中国海异毛虫科和海稚虫科分类学和地理分布研究

异毛虫科（Paraonidae）和海稚虫科（Spionidae）是环节动物门（Annelida），多毛纲（Polychaeta）中两个常见的科，其成体在海洋生态系统尤其是海洋底栖动物群落中占有重要地位。中国近海异毛虫科和海稚虫科种类极为常见，在潮间带和潮下带均有分布。但由于此两科种类个体小，采集和鉴定困难，在中国一直没有系统的分类学研究。 本论文选择异毛虫科和海稚虫科为研究对象，以中国科学院海洋研究所海洋生物标本馆馆藏的3000余号成体标本为主要研究材料，结合攻读博士学位期间对全国各海域的补充采集标本和从其它单位借用的标本，在认真阅读相关文献和比对某些种类模式标本的基础上，首次对此两科的中国种类进行了全面系统的分类学和地理分布研究。结果如下： 1. 本文记述了中国海域异毛虫科4属18种，其中包括3新纪录种；海稚虫科16属39种，包括7新种，10新纪录种。各鉴定种类均进行了详细的分类学特征描述，并附有形态学结构图。对罕见种类的标本和保存状况较差、光学显微镜无法获得可靠分类学信息的标本进行了扫描电镜观察，并拍摄有电镜照片。 2. 对中国海域有关异毛虫科和海稚虫科种类记录进行了系统的分类学修订，澄清了部分种类特别是一些常见种类分类学研究中存在的错误和混淆。（1）通过大量阅读文献和反复比较检查标本，认为以前我国文献记录的海稚虫科奇异稚齿虫属的奇异稚齿虫Paraprionospio pinnata (Ehlers, 1901)实际包括3种，即扭鳃奇异稚齿虫Paraprionospio inaequibranchia (Caullery, 1914)、枫香树奇异稚齿虫Paraprionospio coora Wilson, 1990和冠奇异稚齿虫Paraprionospio cristata sp. nov.，其中扭鳃奇异稚齿虫和枫香树奇异稚齿虫在中国海属首次记录，冠奇异稚齿虫为一新种。枫香树奇异稚齿虫主要分布于黄海，其分布南界为121°30′ E, 34°30′ N, 扭鳃奇异稚齿虫分布于南海，其分布北界为114°00′ E, 21°45′ N，冠奇异稚齿虫分布区域较广，从长江口到南海的沿岸水域均有分布。奇异稚齿虫是分布在智利、南加利福尼亚、西墨西哥（可能还有安哥拉）的种，在我国海域未见分布。（2）将在我国北方沿海非常常见但长期被记录为鳞腹钩虫Scolelepis (Scolelepis) squamata (Müller, 1806)(海稚虫科)的标本重新鉴定为一个新种，即红纹腹钩虫Scolelepis (Scolelepis) daphoinos sp. nov.；鳞腹钩虫分布于北大西洋和地中海沿岸水域，在我国海域未见分布。（3）明确了中国海Prionospio steenstrupi复合体种类。此复合体所包含的种类在形态上十分相似，分类学研究时极易混淆。在已有的文献记录中，该复合体中国种类包括两种，玛氏稚齿虫Prionospio (Prionospio) malmgreni Claparède, 1870和西沙稚齿虫Prionospio (Prionospio) sishaensis Wu & Chen, 1964。本文将该复合体中国种类修正为5种，分别是包氏稚齿虫Prionospio (Prionospio) bocki Söderström, 1920、开普敦稚齿虫Prionospio (Prionospio) dubia Maciolek, 1985、太平洋稚齿虫Prionospio (Prionospio) pacifica sp. nov.、欢乐稚齿虫Prionospio (Prionospio) paradisea Imajima, 1990和西沙稚齿虫Prionospio (Prionospio) sishaensis Wu & Chen, 1964。现在大多数分类学者认为玛氏稚齿虫是一个不可鉴定种，该种的原始描述可能包括数种，且模式标本已丢失。（4）将中国海记录的矮小离稚齿虫Apoprionospio pygmaea (Hartman, 1961)更正为卡米拉离稚齿虫Apoprionospio kirrae Wilson, 1990；将中国海记录的科氏光稚虫Spiophane kroyeri Grube, 1860更正为深蓝光稚虫Spiophanes fuscatus sp. nov.。 3. 比较研究了中国海域异毛虫科和海稚虫科的区系特点，详细分析了两科中国海种类的组成。认为中国种类在区系组成上属于印度-马来区系，异毛虫科中国海特有种较少，仅2种，占该科中国种数的11%；而海稚虫科中国海特有种较多，共9种，占该科中国种数的23%。中国海异毛虫科种类组成和日本、俄罗斯附近水域的组成较为相似，中国海海稚虫科种类组成和日本、澳大利亚附近水域的组成较为相似。

Abundance of mesozooplankton in the western part of the Black Sea in summer 1991 during the NATO Programme Hydroblack

The "Hydroblack91" dataset is based on samples collected in the summer of 1991 and covers part of North-Western in front of Romanian coast and Western Black Sea (Bulgarian coasts) (between 43°30' - 42°10' N latitude and 28°40'- 31°45' E longitude). Mesozooplankton sampling was undertaken at 20 stations. The whole dataset is composed of 72 samples with data of zooplankton species composition, abundance and biomass. Samples were collected in discrete layers 0-10, 0-20, 0-50, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100 and from bottom up to the surface at depths depending on water column stratification and the thermocline depth. Zooplankton samples were collected with vertical closing Juday net,diameter - 36cm, mesh size 150 µm. Tows were performed from surface down to bottom meters depths in discrete layers. Samples were preserved by a 4% formaldehyde sea water buffered solution. Sampling volume was estimated by multiplying the mouth area with the wire length Mesozooplankton abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972). Taxon-specific abundance: The collected material was analysed using the method of Domov (1959). Samples were brought to volume of 25-30 ml depending upon zooplankton density and mixed intensively until all organisms were distributed randomly in the sample volume. After that 5 ml of sample was taken and poured in the counting chamber which is a rectangle form for taxomomic identification and count. Copepods and Cladoceras were identified and enumerated; the other mesozooplankters were identified and enumerated at higher taxonomic level (commonly named as mesozooplankton groups). Large (> 1 mm body length) and not abundant species were calculated in whole sample. Counting and measuring of organisms were made in the Dimov chamber under the stereomicroscope to the lowest taxon possible. Taxonomic identification was done at the Institute of Oceanology by Asen Konsulov using the relevant taxonomic literature (Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, F.D. (Ed.). 1968, 1969,1972).