Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-06-03T03:09:48.469Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations on British and Norwegian Hydroids and Their Medusae

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

W. J. Rees
W. J. Rees
Affiliation:
Research Assistant at the Plymouth Laboratory
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The newly liberated medusa of Perigonimus muscoides M. Sars has been found to be a Bougainvillia. A specimen from the plankton points to the extreme probability that it can be regarded as synonymous with a previously described medusa, B. nordgaardi (Browne). The name of both hydroid and medusa now becomes B. muscoides (M. Sars 1846).

The systematic importance of the above discovery is discussed, and the genus Rhizorhagium M. Sars 1877 is redefined to include all those species of “Perigonimus” with fixed gonophores, viz. Rhizorhagium roseum, R. sarsi, R. antarcticum, R. formosum, and a new species, R. album, from the Cornish coast.

Variations in the form of the hydroid of Leuckartiara octona are described. The newly liberated medusa of Perigonimus abyssi G. O. Sars is figured for the first time and the species referred to the genus Leuckartiara.

A new Bimeria-like hydroid, Thamnostoma russelli, is described. The characters of the medusa indicate that it belongs to the genus Thamnostoma Haeckel, and the characters of the hydroid show that the genera Thamnitis and Thamnostoma must be united.

Corymorpha annulicornis M. Sars is redescribed from living specimens and the medusa is shown to be Euphysa aurata Forbes. It must henceforth be known as Corymorpha aurata (Forbes).

A new species of Campanulina, C. paracuminata, with its young medusa is described from Plymouth.

Notes are included on Boreohydra simplex, Stauridium productum and Staurocoryne filiformis.

Certain points in the synonymy of all these species are discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , November 1938 , pp. 1 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1938

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

REFERENCES

Agassiz, A. 1865. Illustrated catalogue of the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College. No. II. North American Acalephae, pp. 1–234.Google Scholar
Alder, Joshua 1857. A catalogue of the zoophytes of Northumberland and Durham. Trans. Tyneside Nat. Field Club, Vol. iii, pp. 93–162.Google Scholar
Alder, Joshua 1862. Supplement to a catalogue of the zoophytes of Northumberland and Durham. Trans. Tyneside Nat. Field Club, Vol. v, pp. 225–247.Google Scholar
Allman, G. J. 1863. Notes on the Hydroida. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 3, Vol. xi, pp. 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allman, G. J. 1864 a. On the construction and limitation of genera among the Hydroida. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 3, Vol. xiii, pp. 345–80.Google Scholar
Allman, G. J. 1864 b. Notes on the Hydroida. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 3, Vol. xiv pp. 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allman, G. J. 1871–1872. A Monograph of the Gymnoblastic Hydroids, pp. 1–450. Ray Society.Google Scholar
Beneden, P. J. Van 1866. Recherches sur la faune littorale de Belgique. Mém. Acad. R. Belgique, Tome xxxvi, pp. 1–207.Google Scholar
Bonnevie, Kristine 1898. Neue norwegische Hydroiden. Bergens Mus. Aarb., 1898, No. v, pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
Bonnevie, Kristine 1899. Hydroida. Norwegian North-Atlantic Expedition 1876–1878, pp. 1–103. Christiania.Google Scholar
Brink, A. 1925. Beiträge zur Herstellung einer rationellen Hydroidensystematik. Tijdschr. ned. dierk. Ver., Ser. 2, Vol. XIX, Pts. 3–4, pp. 126–65.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1905. Nordsee-Hydroiden. Bergens Mus. Aarb., 1905, No. vi, pp. 1–25.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1909. Die Hydroiden der arktischen Meere. Fauna Arctica, Bd. v, Jena, pp. 127–248.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1911. Fauna droebachensis. I. Hydroider. Nyt. Mag. f. Naturvid., Bd. 49, Kristiania, pp. 1–46.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1916. Hydroida (Part I). Danish Ingolf-Expedition, Vol. v, pp. 1–66. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1928. Hydrozoa, I. Die Tierzvelt der Nord- und Ostsee, Lief. xiii, Teil iii b, pp. 1–94.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1937. Hydroidenuntersuchungen. VII. Corymorpha (Euphysa) annulicornis M. Sars 1859. Norske Videnskaps-Acad. Oslo I. Mat.-Naturv. Klasse, 1937, No. 8, pp. 1–32.Google Scholar
Browne, E. T. 1896. On British hydroids and medusae. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, pp. 459–500.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1903. Report on some medusae from Norway and Spitzbergen. Bergens Mus. Aarb. 1903, No. IV, pp. 1–36.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1905. A report on the medusae found in the Firth of Clyde (1901–1902). Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, Vol. xxv, pt. IX, pp. 738–78.Google Scholar
Broch, Hjalmar 1907. The hydroids collected by the Huxley from the north side of the Bay of Biscay in August 1906. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. xxv, No. 1, pp. 15–36.Google Scholar
Brückner, Erich 1914. Beitrag zur Kenntnis von Perigonimus cidaritis Weisman, und Gemmaria implexa var. neapolitana Hargitt. Z. wiss. Zool. Leipzig, Bd. cxi, pp. 445–505.Google Scholar
Busch, Wilhelm 1851. Beobachtungen über Anatomie und Entwickelung einiger Wirbellosen Seethiere, pp. 1–143. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Calkins, G. N. 1899. Some hydroids from Puget Sound. Proc. Boston Nat. Hist. Soc., Vol. xxviii, pp. 333–67.Google Scholar
Fewkes, J. W., 1889. New Invertebrata from the coast of California. Bull. Essex Inst., Vol. xxi, pp. 99–146.Google Scholar
Forbes, Edward, 1848. A Monograph of the British naked-eyed Medusae, pp. 1–104. Ray Society.Google Scholar
Fraser, C. McLean, 1937. Hydroids of the Pacific Coast of Canada and the United States. Univ. Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gosse, P. H., 1853. A Naturalist's Rambles on the Devonshire Coast, pp. 1–448. London:John van Voorst.Google Scholar
Gudger, E. W., 1928. Association between Sessile Colonial Hydroids and Fishes. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 10, Vol. i, pp. 1&48.Google Scholar
Haeckel, Ernst, 1879. Das System der Medusen, pp. 1–672.Google Scholar
Hartlaub, C., 1895. Polypen und Quallen von Stauridium productum Wright und Perigonimus repens Wright. Zeit. f. wiss. Zool., Bd. lxi, pp. 142–62.Google Scholar
Hartlaub, C., 1911. Nordisches Plankton. Lief. 6, XII, Craspedote Medusen. Teil 1, Lief. 2, Familie III, Margelidae, pp. 137–235.Google Scholar
Hartlaub, C., 1914. Nordisches Plankton. Lief. 6, XII, Craspedote Medusen. Teil 1, Lief. 3, Familie IV, Tiaridae, pp. 237–363.Google Scholar
Heath, Harold, 1910. The association of a fish with a hydroid. Biol. Bull., Vol. xix, No. 2, 1910, pp. 73–8.Google Scholar
Hickson, S. J. & Gravely, F. H., 1907. Coelenterata II. Hydroid zoophytes. Nat. Antarct. Exped., 1901–4, Nat. Hist. iii, London, Brit. Mus., 34 pp. 4 pls.Google Scholar
Hincks, Thomas, 1868. A History of the British Hydroid Zoophytes, pp. 1–338. London:John van Voorst.Google Scholar
Jäderholm, E., 1909. Northern and Arctic invertebrates in the collection of the Swedish State Museum. IV. Hydroiden. Kungl. Svenska Vetenskap. Handl., Bd. 45, No. 1, pp. 1–124.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1911. Reports on the hydroids collected by the Denmark Expedition at north-east Greenland. Danmark-Eksped. til Grönlands Nordöstkyst 1906–8, Bd. 5, Köbenhavn.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1914. Conspectus Faunae Groenlandica. Hydroider. Meddel. om Grönland, xxiii, Kobenhavn.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1926. Medusae. Part II. Anthomedusae. Danish Ingolf-Expedition, Vol. v, Part 10, pp. 1–102.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1927. The Hydromedusae of Danish waters. Mem. Acad. Sci. Lett. Danemark, Sect. Sci., Ser. 8, Tome xii, No. 1, pp. 1–290.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1932 a. The Godthaab Expedition, 1928. Hydroids. Meddel. om Grønland, Bd. 79, No. 1, pp. 1–86.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1932 b. Hydroids collected in west Greenland fjords in 1911 and 1912. Meddel. om Grønland, Bd. 91, No. 3, pp. 1–34.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1933. Coelenterata, Ctenophora and Chaetognatha. Meddel. om Gronland, Bd. 104, No. 11, pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1935. Polypdyr (Coelenterata). I. Ferskvandspolypper og Goplepolypper. Danmarks Fauna, 41, pp. 1–207, Figs. 1–81.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1937. Polypdyr (Coelenterata). II. Golper. Danmarks Fauna, 43, pp. 1–223, Figs. 1–90.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1938. Marine Hydrozoa. Hydroida. The Zoology of Iceland, Vol. II, Pt. 5 a. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L. & Damas, D., 1925. Les Meduses de la Norvége. Vidensk. Medd. Dansk naturh. Foren. Bd. 80, pp. 217–324.Google Scholar
Leloup, E., 1932. Une collection d'Hydropolypes appartenant à l'lndian Museum de Calcutta. Rec. Indian Museum, Vol. xxxiv, Part 11, pp. 131–70.Google Scholar
Levinsen, G. M. R., 1892. Om Fornyelsen af Ernaeringsindividerne hos Hydroiderne. Vidensk. Medd. Dansk naturh. Foren. Kjöbenhavn, pp. 12–31.Google Scholar
Kramp, P. L., 1893. Meduser, Ctenophorer og Hydroider fra Grönlands Vestkyst. Vidensk. Medd. Dansk naturh. Foren. Kjöbenhavn, pp. 1–70.Google Scholar
Linko, A., 1904. Zoologische Studien im Barents-Meere. Zool. Anz., Bd. xxviii, pp. 210–20.Google Scholar
Mayer, A. G., 1910. Medusae of the World. Vol. I. Hydromedusae, pp. 1–230.Google Scholar
Miles, S. S., 1937. A new genus of hydroid and its method of asexual reproduction. Biol. Bull., Vol. lxxii, pt. 3, pp. 327–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murbach, L., 1899. Hydroids from Wood's Hole, Mass. Hipolytus peregrinus, a new unattached Marine Hydroid: Corynitis Agassizii and its medusa. Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci., London, Vol. xlii, pt. 3, N.S., pp. 341–60.Google Scholar
Neppi, Valeria & Stiasny, Gustav, 1913. Die Hydromedusen des Golfes von Trieste. Arb. Zool. Inst. Univ. Wien u. Zool. Stat. Trieste, Bd. xx, pp. 23–90.Google Scholar
Rees, W. J., 1936. On a new species of hydroid Staurocoryne filiformis, with a revision of the genus Staurocoryne Rotch 1872. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. xxi, pp. 135–42.Google Scholar
Rees, W. J., 1937. On a remarkable process of bud formation in a gymnoblastic hydroid (Heterostephanus sp.). Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. xxi, pp. 747–52.Google Scholar
Rees, W. J. & Russell, F. S., 1937. On rearing the hydroids of certain medusae, with an account of the methods used. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. xxii, No. 1, pp. 61–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, James, 1913. A New British commensal hydroid, Perigonimus abyssi G. O. Sars. Fisheries Ireland Sci. Invest. 1913, 1, 1913, pp. 1–3.Google Scholar
Russell, E. S., 1906. On Trichorhiza, a new hydroid genus. Proc. Zool. Soc., London, 02 1906, pp. 99–101.Google Scholar
Russell, E. S., 1907. The Atractylis coccinea of T. S. Wright. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 7, Vol. xx, pp. 52–5.Google Scholar
Sars, Michael, 1835. Beskriveher og Iagt, etc., pp. 1–81. Bergen.Google Scholar
Sars, Michael, 1846. Fauna Littoralis Norvegiae, I, pp. 1–94. Christiania.Google Scholar
Sars, Michael, 1857. Bidrag til kundskaben om Middelhavets Litoral-Fauna. Nyt. Mag. Naturvid., Vol. ix, pp. 110–64.Google Scholar
Sars, Michael, 1859. Udtog af en Afhandling, etc. Forhandl. i Vid. Selsk. i Christiania, 1859, pp. 96–105.Google Scholar
Sars, Michael, 1877. New and little known Coelenterates. Fauna Littoralis Norvegiae, iii, pp. 1–48, Taf. 1–2.Google Scholar
Sars, G. O., 1873. Bidrag til Kundskaben om Norges Hydroider. Vidensk.-Selsk. Forhandl. for 1873, pp. 1&62.Google Scholar
Schydlowsky, A., 1901. Les Hydraires de la Mer Blanche le long du littoral des lies Solowetzky. Trav. Soc. Nat. Univ. Imp. Kharkow, Vol. xxxvi, pp. 1–276.Google Scholar
Stechow, E., 1919. Zur Kenntnis der Hydroidenfauna des Mittelmeeres, Amerikas und anderer Gebiete. Zool. Jahrb. Syst., Bd. 42, pp. 1–172.Google Scholar
Stechow, E., 1923. Zur Kenntnis der Hydroidenfauna des Mittelmeeres, Amerikas und anderer Gebiete. Zool. Jahrb. Syst., Bd. 47, pp. 29–270.Google Scholar
Stechow, E., 1929. Über Symbiosen von Hydroiden mit Polychaeten. Zool. Anz., Bd. 86, Heft 5–6, pp. 150–3.Google Scholar
Strong, L. H., 1925. Development of certain Puget Sound hydroids and medusae. Pub. Puget Sound Biol. Stat., Vol. iii, pp. 383–99.Google Scholar
Torrey, H. B., 1902. The Hydroida of the Pacific coast of North America, with especial reference to the species in the collection of the University of California. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., Vol. 1, pp. 1–104.Google Scholar
Totton, A. K., 1930. Hydroida. Brit. Antarct. (“Terra Nova”) Exp., 1910, Nat. Hist. Rep., Zool., Vol. v, Coelenterata, pp. 131–252.Google Scholar
Westblad, Einar, 1937. Boreohydra simplex n.gen., n.sp., ein Solitärpolyp von der norwegischen Küste. Arch. f. Zool., Bd. xxix, No. 7.Google Scholar
Wright, T. Strethill, 1857. Observations on British zoophytes and on the prehensile apparatus of Spio seticornis. Edinb. New Phil. Journ., N.S., Vol. vi.Google Scholar
Wright, T. Strethill, 1858. Observations on British zoophytes. Edinb. New Phil. Journ., N.S., Vol. vii.Google Scholar
Wright, T. Strethill, 1861. Observations on British Protozoa and zoophytes. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 3, Vol. viii, pp. 120–35.Google Scholar
Wright, T. Strethill, 1863. Observations on British zoophytes. Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci., N.S., Vol. iii, pp. 47–52.Google Scholar