Select the search type
 
  • Site
  • Web
Search

Student Project

Minimize
Comanthus wahlbergii Species Profile


Benjamin Durrington 2017

Summary

Comanthus wahlbergii (Müller 1843) is a widespread crinoid (the most basal group of echinoderms) that can be locally abundant in some parts of Australia (Vail 1987a). The specimen used for this profile was collected from Heron Island from an area of coral rubble. This species belongs to the Order Comatulida, better known as the featherstars. Most members of this group are not fixed to the substrate, and are capable of movement, which may help them avoid predators and find food (Meyer and Macurda 1977). Comanthus wahlbergii exhibits many of the unique adaptations and behaviours of this group that have allowed them to exploit shallow marine habitats around the world (Meyer and Macurda 1977). 

Physical Description

Comanthus wahlbergii varies in color and morphology, but shares the basic feather star body plan, which is described in Messing (2017) and Summers et al. (2014). Feather stars have a bony endoskeleton with units called ossicles connected by ligaments and muscles. Syzygies and synarthries are two common articulations for feather stars: a syzygy connects ossicles with ligaments, while a synarthry has ligaments and muscles. Feather stars have an adoral (Figure 1) and aboral (Figure 2) side. 

The main regions of the body are the centrally-located theca, the rays, and the cirri. The theca includes a calyx, which holds internal organs, and a tegmen, which covers them. Rays branch off from the theca, and may divide multiple times. The ossicles of a ray located proximal to a division comprise a single brachitaxis. The number of branching points of an ray is equal to the number of brachitaxes. The ossicles past the last division point comprise the non-branching arm. The ossicles of a ray are called brachials, and they can be referred to using Roman numerals to denote brachitaxes, and Arabic numbers to denote brachials (starting proximally; summarized in Summers et al. 2014 and Messing 2017; see Figure 3). At the aboral side (bottom) of the theca, there is an ossicle called the centrodorsal, which is the only remnant of the stalk found in mature feather stars.  The cirri are connected to the centrodorsal and help feather stars grip onto the substrate. 

1
Figure 1
2
Figure 2
3
Figure 3

Ecology

Habitat

The specimen used for the profile was collected in an area of coral rubble to the inside of the reef crest at Heron Reef, Queensland. Individuals have also been observed sheltering under coral rubble and reef cavities at Lizard Island, Queensland (Vail 1987a). In more temperate areas with less coral, this species may exploit rocky habitats (Rowe et al. 1986). During its time in captivity, the specimen has remained associated with pieces of coral rock.

Predation

Feather stars are preyed upon by a variety of fish, including triggerfish, snappers, and damselfish (Meyer and Macurda 1977). They are known to exhibit several behaviors in response to predators, including diel movements (see Life History and Behaviour Section), crawling, and swimming (Meyer and Macurda 1977; Vail 1987a). They are able to regrow most of their organs after loss or damage, including arms and viscerae (Mozzi et al. 2006), and they have several morphological traits that minimize damage during predation events (Oji and Okamoto 1994). In particular, feather stars, including Comanthus wahlbergii, typically branch the most at the base of the rays (Oji and Okamoto 1994). This is an anti-predation technique, since a bite to an exposed non-branching arm results in the loss of less tissue than a bite below a branching point (Figure 3; Oji and Okamoto 1994). Sea lilies, by contrast, typically have more distally-located branching points to maximize food collection (Oji and Okamoto 1994). All crinoids have non-muscular articulations (called syzygies in feather stars) that facilitate breakage of arms during autonomy or predation events, another strategy used to reduce tissue loss (Oji and Okamoto 1994). All the arms of my specimen of C. wahlbergii showed evidence of regrowth, suggesting that it may have suffered from multiple predation events. (Figure 4). Using various metrics related to damaged and undamaged arms in a population of Cenometra bella (another feather star), Baumiller and Gahn (2013) estimated that this species loses arms about every 10 days. This would be an interesting parameter to investigate in the future for Comanthus wahlbergii

4
Figure 4

Life History and Behaviour

Life History

Early development in Comanthus wahlbergii has not been studied, but larvae of the comatulid order of crinoids are lecithotrophic (dependent on yolk reserves) and generally known to exhibit a simple morphology (without feedling structures) (McEdwardand Miner 2001). There are two pre-metamorphosis larval stages and two post-metamorphosis larval stages. The former includes a uniformly ciliated stage and an ovoid doliolaria stage, which has up to five transverse rows of cilia and an apical tuft of cilia (Haig and Rouse 2008; McEdward and Miner 2008). These cilia allow locomotion in the water column, and may not be present in crinoid species that brood their larvae (Haig and Rouse 2008). Doliolaria also have a ventral adhesive pit that is involved in attachment to the substrate during the sessile post-metamorphosis phase, and a ventral vestibule that is later enclosed (Haig and Rouse 2008; McEdward and Miner 2008).

During their metamorphosis into cystidean larvae, the doliolaria continue to develop the adhesive pit, as well as a stalk of columnar ossicles, and the basic elements of the calyx: the basal, radial,and oral ossicles (Haig and Rouse 2008). Cystidean larvae attach to the substrate but do not feed. The final larval phase, the pentacrinoid phase, involves the opening of oral plates, commencement of feeding using podia, and production of brachial ossicles that branch out from the radial ossicles (Haig and Rouse 2008). Comatulids lose the stalk ossicles during the juvenile phase (Haig and Rouse 2008).

Some comatulids (brooders) protect their young within or on their pinnules, while others (broadcast spawners) release eggs into the water column to be fertilized (Vail 1987b). Comanthus parvicirrus, a close relative of C. wahlbergii, is known to be a broadcast spawner (Eléaume,Baumiller and Améziane 2003; Vail 1987b). In addition, Capillaster multiradiatus and Anneissia japonica (members of closely related genera) are known to have pelagic larvae (McEdward and Miner 2001). Thus, it may be the case that Comanthus wahlbergii produces pelagic, simple, lecithotrophic larvae through broadcast spawning. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that the species has a large Indo-Pacific distribution,and is found even in South Africa, where the larvae may have been transported by the Agulhas Current (Rowe et al.1986). 

Feeding

Feather stars, like other crinoids, are filter feeders that depend on food that falls on their arms; however, they do have greater capacity to maximize access to food by changing feeding sites (Brusca et al. 2016; Meyer and Macurda 1977). Particles generally ranging from 0.05 to 0.4 mm are collected with the tube feet and first transferred to cilia-lined ambulacral grooves, and then along the arms to the centrally-located mouth (Brusca et al. 2016; Fatheree 2013). Crinoids are known to eat various types of zooplankton, phytoplankton, as well as detritus (Fatherree 2013). They can also absorb dissolved organic material and may rely on this when their viscerae have been damaged through predation (Mozzi et al. 2006).

The Comanthus wahlbergii specimen used for this profile was fed a high-concentration solution of phytoplankton, including Isochrysis sp. (a haptophyte), Thalassiosira weissflogii (a diatom), Nannochloropsis sp. (a eustigmatophyte) and Pavlova sp. (a haptophyte). The solution was squirted over the pinnules on all the rays. Upon exposure to the solution, individual pinnules began undulating, perhaps to enhance feeding, in a behavior not previously observed (Figure 5). Ingestion of the phytoplankton was confirmed afterwards because the crinoid’s fecal matter was bright green.

 

5
Figure 5

Diel Movements

In a study of crinoid behavior on Lizard Island, Comanthus wahlbergii and other crinoid species were observed to vary their degree of exposure from shelter sites over the course of a day (Vail 1987a). Most members of the C. wahlbergii population were visible during part of the day (52%), while others were nocturnal (42%) or visible at all times (6%). When visible, C. wahlbergii individuals were never completely exposed, but they did expose more of their arms when it was dark. In this study, Vail measured light intensity and confirmed that crinoids may respond to darker (i.e. cloudy) days by becoming more active. This is concordant with the behavior of C. wahlbergii in the lab. During observation of the individual with a dissecting scope, it repeatedly avoided the highly illuminated parts of its container by crawling away. The periodic and negatively phototactic behavior of C. wahlbergii may help it avoid predators, feed more efficiently, or coordinate reproduction (Vail 1987a). 

Anatomy and Physiology

External Anatomy

External morphological features such as branching patterns and skeletal articulation (Figures 7 and 8) have been frequently used in classification and keys of crinoids, despite the fact that many of these characters are plesiomorphic (Rowe et al.1986; Summers et al. 2014). Combs (Figure 9) are another feature that may be useful in future work on the group: possession of a transverse proximal comb tooth is likely apomorphic for Comanthus (Summers et al. 2014). Morphology within the Comatulidae family and even within C. wahlbergii is highly variable, but the characters analyzed (Figure 6) place the specimen well within the variation described in the diagnosis of the species (Rowe et al. 1986; Summers et al. 2014). It is worth noting that in a molecular phylogeny for the family Comatulidae, results indicated that there may be undescribed species that resemble Comanthus wahlbergii and two other members of the genus (Summers et al. 2014). Thus future study will be necessary to describe the true diversity of Comanthus and the characters that discriminate its members. 
6
Figure 6
7
Figure 7
8
Figure 8
9
Figure 9

Internal Anatomy

Key features of a crinoid’s internal soft anatomy include the U-shaped gut which connects to the mouth and anus on the surface of the tegmen, and a water vascular system. The water vascular system is composed of a ring canal that connects to stone canals and coelomic sinuses in the calyx, as well as radial canals in the arms. Tube feet branch off from the radial canals and surround the ambulacral grooves on the surface of the arms and pinnules. (Brusca et al. 2016). Crinoids also have hemal and nerve rings which branch into rays through axial canals (Brusca et al. 2016; Messing 2017). 

Physiology

Crinoids, like other echinoderms, cannot osmoregulate and are only found in marine environments (Brusca et al. 2016). They exchange gases passively across their thin tube feet, but generally require less oxygen than other invertebrates (Baumiller and LaBarbera 1989). And, like many other echinoderms, crinoids possess toxins such as polyketide sulfates which may discourage predation (Rideout et al. 1979). Comanthus parvicirrus is one of the species in which production of toxins has been confirmed, so they are likely present in Comanthus wahlbergii as well (Rideout et al. 1979). 

Biogeographic Distribution

Comanthus wahlbergii is widespread in the Indo-Pacific, and can be found in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Japan, New Caledonia, Samoa, and many other locales (Rowe et al. 1986). 

Evolution and Systematics

Crinoids (Class Crinoidea) have been present on the earth for almost half a billion years: the first fossil membersof the group are from the Early Ordovician (Guensburg and Sprinkle 2009). Over this period of time, many lineages have emerged and become extinct, but the 650 species alive today are all members of the subclass Articulata (Rouse et al. 2013; Summers et al. 2014). This group diversified after the Permian-Triassic extinction, and the first fossils known are from the Early Triassic (Rouse et al. 2013;Schubert et al. 1992). Notably, this group inherited complex muscular brachial articulations facilitating greater capacity for movement (Meyer and Macurda 1977). The most mobile of this group are those from the order Comatulida, the comatulids, which represent most of today’s crinoid diversity (Summers et al.2014). Most members of this group are feather stars which lose the stalk after early development, although there are some which have secondarily retained it (Rouse et al. 2013). Feather stars are the only extant crinoids which live in shallow water, and this may because their mobility allows them to avoid predators, maximize their access to food,or avoid stressful abiotic conditions (Meyer and Macurda 1977; Rouse et al. 2013).

The Comatulidae family of feather stars is at least as old as the Miocene, and now has 95 species with a center of diversity in the Indo-Pacific, including 26 species in Australian waters (Rowe et al. 1986; Summers et al. 2014). They are characterized by combs present at the tips of their proximal pinnules and by mouths which are usually off-center (Summers et al. 2014). They are the most common and diverse group of feather stars found on tropical coral reefs (Summers et al. 2014). Comanthus (AH Clark, 1908) belong to the Comatulidae and includes 11 currently accepted species (Messing 2015). Comanthus can be distinguished from other genera in the Comatulidae family by a transverse tooth found on the proximal portion of their pinnule combs (Summers etal. 2014). In Australia, Comanthus wahlbergii can be distinguished from other shallow-water members of the genus by the centrodorsal which usually completely covers the radial ossicles and its “robust” cirri (Rowe et al.1986). 

Conservation and Threats

No threats are known to specifically target Comanthus wahlbergii. Given its large distribution and population size at some locations (Vail 1987a), it is not likely currently in need of conservation effort. 

References

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Charles Messing (Nova Southeastern University, Fort Lauderdale, FL) for confirming the likely ID on this specimen. 

Bibliography

Baumiller TK, Gahn FJ. 2013. Reconstructing predation pressure on crinoids: estimating arm- loss rates from regenerating arms. Paleobiology 39(1): 40-51. 

Baumiller TK, LaBarbera ML. 1989. Metabolic rates of Caribbean crinoids (Echinodermata), with species reference to deep-water stalked and stalkless taxa. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 93A(2): 391-394. 

Brusca RC, Moore W, Shuster SM. 2016. Invertebrates: Third Edition. Sinauer: Sunderland MA, USA. Print.

Eléaume M, Améziane N. and Baumiller TK. 2003. Developmental mode, egg size, larval size and some evolutionary considerations in comatulids (Crinoidea; Echinodermata).  Pp. 307-315. In: J. –P. Féral and B. David (eds), Echinoderm Research 2001. Balkema, Lisse.

Fatherree JW. 2013. Aquarium invertebrates: a good look at the crinoids. Advanced Aquarist 12(7). http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2013/7/inverts. Accessed 27 May 2017. 

Guensburg TE, Sprinkle J. 2009. Solving the mystery of crinoid ancestry: new fossil evidence of arm origin and development. J. Paleont. 83(3): 350-364. 

Haig JA, Gillanders BM, Rouse GW. 2012. Live fast, die young: the life cycle of the brooding feather star Aporometra wilsoni (Echinodermata: Crinoidea). Invertebrate Biology 131(3): 235-243. 

Haig JA, Rouse GW. 2008. Larval development of the featherstar Aporometra wilsoni (Echinodermata: Crinoidea). Invertebrate Biology 127(4): 460-469. 

McEdward LR, Miner BG. 2001. Larval and life-cycle patterns in echinoderms. Can. J. Zool. 79: 1125-1170. 

Messing C. 2015. Comanthus AH Clark, 1908. In: Messing, C. (2017). World List of Crinoidea. Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=205362 on 2017-06-02

Messing C. 2017. Charles Messing’s Crinoid Pages. http://cnso.nova.edu/messing/crinoids/index.html. Accessed 8 May 2017. 

Meyer DL, Macurda DB Jr. 1977. Adaptive radiation of the comatulid crinoids. Paleobiology 3(1): 74-82. 

Mozzi D, Dolmatov IY, Bonasoro F, Candia Carnevali MD. 2006. Visceral regeneration in the crinoid Antedon mediterranea: basic mechanisms, tissues and cells involved in gut regrowth. Central European Journal of Biology 1(4): 609-635. 

Müller J (1843) Neue Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Arten der Comatulen. Archiv für Naturgeschichte, Berlin 9, 131-136. 

Oji T, Okamoto T. 1994. Arm autonomy and arm branching pattern as anti-predatory adaptations in stalked and stalkless crinoids. Paleobiology 20(1): 27-39. 

Rideout JA, Smith NB, Sutherland MD. 1979. Chemical defense of crinoids by polyketide sulphates. Experientia 35(10): 1273-1416. 

Rouse GW, Jermiin LS, Wilson NG, Eeckhaut I, Lanterbecq D, Oji T, Young CM, Browning T, Cisternas P, Helgen LE, Stuckey M,  Messing CG. Fixed free, and fixed: the fickle phylogeny of extant Crinoidea (Echinodermata) and their Permian-Triassic origin. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 66: 161-181. 

Rowe FWE, Hoggett AK, Birtles RA, Vail LL. 1986. Revision of some comasterid genera from Australia (Echinodermata: Crinoidea), with descriptions of two new genera and nine new species. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 86: 197-277. 

Schubert JK, Bottjer DJ, Simms MJ. 1992. Paleobiology of the oldest known articulate crinoid. Lethaia 25: 97-110. 

Summers MM, Messing CG, Rouse GW. 2014. Phylogeny of Comatulidae (Echinodermata: Crinoidea: Comatulida): A new classification and an assessment of morphological characters for crinoid taxonomy. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 80: 319-339. 

Vail L. 1987a. Diel patterns of emergence of crinoids (Echinodermata) from within a reef at Lizard Island, Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Marine Biology 93: 551-560. 

Vail L. 1987b. Reproduction in five species of crinoids at Lizard Island, Great Barrier Reef. Marine Biology 95: 431-446.