Research Article |
Corresponding author: Anne-Nina Lörz ( anne-nina.loerz@t-online.de ) Academic editor: Bente Stransky
© 2018 Anne-Nina Lörz, Anne Helene S. Tandberg, Endre Willassen, Amy Driskell.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Lörz A-N, Tandberg AHS, Willassen E, Driskell A (2018)
|
The genus Rhachotropis has the widest geographic and bathymetric distribution of all amphipod genera worldwide. Molecular and morphological investigations of specimens sampled around Iceland and off the Norwegian coast allow the first insights into the relationships of North East Atlantic Rhachotropis. The 31 cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) sequences generated for this study were assigned 13 Barcode Index Numbers (BINs) in the Barcode of Life database (BOLD), of which 12 are new to the database. Molecular analyses of COI and 16S sequences could not confirm a theory that depth has a greater influence on the phylogeny of Rhachotropis than geographic distance. Although the North East Atlantic is a well-studied area, our molecular investigations revealed the genus Rhachotropis may contain cryptic species, which indicates a higher biodiversity than currently known. For example, the specimens which key to Rhachotropis helleri is a complex of three COI clades, two of which cannot be identified with morphological traits. One specimen of each of the clades in the cladogram was documented by high definition photographs. A special focus was on the visual morphology of the eyes, as this character shows interspecific differences within the genus Rhachotropis in response to fixation in ethanol. Detailed morphological investigation showed that some clades thought to be indistinguishable can be separated by minute but consistent morphological characters. Datamining Genbank to examine all registered COI-sequences of R. aculeata, the only previously known Rhachotropis BIN in the North Atlantic and sub-Arctic, showed R. aculeata to be subdivided by an Arctic and a North Atlantic population.
Amphipoda , Eusiridae , North Atlantic, IceAGE, NorAmph, COI, 16S
Eusiridae are fast moving predators with a worldwide distribution. The genus Rhachotropis has the widest geographic (all oceans) and bathymetric (0–9460 m) distribution of all amphipod genera (
Expeditions to the North East (NE) Atlantic via the programs IceAGE (Icelandic Animals Genetics & Ecology), Mareano and several smaller Norwegian mapping projects (Norwegian and Spitsbergen economic waters) sampled various Amphipoda during the last 10 years. Almost all amphipod collections yielded members of Eusiridae. Rhachotropis was the dominant genus in eusirid samples, along with three other genera: Eusirus, Cleonardo and Eusirella.
As the material was suitable for DNA analysis we investigated the relationships of freshly collected Rhachotropis from the NE Atlantic to each other via analysis of the cytochrome oxidase I (COI) and 16S gene regions. We then set these new specimens in context to Rhachotropis from Norway and other parts of the world.
Twenty-one of the 61 described Rhachotropis species are known from the NE Atlantic and Arctic region: Rhachotropis aculeata (Lepechin, 1780); R. arii Thurston, 1980; R. distincta (Holmes, 1908); R. faeroensis Stephensen, 1944; R. gislii Thurston, 1980; R. gloriosae Ledoyer, 1982; R. gracilis Bonnier, 1896; R. grimaldii (Chevreux, 1887); R. helleri (Boeck, 1971); R. inflata (Sars, 1883); R. aff. kergueleni Stebbing, 1888; R. leucophthalma Sars, 1883; R. lomonosovi Gurjanova, 1934; R. macropus Sars, 1883; R. northriana d’Udekem d’Acoz, Vader & Legezynska, 2007; R. oculata (Hansen, 1887); R. palporum Stebbing, 1908; R. proxima Chevreux, 1911; R. rostrata Bonnier, 1896; R. thordisae Thurston, 1980; R. thorkelli Thurston, 1980.
1) What are the phylogenetic relationships of NE Atlantic and Arctic Rhachotropis?
2) Do relationships among specimens from the shallow (Norwegian Channel) and deep (Icelandic Basin and Norwegian Sea) stations indicate biogeographic processes such as submergence or emergence?
3) Does depth have a bigger influence on the phylogeny of Rhachotropis than geographic distance?
The detailed description of the Icelandic study area is presented in the introduction of this volume (
Specimens were examined and dissected under a Leica MZ12.5 stereomicroscope. Small appendages (e.g. mouthparts, uropods, telson) were temporarily mounted in glycerin and examined using a LeicaDM2500 compound microscope. The body lengths of specimens examined were measured by tracing an individual’s mid-trunk lengths (tip of the rostrum to end of telson).
Photos of material held at the Deutsches Zentrum für Marine Biodiversität (DZMB) were taken with a Canon EOS 5 Mark III with a Canon MP-E65 macro lens mounted for stacking. The stacking programme software used was Zerene Stacker 1.04 (setting P-max). Photos of the Norwegian material (all stored at the University Museum of Bergen) were assembled using a Leica DFC425 camera fitted with a motorised stacker on a Leica M205 binocular, and Leica LAS 3.8 software for taking photos. Compilation of stacked photos was done with Zerene Stacker 1.04 (P-max). Larger specimens were photographed using a Canon EOS 60D with Canon MP-E-65 (f2.8) lens.
In order to examine the eye, Rhachotropis oculataAMPIV228-17 was selected for confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM). To produce auto-fluorescence of the surfaces, 405 nm laser lines with emission filters set to 421–499 nm and 488 nm laser lines with filters set to 489 –607 nm were used. The head was scanned using a Leica DM2500 with a Leica TCS SPE at a resolution of 2480 × 2480 pixels at 10×. The software package LEICA LAS X was used for recording the image from the scans, the topmost seven photo-stack layers were removed to make the ommatidia visible. The image stacks were further processed and finalized in Adobe Photoshop CS5.
IceAGE material is held at the Zoological Museum University of Hamburg, Centre of Natural History (CeNak), Germany.
NorAmph material is held at the University Museum of Bergen, Natural History Collections, Norway.
DNA was extracted from the IceAGE specimens using an Autogen Prep 965 phenol-chloroform automated extractor following the manufacturer’s protocol for animal tissue. The barcode region of COI gene was amplified using primer pair jgLCO1490/jgHCO2198 (
Amphipod tissue samples of material from NorAmph, usually consisting of two or three pleopods, were prepared for the NORBOL-consortium following the procedures of the Barcode of Life Database (BOLD) system (
In addition to these new sequences, we used previously published sequences from Rhachotropis (
Sequences were assembled with the software package Geneious (version 10.0.9) (
We used MEGA7 (
We used FastTree2 ver. 2.1.5 (
We used MrBayes ver 3.2 (
Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD) (
Additional sequences of R. aculeata were downloaded from BIN AAB3310 in BOLD. We calculated a Median Joining Network with POPART (
Geographic distances (in km) between the samples were calculated with Geographic Distance Matrix Generator (
Order AMPHIPODA Latreille, 1816
Suborder GAMMARIDEA Latreille, 1802
Family EUSIRIDAE Stebbing, 1888
Genus Rhachotropis S.I. Smith, 1883
Rhachotropis S.I. Smith, 1883: 222.
Gracilipes Holmes, 1908: 526.
We obtained sequences from 42 Rhachotropis specimens in our samples (Table
COI gene tree calculated with FastTree2 ver. 2.1.5 (
Overview of Rhachotropis sequences produced for this work, with BOLD accession numbers and BIN numbers (BOLD). The dataset can be accessed using https://doi.org/10.5883/DS-RHACHOTR
Species name | BOLD number | 16S | COI | BIN number (BOLD) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rhachotropis aculeata (Lepechin, 1780) | AMPIV200-17 | x | x | AAB3310 |
Rhachotropis aculeata (Lepechin, 1780) | AMPNB077-13 | x | ||
Rhachotropis aff inflata (Sars, 1883) | AMPNB524-17 | x | – | |
Rhachotropis aff palporum Stebbing, 1908 | AMPIV033-17 | x | x | ADH1827 |
Rhachotropis aff palporum Stebbing, 1908 | AMPIV003-17 | x | x | |
Rhachotropis aff proxima Chevreux, 1911 | AMPIV005-17 | x | x | ADH1828 |
Rhachotropis cf proxima Chevreux, 1911 | AMPIV001-17 | x | x | ADH1784 |
Rhachotropis cf proxima Chevreux, 1911 | AMPIV002-17 | x | x | |
Rhachotropis gislii Thurston, 1980 | AMPIV004-17 | x | x | ADH0956 |
Rhachotropis aff helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPIV010-17 | x | x | ADE3179 |
Rhachotropis aff helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPIV011-17 | x | x | |
Rhachotropis aff helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPNB277-15 | x | ||
Rhachotropis aff helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPNB278-15 | x | ||
Rhachotropis aff helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPNB279-15 | x | ADE1120 | |
Rhachotropis aff helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPNB481-17 | x | ||
Rhachotropis helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPIV233-17 | x | x | ADE4377 |
Rhachotropis helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPNB276-15 | x | ||
Rhachotropis helleri (Boeck, 1871) | AMPNB381-16 | x | ||
Rhachotropis inflata (Sars, 1883) | AMPIV070-17 | x | – | |
Rhachotropis inflata (Sars, 1883) | AMPNB078-13 | x | ACF8625 | |
Rhachotropis lomonosovi Gurjanova, 1934 | AMPNB352-15 | x | ACW7325 | |
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB413-16 | x | ADD5182 | |
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB420-16 | x | ||
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB424-16 | x | ||
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB387-16 | x | ||
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB443-16 | x | ||
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB444-16 | x | ||
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB466-16 | x | ||
Rhachotropis macropus Sars, 1893 | AMPNB526-17 | x | ||
Rhachotropis northriana d’Udekem d’Acoz, Vader & Legezinska, 2007 | AMPIV227-17 | x | – | |
Rhachotropis northriana d’Udekem d’Acoz, Vader & Legezinska, 2007 | AMPIV224-17 | x | ||
Rhachotropis northriana d’Udekem d’Acoz, Vader & Legezinska, 2007 | AMPIV225-17 | x | ||
Rhachotropis northriana d’Udekem d’Acoz, Vader & Legezinska, 2007 | AMPIV231-17 | x | ||
Rhachotropis northriana d’Udekem d’Acoz, Vader & Legezinska, 2007 | AMPIV230-17 | x | ||
Rhachotropis oculata (Hansen, 1887) | AMPIV228-17 | x | – | |
Rhachotropis sp. n. B | AMPIV009-17 | x | x | ADH1829 |
Rhachotropis thordisae Thurston, 1980 | AMPIV034-17 | x | x | ADH0957 |
Rhachotropis thordisae Thurston, 1980 | AMPIV007-17 | x | x | |
Rhachotropis thordisae Thurston, 1980 | AMPIV008-17 | x | x | |
Rhachotropis thordisae Thurston, 1980 | AMPIV226-17 | x | x | |
Rhachotropis thorkelli Thurston, 1980 | AMPIV006-17 | x | – | |
Rhachotropis thorkelli Thurston, 1980 | AMPIV078-17 | x |
Twenty-four Rhachotropis 16S sequences were generated from the recent IceAGE collections and analysed separately (Fig.
Within and between-group mean p-distances with estimated standard errors are shown in Tables
Estimates of Average Evolutionary Divergence over Sequence Pairs within morphologically defined groups. The number of base differences per site from averaging over all sequence pairs within each group are shown. Standard error estimate(s) are shown in the last column. The analysis involved 82 nucleotide sequences. Codon positions included were 1st+2nd+3rd. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair. There were a total of 648 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA7. The presence of n/c in the results denotes cases in which it was not possible to estimate evolutionary distances.
Species | p-dist | std_err |
---|---|---|
Eusirus holmii | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Rhachotropis abyssalis | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Rhachotropis aculeata | 0.009 | 0.002 |
Rhachotropis aff helleri | 0.050 | 0.005 |
Rhachotropis aff inflata | n/c | n/c |
Rhachotropis aff palporum | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Rhachotropis aff proxima | n/c | n/c |
Rhachotropis cf proxima | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Rhachotropis chathamensis | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Rhachotropis gislii | n/c | n/c |
Rhachotropis helleri | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Rhachotropis inflata | 0.058 | 0.005 |
Rhachotropis lomonosovi | n/c | n/c |
Rhachotropis macropus | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Rhachotropis novazealandica | n/c | n/c |
Rhachotropis rossi | n/c | n/c |
Rhachotropis sp n. B | n/c | n/c |
Rhachotropis thordisae | 0.011 | 0.003 |
ABGD analyses returned 18 groups of Rhachotropis when using default relative gap width of 1.5 (Suppl. material
Model testing of the data in two partitions using the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) resulted in the TN93+G model both for the third codon position and for the combination of the first and second. Similar models were obtained with MrBayes.
Phylogenetic estimates with MrBayes and FastTree based on COI sequences returned very similar tree topologies (Fig.
The FastTree estimate based on 16S data was indicating somewhat similar tendencies, such as the early divergence of R. thordisae and the splits in the groups associated with R. proxima and R. helleri. The two gene trees were otherwise difficult to compare because the 16S data set included sequences from R. northriana, R. oculata, R. aculeata and R. thordisae, for which COI are missing. Likewise, 16S sequences were not obtained for many of the taxa represented in the COI data set, including R. macropus, R. lomonosovi, R. gislii and others (Fig.
Additional COI sequences of R. aculeata downloaded from BIN AAB3310 in BOLD show some geographic structure. We calculated a Median Joining Network with five geographical groups in POPART (
Photographs were taken of at least one representative of each clade (Figs
Overall the morphological differentiation of the Rhachotropis sampled in the NE Atlantic is mirrored in the differentiation of our mitochondrial DNA markers and reflected both in gene tree topology and genetic distances. However, both R. aff. helleri and R. inflata have diverged into groups that were unnoticed a priori from morphology and R. aff. inflata clusters with one of the latter lineages. The taxonomic status of R. aff. helleri versus R. helleri must be examined further with more data. There is also considerable COI divergence in the R. proxima group.
Our DNA sequence data are shedding new light on the species relationships of Rhachotropis, although based on one gene fragment only the phylogenetic trees should certainly be interpreted with caution. The difference between gene trees and species trees has been an important topic in theoretical phylogenetics since the seminal publication by
The following discussion is divided according to three questions asked.
1) What are the phylogenetic relationships of North East Atlantic and Arctic Rhachotropis?
The FastTree approach and the Bayesian method returned very similar tree topologies with minimum exceptions. In both cases there was strong support for most of the species clades and also for some sister species relationships. However, many of the deeper branches were less well supported, which should be kept in mind when inferring the evolutionary history of ecological and biogeographical events.
Only three species occurred in both sampling sets from our two collecting groups in Icelandic and Norwegian waters: R. aculeata (Fig.
Lateral view photos of IceAGE material representing different clades in the analyses. A Rhachotropis gisliiAMPIV004-17B R. helleriAMPIV233-17CR. aff. helleriAMPIV011-17D R. inflataAMPIV070-17E R. northrianaAMPIV225-17F R. oculataAMPIV228-17GR. aff. palporumAMPIV033-17HR. aff. proximaAMPIV005-17IR. cf. proximaAMPIV002-17J R. sp. B AMPIV009-17K R. thordisaeAMPIV007-17LR: thorkelliAMPIV078-17.
Dorsal view photos of IceAGE material representing different clades in the analyses. A Rhachotropis gisliiAMPIV004-17B R. helleriAMPIV233-17CR. aff. helleriAMPIV011-17D R. inflataAMPIV070-17E R. northrianaAMPIV225-17F R. oculata AMPIV 228-17 GR. aff. palporumAMPIV033-17HR. aff. proximaAMPIV005-17IR. cf. proximaAMPIV002-17J R. sp. B AMPIV009-17K R. thordisaeAMPIV007-17LR: thorkelliAMPIV078-17.
An even more temperature-tolerant species is R. inflata which only occurs in shallow waters above 400 m, but tolerating temperatures from 0°C to 9°C (
Estimates of evolutionary divergence (p-distance) over sequence pairs between groups. The number of base differences per site from averaging over all sequence pairs between groups are shown. Standard error estimate(s) are shown above the diagonal. The analysis involved 82 nucleotide sequences. Codon positions included were 1st+2nd+3rd. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair. There were a total of 648 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA7.
Eusirus holmii | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.023 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.016 | 0.014 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.014 | 0.016 | 0.015 | 0.014 | |
Rhachotropis abyssalis | 0.260 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.023 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.013 | 0.014 | 0.016 | 0.016 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.015 | |
Rhachotropis aculeata | 0.211 | 0.217 | 0.013 | 0.022 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.013 | 0.013 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.013 | |
Rhachotropis aff helleri | 0.238 | 0.247 | 0.217 | 0.022 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.013 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.012 | 0.013 | 0.011 | 0.011 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.013 | |
Rhachotropis aff inflata | 0.236 | 0.198 | 0.207 | 0.242 | 0.022 | 0.022 | 0.022 | 0.021 | 0.021 | 0.029 | 0.005 | 0.023 | 0.024 | 0.021 | 0.022 | 0.023 | 0.022 | |
Rhachotropis aff palporum | 0.218 | 0.237 | 0.194 | 0.237 | 0.194 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.015 | |
Rhachotropis aff proxima | 0.233 | 0.187 | 0.194 | 0.222 | 0.220 | 0.224 | 0.012 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.013 | 0.014 | 0.013 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.014 | |
Rhachotropis cf proxima | 0.221 | 0.191 | 0.201 | 0.222 | 0.204 | 0.212 | 0.152 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.015 | |
Rhachotropis chathamensis | 0.204 | 0.219 | 0.194 | 0.219 | 0.164 | 0.195 | 0.185 | 0.187 | 0.015 | 0.016 | 0.013 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.012 | 0.016 | 0.015 | 0.014 | |
Rhachotropis gislii | 0.239 | 0.233 | 0.221 | 0.237 | 0.210 | 0.207 | 0.242 | 0.225 | 0.224 | 0.016 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.014 | 0.015 | |
Rhachotropis helleri | 0.215 | 0.245 | 0.197 | 0.157 | 0.242 | 0.192 | 0.228 | 0.213 | 0.215 | 0.228 | 0.015 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.016 | 0.015 | |
Rhachotropis inflata | 0.249 | 0.223 | 0.229 | 0.242 | 0.035 | 0.222 | 0.237 | 0.224 | 0.211 | 0.236 | 0.241 | 0.014 | 0.014 | 0.012 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.014 | |
Rhachotropis lomonosovi | 0.255 | 0.258 | 0.219 | 0.164 | 0.210 | 0.216 | 0.233 | 0.225 | 0.210 | 0.238 | 0.150 | 0.236 | 0.011 | 0.014 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.013 | |
Rhachotropis macropus | 0.246 | 0.247 | 0.219 | 0.158 | 0.222 | 0.223 | 0.230 | 0.238 | 0.226 | 0.249 | 0.163 | 0.250 | 0.098 | 0.013 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.014 | |
Rhachotropis novazealandica | 0.222 | 0.207 | 0.202 | 0.225 | 0.204 | 0.218 | 0.182 | 0.174 | 0.129 | 0.235 | 0.226 | 0.216 | 0.207 | 0.236 | 0.015 | 0.015 | 0.014 | |
Rhachotropis rossi | 0.235 | 0.188 | 0.213 | 0.234 | 0.211 | 0.242 | 0.223 | 0.197 | 0.220 | 0.242 | 0.251 | 0.231 | 0.237 | 0.218 | 0.203 | 0.016 | 0.015 | |
Rhachotropis sp n. B | 0.248 | 0.256 | 0.214 | 0.241 | 0.246 | 0.196 | 0.236 | 0.234 | 0.222 | 0.219 | 0.244 | 0.262 | 0.221 | 0.256 | 0.218 | 0.244 | 0.015 | |
Rhachotropis thordisae | 0.208 | 0.248 | 0.194 | 0.211 | 0.206 | 0.226 | 0.240 | 0.219 | 0.210 | 0.223 | 0.206 | 0.222 | 0.205 | 0.207 | 0.198 | 0.222 | 0.244 |
DNA barcoding revealed three clades within a species that keyed out to Rhachotropis helleri. The original description of R. helleri was provided by
We conclude that the two aff. helleri groups therefore either represent a single species, which contains widely-divergent COI sequence, or that the two clades may be two species, which are genuinely cryptic rather than pseudo-cryptic (
R. macropus (Fig.
Lateral view photos of NorAmph material representing different clades in the analyses. A Rhachotropis aculeataAMPNB077-13B R. helleriAMPNB276-15CR. aff. helleriAMPNB279-15DR. aff. inflataAMPNB524-17E R. lomonosoviAMPNB352-15; F. R. macropusAMPNB443-16.
2) Do relationships between the shallow (Norwegian Channel) and the deep (Icelandic Basin and Norwegian Sea) amphipods indicate biogeographic processes such as submergence or emergence?
Generally more species are currently known from the shelf and upper slope area. However, the observed depth pattern is heavily collection biased: areas with more stations show more species (
Eyes
The genus Rhachotropis is known to have a diversity of “eye phenotypes”. R. leucophthalma G. O. Sars, 1893 is a white-eyed species – this feature is so prominent that it provided its name; its eyes become colourless and hard to see in alcohol (
Rhachotropis helleri (AMPIV233-17) has distinct red eyes, even after being preserved in 98% ethanol for more than 4 years (Fig.
Eyes of, A Rhachotropis helleriAMPIV233-17, ommatidiae (Photo) B Rhachotropis oculataAMPIV228-17 (CLSM), 7 stack-layers have been removed in the eye-region to reveal the ommatidia beneath the cuticulum.
R. northriana has distinct red eyes also clearly visible after being preserved in ethanol for several years (eg. AMPIV225-17, Figs
Another species which maintains clearly visible dark eyes in preservation is R. inflata (eg. AMPIV070-17 Figs
We therefore think it unlikely that the ancestral Rhachotropis was a blind inhabitant of the deep sea. We assume that submergence has led to the loss of eyes in truly deep sea or abyssal species such as R. thordisae (Fig.
3) Does depth have a bigger influence on the phylogeny of Rhachotropis than geographic distance?
Rhachotropis specimens are found in all major oceans of the world: Arctic, Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, Caribbean Sea, Indian Ocean, Pacific Ocean and the Southern Ocean (
The genetic distance between shallow species such as Rhachotropis aculeata from 600 m and deep sea species such as R. thordisae from 2750 m is only 16 %, the shallow water R. inflata from 123 m and the deep sea R. thorkelli is 20.7 %. The two deep sea species R. gislii and R. thordisae were collected at the same station at 2750 m depth and show a similar genetic distance of 22 % as the two species R. cf. proxima and R. aff. inflata (21%) both later collected around 900 m (Table
The intraspecific distance is around 5 % in R. aff. helleri, and less than 1 % in R. aff. palporum, R. chathamensis and R. macropus, even though the latter was sampled in a depth range of 330–1260 m. Recent investigations by
A characteristic species, R. aculeata (Fig.
Morphologically separated groups of Rhachotropis are well supported by the genetic markers COI and 16S, with possible cryptic species in Rhachotropis aff. helleri. We recommend a morphological study of allometry in this genus, where many species often are collected in large numbers. Our present data lead us to support the theory that Rhachotropis originated in shallow (photic) seas, and has subsequently submerged to greater (subphotic) depths, with loss of eyes for the abyssal species. The question about geographic versus bathymetric distance as a driver for genetic distance is harder to answer, as there is no clear picture for the entire genus.
The IceAGE material was collected during expeditions in 2011 and 2013 with the RV Meteor and RV Poseidon and sorted with the financial support of the Volkswagenstiftung “Forschung in Museen”. The Norwegian material was collected partly by the MAREANO programme financed by the Norwegian Government, partly by the AB-321 student-cruises of the University Centre of Svalbard in 2007, 2009 and 2015, and partly by the Sognefjord benthic mapping project financed by the Norwegian Biodiversity Initiative. DNA-sequencing of the Univ. Bergen specimens was facilitated by funding from the NORBOL consortium, and produced by the Canadian Centre of DNA-barcoding, Guelph, Canada. Photographic support was provided by T. Dalsgaard and F. Friedrich in Hamburg and K. Kongshavn in Bergen. Curatorial support has been provided by Antje Fischer DZMB, Kathrin Philipps-Bussau CeNak Centre of Naturkunde Hamburg and Jon Kongsrud University Museum of Bergen. The Norwegian Biodiversity Information Centre provided financial support for the work performed by Anne Helene Tandberg. We thank Prof. Wim Vader and Dr. Ania Jażdżewska for their critical comments to an earlier version of this manuscript.
Table
Data type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (.xlsx)
Explanation note: Depths indicated in red have been found using the latitude and longitude information with the datapoint and the bathymetry-layer on Google Earth Pro. Depths indicated in blue are inferred from the general depths in the named (no latitude or longitude given) geographical location, given bathymetry-layer on Google Earth Pro.
Table
Data type: Microsoft Excel Worksheet (.xlsx)
Figure
Data type: Adobe Acrobat Document (.pdf)
Figure
Data type: Adobe Acrobat Document (.pdf)