Comparative morphology among trunk limbs of Caenestheriella gifuensis and Leptestheria kawachiensis (Crustacea: Branchiopoda: Spinicaudata)

Morphological differences among groups of the 24 trunk limbs of Caenestheriella gifuensis (Ishikawa, 1895) and differences between males and females are described and illustrated. A setose attenuate lobe located proximally near enditic lobe 1 and a discoid lobe covered with small setae proximal to enditic lobe 1 are newly described. The five ventral enditic lobes, endopod, exopod, and dorsal exite of traditional spinicaudatan morphology are redescribed. Trunk limbs 1–4 of females bear a palp on enditic lobe 5 and trunk limbs 1–15 of males bear a similar palp. A second, articulating palp is associated with the base of the endopod of trunk limbs 1–2 of males. The proximal part of trunk limbs 19–24, bearing enditic lobe 1, articulates by an arthrodial membrane with the remainder of the limb, and the exite is distal to this arthrodial membrane. Development of trunk limbs, ascertained through an examination of early juvenile instars of Leptestheria kawachiensis Uéno, 1927, includes an asetose limb followed in time by a series of setose limbs that increase in morphological complexity with age. The number of lobes on the asetose limb varies from seven (corresponding to five enditic lobes, an endopod, and an exopod) on anterior limbs to five on trunk limb 24, which lacks the lobes corresponding to enditic lobe 4 and the endopod; these two structures are added later to setose limbs. The attenuate lobe, the discoid lobe, the exite of all trunk limbs, and the palps of the anterior trunk limbs are added to the setose limbs. Development of anterior limbs is accelerated relative to that of posterior limbs, and development of the more posterior limbs is truncated relative to that of limbs immediately anterior to them. Enditic lobe 4 and the endopod of limbs like trunk limb 24 develop from, or are patterned by, enditic lobe 5; the articulating palp of male trunk limbs 1–2 also may be added in this way. A comparison of these observations with development of the copepod maxilliped suggests that the spinicaudatan trunk limb is composed of a praecoxa with three lobes, a coxa and a basis each with one lobe, and an endopod of three segments in females and four in males. This is similar to the homology scheme previously proposed by Hansen in 1925. A critique is given of attempts to homologize parts of arthropod limbs based on developmental gene expression patterns. Stenopodal to phyllopodal transformations of maxillipeds in copepods provide a model at least partly applicable to spinicaudatans, and a ‘multibranched’ interpretation of spinicaudatan (and by extension branchiopodan) limb morphology is rejected. There is nothing intrinsic to the structure of the adult trunk limbs suggesting that they are similar to the adult limbs of the ancestral branchiopod or the ancestral crustacean, but early developmental steps of more posterior limbs are good matches for the morphology of an ancestral crustacean biramal limb predicted by a hypothesis of duplication of the proximo‐distal axis. © 2003 The Linnean Society of London, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2003, 139 , 547–564. No claim to original US government works.