Transcriptomic Analysis of Four Cerianthid (Cnidaria, Ceriantharia) Venoms

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Tube anemones, or cerianthids, are a phylogenetically informative group of cnidarians with complex life histories, including a pelagic larval stage and tube-dwelling adult stage, both known to utilize venom in stinging-cell rich tentacles. Cnidarians are an entirely venomous group that utilize their proteinaceous-dominated toxins to capture prey and defend against predators, in addition to several other ecological functions, including intraspecific interactions. At present there are no studies describing the venom for any species within cerianthids. Given their unique development, ecology, and distinct phylogenetic-placement within Cnidaria, our objective is to evaluate the venom-like gene diversity of four species of cerianthids from newly collected transcriptomic data. We identified 525 venom-like genes between all four species. The venom-gene profile for each species was dominated by enzymatic protein and peptide families, which is consistent with previous findings in other cnidarian venoms. However, we found few toxins that are typical of sea anemones and corals, and furthermore, three of the four species express toxin-like genes closely related to potent pore-forming toxins in box jellyfish. Our study is the first to provide a survey of the putative venom composition of cerianthids and contributes to our general understanding of the diversity of cnidarian toxins.São Paulo Research Foundation FAPESP 2015/24408-42017/50028-0 (SPRINT)2019/03552-0CNPq (PROTAX) 440539/2015-3CNPq (Research Productivity Scholarship)301293/2019-

The taxonomic position of the pelagic 'staurozoan' Tessera gemmaria as a ceriantharian larva

Based on 16 specimens from the Southwestern Atlantic coast (Argentina and Brazil) we reinterpret the taxonomic position of Tessera gemmaria Goy, 1979, a stauromedusa considered as incertae sedis for a long time. Using external morphology histological preparations and molecular data (16S and COI) we conclude that T. gemmaria is an early stage of a cerinula,the long-lived planktonic larval stage of the Ceriantharia (Anthozoa).Tessera gemmaria Goy, 1979, a stauromedusa considered as incertae sedis for a long time. Using external morphology histological preparations and molecular data (16S and COI) we conclude that T. gemmaria is an early stage of a cerinula,the long-lived planktonic larval stage of the Ceriantharia (Anthozoa).Fil: Rodriguez, Carolina Soledad. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata; ArgentinaFil: Marques, Antonio C.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Stampar, Sérgio N.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Morandini, André C.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Christiansen, Ernesto. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones y Desarrollo Pesquero; ArgentinaFil: Genzano, Gabriel Nestor. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras; ArgentinaFil: Mianzan, Hermes Walter. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones y Desarrollo Pesquero; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata; Argentin

The importance of molecular characters when morphological variability hinders diagnosability: systematics of the moon jellyfish genus Aurelia (Cnidaria: Scyphozoa)

Cryptic species have been detected across Metazoa, and while no apparent morphological features distinguish them, it should not impede taxonomists from formal descriptions. We accepted this challenge for the jellyfish genus Aurelia, which has a long and confusing taxonomic history. We demonstrate that morphological variability in Aurelia medusae overlaps across very distant geographic localities. Even though some morphological features seem responsible for most of the variation, regional geographic patterns of dissimilarities are lacking. This is further emphasized by morphological differences found when comparing lab-cultured Aurelia coerulea medusae with the diagnostic features in its recent redescription. Previous studies have also highlighted the difficulties in distinguishing Aurelia polyps and ephyrae, and their morphological plasticity. Therefore, mostly based on genetic data, we recognize 28 species of Aurelia, of which seven were already described, 10 are formally described herein, four are resurrected and seven remain undescribed. We present diagnostic genetic characters for all species and designate type materials for newly described and some resurrected species. Recognizing moon jellyfish diversity with formal names is vital for conservation efforts and other studies. This work clarifies the practical implications of molecular genetic data as diagnostic characters, and sheds light on the patterns and processes that generate crypsis.Fil: Lawley, Jonathan W.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasil. Griffith University; AustraliaFil: Gamero Mora, Edgar. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Maronna, Maximiliano Manuel. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Chiaverano, Luciano Martin. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones y Desarrollo Pesquero; ArgentinaFil: Stampar, Sérgio N.. Universidade Estadual Paulista Julio de Mesquita Filho; BrasilFil: Hopcroft, Russell R.. University of Alaska; Estados UnidosFil: Collins, Allen G.. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Morandini, André C.. Universidade de Sao Paulo; Brasi

Morphology is not always useful for diagnosis, and that’s ok: Species hypotheses should not be bound to a class of data. Reply to Brown and Gibbons (S Afr J Sci. 2022;118(9/10), Art. #12590)

This paper serves as a reply to the Commentary by Brown and Gibbons (S Afr J Sci. 2022;118(9/10), Art. #12590) on our recently published paper on systematics of the moon jellyfish genus Aurelia (Lawley et al. PeerJ 2021;9, e11954)). We emphasise that we are not advocating for the routine use of molecular data alone in taxonomic diagnoses, rather that it is a valid approach in cases where, after detailed analyses, morphological features are shown to be unreliable

Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016

Description and life cycle of the hydrozoan Hydractinia uniformis, sp. nov. (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa: Hydractiniidae), from the coast of southeastern Brazil

Stampar, Sérgio N., Tronolone, Valquiria B., Morandini, André C. (2006): Description and life cycle of the hydrozoan Hydractinia uniformis, sp. nov. (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa: Hydractiniidae), from the coast of southeastern Brazil. Zootaxa 1200: 43-59, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.264645