-
433
http://journals.tubitak.gov.tr/zoology/
Turkish Journal of Zoology Turk J Zool(2016) 40: 433-437©
TÜBİTAKdoi:10.3906/zoo-1510-20
Interesting rotifers (Rotifera: Eurotatoria) from a subtropical
wetland of Meghalaya, Northeast India: new records
Bhushan Kumar SHARMA*Freshwater Biology Laboratory, Department
of Zoology, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong , Meghalaya,
India
* Correspondence: [email protected]
The phylum Rotifera is an important component of freshwater
microinvertebrate communities and an integral link of aquatic food
webs. The faunal diversity of the phylum from the hill state of
Meghalaya, Northeast India (NEI), was documented by Sharma and
Sharma (1999) and that was followed by certain additions
subsequently by Sharma (2006, 2008, 2010) and Sharma and Sharma
(2011). This interim report on seven new records, part of a more
detailed analysis of the rich rotifer diversity of a subtropical
wetland of Meghalaya, is an attempt to update the biodiversity
status of the taxa from this state. All recorded species are
illustrated for validation and comments are made on their taxonomy
and distribution.
This report is a part of limnological reconnaissance of a
subtropical wetland (25°36′32.8″N to 25°36′36.3″N, 91°53′46.9″E to
91°54′01.5″E; alt. 1400 m a.s.l.) located at the campus of
North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, the capital city of the
Meghalaya state of NEI (Figure 1). Sampling was done monthly
between August 2014 and July 2015. Water samples were collected for
basic abiotic parameters. Water temperature, specific conductivity,
and pH were recorded by field probes; dissolved oxygen was
estimated by Winkler’s method and free carbon dioxide, alkalinity,
hardness, calcium, and chloride were analyzed following APHA
protocols (1992).
The qualitative plankton and littoral periphytonic samples were
collected by towing a Nylobolt plankton net (#50 µm) and preserved
in 5% formalin. All collections were screened with a Wild
stereoscopic binocular
microscope; the rotifers were isolated and mounted in polyvinyl
alcohol-lactophenol and were observed with a Leica DM 1000
stereoscopic phase-contrast microscope fitted with an image
analyzer. Various taxa were identified following Koste (1978),
Koste and Shiel (1989), Segers (1995), and Trinh Dang et al.
(2015).
The variations (ranges, mean ± SD) of the recorded abiotic
parameters of the sampled wetland are indicated in the Table.
Seven new records of Rotifera belonging to six genera and six
families are reported. These include five species new to the Indian
Rotifera, namely Colurella tesselata (Figure 2), Lecane stichaea
(Figure 3), Gastropus minor (Figure 4), Stephanoceros fimbriatus
(Figure 5), and Dissotrocha aculeata (Figure 6), while Lecane
dorysimilis (Figure 7) and Cupelopagis vorax (Figures 8 and 9) are
new additions to the rotifer fauna of NEI.
Systematic list of the recorded Rotifera taxaPhylum:
RotiferaClass: EurotatoriaSubclass: MonogonontaOrder: PloimaFamily:
Lepadellidae 1. Colurella tesselata (Glascott, 1893) Family:
Lecanidae 2. Lecane stichaea Harring, 1913 3. Lecane dorysimilis
Trinh Dang, Segers &
Sanoamuang, 2015
Abstract: The plankton and semiplankton samples examined from a
subtropical wetland of Shillong, Meghalaya, Northeast India (NEI),
revealed seven new records of rotifers belonging to six genera and
six families. These include five species new to the Indian Rotifera
and two species new to the rotifer fauna of NEI, thus meriting
interest in terms of biodiversity and distribution. All the species
are illustrated to warrant validation. While a detailed account of
the rich rotifer diversity of the wetland is continuing, this
interim report raises the total tally of Rotifera known from
Meghalaya to 141 species belonging to 41 genera and 20
families.
Key words: Biodiversity, distribution, interesting taxa, urban
wetland
Received: 07.10.2015 Accepted/Published Online: 17.12.2015 Final
Version: 07.04.2016
Short Communication
-
434
SHARMA / Turk J Zool
Family: Gastropodidae 4. Gastropus minor (Rousselet, 1892)
Order: FlosculariaceaeFamily: Floscularidae 5. Stephanoceros
fimbriatus (Goldfusz, 1820) Order: CollothecaceaeFamily: Atrochidae
6. Cupelopagis vorax (Leidy, 1857) Subclass: BdelloideaFamily:
Philodinidae 7. Dissotrocha aculeata (Ehrenberg, 1832) The wetland
is characterized by its subtropical, slightly
acidic-circumneutral, soft, well-oxygenated, and calcium-poor
waters with low free carbon dioxide and low ionic concentrations;
the last salient feature warranted inclusion
of the water body in the ‘Class I’ category of trophic
classification according to Talling and Talling (1965). The
chloride content indicated certain influence of human impact in
this seepage and rainwater-fed ecosystem.
The present study revealed seven new records of rotifers
belonging to six genera and six families. Of these, Colurella
tesselata, Lecane stichaea, Gastropus minor, Stephanoceros
fimbriatus, and Dissotrocha aculeata are new to the Indian Rotifera
while Lecane dorysimilis and Cupelopagis vorax are new additions to
the fauna of NEI. This report merits interest in terms of
biodiversity and distribution interest and has raised the total
tally of Rotifera known from Meghalaya to 141 species belonging to
41 genera and 20 families. Furthermore, the majority of these taxa,
except Dissotrocha aculeata, are rare in the studied
collections.
A B
Figure 1. A) Map of India showing Meghalaya state; B) District
map of Meghalaya showing Shillong (East Khasi hills district).
Table. Variations in some basic abiotic parameters.
Parameters Range Mean ± SD
Water temperature (°C) 12.0–22.5 17.4 ± 3.2
pH 6.02–6.99 6.59 ± 0.19
Specific conductivity (µs/cm) 31.0–51.0 37.4 ± 5.4
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L) 5.6–7.6 6.7 ± 0.5
Free carbon dioxide (mg/L) 6.0–22.0 11.3 ± 4.3
Total alkalinity (mg/L) 18.0–30.0 24.0 ± 3.5
Total hardness (mg/L) 20.0–32.0 26.3 ± 3.4
Calcium (mg/L) 8.4–23.1 14.4 ± 4.6
Chloride (mg/L) 25.0–38.0 32.5 ± 4.1
-
435
SHARMA / Turk J Zool
Colurella tesselata, a new record from India, is characterized
by its dorsal keel and facet-like pattern of ribs on the lorica
(Koste and Shiel, 1989). This species is known
from African, Australian, Nearctic, Palearctic, Neotropical, and
Oriental regions (Segers, 2007). It is reported from the Oriental
region from Thailand (Sa-Ardrit et al., 2013)
2 3 4
6 5
7
8 9
Figures 2–9. 2- Colurella tesselata (Glascott) (lateral view);
3- Lecane stichaea Harring (ventral view); 4- Gastropus minor
(Rousselet) (lateral view); 5- Stephanoceros fimbriatus (Goldfusz)
(lateral view); 6- Dissotrocha aculeata (Ehrenberg) (lateral view);
7- Lecane dorysimilis Trinh Dang, Segers & Sanoamuang (dorsal
view); 8- Cupelopagis vorax (Leidy) (lateral view);9- Cupelopagis
vorax (Leidy) (trophi).
-
436
SHARMA / Turk J Zool
and Vietnam (Trinh Dang et al., 2013); the present report
extended its distribution within that region to the Indian
sub-subcontinent. The lecanid L. stichaea, another new addition to
the Indian Rotifera, is differentiated from its congeners L.
haliclysta, L. stichoclysta, and L. verecunda by its toes bearing
pseudoclaws. The examined specimens are assigned to L. stichaea
following Segers (1995). This cosmopolitan species is known from
the Oriental region from Thailand (Sa-Ardrit et al., 2013) and the
current report extended its distribution to the Indian
subregion.
This study provided the first ‘validated record’ of Gastropus
minor from India; earlier unverifiable reports of the taxon from
Kashmir, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, and Uttar Pradesh
lack any validation (characters, figures, drawings, etc.) and hence
they are considered dubious unless warranted. This dogma of
‘indiscriminate unverifiable reports of the rotifer taxa’ in
several ‘ad hoc routine faunal lists without taxonomic expertise’
is seriously impairing the progress of knowledge of the
biodiversity of the Indian Rotifera (Sharma and Sharma, 2014a,
2014b, 2015) and needs the attention of future workers.
The sessile Stephanoceros fimbriatus is another new record from
India. This rotifer is known elsewhere from the Australian,
Nearctic, Neotropical, Palearctic, and Oriental regions (Segers,
2007); it is reported from the Oriental region from Thailand
(Sa-Ardrit et al., 2013) and its distribution is now extended to
the Indian subregion. The cosmopolitan bdelloid Dissotrocha
aculeata is rather common in various samples, though invariably
contracted, but identifiable. This species is known from the
Oriental region from Thailand (Sa-Ardrit et al., 2013) and the
present record has extended its distribution to the Indian
subcontinent.
Trinh Dang et al. (2015) recently described L. dorysimilis sp.
nov. from the hygropsammon of Bau Thiem Lake, Thua Thien Hue
Province of Vietnam, and considered it to be a psammophilous or
even psammoxene littoral taxon rather than a psammobiontic
species.
Further, it cooccurred with L. doryssa but differed from it in
several attributes. Trinh Dang et al. (2015), however, commented on
incorrectly identified illustrated records of L. doryssa pertaining
to L. dorysimilis and thus confirmed the presence of the latter
species from China (Wang, 1961) and India (Sarma, 1988). This
lecanid even cooccurred with L. doryssa in the sampled wetland but
the present report affirmed its littoral-periphytonic character.
This study extended its distribution range within India to NEI and
thus affirmed its regional distribution. L. dorysimilis is
currently designated as an Indo-Chinese element pending further
knowledge of its biogeography; it is expected to be more widely
distributed in NEI than just the report from Meghalaya.
Cupelopagis vorax is distributed in the Australian, Nearctic,
Palearctic, Neotropical, and Oriental regions (Segers, 2007). This
predaceous rotifer is validly known from India from Kashmir
(Edmonson and Hutchinson, 1934) and Chandigarh (Vasisht and Dawar,
1968), while its unverifiable reports from Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, and
West Bengal are still questionable. The present report, further
extending its occurrence to NEI, is of regional distribution
interest.
This biodiversity update on the rotifer fauna of Meghalaya
indicated an emphasis on analysis of samples from more diverse
aquatic biotopes, especially from the subtropical wetlands of NEI,
which are as of yet underexplored. The records of five species
restricted to NEI and the extension of the distribution ranges of
two species to this region are of biogeographical value.
AcknowledgmentsThanks are due to the Head of the Department of
Zoology, North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong, for laboratory
facilities and to KR Sounii Pou for collecting the samples. The
author is thankful to three anonymous reviewers for their useful
comments.
References
APHA (1992). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Waste Water. 18th ed. New York, NY, USA: American Water Works
Association and Water Pollution Control Federation.
Edmondson WT, Hutchinson GE (1934). Report on Rotatoria. Article
IX. Yale North India expedition. Mem Conn Acad Arts Sci 10:
153-186.
Koste W (1978). ROTATORIA. Die Rädertiere Mitteleuropas,
begründet von Max Voigt. Überordnung Monogononta. Berlin, Germany:
Gebrüder Borntraeger (in German).
Koste W, Shiel RJ (1989). Rotifera from Australian inland
waters. IV. Colurellidae (Rotifera, Monogononta). T Roy Soc South
Aust 113: 119-143.
Sa-Ardrit P, Pholpunthin P, Segers H (2013). A checklist of the
freshwater rotifer fauna of Thailand (Rotifera, Monogononta,
Bdelloidea). J Limnol 72: 361-375.
Sarma SSS (1988). New records of freshwater rotifers (Rotifera)
from Indian waters. Hydrobiologia 160: 263-269.
Segers H (1995). Rotifera 2: Lecanidae. In: Dumont HJ, Nogrady
T, editors. Guides to Identification of the Microinvertebrates of
the Continental Waters of the World. Amsterdam, the Netherlands:
SPB Academic Publishing, pp. 1-226.
Segers H (2007). Annotated checklist of the rotifers (Phylum
Rotifera), with notes on nomenclature, taxonomy and distribution.
Zootaxa 1564: 1-104.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00007141http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00007141
-
437
SHARMA / Turk J Zool
Sharma BK, Sharma S (1999). Freshwater Rotifers (Rotifera,
Eurotatoria). In: Fauna of Meghalaya. State Fauna Series 4.
Calcutta, India: Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, pp.
11-161.
Sharma BK, Sharma S (2011). Faunal diversity of Rotifers
(Rotifera, Eurotatoria) of Nokrek Biosphere Reserve, Meghalaya,
India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 3: 1535-1541.
Sharma BK, Sharma S (2014a). Indian Lecanidae (Rotifera:
Eurotatoria: Monogononta) and its distribution. Int Rev Hydrobiol
99: 38-47.
Sharma BK, Sharma S (2014b). The diversity of Indian
Brachionidae (Rotifera: Eurotatoria: Monogononta) and their
distribution. Opus Zool Budapest 45: 165-180.
Sharma BK, Sharma S (2015). The diversity and distribution of
Lepadellidae (Rotifera: Eurotatoria: Monogononta) of India. Int Rev
Hydrobiol 100: 34-42.
Sharma S (2006). Rotifer communities (Rotifera: Eurotatoria) of
rice-field ecosystems of Meghalaya: composition and distribution.
Rec Zool Surv India 106: 35-50.
Sharma S (2008). Freshwater Monogonont Rotifers (Rotifera:
Eurotatoria: Monogononta). In: Fauna of Kopili Hydro Electric
Project Site. Wetland Ecosystem Series 8. Calcutta, India:
Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, pp. 5-22.
Sharma S (2010). Rotifera (Rotifera: Eurotatoria). In: Faunal
Diversity of Baghmara Reserve Forest, Conservation Area Series 44.
Calcutta, India: Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, pp.
5-10.
Talling JF, Talling IB (1965). The chemical composition of
African lake waters. Int Rev Ges Hydrobiol 50: 421-463.
Trinh Dang M, Segers H, Sanoamuang L (2013). Rotifers from Thuy
Tien lake and Nhu Y river in central Vietnam, with a description of
Ploesoma asiaticum new species (Rotifera: Monogononta). J Limnol
72: 276-286.
Trinh Dang M, Segers H, Sanoamuang L (2015). Psammon rotifers in
Central Vietnam, with the descriptions of three new species
(Rotifera: Monogononta). Zootaxa 4018: 249-265.
Vasisht HS, Dawar BL (1968). Anatomy and histology of the
rotifer Cupelopagis vorax Leidy. Res Bull (NS) Punjab Univ 29:
207-221.
Wang J (1961). Fauna of Freshwater Rotifera of China. Beijing,
China: Science Press of China.
http://dx.doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2527.1535-41http://dx.doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2527.1535-41http://dx.doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2527.1535-41http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.201301702http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.201301702http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.201301702http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.201401739http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.201401739http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.201401739http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.19650500307http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/iroh.19650500307
