Lissodendoryx (Ectyodoryx) Lundbeck, 1909 (Coelosphaeridae, Poecilosclerida, Demospongiae) from Southern Chile: new species and a discussion of morphologic characters in the subgenus Fernandez, Julio C. C. Cárdenas, César A. Bravo, Alejandro Lôbo-Hajdu, Gisele Willenz, Philippe Hajdu, Eduardo 3VF86 [151,715,620,646] Demospongiae Coelosphaeridae Lissodendoryx Animalia Poecilosclerida 13 82 Porifera species diegoramirezensis sp. nov. Ectyodoryx    Holotype.IZUA–POR 169, IslaDiego Ramírez, southern Chile(56ºS, off Cape Horn), ca. 2000 mdepth, September 2002, bycatch from longline fisheries, Leg. A. Bravo. Fragment from holotypedeposited under MNRJ 10884.  Comparative material.  Lissodendoryx( Ectyodoryx) anacantha(Hentschel, 1914)(ZMH S 2327, fragment from the holotype).   Diagnosis.Seemingly erect  Lissodendoryx( Ectyodoryx)with irregular surface, terminally microspined tylotes (223–252/7.2–9.6), acanthostyles (I. 435–602/24–31, II. 320–415/19–21, III. 220–242/14–17), arcuate isochelae with lateral alae bent towards the shaft (22–24), and sigmas ( I.45–60, II. 18.6–25).   Description.The holotypeis incomplete and therefore imprecise to describe its gross morphology. It is seemingly erect, possibly stalked ( Fig. 10A), ca. 2 cmhigh and 0.4 cmthick. Surface rather hispid, irregular, bearing short projections ( Fig. 10B) and roundish openings (ca. 0.1 cmacross), which are of doubtful oscular in function. A gross reticulation is apparent in the entire sponge under transmitted light in a stereo microscope ( Fig. 10C). Colour in life not reported, dried holotypebeige. Consistency relatively compressible and delicate, texture slightly rough.  Skeleton.Plumoreticulate with a slight degree of axial compression ( Figs 11A–B). Larger acanthostyles core main paucispicular tracts (approx. five spicules across) that are entirely echinated by another two distinct typesof acanthostyles ( Fig. 11C). Some of the larger acanthostyles fan out from the main tracts, interconnecting them. Aniso-subtylotes are scattered at the surface, disposed at various angles to it ( Fig. 11D). Isochelae and sigmas are scattered in the ectosome and choanosome. There is no spongin enveloping the fibres and subectosomal lacunae are absent. Choanosomal cavities (ca. 50 µm in diameter) are uncommon, scattered and roundish.  Spicules.Megascleres ( Tabs 2–4): Aniso-subtylotes to aniso-strongyles ( Figs 12A–B), straight, microspined ends, 223– 233.5(10.2) –252/7.2– 8.4(1.3) –9.6. Acanthostyles I ( Figs 12C–D), straight to slightly curved, stout and somewhat fusiform; roundish base, frequently narrower than the central portion of the shaft; gradually thinning point; surface with few straight spines (up to 2.5 µm), mainly over the basal third of the spicule, 435– 536(52.8) – 602/24– 26.6(2.4) –31. Acanthostyles II ( Figs 12E–F), same overall morphology as the preceding category, but smaller, and bearing more spines, although the apical portion is also totally smooth, 320– 391(29.2) –415/19– 20(1) –21. Acanthostyles III ( Fig. 12H) straight to slightly curved; narrow roundish base; gradually thinning point; shaft completely covered with spines (moderately to abundantly), spines frequently straight and usually larger than those of the preceding categories, 220– 232.5(10) –242/14– 15(1.1) –17. Microscleres ( Tabs 2–4): Arcuate isochelae ( Fig. 12I), shaft gently curved, lateral alae elongated and curved towards the shaft as a claw, frontal alae simple, 22– 23.5(1) –24. Sigmas I ( Fig. 12J), contorted, smooth, with sharp ends, 45– 55.5(4.9) –60. Sigmas II ( Fig. 12K) same morphology as the preceding one, but smaller, 16.8– 20.8(2.9) –25.  Ecology.Deep-water habitat ( 2000 mdepth).   Distribution.Currently only known from the typelocality.   Etymology.The species is named after its typelocality.   Remarks.  Lissodendoryx( Ectyodoryx) diegoramirezensis  sp. nov.is distinguished from  Lissodendoryx( E.) spp. occurring in the SE Pacific, additional allied biogeographic provinces, as well as L.( E.)  ballena  sp. nov., L.( E.)  corrugata  sp. nov., and L.( E.)  coloanensis  sp. nov., mainly by its possession of three categories of acanthostyles, separable by their dimensions, morphology and placement in the skeletal architecture ( Tab. 2; Figs 12C–H).   FIGURE 10.A–C,  Lissodendoryx( Ectyodoryx) diegoramirezensis  sp. nov., habit. A–C, holotype (IZUA–POR 169). A, whole specimen (dry); B, markedly hispid surface in detail; C, surface under transmitted light showing reticulated pattern. Scales: A = 0.5 cm; B–C = 0.1 cm.   FIGURE 11.  Lissodendoryx( Ectyodoryx) diegoramirezensis  sp. nov., skeleton. A–D, holotype (IZUA–POR 169): A, overview of skeletal architecture; B, choanosomal reticulation in detail; C, section of a main tract echinated by smaller acanthostyles, i = larger acanthostyle, ii = intermediate acanthostyle, iii = smaller acanthostyle; D, detail of surface with tylotes scattered in disorder. Scales: A = 500 µm; B–D = 200 µm.   FIGURE 12.  Lissodendoryx( Ectyodoryx) diegoramirezensis  sp. nov., electron micrographs. A–K, holotype (IZUA–POR 169): A, aniso-subtylotes; B, extremities of the aniso-subtylotes; C, acanthostyles I; D, bases of acanthostyles I; E, acanthostyles II; F, bases of acanthostyles II; G, acanthostyles III; H, bases of acanthostyles III, and sigma II; I, arcuate isochelae; J, sigmas I; K, sigmas II. Scales: A, C, E, G =100 µm; B = 5 µm; D, F, H–I, K = 10 µm; J = 20 µm.   Lissodendoryx( Ectyodoryx) diegoramirezensis  sp. nov.has arcuate isochelae of uncommon morphology, with lateral alae of both extremities curved towards the shaft ( Fig. 12I). Precisely this isochelae morphotype can be found in L.( E.)  anacantha(Hentschel, 1914: p.107, Taf. VII, Fig. 12), a species amply distributed around Antarcticand the Subantarctic Region, and in another Antarcticspecies,  L.( Lissodendoryx) stylodermaHentschel, 1914(Hentschel, 1914: p.101, Taf. VII, Fig. 7). This latter species can be readily distinguished from the new species by its lack of sigmas, possession of styles in the ectosome, and acanthostyles of a single category only. However, the similarity of the isochelae of the new species and those seen in L.( E.)  anacanthamight indicate a closer affinity between both species, as they further share similar habit and additional spicule characteristics. Nevertheless, both species are considered distinct on the basis of the presence of a third category of acanthostyles in the new species, while its acanthostyles, as a rule, are also more densely spined or with spines more widespread over the shaft. Furthermore, L.( E.)  anacanthahas ectosomal megascleres that can be perfect styles ( Fig. 13C–D), and the smaller category of acanthostyles may bear secondary microspines over the main spines seen at the base of the spicule ( Fig. 13E–F). These characteristics of the acanthostyles have not been spotted in the holotypeof L.( E.)  diegoramirezensis  sp. nov.( Fig. 11C–H). The re-examination of the typematerial of L.( E.)  anacantha( Fig. 13) confirmed the spicule set originally reported by Hentschel (1914), and subsequently recognized by Koltun (1964). Nevertheless, new measurements obtained from the holotype( Tab. 2) revealed that acanthostyles can be much thicker than reported originally (Hentschel, 1914), matching more closely the measurements reported by Koltun (1964). Given the data at hand, L.( E.)  diegoramirezensis  sp. nov.is considered well distinguished from allied forms, but it is suggested that study of additional samples of L.( E.)  anacantha, such as those registered (but not described) by Burton (1932) from South Georgia, is important to verify if these two taxa are distinct, as hypothesised here.