Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-12T10:33:54.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional morphology of brachiopod and coral skeletal structures supporting ciliated epithelia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

P. Westbroek ,
J. Yanagida  and
Y. Isa
P. Westbroek
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, State University of Leiden, Garenmarkt, Leiden, The Netherlands
J. Yanagida
Affiliation:
Department of Geology, Faculty of Science, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
Y. Isa
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of Ryukyus, Shuri, Naha, Okinawa, Japan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Ciliary transport of particulate suspensions in water was studied in the mantles of the inarticulate brachiopod Lingula anatina, the articulate brachiopod Coptothyris grayi and in the ciliated epithelium of the scleractinian coral Montipora foliosa. In both brachiopod species a close correlation was found between the water currents induced by the lophophore and by the mantle. Lophophore and mantle are considered here as functionally integrated organs which are active in the transport and capture of food, accumulation and the removal of (pseudo-)faeces, the sorting of particles, the pumping of water and respiration.

The tuberculate surface of Montipora foliosa is lined with ciliated epithelium; the polyps are situated in the depressions of this surface. The particulate suspension within the labyrinth is constantly diluted: particles are funneled through the furrows but end up at the tips of the tubercles. On their way they pick up some mucus. While they concentrate on the tubercles they coalesce to form larger boluses that are easily removed. The tubercular tips thus act as “bolus accumulators” and the unciliated margins of the brachiopod mantles appear to have the same function. In this accumulated form the particles are probably prevented from being recycled through the food-capturing system.

Based on these observations a preliminary functional interpretation is presented of some fossil brachiopods: the Devonian rhynchonellids Uncinulus and Hypothyridina and the Strophomenida, with the genus Marginifera serving as an example of the latter order. The morphology of the inner shell surface, and the inferred configuration of the lining ciliated mantle, was modified in these taxa by a variety of structures such as spines, tubercles, diaphragms and trails. It is suggested that the mantle of the evolved Uncinulidae and of the Strophomenida is particularly suited for the dilution of particulate suspensions before they reach the lophophore and for the accumulation and removal of mucous pseudofaeces. The inhibitory effect of the constrictions on the circulation of water could be counteracted by local ciliary pumping. In the strophomenids the mantle became a specialized and elaborate organ, while the lophophore probably remained relatively simple. In the other articulate stocks the lophophore became the central food-gathering and pumping device and in general the morphology of the mantle was maintained simple.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , Summer 1980 , pp. 313 - 330
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Atkins, D. 1936. Ciliary mechanisms and interrelationships of lamellibranchs. Part I. New observations on sorting mechanisms. Q. J. Microsc. Sci. (n.s.). 76:181.Google Scholar
Atkins, D. 1937. Ciliary mechanisms and interrelationships of lamellibranchs. Part III. Types of lamellibranch gills and their food currents. Q. J. Microsc. Sci. (n.s.). 79:375.Google Scholar
Atkins, D. 1938. Ciliary mechanisms and interrelationships of lamellibranchs. Part VII. Latero-frontal cilia of the gill filaments and their phylogenetic value. Q. J. Microsc. Sci. (n.s.). 80:345.Google Scholar
Atkins, D. 1956. Ciliary feeding mechanisms of brachiopods. Nature. 177:706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkins, D. 1959. The growth stages of the lophophore of the brachiopods Platidia davidsoni (Eudes Deslongchamps) and P. anomoides (Philippi), with notes on the feeding mechanism. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 38:103–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkins, D. 1960. The ciliary feeding mechanism of the Megathyridae (Brachiopoda), and the growth stages of the lophophore. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U.K. 39:459–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barrington, E. J. W. 1976. Invertebrate Structure and Function (Repr.). 549 pp. London.Google Scholar
Chuang, S. H. 1956. The ciliary feeding mechanisms of Lingula unguis (L.) (Brachiopoda). Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 127:167–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowen, R. 1975. “Flapping valves” in brachiopods. Lethaia. 8:23–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, T. 1886. A monograph of recent Brachiopoda. Pt. I. Trans. Linn. Soc. London, 2nd ser. 6:1–163.Google Scholar
Owen, G. 1974. Studies on the gill of Mytilus edulis: the eu-laterofrontal cirri. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 187:83–91.Google Scholar
Richards, J. R. 1952. The ciliary feeding mechanism of Neothyris lenticularis (Deshayes). J. Morphol. 90:65–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowell, A. J. 1965. Inarticulata. Pp. H260–H296. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology.Google Scholar
Rubenstein, D. I. and Koehl, M. A. R. 1977. The mechanisms of filter feeding: some theoretical considerations. Am. Nat. 111:981–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1961. The feeding mechanism of the Permian brachiopod Prorichthofenia. Palaeontology. 3:450–471.Google Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1962. Filter-feeding mechanisms in some brachiopods from New Zealand. J. Linn. Soc. (Zool.). 44:615.Google Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1964. The function of zigzag deflexions in the commissures of fossil brachiopods. Palaeontology. 7:135–171.Google Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. 1970. Living and Fossil Brachiopods. 199 pp. Hutchinson; London.Google Scholar
Rudwick, M. J. S. and Cowen, R. 1968. The functional morphology of some aberrant strophomenide brachiopods from the Permian of Sicily. Boll. Soc. Paleontol. Ital. 6:113–176.Google Scholar
Schmidt, H. 1937. Zur Morphogenie der Rhynchonelliden. Senckenbergiana. 19:22–60.Google Scholar
Thomson, J. A. 1927. Brachiopod morphology and genera (Recent and Tertiary). New Zealand Board Sci. & Art. Manual. 7:338.Google Scholar
Vogel, S. and Bretz, W. L. 1971. Interfacial organisms: passive ventilation in the velocity gradients near surfaces. Science. 175:210–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westbroek, P. 1967. Morphological observations with systematic implications on some Paleozoic Rhynchonellida from Europe, with special emphasis on the Uncinulidae. Leid. Geol. Meded. 41:1–82.Google Scholar
Westbroek, P., Neijndorff, F., and Stel, J. H. 1975. Ecology and functional morphology of an uncinulid brachiopod from the Devonian of Spain. Palaeontology. 18:367–375.Google Scholar
Williams, A. and Rowell, A. J. 1965. Morhplogy. Pp. H57–H155. In: Moore, R. C., ed. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology.Google Scholar
Yonge, C. M. 1930. Studies on the physiology of corals. I. Feeding mechanisms and food. Great Barrier Reef Expedition 1928–29. Sci. Rep. 1(2):13–47.Google Scholar
Zorn, H. 1979. Form und Funktion von Gehäuse und Lophophor der Strophomenida (Brachiopoda). N. Jb. Geol. Paläontol. Mh. Pp. 49–64.Google Scholar