Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-02T18:34:18.048Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Lobocarcinus lumacopius (Decapoda: Cancridae), a new species of cancrid crab from the Eocene of Fayum, Egypt

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2016

Jessica L. Anderson
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44242
Rodney M. Feldmann
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio 44242

Abstract

The genus Lobocarcinus Reuss, as it is currently understood, consists of five species. Three of these species are retained: L. paulinowurtembergensis, L. indicus, and L. aegypticus. Lobocarcinus catalaunicus is referred to Neptunus, and L.? santosi is referred to Cancer. A new species, L. lumacopius, is described. Lobocarcinus forms are distinct from all other cancrids in the lobation of their anterolateral margins, high width: length ratio, and dorsal carapace ornamentation. The type species of the genus, L. paulinowurtembergensis, is abundant in the Gebel Mokattam region near Cairo. The studied specimens of L. lumacopius are from Wadi Hitan (Zeuglodon Valley), a region approximately 140 km southwest of Gebel Mokattam in the Fayum Depression. Direct comparisons are made between L. lumacopius and L. paulinowurtembergensis, and sexually dimorphic characters of L. lumacopius, including width: length ratios and abdominal and sternal elements, are identified. A key is presented to aid in the identification of the various species within the genus and to help in distinguishing Lobocarcinus from Cancer.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdou, H. and Abdel-Kireem, M. 1975. Planktonic foraminiferal zonation of the middle and upper Eocene rocks of Fayoum Province, Egypt. Revista Española de Micropaleontología, 7:1564.Google Scholar
Beadnell, H. 1901. The Fayum Depression: a preliminary notice of the geology of a district in Egypt containing a new Palaeogene vertebrate fauna. Geological Magazine, Decade IV, 8:540546.Google Scholar
Beurlen, K. 1930. Vergleichende Stammesgeschichte Grundlagen, Methoden, Probleme unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der höheren Krebse. Fortschritte der Geologie und Palaeontologie, 8:317586.Google Scholar
Blanckenhorn, M. 1903. Neue geologisch-stratigraphische Beobachtungen in Aegypten. Sitzunsberichte der Mathematisch-physikalischen Klasse der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, München, 32:353433.Google Scholar
Blanckenhorn, M. 1921. Aegypten. In Steinmann, G. and Wilckens, O. (eds.), Handbuch der regionalen Geologie (Heft 23). Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung, Heidelberg, 244 p.Google Scholar
Burkenroad, M. 1963. The evolution of the Eucarida (Crustacea, Eumlalcostraca), in relation to the fossil record. Tulane Studies in Geology and Paleontology, 2:316.Google Scholar
Fraas, O. 1867. Geologisches aus dem Orient. Jahreshefte des Vereins für vaterländische Naturkunde in Württemburg, 23:145148.Google Scholar
Gingerich, P. 1992. Marine mammals (Cetacea and Sirenia) from the Eocene of Gebel Mokattam and Fayum, Egypt: Stratigraphy, age, and paleoenvironments. University of Michigan Papers on Paleontology 30, 84 p.Google Scholar
Glaessner, M. 1933. New Tertiary crabs in the collection of the British Museum. The Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 27:1326.Google Scholar
Haggag, M. 1990. Globigerina pseudoampliapertura zone, a new late Eocene planktonic foraminiferal zone (Fayoum area, Egypt). Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Monatshefte, Stuttgart, 1990:295307.Google Scholar
Latreille, P. 1802-1803. Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière, des crustacés et des insectes: Volume 3. F. Dufart, Paris, 468 p.Google Scholar
Lörenthey, E. 1898. Beiträge zur Decapodenfauna des ungarischen Tertiärs. Természetrajzi Füzetek, 21:1152.Google Scholar
Lörenthey, E. 1909. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Eozänen Dekapodenfauna Ägyptens. Mathematische und Naturwissenschaftliche Berichte aus Ungarn, 25:106152.Google Scholar
Milne Edwards, A. 1864. Monographie des Crustacés Fossiles de la Famille des Cancériens. Annales des Sciences Naturelles Zoologie et Paléontologie, Series 5, 1:3188.Google Scholar
Nötling, F. 1885. Über Crustaceen aus dem Tertlär Aegyptens. Sitzungsberichte der preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 21:487500.Google Scholar
Rathbun, M. J. 1937. Cretaceous and Tertiary crabs from Panama and Colombia. Journal of Paleontology, 2:2628.Google Scholar
Reuss, A. 1857. Zur Kenntniss Fossiler Krabben. Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 27:161166.Google Scholar
Reuss, A. 1859. Zur Kenntniss Fossiler Krabben. Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften, 17:190.Google Scholar
Schweinfurth, G. 1886. Reise in das Depressionsgebiet im Umkreise des Fajum im Januar 1886. Zeitschrift der Gesellschaft für Erdkurde zu Berlin, 21:96149.Google Scholar
Sismonda, E. 1846. Descrizione dei Pesci e dei Crostacei fossili nel Piemonte. Memorie della Reale Accademia di Scienze di Torino, Series 2, 10:188.Google Scholar
Van Straelen, V. 1927. Contribution á l'étude des Crustacés décapodes fossiles de la Péninsule Ibérique. EOS, Revista Española de Entomologia, 3:7995.Google Scholar
Boada, Via. 1941. Los cangrejos fósiles de Cataluña. Boletin de Instituto Geologico y Minero de Espana, Madrid, Series 3, 55:55128.Google Scholar
Boada, Via. 1969. Decápodos del Eoceno Español. Pirineos, Revista del Instituto de estudios pirenaicos, Jaca, 91-94:1469.Google Scholar
Von Meyer, H. 1843. Briefliche Mitteilungen. Neues Jahrbuch für Mineralogie, Geologie und Paläontologie, p. 589.Google Scholar
Von Meyer, H. 1847. Cancer Paulino-Wurtembergensis, aus einem jüngern Kalkstein in Aegypten. Palaeontographica, 1:9198.Google Scholar