Bugulina simplex ( Hincks, 1886 ) Introduced

Ruiz-Velasco, Sofía, Ros, Macarena, Guerra-García, José M. & López-Fé, Carlos M., 2025, Fouling bryozoans in recreational marinas of the Canary Islands (North-Eastern Atlantic) with new records of non-indigenous and cryptogenic species, Zootaxa 5656 (1), pp. 1-63 : 17-18

Bugulina simplex ( Hincks, 1886) Introduced

( Fig. 6 ; Table 6)

Bugula simplex Hincks, 1886: 254 ; Prenant & Bobin 1966: 505, figs 158 VI, 160 II, 161 VII, 168; Ryland & Hayward 1977: 168, fig. 81; Hayward & Ryland 1998: 226, fig. 71.

Bugulina simplex : Fehlauer-Ale et al. 2015: 6; Ramalhosa et al. 2017: 8, fig. 4.

Figured material. Morro Jable (27/06/23) (1C on buoy) ( MNCN 25.03/4454).

Other material examined. Taliarte (26/06/23) (1C on buoy).

Description. Colonies erect, branching and funnel shaped. Branches in series of 2–6 autozooids in width ( Fig. 6A, B ). Rectangular autozooids with almost the whole frontal surface membranous. Distolateral margin generally with one spine, sometimes appearing as a prominence. Pedunculate and elongate monomorphic avicularia, beak downcurved, located below outer margin spines ( Fig. 6C ). Ooecia hemispherical with a calcified endocist and ectocist mainly membranous (calcified frontal and lateral area) ( Fig. 6D ).

Remarks. Ryland et al. (2011) mentioned that material from New Zealand (i.e. Gordon & Mawatari 1992) shows a notable reduction of the distal spine, appearing as a prominence. In our case, the distal spines are generally not that reduced but may seem like a prominence on inner zooids. This species resemble B. flabellata , but can be distinguished according to the: (1) number of spines on each distolateral margin (three outer, two inner in B. flabellata , and generally one on each in B. simplex ), (2) avicularia shape (more rectangular in B. flabellata ), and (3) ooecia morphology (globular in B. flabellata , hemispherical in B. simplex ) ( Hayward & Ryland 1998; Ramalhosa et al. 2017).

Distribution and status. Bugulina simplex was described from the Adriatic Sea and probably originate in the Mediterranean Sea ( Ryland et al. 2011), where it is considered cryptogenic nowadays (NEMESIS 2024). It has been introduced to North ( Karlson & Osman 2012) and South America ( Figuerola et al. 2014), Australia ( Brock 1985), New Zealand ( Gordon & Mawatari 1992), the Atlantic coasts of Europe ( Ryland et al. 2011; Collin et al. 2015), and Macaronesia. Within Macaronesia, it has been recorded in Azores ( Morton et al. 1998; Micael et al. 2019), Madeira ( Ramalhosa et al. 2017), and in the Canary Islands ( Arístegui 1984b, 1987 (as Bugula simplex ); Moro et al. 2018; Castro et al. 2023). The status of this species shows some disparities, being considered generally as NIS in Macaronesia ( Micael et al. 2019; Castro et al. 2023; AquaNIS 2024; NEMESIS 2024) but also cryptogenic ( Png-Gonzalez et al. 2023). Following the main trend in previous literature and considering its association to port environments, we also consider this species as introduced in the Canary Islands. In addition, despite the establishment success of this species has been considered questionable ( Png-Gonzalez et al. 2023) in the Canary Islands, the previously mentioned records in this archipelago suggest that B. simplex is established in this area.

Figures

FIGURE 6. Bugulina simplex (Hincks, 1886) (MNCN25.03/4454). A. View of the colony through stereomicroscope and B. through SEM. C. Avicularium. D. Ovicelled zooids. Scale bars: A, C, D = 200 µm; B = 400 µm.