Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:39:08.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Observations on the opisthobranch mollusc Acteon tornatilis (L.).

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Vera Fretter
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, Birkbeck College, University of London
Alastair Graham
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Reading

Summary

Acteon tornatilis is an opisthobranch mollusc which burrows in sand, using foot, labial and cephalic tentacles in the process. The last also help to exclude sand from the mantle cavity, which is extended into a caecum coiling alongside the visceral hump, presumably used for respiration but also for excretion. The main pallial water current is an exhalant one on the right.

The mantle skirt carries, on the left, numerous repugnatorial glands with toxic secretions.

Labial glands lie at the mouth and the buccal cavity contains jaws and a reduced buccal mass and radula. Into it open salivary glands the structure of which is like that of the pyramidellids. The oesophagus shows traces neither of glands nor of torsion whereas the stomach, though simplified, has resemblances to that of a prosobranch.

The reproductive system is shown to be different from previous descriptions. Male and female ducts are separate from the lower end of the little hermaphrodite duct. The former passes to a prostate from which a vas deferens leads to a large uninvaginable penis; the latter has associated albumen and mucous glands and there is a receptaculum seminis to the duct of which a ventral channel leads from the female aperture in the mantle cavity.Discussion of these aspects of the animal's structure confirms its position as the most primitive of the opisthobranchs.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1954

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

Bouvier, E. L. 1893. Sur l'organisation des Actéons. C.R. Soc. Biol., Paris, T. 5, pp. 2530.Google Scholar
B, Ealesj N.. 1921. Aplysia. L.M.B.C. Memoir xxiv, 84 pp. Liverpool: University Press.Google Scholar
Forbes, E. & Hanley, S., 1853. A History of British Mollusca and their Shells. London: van Voorst.Google Scholar
Fretter, V.J 1937. The structure and function of the alimentary canal of some tecti-branch molluscs, with a note on excretion. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb., Vol. 59, pp. 599646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fretter, V., 1941. The genital ducts of some British stenoglossan prosobranchs. J. Mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 25, pp. 173211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fretter, V., 1943. Studies in the functional morphology and embryology of Onchidella celtica. (Forbes & Hanley) and their bearing on its relationships. J. Mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 25, pp. 685720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fretter, V., 1946. The genital ducts of Theodoxus, Lamellaria and Trivia, and a discussion on their evolution in the prosobranchs. J. Mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 26, pp. 312–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fretter, V., 1948. The structure and life-history of some minute prosobranchs of rock pools: Skeneopsis planorbis (Fabricius), Omalogyra atomus (Philippi), Rissoella diaphana (Alder) and Rissoella opalina (Jeffreys). J. Mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 27, pp. 597632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fretter, V. & Graham, A., 1949. The structure and mode of life of the Pyramidellidae, parasitic opisthobranchs. J. Mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 28, pp. 493532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabe, M. & Prenant, M., 1952. Quelques particularités histologiques d'Acteon tornatilis L. Bull. Soc. zool. Fr., T. 77, pp. 220–8.Google Scholar
Gabe, M. & Prenant, M., 1953. Données morphologiques sur la région antérieure du tube digestif d'Acteon tornatilis L. Bull. Soc. zool. Fr., T. 78, pp. 3644.Google Scholar
Graham, A., 1954. The anatomy of the prosobranch Trichotropis borealis Broderip & Sowerby, and the systematic position of the Capulidae. J. Mar. biol. Ass. U.K., Vol. 33, pp. 129–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guiart, J., 1901. Contribution à l'étude des gasteropodes opisthobranches et en particulier des céphalaspides. Mém. Soc. zool. Fr., T. 14, pp. 5219.Google Scholar
Heidermanns, C., 1924. Über den Muskelmagen der Süsswasserlungenschnecken. Zool. Jb. Physiol, Bd. 41, pp. 335424.Google Scholar
Hubendick, B., 1947. Phylogenie und Tiergeographie der Siphonariidae. Zur Kenntnis der Phylogenie in der Ordnung Basommatophora und des Ursprungs der Pulmonatengruppe. Zool. Bidr. Uppsala, Bd. 24, pp. 1216.Google Scholar
Joyeux-Laffuie, J., 1882. Organisation et développement de l'oncidie Oncidium celticum Cuv. Arch. Zool. exp. gén., T. 10, pp. 225383.Google Scholar
Linke, O., 1933. Morphologie und Physiologie des Genitalapparates der Nordseelittorinen. Wiss. Meeresuntersuch. Abt. Helgoland (N.F.), Bd. 19, No. 5, 60 pp.Google Scholar
Lloyd, H. M., 1952. A study of the reproductive systems of some opisthobranchiate molluscs. Ph.D. thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
Morton, J. E., 1954. The evolution of the Ellobiidae, with a discussion on the origin of pulmonates. Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. (in press).Google Scholar
Pelseneer, P., 1893. Sur le genre Actaeon. Ann. Soc. roy. malacol. Belg., T. 28, 3 pp.Google Scholar
Pelseneer, P., 1894. Recherches sur divers opisthobranches. Mém. Sav. étr. Acad. R. Belg., T. 53, 157 pp.Google Scholar
Perrier, R. & Fischer, H., 1911. Recherches anatomiques et histologiques sur la cavité palleale et ses dépendances chez les Bulléens. Ann. Sci. not. Zool., 9th ser., T. 14, pp. 1–189.Google Scholar
Sars, G. O., 1878. Bidrag til Kundskaben om Norges Arktiske Fauna. I. Mollusca regionis arcticae Norvegiae. Christiania.Google Scholar
Wissel, K. Von, 1898. Beitrage zur Anatomie der Gattung Oncidiella. Zool. Jb., Suppl. 4, pp. 583640. Google Scholar