A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna

Antarctic arthropods (mites and springtails) have been the subject of numerous studies. However, by far, the most diverse and numerically dominant fauna in Antarctica are the limno-terrestrial microfauna (tardigrades, rotifers and nematodes). Although they have been the focus of several studies, the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Polar Biology
Main Authors: Velasco-Castrillon, A, Gibson, JAE, Stevens, MI
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Springer 2014
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1544-4
http://ecite.utas.edu.au/98912
id ftunivtasecite:oai:ecite.utas.edu.au:98912
record_format openpolar
spelling ftunivtasecite:oai:ecite.utas.edu.au:98912 2023-05-15T13:59:47+02:00 A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna Velasco-Castrillon, A Gibson, JAE Stevens, MI 2014 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1544-4 http://ecite.utas.edu.au/98912 en eng Springer http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1544-4 Velasco-Castrillon, A and Gibson, JAE and Stevens, MI, A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna, Polar Biology, 37, (10) pp. 1517-1531. ISSN 0722-4060 (2014) [Refereed Article] http://ecite.utas.edu.au/98912 Biological Sciences Evolutionary biology Animal systematics and taxonomy Refereed Article PeerReviewed 2014 ftunivtasecite https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1544-4 2022-08-22T22:16:43Z Antarctic arthropods (mites and springtails) have been the subject of numerous studies. However, by far, the most diverse and numerically dominant fauna in Antarctica are the limno-terrestrial microfauna (tardigrades, rotifers and nematodes). Although they have been the focus of several studies, there remains uncertainty of the actual number of species in Antarctica. Inadequate sampling and conserved morphology are the main cause of misclassification of species and underestimation of this diversity. Most species' distributional records are dominated by proximity to research stations or limited opportunistic collections, and therefore, an absence of records for a species may also be a consequence of the limitations of sampling. Limitations in fundamental knowledge of how many species are present and how widespread they are prevents any meaningful analyses that have been applied more generally to the arthropods within Antarctica, such as exploring ancient origins (at least pre-last glacial maximum) and tracking colonisation routes from glacial refugia. In this review, we list published species names and where possible the distribution of microfaunal (tardigrade, rotifer and nematode) species reported for Antarctica. Our current state of knowledge of Antarctic records (south of 60 degree) includes 28 bdelloid rotifers, 66 monogonont rotifers, 59 tardigrades and 68 nematodes. In the light of the difficulties in working with microfauna across such geographical scales, we emphasise the need for molecular markers to help understand the 'true levels' of diversity and suggest future directions for Antarctic biodiversity assessment and species discovery. Article in Journal/Newspaper Antarc* Antarctic Antarctica Polar Biology Rotifer Tardigrade eCite UTAS (University of Tasmania) Antarctic Polar Biology 37 10 1517 1531
institution Open Polar
collection eCite UTAS (University of Tasmania)
op_collection_id ftunivtasecite
language English
topic Biological Sciences
Evolutionary biology
Animal systematics and taxonomy
spellingShingle Biological Sciences
Evolutionary biology
Animal systematics and taxonomy
Velasco-Castrillon, A
Gibson, JAE
Stevens, MI
A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna
topic_facet Biological Sciences
Evolutionary biology
Animal systematics and taxonomy
description Antarctic arthropods (mites and springtails) have been the subject of numerous studies. However, by far, the most diverse and numerically dominant fauna in Antarctica are the limno-terrestrial microfauna (tardigrades, rotifers and nematodes). Although they have been the focus of several studies, there remains uncertainty of the actual number of species in Antarctica. Inadequate sampling and conserved morphology are the main cause of misclassification of species and underestimation of this diversity. Most species' distributional records are dominated by proximity to research stations or limited opportunistic collections, and therefore, an absence of records for a species may also be a consequence of the limitations of sampling. Limitations in fundamental knowledge of how many species are present and how widespread they are prevents any meaningful analyses that have been applied more generally to the arthropods within Antarctica, such as exploring ancient origins (at least pre-last glacial maximum) and tracking colonisation routes from glacial refugia. In this review, we list published species names and where possible the distribution of microfaunal (tardigrade, rotifer and nematode) species reported for Antarctica. Our current state of knowledge of Antarctic records (south of 60 degree) includes 28 bdelloid rotifers, 66 monogonont rotifers, 59 tardigrades and 68 nematodes. In the light of the difficulties in working with microfauna across such geographical scales, we emphasise the need for molecular markers to help understand the 'true levels' of diversity and suggest future directions for Antarctic biodiversity assessment and species discovery.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Velasco-Castrillon, A
Gibson, JAE
Stevens, MI
author_facet Velasco-Castrillon, A
Gibson, JAE
Stevens, MI
author_sort Velasco-Castrillon, A
title A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna
title_short A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna
title_full A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna
title_fullStr A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna
title_full_unstemmed A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna
title_sort review of current antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna
publisher Springer
publishDate 2014
url https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1544-4
http://ecite.utas.edu.au/98912
geographic Antarctic
geographic_facet Antarctic
genre Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctica
Polar Biology
Rotifer
Tardigrade
genre_facet Antarc*
Antarctic
Antarctica
Polar Biology
Rotifer
Tardigrade
op_relation http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1544-4
Velasco-Castrillon, A and Gibson, JAE and Stevens, MI, A review of current Antarctic limno-terrestrial microfauna, Polar Biology, 37, (10) pp. 1517-1531. ISSN 0722-4060 (2014) [Refereed Article]
http://ecite.utas.edu.au/98912
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-014-1544-4
container_title Polar Biology
container_volume 37
container_issue 10
container_start_page 1517
op_container_end_page 1531
_version_ 1766268596057538560