ИСТИНА

В настоящее время на кафедре гидробиологии ведется работа по последовательному изучению различных семейств полихет обитающих в мировом океане. В рамках этого исследования в командировке мною были проведены следующие работы: 1. Изучение полихет семейства Nephtyidae Атлантического океана: Nephtys bucera, N. cirrosa, N. discors, N. inermis, N. phyllocirra, N. picta, N. squamosa. 2. Составление переописания N. phyllocirra, и его сравнение с полихетами из Музея Естественной Истории в Нью-Йорке. 3. Работа в библиотеке Музея Сравнительной Зоологии

a) Work in American History Museum of New York 03 – 06 of April. 1. The aim of this part of study was to investigate two Nephtys samples deposited in American Museum of Natural History, New York (Cat № 1670; Cat. № 2617). These samples were previously referred to N. phyllocirra species by A.L. Treadwell (1928), but their characters do not fit the published descriptions of the species (Ehlers, 1887, Augener, 1918, Hartman, 1950). About 200 photos (optical cuts) of different parts of these worms were made. Based on the comparison with the type specimen of N. phyllocirra earlier (2010-2011) studied in the Museum of Comparative Zoology of Harvard University, it can be concluded that these worms are not N. phyllocirra, but should be attributed as new species Nephtys sp. nov. The description of this new species has been continued in MCZ and will be completed in Russia. 2. Additionally some other samples of Nephtyidae were re-investigated, and their identifications have been improved: • N. ciliata Cat. № 2912 This worm is confirmed as N. ciliata • N. ciliata Cat. № 1710, Cat. № 2914, Cat. № 2875 These worms are not N. ciliata but unidentified Nephtys sp. • N. ciliata Cat. № 2874 the first tube, 3 specimens These worms are re-identified as N. caeca. • N. ciliata Cat. № 2874 the second tube, 3 specimens One worm is Nephtys caeca. The other two worms are unidentified Nephtys sp. • Aglaophamus malmgreni Cat. № AMNH 240 3 specimens These worms are not A. malmgreni but Nephtys aff. caeca • Nephtys picta Ehlers, 1868 Cat. № 4172, Cat. № 4170, Cat. № 4141 All these worms are poorly preserved but there are some characters of real N. picta. • Nephtys bucera Ehlers, 1868 Cat. № 4069 This worm is confirmed as N. bucera. • Aglaophamus inermis Cat. № 888 It should be re-named as Inermonephtys inermis, because Fauchald (1968) described the new genera Inermonephtys. The type specimen of this genus is in MCZ. 3. Also, some time in AMNH was spent studying scientific literature in the Museum’s library. b) Work in the Museum of Comparative Zoology of Harvard University (MCZ) : 08 – 25 of April. The major focus of the study was the following Type Nephtydae species from the Atlantic Ocean: 1. Special attention was paid to Nephtys cirrosa Ehlers, 1868. Holotype, Cat. № 1242 because the two new forms, namely Northern and Southern, have been identified recently within this species in European waters along with a wide range of transitional forms (Ravara 2010). The most important thing for us was — to see whether the Holotype has bilobed prechaetal lamellae or not. Unfortunately, this worm was very dried and all lamellae were shriveled, nevertheless we could not see any bilobed prechaetal lamellae on it. All other characters are similar to the N. cirrosa from the North Europe. We made about 50 photos (optical cuts) of this worm. We have not seen any Southern forms of N. cirrosa yet, so we can not solve whether they are the new species or new subspecies and this question was left open. 2. Nephtys discors Ehlers, 1868. Lectotype. Cat. № 700. This species needs further classification, as it has been synonymized with N. rickettsi inhabiting the Chukchi Sea by Pettibone (1954), whereas Banse (1972) considers them as separate species. We made about 45 photos (optical cuts) of this worm. As a result of our study we can conclude that N. discors and N. rickettsi are really separated species and they differ from each other by several characters : • N. rickettsi has supra-lobes on the interramal parts of the acicular lamellae of nevropodia from C-6 till C-35 — N. discors has not such supra-lobes. • At the anterior and medium (C-6 – C-45) chaetigers N. rickettsi has branchiae with acute pointed tips — N. discors has branchiae with obtuse tips. • On medium (C-30 – C-40) chaetigers postacicular lamellae of neuropodia N. rickettsi twice as long as acicular lamellae — postacicular lamellae of neuropodia N. discors three times more than acicular lamellae. We have studied Paralectotyp of N. discors Ehlers, 1868 Cat. № 91707. Only one of 3 specimens was really N. discors others two were N. caeca. 3. Nephtys inermis Ehlers 1887. Holotype, Cat. № 1088 Fauchald (1968) described the new genus Inermonephtys and the type of genus was Inermonephtys inermis Ehlers, 1887 — so this worm must be the Holotype of this genus. We made about 20 photos (optical cuts) of it. Unfortunately it was very dried, but all specific characters are available. We can recommend using the 40 % lactic aсid to restore these worms (Geptner, Mikhailov, 1989). 4. Nephtys picta Ehlers, 1868. Syntype, Cat. № 830 There were several very dried worms. We made about 20 photos (optical cuts) of these worms. Prostomium and peristomium of them correspond to group I structure (Ohwada, 1985). Group I characterized by possession of relatively tapering antennae with the second pair of antennae placed well behind the first pair on ventral side of the prostomium, and by a markedly wide or flattened first chaetiger. Again, restoration in 40 % lactic aсid is desirable. 5. Nephtys bucera Ehlers, 1868 Holotype, Cat. № 209 Prostomium and peristomium of this species correspond to group I structure (Ohwada, 1985). We made about 90 photos (optical cuts) of this worm. 6. Nephtys squamosa Ehlers, 1887. Lectotype, Cat. № 1202 We made about 90 photos (optical cuts) of this very interesting worm. 7. Nephtys phyllocirra Ehlers, 1887. Syntype, Cat. № 1033 The work with this worm was the continuation of work with the two worms from AMNH NY which were referred to N. phyllocirra species by A.L. Treadwell (1928). The information of this species is extremely scarce. The original description was made by Ehlers (1887) and than concisions description was done by Augener (1918) — both in German. At 1950 Hartman made redescription in English, but without any drawings. So we decided to make the new redescription of this species: • We made about 180 photos (optical cuts) of different parts of this worm. • Based on these photos we have drown 15 drawings of different parts N. phyllocirra. • We prepared a preliminary redescription of N. phyllocirra in Russian and than in English. After finishing this text we would like to publish it in one of MCZ regular journals Study of non-type material of Nephtyidae spp. from MCZ collection: • Aglaophamus circinata (Verrill, 1874) Cat. № 37233 This worm is Aglaophamus indeed, but not A. circinata • Aglaophamus verrilli (McIntosh, 1885) Cat. № 37226 There were 4 very little worms; the two larger are confirmed as A. verrilli. We try to make the comparative study of N. caeca and N. ciliata from MCZ collection and from the collection of Hydrobiology Department of Moscow State University, Moscow. (See the descriptions in Dnestrovskaya, Jirkov 2001). • Nephtys caeca (Fabricius, 1780). Cat. № 37126, Cat. № 67471 All these worms and all other worms of this species which we have seen from USA waters clearly differed from Nephtys caeca from European waters with having the bilobed acicular lamellae almost to the posterior chaetigers. We made about 10 photos (optical cuts) of these worms. The further work is necessary to make the description of a new subspecies. • Nephtys ciliata (O.F. Muller, 1789) We have studied the next samples: Cat. № 1336 This worm from Sweden is Nephtys ciliata indeed Cat. № 37166, Cat № 37220, Cat № 70341, Cat № 37125, Cat № 37204, Cat № 37167 — all these worms are Nephtys pente Rainer, 1984 Cat № 37221 — this worm is Nephtys caeca (Fabricius, 1780) Cat № 37149 — all these 41 worms are Nephtys sp. nov. We have asked Adam J. Baldinger, Curatorial Associate of Invertebrate Zoology Department MCZ, to provide us three worms of this sample as a loan — to study them in Moscow and to make a description of this Nephtys sp. nov. We also had in our disposal two worms of Nephtys ciliata from Russia (the Barents Sea, 69° 7′ 5″ N, 36° 3′ 30″ E) and gladly gave them to the MCZ collection (Dept. of Invertebrate Zool.). • Nephtys incisa Malmgren, 1865 We have studied the next samples: Cat. № 37133, Cat. № 37208 All these worms were not Nephtys incisa but Nephtys sp. nov. We made about 45 photos (optical cuts) of this worm. 8. All other time in AMNH was devoted to study scientific literature in the Museum’s library. We read the literature with the descriptions of different species Nephtyidae family which are absent in Russian libraries.