Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T20:04:49.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

5.—T. R. R. Stebbing, the Challenger and Knowledge of Deep-sea Amphipoda

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

Eric L. Mills
Eric L. Mills
Affiliation:
Department of Oceanography, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. (With 4 tables)
Get access

Synopsis

The Reverend T. R. R. Stebbing (1835–1926), who monographed the Challenger Amphipoda, was brought up in a literary and historical tradition, but became a convert to Darwinism and a naturalist about 1860. Canon A. M. Norman was responsible for the Challenger Amphipoda being offered to Stebbing in 1882. Stebbing's monograph, in 1888, describes the collections and contains a lengthy and definitive annotated bibliography of the Order. It also contains the first indication that the Amphipoda have evolved by adaptive radiation governed by Darwinian selection. Stebbing's later work on amphipod taxonomy contains no evolutionary speculation, although his scientific essays were uniformly and sometimes acrimoniously pro-Darwinian.

Stebbing treated 63 species of presumed deep-sea benthic gammaridean amphipods. Only 44 of these are now believed to be benthic. The Challenger's gear was inadequate for collection of small abyssal animals, and pelagic species make up an increasingly larger fraction of successively deeper ‘benthic’ samples. Consequently most knowledge of deep-sea benthic Amphipoda comes from work in the last 20 years. A deep-sea transect between Massachusetts and Bermuda has at least 108 species, with a maximum of 85 benthic. Distribution is similar to that of a transect off Oregon. Most of the species are in the families Ampeliscidae, Eusiridae, Lysianassidae, Oedicerotidae, Pardaliscidae, Phoxocephalidae and Synopiidae. There is a marked change of species with depth, categorised in six faunal groupings. Endemism is high in the North American basin and there is little affinity to high latitude faunas. Size and biomass decrease with depth.

Diversity of deep-sea Amphipoda is high and comparable to that of Polychaeta and Bivalvia. Present explanations for the high diversity (number of species) are all inadequate in the absence of accurate knowledge of the rate of food supply, diversity of selectively important resources, and rate of food supply, and there is little knowledge of reasons for the high genetic variability in deep-sea animals.

Type
Founders of Oceanography
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , 1972 , pp. 69 - 87
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1972

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 To Literature

Alder-Norman Letters, 1877. Letters to and from J. Alder and A. M. Norman. In Zoology Library, British Museum (N.H.), London.Google Scholar
Barnard, J. L., 1961. Gammaridean Amphipoda from depths of 400 to 6000 meters. Galathea Rep., 5, 23–128.Google Scholar
Barnard, J. L., 1962. South Atlantic abyssal amphipods collected by R. V. Vema. In Abyssal Crustacea. Vema Res. Ser., 1, 1–78.Google Scholar
Barnard, J. L., 1964a. Deep-sea Amphipoda (Crustacea) collected by the R/V Vema in the eastern Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean and Mediterranean Seas. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 127 (01), 46 pp.Google Scholar
Barnard, J. L., 1964b. Some bathyal Pacific Amphipoda collected by the USS Albatross. Pacif. Sci., 18, 315–335.Google Scholar
Barnard, J. L., 1967. Bathyal and abyssal gammaridean Amphipoda of Cedros Trench, Baja California. US Nat. Mus. Bull., 260.Google Scholar
Barnard, J. L., 1971. Gammaridean Amphipoda from a deep-sea transect off Oregon. Smithson. Contr. Zoot., 61.Google Scholar
Bate, C. S., 1872. Catalogue of the amphipodous Crustacea in the British Museum, 399 pp., 58 pi. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Bate, C. S. and Westwood, J. O., 1868. A History of the British Sessile-eyed Crustacea. 2 Vols. London:John Van Voorst.Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A., 1959. Deep-sea Malacostraca of the north-western part of the Pacific Ocean, their distribution and relations. Proc. XVth Int. Congr. Zool., III, Pap. 33, 226–229.Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A. and Vinogradov, M. E., 1955. Pelagic gammarids (Amphipoda: Gammaridea) of the Kurile-Kamchatka Trench. Trudy Inst. Okeanol, 12, 210–287.Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A. and Vinogradov, M. E., 1958. Pelagic gammarids of the northwestern Pacific Ocean. Trudy Inst. Okeanol., 27, 219–257.Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A. and Vinogradov, M. E., 1960. Pelagic gammarids from tropical parts of the Pacific Ocean. Trudy Inst. Okeanol., 34, 165–241.Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A. and Vinogradov, M. E., 1962. Pelagic gammarids collected by the Soviet Antarctic Expedition with the RV Ob southward from 40°S. Issled. Fauni Morei, Rez. Biol. Issled., Sov. Antarkt. Exped., 1955–58), 1 (9), 36–57. (In Russian.)Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A. and Vinogradov, M. E., 1964. The pelagic gammarid amphipods of the northern part of the Indian Ocean. Trudy Inst. Okeanol, 65, 152–196.Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A. and Vinogradov, M. E., 1966. Pelagic Gammaridea (Amphipoda) collected by the Soviet Antarctic Expedition on the M/V Ob, south of 40°S. Biol. Rep. Sov. Antarctic Expedition, 1955–1958, 1, 33–54 (Israel Program for Scientific Translations).Google Scholar
Birstein, J. A. and Vinogradova, N. G., 1960. Descriptions of ultrabyssal gammarids from the northwestern part of the Pacific Ocean. I. Families Lilleborgiidae, Astyridae. Lepechinellidae, Gammaridae. Trudy Inst. Okeanol., 34, 147–164.Google Scholar
Boeck, A., 1872. De Skandinaviske og Arktiske Amphipoder, beskrevne af Axel Boeck. Fdrste Hefte. Christiania. 160 pp.Google Scholar
Brusca, G., 1967a. The ecology of pelagic Amphipoda. I. Species accounts, vertical zonation and migration of Amphipoda from the waters off Southern California. Pacific Set, 21, 382–393.Google Scholar
Brusca, G., 1967b. The ecology of pelagic Amphipoda. II. Observations on the reproductive cycles of several pelagic amphipods from the waters of Southern California. Pacific Sci., 21, 449–456.Google Scholar
Calman, W. T., 1927. T. R. R. Stebbing 1835–1926. Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 101, xxx–xxxii.Google Scholar
Carey, A. G. Jr., 1965. Preliminary studies on animal-sediment interrelationships off the central Oregon coast. Ocean Sci. Ocean Engng, 1, 100–110.Google Scholar
Chevreux, E., 1899. Sur deux espéces géantes d'amphipodes provenant des campagnes du yacht Princess Alice. Bull. Soc. Zool. Fr., 24, 152–158.Google Scholar
Chevreux, E., 1900. Amphipodes provenant des campagnes de “l”Hirondelle'. Résult. Camp. Sclent. Prince Albert I, 16, 195 pp.Google Scholar
Chevreux, E., 1935. Amphipodes provenant des campagnes scientifiques du Prince Albert I er, de Monaco. Résult. Camp. Scient. Prince Albert I, 90, 214 pp.Google Scholar
Clarke, A. H., 1959. Preliminary report on abyssal Atlantic mollusks from the Theta and Vema expeditions. Bull. Am. Malac. Un., 25, 3.Google Scholar
Darlington, P. J., 1971. Modern taxonomy, reality and usefulness. Syst. Zool., 20, 341–365.Google Scholar
Dayton, P. K. and Hessler, R. R., 1972. Role of biological disturbance in maintaining diversity in the deep sea. Deep Sea Res., 19, 199–208.Google Scholar
Doyle, R. W., 1972. Natural selection and genetic variability in Ophiomusium lymani (Echinodermata) populations in the deep sea. Deep Sea Res., (in press).Google Scholar
Dunbar, M. J., 1954. The amphipod Crustacea of Ungava Bay, Canadian Eastern Arctic. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can., 11, 709–798.Google Scholar
Frankenberg, D. and Menzies, R. J., 1968. Some quantitative analyses of deep-sea benthos off Peru. Deep Sea Res., 15, 623–626.Google Scholar
Gosse, P. H., 1853. A Naturalist's Rambles on the Devonshire Coast. London.Google Scholar
Grassle, J. F., 1967. Influence of environmental variation on species diversity in benthic communities of the continental shelf and slope. Ph.D. thesis, Duke Univ., 193 pp. Ann Arbor: Univ. Microfilms, 68–2723.Google Scholar
Grice, G. D. and Hulsemann, K., 1970. New species of bottom living calanoid copepods collected in deepwater by the DSRV Alvin. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harv., 139, 185–230.Google Scholar
Hansen, H. J., 1903. ‘The Ingolfiellidae, f. nov., a new type of Amphipoda. J. Linn. Soc, 29,117–133.Google Scholar
Hartman, Olga, 1965. Deep-water benthic polychaetous annelids off New England to Bermuda and other North Atlantic areas. Occ. Pap. Allan Hancock Fdn, 28, 378 pp.Google Scholar
Hessler, R. R., Isaacs, J. D., and MILLS, E. L., 1972. Giant amphipod from the abyssal Pacific Ocean. Science, N. Y., 175, 636–637.Google Scholar
Hessler, R. R. and Sanders, H. L., 1967. Faunal diversity in the deep-sea. Deep Sea Res., 14, 65–78.Google Scholar
Irvine, W., 1955. Apes, angels & Victorians; the story of Darwin, Huxley and evolution, 399 pp New York:McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Mills, E. L., 1967. Deep-sea Amphipoda from the western North Atlantic Ocean. I. Ingolflellidea and an unusual new species in the gammaridean family Pardaliscidae. Can. J. Zool., 45, 347–355.Google Scholar
Mills, E. L., 1971a. Amphipods and equipoise. A study of T. R. R. Stebbing. Trans. Conn. Acad. Arts Sci. (in press).Google Scholar
Mills, E. L., 1971b. Deep-sea Amphipoda from the western North Atlantic Ocean. The family Ampeliscidae. Limnol. Oceonogr., 16, 357–386.Google Scholar
Murray, J., 1895. General observations on the distribution of marine organisms. Rep. Scient. Res. Voy. H.M.S. Challenger, Summ. Scient. Res., 2, 1431–1462.Google Scholar
Riley, G. A., 1970. Paniculate organic matter in sea water. Adv. Mar. Biol., 8, 1–118.Google Scholar
Rowe, G. T. and Menzel, D. W., 1971. Quantitative benthic samples from the deep Gulf of Mexico with some comments on the measurement of deep-sea biomass. Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf Caribb., 21, 556–566.Google Scholar
Sanders, H. L., 1968. Marine benthic diversity: a comparative study. Am. Nat., 102, 243–282.Google Scholar
Sanders, H. L., 1969. Benthic marine diversity and the stability-time hypothesis. Brookhaven Symp. Biol., 22, 71–81.Google Scholar
Sanders, H. L. and Hessler, R. R., 1969. Ecology of the deep-sea benthos. Science, N. Y., 163, 1419–1424.Google Scholar
Sanders, H. L., Hessler, R. R. and Hampson, G. R., 1965. An introduction to the study of deep-sea benthic faunal assemblages along the Gay Head-Bermuda transect. Deep Sea Res., 12, 845–867.Google Scholar
Schopf, T. J. M. and Gooch, J. L., 1971. A natural experiment using deep-sea invertebrates to test the hypothesis that genetic homozygosity is proportional to environmental stability. Biol. Bull. Mar. Biol. Lab., Woods Hole, 141, 401 (Abstract).Google Scholar
Stebbing, T. R. R., 1873. Notes on Calceola sandalina, Lamarck. Geol. Mag., 10, 57–61.Google Scholar
Stebbing, T. R. R., 1888. Report on the Amphipoda collected by H.M.S. Challenger during the years 1873–76. Rep. Scient. Res. Voy. H.M.S. Challenger, Zool., 29, 1–1737.Google Scholar
Stebbing, T. R. R., 1906. Amphipoda. I. Gammaridea. Tierreich, 21, 806 pp.Google Scholar
Stephensen, K., 1923. Crustacea Malacostraca V. (Amphipoda I). Dan. Ingolf Exped., 3c, 1–100.Google Scholar
Stephensen, K., 1925. Crustacea Malacostraca VI. (Amphipoda II). Dan. Ingolf Exped., 3c, 101–178.Google Scholar
Stephensen, K., 1931. Crustacea Malacostraca VII. (Amphipoda III). Dan. Ingolf Exped., 3c, 179–290.Google Scholar
Stephensen, K., 1944. Crustacea Malacostraca VIII. (Amphipoda IV). Dan. Ingolf Exped., 3, (13), 1–51.Google Scholar
Thomson, C. Wyville, 1873. The depths of the sea. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Thomson, C. Wyville, 1878. The Voyage of the ‘Challenger’. The Atlantic. 2 vote., 391 and 340 pp. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Thomson, C. Wyville, 1880. General introduction to the zoological series of reports. Rep. Scient. Res. Voy. H.M.S. Challenger, Zool. 1, 1–50.Google Scholar
Vinogradova, N. G., 1962. Some problems of the study of deep-sea bottom fauna. J. Oceanogr. Soc. Japan, 20, 724–741.Google Scholar
Wavre, M. and Brinkhurst, R. O., 1971. Interactions between some tubiflcid oligochaetes and bacteria found in the sediments of Toronto Harbour, Ontario. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can., 28, 335–341.Google Scholar
Zenkevitch, L. A., 1959. Certain zoological problems connected with the study of the abyssal and ultra-abyssal zones in the ocean. Proc. XVInt. Congr. Zool., Ill, 215–218.Google Scholar
Zenkevitch, L. A. and Birstein, J. A., 1956. Studies of the deep water fauna and related problems. Deep Sea Res., 4, 54–64.Google Scholar