taxonID	type	format	identifier	references	title	description	created	creator	contributor	publisher	audience	source	license	rightsHolder	datasetID
396387E75F56E004FF50FE61FC24FD1E.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287544/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287544	FIGURE 4. Opercula of Hydroides diramphus. A—Operculum of small individual from Lake Timsah (sample SBE 8, App. Table 2C), B—Specimen from the Great Bitter Lake (legit H. Brattström & J.P. Taasen, 14.I.1975, App. Table 2D). Scales: 100 µm.	FIGURE 4. Opercula of Hydroides diramphus. A—Operculum of small individual from Lake Timsah (sample SBE 8, App. Table 2C), B—Specimen from the Great Bitter Lake (legit H. Brattström & J.P. Taasen, 14.I.1975, App. Table 2D). Scales: 100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F54E001FF50FCBBFD50F837.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287548/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287548	FIGURE 6. The very first serpulid collected from the Suez Canal—Hydroides elegans—from a boat hull, collected by the “Pola” Expedition (Isma’iliya, 17.X.1895, coll. Mus. Vindobonensis, Vienna, Evertebr. Varia, inv. no. 2034 [alte invert. no. 17199]), det. H. Zibrowius. A—Operculum photographed in methylene-blue-glycerine; focus on spines of upper verticil, B—Same, focusing on long tooth arising from the central disk of the verticil, C—Collar chaetae showing characteristic fine teeth and proximal rasp, D, E—Aggregates of tubes on gastropod, Potamides conicus; note the slightly flattened upper surface of the tube. Scales: A, B—100 µm, C—50 µm, D, E—1 mm.	FIGURE 6. The very first serpulid collected from the Suez Canal—Hydroides elegans—from a boat hull, collected by the “Pola” Expedition (Isma’iliya, 17.X.1895, coll. Mus. Vindobonensis, Vienna, Evertebr. Varia, inv. no. 2034 [alte invert. no. 17199]), det. H. Zibrowius. A—Operculum photographed in methylene-blue-glycerine; focus on spines of upper verticil, B—Same, focusing on long tooth arising from the central disk of the verticil, C—Collar chaetae showing characteristic fine teeth and proximal rasp, D, E—Aggregates of tubes on gastropod, Potamides conicus; note the slightly flattened upper surface of the tube. Scales: A, B—100 µm, C—50 µm, D, E—1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F54E001FF50FCBBFD50F837.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287550/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287550	FIGURE 7. Taphonomic residues of Hydroides elegans from mollusc shells collected in the Great Bitter Lake in 1950 by C. Beets. The chitinous residues “survived” more than 50 years in the dried serpulid tubes. A—Body of dried worm, B—Thoracic chaetae, C—Broken but distinctive collar chaetae, D—Residue of verticil, E—Fragment of tube with adhering fascicles of thoracic chaetae (putative identification of species based on tube), F—Thoracic uncini (putative identification to species based on tube), G—Operculum, apical view of verticil, H—Operculum, ¾ view. I. Tube with projecting verticil, lower side of tube. J. Hydroides elegans tube fragment on shell of Gafrarium pectinatum, K—Fusinus polygonoides shell (ca. 11 cm in length), bearing tubes of H. elegans. Scales: A, B, D, E, I, J—1 mm; G, H—100 µm; C, F—50 µm. Figs A, B, D–F, I, K—from Beets’ Stn 4, 0.2–0.8 m, C, G —from Stn 21, 1.5–3 m, H—from Stn 1: 1–2.7 m, J—from Stn 19: 5–5.5 m (for stations, see Beets (1953), Appendix Table 2B).	FIGURE 7. Taphonomic residues of Hydroides elegans from mollusc shells collected in the Great Bitter Lake in 1950 by C. Beets. The chitinous residues “survived” more than 50 years in the dried serpulid tubes. A—Body of dried worm, B—Thoracic chaetae, C—Broken but distinctive collar chaetae, D—Residue of verticil, E—Fragment of tube with adhering fascicles of thoracic chaetae (putative identification of species based on tube), F—Thoracic uncini (putative identification to species based on tube), G—Operculum, apical view of verticil, H—Operculum, ¾ view. I. Tube with projecting verticil, lower side of tube. J. Hydroides elegans tube fragment on shell of Gafrarium pectinatum, K—Fusinus polygonoides shell (ca. 11 cm in length), bearing tubes of H. elegans. Scales: A, B, D, E, I, J—1 mm; G, H—100 µm; C, F—50 µm. Figs A, B, D–F, I, K—from Beets’ Stn 4, 0.2–0.8 m, C, G —from Stn 21, 1.5–3 m, H—from Stn 1: 1–2.7 m, J—from Stn 19: 5–5.5 m (for stations, see Beets (1953), Appendix Table 2B).	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F5FE00BFF50FF1BFB64FD0A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287554/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287554	FIGURE 8. Hydroides heterocerus. Variability in forms of opercula from different regions: A–D. Operculum of specimen from the Great Bitter Lake aggregate removed by J.P. Taasen from the M/S “Münsterland” after its journey to the Hapag-Lloyd dry dock in Bremerhaven (18.VI.1975, 7 m). A—Lateral view, B–D—Apical views, B—Focus on tips of verticil spines, C—Focus on basal spinules of verticil, D—Enlargement of marginal teeth of funnel; the expansion of the tips of the marginal teeth in “D” is intermediate between “E” and “F,” E—“Bowling-pin-shaped” radii with blunt or even stubby tips, specimen from Little Bitter Lake opposite Kabrit (sample SLC 123), F—More expanded, “T”-shaped tips found in specimen from the Sudanese Red Sea (BM(NH) 1972.23, legit C. Crossland, 1904–1905). Lessepsian migrants with marginal radii like “D” or like “E”. Scale: 1 mm.	FIGURE 8. Hydroides heterocerus. Variability in forms of opercula from different regions: A–D. Operculum of specimen from the Great Bitter Lake aggregate removed by J.P. Taasen from the M/S “Münsterland” after its journey to the Hapag-Lloyd dry dock in Bremerhaven (18.VI.1975, 7 m). A—Lateral view, B–D—Apical views, B—Focus on tips of verticil spines, C—Focus on basal spinules of verticil, D—Enlargement of marginal teeth of funnel; the expansion of the tips of the marginal teeth in “D” is intermediate between “E” and “F,” E—“Bowling-pin-shaped” radii with blunt or even stubby tips, specimen from Little Bitter Lake opposite Kabrit (sample SLC 123), F—More expanded, “T”-shaped tips found in specimen from the Sudanese Red Sea (BM(NH) 1972.23, legit C. Crossland, 1904–1905). Lessepsian migrants with marginal radii like “D” or like “E”. Scale: 1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F5FE00BFF50FF1BFB64FD0A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287556/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287556	FIGURE 9. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 1 (specimen from Cambridge Expedition mollusc deposited at the Natural History Museum in London, precise location unknown [See App. Table 2A]). A—Apical view, drawing and photograph, respectively, B—Profile view of drawing and photograph, C—Three-quarters view; note sharply pointed marginal teeth of funnel radii (in contrast with those in Fig. 8), D—Collar chaetae (magnification, <10 x). Scales: B—0.5 mm, D—100 µm.	FIGURE 9. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 1 (specimen from Cambridge Expedition mollusc deposited at the Natural History Museum in London, precise location unknown [See App. Table 2A]). A—Apical view, drawing and photograph, respectively, B—Profile view of drawing and photograph, C—Three-quarters view; note sharply pointed marginal teeth of funnel radii (in contrast with those in Fig. 8), D—Collar chaetae (magnification, <10 x). Scales: B—0.5 mm, D—100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F5FE00BFF50FF1BFB64FD0A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287560/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287560	FIGURE 10. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 2 (specimen scraped from mollusc from the Great Bitter Lake [SLC 117, Y. Eytam, St. 4]). A, B—Funnel radii with some typical “anchor-shaped” (T-shaped) tips; some verticil spines approaching typical adult form, other spines deviating from the typical form, e.g., dorsal spine, upper right, bifid, aberrant. Scale: 100 µm.	FIGURE 10. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 2 (specimen scraped from mollusc from the Great Bitter Lake [SLC 117, Y. Eytam, St. 4]). A, B—Funnel radii with some typical “anchor-shaped” (T-shaped) tips; some verticil spines approaching typical adult form, other spines deviating from the typical form, e.g., dorsal spine, upper right, bifid, aberrant. Scale: 100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F5FE00BFF50FF1BFB64FD0A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287564/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287564	FIGURE 11. Large spiralled serpulid tube. The tube was present in the test-tube labelled "Serpula vermicularis" by F.A. Potts but should rather be attributed to Hydroides heterocerus (The nominal "Serpula vermicularis" specimen collected by the Cambridge Expedition in the Gulf of Suez that was described in detail by Potts 1928 was no longer present [CUZM]). The abdominal uncini and chaetae shown below were found on skin still attached to the lumen of the tube. A—Upper view of tube (note spirorbid tubes encrusted on outer surface of the tube), B—Ventral view of tube, C—3/4 frontal view of tube, D—Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, F+5, E—Same, frontal view, left, F+10, F—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B—5 mm, C—1 mm, D, F—10 µm.	FIGURE 11. Large spiralled serpulid tube. The tube was present in the test-tube labelled "Serpula vermicularis" by F.A. Potts but should rather be attributed to Hydroides heterocerus (The nominal "Serpula vermicularis" specimen collected by the Cambridge Expedition in the Gulf of Suez that was described in detail by Potts 1928 was no longer present [CUZM]). The abdominal uncini and chaetae shown below were found on skin still attached to the lumen of the tube. A—Upper view of tube (note spirorbid tubes encrusted on outer surface of the tube), B—Ventral view of tube, C—3/4 frontal view of tube, D—Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, F+5, E—Same, frontal view, left, F+10, F—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B—5 mm, C—1 mm, D, F—10 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F59E034FF50FF1BFAC7FC80.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287568/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287568	FIGURE 12. Variability in opercula of Hydroides homoceros from different regions. A—Operculum characterized by “single-anchor-shaped” (or T-shaped) marginal radii (see also “D”) from Great Bitter Lake population (sample SLC 117, see App. Table 2C), B—Specimen with “spur-tipped-T-shaped” marginal radii from the Persian (Arabian) Gulf, leg. anon., sample sent to NBE for identification via the late T. Holthe, C—Specimen with “double-anchor” marginal radii from the Dahlak Archipelago (Israel South Red Sea Expedition sample ISRSE 65-TAU-MO-Malleidae 1814), D— Enlarged tip of marginal radius from Fig. A—5th radius from left—from Bitter Lake, Suez Canal—resembles that of specimens from Mediterranean population, E—Lessepsian migrant specimen from the coast of Israel (legit E. Gilat, Gilat sample 1821B, 10.XI.1969, Ashqelon, 22 m). Scale: 100 µm.	FIGURE 12. Variability in opercula of Hydroides homoceros from different regions. A—Operculum characterized by “single-anchor-shaped” (or T-shaped) marginal radii (see also “D”) from Great Bitter Lake population (sample SLC 117, see App. Table 2C), B—Specimen with “spur-tipped-T-shaped” marginal radii from the Persian (Arabian) Gulf, leg. anon., sample sent to NBE for identification via the late T. Holthe, C—Specimen with “double-anchor” marginal radii from the Dahlak Archipelago (Israel South Red Sea Expedition sample ISRSE 65-TAU-MO-Malleidae 1814), D— Enlarged tip of marginal radius from Fig. A—5th radius from left—from Bitter Lake, Suez Canal—resembles that of specimens from Mediterranean population, E—Lessepsian migrant specimen from the coast of Israel (legit E. Gilat, Gilat sample 1821B, 10.XI.1969, Ashqelon, 22 m). Scale: 100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F64E033FF50FBF8FAFBF91A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287570/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287570	FIGURE 13. Variability of opercula in a population of Hydroides steinitzi from the Great Bitter Lake “Yellow Fleet” aggregation (App. Table 2D). Opercula B–F correspond to tubes B–F in Fig. 15; C1—lateral view, C2—apical view of C1. Note variability in height of verticil and in the degree of chitinisation of funnel radii and constriction of peduncle. Scales, 0.5 mm.	FIGURE 13. Variability of opercula in a population of Hydroides steinitzi from the Great Bitter Lake “Yellow Fleet” aggregation (App. Table 2D). Opercula B–F correspond to tubes B–F in Fig. 15; C1—lateral view, C2—apical view of C1. Note variability in height of verticil and in the degree of chitinisation of funnel radii and constriction of peduncle. Scales, 0.5 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F64E033FF50FBF8FAFBF91A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5296372/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5296372	FIGURE 14. First record of Hydroides steinitzi in the Suez Canal from a taphonomic residue of the operculum. Operculum, collected in 1950, was within tube inside Chama asperella valve (Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m, see App. Table 2B). A— Tube in situ, B—Tube removed from valve; note upper surface somewhat encrusted with granular layer, C—Dried opercular residue (verticil) found within the tube had “lasted” 50 years (compare with those in Fig. 13). Scales: B—1 mm, C—100 µm.	FIGURE 14. First record of Hydroides steinitzi in the Suez Canal from a taphonomic residue of the operculum. Operculum, collected in 1950, was within tube inside Chama asperella valve (Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m, see App. Table 2B). A— Tube in situ, B—Tube removed from valve; note upper surface somewhat encrusted with granular layer, C—Dried opercular residue (verticil) found within the tube had “lasted” 50 years (compare with those in Fig. 13). Scales: B—1 mm, C—100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F64E033FF50FBF8FAFBF91A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287578/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287578	FIGURE 15. First description of Hydroides steinitzi tubes. Tubes rugose with 3 longitudinal ridges on upper surface, more or less developed, with middle longitudinal ridge often lower than lateral ones (e.g., F1), and with transverse ridges. Lumen of tube circular, with tube more or less expanded at base, thus, tubes C, D rounded in cross-section; tubes E and F with expanded base, more trapezoidal in cross-section; C1 and C2 are sections of the same tube. Figs E1 and E2, and F1 and F2 are paired cross-section and upper views (of two different tubes). Tubes B–F correspond to opercula B–F in Fig. 12. Scales: 1 mm.	FIGURE 15. First description of Hydroides steinitzi tubes. Tubes rugose with 3 longitudinal ridges on upper surface, more or less developed, with middle longitudinal ridge often lower than lateral ones (e.g., F1), and with transverse ridges. Lumen of tube circular, with tube more or less expanded at base, thus, tubes C, D rounded in cross-section; tubes E and F with expanded base, more trapezoidal in cross-section; C1 and C2 are sections of the same tube. Figs E1 and E2, and F1 and F2 are paired cross-section and upper views (of two different tubes). Tubes B–F correspond to opercula B–F in Fig. 12. Scales: 1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F64E033FF50FBF8FAFBF91A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287536/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287536	FIGURE 1. Map of Suez Canal showing salinity and temperature relations in the areas joined by the canal compiled from various sources. 1—Ben-Eliahu 1977: 70, Table 21, salinity ‰—seasonality, the extreme range of monthly means of sea surface salinity based on daily 00:08 recordings taken by the Nahariyya hydrographic station, northern Israel, 1968–1972 and the Elat hydrographic station, northern Gulf of Aqaba, 1962–1973, 2—Ben-Eliahu et al. 1988: 263, seasonality of sea surface temperature, Mediterranean coast of Israel and Elat, Gulf of Aqaba in °C (data from hydrographic stations listed above), 3—Por 1978: 118–119, fig. 32, southern Cyprus, summer surface isotherm 25°C; summer upwelling; 22°C, 4—Por 1978: 61, depressed salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, 23.1‰ in autumn, 1872, 5—Ben-Tuvia 1970: 183, depressed surface salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, autumn peak, IX & X.1960, 6—Thorson 1971: 842– 843, initial salinity at Great Bitter Lake, bottom, 8 m: 68–80‰; surface: 50–52‰, 7—Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981a: 169, 171, seasonality of Lake Timsah salinity and temperature between II.1977–I.1979; Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981b: 180, southern canal, seasonality of salinity and temperature at the Little Bitter Lake (Kabrit) and Suez between II.1977– I.1979, 8—Por 1972: 113–114. Gulf of Suez coast of Sinai, Ras el Missala and Ras es Sudr, 15 and 50 kms south of Suez, respectively, X.1970, Ras el Missalla along the shore, 44.25‰ and 25 m offshore 43.93‰; Ras es Sudr high VIII.1970, 44.25‰; X.1970, 41.69‰ and I.1971, 42‰, 9—Oren 1970: 226 reported 18°C temperature for the Gulf of Suez; however, Por 1972: 114, 1978: 83 noted even lower winter temperatures, particularly inshore, and found that the temperature decrease from south to north of Gulf of Suez corresponds with the depletion of the tropical fauna (i.e., of corals and associated taxa), from the south to the north of the Gulf, 10—Ben-Tuvia 1966: 255, mean monthly sea surface temperatures at Massawa, Eritrea, 11—Oren 1964: 12, table 3, III.1962, profile of Stn 7, surface to 110 m (low to high value, respectively) taken in the south Red Sea off Eritrea, off Entedebir and Dahlak Kebir Islands, 12—Brit 2000 (E. Spanier, pers. comm.): High peak temperature (9 m) prevailing off Haifa, northern Israel during August, 2000.	FIGURE 1. Map of Suez Canal showing salinity and temperature relations in the areas joined by the canal compiled from various sources. 1—Ben-Eliahu 1977: 70, Table 21, salinity ‰—seasonality, the extreme range of monthly means of sea surface salinity based on daily 00:08 recordings taken by the Nahariyya hydrographic station, northern Israel, 1968–1972 and the Elat hydrographic station, northern Gulf of Aqaba, 1962–1973, 2—Ben-Eliahu et al. 1988: 263, seasonality of sea surface temperature, Mediterranean coast of Israel and Elat, Gulf of Aqaba in °C (data from hydrographic stations listed above), 3—Por 1978: 118–119, fig. 32, southern Cyprus, summer surface isotherm 25°C; summer upwelling; 22°C, 4—Por 1978: 61, depressed salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, 23.1‰ in autumn, 1872, 5—Ben-Tuvia 1970: 183, depressed surface salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, autumn peak, IX & X.1960, 6—Thorson 1971: 842– 843, initial salinity at Great Bitter Lake, bottom, 8 m: 68–80‰; surface: 50–52‰, 7—Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981a: 169, 171, seasonality of Lake Timsah salinity and temperature between II.1977–I.1979; Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981b: 180, southern canal, seasonality of salinity and temperature at the Little Bitter Lake (Kabrit) and Suez between II.1977– I.1979, 8—Por 1972: 113–114. Gulf of Suez coast of Sinai, Ras el Missala and Ras es Sudr, 15 and 50 kms south of Suez, respectively, X.1970, Ras el Missalla along the shore, 44.25‰ and 25 m offshore 43.93‰; Ras es Sudr high VIII.1970, 44.25‰; X.1970, 41.69‰ and I.1971, 42‰, 9—Oren 1970: 226 reported 18°C temperature for the Gulf of Suez; however, Por 1972: 114, 1978: 83 noted even lower winter temperatures, particularly inshore, and found that the temperature decrease from south to north of Gulf of Suez corresponds with the depletion of the tropical fauna (i.e., of corals and associated taxa), from the south to the north of the Gulf, 10—Ben-Tuvia 1966: 255, mean monthly sea surface temperatures at Massawa, Eritrea, 11—Oren 1964: 12, table 3, III.1962, profile of Stn 7, surface to 110 m (low to high value, respectively) taken in the south Red Sea off Eritrea, off Entedebir and Dahlak Kebir Islands, 12—Brit 2000 (E. Spanier, pers. comm.): High peak temperature (9 m) prevailing off Haifa, northern Israel during August, 2000.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F64E033FF50FBF8FAFBF91A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287538/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287538	FIGURE 2. Biofouling on a ship that was trapped in the Suez Canal for 8 years when the canal was shut down due to the June 1967 war (adapted from Barracca & Thomas 1975). Scale: 1 m.	FIGURE 2. Biofouling on a ship that was trapped in the Suez Canal for 8 years when the canal was shut down due to the June 1967 war (adapted from Barracca & Thomas 1975). Scale: 1 m.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F61E03EFF50FF1BFD22FE4B.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287582/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287582	FIGURE 16. The Hydroides “priscus” juvenile stage of Hydroides sp. / spp. A—From Lake Timsah, Isma’iliya, on bivalve Malvufundus normalis, Cambridge Expedition, 26.XI.1924, BM(NH) 1928.3.30.179, B—From sample Great Bitter Lake SLC 117 (see App. Table 2A, C, respectively). Scale: 100 µm.	FIGURE 16. The Hydroides “priscus” juvenile stage of Hydroides sp. / spp. A—From Lake Timsah, Isma’iliya, on bivalve Malvufundus normalis, Cambridge Expedition, 26.XI.1924, BM(NH) 1928.3.30.179, B—From sample Great Bitter Lake SLC 117 (see App. Table 2A, C, respectively). Scale: 100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F6EE03FFF50FD81FDFBFE00.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287540/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287540	FIGURE 3. Serpulid tubeworms encrusted on bivalve molluscs from the biofouling aggregation on the “Yellow Fleet” ships trapped in the Great Bitter Lake. The aggregation on the ships was sampled in January 1975 by H. Brattström & J.P. Taasen before the reopening of the Suez Canal to traffic. A—Spirobranchus tetraceros and spirorbids on Brachidontes pharaonis; note Spirobranchus operculum projecting from upper left tube (see Fig. 33 of S. tetraceros), B—Aggregate of Salmacina incrustans and barnacle, Balanus amphitrite, on Brachidontes pharaonis, C—Minute Josephella marenzelleri tubes at base of spines of Spondylus spinosus shell (from subsample Biv 11 [see App. Table 2D]). Scales: 1 cm.	FIGURE 3. Serpulid tubeworms encrusted on bivalve molluscs from the biofouling aggregation on the “Yellow Fleet” ships trapped in the Great Bitter Lake. The aggregation on the ships was sampled in January 1975 by H. Brattström & J.P. Taasen before the reopening of the Suez Canal to traffic. A—Spirobranchus tetraceros and spirorbids on Brachidontes pharaonis; note Spirobranchus operculum projecting from upper left tube (see Fig. 33 of S. tetraceros), B—Aggregate of Salmacina incrustans and barnacle, Balanus amphitrite, on Brachidontes pharaonis, C—Minute Josephella marenzelleri tubes at base of spines of Spondylus spinosus shell (from subsample Biv 11 [see App. Table 2D]). Scales: 1 cm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F6AE026FF50FE8BFC5EFBF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287594/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287594	FIGURE 21. Protula cf. palliata tubes from the Bitter Lake with distinctive sculpturing—simple growth striations, but with the rim of the striation seemingly eroded with a somewhat scalloped appearance. A–C—Tube fragment of Protula sp. on Chama asperella from Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m (Beets 1953): A—Inner view of Chama valve bearing tube of 3.6 mm diameter, B—Lumen of same tube fragment, diameter ca. 4 mm, C—Enlargement of A, D—Tube fragments of Protula specimen from “Yellow Fleet” encrustation (B&T-C-Pol 27-HUJ-Poly-1567), legit H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen, 1975, diameter 4.8 mm. Scales, 5 mm.	FIGURE 21. Protula cf. palliata tubes from the Bitter Lake with distinctive sculpturing—simple growth striations, but with the rim of the striation seemingly eroded with a somewhat scalloped appearance. A–C—Tube fragment of Protula sp. on Chama asperella from Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m (Beets 1953): A—Inner view of Chama valve bearing tube of 3.6 mm diameter, B—Lumen of same tube fragment, diameter ca. 4 mm, C—Enlargement of A, D—Tube fragments of Protula specimen from “Yellow Fleet” encrustation (B&T-C-Pol 27-HUJ-Poly-1567), legit H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen, 1975, diameter 4.8 mm. Scales, 5 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F6AE026FF50FE8BFC5EFBF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287588/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287588	FIGURE 19. Protula cf. palliata from the Great Bitter Lake (B&T-C-Pol 27- HUJ-Poly-1567), ca. 87 chaetigers, body ~27 mm length + ~5.6 mm branchia = total length ~32.6 mm; width, ~2.2 mm. A—Branchial lobe, inside view; arrow designates dorsal ovoid mouth palp; 19+?few more radioles, B—Enlargement of base of lobe to show the palp, C— Branchial lobe, outside view, D—Radiole; arrows designate white blotches; note the tip appears less filiform than that in Fig. 16A (?likely due to preservation), E—Low interradiolar membrane of branchial lobe at base of branchial lobe (arrows), F—Body, thorax of 7 chaetigers and abdomen of ca. 80 chaetigers (counted from photograph), 3/4 view dorsal side up; note dorsal pygidial glandular pad, G—Thoracic chaetae of 7th (last) chaetiger, Apomatus chaetae not present,. H, I—Abdominal chaetae, sickle-shaped: H—SEM micrograph, 2,400 x, I. Microscopic view with oil immersion. Scales: C, D—1 mm, F—5 mm; G—100 µm.	FIGURE 19. Protula cf. palliata from the Great Bitter Lake (B&T-C-Pol 27- HUJ-Poly-1567), ca. 87 chaetigers, body ~27 mm length + ~5.6 mm branchia = total length ~32.6 mm; width, ~2.2 mm. A—Branchial lobe, inside view; arrow designates dorsal ovoid mouth palp; 19+?few more radioles, B—Enlargement of base of lobe to show the palp, C— Branchial lobe, outside view, D—Radiole; arrows designate white blotches; note the tip appears less filiform than that in Fig. 16A (?likely due to preservation), E—Low interradiolar membrane of branchial lobe at base of branchial lobe (arrows), F—Body, thorax of 7 chaetigers and abdomen of ca. 80 chaetigers (counted from photograph), 3/4 view dorsal side up; note dorsal pygidial glandular pad, G—Thoracic chaetae of 7th (last) chaetiger, Apomatus chaetae not present,. H, I—Abdominal chaetae, sickle-shaped: H—SEM micrograph, 2,400 x, I. Microscopic view with oil immersion. Scales: C, D—1 mm, F—5 mm; G—100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F6AE026FF50FE8BFC5EFBF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287584/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287584	FIGURE 18. Protula cf. palliata from the Little Bitter Lake. Chaetae and uncini (HUJ-Poly-1569, 1570, 4427, 4429, sample SBE1). A—Thoracic uncinus, saw-to-rasp-shaped (spec. 1569) with ca. 19 teeth in profile view (P+19), length 39 µm from apex to tip of peg, B—Abdominal uncinus from mid-body saw-to-rasp-shaped (spec. 4429) with ca. 24 rows of teeth in profile view, length 45.9 µm (pegs of additional uncini displaced when squashing the preparation seen in bottom left and right; left of arrow, part of uncinus inserted in the body wall, C, D—Frontal (edge) view of abdominal uncini “cut” from SEM micrographs of the tori, C—Spec. 4427, abdominal uncinus, with apex partially turned to the side, with ca. 24 teeth in profile view; from the apex, 18 teeth in single row, followed by ca. 2 rows with 2 teeth, then 2 rows of 3 teeth, and 2 rows of 4 teeth, arrow demarcates saw-part of the uncinus from rasp-shaped part; length, ~34 µm (magnification 6 K), D—Spec. 1570, dorsal-most uncinus with 24 teeth in profile view; from the apex, ca. 18 teeth in single file, followed by 2 rows of two teeth, then 2 row of 3 teeth and 2 rows of 4 finer teeth proximal to the bilobed, rounded peg; (arrow demarcates saw-part of the uncinus from rasp-shaped part); length ~28 µm (magnification 9 k), E—Spec. 1570, SEM micrograph of part of the torus, magnification 9 k; location of “D” in torus marked by arrow (another SEM of this torus, presumably most of the torus, magnified only 3 k, numbered at least 65 abdominal uncini); note that dorsal-most uncini are longer than the ventral uncini; 6th more ventral uncinus measures 21 µm, F—Spec. 1569, thoracic chaetae limbate (bordered) capillary chaetae only, Apomatus chaetae not observed, G–J—Abdominal chaetae from different specimens belonging to the same sample: G—Rather sickle-shaped with a somewhat prominent “heel” (spec. 4429), H— Somewhat concave proximally, less sickle-shaped than G (spec. 1569), I—Somewhat geniculate (spec. 4427), J– Both chaetae somewhat geniculate but also somewhat concave (spec. 4427 [1819]), K—Thoracic uncinus of Mediterranean Protula tubularia (Banyuls, France, ZMA.V.Pol. 3816), 1st torus (adapted from ten Hove & Kupriyanova, 2009, fig. 39c); from apex, 16–15 angled double rows of teeth, followed by ca. 3 rows of 3; 1 row of 4, 3 rows of 5, reaching ca. 7– 8 teeth in rows above bilobed peg, length of uncinus ~49.6 µm; arrow demarcates posterior-part of the uncinus from rasp-shaped part with more teeth in row, L—Anterior abdominal uncinus of Protula tubularia from same population as K, as in thoracic uncini the distal part comprises double row, ca 16 angled rows; proximal part, demarcated by arrow, comprises 9 rows with numbers of teeth increasing from 3 to ca. 7, ~27.3 µm (Table 2). For Suez Canal specimen codes, see Protula section, Hebrew University-Smithsonian Expeditions, sample SBE1).	FIGURE 18. Protula cf. palliata from the Little Bitter Lake. Chaetae and uncini (HUJ-Poly-1569, 1570, 4427, 4429, sample SBE1). A—Thoracic uncinus, saw-to-rasp-shaped (spec. 1569) with ca. 19 teeth in profile view (P+19), length 39 µm from apex to tip of peg, B—Abdominal uncinus from mid-body saw-to-rasp-shaped (spec. 4429) with ca. 24 rows of teeth in profile view, length 45.9 µm (pegs of additional uncini displaced when squashing the preparation seen in bottom left and right; left of arrow, part of uncinus inserted in the body wall, C, D—Frontal (edge) view of abdominal uncini “cut” from SEM micrographs of the tori, C—Spec. 4427, abdominal uncinus, with apex partially turned to the side, with ca. 24 teeth in profile view; from the apex, 18 teeth in single row, followed by ca. 2 rows with 2 teeth, then 2 rows of 3 teeth, and 2 rows of 4 teeth, arrow demarcates saw-part of the uncinus from rasp-shaped part; length, ~34 µm (magnification 6 K), D—Spec. 1570, dorsal-most uncinus with 24 teeth in profile view; from the apex, ca. 18 teeth in single file, followed by 2 rows of two teeth, then 2 row of 3 teeth and 2 rows of 4 finer teeth proximal to the bilobed, rounded peg; (arrow demarcates saw-part of the uncinus from rasp-shaped part); length ~28 µm (magnification 9 k), E—Spec. 1570, SEM micrograph of part of the torus, magnification 9 k; location of “D” in torus marked by arrow (another SEM of this torus, presumably most of the torus, magnified only 3 k, numbered at least 65 abdominal uncini); note that dorsal-most uncini are longer than the ventral uncini; 6th more ventral uncinus measures 21 µm, F—Spec. 1569, thoracic chaetae limbate (bordered) capillary chaetae only, Apomatus chaetae not observed, G–J—Abdominal chaetae from different specimens belonging to the same sample: G—Rather sickle-shaped with a somewhat prominent “heel” (spec. 4429), H— Somewhat concave proximally, less sickle-shaped than G (spec. 1569), I—Somewhat geniculate (spec. 4427), J– Both chaetae somewhat geniculate but also somewhat concave (spec. 4427 [1819]), K—Thoracic uncinus of Mediterranean Protula tubularia (Banyuls, France, ZMA.V.Pol. 3816), 1st torus (adapted from ten Hove & Kupriyanova, 2009, fig. 39c); from apex, 16–15 angled double rows of teeth, followed by ca. 3 rows of 3; 1 row of 4, 3 rows of 5, reaching ca. 7– 8 teeth in rows above bilobed peg, length of uncinus ~49.6 µm; arrow demarcates posterior-part of the uncinus from rasp-shaped part with more teeth in row, L—Anterior abdominal uncinus of Protula tubularia from same population as K, as in thoracic uncini the distal part comprises double row, ca 16 angled rows; proximal part, demarcated by arrow, comprises 9 rows with numbers of teeth increasing from 3 to ca. 7, ~27.3 µm (Table 2). For Suez Canal specimen codes, see Protula section, Hebrew University-Smithsonian Expeditions, sample SBE1).	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F6AE026FF50FE8BFC5EFBF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287590/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287590	FIGURE 20. Protula cf. palliata from the Great Bitter Lake, uncini (B&T-C Pol 27-HUJ-Poly-1567). A—Part of torus of thoracic uncini from 7th chaetiger, ca. P+19 teeth in profile view, from apex: 14 teeth in single row, two rows of 3 teeth, 2–?3 rows of 4 teeth (left figure shows method of counting the teeth), B—Abdominal uncinus, profile view, left arrow shows part of uncinus inserted in body wall, right arrow designates section of uncini to the peg corresponding to Fig. D, numbering 23 teeth in profile view, length 46.7 µm, C—Two adjacent abdominal uncini from torus, left uncinus numbering 22 teeth in profile view, length 47.5 µm, D–F—Three views of enlarged peg, D—View taken under oil immersion, showing bilobed tip of peg, 4 teeth in row proximal to the peg; arrow shows part of uncinus corresponding to that designated by right arrow in Figs B, E—SEM micrograph showing frontal view of peg with 4 teeth in the two rows proximal to the peg (4,000 x magnification), peg appears abraded, F—SEM views of abdominal uncini showing markedly bilobed peg; magnification, 6,000 x, G—Part of torus of abdominal uncini from which F was taken, as indicated by arrow; the SEM micrograph of incomplete torus numbered 148 uncini (ends of torus not included on micrograph).	FIGURE 20. Protula cf. palliata from the Great Bitter Lake, uncini (B&T-C Pol 27-HUJ-Poly-1567). A—Part of torus of thoracic uncini from 7th chaetiger, ca. P+19 teeth in profile view, from apex: 14 teeth in single row, two rows of 3 teeth, 2–?3 rows of 4 teeth (left figure shows method of counting the teeth), B—Abdominal uncinus, profile view, left arrow shows part of uncinus inserted in body wall, right arrow designates section of uncini to the peg corresponding to Fig. D, numbering 23 teeth in profile view, length 46.7 µm, C—Two adjacent abdominal uncini from torus, left uncinus numbering 22 teeth in profile view, length 47.5 µm, D–F—Three views of enlarged peg, D—View taken under oil immersion, showing bilobed tip of peg, 4 teeth in row proximal to the peg; arrow shows part of uncinus corresponding to that designated by right arrow in Figs B, E—SEM micrograph showing frontal view of peg with 4 teeth in the two rows proximal to the peg (4,000 x magnification), peg appears abraded, F—SEM views of abdominal uncini showing markedly bilobed peg; magnification, 6,000 x, G—Part of torus of abdominal uncini from which F was taken, as indicated by arrow; the SEM micrograph of incomplete torus numbered 148 uncini (ends of torus not included on micrograph).	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F7BE056FF50FE4EFEDAF873.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287598/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287598	FIGURE 23. Frontal SEM views of the two extreme forms (types) of thoracic uncini in Salmacina spp. A—Paucidentate rasp-shaped uncini (pru-type) of Salmacina dysteri: Uncini from third thoracic torus of specimen from the Isle of Muck, Hebrides, Scotland, 30.VII.1938 (Scottish Museum, Edinburgh); note “above” the fang (the enlarged anterior-most tooth, designated in the figure as F), 7 transverse rows of teeth, with two teeth in the row proximal to the fang (rows in figure numbered and designated by a line); that proximal to fang designated as (F+1); apical (posterior) row, here, the 7th row, designated as (F+7); the detailed dental formula of the left uncinus in A is then (F+1) = 2: (F+2) = 2: (F+3) = 3: (F+4) = 3: (F+5) = 3: (F+6) = 3 and (F+7) = 3, or, briefly, F:2:2:3:3:3:3:3 (as noted above, in the detailed dental formula, the different transverse rows of the uncinus are separated by a colon), B—Multidentate rasp-shaped thoracic uncini (mru-type) present in Salmacina amphidentata not Jones, 1962 sensu Fiege & Sun (1999) from Hainan Island, near China (from Fiege & Sun 1999: 135, fig. 22c), “above” the fang, 9 transverse rows of teeth, with six teeth in the (F+1) row proximal to the fang, and with the number of teeth in the transverse rows increasing to 10–11 towards the apex (transverse rows 5– 7); the dental formula of the right uncinus is F:6:7:?9:10:11:11:11:?8:9.	FIGURE 23. Frontal SEM views of the two extreme forms (types) of thoracic uncini in Salmacina spp. A—Paucidentate rasp-shaped uncini (pru-type) of Salmacina dysteri: Uncini from third thoracic torus of specimen from the Isle of Muck, Hebrides, Scotland, 30.VII.1938 (Scottish Museum, Edinburgh); note “above” the fang (the enlarged anterior-most tooth, designated in the figure as F), 7 transverse rows of teeth, with two teeth in the row proximal to the fang (rows in figure numbered and designated by a line); that proximal to fang designated as (F+1); apical (posterior) row, here, the 7th row, designated as (F+7); the detailed dental formula of the left uncinus in A is then (F+1) = 2: (F+2) = 2: (F+3) = 3: (F+4) = 3: (F+5) = 3: (F+6) = 3 and (F+7) = 3, or, briefly, F:2:2:3:3:3:3:3 (as noted above, in the detailed dental formula, the different transverse rows of the uncinus are separated by a colon), B—Multidentate rasp-shaped thoracic uncini (mru-type) present in Salmacina amphidentata not Jones, 1962 sensu Fiege & Sun (1999) from Hainan Island, near China (from Fiege & Sun 1999: 135, fig. 22c), “above” the fang, 9 transverse rows of teeth, with six teeth in the (F+1) row proximal to the fang, and with the number of teeth in the transverse rows increasing to 10–11 towards the apex (transverse rows 5– 7); the dental formula of the right uncinus is F:6:7:?9:10:11:11:11:?8:9.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F7BE056FF50FE4EFEDAF873.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287610/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287610	FIGURE 27. Comparison of Salmacina spp. from the Suez Canal, Gulf of Suez, and Gulf of Aqaba. A—Salmacina incrustans from Great Bitter Lake, spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini both (F+1) = 3, left uncinus detailed F:3:3:3:3:4:4 (compare Fig. 23), B—Salmacina not dysteri (Huxley) from Gulf of Suez (32°44’–32°47’ E., 28°49’–28°54 N., 25–30 m, legit R. Ph. Dollfus, Stn 11, 8.XII.1928, coralligenous sand, det. P. Fauvel (1933a: 80, 1933b: 143), generalised herein to Salmacina sp.; thoracic uncini from second torus of single (minute) specimen, apical part of uncini covered by a flap; F:4:5:5:? (left uncinus) and F:4:6:6:6:? (right uncinus), C—Collar chaeta fin, blade broken off, D—Intertwining, netlike tube aggregation from which minute specimen was removed, E—Thoracic mru-type uncini of Salmacina specimen from Gulf of Aqaba (from Elat). Magnifications: A—12,000 x, B, C—10,000 x, E—8,000 x.	FIGURE 27. Comparison of Salmacina spp. from the Suez Canal, Gulf of Suez, and Gulf of Aqaba. A—Salmacina incrustans from Great Bitter Lake, spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini both (F+1) = 3, left uncinus detailed F:3:3:3:3:4:4 (compare Fig. 23), B—Salmacina not dysteri (Huxley) from Gulf of Suez (32°44’–32°47’ E., 28°49’–28°54 N., 25–30 m, legit R. Ph. Dollfus, Stn 11, 8.XII.1928, coralligenous sand, det. P. Fauvel (1933a: 80, 1933b: 143), generalised herein to Salmacina sp.; thoracic uncini from second torus of single (minute) specimen, apical part of uncini covered by a flap; F:4:5:5:? (left uncinus) and F:4:6:6:6:? (right uncinus), C—Collar chaeta fin, blade broken off, D—Intertwining, netlike tube aggregation from which minute specimen was removed, E—Thoracic mru-type uncini of Salmacina specimen from Gulf of Aqaba (from Elat). Magnifications: A—12,000 x, B, C—10,000 x, E—8,000 x.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F7BE056FF50FE4EFEDAF873.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287606/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287606	FIGURE 26. Salmacina incrustans: Chaetae (other than collar chaetae) and uncini of specimens shown in Figs 25. A, B—Thoracic and abdominal uncini of spec. 13-3: A: Thoracic uncini (numbers refer to marked uncini in the figures): (1) F:3:4:4:5:6:6:3 = F+7 rows. (2) F:2:3:3:4:5:4 = F+6 rows, B—Abdominal uncini: (3) F:5:7:7:7:8:8:7:6:4 = F+9 rows; (4) F:5:5:6:6:3:5:6:5:5:5 = F+10 rows, C—Thoracic uncini of spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini teeth count: (5) F:3:4:4:4:4:4 = F+6 rows. (6) F:3:4:3:4:5:5:3 = F+7 rows, D—Apomatus chaeta and limbate chaetae (specimen 10-2), E—Abdominal uncini of spec. 13-2, (7) F:4:5:6:7:6:7:7:5:5 = F+9; (8) F:5:5:6:8:7:7:6:7:4 = F+9, F, G—Abdominal chaetae of two specs (15-1 and 8-1. Magnifications: A—13,000 x, B—16,000 x, C—12,000x, D—6,000 x, E—10,000 x, F—12,000 x, G— 16,000 x.	FIGURE 26. Salmacina incrustans: Chaetae (other than collar chaetae) and uncini of specimens shown in Figs 25. A, B—Thoracic and abdominal uncini of spec. 13-3: A: Thoracic uncini (numbers refer to marked uncini in the figures): (1) F:3:4:4:5:6:6:3 = F+7 rows. (2) F:2:3:3:4:5:4 = F+6 rows, B—Abdominal uncini: (3) F:5:7:7:7:8:8:7:6:4 = F+9 rows; (4) F:5:5:6:6:3:5:6:5:5:5 = F+10 rows, C—Thoracic uncini of spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini teeth count: (5) F:3:4:4:4:4:4 = F+6 rows. (6) F:3:4:3:4:5:5:3 = F+7 rows, D—Apomatus chaeta and limbate chaetae (specimen 10-2), E—Abdominal uncini of spec. 13-2, (7) F:4:5:6:7:6:7:7:5:5 = F+9; (8) F:5:5:6:8:7:7:6:7:4 = F+9, F, G—Abdominal chaetae of two specs (15-1 and 8-1. Magnifications: A—13,000 x, B—16,000 x, C—12,000x, D—6,000 x, E—10,000 x, F—12,000 x, G— 16,000 x.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F07E050FF50FF1BFD7EF849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287540/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287540	FIGURE 3. Serpulid tubeworms encrusted on bivalve molluscs from the biofouling aggregation on the “Yellow Fleet” ships trapped in the Great Bitter Lake. The aggregation on the ships was sampled in January 1975 by H. Brattström & J.P. Taasen before the reopening of the Suez Canal to traffic. A—Spirobranchus tetraceros and spirorbids on Brachidontes pharaonis; note Spirobranchus operculum projecting from upper left tube (see Fig. 33 of S. tetraceros), B—Aggregate of Salmacina incrustans and barnacle, Balanus amphitrite, on Brachidontes pharaonis, C—Minute Josephella marenzelleri tubes at base of spines of Spondylus spinosus shell (from subsample Biv 11 [see App. Table 2D]). Scales: 1 cm.	FIGURE 3. Serpulid tubeworms encrusted on bivalve molluscs from the biofouling aggregation on the “Yellow Fleet” ships trapped in the Great Bitter Lake. The aggregation on the ships was sampled in January 1975 by H. Brattström & J.P. Taasen before the reopening of the Suez Canal to traffic. A—Spirobranchus tetraceros and spirorbids on Brachidontes pharaonis; note Spirobranchus operculum projecting from upper left tube (see Fig. 33 of S. tetraceros), B—Aggregate of Salmacina incrustans and barnacle, Balanus amphitrite, on Brachidontes pharaonis, C—Minute Josephella marenzelleri tubes at base of spines of Spondylus spinosus shell (from subsample Biv 11 [see App. Table 2D]). Scales: 1 cm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F07E050FF50FF1BFD7EF849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287600/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287600	FIGURE 24. Salmacina incrustans encrusted on a Brachidontes pharaonis bivalve from the “Yellow Fleet”, Great Bitter Lake. A, B—Encrusting aggregation, outside and inside of a Brachidontes valve, respectively, C—Three-quarters view of worm (subsample Biv11). Scales: A, B–5 mm, C–1 mm.	FIGURE 24. Salmacina incrustans encrusted on a Brachidontes pharaonis bivalve from the “Yellow Fleet”, Great Bitter Lake. A, B—Encrusting aggregation, outside and inside of a Brachidontes valve, respectively, C—Three-quarters view of worm (subsample Biv11). Scales: A, B–5 mm, C–1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F07E050FF50FF1BFD7EF849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287604/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287604	FIGURE 25. Variability in fin and blade collar chaetae of Salmacina incrustans from the Great Bitter Lake sampled by H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen in January 1975. Note morphological variability of the fin structure in chaetae from the same individual. A1–3—Three collar chaetae (spec. no. 15), A1—Profile view, slightly darkened, A2—¾ view, A3—Frontal view of fin, B—Profile view of collar chaeta (spec. no. 8), C1–2—Frontal view of fin (spec. no. 14) with tips of blades of two chaetae to the left, D1–3—Three chaetae of spec. no. 10: D1—Frontal view of most distal fin, D2—Frontal view of fin positioned between the most distal and most proximal chaetae—the blade of these chaetae are below the focus level of the SEM and thus not visible in the micrograph; D3—¾ view of fin of most proximal chaeta, E—Frontal view of fin (specimen no. 16), F—Frontal view of fins (spec. no. 13; note the free (non-denticulate) space between the fin and the blades; the denticulate structure of the blades, G. G1—Frontal view of fin, G2—Lateral, almost profile view of fin & blade chaeta (specimen no. 11, 10,000 x). Magnifications: A1, A2—7,000 x, A3, E–G—10,000 x, B—6,000 x, C—16,000 x; D1—15,000 x; D2, D3—12,000 x.	FIGURE 25. Variability in fin and blade collar chaetae of Salmacina incrustans from the Great Bitter Lake sampled by H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen in January 1975. Note morphological variability of the fin structure in chaetae from the same individual. A1–3—Three collar chaetae (spec. no. 15), A1—Profile view, slightly darkened, A2—¾ view, A3—Frontal view of fin, B—Profile view of collar chaeta (spec. no. 8), C1–2—Frontal view of fin (spec. no. 14) with tips of blades of two chaetae to the left, D1–3—Three chaetae of spec. no. 10: D1—Frontal view of most distal fin, D2—Frontal view of fin positioned between the most distal and most proximal chaetae—the blade of these chaetae are below the focus level of the SEM and thus not visible in the micrograph; D3—¾ view of fin of most proximal chaeta, E—Frontal view of fin (specimen no. 16), F—Frontal view of fins (spec. no. 13; note the free (non-denticulate) space between the fin and the blades; the denticulate structure of the blades, G. G1—Frontal view of fin, G2—Lateral, almost profile view of fin & blade chaeta (specimen no. 11, 10,000 x). Magnifications: A1, A2—7,000 x, A3, E–G—10,000 x, B—6,000 x, C—16,000 x; D1—15,000 x; D2, D3—12,000 x.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F07E050FF50FF1BFD7EF849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287606/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287606	FIGURE 26. Salmacina incrustans: Chaetae (other than collar chaetae) and uncini of specimens shown in Figs 25. A, B—Thoracic and abdominal uncini of spec. 13-3: A: Thoracic uncini (numbers refer to marked uncini in the figures): (1) F:3:4:4:5:6:6:3 = F+7 rows. (2) F:2:3:3:4:5:4 = F+6 rows, B—Abdominal uncini: (3) F:5:7:7:7:8:8:7:6:4 = F+9 rows; (4) F:5:5:6:6:3:5:6:5:5:5 = F+10 rows, C—Thoracic uncini of spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini teeth count: (5) F:3:4:4:4:4:4 = F+6 rows. (6) F:3:4:3:4:5:5:3 = F+7 rows, D—Apomatus chaeta and limbate chaetae (specimen 10-2), E—Abdominal uncini of spec. 13-2, (7) F:4:5:6:7:6:7:7:5:5 = F+9; (8) F:5:5:6:8:7:7:6:7:4 = F+9, F, G—Abdominal chaetae of two specs (15-1 and 8-1. Magnifications: A—13,000 x, B—16,000 x, C—12,000x, D—6,000 x, E—10,000 x, F—12,000 x, G— 16,000 x.	FIGURE 26. Salmacina incrustans: Chaetae (other than collar chaetae) and uncini of specimens shown in Figs 25. A, B—Thoracic and abdominal uncini of spec. 13-3: A: Thoracic uncini (numbers refer to marked uncini in the figures): (1) F:3:4:4:5:6:6:3 = F+7 rows. (2) F:2:3:3:4:5:4 = F+6 rows, B—Abdominal uncini: (3) F:5:7:7:7:8:8:7:6:4 = F+9 rows; (4) F:5:5:6:6:3:5:6:5:5:5 = F+10 rows, C—Thoracic uncini of spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini teeth count: (5) F:3:4:4:4:4:4 = F+6 rows. (6) F:3:4:3:4:5:5:3 = F+7 rows, D—Apomatus chaeta and limbate chaetae (specimen 10-2), E—Abdominal uncini of spec. 13-2, (7) F:4:5:6:7:6:7:7:5:5 = F+9; (8) F:5:5:6:8:7:7:6:7:4 = F+9, F, G—Abdominal chaetae of two specs (15-1 and 8-1. Magnifications: A—13,000 x, B—16,000 x, C—12,000x, D—6,000 x, E—10,000 x, F—12,000 x, G— 16,000 x.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F07E050FF50FF1BFD7EF849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287610/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287610	FIGURE 27. Comparison of Salmacina spp. from the Suez Canal, Gulf of Suez, and Gulf of Aqaba. A—Salmacina incrustans from Great Bitter Lake, spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini both (F+1) = 3, left uncinus detailed F:3:3:3:3:4:4 (compare Fig. 23), B—Salmacina not dysteri (Huxley) from Gulf of Suez (32°44’–32°47’ E., 28°49’–28°54 N., 25–30 m, legit R. Ph. Dollfus, Stn 11, 8.XII.1928, coralligenous sand, det. P. Fauvel (1933a: 80, 1933b: 143), generalised herein to Salmacina sp.; thoracic uncini from second torus of single (minute) specimen, apical part of uncini covered by a flap; F:4:5:5:? (left uncinus) and F:4:6:6:6:? (right uncinus), C—Collar chaeta fin, blade broken off, D—Intertwining, netlike tube aggregation from which minute specimen was removed, E—Thoracic mru-type uncini of Salmacina specimen from Gulf of Aqaba (from Elat). Magnifications: A—12,000 x, B, C—10,000 x, E—8,000 x.	FIGURE 27. Comparison of Salmacina spp. from the Suez Canal, Gulf of Suez, and Gulf of Aqaba. A—Salmacina incrustans from Great Bitter Lake, spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini both (F+1) = 3, left uncinus detailed F:3:3:3:3:4:4 (compare Fig. 23), B—Salmacina not dysteri (Huxley) from Gulf of Suez (32°44’–32°47’ E., 28°49’–28°54 N., 25–30 m, legit R. Ph. Dollfus, Stn 11, 8.XII.1928, coralligenous sand, det. P. Fauvel (1933a: 80, 1933b: 143), generalised herein to Salmacina sp.; thoracic uncini from second torus of single (minute) specimen, apical part of uncini covered by a flap; F:4:5:5:? (left uncinus) and F:4:6:6:6:? (right uncinus), C—Collar chaeta fin, blade broken off, D—Intertwining, netlike tube aggregation from which minute specimen was removed, E—Thoracic mru-type uncini of Salmacina specimen from Gulf of Aqaba (from Elat). Magnifications: A—12,000 x, B, C—10,000 x, E—8,000 x.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F07E050FF50FF1BFD7EF849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287536/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287536	FIGURE 1. Map of Suez Canal showing salinity and temperature relations in the areas joined by the canal compiled from various sources. 1—Ben-Eliahu 1977: 70, Table 21, salinity ‰—seasonality, the extreme range of monthly means of sea surface salinity based on daily 00:08 recordings taken by the Nahariyya hydrographic station, northern Israel, 1968–1972 and the Elat hydrographic station, northern Gulf of Aqaba, 1962–1973, 2—Ben-Eliahu et al. 1988: 263, seasonality of sea surface temperature, Mediterranean coast of Israel and Elat, Gulf of Aqaba in °C (data from hydrographic stations listed above), 3—Por 1978: 118–119, fig. 32, southern Cyprus, summer surface isotherm 25°C; summer upwelling; 22°C, 4—Por 1978: 61, depressed salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, 23.1‰ in autumn, 1872, 5—Ben-Tuvia 1970: 183, depressed surface salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, autumn peak, IX & X.1960, 6—Thorson 1971: 842– 843, initial salinity at Great Bitter Lake, bottom, 8 m: 68–80‰; surface: 50–52‰, 7—Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981a: 169, 171, seasonality of Lake Timsah salinity and temperature between II.1977–I.1979; Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981b: 180, southern canal, seasonality of salinity and temperature at the Little Bitter Lake (Kabrit) and Suez between II.1977– I.1979, 8—Por 1972: 113–114. Gulf of Suez coast of Sinai, Ras el Missala and Ras es Sudr, 15 and 50 kms south of Suez, respectively, X.1970, Ras el Missalla along the shore, 44.25‰ and 25 m offshore 43.93‰; Ras es Sudr high VIII.1970, 44.25‰; X.1970, 41.69‰ and I.1971, 42‰, 9—Oren 1970: 226 reported 18°C temperature for the Gulf of Suez; however, Por 1972: 114, 1978: 83 noted even lower winter temperatures, particularly inshore, and found that the temperature decrease from south to north of Gulf of Suez corresponds with the depletion of the tropical fauna (i.e., of corals and associated taxa), from the south to the north of the Gulf, 10—Ben-Tuvia 1966: 255, mean monthly sea surface temperatures at Massawa, Eritrea, 11—Oren 1964: 12, table 3, III.1962, profile of Stn 7, surface to 110 m (low to high value, respectively) taken in the south Red Sea off Eritrea, off Entedebir and Dahlak Kebir Islands, 12—Brit 2000 (E. Spanier, pers. comm.): High peak temperature (9 m) prevailing off Haifa, northern Israel during August, 2000.	FIGURE 1. Map of Suez Canal showing salinity and temperature relations in the areas joined by the canal compiled from various sources. 1—Ben-Eliahu 1977: 70, Table 21, salinity ‰—seasonality, the extreme range of monthly means of sea surface salinity based on daily 00:08 recordings taken by the Nahariyya hydrographic station, northern Israel, 1968–1972 and the Elat hydrographic station, northern Gulf of Aqaba, 1962–1973, 2—Ben-Eliahu et al. 1988: 263, seasonality of sea surface temperature, Mediterranean coast of Israel and Elat, Gulf of Aqaba in °C (data from hydrographic stations listed above), 3—Por 1978: 118–119, fig. 32, southern Cyprus, summer surface isotherm 25°C; summer upwelling; 22°C, 4—Por 1978: 61, depressed salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, 23.1‰ in autumn, 1872, 5—Ben-Tuvia 1970: 183, depressed surface salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, autumn peak, IX & X.1960, 6—Thorson 1971: 842– 843, initial salinity at Great Bitter Lake, bottom, 8 m: 68–80‰; surface: 50–52‰, 7—Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981a: 169, 171, seasonality of Lake Timsah salinity and temperature between II.1977–I.1979; Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981b: 180, southern canal, seasonality of salinity and temperature at the Little Bitter Lake (Kabrit) and Suez between II.1977– I.1979, 8—Por 1972: 113–114. Gulf of Suez coast of Sinai, Ras el Missala and Ras es Sudr, 15 and 50 kms south of Suez, respectively, X.1970, Ras el Missalla along the shore, 44.25‰ and 25 m offshore 43.93‰; Ras es Sudr high VIII.1970, 44.25‰; X.1970, 41.69‰ and I.1971, 42‰, 9—Oren 1970: 226 reported 18°C temperature for the Gulf of Suez; however, Por 1972: 114, 1978: 83 noted even lower winter temperatures, particularly inshore, and found that the temperature decrease from south to north of Gulf of Suez corresponds with the depletion of the tropical fauna (i.e., of corals and associated taxa), from the south to the north of the Gulf, 10—Ben-Tuvia 1966: 255, mean monthly sea surface temperatures at Massawa, Eritrea, 11—Oren 1964: 12, table 3, III.1962, profile of Stn 7, surface to 110 m (low to high value, respectively) taken in the south Red Sea off Eritrea, off Entedebir and Dahlak Kebir Islands, 12—Brit 2000 (E. Spanier, pers. comm.): High peak temperature (9 m) prevailing off Haifa, northern Israel during August, 2000.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F07E050FF50FF1BFD7EF849.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287538/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287538	FIGURE 2. Biofouling on a ship that was trapped in the Suez Canal for 8 years when the canal was shut down due to the June 1967 war (adapted from Barracca & Thomas 1975). Scale: 1 m.	FIGURE 2. Biofouling on a ship that was trapped in the Suez Canal for 8 years when the canal was shut down due to the June 1967 war (adapted from Barracca & Thomas 1975). Scale: 1 m.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287612/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287612	FIGURE 28. Serpula hartmanae paratype from the Marshall Islands (U.S. National Museum of Natural History specimen no. USNM 38401). A—Operculum, apical view, 18 blunt radii (slightly damaged), B—Same, lateral view; note constriction with asymmetric boss, C—Tube, showing cross-section; note granular overlay, D—Tube from above, laterally rugose; note three longitudinal ridges, median ridge lower; upper surface rather flat, E1—Collar chaetae, frontal view, appearing somewhat abraded, E2—Collar chaeta, lateral view, F—Abdominal chaetae, G—Abdominal uncinus, F+4. Scales: B–C—1 mm.	FIGURE 28. Serpula hartmanae paratype from the Marshall Islands (U.S. National Museum of Natural History specimen no. USNM 38401). A—Operculum, apical view, 18 blunt radii (slightly damaged), B—Same, lateral view; note constriction with asymmetric boss, C—Tube, showing cross-section; note granular overlay, D—Tube from above, laterally rugose; note three longitudinal ridges, median ridge lower; upper surface rather flat, E1—Collar chaetae, frontal view, appearing somewhat abraded, E2—Collar chaeta, lateral view, F—Abdominal chaetae, G—Abdominal uncinus, F+4. Scales: B–C—1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5296374/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5296374	FIGURE 29. Serpula hartmanae from Red Sea, Gulf of Aqaba. Specimen det. as S. concharum in Amoureux et al., 1978: 143, Fig. 11, marked S.c. [TAU-NS-6188], redet. 1990, H.A. ten Hove. A—Cross-section of tube, B—Part of tube, flat surface up, shows 3 longitudinal ridges, middle ridge lower than laterals, C—Part of tube, flat upper part to the right, D—Operculum, apical view, 12 radii, E—Operculum (lateral view) and opercular lobe; arrow designates the peduncular boss proximal to the constriction (also in Fig. 28B), F—View of constriction of opercular peduncle showing characteristic asymmetric proximal boss (enhanced in glycerine mount), G—Branchial lobe, showing pseudoperculum, ca.13 radioles, H—Fascicle of thoracic chaetae (most broken), I, J—Collar chaeta (single unbroken chaeta dissected out from base of fascicle), I—Frontal view, small median tooth between large conical teeth and blade clearly seen, J—Lateral view, K—Abdominal chaetae, L—Posterior? middle abdominal uncinus frontal view (composite picture enables showing rows in focus), detailed dentition, F:1:1:1:1:2:3:3 = F+7/3 rows with maximum number of 3 teeth in the posterior rows, M— Thoracic uncinus, lateral view F+5. Scales: A–E—1 mm, K—10 µm, L, M—50 µm.	FIGURE 29. Serpula hartmanae from Red Sea, Gulf of Aqaba. Specimen det. as S. concharum in Amoureux et al., 1978: 143, Fig. 11, marked S.c. [TAU-NS-6188], redet. 1990, H.A. ten Hove. A—Cross-section of tube, B—Part of tube, flat surface up, shows 3 longitudinal ridges, middle ridge lower than laterals, C—Part of tube, flat upper part to the right, D—Operculum, apical view, 12 radii, E—Operculum (lateral view) and opercular lobe; arrow designates the peduncular boss proximal to the constriction (also in Fig. 28B), F—View of constriction of opercular peduncle showing characteristic asymmetric proximal boss (enhanced in glycerine mount), G—Branchial lobe, showing pseudoperculum, ca.13 radioles, H—Fascicle of thoracic chaetae (most broken), I, J—Collar chaeta (single unbroken chaeta dissected out from base of fascicle), I—Frontal view, small median tooth between large conical teeth and blade clearly seen, J—Lateral view, K—Abdominal chaetae, L—Posterior? middle abdominal uncinus frontal view (composite picture enables showing rows in focus), detailed dentition, F:1:1:1:1:2:3:3 = F+7/3 rows with maximum number of 3 teeth in the posterior rows, M— Thoracic uncinus, lateral view F+5. Scales: A–E—1 mm, K—10 µm, L, M—50 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287618/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287618	FIGURE 30. Serpula hartmanae from the Suez Canal, Great Bitter Lake (Brattström & J.P. Taasen specimen no. 2). A— Tube, showing cross-section; note 3 dorsal longitudinal ridges, tube rather rounded, B—Tube, dorsal aspect, laterally rugose, C—Operculum, apical view, 15 blunt radii, D—Same, lateral view; note constriction with asymmetric boss, E— Whole worm, removed from tube, F—Microscope view of base of operculum with constriction and proximal asymmetric boss (methylene-blue glycerine mount medium), G—Opercular lobe, 11 radioles (in methylene-blue glycerine mount). Scales: A, D—1 mm, E—5mm.	FIGURE 30. Serpula hartmanae from the Suez Canal, Great Bitter Lake (Brattström & J.P. Taasen specimen no. 2). A— Tube, showing cross-section; note 3 dorsal longitudinal ridges, tube rather rounded, B—Tube, dorsal aspect, laterally rugose, C—Operculum, apical view, 15 blunt radii, D—Same, lateral view; note constriction with asymmetric boss, E— Whole worm, removed from tube, F—Microscope view of base of operculum with constriction and proximal asymmetric boss (methylene-blue glycerine mount medium), G—Opercular lobe, 11 radioles (in methylene-blue glycerine mount). Scales: A, D—1 mm, E—5mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287620/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287620	FIGURE 31. Serpula hartmanae from the Suez Canal, Brattström & J.P. Taasen specimen no. 2. A—Collar chaetae, note that two left chaetae have a small accessory tooth between the two large conical teeth and the blade (see also Fig. 32F), B—Thoracic chaetae, C—Abdominal chaetae, D—Thoracic uncini, F+5, E—Abdominal uncini, F+4, F—Radioles with hyaline bodies, G—Enlargement of same. Scales: A, C, G—100 µm, B—1 mm, D, E—10 µm, F—1 mm (estimated from G).	FIGURE 31. Serpula hartmanae from the Suez Canal, Brattström & J.P. Taasen specimen no. 2. A—Collar chaetae, note that two left chaetae have a small accessory tooth between the two large conical teeth and the blade (see also Fig. 32F), B—Thoracic chaetae, C—Abdominal chaetae, D—Thoracic uncini, F+5, E—Abdominal uncini, F+4, F—Radioles with hyaline bodies, G—Enlargement of same. Scales: A, C, G—100 µm, B—1 mm, D, E—10 µm, F—1 mm (estimated from G).	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287624/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287624	FIGURE 32. Serpula hartmanae from the Suez Canal, Brattström & J.P. Taasen specimen no. 1. A—Tube anterior, B— Tube, 3/4 side-top view, C—Operculum, apical view, 12 radii, D—Operculum, lateral view, E—Branchial radiole showing hyaline bodies, F—Collar chaetae, with 2 conical teeth, with small median tooth visible behind large conical teeth, G—?Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, H—?Abdominal uncinus, ¾ frontal view, I—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B— 1 mm, C, D—0.5 mm, E, G, H—100 µm, F, I—10 µm.	FIGURE 32. Serpula hartmanae from the Suez Canal, Brattström & J.P. Taasen specimen no. 1. A—Tube anterior, B— Tube, 3/4 side-top view, C—Operculum, apical view, 12 radii, D—Operculum, lateral view, E—Branchial radiole showing hyaline bodies, F—Collar chaetae, with 2 conical teeth, with small median tooth visible behind large conical teeth, G—?Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, H—?Abdominal uncinus, ¾ frontal view, I—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B— 1 mm, C, D—0.5 mm, E, G, H—100 µm, F, I—10 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287536/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287536	FIGURE 1. Map of Suez Canal showing salinity and temperature relations in the areas joined by the canal compiled from various sources. 1—Ben-Eliahu 1977: 70, Table 21, salinity ‰—seasonality, the extreme range of monthly means of sea surface salinity based on daily 00:08 recordings taken by the Nahariyya hydrographic station, northern Israel, 1968–1972 and the Elat hydrographic station, northern Gulf of Aqaba, 1962–1973, 2—Ben-Eliahu et al. 1988: 263, seasonality of sea surface temperature, Mediterranean coast of Israel and Elat, Gulf of Aqaba in °C (data from hydrographic stations listed above), 3—Por 1978: 118–119, fig. 32, southern Cyprus, summer surface isotherm 25°C; summer upwelling; 22°C, 4—Por 1978: 61, depressed salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, 23.1‰ in autumn, 1872, 5—Ben-Tuvia 1970: 183, depressed surface salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, autumn peak, IX & X.1960, 6—Thorson 1971: 842– 843, initial salinity at Great Bitter Lake, bottom, 8 m: 68–80‰; surface: 50–52‰, 7—Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981a: 169, 171, seasonality of Lake Timsah salinity and temperature between II.1977–I.1979; Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981b: 180, southern canal, seasonality of salinity and temperature at the Little Bitter Lake (Kabrit) and Suez between II.1977– I.1979, 8—Por 1972: 113–114. Gulf of Suez coast of Sinai, Ras el Missala and Ras es Sudr, 15 and 50 kms south of Suez, respectively, X.1970, Ras el Missalla along the shore, 44.25‰ and 25 m offshore 43.93‰; Ras es Sudr high VIII.1970, 44.25‰; X.1970, 41.69‰ and I.1971, 42‰, 9—Oren 1970: 226 reported 18°C temperature for the Gulf of Suez; however, Por 1972: 114, 1978: 83 noted even lower winter temperatures, particularly inshore, and found that the temperature decrease from south to north of Gulf of Suez corresponds with the depletion of the tropical fauna (i.e., of corals and associated taxa), from the south to the north of the Gulf, 10—Ben-Tuvia 1966: 255, mean monthly sea surface temperatures at Massawa, Eritrea, 11—Oren 1964: 12, table 3, III.1962, profile of Stn 7, surface to 110 m (low to high value, respectively) taken in the south Red Sea off Eritrea, off Entedebir and Dahlak Kebir Islands, 12—Brit 2000 (E. Spanier, pers. comm.): High peak temperature (9 m) prevailing off Haifa, northern Israel during August, 2000.	FIGURE 1. Map of Suez Canal showing salinity and temperature relations in the areas joined by the canal compiled from various sources. 1—Ben-Eliahu 1977: 70, Table 21, salinity ‰—seasonality, the extreme range of monthly means of sea surface salinity based on daily 00:08 recordings taken by the Nahariyya hydrographic station, northern Israel, 1968–1972 and the Elat hydrographic station, northern Gulf of Aqaba, 1962–1973, 2—Ben-Eliahu et al. 1988: 263, seasonality of sea surface temperature, Mediterranean coast of Israel and Elat, Gulf of Aqaba in °C (data from hydrographic stations listed above), 3—Por 1978: 118–119, fig. 32, southern Cyprus, summer surface isotherm 25°C; summer upwelling; 22°C, 4—Por 1978: 61, depressed salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, 23.1‰ in autumn, 1872, 5—Ben-Tuvia 1970: 183, depressed surface salinity in Port Said due to Nile flood, autumn peak, IX & X.1960, 6—Thorson 1971: 842– 843, initial salinity at Great Bitter Lake, bottom, 8 m: 68–80‰; surface: 50–52‰, 7—Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981a: 169, 171, seasonality of Lake Timsah salinity and temperature between II.1977–I.1979; Ghobashy & el-Komi 1981b: 180, southern canal, seasonality of salinity and temperature at the Little Bitter Lake (Kabrit) and Suez between II.1977– I.1979, 8—Por 1972: 113–114. Gulf of Suez coast of Sinai, Ras el Missala and Ras es Sudr, 15 and 50 kms south of Suez, respectively, X.1970, Ras el Missalla along the shore, 44.25‰ and 25 m offshore 43.93‰; Ras es Sudr high VIII.1970, 44.25‰; X.1970, 41.69‰ and I.1971, 42‰, 9—Oren 1970: 226 reported 18°C temperature for the Gulf of Suez; however, Por 1972: 114, 1978: 83 noted even lower winter temperatures, particularly inshore, and found that the temperature decrease from south to north of Gulf of Suez corresponds with the depletion of the tropical fauna (i.e., of corals and associated taxa), from the south to the north of the Gulf, 10—Ben-Tuvia 1966: 255, mean monthly sea surface temperatures at Massawa, Eritrea, 11—Oren 1964: 12, table 3, III.1962, profile of Stn 7, surface to 110 m (low to high value, respectively) taken in the south Red Sea off Eritrea, off Entedebir and Dahlak Kebir Islands, 12—Brit 2000 (E. Spanier, pers. comm.): High peak temperature (9 m) prevailing off Haifa, northern Israel during August, 2000.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287554/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287554	FIGURE 8. Hydroides heterocerus. Variability in forms of opercula from different regions: A–D. Operculum of specimen from the Great Bitter Lake aggregate removed by J.P. Taasen from the M/S “Münsterland” after its journey to the Hapag-Lloyd dry dock in Bremerhaven (18.VI.1975, 7 m). A—Lateral view, B–D—Apical views, B—Focus on tips of verticil spines, C—Focus on basal spinules of verticil, D—Enlargement of marginal teeth of funnel; the expansion of the tips of the marginal teeth in “D” is intermediate between “E” and “F,” E—“Bowling-pin-shaped” radii with blunt or even stubby tips, specimen from Little Bitter Lake opposite Kabrit (sample SLC 123), F—More expanded, “T”-shaped tips found in specimen from the Sudanese Red Sea (BM(NH) 1972.23, legit C. Crossland, 1904–1905). Lessepsian migrants with marginal radii like “D” or like “E”. Scale: 1 mm.	FIGURE 8. Hydroides heterocerus. Variability in forms of opercula from different regions: A–D. Operculum of specimen from the Great Bitter Lake aggregate removed by J.P. Taasen from the M/S “Münsterland” after its journey to the Hapag-Lloyd dry dock in Bremerhaven (18.VI.1975, 7 m). A—Lateral view, B–D—Apical views, B—Focus on tips of verticil spines, C—Focus on basal spinules of verticil, D—Enlargement of marginal teeth of funnel; the expansion of the tips of the marginal teeth in “D” is intermediate between “E” and “F,” E—“Bowling-pin-shaped” radii with blunt or even stubby tips, specimen from Little Bitter Lake opposite Kabrit (sample SLC 123), F—More expanded, “T”-shaped tips found in specimen from the Sudanese Red Sea (BM(NH) 1972.23, legit C. Crossland, 1904–1905). Lessepsian migrants with marginal radii like “D” or like “E”. Scale: 1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287556/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287556	FIGURE 9. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 1 (specimen from Cambridge Expedition mollusc deposited at the Natural History Museum in London, precise location unknown [See App. Table 2A]). A—Apical view, drawing and photograph, respectively, B—Profile view of drawing and photograph, C—Three-quarters view; note sharply pointed marginal teeth of funnel radii (in contrast with those in Fig. 8), D—Collar chaetae (magnification, <10 x). Scales: B—0.5 mm, D—100 µm.	FIGURE 9. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 1 (specimen from Cambridge Expedition mollusc deposited at the Natural History Museum in London, precise location unknown [See App. Table 2A]). A—Apical view, drawing and photograph, respectively, B—Profile view of drawing and photograph, C—Three-quarters view; note sharply pointed marginal teeth of funnel radii (in contrast with those in Fig. 8), D—Collar chaetae (magnification, <10 x). Scales: B—0.5 mm, D—100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287560/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287560	FIGURE 10. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 2 (specimen scraped from mollusc from the Great Bitter Lake [SLC 117, Y. Eytam, St. 4]). A, B—Funnel radii with some typical “anchor-shaped” (T-shaped) tips; some verticil spines approaching typical adult form, other spines deviating from the typical form, e.g., dorsal spine, upper right, bifid, aberrant. Scale: 100 µm.	FIGURE 10. Operculum of Hydroides heterocerus juvenile form no. 2 (specimen scraped from mollusc from the Great Bitter Lake [SLC 117, Y. Eytam, St. 4]). A, B—Funnel radii with some typical “anchor-shaped” (T-shaped) tips; some verticil spines approaching typical adult form, other spines deviating from the typical form, e.g., dorsal spine, upper right, bifid, aberrant. Scale: 100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287564/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287564	FIGURE 11. Large spiralled serpulid tube. The tube was present in the test-tube labelled "Serpula vermicularis" by F.A. Potts but should rather be attributed to Hydroides heterocerus (The nominal "Serpula vermicularis" specimen collected by the Cambridge Expedition in the Gulf of Suez that was described in detail by Potts 1928 was no longer present [CUZM]). The abdominal uncini and chaetae shown below were found on skin still attached to the lumen of the tube. A—Upper view of tube (note spirorbid tubes encrusted on outer surface of the tube), B—Ventral view of tube, C—3/4 frontal view of tube, D—Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, F+5, E—Same, frontal view, left, F+10, F—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B—5 mm, C—1 mm, D, F—10 µm.	FIGURE 11. Large spiralled serpulid tube. The tube was present in the test-tube labelled "Serpula vermicularis" by F.A. Potts but should rather be attributed to Hydroides heterocerus (The nominal "Serpula vermicularis" specimen collected by the Cambridge Expedition in the Gulf of Suez that was described in detail by Potts 1928 was no longer present [CUZM]). The abdominal uncini and chaetae shown below were found on skin still attached to the lumen of the tube. A—Upper view of tube (note spirorbid tubes encrusted on outer surface of the tube), B—Ventral view of tube, C—3/4 frontal view of tube, D—Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, F+5, E—Same, frontal view, left, F+10, F—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B—5 mm, C—1 mm, D, F—10 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287538/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287538	FIGURE 2. Biofouling on a ship that was trapped in the Suez Canal for 8 years when the canal was shut down due to the June 1967 war (adapted from Barracca & Thomas 1975). Scale: 1 m.	FIGURE 2. Biofouling on a ship that was trapped in the Suez Canal for 8 years when the canal was shut down due to the June 1967 war (adapted from Barracca & Thomas 1975). Scale: 1 m.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5296372/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5296372	FIGURE 14. First record of Hydroides steinitzi in the Suez Canal from a taphonomic residue of the operculum. Operculum, collected in 1950, was within tube inside Chama asperella valve (Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m, see App. Table 2B). A— Tube in situ, B—Tube removed from valve; note upper surface somewhat encrusted with granular layer, C—Dried opercular residue (verticil) found within the tube had “lasted” 50 years (compare with those in Fig. 13). Scales: B—1 mm, C—100 µm.	FIGURE 14. First record of Hydroides steinitzi in the Suez Canal from a taphonomic residue of the operculum. Operculum, collected in 1950, was within tube inside Chama asperella valve (Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m, see App. Table 2B). A— Tube in situ, B—Tube removed from valve; note upper surface somewhat encrusted with granular layer, C—Dried opercular residue (verticil) found within the tube had “lasted” 50 years (compare with those in Fig. 13). Scales: B—1 mm, C—100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287582/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287582	FIGURE 16. The Hydroides “priscus” juvenile stage of Hydroides sp. / spp. A—From Lake Timsah, Isma’iliya, on bivalve Malvufundus normalis, Cambridge Expedition, 26.XI.1924, BM(NH) 1928.3.30.179, B—From sample Great Bitter Lake SLC 117 (see App. Table 2A, C, respectively). Scale: 100 µm.	FIGURE 16. The Hydroides “priscus” juvenile stage of Hydroides sp. / spp. A—From Lake Timsah, Isma’iliya, on bivalve Malvufundus normalis, Cambridge Expedition, 26.XI.1924, BM(NH) 1928.3.30.179, B—From sample Great Bitter Lake SLC 117 (see App. Table 2A, C, respectively). Scale: 100 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287594/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287594	FIGURE 21. Protula cf. palliata tubes from the Bitter Lake with distinctive sculpturing—simple growth striations, but with the rim of the striation seemingly eroded with a somewhat scalloped appearance. A–C—Tube fragment of Protula sp. on Chama asperella from Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m (Beets 1953): A—Inner view of Chama valve bearing tube of 3.6 mm diameter, B—Lumen of same tube fragment, diameter ca. 4 mm, C—Enlargement of A, D—Tube fragments of Protula specimen from “Yellow Fleet” encrustation (B&T-C-Pol 27-HUJ-Poly-1567), legit H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen, 1975, diameter 4.8 mm. Scales, 5 mm.	FIGURE 21. Protula cf. palliata tubes from the Bitter Lake with distinctive sculpturing—simple growth striations, but with the rim of the striation seemingly eroded with a somewhat scalloped appearance. A–C—Tube fragment of Protula sp. on Chama asperella from Beets’ Stn 15, 10.4 m (Beets 1953): A—Inner view of Chama valve bearing tube of 3.6 mm diameter, B—Lumen of same tube fragment, diameter ca. 4 mm, C—Enlargement of A, D—Tube fragments of Protula specimen from “Yellow Fleet” encrustation (B&T-C-Pol 27-HUJ-Poly-1567), legit H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen, 1975, diameter 4.8 mm. Scales, 5 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287600/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287600	FIGURE 24. Salmacina incrustans encrusted on a Brachidontes pharaonis bivalve from the “Yellow Fleet”, Great Bitter Lake. A, B—Encrusting aggregation, outside and inside of a Brachidontes valve, respectively, C—Three-quarters view of worm (subsample Biv11). Scales: A, B–5 mm, C–1 mm.	FIGURE 24. Salmacina incrustans encrusted on a Brachidontes pharaonis bivalve from the “Yellow Fleet”, Great Bitter Lake. A, B—Encrusting aggregation, outside and inside of a Brachidontes valve, respectively, C—Three-quarters view of worm (subsample Biv11). Scales: A, B–5 mm, C–1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F01E044FF50FB91FBB2FBCB.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287604/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287604	FIGURE 25. Variability in fin and blade collar chaetae of Salmacina incrustans from the Great Bitter Lake sampled by H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen in January 1975. Note morphological variability of the fin structure in chaetae from the same individual. A1–3—Three collar chaetae (spec. no. 15), A1—Profile view, slightly darkened, A2—¾ view, A3—Frontal view of fin, B—Profile view of collar chaeta (spec. no. 8), C1–2—Frontal view of fin (spec. no. 14) with tips of blades of two chaetae to the left, D1–3—Three chaetae of spec. no. 10: D1—Frontal view of most distal fin, D2—Frontal view of fin positioned between the most distal and most proximal chaetae—the blade of these chaetae are below the focus level of the SEM and thus not visible in the micrograph; D3—¾ view of fin of most proximal chaeta, E—Frontal view of fin (specimen no. 16), F—Frontal view of fins (spec. no. 13; note the free (non-denticulate) space between the fin and the blades; the denticulate structure of the blades, G. G1—Frontal view of fin, G2—Lateral, almost profile view of fin & blade chaeta (specimen no. 11, 10,000 x). Magnifications: A1, A2—7,000 x, A3, E–G—10,000 x, B—6,000 x, C—16,000 x; D1—15,000 x; D2, D3—12,000 x.	FIGURE 25. Variability in fin and blade collar chaetae of Salmacina incrustans from the Great Bitter Lake sampled by H. Brattström and J.P. Taasen in January 1975. Note morphological variability of the fin structure in chaetae from the same individual. A1–3—Three collar chaetae (spec. no. 15), A1—Profile view, slightly darkened, A2—¾ view, A3—Frontal view of fin, B—Profile view of collar chaeta (spec. no. 8), C1–2—Frontal view of fin (spec. no. 14) with tips of blades of two chaetae to the left, D1–3—Three chaetae of spec. no. 10: D1—Frontal view of most distal fin, D2—Frontal view of fin positioned between the most distal and most proximal chaetae—the blade of these chaetae are below the focus level of the SEM and thus not visible in the micrograph; D3—¾ view of fin of most proximal chaeta, E—Frontal view of fin (specimen no. 16), F—Frontal view of fins (spec. no. 13; note the free (non-denticulate) space between the fin and the blades; the denticulate structure of the blades, G. G1—Frontal view of fin, G2—Lateral, almost profile view of fin & blade chaeta (specimen no. 11, 10,000 x). Magnifications: A1, A2—7,000 x, A3, E–G—10,000 x, B—6,000 x, C—16,000 x; D1—15,000 x; D2, D3—12,000 x.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F14E040FF50FB03FB94FAEE.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287564/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287564	FIGURE 11. Large spiralled serpulid tube. The tube was present in the test-tube labelled "Serpula vermicularis" by F.A. Potts but should rather be attributed to Hydroides heterocerus (The nominal "Serpula vermicularis" specimen collected by the Cambridge Expedition in the Gulf of Suez that was described in detail by Potts 1928 was no longer present [CUZM]). The abdominal uncini and chaetae shown below were found on skin still attached to the lumen of the tube. A—Upper view of tube (note spirorbid tubes encrusted on outer surface of the tube), B—Ventral view of tube, C—3/4 frontal view of tube, D—Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, F+5, E—Same, frontal view, left, F+10, F—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B—5 mm, C—1 mm, D, F—10 µm.	FIGURE 11. Large spiralled serpulid tube. The tube was present in the test-tube labelled "Serpula vermicularis" by F.A. Potts but should rather be attributed to Hydroides heterocerus (The nominal "Serpula vermicularis" specimen collected by the Cambridge Expedition in the Gulf of Suez that was described in detail by Potts 1928 was no longer present [CUZM]). The abdominal uncini and chaetae shown below were found on skin still attached to the lumen of the tube. A—Upper view of tube (note spirorbid tubes encrusted on outer surface of the tube), B—Ventral view of tube, C—3/4 frontal view of tube, D—Abdominal uncinus, lateral view, F+5, E—Same, frontal view, left, F+10, F—Abdominal chaetae. Scales: A, B—5 mm, C—1 mm, D, F—10 µm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F11E048FF50FE61FC63FBF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287626/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287626	FIGURE 33. Variability in opercula of Spirobranchus tetraceros specimens from the Great Bitter Lake “Yellow Fleet”. A—Fringed wings of opercular peduncle visible on specimen to the right, B—¾ lateral view of tube with partly emerged operculum, C—Lateral view of conical form of operculum, without antler-like spines (subsample Bry1), D—Lateral view of conical operculum with antler-like spines; fringes (even a double one) seen on wings (D–E, subsample Ships Hulls Poly 24), E—Frontal view of operculum with spines; fringes seen on wings. Scales: 1 mm.	FIGURE 33. Variability in opercula of Spirobranchus tetraceros specimens from the Great Bitter Lake “Yellow Fleet”. A—Fringed wings of opercular peduncle visible on specimen to the right, B—¾ lateral view of tube with partly emerged operculum, C—Lateral view of conical form of operculum, without antler-like spines (subsample Bry1), D—Lateral view of conical operculum with antler-like spines; fringes (even a double one) seen on wings (D–E, subsample Ships Hulls Poly 24), E—Frontal view of operculum with spines; fringes seen on wings. Scales: 1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F11E048FF50FE61FC63FBF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287554/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287554	FIGURE 8. Hydroides heterocerus. Variability in forms of opercula from different regions: A–D. Operculum of specimen from the Great Bitter Lake aggregate removed by J.P. Taasen from the M/S “Münsterland” after its journey to the Hapag-Lloyd dry dock in Bremerhaven (18.VI.1975, 7 m). A—Lateral view, B–D—Apical views, B—Focus on tips of verticil spines, C—Focus on basal spinules of verticil, D—Enlargement of marginal teeth of funnel; the expansion of the tips of the marginal teeth in “D” is intermediate between “E” and “F,” E—“Bowling-pin-shaped” radii with blunt or even stubby tips, specimen from Little Bitter Lake opposite Kabrit (sample SLC 123), F—More expanded, “T”-shaped tips found in specimen from the Sudanese Red Sea (BM(NH) 1972.23, legit C. Crossland, 1904–1905). Lessepsian migrants with marginal radii like “D” or like “E”. Scale: 1 mm.	FIGURE 8. Hydroides heterocerus. Variability in forms of opercula from different regions: A–D. Operculum of specimen from the Great Bitter Lake aggregate removed by J.P. Taasen from the M/S “Münsterland” after its journey to the Hapag-Lloyd dry dock in Bremerhaven (18.VI.1975, 7 m). A—Lateral view, B–D—Apical views, B—Focus on tips of verticil spines, C—Focus on basal spinules of verticil, D—Enlargement of marginal teeth of funnel; the expansion of the tips of the marginal teeth in “D” is intermediate between “E” and “F,” E—“Bowling-pin-shaped” radii with blunt or even stubby tips, specimen from Little Bitter Lake opposite Kabrit (sample SLC 123), F—More expanded, “T”-shaped tips found in specimen from the Sudanese Red Sea (BM(NH) 1972.23, legit C. Crossland, 1904–1905). Lessepsian migrants with marginal radii like “D” or like “E”. Scale: 1 mm.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
396387E75F11E048FF50FE61FC63FBF0.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/StillImage	image/png	https://zenodo.org/record/5287610/files/figure.png	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5287610	FIGURE 27. Comparison of Salmacina spp. from the Suez Canal, Gulf of Suez, and Gulf of Aqaba. A—Salmacina incrustans from Great Bitter Lake, spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini both (F+1) = 3, left uncinus detailed F:3:3:3:3:4:4 (compare Fig. 23), B—Salmacina not dysteri (Huxley) from Gulf of Suez (32°44’–32°47’ E., 28°49’–28°54 N., 25–30 m, legit R. Ph. Dollfus, Stn 11, 8.XII.1928, coralligenous sand, det. P. Fauvel (1933a: 80, 1933b: 143), generalised herein to Salmacina sp.; thoracic uncini from second torus of single (minute) specimen, apical part of uncini covered by a flap; F:4:5:5:? (left uncinus) and F:4:6:6:6:? (right uncinus), C—Collar chaeta fin, blade broken off, D—Intertwining, netlike tube aggregation from which minute specimen was removed, E—Thoracic mru-type uncini of Salmacina specimen from Gulf of Aqaba (from Elat). Magnifications: A—12,000 x, B, C—10,000 x, E—8,000 x.	FIGURE 27. Comparison of Salmacina spp. from the Suez Canal, Gulf of Suez, and Gulf of Aqaba. A—Salmacina incrustans from Great Bitter Lake, spec. 10-3, thoracic uncini both (F+1) = 3, left uncinus detailed F:3:3:3:3:4:4 (compare Fig. 23), B—Salmacina not dysteri (Huxley) from Gulf of Suez (32°44’–32°47’ E., 28°49’–28°54 N., 25–30 m, legit R. Ph. Dollfus, Stn 11, 8.XII.1928, coralligenous sand, det. P. Fauvel (1933a: 80, 1933b: 143), generalised herein to Salmacina sp.; thoracic uncini from second torus of single (minute) specimen, apical part of uncini covered by a flap; F:4:5:5:? (left uncinus) and F:4:6:6:6:? (right uncinus), C—Collar chaeta fin, blade broken off, D—Intertwining, netlike tube aggregation from which minute specimen was removed, E—Thoracic mru-type uncini of Salmacina specimen from Gulf of Aqaba (from Elat). Magnifications: A—12,000 x, B, C—10,000 x, E—8,000 x.	2011-04-29	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.		Zenodo	biologists	Ben-Eliahu, M. Nechama;Ten Hove, Harry A.			
