Dendronotus kamchaticus Ekimova
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.1163/18759866-BJA10014 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/1E1A4C68-FF9A-FFDF-51C9-FA0EFED5DD7C |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Dendronotus kamchaticus Ekimova |
| status |
|
Dendronotus kamchaticus Ekimova View in CoL , Remarks. Though this species previously was
Korshunova, Shepetov, Neretina, Sanamyan confused with D. frondosus , D. albus and D.
& Martynov, 2015 venustus , D. kamchaticus is well delineated
Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 from those species according to the
Dendronotus kamchaticus Ekimova , morphological features (semitransparent
Korshunova, Shepetov, Neretina, Sanamyan grayish Downloaded with from white-tipped Brill.com 12/12dorsolateral /2023 04:12:08PM via Open Access. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
appendages and digestive gland often Dendronotus lacteus (Thompson, 1840) penetrating all branches of all dorsolateral Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7
appendages to body brownish colouration Tritonia lactea Thompson, 1840: 88–89 , Pl.
without dorsal subparallel stripes), radular 2, Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 .
patterns (usually almost smooth central teeth Dendronotus lacteus Eliot, 1910: 161 ;
in adults) and molecular phylogenetic data Nordsieck, 1972: 68; Pruvot-Fol, 1954: 356;
(figs1,2).In the original description branches of Thollesson, 1998: 191–193, Figs 1–3 View FIGURE 1 View FIGURE 2 View FIGURE 3 ; Evertsen the dorsolateral appendages were incorrectly and Bakken, 2005: 18; Korshunova et al., 2017: described as bulbous and short (see Ekimova 2–7, Figs 1 View FIGURE 1 , 2 View FIGURE 2 .
et al., 2015: Fig. 8D View FIGURE 8 ), despite the presence of not Becher, 1886: 14.
this species in the same paper (Ekimova et al., not Eliot, 1910:112 (= D. dalli ).
2015: Fig. 16A, B) represented by photos of live = D. frondosus auct. non Ascanius, 1774.
paratypes with more elongated, not exactly bulbous, though still shortened branches. Extended diagnosis. Body relatively narrow.
Further, in a specimen of D. kamchaticus from Four to eight pairs of branched dorsolateral the Sea of Japan the branches were described appendages which in adults commonly show as elongated and also very different from the specific “curly” pattern though other specimens original description and Fig. 8D View FIGURE 8 in Ekimova with more “typical” for genus Dendronotus (2015). This significant discrepancy compared elongated appendages may occur. Four to ten with the original description was explained: oral veil appendages. Four to six appendages “because different ontogenetic stages were (inetrnal middle and posterior ones longest)
used in the description and this study, as of rhinophoral stalks. Lateral papilla of well as cerata morphology may be altered in rhinophoral sheaths present. Rhinophores preserved specimens” (Ekimova et al., 2016: with 10–14 lamellae. At least more than 15 lip
38). However, this discrepancy was not due papillae.Basalcolourfromuniformlydarkredto to the different ontogenetic stages. In the uniform white, often with small brownish dots.
original description of D. kamchaticus , the Redddish and brownish specimens may have type specimens were represented by an almost white stripes between cerata, white specimens adult holotype (12 mm preserved length) milky, non-transparent in appearance. Dorsal with a mature reproductive system whereas processes of jaws inclined posteriorly at seven paratypes were subadults (2–10 mm approximately 55–60° to the longitudinal of preserved length). Most importantly, the axis of the jaw body and 0.52 of its length.
drawing in Ekimova(2015: Fig.8D View FIGURE 8 )depicted the Masticatory processes possibly bear denticles largest holotype, with an adult reproductive and ridge-like structures. Radula with up to 43 system and the artificially bulbous branches rows of teeth. Central tooth with up to 40–50
were only seen in the preserved specimen, small denticles (commonly smaller), often without any considerable ontogenetic with peculiar ribs, never completely smooth.
modifications. The largest specimen so far Up to 16 lateral teeth with up to five denticles.
known of D. kamchatcius (adult, 30 mm) Ampulla moderately narrow with several from the NE Pacific, also has considerably windings or folded loops. Bursa copulatrix elongated branches (Korshunova et al., large, rounded to oval. Seminal receptaculum 2016a). This fully confirms that the branches small placed distally at considerable distance were described and figured incorrectly in the from the vaginal opening. Prostate discoid with original description. a range from Downloaded 12 to more from than Brill30.com alveolar 12/12/2023 glands04:12.:08PM via Open Access. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The vas deferens is relatively long in length, Ampulla was not described in the original penis relatively long, bent. Body length up to description. Bursa copulatrix large, rounded 150 mm. to oval. Seminal receptaculum small placed distally at considerable distance from the
Distribution. North Atlantic and Arctic vaginal opening. Glandular part of prostate (eastern limit at least Laptev Sea, Russia). was reported in the original description as in early development of differentiation.
Bathymetry. From circa 5 to 427 m depth; The vas deferens is extremely long, with common at shallow, subtidal depths at around numerous loops, penis moderately short, 10–20 m. straight, with blunt tip. Body length up to
13 mm.
Remarks. Dendronotus lacteus together with
D. frondosus and D. europaeus form a species Distribution. NE Pacific, Baja California , complex that is difficult to distinguish Puerto Peñasco, Sonora, Mexico .
based on external characteristics, but in which it is still possible to find fine-scale Bathymetry. Floating on seawater surface. morphological differences. In contrast, the radulae of these three species demonstrate Remarks. Dendronotus nanus was considered distinctly different patterns (Korshunova et a synonym of D. iris by Stout et al. (2010), but al., 2017b). in the absence of molecular data we prefer to keep them separate. Furthermore, despite the
Dendronotus nanus Marcus & Marcus, 1967 fact that Stout et al. (2010) mentioned only
Dendronotus nanus Marcus & Marcus , minor morphological differences between
1967: 210–214, Figs 64–65; Farmer, 1980: 72; D. iris and D. nanus, Marcus and Marcus Robilliard, 1972: 428–430 . (1967) in their original description specially highlighted that D. nanus differs from D. iris
Diagnosis (original description). Body by a considerably longer vas deferens in narrow. Six pairs of branched dorsolateral animals of only 13 mm length (an considered appendages. Circa six oral veil appendages. to be not fully mature), whereas D. iris that Five appendages (posterior ones the longest) was studied anatomically by Robilliard of rhinophoral stalks. Lateral papilla of (1970) had a considerably larger average body rhinophoral sheaths present. Rhinophores length 65–120 mm but a significantly shorter with about 15 lamellae. Circa 20 lip papillae. vas deferens. In the BOLD database there is a Basal colour semitransparent grayish with sequence of D. nanus (in GenBank identified a slight reddish hue and a little brown as D. iris ), but from a very remote location in pigment, with white line bordered foot British Columbia whereas the type locality edge, white tipped dorsolateral appendages of D. nanus is Baja California, Sonora, thus with blackish brown subapical rings and an this available sequence does not represent orange base. Masticatory processeses with a true D. nanus . Even if taken into account crested pointed denticles. Radula with up to that the glandular part of vas deferens 26 rows of teeth. Central tooth quite narrow, likely is underdeveloped in D. nanus (see with deep furrows and with up to 10 distinct Marcus & Marcus, 1967), the non-glandular denticles. Up to 14 lateral teeth commonly muscular part of vas deference of D. nanus is smooth, occasionally with up to 12 denticles. considerably Downloaded longer from than Brill.com in D. iris . 12/12/2023 Robilliard 04:12:08PM via Open Access. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
(1972) compared D. iris and D. nanus in detail and mentioned similarity of both species but did not synonymize them. All these characters need to be re-analysed before any further attempts at synonymizing these species should be done.
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 |