A New Species and A New Record of Sphaer
A New Species and A New Record of Sphaer
A New Species and A New Record of Sphaer
Abstract
Two species of Sphaeroma (Sphaeromatidae: Isopoda) from the Iranian coasts of the Persian Gulf were studied and
described. Sphaeroma khalijfarsi sp. nov. is described from the intertidal zone of the Strait of Hormuz. This species is
distinguished by the smooth pereonites; pleon without prominent tubercles and bearing some scattered small tubercles;
pleotelson with numerous scattered small tubercles and well upturned posterior margins. Sphaeroma walkeri Stebbing,
1905 is reported from Kish and Qeshm Islands and from the southern coasts of Iran. Among the non-Indian Ocean
species, Sphaeroma intermedium Baker, 1926 is transferred to genus Lekanesphera Verhoeff, 1943.
Key words: taxonomy, Isopoda, Sphaeromatidae, Sphaeroma, new species, The Persian Gulf
Introduction
The genus Sphaeroma has a worldwide distribution, and about 25 present of valid species has been reported
from Indian Ocean: (S. annandalei Stebbing, 1911: India (Pillai 1955), Persian Gulf (Khalaji-Pirbalouty &
Wägele 2010); S. bigranulata Budde Lund, 1908: Zanzibar; S. coglobator Pallas, 1766: Gulf of Suez; S.
serratum Fabricius, 1787: Gulf of Suez (Monod 1933), South Africa (Kensley 1978); S. sieboldii Dollfus,
1889: Madagascar (Roman 1970); S. terebrans Bate, 1866: South Africa, India, Thailand, Sri Lanka,
Indonesia, Australia (Harrison & Holdich 1984), Madagascar (Roman 1970); S. triste Heller, 1865: India,
Nicobar Islands (Pillai 1961), Indonesia, Australia (Harrison & Holdich 1984); S. tuberculata Purusotham &
Rao, 1971: India; and S. walkeri Stebbing, 1905: Sri lanka (type locality), India, Red Sea, South Africa,
Australia (Carlton & Iverson 1981), Pakistan (Ghani & Qadeer 2001).
The first species of Sphaeroma to be reported from the Persian Gulf was S. irakiensis Ahmad (1971),
which was subsequently synonymised with Sphaeroma annandalei Stebbing, 1911 by Khalaji-Pirbalouty &
Wägele (2010). Following Ahmad’s (1971) record, no further Sphaeroma were reported from the Persian Gulf
except in a table summarizing the distribution of Sphaeroma walkeri Stebbing, 1905 from Sudia Arabian coast
(Carlton & Iverson 1981).
In the present paper we describe a new species of Sphaeroma and provide a new record of S. walkeri.
Samples were collected from the Persian Gulf during 2006–2010. Appendages were dissected and mounted in
stained antibacterial glycerine–gelatine (Merck). Pencil drawings were made using a standard camera lucida
mounted on a compound microscope (Olympus BX 51) and stereomicroscope (Olympus SZX12).
Photographs were taken with a Leica Z6 imaging system. For greater depth of view, the software Auto-
Montage was used for assembling 10 source images to one final image.
Terminology follows Bruce (2003). The material has been returned to the borrowing national history
collections.
Systematics
Diagnosis. Maxilliped robust, particularly the palp; internal border of endite with fringe of robust,
circumplumose setae with swollen base; apical margin of endite with smooth setae and often some plumose
seta set in amongst fine simple setae; palp articles 2–4 often lacking mesial lobes, inferior margins straight,
bearing dense fringes of long, bare or finely plumose setae; palp article 5 longer than 4. Antennule peduncle
article 3 elongate, slender and often more than 2 times as long as article 2. Pereopods 1–3 ischium and merus
superior margins bearing dense fringes of long stiff finely plumose setae. Pereopods 4–5 are shorter than the
other pereopods with the basis bearing inferiorly extended lobes; merus, carpus and propodus are short.
Pereopods 6–7 basis, ischium, merus inferior and superior margins bearing dense fringes of long fine setae.
Penes flat, separated, with folded margins, often covered with several small fine setae.
Remarks. The genus Sphaeroma is closely related to Lekanesphera Verhoeff, 1943. In addition to some
characters mention by Jacobs (1987), Lekanesphera is distinct from Sphaeroma in having a maxilliped with
palp article 5 sub-equal or shorter than palp article 4 (in Sphaeroma article 5 longer than article 4); antennule
peduncle article 3 less than two time as long as article 2. Moreover, the setation on pereopods 1–3 and 6–7 of
Lekanesphera is not as dense as in Sphaeroma.
The genus Sphaeroma Bosc, 1802 includes 41 species, which currently are considered as valid (Appeltans
et al. 2010). However, based on the published descriptions and drawings, some of them should be assign to
other genera.
Sphaeroma intermedium Baker, 1926 was first described as Exosphaeroma intermedia Baker, 1926 and
later transferred to Sphaeroma genus by Harrison & Holdich, 1984. Based on description and drawing of
Baker, 1926 and also Harrison & Holdich, 1984, this species with having the following characters is
transferred to Lekanesphera: Maxilliped palp articles with more or less pronounced lobes, endite semicircular
distal margin bearing stout circumplumose setae, palp article 5 seb-equal to article 4; pereopods 4–5 not
robust and without long setae on ischium and merus superior margins, merus and carpus not short; pereopods
6–7 basis, ischium, merus superior margins without dense fringes of long fine setae.
Sphaeroma dumerilii Leach, 1818 and Sphaeroma savignii H. Milne Edwards, 1840, synonymised with
Dynamenopsis dumerilii by Monod 1933 and then accepted as Dynamenella dumerilii.
Based on the pleotelson with subapical foramen and uropod without acute teeth, Sphaeroma globicauda
Dana, 1853 would not appear to be a species of Sphaeroma (it is probably belongs to Dynamenella or
Paradella).
Sphaeroma granti Walker & Scott, 1903 with well extended pleotelson apex and lateral marked notch of
pleotelson does not appear to belong in Sphaeroma.
Finally, based on the shape of the maxilliped with the lobate palp articles, a maxillule with four
circumplumose robust setae on mesial lobe, pereopod 4 with a long carpus, pereopods 6 and 7 lacking dense,
long marginal setae on the ischium, merus and carpus, Sphaeroma mukaii Nunomura, 2006 does not belong in
Sphaeroma (but the correct generic placement is unknown).
Material examined. Holotype. Male (7.1 mm), Qeshm Island, Eastern coast, Northwest of Qeshm city,
muddy-sand shore, beneath stones, 3 July 2009, 26°58’138”N, 56°15’391”E, coll. A. Behpouri and V. Khalaji
(ZMH–K– 42582).
Paratypes: 11 adult males (up to 8.5 mm, average size 6.5 mm), 9 females (up to 8 mm, average size 6
mm), same data as holotype (ZMH–K– 42583). 4 females (5.5, 6, 7.2, 8.2 mm); 3 juveniles, Baddar-e-Kolahi,
muddy-sand shore, 22 April 2008, 27°03’ N, 56°51’E, coll. R. Naderloo (ZMH–K– 42584). 2 subadult males
(5.5, 6 mm), 5 females (5, 5.5, 6, 6.2, 7 mm); Bandarabbas, Khour-e-shilat, muddy-sand shore, 29 Jun 2009,
27°11’55”N, 56°19’03”E, coll. A. Behpouri and V. Khalaji (ZMH–K– 42585).
Diagnosis. Head dorsally with a pair of small tubercles on either side anteriorly. Pereonites 1–7 smooth,
lacking tubercles. Pleon without prominent tubercles, bearing some small scattered tubercles. Pleotelson
granulated, lateral and posterior borders upturned, apex broadly rounded. Maxilliped palp articles 2–4 bearing
dense fringes of long fine-plumose setae on superior margin. Appendix masculina inserted basally, apically
curved, extending well beyond endopod, with a row of cuticular spines on apex mesial margin. Penes rami
with lateral and mesial margins bearing several small fine setae.
Description of male. Body about 1.8 times as long as greatest width, widest at pereonite 6 (Fig. 1A).
Head anterior margin with pair of weak sub-median tubercles, rostral process barely visible in dorsal view.
Pereonites 1–7 dorsally smooth, posterior margin with fringe of fine setae, pereonites 2–7 with coxal plate
sutures clearly visible on lateral sides(Fig. 1B); coxal plate 4 narrower than others, ventrally more rounded in
pereonites 5–7.
Pleon (Fig. 1A) dorsal surface bearing some small scattered tubercles.
Pleotelson (Fig. 1A) wider than long, dorsal surface granulated with small scattered tubercles, posterior
part excavated dorsally with upturned margins and broadly rounded, slightly truncated apex.
Antennule (Fig. 1C) article 3 slender and about 2.3 times as long as article 2; flagellum 12–articled,
articles 7–10 each bearing aesthetascs.
Antenna (Fig. 1D) peduncle article 5, about 2 times as long as article 1; inferior margin of articles 1–4
fringed with fine dense setae; flagellum 14–articled, each article with an apical tuft of fine setae, posterior
setae being smaller.
Epistome (Fig. 1E) with triangular and pointed apex, lateral margins near apex concave.
Left mandible (Fig. 2C, D) incisor with 4 cusps, lacinia mobilis with 3 cusps; spine row of 6–8 curved,
serrate spines; palp article 2 as long as 1, article 2 and 3 distolateral margins with 17 and 22 biserrate setae.
Maxillule (Fig. 2A) lateral lobe with simple slender setae on mesial and lateral margins, distal margin with
8 robust, serrate and 2 simple robust setae, dorsal surface with 1 robust, long and apically serrate seta; mesial
lobe with simple setae on inner margin, apical margin with 3 circumplumose robust setae (each of them with
some small spines, particularly on apical part), and 2 shorter plumose setae.
Maxilla (Fig. 2B) lateral and middle endites with about 28 finely pectinate robust setae; mesial endite
wider, with about 27 plumose setae.
Maxilliped (Fig. 2E) endite with some plumose setae, set in amongst fine simple setae in apical margin,
mesial margin with single coupling hook, ventral surface with a row of about 10–12 long robust
circumplumose setae; palp articles 2–4 bearing dense fringes of long fine-plumose setae on superior margin,
articles 3–4 with some slender simple setae on inferodistal angle, article 5 about 1.2 time as long as article 4.
Pereopod 1(Fig. 3A) basis about 3.3 times as long as greatest width, proximal superior margin fringed
with dense fine setae; ischium 3.7 times as long as greatest width, superior margin fringed with numerous long
plumose setae; merus, carpus and propodus inferior margins with dense fringe of short setae; propodus
inferodistal angle with 1 biserrate and 1 nodular robust setae; rostral surface with transverse row of several
long plumose setae. Pereopod 2 (Fig. 3B) ischium and merus with dense fringes of long plumose setae on
inferior margins, carpus with 3 robust biserrate setae on inferodistal corner; merus, carpus and propodus
inferior margins fringed with short setae. Pereopod 3 (Fig. 3C) similar to pereopod 2. Pereopods 4 and 5 (Fig.
3D, 4A) are shorter than pereopods 1–3, ischium and merus with several long distally plumose setae in
superior margins; Pereopods 6 and 7(Fig. 4B, 4C) are similar except in some details such as the number of
serrate robust setae on distal margin of carpus. Pereopod 7 with inferior and superior margins of ischium to
carpus bearing dense long simple fine setae; carpus distal margin with 13–15 biserrate setae.
Pleopod 1(Fig. 5A) exopod and endopod with approximately 33 and 19 plumose marginal setae; exopod
with a single stout seta on proximal lateral corner; sympod mesial margin with 3 coupling hooks. Pleopod 2
(Fig. 5B) exopod and endopod with approximately 33 and 26 plumose marginal setae; appendix masculina
arising basally, curving laterally, extending well beyond endopod by about 1.7 as long as endopod, with row
of cuticular spines on apex mesial margin; sympod with 3 distomesial coupling hooks. Pleopod 3 (Fig. 5C)
exopod and endopod with approximately 31 and 19 plumose marginal setae; sympod with 3 distomesial
coupling hooks, lateral margin with fringe of thin setae and 5 long simple setae on distolateral corner. Pleopod
4 (Fig. 5D) endopod with a pronounced and curved apical lob with a single stout seta on apex; exopod with
about 15 slender setae on lateral margin; sympodite sympod with about 8 long slender setae on distolateral
FIGURE 5. Sphaeroma khalijfarsi sp. nov., male (ZMH–K– 42582). A–E, pleopods 1–5.
Sphaeroma walkeri Stebbing, 1905: 31–33, 61, pl. VII.; 1910: 220; 1917: 444. — Barnard, 1920: 360; 1936: 178; 1940:
405.— Omer-Cooper, 1927: 240.— Baker, 1928:49.— Nierstrasz, 1931: 192.— Monod, 1931: 36.— Monod, 1933:
198.— Larwood, 1940: 28. — Pillai, 1955: 132, pl. VI.— Loyola e Silva, 1960: 41, figs, 6–7.— Joshi & Ball, 1959:
61–62.—Menzies & Glynn, 1968: 56, fig. 23.— Miller, 1968: 8–11, fig. 3.— Glynn 1972: 286, fig. 5. — Carlton &
Iverson, 1981: 31–48.— Estevez & Simon, 1976: 288.— Harrison & Holdich, 1984: 279–282, fig. 1.— Jacobs,
1987: 22–24, fig. 6.— Mak et al., 1985: 75. — Kensley & Schotte, 1989: 235, fig. 101.— Kussakin & Malyutina,
1993: 1170.— Bruce, 1993: 156, fig. 1.— Ghani & Qadeer, 2001: 871–872.— Galil, 2008: 443–444.
Additional characters. Head anterior margin with two sub-marginal projections. Appendix masculina
extended well beyond endopod, row of cuticular spines present on mesial margin of the apex. Lateral and
mesial margins of penial processes folded with several marginal small fine setae.
Description of male (from Kish Island, the Persian Gulf). Body about 2.0 times as long as greatest width,
widest at pereonite 6. Head uneven, with 2 projections on frontal surface, rostral process developed, visible in
dorsal view (Fig. 6A). Pereonites 2–7 with coxal sutures clearly visible on lateral sides; pereonites 2–4 each
bearing two irregular transverse rows of low tubercles which gradually increase posteriorly; pereonites 5–7
and pleon with a transverse row of prominent tubercles.
Pleon (Fig. 6A) dorsal surface granulose, with a transverse row of prominent tubercles, posterior margin
bearing two separate sutures on either side.
Pleotelson (Fig. 6A) wider than long, dorsal surface granulated with scattered tubercles, either side of
midline bearing a longitudinal row of 5 prominent tubercles more posteriorly some smaller ones, flanked on
either side by a longitudinal row of 3 prominent tubercles, posterior part dorsally concave subapically, with
upturned and crenulated borders.
Antennule (Fig. 6C) article 3 elongate, slender and about 2.8 times as long as article 2; flagellum 16–
articled, articles 3–15 each bearing aesthetascs, extending to posterior margin of pereonite 1.
Antenna (Fig. 6D) peduncle articles 4 and 5 subequal in length, articles 1–3 shorter; flagellum 20–
articled, flagellum articles 1–9 with an apical tuft of long fine setae.
Epistome (Fig. 6E) with triangular apex, lateral margins concave and sublinear.
Left mandible(Fig. 7C, D) incisor with 3 cusps, lacinia mobilis with 2 cusps; spine row of 7–8 curved,
serrate spines; molar process round, crushing surface ridged; palp article 2 as long as 1, article 2 distolateral
margin with 20 biserrate setae; article 3 with 29 biserrate setae, terminal seta being longest.
Maxillule (Fig. 7A) lateral lobe with simple setae on mesial and outer margins, apical margin with 10
robust, serrate or biserrate and 2 simple robust setae, gnathal subapical surface with 1 robust, long and
apically serrate seta; mesial lobe with simple setae on inner margin, apical margin with 3 circumplumose
We gratefully acknowledge the generous assistance of Dr. F.D. Ferrari (Smithsonian Institution Natural
Museum of Natural History), Dr. Jayme de Loyola e Silva (Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil), Dr. J.
Smit (National Museum of Natural History, Leiden, The Netherlands), M. Lowe (Natural History Museum,
London), and Mrs. K. Philipps-Bussau (ZMH) for the loan of material; Dr. N. L. Bruce (Museum of Tropical
Queensland, Australia), Dr. J. Svavarsson (Institute of Biology, University of Iceland), Dr. N. Dorchin
(ZFMK) for providing useful comments and advises; A. Behpouri ( Ecological research Institute of the
Persian Gulf and Oman Sea) and R. Naderloo (Natural Museum of Senckenberg, Germany) for assistance in
collecting of material. This publication is part of a Ph.D. dissertation on the taxonomy and distribution of the
Persian Gulf isopods conducted by VK at the Friedrich-Wilhelm University of Bonn, Germany. The work was
made possible by a scholarship of the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology of I.R. Iran.
References
Ahmed, M.M. (1971) New Isopoda from Iraq and Persian Gulf. Mitteilungen aus dem Zoologische Museum in Berlin,
Zoologische Reihe, 47, 77–83.
Appeltans, W., Bouchet, P., Boxshall, G.A., Fauchald, K., Gordon, D.P., Hoeksema, B.W., Poore, G.C.B., van Soest,
R.W.M., Stöhr, S., Walter, T.C. & Costello, M.J. (eds) (2010) World Register of Marine Species. Available from
http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia. (accessed 20 August 2010)
Baker, W.H. (1926) Species of the isopod family Sphaeromidae, from the eastern, southern, and western coasts of
Australia. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia, 50, 247–279.
Baker, W.H. (1928) Australian species of the isopod family Sphaeromatidae (Continued). Transactions and Proceedings
of the Royal Society of South Australia, 52, 49–61.
Barnard, K.H. (1920) Contributions to the crustacean fauna of South Africa. 6. Further additions to the list of marine
Isopoda. Annals of the South African Museum, 17, 319–438.
Barnard, K.H. (1936) Isopods collected by the R.I.MS. "Investigator". Records of the Indian Museum, 38 (2), 147–191.
Barnard, K.H. (1940) Contributions to the crustacean fauna of South Africa. 12. Further additions to the Tanaidacea,
Isopoda and Amphipoda, together with keys for the identification of hitherto recorded marine and fresh-water
species. Annals of the South African Museum, 32, 381–543.
Bruce, N.L. (1993) Two new genera of marine isopod crustaceans (Flabellifera: Sphaeromatidae) from southern
Australia, with a reappraisal of the Sphaeromatidae. Invertebrate Taxonomy, 7, 151–171.
Bruce, N.L. (2003) New genera and species of sphaeromatid isopod crustaceans from Australian marine coastal waters.
Memoirs of Museum Victoria, 60(2), 179–239.
Budde-Lund, G. (1908) Isopoda von Madagascar und Ostafrika mit Diagnosen verwandter Arten. Wissenschaftliche
Ergebnisse der Reise in Ostafrika in der Jahren, 1903–1905 2, 263–308.
Carlton, J.T. & Iverson, E.W. (1981) Biogeography and natural history of Sphaeroma walkeri (Crustacea: Isopoda) and
its introduction to San Diego Bay, California. Journal of Natural History, 15, 31–48.
Dollfus, A. (1889) Note XXI. Sur quelques isopodes du Musée de Leyde. Notes from the Leyden Museum, 11, 91–94.
Estevez, E.D. & Simon, J.L. (1976) Systematics and ecology of Sphaeroma (Crustacea, Isopoda) in the mangrove habitat
of Florida. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on the Biology and Management of Mangroves,
Honolulu, 1, 286–304.
Fabricius, J.C. (1787) Mantissa Insectorum, sistens eorum species nuper detectas adjectis characteribus genericis,
differentiis specificis, emendationibus, observationibus, Vol. 1. Hafniae: C.G. Proft. xx, 348 pp.
Galil, B.S. (2008) Sphaeroma walkeri Stebbing, 1905 (Crustacea: Isopoda: Sphaeromatidae) established on the
Mediterranean coast of Israel. Aquatic Invasions 3, 443–444.
Ghani, N. & Qadeer, M. (2001) Sphaeroma walkeri Stebbing, 1905 in the coastal water of Karachi. Online Journal of
The Biological Science, 9, 871–872.
Glynn, P.W. (1972) Contributions to the knowledge of Suez migration. Isopods of the Suez Canal. Israel Journal of
Zoology, 21, 275–300.
Harrison, K. & Holdich, D.M. (1984) Hemibranchiate sphaeromatids (Crustacea: Isopoda) from Queensland, Australia,
with a world-wide review of the genera discussed. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 81, 275–387.
Heller, C. (1865) Crustaceen. Reise der österreichischen Fregatte Novara um die Erde in den Jahren 1857, 1858, 1859
unter den Befehlen des Commodore B. von Wüllerstorf-Urbair. Zoologischer Theil. Zweiter, Band. III. Abteilung,
Vol. 2, 280 pp.