CARIBBEAN ISLANDS: No. 85.

(1)

STUDIES

ON THE

FAUNA

OF CURAÇAO

AND

OTHER

CARIBBEAN

ISLANDS:

No.

85.

Cyathura

_specus,

a new cave Isopod from Cuba

(Anthuroidea:

Anthuridae)

by

Thomas E. Bowman

(Smithsonian Institution, Washington)

Cyathura

specus, new

species

Figures46-79

Material.— 3 specimens from the freshwater lake, Lago Marti,in Cueva

Grande,the largestof the 5CAGUANESCAVES located onPunta Caguanes,north coast ofLas Villas Province, CUBA, east ofthe city of Caibari&i. - Holotype,

male,18.0mmtotal length (excluding antennae),USNM 111020; allotype, female,

19.8mm,USNM _{111021; paratype, male,} 15.4mm, USNM 111022.

FIGS.46-52. Cyathura specus,n. sp.,allotypefemale.— 46. lateralview;47.head,

lateral; 48.head and 1stpereonite, dorsal;49.pleonandtelson, dorsal;50.pleon

andtelson,lateral; 51.pleonandtelson,ventral;52.pereopod 1, lateral.

During

the _years

_1958-1960,

several

_shipments

of

_specimens

collected in the

_Caguanes

Caves of Cubawere sent to the United

States National Museum

_by

GILBERTO SILVA TABOADA. Mr. SILVA'S

collections included 3

_specimens

of ablind anthurid

_isopod,

which

_I

determined

to be _a

_species

of

_Cyathura,

similar to but

apparently

specifically

distinct from C. curassavica Stork

₍₁₉₄₀₎

from

_Curaçao,

NetherlandsAntilles. I wish to express my thanks to Mr. SILVA for the

_gift

of these unusual

_troglobitic

crustaceans and to Dr. P.

WAGENAARHUMMELINCK for theloan of

_specimens

of C. curassavica

for

_{comparison. Having}

these

_specimens

_{at my}

_disposal

has enabled

(2)

(3)

90

All specimenswere collected by GILBERTO SILVA TABOADA, the holotype in

August 1958, the allotypeand paratype inFebruary 1960. - The specific name, fromthe Latinspecus, a_cave, _proposedasanoun,refersto thetroglobitichabit of thenewspecies.

Diagnosis.

— A

large

(about

20mm)

blind

Cyathura

inha-biting

fresh water in _caves of north central Cuba. First

_pereonite

FIGS. 53-57 Cyathura specus, n._sp.—53.antenna 1,lateral, allotype female;54.

antenna1, lateral,holotypemale;55.antenna1, holotype male,distalsegments;

56. antenna2, lateral, allotype female;57.same,2nd segment enlarged.

FIGS. 58-68. Cyathura specus,n.sp.—58._{right mandible,}innersurface,distal_part

ofpalpomitted; 59.incisorofrightmandible fromadifferentangle;60. right mandible, outersurface; 61.distal segmentofpalpofrightmandible, flattened;

62.right mandible,viewed moreanteriorly; 63. maxilla 1; 64. maxilla 1,outer

lobe;65. maxilla 1, inner lobe;66. maxilla 2-_{hypopharynx complex;} 67. apex of maxilla 2; 68._{right maxilliped,}outersurface.

(4)

(5)

92

longer

than second. Telson

_{linguiform. Exopod}

of

_uropod

narrow, not

_folding

over telson. Palm of

_gnathopod

without tooth.

Pereo-pods

with_row of

sensory setae at

proximal

end of

unguis. Appendix

masculina with

_spatulate

_apex.

Description.

—

Body

elongate,

of

_typical

anthurid form. Pleon

segments

fused,

their boundaries

_indistinctly

indicated

_by

shallow _grooves. Telson

_linguiform;

sides

_converging

_gradually;

apex

slightly

pointed,

bearing

2

_long

medial setae and several

shortersetae.

Antenna 1

flagellum

of female formed of 1

_{long segment}

and

api-cal knoblike

segment bearing

long apical

setae.

_Flagellum

of male

composed

of 4

_segments,

the terminalone

knoblike;

first

_segment

with dense cluster of filiform esthetascs inserted in oval _area _on lower lateral

_surface;

segments

1, 2 and 4 with

2,

3 and 1 clavate

esthetascs

_{respectively.}

Antenna 2 similar inmale and female. Second

segment

of

peduncle

with

_conspicuous

lateral_groove intowhichantenna 1 fits.

_Flagellum

a

_single

short

_segment

_bearing

dense terminal cluster of filiform

esthetascs.

Incisor of mandibledivided into 3 shallow teeth.

_{Cutting flange}

withabout 28 recurved teeth. Molar

_{represented by}

small

_pointed

knob. Second and third

segments

of

palp subequal, slightly

lessthan

twicethe

_length

of first

_segment;

surface of first

_segment

with fuzz of fine _setae; firstand second

_segments

each with

_single

distal seta; third

_segment

with about 20

_apical

setae.

Outer lobe of maxilla 1 with 1

_large

and 7 small

_{apical teeth,}

4of

the small teeth curved inward at their

_tips,

2of them

_straight

and

slender,

and the medial tooth short and blunt. Middle of outer lobe encircled

_by

collar of setae. Inner lobe with 2

apical

setae, lateral seta about twice as

_long

asmedial.

FIGS. 69-79. Cyathura specus n.

sp.—69.pereopod 3;70.pereopod 3, junctureof

dactylandunguis;71._{pereopod 3,}serrate spineatlower distalmarginof

propo-dus;72.pereopod6; 73.pleopod1,exopod;74.pleopod1,basipodandendopod;

75.pleopod 2,maleparatype;76.distal end ofappendix masculina,medial view;

(6)

(7)

94

Maxilla 2 fused with

_hypopharynx.

_Apex

armed with

_pointed

teethasin

_fig.

67.

Maxilliped

with 3 free

segments.

First

_segment

with fuzz of fine

setaeon inner

_margin.

Second

_segment

with setal fuzz on

margins,

1

long

setaneardistal end of outer

margin

and 1 on

proximal part

of

inner

margin;

distal inner

_margin

and

_adjacent

outer surface with setae. Third

_segment

with setal fuzz _on outer

_margin

and several

apical

setae.

Pereopod

1

_{(gnathopod) strongly developed. Carpal}

_processacute,

with a few setae on

_{posterior margin}

near apex. Posterior

margin

(palm)

of

propodus

straight,

without

_tooth,

armed with

_evenly

spaced

setae.

Pereopods

2-7 similar.

_Margins

of

_segments

with setal fuzz.

Dactyl

withrow of 5 setae

_{just proximal}

to

_juncture

with

_unguis.

Distal end of

_propodus

_{bearing spine}

serrate onboth

margins.

Ramiof

_{pleopods unisegmental;}

_margins

of

_exopods

with

_closely

spaced

setules and distal

_plumose

_setae;

_margins

of

_endopods

bare.

Exopods

of

_pleopod

1

_indurated,

_overlapping

in

_middle,

_forming

operculum

for other

_{pleopods; endopod transparent, small,}

less than halfas

_long

as

_exopod.

_Appendix

masculina of

_pleopod

2

_arising

at base of

_endopod,

_2-segmented,

_slightly

shorter than

_endopod

in

paratype, slightly longer

in

_holotype,

_apex

_expanded

asin

_figures

76 and

77,

medial surface of_apex covered with slender

_spinules.

Endopod

of

_{uropod pyriform,}

less than half_as

_long

_as

_peduncle,

with

_long

_{setae at apex and setules}on

_{margins; exopod arising}

near

base and

_reaching

distal

_margin

of

_{peduncle, nearly}

6 timesas

_l'ong

as wide and less than

_£

as wide as

_peduncle,

withacluster of

_long

apical

setae.

Relationships.

Of the known

_species

of

_Cyathura,

listed

recently

by

MILLER & BURBANCK

_{(1961), only}

C. curassavicaStork

(1940)

andC. milloti

_Chappuis,

DelamareDeboutteville & Paulian

FIGS. 80-88. Cyathuracurassavica Stork—80.female, lateral;81. pleonandtelson, dorsal; 82. maxilliped;83. _pereopod _1; 84. _{pereopod 2;} 85.pereopod 5; 86.

pereopod 5, junctureof dactyland unguis; 87. pleopod 2, male;88. _apex of

(8)

(9)

96

(1956)

resemble C.

_specus

in

_being

_blind,

subterranean

_species

lacking

a toothon the

palm

of the

gnathopod

and

having

narrow

uropodal exopods

that do not fold over the telson. Both are much

smaller

₍

(C. curassavica 4-7mm, C. milloti 2.8

_mm)

in

_keeping

with

their life in subterranean interstitial_waters,but

_considerably

_larger

than the interstitial anthurids of the genus

Microcerberus,

the

_only

genusof the

family Microcerberidae,

whichare

_only

0.8-1.6mm in

length.

The

_larger

_{(20 mm)}

C.

specus

must be limited to

_larger

underground

channels than its smallerrelatives.

In addition to its small

_size,

C. millotidiffers in many

respects

from C.

_specus.

Themostobvious differencesarethenarrowertelson

and

_uropods,

the

_irregularly

curved

_shape

and

sparse setation of the

palm

of the

_gnathopod,

and the coiled _apex of the

_appendix

masculina.

C. curassavica resembles C.

_specus

_more

_closely.

The

_principal

differences,

otherthan

_size,

are the

_following:

i.Pereonites 1 and 2

are

_subequal

in C. curassavica;

pereonite

1 is

_longer

in C.

_specus.

2. In C. curassavica the telson is

_relatively

_{narrower, and the}sides

are more

_convergent,

j. The apex of the

appendix

masculina is

different, being

split

into a lateral conical process and a medial

bilobed_process. Themedial lobeof thelatter ismore

spherical

than

the lateral

_lobe,

and _a

_proximal

section of itbearsa row of setules

(fig. 88).

It is of interest to note that the narrow

_{uropodal exopod}

and the

presenceofa row of setae

proximal

to the

_unguis

are shared

_by

the 3 subterranean

_species

of

_Cyathura.

These characters are

_probably

adaptations

for

_{underground life,}

since

_they

are foundelsewherein the Anthuridae

_only

inthe

_{superficially}

similar

_{Cruregans fontanus}

Chilton,

an inhabitant of

underground

waters in New Zealand.

Although

the row of setae is not shown in CHILTON'S

₍₁₈₉₄₎

illu-strations,

I have found it to be

_present

in USNM

_specimens.

A similar_rowof setae occurs in

troglobitic

cirolanid

isopods

and has

been termed

_{"organe dactylien"}

_by

RACOVITZA

_(1912).

_Cruregans

is far removed

_{systematically}

from

_Cyathura

; it

belongs

in NORMAN & STEBBING'S

(1886)

"Section B" _{genera with}

_mouthparts

modified for

_piercing

and

_sucking.

The

_exopod

of the

_uropod

is further reduced inMicrocerberus toaminute oval segment.

(10)

97

Origin.

— Like the

troglobitic

Cirolanidae,

the

cave-dwelling

Anthuridae

_presumably

have

_originated

from marine ancestors,

since there are no known freshwater

_epigean

anthurids. The close

similarity

of C. curassavica and C.

_specus

_suggests

a common

ancestor,but _noclues

_concerning

the ancestor canbeobtainedfrom the 2 known western Atlantic

_species

of

_Cyathura.

Both C.

_polita

Stimpson, living

inestuaries

_along

the Atlantic coastof the United States from Maine toLouisiana

_(MILLER

&

_BURBANCK,

_1961),

and the

_briefly

characterized C. crucis Barnard

₍₁₉₂₅₎

from St.

_Croix,

Virgin Islands,

are

_quite

different from the 2 subterranean

_species.

REFERENCES

BARNARD, K.H., 1925. Arevision ofthe familyAnthuridae _{(Crustacea Isopoda),} with remarks oncertain _{morphological peculiarities.} J.Linnean Soc. _(Zool.) 36,

p. 109-160,plate4.

CHAPPUIS, P.-A.,DELAMAREDEBOUTTEVILLE,C.& PAULIAN, R., 1956. Crustaces des eauxsouterraines littorales d'une resurgence d'eau douce ala Reunion. Mdm. Inst. Sci. Madagascar(A) 11,p.51-78,plate1.

CHILTON, CHARLES, 1894. The subterranean Crustacea of New Zealand withsome

generalremarks onthe fauna ofcavesand wells. Trans. Linnean Soc. London

(Zool.)6 (2), p. 163-284, plates 16-23.

MILLER,MILTON A. & BURBANCK, WILLIAMD., 1961.Systematics anddistribution of anestuarine isopod crustacean, Cyathura polita (Stimpson, 1855), new

comb.,fromtheGulfandAtlanticseaboardof the United States. Biol. Bull.120

(1),p. 62-84.

NORMAN, A. M. & STEBBING, T. R. R., 1886. On the Crustacea Isopodaof the

"Lightning", "Porcupine",and "Valorous" expeditions.Part I.- _Apseudidae,

Tanaidae, Anthuridae. Trans.Zool. Soc. London 12,p. 77-141, plates 16-27.

RACOVITZA, ]£MILE G., 1912. Cirolanides (premifcre

serie).

Biospeologia27. Arch. Zool. Exp.Gen. (5) 10,p.203-329, plates1-28.

STORK, H.A., 1940. Anewfresh-water_isopodfromCurasao.Studies Fauna Curasao