Biota of Freshwater Ecosystems
Identification Manual No. 9
CRAYFISHES (ASTACIDAE) OF NORTH AND MIDDLE AMERICA
by
Horton H. Hobbs Jr.
Department of Invertebrate Zoology
Smithsonian Institution
Washington, D. C. 20560
for the
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Library, Region V
1 North Wacker Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60606
Project # 18050 ELD
Contract # 14-12-894
May 1972
-------
EPA Review Notice
This report has been reviewed by the Envir-
onmental Protection Agency and approved for
publication. Approval does not signify that
the contents necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the EPA, nor does mention of
trade names or commercial products constitute
endorsement or recommendation for use.
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES
The Water Pollution Control Research Series describes the
results and progress in the control and abatement of pollution
in our Nation's waters. They provide a central source of
information on the research, development, and demonstration
activities in the water research program of the Environmental
Protection Agency, through inhouse research and grants and
contracts with Federal, State, and local agencies, research
institutions, and industrial organizations.
Inquiries pertaining to Water Pollution Control Research
Reports should be directed to the Chief, Publications Branch
(Water), Research Information Division, R&M, Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC 20460.
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington. D.C. 20402 - Price $3.25
Stock Number 6501-0399
ii
-------
FOREWORD
"Crayfishes (Astacidae) of North and Middle America" is the
ninth of a series of identification manuals for selected taxa
of invertebrates occurring in freshwater systems. These doc-
uments, prepared by the Oceanography and Limnology Program,
Smithsonian Institution for the Environmental Protection
Agency, will contribute toward improving the quality of the
data upon which environmental decisions are based.
Additional manuals will include, but not necessarily be lim-
ited to, freshwater representatives of the following groups:
amphipod crustaceans (Gammaridae), branchiuran crustaceans
(A?>gu1us~), isopod crustaceans (Asellidae), leeches (Hirudinea),
polychaete worms (Polychaeta), freshwater planarians (Turbel-
laria), aquatic dryopoid beetles (Dryopoidea) and freshwater
clams (Sphaeriacea).
111
-------
ABSTRACT
A brief introduction includes discussions of the systematic
position of the 284 recognized species and subspecies of
American crayfishes, their introductions into various regions
of the United States and foreign lands, their habitats, methods
of collecting and preservation, and problems of identification.
Included in the series of illustrated keys that constitute the
major part of the work are indications of the habitats and
range of each crayfish. A list of selected references is
followed by two appendices: one summarizing the distribution
of each crayfish and the other consisting of a list of states
and provinces with references to the crayfish that occur with-
in them. An index to the taxa included constitutes the final
section.
-------
CONTENTS
Section Page
I Introduction 1
Systematic Position of Fauna 2
Introductions 2
Habits 2
Methods of Collecting 4
Preservation 6
Literature 6
Identification 7
II Key to North American Crayfish Genera 13
Key to Species of Genus Paoifastaous 21
Key to Species of Genus Cambarellus 25
Key to Species of Genus Faxonella 29
Key to Subgenera of Proeambarus 31
Key to Species of Subgenus Austrooccmbarus 38
Key to Species of Subgenus Capillieambarus 44
Key to Species of Subgenus Girardiella 45
Key to Species of Subgenus Hagenides 48
Key to Species of Subgenus Leoonticambarus 51
Key to Species of Subgenus Ortmannious 54
Key to Species of Subgenus Paracambarus 66
Key to Species of Subgenus Pennides 67
Key to Species of Subgenus Scapulioambarus 71
Key to Species of Subgenus Villalobosus 73
Key to Species of Genus Hobbseus 75
Key to Species of Genus Orconeetes 77
Key to Species of Genus Fallioambarus 99
Key to Subgenera of Cambarus 103
Key to Species of Subgenus Aviticambarus 109
Key to Species of Subgenus Cambarus 110
Key to Species of Subgenus Depressiocanbarus 112
Key to Species of Subgenus Erebioambarus 117
Key to Species of Subgenus Hiatioambarus 120
Key to Species of Subgenus Jugioambams 122
Key to Species of Subgenus Laeunicambarus 127
Key to Species of Subgenus 'Punot'lcambayus 128
Key to Species of Subgenus Vetioambarus 131
III Acknowledgements 133
IV References 135
V Appendices 145
Appendix I 145
Appendix II 153
VI Index of Scientific Names 157
vii
-------
FIGURES
Page
1 Generalized male crayfish, dorsal view 8
2 Generalized male crayfish, ventral view 9
3 First pleopods of members of Cambarinae and Cambarellinae 10
4 Left pereiopods indicating ischia bearing hooks 13
5 Left first pleopods 14
6 Basal podomeres of third to fifth pereipods of Proaconbarus 16
7 Ventral thorax of Hobbseus and Ovaoneotes 16
8 Chelae of FaLliaamboPus and Cambarus 17
9 Third maxillipeds of Tpoglocambarus and Proeambams 17
10 First pleopods Cambapus 18
11 First pleopods Orooneotes and Proccmbarus 18
12 Carapaces of Paeifastaaus 21
13 Carapaces of Paoifastaous 22
14 Chelae of Paoifastacus 23
15 First pleopods of CambaTellus 25
16 First pleopods of CccmbaTellus 26
17 Carapaces of Cambarellus 27
18 Carapaces and chelae of Cambarellus 28
19 First pleopods of Faxonella 29
20 Carapaces of Prooambarus 31
21 First pleopods of Ppoeambarus 31
22 First pleopods of Procambarus 32
23 First pleopods of Prooccmbarus 33
24 First pleopods of Proccanbarus 33
25 Third maxillipeds and first three pereiopods of Proaambapus 34
26 Chelae of Proacoribarus 35
27 First pleopods of Ppocambarus 36
28 Carapaces of Procambarus 36
29 First pleopods of Proaambapus 37
30 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Austroaambarus) 38
31 Chelae of Prooambavus (Austrooambarus) 38
32 Carapaces of Proeambarus (Austroaambarus) 39
33 Base of third pereiopods of Proaambarus (Austroeconbarus) 41
34 Carapaces of Proaambarus (Austroaambavus) 41
35 First pleopods of Proeambarus (Austrooambarus) 42
36 Rostral region of Procambarus (Austrooambarus) 42
37 First pleopods of Procaribarus (Capillioambarus) 44
38 Chelae and carapaces of Pvoecanbarus ('Girardiella) 45
39 First pleopods of Prooambarus (G-irardiella) 46
40 Posterior abdomens of Proaambaicus ('Girard'iella) 46
41 First pleopods of Proaambarus (Hagenides) 48
42 First pleopods of Procambarus (Hagenides) 49
43 First pleopods of Procambarus (Leoontiaambarus) 51
44 First pleopods and chelae of ProQombarus (Leaontiaambapus) 53
45 First pleopods of Proeambarus (Ortmanniaus) 54
46 First pleopods of Pvooambarus (Ortmann-ieus) 55
47 First pleopods of Proaambarus (OTtmannicus) 56
Vlll
-------
FIGURES (continued) Page
48 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Ortmannicus) 58
49 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Ortmannious) 61
50 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Ortmannious) 62
51 Carapaces of Prooambarus (Ortmannious) 63
52 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Paraoambarus) 66
53 Basal part of left pereiopods of Prooambarus (Pennides) 67
54 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Pennides) 68
55 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Pennides) 70
56 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Soapulioambarus) 71
57 First pleopods of Prooambarus (Villalobosus) 74
58 First pleopods of Hobbseus 75
59 Carapaces of Hobbseus 76
60 First pleopods of Orooneotes 77
61 Carapaces of Orooneotes 78
62 Carapaces of Orooneotes 79
63 First pleopods of Orooneotes 80
64 Carapaces and chelae of Orooneotes 82
65 First pleopods of Orooneates 84
66 Chelae of Orooneotes 84
67 Carapces and first pleopods of Orooneotes 85
68 First pleopods of Orooneotes 86
69 Chelae of Orooneotes 87
70 First pleopods of Orooneotes 88
71 Carapaces of Orooneotes 88
72 First pleopods of Orconeotes 90
73 Chelae of Ovconectes 92
74 First pleopods of Orconeetes 93
75 Carapaces and chelae of Oraoneetes 94
76 Chelae and carapaces of Ovconeotes 94
77 Carapaces and first pleopods of Oraonectes 95
78 Ventral thorax of Orconeotes 96
79 Carapaces and chela of Oraoneates 97
80 Chelae of Ovooneotes 98
81 First pleopods of Fallicambarus 99
82 First pleopods of Fallicambarus 100
83 Chelae of FallioconbaTus 100
84 Carapaces of FalUoambavus 101
85 Third maxillipeds of Fallioambavus 101
86 Dorsal cephalic region of Cambarus 103
87 Antennal scales of Ccaribapus 103
88 First pleopods of Cambarus 104
89 Chelae of Ccoribarus 105
90 Chelae of Cambarus 106
91 Carapaces of Cambarus 107
92 First pleopods of Ccmbarus 107
93 Carapaces and chelae of Cambarus (Aviticambarus) 109
94 Carapaces of Cambarus (Cambarus) 110
95 Carapaces of Cambarus (Cambarus) 110
96 Carapaces of Cambarus (Cambarus) 111
IX
-------
FIGURES (continued) Page
97 First pleopods of Cambarus CDepressiaambarus) 112
98 First pleopods of Cambarus (Depressicambarus) 112
99 Carapaces of Cambarus (Depressiaambarus) 113
100 Carapaces of Cambarus (Depressiaambarus) 114
101 Chelae of Cambarus (Depressiaambarus) 115
102 Carapaces of Cambarus (Erebioambarus) 117
103 Chelae and first pleopods of Cambarus (Erebioambarus) 118
104 Carapaces and chelae of Cambarus (Hiabiaambarus) 120
105 Carapaces of Cambarus (Eiatioambarus) 120
106 First pleopods and chela of Cambarus (Jugiaambarus) 122
107 Carapaces of Cambarus (Jugioambarus) 123
108 Carapaces of Cambarus (Jugioambarus) 124
109 First pleopods of Cambarus (Jugiaambarus) 125
110 Carapaces of Cambarus (Laeunieambarus) 127
111 Carapaces of Cambarus (Punotioambarus) 128
112 Chelae of Cambarus (Punctieambarus) 129
113 Carapaces of Cambarus (Punoti-cambarus) 129
114 Chelae and carapaces of Cambarus (Vetioambarus) 131
115 First pleopods of Cambarus (Vetioambarus) 132
-------
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The keys presented here include all of the species and subspecies de-
scribed from North America and Middle America prior to January 1,
1972, that I consider to be valid. In preparing them, I was unable
to find characters that would distinguish several previously recog-
nized taxa; consequently, they are omitted and are provisionally
relegated to synonomy with previously described species. Most of
the older synonyms have not been cited; however, attention is called
to those taxa that are here considered invalid for the first time,
or in recent works. Several species that previously have been
relegated to synonomy have been resurrected. In instances in which
it is known that the species cited actually represents a species-
complex comprising several undescribed species and subspecies, such
have been indicated, and, at the appropriate places, attention is
called to those sections of the keys in which there is doubt as to
the validity of the taxa recognized.
The trend that pervaded the literature dealing with crayfishes for
almost three-quarters of a century of applying subspecific desig-
nations to superficially similar populations oftentimes led to what
appear now to have been erroneous concepts of relationships. Unless
there is evidence of intergradation between those populations that
have been designated as subspecies, they are here accorded specific
rank without presenting arguments for such apparently arbitrary
decisions. The subgeneric designations employed in the genera
CambaTus and Procambarus are diagnosed and discussed in Hobbs,
1969b and 1972, respectively.
Appended to the keys is an alphabetical list of the subfamilies,
genera, species, and subspecies of the crayfishes occurring in
North America and Middle America and the states in which each
occurs. A second list of the states or provinces of the several
countries and the crayfishes that are known to occur within their
boundaries is also included.
I should be remiss should I fail to warn potential users of these
keys that there exist a number of undescribed species, particularly
of the genera Cambarus and Orooneates in the southeastern United
States. For obvious reasons, none of them are included in the
keys. Although only 284 species and subspecies are included here,
at least an additional 50 taxa are known to exist, and descriptions
of a number of them are in press, in manuscript form, or are being
prepared by R. W. Bouchard, J. F. Fitzpatrick, Jr., H. H. Hobbs,
Jr., R. D. Reimer, Alejandro Villalobos, and J. G. Walls.
Many of the following introductory directions of collecting, methods
of preservation, and aids in identification are only slightly modi-
fied from Hobbs (1968b).
-------
SYSTEMATIC POSITION OF THE FAUNA
The crayfishes of North America and Middle America are members of the
holarctic family ASTACIDAE; they differ most conspicuously from their
counterparts in the Southern Hemisphere, the PARASTACIDAE, in the
modification of the appendages (first pleopods) of the first abdomi-
nal segment of the male as organs of sperm transfer. Three of the
four subfamilies of the Astacidae are represented in the fauna: the
ASTACINAE, largely confined to waters west of the continental divide
in southwestern Canada and the United States; the CAMBARINAE, except
for suspected or known introductions, found only east of the conti-
nental divide from New Brunswick southward to Guatemala, Honduras,
and Cuba; and the CAMBARELLINAE that range from southern Illinois to
the Gulf Coastal region, along the latter from Texas to Florida, and
on the Central Plateau and Pacific slope of Mexico.
INTRODUCTIONS
There is no evidence that crayfishes that have been imported from
other parts of the world have become established in any part of
North or Middle America, but at least three of the American species
exist as breeding populations on islands or in other countries:
OTooneotes li-mosus in western Europe, Paoi-fastaous len-iusaulus in
Sweden, and Proacanbopus olafkii in Hawaii and Japan. (See Penn,
1954.)
HABITS
Members of all of the crayfish genera, except Troglooambarus3 have
exploited a wide variety of epigean aquatic and semiaquatic habitats.
In addition to frequenting various types of aquatic environments
where most individuals secrete themselves during the day under stones,
in dense mats of vegetations, or under debris, many dig burrows into
the beds or banks of ponds or streams. Whereas they may seek refuge
in such excavations during the daylight hours throughout most of the
year, or in dry seasons when the water table sinks below the level
of the bed, or when the surface waters freeze, they also may remain
in these burrows for weeks or months. Frequently, during the breed-
ing season, a pair of individuals share, at least for a time, the
same burrow, and the female remains there until her eggs are laid
and the young have hatched.
Other crayfishes (certain members of the genera Pr>ocajribavus3
Fafli-ocnribapus3 and Ccaribarus} seldom, if ever, invade bodies of open
water; instead, in areas where the water table is not beyond reach,
they tunnel into the soil, often constructing complex, highly branch-
ing burrows with several openings to the surface. Animals with such
habits are rarely seen except on warm, humid evenings when they may
leave their tunnels and wander about over the surface of the ground.
Such burrows are most often found in seepage or swampy areas or in
low-lying flat-woods. They are especially abundant in the "Black
Belt" of Alabama and Mississippi.
-------
Only in North and Middle America and Cuba have crayfishes become so
completely adapted to spelean environments that they have assumed a
troglobitic existence. While there are many trogloxenes and a few
troglophiles among the astacids, only 21 species and subspecies
belonging to the genera TToglocarribapus3 Procambapus, Ovoonectesj and
Caribarus are known to have become typically albinistic and to exist
as troglobites, seldom appearing in epigean waters except following
spring floods or heavy rains.
-------
METHODS OF COLLECTING
In streams and other bodies of water that are shallow and not choked
with vegetation, no implement provides better results than a 1/4-inch-
mesh seine. In streams, if the seine is anchored downstream a few
feet from the area to be sampled, and stones or debris are vigorously
turned or agitated, the animals will "swim" and be carried by the
current into the seine. Dragging the seine across pools or shallow
ponds is also often most effective. In vegetation-choked, or deep
bodies of water, wire traps with inverted cones and baited with meat
often net fair samples of the crayfish population, particularly if
left in the water overnight. D-ring dipnets are also often useful.
Some of the most successful "crawfishing" accomplished in the United
States is conducted in Louisiana where several modifications of a
"lift net" are employed. This net consists essentially of two
V-shaped metal rods (about six feet in length) tied together at
their apices. The ends of the rods are affixed to the corners of a
two-foot square net, and a lift-cord with a float is attached at the
juncture of the rods. The bait (fish heads, scrap pieces of chicken,
etc.) is centered on the net below the juncture of the rods. Several
nets are then "set out" in a shallow slough or bayou, and the
fisherman makes his way from one to another, quickly lifting the
contraption and removing the crayfish that have been attracted to the
bait.
Collecting at night in shallow water is usually most rewarding in
that members of a number of species, most of the adults of which
remain in their burrows or hidden in mats of vegetation or debris
during the day, venture into open water at night. A headlight for
spotting their eyes, which are ruby-red in reflected light, and a
small dipnet are indispensable aids for collecting at night.
To collect burrowing crayfishes that seldom, or never, invade open
water, several techniques have been found to yield some measure of
success:
(1) The chimney should be removed, the burrow opened to the water
table, and the opening sufficiently enlarged so that one's hand may
be thrust below the water. If the water is thoroughly roiled and
then left undisturbed for 2 to 5 minutes, the occupant often comes to
the opening where its antennae may be seen at the surface of the water.
The open hand should be thrust into the opening to "pin" the crayfish
against the wall of the burrow. With careful manipulation, the cray-
fish can be seized with the fingers and withdrawn from the burrow. To
avoid excessive digging, frequently water may be poured into the
burrow to elevate the water level.
(2) In areas in which many burrows indicate the presence of a colony
of crayfish, traps may be utilized with some degree of success, es-
pecially in relatively warm humid weather. Jars or cans, baited with
meat or peanut butter, with one end removed and buried with the open
end flush with the surface of the ground, are adequate, and if left
overnight will frequently attract a few individuals.
-------
(3) Collecting at night involves the least labor. Particularly follow-
ing rains or when the humidity is high, the burrowing crayfishes come to
the mouths of the burrows and often leave them to wander over the sur-
face of the ground. With the aid of a headlight or some similar light
source, they can be obtained in numbers by hand.
(4) For those species that construct a single vertical passage with only
one or two openings to the surface, the use of a "yabby pump" is often
most helpful. This device consists of a cast iron cylinder some three
feet long and about six inches in diameter, open at one end and closed,
except for two small holes (1/8 inch in diameter), at the other. Across
the closed end is a foot-long bar (the handle) welded perpendicular to
the axis of the cylinder. In places where the soil is sufficiently wet,
the cylinder may be forced (open end down) into the soil around the
vertical passage to a depth of one to three feet; then closing the two
small holes with the thumbs, it is lifted quickly. Frequently the
crayfish, along with much of its burrow, is removed from the substrate.
(5) To obtain some species, no substitute has been found for a
laborious dissection of the complex (branching) burrows with the naked
hand and the aid of a trowel or shovel. Gloves are almost useless, and,
if used, the crayfish is often crushed before one realizes that it has
been "cornered."
In capturing the troglobitic species, some type of headlight and a small
dipnet are indispensable, and in some areas scuba equipment is essential.
If one must resort to diving, a hand net with a sufficiently long trail-
ing bag that might be folded against the rim of the net is highly
recommended, for if the bag is too shallow, it is often exceedingly diffi-
cult to keep the crayfish in it when the initial swing is completed.
In all National Parks and in some states, collecting of crayfishes is
prohibited, and they may be taken only after a permit has been obtained
from the appropriate agency. Attention might also be called to the
inappropriateness of trespassing on fenced or private property.
A plea is made to be judicious in collecting specimens where populations
seem to be of limited size. Such restraint is particularly advisable
in subterranean environments.
-------
PRESERVATION
Crayfishes are perhaps best killed in 6 per cent neutral formalin, and
should remain in the solution, depending on size, for 12 hours to a
week. After being washed in running water for a few hours, they should
be transferred to 70 per cent ethyl alcohol or 20 to 30 percent isopro-
pyl alcohol. More relaxed specimens may be obtained by immediate
preservation in 70 to 80 percent ethyl alcohol and, after a week or so,
transferring them to fresh 70 per cent alcohol.
LITERATURE
Despite the number of items cited in the "References" section, this is
a selected bibliography. Several of the citations contain original
descriptions of species that have not been treated in subsequent works;
however, an attempt has been made to restrict the references to summary
studies in which diagnoses, illustrations, ranges, and/or ecological
data are included. In Appendix II, existing regional keys that might
be useful in identifying the faunas of the various countries or states
are indicated by the references in parentheses.
-------
IDENTIFICATION
As is true of many invertebrate and at least some vertebrate animals, the
identification of juvenile crayfishes is difficult, and frequently, with-
out locality data, cannot be made. Furthermore, in localities in which
two or more closely allied species occur together, it is oftentimes
almost impossible to distinguish between the younger members of popu-
lations. Compounding this difficulty among the male members of the
subfamilies Cambarinae and Cambarellinae is the existence of a cyclic
dimorphism associated with the reproductive cycle that, in the more
northern representatives, occurs typically in a circadian rhythm. Among
those species that have an annual reproductive cycle, the breeding ("Form
I," or "first form") males of the population, at the end of their first
season, molt and are transformed to essentially a juvenile morphology
("Form II," or "second form") that is retained until the advent of the
next breeding season when the second semiannual molt returns them to the
adult form (Form I). Thus between each breeding season there is a re-
gression to the quasi-juvenile (Form II) stage which may have a duration
of three to perhaps as long as six months. For those species that have a
seasonal reproductive cycle, the entire male population may be in the
juvenile or quasi-juvenile (Form II) stage throughout most of the summer
months. In many of the species occurring in the lower temperate lati-
tudes, there is no well defined breeding season, and, with staggered
molting periods, the male members of a population consist of juveniles,
quasi-juveniles (Form II), and adults (Form I) throughout the year.
Inasmuch as an individual may have three or more actively reproductive
periods during its life span, and, with few exceptions, there is an
increase in size of the individual with each molt, it is to be expected
that quasi-juveniles (Form II) following their first or second breeding
seasons are larger than an adult (Form I) male in its first. Conse-
quently size alone cannot be used in distinguishing between first and
second form males.
Except for members of the genus Paoifastaaus, only breeding (Form I_)
males may be_ identified using these keys. These first form males may be
distinguished from juvenile and second form males by the presence of one
or more corneous, or horny, terminal elements (projections) on the
distal ends of the first pleopods. These rigid pleopods (Fig. 2), in
their usual position, extend from the base of the abdomen forward between
the bases of the pereiopods and lie against the sternum of the cephalo-
thoracic region. The first pleopods of the juvenile and second form
males have no corneous terminal elements; the projections are more bulb-
ous and much less clearly defined than in the first form males, and the
entire pleopod is of similar texture. (Compare Fig. 3d-j). In females
these pleopods are small and flexible or lacking.
Hopefully, in the future, it will be possible to construct a key to the
female crayfishes, but until a satisfactory terminology can be developed
for designating the elements of the secondary sexual characters, their
identity must be based on correlation with the male or comparisons with
specimens of which the identity is known.
-------
antennule
antenna
•antennal scale
acumen of rostrum
•marginal spine
rostrum
suborbital angle
postorbital ridge
hepatic spines
cervical spine
length of carapace-
width of areola
length of areola —
areola
uropod
inner ramus
outer ramus
Fig. 1. Dorsal view of generalized male crayfish illustrating
structures and measurements referred to in keys.
-------
dactyl
width of palm
length of palm
antenna
antennal scale
antennule
ischium of 3rcJ maxilliped
coxa of cheliped
propodus
of chela
Fig. 2. Ventral view of generalized male crayfish illustrating
structures and measurements referred to in keys.
-------
cephalic process
[
central projection
caudal process
mesial process1
sperm groove
central projection
caudal knob
mesial process
sperm groove
Fig. 3. First pleopods of members of Cambarinae and Cambarellinae. a,b,
Mesial and lateral views of terminal portions of generalized pleopods
illustrating arrangements of terminal elements; c, Methods of measuring
first pleopods (mesial view) in Ovooneotes (e, central projection; mp,
mesial process); d-i, Lateral views of left pleopods of first and second
form males, respectively, with corneous central projection shaded - d,
Cambarellus; e, Cambarus; f, Oraoneetes; g, Prooambavus; h, Hobbseus;
i, Fallieambapus'); j, Caudal view of left pleopods of first and second
form males, respectively, in Faxonefia (corneous central projection shaded)
10
-------
The essential characters and methods of measurements utilized in the
keys are summarized in Figures 1-3; in addition, most couplets are
augmented by additional illustrations. Because of the extensive use
of the first pleopod (unless otherwise indicated, all drawings are
based on first form males) and the standard terminology that has been
adopted for its several elements, Figure 3 has been prepared to pro-
vide an understanding of these terminal structures as they exist in
the several genera. The central projection (shaded in Fig. 3d-j) of
the first pleopod of the first form male is always corneous; the other
terminal elements may or may not be so sclerotized. In the genus
Proaambarus (Fig. 3a,g), all four terminal elements are often present;
in most members of the genera Cambarus (Fig. 3b,e), Fall-ieambarus
(Fig. 3i), and Ovaoneotes (Fig. 3c,f) and in all those of Faxonella
(Fig. 3j) and Hobbseus (Fig. 3h) only two (mesial process and central
projection) are present, while in Carribarellus (Fig. 3d) there are
three -- only the cephalic process is lacking.
For convenience of description, the first pleopod is considered to
hang pendant from the abdomen. Toward the attached end is proximal;
toward the free end, distal; the side toward the head, cephalic; that
toward the telson, caudal; that facing the corresponding pleopod of
the pair, mesial; and that facing away from the midline of the body,
lateral.
Regeneration.-- A large to moderate proportion of the crayfishes in a
population loses one or more pereiopods during their life span, and,
if the loss does not occur too late, the appendage is completely
regenerated. The new appendage, however, seldom, if ever, is a per-
fect replica of the original one, and certain characteristics of the
cheliped that have been utilized in the keys may become so altered as
to lead one to an erroneous determination. Unfortunately, to my
knowledge, there are no specific alterations that would enable a
novice to recognize a. regenerated chela; consequently, it is suggested
that if one of the chelae of the specimen being identified is markedly
different from the other and that of other individuals from the popu-
lation, the characters of the chela that is more similar to those of
other individuals should be used.
Equipment and Procedures that may be Helpful in Identification.-- For
many crayfishes, a hand lens is adequate for observing the necessary
characters. In attempting to identify members of the genus
ProcomboPuSj however, it will be discovered that the terminal elements
of the first pleopod are often obscured by "subapical setae." Fre-
quently, to make these elements visible, the setae must be removed, and
it is suggested that this be done with the aid of a stereoscopic
microscope in order to avoid dismembering one or more of the delicate
terminals. To accomplish this, it is recommended that the pleopod be
removed from the crayfish by severing the articular membranes at its
base and transferring it to a dish of alcohol. By holding the pleopod
at its base with a pair of forceps, the setae may be removed with a
fine needle or slender forceps. Then, if the pleopod is oriented with
11
-------
the flattened mesial surface against the bottom of the dish, it is in a
position to be compared with most of the illustrations of the pleopods
included in the keys.
All of the illustrations of the pleopods have been made in lateral, me-
sial, or caudal aspect from the left member of the pair. Because of
certain asymmetries, it is essential to examine the left pleopod.
(NOTICE! REFERENCE IS MADE TO THE ANIMAL'S LEFT, not that of the
observer.)
12
-------
SECTION II
KEY TO THE MALE MEMBERS OF THE NORTH AMERICAN CRAYFISH GENERA
(Except for Pacifastacus3 all based on First-Form Male)
NOTE: Before beginning to use this key, it will be helpful to de-
termine whether the first pleopods are symmetrically or asymmetric-
ally arranged—see Figure 21.
1 Ischia of all pereiopods lacking hooks (Fig. 4f; see also
Fig. 5a): ASTACINAE: Pacifastacus Bott, 1950 (p. 21)
Ischia of 1 or more pairs of pereiopods with hooks (Fig.
4a-c) 2
Fig. 4. Ventral view of basal portions of left pereiopods with
ischia bearing hooks shaded.
2(1) Ischia of second and third pairs of pereiopods with hooks
(Fig. 4b; see also Fig. 5c): CAMBARELLINAE:
Cambarellus Ortmann, 1905a (p. 25)
Ischia of second pair of pereiopods never bearing hooks
(Fig. 4a,c-e): CAMBARINAE 3
3(2) Body pigmented; eyes faceted and pigmented 4
Body albinistic; eyes seldom faceted and with pigment greatly
reduced or absent 12
13
-------
t u
w
14
-------
4(3) First pleopod terminating in 2 elements; long, slender central
projection; short mesial process no more than 1/2 length of
central projection (Fig. 5w); central projections of paired
pleopods overlapping (Fig. 19):
Faxonella Greaser, 1933 (p. 29)
First pleopod terminating in 2 or more elements; if with 2,
mesial process more than 1/2 length of central projection;
central projections of paired pleopods never overlapping
(Fig. 5d-v) except occasionally in Fallicambarus dissitus
in which also recurved at more than 90 degree angle (Figs
81c, 82d) 5
5(4) First pleopod terminating in 2 elements (Fig. 5h-i, 1-p).... 6
First pleopod terminating in more than 2 elements (Fig. 5d-g,
k,q,v) 10
6(5) Distal 1/3 of first pleopod with prominent shoulder on cephal-
ic surface (Fig. 5h), or central projection forming dis-
tal ly projecting triangular plate (Fig. 5j), or central
projection arising from enlarged subterminal or terminal
area (Fig. 5i): Proeambarus Ortmann, 1905b (part) (p. 31)
Distal 1/3 of first pleopod lacking shoulder on cephalic sur-
face; central projection never forming distally projecting
triangular plate nor arising from enlarged subterminal or
terminal area (Fig. 51-p, r-u) 7
7(6) Coxa of fourth pereiopod lacking caudomesial boss (Fig. 6a)...
8
Coxa of fourth pereiopod with caudomesial boss (Fig. 6b-d)....
9
Fig. 5. a-v, Lateral view of left first pleopods; w, Caudal view
of same, a, Paeifastaous 1. tvowbridgii; b, TpogloaambaTus
maolanei; c, Cambarellus puer; d, Pvooambarus fitzpatrieki; e,
Proaambarus paeninsulanus; f, Procambarus a. aoutus, g, Pro-
cambarus advena; h, Proeambarus mexi-oanus; i, Proeambopus
trueulentus; j, Procambapus pygmaeus; k, Procambarus paradoxus;
1, Orooneotes limosus; m, Ovooneotes propinquus; n, Orconeetes
immunis; o, Hobbseus aristatus; p, Hobbseus orooneotoides; q,
Cambarus pristinus; r, Cambarus b. baiftonii; s, Cambarus vedunaus;
t, FallioambaTus hortoni; u, Fallieambarus fodiens; v, Fallioambarus
maaneesei; w, Faxonella oreaseri.
15
-------
8(7) First pleopods, in resting position, deeply withdrawn between
bases of pereiopods and largely concealed by dense setifer-
ous mat extending from ventrolateral margins of sternum
(Fig. 7a): Hobbseus Fitzpatrick and Payne, 1968 (p. 75)
First pleopods, in resting position, never deeply withdrawn
between bases of pereiopods and never concealed by dense
setiferous mat extending from ventrolateral margins of
sternum (Fig. 7b): Orconeetes Cope, 1872 (part) (p. 77)
Fig. 6. Ventral view of basal podomeres of left third, fourth, and
fifth pereiopods showing variations in coxae (stippled) of fourth
(a, without boss; b-d, with boss), a, ProeambaPus digueti; b, P.
paeninsulanus; c, P. riojai; d, P. tenuis.
9(7) Opposable margin of dactyl of chela with abrupt excision in
proximal 1/2 (Fig. 8a):
Fallicambarus Hobbs, 1969b (part) (p. 99)
Opposable margin of dactyl of chela without abrupt excision in
proximal 1/2 (Fig. 8b-e):
Cambarus Erichson, 1846 (part) (p.103)
Fig. 7. Ventral thoracic region of a, Hobbseus; b, Orconeates.
16
-------
10(5) Central projection of first pleopod bladelike, always directed
caudally or caudodistally, and bearing subterrainal notch
00 (Fig. 5q): Cambarus (part) (p. 103)
Central projection of first pleopod seldom bladelike, if so,
directed laterodistally or lacking subterminal notch (Fig.
5d-g, v) 11
Fig. 8. Dorsal view of right chelae, a, Falliacoribarus oryktes;
b, Cambarus latimanus; c, C. longulus; d, C. extraneus; e,
C. braehydaatylus.
11(10) First pleopod with central projection and mesial process curved
caudally at at least 90 degrees to principal axis of shaft
of appendage (Fig. 5v): Fallieambarus (part) (p. 99)
First pleopod never with both central projection and mesial
process curved caudally at angle of so much as 90 degrees to
principal axis of shaft of appendage (Fig. 5d-g):
Proeambarus (part) (p. 31)
Fig. 9. Ventral view of left third maxillipeds. a, Troglo-
oacmbaYus maalanei; b, Proaambarus pallidus, (i, ischium.)
17
-------
12(3) Ischium of third maxilliped (See Fig. 2) without teeth on mesial
(opposable) border (Fig. 9a; see also Fig. 5b):
TroglooaribctTus Hobbs, 1942a
Monotypic: TroglocambaTus maclanei Hobbs, 1942. (Sub-
terranean waters of peninsular Florida. Literature: Hobbs,
1942b)
Ischium of third maxilliped with teeth on mesial (opposable)
border (Fig. 9b) 13
Fig. 10. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Cambarus
hamulatus; b, C. jonesi; c, C. setosus; d, C. hubviehti; e,
oicyptodytes.
C.
13(12)
First pleopod terminating in 2 elements bent at no less than
90 degrees to principal axis of shaft of appendage (Fig.
10): Cambarus (part) (p. 103)
First pleopod terminating in 2 or more elements; if only 2,
both never bent at angle so great as 90 degrees to principal
axis of shaft of appendage (Fig. 11) 14
Fig. 11. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Oreoneotes a.
australis; b, 0. pellucidus; c, O.i. inermis ; d, Proaambarus
acherontis; e, P. 1. luaifugus; f, P. milleri', g, P, peoki.
18
-------
14(13) First pleopod terminating in 2 elements, sometimes with minute
rudiment of third (Fig. lla); cephalic surface of appendage
either lacking shoulder or with shoulder adjacent to base
of central projection (Fig. llb,c):
Orconectes (part) (p. 77)
First pleopod terminating in 2 (Fig. llg) or more elements
(Fig. lld-f); if only 2, cephalic surface with strong,
often angular, shoulder never contiguous with base of
central projection (Fig. llg): Proaambamts (part) (p. 31)
19
-------
KEY TO SPECIES OF GENUS PACIFASTACUS
(Applicable to Both Sexes)
Rostrum with single pair of marginal tubercles or spines
(Fig. 12a-c) Pacifastacus len-iusculus... 2
(The subspecies of P. leniuseulus that have been described
are not clearly defined, and their ranges overlap--at least
in part due to introductions--to such an extent that it is
questionable that they should be recognized. Only the most
"extreme" representatives of the three can be identified
here.)
Rostrum with at least 3 pairs of marginal spines (Figs 12d,
13) 4
Fig. 12. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Pacifastaous 1. leni-
useulus'f b, P, I, tvotibv'idg'Li; c, P. 1, klamathensis; d,
P. oonneotens.
2(1) Postorbital ridges almost always spiniform cephalically and
with pair of spines at posterior bases; length of acumen
almost always greater than width of rostrum at level of
marginal spines (Fig. 12a; see also Fig. 14e):
Pac-tfastaaus leniusculus leniusaulus (Dana, 1852)
(Streams and lakes in British Columbia, California, Idaho,
Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. Literature: Faxon, 1885;
Riegel, 1959)
Postorbital ridges rounded or tuberculiform cephalically and
with or without low tuberculiform prominences at posterior
bases; length of acumen seldom equal to width of rostrum at
level of marginal spines, never in P. I. trowbridgii (Fig.
12b,c) 3
21
-------
3(2) Base of postorbital ridges with tubercles (Fig. 12b; see also
Fig. 5a):
Paoifastaous leniuseulus tvowbridgii (Stimpson, 1857)
(Streams and lakes in British Columbia, California, Idaho,
Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. Literature: Faxon, 1885;
Hagen, 1870; Riegel, 1959)
Base of postorbital ridges without tubercles (Fig. 12c):
Paoifastaous leniusaulus klamathensis (Stimpson, 1857)
(Streams and lakes in British Columbia, California, Idaho,
Oregon, and Washington. Literature: Faxon, 1885; Riegel,
1959)
Fig. 13. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Paoifastaous gambeliij
b, P. nigrescens; c, P. fort-is.
4(1) Dorsal surface of palm of chela with two conspicuous clusters
of setae (Fig. 14a,b) 5
Dorsal surface of palm of chela without conspicuous clusters
of setae (Fig. 14c,d) 6
5(4) Postorbital ridges with 1 or 2 pairs of posterior spines or
tubercles; rostrum lacking median carina (Fig. 12d); dorsal
surface of chela with comparatively prominent tubercles
(Fig. 14a): Paoifastaous oonneotens (Faxon, 1914)
(Streams in Idaho and Oregon. Literature: Faxon, 1914)
Postorbital ridges lacking posterior spines or tubercles;
rostrum often with median carina (Fig. 13a); dorsal surface
of chela with minute tubercles (Fig. 14b):
Paoifastaous ganibelii (Girard, 1852)
(Streams and lakes on the Pacific slope and in the Missouri
River drainage in California(?), Idaho, Montana, Nevada,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Literature: Hagen,
1870; Riegel, 1959)
22
-------
Fig. 14. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Paaifastaous conneetens;
b, P. gambelii; c, P. fortis; d, P. ni^reseens; e, P. Z.
leniusaulus,
6(4) Width of palm of chela equal to, or greater than, length of
mesial margin (Fig. 14c; see also Fig. 13c):
Pacifastacus fortis (Faxon, 1914)
(Streams in Shasta County, California. Literature: Faxon,
1914; Riegel, 1959)
Width of palm of chela less than length of mesial margin
(Fig. 14d; see also Fig. 13b):
Paeifastacus nigrescens (Stimpson, 1857)
(Streams in the vicinity of San Francisco, California.
Literature: Faxon, 1914; Hagen, 1870; Riegel, 1959)
23
-------
KEY TO SPECIES OF GENUS CAMBARELLUS
(Based on First-Form Male)
NOTE: In using this key, the first pleopod must be viewed mesially.
For comparative purposes, all of the illustrations of this appendage
are made of the left member of the pair.
1 Mesial process of first pleopod without longitudinal groove
along mesial surface of apical 1/3 (Fig. 15)
Mesial process of first pleopod with longitudinal groove
along mesial surface of apical 1/3 (Fig. 16)
2(1)
Terminal elements of first pleopod almost straight and directed
distally (Fig. 15a): Cambayellus shufeldti-i (Faxon, 1884)
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats in the Mississippi
drainage system of southern Illinois, Tennessee, Arkansas and
Louisiana; in the Red River system in Louisiana and Texas;
and in the Pascagoula and Pearl River systems in Mississippi.
Introduced into Rapides, St. Bernard and St. Tammany parishes,
Louisiana. Literature: Black, 1965; Hobbs and Marchand,
1943; Penn, 1959)
Central projection of first pleopod always curved and other
terminal elements never directed distally (Fig. 15b-f) 3
Fig. 15. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Carribapel'lus
shufeldtii; b, C. diminutus; c, C. sahnitti; d, C, ninae;
e, C. puev; f, C. alvavez-l (after Villalobos, 1955).
25
-------
3(2)
4(3)
5(4)
Caudal process of first pleopod broadly triangular and in lateral
aspect obscuring mesial process (Fig. 15b):
Carribabpellus dim-inutus Hobbs, 1945
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats in Mobile County, Alabama,
and George and Jackson counties, Mississippi. Literature:
Hobbs, 1945b; Black, 1965)
Caudal process of first pleopod digitiform or subsetiform and in
lateral aspect never obscuring mesial process (Fig. 15c-f)....
4
Mesial process of first pleopod broadly triangular, its apex
curved distolaterally (Fig. 15c):
Carribavellus schm-itti Hobbs, 1942
(Springs and streams from Mobile County, Alabama, eastward to
the Suwannee River drainage in Florida. Literature: Hobbs,
1942b)
Mesial process comparatively slender and directed subcaudally
(Fig. 15d-f) 5
Fig. 16. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Cambarellus
occidental-Is; b, C. areolatus; c, C. ahapalanus; d, C.
patzcuarensis; e, C. zempoalensis; f, C. monbezwnae.
Central projection of first pleopod directed caudally and ex-
tending much beyond other terminal elements (Fig. 15d):
CambaveVlus ninae Hobbs, 1950
(Lentic habitats in Aransas County, Texas. Literature:
Hobbs, 1950)
Central projection of first pleopod directed caudodistally and
not extending caudally so far as other terminal elements
(Fig. 15e,f) 6
26
-------
6(5) Mesial process of first pleopod subsetiform (Fig. 15f) :
Cambarellus alvarez-i Villalobos, 1952
(Lentic habitat at Potosi, Nuevo Leon, 23 km. northwest
of Galena, Mexico; known only from the type-locality.
Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Mesial process of first pleopod robust but subacute (Fig. 15e;
see also Fig. 5c): Cambarellus puer Hobbs, 1945
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats from Brazos and Matagorda
counties, Texas, to western Tennessee, Holmes County, Missis-
sippi, and Ascension Parish, Louisiana. Literature: Penn
and Hobbs, 1958; Black, 1965)
7(1) Central projection of first pleopod constituting at least 1/5
total length of appendage (Fig. 16a,b) 8
Central projection of first pleopod constituting less than 1/5
total length of appendage (Fig. 16c-f) 9
8(7) Areola at least 3.5 times longer than broad (Fig. 17a; see also
Fig. 16a): Cambarellus oooidentalis (Faxon, 1898)
(Lentic habitats in Michoacan and Sinaloa, Mexico.
Literature: Faxon, 1898; Villalobos, 1955)
Areola less than 3.5 times longer than broad (Fig. 17b); see
also Fig. 16b): Cambarellus areolatus (Faxon, 1885)
(Lotic habitats in Coahuila, Mexico. Literature: Faxon,
1898; Villalobos, 1955)
Fig. 17. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Cambarellus ocoidentalis;
b, C. areolatus; c, C. ahapalanus; d. C. patsouarensis,
9(7) Length of acumen of rostrum as great or greater than distance
between tips of marginal spines (Fig. 17c,d) 10
Length of acumen of rostrum less than distance between tips of
marginal spines of rostrum (Fig. 18a,b) 11
27
-------
10(9) Acumen decidedly longer than distance between tips of marginal
spines of rostrum; cephalothorax slender and gently tapering
in width anteriorly (Fig. 17c; see also Fig. 16c):
Ccaribapellus ehapalanus (Faxon, 1898)
(Lentic habitats in Jalisco and Michoacan, Mexico. Literature:
Faxon, 1898; Villalobos, 1955)
Acumen subequal to or only slightly longer than distance between
marginal spines of rostrum; cephalothorax somewhat robust and
rather abruptly tapering in width anteriorly (Fig. 17d; see
also Fig. 16d): Cambarellus patzcuarensis Villalobos, 1943
(Lago de Patzcuaro, Michoacan, Mexico. Literature:
Villalobos, 1955)
Fig. 18. a,b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c,d, Dorsal view of
chelae, a, Cambarellus zempoalensis; b, C. montezumae; c,
C. zempoalensis; d, C. montezumae.
11(9) Lateral margin of chela strongly convex (Fig. 18c; see also Figs
16e, 18a) : Cambavellus zempoalensis Villalobos, 1943
(Lagunas de Zempoala, Morelos, Mexico. Literature:
Villalobos, 1955)
Lateral margin of chela not markedly convex (Fig. 18d; see also
Figs 16f, 18b): Cambarellus montezumae (Saussure, 1858)
(Sluggish streams and lentic situations in the Valley of Mexico
and Pacific slope. The subspecies C. m. dugesii (Faxon, 1898)
and C. m. lermensis Villalobos, 1943, cannot be separated by me
from the typical form of the species. Literature: Villalobos,
1955)
28
-------
KEY TO SPECIES OF GENUS FAXONELLA
(Based on First-Form Male)
NOTE:
1
2(1)
Pleopods should be examined in situ in caudal aspect.
Mesial process of first pleopod less than 1/4 length of central
projection and never overlapping mesial process of corre-
sponding pleopod (Fig. 19c): Faxonella olypeata (Hay, 1899)
(Sluggish streams and lentic habitats from LeFlore County,
Oklahoma, and Marion County, Texas, east to Gadsden County,
Florida, and Richland County, South Carolina. Literature:
Fitzpatrick, 1963)
Mesial process of first pleopod greater than 1/4 length of
central projection and completely overlapping mesial process
of corresponding pleopod (Fig. 19a,b) 2
Fig. 19. Ventral view of first pleopods.
creaser-i; b, F. beyevi; c, F, alypeata.
a, Faxonella
Mesial process of first pleopod distinctly greater than 1/3
length of central projection but never completely overlapping
both terminal elements of corresponding pleopod (Fig. 19b):
Faxonella beyeri (Penn, 1950)
(Roadside ditches in De Soto and Natchitoches parishes,
Louisiana. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1963; Penn, 1950)
Mesial process of first pleopod about 1/3 length of central
projection and always completely overlapping both terminal
elements of corresponding pleopod (Fig. 19a; see also Fig.
5w): Faxonella oreasevi Walls, 1968
(Roadside ditches in Caldwell Parish, Louisiana. Literature:
Walls, 1968)
29
-------
KEY TO SUBGENERA OF PROCAMBARUS
(Based on First-Form Male)
Carapace with 2 or more cervical spines (Fig. 20a) 2
Carapace with or without 1 cervical spine (Fig. 20b) 4
Fig. 20. Lateral view of carapaces showing presence (a) and
absence (b) of cervical spines.
2(1) First pleopods asymmetrical (Like Fig. 21c,d):
Pennides Hobbs, 1972 (p. 67)
First pleopods symmetrical (Like Fig. 21a,b) 3
Fig. 21. Ventral view of first pleopods: a and b, symmetrical;
c and d, asymmetrical, a, Ppoaambarus hagenianus; b, P. llamasi;
c, P. seminolae; d, P. aautissimus, (x^ proximomedian lobe.)
3(2) Albinistic; eyes reduced and without pigment:
Remotioambcacus Hobbs, 1972
Monotypic: Pvocaribarus (fl.) peoki Hobbs, 1967.
(Subterranean waters of northern Alabama. See Fig. 22b.
Literature: Hobbs, 1967)
Pigmented; eyes well developed:
Austroaambarus Hobbs, 1972 (part) (p.38)
31
-------
4(1) Cephalic surface of first pleopod with prominent angular or sub-
angular shoulder situated far proximal to base of terminal
elements (Figs 22as3b,c, 30, 56) 5
Cephalic surface of first pleopod with or without prominent
angular or subangular shoulder; if present, situated immedi-
ately proximal to base of terminal elements (Fig. 22d-h), or,
if situated more proximally, somewhat rounded and cephalic
process never broadly rounded (Figs 48f, 49h, 54a,b) 7
5(4) Hooks on ischia of third and fourth pereiopods (Fig. 4c); first
pleopod with subapical setae (Fig. 22a):
Soapul'Leambavus Hobbs, 1972 (p. 71)
Hooks on ischia of third pereiopods only (Fig. 4a); first
pleopod without subapical setae (Fig. 22b,c) 6
Fig. 22. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Proacaribarus
okaloosae; b, P. peaki; c, P. rodriguezi; d, P. fitzpatrioki;
e, P. digueti; f, P. latipleurum; g, P. s. si.mu.lans; h, P.
tenuis. (s> shoulder.)
6(5) Mesial process of first pleopod massive, obscuring entire
remainder of distal portion of appendage in caudal aspect
(Fig. 23a; see also Figs llg, 22b) :
Eemotiocoribarus Hobbs, 1972
Monotypic : Ppoeambarus (R.) peoki Hobbs, 1967.
(See couplet 3 for range and literature)
Mesial process of first pleopod spiniform or lanceolate, never
obscuring entire remainder of distal portion of appendage in
caudal aspect (Fig. 23b): Austrocambarus (part) (p. 38)
7(4) Hooks on ischia of fourth pereiopods only (Fig. 4e), occasion-
ally with vestigial ones on third pereiopods 8
Hooks on ischia of third or third and fourth pereiopods well
developed (Fig. 4a,c,d) 10
32
-------
Fig. 23. Caudal view of left first pleopods. a, Proeambavus
peoki; b, P. williamsoni. (m, mesial process.)
8(7) Central projection of first pleopod beaklike and curved
caudally (Fig. 24a,b) : Paracambarus Ortmann, 1906 (p. 66)
Central projection of first pleopod never beaklike, variously
directed (Figs 24c,d, 57) 9
Fig. 24. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Proeambarus
paradoxus; b, P. crtmanni; c, P. rioj'ai; d, P. fitzpatrieki.
(ey central projection.)
33
-------
9(8) Mesial ramus of uropod with distomedian spine projecting beyond
margin of ramus (Like Fig. 40b; see also Fig. 24d):
Aeueauda Hobbs, 1972
Monotypic: Proeambcums (A.~) fitspatrieki Hobbs, 1971.
(Burrows in southern Mississippi between the Wolf and
Pascagoula rivers. Literature: Hobbs, 1971a)
Mesial ramus of uropod with distomedian spine never projecting
beyond margin of ramus (Like Fig. 40a):
VillaZobosus Hobbs, 1972 (p. 73)
10(7) Chela without tubercles or brush of setae on mesial surface of
palm; first 3 pairs of pereiopods with conspicuous brush of
plumose setae extending from basis to at least proximal part
of merus (Fig. 25a) : CapilHoambarus Hobbs, 1972 (p. 44)
Chela with tubercles (Fig. 26a,c-e) (sometimes obscured by
conspicuous brush of setae, Fig. 26f) on mesial surface of
palm (tubercles almost obsolete in P. young-U); first 3
pairs of pereiopods always lacking conspicuous brush of
plumose setae extending from basis to at least proximal part
of merus (Fig. 25b) 11
Fig. 25. Ventral view of left third maxillipeds and first three
pereiopods. a, Proaambarus hinei; b, P. barbatus.
11(10) Chela strongly depressed, usually broadly triangular, and with
mesialmost row of tubercles on palm cristiform or
subcristiform (Fig. 26a): Hagenides Hobbs, 1972 (p. 48)
Chela subovate to cylindrical, mostly elongate, and lacking
cristiform row of tubercles on mesial margin of palm (Figs
26b-f, 38a-c) 12
34
-------
12(11) Hooks on ischia of third pereiopods only (Fig. 4a) 13
Hooks on ischia of third and fourth pereiopods (Fig. 4c,d).. 16
13(12) First pleopod with subapical setae (Fig. 22f):
Leconticambarus Hobbs, 1972 (part) (p. 51)
First pleopod without subapical setae (Figs 22e,g, 27a) 14
f
Fig. 26. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Proccanbarus rogersi expletus;
b, P. youngi; c, P. leoontei; d, P. hirsutus; e, P. seminolae;
f, P. barbatus.
14(13) Cephalic process of first pleopod forming curved plate across
cephalodistal extremity of appendage (Fig. 27a) :
Mexioambarus Hobbs, 1972
Monotypic: Prooambarus (M.) bouvieri (Ortmann, 1909).
(Streams in the vicinity of Uruapan, Michoacan, Mexico.
Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Cephalic process of first pleopod variable in form but never
consisting of curved plate across cephalodistal extremity
of appendage (Fig. 22e,g) 15
15(14) Rostrum with median carina (Fig. 28afc); first pleopod with
proximomedian lobe absent (Like Fig. 21b; see also Figs 6a,
22e): Proeambarus Ortmann, 1905
Monotypic: Ppocambarus (P.) digueti (Bouvier, 1897).
(Streams in Jalisco and Michoacan, Mexico. Literature:
Villalobos, 1955)
Rostrum without median carina (Like Fig. 28b); first pleopod
with proximomedian lobe very strongly developed (Fig. 21ax):
Girardiella Lyle, 1938 (p. 45)
35
-------
16(12) Bituberculate hooks on ischia of third and fourth pereiopods
(Fig. 4d; see also Fig. lid); albinistic:
Lonnbevg-ius Hobbs, 1972
Monotypic: Proeconbarus (L.) acherontis (Lonnberg, 1895).
(Subterranean waters and springs in Seminole County,
Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
Bituberculate hooks never on ischia of both third and fourth
pereiopods; albinistic or pigmented 17
Fig. 27. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Prooambarus
bouvievi', b, p. tennis; c, P. lewisi; d, P. a. acutus; e,
P. fallax; f, P. pictus; g, P. planirostris; hj P. p. pearsei
(cp, cephalic process.)
17(16) First pleopod without subapical setae (Fig. 27b,c) 18
First pleopod with subapical setae (Figs 27d-h, 29c-f) 19
Fig. 28. Dorsal view of carapaces.
P. ratlnbunae. (k> median carina.)
a, Proeambarus digueti; b,
36
-------
18(17) First pleopod with central projection very conspicuous and ex-
tending distally far beyond cephalic and mesial processes;
cephalic process situated distinctly mesial to base of
central projection (Fig. 27b) : Tenuicambarus Hobbs, 1972
Monotypic: Proaambarus (T.) tenuis Hobbs, 1950.
(Stream tributaries of the Red and Ouachita rivers in
south-eastern Oklahoma and western Arkansas. Literature:
Williams, 1954a; Hobbs, 1962)
First pleopod with central projection not conspicuously large
and never extending distally far beyond cephalic and mesial
processes; cephalic process, if present, either cephalic or
lateral to central projection (Figs 27c, 47c, 48f):
Ortmanniaus Fowler, 1912 (part) (p. 54)
Fig. 29. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Pvooambavus
latipleuinm; b, P. litosternum; c, P. barbatus; d, P.
villalobosi; e, P. kilbyi; f, P. hubbelli. (ops cephalic
process; m3 mesial process.)
19(17) Mesial process of first pleopod usually extending to or
beyond apical plane perpend-Leular to axis of shaft of
appendage (Fig. 29a); if not (Fig. 29f), mesial surface
of palm of chela bearded (Fig. 26f):
Leconticambarus (part) (p. 51)
Mesial process of first pleopod seldom extending to or beyond
apical plane perpendicular to axis of shaft of appendage
(Fig. 29b); if so, cephalic process situated caudomesial
to central projection (Fig. 29d) or subapical setae situ-
ated lateral to base of cephalic process (Fig. 27e,f);
mesial surface of palm of chela never bearded (Fig. 26b-e) :
Ortmannicus (part) (p. 54)
37
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus AustroocoribaTUS
First pleopod with prominent bulbous enlargement between level
of shoulder and base of central projection (Fig. 30a-c, a:).
2
First pleopod lacking bulbous enlargement (slightly developed
in P. willicmsoni) between level of shoulder and base of
central projection (Fig. 30d-g) 5
Fig. 30. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Pfooambarus
eubensis rivalis; b, P. a. eubensis; c, P. atkinsoni.; d, P.
wifiiconsoni; e, P. aztecus; f, P. mexioanus; g, P. r.
vuthveni. (x3 see couplet 1; y, see couplet 3.)
2(1) Albinistic, eyes reduced but with small pigmented area:
Proaambarus (4.) niveus Hobbs and Villalobos, 1964
(Subterranean waters of Cuevas de Santo Tomas, Sierra de
los Organos, near Ponce, Pinar del Rio, Cuba. Literature :
Hobbs and Villalobos, 1964)
Pigmented, eyes well developed 3
Fig. 31. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Proeambarus
williamsoni; b, P. pilosimanus; c, P. llamasi.
38
-------
3(2) Areola almost always more than 4 times longer than broad and
constituting at least 26 per cent of total length of
carapace; mesial (inner) part of first pleopod expanded
caudally much more than lateral (outer) part (Fig. 30b,
z/) : Proccoribapus 04.) cubensis oubensis (Erichson, 1846)
(Various types of freshwater habitats throughout the island
of Cuba, except in the southwestern mountains, and Isla de
Pinos. Literature: Hobbs and Villalobos, 1964)
Areola usually less than 4 times longer than broad and seldom
constituting as much as 26 per cent of total length of
carapace; mesial (inner) part of first pleopod expanded
little if any more than lateral (outer) part (Fig. 30a,c)
4
4(3) Shoulder on cephalic surface of first pleopod rounded or
tuberculiform; middle part of shaft with cephalic and
caudal margins subparallel (Fig. 30c):
Proaambarus (A.) atkinsoni (Ortmann, 1913)
(Streams on Isla de Pinos, Cuba. Literature: Hobbs and
Villalobos, 1964)
Shoulder on cephalic surface of first pleopod angular; middle
part of shaft of first pleopod with cephalic and caudal
margins convex (Fig. 30a):
Procambarus (A.~) aubensis rivali-s (Faxon, 1912)
(Streams in the province of Pinar del Rio, Cuba. Litera-
ture: Hobbs and Villalobos, 1964)
Fig. 32. Lateral view of carapaces, a, Procambarus aoantho-
phorus; b, P. pilosimanus. (og, cervical groove; s3 spine;
sa3 suborbital angle.)
5(1) Carapace with 2 or more cervical spines (Fig. 20a) 6
Carapace with or without 1 cervical spine (Fig. 20b) 9
39
-------
6(5) Chela not conspicuously pubescent (Fig. 31a); cephalic margin
of hepatic region of carapace usually without spines,
never more than 1, between cervical groove (og~) and sub-
orbital angle (sa] (Like Fig. 32b; see also Figs 23b, 30d):
Pvooanibarus (A.) williamsoni (Ortmann, 1905)
(Lentic habitats in the province of Izabal, Guatemala, and
Lago Yojoa, Honduras. Literature: Ortmann, 1905b)
Chela with fingers conspicuously pubescent (Fig. 31b,c);
cephalic margin of hepatic region of carapace with 1 or
more spines between cervical groove {eg} and suborbital
angle (so) (Fig. 32a,b) 7
7(6) Chela with conspicuous long pubescence largely confined to
fingers (Fig. 31c; see also Fig. 21b):
Procambarus (4.) llamasi Villalobos, 1954
(Small streams and drainage ditches from Veracruz to Yuca-
tan, Mexico, and northern Guatemala. Literature:
Villalobos, 1955)
Chela with conspicuous long pubescence both on fingers and
much of palm (Fig. 31b) 8
8(7) Cephalic margin of hepatic region of carapace with 3 or 4
spines between cervical groove and suborbital angle (Fig.
32a); tip of hook on ischium of third pereiopod not ex-
tending proximad of basioischial articulation (bi~) (Fig.
33b): Pvoocoribavus 04.) aeanthophorus Villalobos, 1948
(Streams and canals in Atlantic drainage in Oaxaca and
southern Veracruz, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Cephalic margin of hepatic region of carapace with only 1
spine between cervical groove and suborbital angle (Fig.
32b); tip of hook on ischium of third pereiopod extending
proximad of basioischial articulation (Fig. 33a; see also
Fig. 31b): Prooambarus (A.) pilos-imanus (Ortmann, 1906)
(Lentic habitats from Chiapas and Quintana Roo, Mexico, to
British Honduras and Guatemala. Literature: Villalobos,
1955)
9(5) Albinistic; eyes reduced but with small pigment spot (See
also Fig. 22c): Prooambarus G4. ) vodviguezi Hobbs, 1943
(Subterranean stream, Cueva de Ojo de Agua, west-northwest
of hacienda Potrero Viejo, Paraje Nuevo, Cordoba, Veracruz,
Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Pigmented; eyes well developed 10
40
-------
10(9) Areola less than 7 times longer than broad with 3 or 4 punc-
tations across narrowest part (Fig. 34a) :
Proeanibarus (A. ) mirandai Villalobos, 1954
(Subterranean stream, Cerro Hueco, 4 km. southeast of Tuxtla
Gutierrez, Chiapas, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Areola at least 9 times longer than broad with 1 or 2 punc-
tations across narrowest part (Fig. 34b-d) 11
Fig. 33. Caudoventral view of basal portions of third pereiopods;
a, Ppooambarus p-ilosimanus; b, P. aeanthophorus. (bi3 basio-
ischial articulation.)
11(10) Caudodistal margin of central projection of first pleopod with
small subacute projection near midlength (Fig. 35a); eyes
conspicuously large (Fig. 34b):
Proaambarus (A.) vazquezae Villalobos, 1954
(Rocky shore of Laguna de Catemaco, Veracruz, Mexico.
Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Caudodistal margin of central projection of first pleopod
evenly contoured (Fig. 35b); eyes not conspicuously large
(Fig. 34c,d) 12
Fig. 34. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Prooambarus mivandai;
b, P. vazquezae; c, P. azteous; d, P. veraeruzanus.
41
-------
12(11) Distal margin of shoulder on cephalic surface of first pleopod
sloping proximally from base (Fig. 30g) 13
Distal margin of shoulder on cephalic surface of first pleopod
perpendicular to shaft or concave proximad (Fig. 30e,f). 14
Fig. 35. Lateral view of distal portion of first pleopods. a,
Proeambarus vazquezae; b, P. mexieanus.
13(12) Hook on ischiopodite of third pereiopod extending proximally
beyond basioischial articulation (Like Fig. 33a):
ProQombarus (4.) ruthveni zapoapensis Villalobos, 1954
(Streams in the vicinity of Catemaco, Veracruz, Mexico.
Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Hook on ischiopodite of third pereiopod never extending
proximally beyond basioischial articulation (Like Fig. 33b;
see also Fig. 30g):
Proaambarus 04.) ruthveni ruthveni (Pearse, 1911)
(Temporary lentic habitats and burrows in the vicinity of
Cuatotolapan, Veracruz, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos,
1955)
Fig. 36. Lateral view of rostral region:
mexi-oanus; b, P. azteaus.
Ppooambarus
42
-------
14(12) Areola very narrow, sublinear, with room for at most 1 punc-
tation in narrowest part (Fig- 34d) :
Pvoaanibarus 04.) veraovuzanus^Villalobos, 1954
(Stream at Presidio, 30 km. southeast of Cordoba, Veracruz,
Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Areola not sublinear, with room for at least 2 punctations in
narrowest part (Fig. 34c) 15
15(14) Acumen of rostrum upturned apically (Fig. 36a; see also Figs
30f, 35b) : PpoeconboFus 04.) mexioanus (Erichson, 1846)
(Reported from a single locality, El Mirador de Zacuapan,
8 km. northeast of Huatusco, Veracruz, Mexico. Literature:
Villalobos, 1955)
Acumen of rostrum straight, never distinctly upturned (Fig.
36b; see also Figs 30e, 34c):
Proaambarus 04.) azteous (Saussure, 1857)
(Streams in the vicinity of Jalapa, Veracruz, Mexico.
Literature : Villalobos, 1955)
43
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Capilliocanbapus
Distal 1/3 of first pleopod tapering, ending in 2 subacute tips
and third small subtruncate one (Fig. 37a; see also Fig.
25a) : Procambarus (C.) hinei (Ortmann, 1905)
(Lentic habitats in southeastern Texas and southern Louisi-
ana. Literature: Penn, 1953a)
Distal 1/3 of first pleopod almost uniformly broad, ending in 2
distinct tips, one of which broadly truncate (Fig. 37b):
Procambarus (C.~) ineilis Penn, 1962
(Lentic habitats in southeastern Texas - Jackson, Matagorda,
and Wharton counties. Literature: Penn, 1962)
Fig. 37. Lateral view of distal portions of left first
pleopods. a, Procambarus hinei; b, P. inailis.
44
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus
Mesial surface of palm of chela bearded (Fig. 38a) ; areola with
3 or 4 punctations across narrowest part (Fig. 38d; see also
Fig. 39e) : Proaambarus (G. ) tulanei Perm, 1953
(Lentic and lotic habitats and burrows between the Red and
Ouachita river systems in Louisiana and Arkansas.
Literature: Penn, 1956b, 1959)
Mesial surface of palm of chela never bearded (Fig. 38b,c);
areola linear or with only 1 or 2 punctations across nar-
rowest part (Fig . 38e) .................................... 2
Fig. 38. a-c, Dorsal view of chelae; d,e, Dorsal view of
carapaces, a, Ppoeambarus tulanei; b, P. s. simulans; c,
P. gpaeilis; d, P. tulanei; e, P. graailis.
2(1) Areola with room for more than 1 punctation across narrowest
part; chela with length of inner margin of palm subequal
to or greater than width of palm (Fig. 38b) 3
Areola linear, never with room for more than 1 punctation
across narrowest part (Fig. 38e); chela with length of inner
margin of palm less than width of palm (Fig. 38c) 4
45
-------
Fig. 39. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Pr>oaarribarus s.
simulans; b, P. s. regiomontanus; c, P. graoilis; d, P.
hagenianus; e, P. tulanei. (cp3 cephalic process; e, central
projection.)
3(2) Central projection {&} and cephalic process (ep) of first
pleopod tilted cephalodistally; caudal margin of main
body of appendage evenly contoured (Fig. 39a; see also
Fig. 38b): Prooambarus (G.) simulans simulans (Faxon, 1884)
(Lentic and lotic habitats from New Mexico to Colorado,
Kansas, Arkansas, and Louisiana. A species complex that has
been investigated by Rollin D. Reimer. Publication of his
revision of the species is anticipated in the near future.
Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Central projection and cephalic process of first pleopod di-
rected distally (Fig. 39b); caudal margin of main body of
appendage sometimes with angular notch near base of distal
1/3:
Proeambopus (£.) simulans regiomontanus Villalobos, 1954
(Known only from the type-locality, 5 km. north of Monterrey,
Nuevo Leon, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Fig. 40. Dorsal view of terminal portion of abdomens, a,
Procambarus graailis; b, P. hagenianus. (Arrow indicating
median spine on inner ramus of uropod.)
46
-------
4(2) Cephalic process (ep~) of first pleopod well developed (Fig.
39c); inner ramus of uropod with median spine not pro-
jecting distally beyond margin of ramus (Fig. 40a; see
also Fig. 38c,e): Ppooambarus (£.) gpaailis (Bundy, 1876)
(Burrows in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, Missouri,
Iowa, Illinois, and Wisconsin. A species complex that has
been investigated by Rollin D. Reimer. Publication of his
revision of the species is anticipated in the near future.
Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Cephalic process of first pleopod absent (Fig. 39d); inner
ramus of uropod with median spine projecting distally
much beyond margin of ramus (Fig. 40b; see also Fig. 21a):
Proeambarus (G.) hagenianus (Faxon, 1884)
(Burrows in central and eastern Mississippi and western
Alabama. A species complex that is being revised by Joseph
F. Fitzpatrick. Literature: Faxon, 1885, 1914)
47
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Eagemdes
Central projection (e) of first pleopod platelike and directed
laterally across cephalodistal surface of pleopod (Fig. 41a).
2
Central projection (e~) of first pleopod beaklike and directed
caudally, distally, or caudodistally (Fig. 41b-e) 5
Fig. 41. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Prooambarus r.
Togersi; b, P. geodytes; c, P. truoulentus; d, P. advena; e,
P. pygmaeus. (op, cephalic process; e, central projection.)
2(1) Caudal knob (ok} of first pleopod directed mesially at approxi-
mately right angle to principal axis of shaft of appendage
(Fig. 42a; see also Fig. 41a):
Procambarus (E.) rogersi rogersi (Hobbs, 1938)
(Burrows in eastern Calhoun County, Florida. Literature,
Hobbs, 1945a)
Caudal knob (ok] of first pleopod directed distolaterally at
angle less than 90 degrees to principal axis of shaft of
appendage (Fig. 42b-d) 3
3(2) Cephalic process (op) of first pleopod extending as far distally
as central projection (Fig. 42b; see also Fig. 26a):
Ppoacoribarus (H.) rogersi expletus Hobbs and Hart, 1959
(Known only from the type-locality, burrows 0.9 mile north
of Clarksville, Calhoun County, Florida. Literature: Hobbs
and Hart, 1959)
Cephalic process of first pleopod not extending so far distally
as central projection (Fig. 42c,d) 4
48
-------
4(3) Caudal knob of first pleopod in caudal aspect, distinctly
fingerlike, longer than broad (Fig. 42c):
Proeambarus (H.) rogersi eampestris Hobbs, 1942
(Burrows in Leon and Wakulla counties, Florida. Literature :
Hobbs, 1945a)
Caudal knob of first pleopod in caudal aspect, thumblike, al-
most or quite as broad as long (Fig. 42d):
PTOQambarus (#.) rogersi oohloaknensis Hobbs, 1942
(Burrows in Gadsden and Liberty counties, Florida.
Literature: Hobbs, 1945a)
Fig. 42. Caudal view of distal portion of left first pleopods.
a, Pvooambarus T. rogersi; b, P. r. expletus; c, P. v.
eampestp-is; d, P. r, oehloeknensis. (ok3 caudal knob; op3
cephalic process.)
5(1) Ischia of third and fourth pereiopods with hooks (Fig. 4c; see
also Fig. 41b): Prooambarus (H.) geodytes Hobbs, 1942
(Burrows along the St. John's River and its tributaries from
Putnam County south to Orange County, Florida. Literature:
Hobbs, 1942b)
Ischia of only third pereiopods with hooks (Fig. 4a) 6
6(5) Central projection (e~) and mesial process of first pleopod
directed caudally at angle of 90 degrees to axis of main
shaft of appendage (Fig. 41c):
Pvoaambarus (H.) truaulentus Hobbs, 1954
(Burrows between the Savannah and Altamaha rivers in Georgia.
Literature: Hobbs, 1954)
Central projection (e~) and mesial process of first pleopod
directed caudodistally at angle much less than 90 degrees
(Fig. 41d,e) 7
49
-------
7(6) Cephalic process (cp) of first pleopod moderately well-
developed to rudimentary (Fig. 41d):
Pvooambarus (5.) advena (LeConte, 1856)
(Burrows in the lower coastal plain between the Savannah
River, Georgia, and Alachua County, Florida. Literature :
Hobbs, 1942b)
Cephalic process of first pleopod totally absent (Fig. 41e) :
Pvoeambarus (H.) pygmaeus Hobbs, 1942
(Lentic and lotic habitats and burrows in southeastern
Georgia and in Gulf, Liberty, Leon, and Wakulla counties,
Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
50
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Leoontieambarus
1 Albinistic; eyes with reduced pigment (See also Fig. llf):
Proocoribavus (I.} millevi Hobbs, 1971
(Subterranean waters in Dade County, Florida. Literature:
Hobbs, 1971c)
Pigmented; eyes normally pigmented 2
2(1) Hooks on ischia of third pereiopods only (Fig. 4a) 3
Hooks on ischia of third and fourth pereiopods (Fig. 4c) 6
3(2) Mesial process (w) of first pleopod massive and subspatulate
(Fig. 43f): Prooambarus (I.) kilbyi (Hobbs, 1940)
(Burrows and lentic habitats in Calhoun and Gulf counties
east and south to Levy County, Florida. Literature: Hobbs,
1942b)
Mesial process of first pleopod slender and tapering to acute
or subacute apex (Figs 43a-e,g,h, 44a-d) 4
Fig. 43. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, PToaambarus
hubbelli; b, P. vathbunae; c, P. capillatus; d, P. shermani;
e, P. alleni; f, P. kilbyij g, P. latiplewnm; h, P. boucbatus.
(o3 caudal process; m, mesial process.)
4(3) First pleopod with mesial process extending no farther distally
than cephalic process; subapical setae in apical cluster
(Fig. 43a): Proccmbavus (L.) hubbelli (Hobbs, 1940)
(Burrows and lentic habitats in the Choctawhatchee River
basin in Alabama and Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
First pleopod with mesial process extending much farther
distally than cephalic process; subapical setae arranged in
linear series on cephalodistal margin of appendage (Fig.
43b,c) 5
51
-------
5(4) First pleopod with caudal process (o~) directed cephalodistally,
not reaching level of tips of cephalic process and central
projection (Fig. 43b; see also Fig. 28b) :
Procambapus (L.) rathbunae (Hobbs, 1940)
(Burrows and lentic habitats in Okaloosa and Holmes
counties, Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
First pleopod with caudal process (c) directed distally and
extending at least to level of tips of cephalic process and
central projection (Fig. 43c):
Ppoeambapus (L.) eap-illatus Hobbs, 1971
(Burrows and lentic habitats in the Escambia River basin in
Alabama and Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1971b)
6(2) First pleopod with mesial process (m) reaching no farther
distally than tip of cephalic process (Fig. 43d) :
Proaarribarus (L.) shermani Hobbs, 1942
(Streams and sloughs in Pearl River County, Mississippi, St.
Tammany Parish, Louisiana, and in the Escambia River
drainage, Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
First pleopod with mesial process reaching much farther distally
than tip of cephalic process (Figs 43e-h, 44a-d) 7
7(6) First pleopod with mesial process sinuous (Fig. 43e):
Prooambarus (L.) alleni (Faxon, 1884)
(Lentic and lotic habitats east of the St. John's River and
all of peninsular Florida south of Levy and Marion counties.
Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
First pleopod with mesial process straight or curved but never
sinuous (Figs 43f-h, 44a-d) 8
8(7) First pleopod with mesial process massive, subspatulate, and
its apex directed almost caudally (Fig. 43f):
Procambopus (L.) kilbyi (Hobbs, 1940)
(See couplet 3 for range and literature)
First pleopod with mesial process acute to subspiculiform, and
its apex directed caudo- or cephalodistally (Figs 43g,h,
44a-d) 9
9(8) First pleopod with mesial process directed distally or
cephalodistally (Figs 43g,h, 44a) 10
First pleopod with mesial process directed caudodistally
(Fig. 44b-d) 12
10(9) Palm of chela of male not bearded (Fig. 44e; see also Fig.
43g): Ppooambarus (L.) latipleurwn Hobbs, 1942
(Burrows and lentic habitats in Gulf County, Florida.
Literature : Hobbs, 1942b)
Palm of chela of male bearded (Fig. 44f) 11
52
-------
Fig. 44. a-d, Lateral view of left first pleopods; e,f, Dorsal
view of chelae, a, Prooambarus pubisohelae; b, P. esaambiensis;
c, P. econfinae; d, P. apalaehicolae; e, P. latipleurum; f,
P. barbatus. (op3 cephalic process.)
11(10) First pleopod with cephalodistal margin sloping steeply from
base of cephalic process (Fig. 43h; see also Figs 25b,
44f) : Procambarus (£•) barbatus (Faxon, 1890)
(Burrows and lentic habitats in the coastal plain between the
Edisto River in South Carolina and the Altamaha River in
Georgia. Literature: Faxon, 1890; Hobbs, 1942b)
First pleopod with cephalodistal margin forming rounded hump
(Fig. 44a): Prooambarus (L.) pubisohelae Hobbs, 1942
(Burrows and lentic habitats from the Altamaha River,
Georgia, southward to Alachua County, Florida. Literature:
Hobbs, 1942b)
12(9) Palm of chela of male bearded (Like Fig. 44f; also see Fig.
44b) : Prooambarus (L.) esoambiensis Hobbs, 1942
(Burrows and lentic habitats in the lower Perdido and
Escambia river basins in Alabama and Florida. Literature:
Hobbs, 1942b)
Palm of chela of male not bearded (Like Fig. 44e) 13
13(12) First pleopod with cephalic process (c) curved, its apex di-
rected cephalodistally (Fig. 44c):
Procambarus (L.) eeonfinae Hobbs, 1942
(Burrows and lentic habitats in Bay County, Florida.
Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
First pleopod with cephalic process (
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Ortmcmnieus
1 Albinistic [[[ 2
Pigmented [[[ 4
2(1) Eye with small black pigment spot (See also Fig. 45a) :
PpOQcanbarus (0. ) luoifugus alachua (Hobbs, 1940)
(Subterranean habitats in western Gilchrist and southwestern
Alachua counties, Florida. Intergrades with the nominate
subspecies in Marion County, Florida. Literature: Hobbs,
1942b, 1958c)
Eye without pigment ........................................... 3
3(2) Distal portion of first pleopod bent caudal ly at 60 to 80
degrees, and cephalic process directed at angle of approxi-
mately 70 degrees, to main axis of appendage (Fig. 45b) :
Prooaribavus (0.) luoifugus luoifugus (Hobbs, 1940)
(Subterranean habitats from Citrus and Hernando counties
northward to Marion County, Florida, where it intergrades
with P. luaifugus alaohua. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b, 1958c)
Distal portion of first pleopod bent caudally at no more than 45
degrees, and cephalic process directed at angle of approxi-
mately 35 degrees, to main axis of appendage (Fig. 45c; see
also Fig. 9b): Prooambarus (0.~) pallidus (Hobbs, 1940)
(Subterranean habitats from Suwannee County to northwestern
Alachua County, Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b, 1962)
Fig. 45. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Pvoaambarus
luoifugus alaohua; b, P. Z-. luaifugus; c, P. pallidus.
4(1) Subapical setae borne on knob on cephalodistal or laterodistal
surface of first pleopod (Figs 46a-h, 47a) 5
-------
5(4) Setiferous knob situated on cephalodistal surface of first
pleopod with broad gap between it and cephalic process (Fig.
46a): Proaambarus (0.) viaeviridis (Faxon, 1914)
(Sluggish streams and lentic habitats from Clay and Greene
counties, Arkansas, to Tuscaloosa County, Alabama. Litera-
ture: Faxon, 1914; Hobbs, 1962)
Setiferous knob of first pleopod usually laterally situated;
if cephalic to cephalic process never widely separated from
it (Figs 46b-h, 47a) 6
Fig. 46. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Procarribarus
viaevir-idis; b, P. hayi; c, P. leoontei; d, P. aoutissimus;
e, P. texanus; f, P. aoutus ouevaahioae; g, P. lophotus; h,
P. bland-ing-L-l. (ok., caudal knob: op., cephalic process; e3
central projection; m, mesial process; c, caudal process.)
6(5) Setiferous knob situated at lateral base of caudal process of
first pleopod (Fig. 46b):
Proeambarus (0.) hayi (Faxon, 1884)
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats in the Tombigbee and
Tallahatchie river systems in Mississippi and Alabama, and
in the Hatchie drainage system in Tennessee. Literature:
Faxon, 1885; Hobbs, 1962)
Caudal knob of first pleopod situated cephalically or laterally
but never so far caudally as at base of caudal process (Figs
46c-h, 47a) 7
7(6) Mesial process of first pleopod directed at 90 degree angle to
main axis of appendage (Fig. 46c,d) 8
Mesial process of first pleopod directed at angle less than 90
degrees to main axis of appendage (Figs 46e-h, 47a) 9
55
-------
8(7) Cephalic process and central projection of first pleopod di-
rected caudally at 90 degree angle to main axis of append-
age (Fig. 46c; see also Fig. 26c) :
Procambarus (0.) leaontei (Hagen, 1870)
(Streams in Stone County, Mississippi, and Mobile County,
Alabama. Literature: Hobbs, 1952a)
Cephalic process and central projection of first pleopod di-
rected caudodistally at angle much less than 90 degrees to
main axis of appendage (Fig. 46d; see also Fig. 21d):
ProocoribaYUS (0.) aeutissimus (Girard, 1852)
(Lentic habitats in the Tombigbee, Alabama, and Choctaw-
hatchee drainages in east central Mississippi and west
central Alabama. Literature: Hobbs, 1962)
cp
Fig. 47. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Proeambavus
a. aoutus; b, P. bivittatus; c, P. lewisi; d, P. villalobosi;
e, P. gonopodocristatus; f, P. maneus; g, P. p. pecccsei,; h,
P. plani-rostris. {G, caudal process; ok, caudal knob; ap3 ce-
phalic process; e3 central projection; m3 mesial process.)
9(7) Prominent gap between caudal process and central projection
of first pleopod (Fig. 46e):
Proaambarus (0.) texanus Hobbs, 1971
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats in Bastrop County,
Texas. Literature: Hobbs, 1971b)
Gap between caudal process and central projection of first
pleopod exceedingly narrow (Figs 46f-h, 47a) 10
10(9) Cephalic process of first pleopod bladelike and rounded
distally (Fig. 46f):
Prooambarus (0.) aoutus auevaah-ieae (Hobbs, 1941)
(Subterranean and lentic habitats in San Luis Potosi and
Puebla, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1959)
Cephalic process of first pleopod tapering and acute (Figs
" 46g ,h, 47a) 11
56
-------
11(10) Caudal process of first pleopod lanceolate in lateral aspect
(Fig. 46g): Procambarus (0.) lophotus Hobbs and Walton, 1960
(Lentic and lotic habitats in tributaries of the Alabama
River from Clarke County, Alabama, to Gordon and Catoosa
counties, Georgia, and in the Tennessee drainage in Polk
County, Tennessee, and northwestern Georgia. Literature:
Hobbs and Walton, 1960; Hobbs, 1962)
Caudal process of first pleopod tapering from base in lateral
aspect (Figs 46h, 47a) 12
12(11) First pleopod with setiferous knob situated at extreme cephalic
base of cephalic process; setae not obscuring part of
central projection in lateral aspect (Fig. 46h):
PpoeambaFUs (0.) blancting-ii- (Harlan, 1830)
(Lentic and lotic habitats from the Pee Dee River system to
the Santee system in southern North Carolina and in South
Carolina. Literature: Faxon, 1885; Hobbs, 1962)
First pleopod with setiferous knob situated cephalolateral to
cephalic process; setae obscuring at least proximal 1/2 of
central projection in lateral aspect (Fig. 47a):
Proeconbarus (0.) aeutus aoutus (Girard, 1852)
(Sluggish to moderately flowing streams and lentic habitats
in the coastal plain and piedmont from Maine to Georgia,
from Minnesota to Ohio, and from the Florida panhandle to
Texas; intergrades with P. a. auevaahicae in Texas and
northern Mexico. Literature: Hobbs, 1962)
13(4) First pleopod with subapical setae absent (Figs 47c, 48f)... 14
First pleopod with subapical setae present (Figs 47b,d-h,
48a-e,g,h, 49,50) 15
14(13) Cephalic process of first pleopod directed distally (Fig. 47c;
see also Fig. 51b):
Proeambcants (0.) lewisi Hobbs and Walton, 1959
(Sluggish lotic and lentic habitats between the Alabama and
Chattahoochee rivers in southeastern Alabama. Literature:
Hobbs and Walton, 1959; Hobbs, 1962)
Cephalic process of first pleopod directed caudally (Fig. 48f) :
Prooambarus (0.) hybus Hobbs and Walton, 1957
(Lentic habitats and burrows in the Tombigbee River drainage
in Alabama and Mississippi. Literature: Hobbs and Walton,
1957; Hobbs, 1962)
57
-------
15(13) Caudal knob of first pleopod distinct and extending distally to
approximately same level as caudal process and central pro-
jection (Fig. 47b; see also Fig. 51a);
ProcambaPus (0.) bivittatus Hobbs, 1942
(Streams from the Pearl River drainage in Louisiana to the
Escambia River drainage in Santa Rosa County, Florida.
Literature : Hobbs, 1942b)
Caudal knob of first pleopod, if distinct, directed caudo-
distally, never extending to approximately same level as
caudal process and central projection (Figs 47d-h, 48a-e,
g,h, 49, 50) 16
Fig. 48. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Proeambarus
verruoosus; b, P. evermanni; c, P. odballevoi; d, P. pearsei
pl-umimanus; e, P. jaaulus; f, P. hybus; g, P. lepidodaotylus;
h, P. tolteeae. (e, cephalic process; e, central projection;
m, mesial process.)
16(15) Caudal process of first pleopod prominent, usually compress-
ed laterally, and arising from caudolateral surface of
pleopod; caudal knob never well-defined; cephalic process
absent, or if present, arising from cephalic or cephalo-
mesial side of central projection (Figs 47d-h, 48a-e).... 17
Caudal process of first pleopod seldom prominent, sometimes
absent, if present, arising distinctly mesial to caudal
knob except in P. lep-idodaotylus and P. tolteoae in which
cephalic process situated lateral to central projection;
cephalic process arising from cephalic or lateral side of
central projection (Figs 48g,h, 49, 50) 26
58
-------
17(16) Cephalic process of first pleopod situated on mesial surface of
appendage and directed distally (Fig. 47d):
Proaambarus (0.) villalobosi Hobbs, 1969
(Stream in Cueva del Agua, 75 km. east of Valles, San Luis
Potosi, Mexico. Literature: Hobbs, 1969a)
Cephalic process of first pleopod absent, or situated cephalic
or cephalomesial to central projection (Figs 47e-h, 48a-e)..
18
18(17) Caudal process of first pleopod forming long bladelike arc
along distal caudolateral surface of appendage (Fig. 47e):
Procambarus (0.) gonopodoeristatus Villalobos, 1958
(Lentic habitats in northern Veracruz, Mexico. Literature:
Villalobos, 1959)
Caudal process of first pleopod never forming long bladelike
arc along distal caudolateral surface of appendage (Figs
47f-h, 48a-e) 19
19(18) Cephalic process of first pleopod absent (Fig. 47f):
Prooambarus (0.~) manaus Hobbs and Walton, 1957
(Lentic habitats and burrows in Lauderdale and Newton
counties, Mississippi. Literature: Hobbs and Walton, 1957;
Hobbs, 1962)
Cephalic process of first pleopod present (Figs 47g,h, 48a-e). .
20
20(19) Central projection of first pleopod directed caudally at 90
degree angle to main axis of appendage (Fig. 47g,h) 21
Central projection of first pleopod never directed caudally so
much as at 90 degree angle to main axis of appendage (Fig.
48a-e) 22
21(20) All terminal elements of first pleopod directed caudad at 90
degree angle to main axis of appendage, and cephalic process
extending as far caudad as caudal process (Fig. 47g) :
Proeambarus (0.) pearsei- pearse-i (Greaser, 1934)
(Lentic habitats and burrows from Cumberland County, North
Carolina, southward to Horry County, South Carolina. Ap-
parently intergrading with P. pearsei- plumimanus in Johnston
and Pitt counties, North Carolina. Literature: Greaser,
1934b; Hobbs, 1962)
Mesial process of first pleopod directed caudodistally and
cephalic process never extending so far caudad as caudal
process (Fig. 47h):
Prooambavus (0.) planirostris Penn, 1953
("Florida" parishes of southeastern Louisiana and Pearl
River and Winston counties, Mississippi. Literature: Penn,
1953b; Hobbs, 1962)
59
-------
22(20) Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles, or at least angu-
late at base of acumen (Fig. 51c) 23
Rostrum with acumen not distinctly delimited basally (Fig. 51d)
24
23(22) Cephalodistal surface of first pleopod with long rounded hump
extending proximally from base of cephalic process and with
subapical setae restricted to area cephalic to base of
cephalic process (Fig. 48a; see also Fig. 51c):
Proeambarus (<9.) verruaosus Hobbs, 1952
(Stream tributaries of the Tallapoosa and Chattahoochee
rivers in southeastern Alabama. Literature: Hobbs, 1952a,
1962)
Cephalodistal surface of first pleopod not produced in long
rounded hump; subapical setae present also at lateral bases
of cephalic process and central projection (Fig. 48b):
ProGombaPus (0.) evermanni (Faxon, 1890)
(Sluggish streams and lentic habitats from Jackson County,
Mississippi, to Santa Rosa County, Florida. Literature:
Hobbs, 1942b)
24(22) Caudal process of first pleopod acute (Fig. 48c):
Proeambarus (G>.) oaballeroi Villalobos, 1944
(Streams south of Villa Jua'rez, Puebla, Mexico. Known only
from area of the type-locality. Literature: Villalobos,
1959)
Caudal process of first pleopod rounded or truncate (Fig. 48d,
e) 25
25(24) Mesial process of first pleopod gently tapering and directed
caudally; cephalic process situated cephalomesial to central
projection; caudal process subtruncate (Fig. 48d) :
Ppoeambarus (0.) pearsei plumimanus Hobbs and Walton, 1958
(Lentic habitats and burrows in Carteret, Craven, and Duplin
counties, North Carolina. Literature: Hobbs and Walton,
1958; Hobbs, 1962)
Mesial process of first pleopod lanceolate and directed
caudodistally; cephalic process situated cephalic to central
projection; caudal process rounded apically (Fig. 48e; see
also Fig. 51d):
Prooambarus (0.) jaaulus Hobbs and Walton, 1957
(Lentic habitats and burrows in Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana,
and in Hinds, Rankin, and Scott counties, Mississippi.
Literature: Hobbs and Walton, 1957; Hobbs, 1962)
26(16) Cephalic process of first pleopod situated distinctly lateral
to central projection (Fig. 48g,h) 27
Cephalic process of first pleopod situated cephalic to central
projection (Figs 49,50) 28
60
-------
27(26)
28(26)
Rostrum with marginal spines; first pleopod with subapical
setae distributed from caudal base of cephalic process to
cephalic margin of pleopod (Fig. 48g):
Proeambarus (0.) lepidodaotylus Hobbs, 1947
(Streams in the Pee Dee and Santee drainage systems in
eastern South Carolina and Columbus County, North Carolina.
Literature: Hobbs, 1947b, 1958c)
Rostrum without marginal spines; first pleopod with sub-
apical setae situated in cluster caudoproximal to
cephalic process (Fig. 48h):
Prooambarus (0.~) tolteeae Hobbs, 1943
(Lotic subterranean and epigean habitats in southern
Tamaulipas and southeastern San Luis Potosi, Mexico.
Literature: Villalobos, 1959)
Caudal process of first pleopod absent or not evident in
lateral aspect (Fig. 49a-g) 29
Caudal process of first pleopod small to large, always
evident in lateral aspect (Figs 49h, 50) 36
Fig. 49. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Proeambarus
youngi; b, P. pyonogonopodus; c, P. hirsutus; d, P. angustatus;
e, P. seminolae; f, P. lunzi; g, P. anoylus; h, P. fallax.
29(28) First pleopod with subapical setae very few in number and
restricted to cephalodistal margin at base of cephalic
process (Fig. 49a); acumen as long as remainder of
rostrum (see also Fig. 26b):
Ppooambarus (0.) youngi. Hobbs, 1942
(Streams in Leon, Gulf, and Wakulla counties, Florida.
Literature: Hobbs, 1942b, 1962)
First pleopod with subapical setae abundant and dispersed
distally along cephalic and lateral surface of appendage
(Fig. 49b-g); acumen, if distinct, much shorter than
remainder of rostrum 30
61
-------
30(29) Central projection of first pleopod minute, much less con-
spicuous than other terminal elements (Fig. 49b):
Proaambarus ((9.) pyonogonopodus Hobbs, 1942
(Lentic and lotic habitats from the Choctawhatchee River
eastward to the Apalachicola River in Florida.
Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
Central projection of first pleopod always conspicuous, fre-
quently as large as other terminal elements (Fig. 49c-g)
31
31(30) Areola never more than 4 times as long as broad 32
Areola always more than 4 times as long as broad 33
Fig. 50. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Proaambarus
leonensis; b, P. litosteimum; c, P. pubesoens; d, P. epicyrtus;
e, P. enoplostemum; f, P. piotus; g, P. ehaeei. (ok, caudal
knob.)
32(31) Mesial process of first pleopod much longer than central
projection (Fig. 49c; see also Fig. 26d) :
Proccmbarus (0.~) hi-rsutus Hobbs, 1958
(Streams in the Edisto, Salkehatchie, and Savannah drain-
age systems in South Carolina. Literature: Hobbs, 1958a,
1958c)
Mesial process of first pleopod shorter than central pro-
jection (Fig. 49d):
Proaambarus (0.) angustatus (LeConte, 1856)
(Streams in "Georgia inferiore". Known only from the
single type-specimen. Literature: LeConte, 1856; Hobbs,
1962)
62
-------
33(31) Cephalic process of first pleopod directed distally or cephalo-
distally (Fig. 49e; see also Fig. 26e) :
Prooambarus (0.) seminolae Hobbs, 1942
(Lentic and lotic habitats from the Altamaha River drainage,
Georgia, to Marion County, Florida. Literature: Hobbs,
1942b, 1958c)
Cephalic process of first pleopod directed caudodistally (Figs
49f,g, 50a) 34
34(33) Central projection of first pleopod toothlike, almost straight,
and distinctly shorter than cephalic process (Fig. 50a):
Proeambarus (0.) Zeonensis Hobbs, 1942
(Lentic and lotic habitats between the Apalachicola and
Suwannee rivers, Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
Central projection of first pleopod somewhat bladelike, curved,
and as long as cephalic process (Fig. 49f,g) 35
Fig. 51. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Prooaribarus bivittatus; b,
P. lewis-i; c, P. verruaosus; d, P. jaeulus.
35(34) Laterodistal margin of first pleopod at base of central pro-
jection almost horizontal; central projection directed
caudally (Fig. 49f): Procambapus (0.) lunsi (Hobbs, 1940)
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats and burrows between the
Combahee River, South Carolina, and Altamaha River, Georgia.
Literature: Hobbs, 1940, 1958c)
Laterodistal margin of first pleopod at base of central pro-
jection steeply oblique; central projection directed caudo-
distally (Fig. 49g): Procambavus (0.) ancylus Hobbs, 1958
(Lentic and lotic habitats and burrows from Columbus, Bladen,
and Brunswick counties, North Carolina, southward to
Richland and Colleton counties, South Carolina. Literature:
Hobbs, 1958a, 1958c)
63
-------
36(28) Caudal knob (ok} of first pleopod well defined (Fig. 50b-g);
areola usually less than 5 times longer than broad 38
Caudal knob of first pleopod not well defined (Figs 49h, 50a);
areola usually more than 5 times longer than broad 37
37(36) Mesial process of first pleopod lanceolate; caudal process
situated lateral to central projection (Fig. 49h) :
Prooambapus (0.) fallax (Hagen, 1870)
(Lentic and lotic habitats from the Satilla River drainage,
Georgia, southward through peninsular Florida. Litera-
ture : Hobbs, 1942b)
Mesial process of first pleopod subspiculiform; caudal process
situated caudal to central projection (Fig. 50a):
Proaambarus (0.~) leonens-is Hobbs, 1942
(See couplet 34 for range and literature)
38(36) Caudal knob of first pleopod with troughlike groove cephalic-
ally (Fig. 50b): Proocaribarus (0.) 1-itosternwn Hobbs, 1947
(Stream tributaries of the Canoochee, Ogeechee, and Newport
rivers in southeastern Georgia. Literature: Hobbs, 1947a,
1958c)
Caudal knob of first pleopod inflated or truncate but never
with troughlike groove cephalically (Fig. 50c-g) 39
39(38) Caudal knob of first pleopod truncate and somewhat compressed
(Fig. 50c): Ppooambarus (0.) pubesoens (Faxon, 1884)
(Streams from the Oconee to the Savannah drainage systems
in Georgia and South Carolina. Literature: Hobbs, 1947a,
1962)
Caudal knob of first pleopod inflated (Fig. 50d-g) 40
40(39) Cephalic process of first pleopod much shorter than central
projection (Fig. 50d,e) 41
Cephalic process of first pleopod as long as central pro-
jection (Fig. 50f,g) 42
41(40) Caudal process of first pleopod in lateral aspect projecting
caudally between central projection and caudal knob, fill-
ing interval between them (Fig. 50d):
PTOoambcunis (0.) epioyvtus Hobbs, 1958
(Stream tributaries of the Oconee and Ogeechee rivers in
Georgia. Literature: Hobbs, 1958b, 1958c)
Caudal process of first pleopod in lateral aspect projecting
caudally from level of caudal knob (Fig. 50e):
Pvooambarus (0.) enoplosternum Hobbs, 1947
(Streams from the lower Oconee and Ohoopee river drainages
in Georgia. Literature : Hobbs, 1947a, 1958c)
64
-------
42(40) Caudal process of first pleopod in lateral aspect projecting
caudally between central projection and caudal knob, fill-
ing interval between them (Fig. 50f):
PvooamboLTUs (0.) piotus (Hobbs, 1940)
(Streams in Clay County, Florida. Literature: Hobbs,
1942b, 1962)
Caudal process of first pleopod in lateral aspect projecting
caudally from level of caudal knob (Fig. 50g):
Proeambarus (0.) ohaoei Hobbs, 1958
(Streams from the Wateree River system, South Carolina, to
the Canoochee River, Georgia. Literature: Hobbs, 1958b,
1958c)
65
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Paraecaribavus
Mesial process of first pleopod much larger than central pro-
jection and extending caudodistad much beyond it (Fig.
52a): Proocaribarus (P.) paradoxus (Ortmann, 1906)
(Tributaries of Rio Tecoluta at Tetela de Ocampo y La
Canada, 35 km. northeast of Zacapoaxtla, Puebla, Mexico.
Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Mesial process of first pleopod much smaller than central pro-
jection and not extending so far distad as central pro-
jection (Fig. 52b):
Proaambarus (P.) ortmanni (Villalobos, 1949)
(Tributary of Rio San Marcos (to Rio Cazones), 6 km. north-
east of Zihuateutla, Puebla, Mexico. Literature: Villalo-
bos, 1955)
Fig. 52. Lateral view of left first pleopods
paradoxus; b, P. optmanni.
a, Pvooambarus
66
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus ~Penn-id.es
1 Basis of cheliped with spine on mesial surface (Fig. 53a; see
also Fig. 54a): Pvoeambcccus (P.) vevsutus (Hagen, 1870)
(Streams from western Alabama to the Apalachicola River in
Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b) :
Basis of cheliped without spine on mesial surface (Fig. 53b)..
2
2(1) First pleopod with distinct angular shoulder on cephalic
surface (Fig. 54b):
Proaambarus (P.) lylei Fitzpatrick and Hobbs, 1971
(Tributaries of the Yalobusha River in Calhoun County,
Mississippi. Literature: Fitzpatrick and Hobbs, 1971)
First pleopod without distinct angular shoulder on cephalic
surface (Figs. 54c-i, 55) 3
3(2) Cephalic process of first pleopod well developed (Figs 54c-i,
55a,b) 4
Cephalic process of first pleopod absent or rudimentary (Fig.
55c-g) 11
Fig. 53. Ventral view of basal portion of left pereiopods. a,
Arrow indicating spine on basis of first pereiopod (cheliped);
b, First pereiopod lacking spine on basis.
4(3) Cephalic process of first pleopod situated entirely mesial to
central projection and completely obscured by latter in
lateral aspect (Fig. 54c,d):
Prooambarus (P.) suttkusi Hobbs, 1953
(Tributaries of the Choctawhatchee River in Alabama and
Florida. Literature : Hobbs, 1953b, 1962)
Cephalic process of first pleopod situated cephalic, lateral,
or cephalomesial to central projection, never entirely ob-
scured by latter in lateral aspect (Figs 54e-i, 55a,b).
5
67
-------
5(4) Cephalic process of first pleopod subtruncate with acute angle
caudodistally (Fig. 54e): Pvoaambarus (P.) viosoai Penn, 1946
(Tributaries of the Red River in Arkansas and Louisiana east-
ward to the Pascagoula River in Mississippi. Literature:
Penn, 1959; Hobbs, 1962)
Cephalic process of first pleopod tapering from base (Figs
54f-i, 55a,b) 6
6(5) Cephalic process of first pleopod directed caudodistally (Fig.
54h,i) 7
Cephalic process of first pleopod directed distally (Figs 54f,g,
55a,b) 8
cp
Fig. 54. a-c, e,g, Lateral view of distal portion of left first
pleopods; d, Mesial view of same; h,i, Lateral view of left
first pleopods. a, Pvooambarus versutus; b, P. lylei; c,d, P.
suttkus-i; e, P. viosoai; f, P. penni; g, P. elegans; h, P.
eohinatus; i, P. dupratzi. (a, caudal process; ck3 caudal knob;
cp3 cephalic process; e3 central projection; m3 mesial process.)
7(6) First pleopod with subapical setae abundant, no part of central
projection evident in lateral aspect cephalodistal to
cephalic process (Fig. 54i):
Proeambarus (P.) dupvatzi Penn, 1953
(Streams in the Trinity, Red, Neches, Sabine, and Calcasieu
river systems in Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Literature:
Penn, 1956b; Hobbs, 1962)
First pleopod with subapical setae sparse; part of central pro-
jection evident in lateral aspect cephalodistal to cephalic
process (Fig. 54h, note arrow):
Prooambavus (P.) eohinatus Hobbs, 1956
(Streams in the Edisto and Salkehatchie river systems in
South Carolina. Literature: Hobbs, 1956a, 1962)
68
-------
8(6) Cephalic and mesial processes of first pleopod in lateral as-
pect diverging at angle of at least 50 degrees (Fig. 54f):
Proeambarus (P.) penni Hobbs, 1951
(Tributaries of the Pearl and Pascagoula rivers in south-
central Mississippi and Louisiana. Literature : Penn,
1956b; Hobbs, 1962)
Cephalic and mesial processes of first pleopod in lateral as-
pect subparallel or diverging at angle of much less than 50
degrees (Figs 54g, 55a,b) 9
9(8) Cephalic process of first pleopod not reaching so far distally
as caudal knob or caudal process (Fig. 54g):
Proaambarus (P.) elegans Hobbs, 1969
(Streams in the Ouachita River system in northern Louisi-
ana. Literature: Hobbs, 1969c)
Cephalic process of first pleopod reaching farther distally
than caudal knob or caudal process (Fig. 55a,b) 10
10(9) Central projection of first pleopod with cephalic margin round-
ed; caudal process small (Fig. 55a):
Procambarus (P.) ablusus Penn, 1963
(Streams in the Hatchie River system in Tennessee and
Mississippi. Literature: Penn, 1963)
Central projection of first pleopod with cephalic margin virtu-
ally straight; caudal process prominent (Fig. 55b):
Procambarus (P.) natohitoohae Penn, 1953
(Tributaries of the Red, Bayou Teche, and Calcasieu rivers
in Texas, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Literature: Penn,
1956b, 1959; Hobbs, 1962)
11(3) Distolateral surface of shaft of first pleopod with longi-
tudinal excavation extending proximally from base of
central projection (Fig. 55c):
Proeambarus (P.) lagn-iappe Black, 1968
(Tributaries of the Tombigbee River in Kemper County,
Mississippi. Literature: Black, 1968)
Distolateral surface of shaft of first pleopod without such
excavation (Fig. 55d-g) 12
12(11) Central projection of first pleopod arising from level dis-
tinctly proximal to base of caudal process (Fig. 55d,e)..13
Central projection of first pleopod arising from level dis-
tinctly distal to base of caudal process (Fig. 55f,g)....14
69
-------
13(12) Caudodistal portion of shaft of first pleopod subtruncate with
caudal element and central projection situated on cephalic
1/2 of tip (Fig. 55d): Proeambarus (P.) gibbus Hobbs, 1969
(Streams in the Flint River system in southwestern Georgia.
Literature: Hobbs, 1969c)
Caudodistal portion of shaft of first pleopod tapering with
caudal element and central projection constituting almost
entire tip (Fig. 55e) :
Proeambarus (P.) spiaulifer (LeConte, 1856)
(Streams from western Alabama to the Savannah River in
Georgia. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b, 1962)
Fig. 55. Lateral view of distal portion of left first pleopods. a,
Proocoribarus ablusus; b, P3 natehitochae; c, P. lagniappe; d, P.
gi-bbus; e, P. spieulifey, f, P. ouach-itae; g, P. raneyi.
14(12) Caudal knob of first pleopod conspicuous; caudal process broad
and leaflike in lateral aspect (Fig. 55f) :
Proeambopus (P.) ouaohitae Penn, 1956
(Tributaries of the Arkansas and Ouachita rivers in Arkan-
sas and Mississippi. Literature: Penn, 1956a; Hobbs, 1962)
Caudal knob of first pleopod vestigial; caudal process narrow
and elongate (Fig. 55g):
Proaambarus (P.) raneyi Hobbs, 1953
(Tributaries of the Savannah River in South Carolina and
Georgia, and headwaters of the Ocmulgee River in Georgia.
Literature : Hobbs, 1953c, 1962)
70
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Soapulieambarus
1 Cephalic process of first pleopod acute (Fig. 56a,b) 2
Cephalic process of first pleopod lobiform with or without
angle on caudal margin (Fig. 56c-e) 3
2(1) Distal portion of first pleopod tapering distally, in lateral
aspect, from level of shoulder (Fig. 56a):
Prooambarus OS.) howellae Hobbs, 1952
(Lentic and lotic habitats in the lower piedmont and upper
coastal plain of Georgia between the Oconee and Ogeechee
rivers. Literature: Hobbs, 1952b, 1962)
Distal portion of first pleopod not markedly tapering distally,
in lateral aspect, from level of shoulder (Fig. 56b; see also
Fig. 6b): Proeambarus (£.) paeninsulanus (Faxon, 1914)
(Lentic and lotic habitats from the Choctawhatchee drainage
in Florida to the St. Johns and St. Marys rivers, and from
the Hillsborough River, Florida, northward to southeastern
Alabama and southern Georgia. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b,
1962)
Fig. 56. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Prooambarus
howellae; b, P. paeninsulanus; c, P. okaloosae; d, P. clarkii;
e, P. troglodytes, (op, cephalic process.)
3(1) Areola less than 12 times longer than broad (see also Fig.
56c): Ppocambarus (£.) okaloosae Hobbs, 1942
(Lentic and lotic habitats in the Perdido, Escambia, and
Yellow drainage systems in Alabama and Florida. Literature:
Hobbs, 1942b, 1962)
Areola more than 12 times longer than broad (see also Fig. 56d,
e) 4
71
-------
4(3) Caudal margin of cephalic process of first pleopod with distinct
angle (Fig. 56d): Prooambavus (S.) olar'kii (Girard, 1852)
(Lentic and lotic habitats from southern Illinois to northern
Mexico and Escambia County, Florida. Introduced in Cali-
fornia, Hawaii, and Virginia. Literature: Penn, 1943; Hobbs,
1962)
Entire margin of cephalic process of first pleopod rounded,
lacking angle (Fig. 56e):
Procambarus (5.) troglodytes (LeConte, 1856)
(Lentic and lotic habitats in the lower piedmont and coastal
plain from the Pee Dee drainage system in South Carolina to
the Altamaha drainage in Georgia. Literature : Faxon, 1885;
Hobbs, 1962)
72
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus V-illalobosus
1 Mesial process Cm) of first pleopod extending distinctly far-
ther distally than other terminal elements (Fig. 57a-c)...
2
Mesial process of first pleopod extending little, if any,
farther distally than other terminal elements (Fig. 57d-i)
4
2(1) Mesial process of first pleopod comparatively small and ex-
ceeding other terminal elements by no more than 1/2 their
length (Fig. 57a):
PToeambavus (F.) hoffmanni (Villalobos, 1944)
(Tributaries of the Rio Tecolutla and Rio Nautla in Puebla
and Veracruz, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Mesial process of first pleopod very large and exceeding
other terminal elements by at least 2/3 their length (Fig.
57b,c) 3
3(2) Mesial process of first pleopod somewhat flattened and
sinuous (at least caudal margin sinuous) (Fig. 57b);
areola with no more than 2 punctations across narrowest
part: Pvoocmbarus (F.) tlapacoyanensis (Villalobos, 1947)
(Tributaries of the Rio Nautla in the vicinity of Tlapa-
coyan, Veracruz, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Mesial process of first pleopod conical and nearly straight
(Fig. 57c); areola with more than 2 punctations across
narrowest part:
Proeatnbarus (V.) teziutlanensis (Villalobos, 1947)
(Headwater tributaries of the Rio Nautla in Puebla and
Veracruz, Me*xico. Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
4(1) First pleopod with 2 spiniform processes (mesial and cepha-
lic) subequal in length, both projecting distally beyond
other terminal elements (Fig. 57d; see also Fig. 6c):
Ppoaambarus (F.) riojai (Villalobos, 1944)
(Headwater tributaries of the Rio Cazones and Rio
Tecolutla in Hidalgo and Puebla, Mexico. Literature :
Villalobos, 1955)
First pleopod with only 1 conspicuous spiniform or subspini-
form process (mesial), or, if cephalic process somewhat
spiniform, never extending distally beyond other terminal
elements (Fig. 57e-i) 5
73
-------
5(4) Cephalic process of first pleopod well developed, slender, never
platelike, situated cephalomesially, and extending distally
to or slightly beyond level of tip of mesial process (Fig.
57e): Procambarus (7.) erichsoni Villalobos, 1950
(Tributaries of the Rio Pantepec (to Rio Tuxpan) in the vi-
cinity of Tenango de Doria, Hidalgo, Mexico. Literature:
Villalobos, 1955)
Cephalic process of first pleopod either forming curved
crestlike plate, or very much reduced; never extending
distally to level of tip of mesial process (Fig. 57f-i).... 6
6(5) Curved crestlike plate on cephalodistal surface of first pleopod
flared from base (Fig. 57f):
Pvooaribapus (V.~) zihuateutlensis Villalobos, 1950
(Headwater tributaries of the Rio Tecolutla in the vicinity
of Zihuateutla, Puebla, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos,
1955)
Curved crestlike plate on cephalodistal surface of pleopod not
flared from base, extending distally (Fig. 57g-i) 7
m
cp
Fig. 57. a-g, i, Lateral view of distal portion of left first
pleopods; h, Mesial view of same, a, Ppooambccpus hoffmanni', b,
P. tlapaeoyanensis; c, P. teziutlanensis; d, P. rioja-i; e, P.
eviohsoni; f, P. zihuateutlensis; g,h, P. contrerasi; i, P.
hoTtorihobbs'i. (ep, cephalic process; m3 mesial process.)
7(6) Central projection of first pleopod masked in lateral aspect by
crestlike plate; cephalic process small and situated
caudomesial to crestlike plate (Fig. 57g,h):
Prooambarus (F.) contreras-L (Greaser, 1931)
(Tributaries of the Rio Cazones and the Rio Tecolutla in the
vicinity of Zihuateutla and Agua Fria, Puebla, Mexico.
Literature: Villalobos, 1955)
Central projection of first pleopod clearly evident in lateral
aspect; cephalic process forming crestlike plate (Fig. 57i):
Prooconbarus (F.) hortonhobbsi Villalobos, 1950
(Stream at El Coyular, 7 km. northeast of La Uni<5n, Municipio
de Zihuateutla, Puebla, Mexico. Literature: Villalobos,
1955)
74
-------
KEY TO SPECIES OF GENUS HOBBSEUS
(Based on First-Form Male)
Central projection of first pleopod directed caudally at angle
less than 90 degrees to main shaft of appendage (Fig. 58a,b)
2
Central projection of first pleopod directed caudally at angle
of 90 degrees or more to main shaft of appendage (Fig. 58c-e)
3
Fig. 58. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Hobbseus
oicooneotoides; b, H. ovistatus; c, H. attenuatus; d, H.
valleeulus; e, H. pponrinens.
2(1) Central projection of first pleopod directed caudally at less
than 20 degrees to main shaft of appendage, mesial process
at less than 45 degrees (Fig. 58a):
Hobbseus ovooneoto-Ldes Fitzpatrick and Payne, 1968
(Lentic habitat and burrows, 4.25 miles north of Starkville,
Oktibbeha County, Mississippi. Literature: Fitzpatrick and
Payne, 1968)
Central projection of first pleopod directed caudally at more
than 45 degrees to main shaft of appendage, mesial process
at approximately 90 degrees (Fig. 58b):
Hobbseus or-istatus (Hobbs, 1955)
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats and burrows in Kemper,
Lauderdale, Lowndes, and Noxubee counties, Mississippi.
Literature: Fitzpatrick and Payne, 1968; Hobbs, 1955)
3(1) Mesial process of first pleopod directed caudally at 90 degrees
to main shaft of appendage (Fig. 58c):
Hobbseus attenuatus Black, 1969
(Lentic habitats in the Pearl River drainage in Winston and
Neshoba counties, Mississippi. Literature: Black, 1969)
Mesial process directed caudoproximally at more than 90 degrees
to main shaft of appendage (Fig. 58d,e) 4
75
-------
Fig. 59. Dorsal view of carapaces.
valleculus; b, E. prominens.
a, Hobbseus
4(3) Central projection of first pleopod forming broad arc with tip
directed almost proximally (Fig. 58d); rostrum with margins
tapering from base (Fig. 59a):
Hobbseus valleculus (Fitzpatrick, 1967)
(Stream tributaries of the Pearl River in Choctaw County,
Mississippi. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1967b; Fitzpatrick
and Payne, 1968)
Central projection of first pleopod only slightly arched with tip
directed caudoproximad (Fig. 58e); rostrum with convex margins
(Fig. 59b):
Hobbseus prominens (Hobbs, 1966)
(Lentic and lotic habitats and burrows in Choctaw, Clarke,
Dallas, Hale, Marengo, Perry, and Sumter counties, Alabama.
Literature: Fitzpatrick and Payne, 1968; Hobbs, 1966)
76
-------
KEY TO SPECIES OF GENUS ORCONECTES
(Based on First-Form Male)
NOTE: In using this key, the first pleopod must be viewed mesially.
For comparative purposes, all of the illustrations of this appendage
are made of the left member of the pair. See Fig. 3c for terminology
and methods of measurements.
1 Central projection of first pleopod constituting 1/4 or less of
total length of appendage (Figs 60, 63, 65, 67c-g) 2
Central projection of first pleopod constituting more than 1/4
total length of appendage (Figs 68c-g, 70, 72, 74, 77)... 32
2(1) Albinistic; eyes without pigment or facets 3
Pigmented; eyes with pigment and facets 8
Fig. 60. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Orooneotes
pelluoidus; b, 0. -inoomptus; c, 0. a. ausizpali-s; d, 0. a.
packardi; e, 0. i. inermis; f, 0. i. testii; g, 0. harrisoni.
(s3 shoulder.)
3(2) Mesial process of first pleopod extending distinctly farther
distally than central projection (Fig. 60a; see also Fig.
lib): Orconectes pellueidus (Tellkampf, 1843)
(Subterranean waters from Hart County to Trigg County,
Kentucky, and Montgomery County, Tennessee. Literature:
Hobbs and Barr, 1972)
Mesial process of first pleopod extending only slightly, if at
all, farther distally than central projection (Fig. 60b-f) ..
4
77
-------
4(3) Cephalodistal portion of first pleopod with rounded or angular
weak shoulder (s) at base of central projection (Fig- 60b-d)
5
Cephalodistal portion of first pleopod without shoulder at base
of central projection (Pig- 60e,f) 7
5(4) Rostrum without marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 61a; see also
Fig. 60b): Ovconeotes incomptus Hobbs and Barr, 1972
(Subterranean waters in Jackson County, Tennessee. Litera-
ture: Hobbs and Barr, 1972)
Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 61b,c) 6
Fig. 61. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Orooneotes ineomptus; b,
0. a. austval-is; c, 0. a. paakardi', d, 0. i. •inermis; e, 0, i.
testii.
6(5) Cephalodistal portion of first pleopod with angular shoulder at
base of central projection; caudal process absent (Fig. 60d;
see also Fig. 61c):
Oraoneotes australis paakardi Rhoades, 1944
(Subterranean waters of the upper Cumberland drainage system
in Kentucky, intergrading with the nominate subspecies in the
vicinity of the Kentucky-Tennessee state line. Literature:
Hobbs and Barr, 1972)
Cephalodistal portion of first pleopod with rounded shoulder at
base of central projection; caudal process usually present
(Fig. 60c; see also Figs lla, 61b):
Orooneotes austvalis austTolis (Rhoades, 1941)
(Subterranean waters in the northern tributaries of the Ten-
nessee River in Jackson and Madison Counties, Alabama, north-
northeastward on the Cumberland Plateau to near the Kentucky-
Tennessee state line, there intergrading with 0. a. packardi.
Literature: Hobbs and Barr, 1972)
78
-------
7(4) Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles; areola constituting
less than 43 per cent of total length of carapace (Fig. 61d;
see also Figs lie, 60e):
Orconeates inermis in&rmis Cope, 1871
(Subterranean waters from Green County, Kentucky, to Crawford
County, Indiana, intergrading with 0. i. testii northward to
Monroe County, Indiana. Literature: Hobbs and Barr, 1972)
Rostrum without marginal spines or tubercles; areola consti-
tuting at least 43 per cent of total length of carapace
(Fig. 61e; see also Fig. 60f):
Oraonectes inermis testii (Hay, 1891)
(Subterranean waters of Monroe County, Indiana, intergrading
southward to Crawford County with the nominate subspecies.
Literature: Hobbs and Barr, 1972)
8(2) Central projection of first pleopod constituting less than 1/7
total length of appendage and both terminal elements directed
caudodistally (Fig. 60g): Ovooneotes harrisoni (Faxon, 1884)
(Streams in St. Genevieve and Washington counties, Missouri.
Literature: Greaser, 1934a; Williams, 1954a)
Central projection of first pleopod usually constituting at least
1/6 total length of appendage (Figs 63, 65, 67c-g), if less,
then both terminal elements never directed caudodistally
(Fig. 65a) 9
9(8) Areola obliterated or linear along part of length (Fig. 62a)....
10
Areola never obliterated along any part of length (Figs 62b-e,
67a,b) 13
Fig. 62. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Oroonectes lanoifer; b,
0. limosus; c, 0, propinquus; d, 0. eupunctus; e, 0. eriahsoni-
anus.
79
-------
10(9) Rostrum with acumen as long as, or longer than, basal portion
(Fig. 62a): Orconeotes lanoifev (Hagen, 1870)
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats from Texas and Missis-
sippi northward to extreme southern Illinois. Literature:
Hobbs and Marchand, 1943; Penn, 1952; Penn and Hobbs, 1958)
Rostrum with acumen never as long as basal portion., 11
Fig. 63. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, 0-rooneotes
mississippiensis; b, 0. diffiailis; c, 0. hathaaayi; d, 0.
saribovni evismophopous; e, 0. sloanii; f, 0. obsowms', g, 0.
immunis; h, 0. marahandi; i, 0. kentuekiensis.
11(10) Mesial process of first pleopod with basal portion directed
distally and distal 1/3 bent caudally at right angle to
principal axis of appendage (Fig. 63a) :
Oreoneates mississippiensis (Faxon, 1884)
(Streams and roadside ditches in eastern Mississippi and
western Alabama. Literature: Faxon, 1884)
Mesial process of first pleopod directed caudodistally from base
(Fig. 63b,c) 12
12(11) Central projection of first pleopod strongly tapering from base
to acute apex (Fig. 63b): Oveonectes difficilis (Faxon, 1898)
(Streams from Latimer and Pittsburg counties, Oklahoma, and
Upshur county, Texas, to Arkansas and western Louisiana.
Literature: Penn, 1952; Reimer, 1968; Williams, 1954a)
Central projection of first pleopod gradually tapering to cleft
or shallowly concave apex (Fig. 63c):
Oroonectes hathatfayi Penn, 1942
(Streams from Jackson and Rapides parishes south to Vermilion
Parish, Louisiana. Literature: Penn, 1952)
80
-------
13(9) Mesial process of first pleopod with accessory lobe on caudal
surface (Fig. 63d):
Ovooneotes sariborni er-ismophorous Hobbs and Fitzpatrick,
1962 (Streams in the Little Kanawha River system, West
Virginia, intergrading with the nominate subspecies in
neighboring streams. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1967a)
Mesial process of first pleopod without accessory lobe on caudal
surface (Figs 63e-i, 65, 67c-g) 14
14(13) Cephalic surface of first pleopod with prominent angular or
subangular shoulder (Fig. 63f):
Ovconectes obseurus (Hagen, 1870)
(Streams in southeastern Ontario, New York, Pennsylvania,
eastern Ohio, and West Virginia, northern Virginia,and
western Maryland. Literature: Crocker, 1957; Crocker and
Barr, 1968; Fitzpatrick, 1967a; Ortmann, 1906)
Cephalic surface of first pleopod lacking prominent angular
shoulder (Figs 63e,g-i, 65, 67c-g) 15
15(14) Central projection of first pleopod inclined caudally throughout
length (Fig. 63e,g-i) 16
Central projection of first pleopod never inclined caudally
throughout length (Figs 65, 67c-g) 19
16(15) Terminal elements of first pleopod with apices directed caudally
at angle of 90 degrees to principal axis of appendage
(Fig. 63g; see also Fig. 5n):
Orooneates immunis (Hagen, 1870)
(Lentic and sluggish lotic habitats from New England and
Ontario westward to Wyoming and southward to Alabama.
Literature: Crocker and Barr, 1968)
Terminal elements of first pleopod bent caudodistally but apices
directed at angle distinctly less than 90 degrees to princi-
pal axis of appendage (Fig. 63e,h,i) 17
17(16) Central projection of first pleopod constituting more than 1/5
total length of appendage and tapering gradually from base to
apex (Fig. 63h): Ovooneates marchandi Hobbs, 1968
(Streams in the Spring River drainage system in Arkansas and
Missouri. Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Central projection of first pleopod constituting less than 1/5
total length of appendage and bladelike (Fig. 63e,i) 18
81
-------
18(17) Chela strongly pubescent with setae obscuring tubercles on
opposable margins of fingers; areola with no more than 3
punctations across narrowest part; mesial process of first
pleopod somewhat flattened and directed more caudally than
distally (Fig, 63i); Orconeates kentuokiensis Rhoades, 1944
(Streams in Crittenden and Union counties, Kentucky, and
Hardin County, Illinois. Literature: Rhoades, 1944a)
Chela weakly to moderately pubescent but not obscuring tubercles
on opposable margins of fingers; areola with 4 or more
punctations across narrowest part; mesial process of first
pleopod subelliptical in cross-section and directed more
distally than caudally (Fig. 63e):
Ovooneotes stoanii (Bundy, 1876)
(Streams in southern Indiana and southwestern Ohio.
Literature: Eberly, 1955; Faxon, 1885; Rhoades, 1941a)
19(16) Terminal elements of first pleopod distinctly divergent (Fig.
65a-d) 20
Terminal elements of first pleopod subparallel or convergent
distally (Figs 65e-i, 67c-g) 23
20(19) Carapace with hepatic spines (spines occasionally abraded in late
intermolt individuals) (Fig. 62b; see also Figs 5 1, 65a):
Orooneotes li-mosus (Rafinesque, 1817)
(Streams on the Atlantic slope from Maine to the lower James
River in Virginia. Literature: Crocker, 1957; Ortmann, 1906;
Rhoades, 1962)
Carapace without hepatic spines (Fig. 64a,b) 21
21(20) Length of mesial margin of palm of chela less than 1/2 length of
dactyl (Fig. 64c; see also Figs 64a, 65b):
Orconeotes shoup-i Hobbs, 1948
(Streams in the Cumberland drainage system in the vicinity of
Nashville. Literature: Hobbs, 1948a; Rhoades, 1962)
Length of mesial margin of palm of chela greater than 1/2 length
of dactyl (Fig. 64d,e) 22
Fig. 64. a,b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c-e, Dorsal view of
chelae, a, Oraoneotes shoupi; b, 0. -Lndianensis; c, 0. shoupi,
d, 0. wrighti; e, 0. ind-ianensis,
82
-------
22(21) Chela densely setose dorsally; in dorsal aspect, setae obscuring
most tubercles on opposable surfaces of fingers (Fig. 64d;
see also Fig. 65c) : Orooneetes wrighti Hobbs, 1948
(Streams in the Tennessee River drainage in Hardin County,
Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs, 1948b; Rhoades, 1962)
Chela sparingly setose dorsally; in dorsal aspect, most
tubercles on opposable surfaces of fingers clearly visible
(Fig. 64e; see also Figs 64b,65d):
Ovoonectes indianensis (Hay, 1896)
(Streams in southern Illinois and Indiana. Literature:
Eberly, 1955; Hay, 1896)
23(19) Rostrum with median carina (Fig. 62c) 24
Rostrum without median carina (Fig. 62d,e) 25
24(23) Mesial process of first pleopod with acute apex (Fig. 65e; see
also Figs 5m, 62c): Orooneotes pvopinquus (Girard, 1852)
(Streams and littoral areas of cold lentic habits from
Ontario, Quebec and western New England southward to Pennsyl-
vania and westward to Illinois and Wisconsin. Literature:
Crocker and Barr, 1968; Fitzpatrick, 1967a)
Mesial process of first pleopod truncate or spatulate apically
(Fig. 67e): Ovconectes iowaensis Fitzpatrick, 1968
(Streams in the Mississippi drainage system in eastern Iowa.
Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1968)
25(23) Tip of mesial process of first pleopod extending distally to or
beyond tip of central projection (Fig. 65f-i) 26
Tip of mesial process of first pleopod not extending distally so
far as central projection (Fig. 67c-g) 29
26(25) Central projection of first pleopod constituting at least 1/5
total length of appendage (Fig. 65f,g) 27
Central projection of first pleopod constituting less than 1/5
total length of appendage (Fig. 65h,i) 28
27(26) Dorsal surface of carapace with large, contiguous, deep
punctations (Fig. 62d; see also Fig. 65f):
Oreoneotes eupunotus Williams, 1952
(Streams in the Spring River and Eleven Point drainage
systems in Arkansas and Missouri. Literature: Williams,
1954a)
Dorsal surface of carapace with small, moderately spaced, shallow
punctations (Fig. 62e; see also Figs 65g, 66a):
Orooneotes erichsonianus (Faxon, 1898)
(Streams in the Coosa and Tennessee drainage systems in
Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, and Virginia. Literature:
Fitzpatrick, 1967a)
83
-------
28(26) Mesial process of first pleopod twisted and extending slightly
farther distally than central projection (Fig. 65h; see also
Fig. 66b): Orconeotes tvicuspis Rhoades, 1944
(Streams in the Cumberland drainage system in Lyon, Trigg,
and Christian counties, Kentucky. Literature: Rhoades,
1944a)
Mesial process not twisted and never extending farther distally
than central projection (Fig. 65i) :
Oraoneates sanborni sariborni (Faxon, 1884)
(Tributaries of the Ohio River in Ohio, northeastern Ken-
tucky, and West Virginia. Literature : Fitzpatrick, 1967a)
Fig. 65. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Ovconeotes limosus;
b, 0. shoupi; c, 0. wrighti; d, 0. ind'ianens'is; e, 0. ppoptnquus;
f, 0. eupunotus; g, 0. eriahsonianus; h, 0. trieusp-Ls; i, 0. s.
sanboicni..
29(25) Mesial margin of palm of chela greater than 1/2 length of
dactyl (Fig. 66c,d) 30
Mesial margin of palm of chela as short as, or shorter than,
1/2 length of dactyl (Fig. 66e) 31
Fig. 66. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Orconeotes erichsonianus;
b, 0. tricuspis; c, 0. raf-inesquei; d, 0. virgin-iens-is; e,
0. illinoiensis.
84
-------
30(29) Length of areola greater than 5 times its width (Fig. 67a; see
also Figs 66c, 67c): Oreonectes vafinesquei Rhoades, 1944
(Streams in the Rough River drainage in Kentucky.
Literature: Rhoades, 1944a)
Length of areola not more than 5 times its width (Fig. 67b;
see also Figs 66d, 67d) -.Ovooneetes virginiens-is Hobbs, 1951
(Streams in the Chowan River drainage in North Carolina and
Virginia. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1967a)
31(29) Central projection of first pleopod tapering from base to
acute apex (Fig. 67f; see also Fig. 66e):
Oreoneotes -illino-Lensis Brown, 1956
(Streams in southern Illinois. Literature: Fitzpatrick,
1967a)
Central projection of first pleopod bladelike with truncate or
rounded apex (Fig. 67g): Ovooneotes biseotus Rhoades, 1944
(Streams in the Crooked Creek drainage in Crittenden County,
Kentucky. Literature: Prins and Fitzpatrick, 1965;
Rhoades, 1944a)
Fig. 67. a-b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c-g, Mesial view of
left first pleopods. a, Orconectes rafinesquei; b, 0.
vivg-iniensis ; c, 0. rafinesquei; d, 0. virgin-Lensis; e, 0.
'Lowaens'is; f, 0. itl'ino'iens-is; g, 0. biseetus.
85
-------
32(1) Hooks on ischia of third and fourth pereiopods (Fig. 4c);
mesial process of first pleopod broadened and deeply
grooved distally (Fig. 68c) :
Oreonectes pevuncus (Greaser, 1931)
(Streams in the headwaters of the St. Francis River in
southeastern Missouri. Literature: Greaser, 1934a;
Williams, 1954a)
Hooks on ischia of third pereiopods only (Fig. 4a), except in
some populations of 0. hylas; if present on fourth, mesial
process never markedly broadened distally (Figs 68d-g, 70,
72, 74, 77) 33
Fig. 68. a,b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c-g, Mesial view of left
first pleopods. a, Orconeotes leptogonopodus; b, 0. spinosus;
c, 0. perunous; d, 0. putnami; e, 0. leptogonopodus; f, 0.
medius; g, 0. spinosus.
33(32) Central projection of first pleopod constituting at least 1/2
total length of appendage (Fig. 68d-g) 34
Central projection of first pleopod constituting less than 1/2
total length of appendage (Figs 70, 72, 74, 77) 37
34(33) Length of mesial margin of palm of chela no more than 1/2
length of dactyl (Fig. 69a; see also Fig. 68d):
Ovconectes putnami (Faxon, 1844)
(Streams in the Ohio drainage in western Kentucky, southern
Indiana (?), and Tennessee (?). The limits of the ranges
of this species and the closely allied 0. juvenHis and 0,
spinosus have not been determined. Literature: Ortmann,
1931, treated this species and 0. spinosus as synonyms of
0. juvenilis.
Length of mesial margin of palm of chela greater than 1/2
length of dactyl (Fig. 69b-d) 35
86
-------
Fig. 69. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Orooneotes putncmi; b, 0.
leptogonopodus; c, 0. medius; d, 0. spinosus.
35(34) Rostrum with median carina (Fig. 68a; see also Figs 68e, 69b);
Orooneotes leptogonopodus Hobbs, 1948
(Streams in the Red River drainage system in Arkansas and
eastern Oklahoma. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1965; Williams,
1954a)
Rostrum without median carina (Fig. 68b) 36
36(35) Chela with large prominent punctations dorsally; width of palm
greater than 1.4 times length of its mesial margin (Fig.
69c; see also Fig. 68f): Ovconectes medius (Faxon, 1885)
(Streams in the headwaters of the Big and Meramec rivers in
southeastern Missouri. Literature: Greaser, 1934a;
Williams, 1954a)
Chela with fine punctations dorsally; width of palm less than
1.4 times length of its mesial margin (Fig. 69d; see also
Fig. 68b,g): Orooneotes spinosus (Bundy, 1877)
(Stream tributaries of the Coosa, Kanawha (?), and Tennessee
rivers in Alabama, Georgia, eastern Tennessee, Virginia (?),
and West Virginia (?); see statement in couplet 34.
Literature: Ortmann, 1931, treated this species and 0.
putnami as synonyms of 0. juvenilis.~)
37(33) Both terminal elements of first pleopod curved caudally or
caudodistally (Figs 70, 72) 38
Mesial process of first pleopod never directed caudally or
caudodistally (Figs 74, 77) 52
87
-------
Fig. 70. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Ovoonectes
hobbsi; b, 0. p. palmeri; c, 0. p. creolanus; d, 0. p.
longimanus; e, 0. eompressus; f, 0. alabamensis; g, 0.
quadruncus.
38(37) Areola obliterated along part of length or so reduced in width
as to accommodate no punctations in narrowest part (Fig.
71a,b) 39
Areola broad or narrow but always with room for at least one
punctation in narrowest part (Fig. 71c,d) 42
39(38) Areola not obliterated along any part of length (Fig. 71a; see
also Fig. 70a): Oraoneot&s hobbsi Penn, 1950
(Streams in the Lake Pontchartrain watershed in Louisiana
and Mississippi. Literature: Penn, 1952)
Areola obliterated along part of length (Fig. 71b) 40
Fig. 71. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Orooneotes hobbsi,; b, 0. p,
palmeri; c, 0. oomppessus; d, 0. alabamensis.
88
-------
40(39) Central projection of first pleopod comprising more than 1/3
total length of appendage (Fig. 70b; see also Fig. 71b):
Ovaoneates palmeri, palmevi (Faxon, 1884)
(Streams in the lower Mississippi Valley in western
Tennessee, Mississippi, and Louisiana, and in eastern
Missouri and Arkansas. Literature: Penn, 1957)
Central projection of first pleopod comprising less than 1/3
total length of appendage (Fig. 70c,d) 41
41(40) First pleopod with weak shoulder on cephalic surface at base
of central projection (Fig. 70c):
Ovooneates palmeri, ereolanus (Greaser, 1933)
(Streams in the Lake Pontchartrain watershed and the
Pearl and Pascagoula river systems in Louisiana and
Mississippi. Literature: Penn, 1957)
First pleopod with no trace of shoulder on cephalic surface
at base of central projection (Fig. 70d):
OTconeates pa1mer*i longimanus (Faxon, 1898)
(Western stream tributaries of the Mississippi River from
the Arkansas River to the Gulf of Mexico, and streams
westward to the Guadelupe River in Texas. Literature:
Penn, 1957)
42(38) Rostrum with median carina; areola less than 5 times longer
than broad (Fig. 71c,d) 43
Rostrum lacking median carina; areola more than 5 times
longer than broad 44
43(42) Body strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 71c); distal por-
tion of central projection of first pleopod not strongly
recurved (Fig. 70e): Orooneotes eompressus (Faxon, 1884)
(Streams in the Tennessee, Cumberland, and Barren river
systems in Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee.
Literature: Rhoades, 1944a)
Body not strongly compressed laterally (Fig. 71d); distal
portion of central projection of first pleopod strongly
recurved (Fig. 70f): Ovconeetes alabamensis (Faxon, 1884)
(Streams in the Tennessee River system in the vicinity of
the Alabama-Mississippi-Tennessee border. Literature:
Faxon, 1885)
44(42) Mesial process of first pleopod with one or more prominences
slightly proximal to caudodistal extremity (Fig. 70g):
Orooneetes quadpunsus (Greaser, 1933)
(Streams in the headwaters of the St. Francis River in
Iron, St. Genevieve, and Madison counties, Missouri.
Literature: Greaser, 1934a; Williams, 1954a)
Mesial process of first pleopod with no prominences slightly
proximal to caudodistal extremity (Fig. 72) 45
89
-------
Fig. 72. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Ovooneotes
rhoadesi-; b, 0, validus; c, 0. rials; d, 0. m. meeki,', e,
0. m. brevis; f, 0. longidigitus; g, 0. punetimanus; h,
0. virilis.
45(44) Distal 1/4 of mesial process of first pleopod abruptly recurved
caudally (Fig. 72a,b) 46
Distal 1/4 of mesial process of first pleopod not abruptly re-
curved caudally (Fig. 72c-h) 47
46(45) Principal axis of first pleopod almost straight (Fig. 72a) :
Orooneates rhoadesi Hobbs, 1949
(Stream tributaries of the Cumberland, Duck, and Tennessee
rivers in Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs, 1949)
Principal axis of first pleopod inclined caudally (Fig. 72b) :
Oreoneotes validus (Faxon, 1914)
(Stream tributaries of the Tennessee River in Alabama and
southern Tennessee. Literature: Faxon, 1914)
47(45) Central projection of first pleopod comprising less than 1/3
total length of appendage (Fig. 72c,e) (For method of
measuring, see Fig. 3c) 48
Central projection of first pleopod comprising more than 1/3
total length of appendage (Fig. 72d, f-h) 49
90
-------
48(47) Chela with conspicuous tuft of setae at base of fixed finger
and with subserrate rows of tubercles on mesial surfaces
of palm and dactyl (Fig. 73a; see also Fig. 72c):
Orooneotes nais (Faxon, 1885)
(Streams in Kansas and Texas eastward to Arkansas; limits
of its range not clearly defined for apparently often
confused with 0. virilis. Literature: Greaser and
Ortenberger, 1933; Williams, 1954a; Williams and Leonard,
1952)
Chela without conspicuous tuft of setae at base of fixed
finger and tubercles on mesial surfaces of palm and dactyl
subsquamous (See also Fig. 72e):
Oroonectes meeki brevis Williams, 1952
(Streams in the upper Arkansas River drainage in eastern
Oklahoma and northwestern Arkansas. Literature: Williams,
1954a)
49(47) Dactyl of chela approximately 3 times length of mesial margin
of palm (Fig. 73c; see also Fig. 72f):
Orooneates longidigitus (Faxon, 1898)
(Tributaries of the White and Little Red rivers in
Missouri and Arkansas. Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Dactyl of chela distinctly less than 3 times length of mesial
margin of palm (Fig. 73b,d,e) 50
50(49) Central projection of first pleopod comprising almost 1/2
length of appendage (Fig. 72g; see also Fig. 73d):
Orconeotes punetimanus (Greaser, 1933)
(Streams in the Missouri, St. Francis, and White rivers in
Arkansas and Missouri. Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Central projection of first pleopod comprising much less than
1/2 length of appendage (Fig. 72d,h) 51
51(50) Mesial process of first pleopod rather strongly recurved (Fig.
72d); areola constituting less than 36 per cent of total
length of carapace; tubercles on mesial surfaces of palm
and dactyl subsquamous (Fig. 73b):
Ovconeotes meeki meeki (Faxon, 1898)
(Streams in the Arkansas, Red, and White river systems in
Arkansas. Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Mesial process of first pleopod only moderately recurved (Fig.
72h); areola constituting more than 36 per cent of total
length of carapace; tubercles on mesial surfaces of palm
and dactyl distincly elevated (Fig. 73e):
Oreonectes virilis (Hagen, 1870)
(Lentic and lotic habitats in Canada and the northern part
of the United States; the southern boundary of its range is
not known. Its relationships to 0. nais and 0, oauseyi,
the latter here considered a synonym, are far from clear.
Introductions into Maryland, California, and perhaps else-
where have resulted in its being one of the most widely
dispersed crayfishes in North America. Literature:
Crocker and Barr, 1968)
91
-------
52(37) Central projection of first pleopod constituting less than 1/3
total length of appendage (Fig. 74a-c) 53
Central projection of first pleopod constituting more than 1/3
total length of appendage (Figs 74d-i, 77) 55
53(52) Cephalic surface of first pleopod without shoulder at base of
central projection (Fig. 74a):
Oreoneates jeffersoni Rhoades, 1944
(Streams in Beargrass Creek drainage in Jefferson County,
Kentucky. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1967a)
Cephalic surface of first pleopod with shoulder at base of
central projection (Fig. 74b,c) 54
Fig. 73. Dorsal view of chelae, a, OTconeotes nais; b, 0. m.
meeki; c, 0. longidigitus; d, 0. punoti-manus; e, 0. virilis.
54(53) Rostrum with median carina (Fig. 75a); fingers of chela
inflated and gap between them greater than 1/4 width of
palm (Fig. 75c; see also Fig. 74b):
Orooneotes negleatus ahaenodactylus Williams, 1952
(Streams in the North Fork of the White River drainage in
Arkansas and Missouri, intergrading in the headwaters with
the nominate subspecies. Literature: Williams, 1954a,
1954b)
Rostrum without median carina (Fig. 75b); fingers of chela
somewhat flattened and gap between them less than 1/4 width
of palm (Fig. 75d; see also Fig. 74c):
Orooneates rustious (Girard, 1852)
(Streams from southern Ontario to Illinois, Ohio, and Ken-
tucky; introduced in New England and perhaps elsewhere.
Its relationships to other crayfishes treated by Ortmann,
1931, as subspecies are not clear. Literature: Crocker
and Barr, 1968; Rhoades, 1944a; Ortmann, 1931)
92
-------
55(52) Cephalic surface of first pleopod with shoulder or distinct
bulge (Figs 74bsJ d-i, 77a-d) 56
Cephalic surface of first pleopod without shoulder or distinct
bulge (Fig. 77e-i) 68
Fig. 74. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Oreonectes
jeffevsoni; b, 0. negleatus ohaenodaatylus; c, 0. mist-Lous;
d, 0. luteus; e, 0. maovus; f, 0. aoares; g, 0. nana; h,
0. bapr-enensis; i, 0. mirus. (s} shoulder.)
56(55) First pleopods reaching coxae of first pereiopods when abdomen
flexed (Fig. 78a) 57
First pleopods not reaching coxae of first pereiopods when
abdomen flexed (Fig. 78b) 63
57(56) Areola comprising more than 35 per cent of total length of
carapace 58
Areola comprising less than 35 per cent of total length of
carapace 59
58(57) Distal margin of shoulder on cephalic surface of pleopod
forming right angle with base of central projection (Fig.
74e): Oreonectes macrus Williams, 1952
(Streams in the upper Arkansas River system in southwestern
Missouri and northwestern Arkansas. Literature: Williams,
1954a)
Distal margin of shoulder on cephalic surface of pleopod
distinctly sloping (Fig. 68f; see also Fig. 69c):
Oreonectes med-ius (Faxon, 1885)
(See couplet 36 for range and literature)
93
-------
Fig. 75. a,b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c-e, Dorsal view of
chelae, a, Orooneotes negleotus ohaenodaotylus; b, 0. rust-Lous;
c, 0. n. ohaenodaatylus; d, 0. rustious; e, 0. luteus.
59(56) Areola less than 7 times longer than broad 60
Areola more than 7 times longer than broad 61
60(59) Cervical spines well developed (Fig. 68b; see also Figs 68g,
69d): Orooneotes spinosus (Bundy, 1877)
(See couplet 36 for range and literature)
Cervical spines absent or represented by small tubercles (See
also Fig. 74f): Ovooneotes aoares Fitzpatrick, 1965
(Streams in the Ouachita drainage system in Arkansas.
Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1965)
Fig. 76. a-c, Dorsal view of chelae; d,e, Dorsal view of cara-
paces, a, Ovooneotes nana; b, 0. barrenensis; c, 0. mivus;
d, 0. barvenensis; e, 0. mirus.
94
-------
61(59) Maximum subterminal diameter of mesial process of first pleopod
greater than that of adjacent segment of central projection
(Fig. 77a): Oreoneates hylas (Faxon, 1890)
(Streams in the Black and Big drainage systems in south-
eastern Missouri. Literature: Greaser, 1934a; Williams,
1954a)
Maximum subterminal diameter of mesial process of first pleopod
less than that of adjacent segment of central projection
(Fig. 77b,c) 62
62(61) Shoulder on cephalic margin of first pleopod strongly
developed; central projection gently curved from base (Fig.
77b): Oreoneotes juvenilia (Hagen, 1870)
(Streams in the Ohio drainage system in northern Kentucky
and in Indiana(?). The limits of the range of this species
and the closely allied 0. putnomi and 0. spinosus have not
been determined. Literature: Ortmann, 1931 - latter two
treated as synonyms of 0. juveniles')
Shoulder on cephalic margin of first pleopod very weakly
developed; central projection rather strongly recurved
distally (Fig. 77c): Orconectes osarkae Williams, 1952
(Streams in the White River drainage system in Missouri and
Arkansas. Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Fig. 77. Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Orooneotes hylas;
b, 0. juvenilis; c, 0. ozarkae; d, 0. menae; e, 0. transfuga;
f, 0. williamsi; g, 0. n. negleotus; h, 0. plaoidus; i. 0.
forceps.
95
-------
63(56) Lateral margin of fixed finger of chela bowed; maximum width of
gap between fingers greater than 1/4 width of palm (Fig.
75c; see also Figs 74b, 75a):
Ovooneotes negleotus ahaenodaotylus Williams, 1952
(See couplet 54 for range and literature)
Lateral margin of fixed finger of chela evenly contoured with
lateral margin of palm; maximum width of gap between fingers
usually (except sometimes in 0. barvenensis and 0. m-irus")
less than 1/4 width of palm (Figs 75e, 76a-c, 79d) 64
64(63) Areola comprising more than 35 per cent of total length of
carapace 65
Areola comprising less than 35 per cent of total length of
carapace 66
65(64)
Rostrum with median carina (Like Fig. 71d) or shallowly
excavate (See also Figs 74d, 75e):
Oreonectes luteus (Greaser, 1933)
(Stream tributaries of the Marais des Cygnes River, Kansas,
eastward to the St. Francis River, Missouri and northern
Arkansas. Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Rostrum with narrow, deep, longitudinal excavation between
greatly thickened margins (See also Figs 74g, 76a):
Oraonectes nana Williams, 1952
(Streams in the Spring River drainage in Arkansas and
eastern Oklahoma. Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Fig. 78. Ventral view of thoracic region, a, Pleopods reaching
coxae of first pereiopods {oxl}; b, Pleopods reaching coxae of
second pereiopods.
66(64) Areola more than 6 times longer than broad (Fig. 79c; see also
Figs 77d, 79d): Orooneates menae (Greaser, 1933)
(Streams in the Ouachita River system in Polk and Montgomery
counties, Arkansas, and the Red River system in Oklahoma.
Literature: Williams, 1954a)
Areola less than 6 times longer than broad (Fig. 76d,e) 67
96
-------
67(66) Shoulder on cephalic margin of first pleopod angular (Fig. 74i;
see also Fig. 76c,e): Ovaoneotes mirus (Ortmann, 1931)
(Streams in the Elk and Duck drainage systems in Alabama and
Tennessee. Literature: Ortmann, 1931)
Shoulder on cephalic margin of first pleopod broadly rounded
(Fig. 74h; see also Fig. 76b,d):
Oveoneetes bancenens-is Rhoades, 1944
(Streams in the Barren River drainage in Kentucky and Tenn-
essee and in the Green River system in Kentucky. Litera-
ture: Rhoades, 1944a)
68(55) Length of dactyl of chela less than twice that of mesial margin
of palm (Fig. 80a,b) 69
Length of dactyl of chela greater than twice that of mesial
margin of palm (Fig. 80c-e) 71
Fig. 79. a-c, Dorsal view of carapaces; d, Dorsal view of chelae.
a, OTooneotes transfuga; b, 0. williamsi; c,d, 0. menae.
69(68) Rostrum with median carina (Fig. 79a; see also Figs 77e, 80a):
Orooneates transfuga Fitzpatrick, 1966
(Streams in the Rogue River drainage in Jackson County,
Oregon. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1966a)
Rostrum without median carina (Fig. 79b,c) 70
70(69) Areola less than 10 times longer than wide (Fig. 79b; see also
Figs 77f, 80b): Orooneotes williamsi Fitzpatrick, 1966
(Streams in the headwaters of the White River in Madison
County, Arkansas. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1966b)
Areola more than 10 times longer than wide (Fig. 79c; see also
Figs 77d, 79d): Orconectes menae (Greaser, 1933)
(See couplet 66 for range and literature)
97
-------
71(68) Length of dactyl of chela greater than 2.5 times length of
mesial margin of palm (Fig. 80c; see also Fig. 77h):
Oreoneetes plaoidus (Hagen, 1870)
(Streams in the Cumberland, Duck, and Tennessee drainage
systems in Kentucky, Tennessee, and Alabama. Literature:
Ortmann, 1931)
Length of dactyl of chela less than 2.5 times length of mesial
margin of palm (Fig. 80d,e) 72
Fig. 80. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Ovooneotes transfuga; b,
0. will-lamsi,; c, 0, plaoidus; d, 0. forceps; e, 0. n. neglectus.
72(71) Gap between closed fingers of chela more than 1/4 width of palm
(Fig. 80d; see also Fig. 77i):
Oraoneates forceps (Faxon, 1884)
(Streams in the Tennessee River system from southwestern
Virginia to Alabama. Literature: Ortmann, 1931)
Gap between closed fingers of chela less than 1/4 width of palm
(Fig. 80e; see also Fig. 77g):
Ovconeates negleotus negleatus (Faxon, 1885)
(Streams in the White, except North Fork, and Arkansas river
systems in Missouri, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, and in
tributaries of the Kansas River in Colorado, Nebraska, and
east central Kansas. Literature: Williams, 1954a, 1954b)
98
-------
KEY TO SPECIES OF GENUS FALLICAMBARUS
(Based on First-Form Male)
1 First pleopod with distinct cephalic process (Fig. 81acp3b).
2
First pleopod lacking cephalic process (Figs 81c-f, 82) 3
2(1) Hooks on ischia of third and fourth pereiopods well developed
(Fig. 4c; see also Fig. 81a)
Falliaambarus macneesei (Black, 1967)
(Pools and roadside ditches and probably burrows in the
Calcasieu River system in Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana.
Literature: Black, 1967)
Hooks on ischia of third pereiopods; hooks on fourth vestigial
or absent (Fig. 4a; see also Fig. 81b):
Falliaambarus strawni (Reimer, 1966)
(Simple and complex burrows in Howard County, Arkansas.
Literature: Reimer, 1966)
Fig. 81. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Falliaambarus
maoneesei; b, F. strawni; c, F. dissitus; d, F. hortoni; e,
F. byersi; f, F. oryktes. (op, cephalic process.)
3(1) Central projection of first pleopod directed strongly proxi-
momesially, sometimes crossing that of other member of
pair (Figs 81c, 82d) : Falliaambarus dissitus (Penn, 1955)
(Burrows in Caldwell and Lincoln parishes, Louisiana.
Literature: Penn and Marlow, 1959)
Central projection of first pleopod directed caudally or
caudoproximally, never directed mesially or crossing that of
other member of pair (Figs 81d-f, 82a-c) 4
99
-------
Fig. 82. First pleopods. a-c, Lateral view of left first pleo-
pods. a, Fallioambapus uhleri; b, F. fodiens; c, F. hedgpethi;
d, Caudal view of first pleopods of F. dissitus.
4(3) Central projection subtruncate, broad distally, and directed
caudally (Fig. 81d):
FalliaambaPus hovton-L Hobbs and Fitzpatrick, 1970
(Burrows in the Hatchie River drainage, McNairy County,
Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs and Fitzpatrick, 1970)
Central projection tapering and directed caudoproximally
(Figs 81e-f, 82a-c) 5
Fig. 83. Chelae, a-d, Dorsal view; e, Lateral view, a, Falli-
ocaribarus oryktes; b, F. uhleri; c, F. fodiens; d, F. hedgpethi;
e, /. byevsi,.
100
-------
5(4) Distal 1/2 of cephalic margin of first pleopod inclined
caudally at angle of approximately 30 degrees (Fig. 81e);
ventral surface of propodus of chela with longitudinal row
of long stiff setae near lateral margin (Fig. 83e):
Fallicambarus byersi (Hobbs, 1941)
(Burrows from Hancock County, Mississippi, eastward to
Okaloosa County, Florida. Literature: Hobbs, 1942b)
Distal 1/2 of cephalic margin of first pleopod inclined
caudally at angle of less than 20 degrees (Figs 81f,
82a-c); ventral surface of propodus of chela without
longitudinal row of long stiff setae near lateral margin..
6
Fig. 84. Lateral view of carapaces, a, Fallieambarus uhleri;
b, F. fodiens.
6(5) Mesial margin of dactyl of chela with irregularly arranged
tubercles along proximal 1/2 but never with subserrate row
(Fig. 83a; see also Fig. 81f):
Falliaambarus oryktes (Penn and Marlow, 1959)
(Burrows in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, and southern
Mississippi. Literature: Penn and Marlow, 1959)
Mesial margin of dactyl of chela with subserrate row of
tubercles along at least proximal 1/2 (Fig. 83b-d) 7
Fig. 85. Caudal view of third maxillipeds.
a, Fallicambarus uhleri; b, F. fodiens.
101
-------
7(6) Areola usually constituting less than 39 per cent of entire
length of carapace; rostrum subplane dorsally and only
moderately deflexed anteriorly (Fig. 84a); proximolateral
1/2 of postaxial surface of ischium of third maxilliped
with many hirsute punctations mesial to lateral row (Fig.
85a; see also Figs 82a, 83b) :
FalliQcaribaPus uhleri (Faxon, 1884)
(Burrows, streams, and lentic habitats in the coastal
plain from Maryland to South Carolina. Literature:
Meredith and Schwartz, 1960)
Areola usually constituting more than 39 per cent of entire
length of carapace; rostrum concave dorsally and strongly
deflexed anteriorly (Fig. 84b); proximolateral 1/2 of
postaxial surface of ischium of third maxilliped with few,
if any, hirsute punctations mesial to lateral row (Fig.
85b) 8
8(7) Hump on mesial process of first pleopod obscuring part of
central projection in lateral aspect (Fig. 82b); central
projection with subapical notch (often abraded in middle
to late intermolt stages); opposable margin of fixed
finger of chela with only 1 tubercle markedly larger than
others (Fig. 83c; see also Figs 84b, 85b):
Fallieambapus fodiens (Cottle, 1863)
(Burrows, streams, and lentic habitats from lower Ontario,
Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois southward to Arkansas
and southwestern Georgia. The ranges of this species and
the closely allied F. hedgpethi appear to overlap in
Tennessee. Literature: Crocker and Barr, 1968)
Hump on mesial process of first pleopod never obscuring part
of central projection in lateral aspect (Fig. 82c);
central projection lacking subapical notch; opposable
margin of fixed finger with 2 major tubercles (Fig. 83d):
Falliaambarus hedgpethi (Hobbs, 1943)
(Burrows and temporary bodies of water from Texas to
Tennessee. Literature: Penn, 1959; Penn and Hobbs, 1958)
102
-------
KEY TO SUBGENERA OF CAMBARUS
(Based on First-Form Male)
Antennae conspicuously fringed on mesial border (Fig. 86a);
lateral margin of fixed finger of chela serrate (Fig. 89a,f)
Barbicconbarus Hobbs, 1969
Monotypic: Cambarus (B.) oornutus Faxon, 1884. (Streams in
the Green River system in Kentucky. Literature: Faxon,
1885; Hobbs, 1969b)
Antennae not conspicuously fringed on mesial border (Fig. 86b);
lateral margin of fixed finger never serrate (Fig. 89b-e,
g-o) 2
Fig. 86. Dorsal view of cephalic region, a, Cambarus eornutus;
b, C. b. bartonii.
2(1) Albinistic; eyes without facets and pigment reduced or absent.3
Pigmented; eyes with facets and always pigmented 5
Fig. 87. Dorsal view of antennal scales.
b, C. setosus.
a, Cambarus hamulatus,
103
-------
3(2) Eyes with pigment spot:
Erebicambarus Hobbs, 1969 (part) (p. 117)
Eyes without pigment 4
4(3) Antennal scale more than twice as long as broad (Fig. 87a) :
Avitioambarus Hobbs, 1969 (p. 109)
Antennal scale less than twice as long as broad (Fig. 87b):
Jugicambarus Hobbs, 1969 (part) (p. 122)
Fig. 88. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Cambarus pristinus;
b, C. obeyensis; c, C. bouehardi; d, C. b. bavton-ii; e, C. vedunous;
f, C. friaufi.
5(2) Central projection of first pleopod directed caudodistally at
angle distinctly less than 90 degrees to principal shaft of
appendage (Fig. 88a-c): Veticambarus Hobbs, 1969 (p. 131)
Central projection of first pleopod bent caudally at angle of
at least 90 degrees to principal shaft of appendage (Fig.
88d-f) 6
6(5) Fingers of chela with poorly defined dorsal longitudinal ridges,
sometimes moderately well developed in C. girardianus;
fingers widely gaping and usually with prominent cluster of
plumose setae at base of fixed finger (Fig. 89b,c,k):
Hiaticambarus Hobbs, 1969 (p. 120)
Fingers of chela with moderate to strong dorsal longitudinal
ridges; fingers seldom widely gaping and always lacking
prominent cluster of plumose setae at base of fixed finger
(Figs 89d,e,g,i, 90) 7
104
-------
Fig. 89. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Cambavus covnutus^ b, C.
longulus; c, C. girardianus; d, C. rustioi form-is; e, C. asperi-
manus; f, C. oornutus; g, C. rustioiformis; h, C. hamulatus; i,
C. asperimanusj j, C. pristinus; k, C1. longulus; 1, C1. Z>. bartonii;
m, C1. robustus; n, C1.
-------
7(6) Palm of chela with tubercles confined to 1 somewhat regular row
along mesial margin, sometimes with poorly developed row of
few scattered ones adjacent to row; dactyl never twice as
long as mesial margin of palm (Figs 89d,e,g,i, 90a) 8
Palm of chela with 2 or more rows of tubercles along mesial
margin (except in C. nevterius in which dactyl of chela is
twice as long as length of mesial margin of palm (Fig. 90c)
and in C. veteranus which has acuminate rostrum), often with
additional tubercles dorsolateral to 2 rows (Figs 89m-o,90b,
d,e) 10
Fig. 90. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Cambarus b. barton-Li,; b, C.
extraneus; c, C. nerterius; d, C. d. diogenes; e, C. latimanus.
8(7) Mesial margin of palm of chela with row of at least 8
tubercles; fingers never with conspicuous hairlike setae
(Fig. 89d,g) : Erebiaconbarus (part) (p. 117)
Mesial margin of palm of chela with row of fewer than 8
tubercles, or fingers with conspicuous hairlike setae
(Figs 89e,i, 90a) 9
9(8) Color blue and/or palm of chela subquadrate (Fig. 89e); central
projection of first pleopod without subapical notch (Fig.
109) or, if notch present, central projection either
recurved at angle distinctly greater than 90 degrees (Fig.
106b,c) or very short (Fig. 106a):
Jugioambarus Hobbs, 1969 (part) (p. 122)
Color olive to reddish brown; palm of chela not subquadrate
(Fig. 90a); central projection of first pleopod with sub-
apical notch, recurved at angle of approximately 90 degrees,
and never conspicuously short (Fig. 88d):
Cambarus Erichson, 1846 (p. 110)
106
-------
10(7)
Mesial margin of palm of chela usually with row of 8 or more
tubercles (Figs 89d,g, 90b,c), if only 7 then row with
obvious gap 11
Mesial margin of palm of chela with row of fewer than 8
tubercles (Fig. 90d,e) 12
Fig. 91. Dorsal view of carapaces.
hubbsi. {as, cervical spine.)
a, Cambarus reburrus; b, C.
11(10) Strong cervical spines present (Fig. 91a, os~); fixed finger
of chela often with conspicuous deep dorsal and ventral
impressions at base (Fig. 90b,c):
Puncticambarus Hobbs, 1969 (p. 128)
Cervical spines present or absent (Fig. 91b); fixed finger of
chela never with conspicuous dorsal and ventral impressions
at base (Fig. 89d,g): Erebicambarus (part) (p. 117)
Fig. 92. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Cambarus d.
d~iogenes; b, C. latimanus; c, C. redunous; d, C. 'hal'i'L; e,
C. sphenoides; f, C. unestami. (ns subapical notch.)
107
-------
12(10) Dactyl of chela with broad concavity on basal 1/2 of opposable
margin (Fig. 90d); first pleopod with central projection
subequal in length to, or shorter than, cephalocaudal di-
ameter of shaft at base of projection (Fig. 92a):
Laaunioambarus Hobbs, 1969 (p. 127)
Dactyl of chela lacking broad concavity on basal 1/2 of op-
posable margin (Fig. 90e); first pleopod with central
projection distinctly longer than cephalocaudal diameter of
shaft at base of projection (Fig. 92b-d):
Depressieambapus Hobbs, 1969 (p. 112)
108
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Avitiaambarus
Areola less than 7 times longer than broad; hepatic area of
carapace granulate (Fig. 93a); chela with long setae
CFig. 93c; see also Fig. 10b) :
Cambarus (A.) jonesi Hobbs and Barr, 1960
(Subterranean waters in the Tennessee River system from
Florence to just west of Guntersville, Alabama. Litera-
ture: Hobbs and Barr, 1960)
Areola 7 or more times longer than broad; hepatic area of
carapace with spines or spiniform tubercles (Fig. 93b);
chela without long setae (Fig. 93d; see also Figs lOa,
87a,89h): Cambarus (A.) hamulatus (Cope, 1881)
(Subterranean waters from the upper Sequatchie Valley,
Tennessee, southward to Blount County, Alabama. Litera-
ture: Hobbs and Barr, 1960)
Fig. 93. a,b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c,d, Dorsal view of
chelae, a, Cambarus jonesi; b, C. hamulatus; c, C. jonesij
d, C. hamulatus.
109
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Ctmbarus
Suborbital angle obsolete (Fig. 94a); areola constituting more
than 40 per cent of entire length of carapace (Fig. 95a) :
Cambarus (C.) ortmanni Williamson, 1907
(Lotic and lentic habitats and burrows in eastern Indiana,
western Ohio, and adjacent northern Kentucky. Literature:
Williamson, 1907; Rhoades, 1944a)
Suborbital angle present (Fig. 94b); areola constituting less
than 40 per cent of entire length of carapace (Fig. 95b,c).
2
sa
Fig. 94. Lateral view of cephalic region, a, Cambarus ortmanni;
b, C. b. bavtonii. (sa3 suborbital angle.)
2(1) Rostrum acuminate (Fig. 95b):
Cambavus (C.) howardi Hobbs and Hall, 1969
(Lotic habitats in the Chattahoochee River system from Hall
to Douglas County, Georgia. Literature: Hobbs and Hall,
1969)
Rostrum with margins somewhat abruptly contracted at base of
acumen (Figs 95c, 96) 3
Fig. 95. Dorsal view of carapaces,
howardi; c, C. bca>toni-i
a, Cambarus ortmann-i; b, C.
110
-------
3(2) Rostrum with broad, short median elevation (carina) on dorsal
surface near apex (Fig. 95c):
Cambarus (C.) bavtonii oarinirostris Hay, 1914
(Lotic habitats in the Cheat, Greenbrier (?), and Tygart
rivers, West Virginia. This is a local varient of C.
bar-tonii and probably should not be recognized. Litera-
ture: Ortmann, 1931)
Rostrum without median elevation on dorsal surface near apex
(Fig. 96) 4
4(3) Rostrum with conspicuously thickened margins forming angular
bend (occasionally with slightly projecting knobs) at base
of acumen (Fig. 96a):
Cambopus (C.) so-iotens-is Rhoades, 1944
(Lotic habitats in the Scioto River drainage, Ohio, and
Kanawha drainage in West Virginia and southwestern Vir-
ginia. Literature: Rhoades, 1944b)
Rostrum without conspicuously thickened margins, latter never
forming angular bend or knobs at base of acumen (Fig. 96b,
c) 5
Fig. 96. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Cambarus seiotensis; b,
C. bartonii eavatus; c, C. b. bartonii.
5(4) Rostrum deeply excavate dorsally, often almost ladlelike (Fig.
96b): Cambarus (C.) bartonii eavatus Hay, 1902
(Lotic habitats in the Tennessee River drainage system from
southwestern Virginia to Walden Gorge, Tennessee. It is
questionable that this subspecies should be recognized.
Literature: Ortmann, 1931)
Rostrum only shallowly excavate dorsally, never ladlelike (Fig.
96c; see also Figs 86b, 88d, 891, 90a, 94b):
Cambarus (C.) bavtonii bartonii (Fabricius, 1798)
(Lotic and lentic habitats from New Brunswick, Canada, to
northern Georgia, Ohio, and Tennessee; restricted to the
mountains and foothills from North Carolina southward.
Literature: Crocker and Barr, 1968; Ortmann, 1931)
111
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Deputessieambarus
First pleopod with central projection bearing subapical notch
(Figs 92d-£, 97a-c, n) 2
First pleopod with central projection lacking subapical notch
(Figs 97d,e, 98) 6
Fig. 97. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Ccmbarus
cymatilis', b, C. halli; c, C. obstipus; d, C. jordani;
e, C. veduncus. (ns subapical notch.)
2(1) Areola obliterated or linear (Fig. 99a; see also Fig. 97a):
Cambarus (D.) cymatilis Hobbs, 1970
(Burrows in the Conasauga River drainage in northern
Georgia. Literature: Hobbs, 1970b)
Areola with room for 2 or more punctations across narrowest
part (Figs 99b,c, 100) 3
Fig. 98. Lateral view of left first pleopods.
a, Cambarus striatus; b, C. floridanus', c,
C. catagius.
112
-------
3(2) Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 99b,c) 4
Rostrum without marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 100).... 5
4(3) Areola less than 5 times longer than broad, constituting less
than 35 per cent of total length of carapace, and studded
with crowded punctations (Fig. 99b; see also Fig. 97b):
Canibarus CD.) halli Hobbs, 1968
(Lotic habitats in the Tallapoosa River system in Alabama
and Georgia. Literature: Hobbs, 1968a, 1969b)
Areola more than 5 times longer than broad, constituting more
than 35 per cent of total length of carapace, and with
scattered punctations (Fig. 99c; see also Fig. 97c):
Cambapus (D.) obstipus Hall, 1959
(Lotic habitats in the Black Warrior River system in
Alabama. Literature: Hall, 1959; Hobbs, 1969b)
Fig. 99. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, CconbaTus aymatilis; b,
C. halli; c, C. obstipus; d, C. j'ovdccni.
5(3) Dorsal surface of palm of chela with many squamous tubercles
(Fig. lOla); areola usually at least 5 times longer than
broad and with 2 or 3 punctations across narrowest part
(Fig. lOOd; see also Fig. 92e):
Cambarus (D.) sphenoides Hobbs, 1968
(Lotic habitats in the upper Cumberland and Tennessee
drainage systems in western Kentucky, Alabama, and Tennes-
see. Literature: Hobbs, 1968a, 1969b)
Dorsal surface of palm of chela with very few tubercles
lateral to 2 mesial rows (Fig. lOlb); areola always less
than 5 times longer than broad and with 3 or more puncta-
tions across narrowest part (Fig. lOOa; see also Fig. 92f):
Cambarue (V.) unestami Hobbs and Hall, 1969
(Tributaries of the Tennessee River in Dade County,
Georgia. Literature: Hobbs and Hall, 1969; Hobbs, 1969b)
113
-------
6(1) Acumen of rostrum delimited basally by marginal spines or
tubercles, occasionally reduced to minute tubercle or
distinct angle (Fig. 99c,d) 7
Acumen of rostrum not delimited basally by marginal spines
or tubercles, rounded at base of acumen (Fig. 100b,c). 8
7(6) Areola constituting less than 35 per cent of entire length
of carapace and less than 8 times longer than broad
(Fig. 99d; see also Fig. 97d):
Cambarus (D.) jordani Faxon, 1884
(Lotic habitats in the Coosa River system in Alabama and
Georgia. Literature: Faxon, 1884)
Areola constituting more than 35 per cent of entire length
of carapace and more than 8 times longer than broad
(Fig. 99c; see also Fig. 97c):
Cambarus (D.) obstipus Hall, 1959
(See couplet 4 for range and literature)
Fig. 100. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Cambarus unestami', b,
C. tatimanus; c, C. striatus; d, C. sphenoides.
8(6) Areola less than 12 times longer than broad (Fig. lOOb; see
also Figs 89o, 90e, 92b):
Carnbarus (D.) lati-manus (LeConte, 1856)
(Lotic habitats from the Pamilico River system in North
Carolina to the Alabama River system in Alabama, chiefly
in the piedmont, but extending into western Florida along
the Apalachicola River; also in southeastern Tennessee.
Literature: Hobbs, 1942b, 1969b)
Areola more than 12 times longer than broad (Fig. lOOc).. 9
114
-------
9(8) First pleopod with subsetiform central projection, its apex
directed proximally (Fig. 97e) :
Cambarus (D.) redunous Hobbs, 1956
(Lentic and lotic habitats and burrows in the piedmont
from the Neuse River system in North Carolina to the
Santee River system in South Carolina. Literature:
Hobbs, 1956b, 1969b)
First pleopod with bladelike central projection, its apex
directed caudoproximally (Fig. 98a-c) 10
10(9) Central projection of first pleopod extending as far or
farther caudad than mesial process (Fig. 98a; see also
Fig. lOOc): Cambarus (D.) stviatus Hay, 1902
(Lentic and lotic habitats and burrows from the Cumber-
land River system in Kentucky and Tennessee southward to
Mississippi and Alabama. The range cited includes a
species complex including at least 2, and probably 3,
species or subspecies. Literature: Rhoades, 1944a;
Hobbs, 1969b)
Central projection of first pleopod not extending so far
caudad as mesial process (Fig. 98b,c) 11
Fig. 101. Dorsal view of chelae, a, Ccoribavus sphenoides; b, C.
unestami.
115
-------
11(10) Color red; central projection of first pleopod longer than
cephalocaudal plane of shaft at base of projection; gap
between apex of mesial process and that of central pro-
jection less than height of projection at midlength
(Fig. 98b): Ccaribarus (D.) floridanus Hobbs, 1941
(Burrows from the Yellow to the Ochlockonee river drain-
ages in southern Alabama and Georgia, and Florida.
Literature: Hobbs, 1942b; Hobbs and Hart, 1959)
Color brown; central projection of first pleopod subequal to
or shorter than cephalocaudal plane of shaft at base of
projection; gap between apex of mesial process and that of
central projection distinctly greater than height of pro-
jection at midlength (Fig. 98c):
Cambarus (D.) oatagius Hobbs and Perkins, 1967
(Burrows in Guilford County, North Carolina. Literature:
Hobbs and Perkins, 1967; Hobbs, 1969b)
116
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Erebieambarus
Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 102a) 2
Rostrum lacking marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 102b-d).. 4
Fig. 102. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Cambarus rustieiformis;
b, C. tenebrosus; c, C. laevis; d, C. odhni.
2(1) Cervical spines absent (Fig. 91b):
Cambarus (E.) hubbsi Greaser, 1931
(Lotic habitats from the Meramec River system to the Eleven
Point system in Missouri and Arkansas. Literature:
Williams, 1954a)
Cervical spines present (Fig. 102a,b) 3
3(2) Areola less than 7 times longer than broad; rostrum usually
with slightly concave lateral margins (Fig. 102a; see also
Fig. 89d,g): Cambarus (E.) rustioifomri-s Rhoades, 1944
(Lotic habitats in the Cumberland River system in Kentucky
and Tennessee. Literature: Rhoades, 1944a; Hobbs, 1969b)
Areola more than 7 times longer than broad; rostrum with
straight convergent margins (Fig. 102b; see also Fig. 103
b,d): CcaribaTus (E.) tenebrosus Hay, 1902
(Lotic epigean and subterranean habitats from the Ohio
River - below confluence with Salt River - southward to the
Tennessee River in Alabama, and eastward on the Cumberland
Plateau. Literature: Rhoades, 1944a; Hobbs, 1969b)
117
-------
4(1) Albinistic; length of mesial margin of palm of chela distinctly
greater than width of palm (Fig. 103a; see also Fig. lOd):
Cambarus (E.) hubriohti Hobbs, 1952
(Subterranean waters of the White River basin in Carter,
Oregon, and Ripley counties, Missouri. Literature: Hobbs
and Barr, 1960)
Pigmented; length of mesial margin of palm of chela subequal
to, or distinctly less than, width of palm (Fig. 103b,c).. 5
5(4) Areola 7 to 8 times longer than broad (Fig. 102d):
Cambarus (E.) oahni. Rhoades, 1941
(Lotic epigean and subterranean habitats in northern Ala-
bama. The relationship of this species to C. tenebrosus,
of which it may be a subspecies or a synonym, is uncertain.
Literature: Rhoades, 1941b; Hobbs and Barr, 1960)
Areola more than 8 times longer than broad (Fig. 102b,c) 6
Fig. 103. a-c, Dorsal view of chelae; d-f, Lateral view of left
first pleopods. a, Cambarus hubriohti; b, C. tenebrosus; c, C.
laevis; d, C. tenebrosus; e, C. laevis; f, C. ornatus.
6(5) Areola with at least 4 punctations across narrowest part (Fig.
102b); mesial process of first pleopod broadly rounded
distally (Fig. 103d; see also Fig. 103b) :
Carribopus (E.) tenebvosus Hay, 1902
(See couplet 3 for range and literature)
Areola with no more than 3 punctations across narrowest part
(Fig. 102c); mesial process of first pleopod strongly
tapered, often subacute (Fig. 103e,f) 7
118
-------
7(6) First pleopod with least diameter of gap between mesial process
and central projection at least 1/3 of least height of
latter (Fig. 103e; see also Figs 102c, 103c):
Cambarus (E.) laevis Faxon, 1914
(Lotic epigean and subterranean habitats in southern Illi-
nois and Indiana, southwestern Ohio, and northern Kentucky,
in the Ohio River drainage. Literature: Faxon, 1914; Hobbs,
1969b)
First pleopod with least diameter of gap between mesial pro-
cess and central projection much less than 1/3 least height
of latter (Fig. 103F): Cambarus (E.) ornatus Rhoades, 1944
(Lotic habitats from the lower Kentucky River system to the
Salt River, Kentucky. It seems likely that this species
intergrades with C. tenebrosus. Literature: Rhoades, 1944a;
Hobbs, 1969b)
119
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Hiatiocanbarus
Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 104a; see also
Fig. 89c): Cambarus (E.) girardianus Faxon, 1884
(Lotic habitats in the Tennessee River drainage system in
Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Georgia. This species
may prove to be conspecific with C. (H.) longirostvis.
Literature: Faxon, 1884; Hobbs, 1969b)
Rostrum without marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 104b).... 2
Fig. 104. a,b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c,d, Dorsal view of
chelae, a, C. girardianus; b, C. longirostris; c, C. dhasmo-
daotylus; d, C. longulus*
2(1) Suborbital angle acute (Fig. 105a; see also Fig. 104b):
Cambarus (H.) longirostris Faxon, 1885
(Lotic habitats in the Tennessee River system from Lawrence
County, Tennessee, to southwestern Virginia, and in the
Coosa River system in northeastern Alabama and northwestern
Georgia. Literature: James, 1966; Hobbs, 1969b)
Suborbital angle obtuse or obsolete (Fig. 105b) 3
sa
Fig. 105. Lateral view of cephalic region, a, CcoribaTus longi--
rostris; b, C. ehasmodactylus. (_sa3 suborbital angle.)
120
-------
3(2) Dactyl of chela more than twice as long as mesial margin of
palm (Fig. 104c; see also Fig. 105b):
Cambarus (H.) chasmodactylus James, 1966
(Lotic habitats in the New (Kanawha) River system in North
Carolina, Virginia, and southeastern West Virginia.
Literature: James, 1966; Hobbs, 1969b)
Dactyl of chela less than twice as long as mesial margin of
palm (Fig. 104d) : Canibarus (H. ) longulus Girard, 1852
(Lotic habitats from the James River drainage in Virginia,
to the Yadkin River drainage in North Carolina, in the
mountains and piedmont. Literature: James, 1966; Hobbs,
1969b)
121
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Jugioarribarus
Central projection of first pleopod with subapical notch (Fig.
106a-c,e,n) 2
Central projection of first pleopod lacking subapical notch
(Figs 106d, 109) 7
Fig. 106. a-e, Lateral view of left first pleopods; f, Dorsal
view of chelae, a, Cambarus distans; b, C. parvoculus; c, C.
oonasaugaensis; d, C. zophonastes; e, C. monongalens-is s f, C.
oarolinus. (n, subapical notch.)
2(1) Albinistic; eyes reduced and without pigment 3
Pigmented; eyes well developed and with pigment 4
3(2) Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 107a; see also
Figs lOc, 87b): Cambarus (J.) setosus Faxon, 1889
(Subterranean waters of southwestern Missouri and perhaps
in northeastern Oklahoma. Literature: Hobbs and Barr,
1960; Hobbs, 1969b)
Rostrum lacking marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 107b; see
also Fig. lOe): Cambarus (J.) cryptodytes Hobbs, 1941
(Subterranean waters from Jackson County, Florida, to
Decatur County, Georgia. Literature: Hobbs and Barr,
1960)
122
-------
4(2) Areola at least 8 times longer than broad (Fig. 107c; see also
Fig. 106e); color blue:
Cambarus (J.) monongalensis Ortmann, 1905
(Burrows in the mountains of western Pennsylvania and
adjacent northern West Virginia. Literature: Ortmann,
1906, 1931; Hobbs, 1969b)
Areola less than 8 times longer than broad (Figs 107d, 108a,b);
color reddish to greenish brown 5
5(4) Central projection of first pleopod directed approximately at
right angle to shaft of appendage (Fig. 106a; see also Fig.
107d): Cambarus (J.) distorts Rhoades, 1944
(Lotic habitats on the Cumberland Plateau in the Cumber-
land River drainage system in Kentucky and Tennessee.
Literature: Rhoades, 1944a)
Central projection of first pleopod strongly recurved caudo-
proximally (Fig. 106b,c) 6
Fig. 107. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Cambapus setosus; b,
C. eryptodytes; c, C. monongalensis; d, C. distorts.
6(5) Areola at least 5.5 times longer than broad (Fig. 108a; see
also Fig. 106b):
Cambarus (J.) parvoaulus Hobbs and Shoup, 1947
(Lotic habitats in the upper Cumberland River drainage in
Kentucky and Tennessee, and the Tennessee River drainage in
Lee County, Virginia. Literature: Hobbs and Shoup, 1947;
Hobbs, 1969b)
Areola less than 5.5 times longer than broad (Fig. 108b; see
also Fig. 106c):
Cambarus (J.) eonasaugaensis Hobbs and Hobbs, 1962
(Lotic habitats in the Conasauga and Coosawattee river
systems in Tennessee and Georgia. Literature : Hobbs and
Hobbs, 1962; Hobbs, 1969b)
123
-------
7(1) Albinistic; eyes reduced and without pigment (See Fig. 106d):
Cambarus (J.) zophonastes Hobbs and Bedinger, 1964
(Subterranean water in Hell Creek Cave, Stone County,
Arkansas. Literature: Hobbs and Bedinger, 1964; Hobbs,
1969b)
Pigmented; eyes well developed and with pigment 8
8(7) Areola narrow, with no more than 1 punctation in narrowest
part (Fig. 108c); chelae not conspicuously setose (Fig.
106£) 9
Areola broad to moderately broad, with room for 3 or more
punctations across narrowest part (Fig. 108d,e); chelae
conspicuously setose (Fig. 8e) 11
Fig. 108. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Ccoribarus parvoaulus; b,
C. oonasaugaensis; c, C. earolinus; d, C. friaufi; e, C. braohy-
dactylus.
9(8) Central projection of first pleopod extending caudad much
farther than mesial process (Fig. 109a):
Cambapus (J.) eauseyi Reimer, 1966
(Burrows near a spring and natural pond, 4 miles west of
Sandgap, Pope County, Arkansas, on St. Rte. 124. Litera-
ture : Reimer, 1966; Hobbs, 1969b)
Central projection of first pleopod extending little, if any,
farther caudad than mesial process (Fig. 109b-f) 10
124
-------
10(9) First pleopod with adjacent margins of terminal elements
subparallel (Fig. 109b); color blue and yellow:
Cambarus (J.) gentryi Hobbs, 1970
(Burrows along the Cumberland (Stones River, Harpeth River,
and Yellow Creek) and Duck drainage systems in middle
Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs, 1970a)
First pleopod with adjacent margins of terminal elements
diverging (Fig. 109c; see also Figs 106f, 108c); color red
to orange or blue with red to orange markings:
Cambarus (J.) earolinus (Erichson, 1846)
(Burrows in the mountains and foothills from Kentucky and
Pennsylvania to Georgia and South Carolina. (Almost
certainly, there are several species or subspecies current-
ly assigned to C. oarolinus, including C. dvibius Faxon,
1884. Literature: Faxon, 1885; Hobbs, 1969b)
Fig. 109. Lateral view of left first pleopods. a, Cambarus
causeyi; b, C. gentryi; c, C. carolinus; d, C. asperimanus;
e, C. friaufi; f, C. braohydaatylus. (ck3 caudal knob.)
11(8) Central projection of first pleopod strongly recurved proxi-
mocaudally, tip extending proximal to distal base of mesial
process and not projecting so far caudad as latter (Fig.
109d; see also Fig. 89e,i):
Cambarus (J.) asperi.ma.nus Faxon, 1914
(Lotic habitats in the headwater streams from the French
Broad, Little Tennessee, Savannah, Saluda, Catawba, and
Broad rivers in Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Tennessee. Literature: Faxon, 1914; Hobbs, 1969b)
Central projection of first pleopod recurved at not much more
than right angle to principal shaft of appendage, not
extending proximal to distal base of mesial process and
projecting caudad as far as latter (Fig. 109e,f) 12
125
-------
12(11) Areola with comparatively few punctations; caudolateral surface
of first pleopod with prominent lobelike caudal knob at
caudolateral base of central projection (Fig. 109e; see also
Fig. 108d): Cambarus (J.) friaufi Hobbs, 1953
(Lotic habitats on the Eastern Highland Run (Cumberland
River drainage), Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs, 1953a,
1969b)
Areola with many punctations; caudolateral surface of first
pleopod lacking prominent lobelike caudal knob at caudo-
lateral base of central projection (Fig. 109f; see also Figs
8e, 108e) : Caribarus (J.) braehydaotylus Hobbs, 1953
(Lotic habitats in tributaries of the Cumberland River on
the western Highland Rim in Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs,
1953a, 1969b)
126
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Laeunioambarus
(Based on Marlow, 1960)
Cephalic section of carapace at least 1.4 times longer than
areola (Fig. HOa; see also Figs 89n, 90d, 92a):
Cambavus (L.) diogenes diogenes Girard, 1852
(Burrows, occasionally in streams and ponds; widespread
east of the Rocky Mountains, and from the Great Lakes
region southward except in higher mountains and in penin-
sular Florida. This is unquestionably a species complex.
Literature: Marlow, 1960; Hobbs, 1969b)
Cephalic section of carapace no more than 1.3 times longer
than areola (Fig. HOb):
Cambarus (L.) diogenes ludovioianus Faxon, 1884
(Burrows in southern Louisiana. The range has never been
satisfactorily established, and its relation to the nomi-
nate species is obscure. Literature: Marlow, 1960; Hobbs,
1969b)
Fig. 110. Dorsal view of carapaces.
b, C. d-logenes ludovioianus.
a, Cambarus d. diogenes;
127
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Punctiaambarus
1 Rostrum with marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. llla-c) 2
Rostrum without marginal spines or tubercles (Fig. 11Id).... 4
2(1) Hepatic region of carapace with 1 or more spines (Fig. Ilia):
Cambopus (P.) spioatus Hobbs, 1956
(Lotic habitats in the Little River drainage system in
Fairfield and Richland counties, South Carolina. Litera-
ture: Hobbs, 1956c, 1969b)
Hepatic region of carapace usually with tubercles but always
lacking spines (Fig. lllb,c) 3
3(2) Areola comprising more than 36 per cent of total length of
carapace (Fig. lllb; see also Fig. 90c):
Cambarus (P.) nerterius Hobbs, 1964
(Subterranean waters in the Greenbrier River drainage in
West Virginia. Literature: Hobbs, 1964, 1969b)
Areola comprising less than 36 per cent of total length of
carapace (Fig. lllc; see also Fig. 90b):
Cambarus (P.) extraneus Hagen, 1870
(Lotic habitats in the Tennessee River drainage system in
Georgia. Literature: Hagen, 1870; Hobbs, 1969b)
Fig. 111. Dorsal view of carapaces, a, Cambarus spioatus; b,
C. nerterius; c, C. extraneus; d, C. veburrus.
128
-------
4(1) Areola less than 3.5 times longer than broad (Fig. llld);
fingers of chelae distinctly pubescent dorsally (Fig. 112a) :
Cambarus (P.) reburrus Prins, 1968
(Lotic habitats in the headwaters of the French Broad and
Savannah rivers in North Carolina. Literature: Prins,
1968; Prins and Hobbs, 1972)
Areola more than 3.5 times longer than broad; fingers not
conspicuously pubescent dorsally (Fig. 112b,c) 5
Fig. 112. Dorsal view of chelae.
aewninatus; c, C. veteranus.
a, Cambapus vebwcvus; b, (7.
5(4) Width of palm of chela less than 1.5 times length of its mesial
margin (Fig. 112c): Cambarus (P.) veteranus Faxon, 1914
(Lotic habitats in the Guyandot drainage system in south-
ern West Virginia; also in eastern Kentucky. The limits of
the range are not known. Literature: Faxon, 1914; Hobbs,
1969b)
Width of palm of chela more than 1.5 times length of its mesial
margin (Fig. 112b) 6
sa
Fig. 113. Lateral view of cephalic region.
b, C. aoiartinatus (sa3 suborbital angle.)
a, Cambarus robustus;
129
-------
6(5) Suborbital angle (sa) present (Fig. 113a; see also Fig. 89m):
Cambarus (P.) vobustus Girard, 1852
(Lotic habitats from Ontario and New York to Illinois and
southward to Tennessee, North Carolina, and Virginia. Popu-
lations in the Atlantic watershed from Maryland to South
Carolina that are currently assigned to C. aowninatus proba-
bly represent one or more undescribed species or subspecies.
Literature: Crocker and Barr, 1968; Hobbs, 1969b)
Suborbital angle absent (Fig. 113b; see also Fig. 112b):
Cambarus (P.) aewninatus Faxon, 1884
(Lotic habitats in the Atlantic watershed from Maryland to
the Saluda River drainage, South Carolina. This is a spe-
cies complex and needs revision. See the statement under
C. robustus in this couplet. Literature: Faxon, 1885;
Hobbs, 1969b).
130
-------
Key to Species of Subgenus Veticambarus
Chela studded with setae and mesial margin of palm longer than
maximum width of chela (Fig. 114a); areola less than 2.5
times longer than broad (Fig. 114c); first pleopod with
prominent caudal knob (Fig. 115a):
Cambarus (V.) pristinus Hobbs, 1965
(Lotic habitats in the Caney Fork River drainage in Cumber-
land County, Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs, 1965, 1969b)
Chela not markedly setose and mesial margin of palm shorter
than maximum width of chela (Fig. 114b); areola more than
2.5 times longer than broad (Fig. 114d); first pleopod
with caudal knob vestigial or absent (Fig. 115b,c) 2
Fig. 114. a,b, Dcrsal view of chelae; c,d, Dorsal view of
carapaces, a, Cambarus pr-ist-inus; b, C. bouohardi; c, C.
pvistinus; d, C. obeyensis.
2(1) First pleopod with central projection directed at angle less
than 30 degrees to axis of main shaft of appendage; mesial
process reaching as far, or almost as far, distally (along
principal axis of appendage) as does central projection
(Fig. 115b; see also Fig. 114b) :
Cambavus (V.) bouohardi Hobbs, 1970
(Lotic habitats in the Big South Fork of the Cumberland
River in Scott County, Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs,
1970b)
First pleopod with central projection directed at angle
greater than 60 degrees to axis of main shaft of append-
age; mesial process not reaching nearly so far distally
(along principal axis of appendage) as does central pro-
jection (Fig. 115c; see also Fig. 114d):
Ccanbarus (V.) obeyensis Hobbs and Shoup, 1947
(Lotic habitats in the headwaters of the Obey River in
Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs and Shoup, 1947; Hobbs,
1969b)
131
-------
Fig. 115. Lateral view of pleopods. a, Cambarus pristi-nus; b,
C. bouohardi; c, C. obeyensis. {ok3 caudal knob.)
132
-------
SECTION III
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Especial thanks are due Margaret A. Daniel who not only helped in the
preparation of the illustrations, but also, by testing the keys,
aided immeasurably in improving several sections of the paper. I am
also grateful to Alejandro Villalobos who kindly lent me specimens
of a number of Mexican species that otherwise were unavailable.
Others whose advice, criticisms of the manuscript, or contributions
of information have been most helpful are : Raymond W. Bouchard,
Fenner A. Chace, Jr., Martha R. Cooper, Joseph F. Fitzpatrick, Jr.,
Carolyn B. Cast, Georgia B. Hobbs, H. H. Hobbs III, Raymond B.
Manning, and Isabel P6rez Farfante. To all of these persons, I am
most grateful. For her patience and efforts in producing the tedious
typescript, I extend my appreciation to Willie D. Mincey.
133
-------
SECTION IV
REFERENCES
Black, Joe B. 1965. A Survey of the Genus Cambarellus in Mississippi
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Mississippi Academy of
Sciences, 11:216-217.
1967. A New Crawfish of the Genus Cambarus from Southwest Lou-
isiana (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological
Society of Washington, 80(27):173-178, 12 figures.
1968. A New Crawfish of the Genus Procambarus from Mississippi
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Tulane Studies in Zoology and Botany,
15(1):5-9, 12 figures.
1969. A New Crawfish of the Genus Hobbseus from Mississippi
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of
Washington, 82(14):193-200, 12 figures.
Bott, Richard. 1950. Die Flusskrebse Europas (Decapoda, Astacidae).
Abhandlungen der Senckenbergischen Nativeforschenden Gesellschaft,
No. 483, 36 pages, 24 figures, 6 plates.
Cope, E. D. 1872. On the Wyandotte Cave and Its Fauna. American
Naturalist, 6(7):406-422, figures 109-116.
Greaser, Edwin P. 1931. The Michigan Decapod Crustaceans. Papers
of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, 13:257-
276, figures 31-40.
1932. The Decapod Crustacea of Wisconsin. Transactions of the
Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters, 27:321-338, 13
figures.
1933. Descriptions of Some New and Poorly Known Species of
North American Crayfishes. Occasional Papers of the Museum of
Zoology, University of Michigan, No. 275:1-21, 14 figures.
1934a. A Faunistic Area of Five Isolated Species of Crayfish
in Southeastern Missouri. Occasional Papers of the Museum of
Zoology, University of Michigan, No. 278:1-8, 1 figure.
1934b. A New Crayfish from North Carolina. Occasional Papers
of the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, No. 285:1-4,
3 figures.
Greaser, Edwin P. and A. I. Ortenburger. 1933. The Decapod Crus-
taceans of Oklahoma. Publications of The University of Oklahoma
Biological Survey, 5(2):14-47, 19 figures.
Crocker, Denton W. 1957. The Crayfishes of New York State
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Bulletin of the flew York State Museum
and Science Service, No. 355:1-97, 5 plates.
Crocker, Denton W. and David W. Barr. 1968. Handbook of the cray-
fishes of Ontario. Life Sciences Miscellaneous Publications,
Royal Ontario Museum, University of Toronto, 158 pages, 87
figures.
Eberly, William R. 1955. Summary of the Distribution of Indiana
Crayfishes, Including New State and County Records. Proceed-
ings of the Indiana Academy of Science, 64:281-283.
Erichson, W. F. 1846. Uebersicht der Arten der Gattung Astacus.
Archiv fur Naturgeschichte (Berlin), 12(1):86-103.
135
-------
Faxon, Walter. 1884. Descriptions of New Species of Cambarus, to
which is added a synonymical list of the known species of
Cambarus and Astaous. Proceedings of the American Academy of
Arts and Science, 20:107-158.
1885. A Revision of the Astacidae (Part I. The Genera
Cambarus and Astacus) . Memoirs of the Museum of Comparative
Zoology at Harvard College, 10(4):i-vi, 1-186, 10 plates.
1890. Notes on North American Crayfishes, Family Astacidae.
Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 12(4):619-
634.
1898. Observations on the Astacidae in the United States
National Museum and in the Museum of Comparative Zoology, with
Descriptions of New Species. Proceedings of the United States
National Museum, 20(1136):643-694, plates 62-70.
1914. Notes on the Crayfishes in the United States National
Museum and the Museum of Comparative Zoology, with Descriptions
of New Species and Subspecies to which is Appended a Catalogue
of the Known Species and Subspecies. Memoirs of the Museum of
Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, 40(8):351-427, 13
plates.
Fitzpatrick, J. F., Jr. 1963. Geographic Variation in the Crawfish
Faxonella clypeata (Hay) with the Definition and Defense of the
Genus Faxonella Greaser (Decapoda, Astacidae). Tulane Studies
in Zoology, 10(l):57-79, 20 figures.
1965. A New Subspecies of the Crawfish Orconectes
leptogonopodus from the Ouachita River Drainage in Arkansas.
Tulane Studies in Zoology, 12(3):87-91, figures A-J.
1966a. A New Crawfish of the Subfamily Cambarinae from Oregon,
U.S.A. (Decapoda, Astacidae). Crustaceana, 11 (Part 2):178-
184, 17 figures.
1966b. A New Crawfish of the Genus Orconectes from the Head-
waters of the White River in Arkansas (Decapoda, Astacidae).
Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 79(21):
145-150, 10 figures.
1967a. The Propinquus Group of the Crawfish Genus Orconectes
(Decapoda:Astacidae). Ohio Journal of Science, 67(3):129-172,
27 figures.
1967b. A New Crawfish of the Cristatus Section of the Genus
Cambarus from Mississippi (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings
of the Biological Society of Washington, 80(25):163-168, 12
figures.
1968. A New Crawfish of the Genus Orconectes from Iowa.
American Midland Naturalist, 79(2):507-512, 10 figures.
Fitzpatrick, J. F., Jr. and Horton H. Hobbs, Jr. 1971. A New Craw-
fish of the Spiculifer Group of the Genus Procambarus (Decapoda,
Astacidae) from Central Mississippi. Proceedings of the
Biological Society of Washington, 84(12):95-102, 1 figure.
Fitzpatrick, J. F., Jr. and James F. Payne. 1968. A New Genus and
Species of Crawfish from the Southeastern United States
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society
of Washington, 81 (2):11-22, 12 figures.
136
-------
Fowler, Henry W. 1912. The Crustacea of New Jersey. Annual Report of
the New Jersey Museum, 1911, Part II, pages 29-650, 150 plates.
Francois, Donald D. 1959. The Crayfishes of New Jersey. Ohio Journal
of Science, 59(2):108-127, 8 figures.
Hagen, Hermann, A. 1870. Monograph of the North American Astacidae.
Illustrated Catalogue of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at
Harvard College, No. 3:1-109, 11 plates.
Hall, Edward Taylor, Jr. 1959. A New Crayfish of the Genus Cambarus
from Alabama (Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Tennessee
Academy of Science, 34(4):221-225, 9 figures.
Hay, William Perry, 1896. The Crawfishes of the State of Indiana.
20th Annual Report of the Department of Geology and Natural
Resources of Indiana, pages 476-506, 15 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr. 1940. A New Crayfish from South Carolina.
Charleston Museum Leaf letf No. 14:3-7, 10 figures.
1942a. A Generic Revision of the Crayfishes of the Subfamily
Cambarinae (Decapoda, Astacidae) with the Description of a New
Genus and Species. American Midland Naturalist, 28(2):334-
357, 23 figures.
1942b. The Crayfishes of Florida. University of Florida
Publications, Biological Science Series, 3(2):1-179, 346
figures.
1945a. The Subspecies and Intergrades of the Florida Burrow-
ing Crayfish, Procambarus rogersi (Hobbs). Journal of the
Washington Academy of Sciences, 35(8):247-260, 34 figures.
1945b. Two New Species of Crayfishes of the Genus Cambarellus
from the Gulf Coastal States, with a Key to the Species of the
Genus (Decapoda, Astacidae). American Midland Naturalist,
34(2):467-474, 26 figures.
1947a. Two New Crayfishes of the Genus Procambarus from Georgia,
with Notes on Procambarus pubescens (Faxon) (Decapoda, Astacidae).
Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences, 9(1):1-18,
32 figures.
1947b. A Key to the Crayfishes of the Pictus Subgroup of the
Genus Procambarus, with the Description of a New Species from
South Carolina (Decapoda, Astacidae). Florida Entomologist,
30(3):25-31, 12 figures.
1948a. On the Crayfishes of the Limosus Section of the Genus
Orconectes (Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Washington
Academy of Sciences, 38(1):14-21, 29 figures.
1948b. A New Crayfish of the Genus Orconectes from Southern
Tennessee (Decapoda, Astacidae), Proceedings of the Biological
Society of Washington, 61(15):85-91, 9 figures.
1949. A New Crayfish of the Genus Orconectes from the Nashville
Basin. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington,
62(7):17-24, 10 figures.
1950. A New Crayfish of the Genus Cambarellus from Texas
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society
of Washington, 63(18):89-96, 17 figures.
137
-------
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr. 1952a. A New Crayfish from Alabama, with Notes on
Proeambarus leeontei (Hagen). Proceedings of the United States
National Museum, 102(3297):209-219, 26 figures.
1952b. A New Crayfish of the Genus Prooambarus from Georgia
with a Key to the Species of the Clarkii Subgroup (Decapoda,
Astacidae). Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences,
15(3):165-174, 14 figures.
1953a. Two New Crayfishes from the Highland Rim in Tennessee
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Tennessee Academy of
Science, 28(1):20-27, 18 figures.
1953b. A New Crayfish of the Genus Proeambarus from Alabama and
Florida (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological
Society of Washington, 66(22):173-178, 10 figures.
1953c. On the Ranges of Certain Crayfishes of the Spiculifer
Group of the Genus Proeambarus, with the Description of a new
Species (Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Washington Acad-
emy of Sciences, 43(12):412-417, 13 figures.
1954. A New Crayfish from the Upper Coastal Plain of Georgia
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy
of Sciences, 17(2):110-118, 13 figures.
1955. A New Crayfish of the Genus Cambarus from Mississippi.
Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 68(15):
95-100, 11 figures.
1956a. A New Crayfish of the Genus Proeambarus from South
"Carolina (Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Washington Academy
of Sciences, 46(4):117-121, 17 figures.
1956b, A New Crayfish of the Genus Cambarus from North Carolina
"(Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Elisha Mitchell Scientific
Society, 72(1):61-67, 11 figures.
_ 1956c. A New Crayfish of the Extraneus Section of the Genus
Cambarus with a Key to the Species of the Section (Decapoda,
Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington,
69(18):115-122, 11 figures.
_ 1958a. Two New Crayfishes of the Genus Proeambarus from South
"Carolina. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences, 48(5):
160-168, 24 figures.
1958b. Two New Crayfishes of the Genus Proeambarus from South
""Carolina and Georgia. Notulae Naturae, No. 307, 10 pages, 26
figures.
_ 1958c. The Evolutionary History of the Pictus Group of the
Crayfish Genus Proeambarus. Quarterly Journal of the Florida
Academy of Sciences, 21(1)-.71-91, 20 figures.
1959. (In Edmondson, W.T.) "Fresh-water Biology." John Wiley
"and Sons, Inc., New York, pages 883-901, figures 31.18-31.41.
1962. Notes on the Affinities of the Members of the Blandingii
Section of the Crayfish Genus Proeambarus (Decapoda, Astacidae).
Tulane Studies in Zoology, 9(5):273-293, 72 figures.
138
-------
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr. 1964. A New Cave-Dwelling Crayfish from the
Greenbrier Drainage System, West Virginia (Decapoda, Astacidae).
Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 77(21):189-194,
10 figures.
1965. A New Crayfish of the Genus Cambarus from Tennessee with
an Emended Definition of the Genus (Decapoda, Astacidae). Pro-
ceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 78(33):265-273,
12 figures.
1966. A New Crayfish from Alabama with Observations on the
Cristatus Section of the genus Cambarus (Decapoda, Astacidae).
Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 79(15):109-116,
10 figures.
1967. A New Crayfish from Alabama Caves with Notes on the Origin
of the Genera Orconectes and Cambarus (Decapoda:Astacidae). Pro-
ceedings of the United States National Museum, 123(3621):1-17, 21
figures.
1968a. Two New Crayfishes of the Genus Cambarus from Georgia,
Kentucky, and Tennessee (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the
Biological Society of Washington, 81 (31):261-274, 22 figures.
1968b. Crustacea:Malacostraca. In Parrish, Fred K., Keys to
Water Quality Indicative Organisms (Southeastern United States).
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Department of
Interior, pages K-1--K-36, 32 figures.
1969a. Procambarus villalobosi, un nuevo cambarino de San Luis
Potosi, Mexico (Decapoda, Astacidae). Anales del Institute de
Biologia, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Serie Ciencia
del Mar y Limnologia, No. 1:41-46, 11 figures.
1969b. On the Distribution and Phylogeny of the Crayfish Genus
Cambarus, In Holt, Perry C., Richard L. Hoffman, and C. Willard
Hart, Jr., The Distributional History of the Biota of the Southern
Appalachians, Part I: Invertebrates. Virginia Polytechnic
Institute, Research Division Monograph, 1:93-178, 20 figures.
1969c. Two New Species of the Crayfish Genus Procambarus
(Decapoda, Astacidae) with Keys to the Members of the Spiculifer
Group. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 83(24):
329-348, 38 figures.
1970a. A New Crayfish from the Nashville Basin, Tennessee. Pro-
ceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 83(14):161-169, 1
figure.
1970b. New Crayfishes of the Genus Cambarus from Tennessee and
Georgia (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological So-
ciety of Washington, 83(23):241-259, 4 figures.
1971a. A New Crayfish of the Genus Procambarus from Mississippi
(Decapoda:Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of
Washington, 38(40):459-468, 1 figure.
1971b. New Crayfishes of the Genus Procambarus from Alabama and
Texas (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society
of Washington,84(11):81-84, 2 figures.
1971c. A New Troglobitic Crayfish from Florida. Quarterly Jour-
nal of the Florida Academy of Sciences, 34(2): 114-124, 19 figures.
139
-------
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr. 1972. The Subgenera of the Crayfish Genus Procamba-
rus. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, No. 117:1-22, 20 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Thomas C. Barr, Jr. 1960. The Origins
and Affinities of the Troglobitic Crayfishes of North America
(Decapoda, Astacidae). I. The Genus Cambarus. American Mid-
land Naturalist, 64(l):12-33, 57 figures.
1972. The Origins and Affinities of the Troglobitic Crayfishes
of North America (Decapoda, Astacidae). II. The Genus Oroonectes.
Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 105:1-84, 16 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and M. S. Bedinger. 1964. A New Troglobitic
Crayfish of the Genus Cambarus (Decapoda, Astacidae) from Arkansas
with a Note on the Range of Cambarus aryptodytes Hobbs. Pro-
ceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 77(3):9-16, 11
figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Joseph F. Fitzpatrick, Jr. 1970. A New
Crayfish of the Genus Fallicambarus from Tennessee (Decapoda,
Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington,
82(64):829-836, 12 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Edward T. Hall, Jr. 1969. New Crayfishes
from Georgia (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biologi-
cal Society of Washington, 82(21):281-294, 24 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and C. W. Hart, Jr. 1959. The Freshwater
Decapod Crustaceans of the Apalachicola Drainage System in
Florida, Southern Alabama, and Georgia. Bulletin of the Florida
State Museum, 4(5):145-191, 39 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and H. H. Hobbs III. 1962. A New Crayfish of
the Genus Cambarus from Georgia (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings
of the Biological Society of Washington, 75(5):41-45, 10 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Lewis J. Marchand. 1943. A Contribution
Toward a Knowledge of the Crayfishes of the Reelfoot Lake Area.
Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science, 18(1):6-35, 27
figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Frank 0. Perkins. 1967. A New Burrowing
Crayfish from North Carolina (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of
the Biological Society of Washington, 80(21):141-146, 11 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Charles S. Shoup. 1947. Two New Crayfishes
(Decapoda, Astacidae) from the Obey River Drainage in Tennessee.
Journal of the Tennessee Academy of Science, 22(2):138-145, 22
figures.
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Alejandro Villalobos. 1964. Los Cambari-
nos de Cuba. Anales del Institute de Biologia de la Universidad
Nacional Aut6noma de Mexico, 84(ly2):307-366, 40 figures.
Hobbs, Horton H. Jr., and Margaret Walton. 1957. Three New Crayfishes
from Alabama and Mississippi (Decapoda:Astacidae). Tulane Studies
in Zoology, 5(3):39-52, 34 figures.
1958. Procambarus pearsei plumimanus, a New Crayfish from North
Carolina (Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Elisha Mitchell
Scientific Society, 74(1):7-12, 13 figures.
1959. A New Crayfish of the Genus Procambarus from Alabama
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of
Washington, 72(10):39-44, 12 figures.
140
-------
Hobbs, Horton H., Jr., and Margaret Walton. 1960. A New Crayfish of the
Genus Procambarus from Southern Alabama (Decapoda, Astacidae). Pro-
ceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, 73(20) : 123-129, 11
figures.
James, Hugo A. 1966. Range and Variations of Subspecies of Cambarus
longulus (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the United States
National Museum, 119(3544):1-24, 2 figures, 1 plate.
LeConte, John. 1856. Descriptions of New Species of Astacus from
Georgia. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of
Philadelphia, 7:400-402.
Marlow, Guy. 1960. The Subspecies of Cambarus diogenes. American
Midland Naturalist, 64(1):229-250, 8 figures.
Meredith, W. G. and F. J. Schwartz. 1960. Maryland Crayfishes.
Maryland Department of Research and Education, Educational Series,
No. 46:1-32, 17 figures.
Newcombe, Curtis L. 1929. The Crayfishes of West Virginia. Ohio
Journal of Science, 29(6):267-288, 1 figure.
Ortmann, Arnold E. 1905a. The Mutual Affinities of the Species of the
Genus Cambarus, and their Dispersal over the United States.
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 44(180):91-136,
plate III.
1905b. Procambarus, a New Subgenus of the Genus Cambarus.
Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 3(3):435-442, 3 figures.
1906. The Crawfishes of the State of Pennsylvania. Memoirs of
the Carnegie Museum, 2(10):343-523, 5 plates.
1931. Crawfishes of the Southern Appalachians and the Cumberland
Plateau. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 20(2):61-160.
Penn, George H., Jr. 1943. A Study of the Life History of the Louisi-
ana Red-Crawfish, Cambarus clarkii Girard. Ecology, 24(1):1-18,
4 figures.
1950. A New Crawfish of the Genus Orconectes from Louisiana
(Decapoda:Astacidae). Journal of the Washington Academy of
Sciences, 40(5):166-169, 9 figures.
1952. The Genus Orconectes in Louisiana (Decapoda, Astacidae).
American Midland Naturalist, 47(3):743-748.
1953a. A Redescription of the Crawfish Procambarus hinei
(Ortmann) (Decapoda, Astacidae). Tulane Studies in Zoology, 1(5):
63-68, 15 figures.
1953b. A New Burrowing Crawfish of the Genus Procambarus from
Louisiana and Mississippi (Decapoda, Astacidae). Tulane Studies
in Zoology, l(6):71-76, 12 figures.
1954. Introductions of American Crawfishes into Foreign Lands.
Ecology, 35 (2):296.
1956a. A New Crawfish of the Genus Procambarus from Arkansas
(Crustacea, Astacidae). Lloydia, 19(2):109-119, 17 figures.
1956b. The Genus Procambarus in Louisiana (Decapoda, Astacidae).
American Midland Naturalist, 6(2):406-422.
1957. Variation and Subspecies of the Crawfish Orconectes
palmeri (Faxon) (Decapoda, Astacidae). Tulane Studies in Zoology,
5(10):231-262, 30 figures.
1959. An Illustrated Key to the Crawfishes of Louisiana, with a
Summary of their Distribution within the State (Decapoda, Astacidae).
Tulane Studies in Zoology, 7(1):1-20, 86 figures.
141
-------
Penn, George H., Jr. 1962. A New Crawfish of the Hinei Section of the
Genus Procambarus (Decapoda, Astacidae). Crustaceana, 3(Part 3):222-
226, 11 figures.
1963. A New Crawfish from the Hatchie River in Mississippi and
Tennessee (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological
Society of Washington, 76(15):121-126, 10 figures.
Penn, George H., Jr., and Morton H. Hobbs, Jr. 1958. A Contribution
Toward a Knowledge of the Crawfishes of Texas (Decapoda, Asta-
cidae) . Texas Journal of Science, 10(4):452-483, 68 figures.
Penn, George H., Jr., and Guy Marlow. 1959. The Genus Cambarus in
Louisiana. American Midland Naturalist, 61(1):191-203, 14 figures.
Prins, Rudolph. 1968. A New Crayfish of the Genus Cambarus from North
Carolina (Decapoda, Astacidae). Journal of the Elisha Mitchell
Scientific Society, 84(4):458-461, 11 figures.
Prins, Rudolph and Joseph F. Fitzpatrick, Jr. 1965. The First-Form
Male of Orconectes bisectus Rhoades, a Poorly Known Kentucky
Crawfish. American Midland Naturalist, 74(1):141-147, 12 figures.
Prins, Rudolph and Morton H. Hobbs, Jr. 1972. A New Crayfish of the
Subgenus Puncticambarus from the Savannah River Drainage with Notes
on Cambarus (P.) reburrus Prins (Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings
of the Biological Society of Washington, 84(47):411-420, 1 figure.
Reimer, Rollin Dewayne. 1966. Two New Species of the Genus Cambarus
from Arkansas (Decapoda, Astacidae). Tulane Studies in Zoology,
13(1):9-15, 18 figures.
1969. A Report on the Crawfishes (Decapoda, Astacidae) of
Oklahoma. Proceedings of the Oklahoma Academy of Sciences, 48:
49-65, 46 figures.
Rhoades, Rendell. 1941a. The Distribution of Cambarus sloani Bundy in
Ohio. Ohio Journal of Science, 41(2):93-98, 6 figures.
1941b. Notes on Some Crayfishes from Alabama Caves, with the
Description of a New Species and a New Subspecies. Proceedings of
the United States National Museum, 91(3129):141-148, 2 figures.
1944a. The Crayfishes of Kentucky, with Notes on Variation,
Distribution and Descriptions of New Species and Subspecies.
American Midland Naturalist, 31(1):111-149, 10 figures.
1944b. Further Studies on Distribution and Taxonomy of Ohio
Crayfishes. Ohio Journal of Science, 44(2):95-99.
1962. The Evolution of Crayfishes of the Genus Orconectes Section
Limosus (Crustacea:Decapoda). Ohio Journal of Science, 62(2):65-96,
8 figures.
Riegel, J. A. 1959. The Systematics and Distribution of Crayfishes in
California. California Fish and Game, 45(1):29-50, 10 figures.
Schwartz, F. J., Robert Rubelmann, and James Allison. 1963. Ecological
Population Expansion of the Introduced Crayfish, Orconectes virilis.
Ohio Journal of Science, 63(6):266-273, 4 figures.
Turner, Clarence L. 1926. The Crayfishes of Ohio. Ohio State Uni-
versity Bulletin, 30(11):145-195, 51 figures.
Villalobos, Alejandro. 1955. Cambarinos de la fauna mexicana. Tesis,
Facultad de Ciencias. Universidad Nacional Autdnoma de Mexico, 290
pages, 62 plates.
1959. Estudios de los cambarinos mexicanos. XIV Estudio com-
parative de las especias mexicanas del subgroupo blandingii. Anales
del Institute de Biolog-Ca, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico,
29(ly2):303-327, 7 plates.
142
-------
Walls, Jerry G. 1968. A New Faxonella from Northeast Louisiana
(Decapoda, Astacidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society
of Washington, 81(41):413-418, 9 figures.
Williams, Austin B. 1954a. Speciation and Distribution of the
Crayfishes of the Ozark Plateaus and Ouachita Provinces.
University of Kansas Science Bulletin, 36(12) :803-918, 253
figures.
1954b. An Explanation for the Distribution of a North
American Crayfish. Ecology, 35(4):573-575, 1 figure.
Williams, Austin B., and A. Bryon Leonard. 1952. The Crayfishes
of Kansas. University of Kansas Science Bulletin, 34 (15):961-
1012, 7 plates, 8 figures.
Williamson, E. B. 1907. Notes on the Crayfish of Wells County,
Indiana, with Description of a New Species. 3lst Annual
Report of the Department of Geology and Natural Eesources of
Indiana, 1906, pp. 749-763, 1 plate.
143
-------
APPENDIX I
Alphabetical List of North American and Middle American Crayfishes
(Astacidae) and the States and Provinces in which They Occur
Subfamily Astacinae
Pad fas taous
1. oonneatens - U.S.: Idaho, Oregon
2. fortis - U.S.: California
3. gambelii - U.S.: California?, Idaho, Montana, Nevada,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming
4. ten-Lusoulus klconathensis - CANADA: British Columbia.--U.S.
California, Idaho, Oregon, Washington
5. len-iusaulus leniusoulus - CANADA: British Columbia.-- U.S.
California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, (Sweden)
6. leniusGulus trowbridgii - CANADA: British Columbia.-- U.S.
California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington
7. nigresaens - U.S.: California
Subfamily Cambarellinae
Canibarellus
8. alvarezi- - MEXICO: Nuevo Leon
9. aveolatus - MEXICO: Coahuila
10. dhapalanus - MEXICO: Jalisco, Michoacan
11. diminutus - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi
12. montezumae - MEXICO: Distrito Federal, Guanajuato, Jalisco,
Mexico, Michoacan
13. ninae - U.S.: Texas
14. oooidental-is - MEXICO: Michoacan, Sinaloa
15. patzcuarensis - MEXICO: Michoacan
16. puer - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee,
Texas
17. sehmitti - U.S.: Alabama, Florida
18. shufeldtii - U.S.: Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Louisiana,
Mississippi, Tennessee, Texas
19. zempoalens-Ls - MEXICO: Morelos
Subfamily Cambarinae
Cambarus
20. aoiminatus - U.S.: Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Virginia
21. asperimanus - U.S.: Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Tennessee
145
-------
Cambarus (continued)
22. bartonii bartonii - CANADA: New Brunswick, Ontario, Quebec.--
U.S.: Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia,
Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New
York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia
23. barton-Li carinipostris - U.S.: West Virginia
24. bartonii oavatus - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina,
Tennessee, Virginia
25. bouahardi - U.S.: Tennessee
26. braehydaotylus - U.S.: Tennessee
27. odhni. - U.S.: Alabama
28. aarolinus - U.S.: Georgia, Kentucky, Maryland, North Caro-
lina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
West Virginia
29. Qabagius - U.S.: North Carolina
30. oauseyi - U.S.: Arkansas
31. ohasmodaotylus - U.S.: North Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia
32. Gonasaugaens'is - U.S.: Georgia, Tennessee
33. eomutus - U.S.: Kentucky
34. oryptodytes - U.S.: Florida, Georgia
35. oymat-Llis - U.S.: Georgia
36. diogenes diogenes - CANADA: Ontario.-- U.S.: Alabama, Arkan-
sas, Colorado, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisi-
ana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota,
Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin,
Wyoming
37. diogenes ludovicianus - U.S.: Arkansas?, Louisiana, Missis-
sippi?, Oklahoma?, Tennessee?, Texas?
38. distans - U.S.: Kentucky, Tennessee
39. extvaneus - U.S.: Georgia
40. floridanus - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Georgia
41. friau.fi, - U.S.: Tennessee
42. gentryi - U.S.: Tennessee
43. gipardianus - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi?, Tennessee
44. halli ~ U.S.: Alabama, Georgia
45. hcarrulatus - U.S.: Alabama, Tennessee
46. hotiapdi - U.S.: Georgia
47. hubbsi - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
48. hubpiehti - U.S.: Missouri
49. jonesi - U.S.: Alabama
50. jordani - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia
51. laevis - U.S.: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, West Vir-
ginia?
52. latimanus - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Tennessee
53. longipostpis - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina,
Tennessee, Virginia
146
-------
Cambarus
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
(continued)
longulus - U.S.: North Carolina, Virginia
monongalens-is - U.S.: Pennsylvania, West Virginia
nerterius - U.S.: West Virginia
Tennessee
Alabama
Kentucky
Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio
: Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia
Tennessee
North Carolina
North Carolina, South Carolina
obey ens-is - U.S.
obstipus - U.S.:
omatus - U.S.:
OTimanni. - U.S.:
parvoaulus - U.S
pristinus - U.S.
reburrus - U.S.:
vedunaus - U.S.:
robustus - CANADA: Ontario.-- U.S.: Illinois, Indiana,
Kentucky, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, West Virginia
rusticiformis - U.S.: Kentucky, Tennessee
S.: Ohio, Virginia, West Virginia
Missouri, Oklahoma?
Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee
South Carolina
Alabama?, Georgia?, Kentucky, Tennessee,
66.
67. sciotensis - U.
68. setosus - U.S.:
69. spheno-Ldes - U.S. :
70. spicatus - U.S.:
71. str-iatus - U.S.:
Mississippi?
72. tenebvosus - U.S.:
73. unestcani - U.S.:
74. veteranus - U.S.:
75. sophonastes - U.S,
Fallioambarus
Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee
Georgia
Kentucky, West Virginia
: Arkansas
76. byeTS-L - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Mississippi
77. dissitus - U.S.: Louisiana
78. fodiens - CANADA: Ontario.-- U.S.: Alabama, Arkansas,
Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Mississippi?,
Ohio, Tennessee
79. hedgpethi - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Okla-
homa, Tennessee, Texas
80. hovton-i - U.S.: Tennessee
81. maoneesei, - U.S.: Louisiana
82. oryktes - U.S.: Louisiana, Mississippi
83. strauni - U.S.: Arkansas
84. uhleri- - U.S.: Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Virginia
Faxonella
85. beyeri - U.S.: Louisiana
86. olypeata - U.S.: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia,
Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas
87. oTeaseri - U.S.: Louisiana
147
-------
Hobbseus
88. attgnuatus - U.S.: Mississippi
89. eristatus - U.S.: Mississippi
90. orooneatoides - U.S.: Mississippi
91. prominens - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi
92. valleoulus - U.S.: Mississippi
Oraonectes
93. acares - U.S.: Arkansas
94. alabamensis - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee.
95. austTalis australis - U.S.: Alabama, Tennessee
96. australis paakardi- - U.S.: Kentucky
97. bavrenensis - U.S.: Kentucky, Tennessee
98. biseetus - U.S.: Kentucky
99. aompressus - U.S.: Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee
100. diffioilis - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas
101. eTiehsoni-anus - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia
102. eupunatus - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
103. forceps - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia
104. harrisoni - U.S.: Missouri
105. hathawayi - U.S.: Louisiana
106. hobbsi - U.S.: Louisiana, Mississippi
107. hylas - U.S.: Missouri
108. illinoiensis - U.S.: Illinois
109. inmunis - CANADA: Ontario.-- U.S.: Alabama, Colorado,
Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,
Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri,
Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Ohio,
South Dakota, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Wyoming
110. inoomptus - U.S.: Tennessee
111. -ind-ianensis - U.S.: Illinois, Indiana
112. inermis -inermis - U.S.: Indiana, Kentucky
113. inernris testii - U.S.: Indiana
114. iowaensis - U.S.: Iowa
115. jeffersoni - U.S.: Kentucky
116. juvenilis - U.S.: Indiana?, Kentucky, North Carolina?, Ohio,
Tennessee?, Virginia?, West Virginia?
117. kentuckiensis - U.S.: Illinois, Kentucky
118. lancifer - U.S.: Arkansas, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Tennessee, Texas
119. leptogonopodus - U.S.: Arkansas, Oklahoma
120. limosus - U.S.: Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine,
Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia,
West Virginia, (Western Europe)
121. longidig-itus - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
122. luteus - U.S.: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri
123. maorus - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
124. marohandi - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
125. medius - U.S.: Missouri
148
-------
Orconeetes (continued)
126. meeki brevis - U.S.: Arkansas, Oklahoma
127. meeki meeki - U.S.: Arkansas
128. menae - U.S.: Arkansas, Oklahoma
129. mirus - U.S.: Alabama, Tennessee
130. mississippiensis - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi
131. nais - U.S.: Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas
132. nana - U.S.: Arkansas, Oklahoma
133. negleotus ohaenodaotylus - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
134. negleatus negleatus - U.S.: Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas,
Missouri, Nebraska?, Oklahoma, Texas
135. obssurus - CANADA: Ontario.-- U.S.: Maryland, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia
136. ozarkae - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
137. palmeri oreolanus - U.S.: Louisiana, Mississippi
138. palmeri longimanus - U.S.: Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana,
Oklahoma, Texas
139. palmeri palmeri - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Missouri, Tennessee
140. pelluoidus - U.S.: Kentucky, Tennessee
141. peruncus - U.S.: Missouri
142. plaaidus - U.S.: Alabama, Kentucky, Tennessee
143. propinquus - CANADA: Ontario, Quebec.-- U.S.: Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
144. punetimanus - U.S.: Arkansas, Missouri
145. putnami - U.S.: Indiana?, Kentucky, Tennessee?
146. quadruneus - U.S.: Missouri
147. rafinesquei - U.S.: Kentucky
148. rhoadesi - U.S.: Tennessee
149. rustious - CANADA: Ontario.-- U.S.: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa?,
Kentucky, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico?, Ohio
150. sariborni erismophorous - U.S.: West Virginia
151. sariborni sariborni - U.S.: Kentucky, Ohio, West Virginia
152. shoupi - U.S.: Tennessee
153. sloanii - U.S.: Indiana, Ohio
154. spinosus - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Virginia?, West
Virginia?
155. transfuga - U.S.: Oregon
156. tricuspis - U.S.: Kentucky
157. validus - U.S.: Alabama, Tennessee
158. virginiensis - U.S.: North Carolina, Virginia
159. -oirilis - CANADA: Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Saskat-
chewan.-- U.S.: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado,
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New
Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Okla-
homa, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Wyoming
160. williamsi - U.S.: Arkansas
161. wrighti - U.S.: Tennessee
149
-------
Pvoaambarus
162. ablusus - U.S.: Mississippi, Tennessee
163. aaanthophorus - MEXICO: Oaxaca, Veracruz
164. aoheronti-s - U.S.: Florida
165. aautissimus - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi
166. acutus aoutus - U.S.: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louis-
iana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,
Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North
Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Wisconsin
167. aoutus ouevaohicae - MEXICO: Puebla, San Luis Potosi
168. advena - U.S.: Florida, Georgia
169. alleni - U.S.: Florida
170. aneylus - U.S.: North Carolina, South Carolina
171. angustatus - U.S.: Georgia
172. apalaoh-icolae - U.S.: Florida
173. atkinsoni - CUBA: Is la de Pinos
174. azteous - MEXICO: Veracruz
175. barbatus - U.S.: Georgia, South Carolina
176. bivittatus - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Louisiana
177. blanding-ii - U.S.: North Carolina, South Carolina
178. bouvieri - MEXICO: Michoacan
179. oaballevoi - MEXICO: Puebla
180. oapillatus - U.S.: Alabama, Florida
181. ohaoei> - U.S.: Georgia, South Carolina
182. olarkii - MEXICO: Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo Leon, Sonora.--
U.S.: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Florida,
Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas,
Virginia,(Japan)
183. oontverasi - MEXICO: Puebla
184. aubensis aubensis - CUBA: Camagiiey, Isla de Pinos, La Habana,
Las Villas, Matanzas, Oriente, Pinar del Rio
185. aubensis vivalis - CUBA: Pinar del Rio
186. dlgueti - MEXICO: Jalisco, Michoacan
187. dupratzi. - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas
188. eohi-naius - U.S.: South Carolina
189. eoonfinae - U.S.: Florida
190. elegans - U.S.: Louisiana
191. enoplostevnwn - U.S.: Georgia
192. epioyvtus - U.S.: Georgia
193. eriehsoni - MEXICO: Hidalgo
194. eseambiensis - U.S.: Alabama, Florida
195. evermanni - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Mississippi
196. fallax - U.S.: Florida, Georgia
197. f-itzpatvioki, - U.S.: Mississippi
198. geodytes - U.S.: Florida
199. gibbus - U.S.: Georgia
200. gonopodooristatus - MEXICO: Veracruz
150
-------
Proccanbarus (continued)
201. gra&ilis - U.S.: Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri,
Oklahoma, Texas, Wisconsin
202. hagenianus - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi
203. hayi - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi, Tennessee
204. h-inei. - U.S.: Louisiana, Texas
205. hirsutus - U.S.: South Carolina
206. hoffmanni - MEXICO: Puebla, Veracruz
207. hortonhobbsi - MEXICO: Puebla
208. haaellae - U.S.: Georgia
209. hubbelli - U.S.: Alabama, Florida
210. hi/bus - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi
211. inoili-s - U.S.: Texas
212. gaoulus - U.S.: Louisiana, Mississippi
213. kilbyi - U.S.: Florida
214. lagniappe - U.S.: Mississippi
215. latipleuTum - U.S.: Florida
216. leoontei - U.S.: Alabama, Mississippi
217. leonensis - U.S.: Florida
218. lep-idodactylus - U.S.: North Carolina, South Carolina
219. lewisi - U.S.: Alabama
220. litostemum - U.S.: Georgia
221. llamasi - GUATEMALA.-- MEXICO: Campeche, Chiapas, Tabasco,
Veracruz, Yucatan
222. lophotus - U.S.: Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee
223. luaifugus alaahua - U.S.: Florida
224. luoi-fugus tuaifugus - U.S.: Florida
225. lunzi. - U.S.: Georgia, South Carolina
226. lylei, - U.S.: Mississippi
227. manous - U.S.: Mississippi
228. mexioanus - MEXICO: Veracruz
229. millevi - U.S. : Florida
230. miTandai - MEXICO: Chiapas
231. natohitoohae - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas
232. niveus - CUBA: Pinar del Rio
233. okaloosae - U.S.: Alabama, Florida
234. ortmanni - MEXICO: Puebla
235. ouaohitae - U.S.: Arkansas, Mississippi
236. paeninsulanus - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Georgia
237. pallidus - U.S.: Florida
238. paradoocus - MEXICO: Puebla
239. peapse-i peavsei, - U.S.: North Carolina, South Carolina
240. peaTsei, plimimanus - U.S.: North Carolina
241. peck-L - U.S.: Alabama
242. penni - U.S.: Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi
243. pictus - U.S.: Florida
244. pilosimanus - BRITISH HONDURAS.-- GUATEMALA.-- MEXICO: Chiapas,
Quintana Roo
245. plani.vostr*is - U.S.: Louisiana, Mississippi
246. pubescens - U.S.: Georgia, South Carolina
247. pubisohelae - U.S.: Florida, Georgia
248. pycnogonopodus - U.S.: Florida
151
-------
Ppoecoribarus (continued)
249. pygmaeus - U.S.
raneyi - U.S.:
rathbunae - U.S
- MEXICO
250.
251.
252.
253.
254.
255.
256.
257.
258.
259.
260.
261.
262.
263.
264.
265.
266.
267.
268.
269.
270.
271.
272.
273.
274.
275.
276.
277.
278.
279.
280.
281.
282.
283.
Florida, Georgia
Georgia, South Carolina
: Florida
Hidalgo, Puebla
rodriguezi - MEXICO: Veracruz
rogersi campestris - U.S.: Florida
expletus - U.S.: Florida
odhlodknens-is - U.S.: Florida
Togersi, Togevsi- - U.S.: Florida
ruthveni vufkoeni, - MEXICO: Veracruz
ruthveni zapoapensis - MEXICO: Veracruz
seminolae - U.S.: Florida
shermani - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi
simulans pegiomontanus - MEXICO: Nuevo Leon
simulans slmulans - U.S.: Arkansas, Colorado,
ana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas
spiaulifer - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
Alabama, Florida
Oklahoma
Kansas, Louisi-
South Carolina?
suttkusi - U.S
tennis - U.S.:
texanus - U.S.
teziutlanensis
Arkansas,
Texas
- MEXICO:
Puebla, Veracruz
tlapaooyanensis - MEXICO: Veracruz
tolteoae - MEXICO: San Luis Potosi
troglodytes - U.S.: Georgia, South Carolina
truaulentus - U.S.: Georgia
tulanei - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana
vazquezae - MEXICO: Veracruz
vevaoTuzanus - MEXICO: Veracruz
verrucosus - U.S.: Alabama
vevsutus - U.S.: Alabama, Florida, Georgia
viaewividis - U.S.: Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Tennessee
villalobosi - MEXICO: San Luis Potosi
vioscai - U.S.: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi
wilUamsoni - GUATEMALA.-- HONDURAS
youngi - U.S.: Florida
zi-huateutlensis - MEXICO: Puebla
Trogloe
284. maolanei - U.S.: Florida
152
-------
APPENDIX II
Alphabetical List of Countries and States, or Provinces,
and Their Crayfish Faunas
Only those political units from which crayfishes are known to
occur are included. The bibliographic citations are to regional
summary works listed in the "References" that should be helpful in
studying the crayfishes of the various areas. The numbers refer to
the list of species in Appendix I.
BRITISH HONDURAS (Villalobos, 1955) - 244
CANADA (Crocker and Barr, 1968; Riegel, 1959)
Alberta - 159
British Columbia - 4, 5, 6
Manitoba - 159
New Brunswick - 22
Ontario - 22, 36, 65, 78, 109, 135, 143, 149, 159
Quebec - 22, 143, 159
Saskatchewan - 159
CUBA (Hobbs and Villalobos, 1964)
Camagiiey - 184
Isla de Pinos - 173, 184
La Habana - 184
Las Villas - 184
Matanzas - 184
Oriente - 184
Pinar del Rio - 184, 185, 232
GUATEMALA (Villalobos, 1955) - 221, 244, 281
HONDURAS (Villalobos, 1955) - 281
MEXICO (Villalobos, 1955)
Campeche - 221
Chiapas - 221, 230, 244
Chihuahua - 182
Coahuila - 9, 182
Distrito Federal - 12
Guanojuato - 12
Hidalgo - 193, 252
Jalisco - 10, 12, 186
Mexico - 12
Michoacan - 10, 12, 14, 15, 178, 186
Morelos - 19
Nuevo Leon - 8, 182, 262
Oaxaca - 163
153
-------
MEXICO (continued)
Puebla - 167, 179, 183, 206, 207, 234, 238, 252, 268, 283
Quintana Roo - 244
San Luis Potosi - 167, 270, 279
Sinaloa - 14
Sonora - 182
Tabasco - 221
Tamaulipas - 270
Veracruz - 163, 174, 200, 206, 221, 228, 253, 258, 259, 268, 269,
274, 275
Yucatan - 221
UNITED STATES
Alabama (Hobbs, 1942, 1968b, 1969b) - 11, 17, 18, 24, 27, 36, 40,
43, 44, 45, 49, 50, 52, 53, 58, 69, 71?, 72, 76, 78, 86, 91,
94, 95, 99, 101, 103, 109, 129, 130, 142, 154, 157, 165, 166,
176, 180, 182, 194, 195, 202, 203, 209, 210, 216, 219, 222,
233, 236, 241, 242, 261, 264, 265, 276, 277, 278
Arizona (Penn and Hobbs, 1958; Reimer, 1969) - 159, 182
Arkansas (Penn, 1959; Reimer, 1969; Williams, 1954a) - 16, 18, 30,
36, 37?, 47, 75, 78, 79, 83, 86, 93, 100, 102, 118, 119, 121,
122, 123, 124, 126, 127, 128, 131, 132, 133, 134, 136, 138, 139,
144, 159, 160, 166, 182, 187, 201, 231, 235, 263, 266, 273, 278,
280
California (Riegel, 1959) - 2, 3?, 4, 5, 6, 7, 159, 182
Colorado (Reimer, 1969; Williams and Leonard, 1952) - 36, 109, 134,
159, 263
Connecticut (Crocker, 1957; Crocker and Barr, 1968) - 22, 109
Delaware (Francois, 1959; Meredith and Schwartz, 1960) - 36, 120,
166
District of Columbia (Meredith and Schwartz, 1960) - 22, 36, 120
Florida (Hobbs, 1942) - 17, 34, 36, 40, 52, 76, 86, 164, 166, 168,
169, 172, 176, 180, 182, 189, 194, 195, 196, 198, 209, 213, 215,
217, 223, 224, 229, 233, 236, 237, 243, 247, 248, 249, 251, 254,
255, 256, 257, 260, 261, 264, 265, 277, 282
Georgia (Hobbs, 1942, 1968b, 1969b) - 21, 22, 24, 28, 32, 34, 35,
36, 39, 40, 43, 44, 46, 50, 52, 53, 71?, 73, 78, 86, 101, 103,
154, 166, 168, 171, 175, 181, 191, 192, 196, 199, 208, 220, 222,
225, 236, 246, 247, 249, 250, 260, 264, 271, 272, 277
Hawaii - 182
Idaho (Riegel, 1959) - 1, 3, 4, 5, 6
Illinois (Greaser, 1931; Eberly, 1955; Hay, 1893; Rhoades, 1944a)
18, 36, 51, 65, 78, 108, 109, 111, 117, 118, 143. 149, 159, 166,
182, 201
Indiana (See references for Illinois) - 36, 51, 60, 65, 78, 109,
111, 112, 113, 116?, 143, 145?, 149, 153, 159, 166
Iowa (Greaser, 1932; Eberly, 1955; Hay, 1896) - 36, 109, 114, 149?,
159, 166, 201
Kansas (Williams and Leonard, 1952) - 36, 109, 122, 131, 134, 138,
166, 201, 263
154
-------
UNITED STATES (continued)
Kentucky (Rhoades, 1944a; Ortmann, 1931) - 22, 28, 33, 36, 38, 51,
59, 60, 61, 65, 66, 69, 71, 72, 74, 96, 97, 98, 99, 109, 112,
115, 116, 117, 140, 142, 145, 147, 149, 151, 156, 166, 182
Louisiana (Penn, 1952, 1956b, 1959; Penn and Marlow, 1959) - 16,
18, 36, 37, 77, 79, 81, 82, 85, 86, 87, 100, 105, 106, 118, 137
138, 139, 166, 176, 182, 187, 190, 204, 212, 231, 242, 245, 261,
263, 273, 278, 280
Maine (Crocker and Barr, 1968) - 22, 109, 120, 149, 159, 166
Maryland (Meredith and Schwartz, 1960) - 20, 22, 28, 36, 84, 120,
135, 159, 160
Massachusetts (Crocker and Barr, 1968) - 22, 109, 120, 149, 159,
166
Michigan (Greaser, 1931) - 36, 65, 78, 109, 143, 149, 159, 166
Minnesota (Creaser, 1932) - 36, 109, 159, 166
Mississippi (Hobbs, 1942, 1968b; also see references for Louisiana)
11, 16, 18, 36, 37?, 43?, 71?, 76, 78?, 79, 82, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91,
92, 94, 99, 106, 118, 130, 137, 139, 162, 165, 166, 182, 195, 197,
202, 203, 210, 212, 214, 216, 226, 227, 235, 242, 245, 261, 278,
280
Missouri (Williams, 1954a) - 36, 47, 48, 68, 102, 104, 107, 109, 121,
122, 123, 124, 125, 131, 133, 134, 136, 139, 141, 144, 146, 159,
166, 182, 201
Montana (Riegel, 1959) - 3, 159
Nebraska (Reimer, 1969; Williams, 1954a) - 36, 109, 134?, 159
Nevada (Riegel, 1959) - 3, 5, 6, 182
New Hampshire (Crocker and Barr, 1968) - 109, 120, 159
New Jersey (Fowler, 1912; Francois, 1959) - 22, 36, 120, 166
New Mexico (Penn and Hobbs, 1958; Reimer, 1969) - 149?, 159, 182, 263
New York (Crocker, 1957) - 22, 65, 109, 120, 135, 143, 159, 166
North Carolina (Hobbs, 1968b, 1969b; Ortmann, 1931) - 20, 21, 22, 24,
28, 29, 31, 36, 52, 53, 54, 63, 64, 65, 84, 116?, 158, 166, 170,
177, 218, 239, 240
North Dakota (Creaser, 1932) - 36, 109, 159
Ohio (Rhoades, 1944a, 1944b; Turner, 1926) - 22, 36, 51, 60, 65, 67,
78, 109, 116, 135, 143, 149, 151, 153, 159, 166
Oklahoma (Creaser and Ortenberger, 1933; Reimer, 1969; Williams,
1954a) - 36, 37?, 68?, 79, 86, 100, 119, 126, 128, 131, 132, 134,
138, 159, 166, 182, 201, 263, 266
Oregon (Riegel, 1959) - 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 155
Pennsylvania (Ortmann, 1906) - 22, 28, 36, 55, 65, 120, 135, 143, 166
Rhode Island (Crocker, 1957) - 22, 166
South Carolina (Hobbs, 1968b, 1969b; Ortmann, 1931) - 20, 21, 22, 28,
36, 52, 64, 70, 84, 86, 166, 170, 175, 177, 181, 188, 205, 218,
225, 239, 246, 250, 264?, 271
South Dakota (Creaser, 1932) - 36, 109, 159
Tennessee (Hobbs, 1968b, 1969b; Ortmann, 1931; Rhoades, 1944a) - 16,
18, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 32, 36, 37?, 38, 41, 42, 43, 45, 52,
53, 57, 61, 62, 66, 69, 71, 72, 78, 79, 80, 94, 95, 97, 99, 101,
103, 109, 110, 116?, 118, 129, 139, 140, 142, 145?, 148, 152, 154,
157, 159, 161, 162, 166, 182, 203, 222, 278
155
-------
UNITED STATES (continued)
Texas (Penn and Hobbs, 1958) - 13, 16, 18, 36, 37?, 79, 86, 100, 118,
131, 138, 166, 182, 187, 201, 204, 211, 231, 263, 267
Utah (Riegel, 1959) - 3
Vermont (Crocker, 1957) - 22
Virginia (Hobbs, 1968b, 1969b; Meredith and Schwartz, 1960; Ortraann,
1931) - 20, 22, 24, 28, 31, 36, 53, 54, 61, 65, 67, 84, 101, 103,
116?, 120, 135, 154?, 158, 166, 182
Washington (Riegel, 1959) - 3, 4, 5, 6
West Virginia (Hobbs, 1969b; Newcombe, 1929; Ortmann, 1931; Rhoades,
1944a) - 22, 23, 28, 31, 36, 51?, 55, 56, 65, 67, 74, 116?, 120,
135, 150, 151, 154
Wisconsin (Creaser, 1932) - 36, 109, 143, 159, 166, 201
Wyoming (Creaser, 1932; Riegel, 1959) - 3, 36, 109, 159
156
-------
SECTION VI
INDEX OF SCIENTIFIC NAMES
ablusus, Prooambarus (Pennides), £3,150; Fig. 55
aoanthophorus, Prooambarus (Austrocambarus), 40,150; Figs 32,33
aaaresj Oroon&otes, 94,148; Fig. 74
aoherontis, Prooambarus (Lonnbergius), 3£,150; Fig. 11
Aouoauda, 34
fitzpatrioki, Prooambarus, 34,150; Figs 5,22,24
aouminatus, Cambarus (Punoticambarus), 130,145; Figs 112,113
aoutissimus, Prooambarus (Ortmannious), 56,150; Figs 21,46
aoutus aoutus, Pvooambarus (Ortmannieus)_, 57_,150; Figs 5,27,47
euevaehioae3 Proaambarus (Ovtmannious), 56,150; Fig. 46
advena, Proaambarus (Hagenides)} 50,150; Figs 5,41
alabamensis, Ovconeotes, 89,148; Figs 70,71
alleni, Ppoaambarus, (Leaontioambccrus), 52_,150; Fig. 43
alvarezi,, Cambarellus, 27,145; Fig. 15
ancylus, Procambarus (Ortmann-icus), 63,15Q; Fig. 49
angustatus, Prooambarus (Ortmannieus), 52^150; Fig. 49
apalaohicolae, Prooambarus (Leoonticambarus), 53,150; Fig. 44
areolatus, Cambarellus, 27,145; Figs 16,17
asperimanus, Cambarus (Jug-icambarus), 125,145; Figs 89,109
Astacidae, 2
Astacinae, 2, 145
atkinsoni, Proeambarus (Austroaconbarus), 35,150; Fig. 30
attenuatus, Hobbseus, 75,148; Fig. 58
australis austvalis, Ovconectes, 75,148; Figs 11,60,61
paokardi, Oreonectes, 75,148; Figs 60,61
Austrooambapus, 31,32,38
aaanthophorus, Prooambarus, 40,150; Figs 32,33
atkinsoni, Procambarus, 33,150; Fig. 30
azteous, Pvocambavus, 43,150; Figs 30,34,36
eubensis oubensis, Procambarus, 33,150; Fig. 30
eubensis rivalis, Procambarus, 39,150; Fig. 30
llamasi, Procambarus, 40,151; Figs 21,31
mexieanus, Prooambarus, 43,151; Figs 5,30,35,36
mirandai, Prooambarus, 41,151; Fig. 34
niveus, Prooambarus, 35,151
pilosimanus, Prooambarus, 4<9,151; Figs 31,32,33
rodriguezi, Prooambarus, 40,152; Fig. 22
ruthveni, Prooambarus, 42,152; Fig. 30
vazquezae, Prooambarus, 41,152; Figs 34,35
•oeraoruzanus, Prooambarus, 43,152; Fig. 34
williamsoni, Prooambarus, 38,40,152; Figs 23,30,31
zapoapensis, Prooambarus, 42,152
Avitioambarus, 104,109
hamulatus, Cambarus, 109,146; Figs 10,87,89,93
jonesi, Cambarus, 109,146; Figs 10,93
azteous, Prooambarus (Austrooambarus), 43,150; Figs 30,34,36
157
-------
barbatus, Prooambarus (Leoontioambarus)3 53,150; Figs 25,26,29,43,44
Barbicambarus , 103
cornutus, Cambarus3 105,146; Figs 86,89
barvenensis, Orooneotes, 96,57,148; Figs 74,76
bartonii bartonii, Ccanbarus (Ccanbarus), 111,146; Figs 5,86,88,89,90,94,96
carinirostris, Cambarus (Cambarus)3 111,146; Fig. 95
eavatus, Cambarus (Cambarus)3 111,146; Fig. 96
beyeri, Faxonella3 23,147; Fig. 19
bisectus, Ovooneotes, 853148; Fig. 67
bivittatus3 Proaambcacus (Ovtmann-icus)3 55., 150; Figs 47,51
blandingii3 Procambopus (Ovtmannious)3 57jl50; Fig. 46
bouohavdi, Cambarus (Veticambarus)3 1313146; Figs 88,114,115
bouvieri3 Procambarus (Mexicambca?us)3 55^150; Fig. 27
braohydaotylus3 Cambarus (Jugioambarus)3 1263 146; Figs 8,108,109
byei>si3 Fall-icambavus3 1013147; Fig. 81
oaballero-i3 Proeambapus (Ovtmannieus)3 603150; Fig. 48
cahni3 Cambarus (Erebicambarus)3 1183146; Fig. 102
Cambarellinae, 2,7,13,145; Fig. 3
Cambarellus, 13,25jl45; Fig. 3
alvarezi3 27,145; Fig. 15
areolatus, 27,145; Figs 16,17
chapalanus3 25,145; Figs 16,17
dim-inutuSf 26,145; Fig. 15
montezimae3 25,145; Figs 16,18
dugesii,3 28
Iermensi-s3 28
ninae3 263145; Fig. 15
oecidentalis3 27,145; Figs 16,17
patzeuarensisj 25,145; Figs 16,17
27,145; Figs 5,15
25,145; Fig. 15
shufeldtii3 25,145; Fig. 15
zempoalensis, 25,145; Figs 16,18
Cambarinae, 1,7,13,145; Fig. 3
Cambams3 1,2,3,16,17,18,203,145; Fig. 3
(AvLtioambarus) 3 1043109
hcomlatus3 1093146; Figs 10,87,89,93
jonesi3 1093146; Figs 10,93
(Barbioambarus), 103
Gomutus3 1033146; Figs 86,89
f'Cambarus)3 1063110
bartonii bartonii3 1113145; Figs 5,86,88,89,90,94,96
bartonii oarinirostris, 111,146; Fig. 95
bartonii cavatuSj 1113146; Fig. 96
howardi, 1103146; Fig. 95
ortmanni, 1103147; Figs 94,95
saiotensis, 1113147; Fig. 96
(Depressioambarus), 108,112
catagius3 1163146; Fig. 98
oymatilis3 112,146; Figs 97,99
158
-------
Cambarus (Depressiaccnibarus) (continued)
floridanus, 116,146; Fig. 98
halli, 115,146; Figs 92,97,99
jordani, 114,146; Figs 97,99
latimanus, 114,146; Figs 8,89,90,92,100
obstipus, 113,114,147; Figs 97,99
reduncus, 115,147; Figs 5,88,92,97
sphenoides, 113,147; Figs 92,100,101
striatus, 115,147; Figs 98,100
unestami, 113,147; Figs 92,100,101
dubius, 125
(Erebicambarus), 104,106,107,117
oahni, 118,146; Fig. 102
hubbsi, 117,146; Fig. 91
hubrichti, 118,146; Figs 10,103
laevis, 119,146; Figs 102,103
ornatus, 119,147; Fig. 103
rustioiformis, 117,147;Figs 89,102
tenebrosus, 117,118,119,147; Figs 102,103
(Hiatioambarus), 104,120
chasmodactylus, 121,146; Figs 104,105
girardianus, 120,146; Figs 89,104
longirostris, 120,146; Figs 104,105
Zongulus, 121,147; Figs 8,89,104
(Jugieambams), 104,106,122
asperimanus, 125,145; Figs 89,109
braehydaotylus, 126,146; Figs 8,108,109
aarolinus, 125,146; Figs 106,108,109
causeyi, 124,146; Fig. 109
oonasaugaensis, 123,146; Figs 106,108
aryptodytes, 122,146; Figs 10,107
distorts, 123,146; Figs 106,107
friaufi, 126,146; Figs 88,108,109
gentryi, 125,146; Fig. 109
monongalensis, 123,147; Figs 106,107
parvoculus, 123,147; Figs 106,108
setosus, 122,147; Figs 10,87,107
zophonastes, 124,147; Fig. 106
(Laounioombarus), 108,127
diogenes diogenes, 127,146; Figs 89,90,92,110
diogenes ludovic-Lanus, 127,146; Fig. 110
(Puncticambarus), 107,128
aewn-inatus, 130,145; Figs 112,113
esctpocneus, 128,146; Figs 90,111
nerterius, 106,128,147; Figs 90,111
reburpus, 129,147; Figs 91,111,112
Tobustus, 130,147; Figs 89,113
spiaatus, 128,147; Fig. Ill
veteranus, 106,129,147; Fig.112
(Vetioconbarus), 104,131
bouahardi, 131,146; Figs 88,114,115
159
-------
Cambarus (Vetioambarus ) (continued)
obeyensis, 231,147; Figs 88,114,115
pristinus, 232,147; Figs 5,88,89,114,115
oapillatus, ProGombarus (Leoonticambarus) , 52,150; Fig. 43
Capillioambarus, 34,44
hinei, Prooambarus, 44,151; Figs 25,37
inoilis, Prooambarus 3 44,151; Fig. 37
oarolinus, Cambarus (Jugioambarus) , 225,146; Figs 106,108,109
oatagius, Cambarus (Depressicambarus), 116,146; Fig. 98
oauseyi, Cambarus (Jugioambarus), 124,146; Fig. 109
Orooneotes, 91
ohaGei, Prooambarus (Ortmannious) 3 £5^150; Fig. 50
ehapalanus, Cambarellus3 SS.,145; Figs 16,17
chasmodactylus3 Cambarus (Hiatieambarus) 3 121,146; Figs 104,105
olarkii3 Prooanibarus (Scapulicambarus) 3 2,72^150; Fig. 56
olypeaba, FaxonelZa, 29,147; Fig. 19
Qompressus3 Orooneotes, 53,148; Figs 70,71
oonasaugaensisj Cambarus (Jugioambarus) 3 1233146; Figs 106,108
oonnectens3 Paeifastacus3 22,145; Figs 12,14
Gontrerasi3 Prooambarus (Villalobosus) 3 74,150; Fig. 57
Gornutus3 Cambarus (Barbiaambarus) 3 1033146; Figs 86,89
oreaseri3 Faxonella3 23,147; Figs 5,19
aristatus3 Hobbseus3 75,148; Figs 5,58
aryptodytes , Cambarus (Jugiaambarus) , 222,146; Figs 10,107
cubensis oubensis, Prooambarus (Austrocambarus) , 33,150; Fig. 30
rivalis3 Prooambarus (Austrooambarus) , 33,150; Fig. 30
Cambarus (Depressioambarus) , 212,146; Figs 97,99
Depressicambarus, 108 , 11 2
catag-Lus, Cambarus, 1163146; Fig. 98
cymatilis, Cambarus, 222,146; Figs 97,99
floridanus, Cambarus, 22£,146; Fig. 98
halli, Cambarus, 223,146; Figs 92,97,99
jordani3 Cambarus3 114,146; Figs 97,99
latimanus, Cambarus, 114,146; Figs 8,89,90,92,100
obstipus, Cambarus, 223,224,147; Figs 97,99
reduncus, Cambarus, 115,147; Figs 5,88,92,97
sphenoides, Cambarus, 113,147; Figs 92,100,101
striatus, Cambarus, 115,147; Figs 98,100
unestami, Cambarus, 113,147; Figs 92,100,101
diffioilis, Orconeotes, 80,148; Fig. 63
diguet-L, Prooambarus (Prooambarus), 35,150; Figs 6,22,28
diminutus, Cambarellus, 25,145; Fig. 15
diogenes diogenes, Cambarus ( Laounioambarus ) , 127,146; Figs 89,90,92,110
ludovioianus , Cambarus (Laaunioambarus ) , 127,146; Fig. 110
dissitus, Fallioambarus, 15,33,147; Figs 81,82
distorts, Cambarus (Jugioambarus), 223,146; Figs 106,107
dubius, Cambarus, 125
dupratzi, Prooambarus (Pennides), 58,150; Fig. 54
160
-------
echinatus, Procambarus (Pennides), #5,150; Fig. 54
econfinae, Procambarus (Leconticambarus), 53,150; Fig. 44
elegans, Procambarus (Pennides), 69,150; Fig. 54
enoplo sternum., Procambarus (Ortmannicus), 64,150; Fig. 50
epicyrtus, Procambarus (Ortmannicus), £4,150; Fig. 50
Erebicambarus, 104,106,107,117
cahni, Cambarus, 118,146; Fig. 102
hubbsi, Cambarus, 117,146; Fig. 91
hubrieht-i, Cambarus, 118,146; Figs 10,103
laevis, Cambarus, 119,146; Figs 102,103
ornatus, Cambarus, 119,147; Fig. 103
rustiaiform-is, Cambarus, 117,147; Figs 89,102
tenebrosus, Cambayus, 117,118,119,147; Figs 102,103
er-iehson-i, Procambarus (Villalobosus), 74,ISO; Fig. 57
er-iohsonianus, Oroonectes, 83,148; Figs 62,65,66
esoambiensis, Procambarus (Leeontieambarus), 53,150; Fig. 44
eupunotus, Orooneotes, 55^148; Figs 62,65
evermanni, Procambarus (Ortmannicus), 60,150; Fig. 48
extraneus, Cambarus (Puncticambarus), 128,146; Figs 90,111
fallax, Procambarus (Ortmannicus), 64,150; Figs 27,49
FalUcambarus, 2,11,16,17,99,147; Fig. 3
byersi, 101,147; Figs 81,83
dissitus, 15,55,147; Figs 81,82
fodiens, 102,147; Figs 5,82,83,84,85
hedgpethi, 102,147; Figs 82,83
hortoni, 100,147; Figs 5,81
macneesei, 99,147; Figs 5,81
oryktes, 101,147; Figs 8,81,83
strawni, 99,147; Fig. 81
uhleri, 102,147; Figs 82,83,84,85
Faxonella, 11,15,20,147; Fig. 3
beyeri, 29,147; Fig. 19
olypeata, 29,147; Fig. 19
creaseri, 29,147; Figs 5,19
fitzpatricki, Procambarus (Acucauda), 34,150; Figs 5,22,24
floridanus, Cambarus (Depressicambarus), 116,146; Fig. 98
fodiens, FalUcambarus, 102,147; Figs 5,82,83,84,85
forceps, Orconectes, 98,148; Figs 77,80
fort-is, Pacifastacus, 25,145; Figs 13,14
friauf-i, Cambarus (Jugicambarus), 126,146; Figs 88,108,109
gambelii, Pacifastacus, 22,145; Figs 13,14
gentryi, Cambarus (Jugicambarus), 225,146; Fig. 109
geodytes, Procambarus (Eagenides), 45,150; Fig. 41
gibbus, Procambarus (Pennides), 70,150; Fig. 55
girardianus, Cambarus (Hiaticambarus), 120,146; Figs 89,104
Girardiella, 35,45
gracilis, Procambarus, 47,151; Figs 38,39,40
hagenianus, Procambarus, 47,151; Figs 21,39,40
simulans regiomontanus, Procambarus, 46,152; Fig. 39
161
-------
(continued)
si-mulans simulans3 Proeambarus3 46.,152; Figs 22,38,39
tulanei, Procambarus, 45,152; Figs 38,39
gonopodocristatus3 Proeambarus (Ortmannious) 3 55,150; Fig. 47
gvac-ilis3 Procambarus (Girardiella)3 47,151; Figs 38,39,40
hagenianus3 Proecmbarus (Girardiella)3 47., 151; Figs 21,39,40
Hagenides3 34348
advena3 Prooambaruss 50,150; Figs 5,41
geodytes3 Pvoacmbaicus, 45,150; Fig. 41
pygmaeusj ProcambaruSj 50,152; Figs 5,41
pogersi oampestvis3 Ppoaconbapusj 40,152; Fig. 42
expletus3 Proaambarus3 45,152; Figs 26,42
ooh~lodknensi,s3 Prooambarus3 45,152; Fig. 42
•pogersi rogersi3 Procambcacus3 45,152; Figs 41,42
truculentus, Proaambarus, 43,152; Figs 5,41
Cambarus (Depress-iaambams), 11S3146; Figs 92,97,99
hamulatuSj Cambarus (Avitioambarus), 1093146; Figs 10,87,89,93
harrisoni3 Ovconeotes3 75,148; Fig. 60
hathawayi3 Oroaneotes3 50,148; Fig. 63
hayl, Ppoaambarus (Ortmann-i-ous), 55,151; Fig. 46
hedgpethi, Fallicambarus, 102,147; Figs 82,83
Hiatioambarus, 1043120
chasmodactylus3 Cambcccus3 121,146; Figs 104,105
girardianus, Ccmbarus3 1203146; Figs 89,104
longivostrisj Cambarus3 120,146; Figs 104,105
tonguluSj Cambca>us3 121,147; Figs 8,89,104
hinei, Procconbarus (Cap-ilHcambarus)3 44,151; Figs 25,37
hirsutus3 Prooambarus (Ortmannicus), 52,151; Figs 26,49
Hobbseus3 11,16,75,148; Figs 3,7
attenuatus3 75,148; Fig. 58
cristatuSj 75,148; Figs 5,58
orooneotoideSj 75,148; Figs 5,58
prominens3 75,148; Figs 58,59
valleculus3 75,148; Figs 58,59
hobbsi3 Oreoneates3 55,148; Figs 70,71
hoffmanni3 Procambarus (Villalobosus)3 73,151; Fig. 57
hortorihobbsi3 Proeambcaws (Villalobosus), 74,151; Fig. 57
Fallioambarus, 10(9,147; Figs 5,81
Cambarus (Cambarus)3 110,146; Fig. 95
howel1ae3 Procambayus (Saapul-ieambarus), 71,151; Fig. 56
hubbelli3 Proocmbarus (Leeontieambarus), 51,151; Figs 29,43
hubbsi3 Cambams (Erebiaambarus), 117,146; Fig. 91
hubriehtij Cambarus (Epebiaambapus), 115,146; Figs 10,103
hybus3 Procambarus (Ortmann-icus), 57,151; Fig. 48
hy1as3 OrconecteSf 86,55,148; Fig. 77
illinoiensis, Orconectes, 55,148; Figs 66,67
•LmmuniSj Ovooneotes3 51,148; Figs 5,63
i,noi1is3 Pvooconbarus (Capillieambarus), 44,151; Fig. 37
incomptus3 Ovooneotes, 75,148; Figs 60,61
162
-------
indianensis, Orconeotes, 833148; Figs 64,65
inermis inermis, Orconeotes, 79,148; Figs 11,60,61
testii, Orconectes, 79,148; Figs 60,61
iowaensis, Oroonectes, 83,148; Fig. 67
jaoulus, Procambarus (Ortmanniaus), 60^151; Figs 48,51
jeffersoni, Orconectes, 32,148; Fig. 74
jonesi, Cambarus (Avitiaambarus)3 109,146; Figs 10,93
jordani, Cambarus (Deppessieambarus), 114^146; Figs 97,99
Jugieambarus3 104,106,122
asperimanus, Cambarus, 125,145; Figs 89,109
bvachydactylus, Cambarus, 126,146; Figs 8,108,109
oarolinus, Cambarus, 125,146; Figs 106,108,109
causey-i, Cambarus, 124,146, Fig. 109
conasaugaens-is, Cambarus, 125^146; Figs 106,108
cryptodytes, Cambarus, 122,146; Figs 10,107
distans, Cambarus, 123,146; Figs 106,107
friaufi, Cambarus, 126,146; Figs 88,108,109
gentryi, Cambarus, 125,146; Fig. 109
monongalensis, Cambarus, 123,147; Figs 106,107
parvoculus, Cambarus, 123,147; Figs 106,108
setosus, Cambarus, 122,147; Figs 10,87,107
zophonastes, Cambarus, 124,147; Fig. 106
juven-ilis, Oraonectes, 86,87y95,148; Fig. 77
kentuckiensis, Oraoneotes, 52^148; Fig. 63
kilby-i, Prooambarus (Leoontiaambarus), 57,52,151; Figs 29,43
Lasunicambarus, 108,127
diogenes diogenes, Cambarus, 127,146; Figs 89,90,92,110
diogenes ludovio-ianus, Cambarus, 127,146; Fig. 110
laevis, Cambarus (Erebioambarus), 119,146; Figs 102,103
lagniappe, Prooambarus (Pennides), 69,1S1; Fig. 55
lansifer, Orconectes, 80, 148; Fig. 62
latimanus, Cambarus (Depressiaambarus), 114, 146; Figs 8,89,90,92,100
latipleurum, Procambarus (Leoontiaambarus), 52, 151; Figs 22,29,43,44
leoontei, Prooambarus (Ortmannicus), 56, 151; Figs 26,46
Leoont-Loambarus, 35,37,51
alleni, Prooambarus, 52, 150; Fig. 43
apalaohicolae, Prooambarus, 53, 150; Fig. 44
barbatus, Procambarus, 53, 150; Figs 25,26,29,43,44
oapillatus, Procambarus, 52, 150; Fig. 43
eoonf-inae, Prooambarus, 53, 150; Fig. 44
esoambiensis, Prooambarus, 53, 150; Fig. 44
hubbelli, Prooambarus, 51, 151; Figs 29,43
kilbyi, Procambarus, 51,52,151; Figs 29,43
latipleurum, Prooambarus, 52, 151; Figs 22,29,43,44
milleri, Procambarus, 51,151; Fig. 11
pubisahelae, Procambarus, 53, 151; Fig. 44
163
-------
Leconticambarus (continued)
vathbunae3 Procambarus, 52,152; Figs 28,43
shermanij Procambarus3 52., 152; Fig. 43
leniusculus klamafhensis 3 Pacifastacus3 22,145; Fig. 12
leniusculus3 Pacifastacus3 21,145; Figs 12,14
Pacifastacus, 2,21
trowbridgii, Pacifasticus3 21,22,145; Figs 5,12
leonensisj Procambarus (Ortmann-icus), 63,64,151; Fig. 50
lep-idodaetylus3 Procambarus (Ortmannicus), 41,151; Figs 48,58
Ieptogonopodus3 Orconectes3 87,148; Figs 68,69
lew-isi, Procambarus (Ortmannicus), 57,151; Figs 27,47,51
limosus, Orconectes3 2,82,148; Figs 5,62,65
litosteYnum, Prooambavus (Ortmannious), 64,151; Figs 29,50
llcmasi, Procconbarus (Austrocambarus)j 40,151; Figs 21,31
longidigitus, Orooneotes, 51,148; Figs 72,73
longivostris, Cambarus (Hiatieambarus), 52(9,146; Figs 104,105
longulus, Cambarus (Hiaticambarus), 121,147; Figs 8,89,104
Lonnberg-iuSj 36
aoherontis, Procambarus, 56,150; Fig. 11
lophotus, Prooambams (Ortmannicus), 57,151; Fig. 46
tuo-ifugus alaahua, Proocoribarus (Optmannieus), 54,151; Fig. 45
luoifugus, Procambarus (OTtmannicus), 54,151; Figs 11,45
1unzi3 Proaambopus (Ortmannicus), 63,151; Fig. 49
luteus, Orooneotes3 56,148; Figs 74,75
lylei, Proeambarus (Pennides)3 67,151; Fig. 54
maelanei,, Trogloeambarus, 18,152; Figs 5,9
maeneeseij FalHoambaruSj 53,147; Figs 5,81
maeruSj Oroonectes3 53,148; Fig. 74
maneuSj Procambarus (Ortmannicus), 55,151; Fig. 47
marohandi, Orconectes3 81,148; Fig. 63
meeki brevis3 Orconectes3 51,149; Fig. 72
meeki, Orconectes3 51,149; Figs 72,73
medius, Oroonectes, 87,53,148; Figs 68,69
menae3 OrconeGtes3 56,57,149; Figs 77,79
Mexicambarus, 35
bouvieri, Procambarus, 35,150; Fig. 27
mex-icanusj Procambarus (Austrocambarus)3 43,151; Figs 5,30,35,36
milleri3 Procambarus (Leconticambarus), 51,151; Fig. 11
mirandai3 Procambarus (Austrocambarus), 41,151; Fig. 34
mirus, Orconectes3 96,57,149; Figs 74,76
mississippiensiSj Orconectes3 80,149; Fig. 63
monongalensis, Cambarus (Jugicambarus), 123,147; Figs 106,107
montezwmae, Cambarellus3 28,145; Figs 16,18
dugesiij Cambarellus3 28
1ermensis3 Cambarellus, 28
nais, Orconectes, 51,149; Figs 72,73
nana, Orconectes3 56,149; Figs 74,76
natchitochae, Procambarus (Penn-ides), 65,151; Fig. 55
neglectus chaenodactylus, Orconectes3 52,56,149; Figs 74,75
neglectus3 Orconectes3 58,149; Figs 77,80
164
-------
nerter-ius, Cambarus (Punct-icambarus)3 106,128,147; Figs 90,111
n-igrescens, Paoifastacus3 23,145; Figs 13,14
ninae, Cambarellus3 26,145; Fig. 15
niveus, Proeambarus (Austrocambarus)3 38,151
obeyensis, Cambarus (Veticambarus)3 131,147; Figs 88,114,115
obsGUTus, Orconectes3 87,149; Fig. 63
obstipus, Cambarus (Depressicambarus), 113,114,141; Figs 97,99
oaaidentalis, Cambarellus, 27,145; Figs 16,17
okaloosae, Proeambarus (Scapulicambarus)3 7^3151; Figs 22,56
OTooneates, 1,3,11,16,19,7^148; Figs 3,7
aeares, £4., 148; Fig. 74
alabamensis, 53J148; Figs 70,71
australis australis, 78,148; Figs 11,60,61
australis paokavd-i, 75jl48; Figs 60,61
barrenens-Ls, 96,57,148; Figs 74,76
biseetusj 55,148; Fig. 67
causeyi, 91
compress-as, 89,148; Figs 70,71
diffioilis, 80,148; Fig. 63
erichsonianuSj 83,148; Figs 62,65,66
eupunotus, 83,148; Figs 62,65
forceps, 58,148; Figs 77,80
harrisoni, 75,148; Fig. 60
hathawayi, 80,148; Fig. 63
hobbsi, 88,148; Figs 70,71
hylas, 86,55,148; Fig. 77
illinoiensis, 85,148; Figs 66,67
immunis, 81,148; Figs 5,63
incomptus, 78,148; Figs 60,61
indianensis, 83,148; Figs 64,65
inevmis inermis3 75,148; Figs 11,60,61
inerm-is testii, 75,148; Figs 60,61
iowaens-Ls, 83,148; Fig. 67
jeffersoni, 52,148; Fig. 74
juveniHs, 86,87,55,148; Fig. 77
kentuckiensis, 82,148; Fig. 63
lancifer, 80,148; Fig. 62
leptogonopodus, 87,148; Figs 68,69
limosus, 2,82,148; Figs 5,62,65
longidigitus, 51,148; Figs 72,73
luteus, 96,148; Fig. 75
macrus, 53,148; Fig. 74
marchandi, 81,148; Fig. 63
medius, 87,53,148; Figs 68,69
meeki brevis, 91,149; Fig. 72
meeki meeki,, 57,149; Figs 72,73
menae, 96,97,149; Figs 77,79
mirus, 96,97,149; Figs 74, 76
mississippiensis, 80,149; Fig. 63
nais, 52,149; Figs 72,73
nana, 96,149; Figs 74,76
165
-------
Oraonectes (continued)
negleotus ehaenodactylus3 52,56,149; Figs 74,75
negleotus neg1ectus3 55,149; Figs 77,80
obsaurus, 51,149; Fig. 63
ozavkae, 35,149; Fig. 77
palmeri oreolanus, 55,149; Fig. 70
palrnev-i longimanus, 55,149; Fig. 70
palmeri pdlmeri3 55,149; Figs 70,71
pellucidus, 77,149; Figs 11,60
peruncuSj 66,149; Fig. 68
plaoidusj 56,149; Figs 77,80
propinquuSj 53,149; Figs 5,62,65
punotimanus, 51,149; Figs 72,73
putnami, 66,87,95,149; Figs 68,69
quadruneus, 55,149: Fig, 70
rafinesquei, 65,149; Figs 66,67
rhoadesi, 50,149; Fig. 72
rustious3 52,149; Figs 74,75
saribomi erismophorous, 81 f 149; Fig. 63
saribomi sanborn-i, 54,149; Fig. 65
shoupi, 82,149; Figs 64,65
sloanii, 52,149; Fig, 63
spinosus, 86,57,54,149; Figs 68,69
tpanfuga, 57,149; Figs 77,79,80
tpicuspiS; 54,149; Figs 65,66
validus, 50,149; Fig. 72
virginiensis, 65,149; Figs 66,67
virilis, 51,149; Figs 72,73
williconsi, 57,149; Figs 77,79,80
wrighti3 63,149; Figs 64,65
oraoneatoides, Hobbseusf 75,148; Figs 5,58
ornatusj Cambarus (Erebicambarus)j 155,147; Fig. 103
ortmannij Cambarus (Cambarus), 110,147; Figs 94,95
Proeambarus CParacambavus), 66,151; Figs 24,52
Ortmann-ious, 37,54
acutissimu.s3 Proaambarus, 55,150; Figs 21,46
aautus aoutus, Procambarus3 57,150; Figs 5,27,47
acutus auevaahicae, ProcambaruSj 56,150; Fig. 46
ancylus, Procambarus* 63,150; Fig. 49
angustatus, Prooambapus, 62,150; Fig. 49
bivittatust Prooambarus, 56,150; Figs 47,51
blandingii, ProoambaruSj 57,150; Fig. 46
eaballeroi, Pvooambax>usJ 60,150; Fig. 48
chaeeif Proecanbarus, 65,150; Fig. 50
enoplosternum3 Procambarus3 64,150; Fig. 50
epieyrtus, Proaambarus,, 64,150; Fig. 50
evermannij Proaambarus3 60,150; Fig. 48
fallax, Procambopus; 64,150; Figs 27,49
gonopodoeristatus, Pvoocmbarus, 59,150; Fig. 47
/zat/i, ProcambaniSj 55,151; Fig. 46
hivsutus3 Procambarus, 62,151; Figs 26,49
166
-------
Ortmannicus (continued)
hybuSj Procambarus, 57,151; Fig. 48
jaculuSj ProcambaruSj £#,151; Figs 48,51
leoonteij ProcamboFUSj 56,151; Figs 26,46
leonensis, Proccoribarus 3 63364,151; Fig. 50
lepidodaetylus, 58,51,151; Fig. 48
lewisi, Pvoacoribarus, 57,151; Figs 27,47,51
Iitostemwn3 Prooambarus3 64,151; Figs 29,50
lophotuSj Procambarus, 57,151; Fig. 46
lucifugus alaohua, Procambarus, 54,151; Fig. 45
lueifugus luoifugus, Proaambarus, 54,151; Figs 11,45
Iunzi3 Procambamis, 53,151; Fig. 49
manauSj Procambarus, 55,151; Fig. 47
pallidus, Proaambarus, 54,151; Figs 9,45
peavsei pearsei, Proaconbarus, 53,151; Figs 27,47
pearsei plwnimanus, ProcambaruSj 59,60,151; Fig. 48
p-iatus, Proeambapus, 55,151; Figs 27,50
planirostvis, Proocmbarus, 59,151; Figs 27,47
pubeseenSj Pvoocmbarus, 64,151; Fig. 50
pyenogonopodus, Prooambarus, 52,151; Fig. 49
s&minolae, Procambarusf 63,152; Figs 21,26,49
texanuSj Prooambarus, 56,152; Fig. 46
tolteoae, ProeambarusfS8,61jl52; Fig. 48
yerr^eosus, Procambarus, 6(9,152; Figs 48,51
viaeviridis, Procambarus, 55,152; Fig. 46
villalobosij Proaambarus, 57,152; Figs 29,47
youngij Proeambarus, 34,61,152; Figs 26,49
opyktesj Fallicambarus, 1(91,147; Figs 8,81,83
ouaohitae3 Proaambarus (Pennides)> 7(9,151; Fig. 55
ozarkae, Oreoneates, 55,149; Fig. 77
Paaifastaaus, 7,13,21,145
oonneotens, 22,145; Figs 12,14
fortiss 23,145; Figs 13,14
gambeli-i, 22,145; Figs 13,14
leniusaulus,2,21
klamathensis, 22,145; Fig. 12
leniuseulus, 21,145; Figs 12,14
21,22,145; Figs 5,12
23,145; Figs 13,14
paen-insulanus, Procambarus (Scapulicambarus)3 71,151; Figs 5,6,56
palliduSj Procambarus (Ovtmannious), 54,151; Figs 9,45
pdlmevi CTeolanus, Orooneates, 55,149; Fig. 70
longimanuSj Orconeotes, 55,149; Fig. 70
palmeri3 Ovconec-bes, 57,149; Figs 70,71
Paraeambarus, 33,66
ortmannij Proaambapus, 66,151; Figs 24,52
paradoxusj ProeambaruSj 66,151; Figs 5,24,52
paradoxes, Proaambarus (Paracambarus), 66,151; Figs 5,24,52
Parastacidae, 1
167
-------
parvooulus3 Cambcams (Jugioambavus)3 223,147; Figs 106,108
patzeuarensis3 Cambarellus, 25,145; Figs 16,17
pearsei pearse-i, Ppocambarus (Ovtmannicus)3 55,151; Figs 27,47
plumimanus, Prooambarus (Ortmannious), 59,50,, 151; Fig. 48
peoki, Procambarus (Remotioconbarus), 32,32,151; Figs 11,22,23
pelluoi-dus, OTooneotes, 77,149; Figs 11,60
penni, Procambarus (Pennides), 59,151; Fig. 54
Pennides, 32,57
dblususy Procambcccus3 59^150; Fig. 55
dupratzi, Prooambapus, 58_,150; Fig. 54
eoh-inatus3 Proecanbarus3 63^150; Fig. 54
elegans3 Prooctmbarus, 693150; Fig. 54
gibbus3 Proaambarus3 7#.,150; Fig. 55
Iagniappe3 Procconbarus3 693l5l; Fig. 55
Iyle-i3 Procambopus3 £7., 151; Fig. 54
natah-itoGhae3 Prooambarus3 ££.,151; Fig. 55
ouachitae3 Ppocambarus3 70315l; Fig. 55
penni3 Procambarus3 £9., 151; Fig. 54
raneyij Procambarus3 70,152; Fig. 55
spioulifer, Pvoccmbapus3 703 152; Fig. 55
suttkusi3 Proeambarus3 57,152; Fig. 54
versutuSj Proeambarus3 57,152; Fig. 54
viosoai3 ProcambaruSj 58jl52; Fig. 54
peruncus, Orooneotes3 85,149; Fig. 68
pietus3 Proeambarus (Ortmannious)3 55,151; Figs 27,50
pilosimanus3 Proeambarus (Austrooambarus)3 40,151; Figs 31,32,33
plaeidus, OTooneotes, 98,149; Figs 77,80
planirostriSj Proeambavus (Ortmann-ious), 5S,151; Figs 27,47
pri-stinus, Cambarus (Veticcmbarus), 132,147; Figs 5,88,89,114,115
Proeambopus3 1,2,3,11,15,17,19,32,150; Fig. 3
(Acuoauda), 34
fitzpatTicki3 34,150; Figs 5,22,24
(Austvooambca'us), 31,32,38
aeanthophorus, 403 150; Figs 32,33
atkinsoni3 33,150; Fig. 30
aztecus, 43,150; Figs 30,34,36
cubensis oubensis3 39,150; Fig. 30
oubensis i"ivalis3 39,150; Fig. 30
llamasi, 40,151; Figs 21,31
mexioanus, 43,151; Figs 5,30,35,36
42,151; Fig. 34
38,151
pilos'imanus, 40,151; Figs 31,32,33
rodriguezi3 40,152; Fig. 22
ruthveni, 42,152; Fig. 30
vazquezae, 42,152; Figs 34,35
veraeruzanus, 43,152; Fig. 34
will'iamsoni3 38,40,152; Figs 23,30,31
sapoapens-is, 42,152
(Capillioambarus), 34,44
hinei, 44,151; Figs 25,37
168
-------
Proaambarus (Capillieambarus) (continued)
inailis, 44,151; Fig. 37
(Girardiella), 35,45
graeilis, 47,151; Figs 38,39,40
hagenianus, 47,151; Figs 21,39,40
simulans regiomontanus, 46,152; Fig. 39
simulans simulans, 46,152; Figs 22,38,39
tulanei, 45,152; Figs 38,39
(Hagenides), 34,48
advena, 50,150; Figs 5,41
geodytes, 43,150; Fig. 41
pygmaeus, 50,152; Figs 5,41
TogeTsi oampestris, 49,152; Fig. 42
vogeYsi expletus, 48,152; Figs 26,42
rogersi odhloaknensis, 49,152; Fig. 42
rogersi rogersi, 48,152; Figs 41,42
trueulentus, 49,152; Figs 5,41
(Leaontiecoribopus) , 35, 37, 51
alleni, 52,15Q; Fig. 43
apalaehicolae, 55^150; Fig. 44
barbatus, 5^3150; Figs 25,26,29,43,44
capillatus, 52,150; Fig. 43
eoonfinae, 53^150; Fig. 44
esaambiensis, 53,150; Fig. 44
hubbelli, 51,151; Figs 29,43
k-ilbyi, 51,52,151; Fig. 29,43
latipleurwn, 52jl51; Figs 22,29,43,44
mUleri, 51,151; Fig. 11
pubisehelae, S3jl51; Fig. 44
rathbunae, 52,152; Figs 28,43
shermani, 52jl52; Fig. 43
(Lonnbergius), 36
aaherontis, 36,150; Fig. 11
(Mexiecoribarus ), 35
bouvieri, 35,150; Fig. 27
(Ortmannieus), 37,54
aautissimus, 56,150; Figs 21,46
acutus aeutus, 57,150; Figs 5,27,47
aautus ouevaohioae, 55,150; Fig. 46
anaylus, 55,150; Fig. 49
angustatus, 52,150; Fig. 49
bivittatus, 58,150; Figs 47,51
blandingii, 57,150; Fig. 46
aaballeroi, 60,150; Fig. 48
chacei, 65,150; Fig. 50
enoplosternum, 64,150; Fig. 50
epiayvtus, 64,150; Fig. 50
evevmanni, 60,150; Fig. 48
fallax, 64,150; Figs 27,49
gonopodooristatus, 59,150; Fig. 47
hayi, 55,151; Fig. 46
169
-------
Proecmbapus (Ortmannicus) (continued)
hirsutus, 62,151; Figs 26,49
hybue, 57,151; Fig. 48
jaculus, 60,151; Figs 48,51
leoontei, 55,151; Figs 26,46
leonensis, 63,64,151; Fig. 50
lepidodaotylus, 58,52,151; Fig. 48
lewisi, 57,151; Figs 27,47,51
litostemum, 54,151; Figs 29,50
lophotus, 57,151; Fig. 46
luoifugus alachua, 54,151; Fig. 45
luai-fugus lueifugus, 54,151; Figs 11,45
lunzi, 53,151; Fig. 49
ma-nous, 55,151; Fig. 47
pallidus, 54,151; Figs 9,45
peca-sei. pearsei, 53,151; Figs 27,47
pearsei plumimanus, 59,50,151; Fig. 48
piatus, 55,151; Figs 27,50
plan-irostris, 53,151; Figs 27,47
pubesoens, 54,151; Fig. 50
pycnogonopodus, 52,151; Fig. 49
senrinolae, 63,152; Figs 21,26,49
texanus, 56,152; Fig. 46
tolteeae,58,61,152; Fig. 48
vevruoosus, 60,152; Figs 48,51
viaevividis, 55,152; Fig. 46
villalobosi, 53,152; Figs 29,47
youngi, 34,52,152; Figs 26,49
(ParaGambarus), 33,66
ortmanni, 55,151; Figs 24,52
paradoxus, 55,151; Figs 5,24,52
(Prooambarus), 35
digueti, 35,150; Figs 6,22,28
(Pennides), 31,67
ablusus, 69,150; Fig. 55
dupratzi, 55,150; Fig. 54
eahinatus, 55,150; Fig. 54
elegans, 69,150; Fig. 54
gibbus, 70,150; Fig. 55
lagniappe, 53,151; Fig. 55
lylei, 57,151; Fig. 54
natohitoohae, 53,151; Fig. 55
ouaohitae, 70,151; Fig. 55
penni, 53,151; Fig. 54
vaneyi, 70,152; Fig. 55
spiouUfer, 70,152; Fig. 55
suttkusi, 57,152; Fig. 54
versutusj 57,152; Fig. 54
vioscai, 68,152; Fig. 54
(Remotiaconbarus), 31,32
peoki, 32,32,151; Figs 11,22,23
170
-------
Prooambarus (continued)
(' Seapulioambarus), 32,71
olarkii, 2,72,150; Fig. 56
howellae, 77,151; Fig. 56
okaloosae, 71*151; Figs 22,56
paeninsulanus, 77,151; Figs 5,6,56
troglodytes3 72,152; Fig. 56
(Tenuioambarus) , 37
tennis, 27,152; Figs 6,22,27
(Villalobosus), 34,73
aontrerasi, 74,150; Fig. 57
eriohsoni, 74,150; Fig. 57
hoffmanni, 75,151; Fig. 57
hortonhobbsi, 74,151; Fig. 57
riojai, 75,152; Figs 6,24,57
teziutlanensis, 75,152; Fig. 57
tlapaooyanensis, 75,152; Fig. 57
zihuateutlensis, 74,152; Fig. 57
prominens, Hobbseus, 75,148; Figs 58,59
propinquus, Orooneotes, 55,149; Figs 5,62,65
pubesaens, Prooambarus ('Ortmannious), 54,151; Fig. 50
pubisohelae, Proaambarus (Leeontieambarus), 55,151; Fig. 44
puer, Cambopellus, 27,145; Figs 5,15
Punetioambarus, 107,128
aewninatus, Cambarus, 130,145; Figs 112,113
extraneus, Cambarus, 128,146; Figs 90,111
nerterius, Cambarus, 106,128,147; Figs 90,111
reburrus, Cambarus, 129,147; Figs 91,111,112
robustus, Cambarus, 130,147; Figs 89,113
spieatus, Cambarus, 128,147; Fig. Ill
veteranus, Cambarus, 106,123,147; Fig. 112
punotimanus, Orooneetes, 02,149; Figs 72,73
putnami, Oraonectes, 86,87,95,149; Figs 68,69
pyenogonopodus, Prooambarus (Ortmannieus), 52,151; Fig. 49
pygmaeus, Prooambarus (Hagenides), 50,152; Figs 5,41
quadrunous, Oreoneates, 55,149; Fig. 70
rafinesquei, Oreoneetes, 55,149; Figs 66,67
raneyi, Proaambarus (Pennides), 70,152; Fig. 55
rathbunae, Prooambarus (Leoont-ioambarus), 52,152; Figs 28,43
reburrus, Cambarus (Puncticambarus), 129,147; Figs 91,111,112
redunous, Cambarus (Depressicambarus), 115,147; Figs 5,88,92,97
Remoticambarus, 31,32
peoki, Prooambarus, 57,32,151; Figs 11,22,23
rhoadesi, Orooneetes, 50,149; Fig. 72
riojai, Proaambarus (Villalobosus), 73,152; Figs 6,24,57
robustus, Cambarus (Punatioambarus), 130,147; Figs 89,113
rodriguezi, Prooambarus (Austrooambarus), 40,152; Fig. 22
rogersi oampestris, Proeambarus (Hagenides), 45,152; Fig. 42
expletus, Prooambarus (Hagenides), 48,152; Figs 26,42
171
-------
i oahlocknensis3 Proaambarus (Eagenides)3 45,152; Fig. 42
ij Proeconbarus (Hagenides)3 48,152; Figs 41,42
Tust-io-lfovmis, Cambarus (Eveb-icambarus) 3 227,147; Figs 89,102
•?usticus3 OreoneateSj 32,149; Figs 74,75
Tuthveni, Prooambarus (Austroecanbarus), 42,152; Fig. 30
sanborni erismophovous3 Oreoneotes, 82,149; Fig. 63
sanbornij Orconeotes, 84,149; Fig. 65
Soapulicambarus, 32,7.2
olarkii3 Proaambarus3 2,72,150; Fig. 56
howellae, Proaambarus, 72,151; Fig. 56
okaloosae* Prooambarus3 72,151; Figs 22,56
paeninsulanus, Prooambarus, 72,151; Figs 5,6,56
troglodytes, Prooambca>us, 72,152; Fig. 56
sekmitti, Cambarellus3 25,145; Fig. 15
soiotensiss Cambcccus (Cambopus), 222,147; Fig. 96
seminolae, Procambarus (Ovtmannieus), 63,152; Figs 21,26,49
setosus, Cambarus (Jugioambarus), 222,147; Figs 10,87,107
shevman-l, PToearribarus (Leoontiocanbarus), 52,152; Fig. 43
shoupij OrconeoteSj 82,149; Figs 64,65
shufeldtii, Cccrribarellus, 25,145; Fig. 15
simulans regiomontanuSj Pr-oaambarus (Girardiella), 46,152; Fig. 39
simulans, Pvooambarus ('Gi-Tardiella), 46,152; Figs 22,38,39
sloanii3 Ofooneotes, 82,149; Fig. 63
sphenoides, Cambarus (Depress-iocmbarus), 223,147; Figs 92,100,101
spioatuSj Cambarus (Punetiaambapus), 228,147; Fig. Ill
spiouliferj Proaaribarus (Pennides), 7(9,152; Fig. 55
spi-nosus, Orooneotes, 87,149; Figs 68,69
strauni, Fallicambarus, 55,147; Fig. 81
striatuSj Cambarus (Depressieambarus), 225,147; Figs 98, 100
suttkusi, Procambarus (Pennides), 67,152; Fig. 54
tenebrosus, Cambarus (Epebieambarus), 227,228,119,147; Figs 102,103
Tenuieambcams, 37
tennis, Prooambopus, 37,152; Figs 6,22,27
tenui-Sj Prooambapus (Tenuioambopus)3 37,152; Figs 6,22,27
texanus, Pvocambarus (Ortmannious), 56,152; Fig. 46
teziutlanensis, Prooambams (V-iltalobosus), 73,152; Fig. 57
tlapacoyanensisj Ppooambarus (Villalobosus), 73,152; Fig. 57
tolteoae^ Procambarus (Ortmann-icus), 58,62,152; Fig. 48
transfuga, Orconeotes, 57,149; Figs 77,79,80
triouspis3 Ovooneotes, 84,149; Figs 65,66
Trogloaambarus, 2,3,28,152
maelanei, 28,152; Figs 5,9
troglodytes3 Pvocambarus (Soapu'licambarus), 72,152; Fig. 56
tTuoulentus, Prooambarus (Eagenides), 45,152; Figs 5,41
tulanei, Picooambarus (Gi-rardiella), 45,152; Figs 38,39
uhleris Fallieambarus, 2(?2,147; Figs 82,83,84,85
unestami3 Cambarus (Depressiaambarus), 223,147; Figs 93,100,101
172
-------
validus, Oreoneetes, 50,149; Fig. 72
valleaulus, Hobbseus, 7£, 148; Figs 58,59
vazquezae, Proccmbcccus (Austroeambarus) , 42,152; Figs 34,35
veraerusanus , Procambarus (Austvocambcams) ,, 43,152; Fig. 34
verruaosus, Procambarus (Ovtmannious) 3 60,152; Figs 48,51
veFsutus3 Pvoeambarus (Penn-ides) , 57,152; Fig. 54
veteranus, Cambarus (Punetioambarus ) , 106,225,147; Fig. 112
Vetieambarus _, 104,111
bouehardij Cambarus, 232,146; Figs 88,114,115
obeyensiSj CambaruSj 232,147; Figs 88,114,115
pr-istinus,, Cambarus^ 232,147; Figs 5,88,89,114,115
viaeviridis , Proacanbarusf (Ortmannious)s 55,152; Fig. 46
•oillalobosi, Proeambarus ( Ortmannicus ) , 55,152; Figs 29,47
VillalobosuSj 343 73
aontreras-L, Procambarusf 74,150; Fig. 57
evichsoni, Proaambapus , 74,150; Fig. 57
hoffmanni, Proeambarus, 73,151; Fig. 57
hovtorihobbsi, Proccoribavus , 74,151; Fig. 57
riojai, Procambarus, 73,152; Figs 6,24,57
teziutlanensis , Proocmbavus , 73,152; Fig. 57
tlapaooyanensis , 73,152; Fig. 57
zihuateutlensis , Proaambarus , 74,152; Fig. 57
vioseai, Proaambayus (Penn-ides), 683 152; Fig. 54
virginiensiSj Ovooneetes, 85,149; Figs 66,67
virilis, OrooneoteSj 92,149; Figs 72,73
wilHcmsi, Orconeetes, 57,149; Figs 77,79,80,
williamsonij Prooambarus (AustrooambaruB) 3 38,40,152; Figs 23,30,31
ij Oraonectesj S3, 149; Figs 64,65
youngij Proeambarus (Ortmanniaus) , 34, £2,152; Figs 26,49
sapoapensis, Prooambarus (Austrocambapus) , 42,152
zempoalensiSj Cambarellus , 2S, 145; Figs 16,18
zihuateutlensisj Proeambarus (Villalobosus) } 74,152; Fig. 57
sophonasteSj Cambarus (Jug-ioambarus ) , 224,147; Fig. 106
173
-------
SELECTED WATER
RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
1. Report No.
3. Accession No.
w
4. Title BIOTA OF FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS IDENTIFICATION MANUAL 5,
NO. 9. Crayfishes (Astacidae) of North and Middle America, e
7. Author(s)
Hobbs, H. H.
9. Organization Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, D. C.
12. Sponsoring Organization
15. Supplementary Notes
S, Performing Organization
Report So.
10. Project No.
18050 ELD
11. Contract/Grant No.
14,42-894 ,
13. Type of Report and
Period Covered
IS. Abstract
A brief introduction includes discussions of the systematic
position of the 284 recognized species and subspecies of
American crayfishes, their introductions into various regions
of the United States and foreign lands, their habitats, methods
of collecting and preservation, and problems of identification.
Included in the series of illustrated keys that constitute the
major part of the work are indications of the habitats and range
of each crayfish. A list of selected references is followed by
two appendices: one summarizing the distribution of each crayfish
and the other consisting of a list of states and provinces with references
to the crayfish that occur within them. An index to the taxa included
constitutes the final section.
17a. Descriptors
*Aquatic fauna, *Crustacea, *Crayfish, Distribution, Preservation,
17&.identifiers *Identification Manual, *Illustrated Key, *Decapoda, *Astacidae,
North America, Central America, Collection, Species list
17c. COWRR Field A Croup
IS. A vailability
10A
19. Security Class.
(Report)
20. Security Class.
(Page)
21. No. of
Pages
22. Price
Send To:
WATER RESOURCES SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION CENTER
US DEPARTMENT OFTHE INTERIOR
WASHINGTON. D C. 20240
Abstractor Horton H. Hobbs
Institution
Smithsonian Institution
WRSICI02(REV JUNE 1971)
GPO 913.281
« U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • 1972 O - 489-630
------- |