The body wall of cheilostome Bryozoa, V. Frontal budding in Schizoporella unicornis floridana

Banta, William C.

doi:10.1007/bf00365783

Cited by 22 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evaluation of apparent S. unicornis from the eastern United States would benefit from SEM imaging. Mullineaux and Garland (1993) and Rogick and Croasdale (1949) Banta (1972) and Banta and Holden (1974) described the subspecies S. unicornis floridana, which is likely to be part of the complex of species similar or identical to S. errata. The species supposed by Rucker and Carver (1969) to be S. unicornis encompassed material from Massachusetts, Bermuda, Hawaii, California and Washington State and is accompanied by images that do not conclusively identify the species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…isabelleana (d'Orbigny, 1842). To complicate this issue further a subspecies called S. unicornis floridana (Osburn, 1914) has been Downloaded by [Umeå University Library] at 13:30 18 November 2014 recognized in a number of works (Maturo 1957;Banta 1971Banta , 1972Soule at al. 1995).…”

Section: Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The importance of the genus Schizoporella is emphasized by the fact that, as noted by Hayward and McKinney (2002), Schizoporella unicornis and Schizoporella errata have been used as model species in studies of: larval settlement behaviour (Hurlbut 1991;McKinney and McKinney 2002), competition for substrate space (Sutherland 1978;Buss 1981;Turner and Todd 1994;Tzioumis 1994), chemicalmediated hyperplasy , induction of row bifurcations (Banta 1972), environmentally mediated colony morphology (Cocito et al 2000), epifaunal associations (Maluquer 1985;Morgado and Tanaka 2001), skeletal carbonate composition (Rucker and Carver 1969) and skeletal ultrastructure (Tavener-Smith and Williams 1970). Of particular ecological interest has been the role of Schizoporella as an invasive fouling organism in ports and on ships and harbour structures (Ryland 1965;Powell 1970;Gordon and Mawatari 1992;Relini et al 1998;Kocak 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Taxonomy of the fouling cheilostome bryozoansSchizoporella unicornis(Johnston) andSchizoporella errata(Waters)

Tompsett

Porter

Taylor

2009

Journal of Natural History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cheilostomes Schizoporella unicornis (Johnston, 1847) and Schizoporella errata (Waters, 1878) have been used as model species in several ecological and taxonomic studies. However, these species have been consistently misidentified in a large percentage of such works. Here full taxonomic descriptions of both species, based largely on scanning electron micrographs of type specimens, are presented. A lectotype is chosen for S. errata and it is shown that the species described as "Lepralia unicornis? Johnson MS" from the Pliocene Coralline Crag by Wood (1844) is not conspecific with Johnson's L. unicornis introduced for Recent material three years later. This work has implications for the application of seemingly cosmopolitan species to the study of anthropogenic disturbance and identifies the need for molecular characterization of cryptic species complexes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Taxonomy of the fouling cheilostome bryozoansSchizoporella unicornis(Johnston) andSchizoporella errata(Waters)

Tompsett

Porter

Taylor

2009

Journal of Natural History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, only a few bryozoan species today form massive structures; unattached ball-like bryoliths are unusual and have not been reported from the West Coast of the United States (Osburn 1912, Banta 1972, Bradstock & Gordon 1983, Scholz & Hillmer 1995, Hillmer et al 1996, James et al 2006.…”

Section: Abstract: Bryoliths · Bryozoans · Schizoporella · Habitat Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

A non-native bryozoan creates novel substrate on the mudflats in San Francisco Bay

Zabin

Obernolte²,

Mackie³

et al. 2010

Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A non-native bryozoan, Schizoporella errata, forms extensive patches of free-living balls and reef-like structures (bryoliths) on the mudflats in south San Francisco Bay, California. The ball-like bryoliths range from 2 to 20 cm in diameter, and the reef-like structures can be nearly 1 m across. While S. errata is known to form bryoliths in other locations, free-living aggregations like these have not been reported. Colony morphology appears to be a plastic trait as analysis of relationships among forms using cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) nucleotide sequence data revealed no genetic separation. We recorded > 50 species of algae and invertebrates living on and in the bryoliths and determined the invasion status for 34 of the 50 species. Of the 34, 25 (74%) were non-natives and included fouling species that require hard substrate. The bryoliths may thus facilitate colonization by invaders on the mudflats and serve as stepping stones between the limited hard substrate habitats in the Bay. KEY WORDS: Bryoliths · Bryozoans · Schizoporella · Habitat modification · Invasive species · FacilitationResale or republication not permitted without written consent of the publisher Mar Ecol Prog Ser 412: 129-139, 2010 in the Hawaiian Islands, grows attached to the reef but also forms unattached 'tumbleweeds' on sand flats that may aid dispersal through viable fragments (C. J. Zabin pers. obs.).Non-native marine species that create 3-dimensional structures in soft-bottom habitats can also have significant ecological impacts, facilitating the presence of obligate hard-substrate organisms, creating living space for other organisms, and in some cases altering the quality of the nearby benthos (e.g. Posey 1988, Ricciardi et al. 1997, Crooks & Khim 1999, Bruno et al. 2005, Rodriguez 2006. In a literature review, Bruno et al. (2005) found that non-native species facilitated the presence of native species at least as often as that of other non-native species. However, it might be reasoned that when a non-native species creates a novel substrate type, other non-natives may be more likely than natives to either (1) be pre-adapted to use the new substrate or (2) display the environmental plasticity to do so. For example, Heiman et al. (2008) found that reefs created by the Australian tubeworm Ficopomatus enigmaticus in a predominantly soft-bottom estuary in Central California supported abundant communities of non-native amphipods and polychaetes. Native species associated with native oysters also inhabited the worm reefs, but non-native species were much more abundant in the tubeworm reefs than on oysters, suggesting differential facilitation of non-native species by this new foundation species (Heiman et al. 2008).In 2006, we became aware of another organism typically thought of as hard-substrate dependent, living as an unattached form on the mudflats in San Francisco Bay, California. Spheroidal colonies of a bryozoan, ranging from golf ball to football size (~2 to 20 cm), were found in large numbers in the shallow subt...

show abstract

“…An area of structural weakness is present between individuals, especially if the lateral walls are not heavily calcified. The lateral walls appear double (Ryland 1970:87), but are really shared by adjacent individuals (Banta 1972). I n colonies having this budding strategy, regeneration and replacement of damaged zooids can be readily effected by viable zooid5 surrounding the damaged ones.…”

Section: Budding Pattern Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive architectural trends in encrusting ectoprocts

Rtder

Cowen

1977

LET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ectoproct colonies with membraniporiform, celleporiform and Iunulitiform A growth‐forms have particular habitat preferences on the continental shelf. A colonial capability model for each growth‐form, based on a functional analysis of its structure at different levels, tries to portray the adaptive range of the growth‐form and includes inferences from the structure of the individual zooids, their polymorphs, their arrangement within the colony as controlled by budding patterns, and their relation to external environmental stresses. Each encrusting growth‐form on the Sahul Shelf, northwest Australia, has distinct structural and functional characters which can be arranged in adaptive architectural trends. Deviations from the fundamental membraniporiform growth‐form include the development of vertical growth, the sacrifice of individual zooids, the incorporation of substrate within the colony, and variations in the heterozooids. The celleporiform growth‐form is subdivided to recognize the massive, ‘nodular’ colony as a special category.

show abstract

The body wall of cheilostome Bryozoa, V. Frontal budding in Schizoporella unicornis floridana

Cited by 22 publications

References 6 publications

Taxonomy of the fouling cheilostome bryozoansSchizoporella unicornis(Johnston) andSchizoporella errata(Waters)

Taxonomy of the fouling cheilostome bryozoansSchizoporella unicornis(Johnston) andSchizoporella errata(Waters)

A non-native bryozoan creates novel substrate on the mudflats in San Francisco Bay

Adaptive architectural trends in encrusting ectoprocts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About