identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
2C268785586AFFF1A1D9FC64FDF1438D.text	2C268785586AFFF1A1D9FC64FDF1438D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cambarus (Puncticambarus) guenteri	<div><p>Cambarus (Puncticambarus) guenteri, new species</p><p>Figures 3–5, Table 4</p><p>Cambarus robustus Girard, 1852:90 [in part];— Taylor and Schuster, 2004:103, Figs. 74A,B, 75. Cambarus (Puncticambarus) robustus .—Hobbs, 1969:101, Figs. 1 c, 13a, 17o [in part]; 1974b:21, Fig. 87 [in part]; 1989:27, Fig. 104 [in part].</p><p>Diagnosis. Body and eyes pigmented. Rostrum broad, moderately excavated, and deflected anteriorly, margins not thickened, subparallel to slightly converging anteriorly. Acumen distinctly triangular with prominent dorsally directed spiniform tubercle at terminus. Areola 3.9–7.8 (x ‾ = 5.3, n = 23, SE = 0.91) times as long as wide with 4–8 (usually 5) punctations across narrowest point. Cervical spine rarely present (19% of individuals); usually 3–4 (x ‾ = 3.4, SE = 0.7) tubercles present instead of spines (81% of individuals). Mandibular, branchiostegal, and orbital regions of carapace with well-developed tubercles. Postorbital ridges short; spiniform, dorsally directed tubercle present in juveniles and subadults; adult postorbital ridge terminating in rounded tubercle; rarely spiniform tubercles present in adults. Suborbital angle present. Total carapace length (TCL) 1.7–2.0 (x ‾ = 1.9, n = 23, SE = 0.06) times longer than width. Form I and II males possessing hook on ischium of third pereopods only; hook gently curved at apex, overarching basioischial joint in Form I males, not reaching basioischial joint in Form II males; hooks not opposed by tubercle on basis. Mesial surface of chelae with two rows of tubercles; mesial most row with 8–13 (x ‾ = 8.7, n = 23, SE = 1.2) tubercles, second dorsal row with 6–12 (x ‾ = 6.1, n = 23, SE = 1.1) tubercles. Tubercles rarely extend from mesial surface to body of palm forming two additional disorganized rows of tubercles. Ventral surface of chelae with 1–2 (x ‾ = 1.4, n = 23, SE = 0.89) subpalmar tubercles near the dactyl/ propodus junction; when more than one subpalmar tubercle present, tubercles oriented tightly together. Dorsal longitudinal ridge of dactyl consisting of several well developed pronounced scattered tubercles. Dorsomedian ridge of fixed finger of propodus pronounced. Well defined lateral impression at the junction of the fixed finger with the propodus. Dactyl and fixed finger with sharp corneous subterminal tip. Form I male palm length 62.6– 66.8% (x ‾ = 64.3%, n = 5, SE = 1.7%) of palm width, Form I male palm length 27.2–29.7% (x ‾ = 27.9%, n = 5, SE = 1.0%) of total propodus length; female dactyl length 62.3–64.2% (x ‾ = 63.2%, n = 5, SE = 0.75%) of total propodus length. First pleopod of Form I male with short terminal elements. Central projection not tapering distally; recurved&gt; 90° to main shaft of gonopod, with distinct subapical notch. Mesial process directed 90° to shaft, bent cephalolaterally; inflated cephalically, tapering to distinct caudal point at or slightly beyond terminance of central projection. Annulus ventralis immovable; distinctly asymmetrical posteriorly; cephalic portion with median trough leading to strongly sculptured central fossa; exaggerated “S” bend in sinus terminating at caudal edge.</p><p>Description of Holotypic Male, Form I. (Fig. 3 A–D, H, G, J, K; Table 4). Body somewhat compressed dorsoventrally (Fig. 3 A); carapace posterior to cervical groove slightly wider than abdomen. Carapace depth less than carapace width at caudodorsal margin of cervical groove. Total carapace length 43.6 mm; PCL 35.2 mm. Areola 5.8 times longer than wide, with 6 punctations across narrowest part (Fig. 3 H); length of areola 38.3% of TCL (47.4% of PCL). Rostrum excavated, more so anteriorly than posteriorly; margins not thickened, subparallel and continuous to base of acumen; floor of rostrum with numerous punctations. Rostrum 1.8 times longer than wide. Acumen distinctly triangular, ending in dorsally directed corneous tip (Fig. 3 H). Postorbital ridges well developed, terminating in spiniform tubercles. Suborbital angle distinct, with tubercle (Fig. 3 A). Cervical spine absent, but a well developed tubercle present. Mandibular, branchiostegal, and orbital regions of carapace ornamented with well-developed tubercles; greatest tubercle density in hepatic region. Abdomen supraequal in length to carapace, pleura rounded cephaloventrally, angled caudoventrally. Lateral margins of terga angulate; lateral margin of second pleuron deeply furrowed. Cephalic section of telson with 2 large spines in each caudolateral corner. Proximal podomere of uropod with distal spine on mesial lobe; mesial ramus of uropod with median ridge ending distally in distomedian spine not overreaching margin of ramus; laterodistal spine pronounced. Distal margin of proximal segment of lateral ramus of right uropod having 14 immovable, small spines and 1 lateral, large movable spine. Cephalomedian lobe of epistome subtriangular, zygoma moderately arched (Fig. 3 G); cephalolateral margins thickened, forming sharp angle at junction with endostyle (Fig. 3 G). Body of epistome possessing prominent cephalomedian fovea. Antennal scale broadest proximally; lateral margin thickened, terminating in large corneous spine; setiferous on mesial margin. Right antennal scale 7.4 mm long, 2.8 mm wide (Fig. 3 D). Tip of right antenna reaching middle of telson when adpressed. Mesial surface of right chela with 2 well-formed rows of tubercles; mesial most row with 9 tubercles, second dorsal row with 7 tubercles (Fig. 3 K). Several disorganized tubercles present on upper mesial surface of palm. Palm length 65.6% of palm width; depth of palm 9.9 mm. Ventral surface of palm containing 3 subpalmar tubercles forming a triangle. Dorsal longitudinal ridge of dactyl developed and possessing moderate sized tubercles (Fig. 3 K); dactyl terminating in large corneous spine. Dorsomedian ridge of fixed finger of propodus pronounced. Fixed finger junction with well defined lateral impression; numerous setiferous punctations present with sharp, corneous tip. All measurements and counts from right chela. Carpus with prominent dorsal furrow (Fig. 3 K) and 4 weak dorsomesial tubercles; remainder of surface with scattered setiferous punctations; mesial margin with large, procurved spine near midlength, and reduced proximal spine. Distodorsal surface of merus with 9 spiniform tubercles; ventrolateral ridge with 2 small spines and one large, corneous distal spine; ventromesial ridge with 3 well-developed spines. Carapace depth less than width. Hook on ischium of third pereopods as described in diagnosis. Form I gonopod as described in diagnosis (Fig. 3 B–D); tip reaching anterior margin of fourth caudomesial boss.</p><p>Description of Allotypic Female. (Fig. 3 I, Table 4).––Differing from holotype in following respects; carapace height less than carapace width (17.0 and 21.8 mm, respectively); TCL 42.2 mm, PCL 34.3 mm. Areola length 33.8% of TCL (41.7% of PCL), 5.3 times as long as wide. Posterior portion of rostrum more excavated than anterior portion; rostrum 1.9 times longer than wide. Abdomen length 43.9 mm. Mesial surface of chelae with 2 rows of tubercles; mesial most row with 6 tubercles, second dorsal row with 6. Palm length (9.6 mm) 67.1% of palm width (14.3 mm); depth of palm 6.9 mm. All measurements and counts from right chela. Antennal scale 6.8 mm long, 3.1 mm wide. Annulus ventralis as described in diagnosis (Fig. 3 I); width of postannular sclerite half total width of annulus ventralis; first pleopods uniramous, reaching central region of annulus ventralis when abdomen flexed. Lacking all male secondary sexual traits.</p><p>Description of Morphotypic Male, Form II. (Fig. 3 E–F, Table 4).––Differing from holotype in the following respects: carapace height less than carapace width (18.1 and 23.7 mm respectively); TCL 44.1 mm and PCL 37.0 mm. Areola length 29.0% of TCL (34.6% of PCL), 3.9 times longer than wide. Rostrum margins subparallel to base of acumen; rostrum ventrally deflected and excavated; rostrum 2.2 times as long as wide. Abdomen 43.9 mm long. Mesial row of tubercles on palm of chela with 8 tubercles; second dorsal row with 8 tubercles. Palm length (14.3 mm) 65.0% of palm width (22.0 mm). All measurements and counts from right chela. Antennal scale 7.9 mm long, 3.2 mm wide. Gonopods reaching anterior margin of 4th pereopod caudomesial boss. Central projection curved 90° to shaft, with complete apex; rounded (Fig. 3 E–F). Mesial process tapered, bulbous, directed caudolaterally. Hook on ischium of third pereopod small, not reaching basioischial joint.</p><p>Size. Form I male (n = 5) TCL ranges in size from 39.0– 49.3 mm (PCL 32.2–40.8 mm) with a mean TCL of 44.3 mm. Form II male (n = 11) mean TCL is 44.8 mm and ranges in size from 36.6–53.7 mm (PCL 30.1–44.8 mm). Female (n = 7) TCL mean is 43.3 mm and ranges from 32.4–55.5 mm (PCL 23.0– 45.5 mm). The largest specimen examined was a female with TCL of 55.5 mm (PCL 45.5 mm).</p><p>Color in life. Cambarus guenteri (Fig. 4) cephalic section ground color light to chestnut brown; posterior margin of carapace light blue to green. Hepatic and antennal region of carapace punctuated with cream, olive, or tan tubercles. Postorbital ridge color same as carapace to orange-brown. Rostrum margins and acumen cream to red-brown or tan, rarely red. Branchiostegal region olivaceous brown to tan; occasional black saddle present in and around cervical groove; mandibular abductor scars ranging from cream to light-brown. Lateral margin of antennal scale cream to light brown; body of antennal scale olivaceous-brown to cream. Antennal flagellum and antennules green-brown, with olivaceous hue; dorsal surface of lamellae tan to brown; ventral surface light-green to olivaceous. Dorsal surface of chelae olivaceous brown, red-brown, brown to tan with red-brown highlights, no mottling; mesial, second dorsal row, and dorsal surface of dactyl tubercles cream, tan or red-brown. Distal end of dactyl and propodus terminating in orange; South Fork Kentucky River population with distal margin of dactyl and propodus terminating in crimson red. Denticles on opposable surfaces of fingers yellow, white, or tan. Ventral surface of chelae cream or tan. Dorsal surface of carpus cream, light brown or red-brown; occasionally olivaceous brown; region adjacent to and including furrow red-brown to brown; carpus spine cream. Merus orange-brown, cream, or olivaceous brown. Podomeres of pereopods light cream, tan, bluish, or olivaceous-brown; joints of pereopod podomeres pink. Dorsal and dorsolateral surface of abdomen same color as carapace; anterior region of abdomen with slight olivaceous tint; tergal margins brown to reddish brown. Majority of South Fork Kentucky River animals have reticulated cephalothoraxes with dark brown mottling and two distinct dark-brown dorsal stripes present from junction with cephalothorax to junction with uropods and telson. Uropods brown, red, redbrown to pink-brown, with olivaceous tint; margins gray to brown. Ventral surface of abdomen and carapace cream. Dorsal ridge of Form I gonopod central projection amber; body of central projection, gonopod, and mesial process tan. Form II gonopod and associated processes cream. Cephalic portion of annulus ventralis pink to pinkcream; ridge of fossa pink; caudal region of annulus ventralis ranges from pink to cream.</p><p>Type locality. Silver Creek at Hagan Mill Road Crossing, 5.5 km (3.4 mi) southwest of Richmond, Madison County, KY, 37.69196/-84.36081 (Fig. 5, star). At this site, Silver Creek is 15–20 m wide, and consists of a long 50m + run. Directly under the Hagan Mill Road bridge, abundant large slab boulders and boulders are present along the right descending bank. Water depth ranged from 0.2–1.5 m deep. Here the type series was collected along with several additional specimens on 27 October 2014 by ZJL and C. G. Vopal. Orconectes juvenilis (Hagen, 1870) is also abundant at this location.</p><p>Disposition of types. The holotype, allotype, and morphotype are deposited in the North Carolina Museum of Science (NCSM), Raleigh, N.C. (catalogue numbers NCSM 27206, 27207 and 27208, respectively) . Paratypes are deposited in the USNM, Washington D.C. (USNM 1422179) .</p><p>Range and specimens examined. Cambarus guenteri is endemic to the Cumberland Plateau and the junction of the Cumberland Plateau and the Inner Bluegrass physiographic provinces of Kentucky. Within these provinces, C. guenteri appears to be limited to the Middle Kentucky River and South Fork Kentucky River basins of Kentucky in Clay, Estill, Madison, and Owsley counties (Fig. 5).</p><p>All of the following collections, with the exception of the previously discussed type series, are either housed in the Branley A. Branson Museum at Eastern Kentucky University (denoted with EKU), the United States National Museum (denoted with USNM), or the West Liberty University Astacology Collection (denoted with the prefix WLU). The following abbreviations occur in the text: Cr. = Creek; R. = River; Frk. = Fork ; UNT = Un-named tributary; ZJL14—Collectors included ZJL 2014 field crew which consisted of S. S. Bell, Z. W. Dillard, N. M. Sadecky, L. K. Sadecky, E. Tidmore and E. M. Tennant.</p><p>KENTUCKY: Clay Co. (1.) WLU 2096, Red Bird Cr., 36.9488/-83.5323, 8 June 2014, 1 Jv. ZJL14. (2.) WLU 2101, Collin’s Cr., 37.04255/-83.8102, 14 June 2014, 1 IM, ZJL14. (3.) WLU 2103, Thomas Cr., 37.0387/- 83.6631, 8 June 2014, 2F, ZJL14. (4.) WLU 2115, Grays Frk., 37.2001/-83.6631, 8 June 2014, 12 F, 11 IIM, ZJL14. (5.) USNM 147031, Collin’s Frk., 37.2599/-83.6685, 19 October 1974, 1 IIM, R. Bouchard. Jackson Co. (6.) EKU 323, Cavanaugh Cr., 37.3871/-84.0306, 1 IIM. (7.) EKU 2484, Rocklick Cr., 37.5178/-84.0740, 29 October 1988, 2 IIM, P. Ceas, J. Roy and M. Thomas . Leslie Co. (8.) WLU 2097, Chandler Br., 37.1647/-83.5169, 10 June 2014, 1F, ZJL14. Madison Co. (9.) NCSM 27206, 27207, 27208; USNM 1422179, Silver Cr. TYPE LOCALITY, 37.6919/-83.3608, 26 October 2016, 4 IM, 3 IIM, 5 F, 1 Jv. Owsley Co. (10.) WLU 2093, Cow Cr., 37.4341/-83.5640, 7 June 2014, 4 F, 1 IM, 2 IIM, 1 Jv.; WLU 2300, 25 October 2014, 1 F, ZJL14. (11.) WLU 2098, Paw Paw Cr., 37.5278/-83.6831, 7 June 2014, 2 F, 1 IIM, ZJL14. (12.) WLU 2102, Meadow Cr., 37.4828/-83.6453, 7 June 2014, 2 IIM, 2 Jv, ZJL14. (13.) WLU 2104, Rt. Frk. Buffalo Cr., 37.3537/-83.6348, 7 June 2014, 2F, 4 IIM, ZJL14. (14.) WLU 2105, S Frk. Kentucky R., 37.5237/-83.6665, 11 June 2014, 2 F, 2 IIM, ZJL14. (15.) WLU 2116, White Oak Cr., 37.4955/-83.7065, 7 June 2014, 1 F, 1 IIM, 1 Jv, ZJL14. Wolfe Co. (16.) WLU 2288, UNT, 37.7399/-83.5069, 28 April 2012, 1 F, D. Foltz, C. Z. Loughman, Z. J. Loughman and K. T. Skalican. (17.) WLU 2290, Eighth Br., 37.7557/-83.3460, 28 April 2012, 1 IIM, D. Foltz, C. Z. Loughman, Z. J. Loughman and K. T. Skalican. (18.) WLU 2294, Holly Cr., 37.6508/-83.4757, 28 April 2012, 1 F, D. Foltz, C. Z.Loughman &amp; Z. J. Loughman, K. T. Skalican.</p><p>Habitat and life history notes. Cambarus guenteri occurs in small to large wadeable streams with cobble/ boulder substrates. In higher ordered streams, C. guenteri is frequently encountered under large slab boulders, boulders, and other substrate debris in both runs and riffles. Pools are rarely utilized by C. guenteri in the absence of large substrate items. In lower order streams, C. guenteri utilizes mainly large boulders and slabs in riffles and runs. Juveniles in both lower and higher order streams frequent leaf packs, root wads, and course woody debris snags. Cambarus guenteri does not normally occur in ephemeral headwater situations, but will utilize these habitats near headwater confluences with more permanent waterways. Higher gradient streams in the South Fork Kentucky River harbor the largest populations (ZJL, personal observation).</p><p>Future research is needed to elucidate the life history of this species. Both Form I and Form II males have been collected in all months of the year, except November, December and February (Taylor &amp; Schuster 2004). Ovigerous females have not been collected. Females collected in June 2012 displayed active glair glands. Juveniles were collected en-masse from leaf packs in October, 2012 indicating egg extrusion likely occurs over the summer months (ZJL personal observations).</p><p>Conservation status. Cambarus guenteri should be listed as currently stable (CS) using American Fisheries Society criteria (Taylor et al. 2007), and assigned a G4 (Apparently Stable) ranking using Master (1991) global conservation criteria for conservation listing. Cambarus guenteri should be listed as data deficient (DD) using the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN 2001) criteria due to the limited information available on its biology.</p><p>Crayfish associates. Cambarus guenteri has been collected along with Cambarus (Cambarus) bartonii cavatus Hay, 1902; Cambarus (Depressicambarus) cf. sphenoides Hobbs, 1968; Cambarus (Jugicambarus) aff. dubius Faxon, 1884; Cambarus (Jugicambarus) cf. jezerinaci Thoma, 2000; Orconectes (Procericambarus) cristavarius Taylor, 2000 and Orconectes (Procericambarus) juvenilis (Hagen, 1870) .</p><p>Variation. Chelae morphology differs slightly between Upper and Middle Kentucky River mainstem populations and animals from the South Fork Kentucky River. Chelae of South Fork Kentucky River populations are more robust when compared to Middle Fork and Upper Kentucky River populations, which have more subtriangular chelae. In addition to chelae morphology, considerable variation is observed in C. guenteri color pattern. Cambarus guenteri in the South Fork Kentucky River display mottling and abdominal striping, along with a deep crimson red coloration on the distal end of the dactyl and propodus. Upper Kentucky River populations, including the type population, lack mottling, abdominal striping and are somewhat drab (“typical” coloration). Animals collected from the confluence of the South Fork and North Fork at the origin of the Kentucky River mainstem are intergrades of the “typical” and “striped color” pattern, displaying orange chelae tips and barely discernable abdominal stripes.</p><p>Relationships and comparisons. Cambarus guenteri is placed in the subgenus Puncticambarus based on its elongate chelae, its broad, densely punctate areola that is 2.1 to 6.2 times as long as broad, and the presence of a subapical notch on the Form I male gonopod (Hobbs 1969; Cooper 2001). Among described members of the subgenus, C. guenteri is most similar to C. hazardi and C. taylori . Cambarus guenteri differs from C. hazardi in rostral anatomy, chelae ornamentation, and overall spination. The rostrum of C. guenteri is not as excavated and the overall rostral shape is also somewhat acuminate when compared to the spatulate, broad, and moderately to deeply excavated rostrum of C. hazardi .</p><p>The chelae of C. guenteri lack a deeply excavated lateral impression, maintain well organized rows of tubercles on the mesial margin of the palm, and usually possess 2–3 subpalmar tubercles. In C. hazardi, the lateral impression is deep and exaggerated, the mesial margin tubercles consist of up to three rows of tubercles with several tubercles extending onto the chelae palm, and have 2–5 scattered subpalmar tubercles. The presence or absence of both cervical spines and tubercles is an important character that can be used to differentiate C. guenteri from C. hazardi . Normally C. guenteri has either a grouping of well-defined cervical tubercles or occasionally small cervical spines; C. hazardi lacks cervical spines and if present, has a series of small undefined cervical tubercles. South Fork of the Kentucky River populations of C. guenteri chelae are marked in crimson red while Cambarus hazardi chelae are concolorous.</p><p>Cambarus guenteri can be differentiated from C. taylori by rostrum and chelae anatomy, spination on the cephalothorax, gonopod shape, annulus ventralis anatomy, and coloration. The rostrum of Cambarus guenteri is broader, more angled at the acumen junction, and moderately excavated compared to the rostrum of C. taylori, which is more lanceolate and shallow. Cambarus guenteri from the South Fork of the Kentucky River have more subrectangular chelae which are easily differentiated from C. taylori, which possess elongate, subtriangular chelae. Cambarus guenteri subpalmar tubercles are arranged in a triangular shape; C. taylori subpalmar tubercles normally are arranged in a line or an “L” shape. Finally, palm length/palm width ratios are significantly smaller in C. guenteri (x ‾ = 65.8%, SE = 0.53%) compared to C. taylori (x ‾ = 74.4, SE = 2.1%).</p><p>Reproductive structures in both males and females can also be used to discern these species. On the gonopod of C. guenteri the mesial process extends laterally parallel to the central projection at a 90° angle to the gonopod shaft (Fig. 3 B–C). In C. taylori, the Form I male mesial process is oriented at an angle of 65–75° to the gonopod shaft, and terminates in a notch (Fig. 6 B–C). Though not entirely consistent, the anatomy of the annulus ventralis can also be used to differentiate between both species. In C. guenteri, the annulus sinus is oriented to the left in greater than 98% of individuals whereas in C. taylori, the annulus sinus is oriented to the right in&gt;95% of individuals.</p><p>Four other members of the subgenus Puncticambarus occur in Kentucky and are easily separated from C. guenteri using morphology. Cambarus callainus Thoma et al., 2014 differs from C. guenteri by possessing a single row of tubercles on the mesial margin of the palm, compared to the double row of tubercles found in C. guenteri . Additionally, C. callainus has an elongate, narrow lanceolate rostrum compared to the broad rostrum in C. guenteri . Cambarus theepiensis Loughman et al., 2013 differs morphologically from C. guenteri in rostral anatomy. In C. guenteri the rostral margins are not as thickened and are subparallel while in C. theepiensis the rostral margins are noticeably thickened. Both C. callainus and C. theepiensis occur outside the Kentucky River basin in Kentucky, and are allied with the Big Sandy watershed of eastern Kentucky (Thoma et al. 2014).</p><p>Both C. buntingi Bouchard, 1973 and C. cumberlandensis Hobbs and Bouchard, 1973 can be differentiated from C. guenteri by rostral anatomy as well. Cambarus guenteri lacks rostral spines. Cambarus cumberlandensis possess pronounced rostral spines as well as linear rostral margins compared to the more sinuous rostral margin shape found in C. guenteri . Cambarus buntingi also possess rostral tubercles that are much more reduced in size and shape compared to C. cumberlandensis . Finally, both species differ markedly in coloration compared to C. guenteri . Neither C. cumberlandensis nor C. buntingi occur in the Kentucky River basin, but they do both occur in the Cumberland River catchment in Kentucky. Cambarus guenteri differs from nominate C. robustus by having significantly smaller palm length/palm width (x ‾ C. guenteri = 65.8%, SE = 0.5%; x ‾ C. robustus = 67.2%, SE = 0.6%), carapace length/carapace width (x ‾ C. guenteri = 52.6%, SE = 0.4%; x ‾ C. robustus = 54.3%, SE = 0.3%), and rostrum length/rostrum width (x ‾ C. guenteri = 31.3%, SE = 1.0%; x ‾ C. robustus = 30.5%, SE = 0.9%) ratios.</p><p>Etymology. It is with great pleasure that we name this species in honor of Dr. Guenter A. Schuster, Professor Emeritus, Eastern Kentucky University. Dr. Schuster dedicated his professional career to teaching undergraduates, graduate students and professional biologists about the diversity, biology, and conservation of freshwater invertebrates, with a particular influence on biologists from the bluegrass state, and he is a coauthor of the definitive work on the crayfishes of Kentucky. He instilled in those he educated a sense of wonder and appreciation for these organisms, which has undoubtedly led to the conservation of more than one freshwater mussel or crayfish. The common name for C. guenteri is the Redbird Crayfish in reference to the Redbird River drainage where large populations of C. guenteri occur.</p><p>Common name. Redbird Crayfish.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/2C268785586AFFF1A1D9FC64FDF1438D	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	Loughman, Zachary J.;Henkanaththegedara, Sujan M.;Fetzner Jr, James W.;Thoma, Roger F.	Loughman, Zachary J., Henkanaththegedara, Sujan M., Fetzner Jr, James W., Thoma, Roger F. (2017): A case of Appalachian endemism: Revision of the Cambarus robustus complex (Decapoda: Cambaridae) in the Kentucky and Licking River basins of Kentucky, USA, with the description of three new species. Zootaxa 4269 (4): 460-494, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4269.4.4
2C2687855873FFE8A1D9FC6CFDEF41D8.text	2C2687855873FFE8A1D9FC6CFDEF41D8.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cambarus (Puncticambarus) hazardi	<div><p>Cambarus (Puncticambarus) hazardi, new species</p><p>Figures 6–8, Table 5</p><p>Cambarus robustus Girard, 1852:90 [in part];— Taylor and Schuster, 2004:103, Figs. 74 A, B, 75. Cambarus (Puncticambarus) robustus .—Hobbs, 1969:101, Figs. 1 c, 13a, 17o [in part]; 1974:21, Fig. 87 [in part]; 1989:27, Fig. 104 [in part].</p><p>Diagnosis. Body and eyes pigmented. Rostrum broad, moderately to deeply excavated, and deflected anteriorly, margins not thickened, subparallel to slightly converging at acumen. Acumen distinctly triangular with prominent dorsally directed spiniform tubercle at terminus. Areola 3.4–7.3 (x ‾ = 5.1, n = 27, SE = 1.06) times as long as wide with 5–9 (usually 6) punctations across narrowest point. Lacking cervical spines; occasionally 3–4 (x ‾ = 2.1, SE = 0.3) tubercles present (27% of individuals). Mandibular, branchiostegal, and orbital regions of carapace with welldeveloped tubercles. Postorbital ridges short; truncated, dorsally directed tubercle present in juveniles and subadults; adult postorbital ridge terminating in rounded tubercle. Suborbital angle acute. TCL 1.8–2.3 (x ‾ = 1.9, n = 27, SE = 0.10) times longer than width. Form I and II males possessing hook on ischium of third pereopods only; hook gently curved at apex, overarching basioischial joint in Form I males, not reaching basioischial joint in Form II males; hooks not opposed by tubercle on basis. Mesial surface of chelae with two to three rows of tubercles; mesial most row with 6–11 (x ‾ = 9.1, n = 27, SE = 2.7) tubercles, second dorsal row with 8–11 (x ‾ = 7.2, n = 26, SE = 1.9) tubercles. Tubercles extend onto upper body of palm forming 1–2 additional disorganized rows of tubercles. Ventral surface of chelae with 2–6 (x ‾ = 3.1, n = 26, SE = 1.6) subpalmar tubercles scattered across chelae ventral surface. Dorsal longitudinal ridge of dactyl consisting of several well developed, highly pronounced scattered tubercles. Dorsomedian ridge of fixed finger of propodus pronounced. Well defined lateral impression at the junction of the fixed finger with the propodus. Dactyl and fixed finger with sharp corneous terminal tip. Form I male palm length 61.8–76.6% (x ‾ = 67.4%, n = 4, SE = 6.6%) of palm width, Form I male palm length 28.3–30.9% (x ‾ = 29.4%, n = 4, SE = 1.1%) of total propodus length; female dactyl length 57.8–85.9% (x ‾ = 63.8%, n = 16, SE = 6.5%) of total propodus length. First pleopod of Form I male with short terminal elements. Central projection not tapering distally; recurved&gt;90° to main shaft of gonopod, with weak subapical notch. Mesial process directed 90° to shaft, bent cephalolaterally; inflated cephalically, tapering to distinct caudal point at or slightly beyond terminance of central projection. Annulus ventralis immovable; distinctly asymmetrical posteriorly; cephalic portion with median trough leading to strongly sculptured central fossa; exaggerated “S” bend in sinus terminating at caudal edge.</p><p>Description of Holotypic Male, Form I. (Fig. 6 A–D, H, G, J, K; Table 5).––Body compressed dorsoventrally (Fig. 6 A); carapace posterior to cervical groove wider than abdomen. Carapace depth 75.3% carapace width at caudodorsal margin of cervical groove. TCL 44.0 mm; PCL 38.0 mm. Areola 5.9 times longer than wide, with 7 punctations across narrowest part (Fig. 6 H); length of areola 37.7% of TCL (43.7% of PCL). Rostrum excavated along entire length; margins not thickened, subparallel and continuous to base of acumen; floor of rostrum with numerous punctations. Rostrum 1.6 times longer than wide. Acumen broad and triangular, ending in dorsally directed corneous tip (Fig. 6 H). Postorbital ridges well developed, terminating in rounded tubercles. Suborbital angle acute, with tubercle (Fig. 6 A). Cervical spine absent. Mandibular, branchiostegal, and orbital regions of carapace ornamented with well-developed tubercles; greatest tubercle density in hepatic region. Lateral margin of terga angulate; lateral margin of second pleuron deeply furrowed. Cephalic section of telson with 2 large spines in each caudolateral corner. Proximal podomere of uropod with distal spine on mesial lobe; mesial ramus of uropod with median ridge ending distally in distomedian spine not overreaching margin of ramus; laterodistal spine pronounced. Distal margin of proximal segment of lateral ramus of right uropod having 11 immovable, small spines and 1 lateral, large, movable spine. Cephalomedian lobe of epistome subtriangular, zygoma moderately arched (Fig. 6 G); cephalolateral margins thickened, forming sharp angle at junction with endostyle (Fig. 6 G). Body of epistome not possessing prominent cephalomedian fovea. Antennal scale broadest anteriorly; lateral margin thickened, terminating in large corneous spine; setiferous. Right antennal scale 4.43 times as long as wide (6.2 mm × 1.4 mm) (Fig. 6 D). Tip of right antenna reaching middle of telson when adpressed. Mesial surface of right chela with 2 well-formed rows of tubercles and additional tubercles scattered across dorsal palm; mesial most row with 7 tubercles, second dorsal row with 6 tubercles (Fig. 6 K). Palm length 60.7% of palm width; depth 92.5% width. Ventral surface of palm with 5 subpalmar tubercles scattered across ventral surface. Dorsal longitudinal ridge of dactyl well developed and possessing large tubercles (Fig. 6 K); dactyl terminating in large corneous spine. Dorsomedian ridge of fixed finger of propodus well pronounced. Well defined lateral impression at the junction of fixed finger with the propodus. Dactyl and fixed finger of propodus with sharp, corneous tip. All measurements and counts from right chela. Carpus with prominent dorsal furrow (Fig. 6 K) and 5 weak dorsomesial tubercles; mesial margin with large, procurved spine at about mid-length, and reduced proximal spine. Distodorsal surface of merus with 8 spiniform tubercles; ventrolateral ridge with 3 small spines and large, corneous distal spine; ventromesial ridge with 3 well-developed spines. Carapace depth less than width. Hook on ischium of third pereopods and Form I gonopod as described in diagnosis (Fig. 6 B–D); tip reaching anterior margin of fourth caudomesial boss.</p><p>Description of Allotypic Female. (Fig. 6 I, Table 5).––Differing from holotype in following respects: carapace height (22.0 mm) 82.1% of carapace width (26.8 mm); TCL 49.2 mm, PCL 41.1 mm. Areola length 37.4% of TCL (44.7% of PCL), 4.7 times as long as wide. Posterior portion of rostrum more excavated than anterior portion; rostrum 1.4 times longer than wide. Abdomen length 47.8 mm. Mesial surface of chelae mesial most row of tubercles 8, second dorsal row 6. Palm length 64.5% of palm width; depth 58.6% of width. Right antennal scale 2.21 times as long as wide (6.4 mm × 2.9 mm). Annulus ventralis as described in diagnosis (Fig. 6 I); width of postannular sclerite half total width; first pleopods uniramous, reaching central region of annulus ventralis when abdomen flexed.</p><p>Description of Morphotypic Male, Form II. (Fig. 6 E–F, Table 5).––Differing from holotype in the following respects: carapace height (17.4 mm) 72.2% width (24.1 mm); areola length 36.5% of TCL (43.7% of PCL), 4.4 times longer than wide. Rostrum 1.8 times as long as wide. Mesial most row of tubercles on palm of chela 7; second dorsal row 7. Palm length (10.7 mm) 60.8% of palm width (17.6 mm). Antennal scale length (7.5 mm) 2.1 times width (3.6 mm). Central projection rounded (Fig. 6 E–F), mesial process tapered, bulbous, directed caudolaterally. Hook on ischium of third pereopod small, not reaching basioischial joint.</p><p>Size. Form I male (n = 4) mean TCL 36.5 mm, ranging from 26.8–45.0 mm (PCL 22.4–37.6 mm). Form II male (n = 6) mean TCL 42.6 mm, ranging from 40.2–49.2 mm (PCL 32.9–40.3 mm). Female (n = 17) TCL mean 43.9 mm, ranging from 32.5–51.9 mm (PCL 26.3–42.9 mm). The largest specimen examined was a Form I male with TCL of 51.9 mm (PCL 42.9 mm).</p><p>Color in life. Cambarus hazardi (Fig. 7) coloration is similar to C. guenteri but differs in the following respects. Rostrum margins and acumen cream to red-brown or orange-brown, rarely red. Lateral surface of cephalothorax heavily reticulated with olivaceous-brown to dark brown mottling. Dorsal surface of chelae olivaceous-brown, green-brown, brown to tan with yellow, red-brown highlights; mesial, second dorsal row, and dorsal surface of dactyl tubercles yellow, tan or red-brown. Dorsal surface of abdomen heavily reticulated with dark brown mottling, and two pronounced chestnut or buff-brown dorsal abdominal stripes.</p><p>Type locality. Red River at KY 77 crossing in Red River Gorge National Geologic Area at the Powell / Menifee county line, KY, 37.83376/-83.65990 (Fig. 8, star). At this site, the Red River is 20–25 m wide, and consists of a series of riffles and runs coursing over a sand and gravel substrate. Boulders are present at the heads of both riffles and runs. Water depth ranged from 0.5–1.5 m deep. Here the type series was collected along with two additional specimens (Form I males) on 26 October 2014 by ZJL and C. G. Vopal. Orconectes cristavarius was also collected at this location; neither species was common and concerted effort was needed to collect the type series.</p><p>Disposition of types. The holotype, allotype, and morphotype are deposited in the North Carolina Museum of Science (NCSM), Raleigh, N.C. (catalogue numbers NCSM 27212, 27213 and 27214, respectively) . Paratypes are deposited in the USNM, Washington D.C. (USNM 1422180) .</p><p>Range and specimens examined. Of the three putative taxa described herein, C. hazardi appears to have the broadest distribution. Cambarus hazardi occurs throughout the North Fork of the Kentucky River basin in Breathitt, Knott, Letcher, Perry and Wolfe counties, in the Red River watershed in Estill, Powell, Menifee and Wolfe counties, and in the mid-upper portions of the Licking River basin in Bath, Fleming, Magoffin, Montgomery, and Morgan counties. Cambarus hazardi appears to occur within the Cumberland Plateau (Fig. 8).</p><p>All of the following collections, with the exception of the previously discussed type series, are either housed in the Branley A. Branson Museum at Eastern Kentucky University (denoted with EKU), the United States National Museum (denoted with USNM), or the West Liberty University Astacology Collection (denoted with the prefix WLU). The following abbreviations occur in the text: Cr. = Creek; R. = River; Frk. = Fork ; UNT = Un-named tributary; ZJL14—Collectors included ZJL 2014 field crew which consisted of S. S. Bell, Z. W. Dillard, N. M. Sadecky, L. K. Sadecky, E. Tidmore and E. M. Tennant.</p><p>KENTUCKY: Breathitt Co. (1.) WLU 2083, Wolf Cr., 37.3935/-83.3967, 10 June 2014, 1 IIM, 1 JV, ZJL14. (2.) WLU 2086, Frozen Cr., 37.6417/-83.3199, 11 June 2014, 1 IIM, 1 JV, ZJL14. (3.) WLU 2157, S. Frk. Quicksand Cr., 37.5148/-83.2116, 11 June 2014, 2 F, 3 IIM, ZJL14. (4) EKU 1050, Buckhorn Cr., 37.4 544/- 83.1767, 4 April 1969, 3 F, D. L. Batch. (5.) USNM 147040, Buckhorn Cr., 37.5363/-83.2522, 20 October 1974, R. Bouchard. (6.) USNM 260427, Roadside Ditch, 37.4495/-83.18297, 20 October 1974, R. Bouchard. Knott Co. (7.) WLU 2118, Troublesome Cr., 37.3349/-83.1016, 10 June 2014, 1 Jv, ZJL14. (8.) WLU 2122, Carr Frk., 37.2764/- 82.8545, 9 June 2014, 1 IIM, 1 Jv, ZJL14. (9.) WLU 2156, Laurel Frk. Quicksand Cr., 37.4609/-83.0 434, 2 F, 1 IIM, 5 Jv, ZJL14. Letcher Co. (10.) WLU 2085, N. Frk. Kentucky R., 37.1679/-82.7521, 9 June 2014, 1 F, 1 IIM, ZJL14. (11.) WLU 2119, Rockhouse Cr, 37.1731/-82.9188, 9 June 2014, 1 F, 3 IIM, ZJL14. (12.) WLU 2120, Millstone Cr., 37.1872/-82.7444, 9 June 2014, 1 F, 5 IIM, 8 Jv, ZJL14. (13) WLU 2 123, Sandlick Cr., 37.1310/- 82.8305, 9 June 2014, 3 IIM, 7 Jv, ZJL14. Menifee Co. (14.) USNM 145711, Red R., 37.8227/-83.6284, 20 October 1974, 1 F, R. Bouchard. Morgan Co. (15.) WLU 2222, Straight Cr., 37.9710/-83.1740, 28 April 2012, 1 F, 1 IM, D. Foltz, C. Z. &amp; Z. J. Loughman, K. T. Skalican. 16.) WLU 2295, Cow Cr., 37.4342/-83.5639, 25 October 2014, 10 F, 10 IIM, C. G. Vopal and Z. J. Loughman. (17.) WLU 2299, Halsey Branch, 37.8534/-83.3418, 27 April 2012, 1 F, D. Foltz, C. Z. &amp; Z. J. Loughman, K. T. Skalican. Perry Co. (18.) WLU 2084, Cambell Cr., 37.3047/- 83.3357, 10 June 2014, 2 IIM, ZJL14. (19.) WLU 2087, Carr Frk., 37.2088/-83.1109, 9 June 2014, 1 Jv, ZJL14. (20.) WLU 2089, Lotts Cr., 37.2860/-83.1484, 10 June 2014, 1 F, 2 JV, ZJL14. (21.) WLU 2117, Big Cr., 37.2352/ -83.2592, 9 June 2014, 1 IIM, 1 Jv, ZJL14. (22.) WLU 2125, Bull Cr., 37.1379/-83.0705, 9 June 2014, 2 F, 1 Jv, ZJL14. (23.) EKU 435, Leatherwood Frk., 37.8896/-83.6804, 19 June 2000, 3 IM, B. Dickey. (24.) USNM 147037, Big Cr, 37.3693/-83.0689, 20 October 1974, 1 F, R. Bouchard. (25.) USNM 147038, L. Frk. Maces Cr., 37.1810/- 83.1495, 20 October 1974, 3 IM, R, Bouchard. (26.) USNM 310634, Troublesome Cr., 37.3373/-83.1278, 20 October 1974, 1 IIM, R. Bouchard. Powell Co. (27.) NCSM 27212, 27213, 27214; USNM 1422180, Red R. TYPE LOCALITY, 37.8337/-83.65990, 26 October 2016, 2 IM, 1 IIM, 2 F, C. G. Vopal and Z. J. Loughman. (28.) USNM 177297, Red R., 37.8244/-83.6624, 20 October 1974, 1 F, R. Bouchard. Roane Co. (29.) EKU 664, Flooded Field, 38.1213/-83.5454, 21 May 1988, 2 F, 1 IM, D. R. Peak. (30.) USNM 1078924, E. Frk. Triple Cr., 38.3173/- 83.4429, 22 April 1961, 3 F.</p><p>Habitat and life history notes. Cambarus hazardi is a slab-rock, large boulder specialist as an adult, with all recently collected specimens taken from under boulders without exception (ZJL, personal observation). Juveniles and young of the year have been collected from leaf packs, coarse woody debris snags and smaller substrate items. Slow moving riffles and moderate to low velocity runs appear to be C. hazardi preferred stream velocities. Considerable effort was undertaken to sample all available habitats in 2014 by ZJL; C. hazardi was only collected from the aforementioned habitats. Like other members of the C. robustus complex in Kentucky, C. hazardi does occur in headwater situations in addition to large tributaries and mainstems. The presence of sand and silt in streams in the lower reaches of the Red River, Upper Kentucky River, and Licking River basins appears to limit the downstream distribution of C. hazardi .</p><p>Cambarus hazardi annual life history is currently unknown. Form I males have been collected sparingly in May and June, and dominated collections in October and November. Form II males were frequently encountered in June and July, and rarely collected in October. Females exhibited glair in June. Ovigerous females have never been collected. Young-of-the-year were encountered in leaf packs in pools in October. Animals collected in June exhibited exoskeletons that were vibrant and lacked excessive accumulation biofilms, indicating the possibility of a population wide spring molt.</p><p>Conservation status. The entire range of Cambarus hazardi falls within the anthracite coal fields of eastern Kentucky. Coal mining activities, especially within the Licking and North Fork Kentucky River basins are extensive, and have caused basin wide stream degradation via sedimentation and chemical inputs associated with mining practices. Efforts in the fall of 2016 by ZJL in the Licking River basin to obtain additional specimens for this description proved fruitless. All streams sampled were heavily impacted by sedimentation. Dedicated surveys are needed to determine this species’ status within Kentucky.</p><p>Cambarus hazardi should be listed as vulnerable (V) using the American Fisheries Society criteria (Taylor et al. 2007), and assigned a G3 ranking using the Master (1991) global conservation criteria for conservation listing due to its limited range and possible range wide decline. Cambarus hazardi should be listed as vulnerable (VU) using the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN 2001) criteria due to its narrow distribution and a reduction in range caused by anthropogenic stressors, specifically coal mining activities (ZJL, personal observation).</p><p>Crayfish associates. Cambarus hazardi has been collected with Cambarus (Jugicambarus) aff. dubius and Orconectes (Procericambarus) cristavarius .</p><p>Variation. Ontogenic variation exist in this species. Juveniles and sub adults lack the heavily sculptured chelae exhibited by adults. Specifically, juveniles lack a deep lateral impression and usually have more organized palmer tubercles compared to adults. Juveniles also tend to be olivaceous brown to green in overall coloration, transitioning to coloration dominated by browns as adults. Overall coloration also differs among populations. Animals from the headwaters of the North Fork, the Licking, and the Red River normally maintain pronounced dorsal stripes on the abdomen. Cambarus hazardi from the North Fork of the Kentucky River exhibit weakly pronounced abdominal stripes, and are heavily mottled in various shades of brown and green.</p><p>Relationships and comparisons. Cambarus hazardi is placed in the subgenus Puncticambarus based on its elongate chelae, its broad, densely punctate areola that is 2.1 to 6.2 times as long as broad, and the presence of a subapical notch on the Form I male gonopod (Hobbs 1969; Cooper 2001). Among described members of the subgenus, C. hazardi is most similar to C. guenteri and C. taylori .</p><p>Differences between C. taylori and C. guenteri are discussed in the previous relationships and comparison section for C. guenteri . Morphologically C. hazardi can be differentiated from C. taylori by its broad rostrum and by the absence of cervical spines; C. taylori has a lanceolate weakly excavated rostrum and has cervical spines. Cambarus hazardi chelae are subrectangular and possess up to three mesial margin tubercle rows with disorganized tubercles scattered on the upper palmar surface; C. taylori maintains two well organized mesial margin tubercle rows. Finally, C. hazardi has striping on the dorsal surface of the abdomen which C. taylori lacks.</p><p>Cambarus hazardi is easily differentiated from C. buntingi, C. callainus and C. cumberlandensis . Cambarus buntingi has a narrow rostrum with rostral tubercles, which C. hazardi lacks. Cambarus callainus coloration is strikingly different than C. hazardi, has a single row of mesial margin tubercles of which C. hazardi has two to three rows, and C. callainus rostrum is lanceolate; C. hazardi has a broad, excavated rostrum. Cambarus cumberlandensis, like C. buntingi, has rostral tubercles which C. hazardi lacks, and a markedly different color pattern than C. hazardi .</p><p>Cambarus hazardi resembles central Appalachian members of the subgenus Depressicambarus, namely Cambarus striatus Hay, 1902 . Both species have strongly marked abdominal stripes and mottled brown color patterns. Additionally, C. hazardi chelae are more robust and tuberculate than other members of the C. robustus complex in Kentucky, a trait that also makes C. hazardi similar to C. striatus, in some parts of its range. Cambarus hazardi can be differentiated from C. striatus by its wide, open areola compared to C. striatus narrow areola. Form I gonopods in C. hazardi possess a subapical notch which is normally absent in C. striatus Form I gonopods.</p><p>Etymology. Cambarus hazardi is named after Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry, noted American Naval Commander, and the name sake of Perry County Kentucky and the County Seat, Hazard Kentucky. The common name Brawny Crayfish is in reference to the powerfully built stature of C. hazardi .</p><p>Common name. Brawny Crayfish</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/2C2687855873FFE8A1D9FC6CFDEF41D8	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	Loughman, Zachary J.;Henkanaththegedara, Sujan M.;Fetzner Jr, James W.;Thoma, Roger F.	Loughman, Zachary J., Henkanaththegedara, Sujan M., Fetzner Jr, James W., Thoma, Roger F. (2017): A case of Appalachian endemism: Revision of the Cambarus robustus complex (Decapoda: Cambaridae) in the Kentucky and Licking River basins of Kentucky, USA, with the description of three new species. Zootaxa 4269 (4): 460-494, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4269.4.4
2C2687855874FFE3A1D9F9B6FDEF40F1.text	2C2687855874FFE3A1D9F9B6FDEF40F1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cambarus (Puncticambarus) taylori	<div><p>Cambarus (Puncticambarus) taylori, new species</p><p>Figures 9–11, Table 6</p><p>Cambarus robustus Girard, 1852:90 [in part];— Taylor and Schuster, 2004:103, Figs. 74A–B, 75. Cambarus (Puncticambarus) robustus .—Hobbs, 1969:101, Figs. 1 c, 13a, 17o [in part]; 1974:21, Fig. 87 [in part]; 1989:27, Fig. 104 [in part].</p><p>Diagnosis. Body and eyes pigmented. Rostrum narrow, not excavated, gently directed vertically, margins not thickened, subparallel, converging at acumen. Acumen distinctly triangular with prominent dorsally directed spiniform tubercle at terminus. Areola 3.6–6.8 (x ‾ = 4.6, n = 26, SE = 0.8) times as long as wide with 6–8 (mode 6) punctations across narrowest point. Pronounced cervical spines present (100%; n = 26). Mandibular, branchiostegal, and orbital regions of carapace with well-developed tubercles. Postorbital ridges developed; pronounced spiniform, dorsally directed tubercle present in all age classes. Suborbital angle acute. Total carapace length 1.8–2.1 (x ‾ = 1.9, n = 27, SE = 0.1) times longer than width. Form I and II males possessing hook on ischium of third pereopods only; hook gently curved at apex, overarching basioischial joint in Form I males, not reaching basioischial joint in Form II males; hooks not opposed by tubercle on basis. Mesial surface of chelae with two rows of tubercles; mesial most row with 6–13 (x ‾ = 8.2, n = 27, SE = 2.1) tubercles, second dorsal row with 6–9 (x ‾ = 7.2, n = 27, SE = 1.9) tubercles. Tubercles normally not extending onto upper body of palm. Ventral surface of chelae with 2–6 (x ‾ = 9.1, n = 48, SE = 1.9) subpalmar tubercles near the dactyl/propodus junction; when more than one subpalmar tubercle present, tubercles oriented in a straight line parallel to the mesial margin. Dorsal longitudinal ridge of dactyl consisting of several well-developed, pronounced, scattered tubercles. Dorsomedian ridge of fixed finger of propodus pronounced. Well defined lateral impression at base of fixed finger. Dactyl and fixed finger with sharp, corneous, subterminal tip. Form I male palm length 65.2–65.3% (x ‾ = 65.2%, n = 4, SE = 0.2%) palm width, Form I male palm length 26.5–27.5% (x ‾ = 27.0%, n = 4, SE = 0.7%) of total propodus length; female dactyl length 57.5–63.9% (x ‾ = 60.7%, n = 15, SE = 1.9%) of total propodus length. First pleopod of Form I male with short terminal elements. Central projection not tapering distally; recurved&gt;90° to main shaft of gonopod, with distinct subapical notch. Mesial process directed&gt;90° to shaft, bent basolaterally; inflated basally, tapering to distinct caudal point equal to the terminance of central projection with notch. Annulus ventralis immovable; distinctly asymmetrical posteriorly; anterior portion with median trough leading to strongly sculptured central fossa; exaggerated “S” bend in sinus terminating at caudal edge.</p><p>Description of Holotypic Male, Form I. (Fig. 9 A–D, G, H, J, K, Table 6).––Body not compressed dorsoventrally (Fig. 9 A); carapace posterior to cervical groove wider than abdomen. Carapace depth less than carapace width at dorsalcephalic margin of cervical groove. TCL 56.0 mm; PCL 46.5 mm. Areola 5.1 times longer than wide, with 8 punctations across narrowest part (Fig. 9 H); length of areola 36.5% of TCL (43.9% PCL). Rostrum not excavated; margins slightly thickened, subparallel and continuous to base of acumen; floor of rostrum with numerous punctations. Rostrum 1.8 times longer than wide and lanceolate. Acumen ending in dorsally directed corneous tip (Fig. 9 H). Postorbital ridges well developed, terminating in pronounced, anterior directed, spiniform, tubercles. Suborbital angle acute, with small tubercle (Fig. 9 H). Pronounced cervical spine present. Mandibular, branchiostegal, and orbital regions of carapace ornamented with well-developed tubercles; greatest tubercle density in hepatic region. Abdomen supraequal in length to carapace, pleura rounded cephaloventrally, angled distoventrally. Lateral margin of terga angulate; lateral margin of second pleuron deeply furrowed. Cephalic section of telson with 2 large spines in each basolateral corner. Proximal podomere of uropod with distal spine on mesial lobe; mesial ramus of uropod with median ridge ending distally in spine, not overreaching margin of ramus; laterodistal spine pronounced. Distal margin of proximal segment of lateral ramus of right uropod having 18 immovable, small spines and one lateral, large, movable spine. Cephalomedian lobe of epistome subrectangular, zygoma moderately arched (Fig. 9 G); cephalolateral margins thickened, forming sharp angle at junction with endostyle; body of epistome lacking prominent cephalomedian fovea (Fig. 9 G). Antennal scale broadest anteriorly; lateral margin thickened, terminating in large corneous spine; setiferous on mesial margin (Fig. 9 J). Right antennal scale 9.5 mm long, 4.1 mm wide (Fig. 9 J). Tip of right antenna reaching middle of telson when adpressed. Mesial surface of left chela with 2 well-formed rows of tubercles; mesial most row with 10 tubercles, dorsal row with 7 tubercles (Fig. 9 K). Several disorganized tubercles present on mesial surface of palm near dactyl/propodus junction. Palm length 65.5% of palm width; depth of palm 15.4 mm. Ventral surface of palm containing 4 subpalmar tubercles forming a line. Dorsal longitudinal ridges of dactyl well developed and possessing moderate sized tubercles (Fig. 9 K); dactyl terminating in large corneous spine. Dorsomedian ridge of propodus finger pronounced. Well-defined lateral impression at base of opposable propodus; numerous setiferous punctations present. Dactyl and fixed finger of propodus with sharp, corneous tip. Carpus with prominent dorsal furrow (Fig. 9 K) and seven weak dorsomesial tubercles; remaining surface with some setiferous punctations; mesial margin with large, procurved spine at about mid-length, and reduced proximal spine. Distodorsal surface of merus with three spiniform tubercles; ventrolateral ridge with 2 small spines and large, corneous distal spine; ventromesial ridge with eight well-developed spines; ventrolateral margin of ischium with two small, spiniform tubercles. Hook on ischium of third pereopods only; hook gently curved at apex, overarching basioischial joint, not opposed by tubercle on basis. Form I gonopod as described in diagnosis (Fig. 9 B–D); tip reaching anterior margin of fourth caudomesial boss.</p><p>Description of Allotypic Female. (Fig. 9 I, Table 6).––Differing from holotype in following respects; carapace depth (22.1 mm) 77.3% of carapace width (28.6 mm); TCL 53.9 mm, PCL 44.4 mm. Areola length 36.4% of TCL (44.4% of PCL), 5.7 times as long as wide. Rostrum 1.9 times longer than wide. Abdomen length 52.2 mm. Ten tubercles on mesial most row of chelae, second row with seven. Palm length (14.2 mm) 69.6% of palm width (20.4 mm); depth of palm 12.2 mm. All measurements and counts from right chela. Antennal scale 8.0 mm long, 3.8 mm wide. Annulus ventralis as described in diagnosis (Fig. 9 I); width of postannular sclerite half the total width of annulus ventralis; first pleopods uniramous, reaching central region of annulus ventralis when abdomen flexed.</p><p>Description of Morphotypic Male, Form II. (Fig. 9 E–F, Table 6).––Differing from holotype in the following respects: Carapace depth (25.1 mm) 84.5% of carapace width (29.7 mm); TCL 53.4 mm and PCL 44.0 mm. Areola length 36.3% of TCL (44.1% of PCL), 5.5 times longer than wide. Rostrum with margins subparallel to base of acumen; ventrally deflected; length 2.0 times width. Abdomen 51.6 mm long. Mesial row of tubercles on palm of chela with seven tubercles; second row with six. Palm length (13.9 mm) 68.8% of palm width (20.2 mm). All measurements and counts from right chela. Antennal scale 9.7 mm long, 3.9 mm wide. Gonopods reaching anterior margin of 4th pereopod caudomesial boss. Central projection curved at&gt;90° to shaft, with complete apex; rounded (Fig. 9 E–F). Mesial process tapered, bulbous, directed basiolaterally. Hook on ischium of third pereopod small, not reaching basioischial joint.</p><p>Size. Form I male (n = 4) TCL ranges in size from 45.9–56.0 mm (PCL 37.4–46.5 mm), x ‾ = 50.9 mm. Form II male (n = 9) TCL ranges from 39.6–47.5 mm (PCL 26.8–47.5 mm), x ‾ = 46.4 mm. Female (n = 26) TCL ranges from 32.4–53.4 mm (PCL 26.4–42.9 mm), x ‾ = 43.3 mm. The largest specimen examined was a Form I male with a TCL of 56.0 mm (PCL 46.5 mm).</p><p>Color in life. Carapace ground color light brown to yellow to orange-brown; posterior margin of carapace light blue to green. Hepatic and antennal region of carapace ornamented with cream, olive, or tan tubercles. Postorbital ridge color same as carapace, to orange-brown. Rostrum margins and acumen cream to orange, orange-brown or tan. Cephalic section of carapace immediately anterior to and including cervical groove black, forming weak saddle; mandibular abductor scars ranging from cream to light-brown. Lateral margin of antennal scale cream to light brown; body of antennal scale blue-brown to cream. Antennal flagellum and antennules green-brown, with olivaceous hue; dorsal surface of lamellae tan to brown; ventral surface light green to olivaceous. Dorsal surface of chelae gray-blue, light blue, green-blue, or green; with no mottling; mesial row, second dorsal row, and dorsal surface of dactyl tubercles cream, tan or orange. Denticles on opposable surfaces of fingers yellow, white, or tan. Ventral surface of chelae cream or tan. Dorsal surface of carpus light blue, green-blue, or olivaceous gray; region adjacent to and including furrow green-brown to green; carpus spine cream. Merus green-brown, gray, or olivaceous brown. Podomeres of pereopods light blue, cream, or gray-blue; joints of pereopod podomeres pink. Dorsal and dorsolateral surface of abdomen light blue, blue-gray, aqua, or green-blue; tergite margins brown to reddish brown; abdomen lacking dorsal stripe. Uropods same colors as abdomen. Ventral surface of abdomen and carapace cream. Dorsal ridge of Form I gonopod central projection amber; body of central projection, gonopod and mesial process tan. Form II gonopod and all associated processes cream. Cephalic portion of annulus ventralis pink to pink-cream; ridge of fossa pink; caudal region of annulus ventralis ranges from pink to cream colored.</p><p>Type locality. Fourmile Fork at Houston Road (KY 1114) crossing, 1.9 km (1.2 mi) southeast of Turkey, Breathitt County, KY, 37.46333/-83.49893 (WGS-84) (Fig. 11, star). At this site, Fourmile Fork is 8–15m wide, and consists of a series of riffles, runs, and pools. Substrates utilized by C. taylori included large boulders and large slabs, as well as leaf packs. Water depth ranged from 0.2–1.0 m deep. Here, the type series was collected, along with several additional specimens, on 25 October 2014 by S. Bell, Z. Dillard, L. Sadecky, R. K. Scott, K. R. Loughman, C. Z. Loughman and ZJL. Orconectes cristavarius is also abundant at this location.</p><p>Disposition of types. The holotype, allotype, and morphotype are deposited in the North Carolina Museum of Science (NCSM), Raleigh, NC. (catalogue numbers NCSM 27209, 27210 and 27211, respectively) . Paratypes are deposited in the USNM, Washington D.C. (USNM 1422181) .</p><p>Range and specimens examined. Cambarus taylori (Fig. 10) is endemic to the Cumberland Mountains region, and specifically to the Middle Fork Kentucky River and its tributaries in Breathitt, Harlan, and Leslie counties, Kentucky, USA (Fig. 11). The senior author was unsuccessful in collecting C. taylori in the North Fork Kentucky River at its confluence with the Middle Fork. Cambarus hazardi was the only tertiary burrowing Cambarus encountered at that location. Within the Middle Fork basin, C. taylori has been collected in Beech Creek, Cutshin Creek, Cow Creek, Grays Fork, Greasy Creek, Hurst Fork, Laurel Creek, Turkey Creek and the Middle Fork mainstem.</p><p>All of the following collections, with the exception of the previously discussed type series, are either housed in the Branley A. Branson Museum at Eastern Kentucky University (denoted with EKU), the United States National Museum (denoted with USNM), or the West Liberty University Astacology Collection (denoted with the prefix WLU). The following abbreviations occur in the text: Cr. = Creek; R. = River; Frk. = Fork ; UNT = Un-named tributary; ZJL14—Collectors included ZJL 2014 field crew which consisted of S. S. Bell, Z. W. Dillard, N. M. Sadecky, L. K. Sadecky, E. Tidmore and E. M. Tennant.</p><p>KENTUCKY: Breathitt Co. (1.) WLU 2095, Fourmile Frk., 37.4772/-83.4962, 11 June 2014, 7 F, 4 IIM ZJL14; NCSM 27209, 27210, 27211; USNM 1422181, 25, October 2014, TYPE SERIES COLLECTION, 6 F, 2 IM, 5 IIM, ZJL14. C. Z. Loughman and K. R. Loughman. Clay Co. (2.) WLU 2298, Grays Frk., 37.2001/-83.4199, 25 October 2014, 7 F, 5 IIM, ZJL14. Harlan Co. (3.) WLU 2100, Middle Frk . Kentucky R., 37.0232/-83.4199, 8 June 2014, 1 IIM, ZJL14. Leslie Co. (4.) EKU 3353, Middle Frk . Kentucky R., 21 April 1978, 4 IIM, D.L. Batch. (5.) USNM 147032, Middle Frk . Kentucky R., 19 October 1974, 6 F, 10 IIM, 1 IM, R.W. Bouchard and J.W. Bouchard. (6.) USNM 147034, Middle Frk . Kentucky R., 19 October 1974, 3 F, 6 IIM, R.W. Bouchard and J.W. Bouchard. (7.) WLU 2088, Wooton Cr., 37.1663/-83.2843, 10 June 2014, 2 F, ZJL14. (8.) WLU 2090, Beech Frk., 36.93985/ -83.390, 10 June 2014, 2F, ZJL14. (9.) WLU 2092, Wolf Cr., 37.1080/-83.2943, 8 June 2014, 1 IIM, ZJL14. (10.) WLU 2094, Greasy Cr., 36.9985/-83.2956, 8 June 2014, 5 F, 2 IIM, ZJL14. (11.) WLU 2099, Laurel Cr., 36.9727/-83.3203, 8 June 2014, 7 F, 1 IIM, ZJL14.</p><p>Habitat and life history notes. Cambarus taylori occurs in second through fourth order streams with cobble and boulder substrates. Like C. guenteri, C. taylori is most frequently encountered under large slab boulders in both runs and riffles, although pools containing large slab boulders can also harbor abundant populations of C. taylori . It has not been found in smaller order high gradient streams. Larger order moderate gradient streams appear to be the preferred habitat of C. taylori . Equal numbers of animals occurred in both riffles and runs (ZJL, personal observation).</p><p>Very little is known about the life history of C. taylori . Form I males have only been collected in October; Form II males have been collected in June and October. Females exhibited active glair glands in June 2014 (ZJL, personal observation). Ovigerous females or females carrying young have never been collected. Animals collected in late October 2014 exhibited exoskeletons with little if any bioaccumulation, suggesting a recent mass molt had occurred in the weeks prior to collection. Juveniles have been collected in both June and October. Future research should focus on elucidating the life history of this species.</p><p>Conservation status. Cambarus taylori should be listed as threatened (T) using American Fisheries Society criteria (Taylor et al. 2007), and ranked G2 using global conservation criteria for conservation listing due to limited range Master (1991). Cambarus taylori should be listed as vulnerable (VU) using International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN 2001) criteria due to its narrow distribution and a reduction in range caused by anthropogenic stressors, specifically coal mining activities (ZJL personal observation).</p><p>Crayfish associates. Cambarus taylori has been collected along with Cambarus (Depressicambarus) cf. sphenoides, Cambarus (Jugicambarus) aff. dubius and Orconectes (Procericambarus) cristavarius .</p><p>Variation. Based on material available, C. taylori is highly similar in both morphology and coloration across all age groups and sexes. Occasionally juveniles appear more spinose than adults, specifically in the hepatic region of the cephalothorax. Adults demonstrate little morphological variation within and among sites, with rostrum shape being the only occasional noticeable difference within populations. Form I male rostrum shape varies from narrow to lanceolate. Coloration, like morphology, is also consistent both within and among populations throughout the Middle Fork basin. Chelae and abdomen coloration can range from green, blue-gray to aqua, but normally is a single consistent set of colors within populations.</p><p>Relationships and comparisons. Cambarus taylori is placed in the subgenus Puncticambarus based on its elongate chelae, its broad, densely punctate areola (2.1 to 6.2 times as long as broad), and the presence of a subapical notch on the Form I male gonopod (Hobbs 1969; Cooper 2001). Among described members of the subgenus, C. taylori is similar to C. guenteri, C. hazardi, C. veteranus Faxon, 1914 and C. callainus .</p><p>Differences among C. taylori, C. guenteri and C. hazardi are discussed in the previous relationships and comparison sections in the descriptions above. Cambarus taylori, like both C. callainus and C. veteranus, possesses a lanceolate rostrum and pronounced cervical spines. Cambarus taylori can be differentiated from both species by the presence of a second dorsal row of tubercles on the mesial margin of the palm compared to the lack of this row in C. callainus and C. veteranus, a more broad rostrum compared to the narrow rostrum of C. callainus and C. veteranus and the palm length/palm width ratio. Cambarus taylori palm length/palm width ratio is&gt;70%, compared to both C. callainus and C. veteranus which have a palm length/palm width ratios &lt;70%. Coloration in life can also be used to differentiate these taxa. In both C. callainus and C. veteranus, coloration is dominated by aquamarine and blues, while in C. taylori, the cephalothorax is less blue and more olivaceous green and brown. Additionally, both C. callainus and C. veteranus in life have rostra that are bordered in crimson red or orange, respectively, and antennae that are either crimson red ( C. callainus) or reddish orange ( C. veteranus). Cambarus taylori antennae are a nondescript blue-gray. Cambarus callainus can be found in Kentucky, but does not occur sympatrically with C. taylori, and is restricted to the Upper Levisa Fork in the Big Sandy basin.</p><p>Three additional members of the subgenus Puncticambarus occur in Kentucky which are easily differentiated from C. taylori . Both C. cumberlandensis and C. bunting are endemic to the upper Tennessee and Cumberland River watersheds and do not occur naturally within the Middle Fork Kentucky River watershed (Taylor &amp; Schuster 2004). Both species differ from C. taylori by possessing rostral spines ( C. cumberlandensis) or tubercles ( C. bunting), which C. taylori lacks. Cambarus theepiensis also does not occur in the Middle Fork Kentucky River basin, and is limited in Kentucky to the greater Big Sandy catchment. Cambarus theepiensis can be differentiated from C. taylori by its noticeably broader rostrum with thickened margins. Cambarus theepiensis also lacks a cervical spine, which C. taylori possesses.</p><p>Etymology. It is our honor and privilege to name this crayfish after Dr. Christopher A. Taylor from the Illinois Natural History Survey. Dr. Taylor has been one of the most active crayfish researchers in the United States for the past two decades and a leader in crayfish conservation, co-authored the seminal work on Kentucky’s crayfishes, Crayfishes of Kentucky, and has been instrumental in bringing the conservation concerns of North America’s crayfishes to light with his many publications. The common name Cutshin Crayfish is in reference to Cutshin Creek watershed, which harbors the species.</p><p>Common name. Cutshin Crayfish</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/2C2687855874FFE3A1D9F9B6FDEF40F1	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	Loughman, Zachary J.;Henkanaththegedara, Sujan M.;Fetzner Jr, James W.;Thoma, Roger F.	Loughman, Zachary J., Henkanaththegedara, Sujan M., Fetzner Jr, James W., Thoma, Roger F. (2017): A case of Appalachian endemism: Revision of the Cambarus robustus complex (Decapoda: Cambaridae) in the Kentucky and Licking River basins of Kentucky, USA, with the description of three new species. Zootaxa 4269 (4): 460-494, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4269.4.4
