|
|
 |
Fiche d'espèce de Copépode |
|
|
Monstrilloida ( Ordre ) |
|
|
|
Monstrillidae ( Famille ) |
|
|
|
Monstrilla ( Genre ) |
|
|
| |
Monstrilla helgolandica Claus, 1863 (F,M) | |
| | | | | | | Syn.: | Monstrilla canadensis McMurrich, 1917; Fontaine, 1955 (p.890); Tremblay & Anderson, 1984 (p.8); Bernier & al., 2002 (p.651, tab.1);
Monstrilla anglica (M) : Wilson, 1932 a (p.394, figs.M);
Monstrilla serricornis (M) : ? C.B. Wilson, 1950 (p.268);
Non M. helgolandica : Ramirez, 1971 b (p.381, figs.F, Rem.) | | | | Ref.: | | | Claus, 1863 (p.165, figs.F); van Breemen, 1908 a (p.207, figs.F); A. Scott, 1909 (p.238, figs.F); Sars, 1921 (p.18, F); Gallien, 1934 (p.379, figs.F,M, Rem.); Dolgopol'skaya, 1948 (p.178, figs.F); Sewell, 1949 (p.139, fig.F); Fontaine, 1955 (p.890); Park, 1967 (p.149, figs.F); Shih & al., 1971 (p.57); Isaac, 1974 (p.128); 1975 (p.3, 8, non le M); Threlkeld, 1977 (p.226, Rem.); Gardner & Szabo, 1982 (p.84, figs.F,M); McAlice, 1982 (p.45, Rem.); 1985 (p.627, figs.F,M, Rem.); Huys & Boxshall, 1991 (p.163, 464, figs.M); Suarez-Morales, 1994 (p.264: Rem.); Grygier, 1995 a (p.9, 32, 66); Grygier & Ohtsuka, 1995 (Rem.: p.717-718); Suarez-Morales, 2000 (p.115: Rem.); Ferrari & Dahms, 2007 (p.57); Suarez-Morales, 2010 (p.66, Rem.); Vives & Shmeleva, 2010 (p.177, figs.F,M, Rem.); Suarez-Morales, 2011 (p.6: Rem. |  issued from : R.B.S. Sewell in The John Murray Expedition, 1933-34, Scientific Reports, IX (2), 1949. [p.140, Fig.39, A-B]. Female (from Nankauri Harbour, Nicobar Is.): A, habitus (dorsal); B, P5.
|
 issued from : R. Huys & G.A. Boxshall in Copepod Evolution, The Ray Society, 1991. [p.163, Fig.2.5.6]. Male (from Norway): D, distal segment of A1.
|
 issued from : R. Huys & G.A. Boxshall in Copepod Evolution, The Ray Society, 1991. [p.165, Fig.2.5.8]. Male (from Norway): A, urosome with spermatophore partly discharged (lateral view); B, idem (ventral view).
|
 issued from : R. Huys & G.A. Boxshall in Copepod Evolution, The Ray Society, 1991. [p.167, Fig.2.5.10]. Female: Detail of oral region with mouth cone. Scale bar = 0.030 mm.
|
 issued from : M.J. Grygier & S. Ohtsuka in J. Crustacean Biol., 1995, 15 (4). [p.718, Table 1]. Differences between M. hamatapex and European M. helgolandica
|
 issued from : T.S. Park in Trans. Amer. Microsc. Soc., 1967, 86 (2). [p.147, Fig.3]; Female (from Strait of Georgie): A-B, habitus (lateral and dorsal, respectively); C, posterior portion of body (dorsal); D, A1; E, P1; F, P2; C, P5. Nota: Cephalosome including the 1st metasomal segment about as long as the rest of te body, and its surface is finely rugose. Prominent oral papilla located halfway along the ventral side of the cephalosome. 2 dorsal eyes visible immediately dorsal to A1. Genital segment relatively long being equal to the rest of the urosome., including the caudal rami, and bears ventrally ovigerous spiniform processes. Caudal rami with 6 setae, 2 medial, 2 lateral, 1 terminal and 1 dorsal very short. A1 only 2/5 the length of the fused cephalosome including the 1st metasomal segment; it has only one complete articulation, by which the small proximal segment is separated; none of its setae are dichotomously branched. P1 differs from those of the succeeding legs, which are all alike, in that the 3rd exopodal segment has 4 setae. instead of 5. P5 slender, strongly divergent, bears 1 long terminal seta and 1 subterminal, lateral seta; the inner lobe is absent or at least inconspicuous.
|
 issued from : G.O. Sars in An Account of the Crustacea of Norway, with short descriptions and figures of all the species, 1921a, 8. [Pl. IX]. Female (from Christiansund): Urs, urosome (ventral and lateral, respectively). Nota: Body comparatively short and stout, and somewhat dilated in its anterior part. Cephalic segment occupying half the length of the body. Eye easily observable, and having all 3 lenses developed. A1 4-segmented. Oral tubule well marked, located in the middle of the cephalic segment. natatory legs without any denticle inside the 2nd basal segment (Basis). P5 , each forming a narrow cylindrical stem, angularly bent in the middle and tipped with 2 subequal setae. Genital segment being rather large and gradually narrowed behind. Ovigerous spines of moderate length. Caudal rami considerably divergent, narrow oblong in shape, each with 6 setae of somewhat unequal length, one of them, attached somewhat dorsally, being very small, that next to it on the outer side somewhat shorter than the 4 remaining ones.
| | | | | Ref. compl.: | | | Rose, 1926 a (p.61); Holmes, 2001 (p.62); Bernier & al., 2002 (p.651, tab.1); Kovalev, 2003 (p.47); Dias & Bonecker, 2007 (p.270, fig.3, tab.II); Brylinski, 2009 (p.253: Tab.1, p.258: Rem.); Suarez-Morales, 2010 a (p.3); W.-B. Chang & al., 2010 (p.735, Table 2, abundance); | | | | NZ: | 10 + 1 douteuse | | | | | | | | | | | | | Loc: | | | G. du Maine, Woods Hole, Baie de Fundy, Ungava Bay, Norvège, Mer du Nord, Irlande, Manche, G. de Gascogne (Estuaire de la Loire), Médit. (Alger, Mer Noire), Is. Nicobar, Indonésie-Malaisie, ? Japon, Taiwan (south), Is. Gilbert, Détroit de Géorgie | | | | N: | 17 ? | | | | Lg.: | | | (5) F: 2,07; (45) M: 2-1,4; (277) F: 1,55-1,47; (663) F: ? 1,4; (746) F: 2,31; (747) F: 5,3-1,4; M: 2-1,1; (749) F: 2; M: 1,15-1; {F: 1,40-5,30; M: 1,00-2,00} | | | | Rem.: | According to Sars (1921 a, p.18) the form recorded by Bourne as M. helgolandica is quite certainly not that species but more properly referable to M. longiremis
For Park (1967, p.149) the descriptions given by the various authors are too brief to allow detailed comparison, there seems to be considerable variation among specimens from different geographical areas. In these conditions the geographical distribution are doubtful.
For Suarez-Morales (2000 c, p.115) the attempt of Isaac (1974, 1975) to designate the male of M. serricornis as the male of M. helgolandicaM. canadensis Mc Murrich, 1917 to M. helgolandica. See remarks in Suarez-Morales (2000 c, p.114-115; 2011, p.6). After Suarez-Morale ( 2010, p.66) a female from the Nicobar Islands (Sewell, 1949) differs from the Norwegian specimen depicted by Sars (1921) and may represent a different species. Grygier & Ohtsuka (1995) recognized the morphological variability related to records of M. helgolandica from different geographical regions, suggesting that it is unlikely that all refer to the same species. | | | Dernière mise à jour : 03/12/2012 | |
|
|
 Toute utilisation de ce site pour une publication sera mentionnée avec la référence suivante :
Razouls C., de Bovée F., Kouwenberg J. et Desreumaux N., 2005-2012. - Diversité et répartition géographique chez les Copépodes planctoniques marins. Disponible sur http://copepodes.obs-banyuls.fr
[Accédé le 25 mai 2013] © copyright 2005-2012 CNRS, UPMC
|
|
|
|
;)
;)
;)
;)
;){kind=small}
;)
;)
