I'll just add that the printed date at bottom on the otherwise blank reverse of the last page of Friedrich is March, 1938.
Unless there is other evidence that the parts of Tierwelt Nord und Ostee were not published corresponding to the printed date
it seems that Friedrich prematurely published Ophelia remanei, and with an original figure. He cites Augener as 1938, but the paper
seemingly didn't appear until 1939 (I haven't checked the Kieler Meeresforschungen original issue, but that is the date in use).
Geoff
> -----Original Message-----
> From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:annelida-
>bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of Hove, H.A. ten
> Sent: Tuesday, 6 March 2012 10:22 a.m.
> To: Annelida from net.bio.net> Subject: FW: [Annelida] Ophelia remanei
>> Dear all,
>>>> anyone interested in the attached pdf of 2 pages with figure, which I could not
> insert into the message, should just ask me.
>>>> wormly
>>>> Harry A. ten Hove
> ________________________________
> Van: Hove, H.A. ten
> Verzonden: maandag 5 maart 2012 22:19
> Aan: Annelida from net.bio.net; Joao Gil
> Onderwerp: RE: [Annelida] Ophelia remanei
>>> Dear Joao and other interested persons,
>>>> I just happen to have the complete Tierwelt N&Ostzee in my attic, and grabbed
> the Friedrich part. The relevant two pages are attached (could not include them
> unfortunately).
>> Just in case your German is about the same level as my Catalan:
>> 2) 24 chaetigers; 9-10 pairs of branchiae starting from segment 11; ventral furrow
> starting at segment 9; 9 small and 2 large anal papillae O. cluthensis ....
>> p. 146
>> __ As foregoing; anal segment with a ventral larger indented papilla and 4 short,
> rounded papillae ... O. remanei Augener 1938*).
>> Locality: bay of Kiel in sand; live colour whitish (Fig. 97 a).
>>>> *) One should not give too much weight to the number of anal papillae, since
> they usually cannot be counted with certainty and since there is no information
> on the variability. For instance I found specimens of O. remanei with 9 short anal
> papillae. [this is a free translation which might be more informative that a literal
> translation]
>>>> Hope this sheds light.
>>>> Harry A. ten Hove
>> ________________________________________
> Van: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [annelida-
>bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] namens Joao Gil [gil from ceab.csic.es]
> Verzonden: maandag 5 maart 2012 18:17
> Aan: annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu> Onderwerp: RE: [Annelida] Ophelia remanei
>> Dear all,
>> Just a couple of comments on Ophelia rathkei and its synonymies. Sorry, it
> is a long email, don't really need to read it, if you're not interested...
> There are some links to pdfs at the bottom of this message.
>>> 1) I don't have Friedrich (1938), and wasn't able to confirm this directly,
> but if Tebble (1952) is correct, there was a description of Ophelia remanei
> already published in 1938, in Friedrich's monograph. If this is correct, the
> authorship of Ophelia remanei Augener, 1939 should be Augener in Friedrich,
> 1938 (or just Friedrich, 1938, in case the authorship of the species is not
> referred by Friedrich as being Augener). Not very important, as the species
> is presently considered as a junior synonym of Ophelia rathkei, but worth to
> check and emmend it, just in case.
>> Could someone check this and give us the result here is the list, please?
>> Augener and Friedrich were colleagues at the same lab, and it is conceivable
> to think that Friedrich was aware of Augener's new species and forthcoming
> paper, and cited it in his monography with Augener's permission.
>>> 2) The second comment is on Ophelia rathkei and the fact that it is
> apparently the single species of Ophelia that normally lacks the pair of
> ventral pygidial lobes so typical of the genus, showing instead a single
> one. The two other possible exceptions described as lacking this pair of
> ventral pygidial lobes can be discarded as exceptions, as one seems to
> belong to another genus, and the second probably does have these lobes (see
> the PS below, before the bibliography).
>> This way, I think it is reasonable to consider that O. rathkei might also
> present two ventral pygidial lobes, at least in one moment of its ontogeny.
> Chassé & Picard (1968) and Wolff (1969) found forms with single and bilobed
> ventral anal lobes in the same populations, and it is possible that
> Hartmann-Schröder observed the same, as she studied specimens identified as
> O. rathkei and O. remanei at least in one of her papers (Hartmann-Schröder,
> 1958).
>> This could give further support to the synonymies of O. rathkei, as it seems
> that Ophelia rathkei McIntosh, 1908, O. cluthensis McGuire, 1935 and O.
> remanei Augener, 1939 are similar in all other aspects, except in what
> concerns the shape of the ventral pygidial lobes:
>> - O. rathkei - one single pygideal ventral lobe
> - O. remanei - one single ventral lobe deeply bilobated
> - O. cluthensis - two ventral pygidial lobes
>> The question would be if the single bilobed ventral anal lobe (or the two
> lobes) appear early or late during ontogeny. Hartmann-Schröder (1956 - but I
> couldn't check this one-, 1971) suggested that the single ventral anal lobe
> was formed by fusion of the two lobes, explaining this way the weak median
> notch in the single lobe of the adults she observed, while Chassé & Picard
> (1968) observed that specimens with a single lobe had normally less
> branchiate setigers than specimens with the ventral lobe strongly bilobed
> (only 22% of the specimens with a single lobe had 9 or more branchiate
> setigers, while 100% of the specimens with two lobes had more than 9
> branchiate setigers), suggesting the appearence of that character late
> during ontogeny.
>> I have checked some papers on the development and ontogeny of Opheliidae
> (Wilson, 1948; Dales, 1952; Guérin, 1971; Riser, 1987; I'm waiting for
> Hartmann-Schröder, 1956 from our Library service), but couldn't find
> anything conclusive (at least I wasn't able to), except that the number of
> branchiate setigers do increase with age until the definitive number of the
> adults is reached (Riser, 1987, explains this quite well). In what concerns
> the ventral pygidial lobes, Riser (1987) describes two tubular pygidial
> lobes containing the ducts of adhesive glands, used by juveniles to attach
> to the substrate, appearing quite soon during ontogeny, and which apparently
> would become the two ventral lobes of the adults. On the other hand, Dales
> (1952) states that the four anal papillae associated with the cement glands
> typical of juveniles of Thoracophelia mucronata do not correspond to the
> single large ventral cirrus of the adult, as these papillae can be clearly
> seen on the tip of the adult cirrus as it grows out from the pygidium.
>> Any ideas? Did someone studied the development of Ophelia rathkei or made
> direct observations?
>> In the keys for the European Fauna of Polychaeta of my PhD thesis, I have
> followed Chassé & Picard (1968), and Ophelia rathkei is keyed as follows:
>> 8-10 pairs of branchiae; 10-12 anterior abranchial chaetigers (4-5
> postbranchial chaetigers; total number of chaetigers of about 23-24; anal
> segment with 8-10 dorsal small papillae, and one big ventral papilla,
> normally simple, but sometimes more or less bilobed, or divided in two
> papillae............O. rathkei
>> A little long for a key, but it seems to cover all the possibilities...
>> I hope this can help in some way. If someone has more ideas, or if I have
> missed something or got it all wrong, I would love to hear about it.
>> And please, could someone send me a pdf of McGuire (1935)? I never was able
> to find this one... Thanks!
>> All the best (and thanks for reading...),
>> João
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++
> João Gil
> CEAB-CSIC
> Carrer d'accés a la Cala Sant Francesc, 14
> E-17300 BLANES (GIRONA)
> SPAIN
> Email: gil from ceab.csic.es> Telef. (34) 972.33.61.01
> Fax: (34) 972.33.78.06
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++
>> P.S.
>> All species of Ophelia, if I have checked correctly, do have two ventral
> pygidial lobes, apparently with three exceptions: O. rathkei (normally
> described as having only one; but see above), O. ashworthi Fauvel, 1917, and
> Ophelia algida Maciolek & Blake, 2006.
>> Ophelia ashworthi was described as having about 20 annal subequal papillae.
> In the description the pygidium (or anal cone) seems quite atypical. If it
> wasn't for the fact that Fauvel had half a dozen of specimens, I would say
> the pygidium is regenerating. The type material is in Paris (Solis-Weiss et
> al., 2004) so it will be possible to check this. This could also explain the
> apparent posterior lack of records of the species (at least I wasn't able to
> find them, and the original record is also the only one cited in the
> checklist of Australian Polychaeta by Day & Hutchings, 1979). Anyway, I
> think we can assume that two of the about 20 annal subequal papillae present
> can correspond to the two ventral pygidial lobes.
>> In what concerns Ophelia algida, Sene Silva (2007) considered it to be
> closer to Ophelina than to Ophelia, belonging probably to that genus.
>> REFERENCES:
> (Some references include links to papers available on internet. I also have
> uploaded pdfs of some of these papers to my Mediafire account (sorry, no
> OCRs); however they will be available just for a very limited period of
> time, as they might be covered by copyright; so, if you really need them for
> your work, grab them right now, as they will not stay there for long, nor
> will be uploaded again. Thanks!)
>> AUGENER, H. 1939. Beitrag zur Polychaetenfauna der Ostsee. Kieler
> Meeresforschungen, 3 (1): 133-147.
> link: http://www.mediafire.com/?mzr2cm49r4rq28r>> CHASSÉ, C. & J. PICARD. 1968. Identification, variabilité et écologie
> d'Ophelia rathkei McIntosh, espèce nouvelle pour les côtes françaises.
> Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 9: 133-142.
> link: http://www.mediafire.com/?qy9un54j90o3mqc>> DALES, R.P. 1952. The larval development and ecology of Thoracophelia
> mucronata (Treadwell). Biological Bulletin, Woods Hole, 102: 232-242.
> link: http://www.biolbull.org/content/102/3/232.full.pdf>> DAY, J.H. & P.A. HUTCHINGS. 1979. An annotated check-list of Australian and
> New Zealand Polychaeta, Archiannelida and Myzostomida. Records of the
> Australian Museum, 32(3): 80-161.
> link:
>http://australianmuseum.net.au/Uploads/Journals/17532/203_complete.pdf>>> FAUVEL, P. 1917. Annélides polychètes de l'Australie Méridionale. Archives
> de Zoologie Expérimentale et Générale, 56 (3): 159-277, plates 4-8.
> link: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/29998#page/319/mode/1up>> FRIEDRICH, H. 1938. Polychaeta. In: G. GRIMPE & E. WAGLER (Eds.). Tierwelt
> der Nord- und Ostsee, 32 (VI.b): 1-201.
>> GUÉRIN, J.-P. 1971. Modalités d'élevage et description des stades larvaires
> de Polyophthalmus pictus Dujardin (Annélide Polychète). Vie et Milieu, 22
> (1A): 143-152.
> link: http://www.mediafire.com/?ww1tj21blglapsf>> HARTMANN-SCHRÖDER, G. 1956. Polychaeten -Studien II. Zur Larvalentwicklung
> der Opheliiden (Polychaeta). Zoologischer Anzeiger, 157(5/6): 92-101.
>> HARTMANN-SCHRÖDER, G. 1958. Zur Morphologie der Opheliiden (Polychaeta
> sedentaria). Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Zoologie, 161(1/2): 84-143
> link: http://www.mediafire.com/?uajndcjjf7p89sj>> HARTMANN-SCHRÖDER, G. 1971. Annelida, Borstenwürmer, Polychaeta. Die
> Tierwelt Deutschlands und der angrenzenden Meeresteile nach ihren
> Merkmalen
> und nach ihrer Lebensweise. Begründet 1925 von Friedrich Dahl. 58 Teil,
> Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena, 594 pp.
>> MACIOLEK, N.J. & J.A. BLAKE. 2006. Opheliidae (Polychaeta) collected by the
> R/V Hero and the USNS Eltanin cruises from the Southern Ocean and South
> America. Scientia Marina, 70S3: 101-113.
> link:
>http://scientiamarina.revistas.csic.es/index.php/scientiamarina/article/view> /114/111
>> MCGUIRE, I.P. 1935. Note on a new species of polychaete (Ophelia
> cluthensis). Scottish Naturalist, 212: 45-46.
>> MCINTOSH, W.C. 1908. Notes from the Gatty Marine Laboratory, St. Andrews.
> No. XXIX. 1. On a tumor in a plaice. 2. On the british Opheliidae,
> Scalibregmidae, and Telethusae. 3. On the same families in the 'Porcupine'
> Expeditions of 1869 and 1870. 4. On the foregoing families dredged by Dr.
> Whiteaves in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada. 5. On the same groups dredged
> in Norwegian waters and in Finmark by Canon Norman. Annals and Magazine of
> Natural History, Series 8, 1: 373-387, plate 17.
> link: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/78381#page/419/mode/1up>> RISER, N.W. 1987. Observations on the genus Ophelia (Polychaeta: Opheliidae)
> with the descriptions of a new species. Ophelia, 28(1): 11-29.
>> SENE SILVA, G. 2007. Filogenia de Opheliidae (Annelida: Polychaeta). PhD
> Thesis. Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil. 95 pp.
> link:
>http://dspace.c3sl.ufpr.br:8080/dspace/bitstream/handle/1884/12922/Tese%20> de
> %20doutorado%20-%20Gustavo%20Sene%20Silva%20(2007).pdf?sequence=2
>> SOLÍS-WEISS, V., Y. BERTRAND, M.-N. HELLÉOUET & F. PLEIJEL. 2004. Types of
> polychaetous annelids at the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.
> Zoosystema, 26 (3): 377-384.
> link:
>http://www.mnhn.fr/museum/front/medias/publication/2557_z04n3a2.pdf>> TEBBLE, N. 1952. On three species of the genus Ophelia (Polychaeta) from the
> British and adjacent waters. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series
> 12, 5: 553-571.
>> WILSON, D. 1948. The larval development of Ophelia bicornis Savigny. Journal
> of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 27(3): 540-553.
> link:
>http://sabella.mba.ac.uk/1290/01/The_larval_development_of_Ophelia_bicorni> s_
> Savigny.pdf
>> WOLFF, W.J. 1969. A new station of Ophelia rathkei McIntosh in Northern
> France. Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 10: 83-84.
> link: http://www.mediafire.com/?b1huw2msmxadv1m>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> ++++++++++++
>> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu> [mailto:annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] En nombre de Geoff Read
> Enviado el: jueves, 23 de febrero de 2012 22:48
> Para: D Hall; annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu> Asunto: RE: [Annelida] Ophelia remanei
>> Just to clarify on the Hartmann-Schröder (1971) book role in the evolving
> status of these Ophelia names. It seems her POV then on synonymy was based
> on her own observations. The section below on Ophelia rathkei was cut from
> the 1996 edition, and contains a definite statement of opinion on Ophelia
> remanei, and no mention of the comparatively recent work of Chassé & Picard
> (1968) (her MS was finalised in 1969). So readers would be entitled to
> assume the 1971 synonymies were new, although that wasn't the case.
> Nevertheless, she might have covered the issue in her earlier
> biology-oriented papers - I haven't checked.
>> Hartmann-Schröder (1971:386) "Systematische Bemerkung: Auf Grund der
> Beschreibung von McGuire besteht wohl kaum ein Zweifel, daß die von ihr
> beschriebene O. cluthensis identisch ist mit O. rathkei von McIntosh.
> Typusmaterial ist nicht mehr vorhanden. Bei Vergleichen mit O. rathkei und
> O. remanei Augener habe ich keine wirklich bedeutenden Unterschiede
> feststellen können. Bei Tieren aus der Kieler Bucht habe ich zwar
> gelegentlich eine etwas eingedellte Ventralpapille beobachtet, wie sie
> Augener von O. remanei beschreibt; aber auch dieses Merkmal war innerhalb
> derselben Population nicht konstant. Die einheitliche Ventralpapille am
> Pygid geht in der Ontogenese durch Verschmelzen zweier Papillen hervor
> (Hartmann-Schröder 1956), so daß die schwache mediane Einkerbung an der
> einheitlichen Ventralpapille der Adulten noch die Verschmelzungszone
> andeuten kann. Gewisse morphologische Unterschiede an inneren Organen
> scheinen mir noch nicht klar erwiesen (Hartmann-Schröder 1958). Nach m!
> einer Ansicht ist O. remanei synonym zu O. rathkei McIntosh."
>> Geoff
>> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:annelida-
> > bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Read
> > Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2012 9:59 a.m.
> > To: D Hall; annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu> > Subject: RE: [Annelida] Ophelia remanei
> >
> > I have a related question. Hartmann-Schröder (1971 book) apparently newly
> > synonymised both O. remanei and O. cluthensis into O. rathkei. These
> > synonymy assertions are not implemented in WoRMS. I would guess little or
> no
> > explanation was given in 1971 (I have only the 1996 book at hand). Are
> these
> > synonymies regarded as likely correct, or supported by other works?
> >
> > Geoff
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:annelida-
> > > bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of D Hall
> > > Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2012 6:41 a.m.
> > > To: annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu> > > Subject: [Annelida] Ophelia remanei
> > >
> > >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > I'm looking for the location of the type material for Ophelia remanei
> > > Augener 1939, can anyone point me in the right direction?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Dave.
> > >
> > > David Hall BSc (Jt. Hons.) CBiol MSB
> > > Senior Principal Biologist
> > > Operations Manager
> > >
> > > NMBAQC Scheme Administrator: Benthic Invertebrate,
> > > Fish & Particle Size Analysis Components
> > >
> > > Thomson Unicomarine Ltd
> > > 7 Diamond Centre, Works Road
> > > Letchworth, Herts, SG6 1LW, UK
> > > Tel. +44 (0)1462 675559
> > > Fax. +44 (0)1462 483103
> > > www.thomsonunicomarine.com
> > > www.nmbaqcs.org
> > > http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/david-hall/35/5b7/a71>> --
> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
> NIWA is the trading name of the National Institute of Water & Atmospheric
> Research Ltd.
>> _______________________________________________
> Annelida mailing list
> Post: Annelida from net.bio.net> Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida> Resources: http://www.annelida.net>>>> _______________________________________________
> Annelida mailing list
> Post: Annelida from net.bio.net> Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida> Resources: http://www.annelida.net>>> _______________________________________________
> Annelida mailing list
> Post: Annelida from net.bio.net> Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida> Resources: http://www.annelida.net--
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
NIWA is the trading name of the National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd.
