A subjective global checklist of the extant non-marine Ostracoda (Crustacea)

Abstract

We present an updated, subjective list of the extant, non-marine ostracod genera and species of the world, with their distributions in the major zoogeographical regions, as well as a list of the genera in their present hierarchical taxonomic positions. The list includes all taxa described and taxonomic alterations made up to 1 July 2018. Taxonomic changes include 17 new combinations, 5 new names, 1 emended specific name and 11 new synonymies (1 tribe, 4 genera, 6 species). Taking into account the recognized synonymies, there are presently 2330 subjective species of non-marine ostracods in 270 genera. The most diverse family in non-marine habitats is the Cyprididae, comprising 43.2% of all species, followed by the Candonidae (29.0%), Entocytheridae (9.1%) and the Limnocytheridae (7.0%). An additional 13 families comprise the remaining 11.8% of described species. The Palaearctic zoogeographical region has the greatest number of described species (799), followed by the Afrotropical region with 453 species and the Nearctic region with 439 species. The Australasian and Neotropical regions each have 328 and 333 recorded species, respectively, while the Oriental region has 271. The vast majority of non-marine ostracods (89.8%) are endemic to one zoogeographical region, while only six species are found in six or more regions. We also present an additional list with ‘uncertain species’, which have neither been redescribed nor re-assessed since 1912, and which are excluded from the main list; a list of taxonomic changes presented in the present paper; a table with the number of species and % per family; and a table with numbers of new species described in the 20-year period between 1998 and 2017 per zoogeographical region. Two figures visualize the total number of species and endemic species per zoogeographical region, and the numbers of new species descriptions per decade for all families and the three largest families since 1770, respectively.

A new species of Cypris (Crustacea: Ostracoda) from the Iberian Peninsula and the Balearic Islands, with comments on the first ostracod named using the Linnean system

“…nov. is Cypris maculosa. This is considered to be a synonym of C. pubera in some publications (Yu et al 2009;Karanovic 2012;Martens et al 2013), while it is kept as a separate species in others (Smith et al 2018;Meisch et al 2019). We agree that they are not the same species, mostly because of the lack of spines on the edge of the carapace in C. maculosa.…”

“…Cypris pretusi sp. nov. comes morphologically very close to C. pubera and its allied species Cypris triaculeata, although the latter has been considered an uncertain species by some authors (Martens et al 2013;Meisch et al 2019) (but see Fuhrmann 2012 and discussion below). Although their soft parts and inner carapace structure are very similar, the new species can be distinguished from these two species by the lack of conspicuous spines in the front edge of valves, the absence of large spines on its posterior edge, and by its beak-shaped frontal end of the carapace in dorsal view.…”

“…Indeed, Fischer (1851) already considered that C. striata, as described in Jurine (1820), actually corresponded to juveniles of C. pubera. Consequently, there are some founded doubts about the species described by Jurine (1820) as being the same as 'Cypris striata' sensu Daday (1900), as suggested by Meisch et al (2019). Cypris bispinosa was the first member of the genus known to occur in the Iberian Peninsula, while Cypris granulata (as C. subglobosa) and C. pubera were found in this area by the late 20 th century (Baltanás et al 1996).…”

“…The generic name Monoculus was eventually suppressed by the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1954), after the proposal raised by H. Munro Fox. According to the most recent checklist of freshwater ostracods of the world by Meisch et al (2019), there are at present 16 valid species in the genus Cypris, some of them with an uncertain taxonomic status. Out of these, only 6 are known from the Palaearctic Region: Cypris pubera, Cypris granulata Daday, 1898, Cypris bispinosa Lucas, 1849, Cypris decaryi Gauthier, 1933, Cypris striata (Jurine, 1820), and Cypris maculosa Bronstein, 1925. The highest species richness of this genus is found in the Afrotropical and Oriental regions.…”

“…Out of these, only 6 are known from the Palaearctic Region: Cypris pubera, Cypris granulata Daday, 1898, Cypris bispinosa Lucas, 1849, Cypris decaryi Gauthier, 1933, Cypris striata (Jurine, 1820), and Cypris maculosa Bronstein, 1925. The highest species richness of this genus is found in the Afrotropical and Oriental regions. Karanovic (2012) had considered that there are 24 known species in the genus and Martens et al (2013) had listed 21 species, but many of these were later discarded as dated or uncertain (Meisch et al 2019) or as junior synonyms of other species, as in the case of Cypris triaculeata Daday, 1892 (considered a synonym of C. pubera). Therefore, it is still a dynamic genus in terms of the establishment of a clear understanding of its diversity, and its taxonomy seems to be far from settled.…”