730 (coll: G.O.Sars, Norv. occid.) 3 mm, female. Syntype.</p> <p>Type locality: west Norway. Sars (1892) is uncertain where along the west norwegian coast he found the species, as it was confused with samples of M. pusilla.</p> <p>See figures 1, 60, 61 and 62.</p> <p>Morphological redescription of female type material.</p> <p>Head (Fig. 1B): small and rounded, cephalic lobe rounded; eye small and round, 1/3 of head length. Antenna 1 (Fig. 60): slim, little less than half body length; peduncle shorter than flagellum, article 1 almost as long as articles 2 and 3 together; flagellum 9-articulate, one longish simple seta at each article; no accessory flagellum observed. Antenna 2 (Fig. 60): broken in examined specimen, but probably longer than antenna 1; peduncle article 4 longer than article 5, flagellum articles longish, but flagellum broken. Mandible (Fig. 60): palp 3-articulate, first article short and third article minute, one simple seta at tip of third article; incisor and lacinia mobilis serrate; raker setae narrow; no molar. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 60): inner lobe small, one seta; outer lobe flat at distal margin, one tooth, three cuspidate setae, inner margin lined with simple setae; palp 1-articulate, distal margin with one tooth, three simple setae, inner margin lined with simple setae. Maxilla 2 (Fig. 60): outer lobe normally placed to inner lobe; inner lobe with four and outer lobe with five simple setae. Maxilliped (Fig. 60): long and slim; inner plates with a slight notch at distal margin, but not separate; outer lobe small, 0.3x palp article 1 length; palp 4-articulate, very few setae, palp article 3 with cushion at distal margin, article 4 lined with simple setae along inner margin.</p> <p>Pereon (Fig. 1B): smooth. Pereopod 1 (Fig. 61): simple; coxa small and subquadrate; basis straight and slim; ischium subquadrate, merus suboval, cushioned with simple setae at posterior margin, two type A setae at distal margin; carpus elongate, posterior margin with long simple setae; propodus elongate and slim, no trace of a palm, longer and narrower than carpus; dactylus slightly curved, smooth, 0.5x propodus length. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 61): coxa suboval, directed forwards and covering coxa 1; basis straight and slim, ischium subquadrate; merus subtriangular; carpus cushioned with short simple setae at posterior margin, distal margin lined with type A setae; propodus elongate, distal margin slightly wider than proximal, palm almost transverse but with distal half cut off and a small tooth at palmar corner set below normal line of palm, one strong seta near palmar corner; dactylus as long as palm, curved, naked. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 62): coxa subrectangular; rest of leg slim and simple; meral lobe 0.2x carpus length; dactylus thin and slightly curved, 0.7x propodus length. Pereopod 4 (Fig. 62): coxa rounded triangular, rest of leg slim and simple; meral lobe 0.2x carpus length, dactylus curved and smooth, 0.7x propodus length. Pereopod 5 (Fig. 62): coxa small, somewhat extended posteriorly; basis slender and straight; meral lobe 0.3x of carpus length; strong setae along anterior margin of leg; dactylus slim and smooth, 0.8x propodus length. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 62): coxae small, coxa 6 somewhat extended posterodistally; bases expanded posteriorly; meral lobes reaching 0.5x and 0.7x carpus length respectively, dactyli slightly curved and smooth, 0.7x and 0.6x propodus length.</p> <p>Urosome (Fig. 1B): smooth. Epimeral plate 3 (Fig. 1B): posterodistal corner acute. Uropod 1 (Fig. 61): longer than uropod 2; biramous; peduncle longer than rami; outer ramus slightly longer than inner. Uropod 2 (Fig. 61): longer than uropod 3; biramous; peduncle longer than rami; outer ramus longer than inner. Uropod 3 (Fig. 61): uniramous; peduncle shorter than ramus, one seta at distal margin; ramus 2-articulate, inner article slightly longer than outer, one seta distally. Telson (Fig. 61): shorter than 2x width, slightly rounded tip, two pairs of cuspidate setae.</p> <p>Sexual differences: no sexual differences noted.</p> <p>Distribution: West coast of Norway, Scotland, Shetland, East Greenland, East of Laptev Sea, Alaska, see map Figure 69 N.</p> <p>Ecology: not much is known about this species, and nothing of its ecology.</p> <p>The name tenuimana refers to the small gnathopod 2 of this species.</p> <p>Other Metopa -species in the type-collections. For some of the Metopa -species in the type-collections of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, there have already been made changes that have removed them from Metopa. These are presented in Table 1, with both original authors and authors for the move.</p> <p>The file cards for the general collections listed Metopa californica Boeck, 1871, sample F14725, with collection information " California 1871, coll Esm.". The species is described in Boeck (1871b). As this species does not figure in any of the lists of Metopa today, and as it not was listed in the type-collection it is not included in the discussion in this paper.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/931B5117FB12666BFF26AFC8FD6CBA21	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Tandberg, Anne Helene S.	Tandberg, Anne Helene S. (2010): A redescription of Metopa species (Amphipoda, Stenothoidae) based on the type material. 3. Natural History Museum, Oslo (NHM) 2465. Zootaxa 2465 (1): 1-94, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2465.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.2465.1.1
