Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

Journal of Paleontology

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (20) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by SCHWEITZER, C. E. Articles by FELDMANN, R. M. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

DIFFERENTIATION OF THE FOSSIL HEXAPODIDAE MIERS, 1886 (DECAPODA: BRACHYURA) FROM SIMILAR FORMS

¹ Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, 44242 cschweitzer{at}stark.kent.edu rfeldman{at}geology.kent.edu

Distinguishing among members of the Hexapodidae Miers, 1886, the Asthenognathinae Stimpson, 1858, and the Chasmocarcininae Serène, 1964, is difficult in fossil specimens that lack preserved pereiopods or sterna. Members of the Hexapodidae are easily identified if sterna and pereiopods are present, because possession of four pairs of pereiopods and seven exposed sternites is diagnostic for the family. Several features of the dorsal carapace are useful in differentiating among genera assigned to that family and other subfamilies belonging to the Goneplacidae and Pinnotheridae; however, dorsal carapace characters are less useful in assigning taxa at the family or subfamily level. A key to the taxa discussed herein permits generic differentiation based upon the relative dimensions of the carapace, the shape and size of the orbits, the shape and size of the rostrum, carapace ornamentation, and the degree of fusion of abdominal somites in males.

A new species of Palaeopinnixa Via, 1966, Palaeopinnixa rotundus, is described from the Eocene Coaledo Formation of Oregon, USA. A new hexapodid genus and species, Globihexapus paxillus, is recognized from the Miocene Astoria Formation of Washington, USA. Prepaeduma decapoda Morris and Collins, 1991, is referred to Hexapus de Haan, 1833. Viapinnixa new genus has been erected to accommodate material previously assigned to Pinnixa (Palaeopinnixa) nodosa Collins and Rasmussen, 1992, and Orthakrolophos has been named to accommodate three species of Palaeograpsus Bittner, 1875. Asthenognathus urretae new species is described from the middle Eocene Centinela Formation of southern Argentina.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. M. FELDMANN and C. E. SCHWEITZER PALEOBIOGEOGRAPHY OF SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE DECAPOD CRUSTACEA Journal of Paleontology, January 1, 2006; 80(1): 83 - 103. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. E. SCHWEITZER THE GENUS XANTHILITES BELL, 1858 AND A NEW XANTHOID FAMILY (CRUSTACEA: DECAPODA: BRACHYURA: XANTHOIDEA): NEW HYPOTHESES ON THE ORIGIN OF THE XANTHOIDEA MACLEAY, 1838 Journal of Paleontology, February 1, 2005; 79(2): 277 - 295. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				UTILITY OF PROXY CHARACTERS FOR CLASSIFICATION OF FOSSILS: AN EXAMPLE FROM THE FOSSIL XANTHOIDEA (CRUSTACEA: DECAPODA: BRACHYURA) Journal of Paleontology, November 1, 2003; 77(6): 1107 - 1128.

				PALEOBIOGEOGRAPHY OF CRETACEOUS AND TERTIARY DECAPOD CRUSTACEANS OF THE NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN Journal of Paleontology, July 1, 2001; 75(4): 808 - 826.