Table Of ContentPROCEEDINGS OF THE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON
109(4):687-694. 1996
Copepod taxonomy: Discovery vs. recognition
David M. Damkaer
21318-195th Ave. SE, Monroe, Washington 98272-9481, U.S.A.
—
Abstract. A table ofcopepod orders, families, andtype genera, withauthors
and dates, revealed a general marked delay between the discovery of a genus
and the establishment of higher taxa based on that genus. The average time
from genus definition to order definition was 51 yr. For families, this delay
was 31 yr, with a range of to 159 yr. Excluding the 54 families defined
simultaneously with the discovery of their type genus, the average delay was
42 yr. The future trajectory of accumulating family definitions is discussed.
The present dynamics of copepod taxonomy may require additional decades
before a falling off of new orders and families can be predicted.
A
recently published copepod classifica- the higher taxa could be discerned. [Note
tion (Bowman & Abele 1982), in contrast that an investigator could have defined
to many such summaries, indicated authors nearly any and all ofthese higher taxafrom
and dates for taxa down to family. Since liter—ature, without once looking at a speci-
that publication, other authors have made men fortunately, this was not the case.]
A
additions or alterations to this classification second relationship (Fig. 1) shows the
(Fosshagen & Iliffe 1985, 1989; Ho 1990, establishment ofthe highesttaxawithinCo-
1991; Kim 1991, Grygier 1994). A revised pepoda, namely the eight orders into which
classification of the current 10 copepod or- the subclass was divided, as given by Bow-
ders and 205 families is given in Table 1; man & Abele (1982), and two orders added
changes from the table ofBowman & Abele in the subsequent decade (see Ho 1990).
are indicated. It became of interest to plot Again, this indicated a steady increase over
the establishment of the listed families by the same long time. But was the establish-
decade (Fig. 1), as a representation of the ment ofthese 10 orders, and theircontained
historical awareness ofcopepods as a large, families as well, indicative of newly dis-
distinct group of Crustacea. What is appar- covered fundamental copepod types, or
ent is a steady increase in defined families were these higher taxa based on delayed
over 160 yr, with at least four periods of recognition? Answering this question first
exceptionally rapid progress. These periods for the copepod orders, it was seen that the
can be attributed mostly to James Dwight genera upon which all 10 principal groups
Dana (1840s and 1850s), to Wilhelm Gies- are based had been defined between 1776
brecht (1890s), to Georg Ossian Sars and 1977, with 8 by 1891 and with 7 by
(1900s and 1910s), and to several investi- 1865. The range oftime between discovery
gators since 1950. Besides an obvious ex- ofthe genus and the recognition that it rep-
pression ofpersonal energy, the association resented an entirely new major copepod di-
of those periods with individuals reflects in vision was yr, for Siphonostomatoida, to
part an ability to sample in or obtain ma- 88 yr, for Mormonilloida. The average time
terial from a wide variety of new habitats. from discovery of the genus to the defini-
There is also a necessary time-lag, since in tion ofthe order for which that genus is the
any era there had to be a reasonable back- type was 51 yr. That the earliest order, Cy-
ground of described species against which clopoida, was defined in 1835 does not
688 PROCEEDINGS OF THE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON
— —
Table 1. Copepod classification to family, includ- Table 1. Continued.
ing type genera offamilies (modifications to Bowman
& Abele (1982) indicated by *). The original date of *SubclassCopepodaMilneEdwards, 1830
a preoccupied and replaced genus name is indicated
Phaennidae Sars, 1902
by PN.
Phaenna Claus, 1863
*Subcla.ssCopepodaMilneEdwards. 1830 Phyllopodidae Brodsky, 1950
Phyllopus Brady, 1883
Order Calanoida Sars, 1903 Pontellidae Dana, 1853
Acartiidae Sars, 1903 Pontella Dana, 1846 (PN 1828)
Acartia Dana, 1846 Pseudocyclopidae Giesbrecht, 1893
Aetideidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Pseudocyclops Brady, 1872
Aetideus Brady, 1883 Pseudocyclopiidae Sars, 1902
Arietellidae Sars, 1902 Pseudocyclopia T. Scott, 1892
Arietellus Giesbrecht, 1892 Pseudodiaptomidae Sars, 1902
Augaptilidae Sars, 1905 Pseudodiaptomus Herrick, 1884
Augaptilus Giesbrecht, 1889 Ridgewayiidae M. S. Wilson, 1958
Bathypontiidae Brodsky, 1950 Ridgewayia I. C. Thompson & A. Scott, 1903
Bathypontia Sars, 1905 Ryocalanidae Andronov, 1974
*Boholiniidae Fosshagen & Iliffe, 1989 Ryocalanus Tanaka, 1956
Boholina Fosshagen, 1989 Scolecithricidae Giesbrecht, 1892
Calanidae Dana, 1849 Scolecithrix Brady, 1883
Calanus Leach, 1816 Spinocalanidae Vervoort, 1951
Calocalanidae Bernard, 1958 Spinocalanus Giesbrecht, 1888
Calocalanus Giesbrecht, 1888 Stephidae Sars, 1902
Candaciidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Stephos T. Scott, 1892
Candacia Dana, 1846 Sulcanidae NichoUs, 1945
Centropagidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Sulcanus Nicholls, 1945
Centropages Kr0yer, 1849 Temoridae Giesbrecht, 1892
Clausocalanidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Temora Baird, 1850
Clausocalanus Giesbrecht, 1888 Tharybidae Sars, 1902
Diaixidae Sars, 1902 Tharybis Sars, 1902
Diaixis Sars, 1902 Tortanidae Sars, 1902
Tortanus Giesbrecht, 1898 (PN 1883)
Diaptomidae Baird, 1850
Diaptomus Westwood, 1836 Order Harpacticoida Sars, 1903
Discoidae Gordejeva, 1975 Adenopleurellidae Huys, 1990
Disco Grice & Hulsemann, 1965 Adenopleurella Huys, 1990
Epacteriscidae Fosshagen, 1973 Aegisthidae Giesbrecht, 1892
Epacteriscus Fosshagen, 1973 Aegisthus Giesbrecht, 1891
Eucalanidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Ambunguipedidae Huys, 1990
Eucalanus Dana, 1852 Ambunguipes Huys, 1990
Euchaetidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Ameiridae Monard, 1927
Euchaeta Philippi, 1843 Ameira Boeck, 1865
Heterorhabdidae Sars, 1902 Ancorabolidae Sars, 1909
Heterorhabdus Giesbrecht, 1898 (PN 1863) Ancorabolus Norman, 1903
Lucicutiidae Sars, 1902 Balaenophilidae Sars, 1910
Lucicutia Giesbrecht, 1898 (PN 1863) Balaenophilus P. O. Aurivillius, 1879
Mecynoceridae Andronov, 1973 Cancrincolidae Fiers, 1990
Mecynocera I. C. Thompson, 1888 Cancrincola C. B. Wilson, 1913
Megacalanidae Sewell, 1947 Canthocamptidae Sars, 1906
Megacalanus Wolfenden, 1904 Canthocamptus Westwood, 1836
Mesaiokeratidae Matthews, 1961 Canuellidae Lang, 1948
Mesaiokeras Matthews, 1961 Canuella T. & A. Scott, 1893
Metridiidae Sars, 1902 Cerviniidae Sars, 1903
Metridia Boeck, 1865 Cervinia Brady, 1878
Paracalanidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Chappuisiidae Chappuis, 1940
Paracalanus Boeck, 1865 Chappuisius Kiefer, 1938
Parapontellidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Cletodidae T. Scott, 1904
Parapontella Brady, 1878 Cletodes Brady, 1872
VOLUME 109, NUMBER 4 689
— —
Table 1. Continued. Table 1. Continued.
*SubclassCopepodaMilneEdwards, 1830 *SubclassCopepodaMilneEdwards, 1830
Cristacoxidae Huys, 1990 Ascidicolidae Thorell, 1859
Cristacoxa Huys, 1990 Ascidicola Thorell, 1859
Cylindropsyllidae Sars, 1909 Botryllophillidae Sars, 1921
Cylindropsyllus Brady, 1880 Botryllophilus Hesse, 1864
Darcythompsoniidae Lang, 1936 Buproridae Thorell, 1859
Darcythompsonia T. Scott, 1906 Buprorus Thorell, 1859
Diosaccidae Sars, 1906 Cyclopidae Dana, 1853
Diosaccus Boeck, 1872 Cyclops Muller, 1776
Ectinosomatidae Sars, 1903 Cyclopinidae Sars. 1913
Ectinosoma Boeck, 1865 Cyclopina Claus, 1863
Hamondiidae Huys, 1990 Doropygidae Brady, 1878
Hamondia Huys, 1990 Doropygus Thorell, 1859
Harpacticidae Dana, 1846 Enterocolidae Sars, 1921
Harpacticus Milne Edwards, 1840 Enterocola van Beneden, 1860
Laophontidae T. Scott, 1904 *Enteropsidae C. W. S. Aurivillius, 1885
Laophonte Philippi, 1840 Enteropsis C. W. S. Aurivillius, 1885
Latremidae Bozic, 1969 *Lemaeidae C. B. Wilson, 1917
Latremus Bozic, 1969 Lemaea Linnaeus, 1758
Longipediidae Sars, 1903 *Mantridae Leigh-Sharpe, 1934
Longipedia Claus, 1863 Mantra Leigh-Sharpe, 1934
Louriniidae Monard, 1927 Notodelphyidae Dana, 1853
Lourinia C. B. Wilson, 1924 (PN 1866) Notodelphys Allman, 1847
Metidae Sars, 1910 Oithonidae Dana, 1853
Metis Philippi, 1843 Oithona Baird, 1843
Miraciidae Dana, 1846 Ozmanidae Ho & Thatcher, 1989
Miracia Dana, 1846 Ozmana Ho & Thatcher, 1989
&
Neobradyidae Olofsson, 1917 *PhyllodicolidaeDelamare-Deboutteville Laubier,
Neobradya T. Scott, 1892 1960
Paramesochridae Lang, 1948 Phyllodicola Delamare-Deboutteville & Laubier,
Paramesochra T. Scott, 1892 1960
Parastenheliidae Lang, 1936 *Schizoproctidae C. W. S. Aurivillius, 1885
Parastenhelia I. C. Thompson & A. Scott, 1903 Schizoproctus C. W. S. Aurivillius, 1885
Parastenocaridae Chappuis, 1933 Speleoithonidae da Rocha & Ihffe, 1991
Parastenocaris Kessler, 1913 Speleoithona da Rocha & Iliffe, 1991
Peltidiidae Sars, 1904 Order Poecilostom.atoidaThorell, 1859
Peltidium Philippi, 1839
*Amazonicopeidae Thatcher, 1986
Phyllognathopodidae Gurney, 1932
Amazonicopeus Thatcher, 1986
Phyllognathopus Mrazek, 1893 Anchimolgidae Humes & Boxshall, 1996
PoPrcoerlcleiUdiiiddiauemSaCrlsa,us1,9014860 (PN 1840) Anchimolgus Humes & Stock, 1972
Anomoclausiidae Gotto, 1964
Pseudopeltidiidae Poppe, 1891
Anomoclausia Gotto, 1964
Clytemnestra Dana, 1848
Anomopsyllidae Sars, 1921
Tachidiidae Sars, 1909
Anomopsyllus Sars, 1921
Tachidius Lilljeborg, 1853
*Antheacheridae M. Sars, 1870
Tegastidae Sars, 1904
Tegastes Norman, 1903 Antheacheres M. Sars, 1857
*Anthessiidae Humes, 1986
Tetragonicepsidae Lang, 1944
Anthessius Delia Valle, 1880
Tetragoniceps Brady, 1880
*Bomolochidae Claus, 1875
Thalestridae Sars, 1905
Bomolochus von Nordmann, 1832
Thalestris Claus, 1863 Catiniidae Bocquet & Stock, 1957
Tisbidae Stebbing, 1910 Catinia Bocquet & Stock, 1957
Tisbe Lilljeborg. 1853
Chondracanthidae Milne Edwards, 1840
Order Cyclopoida Burmeister, 1835 Chondracanthus Delaroche, 1811
Archinotodelphyidae Lang, 1949 Clausidiidae Embleton, 1901
Archinotodelphys Lang, 1949 Clausidium Kossmann, 1874
690 PROCEEDINGS OF THE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON
— —
Table L Continued. Table 1. Continued.
*SubclassCopepodaMilneEdwards, 1830 *SubclassCopepodaMilneEdwards, 1830
Clausiidae Giesbrecht, 1895 Philoblennidae Izawa, 1976
Clausia Claparede, 1863 Philoblenna Izawa, 1976
Corallovexiidae Stock, 1975 Pseudanthessiidae Humes & Stock, 1972
Corallovexia Stock, 1975 Pseudanthessius Claus, 1889
Corycaeidae Dana, 1852 *Rhynchomolgidae Humes & Stock, 1972
Corycaeus Dana, 1845 Rhynchomolgus Humes & Ho, 1967
Cucumaricolidae Bouligand & Delamare-Deboutte- Sabelliphilidae Gurney, 1927
ville, 1959 Sabelliphilus M. Sars, 1862
Cucumaricola Peterson, 1958 Sapphirinidae Thorell, 1859
Echiurophilidae Delamare-Deboutteville & Nunes- Sapphirina J. V. Thompson, 1829
Ruivo, 1955 Serpulidicolidae Stock, 1979
Echiurophiliis Delamare-Deboutteville & Nunes- Serpulidicola Southward, 1964
Ruivo, 1955 Shiinoidae Cressey, 1975
*Entobiidae Ho, 1984 Shiinoa Kabata, 1968
Entohius Dogiel, 1908 *Spiophanicohdae Ho, 1984
*Erebonasteridae Humes, 1987 Spiophanicola Ho, 1984
Erebonaster Humes, 1987 Splanchnotrophidae Norman & T. Scott, 1906
*Ergasilidae Burmeister, 1835 Splanchnotrophus Hancock & Norman, 1863
Ergasilus von Nordmann, 1832 Synapticolidae Humes & Boxshall, 1996
Eunicicolidae Sars, 1918 Synapticola Voigt, 1892
Eunicicola Kurz, 1877 Synaptiphilidae Bocquet & Stock, 1957
Gastrodelphyidae List, 1889 Synaptiphihis Canu & Cuenot, 1892
Gastrodelphys Graeffe, 1883 Taeniacanthidae C. B. Wilson, 1911
*Herpyllobiidae Hansen, 1892 Taeniacanthus Sumpf, 1871
Herpyllobius Steenstrup & Lutken, 1861 *Tegobomolochidae Avdeev, 1978
Intramolgidae Marchenkov & Boxshall, 1995 Tegobomolochus Izawa, 1976
Intramolgus Marchenkov & Boxshall, 1995 Telsidae Ho, 1967
Kelleriidae Humes & Boxshall, 1996 Telson Pearse, 1952
Kelleria Gumey, 1927 Thamnomolgidae Humes & Boxshall, 1996
Lichomolgidae Kossmann, 1877 Thamnomolgus Humes, 1969
Lichomolgus Thorell, 1859 Tuccidae Vervoort, 1962
Macrochirontidae Humes & Boxshall, 1996 Tucca Kr0yer, 1837
Macrochiron Brady, 1872 Urocopiidae Humes & Stock, 1972
*Mesoglicolidae de Zulueta, 1911 Urocopia Sars, 1917
Vahiniidae Humes, 1967
Mesoglicola Quidor, 1906
Vahinius Humes, 1967
Myicolidae Yamaguti, 1936
Myicola Wright, 1885 *Vaigamidae Thatcher & Robertson, 1984
Mytilicolidae Bocquet & Stock, 1957 Vaigamus Thatcher & Robertson, 1984
Xarifiidae Humes, 1960
Mytilicola Steuer, 1902
Nereicolidae Claus, 1875 Xarifia Humes, 1960
Nereicola Keferstein, 1863 Order Siphonostomatoida Thorell, 1859
Nucellicolidae Lamb, Boxshall, Mill, & Grahame, Artotrogidae Brady, 1880
1996 Artotrogus Boeck, 1859
Nucellicola Lamb, Boxshall, Mill, & Grahame, Ascomyzontidae Thorell, 1859
1996 Ascomyzon Thorell, 1859
Octopicolidae Humes & Boxshall, 1996 Asterocheridae Giesbrecht, 1899
Octopicola Humes, 1957 Asterocheres Boeck, 1859
Oncaeidae Giesbrecht, 1892 Brychiopontiidae Humes, 1974
Oncaea Philippi, 1843 Brychiopontius Humes, 1974
*Paralubbockiidae Boxshall & Huys, 1990 Caligidae Burmeister, 1835
Paralubbockia Boxshall, 1977 Caligus MuUer, 1785
Pharodidae Illg, 1948 *Calverocheridae Stock, 1968
Pharodes C. B. Wilson, 1935 Calverocheres C. B. Wilson, 1932 (PN 1902)
*Philichthyidae Vogt, 1877 Cancerillidae Giesbrecht, 1897
Philichthys Steenstrup, 1862 Cancerilla Dalyell, 1851
VOLUME 109, NUMBER 4 691
— —
Table 1. Continued. Table 1. Continued.
*SubclassCopepodaMilneEdwards, 1830 *SubclassCopepodaMilneEdwards, 1830
Catlaphilidae Tripathi, 1960 Pandaridae Milne Edwards, 1840
Catlaphila Tripathi, 1960 Pandarus Leach, 1816
Cecropidae Dana, 1852 Pennellidae Burmeister, 1835
Cecrops Leach, 1816 Pennella Oken, 1816
Choniostomatidae Hansen, 1887 Pontoeciellidae Giesbrecht, 1895
Choniostoma Hansen, 1887 Pontoeciella Giesbrecht, 1895
Chordeumiidae Boxshall, 1988 Pseudocycnidae C. B. Wilson, 1922
Chordeumium Stephensen, 1918 Pseudocycnus Heller, 1865
Coralliomyzontidae Humes & Stock, 1991 Rataniidae Giesbrecht, 1897
Coralliomyzon\i\ime?, & Stock, 1991 Ratania Giesbrecht, 1892
*Dichelesthiidae Milne Edwards, 1840 Saccopsidae Lutzen, 1964
Dichelesthium Hermann, 1804 Saccopsis Levinsen, 1878
Dinopontiidae Murnane, 1967 *Sphyriidae C. B. Wilson, 1919
Dinopontius Stock, 1960 Sphyrion Cuvier, 1830
Dirivultidae Humes & Dojiri, 1980 Spongiocnizontidae Stock & Kleeton, 1964
Dirivultus Humes & Dojiri, 1980 Spongiocnizon Stock & Kleeton, 1964
Dissonidae Yamaguti, 1963 Stellicomitidae Humes & Cressey, 1958
Dissonus C. B. Wilson, 1906 Stellicomes Humes & Cressey, 1958
Dyspontiidae Giesbrecht, 1895 Tanypleuridae Kabata, 1969
Dyspontius Thorell, 1859 Tanypleurus Steenstrup & Lutken, 1861
Ecbathyriontidae Humes, 1987 *Trebiidae C. B. Wilson, 1905
Ecbathyrion Humes, 1987 Trebius Kr0yer, 1838
Entomolepidae Brady, 1899 Ventriculinidae Leigh-Sharpe, 1934
Entomolepis Brady, 1899 Ventriculina Bassett-Smith, 1903
*Eudactylinidae C. B. Wilson, 1932 Xenocoelomatidae Bresciani & Lutzen, 1966
Eudactylina van Beneden, 1853 Xenocoeloma CauUery & Mesnil, 1915
Euryphoridae C. B. Wilson, 1905 Order Monstrilloida Sars, 1903
Euryphorus Milne Edwards, 1840 *Monstrillidae Dana, 1849
Hatschekiidae Kabata, 1979 Monstrilla Dana, 1849
Hatschekia Poche, 1902
Hyponeoidae Heegaard, 1962 *Order Misophrioida Gumey, 1927
Hyponeo Heegaard, 1962 Misophriidae Brady, 1878
Kroyeriidae Kabata, 1979 Misophria Boeck, 1865
Kroyeria van Beneden, 1853 Order Mormonilloida Boxshall, 1979
*Lamippidae Joliet, 1882
Mormonillidae Giesbrecht, 1892
Lamippe Bruzelius, 1858
Mormonilla Giesbrecht, 1891
Lemaeoceridae Gumey, 1933
Lernaeocera de^XainviWe, 1822 *Order Platycopioida Fosshagen, 1985
*Lemaeopodidae Milne Edwards, 1840 Platycopiidae Sars, 1911
Lernaeopoda de Blainville, 1822 Platycopia Sars, 1911
Lemanthropidae Kabata, 1979
*Order Gelyelloida Huys, 1988
Lernanthropus de Blainville, 1822 Gelyellidae Rouch & Lescher-Moutoue, 1977
Megapontiidae Heptner, 1968 Gelyella Rouch & Lescher-Moutoue, 1977
Megapontius Hulsemann, 1965
Micropontiidae Gooding, 1957 Order uncertain
Micropontius Gooding, 1957 Chitonophilidae Avdeev & Sirenko, 1991
Myzopontiidae Sars, 1915 Chitonophilus Avdeev & Sirenko, 1991
Myzopontius Giesbrecht, 1895 Sponginticolidae Topsent, 1928
Nanaspididae Humes & Cressey, 1959 Sponginticola Topsent, 1928
Nanaspis Humes & Cressey, 1959 Staurosomatidae de Zulueta, 1911
Naobranchiidae Yamaguti, 1939 Staurosoma Will, 1844
Naobranchia Hesse, 1863
Nicothoidae Dana, 1852
Nicothoe Audouin & Milne Edwards, 1826
692 PROCEEDINGS OFTHE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON
10
0) Orders
Tc3
CO 1^.
I I I I I I I
1750 1770 1790 1810 1830 1850 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
220
1750 1770 1790 1810 1830 1850 1870 1890 1910 1930 1950 1970 1990
Years (by decades)
Fig. 1. Cumulative numberofdefined families, type genera, and orders ofcopepods, by decade, from 1750
to 1996.
mean that there were no other order-level also a dynamic process, and undoubtedly al-
taxa at that time, but that the other analo- terations and additions are now occurring. In
gous groups have fallen out of favor in the fact, seven families were described in 1996
meantime. after the first draft was completed. As with
This prompted a similar approach toward Bowman & Abele, I do not provide refer-
the families: were they indicative of newly ences forthe indicated authors; this wouldbe
discovered family-level Copepoda, or were beyond the intention of the survey. Some
they mostly the result of deliberative com- type genera are dated from the time a new
parison of accumulating genus descriptions? name was proposed to replace a preoccupied
This was not so easily answered; a foray into name; in these cases I have used the older
the literature spread across the whole of Co- date for the calculations, since the discovery
pepoda to determine the type-genus (and was based on the earlier date; these extended
date) for each family was not trivial. This is dates are indicated in Table 1.
VOLUME 109, NUMBER 4 693
A third relationship (Fig. 1) shows the come the type of a new family. Future as-
time-dependency of the descriptions of sociation of the two curves depends on
what became type-genera for famihes. The whether families are made from recently
indication, when comparing the family and described genera (the curves will remain to-
type-genus curves, is that copepodologists gether) or from older genera (the curves
are in general a conservative company. will again separate). The availability of
Over the preceding 160 yr, 54 families large numbers of well-defined families po-
(26%) were proposed at the time that the tentially makes iteasierto discern newfam-
type genus was described. (These "instant" ilies with the discovery of new genera or
families arose between 1846 and 1996, with with reconsideration ofolder genera. Clear-
the median year of 1963; that is, the phe- ly, a trend to be avoided would be the cre-
nomenon is skewed to recent years, as one ation of a new family from each genus,
might expect given the accumulated back- thereby defeating the notion of a classifi-
ground of defined families.) Another way cation hierarchy.
to look at this is that most of the funda- There is no trend suggesting thatfamilies
mental (family) copepodtypes were discov- might not be defined at the previous rate,
ered long before they were recognized as or that we are running out of new families.
such. Overall, the average delay time was Of course, as new habitats are explored,
31 yr, with ^range of to 159 yr. Excluding such as caves and deep-ocean thermal
the families that w^ere defined at the time vents, new genera representing new fami-
the type genus was described, the average lies would be expected. Given the present
delay time for family definition was 42 yr. dynamics of copepod taxonomy, predic-
If the type species, rather than the type ge- tions may require a few more decades of
nus, is considered, the dates would be set
observation.
back even farther in some cases, although
Even without the discovery ofabsolutely
probably not significantly so. new types, taxa above genera will be added
Note that 10 genera would define the
as more details, especially ofdevelopmental
present 10 orders, just as the 205 type gen-
biology, are added to the framework in
erabasically define the 205 families. All the
place and more comparisons are made. Co-
many other genera are superfluous, except,
pepod taxonomy has long been vexed by
of course, that they define the limits of
many imperfectly described species, and a
higher taxa already defined in their essen-
re-working of these will add some surpris-
tials.
Can we use the curves to make predic- es. Also, there are some copepod families
tions? The type-genus curve cannot be pre- that cannot now be placed into the defined
dictive, mainly because it does not exist un- orders; there are also many genera that are
til families are defined; a predictive genus not yet assigned to families. These may be
curve would have to include the many more raw material for additional higher taxa, or
genera besides type genera. The genus the discovery of intermediate species may
curve should not be compared within de- link them to established groups. There is a
cades to the family curve; the only com- wealth of material to contemplate, with fu-
parison should be horizontal, reflecting the ture intensive rearranging. However, even-
time lags. Since families must awaitthe dis- tually there will be no more orders and no
covery of their type genera, there will al- more families to discover.
ways, in general, be a lag time. Recently For those who are depressed by thispros-
discovered genera that become type genera pect, and fear coming idleness, there is an
force the two curves to converge, since infinitude of related research to be done. I
there is obviously not much time available offer the insight of Herman Melville
for a newly discovered genus to have be- (1851): "Dissect him how I may, then, I but
—
694 PROCEEDINGS OFTHE BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON
go ski—n deep; I know him not, and never Thaumaleus) typicus K—r0yer, the first described
will." Moby Dick, Chapter 86. monstrilloid copepod. Sarsia78:235-242.
Ho, J.-S. 19—90. Phylogenetic analysis ofcopepod or-
ders. Journal of Crustacean Biology 10(3):
Literature Cited 528-536.
Bowman, T E., & L. G. Abele. 1982. Classification j.or1o9r9d1e.rPohfyslyomgbeinoytiocfcPoopeecpioldoss.toImnatPoriodcae:edaimnag-s
oftherecentCrustacea. Pp. 1-27 in D. E. Bliss, of the F—ourth International Conference on Co-
ed., The biology ofCrustacea. Academic Press, pepoda. Bulletin of the Plankton Society of
New York 1:1-319. Japan, Special Volume:25-48.
Fosshagen, A., & T. M. Iliffe. 1985. Two new genera Huys, R. 1988. Gelyelloida, aneworderofstyg—obiont
ofCalanoidaandaneworderofCopepoda,Pla- copepods from European karstic systems. Hy-
tycopioida, from marine caves on Bermuda. drobiologia 167/168:485-495.
Sarsia 70:345-358. Kim, I.-H. 1991. A new species of Namakosiramia
, & . 1989. BohoUna, anewgenus(Co- Ho & Perkins parasitic on holothurians from
pepoda: Calanoida) with two new speci—es from Korea (Copepoda: Harpacticoida). In Proceed-
an anchialine cave in the Philippines. Sarsia ings of the—Fourth International Conference on
74:201-208. Copepoda. BulletinofthePlankton Societyof
Grygier, M. J. 1994. Identity of Thaumatoessa (= Japan, Special Volume:429-435.
