[Annelida] Aricidea assimilis, A. fauveli and A. mutabilis

Joao Gil via annelida%40net.bio.net (by gil from ceab.csic.es)
Fri Sep 17 06:39:21 EST 2010

Dear all,

Uff, a tough, question... As far as I know, and according to the ms. of my
thesis, the story goes more or less like this:

1) Synonymy of Aricidea mutabilis with A. assimilis: 

	TEBBLE (1959) described Aricidea assimilis, a species with a long
antenna, from the Mediterranean coast of Israel, but he didn't give a
description of the hooks. Later, LAUBIER & RAMOS (1974) described Aricidea
mutabilis, a species with a long antenna and modified neurochaetae with
distal hooks fringed with fine hairs. The holotype of this species was from
the Bay of Rosas, in the Spanish Mediterranean coast, near the border with
	STRELZOV (1973) redescribed Aricidea assimilis Tebble 1959, with
base on paratypes of the species. The description of the modified
neurochaetae as having distal hooks, fringed with fine hairs, by STRELZOV
(1973), which was absent from the original description by TEBBLE (1959),
enabled KATZMANN & LAUBIER (1975) to establish the synonymy of A. mutabilis
with A. assimilis, which had been already suggested by LAUBIER & RAMOS

2) Synonymy of Aricidea fauveli with A. lopezi

	FAUVEL (1936) described some specimens of Aricidea from Morocco,
which he identified as A. fragilis Webster 1879. In his description, Fauvel
refers the variability of the length of the antenna, which reached
chaetigers 4, 5, or 6 in some specimens, while in others it barely touched
the anterior border of chaetiger 2, as in his figure 6. HARTMAN (1957) noted
that the modified chaetae described and depicted by Fauvel were different
from those of A. fragilis, and gave a new name to Fauvel’s Moroccan
specimens, Aricidea fauveli. She stated, however, that A. fauveli approached
A. lopezi Berkeley & Berkeley 1956, in some aspects, and if identical, the
specific name lopezi would have priority. 
	STRELZOV (1973) revised some of Fauvel’s specimens and found them to
be a mixture of, at least, two different species: A. lopezi [specimens with
short antenna and depicted in FAUVEL (1936: figs. 6 and 7)], and A.
assimilis (a species with a long antenna). STRELZOV (op. cit.) considered A.
fauveli as a junior synonym of A. lopezi, probably supported by the fact
that A. fauveli Hartman 1957 was created for the specimens depicted in
Fauvel’s figures, with a short antenna. This synonymy wasn’t based on type
material of A. lopezi, but in specimens identified as A. lopezi collected at
the Gulf of Poset (Sea of Japan). It is possible to perceive one difference,
at least, on the shape and length of the antennae, between the type material
and Strelzov’s description. While BERKELEY & BERKELEY (1956) and BLAKE
(1996) described antennae extending to chaetigers 3-6 and being narrow at
base, broader above, and tapering to a long thread-like tip, STRELZOV (1973)
referred a cirriform antenna that extends posteriorly to segments I-II. The
description given by GASTON (1984) approaches Strelzov’s own description.

The uninvited guest:

	LAUBIER (1966) reported from the coasts of Lebanon a single specimen
of an unidentified Aricidea sp. with modified neurochaetae with distal hooks
fringed with fine hairs and a short antenna. Later, LAUBIER & RAMOS (1974)
included this specimen in the description of Aricidea mutabilis, stating
that this species had an antenna of variable length. However, the pictured
specimens, from the type locality, show a long antenna. 
	This specimen could belong to Aricidea laubieri, a species described
by HARTLEY (1981) from the North, Irish and Celtic Seas, with short antenna
and modified neurochaetae similar to the described for the Lebanese
specimen. Due to the poor condition of the only Mediterranean specimen, a
comparison between both populations depends on the finding of more material
in a better condition. I considered Aricidea sp. sensu Laubier 1966 as
belonging probably to A. assimilis, as it is also possible that the antenna
was broken, according to the general poor condition of the only available


	BERKELEY, E. & C. BERKELEY. 1956. Notes on Polychaeta from the East
Coast of Vancouver Island and from adjacent waters, with a description of a
new species of Aricidea. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada,
13 (4): 541-546.
	BLAKE, J.A. 1996. Family Orbiniidae Hartman, 1942. In: BLAKE, J.A.,
B. HILBIG & P.H. SCOTT (Eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the
Santa Maria Basin and the Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 6 - The
Annelida Part 3. Polychaeta: Orbiniidae to Cossuridae, Santa Barbara Museum
of Natural History, Santa Barbara, pp. 1-26.
	FAUVEL, P. 1936. Contribution à la faune des annélides polychètes du
Maroc. Mémoires de la Société des Sciences Naturelles du Maroc, 43: 1-143.
	GASTON, G.R. 1984. Family Paraonidae Cerruti, 1909. In: UEBELACKER,
J.M. & P.G. JOHNSTON (Eds.). Taxonomic Guide to the Polychaetes of the
Northern Gulf of Mexico, Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc., Mobile Alabama,
1: 2.1-2.53.
	HARTLEY, J.P. 1981. The family Paraonidae (Polychaeta) in British
waters: a new species and new records with a key to species. Journal of the
Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 61: 133-149.
	HARTMAN, O. 1957. Orbiniidae, Apistobranchidae, Paraonidae and
Longosomidae. Allan Hancock Pacific Expeditions, 15 (3): 211-393.
	KATZMANN, W. & L. LAUBIER. 1975. Paraonidae (Polychètes sédentaires)
de l’Adriatique. Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums, Wien, 79: 567-588.
	LAUBIER, L. & J. RAMOS. 1974. Paraonidae (Polychètes sédentaires) de
Méditerranée. Bulletin du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 3e
Série, Nº 168, Zoologie, 113: 1097-1148. [Dated 1973, printed in 30 March
	STRELZOV, V.E. 1973. [Polychaete worms of the family Paraonidae
Cerruti, 1909 (Polychaeta, Sedentaria)]. Akademiya Nauk SSSR, Leningrad,
1-170, plates 1-9 [in Russian; also 1979, translation and publication of the
Russian original by Amerind Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 212 pp.,
for the Smithsonian Institution, and the National Science Foundation,
	TEBBLE, N. 1959. On a collection of polychaetes from the
Mediterranean coast of Israel. The Bulletin of the Research Council of
Israel, Section B: Zoology, 8 (1): 9-30.

I hope all this mess makes sense and helps... Off course that all this
should be confirmed in detail by checking again the available material.
Anyway, according to this, and as far as I know, the online databases should
be corrected, unless there are something published that passed unnoticed by

All the best,

João Gil
Carrer d'accés a la Cala Sant Francesc, 14
Email: gil from ceab.csic.es
Telef. (34) 972.33.61.01
Fax: (34) 972.33.78.06

-----Mensaje original-----
De: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu
[mailto:annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] En nombre de Barbara Mikac
Enviado el: viernes, 17 de septiembre de 2010 11:03
Para: Polychaete mailing list
Asunto: [Annelida] Aricidea assimilis, A. fauveli and A. mutabilis

Dear colleagues,

I'm trying to solve the confusion with the synonymy of the species
Aricidea assimilis Tebble, 1959 and Aricidea fauveli Hartman, 1957. 

I taught that A. assimilis is a valid species, whose synonym (now
unaccepted) is A. mutabilis Laubier & Ramos, 1974.

In WoRMS and ERMS (MarBEF) I came to the information that A. assimilis
is unaccepted and that it is the synonym of the species Aricidea


In WoRMS there is also the information that Aricidea mutabilis Laubier &
Ramos, 1974 is accepted species.


So if I understood well, A. fauveli is accepted taxa. It's synonym is A.
assimilis. But what's with A. mutabilis then? Is it a synonym of A.
fauveli as well or is it a valid species?

Thanks for your help,


Barbara Mikac
Center for Marine Research
Rudjer Boskovic Institute
G. Paliaga 5
52210 Rovinj

Annelida mailing list
Post: Annelida from net.bio.net
Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida
Resources: http://www.annelida.net

More information about the Annelida mailing list