Skip Navigation

Integrative and Comparative Biology 2002 42(3):678-684; doi:10.1093/icb/42.3.678
© 2002 by The Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (21)
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Halanych, K. M.
Right arrow Articles by McHugh, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Unsegmented Annelids? Possible Origins of Four Lophotrochozoan Worm Taxa1

Kenneth M. Halanych2,,1, Thomas G. Dahlgren3,,1 and Damhnait McHugh4,,2
1 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Biology Department MS 33, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543
2 Colgate University, Department of Biology, Hamilton, New York 13346

In traditional classification schemes, the Annelida consists of the Polychaeta and the Clitellata (the latter including the Oligochaeta and Hirudinida). However, recent analyses suggest that annelids are much more diverse than traditionally believed, and that polychaetes are paraphyletic. Specifically, some lesser-known taxa (previously regarded as separate phyla) appear to fall within the annelid radiation. Abundant molecular, developmental, and morphological data show that the Siboglinidae, which includes the formerly recognized Pogonophora and Vestimentifera, are derived annelids; recent data from the Elongation Factor-1{alpha} (EF-1{alpha}) gene also suggest that echiurids are of annelid ancestry. Further, the phylogenetic origins of two other lesser-known groups of marine worms, the Myzostomida and Sipuncula, have recently been called into question. Whereas some authors advocate annelid affinities, others argue that these taxa do not fall within the annelid radiation. With advances in our understanding of annelid phylogeny, our perceptions of body plan evolution within the Metazoa are changing. The evolution of segmentation probably is more plastic than traditionally believed. However, as our understanding of organismal evolution is being revised, we are also forced to reconsider the specific characters being examined. Should segmentation be considered a developmental process or an ontological endpoint?


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Proc R Soc BHome page
E. A. Sperling, J. Vinther, V. N. Moy, B. M. Wheeler, M. Semon, D. E. G. Briggs, and K. J. Peterson
MicroRNAs resolve an apparent conflict between annelid systematics and their fossil record
Proc R Soc B, December 22, 2009; 276(1677): 4315 - 4322.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Biol. Bull.Home page
A. Wanninger
Shaping the Things to Come: Ontogeny of Lophotrochozoan Neuromuscular Systems and the Tetraneuralia Concept
Biol. Bull., June 1, 2009; 216(3): 293 - 306.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Integr. Comp. Biol.Home page
R. A. Merz and S. A. Woodin
Polychaete chaetae: Function, fossils, and phylogeny
Integr. Comp. Biol., August 1, 2006; 46(4): 481 - 496.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.