identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03924C3AFFADA602FF41FAF3AA7FFC5D.text	03924C3AFFADA602FF41FAF3AA7FFC5D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris lakewayi Karanovic & Cooper 2011	<div><p>Kinnecaris lakewayi sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 1–4)</p> <p>Type locality. Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Lake Way borefield, bore SB32-1, 26.873739° S 120.202798° E.</p> <p>Type material. Holotype male dissected on one slide (WAM C45369); allotype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47178); other paratypes: one male, five females, and two copepodids in alcohol (WAM C47179), one female on one SEM stub in toto coated with carbon (WAM C47180), and one male and one female dissected on one slide each (WAM C47181 and C47182); all collected at type locality, leg. V. Campagna &amp; E. Thomas, 21 November 2009, oeLN7122. Additional paratype: one female in alcohol (WAM C45500), collected at type locality, leg. V. Campagna &amp; E. Thomas, 16 August 2010, oeLN0719.</p> <p>Other material examined. One male in alcohol (WAM C45499), Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Lake Way borefield, bore P70, 26.650792° S 120.152298° E, leg. V. Campagna &amp; E. Thomas, 15 August 2010, oeLN0736.</p> <p>One damaged male in alcohol (WAM C45504), Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Lake Way borefield, bore LakeOES41, 26.704722° S 120.338611° E, leg. V. Campagna &amp; E. Thomas, 16 August 2010, oeLN0724. One male and one copepodid in alcohol (WAM C45368), Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Lake Way borefield, bore SB26-1, 26.888636° S 120.132299° E, leg. V. Campagna &amp; E. Thomas, 20 November 2009, oeLN0367.</p> <p>Description. Male (based on holotype and two paratypes). Total body length, measured from tip of rostrum to posterior margin of caudal rami (excluding caudal setae), from 397 to 402 µm (400 µm in holotype). Preserved specimens colourless. Nauplius eye absent. Body composed of prosome (consisting of cephalothorax and three free pedigerous somites; first pedigerous somite fused to cephalothorax), and urosome (consisting of fifth pedigerous somite, genital somite, four abdominal somites, and caudal rami). Habitus (Fig. 1A) cylindrical and very slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome; prosome/urosome ratio 0.8; greatest width from dorsal view at posterior end of cephalothorax. Body length/width ratio about eight; cephalothorax 1.15 times as wide as genital somite. Free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by well-developed arthrodial membranes. Hyaline fringes of all somites smooth, very narrow and hard to distinguish from arthroidal membranes, especially dorsally, except in preanal somite (fifth urosomite) where hyaline fringe more pronounced. Integument relatively weakly sclerotized, without cuticular pits, but ornamented with several rows of minute spinules on all urosomites (especially dorsally) and some additional larger spinules on fourth and fifth (preanal) urosomites ventrally, as well as large sensilla on all somites except preanal one; cephalothorax with clearly visible (Fig. 1A) double dorsal cuticular window (smaller window with thinner integument inside bigger one) posteriorly; fourth and fifth urosomites each with pair of lateral circular windows. Pleural areas of cephalothorax and free pedigerous somites not well developed, cephalic appendages and coxae of swimming legs clearly exposed in lateral view (not covered by pleuras). Rostrum (Fig. 1A) small, membraneous, not demarcated at base, linguiform, almost reaching distal margin of first antennular segment, about as long as wide ornamented with two large dorsal sensilla; area around rostrum with much thinner cuticle, clearly demarcated dorsally, without any surface ornamentation.</p> <p>Cephalothorax (Fig. 1A) about 1.6 times as long as wide in dorsal view; representing almost 20% of total body length. Surface of cephalic shield with 10 large sensilla in posterior half (posterior to cuticular window, corresponding to fused first pedigerous somite; six dorsal and two lateral on each side), and 16 sensilla in anterior half (six dorsal, two lateral on each side, and three on each side near ventral margin of pleuras); single cuticular pore laterally on each side of anterior half.</p> <p>Tergites and pleuras of second and third pedigerous somites (Fig. 1A) with two pairs of dorsal sensilla (pair at 2/3 more widely spaced than posterior pair), one pair of dorso-lateral posterior sensilla, and one pair of lateral sensilla (one sensillum on each side); anterior pair of dorsal sensilla more widely spaced on third pedigerous somite. Fourth pedigerous somite with sensilla only on posterior margin, six in total; with two additional dorsal rows of minute spinules.</p> <p>Fifth pedigerous somite (Fig. 1A) with three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin (one dorsal, one dorso-lateral, and one ventro-lateral), pair of very small cuticular pores in anterior part ventro-laterally, at base of fifth legs, and two dorsal rows of minute spinules.</p> <p>Genital somite (Fig. 1A) with three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin (one dorsal, one dorso-lateral, and one ventro-lateral), one pair of very small cuticular pores in anterior part ventro-laterally, and four dorsal rows of minute spinules; about 1.3 times as wide as long, with single, large, completely formed and longitudinally placed spermatophore visible inside; spermatophore about 1.2 times as long as genital somite and placed more on right side. Third and fourth urosomites (Fig. 1A) also with six posterior sensilla (two dorsal, two ventral, and one lateral on each side), several rows of minute spinules dorsally, and few shorter rows of minute spinules ventrally and laterally. Fourth urosomite with four additional groups of 3-4 large spinules midventrally. Similar spinules on fifth (preanal) urosomite, but no sensilla or pores.</p> <p>Anal somite (Figs. 1A, 2A) with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of large cuticular pores laterally (one pore on each side) in anterior half, two pairs of minute cuticular pores laterally closer to posterior margin, and pair of slightly larger cuticular pores ventrally, at base of caudal rami, in addition to several short rows of minute spinules dorsally and laterally. Anal operculum (Figs. 1A, 2A) well-developed, outer surface unornamented,, row of spinules on inner surface, convex and smooth distal margin, not reaching posterior end of anal somite, representing 66% of somite's width. Anal sinus widely opened, with two diagonal rows of slender spinules on ventral side and transverse row of spinules on dorsal side (below anal operculum).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 1A, B, 2A) about 2.9 times as long as greatest width (dorsal view) and 0.6 times as long as anal somite, nearly cylindrical but slightly inflated at midlength (arrowed in Figs 1B, 2A), with inner margin slightly convex in dorsal view and base about as wide as rest of ramus; rami nearly parallel, with space between them almost 1.7 times one ramus’ width; with seven armature elements (three lateral, one dorsal, and three apical). Dorsal distal margin protruding in lateral view (Fig. 1B) and with characteristic dorsal posterior saddle in lateral view. Ornamentation consists of large cuticular pore ventro-laterally close to posterior margin (between two principal apical setae), and row of spinules along posterior margin ventro-medially. Dorsal seta slender and smooth, inserted somewhat closer to inner margin at about midlength, almost 1.4 times as long as caudal ramus, triarticulate basally, and sparsely pinnate distally. Lateral setae thin and smooth, inserted close to each other (two proximal and one distal) in one depression at 3/5 of ramus’ length; proximal seta close to dorsal surface strongest and longest, about 0.7 times as long as ramus, 1.7 times as long as proximal seta closer to ventral side, and about 1.3 times as long as distal lateral seta. Inner apical seta smooth and slender, inserted closer to ventral side, about 0.7 times as long as ramus. Middle apical seta strongest, inserted distally, without breaking plane, smooth, with strongly curled tip, about 2.6 times as long as outer apical seta and 0.35 times as long as whole body. Outer apical seta strong and without breaking plane, unipinnate distally and inserted closer to ventral side, about twice as long as ramus.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 1A, C) slightly longer than cephalothorax, prehensile and strongly digeniculate, unornamented, seven-segmented but third and fourth segments somewhat subdivided with surface sutures on inner and ventral sides. First segment very short, second segment longest. Geniculation between third and fourth and between fifth and sixth segments. Distal anterior corner of sixth segment protruding as large, apically bifid, spiniform process; a second smaller spiniform process present basally on fourth segment, two processes making powerful pincers. Broad aesthetasc on fourth segment reaching slightly beyond tip of appendage, fused basally to slightly longer seta. Slightly shorter and much more slender apical aesthetasc on seventh segment, fused basally to two setae. Setal formula: 0.6.5.6.0.1.9. All setae slender and almost all with pore on tip; proximalmost seta on second segment uniplumose distally, all other setae smooth. Seta on sixth segment minute and partly hidden behind spiniform process. Largest seta on second segment, one seta on third segment, and four setae on seventh segment biarticulate basally, but some other setae showing some trace of ancestral biarticulation.</p> <p>Antenna (Fig. 1D) relatively stout and long, composed of coxa, allobasis, one-segmented endopod, and onesegmented exopod. Coxa very short, unarmed and unornamented. Allobasis about 3.6 times as long as wide, unarmed, ornamented with single short, transverse row of minute spinules on anterior surface. Endopod about 3.1 times as long as wide, with surface frill subdistally, ornamented with few large spinules along anterior surface, armed laterally with two bipinnate spines (proximal somewhat shorter) and apically with five strong and unipinnate elements (two geniculate). Exopod minute, cylindrical, about 2.6 times as long as wide, unornamented, armed with single unipinnate apical seta, which about 2.6 times as long as segment.</p> <p>Labrum strong and large, with convex and smooth anterior surface, and narrow cutting edge; cutting edge ornamented apically with row of slender and apically bifid spinules, and with some stronger, simple spinules on outer corners; posterior surface with many rows of minute slender spinules.</p> <p>Paragnaths fused into strong plate, densely ornamented with short spinules near distal margin and on anterior surface; posterior surface ornamented with one transverse row of eight long spinules and two diagonal rows of five or six smaller spinules; lateral surface smooth except for large cuticular pore proximally.</p> <p>Mandibula (Fig. 1F, G) with narrow cutting edge on elongated coxa, which positioned between labrum and paragnaths, armed with tricuspidate complex tooth ventrally, unipinnate seta dorsally, and several smaller teeth and/or spinules in between. Palp one-segmented, cylindrical, about three times as long as wide, unornamented, and armed apically with two smooth and subequal setae, each with pore on tip.</p> <p>Maxillula (Fig. 1G, H) with relatively small praecoxa, arthrite rectangular, about 1.5 times as long as wide from lateral view, unornamented, armed with four apical elements (probably three spines and one strong seta; spines each with tuft of basally fused spinules at distal end, forming little scoops; seta with pore on tip). Coxal endite slightly shorter than praecoxal arthrite, armed with two slender setae apically, both with pore on tip; dorsal seta unipinate along dorsal surface (although hardly visible), other setae smooth. Basis slightly longer than coxal endite, armed with one subapical minute seta (or perhaps tubular pore?) and two long smooth apical setae of about same length; all three elements with pore on tip. Endopod and exopod absent (fused to basis without trace).</p> <p>Maxilla (Fig. 1I) composed of syncoxa, basis, and one-segmented endopod; ornamented only with large cuticular pore on syncoxal posterior surface proximally, with closely shut and horizontally placed opening. Syncoxa with two endites; proximal one conical and bent dorsally, armed apically with single distally unipinnate seta; distal endite longer than proximal one, cylindrical, armed apically with two smooth setae with pore on tip. Basis drawn out into strong claw, without seta at base, with tuft of basally fused spinules distally, forming small scoop, and single pore on ventral surface close to base of scoop (pore not visible with light microscope and in anterior view). Endopod represented by minute but distinct segment, armed with two smooth subequal apical setae, both with pore on tip.</p> <p>Maxilliped (Fig. 1J) three-segmented, composed of syncoxa, basis, and one-segmented endopod. Syncoxa short, unarmed and unornamented. Basis slender, almost four times as long as wide and 3.4 times as long as syncoxa, unornamented and unarmed. Endopod represented by short curved claw, about 0.8 times as long as basis, swollen at base as indication of ancestral one-segmented endopod, ornamented with row of long and slender spinules along concave side distally.</p> <p>First swimming leg (Fig. 2B) with small, trapezoidal and smooth intercoxal sclerite with distal margin slightly concave. Leg composed of praecoxa, coxa, basis, three-segmented exopod and two-segmented endopod. Praecoxa triangular, unarmed, ornamented with diagonal row of minute spinules on both anterior and posterior surfaces. Coxa large, quadriform, unarmed, ornamented with several short rows of minute spinules on anterior and posterior surfaces. Basis smaller than coxa, more or less pentagonal, armed with single slender seta on outer margin, ornamented with few large spinules along inner margin at midlength, transverse row of minute spinules at base of outer seta, and few minute spinules along distal margin on anterior surface, between exopod and endopod. Exopod armed with one outer spine on first segment and four elements on third segment (two outer spines and two apical geniculate setae); ornamented with few large spinules along outer margin on all segments; inner distal corners of first and second segments smooth (no frills). Endopod slightly longer than exopod; first segment reaching slightly beyond distal margin of second exopodal segment, about 3.4 times as long as wide, unarmed, ornamented with two short rows of large spinules along outer margin and one long on inner margin; second segment armed apically with long geniculate seta and much shorter spine; geniculate seta 1.7 times as long as entire endopod and 1.2 times as long as larger geniculate exopodal seta.. All armature elements on ultimate endopodal and exopodal segments strongly unipinnate along outer concave margin.</p> <p>Second swimming leg (Fig. 2C) with smooth and large intercoxal sclerite, which more than twice as wide as long, quadriform, with concave distal margin. Leg composed of praecoxa, coxa, basis, three-segmented exopod, and one-segmented endopod. Praecoxa, coxa, and basis unarmed, with integument of different thickness forming distinct plates; praecoxa and coxa unornamented; basis with several minute spinules on outer margin. Exopod slightly curved inwards, ornamented with large spinules along outer margin, and with distal inner hyaline frills on each segment; first segment armed with single outer spine; second segment unarmed; third segment armed with three long elements (probably outer spine and two apical setae), innermost one about 1.4 times as long as exopod; all exopodal armature bipinnate. Endopod one-segmented, cylindrical and slender, about seven times as long as wide, reaching 2/3 of first exopodal segment in length, ornamented with several small spinules along apical margin; armed apically with one smooth seta, about 0.7 times as long as segment, slightly curved inwards.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 2D, G, H) with smooth praecoxa, coxa, and intercoxal sclerite. Intercoxal sclerite large, trapezoidal, unornamented, and with slightly concave distal margin. Praecoxa larger than in second leg. Basis robust, armed with long, slender, smooth outer seta, ornamented with short longitudinal row of small spinules along inner margin at base of endopod, and several spinules on posterior surface proximally. Endopod minute but distinct segment (probably with fused apical armature element), about four as long as largest spinules on inner margin, unornamented; similar to smooth minute seta. Exopod with both segments fused; ancestral proximal segment curved, about 5.7 times as long as wide, with fairly smooth and slightly concave inner margin, ornamented with one longitudinal row of spinules along outer margin distally, armed subapically with strong, smooth and curved element (thumb), 1.5 times as long as apophysis, with distal part curved inwards, and middle part with distinct inner hump; ancestral distal segment (apophysis) short, slightly curved and inflated distally, bifid apically (arrowed in Fig. 2D), slightly curved outward, unornamented and unarmed; apophysis and thumb forming complex threedimensional structure.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg (Fig. 2E) with smooth praecoxa, coxa, and intercoxal sclerite. Intercoxal sclerite smaller than in second or third legs, and with more deeply concave distal margin. Praecoxa relatively large, while coxa smaller than in second or third leg. Basis large, semicircular, armed with slender and smooth outer seta, ornamented with five large spinules at base of endopod, and several minute spinules along outer margin. Exopod curved inwards, three-segmented, ornamented with few large spinules along outer margin on all segments, and with distal inner hyaline frills; first segment with slightly concave inner margin, armed with outer spine; second segment unarmed; third segment armed with outer spine and very long and strong apical seta 1.4 times as long as entire exopod and four times as long as outer spine. Endopod one-segmented, about 0.6 times as long as first exopodal segment, claw-like, curved inwards, armed with single unipinnate apical element, fused basally to segment and ornamented with row of small spinules along outer margin.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Fig. 2F) triangular cuticular plate, with inner-distal corner produced into long and curved spiniform process, ornamented with large cuticular pore on anterior surface basally, and another pore near tip of spiniform process that opens also on anterior surface; armed with four smooth setae along outer margin; outermost seta (probably ancestral basal) longest, reaching beyond tip of appendage, twice as long as second and third seta from outer side and nearly five times as long as innermost seta. Third seta inserted more on anterior surface, while other three setae inserted on outer margin. Fifth legs distinct at base, with very small space between them, with distal tips pointing outwards.</p> <p>Sixth legs very disproportionate in size, right one almost completely reduced, left one enlarged, forming single, smooth, large operculum covering gonopore, which represents 60% of genital somite’s width; no ornamentation or armature.</p> <p>Female (based on allotype and several paratypes). Body length, excluding caudal setae, from 396 to 404 µm (400 µm in allotype). Habitus (Fig. 3A), ornamentation of prosomites, pigmentation, and nauplius eye similar to those in male, except genital and first abdominal somite fused into double-somite and middle part of body slightly less slender. Prosome/urosome ratio 0.85; greatest body width in dorsal view hard to establish; body length/width ratio 8.17; cephalothorax as wide as genital double-somite.</p> <p>Genital double-somite (Fig. 3A, B, C) about as long as wide, without any trace of subdivision except for pair of ancestral dorso-lateral sensilla at middle; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla (two dorsal, two ventral, and two lateral), and one dorso-lateral row of minute spinules. Genital complex (Figs 3B, C, 4C) occupying anterior ventral half of genital double-somite; single genital aperture covered by fused vestigial sixth legs; median copulatory pore located medially at 2/5 of double-somite length and also covered by sixth legs; seminal receptacles small, hard to distinguish from internal tissue and gut content; copulatory duct very short and weakly sclerotized; allotype female with single attached spermatophore (Fig. 3B, C), its neck inserted between and under sixth legs and heavily cemented over best part of sixth legs.</p> <p>Third, fourth (preanal), and fifth (anal) urosomites similar to those in male (Fig. 3B, C), also with four groups of large spinules ventrally on third and fourth urosomites (arrowed in Fig. 3C).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs 3A, B, C) similar to those in male but slightly shorter in proportion to anal somite and slightly wider at middle from lateral view (arrowed in Fig. 3B); ornamentation and armature similar to those in male, except that smallest lateral seta even smaller and main apical seta unipinnate.</p> <p>Antennula (Figs. 3D, 4D) seven-segmented, unornamented, slightly shorter than cephalothorax, with broad aesthetasc on fourth segment almost reaching tip of appendage, and more slender apical aesthetasc on seventh segment, fused basally to two apical setae; both aesthetascs more slender than in male; setal formula: 0.4.5.2.1.1.8. Only largest seta on second segment uniplumose, all other setae smooth and most of them with pore on tip. Largest seta on second segment and four setae on seventh segment biarticulated basally. Seta on sixth segment inserted apically and leaning against seventh segment for its entire length, so very hard to observe without SEM (Fig. 4D). Length ratio of antennular segments, from proximal end, 1: 2.8: 1.4: 1: 0.8: 0.8: 1.5.</p> <p>Antenna (Fig. 4A), labrum (Fig. 4A), paragnaths (Fig. 4B), mandibula (Fig. 4A), maxillula (Fig. 4B), maxilla (Fig. 4A, B), maxilliped (Fig. 4A), first swimming leg (Fig. 4A), second swimming leg (Fig. 2I), and exopod of fourth swimming leg very similar to those of male. Endopod of second swimming leg (Fig. 2I) only slightly shorter than in male.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 2J) with smaller intercoxal sclerite than in male, smooth and with concave distal margin. Leg composed of praecoxa, coxa, basis, two-segmented exopod and one-segmented endopod. Praecoxa large, unarmed, ornamented with few minute spinules. Coxa similar in size to male and also unarmed, but ornamented with several rows of minute spinules. Basis armed with very long and smooth outer seta, about as long as first exopodal segment, ornamented with row of large spinules near outer margin. Exopod ornamented with large spinules along outer margin, and both segments with distal inner hyaline frills; first segment with single outer spine; second with outer spine and apical strong seta; all elements bipinnate. Endopod one-segmented, small, hardly reaching 3/5 of first exopodal segment in length, straight and spiniform, armed apically with single element, fused basally to segment and unipinnate along inner margin.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg without spiniform processes on basis. Endopod (Fig. 2K) one-segmented, cylindrical, about five times as long as wide and half as long as first exopodal segment, with single apical slender and bipinnate seta with four spinules at base of apical seta.Fifth leg (Figs 3B, C, 4C) very similar to that of male, but slightly more elongated, with narrower distal part; armature and ornamentation as in male.</p> <p>Sixth legs (Fig. 4C) vestigial, fused into simple bilobate cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed; outer distal corners produced into sharp processes.</p> <p>Etymology. The species name comes from its type locality (Lake Way), but should be treated as comprising an arbitrary combination of letters that can be treated as a Latin word and may be conceived as a noun in apposition to the generic name.</p> <p>Variability. Body length of males ranges from 397 to 402 µm (399 µm average; n = 5), while in females it ranges from 396 to 404 µm (400 µm average; n = 8). The shape of the apophysis of the third leg in male varies slightly depending on the angle of observation (Fig. 2D, G, H), because it is a complex tridimensional structure, but it is actually quite constant. The number and exact position of minute spinules on urosomites varies slightly, but the number and position of larger spinules is constant (Fig. 3C).</p> <p>Remarks. This species differs from all other eight Australian congeners by the shape of the caudal rami, which are short, widely spaced, and with a characteristic dorsal posterior saddle in lateral view (arrowed in Fig. 3B). Another unique character of K. lakewayi sp. nov. are the large spinules on the penultimate (preanal) somite (arrowed in Fig. 3C), which are also not reported for any other member of the genus. Kinnecaris lakewayi seems to be most similar to K. barrambie sp. nov. (see below), with which it shares four ventral rows of large spinules on the fourth urosomite (third in female) (arrowed in Fig. 3C), relatively similar caudal rami shape, and presence of posterior spinules on the caudal rami ventrally, although some of these may be plesiomorphic character states, and if so not indicative of a close phylogenetic relationship. They differ chiefly in the ornamentation of the genital doublesomite (arrowed in Fig. 6C), preanal somite (arrowed in Fig. 6B), and proportions of the caudal rami (arrowed in Figs 1B, 2A, 6C). The only other Australian Kinnecaris with posterior spinules on the caudal rami is K. linesae sp. nov. (see below), but this species differs from K. lakewayi by a number of characters, including smooth cuticule, absence of any urosomal spinules in female, heavier ornamentation of the fourth leg basis and exopod in male, as well as a different shape of the third leg apophysis in male. Finally, we should mention generally similar caudal rami shape in K. eberhardi (Karanovic, 2005), a species that lives nearly 800 km SSW from any other Australian congener, in the Margaret River area, although the caudal rami have an inflated look in this species and are shorter in proportion to the anal somite. The two species, however, differ in many characters and the general similarity in the caudal rami shape almost certainly indicates that this is a plesiomorphic character (or a group of characters). Another support for this hypothesis is that relatively similar caudal rami (although more slender) can be found in the Madagascan K. forficulata (Chappuis, 1952) and K. madagascarensis (Chappuis, 1952), and even to some extent in the Indian K. godavari Ranga Reddy &amp; Schminke (2009) and Papua New Guinean K. giselae Schminke, 2008, although all these species differ from K. lakewayi in many other morphological characters (see Chappuis 1952; Schminke 2008; Ranga Reddy &amp; Schminke 2009).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFFADA602FF41FAF3AA7FFC5D	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
03924C3AFFB6A606FF41FC7AAD64FD5E.text	03924C3AFFB6A606FF41FC7AAD64FD5E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris barrambie Karanovic & Cooper 2011	<div><p>Kinnecaris barrambie sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 5 &amp; 6)</p> <p>Type locality. Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Barambie, bore B3M, 27.213178° S 118.919514° E.</p> <p>Type material. Holotype male and allotype female on one SEM stub in toto coated with carbon (WAM C47183), both collected at type locality, leg. E. Thomas &amp; V. Campagna, 26 November 2008, oeRBV055. Paratype: one female dissected on one slide (WAM C47184), Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Barambie, bore B14M, 26.832544° S 118.886097° E, leg. E. Thomas &amp; V. Campagna, 26 November 2008, oeRBV0585.</p> <p>Description. Male (based on holotype). Total body length, measured in the same way as in Kinnecaris lakewayi (see above), 328 µm. Surface of integument of all somites with sparse and shallow cuticular pits. Colour, naupliar eye, rostrum, body segmentation, and pore and sensilla pattern of all somites as in K. lakewayi. Habitus (Fig. 5A) cylindrical and very slender, without any dorsal demarcation between prosome and urosome, but urosome wider in lateral view; prosome/urosome ratio about 0.7; greatest width from dorsal view at posterior end of cephalothorax. Body length/width ratio about 7.5; cephalothorax 1.1 times as wide as genital somite. Integument relatively weakly sclerotized, ornamented with several very short dorsal and lateral rows of minute spinules on all urosomites, and some additional larger spinules ventrally or laterally on second (genital), third and fourth urosomites (Fig. 5A, B). Cephalothorax with clearly visible (Fig. 5A) posterior double dorsal cuticular window; fourth and fifth urosomites with pair of lateral circular windows each, although these harder to distinguish than in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Cephalothorax (Fig. 5A) about 1.5 times as long as wide in dorsal view; representing about 18% of total body length. Surface of cephalic shield, tergites and pleuras of free pedigerous somites ornamented as in K. lakewayi, except for presence of sparse and shallow cuticular pits and fewer minute spinules on fifth pedigerous (first urosomal) somite (Fig. 5A, B).</p> <p>Genital somite (Fig. 5A, B) with three short lateral rows of spinules (from five to seven) at midlength, three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin (one dorsal, one dorso-lateral, and one ventro-lateral), one pair of very small cuticular pores in anterior part ventro-laterally, and several dorsal and lateral rows of minute spinules (pore and sensilla pattern being same as in K. lakewayi); spermatophore not visible inside.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 5A) with dorso-lateral large spinules (two parallel short rows of eight spinules each), ventro-lateral rows of large spinules, six posterior sensilla, and several dorsal rows of minute spinules.</p> <p>Fourth urosomite (Fig. 5A) ornamented with two or three large spinules laterally (covered with dirt in Fig. 5A), and four midventral groups of four large spinules; lateral oval cuticular window not easy to observe (more visible with light compound microscope).</p> <p>Fifth (preanal) urosomite (Fig. 5A) with similar windows to those observed in fourth urosomite but without any large spinules, sensilla or pores; only other ornamentation sparse and shallow cuticular pits.</p> <p>Anal somite (Fig. 5A, C) ornamented with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of large cuticular pores laterally (one pore on each side) in anterior half, two pairs of minute cuticular pores laterally closer to posterior margin, and pair of slightly larger cuticular pores ventrally, at base of caudal rami, in addition to hardly visible cuticular pits; spinules absent. Anal operculum well developed, unornamented on outer surface, ornamented with row of slender spinules on inner surface, with convex and smooth distal margin, not reaching posterior end of anal somite, representing 60% of somite's width. Anal sinus widely opened, with two diagonal rows of slen- der spinules on ventral side and transverse row of spinules on dorsal side (below anal operculum).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 5C) about 3.5 times as long as greatest width (dorsal view) and 0.8 times as long as anal somite, nearly cylindrical in dorsal and ventral view, but clearly inflated at midlength in lateral view, with proximal part of inner margin slightly convex in dorsal (or ventral) view and base much narrower than rest of ramus, nearly parallel, with space between them about 1.2 times ramus width. Armature and ornamentation as in K. lakewayi, but lateral setae inserted slightly more posteriorly (or proximal part of caudal rami longer).</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 5A), antenna (Fig. 5A), mouth appendages (Fig. 5A), and first two pairs of swimming legs (Fig. 5A) as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 5D) also very similar to that in K. lakewayi but apophysis with much sharper tip; ornamentation same as in K. lakewayi, including longitudinal row of large spinules on outer margin of first exopodal segment distally; exopodal spine also 1.5 times as long as apophysis.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg (Fig. 5D) similar to that in K lakewayi, i.e. with five relatively large spinules on basis at base of endopod, and endopod spiniform with spinules only along outer margin. Apical seta on third exopodal segment 1.2 times as long as entire exopod and 3.2 times as long as outer spine.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Fig. 5B) without any difference from that in K. lakewayi, except for several shallow cuticular pits on anterior surface in proximal part, and weak outline of cuticular window similar to that in K. eberhardi (Karanovic, 2005), but not so clearly visible.</p> <p>Sixth legs (Fig. 5B) as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Female (based on allotype and one paratype from bore B14M). Body length 405 µm in allotype and 425 µm in paratype. Habitus (Fig. 6A), ornamentation of prosomites, colour and nauplius eye similar to those in male, except genital and first abdominal somites fused into double-somite and middle part slightly less slender. Prosome/urosome ratio 0.78; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish; body length/width ratio about 8.2; cephalothorax less than 1.1 times as wide as genital double-somite.</p> <p>Genital double-somite (Fig. 6A, B, C) only slightly longer than wide in dorsal view, without any trace of subdivision except for pair of ancestral dorso-lateral sensilla in anterior half; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla, many short rows of minute spinules, and two parallel short rows of large spinules (five and each spinules respectively); latter similar to that in K. esbe but not overlapping (arrowed in Fig. 6C). Genital complex (Figs. 6B) as in K. lakewayi, sixth legs also with large spiniform processes.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 6B, C) similar to that in male, with four rows of four large spinules ventro-laterally, one row of three large spinules dorsolaterally (arrowed in Fig. 6C), and clearly visible lateral cuticular windows.</p> <p>Fourth (preanal), and fifth (anal) urosomites also very similar to those in male (Fig. 6B, C), without any large spinules, except those in anal sinus.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs 5C, 6A, B, C) similar to those in male but slightly more divergent.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 6D) very similar to that in K. lakewayi, with only slightly shorter proximal aesthetascs (arrowed in Fig. 6D).</p> <p>Antenna (Fig. 6E), mouth appendages (Fig. 6F), first swimming leg, second swimming leg (Fig. 6G), and exopod of fourth swimming leg very similar to those in male and almost without any difference from those in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Endopod of second swimming leg (Fig. 6G) 5.6 times as long as wide, its apical seta 0.9 times as long as segment.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 6H, I) similar to K. lakewayi, with only slightly proportionately longer apical seta on second segment and more strongly scletotised cuticular plates on praecoxa and coxa.</p> <p>Endopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 6J) about 7.8 times as long as wide, half as long as first exopodal segment, armed with single robust bipinnate element apically, ornamented with four spinules along distal margin, at base of apical element. Exopod similar to that in male.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Fig. 6B, C) similar to that in male, but slightly more elongated, with narrower distal part and cuticular window on anterior surface better defined (although not easily visible with light microscope).</p> <p>Sixth legs (Fig. 6K) vestigial, fused into simple bilobate cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed; outer distal corners produced into sharp processes like in previous species, longer than inner lobes.</p> <p>Etymology. The species name comes from its type locality (Barrambie), but should be treated as comprising an arbitrary combination of letters that can be treated as a Latin word and may be conceived as a noun in apposition to the generic name.</p> <p>Variability. Only one male and two females were examined and no variability or asymmetry was observed, except in their body length. Note that the male is significantly smaller than females (328 µm vs. 405 µm and 425 µm), but that is probably a consequence of a small sample size rather than a specific character.</p> <p>Remarks. This species differs from other eight Australian congeners in the shape of the caudal rami (which have much narrower base than the rest of the ramus and are inflated in lateral view; arrowed in Fig. 6C), armature of the genital double-somite in female (arrowed in Fig. 6C), as well as in the presence of some large spinules on the third urosomite in female dorso-laterally (arrowed in Fig. 6C). Similarities and differences between K. barrambie sp. nov. and K. lakewayi sp. nov. are discussed in the remarks section for the latter species (see above), as the two seem to share the greatest number of morphological characters. The only other Australian Kinnecaris Jakobi, 1972 with two rows of large spinules on the genital double-somite laterally is K. esbe sp. nov. (see below), but this species has much longer caudal rami, more ornamentation on most somites, as well as a very different shape of the third leg apophysis in male. Besides, the rows of large spinules are much closer to each other and clearly parallel in K. esbe (compare Fig. 6C and Fig. 9B), which makes us to question their homology (or at least one of them). These structures have not been reported for any other member of the genus Kinnecaris, but it is fair to say that fine urosomal ornamentation did not always receive full attention in early descriptions.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFFB6A606FF41FC7AAD64FD5E	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
03924C3AFFB2A60CFF41FD7CA985FB1E.text	03924C3AFFB2A60CFF41FD7CA985FB1E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris esbe Karanovic & Cooper 2011	<div><p>Kinnecaris esbe sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 7–10)</p> <p>Type locality. Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore SB14-1, 27.344283˚ S 120.307708 ˚E (south-eastern corner on Fig. 24).</p> <p>Type material. Holotype male, allotype female, and one paratype female on one SEM stub in toto coated with carbon (WAM C47185); one paratype male dissected on one slide (WAM C47186); one paratype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47187); one paratype female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification unsuccessful); 13 paratypes (one male + seven females + five copepodids) in alcohol; all collected at type locality, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 18 March 2010, seLN8180. Other paratypes: One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification unsuccessful); one male + three females + five copepodids in alcohol; all collected at type locality, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; G. Perina, 16 March 2010, seLN8517.</p> <p>Description. Male (based on holotype and several paratypes). Total body length from 374 to 425 µm (374 µm in holotype). Surface of integument of all somites with relatively dense and shallow cuticular pits, and all somites after cephalothorax with numerous short rows of minute spinules; third and fourth urosomites with some additional larger spinules ventrally and/or laterally (Figs. 7A, C, 8A). Colour, nauplius eye, rostrum, body segmentation, and pore and sensilla pattern of all somites as in Kinnecaris lakewayi (see above). Habitus (Fig. 7A) cylindrical and very slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome dorsally, but with urosome wider in lateral view; prosome/urosome ratio about 0.6; greatest width from dorsal view at posterior end of cephalothorax, but very hard to establish. Body length/width ratio about 8.9; cephalothorax only slightly wider than genital somite in dorsal view. Integument more strongly sclerotized than in previous two species, and with relatively deep and irregular depressions on all somites but especially on cephalothoracic shield and pleuras and tergites of three free prosomites (Fig. 7A, B). Cephalothorax with clearly visible (Fig. 7A) double dorsal cuticular window posteriorly; fourth and fifth urosomites each with pair of lateral circular windows, both clearly visible and that on fifth urosomite slightly larger (Figs. 7A, 8A).</p> <p>Cephalothorax (Fig. 7A) about 1.5 times as long as wide in dorsal view; representing about 17% of total body length. Surface of cephalic shield, tergites and pleuras of free pedigerous somites ornamented as in K. lakewayi, except for presence of sparse and shallow cuticular pits and many more minute spinules on free pedigerous somites (Fig. 7A, C); many of short rows of minute spinules arched, especially on lateral sides (Fig. 7C), while those on ventral side of urosomites tend to be straight, parallel, and sometimes join into longer rows (Fig. 8A).</p> <p>Genital somite (Fig. 7A, C) ornamented with more than forty dorso-lateral short rows of spinules (each from three to nine spinules), in addition to three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin (one dorsal, one dorso-lateral, and one ventro-lateral), and one ventro-lateral pair of very small cuticular pores in anterior part (i.e., pore and sensilla pattern as in K. lakewayi); no large spinules on this somite; spermatophore visible inside and similar in size to that in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 7A) with four rows of large spinules in anterior half (two ventro-laterally and two dorsolaterally; each with five to six spinules and central ones largest), in addition to six posterior sensilla, and many rows of minute spinules.</p> <p>Fourth urosomite (Fig. 7A) ornamented with two or three ventro-lateral large spinules ventrally of large and slightly swollen lateral cuticular window; additional ornamentation represented by six posterior sensilla and numerous minute spinules.</p> <p>Fifth (preanal) urosomite (Figs. 7A, 8A) with larger and more more swollen windows but without any large spinules, sensilla or pores; only ornamentation sparse and shallow cuticular pits and numerous minute spinules, forming nearly continuous row along hyaline fringe.</p> <p>Anal somite (Figs. 7A, B, 8A) ornamented with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of lateral large cuticular pores (one pore on each side) in anterior half, two pairs of minute cuticular pores laterally close to posterior margin, and pair of slightly larger ventral cuticular pores at base of caudal rami, in addition to hardly visible cuticular pits and many rows of minute spinules. Anal operculum less developed than in K. lakewayi and bent slightly towards ventral side, unornamented on outer surface, with row of slender spinules on inner surface, convex and smooth distal margin, almost reaching posterior end of anal somite, representing 68% of somite width. Anal sinus less widely opened than in K. lakewayi, with two diagonal rows of slender spinules on ventral side and transverse row of spinules on dorsal side (below anal operculum).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 7B, 8A) almost 6.3 times as long as greatest width (dorsal view) and 1.3 times as long as anal somite, cylindrical in all views, nearly parallel, with space between them about 1.5 times one ramus’ width. Armature and ornamentation as in K. lakewayi, but due to the extreme elongation of the rami, the position of dorsal and lateral setae and their relative lengths differs. Dorsal seta slender and smooth, inserted slightly closer to inner margin at about 2/3 of ramus length, only 0.7 times as long as caudal ramus, triarticulate at base. Lateral setae thin and smooth, inserted close to each other at 5/6 of ramus’ length, in one depression with two positioned proximally and one distally; proximal seta which inserted more dorsally strongest and longest of three, but only about 0.2 times as long as ramus, 2.3 times as long as proximal seta wich inserted closer to ventral side, and about 1.3 times as long distal lateral seta. Inner apical seta smooth and slender, inserted closer to ventral surface, about 0.35 times as long as ramus. Middle apical seta strongest, inserted distally, without breaking plane, unipinnate, with slightly curled tip, about 1.6 times as long as outer apical seta and 0.2 times as long as whole body. Outer apical seta also strong, without breaking plane, unipinnate distally, but inserted closer to ventral side than middle apical seta, about 0.75 times as long as ramus.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 7D), antenna (Fig. 7A), mouth appendages (Fig. 7E), and first two pairs of swimming legs (Fig. 7A) as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 8B) also very similar to that in K. lakewayi but apophysis nearly flat, with narrow notch on outer side and shallow notch on distal margin, making distal part into blade-like structure; ornamentation same as in K. lakewayi, but longitudinal row of large spinules on outer margin missing; exopodal spine also 1.5 times as long as apophysis, but with less pronounced inner hump in proximal part.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg very similar to next two species (see below), with five small spinules on basis at base of endopod (but not as close to endopod as in K. lakewayi), and endopod with seven (on right leg) or eight (on left leg) large spinules arranged into scoop-like structure. Apical seta on third exopodal segment 1.3 times as long as entire exopod and three times as long as outer spine.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Fig. 7C) without any difference from that in K. lakewayi, except for several shallow cuticular pits on anterior surface in proximal part, and very weak outline of cuticular window in some specimens.</p> <p>Sixth legs (Fig. 7C) as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Female (based on allotype and several paratypes). Body length from 383 to 438 µm (402 µm in allotype). Habitus (Fig. 9A), ornamentation of prosomites, colour, and nauplius eye similar to those in male, except genital and first abdominal somite fused into double-somite and middle part slightly less slender. Prosome/urosome ratio 0.7; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish; body length/width ratio 8.8; cephalothorax only slightly wider than genital double-somite.</p> <p>Genital double-somite (Figs. 8D, 9B, C) about 1.2 times as long as wide in dorsal view, without any trace of subdivision except for pair of ancestral dorso-lateral sensilla at middle; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla (two dorsal, two ventral and two lateral), numerous transverse rows of minute spinules, and two parallel short rows of four large spinules in posterior half laterally (arrowed in Fig. 9B). Genital complex (Figs. 8D, 9B, C) as in K. lakewayi, except outer distal corners of genital operculum not produced into spinifom processes.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 9B, C) similar to that in male, with two groups of four large spinules ventrally (arrowed in Fig. 9C); lateral cuticular windows well developed and highly visible.</p> <p>Fourth (preanal), and fifth (anal) urosomites also very similar to those in male (Fig. 9B, C), without any large spinules except those inside anal sinus.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 8C, 9A, B, C) similar to those in male, but slightly inflated at middle in ventral view (arrowed in Fig. 9C) and more divergent.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 10A) very similar to that in K. lakewayi, with slightly more robust aesthetascs.</p> <p>Antenna (Fig. 10B), mouth appendages (Fig. 8E), first swimming leg (Fig. 8E), second swimming leg (Fig. 10C), and exopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 10E) very similar to those in male and without any difference from those in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Endopod of second swimming leg (Fig. 10C) 6.7 times as long as wide, its apical seta 0.7 times as long as segment.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 10D) similar to K. lakewayi, but with more strongly developed cuticular plates on praecoxa and coxa (arrowed in Fig. 10D), and with proportionately longer apical seta on second segment and shorter endopod.</p> <p>Endopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 10E) about five times as long as wide, half as long as first exopodal segment, armed with single slender bipinnate seta apically; ornamented with six slender spinules along distal margin, at base of apical seta. Exopod similar to that of male.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Figs. 8D, 9B) very similar to that of male, only slightly more elongated, with narrower distal part and cuticular window on anterior surface better defined, but not observable under light microscope.</p> <p>Sixth leg (Figs. 8D, 9C) vestigial, both fused into simple bilobate cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed; outer distal corners not produced into sharp processes, but well rounded and shorter than inner lobes.</p> <p>Etymology. The species name comes from its type locality (bore SB spelled in English), but should be treated as comprising an arbitrary combination of letters that can be treated as a Latin word and may be conceived as a noun in apposition to the generic name.</p> <p>Variability. Body length in males ranges from 374 to 425 µm (395 µm average; n = 4), and from 383 to 438 µm in females (405 µm average; n = 15). Note that males are slightly smaller than females, but that may be a consequence of a low number (four) of the male specimens collected and examined. The endopods of the male fourth leg have always seven spinules on the right leg and nine on the left one, which is an unusual asymmetry, but it seems to be a character present also in the next two species (described below). The shape of the apophysis of the third leg in male is not variable, and it is a very good morphological character, as are the groups of large spinules on the urosome of females. The very low morphological variability recorded in this species is not surprising, considering that the species was collected from a single bore, which was the only access at the time of sampling to a small calcrete body in south-east of the Yeelirrie area (see Fig. 24).</p> <p>Remarks. Kinnecaris esbe sp. nov. has the longest and most slender caudal rami of all the Australian congeners, which are also among the most slender recorded for the family. In every other aspect, this is a typical member of the genus Kinnecaris Jakobi, 1972. Morphology would suggest that this species is most closely related to two other short range endemics from Yeelirrie: K. linel sp. nov. and K. uranusi sp. nov. (see below). Unfortunately, despite repeated attempts, we were not able to get any COI sequences of K. esbe to test this relationship by molecular methods. Besides shorter caudal rami, the latter two species differ from K. esbe in the ornamentation of the genital double-somite in female (only one row of large spinules laterally; arrowed in Fig. 11B), and to a smaller extent in the shape of the third leg apophysis in male. Relying only on morphological evidence, we would speculate that these three species represent a monophyletic group among Australian Kinnecaris members (and also on a global scale), but molecular results disprove a close relationship of K. linel and K. uranusi (see discussion further below).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFFB2A60CFF41FD7CA985FB1E	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
03924C3AFFB8A632FF41FA9AAA7EF8FD.text	03924C3AFFB8A632FF41FA9AAA7EF8FD.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris linel Karanovic & Cooper 2011	<div><p>Kinnecaris linel sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 11–14)</p> <p>Type locality. Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line L, Snake Well, 27.3074˚ S 120.1505977 ˚E.</p> <p>Type material. Holotype male dissected on one slide (WAM C47188); allotype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47189); one paratype male and one paratype female on one SEM stub in toto coated with carbon (WAM C47190); one paratype male dissected on one slide (WAM C47191); one paratype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47192); one paratype female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification successful; see Fig. 23); 10 paratypes (six males + two females + two copepodids) in alcohol (WAM C47193); all collected at type locality, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 18 March 2010, seLN8310.</p> <p>Other material examined. One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification unsuccessful); 10 males + 19 females + 12 copepodids in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line L, bore L-UNK1, 27.329832˚ S 120.15059 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; G. Perina, 16 March 2010, seLN8533.</p> <p>Eleven males + 16 females + 12 copepodids in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line L, bore L-UNK1, 27.329832˚ S 120.15059 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 18 March 2010, seLN7139.</p> <p>One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification successful; see Fig. 23); one female in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line L, bore L-UNK1, 27.329832˚ S 120.15059 ˚E, leg. P. Bell &amp; G. Perina, 14 November 2009, seLN7315.</p> <p>Description. Male (based on holotype and several paratypes). Total body length from 365 to 424 µm (424 µm in holotype). Surface of integument of all somites with dense and shallow cuticular pits, and all somites after cephalothorax with numerous short rows of minute spinules; third and fourth urosomites with some additional large spinules ventrally or laterally. Colour, nauplius eye, rostrum, body segmentation, and pore and sensilla pattern of all somites as in Kinnecaris esbe (see above), as well as many other details listed below. Habitus (Fig. 11A) cylindrical and very slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome dorsally, but with urosome wider in lateral view; prosome/urosome ratio about 0.6; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish. Body length/width ratio about 9.6; cephalothorax only slightly wider than genital somite in dorsal view. Integument strongly sclerotized as in K. esbe, and more strongly than in K.lakewayi and K. barrambie, and also with deep and irregular depressions on all somites but especially on cephalothoracic shield, and pleuras and tergites of three free prosomites. Cephalothorax with clearly visible (Fig. 11A) double dorsal cuticular window posteriorly; fourth and fifth urosomites with pair of lateral circular windows each, both clearly visible and one on fifth urosomite slightly larger than that on fourth urosomite (Fig. 11A).</p> <p>Cephalothorax (Fig. 11A) about 1.7 times as long as wide in dorsal view; representing about 18% of total body length. Surface of cephalic shield ornamented as in K. esbe, as well as tergites and pleuras of free pedigerous somites; except for additional dorsal pore on fourth and fifth pedigerous somites.</p> <p>Genital somite (Fig. 11A) ornamented with numerous short dorsolateral rows of spinules, in addition to three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin, and one pair of very small ventro-lateral cuticular pores in anterior part; no large spinules on this somite; spermatophore visible inside some paratypes and similar size and shape to that in K. esbe.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 11A) ornamented with two dorso-lateral rows of large spinules in anterior half, six posterior sensilla, and many rows of minute spinules.</p> <p>Fourth urosomite (Fig. 11A) ornamented with two ventro-lateral short rows of large spinules ventrally of large and somewhat swollen lateral cuticular window; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla and numerous minute spinules.</p> <p>Fifth (preanal) urosomite (Fig. 11A) with even larger and more swollen windows than those on fourth urosomite but without any large spinules, sensilla or pores; only ornamentation shallow cuticular pits and numerous minute spinules, forming nearly continuous row along hyaline fringe.</p> <p>Anal somite (Fig. 11A) ornamented with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of large cuticular pores laterally in anterior half, two pairs of minute cuticular pores laterally closer to posterior margin, and pair of slightly larger cuticular pores ventrally, at base of caudal rami, in addition to cuticular pits and rows of minute spinules. Anal operculum better developed than in K. esbe, unornamented on outer surface, ornamented with row of slender spinules on inner surface, with highly convex and smooth distal margin, not reaching posterior end of anal somite, representing 68% of somite width. Anal sinus widely opened, with two diagonal rows of slender spinules on ventral side and transverse row of spinules on dorsal side.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 11A) about 5.5 times as long as greatest width and 1.2 times as long as anal somite, very cylindrical in all views, with only slight inflation around insertion of dorsal seta, nearly parallel, with space between them about 1.7 times one ramus width. Armature and ornamentation as in K. esbe, but because rami slightly less elongated position of dorsal and lateral setae and their relative lengths differs. Dorsal seta inserted closer to inner margin at about 3/5 of ramus length, 0.8 times as long as caudal ramus, triarticulate basally and smooth. Lateral setae also thin and smooth, inserted close to each other at 5/6 of ramus length; proximal seta which inserted closer to dorsal surface strongest and longest, about 0.2 times as long as ramus, twice as long as proximal seta which inserted closer to ventral side, and about 1.2 times as long distal lateral seta. Inner apical seta smooth and slender, inserted closer to ventral surface, about 0.32 times as long as ramus. Middle apical seta strongest, inserted distally, without breaking plane, smooth, slightly curled, about 2.1 times as long as outer apical seta and 0.2 times as long as whole body. Outer apical seta also strong and without breaking plane, but unipinnate distally and inserted closer to ventral side than middle apical seta, about 0.85 times as long as ramus.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 13C), antenna, mouth appendages, and first two pairs of swimming legs as in K. esbe.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 13A) also very similar to that in K. esbe but apophysis proportionately larger and with much more incised apical notch; longitudinal row of large spinules on outer margin also missing as in K. esbe; exopodal spine about 1.2 times as long as apophysis.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg (Fig. 13B) with five small spinules on basis at base of endopod (but not very close to it), and endopod with seven (on right leg) or nine (on left leg) large spinules arranged into scoop-like structure. Apical seta on third exopodal segment 1.3 times as long as entire exopod and 3.4 times as long as outer spine.</p> <p>Fifth and sixth legs without any difference from those in K. esbe.</p> <p>Female (based on allotype and several paratypes). Body length from 369 to 418 µm (408 µm in allotype). Habitus (Fig. 14A), ornamentation of cephalothorax (Fig. 12A) and free prosomites (Fig. 14A), colour, and nauplius eye similar to those in male, except genital and first abdominal somite fused into double-somite and middle part slightly less slender. Prosome/urosome ratio 0.68; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish; body length/width ratio 8.1; cephalothorax only slightly wider than genital double-somite.</p> <p>Genital double-somite (Fig. 11B, C) slightly longer than wide, without any trace of subdivision except for pair of ancestral dorso-lateral sensilla at middle; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla (two dorsal, two ventral and two lateral), several dorso-lateral rows of minute spinules, and one lateral short row of five large spinules in posterior half (arrowed in Fig. 11B), homologous to those on third urosomite in male. Genital complex (Figs. 11C, 14D) as in K. esbe.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Figs. 11B, C, 14A) similar to that in male, with two groups of four large spinules ventro-laterally; lateral cuticular windows well developed and highly visible.</p> <p>Fourth (preanal), and fifth (anal) urosomites also very similar to those in male (Figs. 11A, B, C, 14A, B), without any large spinules except those inside anal sinus.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 11A, B, C, 14B) similar to those in male, but slightly inflated at middle in ventral view (arrowed in Fig. 11C) and more divergent; shorter than in previous species.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 12B) very similar to that in K. esbe, only with somewhat more robust apical aesthetasc on seventh segment.</p> <p>Antenna (Figs. 12C, 14C, E) very similar to that in K. esbe, exopodal seta twice as long as segment.</p> <p>Maxilla (Fig. 12D) with three setae on distal endite of syncoxa, two smooth and with pore on tip, third with brush of spinules distally and strong; otherwise as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Maxilliped (Fig. 12E) with several minute spinules at base of endopod, otherwise as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Other mouth appendages (Fig. 14C), first swimming leg (Fig. 14A, C), second swimming leg (Fig. 12F, G), and exopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 12I) very similar to those in male and without any difference from those in K. esbe.</p> <p>Endopod of second swimming leg (Fig. 12F, G), cylindrical, six times as long as wide, its apical seta 0.67 times as long as segment; one aberrant endopod in allotype inflated (arrowed in Fig. 12F).</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 12H) similar to that in K.esbe, but with more spinules along distal inner margin of endopod (arrowed in Fig. 12H), which also longer.</p> <p>Endopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 10I, J), small and slender, about seven times as long as wide, less than half as long as first exopodal segment, armed with single bipinnate seta apically; ornamented with several slender spinules along distal margin, at base of apical seta. Exopod similar to that in male.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Figs. 11B, 14D) as in male, and without any difference from that in K. esbe; cuticular window also not observable under light microscope.</p> <p>Sixth leg (Figs. 11C, 14D) vestigial, both fused into simple bilobate cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed; outer distal corners not produced into sharp processes, but well rounded and shorter than inner lobes.</p> <p>Etymology. The species name comes from its type locality (line L; see Fig. 24), but should be treated as comprising an arbitrary combination of letters that can be treated as a Latin word and may be conceived as a noun in apposition to the generic name.</p> <p>Variability. Body length in males ranges from 365 to 424 µm (398 µm average; n = 30), while in females it ranges from 369 to 418 µm (395 µm average; n = 42). Endopod of the female second swimming leg is always cylindrical, except in one leg in the allotype female, which is inflated at middle (arrowed in Fig. 12F). Endopod of the female fourth leg is always small and very slender (Fig. 12I, J), and endopods of the male fourth leg always have seven spinules on the right leg (Fig. 13B) and nine on the left, which is an unusual asymmetry, but it seems to be a constant character also in K. esbe. The shape of the apophysis of the male third leg (Fig. 13A) is not variable, and is a very good morphological character, as are the groups of large spinules on the female urosome (Fig. 11B, C).</p> <p>Remarks. Morphology of this species is such that it is very hard indeed to find enough distinguishing characters between it and K. uranusi sp. nov. (see below), yet our molecular data do not support their sister-species relationship (see further below; Fig. 23). Some of the most important differences include the length and shape of the caudal rami (slightly longer and more cylindrical in K. linel sp. nov.; arrowed in Fig. 11C), fine ornamentation of urosomites (more rows of minute spinules in K. linel, especially dorsally on anal somite; Fig. 11A), as well as the shape of the third leg apophysis in male (with deep apical notch in K. linel; Fig. 13A). As remarked above, both species are also very similar to K. esbe sp. nov., but differ in the ornamentation of the genital double-somite in female, length of the caudal rami, and some other minor details in proportion of certain armature elements and ornamentation of appendages. Molecular data suggest a sister relationship of K. linel and K. lined sp. nov., although support for this clade is not very strong (Fig. 23). The two species, however, differ not only in the proportion of the caudal rami and ornamentation of urosomites, but also in the armature of the fourth leg basis and exopod in male, as well as in the third leg apophysis (see below).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFFB8A632FF41FA9AAA7EF8FD	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
03924C3AFF80A639FF41FF1AAB42F9B6.text	03924C3AFF80A639FF41FF1AAB42F9B6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris uranusi Karanovic & Cooper 2011	<div><p>Kinnecaris uranusi sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 15–18)</p> <p>Type locality. Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 1, bore YYAC0016 A, 27.1657429˚ S 119.8722617 ˚E.</p> <p>Type material. Holotype male dissected on one slide (WAM C47194); allotype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47195); one paratype male on SEM stub in toto coated with carbon (WAM C47196); one paratype male dissected on one slide (WAM C47197); one paratype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47198); five paratype males in alcohol (WAM C 47199); all collected at type locality, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 20 March 2010, seLN8415.</p> <p>Other material examined. One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification successful; see Fig. 23); 1 female + 1 copepodid in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line H, bore TPB33-1, 27.133739˚ S 119.827871 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 18 March 2010, seLN8563.</p> <p>One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification successful; see Fig. 23); one female on SEM stub in toto coated with carbon (WAM C47200); two males + one female + two copepodids in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line F, bore YU2, 27.137169 ˚ S 119.853157 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; G. Perina, 17 March 2010, seLN8536.</p> <p>One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification unsuccessful); four males + five females + 10 copepodids in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line K, bore YYHC085 B, 27.247824˚ S 120.054676 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 18 March 2010, seLN7131.</p> <p>Four males + two females on one SEM stub in toto coated with carbon (WAM C47201); four males + five females in alcohol (WAM C47202); 13 males + six females + 10 copepodids in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line K, bore YYHC085 B, 27.247824˚ S 120.054676 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 20 March 2010, seLN8419.</p> <p>One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification successful; see Fig. 23); seven males + 17 females in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 1, bore YYD22, 27.167304˚ S 119.870456 ˚E, leg. S. Callan &amp; N. Krawczyk, 15 March 2010, seLN8496.</p> <p>One male destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification unsuccessful); three males + one female in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 1, bore YYD26, 27.1686738˚ S 119.8701177 ˚E, leg. S. Callan &amp; N. Krawczyk, 15 March 2010, seLN8479.</p> <p>10 males + six females + 2 copepodids in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 1, bore YYD26, 27.1686738˚ S 119.8701177 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 20 March 2010, seLN8296.</p> <p>One male destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification unsuccessful); four males in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 2, bore YYAC1006 B, 27.1616404˚ S 119.8866403 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 21 March 2010, seLN8553.</p> <p>One female in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 2, bore YYAC1007 A, 27.165236˚ S 119.883142 ˚E, leg. S. Callan &amp; N. Krawczyk, 16 March 2010, seLN8524.</p> <p>Three females in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 2, bore YYAC1007 A, 27.165236˚ S 119.883142 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 21 March 2010, seLN8546.</p> <p>One male in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 2, bore YYAC1007 A, 27.165236˚ S 119.883142 ˚E, leg. P. Bell &amp; G. Perina, 27 August 2009, seLN7312.</p> <p>Two males + one female in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line 1, bore YYD22, 27.167304˚ S 119.870456 ˚E, leg. P. Bell &amp; G. Perina, 1 September 2009, seLN6610.</p> <p>One male in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line H, bore TPB33-1, 27.133739˚ S 119.827871 ˚E, leg. P. Bell &amp; S. Callan, 01 September 2009, seLN7303.</p> <p>One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification unsuccessful); Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line C, bore YYHC0037 C, 27.2067173˚ S 119.9845332 ˚E, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 19 March 2010, seLN8597.</p> <p>Description. Male (based on holotype, several paratypes, and many additional specimens examined). Total body length from 368 to 436 µm (434 µm in holotype). Morphology extremely similar to Kinnecaris linel (see above), and only minute differences observable. Surface of integument of all somites with dense cover of shallow cuticular pits, and all somites after cephalothorax with several short rows of minute spinules (Figs. 16A, 17A); third and fourth urosomites with additional larger spinules ventrally or laterally (Fig. 16C). Colour, naupliar eye, rostrum, body segmentation, and pore and sensilla pattern of all somites as in K. linel. Habitus (Figs. 15A, 16A, 17A) cylindrical and very slender, without any dorsal demarcation between prosome and urosome, but with urosome much wider in lateral view, especially in those specimens with completely formed spermatophore; prosome/ urosome ratio about 0.65; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish. Body length/width ratio about 9.6; cephalothorax as wide as genital somite in dorsal view. Integument equally strongly sclerotized as in K. linel or K. esbe, and also with deep and irregular depressions on all somites but especially on cephalothoracic shield and pleuras and tergites of three free prosomites. Cephalothorax with clearly visible double dorsal cuticular window posteriorly (Figs. 15A, 16B); fourth and fifth urosomites each with pair of lateral circular windows (Figs. 15A, 16C), that on fifth urosomite somewhat larger.</p> <p>Cephalothorax (Figs. 15A, 16B, 17B) almost 1.8 times as long as wide in dorsal view; representing about 17.5% of total body length. Surface of cephalic shield (Figs. 15A, 16B) ornamented as in K. linel, as well as tergites and pleuras of free pedigerous somites (Figs. 16A, 17A), except for dorsal pore on fifth pedigerous somites being absent visible, and generally fewer rows of minute spinules on each somite.</p> <p>Genital somite (Figs. 15A, 18A, B) ornamented with several dorso-lateral short rows of spinules, in addition to three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin, and one pair of very small ventro-lateral cuticular pores in anterior part; no large spinules on this somite; spermatophore visible inside holotype and several paratypes and similar in size to that in K. esbe and K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 16C) ornamented with four rows of five large spinules each in anterior half (two dorsolaterally and two ventro-laterally), in addition to six posterior sensilla, and many rows of minute spinules.</p> <p>Fourth urosomite (Fig. 16C) ornamented with two ventro-lateral short rows of four large spinules, ventrally from large and somewhat swollen lateral cuticular window; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla and several rows of minute spinules.</p> <p>Fifth (preanal) urosomite (Fig. 16C) with even larger and more swollen windows but without any large spinules, sensilla or pores; only ornamentation represented by shallow cuticular pits and numerous minute spinules, although not as many as in K. linel or K. esbe, and those along hyaline fringe very small and scarce.</p> <p>Anal somite (Fig. 15A, 16A, 17A) ornamented with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of lateral large cuticular pores in anterior half, two pairs of minute cuticular lateral pores close to posterior margin, and pair of slightly larger ventral cuticular pores at base of caudal rami, in additional to cuticular pits and rows of minute spinules; minute spinules getting extremely scarce or completely absent on dorsal side of anal somite (arrowed in Fig. 15A). Anal operculum very similar to that of K. linel, unornamented on outer surface, ornamented with row of slender spinules on inner surface, with highly convex and smooth distal margin, not reaching posterior end of anal somite, representing 63% of somite width. Anal sinus widely opened, with two diagonal rows of slen- der spinules on ventral side and transverse row of spinules on dorsal side (Fig. 17C).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 15A, 16D, 17C) about 4.8 times as long as greatest width and 1.15 times as long as anal somite, generally cylindrical in all views, buth with noticable inflation around insertion of dorsal seta, slightly divergent, with space between them about 1.5 times one ramus width. Armature and ornamentation as in K. linel, but, because rami slightly less elongated, position of dorsal and lateral setae slightly different, as well as their relative lengths. Dorsal seta inserted closer to inner margin at about 3/5 of ramus length, 0.85 times as long as caudal ramus, triarticulate basally and smooth. Lateral setae also thin and smooth, inserted close to each other at 3/4 of ramus length; proximal seta which inserted closer to dorsal surface strongest and longest, about 0.3 times as long as ramus, twice as long as proximal seta which inserted closer to ventral side, and about 1.4 times as long distal lateral seta. Inner apical seta smooth and slender, inserted close to ventral surface, about 0.38 times as long as ramus. Middle apical seta strongest, inserted distally, without breaking plane, smooth, slightly curled, twice as long as outer apical seta and 0.2 times as long as whole body. Outer apical seta also strong and without breaking plane, but unipinnate distally and inserted closer to ventral side, about 0.9 times as long as ramus.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 16A), antenna (Fig. 16A), mouth appendages (Figs. 17B, 18C), and first two pairs of swimming legs (Figs. 17A, B, 18C) as in K. linel.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Figs. 15B, 17D) also very similar to that in K. linel but apophysis proportionally longer, more tridimensional, and without apical notch (arrowed in Fig. 15B); longitudinal row of large spinules on outer margin also missing as in K. linel and K. esbe; exopodal spine about 1.2 times as long as apophysis.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg (Figs. 16E, 17E) basis with five small spinules at base of endopod (but not very close to it), and endopod with seven (on right leg) or nine (on left leg) large spinules arranged into scoop-like structure. Apical seta on third exopodal segment 1.2 times as long as entire exopod and 3.2 times as long as outer spine.</p> <p>Fifth and sixth legs (Fig. 18A, B) without almost any difference from those in K. linel or K. esbe; except fifth leg perhaps slightly more slender in distal part and reaching further posteriorly.</p> <p>Female (based on allotype, several paratypes, and many additional specimens). Body length from 354 to 426 µm (405 µm in allotype). Habitus (Fig. 18E), ornamentation of cephalothorax and free prosomites, colour and naupliar eye similar to those of male, except genital and first abdominal somite fused into double-somite and middle part slightly less slender in dorsal view, but more slender in lateral view. Prosome/urosome ratio 0.7; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish; body length/width ratio 7.9; cephalothorax only slightly wider than genital double-somite.</p> <p>Genital double-somite (Figs. 15C, 18E) slightly longer than wide, without any trace of subdivision except for pair of ancestral dorso-lateral sensilla at middle; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla (two dorsal, two ventral, and two lateral), several dorso-lateral rows of minute spinules, and one short row of five lateral large spinules in posterior half, as in K. linel. Genital complex (Figs. 15C, 18E) also similar to that in K. linel, but outer distal corners of operculum slightly more produced posteriorly (although not pointy).</p> <p>Third urosomite (Figs. 15C, 18E) similar to that in male, with two groups of four large ventro-lateral spinules; lateral cuticular windows well developed and highly visible.</p> <p>Fourth (preanal), and fifth (anal) urosomites also very similar to those in male (Figs. 15C, 18E), without any large spinules, except those in anal sinus.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 15A, 18D) similar to those in male, slightly shorter than those in K. linel and significantly shorter than those in K. esbe, also more inflated at middle (arrowed in Fig. 15C).</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 18E) also similar to that in K. linel, but with much more slender aesthetascs.</p> <p>Antenna, mouth appendages, first swimming leg, second swimming leg (Fig. 15D), and exopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 15E) very similar to those in male and without any difference from those in K. linel.</p> <p>Endopod of second swimming leg (Fig. 15D), cylindrical, six times as long as wide, its apical seta 0.68 times as long as segment.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 15E) similar to that in K.linel, but with less spinules along inner margin of endopod and with characteristic hump at ancestral border between segment and apical armature element.</p> <p>Endopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 15G), small and very slender, about seven times as long as wide, half as long as first exopodal segment, armed with single bipinnate seta apically; ornamented with few slender spinules along distal margin, at base of apical seta. Exopod similar to that of male.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Fig. 15C) as in male, and without any difference from that in K. linel; cuticular window not observable.</p> <p>Sixth legs (Fig. 18E) vestigial, fused into simple bilobate cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed; outer distal corners well rounded (not produced into sharp processes), and slightly shorter than inner lobes.</p> <p>Etymology. The name refers to Uranus, the ancient Greek deity of the sky, which gave name to a planet in our solar system, which in turn gave name to the chemical element Uranium, one of the important mineral deposits in the distribution range of this species, which was experimentally mined at Yeelirrie in the 1970s. The specific name is a noun in the genitive singular.</p> <p>Variability. Body length in males ranges from 368 to 436 µm (395 µm average; n = 50), while in females it ranges from 354 to 426 µm (392 µm average; n = 50). Despite a relatively wide distribution of this species in Yeelirrie, no significant variable features were discovered, except the body length. Careful examination and many SEM photographs taken of specimens from the northern part of its range (Figs. 15, 16) and those from line K (Figs. 17, 18) also failed to reveal any geographical variation. Endopod of the male fourth leg always has seven spinules on the right leg and nine on the left (Figs. 16E, 17E), which is an unusual asymmetry, but it seems to be a character also in K. esbe sp. nov. and K. linel sp. nov.. The shape of the apohysis of the third leg in male (Fig. 15B) is not variable, and is a very good morphological character, as are the groups of large spinules on the female urosome (Fig. 15C); although latter do not differ from those in K. linel.</p> <p>Remarks. Major similarities and differences between K. uranusi sp. nov. and K. linel sp. nov. are given in the remarks section for the latter species (see above), and the two seem to share the greatest number of morphological characters. Molecular data (Fig. 23), on the other hand, suggest that these two species are not so closely related, but rather indicate that K. uranusi is more closely related to an undescribed species from line P (Kinnecaris sp.) and to K. linesae sp. nov. The latter species, however, differs from K. uranusi in so many morphological characters that we have to accept the results of our molecular analysis with some reservation. Among other morphological differences suffice to mention here: the caudal rami shape (Figs. 16D, 21G), ornamentation of urosomites (Figs. 18E, 22A), ornamentation of the fourth leg basis and exopod in male (Figs. 16E, 17E, 21F), and shape of the third leg apophysis in male (Figs. 17D, 21E).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFF80A639FF41FF1AAB42F9B6	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
03924C3AFF8DA63DFF41F913AB51FF2D.text	03924C3AFF8DA63DFF41F913AB51FF2D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris lined Karanovic & Cooper 2011	<div><p>Kinnecaris lined sp. nov.</p> <p>(Fig. 19)</p> <p>Type locality. Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line D, bore D-Trog, 27.2828034˚ S 120.1113122 ˚E.</p> <p>Type material. Holotype male dissected on one slide (WAM C47203); allotype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47204); two paratype females destroyed for DNA sequences (both amplifications successful; see Fig. 23); two paratype males dissected on one slide each (WAM C47205 and C47206); two paratype females dissected on one slide each (WAM C47207 and C47208); 30 paratypes (three males + 27 females) in alcohol (WAM C 47209); all collected at type locality, leg. S. Callan &amp; G. Perina, 23 September 2010, seLN100401.</p> <p>Description. Male (based on holotype and several paratypes). Total body length from 355 to 395 µm (388 µm in holotype). Surface of integument of all somites with numerous shallow cuticular pits (Fig. 19B). Colour, naupliar eye, rostrum, body segmentation, and pore and sensilla pattern of all somites as in Kinnecaris lakewayi (see above), except for large dorsal pore on second pedigerous somite dorsally. Habitus (Fig. 19A) cylindrical and very slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome dorsally, but with urosome somewhat wider in lateral view; prosome/urosome ratio about 0.8; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish. Body length/ width ratio about 8.8; cephalothorax 1.07 times as wide as genital somite. Integument relatively weakly sclerotized, smooth, without rows of minute spinules; larger spinules only present on fourth urosomite ventrally. Cephalothorax with clearly visible double dorsal cuticular window posteriorly (Fig. 19A); fourth and fifth urosomites with pair of oval lateral cuticular windows each.</p> <p>Cephalothorax (Fig. 19A) about 1.6 times as long as wide in dorsal view; representing about 19% of total body length. Surface of cephalic shield ornamented as in K. lakewayi, as well as tergites and pleuras of free pedigerous somites, except for presence of shallow cuticular pits.</p> <p>Genital somite (Fig. 19A) ornamented with three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin and one pair of very small cuticular pores in anterior part ventro-laterally; spermatophore not visible inside.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 19A) without any spinules, ornamented only with six posterior sensilla.</p> <p>Fourth urosomite (Fig. 19A) ornamented with two ventral rows of four large spinules at middle, ventrally from well developed oval cuticular window, and six posterior sensilla.</p> <p>Fifth (preanal) urosomite (Fig. 19A) with windows similar to those on fourth urosomite but without any large spinules, sensilla or pores; only ornamentation shallow cuticular pits.</p> <p>Anal somite (Fig. 19A) with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of large lateral cuticular pores (one pore on each side) in anterior half, two lateral pairs of minute cuticular pores close to posterior margin, and ventral pair of slightly larger cuticular pores at base of caudal rami, in addition to cuticular pits; no spinules of any size. Anal operculum well developed, unornamented on outer surface, ornamented with row of slender spinules on inner surface, with convex and smooth distal margin, not reaching posterior end of anal somite, representing 67% of somite width. Anal sinus widely opened, with two diagonal rows of slender spinules on ventral side and transverse row of spinules on dorsal side (below anal operculum).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 19A, B) slightly divergent, with space between them about 1.5 times one ramus’ width, about 3.6 times as long as greatest width (dorsal view) and 0.7 times as long as anal somite, generally cylindrical in dorsal and ventral view (although distal part somewhat tapering), but slightly inflated at midlength in lateral view, with proximal part of inner margin slightly convex in dorsal (or ventral) view; base not much narrower than rest of ramus. Armature and ornamentation as in K. lakewayi, but lateral setae inserted slightly more posteriorly (i.e. at about 3/4 of ramus length).</p> <p>Antennula, antenna, mouth appendages, and first two pairs of swimming legs very similar to those of K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 19C, D, E) also generally similar to K. lakewayi but apophysis much larger, not bilobate, with sharper tip (i.e. more like that in K. esbe, although more robust and without apical notch); ornamentation same as in K. lakewayi, including longitudinal row of large spinules on outer margin of first exopodal segment distally; exopodal spine about 1.2 times as long as apophysis.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg (Fig. 19F) with eight very long spinules on basis at base of endopod; endopod spiniform with spinules along distal third of outer margin, not arranged in scoop-like structure, but in simple row (proximalmost largest). First exopodal segment with several very long spinules on posterior surface at about midlength. Apical seta on third exopodal segment 1.2 times as long as entire exopod and about three times as long as outer spine.</p> <p>Fifth leg without any difference from that in K. lakewayi, except maybe slightly more slender in distal third; no visible outline of cuticular window.</p> <p>Sixth legs as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Female (based on allotype and several paratypes). Body length from 362 to 403 µm (392 µm in allotype). Habitus, ornamentation of prosomites (Fig. 19G, inset), colour, and naupliar eye similar to those in male, except genital and first abdominal somite fused into double-somite and middle part slightly less slender. Prosome/urosome ratio 0.8; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish; body length/width ratio also 8.5; cephalothorax 1.1 times as wide as genital double-somite.</p> <p>Genital double-somite (Fig. 19G) about 1.1 times longer than wide in dorsal view, without any trace of subdivision except for pair of ancestral dorso-lateral sensilla in anterior half; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla; no dorso-lateral rows of large spinules (condition arrowed in Fig. 19G). Genital complex (Fig. 19G) as in K. lakewayi, but sixth legs without spiniform processes.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 19G) similar to that in male, with two ventro-lateral rows of four large spinules and clearly visible lateral cuticular windows.</p> <p>Fourth (preanal), and fifth (anal) urosomites (Fig. 19G) also very similar to those in male, without any large or small spinules, except those in anal sinus.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 19G) also very similar to those in male, slightly inflated at middle from lateral view (arrowed in Fig. 19G).</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 19H) very similar to that in K. lakewayi, with slightly more robust apical aesthetasc.</p> <p>Antenna, mouth appendages, first swimming leg, second swimming leg (Fig. 19I), and exopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 19K) very similar to those of male and almost without any difference from those in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Endopod of second swimming leg (Fig. 19I) 7.2 times as long as wide, its apical seta very slender and only half as long as segment.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 19J) similar to K. lakewayi, with only slightly proportionately longer apical seta on second segment and more strongly expressed cuticular plates on praecoxa and coxa.</p> <p>Endopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 19K) about seven times as long as wide, half as long as first exopodal segment, armed with short bipinnate element apically, ornamented with six spinules along distal margin, at base of apical seta. Exopod similar to that in male, but without large spinules on posterior surface of first exopodal segment.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Fig. 19G) similar to that in male, but slightly more elongated, with narrower distal part.</p> <p>Sixth leg (Fig. 19G) vestigial, both fused into simple bilobate cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed; outer distal corners well rounded, not produced into sharp processes, slightly shorter than inner lobes.</p> <p>Etymology. The species name comes from its type locality (line D; see fig. 23), but should be treated as comprising an arbitrary combination of letters that can be treated as a Latin word and may be conceived as a noun in apposition to the generic name.</p> <p>Variability. Body length of males ranges from 355 to 395 µm (384 µm average; n = 6), while in females it ranges from 362 to 403 µm (388 µm average; n = 30). No other significant forms of variability or asymmetry were observed. The shape of the apohysis of the male third leg (Fig. 19C, D, E) is a very good morphological character, showing very little variability in shape or size, and then mostly due to slightly different angle of observation.</p> <p>Remarks. This species does not show some remarkable autapomorphic morphological features, but is distinct from all other Australian congeners in at least one or two characters, and COI data also suggest its separate specific status. Phylogenetic analyses of the COI data suggest a sister relationship of K. lined sp. nov. and K. linel sp. nov., although support for this clade is not very strong (Fig. 23). The two species, however, differ not only in the proportion of the caudal rami and ornamentation of urosomites, but also in the armature of the fourth leg basis and exopod in male, as well as in the third leg apophysis (arrowed in Fig. 19D, F, G). A very strong ornamentation of the fourth leg basis in male (Fig. 19F) distinguishes at once K. lined from K. lakewayi sp. nov., K. barrambie sp. nov., K. esbe sp. nov., K. linel, and K. uranusi sp. nov. Similarly strong ornamentation was observed only in K. eberhardi (Karanovic, 2005) and K. linesae sp. nov. (see below). The former species, however, has the apical part of the fourth leg endopod completely smooth (Karanovic, 2005), while the latter has much shorter caudal rami, smooth cuticle (no pits), no large spinules on the third urosomite in female, as well as a different shape of the third leg apophysis in male. Kinnecaris solitaria (Karanovic, 2004) is probably the most similar species to K. lined in morphology; this species was described from Depots Spring station, some 70 km south of Yeelirrie and in a different palaeochannel. Unfortunately, K. solitaria is still known only after females, so no male characters can be compared. The females differ slightly in the caudal rami shape, which are more cylindrical in dorsal (or ventral) view in K. solitaria, and the number of lateral setae on them (only two in K. solitaria). The reduced number of lateral caudal setae is an autapomorphic feature of K. solitaria among Australian congeners, although it was reported for several species from Africa (Karanovic, 2004). No doubt, this reduction originated convergently and does not indicate a closer phylogenetic relationship. It is also possible that the smallest lateral seta has been overlooked in some earlier descriptions, so we cannot put too much emphasis on this character. Kinnecris lined differs from K. solitaria also by the densely pitted cuticle (inset in Fig. 19G), more slender anal somite (Fig. 19A), and stronger and ornamented endopod of the fourth leg (Fig. 19K).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFF8DA63DFF41F913AB51FF2D	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
03924C3AFF89A622FF41FEAAABE2FDA6.text	03924C3AFF89A622FF41FEAAABE2FDA6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris linesae Karanovic & Cooper 2011	<div><p>Kinnecaris linesae sp. nov.</p> <p>(Figs. 20–22)</p> <p>Type locality. Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line A, Wirraway Bore, 27.097464˚ S 119.760755 ˚E.</p> <p>Type material. Holotype male dissected on one slide (WAM C47210); allotype female dissected on one slide (WAM C47211); one paratype male and one paratype female on one SEM stub in toto (WAM C47212); one paratype female destroyed for DNA sequences (amplification unsuccessful); two paratype females dissected on one slide each (WAM C47213 and C47214); four paratype females in alcohol (WAM C 47215); all collected at type locality, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; G. Perina, 15 March 2010, seLN8504. Additional paratypes: three males + three females + two copepodid in alcohol, collected at type locality, leg. T. Karanovic &amp; S. Callan, 18 March 2010, seLN8558. Additional paratype female in alcohol, collected at type locality, leg. P. Bell &amp; S. Callan, 15 November 2009.</p> <p>Other material examined. One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification successful; see Fig. 23); 2 males in alcohol (WAM C47216); Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line E, bore YYHHC0118 A, 27.0354526˚ S 119.7159141 ˚E, leg. S. Callan &amp; G. Perina, 22 September 2010, seLN100379.</p> <p>One female destroyed for DNA sequence (amplification successful; see Fig. 23); one male and one female in alcohol; Australia, Western Australia, Yilgarn region, Yeelirrie pastoral station, bore line E, bore YYHHC0103 B, 27.035571˚ S 119.717257 ˚E, leg. S. Callan &amp; G. Perina, 22 September 2010, seLN100387.</p> <p>Description. Male (based on holotype and four paratypes). Total body length from 312 to 354 µm (330 µm in holotype). Surface of integument of all somites extremely smooth, without minute spinules or cuticular pits (Fig. 21). Colour, naupliar eye, rostrum, body segmentation, and pore and sensilla pattern of all somites as in Kinnecaris lakewayi (see above). Habitus (Fig. 21A) cylindrical and slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome in dorsal or lateral view; prosome/urosome ratio about 0.74; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish. Body length/width ratio about 8.4; cephalothorax about as wide as genital somite. Integument relatively weakly sclerotized, smooth, without rows of minute spinules; large spinules present only on third urosomite ventrally (Fig. 21A). Cephalothorax with clearly visible double dorsal cuticular window posteriorly; fourth and fifth urosomites each with pair of oval lateral cuticular windows (Fig. 21A).</p> <p>Cephalothorax about 1.5 times as long as wide in dorsal view; representing about 19% of total body length. Surface of cephalic shield ornamented as in K. lakewayi, as well as tergites and pleuras of free pedigerous somites. Genital somite (Fig. 21A) ornamented with three pairs of sensilla on posterior margin and one pair of ventro-lateral very small cuticular pores in anterior part; spermatophore visible inside in holotype and two paratypes, similar size to that in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Fig. 21A) ornamented with two rows of four large spinules ventrally and with six posterior sensilla.</p> <p>Fourth urosomite (Fig. 21A) ornamented with two ventral rows of large spinules at middle, in front of relatively small, but clearly visible, lateral cuticular windows; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla.</p> <p>Fifth (preanal) urosomite (Fig. 21) with larger lateral cuticular windows but without any ornamentation.</p> <p>Anal somite (Figs. 20A, 21A, G) 1.3 times as long as preanal somite (more than in any other species described here), ornamented with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, lateral pair of large cuticular pores (one pore on each side) in anterior half, two lateral pairs of minute cuticular pores close to posterior margin, and ventral pair of slightly larger cuticular pores, at base of caudal rami; no spinules of any size on outer surface. Anal operculum well developed, unornamented on outer surface, with row of slender spinules on inner surface, with smooth and nearly straight distal margin, reaching posterior end of anal somite, representing 67% of somite width. Anal sinus widely opened, with two diagonal rows of slender spinules on ventral side and transverse row of spinules on dorsal side (below anal operculum).</p> <p>Caudal rami (Figs. 20A, 21G) parallel, with space between them about 1.3 times one ramus width, about 3.1 times as long as greatest width (dorsal view) and 0.7 times as long as anal somite, generally cylindrical in anterior half, but somewhat tapering in distal half and with diagonal distal margin (inner corner being much more produced than outer corner in dorsal or ventral view; arrowed in Fig. 20A), slightly inflated at midlength in lateral view; base about as wide as rest of ramus. Armature and ornamentation as in K. lakewayi, but lateral setae inserted more posteriorly (at about 3/4 of ramus’ length) and principal apical seta with straight tips.</p> <p>Antennula (Fig. 21B, C), antenna (Fig. 21A), mouth appendages (Fig. 21D), and first two pairs of swimming legs (Fig. 21A) very similar to those in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 21E) also generally similar to K. lakewayi but apophysis much larger, not bilobate, with very broad distal part (more than in any other species described here), with slightly concave distal margin and apical tip at about same level as inner distal corner; ornamentation same as in K. lakewayi, including longitudinal row of large spinules on outer margin of first exopodal segment distally; exopodal spine about 1.2 times as long as apophysis, but unlike in other species bent inwards at 90° angle, its distal tip touching distal margin of apophysis.</p> <p>Fourth swimming leg (Fig. 21F) with nine very long spinules on basis at base of endopod, both similar to K. lined; endopod spiniform with five small spinules along distal quarter of outer margin, not arranged in scoop-like structure. First exopodal segment with several very long spinules on posterior surface at about midlength. Apical seta on third exopodal segment about as long as entire exopod and about three times as long as outer spine.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Fig. 21A) without any difference from that in K. lakewayi, except for absence of cuticular pits.</p> <p>Sixth legs (Fig. 21A) as in K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Female (based on allotype and several paratypes). Body length from 322 to 364 µm (343 µm in allotype). Habitus, ornamentation of prosomites (Fig. 22A), colour, and naupliar eye similar to those in male, except genital and first abdominal somite fused into double-somite and middle part slightly less slender, as well as absence of large spinules on urosome. Prosome/urosome ratio 0.8; greatest width from dorsal view hard to establish; body length/width ratio about 8.2; cephalothorax 1.1 times as wide as genital double-somite.</p> <p>Genital double-somite (Figs. 20B, 22A, C) about 1.1 times as long as wide in dorsal view, without any trace of subdivision except for pair of ancestral dorso-lateral sensilla in anterior half; additionally ornamented with six posterior sensilla; no rows of large spinules dorso-laterally (condition arrowed in Fig. 20B). Genital complex (Fig. 22C) as in K. lakewayi, with outer distal corners of genital operculum (fused sixth legs) produced into short and sharp spiniform processes.</p> <p>Third urosomite (Figs. 20B, 22A) similar to that of male, without any ventro-lateral large spinules (condition arrowed in Fig. 20B), and with clearly visible small lateral cuticular windows.</p> <p>Fourth (preanal), and fifth (anal) urosomites (Fig. 20B) also very similar to those of male, without any large or small spinules, except those in anal sinus.</p> <p>Caudal rami (Fig. 20B, 22B) very similar to those of male, although slightly inflated at middle from lateral view (arrowed in Fig. 20B).</p> <p>Antennula (Figs. 20C, 22A) very similar to that in K. lakewayi, with only slightly shorter proximal aesthetasc (arrowed in Fig. 20C).</p> <p>Antenna (Fig. 20D), mouth appendages (Figs. 20E, F, 22D), first swimming leg (Fig. 22A, D), second swimming leg (Fig. 20G, H), and exopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 22A) very similar to those of male and almost without any difference from those of K. lakewayi.</p> <p>Endopod of second swimming leg (Fig. 20G, H) about seven times as long as wide, its apical seta very slender and only half as long as segment.</p> <p>Third swimming leg (Fig. 20I) similar to K. lakewayi, but with proportionately shorter apical seta on second segment (arrowed in Fig. 20I) and more strongly expressed cuticular plates on praecoxa and coxa.</p> <p>Endopod of fourth swimming leg (Fig. 20J) about seven times as long as wide, half as long as first exopodal segment, armed with short bipinnate element apically, ornamented with six spinules along distal margin, at base of apical seta. Exopod similar to that of male, but without large spinules on posterior surface of first exopodal segment.</p> <p>Fifth leg (Figs. 20B, 22C) similar to that of male, but slightly more elongated, with narrower distal part; cuticular window visible (although not well defined) with scanning electron microscope, but not visible with light microscope.</p> <p>Sixth legs (Fig. 22C) vestigial, fused into simple bilobate cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed; outer distal corners produced into short and sharp spiniform processes, but significantly shorter than inner lobes.</p> <p>Etymology. The species name comes from the two bore lines where it was collected (lines A and E; see fig. 23), but should be treated as comprising an arbitrary combination of letters that can be treated as a Latin word and may be conceived as a noun in apposition to the generic name.</p> <p>Variability. Body length of males ranges from 312 to 354 µm (337 µm average; n = 5), while in females it ranges from 322 to 364 µm (344 µm average; n = 13). No other significant forms of variability or asymmetry were observed. The shape of the apohysis of the male third leg (Fig. 21E) is extremely conservative, as is the somite ornamentation (or the lack of it).</p> <p>Remarks. This species differs from all other eight Australian congeners by the absence of all spinules on all somites in female, including those on the third urosomite ventrally (arrowed in Fig. 20B); the only spinules left are those on the male third urosomite ventro-laterally (Fig. 21A). It also has the shortest caudal rami of all Australian species, with diagonal distal margin in ventral view (Fig. 21G), as well as an extremely broad distal part of the third leg apophysis in male (Fig. 21E). Cuticle is extremely smooth in this species, without any cuticular pits. The only other Australian Kinnecaris Jakobi, 1972 that lacks cuticular pits is K. solitaria (Karanovic, 2004), which is unfortunately still only known after females, so the male characters cannot be compared. The latter species, however, can easily be distinguished from K. linesae sp. nov. by the reduced number of lateral caudal setae, longer caudal rami, presence of minute spinules on the anal somite, and presence of large spinules on the third urosomite. Molecular data (Fig. 23) suggest that K. linesae is more closely related to K. uranusi sp. nov. (and one undescribed species from line P: K. sp.) than to K. linel sp. nov. or to K. lined sp. nov. Morphological data do not support this relationship, and differences between K. linesae and K. uranusi are numerous, while the latter species is morphologically very similar to K. linel (see above).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFF89A622FF41FEAAABE2FDA6	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
03924C3AFF9FA62BFF41FEC6ACF5FC57.text	03924C3AFF9FA62BFF41FEC6ACF5FC57.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Kinnecaris Jakobi 1972	<div><p>Key to Australian species of Kinnecaris</p> <p>1. Preanal somite without large spinules ventrally.............................................................. 2</p> <p>– This somite with four groups of large spinules............................................... K. lakewayi sp. nov.</p> <p>2. Third urosomite in female (fourth in male) with at most two groups of large spinules ventrally........................ 3</p> <p>– This somite with four groups of large spinules............................................. K. barrambie sp. nov.</p> <p>3. Third urosomite in female (fourth in male) with no large spinules.............................................. 8</p> <p>– This somite with two groups of large spinules ventrally...................................................... 4</p> <p>4. Genital double-somite without large spinules laterally....................................................... 7</p> <p>– This somite with at least one group of large spinules laterally................................................... 5</p> <p>5. Genital double-somite with one group of large spinules laterally................................................ 6</p> <p>– This somite with two parallel groups of large spinules laterally..................................... K. esbe sp. nov.</p> <p>6. Male third leg apophysis with deep apical notch; caudal rami very slender in lateral view; anal somite with many rows of minute spinules dorsally....................................................................... K. linel sp. nov.</p> <p>– Male third leg apophysis without apical notch; caudal rami slightly inflated at middle in lateral view; anal somite with few minute spinules dorsally................................................................. K. uranusi sp. nov.</p> <p>7. Caudal rami with two lateral setae................................................. K. solitaria (Karanovic, 2004)</p> <p>– Caudal rami with three lateral setae........................................................... K. lined sp. nov.</p> <p>8. Caudal rami inflated distally; somites with cuticular pits............................... K. eberhardi (Karanovic, 2005)</p> <p>– Caudal rami not inflated distally; somites with smooth cuticle................................... K. linesae sp. nov.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03924C3AFF9FA62BFF41FEC6ACF5FC57	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	Karanovic, Tomislav;Cooper, Steven J. B.	Karanovic, Tomislav, Cooper, Steven J. B. (2011): Molecular and morphological evidence for short range endemism in the Kinnecaris solitaria complex (Copepoda: Parastenocarididae), with descriptions of seven new species 3026. Zootaxa 3026 (1): 1-64, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3026.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.3026.1.1
