Marine Biology

, Volume 46, Issue 3, pp 223–235 | Cite as

Resin embedments of quantitative meiofauna samples for ecological and structural studies — Description and application

  • R. M. Rieger
  • E. Ruppert
Article

Abstract

In enumerating data for systematic and ecological studies on meiofauna, an unfortunate diversification exists in the methods used for observation, identification, preservation and curatorial treatment of various taxa. The application of transmission electron microscopy resin embedment techniques to whole, quantitative, extracted meiofauna samples is described here as a new method, which overcomes most of these problems. Slide-shaped resin blocks are produced by this method; they contain the mass-embedded meiofauna on one side and sand from the sample site on the other side; the latter can be used in studying sand-grain epigrowth of Protista, Fungi and Monera. Examples for the applicability of these slides to various meiobenthic studies are given for most taxa, but especially for Turbellaria, Annelida and Mystacocarida. Using this resin-slide technique, whole quantitative transects can be deposited as “ecotype material” in museums.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Cavey, M.J. and R.A. Cloney: Osmium-fixed and epon-embedded whole mounts of delicate specimens. Trans. Am. microsc. Soc. 92, 148–151 (1973)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Elmgren, R.: Methods of sampling sublittoral soft bottom meiofauna. Oikos (Suppl.) 15, 112–120 (1973)Google Scholar
  3. Gray, J.G.: Sample size and sample frequency in relation to the quantitative sampling of sand meiofauna. Smithson. Contr. Zool. 76, 191–198 (1971)Google Scholar
  4. Hall, J.R.: Aspects of the biology of Derocheilocaris typica (Crustacea: Mystacocarida). II. Distribution. Mar. Biol. 12, 42–52 (1972)Google Scholar
  5. — and R.R. Hessler: Aspects in the population dynamics of Derocheilocaris typica (Mystacocarida, Crustacea). Vie Milieu 22, 305–326 (1971)Google Scholar
  6. Heip, C., N. Smol and W. Hautekiet: A rapid method of extracting meiobenthic nematodes and copepods from mud and detritus. Mar. Biol. 28, 79–81 (1974)Google Scholar
  7. Hessler, R.R.: A new species of Mystacocarida from Maine. Vie Milieu 20, 105–116 (1969)Google Scholar
  8. Hulings, N.C. and J.S. Gray: A manual for the study of meiofauna. Smithson. Contr. Zool. 76, 1–83 (1971)Google Scholar
  9. Luft, J.H.: Improvements in epoxy resin embedding methods. J. biophys. biochem. Cytol. 9, 409–414 (1961)CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Meadows, P.S. and J.G. Anderson: Micro-organisms attached to marine sand grains. J. mar. biol. Ass. U.K. 48, 161–175 (1968)Google Scholar
  11. Ores, R.O.: Advantages of epoxy resin as a mounting medium for light microscopy. Stain Technol. 46, 315–317 (1971)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Renaud-Mornant, J. et C. Delamare Deboutteville: L'originalité de la sous-classe des Mystacocarides (Crustacea) et le problème de leur répartition. Ann. Spéléol. 31, 75–83 (1976)Google Scholar
  13. Rieger, R.M.: Multiple ciliary structures in developing spermatozoa of marine Catenulida (Turbellaria). Zoomorphologie 89, (1978)Google Scholar
  14. — and G.E. Rieger: Fine structure of the pharyngeal bulb in Trilobodrilus and its phylogenetic significance within Archiannelida. Tissue Cell 7, 267–279 (1975)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. —, E. Ruppert, G.E. Rieger and C. Schoepfer-Sterrer: On the fine structure of gastrotrichs with description of Chordodasys antennatus sp. n. Zoologica Scr. 3, 219–237 (1974)Google Scholar
  16. Ruppert, E.E.: An efficient, quantitative method for sampling the meiobenthos. Limnol. Oceanogr. 17, 629–631 (1972)Google Scholar
  17. Sterrer, W.: Plate tectonics as a mechanism for dispersal and speciation in interstitial sand fauna. Neth. J. Sea Res. 7, 200–222 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thiel, H., D. Thistle and G.D. Wilson: Ultrasonic treatment of sediment samples for more efficient sorting of meiofauna. Limnol. Oceanogr. 20, 472–473 (1975)Google Scholar
  19. Uhlig, G., H. Thiel and J.S. Gray: The quantitative separation of meiofauna. Helgoländer wiss. Meeresunters. 25, 173–195 (1973)Google Scholar
  20. Westheide, W.: Monographie der Gattungen Hesionides Friedrich und Microphthalmus Mecznikow (Polychaeta, Hesionidae). Z. Morph. Tiere 61, 1–159 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. — The geographical distribution of intertidal polychaetes. Mikrofauna Meeresbod. 61, 281–296 (1977)Google Scholar
  22. Winborn, W.B. and D.L. Guerrero: The use of a single tissue specimen for both transmission and scanning electron microscopy. Cytobios 10, 83–91 (1974)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. M. Rieger
    • 1
  • E. Ruppert
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA
  2. 2.The Smithsonian InstitutionFort Pierce BureauFort PierceUSA

Personalised recommendations