Anamobaea Kroyer , 1856

Tovar-Hernandez, Maria Ana Ana, Garcia-Garza, Maria Elena & de Leon-Gonzalez, Jesus Angel, 2020, Sclerozoan and fouling sabellid worms (Annelida: Sabellidae) from Mexico with the establishment of two new species, Biodiversity Data Journal 8, pp. 57471-57471 : 57471

Anamobaea Kroyer, 1856

Anamobaea Anamobaea orstedii

Anamobaea Anamöbæa Ørstedii

Anamobaea .- Fitzhugh 1989: 74; Capa et al. 2019: 191-192.

Anamobaea Diagnosis (amended)

Anamobaea sensu Bok et al. (2016) Fitzhugh 1989 Capa et al. 2019

Taxon discussion

Anamobaea was placed in synonymy with Hypsicomus by Augener (1925) and defended by Hartman (1959). However, Perkins (1984) recognised Anamobaea , stating that A. orstedii has dorsal and ventral basal flanges (as Notaulax ), not present in Hypsicomus .

Anamobaea , Hypsicomus and Notaulax form part of a well-defined clade, being Anamobaea plesiomorphic to Notaulax and Hypsicomus , the latter two genera being sister taxa, based on the common occurrence of radiolar flanges ( Fitzhugh 1989). In a posterior analysis, the three genera were also nested together, but Hypsicomus resulted in being plesiomorphic to Anamobaea and Notaulax ( Nogueira et al. 2010).

Anamobaea is represented by two species worldwide that have been only reported in dead coral masses (bioclaustration). Eight species of Notaulax are known to bioclaustrate into coral masses as well ( Nishi et al. 2017, Tovar-Hernández et al. 2020). It is unknown where the substrate of Hypsicomus stichophthalmos Grube, 1863 ( Grube 1863) was found.

Major differences amongst Anamobaea , Hypsicomus and Notaulax are the following: Hypsicomus has two pairs of accessory, auriculate lamellae, absent in Anamobaea . Anamobaea and Hypsicomus have chaetae of collar arranged in a small bunch, whereas in Notaulax , collar chaetal arrangement may be longitudinal, oblique, L-shaped, J-shaped or C-shaped. Members of Anamobaea do not present radiolar flanges, but these structures are common in Hypsicomus and Notaulax , amongst other differences (Table 1 ).

The present definition primarily follows Fitzhugh (1989) and Capa et al. (2019), except for the following: the specimens here examined have 12-16 vacuolated cells in cross section at the base (four or more vacuolated cells in Fitzhugh (1989) and Capa et al. (2019)); the anterior peristomial ring is high, with rounded margin (low, of even height in in Fitzhugh 1989 and Capa et al. 2019); dorsal collar margins are not fused to faecal groove (fused to faecal groove in Capa et al. 2019); chaetae form a collar arranged in a small bundle (arrangement not described in Fitzhugh 1989 or Capa et al. 2019); mucros of paleate chaetae in abdominal chaetigers are dentate (mucros not described in Fitzhugh 1989 and Capa et al. 2019), those mucros from anterior abdominal segments are short (as long as paleae width) while those from posterior abdominal segments are long (longer than three times the width of paleae). Additional features related to radiolar ocelli were based on Bok et al. (2016).