Laevilitorina umbilicata Pfeffer 1886

37. Laevilitorina umbilicata Pfeffer, 1886 [Figs 14H–K] Laevilitorina umbilicata Pfeffer, 1886: 88, pl. 1, fig. 12 [in Martens & Pfeffer 1986] Material examined. • 557 spms, Stn. 2; • 7 spms, Stn. 9; • 1 spm, Stn. 12. Type locality. South Georgia. Bathymetric distribution. 0–40 m. Substrate. Hard bottom, grazing on macroalgae or stones. Geographical distribution. ANTARCTICA: Antarctic Peninsula. SUBANTARCTICA: -. SCOTIA ARC: South Georgia, South Orkney Islands, South Shetland Islands. SOUTH AMERICA: -. Remarks. Similar to Engl (2012), the material we found consisted of both smooth and spiral-banded specimens. Laevilitorina umbilicata was by far the most common species in our study area and was found almost exclusively in the intertidal zone. There was only one single finding from a depth of 15 m. Laevilitorina umbilicata can be confused with L. antarctica (E. A. Smith, 1902). However, it is slender and the whorls are not as distinct. Laevilitorina antarctica is more restricted to the Antarctic proper and L. umbilicata to the Antarctic Peninsula and the islands of the Scotia Arc, however, both overlap in their distribution area in South Shetland Islands and Antarctic Peninsula (Rosenfeld et al. 2022). While L. umbilicata is found in masses under stones in the immediate intertidal zone of King George Island (Aldea et al. 2016; this study), L. antarctica obviously prefers to colonise macroalgae in greater depths (9 to 20 m) (Martín et al. 2016; Amsler et al. 2022). There are a number of literature records of L. antarctica from very shallow South Shetland Islands, but it can be assumed that at least some of them are misidentifications. On the other hand, phylogenetic reconstructions of the Antarctic species L. antarctica, L. claviformis Preston, 1916, and L. umbilicata failed to discriminate them as different evolutionary units (Rosenfeld et al. 2024). If it is confirmed that they cannot be separated genetically, both L. antarctica and L. claviformis would have to be placed in the synonymy of L. umbilicata. However, a review is not the subject of this investigation. The species is already known from Maxwell and Admiralty Bays. References. Arnaud et al. (1986), Engl (2012), Aghmich et al. (2016), Aldea et al. (2016), Martín et al. (2016), Amsler et al. (2022), Rosenfeld et al. (2022, 2024).

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-05-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15375117
Primary Topic
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Laevilitorina umbilicata Pfeffer 1886

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
article

Laevilitorina umbilicata Pfeffer 1886

article en

Abstract

37. Laevilitorina umbilicata Pfeffer, 1886 [Figs 14H–K] Laevilitorina umbilicata Pfeffer, 1886: 88, pl. 1, fig. 12 [in Martens & Pfeffer 1986] Material examined. • 557 spms, Stn. 2; • 7 spms, Stn. 9; • 1 spm, Stn. 12. Type locality. South Georgia. Bathymetric distribution. 0–40 m. Substrate. Hard bottom, grazing on macroalgae or stones. Geographical distribution. ANTARCTICA: Antarctic Peninsula. SUBANTARCTICA: -. SCOTIA ARC: South Georgia, South Orkney Islands, South Shetland Islands. SOUTH AMERICA: -. Remarks. Similar to Engl (2012), the material we found consisted of both smooth and spiral-banded specimens. Laevilitorina umbilicata was by far the most common species in our study area and was found almost exclusively in the intertidal zone. There was only one single finding from a depth of 15 m. Laevilitorina umbilicata can be confused with L. antarctica (E. A. Smith, 1902). However, it is slender and the whorls are not as distinct. Laevilitorina antarctica is more restricted to the Antarctic proper and L. umbilicata to the Antarctic Peninsula and the islands of the Scotia Arc, however, both overlap in their distribution area in South Shetland Islands and Antarctic Peninsula (Rosenfeld et al. 2022). While L. umbilicata is found in masses under stones in the immediate intertidal zone of King George Island (Aldea et al. 2016; this study), L. antarctica obviously prefers to colonise macroalgae in greater depths (9 to 20 m) (Martín et al. 2016; Amsler et al. 2022). There are a number of literature records of L. antarctica from very shallow South Shetland Islands, but it can be assumed that at least some of them are misidentifications. On the other hand, phylogenetic reconstructions of the Antarctic species L. antarctica, L. claviformis Preston, 1916, and L. umbilicata failed to discriminate them as different evolutionary units (Rosenfeld et al. 2024). If it is confirmed that they cannot be separated genetically, both L. antarctica and L. claviformis would have to be placed in the synonymy of L. umbilicata. However, a review is not the subject of this investigation. The species is already known from Maxwell and Admiralty Bays. References. Arnaud et al. (1986), Engl (2012), Aghmich et al. (2016), Aldea et al. (2016), Martín et al. (2016), Amsler et al. (2022), Rosenfeld et al. (2022, 2024).

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Leibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research Warnemünde (DE), University of Rostock (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.