Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-sq2k7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-26T09:28:08.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resurrection of Eumorphia von Meyer, 1847 and some taxonomical considerations of other mecochirid lobsters (Crustacea, Decapoda, Mecochiridae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2025

Sylvain Charbonnier Open the ORCID record for Sylvain Charbonnier [Opens in a new window] ,
Alessandro Garassino ,
Günter Schweigert ,
Damien Gendry  and
Martin Simpson
Sylvain Charbonnier*
Affiliation:
Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, Centre de Recherche en Paléontologie-Paris (CR2P, UMR 7207), MNHN, Sorbonne Université, CNRS, 57 rue Cuvier, F-75231 Paris cedex 05 Paris, France
Alessandro Garassino
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Biological Sciences, https://ror.org/04bj28v14 Loma Linda University , Loma Linda, CA 92350 USA
Günter Schweigert
Affiliation:
https://ror.org/05k35b119 Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde , Rosenstein 1, 70191 Stuttgart, Germany
Damien Gendry
Affiliation:
Géosciences, CNRS, https://ror.org/015m7wh34 Université de Rennes , Campus de Beaulieu, 263 avenue du Général Leclerc, F-35042 Rennes, France
Martin Simpson
Affiliation:
Ocean and Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre, https://ror.org/01ryk1543 University of Southampton , SO14 3ZH, United Kingdom
*
Corresponding author: Sylvain Charbonnier; Email: sylvain.charbonnier@mnhn.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mecochirid lobsters (Glypheidea, Mecochiridae) are iconic decapod crustaceans from the Jurassic and Cretaceous. The composition of the family in terms of included genera strongly fluctuated during the twentieth century because of the lack of study of the type specimens, which are herein illustrated. On the basis of the type material of different species housed in German, French, British, and Romanian museums and universities, Eumorphia von Meyer, 1847 (type species Carcinium sociale von Meyer, 1841) is re-established as a valid mecochirid genus. Six species are considered, including the new species Eumorphia fabianmuelleri (Callovian, Germany), and the synonymization of Romaniacheiros Franţescu et al., 2018 with Eumorphia is proposed. The composition of the revised family Mecochiridae is discussed.

UUID: http://zoobank.org/6a518009-c139-4ff6-8669-c9994a698cc5

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Paleontology , First View , pp. 1 - 15
Check for updates
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Paleontological Society

Non-technical Summary

Decapod crustaceans form an important part of the modern marine fauna. They were also common in the geological past. Mecochirid lobsters are an extinct group characterized by remarkably elongate first legs, which are subchelate and thus ending in a dactyl (unique finger) incurved backward, unlike the true chela (two fingers) of crabs and other crustacean groups. Since the nineteenth century, several genera and species were described in the Jurassic and the Cretaceous. Here we reintroduce the genus Eumorphia described by the German paleontologist Herman von Meyer in 1847. It was forgotten for decades and yet it was valid. Five species are placed within Eumorphia, and a new species is described from the Middle Jurassic of Germany (geological stage Callovian: about 165 million years ago).

Introduction

Mecochirids are a group of glypheoidan lobsters (Decapoda, Glypheoidea) characterized by remarkable first pereiopods, which are distinctly elongate and subchelate. All the recent phylogenetical analyses based on morphological characters (e.g., Karasawa et al., Reference Karasawa, Schweitzer and Feldmann2013; Charbonnier et al., Reference Charbonnier, Audo, Barriel, Garassino, Schweigert and Simpson2015) found the mecochirids to be the sister group of the glypheids (Glypheidae Winkler, Reference Winkler1881). The first mecochirid species was originally described as Macrourites longimanatus von Schlotheim, Reference von Schlotheim1820 from the Late Jurassic of Germany, subsequently reassigned to Mecochirus by Germar (Reference Germar1827) (for details, see Garassino and Schweigert, Reference Garassino and Schweigert2006). A century later, the family Mecochiridae was erected by Van Straelen (Reference Van Straelen1925) on the basis of the single genus Mecochirus. The generic composition of this family has changed over time from Beurlen (Reference Beurlen1930) to Schweitzer et al. (Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann and Casadío2022) (see Table 1). The family encompassed different representatives ranging from the Early Jurassic (Sinemurian) of Italy, with Mecochirus germari Garassino, Reference Garassino1996, to the Late Cretaceous (Campanian-Maastrichtian) of Greenland with Meyeria rostrata (Collins and Rasmussen, Reference Collins and Rasmussen1992).

Table 1. Composition of the family Mecochiridae Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1925 over the past 100 years

Our recent examination of the type material of Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841) has raised a number of issues concerning the synonymy of Eumorphia with Mecochirus established by Quenstedt (Reference Quenstedt1854) and followed by almost all of the subsequent authors (e.g., Glaessner, Reference Glaessner and Moore1969; Schweitzer et al., Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann, Garassino, Karasawa and Schweigert2010; Feldmann et al., Reference Feldmann, Schweitzer and Karasawa2015). Indeed, a set of morphological characters (e.g., uropodal exopod without diaeresis, flat dorsal cephalic region limited by carinae) clearly distinguishes Eumorphia not only from Mecochirus but also from the other mecochirid genera. These observations inevitably lead to the reestablishment of Eumorphia as a valid genus within the mecochirids. Leading on from this resurrection, several mecochirid lobsters are re-analyzed, and Romaniacheiros Franţescu et al., Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018 from the Late Jurassic of Romania is considered to be a junior synonym of Eumorphia. New combinations are proposed for three additional species, and one new species is described from the Middle Jurassic of Germany.

Materials

The studied material includes 61 specimens ranging from the Sinemurian to the Albian (Table 2). They correspond to isolated carapaces, sometimes preserved in carbonate or phosphate concretions, and carapaces in conjunction with pleons and/or pereiopods, sometimes strongly compressed. The type specimens of each treated species were examined directly or studied by means of high-resolution pictures provided by curators or colleagues.

Table 2. List of species of Eumorphia von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1847

Anatomical abbreviations

P1–P5, pereiopods 1 to 5; s1–s6, pleonal somites 1 to 6.

Repositories and institutional abbreviations

GPIT, Department of Geosciences University of Tübingen, Germany; IGR-PAL, Geological Museum, University of Rennes, France; KSU, Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio, USA; LPBIIIart, Laboratory of Paleontology, Department of Geology and Paleontology, University of Bucharest, Romania; MHNG, Muséum d’histoire naturelle, Genève, Switzerland; MNHN.F, paleontological collection, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, France; SMNS, Stuttgart Natural History Museum, Stuttgart, Germany; UCBL-EM, École Nationale Supérieure des Mines de Paris, collection housed at Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France; UBGD, geological collection, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France.

The published work and nomenclatural acts are registered in ZooBank with the following LSID: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:6A518009-C139-4FF6-8669-C9994A698CC5.

Systematic paleontology

Order Decapoda Latreille, Reference Latreille1802

Infraorder Glypheidea Winkler, Reference Winkler1881

Superfamily Glypheoidea Winkler, Reference Winkler1881

Family Mecochiridae Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1925

Type genus

Mecochirus Germar, Reference Germar1827.

Included genera

Atherfieldastacus Simpson in Robin et al., Reference Robin, Charbonnier, Merle, Simpson, Petit and Fernandez2016—type species Meyeria magna M’Coy, Reference M’Coy1849; Eumorphia von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841—type species Carcinium sociale von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841 (junior synonym: Romaniacheiros Franţescu et al., Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018—type species Romaniacheiros lophia Franţescu et al., Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018); Huhatanka Feldmann and West, Reference Feldmann and West1978—type species Squilla? kiowana Scott, Reference Scott1970; Mecochirus Germar, Reference Germar1827—type species Macrourites longimanatus von Schlotheim, Reference von Schlotheim1820; Meyeria M’Coy, Reference M’Coy1849—type species Astacus ornatus Phillips, Reference Phillips1829 (junior synomym: Jabaloya Garassino, Artal, and Pasini, Reference Garassino, Artal and Pasini2009—type species Jabaloya aragonensis Garassino, Artal, and Pasini, Reference Garassino, Artal and Pasini2009); Pehuenchia Rusconi, Reference Rusconi1948—type species Pehuenchia tellecheai Rusconi, Reference Rusconi1948.

Preliminary remarks

In the Treatise of Invertebrate Paleontology, Feldmann et al. (Reference Feldmann, Schweitzer and Karasawa2015) included five genera within the Mecochiridae: Mecochirus, Huhatanka, Jabaloya, Meyeria, and Selenisca von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1847 (type species: Selenisca gratiosa von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1847, by monotypy). However, Charbonnier et al. (Reference Charbonnier, Garassino, Schweigert and Simpson2013, p. 36, 79) considered Selenisca gratiosa as a subjective synonym of Glyphea pseudoscyllarus (von Schlotheim, Reference von Schlotheim1822) and synonymized Selenisca with Glyphea von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1835, providing a detailed discussion to support this synonymy. Robin et al. (Reference Robin, Charbonnier, Merle, Simpson, Petit and Fernandez2016, p. 12) synonymized Jabaloya with Meyeria on the basis of the similarity of the groove patterns and introduced Atherfieldastacus Simpson in Robin et al., Reference Robin, Charbonnier, Merle, Simpson, Petit and Fernandez2016. Later, Franţescu et al. (Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018) described the new mecochirid Romaniacheiros (Kimmeridgian–Tithonian, Romania), which is here synonymized with Eumorphia. Schweitzer et al. (Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann and Casadío2022) placed Pehuenchia Rusconi, Reference Rusconi1948 (Tithonian–Berriasian, Argentina) among the mecochirids, following Förster and von Hillebrandt (Reference Förster and von Hillebrandt1984).

Genus Eumorphia von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1847

Reference von Meyer1841 Carcinium von Meyer, p. 96. Not valid: homonym of Carcinium Banks and Solander in Hawkesworth, Reference Hawkesworth1773 (Crustacea, Isopoda) and Carcinium von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1834 (Crustacea, Copepoda).

Reference von Meyer1847 Eumorphia von Meyer, p. 144. Nomen novum pro Carcinium von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841.

Reference Beurlen1930 Eumorphia; Beurlen, p. 372.

Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018 Romaniacheiros Franţescu et al., p. 48, nov. syn.

Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann and Casadío2022 Romaniacheiros; Schweitzer, Feldmann, and Casadio, p. 294.

Type species

Eumorphia: Carcinium sociale von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841, by monotypy. Romaniacheiros: Romaniacheiros lophia Franţescu et al., Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018, by monotypy.

Included fossil species

See Table 2.

Emended diagnosis

Carapace

Subcylindrical carapace slightly compressed laterally, with dorsal midline (separation between right and left parts of the carapace) well visible in branchial region; narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove; flat dorsal cephalic region limited laterally by sinuous orbital carinae and posteriorly by cervical groove; branchial region with dorsal median carina; anterior margin with well-developed orbital spine at level of orbital carina; sinuous posterior margin; ventral margin of antennal–pterygostomial region strongly convex; relatively elongate, rimmed rostrum, slightly turned downward, lacking supra- and subrostral teeth; rostral carinae extending posteriorly in dorsal cephalic region; postcervical and branchiocardiac grooves directed toward the posterior margin; elongate cardiac groove joined to dorsal margin of carapace; hepatic groove shallow and swinging toward posterior; inferior groove directed posteriorly, not reaching ventral margin; gastro-orbital groove absent.

Pleon

Subrectangular telson.

Thoracic appendages

Subchelate P1–P2; achelate P3–P5; very elongate P1; tronconical P2 propodus.

Pleonal appendages

Uropodal exopod without diaeresis.

Remarks

von Meyer (Reference von Meyer1841) described Carcinium sociale from the Middle Jurassic of Germany. He later proposed the new generic name Eumorphia because Carcinium was preoccupied (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1847). Quenstedt (Reference Quenstedt1854) synonymized Eumorphia with Mecochirus on the basis of the very elongate pereiopods. His position was followed, with the exception of Beurlen (Reference Beurlen1930), by all of the subsequent authors (e.g., Oppel, Reference Oppel1862; Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1925; Glaessner, Reference Glaessner and Pompeckj1929, Reference Glaessner and Moore1969; Schweitzer et al., Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann, Garassino, Karasawa and Schweigert2010; Feldmann et al., Reference Feldmann, Schweitzer and Karasawa2015), and Eumorphia disappeared from the literature.

However, careful examination of the type material of Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841) supplemented by both historical and newly collected specimens lead us to highlight some morphological characters (e.g., uropodal exopod without diaeresis, flat dorsal cephalic region limited by orbital carinae and deep cervical groove, rimmed rostrum) that are not shared with Mecochirus or the other mecochirid lobsters. Significantly, the lack of a diaeresis on the uropodal exopods was first noticed by Quenstedt (Reference Quenstedt1854) and figured in his reconstruction; it was also illustrated by Oppel (Reference Oppel1862). Later, at the time of the establishment of the family Mecochiridae, Van Straelen (Reference Van Straelen1925, p. 216) stated that the lack of a diaeresis was formerly noticed by von Meyer (Reference von Meyer1847), Carter (Reference Carter1886), and Krause (Reference Krause1891) and remarked that, if this were really the case, the species cannot belong to Mecochirus. He surmised that the diaeresis was present but not visible due to the imperfect preservation of this thin-shelled form and therefore maintained the species in Mecochirus. This opinion was followed by Glaessner (Reference Glaessner and Moore1969, p. R467), who concurred that the lack of a diaeresis was linked to preservational factors.

However, at least two type specimens of Eumorphia socialis clearly show their uropodal exopod to be made of a single element with no diaeresis, as observed in other species (see the following). Moreover, the carapace groove pattern of Eumorphia is close to, but different from, the other mecochirid genera. Hence, we suggest a resurrection of Eumorphia as a valid genus within the mecochirids.

Franţescu et al. (Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018) erected Romaniacheiros from the Late Jurassic (Kimmeridgian–Tithonian) of Romania, assigning it to the Mecochiridae on the basis of the following characters: carapace longer than high, carinae on cephalic area, deep cervical groove, and weakly incised branchiocardiac groove. The authors considered that Romaniacheiros is distinguished from all other mecochirid genera by a median carina on the thoracic region and the presence of one intestinal tubercle. Our recent review of the holotype of Romaniacheiros lophia indicates that an elongate cardiac groove, although not reported in the original diagnosis, is indeed present, originating from a very faint postcervical groove and joined to the dorsal margin. Thus, the carapace groove pattern is very close to that of Eumorphia. Moreover, the flat dorsal cephalic region limited by orbital carinae, the rimmed rostrum (only the basis is visible), the dorsal median carina in branchial region, and the general outline of the carapace with its sinuous posterior margin are diagnostic characters of Eumorphia. In conclusion, on the basis of the morphological characters herein provided, we consider Romaniacheiros as a junior synonym of Eumorphia.

Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841)

Figures 1, 2, 3

Figure 1. Type material of Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841) from the Middle Jurassic (Callovian) of Dettingen an der Erms near Bad Urach, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. (1–3) Lectotype herein designated SMNS 29924/2, carapace and first pleonal somites: (1) left lateral view, (2) right lateral view, and (3) dorsal view. (4, 5) Interpretative line drawings of carapace groove pattern: (4) right lateral view and (5) dorsal view. (6–8) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/1, carapace and fragments of pleon and pereiopods: (6) left lateral view, (7) right lateral view, and (8) dorsal view. (9, 10) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/4, pleon and tail fan: (9) right lateral view and (10) dorsal view. Note the lack of diaeresis on uropodal exopod. (11) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/3, pleon, dorsal view. Note the tergopleuron with spiny ventral margin. (12, 13) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/5, pleon: (12) left lateral view and (13) right lateral view. (14–16) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/6: (14) carapace and pleon in dorsal view, (15) carapace in left lateral view, and (16) tail fan in right lateral view. a = branchiocardiac groove; b = antennal groove; b1 = hepatic groove; c = postcervical groove; cd = cardiac groove; e1e = cervical groove; i = inferior groove; oc = orbital carina; os = orbital spine; pr = postrostral carina; r = rostrum. Photographs: G. Schweigert. Line drawings: S. Charbonnier. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Figure 2. Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841) from the Callovian of Germany (1, 2), the Oxfordian of Weymouth, Dorset, United Kingdom (3–7), and the Callovian of Villers-sur-Mer, Normandy, France (8–13). (1) Carapace MNHN.F.A87788, right lateral view. (2) Pleon MNHN.F.A87789, dorsal view. (3–5) Carapace IGR-PAL-145585: (3) right lateral view, (4) left lateral view, and (5) dorsal view. (6, 7) Pleon IGR-PAL-145586: (6) dorsal view and (7) left lateral view. (8, 9) Pleon and tail fan IGR-PAL-145593: (8) dorsal view and (9) right lateral view. Note the uropodal exopod without diaeresis. (10, 11) carapace and fragments of pereiopods IGR-PAL-145592: (10) left lateral view and (11) dorsal view. Note the flat dorsal cephalic region. (12) Carapace IGR-PAL-145588, left lateral view. (13) Carapace IGR-PAL-145589, right lateral view. Photographs: (1, 2) L. Cazes; (3–13) D. Gendry. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Figure 3. Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1841) from the Callovian (1–5) and Oxfordian (6, 7) of Villers-sur-Mer, Calvados, Normandy, France. (1, 2) Subcomplete specimen IGR-PAL-145590: (1) left lateral view and (2) close-up of anterior cephalic region. (3–5) Specimen IGR-PAL-145591: (3) ventral view showing set of pereiopods, (4) close-up of anterior cephalic region, and (5) line drawing of spiny scaphocerite. (6, 7) Carapace IGR-PAL-145587 (part and counterpart) collected at top of Marnes de Villers Formation. Photographs: D. Gendry. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Reference von Meyer1841 Carcinium sociale von Meyer, p. 96.

Reference von Meyer1847 Eumorphia socialis; von Meyer, p. 144, pl. 19, figs. 2–19.

Reference Quenstedt1854 Mecochirus socialis; Quenstedt, p. 189, pl. 2, figs. 4, 8–11, 14–17.

Reference Quenstedt1857 Mecochirus socialis; Quenstedt, p. 520, pl. 69, figs. 8–11.

Reference Oppel1862 Mecochirus socialis; Oppel, p. 81, pl. 22, figs. 2, 3.

Reference Carter1886 Mecochirus socialis; Carter, p. 553.

Reference Krause1891 Mecochirus socialis; Krause, p. 185, pl. 14, fig. 7a–e.

Reference Van Straelen1925 Mecochirus socialis; Van Straelen, p. 215, 383, 395, 410, fig. 105.

Reference Woods1928 Mecochirus socialis; Woods, p. 66, pl. 17, fig. 12.

Reference Glaessner and Pompeckj1929 Mecochirus socialis; Glaessner, p. 251.

Reference Förster1971 Mecochirus socialis; Förster, p. 407.

Reference Herrick and Schram1978 Mecochirus socialis; Herrick and Schram, p. 10.

Reference Etter2004 Mecochirus socialis; Etter, p. 387.

Reference Garassino and Schweigert2006 Mecochirus socialis; Garassino and Schweigert, p. 20.

Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann, Garassino, Karasawa and Schweigert2010 Mecochirus socialis; Schweitzer et al., p. 20.

Reference Astrop2011 Mecochirus socialis; Astrop, p. 118.

Reference Dadykin and Shmakov2023 Eumorphia sp.; Dadykin and Shmakov, p. 1053, figs 7, 8.

Type material

The material mentioned by von Meyer (Reference von Meyer1841) was from the collection of Graf (=Count) von Mandelsloh, a fossil collector and amateur geologist, who lived in the town of Urach, southeast of Stuttgart, Germany. The specimens are mostly preserved in small nodules and are very common in the “Callovian claystones”—nowadays called the Ornatenton Formation (Middle Jurassic, middle to late Callovian)—at Dettingen an der Erms, a small town close to Bad Urach, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. The Mandelsloh collection was later purchased by the Stuttgart museum, and six syntypes, SMNS 29924/1 to 29924/6, are still housed in the paleontological collection. After careful examination, we select specimen SMNS 29924/2 as the lectotype.

Occurrences

Eumorphia socialis is widespread and generally abundant in the Callovian of Germany (von Meyer, Reference von Meyer1847; Oppel, Reference Oppel1862) and in the Callovian and Oxfordian of Normandy, France (Charbonnier and Gendry, Reference Charbonnier and Gendry2013; Pezy and Gendry Reference Pezy and Gendry2016; Gendry, Reference Gendry2020; present work), and in the Oxfordian of the United Kingdom (Carter, Reference Carter1886; Woods, Reference Woods1928; present work).

Description

Carapace

Subcylindrical carapace slightly compressed laterally (lectotype, length: ~11 mm, height: ~5.5 mm) with well-marked dorsal midline in branchial region; narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove; flat dorsal cephalic region limited laterally by sinuous, tuberculate orbital carinae and posteriorly by cervical groove; branchial region with dorsal median carina; ventral margin of antennal–pterygostomial region strongly convex and rimmed by a row of tubercles; sinuous posterior margin; pointed rostrum, slightly turned downward, rimmed by smooth lateral carinae, slightly extending in cephalic region; anterior margin with well-developed orbital spine at level of orbital carina; deep sinuous cervical joined to antennal groove; parallel postcervical and branchiocardiac grooves steeply inclined, both reaching the upper part of the dorsal margin; elongate cardiac groove joined to dorsal margin of carapace; weak hepatic groove shallow and swinging toward posterior; inferior groove directed posteriorly, not reaching ventral margin; gastro-orbital groove absent; smooth dorsal surface of carapace; smooth surfaces among the carinae in the cephalic region; cardiac and branchial regions covered with small spiny tubercles uniformly arranged.

Pleon

Subrectangular s1 smaller than s2–s5; s2–s5 equal in length; s2–s5 terga and tergopleura divided by thin transverse tuberculate ridge; s1–s5 terga slightly tuberculate; subtriangular s2–s5 tergopleura covered by small tubercles uniformly arranged; ventral margins of s2–s5 tergopleura rimmed by a row of small spines; subrectangular s6 without transverse ridge and covered by small tubercles uniformly arranged; subrectangular telson with rounded distal extremity, longitudinal carinae, and smooth dorsal surface.

Cephalic appendages

Pointed scaphocerite, smooth, with dorsal carina and spiny lateral outer margin (Fig. 3.4, 3.5).

Thoracic appendages

Subchelate P1–P2; achelate P3–P5; very elongate P1 with dorsal rows of tubercles and scattered tubercles; P2 with tronconical propodus; subcylindrical very elongate P2–P3 meri, equal in length, wing-shaped medially and ventrally; dorsal margin of P2–P3 meri rimmed by a row of small spines slightly incurved forward; ventral margin of P2 merus with one single strong spine incurved forward; surface of P2–P3 meri covered by small tubercles uniformly arranged; P3 with tuberculate carpus incomplete distally, reinforced by one longitudinal tuberculate carina.

Pleonal appendages

Uropodal endopod and exopod equal in length and as long as telson, reinforced by longitudinal tuberculate median carina; smooth surface of uropodal endopod and exopod; smooth lateral margin of uropodal exopod; uropodal exopod without diaeresis.

Additional examined material

Seven specimens (IGR-PAL-145588–145594, Gendry collection) from the Callovian and one specimen (IGR-PAL-145587, Gendry collection) from the Oxfordian of Villers-sur-Mer, Normandy. Two specimens (IGR-PAL-145585, 145586, Bara collection) from the Oxfordian of Weymouth, Dorset, United Kingdom. Two specimens (MNHN.F.A87788, A87789) from Germany.

Remarks

Dadykin and Shmakov (Reference Dadykin and Shmakov2023) reported Eumorphia sp. from the Callovian of Russia. This last occurrence is a very recent discovery and due to the review of one of the authors (S.C.). A careful examination of the figured specimens led us to identify the specimens as representatives of Eumorphia socialis, thus widely extending the paleogeographic distribution of the species to the east of Europe.

Eumorphia olifex (Quenstedt, Reference Quenstedt1856) n. comb.

Figure 4.1–4.3

Figure 4. (1–3) Eumorphia olifex (Quenstedt, Reference Quenstedt1856) n. comb. from the Sinemurian of Duβlingen, near Tübingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. (1, 2) Holotype GPIT-PV 51267-51268 (part and counterpart): (1) dorsal view and (2) close-up of tail fan. Note the uropodal exopod without diaeresis. (3) Pleon and tail fan GPIT-PV 51269, dorsal view. (4–11) Type material of Eumorphia clypeatus (Carter, Reference Carter1898) n. comb. from the Bathonian of Northampton, Northamptonshire, United Kingdom. (4–6) Paralectotype SM 3230, carapace: (4) dorsal view, (5) right lateral view, and (6) left lateral view. (7–11) Lectotype herein designated SM 3231: (7) carapace, right lateral view; (8) carapace and pleon, dorsal view; (9) telson, dorsal view; (10) pleon, dorsal view; (11) pleon and tail fan, left lateral view. Note uropodal exopod without diaeresis. Photographs: (1–3) I. Werneburg; (4–11) M. Riley. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Reference Quenstedt1856 Mecochirus olifex Quenstedt, p. 89, pl. 11, fig. 17.

Reference Oppel1862 Mecochirus olifex; Oppel, 81, pl. 22, fig. 1.

Reference Van Straelen1925 Mecochirus olifex; Van Straelen, p. 214, 383, 392, 402.

Reference Beurlen1928 Mecochirus olifex; Beurlen, p. 142.

Reference Glaessner and Pompeckj1929 Mecochirus olifex; Glaessner, p. 251.

Reference Förster1971 Mecochirus olifex; Förster, p. 406.

Reference Garassino1996 Mecochirus olifex; Garassino, p. 349.

Reference Etter2004 Mecochirus olifex; Etter, p. 387.

Reference Garassino and Schweigert2006 Mecochirus olifex; Garassino and Schweigert, p. 20.

Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann, Garassino, Karasawa and Schweigert2010 Mecochirus olifex; Schweitzer et al., p. 20.

Reference Pagani, Damborenea, Manceñido and Ferrari2011 Mecochirus olifex; Pagani et al., p. 149.

Type material

Holotype by monotypy GPIT-PV 51267, 51268 (part and counterpart) from Duβlingen, near Tübingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. The specimen was collected in the Early Jurassic (late Sinemurian),“Ölschiefer” (oil shale) of the Arietenkalk Formation.

Description

Carapace

Carapace poorly preserved (length: ~10 mm); narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove; flat dorsal cephalic region; rostrum poorly preserved, basally rimmed by lateral carinae; hepatic groove shallow and probably swinging toward posterior; all regions uniformly covered by strong granules.

Pleon

Subrectangular s1 smaller than s2–s5; s2–s5 equal in length; s6 longer than the other pleonal somites; s2–s5 terga and tergopleura divided by thin transverse ridge; smooth s1–s5 terga; rounded s2–s5 tergopleura, globally smooth, with smooth ventral margins; smooth, subrectangular s6; subrectangular telson with rounded distal extremity.

Cephalic appendages

Voluminous eyes; multi-articulated flagellum of antenna or antennule preserved.

Thoracic appendages

Very elongate subchelate P1, with carpus and propodus bearing longitudinal rows of spines; pointed and arcuate dactylus, about half as long as propodus.

Pleonal appendages

Uropodal endopod and exopod equal in length and as long as telson, reinforced by longitudinal, smooth median carina; uropodal endopod and exopod with smooth surface; uropodal exopod without diaeresis.

Additional examined material

One specimen GPIT-PV 51269 from the type locality.

Remarks

Van Straelen (Reference Van Straelen1925, p. 214) noted that the sole specimen studied by Quenstedt (Reference Quenstedt1856) can be assigned to Mecochirus only on the basis of its elongate P1 since the strongly flattened carapace does not preserve the grooves and carinae. Although Schweitzer et al. (Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann, Garassino, Karasawa and Schweigert2010) listed this species within Mecochirus, Pagani et al. (Reference Pagani, Damborenea, Manceñido and Ferrari2011, p. 149) raised some doubts about its systematic validity due to the lack of the main morphological characters of the genus. Indeed, the elongate subchelate P1 is typical of all mecochirid genera.

Careful examination of the holotype and one additional historical specimen (GPIT-PV 51269) lead us to highlight some morphological characters (uropodal exopod without diaeresis, flat dorsal cephalic region) diagnostic of Eumorphia. The presence of a diaeresis on uropodal exopod was highlighted by Van Straelen (Reference Van Straelen1925, p. 214), but this is clearly a mistake. Indeed, the tail fan is well preserved in both available specimens, and the lack of a diaeresis is evident, which is consistent with the drawing produced by Oppel (Reference Oppel1862, pl. 22, fig. 1). In conclusion, we tentatively propose the new combination Eumorphia olifex (Quenstedt, Reference Quenstedt1856) n. comb. This species is the oldest member of the genus and one of the oldest mecochirid lobsters together with Mecochirus germari Garassino, Reference Garassino1996 (Sinemurian, Osteno, Italy).

Eumorphia clypeatus (Carter, Reference Carter1898) n. comb.

Figure 4.4–4.11

Reference Carter1898 Gebia clypeatus Carter, p.16, pl. 1, fig. 2.

Reference Van Straelen1925 Upogebia clypeatus; Van Straelen, p. 309, 386, 407.

Reference Woods1928 Mecochirus clypeatus; Woods, p. 65, pl. 17, figs 8–10.

Reference Glaessner1960 Mecochirus clypeatus; Glaessner, p. 10.

Reference Kennedy, Jakobson and Johnson1969 Mecochirus clypeatus; Kennedy et al., p. 552.

Reference Förster1971 Mecochirus clypeatus; Förster, p. 407.

Reference Sellwood1971 Mecochirus clypeatus; Sellwood, p. 589.

Reference Collins2002 Mecochirus clypeatus; Collins, p. 82.

Reference Etter2004 Mecochirus clypeatus; Etter, p. 387.

Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann, Garassino, Karasawa and Schweigert2010 Mecochirus clypeatus; Schweitzer et al., p. 20.

Reference Charbonnier, Gilardet, Garassino and Odin2023 Mecochirus clypeatus; Charbonnier et al., p. 682.

Type material

After Carter (Reference Carter1898, p. 16), the type material was originally composed of 11 syntypes housed in the Woodwardian Museum (now Sedgwick Museum), in Mr. T. J. George’s collection, and in Carter’s own collection. Three syntypes are still housed at the Sedgwick Museum: SM J3230 (figured by Carter, Reference Carter1898, pl. 1, fig. 2a,b), SM J3231 (figured by Carter, Reference Carter1898, pl. 1, fig. 2c–e), and SM J3232 (figured by Woods, Reference Woods1928, pl. 17, fig. 10a,b). They were collected in the Middle Jurassic (Bathonian) from Northampton, Northamptonshire, UK. Specimen SM 3231 is herein selected as the lectotype. Specimens SM 3230 and 3232 are paralectotypes.

Description

Carapace

Subcylindrical carapace slightly compressed laterally (length: ~10 mm, height: ~5.6 mm); narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove; flat dorsal cephalic region limited laterally by sinuous, tuberculate orbital carinae and posteriorly by cervical groove; orbital carinae fused to lateral rostral margins; large rostrum (not preserved distally) with basal median carina; dorsal median carina in branchial region; ventral margin of antennal–pterygostomial region strongly convex; sinuous posterior margin; deep sinuous cervical joined to antennal groove; parallel postcervical and branchiocardiac grooves steeply inclined, both reaching the upper part of the dorsal margin; elongate cardiac groove joined to dorsal margin of carapace; weak hepatic groove shallow and swinging toward posterior; inferior groove directed posteriorly, not reaching ventral margin; gastro-orbital groove absent; cephalic region with pits; cardiac, hepatic, and branchial regions covered with numerous small pits.

Pleon

Subrectangular s1 smaller than s2–s5; s2–s5 equal in length; s6 longer than the other pleonal somites; s2–s5 terga and tergopleura divided by thin transverse ridge; smooth s1–s5 terga with a few pits; rounded s2–s5 tergopleura, globally smooth, with smooth ventral margins; smooth, subrectangular s6 without transverse ridge; subrectangular telson with rounded distal extremity, longitudinal carinae diverging posteriorly, one axial pair of tubercles, and smooth dorsal surface.

Thoracic appendages

Subchelate P1, very elongate, with carpus and propodus uniformly covered with small granules; pointed dactylus, about half as long as propodus.

Pleonal appendages

Uropodal endopod and exopod equal in length and as long as telson, reinforced by longitudinal, smooth median carina; uropodal endopod and exopod with smooth surface; smooth lateral margin of uropodal exopod; uropodal exopod without diaeresis.

Remarks

Woods (Reference Woods1928) was the first to clearly identify this species as a mecochirid lobster and to place it in Mecochirus. He was followed by all of the subsequent authors until Charbonnier et al. (Reference Charbonnier, Gilardet, Garassino and Odin2023). However, the review of type specimens has revealed several morphological characters diagnostic of Eumorphia: the narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove, with flat dorsal area limited by orbital carinae, the sinuous posterior margin, and the uropodal exopod without diaeresis. We note that the flat dorsal cephalic region was already highlighted by Woods (Reference Woods1928, p. 65) as “shield-like on the dorsal surface.” In conclusion, we propose the new combination Eumorphia clypeatus (Carter, Reference Carter1898) n. comb. This species is the only one with a carapace covered by small pits.

Eumorphia fabianmuelleri new species.

Figure 5.1–5.6

Figure 5. (1–6) Type material of Eumorphia fabianmuelleri n. sp. from the Callovian of NW Bramsche, Lower Saxony, Germany. (1–3) Holotype SMNS 70665-1, carapace: (1) left lateral view, (2) line drawing, and (3) dorsal view. (4) Paratype SMNS 70665-2, close-up of tergopleura. (5) Paratype 70665-4, pleon and tail fan, right lateral view. (6) Paratype 70665-3, carapace and pereiopods, left lateral view. (7–9) Eumorphia lophia (Franţescu et al., Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018) n. comb. from the Kimmeridgian–Tithonian of Cernatului Valley, Săcele, Romania, holotype LPBIIIart 169, carapace and probable isolated telson: (7) left lateral view, (8) line drawing, and (9) dorsal view. a = branchiocardiac groove; ac = antennal carina; b = antennal groove; b1 = hepatic groove; c = postcervical groove; cd = cardiac groove; e1e = cervical groove; gc = gastro-orbital carina; i = inferior groove; oc = orbital carina; pr = postrostral carina. Photographs: (1–6) F. Müller; (7, 9) courtesy C. Schweitzer. Line drawings: S. Charbonnier. (1–6) Scale bars = 5 mm; (7–9) scale bars = 2 mm.

Type material

Holotype SMNS 70665-1 and three paratypes SMNS 70665-2, 70665-3, and 70665-4 collected in the Ornatenton Formation (lower Callovian, Koenigi Zone; corresponding to bed 3 in section “Schleptruper Egge,” published by Lange, Reference Lange1973) of the former clay pit “Frettberg” NW Bramsche, Lower Saxony, Germany (geographic coordinates: 52°25’19.8"N, 7°55’29.2"E).

Diagnosis

Eumorphia with three cephalic carinae (orbital, gastro-orbital, and antennal).

Description

Carapace

Subcylindrical carapace slightly compressed laterally (length: ~18 mm, height: ~9 mm), with dorsal midline well marked in branchial region; narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove, with three cephalic carinae; slightly sinuous, tuberculate orbital carina; weakly marked tuberculate gastro-orbital carina; straight, tuberculate antennal carina; flat dorsal cephalic region limited laterally by orbital carinae and posteriorly by cervical groove; branchial region with dorsal median carina; ventral margin of antennal–pterygostomial region strongly convex; sinuous posterior margin; rostrum not preserved but rimmed by smooth postrostral carinae extending posteriorly in cephalic region; short median carina between the postrostral carinae; well-developed orbital spine at level of orbital carina; deep sinuous cervical joined to antennal groove; parallel postcervical and branchiocardiac grooves steeply inclined, both reaching the upper part of the dorsal margin; elongate cardiac groove joined to dorsal margin of carapace; weak hepatic groove shallow and swinging toward posterior; inferior groove directed posteriorly, not reaching ventral margin; gastro-orbital groove absent; smooth dorsal surface of carapace; smooth surfaces among the carinae in the cephalic region; cardiac region covered with some small spiny tubercles; hepatic, pterygostomial and branchial regions densely covered with spiny tubercles uniformly arranged.

Pleon

Subrectangular s1 smaller than s2–s5; s2–s5 equal in length; s2–s5 terga and tergopleura divided by thin transverse tuberculate ridge; s1–s5 terga globally smooth but with some scattered small tubercles; subtriangular s2–s5 tergopleura covered by small tubercles uniformly arranged; s2–s5 tergopleura margins rimmed by a row of small spines; subrectangular s6 without transverse ridge, globally smooth but with some scattered small tubercles uniformly arranged; subrectangular telson with smooth dorsal surface.

Thoracic appendages

P1 not preserved; P2–P3 partially preserved; only P4–P5 basis preserved; subcylindrical P2–P3 meri very elongate equal in length, wing-shaped medially and ventrally; dorsal margin of P2–P3 meri rimmed by a row of small spines slightly incurved forward; ventral margin of P2 merus with one single strong spine incurved forward; surface of P2–P3 meri covered by small tubercles uniformly arranged; P3 carpus tuberculate, incomplete distally, reinforced by a longitudinal tuberculate carina.

Pleonal appendages

Uropodal endopod and exopod partially preserved, both having same length of telson; uropodal endopod and exopod with smooth surface; uropodal exopod with smooth lateral margin; uropodal exopod without diaeresis.

Etymology

The specific epithet honors Fabian Müller, who collected the studied specimens.

ZooBank

LSID: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:B5833E71-B976-4684-9241-B4AB5FD45D9F

Remarks

The type specimens show morphological characters diagnostic of Eumorphia: the carapace groove pattern, the narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove, with flat dorsal area limited by orbital carinae, the sinuous posterior margin, and the uropodal exopod without diaeresis. Compared with all the other species of Eumorphia, Eumorphia fabianmuelleri n. sp. is the only one with three cephalic carinae.

Eumorphia lophia (Franţescu et al., Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018) n. comb.

Figure 5.7–5.9

Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018 Romaniacheiros lophia Franţescu, Feldmann et al., p. 49, 50, fig. 2.

Type material

Holotype by monotypy LPBIIIart 169 from the Late Jurassic (Kimmeridgian-Tithonian) of Cernatului Valley, Săcele, Romania.

Emended description

Carapace

Subcylindrical carapace slightly compressed laterally (length: ~6.4 mm, height: 3.3 mm); narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove; flat dorsal cephalic region limited laterally by sinuous, tuberculate orbital carinae and posteriorly by cervical groove; branchial region with dorsal median carina with distal intestinal tubercle; ventral margin of antennal–pterygostomial region strongly convex; sinuous posterior margin; rostrum not preserved but rimmed by smooth postrostral carinae extending posteriorly in cephalic region; short median granular carina between the postrostral carinae; anterior margin broken; deep sinuous cervical joined to antennal groove; parallel postcervical and branchiocardiac grooves steeply inclined, both reaching the upper part of the dorsal margin; elongate, arcuate cardiac groove joined to dorsal margin of carapace; weak hepatic groove shallow and swinging toward posterior; inferior groove directed posteriorly, not reaching ventral margin; gastro-orbital groove absent; smooth cephalic region; branchial region smooth dorsally, becoming pitted ventrally, below branchiocardiac groove.

Pleon

subrectangular telson with rounded distal extremity and smooth dorsal surface, proximal margin with short, oblique fissures laterally; axial region with probable tubercle.

Remarks

The review of the holotype led us to modify the original description. We evidence herein the elongate cardiac groove, originating from a very faint postcervical groove and joined to the dorsal margin. The carapace groove pattern in general is diagnostic of Eumorphia. The “subdorsal” and “supraorbital” carinae in the cephalic region are reinterpreted as, respectively, postrostral carinae (extending from a rostrum, herein not preserved) and orbital carinae delimiting a flat dorsal cephalic area, typical of Eumorphia. The dorsal median carina in the branchial region is also a generic character of Eumorphia, and the intestinal tubercle should be considered as merely a specific character. We also reinterpret the pleonal tergopleuron as a subrectangular telson, typical of mecochirid lobsters. In conclusion, we propose the new combination Eumorphia lophia (Franţescu et al., Reference Franţescu, Feldmann, Schweitzer, Lazăr and Stoica2018) n. comb.

Eumorphia houdardi (Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1936) n. comb.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Eumorphia houdardi (Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1936) n. comb. from the Albian of Pargny-sur-Saulx, Marne, France. (1, 2) Holotype UBGD.000269, carapace and fragments of pleon and pereiopods: (1) right lateral view and (2) left lateral view. (3, 4) Specimen MNHN.F.A28991: (3) right lateral view and (4) left lateral view. (5,6) Specimen MNHN.F.A28993: (5) right lateral view and (6) left lateral view. (7, 8) Specimen MNHN.F.A28992: (7) dorsal view and (8) ventral view. Note uropodal exopod without diaeresis. Photographs: (1, 2) J. Thomas; (3–8) L. Cazes. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Reference Van Straelen1936 Mecochirus houdardi Van Straelen, p. 5, pl. 1, figs. 3, 4.

Reference Veiga Ferreira1955 Mecochirus houdardi; Veiga Ferreira, p. 119.

Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann, Garassino, Karasawa and Schweigert2010 Mecochirus houdardi; Schweitzer et al., p. 20.

Reference Breton and Colleté2010a Mecochirus houdardi; Breton, p. 222, fig. 150c.

Reference Breton and Colleté2010b Mecochirus houdardi; Breton, p. 13, fig. 2c.

Reference Breton, Néraudeau and Dépré2015 Meyeria houdardi; Breton et al., p. 57, 59, figs. 1, 2.

Reference Charbonnier, Audo, Garassino, Simpson, Gèze and Azar2021 Meyeria houdardi; Charbonnier et al., p. 4.

Type material

Holotype UBGD.000269 (Houdard collection, by original designation of Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1936, pl. 1, figs 3, 4) from the Early Cretaceous (early Albian) of Pargny-sur-Saulx, Marne, Grand Est, France. At least 22 paratypes (Houdard collection; J. Thomas, personal communication, 2024) from the Albian of Pargny-sur-Saulx (Marne, France) and Moëslains (Haute-Marne, France) are also housed at the Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France. Two paratypes (MHNG-GEPI-68616a, b) from the Albian of Sainte-Croix (Canton of Vaud, Switzerland) are housed at the Geneva Museum. Other paratypes are also probably housed in the paleontological collections of the Neuchâtel University, Switzerland (not checked).

Original description

Carapace relatively wide; deep, narrow cervical groove; weak branchiocardiac groove; postcervical groove not joined to dorsal margin; hepatic groove absent; narrow antennal groove; cephalic region with spiny carinae; rounded s1, s2 pleura (literal translation from Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1936).

Emended description (Breton et al., Reference Breton, Néraudeau and Dépré2015)

Carapace

Subcylindrical carapace, twice longer than high, weakly compressed laterally; ovoid-shaped spatulate rostrum; median carina with very short spines, extending behind an anterior depression; raised lateral margins of rostrum with 4–6 spines forward directed; a row of 6–7 spines extending obliquely in front of cervical groove; serrate anterior margin; cervical region covered with small spiny tubercles; pterygostomial region covered with small tubercles and slightly depressed anteriorly; branchial region covered with small tubercles; deep, wide cervical groove intercepting dorsal margin with an angle of 45°; parallel postcervical and branchiocardiac grooves, the former wider than the latter; both grooves do not reach the dorsal margin; branchiocardiac groove joined to a deep hepatic groove anteriorly.

Pleon

Cylindrical pleon longer than carapace; s1–s6 terga and tergopleura covered with small tubercles; s1–s6 terga and tergopleura divided by a deep transverse groove; triangular s1 tergopleuron; rounded s2 tergopleuron covering s1 and s3 tergopleura; smooth s2–s4 tergopleura; rectangular telson; lateral margins of telson with 2–3 spines backward directed; dorsal surface of telson covered with tubercles arranged randomly and a pair of strong spines located axially.

Cephalic, thoracic, and pleonal appendages poorly preserved.

Additional examined material

MNHN.F.A28991, A28992, A28993 (Franzin collection), collected from the type locality; UCBL-EM 80240 (Terquem collection) from Auxerre, Yonne, Bourgogne, Franche-Comté, France; UCBL-EM 80241 from the type locality.

Remarks

Van Straelen (1936) included his new species in Mecochirus and was followed by all the subsequent authors until Breton (2010a,b). Later, on the basis of 24 specimens, Breton et al. (Reference Breton, Néraudeau and Dépré2015) provided a careful and precise description of the small carapace (holotype, length: 11.0 mm, height: 5.8 mm), highlighting the presence of the cardiac groove, typical of Meyeria, to which this species was assigned. However, the review of the holotype and additional historical and new specimens has revealed several morphological characters diagnostic of Eumorphia: narrow cephalic region limited by deep, strongly oblique cervical groove, with flat dorsal area limited by orbital carinae, dorsal median carina in branchial region, sinuous posterior margin, and uropodal exopod without diaeresis. In conclusion, we propose the new combination Eumorphia houdardi (Van Straelen, Reference Van Straelen1936) n. comb. This species is unique in possessing a carapace uniformly covered by small granules.

Discussion and conclusions

Although the general review of the family Mecochiridae is beyond the scope of this paper, the reinstatement of Eumorphia as a valid genus raises some questions about the other mecochirid genera, especially Huhatanka and Pehuenchia.

Feldmann and West (Reference Feldmann and West1978) described Huhatanka from the Lower Cretaceous (Albian) Kiowa Formation (Kansas, USA). According to their diagnosis, the branchiocardiac groove being weak or absent distinguishes Huhatanka from both Meyeria M’Coy, Reference M’Coy1849 and Mecochirus Germar, Reference Germar1827. The review of some photographs of H. kiowana (KSU 2144, 3768, 3770, 3771, courtesy R. Feldmann, 2023) clearly shows the elongate cardiac groove and the postcervical and branchiocardiac grooves parallel to each other and directed toward the posterior margin, and the flat dorsal cephalic area limited by tuberculate carinae. We note that although the cardiac groove was not reported in the original diagnosis, it was clearly figured by Feldmann and West (Reference Feldmann and West1978, figs 1, 2) and more recently by Bahrami et al. (Reference Bahrami, Yazdi, González-León, Serrano-Sánchez and Vega2020, fig. 6a–h). On the basis of all these characters, we might consider Huhatanka as a junior synonym of Eumorphia, but unfortunately the tail fan is not preserved and the presence or absence of a diaeresis on the uropodal exopod—a strong character supporting the inclusion in Eumorphia—cannot be verified.

The second species recently described—Huhatanka australis Schweitzer, Feldmann, and Casadio, 2022—originates from the Berriasian–Valanginian of Argentina. It also shows some characters compatible with Eumorphia: flat dorsal cephalic area limited by orbital carinae and with postrostral carinae extending in cephalic region (“subaxial and postorbital keels” in the original publication) and carapace groove pattern very close because, in our opinion, the postcervical and cardiac grooves seem to be present (see posterior part of carapace figured by Schweitzer et al., Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann and Casadío2022, fig. 3a,b). However, the tail fan is similarly not preserved and the presence or absence of a diaeresis on the uropodal exopod—a strong character supporting the inclusion in Eumorphia—cannot be currently checked.

Rusconi (Reference Rusconi1948) described Pehuenchia from the Late Cretaceous of Argentina. We concur with Schweitzer et al. (Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann and Casadío2022), who placed it among the mecochirids, following Förster and von Hillebrandt (Reference Förster and von Hillebrandt1984). After careful examination of photographs (courtesy C. Schweitzer, 2024) of the strongly flattened holotype of Pehuenchia tellecheai Rusconi, Reference Rusconi1948, we think that the diaeresis on the uropodal exopod is lacking and that the ventral margin of pleonal somites is rimmed by spines; these characters could be compatible with Eumorphia. Conversely, the wrinkled surface of pleonal somites is also reminiscent of the very ornamented pleon in Meyeria ornata (Phillips, Reference Phillips1829). As stated by Schweitzer et al. (Reference Schweitzer, Feldmann and Casadío2022), the absence of a well-preserved carapace prevents a clear generic assignment of this mecochirid lobster.

In conclusion, we highlight that all the species of Eumorphia are very small-sized with a carapace length no more than 20 mm. This diminutive size should be also considered as a diagnostic character of this mecochirid lobster genus. The current study is not an exhaustive monograph of the genus, and it is likely that other species of Eumorphia may be scattered in the old literature or forgotten in some museum drawers. However, it is a starting point for further studies of this unusual genus of mecochirids.

Acknowledgments

This paper is dedicated to Rodney Feldmann, whose scientific legacy lives up to the achievement of the pioneers of paleocarcinology. We thank the reviewer D. Audo (MNHN, CR2P) and the guest editor O. Franţescu (University of Pittsburgh, Bradford). We warmly thank L. Cazes and P. Loubry (MNHN, CR2P) for the photographs, C. Schweitzer and R. Feldmann (Kent State University, USA), M. Riley (Sedgwick Museum, Cambridge, UK), and I. Werneburg (University of Tübingen, Germany) for sharing photographs, E. Robert (Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, France), J. Thomas (Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France), and L. Cavin (Muséum d’histoire naturelle de Genève, Switzerland) for access to the type material and historical specimens.

A special thanks to F. Müller and C. Bara for the donation of their samples to the Stuttgart Natural History Museum and the University of Rennes, respectively, which illustrates the strong link between professional and amateur paleontologists.

Competing interests

The authors declare none.

Footnotes

Guest Editor: Ovidiu Frantescu

References

Astrop, T.I., 2011, Phylogeny and evolution of Mecochiridae (Decapoda: Reptantia: Glypheoidea): an integrated morphometric and cladistic approach: Journal of Crustacean Biology, v. 31, p. 114–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bahrami, A., Yazdi, M., González-León, O., Serrano-Sánchez, M., and Vega, F.J., 2020, Crustacea (Isopoda, Anomura, Brachyura) from the Cretaceous of Soh area (NW Isfahan) Central Iran: Boletín de la Sociedad Geológica Mexicana, v. 72, n. A271019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beurlen, K., 1928, Die Decapoden des Schwäbischen Jura mit Ausnahme der aus den oberjurassischen Plattenkalken stammenden: Palaeontographica, v. 70, p. 115–278.Google Scholar
Beurlen, K., 1930, Nachträge zur Decapodenfauna des schwäbischen Jura. I. Neue Decapodenfunde aus dem Posidonienschiefer von Holzmaden: Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie, und Paläontologie (B), v. 64, p. 219–234.Google Scholar
Breton, G., 2010a, Le contenu paléontologique. Les Crustacés, in Colleté, C., ed., Stratotype Albien: Paris, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle; Mèze, Biotope; Orléans, BRGM, p. 221–230.Google Scholar
Breton, G., 2010b, Crustacés et Brachiopodes de l’Albien et le contenu paléontologique de l’Albien de l’Aube, in Colleté, C., ed., Stratotype Albien: Paris, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle; Mèze, Biotope; Orléans, BRGM (CD-ROM), p. 1–93.Google Scholar
Breton, G., Néraudeau, D., and Dépré, E., 2015, Mecochiridae (Crustacea, Decapoda, Glypheidea) de l’Albien et du Cénomanien de France: Annales de Paléontologie, v. 101, p. 55–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, J., 1886, On the decapod crustaceans of the Oxford Clay: Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, v. 42, p. 542–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, J., 1898, A Contribution to the palaeontology of the decapod Crustacea of England: The Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 54, p. 15–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charbonnier, S., and Gendry, D., 2013, Les crustacés: Fossiles Revue française de Paléontologie, v. 4, p. 74–75.Google Scholar
Charbonnier, S., Garassino, A., Schweigert, G., and Simpson, M., 2013, A worldwide review of fossil and extant glypheid and litogastrid lobsters (Crustacea, Decapoda, Glypheoidea): Mémoires du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, v. 205, p. 1–304.Google Scholar
Charbonnier, S., Audo, D., Barriel, V., Garassino, A., Schweigert, G., and Simpson, M., 2015, Phylogeny of fossil and extant glypheid and litogastrid lobsters (Crustacea, Decapoda) as revealed by morphological characters: Cladistics, v. 31, p. 231–249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Charbonnier, S., Audo, D., Garassino, A. Simpson, M., Gèze, R., and Azar, D., 2021, A new species of mecochirid lobster, Meyeria libanotica (Decapoda, Glypheoidea), from the Barremian (Early Cretaceous) of Lebanon: Annales de Paléontologie, v. 107, n. 102470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charbonnier, S., Gilardet, R., Garassino, A., and Odin, G.P., 2023, A new species of mecochirid lobster from the Late Cretaceous of France, preserved with its eggs: Geodiversitas, v. 45, no. 23, p. 681–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, J.S.H., 2002, A taxonomic review of British decapod Crustacea: Bulletin of the Mizunami Fossil Museum, v. 29, p. 81–92.Google Scholar
Collins, J.S.H., and Rasmussen, H.W., 1992, Upper Cretaceous–Lower Tertiary decapod crustaceans from west Greenland: Grønlands Geologiske Undersøgelse, Bulletin, v. 162, p. 1–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dadykin, I.A., and Shmakov, A.S., 2023, New findings of Decapoda (Crustacea) in the Callovian of the Ryazan region (Central European Russia): Journal of Paleontology, v. 97, p. 1049–1069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etter, W., 2004, Decapod crustaceans from the Middle Jurassic Opalinus Clay of northern Switzerland, with comments on crustaceans taphonomy: Eclogae geologicae Helvetiae, v. 97, p. 381–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldmann, R.M., and West, R.R., 1978, Huhatanka, a new genus of lobster (Decapoda: Mecochiridae) from the Kiowa Formation (Cretaceous: Albian) of Kansas: Journal of Paleontology, v. 52, p. 1219–1226.Google Scholar
Feldmann, R.M., Schweitzer, C.E., and Karasawa, H., 2015, Part R, Revised, Volume 1, Chapter 8I: Systematic descriptions: infraorder Glypheidea: Treatise Online, v. 68, https://doi.org/10.17161/to.v0i0.5028.Google Scholar
Förster, R., 1971, Die Mecochiridae, eine spezialisierte Familie der mesozoischen Glypheoidea (Crustacea, Decapoda): Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, v. 137, p. 396–421.Google Scholar
Förster, R., and von Hillebrandt, A., 1984, Das Kimmeridge des Profeta-Jura in Nordchile mit einer Mecochirus-Favreina-Vergesellschaftung (Crustacea, Decapoda – Ichnogenus): Mitteilungen der Bayrischen Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und Historische Geologie, v. 24, p. 67–84.Google Scholar
Franţescu, O.D., Feldmann, R.M., Schweitzer, C.E., Lazăr, I., and Stoica, M., 2018, New lobsters and lobster-like decapods (Crustacea) from the Jurassic and Cretaceous of Romania: Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, v. 287, p. 45–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garassino, A., 1996, The family Erymidae Van Straelen, 1924 and the superfamily Glypheoidea Zittel, 1885 in the Sinemurian of Osteno in Lombardy (Crustacea, Decapoda): Atti della Società italiana di Scienze naturali e del Museo civico di Storia naturale in Milano, v. 13, p. 333–373.Google Scholar
Garassino, A., and Schweigert, G., 2006, The Upper Jurassic Solnhofen decapod crustacean fauna: review of the types from old descriptions. Part I. Infraorders Astacidea, Thalassinidea, and Palinura: Memorie della Società italiana di Scienze naturali e del Museo civico di Storia naturale di Milano, v. 34, p. 3–44.Google Scholar
Garassino, A., Artal, P., and Pasini, G., 2009, Jabaloya aragonensis n. gen., n. sp. (Crustacea, Decapoda, Mecochiridae) and Cedrillosia jurassica n. gen., n. sp. (Crustacea, Decapoda, Glypheidae) from the Upper Jurassic of Teruel Province (Aragón, Spain): Atti della Società italiana di Scienze naturali e del Museo civico di Storia naturale in Milano, v. 150, p. 197–206.Google Scholar
Gendry, D., 2020, Les crustacés fossiles: découvertes d’hier et d’aujourd’hui. Actes du premier colloque de l’APVSM, “Paléontologie et Archéologie en Normandie”, 5–6 octobre 2019: Bulletin de l’Association paléontologique de Villers-sur-Mer, v. 2020, p. 73–76.Google Scholar
Germar, E.F., 1827, Über die Versteinerungen von Solenhofen. Keferstein’s Teutschland geognostisch-geologisch dargestellt, v. 4, p. 89–110.Google Scholar
Glaessner, M.F., 1929, Crustacea Decapoda, in Pompeckj, J.F., ed., Fossilium Catalogus, I: Animalia, Pars 41, p. 1–464.Google Scholar
Glaessner, M.F., 1960, The fossil decapod Crustacea of New Zealand and the evolution of the order Decapoda: New Zealand Geological Survey Paleontological Bulletin, v. 31, p. 3–63.Google Scholar
Glaessner, M.F., 1969, Decapoda, in Moore, R.C., ed., Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part R, Arthropoda 4, Volume 2: Boulder, Colorado, Geological Society of America (and University of Kansas Press), p. R400–R533, R626–R628.Google Scholar
Hawkesworth, J., 1773, An account of the voyages undertaken by the order of His present Majesty for making discoveries in the Southern Hemisphere and successively performed by Commodore Captain Wallis, Captain Carteret, and Captain Cook, in the Dolphin, the Swallow, and the Endeavor, drawn up from the journals kept by the several commanders, and from the papers of Joseph Banks: London, Strahan, W. and Cadell, T.Google Scholar
Herrick, E.M., and Schram, F.R., 1978, Malacostracan crustacean fauna from the Sundance Formation (Jurassic) of Wyoming: American Museum Novitates, v. 2652, p. 1–12.Google Scholar
Karasawa, H., Schweitzer, C.E., and Feldmann, R.M., 2013, Phylogeny and systematics of extant and extinct lobsters: Journal of Crustacean Biology, v. 33, p. 78–123.Google Scholar
Kennedy, W.J., Jakobson, M.E., and Johnson, R.T., 1969, A Favreina–Thalassinoides association from the Great Oolite of Oxfordshire: Palaeontology, v. 12, p. 549–554.Google Scholar
Krause, P.G., 1891, Die Decapoden des norddeutschen Jura: Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, v. 43, p. 171–225.Google Scholar
Lange, W., 1973, Ammoniten und Ostreen (Biostratigraphie, Ökologie, Zoogeographie) des Callovium/Oxfordium-Grenzbereichs im Wiehengebirge: Münstersche Forschungen zur Geologie und Paläontologie, v. 27, p. 1–209.Google Scholar
Latreille, P.A., 1802, Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière des crustacés et des insectes. Tome 3: Paris, Dufart, 468 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M’Coy, F., 1849, On the classification of some British fossil Crustacea with notices of new forms in the university collection at Cambridge: Annals and Magazine of Natural History, v. 4, p. 161–179, 330–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppel, A., 1861, Die Arten der Gattungen Glyphea und Pseudoglyphea: Jahreshefte des Vereins für Vaterländische Naturkunde in Württemberg, v. 17, p. 108–111.Google Scholar
Oppel, A., 1862, Ueber jurassische Crustaceen: Palaeontologische Mittheilungen aus dem Museum des koeniglich Bayerischen Staates, v. 1, p. 1–120.Google Scholar
Pagani, M.A., Damborenea, S.E., Manceñido, M.O., and Ferrari, S.M., 2011, New early Jurassic decapod crustacean from Patagonia (Chubut province), Argentina: Paläontologische Zeitschrift, v. 85, p. 143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pezy, J.-P., and Gendry, D., 2016, A re-examination of the decapod fauna from the Upper Bathonian of Ranville (Calvados, France): 6th Symposium on Mesozoic and Cenozoic Decapod Crustaceans, June 2016, Villers-sur-Mer, France, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3700.6966.Google Scholar
Phillips, J., 1829, Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire: York, Thomas Wilson and sons, 192 p.Google Scholar
Quenstedt, F.A., 1854 [imprint 1850], Ueber Mecochirus im braunen Jura bei Gammelshausen und einige andere Krebse: Jahreshefte des Vereins für vaterländische Naturkunde in Württemberg, v. 6, p. 186–197.Google Scholar
Quenstedt, F.A., 1856–1858, Der Jura: Tübingen, Laupp, 842 p.Google Scholar
Robin, N., Charbonnier, S., Merle, D., Simpson, M.I., Petit, G., and Fernandez, S., 2016, Bivalves on mecochirid lobsters from the Aptian of the Isle of Wight: Snapshot on an Early Cretaceous palaeosymbiosis: Palaeogeography, Palaeclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 453, p. 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rusconi, C., 1948, Nuevo plesiosaurio, pez y langustas del mar Jurasico de Mendoza: Revista Museum Historia Natural Mendoza, v. 11, p. 3–12.Google Scholar
Schweitzer, C.E., Feldmann, R.M., Garassino, A., Karasawa, H., and Schweigert, G., 2010, Systematic list of fossil decapod crustacean species: Crustaceana Monographs, v. 10, p. 1–222.Google Scholar
Schweitzer, C.E., Feldmann, R.M., and Casadío, S., 2022, Revision of Decapoda (Glypheidea, Axiidea) from the Upper Jurassic–Lower Cretaceous of Argentina: Annals of Carnegie Museum, v. 87, p. 291–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, R.W., 1970, Paleoecology and paleontology of the Lower Cretaceous Kiowa Formation, Kansas: University of Kansas Paleontological Contributions, v. 52, p. 1–94.Google Scholar
Sellwood, B.W., 1971, A Thalassinoides burrow containing the crustacean Glyphea udressieri (Meyer) from the Bathonian of Oxfordshire: Palaeontology, v. 14, p. 589–591.Google Scholar
Simpson, M.I., and Middleton, R., 1985, Gross morphology and the mode of life of two species of lobster from the Lower Cretaceous of England: Meyeria ornata (Phillips) and Meyerella magna (M’Coy): Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, v. 76, p. 203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Straelen, V., 1925, Contribution à l’étude des crustacés décapodes de la période jurassique: Mémoires de la Classe des Sciences de l’Académie royale de Belgique, v. 7, p. 1–462.Google Scholar
Van Straelen, V., 1936, Crustacés décapodes nouveaux ou peu connus de l’époque crétacique: Bulletin du Musée royal d’Histoire naturelle de Belgique, v. 12, no. 45, p. 1–50.Google Scholar
Veiga Ferreira, O., 1955, Sur la présence du genre Mecochirus dans le Crétacé portugais: Comunicaçoes dos Serviços Geológicos de Portugal, v. 36, p. 117–122.Google Scholar
von Meyer, H., 1834, Krebse im bunten Sandstein: Museum Senckenbergianum, v. 1, p. 293–295.Google Scholar
von Meyer, H., 1835, Briefliche Mittheilungen: Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geognosie, Geologie und Petrefaktenkunde, v. 1835, p. 328–329.Google Scholar
von Meyer, H., 1841, Briefliche Mittheilungen: Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geognosie, Geologie und Petrefaktenkunde, v. 1840, p. 96.Google Scholar
von Meyer, H., 1847, Selenisca und Eumorphia, zwei Krebse aus der Oolithgruppe Württemberg’s: Palaeontographica, v. 1, p. 141–148.Google Scholar
von Schlotheim, E.F., 1820, Die Petrefactenkunde auf dem jetzigen Standpunkte durch die Beschreibung seiner Sammlung versteinerter und fossiler Überreste des Thier- und Pflanzenreichs der Vorwelt erläutert: Gotha, Becker, 457 p.Google Scholar
von Schlotheim, E.F., 1822, Beiträge zur näheren Bestimmung der versteinerten und fossilen Krebsarten. Nachträge zur Petrefaktenkunde: Gotha, Becker, p. 17–37.Google Scholar
Winkler, T.C., 1881, Étude carcinologique sur les genres “Pemphix”, “Glyphea” et “Araeosternus”: Archive du Musée Teyler, Série 2, v. 1, p. 73–124.Google Scholar
Woods, H. 1925–1931, A Monograph of the Fossil Macrurous Crustacea of England: London, Palaeontographical Society, 122 p.Google Scholar
Woodward, H., 1863, On a new Macrurous crustacean (Scapheus ancylochelis) from the Lias of Lyme Regis: Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, v. 19, p. 318–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, H., 1868, Third Report on the Structure and Classification of the Fossil Crustacea. Report of the Thirty-Seventh Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science; held at Dundee in September 1867: London, John Murray, p. 44–47.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Composition of the family Mecochiridae Van Straelen, 1925 over the past 100 years

Figure 1

Table 2. List of species of Eumorphia von Meyer, 1847

Figure 2

Figure 1. Type material of Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, 1841) from the Middle Jurassic (Callovian) of Dettingen an der Erms near Bad Urach, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. (1–3) Lectotype herein designated SMNS 29924/2, carapace and first pleonal somites: (1) left lateral view, (2) right lateral view, and (3) dorsal view. (4, 5) Interpretative line drawings of carapace groove pattern: (4) right lateral view and (5) dorsal view. (6–8) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/1, carapace and fragments of pleon and pereiopods: (6) left lateral view, (7) right lateral view, and (8) dorsal view. (9, 10) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/4, pleon and tail fan: (9) right lateral view and (10) dorsal view. Note the lack of diaeresis on uropodal exopod. (11) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/3, pleon, dorsal view. Note the tergopleuron with spiny ventral margin. (12, 13) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/5, pleon: (12) left lateral view and (13) right lateral view. (14–16) Paralectotype SMNS 29924/6: (14) carapace and pleon in dorsal view, (15) carapace in left lateral view, and (16) tail fan in right lateral view. a = branchiocardiac groove; b = antennal groove; b1 = hepatic groove; c = postcervical groove; cd = cardiac groove; e1e = cervical groove; i = inferior groove; oc = orbital carina; os = orbital spine; pr = postrostral carina; r = rostrum. Photographs: G. Schweigert. Line drawings: S. Charbonnier. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Figure 3

Figure 2. Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, 1841) from the Callovian of Germany (1, 2), the Oxfordian of Weymouth, Dorset, United Kingdom (3–7), and the Callovian of Villers-sur-Mer, Normandy, France (8–13). (1) Carapace MNHN.F.A87788, right lateral view. (2) Pleon MNHN.F.A87789, dorsal view. (3–5) Carapace IGR-PAL-145585: (3) right lateral view, (4) left lateral view, and (5) dorsal view. (6, 7) Pleon IGR-PAL-145586: (6) dorsal view and (7) left lateral view. (8, 9) Pleon and tail fan IGR-PAL-145593: (8) dorsal view and (9) right lateral view. Note the uropodal exopod without diaeresis. (10, 11) carapace and fragments of pereiopods IGR-PAL-145592: (10) left lateral view and (11) dorsal view. Note the flat dorsal cephalic region. (12) Carapace IGR-PAL-145588, left lateral view. (13) Carapace IGR-PAL-145589, right lateral view. Photographs: (1,2) L. Cazes; (3–13) D. Gendry. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Eumorphia socialis (von Meyer, 1841) from the Callovian (1–5) and Oxfordian (6,7) of Villers-sur-Mer, Calvados, Normandy, France. (1, 2) Subcomplete specimen IGR-PAL-145590: (1) left lateral view and (2) close-up of anterior cephalic region. (3–5) Specimen IGR-PAL-145591: (3) ventral view showing set of pereiopods, (4) close-up of anterior cephalic region, and (5) line drawing of spiny scaphocerite. (6, 7) Carapace IGR-PAL-145587 (part and counterpart) collected at top of Marnes de Villers Formation. Photographs: D. Gendry. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Figure 5

Figure 4. (1–3) Eumorphia olifex (Quenstedt, 1856) n. comb. from the Sinemurian of Duβlingen, near Tübingen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. (1, 2) Holotype GPIT-PV 51267-51268 (part and counterpart): (1) dorsal view and (2) close-up of tail fan. Note the uropodal exopod without diaeresis. (3) Pleon and tail fan GPIT-PV 51269, dorsal view. (4–11) Type material of Eumorphia clypeatus (Carter, 1898) n. comb. from the Bathonian of Northampton, Northamptonshire, United Kingdom. (4–6) Paralectotype SM 3230, carapace: (4) dorsal view, (5) right lateral view, and (6) left lateral view. (7–11) Lectotype herein designated SM 3231: (7) carapace, right lateral view; (8) carapace and pleon, dorsal view; (9) telson, dorsal view; (10) pleon, dorsal view; (11) pleon and tail fan, left lateral view. Note uropodal exopod without diaeresis. Photographs: (1–3) I. Werneburg; (4–11) M. Riley. Scale bars = 5 mm.

Figure 6

Figure 5. (1–6) Type material of Eumorphia fabianmuelleri n. sp. from the Callovian of NW Bramsche, Lower Saxony, Germany. (1–3) Holotype SMNS 70665-1, carapace: (1) left lateral view, (2) line drawing, and (3) dorsal view. (4) Paratype SMNS 70665-2, close-up of tergopleura. (5) Paratype 70665-4, pleon and tail fan, right lateral view. (6) Paratype 70665-3, carapace and pereiopods, left lateral view. (7–9) Eumorphia lophia (Franţescu et al., 2018) n. comb. from the Kimmeridgian–Tithonian of Cernatului Valley, Săcele, Romania, holotype LPBIIIart 169, carapace and probable isolated telson: (7) left lateral view, (8) line drawing, and (9) dorsal view. a = branchiocardiac groove; ac = antennal carina; b = antennal groove; b1 = hepatic groove; c = postcervical groove; cd = cardiac groove; e1e = cervical groove; gc = gastro-orbital carina; i = inferior groove; oc = orbital carina; pr = postrostral carina. Photographs: (1–6) F. Müller; (7, 9) courtesy C. Schweitzer. Line drawings: S. Charbonnier. (1–6) Scale bars = 5 mm; (7–9) scale bars = 2 mm.

Figure 7

Figure 6. Eumorphia houdardi (Van Straelen, 1936) n. comb. from the Albian of Pargny-sur-Saulx, Marne, France. (1,2) Holotype UBGD.000269, carapace and fragments of pleon and pereiopods: (1) right lateral view and (2) left lateral view. (3, 4) Specimen MNHN.F.A28991: (3) right lateral view and (4) left lateral view. (5,6) Specimen MNHN.F.A28993: (5) right lateral view and (6) left lateral view. (7, 8) Specimen MNHN.F.A28992: (7) dorsal view and (8) ventral view. Note uropodal exopod without diaeresis. Photographs: (1, 2) J. Thomas; (3–8) L. Cazes. Scale bars = 5 mm.