PHYLLOPOD CRUSTACEA 31 



Family ARTEMIIDAE Grochowski 



1896 Arlciiiiiilae Grochowski. Verh. z(_)ol. bot. Ges. Wien, 45:99 



Eleven pedigerous, 8 or 9 postpedigerous segments. Head without frontal process. 

 Second antennae of 3 biarticulate, not fused at base, or only slightly so. Legs with a single 

 epite (branchial lamina). Cercopods jointed to last abdominal segment, or fused to it or 

 absent. Ovisac subglobular or cylindrical. Distribution world wide. 



Genus Artemia Leach 

 1819 Artemia Leach. Diet. Sci. Nat., 14:543 



Body slender, abdomen often longer than trunk and head combined. Eight postpediger- 

 ous segments, the last one longest. Basal joints of 2nd antennae of $ slightly fused; inner 

 margin with a small round setulose knob. Distal joint of 2nd antennae of i much flattened, 

 apically acute. Intromittent part of penes without spines. Cercopods movable, fused to last 

 body segment, or absent. Body form more or less variable according to the salinity of the 

 environment. 



Daday (1910) reduced the many "species" which had l)een described to two, one of 

 which was from Peru, and was placed in the subgenus CallaoncUa. But the "species" 

 described by Daday as salina, of wide distribution, has been shown to be heterogeneous by the 

 work of Artom (1906, 1911a, 1911b, 1912, 1922, 1926, etc.), who found that there are at 

 least two types, diploid and tetraploid, which he distinguishes at various times as "univalens" 

 and ''bivalens" (1911b) or as "micropirenica" and "macropirenica" (1922), and these may 

 be further divided into sexual and parthenogenetic subraces. Hertwig (1931) and Gross 

 (1932) believe that Artom's "diploid se.xual" Artemia really are diploid, but that his "diploid 

 parthenogenetic" are tetraploid, and that his "tetraploid parthenogenetic" are octoploid. 

 Their Ix'licf is based i in tlie fact that tlie chromosomes of the parthenogenetic races are much 

 larger, each chromosome i)ri)1)alily being bivalent. The most recent review of the situation is 

 by Stella (1933), who agrees substantially with Artom. 



Now, the taxonomic value of these races has never Ijeen properly established, since 

 Artom did not give formal descriptions, but used his terms rather as conveniences. Daday's 

 species salina will undoubtedly have to be divided eventually on cytological and grosser struc- 

 tural grounds, but however the division is made, the name salina will have to be reserved for 

 the form originally described under that name. This form (of which I have a few specimens 

 from the type locality) was" found in the salt pans at Lymington, England, and has been 

 shown to be diploid and sexual — the type called "univalens" and "micropirenica" by Artom. 

 Fortunately, for the sake of simplicity, this is also the only form that has so far l^een found 

 in the Indian region. 



