of the pacific abyssal fauna relevant to the ccz · 2019-01-07 · variation in species composition...

Stefanie Kaiser

Taxonomy and biogeography of macrofaunal isopodsof the Pacific abyssal fauna relevant to the CCZ

Taxonomy

Biodiversity

Sample

processing

Photos: I Mohrbeck, S Kaiser, A Janssen

Isopoda

Photos: A Rose, T Riehl

Feeding types

predators

Ubiquitous and diverse

scavengersdetritivor, foraminiferivor

parasites,suspension feeders

Brökeland et al. 2010

Isopoda


Feeding types

Reproduction mode


Obligate broodersDistribution restricted ?

Isopoda


Feeding types

Reproduction mode


Obligate broodersDistribution restricted ?

Swimming

Differences in mobility

Ambulatory Infauna

Riehl & Kaiser 2012, Brix et al. 2014

Different subordersPresent in abyssal collection

Photos: D Barnes, T Riehl, P Bucktrout

>90%ca. 15 families

Tropical to temperateshallow water

Southern temperate and polar shelves

Asellota Cymothoida Sphaeromatoidea Valvifera

Dominant families

Others:e.g., Ischnomesidae, DendrotionidaeJanirellidae, Katianiridae, Mesosignidae

Kaiser unpubl. data; images: Brix et al. 2014, T Riehl, Riehl & Kaiser 2012, W Brökeland

relevant to the CCZ

DesmosomatidaeMunnopsidaeMacrostylidaeNannoniscidaeHaploniscidae

Proportion (%) of total isopods0 3010 20

Sample processing andspecies discrimination

Distribution of data

Genetic/morphological measuresDiversity & distributionLocal to regional scale

modified from Janssen et al. submitted, Kaiser & Brenke, work in progress; Photo: P Bucktrout

French license area

German license area

1400 km

Photos: T Riehl, S Kaiser

Epibenthic sledge vs. box coreSampling

Quantitative vs. qualitative samplerSupra- and epinetModifications

Preserving for morphological & genetic analyses:

• Careful sieving with cold sea water(500 & 300 µm mesh)

• Fixing in pre-cooled (-20°C) absolute 96% EtOH or DESS (Yoder et al. 2006)

• Exchange of EtOH after 24h max.

Photos: D Barnes, S Kaiser, I Mohrbeck, S Keller

MacrofaunaSample processing

Species discrimination

• (Stereo-) microscope• Sorting on ice• Preparing slides: glycerine, e.g. methyl-green stain• Confocal, SEM

from Kaiser & Marner 2012; Riehl et al. 2014

Image: S Kaiser unpubl.

Isopod body parts

pleotelson pereon - pereonites head

2nd antenna

1st antennapereopods

uropodcoxa

basisischium

meruscarpus

propodusdactylus

claw

maxilliped

mandibles

Nannoniscidae

Important characters:1st antenna,

1st pereopodventral spines,

fused pereonites

Dominant: Nannoniscus, HebefustisAlso present: Thaumastosoma, Micromesus, etc.

12 genera>80 species described

modified from Kaiser 2006, 2008, 2009; Wilson 2008

Photos: T Riehl, A Janssen, V Borges

Desmosomatidae

Important characters:pleotelson:

posterolateral spines, pereopod I

Dominant: Eugerdella, Mirabilicoxa, Prochelatoralso present: Chelator, Disparella, Whoia

2 subfamiles, 20 genera>130 species described

Hessler 1970

Desmosomatidae

Desmosomatinae

Eugerdellatinae

Photo: MOLTAX/ DZMB

Preparation for genetic analyses

Dissect 1-3 pereopods (onboard)

pereopod 2 onwards, one-sided

Voucher for morphological ID & species description

Photo, database(voucher #, metadata)

COI, 16S, HTSalso 18S, H3 for

phylogenetic studies

Morphological ID

reverse

Family/genus

Family/ genus?

Subfamily

Photos: T Riehl, A Janssen, V Borges, Brix et al. 2014; Kaiser & Brandt 2006

Family/ genus

Subfamily

Family/ genus?

VoucheringTaking more informative pictures

Family/genus

Family/ genus?

Subfamily

Photos: T Riehl, A Janssen, V Borges, Brix et al. 2014; Kaiser & Brandt 2006

Family/ genus

Subfamily

Family/ genus?

VoucheringTaking more informative pictures

Overview Dorsal & lateral (pereonites 5-7 dorsal and lateral)

Head dorsal, lateral, ventral (antennae, mouthparts)

Pereopod 1

Pleotelson dorsal, lateral and ventral

Taxonomy – constraints• Photographs not sufficient for species level ID

• Sexual dimorphism: assigning male and female• Bad condition of nodule material

Macrostylis sp.

♀♂

• Hardly any taxonomic keys (limited to certain families)

Photo: P Bucktrout, T Riehl; Brandt et al. 2014

Taxonomy – constraints• Photographs not sufficient for species level ID

• Sexual dimorphism: assigning male and female• Bad condition of nodule material

• Cryptic species

Atlantoserolis vemae Menzies, 1962

♀♂

• Hardly any taxonomic keys (limited to certain families)

Photo: P Bucktrout, T Riehl; Brandt et al. 2014

Isopoda8 morpho species vs.15 molecular taxonomic units

Cryptic species

modified from Janssen et al. submitted, Kaiser & Brenke, work in progress; Photo: P Bucktrout

Biodiversity and distributionof CCFZ Isopoda

station #0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

ES (2

0)

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

W E

Diversity from local to regional scales

Kaiser & Brenke unpubl. data; photo: T Riehl

Differences between sites and areas

One-way ANOVA p = 0.346

Diversity from local to regional scales


Morph GER

Morph FRA

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

0

8

16

24

32

40

48

56

64

Cumulative number of individuals

Cum

ulat

ive

n of

spe

cies

Differences between sites and areas

Rate of novelty

Kaiser & Brenke unpubl. Data, Mezhov 1986; map: DZMB, Senckenberg am Meer; U Raschka

CCZ

88% species provisionally new10% similar to species elsewhere

Rate of novelty


Taxonomic descriptions crucial for further biogeographic, phylogenic and ecological studies

5 species described (from the CCFZ)Genera and families new to science

Cosine similarity, 2 D Stress: 0.09

Variation in species compositionHigh variability even between close-by stations

French claim

German claim

Kaiser, Brenke et al., unpubl. data; photo: A Rose


French claim

German claim

Distance explains differences to some extent

Distance between sites (km)

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

spec

ies

sim

ilarit

y (C

osin

e)

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

R sqr. 0,1761



French claim

German claim

Distance explains differences to some extent


0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

spec

ies

sim

ilarit

y (C

osin

e)

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

R sqr. 0,1761 R sqr. 0.3577


0 50 100 150 200

Cos

ine

sim

ilarit

y

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8


Abundance patternsHigh proportion of unique and duplicate species

n sites occupied2 4 6 8 10

% o

f tot

al s

peci

es

0

10

20

30

40

50


Abundance patternsHigh proportion of unique and duplicate species

n sites occupied2 4 6 8 10

% o

f tot

al s

peci

es

0

10

20

30

40

50

Abundant species more widely distributed


One-third singletons

Image: T RiehlBGR, Kaiser, unpubl. data

German LA

Cosine similarity, 2-D stress: 0

Preservation zone

Potential mining area


Defining preservation zones

Preservation zone



Image: T RiehlBGR, Kaiser, unpubl. data

German LA

Cosine similarity, 2-D stress: 0

Preservation zone



74 morpho-species

>70% uniques & duplicates4% shared

Defining preservation zones

Summary & conclusions

Isopods as a model group

Constraints:• Sampling effort• Intercalibration of data sets

Future work

Thanks

Funding was received by the BGR, IFREMER, the EU and the ISA

of the pacific abyssal fauna relevant to the ccz · 2019-01-07 · variation in species composition...

Documents