An annotated checklist of brachyuran crabs from Taiwan (Crustacea ...

Ng et al. : Checklist of crabs from Taiwan 5
the Hepatidae Stimpson, 1871, as a good family, which is reasonable, considering the comments of
Guinot (1977, 1978) about Hepatus and its allies. For the Raninidae, Goeke (1981) had recognised a
third subfamily, Symethinae, but Tucker (1998) argued that it should be regarded as a distinct family,
the Symethidae Goeke, 1981. We prefer instead, however, to follow the classification of Guinot
(1993 ) who recognised more subfamilies of Raninidae and regarded the Symethinae only as a subfamily.
In a reappraisal of some unusual genera (e. g. Phyllotymolinum and Genkaia) previously placed in
the Cyclodorippidae, Tavares (1998 ) established that they were sufficiently different to warrant the
recognition of a distinct family, the Phyllotymolinidae Tavares, 1998. Recent developments specific to
each family or subfamily are discussed under the respective taxa. The family Eumedonidae Dana, 1852,
is here regarded as a subfamily of the Pilumnidae Samouelle, 1819, following the reappraisal by Ng
and Clark (2o6\).
We have decided against using subgenera in this treatment as this taxonomic unit is not often poorly
defined and its use is often far too subjective. While subgenenc names are nomenclaturally valid, we
have omitted them for practical purposes. When there is sufficient basis to recognise these subgenera as
distinct genera (e. g. in the Sesarminae), and we have followed the consensus. In many cases, however,
subgenera are simply regarded as full genera for convenience. For some families, the use of subgenera
is very common (especially in the Portunidae, Grapsidae and Ocypodidae), but in most cases, the
subgeneric limits are not well defined, and their use is difficult. As such, we have preferred not to use
these subgeneric names for the moment. The same philosophy is followed for subspecies (see discussion
for Uca, Ocypodidae).
For the authorities and years for most of the suprageneric taxa, we mainly follow Manning and
Holthuis (1981) and Ng (1998). The date of a key paper by Rathbun (1931), often incorrectly cited as
" 1929", has been discussed in depth by Ng and Liu (1999). We also follow Ng and Ahyong (2001) in
literature pertaining to MacLeay. There have been some confusion with the correct authorships and dates
of publication of many of the species described by Jacquinot, Adams and White. The authors and dates
used here are based on the historical work done by P. Clark (personal communication) (see also Clark
and Presswell, 2001).
Checklist
Family Dromiidae De Haan, 1833
Conchoecetes arttficiosus (Fabricius, 1798)—Chang, 1963; Ng, Chan and Wang, 2000
Conchoecetes intermedius Lewinsohn, 1984 — Ng, Chan and Wang, 2000
Cryptodromia tumida Stimpson, 1858 (= Cryptodromia fallax aut, )—Ng, Chan and Wang, 2000;
McLay, Chan and Jeng, in press [This species was reported as C. fallax (Lamarck, 1818) by
Ng, Chan and Wang (2000) but a recent reappraisal indicates that it should be referred to C.
tumida instead. ]
Cryptodromia fukuii (Sakai, 1936) (~ Peialomera fukuii) —Jeng, Jan, Tzang, Feng and Yang,
1994, 1996; Yu, Jeng, Chan, Ho and Shy, 1996; Jeng, 1997; Jeng, Jan, Tzeng and Feng,
1997; Jeng, Shao, Tzeng, Feng and Wu, 1998
Dromia dormia (Linnaeus, 1763)—Ng, 1998; Ng, Chan and Wang, 2000
Dromia wilsoni (Fulton and Grant, 1902) — Ng, Chan and Wang, 2000