4.5 Article

South America-Africa missing links revealed by the taxonomy of deep-sea molluscs: Examples from prochaetodermatid aplacophorans

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsr.2017.12.008

关键词

Prochaetodermatidae; Aplacophora; Southwestern Atlantic; Taxonomy; Distribution patterns

资金

  1. Centro de Pesquisas Leopoldo Americo Miguez de Mello (CENPES)
  2. CAPES
  3. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2011/50297-4]
  4. Fundo de Apoio ao Ensino, a Pesquisa e a Extensao (FAEPEX) [362/2012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prochaetodermatidae (Mollusca, Aplacophora, Caudofoveata), typical inhabitants of the deep sea, occur mainly along the continental slope, sometimes in high abundance. Their diversity in some regions, such as the South Atlantic Ocean, is little studied. The genus Claviderma is so far composed of one Pacific Ocean, two Indian Ocean and seven Atlantic Ocean species. Collections of the southeastern Brazilian coast contained three species of this genus. One, C. virium sp. nov., is new to science, and the other two, C. crassum and C. amplum, are new occurrences, extending their distributions southward into the western Atlantic. The external morphology and details of their radula and sclerites are described. The new species is distinguished by its long trunk and comparatively narrow, short posterium, and its trunk sclerites bearing numerous evident transverse growth lines. In the Atlantic Ocean, species with similar body forms and with sclerites of the same shape occur off the western and eastern coasts: the South American C. compactum is similar externally to the African C. brevicaudatum, and the Brazilian C.virium sp. nov. is comparable to the eastern Atlantic C. gladiatum. This suggests that these pairs of species are sister-groups, sharing the same morphological traits as a result of common ancestry. In the western and eastern Atlantic, most species of Claviderma that live over a wider range of depths are more widely distributed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据