identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
03DF8799FFC74B37A9397DCEFEE5FE5E.text	03DF8799FFC74B37A9397DCEFEE5FE5E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chirodropida Haeckel 1880	<div><p>Order Chirodropida Haeckel, 1880, sens. emend.</p> <p>Cubomedusae Haeckel, 1880: 423; in part. — Kramp, 1961: 304; in part.</p> <p>Chirodropidae Haeckel, 1880: 445.</p> <p>Carybdeidae. Mayer, 1910: 504; in part. — Krumbach, 1925: 563; in part.</p> <p>Chirodropida Werner, 1984: 132.</p> <p>Diagnosis (emended)</p> <p>Cubozoa with branched pedalia bearing numerous tentacles; with or without gastric saccules.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFC74B37A9397DCEFEE5FE5E	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFC04B37A9397A8BFD43F9A6.text	03DF8799FFC04B37A9397A8BFD43F9A6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsalmidae Thiel 1936	<div><p>Family Chiropsalmidae Thiel, 1936, sens. emend.</p> <p>Chirodropidae Haeckel, 1880: 445; in part. — Kramp, 1961: 307. — Werner, 1984: 133. Carybdeidae. — Mayer, 1910: 504; in part.</p> <p>Drepanochiridae Krumbach, 1925: 575.</p> <p>Chiropsalmidae Thiel, 1936: 307; in part.</p> <p>Diagnosis Chirodropida with smooth, unbranched, finger­like gastric saccules, lacking filaments.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>Thiel (1936) erected the family Chiropsalmidae to replace the family Chirodropidae based on his opinion that the genus name Chirodropus was invalid. I disagree about the invalidity of Chirodropus (which is beyond the scope of this paper), but believe that there exists enough gross morphological difference between the generic clusters Chiropsalmus – Chiropsoides and Chirodropus – Chironex to warrant recognition at the familial level. I therefore propose resurrection of the family Chiropsalmidae, in an emended sense.</p> <p>Two other families have been previously proposed that overlap to some degree with the Chiropsalmidae, both applying to Chiropsoides buitendijki. Krumbach (1925) proposed the family name Drepanochiridae for his newly erected genus Drepanochirus, which was meant to separate Drepanochirus (= Chiropsalmus) buitendijki from the other Chiropsalmus species. Southcott (1956) found the genus name Drepanochirus to be preoccupied for a coleopterid, and thus proposed the genus name Chiropsoides and the corresponding family name Chiropsoididae, once again emphasizing the uniqueness of ‘ Chiropsalmus buitendijki ’. It may well be that further studies into the morphology and genetics of Chiropsoides buitendijki will prove it worthy of higher level separation, but it seems most conservative to recognize its close relationship to Chiropsalmus (based on the smooth, pendant gastric saccules) in the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary.</p> <p>A comparison of characters useful in separating the species in the family Chiropsalmidae is presented in Table 1.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFC04B37A9397A8BFD43F9A6	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFC04B36A9397DB9FABFFB71.text	03DF8799FFC04B36A9397DB9FABFFB71.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsalmus L. Agassiz 1862	<div><p>Genus Chiropsalmus L. Agassiz, 1862</p> <p>Chiropsalmus Agassiz, 1862: 174, for Tamoya quadrumana Müller, 1859. — Haeckel, 1880: 446, addition of C. quadrigatus sp. nov. and C. zygonema sp. nov. — von Lendenfeld, 1884: 247, recognized only 2 species, C. quadrumanus and C. zygonema. — Horst, 1907: 101, added C. buitendijki nov., recognized only 3 species, C. quadrumanus, C. quadrigatus, and C. buitendijki. — Mayer, 1910: 515, recognized all 4 species so far named. — Southcott, 1956: 277, C. zygonema probably immature. — Kramp, 1961: 308, 4 spp. recognized. — Werner, 1984: 133, 2 spp. recognized, C. quadrumanus and C. quadrigatus. — Gershwin, 2005: 124.</p> <p>Type species Tamoya quadrumana Müller, 1859.</p> <p>Revised diagnosis</p> <p>Chiropsalmidae with nematocyst warts on the exumbrella; with rounded hump in the pedalial canal bend; with finger­shaped, pendant gastric saccules; with well developed lateral gonads; with tentacles narrow in width and round in cross section; lacking mesenteries.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>The genus Chiropsalmus is herein restricted to include only the former chirodropid species with nematocyst warts on the exumbrellar surface. Chiropsalmus quadrumanus, the type species of the genus, has this distinctive character, as does Chiropsalmus alipes n. sp., described below from the Pacific coast of southern Mexico. This Mexican form is immediately recognizable in having pedalia that more resemble Carybdeida than Chirodropida, i.e., they are long and blade­like, with the branching confined to the very distal end. The enigmatic C. zygonema Haeckel, described from Argentina and not illustrated or observed since, is presumed to belong to this group, because it too has peculiarly blade­like pedalia, although the presence or absence of bell warts was not noted.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFC04B36A9397DB9FABFFB71	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFC14B39A9397E6EFB7AFDAE.text	03DF8799FFC14B39A9397E6EFB7AFDAE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsalmus quadrumanus (Muller 1859)	<div><p>Chiropsalmus quadrumanus (Müller 1859)</p> <p>Plates 1, 5A</p> <p>Tamoya quadrumana Müller, 1859: 1–12, pl. 2, figs. 18–25, pl. 3, figs. 26–33. — Greene, 1879: 793–794, should be retained in the genus Tamoya.</p> <p>Chiropsalmus quadrumanus — Agassiz, 1862: 174. — Haeckel, 1880: 447; summary. — von Lendenfeld, 1884: 248; summary. — Conant, 1898: 4. — Mayer, 1910: 515, pl. 57, fig. 3. — Krumbach, 1925: 574; Sumatra. — Ranson, 1945: 314; French Guyana. — Ranson, 1949: 123, 137; mouth of the Amazon. — Vannucci, 1954: 120–123; lengthy description, São Paulo, Brazil. — Vannucci, 1957: 594–597; summary. — Guest, 1959: 79–83; occurrence at Texas, USA, coincident with drought conditions. — Kramp, 1959: 16–17; W. Africa and Venezuela (W. African records doubtful). — Kramp, 1961: 309–310; synopsis. — Vannucci, 1966: 662; sting effects. – Phillips et al., 1969: 708, 711; feeding ecology and crab associates. — Phillips &amp; Burke, 1970: 853–859; ecological effects of salinity, Mississippi Sound, USA. — Burke, 1975: 37; Mississippi Sound. — Burke, 1976: 20, 24–25; Mississippi Sound, USA. — Calder &amp; Peters, 1975: 364–369, text fig. 1; cnidome and systematic comments. — Kraeuter &amp; Setzler, 1975: 68; ecology and occurrence at Georgia, USA. — Larson, 1982: 255–257; Belize. — Werner, 1984: 133, circumtropical. —Gómez Aguirre, 1986: 227–234; ecology and occurrence in Gulf of Mexico. — Bengston et al., 1991: 1404–1406; lethal sting, near Galveston, Texas, USA. — Cairns et al., 1991: 11; name validity, Atlantic USA. — Schnadig et al., 1991: identification via nematocysts from autopsy skin scrapings. — Marques et al., 1997: 136–138; cnidome of Brazilian population. — Morandini &amp; Marques, 1997: 188–189; discussion of sting, occurrence from Pernambuco to Santa Catarina State, Brazil. — Mianzan &amp; Cornelius, 1999: 533, fig. 3.5; may be conspecific with C. quadrigatus. — Fernando, 2001: 140; earlier Indian reports attributed to this species were inaccurate. — Pastorino, 2001: 357; discussion. — Cairns et al., 2002: 9; name validity, USA. — Haddad et al., 2002: 1445–1450, figs. 1 (left) and 3 (left); envenomation. — Migotto et al., 2002: 22; presence in Brazil. — Morandini et al., 2005: 281–294, fig. 3. — Gershwin, 2005: 124, pl. 4.9A and throughout; taxonomy and phylogeny.</p> <p>Cheiropsalamus quadrumanus Brooks, 1882: 137–138; Beaufort, North Carolina, USA, taken only at depth [incorrect subsequent spelling].</p> <p>Chiropsalmus quadramanus Levy, 1983: 154–155; field guide, first aid [incorrect subsequent spelling].</p> <p>Doubtful records</p> <p>Chiropsalmus quadrumanus. — Stiasny, 1926: 250; occurrence in Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia. — Rao, 1931: 28–29; occurrence in Indian Ocean. — Kramp, 1959: 16–17; W. Africa and Venezuela (W. African records doubtful). — Payne, 1960: 7; Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia. — Chakrapani, 1984: 38–40; India. — Fernando, 1992: 75–76; stings in Sri Lanka; later identified as C. quadrigatus.</p> <p>Material examined</p> <p>Holotype: Could not be located at any major European or American institution; apparently no longer extant.</p> <p>Neotype: MZUSP 493, 22 February 2001, collected by bottom trawl over very muddy bottom, 7–10m, Costão do Carneiro, in front of Enseada beach, Ubatuba, São Paulo State, Brazil, by A.C. Marques, preserved in 4% formaldehyde solution in seawater; 8 cm BH, 7­ tentacle stage.</p> <p>Other material: Unregistered, Ubatuba, trawl net, 27 March 1996, 10– 15m; 5.5cm BH, 8.5cm DBW, female. MNRJ 184, Baía de Traição, Paraíba, Brazil, coll. 4 June 1978, P. Duarte; 6 specimens, 2.5–3cm BH. MNRJ 931, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-54.046665&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=6.1566668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -54.046665/lat 6.1566668)">Praia de Itaipava</a>, Espírito Santo, 28 April 1986; 3.5cm BH, 5.5cm DBW. MZUSP 816 (1 specimen in ethanol) and 820 (2 specimens in formalin), 22 February 2001, collected by bottom trawl over very muddy bottom, 7–10m, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-54.046665&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=6.1566668" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -54.046665/lat 6.1566668)">Costão do Carneiro</a>, in front of Enseada beach, Ubatuba, São Paulo State, Brazil, 3 other specimens examined live with neotype, 5–6cm BH, 7­tentacle stage. RMNH 17733, 06°09.4’N, 54°02.8’W, Surinam, 10 April 1969; 3 specimens, 4–8cm BH, up to 9­tentacle stage, with exumbrellar nematocysts, opposite pedalia.</p> <p>Cautiously identify as C. quadrumanus: ZMUC unregistered, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1957; 78mm BH, 91mm DBW, 45mm IRW, 1mm TBW, tentacles per pedalium: 8, 8, 7, 9, alternate; lacking bell nematocysts. NHM 2000.1799, Nova Visçosa, Bahia, Brazil, coll. 3 February 1995, A.C. Morandini (lacking bell nematocysts, alternate pedalial branching), 49mm BH, 72mm DBW, 33mm IRW, 1mm TBW. NHM unregistered, Praia de Caiobá, Paraná, Brazil, 27 May 1980 (inaccurately indicated on the specimen label as 1880); 53mm BH, 72mm DBW, 9­tentacle stage (lacking bell nematocysts, alternate pedalial branching).</p> <p>Type locality</p> <p>Praia de Fora, Palhoça county, Santa Catarina, Brazil; originally reported as stranded at Praia de Fora, in the county of Desterro, Santa Catarina State. According to A. Morandini (pers. comm.), Desterro (now called Florianópolis) is on Santa Catarina Island, and has no beach called Praia de Fora; however, a beach by that name exists on the nearby mainland in the county of Palhoça, which was formerly probably included in the county of Desterro, and this is likely to have been the actual type locality.</p> <p>Neotype locality Ubatuba, São Paulo, Brazil.</p> <p>Emended diagnosis</p> <p>Chiropsalmus with exumbrellar nematocyst warts; with up to ten, oppositely­arranged tentacles on each pedalium; with short, hollow, finger­like gastric saccules.</p> <p>Revised description, based on neotype</p> <p>Body bell­shaped (Plate 1A), somewhat broader than high, to about 8cm tall; with rounded, thickened apex, lacking circumaboral groove. Interradial pillars shallow. Adradial furrows shallow in upper half, defining rhopalial region but not pillars in lower half. Exumbrella liberally sprinkled with small but conspicuous raised nematocyst warts, moderately concentrated near the velarial turnover.</p> <p>Pedalia 4, interradial, about as long as bell is tall, each with about 7 gelatinous ‘fingers’ and tentacles; with right and left ‘fingers’ held somewhat tightly together; lacking nematocysts. Pedalial canals flat in cross section, with angular knee­like or shallow volcano­like bend near pedalial base, lacking upward­pointing ‘thorn’; lateral canal branches emanate from both sides of undivided main canal, right and left side branches arranged opposite to one another (Plate 1B); truncate­bulbous at tentacle insertion. Tentacles round to somewhat flattened in cross section, about 1mm diameter at base; tentacle banding in a 1­2­3­2­1 pattern, without other ornamentation; straight­sided at insertion point.</p> <p>Rhopalial niche dome­shaped, with a single narrowly convex covering scale above, with an open horizontal shelf below; immediate rhopalial niche region is prominently raised from body wall; lacking rhopalial horns. Rhopalia with 6 eyes, 2 median with lenses and 4 lateral eye spots, the upper one rounded, the lower one linear and horizontal (Plate 1C). Rhopalial stem warts lacking. Statolith large, globular, hanging well below the main lensed eye rather than behind it; outline shape was not studied prior to preservation.</p> <p>Velarium broad, about 1/3 to 1/2 bell radius. Velarial canals very numerous, with lateral lobations, dendritically branching from a single root in each octant, with more than 10 canals extending past velarial turnover; with numerous scattered nematocyst warts on bases of velarial canals and on perradial lappets (Plate 1D). Perradial lappets broadly triangular, with canals branching off sides. Frenulum a well developed, single­sheet extending a little over halfway to bell margin.</p> <p>Stomach small and shallow. Gastric cirri short, unbranched, singly­rooted, bundled into discontinous, horseshoe­shaped phacellae. Gastric saccules 8, solid, distinct, fingershaped, smooth and unbranched, pendant, about 1/3 to 1/2 as long as the subumbrellar cavity (Plate 1A, D). Gonads leaf­like, attached along entire height of interradial septa, extending out onto gastric saccules. Manubrium very long, nearly reaching bell margin. Mouth comprising 4 broadly pointy triangular lips, with smooth edges. Perradial mesenteries completely lacking.</p> <p>Color in life transparent and colourless, with conspicuous red nematocyst warts on bell and velarium; tentacles yellowish­whitish.</p> <p>Variation</p> <p>Specimens in the NHM collection from northern Brazil lack any trace of exumbrellar nematocysts. Müller’s three original specimens were about 100mm tall by 120mm wide, and had 7 or 8 tentacles per pedalium (as indicated in the illustrations).</p> <p>Nematocysts</p> <p>The cnidome of the southeastern and northeastern Brazilian populations of C. quadrumanus was studied by Marques et al. (1997), and of the South Carolina population by Calder &amp; Peters (1975). The cnidome comprised ellipsoid and ovoid isorhizas, clubshaped microbasic mastigophores, and three sizes of oval microbasic p ­mastigophores in both populations, but the dimensions and distribution of the various nematocyst types were different. Several of these types are shown in Plate 5A from the neotype specimen.</p> <p>Ecology</p> <p>Kraeuter and Setzler (1975) stated that C. quadrumanus was the second most abundant species in their plankton study at Hudson Creek and Duplin River, Georgia; they further reported that a July bloom was common and that the species overwinters in the estuaries.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Southeast Brazil to North Carolina, USA. Reports from Sumatra, Australia, and West Africa seem dubious pending examination of material. Unfortunately, the Darwin, NT, specimen (AM #4188) identified by Stiasny (1926) cannot presently be located.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>It may well be that the various populations of what have long been thought to be a single species of Chiropsalmus quadrumanus, actually represent more than one species. Specimens from northern Brazil lacking exumbrellar nematocysts were collected from bottom trawls, and thus may have lost their warts during collection (A. Morandini, pers. comm.); however, upon examination, these specimens did not appear to have warts even in un­abraded places such as the recessed areas adjacent to the pedalia or rhopalial niches, or on the velarium. Thus, I am extremely dubious that the northern Brazilian form lacking the exumbrellar nematocysts is the same species, and if it is not, one would have to wonder about the true relationship of the forms to the north and south of it. According to the nematocyst studies of Calder and Peters (1975) and Marques et al. (1997), the nematocyst ratios and sizes are somewhat different between the north and south. It would be helpful to do a combined morphological and molecular comparison of the American and southern Brazilian forms, plus the northern Brazilian form that lacks nematocysts on the body.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFC14B39A9397E6EFB7AFDAE	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFCE4B38A93979A1FC71FA53.text	03DF8799FFCE4B38A93979A1FC71FA53.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsalmus zygonema Haeckel 1880	<div><p>Chiropsalmus zygonema Haeckel, 1880</p> <p>No figure ever published</p> <p>Chiropsalmus zygonema Haeckel, 1880: 641, n. sp. — Mayer, 1910: 517. — Thiel, 1928: 15–16; = juvenile C. quadrigatus. — Southcott, 1956: 277; probably immature. — Kramp, 1961: 310. — Gershwin, 2005: 124­125 and throughout; taxonomy and phylogeny.</p> <p>Type locality South Atlantic Ocean, off the coast of Argentina.</p> <p>Material examined No types or other material known.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Body to about 60mm BH, 40mm BD; with two asymmetrical tentacles on each pedalium; finger­like gastric saccules rudimentary.</p> <p>Description (electronically translated from Haeckel, 1880, with as much of the original terminology as possible in order to minimize erroneous interpretation)</p> <p>Species­Diagnose: Umbrella four­sided­pyramidal, vaulted above, with inclusion of the hanging velarium 1 1/2 times as high as wide. Mouth­tube small, four­lipped, half so long as the roundish stomach­sack whose 4 interradial side­walls carry arched phacellae. The two gastric saccules about the umbral­wall of each radial­pocket, close to the entrance, oval, very small. Four pedalia page­form, two­edged, asymmetrically arranged, approximately 1/3 as long as the umbrella­height, each with 2 short jelly fingers. In total 8 long tentacles.</p> <p>Specielle description: Chiropsalmus zygonema is interesting as the simplest under the Chirodropidae until now examined, which directly joins this Subfamily with the Tamoyidae. In total, this type resembles more of a Tamoya than a Chiropsalmus, but must be put more to the last genus however, since each pedalium carries 2 tentacles. Indeed this condition also occurs as individual variation with the 4­tentacled Tamoya haplonema however (P. 443). Velarium and gonads is similarly like with C. quadrumanus (P. 447).</p> <p>Size: Umbrella­width 40 mm., umbrella­height 60 mm.</p> <p>Place of discovery: South Atlantic Ocean, at the Argentinian coast, Smith.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>Thiel (1928) came to a most curious conclusion about this species, believing it to be an immature Chiropsalmus quadrigatus, even though C. zygonema with apparently immature characters is larger than the comparable specimen of C. quadrigatus. One might logically expect a progressive pattern of development among conspecifics. Thiel also noted that the two species are widely separated geographically, but dismissed it by stating that many cubozoans have wide distributions. In fact, many of the previously assumed widespread species are proving to be comprised of numerous distinct species, and at least in Australia, chirodropid and chiropsalmid species have very tight distributions.</p> <p>Based on distribution, C. quadrumanus would have been a better assumption, because at least C. quadrumanus and C. zygonema are known from the same ocean (Atlantic). However, an ideal method of identification would have been based on structural characters, and C. zygonema with blade­like pedalia would not have been attributable to any other species. Furthermore, with two fingers and tentacles, it would not have seemed similar to other species, which typically have 4–6 at a similar size (e.g., Chiropsella bronzie gen. et sp. nov. (see below) and Chironex fleckeri, unpublished notes).</p> <p>I am provisionally keeping C. zygonema in the restricted genus Chiropsalmus because I suspect that C. alipes n. sp. (described below) may hold the key to its identity. This peculiar form from the Pacific coast of southern Mexico is small at maturity, has exumbrellar warts like C. quadrumanus, and has very peculiar carybdeid­like pedalia, such as those described for C. zygonema. Whether the Mexican form and C. zygonema are identical will probably never be known, because there is no known type material of C. zygonema, and Haeckel left no drawings and only a very brief description. I think the most stable course of action is to regard this species as provisionally valid, but to recognize that it is currently represented by an unrecognizable juvenile form, and thus needs to be redescribed based on an adult form from near the type locality.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFCE4B38A93979A1FC71FA53	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFCF4B3CA9397EBEFCF6FBA6.text	03DF8799FFCF4B3CA9397EBEFCF6FBA6.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsalmus alipes Gershwin 2006	<div><p>Chiropsalmus alipes, sp. nov.</p> <p>Plate 2</p> <p>Material examined</p> <p>Holotype: SIO PIC­060222­0001 ­HT, 6 April 1971, <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=-101.03333&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=17.133333" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long -101.03333/lat 17.133333)">Zihuatenejo</a>, Mexico, 17°08’N, 101°02’W, coll. Scripps Inst. Oceanogr. MV 73 ­I­29; male, 115.0mm BH, 99.5mm DBW, 56.0mm IRW, 4.00mm TBW, 60.0mm pedalial length total (51.0mm to end of adaxial keel), 5.5mm pedalial canal width, 7.5mm abaxial keel width, 10.0mm adaxial keel width.</p> <p>Paratypes: SIO PIC­060222­0002 ­PT, same data as holotype; male, 91.0mm BH, 79.5mm DBW (crumpled), 46.0mm IRW, 2.5mm TBW. SIO PIC­060222­0003 ­PT, same data as holotype; 92.0mm BH, 79.5mm DBW, 37.0mm IRW, 2.0mm TBW.</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>From the Latin ‘ala’ (meaning ‘wing’) and ‘pes’ (meaning ‘foot’), in reference to the wing­like pedalia that characterize this species; gender neutral.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Chiropsalmus with long oar­like pedalia, with ‘fingers’ and tentacles clustered terminally; with short, small, hollow, simple gastric saccules; with warty apical surface, and nematocyst freckles densely scattered on the upper half of the body and in a line on the outer pedalial keel.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Bell shape unknown in life, but somewhat taller than wide, with a rigidly flat­topped apical region (Plate 2A). Apical mesoglea not thickened, lacking any trace of circumaboral groove, densely studded with conspicuous gelatinous nematocyst warts. Very small flush nematocyst freckles are scattered on the interradii of the upper 1/3 of the body, and in a single row along the lower half of the outer pedalial keel; nematocyst freckles or warts could not be found on other parts of the body wall or velarium. Mesoglea is thick, probably rigid in life and able to hold its shape out of water; after being in preservative for over 30 years, the mesoglea has lost all stiffness. Interradial pillars thickened and broad, with a well defined interradial furrow running between. Adradial furrows not observed.</p> <p>Pedalia 4, interradial, very long and spatula­shaped, greatly resembling the pedalia of the Carybdeida, but with short ‘fingers’ and tentacles clustered at the extreme distal end (Plate 2B). Fingers and tentacles 3 or 4 per pedalium, arranged in a most peculiar manner (Plate 2C): pedalia with 3 tentacles have the one outer tentacle branching in the abaxial direction, plus two opposing tentacles immediately distal to it and perpendicular to that axis and opposite in arrangement to each other; in pedalia with 4 tentacles, at the point where the opposite branches meet, the 4 th (reduced) tentacle originates but branches off in the adaxial plane. The pedalial canal is simple throughout its length, to the point of the terminal 3­way branch. Pedalial canal substantially flattened throughout length; with a conspicuous upward­pointing ‘volcano’ shaped diverticulum near the base. Outer pedalial wings about 1.5x canal width; inner pedalial wings about 2x pedalial canal width. Tentacles thick, round to slightly flattened in cross section, about 2mm wide at base; evenly banded with very small bands, with segmented appearance every 1–2mm. Pedalial canal straight at tentacle insertion. Tentacle base narrower at insertion, flaring a bit distally, like a horse’s hoof.</p> <p>Rhopaliar niche contour raised conspicuously off body wall. Rhopaliar niche deeply incised, reminiscent of the deep niches of the Tamoyidae. Rhopaliar niche ostia very shallow frown­shaped, with broad, shallowly convex opposing upper and lower covering scales. Rhopaliar horns and rhopaliar stem warts lacking. Two main lensed eyes with dark pigment could be discerned, but the number and arrangement of lateral eyes could not be determined in these preserved specimens. Rhopalial windows flat, overgrown by frenulum.</p> <p>Velarium broad; with many broad, numerous complexly branched canals with jagged edges (Plate 2D), bearing many lateral diverticulations, not anastomosed. Velarial canal roots 1 per octant leaving stomach; with about 5 velarial canals at the point of the velarial turnover; with 10 or more reaching velarial margin. Perradial lappets present but not conspicuously thickened, appearing as one of the velarial canals, narrow, branching into numerous velarial canals along sides; with lateral and distal diverticulations. Velarial nematocyst warts not observed. Frenulum a single, simple sheet, barely extending onto velarium.</p> <p>Gastric phacellae very bushy, forming a continuous ring of cirri around the edge of the stomach, not in distinct 90º series; microscopically, the cirri are singly rooted in rows. Gastric saccules very small, short, hollow, simple finger­like processes. Perradial mesenteries lacking. Subumbrellar rhopaliar windows flat. Gonads leaf­like, only evident in the holotype to about half the bell height. Stomach shallow and flat. Manubrium about half the length of the subumbrellar cavity. Lips huge, long, broad, straight­edged.</p> <p>Nematocysts</p> <p>Tentacle and bell squashes made from the type series did not yield any nematocysts for study.</p> <p>Variation</p> <p>Several characters were noted as different from my observations by Dr. R. Hartwick (formerly of James Cook University, Australia) in his unpublished notes. First, whereas I was unable to discern the presence or number of lateral eye spots, Hartwick noted that there were six eyes. All Chirodropida known to date, for which the eyes have been studied, have the full complement of two median lensed eyes and four lateral eye spots; thus, it seems probable that this is accurate and that they have simply faded with time in preservative. Second, perhaps most curiously, Hartwick noted that the gastric saccules were ‘3­scalloped’, and about as long as the manubrium and mouth; in contrast, I was unable to discern any such scalloping, the saccules appeared to me as smooth, and also appeared about half the length of the manubrium and mouth. Finally, Hartwick noted the presence of nematocyst warts on the velarium, whereas I was unable to observe these.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>Chiropsalmus alipes is immediately identifiable from all other known chiropsalmids in its exaggeratedly long pedalia, greatly resembling the oar­like pedalia of the Carybdeida rather than the claw­like pedalia typical of the Chirodropida. Haeckel (1880) described “blattförmig, zweischneidig” (i.e., page­form, two­edged) pedalia for C. zygonema, with only two asymmetrical fingers and tentacles; however, with no illustrations, no type specimens, and no additional material ever being found, it is difficult to conclude any precise relationship between C. alipes and C. zygonema. Chiropsalmus alipes is further distinguished from most other chiropsalmids by having conspicuous gelatinous warts on the apex of the bell; no mention of bell warts was made for C. zygonema. Chiropsalmus quadrumanus is the only other known chiropsalmid with exumbrellar warts, but they tend to be less pronounced to the touch, and more evenly scattered over the entire bell surface.</p> <p>Its placement in the genus Chiropsalmus is based on overall morphological similarity; like the type species, C. quadrumanus, this is the only other species described to date with small, simple, pendant saccules, and exumbrellar nematocysts (Table 1). However, the pedalia of C. quadrumanus are more like the typical Chirodropida hand­like or claw­like form, whereas the pedalia of C. alipes are more similar to those of the Carybdeida. Haeckel (1880) interpreted the blade­like pedalia of C. zygonema as a link between the Chirodropidae and Tamoyidae; however, the remaining characters firmly place C. alipes (and presumably C. zygonema) in the Chirodropida.</p> <p>It seems probable that C. alipes is closely related to the enigmatic C. zygonema; it is also possible that C. alipes is the adult form of C. zygonema. If a specimen had only two tentacles, as in C. zygonema, these might logically be the outer unpaired tentacle and one of the typically paired lower tentacles, thus being asymmetrical. However, it is hard to imagine that the two opposing ‘middle tentacles’ would not have formed together, resulting in three tentacles rather than two, as in C. alipes. Thus, it might be that C. alipes and C. zygonema are closely related but not identical. Furthermore, given the geographical separation of C. alipes off the Mexican Pacific coast and C. zygonema of the Argentine coast, it is doubtful that the two would be identical.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFCF4B3CA9397EBEFCF6FBA6	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFCB4B23A9397FB4FBCAFB8E.text	03DF8799FFCB4B23A9397FB4FBCAFB8E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsalmus maculatus Cornelius 2005	<div><p>Chiropsalmus maculatus Cornelius et al., 2005</p> <p>Chiropsalmus maculatus Cornelius et al., 2005: 399–405, figs. 1–6.</p> <p>Chirodropus n. sp. A Gershwin, 2005: 122–123, pl. 4.8B, and throughout.</p> <p>Material examined</p> <p>Holotype: QMG316989: <a href="https://tb.plazi.org/GgServer/search?materialsCitation.longitude=145.82156&amp;materialsCitation.latitude=-15.984167" title="Search Plazi for locations around (long 145.82156/lat -15.984167)">Just</a> inside Outer Great Barrier Reef, NE Queensland, 43 km off mainland, 15° 59.050’S, 145° 49.294’E, 2 May 1997, within 5m of surface, coll. R. Hore.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>The revised diagnosis given herein for the genus Chiropsalmus precludes this species from this classification. Specifically, in comparison with the diagnosis presented above for Chiropsalmus, C. maculatus does not have exumbrellar warts; the pedalial canal bend is spike­shaped rather than rounded; gastric saccules are lacking; the lateral gonads are comprised of thousands of fine ribbon­like filaments rather than two leaf­like sheets; the tentacles are broad and flattened; and the mesenteries are robust. Furthermore, the species has well developed muscle bands occupying the majority of the subumbrellar wall; the phacellae are in large triangular fields along the lateral walls of the stomach rather than as linear organs along the stomach floor; and the ‘palm’ of the pedalium is greatly reduced; these characters are unknown in any other cubozoan.</p> <p>While it is clear that the species is not a Chiropsalmus, it is less clear to exactly which genus the species does belong. Chirodropus Haeckel was said to have ‘grape­like swellings’ on the outer margin of the gonads, but in Chiropsalmus maculatus the gonads are replaced by fine threads. Chirodropus was further said to have feather­like gastric saccules bearing numerous filaments; Chiropsalmus maculatus does not have saccules of any shape, and no structures with filaments emanate from the subumbrellar cavity. While I am hesitant to erect a new genus for a species with only one known member, I believe that this is the most stable course of action for this species, i.e., I believe that including it within Chirodropus would make it unstable in the near future as Chirodropus becomes more accurately redescribed. I therefore propose the new genus Chirodectes for this species (Greek, chiro­, hand; ­dectes, biter), and include Chirodectes maculatus (Cornelius et al., 2005) comb. nov. in the family Chirodropidae, with the following diagnosis:</p> <p>Genus Chirodectes, gen. nov.</p> <p>Chirodropidae without gastric saccules; with large fields of well developed subumbrellar muscle bands spanning the perradial sides; with large fields of gastric cirri lining the interradial sides of the stomach wall; with filamentous gonads.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFCB4B23A9397FB4FBCAFB8E	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFD44B22A9397FDCFB06FD36.text	03DF8799FFD44B22A9397FDCFB06FD36.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsoides Southcott 1956	<div><p>Genus Chiropsoides Southcott, 1956</p> <p>Drepanochirus Krumbach, 1925: 575 (preoccupied for Coleoptera). –— Dawydoff, 1936: 471. Chiropsoides Southcott, 1956: 276–277. — Gershwin, 2005: 104, and throughout.</p> <p>Type species Chiropsalmus buitendijki Horst, 1907.</p> <p>Diagnosis Chiropsalmidae with unilaterally branching pedalia.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>The family Drepanochiridae was established for Drepanochirus buitendijki (Horst 1907), to reflect the uniqueness of its pedalial arrangement from those of other box jellyfishes. This convention has not been adopted by other authors, and the genus name was found to be preoccupied for a coleopterid (Southcott, 1956). The family recognition was retained by Southcott (1956) under the new name ‘Chiropsoididae’; however, this has not been recognized by subsequent authors.</p> <p>The genus Chiropsoides was proposed by Southcott (1956) to replace the preoccupied genus Drepanochirus Krumbach (1925); both authors recognized the unique state of the unilaterally­branching pedalia, and proposed to separate the species originally described as Chiropsalmus buitendijki Horst, 1907, from all others in the genus with bilaterallybranching pedalia. For reasons that are completely unclear, Kramp (1961) did not even acknowledge this separation, nor did Werner (1984).</p> <p>The separation of a taxon with unilaterally branching pedalia from those taxa with bilaterally branching pedalia is supported by other characters, e.g., development of the gastric saccules, morphology of the pedalial canals and tentacles, and nematocysts.</p> <p>As explained below, the holotype of the long­misunderstood nominal species Chiropsalmus quadrigatus Haeckel, 1880, possesses the same pedalial arrangement as C. buitendijki, and is herein recognized as Chiropsoides quadrigatus comb. nov.</p></div> 	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFD44B22A9397FDCFB06FD36	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFD54B26A9397824FB27FB7E.text	03DF8799FFD54B26A9397824FB27FB7E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsoides buitendijki (Horst 1907)	<div><p>Chiropsoides buitendijki (Horst 1907)</p> <p>Plates 3A–D, 5 B–C</p> <p>Chiropsalmus buitendijki Horst, 1907: 101–106, pl. 2, figs. 1–6. — Mayer, 1910: 515. — Stiasny, 1919: 46–47, text figs. 12–14; examination of type specimens, plus 3 additional. — Menon, 1930: 4–5; Madras. — Rao, 1931: 29; curiously not found. — Menon, 1936: 3; Krusadai Island, India. — Ranson, 1945: 314; Indochina. — Nair, 1951: 71, Trivandrum Coast, India. — Kramp, 1959: 16, comparison with C. quadrumanus. — Kramp, 1961: 309. — Fernando, 2001: 140; Sri Lanka, earlier reports attributed to Chiropsalmus quadrumanus were inaccurate.</p> <p>Drepanochirus buitendijki — Krumbach, 1925: 565–571, 575, fig. 531. — Uchida, 1929: 182, noted in classification. — Dawydoff, 1936: 471; Indochina, extremely rare. — Southcott, 1956: 276, genus preoccupied for Coleoptera.</p> <p>Chiropsoides buitendijki — Southcott, 1956: 276. — Southcott, 1963: 49; comparison with Chironex. — Gershwin, 2005: 126, pl. 4.10A, B and throughout; taxonomy and phylogeny.</p> <p>‘ Chiropsalmus quadrumanus. — Fernando, 1992: 75–76; stings in Sri Lanka; later identified as C. quadrigatus [non Chiropsalmus quadrumanus (Müller, 1859)].</p> <p>‘ Chiropsalmus quadrigatus. — Fernando, 1994: 58; stings in Sri Lanka [non Chiropsalmus quadrigatus Haeckel, 1880].</p> <p>non Chiropsalmus buitendijki. — Stiasny, 1926: 249, Bowen Harbour, QLD, Australia [= Chironex fleckeri Southcott, 1956]. — Pope, 1953: 111, presence in Australia. — Payne, 1960: 6; Australia.</p> <p>Type locality From the harbor of Batavia, Java.</p> <p>Material examined</p> <p>Syntype: RMNH 5234, Reede van Batavia, Java, P. Buitendijk, 1907; 2 specimens, A) gravid female, BH 64.21mm, DBW 86.60mm, IRW 46.38mm, TBW 3.46mm; B) BH 64.56mm, DBW 88.72mm, IRW 48.78mm, TBW 3.42mm.</p> <p>Other material: RMNH 5235, Reede van Batavia, Java, P. Buitendijk, 1908–1909. QM G317021, Mt. Lavinia, Sri Lanka, 12 September 1993; 79.84mm BH, 85.26mm DBW, 41.09mm IRW, 1.80mm TBW, 9­tentacle stage. QM G317032, no data, 58.91mm BH, 92.08mm DBW, 41.69 IRW, 7­tentacle stage.</p> <p>Revised diagnosis</p> <p>Chiropsoides with 5–9 fingers and tentacles; with long, hollow, finger­shaped gastric saccules; with low, pyramidal diverticulae on the main shafts of the pedalial canals, singly between successive branches.</p> <p>Revised description, primarily based on syntype specimen A</p> <p>Bell small and quite cuboid, with a smoothly rounded apical dome (Plate 3A), with or without a shallow subapical coronal furrow (spec. A lacks it, spec. B has it). Mesoglea of a thick and rigid consistency, with noticeable thickenings on the apical dome and on the interradial pillars. Interradial furrows absent. Adradial furrows shallow in lower half, becoming indistinct in upper half, defining the interradial pillars. Exumbrellar texture smooth, lacking nematocyst warts or freckles; nematocyst clusters similarly not present on the pedalia or the velarium.</p> <p>Pedalia 4, interradial, less than one half bell height, with 5 fingers and tentacles arranged in a linear series, decreasing in size sequentially, the smallest being the outermost (Plate 3B). The pedalium itself curls adaxially under the bell, but the branches arise in a single row along the abaxial surface. Fingers substantially flattened with the same axis as the pedalia, each narrowly scalpel­shaped. Pedalial canals flattened in cross section, with an extremely long, narrow, upward­pointing ‘spike’ into the sub­lamellar space, obscuring the canal bend. Abaxial edge of main shaft with a single shallow V­shaped convexity between successive tentacles; adaxial edge of main shaft and both edges of branches unadorned. Canal branches L­shaped or crescent­shaped overall, such that the tentacles arise from the side of the distal end of the fingers, rather than the actual terminal end. Canals not flared at tentacle insertion. Tentacles substantially flattened, ribbon­like, considerably larger in diameter than the pedalial canals with which they connect. Tentacle banding pattern could not be discerned due to breakage; none of the tentacles of the holotype are longer than about 1cm.</p> <p>Rhopaliar niche ostia shallow oval­shaped, with a poorly defined lower covering scale and a shallowly­concave upper scale. Rhopaliar horns absent. Rhopaliar warts not examined. Eyes 6 per rhopalium, with 2 median lensed eyes, with 4 lateral pigment spots.</p> <p>Velarium broad, with 2 velarial canals arising from the stomach but branching so profusely that the number of dendritic branches and lateral diverticulae is impossible to count accurately. Perradial lappets more or less equilaterally triangular, extending about three­fourths the distance to the velarial edge; with side branches and distal branches. Frenulae narrowly developed, extending only about half the distance to the velarial margin; with conspicuous perforations down the midline. The number of frenular sheets was not noted during examination of the type specimens, but later examination of rhopaliar niche and velarial photographs reveals that they are thick where they connect to the perradial lappets and approach the rhopaliar niche; thus, they either are a solid gelatinous sheet, or are a hollow structure with two sheets. In specimen RMNH 5235, the frenulae are comprised of double sheets.</p> <p>Phacellae of the typical Chirodropida form, i.e., V­shaped corner masses; cirri unbranched and singly rooted. Lateral gonads well developed, leaf­shaped along almost the full height of the bell, broader in the upper half. Interradial perforations lacking. Superior gonads well developed, enveloping the saccules, especially conspicuous around the distal half. Gastric saccules (Plate 3C) comprising 8 long hollow finger­shaped projections, arising singly from each side of the perradii on the uppermost part of the subumbrellar bell wall; reaching to about the height of the velarium. Manubrium very short, about one­fourth as long as the saccules, cruciform with thickened corners. Mouth with recurved, smooth­edged, folded, tongue­shaped lips. Mesenteries only rudimentarily developed in the uppermost parts of the stomach region, not extending down the bell wall as either flap­like or cord­like structures. Rhopalial window shape not examined.</p> <p>Colour in life unknown; preserved, the body is hyaline, and the gonads and tentacles are pale pinkish, apparently from preservation.</p> <p>Variation</p> <p>The QM specimens are at a similar body size, but differ in several major characters from the Javanese specimens. The Sri Lankan specimen G317021 has nine ‘fingers’ on the pedalia, and about 13 velarial canals per octant reaching the margin, with the lateral diverticula being secondarily diverticulated with a spiky appearance (Plate 3D). The specimen G317022 from an unknown locality has seven ‘fingers’ on the pedalia, and broadly rounded velarial canals. Both QM specimens have fine, round tentacles.</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>Originally described from Java, it has since been reported from the Malay Archipelago (Stiasny 1919), India (Menon 1936; Nair 1951; Chakrapani 1984), and Indochina (Dawydoff 1936; Ranson 1945). Reports from Australia were erroneous (Stiasny 1926; Pope 1953; Payne 1960); see below.</p> <p>Nematocysts</p> <p>The tentacular cnidome from one of the syntype specimens comprised two types (Plate 5B): elongate club­like microbasic p ­mastigophores (85.95–94.14µm long x 11.14–14.55µm wide, n=12), and large oval microbasic p ­mastigophores (37.31–41.43µm long x 16.01–17.86µm wide, n=16). No other nematocyst types were observed.</p> <p>The tentacular cnidome of QM 317021 from Sri Lanka comprised five types: 1) hockey­stick­shaped microbasic p ­mastigophores (60.79–78.92µm long x 9.51–11.78µm wide, n=11; Plate 5C); 2) small football­shaped isorhizas with a beehive­form tubule, 9.26–11.26µm long x 7.39–8.30µm wide, n=6; 3) small rod­shaped isorhizas, 14.34–15.25µm long x 3.76–4.22µm wide, n=3; 4) small spherical isorhizas, 6.97–9.71µm diameter, n=11; and 5) very small spherical isorhizas (3.53–4.21µm diameter, n=8).</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>It is not yet clear whether the Burmese Chiropsoides quadrigatus comb. nov. and Javanese Chiropsoides buitendijki should be regarded as the same species. Logic would hold that they might not be identical based on the geographical separation between the two forms. Furthermore, the holotype of C. quadrigatus has immature gonads and almost the same number of tentacles at only a fraction smaller body size than the C. buitendijki syntypes have at full maturity, leading one to think that perhaps they mature at different sizes (and perhaps different anatomical characteristics). However, until the juvenile stages of C. buitendijki from Java and the adult stages of C. quadrigatus from Rangoon become known and are compared, it would be misleading to conclude with certainty on the relationship between the two forms.</p> <p>It is also possible that the Sri Lankan form is the adult form of the enigmatic C. quadrigatus, or this may represent a different species altogether. I have only had opportunity to study two specimens from Sri Lanka, both have nearly twice the number of pedalial branches at a smaller body size than the Javanese specimens, and the Sri Lankan velarial canals have a peculiar ‘spiky’ appearance, whereas the velarial canals of the Javanese specimens are broader and more rounded.</p> <p>Note of correction to the scientific literature</p> <p>Stiasny (1926) reported on Chiropsoides buitendijki (as Chiropsalmus buitendijki) collected in Queensland. I have examined the specimens in question, which are housed at the Australian Museum (AM G13099, lot of 3), and can confirm without doubt that they are Chironex fleckeri, not Chiropsoides buitendijki. All three specimens are in poor condition, but the pedalia unmistakably fork in both directions, unlike C. buitendijki, in which the pedalia fork serially and uni­directionally. Furthermore, the pedalial canals spike in the typical Chironex fashion, instead of the very long narrow spike of C. buitendijki or the knee­shaped bend of the common Australian “ Chiropsalmus ”.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFD54B26A9397824FB27FB7E	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFD14B2BA9397E6CFE73FD1E.text	03DF8799FFD14B2BA9397E6CFE73FD1E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsoides quadrigatus (Haeckel 1880) Gershwin 2006	<div><p>Chiropsoides quadrigatus (Haeckel, 1880), comb. nov.</p> <p>Plate 3E, F</p> <p>Chiropsalmus quadrigatus Haeckel, 1880: 447. — Mayer, 1910: 516–517 [in part]. — Stiasny, 1922: 517; examination of holotype. — Thiel, 1928: 13–14, fig. 6; examination of type specimen. — Stiasny, 1937: 213–217 [in part]; comparison with specimen from the Maldive Archipelago. — Kramp, 1955: 162; examination of holotype. — Kramp, 1961: 309 [in part]. — Mianzan &amp; Cornelius, 1999: 533 [in part]; may be conspecific with Chiropsalmus quadrumanus.</p> <p>Chiropsoides quadrigatus — Gershwin, 2005: 126–127, pl. 4.10C, D and throughout; taxonomy and phylogeny.</p> <p>non Chiropsalmus quadrigatus. — Mayer, 1910: 516–517, fig. 331. — Mayer, 1915: 171–172 [= one or two undescribed species (see below)].</p> <p>non Chiropsalmus quadrigatus. — Stiasny, 1937: 213–217, figs. 4–9; redescription from Maldives [= unidentified, compare with Chironex sp.].</p> <p>non Chiropsalmus quadrigatus. — Barnes, 1965: 13–22, figs. 4, 6, 8, 10, 11d–f, 13, 15; Australian form, comparison with Chironex [= Chiropsella bronzie gen. et sp. nov. (see below)].</p> <p>Many other references exist to the name Chiropsalmus quadrigatus, but apparently do not refer to medusae conspecific with Haeckel’s type specimen. Because the name C. quadrigatus has long been associated with characters distinctly different from those of the type, those medusae identified with the name were very likely characterized by non­ C. quadrigatus morphology. While it is impossible at this point to determine the proper identification of each, certain generalizations can be made based upon the species that actually are found at these problematical locations, especially those whose morphology resembles that which was mistakenly thought to represent C. quadrigatus. However, such generalizations must be made with great caution, as it is entirely possible that additional closely related forms will be discovered throughout the Indo­Pacific, thus revisiting the same problem. It must be emphasized that species identification must be based on evaluation of many morphological characters, not on geographic occurrence or on possession of a single character.</p> <p>At the present time, all Chirodropida from Australia, the Philippines, Japan, and throughout southeast Asia should be assumed to belong to species other than C. quadrigatus. Within Australia alone, there are at least four new species of Chirodropida that are in the process of publication; more can be expected to be found. Similarly, it follows that a diversity of species will be found throughout the tropical Indo­Pacific.</p> <p>Material examined</p> <p>Holotype: ZMUC unnumbered (= Haeckel #166), Indian Ocean, 10 miles off Rangoon, Burma, coll. by Thallitzer, 18 Nov 1863; 51.86mm BH, 61.44mm crumpled DBW, 29.50mm IRW, 2.14mm TBW.</p> <p>Type locality Indian Ocean, 10 miles off Rangoon.</p> <p>Diagnosis Cannot be accurately diagnosed at this time based on immaturity of the holotype.</p> <p>Revised description</p> <p>Specimen is immature and in extremely poor condition (Plate 3E). Exumbrella apparently lacking nematocysts and circum­aboral furrow; with prominent interradial pillars, divided by shallow interradial furrow, set off from flat sides of body by deep vertical adradial furrows. Pedalia with 3 or 4 fingers and tentacles, unilaterally arranged. Pedalial canal flat throughout length; with upward­pointing thorn at bend; with a raised ‘bump’ on proximal end of the longest canal (Plate 3F). Tentacles flat, ribbon­like, flared slightly at the base. Rhopalial niche raised, dome­shaped; ostium flat on bottom, W­shaped on top. Gastric saccules either missing or not yet developed, but a small, solid gelatinous knob is present in the perradii. Gonads apparently not yet developed.</p> <p>Distribution No additional specimens identifiable with this species are presently known.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>This species has been problematical since the brief and insufficient description given by Haeckel (1880) as Chiropsalmus quadrigatus. Based on a single immature and badly damaged specimen from Rangoon, and lacking illustrations, previous workers were unable to determine the exact nature of the species and thus it has become a catch­all for most Indo–Pacific Chirodropida. Mayer (1910; 1915) redescribed the species based on Philippine material, but this was apparently based on two different species (Gershwin, unpublished notes). Stiasny (1922) and Kramp (1955) both commented that they were unable to determine the proper identity of the holotype. This uncertainty has led to many different forms from widely disparate locations around the Indo–Pacific being assigned to the species, including a North eastern Australian form (described below as Chiropsella bronzie gen. et sp. nov.), two Philippine forms (awaiting description), and at least one Japanese form (awaiting description). At least some of these are apparently lethal to humans.</p> <p>Mianzan &amp; Cornelius (1999) speculated that C. quadrigatus may be conspecific with C. quadrumanus; this is untenable for several reasons. First, of the few characters that can be interpreted from the C. quadrigatus holotype, the only shared characters with C. quadrumanus are very general, such as a cuboid body shape and the fact that the pedalia are branched, but the two forms differ in numerous major structural characters such as the pattern of the pedalial branching, pedalial canal form, pedalial bend morphology, presence of exumbrellar nematocysts, and tentacle shape. Second, there is no a priori reason to presume that a western Atlantic species would be the same as an Indian Ocean species, lacking geographic intermediates. Even forgiving the reliance on previous inaccurate identifications of C. quadrigatus from Australia and the Philippines, this still would be insufficient reason to assume conspecificity of the two forms. Third, no interpretable description of C. quadrigatus exists in the literature, and there is no evidence that either Mianzan or Cornelius have examined the holotype to be able to make an evidence­based assessment.</p> <p>I have examined the holotype and have concluded that it is most closely similar to the later­described Indonesian species Chiropsoides buitendijki (Horst 1907), not to the Philippine forms. In C. quadrigatus, the pedalia fork in a conspicuous unilateral manner; this is not known in any other species except C. buitendijki. Both species possess a similar upward­pointing ‘spike’ near the base of the pedalial canal, which differs from the Philippine species. And like C. buitendijki, C. quadrigatus has flat, ribbon­like tentacles; in the Philippine species they are more rounded. Most other useful characters of the C. quadrigatus holotype are indeterminable. However, in C. buitendijki the main canal has a series of knobs between the forks, whereas in the C. quadrigatus holotype the main canal has knobs on the forks themselves but not between. I would not normally consider the location of the knobs to be of specific difference, but I think it would be foolhardy at this point to consider the two forms conspecific without further evidence. Based on my experience with other cubozoans, it seems likely that the Burmese and Javanese forms are distinct, given their geographic separation. As such, the Indian records of C. buitendijki are more likely to be referable to C. quadrigatus, but such a determination should be made on their morphology, not on geography. On the other hand, if the two forms are found to be identical, then the name C. quadrigatus would have priority. While it is possible that future studies will demonstrate that they are conspecific, until the ontogenetic changes of both forms can be studied, the two should be maintained as separate species in order to maximize stability.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFD14B2BA9397E6CFE73FD1E	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFDC4B2BA939784CFBBCF911.text	03DF8799FFDC4B2BA939784CFBBCF911.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsella Gershwin 2006	<div><p>Genus Chiropsella, gen. nov.</p> <p>Type species: Chiropsella bronzie, gen. et sp. nov., herein designated.</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Chiropsalmidae with divided pedalial canal, with each of the two branches giving rise to the fingers of the pedalia in a unilateral fashion, alternate or opposite to those on the other fork; with gastric saccules sessile, solid and unbranched.</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>Chirops ­ to maintain a close relationship with Chiropsalmus, and ­ ella, an affectionate suffix.</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>The form of the gastric saccules was used by Haeckel (1880) to erect the genus Chirodropus as separate from Chiropsalmus, and again by Southcott (1956) to erect the new genus Chironex; the pedalial branching is also different between Chiropsalmus and these two genera, though this was not noted in either case. The form of the pedalial branching was used by Southcott (1956) to erect the genus Chiropsoides to pull another species away from Chiropsalmus, even though the gastric saccules were remarkably similar. All three of these generic erections have been widely accepted. In the case of the present species, it differs just as greatly in the form of both the saccules and the pedalial branching. At least one other species (from the Northern Territory, Australia) will soon be added to this new genus (Gershwin and Alderslade In review 2006).</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFDC4B2BA939784CFBBCF911	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
03DF8799FFDC4B10A9397D96FD31FDFE.text	03DF8799FFDC4B10A9397D96FD31FDFE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Chiropsella bronzie Gershwin 2006	<div><p>Chiropsella bronzie, sp. nov.</p> <p>Plates 4, 6</p> <p>Chiropsalmus quadrigatus. — Southcott, 1952: 272–274. — Pope, 1953: 112 [photo], implicated in death [in part]. — Southcott, 1956: 254–280, comparison with Chironex fleckeri. — Halstead, 1959 (in part): 33, 36. — Southcott and Kingston, 1959: 443–444, in part, stings. — Barnes, 1960: 993–999, stings. — Kramp, 1961: 309 [in part]. — Southcott, 1963: 49 [in part]; general medical. — Yaldwyn, 1964: 312–313, dangerous. — Barnes, 1965: 13–22, morphological details. — Cleland and Southcott, 1965: 60, 65, 70, 73, 75, 123, 126, 129, 130, 131, 153, Fig. 7, Pl. I.1, Colour Plate II bottom right; medical aspects. — Halstead, 1965: 302 (in part); p. 329 text fig. 3; 334; pl. XL–XLII; LXXVIII, dangerous. — Barnes, 1966: 307–332, morphology and sting potential. — Barnes, 1967: 115–129, venom. — Cochrane, 1968: 16; general. — Halstead, 1971: 405 [in part]; general. — Keen, 1971: 249–254, toxin analysis. — Freeman and Turner, 1972: 31–37; comparison to Chironex venom. — Brown, 1973: Distribution. — Baxter and Marr, 1974: 223–229; venom neutralized by Chironex antivenom. — Halstead, 1980: 55, in part, fig. 26; sting. — Yamaguchi and Hartwick, 1980: 11–16, external fertilization. — Sutherland, 1981: 86, but fig. pg. 87 is actually Chironex fleckeri. — Sutherland, 1983: 374–377, but fig. 26.2 is actually Chironex fleckeri. — Kinsey, 1986: 1–76, appendix; misc. notes. — Marsh and Slack­Smith, 1986: 27–28, 34, fig. 19, [in part]; sting information, comparison with Chironex. — Fenner and Williamson, 1987: 258; nematocyst inhibition. — Williamson et al., 1987: 220, sting. — Kinsey, 1988: 1–32, 94, 106; misc. notes. — Halstead et al., 1990: 47, fig.; sting. — Ming et al., 1990: fig. 10; photo taken in Australia, probably wrongly attributed to Singapore. — Halstead, 1995: 65, in part; sting. — Williamson and Burnett, 1995: 105, sensu Barnes, 1965. —Fenner and Williamson, 1996: 661; use of antivenom. — Williamson et al., 1996b: 46, 150–154, 236, 237, 259–260, 261, 262, 277, 280–283, 292, 298, 302, 405, text figs. 6.29, 6.30, plates 1.10, 6.9.</p> <p>Chiropsalmus sp. — Williamson et al., 1996a: 151, table 6.4a, b, 259–260, 267, 269, 270, 276, 277, 280. — Gordon, 1998; ecophysiology. — White et al., 1998: 113, stings. — Pereira et al., 2000; pressure immobilization bandages. —Carrette, 2002; extraction and ecology of venom. — Carrette et al., 2002: 1547–1551; relationship between nematocyst ratio and prey type. — Collins, 2002: 420, figs. 1–3; molecular phylogeny, Genbank number AF358103.</p> <p>Chiropsalmus quadrigata. —Hawdon &amp; Winkel, 1999: 1370–1371; sting comparison to Chironex [incorrect subsequent spelling].</p> <p>Chiropsalmus n. sp. A Gershwin, 2005: 125, pl. 4.9B, and throughout; taxonomy and phylogeny.</p> <p>The synonymy above includes only those citations I believe refer to the taxon herein described as Chiropsella bronzie gen. et sp. nov. However, not all Australian references to C. quadrigatus can be easily understood as Chiropsella bronzie, gen. et sp. nov. In trying to tease apart the literature of decades ago, in which the identifications were not always accurate, it has become clear that Chironex fleckeri and Chiropsalmus quadrigatus were often used more or less interchangeably for Australian Chirodropida. I have excluded from Chiropsella bronzie gen. et sp. nov. those references to Chiropsalmus quadrigatus in which fatal stinging occurred, as these are most likely attributable to Chironex fleckeri (e.g. Flecker, 1952; Southcott, 1952; Pope, 1953 [in part]; Pope, 1957).</p> <p>Material examined</p> <p>Holotype: MTQ G55274 (JHB J1217), Pretty Beach, QLD, Australia, coll. by J.H. Barnes 11 February 1964; gravid female, BH 67.77mm, DBW 88.60mm, IRW 43.11mm, TBW 1.20mm.</p> <p>Paratypes: MTQ G55275 (JHB J992.9), in fish trap, Buchan Point, QLD, Australia, 8 April 1962; BH 71.75mm, DBW 111.84mm, IRW 56.12mm. SAM H972 (RVS A392), Bells Beach, Cairns, QLD, Australia, coll. G. Rowell 20 February 1959; 65.95mm BH, 102.45mm DBW, 52.65mm IRW, 7 tentacle stage. SAM H973 (RVS A433), same data as H972; 57.16mm BH, 91.68mm DBW, 50.74mm IRW, 7 tentacle stage. SAM H974 (RVS A429), Palm Beach, Cairns, QLD, Australia, coll. J.H. Barnes 22 February 1959; damaged, 44.94mm BH, 5 tentacle stage. SAM H975 (RVS A397­8), Bells Beach, Cairns, QLD, Australia, coll. K. de Witte 14 January 1959; 2 specimens: A) 39.14mm BH, 52.60mm DBW, 5 tentacle stage; B) 46.20mm BH, 58.45mm DBW, 7 tentacle stage. SAM H976 (RVS A371), Simpsons Point, QLD, Australia, coll. J.H. Barnes 22 February 1959; 67.76mm BH, 83.70mm DBW, 40.71mm IRW, 7 tentacle stage. SAM H977 (RVS A422), Bells Beach, Cairns, QLD, Australia, coll. J.H. Barnes 9 January 1960; 37.96mm BH, 46.45mm DBW, 24.94mm IRW; 6 tentacle stage. SAM H978 (RVS A420), same data as H977; 6 specimens, 20.11–23.31mm BH, 29.38–32.29mm DBW, 3–4 tentacle stage. SAM H979 (RVS A421), same data as H977; 4 specimens, damaged, 5 tentacle stage. SAM H980 (RVS A434), 33.57mm BH, 32.33mm DBW, 14.92mm IRW, 4 tentacle stage. SAM H981 (RVS A396), Mossman Beach, QLD, Australia, coll. G. Rowell 22 February 1959; damaged, 54.59mm BH, 6 tentacle stage. SAM H983 (RVS A393), Bells Beach, QLD, Australia, coll. G. Rowell 21 February 1959; 29.29mm BH, 28.96+mm DBW, 16.76mm IRW, 4 tentacle stage. SAM H984 (RVS A395), same data as H981; damaged, 6 tentacle stage. SAM H985 (RVS A397 a), same data as H975; 29.14mm BH, 41.35mm DBW, 22.58mm IRW, 5 tentacle stage. SAM H1057, Cooktown, QLD, Australia, coll. J. &amp; G. Seymour 24 December 1997, numerous juvenile specimens of assorted sizes. SAM H1058, 4 ­ Mile Beach, Port Douglas, QLD, Australia, coll. by J. Seymour and Gordon 28 December 1997; numerous juvenile specimens of assorted sizes. SAM H1048, Palm Cove, Cairns, QLD, Australia, coll. J. &amp; G. Seymour, 25 December 1997; 6 juv. specimens, 21.10–ca. 6mm BH. NTM C12749, 4 Mile Beach, Port Douglas, QLD, coll. J. Seymour 4 December 1997; 62.35mm BH, 92.53mm DBW, 45.47mm IRW, 7 tentacle stage. NTM C12750, Buchan Point, Cairns, QLD, Australia, coll. J. Seymour 9 May 1997; 81.90mm BH, 116.09mm DBW, 56.41mm IRW, 7 tentacle stage. AM G16004, same data as NTM C12749; 54.91mm BH, 65.65mm DBW, 33.23mm IRW, 6–7 tentacle stage. AM G16027, same data as NTM C12750; 64.10mm BH, 88.54mm DBW, 43.07mm IRW, 7 tentacle stage. WAM Z2926, same data as NTM C12749; 60.22mm BH, 85.99mm DBW, 45.35mm IRW, 5 tentacle stage. WAM Z2927, same data as NTM C12750; 56.84mm BH, 90.86mm DBW, 7 tentacle stage. USNM 100351, same data as NTM C12750. QM G317056, Port Douglas Marina, Port Douglas, QLD, Australia, at surface by Quicksilver mooring, coll. by B. Kilpatrick, 3 February; 22 specimens, growth series ca. 15–50mm BH. QM G317057, same data as G317056; 39 specimens, growth series ca. 12–52mm BH. QM G317069, Ellis Beach, QLD, Australia, north of stinger enclosure, coll. by L. Gershwin and W. Porche 13 February 2000; 5 specimens approximately 27–50mm BH. SAM H1065 (RVS A428), Palm Beach, QLD, Australia, 22 Feb 1959; ca 85mm. NHM 1964.5.11.1–2, Bell’s Beach, 4m South of Daintree River, coll. K. Gillett; 40mm BH, 51.81mm DBW, 25.22mm IRW, 5 tentacle stage.</p> <p>Additional material examined: SAM H982 (RVS A446), Cairns, QLD, Australia, coll. J.H. Barnes ~ December 1960; considerably damaged.</p> <p>Type locality Pretty Beach, Queensland, Australia.</p> <p>Etymology</p> <p>The specific name is to honour the men and women of Surf Life Saving, on this the eve of the centenary of Life Saving in Australia. The ‘Bronze Medallion’ is the hallmark of Life Saving, and is here used in the affectionate and familiar sense, ‘bronzie’ (noun in apposition).</p> <p>Diagnosis</p> <p>Chiropsella with 8 conspicuous solid, knob­like gastric saccules in the upper adradii of the subumbrellar cavity; with well­developed lateral gonads spanning the entire interradial septum length; with up to 9 fine, round tentacles per pedalium.</p> <p>Description</p> <p>Bell (Plate 4A, B, F) small and rounded, cuboid overall, typically less than 80mm high and wide, with a shallow subapical coronal groove defining a thick dome of apical jelly; exumbrella smooth, lacking nematocysts or warts. Interradial furrows well marked, dividing the central portion of the interradial pillars, reaching neither the subapical furrow nor the pedalia. Adradial furrows nearly vertical, accentuating the pillars as defined from the perradial region; well defined throughout the height of the bell from the subapical furrow to below the rhopalia, disappearing near the velarium.</p> <p>Rhopalial niche very slightly raised from bell wall. Rhopalial niches approximately ¾ down from apex of bell, with dome­shaped opening, flat orally, creating a 90 corner with the exumbrellar surface; aboral edge of opening convex, interrupted by small median tongue­like flap hanging downward into ostium protecting rhopalium (Plate 4C). Rhopalial horns lacking. Rhopalia 4, deeply set within perradial niches, with 2 large median eyes with lenses and 4 smaller lateral pigment streaks, looking in toward bell cavity. Statoliths short, rounded, rod­shaped, with straight sides. Subumbrellar rhopaliar windows flat, without convexity or concavity. Rhopaliar warts not observed.</p> <p>Pedalia 4, interradial, claw­like; with uppermost branch projecting outward in the interradial axis, all other branches typically (but not always) paired, approximately dichotomously, along main flat, tapering portion of pedalium; each branch leading to a single tentacle. Pedalial main canal with knee­shaped bend (Plate 4D) in the proximal third, laterally compressed throughout main canal and uppermost branch; main canal bifurcating just below first branch point, each side giving rise to compressed unilateral branches, straight­sided at tentacle insertion. Tentacles rarely reaching 9 per pedalium, hollow, fine, round in cross section (Plate 4B, F); straight­sided at base. Tentacular nematocysts borne on raised bands of alternating sizes, with major bands (1) separated by approximately 7 alternating thicker (2) and thinner (3) bands (i.e., 1­3­2­3­2­3­2­3­1).</p> <p>Velarial canals highly diverticulated, with a single main canal­root extending from the stomach in each octant, with inter­digitating non­anastomosing branches, bearing lateral lobations, completely reticulating throughout velarium such that the number of canals cannot be easily counted. Perradial lappets broadly triangular, with branches emanating off the sides as velarial canals (Plate 4E). Frenulum a single, simple flexible sheet of tissue, thickened at base, reaching three­fourths the distance toward velarial margin.</p> <p>Gastro­gonadal pouches 4, completely separated by 4 interradial septa. Gastric phacellae 4, strongly V­shaped with angles pointing toward corners, nearly connected at the perradii; appearing as a 4­pointed star when viewed from the aboral surface (Plate 4F). Cirri singly rooted, short. Manubrium long, extending to about 1/3 distance to bell margin; bearing mouth with 4 short, folded lips with simple margins. Mesenteries as very narrow flap­like structures in stomach region only; extending as wide, unraised clear strips all the way to rhopalia. Lateral gonads originating in center half of interradius, growing in both vertical directions as well as laterally; along entire length of interradial septum in mature individuals.</p> <p>Gastric ‘saccules’ 8, interradial; solid spherical convexities arising from body wall, smooth, lacking digitations (Plate 4B); typically narrowed across the perradius and covered over by gonad in mature specimens.</p> <p>Observations on living specimens</p> <p>Swimming behaviour: Most often in the wild I have seen individuals of all sizes swimming horizontally at the water’s surface, against the prevailing current or just randomly in still water. However, I have also caught hundreds in brief net drags in less than a meter of clear water, and not seen them until the net was pulled in, indicating that they also like to swim at some depth below the surface. The species has also been observed to rotate ¼ turn every 4–5 pulsations (R. Hore, pers. comm. Feb. 2000).</p> <p>Feeding behaviour: In captivity, they exhibit typical cubozoan feeding behaviour, i.e., catch food, sink to the bottom, ingest food, scoot along the bottom for awhile while digesting, then come back up and look for more. They thrive and grow in captivity on frequent hand feedings of live baby fish touched to the tentacles (P. Petersen, pers. comm. March 2000), but they prefer small prawns (unpublished data).</p> <p>Nematocysts and sting power</p> <p>In Australia, ‘ Chiropsalmus quadrigatus ’ has often been maligned for fatalities (Southcott 1952; Flecker 1952; Pope 1953; Pope 1957). But not all references to the Australian Chiropsalmus quadrigatus are referable to Chiropsella bronzie. In fact, there is no evidence that C. bronzie can deliver a lethal sting.</p> <p>Various aspects of the nematocysts and venom of C. bronzie have been investigated (Barnes 1967; Keen 1971; Freeman and Turner 1972; Baxter and Marr 1974; Carrette et al. 2002; Carrette 2002). The tentacular cnidome (Plate 6) is comprised of cigar­shaped microbasic p ­mastigophores (38.90–45.98 x 9.39–10.26, n=6), large football­shaped isorhizas (20.77–24.07 x 11.76–13.77, n=7), small spherical p ­rhopaloids (9.20–10.09 x 7.93–8.68, n=3), small oval isorhizas with a ‘beehive’ appearance of the coiled tubule (8.61–9.70 x 6.77–7.89, n=14), and small rod­shaped, straight­sided isorhizas (10.97–13.08 x 3.64–4.64, n=16).</p> <p>Distribution</p> <p>So far, the species is documented from Cooktown in the North to Magnetic Island (off Townsville) to the South. It is exceedingly abundant from Port Douglas to Cairns in the summer months.</p> <p>Additional literature The best descriptions and figures have been given by Barnes (1965).</p> <p>Remarks</p> <p>This description of Chiropsella bronzie will hopefully remedy some of the confusion which has long surrounded this form.</p> <p>In Australian waters, fatal stingings were originally attributed to blue­bottles (Physalia utriculus (La Martiniéré)) or Portuguese man­o­war (Physalia physalis (Linnaeus)); however, it soon became clear that a cubomedusa was responsible (for historical account see Cleland and Southcott, 1965). McNeill (in Flecker, 1952) was apparently the first to attribute the stings to Chiropsalmus quadrigatus. Later, Southcott (1956) showed that the lethal medusa, which he named Chironex fleckeri, was indeed different from Chiropsalmus quadrigatus (sensu Mayer, 1910), and for reasons that are not currently clear, the superficially similar­appearing Australian form, herein described as Chiropsella bronzie, was left with the name Chiropsalmus quadrigatus, despite the fact that it looks less like the Philippine form than does Chironex fleckeri.</p> <p>To add to the confusion, certain structures have been nomenclaturally unclear. Take, for example, the structures called ‘gastric saccules’ by Kramp (1961) for other Chirodropida, ‘superior gonad’ by Southcott (1956) in describing Chironex fleckeri, and ‘perradial nuclei’ by Barnes (1965; 1966) in differentiating C. fleckeri from Chiropsella bronzie (as Chiropsalmus quadrigatus). Part of the confusion no doubt arose because the gastric swellings in Chiropsella bronzie are solid, not hollow, as in all other species, so the term ‘saccules’ is misleading, and because they are not actually perradial (they straddle the perradii, but the structures are adradial).</p> <p>The name Chiropsalmus quadrigatus was first applied to an Australian jellyfish by McNeill as cited in Flecker (1952), for a medusa responsible for the death of a boy in Darwin in 1938. The specimen in question was poorly preserved and badly mutilated, but Southcott (1956) believed it to be referable to Chironex fleckeri. When the existence of two distinct, sympatric forms became apparent, the name Chiropsalmus quadrigatus was applied to the ‘non­ Chironex ’ form. However, doubt as to the accuracy of this designation was expressed by Southcott (1956) and Barnes (1966). Indeed, Mayer (1910; 1915) redescribed Chiropsalmus quadrigatus from the Philippines as having cock’s­combshaped gastric saccules, more similar in form to those of Chironex fleckeri than to Chiropsella bronzie.</p> <p>Chiropsella bronzie is easily distinguished in the field from other species in the unbranched­saccule forms (i.e., the Chiropsalmidae) as follows: From Chiropsoides buitendijki (which has long finger­shaped gastric saccules) and C. quadrigatus, which have pedalia branching in a single plane, whereas they branch bilaterally in Chiropsella bronzie; from C. quadrumanus, which has exumbrellar nematocysts and finger­shaped gastric saccules; and from C. zygonema, which has long, blade­like pedalia with only 2 asymmetrical fingers and tentacles.</p> </div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/03DF8799FFDC4B10A9397D96FD31FDFE	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	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann	Gershwin, Lisa-Ann (2006): Comments on Chiropsalmus (Cnidaria: Cubozoa: Chirodropida): a preliminary revision of the Chiropsalmidae, with descriptions of two new genera and two new species. Zootaxa 1231 (1): 1-42, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1231.1.1, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1231.1.1
