Psalidopus huxleyi — The Life Data

Animalia/Arthropoda/Malacostraca/Decapoda/Psalidopodidae/Psalidopus

At a glance

Occurrence records91

Data sources6

Biological traits1

DNA specimens7

eDNA detections1

Sources6 archives

Databases and archives Psalidopus huxleyi's data was compiled from.

BioWikiNetmultilingual Wikipediamultilingual↗

GBIFGlobal Biodiversity Information Facility34 records↗

OBISOcean Biodiversity Information System57 records↗

ENAEuropean Nucleotide Archive · EMBL-EBI1 eDNA detections↗

BOLD SystemsCentre for Biodiversity Genomics7 specimens↗

Open Tree of LifeOpenTreephylogeny backbone↗

On this page5 sections

Every layer below draws on the sources above — open one to explore it, or use ← → to move between tabs.

NarrativeWikipediaarticle

Traits & measurements1 literature sources1 traits

Occurrence & distributionGBIF · OBIS91 records

Environmental DNA1 datasets · 0 countries1 detections

DNA & barcodingBOLD7 specimens

01Narrative

Psalidopus huxleyi is een garnalensoort uit de familie van de Psalidopodidae. De wetenschappelijke naam van de soort is voor het eerst geldig gepubliceerd in 1892 door Wood-Mason.

No narrative description available for this taxon yet.

02Traits & measurements

SourcesSeaLifeBase

Habitat & environment1

Habitat saltwateryes

05DNA & barcoding7 specimens

A DNA barcode is a short, standardised stretch of genes that works like a fingerprint — enough to tell one species from another. Below is the molecular trace Psalidopus huxleyi has left across the world's sequence archives.

At a glance

DNA specimens7

BINs1

Marker genes2

eDNA detections1

Countries3

Marker genes sequenced

★ the standard DNA barcode for this group — the short region actually read to tell this species apart. The rest are extra genes sequenced along the way.

COI-5P18S-5P

animal barcoderibosomal

08Occurrence & distribution

Record type91 records

Wild obs. + sensor21

Museum / vouchered69

Other1

Range

Area of Occupancy AOO192 km²

Depth

0–200 m sunlit1

200–1000 m twilight19

1–4 km midnight4

>4 km abyssal0

median 941 m · max 1 280 m · 24 records with depth

Wildobservation + sensor

Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.

Coordinate accuracy92% within 1 km

≤1 km 12>10 km 1

13 georeferenced · 8 without coordinates

Open the mapobservation + sensor21

Museum / Voucheredphysical evidence

Backed by a physical specimen — a herbarium sheet, sample or voucher held in a collection. “Vouchered” means supported by material evidence, not just an observation.

Coordinate accuracy89% within 1 km

≤1 km 16≤10 km 1>10 km 1

18 georeferenced · 51 without coordinates

Open the institutions mapphysical evidence69

Wildobservation + sensor

Human sightings and records, or camera-trap / sensor detections — someone (or a device) saw or captured the species in the wild.

10Collections & institutions

Holding institutions3 of 5 geolocated

Institutions and collections holding physical, vouchered specimens of this species — click a row to fly to it on the map.

Institution	Specimens
Paris, FR	7
Washington, US	6
Australian National Fish Collectionlocation not on record	5
Museums Victoria, Australialocation not on record	5
Chiba, JP	2

5 institutions · 25 of 69 vouchered records shown · 1 without an institution code

09Environmental DNA1 detections

Where the DNA of Psalidopus huxleyi was picked up in samples of water, soil or air — nobody saw the organism, only its DNA left behind. A trace is a clue that the species was near, not a confirmed sighting.

Signal

Detections DNA found1

Studies independent surveys1

Signal confidence: weakweighed across independent studies, places & mapped detections

Where its DNA was found

0 of 1 detections have coordinates

Open the map0 countries0

How strong is each trace?

DNA read depthRead counts were not reported for this species — the map shows presence only, not how strong each trace was.

How to read this: each dot is one detection of this species' DNA in an environmental sample. The confidence meter weighs how many independent studies and places back up the signal — one detection in one study is a hint; many across several studies is solid. Records dated before 2008 (when eDNA methods began) are treated as likely mislabeled and left off the map.