Syllides sp.

San Martin, G & Hutchings, PA, 2006, Eusyllinae (Polychaeta: Syllidae) from Australia with the Description of a New Genus and Fifteen New Species, Records of the Australian Museum 58, pp. 257-370 : 365-367

Syllides sp.

Fig. 91A–D

Material examined. AUSTRALIA: WESTERN AUSTRALIA: N end of beach, Bundegi Reef, Exmouth Gulf , 21°49'S 114°11'E, rocky rubble & sticky sediment with brown & epiphytic algae, 2 m, coll. H.E. Stoddart, 4 Jan 1984 ( AM W28920) .

Description. Body 2.0 mm long, 0.2 mm wide, with 25 chaetigers. Dorsum of each segment with 2–4 transverse rows, more or less well defined, of small, golden inclusions ( Fig. 91A). Prostomium trapezoidal, with 2 distinct tufts of long cilia on anterior corners, and 4 eyes in open trapezoidal arrangement ( Fig. 91A); antennae detached. Palps slightly shorter than prostomium. Peristomium similar in length to following segments, tentacular cirri missing. Dorsal cirri of chaetigers 1 and 2 smooth, elongated, longer than body width; remaining dorsal cirri articulated, long, up to 11 articles, with 1 dark inclusion of granular material in most articles ( Fig. 91A). Compound chaetae with translucent hooded shafts serrated on edge, and relatively short, bidentate blades, with short spines on margin, and distributed in 5 pairs within fascicle, each pair of similar length ( Fig. 91B); dorsal most pair 26 µm in length and ventral most pair 15 µm in length. Dorsal simple chaetae from chaetiger 1, slender, slightly bifid, with short spines on margin, lacking distal hood ( Fig. 91C). Acicula solitary, distally knobbed, with distal, filiform tip ( Fig. 91D). Pharynx long and slender, through 5 segments. Proventricle short, slender, through 2 segments ( Fig. 91A), with about 17 muscle cell rows.

Remarks. This specimen is characterized by having a hood on the edge of shafts of compound chaetae, and blades lacking spurs. The most similar species is Syllides gomezi San Martín, 1990 , from Cuba ( San Martín, 1990). The Cuban species, however has a longer proventriculus through 4 segments, instead of through 2 as occurs in Syllides sp. , and the dorsal simple chaetae are entire, distally pointed, whereas they are bifid in the Australian species. Other species of Syllides also lack basal spurs on the blades of compound chaetae, but none have a hood on the edge of shafts. Syllides sanyaensis Ding & Westheide (1997) described from China, is similar, but the dorsal simple chaetae are hooded whereas those of this specimen lack such hoods. Since we have a single, somewhat damaged specimen, we prefer not to describe this species as a new species.

Habitat. Rocky rubble and sediment with brown and epiphytic algae, in depths of 2 m.

Distribution. Australia (Western Australia).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. This paper was possible by a Visiting Fellowship from The Australian Museum to the senior author; we want to express our gratitude to the Museum authorities for the grant, and all colleagues that gave their help and assistance during, before and after the stay in Sydney of the senior author. Also, funds of the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain, helped in the travel and stay. A grant from the Spanish Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte (Programa de Movilidad Salvador de Madariaga, ref. PR2002-207) and the Project of the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología, BOS2003-01322, provided financial support. Dr Penny Berents facilitated the study of the collection. Kate Attwood and Anna Murray did the rough sorting of the material, previously only identified to family level, and extracted the specimens of the subfamily Eusyllinae , and, together with Keyne Monro, managed the collection and checked the material examined sections for us. Previous work extracting syllids was mostly done by volunteers. Richard Johnson helped us with the literature. The comments and suggestions of two anonymous referees, as well as the efforts of the editor, greatly improved the quality of the paper. Ms Miranda Lowe, British Museum Natural History, London ( UK), Dr Angelika Brandt and Gisella Wegener, Hamburgische Zoologische Museum, Hamburg ( Germany) kindly assisted the senior author during his stay in the Hamburgische Museum to examine specimens for comparison. We want to express also our gratitude to Miss Yolanda Lucas, who collaborated on the figures 5, 7, 40, 57, 74, and 80. Dr Esperanza Salvador (SIDI of the UAM), and Sue Lindsey (AM) who assisted in the SEM study and photographs.