identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
587287CE553BFFF4FF77491DFE2F7DB0.text	587287CE553BFFF4FF77491DFE2F7DB0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ilyograpsus rhizophorae Barnard 1955	<div><p>Ilyograpsus rhizophorae Barnard, 1955</p><p>(Figs. 1, 2 a–j, 3a, b)</p><p>Ilyograpsus rhizophorae Barnard 1955: 26, fig. 8. — Kensley 1981: 46 (in list). — Sawada et al. 2005: 862. — Komai &amp; Wada 2008: 361, figs. 2–5.</p><p>Ilyograpsus paludicola — Crosnier 1965: 31–33, figs. 36–37, 38 a–b, 39, 59. — Fishelson 1971: 128. — Basson et al. 1977: 228, 234. — Titgen 1982: 254 (in list). — Jones 1986: 160, pl. 46. — Vousden 1987: tab. 4. — Ismail &amp; Ahmed 1993: 158. — Hywel-Davies 1994: 37, 48. — Apel 1996: 331 (in list). — Al-Ghais &amp; Cooper 1996: 415. — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996: 143, fig. 55. — Hornby 1997: 14. — Apel &amp; Türkay 1999: 132. — Apel 2001: 117 [not Ilyograpsus paludicola Rathbun, 1909].</p><p>Ilyograpsus vanninii — Sawada et al. 2005: 853 (part), fig. 5b, d, f.</p><p>Type locality. Inhambane, Mozambique (East Africa).</p><p>Examined material. Persian Gulf (Iran): 2 females (1 ovig.), 2 juv. (ZUTC brach1265) Qeshm I., S. coast, 26º 43'N, 55º 49'E, sandy flat with patch of dead corals, 0 9.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 2 males (ZUTC brach1262), Qeshm I., N coast, 3 km W. of Kuweii, 26º 57'N, 56º 00'E, muddy flat, 13.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 3 males, 9 females (6 ovig.) (ZUTC brach1261), Qeshm I., 2 km E. of desalination centre, 26º 56'N, 55º 47'E, muddy sand with shells, 15.12.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 1 female (ovig.) (ZUTC brach1263), 15 km E. of Bandar-Deylam, behind Boyrat police station, 29º 56'N, 50º 08'E, muddy flat, 23.05.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; H. Salehi; 3 females (ZUTC brach1264), Qeshm I., Dargahan, 26º 58'N, 56º 04'E, sandy mud-flat, with planted mangroves, 13.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 1 female (SMF 36856), Qeshm I., Zeyton (olive) park beach, 27º 11'N, 56º 24'E, rocky with dead corals, 0 8.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 1 male (SMF 36857), Bandar-Khamir, E. fishery Jetty, 26º 56'N, 55º 36'E, muddy flat, water channel, 24.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi, &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 2 females (ovig.) (SMF 36858), Bandar-Emam, Park Saheli, 30º 28'N, 49º 04'E, muddy flat with artificial rocky structure covered with Saccostrea sp., 20.05.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; H. Salehi; 2 males, 3 females (SMF 36859), Khalij-Nayband, mangroves, 27º 23'N, 52º 39'E, muddy substrate, 0 5.01.2005, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 2 males, 1 female (SMF 36860), Bandar-Khamir, E. fishery Jetty, 26º 56'N, 55º 36'E, sandy mud-flat, 0 7.06.2006, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 1 male (SMF 36861), Bandar-Khamir, E. of City, behind mangroves, 26º 28'N, 55º 35'E, muddy substrate, 31.12.2005, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi.</p><p>Gulf of Oman: (Iran): 3 females (SMF 36862), Khor-Khalasi, 25º 35'N, 58º 02'E, mangroves, muddy substrate among trees, 20.11.2005, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi.</p><p>Comparative material. Ilyograpsus rhizophorae Barnard 1955: 1 male, 2 female (NHM 1984:416), Pakistan, Manora I. mangroves, Karachi, 0 4.03.1982, N.M. Tirmizi &amp; N. Ghani. Ilyograpsus paludicola Rathbun, 1909: 1 male, 2 females (ZRC 1998.1030), Indonesia, Pulau Bintan, P.K.L. Ng &amp; C.G.S. Tan, June.1995, det. T. Komai.</p><p>Redescription. Carapace nearly subquadrate (Figs. 1, 3 a), slightly wider than long (CL/CB = 1.18), maximum width between third lateral teeth; posterior surface uneven, relatively convex, regions poorly defined; 2 transverse ridges on frontal region, smooth, straight; without epigastric ridges; several transverse ridges on posterolateral region, short, oblique. Front relatively broad, about 0.4 times as wide as carapace, broadly bi-lobed, lobes slightly extending beyond inner orbital angle. Anterolateral margin with 4 distinct teeth, first (exorbital angle) largest, acute, wide triangular, directed forwards; second blunt, as long as first, slightly higher than latter; insetting between first, third teeth; third acute, triangular, highest among all teeth; fourth very small, acute; posterolateral margin nearly subparallel, converging posteriorly (Fig. 1).</p><p>Eyestalks moderately long, orbit slightly more than one fourth of maximum carapace width, upper orbital margin slightly sinuous; lower orbital margin of males (Fig. 2 a) with 3, 4 long tubercles; lower orbital margin of females (Fig. 2 b) with numerous denticles, irregular, variously-sized, larger laterally.</p><p>Third maxilliped (Fig. 2 f) with moderately large gap; ischium about 1.5 times as long as merus, with wide elevation near inner margin, short setae scarce along inner margin; merus short, much shorter than wide, with relatively narrow elevation near inner margin, short setae scarce on inner margin; exopod proximally wide, narrowing distally.</p><p>Chelipeds relatively small; upper margin of merus minutely serrated, with small subdistal spine; lower inner margin finely serrated proximally, distally denticulated, slightly expanded; lower outer margin denticulate; plectrum (Fig. 2 e) on inner surface near lower margin, distinct, short. Manus (Fig. 2 c) about 2.4 times as long as high, slightly longer than movable finger; outer surface smooth, very small, sparse granules on upper portion; lower margin concave in middle part; inner surface smooth, patch of dense setae on distal portion, extending to proximal part of fingers. Fingers relatively narrow, long, smooth, narrow gap between fingers, wider distally; long setae along inner, outer margins of cutting edge; movable finger with cutting edge slightly elevated proximally, with small, variously-size denticles; immovable finger with small denticles on cutting edge, large ones on middle portion; tip of fingers spoon-shaped. Cheliped of females (Fig. 2 d) narrow, long, about 3.2 times as long as high; merus with small subdistal spine on upper margin, stridulating ridge on inner surface; palm without patch of setae on inner surface; cutting edge of fingers scarcely with small denticles; gap between fingers becoming slightly wider distally.</p><p>Walking legs (Fig. 1) relatively long, moderately slender, flattened; second, third largest; merus with large subdistal spine, anterior margin sinuous, faintly serrate, posterior margin nearly straight, merus of fourth leg about 2.6–2.9 times as long as wide (around 2.0 in females); propodus with distal spine on posterior margin, fourth walking legs with short setae along anterior, posterior margins; dactylus narrow, long, unarmed.</p><p>Male abdomen (Fig. 2 g) moderately narrow, segments 4, 5 longest, of equal length; segment 6 about 1.75 as wide as long, lateral margin nearly straight on anterior half, converging posteriorly; telson longer than wide, slightly longer than segment 6, posteriorly rounded.</p><p>Male G1 (Figs. 2 i, j) narrow, straight, slightly curved mesially, apical process long, slightly bent laterally, with depression on lateral surface, distal opening distally on lateral surface; long setae along apical process, short setae scarce along lateral, ventral surface.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 2 h) with elevated lateral lobe; operculum small, hinging on inner margin, directed outwards.</p><p>Remarks. Ilyograpsus paludicola (Rathbun, 1909) has been frequently recorded from the Persian Gulf (Basson et al. 1977; Titgen 1982; Jones 1986; Vousden 1987; Ismail &amp; Ahmed 1993; Hywel-Davies 1994; Apel 1996; Al-Ghais &amp; Cooper 1996; Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996; Hornby 1997; Apel &amp; Türkay 1999; Apel 2001). We collected a large number of specimens from the different sections of the Iranian coast of the Persian Gulf. Precise examination revealed that the Persian Gulf species clearly belongs to I. rhizophorae Barnard, 1955 . Morphological differences between these two species as listed by Komai &amp; Wada (2008) are all seen between the Persian Gulf specimens and specimens of I. paludicola (one male and one female, ZRC 1998.1030). In particular, the G1 of the present specimens has a terminal process that is narrow and long, curved laterally, resembling to that of I. rhizophorae . Persian Gulf specimens, however, are slightly different from I. rhizophorae from other regions regarding the length/width ratio of the merus of the fourth walking leg. In our specimens, this proportion in males is smaller than 3.00 (about 2.6–2.9) in males and about 2.00 in females, whereas the length/width merus ratio of the fourth leg of I. rhizophorae is about 3.48–3.84 in male and 2.52 in females (Komai &amp; Wada 2008).</p><p>Komai &amp; Wada (2008), in their revision of Ilyograpsus, did not record any specimens of I. rhizophorae from the Persian Gulf and did not refer to the numerous published records from the region (see above). Nevertheless, they mentioned that the species recorded from Pakistan (Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996) is likely to be identical with I. paludicola . We examined material from Pakistan (one male and one female, NHM 1984:416) which is clearly I. rhizophorae . Ilyograpsus rhizophorae is thus widely distributed in the western Indian Ocean (Komai &amp; Wada 2008) including the Red Sea, Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, whereas I. paludicola occurs in eastern India and the western Pacific, including Thailand (type locality), Indonesia, Malaysia to Vietnam, Australia and New Caledonia, but does not extend into the western Indian Ocean.</p><p>Biology. Ilyograpsus rhizophorae is a small-size species (largest male CL = 4.92, CB = 5.60 mm, largest female CL = 9.65, CB = 11.64) usually found in the lower intertidal zone of muddy substrates. They are among the most common crabs in mangroves, occurring among trees and pneumatophores. In one case a male was found underneath the bark of a decaying trunk of the mangrove Avicennia marina . The carapace of I. rhizophorae is dirty white to whitish brown, with the appendages being slightly lighter than the carapace. There are irregular light brown bands on the legs, being more distinct on the distal part of carpus and propodus. The ventral surface of the carapace is lighter than the dorsal surface. Flores et al. (2003) described the first zoeal stage of I. paludicola from East Africa, but based on the present study and Komai &amp; Wada (2008), their larvae can be attributed to I. rhizophorae .</p><p>Geographical distribution. Western Indian Ocean: Madagascar, Mozambique, East Africa, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, Pakistan.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE553BFFF4FF77491DFE2F7DB0	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE553FFFFAFF774F09FD8A7849.text	587287CE553FFFFAFF774F09FD8A7849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus dentipes Lucas 1836	<div><p>Macrophthalmus dentipes Lucas, 1836</p><p>(Figs. 4 a–e, 5a–f, 10a–b)</p><p>Macrophthalmus dentipes Lucas 1836: 551 . — Holthuis 1995: 401.</p><p>Macrophthalmus pectinipes — Guerin-Méneville 1838: 1, pl. 23. — Alcock 1900: 377. — Chhapgar 1957b: 512. — Barnes 1970: 237, fig. 10. — Pretzmann, 1971: 31; 1974: 442. — Tirmizi 1981: 109. — Titgen 1982: 253 (in list). — Jones 1986: 159, pl. 45. — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996: 121, fig. 46.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Venitus) dentipes — Apel &amp; Türkay 1999: 135. — Apel 2001: 110. — Barnes 2010: 33 (in key), 43.</p><p>Type locality. Bombay (= Mumbay), India</p><p>Material examined. Persian Gulf: Iran: 3 males (ZUTC Brach1163), Hormozgan, Bandar-Khamir, 28º 48'N, 55º 38'E, mangroves, 31.11.2005, R. Naderloo; 3 females (ZUTC Brach1172), Hormozgan, Khor-Khalasi, 25º 35'N, 58º 08'E, mud flat behind mangroves, 26.10.2006, R. Naderloo; 4 males (ZUTC Brach1186), Hormozgan, Bandar-Khamir, 28º 48'N, 55º 38'E, muddy sandy shore, east of fishery jetty, 14.04.2006, R. Naderloo; 7 females (ovigerous) (ZUTC Brach1210), Khuzestan, Mahshahr, Fishery jetty (Majidieh), 30º 28'N, 49º 11'E, muddy shore, 17.04.2006, R. Naderloo; 4 males, 2 females (ZUTC Brach1211), Khuzestan, Shah Abdollah, 30º 10'N, 50º 05'E, sandy mud-flat, 14.04.2006, R. Naderloo; 3 males, 2 females (ZUTC Brach1238), Khuzestan, Shah Abdollah, 30º 10'N, 50º 05'E, sandy mud-flat, 14.04.2006, R. Naderloo; 1 male (CL = 28.35 CB = 28.15), 1 female (SMF 36863), Bandar-Abbas, E. of city, 27º 08'N, 56º 20'E, muddy sand flat with shell, 23.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 3 males, 3 females (SMF 36866), Bandar-Khamir, E. of fishery Jetty, 26º 56'N, 55º 36'E, Khor, muddy flat, 24.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 1 male (SMF 36864) Qeshm I., N. coast, 3 km W. of Kuweii, 26º 57'N, 56º 00'E, muddy flat, 13.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 2 males, 1 female, 10 juv. (SMF 36865), Bandar-Khamir, E. of fishery Jetty, 26º 56'N, 55º 36'E, Khor, muddy flat, 24.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi.</p><p>Kuwait: 1 male (NHM 1978.194), Kuwait Bay, west coast of Sulaibikhat, near mangroves, 16.04.1978, D. Clayton; 1 female (NHM 1978.195), mud flat creek at Al-Jahra, Clayton &amp; Vaughan.</p><p>Iraq: 4 males (NHM 1892.9.16.2-6), Fao, W.D. Cumming, examined by Barnes (1971).</p><p>Comparative material. Arabian Sea: 1 male, 3 females (SMF 26095), Oman, Filim, W. of Barr al-Hikman, 20º 36.592'N, 58º 11.217'E, muddy flat and mangroves, 14.01.2001, M. Apel; 4 males, 1 female (NHM 1889:6:17:83-87), Pakistan, Sind, F. Day, examined by Barnes (1971).</p><p>Redescription. Carapace (Fig. 4 a) moderately wider than long (CB/CL = 1.6–1.7), slightly convex; large granules scattered on entire posterior surface except in narrow median, frontal regions, granules on branchial regions high, longitudinal row of 6–8 high granules on epibranchial region, granules on median regions low, round. Regions well defined; furrows wide, moderately deep, normally beset with dense setae. Frontal region remarkably deflexed downward, smooth; front very narrow, about 0.06–0.07 times as wide as carapace, strongly constricted medially; anterior edge remarkably concave, bi-lobed, frontal furrow markedly deep.</p><p>Lateral margin of carapace (Fig. 4 a) with 3 distinct teeth (including exorbital tooth); first nearly subquadrate, with posterior margin smooth, curved forward; second triangular, with smooth margin, higher than first, greatest width of carapace between second lateral teeth; third very small, directed forwards; posterolateral margin nearly straight, slightly converging posteriorly, with small granules, beset with long setae; posterior margin with very small granules.</p><p>Eyestalks narrow (Fig. 4 a), long, but not reaching to exorbital angle; upper orbital margin fairly convex, regularly granular, granules large, high, pointed, directed laterally; lower orbital margin (Fig. 4 b) with round granules on inner third, 5–6 long tubercles on outer portion of margin forming stridulating ridge.</p><p>Third maxillipeds leaving small gap between; ischium slightly more than twice the length of merus, inner margin of ischium, merus with long setae, outer margins with short setae, outer margin of ischium completely straight, outer margin of merus sharply sloping distally; outer surface of ischium, merus smooth, elliptical row of long setae proximally on outer surface of ischium.</p><p>Chelipeds nearly equal, sometimes subequal, remarkably long in large specimens (Fig. 4 f). Merus (Fig. 4 e) long; inner upper margin with distinct stridulating ridge, large granules along it, larger distally, with scarce setae; inner lower margin with small granules, continuous with lower surface; upper margin with small granules on proximal portion, with scarce setae. Carpus smooth on outer surface, inner upper margin with denticles, distally larger, small granules along inner portion of these denticles. Palm long (Figs. 4 c, d, f), about 1.8–2.3 times as long as high in proximal portion; outer surface smooth (Figs. 4 c, f) without longitudinal ridge; inner surface (Fig. 4 d) smooth, patch of dense setae on upper portion, parallel to upper margin; lower margin nearly smooth; upper margin with large granules on proximal portion, smaller distally. Fingers remarkably curved inward distally, movable finger with upper margin smooth, long setae densely along inner surface of upper margin, continuous on upper, outer surface, cutting edge with subproximal differentiated tooth, small teeth distally; immovable finger narrow, with relatively large teeth on cutting edge, long setae along inner surface.</p><p>Cheliped of females small; outer surface of palm smooth, longitudinal ridge short, extending from base of immovable finger to proximal half; upper margin with small granules, with long setae; lower margin smooth, with relatively short setae; fingers distinctly long, slightly less than 1.5 length of palm; cutting edge faintly tuberculate, chitinous distal margin long, more than half of length of finger, long setae on inner surface of fingers.</p><p>Walking legs moderately long; second, third longest, with margins of segments more granular than those of first, fourth. Merus long, that of third leg about 4 times as long as wide; merus of first, second, third walking legs with subdistal tooth on anterior margin, 3–4 large denticles distally on posterior margin, merus of females with large denticles on anterior margin. Carpus of first walking leg, with longitudinal ridge, that of second, third with two ridges of long granules on anterior margin, carpus of third with one distinct large denticle distally on posterior margin. Propodus of second with small denticles on anterior, posterior margins; propodus of third with small denticles on anterior margin, large, spine-shaped denticles on posterior margin; dense setae on upper portion of anterior surface of carpus, propodus of third.</p><p>Posteromedian margin of epistome nearly straight, short longitudinal ridge on anterior part of buccal cavity.</p><p>Male abdomen (Fig. 5 d) with segments 3, 4 of same length, slightly shorter than segment 5; segments 5, 6 nearly of same length, with lateral margins nearly straight; lateral margins of segment 6 with small depression at one third distal portion; telson very slightly longer than segment 6, lateral margins strongly converging distally, apically rounded.</p><p>Female abdomen (Fig. 5 e) with large telson, slightly longer than segment 6, distinctly wider than half length of segment 6.</p><p>Male G1 (Fig. 5 a) moderately stout, slightly curved outward medially; distal half relatively narrowing, with apical chitinous process (Figs. 5 b, c) remarkably long, narrow, curved outward at about 45°; distal opening (Fig. 5 b) large, distinct, subdistal on dorsal portion of apical process; long feather-shaped setae densely set along lateral margin, long setae around apical process.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 5 f) on outer wall of depression, directed mesially, anterior margin distinctly rounded, elevated, outer margin slightly convex; operculum small, directed laterally.</p><p>Remarks. Barnes (1970) first recorded M. dentipes from the Persian Gulf at Al-Faw (Fao), Iraq. Barnes (1970), like many preceding authors, referred to this species using the junior synonym M. pectinipes Guerin-Méneville 1838, and assigned it to the subgenus Venitus Barnes, 1967 . Pretzmann (1971) recorded the species from Bandar-Abbas at the Iranian coast, Jones (1986) from Kuwait, both following Barnes (1970) using the name M. pectinipes . The older name M. dentipes, however, was overlooked until Holthuis (1995) revived M. dentipes as the valid name by showing that M. pectinipes is an objective synonym of M. dentipes, and therefore must be replaced by the latter. Apel &amp; Türkay (1999) and Apel (2001) listed M. dentipes from the Persian Gulf with reference to the records by Barnes (1971) and Jones (1986).</p><p>Biology. Macrophthalmus dentipes is the largest ocypodid crab (largest male CL = 40.11, CB = 66.20 mm, largest female CL = 40.55, CB = 65. 56 mm) inhabiting the mid and low intertidal zones in muddy sand/sandy mud substrates (Jones 1986; Al-Zaidan et al. 2006) in the region. This burrowing crab occurs especially in soft muddy substrates at depths of more than 60 cm. The Macrophthalmus zone extends from the middle part of the mudskipper ( Periophthalmus waltoni) zone downwards to the low littoral (Clayton 1986). Macrophthalmus dentipes digs large burrows with an opening of approximately 10 cm in diameter, which sometimes can be confused with those of mudskippers, but in this crab the burrows entrance is marked by a sloppy, light-coloured mud pool with a mound of excavated mud Whereas, the species has not been recorded from the Arabian side on the western and southern parts of the Persian Gulf, it is a common species of muddy sand/sandy mud substrates along the northern and northeast coasts including Kuwait (Jones 1986; Clayton 1986) and the Iranian coast. The population density of this species was estimated based on burrow counts. In the muddy flat of Bandar-Khamir east to the fishery jetty (26º 56'N, 55º 36'E) an average of 10 burrows were present per 5 m 2, whereas near Mahtabi Police station (26º 46'N, 55º 20'E) in sandy mud substrate an average of 20 burrows per 5 m 2 was counted.</p><p>The pereopods of males of M. dentipes grow faster compared to the carapace, therefore large males have remarkably long legs, and long chelipeds in particular. Barnes (1970), in his detailed description, only mentioned the abnormal growth of the merus of the pereopods, but the rapid development of all segments was observed in the present study, which can be clearly detected in the remarkably long palm of the cheliped in large males (Fig. 4 f). Furthermore, large males have more granules on the posterior surface of the carapace, which are markedly high in comparison to the low and round granules of carapace of small males.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Northern Indian Ocean: northern and eastern Persian Gulf, Oman (Gulf of Masirah), Pakistan, west coast of India. A record from Malaysia by Henderson (1893) is highly questionable and probably based on misidentified material.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE553FFFFAFF774F09FD8A7849	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE5533FFFEFF774E80FBC77E52.text	587287CE5533FFFEFF774E80FBC77E52.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus depressus Ruppell 1830	<div><p>Macrophthalmus depressus Rüppell, 1830</p><p>(Figs. 6 a–e, 7a–d, 10c, d)</p><p>Macrophthalmus depressus Rüppell 1830: 19, pl. 4, fig. 6. — Nobili 1906a: 155. — Stephensen 1945: 191, 210, fig. 58A. — Guinot 1967: 282 (in list). — Basson et al. 1977: 56, 228, 235, fig. 37. — Clayton 1986: 87, fig. 3. — Vousden 1987: 35 – 37, tabs. 4, 7. — Hogarth 1989: 117. — Ismail &amp; Ahmed 1993: 158. — Apel 1994: 42 –45, pl. 2; 1996: 331, 337, figs. 1–3. — Al-Ghais &amp; Cooper 1996: 415, fig. 5. — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996: 116, fig. 44. — Cooper 1997: 158. — Hornby 1997: 15. — Al-Khayat &amp; Jones 1999: 58, 61.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Mareotis) depressus — Barnes 1970: 206, 226, fig. 7; 1977: 278 (in key), 279; 2010: 36 (in key). — Pretzmann 1971: 482, pl. 9, fig. 1. — Pretzmann 1974: 440. — Titgen 1982: 148, 253 (in list). — Jones 1986: 159, pl. 47. — Hywel-Davies 1994: 37, 48. — Apel &amp; Türkay 1999: 134. — Apel 2001: 110.</p><p>Type locality. Red Sea.</p><p>Material examined. Persian Gulf: Iran: 1 male (SMF 36868), Qeshm I., 3 km E. of Kuweii, 26° 57'N, 56° 00'E, 0 5.05.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 3 males (ZUTC Brach1218), Bushehr, Khalij-Nayband, 27° 38'N, 52° 65'E, mangroves, 5.06.2006, R. Naderloo; 1 male, 1 juv. (ZUTC Brach1239) Khuzestan, Shah Abdollah, 30° 10'N, 50° 05'E, sandy mud-flat, 14.04.2006; 1 male (SMF 36879), Bushehr, Bandar-Rig, 29º 28'N, 50º 37'E, muddy sand flat, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi.</p><p>Bahrain: 5 females (2 ovig.) (NHM 1999: 370-374), Jufair, 18.04.1974, A.L. Rice, det. M. Apel; 15 males, 7 females (3 ovig.) (NHM 1974:414), W. coast of Bahrain, Janabiya, from burrows in clean sand, 0 1.06.1971, A.L. Rice.</p><p>Saudi Arabia: 1 juv. (SMF 36110), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N Al Jubail, 27° 25.41'N, 49° 13.53'E, low intertidal, rocky, in tide pool under stone with macroalgae, 0 7.02.1993, M. Apel; 1 male, 1 female (NHM 1974:382), Abu Ali, J. Birchard; 3 males, 3 females (SMF 36116), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, Al Jubail, S Dauhat ad Dafi, 27° 8.57'N, 49° 23.11'E, mangroves, 0 5.12.1995, M. Apel; 3 males, 2 females (SMF 36117), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S. Dauhat ad Dafi, 27° 8.57'N, 49° 23.11'E, mangroves, 26.11.1992, M. Apel; 1 male, 1 female (SMF 36118), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary N. Al Jubail, S. Dauhat ad Dafi, 27° 8.57'N, 49° 23.11'E, mangroves, 24.06.1992, M. Apel; 3 males, 1 female (SMF 36119), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S. Dauhat ad Dafi, 27° 8.23'N, 49° 23.41'E, sand, 27.09.1992, M. Apel; 2 males, 1 female, 1 juv. (SMF 36120), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S. Dauhat, ad Dafi, 27° 8.23'N, 49° 23.41'E, sand, 27.09.1992, M. Apel; 3 males (SMF 36121), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S. Dauhat ad Dafi, 27° 8.23'N, 49° 23.41'E, sand, 28.09.1992, M. Apel; 5 males, 1 female (SMF 36122), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, SW bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27° 23.33'N, 49° 10.15'E, rock and muddy sand, 0 2.1993, M. Apel; 5 males (1 juv.), 1 female (juv.) (SMF 36123), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, SW bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27° 23.33'N, 49° 10.15'E, rock and muddy sand, 21.03.1993, M. Apel; 4 males, 3 females (SMF 36124), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S.W. bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27° 23.33'N, 49° 10.15'E, rock and muddy sand, 10.12.1991, M. Apel; 3 males, 3 females (SMF 36125), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S.W. bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27° 23.33'N, 49° 10.15'E, rock and muddy sand, 0 6.12.1991, M. Apel; 5 males, 1 female (SMF 36126), south coast of Abu Ali, 27° 19'N, 49° 38'E, sandy/sandy mud, 29.06.1992, M. Apel; 2 males, 4 females (2 ovig.), 2 juv. (SMF 36127), Abu Ali/Jubail, south coast near the head, 27° 19'N, 49° 38'E, muddy sand, among Salicornia sp., 27.08.1992, M. Apel; 3 males, 1 female (ovig.) (SMF 36128), Tarut Bay, 29.06.1992, M. Apel; 1 male (SMF 36129), N. Jubail, 0 9.1992, M. Apel; 1 female (ovig.) (SMF 36130), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, W. Qurma I., 27° 7.09'N, 49° 27.3'E, muddy sand, 24.06.1992, M. Apel; 1 male (SMF 36131), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S. Dauhat ad Dafi, 27° 8.57'N, 49° 23.11'E, mangroves, 29.05.1992, M. Apel; 1 male, 2 females (SMF 36133), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, S. Dauhat ad Dafi, 27° 8.23'N, 49° 23.41'E, sand, 29.05.1992, M. Apel; 1 male, 1 female (SMF 36134), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, W. bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27° 24.25'N, 49° 7.55'E, muddy substrate, 0 3.05.1993, M. Apel; 1 male (SMF 36135), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, Qurma I., 27° 7.59'N 49° 29.1'E, mangroves, 0 5.08.1992, M. Apel; 1 male (SMF 36136), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, SW bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27° 23.33'N, 49° 10.15'E, rock and muddy sand, 21.03.1993, M. Apel; 6 males, 1 female (SNMNH 101), Abu Ali, S. side, 27° 19'N, 49° 38'E, muddy/ sandy mud, 29.06.1992, M. Apel; 2 males, 2 females (ovig.) 1 juv (SNMNH 101), Abu Ali, Jubail, south side near the headland, 27° 19'N, 49° 38'E, muddy sand, among marsh of Salicornia sp., 27.08.1992, M. Apel; 3 males, 1 female (ovig.) (SNMNH 103), Tarut Bay, sandy mud, among marsh of Salicornia sp., 0 9.06.1992, M. Apel; 3 males, 3 females (SNMNH 104), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. Al Jubail, SW. Bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27° 23.33'N, 49° 10.15'E, rock and mudy-sand, 10.12.1991, M. Apel.</p><p>UAE: 1 female (ovig.) (SMF 36111), Abu Dhabi, West of southern head of Merawwah, 24° 16.4'N, 53° 18.7'E, mangroves, and sandy mud, 10.06.1995. M. Apel; 5 males, 4 females (2 ovig.) (SMF 36112), Fujairah, mangroves of Khor Kalba, 25° 01'N, 56° 21'E, mangroves, intertidal, sandy mud, 0 1.07.1995, M. Apel; 1 male (SMF 36113), Umm al Qaiwain, Khor al Beidah, 25° 35'N, 55° 34'E, sandy mud, 0 9.07.1995, M. Apel; 1 female (ovig.) (SMF 36114), Umm al Qaiwain, Khor al Beidah, 25° 35'N, 55° 34'E, sandy mud, 0 9.07.1995, M. Apel; 1 male, 1 female (juv.) (SMF 36115), Ras al Khaymah, Inside of landhead of S. Rams, 25° 50'N, 55° 00'E, sandy flat, upper intertidal with Salicornia sp., 11.07.1995, M. Apel; 1 male (NHM 1963:10:2:8), Abu Dhabi, Dr. Kinsman.</p><p>Redescription. Carapace (Fig. 6 a) moderately wider than long (CB/CL = 1.5); posterior surface moderately convex, small granules covering entire carapace, except of median gastric, postfrontal portions; epibranchial region without longitudinal granules, sometimes with rows of very small granules on lateral region; short setae scarcely spread over carapace, becoming dense in posterior furrow of gastric, epibranchial region. Regions well defined; furrows defining gastric region deep. Frontal region, with small granules, deflexed; front narrow, about 0.12 times as wide as carapace, moderately constricted medially; anterior edge minutely granular, slightly concave, nearly bilobed, frontal furrow distinct, quite deep.</p><p>Lateral margin (Fig. 6 a) with three distinct teeth including exorbital angle; first tooth subquadrate, second largest, higher than first; greatest width of carapace between second lateral teeth; third faint, indicated just with some granules; postrolateral margin nearly straight, slightly converging posteriorly, with small granules, besets with long setae; posterior margin with small, low granules.</p><p>Eyestalks (Fig. 6 a) narrow, short, not reaching to exorbital angle; upper orbital margin fairly convex, regularly granular, granules small; lower margin with relatively large granules, granules wide-based, quite high, apically round.</p><p>Third maxilliped with ischium slightly more than twice as long as merus, inner margin of ischium, merus with long setae, outer margins with short setae, outer margin of merus distinctly concave, that of ischium straight; outer surface well decorated, covered with short setae.</p><p>Chelipeds nearly equal. Merus smooth, margins without tubercles, densely covered with setae. Carpus smooth on outer, inner surface, dense setae on inner surface. Palm (Fig. 6 b) slightly more than 1.5 times as long as high in proximal portion, outer surface (Fig. 6 b) smooth to naked eye, small microscopic granules on it, without longitudinal ridge; inner surface (Fig. 6 d) fully covered with patch of dense setae, surface smooth underneath setae patch; upper margin with large granules, some very small granules on outer surface of this row of granules. Movable finger relatively narrow, slightly curved inward distally, upper margin smooth, inner surface with dense setae; cutting edge with subproximal differentiated tooth, small teeth distally. Immovable finger slightly shorter than movable finger, with relatively large teeth on cutting edge, sometimes medially elevated (Fig. 6 c), inner surface with dense setae.</p><p>Cheliped of females small, outer surface of palm smooth, longitudinal ridge close to lower margin, curved upward distally; upper, lower margins with long setae, upper margin with small granules, lower margin smooth; fingers long, slightly longer than palm, narrow gap between, denticulate on cutting edge, long setae on inner surface.</p><p>Walking legs medium-size. Merus of third about 3.2 times as long as wide, merus of second, third walking legs with subdistal tooth on anterior margin; merus, carpus, propodus fully covered with dense setae (Fig. 6 e); dactylus long, about as long as propodus, row of short setae along anterior, posterior margins.</p><p>Posteromedian margin of epistome distinctly concave, bearing long longitudinal ridge on anterior part of buccal cavity.</p><p>Male abdomen (Fig. 6 f) elongatedly triangular, segments 3, 4 of same length, shorter than segment 5; segment 6 as long as segment 5, lateral margins gently converging distally; telson about as long as segment 6, semicircular.</p><p>Female abdomen (Fig. 6 g) with small telson, nearly as long as segment 6, but half as wide.</p><p>Male G1(Fig. 7 a) moderately stout, slightly curved outward medially; apical chitinous process (Fig. 7 c) remarkably long, curved outward at about 60°, its distal margin nearly straight, slightly emarginate ventrally; lateral surface with depression along ventral portion (Fig. 7 b). Distal opening distinct, large, located distally on dorsal portion of apical process. Long plumose setae densely set along lateral margin, long setae around apical process, but not completely concealing it.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 7 d) situated at outer wall of depression, directed mesially, with large operculum; upper margin convex.</p><p>Remarks. Macrophthalmus depressus is a well defined species and has been assigned to the subgenus Mareotis Barnes, 1967 . It has been frequently recorded from different parts of the Persian Gulf: Stephensen (1945) and Pretzmann (1971) from Iran, Basson et al. (1977), Apel (1994) and Apel (1996) from Saudi Arabia, Clayton (1986), Jones (1986) and Al-Khayat &amp; Jones (1999) from Kuwait, Vousden (1987) from Bahrain, Al-Ghais &amp; Cooper (1996), Cooper (1997) and Hornby (1997) from the UAE.</p><p>Biology. This medium-size species (largest male CL = 20.94, CB = 30.89 mm, largest female CL = 19.85, CB = 27.51 mm) is common, and the only one of this genus in the lower intertidal of muddy and sandy mud habitats in the Persian Gulf (Apel &amp; Türkay 1999). This zone is densely populated by the species with 40– 75 specimens per m 2 in Tarut Bay on the Saudi Arabian coast, whereas juveniles mainly occur in the mid intertidal zone (Apel 1994). The lower intertidal zone of the mud flats in the Persian Gulf could therefore be called M. depressus zone. Apel (1996) mentioned that M. depressus has a long breeding period. In a study carried out along the Saudi Arabian coast he recorded ovigerous females of this species over most of the year and only during the coldest season from November to January no ovigerous females were observed. According to Litulo et al. (2005), females of this species reach maturity at a size smaller than males. Females and males reach sexual maturity at carapace widths of 13.4 and 13.6 mm, respectively (Litulo et al. 2005).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Indian Ocean: South Africa, Madagascar, East Africa, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Dhofar (South Oman), Gulf of Oman, Persian Gulf, Pakistan, west coast of India.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE5533FFFEFF774E80FBC77E52	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE5537FFE2FF7748BEFF037BA4.text	587287CE5537FFE2FF7748BEFF037BA4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus grandidieri A. Milne-Edwards 1867	<div><p>Macrophthalmus grandidieri A. Milne-Edwards, 1867</p><p>(Figs. 8 a–f, 9a–d, 21a–b)</p><p>Macrophthalmus Grandidieri A. Milne-Edwards 1867: 285 .</p><p>Macrophthalmus grandidieri — Crosnier 1965: 127, figs. 230, 235. — Hywel-Davies 1994: 29, 37, 48. — Apel 2001: 108, 109.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) grandidieri — Barnes 1967: 23; 1970: 233, fig. 6a–c; 1971: 40 (in key); 2010: 35 (in key), 40. — Lewinsohn 1977: 73, 74.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) sulcatus grandidieri — Pretzmann 1974: 438, figs. 1, 4.</p><p>Macrophthalmus brevis — Nobili 1906b: 318.</p><p>Type locality. Zanzibar.</p><p>Material examined. Persian Gulf: Iran: 1 juv. (SMF 38538), Bandar-Abbas, E. city, 27º 11'N, 56º 21'E, muddy sand flat, 23.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 1 juv. (SMF 38537) Qeshm I., 3 km E. of Kuweii, 26° 57'N, 56° 00'E, 0 5.05.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi</p><p>Gulf of Oman: 1 male, 1 female (SMF 26291), Oman, Qurm near Muscat, sandy bank of water channel, 0 7.1994, A. Hywel-Davies.</p><p>Comparative material. South Africa: 2 males, 2 females (NHM 1928:1:2:117–118), Durban, Stebbing collection; 2 males (NHM 1913:2:14:11–12), Durban, coll. W.T. Calman, det. R.S.K. Barnes. East Africa: 66 males, 43 females (20 ovig.) (NHM 1971:50), Tanzania, Dar Es Salam, Tanganyika, R.G. Hartnoll, 1971; 1 male, 4 females (ovig.) (NHM 1973:81), Madagascar, Nosy Be, muddy sand, 10.1971, R.G. Hartnoll; 1 male (NHM 1973:99), Madagascar, Tulear, muddy sand, 10.1971, R.G. Hartnoll; 2 males, 3 females (2 ovig.) (NHM 1955:3:5:109–112), Port E. Africa, Manque Ferry, Morrumbene Estuary, mangroves, J.H. Dey; 1 male, 2 females (SMF 25150), Kenya, between Mombasa and Malindi, 12.1985, W. Baumeister.</p><p>Redescription. Carapace (Fig. 21a) very much wider than long (CB/CL = 2.1), relatively convex, microscopic granules regularly on carapace, some slightly larger granules on epibranchial region, usually in transverse row; transverse row of small granules on posterior region, extending parallel to posterior margin, granules extensively lined. Regions well defined; furrows defining gastric, epibranchial regions remarkably deep. Front narrow, about 0.16 times as wide as carapace; anterior edge smooth, very slightly concave, not bi-lobed, frontal furrow faint.</p><p>Lateral margin (Figs. 8 a, b) with three distinct teeth including exorbital angle; first tooth remarkably smaller than second, elongatedly triangular, directed outwards; second largest, broadly triangular, directed forwards, separated from former by long U-shaped notch; third smallest, directed forwards; posterolateral margin nearly straight, slightly converging posteriorly.</p><p>Eyestalks (Figs. 8 a, b) narrow, not reaching tip of exorbital angle; upper orbital margin convex, sloping outward, regularly granular, granules small, nearly of same size; lower margin with relatively large granules, of different size, directed inwards.</p><p>Third maxilliped large, ischium about twice as long as merus, inner margins of ischium, merus with long brown setae, outer margin without setae, outer surface smooth.</p><p>Chelipeds (Figs. 8 c, e) nearly equal. Merus with dense patch of long setae on inner upper margin, inner upper, lower margins smooth, posterior margin with small granules. Carpus with small granules medially on upper inner margin, large spine-shaped tooth on inner distal margin, directed forwards, sometimes with small accessory one. Palm (Figs. 8 c) long, about 1.7 times as long as high in distal portion; outer surface smooth, with longitudinal ridge on lower portion, running from proximal part to near base of immovable finger, curving downward dorsally, finely granular, granules smaller dorsally; lower margin deflexed on base of immovable finger, covered with small granules; upper margin with very small granules; inner surface (Fig. 8 e) with patch of dense setae on upper portion of palm, continuing to inner surface of fingers; with large spine-shaped tooth on proximal portion, small granules around it, lower proximal portion densely covered with small granules, distal lower portion depressed; upper margin with row of large granules, conical, decreasing in size distally. Movable finger (Fig. 8 c) long, relatively narrow, curved downward, upper margin with small granules; cutting edge without differentiated tooth, small round teeth along it. Immovable finger (Figs. 8 c, d) short, moderately deflexed; with median differentiated tooth, subquadrate, directed forwards, some small teeth distally along cutting edge.</p><p>Cheliped of females small, long setae on posterior, lower inner margin of merus, margins of carpus; upper margin of palm finely granular, lower margin faintly granular; lower half of outer surface with depression, upper half finely granular; inner upper margin of manus, fingers with long setae; cutting edges with numerous small teeth.</p><p>Walking legs medium-size, relatively narrow. Merus with anterior, posterior margins serrated, small subdistal tooth on anterior margin of merus of second, third, posterior margin minutely denticulate distally; third largest, merus of third about 3.2 times as long as wide; dense patch of setae proximally on anterior margin of second. Propodus as long as dactylus; fourth walking leg very small, unarmed, with long setae on posterior, anterior margins of all segments.</p><p>Posteromedian margin of epistome strongly convex, bearing faint ridge on anterior part of buccal cavity.</p><p>Male abdomen (Fig. 8 f) broadly triangular, with segments 3, 4 of same length, slightly shorter than segment 5; segment 5 as long as segment 6, with lateral margins gently converging; lateral margins of segment 6 moderately swollen proximally; telson very slightly longer than segment 6, lateral margins strongly converging distally, apically rounded.</p><p>Male G1 (Fig. 9 a) moderately long, curving outwards proximally, distal portion depressed laterally; apical chitinous process (Fig. 9 b) short, curved laterally, lateral surface with depression, apical margin concave; distal opening (Fig. 9 c) distally on mesiodorsal part; long setae around apical part, long plumose setae sparsely along lateral, ventral surface.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 9 d) having markedly elevated margins, fissure on anterolateral corner; operculum relatively large, directed laterally.</p><p>Remarks. Apel (2001) examined material from the Persian Gulf identified as M. grandidieri by several authors (Basson et al. 1977; Clayton 1986; Jones 1986; Vousden 1987). It appeared, however, that all specimens examined had to be assigned to Macrophthalmus sulcatus H. Milne-Edwards, 1852 . There were only one male and one female (SMF 26291) from the Muscat area in northern Oman (Gulf of Oman) collected by A. Hywel-Davies, which could be convincingly assigned to M. grandidieri . Two juveniles were collected from Bandar-Abbas and Qeshm I., which are assigned to M. grandidieri being the first record of the species from the Straits of Hormuz, while it has not been recorded from the inner Persian Gulf.</p><p>There are several good characters that allow distinguishing between M. grandidieri and M. sulcatus . Macrophthalmus sulcatus has the carapace markedly wider than M. grandidieri . The CB/CL ratio of M. sulcatus is about 2.3, that of M. grandidieri about 2.1. The eyestalks of M. sulcatus are longer, reaching beyond second lateral tooth, whereas those of M. grandidieri do not even reaching the exorbital angle. Furthermore, the granules on the posterior surface of the carapace in M. sulcatus are relatively larger than those of M. grandidieri, and even the epibranchial granules of M. sulcatus are more distinct. The genital apparatus of males and females of these two species are, however, very similar, not allowing to easily distinguish them using the morphology of the G1, the shape of the gonopore, or the male and female abdomen. This similarity is most remarkable in the shape of the G1 (Figs. 9 a–c, 20a–c).</p><p>Tesch (1915) described a new species, M. Hilgendorfi based on a single male from Zanzibar deposited in RMNH. This species is very similar to M. grandidieri, but according to Tesch’s drawing, it has a clearly wider front. Barnes (1977) synonymised M. hilgendorfi with M. grandidieri without any discussion. Ng et al. (2008), however, listed it amongst the valid species of the genus.</p><p>Biology. Macrophthalmus grandidieri is a medium-size species (specimens from the Gulf of Oman: male CL = 12.16, CB = 24.86 mm, female CL = 12.99, CB = 27.02 mm) that inhabits only the mid intertidal zone with a relatively firm sandy substrate. In mangrove stands it is restricted to the seaward fringe on the sandy bank of the water channels, where it was recorded from mangroves near Muscat in Gulf of Oman (Hywel-Davies 1994). Hywel- Davies (1994) recorded 15 specimens per m2 on an exposed sandy bank of a mangal channel near Muscat (Gulf of Oman). Otherwise not much data is available regarding the biology of this species in the northern Indian Ocean, including the Red Sea and the Arabian Sea.</p><p>Emmerson (1994) collected ovigerous females of M. grandidieri throughout the year in a mangrove estuary in Transkei, South Africa. The number of females always exceeded that of males, with a female/male ratio of 1.4. The continuous breeding activity is quite unusual for ocypodoid crabs, most of which have seasonal reproductive cycles (Emmerson 1994).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Western Indian Ocean: South Africa, East Africa, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE5537FFE2FF7748BEFF037BA4	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE552BFFE6FF774B62FBE07ADC.text	587287CE552BFFE6FF774B62FBE07ADC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus graeffei A. Milne-Edwards 1873	<div><p>Macrophthalmus graeffei A. Milne-Edwards, 1873</p><p>(Figs. 11 a–e, 12a–d, 17a, b)</p><p>Macrophthalmus graeffei A. Milne-Edwards 1873: 257, pl. 2, fig. 5. — Titgen 1982: 253 (in list).</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) graeffei — Barnes 1970: 225; 1971: 13, 36 (in key), fig. 3; 1977: 276 (in key), 279 (in list); 2010: 34 (in key), 39. — Apel 2001: 108.</p><p>Macrophthalmus ( convexus Stimpson ?) — Stephensen 1945: 191. [not Macrophthalmus convexus Stimpson, 1858]. Macrophthalmus convexus — Guinot 1967: 282 (in list; partly). [not Macrophthalmus convexus Stimpson, 1858].</p><p>Type locality. Upolu (Samoa).</p><p>Examined material. Persian Gulf: Iran: 1 male (CL = 14.8, CB = 8.4 mm), 1 male (juv.) (ZMUC CRU- 1782), DSII St. 26, O, Kharg I., sand and shells, 18 m deep, 15.03.1937, G. Thorson, identified as Macrophthalmus ( convexus Stimpson ?) by Stephensen (1945).</p><p>Comparative material. Red Sea: 3 females (NHM 1934: 1:17: 133–135, appendages are broken), Sudan, Mersa Marja in Shab-ul-Shumur, coll. C. Crossland, det. R. D. Laurie.</p><p>Redescription. Carapace (Fig. 17a) distinctly wider than long (CB/CL = 1.84), moderately convex, posterior surface smooth; lump of small granules on epibranchial region, granules round; scarce granules on lateral regions. Regions relatively well defined; furrows delimiting gastric region remarkably deep, transverse furrow of epibranchial region nearly shallow depression. Front deflexed, narrow, about 0.12 times as wide as carapace, constricted medially; anterior edge smooth, very slightly concave, faintly bi-lobed, frontal furrow faint.</p><p>Lateral margin with three distinct teeth including exorbital angle; first tooth remarkably long, longer than second, elongatedly triangular, directed outwards, slightly directed forwards, its posterior margin smooth; second tooth about half as long as first one, triangular, directed outwards, separated from former by long V-shaped notch; third smallest, broadly triangular, directed outwards; posterolateral margin nearly straight, very slightly converging posteriorly, serrated with pointed granules, granules larger posteriorly; posterior ridge smooth.</p><p>Eyestalk narrow (Figs. 11 a, 17a, b), long, extending slightly less than half of cornea beyond exorbital angle, distal part of cornea with remarkably narrow bulge (Fig. 11 a); upper orbital margin slightly convex, gently sloping outward, regularly granular, granules very small, low blunt, smaller laterally; lower margin with granules, relatively large, pointed, of various size, smaller laterally.</p><p>Third maxilliped large, ischium about twice as long as merus, inner margin of ischium with long setae, outer margin nearly straight, without setae, outer surface smooth; merus subquadrate, wide, about 1.7 times as wide as long, inner margin with long setae, outer margin proximally swollen, distally strongly converging, finely dentate, without setae, outer surface smooth.</p><p>Chelipeds (Figs. 11 c, d) nearly equal. Merus (Fig. 11 b) with outer margin bearing large denticles along entire length, denticles slightly larger medially; inner upper margin with few small granules, with long setae, continuing to inner surface; inner lower margin with small granules; distal margin with very small granules. Carpus outer surface with small granules, getting dense towards upper, lower surfaces, medially smooth; inner distal margin serrated with small granules. Palm relatively long, about 1.6 times as long as high in distal portion; outer surface (Fig. 11 c) with small granules except in lower distal portion at base of immovable finger, granules continuous to upper, lower margins, granules on upper margin slightly larger than those of lower margin; longitudinal ridge on lower portion, nearly straight, parallel to lower margin, running from proximal part to near end of immovable finger, finely granular, granules small; inner surface (Figs. 11 d, 17b) without patch of setae, small granules on lower proximal portion, continuous medially to near base of fingers. Movable finger relatively long, curved strongly inward, upper margin with large denticles along proximal two thirds, larger distally, small granules proximally; cutting edge with small differentiated tooth subproximally, teeth along cutting edge small, round, long setae along inner lower surface in movable finger. Immovable finger short, cutting edge elevated medially, large teeth along it, long setae along inner surface; tip of cutting edge of both fingers remarkably narrowed.</p><p>Walking legs medium-size, relatively narrow; merus of third walking leg about 3.4 times as long as wide; merus of second, third with large subdistal tooth; anterior, posterior margins serrated; margins of carpus, dactylus smooth; dactylus of third walking leg about as long as propodus; margins of segments scarcely beset with long setae.</p><p>Posteromedian margin of epistome moderately convex, anterior part of buccal cavity distinctly swollen, without ridge.</p><p>Male abdomen (Figs. 11 e, 17b) with segments 5, 6 of same length; lateral margin of segment 6 proximally remarkably swollen, distally very gently converging; telson semicircular, about as long as segment 6.</p><p>Male G1 (Figs. 12 a–d) relatively long, narrow, slightly curving outward medially; apical chitinous process short, narrow, directed outwards at 90°; distal opening (Fig. 12 d) on tip of chitinous process; dorsal palp remarkably large; long setae scarcely on apical portion, not concealing apical process.</p><p>Remarks. Stephensen (1945) recorded one male and one juvenile from the east coast of Kharg I. of Iran in the Persian Gulf which he tentatively identified as M. ( convexus Stimpson ?). Barnes (1971) cited this record in the synonymy of M. graeffei . Apel (2001) examined this specimen and found that it is identical with the M. graeffei sensu Barnes. Barnes (1971), however, did not examine the type specimens of M. graeffei, which had been described by A. Milne-Edwards (1873) from Samoa. Barnes (1971) record of this species is based on two males collected at the eastern Indian Ocean in South Indonesia (Timor Archipelago), and all following authors used his description for defining M. graeffei . Therefore, the taxonomic position of M. graeffei is still not at all certain, and its identity needs to be established. The present material agrees fully with the description given by Barnes (1971), and thus it is tentatively assigned to this species.</p><p>Macrophthalmus graeffei belongs to the subgenus Macrophthalmus Desmarest, 1823, which recently has been divided into four different subgroups (Barnes 2010). Barnes (2010) placed M. graeffei in the M. telescopicus - group, which is mainly characterized by long eyestalks with the cornea extended beyond the lateral carapace margin, the carapace being moderately broad with three lateral teeth, the front being relatively broad, the carpus of the male cheliped lacking spines on the distal margin, the fingers being short and the immovable finger not being deflexed. Most species of this group including M. graeffei are sublittoral.</p><p>The only record of this species from the Persian Gulf is the two males (one juvenile) from Kharg I. collected by the Danish Scientific expedition (Stephensen 1945). Apel (2001) furthermore recorded one specimen from Oman (“Djaraman, Mer d’Oman, Côte d’Arabie”) deposited in MNHN Paris. The type material of M. graeffei had been deposited in the Godeffroy Museum of Hamburg (1861–1885), Germany. In 1885, however, the zoological specimens of this museum were sold to different museums, and no information is available regarding the type material of that species.</p><p>Biology. Macrophthalmus graeffei is a relatively small-size species. The male specimen from the Persian Gulf is the largest specimen (CL = 14.8, CB = 8.4 mm) that has so far been collected. The species is one of the rarest of the genus, even though the lack of material could be particularly due to its subtidal habitat (Lewinsohn 1977) and the lack of adequate collections carried out. The specimen from Kharg I. was collected from a sandy bottom in 18 m depth (Stephensen 1945).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Wide Indo-West Pacific distribution: Red Sea, Gulf of Oman, Persian Gulf, Indonesia (Timor), Samoa; migrated to the Mediterranean through the Suez Canal.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE552BFFE6FF774B62FBE07ADC	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE552FFFE8FF774D37FAE37B14.text	587287CE552FFFE8FF774D37FAE37B14.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus laevis A. Milne-Edwards 1867	<div><p>Macrophthalmus laevis A. Milne-Edwards, 1867</p><p>(Figs. 13 a–f, 14a–e, 10e–f)</p><p>Macrophthalmus laevis A. Milne-Edwards 1867: 287 . — Barnes 1976: 143, fig. 6a–c. — Titgen 1982: 150.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) ressli Pretzmann 1971: 382, pl. 9 figs. 23.</p><p>Macrophthalmus resseli [sic!] — Pretzmann,1974: 441.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) laevis — Barnes 1977: 277 (in key), 280 (in list); 2010: 35 (in key), 40. — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1988: 253, figs. 1–11. — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996: 109, fig. 41. — Apel &amp; Türkay 1999: 135. — Apel 2001: 109.</p><p>Type locality. “ Indian Seas”.</p><p>Examined material. Persian Gulf: Iran: 4 males, 4 females, 3 juv. (SMF 36896), Qeshm I., N. coast, 3 km W. of Kuweii, 26º 57'N, 56º 00'E, muddy sand with rocky patches, 0 6.05.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 1 juv. (SMF 36870), Qeshm I., Zeyton (olive) park beach, 27º 11'N, 56º 24'E, 0 8.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 2 juv. (SMF 36871), Bandar-Khamir, 26º 56'N, 55º 36'E, muddy, 24.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 3 males, 1 female, 2 juv. (SMF 36872), Qeshm I., Dargahan, 26º 58'N, 56º 04'E, sandy mud, with planted mangroves, 13.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 1 male, 3 juv. (SMF 36873) E. Bandar-Kolahi, 27º 02'N, 56º 51'E, muddy sand flat, 22.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 1 female (SMF 36874), Bandar-Abbas, E. city, 27º 11'N, 56º 21'E, muddy sand flat, 23.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 1 juv. (SMF 36875), Bandar-Khamir, E. fishery Jetty, 26º 56'N, 55º 36'E, muddy flat, water channel, 24.04.2008; R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 1 juv. (SMF 36876), Bandar-Khamir, E. city, between mangroves and fisheries jetty, 26º 28'N, 55º 35'E, muddy sand flat, 0 7.06.2006, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 2 females (SMF 36877), Bandar- Emam, Park Saheli, 30º 28'N, 49º 04'E, muddy (Khor), cobble with stones covered densely with Saccostrea cucullata, 21.05.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; H. Salehi; 4 females (2 ovig.), 2 juv. (SMF 36878), Qeshm I., 2 km E. of desalination centre, 26º 56'N, 55º 47'E, muddy sand with shells, 15.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay. 1 male (NHM 1999:71, all appendages missing), Hormoz I., 0 1.1973, coll. G. Polleri, det. M. Apel.</p><p>UAE: 16 males, 3 females (SMF 26293), Ras al Khaimah, inner side of the spit of the south Ras, 25º 50'N, 55º 00'E, supralittoral among Salicornia sp., 11.07.1995, M. Apel.</p><p>Macrophthalmus ressli Pretzmann, 1971 . Holotype: male (NHMW 3790), paratype: 1 male (NHMW 3791), Iran, Bandar Abbas, sandy coast (Pretzmann 1970).</p><p>Redescription. Carapace (Figs. 10 e, 13a) wider than long (CB/CL = 1.7); posterior surface relatively convex, small granules evenly distributed on posterior surface, glabrous on central regions, slightly larger ones irregularly distributed on branchial regions, without longitudinal row of granules; short setae very sparsely on posterior surface, extensive patch of setae near posterolateral margin, long setae on lateral margin. Regions well defined; furrows defining gastric, epibranchial regions are remarkably deep. Frontal region smooth, deflexed downwards; two frontal ridges low, smooth; front narrow, about 0.14 times as wide as carapace; anterior edge smooth, slightly concave, nearly bi-lobed, frontal furrow faint.</p><p>Lateral margin (Fig. 13 a) with three teeth including exorbital angle; exorbital angle subquadrate, directed forwards, slightly smaller than second, separated from second by wide V-shaped notch; second one largest, broadly triangular, directed forwards; third one very small, but usually discernible; posterolateral margin nearly straight, very slightly converging posteriorly, with small granules, besets with long setae.</p><p>Eyestalks (Fig. 13 a) narrow, short, never reaching to end of exorbital angle (Fig. 13 a); upper orbital margin moderately convex, regularly granular, granules very small, directed outwards; lower margin granular, granules relatively large, getting larger in middle, directed inwards.</p><p>Third maxilliped large, ischium about 2.6 times as long as merus; inner margin of ischium, merus bearing long setae, outer margins without setae; outer surface smooth, with short row of setae on outer proximal part of ischium.</p><p>Chelipeds nearly equal (in one case unequal); merus (Fig. 13 b) with upper surface smooth, inner, upper margins sparsely beset with long setae, row of long setae near inner margin, some long setae on distal portion; 12–13 long tooth-shaped tubercles on distal two thirds of inner upper margin; outer margin with very small granules; inner lower margin tuberculate, 4–5 tubercles on distal portion large, tooth-shaped. Carpus smooth with large spineshaped tooth medially on upper inner margin, small one behind it, two spine-shaped teeth on inner proximal margin, of various size; upper surface smooth; outer margin finely serrated. Palm (Fig. 13 c) relatively long, about 1.6 times as long as high in proximal portion, outer surface (Fig. 13 c) smooth, with microscopic granules on proximal portion; lower, upper margins with very small granules; inner surface (Fig. 13 d) smooth, without setae, large spineshaped tooth on proximal portion, 2–4 large granules before large tooth; lower proximal portion covered with large granules, distal lower portion depressed. Movable finger long, curved inward distally; upper margin smooth; cutting edge with differentiated subproximal tooth, large, subquadrate, low, small denticles distal to large one along cutting edge. Immovable finger short, with median tooth, large, extending proximally, small denticles on cutting edge, even on large tooth.</p><p>Walking legs narrow, long, anterior margin of segments bearing long setae. Merus with small subdistal tooth on anterior margin, that of second, third legs large, last leg usually lacking this subdistal tooth; posterior margin of merus minutely denticulate; merus of third leg about 3 times as long as wide; second leg with dense patch of plumose setae along proximal two thirds of anterior margin. Propodus slightly longer than dactylus, that of last leg as long as dactylus; last leg very small, unarmed, with long setae on posterior, anterior margins.</p><p>Posteromedian margin of epistome strongly convex, anterior part of buccal cavity smooth.</p><p>Male abdomen (Fig. 13 e) oblongly triangular; segments 3, 4 of same length, segment 5 slightly longer; segment 6 longest with lateral margins swollen proximally (Figs. 13 e, f), gently converging distally; telson slightly shorter than segment 6, with margins clearly converging distally, rounded distally.</p><p>Male G1 (Fig. 14 a) curved outward medially; apical chitinous process short (Fig. 14 b), nearly subdistal, directed laterally at 45° (Fig. 14 b); distal opening prominent (Fig. 14 c), located apically; long setae around apical part, long plumose setae sparsely set along lateral, ventral surfaces.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 14 e) nearly triangular; operculum small, located at inner side, roundish, directed outwards; lateral margins elevated.</p><p>Remarks. Pretzmann (1971) described M. ressli as a new species from Bandar-Abbas, on the Iranian coast near the Straits of Hormuz. Barnes (1976) reluctantly synonymised M. ressli with M. laevis and was the first to provide a detailed description for M. laevis based on paratype material of M. ressli (NHMW 3791). We have also examined Pretzmann’s specimens, which clearly belong to M. laevis . Further records of this species from the Persian Gulf are those by Titgen (1982) from Dubai and Apel (2001) from Ras al Khaimah (UAE). We found this species throughout the Iranian coast of the Persian Gulf from Bandar-Emam in the north to Bandar Abbas and Qeshm I. in the southeast.</p><p>This species is taxonomically well known and belongs to the subgenus Macrophthalmus Desmarest, 1823 . In a recent revision of the subgenus, Barnes (2010) placed this species together with some others (e.g. M. sulcatus and M. grandidieri) in what he calls the Macrophthalmus brevis -group. He cited some main characters for this group including, 1)-cornea is not extending beyond exorbital angle, 2)- carapace very broad (CB/CL more than 2), 3)- exorbital angle small and pointed, 4)- front narrow, 5)- male cheliped with spines near carpal joint, 6)- fingers long and usually downflexed. Macrophthalmus laevis shares several characters with other species of this group, but regarding some other morphological characters it seems to be isolated within the group. Macrophthalmus laevis does not have a very broad carapace, the CB/CL ratio being distinctly less than 2, averaging at about 1.7, whereas this ratio in other species of this group (e.g. M. sulcatus and M. grandidieri) is 2.3 and 2.1 respectively. The exorbital angle of M. laevis is relatively large and distinctly subrectangular rather than small and pointed as in other members of the group. The fingers of the male cheliped (see Figs. 13 c, d) in M. laevis are not remarkably long and downflexed as described by Barnes (2010) for the group. Regarding the presence of spines on the carpal joints of the male cheliped and the convex posteromedian margin of the epistome, M. laevis is related to this group. As is seen here, the new subdivision proposed by Barnes (2010), is not very satisfactory, at least concerning to position of some species (e.g. M. laevis and M. boscii). Thus, a sound phylogenetic study using genetics as well as morphological characters would be necessary in order to establish a definitive subgeneric system for the genus Macrophthalmus .</p><p>Biology. Macrophthalmus laevis is a medium-size species (largest male CL = 12.26, CB = 25.52 mm, largest female CL = 13, 79, CB = 23.76 mm). It occurs mainly in the mid littoral of intertidal flats with sediments ranging from sandy mud to muddy sand. Tirmizi &amp; Ghani (1988, 1996) recorded the deposit-feeding species buried in muddy substrates associated with mangroves. We found M. laevis mainly in the upper mid eulittoral zone on muddy sand, always mixed with shell fragments. Macropthalmus laevis appears not to be a burrow-building species, just burying in sedimentary substrates. It is found sympatric with M. sulcatus in some habitats with muddy sand with a low percentage of shells (e.g. in Iranian coast of the Persian Gulf: Qeshm I., Kuweii and Bandar- Abbas).</p><p>Geographical distribution. North-western Indian Ocean: Persian Gulf, Gulf of Oman, Pakistan.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE552FFFE8FF774D37FAE37B14	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE5523FFECFF774C87FE80788C.text	587287CE5523FFECFF774C87FE80788C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus serenei Takeda & Komai 1991	<div><p>Macrophthalmus serenei Takeda &amp; Komai, 1991</p><p>(Figs. 15 a–e, 16a–e, 17c, d)</p><p>Macrophthalmus verreauxi — Nobili 1906b: 317. — Sakai 1976: 610, 378.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) verreauxi — Serène 1973: 107, figs. 2a–b, pl. 3, figs. C–D. — Barnes 1976: 135, fig. 1; 1977: 276 (in key). [not Macrophthalmus verreauxi H. Milne-Edwards, 1848: 358 = Macrophthalmus telescopicus (Owen, 1839)]</p><p>Macrophthalmus telescopicus — Basson et al. 1977: 231, 256. — Titgen 1982: 253 (in list). — Vousden 1987: 35.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) kempi Serène 1982: 1140 .</p><p>Macrophthalmus serenei Takeda &amp; Komai 1991: 168, figs. 3a–e.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) serenei — Komai et al. 1995: 122, fig. 9a–p. — Apel 2001: 109, 110. — Barnes 2010: 34 (in key), 40.</p><p>Type locality. Macrophthalmus serenei: Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.</p><p>Material examined. Holotype: 1 male (MNHN B12617), Red Sea, Perim and Obock, Jousseaume, 1879; Paratypes: 4 males, 1 female, 7 juv. (MNHN B12618), type locality same as holotype.</p><p>Persian Gulf: 1 male (SMF 36098) (CL = 17.8, CB = 11.7 mm), Saudi Arabia, N. Jubail, Abu Ali, 27º 18.833'N, 49º 57'E, 0 8.04.1993, M. Richmond; 1 male (SMF 36099), Saudi Arabia, N. Jubail, southern entrance of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27º 24.09'N, 49º 13.53'E, rocky shore, 23.07.1992, M. Apel.</p><p>Redescription. Carapace (Figs. 17 c, d) wider than long (CB/CL = 1.5), relatively convex, small granules set sparsely on lateral region of carapace, some relatively large ones in groups of 2–5; transverse row of low tubercles extending curvedly from middle of third lateral tooth toward central region. Regions well defined, epibranchial furrow relatively deep. Frontal region smooth; front narrow, about 0.19 times as wide as carapace, anterior edge bilobed.</p><p>Lateral margin (Fig. 15 a) with three distinct teeth including exorbital angle; exorbital angle oblongly triangular, directed laterally, larger than second, maximum carapace width between first teeth; second broadly triangular, directed laterally; third smallest, but well discernible.</p><p>Eyestalk narrow (Figs. 15 a, 17c, d), remarkably long, about 3/4 as long as carapace width, extending beyond exorbital angle.</p><p>Chelipeds (Figs. 15 c, d) equal. Merus (Fig. 15 b) with upper surface smooth, bearing some round tubercles near inner margin; outer margin fully covered with denticles, larger distally, distal portion smooth; upper inner margin sparsely set with small granules, denticles on distal portion; lower margin with small granules; inner surface smooth, with patch of setae. Palm about 1.3 times as long as high in proximal portion, outer surface (Fig. 15 c) with small granules on most of it, granular ridge on lower portion, extending from subproximal part almost to end of immovable finger; lower, upper margins with small granules; inner surface (Fig. 15 d) smooth, with small granules on proximal portion, small patch of setae covering distal portion of palm, base of both fingers. Movable finger long; upper margin with small granules along whole length; cutting edge with large subproximal tooth, being low, subquadrate. Immovable finger short, with large median tooth, extending proximally. Walking legs stout in comparison to cheliped. Merus with anterior margin being serrated, with sparsely set long setae and large subdistal tooth, merus of fourth legs without this subdistal tooth, posterior margin of merus minutely denticulate, with some large denticles distally, merus of second walking leg about 2.8 times as long as wide, with patch of plumose setae along one fourth of inner margin.</p><p>Male abdomen (Fig. 15 e) moderately narrow; segments 3, 4 of same length; segment 5 about as long as segment 6; lateral margins of segment 6 remarkably swollen proximally, gently converging distally; telson semicircular, shorter than segment 6, about 2 times as long as wide, with margins curved, distally rounded.</p><p>Male G1 relatively narrow (Figs. 16 a, b, c), curved outward medially; apical process remarkably long, narrow, directed ventrolaterally at about 45°; subdistal palp prominent on dorsal surface; distal opening small, located distally on apical process; long setae around apical part, not completely concealing apical process.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 16 e) on outer wall of depression, directed mesially, without operculum; upper margin rounded.</p><p>Remarks. Serène (1973) distinguished three species within the M. telescopicus complex: M. telescopicus (Owen, 1839), M. verreauxi H. Milne-Edwards, 1848 und M. milloti Crosnier, 1965 . A re-examination of the type material of M. verreauxi by the same author, however, revealed that this material was identical with M. telescopicus and that the species that is distinct from M. telescpopicus needs to be renamed. He thus described it as M. kempi (Serène 1982) . This name, however, was a homonym of M. convexus kempi Gravely, 1927, and therefore could not be used for another species of the genus (Takeda &amp; Komai 1991; Komai et al. 1995). Takeda &amp; Komai (1991) thus renamed the species M. serenei .</p><p>Macrophthalmus serenei is easily recognisable amongst the Persian Gulf species of the genus by having very long eyestalks, which extend far beyond the exorbital angle. It thus belongs, based on this and other characters, to the Macrophthalmus telescopicus -group (Barnes 2010).</p><p>Komai et al. (1995) mentioned spinules occurring along the lateral face of the terminal process of the G1. In the specimens from the Persian Gulf, such spinules were not seen on the terminal process, instead there are some short setae along lateral surface of the terminal process. Komai et al. (1995) most probably considered these short setae as spinules.</p><p>Macrophthalmus serenei has been recorded from the Saudi coast of the Persian Gulf by Basson et al. (1977) (as M. telescopicus) and by Apel (2001).</p><p>Biology. Macrophthalmus serenei is a medium-size species. Nobili (1906b) has given the measurement for the largest male and female of the type series (largest male CL = 10.5, CB = 18 mm, largest female CL =9, CB = 15 mm), the male measurement being almost identical to that of the largest male specimen (CL = 17.8, CB = 11.7 mm) from the Saudi Arabian coast in the Persian Gulf (SMF 36098). Macrophthalmus serenei is an intertidal crab that has been collected on sandy flats (Basson et al. 1977) and rocky shores (Apel 2001) of the Saudi Arabian coast of the Persian Gulf.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Wide Indo-West Pacific distribution: Madagascar, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, Japan, Eastern Australia.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE5523FFECFF774C87FE80788C	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE5524FFD0FF7749FAFC4A7E97.text	587287CE5524FFD0FF7749FAFC4A7E97.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus sinuspersici Naderloo & Turkay 2010	<div><p>Macrophthalmus sinuspersici Naderloo &amp; Türkay, 2010</p><p>(Figs. 17 e, f, 18a–i)</p><p>Macrophthalmus boscii — Crosnier 1965: 134, figs. 244. — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996: 118, fig. 45 [not Macrophthalmus boscii Audouin, 1826].</p><p>Macrophthalmus sinuspersici — Naderloo &amp; Türkay 2010: 1, figs. 3c–d, 4c–d, 5a–f, 6a–g, 7a–c.</p><p>Type locality. Persian Gulf</p><p>Material examined. Holotype: 1 male (CL = 7.33, CB = 9.09 mm) (SMF 36904), Persian Gulf, Hormozgan, 35 km E. of Gavbandi, Moghdan Village, 27º 02'N, 53º 16'E, rocky/sandy, 12.07.2006, R. Naderloo.</p><p>Paratypes. Persian Gulf: 2 males, 1 female (ZUTC Brach1191), locality information same as holotype; 1 male, 2 females (SMF 38349), Qeshm I., south coast, 10 km E. of Salakh, 26º 40 'N, 55º 44 'E, rocky bed, 11.05.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 1 male (SMF 36905), Qeshm I., 2 km E. of Namakdan, 26º 38'N, 55º 36'E, sandy rocky, 0 8.04.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi. Gulf of Oman: 2 males (ZUTC Brach1194), Chabahar Bay, coast of Portuguese castle, 25º 19'N, 60º 37 'E, rocky, cobble beach, 17.11.2005, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 1 female (SMF 36906), Baluchistan, Djod village, 26º 57'N, 56º 00'E, rocky bed, 23.10.2006, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 3 males, 2 females (ovig.) (ZUTC Brach1228), Djod Village, 25º 27'N, 59º 30'E, rocky bed, sandy beach, 21.11.2005, A. Sari, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi.</p><p>Other material. Gulf of Aden: 2 males, 2 females (SMF 24496), Djibouti, Ras Siyahn, 12º 28.590'N, 43º 18.889'E, mangroves (lagoon), 24.06.1996; 10 males, 5 females (3 ovig.), (MNHN B10713) Perim and Obock, 1897, Jousseaume, det. Nobili, 1905 (as Euplax boscii); 2 males, 1 female (SMF 25149), Djibouti, Djibouti City, Plage de Triton, under stone, 18.03.1987, A. Allspach, G. Fischer &amp; M. Türkay.</p><p>Red Sea: 1 male, 3 females (NHM 1984:446), Egypt, Al-Hurghada.</p><p>East Africa: 22 males, 18 females (5 ovig.), 9 juv. (NHM 1973:71), Dar Es Salam, Tanganyika, 1971-2, R.G. Hartnoll; 2 males (NHM 1951:9:13:14-15), Mozambique, Maputo Bay (formerly) Delagoa Bay, O.S. Taltelsall; 2 males (NHM 1964.7.10.78), Dar Es Salam, J. Gordon; 6 males, 9 females (4 ovig.) (NHM 2006- 1854-1869 16), Aldabra, N. side of Moustique, Lagoon, sand flat, under blue green algal crust, 15.12.67, Royal Society Expedition, Aldabra 1967–68, J.D. Taylor; 4 males, 1 female (ovig.) (NHM 1882:24), Mozambique beach, Dr. Coppinger; 2 males, 1 female (NHM 1995:6:22:3-5), Shimonii, 50 m S. of Mombasa, H. Copley; 1 female (ovig.) (SMF 38536), Kenya, S. of Malindi, Watamu, rocky shore with dead coral covered with algae, 24.07.1989 – 07.08.1989, H.-G. Müller.</p><p>Madagascar: 1 male (MNHN B10712), Tulear, G. Petit, 1921; 3 male, 1 female, 1 juv. (MNHN B10720), zône intertidale, Ile Europa, coll. P. Fourmanoir, det. A. Crosnier; 1 male (NHM 1973:91), Madagascar, Nosy Be, 1971, Hartnoll;</p><p>Indonesia: 2 males (SMF 5439), Aru I., Ngaiboor, 20.02.1968. leg. H. Morten; 1 female (ovig.) (SMF 38536), Kenya, S. of Malindi, Watamu, rocky shore with dead coral covered with algae, 24.07.1989 – 07.08.1989, H.G. Müller.</p><p>Papua New Guinea: 1 male, 1 female (SMF 38539), New Ireland, Ulul Plantation (Father John's Home) ca. 30 km SE of Kavieng, among seagrass and Thalassia, 19.07.1998, M. Türkay.</p><p>Australia: 1 female (NHM 1937:9:21:270-273), Great Barrier Reef, General survey, low islands, St. IR17, IR70, 22.03.1929 - 08.05.1929; 1 female (NHM 1937:9:21:270-273), Great Barrier Reef, General survey, St. IR70, 08.05.1929; 1 female (NHM 1937:9:21:270-273), Great Barrier Reef, General survey, Porites pond, 22.03.1929; 4 males, 6 females (NHM 1937:9:21:270-273), Great Barrier Reef, General survey, low islands in the Queensland, 22.03.1929; 6 males, 9 females (3 ovig.) (NHM 1966:1.24:4-20), Monte Bello I., H.M.S. Campania; 2 males, 3 females (NHM 1966:1:24:21-25), Monte Bello I., H.M.S Campania; 1 male, 3 females (NHM 1881: 31), Queensland, Port Male, 0 5.05.1881, Dr. Coppinger; 1 male (NHM 1881: 31), Queensland, Porte Molle, 0 5.05.1881, Dr. Coppinger.</p><p>Unknown locality: 1 male, 4 females (3 ovig.) (MNHN B10716).</p><p>Comparative material. Macrophthalmus boscii Audouin, 1826: 3 males, 4 females (ovig.) (SLR 1479 RMNH), Egypt, Sinai, Gulf of Aqaba, 09.05.1968; 3 males, 1 female, 1 male (juv.) (SLR 2847 RMNH), Gulf of Suez, El-Belahim, 28º 22'N, 33º 22'E, 02.05.1970; 1 male, 1 female, 1 juv. (SMF 26292), Egypt, Manteqad al Bahr al Ahmar, Hurghada, Marine Biological Station, 27º 21'N, 33º 42'E, intertidal, 16.09.1994. C. Rhode &amp; N. Dressler; 1 male, 3 females (NHM 1984:446), Egypt, Al-Hurghada; 1 female (RMNH 30834), Gulf of Suez, Sinai, 01.05.1970; 1 female (RMNH 30835), Ras el Misalla, Gulf of Suez, Sinai, 01.02.1969; 1 female (RMNH 30833), Gulf of Suez, Sinai, Ras es Sudr, 10.08.1970; 2 males (CL = 3.82–4.15, CB = 4.45–5.03 mm, cotypes of Macrophthalmus franchettii), Red Sea, Assab, 11.02.1929.</p><p>Diagnosis. Carapace slightly wider than long (CB/CL = 1.2); posterior surface relatively uneven, covered with small granules, no longitudinal row of granules on branchial regions; regions well defined with deep furrows. Front slightly more than 0.25 times as wide as carapace. Lateral margin (Fig. 18 a) with three teeth including exorbital angle; exorbital angle nearly subquadrate; second slightly longer than first; third very small, but usually distinguishable.</p><p>Chelipeds (Figs. 18 b, c) nearly equal, subequal or even unequal. Merus (Fig. 18 d) with upper surface smooth, short stridulating ridge near inner margin, easily distinguishable by its brown colour, incompletely concealed by long setae. Palm relatively long, about 1.5 times as long as high in distal portion; inner surface mostly covered with patch of long setae, patch of setae continuous to end of fingers; cutting edge of movable fingers subproximally with large subquadrate differentiated tooth.</p><p>Male G1 with apical chitinous process short, directed laterally at 45° (Fig. 18 g), distal margin strongly concave, mesial surface of apical part deeply depressed.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 18 i) relatively small, with outer margin oblique to median line of sternum; operculum small, directed outwards.</p><p>Remarks. Macrophthalmus sinuspersici belongs to the M. boscii -group and is closely related to M. boscii Audouin, 1825, and M. lisae Poupin &amp; Bouchard, 2010 . It is, however, easily distinguishable from those species using several taxonomic characters (Naderloo &amp; Türkay 2010). Macrophthalmus sinuspersici has a distinct longitudinal stridulating ridge on the inner surface of the merus of the male cheliped, which is absent in M. boscii and M. lisae . The exorbital tooth of the carapace in M. sinuspersici and M. lisae is distinctly quadrate or semi-quadrate, terminally blunt, whereas in M. boscii it is nearly triangular and clearly directed forwards. All three species are different from each other regarding the apical part of the male G1. Macrophthalmus sinuspersici is clearly different from that of M. boscii . In M. sinuspersici the apical process of G1 is directed in an anterior-posterior direction and is strongly emarginated, with a depressed mesial surface, whereas that of M. boscii is unique with a plate-shaped apical process, being directed obliquely ventro-posteriorly. The apical process of G 1 in M. lisae is rounded, mesially convex and with an extreme depression on the lateral surface.</p><p>The female gonopore of M. sinuspersici is relatively large, having a small operculum which directs obliquely lateral. In females of M. boscii, however, the operculum is remarkably large, covering most of the gonopore. A further differentiating character is a patch of setae on the inner surface of the male chelipeds. In M. sinuspersici and M. boscii, this patch continues to the inner surface of both fingers, whereas in M. lisae it is restricted to the inner surface of the palm, whereas the inner surface of the fingers is glabrous.</p><p>Macrophthalmus sinuspersici is widely distributed in the Indo-West Pacific, but absent from the Red Sea, where only M. boscii occurs (Naderloo &amp; Türkay 2010). Macrophthalmus lisae is only known from its type locality on the island of Mayotte in the, western Indian Ocean (Poupin &amp; Bouchard 2010).</p><p>Biology. Macrophthalmus sinuspersici is a small-size species with the largest male and female specimens from the Persian Gulf measuring CL = 8.35, CB = 10.14 mm, and CL = 6.76, CB = 8.56 mm, respectively. It is the only species of Macrophthalmus that occurs in the mid intertidal zone of rocky shores. This quickly moving species is found underneath stones covered with an algal mat at low tide.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Wide Indo-West Pacific distribution: Madagascar, East Africa, Gulf of Aden, Red Sea, Persian Gulf, Pakistan, Indonesia, northern and eastern Australia.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE5524FFD0FF7749FAFC4A7E97	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE5519FFD4FF7748E4FEE57D2F.text	587287CE5519FFD4FF7748E4FEE57D2F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus sulcatus H. Milne-Edwards 1852	<div><p>Macrophthalmus sulcatus H. Milne-Edwards, 1852</p><p>(Figs. 19 a–e, 20a–f, 21c–d)</p><p>Macrophthalmus sulcatus H. Milne-Edwards 1852: 156 . — Alcock 1900: 379.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) dilatatus sulcatus — Barnes 1970: 216, fig. 4. — Titgen 1982: 149, 253 (in list). — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996: 112, fig. 42.</p><p>Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) sulcatus — Pretzmann 1971: 482. — Apel &amp; Türkay 1999: 134. — Apel 2001: 110.</p><p>Macrophthalmus sulcatus sulcatus — Pretzmann 1974: 438, figs. 2, –3. — Barnes 2010: 35 (in key), 40.</p><p>Macrophthalmus grandidieri — Basson et al. 1977: 60, 63, 228, 231, 235. — Titgen 1982: 253 (in list). — Clayton 1986: 87, fig. 3. — Jones 1986a: 159, pl. 45. — Vousden 1987: 35. — Tirmizi &amp; Ghani 1996: 114, fig. 43. — Al-Khayat &amp; Jones 1999: 58, 61.</p><p>Macrophthalmus dilatatus sulcatus — Al-Ghais &amp; Cooper 1996: 417, fig. 6.</p><p>Type locality. Île de France (= Mauritius)</p><p>Material examined. Persian Gulf: Iran: 4 females (1 ovig.) (SMF 36899), Bushehr city, coast of the Jofre police station, 28º 58'N, 50º 49'E, sandy band behind rocky/coral bed, 24.05.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; H. Salehi; 1 male, 3 females (SMF 36900), Bandar-Abbas, E. of city, 27º 11'N, 56º 21'E, muddy sand, 23.04.2008, R. Naderloo, A. Kazemi &amp; A. Keykhosravi; 1 male (SMF 36901), Qeshm I., 2 km E. of desalination centre, 26º 56'N, 55º 47'E, muddy sand with shells, 15.01.2008, R. Naderloo &amp; M. Türkay; 2 males, 4 females (1 ovig.), 3 juv. (SMF 36903), Bushehr, Laylateyn, sandy coast of khor (water channel), 17.10.2009, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 1 male (SMF 36885), Bushehr, Bandar-Rig, 29º 28'N, 50º 37'E, muddy sand flat, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi; 1 male (SMF 36902), Bushehr, Bavirat Police station, 30º 10'N, 50º 05'E, sandy substrate, (water channel), 17.10.2009, R. Naderloo &amp; A. Kazemi.</p><p>UAE: 4 males (SMF 36081), Ras al Khaymah, Mangrove, N. of Rams, 25º 53'N, 55º 02'E, sandy mud, 10.07. 1995.</p><p>Saudi Arabia: 5 males (SMF 36088), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, S. Dauhat al Dafi, 27º 8.23'N, 49º 23.41'E, sandy, 27.09.1992, M. Apel; 2 males, 2 females (SMF 36084), N. Jubail, Abu Ali, 26.06.1992, M. Apel; 5 males, 6 females (SMF 36090), Jubail Marine Wildlife Sanctuary, N. of Jubail, SW bank of Dauhat al Musallamiya, 27º 23.33'N, 49º 10.15'E, 22.06.1992, M. Apel; 1 male (SMF 36097), Ras al Mishab, 28º 11.35'N, 47º 37.06'E, 28.01.1993; 1 female (ovig.) (SMF 36090), Manifa Bay, 27º 34.1'N, 49º 10.15'E, 22.06.1992, M. Apel.</p><p>Comparative material. Malaysia: 1 male (NHM 1900:12:1:23), Santubong, Western Malaysia, coll. Shelford, det. R.S.K. Barnes; 1 male (NHM 1880:6), det. R.S.K. Barnes; 1 female (MNHN B. 10968, CL = 7.3, CB = 16.5) Île de France (Mauritius).</p><p>Redescription. Carapace (Figs. 19 a, 21c) much wider than long (CB/CL = 2.3), relatively convex, bearing small granules on carapace; two rows of relatively large granules on epibranchial region (Fig. 19 a), anterior one transverse, posterior one longitudinal; transverse line of small granules on posterior region, extending parallel to posterior margin, granules extensively lined. Regions well defined; furrows defining gastric, epibranchial regions remarkably deep. Frontal region smooth, deflexed; front narrow, about 0.12 times as wide as carapace; anterior edge smooth, slightly concave, nearly bi-lobed, frontal furrow faint, posteriorly divided.</p><p>Lateral margin (Fig. 19 a) with three distinct teeth (including exorbital angle); first one remarkably smaller than second, elongatedly triangular, directed outwards; second one largest, broadly triangular, directed forwards, anterior, posterior margin sometimes slightly concave, separated from former by deep U-shaped notch; third one smallest, directed forwards; posterolateral margin nearly straight, very slightly converging posteriorly, with granules nearly high, long-spaced, beset with long setae.</p><p>Eyestalks narrow (Fig. 19 a), long, with half of cornea extending beyond second lateral tooth; upper orbital margin convex, regularly granular,, granules small, with even smaller ones in between; lower margin granular, granules small, different-size, some relatively high, usually directed inwards.</p><p>Third maxilliped large, ischium slightly less than twice length of merus, inner margin of ischium, merus with long setae, outer margin without setae, outer surface smooth.</p><p>Chelipeds (Fig. 19 d, e, 21c, d) nearly equal. Merus (Figs. 19 b, c) with long setae along inner upper margin, becoming denser distally, 4–5 long spine-shaped tubercles on two thirds of distal margin; inner lower margin finely granular, 2–3 long spine-shaped ones subdistally; posterior margin with small granules. Carpus (Fig. 19 e) with large spine-shaped tooth medially on upper inner margin, large spine-shaped tooth on inner proximal margin, some small ones between these two spines; outer surface finely granular in lower portion. Palm (Figs. 19 d, e) long, about 2.3 times as long as high as in proximal part, gently becoming higher distally, outer surface (Fig. 19 d) nearly smooth, covered with microscopic granules, dense granules on lower, upper margin; longitudinal ridge on lower portion, running from proximal part to near base of immovable finger, not reaching to latter, granular with large granules in middle part; inner surface (Fig. 19 e) with patch of dense setae on upper portion of palm, inner surface of fingers, some long setae in between, large spine-shaped tooth on proximal portion, small granules on middle portion, lower proximal portion densely covered with small granules, distal lower portion depressed; upper margin with row of tubercles, large, conical, decreasing in size distally. Movable finger long, relatively narrow, curved inward distally, upper margin with small granules, cutting edge with small teeth, becoming larger large in proximal half. Immovable finger short, with median large tooth granular, markedly sinuous proximally, row of 7–8 denticles on distal portion.</p><p>Cheliped of females small, bearing long setae on posterior, lower inner margin of merus, margins of carpus; palm with upper margin being finely granular, lower margin faintly granular; lower half of outer surface depressed, upper half finely granular; inner upper margin of manus, fingers with long setae; cutting edges with numerous small teeth.</p><p>Walking legs narrow, long. Merus with small subdistal tooth, posterior margin minutely denticulate, that of third leg about 4.2 times as long as wide; propodus as long as dactylus; last leg very small, unarmed, with long setae on posterior, anterior margins of all segments.</p><p>Male abdomen (Fig. 20 e) broadly triangular, segments 3, 4, 5 of same length; segment 6 slightly longer than previous ones; telson longer than segment 6, with margin curving, resulting in semicircular form.</p><p>Posteromedian margin of epistome strongly convex, faint ridge on anterior part of buccal cavity.</p><p>Male G1 moderately long (Fig. 20 a), curved outward proximally; apical chitinous process (Fig. 20 b) short, curved laterally, lateral surface depressed, apical margin nearly straight, distal opening (Fig. 20 c) on mesiodorsal face; long setae around apical part, long plumose setae set sparsely along lateral, ventral surface.</p><p>Female gonopore (Fig. 20 f) with margins moderately high at anterior, lateral sides; operculum large at inner side, nearly round, directed outwards.</p><p>Remarks. There are several records of this species from the Persian Gulf: Pretzmann (1971) recorded it from Bandar-Abbas (Iran), Al-Ghais &amp; Cooper (1996) from Umm al Qaiwain (UAE), and Apel (2001) from Ras al Khaimah (UAE) and Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, Apel and Türkay (1999) mentioned material identified as M. grandidieri recorded from the Persian Gulf [Basson et al. (1977) from Saudi Arabia; Clayton (1986) and Jones (1986) from Kuwait; Vousden (1987) from Bahrain] that convincingly can be assigned to M. sulcatus . Therefore, M. grandidieri has neither been recorded from the Arabian side of the Persian Gulf nor was it found in the present study along the Iranian coast. Macrophthalmus sulcatus, however, is a quite common species of the intertidal zone of sandy shores throughout the Persian Gulf. We also re-examined some material from the eastern Indian Ocean that revealed all specimens of the Persian Gulf are identical with those from the eastern limit of the distributional range. A female specimen in the dry collection of MNHN lacking most of the appendages (MNHN 10968), which is labelled “Ile France ” (= Mauritius), and was indicated by Apel (2001) as the type material, even though there is no label indicating its type status. Because this specimen is the only record from Mauritius or adjacent regions, there is still some doubt regarding the correct labelling. Persian Gulf specimens, however, are very similar to this specimen, in particular in carapace characters.</p><p>Barnes (1970) defined two subspecies, M. dilatatus dilatatus and M. dilatatus sulcatus, and synonymised M. malaccensis Tweedie, 1937, with the latter. Ng et al. (2008) listed M. malaccensis and M. sulcatus as two distinct species. Barnes (2010) attributed M. sulcatus sulcatus and M. sulcatus malaccensis as subspecies and mentioned that M. sulcatus sulcatus is confined to the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, whereas the latter inhabits muddy sand flats in the Bay of Bengal and western Malaysia. We follow Ng et al. (2008) in considering M. sulcatus as a distinct species, and propose that M. sulcatus is not limited to the western Indian Ocean, as we examined material from western Malaysia, which is surely identical with those from the Persian Gulf (NHM 1900:12:1:23). Barnes’s (1970) illustrations and description of M. sulcatus was based on material from western Malaysia (Santubong). The taxonomic problem of these two species needs to be further clarified and their geographical distribution needs to be studied using material from different regions.</p><p>Biology. Macrophthalmus sulcatus inhabits the mid intertidal zone, where it is found on shores with fine sand, sometimes mixed with mud and shells. It is a medium-size species (largest male CL = 13.70, CB = 29.86 mm, largest female CL = 12.61, Cb = 28.90 mm). Nothing is known about its life history.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Indian Ocean: Mauritius (?), Persian Gulf, Pakistan, west coast of India, western Malaysia.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE5519FFD4FF7748E4FEE57D2F	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
587287CE551DFFD5FF774B6BFA767947.text	587287CE551DFFD5FF774B6BFA767947.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrophthalmus	<div><p>Key to the species of Macrophthalmus in the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman</p><p>1. Distinct chitinous plectrum near lower margin of inner surface of merus of male cheliped........................... 2</p><p>- Without plectrum on the upper surface of merus of male cheliped............................................... 3</p><p>2. Eyestalks stout, hardly reaching exorbital angle; lower orbital margin with small rounded tubercles; palm with longitudinal ridge on outer surface, inner surface fully covered with dense setae; small-size species (CL &lt;10 mm); occurring on rocky shores.................................................................................... M. sinuspersici</p><p>- Eyestalks narrow, not reaching to exorbital angle; lower orbital margin with long tubercles; palm without longitudinal ridge on outer surface, inner surface only with a longitudinal row of setae on upper potion; large-size species; occurring on muddy substrates....................................................................................... M. dentipes</p><p>3. Eyestalks projecting beyond tip of exorbital angle........................................................... 4</p><p>- Eyestalks never projecting beyond tip of exorbital angle...................................................... 6</p><p>4. Eyestalks extremely long, extending beyond exorbital angle for half of its length; second anterolateral teeth of carapace nearly as long as exorbital angle....................................................................... M. serenei</p><p>- Eyestalks not extremely long, extending only slightly beyond exorbital angle...................................... 5</p><p>5. Apical portion of cornea with unique extension, about half of the cornea extending beyond exorbital angle; exorbital angle longer than second lateral tooth of carapace; inner surface of palm of male cheliped without spine on proximal portion, without patch of setae................................................................................ M. graeffei</p><p>- Apical portion of cornea without extension, extending beyond exorbital angle; second lateral tooth of carapace larger than exorbital angle; inner surface of palm of male cheliped with spines on proximal portion, patch of dense setae covering most part of inner surface, immovable finger strongly deflected............................................. M. sulcatus</p><p>6. Exorbital angle much smaller than second lateral tooth of carapace; palm with longitudinal ridge on outer surface, inner surface of palm with spines on proximal portion.................................................... M. grandidieri</p><p>- Exorbital angle not larger than second lateral tooth of carapace; eyestalks never reaching tip of exorbital angle............ 7</p><p>7. Walking legs with dense setae; palm of male cheliped with inner surface fully covered with dense setae, without spines on proximal portion............................................................................ M. depressus</p><p>- Walking legs without [dense] setae; palm of male cheliped without setae on inner surface; spines on proximal portion of inner surface of male cheliped......................................................................... M. laevis</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/587287CE551DFFD5FF774B6BFA767947	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	Naderloo, Reza;Türkay, Michael;Apel, Michael	Naderloo, Reza, Türkay, Michael, Apel, Michael (2011): Brachyuran crabs of the family Macrophthalmidae Dana, 1851 (Decapoda: Brachyura: Macrophthalmidae) of the Persian Gulf. Zootaxa 2911: 1-42, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.203098
