Disentangling invasions in the sea: molecular analysis of a global polychaete species complex (Annelida: Spionidae: Pseudopolydora paucibranchiata)

Radashevsky, Vasily I.; Malyar, Vasily V.; Pankova, Victoria V.; Gambi, María Cristina; Giangrande, Adriana; Keppel, Erica; Nygren, Arne; Al-Kandari, Manal; Carlton, James T.

doi:10.1007/s10530-020-02346-x

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… kempi . The 16S rRNA gene sequence obtained in the present study showed a 99.7% (305/306 bp) similarity with that of P. kempi japonica Imajima & Hartman, 1964 from Russia ( MG460897 ) reported by Radashevsky et al (2020b) , indicating these two are same species. It will need to be clarified whether P. kempi (type locality India) and subspecies P. kempi japonica (type locality Japan) are the same species.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 71%

“…Therefore, these individuals were referred to this species. The 16S rRNA gene sequence obtained in the present study showed a 99.4% (304/306 bp) similarity with that of P. bassarginensis (Zachs, 1933) from Russia ( MG460894 ) reported by Radashevsky et al (2020b) , indicating these two are one species. Although the Japanese population shows intermediate morphological characteristics between P. reticulata (type locality Taiwan) and P. bassarginensis (type locality Russia), Abe et al (2016) tentatively identified the Japanese population as P. cf.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Molecular identification and larval morphology of spionid polychaetes (Annelida, Spionidae) from northeastern Japan

Abe¹,

Sato-Okoshi²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planktonic larvae of spionid polychaetes are among the most common and abundant group in coastal meroplankton worldwide. The present study reports the morphology of spionid larvae collected mainly from coastal waters of northeastern Japan that were identified by the comparison of adult and larval 18S and 16S rRNA gene sequences. The molecular analysis effectively discriminated the species. Adult sequences of 48 species from 14 genera (Aonides Claparède, 1864; Boccardia Carazzi, 1893; Boccardiella Blake & Kudenov, 1978; Dipolydora Verrill, 1881; Laonice Malmgren, 1867; Malacoceros Quatrefages, 1843; Paraprionospio Caullery, 1914; Polydora Bosc, 1802; Prionospio Malmgren, 1867; Pseudopolydora Czerniavsky, 1881; Rhynchospio Hartman, 1936; Scolelepis Blainville, 1828; Spio Fabricius, 1785; Spiophanes Grube, 1860) and larval sequences of 41 species from 14 genera (Aonides; Boccardia; Boccardiella; Dipolydora; Laonice; Paraprionospio; Poecilochaetus Claparède in Ehlers, 1875; Polydora; Prionospio; Pseudopolydora; Rhynchospio; Scolelepis; Spio; Spiophanes) of spionid polychaetes were obtained; sequences of 27 of these species matched between adults and larvae. Morphology of the larvae was generally species‐specific, and larvae from the same genus mostly shared morphological features, with some exceptions. Color and number of eyes, overall body shape, and type and arrangement of pigmentation are the most obvious differences between genera or species. The morphological information on spionid larvae provided in this study contributes to species or genus level larval identification of this taxon in the studied area. Identification keys to genera and species of planktonic spionid larvae in northeastern Japan are provided. The preliminary results of the molecular phylogeny of the family Spionidae using 18S and 16S rRNA gene regions are also provided.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 71%

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 70%

Molecular identification and larval morphology of spionid polychaetes (Annelida, Spionidae) from northeastern Japan

Abe¹,

Sato-Okoshi²

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, morphological and molecular analysis conducted by Simon et al (2019) confirmed that this species is restricted to southern African coasts and belongs to a globally distributed complex of morphologically similar species. Similarly, the impact of P. paucibranchiata was reported on the Pacific coast of the USA (Ranasinghe et al, 2005) and in the Mediterranean Sea (Dagli & Çinar, 2008), but a recent taxonomic revision concluded that this species must be considered a complex of four pseudocryptic species (Radashevsky et al, 2020). In the case of P. websteri, this species was confirmed recently by molecular and morphological analyses as an alien in the Wadden Sea, west coast of the USA and South Africa (Martinelli et al, 2020;Waser et al, 2020;Rodewald et al, 2021;Spencer et al, 2020).…”

Section: Taxonomic Problemsmentioning

confidence: 80%

Impacts of alien polychaete species in marine ecosystems: a systematic review

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review analysed scientific publications to identify relevant research about the impact of alien polychaete species around the world, using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis) guide. The criterion for inclusion was studies published in English, with the key terms (e.g. ‘impact’, ‘alien species’, ‘polychaetes’) in the title, abstract and keywords. The literature search was conducted in Scopus and Web of Science from April to December 2020. The search resulted in 150 papers that included information about impact of alien polychaete species. Of these studies, 98% were published in the last 25 years, reporting on the impact of 40 species in 18 regions of the world. Sixty-one per cent of the research was conducted in the Baltic Sea, South-west Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea. The most frequent type of study was field surveys (46%) and the most studied system was open coast areas (36%). The species with the highest number of publications about their impacts were Ficopomatus enigmaticus, Marenzelleria viridis, Sabella spallanzanii and Boccardia proboscidea. Based on evidence of their most severe documented impacts in their introduced ranges, the impact mechanisms (IMos) of the alien polychaete species were strongly related to their biology and lifestyles. We found that species that build conspicuous reefs and tube-dwellers mainly showed physical and structural impact on ecosystems; shell-borers, mainly parasitism and infauna species, showed mainly chemical, physical and structural impacts on ecosystems. Some recommendations for the study of alien polychaete species are discussed.

show abstract

“…We acknowledge that species hypotheses have been previously and separately inferred and are not the focus of this paper. Whilst this distinction between phylogenetic and specific hypotheses has been the typical and inferentially appropriate approach in systematics, exceptions can be found among some publications (e.g., Nygren et al, 2018;Shimabukuro et al, 2019;Radashevsky et al, 2020), in which species hypotheses are simultaneously inferred with phylogenetic hypotheses that only causally account for sequence data, after which morphological characters are incorrectly introduced in a post hoc manner. Notwithstanding the fact that the requirement of total evidence (RTE;Fitzhugh, 2006b; see Sequence data and explanatory hypotheses, below) is violated, such inferences have questionable merits for the fact that explaining shared nucleotides or amino acids requires, at a minimum, discriminating between causes such as genetic drift, and selection via downward causation (see Sequence data and explanatory hypotheses, below).…”

Section: The Goal Of Scientific Inquirymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mapping most often involves obtaining phylogenetic trees using sequence data, then ''optimising'' other characters, usually morphological, onto these diagrams, from which are determined vague evolutionary conclusions regarding the mapped characters. This approach has become popular among polychaete phylogenetic studies (e.g., Struck et al, 2011;Borda et al, 2012;Glasby, Schroeder & Aguado, 2012;Goto et al, 2013;Weigert et al, 2014;Aguado et al, 2015;Andrade et al, 2015;Struck et al, 2015;Goto, 2016;Kobayashi et al, 2018;Nygren et al, 2018;Langeneck et al, 2019;Shimabukuro et al, 2019;Radashevsky et al, 2020;Martín et al, 2020;Tilic et al, 2020;Gonzalez et al, 2021). Much credence has been given to mapping, albeit without foundation.…”

Section: Phylogenetic Inference = Abductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who’s who inMagelona:phylogenetic hypotheses under Magelonidae Cunningham & Ramage, 1888 (Annelida: Polychaeta)

Mortimer

Fitzhugh

Brasil

et al. 2021

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Known as shovel head worms, members of Magelonidae comprise a group of polychaetes readily recognised by the uniquely shaped, dorso-ventrally flattened prostomium and paired ventro-laterally inserted papillated palps. The present study is the first published account of inferences of phylogenetic hypotheses within Magelonidae. Members of 72 species of Magelona and two species of Octomagelona were included, with outgroups including members of one species of Chaetopteridae and four of Spionidae. The phylogenetic inferences were performed to causally account for 176 characters distributed among 79 subjects, and produced 2,417,600 cladograms, each with 404 steps. A formal definition of Magelonidae is provided, represented by a composite phylogenetic hypothesis explaining seven synapomorphies: shovel-shaped prostomium, prostomial ridges, absence of nuchal organs, ventral insertion of palps and their papillation, presence of a burrowing organ, and unique body regionation. Octomagelona is synonymised with Magelona due to the latter being paraphyletic relative to the former. The consequence is that Magelonidae is monotypic, such that Magelona cannot be formally defined as associated with any phylogenetic hypotheses. As such, the latter name is an empirically empty placeholder, but because of the binomial name requirement mandated by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, the definition is identical to that of Magelonidae. Several key features for future descriptions are suggested: prostomial dimensions, presence/absence of prostomial horns, morphology of anterior lamellae, presence/absence of specialised chaetae, and lateral abdominal pouches. Additionally, great care must be taken to fully describe and illustrate all thoracic chaetigers in descriptions.

show abstract

Disentangling invasions in the sea: molecular analysis of a global polychaete species complex (Annelida: Spionidae: Pseudopolydora paucibranchiata)

Cited by 13 publications

References 82 publications

Molecular identification and larval morphology of spionid polychaetes (Annelida, Spionidae) from northeastern Japan

Molecular identification and larval morphology of spionid polychaetes (Annelida, Spionidae) from northeastern Japan

Impacts of alien polychaete species in marine ecosystems: a systematic review

Who’s who inMagelona:phylogenetic hypotheses under Magelonidae Cunningham & Ramage, 1888 (Annelida: Polychaeta)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About