Table Of Content

PROCEEDINGS 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 orders. 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.