SCAMIT newsletter

Southern
California
Assocation of
Marine
Invertebrate
Taxonomists

May/June, 2013 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 32, No. 1

Munida tenella Benediet 1902
B’13 station 9073, 7 August 2013, 182 m
Photo by N. Haring, CSD

This Issue

SCAMIT OFFICER NEWS.2

13 MAY 2013, MOEEUSCA, OCSD, KEEVIN BARWICK.2

6 JUNE 2013, POEYCHAETA, NHMEAC, S. SAEAZAR-VAEEEJO AND E. CARRERA-PARRA .5

10 JUNE, ARTHROPODS, CSD, DR. TIM STEBBINS AND DEAN PASKO.8

EITERATURE CITED.16

SCAMIT OFFICERS.19

The SCAMIT newsletter is not deemed to be a valid publieation for formal taxonomie purposes.

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

SCAMIT OFFICER NEWS

Two new officers take the helm with this newsletter, Laura Terriquez takes over as Treasurer for
Cheryl Brantley, and Dean Pasko takes over as Secretary for Megan Lilly. SCAMIT would like
to extend its gratitude to Cheryl and Megan who have served SCAMIT well for the past 11 and
15 years, respectfully. We appreciate
the time and dedication of the many
volunteer hours spent by these two
long time and faithful SCAMIT
members.

UPCOMING MEETINGS

Visit the SCAMIT website at: www.scamit.org for the
latest upcoming meetings announcements.

13 MAY 2013, MOLLUSCA, OCSD, KELVIN BARWICK

Attendees: Larry Lovell, Bill Power, Terra Petri, Don Cadien (LACSD); Kelvin Barwick, Danny
Tang, Michael Vendrassco (OCSD); Dot Norris (City of San Francisco); Dean Pasko (Private
Consultant); Wendy Emight, Ron Velarde (City San Diego); Angela Eagleston (EcoAnalysts);
Craig Campbell, Greg Eyon (CEAEMD); Sarah Briley, Kim Walker (CSU Fullerton, Zacherl lab),
Emilia Gonzalez (Mexico, visiting NHMEAC).

BUSINESS:

The last of the Bight’ 13 preparatory meetings will be June 15, and cover Arthropoda. Dean Pasko
will lead the meeting.

The SCAMIT Picnic was held July 27, 2013 from 10 am - Sunset at Doheny State Beach
Park. Those who attended enjoyed hot dogs, hamburgers, good snacks, good company and good
conversation.

The SCAMIT Species List Committee met recently and is working on revisions for Ed 8. They
are requesting that all members provide suggestions for corrections to the current list or new
species to be added very soon. Comments may be sent to Don Cadien or Earry Eovell, or posted
directly to the general list server (general_topics@discussion.list.scamit.org).

A meeting of interest to members is the all American Malacological Conference which will be
held in Mexico City, June 23-27, 2014. Paul Valentich-Scott of SBMNH is organizing it and will
include most of the major Molluscan scientific organizations in the Western Hemisphere.

SCAMIT’s SCAS symposium at the May meetings was very successful, and included talks from
members of our sister organizations SAFIT (Southwestern Association of Freshwater Invertebrate
Taxonomists) and SCAITE (Southern California Association of Ichthyological Taxonomists and
Ecologists). The talks included presentations of data as well as how SCAMIT works. There was a
request that SCAMIT participate again next year.

It is membership time again and the New Membership form will be available on the SCAMIT
website. Please note the new mailing address as C/0 Eaura Terriquez, PO. Box 50162, Eong
Beach, CA. 90815. U.S.A.

SCAMIT Leadership: SCAMIT hosted the Second contractual EPA CBRAT workshop at
SCCWRP May 15-18. Expert panels provided information on distributions, abundance, and
ecology of species of economic value. Specifically they addressed issues of global warming, sea-
level rise, changes in C02 concentrations, etc.

2

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

The SCAMIT Newsletter was discussed. There were requests that the Newsletter inelude Date
of Publieation in header, and be published bi-monthly. In addition, as a result of the Southern
California Regional Monitoring Program requirement that partieipating taxonomists partieipate in
SCAMIT, a list of attendees will be ineluded in upeoming Newsletters, as it has in the past.

Norma Emilia Gonzalez, a doetoral student, from El Colegio de la Frontera Sur Chetumal,
Quintana Roo Mexieo then spoke about her researeh on eulimd gastropods that live on
eehinoderms. All eulimids are non-obligate parasites, endo- and eeto-parasites. However, of
the 850 speeies and 90 genera of eulimds known, only 33 speeies and 15 genera have a known
assoeiation with eehinoderms. In other words, there is a lot of work yet-to-be done on eulmid
eeology and taxonomy. For example, two different speeies ean inhabit different parts of the same
sea star (arm and internal part of dise) and in some eases, the male lives on the female as a tiny
parasite.

Norma summarized the knowledge of some of these relationships. There are 16 speeies of erinoid
hosts that house nine genera of eulimds; 50 speeies of eehinoids host 14 different eulimid genera;
25 speeies of asteroids aeeommodate eight different eulimid genera; and six speeies of ophiuroids
host seven different eulimid genera.

When visiting museums, Norma realized that most eulimid speeies were diffieult to identify on
shell morphology alone. She hopes to use this trip to different museums in Southern California
to develop a key. So far she has found it diffieult to distinguishing genera, though there are many
speeies deseribed that are fairly distinguishable.

Some tidbits gleaned from the general diseussion inelude that the apex and aperture of the shell
ean be useful beeause they are determined, in part, by the parasite nature of the speeies life-style.
However, she also relies on internal eharaeters, the radula and sex organs, as well as sears of inner
whorl of the shell. Additionally, mantle eolor is not praetieal for distinguishing speeies, but ean be
used to distinguish eertain genera, e.g., Eulima and Melanella

Kelvin Barwick, of the Orange County Sanitation Distriet, then reviewed seleeted Mollusk
Fiterature.

• Alleoek et al (2011). Diseussion of higher-level Cephalopod phylogeny, and generally
good support for existing strueture. For the first time it established support for monophyly of
Teuthoidea. Analysis did not inelude any loeal speeies.

• Baez, et al (2011). Taxonomy and phylogeny of Armina spp.(Nudibranehia) via
morphologieal methods, ineluding some loeal speeies and using radula strueture. Ineludes
undeseribed speeies

• MeFean, J.H. (2011). Re-ereeted Subfamily Hemitominae (Fissurellidae) with deseriptions
of new genera based on shell and radula morphology. None of the loeal fauna are diseussed.
Differs from earlier workers using DNA.

• Bieler, R and R.E. Petit (2011). Catalogue of reeent fossil Caenogastropoda “worm snails”
eovering Vermetidae, Siliquariidae, Turritellidae. Paper does eover some taxa found in the
SCB, but mostly from hard bottom eolleetions. No ehange to SCAMIT nomenelature.

• Brandt, A et al (2009). Diseusses the bathymetrie distribution of southern oeean speeies of
Bivalvia, Gastropoda, Isopoda, Polyehaeta, by depth and number of taxa, and provides depth
distributions by elass and family.

3

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

• Benaim, N P, D.C. Paone Viegas, et al (2011). Review of the features of the hinge plate of
Yoldiella spp vs shell morphology using several taxa from Brazil, ineluding Y. aff. Jeffrey si
and sp 1 and sp 2. They were able to obtain about 75% speeies diserimination based on
general shell morphology, while the use of hinge morphology aehieved over 85% reliable
distinetion among taxa.

• Haga, T, and T. Kase (2013). Reviewed and eonfirmed the presenee of dwarf males in deep
sea wood borers (Bivalvia: Pholadoidea: Xylophaga) relative to life history and distribution,
and found an inereased prevalenee of dwarf males in deeper water taxa. They were previously
thought to be juvenile brood.

• Paalvast, Peter and Gerard van der Velde (2013). Reviewed the main food souree of
shipworms {Teredo navalis)', suggesting that the main form of feeding is filter feeding, not the
ship’s wood.

• Oliver, PG. and J. Lotzen (2011). Deseribes a new fiuid feeding bivalve of
Galeommatoidea, to whieh they assigned the appropriate name Draculamya porobranchiata.

• Oliver, PG. and J.D. Taylor (2012). Baeterial symbiosis in Nueinellidae (Bivalvia:
Solemyida) is eonfirmed and ineludes a deseription of two new speeies. Ineludes a niee
illustration of shell morphology for the neweomer to gastropod taxonomy, and differentiation
between Nucinella and Hwdeyia.

• Cyrus, A.Z et al (2012). Sensory eeology of swash-zone living predatory Olivoidea,
Agaronia propatula, ineluding diseussion of predation response and interesting photos and
diseussion of predation on larger organisms. They rely heavily on physieal eneounters with
prey items eonsuming anything they bump into. They take advantage of the swash zone to
eover large areas.

• Harbo, R. et al. (2012). The feeding of Evalea tenuisculpta (Odostomia) on the feeding
siphons of Tresus capax.

Problem Taxa. After luneh we diseussed some of the diffieult speeies that might ereate problems
during Bight’13.

Tellina: Tellina sp B vs T cadieni. The problem is that Tellina sp B is without voueher sheet
doeumentation. OCSD, as well as the other monitoring ageneies, eall all offshore individuals
Tellina sp B; and all bay speeies T cadieni. The question remains should we use loeation
(offshore vs bay) to diseriminate the two for Bight’ 13? Paul Seott, SBNHM, did not see a
differenee when Ron Velarde took speeimens of the two taxa from the City of San Diego. One
problem is that the deseription of T cadieni is not very detailed. The other problems lie within
the history of the usage and doeumentation within SCAMIT. The original voueher sheet for T
carpenteri is aetually Tellina sp B; whereas the original voueher sheet for Tellina sp A (1995)
turned out to be T carpenteri. This issue is diseussed in the last paragraph of the Comments
seetion (page 2) of the Tellina sp A voueher sheet, whieh states that Tellina sp A (1995) beeame T.
carpenteri, the “rose pink” speeimen from the offshore beeoming the undoeumented Tellina sp B,
but does not distinguish T. cadieni, a bay form deseribed by Seott (2000).

The group reviewed pietures of T. cadieni fide T. Phillips SMB Station FB15, 7/18/12, whieh
everyone determined to be Tellina sp B. The group then eompared Phillip’s pieture to Seott’s plate
of T. cadieni but that provided little resolution of the problem. After mueh diseussion, everyone
deeided that absent a review of Tellina sp B and ereation of a voueher sheet, offshore speeimens
should be referred to Tellina sp B and speeimens from true bays and harbors should be referred to

4

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Tellina cadieni. The noted exeeption being Santa Moniea Bay, whieh is generally eonsidered open
eoast.

Pyramadellids were next on the hit list, partieularly Turbonilla sp SDl vs. deseribed speeies
Turbonilla santarosana. See SCAMIT NL Volume 29, No. 3&4. Diseussion about whether or
not they one in the same, and what is the eorreet name to be used ensued. Generally the usage
among the ageneies is Turbonilla sp; however, two primary people are using the deseribed
names, ineluding Tony Phillips and Carol Paquette, both of whieh were absent from the day’s
meeting. Notes deseribing the history of these problematie taxa ean be found in SCAMIT NL
Vol. 29, No 3&4. There was some diseussion of leaving these identifieations at the generie
level (e.g., Turbonilla sp and Odostomia sp) sinee both are eetoparasites that do not have direet
eeologieal implieations for Bight benthie work. In the end, the group deeided to allow eaeh lab
and taxonomist to proeeed with usage of the taxa listed on SCAMIT Ed 8 as eapable, as long
as everyone remains eommitted to using the list-server to ensure that all other Bight mollusean
taxonomists are informed if any new taxa are “found” in samples.

Cadulus and Lirobittium were diseussed briefly and everyone was reminded to eheek the prior
meeting minutes during whieh eharaeteristies to distinguish L. attenuatum and L. purpureum were
outlined. Kelvin volunteered to ereate voueher sheets for these {Lirobittium and Cadulus) ahead
of the formal publieation of the minutes for the meeting.

For eulimids, everyone is direeted to the SCAMIT Tools and the eulimid voueher sheet tables
and plates. Plate 1 shows eonflrmed Melanella rosa. Plate 2 shows eonflrmed Polygireulima
rutila. Plate 3 illustrates Vitrolina Columbiana and Vitreolina macra, however Vitreolina yod is
represented by juveniles whieh were eonsidered too small to be plaeed in a partieular speeies.
Norma eonflrmed this latter determination based on her knowledge of the true size of V yod and
the few whorls represented by the Plate 3 pieture. We also reviewed the original illustration of V
yod whieh showed some differenees between the original and Kelvin’s photos. Among the other
voueher sheets available. Figure 1 showing Balds sp A was eonflrmed, as were Balds sp SDl
and Balds sp SD2.

Kelvin then helped Sarah and Kim with speeifle speeimens that they had brought to the meeting
for resolution. The meeting ended at approximately 3:00 PM.

6 JUNE 2013, POLYCHAETA, NHMLAC, SERGIO SALAZAR-VALLEJO AND LUIS

CARRERA-PARRA

Attendees: Larry Lovell, Cheryl Brantley (LACSD); Kelvin Barwiek, Ernest Ruekman (OCSD);
Kathy Langan, Rieardo Martinez-Lara, Veroniea Rodriguez-Villanueva (City San Diego); Chip
Barrett (EeoAnalysts); Leslie Harris (NHMLAC); Luis Carrera-Parra, Sergio Salazar-Vallejo
(ECOSUR).

Dr. Sergio Salazar-Vallejo, who works at ECOSUR in Mexico, began the polychaete review
with a presentation entitled: Sternaspids: “Wide distribution or widespread confusion? ”

The presentation is based on Sergio’s reeent publieation with Kelly Sendall (Sendall and Salazar-
Vallejo, 2013), whieh diseusses the question of whether there’s a single speeies of Sternaspis with
worldwide distribution or multiple speeies.

Sergio began with a diseussion on the history of sternaspids. The first reeorded mention of a
stemaspid was by Janus Planeus who thought it was a sea eueumber (Planeus, 1760). Ranzani

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

(1817) described Sternaspisscutata in the genus Thalassema. A few years later Otto (1821)
established the genus Sternaspis. There was initially some confusion regarding the anterior and
posterior ends; the shield is located on the posterior end. The current conundrum is whether or not
Otto’s 1821 description of Sternaspis thalassemoides represents a single cosmopolitan species or
one genus encompassing about 15 species.

Sergio discussed shield morphology. The shield is a fan-shaped structure in the central
posterior area that can be projected or truncate. The anterior, depressed margin of the shield is
3-dimensional which makes it difficult to illustrate the morphology in two dimensions. Careful
brushing of sediment from the shield is necessary for examination and identification. Change in
shield shape with growth can be a confounding issue. Sergio used analogies with variability in
leaf shape in trees and shell shape in bivalves to explain this. Stemapsids employ phragmosis
(the use of a body part to protect the opening to a burrow: many spiders and ants of the genus
Cephalotes employ this strategy) to protect their tubes, using the anal shield.

In stemaspids, the branchiae filaments are associated with the anal shield; consequently, the
orientation of the animal must be posterior end up to keep the branchiae near the sediment/
water interface. Because of this feature, the anal shield has developed specific characteristics and
has taxonomic value. In Sendall and Salazar-Vallejo (2013) three genera are established based
on characteristics of the ventro-caudal shield, the introvert hooks, and number of abdominal
segments.

• Caulleryaspis - this genus has a very soft shield with sediment embedded in it.

• Petersenaspis - this genus has 8 abdominal segments anterior to the shield.

• Sternaspis - this genus has 7 abdominal segments anterior to the shield.

Sergio showed an image with a growth series of eight specimens from the same sample. The
shield is not well developed in juveniles. Chaetae along the margin start as 1 per bundle, but then
additional chaetae are added to bundles as the animal grows. In addition, concentric lines develop
with growth of the shield, then characteristics of the shield margin and striations.

Various types of chaetae were shown. The shape of the distal portion of the anterior hooks may be
an important diagnostic character, but wear confounds the issue. Chaetae in the posterior region
are thin, and of less taxonomic value.

Sergio also mentioned that the mouth papillae have patterns. Some are circular or U-shaped. In
contrast, the genital papillae are not well known or defined.

Locally we get Sternaspis affinis in shallower water, down to about 350 m. There is new species
of Caulleryaspis in deeper water (350^ m), then another species in much deeper water (2500-
4000 m). There are possibly other species in shallow bays or intertidal mudfiats not yet known. A
question was asked about the composition of the shield. Sergio explained that it is not true chitin
(modified polysaccharide). Rather, it is sclerotized tissue. The animal utilizes iron compounds to
give stiffness and a reddish color to the shield.

Chip Barnett brought some specimens of Eastern Mediterranean stemaspids for examination.
There were two vials of Sternaspis scutata. One contained juveniles with reddish, comma-shaped
eyespots. He also brought two specimens of Caulleryaspis in another vial. All of Chip’s material
was examined.

Sergio will provide a pdf of his presentation for SCAMIT to post on the website.

6

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Dr. Luis Carrera-Parra, who also works at ECOSUR in Mexico, next led a discussion on
Lumbrineridae. Luis began with some eautionary notes on the identifieation of fragments and
juvenile lumbrinerid speeimens. Small, eomplete lumbrinerids should have at least 45 segments
present in order to eonfidently identify them. He does not identify anterior fragments to speeies
level. In situations where a taxonomist is very familiar with a partieular area and the regional
fauna it may be OK to identify anterior fragments. Ideally, it’s best to have about 100 segments to
observe full development of the posterior lobes.

The distribution of ehaetae is important. Chaetae ean ehange along the length of the animal. In
the anterior of the worm, hoods are approximately the same size whereas in the posterior of the
worm, the size of the hoods ean vary by a faetor of 2. The ehaetiger where the dorsal ehaetae
end is also a signifieant eharaeter. The length to width ratio of the blades of eomposite hooks is
important. A long ehaeta is one where the length is about 11 times the width.

Scoletoma ean be problematie and Luis reeommends eaution in identifying speeies in this genus.

Although aeieulae “eolor” - some taxonomists use yellow and blaek and others use the terms
light and dark - is often used in eonjunetion with other eharaeters for speeies identifieation,
some speeies’ aeieulae ehange eolor along the length of the body. Luis reeommends looking at
parapodia from three different regions of the body (e.g., anterior, median, and posterior).

We then examined speeimens of Abyssoninoe that Chip brought from deep-water samples off the
Eastern Mediterranean. These speeimens had long blades with limbate hooks.

Little work has been done on lumbrinerid growth patterns. Larval development is poorly
doeumented. In some speeies it oeeurs within a jelly mass. Small speeimens (less than 30 -
40 segments) will not have eomposite ehaetae. Luis does not like to use simple ehaetae as a
taxonomie eharaeter beeause they show a high degree of variability. He has notieed that they ean
have a long hood, short hood, or both long and short hoods within a faseiele.

Leslie mentioned that she has reeently found the Caribbean speeies Lumbrinerisperkinsi in San
Diego harbor in fouling habitats.

There was some diseussion about the need to eheek hooks and jaws to eonfidently distinguish
between Lumbrineris sp E and L. latreilli.

There was also a brief diseussion of a new Terebelliformia paper elevating several subfamilies
to family status (Nogueira et al. 2013). Polyeirrinae is not well supported aeeording to Kirk. The
group reeommended that we wait before making this ehange to the SCAMIT speeies list.

7

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

10 JUNE, ARTHROPODS, CSD, DR. TIM STEBBINS AND DEAN PASKO

Attendees: Larry Lovell, Don Cadien and Chase MeDonald (LACSD); Ken Sakamoto and
Danny Tang (OCSD); Ross Duggan (City and County of San Franeiseo); Tim Stebbins, Ron
Velarde, Katie Beauehamp and Andy Davenport (City of San Diego); Matt Hill (LeoAnalysts);
Craig Campbell and Greg Lyon (CLAEMD); Tony Phillips and Dean Pasko (Private Consultants).

BUSINESS:

We diseussed upeoming meetings, most of whieh are available on the SCAMIT web-site (www.
seamit.org). However, a speeial meeting was announeed. Dr. Buz Wilson of the Australian
Museum will hold an asellote isopod workshop on Monday, September 30* at the City of San
Diego Marine Biology Laboratory.

On Oetober 7*, SCAMlT’s sister group for fishes, the Southern California Assoeiation of
lethyologieal Taxonomists and Eeologists (SCAITE), will be holding a Trawled Fish FID
(speeimens for further identifieation) review meeting at the SCCWRP Eaboratory. Plans for a
separate meeting for invertebrate taxa is in the works. Please send a list of potential FlDs to Earry
(llovell@lacsd.org) or Don (dcadien@lacsd.org).

Finally, on November 8th, Dr. Pam Neubert and Don Cadien will host an Aplaeophoran workshop
at the City of San Diego laboratory.

Job openings were also announeed at the City of Eos Angeles (Water Biologist position) and the
Orange County Sanitation Distriet (Senior Environmental Speeialist). Please see the SCAMIT
web site for additional information.

It is membership time again and the New Membership form will be available on the SCAMIT
website. Please note the new mailing address as C/0 Eaura Terriquez, PO Box 50162, Eong
Beaeh, CA 90815. USA.

Dr. Tim Stebbins presented “Review of the Southern California Mysids.” Tim reeently started
taekling the mysids when he ran into problems trying to identify speeimens eolleeted by the
City of San Diego’s benthie monitoring program. Briefiy, he found himself using mostly “poor
quality” eopies (2""^, 3*, 4*... generation) of speeimen identifieation sheets that left some details
inadequate for eonfident identifieations. Many of these speeies’ old ID sheets are available in the
SCAMIT Taxonomie Toolbox. Consequently, he started gathering and eompiling the neeessary
literature and information in order to produee new elean eopies of these identifieation guides.

Tim also noted that although several keys or draft keys exist eovering southern California speeies,
none are eurrent or eomplete. For example, T im him self prepared a “Key to the Co mm on Mysids
off Point Eoma” in 1991, but whieh ineluded only 11 speeies. A more eomprehensive draft “Key
to the Mysid Speeies Reported from California” eovering about 31 speeies was ereated by Ron
Velarde and others in early 1992 following Ron’s Mysid workshop (see SCAMIT NE Vol. 10,

No. 9). Copies of both Tim’s and Ron’s keys are also available in the SCAMIT Toolbox (i.e.,
under Order Mysida, Family Mysidae, Other Useful Tools). Several other published keys are also
available that SCAMIT members may find useful, ineluding those by Daly & Holmquist (1986:
Paeifie Northwest mysids), Gerken et al. (1997: Santa Maria Basin mysids), and Modlin (2007:
Central California to Oregon mysids).

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Tim distributed a species listing and updated comprehensive list of mysid literature, along with
a table of introduced species. Although he intended to create a new key, this effort did not get
beyond the concept prior to the meeting. Instead, Tim presented a new set of figure pages for
most species that he intends to make available to the SCAMIT membership.

The presentation began with an introduction to the mysids and overview of their primary
characteristics. His preliminary list included 35 species representing 28 genera, 8 subfamilies,
and 2 families in the Southern California Bight (SCB), although some of these may eventually
be excluded as being non-marine. This was followed by drafts of the various new mysid figure
pages. The presentation was in draft form and not for general distribution, so Tim did not provide
an electronic copy for posting at this time.

Don Cadien then reviewed the Tanaidacea literature. Most of the literature was not pertinent
to SCB taxonomic issues, although he cited one very interesting publication on tanaid diversity
and radiation within the world’s oceans (Blazewicz-Paszkowycz, et al, 2012).

Absent other relevant issues, the session quickly deteriorated to a discussion of Leptochelia and
the issue of L. dubia complex. Adding to this discussion (and confusion) are several publications
by Bamber. Bamber and Costa (2009) describes L. caldera and revisits the confusion over L.
savignyi. Bamber (2010) re-describes L. savignyi from topotype material and Bamber et al (2009)
describes L tanykeraia, a species very similar to L. dubia in number and relative length of the
uropodal articles. In addition, Edgar (2012) discusses the difficulty of Leptochelia identification
as a result of ontological variability.

Don Cadien then initiated a discussion of the preliminary phylogenetic results from 12 California
L. dubia samples analyzed with Leptochelia Genbank sequences from the Western Atlantic and
West Africa. Katie Beauchamp, Don Cadien, Ross Duggan, and Erik Pilgrim are working on a
project using a combination of molecular techniques and traditional taxonomic procedures to
explore the systematic relationships of species in the genus Leptochelia and related taxa. Katie
provided a brief summary of phylogenetic results from Tanaidomorpha taxa sequenced thus far
using the mitochondrial COl gene (mt COl). These results included 12 specimens sequenced
from the Southern California Bight. When compared with Genbank sequences from the Atlantic
Ocean, 11 of the California L. dubia specimens grouped together with strong statistical support.
However, one OCSD L. dubia specimen (Specimen #599, collected for the SCCWRP barcoding
project) was outside the California clade and linked more closely with Hargeria rapax, and
L. dubia from Florida. Additional mt COl and nuclear gene sequences from morphologically
Leptochelia species and other taxa in the family Eeptocheliidae should help clarify
these preliminary findings.

Dean noted that he had also been looking into this issue, particularly focusing on the L. dubia -
L. savignyi question. Dean has seen L. savignyi reported from northern California, specifically
in Humboldt Bay. Booking at the literature, the two notable differences between the two taxa
were that L. savignyi is reported to have a uropod with 6 articles on the ramus (excluding basis)
versus L. dubia, which only has 5. Additionally, L. savignyi is reported to have 4 strong setae
on the maxilliped basis, whereas L. dubia has 5. He confirmed the characters of L. dubia from
several specimens from the OCSD monitoring program. [However, in subsequently looking at
a larger population of specimens. Dean found quite a bit of variability in number of setae on the
maxilliped basis, but a very consistent number of articles (5) on the uropod.]

9

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Discussion then moved on to Araphura sp SDl. This provisional species found in the shallow
waters at the head of La Jolla Canyon is very mueh like A. brevaria. It differs from A. brevaria
in the presenee of a line of granules on the ventral margin of the propodus of the ehela. Ron
mentioned trying to find (or ereate) a voueher sheet for the speeies.

Dean also eautioned everyone about the problems or eonfusion that he has experieneed with
members of the genus Zewco and Synaptotanais. He has had diffieulty applying the eharaeters
used by Sieg and Winn (1981) to distinguish the genera. The issue eame to a head in the Bight
2008 work. Fortunately, a true Synaptotanais notabilis was eolleeted from a station in the Channel
Islands (B’08 Station 7553) that eonfirmed the differenees in the length of the uropod artieles
between Zeuxo and Synaptotanais', however, there was never equally elear resolution of Zeuxo
spp. Don mentioned that he has reeorded Z paranormani almost exelusively. Dean agreed, but
has also used Z. normani, and reeently reported Z. coralensis from stations near the Sweetwater
River in San Diego Bay, the latter having only 3 artieles on the uropodal endopod. Don suggested
that Dean eontaet Peter Slattery to diseuss Zeuxo.

Somehow an isopod entered this eonversation. The topie of Boreosignum sp A eame up and
Dean and Tony diseussed the OCSD speeimen that was a Boreosignum sp A look alike. They
noted differenees in the presenee (or absenee) of setae along the pleotelson margin, but eouldn’t
remember if there were other differenees. Notes on this were left at the OCSD laboratory upon
Dean’s retirement, and Ken Sakamoto volunteered to look for them.

Tony Phillips conducted the Cumacea literature review. Tony eautioned everyone to be eareful
when using the SCAMIT taxonomie tool box for information on Cumaeea. There are several
old voueher sheets listed with the old names, and some ineorreetly listed. When looking at the
tool box and speeifieally Cumella sp B (now Cumella morion), what is listed as Cumella sp B
male is aetually Cumella sp E Phillips 1995 male. He noted that Don’s information on families
and the ineluded keys are very helpful. Of the many publieations dealing with eumaeeans, Tony
mentioned the following as of potential interest to the group.

• Akiyama and Gerken (2012) deals with the Pseudoeumatidae group, partieularly
Petalosarsia, noting the SCAMIT provisional Petalosarsia sp ADiener 1982.

• Alberieo and Roeeatagliata (2013) deals with the genus Diastylis and eontains an exeellent
eomments seetion at the eonelusion of the paper.

• Gerken and Watling (1998) also provide a valuable review of Diastylis spp.

• Shalla (2011) Identifieation guide to the British Cumaeea is an exeellent overview of the
eumaeeans. It ineludes wonderful illustrations and explanations of morphologieal eharaeter
states and useful keys to families and genera.

• Donath-Hemandez (2011) has two publieations dealing with eumaeeans from Baja
California, Mexieo.

• Pilar Haye (2007) is an exeellent review of the systematies of Bodotriidae.

Dean Pasko then eondueted the remainder of the review meeting. We began with a quiek
diseussion of other pertinent literature.

• Takeuehi, 1. and A. Oyamada (2012). Revisit the deseriptions of Caprella californica
Stimpson, 1857 with material from California, partieularly in eomparison to Japanese
material. They elevate C. scauroides Mayer, 1903 to speeies level for the Japanese material
and provide detailed eomparative deseriptions and illustrations of the two taxa.

10

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

• Wicksten, M. K. (2012). Mary has updated her 2008 deeapod publieation with mueh
improved figures and images, and, from what 1 ean tell from my initial use, re-edited and
updated keys. 1 highly reeommend that this be your starting plaee for most deeapods.

• De-la-Ossa-Carrtero, et al (2012). This paper diseusses amphipod sensitivity to sewage. It
employs AMBl eategories to investigate amphipod sensitivity to sewage pollution, showing a
general deerease in abundanee and diversity in stations elose to outfalls. Some of the affeeted
speeies showed some differenees in level of sensitivity related to their burrowing and feeding
behavior. For example, suspension and surfaee deposit feeders and tube builders showed less
sensitivity to sewage disposal than others, and are thus even able to inerease in abundanee.
The publieation should be of interest to all of the diseharging ageneies as they wrestle to
interpret their monitoring data.

• Lowry and Myers (2013). Provide a follow-up to their review of eaprellids and eorophioids,
ereating a new suborder of Gammaridean amphipod: Sentieaudata, for those amphipods with
embedded spines terminally on uropods.

• Lowry and Stoddard also produeed two other 2012 publieations on Lysianassids
(Conieostomatinae and Paehynidae) that inelude family and speeies keys. Eaeh ineludes
useful keys involving loeal speeies.

Dean briefiy ealled attention to the problems experieneed with eaprellid amphipods during the last
Bight projeet, partieularly Caprella scaura, C. californica, C. simia, and Caprella sp WSl. Eaeh
of these speeies has similarly shaped (and variable) head spines, and few other distinguishing
eharaeters. Differenees used to distinguish them inelude the presenee/absenee and number of
dorsal proeesses on several of the pereonites, although the size of these vary with size of the
individual. The problem is espeeially keen when dealing with speeimens from embayments. Dean
reeommended that everyone be eautious beeause there seem to be mixed lots, sometimes tens of
speeimens at varying stages of development and gender, and, of eourse, varied maturity of the
differentiating eharaeter states. A single key representing all the possible taxa does not exist and
Dean reeommended using a eombination of keys: Eight’s Manual (Watling and Carlton 2007),
Eaubitz (1970), and Watling (1995). A voueher sheet for Caprella sp WSl has been drafted, but
not finalized for distribution. Dean plans to eomplete and distribute the voueher sheet in time for
taxonomie analysis of these samples.

Callianassids, in partieular Neotrypaea californiensis and N. gigas (See Pemet et al 2010)
were diseussed. Although the issue was thoroughly reviewed in a previous SCAMIT meeting
(SCAMIT NE Vol. 27 No. 3/4), Dean thought that revisiting the distinetion between these two
taxa was important with regional Bight sampling and the large number of samples eolleeted in
the various embayments. The simplest distinetion between the two taxa lies in the eyestalks (See
Figure 2, Pemet et al 2010):

• N. californiensis has short, blunt eyestalks that reaeh to or just beyond the artiele 2 of the
first antenna

• N. gigas has long, tapered, laterally eoneave eyestalks that extend well beyond the artiele 2
of the first antenna

The key in Wieksten (2012) distinguishes these two speeies as well as N. biffari, whieh has an
unprodueed, short, blunt eyestalk.

We also diseussed the leueonid eumaeea Nippoleucon hinumensis vs. Leucon subnasica. The two
genera are distinguished by the presenee or absenee (respeetively) of pleopods in the male, and

11

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

the females look suffieiently similar to have eaused problems in the past... at least for Dean. N.
hinumensis, an introdueed speeies from Japan that oeeurs in embayments, differs from Leucon
by the absenee of pleopods in the male; a trait that offers little eomfort when faeed with a sample
ineluding only females. Consequently, Dean noted the following differenees in females that are
useful to distinguish the two taxa:

• The anteroventral eomer of the antennal noteh of N. hinumensis is blunt, whereas it is
upturned and more aeute in L. subnasica;

• In N. hinumensis the isehium + merus of pereopod 1 is notably longer than the propodus,
whereas the two (i + m) are notably shorter than the propodus in L. subnasica;

• In N. hinumensis the basis is mueh more setose than in L. subnasica (~6 long plumose setae
vs. 2-3);

• In N. hinumensis, the uropodal endopod is notably shorter than the exopod, but sub-equal in
L. subnasica;

• The pattern of dorsal erest teeth is also different, but it is diffieult to deseribe and one
should eompare the illustrations for this eharaeter.

Next on the list were eylindroleberid ostraeods. Dean provided a mini-training on several of the
eharaeters typieally used to distinguish the genera and reeognized speeies eommon to the SCB.
The primary eharaeters inelude:

• Antenna 1 - length of sensory bristle, and presenee/absenee of an aeeessory filament;

• Mandible - the size of the exopodite, pattern of primary and seeondary bristles along the
anterior margin of artiele 2 of the endopodite, and the number and pattern of triaenid and
spinose bristles on the endite;

• Sixth limb - the number and general pattern of spinose bristles along the ventral margin.

Dean also briefiy deseribed a potentially new eylindroleberid eolleeted from the OCSD
monitoring program. This taxon is represented by two speeimens eolleeted from 50 m off Orange
County, and has the following eharaeters: the sensory bristle of antenna 1 has an aeeessory
filament and extends well beyond the tip of antenna 1; exopodite of the mandible is about one-
half the length of the endopodite; there are two bristles proximal to the a-bristle and one between
the a- and Z^-bristles of the mandible endopod, artiele 2; the endite of the mandible has 1 triaenid
and 4 spinose bristles (although this eharaeter seems to vary slightly); and the 6^*" limb has 14
bristles along the ventral margin.

Dean distributed an updated tabular key to the Cylindroleberididae from the SCB [older versions
ean be found in the SCAMIT Taxonomie Toolbox]. He plans to review and update the table for
greater distribution and posting.

We also diseussed the differenees among several similar looking eorophiid amphipods,
the males of whieh have a earpoehelate gnathopod 1 (Acuminodeutopus, Rudilemboides,
and Paramicrodeutopus), and distinguishing between females Rudilemboides sp A vs. R.
stenopropodus. Dean first reminded everyone not to rely on eolor to distinguish these speeies,
partieularly Rudilemboides sp A and R. stenopropodus. Acuminodeutopus heteruropus is easily
distinguished from the others by the shortened outer ramus of uropod 3. In eontrast, both
Paramicrodeutopus schmitti and Rudilemboides have two well-developed rami on uropod 3.

P. schmitti is easily distinguished from Rudilemboides by the rounded eye lobe, whieh is aeute
in Rudilemboides. Female Rudilemboides sp A ean be separated from R. stenopropodus by the

12

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

presence of spines on the anterior margin of the gnathopod 2 basis instead of setae. The males
are distinguished by the presence of large teeth on the gnathopod 1 propodus and carpus in
Rudilemboides sp A, which are absent in R. stenopropodus. These differences are discussed in the
SCAMIT voucher sheet available in the tools section of the SCAMIT website.

Dean then moved on to another Corophioid group, the genus Aoroides (Aoridae), which creates
some difficulty, particularly because correct identification requires examination of the teeth on
the outer plate of the maxilliped. Basically, he reiterated that the key to the species of Aoroides in
Conlan and Bousfield (1982b) works well. He relies heavily on the presence/absence of the seta
on article 2 of the mandibular palp and cusps on the outer plate of the maxilliped, especially when
dealing with female specimens (see Table 2 of Conlan & Bousfield 1982b). He again reminded
everyone not to rely solely on color because he has noticed differences in definition of the color
patterns according to location (e.g., north, central, and southern areas of the SCB). He showed
several slides depicting several of the character states.

The Photids, a perplexing group that everyone loves to hate, was next on the agenda. Dean
[again] emphasized the use of the particular character states used in his 1999 key to the Photis
and not color alone. Color patterns on certain species (e.g., a stripe of color in the antenna 1 of
Photis californica) can be a useful tool to sort specimens into species groups; but they should not
be used as the identifying character. Over the years. Dean and others have found mixed lots of P.
brevipes and P. californica where all the specimens had this “characteristic line of pigment” in
the antenna and female P. brevipes will sometimes have pigment distally on antenna 1 peduncular
articles. Photids overall do show some differentiating pigment pattern that can be used to sort
the specimens into groups, and may be helpful when identifying groups of specimens from one
narrow region, but these color patterns may not (and probably do not) translate across regions and
therefore should not be used for species-level identification.

Dean also acknowledged the problems with his key and the difficulty some have had interpreting
the character states (e.g., relative length of the anterior and posterior margins of the carpus on
gnathopod 1), and indicated that he hoped to re-write and simplify the key later this year. Until
then, he noted that the common taxa found within the SCB are not impossible to deal with. First,
there are several taxa where the males and females are very distinctive (i.e., Photis sp A, Photis sp
B, Photis sp C, and P. lacia). Second, size makes a difference when distinguishing among certain
species (e.g., P. brevipes, P. californica, Photis sp OCl), and Dean provided a table that listed
the reported sizes of SCAMIT Ed 7 species (Table 1). He suggested that a combination of the
shape of gnathopods 1 and 2, along with certain other specific characters (setation on the coxae,
or bend in antenna 2), can be employed fairly reliably with size to identify many specimens. For
example, P. brevipes grow to 8 mm in length whereas P. californica mature at 4.5 mm. Males of
the two are distinguished by the presence {P. brevipes) or absence {P. californica) of a tooth on
the male dactyl. Immature (3-5 mm) specimens of P. brevipes will develop a noticeable bump
on the gnathopod 2 dactyl where similarly sized specimens of P. californica will not. Similar
comparisons can be made for the development of the concavity along the palm of gnathopod 1, or
the development of the palmar tooth on gnathopod 2, etc. to distinguish other similar taxa (e.g., P.
parvidons vs. P. californica). Dean then provided a slide show of several of these distinguishing
characters and character states used in his key.

13

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Table 1. Reported sizes for Photis spp listed in SCAMIT Ed 7. All sizes from Conlan (1983)
unless noted by an in whieh ease they are from Barnard (1962). Bolded taxa are >5.0 mm in
size.

Species

Male

Female

P. hifurcata

to 4.0 mm tHolotvpe 2.75 mm*l

to 3.5 mm

to S.Onini*

to 6.0 mm

P californica

4.5 mm*

Hnlntvne S.O mm*

to 4 5 mm*

P. conchlcnla

to S.S mm

to 3 2 mm*

P 1nrin

to 3 0 mm

to 3 3 mm

Plinprnmnnys 3 4 mm

P rynriyprypvi

to 4 3 mm

to 4 0 mm

P macrotica

to 3 3 mm*

PpnrvMnn.

to S.O mm

to 6.0 mm

P. viuda

Holotvpe 5.0 mm*

Photis sp A

<3.0 mm

2.8 mm

Photis sn B

2 5 mm

2 5 mm

3 0 mm

3 5 mm

Phntis .nL

3 25 mm

Photis ^x) OCA 4.0 mm

Members of the family Corophiidae, speeifieally Grandidierella and Monocorophium, are
eommon in bay and harbor samples. Dean reeommended the key in Light’s Manual (Chapman
2007) for this group. This key is extremely useful and easy to follow, but noted that it takes a little
bit of eareful examination to understand and apply the deseription of the spines along the base of
the antenna. He also noted that eouplet 20 requires some eaution. Monocorophium insidiosum is
listed as having a “medial protrusion” (basieally a triangular medial proeess: Plate 270, Figure
V) emanating from just below the dorsal margin of the antenna 1 pedunele, artiele 1; however,

M. uenoi has a similar, though smaller, medial bulge emanating from the mid-point of the
antennal pedunele (i.e., distinetly below the flattened dorsal margin), whieh is not illustrated. M.
insidiosum is by far the more eommon of the two, but the both have very similar eolor patterns, so
one must be eareful to examine the plaeement of the medial tooth when applying the eharaeters of
eouplet 20. Dean and Tony Phillips related stories of mixed lots being very eommon, espeeially
within embayment and river mouth samples; therefore ALL speeimens need to be examined with
immature or damaged speeimens listed as “sp.” Dean had one story Ifom a Bight sample with
>10,000 individual Monocorophium that he flgured eontained a single taxon. Unfortunately, at a
eount of about 5,000 individuals he diseovered a seeond speeies with the same eolor pattern of
the primary speeies, foreing him to review the entire lot to obtain an aeeurate eount.

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Ampithoe (Ampithoidae) is another corophioid that can create problems, particularly because
there is no single key that includes all potential species. For example, the excellent keys in
Chapman (2007) and Conlan and Bousfield (1982a) exclude two fairly common species {A.
longimana and A. polex). In addition, females are particularly difficult (if not impossible)
to reliably distinguish, even when mature. So all identifications should be verified against
descriptions and illustrations carefully.

Pleustids (Pleustidae) are another difficult group to identify with confidence in part because of
their small size and reliance on the mouthpart morphology. Dean has been particularly vexed by
this group, and has found the key in Light’s Manual difficult to apply, particularly with regards to
several fairly common taxa within subfamily Parapleustinae: Chromopleustes oculatus (Holmes
1908), Gnathopleustes den (J.L. Barnard 1969), G. pugettensis (Dana 1852), and Incisocalliope
newportensis (J.L. Barnard in J.L. Barnard & Reish 1959). Readers are referred to Don Cadien’s
thorough review of the group during a prior SCAMIT meeting (See SCAMIT NL Vol. 15, No 8).
The cautionary message: Approach this group carefully!

Although SCAMIT Ed 7 lists only a few hyalid amphipods (four species), they are common
enough in embayment samples to warrant a brief discussion. Dean has found that the characters
in Light’s manual (Chapman 2007) for distinguishing the species of Protohyale and Apohyale
difficult to apply. For example, the length of maxillipedal palp article 4 relative to article 3 is used
to distinguish members of Protohyale, but Dean has found variability in this character between
males and females in the samples that he has processed. The same was true for the length of the
gnathopod 2 palm relative to the posterior edge of the propodus fox Apohyale. Consequently, one
should be cautious when applying specific identifications for this group.

Lastly, Dean introduced a modified version of John Chapman’s Key to the Families and
Superfamilies of gammarid amphipods found in Light’s Manual (Chapman 2007). With John’s
permission. Dean modified the key in an attempt to incorporate all of the families listed in
SCAMIT Ed 7 [Edition 8 wasn’t out at the time]. Most of the character states used in the various
couplets were left intact, with the original figure references maintained. The specific couplets that
required major revisions to incorporate the new families were reviewed. Draff versions of the
key were distributed for comment with a request that it not be distributed further since it is still
in draff form. Several insignificant editorial errors were pointed out almost immediately, and any
other comments are welcomed.

Dean has the following corrections to the distributed key: Couplet 1 - Change “Caprellidae” to
“Caprellida”; Couplet 2 - Change “Ingolfielllidea” to “Ingolfiellidea” (delete extra “1”); Couplet
16 both dichotomies - Change “lessor” to “lesser”; Couplet 17 first dichotomy - add “examine
carefully” after “(plate 263M)” and delete “with” after “pereopods 5-7”; Couplet 19 - Change
“LJnicolidae” to “Unciolidae”; Couplet 32 second dichotomy - change “pereopods 2 and 3 dactyls
shorter... ” to “pereopods 3 and 4 dactyls shorter... ”; Couplet 44 first dichotomy - add “ posterior
margin of coxa 4 not excavate; uropod 3 rami and telson never lined with robust spines”; Couplet
44 second dichotomy - add “coxa 4 often different size, excavate posteriorly, or lobed; if not
excavate or lobed, then uropod 3 rami and telson often lined with robust spines (as in members
of the Melitidae and Maeridae)”; Couplet 45 first dichotomy - add “although incisor may be
prominenf’ after “Mandible lacking molar”; Couplet 51 second dichotomy - change “lower lip”
to “upper lip”; Bottom of page 7, Footnote 2 - change “her” to “here”.

15

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

LITERATURE CITED

MOLLUSCA LITERATURE

Allcock, A.L., I.R. Cooke, and J.M. Stmgnell. “What Can the Mitoehondrial Genome Reveal
About Higher-Level Phylogeny of the Mollusean Class Cephalopoda?” Zoological
Journal of the Linnean Society 161, no. 3 (Mar 2011): 573-86.

Benaim, N.P., D. Correa Paone Viegas, and R. Silva Absalao. 2011. “How Features of the Hinge
Plate Aid in Diseriminating among Three Yoldiella (Peleeypoda, Protobranehia) Speeies
from the Campos Basin, Brazil.” Zootaxa, no. 2883: 39-51.

Bieler, R. and R.E. Petit. 2011. “Catalogue of Reeent and Fossil “Worm-Snail” Taxa of the
Families Vermetidae, Siliquariidae, and Turritellidae (Mollusea: Caenogastropoda).”
Zootaxa, no. 2948: 1-103.

Brandt, A., K. Linse, and M. Sehueller. 2009. “Bathymetrie Distribution Patterns of Southern
Oeean Maerofaunal Taxa: Bivalvia, Gastropoda, Isopoda and Polyehaeta.” Deep-Sea
Research Part I-Oceanographic Research Papers 56, no. 11: 2013-25.

Cyrus, Ariel Z., S.D. Rupert, A.S. Silva, M. Graf, J.C. Rappaport, F.V. Paladino, and W. S. Peters.
2012. “The Behavioural and Sensory Eeology of Agaronia Propatula (Caenogastropoda:
Olividae), a Swash-Surfing Predator on Sandy Beaehes of the Panamie Faunal Provinee.”
Journal of Mollusean Studies 78: 235-45.

Haga, T., and T. Kase. 2013. “Progenetie Dwarf Males in the Deep-Sea Wood-Boring Genus
Xylophaga (Bivalvia: Pholadoidea).” Journal of Mollusean Studies 79, no. 1: 90-94.
Harbo, R., N. MeDaniel, D. Swanston, and P. Eafollette. 2012. “An Exeiting New Diseovery:

The Tightly-Seulptured Odostome Snail, Evalea Tenuiseulpta (Carpenter, 1864) Feeding
on the Siphon Tips of the Fat Gaper, Tresus Capax (Gould, 1850) in Vaneouver Harbour,
British Columbia.” The Dredgings 52, no. 2: 3-4.

MeEean, J. H. 2011. “Reinstatement of the Fissurellid Subfamily Hemitominae, with
the Deseription of New Genera, and Proposed Evolutionary Eineage, Based on
Morphologieal Charaeters of Shell and Radula (Gastropoda: Vetigastropoda).” [In
English]. M4LHC(9L(9G/H 54, no. 1-2: 407-27.

Oliver, P. G., and J. Eotzen. 2011. “An Anatomieally Bizarre, Fluid-Feeding, Galeommatoidean
Bivalve: Draculamyaporobranchiata Gen. Et Sp. Nov. (Mollusea: Bivalvia).” [In
English]. Journal of Conchology 40: 365-92.

Oliver, P. G., and J. D. Taylor. 2012. “Baeterial Symbiosis in the Nueinellidae (Bivalvia:

Solemyida) with Deseriptions of Two New Speeies.” [In English]. Journal of Mollusean
Studies 1^-. 81-91.

Paalvast, P. and G. van der Velde. 2013. “What Is the Main Food Souree of the Shipworm
{Teredo navalisf A Stable Isotope Approaeh.” Journal of Sea Research 80: 58-60.

POLYCHAETE LITERATURE

Nogueira, J.M.M., K. Fitzhugh, and P. Hutehings. 2013. The eontinuing ehallenge of

phylogenetie relationships in Terebelliformia (Annelida: Polyehaeta). Invertebrate
Systematies, 27, 186-238.

Otto, A. G. 1821. Animalium maritimorum nondum editorum genera duo. Nova Aeta Physieo-
Mediea Aeademiae Caesareae Eeopoldino-Carolinae Naturae Curiosorum 10(2): 617-
634, Plates 50-51.

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Plancus, J. 1760. Ariminensis. De Conchis Minus Notis Liber. Cui accessit specimen aestus
reciproci maris superi ad Littus Portumque Arimini. Editio Altera. Duplici Appendice
Acuta. Roma, 136 pp, 14 PI.

Ranzani, C. 1817. Descrizione di una nuova specie del genere Thalassema. Opuscoli scientifica
2, 112, Oken’s Isis 12-13(183): 1457-1461. [transl. German with additional comments
in 1817]

Sendall, K. and S. Salazar-Vallejo. 2013. Revision of Sternaspis Otto, 1821 (Polychaeta,
Stemaspidae). ZooKeys 286: Special issue: 1-74.

CRUSTACEA LITERATURE

Akiyama, T. and S. Gerken. 2012. The Cumacea (Crustacea: Paracarida) genus Petalosarsia
(Pseudocumatidae) from the Pacific Ocean. Zootaxa 3320: 1-35.

Alberico, N.A. and D. Roccatagliata. 2013. On two South-West Atlantic Diastylis (Cumacea:
Crustacea), D. obliquisulcata n. sp. and D. geocostae, with remarks on this speciose
genus. Zootaxa 3640 (1): 001-022.

Bamber, R. N. and A. C. Costa. 2009. The tanaidaceans (Arthropoda: Peracarida: Tanaidacea)
of Sao Miguel, Azores, with description of two new species and a new record from
Tenerife. A 9 oreana, Suplemento 6, Setembro 2009: 183-200.

Bamber, R. N. 2010. In the footsteps of HemickNikolaj Kroyer: the rediscovery and
redescription of Leptochelia savignyi (Kroyer, 1842) sensu stricto (Crustacea:

Tanaidacea: Leptochelidae). Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 123(4): 289-311.

Bamber, R. N., G. Bird, M. Blazewicz-Paszkowycz, andB. Galil. 2009. Tanaidaceans

(Crustacea: Malacostraca: Peracarida) from soft-sediment habitats, off Israel, Eastern
Mediterranean. Zootaxa 2109: 1^4.

Barnard, J. E. 1962. Benthic marine Amphipoda of southern California: Families Aoridae,
Photidae, Ischyroceridae, Corophiidae, Podoceridae. Pacific Naturalist. 3(1): 1-72.

Blazewicz-Paszkowycz, M., R. Bamber, and G. Anderson. 2012. Diversity of Tanaidacea

(Crustacea: Peracarida) in the World’s Oceans - How Far Have We Come? PEoS ONE
7(4): e33068. doi: 10.1371/joumal.pone.0033068.

Chapman, J.W. 2007. Amphipoda. In: The Eight & Smith Manual: Intertidal Invertebrates from
Central California to Oregon. Ed: J.T. Carlton. Ed. Pp. 545-618.

Conlan, K.E. and E.E. Bousfield. 1982a. The amphipod superfamily Corophioidea in the
northeastern Pacific Region: Family Ampithoidae: systematics and distributional
ecology. Natl. Mus. of Nat. Sci., Canada, Pub. in Biol. Ocean. 10:41-75.

Conlan, K.E. and E.E. Bousfield. 1982b. The amphipod superfamily Corophioidea in the

northeastern Pacific Region: Family Aoridae: systematics and distributional ecology.
Natl. Mus. of Nat. Sci., Canada, Pub. in Biol. Ocean. 10:77-101.

Conlan, K. E. 1983. The Amphipod Superfamily Corophioidea in the Northeastern Pacific
Region. 3. Family Isaeidae: Systematics and Distributional Ecology. Publications in
Natural Sciences. 4:1-75.

Daly, K.E., and C. Holmquist. 1986. A key to the Mysidacea of the Pacific Northwest. Canadian
Journal of Zoology, 64(6): 1201-1210.

De-la-Ossa-Carrtero, Y. Del-Pilar-Ruso, F. Gimenez-Casalduero, J.E. Sanchez-Eizaso, and J.-C.
Dauvin. 2012. Sensitivity of amphipods to sewage pollution. Estuarine, Coastal and
Shelf Science. 96: 129-138.

17

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Donath-Hemandez, F.E. 2011. Cumella (Cumewingia) quintinensis sp. nov. (Cumacea:

Narmastacidae) from Bahia de San Quintin, Baja California, Mexico. Cah. Biol. Mar. 52:
41 ^ 6 .

Donath-Hemandez, F.E. 2011. Cyclaspis giveni sp. nov. (Cmstacea: Cumacea) from Bahia de
Todos Santos, Baja California, Mexico. Cah. Biol. Mar. 52: 125-129.

Edgar, G.J. 2012. New Eeptocheliidae (Cmstacea: Tanaidacea: Tanaidomorpha) from Australian
seagrass and macro-algal habitats, and a redescription of the poorly-known Leptochelia
ignota from Sydney Harbour. Zootaxa 3276:1-37.

Gerken, S. andE. Watling. 1998. Diastylis tongoyensis, anew diastylid (Cmstacea: Cumacea)
from northern central coast of Chile, with an amendment to the description of Diastylis
crenellata Watling & McCann, 1997. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 111(4): 857-874.

Gerken, S., E. Watling, and l.P. Williams. 1997. Order Mysidacea. Pp. 123-142 in: Blake, J.A.

and PH. Scott (eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and
Western Santa Barbara Channel, Vol. 10: The Arthropoda - The Pycnogonida, and The
Cmstacea Part 1 - The Decapoda and Mysidacea. 151 pp.

Haye, PA. 2007. Systematics of the genera of Bodotriidae (Cmstacea: Cumacea). Zool. J. of the
Finn. Soc. 151: 1-58.

Eaubitz. D.R. 1970. Studies on the Caprellidae (Cmstacea, Amphipoda) of the American North
Pacific. Natl. Mus. of Nat. Sci., Canada, Pub. in Biol. Ocean. No.l: 1-89.

Eowry, J.K. and A.A. Myers. 2013. APhylogeny and Classification of the Senticaudata subord.
nov. (Cmstacea: Amphipoda), Zootaxa 3610 (1): 001-080.

Eowry, J.K. andH.E. Stoddart. 2012. The Pachynidae fam. nov. (Cmstacea: Amphipoda:
Eysianasoidea). Zootaxa 3246: 1-69.

Eowry, J.K. andH.E. Stoddart. 2012. Australian and South African conicostomatine amphipods
(Amphipoda: Eysianasoidea: Eysianassidae: Conicostomatinae subfam. nov.). Zootaxa
3248: 43-65.

Modlin, R.F. 2007. Mysidacea. Pp. 489-495 in: The Eight and Smith Manual: Intertidal

Invertebrates from Central California to Oregon.4th Edition. J. T. Carlton, ed. University
of California Press, Berkeley, CA. 1001 pp.

Pemet, B., A. Deconinck, and E. Haney. 2010. Molecular and morphological markers for

distinguishing the sympatric intertidal ghost shrimp Neotrypaea californiensis and N.
gigas in the eastern Pacific. J. Cmst. Biol. 30(2): 323-331.

Shalla, S.H. 2011. Cumacea - Identification guide to British cumaceans. NMBAQC 2010
taxonomic workshop. Dove Marine Eaboratory. 46pp.

Sieg, J. and R.N. Winn. 1981. The Tanaidae (Cmstacea; Tanaidacea) of California, with a key to
the world genera. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 94(2). 315-343.

Takeuchi, 1 and A. Oyamada. 2012. Descriptions of two species of Caprella (Cmstacea:

Amphipoda: Caprellidae) from the North Pacific; C. californica Stimpson, 1857 and C.
scauroides Mayer, 1903, with a new appraisal of species ranking for C. scauroides. Helg.
Mar. Res. Vol. 67 issue 2 June 2013. p. 371-381.

Watling, E. 1995. The Suborder Caprellidea. Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa
Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 12, Part 3, pp. 223-240. Santa
Barbara, CA: Special Publications of the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History.

Watling, E. and J.T Carlton. 2007. Caprellidae. In: The Eight & Smith Manual: Intertidal

Invertebrates from Central California to Oregon. Ed: J.T. Carlton. 4* Ed. Pp. 618-629.

Wicksten, M.K. 2012. Decapod Cmstacea of the Californian and Oregonian Zoogeographic
Provinces. Zootaxa 3371: 1-307. www.mapres.com/zootaxa/

18

Publication Date: October 2013

May/June, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 1

Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: www.seamit.org

SCAMIT OFFICERS

If you need any other information eoneeming SCAMIT please feel free to eontaet any of the offieers at
their e-mail addresses:

President Larry Lovell (310)830-2400X5613 llovell@laesd.org

Viee-President Leslie Harris (213)763-3234 lharris@nhm.org

Seeretary DeanPasko (858)395-2104 deanpasko@yahoo.eom

Treasurer Laura Terriquez (714)593-7474 lterriquez@oesd.org

Hard eopy baek issues of the newsletter are available. Priees are as follows:

Volumes 1 - 4 (eompilation).$ 30.00

Volumes 5 - 7 (eompilation).$ 15.00

Volumes 8-15 .$ 20.00/vol.

Single baek issues are also available at eost.

The SCAMIT newsletter is published every two months and is distributed freely to members in good
standing. Membership is $15 for an eleetronie eopy of the newsletter, available via the web site at
www.scamit.org, and $30 to reeeive a printed eopy via USPS. Institutional membership, whieh
ineludes a mailed printed eopy, is $60. All eorrespondenees ean be sent to the Seeretary at the email
address above or to:

SCAMIT

C/0 The Natural History Museum, Invertebrate Zoology

attn: Leslie Harris

900 Exposition Boulevard

Los Angeles, California, 90007

Southern
California
Assocation of
Marine
Invertebrate
Taxonomists

September/October, 2013 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Munnidae (Zoromunna sp.nov)
from the Juan de Fuca -
Gorda Ridge region.

Photo by Dr. G. (Buz) Wilson

This Issue

13 SEPTEMBER 2013, ANGEE VAEDES, NHMEAC, OPISTHOBRANCH MOEEUSKS.2

SCAMIT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ANNUAE MEETING,SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2013.6

SEPTEMBER 30, 2013, DR. BUZ WIESON, ASEEEOTE ISOPODS.8

OCTOBER 13, 2013, DRS. CARRERETTE, CARVAEHO, HAEANYCH, AND STEIN, NHMEAC,

POEYCHAETES AND DNA BARCODING.14

EITERATURE-ASEEEOTA.19

EITERATURE - OPISTHOBRANCH.20

EITERATURE - POEYCHAETA.21

SCAMIT OFFICERS.22

The SCAMIT newsletter is not deemed to be a valid publieation for formal taxonomie purposes.

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

SCAMIT Vol 32, No. 2: No meetings were held in July or August 2013 in order to
accommodate the Bight’13 Regional Monitoring Program field coordination and
sampling efforts. Consequently, there are no minutes for these months, which would have
formed Vol. 32, No. 2 of the SCAMIT NL series.

13 SEPTEMBER 2013, ANGEL VALDES, NHMLAC, OPISTHOBRANCH MOLLUSKS

Attendees: Larry Lovell, Terra
Petry, Don Cadien (LACSD); Kelvin
Barwiek, Eriea Jarvis (OCSD); Wendy
Enright, Ron Velarde (CSD); Eeslie
Harris (NHMEAC); Angel Valdes
(Presenter: Cal Poly Pomona).

Business:

The SCAMIT Exeeutive Board will hold its annual meeting later this month (9/28; minutes
ineluded in this NE). No meetings were seheduled for July or August 2013 to aeeommodate the
Regional Bight Survey field sampling sehedules.

Monday, December 9: Tony Phillips will provide a review of Cnidarians based on the
eolleetions and images of the late John Ejubenkov. The meeting will be held at the Orange
County Sanitation Distriet Eaboratory. Anyone interested in attending the meeting should eontaet
Kelvin Barwiek at kbarwiek@oesd.eom prior to the meeting.

Trawl invertebrate FlDs. Meetings are expeeted, but eurrently unseheduled, in November and
Deeember 2013 to address identifieation of B’13 trawl invertebrates. One meeting will deal with
erustaeeans, the other with mollusks, enidarians, uroehordates, ete. Another is planned for late
January 2014 eovering eehinoderms and foeusing on Brisaster.

Other upeoming meetings - CERE (Coastal and Estuarine Researeh Federation) Annual
Conferenee in San Diego, November 3-7. SCAMIT efforts will be represented in presentations
dealing with the development of a national AMBl.

There will be a Malaeology meeting in Mexieo City in June 2014. This will be a joint meeting
with WSM, AMS, SMM, and AEM (the Mexiean and Eatin Ameriean eounterparts). Paul Seott is
President of both Ameriean organizations this year. The Malaeologieal Soeiety of South Ameriea
will hold their annual meeting eoneurrently, making this a meeting of the Amerieas.

Larry introduced Dr. Valdes who began with a presentation of some reeent researeh eondueted
by himself and his students. In partieular he diseussed their work on speeies eomplexes and the
biogeography of “widespread” speeies. All this is right up SCAMlT’s alley sinee we have eome
to distrust most reports of multi-oeean distributions. All of the work involves some measure of
moleeular analyses of speeimens from various spots around the globe.

The first problem taekled was the reported distribution of Doriopsilla areolata in the Atlantie.
Valdes and Orea Rato (1997) suggested segregation into subspeeies, whieh has now been
rejeeted based on moleeular analysis (Goodheart and Valdes 2013). While there were interesting
loealized differenees in haplotype frequeney, no real reproduetive isolation was indieated in the
analysis, and the subspeeifie taxa eould not be supported. Speeimens identified as D. miniata

UPCOMING MEETINGS

Visit the SCAMIT website at: www.seamit.org for the
latest upeoming meetings announeements.

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

from South Africa proved to nest within D. areolata in the eladogram, raising the possibility that
they might prove to be synonymous. D. areolata is distributed through mueh of the Indo-Paeifie,
and speeimens from other areas were not ineluded in the study. It was premature to propose the
synonymy, sinee the speeimens sequeneed might prove misidentified rather than eharaeteristie of
the speeies as a whole. Broader sampling is needed before a definitive eonelusion ean be reaehed.

The eephalaspid genus Navanax was the next problem area visited. We have N. inermis here in
southern California, while N. aenigmaticus, a more southern speeies, is fairly eommon in the Gulf
of California and rarely reported from the Southern California Bight (SCB) though it may eome
into the area during El Nino eurrent flows. Within this radula-less group morphologieal eharaeters
to distinguish taxa are elusive. The internal shell, for example, has proven largely uninformative
for speeies separation. Consequently external eolor and eolor patterning have sometimes been
used to separate speeies. The value of this was tested by moleeular analysis and found relatively
umeliable. Navanax aenigmaticus has been eonsidered eireum-tropieal in the past, with
populations in the NEP, tropieal west Afriea, and the Caribbean. The analyses of Omeles-Gatdula
et al (2012) demonstrated that there are aetually three speeies, one in eaeh geographie area. N.
aenigmaticus is the Paeifle speeies, N. gemmatus is found in the Caribbean, and N. nyanyana is
found in tropieal west Afriea. This latter speeies has reeently been suggested to be synonymous
with the earlier N. orbignyanus (see Ortea et al 2012).

Another supposedly eireum-tropieal speeies, the sea hare Aplysia dactylomela was diseussed next.
It is widespread in the tropies (Hawaii, China, Atlantie) but representative of two elearly different
genetie groups, one in the Atlantie and one in the Indo-Paeifle. It was first reported as an invasive
speeies from a small island in the southwest off Tunisia in the Mediterranean in 2002. Subsequent
reports showed a rapid and steady spread to the east, a pattern at odds with the normal pattern
of Eessepsian invasion through the Suez Canal. In an effort to see just where the Mediterranean
speeies originated, Angel examined the genome. Speeimens were eolleeted from various
loeations for sequeneing. Angel hypothesized that the invasion was from the Atlantie into the
Mediterranean, rather than along the usual Red Sea-Canal pathway. His hypothesis was supported
by genomie data. He found lots of genetie strueture in the Atlantie, but not mueh in the Indo-
Paeifle. Oeeanographie barriers sueh as the Canary eurrent and strong upwelling off several parts
of west Afriea have beeome weaker with elimate ehange, making the previously diffleult invasion
of the Mediterranean from the Atlantie easier. With eontinuing elimatie shifts, sueh barriers will
beeome sieves allowing the more optimally invasive taxa through, but may fail entirely with
time. Onee that oeeurs free interehange will beeome possible in areas formerly separated, and the
homogenization of the planet’s oeeans will aeeelerate.

Our next diseussion involved a nudibraneh living at the oeean surfaee with the potential for a very
broad distribution throughout entire oeeans and possibly between oeeans. Angel showed video
of Glaucus feeding on Portuguese Man-of-War eolleeted in eollaboration with the University
of Miehigan and the National Geographie Soeiety. Angel studied two speeies living in different
oeean gyres. G. marginatus (the stouter speeies) is aetually a eomplex of four eryptie speeies. The
issue proved to be a good example of sexual seleetion at work sinee G. marginatus have a bursa
eopulatrix and regular eopulation, while G. atlanticus, injeets sperm via a penile spine. Using
moleeular eloeks, Angel found that differenees in the Atlantie vs. Indo-Paeifle populations were
established about 1.2 million years ago. This eoineides with the onset of the Agulhas leakage
around the Cape of Good Hope in South Afriea. Prior to that date there had been an impervious

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

barrier at the Cape preventing interehange between the Atlantie and Paeifie populations. The
leakage has varied with glaeial events, eurrents, and temperature allowing pulses of mixing
between the two oeeans. The eurrent hypothesis is that this history is refleeted in the genomes of
the animals affeeted. Investigations testing this hypothesis are in the proeess of publieation.

Angel then went on to diseuss Caribbean diversity in another eephalaspidean genus; Chelidonura,
a eoral sand dwelling form, whieh demonstrates a wide range of eolor variations in the Caribbean.
Genetie analysis showed that there were two elades - one only in the Bahamas, the other
throughout the Caribbean - with wide eolor variation in eaeh elade. Color eould not be used
to separate the elades, but internal shell morphology did separate morphs. It turned out that the
protoeoneh growth patterns refleet feeding dififerenees and larval life style: widespread speeies
were planktotrophie, while endemies were leeithotrophie. These data were partially presented by
Omeles-Gatdula et al (2011).

Philinopsis has the same pattern of habitat with eryptie eoloration; although internal shell
variation was evident. A study of two different eolor morphs of Philinopsis pulsa from the same
habitat showed no differenee in haplotypes or burying behavior. There was no genetie basis for
the eolor variation, and no indieation of the potential souree of the variation (Omeles-Gatdula and
Valdes, 2012). This pattern repeats with some eryptie speeies of saeeoglossans as well.

Angel also diseussed several new speeies. Anew Chromodoris from the Gulf of Mexieo is
aposematie, using its dorsal eolor pattern as a warning and defense meehanism. It feeds on red
sponge, against whieh its eoloration ean elearly be seen. He also mentioned that deseription of the
first speeies of Melihe known from Florida is underway. This is an extremely transparent member
of the genus, whieh is virtually invisible underwater. While most speeies of Melibe have eryptie
eoloration and dermal elaboration, no other speeies has been this diffleult to see.

Going baek to problems with existing deseribed speeies, the aeolid genus Dondice was
addressed. Members of Dondice are enidarian feeders, and D. banyulensis, D. occidentalis,
and D. parguerensis look very similar but are genetieally distinet. The first two speeies feed on
hydroids, as do most aeolids, while D. parguerensis feed on the jellyfish Cassiopeia. This medusa
lives upside-down on the sediments, farming symbiotie algae in its tentaeles on shallow sun¬
lit bottoms. Why this dietary differenee, and its possible eonsequenees, are subjeets of interest.
Angel hopes to perform some lab experiments to test (1) if the two speeies that eo-oeeur in the
tropieal west Atlantie {D. occidentalis and D. parguerensis) are inter-fertile, and (2) if switehing
prey between the two speeies is an option.

As an aside, Angel mentioned that although studies foeused on the Aglajidae (Aglaja, Navanax,
and Chelidonura) have shown these taxa nest together, their synonymy has not been performed.
Reviewers won’t support the idea of synonymizing these genera, and efforts to do so have been
rebuffed.

Researeh on the Philinidae has been spurred loeally by the invasion of several speeies, most
notably Philine auriformis. In California, Philine have proven to be a eomplex in Northern
California - partieularly in Bodega Bay. This eomplex ineludes three fusiform speeies: P. aperta,
P auriformis, andP orientalis (similar gizzard plates to P. auriformis but with tiny holes). This
eomplex was eonflrmed by Pat Krug and his students. The endemie P. alba, a lentieular speeies
that is also large and white, is not part of this eomplex. All three members of this eomplex

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

are invasive; P. aperta from the North Atlantie, P. orientalis from the South China Sea, and//
auriformis from New Zealand.

In addition, Dendronotus frondosus, now D. venustus, was found to represent more than one
speeies. Moleeular investigations indieated that the reputedly wide-ranging D. frondosus should
be restrieted, and previously synonymized speeies sueh as D. venustus reeognized (Stout et
al 2010). Angel thinks that there may be more eryptie speeies loeally under this name. It is an
interesting group beeause they seem more speeious in temperate areas, whereas most nudibranehs
reaeh maximum diversity in the tropies. Five taxa are listed in SCAMIT Ed 8. D. patricki, not on
the list, is a vent speeies found on whale skeletons (Stout et al 2011).

Under-reported diversity may also reside in Polycera. Members of the genus Polycera are
typieally shallow water speeies that oeeur in embayments. P atra is the same up and down the
eoast, but P alabe is represented by three elades with overlapping ranges that show some minor
radular differenees. Investigations of this situation eontinue.

Another interesting story, Haminoea japonica was first deteeted in Canada, down to San
Franeiseo. It has a distinetive deep noteh in the eephalie shield, along with a distinetive radula
when eompared to the native speeies. All the invaders to both Europe and North Ameriea eame
from one small area of intense oyster farming in northeast Japan (Hanson et al 2013). When first
deteeted in the NEP they were deseribed as a new speeies, H. callidegenita, by Gibson and Chia
(1989). The North Ameriean populations show a different haplotype than Europe, but not enough
to qualify as a different speeies. H. japonica has displaeed H. vesicula in bay and estuaries in
North Ameriea. In Europe, it has invaded several eoastal lagoons previously oeeupied by endemie
speeies sueh as H. fusari, H. templadoi, H. orteai, ete. In its non-native habitat, it is found in
estuaries assoeiated with bivalve aquaeulture. It is not in southern California yet, but expeeted
eventually.

Angel deseribed a projeet that Jeff Goddard is pursuing (see Goddard et al 2013), and he eould
use help finding speeimens. Felimare californiensis is a small opisthobraneh that feeds on
sponges of the genus Dysidea. The speeies has historieally been found on the mainland and
Channel Islands. In the mid-1980’s it disappeared from the mainland, although it was reeently
found in Mission Bay and Ea Jolla. E californiensis has a history of variable abundanee; its
eongener speeies F. porterae is doing fine. Jeff is interested in seeing if the genetie diversity
has ehanged over time, or if there are links to pollution/runoff, or variability in the availability
of prey. Jeff eould use speeimens of F californiensis for genetie analysis, BUT do not kill the
speeimens, a elip from the tail preserved in 95% EtOH is just fine!

Angel is also interested in members of Melanochlamys, M. diomedea being our loeal
representative. Nine speeies worldwide have very tight, restrieted ranges, but initial analysis
showed a distinet speeies, M. ezoensis (identified as that, but aetually a new speeies) in San
Franeiseo Bay and Japan. Angel is still working on teasing apart the exaet story. Speeimens are
morphologieally falling out along the same lines, but he needs more material if you eome aeross it.

He has also found a Parvaplustrum and Philine from a whale fall; their identity still unknown.

The Philine gizzard plates were not ealeified, so their purpose is rather obseure. Just another
eonundrum awaiting more work.

5

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

SCAMIT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ANNUAL MEETING,

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2013

Attendees: Cheryl Brantley, Don Cadien, Dean Penteheff, Megan Lilly, Larry Lovell, Dean
Pasko, and Leslie Harris.

Larry Lovell began the meeting by thanking Cheryl Brantley and Megan Lilly for their many
years of serviee to SCAMIT, and presented eaeh with a eard signed by members of the exeeutive
eommittee and a gift eertifieate of appreeiation.

He then eommented on SCAMlT’s sueeessful 31st year that ended with a reeord number of
members (170), and ineluded a full sehedule of meetings, a SCAS symposium, organizing and
hosting two EPA/USGS workshops, and releasing edition 8 of the SCAMIT Speeies List.

SCAMIT organized and eo-hosted two EPA/USGS-sponsored CBRAT workshops to evaluate
potential target speeies that eould be impaeted by the effeets of Global Climate Change, sueh
as warming water temperatures and ehanges in pH. These workshops eovered erabs, bivalves,
and ehitons, and netted approximately $3,700.00 in 2012/13 and $4,000 for 2013/14. Several
SCAMIT members were among the invited experts: Mary Wieksten, Doug Eemesse, Don
Cadien, Ron Velarde, and Paul Seott. Future CBRAT workshops on annelids, arthropods, and
other phyla are possible depending on EPA needs and budget demands. SCAMIT is likely to be
approaehed to play a similar role.

Earry also mentioned that the Taxonomie Database Tool (TDT) VI is nearly ready for release in
antieipation of Bight’13 sample proeessing. The database tool will link taxa to SCAMIT voueher
sheets, images, and keys from the SCAMIT Toolbox. The Committee diseussed the faet that the
Toolbox has its share of problems that need to be eleaned-up, sueh as duplieate voueher sheets,
voueher sheets with old names, ete. The Committee suggested that eaeh monthly meeting eould
dedieate a small amount of time to reviewing the information in the toolbox that relates to the
taxon being eovered at the meeting. In addition, these meetings eould be meehanisms by whieh
notebooks and eomputers eould be mined for doeuments that eould be added to the toolbox.

The diseussion then migrated to SCAMlT’s effort to build an image library, whieh was to
be linked to the Taxonomie Database Tool. SCAMIT has $3,200 remaining from the OCSD
funds that eould be used to hire an intern to seareh POTW lab eomputers for images. Several
people eommented on the diffieulties assoeiated with eontinued submittal to Morphbank and
the faet that it is not user friendly. Dean Penteheff deseribed Morphbank’s intended use as a
baekground repository of images that eould be aeeessed through something like the SCAMIT
Database, noting that Kelvin’s aplaeophoran images in the toolbox are stored in Morphbank.
Despite this example of sueeessful usage, there was mueh diseussion about whether Morphbank
would be there in the future, the eomplexities involved in loading images, that some of our TDT
development partners at SCCWRP are not happy using Morphbank, whether there was some
other option to meet our needs, and whether maintenanee of a database of this type is beyond
SCAMlT’s area of expertise or funding. Still, the need to pull together the images was elear, and
the Committee diseussed hiring an intern to find material from the various ageneies for potential
uploading to the TDT or Morphbank. Support from SCCWRP for this effort may be on hold
and Earry argued that SCCWRP needs to reeognize their history with taxonomy and eontinue to
maintain the TDT. The two organizations are linked in many ways, sueh as AMBl development,
development of the BRI tools, the BATMAN group to maintain data eonsisteney, DNA bareoding
efforts, ete. and SCCWRP should reeiproeate by supporting the TDT.

6

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Vice-President Leslie provided a summary of the year’s meetings. SCAMIT held meetings every
month of the year, with two meetings in some months. There will not be a Deeember Party sinee
we held the summer beaeh party instead. Leslie is hoping to get inereased support from the loeal
museums when various experts are visiting. It would be great if during their visits these seientists
eould provide summaries of their work to SCAMIT.

Leslie is now looking to fill the 2014 meeting sehedule whieh will inelude a fair amount of Bight-
related taxonomie problems. We will likely deal with problem FID trawl animals at the beginning
of the year sinee some Bight’ 13 eonsultants are eontinuing to work on their speeimens post-
eolleetion. Additional diseussion foeused on the problem that there are fewer qualified people
to perform FlDs within the ageneies and eonsulting firms. One suggestion was that SCAMIT
eould fill the need for training during the trawl FID meeting(s) by faeilitating the transfer of
information among ageneies. However, there are a lot of FlDs yet to be resolved and all of the
data needs to be pulled together before they ean get to the FID effort. The Committee suggested
ealling meetings at the end of January 2014 to get past the inertia. Plans for this meeting will be
fortheoming.

Leslie then deseribed the upeoming Oetober meeting that will inelude presentations by several
visiting seientists ineluding Russell Carvalho (Texas A&M), Orlemir Carrerette (Universidad
Sao Paulo, Brazil), Erie Stein (SCCWRP) and Ken Halanyeh (Auburn University). Ken will
attend primarily to deseribe his work with WormNet, a large $4-5 million grant dedieated
to the evolutionary development of polyehaetes. One goal of WormNET is to reaeh out to
polyehaete workers worldwide for projeets that would benefit from DNA work. The Oetober 14
SCAMIT meeting at the museum will be followed by a separate meeting to diseuss eollaborative
opportunities between WormNET and the various bareoding efforts that SCAMIT and its member
ageneies have been involved in. Ken is willing to eonsider any interesting projeet.

Megan Eilly and Dean Pasko provided the Seeretary’s report. The transfer of responsibilities is
taking plaee with Dean having produeed the minutes for the May and June meetings, and Megan
helping get those rough drafts into produetion-ready format. Megan spent the day showing Dean
the ins-and-outs of produeing the Newsletter and graeiously volunteered to eontinue to help with
editing, ete. as the year progresses.

Beeause the transition will involve Dean publishing the 2013 and future meeting minutes in
issues eovering 2-month periods, and Megan publishing the Volume 31 baeklog of 2012-13
issues, the Committee diseussed and agreed to add a publieation date to eaeh newsletter.

In addition arrangements were made to have Dean Pasko purehase the required publieation
software (InDesign) through TeehSoup, an organization that provides aeeess to software for
non-profit organizations. Onee Dean has aeeess to his own version of the software, Megan will
eontinue working on the baek issues and Dean will attempt to keep paee with eurrent meetings.
The first issue of Volume 32 should be available soon.

Treasurer Eaura Terriquez’s report (presented by Earry) showed that SCAMIT is healthy
finaneially. SCAMlT’s modest Operating Budget of $22,396.81 (as of June 15), not ineluding
the $3,267 remaining in the database-speeifie fund, leaves $5,599 available for publieation
grants (25% of the Operating Budget). Over the eourse of the year SCAMIT generated $5,723
in ineome. SCAMIT spent $767 on Newsletter produetion and distribution, meetings, and travel,
and $3,382.50 of our database funds on improving the toolbox eontent.

7

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

The Committee diseussed the desire to spend the grant money, and wished to eneourage members
to apply for publieation support. Megan mentioned requesting support to produee a guide to the
mega-benthie trawl invertebrates eolleeted by the monitoring programs. There was diseussion
about whether sueh an effort would overlap the SCAMIT TDT, and how might the issue of photo
eopy-write and release be handled sinee many of the photos would eome from publie ageneies.
This brought the diseussion baek around to the issue of the SCAMIT TDT and diseussion
of designating the proeeeds from the EPA Workshops for the speeifie purpose of funding the
database projeet.

Finally, we diseussed the idea of eontinuing to set aside some of the operating balanee in
eertifieates of deposit. Currently, SCAMIT holds a 9-month $10,000 CD that has generated $7.17
in interest. The Committee will ask Laura to shop around for the best interest rate to roll these
dollars into onee the eurrent holding expires.

Dean Penteheff provided the Webmaster report. Dean deseribed the Advaneing Digitization
of Biodiversity Colleetions (ADBC) grant to eneourage museums to digitize their eolleetions.
Gustav Paulay (Florida Museum of Natural History) is leading the effort with Regina Wetzer
and Dean Penteheff as the Pis for the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. Other
major partieipating museums inelude the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History and the
California Aeademy of Seienees (CAS). The effort is being run through the CAS and is in need
of taxonomie seaffolding for the listing. Dean requested that SCAMIT provide a letter of support
and offer the use of the SCAMIT Speeies List. Dean also suggested that SCAMIT eneourage
ADBC grantees to work with POTWs to get data on oeeurrenee, ete. Larry and Don mentioned
that CBRAT has the entire list of invertebrate fauna from the entire eoast with distributional
information that might also be helpful to the ADBC effort.

We eoneluded the meeting with Don Cadien’s report noting that SCAMIT Ed 8 was done and
posted to the website, and that the planning for Ed 9 was almost ready to start. The goal for Ed 9
is a July 1 “Publieation” date. The effort will likely inelude a lot of new information from Tony
Phillip’s work with John Ljubenkov’s enidarian eolleetion and images.

SEPTEMBER 30, 2013, DR. BUZ WILSON, ASELLOTE ISOPODS

Attendees: Don Cadien, Larry Lovell, Chase MeDonald (LACSD); Katie Beauehamp, Greg
Weleh, Paul Mattson, Ron Velarde, Andy Davenport, Tim Stebbins (CSD); Ken Sakamoto, Danny
Tang (OCSD); Dean Pasko (Private Consultant); Regina Wetzer, Adam Wall (NHMLAC); George
(Buz) Wilson (Australia Museum of Natural History, presenter).

Business:

The upeoming meetings (see the SCAMIT website) were briefly summarized, ineluding
diseussion of SCAMIT getting more involved in the Bight’ 13 trawl identifleations via a January
2014 Trawl FID meeting. The meeting will likely be driven by a Bight’13 Trawl Committee due
date.

Larry also summarized the Exeeutive Committee meeting, the minutes of whieh are ineluded in
this NL.

Some of the ageneies eneouraged members to wateh for upeoming job openings that will be
posted to the website.

8

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Tim Stebbins then introduced Dr. George (Buz) Wilson for the presentation on asellote
isopods. Buz distributed several hand-outs for the meeting, all of whieh are available at the
SCAMIT website under the Taxonomie Toolbox: Speeies Listing of Munnopsidae listed in
Osborn (2009), Marine Asellotes from California and adjaeent regions. Key to the Superfamily
Janiroidea (Asellota), Anatomieal Glossary of Isopoda Asellota, and a handout ineluding the
presentation slide set: Isopod Crustaeeans Suborder Asellota Superfamily Janiroidea. Tim listed
several taxa that people had brought for later review.

Isopod Crustaceans Suborder Asellota Superfamily Janiroidea (presentation).

Buz’s presentation eovered a variety of topies ineluding Janiroidea diversity and morphology,
phylogenetie relationships among the taxa, eolleetion teehniques, what to expeet to find in
California, identifieation of asellotes and a survey of the eommon families, and a demonstration
of a Key to the Families using the interaetive DELTA INTKEY.

Buz started by saying that most Janiroidea speeimens ean be identified to speeies without
disseetion, at least for the purpose of pragmatie identifieation. All Janiroideans have a peeuliar
sperm transfer organ; a bent (genieulate) pleopod 2. Transfer oeeurs from pleopod 1 to 2 and
then to a mate. The pleopods are eovered by an opereulum eonsisting of 3 segments (male) or
one segment (female). Pleopod 2 of males is like a hypodermie needle, it ean be a long whip-like
thing or a erazy spiral.

Buz reviewed the known speeies riehness by families. Janiroideans are primarily deepwater
organisms, but there are likely many asellotes above 100 m that are simply unknown as of yet.
The highest asellote diversity is sampled below 100 m with a 0.3mm sereen. For example,
some of the most diverse families (e.g., Munnopsidae, Desmosomatidae, Haploniseidae,
Isehnomesidae, Janiridae, Munnidae, and Paramunnidae) oeeur almost exelusively in deep
water, or both deep and shallow shelf Buz’s speeialty is deep sea Munnopsidae, Paramunnidae,
Dendrotionidae, Desmosomatidae, Maerostylidae, and Isehnomesidae. He estimates a possible
diversity of 400,000 speeies in the deep sea if he were to extrapolate his data from the North
Paeifie to the area of the deep sea. In shallow waters, the Mieroparasellidae, Pleuroeopidae,
Munnidae, Santiidae, Janiridae, Joeropsidae, and diverse Paramunnidae predominate.

He maintains a list of isopods that ean be aeeessed via the Smithsonian Institution website:
http://invertebrates.si.edu/isopod/about.html. The list was transported to WoRMS but it is not
edited well. He reeommends eaution when using the WoRMS listing.

We then reviewed some of the interesting adaptations of deep sea isopods. Many of these
adaptations, sueh as body and leg type, are useful for separating families without disseetion.

Some of these inelude long legs to walk over substrate (Munnopsums: Munnopsidae), or a large
abdomen that infiates with water (Paropsurus: Munnopsidae).

Isopods have been around for a long time. The oldest known isopod fossil, Hesslerella, represents
a fairly derived isopod. An analysis of Janiroidean relationships suggests that deep sea taxa
derived from multiple aneestors, with the Janiridae likely being made up of multiple family
groups.

Asellotes ean be found in shallow marine habitats, on plants, or as epibiotes on sponges and
tunieates. They ean be sueeessfully eolleeted by divers, espeeially on algae, and bueket washes
of roeks and eobbles ean produee many speeimens that are not easily seen otherwise. In general.

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

asellotes tend to be highly abundant on their prefered habitat. So if one ean get to the eorreet
substrate, the eolleetion of quality speeimens is fairly eertain in shallow waters. On the other
hand, the sueeess rate ehanges when sampling from abyssal habitats via box eores. Sueeessful
sampling in the deep sea is limited to only a few families (Isehnomesidae, Nannoniseidae,
Desmosomatidae, Haploniseidae, Maerostylidae, and Munnopsidae).

When preserving speeimens for analysis, sodium biearbonate seems to work best for buffering
to reduee the aeidity of formalin, whereas sodium borate ean maeerate material, espeeially if its
eoneentration is too high. Pure ethanol and eold storage works great for genetie work, but makes
speeimens brittle. Adding glyeerin helps keep tissues more pliable and minimizes brittleness. Buz
found that 85-95% ethanol and 5% glyeerin worked well for nearly all groups, and DNA ean still
be reeovered.

In general, one doesn’t have to disseet Janioideans. Many ean be elassified by leg morphology,
and even when legs are lost one ean use the basis as a proxy of leg size/robustness. Munnopsids
ean be plaeed into genus by eharaeteristies of the head. Unfortunately, many speeies were
deseribed by taxonomists with little asellote experienee, so taxonomie eharaeters are not well
illustrated.

Some of the more important eharaeters are summarized below. (See examples on slides 17 - 25 of
Buz’s presentation)

• The frontal margin of the head is important taxonomieally. The presenee of a rostrum
- projeetion of dorsal surfaee of head - is distinet from a frontal projeetion or
“pseudorostrum” whieh emanates from below the dorsal margin and may or may not
projeet anteriorly.

• The antennulae and their direetion of attaehment, as well as the distanee between
antennulae, is of value. The basal artiele of antennulae and direetion of emergenee from
head anteriorly, dorsally, or antero-dorsally is also important.

• The antennae and whether or not they are genieulate (knee-like, bent) is helpful. In
Paramunnidae, artiele 1 is diffieult to see, whereas artiele 3 is enlarged, and artiele 4 is
genieulate. The Janiridae have no bend (i.e., not genieulate); whereas the Joeropsididae
have genieulate antennae with a large 5th artiele against whieh distal artieles ean nest.
Haploniseidae have a slightly genieulate juneture, but have a large dorsally direeted
spine.

• The relative size of the distal three artieles (earpus, propodus, daetylus) of pereopod 1
(thoraeopod 2), setation, spination, ete. is helpful. Asellidae, Stentriidae, Pseudojaniridae
show primitive form with a large and prehensile propodus-daetyl and small triangular

or quadrate earpus. In Munnidae and Janiridae by eontrast, the earpus has beeome quite
enlarged, representing more advaneed eonditions, and the grasping portion beeomes the
link between earpus-propodus rather than propodus-daetyl.

• The daetylar elaws require a eompound seope to view, but provide good elues. Note the
presenee and shape of sensillae (small, elongate modified seta(e) between elaws). The
presenee of a 3rd elaw, derived from spine-like seta of the Stenetriidae, is indieative of
Janiridae.

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

• The position of coxae and how they fit into the body (i.e., do they fit "into" the body; can
you see them in dorsal view, ventral view only) and setation. Deep sea isopods tend to
have a narrow, elongate 4th pereonite with an anteriorly positioned coxa vs. the wider,
narrower pereonite IV and a centrally positioned coxa of shallow species.

• The mouthparts, particularly the mandibular palp, which is lost differentially within
families and genera. Its presence/absence can be used to narrow species search. The size
of the mandible can also separate groups.

• The pleotelson shape, dimensions, and margin structure.

• The uropod shapes and relative sizes. If the uropods are broken off, it typically means
that they are large and elongate, so don't try to place the specimen in a family that has
small uropods, for example the Munnidae.

Buz then reviewed some of the more co mm on eastern Pacific families and their representatives.
He recommended that local workers consult the multivolume monograph by Kussakin (1979,
1982, 1988, 1999, 2003), which covers North Pacific species. All these volumes are available
on-line at the Los Angeles Co. Museum Crustacea section webpage (http://research.nhm.org/
publications/). Within the Janiridae, Janiralata is common in Eastern Pacific waters. It is a
shallow-water group with sexual dimorphism of pereopod 1, and characteristic notches in the
coxae. The male pleopod can be helpful. All described NEP Janiralata are covered by Kussakin
(1988). Several additional provisional species are described in Wilson (1997). laniropsis, another
common taxa, has a large male maxilliped, and uropods are typically biramus, large, and easily
visible; the rami are in the same plane, and the anntenna and annula are positioned pointing
forward (primitive status). Adult male members of the genus Caprias have enormous carpus of
pereopod 1. Several Janirids listed in the world list are probably not among the Janirid clade:
Ectias, Caecianiropsis, Microjanira, for example.

In species of Joeropsis, pigmentation can be helpful as a quick visual cue for grouping specimens
for identification, especially when dealing with high numbers of individuals. In general,
Joeropsids have geniculate antennae and conjoined fiagellar articles, and most of the legs are
maintained upon collection. Their legs, antennae, and (often) hooked uropods are all valuable
taxonomic characters. Representatives of Joeropsis and Rugojoeropsis noted for the distal hooks
present on the uropods, and Scaphojoeropsis with its anterolateral projections medially between
antennae, will likely not be encountered in the SCB.

The Acanthaspidiidae have elongate biramous uropods that distinguish them from Janiralata.
Acanthaspids represent a transitional group between shallow and deep water. They have lappets
(which resemble coxae, but are actually projections of the tergites) on pereonites that are long
pointed lateral projections, and the first pereopod appears to be a walking leg.

The Janirellidae are deep sea species that often have large bodies. They have large antennae and
highly variable lateral lappets of the pereonites. All have broad heads with projecting lateral
margins, tiny uropods, and grasping, pre-hensile pereopod 1.

The Munnidae are common in the SCB. They tend to live on hard substrates, as well as sponges,
plants, and soft substrate. They have long legs, large pedunculate eyes, and operculate male
pleopod 1. Munnids and Paramunnids are quite similar and both are present in SCB samples.

11

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Muimids have the anus direeted posteriorly, towards the baek of the pleotelson where it is
eovered. The anus is ventral in Paramunnidae. Paramunnidae have pereopods VI and Vll stieking
out laterally vs. Munnidae, whieh have them direeted posteriorly due to eompressed pereonites VI
and Vll. Among the eommon Munnids, two genera, Munna and Uromunna, ean be separated by
their respeetive presenee or absenee of a mandibular palp, for the most part (exeeptions oeeur!).

We broke for luneh during whieh we had a vigorous diseussion about Munnogonium tillerae
(speeifieally from San Diego) vs. M. erratum (from off Palos Verdes) vs. M. waldronense. Buz
eonvineed us all that they are distinet and therefore the SCAMIT Ed 8 listing synonymizing the
three is ineorreet. [Buz subsequently explained that he has started work on this suite of taxa. Stay
tuned.]

After luneh Buz eontinued his summary of the major families, starting with the hard substrate
Santiidae (Syn = Antiasidae). Representatives of this taxon have a propodo-earpoehelate
pereopod 1 distinetly different from pereopods 11 - Vll, straight antennae, and unexposed anus,
and large, biramus uropods. The peduneulate eyes, short antennula that is typieally shorter than
the head is wide, and setose dorsum, also help distinguish this group.

Paramunnids are a speeiose group that inelude some of our eommon taxa {Munnogonium tillerae
and Pleurogonium californiense). In this group, pereopod 1 is fundamentally propodus-earpus-
daetyl ehelate, and the male first pereonite is enlarged - Buz likened them to having “football
player shoulders.” Paramunnid speeies are distinguished by spine/projeetion pattern of body,
serrations of telson, and proportions of the pereonites.

The Dendrotionidae are transitional to deep sea. The genus Dendrotion eontains eyeless, long-
legged speeies whose antennae are on stalks, but the uropodal endopod is highly redueed.
Acanthomunna tannerensis is the SCB speeies found by the City of San Diego staff and has huge
biramous uropods that are generally lost during sampling.

The Haplomunnidae are deep sea taxa related to the Dendrotionidae, that are rare in most areas.
They are a heavy-bodied lot, so that they are often eolleeted with the body fully intaet. The
uropods are tiny! Haplomunna sp has been reeorded in the SCB, but it is too deep for the typieal
oeean monitoring programs that make up the SCAMIT speeies list.

The Pleuroeopidae is a monotypie family, represented in southern California by Pleurocope sp
A. They are an interesting taxon; the uropods are dorsomedial and loeated proximally on the
pleotelson, the pereonites have lateral projeetions with paired setae, the body also has several
long dorsal setae, while the eyes are situated on long, laterally projeeting peduneles.

The Munnopsidae are good swimmers with paddle-like pereopods. Five speeies are represented in
SCAMIT Ed 8 and most ean be separated by head eharaeters alone, sueh as the relative size and
projeetion of the rostrum in Eurycope.

Nannoniseidae is another deep sea family that is not often found in our SCB samples. The
antennule and biramous uropods are typieally short, and the head has a projeeting frons with
eephalie keels present laterally alongside the projeeting frons. All eoxae are ventral and eoxa Vll
is rotated inwards.

Desmosomatidae are also deep water, but may be found as shallow as 90 m. Two speeies
are represented in SCAMIT Ed 8 {Momedosa symmetrica and Prochelator sp A). They have

12

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

uniramous uropods and powerful anterior limbs with robust setae that are used for burrowing. The
genus Desmosoma has a small first pereonite but is not taken loeally. Reported loeal members
have been realloeated to other genera.

Isehnomesidae are a deep sea family reeognizable by their elongate pereonites IV - V, but
espeeially pereonite V. Some genera have lost pereonite Vll entirely.

The Haploniseidae have legs that are all similar and generally have the appearanee of true
“isopods”, or pillbugs. They have a large spine on the 3rd artiele of the antenna, the details of
whieh ean be used to identify speeies. Suture lines of posterior pereonites are visible, but the
pereonites are aetually funetionally fused.

The deep sea Maerostylidae have a large stylet-like, stiff uropod, and a large sternal spine on
pereonite 1 behind the maxilliped. The isehium of pereopod 111 is diagnostie for the family and
speeies. The Family is under revision by Torben Riehl.

Buz also briefiy diseussed a new family being deseribed in Riehl et al. (in press). They look a
little like members of the Maerostylidae, but differ in struetures of telson and uropods, but have
mandibles that are virtually identieal.

Next Buz diseussed DELTA and ran through an example of DELTA using IntKey. Using
laniropsis as an example, the group seleeted eharaeter states for eyes (presenee/absenee),
head margin (projeeting/not), ete. It took nine eharaeter states to get to family Janiridae. Buz
mentioned that you ean also get distanee matrix, and develop interaetive keys via IntKey.

DELTA has not been re-eompiled for over 13 years, so there are some problems with the site,
but it remains a useful tool. Open-souree DELTA is available for all platforms, but also has
some problems. Use of Buz’s key requires that you know it is an Asellote beeause there is no
hierarehieal key in DELTA.

After a short break we jumped into specimen reviews:

Matt brought representatives of Desmosomatidae from the Mediterranean. They were probably
Mirabilicoxa speeies. We reviewed and eonfirmed the City of San Diego’s speeimen of
Pleurocope sp A SCAMIT 2012, whieh is likely to be the same as Buz’s speeies.

Dean brought a speeimen of Munnogonium tillerae that was eonfirmed, thankfully!

Tim Stebbins brought speeimens of Belonectes and Eurycope from Bight’ 13. We initially thought
Tim had a male of Eurycope californiensis but we found differenees in the shape of the rostrum
(truneate in present speeimen(s) vs. rounded in E. californiensis). The speeimen(s) seemed more
similar to E. complanata eomplx from the Atlantie (See eomment Wilson 1997). In all likelihood,
Tim’s speeimens probably represent a new speeies beeause of the truneate rostrum and length
of basal antennal artiele, whieh exeeeds lateral projeetions, and length of artiele 2 is longer than
in E. californiensis. The speeimens were from 850 m off San Diego, the same depth range as E.
californiensis.

The Belonectes sp. is also likely a new speeies due to do the different uropodal endopod whieh
is long, the shape of the keel of the opereulum whieh was sinuous and projeets forward with
an aeuminate eomer, and the more dentieulate head and anterior pereonites. In addition, the
pereopod basis and antenna seemed longer.

13

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Caecianiropsis sp A specimens from LACSD and CSD were reviewed and confirmed as being
distinct from C. psammophila. [Buz subsequently reported that his review of Caecianiropsis
specimens from the NHMLAC suggest at least three species present in their collections.]

llyarachna profunda from Stebbins Bight’ 13 was compared to I. acarina from Pasko Bight’03
(334 m off SCB). Dean’s acarina” may be different. It has pedestal setae, but several
subtleties seemed to distinguish it. For example, the shape of the pleotelson was similar to
illustrations of /. profunda (not I. acarina), but pedestal setae were fewer and smaller. We
considered whether or not this difference may be a size-related issue since we were dealing with
a juvenile female. In addition, the lateral margins of pereopods V - Vll were of different shape
with the anterolateral margin of pereopod V being rounded. Tim brought out other /. acarina
specimens from 260+/- m from San Diego Regional station 8038 collected in 2010. Both were
determined to be different from true /. acarina due to the lack of regular setae between pedestal
setae, relative to specimens from San Diego Regional station 2147 (1997, 638 ft), which did have
both setal types. Buz confirmed these differences, but none of us were sure what to do about them
since we could not be sure if any of this variability was associated with development or gender.

Dean pulled a specimen of Janiralata sp B from Bight’03 for review. It was also confirmed.

Don brought out several specimens of Microcharon sp A collected off Catalina Island that were
confirmed.

A specimen identified as Munnogonium tillerae from 1372 m off Oregon prompted a strong
“NO” from Buz, since this was way too deep and too far north for this species. His examination
confirmed this was a new Munnogonium distinguished by, among other things, elongate
abdominal somites and pleotelson.

OCTOBER 13, 2013, DRS. CARRERETTE, CARVALHO, HALANYCH, AND STEIN,
NHMLAC, POLYCHAETES AND DNA BARCODING

Attendees: Ron Velarde, Kathy Langan, Veronica Rodriguez (City of San Diego); Larry Lovell
(LACSD); Victoria Gray, Lindsay Fitzgerald, Tania Asef (Endemic Environmental Services);
Emmanuel Riclet (CEA-EMD); Ernie Ruckman, Kelvin Barwick, Rob Gamber (OCSD);

Terrance Champieux, Christine Whitcraft, Jessica Eee (CSUEB); Eeslie Harris (NHMLAC);

Dean Pasko, Tony Phillips (DCE); Russell Carvalho (Texas A&M, presenter); Orlemir Carrerette
(Universidad Sao Paulo, Brazil, presenter); Ken Halanych (Auburn University, presenter); Eric
Stein (presenter), David Gillett (SCCWRP).

Business:

The upcoming meetings (see the SCAMIT website) were briefiy summarized [again!]. Most of
the 2014 meetings will likely focus on Bight’ 13 taxonomic issues.

Earry also noted that there are many members who have still not paid their 2013 membership
dues, and some are several years behind. SCAMIT will soon drop from the email listing and
general discussion list server those members who do not pay their requested dues.

Orlemir Carrerette (Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil)

Leslie Harris introduced Orlemir Carrerette, PhD. student of Dr Joao Nogueira from
Universidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil. Orlemir started out describing his work on the diversity
of p^chaetes occurring in the intertidal zone of sandstone reefs off the states of Paraiba and

14

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Pernambuco, northeastern Brazil, with a special focus on Terebelliformia and Sabellidae.
Collections were made at low tide from reefs off fifteen beaches along these states. Algae,
sponges, ascidians, and other organisms from mussel beds and similar substrates were scrapped
from the rocks then examined under stereomicroscope. Polychaetes were removed from the
samples, relaxed in menthol solution, preserved in 10% formalin solution and later rinsed in fresh
water and transferred to 70% ethanol. He found -5,000 specimens distributed among 13 genera
and 22 species of terebelliforms and 8 genera and 13 species of sabellids. 23 of the total species
found are new to science.

After a short and general explanation of his work, Orlemir presented an amazing animated slide
show on some of the important morphological characters of the family Polycirridae.

The Polycirridae are a well-known group of polychaetes characterized by the absence of
branchiae, presence of a circular upper lip, at least two types of buccal tentacles, and segment
2 distinctly narrower than following segments, constricting the body posterior to the mouth and
separating the body into ‘head’ and ‘trunk’ regions. The trunk is further divided into an anterior
part with paired ventro-lateral glandular pads, frequently densely papillated, with pairs separated
by a mid-ventral groove extending posteriorly from segments 2-3, and a posterior region which
only has neuropodia or is achaetous.

Polycirridae contains six genera: Amaeana Hartman, 1959; Biremis Polloni, Rowe and Teal,

1973; EnoplobranchusWobster, 1^79; Hauchiella LQyinsQn, 1893; Zy^/7/a Malmgren, 1866; and
Polycirrus GmhQ, 1850.

The most important characters used in the taxonomy of the group are:

• Anterior end characters of prostomium and peristomium - Location of prostomium;

Shape of distal part of prostomium; Prostomial buccal tentacles; Peristomial palps; Shape
of both upper and lower lips

• Anterior segments - Glandular ventral surfaces; Paired glandular pads; Nephridial/genital
papillae - number and placement

• Notopodia - Number of pairs of notopodia; Notopodia shape; Digitiform expansion on
post-chaetal lobes; Notochaetal characters

• Neuropodia - Start of neuropodia relative to notopodia; Neurochaetae

• Pygidium - Smooth or papillate

Orlemir’s presentation generated a discussion on the difficulty of identifying species of
polycirrids, mainly due to loss of the anterior region of body and regeneration in most specimens
collected. Also there was another discussion about tube-building by some species of Polycirridae.
Although most of the publications on polycirrids consider that members of this family do not
produce tubes, it is possible to find some individuals inhabiting tubes, probably tubes produced by
other species of polychaetes. Leslie commented that at least one undescribed west coast species
preferentially lives in old isopod-burrows in Macrocystis holdfasts. Kelvin Barwick and others
mentioned that another local species was almost always found in soft sediment tubes and would
rapidly rebuild their tubes when placed in petri dishes with sediment.

Larry introduced Dr. Russell Carvallo, student of Dr Anja Shultze and recent PhD candidate
from Texas A&M. Russell started out describing his work at Texas A&M. He worked on the

15

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Deep Gulf of Mexieo Benthos (DGoMB) program maerofauna and analysis, with a speeial
foeus on faetors affeeting maero faunal polyehaete eommunities in the deep Gulf of Mexieo.

He looked for variation in the funetional diversity of the benthos, sinee funetional diversity
plays a key role in eommunity strueture and speeies diversity. The DGoMB eolleeted sediment
and water samples from 51 stations from 200 m to 3700 m using a box eorer. Russell used the
feeding guild eategories from Fauehald and Jumars (1979) to eharaeterize the polyehaetes into
funetional group and test two hypotheses: (1) Distinet speeies eommunities would be eonstrueted
of distinet feeding guilds; and (2) The level of food supply would manifest as differenees of
guild strueture. Russell eharaeterized 17,881 speeimens and 532 speeies into 16 guilds. He found
three distinet groups using speeies eomposition and the number of guilds deelined sharply with
depth. Interestingly, he did not find a parabolie diversity eurve with mid-depth-max (MDM) using
speeies eompositions, but did find an MDM using the feeding guild analysis. Russell believes that
funetional diversity may show the same MDM in other oeeans but a large data set is required to
perform the analysis.

Russell’s presentation generated a niee diseussion during whieh other tid-bits of interesting
information eame forward. Russell found no strong eorrelation between speeies diversity and
guild diversity, however guild diversity was a good estimator of funetional redundaney. As found
by many of us who have looked at sueh things before, “depth” showed the highest eorrelation
with diversity; but diversity was also highest at mid-depth where the diversity of habitat strueture
was greatest.

There was some additional diseussion about whether or not eategorizing speeies into feeding
guilds is legitimate. Russell explained that the proeess was laborious. He went through a fair
amount of trouble to expand upon Fauehald and Jumars by emailing various experts for speeies-
speeifie information whenever eategorization of a taxon wasn’t known or multiple feeding
modes were possible. Sinee the data set was so large, he felt that issues of uneertainty or slight
mis-eategorization were likely to be drowned out by sheer seope. David Gillett suggested using
"interfaee" feeders for those taxa that show multiple feeding types. Overall, however, Russell
felt that Fauehald and Jumars (1979) provides a good breakdown of speeies and guilds and that
by determining the number of speeies that form a feeding guild, we ean estimate the degree of
funetional redundaney that may be important to eeosystem resilieney. He strongly feels that
the analysis of feeding guilds provides insight into food sourees for polyehaetes and other
interaetions with their environment (e.g. burrowing, bioturbation). Additionally, feeding guild
diversity ean be used as a proxy for eeosystem funetion when assessing the impaet of natural and
anthropogenie disturbanees on benthie eommunities. Russell’s work has been published in the
researeh journal Deep-Sea Researeh 1 (Carvalho, et al. 2013).

Dr. Ken Halanych next spoke about Morphology, Genes, and Taxonomy Collaborative
Possibilities. WormNetll is a projeet dedieated primarily to the evolutionary development of
polyehaetes and is in year 2 of its 5-year $3 million grant funding. The Projeet poses several
questions: What is the phylogeny of Annelida? Whieh lineages are basal? It aims to generate a
database of 2000 annelid transeriptomes, ineluding analysis of 10 nuelear loei for >400 annelids;
eoordinate eommunity-wide programs that will faeilitate researeh in reeent annelid evolution and
eeology; and provide resourees to all levels of annelid researeh.

The effort to look deep into annelid phylogeny via the use of transeriptomes is a eollaborative
work. Anja Shulze and Andy Anderson are tasked with the Community Sequeneing Effort
(outreaeh) in order to resolve phylogeny among elosely related annelid taxa. The initial findings

16

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

suggest that magelonids and oweniids are falling out at the base, along with ehaetopterids. They
are foeusing on mitoehondrial markers beeause they are easy to use.

They have already data based a large number of speeimens and their genetie information. Ken
provided the following examples of researeh topies that benefited from WormNetll projeets.

• Investigations into and resolution of speeies eomplexes . Neanthes acuminata
(Nereididae) - This is a large speeies eomplex that has been used historieally in various
toxieologieal studies beginning with Dr. Reish in the early 1970’s. Using morphologieal
data informed by genetie data Andy Anderson’s group found that N. acuminata represents
up to five separate taxa (work in progress). The morphology results indieate that eye eolor
may distinguish two SCB taxa.

• Researeh into speeies boundaries . Hermodice carunculata (an amphinomid). - Ahrens
et al. (2013) have used data from H. carunculata to investigate speeies boundaries.

Eight speeies were synonymized under the name H. carunculata, but one Mediterranean
speeies was subsequently re-instated. Ahrens et al. (2013) found very little COl diversity;
although the Mediterranean speeies did eome out as being different, it also eo-oeeurred
with other groups. The results suggested that H. carunculata is one taxon with a wide
distribution aeross the Atlantie.

• Genetie variability and reproduetive strategies . Boccardiaproboscidea (Spionidae) -
Oyarzun et al (2011) looked at reproduetive variation in this poeeilogonous speeies
eompared to geographie distribution. They examined B. proboscidea speeimens eolleeted
from Mexieo to northern Washington that showed some morphologieal differenees and
erossed known biogeographie breaks (e.g.. Point Coneeption). Results from analyses of
eytoehrome b and 16S rDNA did not show distinet taxa. Though there were some genetie
differenees between populations by geographie region the differenees supported the
natural variability in reproduetion of B. proboscidea.

• Invasive speeies. - Simon et al (2009) looked at impaets of B. proboscidea on Afriean
abalone aquaeulture. When Simon et al looked at speeimens of B. proboscidea found in
South Afriean abalone farms, they found that the worms had originated from southern
California, most likely the result of oyster imports.

• Cryptie speeies/umeeognized speeies. Diopatra (Onuphidae) - Berke et al (2010) found
an undeseribed speeies of Diopatra mistaken for D. neapolitana while investigating
Diopatra range shifts in western Europe. It was later deseribed as Diopatra biscayensis
Fauehald, Berke & Woodin (2012).

• Determining taxonomie eharaeters . Eunieidae - Zanol, Halanyeh, and Fauehald (2013)
first used phylogenetie analysis to establish monophyletie groups as well as the utility
of both traditional and new physieal eharaeters, and were able to demonstrate whieh
eharaeters were the most useful for taxonomy.

After the eonelusion of Ken’s wonderful examples demonstrating the exeellent use of genetie
work, we dove into many interesting diseussions about how SCAMIT members and SCAMIT
member ageneies eould eollaborate with WormNetll. SCAMIT members ean provide the
taxonomie expertise to resolve poor taxonomy, but many members (at least those present) work
for government ageneies that for a variety of reasons eannot release the resourees to support the
neeessary work (eolleetion, identifieation, storage, transport of speeimens, and eost of supplies).
Regina Wetzer reiterated the idea that if the ageneies eould partieipate in the eolleetion of

17

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

representative samples fixed in 95% EtOH the museum eould hold them for eventual use by staff
or visiting researehers. The issue is gathering the bulk samples, then figuring out the proeessing
that would eome later. Larry mentioned that SCAMIT member ageneies are already working
with SCCWRP to resolve different fixation teehniques (sueh as short-term formalin exposure
before transfer to 95% EtOH versus initial preservation in 95% EtOH) and argued that even the
eolleetion of speeial samples remains an issue beeause just maintaining the EtOH-preserved
speeimens takes time and resourees. Another problem is that soft bodied ereatures sueh as worms
need speeial handling during fixation to maintain their shape. Polyehaetes eoming out of bulk-
fixed 95% samples are typieally too eontorted and shrunken to be easily identified and may not be
identifiable past genus or even family.

The group diseussed several different possible goals. Regina again expressed the museum’s
desire to simply eolleet bulk samples, an approaeh better suited to animals with exoskeletons
sueh as erustaeeans (her partieular speeialty). Ken would like SCAMIT to help find interesting
problems for eollaborative projeets. The various monitoring ageneies would be grateful for
help in speeies resolutions (e.g., Leptochelia, Cirratulidae, eryptie speeies). SCCWRP has an
interest in developing a store of eorreetly identified and vouehered representative speeimens with
genetie data. We also briefiy diseussed how the SCAMIT Newsletter and website eould be used
to eommunieate the need for and/or availability of material that needs taxonomists or money.

The ehallenge of WormNetll (or similar projeets) reaehing out to members of SCAMIT (or other
eonsultants) is that grant money is generally restrieted to in-house use, and it is often diffieult
to bring in outside experts after the faet. Even if the money eould be written into a grant, the
question still eomes down to why is this taxon in southern California more important than others.

After a break for luneh. Dr Eric Stein shared information about SCCWRP’s research
interests in the use of DNABareoding as a tool for Marine and Freshwater Bioassessment. They
are looking at Mitoehondrial COl (eytoehrome oxidase) gene as a marker. It is not exeellent, but
it represents a good start. SCCWRP has teamed with BOLD to establish a referenee library of
vouehered speeimens with eorresponding genetie information. However, even when eomplete,
there remains the question, “How do we move from researeh to routine bioassessment?”

Currently, the investigations foeus on developing standard methods (preservation, referenee
library, effieaey of moleeular approaehes, test performanee indiees, standardization of speeies
delimitations). Freshwater investigations have provided some good results with 20% variability.
SCCWRP eurrently has a suite of marine samples fixed with 95% EtOH with 5% glyeerin,

95% EtOH with 15% glyeerin, and straight 95% EtOH. The samples have been sorted and
identifieations are in progress. The question is whether we ean find a fixation/preservation method
that works for both monitoring and DNA assessment.

SCCWRP is also building referenee library through regional monitoring. In the freshwater
system there are eurrently 3,800 reeognized southern California taxa, but only 600 are aetually
used in the various indiees. Of those, 260 are registered in BOLD. In the marine environment,
4,400 speeies are reeognized in SCAMIT, and 1200 have been used in index development,
but only 180 speeies are housed in BOLD. Some of the goals are to aid in marine benthos
identifieations to potentially streamline the assessment proeess and to help resolve eosmopolitan
and eryptie speeies. For example, in their freshwater investigation of three stream types they
found an inerease in speeies riehness using genetie teehnique vs. morphologieal identifieation
(181 reeorded taxa vs. 101, respeetively). Part of this differenee is simply a matter of some taxa
being distinguishable to speeies by moleeular methods that are routinely left at genus or family
when using morphology-based taxonomy. The genetie data provided an inereased resolution of

18

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

differences between impacted and non-impacted sites relative to morphological data alone. In
the marine environment, SCCWRP has found that some indexes (e.g., BRI and AMBl) yield
similar results whether using a full data set of species and abundance or species presence/absence
alone. They are also developing new Bioinformatics tools (e.g., data queries to perform specific
analysis). The areas ripe for additional research include: finding additional genetic markers,
improved primers, next generation sequencing, methods for processing bulk samples, evaluation
of environmental DNA (surrounding contaminations), species delimitation, revised bioassessment
scoring tools, additional taxonomic groups, adequate vouchering, data management and analysis.

There was some follow-up discussion about the need to have a minimum amount of replication
of individuals (minimum of 10) representing each individual taxon. David Gillett raised the issue
of scoring the taxa for the test of the different preservation methods. How do you rate a sample
as a whole, and how do you rate the different taxa types (polychaetes in tubes vs. arthropods vs.
molluscs, etc.). We also delved into issues surrounding where to take this information moving
forward, and how does it get down to the taxonomy and resolutions. Concern was also expressed
about the huge need to curate the regional product. There are few freezers and ultra freezers on
the west cost to store the tissues and samples even if we were able to collect and analyze them.

LITERATURE - ASELLOTA

Kussakin, O. G. 1979. Morskye 1 solonovatovodnye ravnonogie rakoobrasnye (Isopoda)
cholodnix 1 umerennix vod sevemogo polushariya. Podotryd Flabellifera. Nauka,
Leningrad.

Kussakin, O. G. 1982. Morskye 1 solonovatovodnye ravnonogie rakoobrasnye (Isopoda)
cholodnix 1 umerennix vod sevemogo polushariya. Podotryadi Anthuridea,
Microcerberidea, Valvifera, Tyloidea. Nauka, Leningrad.

Kussakin, O. G. 1988. Morskye 1 solonovatovodnye ravnonogie rakoobrasnye (Isopoda)

cholodnix 1 umerennix vod sevemogo polushariya. Podotryad Asellota. Part 1. Cemeistva
Janiridae, Santidae, Dendrotionidae, Munnidae, Paramunnidae, Haplomunnidae,
Mesosignidae, Haploniscidae, Mictosomatidae, Ischnomesidae Nauka, Leningrad.

Kussakin, O. G. 1999. Morskye 1 solonovatovodnye ravnonogie rakoobrasnye (Isopoda)
cholodnix 1 umerennix vod sevemogo polushariya. Podotryad Asellota. Chast 2.
Semeistva Joeropsididae, Nannoniscidae, Desmosomatidae, Macrostylidae). Nauka, St.
Petersburg.

Kussakin, O. G. 2003. Morskye 1 solonovatovodnye ravnonogie rakoobrasnye (Isopoda)
cholodnix 1 umerennix vod sevemogo polushariya. Podotryad Asellota. Chast 3.
Semeistva Munnopsidae. “Nauka”, Leningradskoe otd-nie, St. Petersburg.

Osborn, K. J. 2009. Relationships within the Munnopsidae (Cmstacea, Isopoda, Asellota) based
on three genes. Zoologica Scripta 38: 617-635.

Riehl, T, G.D.F. Wilson, and M. Malyutina, (in press). Urstylidae - A new family of abyssal

isopods (Cmstacea: Asellota) and its phylogenetic implications. Zoological Journal of the
Linnean Society.

Wilson, G. D. F. 1997. The Suborder Asellota. pp. 59-109 in R. Wetzer, R. Bmsca and G. D. F.

Wilson (eds.). Taxonomic atlas of the benthic fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and western
Santa Barbara Channel. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara,
California, USA. [Note from Buz: do not use the key! It has errors.]

19

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

LITERATURE - OPISTHOBRANCH

Gibson, G. D. and F.S. Chia. 1989. “Description of a new species of Haminoea, Haminoea

callidegenita (Mollusca: Opisthobranchia), with a comparison with two other Haminoea
species found in the northeast Pacific.” Canadian Journal of Zoology 67: 914-922.

Goddard, J. H. R., M. C. Schaefer, C. Hoover, and A. Valdes. 2013. “Regional extinction of a
conspicuous dorid nudibranch (Mollusca: Gastropoda) in California.” Marine Biology.
VoL 160 (6): 1497-1510.

Goodheart, J. and A. Valdes. 2013. “Re-evaluation of the Doriopsilla areolata Bergh, 1880

(Mollusca: Opisthobranchia) subspecies complex in the eastern Atlantic Ocean and its
relationship to South African Doriopsilla miniata (Alder & Hancock, 1864) based on
molecular data.” Marine Biodiversity 43: 113-120.

Hanson, D., Y. Hirano, and A. Valdes. 2013. “Population genetics of Haminoea (Haloa) japonica
Pilsbry, 1895, a widespread non-indigenous sea slug (Mollusca: Opisthobranchia) in
North America and Europe.” Biological Invasions 15: 395^06.

Omelas-Gatdula, E., Y. Camacho-Garcia, M. Schrodl, V. Padula, Y. Hooker, T. M. Gosliner, and
A. Valdes. 2012. “Molecular systematics of the 'Navanax aenigmaticus' species complex
(Mollusca, Cephalaspidea): coming full circle.” Zoologica Scripta 41(4): 374-385.

Omelas-Gatdula, E., A. Dupont, and A. Valdes. 2011. “The tail tells the tale: taxonomy and
biogeography of some Atlantic Chelidonura (Gastropoda: Cephalaspidea: Aglajidae)
inferred from nuclear and mitochondrial gene data.” Zoological Journal of the Einnean
Society 163: 1077-1095.

Omelas-Gatdula, E. and A. Valdes. 2012. “Two cryptic and sympatric species of Philinopsis

(Cephalaspidea: Aglajidae) in the Bahamas distinguished using molecular and anatomical
data.” Journal ofMolluscan Studies 78: 313-320.

Ortea J., M. Caballer, E. Moro, and J. Espinosa. 2012 “Notas en Opistobranchia (Mollusca,

Gastropoda) 1. Sobre la validez de la especie Posterobranchus orbignyanus Rochebmne,
1881 (Cephalaspidea, Aglajidae)”. Revista 'de la Academia Canaria de Ciencias 23(3):
39^4. [Journal issue for 2011; published April 2012]

Stout, C.C., M. Pola, and A. Valdes. 2010. “Phylogenetic analysis of Dendronotus nudibranchs

with emphasis on Northeastern Pacific species.” Journal ofMolluscan Studies 76(3): 1-9.

Stout, C.C., N.G. Wilson, and A. Valdes. 2011. “Anew species of doop-SQa Dendronotus Alder &
Hancock (Mollusca: Nudibranchia) from California, with an expanded phylogeny of the
genus.” Invertebrate Systematics 25: 60-69.

Valdes, A. and J.A. Ortea Rato. 1997. “Review of the genus Doriopsilla Bergh, 1880
(Gastropoda: Nudibranchia) in the Atlantic Ocean.” Veliger 40(3): 240-254.

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

LITERATURE - POLYCHAETA

Ahrens, J.B., E. Borda, R. Barroso, RC. Paiva, A.M. Campbell, A. Wolf, M.M. Nugues, G.W.
Rouse, and A. Sehulze. 2013. The eurious ease of Hermodice carunculata (Annelida:
Amphinomidae): evidenee for genetie homogeneity throughout the Atlantie Oeean and
adjaeent basins. Moleeular Eeology. Vol. 22(8): 2280-91
Berke, S.K., A.R. Mahon, F.P. Eima, K.M. Halanyeh, D.S. Wethey, and S.A. Woodin. 2010.
Range shifts and speeies diversity in marine eeosystem engineers: patterns and
predietions for European sedimentary habitats. Global Eeology and Biogeography 19:

223-232.

Carvalho, R., C.E. Wei, G. Rowe, and A. Sehulze. 2013. Complex depth-related patterns in
taxonomie and fimetional diversity of polyehaetes in the Gulf of Mexieo. Deep Sea
Researeh Part 1: Oeeanographie Researeh Papers, v. 80, p. 66-77.

Fauehald, K., S.K. Berke, and S.A. Woodin. 2012. Diopatra (Onuphidae: Polyehaeta) from
intertidal sediments in southern Europe. Zootaxa 3395: 47-58.

Fauehald, K., and PA. Jumars. 1979. The diet of worms: a study of polyehaete feeding guilds.
Oeeanography and Marine Biology Annual Review. Vol. 17: 193-284

Oyarzun, F.X., A.R. Mahon, B.J. Swalla, and K.M. Halanyeh. 2011. Phylogeography and
reproduetive variation of the poeeilogonous polyehaete Boccardia proboscidea
(Annelida: Spionidae) along the West Coast of North Ameriea. Evolutionary
Development. Vol. 13(6): 489-503.

Simon, C.A., D.J. Thornhill, F. Oyarzun, and K.M. Halanyeh. 2009. Genetie similarity between
Boccardia proboscidea from Western North Ameriea and eultured abalone, Haliotis
midae, in South Afriea. Aquaeulture 294: 18-24.

Zanol, J., K.M. Halanyeh, and K. Fauehald. 2013. Reeoneiling taxonomy and phylogeny in
the bristleworm family Eunieidae (polyehaete, Annelida). Zoologiea Seripta. http://
onlinelibrary.wiley.eom/doi/10. Ill 1/zse. 12034/abstraet

21

Publication Date: 2 December 2013

September/October, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 2/3

Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: www.seamit.org

SCAMIT OFFICERS

If you need any other information eoneeming SCAMIT please feel free to eontaet any of the offieers at
their e-mail addresses:

President

Larry Lovell (310)830-2400X5613 llovell@laesd.org

Leslie Harris (213)763-3234 lharris@nhm.org

DeanPakso (858)395-2104 deanpasko@yahoo.eom

Laura Terriquez (714)593-7474 lterriquez@oesd.org

Viee-President

Seeretary

Treasurer

The SCAMIT newsletter is published every two months and is distributed freely to members in good
standing. Membership is $15 for an eleetronie eopy of the newsletter, available via the web site at
www.scamit.org, and $30 to reeeive a printed eopy via USPS. Institutional membership, whieh
ineludes a mailed printed eopy, is $60. All eorrespondenees ean be sent to the Seeretary at the email
address above or to:

SCAMIT

PO Box 50162

Long Beaeh, CA 90815

Southern
Cali fornia
Assocation of
Marine

I NVERTEBRATE

Taxonomists

November/December, 2013 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 32, No. 4

Paguristes bakeri inhabiting a shell fully covered by the sponge Suberites
and with an Ophiopholis bakeri for a neighbor.

Bight’13 Trawl Station 9287, 201.5 m
Photo by Greg Lyons, CLA-EMD

This Issue

APLACOPHORA, 8 NOVEMBER 2013, PAM NEUBERT, CSD.

BIGHT’ 13 TRAWE EIDS, ARTHROPODA, 18 NOV 2013, EACSD

CNIDARIA, 9 DECEMBER 2013, TONY PHIEEIPS, OCSD.

B’13 TRAWE EIDS, 16 DECEMBER 2013, OCSD.

BIBEIOGRAPHY.

SCAMIT OEEICERS.

,.2

,.7

10

17

19

22

The SCAMIT newsletter is not deemed to be a valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes.

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

APLACOPHORA, 8 NOVEMBER 2013, PAM NEUBERT, CSD

Attendees: Don Cadien, Larry Lovell (LACSD); Kelvin Barwick (OCSD); Wendy Enright,
Megan Lilly, Kathy Langan, Ron Velarde, Adriano Feit (CSD); Seth Jones (Marine Taxonomic
Services); N. Scott Rugh (Invertebrate Paleontologist); Pam Neubert (EcoAnalysts - Presenter),
Susan Kidwell (University of Chicago
- Presenter), Tony Phillips, Dean
Pasko (DCE).

Business:

Larry opened the meeting with his
usual announcement of upcoming
meetings. Tony Phillips took a minute to remind attendees that at his December 9th cnidaria
review meeting, he will be dealing with infauna species and will not be discussing trawl
specimens. Larry then reviewed all the upcoming B’ 13 trawl invertebrate review meetings which
are as follows: Monday, November 18th - Arthropods at LACSD’s marine biology lab in Carson.
Monday, December 16th - sponges, cnidarians, mollusks, urochordates, sipunculids (if needed),
echiurans, polychaetes, and ectoprocts at LACSD. Tuesday, January 7th - Wrap-up meeting
for any remaining specimens for further identihcation (FID) not previously addressed (except
Echinoderms) at LACSD.Wednesday, January 29th - Echinoderms (including assessment of all
Brisaster specimens) to be held at CSD. Many of the 2014 SCAMIT meetings will be dealing
with difficult species encountered during the processing of the Bight’ 13 samples. As of now there
are no meetings scheduled for 2014, but that will be changing soon. There was discussion of how
the meeting will handle trawl Brisaster identihcations and how will participants deal with the
large number of specimens to be identihed and the mixed lots likely expected. Megan anticipated
that the specimens will be segregated by depth and that the expectation of mixed lots may be
overblown.

The group also discussed use of Bight’ 13 list server, particularly that it should be used more
fully. Larry encouraged everyone to also use the list server to raise questions and issues early
in the process. Kelvin reminded everyone to “respond to all” when using the list server to keep
everyone in the loop. Responding to just the originator of the email can inadvertently prevent
other Bight’ 13 taxonomists from receiving important information. We also discussed the
potential of having meetings or workshops to which participants could bring the not-yet-funded
specialty taxa (i.e., Photis, Cirratulids, Oligochaetes). Everyone was reminded that Bight’ 13
taxonomists should separate these groups into separate vials within their sample vial (1/4 dram
would be hne), so that they could be easily pulled for the specialty taxonomy, should funds
become available, or for identihcation “workshops” early in the year.

The need to revisit Tellinids was also suggested, but there was no resolution as to who would
lead it, or when it might occur.

Finally, Larry summarized the status of the Taxonomic database tool. There is a beta version
housed on the SCCWRP website that is nearly ready to release. Larry is preparing documentation
to seek additional/continued support from SCCWRP and the major POTW agencies.

Additionally, SCAMIT will be hiring an intern to mine images from various computers, etc., to
populate the Database tool and clean-up existing vouchers and names in Taxonomic Toolbox.
Some of the clean-up will require the expertise of the local taxonomists and we may dedicate
portions of monthly meetings to address these issues.

2

UPCOMING MEETINGS

Visit the SCAMIT website at: www.scamit.org for the
latest upcoming meetings announcements.

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

Next Susan Kidwell of the University of Chicago presented a summary of her past decade of
work, “Putting the dead to work...” Susan was visiting Southern California to attend the CERF
conference and agreed to update SCAMIT on her recent work. Her visit to the CERF conference
involved introducing this community to the value of death assemblages for ecological analysis,
especially in settings with various kinds of human impacts. She has two new publications
providing an overview of her team’s hndings: “Time Averaging and Fidelity of Modern Death
Assemblages: Building a Foundation for Conservation Paleobiology,” published in Paleontology,
July 2013 (v56, p 487-522); and “Implications of time-averaged death assemblages for ecology
and conservation biology”, due out in November in the Annual Reviews of Ecology, Evolution,
and Systematics (v44). She will be happy to send you pdfs if you email her (skidwell@
uchicago.edu). Her team includes former post-doc Adam Tomasovych, who many of you have
probably met during previous visits to southern California (he is now back home at the Slovak
Institute of Geology), and new post-doc Jill Leonard-Pingel, a recent PhD out of Scripps.

Susan and her lab have been using the grunge (the shelly debris of benthic sediment samples
after all the “live” animals have been removed for taxonomic identihcation) from the monitoring
programs of the City of San Diego, Los Angeles County Sanitation District, Orange County
Sanitation District and from regional Bight programs. Death assemblages are “time-averaged”
accumulations of the skeletal remains of past generations of living organisms. If not too biased by
loss or too influenced by exotic input, they should provide insight into local historical ecological
conditions. Susan and her team have been using grunge samples from the 1975 BLM survey and
Bight’03 as well as recent agency samples from 2004 through 2012, generating species data from
dead mollusk assemblages to compare with living assemblages at the same sets of sites. They
use far-field reference sites to evaluate the fidelity of death assemblages under relatively natural
conditions, and use sets of samples along pollution gradients to evaluate the ability of dead shell
remains to detect historical change in ecological conditions.

The following is a brief summary from the wealth of information presented on some very
interesting research. Using radiocarbon-calibrated amino-acid racemization dating, Susan’s
lab can determine the absolute magnitude of time-averaging that these dead shell assemblages
represent. She presented Nuculana taphria shell-age distributions showing some specimens
from agency-sampled Southern California Bight (SCB) sediments to be 12,500 years old.

Overall, however, the time-averaged assemblages usually have a L-shaped shell-age frequency
distribution, with most shells being less than 100 years old. Another local species, Parvilucina
tenuisculpta, showed a much younger profile with most shells less than 50 years old. It was
interesting that both taxa had older average shell ages on the San Pedro shelf than on the other
shelves (e.g., off San Diego, Santa Barbara, Orange County). This might be a signal that living
populations there have been especially suppressed during the urban 20* century.

Susan then described her most recent sampling program in the SCB. Using insights into the
preservation quality of currently forming death assemblages, she was able to generate a successful
NSF grant application to evaluate how the reliability of shell assemblages might change with
progressive sedimentary burial, using sediment cores. This work would also give her and her team
a chance to reconstruct historical responses to urbanization in the marine environment, going
back before the Clean Water Act. Susan collected box and sediment cores using the R/V Melville
in September 2012 off Malibu (muddy sediments with no DDT), off the Palos Verdes Shelf and
LACSD outfall (muddy sediments with DDT contamination), and near the OCSD outfall (sandy
sediments without DDT). They are focusing first on a 50 m site along LACSD’s Line 10 where

3

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

cores have abundant shells. They use the bivalve portion of LACSD’s “live” data from 1972 to
2009 to create a prediction of what they should hnd down-core if the cores are effective recorders
of ecological history. In the live data, the bivalve community sampled in the 1970s and early
1980s exhibit high community stability, dominated by the indicator species P. tenuisculpta, a
signal of anthropogenic stress (steady high nutrients). Over the next several decades, the living
bivalve community has contained fewer Parvilucina and exhibited greater inter-annual variability
in species composition: you get greater instability with cleaner environments, and these samples
also had greater evenness among a larger number of functional groups. Their box cores collected
sediments ranging in age from 2009 to 1954 with each 2 cm representing 5 years, based on Lead-
210 age-dating by collaborator Clark Alexander. The core increments from the 1970s and early
1980s show a peak of Parvilucina, consistent with the known ecological history.

Moving beyond the known history since 1972, her comparative analysis showed that shell
assemblages from mid-to late 2000s were comparable to those of the 1950 increment. The core
thus recognizes that the PV shelf has changed remarkably from its highly degraded state when the
Clean Water Act started, and specihcally that its recovery has progressed to a state comparable at
least to the middle of the 20* century. She and her team are now processing samples from longer
vibracores at this PV site in order to get pre-outfall (1937) assemblage information and reach
several additional centuries into the pre-urban past.

Susan and her colleagues have gone through extraordinary efforts to rescue historical information
on living bivalve communities. For example, they have digitized 6000 pages of CSD data from
pre-and post-discharge samples, by quarter and station, collected between 1962 and 1984. In
addition, they have digitized the “live” Mollusca data from both the 1954-56 State Water Board
and the 1975 BLM surveys along the SCB. The 1975 BLM live data along with the dead data
they produced from the grunge of some of those samples is already available publicly at DRYAD
(www.datadryad.org), a non-proht organization and general purpose repository of data that
provides long-term storage of and access to ecological data used in publications. However, the
other historical data will require some taxonomic clean-up, and she hopes that SCAMIT may be
able to help in this effort. Larry mentioned that Shelly Moore of SCCWRP has built a tool based
on prior SCAMIT lists to take historical data sets and match old records to current SCAMIT
names.

Pam Neubert, Aplacophorans

Pam started with a little background on the Aplacophorans. The aplacophorans represent
a monophyletic group that is exclusively benthic and marine, occurring across all the
world’s oceans. All modern forms are shell-less and form two distinct clades, Solenogastres
(Neomeniomorpha) and Caudofoveata (Chaetodermatomorpha). There are currently thought to
be 18 families and 320 species but this is an underestimate given there are numerous undescribed
species. Aplacophorans are traditionally considered ancestral, but as is often the case, that idea is
not uniformly held. They have their greatest diversity at 1000 m or deeper.

Amelie Scheltema and Luitfried von Salvini-Plawen are the two dominant workers in the held.
Prof. Scheltema believes in the use of hard parts (spicules, radula) to distinguish taxa, whereas
Prof. Salvini-Plawen uses anatomical/histological character states. Prof. Scheltema believes they
are derived mollusks, whereas Prof. Salvini-Plawen suggests they are ancestral.

Aplacophorans have the following in common with the “typical” mollusc: Radula, mantle
cavity, aragonite spicules, but no shell. But are they monophyletic? Most recent evidence

4

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

suggests yes. Using genetic data, Kocot et al (2011) found that the Aculifera were monophyletic
(Chaetodermompha, Neomeniomorpha) and were sister taxa to the Monoplacophora. Sherholz et
al. (2013) looked at internal anatomy of monoplacophorans and neomeniomorphs and determined
that these two groups share developmental traits further supporting the concept of Aculifera. Once
they develop to adulthood, the shared traits are lost. Additionally for the hrst time Todt and Kocot
(in manuscript) have found brooding Neomeniomorpha.

Pam then reviewed some of her post-doc work on Spiomenia, which has capitate spicules and a
radula with denticles lateral to the radular buttress. Pam’s work as a post-doc investigated whether
Simrothiellidae was monophyletic but that Cavibelonia was not. Dimitry Ivanov shared with Pam
how to quickly distinguish four genera of prochaetodermatids. He provided four drawings that
demonstrated different patterns of the surface spicules and how they are aligned along the body
axis: Spathoderma have spicules that spiral outward from antero-ventro center; Prochaetoderma
have linearly arranged spicules lying longitudinally along the body axis; Claviderma have
obliquely arranged spicules angled from ventrum-to-dorsum towards the posterior; and
Chevroderma spicules are arranged in a diagonal chevron type pattern from anterior to posterior.

Having been updated on recent research on aplacophorans, we moved on to discuss the
practical aspects of sectioning them. Sectioning is important for new species descriptions and
provides useful insights as noted above regarding phytogeny. Prior to such invasive analysis,
however, information on the external features should be gathered, particularly the morphology
and arrangements of the aragonitic spicules that cover the body. These should be carefully
scraped off from several areas of the body including the margins of the pedal groove and the
mid dorsal area. If there are different types of spicules in different areas all should be gathered
and documented. Use of polarized light birefringence patterns can help describe these spicules
by providing information of their thickness and three-dimensional forms. Once the spicules
have been documented, the spicules and tissues need to be removed to allow for radular
dissection. Bleaching the specimens helps rid them of spicules; but maintains the radula.

Preparing aplacophorans for sectioning requires multiple steps. Pam showed histological slides
of Spiomenia from her post-doctoral work and discussed methods for preparing and drawing
aplacophorans, and reconstructing internal structure of whole organisms from the histological
sections. We also reviewed some of the permanent slides of these specimens, during which Pam
demonstrated the capitate spicules of Spiomenia. Spicules usually vary in different regions of the
body, and many Solenogastres have special modihed spicules, which tend to be located on the
postero-dorsal portion of the body.

We also saw examples of the copulatory apparatus, including spicules with hooked ends and
bifurcate tips. The morphology of the hook and general shape is diagnostic for different genera.
These types of copulatory spicules are present only in the Solenogastres.

We next looked at slides of radula structure. There was some discussion of the functioning of the
radula and how it works without large musculature attachments. Pam has seen specimens with
cnidarian nematocysts as well as sponge spicules in the gut.

We discussed the difficulty of aplacophoran identihcations, during which Pam congratulated
Kelvin and Don on their key, noting that she uses it all the time. However, there is still some
ambiguity regarding Chaetoderma pacificum vs. C. marinelli vs. Chaetoderma sp A, which
should be resolved with the discovery of additional specimens. With the various presentations
complete, we jumped into the examination of specimens for FID. Wendy had pulled CSD

5

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

specimens for review by Pam. Two specimens came from 676 m, station 9095 near Encinitas/
Carlsbad area, along the lower slope. The hrst specimen had a large fat oral shield or “lips”. We
performed a spicule preparation. There was some discussion of the preferred media for spicule
preparations - H20 (Pam) vs. EtOH (Kelvin) - but both preferred to get them from the same
area of the body by routine. The sample included two species, one denuded specimen originally
thought to C. pacificum based on general gestalt and the other was something different. Kelvin
removed the few remaining spicules from the denuded specimen and mounted them for view
via Nomarski polarization. These were long with a narrow base, almost parallel sided, but there
were not enough of them to identify the specimen. They then dissected spicules from the second
specimen, which had spicules over the entire body. After careful review by Pam, Kelvin, Wendy,
Tony, and Ron this specimen was determined to be Chaetoderma sp A SCAMIT 2005. As it
turns out. Station 9095 was just north of Station 4100 from which Chaetoderma sp A had been
originally collected. This was only the second specimen of this species found to date.

The second set of specimens came from off the South Bay Ocean Outfall (CSD), Station 9009,
648 m. Of the three specimens, two were
determined to be Falcidens hartmanae, while
the other was Chaetoderma hancocki.

Larry took this opportunity to segue into
SCAMIT’s Taxonomic Database Tool (DBT).

Kelvin and Don’s key to the chaeteodermatidae
is an excellent example of how the DBT could
be used. Each species is linked to the color
images of the specimens and their spicules. The
beta version of the DBT allows you to click
on a species, and pull up information on depth
range, phytogeny, distribution map, and, most
importantly, images. We’re all looking forward
to seeing how this tool develops.

Don then introduced a specimen from the Oregon slope that Pam thought might be interesting.

It was a member of the Neomeniomorpha, which is as far as Don was able to go with it:
Neomeniomorpha sp CS14, a.k.a. the plump C-shaped neomeniomorph. Pam dissected spicules
from the dorsal ridge, some of which turned out to be hollow, elongate, and spatulate (thinning
and distally curved). There was discussion about whether hollow spicules were specihc to
Philodoskepia. Kelvin, under guidance of Pam’s direction, then dissected out the radula, which
was hooked. Kelvin cleaned and mounted it revealing a bilateral radula with rows of broad-
based, closely packed denticulate bars. This made Pam speculate that it was in the family
Simrothiellidae, quite likely Kruppomenia sp, representing the hrst west coast record. Kelvin and
Wendy then brought back some beautiful images of the radula.

Don brought out another specimen from the same station. This specimen was full of grouped
spicules. It generated a lot of curiosity, but alas as the meeting was reaching the end of a long
day, interest dwindled. However, before packing up for the day, Pam and Don identihed this
second neomeniod from off Oregon as a possible Tegulaherpia sp, which would also be a new
geographic record for this genus.

Kruppomenia sp radula (ID Pam Neubert). Specimen
courtesy of Don Cadien:

Cascad.ia slope station EBS - 64 950m 05 july 1975
photo credit: Kelvin Barwick

6

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

BIGHT’13 TRAWL FIDs, ARTHROPODA, 18 NOV 2013, LACSD

Attendees: Larry Lovell, Chase McDonald, Cheryl Brantley, Don Cadien (LACSD); Kelvin
Barwick, Danny Tang, Ken Sakamoto (OCSD); Wendy Enright, Megan Lilly, Matt Nelson,

Maiko Kasuya, Ron Velarde (CSD); Kelly Tail (AMEC); Mark LeBlanc (NHMLAC); Wayne
Dossett (MBC); Emmanuel Riccet, Greg Lyon (CLAEMD); Jim Mann (ABC); Tony Phillips,
Dean Pasko (DCE); Emile Fesler (BioNeyda).

Business:

This was the hrst SCAMIT sponsored Bight Trawl identihcation meeting. There was some
discussion about the upcoming meetings, their meeting dates and locations. Please see the
SCAMIT website or read the General Membership emails for the latest developments. After some
discussion, the group decided to hold the January 2014 meeting to discuss Echinoderms at the
City of San Diego laboratory.

Specimen review:

Don began by asking what had been brought for further identihcation (FID).

• CLAEMD - Shrimp conhrmations; along with Paguristes bakeri, and Pachycheles pubescens

• MBC - One peneid shrimp

• AMEC - Several anomurans, shrimp, and brachyurans

• OCSD - Several samples of shrimp for verihcation

• CSD - Squat lobster (Munidopsis aspera) to show and tell, and, if time allows, incidentally

collected sergestid shrimps and mysids,

• ABC labs - A number of shrimp, brachyurans, and pycnogonids

Ron asked if anyone pulled Neocrangon recima/zacae from their trawls for hxation in 95% EtOH
for genetic analysis. Ethanol hxed specimens of both species were collected by CLAMED, CSD,
LACSD, and OCSD. Eric Pilgram of the EPA Cincinnati lab will be performing the genetic
analysis to resolve these co-occurring species.

We decided to take specimens in order of pycnogonids, brachyurans, anomurans, hnishing
with the more numerous shrimp. Larry suggested that we also discuss relevant literature
that laboratories should consider using in the held or in the laboratory to complete these
identihcations in the future.

Although the workshop was successful in hnalizing the identihcations of all of the specimens
brought to the meetings, not every identihcation was documented in detail. For the most part, the
Secretary took notes of specimens being identihed by D. Cadien while other taxonomists worked
at other microscopes available at other locations in the laboratory. During the latter part of the
day, R. Velarde conhrmed shrimp specimens from other laboratories to insure that all specimens
were completed before day’s end.

Pycnogonida

ABC brought a few specimens of Nymphon pixillae for identihcation. No other species of
pycnogonids were examined.

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

Anomura:

CLAEMD brought a beautiful specimen of Paguristes bakeri that had burrowed deeply into
a shell overgrown by the sponge Suberites. Greg had an excellent cross-section photo of the
specimen within the sponge (see cover photo). We discussed the application of a mechanism
for deciding whether the chelae are “very broad” or not. Dean had measured many specimens
(large and small) when working for the City of San Diego, and found that the width of chelae -
measured at the widest portion of propodus behind the dactyl - in P. bakeri is >75% of the length;
where as it is <66% in P. turgidus. In addition, Tony noted that the corneal spines of P. bakeri are
much less pronounced and less pointed than those in P. turgidus. The primary references for this
group is Janet Haig’s key updated by SCAMIT (J. Haig: A preliminary key to the hermit crabs of
California. AHF, Revised 14 February 1990) or Wicksten (2012).

ABC Labs brought another, smaller, P. bakeri housed in a Megasurcula shell. This specimen was
collected from the Santa Barbara Channel, and was verihed by D. Cadien.

CLAEMD also brought in a specimen of Munnidopsis aspera, from 466 m that was conhrmed.
The primary reference for this group is Cadien (1997: California Galatheids, D. Cadien,
CSDLAC, 10 December 1997) or Wicksten (2102). M. aspera differs fromM. depressus in
absence of a strongly upturned rostrum or ventro-lateral spines, and the presence of setose chelae.
Munnidopsis are easy to quickly separate from other galatheids by their “white” eyes. M. aspera
is an addition to the SCAMIT species list. It is not often collected due to preference for hard
bottom substrates; whereas M. depressa is thought to be associated with multi-armed seastars.
Ron then passed around their specimen of Munnida tenella (see photo in SCAMIT NL, Vol. 32,
No. 1).

We then reviewed a CLAEMD specimen of Pachycheles pubescens, which was conhrmed using
Wicksten’s key (2012). The specimen initially keyed to P holosericus, but is distinguished by the
presence of 7 telson plates vs. 5 in P holosericus.

Brachyura

We made a valiant effort to work our way through the Brachyurans before lunch. AMEC brought
a number of vials for review, most of which were immature Majoids (left in Majoidea). Nearly
all of these were very small (carapace diameter < 1cm), and although many looked like juvenile
Pyromaia, they were determined to be not reportable because they did not meet the criterion
of having a diameter of >1 cm. Only one or two specimens were considered countable by this
criterion, and then conhdently identihed as P. tuberculata. The primary identihcation aid for this
group remains Debbie Zmarzly’s Understanding Majid Crabs (we all need a little understanding)
an internal publication of the City of San Diego Lab that has been widely circulated among
SCAMIT member agencies, along with Wicksten (2012) and Garth (1958).

Kelly also had several specimens labeled as Lophopanopeus. Unfortunately, many of these
specimens were also < 1 cm and considered too small to identify. However, one station contained
several specimens that exceeded the 1 cm mark, and also retained their chelae. All keyed to L.
frontalis with the absence of several key characteristics: a large proximal tooth on the dactyl,
bilobed carpus of ambulatory legs, and granulate chelae. Don reviewed several other specimens
from other stations and all were conhrmed as L. frontalis based on one or more of the above
characters.

ABC brought a small, densely decorated Loxorhynchus that was determined to be L. grandis

8

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

by the presence of the two vertically stacked hepatic spines, relative to one in L. crispatus.
Wicksten (2012) conhrms the use of this character over the spread or deflexed nature of the
rostrum or use of the crab’s carapace decorations. Several other Majoidea samples brought for
review contained mixed batches of P. tuberculata and Podochela lobifrons. A different sample
contained a specimen decorated with an anemone {Urticina sp A, recognized by the uneven rows
of verrucae on the column) with a nearly 1 cm broad disc, and a large barnacle (Paraconcavus
pacificus). Although this specimen was relatively large, it could not be easily identihed because
the barnacle had completely overgrown the carapace along the posterior margin and obscured the
key characters; however, after some debate, the specimen was identihed as P. lobifrons.

P tuberculata was then conhrmed from another station.

The OCSD representatives brought a kelp crab collected from 78 m off northern San Diego
County. There was some debate over the identity of the specimen as it did not readily key using
Wicksten (2012). No one was sure if the difficulty was the result of the specimen (roughly 5
mm in carapace width) being an immature representative of a large taxon, or a poor specimen
of something smaller. The key in Wicksten and descriptions in Garth (1958) kept leading us
in the direction of Pugetia, but the specimen just didn’t ht any description or image correctly.
Eventually, recognizing that it was a male, we pulled the gonopods and, comparing these to
the hgures in Garth, Dean concluded that the specimen might represent an immature Chorilia
longipes (Plate P, Figure 4). However, the specimen did not show the extended rostral horns.
There was some debate that the gonopod also resembled that of P. producta (Plate L, Figure 2),
but again the carapace did not resemble the images or description. Alternatively, there was some
resemblance to the gonopod represented of P. richi in (Plate L, Figure 3), which everyone was
initially leaning towards based on the Wicksten’s key. In the end, the specimen and gonopods
were return to the OCSD staff with some conhdence that it belonged to the family Epialtidae,
but unsure of the specihc identihcation, with a blessing to decide for themselves given all the
information that had been discussed and debated.

Shrimps

Wayne (MBC) brought a specimen of Sicyonia from Station 8355 in the Harbor area that had
been collected with many S. penicillata, but the specimen just “looked different.” The key
literature for this group is Perez-Farfante (1985). The specimen was fairly small, relative to the
co-occurring adults, and had a broken rostrum. The dehning characters of the spination of the
rostrum, carapace, and abdomen were not developed to the point of allowing for a conhdent
identihcation. It had some characteristics of S. penicillata, but could not be verihed, although
better judgment suggested that it was probably the same as the other specimens from the same
trawl.

ABC brought several samples containing large numbers of crangonids. These were predominantly
mixed lots of N. zacaelresima, and one Neocrangon alaskensis from Station 9424 (63 m).

AMEC brought a Heptacarpus palpator conhrmed by R. Velarde, from Mission Bay, Station
8152, about 12 m, while a Metacrangon spinosissima from station 9431 was conhrmed. Station
9419 from 191 m contained a mixed bag of N. resima, N. zacae, and Heptacarpus tenuissimus.

CLAEMD received conhrmations from R. Velarde of H. stimpsoni (Stn 8318, in LA Harbor);
Lysmata californica (Stn 9319, SMB), Spirontocaris holmesi (Stn 9287, SMB), S. prionota (Stn
8322, LA Harbor).

9

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

CNIDARIA, 9 DECEMBER 2013, TONY PHILLIPS, OCSD

Attendees: Carol Paquette (MBC); Terra Petry, Larry Lovell (LACSD); Erica Jarvis, Rob
Gamber, Ken Sakamoto, Laura Terriquez, Kelvin Barwick (OCSD); Greg Lyon (CLA-EMD);
Megan Lilly, Nick Haring, Wendy Enright (CSD); Beth Horvath (SBMNH); Tony Phillips, Dean
Pasko (DCE)

Business:

The Jan 7th meeting will be follow-up from the December 16* B’ 13 Trawl meeting covering all
things not arthropod or echinoderm.

The January 29th meeting will cover trawl Echinoderms at CSD.

Larry put out a general request for 2014 meetings. Most will likely be Bight’ 13-related. Megan
suggested a meeting dealing with small sipunculids in grab samples and how to distinguish them
(e.g., Siphonosoma ingens vs. Sipunculus nudus); although the single topic may not be enough
for full meeting. Tony mentioned that he is getting Thysanocardia from Puget Sound that look
different externally.

This prompted additional discussion of potential Bight’ 13 meetings in a workshop format to
take some burden off the host. For example, one or more individuals could host the workshop
where Bight’ 13 taxonomists could bring their troubling specimens for further ID, resolution,
conhrmation, or just to inform others (e.g., provisional taxa demonstrations), without the host(s)
being burdened with creating large presentations.

Larry also reminded everyone to vial specialty taxonomy taxa (oligochaetes, cirratulids, Photis
spp) into separate vials and within jars by taxa. This effort will facilitate the identihcation of these
taxa should the funding come through in succeeding years.

Don Cadien will be divesting himself of a large portion of his literature collection. He intends to
donate it to SCAMIT members and SCAMIT so that it could be sold to raise money for SCAMIT.

Tony then began the presentation titled: Infaunal Anthozoa of the SCB, Big John’s Legacy.

Tony explained how he came about getting these samples when helping clean out John’s storage
and collection. During the clean-out and organizational effort, Tony found many of John’s
personal voucher specimens, including a number of provisional taxa that had not been clearly
documented. He added other donated specimens from Carol, Don, Dean, and his own collection
to compile this presentation. Tony also paid tribute to John’s work and the reliance we all had on
John such that many of us let this very difficult group go without giving it a lot of effort. [We all
owe Tony a big favor for spending many hours and hours photographing and documenting as well
as possible John’s legacy in this presentation. It was a Herculean effort!]

In going through John’s material and notebooks, and in his efforts to give himself a better
understanding of the subject, Tony found the following material of great value: The MMS Atlas,
Volume 3 has a lot of value including an excellent glossary and great species descriptions; Light’s
manual has an excellent key, but poor glossary; the British Anthozoa (Manuel 1981) is a great
resource for general family and generic descriptions and illustrations; and John’s notebook that
provided a great history of the evolution of his thinking on these taxa. He discussed the difficulty
of the soft internal characters used by Cnidarian specialists to identify specimens that has been
a stumbling block for us all (e.g., siphonoglyph; actinopharynx; primary, secondary, tertiary

10

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

mesenteries; acontia; etc.). Tony did not try to deal with the scleractinia but suggested Bythel
(1986) “Guide to the Living Corals”, and Cairns (1994) “Scleractinia of the Temperate North
Pacihc”. Carlgren (1949), the survey of the actiniara includes keys to all taxa but uses internal
characters that are often difficult to interpret or apply. Dehnitions of the various families and
genera can be found in Carlgren’s publication. Tony explained that he was not trying to provide
a workshop of “how to id the anthozoans” but wanted to provide us an opportunity to get on the
same page by providing images of material collected from the SCB. The presentation of images
followed the organization of SCAMIT Ed. 8, and using John’s identihcations and names as he
applied them; however, this was not intended to be an exhaustive review of all the taxa listed in
SCAMIT Ed 8, only a review of John’s collection. Some of those IDs were changed according
to collective discussions that took place during the meeting. An updated presentation will be
made available at the December 16 Trawl Review meeting. Tony also said that this is a “living”
presentation: As other species listed in Ed 8 or new species are identihed from Bight’ 13 samples,
he will photograph them and add them to this presentation.

Tony started with describing the list of taxa he would be covering. [Secretary’s clarihcation: in
the polyp phase of cnidarians, the proximal end is the basal end where the physa or pedal disc is
located, and the distal end is the mouth-tentacle end.]

Heterogorgia tortuosa - Beth Horvath looked at these in 2012 and initially believed them to be
something else (probably Leptogorgia). Tony followed Beth’s lead and went to literature and
found support for Beth’s claim that our Heterogorgia is probably not so. The species referred
to as H. tortuosa by members of SCAMIT actually has a calix with “flaps” that fold over the
polyps, which are characteristic of Leptogorgia. Real H. tortuosa have polyps placed irregularly
over the rachis, and are bright yellow. However, Beth clarified that the sclerite form of this
species was more true to Eugorgia. Beth will be describing this species as a Eugorgia sp nov
(not Leptogorgia). For now, SCAMIT members should continue to use Heterogorgia tortuosa to
reference this white gorgonian with alternating polyps arranged opposite each other, and with slits
that fold over the polyps because Bight’ 13 identifications are to be based on the SCAMIT Edition
8 listing.

Tony then showed Thesea sp B with polyps placed randomly around stalk, colored gray to
yellow-white and calyx with 8 lobes surrounding opening of polyp. Eugorgia, Eiligorgia and
Thesea all have eight lobes. The ensuing discussion of Thesea sp A (stalk is white) vs Thesea sp
B, concluded that no one really sees a Thesea sp A; however Beth later mentioned that she has
some specimens that she got from John. Her recollection was that they were the same. Thesea
typically has “football” sclerites, but some specimens/colonies will develop without them. Beth
plans to revisit some of these specimens from John to help resolve this question. [At the trawl
FID meeting on December 16* a specimen of Thesea thought to be sp A was shown by San
Diego. The specimen was white like Thesea sp A, but differences in general morphology (width
of stalk, placement of polyps and difference in sclerite size) had Beth come to the conclusion that
this could be another species. At this time it will be called Thesea sp SDl. Pictures have been
taken by Tony of the individual and will be added to the presentation.]

We then looked at juvenile Renillidae, Renilla koellikeri. Juveniles, taken from shallow waters
in fine sediments, look very different from the adults with 4 mm specimens having a single main
polyp.

Stachyptilum superbum was next, another juvenile, but this time from deep water. This juvenile

11

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

specimen had a single calyx with large spines that surrounded a solitary polyp, and had spicules
along the axis.

Tony then moved into the members of the Virgulariidae. Acanthoptilum has sclerites at the base
of each extended leaf. The MMS Atlas includes descriptions of two species, A. album Nutting
1909 and A. gracile (Gabb 1863), and makes mention of a third, A. annulatum Nutting 1909. One
species, Acanthoptilum sp Type 1, is probably A. annulatum. It has reddish sclerites below the
extended leaf. Another species, Acanthoptilum sp Type 2, appears to have white sclerites below
the leaves. However, the distinctive SCB shelf species with the reddish peduncle will continue to
be referred to as Acanthoptilum sp per SCAMIT Edition 8 protocol.

Stylatula elongata is another common taxon collected in our trawl and benthic samples. S.
elongata has many sclerites below the tightly grouped polyps of
each leaf. Megan has observed specimens in the held with pigment
at the base of the polyps, even though the species is described as
being white. The pigment is generally uniform on the polyps, like
that on Virgularia californica, but fades with time in EtOH. We
also discussed juvenile S. elongata, which will have tightly packed
leaves vs. Stylatula sp A, which has the polyps widely separated and
fewer supporting spicules per leaf. We then clarihed that counts of
S. elongata are handled a little differently than other sea pens. We
typically include a count of one (1) even when the peduncle is not
present because S. elongata have a very elongate rachis with the
peduncle oft well below the penetration depth of the van veen grab,
and the rachis is often broken to ht the specimen within the sample
vial. This method of counting is not followed with the other sea
pens.

Virgularia agassizii, V. californica, and E sp B do not have sclerites
below the leaves. V. agassizii has just a few polyps (three to hve) and
with very little color.

V. californica has six to eight polyps per leave, although 17-18 are
reported in the literature. The polyps have dark pigmented cores and
the siphonozooids are also darkly pigmented. Tony noted that the
polyp color can fade with time, but the siphonozooids maintained
their color.

Virgularia sp B has 5-7 polps per leaf and siphonzooids that are n^ darkly pigmented. Instead
Virgularia sp B has a brownish ground color at the base of each polyp which extends down to
the rachis. The actual tips of the polyps are white. The specimens came from OCSD samples, in
50-60 meter water.

Tony also showed some beautiful pictures of Pennatula phosphorea, a deep-water animal from
depths >400 m. It has sweeping reddish polyp leaves with long sclerites that all bend to one side,
with a rachis base that is white, and which contains groups of small sclerites within. Tony noted
that the MMS Atlas is a very good reference for these deep-water taxa.

We hnished the sea pens with a few pictures of Ptilosarcus gurneyi, the brightly colored orange-
red pen with a thick peduncle and large rachis.

12

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

CSD, SD-17, July 08. 32m

Stylatula elongata
with pigment

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

We next dove into the Ceriantharia, a difficult group for most of us. Cerianthids are true tube¬
dwelling anemones that are exclusively infaunal. They are defined as having simple tentacles in
two cycles: longer marginal and shorter oral tentacles, and unpaired complete mesenteries. They
are quite distinctive in having a long, tapering, smooth column that ends in a typically narrowed
end. Tony noted a difference in color between the different cerianthids in John’s collection,
particularly Arachnanthus and Pachycerianthus. Pachycerianthus is distinguished by having
a chocolate brown column, whereas Arachnanthus are typically a fighter shade of brown and
some specimens from the Channel Islands were white. Arachnanthus have mesenteries that
reach toward the end of the body and end in acontoids. Arachnanthus sp A is defined as a brown
cerianthid with a single pair of mesenteries running the length of the body, each ending with a
single acontoid. However, during a review of Molodtsova 2003, Tony learned \hdX Arachnanthus
can vary from having zero to two acontoids. In Arachnanthus sp A the acontoids are typically
cream colored, but those from the Chanel Island specimens were bright white. Another specimen
from the Channel Islands had a brown column but two acontoids per mesentery.

Tony found a couple of vials labeled as Ceriantharia sp C, which John had defined as a cerianthid
with mesenteries that stop about 1/2 to 2/3 the way down the base. However, Dean raised
the point that John had told him that he had stopped recognizing Ceriantharia sp C because
he considered it an invalid taxon. After some discussion, the group decided that we should
keep a lookout for specimens representing this mesentery arrangement, but would report it as
Ceriantharia.

Pachycerianthus, in addition to being chocolate brown, are very large by comparison. The
largest Pachycerianthids can be 50-i- cm, and live in meters-long tubes. Carol mentioned that she
has seen specimens that are large enough to fill a quart jar. In reviewing the specimens, Tony
noted that Pachycerianthus has labial palps and a ribbed actinopharynx, which were absent in
Arachnanthus, and mesenteries that are much more thickened in the middle of the column.

We then discussed how to deal with specimens that are tangled such that they cannot be reliably
dissected or that have broken bases. These should all be referred to the Order Ceriantharia. In
addition, some are clean but do not have acontoids or other distinguishing characters. These too
are referred to Ceriantharia. Tony and others recommended that when collecting benthic grabs, it
is good practice to separate the cerianthid tubes from the remainder of the sample by placing them
in a whirl pack or separate container because they can create such a mess when dismantling them
to collect the anemone.

After a lunch break, we moved into Part II of Big John’s Legacy: The actiniarians, corallomorphs
and provisional/unidentified species. Tony noted that the actiniarians are the most commonly
encountered anthozoans in our samples and that for the purposes of identification, cross-sections
seem to be more valuable than longitudinal sections.

We began with the Edwardsiidae. Edwardsids are elongate, infaunal anthozoans, whose body is
divided into several distinct regions: capitulum, scapus with periderm, scapulus without periderm,
and an aboral end that may be differentiated into a physa. They have eight primary mesenteries
- enumerate the primary mesenteries only, i.e., those attached to body wall and pharynx. The
presence or absence of nemathybomes - ectodermal invaginations of the mesogela containing
nematocyst batteries - is of generic value.

13

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

Drillactis sp (=Nematostella vectensis) is a small edwardsid with brownish coloration to the
column and very thin tentacles. There were no descriptions of the species from preserved
material. They differ from Edwardsia and Scolanthus by the presence of hne tentacles, tapered
distal end, and absence of nemathybomes. This species has only been found in estuaries between
1 and 5 meters.

As Tony looked through vials of Edwardsia and Scolanthus he found vouchered specimens that
did not match the descriptions. This group has represented a conundrum for many years among
those of us performing cnidarian identihcations in the SCB. Tony spent quite some time trying to
make sense of the publication (Daley and Ljubenkov 2008) relative to the specimens at hand, but
ran into some difficulties.

Edwardsia califomica - Tony mentioned the disconnect between the description of E. californica
relative to the key, particularly couplet 4B, which suggests that the nemathybomes are
inconspicuous. However, Tony noted that the nemathybomes are very prominent and quite easily
seen in straight rows raised above the epidermis. He also noted that the physa is very thin and
the body has a soft, flimsy structure. Do not use presence of debris on the physa as a distinctive
character as this was seen on several different species.

Megan showed an image of a San Diego specimen that may be a new species of Edwardsia. They
are hoping to collect more specimens.

E. handi - Daley and Ljubenkov (2008) note that E. handi replaces E. californica north of Point
Conception. E. handi has large protrusive nemathybomes in low density between mesenteries,
with basotrichs of two different sizes.

E. juliae - a compact animal with small nemathybomes that do not protrude notably above the
epidermis. There are two forms pictured: a smooth form and one that is tightly packed and
wrinkled. They are typically collected from 10 - 15 m in outer harbor areas, but can be found on
the shallow shelf to 45 meters. Tony noted that many of the specimens he has seen have an ivory
white physa.

E. olguini - The basal end of E. olguini is expanded, making them look like Scolanthus, but the
nemathybomes appear smaller and more depressed than those of Scolanthus.

E. profunda - This deep water species is distinguished by the rosette-shaped physa. It also has
tiny nemathybomes that occur in a single row proximally and spread out as you move away from
the base.

Scolanthus scamiti - This bay species is reddish brown and has small nemathybomes in irregular
rows that occur in higher concentrations proximally than distally.

S. triangulus - This nearshore edwardsid has large nemathybomes arranged in irregular rows.

The large nemathybomes have large basotrichs that lay one on another and appear like stacked
bananas.

The Halcampoididae are also elongate, vermiform anthozoans, without a sphincter, and with a
physa-shaped, rarely flattened, proximal end. Pentactinia californica is our local representative.

It has tenaculi with adherent sand grains along the column, white tentacles without internal
pigment, and five pair of perfect mesenteries. Juveniles generally do not have the full complement
of mesenteries. For example Tony reviewed one 4 mm specimen with eight mesenteries.

14

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

The Limnactiniidae are a vermiform anemone that do not have any tentacles, nor a sphincter.
There are eight to 10 perfect mesenteries and the oral disc has a very thickened ectoderm. John
had recognized one species, Limnactiniidae sp A, and Tony provided some excellent images. It
has no tentacles, but typically retains some coloration in oral region where tentacles might be
placed if present, and a long actinopharynx.

Among the Haloclavidae, we discussed Anemonactis sp A, Harenactis attenuata, and Peachia
quinquecapitata. There are supposed to be 20 tentacles in Anemonactis, but Tony never found
one with that many. The tentacles often have pigment within, and have capitate tips, which can be
wider than the remainder of tentacle, while the wrinkled column has rows of papillae externally,
and a large basal pore. Juvenile Anemonactis have fewer tentacles, but the tentacles are still
capitate.

Harenactis attenuata has a physa-like aboral end that is often flattened. It has 24 tentacles, a
smooth column with cinclides (pores). The specimen reviewed was collected from 30 m on D
transect off LACSD.

Peachia quinquecapitata has 12 tentacles that are nipple-like to digitiform, six pairs of primary
mesenteries that are continuous along the entire column. A longitudinal section is valuable to
verify that the mesenteries run the full length of the animal.

The Halcampidae are not too different from the Haloclavidae. John had a specimen of Cactosoma
arenaria, which had 24 tentacles, and the columns of a couple of specimens were covered in
adherent material. These also had six pairs of mesenteries.

Halcampa decemtentaculata has 10 tentacles and five pairs of perfect mesenteries. Generally,

H. decemtentaculata is white, with a clear physa, and tentacles without pigment, although CSD
staff mentioned that they get specimens with pigment, both associated with the tentacles and
occasionally with a pigmented column.

Halianthella sp A has six pairs of mesenteries, groups of 12 tentacles with pigment, and a physa.
The column is almost always found with encrusting material, typically of uniform sized sand
grains. In contrast, Pentactinia has more heterogeneous sand grains adhering to the column.
Halianthella sp B was not covered here, but is included in John’s presentation of Anthozoa from
Bight 2003.

Among the members of Actiniidae, Tony showed a small, 2.5 mm specimen that had been labeled
as Anthopleura sp; however, the group felt that there was not enough evidence to identify the
specimen at the generic-level.

Tony then showed a few pictures of specimens labeled as Epiactis prolifera. These had a distinct
pedal disc, many tentacles, and a wrinkled to smooth column. Tony noted that the mid-portion of
the tentacles was larger than either the base or tip, which may be something worth watching for.

Urticina sp A is a relatively large specimen with large veruccae on the distal end of the column,
beneath the tentacles. The veruccae occur in tight longitudinal rows. Tony mentioned that U.
macpeaki was described from the Pacific Northwest by Hauswaldt & Pearson (1999), but the
authors made no reference to MacPeak’s Urticina sp A.

Zaolutus actius (Isanthidae) is another common elongate anemone with a slightly papillated
column, elongate tentacles, and a pedal disc. We had a lot of discussion about whether all of the

15

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

specimens John referred to Zaolutus were representative of a single taxon. Some specimens were
very similar to other lots listed as Diadumene. We found there to be a discrepancy in several
pictures, which Tony noted for correction.

Flosmaris grandis (Isopheliidae) has a large pedal disc, with many tentacles (from 80 - 100) and
occurs in shallow water. The specimens that Tony photographed were quite large.

Sagartia catalinensis (Sagartiidae) often occurs on hard substrates (rock, shell, etc.) and forms to
the shape of the substrate.

Bunodeopsis sp A (Bolocerodidae) is a small species with long tentacles for its small size. A
large specimen is only 2-3 mm tall. These tentacles are not retractile, and are often shed upon
collection. Bunodeopsis are hard to cross-section because they reproduce asexually and you get
mixed counts of mesenteries.

We looked at a few pictures of Metridium sp (Metridiidae) which have up to 100 tentacles,
a pedal disc, generally ribbed column, and an outer lip that is always ribbed (vs. Epiactis or
Urticina, each of which has smooth lips). Metridium also have numerous primary mesenteries.

Corynactis californica (Corallimorphidae) is another small species found attached to rocks and
debris, but is distinguished by the clearly capitate tentacles.

We then reviewed several pictures of John’s provisional taxa that could not be neatly placed into
any of the existing anthozoan families. Actiniaria sp 10 (as recorded in Bight’03) is the same, we
think, as Acontifera sp A (recorded from Bight’08). This is a small species reported from off the
Channel Islands, that has adherent shell hash, or not, but is often attached to shell hash. There is
very little else to go on.

Anthozoa #49, commonly referred to as “The Brown tent anemone,” is a distinctive creature
sometimes overlooked because of how it tightly compresses against the substrate to which it attaches
(shell or other material). It has six pairs of mesenteries, with muscles positioned towards middle.

Zoanthidea sp A is a small, elongate species from Bigth’03 that is completely encrusted with sand
grains and shells. It has tentacles that appear cupped.

Zoanthidea sp B, also from Bight’03, is similar in basic appearance to Zoanthidae sp A except
that the specimens are connected. It also has cupped tentacles, and is likely the same species: We
couldn’t distinguish any differences between the two species!

At the very end Tony showed pictures of specimens that none of us could identify, but were good
for all of us to see. Species (?) 1 had been taken from 45 m at a couple of sites in Santa Monica
Bay in 2010 and 2011. It had a brown mottled column with distinctive mesenteries. Species
(?) 2 is another small, 5 mm specimen collected in Bight’08 from shallow waters. It is a clean,
de-nuded species with eight clear mesenteries visible through the body wall, and clear in cross-
section. Species (?) 3 is another Bight’08 species collected at 42 m, and distinguished by a dense
mesoglea in cross section and a large number of mesenteries. There were specimens labeled as
Species (?) 4 but looked like juvenile Halcampa decemtentaculata.

Tony showed a few slides comparing Species ?1 and ?5 which seemed to represent two different
species. Although very similar in overall appearance, the number of mesenteries differed.

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

Finally, Tony showed specimens that one should only list as “Actiniaria.” These are specimens
without any clear qualities or which are exploded leaving one without anything to go on other
than the fact that you have a countable specimen.

B’13 TRAWL FIDs, 16 DECEMBER 2013, OCSD

Attendees: Mark LeBlanc (NHMLAC); Greg Lyon (CLAEMD); Megan Lilly, Matt Nelson,
Maiko Kasuya, Wendy Enright (CSD); Beth Horvath (SBMNH), Kelly Tail (AMEC); Jim Mann
(ABC); Tony Phillips (DCE); Ken Sakamoto, Laura Terriquez (OCSD); Larry Lovell, Cheryl
Brantley, Don Cadien (LACSD).

Business:

Larry called the meeting to order with a round robin of introductions and reminded us that Part 2
of the Mollusca & Miscellaneous Phyla review will occur at LACSD Tuesday, January 7th. The
hnal Trawl EID meeting will be Wednesday January 29 at CSD to address Echinodermata.

There seem to be some continuing issues with emails to/from the Bight’ 13 taxon listserver either
not coming in or going out. If you’re having problems, please check with your local IT staff for
potential issues.

Tony clarihed a couple of corrections to his Cnidarian (Anthozoan) presentation from last week
and re-distributed his corrected power points (e.g., Heterogorgia tortuosa will be transferred to
Eugorgia sp 1, Edwardsia handi is actually E. californica, etc.). However, these changes will be
proposed for Edition 9 and name usage for Bight’ 13 identihcations will follow Edition 8 of the
SCAMIT Species List.

Larry turned the meeting over to Don and the meeting broke up into Mollusca, Cnidaria, and
other groups with Beth Horvath on hand to help ID the gorgonians right away.

ID resolutions:

Mollusca - We conhrmed specimens of Tegula eiseni, Caesiafossatus, Argopecten ventricosus,
Norrisia norrisi, Megastraea undosa for Kelly and then identihed Janolus barbarensis. During
the process we realized that the picture of J. barbarensis in David Behrens’ nudibranch book
(Behrens 1991) is “awful” and not representative of the actual animal. A picture of a live
specimen brought in by Kelly looked like a Limacina crockerelli upon initial inspection. The key
character is the indigo blue band beneath the tips of the cerata, which can be either white or more
commonly golden.

Platydoris macfarlandi, Elabellina, and Polygireulima rutila were idenhed for the CLA-EMD
staff. There were no specimens of the Elabellina, photos only, so we were unable to identify the
specimen any further.

Conhrmed Calliostoma keenae for CSD and identihed specimens of Antiplanes thalea and
Borsonella merriami, a new record of live occurrence in the SCB.

Conhrmed Octopus rubescens for ABC and identihed Calinaticina oldroydii, Cancellaria
crawfordiana, Calliostoma tricolor. Antiplanes catalinae, Rossia pacifica, Acanthodoris brunnea,
and Tritonia tetraquetra. A Simnia sp was put off for the January meeting when Ron Velarde
could attend.

17

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

Confirmed Lamellaria diegoensis for OCSD. The specimen was without the dermis, and the shell
looked quite a bit like Sinum scopulosum.

The CSD lab also had a specimen of Opisthoteuthis for conhrmation. Don Cadien reminded
us that Opisthoteuthis californica has a larger web and is more disc-shaped/flatter than
Opisthoteuthis sp A. Megan will still perform a dissection of SD’s specimen to do a gill lamellae
count to conhrm her identihcation.

Cnidaria - Don also reminded us that Thesea sp A Ljubenkov 1986 is bright white, very thick,
with scattered polyps (i.e., a 5 cm section will have about 8-10 polyps). Wendy brought a
white Thesea that was not sp B, and which will become Thesea sp SDl. A voucher sheet is in
preparation. Thesea sp SDl is white and otherwise very similar to Thesea sp B; however, Beth
conhrmed that the sclerites are different: smaller and without the “footballs” common in Thesea
spB.

Beth looked at many gorgonians for us, including Muricea californica (CLA-EMD), Thesea sp
SDl (CSD), Eugorgia sp 1, which Beth will be describing in her upcoming manuscript, Thesea sp
B, Adelogorgia phyllosclera, and Eugorgia rubens (OCSD).

Other Cnidarian identihcations/conhrmations included Virgularia agassizii, Tubularia sp
A, Aglaophenia and Plumularia (CLA-EMD), Stephanauge sp, Stylatula elongata (CSD),
Parazoanthus, V. agassizii (OCSD) Sind Acanthoptilum sp (ABC).

Other Miscellaneous Phyla -We then dove into the few remaining specimens of various sorts.
Echiura - Nellobia eusoma was conhrmed for OCSD.

Ectoprocta - Membranoporidae, Scrupocellaria diegensis, Crissiidae were reviewed for CLA-
EMD.

Annelida - Ap/zroJ/to longipalpa, notable for the absence of eyes, longer palps, and presence of
a cirriform median antennae, A. negligens,md Chloeia pinnata were conhrmed for ABC Labs.

A few specimens of “trawl caught”, but true infaunal annelids were examined and identihed for
AMEC.

Sponges will be addressed at a separate meeting since most (all?) specimens brought for EID by
AMEC were from SD Bay. Megan will set up a separate meeting to review those.

The meeting successfully handled all the trawl EID material that was brought to the meeting.

Thus the Jan 7 meeting will not be necessary and was cancelled.

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APLACOPHORA LITERATURE

Kocot, K., Cannon, J.T., Todt, C., Citarella, M.R., Kohn, A.B., Meyer, A., Santos, S.R., Schander,
C., Moroz, L.L., Leib, B. And K.M. Halanych. 2011. Phylogenomics reveals deep
molluscan relationships. Nature. Vol. 477: 452-457.

Scherholz, M., Redl, E., Wollesen, T.,Todt, C. and A. Wanniger. 2013. Aplacophoran molluscs
evolved from ancestors with polyplacophoran-like features. Current Biology. Vol. 23:

1-5.

TRAWL FID MEETING LITERATURE - 18 NOVEMBER

Farfante, I.P. 1985. The rock shrimp genus Sicyonia (Crustacea: Decapoda: Penaeoidea) in the
eastern Pacihc. U. S. Fishery Bulletin 83 (1): 1-79.

Garth, J.S. 1958. Brachyura of the Pacihc Coast of America. Oxyrhyncha. Allan Hancock Pacihc
Expedition. Vol. 21, Parts 1 and 2.

Wicksten, M.K. 2012. Decapod Crustacea of the Californian and Oregonian Zoogeographic
Provinces. Zootaxa3371: 1-307.

CNIDARIA LITERATURE

Bethyl, J.C. 1986. A Guide to the Identihcation of the Living Corals (Scleractinia) of Southern
California San Diego Natural History Museum.

Cairns, S. 1994. Scleractinia of the Temperate North Pacihc. Smithsonian Contribution to
Zoology. No.557.

Carlgen, O. 1949. A survey of the Ptychodactiaria, Corallimorpharia and Actiniaria. Kungl.
Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar. Fjarde Serien Band 1, No. 1.

Hauswaldt, J.S., and K.E. Pearson. 1999. Urticina mcpeaki, a new species of sea anemone

(Anthozoa: Actiniaria: Actiniidae) from the North American Pacihc coast. Proceedings of
the Biological Society of Washington. 112(4): 652-660.

Manual, R.L. 1981. British Anthozoa (Synopses of the British Fauna, No. 18). Academic Press,
London and other cities. 241 pp.

Molodtsova, T.N. 2003. On Isarachnanthus from Central Atlantic and Caribbean region with
notes on Isarachnactis lobiancoi (Carlgren, 1912). Zoologische Verhandelingen, 345:
249-255.

TRAWL FID MEETING LITERATURE - 16 DECEMBER

Behrens, D.W. 1991. Pacihc Coast Nudibranchs: A Guide to the Opisthobranchs Alaska to Baja
California. Second Edition. Sea Challengers, Monterey, CA.

19

Publication Date: 5 February 2014

November/December, 2013

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 4

Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: www.scamit.org

SCAMIT OFFICERS

If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers at
their e-mail addresses:

President

Larry Lovell (310)830-2400X5613 llovell@lacsd.org

Leslie Harris (213)763-3234 lharris@nhm.org

Dean Pakso (858)395-2104 deanpasko@yahoo.com

Laura Terriquez (714)593-7474 lterriquez@ocsd.org

Vice-President

Secretary

Treasurer

The SCAMIT newsletter is published every two months and is distributed freely to members in good
standing. Membership is $15 for an electronic copy of the newsletter, available via the web site at
www.scamit.org, and $30 to receive a printed copy via USPS. Institutional membership, which
includes a mailed printed copy, is $60. All correspondences can be sent to the Secretary at the email
address above or to:

SCAMIT

PO Box 50162

Long Beach, CA 90815

Southern
California
Assocation of
Marine
Invertebrate
Taxonomists

January/Febmary, 2014 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 32, No. 5

Scolanthus triangularis nemathybomes at 600x. Photo by Dean Pasko

The SCAMIT newsletter is not deemed to be a valid publieation for formal taxonomie purposes.

Publication Date: May 2015

January/Febmary, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 5

BIGHT’13 TRAWL ECHINODERM EID, 29 JANUARY 2014, CSD

Attendees: Greg Lyon (CLAEMD); Ron Velarde, Megan Lilly, Matt Nelson, Kathy Langan,
Wendy Enright (CSD); Kelly Tail (AMEC); Jim Mann (ABC); Seth Jones (MTS); Tony Phillips
(DCE); Kelvin Barwiek, Ernest
Ruekman, Eaura Terriquez (OCSD);

Earry Eovell, Cheryl Brantley, Chase
MeDonald, Fred Stem, Don Cadien
(EACSD).

Business

Earry ealled the meeting to order by announeing that many of the 2014 meetings will likely foeus
on Bight taxonomie issues. The Monday Febmary 24 meeting will be at CSD and will eover
Bight’ 13 infauna miseellaneous phyla and Megan may inelude a short segment on sipuneulids,
speeifieally how to deal with small speeimens.

Larry also called for more meeting topics for 2014.

We diseussed the reeent posts to the SCAMIT General list server emails dealing with Nuculana
minuta (Mollusea: Bivalvia: Nueulanidae), an invalid taxon. There was also some diseussion
about the panopeid deeapods, Lophopanopeus bellus and L. diegensis, now synonomized under L.
bellus.

We then moved on to how to address juvenile speeimens of Cyclocardia crebricostata (Mollusea:
Bivalvia: Carditidae). The diseussion eame about beeause we had C. crebricostata on the
list based on a John Ljubenkov identifieation from some regional material. Paul Seott (Santa
Barbara Museum of Natural History) found this very unlikely and asked SCAMIT to review the
ID if possible. We did, and the speeimens proved to be something other than C. crebricostata,
whieh eliminated the need for a eonsiderable southern range extension. Paul was happy, and the
SCAMIT List got simpler. Unfortunately, the five speeies within Cyclocardia remain diffieult to
distinguish, espeeially as juveniles. The reeommendation is to leave juveniles at the generie level.

Tony announeed that he had updated the Cnidaria presentation parts 1 and 11, whieh will be posted
to the SCAMIT website.

ID resolutions

Kelly announeed that AMEC has partially worked up the SD Bay sponges, but the effort is
ongoing.

Megan reviewed ophiuroid speeimens for Kelly (AMEC) and eonfirmed many identifieations.

There was some eonfusion and diseussion as to the desired proeessing proeedures for measuring
Brisaster for the meeting. The idea was that individuals were to have arrived with some efforts to
measure and identify their speeimens prior to the meeting.

Brisaster measurements were reviewed for EACSD and CEAEMD. OCSD had already measured
their speeimens. Aquatie BioAssay Consulting (ABC Eabs) and AMEC were fortunate enough to
have none sinee their Bight’ 13 trawl stations were too shallow for the eehinoid fauna.

2

Publication Date: May 2015

UPCOMING MEETINGS

Visit the SCAMIT website at: www.seamit.org for the
latest upeoming meetings announeements.

January/Febmary, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 5

ABC Labs and Vantuna Research Group (VRG) brought specimens of Aphrodita for review (a
polychaeta - just for clarification!). ABC labs collected^, castanea and VRG specimens were
identified as A. negligans and^. japonica.

Megan and Wendy assisted everyone with Asteroid identifications in the afternoon.

Bight’13 Miscellaneous Phyla, 24 February 2014, CSD

Attendees: Greg Lyon, Craig Campbell (CLAEMD); Ron Velarde, Megan Lilly, Wendy Emight,
Nick Haring, Robin Gartman (CSD); Seth Jones (MTS); Tony Phillips (DCE); Ken Sakamoto,
Eaura Terriquez (OCSD); Earry Eovell, Don Cadien (EACSD); Chip Barrett (EcoAnalysts); Dean
Pasko (DCE-presenter).

Business

Earry called the meeting to order by announcing that there were no new meetings scheduled for
2014. Earry offered to host a SCAMIT Taxonomic Toolbox Workshop and Tony offered to help
host a discussion workshop on Chaetozone (Annelid: Cirratulidae). Dean then suggested that he
could try to manage an arthropod workshop, particularly if Don and Ron were willing to assist
with FlDs. The two meetings were tentatively scheduled for April and March respectively. See
the SCAMIT webpage and General Discussion EistServer for additional information.

Workshop

Earry then turned the meeting over to Dean who began by announcing that this was indeed
intended to be a workshop since none of us were really “expert” in any of the various taxa that
make up the Miscellaneous Phyla category. And with the recent passing of John Ejubenkov (“Big
John”), we have an even smaller pool of people with broad ranging experience or expertise.
Although several of us have tried hard to grasp these difficult groups over the years, they remain a
challenge for all of us.

Dean then opened with a few slides and a short discussion of the Edwardsiidae, specifically
Scolanthus triangulus and Edwardsia olguini. Dean had a couple of slides showing the difference
in nemathybome basotrich size between S. triangulus and E. juliae. The difference in size is very
clear (see comparison photo). He offered up the idea that the basotrichs can be used, in some
cases, to separate species or individuals when there is a difference between specimens. However,
he pointed out that he had had difficulty differentiating S. triangulus from E. olguini because the
absence of a physa in S. triangulus, versus its presence in a very reduced form in E. olguini, was
nearly impossible to differentiate. He wondered if the basotrichs could be used to distinguish
between them, and though he had tried there did not seem to be a notable difference. On the other
hand, he couldn’t know for sure if this difficulty was the result of not having truly distinct species
to examine or not. Additional work will be required going forward.

Dean then explained that he had found the nemathybome basotrichs less difficult to isolate
and examine than he had thought. John had always sliced off a portion of the epidermis of his
specimens, laid that piece on a slide, diced it up with a blade, smashed it under a coverslip, and
examined the result for basotrichs. While trying to repeat the process. Dean discovered that the
nemathybome tissue seems to dissolve readily in glycerin! So it became much easier to simply
pinch off a nemathybome or two, place them into a drop of 50% glycerol on a slide, place a
coverslip over it, and, using a dissecting scope, smash the material with the base or tips of his

3

Publication Date; May 2015

January/Febmary, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 5

forceps. Doing the manipulation under a eompound seope is not impossible, but more diffieult
beeause of the restrieted working distanee. In just a few seeonds the tissue falls apart leaving the
basotriehs mostly intaet and ready for viewing. The slide ean then be moved to the eompound
seope onee the tissue is dissoeiated for examination of basotriehs. Hopefully sharing the
simplieity of this proeess will faeilitate a broader examine basotriehs for eomparison by everyone.

Later on, after luneh and during the workshop portion, we were able to take speeimens identified
as E. olguini by Megan and S. triangulus by Big John and eompare them. We noted differenees in
the external appearanee that, although apparently elear in these two speeimens, remain potentially
diffieult to apply. S. triangulus has nemathybomes that are sunken into the wrinkled mesoglea/
epidermis of the animal, while the nemathybomes of E. olguini tend to be more bulbous and
protruding (blister-like) out of a smoother epidermis. When we mounted the basotriehs however,
we were able to distinguish the E. olguini basotriehs (approximately 25 mierometer units at 400x)
were about one-half the size of those from the S. triangulus speeimen (about 80 mierometer units
at 400x). See the comparison figure.

at <40 um. Magnification is 600x. Measurements are estimated using a Motic compound microscope with
internal measurement tool.

Dean then gave a short presentation on the eorymorphines (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa: Corymorphidae).
Big John had been working with this group for a while and helped prepare the MMS
Atlas Volume 3 Cnidaria seetion on Hydrozoa. He ereated a key to the southern California
eorymorphines in about 2004, whieh Dean later revised to ineorporate Corymorphidae sp SDl.
During the presentation we were able to add distribution information to the key, and elarify
and eorreet the usage of eertain terms. The revised key is ineluded in this NL. This key was
distributed via the Bight’ 13 taxon list server and should be used for all Bight’ 13 identifieations.

We then moved on to a presentation of Nemertea that had been modified from Megan Lilly’s 2006
presentation: “Palaeonemertea of the SCB.” The presentation began with a short deseription/
differenees between Heteronemertea and Palaeonemertea, and Carinomidae

4

Publication Date: May 2015

January/Febmary, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 5

and Tubulanidae within the latter. Dean emphasized the need to perform eross-seetions to
eonfirm museulature and/or elear the speeimens as neeessary, partieularly for the Enopla, whieh
were not diseussed. Throughout the presentation we made additions and elarifieations to the
pietured and refereneed taxa. Niek Haring shared his preferred blade for making nemertean
eross-seetions: Feather Hi-stainless double edged razor blades. You ean get paeks of 10 for about
$5 from Amazon. All of these additions to the presentation and more were ineorporated into a
final presentation that will be posted to the SCAMIT website and distributed via the Bight’ 13
Listserver for use during Bight’ 13 sample proeessing.

After luneh we dove into a review of speeimens. Dean started by showing a few slides of a large
polyelad fiatworm that he eould not identify eleanly. The speeimen was about 20 mm long,
had eyes within the tentaeles, and a small group of eyes between the tentaeles and extending
anteriorly. No marginal eyes were present. There was some diseussion of potential taxa, and
Tony suggested that the speeimen was a styloehoplanid and perhaps Emprosthopharym gracilis.
Though the number of eerebral eyes was small by eomparison, the shape of the general body
strueture was suggestive of E. gracilis. [Editor’s note: Dean was able to eonfirm the ID.]

We had a more lengthy diseussion of Heteronemertea sp SD2, Heteronemertea sp HYPl, and
what Laura, Dean, and Ken had ealled Anopla sp OCl. Laura and Megan had already eonsidered
Heteronemertea sp SD2 and Anopla sp OCl and determined them to be the same. Some question
remained in Dean’s mind beeause he had not yet seen a speeimen of Anopla sp OCl with a
eaudal eirrus. Unfortunately, there is little to distinguish the two taxa sinee both have the same
distinetive C-shaped eerebral sense organ (CSO), aeeompanied by a group of eells lining the CSO
invagination with a unique sheen or glistening eharaeteristie to them that make the CSO stand
out. And both have the same museulature that ineludes a narrowed band of outer longitudinal
musele. The only eharaeter that eould be used to distinguish them was the presenee/absenee of the
eaudal eirrus; but that remained an elusive eharaeter sinee only one damaged eomplete speeimen
of “Anopla sp OCl” had been eolleeted. On the other hand, there was also a fair amount of debate
about whether Heteronemertea sp SD2 and Heteronemertea sp HYPl are the same. After quite a
lively diseussion, we deeided to attempt to separate them based on differenees of the museulature.
Heteronemertea sp SD2 museulature ineludes a very narrow outer longitudinal musele band that
is not mueh wider than the middle eireular musele band, if at all. Heteronemertea sp HYPl, on
the other hand, has a quite large, notieeable outer longitudinal musele band that is about 1.5 to
2 times as thiek as the inner eireular musele band. Heteronemertea sp HYPl also has a different
presentation than Heteronemertea sp SD2. The former does not have the eharaeteristie “puekered”
mouth opening, nor the glistening C-shaped CSO - it is typieally round in form. In addition the
head seems to preserve with a ventral furrow.

We also diseussed Dean’s speeimens listed as Heteronemertea: Lineidae, whieh only added to the
eonfusion diseussed above between Heteronemertea sp SD2 - Heteronemertea sp HYPl. Megan
and a few others thought they might represent Zygeupolia rubens beeause of the tapered head,
wrinkled anterior region, and eaudal eirrus. However, Dean’s speeimens have a distinet, though
shallow, eephalie slit and a less strongly tapered head. These speeimens also do not have a strong
eerebral sense organ, like that found in Z. rubens. Dean mentioned that, in his experienee, finding
the CSO on Z rubens is often diffieult due to the eontraeted/wrinkled nature of the head; it is not
an obvious eharaeter of the speeies. In the end. Dean renamed the speeies as Lineidae sp LAHl in
reeognition that the speeimen was eolleeted from Bight’ 13 samples eolleeted from Los Angeles
Harbor/Port of Long Beaeh area.

5

Publication Date; May 2015

January/Febmary, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 5

A specimen of Tubulanidae sp C that Dean had brought was also confirmed.

Finally, Megan confirmed an echiurid specimen from 363 m off the Santa Barbara Channel. Dean
had identified it as Listriolobus hexamyotus at first, but then changed his mind to Arhynchite
californicus because he could not distinguish the muscle bands. However, upon additional
dissection and review, Megan was able to confirm the long nephrostomal lips of L. hexamyotus.

6

Publication Date: May 2015

January/Febmary, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32, No. 5

Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: www.seamit.org

SCAMIT OFFICERS

If you need any other information eoneeming SCAMIT please feel free to eontaet any of the offieers at
their e-mail addresses:

President

Larry Lovell (310)830-2400X5613 llovell@laesd.org

Leslie Harris (213)763-3234 lharris@nhm.org

DeanPakso (858)395-2104 deanpasko@yahoo.eom

Laura Terriquez (714)593-7474 lterriquez@oesd.org

Viee-President

Seeretary

Treasurer

The SCAMIT newsletter is published every two months and is distributed freely to members in good
standing. Membership is $15 for an eleetronie eopy of the newsletter, available via the web site at
www.scamit.org, and $30 to reeeive a printed eopy via USPS. Institutional membership, whieh
ineludes a mailed printed eopy, is $60. All eorrespondenees ean be sent to the Seeretary at the email
address above or to:

SCAMIT

PO Box 50162

Long Beaeh, CA 90815

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol 32 No. 5

A Key To Corymorphine Polyps

Modified from J.Ljubenkov (2004) bv D.Pasko 26Feb2015

1. Both tentacle whorls hliform (smooth) to serially bulbous, tips bulbous; papillae at base of hydrocaulus
. Corymorpha 2

— Aboral and/or oral tentacles moniliform (beaded). 3

2. [Note: 3 choices] Gonangia are cryptomedusae (elongate, fusiform bodies); hydrotheca transparent...
. Corymorpha palma

— Gonangia are quadrate eumedusoids with one tentacle longer; hydrotheca transparent.

. Corymorpha bigelowi

— Hydranth equal to or larger than hydrocaulus; hydrotheca not transparent, rugose... Corymorpha sp A

3. Oral tentacles moniliform, tapering distally, 10 in number; aboral tentacles hliform, up to 12 in number;

papillae above oral tentacles at base of hypostome; San Diego Bay.Corymorphidae sp SDl

— Oral tentacles hliform or moniliform and capitate; aboral tentacles moniliform; papillae below oral

tentacles at top of hydrocaulus. Euphysa 4

4. More than 10 oral tentacles; oral and aboral tentacles long, moniliform, capitate; hydrocaulus short and

relatively thick, not tapering; hydranth tapering distally; gonosome formed by quadrate eumedusoids with
4 equal tentacles; from Point Arguello. Euphysa sp B

— Less than 10 oral tentacles; hydrocaulus long, thin for entire length or tapering; gonosome of medusoids

or buds without 4 equal tentacles. 5

5. Oral tentacles typically 4 in number, short and capitate; aboral tentacles about 10 in single whorl;

hydrocaulus tapering; hypostome short and blunt; quadrate hydromedusa with 1 longer tentacle.

. Euphysa sp A

— Oral tentacles 3-7, short and capitate; aboral tentacles 4-12 in two alternating whorls; hydrocaulus thin

with uniform diameter; hypostome elongate, ovoid; buds polyps that often contain one aboral tentacle of
parent. Euphysa ruthae

References:

Barwick, K. 1993. Common Hydrozoa off Point Loma. http://www.scamit.org/taxontools

Hochberg EG. & J.C. Ljubenkov. 1998. Chapter 1. Class Hydrozoa. In: Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the
Santa Maria Basin and the Western Santa Barbara Channel, Vol. 3: Cnidaria. Scott PV & Blake JA, eds., pp. 55-1 12. Santa
Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California.

Ljubenkov, J.C. 2004. A Key to Corymorphine Polyps. SCAMIT NL Vol 23, No 1&2, May/June 2004.

Norenburg, J.L. and M.P. Morse. 1983. Systematic implications of Euphysa ruthae n. sp. (Athecate: Corymorphidae), a
psammophilic solitary hydroid with unusual morphogenesis. Transactions of the American Microscopical Society 102(1):
1-17.

A Key To Corymorphine Polyps

Modified from J.Ljubenkov (2004) bv D.Pasko 26Feb2015

Corymorpha palma

Southern
California
Assocation of
Marine
Invertebrate
Taxonomists

March/April, 2014 SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

1.5 mm male Rutiderma lomae; OCSD Station 4; 4Jan2011; 56m. Photo by Dean Pasko

This Issue

17 MARCH 2014, BIGHT’13 ARTHROPOD PREPARATION, SCCWRP.2

17 APRIL 2014, TAXONOMIC TOOLBOX & CIRRATULIDAE (POLYCHAETA), SCCWRP.4

BIBLIOGRAPHY.11

SCAMIT OFFICERS.12

The SCAMIT newsletter is not deemed to be a valid publieation for formal taxonomie purposes.

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

17 MARCH 2014, BIGHT’13 ARTHROPOD PREPARATION, SCCWRP

Attendees: Andrew Davenport, Katie Beauehamp, Ron Velarde, Tim Stebbins (CSD); Chase
MeDonald, Don Cadien, Larry Lovell (LACSD); Greg Lyon, Craig Campbell (CLA-EMD); Tony
Phillips, Dean Pasko (DCE); Ken Sakomoto, Danny Tang, Eriea Jarvis (OCSD); David Dmmm
(Eeo Analysts).

Business Meeting: Earry opened the
meeting noting that this meeting and
many of the upeoming meetings will
likely foeus on Bight’ 13 taxonomie
issues, and that we need more
suggestions for speeifie topies to
diseuss. The next meeting will inelude a presentation by Earry about the Taxonomie Database
Tool, ineluding a demonstration of the features and tools available, along with a review of the
eirratulid genus Chaetozone by Tony.

Earry apologized for getting a late start on the SCAMIT eleetions, but promised to have the
ballots out soon, with a due date of Mareh 31 baek to Eeslie Harris. All of the eurrent offieers
were willing to run again, and Earry opened the floor for additional nominations. Hearing none,
he elosed the nomination proeess and turned the meeting over to Dean.

Bight’13 Arthropod Preview

Dean started his review of potentially problematie or interesting arthropods with a look at a
eommon taxon, Heterophoxus ellisi (Phoxoeephalidae). He notieed a different form in bays and
harbors that he has ealled Heterophoxus cf ellisi. The offshore form of H. ellisi has singly inserted
setae on the posterior margin of pereopod 6, artiele 6, and multiple sets of a single spine paired
with single plumose seta on the posterior margin of artiele 5, along with a strong (long), slender
hooked tooth on epimeron 3. In eontrast, the bay/shallow water H. cf ellisi has singly inserted
setae on the posterior margins of both artieles 5 and 6 of pereopod 6, and a very small, aeute tooth
on epimeron 3. The latter is not prolonged into a hook. A eomparative slide helped demonstrate
the differenees.

He then moved on to diseuss an interesting ostraeod eneountered in samples from OCSD’s
monitoring program (Station 4, 56m; Station 86, 57m). He had referred these speeimens to
Sarsiellidae sp OCl and noted that they had a flnely serrated rostrum, two longitudinally running
elevated earapaee ridges that are distinetly elevated at their posterior termination, and a 4-elawed
furea. [Secretary’s note: Danny Tang of OCSD has subsequently identifled these speeimens as the
male of Rutiderma lomae. See eover photo. Oops!]

Dean then began a diseussion of Hippomedon (Eysanassidae), partieularly Hippomedon sp A.
and H. columbianus. Dean was eoneemed that H. columbianus was being missed and wanted
to make sure that we were all on the same page as to the distinguishing eharaeter employed in
Jarrett and Bousfleld’s key (Jarrett and Bousfleld 1982) subsequently modifled by Doug Diener
to aeeommodate Hippomedon sp A (Diener 1990): the length of the gnathopod 2 palm relative to
the daetyl. In H. columbianus the gnathopod 2 palm is longer than the daetyl by nearly the entire
length of the daetyl, whereas in Hippomedon sp A the daetyl, when elosed, fully eovers the palm
reaehing just shy of the posterior-distal (deflning) eomer of the palm. Dean showed a eouple of
pietures depleting this differenee quite elearly.

2

UPCOMING MEETINGS

Visit the SCAMIT website at: www.seamit.org for the
latest upeoming meetings announeements.

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

Americhelidium was next on the list. Dean had been having some doubt about the distinetion
between Americhelidium sp SD4 and A. rectipalmum. To resolve the issue for himself, he
revisited the distinguishing eharaeters as well as his 2005 key. He reviewed his key and presented
pietures of the distinguishing eharaeters for eaeh speeies in a set of slides, partieularly the
provisional speeies Americhelidium sp SDl and sp SD4 (see voueher sheets at www.SCAMIT.
org). Americhelidium sp SDl is easily reeognized by the relatively sparse setation of the propodus
and the elongate setae emanating from the distal end of the gnathopod 2 propodus and running
dorsally (anteriorly) for the length of the daetyl. Americhelidium sp SD4 ean be distinguished
from A. rectipalmum by the absenee of a postero-distal lobe on the basis of pereopod 7, the
sparse postero-marginal setae on pereopod 7, and the single, short seta loeated along the proximal
quarter of the gnathopod 2 daetyl. In eontrast, A. rectipalmum has a distinet lobe on pereopod 7
basis, of whieh the posterior margin has numerous long setae, and two or more pleonites with
pairs of relatively long setae mid-dorsally along their posterior margin. Dean also eonfirmed with
everyone thatH. shoemakeri is now being reeognized as a eomplex by SCB SCAMIT members.
Several members (Dean, Don Cadien, Ron Velarde, among others) have noted a lot of variability
in the shape and setation of the gnathopods as well as uropodal setation and spination, and none
have been able to distinguish these apparently variable morphs with eonsisteney.

With some trepidation we ventured into eaprellids. This group, partieularly the bay speeies,
has eonfounded Dean. Dean’s presentation ineluded images of Caprella californica, C. mutica,

C. scaura, C. simia, and Caprella sp WSl. All but C. mutica have a distinet head spine. Dean
suggested that everyone pay attention to the position and size of the head spine, position of
the gnathopod 2 on pereonite 11, and presenee/absenee, length and density of swimming setae
on antenna 2. He had also noted differenees in the size and shape of the gills. After luneh we
examined speeimens of C. simia and Caprella sp WSl, and determined them to be synonymous.
[Secretary’s note: In a subsequent meeting on 13 April 2015, we eneountered great diffieulty
distinguishing C. calif arnica and C. scauroides. Readers are referred to the April 2015 meeting
minutes for a diseussion of Bight’13 eaprellid amphipods.]

Another perplexing group, at least for Dean, has been the tanaids, partieularly the Zemo eomplex.
To get the diseussion started, however, we dealt with something simpler, distinguishing Araphura
sp SDl from the elosely relatedH. brevaria. Both have the fused uropodal exopod (pseudo¬
biramus) hut Araphura sp SDl, a deep-water speeies, has a granulate ridge on the ventro-mesial
margin of the fixed finger of the ehela and the pseudo-exopodite is shorter than in A. brevaria. A.
brevaria does have a ridge on the inner margin of the ehela, but the ridge is smooth and sharp,
without granulations. In addition, the pseudo-exopod is more robust, elongate, and distinetly
eurved inward, whereas the short pseudo-exopod of Araphura sp SDl is nearly straight.

Dean then showed images of Zemo coralensis, a speeies that he has been eneountering in shallow
water samples from San Diego Bay, near the Reynolds Desalination Faeility. Z. coralensis is
easily distinguished from the other possible Zemo in SCB in having fewer artieles of the uropod,
eonsistently four ineluding the pedunele, relative to 5-6 for the other taxa. It also has weakly
produeed eoxae of pereonite 1, and one seta on the inner margin of the pleopodal endopod.

He suggested that we attaeh “eomplex” to reeords of Zemo normani beeause of the variability
he has found in the uropodal artieles sueh that Z normani and Z. pseudonormani eannot be
distinguished. For the Bight’ 13 proeess. Dean reeommended the use of Z. normani Cmplx.

We also had images of Zemo maledivensis identified by Tony and eolleeted from Los Angeles
Harbor Station B, Settling Plate by Dr. Reish. These speeimens had a 5-artieulate uropod and a

3

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

pleon without dorsal setae, and one seta on the inner border of the pleopodal endopod. Tony also
provided Dean with a speeimen of Anatanais ? pseudonormani from Avalon (42m). Anatanais
differs from Zeivco in having antenna 1, artiele 1 only twiee as long as artiele 2 instead of 2.5
times as long (as in Zeuxo). In addition, the speeimen had 6-artieulate uropod and five setae along
the inner border of the pleopodal endopod. [Secretary’s note\ Larsen et al. (2014) subsequently
synonymized Z normani and Z pseudonormani thus eliminating the need to use Z. normani
Cmplx.]

We moved forward with a eouple of slides of a new braehyuran Dean eneountered in a sample
from Mission Bay (Bight’ 13 Station 8157, 3.3m). It was a small speeimen that Dean originally
keyed to be Eurypanopeus hyperconvexus in Wieksten (2012), but then eonsidered it to be
Rhithropanopeus harrisii. We examined the small erab and after some time and diseussion, the
group leaned towards Gonopanope areoloata as the proper identifieation. Following the meeting,
however. Dean had a few email exehanges with Dr. Wieksten and Dr. Terrenee Boyle, a student of
Mary’s who had studied Rhithropanopeus in the U.S. for his doetoral dissertation. After a series
of exehanges. Dean settled on Gonopanope nitida (Rathbun 1898) based on the dark eoloration of
the fixed finger and daetyl of the ehelae, but whieh does not extend onto the palm, as it does in G.
areoloata.

After this exeitement, we diseussed the validity of reeords of Heterophoxus conlanae in the SCB.
Dean had some doubt about the reliability and eonsisteney of the 3-setal group on pereopod 6,
noting the great amount of asymmetrieal setal pairing in Heterophoxus. However, Ron Velarde
brought out a speeimen eolleeted from an offshore sample (Station B-11, 90m) that was quite
eonvineingly adorned with 3-setal sets along the posterior margin of pereopod 6. In the end, we
deeided to eontinue reeognizing H. conlanae and distinguishing it from H. ellisi and H. oculatus
based on the setal patterns, and hoped that someone would make an effort to find at least one
additional eharaeter to distinguish them.

The City of Los Angeles staff brought out a vouehered speeimen of Americhelidium shoemakeri
for eonfirmation. Unfortunately, the speeimen was in poor eondition. Dean tentatively identified it
as Americhelidium sp SDl, but the speeimen’s eondition prevented eonfirmation.

Lastly, we reviewed a speeimen of Listrella sp from a 202m Bight station. It was not taken any
further.

17 APRIL 2014, TAXONOMIC TOOLBOX & CIRRATULIDAE (POLYCHAETA),

SCCWRP

Attendees: David Vilas (MBC); Leslie Harris (NHMLAC); Chip Barrett (LeoAnalysts); Ananda
Ranasinghe (PC); Cheryl Brantley, Bill Furlong, Larry Lovell (LACSD); Greg Lyon, Craig
Campbell (CLA-EMD); Rieardo Martinez-Lara, Veroniea Rodriquez, Ron Velarde, Maiko
Kasuya, Kathy Langan (CSD); Eriea Mason, Kelvin Barwiek, Rob Gamber, Eaura Terriquez, Ken
Sakamoto, Matthew Garehow, Danny Tang (OCSD); Russell Carvallo (OCCR); Tony Phillips,
Dean Pasko (DCE); Dot Norris (SFPUC).

Business Meeting: Earry announeed that the next several meetings would foeus on eonsistent
taxonomy for the Bight’ 13 Regional Monitoring and eoordination of taxonomie identifieation.
There was also a round of questions about the Bight’ 13 voueher speeimens and the request by
the NHMLAC staff that taxonomists try to pull good eondition speeimens for the museum where
praetieal. Poor speeimens pulled beeause they were the first speeimen(s) eneountered should be

4

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

replaced with good quality specimens for the museum. Museum staff also asked that we make an
effort to use our best hand writing for recording species names and data. The museum can accept
slides (e.g., parapodia, setae, mouthparts, etc.), if properly labeled. It was preferable, however, to
put dissected parts into properly labeled micro-vials; it is often difficult to track permanent slides
back to the originating specimen, even when properly labeled.

The upcoming meetings will include Polychaetes (May 12) at the NHMLAC; a Cnidaria Meeting
(June 9) at OCSD; and a Micro-Crustacea meeting (June 23) at CSD.

Taxonomic Database Tool

History of the database tool started with Dave Montagne in 2004. He called together a group
of SCAMIT taxonomists to discuss the concept of a database tool for taxonomy. In 2005 we
determined that the fiow would include the SCAMIT Species List as the backbone. In 2006, the
expanded version came into concept, which was based on a large, complicated “pie in the sky”
approach. Dr. Todd Haney, then a recent UCLA graduate, led an effort to secure some sort of
grant funding; unfortunately, that effort didn’t pan out. What followed was a period of dormancy
due to the shear complexity of the project. With Bight’08 and a need to develop SCAMIT Ed
5, Rick Rowe re-invigorated the idea of putting the species list into a database. BATMAN, the
Benthic Assessment and Taxonomic Management group, grew out of that effort. From 2008-
10, OCSD granted $15K to push the process along, help retrieve database species images in
Morphbank and link those to the Database Tool in the hopes of creating dynamic identification
pages. Unfortunately, that effort came to an abrupt stall in 2011 when Katja Seltmann became
too busy to further consult with SCAMIT, and substitute efforts failed. BATMAN continued
to meet and Cheryl Brantley took the lead from a discussion at one of the meetings. She met
with Steve Weisberg (SCCWRP) to get things moving forward again. Ananda, Cheryl, Shelly
Walther, Wendy Emight, and the recently hired Data Group Manager at SCCWRP, Steve
Steinberg, kept the database effort moving forward. SCAMIT applied some of the OCSD funds
to hire an intern to mine the various agencies for missing taxonomic documents (voucher sheets,
keys, etc.), which have been added to the toolbox. Although hugely helpful at consolidating the
wealth of information from the different agencies, the effort has produced a number of duplicate
documents, some with old, outdated names. Progress has been made however and Tarry showed
a chart showing the items from the “Pie in Sky” document that have been implemented: species
maps, depth, latitude, distribution, synonymy, voucher sheets, Morphbank image links, definitive
diagnosis, links to WoRMS, IBIS, EOF, SCAMIT NE content, character tables, keys, and BOED
and Genbank l ink s.

Future efforts will focus on the following items:

• Update species names from Edition 8 to 9 [Ed 10 at the time of publication of this NE]

• Building a name update tool for future editions of the list

• Eink assessment tools (BRI, P-code, SQO, etc.) to the species list

• Seek a solution to long-term image storage

• Seek additional funding ($5 - 20K), perhaps teaming with SCCWRP, State of CA, or CTAG
to complete the basic structure of the database including a Species Fist update tool.

• Hire an intern to clean-up the duplicate pages in the tool box, remove erroneous pages, and
update filenames, etc.

5

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

Members ean help by suggesting eorreetions to tool box files, seareh their individual labs and
their own eomputers for images of speeies and taxonomie eharaeters, provide suggestions for
member-funded aetivities, and eneourage their laboratories to submit their monitoring data to
SCCWRP for inelusion in the mapping and distributional tools.

Larry noted that Morphbank is having funding issues and although the images are available on
mirrored websites, we’re not sure how long this will last. We need to deeide whether to host the
images ourselves or look for another image server.

Why did we feel it was neeessary to build the database tool? SCAMIT thought it was important
to monitoring assessment, espeeially for maintaining data eonsisteney through time. SCAMIT
believes it is important to provide a eomprehensive information souree (e.g., P-eodes), to have a
long-lasting taxonomie legaey, a training tool for future taxonomists, and to standardize the use of
speeifie eodes (P-eodes, BRI, AMBl) for assessment.

There was open diseussion of how individual laboratories eould help support funding
meehanisms, and how SCAMIT ean get funded to eomplete this projeet. Staff was eneouraged to
understand how the data are used/analyzed and how the eodes are applied to their identifieations
so that they ean talk to their laboratory managers and request support for SCAMlT’s effort to
inerease their own effieieneies.

Russell Carvalho asked if SCAMIT had eonsidered hosting it on a GIS database. Shelly Moore
said it ean be done, but there hasn’t been any thought on it. Right now the plan is to use the
SCAMIT server.

Larry then distributed the Toolbox User Guide 1.0 DRAFT, and we went through a demonstration
of the existing tools. The toolbox works best on FireFox, Google Chrome, and Safari, and is a
little elunky on Explorer. It also works best on high sereen resolution. It is eurrently based on
SCAMIT Ed 7 names. Here are some highlights.

• The edition of the speeies listing (SCAMIT Ed 7) is displayed in the synonyms box when
browsing speeies names

• Speeies display information page ineludes phylogeny and synonyms, and links to toolbox
doeuments and external links (Morphbank, ITIS, uBio, NCBl Entrez, WoRMS, EOE,
GenBank, BOED)

• The Photo links direetly to Morphbank

• Mapping Tab is populated by Regional Bight sample data (up to B’03), WEMAP surveys,
and some POTW data. More data is needed. The tool displays the data underlying eaeh
oeeurrenee (depth of sample, origin of sample, ete.)

• Outside links have been maximized. For example, when you eliek on the link to ITIS, ITIS
automatieally understands that you want that speeifie taxon so that you do not have to re-
seareh within the site

Earry performed demonstrations using Euphilomedes carcharodonta, Nuculana sp A, and other
taxa. Eeslie asked if the underlying data would be available for download via Exeel or database?
These data will not be made available through the SCAMIT site, but ean be aeeessed through
CDEN (California Environmental Data Exehange Network) or at the SCCWRP website for Bight
data. The Nuculana sp A demonstration showed the need to get more monitoring data into the
database as the toolbox showed seanty reeords for a speeies that is very eommon in CSD and
OCSD.

6

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

Leslie Harris noted that the reeords are not representative of “true” distribution but only publie
reeords from SCB and speeifie monitoring programs (E-map, ete.). Others agreed that this
limitation should be posted prominently, so that there is no misunderstanding about the intended
use for these data (i.e., limited to our own efforts here in the SCB). Cheryl suggested that
perhaps an abbreviated table listing speeies and depth range, rather than a detailed listing of
station and abundanees would be appropriate. Shelly agreed that this was possible. Kelvin and
Leslie suggested that the addition of a eomment tool and “report error” page (e.g., dead link,
distributional error) might also be helpful. Kelvin then asked if there would be an opportunity to
download an eleetronie form of the speeies list (Aeeess or Exeel)? At present this is available on
request, but not as an automatie download.

Someone asked, “If all money were available to eomplete the proeess, would it simplify the
proeess of [SCAMIT Speeies] list maintenanee?” The answer was “yes!” Ideally, the intention
is for a name ehange to easeade through the SCAMIT Website from the Speeies List as well as
the voueher sheets, ete. A few seleet individuals would eontrol the Toolbox and Speeies List
with “Super User” aeeess. This lead to a diseussion of sueeession management relative to the
flexibility of the website and database going forward (20 years into the future); and the neeessary
aetivities of the members to support the effort overall. How to maintain the effort and progress
should the eurrent leaders retire is always a eoneem.

Somehow this lead to the diseussion, with a little admonition, that the synonymy listing of
SCAMIT Speeies List is not exhaustive and is only intended to update eommonly used literature
in the SCB and historieal SCAMIT usage. The users of the list need to understand this, but that
information is eontained in the introduetory material to the List, and it is up to the user to read
this material for a elear understanding of the ineluded taxa.

Some also suggested that we limit the sites to whieh the toolbox links. SCAMIT linkage to a site
provides some legitimaey to a site (e.g., WoRMS or ITIS), and therefore links should be applied
eautiously and eaeh should reeeive approval at some level before a link is established. Dot
suggested that there should be an effort to involve northern Ca.

We eoneluded with a short list of Aetion Items: (1) And funding and support funding via your
ageneies or suggest funding; (2) look for errors and report the errors to Larry (ee’d to Shelly
Moore); (3) identify errors in names and links to the toolbox; and (4) look into Crowd Funding.

After a brief luneh we eelebrated Cheryl Brantley and her many years of serviee to SCAMIT.
Larry showed several pietures of Cheryl from her first days at LACSD, thanking her for her
nearly 20 years of SCAMIT serviee as Seeretary and then Treasurer; as well as her years of
serviee at the Distriets. Larry then gave Cheryl several gifts from SCAMIT in her appreeiation for
her many years as friend, taxonomist, and edueator representing the Distriets.

We then moved on to diseuss Cirratulidae (Polyehaeta). Veroniea Rodriguez-Villanueva
introdueed the topie. Veroniea began with a referenee to her list of eharaeters of importanee:

• Where neuroaeieular setae start (although growth related): first of body, middle, or last
third

• Number of aeieular spines at the partial einetures (first, seeond, third portion)

• Aeieular setal arrangement (w/ or w/o gap) between dorsal and ventral portions of body

• Shape of prostomium (with or without erest) and peristomium

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

• First pair of branchiae in relation to insertion of dorsal tentaele on the body

• Shape of pygidium eup-like, dome-like, fan-shaped

She generated some diseussion with a brief deseription of Chaetozone sp 1 Morph 1 vs. Morph
2 vs. Morph 3, all pulled from the Chaetozone setosa eomplex of taxa. All have a dorsal erest,
but position of branehiae differs relative to erest. Right now they are all ealled Chaetozone sp
1 beeause of the plaeement of the neuroaeieular setae in the first 1/3 of the body. Head shape
is similar to C. hedgpethi. Morph 3 also has a dorsal erest but differs in the position of the first
tentaele. All have the same methyl green stain. None have eyes. The dififerenees in dorsal erest
morphology may be due to relaxation. Dot asked if the first position of the aeieular setae was size
dependent? Veroniea has a table showing that the individuals differ in exaet setiger plaeement of
aeieulae, however, they still oeeur in the same body region (i.e., same third of the body).

In response to this diseussion, Tony read from an email exehange he had had with Riek Rowe.
Riek had mentioned that the head shape is variable, as is staining, when not done with some
eonsisteney. Riek reeommended hours of soaking in stain rather than just minutes! Tony leaves
them in for a minimum of 2 hours and sometimes overnight before reading the staining patterns.

Tony then began to introduee his 72-slide presentation, reeognizing Veroniea’s efforts to wrestle
with this diffieult group and pull together eharaeteristies of Cirratulidae taxa. Tony introdueed the
topie with a short diseussion of the wide variation of staining for speeies of Chaetozone, where
the same speeies may demonstrate two or three separate staining patterns. Other eharaeters, sueh
as eineture types in some of the setae, are also variable. In short, the diffieulty of the group is that
so many of the eharaeters show themselves to be variable, thus ereating eonfusion.

Tony modeled his presentation on the MMS Atlas key by Jim Blake (1996). The presentation
was quite exhaustive and ineluded beautiful eolor photographs of all speeies represented in
Blake (1996), as well as three SCAMIT provisionals: Chaetozone sp SD3 of Riek Rowe 1997;
Chaetozone sp B from Channel Is; and Chaetozone sp C from Santa Moniea Bay (SMB). His
presentation, listing the speeies aeeording to the major eouplets of Blake’s key (e.g., those taxa
with paired dorsal tentaeles first present from setiger 4-7, and speeies with neuropodial spines
present from setiger 1), is summarized below. He also mentioned that the Atlas key has one
mistake: C. commonalis was plaeed in the seetion of the key with neuropodial spines starting
at 65+ setigers, when it should be in the seetion of the key where neuropodial spines begin at
setigers 20^0.

Tony eautioned everyone that the Channel Island samples from previous Bight projeets have been
a Chaetozone nightmare! With spines starting between Blake’s two groupings, variable spination,
and plaeement of tentaeular eirri, speeiation has been diffieult. High abundanees are also a
problem in proeessing.

Leslie eommented that Blake no longer eonsiders C. setosa to be found on west eoast.
Consequently, we ean eall our C. setosa whatever we want.

Tony noted that he would not be diseussing C. spinosa and C. gracilis, whieh are both deep-water
1000+ m depth.

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

The following notes are from Part 1 of Tony’s Cirratulidae presentation: Chaetozone, the
bi-tentaculate cirratulid. This group includes the following SCB taxa: C. acuta, C. armata,

C. bansei, C. Columbiana, C. corona, C. commonalis, C. hartmanae, C. hedgpethi, C. lunula,

C. senticosa, C. setosa Cmplx, Chaetozone sp A (= sp SD3 of Rowe 1997), Chaetozone sp B
SCAMIT 2014 (Santa Barbara Channel), Chaetozone sp C SCAMIT 2014 from Santa Moniea
Bay (SMB) and 150m.

Paired dorsal tentacles found from setigers 4-7 (All other species with paired dorsal tentacles
have them first present from the peristomium or from setiger 1)

• Chaetozone bansei has been eolleeted at LACSD Station 0 and in Carpenteria. It has a very
distinetive stain where ridge pattern and posterior prolongation of dorsal ridge show a dark
staining elongate, triangular extension from prostomium. The dorsal tentaeles start on setigers
3-5. The speeimen pietured in Tony’s presentation eame from San Luis Obispo.

Species with neuropodial spines from setiger 1.

• C. armata is typieally eolleeted from 45-100m. It has single spines in neuro- and notopodia,
a pointed prostomium that may be with and without slight posteriorly direeted dorsal ridge.
There are typieally two annulations on peristomium. The position of branehiae relative to
tentaele is eonsistent, but has some variability of staining pattern. Tony found one speeimen
with dark stain on the posterior portion of peristomium.

• C. corona ranges from Gulf of California to Goleta, and from 15 to 120m. It has a grub-like,
irideseent body, with eyes, and spaghetti-like branehiae.

Species with neuropodial acicular spines starting between setigers 60-100+.

• C. senticosa was found onee in Bight’08 by Tony, but that speeimen eould not be loeated,
and Tony’s deep-water speeimens have now been referred to Chaetozone sp C SCAMIT
2014. C. senticosa eomes from shallow water bays and harbors (5-1 Om). The type material
is deseribed as having setiger 1 larger/wider than following setigers and as having partial
einetures on thoraeie segments, but Tony has had diffieulty seeing these eharaeters. It’s a
large speeies, reaehing greater than 20mm in length. The dorsal tentaele starts anterior to first
setiger. Tony had some pietures of paratypes from the Los Angeles Natural History Museum,
whieh were supplied by Leslie Harris. In general, the spines start on setigers 65-80, and the
einetures are weak with 5-6 spines/eineture, and there is no distinetive staining. Tony has
observed that C. senticosa has a pear-shaped prostomium, narrowing in the post-peristomium
region,with the thoraeie setigers beeoming quite narrow.

• C. hedgpethi is a large animal without eyes that oeeurs from San Diego to Goleta, north of
Pt. Coneeption, and the Channel Islands. The dorsal tentaele and first branehiae are anterior
to setiger 1, and there is a pear-shaped, infiated erest posteriorly on posterior margin of the
peristomium. C. hedgpethi has partial einetures housing 13-15 spines, and a very distinetive
staining pattern, with no stain between neuro- and notopodia. Tony also showed a pieture of a
speeimen from Goleta that had a different staining pattern: It was missing the white band on
the posterior portion of the peristomium.

• C. Columbiana is the most eommon speeies, oeeurring from San Diego to Goleta, found at
depths between 15 to 45m. It should have three faint, indistinet annulations on peristomium
that are not very strongly grooved. It always has a depression at the posterior margin of
prostomium; although this eharaeter is also present in other speeies. The dorsal tentaele is
anterior to first setiger, and there are no distinet deep einetures. Eaeh of the partial einetures
have 11-14 spines. The rounded pygidium fiips upward and matehes the illustrations in Blake
(1996) very well. The staining pattern is distinetive with head/peristomium very different
from setigers.

9

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

• Chaetozone sp A (=Chaetozone sp SD3 Rowe 1997 and Chaetozone sp 1 Lovell and Phillips
1998) is found from San Diego to Goleta, 45-lOOm, in eoarser sands. It has a small seetion of
inflated setigers between 12-25 and flattening at the pygidium. The speeies has distinet spines
on posterior of body, and a very distinetive methyl green banding at the inflated seetion and
on the head, with no eolor anterior to the band in the inflated region and nothing posterior to
it, exeept for pro- and peristomium. The eyes are evident. The einetures are very visible with
13-16 spines, and the neuropodial spines start on setigers 40-65. Tony ealls sueh speeimens

a “tweener” sinee the spines start between Blake’s two major groupings. A voueher sheet is
available in the SCAMIT toolbox.

• Chaetozone sp C is another “tweener” that was originally thought to be C. senticosa based
on where spines start (setigers 59-75) with 11-12 spines. It differs from C. senticosa beeause
the first two setigers are equal in width, with sueeeeding setigers beeoming wider moving
posteriorly, rather than uniform in width. In addition, Chaetozone. sp C is found at 150+ m,
while C. senticosa is found in bays and harbors, 5-1 Om. There is a large tentaele anterior to
the first setiger that is twiee as large as the branehiae (whieh start on first setiger). The speeies
has a distinetly triangular head, and there is a elear gap between the dorsal and ventral group
of setae, whieh may be related to how eontraeted or inflated the speeimen was at the time of
fixation. Chaetozone sp C has a dark staining pro- and peristomium, with narrow bands of
non-staining ventrally. The represented speeimen eame from Station E8, SMB, 152m.

Species with acicula starting on setigers 20-40

• C. commonalis has been found off Palos Verdes, but not yet in SMB nor in OCSD samples.
This is a small speeies, 5-7 mm. It has a short prostomium/peristomium with a triangular
prostomium. The peristomium has three elear annulations. The tentaele and first branehiae
are just anterior of setiger 1 and more eentrally plaeed, away from parapodia. Neuropodial
spines start at setigers 40^8, and there are weak einetures in the posterior setigers. There is
no distinetive staining pattern. A key eharaeter is the distinet shape of the neuropodial spines;
the tips bend baek along the shaft, attaehing to the spine (see Blake 1996).

• C. hartmanae is eommon in eoarse-grained sediments from 45-150m, from San Diego to
Goleta. This speeies also has an inflated region anteriorly; neuropodia that often have an
orange tinge, and faleate spines with slight serrations. The staining pattern is distinetive
with lateral staining that begins posterior to the inflated region and does not extend on to the
dorsum. This is a very eharaeteristie speeies with the golden spines and speeifle staining eolor
pattern. One of the few speeies that is so distinetive that it ean be readily identified with little
eonfusion to others.

• C. acuta is another small speeies, ranging between 8-10 mm that oeeurs from 30-125m in
SMB and Goleta. It has two weak annulations on the laterally rounded/bulbous peristomium,
and a fairly large separation between tentaele and first branehiae. Spines start at 18^0; but
Tony has seen them only as far baek as 30. Partial einetures are present with 7-9 spines. The
staining pattern ineludes a pale band on the posterior of the prostomium, a dark stain between
parapodia, and weak staining ventrally.

• C. lunula is yet another small speeies, reaehing only 8 mm. Tony examined the paratypes
from Santa Cruz, and his own speeimens from SMB (113m). C. lunula has a distinetive
dorsal groove in the thorax, a pointed prostomium, with semi-einetures in the posterior
portion of body, but does not have a staining pattern. There was some diseussion of whether
the bifid setae in posterior region illustrated by Blake (1996) are a eharaeter worth watehing
for. For example, Veroniea argued for the faet that they were seeing this animal in San
Diego, based on the presenee of the bifid setae; however, Ron was of the opinion that it was
a juvenile speeimen. On the other hand, the pietured speeimen represented a 5 mm holotype,
whieh was gravid. Tony’s speeimens did not show any staining pattern.

10

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

• Chaetozone sp B was originally called Chaetozone sp MECl from Bight’98, Channel Island
sample. Tony has seen it in 45m samples from the Santa Barbara Channel. The first branehiae
are anterior to first setiger and there are massive, golden, thiek, pointed spines in posterior
region. Neurospines start at 37^0; and notospines from setiger 60. Pygidium is a little
different from others and is fiattened dorso-ventrally, but slightly produeed laterally. Staining
shows banding posteriorly on the dorsum and ventrum of eaeh segment, and between the
parapodia from about mid-body to posterior.

Tony reeommended that everyone look at the ehart that Veroniea put together, whieh was
modified from Rowe.

The presentations from today’s meeting will be distributed via Dropbox. [Seeretary’s note:
Whether or not these presentations make it to the SCAMIT website will be left with the
originating taxonomist; however, please feel free to eontaet any individual direetly for
information regarding these taxa or their presentations.]

Tony’s presentation brought about a question eoneeming the uniformity of stain formulations.

Ron knows of two different green stains, methyl green, and ethyl green (listed as “methyl green”),
and suggested that we perform a study of the differenees between them. Leslie has researehed this
a little when helping another group establishing their lab, and found that different eompanies may
use different formulations. She suggests that everyone bring material and their bottles of stain to
the May 12 meeting at the museum.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arthropod:

Diener, D. 1990. Key to North Paeifie Speeies of Hippomedon. SCAMIT NL. Vol. 9, No. 8.
Jarrett, N.E., and E.L. Bousfield. 1982. Studies on amphipod erustaeeans of the Northeastern
Paeifie region. 1. 4. Studies on the amphipod family Eysianassidae in the Northeastern
Paeifie region. Hippomedon and related genera: systematies and distributional eeology.
National Museums of Canada, Publications in Biological Oceanography 10: 103-128.
Earsen, K. 2014. “New speeies of the genus Zeuxo (Peraearida, Tanaidaeea).” Crustaeeana 87:
715-754.

Wieksten, M.K. 2012. Deeapod Crustaeea of the Californian and Oregonian Zoogeographie
Provinees. Zootaxa 3371. 307 pp.

Polychaeta:

Blake, James A. 1996. Chapter 8. Family Cirratulidae Ryekholdt, 1851. pp. 263-384, In: Blake,
James A., Brigitte Hilbig, and Paul H. Seott (eds). Taxonomie Atlas of the Benthie Fauna
of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 6, The Annelida
Part 3. Polyehaeta: Orbiniidae to Cossuridae. 418 pp.

11

Publication Date: 2 November 2015

March/April, 2014

SCAMIT Newsletter

Vol. 32 No. 6

Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: www.seamit.org

SCAMIT OFFICERS

If you need any other information eoneeming SCAMIT please feel free to eontaet any of the offieers at
their e-mail addresses:

President

Larry Lovell (310)830-2400X5613 llovell@laesd.org

Leslie Harris (213)763-3234 lharris@nhm.org

DeanPakso (858)395-2104 deanpasko@yahoo.eom

Laura Terriquez (714)593-7474 lterriquez@oesd.org

Viee-President

Seeretary

Treasurer

The SCAMIT newsletter is published every two months and is distributed freely to members in good
standing. Membership is $15 for an eleetronie eopy of the newsletter, available via the web site at
www.scamit.org, and $30 to reeeive a printed eopy via USPS. Institutional membership, whieh
ineludes a mailed printed eopy, is $60. All eorrespondenees ean be sent to the Seeretary at the email
address above or to:

SCAMIT

PO Box 50162

Long Beaeh, CA 90815