Dispio glandulosa, Delgado-Blas & Díaz-Díaz & Viéitez, 2019

Delgado-Blas, Víctor Hugo, Díaz-Díaz, Óscar & Viéitez, José M., 2019, Two new species of spionids from the genera Dispio and Prionospio (Polychaeta Spionidae) from the Iberian Peninsula with redescription and notes on Prionospio (Minuspio) multibranchiata Berkeley, 1927, Zootaxa 4604 (3), pp. 562-574 : 563-568

publication ID

https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4604.3.11

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:9FE86779-5136-47EB-84E6-91AC10668671

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/4E418793-D34B-7C3C-97ED-9EB877DEFBAE

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Dispio glandulosa
status

sp. nov.

Dispio glandulosa View in CoL sp. nov.

Figure 1 View FIGURE 1 A–W

Material examined. Mediterranean Sea: Puerto de Sagunto to Puerto de Castellón (Valencia), 39º48’ N, 00º05’ W, coll. G. San Martín, Holotype ( MNCN 16.01 About MNCN /6033); paratype ( MNCN 16.01 About MNCN /18455). GoogleMaps

Description. Holotype incomplete, 25 mm long, 2.0 mm wide, for 57 chaetigers. Paratype incomplete, 55 mm long, 2.2 mm wide for 100 chaetigers.

Prostomium elliptic, pointed anteriorly ( Fig. 1A View FIGURE 1 ), posteriorly tapered with a long, narrow caruncle as a long longitudinal nuchal ridge, extending to the anterior margin of chaetiger 2 ( Fig. 1A View FIGURE 1 ). Two pairs of rounded, black subdermal eyes (very small and with slight pigmentation) ( Fig. 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ), arranged in a transversal line (eyes absent in holotype). Palps lost in both specimens. Ciliated nuchal organs starting between the palps scars and beginning of caruncle as a pair of dorsal loops extending to the posterior margin of chaetiger 1 ( Fig. 1A View FIGURE 1 ). Peristomium long ( Fig. 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ) partially enveloping prostomium and extending around scar at base of palps forming low lateral wings ( Fig. 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ), separated from chaetiger 1.

Anterior notopodial postchaetal lamellae completely fused to branchiae, distal ends short, pointed ( Fig. 1A View FIGURE 1 , B–E); notopodial postchaetal lamellae on chaetiger 1 shifted dorsally ( Fig. 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ), about 1/2 as large as those on subsequent chaetigers ( Fig. 1A, B View FIGURE 1 ). Notopodial postchaetal lamellae of chaetiger 1 and subsequent chaetigers entire, short and narrow on first two chaetigers ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A–C), thereafter wider and longer with a wider, rounded basal margin ( Fig. 1B View FIGURE 1 , C–E); lamellae on chaetigers 24–28 (holotype 24) with elongated ventral edges ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 F–G), gradually reducing in size from about chaetigers 29–30 and becoming pointed along ventral edges ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 H–J), overlapping enlarged neuropodial postchaetal lamellae ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 H–J). Distal and middle regions of notopodial postchaetal lamellae with highly glandular cell margins ( Fig. 1A, B View FIGURE 1 , D–J) from chaetiger 5, glandular cells gradually increasing in number in all noto- and neuropodial post- and prechaetal lamellae ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 G–J) on subsequent chaetigers to ends of the fragments, and in ventral regions of middle segments; posterior lamellae dorsally pointed and elongated ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 I–J), reduced in size posteriorly. Notopodial prechaetal lamellae on anterior chaetigers large, rounded with enlarged dorsal edges ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 C–J), thereafter decreasing in size.

Each segment with a pair of O-shaped dorsal organs arranged between each transverse band of cilia from chaetiger 2 ( Fig. 1A View FIGURE 1 ). Lateral organs between notopodial and neuropodial postchaetal lamellae ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 H’) present from about chaetigers 16–18; distribution of these organs irregular.

Neuropodial postchaetal lamellae tongue-shaped and smooth ( Fig. 1B, C View FIGURE 1 ) shifted to dorsal side on chaetiger 1 ( Fig. 1B View FIGURE 1 ), rounded on chaetigers 2–6 ( Figs. 1D, E View FIGURE 1 ), becoming rectangular, wider on chaetigers 7–14, and rounded, wider from chaetigers 15–17, developing into a pointed upper edge from around chaetigers 27–37 (holotype 27) ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 F–J). Anterior neuropodial prechaetal lamellae small, rounded, wide ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 B–H), larger on middle chaetigers, and decreasing gradually in size with triangular upper and lower edges ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 I–J) up to end of fragments; these lamellae not fused with neuropodial postchaetal lamellae at the base.

Branchiae present from chaetiger 1; all anterior and middle branchiae smooth, long, tapering, completely fused to notopodial lamellae ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A–H), branchial tips becoming free from notopodial lamellae at chaetigers 48–52, distal tips pointed ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 I–J); posterior branchiae with tips with highly glandular cell margins ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 I–J), longer than notopodial lamellae. Each branchia with a dense band of cilia along the inner edge ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 C–I). Accessory branchiae lacking.

Notochaetae on chaetiger 1 arranged in a dorsal tuft and a ventral fascicle; dorsal tuft with short, smooth, alimbate, slender capillaries extending beyond margins of notopodial lamellae; ventral fascicle arranged into an anterior row of basally striated and, then reticulate, granulated, unilimbate capillaries with short tips ( Fig. 1K View FIGURE 1 ), and a posterior row of smooth, unilimbate capillaries with long pointed tips, striated basally ( Fig. 1L View FIGURE 1 ). Notochaetae on chaetiger 2 and subsequent chaetigers arranged similarly to those on chaetiger 1, except dorsal tufts with long, slen- der, smooth, alimbate capillaries. Notochaetae on about chaetiger 12 similar to those on anterior chaetigers, except chaetae on anterior row with wider limbation ( Fig. 1M View FIGURE 1 ), those on posterior row form striated, long, unilimbate capillaries ( Fig. 1N View FIGURE 1 ). Chaetae on posterior notopodia arranged in a dorsal tuft with granulated, reticulated, unilimbate capillaries ( Fig. 1O View FIGURE 1 ). Notopodial hooded hooks absent.

Neurochaetae on chaetiger 1 and subsequent chaetigers arranged in two rows and a ventral tuft; anterior row composed of short reticulated, granulated, unilimbate capillaries ( Fig. 1P View FIGURE 1 ); posterior row of longer, smooth, unilimbate capillaries with pointed tips ( Fig. 1Q View FIGURE 1 ); ventral tuft of three short, slender, smooth, alimbate capillary chaetae located in ventral most position ( Fig. 1R View FIGURE 1 ). Neurochaetae on about chaetiger 13 and subsequent chaetigers similar to those on anterior ones, but with ventral tuft chaetae reticulated and unilimbated ( Fig. 1S View FIGURE 1 ). Middle and posterior chaetigers with a row of unidentate neuropodial hooded hooks ( Fig. 1T View FIGURE 1 ) from chaetigers 30–31 (31 in holotype), 4–8 hooks present per neuropodium with open hoods and slightly recurved shafts subdistally ( Fig. 1T View FIGURE 1 ), each one accompanied by 2–3 slender, short, smooth, alimbate capillaries ( Fig. 1U View FIGURE 1 ); posterior row with granulated, reticulated, unilimbate capillaries ( Fig. 1V View FIGURE 1 ); ventral tuft with granulated, reticulated, alimbate chaetae in ventral most position ( Fig. 1W View FIGURE 1 ).

Pygidium unknown.

Remarks. Dispio glandulosa sp. nov. is similar to D. oculata Imajima 1990b from Japan, D. magna ( Day, 1955) from South Africa, and D. brachychaeta Blake, 1983 from Argentina in that the branchiae are completely fused to the notopodial postchaetal lamellae anteriorly but are free posteriorly. Also, D. glandulosa sp. nov. is similar to D. oculata and D. brachychaeta , in that accessory branchiae are absent; chaetiger 1 bears short notopodial chaetae; all the notopodial poschaetal lamellae have entire margins; and the branchiae on chaetiger 1 are between 1/3 and 1/2 as long as those on subsequent chaetigers. However, Dispio glandulosa sp. nov. differs from D. oculata in that in the former the prostomium is elliptical in shape (rather than elongate); the notopodial postchaetal lamel- lae of chaetiger 1 are not fused with the peristomium (peristomium dorsally fused with chaetiger 1); almost all the noto- and neuropodial postchaetal lamellae have a highly glandular cell margin (absent in D. oculata ); the branchial tips are free from the notopodial lamellae on chaetigers 48–52 (rather than chaetigers 36–38); the distal tips of the posterior branchiae do not show granules (present in D. oculata ), but some branchial tips do have (rather than lack) a highly glandular cell margin. Also, D. glandulosa sp. nov. differs from D. brachychaeta in that the former has a caruncle in the form of a longitudinally long nuchal ridge extending to the anterior margin of chaetiger 2 (rather than being indistinct); the branchiae are partially (rather than entirely) free from the notopodial lamellae in posterior chaetigers; and the hooks have open (rather than closely applied) hoods. Finally, Dispio glandulosa sp. nov. differs from D. magna in having an elliptic or spheroid (rather than a fusiform) prostomium; the first branchiae are smaller (rather than similar) in length to the succeeding ones; and the accessory branchiae are absent (rather than present).

Etymology. The epithet, glandulosa , is from the Latin glandis meaning gland and refers to the numerous glandular cells that cover the parapodial lamellae and the ventral region of the body.

Distribution. To date this species has only been found off the coast of Valencia in the western Mediterranean.

Genus Prionospio Malmgren, 1867

Prionospio (Minuspio) multibranchiata Berkeley, 1927 View in CoL

( Figure 2 View FIGURE 2 A–G)

Prionospio multibranchiata E. Berkeley, 1927:414 View in CoL , Pl. 1, fig.1.

Prionospio (Minuspio) multibranchiata: Maciolek 1985: 365 View in CoL –367 (in part, Fig. 15b, not Fig. 15a, c–f).

Material examined. North Pacific Ocean, Canada, British Columbia, Vancouver, Burrad Sound Inlet, Port of Vancouver, dock opposite Canada Place, 49°17’3.5” N, 123°06’38.47” W, 0.3 m, from mud inside tire attached to dock, hand, Sta. BCX 13, coll. & id. Leslie Harris, 26 Feb. 1999, 9 specimens (LACM-AHF-POLY 11125).

Description. Complete specimen 15 mm long, 0.4 mm wide for 72 chaetigers. Incomplete specimens 2.4–2.5 mm long, 0.7 mm wide for 32–43. Color in alcohol straw yellow.

Prostomium triangular, anterior margin truncate ( Fig. 2A View FIGURE 2 ), longer than wide, posteriorly tapered, with long caruncle swollen by nuchal organs that surround it, extending to the anterior edge of chaetiger 2. Two pairs of large, reniform, reddish brown eyes, arranged in a trapezoid; anterior pair more widely separated, posterior pair larger ( Fig. 2A View FIGURE 2 ). Palps lost. Peristomium moderate, collar-like, surrounding the prostomium, fused dorsally, with large, rounded notopodial postchaetal lamellae (distally curled back) on chaetiger 1 ( Fig. 2A View FIGURE 2 ). Neuropodial postchaetal lamellae on chaetiger 1 small, rounded ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ).

Nine to ten pairs of branchiae present on chaetigers 2–11, all triangular and small ( Fig. 2A, B View FIGURE 2 ); anterior most branchiae same size as notopodial lamellae ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ) except last pair larger than lamellae ( Fig. 2C View FIGURE 2 ).

Notopodial postchaetal lamellae triangular and long on chaetigers 2–10 ( Fig. 2 View FIGURE 2 A–C), longest on chaetigers 4–9, becoming rounded and broader on chaetiger 11, then progressively diminishing in size towards end of body, but always visible. Dorsal crests absent. Ventral edges of notopodial lamellae not in contact with dorsal edges of neuropodial lamellae on any chaetigers. Notopodial pre-chaetal lamellae of anterior region rounded, large ( Fig. 2C View FIGURE 2 ), posteriorly becoming low lobes.

Neuropodial postchaetal lamellae of chaetiger 2 largest, square-shaped, with a small ventral projection ( Fig. 2B View FIGURE 2 ); neuropodial postchaetal lamellae on chaetiger 3 and subsequent chaetigers becoming rounded ( Fig. 2C View FIGURE 2 ), progressively diminishing in size towards end of body, forming rounded lobes. All neuropodial pre-chaetal lamellae low, rounded lobes ( Fig. 2C View FIGURE 2 ). Ventrolateral interparapodial pouches absent.

Notopodial capillaries on anterior chaetigers arranged in two rows: anterior row short, smooth, alimbate; posterior row longer, thick, slightly granulated. Notopodial capillaries of middle and posterior chaetigers short, smooth, alimbate. Neuropodial capillaries on anterior chaetigers arranged in two rows; all capillaries smooth. Sabre chaetae from chaetigers 11–12, up to two per fascicle; each stout, distinctly curved, basally smooth, heavily granulated, without sheaths ( Fig. 2D View FIGURE 2 ). Neuropodial hooded hooks from chaetigers 14–16; notopodial hooded hooks from chaetigers 37–40, up to six per fascicle. All hooks with four pairs of accessory teeth above main tooth; secondary hood present ( Fig. 2E View FIGURE 2 ).

Pygidium with long dorsal cirrus and two large lateral lobes ( Fig. 2F View FIGURE 2 ).

Remarks. The morphology of the material examined agrees well with the original description ( Berkeley 1927), although a few slight differences were observed. The original description identified 8–9 pairs of branchiae, and the neuropodial hooded hooks were described as having three pairs of accessory teeth. No mention was made in the original description of dorsal crests or the first chaetiger that sabre chaetae and notopodial hooks appear on. A later description ( Berkeley & Berkeley 1952:28–29, Figs. 52–53) does mention these characters but, since parts of the descriptions of Fauvel (1927) are clearly incorporated, this cannot be relied upon. Also, Berkeley & Berkeley (1952) mention hooded hooks with four pairs of accessory teeth and a secondary hood, and referred the specimens to P. (M). cirrifera . The type material has unfortunately been lost ( Pettibone 1967). The differences between the original description given by Berkeley (1927) and these specimens are thus the number of accessory teeth (3 vs 4) and the number of branchial pairs (8–9 vs 9–10). This could be due to the different quality of the optics, and/or the size of the organisms. The discovery of these specimens near the type locality has, however, provided us with additional information.

As previously noted by Dagli & Çinar (2011), P. (M). multibranchiata likely represents a species complex. We agree with these authors that the specimens identified by Mackie (1984) from Scotland, England and Sweden as P. (M). multibranchiata likely represent a new species. Mackie’s (1984) specimens differ morphologically from the original description of P. (M). multibranchiata and the specimens we examined. Mackie (1984) described the European specimens as having small spherical eyes (rather than large, reniforme or crescent-shaped), an anteriorly rounded prostomium, 6–13 pairs of cirriform branchiae (rather than 8–10 triangular pairs), rectangular neuropodial lamellae with rounded edges on chaetiger 2 (rather than square-shaped, with a small ventral projection), and dorsal crests on a maximum of about 20 segments from chaetigers 13–15 (rather than dorsal crests absent).

Maciolek (1985) mentioned that the morphological characters of specimens from Washington (Bainbridge Island, Skif Point), Mexico ( Ascension Bay, Quintana Roo), Gulf of Mexico, and Florida (Hutchinson Island) agreed with the original description of Berkeley (1927) by having the large crescent-shaped eyes, the form of the peristomial wings, and the structure of the hooded hooks with three pairs of apical teeth. However, Berkeley (1927) described P. (M). multibranchiata with 8–9 pairs of branchiae (rather than 7–11 pairs), and did not mention the presence of dorsal crests. The mixture of specimens from several localities leads to a very broad morphological characterization (particularly in the 7–11 pairs of branchiae and the presence of dorsal crests). Maciolek’s (1985) specimens from the Puget Sound, Washington specimens correspond to P. (M.) multibranchiata ; however, it is necessary to re-examine the materials reported as this species from the Atlantic.

Dagli & Cinar (2011) described specimens from Bazan Bay ( Canada) and conclude that the morphological characters of the specimens in their study agree with the original ( Berkeley 1927) and subsequent ( Maciolek 1985) descriptions of Prionospio (M.) multibranchiata . However, despite the geographical proximity of Bazan Bay to the type locality (Vancouver), the Dagli & Cinar (2011) specimens differ morphologically from the original description of P. (M.) multibranchiata in having peaks on the anterior margin of the prostomium and dorsal crest present, rather than absent; prostomium subrectangular rather than triangular; and notopodial lamellae lacking (rather than present) on chaetiger 1. Further differences between P. (M.) multibranchiata Berkeley 1927 as originally described (and expanded on in this study) from the purported records of this species are shown in Table 1.

Distribution. British Columbia, Canada, Vancouver Island, Nanaimo District, intertidal (Type locality); mainland, near City of Vancouver, Burrad Sound Inlet, dock opposite Canada Place, British Columbia Exotics Survey shallow water (– 0.3 m).

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Annelida

Class

Polychaeta

Order

Spionida

Family

Spionidae

Genus

Dispio

Loc

Dispio glandulosa

Delgado-Blas, Víctor Hugo, Díaz-Díaz, Óscar & Viéitez, José M. 2019
2019
Loc

Prionospio (Minuspio) multibranchiata:

Maciolek, N. J. 1985: 365
1985
Loc

Prionospio multibranchiata E. Berkeley, 1927 :414

Berkeley, E. 1927: 414
1927
GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF