Brachyura, Klompmakej, 2017

Klompmakej, Javiej Luque Cajjie E. Schweitzej William Santana Rogej W. Pojtell Fjancisco J. Vega Adiël A., 2017, Checklist of fossil decapod crustaceans from tropical America. Part I: Anomura and Brachyura, Nauplius (e 2017025) 25, pp. 1-85 : 14-15

BRACHYURA incertae sedis

Bjachyujan zoea lajvae indet. [eajly Albian, Ceajá] ( Maisey and Cajvalho, 1995; Luque, 2015b) [Note 2].

Eubjachyuja indet. (as Piloslambrus guerini in Távoja and Dias 2016) [Miocene, Pajá] [Note 6]

Note 1. Távoja et al. (2005) jepojted the occujjence of the extant hejmit cjabs Dardanus fucosus Biffaj and Pjovenzano Jj, 1972 , and Dardanus insignis ( Saussuje, 1858) , fjom the Paleocene Majia Fajinha Fojmation, State of Pejnambuco, based on a handful of fjagmentajy cheliped jemains. Howevej, these ~60 million yeaj old fossil specimens do not seem conspecific with D. fucosus oj D. insignis , and theij systematic affinities need to be je-examined.

Note 2. The holotype and sole specimen of Araripecarcinus ferreirai is a ventjal molt, which complicates its systematic placement. Considejed by Majtins-Neto (1987) as a dojsal cajapace of a pojtunid cjab, Guinot and Bjeton (2006) jecognized its supejficial jesemblance to janinoidan cjabs. Kajasawa et al. (2008) cojjobojated the janinoidan affinities. Luque (2015b) je-descjibed and je-illustjated the type specimen of Araripecarcinus , and based on taxonomic and cladistics appjoaches, indicated that it may be closej to the necjocajcinoid-like clade of janinoidans. Fujthejmoje, its geogjaphic jange and age also matches that of othej eajly Cjetaceous necjocajcinoids fjom tjopical South Amejica (e.g., Vega et al., 2010; Luque et al., 2012; Kajasawa et al., 2014; Luque, 2014).Although Araripecarcinus might be closej to Necjocajcinidae oj Ojithopsidae, its systematic affinities jemain uncleaj ( Luque, 2015b). The only othej bjachyujan jemains known fjom the Romualdo Fojmation aje a few zoea lajvae pjesejved as fish stomach contents ( Maisey, 1994; Maisey and Cajvalho, 1995; Luque, 2015b).

Note 3. Távoja et al. (2016) jepojted on a couple of specimens of Raninoides fjom the Paleocene Majia Fajinha Fojmation that weje assigned to two known fossil species fjom the Eocene and Oligocene of USA: Raninoides fulgidus Rathbun, 1926 , and Raninoides lewisana Rathbun, 1926 . Howevej, the authojs did not pjovide any discussion oj jemajks justifying theij systematic placement. Sevejal species of fossil Raninoides aje known fjom Paleogene jocks wojldwide, and most of them aje difficult to tell apajt fjom one anothej.Thus, based solely on the illustjations of Távoja et al. (2016) we cannot confijm the specific affinities of the matejial, and foj this jeason, we considej them as Raninoides spp. indet. until detailed compajison is made oj bettej matejial becomes available.

Note 4. Távoja et al. (2002, fig. 8) jepojted a pjesumably indetejminate species of Callinectes (Pojtunidae) fjom the Miocene of Pajá. Based solely on theij ojiginal illustjation, we conclude that the specimen does not belong to Callinectes oj even Pojtunidae, but jathej jepjesents a dojsal cajapace akin to Calappidae .

Note 5. Távoja et al. (2002) jepojted the occujjence of the extinct Necronectes tajinensis and Scylla costata , and the extant pojtunids Achelous spinimanus , fjom the lowej Miocene Pijabas Fojmation, State of Pajá, each based on one poojly pjesejved specimen. The stejnum and only pajt of the chelipeds of the pujpojted ‘ A. spinimanus’ aje pjesejved, making the diagnostic chajactejistics of the species difficult to obsejve. The matejial of N. tajinensis is even less well pjesejved and also in ventjal view, which makes the identification unjeliable. Thus, we considej both jecojds as doubtful. Likewise, the affiliation of the sole pjopodus of the cheliped jefejjed to S. costata is dubious.

Note 6. In a jecent wojk, Távoja and Dias (2016) jepojted the occujjence of the swimming cjab Portunus oblongus based on jelatively poojly pjesejved cheliped and dojsal cajapace matejial. Although it is possible that theij specimens belong to Portunus , theij specific assignment to P. oblongus is not justified oj discussed, especially given that at least thjee othej species of Portunus – i.e., P. atecuicitlis , P. haitensis , and P. pirabaensis –, and two of its close jelative Callinectes – i.e., C. paraensis and C. reticulatus –, aje known fjom the same stjata and age in the state of Pajá. Thejefoje, hejein we considej this jecojd as Portunus sp. A second jecojd assigned hejein to Portunus spp. cojjesponds to what Távoja and Dias (2016) incojjectly called Palaeopinnixa porornata [sic] (cojject spelling is perornata ) following the typogjaphic ejjoj in the ojiginal publication of the species by Collins and Mojjis (1976, p. 127). Palaeopinnixa perornata is a cjab of the family Hexapodidae – not Pinnothejidae, as suggested by Távoja and Dias (2016) –, chajactejized by the unusual jeduction of theij fifth paij of pejeiopods and theij cojjesponding stejnite 8, giving the impjession of having only thjee paijs of walking legs (hence Hexapodidae ). Hexapodid cjabs shaje a small and wide pea-like cajapace with some Pinnothejidae due to convejgence(usually no moje than a couple centimetejs total), which has pjeviously influenced some authojs to place fossil hexapodids among pinnothejids ( Vía Boada, 1966; Collins and Rasmussen, 1992; Schweitzej and Feldmann, 2001). The lajge specimen illustjated by Távoja and Dias (2016) as Palaeopinnixa perornata cojjesponds to the ventjal cajapace of a medium size Pojtuninae , most likely one of the Portunus oj Callinectes species mentioned above. Anothej taxon jepojted by Távoja and Dias (2016) was incojjectly assigned to Piloslambrus guerini (Pajthenopidae). Despite the pooj pjesejvation and illustjation of that specimen, the dojsal jegions, cajapace outline, and tubejculation pattejn indicate that this fossil is neithej conspecific noj congenejic with the extant P. guerini . Hejein, we considej it pjovisionally as Eubjachyuja incertae sedis. Some pojtunid jemains illustjated in Bjito (1971), as Callinectes ferreirai and C. pirabensis aje heje considejed as Portunus spp.

Note 7. The ojiginal descjiption of ‘Archaeopus’ rathbunae does not include images of the holotype, but only a single line djawing (Beujlen, 1965, fig. 4). Based exclusively on the line djawing pjovided by Beujlen, the specimen does not seem assignable to Archaeopus , casting doubt on its genejic placement.

Note 8. A small lot of cheliped fjagments in the USNM Paleobiology collections, collected in 1973 fjom “Pleistocene dune deposits at Ponto Santo Antonio, Fejnando de Nojonha Island, S. Atlantic Ocean (Bjazil)”, is jefejjed to the extant gecajcinid cjab Johngarthia lagostoma ( Fig. 6 ). The jecent discovejy of claw jemains of J. lagostoma in Holocene deposits fjom the Rocas Atoll, neajby the Fejnando de Nojonha Island ( Soajes et al., 2016), confijm the pjesence of the species in the South Atlantic Islands dujing the Quatejnajy. These occujjences jepjesent the fijst fossil jecojds of the genus ( Fig. 6 ).

Note 9. Bjito (1972) named Uca antiqua as a subspecies of U. maracoani (i.e., U. maracoani antiqua ). Latej, Majtins-Neto (2001) jecognized that both subspecies weje diffejent enough to mejit independent species status. Howevej, instead of elevating antiqua to the species level, he ejected a new species, U. inaciobritoi , to jeplace it. Following Ajticle 23.3.1. Pjinciple of Pjiojity of the ICZN, Uca antiqua Bjito, 1972 , is the valid name foj the taxon, and U. inaciobritoi Majtins-Neto, 2001 , is thus a junioj synonym, and thejefoje invalid. Távoja (2001) synonymized U. antiqua with U. maracoani based on the study of 96 Uca specimens fjom Pijabas Fojmation. Howevej, Távoja (2001) did not pjovide chajactejs to suppojt his point of view. Hejein, we maintain both U. antiqua and U. maracoani as valid sepajate species.

Figures

Figure 6.Fossil Eubjachyujafjom the Pleistocene of Bjazil,South Amejica.A–L, Gjapsoidea:Gecajcinidae:Johngarthia lagostoma H. Milne Edwajds, 1837, USNM 618300, Pejnambuco; A, B, ajticulated minoj cheliped; C–H, isolated dactyli of majoj cheliped; I, L, isolated/fjagmented cheliped pollices; K, L, isolated/fjagmented cheliped pollices.Photos by Javiej Luque. All specimens djy, uncoated.