Dipolydora notialis
Notice: | This page is derived from the original publication listed below, whose author(s) should always be credited. Further contributors may edit and improve the content of this page and, consequently, need to be credited as well (see page history). Any assessment of factual correctness requires a careful review of the original article as well as of subsequent contributions.
If you are uncertain whether your planned contribution is correct or not, we suggest that you use the associated discussion page instead of editing the page directly. This page should be cited as follows (rationale):
Citation formats to copy and paste
BibTeX: @article{Gunton2021ZooKeys1020, RIS/ Endnote: TY - JOUR Wikipedia/ Citizendium: <ref name="Gunton2021ZooKeys1020">{{Citation See also the citation download page at the journal. |
Ordo: Phyllodocida
Familia: Spionidae
Genus: Dipolydora
Name
Dipolydora notialis (Blake & Kudenov, 1978) – Wikispecies link – Pensoft Profile
Diagnosis
Specimens all short anterior fragments, moderately preserved. Prostomium narrow, rounded anteriorly, caruncle not well preserved in present material; occipital tentacle not observed. Chaetiger 1 with capillaries in noto- and neuropodia. Chaetiger 5 moderately modified; modified heavy spines of one type arranged in a curved row, heavy spines with bent tip and crest of bristles on convex side, arranged together with thin companion chaetae; dorsal fascicle of geniculate chaetae and of neuropodial capillaries present. Bidentate hooded hooks with smooth, curved shafts without constriction start in neuropodia of chaetiger 7. Branchiae from chaetiger 7, continuing to the end of fragments. Gizzard-like structure in anterior part of the digestive tract not very distinct.
Remarks
The morphology of specimens examined is generally in good accordance with the original description of Polydora notialis by Blake and Kudenov (1978)[1], now referred to Dipolydora. The number of heavy spines is greater in the here examined specimens (eight spines in one row opposed to four or five spines cited in the original description). However, this character is not regarded an important diagnostic character in the taxonomic literature dealing with this species or genus.
Records
7 specimens. Suppl. material 1: ops. 4, 67, 70, 80, 100 (AM).
Taxon Treatment
- Gunton, L; Kupriyanova, E; Alvestad, T; Avery, L; Blake, J; Biriukova, O; Böggemann, M; Borisova, P; Budaeva, N; Burghardt, I; Capa, M; Georgieva, M; Glasby, C; Hsueh, P; Hutchings, P; Jimi, N; Kongsrud, J; Langeneck, J; Meißner, K; Murray, A; Nikolic, M; Paxton, H; Ramos, D; Schulze, A; Sobczyk, R; Watson, C; Wiklund, H; Wilson, R; Zhadan, A; Zhang, J; 2021: Annelids of the eastern Australian abyss collected by the 2017 RV ‘Investigator’ voyage ZooKeys, 1020: 1-198. doi
Images
|
Other References
- ↑ Blake J, Kudenov J (1978) The Spionidae (Polychaeta) from southeastern Australia and adjacent areas with a revision of the genera.Memoirs of the Museum Victoria39: 171–280. https://doi.org/10.24199/j.mmv.1978.39.11