identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FDF2FBF4FCAE.text	D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FDF2FBF4FCAE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Bimeria vestita Wright 1859	<div><p>Bimeria vestita Wright, 1859</p><p>(Fig. 2A)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 8, 25.i.2012, 12– 15 m, M052: small colonies on stems of Hincksella formosa (Fewkes, 1881), some with incipient gonophores.</p><p>Remarks. An extensive synonymy, a recent redescription, and data on the biology of this species are provided by Schuchert (2007).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Nearly cosmopolitan, except for the polar waters of both hemispheres (Schuchert 2007). The Caribbean records are summarized by Calder &amp; Kirkendale (2005).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FDF2FBF4FCAE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FC07FF11FAD9.text	D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FC07FF11FAD9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Garveia franciscana (Torrey 1902) Torrey 1902	<div><p>Garveia franciscana (Torrey, 1902)</p><p>(Fig. 2B, C)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 17, 12.i.2012, 0.2 m, M001: small, mostly infertile colonies (occasionally with incipient gonophores), epizoic on Dynamena crisioides Lamouroux, 1824 .</p><p>Remarks. A redescription, as well as a list of synonyms, and notes on the biology of this brackish water species, are provided by Schuchert (2007).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Widely destributed in the Pacific and Atlantic as summarized by Schuchert (2007).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FC07FF11FAD9	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FA98FC72F9BF.text	D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FA98FC72F9BF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Parawrightia robusta Warren 1907	<div><p>Parawrightia robusta Warren, 1907</p><p>(Pl. 1A, B; Fig. 2D–F)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 4, 25.ii.2012, 5 m, M249: male colony on stolon and basal parts of stems of Macrorhynchia philippina Kirchenpauer, 1872 (MHNG-INVE-82907).</p><p>Remarks. For a redescription of this species, see Calder (1988).</p><p>Geographical distribution. South Africa (Millard 1975), Bermuda (Calder 1988), Florida (Calder 2013). The Caribbean records are summarized by Calder &amp; Kirkendale (2005).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF4FFFF1FF36FA98FC72F9BF	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF4FFFF0FF36F8CFFCA7FD37.text	D6410C37BF4FFFF0FF36F8CFFCA7FD37.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hydractinia	<div><p>Hydractinia sp.</p><p>(Pl. 1C; Fig. 2G, H)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 6, 28.i.2012, 10– 18 m, M104: fertile colony on limestone and sponge.</p><p>Description. Colony arising from creeping, ramified hydrorhiza devoid of spines. Three types of polyps: 1) gastrozooids, with 12–16 tentacles and the hypostome encircled by a conspicuous band of large heteronemes; 2) gonozooids, being smaller, modified gastrozooids, with 6–12 tentacles (though some individuals completely lack them), retaining the band of nematocysts around the hypostome; 3) tentaculozooids, rare and scattered within the colony. Gonophores medusoids, presumably male; rounded, with a central spadix and four radial canals; marginal bulbs and tentacles absent, velum not observed. Cnidome: 1) desmonemes, (6.9–7.2)×(3.7–4.0) µm, abundant in the tentacles, also scattered in the coenosarc; 2) microbasic euryteles, (8.0–8.5)×(2.9–3.2) µm, abundant in the tentacles, also scattered in the coenosarc, rare in the tentaculozooids; 3) microbasic heteronemes with short shaft, (9.8–10.4)×(4.2–4.5) µm, not uncommon in the coenosarc, more abundant in the tentaculozooids; 4) microbasic heretonemes with long shaft, (13.3–14.4)×(3.7–4.0) µm, in a conspicuous band around the hypostome, also scattered in the coenosarc, abundant in both the tentaculozooids and the ectoderm of the gonophore; 5) ovoid capsules, (6.4–6.6)×(3.2–3.4) µm, of unidentified type (though not clearly visible, a shaft seems to be present), occurring exclusively, though rather scantly, in the tentaculozooids.</p><p>Remarks. The present material comes close to H. inermis (Allman, 1872), as described by Schuchert (2008), mainly due the presence of a conspicuous band of nematocysts around the hypostome, and the structure of the gonophore. However, the cnidome composition given by Boero (1981) for this species depicts small, ovoid atrichous isorhizas, not occurring in this material.</p><p>The finding of additional, fertile specimens of both sexes will allow for a more comprehensive description of the gonophores. In addition, the cnidome suggests that we are probably dealing with a new species.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF4FFFF0FF36F8CFFCA7FD37	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF4EFFF0FF36FC47FD21FB3D.text	D6410C37BF4EFFF0FF36FC47FD21FB3D.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Corydendrium parasiticum (Linnaeus 1767) Linnaeus 1767	<div><p>Corydendrium parasiticum (Linnaeus, 1767)</p><p>(Fig. 2I)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 7, 24.i.2012, 6– 8 m, M032: a sparsely branched colony, 4.5 cm high, with gonophores. Stn. 8, 25.i.2012, 12– 15 m, M056: a 15 cm high, sterile colony (MHNG-INVE-82908).</p><p>Remarks. For the synonymy and a redescription of this species, see Schuchert (2004).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Likely circumglobal in tropical and subtropical waters (Schuchert 2004). In the Caribbean, this species was recorded from Colombia (Wedler 1975, Flórez Gonzáles 1983), Belize (Spracklin 1982), Puerto Rico (Wedler &amp; Larson 1986), Panama (Calder &amp; Kirkendale 2005), Guadeloupe (Galea, unpublished data), and Martinique (present record).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF4EFFF0FF36FC47FD21FB3D	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF4EFFF0FF36FAF4FC72F904.text	D6410C37BF4EFFF0FF36FAF4FC72F904.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Turritopsis nutricula McCrady 1859	<div><p>Turritopsis nutricula McCrady, 1859</p><p>(Fig. 2J)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 3, 19.ii.2012, 10– 15m, M225: fertile colony, with stems up to 3 cm high, on sponge and worm tubes (MHNG-INVE-82910). Stn. 6, 18.i.2012, 15– 18 m, M006: fertile colony, with stems up to 3 cm high, epizoic on Pennaria disticha (Goldfuss, 1820) (MHNG-INVE-82909).</p><p>Remarks. Only small, stolonal material was reported earlier from Guadeloupe (Galea 2010a), but more characteristic bushy, polysiphonic, fertile colonies occur in the present collection from Martinique. Migotto (1996) provided a redescription of this species. Additional notes, especially on the medusa stage, are found in Schuchert (2004).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Western Atlantic, from Bermuda (Calder 1988) to Brazil (Migotto 1996). The Caribbean records are summarized by Calder &amp; Kirkendale (2005).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF4EFFF0FF36FAF4FC72F904	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF4EFFFDFF36F8A1FD75FEE7.text	D6410C37BF4EFFFDFF36F8A1FD75FEE7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Solanderia gracilis Duchassaing & Michelin 1846	<div><p>Solanderia gracilis Duchassaing &amp; Michelin, 1846</p><p>(Pl. 1D–F; Fig. 2K, L)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 1, 18.ii.2012, 20 m, M220: two sterile colonies, 10.5×9.0 cm and 4.5× 2.5 cm, respectively, on limestone (MHNG-INVE-82875); 26.ii.2012, 20 m, M272: fertile colony (immature gonophores, sex could not be ascertained), basal part missing, 8.0×7.0 cm (MHNG-INVE-82876).</p><p>FIGURE 2. A: Bimeria vestita Wright, 1859 ―portion of erect stem with hydranth. B, C: Garveia franciscana (Torrey, 1902) ―portion of colony with hydranths and gonophores (B); cnidome (C). D–F: Parawrightia robusta Warren, 1907 ―hydranth atop its pedicel (D); gonophore in lateral view (E1) and cross section (E2). G, H: Hydractinia sp.―gastro- (G1) and gonozooid with gonophore seen frontally (G2); tentaculo- and gonozooid with gonophore seen laterally (G3); cnidome (H). I: Corydendrium parasiticum (Linnaeus, 1767) ―hydranth and female gonads. J: Turritopsis nutricula McCrady, 1857 ―hydranth and gonophores. K, L: Solanderia gracilis Duchassaing &amp; Michelin, 1846 ―fragment of a branchlet showing hydranths and gonophores (K); cnidome (L). M: Heterocoryne caribbensis Wedler &amp; Larson, 1986 ―cnidome. N–Q: Ectopleura mayeri Petersen, 1990 ―newly liberated medusa seen apically (N), in lateral (O) and subumbrellar (P) views; cnidome (Q) of medusa (upper row) and polyp (lower row). R: Ralpharia gorgoniae Petersen, 1990 ―cnidome. Scale bars: 10 µm (C, F, H, L, M, Q, R), 300 µm (E, N–P), 500 µm (A, B, D, G, J, K), 1 mm (I).</p><p>PLATE 1. A–B: Parawrightia robusta Warren, 1907 ―hydranth, note the amphicoronate tentacles (A); male gonophore (B). C: Hydractinia sp.―gastro- and gonozooid. D–F: Solanderia gracilis Duchassaing &amp; Michelin, 1846 ―detail of colony (D); hydranth (E); gonophores (F). G–I: Heterocoryne caribbensis Wedler &amp; Larson, 1986 ―portion of colony on red sponge (G); hydranth with gonophore (H); trifid aboral tentacle (I). J, K: Ectopleura mayeri Petersen, 1990 ―detail of hydranth showing the medusa buds (J); newly liberated medusa (K). L– O: Ralpharia gorgoniae Petersen, 1990 ―three polyps (L); detail of hydranth showing blastostyles with gonophores and loose distal clusters of cnidophores (M); eumedusoid gonophores at various stages of development (N); larvae brooded within the female gonophore (O). Photo courtesy: Romain Ferry (A–F, H, J, K, M, N) and Alain Goyeau (G, L).</p><p>Remarks. For a thorough redescription of this species, see Vervoort (1962). Its ecology was studied by Larson (1987). The cnidome (unreported so far) is composed of two size classes of stenoteles, with small (ca. 8.5×6.1 µm) and large (ca. 16.0×12.8 µm) capsules, respectively.</p><p>Geographical distribution. From North Carolina to Brazil (Larson 1987). The Caribbean records are summarized by Calder &amp; Kirkendale (2005).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF4EFFFDFF36F8A1FD75FEE7	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF43FFFDFF36FE14FE31FC66.text	D6410C37BF43FFFDFF36FE14FE31FC66.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Heterocoryne caribbensis Welder & Larson 1986	<div><p>Heterocoryne caribbensis Welder &amp; Larson, 1986</p><p>(Pl. 1G–I; Fig. 2M)</p><p>Heterocoryne caribbensis Wedler &amp; Larson, 1986: 75, fig. 2.― Petersen, 1990: 132.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 2, 22.ii.2012, 3– 13 m, M243: a fertile colony on sponge (MHNG-INVE-82911).</p><p>Remarks. After its description by Wedler &amp; Larson (1986), Petersen (1990) discussed the relationship between Sphaerocoryne Pictet, 1893 and Heterocoryne Wedler &amp; Larson, 1986, indicating that the trophosome of the latter is solely distinguished from the former through its trifid arrangement of the tentacles (Pl. 1I). The cnidome of the polyp (not previously reported) is composed of: 1) small [(10.3–11.0)×(6.5–6.8) µm] and large [(17.8–18.7)×(12.6–13.5) µm] stenoteles; 2) desmonemes, (8.2–8.4)×(4.4–4.9) µm. No nematocysts could be found in the medusoid.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Puerto Rico (Wedler &amp; Larson 1986), Guadeloupe (Galea, unpublished results), Martinique (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF43FFFDFF36FE14FE31FC66	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF43FFFCFF36FB9AFC46FD14.text	D6410C37BF43FFFCFF36FB9AFC46FD14.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ectopleura mayeri Petersen 1990	<div><p>Ectopleura mayeri Petersen, 1990</p><p>(Pl. 1J, K; Fig. 2N–Q)</p><p>Ectopleura mayeri Petersen, 1990: 166, fig. 22.―Var el a et al., 2010: 30. Ectopleura pacifica ― Calder, 1988: 53, fig. 41 (not Ectopleura pacifica Thornely, 1900).? Ectopleura minerva Mayer, 1900: 31, pl. 16 fig. 38, pl. 37 fig. 125.</p><p>? Ectopleura sp. Fewkes, 1883: 85, pl. 1 fig. 11.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 6, 28.i.2012, 10– 18 m, M088: fertile colony from sponge substrate, and newly liberated medusae (MHNG-INVE-82914). Stn. 7, 24.i.2012, 6 m, M017: small, fertile colony on seaweed (MHNG-INVE- 82912); M029: fertile colony on sponge (MHNG-INVE-82913).</p><p>Remarks. Petersen (1990) provides a sound description of this species, but to this, it can be added that the aboral tentacles are monilifiliform, with nematocysts uniformly spread on their aboral side, and scattered, rather smooth patches on their adoral side. The oral tentacles are provided with a terminal capitation, a continuous band of nematocysts on their aboral side, and 1–3 rough, adoral patches with crowded capsules.</p><p>Newly liberated medusae were obtained from living colonies. The umbrella is dome-shaped, 390–485 µm high, 240–340 µm wide, depending on its state of contraction/relaxation. The mesoglea is thin, the exumbrella is provided with eight longitudinal tracks of nematocysts, while no scattered capsules could be observed on its surface. There are four marginal bulbs, of which two of them give rise to two short, opposite, perradial tentacles with a terminal capitation. The manubrium is globular, about half the length of the subumbrellar cavity. Live medusae have a yellow-orange manubrium, the nematocysts tracks are green fluorescent, while the marginal bulbs and the tentacle capitations are milky white, due to the presence of crowded nematocysts (Pl. 1K).</p><p>The cnidome of this species (not previously reported) is given for both the polyp and the medusa bud. The former contains five capsules: 1) small, ovoid stenoteles, (5.8–6.4)×(4.5–5.0) µm, in both aboral and oral tentacles; 2) small, rounded stenoteles, (6.6–7.2)×(5.6–6.4) µm, in both aboral and oral tentacles; 3) large stenoteles, (10.6– 11.7)×(9.6–10.4) µm, in the oral tentacles; 4) desmonemes, (4.5–4.8)×(3.4–3.7) µm, in the aboral tentacles; 5) ovoid microbasic mastigophores, (8.5–9.8)×(4.2–4.5) µm, in both oral and aboral tentacles. The newly liberated medusa contains six capsules: 1) small, ovoid stenoteles, (6.4–6.6)×(4.8–5.0) µm, in the marginal bulbs; 2) small, rounded stenoteles, (6.1–6.4)×(5.0–5.4) µm, in the marginal bulbs; 3) large stenoteles, (8.2–9.0)×(7.7–8.2) µm, in the marginal bulbs and the exumbrellar tracks; 4) desmonemes, (5.0–5.3)×(3.4–3.7) µm, in the marginal bulbs; 5) anisorhizas, (7.4–8.0)×(6.6–7.2) µm, in the exumbrellar tracks; 6) microbasic mastigophores, (7.2–8.0)×(3.7–4.0) µm, in the exumbrellar tracks.</p><p>Both Calder (1988) and Petersen (1900) questioned the conspecificity of Ectopleura minerva Mayer, 1900, only known from its medusa stage, and the present hydroid. Some of the colors reported by Mayer (1900), notably the greenish tinge of the bell, are equally found in the buds and the newly liberated medusae of E. mayeri (Pl. 1J, K). As in E. minerva, young medusae of E. mayeri bear only two opposite perradiar tentacles, and their number is not expected to increase with age, similarly to E. obypa Migotto &amp; Marques, 1999 . It could thus logically be assumed that the hydroid E. mayeri and the medusa E. minerva are coterminous. Either rearing experiments or genetic comparison could test this assumption.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Bermuda (Calder 1988, as E. pacifica), Caribbean coast of Panama (Calder &amp; Kirkendale 2005), Cuba (Varela et al. 2010), Guadeloupe (Galea, unpublished results), Martinique (present study). Ectopleura minerva is known from Bermuda and Florida (Mayer 1900).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF43FFFCFF36FB9AFC46FD14	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF42FFFCFF36FCD2FD41F972.text	D6410C37BF42FFFCFF36FCD2FD41F972.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ralpharia gorgoniae Petersen 1990	<div><p>Ralpharia gorgoniae Petersen, 1990</p><p>(Pl. 1L– O; Fig. 2R)</p><p>Ralpharia gorgoniae Petersen, 1990: 189, fig. 35.― Calder &amp; Kirkendale, 2005: 480.― Castellanos Iglesias et al., 2011: 14. Tubularia parasitica ― Wedler &amp; Larson, 1986: 72, fig. 1B (not Tubularia parasitica Korotneff, 1887). Pachycordyle sp. A― Larson, 1982: 255.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 7, 24.i.2012, 6– 8 m, M044: two fertile polyps (MHNG-INVE-82915). Additional material for comparison: Guadeloupe, Stn4. 18, 04.xii.2009, 10– 15 m, five polyps with and without gonophores (MHNG-INVE-82916).</p><p>Remarks. For a thorough description of this species, see Petersen (1990). The gonophore is well illustrated by Wedler &amp; Larson (1986). In addition to these, it is worth mentioning that the oral and aboral tentacles are pseudofiliform, with cnidocytes concentrated on both ad- and aboral sides, except for the distalmost parts where the capsules cover uniformly all the surface of these tentacles. Cnidome (previously unreported): 1) small stenoteles, (8.5–8.9)×(6.2–6.9) µm, in both oral and aboral tentacles; 2) large stenoteles, (11.5–11.9)×(9.9–10.1) µm, in the oral tentacles; 3) desmonemes, (6.9–7.8)×(4.8–5.5) µm, in both oral and aboral tentacles; 4) microbasic mastigophores, (13.1–13.8)×(4.8–5.3) µm, in the aboral tentacles; 5) heterotrichous anisorhizas, (11.7– 12.4)×(10.8–11.2) µm, in the nematophores. No cnidocysts occur in the gonophores.</p><p>Some polyps bear, with little doubt, male gonophores (a homogenous, compact mass of tissue invests the subumbrellar cavity), while others are probably female. No oocytes could be seen, but possibly developing larvae (Pl. 1 O), resembling those figured earlier by myself (Galea 2008, fig. 3H) for Zyzzyzus warreni Calder, 1988 . Similar larvae are also visible in some gonophores illustrated by Petersen (1990, Fig. 35).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Belize (Larson 1982, planktonic medusoids, as Pachycordyle sp. A), Colombia (Flórez González 1983, as Tubularia parasitica), Puerto Rico (Wedler &amp; Larson 1986, as T. parasitica), Caribbean coast of Panama (Calder &amp; Kirkendale 2005), Cuba (Castellanos Iglesias et al. 2011), Guadeloupe (Galea, unpublished results), Martinique (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF42FFFCFF36FCD2FD41F972	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FF5AFEA0FE72.text	D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FF5AFEA0FE72.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Clytia hemisphaerica (Linnaeus 1767) Linnaeus 1767	<div><p>Clytia hemisphaerica (Linnaeus, 1767)</p><p>(Fig. 3A, B)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 14, 20.ii.2012, 10– 13 m, M242: small, fertile colonies on Thyroscyphus marginatus (Allman, 1877) .</p><p>Geographical distribution. Circumglobal (Calder 1991), though not penetrating in polar waters. The Caribbean records are summarized by Calder &amp; Kirkendale (2005); to these should be added the present record from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FF5AFEA0FE72	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FE33FED2FC81.text	D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FE33FED2FC81.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Clytia noliformis (McCrady 1859) McCrady 1859	<div><p>Clytia noliformis (McCrady, 1859)</p><p>(Fig. 3 C, D)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 6, 28.i.2012, 4– 10 m, M096: a colony on Halimeda sp., some gonothecae occur (MHNG- INVE-82918); 14.ii.2012, 10– 17 m, M197: a colony on Halimeda sp., several gonothecae present (MHNG-INVE- 82919).</p><p>Remarks. A thorough redescription of this species is available in Lindner &amp; Migotto (2002), and an extensive list of synonyms is provided by Calder (1991).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Circumglobal (Calder 1991), though likely absent from the cold waters of both hemispheres.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FE33FED2FC81	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FC60FC7EF994.text	D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FC60FC7EF994.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gastroblasta	<div><p>? Gastroblasta sp.</p><p>(Fig. 3 E)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 7, 23.i.2012, 6 m, M019: four fragments on Amphimedon compressa (Porifera) bearing numerous hydrothecae, but no gonothecae (MHNG-INVE-82920).</p><p>Description. Hydrothecal pedicels arising irregularly from within the inhalant pores of the sponge host; hydrorhiza deeply embedded in host's tissues. Pedicels annulated basally and distally, sometimes in between, protruding at 365–1700 µm above surface of sponge, diameter 80–105 µm; each carrying a hydrotheca distally. Hydrotheca campanulate with slightly diverging walls from base to rim, 505–620 µm high, 310–380 µm wide at aperture; subhydrothecal chamber rather tall, 90–120 µm high; diaphragm well marked, a ring of desmocytes above; margin with 9–10 wide, triangular, moderately high cusps with rounded tips. Hydranths with ca. 20 tentacles. Gonothecae absent.</p><p>Remarks. Clytia -like polyps of the genus Gastroblasta Keller, 1883, living in symbiotic associations with sponges, are only known for G. r a f f a e l e i Lang, 1886 (Gravili et al. 2007). The two remaining congeners, G. t i m i d a Keller, 1883 from the Red Sea, and G. o v a l i s (Mayer, 1900) from Florida, are only known from their medusa stage. The present hydroid may represent the polyp of G. o v a l i s, though rearing experiments or genetic data are necessary to test this assertion.</p><p>Geographical distribution. The sole known record of this hydroid is from Martinique, while the medusa of G. ovalis occur from Florida (Mayer 1900) to Brazil (Vannucci 1949).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36FC60FC7EF994	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36F952FBB2F86A.text	D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36F952FBB2F86A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Orthopyxis sargassicola (Nutting 1915) Nutting 1915	<div><p>Orthopyxis sargassicola (Nutting, 1915)</p><p>(Fig. 3 F, G)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 12, 04.ii.2012, 6– 12 m, M138: a fertile (female) colony on Sargassum sp. (MHNG- INVE-82922). Stn. 13, 29.i.2012, 6– 10 m, M116: a fertile (female) colony on Sargassum sp. (MHNG-INVE- 82921).</p><p>Remarks. The synonymy and a redescription of this species are provided by Calder (1991). Geographical distribution. Western Atlantic, as summarized by Calder (2013).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF41FFFFFF36F952FBB2F86A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF47FFF9FF36FF14FC58F93F.text	D6410C37BF47FFF9FF36FF14FC58F93F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Egmundella humilis Fraser 1936	<div><p>Egmundella humilis Fraser, 1936</p><p>(Fig. 3 H, I; Table 2)</p><p>Egmundella humilis Fraser, 1936: 50, pl. 1 fig. 2.― Hirohito, 1995: 84, fig. 24A–C.? Lovenella sp. Millard &amp; Bouillon, 1973: 42, fig. 5E, F.</p><p>? Egmundella modesta Millard &amp; Bouillon, 1975: 5, fig.1E–H.― Vervoort, 2006: 224, figs 7.3, 8.3, 9D–H.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 6, 18.i.2012, 15– 18 m, M007: small, sterile colony on stolon of Clytia gracilis (M. Sars, 1850) . Stn. 14, 20.ii.2012, 10– 13 m, M231: minute, sterile colony on stolon of Hincksella formosa (Fewkes, 1881) .</p><p>Description. Small, stolonal colonies composed of hydrothecae borne singly on top of basally wrinkled pedicels of varied length. Hydrothecae tubular, walls smooth, rounded basally and provided with a thin diaphragm; a belt of desmocytes above; operculum composed of an indeterminable number of interconnected triangular flaps delimited from the rim by crease line. Nematothecae exclusively stolonal, ovoid to globular, with small, rounded, distal aperture; lumen filled with several large, banana-shaped nematocysts.</p><p>Remarks. When Millard &amp; Bouillon (1975) described Egmundella modesta from the Seychelles, they did not compare their new species with E. humilis Fraser, 1936, described earlier from Japan. Conversely, the latter nominal species was redescribed by Hirohito (1995), who also discovered its gonosome, though he did not discuss its affinities with E. modesta . Vervoort (2006), too, did not comment on the relationship between his Mauritanian hydroid assigned to E. modesta and Fraser's species.</p><p>From the available accounts of the two nominal species, it is obvious that their trophosomes are indistinguishable morphologically, and that their dimensions fall within a common range of variation (Table 2).</p><p>Present study Fraser (1936) Millard &amp; Bouillon (1973), Millard &amp; Vervoort</p><p>as? Lovenella sp. Bouillon (1975), (2006),</p><p>Praslin Mahé as E. modesta as E. modesta</p><p>Pedicel</p><p>I assign the present material to Fraser’s species, which would have priority if proven conspecific with E. modesta, but this assignment is tentative given that the gonosome of E. modesta is unknown.</p><p>Another species occurring in the Caribbean is E. superba Stechow, 1921, but it has much taller pedicels, while its hydro- and nematothecae are two times bigger (Stechow 1921, Calder 1991).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Japan (Fraser 1936, Hirohito 1995), the Seychelles (Millard &amp; Bouillon 1975, as E. modesta), Mauritania (Vervoort 2006), Martinique (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF47FFF9FF36FF14FC58F93F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF47FFF8FF36F8BBFC14FB42.text	D6410C37BF47FFF8FF36F8BBFC14FB42.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Anthohebella communis (Calder 1991) Calder 1991	<div><p>Anthohebella communis (Calder, 1991)</p><p>(Figs 3 J, Q, R; 4D)</p><p>Hebellopsis communis Calder, 1991: 42, fig. 26.―? Castellanos Iglesias et al., 2011: 20, fig. 11.― Calder, 2013: 19, fig. 5C.</p><p>Hebella communis ― Boero et al., 1997: 34.</p><p>? Hebella scandens ― Vannucci, 1949: 236, pl. 2 figs 22, 23; 1951: 82 [not Hebella scandens (Bale, 1888)].</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 6, 14.ii.2012, 10– 17 m, M195: colony composed of numerous hydrothecae and four male gonothecae, epizoic on Thyroscyphus marginatus (Allman, 1877) (MHNG-INVE-82936).</p><p>Remarks. The present material, with hydrothecae 430–500 µm long and 240–265 µm wide, the margin slightly flaring, 250–280 µm wide, and a basal diaphragm, belongs with little doubt to Calder's (1991) species. The cnidome (not previously reported) comprises at least three types of nematocysts: 1) microbasic mastigophores, ca. 6.7×2.1 µm, abundant in the tentacles and the coenosarc; 2) microbasic heteronemes, ca. 5.3×2.6 µm, with rare occurrence in the coenosarc; 3) large, fusiform capsules, ca. 20.2×5.9 µm, exclusively found in the stolon. Small, seed-shaped microbasic heteronemes as those found in the six species of hebellids discussed below, could not be found, most probably owing their rare occurrence in the coenosarc.</p><p>The material is fertile and bears four gonothecae. They are conical, 1770–1890 µm long, with slightly undulated, thin perisarc walls, widest distally (465–510 µm), tapering gradually basally into indistinct pedicel, and apically truncate. The gonophore, male in the present material, is a medusoid with four somewhat dark-colored radial canals, well visible by contrasting with the homogenous, milky white mass of sperm cells encircling the manubrium, and completely filling the subumbrellar cavity. No other morphological details could be seen in this fixed material. Given the structure of its gonophore, the allocation of this species to Anthohebella Boero et al., 1997 is required.</p><p>The validity of Hebellopsis communis has been questioned by Boero et al. (1997), partly due to the absence of knowledge of its gonothecae and gonophore, and partly to the morphological plasticity in the hebellids in relation to their hosts, suggesting that, if not doubtful, it could well represent a morphotype of Hebella scandens (Bale, 1888) . However, the present discovery of its gonosome shows that A. communis is clearly separable from the medusa-producing H. scandens .</p><p>Migotto (1996), after examining the slide material identified as H. scandens by Vannucci (1949, 1951), raised the conclusion that her specimens belong indeed to the present species. His conclusion is adopted here as provisional, pending essential data on its cnidome.</p><p>Geographical distribution.? Brazil (Vannucci 1949, 1951), Bermuda (Calder 1991),? Cuba (Castellanos Iglesias5 et al. 2011), Florida (Calder 2013), and Martinique (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF47FFF8FF36F8BBFC14FB42	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF46FFFBFF36FB3CFB69FF21.text	D6410C37BF46FFFBFF36FB3CFB69FF21.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hebella dyssymetra Billard 1933	<div><p>Hebella dyssymetra Billard, 1933</p><p>(Figs 3 K, S, T; 4E)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 7, 24.i.2012, 6– 8 m, M044: hydrothecae on stems of Ventromma halecioides (Alder, 1859), some spreading on the substrate of the latter, a dead gorgonian.</p><p>Remarks. Boero et al. (1997) provide a description of this species and a list of synonyms. This material shows that the portion of colony creeping on the host's stems, Ventromma halecioides (Alder, 1859), has conspicuously asymmetric hydrothecae, nearly adnate basally to their substrate (Fig. 3 S), identical to those observed earlier by Calder (1991) in material from Bermuda. In addition, a portion of the same colony extends over the substrate of V. halecioides, a dead gorgonian, and has pedicellate, nearly radially symmetrical hydrothecae (Fig. 3 T).</p><p>The cnidome of the hydroid is composed of four types of capsules (none seen discharged): 1) minute, eggshaped microbasic heteronemes, ca. 3.7×1.6 µm, occurring occasionally in the coenosarc; 2) fusiform microbasic mastigophores, ca. 6.6×2.1 µm, abundant in the tentacles, also present in the coenosarc; 3) ovoid capsules provided with a lateral "beak" at the insertion of the shaft, ca. 6.1×2.6 µm, sparsely found in the coenosarc; 4) elongateovoid capsules, (16.5–18.9)×(5.6–6.4) µm, exclusively occurring in the hydrorhiza.</p><p>Boero et al. (1997) reported on the presence of only two size classes of microbasic mastigophores in the hydroid of this species, of which one is illustrated in their Fig. 8F, and corresponds to type 2 described here. Since some nematocysts (types 1 and 3) occur rarely in the coenosarc, and type 4 is only present in the hydrorhiza, I assume that these authors overlooked them. However, they illustrated (Fig. 8G, H) two additional microbasic mastigophores of the medusoid, which correspond well to types 3 and 4 described above.</p><p>5. In the absence of morphometric data, knowledge of the cnidome, and even the nature of the gonophore, this record is only provisionally assigned to A. communis (Calder, 1991) . It may well belong to Hebella scandens (Bale, 1888) .</p><p>Geographical distribution. Circumglobal in tropical to temperate seas (Calder 1991).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF46FFFBFF36FB3CFB69FF21	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF45FFFBFF36FB02FCA7F802.text	D6410C37BF45FFFBFF36FB02FCA7F802.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hebella	<div><p>Hebella sp. 1</p><p>(Figs 3 M, Z; 4G)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 1, 18.ii.2012, 13 m, M217: several hydrothecae on three cormoids of Aglaophenia rhynchocarpa Allman, 1877 .</p><p>Description. Stolon linear, occasionally branched, creeping mostly on the posterior side of the host's stem, giving rise irregularly to rather short (210–550 µm), slightly wrinkled pedicels, carrying large (1160–1645 µm long, 560–610 µm wide), campanulate hydrothecae; walls smooth or nearly so, rounded and slightly asymmetrical basally, with thin, membranous diaphragm; margin circular, strongly everted, 770–940 µm wide at aperture, occasionally renovated once; hydranths with 18–19 tentacles. Gonothecae absent. Nematocysts: 1) egg-shaped microbasic heteronemes, ca. 5.8×3.4 µm, of rare occurrence in the coenosarc; 2) microbasic mastigophores, (7.8– 9.0)×(2.6–2.9) µm, abundant in the tentacles, also present in the coenosarc; 3) ovoid microbasic heteronemes with a lateral "beak" at insertion of the shaft, (7.4–8.0)×(2.9–3.2) µm, sparsely distributed in the coenosarc; 4) large microbasic heteronemes, ca. 22.3×7.2 µm, occurring rather rarely in the stolon.</p><p>Remarks. In the absence of knowledge of its gonosome, this hydroid, as well as the three following species, could not be linked to any known taxa. According to Fig. 4 D–J, in which the cnidomes of the seven hebellids discussed here are compared, it appears that at least some of them produce capsules with a very characteristic shape. These, together with the features of their trophosomes alone, could possibly allow a specific identification in some cases, provided that their life cycles are already known and specific names are introduced for those that appear as new. Unfortunately, the review by Boero et al. (1997) paid little attention to the cnidomes, thus preventing any reliable comparisons based on the nematocysts and trophosomes alone.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF45FFFBFF36FB02FCA7F802	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF45FFFBFF36FE80FBB6FBA3.text	D6410C37BF45FFFBFF36FE80FBB6FBA3.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hebella scandens (Bale 1888) Bale 1888	<div><p>Hebella scandens (Bale, 1888)</p><p>(Figs 3 L, U– Y; 4F)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 3, 19.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M226: fertile colony on Thyroscyphus marginatus (Allman, 1877) .</p><p>Remarks. For a description of this species and a list of synonyms, see Boero et al. (1997). A medusa bud obtained from a dissected gonotheca showed the presence of a wide manubrium with no apparent gonads, at least two (possibly three) long tentacles and four large marginal bulbs, each bearing a black pigment spot (Fig. 3 Y). Altuna (1996) reported medusae at liberation with 3–4 marginal tentacles, and ocelli appearing after one day of free living, while the medusae examined by Migotto (1996) had 2 perradial tentacles at liberation, and the ocelli only became apparent in 3-day old medusae.</p><p>The cnidome of the polyp (not thoroughly documented previously) comprises four types of capsules: 1) microbasic heteronemes, ca. 5.3×3.4 µm, of rare occurrence in the coenosarc; 2) a fusiform microbasic mastigophore, (5.9–6.4)×(2.1–2.4) µm, abundant in the tentacles and the coenosarc; 3) a rare microbasic heteroneme occurring in the coenosarc, rather poorly distinguishable from the former mastigophores (type 2), except for its globally more swollen capsule, ca. 5.9×2.4 µm; 4) a large microbasic mastigophore, (17.6– 19.1)×(5.3–5.8) µm, quite abundant in the stolon.</p><p>The cnidome of the medusa bud comprises apparently only two types of microbasic mastigophores: 1) one with small, fusiform capsules, (6.4–6.9)×(2.1–2.4) µm; 2) larger, ovoid capsules, (9.3–10.1)×(4.8–5.0) µm. Their distribution could not be checked in the present material, though both Altuna Prados (1996) and Migotto (1996) found the former in the tentacles, as well as in the atentaculate marginal bulbs, and the latter scattered on the exumbrella.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Circumglobal (Millard 1975), except for polar seas.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF45FFFBFF36FE80FBB6FBA3	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FD0FFCA7FB5A.text	D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FD0FFCA7FB5A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hebella	<div><p>Hebella sp. 3</p><p>(Fig. 4 B, I)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 7, 23.i.2012, 6– 8 m, M015: numerous hydrothecae, but no gonothecae, on Eudendrium sp.</p><p>Description. Hydrothecae arising irregularly from linear, occasionally branched stolon, creeping on stems and branches of its hydroid host. Pedicels 135–365 µm long, with smooth to slightly wrinkled perisarc. Hydrothecae tubular, curved, 890–1035 µm long, 380–400 µm wide; walls often undulated, 465–550 µm wide at aperture; renovations not seen. Tentacle number could not be ascertained due to the rather poor state of preservation of the polyps. Gonothecae absent. Nematocysts: 1) egg-shaped microbasic heteronemes, ca. 5.8×2.4 µm, of rare occurrence in the coenosarc; 2) microbasic mastigophores, ca. 7.0×2.4 µm, abundant in the tentacles, also present in the coenosarc; 3) ovoid microbasic heteronemes with a distal "beak", ca. 5.8×2.6 µm, sparsely distributed in the coenosarc; 4) large microbasic heteronemes, ca. 16.8×6.1 µm, of rare occurrence in the stolon.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FD0FFCA7FB5A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FB1BFCA7F945.text	D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FB1BFCA7F945.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hebella	<div><p>Hebella sp. 4</p><p>(Fig. 4 C, J)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 7, 23.i.2012, 6 m, M012: sterile colony growing over varied debris fixed on a portion of fishing wire.</p><p>Remarks. Hydrorhiza creeping, giving rise to short, smooth pedicels, each carrying a 520–730 µm long and 310–365 µm wide hydrotheca; margin slightly flaring, 360–400 µm wide at aperture. The cnidome comprises four types of capsules: 1) small, ovoid microbasic heteronemes, ca. 5.0×2.6 µm, of rare occurrence in the coenosarc; 2) fusiform microbasic mastigophores, (6.1–6.9)×2.1 µm, abundant in the tentacles and the coenosarc; 3) tubular microbasic mastigophores with a rather prominent, lateral "beak" at insertion of the shaft, ca. 6.6×2.1 µm, rarely occurring in the coenosarc; 4) large, elongate-ovoid microbasic heteronemes, (17.8–18.6)×(5.3–5.8) µm, abundant in the hydrorhiza.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FB1BFCA7F945	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FF5AFCA7FDA4.text	D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FF5AFCA7FDA4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hebella	<div><p>Hebella sp. 2</p><p>(Fig. 4A, H)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 8, 25.i.2012, 12– 15 m, M058: numerous hydrothecae, but no gonothecae, on stems of Diphasia digitalis (Busk, 1852) .</p><p>Description. Hydrothecae arising irregularly from linear stolon creeping on the hydrorhiza and both sides of stems of the hydroid host. Pedicels 185–490 µm long, with slightly wrinkled perisarc. Hydrothecae tubular, 1035– 1320 µm long, 475–560 µm wide, perisarc thin, smooth to slightly undulated; aperture tilted to one side, 635–780 µm wide, rim everted, margin occasionally renovated once. Hydranths with 20–24 tentacles. Gonothecae absent. Nematocysts: 1) egg-shaped microbasic heteronemes, ca. 2.3×1.6 µm, rarely occurring in the coenosarc; 2) microbasic mastigophores, (7.7–8.2)×(2.6–3.2) µm, abundant in the tentacles, also present in the coenosarc; 3) bean-shaped microbasic heteronemes, (11.9–12.3)×(3.7–4.2) µm, sparsely distributed in the coenosarc; 4) large microbasic heteronemes, (21.9–25.0)×(7.4–8.5) µm, of rare occurrence in the stolon.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF44FFFAFF36FF5AFCA7FDA4	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF44FFE4FF36F8FBFDEEFDCF.text	D6410C37BF44FFE4FF36F8FBFDEEFDCF.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Halecium dichotomum Allman 1888	<div><p>Halecium dichotomum Allman, 1888</p><p>(Fig. 4 K–Q)</p><p>Halecium dichotomum Allman, 1888: 13, pl. 6.― Billard, 1910: 4.― Stechow, 1925:419.― Millard, 1957: 188; 1966: 466, fig. 10A–K; 1968: 256; 1975: 147, fig. 48A–G.― Migotto, 1996: 31, fig. 6F, G.</p><p>not Halecium cf. dichotomum ― Gili et al., 1989: 78, fig. 8.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 2, 22.ii.2012, 1 m, M245: small female and male colonies on Sertularella diaphana (Allman, 1885) .</p><p>Remarks. No dichotomic arrangement of the lateral hydrophores, so characteristic of Allman's (1888) species, could be seen in this epizoic material with dwarfed, poorly developed colonies. However, the presence of both male and female gonothecae support this correct identification. The perisarc of gonothecae of both sexes has a filmy appearance and is easily collapsible, and wrinkled surfaces are less regularly marked than in earlier accounts (Millard 1966, Migotto 1996), especially in males.</p><p>Two types of nematocysts occur in this species (Fig. 3 Q): 1) microbasic mastigophores, ca. 5.9×1.6 µm, abundant in the tentacles, also scattered in the coenosarc; 2) larger and wider capsules with conspicuous shaft, (8.8–9.3)×(3.7–4.0) µm, occurring in the coenosarc. Since no discharged capsules of the latter type were found, I follow Migotto (1996) in considering them to be pseudostenoteles.</p><p>Geographical distribution. South Africa (Allman 1888; Stechow 1925; Millard 1975), Brazil (Migotto 1996), eastern Caribbean (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF44FFE4FF36F8FBFDEEFDCF	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF5AFFE6FF36FDA1FCA7F9F2.text	D6410C37BF5AFFE6FF36FDA1FCA7F9F2.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Halecium discoidum	<div><p>Halecium discoidum sp. nov.</p><p>(Fig. 5A–E)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 7, 24.i.2012, 6– 8 m, M036: fertile (female) colony on Thyroscyphus marginatus (Allman, 1877) and its substrate, a sponge (holotype: MHNG-INVE-82923).</p><p>Description. Colony reptant, arising from creeping, branching, anastomozing hydrorhiza. Hydrocauli simple or occasionally branched, always monosiphonic, 0.5–1.6 mm high, widening gradually from base to tip, where they bear a terminal hydrotheca; perisarc thin, transparent and smooth throughout. Branches given off singly or in pairs from below stem hydrothecae; an internal perisarc plug at upper level of insertion of a branch on the stem (Fig. 4A 1, A4, A6), most probably as a result of mechanical strain. Hydrotheca 60–90 µm deep, flaring, margin everted; a basal diaphragm and a ring of desmocytes above; 280–355 µm wide at base, 440–515 µm wide at aperture; renovations present, lower order hydrophores of varied length, tapering gradually below, perisarc smooth. Female gonothecae borne on short (ca. 85 µm), conical pedicel given off from stolon; irregularly ovate, laterally flattened, 485–595 µm high, 530–585 µm wide in frontal view, perisarc smooth; aperture, a distal, circular notch, ca. 155 µm wide; ca. 8–10 oocytes per gonotheca, each 90–100 µm in diameter. Male gonothecae unknown. Nematocysts: 1) fusiform microbasic mastigophores ca. 5.9×1.9 µm, abundant in the tentacles, also scattered in the coenosarc; 2) rare microbasic heteronemes present in the coenosarc, with swollen capsules and a lateral "beak" at insertion of shaft, ca. 6.1×2.9 µm; 3) microbasic heteronemes with long, tubular, slender capsules, (6.7–7.7)×(2.1–2.4) µm, abundant in the coenosarc.</p><p>Remarks. A number of Halecium species have female gonothecae morphologically similar to those of Halecium discoidum sp. nov., but can be distinguished from it on the following accounts: 1) the Australian H. amphibolum Watson, 1993 has wrinkled internodes and the side branches arise some distance below the stem hydrothecae (Watson 1993); 2) the Patagonian H. annuliforme Galea &amp; Schories, 2012 has irregular, much longer, fully annulated internodes (Galea &amp; Schories 2012); 3) H. cymiforme Allman, 1888, also from Patagonia, is more robust, with a peculiar mode of branching, and has the internodes mostly wrinkled throughout (Galea et al. 2009); 4) the northern H. labrosum Alder, 1859 forms large, polysiphonic colonies with irregular, smooth to corrugated internodes, and the hydrothecae are borne on hydrophores of varied length (Schuchert 2005); 5) the mainly Mediterranean H. mediterraneum Weismann, 1883 has long, geniculate internodes, the hydrophores are well developed and have a conspicuous pseudodiaphragm on their adaxial side (Schuchert 2005); 6) H. ochotense Linko, 1911 from the Okhotsk Sea is a large, polysiphonic species, with short, regular, slightly zigzagging internodes (Naumov 1969).</p><p>Etymology. The specific name makes references to the disk-shaped female gonotheca.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p><p>FIGURE 5. A–E: Halecium discoidum sp. nov. ―various stems (A); hydranth protruding from its hydrotheca (B); female gonotheca with oocytes (C); female gonotheca in lateral (D1) and apical (D2) views; cnidome (E). F–I: Halecium xanthellatum sp. nov. ―three stems (F); female gonothecae (G), one of them showing a spent gonophore (G4); detail of the female gonotheca, showing the the twin hydrotheca in frontal (H1), lateral (H2), and apical (H3) views; cnidome (I). J–M: Halecium sp.―various stems (J), some bearing male gonothecae (J1–J3, J5); hydrophores and their corresponding hydrothecae (K, L); cnidome (O). Scale bars: 10 µm (E, I, M); 100 µm (K, L), 200 µm (H), 300 µm (B), 500 µm (C, D, F, G, J), 1 mm (A).</p><p>Halecium xanthellatum sp. nov. (Fig. 5F–I)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 16, 11.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M167: small, fertile (female) colony on Sargassum sp. (holotype: MHNG-INVE-82924).</p><p>Description. Colony reptant, arising from creeping, branching, sometimes anastomozing hydrorhiza. Stems simple or occasionally branched, 340–900 µm high. Perisarc thin, transparent, wrinkled basally, fading out distally. Branches given off irregularly from below bases of stem hydrothecae. Hydrothecae borne distally on hydrantophores; walls divergent, rim flared (most obvious in young hydrothecae), a bit atrophied and not clearly everted in older ones; hydrotheca 30–35 µm high, 110–125 µm wide at base and 140–180 µm at aperture; renovations common, with lower order hydranthopores of varied length. Hydranths with 18–20 tentacles, the coenosarc crowded with zooxanthellae. Gonothecae, female in present material, arising from a short internodal apophysis lateral to a hydrotheca, or occasionally from within a theca; mitten-shaped, 720–790 µm long, 305–355 µm wide, tapering basally; in lateral view, distal part with a "bump" on one side, and the aperture on the opposite side; perisarc wrinkled on the bumped side, smooth on the other. Aperture borne on top of two appressed tubes, sunk for some distance inside the cavity of gonotheca, bearing distally a twin hydrotheca; the latter shaped, in frontal view, like the number 8, with two foramina visible below each hydrothecal base, allowing the passage of a pair of normally developed hydranths. The number of oocytes could not be ascertained properly, as most gonothecae have already expelled their eggs, while some others have the ectoderm of the blastostyle withdrawn, and retain a single, small oocyte. Male gonothecae unknown. Cnidome: 1) microbasic mastigophores, (6.4– 6.9)×1.9 µm, abundant in the tentacles, also scatterd in the coenosarc; 2) ovoid microbasic heteronemes, (3.5– 4.0)×(2.4–2.7) µm, not uncommon in the coenosarc; 3) pseudostenoteles, (9.9–10.2)×(4.8–5.1) µm, frequent in the coenosarc.</p><p>Remarks. This new species is reminiscent of H. nanum Alder, 1859 due to the presence of zooxanthellae in the coenosarc. However, unlike H. nanum, the hydrothecal margins are distinctly flared in H. xanthellatum . In addition, their gonothecae differ in shape, with those of H. nanum being more swollen and provided with fine annulations frontally, whereas those of H. xanthellatum are more slender and tubular, and bear coarse annulations exclusively on their dorsal side. Last but not least, the cnidome of H. nanum comprises, besides the common microbasic mastigophores, ovoid capsules identified by Calder (1991) as microbasic euryteles, while H. xanthellatum possesses rounded-ovoid microbasic heteronemes, as well as conspicuous pseudostenoteles.</p><p>The female gonothecae of the new species recall well those of the Arctic H. curvicaule von Lorenz, 1886, as illustrated by Marktanner-Turneretscher (1895, as H. kükenthali n.sp.) and Jäderholm (1909, equally as H. kükenthali). However, this species may form large, polysiphonic colonies, with a peculiar mode of branching. Its hydrothecae have almost parallel, straight walls (Schuchert 2001), and the coenosarc is devoid of zooxanthellae.</p><p>Equally similar in overall shape are the gonothecae of H. halecinum (Linnaeus, 1758) (see Schuchert 2005), H. inhacae Millard 1958 (see Millard 1975) and H. liouvillei Billard, 1934 (see Medel et al. 1998), but they have their apertures borne atop of somewhat raised collars and lack the "dorsal" annuli. Their respective trophosomes are also different, and no zooxanthellae are known to occur in their tissues.</p><p>Etymology. The specific name makes reference to the presence of numerous zoothanthellae in the coenosarc.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF5AFFE6FF36FDA1FCA7F9F2	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF58FFE1FF36F9B9FCA7FD5C.text	D6410C37BF58FFE1FF36F9B9FCA7FD5C.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Halecium	<div><p>Halecium sp.</p><p>(Fig. 5J–M)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 16, 11.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M167: small, fertile (male) colony on Sargassum sp.</p><p>Description. Stems up to 5 mm high arising from creeping, branching hydrorhiza. Basal part above origin from stolon short, either smooth or wrinkled. Remainder of stem divided into internodes by means of transverse to slightly oblique nodes, 65–70 µm wide; perisarc thin and smooth. Each internode 545–690 µm long, with a basal bulge above the proximal node, a terminal hydrotheca, and a latero-distal apophysis supporting the following internode. Branching occasional, with side branches given off laterally through a second distal stem apophysis, the hydrotheca thus becoming axillar; branches short, generally composed of a single hydranthopore. Hydrotheca shallow, ca. 25 µm deep, 120–130 µm wide at diaphragm and 135–150 µm at aperture; walls somewhat flaring, rim not everted; a row of desmocytes above the diaphragm; renovations not seen. Hydranths with 19–21 tentacles. Gonothecae, male in the present material, club shaped, 610–790 µm long, 185–250 µm wide, tapering abruptly proximally into indistinct pedicel, rounded distally. Cnidome: 1) microbasic mastigophores, (6.4–6.6)×1.9 µm, abundant in the tentacles, also scattered in the coenosarc; 2) microbasic heteronemes, slightly wider than the mastigophores, ca. 6.6×2.4 µm, rare in the coenosarc; 3) pseudostenoteles, (10.3–11.6)×(4.8–6.1) µm, common in the coenosarc.</p><p>Remarks. This specimen comes close to H. lightbourni Calder, 1991 with respect to the shape and size of both internodes and hydrotheca. However, a difference in the cnidome composition prevents identification as this species: the small microbasic eurytele illustrated by Calder in his Fig. 11A looks distinct from the microbasic heteronemes occurring in this material. In addition, I think that what Calder identified as large microbasic euryteles are instead pseudostenoteles. Indeed, the same capsules occur in specimens of H. dichotomum Allman, 1888 examined here and, though no discharged nematocysts could be found, I follow Migotto (1996), who indicated that they are pseudostenoteles.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF58FFE1FF36F9B9FCA7FD5C	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF5FFFE2FF36FCDFFB6AFB1F.text	D6410C37BF5FFFE2FF36FCDFFB6AFB1F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Diphasia digitalis (Busk 1852) Busk 1852	<div><p>Diphasia digitalis (Busk, 1852)</p><p>(Fig. 6A–B)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 8, 25.i.2012, 12– 15 m, M058: numerous sterile stems on sponge (MHNG-INVE-82973). Remarks. For a recent redescription of this species, refer to Schuchert (2003).</p><p>Geographical distribution. Circumglobal in tropical and subtropical waters (Schuchert 2003). In the Caribbean, it was found in Puerto Rico (Fraser 1944), St. Thomas (Vervoort 1968), and Martinique (present study).</p><p>Sertularella calderi sp. nov. (Fig. 6 C–G, J–M; Table 3)</p><p>Sertularella conica ― Calder, 1983: 11, fig. 4; 1991: 99, fig. 52; 2013: 29, fig. 8I (not S. conica Allman, 1877). Sertulariella gayi ― Verrill, 1900: 571 [not S. gayi (Lamouroux, 1821); incorrect subsequent spelling]. Sertularella gayi ― Verrill, 1907: 319, fig. 170 [not S. gayi (Lamouroux, 1821)].</p><p>Sertularella tenella ― Bennitt, 1922: 250 (not S. tenella Alder, 1857).</p><p>Sertularella inconstans ― Calder &amp; Hester, 1978: 91 (not S. inconstans Billard, 1919).</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 2, 22.ii.2012, 1 m, M244: fertile stems on sponge and limestone (syntype: MHNG- INVE-82937).</p><p>Description. Colony comprising both stolonal hydrothecae and erect stems, up to 1.15 cm high, arising from creeping hydrorhiza. Stems monosiphonic, almost straight, unbranched or with an occasional, short side branch; stem composed of a basal part (210–570 µm long) devoid of hydrothecae, and a much longer, distal part, carrying up to 24 successive thecae. Perisarc moderately thick, nodes unnoticeable; equivalents of internodes of uniform length, rather short, bearing a single hydrotheca distally; aperture of a hydrotheca surpassing base of the following one (Fig. 6 C, D). Side branches, when present, given off from below the base of a stem hydrotheca (Fig. 6 C); structure similar to stem. Hydrothecae alternate, flask-shaped, adnate for half or slightly less their total length, widest at level where the adaxial wall becomes free; narrowing distally, and provided with a short neck region below the aperture. Abaxial wall provided with 3–4 undulations, free adaxial wall with only 2–3 of these (Fig. 6 E). Aperture rhomboidal in frontal view (Fig. 6 F), margin with four triangular cusps separated by shallow embayments; operculum of four triangular valves. Five internal, submarginal teeth (a prominent abaxial one, two smaller latero-abaxial, and two latero adaxial) projecting for 1/3 inside the lumen of hydrotheca. Hydranths greenish, more markedly in their distal halves; 28–30 filiform tentacles. Gonothecae, one per stem, arising from below the base of a hydrotheca through a short pedicel (Fig. 6 J); male similar to female, elongate-oval, nearly radially symmetrical, though slightly smaller and with fewer transverse annulations (8–9 vs. 8–12); aperture distal, borne on short neck region, surrounded by 2–5 blunt spines. Female gonotheca carrying 20–30 spherical oocytes with large nuclei (Fig. 6 K); male gonotheca producing a homogenous mass of milky-white sperm cells around the blastostyle (Fig. 6 J). Aperture of female gonotheca obstructed by thin perisarc in younger stages, changing to an internally-projected, funnel-shaped structure, with simple or fronded margin, in ripe gonothecae (Fig. 6 M); young male gonothecae closed apically, and provided with a rounded aperture when ripe (Fig. 6 L).</p><p>Remarks. Two Caribbean congeners, S. peculiaris Leloup, 1974 and S. fraseri Galea, 2010a, superficially resemble the present species, and material belonging to them was reexamined in the course of this study. They are immediately distinguished from S. calderi through the more delicate appearance of their colonies, covered by much thinner perisarc, and their slightly smaller hydrothecae, less adnate in the former (Fig. 6 I) and with many corrugated walls in the latter species (Fig. 6 H). As to the gonothecae, those of S. peculiaris bear 7–8 more or less distinct, incomplete transverse ridges (Galea 2008), while those of S. fraseri are comparatively smaller and provided with sharper corrugations (Galea 2010a). For a morphometrical comparison, see Table 3.</p><p>TABLE 3. Comparative measurements of Sertularella calderi sp. nov., S. fraseri Galea, 2010a, and S. peculiaris Leloup, 1974 . *The gonotheca figured by Migotto (1996, fig. 12K) was probably injured, thus explaining its smaller size compared to that of the Caribbean S. peculiaris .</p><p>Sertularella calderi sp. nov. S. fraseri Galea, Sertularella peculiaris Leloup, 2010 a 1974</p><p>Earlier records of S. calderi appear to be present in the literature. According to the description and illustrations given by Verrill (1907), his Bermudan hydroid assigned to S. gayi (Lamouroux, 1921) corresponds in every respect to the present material. In the absence of formal description and illustrations, I assume that his earlier record (Verrill 1900) belongs to the present species as well. The same applies also to the hydroid identified as S. tenella Alder, 1857 by Bennitt (1922).</p><p>In an earlier paper (Galea 2008), I considered that the hydroids assigned to S. conica Allman, 1877 by both Calder (1983, 1991) and Migotto (1996) belonged to S. peculiaris Leloup, 1974 . In light of the present material from Martinique, and after comparison with Leloup's species, I now conclude that Migotto's hydroid belongs instead to the latter, given the size of its hydrothecae (see Table 3) and the low degree of fusion (one third) of the adcauline wall with the internode. In contrast, Calder's specimens belong to the new species under discussion here, based on the fact that their hydrothecae are adnate for half their length.</p><p>As stated by Calder (1991), the specimens from shallower waters have "smaller and more strongly annulated hydrothecae and shorter internodes", thus perfectly fitting my material. In addition, the dimensions given for his gonothecae fit better those of the males in the specimens in hand.</p><p>There is much confusion over the identity of Sertularella conica Allman, 1877, with almost all the subsequent records apparently belonging to other species, as noted earlier by Calder (1991). According to him, type material of S. conica Allman, 1877 could not be located for reexamination. However, Allman described and figured the internodes of his species as long6, thus appearing radically different from those of S. calderi . The second known record of S. conica is, in my opinion, that by Calder (1991), who identified his material as S. gayi unituba, a new variety of Lamouroux' (1821) species. He stated that the "hydroids of S. gayi unituba resemble those of S. conica Allman, 1877, in colony form and size, and the hydrothecae of both species bear transverse wrinkles", but I think that he was mislead by the discovery of the gonothecae in what he called S. conica (= S. calderi sp. nov.). According to him, the gonothecae of S. gayi unituba (= S. conica Allman, 1877) are "less strongly ridged, especially towards the base" and have "a more slender neck distally with fewer spines around the margin". I suspect that Calder's (1991) account on S. gayi unituba is actually the first redescription of Allman's (1877) species, which further contributes with the discovery of its gonotheca.</p><p>The Cape Verde specimens assigned by Medel &amp; Vervoort (1998) to Calder's subspecies, eventually raised to species as S. unituba, is reported to be extremely varied morphologically, and it may or many not, partly or all, belong to S. conica .</p><p>Sertularella calderi sp. nov. appears to be related to a group of species including S. africana Stechow, 1919, S. ellisii (Deshayes &amp; Milne-Edwards, 1836), S. fusiformis (Hincks, 1861), S. mixta Galea &amp; Schories, 2012, S. lagenoides Stechow, 1919, S. mediterranea Hartlaub, 1901, S. simplex (Hutton, 1873), and S. uruguayensis Mañé- Garzón &amp; Milstein, 1973, whose common features were summarized by Galea &amp; Schories (2012). Unlike them, S. calderi has equally developed hydrothecal cusps (the abcauline one is not conspicuously tilted outwards), five (instead of only three) submarginal perisarc projections, and its female gonotheca is provided with a peculiar, funnel-shaped, interal structure with simple or fronded margin. In addition, its geographical distribution sets it apart from its congeners listed above.</p><p>Etymology. It is my pleasure to dedicate this species to my colleague Dale R. Calder of the Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Canada, for his valuable contribution to the sudy of hydroids during more than four decades.</p><p>Geographical distribution. South Carolina (Calder 1983, as S. conica), Bermuda (Verrill 1907, as S. gayi; Calder 1991, as S. conica), Florida (Calder 2013, as S. conica), Martinique (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF5FFFE2FF36FCDFFB6AFB1F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF5CFFE2FF36FAACFD8AF8A8.text	D6410C37BF5CFFE2FF36FAACFD8AF8A8.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Sertularelloides cylindritheca (Allman 1888) Allman 1888	<div><p>Sertularelloides cylindritheca (Allman, 1888)</p><p>(Fig. 6 N–P)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 1, 18.ii.2012, 13 m, M214: several infertile stems, 7–12 mm high (MHNG-INVE- 82940); 26.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M261: a single sterile stem, 18 mm high (MHNG-INVE-82941); M265: several sterile stems, 11–22 mm high (MHNG-INVE-82942); M271: a single sterile stem, 20 mm high (MHNG-INVE- 82943).</p><p>Remarks. For the synonymy of this species, refer to Medel &amp; Vervoort (1998). As noted by Kramp (1947, as Cnidoscyphus macrotheca sp. nov.), the hydrothecae are borne on a short, distal apophysis of the stem/branch internodes, and its cavity "is separated from that of the internodium by a strong chitinous septum, perforated by the coenosarc". This structure (Fig. 6 O), as well as the presence of short stem apophyses supporting sessile hydrothecae, justify the assignement of this species to the genus Sertularelloides Leloup, 1937 .</p><p>Geographical distribution. Subtropical and tropical waters of eastern and western Atlantic (Medel &amp; Vervoort 1998). The Caribbean records are summarized by Calder &amp; Kirkendale (2005); to these, it should be added the present record from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF5CFFE2FF36FAACFD8AF8A8	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF53FFEDFF36FF5AFD17FAA9.text	D6410C37BF53FFEDFF36FF5AFD17FAA9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Thyroscyphus longicaulis Splettstosser 1929	<div><p>Thyroscyphus longicaulis Splettstösser, 1929</p><p>(Fig. 6 Q–T)</p><p>Thyroscyphus longicaulis Splettstösser, 1929: 49, figs. 43–45.― Vervoort, 1968: 35, fig. 16.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 3, 19.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M229: a 2.3 cm high fragment bearing five female gonothecae with acrocysts (MHNG-INVE-83067). Stn. 7, 23.i.2012, 6 m, M022: several stems 0.8–4 cm high, of which one bears a male gonotheca (MHNG-INVE-82944). Stn. 8, 31.i.2012, 12– 15 m, M107: a 2.1 cm high colony with 3 female gonothecae bearing acrocysts (MHNG-INVE-82972). Stn. 9, 16.ii.2012, 5– 15 m, M204: several stems and fragments up to 2.5 cm high, some bearing male gonothecae (MHNG-INVE-82947). Stn. 11, 03.ii.2012, 9– 15 m, M135: numerous sterile stems up to 7.5 cm high (MHNG-INVE-82945). Stn. 15, 11.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M175: several sterile stems 1–5.2 cm high (MHNG-INVE-82946).</p><p>Description. Hydrorhiza creeping on, or partly embedded in, tissues of demosponge, with spongin fibers firmly attached to the hydrorhiza and, occasionally, to the basal parts of cauli. Stems erect, always unbranched, reaching 7.5 cm high, tapering gradually from base to tip; no basal constriction at origin from stolon; slightly geniculate, divided into up to 31 internodes by means of transverse to slightly oblique nodes. Each internode, 1830–3535 µm long, 350–520 µm wide at node, bearing a latero-distal apophysis supporting a hydrotheca; apophyses alternate on stem, rounded-conical in shape, 245–305 µm long. Hydrothecae in plane of stem, directed outwards and upwards, 2195–2490 µm long, tubular, 620–680 µm wide, tapering basally and merging imperceptibly with an indistinct pedicel, convex on adcauline side and more or less straight on abcauline. Margin 575–620 µm wide, provided with four triangular, sharp cusps separated by deep, rounded embayments. Diaphragm absent; on adcauline side, a blister-like, internal reduplication of the perisarc, leaving an empty cavity between the two layers thus formed. Hydranths with ca. 28 filiform tentacles, all raised at same level. Gonothecae borne on apophyses supporting the hydrothecae; both sexes similar: smooth, cylindrical, tapering basally into indistinct pedicel, truncated distally; female ca. 3020 µm long and 870 µm wide, male ca. 2575 µm long and 810 µm wide. Life specimens with bright orange hydranths and the perisarc slightly horn colored.</p><p>Remarks. The attachment of the hydranth to the inner wall of hydrotheca occurs distally to the abcauline reduplication of the perisarc, as illustrated by Splettstösser (1929, Fig. 44). In the absence of a basal diaphragm, the demarcation between the hydrotheca and its pedicel could be not fixed other than arbitrarily, at the level of the perisarcal reduplication, as Splettstösser did. However, since the hydrotheca merges imperceptibly into its pedicel, the length given above was measured from its insertion on apophysis to the tip of one of the lateral cusps.</p><p>The gonothecae of this species were unknown to both Splettstösser and Vervoort (1968). Within female ones, a single, large egg matures into a huge, externally held, gelatinous acrocyst.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Possibly endemic to the Caribbean, known only from St. Thomas (Splettstösser 1929, Vervoort 1968) and Martinique (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF53FFEDFF36FF5AFD17FAA9	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF53FFECFF36F9CBFCDFFDE4.text	D6410C37BF53FFECFF36F9CBFCDFFDE4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Hincksella formosa (Fewkes 1881) Fewkes 1881	<div><p>Hincksella formosa (Fewkes, 1881)</p><p>(Fig. 6 U–Z)</p><p>Sertularella formosa Fewkes, 1881: 130 .― Nutting, 1895: figs 2, 2A; 1904: 104, pl. 27 figs 2–4.― Fraser, 1944: 260, pl. 55 fig. 246.― Vervoort, 1959: 264, figs 27C, 29.</p><p>Sertularia integritheca Allman, 1888: 60, pl. 29 figs 2, 2A.― Nutting, 1895: 88.― Versluys, 1899: 37. Sertularella hartlaubi Nutting, 1904: 104, pl. 27 fig. 5.―Galea, 2009: 65, fig. 2J–L. Hincksella formosa ― Calder &amp; Kirkendale, 2005: 484.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 8, 25.i.2012, 12– 15 m, M052: numerous colonies and fragments 2.5–10 cm high, some with gonothecae (MHNG-INVE-82890); 27.i.2012, 9– 15 m, M061: two fertile colonies 4.0 and 7.5 cm, respectively (MHNG-INVE-82938). Stn. 14, 20.ii.2012, 10– 13 m, M231: numerous erect stems, 2–12 cm high, some bearing gonothecae (MHNG-INVE-82939).</p><p>Remarks. For a redescription of the trophosome, refer to Vervoort (1959). The gonotheca was described by Nutting (1904) and his account is generally accurate. However, the "four flapped membranous operculum" observed by him is not an anatomical structure, but rather the result of the distal perisarc sheet of the gonotheca (Fig. 6 Y) rupturing, thus allowing the release of the gametes. The gonotheca is 2050–2195 µm long and 1035–1120 µm wide in middle, and is provided with 2–4 distal, blunt spines. One of its lateral sides is always concave (Fig. 6 V, X), though not necessarily that adnate to the internode. Cnidome (not previously reported): 1) slender microbasic heteronemes, (6.9–7.4)×(2.6–2.9) µm; 2) slightly larger microbasic heteronemes, (7.7–8.2)×3.5 µm; 3) huge macrobasic mastigophores, (26.6–29.8)×(6.9–7.7) µm.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Widely distributed in the tropical eastern and western Atlantic, but also occurring in the tropical eastern Pacific: Brazil (Allman 1888, as Sertularia integritheca), Bahamas (Nutting 1895, as S. integritheca), Cuba (Nutting 1904), Peru (Nutting 1904, as Sertularella hartlaubi), Ghana (Vervoort 1959, as Sertularella formosa). In the Caribbean, it was reported from Grenada and Martinique (Fewkes 1881), Testigos (Versluys 1899, as S. integritheca), from an offshore locality between Jamaica and Haiti (Nutting 1904, as S. hartlaubi), and from Panama (Calder &amp; Kirkendale 2005).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF53FFECFF36F9CBFCDFFDE4	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF52FFE9FF36FD03FCA7FD7F.text	D6410C37BF52FFE9FF36FD03FCA7FD7F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Antennella peculiaris	<div><p>Antennella peculiaris sp. nov.</p><p>(Plate 2A–F; Fig. 7A–D; Table 4)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 6, 28.i.2012, 4– 10 m, M092: fertile (female) colony on Halimeda sp. (MHNG-INVE- 82925); M099: fertile (female) colony on Halimeda sp. (MHNG-INVE-82926); 14.ii.2012, 10– 17 m, M197: fertile (female) colonies on Halimeda sp. (syntype: MHNG-INVE-82927). Additional material for comparison: Stn. 13, 29.i.2012, 6– 10 m, M118: fertile (female) colony of Antennella secundaria (Gmelin, 1791), on Sargassum sp. (MHNG-INVE-82928). Mediterranean, France, La Ciotat, 05.viii.2009, 0.5 m, HRG-0124: fertile (female) colony of A. secundaria, on seaweed; Le Pradon, 27.viii.2008, 1 m, HRG-0153: sterile colony of A. secundaria, on seaweed.</p><p>Description. Stems up to 8 mm high arising from creeping, branching hydrorhiza. Stems with basal part of varied length, devoid of hydrothecae, carrying only nematothecae (up to 6) in two closely set, parallel rows; a basal constriction, just above origin from stolon, and 1–2 occasional transverse nodes above this; last node oblique. Stem heteromerously divided into hydrothecate and ahydrothecate internodes. Hydrothecate segments with proximal oblique node and distal transverse node, just as long as to accommodate a hydrotheca and its associated nematothecae: one mesial, a pair of laterals (not reaching the hydrothecal rim), as well as an axillar one, this occasionally missing. Ahydrothecate internodes with distal oblique node distally and transverse node proximally; there is characteristically a second, incomplete (not reaching the posterior side of stem) transverse node towards the proximal end of these internodes, delimiting a short, rectangular segment; whole ahydrothecate internodes comparatively longer than they hydrothecate counterparts, and carrying two distant nematothecae on their longest parts. All nematothecae bithalamic, wall of upper chamber lowered on adaxial side, except in lateral nematothecae, where there is a central, rounded lobe. Gonotheca (only female observed), arising singly or in pairs from below the hydrothecae through a pedicel composed of two short, rectangular pieces; shape typical of the genus, with two basal nematothecae; walls thin, except around aperture where the perisarc is conspiculously thickened; a watch glass shaped operculum. Gonophore of unidentified type: a darker, ovoid, central mass is envelopped in a coat of jelly, the latter being protected by the ectoderm of the blastostyle (Plate 2A–D). Cnidome: 1) small, rounded heteronemes, rare in the coenosarc and the gonophore; 2) small, banana shaped microbasic mastigophores, abundant in the tentacles and the coenosarc; 3) large, elongated microbasic mastigophores, in the nematophores, also common in the coenosarc; 4) fusiform microbasic heteronemes, occurring exclusively in the gonophore.</p><p>Remarks. The stems of A. peculiaris sp. nov. are indistinguishable macroscopically from those of the sympatric A. secundaria (Gmelin, 1791), except for their more pigmented coenosarc (pale brown vs. transparent), and their preferential occurrence on Halimeda sp. rather than on Sargassum sp.</p><p>On one hand, the identification of Caribbean A. secundaria was made upon comparison with fertile, Mediterranean specimens from two localities from the south of France. Only differences related to the length of the internodes (compare Fig. 7E and H), so variable in this species (see Schuchert 1997), could be noted. However, the general structure of their tropho- and gonosomes (Fig. 7F and I), as well as their cnidome composition (Fig. 7G and J), leave little doubt about their conspecificity.</p><p>PLATE 2. A–F: Antennella peculiaris sp. nov. ―general view of the gonotheca with its gonophore (A); gonophore, mounted in glycerin, in lateral view (B) and cross section (C); microscopic structure of the gonophore (D); emptied gonotheca after expulsion of its gonophore (E); frontal view of gonotheca showing rounded hole in the ectoderm of blastostyle allowing the exit of the gonophore (F). G–I: Antennella secundaria (Gmelin, 1791) ―gonotheca and gonophore in lateral view (G) and crosssection (H), showing large oocyte enveloped by the ectoderm of the blastostyle, Caribbean material; gonophore of Mediterranean specimen in lateral view (I).</p><p>On the other hand, several microscopic differences with taxonomic significance could be noted between A. peculiaris and A. secundaria, as follows: 1) the presence, in the former, of a small, rectangular, intermediate, ahydrothecate and anematothecate internode, situated at the proximal end of the ahydrothecate stem internodes; 2) in A. peculiaris, the distal part of the hydrothecate segments above the theca is very reduced, just as long as to accommodate the insertion of the axillar nematotheca, while in A. secundaria this portion is much longer, and surpasses the level of the rim of hydrotheca; 3) the gonothecae of the new species appear slightly larger and wider compared to those of A. secundaria (compare Fig. 7B and I), and the gonophores they produce seem different, as seen in temporary preparations in glyceryne. While the female gonophore of A. secundaria is represented by a single, large oocyte enveloped by the ectoderm of the blastostyle (Plate 2G–I), that of A. peculiaris is a dark, FIGURE 7. A–D: Antennella peculiaris sp. nov. ―stem fragment in lateral (A1) and frontal (A2) views; female gonotheca (B); nematothecae: lateral and axillar (C1), mesial (C2), and of stem internode (C3); cnidome (D). E–J: Antennella secundaria (Gmelin, 1791) ―stem (E), female gonotheca (F), and cnidome (G) of Mediterranean specimen; stem (H), female gonothecae (I), and cnidome (J) of Caribbean specimen. K–N: Antennella aff. quadriaurita Ritchie, 1909 ―stem fragment in frontal view (K); gonotheca (L); comparison of lateral nematothecae and cnidomes between specimens from Martinique (M1 and N1, respectively) and Tristan da Cunha (M2 and N2, respectively). O –S: Antennella similis sp. nov. ―stem fragment in lateral (O 1) and frontal (O 2) views; female (P) and male (Q) gonothecae; nematothecae: of stem internode (R1), mesial (R2), lateral (R3), and axillar (R4); cnidome (S). T–W: Antennella tubitheca sp. nov. ―stem fragment (T); gonotheca (U); nematothecae: lateral and axillar (V1), of stem internodes and mesial (V2); cnidome (W). X–Z: Antennella sp.―stem fragment (X); lateral (Y 1), mesial (Y 2) and stem (Y 3) nematothecae; cnidome (Z). Scale bars: 10 µm (D, G, J, N, S, W, Z), 100 µm (C, M, R, V, Y), 300 µm (A, B, E, F, H, I, K, L, O –Q, T, U, X).</p><p>compact, central mass contained in a thick jelly, itself enveloped by the ectoderm of the blastostyle (Plate 2A–C). Its microscopic structure (Plate 2D) could not be properly investigated in the absence of histological sections. No free gonophores have been observed. In numerous empty gonothecae, the ectoderm of the blastostyle retains the imprint of the expelled gonophore (Plate 2E), and shows apically a hole allowing the dispersive stage to become free (Plate 2F); 4) the large microbasic mastigophores of A. peculiaris differ in shape and, to a lesser extent in size, compared to their counterparts of A. secundaria from both Martinique (sample M118) and the Mediterranean (sample HRG-124). While these capsules are rather tubular in A. peculiaris, comparatively more ovoid nematocysts are seen in A. secundaria; 5) an abundant microbasic heteroneme occurs specifically, and in high numbers, in the gonophore of A. peculiaris, while no nematocysts could be found in any of the available samples of A. secundaria from both the Caribbean and the Mediterranean.</p><p>Life cycle experiments on living material, as well as a histological study are necessary to ascertain the exact nature of the gonophore of A. peculiaris .</p><p>Etymology. From peculiaris (Latin), meaning peculiar, with reference to the likely unusual structure of its stem and gonophore.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF52FFE9FF36FD03FCA7FD7F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF57FFE8FF36FD31FB05FAD0.text	D6410C37BF57FFE8FF36FD31FB05FAD0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Antennella quadriaurita Ritchie 1909	<div><p>Antennella aff. quadriaurita Ritchie, 1909</p><p>(Fig. 7K–N)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 8, 27.i.2012, 9– 15 m, M076: fertile (female) colony on Thyroscyphus marginatus (Allman, 1877) . Additional material for comparison: Tristan da Cunha group, Inaccessible Island, Stn7. I10, 28.xi.2007, HRG-0341: several sterile stems.</p><p>Remarks. Compared to the material from Inaccessible Island studied earlier by myself (Galea 2010b), the present specimens have smaller hydrothecae, the lateral nematothecae of the anterior pair are shorter (compare Fig. 7M1 and M2), and the ahydrothecate segments bear 3 or 4 nematothecae in two parallel, closely set rows (Fig. 7K), instead of only one, occasionally two.</p><p>The cnidome of the Caribbean material is composed of three types of capsules (Fig. 7N1): 1) seed-shaped microbasic heteronemes, ca. 4.2×2.6 µm, occurring rarely in the coenosarc; 2) small, banana-shaped microbasic mastigophores, ca. 6.4×2.2 µm, abundant in the tentacles, also scattered in the coenosarc; 3) large, ovoid microbasic heteronemes with thick shaft (pseudostenoteles?), (14.1–16.0)×(5.6–6.4) µm, occurring in the nematophores, also scattered in the coenosarc.</p><p>In contrast, the large microbasic heteronemes in material from Inaccessible Island are smaller, slender, and more tubular [(11.2–12.5)×(3.8–4.0) µm], and their shaft is less conspicuous (Fig. 7N2).</p><p>Given: 1) the extreme variability in size of the stems and the number of hydrothecae they carry [from 1.4 cm high and 9 hydrothecae in Ritchie's (1909) material from Gough Island, to up to 6 cm high and 40 hydrothecae in the Indian specimens studied by Leloup (1932)]; 2) the shape (walls parallel or divergent) and size of the hydrothecae; 3) the shape of the upper chamber of the first pair of lateral nematothecae (see variation in Schuchert 1997); 4) the varied number of nematothecae (from 1 to 4) carried by the ahydrothecate segments (Millard 1977); 5) the lack of data on the cnidome composition in nearly all the previous records from around the world; 6) the lack of knowledge on the nature of the gonophores,</p><p>I raise the question of the specific limitation in A. quadriaurita, and I refrain from including with certainty the present material in the synonymy of this species, pending a broader study based on specimens from various localities around the world.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Likely unsettled at present, though a summary of the world records is given by Schuchert (1997); to this, it should be added a recent record from Brazil (Grohmann et al. 2003). In the Caribbean, the species was found in Cuba (Stechow 1919a8), Belize (Spracklin 1982), and Martinique (present study).</p><p>7. See Galea (2010b) for details.</p><p>8. Upon the reexamination of the material from Havana, Cuba, assigned by Nutting (1900) to A. gracilis Allman, 1877, Stechow (1919) reached the conclusion that it belonged instead to A. quadriaurita, due the presence of a second pair of smaller lateral nematothecae behind the hydrotheca.</p><p>- small, seed-shaped heteronemes ca. 4.0×2.6 ca. 4.2×2.6 ca. 3.5×2.4 not found, but likely</p><p>present - large heteronemes (gonophore) (9.6–12.0)×(2.9–3.2) absent absent absent</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF57FFE8FF36FD31FB05FAD0	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF56FFEBFF36FABCFCA7FBEC.text	D6410C37BF56FFEBFF36FABCFCA7FBEC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Antennella similis	<div><p>Antennella similis sp. nov.</p><p>(Fig. 7 O –S; Table 4)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 1, 18.ii.2012, 10– 13 m, M212: numerous stems, mostly sterile, at least one bearing a male gonotheca, on algae and sponge (MHNG-INVE-82930); 26.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M262: colony on sponge, with female gonothecae and stems up to 1.5 cm high (holotype: MHNG-INVE-82931). Stn. 7, 24.i.2012, 6– 8 m, M034: several stems, up to 1.1 cm high, on sponge, two of which bear gonothecae (one female, the other male) (MHNG- INVE-82929). Stn. 9, 16.ii.2012, 5– 15 m, M207: several stems, up to 1.5 cm high, on sponge, some bearing male gonothecae (MHNG-INVE-83051).</p><p>Description. Stems up to 15 mm high, arising from a creeping, branching hydrorhiza; basal part devoid of hydrothecae, but carrying a varied number of frontal nematothecae (up to 12); there is a basal constriction a short distance after the origin from stolon, as well as several additional, irregularly placed, transverse nodes; last node oblique, followed by the first hydrothecate segment. Stem above basal part heteromerously divided into hydrothecate and ahydrothecate internodes by means of alternating oblique and transverse nodes, all well marked. Ahydrothecate segments with a basal transverse node and a distal oblique node; there is characteristically a second transverse, though incomplete, node immediately above the proximal node, not reaching the rear side of the stem (Fig. 7 O); each internode provided with two nematothecae on frontal side; occassionally three of these may be present in basalmost parts of the stem. Hydrothecate internodes very short, just as long as to accommodate a hydrotheca and its associated nematothecae: a mesial inferior, not reaching the hydrothecal base, a pair of laterals shorter than the free adcauline wall of the hydrotheca, as well as an axillar nematotheca. Stem, mesial and axillar nematothecae with upper chamber lowered on adaxial side, while a central, rounded lobe is present on the side adnate to the hydrotheca in the lateral nematothecae. Hydrotheca half-length adnate, lower and upper walls slightly divergent; free adcauline side straight, abcauline wall equally straight for most of its length, except distally, where it is slightly flared; aperture circular. Gonothecae arising from stem just below the base of a hydrotheca through a two, short-segmented pedicel. Female gonotheca large, cornucopia-shaped, with two (sample M262), rarely three (sample M034) basal nematothecae; aperture distal, perisarc conspicuously thickened immediately below margin, operculum watch glass sheped. Male gonothecae ovoid, with no aperture, provided with a pair of basal nematothecae.</p><p>Remarks. One stem in sample M207 is likely aberrant and bears a short side branch distally. It is given off like a gonotheca, from below the base of a stem hydrotheca, through a two segmented pedicel; follows an ahydrothecate segment with a straight proximal node and an oblique node distally, next to which a hydrothecate segment occurs, in which the axillar nematotheca is missing (possibly lost ot not yet formed).</p><p>The present taxon belongs to a group of species morphologically similar to A. secundaria, with respect to the heteromerous segmentation of the stem, the presence of two nematothecae on the ahydrothecate segments, and the occurrence of an axillar nematotheca behind the hydrotheca. Comparison of the new species with the Mediterranean and Caribbean A. secundaria reveals some discrete, not insignificant differences, such as: 1) the exclusive occurrence of very short hydrothecate segments, ending immediately above the axillar nematotheca, a situation not met with in A. secundaria; 2) the presence of an incomplete, basal, transverse node in the ahydrothecate segments, analogous to the small, rectangular, intermediate, ahydrothecate segment of A. peculiaris sp. nov., which is always missing in Gmelin's species; 3) the comparatively bigger female gonothecae (1.5–2 times bigger than those of A. secundaria).</p><p>Etymology. From the Latin similis, meaning similar, on the account of its general resemblance to A. secundaria (Gmelin, 1791) .</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF56FFEBFF36FABCFCA7FBEC	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF55FFEAFF36FB4AFCA7FEBC.text	D6410C37BF55FFEAFF36FB4AFCA7FEBC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Antennella tubitheca	<div><p>Antennella tubitheca sp. nov.</p><p>(Fig. 7T–W; Table 4)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 8, 31.i.2012, 9– 15 m, M129: small, fertile (female) colony on sponge (holotype: MHNG- INVE-82932).</p><p>Description. Stems up to 7 mm high, arising from creeping, branching hydrorhiza. Basal part, of varied length, devoid of hydrothecae, carrying up to 4 nematothecae in a fontal row, ending distally with oblique node. Remainder of stem divided heteromerously, with prominent oblique nodes and faintly indicated transverse nodes, not reaching the posterior side of the stem. Hydrothecate segments with proximal oblique node and distal transverse node; a hydrotheca placed in middle region, and four nematothecae. Hydrotheca tubular, adnate for half its length, walls parallel; free adcauline wall straight, abcauline wall slightly flaring distally; rim circular. Nematothecae: a mesial inferior (with the rim of upper chamber notably lowered adaxially), a pair of laterals (with rounded, central, adaxial lobe), and an axiallar one (with slightly lowered rim adaxially). Ahydrothecate segments, nearly the same length as their hydrothecate counterparts, with proximal transverse node and distal oblique node, carrying two frontal nematothecae. Gonothecae, female in present material, arising from below the bases of hydrothecae through a two-segmented pedicel; barrel-shaped, with a pair of nematothecae basally; aperture distal, circular, rim with thickened perisarc, operculum watch-glass shaped. Cnidome: 1) banana-shaped microbasic mastigophores, abundant in the tentacles, also present in the coenosarc; 2) elongate, parallel-sided microbasic mastigophores, in the nematophores, also scattered in the coenosarc.</p><p>Remarks. At first glance, this species recalls A. secundaria (Gmelin, 1791) through the segmentation of the stem, the presence of an axillar nematotheca, and the similar shape of the female gonotheca. Mediterranean specimens of this ubiquitous species, as well as colonies from Martinique (notably sample M118), have been used for comparison with the species under discussion. The most significant difference relies in the tubular, comparatively deeper and narrower hydrotheca in the latter species. Additionally, in all the specimens assigned to A. secundaria from Martinique, the ahydrothecate segments are significantly longer than in A. tubitheca . Moreover, discrete differences are noted among the cnidomes of both species: while the new species possesses elongate, parallel-sided microbasic mastigophores in the nematophores and the coenosarc, the same category of capsules has a typically ovoid shape in A. secundaria .</p><p>Etymology. From the Latin tubus/tuba, meaning tube, an allusion to the tubular shape of the hydrotheca. Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF55FFEAFF36FB4AFCA7FEBC	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF54FFEAFF36FE7AFCA7FB1A.text	D6410C37BF54FFEAFF36FE7AFCA7FB1A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Antennella	<div><p>Antennella sp.</p><p>(Fig. 7X –Z)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 16, 11.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M171: sterile colony on seaweed.</p><p>Description. Stems up to 4.5 mm high arising from creeping, branching hydrorhiza. Stems composed of an ahydrothecate basal part provided with 2–3 nematothecae in a frontal row; there is a proximal transverse constriction immediately above origin from stolon, occasionally another one placed distally; last node oblique. Stem above basal part heteromerously segmented into hydrothecate and ahydrothecate segments. Oblique nodes well-marked, transverse nodes faintly marked and incomplete, not reaching posterior side of the stem. Hydrothecate segments with proximal oblique node and distal transverse node; rather short, just enough to accommodate a hydrotheca and its associated nematothecae: a mesial one, situated below the base of hydrotheca, and a pair of laterals; distal part of segment ending a short distance above the axil; axillar nematotheca absent. Ahydrothecate segments with 2, rarely 3, frontal nematothecae in one row. Hydrotheca adnate for about half its length; walls slightly divergent; adnate one straight, abcauline one somewhat sigmoid, slightly flared at rim. All nematothecae bithalamic and movable. Gonothecae unknown. Cnidome: 1) seed-shaped microbasic heteronemes, very rare in the coenosarc; 2) small microbasic mastigophores, abundant in the tentacles, also present in the coenosarc; 3) larger capsules, presumably microbasic mastigophores, abundant in the nematophores, also scattered in the coenosarc.</p><p>Remarks. This species is readily distinguished from A. secundaria through its slightly marked heteromerous (nearly homomerous) segmentation of the stem, and the regular absence of an axillar nematotheca. Since the gonothecae remain undiscovered, no attempt to identify specifically this species is made.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Only known from Martinique.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF54FFEAFF36FE7AFCA7FB1A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF54FFD4FF36FADBFADCF9CE.text	D6410C37BF54FFD4FF36FADBFADCF9CE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Halopteris tenella (Verrill 1874) Verrill 1874	<div><p>Halopteris tenella (Verrill, 1874)</p><p>(Fig. 8A–H)</p><p>Plumularia tenella Verrill, 1874: 731 .</p><p>Schizotricha tenella ― Nutting, 1900: 80, pl. 4 figs 4, 5; 1901: 365, fig. 70.― Fraser, 1912: 383, fig. 52.― Calder, 1971, 73, pl. 5F–G; 1983: 18, fig. 10.</p><p>Halopteris tenella ― Schuchert, 1997: 52, fig. 16.</p><p>Halopteris diaphana ― Galea, 2008: 42, fig. 8E.― Calder, 2013: 43, fig. 13B–D [not H. diaphana (Heller, 1868)].</p><p>Halopteris constricta ― Migotto, 1996: 44, fig. 9A–C (not H. constricta Totton, 1930).</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 6, 28.i.2012, 4– 10 m, M100: female colonies on Halimeda sp. (MHNG-INVE-82933); 14.ii.2012, 10– 17 m, M192: male colonies on seaweed (MHNG-INVE-82934); M197: male and female colonies on Halimeda sp. (MHNG-INVE-82935).</p><p>Remarks. The present material fits the descriptions of this species given by Verrill (1874), Nutting (1900), Fraser (1912) and Calder (1983), except for the cladia, which are always unbranched9, and the presence of Antennella -like stems, as illustrated in sample M192. As a typical feature of this species, the stems10, as well as the cladia, are divided into three types of internodes: hydrothecate, long ahydrothecate, and short ahydrothecate.</p><p>9. Cladia "mostly unbrached" were also present in Verrill's (1874) type material. 10. Schuchert (1997) described material from South Carolina as having the "caulus above basal part homomerously segmented by oblique nodes".</p><p>The hydrothecate internodes of the stem are rather short and bear a hydrotheca in middle, an apophysis lateral to it, as well as 3 to 5 nematothecae: a mesial one and a pair of laterals, as well as commonly one (Fig. 8D 1, 3), rarely two (Fig. 8D 2), nematothecae distal to hydrotheca. These could be absent in half of the cases in the material examined (Fig. 8D 4, 5). The cladial hydrothecate internodes recall those of the stem, but are always devoid of the nematothecae distal to hydrotheca (Fig. 8A–C).</p><p>The ahydrothecate internodes of the stem bear commonly 2 nematothecae, but 3 may also occur, and even 4 in rare instances (Fig. 8F). The first cladial ahydrothecate internode is very long, and bears 2 or 3 nematothecae, while 1 or 2 of these are indifferently found on the second internode, whereas the third and fourth (when present) internodes carry generally 1, rarely 2, nematothecae.</p><p>The short ahydrothecate internodes are situated distal to the hydrothecate internodes and make the junction between these and the long ahydrothecate internodes. They are provided with transverse nodes at both ends and are devoid of nematothecae. These internodes could be absent in some parts of the stem (Fig. 8D 1, 2, 5) and/or cladia (Fig. 8B).</p><p>The female gonothecae (Fig. 8H) are cornucopia-shaped, have 3 basal nematothecae11, a terminal aperture with thickened perisarc below the rim, and a watch glass shaped lid. The male gonothecae (Fig. 8G) are bottle-shaped and are provided with only 2 basal nematothecae. The gonothecae of both sexes are borne on a pedicel composed of a couple of short, rectangular segments12.</p><p>There is a peculiar situation occurring in H. tenella regarding its mesial nematothecae, which are morphologically indistinguishable from the others occurring within the cormoid. They have a very tall basal chamber and, unlike the other species of Halopteris, are entirely movable13. In addition, the pair of lateral nematothecae flanking the hydrothecae is sessile, as no apophyses supporting them are present.</p><p>The material assigned to H. constricta Totton, 1930 by Migotto (1996) may belong to the present species, for the following reasons: 1) the hydrothecate internodes of the stem are "followed by 2 athecate internodes, the first short, without nematotheca and the second long, with 1–4 frontal nematothecae (usually 3 in basal internodes and 1–2 in distal ones)"; 2) the hydrocladia are composed of "1–2 short basal, athecate internodes (short intersegments) without nematothecae, followed by 1 long athecate internode (long intersegments) usually with 2 nematothecae (rarely 1), and 1 thecate internode similar to those of the stem. Next internodes with pattern of the main stem, but long intersegments usually with only a single namtotheca; division into short and long intersegments not always distinct"; 3) the mesial nematothecae have a tall, well-developed basal chamber (Migotto 1996, Fig. 9B); 4) the gonothecae in the Brazilian material are undoubtedly male (Migotto 1996, Fig. 9B) and represent the first finding of these structures in H. tenella .</p><p>The rather scarce and sterile material from Guadeloupe identified earlier by myself (Galea 2008) as H. diaphana (Heller, 1868) was reexamined, and the presence of extra nematothecae above the stem hydrothecae could be confirmed, as well as the characteristic trumpet-shaped, movable mesial nematotheca. In addition, the material assigned to Heller's species by Calder (2013) is included here in the synonymy of H. tenella, mainly on account of the typical segmentation of both cauli and cladia, and its occurrence outside the Mediterranean basin.</p><p>As to the cnidome, the large capsules occurring in this species were variably described as either pseudostenoteles (Migotto 1996) or microbasic euryteles (Schuchert 1997). Discharged capsules occur quite frequently in the present material, and their shaft is provided basally with strong, conspicuous spines, which suggest that they are undoubtedly pseudostenoteles.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Massachusetts to the Caribbean Sea (Calder 1983), Brazil (Migotto 1996, as H. constricta Totton, 1930; Calder &amp; Maÿal 1998), and from southern California to Panama (Calder 1983).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF54FFD4FF36FADBFADCF9CE	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF6AFFD7FF36F97DFD19FD87.text	D6410C37BF6AFFD7FF36F97DFD19FD87.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aglaophenia postdentata Billard 1913	<div><p>Aglaophenia postdentata Billard, 1913</p><p>(Fig. 8 I–N)</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 14, 20.ii.2012, 1 m, M233: numerous plumes, some fertile (female) on Dyctiota sp. (MHNG-INVE-82877).</p><p>11. Nutting (1900) reported on up to 4 nematothecae.</p><p>12. A female gonotheca seen in the present material exhibited a pedicel composed of three segments instead of only two. 13. Their movement could be demonstrated using a fine syringe needle.</p><p>Remarks. Sterile material of this species was reported for the first time from the Caribbean in an earlier account on the hydroids of Guadeloupe (Galea 2010a). The present specimens from Martinique are fertile and confirm the previous identification. It is interesting to note some minor differences, as for instance the presence of shorter stem internodes and cormidia in material from Martinique (compare Fig. 8 I and J, and Fig. 8 K and L, respectively).</p><p>To the description of corbula by Millard &amp; Bouillon (1973), it is worth adding the following: 1) the rachis is divided into internodes by oblique nodes slanting in opposite directions; each internode is provided with a laterodistal apophysis and two nematothecae in the axil formed by the apophyses and internode; each nematotheca is situated on one side of the rachis: one points towards the interior of the corbula, the other outwardly; 2) the costae may occasionally be branched (Fig. 8 M), and bear up to 7 pairs of laterally placed nematothecae; 3) the latter are short, gutter-shaped, with wide aperture extending from top to base, and a small foramen communicating with the costal internode (Fig. 8 N).</p><p>Geographical distribution. See Galea (2010a).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF6AFFD7FF36F97DFD19FD87	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF69FFD0FF36FD64FA8BFACC.text	D6410C37BF69FFD0FF36FD64FA8BFACC.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Aglaophenia rhynchocarpa Allman 1877	<div><p>Aglaophenia rhynchocarpa Allman, 1877</p><p>(Plate 3; Fig. 9)</p><p>Aglaophenia rhynchocarpa Allman, 1877: 40, pl. 23 figs 5–8.― Nutting, 1895: 89; 1900: 90, pl. 18 figs 1, 2.― Wallace, 1909: 137.― Nutting, 1919: 115.― Fraser, 1944: 387, pl. 84 fig. 377.― Vervoort, 1968: 73, fig. 34.― Bogle, 1975: 59, fig. 3.― Calder, 1997: 59, fig. 18.― Galea, 2010a: 31, figs 1K, 8G–I.― Calder, 2013: 48, fig. 14C.</p><p>? Aglaophenia gracillima Fewkes, 1881: 131, pl. 3 figs 6, 8.― Nutting, 1900: 103, pl. 23 figs 6–8.― Fraser, 1944: 376, pl. 81 fig. 365.</p><p>Aglaophenia cylindrata Versluys, 1899: 49, figs 19–21.― Jäderholm, 1903: 297, pl. 14 fig. 2.―Ritchie, 1909: 261.― Bennitt, 1922: 252.― Fraser, 1944: 370, pl. 80 fig. 360.</p><p>Aglaophenia rathbuni Nutting, 1900: 101, pl. 22 figs 4–6.</p><p>Aglaophenia insolens Fraser, 1943: 81, pl. 19 fig. 13; 1944: 377, pl. 82 fig. 367.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 1, 18.ii.2012, 13 m, M214: numerous plumes, up to 5.5 cm high, some with female corbulae, epizoic on sponge (MHNG-INVE-82883). Stn. 3, 19.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M230: numerous plumes, up to 9 cm high, some bearing male or female corbulae, epizoic on sponge and Thyroscyphus marginatus (MHNG-INVE- 82884). Stn. 5, 08.ii.2012, 2– 3 m, M159: numerous sterile plumes, up to 4 cm high, epizoic on sponge and T. marginatus (MHNG-INVE-82917). Stn. 6, 28.i.2012, 10– 18 m, M093: several plumes, up to 5 cm high, a couple of them with male corbulae, epizoic on sponge and T. marginatus (MHNG-INVE-82882). Stn. 8, 25.i.2012, 12– 15 m, M052: numerous plumes, up to 4.5 cm high, some with male corbulae (MHNG-INVE-82878); M054: numerous plumes, up to 8 cm high, some with female corbulae, epizoic on sponge (MHNG-INVE-82879); M057: numerous plumes, up to 7.5 cm high, some with female corbulae, epizoic on sponge and T. marginatus (Allman, 1877) (MHNG-INVE-82880); 27.i.2012, 9– 15 m, M068: numerous plumes, up to 12 cm high, some with female corbulae, epizoic on sponge and T. marginatus (MHNG-INVE-82881). Additional material examined: Guadeloupe, Stn 14. 8, 05.xii.2009, 17 m, HRG-0582: fertile (male) colony on limestone.</p><p>Remarks. The nodes of the stem are indistinct, each "internode" carrying the following: 1) a latero-distal apophysis supporting a cladium (Fig. 9D1); 2) a mamelon at the base of the apophysis, provided with a reduced, cone-shaped nematotheca, with small, rounded aperture (Fig. 9D, E, arrowheads); 3) a pair of nematothecae flanking each side of the apophysis; each nematotheca is provided with two apertures: a rather small, rounded, lateral one, and a wide, ovoid, situated posteriorily in the axil formed by the nematotheca and the stem internode (Fig. 9F); 4) one (Fig. 9E) or two (Fig. 9D) additional nematothecae below the apophysis, these generally provided with a small, rounded, frontal aperture (Fig. 9G), rarely with two (Fig. 9H), as well as with a large, ovoid aperture on the posterior side of the theca (better seen in lateral view, Fig. 9G2).</p><p>There are notable differences in the spacing of cladia (Fig. 9A), depending on the number of nematothecae (one or two) carried on by the stem internodes, their position with respect to the length of the internode and, implicitly, their proximity with the cladial apophyses. The specimens from Guadeloupe described earlier by myself (Galea 2010a) were compared to the present material from Martinique. It appears that cormoids of the former exhibit the most approximated cladia, which are only 515–645 µm distant (Fig. 9A4). Their stem internodes always carry a single nematotheca that is almost fused to the base of the cladial apophysis (Fig. 9E). In sample M159, the cladia are 645–715 µm distant (Fig. 9A3), and recall the material from Guadeloupe. In contrast, the sample M068 has cormoids with stem internodes that carry one, occasionally two, nematothecae; the proximal one is situated in the middle of the internode, while the second is almost fused to the apophysis, producing a spacing between the cladia of 950–1170 µm (Fig. 9A2). An extreme situation is met with in sample M093, whose cladia are 1300–1465 µm distant (Fig. 9A1). Their stem internodes carry generally two nematothecae, more rarely only one; these are equidistantly spaced along the internode (Fig. 9D1), occasionally with the superior nematotheca very close to the apophysis (Fig. 9D2).</p><p>14. See Galea (2010a).</p><p>FIGURE 9. A–L: Aglaophenia rhynchocarpa Allman, 1877 ―four cormoids showing different spacing of cladia in specimens from Martinique [samples M093 (A1), M068 (A2), and M159 (A3)] and Guadeloupe (A4); differences in length of cormidia between specimens from Martinique (B1) and Guadeloupe (B2); hydrotheca in lateral (C1), frontal (C2), and apical (C3) views; stem internode from sample M093 in frontal (D1) and lateral (D2) views, compared to specimen from Guadeloupe (E, lateral view); pair of nematothecae flanking the stem apophyses (F); stem nematotheca in frontal (G1) and lateral (G2) views, note single frontal aperture; stem nematothecae in specimen from Guadeloupe in frontal (H1, H2) and lateral (H3) views, note the pair of lateral apertures; basal part of a female corbula in lateral view (I); detail of a male (J) and a female (K) corbula; unpaired costa (L). Scale bars: 100 µm (F–H), 200 µm (C–E), 300 µm (B, I–L), 1 cm (A).</p><p>PLATE 3. Aglaophenia rhynchocarpa Allman, 1877 ―male (A) and female (G) corbulae; overview of the central (B) and distal (C) parts of a male corbula; lateral (D) and dorsal (E, F) views of a male corbula showing the pair of basal nematothecae flanking the lateral spikes; ventral and lateral views of a female corbula showing the lateral spikes (H, J) and the costae (I).</p><p>Corbulae of this species occur in many of the specimens from Martinique. They show a conspicuous sexual dimorphism, with the males (Plate 3A) being longer (6.5 vs. 3.0 mm) and more slender than the females (Plate 3B), as well as more flattened dorso-ventrally. Each corbula is composed of a basal hydrotheca and a non-segmented rachis (Plate 3D–F) bearing alternately up to 18 (in males) or 10 (in females) spike-like processes, each of which carrying a costa (Plate 3I, J; Fig. 9I). Each process bears two basal nematothecae at its origin from rachis (one to each side, Plate 3D–F), as well as 2–3 (in males, Fig. 9J) or 3–4 (in female, Fig. 9K) nematothecae on its trunk (Plate 3C, H, J). The costae are given off upwardly from the bases of the lateral processes of the rachis, and are broad, leaf-like structures, arching over the gonothecae (Plate 3I). Each costa is composed of two, occasionally three, fronto-distal nematothecae in males (Fig. 9J), and 5 in females (Fig. 9K). Unpaired, irregularly placed costae (one, exceptionally two per corbula), bearing numerous nematothecae, mostly on one side, are occasionally found in the female corbulae (Fig. 9L). All nematothecae are tubular to globular, and are provided with two apertures, one rounded and terminal, the other large and ovoid, situated on a side of the theca.</p><p>Except for the larger size of the thecae in the material from Martinique (Fig. 9B1), compared to the specimens from Guadeloupe (Fig. 9B2), there are no other significant differences among the colonies, though the extreme habits exhibited by some cormoids (compare Fig. 9A1 and 9A4), give the impression that macroscopically we are dealing with different species.</p><p>I follow Bogle (1975) who, after examining the types of A. rathbuni Nutting, 1900 and A. insolens Fraser, 1943, reached the conclusion that both are coterminous, and hypothesized that the former is merely a variant of A. rhynchocarpa . I equally agree with Vervoort (1968), who included A. cylindrata Versluys, 1899 into its synonymy.</p><p>In addition, Aglaophenia gracillima Fewkes, 1881, a deep-water species whose type locality is Martinique, shows striking resemblances with Allman's species, the latter being omnipresent at all shallow-water stations inspected during the present study. The account by Fewkes is rather succinct and his illustrations are sketchy, but type material was reexamined by Nutting (1900), who provided a more detailed description and better illustrations. The sole distinguishing character between A. gracillima and A. rhynchocarpa is found in the extreme hypertrophy of the hydrothecal carina and, to a lesser extent, of the median cusp in the former nominal species. Bogle (1975), upon examination of her GERDA material assigned to Allman's species, noted the following: "Median tooth very variable in size and occasionally greatly enlarged. […] Strength of carina variable." In addition, the corbula illustrated by Nutting (1900) for A. gracillima strongly recalls the female corbula in specimens from Martinique, with the sole exception concerning the increased number of hydrothecae (3 of these are figured by Nutting) at the base of the modified cladium. Given the data available at present, it would be too early to conclude on a possible conspecificity between the two nominal species, but the finding of additional material corresponding to the phenotype of A. gracillima will certainly allow estimating its degree of intraspecific variation.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Bogle (1975) indicated that the species extends from Bermuda in the North, to Barbados in the South, the Yucatan Channel in the West, and the Lesser Antilles in the East. To this, it should be added the record by Nutting (1900, as A. rathbuni), which extends its latitudinal range of distribution to Brazil.</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF69FFD0FF36FD64FA8BFACC	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF6EFFDDFF36FAA5FC04FB78.text	D6410C37BF6EFFDDFF36FAA5FC04FB78.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Gymnangium allmani (Marktanner-Turneretscher 1890) Marktanner-Turneretscher 1890	<div><p>Gymnangium allmani (Marktanner-Turneretscher, 1890)</p><p>(Fig. 10A–H)</p><p>Halicornaria plumosa Allman, 1883: 52, pl. 18 [invalid junior homonym of Halicornaria plumosa Armstrong, 1879].</p><p>Halicornaria Allmani Marktanner-Turneretscher, 1890: 277 (new name; not pl. 6 fig. 23 = Gymnangium sp.).</p><p>Halicornaria Allmani ― Billard, 1910: 45, fig. 20.― Billard, 1912: 474, fig. 7.</p><p>not Halicornaria Allmani Jäderholm, 1923: 5, fig.</p><p>not Halicornaria allmani var. sibogae Billard, 1913: 68, fig. 55.</p><p>not Halicornaria allmani ― Millard, 1968: 282, fig. 6C.</p><p>not Gymnagium allmani ―Millard, 1975: 434, fig. 134J–K.</p><p>Halicornaria longicauda Nutting, 1900: 127, pl. 33 figs 4, 5.―Ritchie, 1909: 76, fig. 11.―Fraser, 1937: 5, pl. 2 fig. 8; 1944: 413, pl. 91 fig. 402.</p><p>Gymnangium longicauda ― Vervoort, 1968: 78, fig. 36.</p><p>not Gymnangium longicauda ― Vervoort, 1959: 298, fig. 48.</p><p>Halicornaria pennatula ― Mayal, 1983: 8, fig. 14 (not Sertularia pennatula Ellis &amp; Solander, 1786).</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 1, 18.ii.2012, 22 m, M214: several cormoids 3.0– 7.5 cm high, some with gonothecae (MHNG-INVE-82885); 26.ii.2012, 20 m, M261: several cormoids 3.5–9.0 cm high, some with gonothecae (MHNG-INVE-82886).</p><p>Description. Stems up to 9 cm high, arising from branched, rhizoid stolon; simple, monosiphonic, straight to slightly curved backward, divided into internodes by means of regular, well-marked, transverse nodes; basal part, of varied length, devoid of hydrocladia, bearing only abortive apophyses and groups of laterally placed nematothecae. Stem above basal part with internodes provided with two alternate, closely spaced, short apophyses supporting cladia, and three nematothecae: one at base of apophysis, the remaining two on the anterior and posterior sides of the axil made by the apophysis with the stem internode. Basal nematotheca sac-shaped, broadly triangular, generally two-spined (occasionally with an additional, frontal aperture), rim curved backward, aperture wide, slit-like, opening in the axil with the internode behind (Fig. 10A). Axillar nematothecae similar to the former, but comparatively wider, provided with 3–4 (occasionally 5) fronto-distal apertures, rim curved inwards, aperture wide (Fig. 10A). Cladia up to 9 mm long, divided into up to 35 short cormidia, by means of slightly oblique nodes. Hydrotheca sac-shaped, curved outward, aperture at sharp angle with axis of internode; abcauline intrathecal septum prominent, posterior margin with several centrally placed perisarcal papillae [Fig. 10C, F); basal end of adaxial wall with a 2–4 hooks [Fig. 10C2, G]; rim with two lateral cusps, the anterior inconspicuous and slightly convex, followed by a prominent one, with adaxial notch. Three nematothecae associated with a hydrotheca: a mesial and a pair of laterals. Mesial nematotheca long, tubular, uniformly tapering distally, arching over the hydrothecal aperture; a small, distal aperture, as well as a basal one, in the axil with the abaxial wall of hydrotheca. Lateral nematothecae not reaching the hydrothecal margin; small, sac shaped, swollen basally, considerably narrowing distally; aperture scoop shaped (Fig. 10E); an ovoid foramen communicating with the hydrothecal cavity. Gonothecae crowded together and alternately placed along the middle portion of the stem; given off from cladial apophyses, at mid distance between the lower and the fronto-axillar nematothecae (a foramen marking the insertion of gonotheca in visible in Fig. 10A). Gonotheca borne on short, inconspicuous pedicel; barrel shaped, slightly widening distally, rounded basally, slightly compressed laterally; distally a watch glass shaped operculum, with radially striated perisarc.</p><p>Remarks. Three nominal species of Gymnangium are commonly reported from the northern part of the tropical western Atlantic, viz. G. longicaudum (Nutting, 1900), G. sinuosum (Fraser, 1925), and G. speciosum (Allman, 1877) . The latter two were discussed at length by both Bogle (1975) and Calder (1997), and are mainly characterized by having hydrothecae with short to moderately developed mesial nematothecae. In contrast, G. longicaudum is distinguished through its exceedingly long mesial nematothecae and the rim of hydrotheca provided with "two shallow sinuations on each side" (Nutting 1900). However, examination of present material shows that the indentation of the hydrothecal rim changes dramatically with respect to the angle at which the hydrothecae are seen. There is an anterior, shallow sinuation, not subjected to noticeable change when the angle of view varies, as well as a second, centrally placed, deep indentation, whose shape changes significantly, from barely noticeable to conspicuous. It is likely that Nutting (1900) overlooked this difference, as his Fig. 4 shows the hydrothecal rim as wavy.</p><p>In light of these new observations, one can note obvious similarities between Nutting's species and Halicornaria plumosa Allman, 1883, originally described from the NE of Brazil. The stem size, the "deep lateral notch" on the hydrothecal rim, the considerable development of the mesial nematotheca, as well as the "wide, conical" lateral nematothecae (Allman 1883), leave little doubt that the Brazilian species is the same as that occurring in the Caribbean. Nutting (1900) was apparently unaware of H. plumosa, as he did not include it in his comprehensive monograph on American hydroids.</p><p>Bale (1887) indicated that the name of Allman's species had to be changed in order to avoid the homonymy with a taxon already described by Armstrong (1879), but did not proceed. Consequently, Marktanner-Turneretscher (1890) introduced the new name Halicornaria Allmani, and applied it to Cape, South Africa, specimens, though he acknowledged that their hydrothecal rim was less ornamented and the lateral nematothecae had a narrower aperture, compared to the type 15. Indeed, the aperture of hydrotheca is described as being provided with a small cusp16, and is also figured this way (see his Pl. 6 Fig. 23). In addition, the mesial nematotheca in these specimens is reportedly devoid of the basal, axial foramen, and the lateral nematotheca is figured with an uprightly directed aperture. I therefore suspect that this material was only given the name, but that it does not belong to the western Atlantic species.</p><p>15. "Diese Form steht jedenfalls der H. plumosa sehr nahe, unterscheidet sich aber, wie erwähnt, durch den einfacher gegliederten Mündungsrand der Hydrothek und die verengerte Mündung der Nematocalyces."</p><p>16. Hydrothek […] "mit einem kleinen seitlichen Zahn am Mündungsrande".</p><p>FIGURE 10. A–H: Gymnangium allmani (Marktanner-Turneretscher, 1890) ―upper part of stem internode showing the apophysis, its associated nematothecae, and the first hydrotheca of a cladium (A); two cormidia (B) and detailed view in lateral (C1) and frontal (C2) aspects; variation in hydrothecal rim and shape of lateral nematothecae (D); detail of a lateral nematotheva showing the scoop-shaped aperture (E); frontal view of the intrathecal septum, showing the median papillae (F); hydrothecal bases with varied number of hooks (G); gonotheca in lateral (H1), frontal (H2), and apical (H3) views. I–N: Macrorhynchia allmani (Nutting, 1900) ― stem internode showing insertion of cladia (I); another internode with removed cladia in frontal (J1) and lateral (J2) aspects, to show the shape of the nematothecae and apophysis; fragment of cladium (K); three hydrothecae, showing variation in the length of mesial and lateral nematothecae (L); shape variation of the hydrothecal cusps (M); corbulacosta (N). Scale bars: 50 µm (E–G), 200 µm (A–D, L, M), 300 µm (I–K), 500 µm (H, N).</p><p>Type material of Halicornaria plumosa was reexamined by Billard, who provided better illustrations of the cormidium (Billard 1910, 1912), though he figured the lateral nematotheca as having the aperture either tilted anteriorily (Billard 1910) or uprightly and backwardly (Billard 1912), without mentioning the scoop shape of the theca, otherwise evident from Allman's (1883) figures. Billard also confirmed that the mesial nematotheca bore a basal, axillar foramen, but he found that the axillar stem nematothecae bore only two apertures, while the basal one had three (Billard 1912). The latter differences have, most probably, no specific importance and it would not be surprising to find some variation among colonies from various localities, as more material becomes available.</p><p>The Brazilian specimens assigned by Ritchie (1909) to G. longicauda have the hydrothecal margin provided with a "sharp tooth projecting upwards and outwards on either side", the lateral nematothecae are "short and stout", with a gutter shaped aperture (especially visible on his Fig. 11B), thus agreeing with the present concept of G. allmani . However, this author noted "considerable differences" in the length of mesial nematotheca "even in two succeeding hydrothecae". It is not clear whether the occurrence of this size difference was significant or not. No such variation could be noted in the present material from Martinique, in which all the hydrothecae bear exceedingly long mesial nematothecae.</p><p>The material from the Marshall Islands assigned by Jäderholm (1923) to G. allmani has hydrothecae and mesial nematothecae recalling those of G. allmani, though the pair of laterals is figured with the apertures shifted anteriorily. Based on this difference, as well as on biogeographical grounds, his material could belong to a variant of G. hians (Busk, 1852) similar to that described by Watson (2000).</p><p>The South African hydroids described and depicted by Millard (1968, 1975) likely do not belong to the present species either, due to some differences such as: 1) the presence of generally one hydrocladia per stem internode; 2) the shape of the hydrothecal rim, which has "one low but distinct tooth […] and a bay of varying depth posterior to it"; 3) the structure of the lateral nematothecae, whose apertures are situated "at the end of a tubular neck directed upwards and slightly posteriorily".</p><p>Vervoort (1968) listed some important differences between its Caribbean specimens and what he had thought to belong to G. longicauda from Guinea (Vervoort 1959), those features reported in his material from St. Thomas being equally present in my specimens from Martinique.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Brazil (Allman 1883, Ritchie 1909, Mayal 1983), Caribbean coast of Panama (Nutting 1900), Puerto Rico and Culebra Is. (Fraser 1937), St. Thomas (Vervoort 1968), Virgin Islands (Larson 1987, cited as an epibiont of Solanderia gracilis), Martinique (present study).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF6EFFDDFF36FAA5FC04FB78	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
D6410C37BF63FFDEFF36FB39FBB2FEC4.text	D6410C37BF63FFDEFF36FB39FBB2FEC4.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Macrorhynchia allmani (Nutting 1900) Nutting 1900	<div><p>Macrorhynchia allmani (Nutting, 1900)</p><p>(Fig. 10 I –N)</p><p>Aglaophenia ramosa Allman, 1877: pl. 23 figs 1–4 [invalid junior secondary homonym of Aglaophenia ramosa (Busk, 1852)]. Aglaophenia allmani Nutting, 1900: 100, pl. 22 figs 2–3.</p><p>Macrorhynchia allmani ― Calder, 1997: 64, fig. 19; 2013: 50, fig. 14F.</p><p>Material examined. Stn. 1, 26.ii.2012, 10– 15 m, M266: three fertile colonies, 7.5–10 cm high (MHNG-INVE- 82948); M269: several colonies 7–14 cm high, some fertile (MHNG-INVE-82889). Stn. 14, 20.ii.2012, 10– 13 m, M239: a large (almost 30 cm high), profusely branched, fertile colony (MHNG-INVE-82887); M240: two fragmented colonies, of which one is sterile and attains ca. 11 cm high, the other fertile, may have attained ca. 30 cm in life; M241: a large (ca. 30 cm high) fertile colony; M242: two fragmentary, fertile colonies, largest fragment 17 cm high (MHNG-INVE-82888).</p><p>Description. Colonies large, up to 30 cm high (even larger in the field), arising from a complex mesh of intertwined hydrorhizal fibers firmly attached to a hard substrate. Color dark brown basally, changing to light horn distally. Stems alternately to irregularly branched, with side branches given off at almost 90° in the largest colonies, then gradually curving backwards; branches generally branched in like manner several times. Stem and branches thick, highly polysiphonic, except for their very distal parts. Side branches given off from secondary tubes, with the new main tubes bearing a row of large, scoop-shaped to triangular, frontal nematothecae basally, then giving off alternately placed hydrocladia, the latter being generally present only on the less thickest parts of stem and branches. Monosiphonic parts divided by slightly oblique nodes into moderately long internodes, each of which bears two frontal nematothecae, as well as a lateral apophysis (supporting a cladium), carrying basally a mamelon provided with an almost circular foramen (reduced nematotheca). Stem nematothecae, more or less triangular, with a large foramen communicating with the internode behind, and wide, two-spined aperture having the abaxial wall inwardly rolled distally. Hydrocladia composed of up to 17 short cormidia delimited by transverse nodes; each internode with two internal septa (one adjacent to intra-hydrothecal ridge, the other beneath lateral nematothecae), and a hydrotheca. Hydrotheca cone-shaped, basal fourth with a slightly convex internal ridge, aperture oblique to long axis, margin with nine cusps: a median one and four pairs of laterals, of which the former and the three proximal pairs have slightly thickened perisarc, giving the margin a wavy appearance when seen from above, and the fourth pair hidden behind the lateral nematothecae. Median cusp rather prominent, inclined towards lumen of hydrotheca, the others triangular with rounded tips, except for the second pair, which may be comparatively wider, more blunt or even with an incised apex (see variation in Fig. 10M). Three nematothecae associated to a hydrotheca: a mesial and a pair of laterals. Mesial nematotheca curved, adnate for much of its length to abaxial wall of hydrotheca, leaving a rather short, free, tubular end, provided with a distal aperture and an adaxially one near the axil with the abaxial hydrothecal wall. Lateral nematothecae ovoid to horn shaped, bearing two apertures, one distal, and another one ovoid, opened within the hydrotheca. Length and structure of nematothecae variable, according to the cormidia to which they belong: proximal most hydrothecae with short lateral nematothecae, barely surpassing the rim, and having the apertures mostly fused; mesial nematotheca with a minute free part, guttershaped, opened adaxially through fusion of its apertures. Distalmost hydrothecae with horn-shaped lateral nematothecae, extening beyond margin of hydrotheca, and mesial nematothecae with generally a longer free part, and the apertures distinct; occasionally, the mesial nematotheca may be short. Fertile specimens produce pseudocorbulae, the latter up to 11 mm long. They are given off from modified side branches, whose main tubes carry basally a sequence of up to 8 internodes, each of which with a frontal, scoop-shaped to triangular nematotheca, followed by up to 17 internodes being the rachis of the pseudocorbula, and ending in a normal sequence of internodes bearing hydrocladia. Internodes of rachis with the same structure as the stem and branches, with two frontal, triangular nematothecae and a lateral apophysis supporting a corbulacosta, the apophysis carrying basally a reduced nematotheca. Costae given off alternately from the rachis, curving over the middle region to form a partially open structure; composed of up to 12 internodes, of which the first bears a normal hydrotheca; it is followed by 2–5 segments carrying three nematothecae (one median inferior and two latero-distal) and a centrally placed apophysis supporting a lenticular gonotheca; the remaining internodes carry alternately either a single, dorsal nematotheca, or a pair of lateral nematothecae.</p><p>Remarks. The above description is based mainly on sample M242. Some macro- and microscopic differences, with no major importance, are apparent among the colonies present in other samples examined. For instance, decimeter high colonies are branched more or less regularly, with side branches given off laterally or in front of the main stem (samples M266 and M269), while the largest colonies exhibit a fully irregular branching pattern, with side branches given off in all directions (samples M239–242). Variation also occur in the shape and size of the nematothecae as, for example, in samples M241 and M269, in which the mesials have an almost constant length, never reaching the hydrothecal rim, even in the distalmost hydrothecae. Their apertures are generally fused, a situation also met with in the well-developed, lateral nematothecae of the distal most cormidia. In addition, the cormidia in sample M241 exhibit a second internodal ridge situated at level of the insertion of the lateral nematothecae, a structure absent in other specimens.</p><p>The identification of the present material faced considerable difficulties, since there is a stupefacient confusion over the identity of seven tropical, western Atlantic species of hydroids, namely Macrorhynchia allmani (Nutting, 1900), M. grandis (Clarke, 1879), M. ramosa (Fewkes, 1881), M. racemifera (Allman, 1883), M. clarkei (Nutting, 1900), M. mercatoris (Leloup, 1937), and M. longiramosa (Fraser, 1945) . Nearly all original descriptions and illustrations are rather poor and occasionally incorrect, and the relationships between the new species added in time and those described earlier were either not discussed or, when provided, they are based on less than reliable morphological characters. In addition, numerous subsequent authors included their materials in one or another species, mostly without providing any argument for doing so, thus further complicating the general confusion.</p><p>Judging from their microscopic trophosomal and, when known, gonosomal features, all seven nominal species are more or less related, but their degree of intraspecific variation is as yet insufficiently known. Their differentiation has been done mainly owing the shape of the hydrotheca (more or less deep and/or wide) and the length of the mesial nematotheca.</p><p>In all the available records, M. allmani is depicted as a species with hydrothecae having mesial nematothecae of varied development, though never surpassing the hydrothecal rim (Allman 1877, Ritchie 1909, Van Gemerden- Hoogeveen 1965, Vervoort 1968, Calder 1997). In contrast, both M. grandis and M. ramosa were originally reported as having well-developed mesial nematothecae that may considerably overtop the aperture of hydrotheca. Reexamination of the type material of the former species by Calder (1997), and of the latter by both Nutting (1900) and Calder (1997), confirmed the original statements. However, variation in length of the mesial nematotheca is evident from the accounts of Versluys (1899), Ritchie (1907), and Bedot (1921) on M. grandis, and of Nutting (1900) on M. ramosa . In addition, the description and illustration provided by Versluys (1899) for the gonosome of M. grandis, and by both Fewkes (1881) and Nutting (1900) for that of M. ramosa, raise the question as to their possible conspecificity, an opinion expressed earlier by Bedot (1921), Bogle (1975) and Calder (1997).</p><p>Among other features allowing distinction of M. racemifera from its congeners, the side branches shifted on to the anterior side of the colonies are reportedly characteristic (Allman 1883, Vervoort 1968). However, such a character was already found in specimens assigned by Ritchie (1907) to a new variety, unilateralis, of L. grandis, as well as in the present material of M. allmani, showing that at least two other taxa could display the "typical" habit of M. racemifera . The hydrothecae of the latter exhibit an intermediate morphology between those of M. allmani and M. grandis and/or M. ramosa, especially in the length of mesial nematotheca, which may slightly overtop (Allman 1883) or just reach (Vervoort 1968) the hydrothecal rim. Its gonosome is composed of only 3–6 pairs of corbulacostae, each of which bears as much as 5 to 10 gonothecae (Allman 1883, Vervoort 1968), in contrast with that of its congeners, which is more profuse and carries lesser gonothecae [e.g. 7 pairs of costae, each bearing 2–3 gonothecae in M. grandis (Versluys 1899), 8–9 pairs of costae in M. ramosa (Fewkes 1881), 7–16 pairs of costae and 2–5 gonothecae in M. clarkei (Ansín Agís et al. 2001)]. Last but not least, the gonophore of M. racemifera is said to bear distally "a wreath of highly refringent spherules" (Allman 1883), suggesting that it could produce a medusoid, thus setting apart this species with respect to the other western Atlantic Macrorhynchia, until their gonophores are described properly.</p><p>According to Nutting (1900), the colonies of M. clarkei exhibit one distinguishing feature in that they are "very dark colored when fresh", though it is recognized that some differences arose between shallow and deep-water specimens, with colonies having the "coenosarc crowded full of black pigment" in the first case, and others that "do not show so many of these granular bodies". Similar observations on the pigmentation were made by Ansín Agís et al. (2001), who even found colorless colonies. Dark-colored species, among the group under discussion here, were scantly reported in the literature, as for instance in M. grandis, whose stems are "black and thickest at the base, changing to light horn-color" distally (Clarke 1879).</p><p>Although reportedly coming close to M. grandis, Nutting (1900) distinguished his M. clarkei from the former on the account of its mesial nematothecae, comparatively shorter and never reaching the hydrothecal aperture. The same is demonstrated in subsequent reports of this species (Vervoort 1959, 1968), though a little variation in length could be noted (Ansín Agís et al. 2001), nevertheless without facing the situation met with in M. grandis .</p><p>Among the seven species discussed here, M. mercatoris is immediately distinguished from its congeners through its lateral nematothecae of the first cormidium, showing a pronounced asymmetry, with one of them being considerably hypertrophied, tubular in shape, outwardly and backwardly directed with respect to the long axis of its corresponding hydrotheca (Leloup 1937, Vervoort 1968). In addition, the first hydrotheca is smaller than the following ones, and is provided with a longer mesial nematotheca (Leloup 1937).</p><p>Macrorhynchia longiramosa exhibits characteristically exceedingly long cladia, "up to 2 cm or even more" (Fraser 1945), though the shape of its hydrothecae was found close to that of M. mercatoris by Bogle (1975). However, a reexamination of the type of Fraser's species is imperative, in order to check whether an asymmetry of its lateral nematothecae possibly occurs.</p><p>The present material from Martinique is assigned to M. allmani on the account of its mesial nematothecae not surpassing the hydrothecal rim, in contrast with those of both M. grandis and M. ramosa, which greatly overtop the aperture of hydrotheca. It is different from M. racemifera in having pseudo-corbulae with numerous costae, carrying lesser gonothecae, and having the gonophores apparently devoid17 of the belt of refringent corpuscles reported by Allman (1883). It also differs from M. clarkei in having comparatively longer (7.5 vs. 4.0 mm), more widely-spaced cladia (10 vs. 13 cladia/cm of branch), and brownish vs. black colonies in live [similar arguments in favor of their distinction were also expressed by Calder (2013)]. Macrorhychia mercatoris was excluded on the account of the pronounced asymmetry occurring in the first cormidium, as well as M. longiramosa, due to its, at least, three times longer hydrocladia, and mesial nematothecae with a very short free portion, barely reaching the hydrothecal rim.</p><p>17. No such refringent bodies have been noted upon the examination of fresh material.</p><p>Geographical distribution. Western Atlantic, as summarized by Calder (2013).</p></div>	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/D6410C37BF63FFDEFF36FB39FBB2FEC4	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Galea, Horia R.	Galea, Horia R. (2013): New additions to the shallow-water hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) of the French Lesser Antilles: Martinique. Zootaxa 3686 (1): 1-50, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3686.1.1
