Re-examination of type and other material in light of the cladistic analysis allows additions and revisions to be made to existing species descriptions.
Metaingolfiella mirabilis Ruffo, 1969
Material examined. – collection of the Natural History Museum Verona.
Additional redescription: cephalon fused over about half the lateral lower side with the first pereionite.
Trogloleleupia eggerti (Ruffo, 1964)
Material examined . – collection of the Natural History Museum Verona.
The allotype (female) designated by Ruffo was restudied and some more sexual dimorphism is reported. Not only is the form of the first pleopod different – elongate in males and triangular in females – as mentioned by Ruffo, but also the female lacks a hooked spine on the base of the peduncle of the first uropod and the claviform process on the peduncle of the second uropod. Another noteworthy difference is the lack of the palmar corner process in the second gnathopod, but this occurs in other ingolfiellids too.
Maxilla 1, (Fig 6a) palp two-segmented with 4 setae on distal segment. Outer lobe with 6 serrated and combed robust setae. Inner lobe with 5 setae almost evenly distributed along its margin.
Maxilla 2 (Fig 6b), with both lobes having 5 setae, some plumed.
Mandible (Fig 6c, d). Left side with pointed pars molaris and 3 hooked and serrate spines at the base of the masticatory teeth. Right side with two such curved hooks.
Maxilliped (Fig. 5e). Palp with 3 spines apically and 1 spinule on a small pedestal submarginally on the propodal segment.
Pleopod 1 (Fig. 5f). Triangular fin with a slightly serrated hind corner margin and 3 tiny spinules on the lower margin
Trogloleleupia leleupi Ruffo, 1951
Material examined. – British Museum, Lusaka Boreholes, Zimbabwe, 9 specimen; Zoological Institute and Museum, University of Hamburg, 15 specimens, Kivu, Distric de Kindu, Territoire de Kasongo, Grotte de Mwana-Kussu, Congo, 24-X-1954
In the descriptions of Ruffo (1951) and Ingle (1961) no special emphasis was placed on the form of the first pleopod. These pleopods have in most ingolfiellids a different form in males and females. However, in the many specimens of Trogloleleupia (44 + from Belgian Congo and 9 from Lusaka, Zimbabwe), no distinction could be made between the sexes. We checked the pleopods for such differences. Indeed, some of the smaller specimens carry the digitiform first pleopods with two setules on the apex typical of males, while the larger specimens have the more spatulate crenelated type as in pleopod 2 and 3.
Antenna 1 (Fig. 5k) with a 4-segmented flagellum, bearing an aesthetasc on each segment. Accessory flagellum 3-segmented.
Gnathopod 2 (Fig. 5g, h) differs in aspect with increasing size. the 8 mm male (6e) has a hyaline lobe aligning the margin right under the palmar process but this is not seen in a 12 mm specimen (Fig. 5h), with a sculptured palmar process. The crenelations are more numerous on the palmar margin.
Pleopod 1 (Fig. 5i, j) is long and slender in the male, having two setae on the apex. the female form is somewhat triangular and lightly serrate on the hind margin.
Uropod 3 (Fig. 5l) in one instance quite long, with five slender setae on its apex.
Ingolfiella littoralis Hansen 1903
Material examined. – Holotype specimen, Zoological Museum of Copenhagen (ZMUC-CRU-7088)
Gnathopod 1 (Fig. 6a), margin of palm smooth, without structures or serrations
Gnathopod 2 (Fig. 6b), margin of palm serrated.
Pereiopod 3, 4 (Fig. 6c, d), claws tapering to a forked end
Pereiopod 5 (Fig. 6e), claw thick, undifferentiated.
Uropod 2 (Fig. 3g), with three oblique rows of setules on the inner side of the peduncle and a small group of setules on the inner side of the inner ramus.
Ingolfiella tabularis Stock 1977
Material examined. – Zoological Museum of Amsterdam, paratypes, cat. nr. 106.107
Mandible (Fig. 6g, h, I), with cup shaped spine on left mandible.
Maxilla 1 (Fig. 6j), with 6 combed and serrate setae of irregular length on outer lobe. Inner lobe with 1 seta, palp with 3 setae on apex.
Maxilla 2 (Fig. 6k), fitted with sparse setae on both lobes.
Ingolfiella margaritae Stock 1979
Material examined. – Zoological Museum of Amsterdam, holotype cat. nr. 106.443 – 444
Mandible (Fig. 6n), with apparently broken off molar process. Left or right side could not be discerned. Three curved spines just below pars incisiva.
Ingolfiella quadridentata Stock 1979
Material examined. – Zoological Museum of Amsterdam, paratypes cat. nr. 106.445 – 446
Mandible (Fig. 6l) with pointed molar process. Three very small spinules below the pars incisiva
Maxilla 1(Fig. 6m) has an outer lobe with 6 robust spines, bifid or serrate. Inner lobe with 1 seta, palp with 3 on apex.
Ingolfiella abyssi Hansen 1903
Material examined. – Museum of Copenhagen ZMUC-CRU-5030
Antenna 1 (Fig. 7c), with 4-segmented flagellum, bearing aesthetascs on the second and fourth segment. Accessory flagellum 3-segmented.
Gnathopod 1 and 2 (Fig. 7a, b), with 4 incisions on the inner margin of the dactylus, forming 4 blades. Gnathopod 2 claw with a clear articulation between dactylus and unguis.
Pereiopods 3–7 (Fig. 7d-g), with bifid claws in p3 and p4 (8d) and straight in p5-7 (8e, f, g).
Pleopods 1–3 (Fig. 7h-j), with more or less triangular form.
Uropod 1 (Fig. 7k), with 3 spiniform processes (instead of 4 in the original description) on inner ramus. Outer ramus with a breach on two-thirds of its length, dividing the ramus in two articles.