SERIAL PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

The emphasis upon publications as a means of diffusing knowledge was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. In his formal plan for the Institution, Joseph Henry articulated a program that included the following statement: “It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge.” This keynote of basic research has been adhered to over the years in the issuance of thousands of titles in serial publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series:

Smithsonian Annals of Flight

Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology

Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics

Smithsonian Contributions to Botany

Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences

Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology

Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology

Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology

In these series, the Institution publishes original articles and monographs dealing with the research and collections of its several museums and offices and of professional colleagues at other institutions of learning. These papers report newly acquired facts, synoptic interpretations of data, or original theory in specialized fields. These publications are distributed by subscription to libraries, laboratories, and other interested institutions and specialists throughout the world. Individual copies may be obtained from the Smithsonian Institution Press as long as stocks are available.

S. DILLON RIPLEY
Secretary
Smithsonian Institution

SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY • NUMBER 89

Shrimps of the Family Processidae from the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean (Crustacea: Decapoda: Caridea)

Raymond B. Manning and Fenner A. Chace, Jr.

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS

CITY OF WASHINGTON

1971

A B S T R A C T

Manning, Raymond B., and Fenner A. Chace, Jr. Shrimps of the Family Processidae from the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean. (Crustacea: Decapoda: Caridea) Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, number 89, 41 pages, 1971.—The processid shrimp fauna of the northwestern Atlantic Ocean is reviewed for the first time. Eleven species are recorded, of which eight are newly described. Ambidexter symmetricus, new genus, new species; Nikoides schmitti, new species; and six new species of Processa are described. Ambidexter is the only genus of the family in which both first pereiopods are chelate. Nikoides has not been recorded previously from outside of the Indo–West Pacific region. Keys to the species of Nikoides and to the Atlantic species of Processa are presented, and the Indo–West Pacific species of Processa are listed.

Official publication date is handstamped in a limited number of initial copies and is recorded in the Institution's annual report, Smithsonian Year.

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1971

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price 50 cents (paper cover)

Contents

Introduction

Acknowledgments

Family PROCESSIDAE Ortmann, 1896

Ambidexter, new genus

Ambidexter symmetricus, new species

Nikoides Paulson, 1875

Nikoides schmitti, new species

Processa Leach, 1815

Processa bermudensis (Rankin, 1900)

Processa fimbriata, new species

Processa guyanae Holthuis, 1959

Processa hemphilli, new species

Processa profunda, new species

Processa riveroi, new species

Processa tenuipes, new species

Processa vicina, new species

Processa wheeleri Lebour, 1941

Literature Cited

Index

Publication in Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology

Shrimps of the Family Processidae from the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean (Crustacea: Decapoda: Caridea)

Raymond B. Manning and Fenner A. Chace, Jr.

____________

Raymond B. Manning and Fenner A. Chace, Jr., Department of Invertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.

Introduction

Shrimps of the family Processidae are small, nocturnal animals which are abundant in shallow-water habitats, primarily on grass flats. In the western Atlantic, at least, most of the species are found in the tropics or subtropics. We have seen no material from the American mainland north of North Carolina.

The western Atlantic processids have never been studied in detail. Prior to our study, the only representatives of the family known with certainty from the western Atlantic were three species of Processa. Processa bermudensis (Rankin, 1900), the first to be described, was redescribed by Gurney (1936), who also gave an account of its larvae; it was known only from Bermuda until Williams (1965) recorded it from North Carolina. In 1941 Lebour described P. wheeleri and its larvae from Bermuda; it is still known only from her material. Holthuis (1959) described P. guyanae from the coast of Surinam; we have seen no further specimens of this species.

Numerous lots of unidentified processids from various localities in the western Atlantic, which had accumulated in the collection of the Division of Crustacea, National Museum of Natural History (USNM), supplemented by collections made by one of us (RBM) in Florida and Puerto Rico, formed the basis of this report. Additional collections from Bermuda were made by one of us (RBM) in April 1970, because available study material from Bermuda, the type locality for two of the western Atlantic species, was apparently limited to one damaged specimen of P. bermudensis collected by G. Brown Goode in 1876–1877.

We describe below a new genus and species, a new species of Nikoides, a genus previously known only from the Indo–West Pacific region, and six new species of Processa. The eight new species, the presence of inadequate material of an additional new Processa, the occurrence of two unknown processid larvae at Bermuda (Lebour 1941), and the fact that we did not encounter two of the three previously known species from the study area suggest that not only was this review needed but that more is yet to be learned about the western Atlantic processids. We hope that this contribution to our knowledge of American processids will aid future work on members of this family.

Until 1936 when Miss Lebour showed that the British species then called P. canaliculata actually comprised two species, that species was thought to have a cosmopolitan distribution. Thus, most records of processids from the western Atlantic were identified as P. canaliculata, a species which does not occur outside of the eastern Atlantic region (Nouvel and Holthuis 1957). Fortunately, we have been able to examine and reidentify most of the western Atlantic specimens recorded in the literature as P. canaliculata, and the synonymies given herein reflect these identifications. Only two literature records could not be verified with certainty: Schmitt (1924) recorded a specimen of “P. canaliculata” from Caracas Bay, Curaçao, and Hudson, Allen, and Costello (1970) listed Processa sp. from Florida Bay. We have examined none of the material reported in these two papers.

In addition to our descriptive accounts of the western Atlantic processids, we have included a key to the known species of Nikoides, constructed from data in the literature, a list of the nominal Indo–West Pacific species of Processa, and a provisional key to the Atlantic species of Processa. Some of the species recorded from the eastern Atlantic may conceivably be found in the western Atlantic also, although no species is now known to occur in both.

The descriptive accounts include a brief diagnosis designed to distinguish each species from other processids in the western Atlantic. Complete descriptions and illustrations are given for all species except P. guyanae Holthuis and P. wheeleri Lebour. Holthuis (1959) gave a complete account for P. guyanae; we have seen no additional material of that species. We were unable to locate the type or any additional material of P. wheeleri. Measurements in all cases are carapace lengths in millimeters. The descriptions are composites, and include observed variations in the material examined.

Acknowledgments

We are pleased to acknowledge the aid of the following individuals: Dorothy Bliss, American Museum of Natural History, and Willard Hartman, Peabody Museum, Yale University, for tracking down specimens previously recorded from Bermuda; H. Levi, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University (MCZ), for the loan of a specimen from the Bahamas; R. Ingle and A. L. Rice, British Museum (Natural History), for looking up the material from Bermuda reported by R. Gurney and M. Lebour; Carl Saloman, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Saint Petersburg, Florida, and Larry Abele, Florida State University, for generously sharing collections; J. Rivero, University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, for making possible the visit by one of us (RBM) to Puerto Rico in 1961; Wolfgang Sterrer, director, Bermuda Biological Station, for making facilities available at the station in April 1970; and L. B. Holthuis, for funishing notes and illustrations made by H. Nouvel of the specimen reported from Guadeloupe as P. canaliculata by Monod (1939).

Family PROCESSIDAE Ortmann, 1896

Processidae Ortmann, 1896: 415, 424.—Holthuis, 1955: 116 [and synonymy].

DEFINITION.—Body smooth. Rostrum short, apex bifid or simple, ventral border never armed. Carapace armed at most with antennal spines. Postorbital groove present or absent. First abdominal somite neither armed nor denticulate. Fifth abdominal somite occasionally with posterolateral spine or spines on pleuron. Telson with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of posterior spines, with pair of stout plumose setae between inner pair of posterior spines. Eyes relatively large, with well-developed cornea. Antennular peduncle with well-developed stylocerite; antennular flagella simple, ventromesial shorter than dorsolateral, with thickened setigerous portion proximally. Antennal scale well developed. Mandible lacking distinct incisor process and palp. First maxilla with 1 endite and palp. Second maxilla with endites reduced, palp and scaphognathite well developed. First maxilliped with palp, caridean lobe, epipod, and exopod. Second maxilliped with endite of 5 articles, exopod, and epipod. Third maxilliped with well-developed exopod. All pereiopods with pleurobranch; arthrobranch present or absent at base of first pereiopod; first pereiopod with (Nikoides) or without (Ambidexter, Processa) exopod. Both pereiopods of first pair chelate (Ambidexter) or with only 1 chelate (Nikoides, Processa), usually right, left with unopposed simple dactyl. Second pair of pereiopods chelate, slenderer than first; carpus always, merus usually, and ischium occasionally subdivided; ischium with inner basal enlargement; right second pereiopod usually stronger than left, sometimes equal. Third, fourth, and fifth pereiopods slender, terminating in simple dactyl. First pair of pleopods in male with foliaceous endopod sometimes bearing coupling lobe. Endopod of second pleopod in male with appendix interna and appendix masculina. Uropods elongate, exopods with transverse suture extending from lateral spine (adapted from Nouvel and Holthuis 1957.)

DISCUSSION.—Discovery of a processid shrimp with both first pereiopods chelate has necessitated a redefinition of the family—previously defined by the presence of a simple dactyl on one of the first pereiopods in all known species. The family can best be recognized by the form of the rostrum, which in most species is a simple projection of the carapace, terminating in an apical and a subapical tooth, in combination with usually asymmetrical first pereiopods. The subapical tooth may be set some distance posterior to the apex of the rostrum (as in Nikoides maldivensis Borradaile and Processa jacobsoni De Man), or it may be absent (as in P. acutirostris Nouvel and Holthuis and Nikoides nanus Chace).

In the key to families and superfamilies of caridean shrimp given by Holthuis (1955, couplet 16), in which the Processidae are separated from the other families in the superfamily Alpheoida (Hippolytidae, Ogyrididae, and Alpheidae), the following modification could be made:

16.

First pair of pereiopods both chelate. Rostrum dentate or unarmed, not with single subdistal dorsal tooth

17

Usually right first pereiopod chelate, left ending in simple clawlike dactylus. If both chelate, rostrum with distal setose notch formed by subdistal dorsal tooth

Processidae

Although the processids exhibit some superficial resemblance to the Hippolytidae, we believe that the form of the rostrum and the structure of the mouthparts in the processids support the continued recognition of these two groups of species as distinct families.

All of the Atlantic processids are similar in basic facies; indeed, the western Atlantic species examined by us apparently have essentially identical mouthparts—with the exception of the number of spinules on the posterior margin of the molar process of the mandible—and uropods. We have figured the mouthparts of all but two of the western Atlantic species; they appear to be subsimilar to the mouthparts of Processa canaliculata Leach and P. edulis (Risso) as described by Lebour (1936).

In view of these close similarities, it is not surprising that the genera are very similar, differing only in characters of the first pereiopods. Gurney (1937) pointed out the similarities of the larvae of Nikoides and Processa, noting that there is more difference between the larvae of Processa aequimana and those of other species of Processa than there is between the larvae of Nikoides and Processa. He also pointed out the similarities between the rostrums of Processa jacobsoni De Man and Nikoides maldivensis Borradaile, in which the dorsal tooth is widely separated from the apex; De Man (1921) did not mention the exopods on the first pereiopods, but his species could prove to be conspecific with N. maldivensis. Chace (1955: 10), in his discussion of Nikoides nanus, a small species with short exopods on the first pereiopods, pointed out that the occurrence of short exopods in his species possibly strengthened Gurney's suggestion that Nikoides could be maintained as a distinct genus if only for convenience. It seems likely that the genera recognized here are closely related natural units.

It is also possible that additional study of Indo-West Pacific species will result in the recognition of additional genera. Processa molaris Chace has an unusually enlarged mandible, and P. paucirostris and P. steinii, two species described by Edmondson, each have an unusually short, unarmed rostrum, not extending much beyond the antennal spine.

Key to the Genera of the Processidae

Ambidexter, new genus

DEFINITION.—Processid shrimp with both first pereiopods chelate and lacking exopods.

TYPE-SPECIES.—Ambidexter symmetricus, new species (see below).

GENDER.—Masculine.

NUMBER OF SPECIES.—One, described below.

Ambidexter symmetricus, new species

FIGURES 1, 2

Processa sp. Tabb and Manning, 1961: 598 [listed; specimen from Flamingo].—Rouse, 1970: 140 [listed; part].

HOLOTYPE.— , 4.7 mm; Florida, Dade County, Miami, Biscayne Bay, Matheson Hammock Wading Beach; push net on grass flats, evening; C. F. E. Roper and R. B. Manning, col.; 7 July 1962; USNM 134097.

PARATYPES.—19 , 17 (16 ovigerous); data as in holotype; USNM.—1 ; same locality; R. B. Manming, col.; 21 February 1960; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; same locality; sand, in sparse Diplanthera; R. B. Manning, col.; 10 May 1962; USNM.—4, 3 (1 ovigerous); same locality; L. P. Thomas, S. Dobkin, and R. B. Manning, col.; 28 June 1962; USNM.—6, 5 (3 ovigerous); same locality; D. R. Moore and R. B. Manning, col.; 13 July 1962; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Florida, Dade County, Biscayne Bay, Soldier Key; L. P. Thomas, col.; 3 July 1959; USNM.—1; Florida, Monroe County, Everglades National Park, Florida Bay, off Flamingo, Sandy Key Basin; D. Tabb and R. B. Manning, col.; 16 April 1959; USNM.—1, 1 ; Florida, Pinellas County, Boca Ciega Bay; BCG shovel; Carl H. Saloman, col.; 14 November 1963; USNM.—5, 10 ; Florida, Pinellas County, Point Pinellas, Tampa Bay; fine net, night; Carl H. Saloman, col.; 4 December 1965; USNM.—3 ovigerous ; Florida, Levy County, Seahorse Key, in channel near marker 14; H. B. Herrick, col.; 28 May 1964; USNM—3, 4 ; Florida, Levy County, Cedar Keys; found among grass between tides; H. Hemphill, col.; 1883; USNM.—1; Florida, Franklin County, Bald Point; dug from sand-mud grass flat at low tide; M. Wass, col.; 31 January 1957; USNM.—1 ; Florida, Franklin County, Alligator Harbor, grass flats at mouth; L. Abele, col.; 29 January 1968; USNM.—1 ; Florida, Franklin County, Alligator Harbor; on bar, at mouth, in sand; may have come from Diopatra hole; L. Abele, col.; 18 November 1969; USNM.—5, 1 ; Louisiana, Chandeleur Island, Smack Channel; 29°51′N, 88°51′W; 17–18 feet; R. M. Darnell, col.; 28 March 1954; USNM.—2, 10 (8 ovigerous); Mexico, Tamaulipas, Punta Piedras (South), Laguna Madre del San Antonio; push net, night; 0–3 feet; H. Hildebrand, col.; 24 October 1953; USNM.—8, 11 (9 ovigerous); Puerto Rico, Lajas, La Parguera, east side of Maguey Island; evening, after dark, with push net on shallow Thalassia flats; R. B. Manning station PR 6–61; 24 June 1961; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Trinidad; shore; Albatross, col.; 30 January-2 February 1884; USNM.

OTHER MATERIAL.—1 juvenile; Trinidad, Cocorite Swamp, northwest of Port of Spain; seaward mud flats; P. R. Bacon, col.; 31 August 1966; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite rounded laterally, unarmed. (Both first pereiopods chelate, lacking exopods.) Second pereiopods symmetrical, with 4 meral and 9–10 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod longer than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figure 1b) slightly deflexed, not extending beyond anterior margin of eye, upper margin slightly convex; apex (Figure 1c) bifid, lower tooth longer, short setae implanted in bifurcation; distal portion of lower margin of rostrum straight, lined with setae. Lower orbital angle obtusely rounded, inconspicuous. Antennal spine present. Lower anterior angle of carapace broadly rounded (Figure 1a).

Abdomen (Figure 1d) smooth, bare, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite rounded or bluntly angled but unarmed posterolaterally. Sixth abdominal somite less than 1½ times as long as fifth, with acute posterolateral spine, lobe above articulation of uropod unarmed. Telson (Figure 1e) about 1¾ times as long as sixth abdominal somite, length 3½ times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; transverse line of setae present between anterior margin and anterior dorsal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set in proximal fourth, posterior spines near midlength; distance between anterior margin of telson and anterior pair of dorsal spines about 1/3 distance between pairs of spines; outer of distal spines (Figure 1f) stronger, ventromesial flanked mesially by strong plumose seta; apex of telson rounded or produced into sharp median point.

Eyes (Figure 1a) moderately large, cornea width greater than length of stalk and cornea combined, about twice greatest width of antennal scale.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 1g) extending by distal 2 segments and ½ of proximal segment beyond rostrum, penultimate segment longer than distal, proximal segment subequal in length or longer than distal segments combined; proximal segment of antennular peduncle with ventral spine, set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite rounded laterally, unarmed. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule nearly as long as carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 11–19 articles and amounting to ½–2/3 of length in both sexes, slender distal portion consisting of 7–15 segments. Ventromesial flagellum twice as long as carapace.

Antennal scale (Figure 1h) extending to about midlength of distal segment of antennular peduncle, length of scale about 4 1/3 times greatest breadth; distal spine of scale not overreaching blade. Antennal peduncle extending to about midlength of penultimate segment of antennular peduncle. Basal segment of antenna lacking ventrolateral spine. Antennal flagellum slightly longer than body.

Third maxilliped (Figure 1o) overreaching antennal scale by distal and ½ of penultimate segments; ultimate segment with short spines and numerous setae on surface, apex sharp; penultimate segment subequal to ultimate, less than half as long as proximal segment, with distal spines on mesial surface. Exopod well developed. Posterior margin of molar process of mandible (Figures 1i, j) with 16 spines; other mouthparts shown in Figures 1k–n.

FIGURE 1.—Ambidexter symmetricus, new genus, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 4.7 mm: a, anterior region; b, rostrum; c, same, distal end; d, abdomen; e, telson and uropods; f, end of telson; g, right antennule; h, right antenna; i, right mandible; j, left mandible; k, right first maxilla; l, right second maxilla; m, right first maxilliped; n, right second maxilliped; o, right third maxilliped. Magnifications: d, ×6; a, b, c, g, h, o, ×12.5;f, k–n, ×25; c, i, j, ×63.

Both pereiopods of first pair (Figures 2a–b) chelate, symmetrical, overreaching antennal scale by ½ the length of fingers; fingers slightly more than ½ the length of palm; carpus subequal to palm; merus slightly longer than carpus and chela combined. First pereiopods lacking arthrobranchs. Second pereiopods (Figures 2c–d) symmetrical, overreaching antennal scale by chela and 2 distal articles of carpus; ischium undivided, merus with 4 and carpus with 9–10 articles; fingers about ¾ the length of palm; carpus 4 times as long as chela; merus about 2½ times as long as chela; ischium slightly shorter than merus. Third pereiopod (Figure 2e) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and 1/8 of carpus; dactyl (Figure 2f) slender, simple, with subapical setae; propodus 3 1/3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with short setae on surface, longer setae near midlength and subapically; carpus about twice the length of propodus, unarmed; merus 1¾ times as long as propodus, with 4–5 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium as long as propodus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod subequal to that of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 2g) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and nearly ½ of carpus; dactyl (Figure 2h) slender, simple, with subapical tufts of setae; propodus slightly more than 3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, ornamented with short setae on surface and longer subapical tufts of of setae; propodus not markedly more setose in males than in females; carpus about 2 times the length of propodus, unarmed, ornamented with short setae on surface; meras about 1½ times as long as propodus, with 4–5 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium more than half as long as merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined lengths of carpus and propodus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 2i) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and ½ of propodus; dactyl (Figure 2j) short, triangular, apex simple, obscured by setae; propodus 3 2/3 times as long as dactyl, with 1 spine beyond midlength on flexor margin and scattered short setae on surface; propodus not markedly more setose in males than in females; carpus about 1½ times as long as propodus, unarmed; merus slightly more than 1½ times as long as carpus, unarmed; ischium about half as long merus, unarmed; combined lengths of carpus and propodus of fifth pereiopod subequal to that of ischium and merus.

FIGURE 2.—Ambidexter symmetricus, new genus, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 4.7 mm: a, right first pereiopod; b, left first pereiopod; c, right second pereiopod; d, left second pereiopod; e, right third pereiopod; f, same, dactyl; g, right fourth pereiopod; h, same, dactyl; i, right fifth pereiopod; j, same, dactyl; k, right first pleopod; l, same, endopod; m, same, coupling-hook area at distomesial angle; n, right second pleopod; o, same, appendix masculina and appendix interna; p, end of appendix masculina. Magnifications: a–e, g, i, k, n, × 12.5; l, o, ×25; ?, h, j, m, p, ×63.

Endopod (Figures 2k–m) of first pleopod of male about ½ as long as exopod, apex obliquely truncated, nonsetose; appendix interna completely fused with endopod, retinacular lobe present. Appendix masculina (Figures 2n–p) of second pleopod of male with 4 apical spinules, unarmed except near apex. Abdominal sternites unarmed. Outer margin of uropodal exopod (Figure 1e) terminating in blunt, triangular projection, with stronger mesial movable spine; exopod with suture at level of outer tooth, dorsal surface marked with blunt, triangular tooth or lobe on each side anterior to suture. Eggs small and numerous, 0.3–0.4 mm in diameter.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of males, 2.1–4.5 mm; of females, 2.4–6.7 mm; of ovigerous females, 3.8–6.7 mm.

COLOR.—Body covered with scattered red chromatophores on light-cream, white, or colorless background. Chromatophores arranged in band across anterior portion of abdomen; color also concentrated on pleura and on appendages. Dactyls of first pereiopods and distal 2 segments of third maxillipeds darker than body. Smaller specimens with fewer chromatophores on body. Eggs orange.

DISCUSSION.—Among the western Atlantic processids, A. symmetricus shows some slight resemblance to Processa hemphilli, new species; a specimen of Ambidexter lacking the first pereiopods could be confused with P. hemphilli, for in both species the second pereiopods are symmetrical and have the same number of articles in the meras (four) and carpus (ten). In P. hemphilli, however, the stylocerite is armed laterally and the proportions of the segments of the pereiopods are different in the two species. In A. symmetricus the propodus of the third pereiopod is half as long as the carpus, and the propodus of the fifth pereiopod is two thirds the length of the carpus; in P. hemphilli the propodus of the third pereiopod is three fifths the length of the carpus, and the propodus of the fifth pereiopod is four fifths the length of the carpus. Both species are recorded herein from the west coast of Florida, where they may occur together.

Specimens of A. symmetricus are uniform and exhibit little variation. The relative size and number of articles in the thickened portion of the antennular flagellum appears to be the same in both males and females. The number of articles in the carpus and meras of the second pereiopods was not observed to vary widely; all specimens have four meral and nine or ten carpal articles. The merocarpal articulation of the second pereiopods does not extend beyond the eye, and falls well short of the eye in smaller specimens. The apex of the telson is rounded, as figured, or ends in an acute point.

The specimens collected by one of us (RBM) in Florida and Puerto Rico were obtained by using a push net in shallow water, one meter or less, on grass flats, after dark. Specimens were found on both Diplanthera and Thalassia flats with sand or mud substratum.

We have reexamined the material reported by Tabb and Manning (1961). Rouse (1970) noted that two species were taken in collections from Florida Bay studied by him; one of those had symmetrical first pereiopods.

NAME.—The generic name is from the Latin, ambo, both, and dexter, right, referring to the symmetrical chelae of the first pereiopods. The specific name is from the Greek, symmetros, referring to the symmetrical second pereiopods.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Biscayne Bay, Miami, Dade County, Florida.

RANGE.—Western Atlantic region, from scattered localities in the northern and western Gulf of Mexico, southern Florida to Tamaulipas, Puerto Rico, and Trinidad; sublittoral to 6 m. It has been recorded from Everglades National Park, Florida, by Tabb and Manning (1961) and Rouse (1970).

Nikoides Paulson, 1875

Nikoides Paulson, 1875: 98.—De Man, 1920: 192 [list of species then known].—Gumey, 1937: 88 [review of species].—Holthuis, 1955: 117 [synonymy].

DEFINITION.—Processid shrimp with only 1 of first pereiopods chelate, the other (usually left) with simple dactyl; both first pereiopods with exopods.

TYPE-SPECIES.—Nikoides danae Paulson, 1875, by monotypy.

GENDER.—Masculine.

NUMBER OF SPECIES.—5, of which 1 is described below. The 5 known species may be distinguished by means of the following key:

Key to the Species of Nikoides

Nikoides schmitti, new species

FIGURES 3–5

Processa sp. Bullis and Thompson, 1965: 8 [listed; specimen from Oregon 2249].

HOLOTYPE.— , 4.4 mm; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, near black buoy, 1.25 km south of Garden Key; boat dredge, northeast haul, 26 m; W. L. Schmitt station 42–32; 8 July 1932; USNM 134109.

PARATYPES.—1 ; data as for holotype; USNM.— 1 ovigerous ; Florida, Dade County, Biscayne Bay; Bill Retskin, col.; 7 July 1960; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; same, 1.25 km east of Matheson Hammock; shrimp trawl; D. Tabb, col.; 21–22 April 1961; USNM.—1 ; same, between markers 22 and 23, near west end of Biscayne Channel, approximately 1.1 km west-southwest of Cape Florida; 5 m; K. McNulty and R. Work, col.; Institute of Marine Sciences Bottom Community Survey station 22; 11 July 1957; USNM.

OTHER MATERIAL.—1 , 1 ovigerous ; between British and Dutch Guiana; 33°11.5′N, 79°07′W; 7–9 m; Oregon station 2249; 27 July 1960; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with lateral spine in adults. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods with exopods.) Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right longer. Right second pereiopod with 23–24 meral and 43–49 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 5 meral and 17–18 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod longer than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figure 3b) slightly deflexed, slender, extending to cornea or slightly beyond anterior margin of eye. Apex (Figure 3c) bifid, lower tooth longer, apex obscured by numerous long setae. Lower margin of rostrum sinuous, convex proximally, slightly concave distally. Lower orbital angle inconspicuous, broadly rounded. Antennal spine well developed. Lower anterior angle of carapace broadly rounded (Figure 3a).

Abdomen (Figure 3d) smooth, surface sparsely setose, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite rounded posterolaterally. Sixth abdominal somite less than twice as long as fifth, angled or bluntly spined posterolaterally; lobe above articulation of uropod usually unarmed. Telson (Figure 3e) about or slightly more than 1½ times as long as sixth abdominal somite, length more than 3 times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set in proximal fourth, distal pair at midlength; distance from anterior margin to anterior pair of spines less than half the distance between pairs of spines; outer of distal spines (Figure 3f) stronger, ventromesial flanked mesially by strong plumose seta; apex of telson rounded.

FIGURE 3.—Nikoides schmitti, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 4.4 mm: a, anterior region; b, rostrum; c, same, distal end; d, abdomen; e, telson and uropods; f, end of telson; g, right antennule; h, right antenna; i, right mandible j, left mandible; k, right first maxilla; l, right second maxilla; m, right first maxilliped; n, right second maxilliped; o, right third maxilliped. Magnifications: d, ×6; a, b, e, g, h, o, ×12.5; f, k–n, ×25; c, i, j, ×63.

Eyes (Figure 3a) moderately large, cornea width less than length of stalk and cornea combined, twice or more greatest width of antennal scale.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 3g) extending beyond rostrum by distal segments and distalmost third of proximal segment, proximal segment longer than distal segments combined, penultimate segment 1½ times as long as ultimate. Proximal segment of antennular peduncle with ventral spine, set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite broadly rounded, with small lateral tooth in largest specimens (Figure 5c). Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule at least as long as carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 20–21 articles and amounting to 2/3 of length in males, of 21–25 articles and amounting to ¾ of length in females, slender distal portion with 9–14 segments in both sexes. Ventromesial flagellum of antennule at least three times as long as carapace.

Antennal scale (Figure 3h) extending to end of or beyond antennular peduncle by less than length of distalmost segment, length of scale about 4 times greatest breadth; distal spine of scale overreaching anterior margin of blade in males, falling short of anterior margin in females. Antennal peduncle extending slighdy beyond proximal segment of antennular peduncle. Basal segment of antenna lacking ventrolateral spine. Antennal flagellum more than 6½ times carapace length.

FIGURE 4.—Nikoides schmitti, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 4.4 mm: a, right first pereiopod; b, left first pereiopod; c, left second pereiopod; d, right third pereiopod; e, same, dactyl; f, right fourth pereiopod; g, same, dactyl; h, right fifth pereiopod; i, same, dactyl; j, right first pleopod; k, same, endopod; l, same, coupling-hook area at distomesial angle; m, right second pleopod; n, same, appendix masculina and appendix interna; o, end of appendix masculina. Magnifications: a–d, f. h, j, m, × 12.5; k, n, ×25; e, g, i, l, o, ×63.

Third maxilliped (Figure 3o) overreaching antennal scale by slightly more than length of distal segment in males, by most of penultimate segment in females; ultimate segment with dorsal spines, apex sharp, about as long as penultimate segment but slightly less than 1/3 as long as proximal segment. Exopod well developed. Posterior margin of mandible (Figures 3i, j) with 13 small spines. Remainder of mouthparts shown in Figures 3k–n.

Right pereiopod of first pair (Figure 4a) chelate, falling short of tip of antennal scale, slightly overreaching penultimate segment of antennular peduncle; fingers about ½ length of the palm in males, about ¾ the length of palm in females; carpus subequal to or slightly shorter than palm; merus longer than carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 3b) with dactyl simple, extending about to end of antennal scale; dactyl less than 1/3 the length of propodus; carpus shorter than propodus; merus about as long as carpus, propodus, and dactyl combined. Exopods of first pereiopods not extending beyond midlength of merus. First pereiopods with arthrobranch. Second pereiopods (Figure 5) strongly asymmetrical. Right larger, overreaching antennal scale by chela, carpus, and ½ of merus; ischium divided into 3, merus into 23–24, and carpus into 43–49 articles; fingers subequal to palm in males, slightly shorter than palm in females; carpus about 13 times as long as chela in males, about 10 times as long as chela in females; merus more than 7 times as long as chela in males, 5–7 times as long as chela in females; ischium shorter than merus. Left pereiopod of second pair (Figures 4c, 5b) overreaching antennal scale by chela and about 1/3 of carpus; ischium not noticeably segmented, merus with 5 and carpus with 17–18 articles; fingers subequal to palm; carpus more than 8 times as long as chela; merus about 5 times as long as chela; ischium subequal to merus. Third pereiopod (Figure 4d) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and 1/3 of carpus; dactyl (Figure 4e) slender, simple, with numerous apical setae; propodus more than 3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, ornamented with few scattered setae; carpus about 2 times as long as propodus in males, about 2–3 times as long in females, unarmed; merus less than twice as long as propodus, with 4 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod about as long as that of ischium and merus in males, combined length of propodus and carpus slightly longer in large females. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 4f) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and 2/3 of carpus; dactyl (Figure 4g) slender, simple, with numerous apical setae; propodus less than 3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with few scattered setae on surface and several long, distal tufts of setae; outer margin of propodus not lined with short setae in males; carpus slightly more than twice as long as propodus, unarmed, with few scattered setae; merus slightly less than twice the length of propodus, with 2–8 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 1–2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 4h) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and 9/10 of propodus in males, by dactyl and all of propodus in large females; dactyl (Figure 4i) slender, with rounded ventral tubercle distally and numerous long apical setae; propodus less than 3 times as long as dactyl, with scattered tufts of setae and 2 slender spines on flexor margin; upper margin of propodus not lined with short setae in males; carpus less than 1½ times as long as propodus in males, 1¼ times as long in females, unarmed, with few scattered setae; merus about 1½ times as long as propodus in males, 1¼ times in females, unarmed; combined length of propodus and carpus of fifth pereiopod subequal to that of ischium and merus.

Endopod of first male pleopod (Figures 4j–k) about ½ as long as exopod, apex obliquely truncate, with coupling hooks mesially; margins sparsely setose. Appendix masculina on endopod of second male pleopod (Figures 4m–o) with short lateral spinules and several longer distal spinules. Abdominal sternites unarmed. Basal segment of uropod (Figure 3e) terminating in rounded outer lobe; outer margin of exopods with 2 teeth at diaresis, inner slender, movable, outer blunter, fixed; diaresis with 2 blunt triangular lobes projecting posteriorly. Eggs small and numerous, 0.4–0.5 mm in diameter.

FIGURE 5.—Nikoides schmitti, new species. Paratype, male, from same lot as holotype, carapace length 5.0 mm: a, right second pereiopod; b, left second pereiopod. Paratype, ovigerous female, from Biscayne Bay, 7 July 1960, carapace length 8.8 mm: c, stylocerite of right antennule. Magnifications: a, b, ×12.5; c, ×25.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of males, 4.4–5.3 mm; of females, 4.2–8.6 mm; of ovigerous females, 7.0–8.8 mm.

COLOR.—Not recorded.

DISCUSSION.—Four species of Nikoides have been described from localities in the Indo—West Pacific region; until now, the genus was believed to be restricted to that region. The four previously known species are Nikoides danae Paulson, 1875, from the Red Sea; Nikoides maldivensis Borradaile, 1915, from the Maldive Islands and Amirante Islands, Indian Ocean; Nikoides sibogae De Man, 1918, from Indonesia and Bikini Atoll, Pacific Ocean; and Nikoides nanus Chace, 1955, from the Marshall Islands. Gurney (1937) suggested that N. sibogae and N. danae should be synonymized, but Chace (1955) recognized both species. Nikoides schmitti differs from N. danae, N. sibogae, and N. nanus in lacking a posterolateral spine on the pleuron of the fifth abdominal somite; it further differs from N. nanus in having a bifid rostrum. The new species differs from N. maldivensis in having the rostral tooth situated subapically, not at the middle of the rostrum as in Borradaile’s species.

The two specimens from the Guianas lack most pereiopods but appear to be conspecific with those from Florida; they were reported by Bullis and Thompson (1965) as Processa sp.

NAME.—We take great pleasure in dedicating this species to Waldo L. Schmitt, the dean of American carcinologists, who collected the holotype, and whose collections from the Americas have laid the foundation for much of our present knowledge of American decapods.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—1.25 km south of Garden Key, Tortugas, Monroe County, Florida.

DISTRIBUTION.—Western Atlantic, where it is known only from two localities off Florida, Biscayne Bay and Dry Tortugas, and from off the Guianas; shallow water to 26 m.

Processa Leach, 1815

Processa Leach, 1815, explanation of plate 41.—De Man, 1920: 197 [species listed].—Holthuis, 1955: 116 [synonymy].—Nouvel and Holthuis, 1957: 7 [synonymy, account of eastern Atlantic species].

DEFINITION.—Processid shrimps with only 1 of first pereiopods chelate, the other (usually left) with simple dactyl, and with first pereiopods lacking exopods.

TYPE-SPECIES.—Processa canaliculata Leach, 1815, by monotypy.

GENDER.—Feminine.

NUMBER OF SPECIES.—35, of which 14 occur in the Indo—West Pacific area (Table 1) and 21 occur in the Atlantic.

DISCUSSION.—Four groups can be distinguished among the nine species recorded below. In the two new species, P. fimbriata and P. riveroi, the stylocerite is armed, the pleuron of the fifth abdominal somite is armed posterolaterally, and the sternal spines are present on the abdomen. So far as we can determine, the only other species in which sternal spines have been recorded is P. elegantula Nouvel and Holthuis, which lacks the spine on the fifth pleuron, but has a well-developed spine on the stylocerite. Processa elegantula apparently is distantly related to P. fimbriata and P. riveroi; the sternal spines probably have arisen independently in the latter two species. The second group of species comprises P. bermudensis (Rankin) and P. vicina, new species, which differ from all other Atlantic processids in lacking antennal spines on the carapace; P. vicina differs from P. bermudensis in having symmetrical second pereiopods. P. hemphilli, new species, which also has symmetrical second pereiopods but has well-developed antennal spines, has two counterparts—P. parva Holthuis in the eastern Atlantic and P. aequimana (Paulson) in the Red Sea. The three species are so similar that they may prove to represent subspecies or populations of the same species. The remaining four species have asymmetrical second pereiopods, an unarmed pleuron on the fifth abdominal somite, and well-developed antennal spines. Two of the species, P. guyanae Holthuis and P. tenuipes, new species, are similar to P. canaliculata Leach and appear to be its counterparts in the western Atlantic.

The specimens of each species examined by us have proved to be very uniform, varying little if at all in major features; there were some observed differences between males and females and other differences between young specimens and adults. We observed no variation comparable to that reported by Allen (1961) for P. canaliculata from England. He observed variation in the spination of the stylocerite, the pleuron of the fifth abdominal somite, and the lobe on the sixth somite above the articulation of the uropod, as well as in the occurrence of arthrobranchs on the first pereiopods, the shape of the male pleopods, and the terminal spination of the telson. These features appear to be more stable in the western Atlantic species of Processa.

TABLE 1—Nominal Species of Processa Described from the Indo-West Pacific Region

Species

Region

P. aequimana (Paulson, 1875) (Gurney, 1937)

Red Sea

P. australiensis (Baker, 1907) (De Man, 1920)

Australia, Philippine Islands, Indonesia, and South Arabian coast

P. austroafricana Barnard, 1947 (Barnard, 1950, 1955)

South Africa

P. coutiere Nobili, 1904 (Nouvel, 1945)

Gulf of Aden

P. gracilis Baker, 1907

South Australia

P. hawaiiensis (Dana, 1852)

Hawaiian Islands

P. jacobsoni De Man, 1921 (De Man, 1924)

Savaii, Samoa, and Sumatra

P. japonica (De Haan, 1849) (Gurney, 1937)

Japan, Indonesia, Hawaiian Islands

P. kotiensis (Yokoya, 1933)

Japan

P. macrognatha (Stimpson, 1860)

Hong Kong

P. molaris Chace, 1955

Rongelap Atoll and Bikini Atoll, Marshall Islands

P. paucirostris Edmondson, 1930

Hawaiian Islands

P. processa (Bate, 1888)

Japan, Hawaiian Islands, Amboina, Singapore, and Gulf of Martaban

P. steinii Edmondson, 1935

Hawaiian Islands

There is a species of Processa from the Caribbean which we have not described herein. It differs from all the western Atlantic species in having the rostrum extending beyond the eyes, almost to the end of the first segment of the antennular peduncle. Both specimens in our collections lack all of the pereiopods. One of the specimens from Old Providence Island, West Indies, was recorded by Rathbun (1901) as P. canaliculata.

The Indo-West Pacific species of Processa described to date are listed in Table 1. All of the species listed in that table appear to be distinct from their Atlantic counterparts, with the possible exception of P. aequimana (Paulson), which we have not seen and which is similar to P. parva and P. hemphilli from the eastern and western Atlantic.

A provisional key to the Atlantic species of Processa follows. We have included P. pontica (Sowinsky) in the key on the basis of its redescription by Bacescu (1967)—Nouvel and Holthuis (1957) had synonymized the species with P. edulis (Risso).

Provisional Key to Atlantic Species of Processa

Processa bermudensis (Rankin, 1900)

FIGURES 6, 7

Nika bermudensis Rankin, 1900: 536, pl. 17: figs. 2, 2a, 2b.

Processa canaliculata.—Rathbun, 1901: 104 [part, records for Bermuda and Key West only; listed].—Schmitt, 1935: 169, fig. 32 [part; Bermuda record only].—Chace, 1937: 56 [listed; ? part].—Monod, 1939: 557.

Processa canaliculata var. bermudensis.—Verrill, 1922: 138, pl. 16: figs. 6–6b, pl. 35: figs. 1–1g, pl. 41: fig. 4, pl. 47: figs. 8, 8a, 8b [? part; some figures possibly of P. processa, from Bate, 1888].

Processa bermudensis.—Gurney, 1936: 624, pl. 5: figs. 44–52, pl. 6: figs. 53–62 [larvae], pl. 7: figs. 63–68 [larvae]; 1937: 87 [listed].—Lebour, 1941: 401, 410, figs. 28–33.—Holthuis, 1959: 120 [discussion].—Williams, 1965: 86, fig. 70.

Processa ? bermudensis.—O'Gower and Wacasey, 1967:209 [listed].

Processa sp. Rouse, 1970: 140 [part].

MATERIAL.—l ; Bermuda; G. Brown Goode; 1876–1877; USNM.—1 ovigerous 9; Bermuda, Saint George's Island, Ferry Point, grass flats on eastern side of point; push net; afternoon; L. K. and R. B. Manning, col.; 18 April 1970; USNM.—5 ; same; night collection; L. K. and R. B. Manning, col.; 18 April 1970; USNM.—l , 2 (1 ovigerous); same; grass flats on western side of point; push net; at night; L. K. and R. B. Manning, col.; 18 April 1970; USNM.—3 (2 ovigerous); Florida, Dade County, Miami, Virginia Key, Bear Cut; sewage beach, north of causeway; pushnet; R. B. Manning, col.; 4 May 1961; USNM.—7 ovigerous ; Florida, Dade County, Miami, Biscayne Bay; bait shrimp trawl; M. McBean, col.; 29 July 1959; USNM.—11 ovigerous ; same; 4 August 1959; USNM.—l , 2 ovigerous ; same; shrimp trawl; B. Retskin, col.; 7 July 1960; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Florida, Monroe County, Key West; H. Hemphill, col.; 1885; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Florida, Monroe County, Dry Tortugas, off west side of Bush Key Reef; from Halimeda; 20 August 1924; USNM.—1 ; Florida, Monroe County, Everglades National Park, Buttonwood Canal; D. Dubrow, A. Jones, col.; 4–5 April 1962; USNM.—5 (1 ovigerous); Florida, mouth of Tampa Bay, Egmont Key; trawl; Carl H. Saloman, col., station K-3; 21 December 1962; USNM.—6 ; same; 13 December 1963; USNM.—9 damaged specimens; Florida, Levy County, Cedar Key; H. Hemphill, col.; December 1883; USNM.—1 ; same; Amphioxus dredge; M. Wass, col.; 10 March 1956; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Cuba, Cabanas; on mud, shell, and grass bottom; poisoned with copper sulphate; Tomas Barrera Expedition station 16; 8 June 1914; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Cuba, Matanzas Province, Varadero, Cardenas Bay, off 61st Street; W. L. Schmitt, col.; 19 January 1957; USNM.—8, 7 ovigerous ; Puerto Rico, Lajas, La Parguera, east side of Maguey Island; evening, after dark, with push net on shallow Thalassia flats; R. B. Manning station PR 6–61; 24 June 1961; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine absent. Stylocerite rounded laterally, unarmed. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods lacking exopods.) Second legs asymmetrical, right longer. Right second pereiopod with 10–15 meral and 19–29 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 3–4 meral and 13–15 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod longer than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figures 6b, c) almost straight, not extending beyond eye; apex slightly deflexed, bifid, lower tooth longer, bifurcation obscured by several long setae; lower margin of rostrum convex proximally, concave distally. Lower orbital angle inconspicuous, rounded. Antennal spine absent. Lower anterior angle of carapace broadly rounded (Figure 6a).

Abdomen (Figure 6d) smooth, surface sparsely setose, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite rounded posterolaterally. Sixth abdominal somite less than twice as long as fifth, bluntly angled posterolaterally; lobe above articulation of uropod rounded, unarmed. Telson (Figure 6e) about 1½ times as long as sixth abdominal somite, length 2½ to 3 times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set in proximal fourth, posterior spines at midlength; distance between anterior margin and anterior pair of dorsal spines less than ½ the distance between pairs of dorsal spines; outer of distal spines (Figure 6f) stronger, ventromesial flanked mesially by strong plumose seta; apex of telson produced into sharp median point.

Eye (Figure 6a) moderately large; cornea width less than length of stalk and cornea combined, slightly more than twice greatest width of antennal scale.

FIGURE 6.—Processa bermudensis (Rankin), male from Parguera, Puerto Rico (Manning Station 6–61 ), carapace length 3.0 mm: a, anterior region; b, rostrum; c, same, distal end; d, abdomen; e, telson and uropods; f, end of telson; g, right antennule; h, right antenna; i, right mandible; j, left mandible; k, right first maxilla; l, right second maxilla; m, right first maxilliped; n, right second maxilliped; o, right third maxilliped. Magnifications: d, ×6, a, b, e, g, h, o, ×12.5; f, k–n, ×25; c, i, j, ×63.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 6g) extending beyond rostrum by distal 2 segments and ½ of proximal segment, proximal segment longer than distal segments combined, ultimate segment 9/10 the length of penultimate segment; proximal segment of antennular peduncle with ventral spine, set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite obtusely rounded laterally, inner margin projecting farther than outer, unarmed. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule 2/3 as long as carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 12–17 articles and amounting to 2/3-4/5 of length, slender distal portion consisting of 5–11 articles; ventromesial flagellum 2–3 times as long as carapace.

Antennal scale (Figure 6h) extending to or almost to end of antennular peduncle, length of scale about 5 2/3 times greatest breadth; distal spine of scale overreaching blade. Antennal peduncle extending about to midlength of second segment of antennular peduncle. Basal segment of antenna lacking ventrolateral spine. Antennal flagellum about 4 times carapace length.

Third maxilliped (Figure 6o) overreaching antennal scale by distal and ½ of penultimate segments; ultimate segment with some short spines on surface, apex acute; ultimate segment equal to or shorter than penultimate, less than ½ as long as proximal segment; exopod well developed. Posterior margin of molar process of mandible with row of 9 spines. Other mouthparts (Figures 6i–n) as figured.

Right pereiopod of first pair (Figure 7a) chelate, overreaching antennal scale by about ½ the length of fingers; fingers about 2/3 the length of palm; carpus subequal to palm; merus as long as carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 7b) with simple dactyl, overreaching antennal scale by nearly entire dactyl; dactyl about 1/3 the length of propodus; carpus about 2/3 the length of propodus; merus as long as carpus and propodus combined. Arthrobranchs not visible at base of first pereiopods. Second pereiopods (Figures 7c, d) unequal, right longer, overreaching antennal scale by chela and nearly all of carpus; merocarpal articulation of right pereiopod extending beyond eye; ischium with 5 indistinct, merus with 10–15, and carpus with 19–29 articles; fingers about 4/5 as long as palm; carpus almost 6 times as long as chela; merus slightly more than 3 times as long as chela; ischium slightly longer than merus. Left pereiopod of second pair overreaching antennal scale by chela and slightly less than ½ of carpus; ischium undivided, merus with 3–4 and carpus with 13–15 articles; fingers subequal to palm; carpus slightly more than 6 times as long as chela; merus about 4 times as long as chela; ischium slightly shorter than merus. Third pereiopod (Figure 7e) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and ½ of carpus; dactyl (Figure 7f) slender, simple, with subapical setae; propodus about 3 2/3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, surface ornamented with scattered short setae, longer tufts at apex; carpus 1 2/3 times as long as propodus, unarmed, with scattered short setae on surface; merus about 1½ times as long as propodus, with 4–5 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium about 2/3 as long as merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod slightly greater than that of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 7g) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and ½ of carpus; dactyl (Figure 7h) slender, simple, with subapical tufts of setae; propodus slightly more than 4 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, ornamented with few short setae on surface and longer distal tufts; outer margin of propodus not markedly more setose in males than females; carpus about 1½ times as long as propodus, unarmed, ornamented with few surface setae; merus about 1¼ times as long as propodus, with 4–8 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of carpus and propodus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 7i) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and propodus; dactyl (Figure 7j) slender, simple, apex obscured by long setae; propodus more than 3½ times as long as dactyl, ornamented with scattered short setae on surface and 3 spines on flexor margin; outer margin of propodus not markedly more setose in males than in females; carpus slightly longer than propodus, unarmed; merus about 1¼ times as long as propodus, unarmed; ischium shorter than merus, unarmed; combined length of propodus and carpus of fifth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus.

Endopod of first male pleopod (Figures 7k, l) about half as long as exopod, tapering distally, apex acute, setose, retinacular lobe well developed. Appendix masculina of second male pleopod (Figures 7n, o) with row of spinules on lateral margin, and with 4 distal and 2 subdistal spinules. Abdominal sternites unarmed. Outer margin of uropodal exopod (Figure 6e) terminating in blunt, triangular projection, with stronger mesial movable spine; exopod with suture at level of outer tooth, dorsal surface marked with blunt, triangular tooth or lobe on each side anterior to suture. Eggs small and numerous, 0.4–0.5 mm in diameter.

FIGURE 7.—Processa bermudensis (Rankin), male from Parguera, Puerto Rico (Manning Station 6–61), carapace length 3.0 mm: a, right first pereiopod; b, left first pereiopod; c, right second pereiopod; d, left second pereiopod; e, right third pereiopod;f, same, dactyl; g, right fourth pereiopod; h, same, dactyl; i, right fifth pereiopod; j, same, dactyl; k, right first pleopod; l, same, endopod; m, right second pleopod; n, same, appendix masculina and appendix interna; o, end of appendix masculina. Magnifications: a–e, g, i, k, m, × 12.5; n, ×25; f, h, j, l, o, ×63.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of males, 2.4–3.4 mm; of females, 3.3–5.8 mm; of ovigerous females, 3.3–5.7 mm.

COLOR.—Background light with many small, red chromatophores and fewer, larger white ones scattered over body; eyes light green; distal segment of third maxilliped and bases of third, fourth, and fifth pereiopods and pleopods red; abdomen with transverse red bar across third somite; eggs yellowish.

DISCUSSION.—Processa bermudensis resembles P. vicina, described below, but differs from all other Atlantic species of Processa in lacking the antennal spines on the carapace; it differs from P. vicina in having asymmetrical second pereiopods and in certain other features. Processa bermudensis has 10–15 meral and 19–29 carpal articles in the right second pereiopod and 3–4 meral and 13–15 carpal articles in the left second pereiopod, whereas in P. vicina there are 5 meral and 10–14 carpal articles in both second pereiopods. The rostrum of P. bermudensis is less deflexed apically, the eyes of that species are slightly smaller, and the pereiopod lengths and proportions of pereiopod segments differ in the two species.

The three females from the open beach on Virginia Key, Miami, are larger than most of the other specimens examined, and appear to have slightly smaller eyes; inasmuch as they resemble in most respects other available material (although the posterior pereiopods are missing), we tentatively assign them to this species.

We were unable to trace Rankin's types, which could not be found at the American Museum of Natural History or the Peabody Museum at Yale University; also, the material from Bermuda, reported by Gurney (1936) or Lebour (1941), apparently had not been deposited in the British Museum (Natural History). Two specimens collected by one of us (FACJr.) in Bermuda in 1936 (Chace 1937) could not be located in the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard; apparently they were loaned to Miss Lebour, who noted (1941:411) that one of the specimens was P. bermudensis but that the other was a new species.

Processa bermudensis was collected together with Ambidexter symmetricus and P. riveroi on shallow Thalassia flats at Maguey Island, La Parguera, Puerto Rico; the three species apparently lived together and had the same or similar color patterns; of the three species taken at that station, A. symmetricus was the most abundant, P. bermudensis was second most abundant, and P. riveroi, of which only three specimens were taken, was the rarest.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Harrington Sound, Bermuda.

DISTRIBUTION.—Western Atlantic, from Bermuda and the southeastern United States from North Carolina to northwest Florida, Cuba, and Puerto Rico, in shallow water.

Processa fimbriata, new species

FIGURES 8–10

Processa canaliculata.—Rathbun, 1901: 104 [part; records from Boqueron Bay and Vieques, only; listed].—Richardson, 1904: 87 [listed].—Pearse, 1932: 119 [listed].—Schmitt, 1935: 109 [part; records from Brazil, Puerto Rico, and Vieques only].

Processa sp. Pearse, 1950: 150 [listed].

HOLOTYPE.—, 2.5 mm; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, off East Key; 3 m; W. L. Schmitt, col.; 7 August 1924; USNM 134113.

PARATYPES.—2 ( 1 ovigerous); Bahama Islands, Bimini; from loggerhead sponge; A. S. Pearse, col.; 13 October 1948; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Bahama Islands, Bimini; from sponge; A. S. Pearse, col.; 20 October 1948; USNM.—1 ; same; from Spheciospongia vespara; A. S. Pearse, col.; 31 October 1948; USNM.—1 ; Bahama Islands, Great Inagua Island, off Matthew Town; R. A. McLean and B. Shreve, col.; 1 August 1938; MCZ.—1 ovigerous ; Bahama Islands, Cat Cay; 11 meters; Oregon, col.; 10 November 1954; USNM.—l; North Carolina, off New River, Black Rocks; A. S. Pearse, col.; 8 August 1949; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, below lighthouse pier, east side Loggerhead Key; from weeds and rocks; W. L. Schmitt, col.; 18 August 1924; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, Loggerhead Key; from loggerhead sponge; A. S. Pearse, col., no. 119; 8 July 1931; USNM.—1 , 1 juvenile; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, off north end of Loggerhead Key; 1 + meters; old coral rock with algae; C. R. Shoemaker station 1; 14 July 1926; USNM.—1 juvenile; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, Loggerhead Key, west of lighthouse; dredged from 6–9 meters; W. L. Schmitt, col.; 6 August 1924; USNM.—1 ; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, Bush Key reef, fort side; W. L. Schmitt station 29–30; 23 July 1930; USNM.—.1 ; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas, haul along east side of White Shoal off C3 buoy; W. L. Schmitt station 49–30; 9 August 1930; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Florida, Monroe County, Tortugas; from stomach of Lutjanus apodus, Manter no. 1006, caught in trap; 31 July 1931; USNM.—1 ; Puerto Rico, Boqueron Bay; Fish Hawk, col.; 25 January 1899; USNM.—1 ; Puerto Rico, off Vieques; 23 m; coral; Fish Hawk station 6095 (Puerto Rico station 167); 8 February 1899; USNM.—1 ; Brazil, off Recife; 06°59′30″S, 34°47′W; 37 m; broken shells; Albatross station 2758; 16 December 1887; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with lateral spinule. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods lacking exopods.) Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right stronger. Right second pereiopod with 13–16 meral and 31–40 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 4–6 meral and 15–18 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod shorter than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite with posterolateral spine. Abdominal sternites 1–5 with median ventral spine.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figure 8b) straight, not extending to anterior margin of eye; apex (Figure 8c) bifid, lower tooth longer, apex obscured by few short setae; lower margin of rostrum evenly convex. Lower orbital angle rounded, inconspicuous. Antennal spine present. Lower anterior angle of carapace broadly rounded (Figure 8a).

Abdomen (Figure 8d) smooth, bare, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite with posterolateral spine (Figure 8e). Sixth abdominal somite less than twice as long as fifth, with blunt posterolateral spine; lobe above articulation of uropod produced into blunt triangular projection. Telson (Figure 8f) almost twice as long as fifth abdominal somite, length 3 times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set at end of proximal third, posterior spines beyond midlength; distance between anterior margin and anterior pair of spines slightly less than distance between pairs of spines; distal spines of telson (Figure 8g) as in P. bermudensis; apex of telson produced into sharp point.

FIGURE 8.—Processa fimbriata, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 2.5 mm: a, anterior region; b, rostrum; c, same, distal end; d, abdomen; e, margin of fifth abdominal pleuron; f, telson and uropods; g, end of telson; h, right antennule (regenerating); i, right antenna; j, right mandible; k, left mandible; l, right first maxilla; m, right second maxilla; n, right first maxilliped; o, right second maxilliped; p, right third maxilliped. Magnifications: d, ×6; a, b, f, h, i, p, ×12.5; f, l–o, ×25; c, g, j, k, ×63.

Eyes (Figure 8a) moderately large; cornea width slightly less than length of stalk and cornea combined, about 1 2/3 times greatest width of antennal scale.

Antennular peduncle (Figures 8h, 10b) extending by distal 2 segments and 1/3 of proximal segment beyond rostrum; basal segment of antennular peduncle almost twice as long as distal segments, ultimate segment about 9/10 as long as penultimate segment; proximal segment of antennular peduncle with ventral spine, set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite truncated anteriorly, with outer spine. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule shorter than carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 10–19 articles and amounting to 2/5-2/3 of length, slender distal portion consisting of at least 10–19 articles. Ventromesial flagellum at least 10 times as long as carapace.

Antennal scale (Figure 8i) slightly overreaching antennular peduncle, length of scale about 4 times greatest breadth; distal spine of scale not overreaching blade. Antennal peduncle extending to end of second segment of antennular peduncle. Basal segment of antenna with outer spine. Antennal flagellum damaged.

Third maxilliped (Figure 8p) overreaching antennal scale by length of ultimate and 2/3 of penultimate segments; ultimate segment with some short spines on outer surface, apex sharp; ultimate segment slightly longer than penultimate, slightly more than half as long as proximal segment. Exopod well developed. Mandible (Figures 8j, k) with 6–7 spines on posterior margin of molar process. Remainder of mouthparts (Figures 8l–o) as in P. bermudensis.

Right pereiopod of first pair (Figure 9a) chelate, barely overreaching antennal scale; fingers about 2/3 length of palm; merus slightly shorter than carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 9b) with simple dactyl, overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and ¼ of propodus; dactyl about 1/3 length of propodus; carpus slightly more than ½ as long as propodus; merus about as long as carpus and propodus combined. Arthrobranch not visible at base of first pereiopods. Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right (Figure 9c) stronger, overreaching antennal scale by chela and all but 1 or 2 proximal articles of carpus; merocarpal articulation extending to end of scale; ischium undivided, merus with 13–16, and carpus with 31–40 articles; fingers slightly shorter than palm; carpus slightly more than 7 times as long as chela; merus 4 1/3 times as long as chela; ischium longer than merus. Left pereiopod of second pair (Figure 9d) overreaching antennal scale by chela and less than 2/3 of carpus; ischium undivided, merus with 4–6 and carpus with 15–18 articles; fingers about 2/3 length of palm; carpus 4 times as long as chela; merus 2 2/3 times as long as chela; ischium slightly longer than merus. Third pereiopod (Figure 9e) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and propodus; dactyl (Figure 9f) slender, simple, with apical setae; propodus 3 2/3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, ornamented with scattered tufts of setae along surface, longer tufts at apex; carpus 1½ times as long as propodus, unarmed; merus less than 1½ times as long as propodus, with 3–4 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined lengths of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod slightly greater than that of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 9g) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and about ½ of carpus; dactyl (Figure 9h) slender, simple, apex obscured by long setae; propodus slightly more than 4 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with some scattered tufts of setae on surface, as well as longer subapical tufts in females; outer surface of propodus in males completely covered by short setae; carpus about 1 1/3 times as long as propodus, unarmed, with scattered setae on surface; merus about 1 1/5 times as long as propodus, with 3–4 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 1–2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 9i) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and slightly less to slightly more than ½ of propodus; dactyl (Figure 9j) slender, simple, with subapical tuft of setae; propodus slightly more than 3 times length of dactyl in males, slightly less than 3 times the length of dactyl in females, ornamented with 4–5 spines on flexor margin; outer surface of propodus with scattered tufts of setae in females, completely obscured by short setae in males; carpus shorter than propodus, unarmed; merus longer than propodus, unarmed; ischium shorter than merus, unarmed; combined lengths of propodus and carpus of fifth pereiopod slightly greater than or subequal to that of ischium and merus.

FIGURE 9.—Processa fimbriata, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 2.5 mm: a, right first pereiopod; b, left first pereiopod; c, right second pereiopod; d, left second pereiopod; e, right third pereiopod;f, same, dactyl; g, right fourth pereiopod; h, same, dactyl; i, right fifth pereiopod;j, same, dactyl; k, right first pleopod; l, same, endopod; m, right second pleopod; n, same, appendix masculina and appendix interna; o, appendix masculina. Magnifications: a–e, g, i, k, m, ×12.5; n, ×25;f, h, j, l, o, ×63.

Endopod of first male pleopod (Figures 9k, l) about ½ as long as exopod, apex truncate, with mesial retinacular surface; margins sparsely setose. Appendix masculina on endopod of second male pleopod (Figures 9m–o) with 4 subdistal and 6 distal spinules. Abdominal sternites 1–5 with median ventral spine. Uropods (Figure 8f) as in P. bermudensis. Eggs small and numerous, 0.3–0.4 mm in diameter.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of males, 1.9–3.1 mm; of females, 1.9–6.3 mm; of ovigerous females, 3.3–6.3 mm.

COLOR.—Waldo L. Schmitt noted that a female from Tortugas has “no color markings of consequence; transparent; eyes black.” No other information is available on color.

DISCUSSION.—This small species resembles P. riveroi, described below, and differs from all other Atlanticspecies in several features. Both the stylocerite and the pleuron of the fifth abdominal somite are provided with spines, there is a ventral spine on each of the anterior five abdominal sternites between the pleopods, and the propodus of the fifth pereiopod is longer than the carpus. Sternal spines on the abdomen have been described previously only in P. elegantula Nouvel and Holthuis from the eastern Atlantic; in that species they were not observed on mature females—in contrast the sternal spines occur on adult females of both P. fimbriata and P. riveroi. Processa elegantula further differs from both P. fimbriata and P. riveroi in lacking a posterolateral spine on the pleuron of the fifth abdominal somite.

FIGURE 10.—Processa fimbriata, new species, paratype, ovigerous female from Loggerhead Key, Dry Tortugas, carapace length 3.8 mm: a, anterior region; b, right antennule; c, right fifth pereiopod. Magnifications: a–c, ×12.5.

Processa fimbriata differs from the closely related P. riveroi in several features. The eyes of P. fimbriata are larger, the stylocerite is armed with one spine rather than two, and there are fewer spines (6–7 rather than 21) on the posterior margin of the molar process of the mandible; other differences are pointed out under the discussion of P. riveroi.

It seems likely that there is a habitat difference between P. fimbriata and P. riveroi. Many of our specimens of the former species were taken from sponges, and Pearse (1932, 1950) found P. fimbriata in Spheciospongia vespara, Hircinia strobilina, and Aulospongus schoemus. In contrast, our material of P. riveroi was found free-living on shallow grass flats in association with two other species of processids.

Males of P. fimbriata differ from adult males of other western Atlantic processids (males of P. hemphilli and P. riveroi not examined) in having the lateral margin of the carpus and propodus of the fourth and fifth pereiopods ornamented with a dense coat of short setae, as shown in Figures 9g, i; the setae are not so well marked in smaller males as they are in large ones, in which the outline of the pereiopod is obscured. The only other species in which such setae have been reported, so far as we are aware, is Nikoides danae (Paulson) from the Red Sea; Gurney (1937:89) reported that males of N. danae could readily be distinguished from females “by having a series of bundles of stiff hairs along anterior margin of propodus of pereiopods 3–5.”

The specimen from off Brazil was host for the type of a bopyrid isopod, Urobopyrus processae Richardson, 1905.

NAME.—The name is from the Latin, fimbriatus, fringed, alluding to the appearance of the fourth and fifth pereiopods.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Off East Key, Tortugas, Monroe County, Florida.

DISTRIBUTION.—Western Atlantic, from North Carolina, southern Florida, the Bahamas, Puerto Rico, and off Brazil; shallow water to 37 m, on broken shell, coral, and in sponges.

Processa guyanae Holthuis, 1959

Processa guyanae Holthuis, 1959: 115, figs. 18, 19.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with, at most, trace of lateral spinule. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods lacking exopods.) Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right stronger. Right second pereiopod with 18–20 meral and 44–47 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 3–5+ meral and 17–18 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod longer than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DISCUSSION.—We have seen no material of this species other than some of the specimens on which Holthuis (1959) based his original description.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Off the coast of Surinam.

DISTRIBUTION.—Western Atlantic, from off the coast of Surinam in depths between 44 and 49 m.

Processa hemphilli, new species

FIGURES 11, 12

Processa canaliculate.—Rathbun, 1901: 104 [listed; specimens from Grampus 5066 and Marco].

HOLOTYPE.—, 3.9 mm; Florida, Collier County, Marco; 2–6 m; H. Hemphill, col.; USNM 23386.

PARATYPES.—1 ; data as for holotype; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; Gulf of Mexico, off southwestern Florida; 25°13′N, 82°28′W; 31 m; broken shell; Grampus station 5066; 19 February 1889; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with small lateral spine. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods lacking exopods.) Second pereiopods symmetrical, with 4 meral and 10 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod longer than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figure 11b) slightly deflexed, tapering distally, not extending to anterior margin of eye. Apex (Figure 11c) bifid, lower tooth longer, apex obscured by numerous setae. Lower orbital angle broadly rounded. Antennal spine well developed. Lower anterior angle of carapace rounded (Figure 11a).

Abdomen (Figure 11d) smooth, bare, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite obtusely angled posterolaterally, unarmed. Sixth abdominal somite subequal in length to fifth, with acute posterolateral angle; lobe above articulation of uropod angled but unarmed. Telson (Figure 11 e) slightly more than 1 ½ times as long as fifth abdominal somite, length slightly more than 3 times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set in proximal fourth, posterior pair set beyond midlength; distance between anterior margin and anterior pair of dorsal spines about ¼ distance between pairs of dorsal spines; distal spines (Figure 11f) as in P. bermudensis; apex of telson produced into acute point.

Eye (Figure 11a) large, cornea width less than length of stalk and cornea combined, 1 2/3 greatest width of antennal scale.

FIGURE 11.—Processa hemphilli, new species, holotype, female, carapace length 3.9 mm: a, anterior region; b, rostrum; c, same, distal end; d, abdomen; e, telson and uropods; f, end of telson; g, right antennule; h, same, stylocerite; i, right antenna; j, right mandible; k, right first maxilla; l, right second maxilla; m, right first maxilliped; n, left second maxilliped; o, right third maxilliped. Magnifications: d, ×6; a, b, e, g, i, o, '12.5; f, h, k–n, ×25;c, j, ×63.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 11g) extending by 2 distal segments and 1/3 of proximal segment beyond rostrum, basal segment longer than distal segments combined; ultimate segment 3/5 the length of penultimate segment; proximal segment of peduncle with ventral spine, set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite (Figure 11h) subtruncated anteriorly, anterior margin sinuous, with small outer spine. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule about ½ as long as carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 10 articles and amounting to 9/10 of length slender distal portion with 5 articles. Ventromesial flagellum as long as carapace.

Antennal scale (Figure 11i) extending to end of antennular peduncle, length of scale almost 6 times its greatest width; distal spine of scale falling short of rounded anterior margin of blade. Basal segment of antenna unarmed. Antennal peduncle extending slightly beyond proximal segment of antennular peduncle. Antennal flagellum broken in all specimens.

Third maxilliped (Figure 11o) overreaching antennal scale by slightly more than length of ultimate segment; ultimate segment ornamented with spines, apex sharp, segment slightly shorter than penultimate segment but 1/3 as long as proximal segment. Exopod well developed. Mandible (Figure 11j) with row of 9 spines on posterior margin of molar process. Remainder of mouthparts (Figures 11k–n) as in P. bermudensis.

Right pereiopod of first pair (Figure 12a) chelate, falling short of antennal scale by length of distal segment, reaching distal end of second antennular segment; fingers about ¾ the length of palm; carpus slightly shorter than palm; merus about as long as carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 12b) with simple dactyl, falling short of antennal scale, extending barely to distal end of second antennular segment; dactyl slightly more than 1/3 the length of propodus; carpus shorter than propodus; merus about as long as carpus, propodus, and dactyl combined. No arthrobranch visible at bases of first pereiopods. Second pereiopods (Figures 12c, d) symmetrical, overreaching antennal scale by slightly more than length of chela; merocarpal articulation of second pereiopod not extending beyond eye; ischium not segmented, merus with 4 and carpus with 10 articles; fingers subequal to or slightly shorter than palm; carpus less than 5 times as long as chela; merus 3 times as long as chela; ischium subequal to or slightly shorter than merus. Third pereiopod (Figure 12e) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and propodus; dactyl (Figure 12f) slender, simple, with apical setae; propodus 3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with scattered setae on surface and longer distal tufts of setae; carpus less than twice as long as propodus, unarmed; merus less than twice as long as propodus, subequal with carpus, with 4 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 spines on outer surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod less than that of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 12g) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and nearly ½ of carpus; dactyl (Figure 12h) slender, simple, apex obscured by tuft of setae; propodus about 2½ times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with some short setae on surface and longer distal tuft of setae; carpus less than twice as long as propodus, unarmed; merus about 1½ times as long as propodus, shorter than carpus, with 4 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 12i) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and nearly 1/5 of carpus; dactyl slender, simple, apex obscured by tufts of setae; propodus less than 3 times as long as dactyl, with tufts of setae on surface and longer distal setae, 1 spine present on flexor margin; carpus slightly longer than propodus, unarmed; merus less than 1½ times as long as propodus, slightly longer than carpus, unarmed; ischium shorter than merus, unarmed; combined lengths of propodus and carpus of fifth pereiopod slightly greater than that of ischium and merus.

FIGURE 12.—Processa hemphilli, new species, holotype, female, carapace length 3.9 mm: a, right first pereiopod; b, left first pereiopod; c, right second pereiopod; d, left second pereiopod; e, right third pereiopod;f, same, dactyl; g, right fourth pereiopod; h, same, dactyl. Paratype, ovigerous female from off West Florida (Grampus Station 5066), carapace length 3.75 mm: i, right fifth pereiopod (extreme tip of dactyl missing). Magnifications: a–l, g, i, ×12.5;f, h, ×63.

Abdominal sternites unarmed. Uropods (Figure 11e) as in P. bermudensis. Eggs small and numerous, maximum diameter 0.3 mm.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of females, 3.7–3.9 mm; of ovigerous female, 3.75 mm.

COLOR.—Not recorded.

DISCUSSION.—This new species closely resembles P. parva Holthuis, but differs in the following features: the rostrum is more tapered distally, less deflexed apically, and the interval between the rostral teeth is smaller; the antennular peduncle is slenderer; the tooth of the antennal scale falls short of the distal margin of the blade; the first pereiopod fails to reach the end of the antennal scale by the length of the distal segment, rather than extending to the end of the blade, and the merus is comparatively longer; in the second pereiopods there are 4 meral and 10 carpal segments, rather than 4–6 meral and 11–15 carpal segments; on the fourth pereiopod the carpus is longer than the merus, rather than subequal in length; the propodus of the fifth pereiopod has 2 spines on the flexor margin, whereas in P. parva there are 3 spines on the flexor margin; and the apex of the telson is produced into a sharp point, rather than being rounded or subacute apically.

In view of these differences, we prefer to call attention to the occurrence of this species by naming it, rather than by identifying it with the eastern Atlantic P. parva. The differences between P. parva, P. aequimana (Paulson) from the Red Sea, and P. hemphilli are so slight that additional material might very well show that they are the same.

Two other western Atlantic processids agree with P. hemphilli in having symmetrical second pereiopods, Ambidexter symmetricus and Processa vicina, which are described herein. An Ambidexter with both first pereiopods can be distinguished from P. hemphilli by the two being chelate; one lacking first pereiopods or the left first pereiopod can be distinguished by the absence of a spine on the stylocerite; the species also differ in the proportions of the segments of the pereiopods. Processa vicina differs from P. hemphilli in lacking an antennal spine.

NAME.—The species is named for the collector, Henry Hemphill.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Marco, Collier County, Florida.

DISTRIBUTION.—Known only from the west coast of Florida, in 2–31 m.

Processa profunda, new species

FIGURES 13–15

Processa canaliculata.—Rathbun, 1901: 104 [listed; part, specimens from Albatross station 2402 only].

HOLOTYPE.—, 7.2 mm; Gulf of Mexico, off west coast of Florida; 28°36′N, 85°33′30″W; 202 m; grey mud; Albatross station 2402; 14 March 1885; USNM 23382.

PARATYPES.—l, 2 (1 ovigerous); data as for holotype; USNM.—2 (1 ovigerous); Gulf of Mexico, Florida, southwest of Dry Tortugas; 24°20′N, 83°20′W; 346 m; Oregon station 1005; 13 April 1954; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with large lateral spine. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods lackingexopods.) Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right stronger. Right second pereiopod with 21–22 meral and 45–46 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 5 meral and 18–21 carpal articles. (Fifth pereiopods incomplete.) Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figure 13a) almost straight, apex slightly deflexed, bifid, lower tooth longer, apex (Figure 13b) obscured by numerous long setae; lower margin of rostrum sinuous, convex proximally, slightly concave distally. Lower orbital angle broadly rounded. Antennal spine well developed. Lower anterior angle of carapace broadly rounded.

Abdomen (Figure 13c) smooth, bare, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite rounded posterolaterally. Sixth abdominal somite only slightly longer than fifth, with posterolateral spine; lobe above articulation of uropod produced into small, sharp spine. Telson (Figure 14a) slightly more than 1½ times as long as sixth abdominal somite, length about 3½ times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set at end of proximal fourth, distal pair beyond midlength; distance between anterior margin and anterior pair of spines more than ½ the distance between pairs of spines; distal spines of telson (Figure 14b) as in P. bermudensis; apex of telson produced into small, sharp point.

Eyes (Figure 13a) moderately large, cornea width subequal to length of stalk and cornea combined, twice greatest width of antennal scale.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 13d) extending by 2 distal segments and about ½ of proximal segment beyond rostrum; basal segment of peduncle subequal in length to distal segments, ultimate segment 3/5 the length of penultimate; proximal segment of peduncle with ventral spine set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite (Figure 13e) with strong, acute lateral projection, anterior margin sloping proximally mesially, concave. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule at least as long as carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 20–27 articles, distal portion incomplete. Ventromesial flagellum of antennule broken, probably at least twice as long as carapace.

Antennal scale (Figure 13f) scarcely overreaching antennular peduncle, length of scale 6½ times greatest width; distal spine of scale slightly overreaching rounded anterior margin of blade. Proximal segment of antenna with slender outer spine. Antennal peduncle extending about to midlength of second segment of antennular peduncle. Antennal flagellum more than 4 times carapace length.

FIGURE 13.—Processa profunda, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 7.2 mm: a, anterior region; b, distal end of rostrum; c, abdomen; d, right antennule; e, same, stylocerite; f, right antenna; g, right mandible; h, same, distal end; i, right first maxilla; j, right second maxilla; k, right first maxilliped; l, right second maxilliped; m, right first pleopod; n, same, endopod; o, right second pleopod; p, same, appendix masculina and appendix interna; q, end of appendix masculina. Magnifications: c, ×3; a, d, f, m, o, ×6; i–l, ×12.5; e, g, n, p, ×25; b, h, q, ×63.

Third maxilliped (Figure 14c) overreaching antennal scale by distal and ½ of penultimate segments; ultimate segment ornamented with few spines, apex sharp, shorter than penultimate segment, and about 1/3 as long as basal segment. Mandible (Figures 13g, h) with row of about 18 spines on posterior margin of molar process. Remainder of mouthparts (Figures 13i–l) as in P. bermudensis.

Right pereiopod of first pair (Figure 14d) chelate, overreaching antennal scale by most of length of fingers of chela; fingers about ¾ the length of palm; carpus slightly longer than palm; merus about as long as carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 14e) with simple dactyl, overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and 1/3 of propodus; dactyl about 1/3 the length of propodus; carpus slightly shorter than propodus; merus shorter than remainder of distal segments combined. Arthrobranch present at base of first pereiopods. Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right (Figure 14f) longer, overreaching antennal scale by chela, carpus, and 3 distal articles of merus; merocarpal articulation of right pereiopod extending beyond eye; ischium with 3, merus with 21–22, and carpus with 45–56 articles; fingers subequal to or slightly longer than palm; carpus almost 11 times as long as chela; merus 6 times as long as chela; ischium shorter than merus. Left pereiopod of second pair (Figure 14g) overreaching antennal scale by chela and about 1/3 of carpus; ischium not divided, merus with 5 and carpus with 18–21 articles; fingers slightly longer than palm; carpus almost 7 times as long as chela; merus almost 4 times as long as chela; ischium slightly longer than merus. Third pereiopod (Figure 15a) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and about 1/3 of carpus; dactyl (Figure 15b) slender, simple, with subapical setae; propodus almost 4 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with tufts of setae beyond midlength, and denser distal tufts of setae; carpus about 2 1/3 times as long as propodus, unarmed, not markedly setose; merus less than twice as long as propodus, with 5 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 1 movable spine on lateral surface; combined lengths of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod subequal to that of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 15c) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and about ½ of carpus; dactyl (Figure 15d) slender, simple, with dense subapical tuft of setae; propodus slightly more than 3 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with tufts of setae proximal and distal to midlength, as well as denser distal tufts; carpus slightly more than twice as long as propodus, unarmed, not markedly setose; merus less than 1½ times as long as propodus, shorterthan carpus, with 5 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, about as along as propodus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined lengths of propodus and carpus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 15e) damaged or missing in all specimens, but extending beyond antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and ½ of carpus; carpus longer than merus, unarmed; ischium shorter than merus, unarmed.

FIGURE 14.—Processa profunda, new species, paratype, ovigerous female from south of Cape San Blas, Florida (Albatross Station 2402), carapace length 9.3 mm: a, telson and uropods; b, end of telson; c, right third maxilliped; d, right first pereiopod; e, left first pereiopod; f, right second pereiopod; g, left second pereiopod. Magnifications: c–g, ×3; a, ×6; b, ×25.

FIGURE 15.—Processa profunda, new species, paratype, ovigerous female from southwest of Dry Tortugas (Oregon Station 1005), carapace length 10.8 mm: a, right third pereiopod; b, same, dactyl; c, right fourth pereiopod; d, same, dactyl; e, right fifth pereiopod (propodus and dactyl missing). Magnifications: a, c, e, ×3; b, d, ×25.

Endopod of first male pleopod (Figures 13m, n) about ½ as long as exopod, apex obliquely truncate, smooth, without setae or spines; inner margin more setose than outer; retinacular lobe distinct distally, fused proximally. Appendix masculina on endopod of first male pleopod (Figures 13o–q) with 5 short lateral spinules and 4 distal spinules, 3 elongate. Abdominal sternites unarmed. Uropods (Figure 14a) as in P. bermudensis. Eggs small and numerous, 0.4–0.6 mm in diameter.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of males, 6.5–7.2 mm; of females, 7.0–10.8 mm; of ovigerous females, 9.3–10.8 mm.

COLOR.—Not recorded.

DISCUSSION.—Processa profunda resembles both P. guyanae and P. tenuipes in having large eyes, an antennal spine, a basal spine on the antenna, numerous (more than forty) articles in the carpus of the second pereiopods, and a rounded pleuron on the fifth abdominal somite. It differs from those two species in having the stylocerite produced into a strong outer spine and in having an arthrobranch at the base of the first pereiopods; no other Atlantic species has the stylocerite shaped as in P. profunda.

The specimens taken by the Albatross were reported by Rathbun (1901) as P. canaliculata.

NAME.—The specific name is from the Latin, profundus, deep, alluding to the depths at which the type-series was collected.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Gulf of Mexico, off the west coast of Florida, in 202 m.

DISTRIBUTION.—Gulf of Mexico, in depths between 202 and 346 m.

Processa riveroi, new species

FIGURE 16

HOLOTYPE.—Ovigerous , 5.65 mm; Puerto Rico; Lajas, La Parguera, east side of Maguey Island, evening, after dark, with push net on shallow Thalassia flats; R. B. Manning, col., station PR 6–61; 24 June 1961; USNM 134122.

PARATYPES.—2 (1 ovigerous); data as for holotype; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with spine at inner and outer angles. (Right leg of first pereiopod chelate, left with simple dactyl; first periopods lacking exopods.) Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right stronger. Right second pereiopod with 17 meral and 39–43 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 5–6 meral and 16–20 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod shorter than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite with posterolateral spine. Abdominal sternites 1–5 with median ventral spine.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figure 16b) slightly deflexed, not extending to anterior margin of eye; apex (Figure 16c) bifid, lower tooth longer, apex obscured by long setae; ventral margin of rostrum ornamented with setae, evenly convex. Lower orbital angle inconspicuous, broadly rounded. Antennal spine well developed. Lower anterior angle of carapace rounded (Figure 16a).

Abdomen (Figure 16d) smooth, surface ornamented with numerous short setae, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae; fifth abdominal somite with posterolateral spine (Figure 16e). Sixth abdominal somite less than twice as long as fifth, with blunt posterolateral spine; lobe above articulation of uropod produced into posterior spine. Telson (Figure 16f) more than 1½ times as long as fifth abdominal somite, length about 2½ times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set at end of proximal fourth, posterior pair beyond midlength; distance between anterior margin and anterior pair of spines more than ½ the distance between pairs of spines; distal spines (Figures 16g) as in P. bermudensis; apex of telson produced into small, sharp point.

Eyes (Figure 16a) small, cornea width less than length of stalk and cornea combined, only slightly greater than greatest width of antennal scale.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 16h) extending by distal 2 segments and 2/3 of proximal segment beyond rostrum; basal segment longer than distal segments combined, ultimate segment about ¾ the length of penultimate; proximal segment with ventral spine set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite (Figure 16i) truncated anteriorly, with small spine at inner and outer angles. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule nearly 1/5 longer than carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 17–19 articles and amounting to 2/5 of total length, slender distal portion consisting of 26–29 articles. Ventromesial flagellum at least 2¾ times as long as carapace.

Figure 16.—Processa riveroi, new species, holotype, ovigerous female, carapace length 5.65 mm: a, anterior region; b, rostrum; c, same, distal end; d, abdomen; e, margin of fifth abdominal pleuron; f, telson and uropods; g, end of telson; h, right antennule; i, same, stylocerite; j, right antenna; k, right mandible; l, same, distal end; m, right first maxilla; n, right second maxilla; o, right first maxilliped; p, right second maxilliped; q, right third maxilliped; r, right first pereiopod; s, left first pereiopod; t, right second pereiopod; u, left second pereiopod; v, right third pereiopod; w, right fourth pereiopod; x, right fifth pereiopod. Magnifications: d, × 3; a, b, f, h, j, q−x, ×6; e, m−p, ×12; g, i, k, ×25; c, l, ×63.

Antennal scale (Figure 16j) slightly overreaching antennular peduncle, length of scale almost 4 times the greatest breadth; distal spine of scale extending slightly beyond lamella. Basal segment of antenna with ventral spine. Antennal peduncle extending to end of second segment of antennular peduncle. Antennal flagellum at least as long as body.

Third maxilliped (Figure 16g) overreaching antennal scale by slightly more than combined lengths of two distal segments; ultimate segment ornamented with short spines, apex sharp; ultimate segment longer than penultimate, slightly more than half as long as proximal segment. Exopod well developed. Mandible (Figures 16k, l) with row of 21 spines on posterior margin of molar process. Remainder of mouthparts (Figures 16m–p) as in P. bermudensis.

Right pereiopod of first pair (Figure 16r) chelate, overreaching antennal scale by fingers and over ½ of palm of chela; fingers about ¾ the length of palm; carpus slightly shorter than palm; merus slightly shorter than carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 16s) with simple dactyl, overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and 2/3 of propodus; dactyl 1/3 the length of propodus; carpus slightly more than ½ as long as propodus; merus about as long as carpus and propodus combined. No arthrobranch visible at base of first pereiopods. Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right (Figure 16t) stronger, overreaching antennal scale by chela, carpus, and 2/3 of merus; merocarpal articulation extending beyond eye; ischium with 3, merus with 17, and carpus with 39–43 articles; fingers slightly shorter than palm; carpus 10 times as long as chela; merus about 5 2/3 times as long as chela; ischium slightly shorter than merus. Left pereiopod of second pair (Figure 16u) overreaching antennal scale by chela, carpus, and 2 distal articles of merus; ischium undivided, merus with 5–6 and carpus with 16–20 articles; fingers shorter than palm; carpus about 4½ times as long as chela; merus about 2 2/3 times as long as chela. Third pereiopod (Figure 16v) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and about 7/10 of carpus; dactyl slender, simple, with apical setae; propodus about 4 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, ornamented with tufts of setae along surface and at apex; carpus slightly more than 1 1/3 times as long as propodus, unarmed; merus less than 1½ times as long as propodus, with 4 movable spines on lateral face; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral face; combined lengths of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod greater than those of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 16w) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and 4/5 of carpus; dactyl slender, simple, with apical tuft of setae; propodus 3¾ times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with tufts of setae along surface and at apex; carpus less than 1½ times as long as propodus, unarmed; merus slightly longer than propodus, with 3 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 16x) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and 9/10 of propodus; dactyl slender, simple, with short apical tuft of setae; propodus almost 4 times as long as dactyl, surface with scattered setae, with 4–5 spines on flexor margin; carpus slightly shorter than propodus, unarmed; merus slightly longer than propodus, unarmed; ischium shorter than merus, unarmed; combined length of propodus and carpus of fifth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus.

Abdominal sternites 1–5 with median spine in females. Uropods (Figure 16f) as in P. bermudensis. Eggs small and numerous, 0.3–0.4 mm in diameter.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of females, 2.7–5.65 mm; of ovigerous females, 5.3–5.65 mm.

COLOR.—Background white, with minute red chromatophores scattered over body; third maxillipeds and first pereiopods tinged with orange distally; eggs light green.

DISCUSSION.—Processa riveroi closely resembles P. fimbriata, the only other western Atlantic species with a spine on the stylocerite, a posterolateral spine on the pleuron of the fifth abdominal somite, and spines on the abdominal sternites. It can, however, be distinguished from that species by several features. Processa riveroi is a slenderer species, with noticeably smaller eyes; the cornea width is only slightly greater than the greatest width of the antennal scale, whereas in P. fimbriata it is usually twice as broad as the antennal scale. The distal portion of the dorsolateral antennal flagellum is longer than the proximal in P. riveroi, whereas the reverse is true in P. fimbriata. The stylocerite of P. riveroi is armed at both internal and external angles, rather than the external angle only, and there are more spines (21 rather than 6–7) on the posterior margin of the mandible. The pereiopods of P. riveroi are longer than those of P. fimbriata: the right second pereiopod in P. riveroi extends beyond the antennal scale by two thirds of the merus, rather than by most of the carpus; the third pereiopod of P. riveroi overreaches the antennal scale by most of the carpus, whereas in P. fimbriata it extends beyond the scale by the two distal segments only. The numbers of articles in the second pereiopods are slightly different in the two species: in P. riveroi there are 17 meral and 39–43 carpal articles in the right pereiopod, 5–6 meral and 16–20 carpal articles in the left; in P. fimbriata there are 13–16 meral and 31–40 carpal articles in the right pereiopod, 4–6 meral and 15–18 carpal articles in the left.

There may also be a habitat difference in the two species, for P. riveroi was found free-living on shallow grass flats, whereas many of the specimens of P. fimbriata were found to be associated with sponges.

Two other species, Ambidexter symmetricus and Processa bermudensis, were collected along with P. riveroi at Maguey Island; all three apparently live in the same habitat, Thalassia flats in shallow water, (water depth 1 meter or less) on a sandy substratum.

NAME.—We are pleased to dedicate this species toJuan A. Rivero, University of Puerto Rico, who supported the trip to Puerto Rico by one of us (RBM) to study the decapods in the collection of the Institute of Marine Biology at Mayaguez; during that trip the types of P. riveroi were collected.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Maguey Island, La Parguera, Puerto Rico.

DISTRIBUTION.—Known only from the type-locality, Maguey Island, La Parguera, Puerto Rico, in shallow water.

Processa tenuipes, new species

FIGURES 17, 18

HOLOTYPE.—Ovigerous , 9.65 mm; Gulf of Mexico, off west coast of Florida; 29°12′N, 84°;22′W; 31 m; Oregon station 898; 8 March 1954; USNM 97415.

PARATYPES.—5 , 6 ovigerous ; off North Carolina; 35°08′30″N, 75°10′W; 90 m; grey sand; Albatross station 2596; 17 October 1885; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; off northern coast of Cuba; 23°H′45″N, 82°17′54″W; 331 m; fine brown sand; Albatross station 2327; 17 January 1885; USNM.—7 (5 ovigerous); Gulf of Mexico; off west coast of Florida; 28°44′N, 85°06′W; 92 m; fine clay ooze; L. Abele col., LGA 70–5; 10 April 1970; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with at most lateral tubercle. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods lacking exopods.) Second pereiopod asymmetrical, right stronger. Right second pereiopods with 18–28 meral and 28–69 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 5–9 meral and 17–26 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod longer than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figure 17b) slender, convex dorsally, not extending to anterior margin of eye; apex deflexed, bifid, lower tooth longer, apex obscured by long setae. Lower orbital angle inconspicuous, broadly rounded. Antennal spine small but distinct. Lower anterior angle of carapace broadly rounded (Figure 17a).

Abdomen (Figure 17c) smooth, surface ornamented with few short setae, ventral margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite bluntly angled posterolaterally. Sixth abdominal somite less than twice as long as fifth, angled posterolaterally; lobe above articulation of telson unarmed. Telson (Figure 17d) slightly more than 1½ times as long as sixth abdominal somite, length slightly more than 3 times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 3 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set near end of proximal fourth, posterior pair beyond midlength; distance between anterior margin and anterior pair of spines more than ½ distance between pairs of spines; distal spines (Figure 17e) as in P. bermudensis; apex of telson produced into slender median spine.

Eye (Figure 17a) of moderate size, cornea width subequal to length of stalk and cornea combined, more than double greatest width of antennal scale.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 17f) extending beyond rostrum by 2 distal segments and distalmost third of proximal segment; basal segment as long as combined lengths of distal segments, penultimate segment more than twice the length of ultimate segment. Proximal segment of antennular peduncle with small ventral spine near midlength. Stylocerite (Figure 17g) subtruncate.anteriorly, anterior margin sinuous, with lateral tubercle or bluntly angled prominence. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule ¾ as long as carapace, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 17–26 articles in females and 26–30 articles in males and amounting to 3/5 of length, slender distal portion consisting of 17–19 articles. Ventromesial flagellum of antennule at least 4 times as long as carapace.

Antennal scale (Figure 17h) extending about to end of antennular peduncle, length of scale about 6½ times greatest width; distal spine of scale small, not overreaching blade. Basal segment of antennal peduncle with small but distinct outer spine. Antennal peduncle extending about to midlength of second segment of antennular peduncle. Antennal flagellum about 4½ times as long as carapace.

Third maxilliped (Figure 17n) overreaching antennal scale by 2 distal segments; ultimate segment ornamented with spines, apex sharp, shorter than penultimate segment and less than 1/3 as long as proximal segment; exopod well developed. Posterior margin of molar process of mandible (Figure 17i) with row of 21 small spines. Remainder of mouthparts (Figures 17j–m) as in P. bermudensis.

Right pereiopod of first pair (Figure 17o) chelate, overreaching antennal scale by length of fingers; fingers slightly more than ½ the length of palm; carpus subequal to palm; merus longer than carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 17p) with simple dactyl, overreaching antennal scale by dactyl and fully 1/3 of propodus; dactyl about ¼ the length of propodus; carpus slightly shorter than propodus; merus longer than carpus, propodus, and dactyl combined. No arthrobranch visible at base of first pereiopods. Second pereiopods strongly asymmetrical, right longer. Right pereiopod of second pair (Figure 17g) overreaching antennal scale by chela, carpus, and slightly less than ½ of merus; merocarpal articulation of right pereiopod extending well beyond eye; ischium divided into 4 (sometimes indistinct), merus into 18–28, and carpus into 48–69 articles; fingers subequal to palm; carpus about 11½ times as long as chela; merus about 6 times as long as chela; ischium slightly shorter than merus. Left pereiopod of second pair (Figure 17r) overreaching antennal scale by chela and 4 distalmost articles of carpus; ischium not noticeably segmented, merus with 5–9 and carpus with 17–26 articles; fingers subequal to palm; carpus 6 times as long as chela; merus less than 4 times as long as chela; ischium subequal to merus. Third pereiopod (Figure 17s) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and 3/5 of carpus; dactyl (Figure 17t) slender, simple, with subapical tuft of setae; propodus 4 times as long as dactyl, unarmed; carpus slightly more than twice as long as propodus, unarmed; merus slightly less than twice as long as propodus, with 4–6 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 spines on lateral surface, combined length of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figures 17u, 18a, b) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and 4/5 of carpus; dactyl (Figure 18a) slender, simple, with subapical tuft of setae; propodus 4 times as long as dactyl, unarmed; carpus about twice or slightly less than twice the length of propodus, unarmed; merus about 1 1/3–1½ times as long as propodus, with 2–7 movable spines on lateral face; ischium shorter than merus, with 1–2 movable spines on lateral face; combined length of propodus and carpus of fourth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figures 17v, 18c, d) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and about 2/3 of carpus; dactyl (Figure 18d) slender, simple, with subapical tufts of setae; propodus about 6–7 times as long as dactyl, with 3–4 spines on flexor margin, distalmost sometimes paired; carpus slightly longer than propodus, unarmed; merus slightly shorter than carpus, unarmed; ischium shorter than merus, unarmed; combined length of propodus and carpus of fifth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus.

FIGURE 17.—processa tenuipes, new species, holotype, ovigerous female, carapace length 9.65 mm: a, anterior region; b, distal portion of rostrum; c, abdomen; d, telson and uropods; e, end of telson; f, left antennule; g, same, stylocerite; h, left antenna; i, right mandible;j, right first maxilla; k, right second maxilla; l, right first maxilliped; m, right second maxilliped; n, left third maxilliped; o, right first pereiopod; p, left first pereiopod; q, right second pereiopod; r, left second pereiopod; s, right third pereiopod; t, same, dactyl; u, left fourth pereiopod (dactyl missing); v, left fifth pereiopod (dactyl and distal end of propodus missing). Magnifications: a, c, d, f, h, n−s, u, v, ×4.2; j−m, ×8.4; g, ×17.5; b, e, i, t, ×35.

FIGURE 18.—processa tenuipes, new species, paratype, ovigerous female, from Gulf of Mexico, 92 meters, carapace length 6.4 mm: a, right fourth pereiopod; b, same, dactyl; c, right fifth pereiopod; d, same, dactyl. Magnifications: a, c, ×6; b, d, ×25.

Abdominal sternites unarmed. Uropods (Figure 17d) as in P. bermudensis. Eggs small and numerous, 0.3–0.5 mm in diameter.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of males, 5.4–6.7 mm; of females, 4.3–9.65 mm; of ovigerous females, 5.9–9.65 mm.

COLOR.—Not recorded.

DISCUSSION.—Processa tenuipes may be the northern counterpart of P. guyanae, a species not known from localities north of Surinam. The new species resembles P.guyanae in general facies; both species have large eyes, an anteriorly truncated stylocerite, slender pereiopods and numerous articles (44 or more) on the carpus of the second right pereiopod. Processa tenuipes differs from P. guyanae in having the rostrum convex dorsally, with the apex deflexed, more articles on the carpus of the second pereiopods, 48–69 rather than 44–47, slenderer third, fourth, and fifth pereiopods, and with different proportions in the segments, especially those of the fifth pereiopods. The propodus of the fifth pereiopod in P. tenuipes is 6–7 times as long as the dactyl and the merus is shorter than the carpus, whereas in P. guyanae the propodus is 4 times as long as the dactyl and the merus is slightly longer than the carpus. Of the known processids from the western Atlantic, only Nikoides schmitti resembles P. tenuipes in overall slenderness of the posterior three pairs of pereiopods.

NAME.—The name is from the Latin, tenuis, thin, and pes, foot, in reference to the slender pereiopods.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Gulf of Mexico, off the west coast of Florida, in 31 m.

DISTRIBUTION.—Northwestern Atlantic, from scattered localities between North Carolina and the Gulf of Mexico in depths between 31 and 331 m.

Processa vicina, new species

FIGURES 19, 20

Processa canaliculata.—Rathbun, 1901: 104 [listed, specimens from Albatross stations 2605, 2606, 2370, 2373 only; part].—Schmitt, 1935: 169 [part; North Carolina record only].

HOLOTYPE.—, 4.0 mm; off North Carolina; 34°35′30″N, 75°45′30″W; 59 m; white sand, black specks; Albatross station 2605; 18 October 1885; USNM 23383.

PARATYPES.—2 , 4 (2 ovigerous); 1 carapace; data as for holotype; USNM.—1 ovigerous ; off North Carolina; 34–35′15″N, 75°52′W; 46 m; white sand, black specks; Albatross station 2606; 18 October 1885; USNM.—1 ; Gulf of Mexico, off northwestern Florida; 29°14′N, 85°29′15″W; 46 m; coral; Albatross station 2373; 7 February 1885; USNM.—2 (l ovigerous); Gulf of Mexico, off northwestern Florida; 29°18′15″N, 85°32′W; 46 m; coarse, gray sand, broken shell; Albatross station 2370; 7 February 1885; USNM.—1 ; Venezuela, off Isla de Margarita; 11°03′N, 64°37.5′W; 95 m; LS 6805, station III; L. Abele; 25 November 1968; USNM.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine absent. Stylocerite rounded laterally. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first legs lacking exopods.) Second pereiopods symmetrical, with 5 meral and 10–14 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth pereiopod longer than propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. Abdominal sternites unarmed.

DESCRIPTION.—Rostrum (Figures 19b, 20a) sinuous or convex dorsally, apex (Figure 19c) noticeably deflexed, bifid, lower tooth longer, bifurcation obscured by long setae; lower margin of rostrum convex proximally, concave distally. Lower orbital angle an inconspicuous, rounded lobe. Antennal spine absent. Lower anterior angle of carapace broadly rounded (Figures 19a, 20a).

Abdomen (Figure 19d) smooth, bare, lower margins of pleura lined with fine setae. Fifth abdominal somite rectangular posterolaterally, posterolateral apex of pleuron rounded, unarmed. Sixth abdominal somite less than 1½ times as long as fifth, bluntly angled posterolaterally; lobe above articulation of uropod irregular in outline, unarmed. Telson (Figures 19e, 20b) about 1½ times as long as sixth abdominal somite, length slightly more than 3 times greatest width, with 2 pairs of dorsal and 2 pairs of distal spines; anterior pair of dorsal spines of telson set in proximal fourth, posterior spines beyond midlength; distance between anterior margin and anterior pair of dorsal spines less than 1/3 distance between pairs of spines; distal spines (Figures 19f, 20c) as in P. bermudensis.

Eye (Figures 19a, 20a) moderately large, cornea width subequal to or slightly greater than length of stalk and cornea combined, 2½ times greatest width of antennal scale.

Antennular peduncle (Figure 19w) extending by 2 distal segments and ½–1/3 of proximal segment beyond rostrum, proximal segment longer than distal segments combined; ultimate segment slightly more than ½ the length of penultimate; proximal segment of antennular peduncle with ventral spine, set slightly beyond midlength. Stylocerite (Figures 19g, 20d) obtusely rounded laterally, inner margin projecting farther than outer, inner armed with minute tubercle in some specimens. Dorsolateral flagellum of antennule incomplete, thickened setigerous portion consisting of 9–12 articles.

Antennal scale (Figure 19x) extending to or slightly beyond end of antennular peduncle, length of scale about 6½ times greatest breadth; distal spine of scale overreaching blade. Antennal peduncle extending about to midlength of second segment of antennular peduncle, basal segment of antenna unarmed. Antennal flagellum about 4–5 times carapace length.

FIGURE 19.—Processa vicina, new species, holotype, male, carapace length 4.0 mm: a, anterior region; b, rostrum; c, same, distal end; d, abdomen; e, telson and uropods;f, end of telson; g, stylocerite of right antennule; h, right mandible; i, right first maxilla; j, right second maxilla; k, right first maxilliped; l, right second maxilliped; m, right third maxilliped; n, right first pereiopod; o, right second pereiopod; p, left second pereiopod; q, right third pereiopod (propodus and dactyl missing); r, right first pleopod; s, same, endopod; t, right second pleopod; u, same, endopod; v, same, appendix masculina. Paratype, ovigerous female, from type-locality, carapace length 5.3 mm: w, right antennule; x, right antenna. Magnifications: d, ×6; a, b, e, m–r, t, w, x, ×12.5; f, g, i–l, u, ×25; c, h, s, u, ×63.

Third maxilliped (Figure 19m) overreaching antennal scale by slightly more than length of distal segment; ultimate segment with short spines on surface, apex acute; ultimate segment subequal to penultimate, slightly more than 1/3 the length of proximal segment; exopod well developed. Mandible (Figure 19h) with row of 11 spines on posterior margin of molar process; other mouthparts (Figures 19i–l) as in P. bermudensis.

Right pereiopods of first pair (Figures 19n, 20e) chelate, reaching about to end of or barely overreaching antennal scale; fingers 3/5-4/5 length of palm; carpus subequal to palm; merus longer than carpus and chela combined. Left pereiopod of first pair (Figure 20f) with simple dactyl, overreaching antennal scale by most of dactyl; dactyl 1/3 the length of propodus; carpus ¾ the length of propodus; merus longer than carpus, propodus, and dactyl combined. Arthrobranch not visible at base of first pereiopods. Second pereiopods (Figures 19o, p, 20g, h) symmetrical, overreaching antennal scale by chela and distal 3 articles of carpus; merocarpal articulation of second legs not extending beyond eye; ischium undivided, merus with 5 and carpus with 10–14 articles; fingers subequal to palm; carpus 4½–5 times as long as chela; merus about 3 times as long as chela; ischium subequal to merus. Third pereiopod (Figures 19q, 20i) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and fully half of carpus; dactyl (Figure 20j) slender, simple, with subapical setae; propodus 4 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, with scattered setae on surface, and longer apical tufts of setae; carpus 1 2/3 times as long as propodus, unarmed, with scattered setae on surface; merus about 1½ times as long as propodus, with 5 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium about 2/3 as long as merus, with 0–2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of third pereiopod slightly greater than that of ischium and merus. Fourth pereiopod (Figure 20k) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and about ¾ of carpus; dactyl slender, simple, with subapical tufts of setae; propodus 5 times as long as dactyl, unarmed, ornamented with few short setae on surface and longer distal tufts of setae; outer margin of propodus not markedly more setose in males than in females; carpus slightly more than 1½ times as long as propodus, unarmed, with few short setae on surface; merus about 1/5 times as long as propodus, with 5 movable spines on lateral surface; ischium shorter than merus, with 2 movable spines on lateral surface; combined length of propodus and carpus of fourth periopod much greater than that of ischium and merus. Fifth pereiopod (Figure 20l) overreaching antennal scale by dactyl, propodus, and fully half of carpus; dactyl slender, simple, with subapical tufts of setae; propodus almost 4 times as long as dactyl, with scattered short setae on surface, longer apical setae, and 1 distal spine on flexor margin; outer margin of propodus not markedly more setose in males than in females; carpus ¼ longer than propodus, unarmed; merus about 1 1/6 times as long as propodus, unarmed; ischium shorter than merus, unarmed; combined length of propodus and carpus of fifth pereiopod greater than that of ischium and merus.

FIGURE 20.—Processa vicina, new species, paratype, male, from off Venezuela, carapace length 3.0 mm: a, anterior region; b, telson and uropods; c, end of telson; d, stylocerite of right antennule; e, right first pereiopod; f, left first pereiopod; g, right second pereiopod; h, left second pereiopod; i, right third pereiopod; j, same, dactyl; k, right fourth pereiopod; l, left fifth pereiopod; m, endopod of right second pleopod. Magnifications: a, b, e–i, k, l, ×12.5; d, ×25; c, j, m, ×63.

Endopod of first male pleopod (Figures 19r, s) about ½ as long as exopod, tapering distally, apex acute, setose, retinacular lobe well developed, separated for most of its length; coupling hooks not seen. Appendix masculina of second male pleopod (Figures 19t–v, 20m) with row of spinules on outer margin, apex with 4 distal spinules. Abdominal sternites unarmed. Uropods (Figures 19e, 20b) as in P. bermudensis. Eggs small and numerous, 0.5–0.6 mm in diameter.

SIZE.—Carapace lengths of males, 2.8–4.0 mm; of females, 2.9–5.3 mm; of ovigerous females, 4.3–5.3 mm.

COLOR.—NOT RECORDED.

DISCUSSION.—Processa vicina resembles P. bermudensis and differs from all other Atlantic species of Processa in lacking the antennal spine of the carapace. It differs from P. bermudensis in having symmetrical second pereiopods, with 5 meral and 10–14 carpal articles on both; it further differs from P. bermudensis in having the rostrum deflexed anteriorly and in having broader eyes.

Only three other species of Processa are known to have symmetrical second pereiopods: P. aequimana (Paulson), from the Red Sea; P. parva Holthuis, from the eastern Atlantic; and P. hemphilli, described herein from west Florida. These three species also have an antennal spine on the carapace.

NAME.—The name is from the Latin, vicina, near, alluding to its presumed relationship with P. bermudensis.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Off North Carolina, in 59 m.

DISTRIBUTION.—Western Atlantic, where it has been taken off North Carolina, in the Gulf of Mexico, and off Venezuela, in depths between 46 and 95 m.

Processa wheeleri Lebour, 1941

Processa wheeleri Lebour, 1941: 403, figs. 1–9, 11–27.—Holthuis, 1959: 120 [discussion].—A. B. Williams, 1965: 87.

DIAGNOSIS.—Antennal spine present. Stylocerite with lateral spine. (Right pereiopod of first pair chelate, left with simple dactyl; first pereiopods lacking exopods.) Second pereiopods asymmetrical, right stronger. Right second pereiopod with 7 meral and 23 carpal articles, left second pereiopod with 5 meral and 15 carpal articles. Carpus of fifth leg subequal in length to propodus. Fifth abdominal somite unarmed posterolaterally. (Abdominal sternites not described).

DISCUSSION.—This species was not represented in the material available to us, and we were unable to locate the male holotype; it may prove to be at The Marine Laboratory, Plymouth.

P. guyanae, P. profunda, and P. tenuipes (the other western Atlantic species with a spine on the stylocerite, an antennal spine, unarmed pleura on the fifth abdominal somite, and asymmetrical second chelae) all have longer pereiopods and have more than forty articles on the carpus of the right second pereiopod.

Williams (1965) suggested that a few immature specimens of Processa collected in Bogue Sound, North Carolina, might prove to be P. wheeleri, but his specimens were too young to be identified with certainty.

TYPE-LOCALITY.—Off Bermuda.

DISTRIBUTION.—Western Atlantic, where it is known from Bermuda and possibly from off North Carolina.

Literature Cited

Allen, J. A.

1961. Observations on the Genus Processa from Northumberland Waters. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 13, 4: 129–141, figures 1–7.

Bacescu, M.

1967. Decapoda. Fauna Republicii Socialiste România, Crustacea, 4 (9): 1–351, figures 1–141. Academia Republicii Socialiste România.

Baker, W. H.

1907. Notes on South Australian Decapod Crustacea, Part V. Transactions and Proceedings and Report of the Royal Society of South Australia, 31: 173–191, plates 23–25.

Barnard, K. H.

1947. Descriptions of New Species of South African Decapod Crustacea, and Notes on Synonymy and New Records. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 11, 13: 361–392.

1950. Descriptive Catalogue of South African Decapod Crustacea. Annals of the South African Museum, 38: 1–837, figures 1–154.

1955. Additions to the Fauna-list of South African Crustacea and Pycnogonida. Annals of the South African Museum, 43: 1–107, figures 1–53.

Bate, C. Spence

1888. Report on the Crustacea Macrura Collected by H. M. S. Challenger during the Years 1873–76. The Voyage of H. M. S. “Challenger,” Zoology, 24: i–xc, 1–942, figures 1–76, plates 1–150.

Borradaile, L. A.

1915. Notes on Carides. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 8, 15: 205–213.

Bullis, Harvey R., Jr., and John R. Thompson

1965. Collections by the Exploratory Fishing Vessels Oregon, Silver Bay, Combat, and Pelican Made during 1956–1960 in the Southwestern North Atlantic. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report—Fisheries, number 510: iii, 1–130.

Chace, Fenner A., Jr.

1937. Bermudian Crustacea, pages 55–57. In The Bermuda Biological Station for Research, Reports of Officers for the Years 1935 and 1936, Appendix I, Summaries of the Work of Visiting Scientists.

1955. Notes on Shrimps from the Marshall Islands. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 105 (3349): 1–22, figures 1–8.

Dana, J. D.

1852. Crustacea, Part I. United States Exploring Expedition during the Tears 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842 under the Command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N., 13: 1–685. Atlas, 1855: 1–27, plates 1–96. Philadelphia: C. Sherman.

Edmondson, Charles H.

1930. New Hawaiian Crustacea. Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Occasional Papers, 9 (10): 1–18, figures 1–6, plate 1.

1935. New and Rare Polynesian Crustacea. Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Occasional Papers, 10 (24): 1–40, figures 1–11, plates 1–2.

Gurney, Robert R.

1936. A Description of Processa bermudensis Rankin and Its Larvae, IV. Notes on Some Decapod Crustacea of Bermuda, III–V. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, part 3, 1936: 621–630, plates 1–7.

1937. The Genus Processa. Notes on Some Decapod Crustacea from the Red Sea. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, series B, part 1, 1937: 85–101, plates 1–6.

Haan, W. De

1833–1850. Crustacea. In De Siebold, Fauna Japonica, sive Descriptio Animalium, Quae in ltinere per Japoniam, Jusse et Auspiciis Superiorum, qui Summum in India Batavia Imperium Tenent, Suscepto, Annis 1823–1830 Collegit, Notis Observationibus et Adumbrationibus Illustravit, i–xvi, i–xxxi, vii–xvii, 1–243, plates A–Q, 1–55, circular 2. A. Arnz, Lugdunum Batavorum.

Holthuis, L. B.

1951. The Caridean Crustacea of Tropical West Africa. Atlantide-Report, number 2: 7–187, figures 1–34.

1952. Crustacés Décapodes, Macrures. Résultats Scientifiques. Expédition Océanographique Belge dans les Eaux Cotières Africaines de l'Atlantique Sud (1948–1949), 3 (2): 1–88, figures 1–21.

1955. The Recent Genera of the Caridean and Stenopodidean Shrimps (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda, Supersection Natantia) with Keys for Their Determination. Zoologische Verhandelingen, number 26: 1–157, figures A–B, 1–105.

1959. The Crustacea Decapoda of Suriname. Zoologische Verhandelingen, number 44: 1–296, figures 1–68, plates 1–16.

Hudson, J. Harold, Donald M. Allen, and T. J. Costello

1970. The Flora and Fauna of a Basin in Central Florida Bay. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Special Scientific Report—Fisheries, number 604: 1–14, figures 1–2.

Leach, W. E.

1815–1875. Malacostraca Podophthalmata Britanniae; or Descriptions of such British Species of the Linnaean Genus Cancer as Have Their Eyes Elevated on Footstalks. 124 pages, 45 plates. London.

Lebour, Marie V.

1936. Notes on the Plymouth Processa (Crustacea). Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, part 3, 1936: 609–617, plates 1–6.

1941. Notes on Thalassinid and Processid Larvae (Crustacea Decapoda) from Bermuda. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, series 11, 7: 401–420, figures 1–45.

Man, J. G. De

1918. Diagnoses of New Species of Macrurous Decapod Crustacea from the Siboga-Expedition. Zoologische Mededeelingen, 4 (3): 159–166.

1920. Families Pasiphaeidae, Stylodactylidae, Hoplophoridae, Nematocarcinidae, Thalassocaridae, Pandalidae, Psalidopidae, Gnathophyllidae, Processidae, Glyphocrangonidae, and Crangonidae. The Decapoda of the Siboga Expedition, Part IV. Siboga-Expeditie, monograph 39a^3: 1–318, plates 1–25.

1921. On Three Macrurous Decapod Crustacea, One of Which Is New to Science. Zoologische Mededeelingen, 6 (2): 92–96, 2 figures.

1924. On a Collection of Macrurous Decapod Crustacea, Chiefly Penaeidae and Alpheidae, from the Indian Archipelago. Archiv für Naturgeschichte, 90 (1): 1–60, figures 1–20.

Monod, Th.

1939. Sur Quelques Crustacés de la Guadeloupe (Mission P. Allorge, 1936). Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, series 2, 11 (6): 557–568, figures 1–11.

Nobili, G.

1904. Diagnoses Préliminaires de Vingt-huit Espèces Nouvelles de Stomatopode et Décapodes de la Mer Rouge. Bulletin du Muséum d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 10: 228–238.

Nouvel, H.

1945. Description du Type de Processa coutierei Nobili, 1904. Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, series 2, 17 (5): 395–398, figures 1–8,

Nouvel, H., and L. B. Holthuis

1957. Les Processidae (Crustacea Decapoda Natantia) des Eaux Européennes. Zoologische Verhandelingen, number 32: 1–53, figures 1–220.

O’Gower, A. K., and J. W. Wacasey

1967. Analysis of Communities in Relation to Water Movement. Animal Communities Associated with Thalassia, Diplanthera, and Sand Beds in Biscayne Bay, I. Bulletin of Marine Science, 17 (1): 175–210.

Ortmann, A. E.

1896. Das System der Decapoden Krebse. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Systematik, Ökologie und Geographie der Tiere, 9: 409–153.

Parisi, B.

1915. Note su Alcuni Crostacei del Mediterraneo. Monitore Zoologico Italiano, 26: 62–66, figures 1–2.

Paulson, O.

1875. Podophthalmata and Edriophthalmata (Cumacea), Part 1. Investigations on the Crustacea of the Red Sea with Notes on Crustacea of the Adjacent Seas. Pages i–xiv, 1–144, plates 1–21 (text in Russian).

Pearse, A. S.

1932. Inhabitants of Certain Sponges at Dry Tortugas, VII. Papers from the Tortugas Laboratory, volume 28. Carnegie Institute of Washington, Publication Number 435: 117–124, figure 1, plates 1–2.

1950. Notes on the Inhabitants of Certain Sponges at Bimini. Ecology, 31 (1): 149–151.

Rankin, W. M.

1900. The Crustacea of the Bermuda Islands, with Notes on the Collections Made by the New York University Expeditions in 1897 and 1898. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 12 (12): 521–548, plate 17.

Rathbun, Mary J.

1901. The Brachyura and Macrura of Porto Rico. Bulletin of the United States Fish Commission, 20 (2) (for 1900): 1–127, figures 1–24, plate 1.

Richardson, Harriet

1904. Contributions to the Natural History of the Isopoda. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 27 (1350): 1–89, figures 1–92.

Risso, A.

1816. Histoire Naturelle des Crustacés des Environs de Nice. Pages 1–175, plates 1–3. Paris.

Rouse, Wesley L.

1970. Littoral Crustacea from Southwest Florida. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences, 32 (2) (for 1969): 127–152, figure 1.

Schmitt, Waldo L.

1924. The Macruran, Anomuran and Stomatopod Crustacea. Bijdragen tot de Kennis der Fauna van Curaçao. Resultaten eener reis van Dr. C. J. van der Horst in 1920. Bijdragen toi de Dierkunde uitgegeven door het Koninklijk Zoölogisch genootschap Natura Artis Magistra te Amsterdam, 23: 61–81, figures 1–7, plate 8.

1935. Crustacea Macrura and Anomura of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. New York Academy of Sciences, Scientific Survey of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands, 15 (2): 125–227, figures 1–80.

Sowinsky, V.

1882. The Crustacean Fauna of the Black Sea. Zapiski Kievskago Obshchestva Estestvoispytatelei, 6: 220–254, plates 9–11 (text in Russian).

Stimpson, W.

1860. Prodromus descriptionis animalium evertebratorum, quae in Expeditione ad Oceanum Pacificum Septentrionalem, a Republica Federata Missa, C. Ringgold et J. Rodgers ducibus, observavit et descripsit. Pars 8. Crustacea Macrura. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1860: 22–47.

Tabb, Durbin C., and Raymond B. Manning

1961. A checklist of the Flora and Fauna of Northern Florida Bay and Adjacent Brackish Waters of the Florida Mainland Collected During the Period July, 1957 Through September, 1960. Bulletin of Marine Science of the Gulf and Caribbean, 11 (4): 552–649, figures 1–8.

Verrill, A. E.

1922. Macrura. Decapod Crustacea of Bermuda, Part II. Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, 26: 1–179, figures 1–12, plates 1–48.

Williams, Austin B.

1965. Marine Decapod Crustaceans of the Carolinas. Fishery Bulletin, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 65 (1): xi, 1–298, figures 1–252.

Yokoya, Yu.

1933. On the Distribution of Decapod Crustaceans Inhabiting the Continental Shelf Around Japan. Chiefly Based Upon the Materials Collected by S. S. Sôyô-Maru, During the Year 1923–30. Journal of the College of Agriculture, Tokyo Imperial University, 12 (1): 1–226, figures 1–71.

Index

[Pages with principal accounts are in boldface]

acutirostris, Processa, 2, 13

aequimana, Processa, 3, 12, 13, 25, 37

Ambidexter, 2, 3, 7, 25

symmetricus, 3, 5–7, 19, 25, 30

apodus, Lutjanus, 19

Aulospongus schoemus, 22

australiensis, Processa, 13

austroafricana, Processa, 13

bermudensis, Nika, 15

Processa, 1, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23–31, 33, 34, 36, 37

Processa canaliculata var., 15

borboronica, Processa, 15

canaliculata, Processa, 1–3, 12, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25, 28, 34

var. bermudensis, Processa, 15

coutierei, Processa, 13

danae, Nikoides, 7, 8, 12, 22

Diopatra, 4

Diplanthera, 3, 7

edulis, Processa, 3, 13

elegantula, Processa, 12, 14, 22

fimbriata, Processa, 12, 14, 19, 20–22, 30

gracilis, Processa, 13

guyanae, Processa, 1, 2, 12, 15, 22, 28, 33, 34, 37

Halimeda, 16

hawaiiensis, Processa, 13

hemphilli, Processa, 7, 12–14, 22, 23, 24, 25

Hircinia strobilina, 22

intermedia, Processa, 14

jacobsoni, Processa, 2, 3, 13

japonica, Processa, 13

kotiensis, Processa, 13

Lutjanus apodus, 19

macrodactyla, Processa, 14

macrognatha, Processa, 13

macrophthalma, Processa, 14

maldivensis, Nikoides, 2, 3, 8, 12

mediterranea, Processa, 15

molaris, Processa, 3, 13

nanus, Nikoides, 2, 3, 7, 12

Nika bermudensis, 15

Nikoides, 1–3, 7, 12

danae, 7, 8, 12, 22

maldivensis, 2, 3, 8, 12

nanus, 2, 3, 7, 12

schmitti, 8, 9–12, 34

sibogae, 8, 12

parva, Processa, 12–14, 25, 37

paucirostris, Processa, 3, 13

pontica, Processa, 13, 14

Processa, 1–3, 12, 13, 18, 37

acutirostris, 2, 13

aequimana, 3, 12, 13, 25, 37

australiensis, 13

austroafricana, 13

bermudensis, 1, 12, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23–31, 33, 34, 36, 37

borboronica, 15

canaliculata, 1–3, 12, 13, 15, 19, 23, 25, 28, 34

var. bermudensis, 15

coutierei, 13

edulis, 3, 13

elegantula, 12, 14, 22

fimbriata, 12, 14, 19, 20–22, 30

gracilis, 13

guyanae, 1, 2, 12, 15, 22, 28, 33, 34, 37

hawaiiensis, 13

hemphilli, 7, 12–14, 22, 23, 24, 25

intermedia, 14

jacobsoni, 2, 3, 13

japonica, 13

kotiensis, 13

macrodactyla, 14

macrognatha, 13

macrophthalma, 14

mediterranea, 15

molaris, 3, 13

parva, 12–14, 25, 37

paucirostris, 3, 13

pontica, 13, 14

processa, 13, 15

profunda, 15, 25, 26–28, 37

riveroi, 12, 14, 19, 21, 22, 28, 29–31

robusta, 13

species, 1, 8, 12, 15, 19

steinii, 3, 13

tenuipes, 12, 15, 28, 31, 32–34, 37

vicina, 12, 14, 18, 25, 34, 35–37

wheeleri, 1, 2, 14, 37

processa, Processa, 13, 15

processae, Urobopyrus, 22

profunda, Processa, 15, 25, 26–28, 37

riveroi, Processa, 12, 14, 19, 21, 22, 28, 29–31

robusta, Processa, 13

schmitti, Nikoides, 8, 9–12, 34

schoemus, Aulospongus, 22

sibogae, Nikoides, 8, 12

species, Processa, 1, 8, 12, 15, 19

Spheciospongia vespara, 19, 22

steinii, Processa, 3, 13

strobilina, Hircinia, 22

symmetricus, Ambidexter, 3, 5–7, 19, 25, 30

tenuipes, Processa, 12, 15, 28, 31, 32–34, 37

Thalassia, 4, 7, 16, 19, 28, 30

Urobopyrus processae, 22

vespara, Spheciospongia, 19, 22

vicina, Processa, 12, 14, 18, 25, 34, 35–37

wheeled, Processa, 1, 2, 14, 37

Publication in Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology

Manuscripts for serial publications are accepted by the Smithsonian Institution Press subject to substantive review, only through departments of the various Smithsonian museums. Non-Smithsonian authors should address inquiries to the appropriate department. If submission is invited, the following format requirements of the Press should govern the preparation of copy.

Copy must be typewritten, double-spaced, on one side of standard white bond paper, with 1½″ top and left margins, submitted in ribbon copy with a carbon or duplicate, and accompanied by the original artwork. Duplicate copies of all material, including illustrations, should be retained by the author. There may be several paragraphs to a page, but each page should begin with a new paragraph. Number all pages consecutively, including title page, abstract, text, literature cited, legends, and tables. A manuscript should consist of at least thirty pages, including typescript and illustrations.

The title should be complete and clear for easy indexing by abstracting services. Taxonomic titles will carry a final line indicating the higher categories to which the taxon is referable: “(Hymenoptera: Sphecidae).” Include an abstract as an introductory part of the text. Identify the author on the first page of text with an unnumbered footnote that includes his professional mailing address. A table of contents is optional. An index, if required, may be supplied by the author when he returns page proof.

Two headings are used: (1) text heads (boldface in print) for major sections and chapters and (2) paragraph sideheads (caps and small caps in print) for subdivisions. Further headings may be worked out with the editor.

In taxonomic keys, number only the first item of each couplet; if there is only one couplet, omit the number. For easy reference, number also the taxa and their corresponding headings throughout the text; do not incorporate page references in the key.

In synonymy, use the short form (taxon, author, date, page) with a full reference at the end of the paper under “Literature Cited.” Begin each taxon at the left margin with subsequent lines indented about three spaces. Within a taxon, use a period-dash (.—) to separate each entry. Enclose with square brackets any annotation in or at the end of the taxon. For synonymy and references within the text, use the author-date system: “(Jones 1910).” Use the colon system for page references: “(Jones 1910:122),” and abbreviate further data: “(Jones 1910:122, fig. 3, pl. 5: fig. 1).”

Simple tabulations in the text (e.g., columns of data) may carry headings or not, but they should not contain rules. Formal tables must be submitted as pages separate from the text, and each table, no matter how large, should be pasted up as a single sheet of copy.

Use the metric system instead of (or in addition to) the English system.

Illustrations (line drawings, maps, photographs, shaded drawings) usually can be intermixed throughout the printed text. They will be termed Figures and should be numbered consecutively; however, if a group of figures is treated as a single figure, the individual components should be indicated by lowercase italic letters on the illustration, in the legend, and in text references: “Figure 9b.” Submit all legends on pages separate from the text and not attached to the artwork. An instruction sheet for the preparation of illustrations is available from the Press on request.

In the bibliography (usually called “Literature Cited”), spell out book, journal, and article titles, using initial caps with all words except minor terms such as “and, of, the.” (For capitalization of titles in foreign languages, follow the national practice of each language.) Underscore (for italics) book and journal titles. Use the colon–parentheses system for volume number and page citations: “10(2):5–9.” Spell out such words as “figures,” “plates,” pages.”

For free copies of his own paper, a Smithsonian author should indicate his requirements on “Form 36” (submitted to the Press with the manuscript). A non-Smithsonian author will receive fifty free copies; order forms for quantities above this amount, with instructions for payment, will be supplied when page proof is forwarded.