Shell-Less Opisthobranchs of Virginia and Maryland
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
W&M ScholarWorks Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects 1978 Shell-less opisthobranchs of Virginia and Maryland Rosalie M. Vogel College of William and Mary - Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etd Part of the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Vogel, Rosalie M., "Shell-less opisthobranchs of Virginia and Maryland" (1978). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539616894. https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.25773/v5-6gnb-fq17 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, & Master Projects at W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS Thii notarial was produced from a microfilm copy of tha original document. While the moit advanced technological meant to photograph end reproduce dm document have been uiad, the quality it heavily dependent upon tha quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of technique* it provided to help you understand marking* or pattern! which may appear on thii reproduction. 1. Tha sign or "target" for page* apparently lacking from tha document photographed i* "Missing Page I*}". If it wat possible to obtain the missing page(t) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent page*. This may have necessitated cutting thru an Image and duplicating adjacent page* to insure you complete continuity- 2. When an Image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it it an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page In the adjacent frame. 3. Whan a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. Tha majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Oapartment, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you with reproduced. 6. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received. University Microfilms International 300 Woin Zeeb Head Ann Arbor. MichiQar 4Q106 USA SI Johe's Road, Tylers Green High Wycombe. Bucks. England HPiO 8 hR VOaCL, fiO|ALlE HARIE flHCiL»LES5 0PISTH06R*NCHS OF VlflGINU ANO MARYLAND, TH{ qOLLCGE OF HILL1AH *N& M*RY IN VIRGINIA t PH,D,# 19TB SHELL-LESS OPISTHOBRANCHS OP VIRGINIA AND MARYLAND A Dissertation Presented to The Faculty of the School of Marine Science The College of Uliliam and Mary In Virginia In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Rosalie M. Vogel 1977 APPROVAL SHEET This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy r 1 ? f l l i a ; t Rosalie Marie Vogel A Approved, Octoher 1977 Marvin L, Wass, Ph.D., Chairman /- ) ' / ) <'M (£ ) ( J a ^ D . ^tyrews, Ph.D. Donald F. Boesch, Ph.D. f ( CL* Michael Castagna, M.S./} <?oJitxA v / Robert E. L. Black, Ph.D. College of William and Mary i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................................... v LIST OF TABLES..............................................................................................................................v ii i LIST OF FIGURES...................................................................................................................... x LIST OF PLATES..............................................................................................................................x ii ABSTRACT......................................... ................................................................................................xlv INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................ 2 METHODS AND MATERIALS....................................................................................................... B RESULTS......................................................................................................................................... 15 Introduction , 15 Taxonomic Account ......................... ...... 29 Key to Adults. ............................. 31 Key to Egg Manses ....................................... 36 Descriptions of Species. .......... ................................. .... 39 Aplyala wlllcoxl. ................... 39 Phyllaplysia engeli.......... ............................. ..... 39 Elyaia chlorotjca , 41 Elysia cstulus. .............................. ..... 43 Henna ea c ru c la ta . ........................ 44 Placlda dendritica. .................. 46 Ercolania vanellus. .................. 49 Ercolanla sp ..................................................................................................... 50 StlHger fuscatuB .................................................................51 H i Page Alderla modesta .................... 52 Doris verrucosa * ............................... , 54 PolycaTella emertoni. ........... .................... , 56 Acanthodorls pilose ....... , , .........................................58 Okenla cupella. .................... 61 Dorldalla obacura . .................... ............. 62 Dorlopallia pharpa. ....... .................... ...... 65 Doto coronata . ........................ 74 Tenellla adsparsa ....... ......................... ...... 76 Tenellla fuscata ............................................................................................. 79 Ten ell la s p ............................................................................................................81 Cratena pllata. ........... ... 84 Cratena kaoruae ........... 88 Glaucus atlantlcufl. .......... 97 DISCUSSION..........................................................................................................................................99 LITERATURE CITED.........................................................................................................................112 APPENDIX............................................................................................................................................ 121 VITA.......................................................................................................................................................159 lv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS X am pleased to thank Dr. Marvin L. Wass, chairman of my committee, for his long-suffering during the study. Special thanks go to Michael Castagna for his ideas, encouragement and many discussions, as well as to the other members of my committee; Drs. Jay B. Andrews, Robert E. L. Black, and Donald F. Boesch for critically reading the manuscript and making suggestions for improvement. Thanks are given to the staff of the VIMS Eastern Shore Laboratory at Wachapreague, especially Jim Moore and Rick Hartley for helping collect the samples and Nancy Lewis for taking care of the animals in my absence, 1 am also pleased to acknowledge the assistance of these people from the Chesapeake B iological Laboratory, Solomons, Maryland, who aided me in the Maryland portion of this study: Dr. Leonard F. Schultz, Messrs. David G. Cargo and Michael J. Reber. Thanks are given to Ms. Peggy Peoples, Mrs. Debbie Kennedy and Mrs, Alice J. Llppson for the art work and Messrs. William Jenkins and Kenneth Thornberry for the photographs. The VIMS library staff was helpful in locating certain literature and Ms, Susan Barrick reviewed the lite ra tu re c ita tio n s. Mrs. Linda Jenkins and Mrs, Mary Crull typed the manuscript. Thanks are also given to Dr. Eveline Marcus of Sao Paulo, Brazil, for some of the early identifications and instructions on opisthabranchs, and to the Division of Invertebrates, Mollugks, Smithsonian Institution, for the use of their library and collection. Lastly, thanks to all my friends and co-workers who have given me encouragement and assistance during these studies, especially Jim Cumbee. The funds for the Maryland studies were provided in part by the National Marine Fisheries Service of the Department of Commerce and the State of Maryland, Fish and Wildlife Administration, Contract no, 14-17-003-517 under public law no. 89-720. Vi dedication To my patents, Mr, and Mrs- William J* Vogel for th e ir constant support and many sacrifices in my behalf. v ll LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Characteristics of three orders of opisthobranchs........... jg 2. Characteristics of egg masses of opisthobranchs. .................., .. 18 3. Development types in opisthobranchs, .................................. 19 4. Opisthobranch development - Type I, ......................... 20 5. Nudlbranch development - Types II and 111.,,,..,...,..,.,.,. 21 6. Collection data for opisthobranchs 23 7. Development of Dorlopsilla