Phylogeny of the bristle worm family Eunicidae (Eunicida, Annelida) and the phylogenetic utility of noncongruent 16S, COI and 18S in combined analyses.

The bristleworm family Eunicidae is distributed worldwide and well-known for the large size of many of its species, its hard jaws and its economic importance in the bait industry. Monophyly of Eunicidae has been contradicted in previous molecular and morphological phylogenetic analyses focusing on Eunicida or on its type genus, Eunice. The current study focused on the phylogeny of the family per se combining mitochondrial and nuclear genes in different analyses. It recovered well-resolved phylogenetic hypotheses supporting the monophyly of Eunicidae and Palola, the only monophyletic genus among the genera for which we tested their monophyly (Eunice, Marphysa, Palola, Lysidice and Nematonereis). Four other stable clades containing the type species of different genera, or species deemed very similar to them, were recovered within Eunicidae. These clades may represent monophyletic redefinitions of current genera, except for Eunice, and of previous synonymized genera. Evolution of the number of peristomial cirri and prostomial appendages in Eunicidae happened by independent step-by-step reduction in the opposite order of their ontogenetic development, suggestive of sequential heterochrony. All three genes were informative, however, at different levels within the combined trees. 16S and COI were important in recovering a monophyletic Eunicidae and relationships within the family, while 18S was important in the resolution of basal eunicidan relationships, monophyly of Onuphidae and basal relationships within this family. Moreover, results of congruence tests (SH and WRST using PABA) indicate that hidden support is picked up in the combined analyses, which is not revealed in the single gene analyses. Further supporting the idea that congruence is not a requirement for combining different partitions.

Eunice sensu lato (Annelida: Eunicidae) from Australia: description of seven new species and comments on previously reported species of the genera Eunice, Leodice and Nicidion.

Species traditionally considered to belong to Eunice are now, also, distributed in two other genera Leodice and Nicidion recently resurrected to reconcile Eunicidae taxonomy with its phylogenetic hypothesis. In Australia, Eunice species have been reported from all seas and sum up to 22 species. In this study, we propose 10 new combinations for traditional Eunice species, which should be moved to Leodice; describe seven new species, four of Eunice and three of Leodice; and comment on species previous recorded from the Australian Coast. Previous records of E. denticulata, E. filamentosa, E. grubei, E. indica, E. longicirris, E. microprion, E. paupera, E. tridentata, E. tubifex and E. vittata from Australia are considered dubious. Eunice tribranchiata, originally described from Australian specimens, is considered here to be an indeterminable species. This study also includes descriptions of Eunice, Leodice and Nicidion as well as key to these genera and their species recorded from Australia.

Occurrence of Diopatramarocensis (Annelida, Onuphidae) in the eastern Mediterranean.

The present study deals with the presence of Diopatramarocensis in the eastern Mediterranean. This species is small-sized and inhabited muddy bottom near the opening of rivers or lagoons [salinity range: 33-39‰] in the Aegean and Levantine Seas, and reached a maximum density of 90 ind.m(-2) in Mersin Bay. This species might be an alien species that was introduced from the East Atlantic (near Gibraltar) to the eastern Mediterranean via ballast water of ships, as it has never been reported from the western Mediterranean Sea.

Global coordination and standardisation in marine biodiversity through the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) and related databases.

The World Register of Marine Species is an over 90% complete open-access inventory of all marine species names. Here we illustrate the scale of the problems with species names, synonyms, and their classification, and describe how WoRMS publishes online quality assured information on marine species. Within WoRMS, over 100 global, 12 regional and 4 thematic species databases are integrated with a common taxonomy. Over 240 editors from 133 institutions and 31 countries manage the content. To avoid duplication of effort, content is exchanged with 10 external databases. At present WoRMS contains 460,000 taxonomic names (from Kingdom to subspecies), 368,000 species level combinations of which 215,000 are currently accepted marine species names, and 26,000 related but non-marine species. Associated information includes 150,000 literature sources, 20,000 images, and locations of 44,000 specimens. Usage has grown linearly since its launch in 2007, with about 600,000 unique visitors to the website in 2011, and at least 90 organisations from 12 countries using WoRMS for their data management. By providing easy access to expert-validated content, WoRMS improves quality control in the use of species names, with consequent benefits to taxonomy, ecology, conservation and marine biodiversity research and management. The service manages information on species names that would otherwise be overly costly for individuals, and thus minimises errors in the application of nomenclature standards. WoRMS' content is expanding to include host-parasite relationships, additional literature sources, locations of specimens, images, distribution range, ecological, and biological data. Species are being categorised as introduced (alien, invasive), of conservation importance, and on other attributes. These developments have a multiplier effect on its potential as a resource for biodiversity research and management. As a consequence of WoRMS, we are witnessing improved communication within the scientific community, and anticipate increased taxonomic efficiency and quality control in marine biodiversity research and management.

The magnitude of global marine species diversity.

BACKGROUND: The question of how many marine species exist is important because it provides a metric for how much we do and do not know about life in the oceans. We have compiled the first register of the marine species of the world and used this baseline to estimate how many more species, partitioned among all major eukaryotic groups, may be discovered. RESULTS: There are ∼226,000 eukaryotic marine species described. More species were described in the past decade (∼20,000) than in any previous one. The number of authors describing new species has been increasing at a faster rate than the number of new species described in the past six decades. We report that there are ∼170,000 synonyms, that 58,000-72,000 species are collected but not yet described, and that 482,000-741,000 more species have yet to be sampled. Molecular methods may add tens of thousands of cryptic species. Thus, there may be 0.7-1.0 million marine species. Past rates of description of new species indicate there may be 0.5 ± 0.2 million marine species. On average 37% (median 31%) of species in over 100 recent field studies around the world might be new to science. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, between one-third and two-thirds of marine species may be undescribed, and previous estimates of there being well over one million marine species appear highly unlikely. More species than ever before are being described annually by an increasing number of authors. If the current trend continues, most species will be discovered this century.