Caecum invisibile Egger & Joerger, 2020
publication ID |
https://dx.doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.968.52986 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:4296306E-51B9-4873-AB6F-4B475194CA98 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/4183679F-44F4-4817-A2E1-7325687E5F0A |
taxon LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:act:4183679F-44F4-4817-A2E1-7325687E5F0A |
treatment provided by |
|
scientific name |
Caecum invisibile Egger & Joerger |
status |
sp. nov. |
Caecum invisibile Egger & Joerger View in CoL sp. nov.
Material examined.
Holotype Belize • 1 (Fig. 5O-R View Figure 5 ); Carrie Bow Cay; 16.8015, -88.0790; depth 10 m; 14 Jan 2010; USNM Belize2010 exped.; Stat. CBC1b; DNA voucher; DNA bank: r462p15f2t91; GenBank: MT727055, MT704268, MT731697; ZSM-Mol-20100320. Paratypes Belize • 1; same data as for holotype; DNA voucher; DNA bank: r462p14f2t91; GenBank: MT727054, MT704267, MT731696; ZSM-Mol-20200109. Belize • 2; same data as for holotype; ZSM-Mol-20200111, ZSM-Mol-20200112. Other material Belize • 10; same data as for holotype; DNA voucher; GenBank: MT727056-MT727065, MT704269-MT704279, MT731698-MT731707; USNM 1618839, USNM 1618840, USNM 1618841, USNM 1618842, USNM 1618843, USNM 1618846, USNM 1618847, USNM 1618848, USNM 1618849. Panama • 1; Bocas del Toro; 9.2140, -81.9318; depth 8.5 m; 5 Jun 2010; USNM BRS2010 exped.; Stat. BRS104; DNA voucher; GenBank: MT727049, MT704264, MT731689; USNM 1618856. • 1; Bocas del Toro; 9.3507, -82.1724; depth 3 m; 13 Jun 2010; USNM BRS2010 exped.; Stat. BRS200; DNA voucher; GenBank: MT727052, MT731694; USNM 1618859.
Molecular diagnostic characters.
see Table 4 View Table 4 .
Morphological description.
All investigated specimens were very similar in appearance, with little or no variation in shell morphology. Shell completely translucent. Length 0.8 mm long, width 0.2 mm (holotype, Fig. 5O View Figure 5 ). Tube regularly curved, shape equal in width but bears prominent edge at transition to septum, edge with smaller diameter. Septum round and blistered lacking a distinct mucro. Septum slightly inclining towards the left, dorsal side in holotype with slight variation between the specimens. Aperture equally wide as tube with straight edge. Sculpture appears smooth, only with faint growth lines (Fig. 5R View Figure 5 ). Whitish translucent body visible through translucent shell. Operculum translucent, slightly tinted yellowish. Radula formula shows taenioglossate pattern 2.1.1.1.2. with very small central rhachidian tooth. Large lateral teeth oriented towards the rhachidian tooth. Marginal teeth finer, outer marginal teeth are scoop-like curved. All the specimens investigated are adults based on the cylindrical shape of the tube and the shape of the aperture showing a reflected lip without cutting edge, which is normally present in immature specimens.
Etymology.
The Latin adjective invisibile (invisible, unable to be seen) refers to the minute size of specimens, the translucent color of its shell, its hidden lifestyle between sand grains, and its taxonomic crypsis.
Distribution.
Type locality: Carrie Bow Cay, Belize. (16.8015°N, - 88.0790°W, -10 m). Distributed in Central American Atlantic from Carrie Bow Cay, Belize to Bocas del Toro, Panama. Interstitial in coarse biogenic sediments (calcareous sand and shell hash), shallow subtidal at ten meters’ depth.
Remarks.
Caecum invisibile sp. nov. is described as a new species based on molecular diagnostic characters, which show it as distinct from the European C. glabrum (Fig. 5M View Figure 5 ), as well as the morphologically similar C. corrugulatum (Fig. 5F, G View Figure 5 ) from the Central American Pacific and C. glabellum from Japan (Fig. 5N View Figure 5 ).
MOTU I
Material examined. Panama • 1 (Fig. 5I-L View Figure 5 ); Bocas del Toro; 2010; USNM BRS2010 exped.; DNA voucher; DNA bank: r462p13f2t91; GenBank: MT704263, MT731688; ZSM-Mol-20200039.
Morphological characterization. Shell size 1.3 mm long, 0.3 mm wide. Translucent, with whitish body. Tube regularly curved and equal width. Septum hemispherical (Fig. 5K View Figure 5 ). Aperture straight, with lip indicating an adult specimen. Operculum brownish. No sculpture or microsculpture diagnostic features (compare Fig. 5L View Figure 5 ).
Remarks. MOTU I is highly similar to the European C. glabrum (Fig. 5M View Figure 5 ) and Caecum invisibile sp. nov. (Fig. 5O-R View Figure 5 ). However, MOTU I shows some small morphological differences such as a bigger shell size and a tiny rim at the aperture (Fig. 5L View Figure 5 ) which is absent in C. glabrum . The septum is further completely round and blistered (Fig. 5K View Figure 5 ), whereas the one of Caecum invisibile sp. nov. slightly inclines (Fig. 5Q View Figure 5 ). MOTU I is based on a singleton and an incomplete molecular dataset, lacking COI sequence data. Additional material from the same locality is necessary to justify proper species description in future research.
MOTU II
Material examined. Panama • 1 (Fig. 5H View Figure 5 ); Bocas del Toro; 9.4333, -82.347; depth 3 m; 5 Jun 2010; USNM BRS2010 exped.; Stat. BRS101; DNA voucher; GenBank: MT727046, MT704262, MT731687; USNM 1618853. • 1; Bocas del Toro; 9.3507, -82.1724; depth 15 m; 13 Jun 2010; USNM BRS2010 exped.; Stat. BRS110; DNA voucher; GenBank: MT727051, MT731693; USNM 1618852. • 1; Bocas del Toro; 9.3507, -82.1724; depth 3 m; 13 Jun 2010; USNM BRS2010 exped.; Stat. BRS200; DNA voucher; GenBank: MT727053, MT731695; USNM 1618860.
Morphological characterization. Shell size unknown. Translucent, with translucent body. Tube regularly curved, slightly increasing in diameter towards aperture. Septum round, slightly flattened (Fig. 5H View Figure 5 ). Aperture straight. No sculpture visible, microsculptural data missing.
Remarks. MOTU II is based on the molecular data of three specimens; however, we unfortunately lack SEM scans and thus microsculptural data of the shell and light microscopic images are only available for one specimen (Fig. 5H View Figure 5 ). This specimen is a juvenile, and due to uncertainty with regards to adult ornamentation of the shell, and its possible identity with an already described species, we refrain from providing a formal description based on the available material only.
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 |