Comprehensive Description
provided by Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology
Faxonella clypeata (Hay)
Cambarus clypeatus Hay, 1899a:122–123, fig. 2.—Creaser and Ortenburger, 1933:17, 36, 40, figs. 13, 28.—Smith, 1953:79.
Faxonius (Faxonella) clypeatus.—Creaser, 1933b:19–21, pl. I: figs. 7, 8, pl. II: figs. 1, 2.
Orconectes clypeatus.—Hobbs, 1942a:352 [by implication].—Smith, 1953:79–95, figs. 1–3.—Penn and Hobbs, 1958:462, 481, figs. 17, 34, 47, 62.—Black, 1958:190–202, figs. 1–24.—Penn, 1959:8, 15–17, figs. 8, 30, 49, 80.
Orconectes (Faxonella) clypeata.—Hobbs, 1942b:14, 15, 20, 21, 28, 106, 148, 154–156*, figs. 181–185.
Orconectes (Faxonella) clypeatus.—Penn, 1952:746.—Hobbs and Hart, 1959:149, 151, 156, 159–161, 164, 168, 171, 172*, 175, 178, 184*, 185*, 188, fig. 25.—Fitzpatrick, 1962:246–247.
Faxonella clypeata.—Creaser, 1962:3 [by implication].—Fitzpatrick, 1963:57–62*, 64–78, figs. 1–22*.—Mobberly, 1965:45–51, figs. 1, 2.–Mobberly and Pfrimmer, 1967: 82–88.—Reimer, 1969:50, 51, 55, 56*, figs. 21, 34; 1972: 264.—Hobbs, 1972b:29, fig. 19c; 1974b:24, fig. 89.—Hart and Hart, 1974:(22, 28, 30, 32, 33, 129, 131)*.—Hobbs III, Thorp, and Anderson, 1976:3, 5, 25–26, figs. 10, 22.
Faxonella clypeta.—Unestam, 1969:203 [erroneous spelling].
Faxonella clyptea.—Spitzy, 1976:445 [erroneous spelling].
Faxonella cylpeata.—Hobbs III, Thorp, and Anderson, 1976: 13 [erroneous spelling].
The list of references cited here is a selected one, including all synonyms, summary articles, citations to most illustrations, and observations on distribution, ecology, and life history. Chief among the omissions are experimental work and additions of new locality records. Specific references to the occurrence of the species in Georgia are indicated by asterisks.
SUMMARY OF LITERATURE.—By far the most comprehensive studies of the species are those of Smith (1953) and Fitzpatrick (1963), the former devoting her attention to its life history and the latter primarily to geographic variation, although he also included additional data on its life history. Black (1958) presented an account of the ontogeny of the first and second pleopods of the male, including data on growth. Mobberly and Pfrimmer (1967) found that individuals of the species do not have a home range and that dispersal appears to be influenced by depth of water and is unrelated to population density. The first record of the occurrence of this crayfish in Georgia is that of Hobbs (1942b:155), who reported its presence in Dougherty, Emanuel, and Jenkins counties. The first specific localities cited were those of Hobbs and Hart (1959:185) in Baker, Early, and Dougherty counties. Fitzpatrick (1963: 62) reported it from Baker, Bulloch, Burke, Dooly, Dougherty, Early, Emanuel, Jenkins, Johnson, and Seminole counties. Hart and Hart (1974) noted its occurrence in localities in Bleckley, Crisp, Laurens, Montgomery, Telfair, Twiggs, Wheeler, and Wilkinson counties, where it harbored one or more of seven species of entocytherid ostracods. The only observations on its habitat in Georgia were presented by Hobbs and Hart (1959:184–185), who noted that it occurs in “roadside ditches, borrow pits, cypress ponds, sluggish silty streams, and [in] submerged vegetation in clear, sand bottomed streams. It also constructs simple burrows with well formed chimneys that range from a few inches to a foot in height.” They and Fitzpatrick (1963) reported that first form males had been collected in the state from February to June and in August and September.
DIAGNOSIS.—Rostrum usually lacking marginal spines or tubercles. Postorbital ridges terminating cephalically with or without spines or tubercles. Cervical spine usually lacking but sometimes represented by small spine or tubercle. Areola 1.9 to 4.5 (average 3.3) times as long as broad and constituting 26.7 to 34.9 (average 30.7) percent of entire length of carapace (35.5 to 43.6, average 38.8, percent of postorbital carapace length). Mesial margin of palm of chela longer than dactyl in males, subequal in females; entire dorsal surface of palm studded with tubercles in large individuals; opposable margins of fingers contiguous throughout length, sometimes provided with 2 tubercles on basal half of both fingers (more often none evident in males), and always with densely crowded denticles, only single row in females and young second form males. Ischium of third pereiopod of first form male with curved hook overreaching basioischial articulation and not opposed by tubercle on basis. Caudomesial angle of fourth pereiopod of male without prominent boss. First pleopod of male with central projection reaching coxa of second pereiopod, occasionally caudal part of first, and more than twice as long as mesial process, latter ranging from spiniform to vestigial; first form male with central projection of 1 pleopod overlapping that of other member of pair, parallel in second form male. Female with annulus ventralis movable, not firmly fused to sternum anteriorly, subcircular in outline, conspicuously sculptured; first pleopod absent.
COLOR NOTES (Figure 103).—Like many of the crayfishes in Georgia, this species occurs in two rather distinctive color patterns, differing chiefly in the presence or absence of a median dorsal light stripe extending from the rostrum to the sixth abdominal tergum. The striped pattern is described in detail, and the differences in the nonstriped form are indicated.
Carapace olive tan to reddish brown, with broad, pale cream tan stripe extending from rostrum to caudal margin of carapace; orbital and most of hepatic areas pinkish cream; oblique dark olive line extending posteroventrally from antennal region; mandibular area olive; paired olive charcoal bands, narrowing posteriorly, flanking median stripe from level of cephalic ends of postorbital ridges to cervical groove. Areola bounded by paired, broad olive charcoal bands; lateral surface of branchiostegites pinkish tan with pinkish cream spots, some linearly arranged. Abdomen with median pinkish tan stripe flanked by pair of broad olive chocolate ones, converging posteriorly and uniting on telson, or sometimes to form median stripe on sixth abdominal tergum, continuing onto cephalic section of telson; olive chocolate stripe subtended laterally by pale pinkish cream one, and it, in turn, by undulating chocolate one along bases of pleura, latter with cream marginal part encompassing tan to reddish area. Cephalic section of telson with paired dark olive spots antero- and posterolaterally; otherwise it and uropods with olive to tan reticulate pattern on pale olive. Antennule and antenna olive tan with charcoal markings and olive flagella. Cheliped mostly olive tan with olive brown tubercles (occasionally in larger males pink to reddish, especially along mesial surface of merus and ventral surface of chela). Remaining pereiopods pinkish basally, giving way to pale olive with olive tan markings, sometimes appearing banded. Ventral surface of body cream.
Individuals lacking stripe, with almost concolorous pinkish brown dorsal surface of carapace marked by charcoal spot at anterior extremity of areola and paired dorsolateral spots on branchiostegites abutting cervical groove; lateral surface paler brown mottled in pinkish cream; caudal ridge suffused with charcoal. Abdomen olive tan, with transverse brown bands along caudal margin of first through fifth terga, and darker median area bounded anterolaterally by black spots on all 6 terga; spots progressively smaller in succeeding posterior terga; area between spots and undulating charcoal band at bases of pleura pinkish cream. Otherwise coloration similar to that of individuals with longitudinal dorsal stripes.
TYPES.—Holotype, USNM 17277 ().
TYPE-LOCALITY.—Bay Saint Louis, Hancock County, Mississippi.
RANGE.—Arkansas and Louisiana eastward, almost exclusively in the coastal plain, to Gadsden County, Florida, and Richland County, South Carolina. In Georgia, except along the Ogeechee River where it has invaded the Barrier Island Sequence District and in the single locality in the Piedmont Province (Harris County), it has been found only in the Fall Line Hills, Dougherty Plain, Tifton Upland, and Vidalia Upland districts.
The northwestern part of the range formerly cited as LeFlore and McCurtain counties, Oklahoma, and Cass and Marion counties, Texas, must be investigated in view of the recent description of F. blairi, which according to Hayes and Reimer (1977:1) occurs in “the Little River drainage of southeastern Oklahoma and the Red River drainage below the confluence of these two streams in southeastern [?—probably “southwestern” was intended] Arkansas. The southern boundary of this species in the Red River drainage has not yet been determined.”
GEORGIA SPECIMENS EXAMINED.—I have examined 1208 specimens from 66 localities (Figure 105) in the following counties (the numbers of localities are noted in parentheses): Baker (3), Bleckley (1), Bulloch-Effingham (1), Burke (1), Calhoun (1), Crisp (2), Dodge (2), Dooly (2), Dougherty (4), Early (3), Emanuel (1), Harris (1), Jeff Davis (1), Jenkins (3), Johnson (2), Laurens (2), Lee (3), Macon (1), Miller (2), Montgomery (2), Pulaski (1), Screven (1), Seminole (4), Sumter (1), Telfair (4), Terrell (2), Tift-Worth (1), Turner (3), Twiggs (1), Washington (1), Wheeler (2), and Wilkinson (7).
VARIATIONS.—In Georgia, this crayfish demonstrates a wide degree of variation, and, whereas a few characteristics do not seem to appear throughout the range in the state, in general, as pointed out by Fitzpatrick (1963:75), for the species throughout its range, intrapopulational variations appear to be as great as interpopulational ones. Most conspicuous perhaps is the disparity in the size of individuals in different localities. The fact that males attain the first form at carapace lengths of 10.1 to 21.1 (average 14.8) mm (presumably adult females slightly increase these limits) is perhaps not noteworthy. That all of the members of the species collected in some localities have carapace lengths of no more than 13 mm, whereas those taken from others a few days before or after have corresponding lengths of no less than 18 mm, presents a striking, if not significant, feature of the populations. The rostrum (Figure 106b) of members in several localities in the Flint Basin possesses marginal spines or tubercles, a feature that has not been observed in representatives of the species in other parts of the state, but within the basin other populations exhibit rostra, the margins of which are entire, and in at least one locality both types of rostra were present in the specimens collected. When present, the spines are usually best developed in the smaller specimens. The areola is also highly variable in length and width: it is longest in specimens from the Altamaha Basin (Twiggs and Wilkinson counties) and shortest in some from the Suwannee Basin (Worth County), and the broadest areola (less than three times as long as wide) is found in the Chattahoochee-Flint (Baker, Early, Harris, and Lee counties), Altamaha (Wheeler County), and Ogeechee (Jenkins County) basins. The postorbital ridges may or may not terminate cephalically in spines or tubercles; in general, spines are more often present in individuals that possess rostral spines or tubercles, but they may occur in other specimens. Cervical spines are always small if present, and frequently there is hardly a trace of them. The basis and ischium of the antennule may each bear strong spines, or the latter may be represented as barely perceptible rudiments. The palm of the chela, particularly in small individuals, may appear to be virtually devoid of tubercles except along the mesial margin; in larger ones the entire dorsal surface may be studded with them; the opposable margins of the fingers always possess denticles (broad band in adult males and single row in females), but there may or may not be two teeth on the proximal half of both fingers. The first pleopods (Figures 106f,g) of the first form male vary chiefly in their disposition and in the relative development of the mesial process, which may be spiniform or reduced to a very small tuberculiform prominence. The most conspicuous differences noted in the annulus ventralis are in the degree of development of the cephalolateral walls, which may be strongly or very weakly inflated, and also the caudal margin may be gently rounded or slightly produced submedianly. The two color patterns described above occur in both sexes from a single locality. In a population of F. clypeata frequenting a small borrow pit in Turner County (one mile northeast of Interstate Highway 75 on State Route 149), the color patterns of 170 specimens were recorded. Of the first form males, seven were spotted and three bore longitudinal stripes; among the 71 second form males, the respective numbers were 51 and 20; and among the 89 females, 63 and 26. Thus in the sample, 121 individuals were spotted and 49 were striped. For further data dealing with variation in the species in Georgia, see Fitzpatrick (1963).
SIZE.—The largest specimen available is a female from Seminole County, which has a carapace length of 22.9 (postorbital carapace length 18.2) mm. The corresponding lengths of the smallest and largest first form males are 10.1 (8.1) mm from Wilkinson County and 21.1 (16.7) mm from Baker County. Although no ovigerous females were found in Georgia, Fitzpatrick (1963: 76) reported that two such females examined by him had carapace lengths of 12.9 and 13.0 mm.
- bibliographic citation
- Hobbs, Horton Holcombe, Jr. 1981. "The Crayfishes of Georgia." Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology. 1-549. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00810282.318
Comprehensive Description
provided by Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology
Faxonella clypeata (Hay)
Cambarus clyptatus Hay, 1899a:122, fig. 2.
Faxonius clypeatus.—Creaser, 1933b:19, pl. 1: figs. 7, 8, pl.2: figs. 1, 2.
Faxonius (Faxonella) clypeatus.—Creaser, 1933b:21 [by implication].
Orconectes clyptalus.—Hobbs, 1942a:352 [by implication].
Orconectes clypeata.—Hobbs, 1942b:14.
Orconectes (Faxontlla) clyptala.—Hobbs, 1942b:154, pl. 11: figs. 181–185.
Procambarus clypeata.—Hoff, 1944:349 [lapsus calami].
Orconectes (Faxonella) clypeatus.—Penn, 1952a:746.
Faxonella clypeata.—Creaser, 1962:3 [by implication].—Fitzpatrick, 1963:61.—Hobbs, 1972b:29, fig. 19c; 1974b:24, fig. 89.—Huner, 1977:10.—Pflieger, 1987a:29; 1987b:13.
Faxonella clypeta.—Unestam, 1969:203 [erroneous spelling].
Faxonella clyptea.—Spitzy, 1976:445 [erroneous spelling].
Faxonella cylpeata.—Hobbs III, Thorp, and Anderson, 1976:13 [erroneous spelling].
Faxonella clypeatus.—Rao and Fingerman, 1983:518.
TYPES.—Holotype, USNM 17277 (female).
TYPE LOCALITY.—Bay St. Louis, Hancock County, Mississippi.
RANGE.—Le Flore County, Oklahoma(?), and Marion County, Texas, east to Gadsden County, Florida, and Richland County, South Carolina.
HABITAT.—Sluggish streams, lentic situations, and burrows (tertiary burrower).
- bibliographic citation
- Hobbs, Horton Holcombe, Jr. 1989. "An Illustrated Checklist of the American Crayfishes (Decapoda, Astacidae, Cambaridae, Parastacidae)." Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology. 1-236. https://doi.org/10.5479/si.00810282.480
