Search

Maliithipon cf. aberrans (Mielke 1984a) = Apodopsyllus aberrans Mielke 1984a in Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor & George (2016) (Figs. 6–11) Material examined. Two male and four female specimens, each one undissected and mounted on one slide labelled respectively: Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female. Prainha, ST 1/3 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female, Prainha, ST 1/4 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult male. Prainha, ST 1/6 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult male. Calheta, ST1/1 (Madeira Island); Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female, Puerto Santo Island East, ST 3/6; Apodopsyllus aberrans, adult female, Puerto Santo Island East, ST 3/6. Details on the collecting methods, collecting sites and dates in Packmor et al. (2015). Description of female. Habitus (Fig. 6A). Body unpigmented, elongate, cylindrical and slightly depressed dorsoventrally, naupliar eye absent. Length 228 μm, n = 4, mean = 229 μm. Last urosomites tapering posteriorly. Free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by well-developed arthrodial membranes. Ventrolateral margin of first, second, and fourth free thoracic somites with row of denticles (Fig. 6B). Integument weakly sclerotized, without cuticular pits. First pedigerous somite and dorsal cephalic shield fused forming cephalothorax representing about 26% of total body length. Cephalothorax and somites with few sensilla and several pores on dorsal, lateral and ventral surfaces (pores were difficult to observe, their pattern could not be precisely determined). Second and third urosomite completely fused to form genital double-somite. Penultimate body somite without sensilla, carrying a fine, well developed lobate pseudoperculum (Figs. 6A, 7C). Anal somite small, with pair of dorsal sensilla (Fig. 7B); anal operculum not visible. Genital field (Fig. 6C–D) small, ellipsoidal with two small lateral lobes, located mid-ventrally and at mid-length of the genital double-somite, surrounded by eight pores of different size; P6 not discernible (morphology probably as in M. wellsi). Caudal rami (Fig. 7 °–B). Parallel, slightly longer than the last urosomite; length: 14 μm; length/width: 1.8. Approximately rectangular in shape, slightly tapering posteriorly, the distal outer corner is prolonged in a ventral cuticular outgrowth; armature represented by six setae (seta I apparently missing): seta II short and very thin, seta III stout and pointed, unipinnate along approximately one/fifth of the distal outer margin; seta IV unipinnate, seta V bare and very reduced; seta VI as seta III but shorter; seta VII bare, bi-articulate at base and arising distally at two-thirds of the ramus length. Rostrum (Fig. 6A, 8A). Small, approximately triangular, with round tip, fused to cephalic shield, armed with two sensilla. Antennule (Fig. 8A–B). Short, robust, 8-segmented. First segment longest, without armature; second segment with ten setae, four of which pinnate, the one on the outer distal corner longest. Third segment provided with two pinnate and five bare setae. Inner distal corner of fourth segment forming a sub-cylindrical process carrying a long and thick aesthetasc fused at base with one long bare seta, and two short, basally-enlarged setae, the outer one pinnate. Fifth segment smallest, with one bare seta. Sixth segment with two bare setae; seventh segment with one bare and one pinnate seta. Eighth segment with seven bare setae and one pinnate and acrothek formed by a slender aesthetasc and a seta fused at base. Armature formula: 1–[0], 2–[6 bare + 4 pinnate], 3–[5 bare + 2 pinnate], 4–[1 bare + 1 pinnate + (1 + ae)], 5–[1 bare], 6–[2 bare], 7–[1 bare + 1 pinnate], 8–[8 bare + 1 pinnate + acrothek]. Antenna (Fig. 8C–D). 4-segmented; coxa small and bare; basis approximately twice longer than wide, without any surface ornamentation; exopod (Fig. 8D) 1-segmented, with two bare setae laterally, one pinnate seta and one short spine apically. Endopod 2-segmented, proximal segment with one pinnate abexopodal seta; distal endopodal segment armed with two subdistal bare spiniform setae, distal margin carrying three bare geniculate setae and three bare normal setae, one of which very short. Mandible (Fig. 8E). Coxa long and narrow, with well-developed gnathobase bearing one bare seta at dorsal corner; cutting edge provided with three apical needle-like teeth, one long pointed tooth on inner and on outer corner, one tooth has double the size of the other. Palp reduced, 2-segmented, comprising roundish basis, 1-segmented endopod with one seta, one pinnate spiniform seta, and one spinule distally, and one lateral unipinnate spiniform seta. Maxillule (Fig. 8F). Difficult to discern. All setae bare. Praecoxal arthrite roundish, with one seta at half of the lateral margin (marked with asterisk in Fig. 8F), two thin and two stronger setae at distal margin. Coxa prolonged in a cylindrical endite with two apical setae; basis with one apical seta. Exopod and endopod missing. Maxilla (Fig. 9A). Overall very large compared to the other mouthparts (in lateral view, it projects from the cephalothoracic margin); syncoxa with three endites, proximal one small with one apical pinnate seta, median endite small with one apical pinnate seta, distal coxal endite with two apical bare setae. Allobasis prolonged into strong denticled claw; endopod fused to basis and armed with four strong setae distally. Maxilliped (Fig. 9C). 3-segmented, comprising syncoxa, basis, and 1-segmented endopod; syncoxa bare, basis slightly longer than coxa and bare; endopod short, distally one normal and two slightly geniculated bare setae. P1 (Fig. 9D). Intercoxal sclerite long and thin, slightly concave; coxa bare, well-developed; basis without outer seta, with bare inner seta at half length of the inner margin; exopod and endopod 2-segmented, exopod slightly shorter than endopod. First exopodal segment longer than the second one, with spinular row along outer margin, strong pinnate seta on distal outer corner; second segment with spinular row along outer margin, four distal pinnate setae, the innermost is the longest. First endopodal segment bare, 2.5 times longer than the second one, with spinules along outer margin; second segment with spinules along the distal part of the outer margin, two long geniculate apical setae. P2–P4. (Figs. 9E–F, 10A). Intercoxal sclerites long and thin. P2 basis with small bare outer seta and with a row of spinules on inner margin; P3 and P4 basis with outer pinnate seta. Exopods 3-segmented, first, second and third segments with spinular row along outer margin and outer unipinnate, curved spine at distal corner, longest in P4 exp-2; third segment also with apical long geniculate pinnate seta. Endopods missing. Setal formula provided in Table 1. P5 (Fig. 6C). Reduced to two adjacent lobed plates laterally inserted; the outermost plate with a pinnate seta (ancestral basal seta), the innermost plate, roundish, with three setae, the longest middle one unipinnate. Description of male. General body shape and ornamentation as in female, but slightly smaller and more slender, body length 220 μm; prosome to urosome ratio: 0.85. Last urosomites tapering posteriorly. Cephalothorax representing about 25% of total body length. Antenna, Mdb, Mxl, Mx, Mxp, P1–P4 (Figs. 10D, 11–C) as in female. Sexual dimorphism in separation of genital somite, A1, P5, and P6, ventrolateral margin of free thoracic somites without row of denticles; P2 basis ornamentation, P3–P4 basis armature; P4 exp-2 armature.Anal somite small, anal operculum and dorsal sensilla of the anal somite not visible. Caudal rami (Fig. 11E). Shape and armature as in female but proportionally longer and thinner (length/width = 2). Antennule (Fig. 10C). Strong, short, subchirocer, 7-segmented. First segment without distal seta, as in female; second segment with long lateral seta, as in female, two short pinnate lateral setae, five bare setae. Third segment with four bare setae of different lengths, one short pinnate seta. Fourth segment small, with two short setae; fifth segment enlarged, square, with long aesthetasc fused at base with long seta. Fifth segment with lateral tubercle carrying one thick esthetasc and two setae of same length; inner distal corner produced in a tubercle carrying one bare seta and three shorter ones, the middle one is enlarged in the first half and pinnate. Sixth segment with one long and three short setae, one of which pinnate; seventh segment with eight bare setae and one small seta fused to aesthetasc to form apical acrothek. Armature formula: 1–[0], 2–[6 bare + 2 pinnate], 3–[4 bare + 1 pinnate], 4–[2 bare], 5–[4 bare + 1 pinnate + (1 + ae)], 6–[3 bare +1 pinnate], 7–[8 bare + acrothek]. P2 (Fig. 11A). Basis without inner row of spinules. P3 (Fig. 11B). Basis with outer bare seta. P4 (Fig. 11C). Basis with outer bare seta; exp-2 with distal spine of normal size. P5 (Fig. 10E). Similar to female but the two lobes are merged, smaller, and with bare setae; the exopod is merged with the somite and carries two setae (one less seta than in the female). P6 (Fig. 11D) represented by two asymmetrical (the right one is larger) roundish plates with one seta, the one on the right is longer. Spermatophore (Fig. 11D). Ellipsoidal, approximately as long as the somite carrying the P5. Variability. In one female paratype the maxillary distal endite is longer and carries three setae instead of two (Fig. 9B). In a second female paratype the P5 exopod carries one seta less (Fig. 10B) and setae IV and V on the caudal rami are normally developed (Fig. 7C). In one male seta V is normal on the right caudal ramus, and extremely reduced on the left caudal ramus (Fig. 11F). Remarks. Since the description of the new genus Maliithipon is based exclusively on morphological characters, M. cf. aberrans can be included in the new genus (Table 1). Females and males of M. cf. aberrans can be distinguished from those of M. wellsi sp. nov. by easily-observable characters, e.g. the caudal rami, P5 and P6. The distinction of M. cf. aberrans from M. aberrans comb. nov. is more difficult, mainly due to the lack of males in the type series of M. aberrans. As a consequence, the males collected in the Azores, initially listed as A. aberrans in Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor & George (2016), cannot be compared with males of the type series, and could potentially belong to a different taxon. However, because the females collected in the Azores share the main discriminant features with M. aberrans, but differ in some minor features which are more difficult to observe (Table 1), we have chosen to be more conservative in the attribution of the taxonomic status to this population of Maliithipon, and not to follow Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor & George (2016). The discovery of new populations, or the availability of new knowledge on the taxonomy of the existing populations (based for instance on scanning and/or confocal laser scanning microscopy; developmental study, molecular analysis) will hopefully allow to attribute a final taxonomic status to this taxon.

Maliithipon aberrans (Mielke, 1984a) comb. nov. This species was described as Apodopsyllus aberrans by Mielke (1984a) based on three female specimens collected in two sandy beaches on the Pacific Coast of Panama: “ Isla Naos” (two specimens) and “ Isla Melones” (one specimen). The description and the drawings clearly show how this species shares all the characters listed for Maliithipon gen. nov. This species can be distinguished from the type species M. wellsi sp. nov. by several characters (Table 1), some of which are easy to observe, such as the shape and size of caudal rami (shorter and wider in M. aberrans, length/ width: 1), the structure of P5 (more reduced in M. wellsi sp. nov.). To expand the comparison of the two species, we report here the antennulary armature deducted from Mielke’s (1984a: 227) original drawings: 1–[0], 2–[3 bare + 5 pinnate], 3–[3 bare + 3 pinnate], 4–[1 bare + 1 + ae], 5–[1 bare], 6–[1 pinnate], 7–[4 bare + 1 pinnate], 8–[4 bare + ae (acrothek?)]., Published as part of Cottarelli, Vezio & Bruno, Maria Cristina, 2021, Interesting interstitial Paramesochridae (Copepoda: Harpacticoida): Maliithipon wellsi gen. et sp. nov. from the Philippines, M. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) comb. nov from Panama, and M. cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984) from the Azores, pp. 68-93 in Zootaxa 5051 (1) on page 80, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5051.1.7, http://zenodo.org/record/5564063, {"references":["Mielke, W. (1984 a) Einige Paramesochridae (Copepoda) von Panama. Spixiana, 7, 217 - 243."]}

Genus Maliithipon gen. nov. zoobank.org:act: 3C6CE0CB-4E60-4257-8C14-4C2FF804DBB2 Diagnosis. Body elongate, cylindrical, slightly depressed dorsoventrally and slightly tapering distally. No distinct separation between prosome and urosome. Cephalotorax approximately quadrangular, larger than somites, longer than the following two somites, with sensilla and several dorsal pores. Dorsal pores present also on the remaining somites. Genital complex of female: genital field small, transversally oval, ventrally at half length of the double genital somite which lacks dorsal suture; P6 reduced to two small arched chitinous plates, apparently not fused; genital pore near the distal margin of the genital field, below the P6. Penultimate somite with well-developed quadrilobate pseudoperculum. Caudal rami approximately cylindrical, tapering distally in lateral view, apparently with six setae. Seta I missing (or not discernible), seta III and VI enlarged and pointed, unipinnate in the distal third on the outer (seta III) or inner (seta VI) margin. Distal setae (IV and V) variable in shape, peculiarly transformed in short fusiform structures in some specimens; seta VII dorsally inserted at 2/3 of the ramus length, biarticulate at base. Rostrum small, triangular, fused to cephalothorax, with two sensilla. Antennule 8-segmented in female, with large aesthetasc on segment four and small easthetasc on segment eight. Antennule 7-segmented in male, short, subchirocer, aesthetasc on segments V and VII. Antenna 4-segmented; coxa and basis without ornamentation, enp-1 with strong pinnate abexopodal seta, enp-2 armed with eight elements; exopod 1-segmented with two lateral setae and one or two distal ones, the longest one pinnate. Mandible with uniramous and 2-segmented palp comprising basis, 1-segmented endopod with four setae or three setae and one spine. Coxal gnathobase long, with dorsal seta; cutting edge with a row of thin and pointed teeth along the distal margin, with a stronger tooth at the inner and outer corner. Maxillula: praecoxal arthrite with strong lateral seta and 5-6 distal spiniform setae; coxa with one or two distal setae, basis with one or two to three apical setae; exopod and endopod missing. Maxilla large, with reduced chaetotaxy; syncoxa with three endites: proximal and median ones with one seta, distal one with two or three pinnate setae; basis produced into strong claw; endopod fused with basipodite, carrying four setae, one or two of which are claw-like. Maxilliped: subchelate, syncoxa bare; basis elongate and bare; endopod 1- or 2-segmented. P1: coxa large and bare, basis without outer basal seta, with strong inner seta; rami 2-segmented, endopod slightly longer than exopod, or of about equal length; exp-1 with long pinnate outer seta, exp-2 with four setae; enp-2 with two geniculate apical setae. P2-P4 laterally displaced but coxa and basis not fused and not markedly produced laterally; basis with outer seta. P2 basis with inner setular row in females; exopods 3-segmented, with two spiniform setae on distal segment; endopods absent. P5 very reduced in both sexes, partly incorporated in somite. In females, baseoendopod represented by a lobe with a lateral seta, exopod reduced to a minute subrectangular lobe with two bare and one pinnate setae or exopod reduced to a lobe with one seta. In males, baseoendopodal lobe with one seta, exopodal lobe with two setae or reduced to a small lobe without armature. P 6 in male reduced to two asymmetrical round plates with one or no seta. Type species. Maliithipon wellsi gen. et sp. nov. (by original designation). Other species. Apodopsyllus aberrans Mielke, 1984a = Maliithipon aberrans (Mielke, 1984a) comb. nov.; Apodopsyllus aberrans Mielke, 1984a in Packmor et al. (2015) and Packmor & George (2016) = Malliithipon cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984a). Etymology. The generic name is derived from two Tagalog (the official language of the Philippines) words: “maliit” meaning small, and “hipon” meaning shrimp. Gender: masculine. Relationships. Based on the existing classifications, M. wellsi sp. nov. could have been included in the genus Apodopsyllus, as we did when we first examined our specimens, and as it had occurred for the specimens collected from the locus typicus and the Azores (Packmor et al. 2015; Packmor & George 2016). In fact, M. wellsi sp. nov. lacks the endopods of swimming legs P2–P4, as is typical of Apodopsyllus. However, members of the latter genus have the coxa and basis of P2–P4 fused forming a fusiform segment that is much longer than wide. To our knowledge no author noticed that in A. aberrans the coxa and basis are not fused, are wider than long, and that the exopods are inserted laterally. The same conditions occur in the new genus; the P2–P4 of this type are morphologically and functionally different from those of the remaining species of Apodopsyllus, possibly providing a very different locomotion modality. A similar type of swimming legs are present in Leptopsyllus Scott, 1894 and Wellsopsyllus Kunz, 1981, which include species similar to the new ones established in this work (see below). The presence of this type of legs could therefore be a synapomorphic character, shared with other genera, however, Maliithipon gen. nov. has a set of exclusive (autapomorphic?) characters related to the mouthparts, P5 and caudal rami, the most significant being the following: i) Mandibular palp: uniramous and 2-segmented, i.e. composed of basis and endopod, armed with few setae. Cutting edge of coxal gnathobase with long, thin and pointed teeth, the innermost and outermost ones being longer and stronger. ii) Maxillule of simple structure, coxa and basis with few setae, exopod and endopod missing. iii) Maxilla with three endites with reduced armature, the proximal endite can be reduced to a seta; the endopod is 1-segmented and fused to the basis, which is unarmed, at least one of the apical endopodal setae is claw-like. The maxillae are very large compared to the other mouthparts; in lateral view, they typically protrude from the cephalothorax. iv) P5 very reduced in both sexes: in M. aberrans comb. nov. (only females are known for this species) each P5 is represented by two small adjacent plates (one is the baseoendopod, the other the exopod), inserted laterally and carrying respectively one and three setae; in M. cf. aberrans the exopod has three setae in the female but only two in the male, and the endopodal lobe in the male is partly fused with the exopodal lobe to form a structure similar to the one of Wellsopsyllus (Intermediopsyllus) smirnovi. The P5 can be further reduced: in M. wellsi sp. nov. the female has only one lobe (with a small incision, probably representing the boundary between baseoendopod and exopod) with one seta (missing in some specimens), and the male has a single, smaller lobe without setae. v) Pseudoperculum with multilobate posterior margin. vi) Caudal rami always with six setae, with peculiar transformation of setae III and VI. All the above-mentioned characters are absent in the remaining species of Apodopsyllus (A. aberrans excluded), which share with Maliithipon gen. nov. only the morphology of P1, the absence of P2–P4 endopods, and the morphology of P2–P2 exopods. These similarities could be due to parallel evolution; however, the morphology of P2–P4 coxa and basis differs between the two genera. Both genera also share the number of setae on the caudal rami, but setae III and VI are not transformed in Apodopsyllus, which also has a different shape and ornamentation of the body, caudal rami, and genital field. In summary, the unique combination of the above-listed characters does, in our opinion, characterize the new genus and separates it from Apodopsyllus; as a consequence the two species of Apodopsyllus which indeed share such set of characters, i.e. A. aberrans and A. cf. aberrans, are transferred to the new genus Maliithipon as M. aberrans (Mielke, 1984a) comb. nov. and M. cf. aberrans (Mielke, 1984a), respectively. As regards the genera Wellsopsyllus and Leptopsyllu s, the affinities with Maliithipon gen. nov. can be found with some species whose generic attribution is uncertain, according to their authors. As we discussed for Apodopsyllus, there are two unusual species among these genera, i.e. Leptopsyllus (Leptopsyllus) platyspinosus and Wellsopsyllus (Intermediopsullus) smirnovi, which, according to us, have more morphological characters in common with Maliithipon gen. nov. than with their respective congeners. The same applies, but to a lesser degree, to Leptopsyllus (Leptopsyllus) typicus, Wellsopsyllus (Wellsopsyllus) antarcticus Kottmann & Veit-Köhler, 2013, and Biuncus ingens. In Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus the mandible has a uniramous, 2-segmented palp, including an unarmed basis and a 1-segmented endopod carrying four setae; the morphology of the coxal gnathobase and cutting edge are also similar to those of the new genus. The maxillule and maxilla are very similar to those of the new genus (see Mielke 1984b: Fig. 23). The maxillipedal endopod is 2-segmented, there is a pseudoperculum with a bilobate rather than a quadrilobate posterior margin, the P4 has a 1-segmented endopod, the P5 has a reduced baseoendopod and small exopod, carrying three setae, and the genital field and shape and armature of the caudal rami are very similar to those of Maliithipon gen. nov. Leptopsyllus (L.) typicus has not been redescribed according to modern standards, and only the females are known. Nonetheless, the mandibular palp is uniramous, being represented by the basis and the endopod, and the structure of the maxilla (endites with reduced armature, basis prolonged into a claw, a second claw originates from the partially fused endopod) and maxilliped (with 1-segmented endopod) are characters which indicate a degree of affinity with the new genus. The morphology of the maxilla, pseudoperculum and P5 are unknown for this species, the caudal rami differ in shape and ornamentation and the body size of this species is very large (700 μm). Wellsopsyllus (I.) smirnovi has the same transformation/reduction of the mouthparts as in Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus, but the three maxillary endites have more setae than the taxa discussed so far, and the P5, “a small plate with three setae, middle lobe not noticeable” (Kunz 1992), is morphologically similar to the one of the new genus but even simpler: it is reduced to a very small exopod, completely fused to the somite, carrying only two setae. Setae III and IV of the caudal rami are not characteristically transformed, the pseudoperculum seems to be missing but it could have been overlooked by Kunz (1992) who, for the male, described only the subchirocer antennule and did not provide any information on the P5 and P6. This species is remarkably long (510 μm). Wellsopsyllus (W.) antarcticus (1) has a 1-segmented antennary exopod, a uniramous (but 3-segmented) mandibular palp, a maxillule without endopod or exopod and the size and armature of the maxilla are similar to those of Maliithipon gen. nov. Differences with the new genus are expressed in the P2–P4 which have retained the endopod, the genital field with a different structure carrying two setae, the P5 which is not reduced in either sex, the absence of a lobate pseudoperculum and the morphology of the caudal rami. Biuncus ingens is a large species, known only from males, and was included by Huys (1995) in the group of species related to Leptopsyllus based on the mandibular palp (which in Biuncus is simple but retains the exopod, represented by a seta, and the endopod is 2-segmented), the structure and size of the maxilla, and the presence of a lobate pseudoperculum. The analysis of all the above-listed taxa, which are morphologically close to Maliithipon gen. nov., underlines that only the species of this genus share all the above-mentioned characters. These same characters can be present in other Paramesochridae, but never all of them combined in one species. 1 We underline that Kottmann et al. (2013) provided some interesting remarks on the “uncertainties” regarding the systematic and morphology of this genus and subgenera with which we fully agree. Particularly relevant to solving some systematic issues in the Paramesochridae is the analysis of the morphology of mouthparts, P5 and caudal rami. This view is supported by Kottman et al. (2013) who, while discussing affinities among species of Wellsopsyllus, remarked how “at present, the classification is mainly based on the segmentation of the swimming legs, but there are other important characteristics to be considered (e.g., mouthparts, furcal rami)”. More recently, Back & Lee (2017a) discussed the genus Leptopsyllus, underlining how most of the recent classifications for this genus are based on leg characteristics (reduced or absent), and the complete descriptions of mouthparts are lacking for many species. Veit-Köhler (2004, 2005) gave similar remarks for the genus Kliopsyllus (now Emertonia). Already Kunz (1981) stated that in very specialized Paramesochridae with reduced pereiopods, such as Apodopsyllus and Leptopsyllus, the original components of the mouthparts are still recognizable. Later on, Huys (1987) remarked that Wellsopsyllus, Leptopsyllus and Apodopsyllus have undergone paedomorphic evolution and “can easily be included in a morphological series with increasingly pronounced larval characters”. The new genus Maliithipon gen. nov. can be added to this “morphological series” but the species included in the latter and the above-discussed species to which it is most closely related (mainly Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus) can represent a further step which characterizes and separates them from the other components of the evolutionary lineages hypothesized by Huys (1987). Possibly, further studies based also on a molecular approach will allow including them in a phylogenetically-valid group. The discussion of the taxonomic position of Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus and W. (I.) smirnovi is outside the scope of this paper. We, however, suggest that these two species should be considered incertae sedis, as already proposed by Wells (2007) for W. (I.) smirnovi. When and if Wellsopsyllus (I.) smirnovi will be redescribed with more details (the original drawings of Leptopsyllus (L.) platyspinosus are still adequate), it will be possible to include these two species in a taxonomic unit close to Maliithipon gen. nov., or possibly in the same genus appropriately reviewed and divided into subgenera. In fact, it is difficult to suppose that complicated structures as those described above could have evolved independently but in a similar way in different genera. It is worthy to remember that Kunz (1992: 90), while discussing the affinities of W. (I.) smirnovi, stated that “these observations suggest to separate L. platyspinosus, S. smirnovi and S. minutus as a phylogenetically-related group”.

This article presents different narratives concerning the paths that the Network of Archaeological and Ethnographic Museums and Collections (REMAAE), which was created in 2008, took in Brazil. Based on reports and several information exchanged between its coordinators and members, and under the analysis of publications, articles, and REMAAES’s documents, the background of its articulation is explored, its stance and agendas over time, as well as the challenges identified in the present, that may guide future actions. The perspective offered by the Social Memory scope has also allowed to value and reproduce some of the most poignant characteristics of the articulation of its members, such as the polyphony and the non-hierarchization of the disciplinary areas of training. Este artículo presenta distintas narrativas sobre las trayectorias de la Red de Museos y Colecciones Arqueológicas y Etnográficas (REMAAE) en el país, creada en 2008. A través de la recolección de informes e informaciones de diversas órdenes entre sus coordinadores y miembros, fueron analizadas las publicaciones, artículos y documentos de la Red, investigados los antecedentes de esta articulación, su reposicionamiento y agendas a lo largo del tiempo, así como los retos identificados en el presente, que pueden orientar acciones futuras. La perspectiva que ofrece el campo de la Memoria Social también ha permitido valorar y reproducir algunas de las características más pungentes de la articulación de sus integrantes, como la polifonía y la no jerarquización de las áreas disciplinarias de formación. O presente artigo apresenta diferentes narrativas sobre os trajetos da Rede de Museus e Acervos Arqueológicos e Etnográficos (REMAAE) no país, criada em 2008. Por meio da coleta de relatos e informações de diversas ordens entre suas/seus coordenadoras/es e integrantes, e da análise de publicações, artigos e documentos da Rede, exploramos os antecedentes dessa articulação, seus reposicionamentos e agendas ao longo do tempo, bem como os desafios identificados no presente, que possam orientar ações futuras. A perspectiva oferecida pelo campo da Memória Social permitiu, ademais, valorizar e reproduzir algumas das características mais pungentes da articulação de seus membros, como a polifonia e a não-hierarquização das áreas disciplinares de formação.

The approach to archaeological collections, in this text, is guided by the problematization related to the longevity of the collections and their historical-cultural implications for the societies that are responsible for their constitutions, maintenance, and preservations, with special projection on some Brazilian issues in the contemporary and still that corresponds to the curatorial responsibilities. En este trabajo el abordaje de las colecciones arqueológicas está guiado por la problematización relacionada con la longevidad de las colecciones y sus implicaciones histórico-culturales para las sociedades que son responsables de su constitución, mantenimiento y preservación, con especial proyección sobre algunas cuestiones brasileñas en la actualidad, así como en lo que concerniente a las responsabilidades curatoriales. A abordagem sobre acervos arqueológicos, neste texto, está pautada pela problematização referente à longevidade dos acervos e suas implicações histórico-culturais para as sociedades que são responsáveis pelas suas constituições, manutenções e preservações, com projeção especial sobre algumas questões brasileiras na contemporaneidade e ainda no que corresponde às responsabilidades curatoriais.

Stammericaris vincentimariae Bruno & Cottarelli sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: AD8C5160-A007-4D29-974F-12925EAD0CA7 Figs 9–11, 12a; Tables 1–3 Diagnosis Stammericaris vincentimariae Bruno & Cottarelli sp. nov. is characterized in males primarily by the presence of one seta on the 7 th antennular segment and by the morphology of the P4: the innermost spinule of the basis inner row is inserted transversally instead of longitudinally; the enp curved plate tip is bifid instead of pointy and the distal outgrowth is flattened instead of being a seta. Females are characterized by the enp P3 much shorter than half of the first corresponding exp-1. Both sexes are characterized by caudal rami with a strong apical pointed apophysis. Etymology The species epithet is the genitive of the Latin first names Vincentius and Maria (Vincent and Mary in English), the names of the son and daughter of one of the authors (RG), in recognition of the great interest shown to speleology from their childhood onward and for participating in some of the collection campaigns. Material examined Holotype ITALY • ♂; Cosenza Province, Cassano allo Ionio, Grotta dello Scoglio, pool 1; approximate coordinates 39°47′9.38ʺ N, 16°18′31.89ʺ E; 25 Apr. 2015; R. Grasso and M.T. Spena leg.; dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Stammericaris vincentimariae holotype: male”; NHMUK 2020.33. Paratypes ITALY • 2 ♂♂; same collection data as for holotype but pool 2; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Stammericaris vincentimariae paratype: male”; NHMUK 2020.34 to 2020.35 • 1 ♂; same collection data as for preceding; dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Stammericaris vincentimariae paratype: male”; NHMUK 2020.36 • 3 ♂♂; same collection data as for holotype; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Stammericaris vincentimariae paratype: male”; NHMUK 2020.37 to 2020.39 • 1 ♀; same collection data as for holotype; dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Stammericaris vincentimariae paratype: female”; NHMUK 2020.40. Description Adult male BODY. Unpigmented, nauplius eye absent. Total body length, measured from tip of rostrum to posterior margin of caudal rami (excluding caudal setae) from 295 to 334 µm, mean 310 μm (n = 5). Habitus cylindrical and slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome; prosome to urosome ratio: 0.80. Free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by welldeveloped arthrodial membranes. Integument weakly sclerotized, without cuticular pits, ornamented with sensilla on all somites except preanal one. Cuticular windows on urosomites (Figs 10j, 11a) and cephalothorax not visible. Cephalothorax representing about 18 % of total body length. Anal somite (Fig. 9 a–b) with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of cuticular lateral pores (one pore on each side) on proximal margin. Anal operculum (Fig. 9 a–b) well developed, with straight distal margin. Anal sinus wide open. Spermatophore as in Fig. 10j. CAUDAL RAMI (Fig. 9 a–b). Shorter than anal somite, approximately cylindrical, with strong dorsal pointed apophysis, length to width ratio: 2.7. Anterolateral accessory seta (I) and anterolateral seta (III) subequal in length, posterolateral seta (III) short, all setae inserted together distally at ¾ length of caudal ramus. Outer terminal seta (IV) long and pinnate (length seta/length caudal ramus: 1.4), inserted subterminally; inner terminal seta (V) without fracture plane. Terminal accessory seta (VI) short (length seta/length caudal ramus: 0.6) and smooth. Dorsal seta (VII) articulate, inserted distally at ¾ length of the caudal ramus. ROSTRUM (Fig. 9d). Small, not demarcated at base, almost reaching distal margin of first antennulary segment, ornamented with two dorsal sensilla. A1 (Fig. 9 c–d). Prehensile, eight-segmented, pocket-knife type sensu Schminke (2010). First segment short; second segment longest, with seven setae, the longest seta unipinnate; third segment with four distal bare setae; fourth segment reduced to small sclerite with two short setae; fifth segment enlarged with inner round expansion with deep incision (arrowed in Fig. 9 c–d) and one seta at base of distal tubercle with two long subequal setae and one large aesthetasc, reaching past end of eighth segment. Sixth segment bare, partially fused to previous one. Seventh segment with one small seta, distal anterior corner protruding as curved apophysis ending in tip. Eighth segment with seven setae and apical acrothek represented by two setae and slender long aesthetasc. Armature formula: 1-[0], 2-[1 uniplumose + 6 bare], 3-[4 bare], 4-[2 bare], 5-[3 bare + ae], 6-[0], 7-[1 bare], 8-[7 bare + (2 bare + ae)]. A2 (Fig. 9e). Coxa unarmed; allobasis with two transverse row of spinules on inner margin. Exp represented by small segment merged with allobasis, with bipinnate apical seta. Enp bearing two spines along inner margin, one short subdistal inner spine, one subdistal outer transformed seta, two geniculate setae and one spine apically, all spines unipinnate, all elements with long spinules near their insertions except proximalmost inner spines. MDB (Fig. 9f). Coxal gnathobase with lateral pinnate short seta, cutting edge with apical teeth. Onesegmented palp, with two distal setae of different length. MX 1 (Fig. 9h). Praecoxal arthrite with three apical curved robust spines apically denticled, one subdistal curved seta. Coxal endite long, with one apical seta. Basis cylindrical, with three distal bare setae. Enp and exp absent (fused to basis without trace). MX 2 (Fig. 9g). Basis with two endites, proximal endite short, with one thin, bare seta; distal endite cylindrical, longer, armed apically with two subequal thin bare setae and one transformed, leaf-like pinnate seta; proximal endopodal segment drawn into apical unipinnate claw; distal endopodal segment with two long setae of equal length. MXP (Fig. 9i). Subchelate, composed of small and unarmed syncoxa, basis slim and elongate, unarmed, 1-segmented enp fused to claw-like apical seta. P1 (Fig. 9 j–k). With smooth and small intercoxal sclerite; coxa bare. Basis large, armed with single slender seta on outer margin, and small seta and lamellar hook on inner margin of basis near enp insertion. Exp three-segmented, slightly shorter than enp; exp-1 with thin unipinnate spine on outer distal corner; exp-2 shortest and unarmed; exp-3 with two geniculate and one normal unipinnate apical setae, and one subapical unipinnate spine. Enp two-segmented; enp-1 longer than first two segments of corresponding exp, with one transversal row of spinules on outer margin, and three on inner margin. Enp-2 thinner and shorter than enp-1, with two spinules at ¼ of inner margin; long, geniculate unipinnate seta, and shorter unipinnate seta on apex. P2 (Fig. 10a). With smooth and small intercoxal sclerite, three times as wide as long, with slightly concave distal margin. Coxa bare. Basis unarmed, with row of four spinules on outer margin. Exp three-segmented, exp-1 longest, with three transversal rows of spinules and transversal row of spinules proximal to strong distolateral bipinnate spine. Second and third segments of same length, exp-2 unarmed, with distal row of spinules; exp-3 armed with subapical outer unipinnate spine, apical bipinnate seta and unipinnate spine, ornamented with outer subapical spinules, distal row of spinules, and inner hyaline frill. Enp one-segmented, slightly longer than half length of corresponding exp-1, but reaching approximately to half length of exp-1, cylindrical, with subapical seta about as long as segment and three short apical spinules. P3 (Fig. 10 b–c). Intercoxal sclerite narrow and tall, trapezoidal, unornamented, with slightly concave distal margin. Coxa with two outer spinular rows. Basis robust, with long, slender, smooth outer seta and transverse spinule row above. Enp reduced to short seta. Exp-1 outer margin with one proximal group of two spinules, distal group of two large and two smaller spinules (almost divided into two groups). Exp-2 fused with exp-1, without ornamentation, prolonged into long apophysis slightly bent inwards, with pointed tip surrounded by hyaline membrane (arrowed in Fig. 10b). Distal thumb represented by thin and pointed segment, shorter than apophysis. P4 (Fig. 10 g–h). Intercoxal sclerite smaller than in P1 or P2, with concave, smooth distal margin. Coxa with spinular row on outer margin. Basis armed with single slender seta on outer margin; ornamented with row of spinules at base of outer seta and pore. Row of three spinules of increasing size, slightly curved inwards aligned along inner margin, smaller one close to enp; one spiniform process on inner margin projecting inwards. Exp three-segmented, slender, all segments approximately of the same length; exp-1 with distolateral unipinnate spine; with transversal row of two spinules at ¼ of outer margin and below distolateral spine insertion, spinular row along distal margin; exp-2 unarmed, with spinular row along distal margin and two spinules at outer distal corner; exp-3 armed with outer unipinnate spine and long apical unipinnate seta, spine length less than ½ of seta length; ornamentation represented by row of apical spinules, row of spinules along distal outer margine, inner hyaline frill. Enp one-segmented and as long as first two segments of corresponding exp, represented by curved plate with bifid tip, carrying at outer border two outgrowths, distal one being long denticled lamella and proximal one plain small spiniform outgrowth. P5 (Figs 10 i–j, 11a). Fused to intercoxal sclerite; represented by two trapezoidal cuticular plates with long basipodal seta. Armature on free distal margin, from inner to outer: one spiniform process, three bare setae, outermost very short, remaining two subequal. P6 (Figs 10j, 11a). Vestigial, fused into simple cuticular plate, unornamented and unarmed. Adult female HABITUS. Cylindrical and slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome. Free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by well-developed arthrodial membranes. Integument weakly sclerotized, without cuticular pits, ornamented with sensilla on all somites except preanal one. Cuticular windows on urosomites and cephalothorax not visible. Body length, excluding caudal setae, from 290 to 340 μm, mean 314 μm (n = 5), ornamentation of cephalothorax, somites, pigmentation and absence of nauplius eye as in male, except genital and first urosomite fused into double-somite. Cephalotorax representing about 19% of total body length. Prosome/urosome ratio: 0.80. Genital double-somite (Fig. 12a) without any trace of subdivision. Genital field (Fig. 12a) broader than tall, occupying anterior ventral ¼ of genital double-somite, with pair of ventrodistal pores; single genital aperture covered by fused vestigial sixth legs; median copulatory pore located medially at ¼ of double-somite length. Anal operculum and anal sinus (Fig. 11b) as in male. CAUDAL RAMI (Fig. 11b). Shape, ornamentation and armature similar to those of male, length/width ratio: 3.3. ROSTRUM, A2 AND ORAL APPENDAGES. As in male. A1 (Fig. 11c). Seven-segmented, aesthetasc on fourth segment shorter than in male, reaching below end of seventh segment. First segment bare. Second segment longest. Apical acrothek represented by two setae of subequal length and slender aesthetasc. Armature formula: 1-[0], 2-[1 pinnate + 3 bare], 3-[4 bare], 4-[2 bare + ae], 5-[0], 6-[0], 7-[7 bare + (2 bare + ae)]. P1 (Fig. 11d). Intercoxal sclerite, coxa, basis ornamentation as in male, but with inner spiniform seta (lamellar hook missing), outer seta missing; exp and enp similar to those of male in shape, ornamentation and armature. P2 (Fig. 11e). Intercoxal sclerite, coxa, basis and exp as in male. Enp similar in shape and ornamentation to that of male, but subapical seta shorter. P3 (Fig. 11f). Intercoxal sclerite small, trapezoidal, with concave margin, bare. Coxa with outer spinular row. Basis with outer spinular row; exp two-segmented: exp-1 slightly longer than exp-2, with distolateral curved unipinnate spine, transversal row of spinules at ¼ and ¼ of outer margin, distal spinular row, hyaline frill on inner distal corner; exp-2 with subapical outer unipinnate spine and apical bipinnate seta, spine length about ¼ of seta, with distal spinular row and hyaline frill on inner distal corner. Enp represented by thin and pointed segment, much shorter than half of corresponding exp-1. P4 (Fig. 11g). Intercoxal sclerite, coxa and exp as in male. Basis bare. Enp represented by thin cylindrical segment, slightly shorter than ½ the length of corresponding exp-1, ending in spiniform seta with spinules around the insertion. P5 (Figs 11h, 12a). Fused to intercoxal sclerite, represented by cuticular plate more elongated than in male, with inner spiniform process shorter than in male, outer short setae transformed in spiniform process, remaining ornamentation represented by two setae, innermost shortest and long basipodal seta. P6 (Fig. 12a). Vestigial, fused into simple cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed. Variability One male specimen with a distal row of three spinules on the outer margin of P3–Exp-1 (Fig. 10d). A second specimen with three spinules on one P3 (Fig. 10e) and one spinule on the other P3 (Fig. 10f).

Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli Bruno & Cottarelli sp. nov. urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act: BFD63C80-116A-49C7-B10D-547D0146CB5A Figs 2 – 8; Tables 1–3 Diagnosis Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli Bruno & Cottarelli sp. nov. is characterized by the peculiar morphology of the male P4 enp, with apically curved inner tip and, mainly, with a thin proximal outgrowth as long as the apical (crenulate) lamellar outgrowth. Females are characterized by the P3 enp being shorter than the corresponding exp-1. Etymology The species epithet is the masculine genitive of the Latin words ‘ sanctus ’ and ‘ angelus ’, meaning ‘Saint’ and ‘angel’, respectively, and refer to the locus typicus of this Cottarellicaris, i.e., a cave dedicated to Saint Michael the Archangel, whose cult is widespread in Southern Italy. Material examined Holotype ITALY • ♂; Cosenza Province, Cassano allo Ionio, Complesso Grotte di Sant’Angelo, Grotta Superiore di Sant’Angelo, pool 2; approximate coordinates 39°47′20.24ʺ N, 16°18′25.60ʺ E; 9 May 2017; R. Grasso and M.T. Spena leg.; dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli holotype: male”; NHMUK 2020.4. Paratypes ITALY • 2 ♂♂; same collection data as for holotype; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli paratype: male”; NHMUK 2020.5 to 2020.6 • 2 ♂♂; same collection data as for holotype but pool 4; dissected and mounted each on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli paratype: male”; NHMUK 2020.7 to 2020.8 • 1 ♂; same collection data as for holotype but pool 4; undissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli paratype: male”; NHMUK 2020.9 • 3 ♀♀; same collection data as for holotype; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli paratype: female”; NHMUK 2020.10 to 2020.12 • 1 ♀; same collection data as for holotype; mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli paratype: female”; NHMUK 2020.13 • 1 ♀; same collection data as for holotype but pool 4; dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli paratype: female”; NHMUK 2020.14 • 1 ♀; same collection data as for holotype but pool 4; mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli paratype: female”; NHMUK 2020.15. Other material ITALY • 1 ♂; Cosenza Province, Cassano allo Ionio, Vucco Ucciardo, pool 1; approximate coordinates; 39°47′3.56ʺ N, 16°19′14.87″ E; 25 Apr. 2013; R. Grasso and M.T. Spena leg.; mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: male”; NHMUK 2020.16 • 4 ♂♂; same collection data as for preceding; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: male”; NHMUK 2020.17 to 2020.20 • 1 ♀; same collection data as for preceding; mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: female”; NHMUK 2020.21 • 4 ♀♀; same collection data as for preceding; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: female”; NHMUK 2020.22 to 2020.25 • 2 ♂♂; Cosenza Province, San Lorenzo Bellizzi, Grotta del Banco di ferro, pool 3; approximate coordinates: 39°52′26.38ʺ N, 16°20′27.35ʺ E; 27 May 2015; Grasso and M.T. Spena leg.; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: male”; NHMUK 2020.26 to 2020.27 • 1 ♂, 1 ♀; same collection data as for preceding; mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: male and female”; NHMUK 2020.28 to 2020.29 • 2 ♀♀, same collection data as for preceding; each dissected and mounted on one slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: female”; NHMUK 2020.30 to 2020.31 • 1 ♀, same collection data as for preceding; 10 May 2017; mounted on slide labelled “ Cottarellicaris sanctiangeli: female”; NHMUK 2020.32. Description Adult male BODY. Unpigmented, nauplius eye absent. Total body length, measured from tip of rostrum to posterior margin of caudal rami (excluding caudal setae) from 295 to 333 µm, mean 311 μm (n = 6). Habitus (Fig. 2a) cylindrical and slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome; prosome to urosome ratio: 0.90. Free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by well-developed arthrodial membranes.Integument weakly sclerotized, without cuticular pits, ornamented with sensilla on all somites except preanal one. Cuticular windows on urosomites and cephalothorax not observed. Cephalothorax representing about 20 % of total body length. Anal somite (Fig. 3a, c) with pair of large dorsal sensilla at base of anal operculum, pair of cuticular lateral pores (one pore on each side) on proximal margin. Anal operculum (Fig. 3a, c) well-developed, ornamented with row of spinules on outer surface, with straight distal margin. Anal sinus wide open. CAUDAL RAMI (Fig. 3a, c). Shorter than anal somite, approximately cylindrical, slightly divergent; length to width ratio: 2.7. Anterolateral accessory seta (I) and anterolateral seta (II) subequal in length, both setae inserted together distally at 5/6 length of caudal ramus, smooth. Posterolateral seta (III) missing. Outer terminal seta (IV) long and pinnate (length seta/length caudal ramus: 1.5), inserted subterminally and projecting outwards; inner terminal seta (V) without fracture plane. Terminal accessory seta (VI) short (length seta/length caudal ramus: 0.7) and smooth. Dorsal seta (VII) articulate, inserted distally at 5/6 length of the caudal ramus, smooth. ROSTRUM (Fig. 4 a–b). Small, not demarcated at base, almost reaching distal margin of first antennulary segment, ornamented with two dorsal sensilla. A1 (Fig. 4 a–c). Prehensile, eight-segmented pocket-knife type sensu Schminke (2010). First segment short with transversal row of spinules; second segment longest, with six setae, longest seta unipinnate; third segment with four distal bare setae; fourth segment reduced to a small sclerite with two short setae; fifth segment enlarged with inner round expansion carrying one short and two longer subequal setae, and distal tubercle with one seta and one large aesthetasc, reaching past end of eighth segment; sixth segment bare, partially fused to previous one; seventh segment bare, distal anterior corner protruding as curved apophysis ending in bilobate tip; eighth segment with seven setae and apical acrothek represented two setae and long, slender aesthetasc. Armature formula: 1-[0], 2-[1 unipinnate + 5 bare], 3-[4 bare], 4-[2 bare], 5-[4 bare + ae], 6-[0], 7-[0], 8-[7 bare + (2 bare + ae)]. A2 (Fig. 4d). Coxa unarmed; allobasis with transverse row of spinules on inner margin. Exp represented by small segment merged with allobasis, with pinnate apical seta. Enp bearing two short subdistal unipinnate spines and five longer distal elements: two of them geniculated, one transformed with furcate tip, all elements unipinnate, with long spinules near their insertions. MDB (Fig. 4e). Coxal gnathobase bare, cutting edge with apical teeth and short bipinnate seta. Onesegmented palp, with two smooth, apical setae of equal length. MX 1 (Fig. 4f). Praecoxal arthrite with three apical curved robust spines apically denticled, one subdistal curved seta. Coxal endite long, with one apical seta. Basis cylindrical, with two distal bare setae. Enp and exp absent (fused to basis without trace). MX 2 (Fig. 4g). Basis with two endites, proximal endite short, with one thin, bare seta; distal endite cylindrical, longer, armed apically with two subequal thin bare setae and one transformed, leaf-like pinnate seta; proximal endopodal segment drawn into apical unipinnate claw; distal endopodal segment with two long setae of equal length. MXP (Fig. 4h). Subchelate, composed of small and unarmed syncoxa, basis slim and elongate, unarmed, 1-segmented enp fused to the claw-like apical seta. P1 (Fig. 5 a–b). With smooth and small intercoxal sclerite; coxa bare. Basis large, armed with small seta and lamellar hook with rounded tip on the inner margin near the enp insertion. Exp three-segmented, slightly shorter than endopod; exp-1 with thin pinnate seta on outer distal corner; exp-2 shortest and unarmed, ornamented with row of spinules along the subdistal and distal margins; exp-3 with two geniculate unipinnate apical setae and two subapical unipinnate setae. Enp two-segmented; enp-1 as long as first two segments of corresponding exp, with two transversal rows of few spinules on outer margin. Enp-2 thinner and shorter than enp-1, with two spinules at ¼ of inner margin and spinules along distal margin, with long, geniculate unipinnate seta and shorter unipinnate seta apically. P2 (Fig. 5c). With smooth intercoxal sclerite, twice as wide as long, with concave distal margin. Coxa bare. Basis unarmed, with row of five spinules on outer margin. Exp three-segmented, exp-1 longest, with row of two spinules at ¼ of outer margin, longitudinal row of three spinules proximal to strong distolateral unipinnate spine. Second and third segments of same length; exp-2 unarmed, with row of spinules on distolateral corner, exp-3 armed with subapical outer unipinnate spine, apical bipinnate seta and outer unipinnate spine, ornamented with subapical spinule and inner hyaline frill. Enp onesegmented, about half length of exp-1, represented by cylindrical segment, with apical seta about as long as segment and three short spinules. P3 (Fig. 5d). Intercoxal sclerite small, trapezoidal, unornamented, with slightly concave distal margin. Coxa bare. Basis robust, with long, slender, smooth outer seta and transverse spinule row above, and distal pore. Enp reduced to short seta. Exp-1 of characteristic shape: inner margin with large knob at ½ length and basal thin and pointed tubercle fused to exp; outer margin with proximal and distal rows of respectively one and four spinules. Exp-2 fused with exp-1, without ornamentation, prolonged into long apophysis slightly bent inwards, with pointed tip. Distal thumb represented by thin and pointed sigmoid segment, reaching past apophysis. P4 (Fig. 5 f–h). Intercoxal sclerite smaller than in P1–P3, with concave, smooth distal margin. Coxa bare. Basis armed with single slender seta on outer margin; ornamented with row of spinules at base of outer seta; row of three spiniform processes aligned along inner margin, of increasing size from outermost to innermost, all slightly curved inwards. Exp three-segmented, slender, all segments approximately of the same length; exp-1 slightly curved inwards, with distolateral pinnate spine, transversal spinular row at midlength of outer margin, spinular row at distolateral spine insertion, spinular row along distal margin; exp-2 unarmed, with spinular row along distal margin; exp-3 armed with outer unipinnate spine with spinules near insertion and very long apical pinnate seta, spine length less than ¼ of seta length; ornamentation represented by row of apical spinules and hyaline frill on inner distal corner. Enp onesegmented, as long as first two segments of corresponding exp, represented by curved plate with pointed inner tip carrying at outer border two outgrowths, distal one being elongate lamella, with undulating (crenulate) margins, reaching past end of enp, proximal outgrowth short curved lamella ending in thin tip. P5 (Fig. 6 a–d). Fused to intercoxal sclerite; represented by two trapezoidal cuticular plates with long basipodal seta and small pore near insertion. Armature on free distal margin, from inner to outer: one spiniform seta, three bare setae, outermost very short, remaining two subequal. P6 (Fig. 6a). Vestigial, fused into simple cuticular plate, unornamented and unarmed. Adult female HABITUS (Fig. 2b). Cylindrical and slender, without any demarcation between prosome and urosome. Free pedigerous somites without any lateral or dorsal expansions, all connected by well-developed arthrodial membranes. Integument weakly sclerotized, without cuticular pits, ornamented with sensilla on all somites except preanal one. Cuticular windows on urosomites and cephalothorax not present. Body length, excluding caudal setae, from 280 to 312 μm, mean 304 μm (n = 6), ornamentation of cephalothorax, somites, pigmentation and absence of nauplius eye as in male, except genital and first urosomite fused into double-somite. Cephalotorax representing about 19% of the total body length. Genital double-somite (Figs 6e, 8c) without any trace of subdivision. Genital field (Figs 6e, 8c) broader than tall, occupying anterior ventral ¼ of genital double-somite; single genital aperture covered by fused vestigial sixth legs; median copulatory pore located medially at ¼ of somite. Anal operculum convex. CAUDAL RAMI (Figs 6 f–g, 8b). Shape, ornamentation and armature similar to those of male, length to width ratio: 3.5. ROSTRUM, A2 AND ORAL APPENDAGES. As in male. A1 (Fig. 7c). Seven-segmented, aesthetasc on fourth segment longer than in male, reaching beyond end of seventh segment. First segment bare. Apical acrothek represented by two setae of different length and slender aesthetasc. Armature formula: 1-[0], 2-[1 unipinnate + 4 bare], 3-[4 bare], 4-[2 bare + ae], 5-[0], 6-[0], 7-[7 bare + (2 bare + ae)]. P1 (Fig. 7d). Intercoxal sclerite, coxa, basis as in male but lamellar hook missing; exp and enp similar to those of male in shape, ornamentation and armature. P2 (Fig. 7e). Intercoxal sclerite longer and narrower than in male, coxa narrower than in male, basis as in male, but with spinular row below enp insertion. Exp as in male. Enp similar in shape and ornamentation to that of male, but with two apical spinule instead of three. P3 (Fig. 7 f–g). Intercoxal sclerite small, with concave margin, bare. Coxa bare. Basis with outer seta and spinular row near seta insertion. Exp two-segmented: exp-1 as long as exp-2, with distolateral curved unipinnate spine, transversal row of spinules at ¼ and ¼ of outer margin, hyaline frill on inner distal corner; exp-2 with outer unipinnate spine and apical pinnate seta, spine length about ¼ of seta, hyaline frill on inner distal corner. Enp represented by thin and pointed segment, slightly shorter than half of corresponding exp-1, apically pinnate. P4 (Figs 7h, 8d). Intercoxal sclerite, coxa and exp as in male. Basis bare. Enp represented by thin cylindrical segment, about ¼ length of corresponding exp-1, ending in short bipinnate seta. P5 (Fig. 6e). Fused to intercoxal sclerite, represented by two cuticular plates shorter than in male, with same armature and without distal pore. P6 (Fig. 6e). Vestigial, fused into simple cuticular plate, covering gonopore, unornamented and unarmed. Variability The ornamentation of male P3 exp-1 can vary, as one specimen from Vucco Ucciardo has the proximal and distal rows of respectively two and three spinules (Fig. 5e). Two males (Fig. 3b, d) and one female (Fig. 7b) from Grotta del Banco di ferro, one male (Fig. 3e) and one female (Fig. 7a) from Vucco Ucciardo carry seven setae on the caudal rami instead then 6. In one female from Vucco Ucciardo the enp P4 is fused with the apical spine (Fig. 7i). Accompanying fauna Grotta del Banco di ferro, 10 May 2017: Maraenobiotus sp.: pool 4; Elaphoidella sp.: pool 2.

The reflection on the theoretical paths that have consolidated the field of Museology is the central axis of the approaches presented in this text, with special emphasis on the dilemmas identified between the epistemological vectors and the confrontation of the new sociocultural challenges that are projected on the museological processes. The proposition of museological pedagogy also stands out. &nbsp, A reflexão sobre os caminhos teóricos que têm consolidado o campo da Museologia é o eixo central das abordagens apresentadas neste texto, com especial ênfase para os dilemas identificados entre os vetores epistemológicos e o enfrentamento dos novos desafios socioculturais que são projetados sobre os processos museológicos. Destaca-se ainda a proposição da pedagogia museológica.