Biodiversity data and new species descriptions of polychaetes from offshore waters of the Falkland Islands, an area undergoing hydrocarbon exploration

Lenka Neal; Gordon L. J. Paterson; David Blockley; Ben Scott; Emma Sherlock; Cate Huque; Adrian G. Glover

doi:10.3897/zookeys.938.49349

Research Article

Biodiversity data and new species descriptions of polychaetes from offshore waters of the Falkland Islands, an area undergoing hydrocarbon exploration

Lenka Neal^‡, Gordon L. J. Paterson^‡, David Blockley^§, Ben Scott^‡, Emma Sherlock^‡, Cate Huque^‡, Adrian G. Glover^‡

‡ Natural History Museum, London, London, United Kingdom

§ Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, Nuuk, Greenland

Corresponding author: Lenka Neal ( l.nealova@nhm.ac.uk )

Academic editor: Greg Rouse

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: Neal L, Paterson GLJ, Blockley D, Scott B, Sherlock E, Huque C, Glover AG (2020) Biodiversity data and new species descriptions of polychaetes from offshore waters of the Falkland Islands, an area undergoing hydrocarbon exploration. ZooKeys 938: 1-86. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.938.49349

ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:76B7FF03-FEB1-4884-AD29-55BE864F0EBF

Abstract

Benthic environmental impact assessments and monitoring programs accompanying offshore hydrocarbon industry activities result in large collections of benthic organisms. Such collections offer great potential for systematics, biodiversity and biogeography research, but these opportunities are only rarely realised. In recent decades, the hydrocarbon industry has started exploration activities in offshore waters off the Falkland Islands. A large collection of ca. 25,000 polychaete (Annelida) specimens, representing some 233 morphological species was processed at the Natural History Museum, London. Taxonomic assessment led to recognition of many polychaete species that are new to science. The existing taxonomic literature for the region is outdated and many species in existing literature are likely misidentifications. Initially, an online taxonomic guide (http://falklands.myspecies.info) was created, to provide a single taxonomic source for 191 polychaete species to standardise identification across different environmental contractors working in Falkland Islands. Here, this effort is continued to make data available for 18,015 specimens through publication of raw biodiversity data, checklist with links to online taxonomic information and formal descriptions of five new species. New species were chosen across different families to highlight the taxonomic novelty of this area: Apistobranchus jasoni Neal & Paterson, sp. nov. (Apistobranchidae), Leitoscoloplos olei Neal & Paterson, sp. nov. (Orbiniidae), Prosphaerosyllis modinouae Neal & Paterson, sp. nov. (Syllidae) and Aphelochaeta falklandica Paterson & Neal, sp. nov., and Dodecaceria saeria Paterson & Neal, sp. nov. (both Cirratulidae). The potential of the Falkland Islands material to provide up to date informationfor known species described in the literature is also highlighted by publishing images and redescription of Harmothoe anderssoni Bergström, 1916 and Aphelochaeta longisetosa (Hartmann-Schröder, 1965). Biodiversity and abundance data are made available through a DarwinCore database, including material collected from 83 stations at Sea Lion developmental oil field in North Falklands Basin and voucher specimens’ data collected from exploratory oil wells in East Falklands Basin.

Keywords

Annelida, biodiversity, DarwinCore, deep sea, Environmental Impact Assessments, Falkland Islands, hydrocarbon exploration, marine, oceans, taxonomic novelty

Introduction

Benthic Environmental Impact Assessments (BEIAs) generate large amount of data, which can provide a comprehensive characterisation of benthic habitats and associated fauna. However, several conditions need to be met for this potential to be realised. Most importantly the samples have to be collected in standardised way; the identification of organisms needs to be carried out in a consistent manner and the data should be made available in the public domain. Lack of this consistency can make data incomparable in a broader context and prevent iterative improvement of species identifications and concepts. While in well-known areas, such as North Sea this may be less of a problem, the case is magnified once the surveys move to previously unsampled regions and/or depths (see e.g., Brett 2001; Glover et al. 2015; Dahlgren et al. 2016). The current process used for samples collected as part of BEIAs from deep sea (areas below 200 m depth) is disjointed, with samples scattered across many different contractors and sub-contractors, and mostly lacking a standardised taxonomy.

In recent decades, the potential for the development of a substantial offshore hydrocarbons industry within the Falkland Islands was realised (Blockley and Tierney 2017), with several benthic surveys carried out in 2008, 2009, 2011, and 2012. These surveys involved the identification and vouchering of large collections of benthic invertebrates from a poorly studied region of our planet. In this paper, we attempt to improve the data availability situation for offshore contracted work by making our species descriptions, raw data and vouchers available for future study as funded by the South Atlantic Environmental Research Institute (SAERI).

Marine benthic fauna from the Falklands area has been considered part of the Magellanic province, but links have also been drawn to the Southern Ocean and sub-Antarctic fauna (e.g., Arntz 1999). Available (and therefore used) taxonomicmonographs of polychaetes for these regions (Hartmann-Schröder 1962, 1965; Hartman 1966, 1967, 1978; Hartmann-Schröder and Rosenfeldt 1988, 1989, 1990, 1992), however, need updating. Recent taxonomic efforts, which concentrated on the polychaete family Ampharetidae (Schüller and Jirkov 2013) summed up the problem as follows: “The Southern Ocean and also Patagonian waters represent an interesting geographical region, as many [polychaete] species recorded from these areas were originally described from the Northern hemisphere. These records from Southern waters may possibly be the result of misidentification and give some substance for the discovery of new species from already well-defined genera”. For example, during ANDEEP (ANtarctic benthic DEEP-sea biodiversity: colonisation history and recent community patterns) expeditions to the deep Weddell Sea (Brandt et al. 2004) over 450 ampharetid specimens belonging to over 20 species (many undescribed) were found (Schüller et al. 2009; Schüller and Jirkov 2013). Similarly, recent BIOPEARL (Biodiversity, Phylogeny, Evolution and Adaptive Radiation of Life in Antarctica) expeditions to Scotia and, particularly, Amundsen Sea, revealed many species new to science for isopods, polychaetes, molluscs and tanaids (Kaiser et al. 2009; Neal et al. 2012, 2017; Moreau et al. 2013; Pabis et al. 2015).

The problem of the lack of standardised taxonomy between contractors, highlighted in the “Gap Analysis” carried out by SAERI (Blockley and Tierney 2017), was one of the priority issues in developing an understanding of ecosystem functioning. A potential solution was found initially by developing an on-line taxonomic guide (http://falklands.myspecies.info) to provide a standardised taxonomic resource, particularly for those species that are currently not formally described. An abundant and species-rich benthic group, the polychaete worms, was selected as a model taxon to demonstrate the value of a taxonomic resource based on a large collection (ca.25,000 specimens), collected as part of the BEIAs by the contractors and subsequently identified at NHM, London.

This paper is thus the first attempt at a partial, taxonomic synthesis for offshore waters of the Falkland Islands, based on currently available collections, and deals with description (formal or informal) of 191 polychaete taxa. Five new species from four families are formally described here to highlight the potential for discovery of species new to science in this material: Apistobranchus jasoni sp. nov. (Apistobranchidae), Leitoscoloplos olei sp. nov. (Orbiniidae), Prosphaerosyllis modinouae sp. nov. (Syllidae), Aphelochaeta falklandica sp. nov. and Dodecaceria saeria sp. nov. (both Cirratulidae). In addition, the material provides an opportunity to update and revise existing descriptions of known but poorly described or figured species. We illustrate this with two species – Harmothoe anderssoni Bergström, 1916 which is here redescribed and Aphelochaeta longisetosa (Hartmann-Schröder, 1965) where the holotype (ZMH- P15068) is imaged for the first time.

The availability of such data and collections to the research community is also an important part of the curatorial function of NHM London, therefore large number specimens (N = 18,015) were formally accessed into museum’s collection (http://data.nhm.ac.uk/) following Darwin Core format and the data are made available here. The vouchering and curation of the specimens is of the utmostimportance as specimens are the ultimate evidence as to what species have been found. This also creates an opportunity for more taxa to be formerly described as funding and interest develops in the region.

Materials and methods

Falkland Islands

Falkland Islands are located in the south-western Atlantic, ca. 450 km north-east of Tierra del Fuego. The islands lie close to the edge of the Patagonian continental shelf and are considered to be part of the Magellan region (e.g., Hedgpeth 1969). From a geological point of view the Falklands Plateau and surrounding basins are result of the break-up of the Gondwana supercontinent in the Jurassic period. In terms of hydrography, there is a strong influence of Falklands Current which derives from the west wind drift around the Southern Ocean and an anticyclonic ring current that is formed around the Falkland Islands.

Field sampling protocol

Samples were collected during contractor-led environmental impact assessment surveys carried out in 2009, 2011, and 2012 (Fig. 1). Two contractors were involved in the field sampling and sampling design (Fugro GB Marine Limited was responsible for 2009 survey and Gardline Limited for 2011 and 2012 survey), below is a summary of methodology used based on available field logs:

2009 survey concentrated on four exploration wells: Toroa (ca. 600 m depth), Nimrod (ca. 1300 m depth), Loligo (ca. 1400 m depth) and Endeavour (ca. 1300 m depth). These wells are located in the East Falkland Basin, southeast to east off the Falkland Islands (see map in Fig. 1). In total 22 stations were successfully sampled, with up to two replicates collected at each station (see, DarwinCore file in Suppl. material 1 for details).
2011 survey concentrated on four exploration wells: Hero (ca. 1800 m depth), Loligo (ca. 1300 m depth), Vinson (ca. 1500 m) and Inflexible (ca. 1800 m depth). These wells are located in East Falkland Basin, southeast to east off Falkland Islands (see map in Fig. 1). In total 18 stations were successfully sampled, with two replicates collected at each station (see Darwin Core file in Suppl. material 1 for details).
2012 survey concentrated on the single exploration oil field – Sea Lion, at depths of ca. 450 m. Sea Lion field is located in North Falkland Basin, north of Falkland Islands (see map in Fig. 1). In total 83 stations were successfully sampled, with three replicates collected at each station (see DarwinCore in Suppl. materials 2, 3 for details).

Most samples were collected using a USNEL box core (area 0.25 m²), but in some cases Van Veen Grab sampler was deployed, where the use of boxcorer was prevented (see DarwinCore in Suppl. materials for details). The volume of sampled sediment was not always specified in the field logs and where specified, it varied considerably from 10 to 35 cm of top horizon removed and sieved. Additionally, subcores were taken in some instances for chemical and sedimentary analysis. All samples were sieved on a 0.5 mm mesh sieve. Specimens were fixed in 4% formalin and transferred into 70% ethanol for long-term storage.

Figure 1.

Map showing exploratory oil field (Sea Lion) in North Falklands Basin and exploratory oil wells in East Falklands Basin from which samples in this study were collected.

Laboratory identification (carried out at NHM)

Leica MZ6 and DM5000 stereo and compound microscopes were used to examine polychaete specimens. Images of these specimens were captured using a Zeiss V.20 and AxioCam HRc, and a Leica DFC 480 dedicated camera system connected to the DM5000. Photoshop software was used to edit photographs and to compile plates. A camera lucida system was used to draw the specimens. Helicon focus software (HeliconSoft 2018) was used to create composite images of specimens taken at different focal points. The software combines such images to create a clear and focused final image. Specimens of Harmothoe anderssoni and Prosphaerosyllis modinouae sp. nov. were also examined using a FEI QANTA FEG 650 (FEI, USA) SEM. These specimens were firstdehydrated to 100% alcohol before being critically point dried, mounted on stubs, and coated with gold-vanadium using a sputter coater.

Results

Species determinations

From the material examined, in total 233 species were determined following morphological examinations during the contract work, with 191 species included in on-line taxonomic guide (see the checklist). Of these, 123 species were determined from exploration wells in the East Falklands Basin and 110 species from the Sea Lion exploration field in the North Falklands Basin. Voucher specimens, the best-preserved representatives of each taxon, were selected to represent each morphospecies found in the material. Vouchers were not necessarily in “pristine condition”, and not all characters were always observed or determined with certainty. Thus, polychaete morphospecies determined fall into three groups:

“The Knowns” – these are species known to science and described from “the region” (Magellanic province, sub-Antarctic islands and parts the Southern Ocean, deep-parts of the Atlantic or Pacific Oceans were also sometimes considered). These species were assigned to known Linnean-named species (e.g., Onuphis pseudoiridescens Averincev, 1972). “The Knowns” represent a small group of the available Falkland Islands polychaete fauna, with 37 species, representing only 16% of our total (available) material.
“The Uncertain” – the status of such species is currently uncertain and these are designated “cf.” The reasons of uncertainty were usually as follows: i) specimens were too damaged and/or incomplete, therefore not all characters could be observed; ii) species were considered cosmopolitan having a wide geographic and/or bathymetric distribution, with the type locality outside of “the region” as defined earlier (usually the type locality is in Northern Europe); and/or iii) the original description is of little value (too short, too general, based on incomplete or damaged specimens, unaccompanied by drawings etc.). The type specimens housed at NHM collection were always examined, but those housed by other institutions were not always requested due to time constraints of the initial phase of this project and should be examined in the future work. Only 30 species were assigned to this category, ca. 13% of the diversity.
“The Unknowns” (new species) – includes species which were recognised as new to science and ca. 70% of species fall into this category. These taxa are currently assigned to morphospecies name (e.g., Leitoscoloplos sp. 1) and some will be formally described. However, many of these species are represented by only one specimen and/or the specimens are damaged or too incomplete to provide a full diagnosis. It is hoped that future sampling work will provide better examples of such species, enabling their formal description.

An on-line taxonomic guide was created for 191 morphospecies using the Scratchpad platform (Smith et al. 2012) and links to preliminary informal descriptions and images can be found in the check list in this publication. The taxonomic guide itself is an identification tool and its aim is not solving taxonomic problems. These are merely highlighted (where possible), stressing the need for future work by taxonomic experts in particular polychaete groups. Finally, it is important to note, that only morphological examination has been carried out so far as the specimens were not suitable for molecular work. Ultimately, recent taxonomic research has shown that morphological examination has its limits and molecular work is often needed to resolve taxonomic problems (Nygren 2014).

The remainder of this publication concentrates on re-descriptions or formal descriptions of new species, where material was available in condition that is conductive to observation of important taxonomic characters. Whilst this work concentrates on a fraction of the ‘unknowns’, it represents a useful advance, coupled with the significant effort to make raw data and vouchers for the entire collection available for loan. Many known species described in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries suffer from poor descriptions and lack of images. Thus, we provide an up to date description, accompanied by photographs and SEM images for Harmothoe anderssoni Bergström, 1916 a commonly reported species from the area, with confused taxonomic history to highlight the potential of material presented in this publication. Similarly, Hartmann-Schröder (1965) described Aphelochaeta longisetosa but did not provide any figures. We have taken the opportunity to provide images of the holotype as well as specimens of the species collected from the Falkland Islands.

Accession of the specimens into NHM London collection

Voucher specimens (N = 161) from East Falkland Basin surveys were formally accessioned into museum’s collection and the data are here made available via Darwin Core Database (Suppl. material 1). We also undertook accession-ready re-sorting of the material from the North Falkland Basin (Sea Lion oil field). As a result, 15,394 specimens were accessioned at species level (Suppl. material 3) and 2,460 specimens were accessioned at family level (Suppl. material 2) due to time constraints on the re-sorting. All together 18,015 specimens were accessioned to date out of total of ca. 25,000 specimens available.

Systematic accounts

Polynoidae Kinberg, 1856

Harmothoe anderssoni Bergström, 1916

Figures 2, 3, 4

Harmothoe anderssoni Bergström, 1916: 286; Monro 1930: 57.

Eunoe anderssoni (Bergström, 1916): Monro 1936: 90; Hartman 1953: 31.

Hermadion anderssoni (Bergström, 1916): Fauvel 1950: 754.

Harmothoe (Eunoe) anderssoni (Bergström, 1916): Hartmann-Schröder and Rosenfeldt 1990: 92; Hartmann-Schröder and Rosenfeldt 1992: 89.

Materials

Sample 40MFC, 442 m, -49.3403947, -59.0845558, coll. 23/04/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24629. Sample 75MFC, 438 m, -49.3383880, -59.1262342, coll. 22/03/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.21524. Sample 28MFA, 452 m, -49.3044189, -59.0852225, coll. 23/04/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24377. Sample 30MFB, 456 m, -49.3039703, -59.0302064, coll. 25/04/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24424. Sample 35MFB, 450 m, -49.3221858, -59.0573711, coll. 15/04/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24490. Sample 36MFB, 450 m, -49.3219581, -59.0298531, coll. 25/04/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24508. Sample 38MFB, 434 m, -49.3408178, -59.1396133, coll. 23/04/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24547. Sample 42MFC, 433 m, -49.3590078, -59.1668389, coll. 14/04/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24664. Sample 53MFC, 444 m, -49.3751330, -59.1116004, coll. 25/03/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.24908. Sample 67MFB, 442 m, -49.2889470, -59.1102897, coll. 19/03/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.25176. Sample 75MFB, 438 m, -49.3383880, -59.1262342, coll. 22/03/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.21519. Sample 77MFA, 432 m, -49.3511630, -59.1260079, coll. 22/03/2012, Ind. 1, NHM.2018.21547. Sample 19MFA, 443 m, -49.2870544, -59.1680519, coll. 17/04/2012, Ind. 2, NHM.2018.11562–11563. Sample 82MFA, 443 m, -49.2614970, -59.1672448, coll. 16/03/2012, Ind. 2, NHM.2018.12638–12639. Sample 56MFC, 450 m -49.2451170, -59.0544011, coll. 18/03/2012, Ind. 3, NHM.2018.13437–13439.

Description

Voucher, NHM.2018.24629, a complete specimen (in two fragments) with 35 segments (Fig. 2a), 7.5 mm long and 2 mm wide, including parapodia, but excluding chaetae. Voucher (SEM specimen on stub), NHM.2018.21524, a complete specimen with 35 segments 5 mm long and 1.5 mm wide, including parapodia, but excluding chaetae (Fig. 2b).

Figure 2.

Harmothoe anderssoni (voucher NHM.2018.24629, unless stated otherwise) a complete specimen (in two fragments) in dorsal view b SEM micrograph of the complete specimen in dorsal view (voucher, NHM.2018.21524) c detail of prostomium in dorsal view d pygidium with pygidial cirri in ventral view. Scale bars: 1 mm (a, d); 2 mm (b).

Prostomium bilobed, with cephalic peaks (Fig. 2b, c); ceratophore of median antenna in anterior notch, style of median antenna papillate, slightly inflated subdistally, then abruptly tapering; lateral antennae inserted ventrally with styles papillate, tapering. Anterior pair of eyes situated dorsolaterally on widest part of prostomium, posterior pair dorsally near hind margin of prostomium. Palps papillate, tapering.

Tentaculophores inserted laterally to prostomium, each with notochaetae; styles of dorsal and ventral tentacular cirri papillate, slightly inflated subdistally, then abruptly tapering; the dorsal cirri longer than ventral cirri. Second segment with first pair of elytra, biramous parapodia, and long buccal (ventral) cirri.

Fifteen pairs of elytra covering dorsum, on segments 2, 4, 5, 7, on alternating segments until segment 23, then on segments 26, 29 and 32; all elytra present in voucher specimen (NHM.2018.24629) (Fig. 2a). Outer lateral margin of elytra with dense fringe of long, filiform papillae (Figs 3d; 4a), such papillae also cover elytral surface in between tubercles. Elytral surface covered with 3 forms of tubercles (Figs 3e; 4a–e): small and conical microtubercules confined to anteriormostmargin of elytra (form 1) begin to increase in size, becoming cylindrical to conical, distally somewhat truncated (form 2) and this form covers most of elytral surface; posteriormost margin of elytra with several (8–10) cylindrical to conical distally multifid macrotubercles (form 3).

Figure 3.

Harmothoe anderssoni (voucher, NHM.2018.24629) a mid-body parapodium, insert showing line drawing of supra-acicular neuropodial lobe b bidentate neurochaetae c unidentate neurochaetae d mid-body elytron showing elongated marginal papillae e detail of elytral surface from mid-body elytron showing multifid macrotubercules. Scale bars: 500 µm (a, d); 50 µm (b, c); 200 µm (e).

Parapodia biramous (Fig. 3a); notopodia with elongate acicular lobe; neuropodia larger than notopodia, with short slender supracicular process (Fig. 3a, insert) tips of noto- and neuro-acicula penetrating epidermis. Cirrigerous segments with indistinct dorsal tubercules and cylindrical cirrophores, styles of dorsal cirri very long (slightly longer than neurochaetae), slender, papillate, tapering. Ventral cirri from chaetiger 2 where long and basally inserted; on subsequent chaetigers ventral cirri short, smooth, tapering, medially inserted on neuropodia. Nephridial papillae distinct from chaetiger 6 till end of the body.

Notochaetae stouter than neurochaetae. Notochaetae curved, with distinct rows of spines on convex side and blunt, unidentate tip; numerous, arranged in ca. five rows, increasing in length with each row (Fig. 3a). Neurochaetae uni- and bidentate (Figs 3b, c; 4f); lower and mid neurochaetae unidentate, falcate, subdistally with spines; upper neurochaetae few, bidentate with slender secondary tooth (often abraded), subdistally with spines.

Pygidium with a pair of very long (reaching back over ten segments), thin, papillate anal cirri (Fig. 2d).

Figure 4.

Harmothoe anderssoni (SEM micrograph), (voucher, NHM.2018.21524) a detached elytron from mid-body b detail of the multifid macrotubercles c detail of the posterior elytral margin d detail of microtubercules from the mid-section of the elytra e detail of conical microtubercules near the anterior elytral margin f detail of bidentate neurochaetae. Scale bars: 500 µm (a); 100 µm (b, c, e); 50 µm (d); 20 µm (f).

Remarks

During preliminary assessment of Falkland Islands specimens these were assigned to Harmothoe due to presence of bidentate neurochaetae, as well as other generic characters such short body, 15 segments with elytra, prostomium with cephalic peaks and neuropodia with supra-acicular lobes. However, this species did not match any described or recently reviewed species of Harmothoe from the Southern and South Atlantic Oceans (Barnich et al. 2006; Barnich and Fiege 2009; Barnich and Fiege 2010; Barnich et al. 2012; Miranda and Brasil 2014). The form of elytra was, however, consistent with that described for Eunoe anderssoni, a Southern Ocean species, which has a confused taxonomic history. It was originally placed in genus Harmothoe by Bergström (1916), referred to as Eunoe by Monro (1936), moved to Hermadion by Fauvel (1950) and again considered Eunoe by Hartman (1966). Our understanding is that the reports of Polynoe hirsuta from Chile by Ehlers (1901) are misidentified specimens of H. anderssoni, given they were recognised as such by Bergström (1916) and Fauvel (1950). Given that Ehlers’ specimens are not available for examination we prefer not to include these in formal synonymy.

The genera Eunoe and Hermadion share some characters with Harmothoe such as a short body and the presence of 15 elytragerous segments (see e.g., Barnichand Fiege 2009, 2010; Bock et al. 2010), but while prostomial cephalic peaks and neuropodial supracicular lobes are present in Harmothoe and Eunoe, these are lacking in Hermadion (see Barnich and Fiege 2006). However, Eunoe supposed to have only unidentate neurochaetae (see e.g., Barnich and Fiege 2009, 2010), while supra-acicular neurochaetae in Falkland Island specimens are clearly bidentate. Unfortunately, Bergström (1916) did not comment on the form of neurochaetae in detail, but subsequently both unidentate and bidentate neurochaetae were reported in Eunoe anderssoni by Monro (1936), Hartman (1953) and Hartmann-Schröder and Rosenfeldt (1992). Monro (1936) commented that three out of six specimens had unidentate chaetae only, but in our experience, the slender secondary tooth becomes easily abraded, which may erroneously lead to the conclusion that all neurochaetae are unidentate. The original placement of this species in genus Harmothoe is therefore justified and is referred to here as Harmothoe anderssoni. It is important to stress that this decision is driven by practical ease of identification rather than phylogenetic position of this species. Recent molecular work on Polynoidae suggests paraphyly of Harmothoe (e.g., Norlinder et al. 2012) and the current designation of polynoid genera is likely problematic. Here, we do not attempt to solve systematic difficulties, but provide new information on Harmothoe anderssoni with photographs, high quality SEM images (see also Hartmann-Schröder and Rosenfeldt 1992) and detailed description of this species based on material from Falkland Islands.

Distribution

This species is known from Adélie Coast, Kerguelen Islands, South Georgia, South Orkneys and the Antarctic (Hartmann-Schröder and Rosenfeldt 1992). Here, we record this species from the North Falklands Basin, ca. 450 m depth.

Syllidae Grube, 1850