Colossendeis colossea Wilson, 1881

Colossendeis colossea Wilson, 1881 View in CoL

Colossendeis colossea Wilson, 1881: 244–246 View in CoL , L.1, fig. 1, L. 3. figs. 5–7; Bouvier, 1917: 13–16, L.I, fig. 2, L.II, fig. 1; Bamber, 2010: 48–49, fig. 87; Munilla & Soler-Membrives, 2014: 214–216, fig. 118.

Colossendeis gigas Hoek, 1881: 61–64 View in CoL , L. VIII, figs. 1–2, L.X, figs. 1–5.

Type locality— Blake, Stn. 307, 41º29'45"N 65º47'10"W, 1792.22 m

Material examined. Maroc-0411: MO26, 1♀; MO28, 1♂, 2♀; MO31, 1♂; MO47, 3♂; MO50, 1♂; MO61, 2♂, 1♀; MO68, 5♂; MO82, 3♂; MO83, 2♂, 1♀; MO84, 3♂. Maroc-0511: MO94, 2♂; MO105, 3♂; MO106, 2♂, 1 indet; MO111, 1♂; MO120, 1♂; MO129, 1♂, 1 indet.

Remarks. Our specimens are consistent with descriptions and figures reported by Wilson (1881) ( holotype) and Hoek (1881,as Colossendeis gigas ).

Colossendeis colossea is very similar to Colossendeis tasmanica Staples, 2007 but there are some diagnostic differences in the morphology of ovigers and palps, and in the abdomen/trunk ratio (see Staples, 2007).

In our specimens, the oviger claw is fused with article 10 but not articulated, the oviger article 10 is not uniform but tapering distally, and the palp article 10 is uniformly rounded distally; all three are typical features of C. colossea , differing from the segmented oviger claw, the oviger article 10 of uniform width, and the palp article 10 clearly narrowing towards the tip for C. tasmanica . The length/width ratio of oviger article 10 and palp article 10 are 3.1–5.5 and 6.8–10.9, respectively, falling within the measurements given by Staples (2007) for C. colossea . Staples (2007) indicated that the abdomen/trunk proportions are <20% in C. colossea and>20% in C. tasmanica . For our specimens this ratio ranged between 10.2 and 21.3, but most were <20%, with an average of 17.1%, allowing us to assign them with confidence to C. colossea .

Staples (2007) also highlighted that Nogueira (1967) reported and illustrated a putative juvenile of C. tasmanica collected off the coast of Portugal, identified as C. colossea . This material consists of a single young male specimen collected during the 1895 survey accomplished on the Yacht “Princesse Alice” by Prince Albert I of Monaco (Stn 115, 17/06/1895, 38°21'N, 09°37'45"W, 2028 m depth). This specimen was identified by Topsent [1897 as Colossendeis gigas Hoek, 1881 (= Colossendeis colossea Wilson, 1881 )], and later as C. colossea by Bouvier (1917). None of these studies included a description or figures of the specimen. There are some differences between the geographical coordinates given by Topsent (1897) and Bouvier (1917) for Station 115 ( 38º21'N, 12°02'W vs. 38°21'N, 09°37'45"W, respectively). These differences could be because Topsent (1897) may have used the Paris meridian to express longitude, common among French authors at the time. The difference between the latitude ( 38°12'N) reported by Nogueira (1967) and 38°21'N reported by Topsent (1897) and Bouvier (1917) is likely a misspelling. However, the survey, station, depth, and collection date (for Nogueira 1967, see Nogueira 1957) are the same, which means that all three authors refer to the same specimen.

The conclusions of Staples (2007) may be based on figures of C. colossea published by Nogueira (1967) (see planche 17), especially Figure c clearly showing that the oviger claw is not fused with oviger article 10, but is articulated, a distinctive feature for C. tasmanica . However, there are serious doubts that the figures presented in Nogueira (1967) actually correspond to the specimen collected off the coast of Portugal. In the Preface, Nogueira (1967) points out that all figures are original and were generated from the collections curated at the Bocage Museum using a camera lucida. However, figures of species not represented in the Bocage Museum collections were generated at the Natural History Museum ( UK) using specimens curated there. Taking into account that in the 1960s the only record of C. colossea in Portugal is based on the specimen collected during the 1895 Princesse Alice survey and that the material from the Prince Albert I surveys is curated in the collections of the Oceanographic Museum of Monaco, it seems clear that the author did not have access to this specimen, and that their figures are based on material from the Natural History Museum ( UK) from an unknown locality. Therefore, in our opinion, there are no objective reasons to assume that C. tasmanica was collected in Portuguese waters or from the Northeast Atlantic.

Habitat. Species from deep and cold waters that have been collected from muddy ( Munilla & Soler-Membrives, 2014), clay with diatoms ( Cole 1909), clay, clay with pumice, hard bottoms ( Stock 1990) and gravel bottoms with foraminifera and pteropods ( Stock 1987). The bathymetric range extends from 79 to 5203 m, but in the East Atlantic is most common from 1000 to 2500 m ( Bamber, 2010). Our material was collected between 784 and 1860 m.

Geographical distribution. Cosmopolitan species, found in all the oceans including the polar seas ( Bamber, 2010). Reported from Ireland ( Bamber & Thurston 1995), Denmark Strait ( Meinert 1899), France ( Bouvier 1923), Portugal ( Bamber & Thurston 1995; Soler-Membrives & Munilla 2015) Azores ( Bouvier 1937; Stock 1990), Morocco ( Olsen 1913; Stock 1987; Bamber & Thurston 1993), Western Sahara ( Bouvier 1937), Walvis Ridge ( Stock 1975) and Cape Point ( South Africa) ( Flynn 1928; Barnard 1954) in the East Atlantic and from the south of Terranova ( Olsen 1913), near to Rhode Island ( Wilson 1881), and the Caribbean Sea ( Stock 1986) in the West Atlantic. Colossendeis colossea has also been collected from Bering Sea ( Child 1995), Japan ( Hedgpeth 1949; Nakamura & Child 1991; Miyazaki 2022), Philippines ( Stock 1983), Melanesia ( Loman 1908; Stock 1953; Stock 1997; Bamber 2004; Bamber 2013), the Great Australian Bight ( Arango 2009) Southern Australia (Staples 2007), New Caledonia (Stock 1991), New Zealand ( Child 1999), Kermadec Trench ( Fage 1956); California and Oregon ( Child 1994), Gulf of Panama ( Fage 1956; Stock 1975), Peru ( Cole 1909) and Chile (Child 1992; Anaya 2016) in the Pacific, and from Andaman Sea ( Calman 1923) and SW India ( Vinu et al. 2016) in the Indian Ocean. This species has been reported also from the Scotia and Weddel Seas in the Antarctic region ( Munilla & Soler-Membrives 2009). Our specimens were collected along the Morocco coast.