A shovelhead worm (Magelona mirabilis)
No image available
Distribution data supplied by the Ocean Biodiversity Information System (OBIS). To interrogate UK data visit the NBN Atlas.Map Help
| Researched by | Will Rayment | Refereed by | Mike Kendall |
| Authority | (Johnston, 1865) | ||
| Other common names | A bristleworm | Synonyms | Magelona papillicornis F. Müller, 1858 (see below), Maea mirabilis Johnston, 1865 |
Summary
Description
A long, threadlike worm comprising of an elongate and rounded shovel-shaped 'head', and a body divided into two distinct regions. The thorax has nine segments with fine hair-like bristles (chaetae), and the abdomen has many segments carrying rows of small hooks. The bristles of the last segment of the thorax (9th chaetiger) have expanded tips (mucronate). The body is often constricted between the two body regions. The head end bears a pair of long 'tentacle-like' palps (used in feeding), which carry finger-like papillae. Although, the palps are often lost upon collection. The head and thorax are often soft pink, whilst the rear is often greenish grey. The palps carry darker stripy pigment, which can be seen even without a microscope. They have an oval to heart-shaped burrowing organ in between the palps which can be everted to aid digging in sediments. It is the larger of the UK shovelhead worm species.
Recorded distribution in Britain and Ireland
Expected to occur all around the coasts of Britain and Ireland where suitable substrata occur. Recorded patchily from all British and Irish coasts.
Global distribution
Recorded from the Irish Sea, North Sea, Baltic Sea, the Atlantic coasts of Ireland, France and Portugal, and the Mediterranean coast of France.
Habitat
Magelona mirabilis typically burrows in muddy to fine sand at low water and in the shallow sublittoral. It does not produce a tube. Magelona mirabilis may occur in highly unstable sediments, characterized by surf, strong currents and sediment mobility, it may be more indicative of stable compacted fine sand.
Depth range
Mid shore to 50 m depthIdentifying features
- Long, rounded 'head' (prostomium)
- Palps fringed with papillae inserted ventrally at the base of the prostomium and carrying stripy dark pigmentation. However, the palps are rarely present.
- The first 8 chaetigers have an upper (notopodia) and lower (neuropodia) projection on each side of the body, which are broad. No other lobes are present. They bear only hair-like chaetae.
- Bristles (chaetae) of chaetiger 9 with expanded tips (mucronate), which can be seen under high magnification.
- Remaining abdominal chaetigers have rows of hooded hooks, which have two small teeth above a large fang (tridentate).
- Terminal segment bears 2 small, anal cirri.
Additional information
The species looks very similar to Magelona johnstoni (Fiege et al., 2000) but can be separated as it lacks the large pocket-like pouches at the start of the abdomen, which are present in Magelona johnstoni. For detailed notes on the identification of European Magelona spp., see Fiege et al. (2000), Mills & Mortimer (2018), Mortimer et al. (2020) and Mortimer et al. (2022). Magelona papillicornis is not a true synonym. Magelona papillicornis has not changed its name and still exists off the coasts of Brazil. However, Magelona mirabilis includes the North East Atlantic specimens that were once called Magelona papillicornis (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). See Jones (1977) for further taxonomic information.
Listed by
- none -
Biology review
Taxonomy
| Phylum | Annelida | Segmented worms e.g. ragworms, tubeworms, fanworms and spoon worms |
| Class | Polychaeta | Bristleworms, e.g. ragworms, scaleworms, paddleworms, fanworms, tubeworms and spoon worms |
| Family | Magelonidae | |
| Genus | Magelona | |
| Authority | (Johnston, 1865) | |
| Recent Synonyms | Magelona papillicornis F. Müller, 1858 (see below)Maea mirabilis Johnston, 1865 | |
Biology
| Typical abundance | See additional information | ||
| Male size range | 3-10 cm | ||
| Male size at maturity | |||
| Female size range | 3-10 cm | ||
| Female size at maturity | |||
| Growth form | Vermiform segmented | ||
| Growth rate | Insufficient information | ||
| Body flexibility | High (greater than 45 degrees) | ||
| Mobility | Burrower | ||
| Characteristic feeding method | Surface deposit feeder | ||
| Diet/food source | Detritivore | ||
| Typically feeds on | Detritus, microalgae, small animals, and sediment | ||
| Sociability | |||
| Environmental position | Infaunal | ||
| Dependency | Independent. | ||
| Supports | None | ||
| Is the species harmful? | No | ||
Biology information
Abundance
Occurs at high densities where environmental conditions are suitable. For example, Kuhl (1972) reported Magelona papillicormis at densities of 279 individuals per 0.1 m² on sandy muddy ground in the Elbe Estuary.
Feeding
Magelona mirabilis feeds by gathering organic material from the sediment surface with its palps. When feeding on poorly sorted material, selectivity may be shown in that magelonids prefer to handle larger particles. Small crustaceans may also be taken as prey, for example, the mucous on the palps may trap a few harpacticoids although this is likely to be incidental (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). In well sorted sand, selectivity may be absent as particles with a high organic content have already been concentrated by other means (Fauchald & Jumars, 1979).
Habitat preferences
| Physiographic preferences | Enclosed coast / Embayment, Open coast, Strait / sound |
| Biological zone preferences | Lower eulittoral, Lower infralittoral, Sublittoral fringe, Upper circalittoral, Upper infralittoral |
| Substratum / habitat preferences | Coarse clean sand, Fine clean sand |
| Tidal strength preferences | Moderately Strong 1 to 3 knots (0.5-1.5 m/sec.), Strong 3 to 6 knots (1.5-3 m/sec.) |
| Wave exposure preferences | Exposed, Moderately exposed, Sheltered, Very exposed |
| Salinity preferences | Full (30-40 psu), Variable (18-40 psu) |
| Depth range | Mid shore to 50 m depth |
| Other preferences | |
| Migration Pattern | Non-migratory / resident |
Habitat Information
-
Life history
Adult characteristics
| Reproductive type | Gonochoristic (dioecious) | |
| Reproductive frequency | Annual protracted | |
| Fecundity (number of eggs) | No information | |
| Generation time | 1-2 years | |
| Age at maturity | Insufficient information | |
| Season | See additional information | |
| Life span | 2-5 years |
Larval characteristics
| Larval/propagule type | - |
| Larval/juvenile development | Planktotrophic |
| Duration of larval stage | No information |
| Larval dispersal potential | Greater than 10 km |
| Larval settlement period | Insufficient information |
Life history information
Reproductive data concerning Magelona mirabilis is scarce (Fiege et al., 2000). The data that is available suggests that the reproductive period in Magelona mirabilis varies with geographic location and the breeding season of many polychaetes is known to vary with latitude. Fiege et al. (2000) reported males with sperm masses in St. Andrews, Scotland, in March and females with eggs in Berwick-upon-Tweed in March whilst egg bearing females in Lancieux, France, were recorded in May.It is generally agreed that Magelona mirabilis displays characteristics typical of an r-selected species, i.e. rapid reproduction, short lifespan and high dispersal potential (Krönke, 1990; Niermann et al., 1990), and is characteristic of shallow, disturbed, non-successional habitats (M. Kendall, pers. comm.).
Sensitivity review
The MarLIN sensitivity assessment approach used below has been superseded by the MarESA (Marine Evidence-based Sensitivity Assessment) approach (see menu). The MarLIN approach was used for assessments from 1999-2010. The MarESA approach reflects the recent conservation imperatives and terminology and is used for sensitivity assessments from 2014 onwards.
Physical pressures
| Intolerance | Recoverability | Sensitivity | Evidence/Confidence | |
| High | High | Moderate | High | |
| Magelona mirabilis is an infaunal species which lives in the top few centimetres of fine sand substrata (Fiege et al., 2000). The majority of the population would be removed along with the substratum, e.g. as a result of channel dredging activities, and therefore intolerance is assessed as high. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Low | Immediate | Not sensitive | Low | |
| Magelona mirabilis lives infaunally in fine sand and moves by burrowing. It deposit feeds at the surface by extending contractile palps from its burrow. An additional 5 cm layer of sediment would result in a temporary cessation of feeding activity, and therefore growth and reproduction are likely to be compromised. However, Magelona mirabilis would be expected to quickly relocate to its favoured depth, with no mortality, and hence an intolerance of low is recorded. Once the animals have relocated to the surface, feeding activity should return to normal and therefore a recoverability of immediate is recorded. | ||||
| Tolerant* | Not relevant | Not sensitive* | Very low | |
| Magelona mirabilis is unlikely to be perturbed by an increase in suspended sediment as it lives infaunally. It is a deposit feeder, gathering organic particles from the sediment surface with its mobile palps. An increase in suspended sediment may result in greater food availability at the sediment surface, potentially enhancing growth and reproduction of Magelona mirabilis. However, the species would only benefit if there was a significant proportion of organic matter in the suspended sediment and if food was previously limiting. | ||||
| Intermediate | Immediate | Very Low | ||
| Magelona mirabilis is a surface deposit feeder and therefore relies on a supply of nutrients at the sediment surface. A decrease in the suspended sediment may result in a decreased rate of deposition on the substratum surface and therefore a reduction in food availability. Magelona mirabilis is a short-lived species and a reduction in the amount of suspended sediment is likely to impair growth and may result in the death of some of the population (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). The benchmark states that this change would occur for one month and therefore an intolerance of intermediate has been recorded. As soon as suspended sediment levels increased, feeding activity would return to normal and hence recovery is recorded as immediate. | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Very low | |
| Magelona mirabilis lives infaunally and is therefore likely to be protected from desiccation stress. A proportion of the population lives in the intertidal (Fiege et al., 2000) suggesting the species is tolerant to emersion of its substratum. However, if an individual were removed from the substratum, exposed to the air and was unable to reburrow, for example by bait digging, mortality would be likely to result. Intolerance is therefore assessed as intermediate. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Low | |
| A proportion of the population of Magelona mirabilis lives in the intertidal zone (Fiege et al., 2000). The species lives infaunally and hence is not likely to suffer from desiccation stress unless displaced. However, Magelona mirabilis can only feed when immersed and therefore will experience reduced feeding opportunities. If it burrows to find immersed sediment, the digging will result in the palps being lost (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). Over the course of a year the resultant energetic cost is likely to cause some mortality. An intolerance of intermediate is therefore recorded. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Tolerant | Not relevant | Not sensitive | High | |
| Magelona mirabilis thrives in the subtidal zone (Fiege et al., 2000) and therefore could potentially benefit from a decreased emergence regime. It is possible that decreased emergence would allow the species to colonize further up the shore. | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Very low | |
| Magelona mirabilis is adapted to life in areas with strong currents, high wave exposure and unstable sediments (Lackshewitz & Reise, 1998). However, increased water flow rate may remove sediment or change the sediment characteristics in which the species lives, primarily by re-suspending and preventing deposition of finer particles (Hiscock, 1983). Magelona mirabilis typically occurs in sandy sediments (Fiege et al., 2000), a substratum which may be eroded by increases in water flow. Additionally, the consequent lack of deposition of particulate matter at the sediment surface would reduce food availability. The resultant energetic cost over one year would be likely to result in some mortality. An intolerance of intermediate is therefore recorded. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Low | |
| Magelona mirabilis is adapted to life in areas with strong currents, high wave exposure and unstable sediments (Lackshewitz & Reise, 1998). Decreased water movement would result in increased deposition of fine suspended sediment (Hiscock, 1983), changing the sediment characteristics of the habitat in which the species lives. Over the course of a year, it is likely that some mortality would occur and an intolerance of intermediate is recorded. Recoverability is assessed as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| No information was found concerning the intolerance of Magelona mirabilis to an increase in temperature. | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Moderate | |
| The abundance of Magelona mirabilis experienced a sharp decline following the severe winter of 1995 / 1996 in the Wadden Sea, the Netherlands (Armonies et al., 2001). Between 1992 and 1995 the average abundance in an area 5 km west of Sylt was 2901 individuals per m²and by 1996 / 1997, abundance had fallen to 138 per m² (Armonies et al., 2001). The average water temperature in List Harbour, near Sylt, over the severe winter was 0.5 °C which was 2.7 °C and 3.7 °C below the mean water temperatures of the moderate and mild winters of 1996 / 1997 and 1997 / 1998 respectively (Strasser & Günther, 2001). This change in temperature is comparable to the chronic change in the benchmark and therefore an intolerance of intermediate has been recorded. Armonies et al. (2001) commented that, following the severe winter, recovery in this species was 'slow'. However, 'slow' was not quantified although the study suggests that the species had not yet recovered by the 1996 / 1997 sampling. | ||||
| Low | Very high | Very Low | Low | |
| Magelona mirabilis does not require light and therefore is not directly affected by an increase in turbidity. However, increased turbidity may affect primary production in the water column and therefore reduce the availability of diatom food arriving at the sediment surface. In addition, primary production by the micro-phyto benthos on the sediment surface may be reduced, further decreasing food availability. However, Magelona mirabilis also feeds on detritus although it is not known what proportion of the diet is this represents (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). It is possible that, over the course of the year, growth and fecundity may be reduced and an intolerance of low is recorded. However, as soon as light levels return to normal, primary production will increase and hence recoverability is recorded as very high. | ||||
| Tolerant | Not relevant | Not sensitive | High | |
| Magelona mirabilis does not require light and therefore would not be directly affected by a decrease in turbidity. However, decreased turbidity may increase primary production in the water column and by the micro-phyto benthos on the sediment surface. This could potentially increase the amount of food available to Magelona mirabilis although this species also feeds on detritus and it is not known what proportion of the diet diatoms represent (M. Kendall, pers. comm.), nor if it is limiting and therefore, tolerant has been recorded. | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Low | |
| Magelona mirabilis is adapted to life in areas with strong currents, high wave exposure and unstable sediments (Lackshewitz & Reise, 1998). However, a further increase in wave action may affect the species in several ways (Hiscock, 1983). Strong wave action is likely to cause damage or withdrawal of delicate feeding structures resulting in loss of feeding opportunities and compromised growth. Furthermore, individuals may be damaged or dislodged by scouring from sand and gravel mobilized by increased wave action. The sediment they live in may be eroded and burrowing would result in the loss of the delicate palps (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). It is likely that some mortality would result from the considerations discussed above and therefore an intolerance of intermediate is recorded. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Low | |
| Magelona mirabilis is adapted to life in areas with strong currents, high wave exposure and unstable sediments (Lackshewitz & Reise, 1998). Decreased wave exposure over the course of a year is likely to result in the establishment of a finer sediment habitat. It is expected that some mortality would occur and therefore intolerance is assessed as intermediate. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Tolerant | Not relevant | Not sensitive | Low | |
| No information was found concerning the intolerance of Magelona mirabilis to noise. However, it is unlikely to be affected by noise and vibration at the level of the benchmark. | ||||
| Tolerant | Not relevant | Not sensitive | High | |
| No information was found concerning the intolerance of Magelona mirabilis to visual disturbance. The species has no eyes (Hayward & Ryland, 1995) and therefore would not be expected to respond to visual cues. | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Low | |
| Magelona mirabilis is a soft bodied organism which exposes its palps at the surface while feeding. The species lives infaunally in sandy sediment, usually within a few centimetres of the sediment surface. Physical disturbance, such as dredging or dragging an anchor, would be likely to penetrate the upper few centimetres of the sediment and cause physical damage to Magelona mirabilis. An intolerance of intermediate is therefore recorded. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Low | |
| Jones (1968) observed burrowing behaviour of Magelona sp. in the laboratory. Worms rapidly buried themselves following displacement to the sediment surface. However, this burrowing will result in damage to the palps (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). Furthermore, displacement to the sediment surface would increase the risk of predation by bottom feeding fish, to which Magelona mirabilis is particularly vulnerable (Hunt, 1925; Hayward & Ryland, 1995). Some mortality may result and therefore intolerance is assessed as intermediate. Recoverability is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
Chemical pressures
| Intolerance | Recoverability | Sensitivity | Evidence/Confidence | |
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| There is no evidence relating directly to the effects of synthetic chemicals on Magelona mirabilis. However, there is evidence from other polychaete species. Collier & Pinn (1998), for example, investigated the effect on the benthos of invermectin, a feed additive treatment for infestations of sea-lice on farmed salmonids. The polychaete Hediste diversicolor experienced 100% mortality within 14 days when exposed to 8 mg / m² of invermectin in a microcosm. Polychaetes are, however, highly diverse and have different tolerances in different species (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). It is therefore not advisable to make assumptions about one particular polychaete species based on evidence relating to another. | ||||
| No information | Not relevant | No information | Not relevant | |
| Little information was found concerning the intolerance of Magelona sp. to heavy metal contamination. However, Boilly & Richard (1978) stated that the presence of Magelona mirabilis is indicative of sediments which have been contaminated with iron. Studies on a dredge spoil disposal site in the harbours of Boulogne and Dunkerque in France (Bourgain et al., 1988) found higher densities of Magleona mirabilis three months after the dumping of dredge spoil than after five months, that is, when the metal contamination of the sediments was higher. No information regarding the effect of other metals on this species was found. | ||||
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| Suchanek (1993) reviewed the effects of oil spills on marine invertebrates and concluded that, in general, on soft sediment habitats, infaunal polychaetes, bivalves and amphipods were particularly affected. However, no information was found concerning the intolerance of Magelona mirabilis to hydrocarbon contamination. Evidence exists for other polychaete species. For example, Levell (1976) found that single spills of crude oil and oil / dispersant (BP 11 00X) mixtures caused a 25 - 50 % reduction in the abundance of Arenicola marina in addition to a reduction in feeding activity. Up to four repeated spillages (over a ten month period) resulted in complete eradication of the affected population either due to death or migration out of the sediment. It was also noted that recolonization was reduced although not completely prevented. In contrast, observations on Aphelochaeta marioni following the Amoco Cadiz oil spill in March, 1978 saw an increase in the abundance of this species after the spill (Dauvin, 1982, 2000). Polychaetes are, however, highly diverse and have different tolerances in different species (M. Kendall, pers. comm.). It is therefore not advisable to make assumptions about one particular polychaete species based on evidence relating to another. | ||||
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| No information was found concerning the intolerance of Magelona mirabilis to radionuclide contamination. | ||||
| Intermediate | High | Low | Low | |
| As a surface deposit feeder, Magelona mirabilis relies on a supply of organic matter at the sediment surface. Increased nutrient levels in the water column would be expected to result in increased deposition of organic matter at the sediment surface, and therefore moderate nutrient enrichment may be beneficial to Magelona mirabilis. Indeed, Kröncke (1990) postulated that the increase in certain species, including Magelona sp., on the Dogger Bank between 1951 and 1987 may be due to eutrophication. However, Niermann (1996) noted that Magelona sp. decreased in abundance following a nutrient enrichment event in the North Sea, probably because the species were adapted to living in sediments with low or moderate amounts of organic carbon. Intolerance is therefore assessed as intermediate. Recovery is recorded as high (see additional information below). | ||||
| Tolerant | Not relevant | Not sensitive | High | |
| Magelona mirabilis occurs on the open coast where sea water is at full salinity (Fiege et al., 2000) and is therefore probably relatively tolerant of increases in salinity. No information was found concerning the intolerance of the species to hypersaline conditions. | ||||
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| Magelona mirabilis occurs in the Baltic Sea (Fiege et al., 2000), where salinity is typically lower than in the open ocean. It is likely that some populations of Magelona mirabilis are adapted to reduced salinity habitats however no information on the effects of an overall decrease in salinity were found. | ||||
| Tolerant | Not relevant | Not sensitive | High | |
| Niermann et al. (1990) reported the changes in a fine sand community from the German Bight in an area with regular seasonal hypoxia. In 1983, oxygen tension fell to exceptionally low levels; < 3 mg O2/dm3 in large areas and < 1 mg O2/dm3 in some places. Species richness was reduced by 30-50% following this event and overall biomass was reduced. Niermann et al. (1990) reported that Magelona sp. remained abundant during the period of hypoxia, and, in fact, decreased slightly in abundance on resumption of normoxia. The benchmark level of hypoxia is 2 mg O2/l for one week. The evidence suggests that Magelona mirabilis would survive this and so is assessed as not sensitive. | ||||
Biological pressures
| Intolerance | Recoverability | Sensitivity | Evidence/Confidence | |
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| No information was found concerning the infection of Magelona mirabilis by microbial pathogens. | ||||
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| There is no evidence to suggest that Magelona mirabilis is susceptible to displacement by non-native species. | ||||
| Not relevant | Not relevant | Not relevant | Not relevant | |
| There is no evidence that Magelona mirabilis is extracted deliberately. | ||||
| No information | No information | No information | Not relevant | |
| No information was found concerning the effects of extraction of other species on Magelona mirabilis. The species is potentially at risk from fishing activities on sandy substrata, e.g. beam trawling for flatfish, and extraction of sand by the aggregate industry (Eno, 1991). | ||||
Additional information
It is generally agreed that Magelona mirabilis displays characteristics typical of an r-selected species, i.e. rapid reproduction, short life span and high dispersal potential (Kröncke, 1990; Niermann et al., 1990). The larval dispersal phase would potentially allow the species to colonize remote habitats.It is expected that populations of Magelona mirabilis would recover within 2 or 3 years and certainly within 5 years. Recoverability is therefore assessed as high.
Importance review
Policy/legislation
- no data -
Status
| National (GB) importance | - | Global red list (IUCN) category | - |
Non-native
| Native | - | ||
| Origin | - | Date Arrived | - |
Importance information
It is possible that Magelona mirabilis contributes to the energy budget of flatfish nursery grounds along with spionids and tellinids (M. Kendall, pers. comm.).Bibliography
Armonies, W., Herre, E. & Sturm, M., 2001. Effects of the severe winter 1995 / 1996 on the benthic macrofauna of the Wadden Sea and the coastal North Sea near the island of Sylt. Helgoland Marine Research, 55, 170-175.
Bat, L. & Raffaelli, D., 1998. Sediment toxicity testing: a bioassay approach using the amphipod Corophium volutator and the polychaete Arenicola marina. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 226 (2), 217-239. DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-0981(97)00249-9
Boilly, B. & Richard, A., 1978. Accumulation de fer chez une annelide polychete: Magelona papillicornis F. Müller. Compte Rendu Hebdomadaire Acadamie Sciences de Paris, 286, 1005-1008.
Bosselmann, A., 1989. Larval plankton and recruitment of macrofauna in a subtidal area in the German Bight. In Reproduction, Genetics and Distributions of Marine Organisms (ed. J.S. Ryland & P.A. Tyler), pp. 43-54.
Bourgain, J-L., Dewez, S., Dewarumez, J-M., Richard, A. & Beck, C., 1988. Les rejets de vases portuaires: impacts sedimentologiques et biologiques sur le peuplement des sables a Ophelia borealis de la manche orientale et de la mer du nord. Journal de Recherche Océanographique, 13, 25-27.
Bryan, G.W. & Gibbs, P.E., 1983. Heavy metals from the Fal estuary, Cornwall: a study of long-term contamination by mining waste and its effects on estuarine organisms. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [Occasional Publication, no. 2.]
Bryan, G.W., 1984. Pollution due to heavy metals and their compounds. In Marine Ecology: A Comprehensive, Integrated Treatise on Life in the Oceans and Coastal Waters, vol. 5. Ocean Management, part 3, (ed. O. Kinne), pp.1289-1431. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Dauvin, J.C., 1982. Impact of Amoco Cadiz oil spill on the muddy fine sand Abra alba - Melinna palmata community from the Bay of Morlaix. Estuarine and Coastal Shelf Science, 14, 517-531.
Dauvin, J.C., 2000. The muddy fine sand Abra alba - Melinna palmata community of the Bay of Morlaix twenty years after the Amoco Cadiz oil spill. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 40, 528-536.
Eno, N.C., 1991. Marine Conservation Handbook. English Nature, Peterborough.
Fauchald, J. & Jumars, P.A., 1979. The diet of worms: a study of polychaete feeding guilds. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review, 17, 193-284.
Fernandez, T.V. & Jones, N.V., 1987. Some studies on the effect of zinc on Nereis diversicolor (Polychaeta: Annelida). Tropical Ecology, 28, 9-21.
Fiege, D., Licher, F. & Mackie, A.S.Y., 2000. A partial review of the European Magelonidae (Annelida : Polychaeta) Magelona mirabilis redefined and M. johnstoni sp. nov. distinguished. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 80, 215-234.
Fish, J.D. & Fish, S., 1996. A student's guide to the seashore. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, P.E., Langston, W.J., Burt, G.R. & Pascoe, P.L., 1983. Tharyx marioni (Polychaeta) : a remarkable accumulator of arsenic. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 63, 313-325.
Hayward, P., Nelson-Smith, T. & Shields, C. 1996. Collins pocket guide. Sea shore of Britain and northern Europe. London: HarperCollins.
Hayward, P.J. & Ryland, J.S. (ed.) 1995b. Handbook of the marine fauna of North-West Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hiscock, K., 1983. Water movement. In Sublittoral ecology. The ecology of shallow sublittoral benthos (ed. R. Earll & D.G. Erwin), pp. 58-96. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Howson, C.M. & Picton, B.E., 1997. The species directory of the marine fauna and flora of the British Isles and surrounding seas. Belfast: Ulster Museum. [Ulster Museum publication, no. 276.]
Hunt, J.D., 1925. The food of the bottom fauna of the Plymouth fishing grounds. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 13, 560-599.
JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee), 1999. Marine Environment Resource Mapping And Information Database (MERMAID): Marine Nature Conservation Review Survey Database. [on-line] http://www.jncc.gov.uk/mermaid
Jones, M.L., 1968. On the morphology, feeding and behaviour of Magelona sp. Biological Bulletin of the Marine Laboratory, Woods Hole, 134, 272-297.
Jones, M.L., 1977. A redescription of Magelona papillicornis F. Müller.
Kröncke, I., 1990. Macrofauna standing stock of the Dogger Bank. A comparison: II. 1951 - 1952 versus 1985 - 1987. Are changes in the community of the northeastern part of the Dogger Bank due to environmental changes? Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 25, 189-198.
Kuhl, H., 1972. Hydrography and biology of the Elbe Estuary. Oceanography and Marine Biology: an Annual Review, 10, 225-309.
Lackschewitz, D. & Reise, K., 1998. Macrofauna on flood delta shoals in the Wadden Sea with an underground association between the lugworm Arenicola marina and the amphipod Urothoe poseidonis. Helgolander Meeresuntersuchungen, 52, 147-158.
Levell, D., 1976. The effect of Kuwait Crude Oil and the Dispersant BP 1100X on the lugworm, Arenicola marina L. In Proceedings of an Institute of Petroleum / Field Studies Council meeting, Aviemore, Scotland, 21-23 April 1975. Marine Ecology and Oil Pollution (ed. J.M. Baker), pp. 131-185. Barking, England: Applied Science Publishers Ltd.
Mackie, A.S.Y., James, J.W.C., Rees, E.I.S., Darbyshire, T., Philpott, S.L., Mortimer, K., Jenkins, G.O. & Morando, A., 2006. BIOMÔR 4. The Outer Bristol Channel Marine Habitat Study. Studies in marine biodiversity and systematics from the National Museum of Wales, Cardiff. BIOMÔR Reports 4: 1–249 and A1–A227, + DVD-ROM (2007).
Meißner, K. & Darr, A., 2009. Distribution of Magelona species (Polychaeta: Magelonidae) in the German Bight (North Sea): a modelling approach. Zoosymposia, 2, 567–586. DOI https://doi.org/10.11646/zoosymposia.2.1.39
Mills, K. & Mortimer, K., 2018. Redescription of Magelona minuta Eliason, 1962 (Annelida), with discussions on the validity of Magelona filiformis minuta. Zootaxa, 4527 (4), 541–559. DOI https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4527.4.5
Mills, K. & Mortimer, K., 2019. Observations on the tubicolous annelid Magelona alleni (Magelonidae), with discussions on the relationship between morphology and behaviour of European magelonids. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 99 (4), 715-727. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315418000784
Mortimer, K. & Mackie, A.S.Y., 2014. Morphology, feeding and behaviour of British Magelona (Annelida: Magelonidae), with discussions on the form and function of abdominal lateral pouches. Memoirs of Museum Victoria, 71, 177–201. DOI http://doi.org/10.24199/j.mmv.2014.71.15
Mortimer, K., Kongsrud, J.A. & Willassen, E., 2022. Integrative taxonomy of West African Magelona (Annelida: Magelonidae): species with thoracic pigmentation. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 194 (4), 1134–1176. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlab070
Mortimer, K., Mills, K., Jordana, E., Pinedo, S. & Gil, J., 2020. A further review of European Magelonidae (Annelida), including redescriptions of Magelona equilamellae and Magelona filiformis. Zootaxa, 4767 (1), 89–114. DOI https://doi.org/10.11646/ZOOTAXA.4767.1.4
Niermann, U., 1996. Fluctuation and mass occurrence of Phoronis muelleri (Phoronidea) in the south-eastern North Sea during 1983-1988. Senckenbergiana Maritima, 28, 65-79.
Niermann, U., Bauerfeind, E., Hickel, W. & Westernhagen, H.V., 1990. The recovery of benthos following the impact of low oxygen content in the German Bight. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research, 25, 215-226.
Picton, B.E. & Costello, M.J., 1998. BioMar biotope viewer: a guide to marine habitats, fauna and flora of Britain and Ireland. [CD-ROM] Environmental Sciences Unit, Trinity College, Dublin.
Probert, P.K., 1981. Changes in the benthic community of china clay waste deposits is Mevagissey Bay following a reduction of discharges. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 61, 789-804.
Rasmussen, A.D., Banta, G.T. & Anderson, O., 1998. Effects of bioturbation by the lugworm Arenicola marina on cadmium uptake and distribution in sandy sediments. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 164, 179-188.
Soemodinoto, A., Oey, B.L. & Ibkar-Kramadibrata, H., 1995. Effect of salinity decline on macrozoobenthos community of Cibeurum River estuary, Java, Indonesia. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences, 24, 62-67.
Strasser, M. & Günther, C-P., 2001. Larval supply of predator and prey: temporal mismatch between crabs and bivalves after a severe winter in the Wadden Sea. Journal of Sea Reasearch, 46, 57-67.
Suchanek, T.H., 1993. Oil impacts on marine invertebrate populations and communities. American Zoologist, 33, 510-523. DOI https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/33.6.510
Wilson, D.P., 1982. The larval development of three species of Magelona (Polychaeta) from localities near Plymouth. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 62 (2), 385-401. DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315400057350
Datasets
Environmental Records Information Centre North East, 2018. ERIC NE Combined dataset to 2017. Occurrence dataset: http://www.ericnortheast.org.ukl accessed via NBNAtlas.org on 2018-09-38
NBN (National Biodiversity Network) Atlas. Available from: https://www.nbnatlas.org.
OBIS (Ocean Biodiversity Information System), 2023. Global map of species distribution using gridded data. Available from: Ocean Biogeographic Information System. www.iobis.org. Accessed: 2023-06-02
South East Wales Biodiversity Records Centre, 2018. SEWBReC Worms (South East Wales). Occurrence dataset: https://doi.org/10.15468/5vh0w8 accessed via GBIF.org on 2018-10-02.
Citation
This review can be cited as:
Last Updated: 21/08/2007
