taxonID	type	description	language	source
72B3042D370A1E5C2599682F3A0A9BC2.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Trophi unspecialized, malleate; head, trunk and foot largely loricate, but head retractable. No discernible separate lorica plates or sulci on the trunk, but lorica stiffness not homogeneous. Lorica granulated and / or facetted. Distal part of trunk (anal segment) illoricate, separated from trunk proper. Foot with two pseudosegments and a pair of terminal toes.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
72B3042D370A1E5C2599682F3A0A9BC2.taxon	discussion	Discussion. The diagnostic autapomorphic feature for the family is the stiffening of the tegument of the head region, especially of the neck and lateral parts of the head, which in contracted specimens folds into a characteristic, more or less symmetrical shape protruding from the head aperture. The feature distinguishes family members from Brachionidae, Epiphanidae, Euchlanidae, and Mytilinidae who have an illoricate head; Lepadellidae has a characteristic sclerotized head shield overlaying the corona but the rest of the head is illoricate (Colurella, Lepadella), and not retractile (Squatinella). In contrast, Sorensen and Giribet's (2006) detailed phylogenetic analysis could not confirm monophyly of Trichotriidae, neither on molecular nor morphological data. The classic diagnoses of Trichotriidae genera are problematic. They refer to features that are not present in all species of the genus (e. g., the purported synapomorphic dorsal spines in Macrochaetus), or features which appear to have been misinterpreted. This holds in particular for the structure of the foot which, in its basic form, consists of two foot pseudosegments bearing two toes, and is inserted on an illoricate terminal part of the trunk, termed the anal segment. This anal segment is a part of the trunk proper as it lies anterior to the (dorsal) anal opening. Its tegument is always relatively weakly sclerotized, which enables mobility of the rigid foot relative to the rigid trunk lorica, but which may also make it difficult to distinguish it from the trunk and / or from the two distal pseudosegments of the foot in contracted specimens. The structure is occasionally mistaken for a part of the foot and is then referred to as first of three foot pseudosegments. Note that in Koste and Shiel (1989) both terms (anal segment and first foot segment) appear to have been used for the same structure, and that the position of the anus as indicated in their fig. 16: 1 is incorrect. In view of these inconsistencies, and awaiting a full review, preferably integrating both molecular and morphological data of genera in this and the related Euchlanidae and Mytilinidae, we tentatively propose emended diagnoses of the trichotriid genera, and propose a new genus to accommodate Monostyla dorsicornuta Van Oye, 1926 and Macrochaetus kostei Jose de Paggi, Branco & Kozlowsky-Suzuki, 2000.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
A23BA19CC86C10C062695CF7CA2438A4.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Body, including head and foot, loricate; head retractile, foot non-retractile, consisting of a short basal, squarish and an elongate, cylindrical foot pseudosegment terminating in two equal toes. Anal segment strongly reduced. Trunk lorica ventrally relatively flat, dorsally with a Y-shaped keel, pustulated, rounded elliptical.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
A23BA19CC86C10C062695CF7CA2438A4.taxon	etymology	Etymology. The name Pulchritia is derived from the Latin adjective pulcher, meaning " pretty, beautiful, handsome ". It refers to the beauty of its type species, Pulchritia dorsicornuta comb. n.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
A23BA19CC86C10C062695CF7CA2438A4.taxon	discussion	Discussion. We recognize this genus as containing two species, Pulchritia dorsicornuta comb. n. and Pulchritia kostei (Jose de Paggi, Branco & Kozlowsky-Suzuki, 2000), comb. n. The two share a number of features that clearly sets them apart from other Trichotriidae. Their rounded, dorso-ventrally flattened trunk shape reminds one only of Macrochaetus, while the anal segment being reduced is as in certain Trichotria (e. g., Trichotria buchneri Koste, Shiel & Tan, 1988, Trichotria brevidactyla Harring, 1913 (= Trichotria curta (Skorikov, 1914 ))). The peculiar keel formation of the dorsal lorica is somewhat similar to Trichotria buchneri only. The unique foot structure of the two species, however, can be considered synapomorphic and is superficially and probably functionally similar to the foot consisting of a single short foot pseudosegment and elongated, fused toes bearing terminal (pseudo) claws of some Lecane species.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
418802056EB057D04C11C9DE3DB601B5.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. Pulchritia dorsicornuta comb. n. is unmistakable by the large, S-shaped antero-lateral projections of its ventral lorica. These are completely absent in its closest relative Pulchritia kostei comb. n.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
418802056EB057D04C11C9DE3DB601B5.taxon	description	Description. Female (Figs 1, 2 a-b; male unknown): Body: Head largely retracted in trunk lorica, with two lateral stiffened elements protruding from the head aperture. A pigmented spot (eye?) present. Trunk loricate, elliptic in outline, longer than wide, dorso-ventrally compressed. Ventral and dorsal plates fused laterally and caudally, leaving a broad head aperture and a smaller foot aperture. Dorsal plate medially with two semi-longitudinal ridges forming a Y-shaped double dorsal keel, fused to a single dorsal keel terminally. Posterior of dorsal lorica with a weakly protruding rounded margin bearing two pairs of short ridges over the foot aperture. Openings of the lateral antennae in posterior third of body, about halfway between dorsal keel and lateral margin of lorica. Dorsal head aperture margin concave. Ventral plate flat, with two protruding, weakly S-shaped and diverging spines antero-laterally, these separated by a shallow U-shaped sinus. Posterior of ventral plate with a well-defined foot aperture, with rounded anterior and diverging lateral margins. Anal segment indistinct, poorly developed (also in poorly contracted specimens). Foot subterminally, consisting of a short, bilaterally constricted first and an elongate, parallel-sided second foot pseudosegment. Two long, equal toes, these mostly parallel-sided, terminating in a sharp tip. Trophi (Figs 2 c-e) malleate, almost symmetrical. Fulcrum short, with a small basal plate; rami relatively flat, triangular, with rounded postero-lateral corners and short, curved alulae, inner margins with asymmetrical, protruding teeth-shaped structures. Left uncus with two large frontal and three minor dorsal webbed teeth, right with a single large frontal and four minor teeth, all minor teeth gradually reduced in size from frontal to dorsal. Manubria symmetrical, with elongate and weakly procurved shaft. Head broad, with clear ventral, median and dorsal chambers, anterior chamber with an additional rounded triangular apophysis, dorsal chamber with a recurved hook.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
418802056EB057D04C11C9DE3DB601B5.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Pulchritia dorsicornuta comb. n. is only known from the two localities cited above, and from Ruki River near Eala (Van Oye 1926), near Mbandaka, Equator province, DR Congo. Its close relative Pulchritia kostei com b. n. is known only from a coastal lagoon, State of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. We hypothesize that the two represent a vicariant species pair. This is remarkable as there are few examples of such vicariant sister-taxa, possibly originating from allopatric speciation, in rotifers, and patters are blurred by their purportedly superb dispersal potential (Segers 2008, Segers and De Smet 2008). Some have been identified before in the genus Lecane (see Segers 1996), but the most notorious example of such a vicariant species-pair is Kellicottia longispina (Kellicott) and Kellicottia bostoniensis (Rousselet), in which the former is hypothesized to be of Palaearctic, the latter of Nearctic origin (Pejler 1977).	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
09660F12B974FB55B74C03AF33D08A5D.taxon	discussion	Discussion. Most species of Macrochaetus are readily identified as belonging to this genus by the presence of long, conspicuous dorsal spines. However, three species of Macrochaetus (Macrochaetus aspinus Segers & Sarma, 1993, Macrochaetus danneelae Koste & Shiel, 1983, and Macrochaetus paggiensae Koste, 2000) lack these dorsal spines and their presence can therefore not be confirmed as generally diagnostic for the genus. On the other hand, small lorica spinulets are present dorsally, ventrally and marginally on the trunk lorica, and on the lorica of the head and neck regions. In particular the spinulets on the head and neck lorica appear to be synapomorphic for the genus. The foot consist of a large, relatively soft anal segment covering a relatively poorly sclerotized first foot pseudosegment and a terminal cylindrical foot pseudosegment bearing two separate toes. There are 14 species in this genus, several of which are endemic to South America (Segers 2007, Segers and De Smet 2008).	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
4547D8F38B00AD0577B2BDC40C1E8175.taxon	discussion	Discussion. In comparison with Wolga, the anal segment is clearly discernible in almost all species but it is relatively weakly sclerotized; the two foot pseudosegments are cylindrical and strongly sclerotized. Retraction of the foot is not possible in those species in which the foot is situated terminally. Spines on the first foot pseudosegment and on the trunk lorica are present in most, but not all species (e. g., Trichotria pseudocurta Koste, Shiel & Tan, 1988). There are seven species in the genus (Segers 2007), most are cosmopolitan, one (Trichotria brevidactyla) is Holarctic, two are Australian. Regarding the latter, however, the attribution of Trichotria buchneri to Trichotria was considered uncertain by Koste and Shiel (1989) in view of this species' peculiar triangular cross section, and foot consisting of two cylindrical pseudosegments only (apparently without, a reduced, or completely retracted anal segment in the preserved material examined?). A re-examination of the species is in order.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
0BFEFE6DF797C386426E18B2AD90CB55.taxon	discussion	Discussion. The published generic diagnosis refers to absence of an anal segment (Koste 1978; Koste and Shiel 1989). This does not appear to be correct; the illustration of a non-contracted animal by Western (1894, reproduced by Koste (1978) and Koste and Shiel (1989)) depicts a foot consisting of a first element having numerous transverse folds indicating its high mobility, and two additional, relatively short pseudosegments; all but the terminal part may be indistinct in preserved specimens. We interpret the first element as being the anal segment. The foot is situated subterminally and can be retracted entirely into the lorica by which the anal segment becomes indiscernible; there are two separate toes. It is unlikely that the presence of short spines over the lateral antennae is diagnostic at the genus level. Western (1894) notes that the lorica of the species would consist of plates connected with a membranous lateral invagination. While the lateral parts of the trunk lorica may be concave, they do not appear distinctly less sclerotized as in, e. g., many species of Lecane.	en	Luo, Yongting, Segers, Hendrik (2013): On Pulchritia new genus, with a reappraisal of the genera of Trichotriidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). ZooKeys 342: 1-12, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.342.5948
