Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T15:08:44.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Genital Ducts of Theodoxus, Lamellaria and Trivia, and a Discussion on their Evolution in the Prosobranchs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Vera Fretter
Vera Fretter
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Birkbeck College, University of London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The prosobranchiate gastropods are divided into three orders, the Archaeogastropoda, the Mesogastropoda and the Stenoglossa. In the first of these groups the gonad is connected with the right kidney by a duct which is developed from the ovary, and the sex cells escape to the posterior end of the mantle cavity through the right ureter. The eggs are usually shed singly into the sea where fertilization occurs. In the Mesogastropoda and Stenoglossa the right kidney is not developed and the ovarian duct leads to a short and narrow section of the genital duct which is typically ciliated, and may communicate with the pericardium by a gonopericardial duct and passes anteriorly to a long glandular tract running forwards to the mouth of the mantle cavity. This glandular section is incipient in the archaeogastropod Calliostoma zizyphinum. It is probably formed, as Thiele (1935) suggests, by an ectodermal intucking and will be referred to as the pallial oviduct, for it lies anterior to the opening of the original right kidney, and must be derived from the ectoderm of the mantle (Bourne, 1908; Giese, 1915). The short duct which links it with the ovarian duct will be termed the renal oviduct: in Paludina (=Viviparus), in which its development has been investigated (Drummond, 1903), it is formed from the vestige of the right kidney, and even in the highly specialized Stenoglossa it retains the connexion with the pericardium which is characteristic of the right and left kidneys of the archaeogastropods. Similarly, in the male system of the Mesogastropoda and Stenoglossa there can be distinguished a testis duct, which is connected to the posterior end of the mantle cavity by a renal vas deferens, and this in turn is followed by a pallial vas deferens.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , July 1946 , pp. 312 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1946

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andrews, E. A., 1935. The egg capsules of certain Neritidae. Journ. Morph., Vol. LVII, pp. 31–59.Google Scholar
Ankel, W. E., 1926. Spermiozeugmenbildung durch atypische (apyrene) und typische Spermien bei Scala und Janthina. Verh. Dtsch. zool. Ges., Bd. XXXI, Zool. Anz., suppl. II, pp. 193–202.Google Scholar
Ankel, W. E., 1935. Das Gelege von Lamellaria perspicua L. Zeitschr. Morphol. Ökologie Tiere, Bd. XXX, pp. 635–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ankel, W. E., 1936. Prosobranchiata, in Der Tierwelt der Nord- und Ostsee, Teil IX. Leipzig: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Ankel, W. E., 1937. Der feinere Bau des Kokons der Purpurschnecke Nucella lapillus (L.) und seine Bedeutung für das Laichleben. Verh. Dtsch. zool. Ges., Bd. XXXIX, Zool. Anz., suppl. X, pp. 77–86.Google Scholar
Bourne, G. C., 1908. Contributions to the morphology of the group Neritacea of Aspidobranch Gastropods. Part I. The Neritidae. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, pp. 810–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boutan, L., 1885. Recherches sur l'anatomie et le développement de la Fissurelle. Arch. Zool. exp. gén., 2 sér., T. III bis, suppl. pp. 1–173.Google Scholar
Drummond, I. M., 1903. Notes on the development of Paludina vivipara, with special reference to the urinogenital organs and theories of gastropod torsion. Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci., Vol. XLVI, pp. 97–143.Google Scholar
Eales, N. B., 1921. Aplysia. L.M.B.C. Memoir, No. XXIV, pp. 1–84.Google Scholar
Frank, E. J., 1914. Beiträge zur Anatomie der Trochiden. Jena. Zeitschr. Naturw., Bd. LI, pp. 377–486.Google Scholar
Fretter, V., 1941. The genital ducts of some British stenoglossan prosobranchs. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XXV, pp. 173–211.Google Scholar
Fretter, V., 1943. Studies in the functional morphology and embryology of Onchidella celtica (Forbes & Hanley) and their bearings on its relationships. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XXV, pp. 685–720.Google Scholar
Gersch, M., 1936. Der Genitalapparat und die Sexualbiologie der Nordseetrochiden. Zeitschr. Morphol. Ökologie Tiere, Bd. XXXI, pp. 106–50.Google Scholar
Giard, A., 1875. Sur l'embryologie du Lamellaria perspicua. C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris, T. LXXX, pp. 736–9.Google Scholar
Giese, M., 1915. Der Genitalapparat von Calyptraea sinensis Linn., Crepidula unguiformis Lam. und Capulus hungaricus Lam. Zeitschr. wiss. Zool., Bd. CXIV, pp. 169–231.Google Scholar
Graham, A., 1932. On the structure and function of the alimentary canal of the limpet. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb., Vol. LVII, pp. 287–308.Google Scholar
Graham, A., 1938. On a ciliary process of food-collecting in the gastropod Turritella communis Risso. Proc. Zool. Soc. London, pp. 453–63.Google Scholar
Guiart, J., 1901. Contribution a l'étude des Gastéropodes Opisthobranches et en particulier des Céphalaspides. Mém. Soc. Zool. France, T. XIV, pp. 5–219.Google Scholar
Hertling, H. & Ankel, W. E., 1927. Bemerkungen über Laich und Jugendformen von Littorina und Lacuna. Wiss. Meeres. Komm. Unt. Deutsch. Meere, N.F., Abt. Helgoland, Bd. XVI, 7, 13 pp.Google Scholar
Krull, H., 1935. Anatomische Untersuchungen an einheimischen Prosobranchiern und Beiträge zur Phylogenie der Gastropoden. Zool. Jahrb. (Anatomie), Bd. LX, pp. 399–464Google Scholar
Lamy, E., 1928. La ponte chez les Gastéropodes prosobranches. Journ. Conchyliologie, T. LXXII, pp. 25–196.Google Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1931. The larval stages of Trivia europea. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XVII, pp. 819–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1933. The British species of Trivia: T. arctica and T. monacha. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XVIII, pp. 477–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lebour, M. V., 1937. The eggs and larvae of the British Prosobranchs with special reference to those living in the plankton. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XXII, pp. 105–66.Google Scholar
Lenssen, J., 1899. Système digestif et système génital de la Neritina fluviatilis. La Cellule, T. XVI, pp. 179–232.Google Scholar
Linke, O., 1933. Morphologie und Physiologie des Genitalapparates der Nordseelittorinen. Wiss. Meeres. Komm. Unt. Deutsch. Meere, N.F., Abt. Helgoland. Bd. XIX, 5, 60 pp.Google Scholar
Linke, O., 1935. Zur Morphologie und Physiologie des Genitalapparates der Süsswasserlittorinide Cremnoconchus syhadrensis Blanford. Arch. Naturgesch. N.F., Bd. IV, Heft I, pp. 72–87.Google Scholar
Orton, J. H., 1928. Observations on Patella vulgata. Part I. Sex phenomena, breeding and shell-growth. Journ. Mar. Biol. Assoc., Vol. XV, pp. 851–74.Google Scholar
Pelseneer, P., 1911. Recherches sur l'embryologie des Gastéropodes. Mém. Acad. Royale Belgique, 2e Sér., T. III, pp. 1–167.Google Scholar
Portmann, A., 1925. Der Einfluss des Nähreier auf die Larvenentwicklung von Buccinum und Purpura. Zeitschr. Morphol. Ökologie Tiere, Bd. III, pp. 526–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Randles, W. B., 1904. Some observations on the anatomy and affinities of the Trochidae. Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci., Vol. XLVIII, pp. 32–78.Google Scholar
Rau, A., 1934. Anatomisch-histologische Untersuchungen an Cypraeen. Jena. Zeitschr. Naturw., Bd. LXIX, pp. 83–168.Google Scholar
Robert, A., 1902. Recherches sur le développement des Troques. Arch. Zool. exp. gén., 3e Ser., T. X, pp. 269–538.Google Scholar
Thiele, J., 1935. Handbuch der systematischen Weichtierkunde. 4. Teil. Jena, Fischer.Google Scholar
Thorson, G., 1935. Studies of the egg capsules and development of Arctic marine prosobranchs. Medd. om Grønland, Bd. C, pp. 1–71.Google Scholar
Willcox, M. A., 1898. Zur Anatomie von Acmaea fragilis. Jena. Zeitschr. Naturw., Bd. XXXII, pp. 411–56.Google Scholar
Winckworth, R., 1932. The British marine Mollusca. Journ. Conch., Vol. XIX pp. 211–52.Google Scholar
Woodward, M. F., 1901. The anatomy of Pleurotomaria Beyrichii Hilg. Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci., Vol. XLIV, pp. 215–68.Google Scholar