Dipolydora cf. commensalis (Andrews, 1891)
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1015.54387 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F6BD9213-9DB7-4564-AA00-3C61B2F43B2D |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/5BEAEF98-C1CB-58FE-AFC0-035B88DB4FC8 |
treatment provided by |
|
scientific name |
Dipolydora cf. commensalis (Andrews, 1891) |
status |
|
Dipolydora cf. commensalis (Andrews, 1891) View in CoL Fig. 7L View Figure 7
Larval morphology.
Overall shape elongated and slender. Prostomium small but wider than body and rounded anteriorly. Three pairs of eyes present, most lateral pairs double-eyes of kidney-shaped appearance. Ramified melanophores present around eyes. Black pigmentation on lateral peristomium absent. Median row of ramified melanophores from chaetiger I onwards. Lateral and ventral pigments absent. A central black pigment spot and a pair of dark brown pigments on pygidium. Pygidium has a dorsal notch and lacks appendages. Gastrotrochs on chaetigers III, V, VII, X, XIII, XV, XVII, XIX, XXI, and XXIII. Modified chaetae develop in chaetiger V in late larvae.
Remarks.
No adults of this species were collected in the present study. The 18S and 16S rRNA gene sequences obtained from the larvae of this species neither match nor constitute a monophyletic clade with any of the other available spionid sequences (Figs 2 View Figure 2 , 3 View Figure 3 ). However, this species was tentatively identified as D. cf. commensalis based on its larval morphology, as it includes the characteristic dorsal pigment pattern of larvae of D. commensalis as described by Andrews (1891), Hatfield (1965), Blake (1969), and Radashevsky (1989) (described as Polydora commensalis by all of these authors). The combination of a slender body and a single dorsal median row of distinct melanophores from chaetiger I to the end of the body is distinctive among spionid larvae and has not been reported for any other spionid species. Currently, there are no records of D. commensalis from Japan; however, the presence of this species in Japan is expected as it has been reported from the Asian continental coast of the Sea of Japan and the Kurile Islands ( Radashevsky 1993). This species is an obligate symbiont of hermit crabs ( Blake 1996; Williams and McDermott 1997), but little effort was devoted to collecting hermit crab shells in the present study.
Notably, the results of the phylogenetic analysis in the present study showed that D. cf. commensalis deviates from the monophyletic clade constituted by many other Dipolydora species. This result supports the suggestion by Blake (1971) that D. commensalis may represent a distinct genus as its morphology deviates widely from other species of the genus Polydora and Dipolydora .
Only three individuals of planktonic larvae of this species were collected in Sasuhama in January 2013. A small patch of lateral black pigments on the anterior margin of each chaetiger in late larvae was described in Hatfield (1965) and Blake (1969). However, these pigments were not observed in the present study, as in Andrews (1891) and Radashevsky (1989). Although Hatfield (1965) and Blake (1966) noted the high similarity between the larval morphologies of D. commensalis and Polydora hermaphroditica Hannerz, 1956, the adult morphologies of these two species were reported to be completely different ( Bhaud 1966). The dorsal pigment pattern of P. hermaphroditica larvae reported by Hannerz (1956) rather resembles those of Polydora glycymerica and Polydora cf. glymymerica larvae reported by Radashevsky (1989) and in the present study, respectively.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
SubFamily |
Spioninae |
Genus |