Hexabranchus sanguineus (Rüppell & Leuckart, 1830)
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s13127-023-00611-0 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/706C87DE-FFF8-C227-1A6D-6DB348B6F0E2 |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Hexabranchus sanguineus (Rüppell & Leuckart, 1830) |
status |
|
Hexabranchus sanguineus (Rüppell & Leuckart, 1830) View in CoL . Abraham (1876: pgs. 103–108) (new combination reference).
Hexabranchus praetextus Ehrenberg (1828: pt1-2, pl. 1a-c). Type locality: El Tur, Egypt (synonymized by Thompson, 1972).
Hexabranchus suezensis Abraham (1876 View in CoL : v. (4) 18, pgs. 137–138, pl. 6, figs. 3, 3a). Type locality: Red Sea (synonymized by Thompson, 1972).
Hexabranchus petersi Bergh (1878: 2 View in CoL (13), pgs. 60–564, pl. 64, Fig. 1 View Fig ; pl. 67, figs. 7–9). Type locality: Quirimba Islands , Northern Mozambique, East Africa (synonymized by Valdés, 2002).
Albania formosa Collingwood (1881 View in CoL : v.2 (2), p.133, pl. 10, Figs. 1–5 View Fig View Fig View Fig View Fig View Fig ). Type location: Ke-lung Harbour , Formosa, Taiwan (synonymized by Thompson, 1972).
margin, D unrolled mantle, white margin, E underside, F genital papillae, G rhinophores, H gills, I oral tentacles, J oral tentacle, pink margin, K transitional in laboratory, L egg mass
Hexabranchus plicatus Hägg (1901: v.6, pgs. 5–7, pl. 1, figs. 4–5). Type locality: Tor, Egypt. (synonymized by Thompson, 1972).
tle, red margin, E unrolled mantle, white margin, F unrolled mantle, violet margin G unrolled mantle, red margin H rhinophores, I genital papillae, J genital papillae, close up, K gills, L oral tentacles
Material examined CASIZ194618 , length 75 mm (preserved), Madagascar, Sud Baie de Lokaro (24° 57′ S, 47° 6.5′ E), 10 m depth, 12 May 2010 GoogleMaps . MB28-005033 , length dark, mature E unrolled mante, mature F underside, G gills, H rhinophores, I mature specimen in laboratory
250 mm, Mozambique, Ponta do Ouro (26° 50′ 58″ S, 32° 44′ 54″ E), 39 m depth, 18 June 2016 GoogleMaps . MNCN: ADN 110932 About MNCN (tissue), length ≈ 250 mm, Mozambique, Ponta do Ouro (26° 50′ 58″ S, 32° 44′ 54″ E), 40 m depth, 10 May 2014 GoogleMaps . UF455939 Jeddah , Saudi Arabia (21° 45′ 24.1″ N, 39° 03′ 06.5″ E), 15 m depth, 9 October 2012, collected by Gustav Paulay. GoogleMaps MNCN: ADN 110934 About MNCN , length 240 mm, Mozambique, Ponta do Ouro , “The Cake” (26° 50′ 22″ S, 32° 54′ 39″ E), 38 m depth, 12 April 2022 GoogleMaps . Other material: MNCN: ADN 110939 About MNCN (tissue), length ≈ 250 mm, Mozambique, Ponta do Ouro (26° 50′ 58″ S, 32° 44′ 54″ E), 40 m depth, 17 Nov. 2018 GoogleMaps . UF449478 (tissue), French Polynesia, Marquesas Islands, Fatu Hiva Island (10° 31′ 58.4″ S, 138° 41′ 05.6″ W), 3 Dec. 2011 ( FLMNH Invertebrate Zoology) GoogleMaps . UF449478 (tissue), French Polynesia, Marquesas Islands, Fatu Hiva Island (10° 31′ 58.4″ S, 138° 41′ 05.6″ W), 3 Dec. 2011 ( FLMNH Invertebrate Zoology) GoogleMaps . Sequenced but not deposited (tissue), length ≈250, Red Sea, Global Range (27° 40′ 07″ N, 33° 48′ 32″ E), 10 m depth, 29 Oct. 2018 GoogleMaps . Sequenced but not deposited (tissue) length ≈ 230 mm, Red Sea, Egypt, Shaab Samadai East (24° 59.144′ N, 34° 59.798′ E), 10 m depth, 1 Nov. 2018 GoogleMaps .
Distribution Broadly distributed across the Indo-Pacific from the Red Sea to French Polynesia: Egypt ( Debelius, 1996; Rüppel marginal band, F stranded, red marginal band, G mature pair, heavily flecked, H lighly flecked, detail, I heavily flecked, detail, J gills, juvenile, K gills, mature, L rinophores and oral tentacles
& Leuckart, 1828; Yonow, 2008), Sudan ( Debelius, 1996), Sri Lanka ( Debelius, 1996), southern Mozambique (Stromvoll & Jones, 2019; Tibiriçá et al., 2017), South Africa (Gosliner et al., 2008; King & Fraser, 2014), Seychelles ( Debelius, 1996), Japan ( Atsushi, 2004; Nakano, 2004), and Australia (Marshall & Willan, 1999) including Lord Howe Island ( Coleman, 2001, 2008), New Caledonia (Hervé, 2010), and French Polynesia (Salvat & Bacchet, 2011). On-line sources: Israel, Tanzania (iNaturalist), Indonesia (Sea Slug Forum) including West Papua (iNaturalist), Madagascar, Reunion (South-west Indian Ocean Seaslug site), north-western Australia (Sea Slug Forum, iNaturalist), east Australia (Nudibranchs Sunshine Coast Queensland, Australia), Saipan (Nudipixel archive).
External morphology ( Figs. 8 View Fig , 9 View Fig , 10 View Fig , and 11) Commonly up to 250 mm (with some reports to 400 mm in the Red Sea). The body of resting, mature animals is smooth and more dorsal-ventrally compressed than in other Hexabranchus spp. The extended mantle has an undulating edge that is very thin and delicate on the sides, posteriorly, but shorter and thicker with a smooth edge, anteriorly. The rhinophore sheath is very short with smooth edges. The rhinophores are slightly bent to the back with approximately 40 lamellae in large, mature animals. There are usually six tufts of multi-pinnate gill branches set widely apart and forming a circle around the anus. The anus is elevated on a tubular papilla. The kidney pore is anterior to the anus on its right side. The oral tentacles are large, fleshy, oval, and crenate. The foot is narrower than the body.
Ontogeny, color, and variation ( Figs. 8 View Fig , 9 View Fig , 10 View Fig , and 11) There are four, apparently disjunct, lineages that differ in color (which changes with ontogeny).
Lineage 1 ( Fig. 8 View Fig ) Predominantly in the Red Sea with very few records in the western Indian Ocean. No specimens or photos of very young juveniles were available. Gohar and Soliman (1963) provided information on intra-specific and ontogenetic variation in this lineage for specimens above approximately 75 mm, and it is in agreement with the photos reviewed in this study. Transitional animals vary from translucent pink to pink-reddish with variable white marginal bands. As the transition proceeds, lateral red patches (truncated medially) begin to develop, white pigment develops on the outer face of the rachis and often a white line appears on the anterior face of the rhinophore club. With growth, a submarginal red band develops. In large animals, the background usually darkens to blood red, which may obscure the lateral red markings. Additionally, a white marginal band is often present. A small amount of white pigment may appear on the posterior edge of the rhinophore stalk. There are no white markings on the notum or white flecks on the rhinophore lamellae. Lateral striations are uncommon.
Lineage 2 ( Fig. 9 View Fig ) Western Indian Ocean (from Tanzania to South Africa). It is similar to lineage 1 in pattern and ontogeny, but the mantle color is predominantly orange. Young juveniles are gray with a marginal white line. The branchia and rhinophores are translucent-gray, tipped with orange-red. Transitional animals are grayish-yellow in color with a yellow-white edge, and a few orange-red lateral patches. The rhinophores are orange. Transitional animals are light orange with a marginal red band and, in some specimens, a white edge. As it grows, the mantle gets darker and the marginal band wider, while the lateral red patches (truncated medially) increase in number and size. The rhinophores remain orange and a white line often develops on the anterior face of the club. As in lineage 1, lateral striations are uncommon, and no white flecks are present on the notum or rhinophore lamellae.
Lineage 3 ( Fig. 10 View Fig ) French Polynesia. No specimens or photos of juveniles were available but transitional animals appear to vary from translucent pink to yellow with extensive white pigment clustered in large rosettes. The rachis has dense white pigment. Dark lateral patches and red submarginal or marginal bands develop fairly late. Larger animals may become dark-red with some reduction in the white pigment and a white line may appear on the anterior face of the rhinophore club. The rhinophore lamellae are often flecked with white. The margin in mature animals may be either red-banded or white-banded with the former being most common.
Lineage 4 ( Fig. 11 View Fig ) Western Pacific. Regrettably, we could not obtain specimens of this morphotype for DNA analysis but based on extensive photograph review it is likely that a fourth distinct lineage of H. sanguineus exists in this region. This lineage shows an intermediate pattern between the ones from the Indian Ocean and the one from French Polynesia. Juveniles vary from translucent gray to yellow with a white marginal band and scattered white flecks on the notum. With growth, red lateral patches and a red submarginal band develop, white pigment appears on the rachis and the white flecks form clusters on the notum. The clusters of white flecks are present in almost all mature animals while the lateral patches are more variable than in specimens from the Indian Ocean. Dark-red animals occur but they appear to be limited to the northern and southern extremes of its distribution (southern Japan and Lord Howe Island, respectively). A white line usually appears on the anterior face of the rhinophore club. The rhinophore lamellae are often flecked with white. Pale animals seem rare. The margin in mature animals may be either red-banded or white-banded. Rarely, the red band may be interrupted (with associated lateral striations).
In all four lineages, during ontogeny, the mantle expands laterally and becomes rolled, the number of rhinophore lamellae increases and the gills become more elaborate. The notum of resting animals remains smooth.
Internal morphology Buccal mass ( Fig. 12 View Fig ). The buccal bulb is oval and slightly larger than the oral tube. The radula is broad and bilobed with 30 anterior raised rows of teeth ( Fig. 12A View Fig ). The center of the ribbon is devoid of teeth. The teeth are simple and hamate. The innermost teeth are smaller and degenerate. The lateral teeth increase in length centrally ( Fig. 12B View Fig ). The outer teeth are smaller ( Fig. 12C View Fig ). The radular formula is 49 × 89.0.89 (MB28-005033) and 32 × 50.0.50 (CASIZ194618). The armed jaws have numerous simple, finger-like rodlets ( Fig. 12D View Fig ).
Reproductive system ( Fig. 13 View Fig ) As described by Eales (1953) and Gohar and Soliman (1963).
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 |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Hexabranchus sanguineus (Rüppell & Leuckart, 1830)
Tibiriçá, Yara, Pola, Marta, Pittman, Cory, Gosliner, Terrence M., Malaquias, Manuel A. & Cervera, Juan Lucas 2023 |
Hexabranchus petersi
Bergh, L. S. R. 1878: 2 |