Nicolea ceciliae, Santos & Nogueira & Fukuda & Christoffersen, 2010

Santos, Andre Souza Dos, Nogueira, João Miguel De Matos, Fukuda, Marcelo Veronesi & Christoffersen, Martin Lindsey, 2010, New terebellids (Polychaeta: Terebellidae) from northeastern Brazil, Zootaxa 2389 (1), pp. 1-46: 24-32

publication ID

http://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.2389.1.1

DOI

http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5313133

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/8C6287D6-4307-FFFA-FF16-28E83920B7F9

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Nicolea ceciliae
status

sp. nov.

Nicolea ceciliae   sp. nov.

( Figs. 11–15 View FIGURE 11 View FIGURE 12 View FIGURE 13 View FIGURE 14 View FIGURE 15 ; Table 3)

Material examined. Type material. Holotype and paratypes 1–10 coll. Sta. 20 (05°04’46.9”S 36°26’19.5”W), 8 Nov 2007; holotype MZUSP 01032, paratype 1 CIPY-POLY-1392, paratype 2 MZUSP 01033, paratype 3 MZUSP 01034, paratypes 4-5 LACM-AHF POLY 2257, paratype 6 ZMUC-POL-2108, paratype 7 CIPY-POLY-1393, paratype 8 CIPY-POLY-1394, paratype 9 CIPY-POLY-1395, paratype 10 MZUSP 01035. For more information on each specimen of type-series see Table 3.

Additional material. Sta. 20 (05°04’46.9”S 36°26’19.5”W): 1 posterior end, coll. 8 Nov 2007. Sta 22 (05°05’12.9”S 36°28’03.8”W): 1 spec., coll. 10 Nov 2007. Sta 24 (05°04’05.6”S 36°26’19.5”W): 3 specs plus pieces of tubes of another taxon, coll. 11 Nov 2007.

Comparative material examined. Nicolea uspiana ( Nogueira, 2003)   : Holotype (MHN BPO 72/0) and 5 paratypes (MHN BPO 72/1–5), coll. Ilha Porchat , São Vicente, State of São Paulo, Brazil (23º59’S 46º22’W), 17 Nov 2002 GoogleMaps   . Non-type material: 331 specs, coll. Praia do Guaraú , Peruíbe, State of São Paulo, Brazil (24 o 22’S 47 o 01’W), 5 Mar 2007 GoogleMaps   .

Nicolea cetrata   ( Ehlers, 1887, as Terebella cetrata   ). Holotype ( MCZ 834 View Materials ), coll. Expedition Blake, USA, Florida, Key West, by A. Agassiz, 2–4 m, 1877–1878; incomplete spec., in relatively good state of preservation; slides: notochaetae from segment 18; neurochaetae from segments 6, 13, 23, 61.  

Description. Thick tube, mucous, with sand, small stones and fragments of shells embedded. Complete specimens 15–22 mm long, around 1 mm wide, with up to 55 segments; larger incomplete specimens up to 24 (17) mm long, 2.1 (1.5) mm wide ( Table 3); buccal tentacles up to 14 (6) mm long. Preserved body uniformly beige, neuropodia throughout bordered with brown pigmentation, notopodia with brown line at tip ( Figs 11A– C, E–H View FIGURE 11 ; 12A–B, F–H View FIGURE 12 ). Anterior segments slightly inflated dorsally ( Figs 11B–C, E–G View FIGURE 11 ; 12A, C, E–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13A–B, D–E, G–I View FIGURE 13 ). Body progressively wider until segment 8; anterior segments compact, about same length, segments progressively longer from segment 8 until segment on which notopodia terminate, more evident from segment 11 ( Figs 11A–H View FIGURE 11 ; 12A–B, F–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13A–I View FIGURE 13 ). Ventral shields on segments 2–15 or 16 (2–15), smooth shields, rectangular; shields on segments 2–4 about same width, then shields progressively narrower and longer until segment 15–16, more evident from segment 7 ( Figs 11A, C, E–I View FIGURE 11 ; 12A–B, F–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13B–C, F–G, J View FIGURE 13 ); after segments 15–16 shields replaced by mid-ventral groove extending until pygidium ( Figs 11A, L View FIGURE 11 ; 13C, F View FIGURE 13 ). Prostomium at base of upper lip; distal part forming shelf-like process from which buccal tentacles originate; basal part of prostomium with thin row of eyespots more concentrated laterally, mid-dorsal gap sometimes present. Peristomium restricted to lips; upper lip longer than wide; lower lip swollen, cushion-like ( Figs 11H– I View FIGURE 11 ; 12A–B, D, F–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13C, F, J View FIGURE 13 ). Segment 1 dorsally short, with well developed ventral lobe below lower lip ( Figs 11A–I, K View FIGURE 11 ; 12A–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13C, F–G, J View FIGURE 13 ). Two pairs of branching branchiae on segments 2–3, with conspicuous annulated basal stem and ramifications ending in short filaments; ramifications dichotomous or arborescent, varying between specimens and sometimes within same specimen, from first to second pairs of branchiae; first pair longer, with longer basal stem, inserted slightly more dorsally than second pair ( Figs 11A–G, J–K View FIGURE 11 ; 12A–C, E–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13A–E, G–J, L View FIGURE 13 ) (holotype with first pair of branchiae dichotomously branching and arborescent second pair; Fig. 11A–G, J–K View FIGURE 11 ). Most specimens, including holotype, with seventeen pairs of notopodia, on segments 4–20 ( Table 3); first two pairs shorter and dorsally aligned to following ones ( Figs 11B–C, E–G View FIGURE 11 ; 12A, C, E–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13B, G–H, L View FIGURE 13 ). Narrowly-winged notochaetae on both tiers, those on posterior tier with wing starting from mid-length of chaetae ( Figs 14A View FIGURE 14 ; 15A–D View FIGURE 15 ). Neuropodia beginning from segment 5, as low rectangular ridges slightly raised from surface of body until segment on which notopodia terminate ( Figs 11A–I, L View FIGURE 11 ; 12A–B, F–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13B–H, J–L View FIGURE 13 ), as raised pinnules on abdomen, situated laterally to mid-ventral groove ( Figs 11L View FIGURE 11 , 15I View FIGURE 15 ), with internal neuropodial shafts. Uncini short-handled throughout, with short triangular heel, short prow, downwardly directed process present, dorsal button situated at mid-length between base of main fang and tip of prow, and crest with 2 rows of secondary teeth ( Figs 14B–E View FIGURE 14 ; 15E–K View FIGURE 15 ); uncini arranged in completely intercalated double rows from segment 10 until segment on which notopodia terminate ( Figs 14D View FIGURE 14 ; 15G–H View FIGURE 15 ). Nephridial papillae as one pair of short papillae on segment 3, situated posteriorly to base of branchiae on segment 3 and vertically aligned to it ( Fig. 13L View FIGURE 13 ); genital papillae situated posteriorly to notopodia on segments 6–7, females with large, spherical papillae ( Figs 11B–G, K View FIGURE 11 ; 13G–H, L View FIGURE 13 ), males with relatively short, thick digitiform papillae, larger on segment 6 ( Fig. 12A, C, E–H View FIGURE 12 ; 13A–E, K View FIGURE 13 ). Pygidium smooth.

Variation. Ocelli readily fade and disappear in preserved specimens. Most specimens, including paratypes 1–2, 4, 6–8 and 10, have ocelli in a continuous row across basal part of prostomium, but holotype and a few other specimens have lighter ocelli, with conspicuous mid-dorsal gap, and in other specimens, including paratypes 3 and 5, ocelli have completely disappeared.

The number of pairs of notopodia presents little variation. Except for paratype 9, which has notopodia extending until segment 19, and paratype 6, which has notopodia until segment 21 on the right side of the body and 20 on the left side, all other specimens have notopodia on segments 4–20 ( Table 3). However, paratype 9 is also much smaller than the other specimens ( Table 3) and is possibly a juvenile, since it also has genital papillae distinctly smaller than on most paratypes.

Remarks. As said above, the only species of Nicolea   reported for the Brazilian coast prior to the present study is N. uspiana   , known from the State of São Paulo. Nicolea uspiana   differs from N. ceciliae   sp. nov., in having branchiae and genital papillae with different morphology, segment 1 not forming a ventral lobe below the lower lip, uncini arranged in double rows from segment 11, and ventral shields extending until segment 20, while N. ceciliae   sp. nov., has uncini arranged in double rows from segment 10 and ventral shields extending until segment 15–16. The branchiae of N. uspiana   are always arborescent ( Nogueira 2003; Alves 2008), not presenting the variation observed in N. ceciliae   sp. nov., between dichotomously branching and arborescent types.

In regards to the species of Nicolea   occurring in the Caribbean region, Salazar-Vallejo (1996) listed two species occurring in that area, N. cetrata ( Ehlers, 1887)   , which was described from Key West, Florida, USA, and N. modesta Verrill, 1900   , described from Bermuda. However, the study of the holotype of N. cetrata   demonstrated that it has lobes on anterior segments, broadly-winged notochaetae and long-handled uncini on anterior segments, which is not in agreement with the diagnosis of Nicolea   , but with Pista   , as correctly noticed by Londoño-Mesa (2009). Therefore, this species is discussed below, as P.cetrata   .

On the other hand, N. modesta   was considered by Holthe (1986) as indeterminable and its original description states that it has notopodia from segment 3 and neuropodia from segment 4 ( Verrill 1900). If this is correct, the species must also be allocated to a different genus, still undescribed, as noted by Nogueira (2008).

Etymology. We dedicate this species to Dr Cecília Amaral, from Universidade Estadual de Campinas – UNICAMP, for her great contribution to the knowledge of Brazilian marine invertebrates. Dr Amaral has been the coordinator of most projects which have investigated invertebrate biodiversity in Brazil in recent years, being responsible for a great increase on the knowledge of the Brazilian fauna of polychaetes and other groups of invertebrates.