Atlantisina inarmata, Berning & Harmelin & Bader & Cibio, 2017
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5852/ejt.2017.347 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3850616 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/546F87A1-FFB2-FF99-094F-942F3450FB5E |
treatment provided by |
Carolina |
scientific name |
Atlantisina inarmata |
status |
gen. et sp. nov. |
Atlantisina inarmata gen. et sp. nov.
urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:BDF79949-1519-48E1-81DF-12B922AE7D25
Fig. 4 View Fig A–F, Table 4 View Table 4
Diagnosis
Frontal shield porcelain white, markedly convex, surface densely covered by large flattened nodules, up to eight tiny marginal pores; lateral walls well developed, septular pores large, round to transversely oval; orifice margin with six oral spines, condyles short and narrow, occasionally slightly thickened distally, operculum yellowish; no suboral mucro. Ooecium as long as wide; ectooecium covering slightly more than the lower half of ooecium; exposed endooecium relatively large and hemispherical, surface densely covered by numerous closely spaced and deep pits separated by thickened ridges. Ancestrula with nine spines separated into two groups of five widely spaced proximal and four closely spaced distal spines, opesia pyriform, cryptocyst a narrow proximal band thinning distally.
Etymology
The name refers to the absence of a protective suboral mucro, in contrast to the other species occurring in the nearshore seamounts and the continental slope.
Material examined
Holotype
CANARY ISLANDS: 1 large colony (> 50 autozooids), on rock, Stn 10 ( MNHN-IB-2014-53 ).
Paratypes
CANARY ISLANDS: 7 colonies on skeleton, Stn 9 (MNHN-IB- 2014-54); 1 ovicellate colony on biogenic substrate, Stn 9 (MNHN-IB- 2014-55); 1 young colony with ancestrula, on echinid test, Stn 9 ( OLL 2016/140); 1 colony on rock, Stn 11 (MNHN-IB- 2014-56).
Other material examined
CANARY ISLANDS: 10 colonies on small rocks, shells and other biogenic substrata, Stn 9 (unregistered MNHN material); 7 colonies on small rocks, Stn 9 ( OLL 2016/141); 3 colonies on rock, Stn 11 ( OLL 2016/142); 1 small colony with ancestrula on limestone, unbleached, Stn 11 ( OLL 2016/143).
Description
Colony encrusting, unilaminar, forming small irregular patches or biserial to triserial branching ribbons ( Fig. 4A View Fig ). Zooecia oval to polygonal, with proximal ends tapering and wedged in between proximal zooecia ( Fig. 4B View Fig ). Frontal shield translucent, very convex, densely covered by relatively large, closelyspaced, flattened nodules (Fig. D, F), imperforate except for up to eight minute marginal pores that may be difficult to detect in frontal view or in older zooecia; lateral walls well developed, septular pores large and surrounded by a distinct cryptocystal area, lateral ones usually transversely oval, slightly raised distal pore suborbicular ( Fig. 4E View Fig ).
Orifice a little longer than wide, with a rounded and broader anter and a fairly straight and narrower proximal margin delimited by a pair of very short, blunt and occasionally distally thickened condyles directing proximomedially ( Fig. 4C View Fig ); distolateral orifice margins with six closely-spaced spines with thick bases, arranged in two groups of three with a distinct distal gap ( Fig. 4E View Fig ).
Ovicell hyperstomial, ooecium barely resting on frontal shield of distal zooid, globular with a short tubular proximal peristome wedged in between distalmost pair of spines and terminating at distal orifice margin, about as long as wide; ectooecium smooth, encompassing slightly more than lower half of ooecium; exposed endooecium relatively large, hemispherical, densely covered by numerous deep pits that give it a perforate appearance ( Fig. 4C View Fig ); ooecial aperture about as tall as wide.
Ancestrula tatiform, broadly oval (ca 320 µm long, 260 µm wide), widest at about mid-distance, gymnocyst relatively well developed all around, gently sloping all around, becoming slightly narrower and steeper distally, cryptocyst forming only a very narrow rim around proximal half of opesia, opesia extensive (ca 215 µm long, 150 µm wide), pyriform, distinctly constricted in distal third, surrounded by
nine spines arranged in four closely positioned distal spines and five more widely spaced proximal ones; a single first-generation autozooid budded distally or distolaterally ( Fig. 4D View Fig ).
Remarks
The autozooids of Atlantisina inarmata gen. et sp. nov. are very similar to those of A. atlantis gen. et sp. nov. when observed under the SEM. When observed under a binocular microscope, however, the frontal shield of the former is porcelain-white while that of the latter is rather translucent. Moreover, the ovicells are distinctly different, with A. inarmata gen. et sp. nov. having a deeply and densely pitted endooecial surface structure, while it is rather faint and irregular in A. atlantis gen. et sp. nov. The zooids, orifices and ovicells are also larger in A. inarmata gen. et sp. nov. than in A. atlantis gen. et sp. nov. (see Table 1 View Table 1 ). Nevertheless, the similarity in autozooidal morphology is remarkable given the distance of ca 1500 km between Atlantis Smt and the Canary Islands.
Ecology
The bi- to triserial colonies of A. inarmata gen. et sp. nov. encrust empty shells, dead skeletons and small rocks at depths between 345 and 485 m. Some zooidal frontal shields show bevelled boreholes ( Fig. 4F View Fig ), which were presumably drilled by predatory microgastropods, while others are damaged around the orifice, and intramural buds occur in damaged or undamaged zooecia (cf. Berning 2008). The relatively high percentage of damaged and repaired zooids may be related to the lack of defensive structures around the orifice apart from oral spines, which characterise all other species from nearshore seamounts and the continental slope described below.
Distribution
Restricted to the island of Gran Canaria (Canary Islands).
MNHN |
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle |
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 |
|
SubOrder |
Neocheilostomina |
SuperFamily |
Lepralielloidea |
Family |
|
Genus |