© The Author, 2012. Journal compilation © Australian Museum, Sydney, 2012 
Records of the Australian Museum (2012) Vol. 64: 71-120. ISSN 0067-1975 
http://dx.doi.Org/10.3853/j.0067-1975.64.2012.1588 
New and Little-known Podoceridae 
(Peracarida: Amphipoda) of Southern Australia 
L. E. Hughes 
Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney New South Wales 2010, Australia 
lauren.hughes @ austmus.gov.au 
Abstract. Thirteen taxa in the family Podoceridae are documented for southern Australia, including five 
new species, three new records and five redescriptions. The redescription of Cyrtophium minutum Dana, 
1852; Podocerus dentatus (Haswell, 1879); Podocerus hystrix Stebbing, 1910; Podocerus inconspicuus 
(Stebbing, 1888) and Podocerus lobatus (Haswell, 1885) helps clarify existing knowledge of these old taxa. 
Hughes, L. E. 2012. New and little-known Podoceridae (Peracarida: Amphipoda) of southern Australia. Records of 
the Australian Museum 64(1): 71-120. 
Prior to this study, nine species of podocerid were known 
from southern Australia; Cyrtophium minutum Haswell, 
1879; Laetmatophilus dabberi Barnard & Drummond, 
1981; L. hystrix (Haswell, 1880); Leipsuropus parasiticus 
(Haswell, 1879); Podocerus dentatus (Haswell, 1879); 
P. hystrix Stebbing, 1910; P. inconspicuus (Stebbing, 
1888); P. laevis (Haswell, 1885) and P. lobatus (Haswell, 
1885). With the exception of Laetmatophilus dabberi, 
the Australian fauna is described in the literature before 
1911. Podocerus laevis, is considered an unidentifiable 
taxon (Kilgallen, 2009). The following work clarifies the 
taxonomy of taxa recognized more than a century ago and 
describes a further five new species. Extensive material 
housed in state museum collections has provided a valuable 
resource to investigate variation in podocerid morphology. 
During this study, material of one historic podocerid taxon 
was unfortunately not encountered: Laetmatophilus hystrix 
(Haswell, 1880), with the type locality of Port Jackson, 
Sydney. Based on the original descriptions L. hystrix is 
still considered valid and identifiable. 
Podocerids are sexually dimorphic as with most coro- 
phiideans, however female podocerids have clearly 
recognizable species level characters. This is somewhat 
unusual in the corophiideans where such groups as ampithoid 
and ischyrocerids show strong sexual dimorphism but little 
variation in the female form between species (Barnard, 1965). 
Characters most useful for species level identification 
include: pereonite and pleonite carination; gnathopod 1 
propodus shape; gnathopod 2 propodus shape, palm sculpting 
and setal ornamentation. Dorsal carination although highly 
useful for identification, is not always a species level 
character and this has contributed to confusion within the 
family (Pirlot, 1938; Rabindranath, 1972; Ledoyer, 1984). 
Species level characters which alter with growth stage 
include: the relative size of dorsal carnation; gnathopod 1 
propodus palm number of robust setae and dactylus posterior 
margin serrations; and gnathopod 2 propodus palm tooth size 
(see K. H. Barnard, 1937; Pirlot, 1938; Ledoyer, 1986). All 
these characters increase in size/number with development. 
For P. akanthius sp. nov. specimens between 3.3-4.5 mm, 
showed no variation in the number of robust setae on 
the gnathopod 1 propodus palm. However in P. dentatus 
specimens between 5.0-7.0 mm had five or six palmar robust 
setae and one individual 5.1 mm with nine robust setae. 
Variation of gnathopod 2 propodus palm sculpting and tooth 
development, for the species studied here, did not vary to the 
degree reported for the well documented P. chelonophilus 
(Chevreux & de Guerne, 1888), (see Baldinger, 2001). 
