Parvipalpina verrucosa Stephensen 1944

• Main Authors: Guerra-García, José M., Tato, Ramiro, Moreira, Juan
• Format: Other/Unknown Material
• Language: unknown
• Published: Zenodo 2018
• Subjects: Biodiversity; Taxonomy; Animalia; Arthropoda; Malacostraca; Amphipoda; Caprellidae; Parvipalpina; Parvipalpina verrucosa; Iceland
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6485670; http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03BE87ACFFDEFF96FF10FF24FBBFFAE8

Parvipalpina cf. verrucosa Stephensen, 1944 (Figs. 12–15) Parvipalpina verrucosa Stephensen, 1944: 46 –48, fig. 36.— McCain, 1966: 92.— MCain & Steinberg, 1970: 63.— Larsen, 1998: 86. Material examined. SELVA 2008 : 1 male (used for drawings of lateral view, antennae and gnathopods) (2 slides, mouthparts dissected) (MHNUSC 25108), 1 juvenile male (used for drawings of pereopods 6 and 7, abdomen and mouthparts (vial with 70% ethanol and 2 slides, mouthparts dissected) (MHNUSC 25109); AT-12, 18 July 2008, 44°15.367’N, 008°30.438’W, 2516 m, stones with dead corals. Remarks. The genus Parvipalpina was erected by Stephensen (1944) with the description of Parvipalpina verrucosa , based on a male specimen collected from the SW of Iceland at 1505 m. To our knowledge, this is the first record of the species after the original description. Although the most important characters are clearly reported by Stephensen (1944) in his description and figures, details of gnathopods, mouthparts and abdomen were lacking so we provide full figures of the species in the present study. Our specimens are in good agreement with the description of Stephensen (1944) in the following diagnostic characteristics: (1) presence of accessory flagellum on antenna 1, (2) head, pereonite 1 and 7 smooth but pereonites 2 to 6 densely covered by tiny tubercles, (3) pereopods 3 and 4 absent (only a seta is present), (4) pereopod 5 reduced to a bud-like process, located by the middle of pereonite 5, and tipped by a strong seta, (5) abdomen without appendages and (6) pereopods 6 and 7 with a unique shape (see fig. 36 in Stephensen, 1944 and Fig. 15 in the present study) and propodus provided with grasping spines The main differences among specimens from Iceland and those from the present study are (1) eyes are not clearly distinguished in Galician specimens and (2) the suture and line between head and pereonite 1 is not evident in Galician specimens and is marked in the material figured by Stephensen. However, our material contains only one juvenile ...