2017
DOI: 10.1007/s00435-017-0352-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Morphological variability of the “Caribbean hidden anemone” Lebrunia coralligens (Wilson, 1890)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

2
4
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the comparison between the green and pink/purple morphotypes reveals no statistical variation, agreeing with previous morphological revisions which suggest that there are no other morphological differences between the morphotypes, besides the variability in the tentacular tip coloration (González-Muñoz et al, 2012). In other species of sea anemones the variation between morphotypes occurs also -Muñoz et al, 2015); or the variation in the cnidae size range in Lebrunia coralligens (Wilson, 1890) (González-Muñoz et al, 2017. Furthermore, although our analyses only focused in the comparison between morphotypes regardless samples body size or reef locality of origin, results suggest a high degree of stability in the size of cnidae of C. gigantea.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, the comparison between the green and pink/purple morphotypes reveals no statistical variation, agreeing with previous morphological revisions which suggest that there are no other morphological differences between the morphotypes, besides the variability in the tentacular tip coloration (González-Muñoz et al, 2012). In other species of sea anemones the variation between morphotypes occurs also -Muñoz et al, 2015); or the variation in the cnidae size range in Lebrunia coralligens (Wilson, 1890) (González-Muñoz et al, 2017. Furthermore, although our analyses only focused in the comparison between morphotypes regardless samples body size or reef locality of origin, results suggest a high degree of stability in the size of cnidae of C. gigantea.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Allcock, Watts, & Thorpe, 1998;Manchenko, Dautova, & Latypov, 2000;Watts, Allcock, Lynch, & Thorpe, 2000), while other attempts did not find statistical support to clearly separate species or morphotypes based on cnidae size differences (e.g. Solé-Cava & Thorpe, 1987;Chintiroglou & Karalis, 2000;González-Muñoz et al, 2015;González-Muñoz, Garese, Tello-Musi, & Acuña, 2017).…”
mentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Altogether, these morphological results support the importance of detailed cnidome analyses in cnidarian taxonomy (e.g. González-Muñoz et al, 2017;Arrigoni et al, 2018;Manca et al, 2019).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…Recent studies, however, suggested that quantitative analyses of cnidocyst size could help to distinguish between morphotypes or species where traditional nematocyst accounts fail (Garese et al, ). Parametric and non‐parametric statistical treatments have been successfully used to compare cnidocyst capsule size in different groups of the class Anthozoa, such as Actiniaria (Acuña, Excoffon, Zamponi, & Ricci, ; Acu, Ricci, Excoffon, & Zamponi, ; Garese et al, ; González‐Muñoz, Garese, Tello‐Musi, & Acuña, ; Watts, Allcock, Lynch, & Thorpe, ), Corallimorpharia (Acuña & Garese, ) and Zoantharia (Ryland, Brasseur, & Lancaster, ). The present study represents the first case where a statistical analysis of nematocyst size is successfully employed in the morphological characterisation of closely related clades within the genus Zanclea .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%