Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-08T15:49:49.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XIV.—Observations on the structure of the shipworms, Nausitora hedleyi, Teredo furcifera and Teredora princesae (Bivalvia: Teredinidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

M. Saraswathy  and
N. Balakrishnan Nair
M. Saraswathy
Affiliation:
National Institute of Oceanography, Cochin, 18 India
N. Balakrishnan Nair
Affiliation:
Marine Biological Laboratory, Trivandrum-7, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Synopsis

Detailed descriptions and illustrations are presented of the structure of three representative species of tropical shipworms, Nausitora hedleyi, Teredo furcifera and Teredora princesae. The disposition of the various organ systems is described and illustrated with notes on the histology of the different regions so as to throw light on the adaptations and specializations of these unusual bivalves. The trend of evolution within the Teredinidae is discussed in the light of the available evidence contained in the present morphological studies.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 68 , Issue 14 , 1971 , pp. 507 - 566
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Atkins, D., 1936. “On the Ciliary Mechanisms and Interrelationships of Lamellibranchs, I. New Observations on Sorting Mechanisms”, Q. Jl Microsc. Sci., 79, 181–308.Google Scholar
Atkins, D., 1937. “On the Ciliary Mechanisms and Interrelationships of Lamellibranchs. II. Sorting Devices on the Gills”, Q. Jl Microsc. Sci., 79, 339–373.Google Scholar
Bade, I. V., Masurekar, V. B. & Bal, D. V., 1961. “A general account of the wood-borer, Bankia (Bankiella) minima Blv. nach Roch”, J. Univ. Bombay, 29, 49–61.Google Scholar
Beuk, S., 1899. “Aur kenntnis des Baues der Niere und der Morphologie von Teredo L.”, Arb. Zool. Inst. Univ. Wien, 11, 269–288.Google Scholar
Board, P. A., 1970. “Some Observations on the Tunnelling of Shipworms”, J. Zool., 161, 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deschamps, P., 1953. “Recherche de la cellulase chez Teredo navalis au moyen de la chromatographie de partage”, Bull. Soc. Zool. Fr., 78, 174–177.Google Scholar
Deshayes, G. P., 1848. “Histoire naturelle des Mollusques”, Explor. Scient. Algérie, Zool., 1, 609.Google Scholar
Gallo, Ugo, 1950. “The anatomy, habits and destructiveness of Bankia setacea”, Tech. Rep., Powell River Co. Ltd., 1–30.Google Scholar
Grobben, C., 1888. “Die Pericardialdrüse der Lamellibranchiaten. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Anatomie dieser Molluskenclasse”, Arb. Zool. Inst. Univ. Wien, 7, 355–444.Google Scholar
Halton, D. W. and Owen, G., 1968. “The fine structure and histochemistry of the gastric cuticle of the protobranchiate bivalve, Nucula sulcata Bronn”, Proc. Malac. Soc. Lond., 38, 71–80.Google Scholar
Hancock, A., 1845. “Note on the Boring Apparatus of the Carnivorous Gastropods, and of the Stone- and Wood-burrowing Bivalves”, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 15, 113–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ikeda, I. and Ozaki, Y., 1918. “Notes on a new Boveria species Boveria labialis n. sp.”, J. Coll. Sci. Imp. Univ. Tokyo, 40, 6, 25p.Google Scholar
Kato, K. & Kubomura, K., 1954. “On the origins of the crystalline style of lamellibranchs”, Sci. Rep. Saitama Univ., B3, 135–152.Google Scholar
Kellog, J. L., 1915. “Ciliary mechanisms of lamellibranchs with descriptions of anatomy”, J. Morph., 26, 625–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lane, C. E., 1959. “Some aspects of the general biology of Teredo. Marine boring and fouling organisms”, Seattle: Univ. Wash. Press. 137–144.Google Scholar
Lazier, E. L., 1924. “Morphology of the digestive tract of Teredo navalis”, Univ. Calif. Publs Zool., 22, 455–474.Google Scholar
Miller, R. C., 1922. “Variations in the shell of Teredo navalis in San Francisco Bay”, Univ. Calif. Publs Zool, 22, 293–328.Google Scholar
Miller, R. C., 1923. “Variations in the pallets of Teredo navalis in San Francisco Bay”, Univ. Calif. Publs Zool., 22, 401–412.Google Scholar
Morton, B. S., 1969. “Studies on the biology of Dreissena polymorpha Pall. I. General anatomy and Morphology”, Proc. Malac. Soc. Lond., 38, 301–321.Google Scholar
Morton, B. S., 1970 a. “The tidal rhythm and rhythm of feeding and digestion in Cardium edule”, J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., 50, 499–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morton, B. S., 1970 b. “The Functional Anatomy of the Organs of Feeding and Digestion of Teredo navalis Linnaeu and Lyrodus pedicellalus (Quatrefages)”, Proc. Malac. Soc. Lond., 39, 151–167.Google Scholar
Nair, N. B., 1954. “Shipworms from India. I. Report on Ten Species of Shipworms from the Madras Coast”, Rec. Indian Mus., 52, 387–414.Google Scholar
Nair, N. B., 1956. “Physiology of digestion in Bankia indica. The enzymatic activity of the digestive diverticula”, J. Madras Univ., B, 26, 599–627.Google Scholar
Nair, N. B., 1957. “Structure and physiology of the timber borer Bankia indica with special reference to boring habit”, J. Madras Univ., 27B 335–372.Google Scholar
Nair, N. B., 1964. “Structure and physiology of the timber borer Bankia indica. II. The circulatory and excretory systems”, J. Anim. Morph. Physiol., 11, 51–57.Google Scholar
Nelson, T. C., 1918. “On the origin, nature and function of the crystalline style of lamellibranchs”, J. Morph., 31, 53–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, G., 1955. “Observations on the Stomach and Digestive Diverticula of the Lamellibranchia. I. The Anisomyaria and Eulamellibranchia”, Q. Jl Microsc. Sci., 96, 517–537.Google Scholar
Owen, G., 1966. “Digestion”. In Physiology of Mollusca. II. (Ed. Wilbur, K. M. and Yonge, C. M.) New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pelseneer, P., 1891. “Contribution a l'etude des Lamellibranches”, Archs Biol., 11, 147–312.Google Scholar
Potts, F. A., 1923. “The structure and function of the liver of Teredo, the shipworm”, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. Biol. Sci., 1, 1–17.Google Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1939. “Reduction of the Ctenidia in the Lamellibranchia”, Nature, Lond., 144, 206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1941. “On the biology and relationships of the lamellibranch Xylophaga dorsalis (Turton)”, J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., 24, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1954. “A note on the biology of the Lamellibranch Rocellaria (Gastrochaena) cuneiformis Spengler”, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 124, 17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1655. “The structure and function of the British Pholadidae (Rock-Boring Lamellibranchia”, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 124, 859–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1955 a. “The functional morphology of the rock-boring lamellibranch Petricola pholadiformis Lamarck”, J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K., 34, 257–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purchon, R. D., 1960. “The stomach in the Eulamellibranchia, stomach types IV and V”, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond, 125, 431–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quartefages, A. De, 1849. “Memoire sur le genre Taret (Teredo Lin.)”, Annls Sci. Nat. Zool., 11, 19–64.Google Scholar
Reid, R. G. B., 1965. “The structure and function of the stomach in bivalve molluscs”, J. Zool., 147, 156–184.Google Scholar
Ridewood, W. G., 1903. “On the Structure of the Gills of Lamellibranchia”, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 195B, 147–284.Google Scholar
Sigerfoos, C. P., 1908. “Natural history, organization, and late development of the Teredinidae, or shipworms”, Bull. Bur. Fish. Wash., 27, 191–231.Google Scholar
Turner, R. D., 1966. A survey and illustrated Catalogue of the Teredinidae {Mollusca: Bivalvia). Cambridge, Mass.: Mus. Comp. Zool. Harv. Univ.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallengren, H., 1905. “Zur Biologie der Muscheln. I. Die Wasserströmungen; II. Die Nahrungsaufnahme”, Acta Univ. Lund, (2), 1, Nos. 2–3.Google Scholar
White, K. M., 1942. “The pericardial cavity and the pericardial gland of the Lamellibranchia”, Proc. Malac. Soc. Lond., 25, 37–88.Google Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1923. “The Mechanism of feeding, digestion and assimilation in the lamellibranch, Mya”, J. Exp. Zool., 1, 15–63.Google Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1926. “The Digestive Diverticula in the Lamellibranchs”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb, 54, 703–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1928. “Feeding mechanisms in the invertebrates”, Biol. Rev., 3, 21–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1949. “On the structure and adaptations of the Tellinacea deposit-feeding Eulamellibranchia”, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 234B, 29–76.Google Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1953. “The Monomyarian Condition in the Lamellibranchia”, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb., 62, 443–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yonge, C. M., 1957. “Mantle fusion in the Lamellibranchia”, Pubbl. Stz. Zool. Napoli, 29, 151–171.Google Scholar
Zobell, C. E., 1946. Marine Microbiology. Waltham, Mass.Google Scholar