Cuchiadromites jadeae, a new genus and species of primitive crab (Crustacea: Decapoda: Podotremata) from the Aptian of Cantabria (Spain), with comments on its peculiar surface ornament

A new genus and new species of decapod brachyuran, Cuchiadromites jadeae, is recorded and described herein from the Lower Aptian (Early Cretaceous) Patrocinio Formation (Deshayesites forbesi Ammonite Zone) of the coastal cliffs near Cuchía (Cantabria, Spain). Cuchiadromites jadeae gen. et sp. nov., is the fourth species of brachyuran recovered in this locality. The dorsal carapace of the sole specimen preserves sufficient diagnostic characters that allow placement in the family Longodromitidae. The present species exhibits a profuse dorsal ornamentation of fungiform granules that form cauliflower-shaped clusters reminiscent of the ornamentation seen in fossil and extant species of different eubrachyuran families, for instance Parthenopidae or Dairidae, and also in the anomuran families Paguridae or Xylopaguridae, but not described before in podotreme taxa. This could be due to convergence in groups far distant in geological time and systematic placement

Mesozoic-Cenozoic crustaceans preserved within echinoid tests and bivalve shells

Associations of crustaceans with echinoids (Echinodermata) and bivalves (Mollusca) are not uncommon in modern oceans. Here we record the occurrence of anomurans, brachyurans and isopods within echinoid tests and bivalve shells from the Middle Jurassic of France, the Upper Jurassic of the Czech Republic, the Eocene of Croatia and the Miocene of Austria. Additionally a new genus and species of fossil cirolanid isopod from the Middle Jurassic of France is described. The present examples are interpreted as crustacean sheltering, probably for safe and undisturbed moulting (ecdysis), within a vacant host test or shell. However, accidental association (washed in) or even food remains cannot be ruled out entirelyWeb of Science90361160

Origin, early evolution and palaeoecology of Gymnopleura (Crustacea, Decapoda): Basal palaeocorystoid crabs from the Upper Jurassic-Lower Cretaceous of central Europe

Recent fieldwork has yielded new decapod crustacean material from Upper Jurassic-lowest Cretaceous bioclastic limestones at Kotou.c quarry near.Stramberk (Moravia, northeastern Czech Republic). Two specimens in this lot can be ascribed to the superfamily Palaeocorystoidea and represent the oldest gymnopleuran crabs known to date. A new genus and species, Moravacarcinus stramberkensis, are here erected and assigned to a new subfamily, Moravacarcininae, to accommodate this basal necrocarcinid. Our re-examination of Late Jurassic primitive crabs from southern Germany has resulted in the discovery of another early member of this group, here referred to a new genus, Juranecrocarcinus, as J. angulosum (Wehner, 1988). These new finds demonstrate that palaeocorystoids originated within shallow-water, reefal settings in the Upper Jurassic reef belt across central and southern Europe. We hypothesise that members of basal necrocarcinid subfamilies (Paranecrocarcininae and Moravacarcininae subfam. nov.), and thus the Gymnopleura, were derived from a dynomeniform ancestor which adapted to and became modified for a burying mode of life. Possible candidates are, for instance, the goniodromitid genus Cycloprosopon L.orenthey, in L.orenthey and Beurlen, 1929 and the longodromitid genera Longodromites Patrulius, 1959 and Planoprosopon Schweitzer, Feldmann and Laz.ar, 2007. The evolutionary pathways and palaeogeographical history of Mesozoic gymnopleurans were markedly influenced by the planktonic revolution which considerably enriched deeper-marine clastic sediments with nutrients from the Late Jurassic onwards.Web of Science564art. no. 11017

Comment on the letter of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology (SVP) dated April 21, 2020 regarding “Fossils from conflict zones and reproducibility of fossil‑based scientific data”: Myanmar amber

Non peer reviewe

Cenomanocarcinidae n. fam., une nouvelle famille de Podotremata du Crétacé (Crustacea, Decapoda), et commentaires sur les familles apparentées

Des spécimens exceptionellement bien préservés de Cenomanocarcinus vanstraeleni Stenzel, 1945 du Turonien du Mexique et de Colombie, d’un remarquable C. aff. vanstraeleni du Coniacien de Colombie et de Cenomanocarcinus sp. de l’Albien supérieur de Colombie permettent l’établissement d’une nouvelle famille podotrème, Cenomanocarcinidae n. fam., proche des Palaeocorystidae Lőrenthey in Lőrenthey &amp; Beurlen, 1929, et son attribution à la sous-section Raninoidia De Haan, 1839. La nouvelle famille inclut le genre crétacé Cenomanocarcinus Van Straelen, 1936, éteint à la fin du Crétacé, et, sous réserve, Campylostoma Bell, 1858 de l’éocène inférieur. Hasaracancer Jux, 1971 est placé dans la synonymie de Cenomanocarcinus. Le statut des Necrocarcinidae Förster, 1968 est révisé, et cette famille est également assignée aux Podotremata bien que le gonopore femelle n’ait pu être observé dans le matériel disponible. Le transfert des Cenomanocarcinidae n. fam., des Necrocarcinidae emend. et, préliminairement, des Orithopsidae Schweitzer, Feldmann, Fam, Hessin, Hetrick, Nyborg &amp; Ross, 2003 ainsi que de Camarocarcinus Holland &amp; Cvancara, 1958 aux côtés des Palaeocorystidae est discuté. Une standardisation est proposée ici pour homogénéiser la désignation des taxa podotrèmes de rang supérieur, à savoir : Dromioidia de Haan, 1833 (= Dromiacea De Haan, 1833, émendation standardisée), Homoloidia De Haan, 1839, Cyclodorippoidia Ortmann, 1892, et Raninoidia De Haan, 1839.Exceptionally well-preserved specimens of Cenomanocarcinus vanstraeleni Stenzel, 1945 from the Turonian of Mexico and Colombia, plus a remarkable Colombian C. aff. vanstraeleni of Coniacian age, as well as Cenomanocarcinus sp. from the upper Albian of Colombia, provide the basis for the definition of the Cenomanocarcinidae n. fam., a new podotreme family which is close to the Palaeocorystidae Lőrenthey in Lőrenthey &amp; Beurlen, 1929 and assigned to the subsection Raninoidia De Haan, 1839. The new family includes the Cretaceous Cenomanocarcinus Van Straelen, 1936, which went extinct at the end of the Cretaceous, and, with reservation, the early Eocene Campylostoma Bell, 1858. Hasaracancer Jux, 1971 is considered synonymous with Cenomanocarcinus. The status of the Necrocarcinidae Förster, 1968 is revised, being also assigned to the Podotremata, albeit with a query because the female gonopore could not be observed in any specimen available. Inclusion of the Cenomanocarcinidae n. fam., Necrocarcinidae emend. and, preliminarily, the Orithopsidae Schweitzer, Feldmann, Fam, Hessin, Hetrick, Nyborg &amp; Ross, 2003 and Camarocarcinus Holland &amp; Cvancara, 1958 next to the Palaeocorystidae is discussed. A standardization is proposed here to homogenize the designation of the higher-ranked podotreme taxa, as follows: Dromioidia de Haan, 1833 (= Dromiacea De Haan, 1833, emended from standardization), Homoloidia De Haan, 1839, Cyclodorippoidia Ortmann, 1892, and Raninoidia De Haan, 1839.</p

Basadromia Artal, Bakel, Domínguez & Gómez, 2016, n. gen.

Basadromia n. gen. Type species. Basadromia longifrons n. sp. Diagnosis. Small carapace, longitudinally subelliptical in outline, slightly longer than wide, maximum width at position of epibranchial region; markedly convex in both directions; front fairly projecting beyond orbits, narrow, with notable V-shaped notch and deep groove, bearing four long, subtriangular teeth plus short rostral tooth situated in lower plane; orbits small, anterolaterally disposed, supraorbital margin with strong supraorbital (inner orbital) tooth, anterior portion of supraorbital margin nearly vertical; lateral margins of carapace broadly arched, with short, subtle teeth; posterior margin narrow, being narrower than orbitofrontal margin; dorsal surface strongly areolated, uniformly granular; dorsal regions very well defined and individualised by swellings and grooves; epibranchial regions large, elongated, posterior portion distinctly swollen; mesogastric region transversely subelliptical, swollen, with subtle axial depression, broad subtriangular anterior extension; epibranchial region large, divided into 2 portions, axial portion strongly swollen; cardiac region large, markedly swollen, inverted subpentagonal in shape; cervical, branchial grooves clearly marked. Dorsal surface of carapace, chelipeds densely, uniformly granular. Etymology. From Basa, the name of the valley in the province of Huesca (Aragón, Spain) from where the new form was recovered, and - dromia, the common suffix for members of the family and superfamily. Remarks. The new genus differs from all extinct and extant members assigned to the Dromioidea (Guinot and Tavares, 2003; Ng et al., 2008; Karasawa et al., 2011; McLay, 2001 a, b; Schweitzer et al., 2012) in having four strong, conspicuously long, frontal teeth, a narrow posterior carapace margin, the posterior portion of the protogastric region being nearly hemispherical and the axial portion of the epibranchial region strongly swollen, subelliptical in shape.Published as part of Artal, Pedro, Van Bakel, Barry W. M., Domínguez, José L. & Gómez, Guillermo, 2016, A new dromiid crab (Crustacea, Brachyura, Dromioidea) from the Upper Eocene of Huesca (Aragón, northern Spain), pp. 438-446 in Zootaxa 4061 (4) on page 440, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4061.4.8, http://zenodo.org/record/27040

Basadromia longifrons Artal, Bakel, Domínguez & Gómez, 2016, n. sp.

&lt;i&gt;Basadromia longifrons&lt;/i&gt; n. sp. &lt;p&gt;(Fig. 1&ndash;4)&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Diagnosis.&lt;/b&gt; As for genus.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Etymology.&lt;/b&gt; From the Latin &lt;i&gt;longus&lt;/i&gt;, meaning long and &lt;i&gt;frons&lt;/i&gt;, front, in allusion to the fairly projected front, with long subtriangular teeth.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Material examined.&lt;/b&gt; The holotype, MPZ 2011.185, and six paratypes, MPZ 2013.73&ndash; MPZ 2013.78, all from the Upper Eocene (Priabonian) in the Yebra de Basa area, Huesca. Maximum carapace width and length in the holotype are 14.1 and 16.4 mm, respectively.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Description.&lt;/b&gt; Carapace transversely elliptical in outline; slightly longer than wide, widest anteriorly, at level of epibranchial region; dorsal surface strongly convex in both directions. Front strongly projected, narrow, with noticeable V-shaped notch, deep groove; frontal margin defined by 4 long, subtriangular teeth, short rostral tooth in lower plane, not visible in dorsal view. Orbits small, somewhat rimmed, directed anteriorly, laterally; supraorbital margin nearly vertical in inner portion (Fig. 1). Anterolateral margin short, arched, densely granular, with small, subtle teeth. Posterolateral margin longer than anterolateral, broadly arched. Posterior margin slightly concave, notably reduced, shorter than orbitofrontal margin. Dorsal carapace surface very well defined by numerous, strong swellings, fairly marked grooves. Epigastric regions small, slightly swollen, separated by frontal groove.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt;Protogastric regions large, elongated, posterior portion nearly circular, strongly swollen. Mesogastric region transversely subelliptical, swollen, with axial depression; anterior extension large, broadly subtriangular. Hepatic region slightly swollen, bounded by notable cervical, hepatogastric grooves. Urogastric region tranversely subrectangular, bounded by lateral grooves, divided into 2 portions by short axial depression. Epibranchial region notably large, divided into 2 portions by longitudinal groove; axial portion large, subelliptical, strongly swollen. Posterior branchial regions large, broadly swollen. Cardiac region large, gently swollen, subpentagonal in shape, with apex pointed downwards. Intestinal region small, flat. Cervical groove well marked, continuous from side to side, notching lateral margins. Branchial groove deep, oblique in lateral portions, converging abruptly towards rear in posterior portion of cardiac region. Dorsal carapace surface densely, uniformly covered by small granules. Chelipeds not completely preserved, short, robust, strongly granular; moveable finger thin, delicate, strongly curved (Fig. 3).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;b&gt;Remarks&lt;/b&gt;. The dorsal carapace of &lt;i&gt;Basadromia longifrons&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen., n. sp.&lt;/b&gt; exhibits the main characters of the family Dromiidae (&lt;i&gt;sensu&lt;/i&gt; Guinot and Tavares, 2003; Ng &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2008; Guinot &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2013), including general carapace outline, shape and distribution of dorsal regions, presence of well-defined cervical, branchial, and branchiocardiac grooves, a narrow and projected front with two inner orbital teeth, two marked median teeth, and a rostral tooth situated in a lower plane. Following recent revisions and general classifications (Guinot and Tavares, 2003; Schweitzer and Feldmann, 2010; Karasawa &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt;, 2011; Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2012; Guinot &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2013), these main features, as well as the distribution and shape of dorsal regions in &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;., are also seen in members of various subfamilies. The epigastric, protogastric, mesogastric, urogastric, hepatic, epibranchial, and cardiac regions, either weak to strongly marked, are similar in general shape and distribution in extinct forms assigned to the Dromiinae, Basinotopinae, Sphaerodromiinae and Dynomenidae (compare Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2012).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; With regard to dorsal carapace grooves (frontal, cervical, branchial, and branchiocardiac) are shared by representatives of the various subfamilies as well. The mesogastric region (of fairly constant shape amongst dromioids) in &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;. resembles that of other members of the superfamily. This region, which is either weakly to strongly divided, with two somewhat swollen portions separated by either a faint or deep longitudinal depression, usually with the anterior extension broadly triangular, shows rather constant features in extinct genera such as &lt;i&gt;Dromilites&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;Ferricorda&lt;/i&gt; Schweitzer &amp; Feldmann, 2010, &lt;i&gt;Pseudodromilites&lt;/i&gt; Beurlen, 1928, &lt;i&gt;Basinotopus&lt;/i&gt;, and even &lt;i&gt;Kromtitis&lt;/i&gt; M&uuml;ller, 1984 (Schweitzer &amp; Feldmann, 2010; Karasawa &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt;, 2011; Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al.&lt;/i&gt;, 2012). The new form yet exhibits a set of distinctive features that set it apart from all known fossil and extant dromioids, warranting the erection of a new genus. The front is distinctly projected, with four long teeth, the two median ones being longer, the two inner orbital ones shorter; the rostral tooth, situated in a lower plane, is short, not visible in dorsal view; the anterolateral margin is broadly arched, densely granular, bearing small teeth or protuberances; the posterolateral margins are broadly arched, the posterior margin is fairly narrow; the posterior portion of the protogastric region presents a near-circular, subhemispherical swelling; the epibranchial region is divided into two portions by a longitudinal groove, and the axial portion is strongly swollen and subelliptical in shape. This set of features differentiates the new taxon from all known extinct and extant forms.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;. appears to be close to the extant genus &lt;i&gt;Petalomera&lt;/i&gt; Stimpson, 1858, and the extinct &lt;i&gt;Pseudodromilites&lt;/i&gt;. The former is characterised by a granular dorsal surface of the carapace, well-defined regions with numerous swellings and grooves (similar to the new taxon), granular anterolateral margins, usually without long spines or noticeable teeth, and a relatively projected front with a single rostral tooth in lower plane, two lateral median teeth and supraorbital (inner orbital) lobes (McLay &amp; Ng, 2007). &lt;i&gt;Petalomera&lt;/i&gt;, however, presents a less projected front than &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;., with the rostral tooth clearly visible in dorsal view and the inner orbital teeth (supraorbital) are less salient, the outer orbital nodes less pronounced. For describing orbitofrontal construction different terms have been used in the literature to capture the same morphology. Here we use &ldquo;frontal margin, front, rostral tooth, lateral median teeth, and inner orbital teeth&rdquo;. Collins &amp; Jakobsen (2004) also used the terms &ldquo;front&rdquo; and &ldquo;inner orbital&rdquo;; &ldquo;produced front&hellip;slender and slightly diverging inner orbital spines&rdquo; (Collins &amp; Jakobsen, 2004: 69). These authors considered dromioids to have usually a frontal margin with one rostral tooth and two lateral median teeth isolated (i.e., differentiated) from the inner orbital teeth or lobes, all the lobes from weakly to strongly marked in the different genera, but to some degree always present (Collins &amp; Jakobsen, 2004: 70). Guinot &amp; Tavares (2003) usually described the front as &ldquo;front with median rostrum and two pseudorostral teeth, one at each side of the rostrum&rdquo; and &ldquo;supraorbital teeth well developed&rdquo; (Guinot &amp; Tavares, 2003: 49, 50). McLay (2007: 109) employed &ldquo;rostrum&rdquo;, rather than &ldquo;front&rdquo;, &ldquo;lateral teeth&rdquo; instead of &ldquo;median frontal teeth&rdquo; (or &ldquo;pseudorostral teeth&rdquo;) and &ldquo;supraorbital teeth&rdquo; instead of &ldquo;inner orbital teeth&rdquo;; &ldquo;rostrum tridentate, median tooth deflexed, lateral teeth separated by a V-shaped sinus&hellip;well developed supraorbital tooth&rdquo;.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; In the absence of well-preserved ventral features, we tentatively assign the new taxon to the Dromiinae. &lt;i&gt;Pseudodromilites&lt;/i&gt;, included in the Dromiidae by Schweitzer &amp; Feldmann (2010), presents a dorsal surface densely covered by granules; the distribution and shape of dorsal regions is similar to that seen in &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen.&lt;/b&gt; &lt;i&gt;Pseudodromilites&lt;/i&gt;, however, has a subpentagonal carapace shape, with near-straight portions of posterolateral margins and the posterior margin is longer; the dorsal regions are more uniformly swollen, less protuberant and subdivided, not clearly differentiated as in &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;. The frontal margin presents only two median teeth and nearly undifferentiated inner orbital lobes. The anterolateral margin in &lt;i&gt;Pseudodromilites&lt;/i&gt; was described as having triangular teeth by Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;. (2010: 422), due to the appearance conveyed in drawings of the original descriptions. A good illustration of a complete specimen (Beschin &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2012: 32, fig. 25; pl. 4/2) confirms that the anterolateral margin is slightly notched, with two granular protuberances, but lacking triangular teeth.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;. appears to be morphologically close to some fossil species that have recently been assigned to the subfamily Sphaerodromiinae Guinot &amp; Tavares, 2003 (see Schweitzer &amp; Feldmann, 2010). &lt;i&gt;Dromilites bucklandii&lt;/i&gt; H. Milne Edwards, 1837, the type species of the genus, also presents a frontal margin with one rostral tooth, two notable median teeth and two supraorbital teeth, thus five frontal teeth in total. &lt;i&gt;Dromilites&lt;/i&gt; nevertheless presents a less salient front, with smaller frontal teeth, the two inner orbital ones being fairly smaller, the lateral margins of the carapace have salient teeth, and the dorsal carapace surface shows different dorsal regions, being more individualised, nearly hemispherical. &lt;i&gt;Dromilites simplex&lt;/i&gt; Quayle &amp; Collins, 1981 presents similar characters. The frontal margin is less projecting, without pronounced teeth or spines, and in general the dorsal regions are weakly defined, less swollen and separate. This species exhibits a typical marked groove, subparallel, between the cervical and branchial grooves (Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2010: fig. 4).&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;. shares with &lt;i&gt;Dromilites vicensis&lt;/i&gt; Barnolas, 1973, the two fairly long median teeth in the front, and the deep, broadly V-shaped notch (Barnolas, 1973, figs. 2, 4). Despite that the dorsal regions and grooves are weakly pronounced in &lt;i&gt;D. vicensis&lt;/i&gt;, some characters, such as the shape of the mesogastric, urogastric and cardiac regions, appear to be closey similar to those of the new species. The main differences in &lt;i&gt;D. vicensis&lt;/i&gt; are the absence of marked supraorbital spines (teeth or spines in the orbitofrontal corner) and the presence of salient teeth along the anterolateral margins. In spite of sharing some diagnostic features such as the general carapace outline, the produced front and dorsal regions and grooves in &lt;i&gt;D. pastoris&lt;/i&gt; Via, 1959, differ from &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen.&lt;/b&gt; There are notable lobes along the lateral carapace margins, the front is axially produced, the rostral tooth being the more projected one, and the four adjacent few marked, notably small; dorsal regions are more uniformly swollen, less individualised; there is a subparallel dorsal groove between the cervical and branchial grooves, the post-cervical groove. This groove is very characteristic in some dromioids, being notably marked in genera such as &lt;i&gt;Pseudodromilites&lt;/i&gt;, &lt;i&gt;Basinotopus,&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;Ferricorda&lt;/i&gt;. A cast of the holotype of &lt;i&gt;D. pastoris&lt;/i&gt;, illustrated by Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;. (2010: fig. 3) is either broken or incomplete; the original specimen, housed in the MGSB collections, has recently been reexamined by the senior author and does exhibit a complete front. The holotype of &lt;i&gt;D. pastoris&lt;/i&gt; actually possesses a very complete front, showing the rostral tooth to be the more produced (Via, 1959; Via, 1969: fig. 10; pl. 4). The Italian specimen assigned to &lt;i&gt;D&lt;/i&gt;. &lt;i&gt;pastoris&lt;/i&gt; also exhibits the same features, as clearly indicated in the text and illustrations (Beschin &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2012: 34, fig. 26; pl. 4). &lt;i&gt;Quinquerugatus,&lt;/i&gt; assigned to Dromiidae (Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2010), presents numerous characters that are also present in &lt;i&gt;D. pastoris&lt;/i&gt;, as mentioned by Beschin &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;. (2012: 34), despite the fact that the two genera were assigned to two different subfamilies, Dromiinae and Sphaerodromiinae, respectively (&lt;i&gt;sensu&lt;/i&gt; Schweitzer &amp; Feldmann, 2010). The carapace is subpentagonal in outline in these two species, the dorsal regions are weakly marked and the frontal margin has a median spine that in both species is the more projected in the front. &lt;i&gt;Dromilites pastoris&lt;/i&gt; was assigned to Sphaerodromiinae despite the produced rostral tooth which is utterly different from all other assigned members, whereas &lt;i&gt;Dromilites&lt;/i&gt; was diagnosed as having a clearly &ldquo;bilobed rostrum&rdquo; (Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2010: 418). All data mentioned above clearly indicate that much more work is needed to make assignment of the various dromiid species clearer.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;p&gt; The Basinotopinae is a recently erected subfamily that is characterised by a subtriangular carapace shape, being notably longer than wide, a triangular front with three lobes (spines), the rostral one being the longer, and lateral carapace margins with clearly marked spines (Karasawa &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2011: 539). &lt;i&gt;Basinotopus&lt;/i&gt; has the strongly swollen carapace regions and the produced front in common with &lt;i&gt;Basadromia&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen&lt;/b&gt;. The dorsal regions present a general aspect and similar distribution, are numerous and well divided by numerous grooves in both genera. &lt;i&gt;Basinotopus lamarckii&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;B. tricornis&lt;/i&gt; Collins &amp; Jakobsen, 2004 are easily distinguished from &lt;i&gt;Basadromia longifrons&lt;/i&gt; &lt;b&gt;n. gen., n. sp.&lt;/b&gt; in that both have a subtriangular front with a markedly long rostral spine, notably more projecting than the two inner orbital spines; extremely long spines along the anterolateral and posterolateral margins of carapace; a longer posterior carapace margin, at least of the same size of the orbitofrontal margin. Schweitzer &amp; Feldmann (2010: 422) mentioned that &lt;i&gt;Dromilites alpina&lt;/i&gt; Glaessner, 1929, and &lt;i&gt;Dromilites lothi&lt;/i&gt; F&ouml;rster &amp; Mundlos, 1982 should be assigned to &lt;i&gt;Kromtitis&lt;/i&gt;. A close reading of the text and a careful examination of the images for &lt;i&gt;D. alpina&lt;/i&gt; confirms that this species exhibits a subtriangular carapace, with typical strong, long lateral spines and cervical and branchial grooves characteristic of the configuration in &lt;i&gt;Basinotopus&lt;/i&gt;. Collins &amp; Jakobsen (2004:70) also mentioned that this species should be assigned to &lt;i&gt;Basinotopus&lt;/i&gt;. &lt;i&gt;Dromilites lothi&lt;/i&gt; presents a similar carapace outline, lateral spines along the lateral carapace margins, distribution of dorsal regions and shape of cervical, branchial and branchiocardiac grooves (F&ouml;rster &amp; Mundlos, 1982: 155, figs. 5, 6). Despite the fact that the frontal margin appears to be different, we consider this species to belong to &lt;i&gt;Basinotopus&lt;/i&gt;, but for now we retain it in &lt;i&gt;Dromilites&lt;/i&gt; until better-preserved material becomes available. &lt;i&gt;Kromtitis&lt;/i&gt; is characterised by a subquadrate carapace outline, a broad and near-straight frontal margin in dorsal view, dorsal regions that are subdivided into numerous portions, presenting a range of small swellings and absence of cervical and branchial grooves that are typical of genera such as &lt;i&gt;Dromilites, Basinotopus&lt;/i&gt;, or &lt;i&gt;Pseudodromilites&lt;/i&gt; (Beschin &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2007: pl. 3; Schweitzer &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;., 2012: fig. 21). Reasons to exclude &lt;i&gt;B. alpina&lt;/i&gt; and &lt;i&gt;D. lothi&lt;/i&gt; from &lt;i&gt;Kromtitis&lt;/i&gt; were discussed by Van Bakel &lt;i&gt;et al&lt;/i&gt;. (2009: 49, 50).&lt;/p&gt;Published as part of &lt;i&gt;Artal, Pedro, Van Bakel, Barry W. M., Domínguez, José L. &amp; Gómez, Guillermo, 2016, A new dromiid crab (Crustacea, Brachyura, Dromioidea) from the Upper Eocene of Huesca (Aragón, northern Spain), pp. 438-446 in Zootaxa 4061 (4)&lt;/i&gt; on pages 440-445, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4061.4.8, &lt;a href="http://zenodo.org/record/270404"&gt;http://zenodo.org/record/270404&lt;/a&gt

New retroplumid crabs (Crustacea, Brachyura, Retroplumidae Gill, 1894) from the Eocene of Huesca (Aragón, Spain)

Artal, Pedro, Van Bakel, Barry W. M., Fraaije, René H. B., Jagt, John W. M. (2013): New retroplumid crabs (Crustacea, Brachyura, Retroplumidae Gill, 1894) from the Eocene of Huesca (Aragón, Spain). Zootaxa 3652 (3): 343-352, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3652.3.

First record of paguroid anomurans (Crustacea) from the Tithonian-lower Berriasian of Štramberk, Moravia (Czech Republic)

For the first time, paguroid remains are recorded from the Tithonian (latest Jurassic) to early Berriasian (Early Cretaceous) Štramberk Limestone in the eastern Czech Republic. On the basis of carapaces and a sixth abdominal tergite, new representatives of the families Diogenidae (Bachmayerus cavus n. gen., n. sp.), Parapylochelidae (Housacheles timidus n. gen., n. sp.) and Pylochelidae (Pylochelitergites stramberkensis n. sp.) are named and described. Data are added on the morphology of a new member of the Gastrodoridae, Gastrodorus kotoucensis n. sp.; on the basis of this record, the family is reassigned, as a basal group, to the Paguroidea.Web of Science269325925