Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-kv2lp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T03:57:08.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Larval morphologies and potential developmental modes of eight sea spider species (Arthropoda: Pycnogonida) from the southern Oregon coast

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2010

Z.P. Burris*
Affiliation:
Oregon Institute of Marine Biology, University of Oregon, PO Box 5389, Charleston, OR, 97420
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Z.P. Burris, Oregon Institute of Marine Biology, University of Oregon, PO Box 5389, Charleston, OR, 97420 email: zair@uoregon.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Larvae of eight sea spiders from three families (Ammotheidae, Pycnogonidae and Phoxichilidiidae) are described for the first time. The external morphology of the first larval stage of each species is presented in detail using scanning electron microscopy photographs in order to determine the mode of postembryonic development. Three types of larval development are apparent in the species examined. The species Achelia gracilipes, Eurycyde spinosa, Pycnogonum rickettsi and Pycnogonum stearnsi (families Ammotheidae and Pycnogonidae) have larval morphologies indicative of an ‘ectoparasitic’ development. Morphological characteristics of Achelia simplissima and Achelia chelata (family Ammotheidae) larvae suggest an ‘endoparasitic’ development, while larvae of the species Anoplodactylus viridintestinalis (family Phoxichilidiidae) have traits implying an ‘encysting’ postembryonic mode of development. Larvae of the species Nymphopsis spinosissima have unusual morphological characteristics that may be indicative of a new developmental mode.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2010
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Larva of Achelia gracilipes. (A) Side view of larva (scale bar: 50 µm); (B) tripartite mouth with raised lip (arrow) ending in a single denticle (5 µm); (C) cheliphores and spinning spines (50 µm); (D) tip and tooth of terminal article of larval appendages (20 µm); (ch) cheliphore, (II) second larval appendage, (III) third larval appendage; (1) spinning spine, (2) proboscis, (3) fixed chela finger, (4) moveable chela finger, (5) trifurcate smooth sensillum, (6) quadfurcate sensillum, (9) raised lip.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Dorsal view of Achelia gracilipes. (A) Dorsal pores and sensilla (scale bar: 20 µm); (B) trifurcate sensillum and slit-like pore (arrow) (5 µm); (ch) cheliphore, (5) trifurcate sensillum, (6) median dorsolateral quadfurcate sensillum, (7) cluster of 6 dorsal pores, (8) bifurcate sensillum.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Achelia chelata larva. (A) Ventral view (scale bar: 50 µm); (B) fixed and moveable finger of chela (30 µm); (C) tripartite closed mouth and denticles on lip (10 µm).

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Achelia simplissima larva. (A) Ventral view of larva (scale bar: 10 µm); (B) chela (10 µm); (C) tip and teeth on terminal article of II and III appendages (5 µm); (D) tripartite mouth (5 µm).

Figure 4

Fig. 5. Nymphopsis spinosissima larva. (A) Ventral view showing II and III appendages with extra article (arrow) (scale bar: 100 µm); (B) terminal article of the II and III appendages showing basal spine (arrow) and two rows of denticles (double arrows) (20 µm); (C) chela showing ornamentation (20 µm); (D) proboscis and tripartite mouth with glands (arrow) at each corner (20 µm); (E) view of proboscis from dorsal side with cheliphores (ch) offset and a median dorsolateral unpaired bifurcate sensillum (8) (50 µm).

Figure 5

Fig. 6. Eurycyde spinosa larva. (A) Ventral view of larva (scale bar: 50 µm); (B) chela with tooth (arrow) and spinning spine (1) (10 µm); (C) II and III appendages (20 µm); (D) mouth (5 µm); (E) bifurcate sensillum on dorsal posterior (5 µm).

Figure 6

Fig. 7. Pycnogonum stearnsi larva. (A) Ventral view of larva and pointed proboscis (arrow) (scale bar: 20 µm); (B) chela with spinning spine and short fixed finger with a single tooth (arrow) (10 µm); (C) terminal articles of II and III appendages showing fine denticles (10 µm).

Figure 7

Fig. 8. Pycnogonum rickettsi larva. (A) Ventral view showing long cheliphore spinning spines (arrow) and II and III appendage spines (scale bar: 100 µm); (B) chela with sharply hooked fixed finger and large pore on the basal article of the cheliphore (arrow) (20 µm); (C) terminal article of II and III appendages showing denticle (arrow) (20 µm); (D) open mouth showing single raised lip (10 µm); (E) trifurcate sensillum (5 µm).

Figure 8

Fig. 9. Anoplodactylus viridintestinalis larva. (A) Side view showing filamentous strands (arrow) as the terminal articles of the II and III appendages (scale bar: 20 µm); (B) chela (5 µm); (C) open mouth (5 µm).

Figure 9

Fig. 10. Key to postembryonic developmental mode based on larval characteristics (number of larval appendages, degree of development of larval appendages, presence/absence of spinning spine, and morphology of the terminal article of the II and III appendages). Larval characteristics are in boxes and developmental modes are in ovals.

Figure 10

Fig. 11. Predicted mode of development for eight species of pycnogonids based on larval morphology showing within and between family and genera differences. The five species examined in the family Ammotheidae exhibit larval morphologies indicative of two types of postembryonic development (‘ectoparasitic’ and ‘endoparasitic’). The two species of larvae from the family Pycnogonidae both display characteristics suggestive of an ‘ectoparasitic’ postembryonic development. Anoplodactylus viridintestinalis from the family Phoxichilidiidae has a larva indicative of the ‘encysting’ developmental mode.