taxonID	type	description	language	source
177687D7FFECFFAEE0CBF969D444F890.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Sta. 7: 3 specimens associated with Galaxaura sp, turf algae and hydroids (1 male and 1 female used for drawings); sta. 8: 46 specimens associated with Halimeda sp, Laurancia obtusa and Halimeda macroloba; sta. 9: 13 specimens associated with Jania rubens, Palisada perorata, Digenia simplex and Halimeda sp; sta. 10: 139 specimens associated with Jania rubens, Palisada perorata, Digenia simplex, Sargassum dentifolium, Sargassum latifolium, Galaxaura sp, Dictyota dichotoma, Caulerpa serrulata and Codium dichotomum; sta. 1 3: 2 specimens associated with Dictyota dichotoma; sta. 14: 38 specimens associated with Dictyota dichotoma, Sargassum dentifolium, Sargassum latifolium, Galaxaura sp, Jania rubens, Codium dichotomum, Polysiphonia sp and Laurancia obtusa; sta. 17: 1 specimen associated with Codium dichotomum.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFECFFAEE0CBF969D444F890.taxon	discussion	Remarks. The species was described by Sundara Raj (1927) based on two male specimens from Pamban bridge, India. Sivaprakasam (1977) described the female, also from Southern India. Laubitz (1995) figured specimens collected from St. Paul and Amsterdan islands. Guerra-Garcia (2002 a) described material from Tanzania, which was in agreement with the descriptions of Sundara Raj (1927) and Sivaprakasam (1977) from India, except for the presence of 3 instead of 2 grasping spines in the female propodus palm of gnathopod 2, and variations of the number of teeth in incisor and lacinia mobilis of the mandible. Guerra-Garcia (2004) figured material from Western Australia, and Krapp - Schickel & Guerra-Garcia (2005) provided illustrations of specimens from Indonesia, indicating that the species is probably distributed through the whole Indian Ocean. Zeina & Abou Zaid (2013) described in detail a female of P. pambanensis collected from the Red Sea and they pointed some minor differences in the number of setae of mandibular palp and maxilla 2 between the material from the Red Sea and Tanzanian specimens. In the present study we include also the lateral view figure of a male specimen collected from the Red Sea (Fig. 2). Momtazi & Sari (2013) figured P. pambanensis from the Gulf of Oman. Although the authors reported that the material agrees well with previously studied material by Guerra - Garcia (2002 a), they point out some variations in the setal formula (1 - 3 - 1 instead of 1 - 2 - 1) and the degree of pilosity of lower lip. On the other hand, specimens from the Red Sea (Zeina & Abou Zaid, 2013, present study) and St. Paul and Amsterdam Islands (Laubitz, 1995), have distinct anterolateral projections on pereonites 2 and 3, which seem to be absent or scarcely developed in the material from the other localities. In some specimens examined during the present study (e. g. Fig. 2) these projections are not so clear, so it could be intraespecific variation in shape and size of these lateral projections depending on the ontogenetic development of the specimens. The comparison between the specimens from the Red Sea and those from the type locality is difficult since the figures of the original description of Sundara Raj (1927) are incomplete and lack details. The female described by Sivaprakasam (1977) from the same locality is very similar to the females collected during the present study, apart from the suture between head and pereonite 1, which seem to be more marked in the material from India. Unfortunately, Guerra-Garcia et al. (2010) did not found specimens of this species during their collections in Southern India, and a detailed redescription based on newly collected material of this species from the type locality is still lacking. This redescription is necessary to confirm the distribution of P. pambanensis through the whole Indian Ocean. Additionally, Guerra-Garcia (2004) discussed the differences between Pseudocaprellina and Caprellina and evaluated the validity of some diagnostic characters for species of the close genera Caprellina, Pseudocaprellina, Hircella and Liriarchus. The phylogenetic relationships among the species of this group of genera should be further investigated in detail to explore constant morphological differences among species to clarify the delimitation and diagnosis of valid genera and species. In this sense, a molecular approach could help to understand the species status.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFECFFAEE0CBF969D444F890.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Type locality: Gulf of Mannar (Sundara Raj, 1927; Sivaprakasam, 1977). Other records: St. Paul and Amsterdam islands (Laubitz, 1995); Bahari Beach, Tanzania (Guerra-Garcia, 2002 a); Rottnest Island, Kalbarri and West Wallaby Island, Western Australia (Guerra-Garcia, 2004); Bali, Indonesia (Krapp - Schickel & Guerra-Garcia, 2005); Hurghada coastal area, Egypt (Zeina & Abou Zaid, 2013, present study); Djod, Gulf of Oman (Momtazi & Sari, 2013).	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFEBFFADE0CBF802D3D8FD32.taxon	discussion	Remarks. No specimens of Caprella equilibra have been found or examined during the present study. Schellenberg (1928) recorded the species from Port Said (Mediterranean side at the entrance of the Canal). Recently, studies on the fouling community in the Suez Canal by Emara & Belal (2004) reported the presence of Caprella equilibra in Bitter Lake and Lake Timsah. Future studies are necessary to confirm if the species is also distributed along the Red Sea or if it is restricted to the Canal.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFEBFFADE0CBF802D3D8FD32.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Globally distributed: Mediterranean, Black Sea, Atlantic Ocean, Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean (see McCain, 1968 and McCain & Steinberg, 1970 for details). Takeuchi & Sawamoto (1998) found C. equilibra as abundant in plankton samples. We have also observed for this species a great ability to disperse in the water column and colonize buoys and fouling structures. This could explain its wide distribution.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE8FFADE0CBFD64D5C3F8BB.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Sta. 7: 15 specimens associated with Galaxaura sp, turf algae and hydroids (1 male and 1 female used for drawings); sta. 10: 38 specimens associated with Colpomenia peregrina, Codium dichotomum, Digenia simplex and Dictyota dichotoma; sta. 12: 11 specimens associated with Obelia sp and some hydroids, sta. 14: 20 specimens associated with Polysiphonia sp.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE8FFADE0CBFD64D5C3F8BB.taxon	discussion	Remarks. The material of this species collected during the present study agrees well with taxonomic descriptions of specimens from other areas. Zeina & Abou Zaid (2013) fully described a female specimen from the Red Sea, and in the present study we include also the lateral view figure of the male (Fig. 3). This species shows very little intraspecific variation among localities in spite of being distributed widely in tropical and temperate waters. The species has been taken in plankton tows (McCain, 1968), which could indicate that probably the species is able to survive easily in the water column, contributing to its global distribution. A complete description of this species is provided by McCain (1968) who designated a lectotype from Mayer’s type - series (Mayer, 1890). Detailed figures based on material from the Caribbean coast of Colombia are included in Guerra-Garcia et al. (2006)	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE8FFADE0CBFD64D5C3F8BB.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Type locality: Off Amoy, China (Mayer, 1890). Other records: Red Sea, West coast of United States, Venezuela, Colombia, Gulf of Mexico, South Africa, Hawaii, Bora Bora, Japan, Papua New Guinea, Australia, India, Mauritius, South Arabian coast, Indonesia (for details of the localities see McCain, 1968, McCain & Steinberg, 1970; Guerra-Garcia, 2003 a, 2004; Diaz et al., 2005; Krapp - Schickel & Guerra-Garcia, 2005, Guerra-Garcia 2006; Guerra-Garcia et al., 2006; Zeina & Abou Zaid, 2013, present study; Paz - Rios et al., 2014).	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE6FFA5E0CBFF0CD340FC3D.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Types, 1 male MNHN Am - 5252 and 1 female MNHN Am - 5253, collected from Djibouti, Somaliland (see Mayer, 1903)	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE6FFA5E0CBFF0CD340FC3D.taxon	description	Description. Male (MNHN Am - 5252) Body length 7.4 mm. Suture between head and pereonite 1 present; pereonite 3 longest. Pereonites 6 and 7 fused. Head and pereonites smooth, except for pereonite 2 with paired of anteriorly curved dorsal projections medially, and two small acute projections laterally near the coxa of gnathopod 2 (Fig. 4 A). Eye distinctive. Gills on pereonites 3 and 4, elongate, length about 3 times the width; first pair 1.2 times as long as the second pair. Mouthparts. Upper lip symmetrically bilobed; each lobe carrying a distal row of minute setulae. Mandibles with palp (broken in left mandible); mandibular molar process strong; left mandible with incisor and lacinia mobilis divided into 5 teeth, followed by 3 submarginal pectinate setae; right mandible incisor divided into 5 – 6 teeth followed by lacinia mobilis divided into 3 teeth, one wider and minutely serrate, followed by 2 pectinate setae; palp with 3 articles; article 1 lacking setae; article 2 with 7 setae; article 3 with setal formula 1 - 4 - 1 and distal row of minute setulae. Inner lobes of the lower lip well demarcated, oval; outer and inner lobes provided with setulae. Maxilla 1 outer lobe carrying 7 bifurcate spines; distal article of palp with 3 teeth and 3 spines on apical end, and a group of setae medially. Maxilla 2 outer lobe rectangular, carrying 15 setae; inner lobe oval, with group of setae distally and setulae laterally. Maxilliped inner plate with 3 plumose setae and 2 non plumose setae on distal margin; outer plate larger than inner, 2 x length of inner plate, margin setulose, bearing 1 seta apically; palp setose, dactylus falcate, with two rows of setulae and a proximal seta on outer margin. Antenna 1 about 0.7 x body length; article 2 of the peduncle the longest; flagellum 11 - articulate, with the proximal article composed of 4 articles fused. Antenna 2 slender, about 0.4 x antenna 1 length, without swimming setae; peduncular article 1 with a short acute distal projection; flagellum 2 - articulate. Gnathopod 1 basis shorter than ischium to carpus combined; propodus oval with proximal grasping spine, palm margin finely serrate; dactylus minutely denticulate and setose on inner margin. Gnathopod 2 inserted on the middle of pereonite 2; coxa vestigial, small acute projection near the coxa, basis slender, 1.2 x pereonite 2 length, with a small acute projection distally; propodus elongate, length about 2.3 times of width, with a grasping spine on a small proximal projection, medial projection, followed by U - notch and triangular projection distally; dactylus with sparse setulae and minutely denticulate in the proximal and medium margin. Pereopods 3 – 4 uniarticulate, about 0.25 x gill length Pereopods 5 and 7 missing; pereopod 6 7 - articulate, robust, basis subequal in length than merus and carpus; propodus provided with a pair of proximal grasping spines, dactylus falcate. Abdomen with a pair of 1 - articulate appendages provided with fine setulae distally, pair of lobes and single dorsal lobe with pair of plumose setae. Female (MNHN Am - 5253). Body length 5.8 mm. 2 dorsal projections medially on the head and pereonites 2 and 3, together with an additional dorsal projection distally on pereonites 2 and 3 and two medial protuberances on pereonite 4. A small projection antero laterally on pereonite 2, together with an acute projection (larger than in male) near the coxa of gnathopod 2 (Fig. 4 B). Antenna 1 flagellum 10 - articulate. Gills less elongate than in male, and pereopods 3 and 4 slightly larger than in male. Palm of gnathopod 2 straight, with a small proximal projection provided with a grasping spine. Oostegites on pereonite 3 and 4 with inner margin setose. Abdomen lacking appendages, with pair of lateral lobes and single dorsal lobe with two plumose setae.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE6FFA5E0CBFF0CD340FC3D.taxon	discussion	Remarks (see also remarks under Pseudoprotella phasma). The only information available of M. africana correspond with the original description of Mayer (1903) based on a male and female collected from Djibouti, Somaliland, and a record of the species in the Gulf of Aqaba provided by Ruffo (1959). Mayer (1903) only provided the lateral view figure of the male and the female and his description is very concise. During a visit of one of the authors of the present study (JMGG) to the Muséum nacional d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, the type material of this species was located. Both the male and the female were in agreement with the lateral view figures provided by Mayer, and detailed figures and description are provided in the present study. The generic diagnosis of Metaprotella was recently defined by Takeuchi & Lowry (2007) based on the description of newly collected material of Metaprotella haswelliana (Mayer, 1882), the type species of Metaprotella. Lim & Takeuchi (2012) revised the diagnosis of Metaprotella in order to include variation in the suture between head and pereonite 1 and reported the following diagnostic characters for the genus: (1) Head fused (suture present or vestigial as slight concaved area) with pereonite 1; (2) Antenna 1 well developed, flagellum with more than 2 articles; (3) Antenna 2 well developed, flagellum with 2 articles; (4) Mandible well developed, molar present, well developed, palp 3 - articulate with setal formula 1 - x - y - 1 or 1 - x - 1; (4) Maxilliped well developed, inner plate smaller than outer plate, outer plate well developed, palp article 3 with distal projection, palp article 4 well developed; (5) Pereonites 6 and 7 completely fused (dorsal suture absent); (6) Pereopods 3 and 4 vestigial, with 1 article; (7) Pereopod 5 well developed, with 7 articles, with sparse, short setae and well - developed dactylus; (8) Pereopods 6 and 7 well developed, with 7 articles; (9) Gills on pereonites 3 and 4; (10) Pleopods absent; (11) Uropods 2 pairs, biarticulate, unirramous and vestigial; (12) Telson (dorsal lobe) present. Metaprotella africana agree with all the generic diagnostic characteristics except for the projection of the third article of the maxilliped palp, which is lacking in this species. In this sense, the diagnosis should be modified since the distal projection can be present or not depending on the species. Similarly, Takeuchi & Lowry (2007) and Lim & Takeuchi (2012) also considered in the diagnosis pereopods 3 and 4 uniarticulate. This is valid for all the species, including M. africana, except for M. tanzaniensis Guerra-Garcia, 2002 b, which seem to have 2 - articulate pereopods 3 and 4 (Guerra-Garcia, 2002 b: p. 914, fig. 4 A, B) The diagnosis of the abdomen in the genus is not clear, since the second pair of uropods is difficult to assign in Metaprotella species. Even in M. haswelliana, the type species of the genus, the second pair of vestigial uropods reported in the diagnosis and description is not distinguishable in the illustrations (see Takeuchi & Lowry, 2007: p. 15, fig. 3 h). In descriptions of other Metaprotella species, this second pair is also not recognizable, as shown, e. g, in McCain, 1968 (p. 80, fig. 39 i, j), Guerra-Garcia, 2002 b (p. 914, fig. 4 d), Guerra-Garcia, 2003 b (p. 11, fig. 7 f), Lim & Takeuchi, 2012 (p. 28, fig. 3) and Momtazy & Sari, 2013 (p. 199, fig. 2). Furthermore, the first pair of uropods is not clearly biarticulated in M. haswelliana, and is indeed clearly uniarticulate in other species of Metaprotella (see e. g. Müller, 1990: p. 840, fig. 57; Laubitz, 1991: p. 114, fig. 10 G; Guerra-Garcia, 2002 b: p. 914, fig. 4 d; Lim & Takeuchi, 2012: p. 28, fig. 3; Momtazy & Sari, 2013: p. 199, fig. 2). Consequently, a further detailed study of the abdomen in Metaprotella species should be conducted to properly clarify the diagnostic characters of abdominal appendages. On the other hand, the male penes are not clearly distinguishable in several species of Metaprotella. Although they can be recognized in M. sandalensis (Lim & Takeuchi, 2012: p. 28, fig. 3), they are not described for M. haswelliana (Takeuchi & lowry, 2007). The redescription of the present study show that the abdomen in M. africana is also complicate, the pair of appendages (uropods) is clearly uniarticulate, but the penes are not clearly differentiated in the male specimen. Larsen (1997) and Guerra-Garcia (2003 b) provided keys to the world species of Metaprotella. The genus presently comprises 11 species: M. haswelliana (Mayer, 1882) the type species of the genus, redescribed in detail based on material from Western Australia by Takeuchi & Lowry (2007), M. excentrica Mayer, 1890 described from Pamban Bridge, India and recently found also by Guerra-Garcia et al. (2010), M. problematica Mayer, 1890 described also from Pamban Bridge, India, M. sandalensis Mayer, 1898, recently redescribed based on newly collected specimens from Lifou Island, New Caledonia, the type locality (Lim & Takeuchi, 2012), M. africana Mayer, 1903 redescribed in the present paper based on they type material designated by Mayer from Djibouti, Somaliland, M. makrodactylos Stebbing, 1910 described from South Africa, M. hummelincki McCain, 1968 from Puerto Rico (fully illustrated by McCain, 1968), M. unguja Larsen, 1997 and M. tanzaniensis Guerra-Garcia, 2002 b, both described from Tanzania, M. mauritiensis Guerra-Garcia, 2003 b, from Mauritius and M. macoranicus (Momtazi & Sari, 2013) described from the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Most of the Metaprotella species are fully illustrated and properly described, except for M. excentrica, M. problematica and M. makrodactilos, which need to be redescribed in detail. All of the species show pereonites 6 and 7 totally fused, agreeing with the main diagnostic character for the genus. Metaprotella africana can be distinguished from the remaining species of Metaprotella mainly by the arrangement of dorsal projections; the male is provided with a pair of dorsal acute projections on pereonite 2, and the female with 2 dorsal projections medially on the head and pereonites 2 and 3, together with an additional dorsal projection distally on pereonites 2 and 3 and two medial protuberances on pereonite 4. Unfortunately, only two specimens constitute the type material of Mayer, and the different pattern of body projections arrangement in male and female cannot be confirmed in other specimens as a constant character. Larsen (1997) also found differences in body projections between male and female of M. unguja. M. africana seems to be closer to M. tanzaniensis; however, the present redescription of M. africana shows that male has no paired dorsal projections on head, while female has distinct dorsal projection. To the contrary to M. africana, in M. tanzaniensis, male has distinct dorsal projection on head, while female has no paired dorsal projections on head. So male of M. africana looks closer to female of M. tanzaniensis, and female of M. africana looks closer to male of M. tanzaniensis.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE6FFA5E0CBFF0CD340FC3D.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Type locality: Djibouti, Somaliland. Other record: Gulf of Aqaba	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE0FFA4E0CBFC6ED576FE32.taxon	discussion	Remarks. No specimens of Paracaprella pusilla have been collected during the present study. The presence of P. pusilla in the Suez Canal was reported by Schellenberg (1928), who cited the species in three stations: Kantara (46 km from Port Said), Kabret (between Little Bitter Lake and Great Bitter Lake) and Port Taufiq. Since then, the species has not been recorded nor in the Suez Canal nor along the Red Sea. The material reported by Schellenberg (1928) could not be located by us for examination, but according to the remarks provided by this author, it seems that there is no doubt in the species identification (see Schellenberg, 1928, p. 678: “ agree so completely with all the characters described and figured by Mayer that they may undoubtedly referred to Paracaprella pusilla ”). Although the species appears to be a strongly Caribbean species (Carlton & Eldredge, 2009), it has been recently introduced at the west and east coasts of Mediterranean Sea (see Ros & Guerra-Garcia, 2012 and Ros e t at., 2013, Ros et al., 2015). Ros et al. (2013) suggested two main alternatives to explain the presence of P. pusilla in the Mediterranean Sea: The species entered (a) via the Suez Canal (Port Said) on vessels from the Indo-Pacific, or (b) through the Strait of Gibraltar, on vessels arriving from the Atlantic coast of America or from the established population in southwest Spain. P. pusilla has been primarily associated with fouling communities in harbours and marinas (Ros & Guerra-Garcia, 2012), but, unfortunately, we could not confirm the presence of the species along the Egyptian coast, since we could not have access to marinas of Egypt during the present study due to access restrictions because of political reasons. And we did not find the species in natural environments. However, taking into account that the species has become the most abundant among the caprellids found along the entire coast of India, both in harbours and in natural intertidal rocky shores (Guerra-Garcia et al., 2010), it is not surprising that the species could be also abundant in the Red Sea. Future studies must be addressed to confirm the presence of P. pusilla in this area. Figures of the species based on specimens from Brazil were provided by Mayer (1890). Guerra-Garcia et al. (2006) figured additional Caribbean material collected from the coast of Colombia.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE0FFA4E0CBFC6ED576FE32.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Type locality: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Mayer, 1890). Other records: Western North Atlantic, Tropical West Africa and Soth Africa, Tanzania, Suez Canal, Hawaii, China, Gulf of Mexico, Venezuela, Cuba, Colombia, India, Australia and Mediterranean (McCain & Steinberg 1970; Wakabara et al. 1991; Ortiz and Lalana 1998; Diaz et al, 2005; Winfield et al. 2006; Montelli & Lewis, 2008; Guerra-Garcia et al., 2010). Details of the global distribution and invasion history are provided by Ros & Guerra-Garcia, 2012 and Ros et al., 2013).	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE1FFBDE0CBFE6ED5B1FD6D.taxon	materials_examined	Material examined. Male “ a ”, female “ b ”, 2 males (one of them lacking head), 1 female (ZMB 21555) collected during the Cambridge Suez Canal Expedition; 2 males and 1 female (ZMB 17533) collected from Suez by E. Bannwarth in 1914 (see remarks for discussion about the type material)	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE1FFBDE0CBFE6ED5B1FD6D.taxon	description	Description. Male “ a ” (ZMB 21555) Body length 5.4 mm. Head with a dorsal acute projection; suture between head and pereonite 1 non - marked. Pereonite 1 with a dorsal acute projection. Pereonite 2, 3 and 4 with two dorsal acute projections forwardly and another dorsal acute projection backwardly. Pereonite 2, with a lateral projection proximally and other projection near the coxa, both of them forwardly. Pereonite 3 with a lateral proximal projection and other projection near the gill insertion. Pereonite 4 with a small rounded projection proximally and other projection near the gill insertion. Pereonite 5 with a proximal lateral projection and two dorsal projections. Pereonite 6 with a dorsal small projection. Pereonite 7 with a small projection near the coxa of pereopod 7. Eyes distinct, small. Gills on pereonites 3 and 4, oval, length 2 times width. Mouthparts. Upper lip symmetrically bilobed, without setulae. Lower lip broken. Mandibles with no sign of mandibular molar; left mandible with incisor 5 - toothed, lacinia mobilis 5 - toothed followed by three plates; right mandible with incisor 5 - toothed, lacinia mobilis transformed into a plate, followed by other plate; molar flake absent; palp three - articulate, second article with a single seta, third article with a distal robust setae (like a knob) and a setal row formula 1 - x - 1, being x = 7 in left mandible and x = 8 in right mandible. Maxilla 1 outer lobe carrying 6 robust seta; distal article of the palp with 4 setae. Maxilla 2 inner lobe triangular, with 4 setae; outer lobe rectangular, about 1.5 times as long as inner lobe, with 4 setae. Maxilliped inner plate small and rounded with 2 setae; outer plate elongate, 3 times as long as the inner plate, with 5 setae; palp 4 - articulate, dactylus curved (falcate) with row of setulae. Antenna 1 about 3 ⁄ 4 of body length; flagellum 10 - articulate. Antenna 2, about 0.4 x antenna 1 length, without swimming setae, flagellum two - articulate, peduncular article 1 with a distal projection. Gnathopod 1 basis as long as the combination of ischium, merus and carpus; palm of propodus non - serrate, provided with two grasping spines; dactylus margin smooth. Gnathopod 2 inserted on the anterior half of pereonite 2; basis 1.3 times as long as pereonite 2, with a projection distally; ischium rectangular with a lateral acute projection; merus rounded; carpus triangular; propodus oval with a hump dorso laterally, more marked in some specimens (see Fig. 12), length about 1.6 times of width, provided with small grasping spine proximally and an acute projection medially and a hump distally; dactylus smooth Pereopods 3 and 4 minuscule (smaller than 0.1 mm), 1 - articulate, elongate, provided with two distal setae. Pereopods 5, 6 and 7 lacking (missing also in all the specimens examined) Penes large, length about 2 times width. Abdomen without clear appendages, with a pair of lateral lobes well marked and setose, and a single dorsal lobe provided with a pair of plumose setae. Female “ b ” (ZMB 21555) Similar to holotype male apart from the following characters: flagellum of antenna 1 with 8 articles; gnathopod 2 without projections on basis and ischium, propodus lacking hump and the medial projection smaller than in male; oostegites on pereonite 3 very setose, on pereonite 4 scarcely setose; abdomen without well marked setose lobes.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE1FFBDE0CBFE6ED5B1FD6D.taxon	discussion	Remarks. Schellenberg (1928) in the original description of P. multispinosa reported the following material: 1 young specimen 3 mm from Km 76 (Ferry Port); several males 3.5 – 5.5 mm and young specimens, 3 female with brood - sac 3.5 – 4 mm from K. 0 (Kabret); 1 female with brood - sac 3.5 mm from K. 13 (Little Bitter Lake); 1 male 5 mm Km. 157 (El Shatt). McCain & Steinberg (1970) pointed out that the type material was deposited at the Museum für Naturkunde, Berlin. All the material of this species deposited at the Museum has been examined. The museum houses two lots of specimens (ZMB 17533 and ZMB 21555) of P. mutispinosa. ZMB 17533 contain material (2 males and 1 female, see Fig. 12 lower) collected by E. Bannwarth (21 February 1914). This material was collected from Suez and in the database of the Museum is considered as unspec. Typus. The other lot (ZMB 21555) comprises 3 males (1 of them very damaged, lacking head) and 2 females and, according to the label and database, it was collected during the Cambridge Expedition to the Suez Canal (1924). Schellenberg (1928) describes this species as part of the report on the Amphipoda collected during Cambridge Expedition to the Suez Canal but he only figured the lateral view and ganthopod 2 of one adult male (Schellenberg, 1928, fig. 209). Therefore, this material collected in 1924 (ZMB 21555) might be part of the material in which the description of the species is based on, and could correspond with the type material. However, it seems that Schellenberg (1928) reported more material in his description than that included in the lot ZMB 21555, which contain only 5 specimens. The other lot (ZMB 17533), collected previously to the Cambridge Expedition, was probably later identified as P. multispinosa. Therefore, it seems more adequate to consider as type material the lot ZMB 21555. However, at the Museum records, the lot ZMB 17533 is registered as type material and we cannot discard the possibility that Schellenberg used this material collected before to describe the species. For all these reasons, we have decided not to designate a lectotype so far, but we based the descriptions on a male “ a ” and female “ b ” from the lot ZMB 21555. Anyway, the material of both lots clearly belongs to the same species and all the specimens of both lots (except for the damaged male without head) have been figured (male “ a ” and female “ b ” in Fig. 8, and the rest of specimens in Fig. 12). Schellenberg (1928) considered that the rudiments of the abdominal appendages of P. multispinosa showed the same arrangement of setae that Mayer figures for the genus (Mayer, 1890, plate 5, figure 34). He also indicated that the mouthparts are like those shown by Mayer for the genus, but in Mayer descriptions, mouthparts of this genus are not clear.	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
177687D7FFE1FFBDE0CBFE6ED5B1FD6D.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Type locality: Suez Canal (Kabret, Little Bitter Lake, El Shatt, and the Ferry Port). Only reported so far from the type locality	en	Zeina, Amr F., Guerra, José M. (2016): Caprellidae (Crustacea: Peracarida: Amphipoda) from the Red Sea and Suez Canal, with the redescription of Metaprotella africana and Paradeutella multispinosa. Zootaxa 4098 (2): 227-253, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4098.2.2
