A framework for the development of a global standardised marine taxon reference image database (SMarTaR-ID) to support image-based analyses

Video and image data are regularly used in the field of benthic ecology to document biodiversity. However, their use is subject to a number of challenges, principally the identification of taxa within the images without associated physical specimens. The challenge of applying traditional taxonomic keys to the identification of fauna from images has led to the development of personal, group, or institution level reference image catalogues of operational taxonomic units (OTUs) or morphospecies. Lack of standardisation among these reference catalogues has led to problems with observer bias and the inability to combine datasets across studies. In addition, lack of a common reference standard is stifling efforts in the application of artificial intelligence to taxon identification. Using the North Atlantic deep sea as a case study, we propose a database structure to facilitate standardisation of morphospecies image catalogues between research groups and support future use in multiple front-end applications. We also propose a framework for coordination of international efforts to develop reference guides for the identification of marine species from images. The proposed structure maps to the Darwin Core standard to allow integration with existing databases. We suggest a management framework where high-level taxonomic groups are curated by a regional team, consisting of both end users and taxonomic experts. We identify a mechanism by which overall quality of data within a common reference guide could be raised over the next decade. Finally, we discuss the role of a common reference standard in advancing marine ecology and supporting sustainable use of this ecosystem

A blueprint for an inclusive, global deep-sea Ocean Decade field programme

The ocean plays a crucial role in the functioning of the Earth System and in the provision of vital goods and services. The United Nations (UN) declared 2021–2030 as the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. The Roadmap for the Ocean Decade aims to achieve six critical societal outcomes (SOs) by 2030, through the pursuit of four objectives (Os). It specifically recognizes the scarcity of biological data for deep-sea biomes, and challenges the global scientific community to conduct research to advance understanding of deep-sea ecosystems to inform sustainable management. In this paper, we map four key scientific questions identified by the academic community to the Ocean Decade SOs: (i) What is the diversity of life in the deep ocean? (ii) How are populations and habitats connected? (iii) What is the role of living organisms in ecosystem function and service provision? and (iv) How do species, communities, and ecosystems respond to disturbance? We then consider the design of a global-scale program to address these questions by reviewing key drivers of ecological pattern and process. We recommend using the following criteria to stratify a global survey design: biogeographic region, depth, horizontal distance, substrate type, high and low climate hazard, fished/unfished, near/far from sources of pollution, licensed/protected from industry activities. We consider both spatial and temporal surveys, and emphasize new biological data collection that prioritizes southern and polar latitudes, deeper (> 2000 m) depths, and midwater environments. We provide guidance on observational, experimental, and monitoring needs for different benthic and pelagic ecosystems. We then review recent efforts to standardize biological data and specimen collection and archiving, making “sampling design to knowledge application” recommendations in the context of a new global program. We also review and comment on needs, and recommend actions, to develop capacity in deep-sea research; and the role of inclusivity - from accessing indigenous and local knowledge to the sharing of technologies - as part of such a global program. We discuss the concept of a new global deep-sea biological research program ‘Challenger 150,’ highlighting what it could deliver for the Ocean Decade and UN Sustainable Development Goal 14

Man and the Last Great Wilderness: Human Impact on the Deep Sea

The deep sea, the largest ecosystem on Earth and one of the least studied, harbours high biodiversity and provides a wealth of resources. Although humans have used the oceans for millennia, technological developments now allow exploitation of fisheries resources, hydrocarbons and minerals below 2000 m depth. The remoteness of the deep seafloor has promoted the disposal of residues and litter. Ocean acidification and climate change now bring a new dimension of global effects. Thus the challenges facing the deep sea are large and accelerating, providing a new imperative for the science community, industry and national and international organizations to work together to develop successful exploitation management and conservation of the deep-sea ecosystem. This paper provides scientific expert judgement and a semi-quantitative analysis of past, present and future impacts of human-related activities on global deep-sea habitats within three categories: disposal, exploitation and climate change. The analysis is the result of a Census of Marine Life – SYNDEEP workshop (September 2008). A detailed review of known impacts and their effects is provided. The analysis shows how, in recent decades, the most significant anthropogenic activities that affect the deep sea have evolved from mainly disposal (past) to exploitation (present). We predict that from now and into the future, increases in atmospheric CO2 and facets and consequences of climate change will have the most impact on deep-sea habitats and their fauna. Synergies between different anthropogenic pressures and associated effects are discussed, indicating that most synergies are related to increased atmospheric CO2 and climate change effects. We identify deep-sea ecosystems we believe are at higher risk from human impacts in the near future: benthic communities on sedimentary upper slopes, cold-water corals, canyon benthic communities and seamount pelagic and benthic communities. We finalise this review with a short discussion on protection and management methods

Aurospio tribranchiata Paterson, Neal, Altamira, Soto, Smith, Menot, Billett, Cunha, Marchais-Laguionie & Glover, 2016, sp. nov.

<i>Aurospio tribranchiata</i> sp. nov. Paterson & Soto <p>(Figure 1, 8 d, 10, 11, 12, Table 3)</p> <p> <i>Minuspio</i> sp4 Soto 2008: 89.</p> <p> <b>Material examined:</b> 33 specimens examined in total.</p> <p> <b>Holotype:</b> <i>Porcupine Abyssal Plain,</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i> D229, July 1997, 13200#20, 48º49.8’ N, 16º29.62’ W, 4844 m, 1–3 cm, 0.3 mm (NHMUK 2015:1199).</p> <p> <b>Paratypes:</b> <i>Porcupine Abyssal Plain,</i> RRS <i>Challenger</i> 79, May 1991, 52701#9, 48º51.6’ N, 16º27.4’ W, 4842 m, 2 individual; 52701#25, 48º50.4’ N, 16º29.6’ W, 4844 m, 3 individuals; 52701#47, 48º50.6’ N, 16º29.9’ W 4841 m, 1 individual.</p> <p> <i>Porcupine Abyssal Plain,</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i> D222, August 1996, 12930#14, 48º50.92’N, 16º30.24’W, 4837 m, 1 individual; 12930#44, 4849.95’N, 1630.2’W, 4839 m, 1 individual; 12930#59, 4850.45’N, 1630.58’W, 4837 m, 1 individual; 12930#68, 48º49.92’N, 16º29.76’W, 4840 m, 2 individual; 12930#73, 48º50.08’N, 16º29.69’W 4839 m, 2 individuals.</p> <p> 1) <i>Aurospio tribranchiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> a) Chaetiger 2; b) Chaetiger 3; c) Chaetiger 4; d) Chaetiger 5; scale bar = 100 µm. 2) <i>Aurospio abranchiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> from PAP a) Chaetiger 2; b) Chaetiger 3; c) Chaetiger 4; d) Chaetiger 5; e) Chaetiger 8; scale bar = 100 µm.</p> <p> 3) <i>Aurospio abranchiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> from canyons a) Chaetiger 2; b) Chaetiger 3; c) Chaetiger 4; Chaetiger 5; scale bar = µm.</p> <p> <i>Porcupine Abyssal Plain,</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i> D226, March 1998, 13077#19, 4850’N, 1630.05’W, 4846 m, 4 individual; 13077#23, 4849.28’N, 1630.56’W, 4844 m, 1 individual; 13077#59, 48 49.98N, 16 29.96W, 4845 m, 1 individual; 13078#13, 48º50.00’N, 16º30.0’W, 4843 m, 1 individual.</p> <p> <i>Porcupine Abyssal Plain,</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i> D229, July 1997, 13200#17, 4849.67’N, 1628.72’W, 4843 m, 2 individuals; 13200#20, 48º49.8’ N, 16º29.62’ W, 4844 m, 3 individuals; 13200#47, 4839.29’N, 1630.27’W, 4844 m, 1 individual; 13200#52, 48º49.84’N, 16º29.84’W, 4844 m, 2 individuals.</p> <p> <i>Porcupine Abyssal Plain,</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i> D231, March 1998, 48 50.51’N 16 29.43’W, 4842 m, 1 individual; 13368#25, 48º 50.51’N, 16º 29.43’W, 3 individuals.</p> <p> <i>Porcupine Abyssal Plain,</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i> D237 September 1998, 13627#17, 4849.9’N, 16 49.9’W, 4837 m 2 individuals.</p> <p> <b>Diagnostic features:</b> three pairs of branchiae, first pair starting on chaetiger 3 and the last pair being much longer than the other two.</p> <p> <b>Description.</b> Small slender species with thorax widening posteriorly then staying the same width; holotype fragment with 20 chaetigers, 3.00 mm long; 0.18 mm wide at chaetiger 1 (not including the chaetae). Colour cream to pale yellow.</p> <p>Prostomium rounded to rectangular; caruncle long extending to anterior edge of chaetiger 2, well developed, then appearing to extend weakly beyond segment boundary. No eyes. Peristomium separated ventrally and laterally from chaetiger 1, fused dorsally forming a distinct rounded collar. Palps simple up to 5 chaetigers in length, no basal sheath.</p> <p>Branchiae present on chaetigers 3 to 5; all apinnate, cylindrical, tapering gradually to a rounded point; branchiae on chaetigers 3 and 4 short, about the same length as the accompanying dorsal lamellae; branchiae on chaetiger 5 long, up to five chaetigers in length and two to three times the length of the accompanying dorsal lamellae (Fig. 11.1d; 12 a,c, 13a,c.</p> <p>Chaetiger 1 with small rounded notopodial lamellae. Notopodial lamellae increase in size with the largest on chaetigers 4 and 5; lamellae triangular on chaetigers 2 and 3, becoming wider and more rounded on chaetigers 5 and 6. Notopodial lamellae in mid-body low and rounded. Dorsal crests low difficult to see but occur on chaetigers 9 to 12.</p> <p>Neuropodial lamellae on chaetiger 1 small rounded, increasing over chaetigers 2 to 9; lamellae largest on chaetiger 3 (Fig 12 b).</p> <p>Capillaries arranged on two rows on notopodia and neuropodia, capillaries bilimbate with those in the lower row slightly granulated. Sabre chaetae robust, curved, limbate, slightly or non-granulated, starting on chaetiger 10 or 11; one per fascicle. Neuropodia hooded hooks start on chaetiger 12, up to six per fascicle; two to three pairs of small teeth above the main fang (specimens small difficult to see the exact arrangement), no inner hood; Notopodial hooded hooks not observed. Pygidium unknown.</p> <p> <b>Methyl green pattern.</b> Band of stain across middle of prostomium or across whole prostomium, diffuse over body.</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> <i>A. tribranchiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> is assigned to <i>Aurospio</i> because the branchiae start on chaetiger 3. All specimens of <i>A. tribranchiata</i>, were carefully examined stained with Shirlastain A (SDL international. A textile fibre identification stain - very useful in revealing features, such as scars) and were not able to detect the presence of scars on any of our specimens. As further supporting evidence there was no branchial pair on chaetiger 2 or evidence of their scars even on otherwise complete specimens which had very long branchiae of chaetiger 4 (which could be easily lost) and palps (almost always lost in spionids) still attached. Based on current evidence we have assigned this species to <i>Aurospio</i> until proven otherwise. Other characters such as the shape of the prostomium, lack of an internal secondary hood in the hooded hooks also are common to species in this genus (but see Remarks in the previous species for a discussion on the problems of defining this genus).</p> <p> <i>A. tribranchiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> is similar to <i>A. pilkena</i> Wilson, 1990 and <i>A. banyulensis</i> (Laubier, 1963), in particular the form of the prostomium, having three pairs of branchiae (see Table 4). <i>A. banyulensis</i> also has dorsal crests starting on chaetiger 8, hooded hooks starting on chaetiger 12 and sabre chaetae on chaetiger 10. <i>A. tribranchiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> differs in the arrangement of the third pair branchiae which are long whereas on <i>A. pilkena</i> and <i>A. banyulensis</i> they are all the same size. <i>A. longibranchiata</i> differs from <i>A. pilkena</i> in the starting positions of the sabre chaetae and hooded hooks and having dorsal crests (see Table 4).</p> <p> <b>Etymology.</b> <i>tribranchiata</i> refers to the three pairs of branchiae found on this species. <b>Ecology.</b> <i>A. tribranchiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> is one of the dominant species of spionids found on the Porcupine Abyssal Plain, found in densities of between 4 and 24 individuals per m2. This species was found within the sediment at depths between 0–5 cm.</p> <p> <b>Distribution</b>. This species has only been recorded from the Porcupine Abyssal Plain 48°N, 16° W (Northeast Atlantic Ocean) and from a depth of 4800 m.</p>Published as part of <i>Paterson, Gordon L. J., Neal, Lenka, Altamira, Iris, Soto, Eulogio H., Smith, Craig R., Menot, Lenaick, Billett, David S. M., Cunha, Marina R., Marchais-Laguionie, Claire & Glover, Adrian G., 2016, New Prionospio and Aurospio Species from the Deep Sea (Annelida: Polychaeta) in Zootaxa 4092 (1)</i> on pages 19-24, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4092.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/259914">http://zenodo.org/record/259914</a&gt

Prionospio Malmgren 1867

<i>Prionospio</i> Malmgren, 1867Published as part of <i>Paterson, Gordon L. J., Neal, Lenka, Altamira, Iris, Soto, Eulogio H., Smith, Craig R., Menot, Lenaick, Billett, David S. M., Cunha, Marina R., Marchais-Laguionie, Claire & Glover, Adrian G., 2016, New Prionospio and Aurospio Species from the Deep Sea (Annelida: Polychaeta) in Zootaxa 4092 (1)</i> on page 4, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4092.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/259914">http://zenodo.org/record/259914</a&gt

Aurospio Maciolek 1981

<i>Aurospio</i> Maciolek, 1981 aPublished as part of <i>Paterson, Gordon L. J., Neal, Lenka, Altamira, Iris, Soto, Eulogio H., Smith, Craig R., Menot, Lenaick, Billett, David S. M., Cunha, Marina R., Marchais-Laguionie, Claire & Glover, Adrian G., 2016, New Prionospio and Aurospio Species from the Deep Sea (Annelida: Polychaeta) in Zootaxa 4092 (1)</i> on page 19, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4092.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/259914">http://zenodo.org/record/259914</a&gt

Prionospio vallensis Paterson, Neal, Altamira, Soto, Smith, Menot, Billett, Cunha, Marchais-Laguionie & Glover, 2016, sp. nov.

<i>Prionospio vallensis</i> sp. nov. Neal & Paterson <p>(Figures 1, 2.2, 4, 8g)</p> <p> <i>Prionospio</i> sp G Curdia <i>et al.</i> 2004:</p> <p> <i>Prionospio</i> sp A Paterson <i>et al.</i> 2011: 2453</p> <p> <b>Material examined:</b> 1035 specimens examined.</p> <p> <b>Holotype:</b> RRS <i>Charles Darwin,</i> cruise 179 April–May 2006, Setúbal canyon St. 56859#1, 39°35.58’N 10°20.00’W 4418m, megacore (NHMUK 2015:1040).</p> <p> <b>Paratypes</b>: <i>Portuguese margin canyon: Nazaré canyon</i> RRS Discovery 297 August 2005, St.15755#1 39º30.62’N 09°56.19’W 3461m, 175 individuals; St.15760#1 39º30.02’N 09°56.17’W 3465m, 54 individuals; St.15762#1 39º30.02’N 09°56.22’W 3464m, 103 individuals; St.15758#2 39º34.94’N 10°19.00’W 4332m, 26 individuals; St. 15758#6 39º34.99’N 10°19.00’W 4335m, 65 individuals; St.15765#2 39º35.00’N 10°19.04’W 4336m, 39 individuals.</p> <p> RRS <i>Charles Darwin</i> 179, April/ May 2006, St. 56847#6 39°35.57’N 10°19.99’W 4403m, 33 individuals; St. 56847#7 39° 35.55’N 10° 20.06’W 4404m 33 individuals; St. 56851#1 39° 29.99’N 09° 55.97’W 3517m, 36 individuals; St. 56851#2 39°29.99’N 09°56.01’W 3517m, 76 individuals; St.56856#1 39° 29.95’N 09° 56.00’W 3519m, 40 individuals; St. 56856#2 39°30.00’N 09° 55.98’W 3522m 49 individuals; St. 56859#1 39°35.58’N 10°20.00’W 4418m, 37 individuals; St. 56861#1 39°35.57’N 10°20.02’W 4404m, 44 individuals.</p> <p> <i>Setúbal canyon:</i> RRS <i>Charles Darwin</i> 179 April/ May 2006, St. 56804#5 38°09.27’N 09°36.93’W 3275m, 75 individuals; St. 56804#6 38°09.26’N 09°36.94’W 3275m, 48 individuals; St. 56806#1 38°09.29’N 09°36.96’W 3275m, 60 individuals; St. 56810#1 38°09.22’N 09°37.02’W 3224m, 23 individuals; St. 56816#1 38°09.27’N 09°36.94’W 3275m, 37 individuals.</p> <p> <i>Cascais canyon</i>: RRS <i>Charles Darwin</i> 179 April/ May 2006, St. 56821#1 38°17.96’N 09°46.87’W 3219m, 1 individual; St. 56823#2 38°18.01’N 09°47.02’W 3218m, 2 individuals; St. 56823#3 38°17.99’N 09°47.07’W 3219m, 2 individual; St. 56828#1 38°18.02’N 09°46.98’W 3199m, 3 individuals; St. 56837#7 38.3748° -9.8920°, 4243 m, 3 individuals.</p> <p> <b>Other material studied</b>: <i>Prionospio laciniosa</i> Maciolek, 1985; paratypes (USNM 67674-75). <b>Diagnostic features.</b> Wrinkled branchiae on chaetigers 2 and 5, rectangular prostomium, dorsal crests from chaetiger 6 extending to beyond chaetiger 20, distal ends of proximal dorsal lamellae bent toward the mid-line and produced into slender tips.</p> <p> <b>Description.</b> A small and slender species, holotype complete with 65 chaetigers, measuring 12.4 mm long and 0.25 mm wide at chaetiger 1. Colour in alcohol pale yellow. Prostomium rectangular for about 2/3 of length, then tapering into caruncle reaching to anterior margin of chaetiger 2; posterior portion surrounded by heavily ciliated nuchal organs (Fig. 4 a); anterior margin truncated (Fig.4), prostomial peaks absent; eyes absent (1 pair of colourless eyes present in some specimens, positioned on prostomium just before caruncle, best observed on stained specimens). Peristomium well developed ventrally, forming distinct lateral wings; chaetiger 1 reduced, dorsally fused to peristomium.</p> <p>Branchiae present on chaetigers 2–5, 4 pairs, all apinnate, but wrinkled (Fig.4 b,c). First pair longest, reaching to the anterior margin of chaetiger 8, approximately six times longer than the corresponding notopodial lamellae, distinctly wrinkled with deep grooves, thickened at the base, then cylindrical, tapering into blunt tip (in some specimens the first pair rather slender, still wrinkled but without deep grooves, possibly regenerating), heavily ciliated; pair 4 similar to pair 1 but shorter, by a ratio of 1:4, approximately four times longer than the corresponding notopodial lamellae; pairs 2 and 3 short and heavily ciliated, only slightly longer than notopodial lamellae, with wrinkled surface, fleshy and triangular, wider at base and tapering distally, both pairs are partially covered by enlarged notopodial lamellae; all branchiae free from notopodial lamellae, positioned laterally and slightly posteriorly in relation to inner edge of notopodial lamellae (branchial pairs 1 and 4 easily lost and missing in majority of specimens).</p> <p>Notopodial lamellae on chaetiger 1 well developed (Fig.2.2a), rounded with very produced tip pointed dorsally; lamellae largest on branchial segments, particularly on chaetigers 3 and 4, subtriangular and somewhat bent, with tips pointing to the midline of dorsum (Fig.2.2 b,c), notopodial lamellae on chaetiger 6 becoming smaller; from chaetiger 7 lamellae small, triangular, pointed distally, often bent, in mid-body segments becoming low, globular (Fig.2.2d). Distinct dorsal crests present from chaetiger 6 and on subsequent chaetigers (Fig. 4 a) to beyond chaetiger 20. Interparapodial pouches absent.</p> <p>Neuropodial lamellae largest in branchial segments; small and rounded in chaetiger 1, neuropodia of chaetiger 2 square-shaped, similar in shape but with distinct tip pointing dorsally on chaetiger 3 (Fig. 2.2), in chaetigers 4 and 5 tip not protruded, lamellae square to slightly rounded in shape; from chaetiger 6 becoming small (low rising) and distinctly globular (Fig. 1.2d).</p> <p>Anterior chaetae all capillaries, granulated, forming dense fascicles, arranged in two rows in both noto- and neuropodia, neuropodial capillaries become long in middle and posterior segments reaching over 4–5 chaetigers in length. Sabre chaetae first occur in neuropodia of chaetiger 10, up to two per fascicle, robust, curved, heavily granulated. Neuropodial hooks first occur on chaetiger 12 but occasionally start from chaetiger 13, up to eight per fascicle; primary hood inflated and somewhat rectangular in shape, secondary hood present and well developed; each hook with six pairs of smaller teeth sequentially reduced in size above the main fang. Notopodial hooks appear around segment 45 (holotype damaged in this section, all other specimens examined were incomplete and notopodial hooks not observed), two per fascicle, long and slender.</p> <p>Pygidium conical, without any appendages, but these might have been lost.</p> <p> <b>Methyl green pattern.</b> The borders of prostomium, including caruncle, peristomium, and dorsal crests on segments 12–20 stain strongly.</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> <i>Prionospio vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> is characterised by wrinkled branchiae on segments 2 and 5. <i>Prionospio fauchaldi</i> and <i>P. laciniosa</i>, both described by Maciolek, 1985, also possess wrinkled branchiae. <i>Prionospio fauchaldi</i> is recorded from the West Atlantic, SE coast of Africa in 530–4950 m and in the western Pacific in approximately 2500 to 3000 m (Blake et al. 2009), and <i>P. laciniosa</i> is recorded from the west coast of Africa at 527– 542m. <i>Prionospio vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> further resembles <i>P. fauchaldi</i> by having a similar shape of prostomium and peristomium, with sabre chaetae and neuropodial hooks starting in the same segments. The major differences are that in <i>P. fauchaldi</i> the first and fourth pair of branchiae are of the same length, while the first pair is longer than fourth in <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>; sabre chaetae are slender in <i>P. fauchaldi</i> but robust in <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>; and <i>P. fauchaldi</i> possesses extremely long capillaries on the third chaetiger, but these are lacking in <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b></p> <p> <i>Prionospio vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> is most similar to <i>P. laciniosa</i>, which also has the first wrinkled pair of branchiae longer than the fourth, but differs from <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> in having a triangular rather than rectangular prostomium and presence of distinct dorsal flaps, which were not seen in <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> The dorsal crests in <i>P. laciniosa</i> are present only on chaetigers 5–13 while in <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> they start on chaetiger 6 and continue beyond chaetiger 20. The shape of notopodial lamellae of the branchial region is also different, whilst subtriangular in both species, the distal ends are bent and directed to the middle and extend into slender tips in <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, whereas in <i>P. laciniosa</i> this bend is less prominent and the tips are more robust. The sabre chaetae in <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> are more robust and shorter than in <i>P. laciniosa</i>. The specimens of both species were of similar size, therefore these differences, particularly presence/absence of dorsal flaps are unlikely to be of result of different developmental stages.</p> <p> <b>Etymology.</b> <i>vallensis</i> from the Latin <i>valles</i>, meaning valley, the closest Latin expression for canyon.</p> <p> <b>Ecology.</b> <i>P. vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> was previously recorded from Setúbal canyon at 3400 m during the RRS <i>Discovery</i> cruise 186 in 1989; although not formally described, it was recorded as Spionidae H. It was the second most abundant species in that study. Examination of photographs of polychaete specimens collected in 1999 during OMEX II from Nazaré canyon and reported by Curdia <i>et al.</i> (2004) as <i>Prionospio</i> sp. G is likely to be <i>Prionospio vallensis</i>. It was reported as the most abundant macrofaunal species at 3514 m and 4141 m.</p> <p> <i>Prionospio vallensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> was the single most abundant polychaete in Portuguese canyons, achieving densities of 784 ind./m 2 in Setúbal canyon (3400 m) and up to 918 ind./m 2 in Nazaré canyon (3400 m) (Cunha <i>et al.</i> 2011; Paterson <i>et al.</i> 2011). The difference in the abundance between our study and previous ones may be a reflection of different sampling design used during <i>RRS Discovery</i> cruise186, where macrofauna was sieved on 300-micron mesh. However, it was not present in Portuguese canyon samples collected at 1000 m or on the Tagus Abyssal Plain, which is adjacent to Setúbal and Cascais canyons. It is possible that this is a deep canyon “specialist” able to utilize the organically enriched sediments found within the canyon (compared to similar noncanyon depths) and/or rapidly occupy sediments following frequent disturbances, which occur within canyons. Data from previous studies in these canyons (Gage <i>et al.</i> 1995; Curdia <i>et al.</i> 2004) suggest that <i>P. vall ensis</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> has been able to maintain high-density populations in Portuguese canyons on more than a decadal timescale (sampling in 1989, 1999, 2005, 2006).</p> <p> <b>Distribution.</b> Nazaré, Setúbal, and Cascais canyons along the Portuguese margin, 3199–4419 m.</p>Published as part of <i>Paterson, Gordon L. J., Neal, Lenka, Altamira, Iris, Soto, Eulogio H., Smith, Craig R., Menot, Lenaick, Billett, David S. M., Cunha, Marina R., Marchais-Laguionie, Claire & Glover, Adrian G., 2016, New Prionospio and Aurospio Species from the Deep Sea (Annelida: Polychaeta) in Zootaxa 4092 (1)</i> on pages 8-11, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4092.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/259914">http://zenodo.org/record/259914</a&gt

Prionospio amarsupiata Paterson, Neal, Altamira, Soto, Smith, Menot, Billett, Cunha, Marchais-Laguionie & Glover, 2016, sp. nov.

<i>Prionospio amarsupiata</i> sp. nov. Neal & Altamira <p>(Figures 1, 2.1, 3, 8e)</p> <p> <i>Prionospio</i> sp D Paterson <i>et al.</i> 2011: 2453.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> 24 specimens examined.</p> <p> <b>Holotype</b>: Setúbal canyon RRS <i>Charles Darwin</i> 179. April–May 2006, St. 56842#1, 38º06.45’N 9º59.94’W, 4482 m (NHMUK 2015:1042).</p> <p> <b>Paratypes</b>: <i>Portuguese margin canyons:</i> Nazaré canyon RRS <i>Discovery</i> 297, August 2005, St. 15758#2, 39º34.94’ N 10º19.00’ W, 4332 m, 2 individuals; St. 15765#2, 39º35.00’ N, 10º19.04’ W, 4336 m, 1 individual.</p> <p> RRS <i>Charles Darwin</i> 179, April–May 2006, St. 56861#1 39º35.57’ N, 10º20.02’ W, 4404 m, 1 individual. St. 56847#6 39°35.57’N 10°19.99’W 4403m, 1 individual.</p> <p> Setúbal canyon RRS <i>Charles Darwin</i> 179. April–May 2006, St. 56804#5, 38º09.27’N 9º36.93’W, 3275m, 1 individual; St. 56804#6 38º09.26’N 9º36.94’W, 3275m, 3 individuals; St. 56806#1, 38º09.29’N 9º36.96’W, 3275m, 1 individual; St. 56838#2 38º06.50’N 9º59.98’W, 4482m, 1 individual; St. 56842#1, 38º06.45’ºN 9º59.94’W, 4482m, 3 individuals;</p> <p> Cascais canyon RRS <i>Charles Darwin</i> 179. April–May 2006, St. 56837#8, 38º22.49’N 9º 53.52ºW, 4244 m, 1 individual; St. 56821#1, 38º17.96’N 9º46.87’ºW, 3219m, 1 individual; St. 56823#2, 38º18.01’N 9º47.02’ºW, 3218m, 1 individual; St. 56828#1, 38º18.02’N 9º46.98’W, 3199m, 1 individual.</p> <p> <b>Other material studied:</b> <i>Crozet Island</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i> D300, December 2005 – January 2006, site M6,15773#31, 49°01.92’S 51°13.88’E, 4192 m, 1 individual. Site M5, 15773#18, 45°52.96’ S, 56°23.78’ E, 4186 m, 1 individual.</p> <p> <i>Kaplan CCFZ Central Site (IFREMER Nodinaut campaign)</i>: RV <i>L’Atalante</i>, May–June 2004 KAP3, CRS868/ MTB9, 14°3.093’N, 130°4.7825’W, 5031m, individual KP397, 1 individual.</p> <p> <i>EqPac:</i> RV <i>Thomas Thompson</i>, November 1992, BC15, 5°N 140 W, 0-1cm, EP436 1 individual</p> <p> <i>Madeira Abyssal Plain:</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i>, August 1990, 12174 3-5cm, 300µm: (MAST_Polychaete Intercalibration Project number–map 55), 1 individual.</p> <p> <i>Cape Verde Abyssal Plain:</i> RRS <i>Discovery</i>, October 1993, 12600#10 213.2’N 3111.0’W, 4543 m, MAST_cv7, 1 individual.</p> <p> <b>Diagnostic features</b>. Lack of interparapodial pouches, first branchial pair with only few pinnules at the base of branchiae.</p> <p> <b>Description.</b> Holotype incomplete with 42 segments, measuring 14.5 mm long for 42 chaetigers and 0.63 mm wide at chaetiger 1. Pale yellow colour in alcohol. Prostomium angular, bottle-shaped with broadly rounded anterior margin, prostomial peaks normally absent (but two small peaks observed in one of the CROZET specimens); slender caruncle extending to anterior margin of chaetiger 2 (Fig.3 a); eyes not observed. Peristomium well developed, encircling prostomium closely like a collar, partially fused to chaetiger 1, forming low lateral wings (Fig3.a).</p> <p>Four pairs of branchiae present on chaetigers 2–5. First pair longest, reaching to chaetiger 10, very slender and cylindrical, although slightly flattened near base and with slender, slightly curled tips; surface mostly smooth to slightly wrinkled (Fig.2.1a); very few (1–3) pinnules near base; fourth pair of branchiae similar to first pair but about half the length, apinnate, no rudimentary pinnules observed. Branchial pairs 2 and 3 short, fleshy, foliaceous, wider at base, tapering into somewhat swollen tip, laterally ciliated, both pairs slightly shorter than accompanying notopodial lamellae, in dorsal view both pairs covered by enlarged notopodial lamellae. All branchial pairs situated lateral and slightly posterior to notopodial lamellae.</p> <p>Anterior notopodial lamellae from chaetiger 2–20 (holotype) generally enlarged, subtriangular, largest on branchial segments, particularly on chaetigers 3 and 4; more narrow on chaetiger 5; from chaetiger 6 increasing in width, becoming nearly square by chaetiger 10; after chaetiger 20 greatly reduced in size, becoming flattened assuming broadly ovoid shape with sharp pointed dorsal end and broad round posterior ventral end (Fig. 2.1e chaetiger 22). Dorsal crests on chaetigers 5–20.</p> <p>Neuropodial lamellae small on chaetiger 1, largest on branchial chaetigers, then gradually becoming reduced in size; lamellae on chaetiger 2 fan-shaped with rounded corners (Fig 2.1a); lamellae on chaetiger 3 also fan-like possesing well developed ventral tip (Fig. 2.1b); lamellae on chaetiger 4 rounded; lamellae on cheatiger 5 low, rectangular (Fig. 2.1c); from chaetiger 6 more rounded ventrally, starting to assume broadly ovoid in shape with somewhat pointed ventral tip (Fig.2 e–f); similarly shaped through chaetiger 42, with lamellae becoming more flattened and pointed both dorsally and ventrally (Fig. 2.1f). Interparapodial pouches absent (Fig.3 b).</p> <p>Notopodia in anterior region with four rows of dense, yellow-hued capillaries, anterior neuropodial capillaries arranged in two rows. Sabre chaetae and neuropodial hooks start on chaetiger 19 in holotype and other specimens of similar size, but on chaetiger 18 in smaller specimens. Sabre chaetae long, slender, gently curved, often broken; anterior half is lightly granulated; 1 to 2 per fascicle. Neuropodial hooks up to 10 per fascicle. Neuropodial hooks long, slender, with round, inflated primary hood and striated secondary hood; shaft very constricted just below multidentate head, with six pairs of small teeth above the main fang (Fig.3 c,d). Notopodial hooks not present in 42 chaetigers. Pygidium unknown.</p> <p> <b>Methyl green pattern.</b> Prostomium, peristomium and the edge of notopodial and neuropodial lamellae on chaetiger 1–4 stained strongly, thereafter only edges of notopodial lamellae and dorsal crest with faint stain.</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> This species closely resembles <i>Prionospio ehlersi</i> Fauvel, 1928 in the shape of the prostomium and peristomium and the chaetiger where the sabre chaetae and neuropodial hooks appear; neuropodial hooded hooks and sabre chaetae begin on chaetigers 18–19 in <i>P. amarsupiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, which is within the range of their occurrence on chaetigers 18–22 in <i>P. ehlersi</i>. The major difference is in the small number of pinnules on first branchial pair and lack of pouches in <i>Prionospio amarsupiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> This feature has been encountered in specimens collected from Crozet as well as in Portuguese canyons, EqPac and PAP specimens. It seems likely, therefore, that reduction in number of pinnules is a real feature of this species rather than a loss of pinnules, damaged during the handling of the specimens</p> <p> Interestingly, a species identified as <i>Prionospio</i> cf. <i>ehlersi</i> but lacking pouches was reported by Blake (1983) from the deep sea in the Antarctic and Chile. In a later publication Blake (1996) concluded that: “…these widely scattered deep-sea records of a <i>P. ehlersi</i> -like species that lack interparapodial pouches represent at least one, yet undescribed species.” It is likely that at least some of Blake’s specimens are <i>P. amarsupiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> In additional deep-sea material examined, Blake encountered a specimen that lacked pouches but had a full branchial set (first pair short and pinnate, pairs 2, 3, and 4 short, all the same length, thick, and apinnate). This particular specimen is clearly different from <i>P. amarsupiata</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> based on its branchial form.</p> <p>Some specimens collected from HERMES canyons were reproductive with eggs, the largest of which were approximately 70 microns in diameter.</p> <p> <b>Etymology.</b> <i>amarsupiata</i>, meaning “lacking pouches”; from the Latin <i>marsupium</i>, a pouch; reference is to the lack of interparapodial pouches in this species.</p> <p> <b>Distribution.</b> This species is widespread in the deep sea; confirmed records indicate the species has been recorded from the Nazaré, Setúbal and Cascais canyons along the Portuguese margin (3199–4488 m), Crozet Island (3500 m), the Equatorial Pacific (EqPac), and the Northeast Atlantic (Cape Verde Abyssal Plain 4500 m, Madeira Abyssal Plain 4800 m).</p>Published as part of <i>Paterson, Gordon L. J., Neal, Lenka, Altamira, Iris, Soto, Eulogio H., Smith, Craig R., Menot, Lenaick, Billett, David S. M., Cunha, Marina R., Marchais-Laguionie, Claire & Glover, Adrian G., 2016, New Prionospio and Aurospio Species from the Deep Sea (Annelida: Polychaeta) in Zootaxa 4092 (1)</i> on pages 5-8, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4092.1.1, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/259914">http://zenodo.org/record/259914</a&gt