Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T10:36:29.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diet preferences of the Aglajidae: a family of cephalaspidean gastropod predators on tropical and temperate shores

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 August 2015

Andrea Zamora-Silva*
Affiliation:
Phylogenetic Systematics and Evolution Research Group, Department of Natural History, University Museum of Bergen, University of Bergen, PB 7800, 5020-Bergen, Norway
Manuel António E. Malaquias
Affiliation:
Phylogenetic Systematics and Evolution Research Group, Department of Natural History, University Museum of Bergen, University of Bergen, PB 7800, 5020-Bergen, Norway
*
Correspondence should be addressed to:A. Zamora-Silva, Phylogenetic Systematics and Evolution Research Group, Department of Natural History, University Museum of Bergen, University of Bergen, PB 7800, 5020-Bergen, Norway email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aglajidae is a family of tropical and temperate marine Cephalaspidea gastropod slugs regarded as active predators. In order to better understand their food habits and trophic interactions, we have studied the diet of all genera through the examination of gut contents. Specimens were dissected for the digestive tract and gut contents were removed and identified by optical and scanning electron microscopy. Our results confirmed that carnivory is the only feeding mode in aglajids and showed a sharp preference for vagile prey (94% of food items). We suggest that the interaction between crawling speed, presence of sensorial structures capable of detecting chemical signals from prey, and unique features of the digestive system (e.g. lack of radula, eversion of the buccal bulb, thickening of gizzard walls) led aglajid slugs to occupy a unique trophic niche among cephalaspideans, supporting the hypothesis that dietary specialization played a major role in the adaptive radiation of Cephalaspidea gastropods.

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 2015

INTRODUCTION

Aglajidae is a diverse group of predominantly shallow-water cephalaspidean gastropods with an extensive degree of morphological and colour variation (Rudman, Reference Rudman1971, Reference Rudman1972a, Reference Rudmanb, Reference Rudmanc, Reference Rudman1974, Reference Rudman1978; Gosliner, Reference Gosliner1980, Reference Gosliner, Behrens and Valdés2008). The family contains seven recognized genera and approximately 80 species worldwide distributed in tropical, sub-tropical and temperate shores. They are mostly found in soft bottom habitats and alga tufts around rocky shores, coral reefs and seagrass meadows (Thompson, Reference Thompson1977; Martínez et al., Reference Martínez, Ballesteros, Ávila and Cimino1993; Nakano, Reference Nakano2004; Valdés et al., Reference Valdés, Behrens and DuPont2006; Gosliner et al., Reference Gosliner, Behrens and Valdés2008; Camacho-García et al., Reference Camacho-García, Ornelas-Gatdula, Gosliner and Valdés2013; Costello et al., Reference Costello, Bouchet, Boxshall, Fauchald, Gordon, Hoeksema, Poore, van Soest, Sto, Walter, Vanhoorne, Decock and Appeltans2013; Bouchet, Reference Bouchet2014; Malaquias, Reference Malaquias2014).

A recent phylogenetic hypothesis of the Aglajidae confirmed the monophyly of the genera Aglaja, Melanochlamys, Nakamigawaia, Navanax, Odontoglaja and Philinopsis but suggested the paraphyly of Chelidonura which branched in three sub-clades (Camacho-García et al., Reference Camacho-García, Ornelas-Gatdula, Gosliner and Valdés2013). The general morphology and anatomy of several species in these three subclades are well known and they all depict similar body plans (Rudman, Reference Rudman1974; Gosliner, Reference Gosliner1980; Yonow, Reference Yonow1992, Reference Yonow1994; Ornelas-Gatdula et al., Reference Ornelas-Gatdula, Dupont and Valdés2012). As a consequence, the taxonomic status of Chelidonura is presently not clear and thus, for the purpose of this research, we adopted its traditional definition (sensu Burn & Thompson, Reference Burn, Thompson, Beesley, Ross and Wells1998).

In addition to these seven genera, there has been some debate about the validity and inclusion in the family Aglajidae of three other lineages, namely Noalda, Pseudophiline and Spinoaglaja. The genus Spinoaglaja was proposed for western Atlantic species with a spine-like extension on the anterior part of the shell (Ortea et al., Reference Ortea, Moro and Espinosa2007), but Camacho-García et al. (Reference Camacho-García, Ornelas-Gatdula, Gosliner and Valdés2013) have regarded it as a synonym of Philinopsis; the latter authors did not consider Noalda as part of the Aglajidae, but this remains to be tested in a molecular phylogenetic framework. Pseudophiline has morphological similarities with Philine (Gosliner, Reference Gosliner1980; Kitao & Habe, Reference Kitao and Habe1982) and the genus was recently ascribed to the family Philinidae based on the presence of philinid-like gizzard plates and radula (Chaban, Reference Chaban and Lutaenko2011). More recently, the new genus Migaya was proposed by Ortea et al. (Reference Ortea, Caballer, Moro and Espinosa2014) for the western Atlantic species Aglaja felis, but the validity of this genus remains to be tested in a phylogenetic framework.

Herbivory is considered the plesiomorphic feeding condition in the Cephalaspidea (Jensen, Reference Jensen1994; Mikkelsen, Reference Mikkelsen1996; Göbbeler & Klussmann-Kolb, Reference Göbbeler and Klussmann-Kolb2009; Malaquias et al., Reference Malaquias, Berecibar and Reid2009), and carnivory was suggested by Malaquias et al. (Reference Malaquias, Mackenzie-Dodds, Bouchet, Gosliner and Reid2009) to have arisen independently two or three times in different lineages. The latter authors have hypothesized that dietary specialization played a major role in the adaptive radiation of Cephalaspidea gastropods and that relations between prey structure, habitat and anatomy were important in the diversification within each lineage, allowing the development of more specific predator–prey interactions.

Aglajids show several unique evolutionary traits with potential relevance for feeding strategies and diversification, such as the reduction and posterior internalization of the shell, simplification of the digestive system (e.g. loss of hard mastication structures like the radula and gastric plates in the large majority of species), development and thickening of the buccal bulb and gizzard, secretion of deterrent chemicals, and cephalization of sensorial organs (Rudman, Reference Rudman1972a, Reference Rudmanb, Reference Rudmanc, Reference Rudman1978; Gosliner, Reference Gosliner1980; Sleeper et al., Reference Sleeper, Paul and Fenical1980; Leonard & Lukowiak, Reference Leonard and Lukowiak1984; Wägele & Klussmann-Kolb, Reference Wägele and Klussmann-Kolb2005; Cruz-Rivera, Reference Cruz-Rivera2011).

Several sensory structures in gastropods (e.g. eyes, anterior lateral folds, Hancock's organs, cephalic bristles, labial palps) are known to aid in tracking mucous trails (Kohn, Reference Kohn, Saleuddin and Wilbur1983) and for example, Paine (Reference Paine1963, Reference Paine1965) and Leonard & Lukowiak (Reference Leonard and Lukowiak1984) have demonstrated that active predation in Navanax involves mucous trail and chemoreception. The few empirical data available on the crawling speed of aglajids suggests that they are among the fastest moving sea slugs (Turner, Reference Turner1978).

The size of the buccal bulb and its ability of eversion are also important features in feeding: in Aglaja, Melanochlamys, Navanax and Philinopsis, the buccal bulb occupies almost half of the body length; while in Chelidonura, Nakamigawaia and Odontoglaja it is reduced to one-fifth of the body (Rudman, Reference Rudman1971). Two different forms of the buccal bulb prevail in Philinopsis: the typical bulbous shape (e.g. P. taronga, P. orientalis) that is also present in Aglaja, Melanochlamys and Navanax; and a tubular variation (e.g. P. depicta, P. pilsbryi) (Rudman, Reference Rudman1971, Reference Rudman1972a, Reference Rudmanb, Reference Rudmanc, Reference Rudman1974, Reference Rudman1978) (Figure 1A–C). The buccal bulb in Aglaja and Navanax can evert completely, whereas this ability is absent in Chelidonura, Nakamigawaia, Melanochlamys and Philinopsis (Rudman, Reference Rudman1971, Reference Rudman1974; Gosliner, Reference Gosliner1980, Reference Gosliner, Harrison and Kohn1994).

Fig. 1. Diagrammatic representation of the digestive system in Aglajidae and SEM image of the radula of Odontoglaja guamensis: (A) massive buccal bulb of Aglaja, Melanochlamys, Navanax and Philinopsis; (B) tubular buccal bulb variation of Philinopsis; (C) reduced buccal bulb in Chelidonura, Nakamigawaia and Odontoglaja; (D) radula of O. guamensis. (m) mouth; (bb) buccal bulb; (sg) salivary glands; (oe) oesophagus; (g) gut; (dg) digestive gland; (a) anus. Scale bar: 100 μm.

The genus Navanax feed upon other cephalaspideans including conspecifics, sacoglosans, anaspideans, nudibranchs, caenogastropods, polychaetes, crustaceans and small fish (Paine, Reference Paine1963, Reference Paine1965; Blair & Seapy, Reference Blair and Seapy1972; Gosliner, Reference Gosliner1980; Leonard & Lukowiak, Reference Leonard and Lukowiak1984; Pennings, Reference Pennings1990; Pennings et al., Reference Pennings, Natisch and Paul2001; Korb, Reference Korb2003); Philinopsis and Melanochlamys feed upon cephalaspideans and polychaetes (Rudman, Reference Rudman1972a, Reference Rudmanb, Göbbeler & Klussmann-Kolb, Reference Göbbeler and Klussmann-Kolb2009); Chelidonura upon flatworms (Gosliner, Reference Gosliner1987, Reference Gosliner, Harrison and Kohn1994; Yonow, Reference Yonow1992; Mangubhai, Reference Mangubhai2007); while Odontoglaja feeds on polychaetes and bivalves (Rudman, Reference Rudman1978; Wägele & Klussmann-Kolb, Reference Wägele and Klussmann-Kolb2005; Lobo-da-Cunha et al., Reference Lobo-da-Cunha, Ferreira, Coelho and Calado2009). No data are available on the diet of Aglaja and Nakamigawaia.

In this study we provide the first assessment of the dietary habits of Aglajidae sea slugs based on a comprehensive review of the literature and examination of gut contents of specimens representing the generic diversity of the family. We discuss our findings in relation to the distinctive anatomical, ecological and behavioural adaptations of these slugs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-two specimens belonging to 32 species of Aglajidae were dissected and their gut contents removed and examined (Table 1). Buccal bulb, oesophagus, intestine, and digestive gland were extracted and opened and the contents spread in Petri dishes filled with 70% ethanol and identified to the lowest possible taxonomic level using stereo, compound and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Food items were mounted on SEM metallic stubs and coated with gold-palladium. Macrophotography was also used when convenient (Figures 2–4). In addition to gut content analyses, we revised the literature for records of Aglajidae food preferences in the wild (Table 2).

Fig. 2. Scanning electron micrographs of food items found in the digestive tract of Aglajidae specimens: (A) residues of foraminiferans in Aglaja felis ZMBN 84913; (B) valve of Nuculidae bivalve in Chelidonura fulvipunctata WAM S80134; (C) jaws of Facelinidae nudibranch in Philinopsis depicta ZMBM 94031; (D) radula of Facelinidae nudibranch in Philinopsis depicta ZMBM 94031; (E) detail of radula of Facelinidae nudibranch in Philinopsis depicta ZMBM 94031; (F) shell of Haminoea sp. in Philinopsis taronga NMVF K02; (G) gizzard plates of Haminoea sp. in Philinopsis taronga NMVF K02. Scale bars A and E: 200 μm; B and F: 100 μm; C, D, and G: 20 μm.

Fig. 3. Scanning electron micrographs of food items found in the digestive tract of Aglajidae specimens: (A) shell of Bulla punctulata in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818; (B) radula of B. punctulata in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818; (C) gizzard plates of B. punctulata in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818; (D) shell of Philine sp. in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (E) gizzard plates of Philine sp. in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (F) Aciculata polychaete in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (G) detail of the parapodia of Aciculata polychaetes in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859. Scale bars A: 1 mm; B, C and D: 200 μm; E and G: 20 μm; F: 100 μm.

Fig. 4. Scanning electron micrographs of food items found in the digestive tract of Aglajidae specimens: (A) Kynorhyncha sp. in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (B) ?exoskeleton of Isopoda in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (C) Enoploidea nematodes in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (D) detail of the mouth of the nematodes in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (E) ?fragment of a spicule of Holothuria in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (F) complete specimen of Gobiidae fish in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818. Scale bars A: 20 μm; B: 30 μm: C and E: 100 μm; D: 10 μm, F: 5 mm.

Table 1. List of Aglajidae species dissected for gut contents. Numbers in brackets are the total number of specimens dissected. (ZMBN – Natural History Collections, University Museum of Bergen, Norway; WAM – Western Australian Museum; USNM – United States National Museum, Smithsonian; CNMO – Colección Nacional de Moluscos, National Autonomous University of México; NMVF – Museum Victoria, Australia).

Table 2. Review of the diet of Aglajidae based on literature records and novel data (based on animals collected in the wild).

Food items were classified in ‘sessile’ and ‘vagile’ according to their mobility capacities (Menge et al., Reference Menge, Berlow, Blanchette, Navarrete and Yamada1994; Wägele, Reference Wägele2004; Madden et al., Reference Madden, Goodin, Allee, Finkbeiner and Bamford2008) and an estimate of food preference (vagile vs sessile) was inferred based on the total diversity of food items recognized during this study and from literature records presented in Table 2.

RESULTS

Food items were found in the gut of 11 out of the 32 species studied and in 24 of the 92 specimens dissected, corresponding to 26% of the specimens analysed (Table 1): one specimen of Aglaja and Nakamigawaia, three specimens of Navanax, four specimens of Chelidonura, Philinopsis and Odontoglaja, and seven of Melanochlamys.

Based on literature records and our own results, 70 different food items were recognized belonging to 20 major taxonomic groups, with vagile organisms accounting for 94% (=66 food items) of the diet composition. Carnivory is confirmed as the only feeding strategy in Aglajidae. The sessile organisms recognized in the gut of aglajids were bivalves, foraminiferans and sponge spicules (Table 2).

Foraminiferans were the only food item found in the gut contents of Aglaja and Nakamigawaia, whereas Navanax yielded the most diverse assemblage of food items, namely sponges, cephalaspidean gastropods, nudibranch gastropods, sacoglossan gastropods, caenogastropods, annelids, crustaceans and fish.

Field observations showed that Chelidonura inornata feed upon conspecifics and Navanax inermis was observed sucking in juveniles of Aplysia sp. (A. Zamora, personal observation).

DISCUSSION

With the exception of the studies by Paine (Reference Paine1963, Reference Paine1965) on the diet of the genus Navanax, knowledge about dietary preferences of aglajid slugs is based on sparse records included in general works about the diversity or morphological aspects of the Aglajidae (e.g. Tchang-Si, 1934; Marcus, Reference Marcus1961; Marcus & Marcus, Reference Marcus and Marcus1966; Blair & Seapy, Reference Blair and Seapy1972; Rudman, Reference Rudman1972a, Reference Rudmanb, Reference Rudman1978; Pennings, Reference Pennings1990; Pennings et al., Reference Pennings, Natisch and Paul2001; Padilla et al., Reference Padilla, Carballo and Camacho2010; Gosliner, Reference Gosliner2011; Camacho-García et al., Reference Camacho-García, Ornelas-Gatdula, Gosliner and Valdés2013; see Table 2). This study is the first comprehensive account dedicated to understand the trophic interactions of Aglajidae slugs as a whole.

The rather low percentage of slugs found with food remains in the gut (26%) may be partly explained by the fact that some aglajids regurgitate the hard parts of prey items after digestion when those seem to be above a certain threshold size. This behaviour was documented by Rudman (Reference Rudman1971, Reference Rudman1972a) for the species Philinopsis speciosa, which he observed regurgitating several empty shells of the gastropod Bulla ampulla after 2–3 h of capture. Aglajids do not have a crushing gizzard with plates and in some cases large shells are likely too difficult to be carried along the digestive tract and end up, therefore, being regurgitated. However, Paine (Reference Paine1963) and Pennings (Reference Pennings1990) have demonstrated that in the large sized-body aglajid species Navanax inermis (average adult size c. 40 mm; Leonard & Lukowiak, Reference Leonard and Lukowiak1984), complete shells of small ‘prosobranchs’ and ‘opisthobranchs’ (e.g. Aplysia, Bulla) and hard-parts of sea slugs (e.g. radulae, jaws, shells) can be defecated unaltered.

A striking result of this research is the recognition that aglajids feed nearly exclusively upon vagile prey (94% of food items; Table 2). Motile organisms secrete mucus to aid in crawling or as a protective mechanism (e.g. opisthobranchs, nematodes, platyhelminths, annelids, gastropods) (Brusca & Brusca, Reference Brusca and Brusca2003; Hickman et al., Reference Hickman, Roberts and Larson1993), leaving behind mucous trails that can be located and traced by aglajids using their sensorial organs (Paine, Reference Paine1965; Kohn, Reference Kohn, Saleuddin and Wilbur1983; Davies & Blackwell, Reference Davies and Blackwell2007; Terrence et al., Reference Terrence, Saltin, Davies, Johannesson, Stafford and Williams2013).

The genera Navanax and Philinopsis include relatively large animals (adult size over 10 mm in most cases) with a massive buccal bulb that occupies about half of the body cavity (Rudman, Reference Rudman1972a, Reference Rudman1974) (Figure 1). These slugs are active crawlers and can feed upon larger prey (e.g. fish, bulloid gastropods, polychaetes, flatworms, crustaceans, ctenophores and other sea slugs; Table 3) by a rapid, partial or complete eversion of the buccal bulb. Paine (Reference Paine1963) documented cannibalism in Navanax (N. inermis) but only between animals of dissimilar size and when those attempted to mate. The diet of N. inermis is by far the best known among aglajids as a result of the long-term and dedicated studies by Paine (Reference Paine1963, Reference Paine1965; see Table 2). These studies seem to indicate that the genus Navanax is the most generalist among the Aglajidae, but of course this can be the result of the uneven amount of data collected for this genus when compared with the others. The presence of sponge spicules found by us in the gut of Navanax is likely the result of random ingestion.

Table 3. Synoptic table of the diet preferences and buccal bulb features in the Aglajidae genera.

On the other hand, Chelidonura, Melanochlamys and Odontoglaja species are on average smaller slugs (adult size less than 10 mm in most cases; exceptions are common in Chelidonura) that have comparatively a reduced and non-eversible buccal bulb (the latter is partially eversible in Odontoglaja) (Rudman, Reference Rudman1972b, Reference Rudman1974; Figure 1; Table 3). Chelidonura seems to have a preference for epifaunal organisms (e.g. flatworms, slugs, shelled gastropods), whereas Melanochlamys feed predominantly upon infaunal prey such as polychaetes, nemerteans, nematodes and kinorhynchs (Table 3).

Odontoglaja, the only confirmed genus with radula (Gosliner et al., Reference Gosliner, Behrens and Valdés2008; Figure 1; referred to a possible Chelidonura with a vestigial radula), which is well developed with strong bicuspid lateral teeth (Gosliner et al., Reference Gosliner, Behrens and Valdés2008; Figure 1), has apparently a preference for organisms with thicker dermis such as crustaceans, ?holothurians, and polychaetes (Hickman et al., Reference Hickman, Roberts and Larson1993; Table 3).

Aglaja and Nakamigawaia are genera for which nothing was previously known about their diet. Most species have an average adult size over 10 mm (Rudman, Reference Rudman1972c; Baba, Reference Baba1985), but based on our results it is not possible to ascertain where the sole presence of foraminiferans found in the gut reflects a dietary preference or results from accidental ingestion. Because of average size, anatomical configuration of the digestive tract, and crawling capacities of these snails (Rudman, Reference Rudman1972c; Baba, Reference Baba1985; Gosliner et al., Reference Gosliner, Behrens and Valdés2008; Figure 1; Tables 2 & 3), our expectation was to find a diet composed by several motile invertebrates.

Malaquias et al. (Reference Malaquias, Berecibar and Reid2009) mapped the diet of most lineages of cephaslaspids onto a molecular phylogeny of the group and have suggested that dietary specialization played a major role in the adaptive radiation of these gastropods. Our results reinforced the view that Aglajidae slugs are the only active hunter group of cephalaspids and the only one to be specialized on motile prey (Malaquias et al., Reference Malaquias, Berecibar and Reid2009; Göbbeler & Klussmann-Kolb, Reference Göbbeler and Klussmann-Kolb2009).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are indebted to A. Cosgrove-Wilke (Western Australian Museum), E. Naranjo-García (Colección Nacional de Moluscos, UNAM-México), J. Chuk (Museum Victoria, Australia), N. Anthes (University of Tübingen), K. Jensen and O. Tendal (Zoologisk Museum, Copenhagen), T. Nickens (Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History), and M. Caballer (Muséum national d¹Histoire naturelle, Paris) for providing specimens for this study. We also thank J. L. Cervera (University of Cádiz), N. Budaeva (University Museum of Bergen, Norway) and P. Valentich-Scott (Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History) for helping with identification of some food items. We are grateful to E. Erichsen (University of Bergen) for his support with the electron microscopy sessions. M. Caballer made valuable comments on this paper.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT

This work was funded through a doctoral grant given to the first author by the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT-México), fellowship BAZS/188890/2010. Additionally, this research benefited from specimens gathered through visits of the second author to European natural history museums funded by the SYNTHESYS Project, http://www.synthesys.info/, which is financed by the European Community Research Infrastructure Action under the FP7 ‘Capacities’ Program.

References

REFERENCES

Baba, K. (1985) Anatomical review of a Cephalaspidean mollusc, Nakamigawaia spiralis Kuroda & Habe in Habe 1961, (Aglajidae), from Japan. Mukaishima Marine Biological Station, Occasional Publications, no. 231, 5 pp.Google Scholar
Blair, G.M. and Seapy, R. (1972) Selective predation and prey location in the sea slug Navanax inermis . Veliger 15, 119124.Google Scholar
Bouchet, P. (2014) Aglajidae Pilsbry, 1895 (1847). In World Register of Marine Species. http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=22981.Google Scholar
Brusca, R.C. and Brusca, G.J. (2003) Invertebrates, 2nd edn. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
Burn, R. and Thompson, T.E. (1998) Order Cephalaspidea. In Beesley, P.L., Ross, G.J.B. and Wells, A. (eds) Mollusca, the Southern synthesis, fauna of Australia Part B. Melbourne: CSIRO Publishing, pp. 943959.Google Scholar
Camacho-García, Y.E., Ornelas-Gatdula, E., Gosliner, T.M. and Valdés, Á. (2013) Phylogeny of the family Aglajidae (Pilsbry 1895) (Heterobranchia: Cephalaspidea) inferred from mtDNA and nDNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 71, 113126.Google Scholar
Chaban, E.M. (2011) Philinorbis teramachi Habe, 1950 (Gastropoda: Opisthobranchia: Cephalaspidea) from coastal waters of Vietnam. In Lutaenko, K.A. (ed.) Proceedings of the workshop Coastal marine biodiversity and bioresources of Vietnam and adjacent areas to the South China Sea, Zhirmundsky Institute of Marine Biology, Far East Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Nha Trang, 24–25 November 2001. Vietnam: Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research (APN), pp. 37–38.Google Scholar
Chiu, S.T. (1990) The diet, prey size and consumption of Philine orientalis (Opisthobranchia: Philinidae) in Hong Kong. Journal of Molluscan Studies 56, 289299.Google Scholar
Costello, M.J., Bouchet, P., Boxshall, G., Fauchald, K., Gordon, D., Hoeksema, B.W., Poore, G.C.B., van Soest, R.W.M., Sto, S., Walter, T.C., Vanhoorne, B., Decock, W. and Appeltans, W. (2013) Global coordination and standardisation in Marine biodiversity through the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) and related databases. PLoS ONE 8, e51629. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0051629.Google Scholar
Cruz-Rivera, E. (2011) Evidence for chemical defense in the cephalaspidean Nakamigawaia spiralis Huroda and Habe 1961. Proceedings of the Malacological Society of London 77, 9597.Google Scholar
Davies, M. and Blackwell, J. (2007) Energy saving through trail following in a marine snail. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 274, 12331236.Google Scholar
Emlen, M.J. (1966) The role of time and energy in food preference. American Naturalist 96, 611617.Google Scholar
Göbbeler, K. and Klussmann-Kolb, A. (2009) Molecular phylogeny of Euthyneura (Mollusca, Gastropoda) with special focus on Opisthobranchia as a framework for reconstruction of evolution of diet. Thalassas 27, 121154.Google Scholar
Gosliner, T.M. (1980) Systematics and phylogeny of the Aglajidae. (Opisthobranchia: Mollusca). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 68, 325360.Google Scholar
Gosliner, T.M. (1987) Nudibranchs of Southern Africa. A guide to opisthobranch molluscs of Southern Africa. Monterey, CA: Sea Challengers and J. Hamann in association with the California Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Gosliner, T.M. (1994) Gastropoda: Opisthobranchia. In Harrison, F.W. and Kohn, A.J. (eds) Mollusca I, Microscopy Anatomy of Invertebrates. New York, NY: Wiley-Liss, pp. 253355.Google Scholar
Gosliner, T.M. (2011) Six new species of aglajids opisthobranch molluscs from the tropical Indo-Pacific. Zootaxa 2751, 124.Google Scholar
Gosliner, T.M., Behrens, D.W. and Valdés, Á. (2008) Indo-Pacific Nudibranchs and Sea Slugs. A field guide to the World's most diverse fauna. San Francisco, CA: Sea Challengers in association with the California Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Gosliner, T.M. and Williams, G. (1972) A new species of Chelidonura from bahía de San Carlos, Gulf of California, with a synonymy of the Family Aglajidae. Veliger 14, 424436.Google Scholar
Hickman, C.P., Roberts, L.S. and Larson, A. (1993) Integrated principles of zoology, 2nd edn. St. Louis, MO: Mosby.Google Scholar
Jensen, K. (1994) Behavioral adaptations and diet specificity of sacoglossan opisthobranchs. Ethology Ecology and Evolution 6, 87101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitao, K. and Habe, T. (1982) Systematic positions of Hamineobulla kawamurai Habe 1950 and Pseudophiline hayashii Habe 1976 (Opisthobranchia). Venus 41, 6163.Google Scholar
Kohn, A.J. (1983) Feeding biology of gastropods. In Saleuddin, A.S.M. and Wilbur, K.M. (eds) The Mollusca, physiology. Part 2. London: Academic Press, pp. 353.Google Scholar
Korb, R. (2003) Lack of dietary specialization in adult Aplysia californica: evidence from stable carbon isotope composition. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 83, 501505.Google Scholar
Leonard, J. and Lukowiak, K. (1984) An ethogram of the sea slug Navanax inermis (Gastropoda, Opisthobranchia). Tierpsychologie 65, 327345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobo-da-Cunha, A., Ferreira, Í., Coelho, R. and Calado, G. (2009) Light and electron microscopy study of the salivary glands of the carnivorous opisthobranch Philinopsis depicta (Mollusca, Gastropoda). Tissue and Cell 41, 367375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lobo-da-Cunha, A., Santos, T., Oliveira, A., Coelho, R. and Calado, G. (2011) Microscopical study of the crop and oesophagus of the carnivorous opisthobranch Philinopsis depicta (Cephalaspidea: Aglajidae). Journal of Molluscan Studies 77, 322331.Google Scholar
Madden, C., Goodin, K., Allee, B., Finkbeiner, M. and Bamford, D. (2008) Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U. S. Department of Commerce, Occasional Publications, no. III, pp. 4651.Google Scholar
Malaquias, M.A.E. (2014). New data on the heterobranch gastropods (“opisthobranchs”) for the Bahamas (tropical western Atlantic ocean). Marine Biodiversity Records 7, e27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malaquias, M.A.E., Berecibar, E. and Reid, D.G. (2009) Reassessment of the tropic position of Bullidae (Gastropoda: Cephalaspidea) and the importance of diet in the evolution of cephalaspidean gastropods. Journal of Zoology 277, 8897.Google Scholar
Malaquias, M.A.E., Mackenzie-Dodds, J., Bouchet, P., Gosliner, T.M. and Reid, D.G. (2009) A molecular phylogeny of the Cephalaspidea sensu lato (Gastropoda: Euthyneyra): Architectibranchia redefined and Runcinacea reinstated. Zoologica Scripta 38, 2341.Google Scholar
Mangubhai, S. (2007) Chelidonura punctata (Eliot 1903) prey on acoel flatworms recruiting onto Platygyra daedalea (Ellis and Solander 1796) in Kenya. Coral Reefs 26, 1057.Google Scholar
Marcus, E. (1961) Opisthobranch molluscs from California. Veliger 3, 184.Google Scholar
Marcus, E. and Marcus, E. (1966) Opisthobranchs from tropical West Africa. (The R/V Pillsbury deep sea expedition to the Gulf of Guinea, 1964–1965). Studies of Tropical Oceanography, Miami 4, 152208.Google Scholar
Martínez, E., Ballesteros, M., Ávila, C. and Cimino, G. (1993) La familia Aglajidae en la Península Ibérica. Iberus 11, 1529.Google Scholar
Menge, B., Berlow, E., Blanchette, C., Navarrete, S. and Yamada, S. (1994) The keystone species concept: variation in the interaction strength in a rocky intertidal habitat. Ecological Monographs 64, 249286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikkelsen, P.M. (1996) The evolutionary relationships of Cephalaspidea s.l. (Gastropoda: Opisthobranchia): a phylogenetic analysis. Malacologia 37, 375442.Google Scholar
Nakano, R. (2004) Opisthobranchs of Japan Islands. Japan: Rutles Inc.Google Scholar
Ornelas-Gatdula, E., Dupont, A. and Valdés, Á. (2012) The tail tells the tale: taxonomy and biogeography of some Atlantic Chelidonura (Gastropoda: Cephalaspidea: Aglajidae) inferred from nuclear and mithocondrial gene data. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 163, 10771095.Google Scholar
Ortea, J., Caballer, M., Moro, L. and Espinosa, J. (2014) What the shell tells in Aglajidae: a new genus for Aglaja felis (Opisthobranchia: Cephalaspidea). Revista de la Academia Canaria de Ciencias 26, 83119.Google Scholar
Ortea, J., Moro, L. and Espinosa, J. (2007) Descripción de dos nuevas especies de Philinopsis Pease 1860 (Mollusca: Opisthobranchia: Cephalaspidea) de Cuba y Bahamas con comentarios sobre las especies atlánticas del género. Revista de la Academia Canaria de Ciencias 4, 3352.Google Scholar
Padilla, C.J., Carballo, J.L. and Camacho, M.L. (2010) A qualitative assessment of sponge-feeding organisms from the Mexican pacific coast. Marine Biology 4, 3946.Google Scholar
Paine, R. (1963) Food recognition and predation on opisthobranchs by Navanax inermis (Gastropoda: Opisthobranchia). Veliger 6, 19.Google Scholar
Paine, R. (1965) Natural history, limiting factors and energetics of the opisthobranch Navanax inermis . Ecology 46, 603619.Google Scholar
Pennings, S.C. (1990) Predator-prey interactions in opisthobranch gastropods: effects of prey body size and habitat complexity. Marine Ecology Progress Series 62, 95101.Google Scholar
Pennings, S.C., Natisch, S. and Paul, V.J. (2001) Vulnerability of sea hares to fish predators: importance of diet and fish species. Coral Reefs 20, 320324.Google Scholar
Rudman, W.B. (1971) Structure and functioning of the gut in the Bullomorpha (Opisthobranchia). Journal of Natural History 5, 647675.Google Scholar
Rudman, W.B. (1972a) A comparative study of the genus Philinopsis Pease 1860 (Aglajidae, Opisthobranchia). Pacific Science 26, 381399.Google Scholar
Rudman, W.B. (1972b) On Melanochlamys Cheeseman 1881, a genus of the Aglajidae (Opisthobranchia, Gastropoda). Pacific Science 26, 5062.Google Scholar
Rudman, W.B. (1972c) Structure and functioning of the gut in the Bullomorpha (Opisthobranchia). Part 4. Aglajidae. Journal of Natural History 6, 547560.Google Scholar
Rudman, W.B. (1974) A comparison of Chelidonura, Navanax and Aglaja with other genera of the Aglajidae (Opisthobranchia: Gastropoda). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 54, 185212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudman, W.B. (1978) A new species and genus of the Aglajidae and the evolution of the philinacean opisthobranch molluscs. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 62, 89107.Google Scholar
Sleeper, H.L., Paul, V.J. and Fenical, W. (1980) Alarm pheromones from the marine opisthobranch Navanax inermis . Journal of Chemical Ecology 6, 5770.Google Scholar
Tchang-Si (1934) Contribution a l'étude des opisthobranches de la côte de Tsingtao. Contributions from the Institute of Zoology, National Academy of Peiping 2, 1139.Google Scholar
Terrence, P., Saltin, S.H., Davies, M.S., Johannesson, K., Stafford, R. and Williams, G. (2013) Snails and their trails: the multiple functions of trail following in gastropods. Biological Reviews 88, 683700.Google Scholar
Thompson, T.E. (1976) Biology of Opisthobranch molluscs. Volume I. London: The Ray Society.Google Scholar
Thompson, T.E. (1977) Jamaican opisthobranch molluscs I. Journal of Molluscan Studies 43, 93140.Google Scholar
Turner, T. (1978) Adaptive significance of foot forms and types of locomotion in Opisthobranchs. Master thesis. California State University, East Bay, Hayward, CA.Google Scholar
Valdés, Á., Behrens, D. and DuPont, A. (2006) Caribbean sea slugs. A field guide to the opisthobranch mollusks from the tropical northwestern Atlantic. Washington, DC: Sea Challengers Natural History Books.Google Scholar
Wägele, H. (2004). Potential key characters in Opisthobranchia (Gastropoda, Mollusca) enhancing adaptive radiation. Organisms, Diversity and Evolution 4, 175188.Google Scholar
Wägele, H. and Klussmann-Kolb, A. (2005) Opisthobranchia (Mollusca, Gastropoda) – more than just slimy slugs. Shell reduction and its implications on defence and foraging. Frontiers in Zoology 2, 118.Google Scholar
Yonow, N. (1992) Observations on the diet of Philinopsis cyanea (Martens) (Cephalaspidea, Aglajidae). Journal of Conchology 34, 199204.Google Scholar
Yonow, N. (1994) A new species and a new record of Chelidonura from the Red Sea (Cephalaspidea: Aglajidae). Journal of Conchology 35, 141147.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Diagrammatic representation of the digestive system in Aglajidae and SEM image of the radula of Odontoglaja guamensis: (A) massive buccal bulb of Aglaja, Melanochlamys, Navanax and Philinopsis; (B) tubular buccal bulb variation of Philinopsis; (C) reduced buccal bulb in Chelidonura, Nakamigawaia and Odontoglaja; (D) radula of O. guamensis. (m) mouth; (bb) buccal bulb; (sg) salivary glands; (oe) oesophagus; (g) gut; (dg) digestive gland; (a) anus. Scale bar: 100 μm.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Scanning electron micrographs of food items found in the digestive tract of Aglajidae specimens: (A) residues of foraminiferans in Aglaja felis ZMBN 84913; (B) valve of Nuculidae bivalve in Chelidonura fulvipunctata WAM S80134; (C) jaws of Facelinidae nudibranch in Philinopsis depicta ZMBM 94031; (D) radula of Facelinidae nudibranch in Philinopsis depicta ZMBM 94031; (E) detail of radula of Facelinidae nudibranch in Philinopsis depicta ZMBM 94031; (F) shell of Haminoea sp. in Philinopsis taronga NMVF K02; (G) gizzard plates of Haminoea sp. in Philinopsis taronga NMVF K02. Scale bars A and E: 200 μm; B and F: 100 μm; C, D, and G: 20 μm.

Figure 2

Fig. 3. Scanning electron micrographs of food items found in the digestive tract of Aglajidae specimens: (A) shell of Bulla punctulata in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818; (B) radula of B. punctulata in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818; (C) gizzard plates of B. punctulata in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818; (D) shell of Philine sp. in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (E) gizzard plates of Philine sp. in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (F) Aciculata polychaete in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (G) detail of the parapodia of Aciculata polychaetes in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859. Scale bars A: 1 mm; B, C and D: 200 μm; E and G: 20 μm; F: 100 μm.

Figure 3

Fig. 4. Scanning electron micrographs of food items found in the digestive tract of Aglajidae specimens: (A) Kynorhyncha sp. in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (B) ?exoskeleton of Isopoda in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (C) Enoploidea nematodes in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (D) detail of the mouth of the nematodes in Melanochlamys diomedea USNM 771859; (E) ?fragment of a spicule of Holothuria in Odontoglaja guamensis ZMBM 94030; (F) complete specimen of Gobiidae fish in Navanax inermis CNMO 1818. Scale bars A: 20 μm; B: 30 μm: C and E: 100 μm; D: 10 μm, F: 5 mm.

Figure 4

Table 1. List of Aglajidae species dissected for gut contents. Numbers in brackets are the total number of specimens dissected. (ZMBN – Natural History Collections, University Museum of Bergen, Norway; WAM – Western Australian Museum; USNM – United States National Museum, Smithsonian; CNMO – Colección Nacional de Moluscos, National Autonomous University of México; NMVF – Museum Victoria, Australia).

Figure 5

Table 2. Review of the diet of Aglajidae based on literature records and novel data (based on animals collected in the wild).

Figure 6

Table 3. Synoptic table of the diet preferences and buccal bulb features in the Aglajidae genera.