DOCSLIB.ORG

Adelaide Desalination Plant 2020 Infauna Survey Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Adelaide Desalination Plant 2020 Infauna Survey Final Report Adelaide Desalination Plant 2020 Infauna Survey Final Report M. G. K. Loo, S. Drabsch and J. Brook J Diversity Pty Ltd January 2021 This publication may be cited as: Loo, M. G. K., Drabsch, S. and Brook, J. (2021). Adelaide Desalination Plant – 2020 Infauna Survey. Final Report. J Diversity Pty Ltd, Adelaide. 80pp. Disclaimer The findings and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of AdelaideAqua. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure the contents of this report are factually correct, AdelaideAqua, J Diversity Pty Ltd and the authors do not accept responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the contents. J Diversity Pty Ltd and the authors do not accept liability for any loss or damage that may be occasioned directly or indirectly through the use of, or reliance on, the contents of this report. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... i LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ........................................................................ iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................... x EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................... xi 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 2. MATERIALS AND METHODS .................................................................... 1 2.1 Sampling sites ................................................................................. 1 2.2 Field sampling ................................................................................. 1 2.3 Laboratory processing ..................................................................... 4 2.4 Data Analysis .................................................................................. 5 3. RESULTS .................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Survey 1 (February 2020) ............................................................... 9 3.1.1 Sediment grain size ............................................................ 9 3.1.2 Macrofauna ....................................................................... 16 3.1.3 Meiofauna ......................................................................... 23 3.1 Survey 2 (September 2020) .......................................................... 30 3.2.1 Sediment Grain Size ......................................................... 30 3.2.2 Macrofauna ....................................................................... 37 3.2.3 Meiofauna ......................................................................... 43 3.2 Infauna-sediment relationship ....................................................... 50 3.2.1 Survey 1 ........................................................................... 50 3.2.2 Survey 2 ........................................................................... 52 3.3 Comparison between surveys in 2020 .......................................... 55 3.3.1 Sediment Grain Size ......................................................... 55 3.3.2 Macrofauna ....................................................................... 56 3.3.3 Meiofauna ......................................................................... 58 3.4 Comparison between years ........................................................... 59 3.4.1 Macrofauna ....................................................................... 59 3.4.2 Meiofauna ......................................................................... 63 4 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................. 66 5 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................... 68 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 69 Appendix 1 .......................................................................................................... 71 Appendix 2 .......................................................................................................... 74 i Appendix 3 .......................................................................................................... 76 Appendix 4 .......................................................................................................... 79 ii LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figure 1 Location of the ten sites at Port Stanvac around the ADP outfall diffuser and vicinity, and the five sites each at North Control off Glenelg (NC) and South Control off Noarlunga (SC). .......................................................... 3 Figure 2 Location of the ten sites at Port Stanvac (PS) around the ADP outfall diffuser and vicinity, and the five sites each at North Control (NC) and South Control (SC) for the 2017 and 2020 surveys (green) and the sites for the 2013 survey (orange). ................................................................. 8 Figure 3 Sediment grain size composition showing the six sediment fractions for the ten sites at Port Stanvac (PS), five sites each at North Control (NC) and South Control (SC) from Survey 1. ................................................ 10 Figure 4 PCO plot of sediment grain size for the sites at Port Stanvac (PS), North Control (NC) and South Control (SC) from Survey 1 with superimposed vectors of sediment fractions. Vector length reflects the correlation between each fraction in PC1 and PC2, with the circle representing the vector length for a correlation of 1. ....................................................... 10 Figure 5 Mean (a) abundance A (individuals per core) and (b) number of taxonomic groups S, with SE bars (n=10) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 1. .................................................................... 18 Figure 6 Mean (a) Shannon-Wiener diversity H’ and (b) Pielou’s evenness J’, with SE bars (n=10) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 1. ............................................................................................................. 19 Figure 7 Two-dimensional nMDS ordination plot of square-root transformed mean abundance data of benthic macrofaunal assemblages from Port Stanvac, North Control and South Control for Survey 1. ..................................... 20 Figure 8 Mean (a) abundance A (individuals per core) and (b) number of taxonomic groups S, with SE bars (n=10) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 1. .................................................................... 26 Figure 9 Mean (a) Shannon-Wiener diversity H’ and (b) Pielou’s evenness J’, with SE bars (n=10) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 1. ............................................................................................................. 27 Figure 10 Two-dimensional nMDS ordination plot of square-root transformed mean abundance data of benthic meiofaunal assemblages from Port Stanvac, North Control and South Control for Survey 1. ..................................... 28 Figure 11 Sediment grain size composition showing the six sediment fractions for the ten sites at Port Stanvac (PS), five sites each at North Control (NC) and South Control (SC) from Survey 2. ................................................ 31 iii Figure 12 PCO plot of sediment grain size for the sites at Port Stanvac (PS), North Control (NC) and South Control (SC) from Survey 2 with superimposed vectors of sediment fractions. Vector length reflects the correlation between each fraction in PC1 and PC2, with the circle representing the vector length for a correlation of 1. ....................................................... 31 Figure 13 Mean (a) abundance A (individuals per core) and (b) number of taxonomic groups S, with SE bars (n=10 except n=9 for PS09, NC04 and SC05) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 2. ............ 39 Figure 14 Mean (a) Shannon-Wiener diversity H’ and (b) Pielou’s evenness J’, with SE bars (n=10) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 2. ............................................................................................................. 40 Figure 15 Two-dimensional nMDS ordination plot of square-root transformed mean abundance data of benthic macrofaunal assemblages at Port Stanvac, North Control and South Control for Survey 2. ..................................... 41 Figure 16 Mean (a) abundance A (individuals per core) and (b) number of taxonomic groups S, with SE bars (n=10) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 2. .................................................................... 46 Figure 17 Mean (a) Shannon-Wiener diversity H’ and (b) Pielou’s evenness J’, with SE bars (n=10) of macrofauna for each of the 20 sites sampled at North Control (NC), Port Stanvac (PS) and South Control (SC) for Survey 2. ............................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evolutionary History of Inversions in the Direction of Architecture-Driven
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.09.085712; this version posted May 10, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. Evolutionary history of inversions in the direction of architecture- driven mutational pressures in crustacean mitochondrial genomes Dong Zhang1,2, Hong Zou1, Jin Zhang3, Gui-Tang Wang1,2*, Ivan Jakovlić3* 1 Key Laboratory of Aquaculture Disease Control, Ministry of Agriculture, and State Key Laboratory of Freshwater Ecology and Biotechnology, Institute of Hydrobiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430072, China. 2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China 3 Bio-Transduction Lab, Wuhan 430075, China * Corresponding authors Short title: Evolutionary history of ORI events in crustaceans Abbreviations: CR: control region, RO: replication of origin, ROI: inversion of the replication of origin, D-I skew: double-inverted skew, LBA: long-branch attraction bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.09.085712; this version posted May 10, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. Abstract Inversions of the origin of replication (ORI) of mitochondrial genomes produce asymmetrical mutational pressures that can cause artefactual clustering in phylogenetic analyses. It is therefore an absolute prerequisite for all molecular evolution studies that use mitochondrial data to account for ORI events in the evolutionary history of their dataset.
    [Show full text]
  • Boccardia Proboscidea Class: Polychaeta, Sedentaria, Canalipalpata
    Phylum: Annelida Boccardia proboscidea Class: Polychaeta, Sedentaria, Canalipalpata Order: Spionida, Spioniformia A burrowing spionid worm Family: Spionidae Taxonomy: Boccardia proboscidea’s senior Trunk: subjective synonym, Polydora californica Posterior: Pygidium is a round, flaring (Treadwell, 1914) and an un-typified name, disc with four unequal lobes where dorsal Spio californica (Fewkes, 1889) were both lobes are smaller (Fig. 4) (Hartman 1969). suppressed in 2012 by the International Parapodia: Biramous after first setiger. Commission on Zoological Nomenclature Podia on the first setiger are not lobed, small (ICZN, case 3520). The widely cited and and inconspicuous. The second setiger's used name, Boccardia proboscidea parapodial lobes become twice as large as (Hartman, 1940) was conserved (ICZN the first's, and continue to worm posterior. 2012). Setae (chaetae): All setae are simple and in- clude bunches of short, capillary spines to se- Description tiger six (except for modified setiger five) Size: Specimens up to 30–35 mm in length (Figs. 5a, b). A transverse row of and 1.5 mm in width, where length extends approximately eight neuropodial uncini with age (Hartman 1940). The illustrated (hooded hooks) with bifid (two-pronged) tips specimen has approximately 130 segments begins on setiger seven and continues to (Fig. 1). posterior end (Fig. 5e), with bunches of Color: Yellow-orange with red branchiae capillary setae below them (until setiger 11). and dusky areas around prostomium and Notosetae of setiger five are heavy, dark and parapodia (Hartman 1969). Sato-Okoshi arranged vertically in two rows of five with and Okoshi (1997) report black pigment fol- pairs of long, falcate spines (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • The 17Th International Colloquium on Amphipoda
    Biodiversity Journal, 2017, 8 (2): 391–394 MONOGRAPH The 17th International Colloquium on Amphipoda Sabrina Lo Brutto1,2,*, Eugenia Schimmenti1 & Davide Iaciofano1 1Dept. STEBICEF, Section of Animal Biology, via Archirafi 18, Palermo, University of Palermo, Italy 2Museum of Zoology “Doderlein”, SIMUA, via Archirafi 16, University of Palermo, Italy *Corresponding author, email: [email protected] th th ABSTRACT The 17 International Colloquium on Amphipoda (17 ICA) has been organized by the University of Palermo (Sicily, Italy), and took place in Trapani, 4-7 September 2017. All the contributions have been published in the present monograph and include a wide range of topics. KEY WORDS International Colloquium on Amphipoda; ICA; Amphipoda. Received 30.04.2017; accepted 31.05.2017; printed 30.06.2017 Proceedings of the 17th International Colloquium on Amphipoda (17th ICA), September 4th-7th 2017, Trapani (Italy) The first International Colloquium on Amphi- Poland, Turkey, Norway, Brazil and Canada within poda was held in Verona in 1969, as a simple meet- the Scientific Committee: ing of specialists interested in the Systematics of Sabrina Lo Brutto (Coordinator) - University of Gammarus and Niphargus. Palermo, Italy Now, after 48 years, the Colloquium reached the Elvira De Matthaeis - University La Sapienza, 17th edition, held at the “Polo Territoriale della Italy Provincia di Trapani”, a site of the University of Felicita Scapini - University of Firenze, Italy Palermo, in Italy; and for the second time in Sicily Alberto Ugolini - University of Firenze, Italy (Lo Brutto et al., 2013). Maria Beatrice Scipione - Stazione Zoologica The Organizing and Scientific Committees were Anton Dohrn, Italy composed by people from different countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematics, Phylogeny, and Taphonomy of Ghost Shrimps (Decapoda): a Perspective from the Fossil Record
    73 (3): 401 – 437 23.12.2015 © Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung, 2015. Systematics, phylogeny, and taphonomy of ghost shrimps (Decapoda): a perspective from the fossil record Matúš Hyžný *, 1, 2 & Adiël A. Klompmaker 3 1 Geological-Paleontological Department, Natural History Museum Vienna, Burgring 7, 1010 Vienna, Austria; Matúš Hyžný [hyzny.matus@ gmail.com] — 2 Department of Geology and Paleontology, Faculty of Natural Sciences, Comenius University, Mlynská dolina, Ilkovičova 6, SVK-842 15 Bratislava, Slovakia — 3 Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, 1659 Museum Road, PO Box 117800, Gaines- ville, FL 32611, USA; Adiël A. Klompmaker [[email protected]] — * Correspond ing author Accepted 06.viii.2015. Published online at www.senckenberg.de/arthropod-systematics on 14.xii.2015. Editor in charge: Stefan Richter. Abstract Ghost shrimps of Callianassidae and Ctenochelidae are soft-bodied, usually heterochelous decapods representing major bioturbators of muddy and sandy (sub)marine substrates. Ghost shrimps have a robust fossil record spanning from the Early Cretaceous (~ 133 Ma) to the Holocene and their remains are present in most assemblages of Cenozoic decapod crustaceans. Their taxonomic interpretation is in flux, mainly because the generic assignment is hindered by their insufficient preservation and disagreement in the biological classification. Fur- thermore, numerous taxa are incorrectly classified within the catch-all taxonCallianassa . To show the historical patterns in describing fos- sil ghost shrimps and to evaluate taphonomic aspects influencing the attribution of ghost shrimp remains to higher level taxa, a database of all fossil species treated at some time as belonging to the group has been compiled: 250 / 274 species are considered valid ghost shrimp taxa herein.
    [Show full text]
  • Thelepus Crispus Class: Polychaeta, Sedentaria, Canalipalpata
    Phylum: Annelida Thelepus crispus Class: Polychaeta, Sedentaria, Canalipalpata Order: Terebellida, Terebellomorpha A terebellid worm Family: Terebellidae, Theleponinae Description (Hartman 1969). Notosetae present from Size: Individuals range in size from 70–280 second branchial segment (third body mm in length (Hartman 1969). The greatest segment) and continue almost to the worm body width at segments 10–16 is 13 mm (88 posterior (to 14th segment from end in mature –147 segments). The dissected individual specimens) (Hutchings and Glasby 1986). All on which this description is based was 120 neurosetae short handled, avicular (bird-like) mm in length (from Coos Bay, Fig. 1). uncini, imbedded in a single row on oval- Color: Pinkish orange and cream with bright shaped tori (Figs. 3, 5) where the single row red branchiae, dark pink prostomium and curves into a hook, then a ring in latter gray tentacles and peristomium. segments (Fig. 3). Each uncinus bears a General Morphology: Worm rather stout thick, short fang surmounted by 4–5 small and cigar-shaped. teeth (Hartman 1969) (two in this specimen) Body: Two distinct body regions consisting (Fig. 4). Uncini begin on the fifth body of a broad thorax with neuro- and notopodia segment (third setiger), however, Johnson and a tapering abdomen with only neuropo- (1901) and Hartman (1969) have uncini dia. beginning on setiger two. Anterior: Prostomium reduced, with Eyes/Eyespots: None. ample dorsal flap transversely corrugated Anterior Appendages: Feeding tentacles are dorsally (Fig. 5). Peristomium with circlet of long (Fig. 1), filamentous, white and mucus strongly grooved, unbranched tentacles (Fig. covered. 5), which cannot be retracted fully (as in Am- Branchiae: Branchiae present (subfamily pharctidae).
    [Show full text]
  • Crustacea: Amphipoda) from India J
    Caprellids (Crustacea: Amphipoda) from India J. M. Guerra-García, T. Ganesh, M. Jaikumar, A. V. Raman To cite this version: J. M. Guerra-García, T. Ganesh, M. Jaikumar, A. V. Raman. Caprellids (Crustacea: Amphipoda) from India. Helgoland Marine Research, Springer Verlag, 2009, 64 (4), pp.297-310. 10.1007/s10152- 009-0183-6. hal-00544810 HAL Id: hal-00544810 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00544810 Submitted on 9 Dec 2010 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. CAPRELLIDS (CRUSTACEA: AMPHIPODA) FROM INDIA J.M. Guerra-García*, T. Ganesh**, M. Jaikumar**, A.V. Raman** *Laboratorio de Biología Marina, Departamento de Fisiología y Zoología, Facultad de Biología, Universidad de Sevilla, Avda. Reina Mercedes 6, 41012 Sevilla, Spain. E-mail: [email protected] **Marine Biological Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam, 530003, India Abstract The caprellid fauna of India is investigated. A total of 538 samples (including algae, seagrasses, sponges, hydroids, ascidians, bryozoans, encrusted dead corals, coral rubble, fine and coarse sediments) were collected from 39 stations along the coast of India, covering a wide diversity of habitats from intertidal to 12 m water depth.
    [Show full text]
  • Suborder Gammaridea Latreille, 1803
    Systematic List of Amphipods Found in British Columbia by Aaron Baldwin, PhD Candidate School of Fisheries and Ocean Science University of Alaska, Fairbanks Questions and comments can be directed to Aaron Baldwin at [email protected] This list is adapted from my unpublished list “Amphipoda of Alaska” that I had maintained from 1999 to about 2004. This list follows the taxonomy of Bousfield (2001b) and utilizes his ranges as confirmed records for British Columbia. It is important to note that I have not updated the original list for about five years, so name changes, range extensions, and new species since that time are unlikely to be included. Because of the relative difficulty in amphipod identification and the shortage of specialists there are undoubtedly many more species that have yet to be discovered and/or named. In cases where I believe that a family or genus will likely be discovered I included a bolded note. Traditional classification divides the amphipods into four suborders, of which three occur on our coast. This classification is utilized here (but see note on Hyperiida at end of list), but is likely artificial as the Hyperiidea and Caprelidea probably nest within the Gammaridea. Myers and Lowry (2003) used molecular work to support elevating the superfamily Corophioidea (Corophoidea) to subordinal status and including the traditional corophoids as well as the caprellids as infraorders within this taxon. These authors cite a reference I do not have (Barnard and Karaman, 1984) as the original source of this classification. As time allows I may include this new and probably better classification updates to this list Key: (?) Author unknown to me and apparently everyone else.
    [Show full text]
  • Drilonereis Pictorial
    H:\wordperf\taxtrain\spionid.key Spionidae Reformated. 11/95 KEY TO THE NON-POLYDORID SPIONIDAE FROM SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (INTERTIDAL TO 500 METERS)1 by Lawrence L. Lovell and Dean Pasko 1. Branchiae absent; setiger 1 with 1-2 large recurved neuropodial spines in addition to capillary setae (Fig. 1) (Spiophanes) . 2 Branchiae present; setiger 1 without recurved neuropodial spines (see Fig. 13) 7 2. Prostomium rounded anteriorly, without lateral projections; prostomium with medial orange pigment spot; median antennae absent (Fig. 2) Spiophanes wigleyi Prostomium bell or T-shaped, with short or long lateral projections (Figs. 3-7); prostomium without pigment spot; median antennae present or absent 3 3. Prostomium T-shaped with long lateral projections 4 Prostomium bell shaped without lateral projections 5 4. Eyes present (Fig. 3) Spiophanes bombyx Eyes absent (Fig. 4) Spiophanes anoculata 5. Median antennae absent; peristomium poorly developed (Fig. 5) . Spiophanes missionensis =j] Median antennae present; peristomium well developed (Fig. 6) 6 6. Prostomium flairs laterally at distal end; neuropodial glands in setigers 10 - 13 without pigment; ventrum of setiger 8 forms dark transverse band with methyl green stain; dorsal transverse membrane without fimbriae (Fig. 6) Spiophanes berkeleyorumY=\ Prostomium straight or with a slight constriction distally; neuropodial glands in setigers 10-13 darkly pigmented; setiger 8 does not form transverse band of methyl green stain; dorsal transverse membrane with fimbriae (Fig. 7) Spiophanes fimbriataV=\ 7. Modified segment present in anterior region (Figs. 8 & 9) 8 Modified segment absent in anterior region 9 1 Species in bold type have been recorded off Point Loma. H:\wordperf\taxtrain\spionid.key Spionidae Reformated.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents.................................................................................................................1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................3 Amphipod Superfamilies.....................................................................................................4 Index of Families.................................................................................................................7 I Suborder Ingolfiellidea....................................................................................................12 Suborder Senticaudata Infraorder Talitrida II. Superfamily Talitroidea........................................................................20 Infraorder Corophiida III. Superfamily Aoroidea.........................................................................65 IV. Superfamily Cheluroidea.....................................................................91 V. Superfamily Chevalioidea....................................................................96 VI. Superfamily Corophioidea.................................................................100 Infraorder Caprellida VII. Superfamily Caprelloidea................................................................142 VIII. Superfamily Neomegamphopoidea................................................191 IX. Superfamily Photoidea......................................................................199 Infraorder Hadziida X.
    [Show full text]
  • Scientific Note a Retrospective of Helicosiphon Biscoeensis Gravier
    Scientific Note A retrospective of Helicosiphon biscoeensis Gravier, 1907 (Polychaeta: Serpulidae): morphological and ecological characteristics * GABRIEL S.C. MONTEIRO , EDMUNDO F. NONATO, MONICA A.V. PETTI & THAIS N. CORBISIER USP, Instituto Oceanográfico, Departamento de Oceanografia Biológica, São Paulo-SP, Brasil *Corresponding author: [email protected] Abstract. This note gathers the main information and illustrations published concerning the Antarctic/Subantarctic polychaete Helicosiphon biscoeensis (Spirorbinae). It provides a short historical overview about the knowledge of this species, including information on its morphology and ecology, and contributes new digital images. Key words: ecology, life story, Southern Ocean, Spirorbinae, taxonomy Resumo. Restrospectiva do Helicosiphon biscoeensis Gravier, 1907 (Polychaeta: Serpulidae): características morfológicas e ecológicas. Esta nota reúne a maior parte das informações e ilustrações publicadas sobre o poliqueta antártico/subantártico Helicosiphon biscoeensis (Spirorbinae), faz uma breve retrospectiva da evolução de seu conhecimento, incluindo considerações sobre sua morfologia e ecologia, e contribui com imagens digitais inéditas. Palavras chave: ecologia, história de vida, Oceano Austral, Spirorbinae, taxonomia Taxonomic classification (Rzhavsky et al. have an egg string externally attached to their 2013): bodies, usually as a stalk or epithelial funnel Annelida (Phylum) > Polychaeta (Class) > (Knight-Jones & Knight-Jones 1994). Besides the Canalipalpata (Subclass) > Sabellida (Order) > peculiarity of the egg string, H. biscoeensis has an Serpulidae (Family) > Spirorbinae (Subfamily) > initially flat coiled tube that projects from the Romanchellini (Tribe) > Helicosiphon (Genus) > substrate forming an almost straight ascending spiral Helicosiphon biscoeensis Gravier, 1907 (Species) coiling. It was originally described by Gravier Although serpulids are less common at high (1907) as a serpulid with a free tube, coiled and of latitudes (ten Hove & Kupriyanova 2009), smooth texture (Figs.
    [Show full text]
  • Systematics, Evolution and Phylogeny of Annelida – a Morphological Perspective
    Memoirs of Museum Victoria 71: 247–269 (2014) Published December 2014 ISSN 1447-2546 (Print) 1447-2554 (On-line) http://museumvictoria.com.au/about/books-and-journals/journals/memoirs-of-museum-victoria/ Systematics, evolution and phylogeny of Annelida – a morphological perspective GÜNTER PURSCHKE1,*, CHRISTOPH BLEIDORN2 AND TORSTEN STRUCK3 1 Zoology and Developmental Biology, Department of Biology and Chemistry, University of Osnabrück, Barbarastr. 11, 49069 Osnabrück, Germany ([email protected]) 2 Molecular Evolution and Animal Systematics, University of Leipzig, Talstr. 33, 04103 Leipzig, Germany (bleidorn@ rz.uni-leipzig.de) 3 Zoological Research Museum Alexander König, Adenauerallee 160, 53113 Bonn, Germany (torsten.struck.zfmk@uni- bonn.de) * To whom correspondence and reprint requests should be addressed. Email: [email protected] Abstract Purschke, G., Bleidorn, C. and Struck, T. 2014. Systematics, evolution and phylogeny of Annelida – a morphological perspective . Memoirs of Museum Victoria 71: 247–269. Annelida, traditionally divided into Polychaeta and Clitellata, is an evolutionary ancient and ecologically important group today usually considered to be monophyletic. However, there is a long debate regarding the in-group relationships as well as the direction of evolutionary changes within the group. This debate is correlated to the extraordinary evolutionary diversity of this group. Although annelids may generally be characterised as organisms with multiple repetitions of identically organised segments and usually bearing certain other characters such as a collagenous cuticle, chitinous chaetae or nuchal organs, none of these are present in every subgroup. This is even true for the annelid key character, segmentation. The first morphology-based cladistic analyses of polychaetes showed Polychaeta and Clitellata as sister groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Joko Pamungkas" CACING Lalit DAN KEINDAHANNYA
    Oseana, Volume XXXVI, Nomor 2, Tahun 2011: 21-29 ISSN 0216- 1877 CACING LAlIT DAN KEINDAHANNYA Oleh Joko Pamungkas" ABSTRACT MARINE WORMS AND THEIR BEAUTY. Many people generally assume that a worm is always ugly. Nonetheless, particular species of polychaete marine worms (Annelida) belonging to the family Serpulidae and Sabel/idae reveal something different. They are showy, beautiful and attractive. Moreover, they are unlike a worm. For many years, these species of seaworms have been fascinating many divers. For their unique shape, these animals are well known as jan worm't'peacock worm'Z'feather-duster worm' (Sabella pavonina Savigny, 1822) and 'christmas-tree worm' iSpirobranchus giganteus Pallas, 1766). PENDAHULUAN bahwa hewan yang dijumpai tersebut adalah seekor cacing. Hal ini karena morfologi eaeing Apa yang terbersit dalam benak tersebut jauh bcrbeda dengan wujud eacing kita manakala kata "cacing ' disebut? yang biasa dijurnpai di darat. Membayangkannya, asosiasi kita biasanya Cacing yang dimaksud ialab cacing laut langsung tertuju pada makhluk buruk rupa yang Polikaeta (Filum Annelida) dari jenis Sabella hidup di tcmpat-tempat kotor, Bentuknya yang pavonina Sevigny, 1822 (Suku Sabellidae) dan filiform dengan wama khas kernerahan kerap membuat hewan inidicap sebagai binatang yang Spirobranchus giganteus Pallas, 1766 (Suku menjijikkan.Cacing juga sering dianggap Serpulidae). Dua fauna laut inisetidaknya dapat sebagai sumber penyakit yang harus dijaubi dianggap sebagai penghias karang yang telah karena dalam dunia medis beberapa penyakit memikat begitu banyak penyelam. Sebagai memang disebabkan oleh fauna ini. cacing, mereka memiliki benmk tubuh yang Padahal, anggapan terscbut tidak "tidak lazirn" narmm sangat menarik. sepenuhnya benar. Di a1am bawah laut, Tulisan ini mengulas beberapa aspek khususnya zona terumbu karang, kita bisa biologi cacing laut polikaeta dari jenis S.
    [Show full text]