A Review of the Genus Eunice - Smithsonian Institution Libraries

NUMBER 523 71
REMARKS.—Eunice articulata, as described above, belongs
to group A-l and agree in most details with E. websteri; it is
listed with similar species in Table 19. The maxillary formula
given by Ehlers (1887:83) matches neither of the 2 syntypes.
The other syntype clearly belongs to group B and, judging
from the development of the branchiae in the last setigers
present, probably to subgroup 2 (forms with branchiae beyond
setiger 100). This specimen was seen by Ehlers: a note in his
handwriting detailing some of the features of the specimen,
including the branchial distribution and the maxillary formula,
was present in the vial with the specimen. The specimen is not
identifiable because details of the anterior end cannot be
determined and is here considered an unidentifiable member of
the genus.
Eunice articulata may be separated from other species in the
group by having branchiae from setiger 4 rather than from
setiger 3; these branchiae are short, with thick, stubby
filaments. In addition the antennae and peristomial cirri are
unusually long, slender and strongly articulated, without being
moniliform. It is listed with similar species in Tables 19 and 20.
Eunice articulata (Hoagland, 1920)
Leodice articulata Hoagland, 1920:615-616, pi. 50: figs. 9-12.
Eunice articulata.—Hartman, 1959:316.
REMARKS.—The specific name used by Hoagland (1920) is
pre-occupied in the combination Eunice articulata Ehlers,
1887. The species described by Hoagland, clearly different
from Ehlers' species, is here re-named E. hirschi (see below).
20. Eunice atlantica Kinberg, 1865
FIGURE 16f-i; TABLES 41, 42
Eunice atlantica Kinberg, 1865:563; 1910:42, pi. 16: fig. 18.—Hartman,
1948:79.
MATERIAL EXAMINED.—Holotype, RM 325, Praya Grande
near Rio de Janeiro, Eugenie Expedition 305.
COMMENTS ON MATERIAL EXAMINED.—The type material
consists of 4 fragments, one of which is an anterior end. The 3
other fragments consists of 9 segments, 5 segments, and a
single segment; these fragments must be from the median to
posterior part of the body in that they lack branchiae and have
subacicular hooks, assuming a common configuration of
features. The shape of the compound hooks, aciculae, and
limbate setae indicate that the median fragments came from a
specimen of the same species as the anterior fragment, perhaps
from the same specimen.
DESCRIPTION.—Anterior fragment with 9 setigers, of unknown
sex; length 4 mm; width 2 mm.
Prostomium distinctly shorter than peristomium. Prostomial
lobes frontally rounded, dorsally flattened; median sulcus
shallow. Ceratophores ring-shaped in all antennae, without
articulations. Ceratostyles tapering, with up to 5 cylindrical
articulations. A-I to middle of peristomium; A-II to setiger 1;
A-III now broken (to segment 5 according to Kinberg, 1865).
Peristomium cylindrical. Separation between rings distinct on
all sides; anterior ring 2 /3 of total peristomial length. Peristomial
cirri to posterior third of prostomium, slender and
tapering, with 3 cylindrical articulations.
Jaws not examined.
Branchiae from setiger 3; first branchiae single; maximum 5
digitiform filaments.
Parapodial shapes indeterminable.
Limbate setae longer than other setae, slender, marginally
serrated. Pectinate setae not seen. Shafts of compound falcigers
(Figure 160 inflated, marginally coarsely serrated; distal beak
present. Appendages long, narrow, tapering, bidentate. Proximal
teeth short, reduced triangular, directed basally. Distal
teeth slender, distally hooked, tapering, directed laterally.
Guards distally symmetrically rounded, with distinct, slender
mucros (Figure 16f,i), marginally smooth. Pseudocompound
falcigers and compound spinigers absent. Aciculae paired,
yellow, tapering, straight or gently curved (Figure 16h).
Subacicular hooks (Figure 16g) yellow, tridentate with teeth in
a crest. Primary fangs large, curved basally; 2 distal fangs with
common stem; tertiary fangs very small. Distribution of
subacicular hooks unknown.
UKNOWN MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURES.—All features associated
with mid-body and posterior parts of the body; jaw
structure.
EXPECTED STATE OF SELECTED UNKNOWN FEATURES.—
The species is too poorly known to yield meaningful
predictions.
CHARACTERS USED IN PREPARATION OF KEY NOT
SCORED.—Inappropriate Characters: None known. Unknown
Characters: 1, 2, 4-6, 11-17, 32, 34, 36-38, 40,
42-59, 61-68, 80-82.
ASSUMED STATES FOR PURPOSE OF PREPARING KEY.—33,2;
37,2; 38,2; 53,1; 57,2.
REMARKS.—The anterior end is poorly preserved. Kinberg
stated that up to 12 branchial filaments should be present, but
this cannot presently be confirmed. The description of the
subacicular hooks given above assumes that the median
fragments present belong to the same species as the anterior
end.
The label in the vial is marked Eunice atlantica (var).
Kinberg (1865:563) described a variety of his new species,
which should differ from the main form basically in the reduced
number of branchial filaments. This variety should be present
in sandy and rocky shores near the mouth of La Plata. The
locality information given for the specimen examined here
matches that given for the main form, and the specimen is here
considered the type of the species. The difference between the
two forms is minor and it is here assumed that both (lots of)
specimens belonged to the same species.