Hydrobiologia

, Volume 595, Issue 1, pp 27–33 | Cite as

Global diversity of sponges (Porifera: Spongillina) in freshwater

Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment

Abstract

Porifera is a primarily marine phylum comprising more than 15,000 species. The successful and wide adaptive radiation of freshwater sponges (Haplosclerida: Spongillina) has resulted in the colonization of an extremely wide variety of habitats at all latitudes. Colonization is dated back to the Mesozoic, and the mono- or poly-phyletism of Spongillina, and the number of potential sponge invasions into freshwater is still under debate. Living freshwater sponges belong to 45 genera in six families for a total of 219 species. The highest diversity, at the scale of zoogeographic regions, is recorded from the Neotropical (65 species), Palaearctic (59 species), and Afrotropical regions (49 species). Endemic freshwater sponge species are 103 (47%) out of 219. All species belonging to the families Lubomirskiidae, Metschnikowiidae, and Malawispongiidae are endemic. Endemic species among the other families are 72% for Potamolepidae, 38% for Spongillidae, and 32% for Metaniidae. Data on some wide geographic areas are scattered and fragmentary if not almost completely lacking. Species richness is probably underestimated and doubtless destined to increase with further research.

Keywords

Taxonomic richness Geographic distribution Endemicity Habitat 

References

  1. Annandale, N., 1911. Freshwater sponges, hydroids and polyzoa. Porifera. In Shipley, A. E. (ed.), Fauna of British India, Including Ceylon and Burma. Taylor & Francis, London, 27–126, 241–245.Google Scholar
  2. Arndt, W., 1926. Die Spongillidenfauna Europas. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 17: 337–365.Google Scholar
  3. Brien, P., 1969. Les Potamolepides africaines. Polyphyletisme des eponges d’eau douce. Archives de Zoologie Experimentale et Generale 110: 527–561.Google Scholar
  4. Efremova, S. M., 2004. New genus and new sponge species of the family Lubomirskiidae Rezvoy, 1936. Index of animal species inhabiting Lake Baikal and its catchment area. Novosibirsk, “Nauka” Vol. 1, Lake Baikal, book 2, 1261–1278 (in Russian).Google Scholar
  5. Ereskovskii, A. V., 2003 (2004). Comparative embriology of sponges and its application for poriferan phylogeny. In Pansini, M., R. Pronzato, G. Bavestrello & R. Manconi (eds), Sponge Science in the New Millennium, Bollettino dei Musei e degli Istituti Biologici dell’Università di Genova 68: 301–318.Google Scholar
  6. Frost, T. M., 1980. Clearance rate determinations for the freshwater sponge Spongilla lacustris: effect of temperature, particle type and concentration, and sponge size. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 90(3): 330–356.Google Scholar
  7. Frost, T. M., 1991. Porifera. In Thorp, J. H. & A. P. Covich (eds), Ecology and Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press Inc., San Diego, 95–124.Google Scholar
  8. Harrison, F. W., 1974. Sponges (Porifera: Spongillidae). In Hart C. V. Jr., & S. L. H. Fuller (eds), Pollution Ecology of Freshwater Invertebrates. Academic Press, New York, 29–66.Google Scholar
  9. Hooper, J. N. A. & van Soest R. W. M. (eds), 2002. Systema Porifera. A guide to the classification of sponges. I. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publisher, New York, 1101 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Manconi, R. & R. Pronzato, 1994. Spongillids of Mediterranean Islands. In van Soest, R. W. M., Th. M. G. van Kempen & J. C. Braekman (eds), Sponges in Time and Space. Balkema, Rotterdam, 333–340.Google Scholar
  11. Manconi, R. & R. Pronzato, 2000. Rediscovery of the type material of Spongilla lacustris (L., 1759) from the Linnean Herbarium. Italian Journal of Zoology 67(1): 89–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Manconi, R. & R. Pronzato, 2002. Spongillina n. subord. Freshwater sponges. Lubomirskiidae, Malawispongiidae n. fam., Metaniidae, Metschnikowiidae, Palaeospongillidae, Potamolepidae, Spongillidae. In Hooper, J. N. A. & R. W. M. van Soest (eds), Systema Porifera. A Guide to the Classification of Sponges, Vol. 1. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, 921–1019.Google Scholar
  13. Manconi, R. & R. Pronzato, 2004. The genus Corvospongilla Annandale (Haplosclerida, Spongillina, Spongillidae) with description of a new species from eastern Mesopotamia, Iraq. Archiv für Hydrobiologie, suppl. Monographic Studies 151(1–2): 161–189.Google Scholar
  14. Manconi, R. & R. Pronzato, 2005. Freshwater sponges of the West Indies: discovery of Spongillidae (Haplosclerida, Spongillina) from Cuba with biogeographic notes and a checklist for the Caribbean area. Journal of Natural History 39(36): 3235–3253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Manconi, R. & R. Pronzato, in press. Gemmules as a key structure for the adaptive radiation of freshwater sponges: a morpho-functional and biogeographic study. In Custodio, M. R., E. Hajdu, G. Lobo-Hadju & G. Muricy (eds), Porifera Research: Biodiversity, Innovation and Sustainability. Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium 2006.Google Scholar
  16. Penney, J. T. & A. A. Racek, 1968. Comprehensive revision of a world-wide collection of freshwater sponges (Porifera: Spongillidae). United States National Museum Bulletin 272: 1–184.Google Scholar
  17. Poirrier, M. A., 1982. Porifera. In Hulbert, S. H. & A. Villalobos-Figueroa (eds), Aquatic Biota of Mexico, Central America and West Indies. San Diego State University, San Diego, 59–61.Google Scholar
  18. Potts, E., 1887. Fresh water sponges: a monograph. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 158–279.Google Scholar
  19. Pronzato, R. & R. Manconi, 1994. Adaptive strategies of sponges in inland waters. Bollettino di Zoologia 61: 395–401.Google Scholar
  20. Pronzato, R. & R. Manconi, 2002. Atlas of European Freshwater Sponges. Annali del Museo Civico di Storia naturale di Ferrara 4: 3–64.Google Scholar
  21. Racek, A.A., 1969. The freshwater sponges of Australia (Porifera: Spongillidae). Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 20: 267–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ricciardi, A. & H. M. Reiswig, 1993. Freshwater sponges (Porifera, Spongillidae) of Eastern Canada: taxonomy, distribution and ecology. Canadian Journal of Zoology 71: 665–682.Google Scholar
  23. Ricciardi, A., F. L. Snyder, D. O. Kelch & H. M. Reiswig, 1995. Lethal and sublethal effects of sponge overgrowth on introduced dreissenid mussels in the Great Lakes, St. Lawrence River System. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 52: 2695–2703.Google Scholar
  24. de Silva, C. M. M. & C. Volkmer-Ribeiro, 2001. Key to the Ethiopian species of the genus Metania Gray, 1867 (Porifera, Metaniidae) with redescription of Metania rhodesiana and Metania godeauxi comb. n. Bulletin de l’Institut royal des Sciences naturelles de Belgique 71: 127–138.Google Scholar
  25. van Soest, R. W. M., 1991. Demosponge higher taxa classification re-examination. In Reitner, J., & H. Keupp (eds), Fossil and recent sponges. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 54–71.Google Scholar
  26. Volkmer-Ribeiro, C., 1981. Key to the presently known families and genera of Neotropical freshwater sponges. Revista Brasileira de Biologia 41(4): 803–808.Google Scholar
  27. Volkmer-Ribeiro, C. & J. Reitner, 1991. Renewed study of the type material of Palaeospongilla chubutensis Ott & Volkheimer (1972). In Reitner, J., & H. Keupp (eds), Fossil and recent sponges. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 121–133.Google Scholar
  28. Weltner, W., 1895. Spongillidenstudien III. Katalog und verbreitung der bekannten susswasserschwamme. Archiv für Naturgeschichte 61(1): 114–144.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Zoologia e Genetica EvoluzionisticaUniversità di SassariSassariItaly
  2. 2.Dip.Te.Ris. (Dipartimento per lo Studio del Territorio e delle sue Risorse)Università di GenovaGenovaItaly

Personalised recommendations