, Volume 595, Issue 1, pp 117–127 | Cite as

Global diversity of oligochaetous clitellates (“Oligochaeta”; Clitellata) in freshwater

  • Patrick MartinEmail author
  • Enrique Martinez-Ansemil
  • Adrian Pinder
  • Tarmo Timm
  • Mark J. Wetzel
Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment


Oligochaeta sensu stricto, namely clitellates exclusive of branchiobdellids and leeches, occur in marine, estuarine, freshwater and terrestrial environs. About one-third of the almost 5,000 valid species described to date is aquatic. With the exception of some earthworm-like genera (the “megadriles”), aquatic oligochaetes are usually small, ranging from 1 mm to a few centimetres in length (the “microdriles”). Although predominantly terrestrial, 4 of the 14 described megadrile families include species that occur in aquatic or semi-aquatic habitats. The microdriles are fully aquatic, with the exception of the primarily terrestrial family Enchytraeidae, and comprise 13 families. About 1,700 valid species of aquatic oligochaetes are known to date; of these, about 1,100 are freshwater. The most speciose group is the Tubificidae with over 1,000 described species including 582 being considered as freshwater inhabitants. No fewer than 60 species of megadriles are also considered aquatic. Recent years have seen a continuous increase in the number of described species, so that any estimate of the proportion of known freshwater oligochaete species to unknown species would be very imprecise. Molecular studies have recently confirmed the long suspected paraphyly of the Oligochaeta if the group does not include branchiobdellids and leeches, so that Clitellata has become synonymous with “Oligochaeta”. The family Capilloventridae has been recently shown to represent a basal clade of Clitellata, supporting an aquatic (freshwater?) origin of the clitellates. In contrast, the adaptation to freshwater of the aquamegadriles is most likely secondary. The Palaearctic region supports the most abundant and diverse freshwater oligochaete fauna, with more than 600 valid species described to date; 80% of these are considered endemic. However, it is likely that the apparent concentration of genera and species in the Northern Hemisphere is biassed given the relatively late and still limited interest in the oligochaete fauna of the Southern Hemisphere. Ancient lakes, as well as ground waters, are important centres of endemicity but, except for Lake Baikal, they represent important knowledge gaps. Aquatic oligochaetes perform ecological functions and roles with potentially important repercussions for human health issues. These ecological values of oligochaetes include their importance in aquatic food chains; their impact on sediment structure and water-sediment exchanges; their long history of use in pollution monitoring and assessment; their potential to reduce sludge volumes in sewage treatment systems; and their role as intermediate host for several myxozoan parasites of fishes, including commercially exploited species.


Freshwater Oligochaeta Diversity Phylogeny Distribution Endemism 



We gratefully acknowledge Kathryn A. Coates (Bermuda), Steven V. Fend (California, USA), and R. Deedee Kathman (Tennessee, USA) for their assistance in compiling the information for Nearctic species of freshwater oligochaetes; many additional records for Nearctic taxa were secured from the Illinois Natural History Survey Annelida Collection databases. We thank Emilia Rota (Universitá di Siena, Italy) for sharing her knowledge about the Enchytraeidae. Francis Behen (RBINSc, Belgium) assisted the first author in going through the Zoological Records and in feeding his oligochaete database.


  1. Avel, M., 1959. Classe des annélides oligochètes. In Grassé, P. P. (ed.), Traité de Zoologie, Vol. 5, No. 1. Paris, 224–462.Google Scholar
  2. Balian, E., H. Segers, C. Lévèque, & K. Martens, 2007. An introduction to the Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment (FADA) project. Hydrobiologia doi: 10.1007/s10750-007-9235-6 Google Scholar
  3. Beauchamp, K. A., R. D. Kathman, T. S. McDowell & R. P. Hedrick, 2001. Molecular phylogeny of tubificid oligochaetes with special emphasis on Tubifex tubifex (Tubificidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 19: 216–224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beauchamp, K. A., M. El-Matbouli, M. Gay, M. P. Georgiadis, B. Nehring & R. P. Hedrick, 2006. The effect of cohabitation of Tubifex tubifex (Oligochaeta: Tubificidae) populations on infections to Myxobolis cerebralis (Myxozoa: Myxobolidae). Journal of Invertebrate Zoology 91: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1982a. Oligochaeta. In Parker, S. P. (ed.), Synopsis and Classification of Living Organisms, Vol. 1. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New-York, 50–61.Google Scholar
  6. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1982b. Evolution in the Annelida. Canadian Journal of Zoology 60: 1043–1059.Google Scholar
  7. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1984. The position of the Haplotaxidae in the evolution of oligochaete annelids. Hydrobiologia 115: 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1988. A taxonomic analysis of the Haplotaxidae (Annelida, Oligochaeta). Canadian Journal of Zoology 66: 2243–2252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1991. Ancestors (Oligochaeta). Mitteilungen aus dem Hamburgischen Zoologischen Museum und Institut 88: 97–110.Google Scholar
  10. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1994. Evolutionary relationships within the Clitellata: an update. Megadrilogica 5: 109–112.Google Scholar
  11. Brinkhurst, R. O., 1999. Lumbriculids, branchiobdellidans and leeches: a review of progress. Hydrobiologia 406: 281–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brinkhurst, R. O. & B. G. M. Jamieson, 1971. Distribution and ecology. In Brinkhurst, R. O. & B. G. M. Jamieson (eds), Aquatic Oligochaeta of the World. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh, 104–164.Google Scholar
  13. Brinkhurst, R. O. & M. J. Wetzel, 1984. Aquatic Oligochaeta of the world: supplement. A catalogue of new freshwater species, descriptions, and revisions. Canadian Technical Report of Hydrography and Ocean Sciences, No 44.Google Scholar
  14. Brinkhurst, R. O. & S. R. Gelder. 2001. Annelida: Oligochaeta, including Branchiobdellidae. In Thorp, J. H. & and A. P. Covich (eds), Ecology and Classification of North American Freshwater Invertebrates, 2nd edn. Academic Press, San Diego, 431–463.Google Scholar
  15. Brusca, R. C. & G. J. Brusca, 2003. Invertebrates, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA.Google Scholar
  16. Chapman, P. M., 2001. Utility and relevance of aquatic oligochaetes in Ecological Risk Assessment. Hydrobiologia 463: 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Creuzé des Châtelliers, M., P. Martin, J. Juget & M. Lafont, 2007. Status of the Oligochaeta (oligochaetous Clitellata) in the subterranean aquatic environment. Freshwater Biology (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Erséus, C., 1987. Phylogenetic analysis of the aquatic Oligochaeta under the principle of parsimony. Hydrobiologia 155: 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Erséus, C., 1993. Taxonomy of Capilloventer (Capilloventridae), a little-known group of aquatic Oligochaeta, with descriptions of two new species. Journal of Natural History 27: 1029–1040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Erséus, C., 1999. Parvidrilus strayeri, a new genus and species, an enigmatic interstitial clitellate from underground waters in Alabama. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 112: 327–337.Google Scholar
  21. Erséus, C., 2005. Phylogeny of oligochaetous Clitellata. Hydrobiologia 535/536: 357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Erséus, C. & L. Gustavsson, 2002. A proposal to regard the former family Naididae as a subfamily within the Tubificidae (Annelida, Clitellata). Hydrobiologia 485: 253–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Erséus, C. & M. Källerjsö, 2004. 18S rDNA phylogeny of Clitellata (Annelida). Zoologica Scripta 33: 187–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ferraguti, M. & C. Erséus, 1999. Sperm types and their use for a phylogenetic analysis of aquatic clitellates. Hydrobiologia 402: 225–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ferraguti, M. & S. R. Gelder, 1991. The comparative ultrastructure of spermatozoa from five branchiobdellidans (Annelida: Clitellata). Canadian Journal of Zoology 69: 1945–1956.Google Scholar
  26. Ferraguti, M., C. Erséus & A. Pinder, 1996. The spermatozoon of Capilloventer australis and the systematic position of the Capilloventridae (Annelida: Oligochaeta). Australian Journal of Zoology 44: 469–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gelder, S. R. & R. O. Brinkhurst, 1990. An assessment of the phylogeny of the Branchiobdellida (Annelida: Clitellata), using PAUP. Canadian Journal of Zoology 68: 1318–1326.Google Scholar
  28. Giani, N., 1984. Contribution à l’étude de la faune d’eau douce et plus particulièrement des Oligochètes. II – Les oligochètes aquatiques : taxinomie, répartition et écologie. Thèse de doctorat d’Etat, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse.Google Scholar
  29. Giani, N., P. Martin & J. Juget, 1995. A new species of Phreodrilidae (Oligochaeta), Astacopsidrilus naceri sp. nov., from Morocco (North Africa), with notes on the biogeography of the family. Canadian Journal of Zoology 73: 2375–2381.Google Scholar
  30. Giani, N., B. Sambugar, P. Rodriguez & E. Martínez-Ansemil, 2001. Oligochaetes in southern European groundwater: new records and an overview. Hydrobiologia 463: 65–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Golterman, H. L., P. G. Sly & R. L. Thomas, 1983. Study of the relationship between water quality and sediment transport. Technical Papers in Hydrobiology, UNESCO.Google Scholar
  32. Gorthner, A., 1994. What is an ancient lake? In Martens K., B. Goddeeris & G. Coulter (eds), Speciation in Ancient Lakes. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Beiheft Ergebnisse der Limnologie 44: 97–100.Google Scholar
  33. Jamieson, B. G. M., 1988. On the phylogeny and higher classification of the Oligochaeta. Cladistics 4: 367–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Jamieson, B. G. M., C. Erséus & M. Ferraguti, 1987. Parsimony analysis of the phylogeny of some Oligochaeta (Annelida) using spermatozoal ultrastructure. Cladistics 3: 145–155.Google Scholar
  35. Jamieson, B. G. M., S. Tillier, A. Tillier, J.-L. Justine, E. Ling, K. McDonald & A. F. Hugall, 2002. Phylogeny of the Megascolecidae and Crassiclitellata (Annelida, Oligochaeta): combined versus partitioned analysis using nuclear (28S) and mitochondrial (12S, 16S) rDNA. Zoosystema 24: 707–734.Google Scholar
  36. Juget, J. & E. Dumnicka, 1986. Oligochaeta (incl. Aphanoneura) des eaux souterraines continentales. In Botosaneanu, L. (ed.), Sytogofauna Mundi. E.J. Brill., Leiden, 234–244.Google Scholar
  37. Kathman, R. D. & R. O. Brinkhurst, 1998. Guide to the freshwater oligochaetes of North America. Aquatic Resources Center, College Grove, Tennessee, 264 ppGoogle Scholar
  38. Martin, P., 1996. Oligochaeta and Aphanoneura in ancient lakes: a review. Hydrobiologia 334: 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Martin, P., 2001. On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B 268: 1089–1098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin, P., I. Kaygorodova, D. Yu. Sherbakov & E. Verheyen, 2000. Rapidly evolving lineages impede the resolution of phylogenetic relationships among Clitellata (Annelida). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 15: 355–368.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Martínez-Ansemil, E., N. Giani & B. Sambugar, 2002. Oligochaetes from underground waters of Oman with descriptions of two new species of Phreodrilidae (Oligochaeta): Antarctodrilus arabicus n. sp. and Phreodrilus stocki n. sp. Contributions to Zoology 71: 147–158.Google Scholar
  42. McHugh, D., 2005. Molecular systematics of polychaetes (Annelida). Hydrobiologia 535/536: 309–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Michaelsen, W., 1919. Über die Beziehungen der Hirudineen zu den Oligochäten. Mitteilungen aus dem Naturhistorischen Museum in Hamburg 36: 131–153.Google Scholar
  44. Naidu, K. V., 2005. The Fauna of India and the Adjacent Countries. Aquatic Oligochaeta. Director, Zoological Survey of India, Kolkata.Google Scholar
  45. Pinder, A. M., S. M. Eberhard & W. F. Humphreys, 2006. New phalodrilines (Annelida: Clitellata: Tubificidae) from Western Australian groundwater. Zootaxa 1304: 31–48Google Scholar
  46. Purschke, G., W. Westheide, D. Rohde & R. Brinkhurst, 1993. Morphological reinvestigation and phylogenetic relationships of Acanthobdella peledina (Annelida, Clitellata). Zoomorphology 113: 91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reynolds, J. W. & D. G. Cook, 1976. Nomenclatura Oligochaetologica. A catalogue of names, descriptions and type specimens of the Oligochaeta. University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
  48. Reynolds, J. W. & D. G. Cook, 1981. Nomenclatura Oligochaetologica. Supplementum primum. A catalogue of names, descriptions and type specimens of the Oligochaeta. University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
  49. Reynolds, J. W. & D. G. Cook, 1989. Nomenclatura Oligochaetologica. Supplementum secundum. A catalogue of names, descriptions and type specimens of the Oligochaeta. New Brunswick Museum Monographic Series (Natural Science) No. 8, Fredericton, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
  50. Reynolds, J. W. & D. G. Cook, 1993. Nomenclatura Oligochaetologica. Supplementum tertium. A catalogue of names, descriptions and type specimens of the Oligochaeta. New Brunswick Museum Monographic Series (Natural Science) No. 9, Fredericton, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
  51. Reynolds, J. W. & M. J. Wetzel, 2007. Nomenclatura oligochaetologica. Supplementum quartum. A catalogue of names, descriptions and type specimens of the Oligochaeta. In prep.Google Scholar
  52. Reynoldson, T. B. & P. Rodriguez, 1999. Field methods and interpretation for sediment bioassessment, Chapter 4. In Mudroch, A., J. M. Azcue & P. Mudroch (eds), Manual of Bioassessment of Aquatic Sediment Quality. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida, 135–175.Google Scholar
  53. Reynoldson, T. B., S. P. Thompson & J. L. Ramsey, 1991. A sediment bioassay using the tubificid oligochaete worm Tubifex tubifex. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 10: 1061–1072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rota, E., P. Martin & C. Erséus, 2001. Soil-dwelling polychaetes: enigmatic as ever? Some hints on their phylogenetic relationships as suggested by a maximum parsimony analysis of 18S rRNA gene sequences. Contributions to Zoology 70: 127–138.Google Scholar
  55. Rouse, G. W. & K. Fauchald, 1995. The articulation of annelids. Zoologica Scripta 24: 269–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sambugar, B., N. Giani & E. Martínez-Ansemil, 1999. Groundwater oligochaetes from Southern-Europe. Tubificidae with marine phyletic affinities: new data with description of a new species, review and consideration on their origin. Mémoires de Biospéologie 26: 107–116.Google Scholar
  57. Sawyer, R. T., 1986. Leech Biology and Behaviour. II. Feeding Biology, Ecology, and Systematics. Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  58. Semernoy, V. P., 2004. Oligochaeta of Lake Baikal. In Timm, T., G. F. Mazepova & O. A. Timoshkin (eds), Guides and Keys to Identification of Fauna and Flora of Lake Baikal. Nauka, Novosibirsk.Google Scholar
  59. Siddall, M. E. & E. M. Burreson, 1996. Leeches (Oligochaeta?: Euhirudinea), their phylogeny and the evolution of life-history strategies. Hydrobiologia 334: 277–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Siddall, M. E., K. Apakupakul, E. M. Burreson, K. A. Coates, C. Erséus, S. R. Gelder, M. Källersjö & H. Trapido-Rosenthal, 2001. Validating Livanow: molecular data agree that leeches, branchiobdellidans and Acanthobdella peledina form a monophyletic group of oligochaetes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 21: 346–351.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Sket, B., & P. Trontelj, 2007. Global diversity of leeches (Hirudinea) in freshwater. In Balian, E. V., C. Lévêque, H. Segers & K. Martens (eds), Freshwater Animal Diversity Assessment. Hydrobiologia. doi: 10.1007/s10750-007-9010-8
  62. Stephenson, J., 1930. The Oligochaeta. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  63. Sturmbauer, C., G. B. Opadiya, H. Niederstätter, A. Riedman & R. Dallinger, 1999. Mitochondrial DNA reveals cryptic oligochaete species differing in Cadmium resistance. Molecular Biology and Evolution 16: 967–974.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Thienemann, A. 1912. Aristotles und die Abwasserbiologie. Festschrift Medizinisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft Münster. Commissionsverlag, Universitäts Buchhandlung Franz Coppenrath Münster.Google Scholar
  65. Timm, T. & H. Veldhuijzen van Zanten, 2002. Freshwater Oligochaeta of North-West Europe. World Biodiversity Database, CD-ROM Series, Biodiversity Center of ETI, Multimedia Interactive Software, Macintosh & Windows Version 1.0, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  66. Wallace, A. R., 1876. The Geographical Distribution of Animals with a Study of the Relations of Living and Extinct Faunas as Elucidating the Past Changes of the Earth’s Surface. Macmillan & Co., London.Google Scholar
  67. Westheide, W., 1997. The direction of evolution within the Polychaeta. Journal of Natural History 31: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Westheide, W., D. McHugh, G. Purschke & G. Rouse, 1999. Systematization of the Annelida: different approaches. Hydrobiologia 402: 291–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Wei, Y. & J. Liu, 2006. Sludge reduction with a novel combined worm-reactor. Hydrobiologia 564: 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wetzel, M. J., S. V. Fend, K. A. Coates, R. D. Kathman & S. R. Gelder, 2006. Taxonomy, systematics, and ecology of the aquatic Oligochaeta and Branchiobdellidae (Annelida, Clitcllata) of North America, with emphasis on the fauna occurring in Florida. A workbook. 10 September. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign.Google Scholar
  71. Wetzel, M. J., R. D. Kathman, S. V. Fend & K. A_ Coates, 2007. Classification and Checklist of the Freshwater Oligochaeta occurring in North America North of Mexico. World Wide Web URL: 15 July 2007.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Martin
    • 1
    Email author
  • Enrique Martinez-Ansemil
    • 2
  • Adrian Pinder
    • 3
  • Tarmo Timm
    • 4
  • Mark J. Wetzel
    • 5
  1. 1.Freshwater BiologyRoyal Belgian Institute of Natural SciencesBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Departamento de Bioloxía Animal, Bioloxía Vexetal e EcoloxíaUniversidade da CoruñaA Coruna Spain
  3. 3.Department of Environment and ConservationWildlife Research CentreWannerooAustralia
  4. 4.Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Centre for LimnologyEstonian University of Life SciencesRannu, TartumaaEstonia
  5. 5.Center for BiodiversityIllinois Natural History SurveyChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations