ArticlePDF Available

A Classification of Living and Fossil Genera of Decapod Crustaceans

September 2009
The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology supplement 21:1-109

Authors:

Sammy De Grave

University of Oxford

N. Dean Pentcheff

Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County

Shane Ahyong

Australian Museum

Tin Yam Chan

National Taiwan Ocean University

Show all 18 authorsHide

We present an updated classification for the entire Crustacea Decapoda, listing all known families and genera organized by higher taxonomic groups and including estimates of the number of species in every genus. All taxonomic names are also linked to the verified literature in which they were described, the first compilation of its kind for the Decapoda. To arrive at this compilation, we began with the classification scheme provided by Martin & Davis (2001) for extant families, updated the higher classification and included the fossil taxa. The resultant framework was then populated with the currently valid genera and an estimate of species numbers within each genus. Our resulting classification, spanning both extant (living) and fossil taxa, is the first comprehensive estimate of taxonomic diversity within the entire Decapoda. The classification consists of 233 families of decapods containing 2,725 genera and an estimated 17,635 species (including both extant and fossil species). Of the families in our classification, 53 are exclusively fossil, 109 contain both fossil and extant species, and 71 are extant only. The current estimate for extant species is 14,756, whereas 2,979 species are known exclusively as fossils.

Content uploaded by Martyn Low

Content may be subject to copyright.

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009 Supplement No. 21: 1–109

Date of Publication: 15 Sep.2009

A CLASSIFICATION OF LIVING AND FOSSIL GENERA OF DECAPOD CRUSTACEANS

Sammy De Grave1, N. Dean Pentcheff 2, Shane T. Ahyong3, Tin-Yam Chan4, Keith A. Crandall5,

Peter C. Dworschak6, Darryl L. Felder7, Rodney M. Feldmann8, Charles H. J. M. Fransen9,

Laura Y. D. Goulding1, Rafael Lemaitre10, Martyn E. Y. Low11 , Joel W. Martin2, Peter K. L. Ng11,

Carrie E. Schweitzer12, S. H. Tan11, Dale Tshudy13, Regina Wetzer2

1Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PW, United Kingdom

sammy.degrave@oum.ox.ac.uk!!lydgoulding@googlemail.com

2Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90007 United States of America

pentcheff@gmail.com!!jmartin@nhm.org!!rwetzer@nhm.org

3Marine Biodiversity and Biosecurity, NIWA, Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie Wellington, New Zealand

s.ahyong@niwa.co.nz

4Institute of Marine Biology, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20224, Taiwan, Republic of China

tychan@mail.ntou.edu.tw

5Department of Biology and Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602 United States of America

keith.crandall@byu.edu

6Dritte Zoologische Abteilung, Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien, Austria

Peter.Dworschak@nhm-wien.ac.at

7Department of Biology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504 United States of America

dlf4517@louisiana.edu

8Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242 United States of America

rfeldman@kent.edu

9Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, P. O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands

Fransen@naturalis.nnm.nl

10Invertebrate Zoology, Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, 10th and Constitution Avenue,

Washington, DC 20560 United States of America

lemaitrr@si.edu

11Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543

martyn@nus.edu.sg!!peterng@nus.edu.sg!!sweehee@nus.edu.sg

12Department of Geology, Kent State University Stark Campus, 6000 Frank Ave. NW, North Canton, OH 44720 United States of America

cschweit@kent.edu

13Department of Geosciences, Edinboro University of Pennsylvania, Edinboro, PA 16444 United States of America

dtshudy@edinboro.edu

ABSTRACT. – We present an updated classiﬁcation for the entire Crustacea Decapoda, listing all known

families and genera organized by higher taxonomic groups and including estimates of the number of species

in every genus. All taxonomic names are also linked to the veriﬁed literature in which they were described,

the ﬁrst compilation of its kind for the Decapoda. To arrive at this compilation, we began with the

classiﬁcation scheme provided by Martin & Davis (2001) for extant families, updated the higher

classiﬁcation and included the fossil taxa. The resultant framework was then populated with the currently

valid genera and an estimate of species numbers within each genus. Our resulting classiﬁcation, spanning

both extant (living) and fossil taxa, is the ﬁrst comprehensive estimate of taxonomic diversity within the

entire Decapoda. The classiﬁcation consists of 233 families of decapods containing 2,725 genera and an

estimated 17,635 species (including both extant and fossil species). Of the families in our classiﬁcation, 53

are exclusively fossil, 109 contain both fossil and extant species, and 71 are extant only. The current

estimate for extant species is 14,756, whereas 2,979 species are known exclusively as fossils.

KEY WORDS. – Decapoda, Crustacea, Arthropoda, taxonomy, classiﬁcation.

CONTENTS

...........................................................................Preamble ! 3

....................................................................General notes ! 3

......................How many species of Decapoda are there? ! 5

..............................The higher classiﬁcation of Decapoda ! 5

.............................................The placement of fossil taxa ! 8

............................................................Acknowledgements! 9

................................................................Literature cited ! 10

..............................................................Order Decapoda ! 14

..........................................!Suborder Dendrobranchiata ! 14

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Penaeoidea ! 14

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Sergestoidea ! 14

..................................................!Suborder Pleocyemata ! 15

.............................................! ! Infraorder Stenopodidea ! 15

......................................................! ! Infraorder Caridea ! 15

..............................!!!!!Superfamily Pleopteryxoidea ! 15

..................................!!!!!Superfamily Procaridoidea ! 15

..........................!!!!!Superfamily Galatheacaridoidea ! 15

..................................!!!!!Superfamily Pasiphaeoidea ! 15

................................!!!!!Superfamily Oplophoroidea ! 15

..........................................!!!!!Superfamily Atyoidea ! 15

.....................................!!!!!Superfamily Bresilioidea ! 16

.........................!!!!!Superfamily Nematocarcinoidea ! 16

..............................!!!!!Superfamily Psalidopodoidea ! 16

..............................!!!!!Superfamily Stylodactyloidea ! 16

............................!!!!!Superfamily Campylonotoidea ! 16

................................!!!!!Superfamily Palaemonoidea ! 16

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Alpheoidea ! 18

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Processoidea ! 19

.....................................!!!!!Superfamily Pandaloidea ! 19

...........................!!!!!Superfamily Physetocaridoidea ! 19

..................................!!!!!Superfamily Crangonoidea ! 19

.............................!!!!!Unplaced at superfamily level ! 19

...................................................! ! Infraorder Astacidea ! 20

......................!!!!!Superfamily Palaeopalaemonoidea ! 20

..........................!!!!!Superfamily Enoplometopoidea ! 20

..................................!!!!!Superfamily Nephropoidea ! 20

.......................................!!!!!Superfamily Astacoidea ! 20

..................................!!!!!Superfamily Parastacoidea ! 20

................................................! ! Infraorder Glypheidea ! 20

.......................................!!!!!Superfamily Erymoidea ! 20

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Glypheoidea ! 21

......................................................! ! Infraorder Axiidea ! 21

....................................................! ! Infraorder Gebiidea ! 22

.....................................................! ! Infraorder Achelata ! 22

................................................! ! Infraorder Polychelida ! 23

....................................................! ! Infraorder Anomura ! 23

........................................!!!!!Superfamily Aegloidea ! 23

...................................!!!!!Superfamily Galatheoidea ! 23

........................................!!!!!Superfamily Hippoidea ! 24

.......................................!!!!!Superfamily Kiwaoidea ! 25

.....................................!!!!!Superfamily Lithodoidea ! 25

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Lomisoidea ! 25

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Paguroidea ! 25

..................................................! ! Infraorder Brachyura ! 26

...................................................!!!Section Dromiacea ! 26

............................!!!!!Superfamily Dakoticancroidea ! 26

.....................................!!!!!Superfamily Dromioidea ! 26

..................................!!!!!Superfamily Eocarcinoidea ! 27

..........................!!!!!Superfamily Glaessneropsoidea ! 27

.........................!!!!!Superfamily Homolodromioidea ! 27

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Homoloidea ! 28

....................................................!!!Section Raninoida ! 28

..........................................!!!Section Cyclodorippoida ! 29

................................................!!!Section Eubrachyura ! 29

......................................!!!!Subsection Heterotremata ! 29

.......................................!!!!!Superfamily Aethroidea ! 29

........................................!!!!!Superfamily Bellioidea ! 29

...............................!!!!!Superfamily Bythograeoidea ! 30

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Calappoidea ! 30

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Cancroidea ! 30

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Carpilioidea ! 30

...............................!!!!!Superfamily Cheiragonoidea ! 31

.......................!!!!!Superfamily Componocancroidea ! 31

.....................................!!!!!Superfamily Corystoidea ! 31

........................................!!!!!Superfamily Dairoidea ! 31

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Dorippoidea ! 31

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Eriphioidea ! 31

..............................!!!!!Superfamily Gecarcinucoidea ! 32

................................!!!!!Superfamily Goneplacoidea ! 32

.................................!!!!!Superfamily Hexapodoidea ! 33

...................................!!!!!Superfamily Leucosioidea ! 33

.........................................!!!!!Superfamily Majoidea ! 34

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Orithyioidea ! 37

........................................!!!!!Superfamily Palicoidea ! 37

................................!!!!!Superfamily Parthenopoidea ! 37

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Pilumnoidea ! 37

.....................................!!!!!Superfamily Portunoidea ! 38

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Potamoidea ! 39

......................!!!!!Superfamily Pseudothelphusoidea ! 40

.................................!!!!!Superfamily Pseudozioidea ! 41

..............................!!!!!Superfamily Retroplumoidea ! 41

....................................!!!!!Superfamily Trapezioidea ! 41

...........................!!!!!Superfamily Trichodactyloidea ! 41

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Xanthoidea ! 42

....................................!!!!Subsection Thoracotremata ! 44

..............................!!!!!Superfamily Cryptochiroidea ! 44

......................................!!!!!Superfamily Grapsoidea ! 44

...................................!!!!!Superfamily Ocypodoidea ! 45

................................!!!!!Superfamily Pinnotheroidea ! 46

..................................!!!!Unplaced at subsection level ! 46

........................................!Unplaced at subordinal level ! 46

..............................................................Authorities cited ! 47

............................................................................Figures ! 95

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

PREAMBLE

It is a daunting task to compile a comprehensive list of the

families and genera of the decapod crustaceans. Decapods

are incredibly diverse, and decapod taxonomy is an active

ﬁeld with productive researchers constantly making new

discoveries. These discoveries require changes in our

classiﬁcation in order to accommodate new ﬁndings and to

better reﬂect evolutionary relationships. Thus, producing a

complete and “up to date” classiﬁcation of the decapods is

in many ways an exercise in futility, as any such work is

bound to be outdated by the time it is published.

Nevertheless, such compilations are immensely helpful for

newcomers to the ﬁeld, for established veterans with

failing memories, for keeping track of recent updates, and

for organizing future work. Indeed, a well-done clas-

siﬁcation becomes the framework for a diversity of ﬁelds

and projects well beyond the systematic ﬁeld. Such

classiﬁcations are the backbone of retrieval systems for

genetic data, such as GenBank, and they are the foundation

for synthesis efforts such as the Encyclopedia of Life

project. For the decapods, we had the great advantage of

having a recent and comprehensive classiﬁcation of all

crustacean families (Martin & Davis, 2001) as our starting

point. From that starting point, we incorporated recent

updates, modiﬁed the higher level classiﬁcation to reﬂect

current phylogenetic understanding and expanded the

treatment to the genus level. Additionally, we have

incorporated into the taxonomy a complete listing of all

fossil decapod taxa, with the resulting list thus spanning

the realms of neontology and paleontology, an exercise not

often undertaken for Crustacea. The cut-off date for

inclusion of taxa was set at 31 July 2009; we are however

acutely aware that by the time this compilation sees the

light of day, new taxa will have been described, some taxa

will perhaps have been synonymised, and new insights into

decapods relationships will have appeared in print. As

additional modern studies are conducted there will

inevitably be reassignments and re-evaluations; however,

the present list reﬂects our best judgment based upon our

personal evaluation of the literature and an intimate

knowledge of that group of animals with which we are all

fascinated, the decapod crustaceans.

GENERAL NOTES

Structure of the list. It is important to recognize that,

although some relationships are implied by the grouping of

genera within families and families within superfamilies,

the classiﬁcation presented here is intended to be more of a

catalogue of Decapoda rather than a wholly phylogenetic

treatment. Thus, superfamilies and families are often listed

in alphabetical order. Unfortunately, this can at times

obscure relationships that seem (to us) well founded. One

example is the separation of the eriphiids and menippids

from other traditionally “xanthoid” families; another is the

separation of the goneplacoids and portunoids. But on the

other hand, an alphabetical listing is quite useful for the

purposes of a catalogue. Within families and subfamilies,

all genera are also listed alphabetically.

One reason we have avoided a phylogenetic treatment at

this time is that we have included both extant and fossil

taxa; few phylogenetic studies of Crustacea have crossed

this divide and incorporated both (see Karasawa et al.,

2008, for an example of such a study). Where phylogenetic

information is generally accepted and relatively uncontro-

versial, as for instance in the arrangement of the sub- and

infraorders, we have attempted to list taxa phylo-

genetically. Because many modern phylogenetic studies

and resulting classiﬁcations are based upon molecular

studies, the incorporation of fossil taxa into these

frameworks can be problematic. As such, the current clas-

siﬁcation may seem an unfortunate “mix of two evils” to

some readers, and we can but hope that revisionary studies

will continue apace, so that when the time comes to

produce a second, revised version we may have achieved

that Holy Grail of neo-Darwinian systematics, a clas-

siﬁcation that reﬂects modiﬁcation by descent. Indeed, one

of our purposes in publishing such a list at this time is to

discern what areas of decapod phylogeny are in need of

more rigorous testing.

On taxon authorities, author names and dating. As is

well known among systematists, attributing the correct

authorship in some of the older references can be

confusing, especially in those cases where the authors

themselves attribute the name to somebody else. For

instance, Desmarest (1823) attributed several names to

either Latreille or Leach. Under current ICZN rules these

names must be attributed to Desmarest, and not attributed

to Leach in Desmarest. A full discussion of this and related

issues can be found in Ng (1998), Ng (1999), and Ng et al.

(2008). In the present catalogue, the same rules are

applied. Although it is customary to address the spelling of

author names and how these should be listed in the

literature section, much of this has been stated previously,

and we refer readers to Ng et al. (2008) for a discussion on

this topic. A further difﬁcult point as concerns older

references is their date of publication, a very important

issue for taxonomists but one that is often misunderstood

in other branches of science that use and rely on taxonomic

information. In those cases where dating issues have been

reported, commented upon in various draft versions of the

current list, or where discrepancies were noted, we have

made every effort to arrive at the correct year of

publication. For this we have relied on a variety of sources:

Duncan (1937) and Dickinson (2005) for Proceedings of

the Zoological Society of London and their Transactions;

Clark & Presswell (2001) for White’s publications;

Evenhuis (2003) for the Annals and Magazine of Natural

History; Guinot & Cleva (2002) for authorship and dates in

d’Orbigny’s Voyage dans l’Amérique méridionale;

Harrison & Smith (2008) for all of Leach’s publications;

Low et al. (2009) for dating of early issues of the Rafﬂes

Bulletin of Zoology; others as listed in Ng et al. (2008); and

additional as yet unpublished information, for instance on

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

the publication date of Bruce (1995).

On species counts. The species counts are based on a

number of published and unpublished species level lists by

the various authors of the current compilation. Subspecies

were not counted. In numerous cases, the counts are

accurate up to 31 August 2009, but in this rapidly moving

ﬁeld, numerous new species are described every month,

and others are synonymised as new evidence comes to

light. As such, the species counts should be regarded only

as current “best estimates.” Taxa that are either exclusively

living (extant) or exclusively fossil (the latter indicated by

††) have only one tally associated with them. In contrast,

taxa that are known to include both extant and fossil

species (indicated by †) are provided with three counts,

e.g. “Family Nephropidae † Dana, 1852a (49, 4, 90)”. The

ﬁrst number represents exclusively extant species, the

second number indicates extant species also represented in

the fossil record, and the third is the number of exclusively

fossil species. The total number of extant species is the

sum of the ﬁrst two numbers; in this case there are 53

known species of living Nephropidae. The total number of

fossil species is the sum of the second and third numbers:

there are 94 known species of fossil Nephropidae. The

total number of known species (extant, fossil, or both) is

the sum of all three numbers: there are 143 known species

of Nephropidae.

On subgenera. The current classiﬁcation is presented

down to genus level only. We are aware that subgenera are

in common use in some taxa, such as the crab genera Uca

Leach, 1814, Portunus Weber, 1795, Charybdis De Haan,

1833, and Macrophthalmus A. G. Desmarest, 1823 (see Ng

et al., 2008) and the crayﬁsh genus Cambarus Erichson,

1846. For consistency, and because of the difﬁculty in

properly assigning both fossil and extant species to

subgenera, we have chosen to summarize information

down to only the genus level.

On synonyms. The current classiﬁcation lists only

currently valid genera. The observant reader will notice the

absence of some well known genera, for example the

caridean genus Kemponia Bruce, 2004, for which very

recently a senior synonym, Cuapetes Clark, 1919, was

resurrected by Okuno (2009). We accept that this may be

of some inconvenience to those users of the classiﬁcation

who are perhaps not as familiar with decapod literature as

the authors. For Brachyura, such information can be found

in Ng et al. (2008) (with updates available on the website:

http://rmbr.nus.edu.sg/research/cotw/supplement17.php),

and this key compilation will soon be joined by similar

efforts for Dendrobranchiata, Caridea and Stenopodidea

(De Grave & Fransen, in prep.); for Astacidea, Achelata

and Polychelida (Chan & Crandall, in prep.); and by the

important compilation of fossil Decapoda [Schweitzer et

al., 2009 (in press)]. We refer the reader to those

compilations for synonymy information.

On hyperlinks in the text. Each taxon name in the text is

linked to an internet resource for that taxon. Initially, those

links will go to the curated bibliographic information for

that taxon (which includes, where available, the full text of

the publication) at http://decapoda.nhm.org. After pub-

lication, this taxonomic catalogue will be used to revise the

online classiﬁcation at the World Register of Marine

Species (http://marinespecies.org). Once the revision of the

online resource is completed, the links will be redirected to

the taxon information there (which will also include the

authority information). Corrections, changes, and additions

will be made to the online catalogue. By linking taxon

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

Table 1. Number of species of Decapoda.

! ! Extant!Extant species also!Exclusively fossil

!Taxon!species!known as fossils!species

Order Decapoda Latreille, 1802!14,335!321!2,979

!Suborder Dendrobranchiata Bate, 1888!540!0!98

!Suborder Pleocyemata Burkenroad, 1963!13,795!321!2,862

! ! Infraorder Stenopodidea Bate, 1888!69!0!2

! ! Infraorder Caridea Dana, 1852!3,268!0!57

! ! Infraorder Astacidea Latreille, 1802!653!5!124

! ! Infraorder Glypheidea Winkler, 1883!2!0!256

! ! Infraorder Axiidea de Saint Laurent, 1979!423!14!260

! ! Infraorder Gebiidea de Saint Laurent, 1979!192!4!25

! ! Infraorder Achelata Scholtz & Richter, 1995!140!3!72

! ! Infraorder Polychelida Scholtz & Richter, 1995!38!0!55

! ! Infraorder Anomura MacLeay, 1838!2,451!19!230

! ! Infraorder Brachyura Linnaeus, 1758!6,559!276!1,781

!!!Section Dromiacea De Haan, 1833!240!4!293

!!!Section Raninoida De Haan, 1839!39!7!196

!!!Section Cyclodorippoida Ortmann, 1892!89!0!27

!!!Section Eubrachyura de Saint Laurent, 1980!6,191!265!1,265

! ! ! ! Subsection Heterotremata Guinot, 1977!5,066!241!1,209

! ! ! ! Subsection Thoracotremata Guinot, 1977!1,125!24!55

! ! ! ! Unplaced at subsection level !0!0!1

!Unplaced at subordinal level !0!0!19

names to an online resource, updated information will be

available after the publication of the text.

HOW MANY SPECIES OF DECAPODA

ARE THERE?

Chace (1951) was the last authority to tabulate all genera

and species of then-known Recent decapod crustaceans,

based on a comprehensive ﬁle card system that he and

colleagues maintained at the United States National

Museum of Natural History. Chace estimated the known

number at 8,321 species, distributed among 1,000 genera,

with Brachyura accounting for 4,428 species (in 635

genera). According to Ng et al. (2008), this latter ﬁgure

compares quite favorably with their estimate of 4,120

known at that time (raised to 6,793 by 2008), and thus we

can place some conﬁdence in Chace’s global decapod

species estimate of 8,321 known in 1951. More recent,

somewhat vague, published estimates put the number of

species somewhere upwards of 10,000 species, with only

Martin & Davis (2006) providing an accurate estimate of

7,905 species (but based on a database estimated to contain

only about half of all described crustacean species). Based

on our current effort, we put the total number of extant

species of Decapoda at 14,756 (in 2,725 genera), with

Brachyura accounting for 6,835 species, i.e. 46% (Table 1).

This implies that in the last 50 years, the number of

described species has nearly doubled! However, we are of

course still a long way from knowing the true global

diversity of Decapoda. The number of known fossil species

currently stands at 3,300. Here too, discoveries will

continue for some time to come, as new localities are

explored, more revisions are completed, and museum

collections are more thoroughly studied.

THE HIGHER CLASSIFICATION OF DECAPODA

The higher classiﬁcation of the Decapoda is deeply rooted

in the early works of such luminaries as H. Milne Edwards,

Dana, Latreille and contemporaries, to which can be added

the often divergent opinions of Borradaile, Bate and others.

In the last few decades, a more stable classiﬁcation has

emerged due to the more rigorous application of cladistic

techniques to both morphological and molecular data, as

well as to the advent of more sophisticated morphological

and molecular studies. Although the last word on the

subject has not been given (especially within the

Brachyura), we now appear to have broad consensus on the

validity of two suborders: Dendrobranchiata and

Pleocyemata, amply supported by genetic and

morphological studies. The Pleocyemata are herein further

divided into 10 infraorders, most of which have been

recognized for some time and appear uncontroversial

(Caridea, Stenopodidea, Astacidea, Achelata, Anomura,

Brachyura). In addition to those, we follow Dixon et al.

(2003), Ahyong & O’Meally (2004), and Bracken et al.

(2009) in affording infraordinal status to the glypheid

lobsters (as infraorder Glypheidea). Following Scholtz &

Richter (1995) and Ahyong (2009), we also recognize the

infraorder Polychelida. We follow Robles et al. (2009) in

the recognition of two infraorders (Axiidea, Gebiidea) for

the thalassinidean families. Within the Brachyura, and

departing from Ng et al. (2008), we do not recognize the

section Podotremata, and instead follow Ahyong et al.

(2007) with three sections: Dromiacea, Raninoida,

Cyclodrippoida (see also Ahyong, Naruse et al., 2009).

Further notes on the classiﬁcation employed within the

various groups are presented below.

We stress that our arrangement of taxa, both at higher

levels (families within superfamilies, sections, etc.) and at

lower levels (genera within families), is not agreed upon

by all workers.

Dendrobranchiata, Stenopodidea, Caridea. For the

Dendrobranchiata, apart from some additional genera, little

has changed since the comprehensive treatment in Pérez

Farfante & Kensley (1997), which in turn formed the basis

of the Martin & Davis (2001) classiﬁcation. Recent and

ongoing molecular studies (e.g. Chan et al., 2008; Ma et

al., 2009) may require changes in the near future. The

stenopodideans, a relatively small group, also have

changed little since the Martin & Davis (2001) list,

although one family and several new genera have been

added. For the Caridea, an enormous and diverse

assemblage, our work is based on ongoing updates to the

Holthuis (1993) catalogue by S. De Grave and C. Fransen.

One difference pertains to the subfamilies in Atyidae,

which we do not recognize herein. Another difference

concerns the family status of several palaemonoid groups,

where we follow Bruce (1993) in recognizing eight

families. The order of superfamilies followed here is not a

reﬂection of phylogenetic order, and merely follows Chace

(1992) and Holthuis (1993). We acknowledge the recent

study by Bracken et al. (2009), which questioned the

validity of the superfamily arrangement within Caridea as

well as the monophyly of several families. Christoffersen

(1986, 1987, 1988a, 1988b, 1989, 1990) proposed an

alternative arrangement of caridean systematics (see

Holthuis, 1993, for a discussion). Although some of his

suggestions have been incorporated over the years (e.g. see

Martin & Davis, 2001), many others were rejected.

However, recent, as yet unpublished, work has forced

caridean workers to look more closely at some of

Christoffersen’s suggestions. Evidence that an extensive

rearrangement of caridean superfamilies and families is

needed is forthcoming in ongoing morphological and

molecular studies, but for now we adhere to the more

traditional classiﬁcation.

Astacidea. The evolutionary relationships and taxonomy

of groups within the infraorder Astacidea are far from

settled and stable. Cladistic methods applied to

morphology (since the mid-1990s) and to molecular data

(since 2004) hold promise, but results often disagree even

at high taxonomic levels. For example, the extinct family

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

Chilenophoberidae is arguably monophyletic (Ahyong,

2006; Tshudy & Babcock, 1997), but its relationship to

other higher taxa differs in various studies (Ahyong, 2006;

Rode & Babcock, 2003; Tshudy & Babcock, 1997).

Additionally, some astacid fossil families (e.g.

Protastacidae, Stenochiridae) have been largely or

altogether ignored to date in cladistic analyses. For marine

clawed lobsters, Ahyong & O’Meally (2004) and Ahyong

(2006) are currently the most extensive analyses; both

show good agreement with the results of Tshudy et al.

(2009), who analyzed nephropid phylogeny using 12s and

16s rRNA from most of the extant nephropid genera.

The higher classiﬁcation presented here is based largely on

Ahyong & O’Meally’s (2004) extensive, combined

morphological-molecular analysis of 45 decapod taxa.

Their analysis shows marine clawed lobsters to be the

sister group to the freshwater crayﬁsh. Within the marine

lobsters, the Enoplometopidae are a sister group to the

Nephropidae "+"Thaumastochelidae. These results are

corroborated by more recent molecular studies (e.g. Tsang,

Ma et al., 2008). Following Amati et al. (2004), the extinct

Erymoidea is removed to the infraorder Glypheida (see

below).

The thaumastochelids are a morphologically distinctive

and cladistically cohesive monophyletic group, tradition-

ally recognized as the family Thaumastochelidae.

However, they are depicted as nested within the

Nephropidae in recent molecular analyses (Tsang, Ma et

al., 2008; Tshudy et al., 2009). We follow that arrangement

here.

At a lower taxonomic level (families, genera), Ahyong

(2006) presented the most extensive morphological analy-

sis of clawed lobster genera to date. His cladogram serves

as the morphological state of the art for comparison to

recent molecular phylogenies (e.g. Tsang, Ma et al., 2008

and Tshudy et al., 2009). Currently, molecular results are in

relatively good agreement with each other but differ sig-

niﬁcantly from morphological results (e.g. see Tshudy et

al., 2009).

The freshwater crayﬁsh are a well-established mono-

phyletic group (Crandall et al., 2000; Scholtz & Richter,

1995). Scholtz & Richter (1995) further suggested that

there are no morphological characters uniting freshwater

crayﬁshes with the clawed lobsters and that the mud

shrimps (Thalassinidea) might actually be more closely

related to the crayﬁshes. However, recent analyses support

the sister relationship between clawed lobsters and

freshwater crayﬁshes (Ahyong & O’Meally, 2004; Bracken

et al., 2009; Breinholt et al., 2009; Crandall et al., 2000;

Dixon et al., 2003; Porter et al., 2005), lending support to

the continued recognition of Astacidea. Within the fresh-

water crayﬁsh, there are two monophyletic groups that

correspond to the superfamilies Parastacoidea (the

southern-hemisphere crayﬁsh) and Astacoidea (northern

hemisphere crayﬁsh). The genus level taxonomy has been

very dynamic of late with three signiﬁcant alterations, one

by Hansen & Richardson (2006) who sank the genus

Parastacoides Clark, 1936, and created two new genera,

Spinastacoides Hansen & Richardson, 2006, and

Ombrastacoides Hansen & Richardson, 2006. Another

proposal was by Starobogatov (1995), who created six new

genera and 36 new species in the Astacidae. However, his

taxonomy has not been generally accepted by the

community (especially those in Europe where the

Astacidae are found), and therefore we keep to the more

conventional higher taxonomy outlined by Hobbs (1974),

but with the adjustments from Hansen & Richardson

(2006). We should note, however, that this taxonomy

leaves much to be desired, as many of the genera from the

family Cambaridae clearly do not form monophyletic

groups (Breinholt et al., 2009; Crandall & Fitzpatrick,

1996). In addition to these adjustments with the extant

taxa, there have also been recent additions at the family

level (Taylor et al., 1999) and genus level (Martin et al.,

2008) for fossil crayﬁsh. Previous species counts (Crandall

& Buhay, 2008) included the Starobogatov (1995)

taxonomy and species counts as well as counts of

subspecies. The species counts in the present catalogue do

not include subspecies or the Starobogatov taxonomy and

are therefore reduced from the previous counts (but they do

include new species and fossil species published through

31 July 2009).

Glypheida. We follow the results of Dixon et al. (2003),

Ahyong & O’Meally (2004) and Bracken et al. (2009) in

giving infraordinal status to the glypheid lobsters. Further,

as the analysis of Amati et al. (2004) demonstrated that the

erymoids are the sister group to the glypheoids, the

Erymoidea is treated herein as a superfamily within the

Glypheida.

Axiidea and Gebiidea. Our classiﬁcation of the decapods

formerly treated as the infraorder Thalassinidea follows

recently proposed revisions that have partitioned this

paraphyletic group into two separate infraorders, which

were originally proposed by de Saint Laurent (1979a,

1979b) as “sections,” the Axiidea and Gebiidea, each with

families as reﬂected in the listings that follow. As reviewed

in the genetically-based revision by Robles et al. (2009),

both morphological observations (Gurney, 1938, 1942; de

Saint Laurent, 1979a; de Saint Laurent, 1979b; Sakai,

2004; Sakai & Sawada, 2005) and previous genetic studies

(Tsang, Lin et al., 2008; Tsang, Ma et al., 2008) lend

support to this arrangement. No genetic support can be

found for retention of the former superfamilies Axioidea,

Thalassinoidea and Callianassoidea as previously applied

by Poore (1994) and Martin & Davis (2001). Within the

Axiidea, the Thomassiniidae and the Callianideidae do not

appear to represent distinct families, and the formerly

separated Eiconaxiidae and Calocarididae appear to be

imbedded within the family Axiidae, no longer warranting

separate family rank (Robles et al., 2009). However, for

now, these four families continue to be included in our list.

It should also be noted that many lower level taxonomic

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

revisions within these infraorders proposed by Sakai

(1999, 2005, 2006) are not incorporated into this list,

especially in cases of obvious errors or lack of adequate

justiﬁcation (see Dworschak, 2007; Poore, 2008a, 2008b).

Achelata. The infraorder Achelata was treated as Palinura

in the Martin & Davis (2001) classiﬁcation. However,

following the removal of the polychelid lobsters to a

separate infraorder (see Ahyong, 2009), we follow Scholtz

& Richter (1995) in recognizing the remaining taxa as

Achelata.

Anomura. For the Anomura we follow the seven

superfamily scheme proposed by McLaughlin et al. (2007)

in their extensive review of external morphological char-

acters and their appraisal of overall anomuran phylogenetic

relationships. At the same time, we acknowledge that there

are conﬂicting studies on the classiﬁcation within this

group. It is noteworthy that although the extant Anomura

currently include 17 families, 265 genera and about 2,470

species; approximately 54% of the genera and 43% of the

species are paguroids.

The phylogenetic relationships of the Anomura historically

have been the focus of intense debate, including disagree-

ments over which taxa belong in this diverse infraorder and

even what name is appropriate (Anomura or Anomala).

McLaughlin & Holthuis (1985) reviewed historical aspects

and concluded that the name Anomura MacLeay, 1838,

should be used in preference to the older, but less

frequently used, Anomala Latreille, 1816. Lemaitre &

McLaughlin (2009) recently reviewed advances and

conﬂicts over the last two decades; the studies reviewed by

them include works based on molecular as well as

morphological data that have continued to add controversy

to concepts of anomuran phylogeny. Modern studies have

been useful in contributing to deciphering anomuran

relationships but also have limitations. Several phylo-

genetic studies based on molecular data, in particular, are

contradictory. Ahyong, Schnabel et al.’s (2009) latest

study, based on the largest molecular dataset used for the

Anomura to date, acknowledges that a consensus on

internal relationships is still far off and concludes that only

three superfamilies, Aegloidea, Hippoidea and Lomisoidea,

remain uncontroversial. Clearly, the Anomura remains

today a source of much discord, and although there is now

agreement on some major issues (below), hypotheses on

anomuran phylogenetic relationships will undoubtedly

remain contentious until morphological and molecular

studies produce more harmonious results.

Lemaitre & McLaughlin (2009) provided some summary

statements about our phylogenetic knowledge of ano-

murans: 1) based on morphological and molecular data, the

Anomura and Brachyura both appear to be monophyletic

sister clades (Ahyong & O’Meally, 2004; Ahyong,

Schnabel et al., 2009; Dixon et al., 2003; Scholtz &

Richter, 1995; Schram, 2001), the two jointly forming a

clade referred to by some as the Meiura; 2) "the

Thalassinidea are now consistently placed outside of the

Anomura (see Axiidea and Gebiidea above); 3) "the

Lomisoidea is a monophyletic group, although there is

uncertainty as to its sister group (e.g., McLaughlin et al.,

2007); 4) "the Hippoidea appears to be a monophyletic

group, but this concept still needs rigorous phylogenetic

testing; 5)"there is conclusive evidence that the Aeglidae is

outside the Galatheoidea, although it is unclear which is

the sister group (e.g., Ahyong, Schnabel et al., 2009;

McLaughlin et al., 2007; Morrison et al., 2002; Porter et

al., 2005); 6)"the families Galatheidae, Chirostylidae and

Porcellanidae of the Galatheoidea still need rigorous

phylogenetic testing to determine relationships among and

within them, as does the Kiwaidae, a taxon originally

placed in the Galatheoidea and then elevated to super-

family rank by McLaughlin et al. (2007) [although this

elevation was not accepted by Baba et al. (2008) or by

Ahyong, Schnabel et al. (2009)]; 7)"the composition of the

Paguroidea sensu lato has been revised recently based on

extensive morphological and developmental evidence, and

as a result the family Lithodidae was removed to its own

superfamily (McLaughlin et al., 2007); however, Ahyong,

Schnabel et al. (2009) found that move incompatible with

results from their molecular analysis; 8) "within the

Paguroidea, Lemaitre et al. (2009) found that the mono-

phyly of the Pylochelidae is not clearly conﬁrmed, provi-

ding support for a paraphyletic Pylochelidae as originally

proposed by Richter & Scholtz (1994) (see also Lemaitre

& McLaughlin, 2009; McLaughlin & Lemaitre, 2009),

although molecular studies are needed to explore the

possible polyphyly of this family suggested by larval data,

and other families still need to be fully analyzed.

Brachyura. For the Brachyura (true crabs), an enormous

and historically difﬁcult group of decapods, we have fol-

lowed the recent and comprehensive catalogue of all extant

families, genera and species of crabs of the world by Ng et

al. (2008), with a few notable exceptions.

The most important exception, perhaps, is that the Ng et al.

(2008) catalogue provisionally recognized the

Podotremata, a category that contains several groups of

presumed “primitive” crabs, although Ng et al. (2008) are

also careful to discuss the various lines of evidence

(morphological and molecular) for and against its

recognition (see also Ahyong et al., 2007; Scholtz &

McLay, 2009; Tavares, 2003). The Martin & Davis (2001)

classiﬁcation, on which much of the current catalogue is

based, did not recognize the Podotremata, instead treating

some of these same families as a “Section

Dromiacea” (which did not, however, include the

Raninoidea or Cyclodorippoidea). Recent morphological

(Scholtz & McLay, 2009) and molecular (Ahyong et al.,

2007) evidence also suggests the artiﬁciality of the

Podotremata; Ahyong et al. (2007) proposed that the

Dromiacea, Raninoida and Cyclodorippoida be treated as

separate brachyuran lineages that are equal in weight to the

much larger Eubrachyura (see discussions in Ahyong et al.,

2007; Ng et al., 2008; Scholtz & McLay, 2009). The

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

Ahyong et al. (2007) work seems to us the strongest

evidence to date on the relationships of the primitive crab

families, and we have followed their suggestion in

recognizing the Dromiacea, Raninoida, and

Cyclodorippoida, and not the Podotremata.

The Ng et al. (2008) catalogue also differs from the Martin

& Davis (2001) list in recognizing subfamilies (in part

following Davie’s (2002) extremely useful catalogue of

Australian crabs and Ng & Davie’s (2002) list of crabs

from Phuket and western Thailand), and by including all

known species. This addition makes it a very useful

compendium, and we have followed the Ng et al. (2008)

catalogue, rather than the Martin & Davis (2001)

classiﬁcation, in our treatment of nearly all families and

subfamilies and their included genera.

The current list also differs from the Ng et al. (2008)

catalogue in the inclusion of fossil taxa. Although all

named fossil taxa are now included, not all recently

proposed arrangements within families based on fossil taxa

have been incorporated [see e.g. revisions of the

Xanthoidea by Karasawa & Schweitzer (2006) and of the

Carcineretidae by Schweitzer et al. (2007)]. On the whole,

we have attempted to place the fossil taxa within a

framework based on living taxa, with one exception. For

the Portunoidea we do not follow the primarily fossil-

based Karasawa et al. (2008) classiﬁcation (with some

minor exceptions). However, a recent preliminary analysis

by Schubart & Reuschel (2009) suggests that an extensive

rearrangement of portunoid families will be required. And

indeed, following Schubart & Reuschel (2009), we are

now treating the families Pirimelidae and Thiidae as

members of the Portunoidea. As an example of a widely

divergent placement between classiﬁcations based on

extant taxa and those used by fossil workers, the family

Mathildellidae could be cited. Although treated as a family

of the Portunoidea by Karasawa et al. (2008) on mostly

fossil evidence, the Mathildellidae is retained here in the

Goneplacoidea following Ng et al. (2008).

In part because of consideration of fossil taxa, we also

have not used the suggested subfamilies of the family

Dynomenidae as employed by Guinot (2008). We felt that

the addition of these subfamilies would result in too large a

number of unplaced fossil genera. The pending list of

fossil decapods [Schweitzer et al., 2009 (in press)] also

does not use these suggested dynomenid subfamilies. For

the freshwater crabs, we have combined the genera

formerly in the family Parathelphusidae (e.g. in Ng et al.,

2008) with those in the Gecarcinucidae, resulting in a

single family (Gecarcinucidae) in the superfamily

Gecarcinucoidea, following the suggestion of Klaus et al.

(2009), who found no support for recognizing both

families. However, with regard to"the suggestion by"Klaus

et al. (2009) that the Old World freshwater crabs should

perhaps be combined in one superfamily, we defer from

doing so until more evidence surfaces (see also

Cumberlidge & Ng, 2009).

There is still debate among systematists as to the recogni-

tion, limits and constituencies of some of the proposed

higher crab taxa, such as the Podotremata (noted above),

Eubrachyura, Heterotremata and Thoracotremata. The use

of superfamilies has also been questioned recently, at least

for “grapsoid” families (see Schubart et al., 2006). We

have maintained these superfamily groupings and higher

taxa (other than Podotremata) for now in keeping with our

decision to follow the classiﬁcations used by Martin &

Davis (2001) and Ng et al. (2008). For most of the higher

level taxa (families and their organization into super-

families and sections), see discussions in Martin & Davis

(2001), Davie (2002), McLaughlin et al. (2005), Ahyong et

al. (2007), and Ng et al. (2008).

We refer readers to the Ng et al. (2008) paper for a large

number of synonymies, assigned authors, dates of pub-

lications and discussions of questionable taxa in the

Brachyura. Also discussed at various points by Ng et al.

(2008) are recent changes suggested by Števčić (2005),

who proposed a number of new taxa and proposed

increasing the number of recognized superfamilies to 48

[up from 25 in Martin & Davis (2001) and 37 in Ng et al.

(2008)]. One of our goals in assembling the current list is

to establish a general framework that can then be tested

using a combination of molecular, morphological, and

paleontological characters. Števčić’s proposed clas-

siﬁcation gives us another alternative that we will be

testing in the years ahead, along with the arrangements

proposed by Martin & Davis (2001), Ng et al. (2008), and

others.

THE PLACEMENT OF FOSSIL TAXA

Our classiﬁcation draws heavily on the work Schweitzer et

al. [Schweitzer et al., 2009 (in press)] for the placement of

fossil taxa, but it differs in some respects. We have relied

more heavily on classiﬁcations based on extant taxa and in

many cases have “shoe-horned” fossil taxa into this

classiﬁcation. For those forms, primarily Cenozoic in age,

that exhibit very close morphological afﬁnities with extant

forms, the placement of fossil taxa has been a

straightforward exercise. However, many ancient decapods

are morphologically quite dissimilar from known modern

animals, and therefore they pose special problems in

classiﬁcation. Modern classiﬁcations of Decapoda are

largely based upon characters of the anatomy that only

rarely are preserved in the fossil record, such as the

maxillipeds and the reproductive structures. Therefore,

paleontologists ﬁnd it necessary to employ morphological

features that are preserved on fossils and relate those

attributes to comparable features on extant forms. These

so-called proxy characters (Schweitzer, 2003), although

not without problems (see Ng et al., 2008), often provide a

bridge that permits fossil taxa to be placed within

classiﬁcation schemes developed solely for extant forms

(Feldmann, 2003; Feldmann & Schweitzer, 2000).

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

An additional challenge in working with extinct taxa is the

placement of families known only from the fossil record

into a classiﬁcation that may be based in part on genetic

work (e.g. Martin & Davis, 2001; Ng et al., 2008). Re-

examination of Glaessner’s (1969) classiﬁcation in the

light of recent fossil discoveries, and the detailed study of

suprageneric groups of fossil and extant decapods, has

resulted in some important reassignments [see Schweitzer

et al., 2009 (in press)].

Without doubt, substantial changes, particularly within the

fossil shrimp taxa, will continue for years to come. For

many of these groups, attempts to employ molecular

analyses in combination with morphological analyses of

fossil and extant decapods are still few and far between.

Entry into the general ﬁeld of paleontological literature is

facilitated by two landmark publications that should be

acknowledged. Glaessner (1929) provided a nearly

comprehensive compilation of species known from the

fossil record up to that date in the decapod volume of

Fossilium Catalogus. This monumental work provides an

excellent entry into early literature and a platform from

which one can apply more recent systematic work. Forty

years later, Glaessner (1969) published the decapod

volume of the Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, in

which he revised the classiﬁcation of fossil decapods and

added taxa not listed in Fossilium Catalogus. However, no

attempt was made to provide a comprehensive list of

species in the Treatise, and a vast literature has grown

since 1969. Although these compilations are extremely

useful, more than 400 references to fossil occurrences,

spanning the time from the 18th Century to the present,

were employed in preparing the current list.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank the many workers in the ﬁeld who have

contributed additions and corrections to this list and/or

have generously responded to our requests for help in

locating the necessary literature over the last several years.

These workers include Joseph Goy, Cedric d’Udekem

d’Acoz, Sandy Bruce, Tomoyuki Komai, Peter Davie,

Daniele Guinot, Peter Castro and Roy Kropp. We are

indebted to Alessandro Garassino, Günter Schweigert and

Hiroaki Karasawa for additional help with information on

fossil decapods. We stress that these workers are not

necessarily in agreement with our arrangements of families

within superfamilies, genera within families and estimates

of species numbers within genera. We thank a number of

undergraduate students from the University of Southern

California who were of immense help in collecting and

collating much of the taxonomic authority information:

Isaac Ahn, Ashley Avery, Celia Carter, Christina Chen,

David Luangpraseuth, Anita Rai, Jonathan Sepulveda,

Adam Wall and Jennifer Zieba.

Some of the photographs used were based on specimens

collected by the Philippines AURORA 2007 and the

Mozambique MAINBAZA expeditions. The AURORA

2007 Expedition was a collaboration between Museum

national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris (principal investigator

Philippe Bouchet); Philippine National Museum (principal

investigator Marivene Manuel-Santos); Philippine Bureau

of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources; Smithsonian

Institution (National Museum of Natural History); Aurora

State College of Technology; National University of

Singapore; University of San Carlos, Cebu City; and

National Taiwan Ocean University; and with funding from

the Lounsbery Foundation and Total (Philippines)

Corporation. The MAINBAZA expedition was organized

by Philippe Bouchet of the Museum national d’Histoire

naturelle, Paris. These cruises were afﬁliated with the

Census of Continental Margins (CoMarges) component of

the Census of Marine Life. T.-Y. Chan received funding

support from the National Science Council, Taiwan,

Republic of China; Academia Sinica, Taiwan, Republic of

China; and the Center for Marine Bioscience and

Biotechnology of the National Taiwan Ocean University.

Photographs copyrighted by J."W. Martin are also courtesy

of the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Marine National

Monument, Hawaiian Islands National Wildlife Refuge,

the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands State Marine Refuge,

NOAA’s Paciﬁc Islands Fisheries Science Center and

CReefs, in accordance with permit numbers

NWHIMNM-2006-015 and DLNR.NWHI06R021 and

associated amendments (Rusty Brainard, Chief Scientist).

We thank Arthur Anker (Florida Museum of Natural

History) for the cover images.

This publication is a product of the decapod crustacean

“Assembling the Tree of Life” (AToL) project supported

by the United States National Science Foundation via a

series of collaborative grants to K. A. Crandall (team

leader) and N. "Hannegan (DEB 0531762), D. L. Felder

(DEB 0531603), J. W. Martin (DEB 0531616), and R.

Feldmann and C. Schweitzer (DEB 0531670). S. T.

Ahyong gratefully acknowledges support from the NIWA

Capability Fund and New Zealand Foundation for

Research Science and Technology. J. W. Martin was

additionally supported by a contract from NOAA for

systematic work on Hawaiian decapods.

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

LITERATURE CITED

Ahyong, S. T., 2006. Phylogeny of the clawed lobsters

(Crustacea: Decapoda: Homarida). Zootaxa, 1109: 1–14.

Ahyong, S. T., 2009. The Polychelidan lobsters: Phylogeny and

systematics (Polychelida: Polychelidae). In: Martin, J. W., K.

A. Crandall & D. L. Felder, Decapod Crustacean

Phylogenetics. Koenemann, S., Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18.

Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor &

Francis Group. Pp. 369–396.

Ahyong, S. T., J. C. Y. Lai, D. Sharkey, D. J. Colgan & P. K. L.

Ng, 2007. Phylogenetics of the brachyuran crabs (Crustacea:

Decapoda): the status of Podotremata based on small subunit

nuclear ribosomal RNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and

Evolution, 45: 576–586.

Ahyong, S. T., T. Naruse, S. H. Tan & P. K. L. Ng, 2009. Part II.

Infraorder Brachyura: Sections Dromiacea, Raninoida,

Cyclodorippoida. In: Chan, T.-Y., P. K. L. Ng, S. T. Ahyong &

S. H. Tan, Crustacean Fauna of Taiwan: Brachyuran Crabs.

Vol. 1. Keelung, Taiwan, National Taiwan Ocean University.

Pp. 27–180.

Ahyong, S. T. & D. O’Meally, 2004. Phylogeny of the Decapoda

Reptantia: resolution using three molecular loci and

morphology. Rafﬂes Bulletin of Zoology, 52(2): 673–693.

Ahyong, S. T., K. E. Schnabel & E. W. Maas, 2009. Anomuran

phylogeny: new insights from molecular data. In: Martin, J.

W., K. A. Crandall & D. L. Felder, Decapod Crustacean

Phylogenetics. Koenemann, S., Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18.

Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor &

Francis Group. Pp. 399–414.

Amati, L., R. M. Feldmann & J.-P. Zonneveld, 2004. A new

family of Triassic lobsters (Decapoda: Astacidea) from

British Columbia and its phylogenetic context. Journal of

Paleontology, 78(1): 150–168.

Baba, K., E. Macpherson, G. C. B. Poore, S. T. Ahyong, A.

Bermudez, P. Cabezas, C.-W. Lin, M. Nizinski, C. Rodrigues

& K. E. Schnabel, 2008. Catalogue of squat lobsters of the

world (Crustacea: Decapoda: Anomura — families

Chirostylidae, Galatheidae and Kiwaidae. Zootaxa, 1905: 1–

220.

Bracken, H. D., S. De Grave & D. L. Felder, 2009. Phylogeny of

the infraorder Caridea based on mitchondrial and nuclear

genes (Crustacea: Decapoda). In: Martin, J. W., K. A.

Crandall & D. L. Felder, Decapod Crustacean Phylogenetics.

Koenemann, S., Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18. Boca Raton,

London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. Pp.

281–305.

Bracken, H. D., A. Toon, D. L. Felder, J. W. Martin, M. Finley, J.

Rasmussen, F. Palero & K. A. Crandall, 2009. The decapod

tree of life: compiling the data and moving toward a

consensus of decapod evolution. Arthropod Systematics &

Phylogeny, 67(1): 99–116.

Breinholt, J., M. Pérez-Losada & K. A. Crandall, 2009. The

timing of the diversiﬁcation of the freshwater crayﬁshes. In:

Martin, J. W., K. A. Crandall & D. L. Felder, Decapod

Crustacean Phylogenetics. Koenemann, S., Crustacean

Issues. Vol. 18. Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press,

Taylor & Francis Group. Pp. 343–355.

Bruce, A. J., 1993. Kakaducaris glabra gen. nov., sp. nov., a new

freshwater shrimp from the Kakadu National Park, Northern

Territory, Australia, Crustacea: Decapoda: Palaemonidae with

the designation of a new subfamily Kakaducaridinae.

Hydrobiologia, 268: 27–44.

Bruce, A. J., 1995. A Synopsis of the Indo-West Paciﬁc Genera of

the Pontoniinae (Crustacea: Decapoda: Palaemonidae).

Theses Zoologicae, 25 [imprint 1994, published 1995]: 1–

172.

Chace, F. A., Jr., 1951. The number of species of decapod and

stomatopod Crustacea. Journal of the Washington Academy of

Sciences, 41(11): 370–372.

Chace, F. A., Jr., 1992. On the classiﬁcation of the Caridea

(Decapoda). Crustaceana, 63(1): 70–80.

Chan, T.-Y., J. Tong, Y. K. Tam & K. H. Chu, 2008. Phylogenetic

relationships among the genera of the Penaeidae (Crustacea:

Decapoda) revealed by mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene

sequences. Zootaxa, 1694: 38–50.

Christoffersen, M. L., 1986. Phylogenetic relationships between

Oplophoridae, Atyidae, Pasiphaeidae, Alvinocarididae fam.

n., Bresiliidae, Psalidopodidae and Disciadidae (Crustacea

Caridea Atyoidea). Boletim de Zoologia, Universidade de São

Paulo, 10: 273–281.

Christoffersen, M. L., 1987. Phylogenetic relationships of

hippolytid genera, with an assignment of new families for the

Crangonoidea and Alpheoidea (Crustacea, Decapoda,

Caridea). Cladistics, 3: 348–362.

Christoffersen, M. L., 1988a. Genealogy and phylogenetic

classiﬁcation of the world Crangonidae (Crustacea, Caridea),

with a new species and new records for the South Western

Atlantic. Revista Nordestina de Biologia, 6(1): 43–59.

Christoffersen, M. L., 1988b. Phylogenetic systematics of the

Eucarida (Crustacea, Malacostraca). Revista Brasiliera de

Zoologia, 5(2): 325–351.

Christoffersen, M. L., 1989. Phylogeny and classiﬁcation of the

Pandaloidea (Crustacea, Caridea). Cladistics, 5: 259–274.

Christoffersen, M. L., 1990. A new superfamily classiﬁcation of

the Caridea (Crustacea: Pleocyemata) based on phylogenetic

pattern. Zeitschrift für Zoologische Systematik und

Evolutionsforschung, 28: 94–106.

Clark, P. F. & B. Presswell, 2001. Adam White: the crustacean

years. Rafﬂes Bulletin of Zoology, 49: 149–166.

Crandall, K. A. & J. E. Buhay, 2008. Global diversity of crayﬁsh

(Astacidae, Cambaridae, and Parastacidae—Decapoda) in

freshwater. Hydrobiologia, 595: 295–301.

Crandall, K. A. & J. F. Fitzpatrick, Jr., 1996. Crayﬁsh molecular

systematics: using a combination of procedures to estimate

phylogeny. Systematic Biology, 45(1): 1–26.

Crandall, K. A., D. J. Harris & J. W. Fetzner, Jr., 2000. The

monophyletic origin of freshwater crayﬁshes estimated from

nuclear and mitochondrial DNA sequences. Proceedings of

the Royal Society, London B, 267: 1679–1686.

Cumberlidge, N. & P. K. L. Ng, 2009. Systematics, evolution, and

biogeography of freshwater crabs. In: Martin, J. W., K. A.

Crandall & D. L. Felder, Decapod Crustacean Phylogenetics.

Koenemann, S., Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18. Boca Raton,

London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. Pp.

491–508.

Davie, P. J. F., 2002. Crustacea: Malacostraca: Eucarida (Part

2): Decapoda — Anomura, Brachyura. Wells, A. & W. W. K.

Houston, Zoological Catalogue of Australia. Vol. 19.3B.

Melbourne, CSIRO Publishing. 641 pp.

Desmarest, A. G., 1823. Malacostracés, Malacostraca. (Crust.).

In: Cuvier, F., Dictionnaire des Sciences Naturelles, dans

lequel on trait Méthodiquement des Différens étres de la

Nature, considérés soit en eux-mêmes, d’après l’état actuel

de nos connoissances, soit relativement a l’utilité qu’en

peuvent retirer la Médecine, l’Agriculture, le Commerce et les

Arts. Suivi d’une biographie des plus Célèbres Naturalistes.

Ouvrage destiné aux médecins, aux agriculteurs, aux

commerçans, aux artistes, aux manufacturiers, et à tous ceux

qui ont intérêt à connoître les productions de la nature, leurs

caractères génériques et spéciﬁques, leur lieu natal, leurs

propiétés et leurs usages. Vol. 28. Strasbourg et Paris, F.G.

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

Levrault et Le Normant. Pp. 138–425 [Malacostracés 211–

285], Tables 1–4, Atlas, vol. 4, Plates 1–58.

Dickinson, E. C., 2005. The Proceedings of the Zoological

Society of London, 1859–1900: an exploration of breaks

between calendar years of publication. Journal of Zoology,

266: 427–430.

Dixon, C. J., S. Ahyong & F. R. Schram, 2003. A new hypothesis

of decapod phylogeny. Crustaceana, 76(8): 935–975.

Duncan, F. M., 1937. On the dates of publication of the Society’s

‘Proceedings’, 1859–1926. With an appendix containing the

dates of publication of ‘Proceedings’, 1830–1858, compiled

by the late F.H. Waterhouse, and of the ‘Transactions’, 1833–

1869, by the late Henry Peavot, originally published in P.Z.S.

1893, 1913. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London.

Series A, General and experimental, 107: 71–84.

Dworschak, P. C., 2007. Book review. Sakai, K. 2005.

Callianassoidea of the world (Decapoda: Thalassinidea).

Crustaceana Monographs 4, i–vi, 285 pp., 44 textﬁgs.

Koninklijke Brill, NV, Leiden, The Netherlands, ISBN 90 04

14211 8, hardcover, €89/U.S.$120. Journal Of Crustacean

Biology, 27(1): 158–169.

Evenhuis, N. L., 2003. Publication and dating of the journals

forming the Annals and Magazine of Natural History and the

Journal of Natural History. Zootaxa, 385: 1–68.

Feldmann, R. M., 2003. The Decapoda: New initiatives and novel

approaches. Journal of Paleontology, 77(6): 1021–1039.

Feldmann, R. M. & C. E. Schweitzer, 2000. Reconciling the fossil

record of decapods with modern classiﬁcations: can it be

done? Studi e Ricerche, Associazione Amici del Museo,

Museo Civico “G. Zannato”, Montecchio Maggiore

(Vicenza), 2000: 21–23.

Glaessner, M. F., 1929. Crustacea Decapoda. In: Pompeckj, J. F.,

Fossilium Catalogus I: Animalia Pt. 41. Berlin, W. Junk. Pp.

1–464.

Glaessner, M. F., 1969. Decapoda. In: Moore, R. C., Part R

Arthropoda 4(2). Moore, R. C., Treatise on Invertebrate

Paleontology. Lawrence, Kansas, The University of Kansas

Press and The Geological Society of America. Pp. R399–

R533, R626–R628.

Guinot, D., 2008. A re-evaluation of the Dynomenidae Ortmann,

1892 (Crustacea, Decapoda, Brachyura, Podotremata), with

the recognition of four subfamilies. Zootaxa, 1850: 1–26.

Guinot, D. & R. Cleva, 2002. Les crustacés récoltés par

d’Orbigny en Amérique du Sud et déposés au Muséum

national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris. Comptes Rendus Palevol,

1(7): 499–515.

Gurney, R., 1938. Larvae of Decapod Crustacea. Part V.

Nephropsidea and Thalassinidea. Discovery Reports, 17:

293–344.

Gurney, R., 1942. Larvae of decapod Crustacea. London, Ray

Society. 306 pp.

Hansen, B. & A. M. M. Richardson, 2006. A revision of the

Tasmanian endemic freshwater crayﬁsh genus Parastacoides

(Crustacea: Decapoda: Parasticidae). Invertebrate

Systematics, 20: 713–769.

Harrison, K. & E. Smith, 2008. Riﬂe Green by Nature. A Regency

Naturalist and his Family, William Telford Leach. London,

Ray Society. 621 pp.

Hobbs, H. H., 1974. Synopsis of the families and genera of

crayﬁshes (Crustacea: Decapoda). Smithsonian Contributions

to Zoology, 164: 1–32.

Holthuis, L. B., 1993. The recent genera of the caridean and

stenopodidean shrimps (Crustacea, Decapoda): with an

appendix on the order Amphionidacea. Leiden, Nationaal

Natuurhistorisch Museum. 328 pp.

Karasawa, H. & C. E. Schweitzer, 2006. A new classiﬁcation of

the Xanthoidea sensu lato (Crustacea: Decapoda: Brachyura)

based on phylogenetic analysis and traditional systematics

and evaluation of all fossil Xanthoidea sensu lato.

Contributions to Zoology, 75(1/2): 23–73.

Karasawa, H., C. E. Schweitzer & R. M. Feldmann, 2008.

Revision of Portunoidea Raﬁnesque, 1815 (Decapoda:

Brachyura) with emphasis on the fossil genera and families.

Journal of Crustacean Biology, 28(1): 82–127.

Klaus, S., D. Brandis, P. K. L. Ng, D. C. J. Yeo & C. D. Schubart,

2009. Phylogeny and biogeography of Asian freshwater crabs

of the family Gecarcinucidae (Brachyura: Potamoidea). In:

Martin, J. W., K. A. Crandall & D. L. Felder, Decapod

Crustacean Phylogenetics. Koenemann, S., Crustacean

Issues. Vol. 18. Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press,

Taylor & Francis Group. Pp. 509–531.

Lemaitre, R. & P. A. McLaughlin, 2009. Recent advances and

conﬂicts in concepts of anomuran phylogeny (Crustacea:

Malacostraca). Arthropod Systematics and Phylogeny, 67(2):

119–135.

Lemaitre, R., P. A. McLaughlin & U. Sorhannus, 2009.

Phylogenetic relationships within the Pylochelidae

(Decapoda: Anomura: Paguroidea): A cladistic analysis based

on morphological characters. Zootaxa, 2022: 1–14.

Low, M. E. Y., S. H. Tan & P. K. L. Ng, 2009. The Rafﬂes

Bulletin, 1928–2009: Eight decades of brachyuran crab

research (Crustacea: Decapoda). Rafﬂes Bulletin of Zoology,

Supplement No. 20: 291–307.

Ma, K. Y., T.-Y. Chan & K. H. Chu, 2009. Phylogeny of penaeoid

shrimps (Decapoda: Penaeoidea) inferred from nuclear

protein-coding genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and

Evolution, 53: 45–55.

Martin, A. J., T. H. Rich, G. C. B. Poore, M. B. Schultz, C. M.

Austin, L. Kool & P. Vickers-Rich, 2008. Fossil evidence in

Australia for oldest known freshwater crayﬁsh of Gondwana.

Gondwana Research, 14(3): 287–296.

Martin, J. W. & G. E. Davis, 2001. An updated classiﬁcation of

the Recent Crustacea. Natural History Museum of Los

Angeles County, Science Series, 39: 1–124.

Martin, J. W. & G. E. Davis, 2006. Historical trends in crustacean

systematics. Crustaceana, 79(11): 1347–1368.

McLaughlin, P. A., D. K. Camp, L. G. Eldredge, D. L. Felder, J.

W. Goy, H. H. Hobbs, III, B. Kensley, R. Lemaitre & J. W.

Martin, 2005. Order Decapoda. In: Turgeon, D., Common and

Scientiﬁc Names of Aquatic Invertebrates of the United States

and Canada. Names of Crustaceans Special Publications.

Vol. 31. Bethesda, Maryland, American Fisheries Society

Special Publication. Pp. 209–326.

McLaughlin, P. A. & L. B. Holthuis, 1985. Anomura versus

Anomala. Crustaceana, 49: 204–209.

McLaughlin, P. A. & R. Lemaitre, 2009. A new classiﬁcation for

the Pylochelidae (Decapoda: Anomura: Paguroidea) and

descriptions of new taxa. Rafﬂes Bulletin of Zoology,

Supplement No. 20: 159–231.

McLaughlin, P. A., R. Lemaitre & U. Sorhannus, 2007. Hermit

crab phylogeny: a reappraisal and its “fall-out”. Journal of

Crustacean Biology, 27(1): 97–115.

Morrison, C. L., A. W. Harvey, S. Lavery, K. Tieu, Y. Huang & C.

W. Cunningham, 2002. Mitochondrial gene rearrangements

conﬁrm the parallel evolution of the crab-like body form.

Proceedings of the Royal Society, London B, 269: 345–350.

Ng, P. K. L., 1998. Lamoha, a replacement name for Hypsophrys

Wood Mason & Alcock, 1891 (Brachyura, Homolidae), a

junior homonym of Hypsophrys Agassiz, 1859 (Pisces,

Teleostei, Cichlidae). Crustaceana, 71(1): 121–125.

Ng, P. K. L., 1999. A synopsis of the genus Aethra Latreille, 1816

(Decapoda, Brachyura, Parthenopidae). Crustaceana, 72(1):

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

109–121.

Ng, P. K. L. & P. J. F. Davie, 2002. A checklist of the brachyuran

crabs of Phuket and western Thailand. Phuket Marine

Biological Center Special Publication, 23(2): 369–384.

Ng, P. K. L., D. Guinot & P. J. F. Davie, 2008. Systema

Brachyurorum: Part I. An annotated checklist of extant

brachyuran crabs of the world. Rafﬂes Bulletin of Zoology,

Supplement No. 17: 1–286.

Okuno, J., 2009. Cuapetes Clark, 1919, a senior synonym of

Kemponia Bruce, 2004 (Crustacea: Decapoda:

Palaemonidae). Zootaxa, 2028: 67–68.

Pérez Farfante, I. & B. Kensley, 1997. Penaeoid and sergestoid

shrimps and prawns of the world. Keys and diagnoses for the

families and genera. Mémoires du Muséum national

d’Histoire naturelle, 175: 1–233.

Poore, G. C. B., 1994. A phylogeny of the families of

Thalassinidea (Crustacea: Decapoda) with keys to families

and genera. Memoirs of Museum Victoria, 54: 79–120.

Poore, G. C. B., 2008a. Book review. Sakai, K. 2006.

Upogebiidae of the world (Decapoda: Thalassinidea).

Crustaceana Monographs 6, i–ix, 185 pp., 23 textﬁgs.

Koninklijke Brill, NV, Leiden, The Netherlands, ISBN-13

978 90 04 15150 8, hardcover, Euro98/U.S.$132. Journal Of

Crustacean Biology, 28(2): 422–423.

Poore, G. C. B., 2008b. Thalassinidean shrimps (Crustacea:

Decapoda) from north-western Australia, including ﬁve new

species. Records of the Western Australian Museum,

Supplement, 73: 161–179.

Porter, M. L., M. Pérez-Losada & K. A. Crandall, 2005. Model-

based multi-locus estimation of decapod phylogeny and

divergence times. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution,

37: 355–369.

Richter, S. & G. Scholtz, 1994. Morphological evidence for a

hermit crab ancestry of lithodids (Crustacea, Decapoda,

Anomala, Paguroidea). Zoologischer Anzeiger, 233: 187–219.

Robles, R., C. C. Tudge, P. C. Dworschak, G. C. B. Poore & D. L.

Felder, 2009. Molecular phylogeny of the Thalassinidea

based on nuclear and mitochondrial genes. In: Martin, J. W.,

K. A. Crandall & D. L. Felder, Decapod Crustacean

Phylogenetics. Koenemann, S., Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18.

Boca Raton, London, New York, CRC Press, Taylor &

Francis Group. Pp. 309–326.

Rode, A. L. & L. E. Babcock, 2003. Phylogeny of fossil and

extant freshwater crayﬁsh and some closely related nephropid

lobsters. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 23(2): 418–435.

Saint Laurent, M. de, 1979a. Sur la classiﬁcation et la phylogénie

des Thalassinides: déﬁnitions de la superfamille des Axioidea,

de la sous-famille des Thomassiniinae et de deux genres

nouveaux (Crustacea Decapoda). Comptes rendus

hebdomadaires des séances de l’Académie des sciences, série

D, 288(31): 1395–1397.

Saint Laurent, M. de, 1979b. Vers une nouvelle classiﬁcation des

Crustacés Décapodes Reptantia. Bulletin de l’Ofﬁce National

des Pêches République Tunisienne, Ministere de

l’Agriculture, 3: 15–31.

Sakai, K., 1999. Synopsis of the family Callianassidae, with keys

to subfamilies, genera and species, and the description of new

taxa (Crustacea: Decapoda: Thalassinidea). Zoologische

Verhandelingen, Leiden, 326: 1–152.

Sakai, K., 2004. The diphyletic nature of the infraorder

Thalassinidea (Decapoda, Pleocyemata) as derived from the

morphology of the gastric mill. Crustaceana, 77(9): 1117–

1130.

Sakai, K., 2005. Callianassoidea of the world (Decapoda:

Thalassinidea). Crustaceana Monographs, 4: 1–200.

Sakai, K., 2006. Upogebiidae of the world (Decapoda,

Thalassinidea). Crustaceana Monographs, 6: 1–185.

Sakai, K. & T. Sawada, 2005. The taxa of the infraorders

Astacidea, Thalassinidea, Palinura, and Anomura (Decapoda,

Pleocyemata) classiﬁed by the form of the prepyloric ossicle.

Crustaceana, 78(11): 1353–1368.

Scholtz, G. & C. L. McLay, 2009. Is the Brachyura Podotremata a

monophyletic group? In: Martin, J. W., K. A. Crandall & D.

L. Felder, Decapod Crustacean Phylogenetics. Koenemann,

S., Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18. Boca Raton, London, New

York, CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. Pp. 417–437.

Scholtz, G. & S. Richter, 1995. Phylogenetic systematics of the

reptantian Decapoda (Crustacea, Malacostraca). Zoological

Journal of the Linnean Society, 113: 289–328.

Schram, F. R., 2001. Phylogeny of decapods: moving toward a

consensus. Hydrobiologia, 449: 1–20.

Schubart, C. D., S. Cannicci, M. Vannini & S. Fratini, 2006.

Molecular phylogeny of grapsoid crabs (Decapoda,

Brachyura) and allies based on two mitochondrial genes and a

proposal for refraining from current superfamily

classiﬁcation. Journal of Zoological Systematics and

Evolutionary Research, 44(3): 193–199.

Schubart, C. D. & S. Reuschel, 2009. A proposal for a new

classiﬁcation of Portunoidea and Carcroidea (Brachyura:

Heterotremata) based on two independent molecular

phylogenies. In: Martin, J. W., K. A. Crandall & D. L. Felder,

Decapod Crustacean Phylogenetics. Koenemann, S.,

Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18. Boca Raton, London, New York,

CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. Pp. 533–549.

Schweitzer, C. E., 2003. Utility of proxy characters for

classiﬁcation of fossils: an example from the fossil

Xanthoidea (Crustacea: Decapoda: Brachyura). Journal of

Paleontology, 77: 1107–1128.

Schweitzer, C. E., R. M. Feldmann, A. Garassino, H. Karasawa &

G. Schweigert, 2009 [in press]. Systematic list of fossil

decapod crustacean species. Crustaceana Monographs.

Schweitzer, C. E., R. M. Feldmann & H. Karasawa, 2007.

Revision of the Carcineretidae Beurlen, 1930 (Decapoda:

Brachyura: Portunoidea) and remarks on the Portunidae

Raﬁnesque, 1815. Annals of Carnegie Museum, 76(1): 15–37.

Starobogatov, Ya. I., 1995. Taxonomy and geographical

distribution of crayﬁshes of Asia and East Europe (Crustacea

Decapoda Astacoidei). Arthropoda Selecta, 4(3–4): 3–25.

Števčić, Z., 2005. The reclassiﬁcation of brachyuran crabs

(Crustacea: Decapoda: Brachyura). Natura Croatica, 14

Supplement 1: 1–159.

Tavares, M. S., 2003. A new theoretical approach for the study of

monophyly of the Brachyura (Crustacea: Decapoda) and its

implication for the Anomura. Memoirs of Museum Victoria,

60: 145–149.

Taylor, R. S., F. R. Schram & Y.-B. Shen, 1999. A new crayﬁsh

Family (Decapoda: Astacida) from the Upper Jurassic of

China, with a reinterpretation of other Chinese crayﬁsh taxa.

Paleontological Research, 3(2): 121–136.

Tsang, L. M., F.-J. Lin, K. H. Chu & T.-Y. Chan, 2008. Phylogeny

of Thalassinidea (Crustacea, Decapoda) inferred from three

rDNA sequences: implications for morphological evolution

and superfamily classiﬁcation. Journal of Zoological

Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 46: 216–223.

Tsang, L. M., K. Y. Ma, S. T. Ahyong, T.-Y. Chan & K. H. Chu,

2008. Phylogeny of Decapoda using two nuclear protein-

coding genes: Origin and evolution of the Reptantia.

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 48: 359–368.

Tshudy, D. & L. E. Babcock, 1997. Morphology-based

phylogenetic analysis of the clawed lobsters (family

Nephropidae and the new family Chilenophoberidae).

Journal of Crustacean Biology, 17(2): 253–263.

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

Tshudy, D., R. Robles, T.-Y. Chan, K. C. Ho, K. H. Chu, S. T.

Ahyong & D. L. Felder, 2009. Phylogeny of marine clawed

lobster families Nephropidae Dana, 1852, and

Thaumastochelidae Bate, 1888, based on mitochondrial

genes. In: Martin, J. W., K. A. Crandall & D. L. Felder,

Decapod Crustacean Phylogenetics. Koenemann, S.,

Crustacean Issues. Vol. 18. Boca Raton, London, New York,

CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group. Pp. 357–368.

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

THE GENERA OF THE DECAPODA

ORDER DECAPODA †

Latreille, 1802

SUBORDER DENDROBRANCHIATA †

Bate, 1888

SUPERFAMILY PENAEOIDEA † Raﬁnesque, 1815

!(428,"0,"96)

Family Aegeridae †† Burkenroad, 1963!(25)

!Acanthochirana †† Strand, 1928!(5)

!Aeger †† Münster, 1839!(20)

Family Aristeidae † Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(27,"0,"1)

!Aristaeomorpha Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(2)

!Aristeus Duvernoy, 1840!(9)

!Archeosolenocera †† Carriol & Riou, 1991!(1)

!Aristaeopsis Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(1)

!Austropenaeus Pérez Farfante & Kensley, 1997!(1)

!Hemipenaeus Bate, 1881!(2)

!Hepomadus Bate, 1881!(3)

!Parahepomadus Crosnier, 1978!(1)

!Plesiopenaeus Bate, 1881!(2)

!Pseudaristeus Crosnier, 1978!(6)

Family Benthesicymidae † Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(42,"0,"1)

!Altelatipes Crosnier & Vereshchaka, 2008!(3)

!Bentheogennema Burkenroad, 1936!(5)

!Benthesicymus † Bate, 1881!(16,"0,"1)

!Benthonectes Smith, 1885c!(1)

!Gennadas Bate, 1881!(17)

Family Carpopenaeidae †† Garassino, 1994!(3)

!Carpopenaeus †† Glaessner, 1946!(3)

Family Penaeidae † Raﬁnesque, 1815!(221,"0,"65)

!Albertoppelia †† Schweigert & Garassino, 2004!(1)

!Ambilobeia †† Garassino & Pasini, 2002!(1)

!Antrimpos †† Münster, 1839!(15)

!Artemesia Bate, 1888!(1)

!Atypopenaeus Alcock, 1905a!(5)

!Bombur †† Münster, 1839!(2)

!Bylgia †† Münster, 1839!(4)

!Carinacaris †† Garassino, 1994!(1)

!Cretapenaeus †† Garassino, Pasini & Dutheil, 2006!(1)

!Drobna †† Münster, 1839!(1)

!Dusa †† Münster, 1839!(5)

!Farfantepenaeus Burukovsky, 1997!(8)

!Fenneropenaeus Pérez Farfante, 1969!(6)

!Funchalia Johnson, 1868!(6)

!Hakelocaris †† Garassino, 1994!(1)

!Heteropenaeus De Man, 1896a!(1)

!Ifasya †† Garassino & Teruzzi, 1995!(2)

!Koelga †† Münster, 1839!(2)

!Libanocaris †† Garassino, 1994!(1)

!Litopenaeus Pérez Farfante, 1969!(5)

!Longichela †† Garassino & Teruzzi, 1993!(1)

!Longitergite †† Garassino & Teruzzi, 1996!(1)

!Macropenaeus †† Garassino, 1994!(1)

!Macropetasma Stebbing, 1914!(1)

!Marsupenaeus Tirmizi, 1971!(1)

!Megokris Pérez Farfante & Kensley, 1997!(9)

!Melicertus Raﬁnesque, 1814!(8)

!Metapenaeopsis Bouvier, 1905!(74)

!Metapenaeus Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(28)

!Microchela †† Garassino, 1994!(1)

!Micropenaeus †† Bravi & Garassino, 1998a!(1)

!Parapenaeopsis Alcock, 1901!(22)

!Parapenaeus Smith, 1885b!(14)

!Pelagopenaeus Pérez Farfante & Kensley, 1997!(1)

!Penaeopsis Bate, 1881!(7)

!Penaeus † Fabricius, 1798!(3,"0,"18)

!Protrachypene Burkenroad, 1934!(1)

!Pseudobombur †† Secretan, 1975!(1)

!Pseudodusa †† Schweigert & Garassino, 2004!(1)

!Rauna †† Münster, 1839!(1)

!Rhodanicaris †† Van Straelen, 1924!(1)

!Rimapenaeus Pérez Farfante & Kensley, 1997!(4)

!Satyrocaris †† Garassino & Teruzzi, 1993!(1)

!Tanypenaeus Pérez Farfante, 1972!(1)

!Trachypenaeopsis Burkenroad, 1934!(3)

!Trachypenaeus Alcock, 1901!(2)

!Trachysalambria Burkenroad, 1934!(9)

!Xiphopenaeus Smith, 1869b!(1)

Family Sicyoniidae † Ortmann, 1898!(52,"0,"1)

!Sicyonia † H. Milne Edwards, 1830a!(52,"0,"1)

Family Solenoceridae Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(86)

!Cryptopenaeus de Freitas, 1979!(5)

!Gordonella Tirmizi, 1960!(3)

!Hadropenaeus Pérez Farfante, 1977!(4)

!Haliporoides Stebbing, 1914!(4)

!Haliporus Bate, 1881!(3)

!Hymenopenaeus Smith, 1882!(17)

!Mesopenaeus Pérez Farfante, 1977!(3)

!Pleoticus Bate, 1888!(3)

!Solenocera Lucas, 1849!(44)

SUPERFAMILY SERGESTOIDEA † Dana, 1852a

!(112,"0,"2)

Family Luciferidae De Haan, 1849

[in De Haan, 1833–1850]!(8)

!Lucifer Thompson, 1829!(8)

Family Sergestidae † Dana, 1852a!(104,"0,"2)

!Acetes H. Milne Edwards, 1830a!(14)

!Allosergestes Judkins & Kensley, 2008!(6)

!Cretasergestes †† Garassino & Schweigert, 2006!(1)

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

!Deosergestes Judkins & Kensley, 2008!(11)

!Eusergestes Judkins & Kensley, 2008!(2)

!Neosergestes Judkins & Kensley, 2008!(8)

!Paleomattea †† Maisey & G. P. de Carvalho, 1995!(1)

!Parasergestes Judkins & Kensley, 2008!(6)

!Peisos Burkenroad, 1945!(1)

!Petalidium Bate, 1881!(3)

!Sergestes H. Milne Edwards, 1830a!(10)

!Sergia Stimpson, 1860c!(40)

!Sicyonella Borradaile, 1910!(3)

SUBORDER PLEOCYEMATA †

Burkenroad, 1963

INFRAORDER STENOPODIDEA †

Bate, 1888

Family Macromaxillocarididae

Alvarez, Iliffe & Villalobos, 2006!(1)

!Macromaxillocaris Alvarez, Iliffe & Villalobos, 2006!(1)

Family Spongicolidae † Schram, 1986!(34,"0,"1)

!Globospongicola Komai & Saito, 2006!(2)

!Jilinicaris †† Schram, Shen, Vonk & Taylor, 2000!(1)

!Microprosthema Stimpson, 1860c!(10)

!Paraspongicola de Saint Laurent & Cléva, 1981!(2)

!Spongicola De Haan, 1844 [in De Haan, 1833–1850]!(9)

!Spongicoloides Hansen, 1908!(7)

!Spongiocaris Bruce & Baba, 1973!(4)

Family Stenopodidae † Claus, 1872!(34,"0,"1)

!Engystenopus Alcock & Anderson, 1894!(2)

!Odontozona Holthuis, 1946!(14)

!Phoenice †† Garassino, 2001!(1)

!Richardina A. Milne-Edwards, 1881a!(6)

!Stenopus Latreille, 1819!(12)

INFRAORDER CARIDEA †

Dana, 1852c

SUPERFAMILY PLEOPTERYXOIDEA ††

Schweigert & Garassino, 2006!(1)

Family Pleopteryxidae ††

Schweigert & Garassino, 2006!(1)

!Pleopteryx †† Schweigert & Garassino, 2004!(1)

SUPERFAMILY PROCARIDOIDEA †

Chace & Manning, 1972!(6,"0,"5)

Family Procarididae Chace & Manning, 1972!(6)

!Procaris Chace & Manning, 1972!(5)

!Vetericaris Kensley & Williams, 1986!(1)

Unplaced at family level ††!(5)

!Udora †† Münster, 1839!(5)

SUPERFAMILY GALATHEACARIDOIDEA

Vereshchaka, 1997a!(1)

Family Galatheacarididae Vereshchaka, 1997a!(1)

!Galatheacaris Vereshchaka, 1997a!(1)

SUPERFAMILY PASIPHAEOIDEA † Dana, 1852a

!(92,"0,"1)

Family Pasiphaeidae † Dana, 1852a!(92,"0,"1)

!Alainopasiphaea Hayashi, 1999!(2)

!Eupasiphae Wood-Mason, 1893

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(4)

!Glyphus Filhol, 1884!(1)

!Leptochela Stimpson, 1860c!(15)

!Parapasiphae Smith, 1884!(4)

!Pasiphaea † Savigny, 1816!(61,"0,"1)

!Psathyrocaris Wood-Mason, 1893

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(5)

SUPERFAMILY OPLOPHOROIDEA † Dana, 1852a

!(70,"0,"6)

Family Oplophoridae † Dana, 1852a!(70,"0,"6)

!Acanthephyra A. Milne-Edwards, 1881b!(27)

!Ephyrina Smith, 1885c!(6)

!Heterogenys Chace, 1986!(2)

!Hymenodora Sars, 1877!(4)

!Janicella Chace, 1986!(1)

!Kemphyra Chace, 1986!(1)

!Meningodora Smith, 1882!(6)

!Notostomus † A. Milne-Edwards, 1881b!(9,"0,"1)

!Odontochelion †† Garassino, 1994!(1)

!Oplophorus † H. Milne Edwards, 1837

[in H. Milne Edwards, 1834–1840]!(4,"0,"3)

!Systellaspis Bate, 1888!(10)

!Tonellocaris †† Garassino, 1998!(1)

SUPERFAMILY ATYOIDEA † De Haan, 1849

[in De Haan, 1833–1850]!(449,"0,"3)

Family Atyidae † De Haan, 1849

[in De Haan, 1833–1850]!(449,"0,"3)

!Antecaridina Edmondson, 1954!(1)

!Archaeatya Villalobos, 1959!(1)

!Atya Leach, 1816b!(13)

!Atyaephyra de Brito Capello, 1867!(3)

!Atyella Calman, 1906b!(2)

!Atyoida Randall, 1840!(3)

!Atyopsis Chace, 1983!(2)

!Australatya Chace, 1983!(1)

!Caridella Calman, 1906b!(3)

!Caridina † H. Milne Edwards, 1837

[in H. Milne Edwards, 1834–1840]!(279,"0,"1)

!Caridinides Calman, 1926!(1)

!Caridinopsis Bouvier, 1912b!(1)

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

!Delclosia †† Rabadà, 1993!(2)

!Dugastella Bouvier, 1912a!(2)

!Edoneus Holthuis, 1978!(4)

!Gallocaris Sket & Zakšek, 2009!(1)

!Halocaridina Holthuis, 1963!(2)

!Halocaridinides Fujino & Shokita, 1975!(2)

!Jolivetya Cals, 1986!(1)

!Jonga Hart, 1961!(1)

!Lancaris Cai & Bahir, 2005!(2)

!Limnocaridella Bouvier, 1913!(1)

!Limnocaridina Calman, 1899b!(8)

!Mancicaris Liang, Z. L. Guo & Tang, 1999!(1)

!Marosina Cai & Ng, 2005!(2)

!Micratya Bouvier, 1913!(1)

!Neocaridina Kubo, 1938!(23)

!Palaemonias Hay, 1902!(2)

!Paracaridina Liang, Z. L. Guo & Tang, 1999!(5)

!Paratya Miers, 1882!(15)

!Parisia Holthuis, 1956!(8)

!Potimirim Holthuis, 1954!(4)

!Puteonator Gurney, 1987!(1)

!Pycneus Holthuis, 1986!(1)

!Pycnisia Bruce, 1992b!(2)

!Sinodina Liang & Cai, 1999!(12)

!Stygiocaris Holthuis, 1960b!(2)

!Syncaris Holmes, 1900!(2)

!Troglocaris Dormitzer, 1853!(13)

!Typhlatya Creaser, 1936!(17)

!Typhlocaridina Liang & Yan, 1981!(3)

!Typhlopatsa Holthuis, 1956!(1)

SUPERFAMILY BRESILIOIDEA † Calman, 1896

!(48,"0,"2)

Family Agostocarididae Hart & Manning, 1986!(3)

!Agostocaris Hart & Manning, 1986!(3)

Family Alvinocarididae † Christoffersen, 1986!(23,"0,"2)

!Alvinocaris Williams & Chace, 1982!(12)

!Chorocaris J. W. Martin & Hessler, 1990!(3)

!Harthoﬁa †† Polz, 2007!(2)

!Mirocaris Vereshchaka, 1997b!(2)

!Nautilocaris Komai & Segonzac, 2004!(1)

!Opaepele Williams & Dobbs, 1995!(2)

!Rimicaris Williams & Rona, 1986!(2)

!Shinkaicaris Komai & Segonzac, 2005!(1)

Family Bresiliidae Calman, 1896!(7)

!Bresilia Calman, 1896!(6)

!Encantada Wicksten, 1989!(1)

Family Disciadidae Rathbun, 1902!(12)

!Discias Rathbun, 1902!(8)

!Kirnasia Burukovsky, 1988!(2)

!Lucaya Chace, 1939!(1)

!Tridiscias Kensley, 1983!(1)

Family Pseudochelidae De Grave & Moosa, 2004!(3)

!Pseudocheles Chace & Brown, 1978!(3)

SUPERFAMILY NEMATOCARCINOIDEA

Smith, 1884!(75)

Family Eugonatonotidae Chace, 1937a!(2)

!Eugonatonotus Schmitt, 1926!(2)

Family Nematocarcinidae Smith, 1884!(46)

!Lenzicarcinus Burukovsky, 2005!(1)

!Lipkius Yaldwyn, 1960!(1)

!Nematocarcinus A. Milne-Edwards, 1881b!(43)

!Nigmatullinus Burukovsky, 1991!(1)

Family Rhynchocinetidae Ortmann, 1890!(25)

!Cinetorhynchus Holthuis, 1995!(11)

!Rhynchocinetes H. Milne Edwards, 1837

[in H. Milne Edwards, 1834–1840]!(14)

Family Xiphocarididae Ortmann, 1895!(2)

!Xiphocaris von Martens, 1872!(2)

SUPERFAMILY PSALIDOPODOIDEA Wood-Mason,

1892 [in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(3)

Family Psalidopodidae Wood-Mason, 1892

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(3)

!Psalidopus Wood-Mason, 1892

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(3)

SUPERFAMILY STYLODACTYLOIDEA Bate, 1888

!(33)

Family Stylodactylidae Bate, 1888!(33)

!Bathystylodactylus Hanamura & Takeda, 1996!(3)

!Neostylodactylus Hayashi & Miyake, 1968!(6)

!Parastylodactylus Figueira, 1971!(6)

!Stylodactyloides Cleva, 1990!(1)

!Stylodactylus A. Milne-Edwards, 1881b!(17)

SUPERFAMILY CAMPYLONOTOIDEA Sollaud, 1913

!(16)

Family Bathypalaemonellidae de Saint Laurent, 1985!(11)

!Bathypalaemonella Balss, 1914b!(8)

!Bathypalaemonetes Cleva, 2001!(3)

Family Campylonotidae Sollaud, 1913!(5)

!Campylonotus Bate, 1888!(5)

SUPERFAMILY PALAEMONOIDEA †

Raﬁnesque, 1815!(971,"0,"20)

Family Anchistioididae Borradaile, 1915!(4)

!Anchistioides Paul’son, 1875!(4)

Family Desmocarididae Borradaile, 1915!(2)

!Desmocaris Sollaud, 1911a!(2)

Family Euryrhynchidae Holthuis, 1950!(7)

!Euryrhynchina Powell, 1976!(1)

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

!Euryrhynchoides Powell, 1976!(1)

!Euryrhynchus Miers, 1877a!(5)

Family Gnathophyllidae Dana, 1852a!(14)

!Gnathophylleptum d’Udekem d’Acoz, 2001!(1)

!Gnathophylloides Schmitt, 1933!(2)

!Gnathophyllum Latreille, 1819!(9)

!Levicaris Bruce, 1973a!(1)

!Pycnocaris Bruce, 1972b!(1)

Family Hymenoceridae Ortmann, 1890!(3)

!Hymenocera Latreille, 1819!(1)

!Phyllognathia Borradaile, 1915!(2)

Family Kakaducarididae Bruce, 1993!(3)

!Calathaemon Bruce & Short, 1993!(1)

!Kakaducaris Bruce, 1993!(1)

!Leptopalaemon Bruce & Short, 1993!(1)

Family Palaemonidae † Raﬁnesque, 1815!(934,"0,"20)

Subfamily Palaemoninae † Raﬁnesque, 1815!(372,"0,"20)

!Alburnia †† Bravi & Garassino, 1998b!(1)

!Bechleja †† Houša, 1957!(4)

!Beurlenia †† Martins-Neto & Mezzalira, 1991a!(1)

!Brachycarpus Bate, 1888!(3)

!Coutierella Sollaud, 1914!(2)

!Creaseria Holthuis, 1950!(1)

!Cryphiops Dana, 1852a!(5)

!Exopalaemon Holthuis, 1950!(10)

!Leander E. Desmarest, 1849!(5)

!Leandrites Holthuis, 1950!(4)

!Leptocarpus Holthuis, 1950!(3)

!Macrobrachium Bate, 1868!(239)

!Micropsalis †† von Meyer, 1859!(1)

!Nematopalaemon Holthuis, 1950!(5)

!Neopalaemon Hobbs, 1973!(1)

!Palaemon † Weber, 1795!(42,"0,"6)

!Palaemonetes Heller, 1869!(31)

!Propalaemon †† Woodward, 1903!(3)

!Pseudocaridinella †† Martins-Neto & Mezzalira, 1991b

!(2)

!Pseudopalaemon Sollaud, 1911b!(7)

!Schmelingia †† Schweigert, 2002!(1)

!Troglindicus Sankolli & Shenoy, 1979!(1)

!Troglocubanus Holthuis, 1949!(5)

!Troglomexicanus Villalobos, Alvarez & Iliffe, 1999!(3)

!Urocaridella Borradaile, 1915!(5)

!Yongjiacaris †† Garassino, Shen, Schram & Taylor, 2002

!(1)

Subfamily Pontoniinae Kingsley, 1879a!(562)

!Allopontonia Bruce, 1972a!(1)

!Altopontonia Bruce, 1990b!(1)

!Amphipontonia Bruce, 1991a!(1)

!Anapontonia Bruce, 1966!(1)

!Anchiopontonia Bruce, 1992a!(1)

!Anchistus Borradaile, 1898!(7)

!Apopontonia Bruce, 1976!(1)

!Araiopontonia Fujino & Miyake, 1970!(1)

!Ascidonia Fransen, 2002!(5)

!Balssia Kemp, 1922!(3)

!Blepharocaris Mitsuhashi & Chan, 2007!(1)

!Brucecaris Marin & Chan, 2006!(1)

!Bruceonia Fransen, 2002!(1)

!Cainonia Bruce, 2005b!(1)

!Carinopontonia Bruce, 1988e!(1)

!Chacella Bruce, 1986a!(1)

!Chernocaris Johnson, 1967!(1)

!Climeniperaeus Bruce, 1995!(1)

!Colemonia Bruce, 2005b!(1)

!Conchodytes Peters, 1852!(9)

!Coralliocaris Stimpson, 1860c!(11)

!Coutierea Nobili, 1901!(1)

!Crinotonia Marin, 2006!(2)

!Ctenopontonia Bruce, 1979!(1)

!Cuapetes A. H. Clark, 1919!(25)

!Dactylonia Fransen, 2002!(8)

!Dasella Lebour, 1945!(3)

!Dasycaris Kemp, 1922!(4)

!Diapontonia Bruce, 1986b!(1)

!Epipontonia Bruce, 1977!(4)

!Eupontonia Bruce, 1971!(1)

!Exoclimenella Bruce, 1995!(4)

!Exopontonia Bruce, 1988c!(1)

!Fennera Holthuis, 1951!(1)

!Hamiger Borradaile, 1916!(1)

!Hamodactyloides Fujino, 1973!(2)

!Hamodactylus Holthuis, 1952b!(3)

!Hamopontonia Bruce, 1970!(2)

!Harpiliopsis Borradaile, 1917!(3)

!Harpilius Dana, 1852a!(4)

!Ischnopontonia Bruce, 1966!(1)

!Isopontonia Bruce, 1982b!(1)

!Izucaris Okuno, 1999!(2)

!Jocaste Holthuis, 1952b!(3)

!Laomenes A. H. Clark, 1919!(8)

!Leptomenaeus Bruce, 2007b!(2)

!Lipkebe Chace, 1969!(1)

!Manipontonia Bruce, Okuno & Li, 2005!(1)

!Margitonia Bruce, 2007a!(1)

!Mesopontonia Bruce, 1967!(6)

!Metapontonia Bruce, 1967!(1)

!Miopontonia Bruce, 1985b!(1)

!Neoanchistus Bruce, 1975b!(2)

!Neopericlimenes Heard, Spotte & Bubucis, 1993!(1)

!Neopontonides Holthuis, 1951!(4)

!Nippontonia Bruce & Bauer, 1997!(1)

!Notopontonia Bruce, 1991b!(1)

!Odontonia Fransen, 2002!(7)

!Onycocaridella Bruce, 1981!(3)

!Onycocaridites Bruce, 1987!(1)

!Onycocaris Nobili, 1904!(15)

!Onycomenes Bruce, 2009!(1)

!Orthopontonia Bruce, 1982a!(1)

!Palaemonella Dana, 1852a!(20)

!Paraclimenaeus Bruce, 1988a!(3)

!Paraclimenes Bruce, 1995!(4)

!Paranchistus Holthuis, 1952b!(6)

!Paratypton Balss, 1914d!(1)

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

!Patonia Mitsuhashi & Chan, 2006!(1)

!Periclimenaeus Borradaile, 1915!(69)

!Periclimenella Bruce, 1995!(2)

!Periclimenes Costa, 1844!(173)

!Periclimenoides Bruce, 1990a!(2)

!Philarius Holthuis, 1952b!(3)

!Phycomenes Bruce, 2008b!(1)

!Platycaris Holthuis, 1952b!(1)

!Platypontonia Bruce, 1968!(2)

!Plesiopontonia Bruce, 1985a!(1)

!Pliopontonia Bruce, 1973c!(2)

!Pontonia Latreille, 1829!(10)

!Pontonides Borradaile, 1917!(7)

!Pontoniopsides Bruce, 2005a!(1)

!Pontoniopsis Borradaile, 1915!(1)

!Poripontonia Fransen, 2003!(2)

!Propontonia Bruce, 1969!(1)

!Pseudoclimenes Bruce, 2008a!(1)

!Pseudocoutierea Holthuis, 1951!(6)

!Pseudopontonia Bruce, 1992a!(1)

!Pseudopontonides Heard, 1986!(1)

!Pseudoveleronia Marin, 2008!(1)

!Rapipontonia Marin, 2007!(3)

!Rostronia Fransen, 2002!(1)

!Sandimenes Li, 2009!(1)

!Sandyella Marin, 2009!(2)

!Stegopontonia Nobili, 1906!(1)

!Tectopontonia Bruce, 1973b!(1)

!Thaumastocaris Kemp, 1922!(1)

!Tuleariocaris Hipeau-Jacquotte, 1965!(4)

!Typton Costa, 1844!(17)

!Typtonychus Bruce, 1996!(4)

!Unguicaris Marin & Chan, 2006!(4)

!Urocaris Stimpson, 1860c!(1)

!Veleronia Holthuis, 1951!(2)

!Veleroniopsis Gore, 1981!(1)

!Vir Holthuis, 1952b!(6)

!Waldola Holthuis, 1951!(1)

!Yemenicaris Bruce, 1997!(1)

!Zenopontonia Bruce, 1975a!(1)

Family Typhlocarididae Annandale & Kemp, 1913!(4)

!Typhlocaris Calman, 1909a!(4)

SUPERFAMILY ALPHEOIDEA Raﬁnesque, 1815!(963)

Family Alpheidae Raﬁnesque, 1815!(627)

!Acanthanas Anker, Poddoubtchenko & Jeng, 2006!(1)

!Alpheopsis Coutière, 1896!(20)

!Alpheus Fabricius, 1798!(283)

!Amphibetaeus Coutière, 1896!(1)

!Arete Stimpson, 1860c!(4)

!Aretopsis De Man, 1910!(2)

!Athanas Leach, 1814 [in Leach, 1813–1815]!(32)

!Athanopsis Coutière, 1897!(5)

!Automate De Man, 1888!(9)

!Bannereus Bruce, 1988b!(1)

!Batella Holthuis, 1955!(3)

!Bermudacaris Anker & Iliffe, 2000!(3)

!Betaeopsis Yaldwyn, 1971!(3)

!Betaeus Dana, 1852a!(15)

!Coronalpheus Wicksten, 1999!(1)

!Coutieralpheus Anker & Felder, 2005!(1)

!Deioneus Dworschak, Anker & Abed-Navandi, 2000!(1)

!Fenneralpheus Felder & Manning, 1986!(1)

!Harperalpheus Felder & Anker, 2007!(1)

!Jengalpheops Anker & Dworschak, 2007!(1)

!Leptalpheus Williams, 1965!(8)

!Leptathanas De Grave & Anker, 2008!(1)

!Leslibetaeus

Anker, Poddoubtchenko & Wehrtmann, 2006!(1)

!Metabetaeus Borradaile, 1899!(2)

!Metalpheus Coutière, 1908!(4)

!Mohocaris Holthuis, 1973a!(1)

!Nennalpheus Banner & Banner, 1981!(2)

!Notalpheus Méndez G. & Wicksten, 1982!(1)

!Orygmalpheus De Grave & Anker, 2000!(1)

!Parabetaeus Coutière, 1896!(4)

!Pomagnathus Chace, 1937b!(1)

!Potamalpheops Powell, 1979!(13)

!Prionalpheus Banner & Banner, 1960!(7)

!Pseudalpheopsis Anker, 2007!(1)

!Pseudathanas Bruce, 1983b!(1)

!Pterocaris Heller, 1862a!(1)

!Racilius Paul’son, 1875!(1)

!Richalpheus Anker & Jeng, 2006!(2)

!Rugathanas Anker & Jeng, 2007!(2)

!Salmoneus Holthuis, 1955!(34)

!Stenalpheops Miya, 1997!(2)

!Synalpheus Bate, 1888!(146)

!Thuylamea Nguyên, 2001!(1)

!Vexillipar Chace, 1988!(1)

!Yagerocaris Kensley, 1988!(1)

Family Barbouriidae Christoffersen, 1987!(8)

!Barbouria Rathbun, 1912!(2)

!Janicea Manning & Hart, 1984!(1)

!Parhippolyte Borradaile, 1900b!(5)

Family Hippolytidae Bate, 1888!(318)

!Alope White, 1847b!(2)

!Bathyhippolyte Hayashi & Miyake, 1970!(1)

!Birulia Bražnikov, 1903!(2)

!Bythocarides Sokolov, 2002!(1)

!Bythocaris Sars, 1870!(17)

!Calliasmata Holthuis, 1973b!(3)

!Caridion Goës, 1864!(2)

!Chorismus Bate, 1888!(2)

!Cryptocheles Sars, 1870!(1)

!Eualus Thallwitz, 1892!(37)

!Eumanningia Crosnier, 2000!(1)

!Exhippolysmata Stebbing, 1915!(4)

!Gelastocaris Kemp, 1914!(1)

!Gelastreutes Bruce, 1990c!(1)

!Heptacarpus Holmes, 1900!(34)

!Hippolyte Leach, 1814 [in Leach, 1813–1815]!(31)

!Latreutes Stimpson, 1860c!(17)

!Lebbeus White, 1847c!(47)

De Grave et al.: Living and fossil genera of decapod crustaceans

!Leontocaris Stebbing, 1905!(8)

!Ligur Sarato, 1885!(1)

!Lysmata Risso, 1816!(36)

!Lysmatella Borradaile, 1915!(1)

!Merguia Kemp, 1914!(2)

!Merhippolyte Bate, 1888!(7)

!Mimocaris Nobili, 1903!(1)

!Nauticaris Bate, 1888!(3)

!Paralatreutes Kemp, 1925!(1)

!Paralebbeus Bruce & Chace, 1986!(2)

!Phycocaris Kemp, 1916!(1)

!Saron Thallwitz, 1891!(4)

!Spirontocaris Bate, 1888!(20)

!Thinora Bruce, 1998!(1)

!Thor Kingsley, 1878!(12)

!Thorella Bruce, 1982c!(1)

!Tozeuma Stimpson, 1860c!(11)

!Trachycaris Calman, 1906a!(2)

Family Ogyrididae Holthuis, 1955!(10)

!Ogyrides Stebbing, 1914!(10)

SUPERFAMILY PROCESSOIDEA Ortmann, 1896!(65)

Family Processidae Ortmann, 1896!(65)

!Ambidexter Manning & Chace, 1971!(3)

!Clytomanningus Chace, 1997!(2)

!Hayashidonus Chace, 1997!(1)

!Nikoides Paul’son, 1875!(10)

!Processa Leach, 1815 [in Leach, 1815–1875]!(49)

SUPERFAMILY PANDALOIDEA † Haworth, 1825

!(191,"0,"1)

Family Pandalidae † Haworth, 1825!(187,"0,"1)

!Anachlorocurtis Hayashi, 1975!(1)

!Atlantopandalus Komai, 1999!(1)

!Austropandalus Holthuis, 1952a!(1)

!Bitias Fransen, 1990!(2)

!Calipandalus Komai & Chan, 2003!(1)

!Chelonika Fransen, 1997!(1)

!Chlorocurtis Kemp, 1925!(1)

!Chlorotocella Balss, 1914a!(2)

!Chlorotocus A. Milne-Edwards, 1882a!(2)

!Dichelopandalus Caullery, 1896!(2)

!Dorodotes Bate, 1888!(1)

!Heterocarpus A. Milne-Edwards, 1881b!(27)

!Miropandalus Bruce, 1983a!(1)

!Notopandalus Yaldwyn, 1960!(1)

!Pandalina Calman, 1899a!(4)

!Pandalopsis Bate, 1888!(20)

!Pandalus † Leach, 1814 [in Leach, 1813–1815]!(21,"0,"1)

!Pantomus A. Milne-Edwards, 1883!(2)

!Peripandalus De Man, 1917!(1)

!Plesionika Bate, 1888!(92)

!Procletes Bate, 1888!(1)

!Pseudopandalus Crosnier, 1997!(1)

!Stylopandalus Coutière, 1905!(1)

Family Thalassocarididae Bate, 1888!(4)

!Chlorotocoides Kemp, 1925!(1)

!Thalassocaris Stimpson, 1860c!(3)

SUPERFAMILY PHYSETOCARIDOIDEA

Chace, 1940a!(1)

Family Physetocarididae Chace, 1940a!(1)

!Physetocaris Chace, 1940a!(1)

SUPERFAMILY CRANGONOIDEA † Haworth, 1825

!(284,"0,"4)

Family Crangonidae † Haworth, 1825!(199,"0,"3)

!Aegaeon Agassiz, 1846 [in Agassiz, 1842–1846]!(5)

!Argis Krøyer, 1842!(10)

!Crangon † Fabricius, 1798!(19,"0,"2)

!Lissocrangon Kuris & Carlton, 1977!(1)

!Lissosabinea Christoffersen, 1988!(5)

!Mesocrangon Zarenkov, 1965!(3)

!Metacrangon Zarenkov, 1965!(24)

!Morscrangon †† Garassino & Jakobsen, 2005!(1)

!Neocrangon Zarenkov, 1965!(6)

!Notocrangon Coutière, 1900!(1)

!Paracrangon Dana, 1852a!(7)

!Parapontocaris Alcock, 1901!(6)

!Parapontophilus Christoffersen, 1988!(18)

!Philocheras Stebbing, 1900!(52)

!Placopsicrangon Komai & Chan, 2009!(1)

!Pontocaris Bate, 1888!(10)

!Pontophilus Leach, 1817 [in Leach, 1815–1875]!(3)

!Pseudopontophilus Komai, 2004!(1)

!Prionocrangon Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891

[in Wood-Mason & Alcock, 1891–1893]!(7)

!Rhynocrangon Zarenkov, 1965!(3)

!Sabinea J. C. Ross, 1835!(3)

!Sclerocrangon Sars, 1883!(8)

!Syncrangon Kim & Hayashi, 2003!(2)

!Vercoia Baker, 1904!(4)

Family Glyphocrangonidae Smith, 1884!(85)

!Glyphocrangon A. Milne-Edwards, 1881b!(85)

Family Udorellidae †† Van Straelen, 1924!(1)

!Udorella †† Oppel, 1862!(1)

UNPLACED AT SUPERFAMILY LEVEL ††!(14)

!Acanthinopus †† Pinna, 1974!(1)

!Alcmonacaris †† Polz, 2009!(1)

!Bannikovia †† Garassino & Teruzzi, 1996!(1)

!Blaculla †† Münster, 1839!(3)

!Buergerocaris †† Schweigert & Garassino, 2004!(1)

!Gampsurus †† von der Marck, 1863!(1)

!Hefriga †† Münster, 1839!(3)

!Leiothorax †† Pinna, 1974!(1)

!Parvocaris †† Bravi & Garassino, 1998a!(1)

!Pinnacaris †† Garassino & Teruzzi, 1993!(1)

RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009

A Classification of Living and Fossil Genera of Decapod Crustaceans

Abstract