(2011b) vs.40–45 × 20–25 cm in the present study, 30–55 × 12–25 cm in Song (1995) and (45)–60 × 20–30 in Pan et al. (2011); thediscrepancy perhaps attribute to the living environment.The only differences between our Zhangjiang isolate andthe previously described morphotypes found from other geo-graphical areas, are the slightly greater range of number ofsomatic kineties (18–24 vs. 19–20) and the ratio of buccalfield to body length is less [40% vs. 40–50% in Pan et al.(2011), (60)% in Song (1995) and Fan et al. (2011a,b)].Nevertheless, we believe them to be conspecific.