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.
EDITOR's NOTE:
The genus Orconectes was subdivided into 10 subgenera by Fitzpatrick (1987) and
later modified by Bouchard & Bouchard
(1995).
To view a table of the breakdown of species in each subgenus, click
here.
1. Central
projection of first pleopod constituting 1/4 or less of total length of
appendage
(Fig. 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, Orconectes
pellucidus; b, O. incomptus; c, O.
a. australis; d, O. a. packardi;
e, O. i. inermis; f, O. i. testii;
g, O. harrisoni. (s,
shoulder).
3(2). Mesial process of first pleopod
extending distinctly farther distally than central projection
(Fig.
60a;
see also Fig. 11b):.............................................
Orconectes pellucidus (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 thancentral
projection (Fig. 60b-f):...........................................................................................................................
4
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 (Fig. 60e,
f):
.............................................................................................................................................................
7
5(4). Rostrum without marginal spines
or tubercles (Fig. 61a; see also Fig.
60b):
......................................
...........................................................................................
Orconectes incomptus Hobbs and Barr, 1972.
(Subterranean
waters in Jackson County, Tennessee. Literature: Hobbs and
Barr, 1972).
Rostrum with marginal spines of tubercles (Fig.
61b, c):..........................................................................
6
Fig. 61.
Dorsal view of carapaces. a, Orconectes
incomptus; b, O. a. australis; c,
O. a. packardi; d, O. i. inermis;
e, O. 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):......................................................................
.......................................................................................
Orconectes
australis
packardi 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.
11a, 61b):.......................................................
.......................................................................................
Orconectes
australis australis (Rhoades, 1941).
(Subterranean
waters in the northern tributaries of the Tennessee River in Jackson and
Madison Counties, Alabama, north-northeastward on the Cumberland Plateau
to near the
Kentucky-Tennessee state line, there intergrading with O.
a. packardi. Literature: Hobbs
and Barr, 1972).
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.
11c, 60e):..................................................................
..........................................................................................
Orconectes inermis inermis Cope, 1871.
(Subterranean
waters from Green County, Kentucky, to Crawford County, Indiana,
intergrading
with O. i. testii northward to Monroe County, Indiana.
Literature: Hobbs and Barr, 1972).
Rostrum without marginal spines or tubercles;
areola constituting at least 43 per cent of total
length of carapace (Fig. 61e; see also Fig.
60f):...........................
Orconectes 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):...............................................
Orconectes harrisonii (Faxon, 1884).
(Streams in St.
Genevieve and Washington counties, Missouri. Literature:
Creaser, 1934a; Williams, 1954a).
Central projection of first pleopod usually
consisting 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 of 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, Orconectes
lancifer; b, O. limosus; c, O.
propinquus; d, O. eupunctus;
e, O. erichsonianus.
10(9). Rostrum with acumen as long as,
or longer than, basal portion (Fig. 62a):.......................................
.............................................................................................
Orconectes lancifer (Hagen, 1870).
(Lentic and
sluggish lotic habitats from Texas and Mississippi northward to extreme
southern Illinois. Literature: Hobbs and Marchand, 1943;
Penn, 1952; Penn and Hobbs, 1958).
Rostrum with acumen never as long as basal
potion..........................................................................
11
Fig. 63.
Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Orconectes
mississippiensis; b, O. difficilis;
c, O. hathawayi; d, O. sanborni
erismophorous; e, O. sloanii; f, O.
obscurus; g, O. immunis, h, O.
marchandi; i, O. kentuckiensis.
11(10). Mesial process of first
pleopod with basal protion directed distally and distal 1/3 bent caudally
at right angle to principal axis of appendage (Fig.
63a):..................................................................
.....................................................................................
Orconectes mississippiensis (Faxon, 1884).
(Streams and
roadside ditches in eastern 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):...
..................................................................................................
Orconectes 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):...
............................................................................................................
Orconectes hathawayi Penn, 1942.
(Streams from
Jackson and Rapides parishes south to Vermilion Parish, Louisiana.
Literature: Penn, 1952).
13(9). Mesial process of first pleopod
with accessory lobe on caudal surface (Fig. 63d):.......................
......................................................
Orconectes
sanbornii erismophorous 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):........
.............................................................................................................
Orconectes obscurus (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):...................................................................
............................................................................................................
Orconectes 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 principal 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):........................
Orconectes
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
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):....................
..................................................................................................
Orconectes kentuckiensis 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 marrowest part; mesial process of first
pleopod subelliptical in cross-section and directed more distally than
caudally (Fig. 63e):.................
.....................................................................................................................
Orconectes sloanii (Bundy, 1876).
(Streams in
southern Indiana and southwestern Ohio. Literature: Eberly,
1955;
Faxon, 1885; Rhoades, 1941a).
19(15). 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 inter-molt individuals)
(Fig. 62b; see
also Figs 51, 65a):............................................
Orconectes
limosus (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):..............................................................................
Orconectes shoupi Hobbs, 1948.
(Streams in the
Cumberland drainage system in the vicinity of Nashville.
Literature:
Hobbs, 1948a; Rhoades, 1962).
Lenght 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, Orconectes shoupi, b, O.
indianensis; c, O. shoupi; d, O.
wrighti; e, O. indianensis.
22(21). Chela densely setose
dorsally; in dorsal aspect, setae obscuring most tubercles on
opposable surfaces of fingers (Fig. 64d; see also
Fig. 65c):...............................................................
.............................................................................................................
Orconectes 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):......................................................................
.............................................................................................................
Orconectes 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. 63d,
e):..............................................................................................
25
24(23). Mesial process of first
pleopod with acute apex (Fig. 65e; see also Figs.
5m, 62c):............................
................................................................................................................
Orconectes propinquus (Girard, 1852).
(Streams and
littoral areas of cold lentic habits from Ontario, Quebec and western
New
England southward to Pennsylvania and westward to Illinois and
Wisconsin.
Literature: Crocker and Barr, 1968; Fitzpatrick,
1967a).
Mesial process of first pleopod truncate or
spatulate apically (Fig. 67e):....................................................
..................................................................................................
Orconectes iowaensis Fitzpatrick, 1968.
(Streams in the
Mississippi drainage system in eastern Iowa. Literature:
Fitzpatrick, 1968).
EDITOR'S
NOTE: This species is no longer recognized !!
(synonym of Orconectes propinquus).
25(23). Tip of mesial process of
first pleopod constituting at least 1/5 total length of appendage
(Fig.
65f, g):........................................................................................................................................
27
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):.................................................................................
Orconectes eupunctus 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):.....................................................
Orconectes
erichsonianus (Faxon, 1898).
(Streams in the
Coosa and Tennessee drainage systems in Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee,
and
Virginia. Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1967a).
28(26). Mesial process of first
pleopod twisted and extending slightly farther distally than
central
projection (Fig. 65h; see also Fig.
66b):...............
Orconectes
tricuspis 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):.....................................................................
Orconectes sanbornii sanbornii (Faxon, 1884).
(Tributaries of
the Ohio River in Ohio, northeastern Kentucky, and West Virginia.
Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1967a).
Fig. 65.
Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Orconectes
limosus; b, O. shoupi; c, O.
wrighti; d, O. indianensis; e, O.
propinquus; f, O. eupunctus; g, O.
erichsonianus; h, O. tricuspis;
i, O. s. sanborni.
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, Orconectes
erichsonianus; b, O. tricuspis;
c, O. rafinesquei; d, O. virginiensis;
e, O. illinoiensis.
30(29). Length of areola greater than 5
times its width (Fig. 67a; see also Figs.
66c, 67c):.........................
.............................................................................................
Orconectes rafinesquei Rhoades, 1944.
(Streams in the
Rough River drainage in Kentucky. Literature: Rhoades).
Length of areola not more than 5 times its width
(Fig. 67b; see also Figs.
66d, 67d):............................
......................................................................................................
Orconectes virginiensis 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):.................................................................................
Orconectes illinoiensis Brown, 1956.
(Streams in
southern Illinois . Literature: Fitzpatrick, 1967a).
Central projection of first pleopod bladelike
with truncate or rounded apex (Fig. 67g):............................
.......................................................................................................
Orconectes bisectus 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, O. virginiensis; c, O. rafinesquei;
d, O. virginiensis; e, O. iowaensis;
f, O. illinoiensis; g, O. bisectus.
32(1). Hooks on ischia of third
and fourth pereiopods (Fig. 4c); mesial process of first pleopod
broadened and deeply grooved distally
(Fig. 68c):..........
Orconectes
peruncus (Creaser, 1931).
(Streams in the
headwaters of the St. Francis River in southeastern Missouri.
Literature: Creaser, 1934a; Williams, 1954a).
Hooks on ischia of third pereiopods only (Fig.
4a), except in some populations of O. 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, Orconectes leptogonopodus;
b, O. spinosus; c, O. peruncus;
d, O. putnami; e, O. leptogonopodus;
f, O. medius; g, O. 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):..................................................................................
Orconectes
putnami (Faxon, 1844).
(Streams in the
Ohio drainage in western Kentucky, southern Indiana (?), and Tennessee
(?).
The limits of the ranges of this species have not been
determined.
Literature:
Ortmann, 1931, treated this species
and O. spinosus as synonyms of O. juvenilis.
Length of mesial margin of palm of chela greater
than 1/2 length of dactyl (Fig. 69b-d):................
35
Fig. 69.
Dorsal view of chelae. a, Orconectes putnami;
b, O. leptogonopodus; c, O. medius;
d, O. spinosus.
35(34). Rostrum with median
carina (Fig. 68a; see also Figs.
68e, 69b):.....................................................
........................................................................................
Orconectes
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):....................
Orconectes
medius (Faxon, 1885).
(Streams in the
headwaters of the Big and Merames rivers in southeastern Missouri.
Literature: Creaser, 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):....................................
Orconectes spinosus
(Bundy, 1877).
(Streams
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 O. putnami as synonyms of O. 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
Fig. 70.
Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Orconectes
hobbsi; b, O. p. palmeri; c, O.
p. creolanus; d, O. p. longimanus;
e, O. compressus; f, O. alabamensis;
g, O. 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):................................
..........................................................................................................
Orconectes 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, Orconectes hobbsi;
b, O. p. palmeri; c, O. compressus;
d, O. alabamensis.
40(39). Central projection of
first pleopod comprising more than 1/3 total length of appendage
(Fig. 70b; see also Fig.
71b):..................................
Orconectes
palmeri palmeri (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):...............................................................
Orconectes palmeri creolanus (Creaser, 1933).
(Streams in the
Lake Pontchartrain watershed and he 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):....................................................................
Orconectes
palmeri 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 Texas.
Literature: Penn, 1957).
42(38). Rostrum with median carina;
areola less than 5 time 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 portion of central projection of first
pleopod not strongly recurved (Fig. 70e):.........................
Orconectes
compressus (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):.....................................
Orconectes
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):...................................
Orconectes quadruncus
(Creaser, 1933).
(Streams in the
headwaters of the St. Francis River in Iron, St. Genevieve, and Madison
counties,
Missouri. Literature: Creaser, 1934a;
Williams, 1954a).
Mesial process of first pleopod with no
prominences slightly proximal to caudodistal
extremity (Fig. 72):........................................................................................................................................
45
Fig. 72.
Mesial view of left first pleopods. a, Orconectes
rhoadesi; b, O. validus; c, O.
nais; d, O. m. meeki; e, O. m.
brevis; f, O. longidigitus; g, O.
punctimanus; h, O. 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 recurved caudally (Fig. 72c-h):.................
47
(Stream
tributaries of the Cumberland, Duck, and Tennessee rivers in
Tennessee.
Literature: Hobbs, 1949).
Principal axis of first pleopod inclined caudally
(Fig. 72b):...............
Orconectes 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
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):........................
...................................................................................................................
Orconectes nais (Faxon, 1885).
(Streams in
Kansas and Texas eastward to Arkansas; limits of its range not clearly
defined
for apparently often confused with O. virilis.
Literature: Creaser 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):.......................................................................
......................................................................................................
Orconectes meeki
brevis Williams,
1952.
(Streams in the
upper Arkansas River drainage in eastern Oklahoma and norhtwestern
Arkansas.
Literature: Williams, 1954a).
49(47). Dactyl of chela approximately 3
times length of mesial margin of palm (Fig. 73x; see also Fig. 72f):...............................................................................
Orconectes 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):...................................................
Orconectes
punctimanus (Creaser, 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. 73e):................................................
Orconectes
meeki meeki (Faxon, 1898).
(Streams in the
Arkansas, Red, an 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):.........................................................
Orconectes
virilis (Hagen, 1870).
(Lentic and
lotic habitats in Canada and the northern part of the United States; the
southern
boundry of its range is not known. Its relationships to
O.
nais and O. causeyi, the latter here
considered a synonym, are far from
clear. Introductions into Maryland, California, and perhaps
elsewhere have resulted in its being one of the most widely dispersed
crayfishes in North America.
Literature: Crocker and Barr,
1968).
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):..
...............................................................................
Orconectes 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, Orconectes nias;
b, O. m. meeki; c, O. longidigitus;
d, O. punctimanus; e, O. virilis.
54(53). Rostrum with median
carina (Fig. 75a); fingers of chela inflated ad gap between them
greater
than 1/4 width of palm (Fig. 75c; see also Fig.
74b):.....................................................
..............................................................
Orconectes
neglectus chaenodactylus 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):...................................
..........................................................................................................
Orconectes rusticus (Girard, 1852).
(Streams from
southern Ontario to Illinois, Ohio, and Kentucky; 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).
55(52). Cephalic surface of first
pleopod with shoulder or distinct bulge (Figs. 74b s, 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, Orconectes
jeffersoni; b, O. neglectus chaenodactylus;
c, O. rusticus; d, O. luteus;
e, O. macrus; f, O. acares; g,
O. nana; h, O. barrenensis; i,
O. 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 surace of pleopod forming right angle with base
of central projection (Fig. 74e):............................................
Orconectes
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):...............................................................................
Orconectes medius (Faxon, 1885).
Fig. 75.
a-b, Dorsal view of carapaces; c-e, Dorsal view of
chelae. a, Orconectes neglectus chaenodactylus;
b, O. rusticus; c, O. n, chaenodactylus;
d, O. rusticus; e, O. 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):.................................
....................................................................................................
Orconectes spinosus (Bundy, 1877).
Cervical spines absent or represented by small
tubercles (See also Fig. 74f):.....................
..........................................................................................................
Orconectes acares 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
carapaces. a, Orconectes nana; b, O.
barrenensis; c, O. mirus; d, O.
barrenensis; e, O. mirus.
61(59). Maximum subterminal
diameter of mesial process of first pleopod greater than that
of adjacent
segment of central projection (Fig. 77a):..............
Orconectes
hylas (Faxon, 1890).
(Streams in the
Black and Big drainage systems in southeastern Missouri.
Literature: Creaser, 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):....................................
Orconectes
juvenilis (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 O. putnami
and O. spinosus have not been
determined. Literature:
Ortmann, 1931; latter two treated as synonyms of O. juvenilis).
Shoulder on cephalic margin of first pleopod very
weakly developed; central projection
rather strongly recurved
distally (Fig. 77c):.............................
Orconectes
ozarkae 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, Orconectes
hylas; b, O. juvenilis; c, O.
ozarkae; d, O. menae; e, O.
transfuga; f, O. williamsi; g, O.
n. neglectus; h, O. placidus; i, O.
forceps.
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):...........................................
.............................................................
Orconectes
neglectus chaenodactylus Williams, 1952.
Lateral margin of fixed finger of chela evenly
countoured with lateral margin of palm;
maximum width of gap between
fingers usually (except sometimes in O. barrenensis
and O. mirus) 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):............................................................................................
Orconectes luteus (Creaser 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):...............................................................
Orconectes
nana Williams, 1952).
Fig. 78.
Ventral view of thoracic region. a, Pleopods
reaching coxae of first pereiopods (cx1);
b, Pleopods reaching coxae of second pereiopods.
66(64). Areola more than 6 times
longer than broad (Fig. 79c; see also Figs.
77d, 79d):.................
.....................................................................................................
Orconectes menae (Creaser, 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
67(66). Shoulder on cephalic
margin of first pleopod angular (Fig. 74i; see also
Fig. 76c, e):.........
......................................................................................................
Orconectes 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):.
............................................................................................
Orconectes barrenensis Rhoades, 1944.
(Streams in the
Barren River drainage in Kentucky and Tennessee and in the Green
River
system in Kentucky. Literature: 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, Orconectes transfuga;
b, O. williamsi; c-d, O. menae.
69(68). Rostrum with median
carina (Fig. 79a; see also Figs.
77e, 80a):........................................
...............................................................................................
Orconectes transfuga Fitzpatrick, 1966.
EDITOR's
NOTE: This species is no longer recognized. Synonym of
Orconectes neglectus neglectus.
(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):................
.............................................................................................
Orconectes 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 (Creaser, 1933).
71(68). Length of dactyl of chela
greater than 2.5 times length of mesial margin of palm
(Fig. 80c; see also Fig.
77h):................................................
Orconectes placidus (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, Orconectes transfuga;
b, O. williamsi; c, O. placidus;
d. O. forceps; e, O. n. neglectus.
72(71). Gap between closed
fingers of chela more than 1/4 width of palm (Fig.
80d; see also Fig. 77i):......................................................................................
Orconectes 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):..................................................................
Orconectes
neglectus neglectus (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).