An Updated Classification of the Recent Crustacea
An Updated Classification of the Recent Crustacea
An Updated Classification of the Recent Crustacea
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Boxshall and Jaume (2000, see also 1999). The palpophriids<br />
and misophriids constitute a clade that is<br />
<strong>the</strong> sister group to <strong>the</strong> Speleophriidae (Boxshall and<br />
Jaume, 1999).<br />
ORDER CYCLOPOIDA<br />
Papers with new cyclopoid taxa include Boxshall<br />
(1988; Chordeumiidae), Ho and Thatcher (1989;<br />
Ozmanidae [<strong>of</strong> interest because this family is based<br />
on a new genus and species from a freshwater snail,<br />
making it, according to <strong>the</strong> authors, <strong>the</strong> ‘‘first parasitic<br />
copepod ever recorded from a freshwater invertebrate’’]),<br />
da Rocha and Iliffe (1991; Speleoithonidae),<br />
and Ho et al. (1998; Fratiidae). The<br />
family Thespesiopsyllidae has been removed, as it<br />
is an objective synonym <strong>of</strong> Thaumatopsyllidae (see<br />
McKinnon, 1994). The family Mantridae, originally<br />
placed in <strong>the</strong> Poecilostomatoida, was transferred<br />
to <strong>the</strong> Cyclopoida by Huys (1990d).<br />
We initially removed from <strong>the</strong> cyclopoids <strong>the</strong> Botrylophyllidae<br />
and Buproridae, following Huys and<br />
Boxshall (1991). Illg and Dudley (1980) recognized<br />
<strong>the</strong>se as subfamilies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Ascidicolidae (along<br />
with five o<strong>the</strong>r subfamilies), and Huys and Boxshall<br />
(1991) followed that arrangement. However, Huys<br />
(pers. comm.) has suggested that <strong>the</strong> Buproridae<br />
(and also <strong>the</strong> Botrylophyllidae; see below) should<br />
be reinstated. G. Boxshall (pers. comm.) also feels<br />
that <strong>the</strong> Ascidicolidae, as constituted, ‘‘is too heterogeneous<br />
and <strong>the</strong> Buproridae at least should be<br />
accorded separate family status.’’ However, <strong>the</strong> situation<br />
with <strong>the</strong> Botrylophyllidae is more problematic,<br />
one problem being that it is a junior synonym<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Schizoproctidae (Illg and Dudley, 1980; G.<br />
Boxshall, pers. comm.); Boxshall (pers. comm.)<br />
feels that most, but not all, <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> seven ascidicolid<br />
subfamilies recognized by Illg and Dudley (1980)<br />
‘‘will eventually be given full family status.’’ Thus,<br />
we have reinstated <strong>the</strong> Buproridae but not <strong>the</strong> Botrylophyllidae.<br />
The former families Enterocolidae,<br />
Enteropsidae, and Schizoproctidae were also reduced<br />
to subfamilies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Ascidicolidae by Illg<br />
and Dudley (1980), according to J.-S. Ho (pers.<br />
comm.). The family Cucumaricolidae was transferred<br />
here from <strong>the</strong> Poecilostomatoidea following<br />
Huys and Boxshall (1991), among o<strong>the</strong>r such<br />
changes (see <strong>the</strong>ir book). O<strong>the</strong>r changes to <strong>the</strong><br />
Bowman and Abele (1982) list include <strong>the</strong> removal<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Doropygidae (long known to be a synonym<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Notodelphyidae) and <strong>the</strong> Namakosiramiidae<br />
(a synonym <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> harpacticoid family Laophontidae)<br />
(J.-S. Ho, pers. comm.; G. Boxshall, pers.<br />
comm.). Ho (1994b) discussed cyclopoid phylogeny<br />
(based on cladistic analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> 10 families<br />
known at that time) and concluded that parasitism<br />
had arisen twice in <strong>the</strong> group.<br />
ORDERS GELYELLOIDA AND<br />
MORMONILLOIDA<br />
The order Gelyelloida was established by Huys<br />
(1988) for <strong>the</strong> family Gelyellidae, treated in <strong>the</strong> past<br />
as a harpacticoid family and listed as ‘‘infraorder<br />
incertae cedis’’ by Bowman and Abele (1982:11).<br />
The Mormonilloida is unchanged, consisting still <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> single family Mormonillidae.<br />
ORDER HARPACTICOIDA<br />
Papers describing new harpacticoid taxa (or elevating<br />
former subfamilies) include Huys (1990a, Adenopleurellidae;<br />
1990b, Hamondiidae, Ambunguipedidae;<br />
1990c, Cristacoxidae, Orthopsyllidae),<br />
Por (1986, Argestidae, Huntemanniidae, Paranannopidae<br />
[revised by Huys and Gee, 1996], Rhizothricidae<br />
[splitting <strong>the</strong> polyphyletic Cletodidae]),<br />
Fiers (1990, Cancrincolidae), Huys and Willems<br />
(1989, Laophontopsidae, Normanellidae; see also<br />
Huys and Lee, 1999), Huys and Iliffe (1998, Novocriniidae),<br />
Huys (1988, Rotundiclipeidae), Huys<br />
(1993, Styracothoracidae), and Huys (1997, Superornatiremidae).<br />
Huys and Lee (1999) elevated to<br />
family level <strong>the</strong> Cletopsyllinae, formerly a subfamily<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Normanellidae (following Huys and Willems,<br />
1989). The Paranannopidae established by<br />
Por (1986) was relegated to a subfamily <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
Pseudotachidiidae by Willen (1999); <strong>the</strong> Pseudotachidiidae<br />
was formerly a subfamily <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Thalestriidae.<br />
Huys et al. (1996) referred to this assemblage<br />
(<strong>the</strong> Paranannopidae) as <strong>the</strong> Danielsseniidae<br />
Huys and Gee because Paranannopidae was based<br />
on an unavailable genus name. Thus, <strong>the</strong> family<br />
Paranannopidae (� <strong>the</strong> Danielsseniidae <strong>of</strong> Huys et<br />
al., 1996) does not appear in our list, as it is considered<br />
a subfamily <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Pseudotachiidae following<br />
Willen’s (1999) preliminary study. The subfamily<br />
Leptastacinae Lang was upgraded to a family by<br />
Huys (1992). The family Gelyellidae, treated by<br />
Bowman and Abele (1982) as a harpacticoid family,<br />
was transferred to its own order, Gelyelloida,<br />
by Huys (1988). Relationships among <strong>the</strong> laophontoidean<br />
families were addressed by Huys (1990b)<br />
and Huys and Lee (1999).<br />
Arbizu and Moura (1994) found <strong>the</strong> family Cylindropsyllidae<br />
polyphyletic and elevated <strong>the</strong> former<br />
subfamily Leptopontiinae to family level (family<br />
Leptopontiidae). Although <strong>the</strong>y also suggested<br />
that <strong>the</strong> family Cylindropsyllidae should be relegated<br />
to a subfamily <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Canthocamptidae, we<br />
have retained <strong>the</strong> family Cylindropsyllidae for now<br />
(and on <strong>the</strong> advice <strong>of</strong> R. Huys, pers. comm.).<br />
ORDER POECILOSTOMATOIDA<br />
Papers describing new poecilostomatoid taxa include<br />
Humes (1986, <strong>An</strong><strong>the</strong>ssiidae), Humes and<br />
Boxshall (1996, <strong>An</strong>chimolgidae, Kelleriidae, Macrochironidae,<br />
Octopicolidae, Synapticolidae,<br />
Thamnomolgidae), Avdeev and Sirenko (1991, Chitonophilidae<br />
[incomplete description; tentative<br />
placement in <strong>the</strong> Poecilostomatoida is based on<br />
pers. comm. from W. Vervoort, A. Humes, and G.<br />
Boxshall]), Ho (1984, Entobiidae, Spiophanicolidae),<br />
Humes (1987, Erebonasteridae), Marchenkov<br />
and Boxshall (1995, Intramolgidae), Huys and<br />
Contributions in Science, Number 39 Rationale � 27