Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen

, Volume 45, Issue 4, pp 465–485 | Cite as

Ultrastructure and functional morphology of the female reproductive organs inProtodrilus (Polychaeta, Annelida)

  • Henning von Nordheim

Abstract

The morphology and function of the female reproductive organs in 6Protodrilus species are investigated by light- and transmission electron microscopy. Possible ways in which spermatozoa may enter the female coelom after leaving the spermatophore are discussed for species with and without special female reception organs. Only femaleP. rubropharyngeus andP. flavocapitatus have “dorsal organs” for spermatophore reception. The structure and function of these organs are described, as well as those of the oviduct found in 3 of the species investigated. The possible phylogenetic origin of gonoducts and different modes of oviposition within the genus are discussed. Finally, the high taxonomic significance of female traits such as dorsal organs, oviducts, cocoon glands and lateral ciliary rows in this genus is stressed.

Literature Cited

  1. Aiyar, R. G. & Alikunhi, K. H., 1944. On some archiannelids of the Madras coast. — Proc. natn. Inst. Sci. India10, 113–140.Google Scholar
  2. Daly, J. M. & Golding, D. W., 1977. A description of the spermatheca ofSpirorbis spirorbis (L.) (Polychaeta: Serpulidae) and evidence for a novel mode of sperm transmission. J. mar. biol. Ass. U. K.57, 219–227.Google Scholar
  3. Ermack, S. M. & Eakin, R. M., 1976. Fine structure of the cerebral and pygidial ocelli inChone ecaudata (Polychaeta, Sabellidae). — J. Ultrastruct. Res.54, 243–260.Google Scholar
  4. Evans, S. M., 1971. Behaviour in polychaetes. — Q. Rev. Biol.46, 379–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goodrich, E. S., 1931. Notes onProtodrilus. — Q. Jl microsc. Sci.74, 303–319.Google Scholar
  6. Higgins, R. P. & Thiel, H., 1988. Introduction to the study of meiofauna. Smithson. Inst. Press, Washington, 488 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Jägersten, G., 1952. Studies on the morphology, larval development and biology ofProtodrilus. —Zool. Bidr. Uppsala29, 425–512.Google Scholar
  8. Jouin, C., 1970a. Recherches sur les protodrilidae (Archiannélides): I. Etude morphologique et systématique du genreProtodrilus. — Cah. Biol. mar.11, 367–434.Google Scholar
  9. Jouin, C., 1970b. Recherches sur les archiannélides interstitielles: systématique, anatomie et developpement des Protodrilidae et des Nerillides. Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. Paris, 204 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Jouin, C., 1971. Status of the knowledge of the systematics and ecology of Archiannelida. —Smithson. Contr. Zool.76, 47–56.Google Scholar
  11. Lassere, P., 1975. Clitellata. In: Reproduction of marine invertebrates. Ed. by A. C. Giese & J. S. Pearse. Acad. Press, New York,3, 215–275.Google Scholar
  12. Mann, T., 1984. Spermatophores. Springer, Berlin, 217 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Nordheim, H. von, 1983. Systematics and ecology ofProtodrilus helgolandicus sp.n., an interstitial polychaete (Protodrilidae) from subtidal sands off Helgoland, German Bight. — Zool. Scr.12, 171–177.Google Scholar
  14. Nordheim, H. von, 1987. Anatomie, Ultrastruktur und Systematik der GattungProtodrilus (Annelida, Polychaeta). Diss., Univ. Osnabrück, 299 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Nordheim, H. von, 1989a. Six new species ofProtodrilus (Polychaeta, Annelida) from Europe and New Zealand together with a concised presentation of the genus. — Zool. Scr.18, 245–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nordheim, H. von, 1989b. Vergleichende Ultrastrukturuntersuchungen der Eu- und Paraspermien von 13Protodrilus-Arten (Polychaeta, Annelida) und ihre taxonomische und phylogenetische Bedeutung. — Helgoländer Meeresunters.43, 113–156.Google Scholar
  17. Nordheim, H. von, 1991. Ultrastructure and functional morphology of male genital organs and spermatophore formation inProtodrilus (Polychaeta, Annelida). — Zoomorphology111, 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pierantoni, U., 1908.Protodrilus. — Fauna Flora Golf. Neapel,31, 1–226.Google Scholar
  19. Rice, S. A., 1978. Spermatophores and sperm transfer in spionid polychaetes. — Trans. Am. microsc. Soc.97, 181–194.Google Scholar
  20. Salensky, W., 1907. Morphogenetische Studien an Würmern. T. II, III und IV. — Zap. imp. Akad. Nauk19, 1–348.Google Scholar
  21. Schmidt, P. & Westheide, W., 1972.Dinophilus gyrociliatus (Polychaeta). Nahrungsaufnahme und Fortpflanzung. — Encycl. cinematogr.E 1750, 1–16.Google Scholar
  22. Schneider, A., 1868. Über Bau und Entwicklung vonPolygordius. — Archs Anat. Phys.56, 51–60.Google Scholar
  23. Schroeder, P. C. & Hermans, C. O., 1975. Annelida: Polychaeta. In: Reproduction of marine invertebrates. Ed. by A. C. Giese & J. S. Pearse. Acad. Press, New York,3, 1–213.Google Scholar
  24. Westheide, W., 1982.Ikosipodus caroliensis gen. et sp.n., an interstitial neotenic polychaete from North Carolina. USA, and its phylogenetic relationships with the Dorvilleidae. — Zool. Scr.11, 117–126.Google Scholar
  25. Westheide, W., 1988. Genital organs. — Microfauna mar.4, 263–279.Google Scholar
  26. Westheide, W. & Schmidt, P., 1974.Trilobodrilus axi. Nahrungsaufnahme und Fortpflanzung. —Encycl. cinematogr.E 1955, 1–12.Google Scholar
  27. Westheide, W. & Riser, N. W., 1983. Morphology and phylogenetic relationships of the neotenic interstitial polychaeteApodotrocha progenerans n.gen, n.sp. (Annelida). — Zoomorphology103, 67–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Biologische Anstalt Helgoland 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Henning von Nordheim
    • 1
  1. 1.Zoologisches InstitutTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigFederal Republic of Germany

Personalised recommendations