Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T09:36:40.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early Ontogeny of the Septibranch Bivalve Cardiomya Pectinata (Carpenter, 1865)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Richard G. Gustafson ,
Diarmaid Ó. Foighil  and
Robert G. B. Reid
Richard G. Gustafson
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 1700, Victoria, B.C., Canada V8W 2Y2
Diarmaid Ó. Foighil
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 1700, Victoria, B.C., Canada V8W 2Y2
Robert G. B. Reid
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Victoria, P.O. Box 1700, Victoria, B.C., Canada V8W 2Y2
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A minor spawning event by laboratory-held specimens of the septibranch bivalve Cardiomyapectinata yielded approximately 40 developing embryos. Their early ontogeny was observed from the early gastrula stage of development until the developing shell had completely enclosed the embryos and had attained 90% of the prodissoconch size observed on juvenile shells. Available evidence indicates that this species undergoes a non-planktotrophic, direct pre-juvenile development. Support for this view includes the enclosure of the developing embryo in a negatively buoyant, adhesive capsule until an advanced stage of development; poorly developed velar ciliation and lack of prodissoconch II formation. Although incomplete, this, the first study on septibranch pre-juvenile development, reveals that C. pectinata embryos form an external calcified shell in a manner homologous to the lamellibranch bivalves, and develop a velum modified for yolk storage, while lacking the epithelial test or pericalymma characteristic of protobranch bivalves. These data indicate that cuspidariid septibranchs are phylogenetically closer to the lamellibranchs than to the protobranch bivalves.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 66 , Issue 4 , November 1986 , pp. 943 - 950
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. A., 1961. The development of Pandora inaequivalvis (Linné). Journal of Embryology and Experimental Morphology, 9, 252–268.Google ScholarPubMed
Allen, J. A. & Morgan, R. E., 1981. The functional morphology of Atlantic deep water species of the family Cuspidariidae and Poromyidae (Bivalvia): an analysis of the evolution of the septibranch condition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (B), 294, 413–546.Google Scholar
Allen, J. A. & Sanders, H. L., 1973. Studies on deep-sea Protobranchia (Bivalvia); the families Siliculidae and Lametilidae. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, 145, 263–309.Google Scholar
Allen, J. A. & Turner, J. F., 1974. On the functional morphology of the family Verticordiidae (Bivalvia) with descriptions of new species from the abyssal Atlantic. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 268, 401–561.Google Scholar
Bernard, F. R., 1974. Septibranchs of the eastern Pacific (Bivalvia Anomalodesmata). Allan Hancock Monographs in Marine Biology, no. 8, 279 pp.Google Scholar
Bernard, F. R., 1979. New species of Cuspidaria from the northeastern Pacific (Bivalvia: Anomalodesmata), with a proposed classification of septibranchs. Venus, 38, 14–24.Google Scholar
Bernard, F. R., 1983. Catalogue of the living Bivalvia of the eastern Pacific Ocean: Bering Strait to Cape Horn. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 61, 102 pp.Google Scholar
Blacknell, W. M. & Ansell, A. D., 1974. The direct development of the bivalve Thyasira gouldi (Philippi). Thalassia jugoslavica, 10, 23–43.Google Scholar
Carriker, M. R. & Palmer, R. E., 1979. Ultrastructural morphogenesis of prodissoconch and early dissoconch valves of the oyster Crassostrea virginica. Proceedings. National Shellfisheries Association, 69, 103–128.Google Scholar
Chanley, P. & Castanga, M., 1966. Larval development of the pelecypod Lyonsia hyalina. Nautilus, 79, 123–128.Google Scholar
Dall, W. H., 1886. Report on the Mollusca, Part 1: Brachiopoda and Pelecypoda. Reports on the results of dredging by the U.S. coast survey steamer ‘Blake’. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, 12, 171—318.Google Scholar
Dietrich, H. F. & Fontaine, A. R., 1975. A decalcification method for ultrastructure of echinoderm tissues. Stain Technology, 50, 351–353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Drew, G. A., 1899. Some observations on the habits, anatomy and embryology of members of the Protobranchia. Anatomischer Anzeiger, 15, 493–519.Google Scholar
Drew, G. A., 1901. The life history of Nucula delphinodonta (Mighels). Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science, 44, 313–391.Google Scholar
Gustafson, R. G., 1985. Development, Morphogensis and Putative Symbiont Transmission in the Pericalymma Larva of Solemya reidi (Bivalvia, Cryptodonta, Solemyidae). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Victoria, B. C, Canada.Google Scholar
Knudsen, J., 1967. The deep sea Bivalvia. Scientific Reports. John Murray Expedition, 11, 237–343.Google Scholar
Knudsen, J., 1970. The systematics and biology of the abyssal and hadal Bivalvia. Galathea Report, 11, 7–236.Google Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1938. Notes on the breeding of some lamellibranchs from Plymouth and their larvae. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 23, 119–144.Google Scholar
Lutz, R. A., Jablonski, D., Rhoads, D. C. & Turner, R. D., 1980. Larval dispersal of a deep-sea hydrothermal vent bivalve from the Galapagos Rift. Marine Biology, 57, 127–133.Google Scholar
Moore, R. C. (ed.), 1969. Mollusca 6, Bivalvia. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, pt.N, vol. 1. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Morton, B., 1981. The Anomalodesmata. Malacologia, 21, 35–60.Google Scholar
Morton, B., 1982. The functional morphology of Parilimya fragilis (Bivalvia: Parilimyidae nov.fam.) with a discussion on the origin and evolution of the carnivorous septibranchs and a reclassification of the Anomalodesmata. Transactions of the Zoological Society of London, 36, 153–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, D. N., 1965. Classification of the Bivalvia. American Museum Novitates, no. 2206, 25 pp.Google Scholar
Nordsieck, F., 1969. Die Europaischen Meeresmuscheln (Bivalvia) von Eismeer bis Kapverden, Mittelmeer und Schwarzes Meer. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Ockelmann, K. W., 1965. Developmental types in marine bivalves and their distribution along the Atlantic coast of Europe. In Proceedings of the First European Malacological Congress, 1962 (ed. Cox, L. R. and Peake, J. F.), pp. 25–35. London: Conchological Society of Great Britain and Ireland and Malacological Society of London.Google Scholar
Oldfield, E., 1964. The reproduction and development of some members of the Erycinidae and Montacutidae (Mollusca, Eulamellibranchiata). Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, 36, 79–120.Google Scholar
Pelseneer, P., 1891. Contribution à l'étude de lamellibranches. Archives de biologie, 11, 147–312.Google Scholar
Pelseneer, P., 1911. Les lamellibranches de l'expédition du Siboga, partie anatomique. Siboga Expeditie, 53a, 125 pp.Google Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1956. The stomach in the Protobranchia and Septibranchia (Lamellibranchia). Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 127, 511–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1959. Phylogenetic classification of the Lamellibranchia, with special reference to the Protobranchia. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, 33, 224–230.Google Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1963. Phylogenetic classification of the Bivalvia, with special reference to the Septibranchia. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, 35, 71—80.Google Scholar
Ridewood, W. G., 1903. On the structure of the gills of the Lamellibranchia. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (B), 195, 147–284.Google Scholar
Runnegar, B., 1974. Evolutionary history of the bivalve subclass Anomalodesmata. Journal of Paleontology, 48, 904–939.Google Scholar
Salvini-Plawen, L. V., 1973. Zur klarung des ‘trochophora'-begriffes. Experientia, 29, 1434–1436.Google Scholar
Salvini-Plawen, L. V., 1980. A reconsideration of systematics in the Mollusca (phytogeny and higher classification). Malacologia, 19, 249–278.Google Scholar
Thiele, J., 1935. Handbuch der Systematischen Weichtierkunde, vol. z. Classis Bivalvia. Jena: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
Trevallion, C. 1965. A Study of Detritus-feeding Bivalve Molluscs, and an Investigation on Detritus. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Southampton.Google Scholar
Vokes, H. E., 1967. Genera of the Bivalvia, a systematic and bibliographic catalogue. Bulletin of American Paleontology, 51, 111–394.Google Scholar
Waller, T. R., 1981. Functional morphology and development of veliger larvae of the European oyster Ostrea edulis Linne. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, no. 328, 70 pp.Google Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1928. Structure and function of the organs of feeding and digestion in the septibranchs, Cuspidaria and Poromya. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (B), 216, 221–263.Google Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1959. The status of the Protobranchia in the bivalve Mollusca. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London, 33, 210–214.Google Scholar
Yonge, C. M. & Morton, B. S., 1980. Ligament and lithodesma in the Pandoracea and Poromyacea with a discussion on evolutionary history in the Anomalodesmata (Mollusca: Bivalvia). Journal of Zoology, 191, 292.Google Scholar