August, 1999 
SCAMIT Newsletter 
Vol. 18, No.4 
Island station 2514 at 57 m. After looking at 
ossicle mounts from the two animals present it 
was determined that the animals most closely 
fit the description and keyed to the Havelockia 
variant pictured by Bergen in the Taxonomic 
Atlas (Figure 9.2IF page 235 ). The ID 
recorded for these specimens will be 
Havelockia sp. 
Astropecten were then examined. While out at 
sea a few weeks ago Megan Lilly 
(CSDMWWD) was finding Astropecten in 
trawls from 90 ft that appeared to be 
Astropecten verrilli in most aspects, but had 
small spines on some of the superomarginal 
arm plates. After examination back at the lab, 
all the animals were concluded to be A. verrilli. 
The “spines” being seen were not the large 
spines seen in Astropecten armatus but small 
spinules on the superomarginal plates. This 
difference can be tricky and subtle, so don’t be 
fooled by it in the field. “A rose is a rose is a 
rose”, but a spine may not necessarily be a 
spine in a diagnostic sense. Rely on some of 
the other character differences, i.e., arm length 
to disk diameter ratio, and the appearance of 
the lateral arm spines to assist in the final 
determination of species. 
Dendraster excentricus and Dendraster 
terminalis were again compared side by side 
for the benefit of Nancy Carder and Dot Norris. 
Seeing the animals next to one another greatly 
assists understanding of the differences 
between the species, although the differences 
are well delineated in Rich Mooi’s recent 
treatment of the genus. 
Finally, the crustaceans were tackled. Dean 
Pasko (CSDMWWD) had a Cancer crab that at 
first appeared to be C. anthonyi. However, 
upon closer inspection the animal was seen not 
to be this species, differing in chelae, dorsal 
carapace tooth structure, and areolation of the 
carapace. It was also briefly thought to be 
Cancer amphioetus, however, this ID was 
incorrect as well due to the shape of the dorsal 
carapace teeth, the size of the animal (too big) 
and the configuration of the chelae. In 
addition, this animal was hirsute ventrally. It 
was decided to erect a provisional and call the 
specimen Cancer sp SD1. It does not match 
with any of the species treated by Nations 
(1975), but comes closest to a species from 
Japan, C. nadaensis Sakai 1969. 
Next, a Lophopanopeus of uncertain species 
was brought forth. After some examination 
Don Cadien recommended that Dean examine 
Menzies’ review of the genus (1948). The 
animal did seem peculiar; having relatively 
smooth carpi on the legs, and lacking pigment 
in the chelae. After further examination, the 
specimen was identified as L. leucomanus 
leucomanus. 
The next crab caused some excitement as it 
belonged to the family Palicidae and to the 
genus Palicus. This family has only been 
recorded once before from the Southern 
California Bight. The previous record was 
from off Palos Verde in 30m of water. The 
CSDMWWD specimen was from station 
2101,124 ft, July 1996. This animal was not 
discovered during the B’98 project, rather it 
was captured during sampling for the City of 
San Diego’s ITP (International Treatment 
Plant) monitoring. The ID was left at Palicus 
sp. Dean will key the animal in Rathbun, 
hopefully arriving at a species identity. 
Caprellids were then the order of business. 
Dean Pasko previously sent out a message to 
the B’98 Taxonomic Listserver discussing two 
caprellids that he’d been seeing. A copy of the 
original message follows: “Dear Crustacean 
folks: I recently ran across two species of 
caprellids from San Diego Bay that appear to 
be new. Both are closely related to Mayerella 
banksia. 
Mayerella sp SD1 
The first species, Mayerella sp SD1, is a dead 
ringer for M. banksia except for the 
composition of pereopod 5. Where P5 of true 
M. banksia consists of three subequal articles, 
7 
