Tshudy et al.—New Oligocene lobster from Hungary There are several species that, although referable to either
Hoploparia or Homarus, more closely resemble the other genus in one or more features. For example, Homarus klebsi (Noetling, 1885) and Homarus morrisi Quayle, 1987 exhibit a ventral extension of the branchiocardiac groove, as is typical of Hoploparia, but are, otherwise, referable to Homarus. Conversely, some species referred to Hoploparia, such as H. collignoni (Van Straelen, 1949), lack the ventral extension of the branchiocardiac groove, but are otherwise characteristically Hoploparia. Reference is made to Tshudy (1993) for more examples and discussion. In the present paper, we appraise the fossil record of
Homarus.We summarize the taxonomic history of, and confu- sion between, Homarus and Hoploparia, provide a redefinition of Hoploparia, describe a new fossil species of Homarus, list the species recognized for both genera, tabulate all fossil species of the family Nephropidae, and discuss nephropid species diversity through time.
Geological setting
The new species presented herein was collected from the Mány Formation of north-central Hungary. The Mány Formation occurs mostly in the northeastern part of the Transdanubian Mountains. Patchy occurrences are known also from the western and eastern foreland of the Gerecse Mountains and in the Dorog Basin. The thickness of the formation varies between 200 and 600 m. The Mány Formation itself consists of alternating cal- careous siltstone, clayey siltstone, cross-bedded sand and sandstone beds, with conglomerate coal stringers and variegated clay intercalations and coal bands (Nagymarosy and Gyalog in Császár, 1997). The formation formed predominantly in the brackish water of a shallow-marine lagoon; however, inter- calations with sediments of freshwater origin, as well as those from fully marine settings, are present here. Deposition of the formation probably started at the end of
the ‘Kiscellian’ (Rupelian, early Oligocene) and continued into the ‘Egerian’ (Chattian, late Oligocene) (Gyalog and Budai, 2004). On the basis of the mollusc fauna, the maximum depositional depth of Mány Formation is 20–30m (Báldi, 1973). According to some researchers (e.g., Sztanó et al., 1998), the Mány Formation should be integrated as a member of the Törökbálint Formation. Previous occurrences of decapod crustaceans from the
Mány Formation include the retroplumid crab Loerenthopluma lata Beschin et al., 1996 recovered from borehole Mány-15 (Hyžný and Müller, 2010).
Repositories and institutional abbreviations.—Hungarian Nat- ural History Museum, Budapest (HNHMPAL); Natural History Museum, London (NHMUK).
Systematic paleontology Order Decapoda Latreille, 1802
Infraorder Astacidea Latreille, 1802 Family Nephropidae Dana, 1852
171
(sensu Tshudy et al., 2009; inclusive of Thaumastochelidae Bate, 1888)
Genus Homarus Weber, 1795
Type species.—Astacus marinus Fabricius, 1775, p. 413 (see Holthuis, 1974, for discussion).
Remarks.—The original description (Weber, 1795) of Homarus is in Latin. We follow here the emended definition of Holthuis (1974, p. 815–818).
Homarus hungaricus new species Figures 2, 3
Figure 1. Homarus benedeni Pelseneer, 1886; line drawing, in right lateral view, showing a morphology similar to that of Recent species of Homarus (modified from Pelseneer, 1886).
Figure 2. Homarus hungaricus n. sp. from the upper Oligocene (Chattian) Törökbálint Formation (HNHM PAL 2015.1): (1) pleon, and lower surface of incomplete, right cheliped; (2) left lateral view of pleon and lower surface of left (cutter) claw. Scale bar equals 10mm.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204
