Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Ecology and Evolution logoLink to Ecology and Evolution
. 2024 Feb 14;14(2):e11014. doi: 10.1002/ece3.11014

Validating a molecular clock for nudibranchs—No fossils to the rescue

Kara K S Layton 1,2,✉, Nerida G Wilson 3,4
PMCID: PMC10867498  PMID: 38362166

Abstract

Time calibrated phylogenies are typically reconstructed with fossil information but for soft‐bodied marine invertebrates that lack hard parts, a fossil record is lacking. In these cases, biogeographic calibrations or the rates of divergence for related taxa are often used. Although nudibranch phylogenies have advanced with the input of molecular data, no study has derived a divergence rate for this diverse group of invertebrates. Here, we use an updated closure date for the Isthmus of Panama (2.8 Ma) to derive the first divergence rates for chromodorid nudibranchs using multigene data from a geminate pair with broad phylogeographic sampling. Examining the species Chromolaichma sedna (Marcus & Marcus, 1967), we uncover deep divergences among eastern Pacific and western Atlantic clades and we erect a new species designation for the latter (Chromolaichma hemera sp. nov.). Next, we discover extensive phylogeographic structure within C. hemera sp. nov. sensu lato, thereby refuting the hypothesis of a recent introduction. Lastly, we derive divergence rates for mitochondrial and nuclear loci that exceed known rates for other gastropods and we highlight significant rate heterogeneity both among markers and taxa. Together, these findings improve understanding of nudibranch systematics and provide rates useful to apply to divergence scenarios in this diverse group.

Keywords: divergence rate, geminate pairs, molecular clock, Nudibranchia

Here, for the first time, we derive divergence rates for nudibranchs using multigene data from a previously undetected geminate pair, with rates exceeding those reported for shelled gastropods. We also erect a new species designation for the Western Atlantic clade, Chromolaichma hemera sp. nov., and we uncover deep divergences within this clade.

graphic file with name ECE3-14-e11014-g005.jpg

1. INTRODUCTION

There is no question that the concurrent estimation of divergence times with a phylogenetic tree improves inferences regarding evolutionary hypotheses (Hipsley & Muller, 2014; Ho, 2021; Landis, 2020; Marko, 2002). For many invertebrate groups, calibrating time‐trees with fossil information has been key to understanding rate variation across a range of lineages (e.g. Schultheiß et al., 2009; Wall‐Palmer et al., 2020). However, in many cases, fossil information is absent, scarce, or unreliable. This may be because the organisms live in habitats that rarely encounter fossilization or because they lack hard parts to fossilize, like many soft‐bodied marine organisms (Holland, 2016; Loeza‐Quintana et al., 2018). Alternative approaches to fossil calibrations include dating divergences using biogeographic calibrations, such as the Isthmus of Panama or the closure of the Bering Strait (e.g. Coppard et al., 2013; Hallas et al., 2016; Knowlton & Weigt, 1998; Loeza‐Quintana et al., 2018), but these approaches carry a number of assumptions. Most importantly, assigning dates to these events can be difficult to do with precision since dates often span a large period of time (Ho et al., 2015). However, recent work by O'Dea et al. (2016) demonstrated a gradual closure with the Isthmus of Panama forming 2.8 million years ago (Ma), a date that is most appropriate for shallow‐water organisms. Despite these advances, biogeographic calibrations can still be problematic when putative geminate species pairs are erroneously assigned and not recovered as sister‐species (Marko et al., 2015).

Soft‐bodied sea slugs such as nudibranchs, lack diagnostic hard parts large enough (and informative enough) to fossilize and this dearth of fossil data has hindered molecular clock calibration in the group. Although previous studies have calibrated nudibranch phylogenies with few geological data points (Hallas et al., 2016) or rates from other taxonomic groups (Lindsay et al., 2016), a lineage‐specific rate is lacking for nudibranchs. Chromolaichma sedna, a chromodorid nudibranch, is known on both sides of the Isthmus of Panama, but was first reported in the western Atlantic only in the 1980s (Bertsch, 1988). A subsequent surge in distribution records for this species in the western Atlantic in the 1990s led to support for a hypothesis of recent introduction in the Caribbean Sea (Goodheart et al., 2016). However, the remarkable conservation of external features in both eastern Pacific and western Atlantic populations (Bertsch, 1988), along with results from a broadly‐sampled molecular phylogeny of the Chromodorididae (Johnson & Gosliner, 2012), indicate that these allopatric populations are indeed conspecific and constitute a geminate pair. Investigation of the systematic relationship between these two geographic areas is critical to clarifying their taxonomy. Furthermore, the continued use of few diagnostic loci for nudibranch systematics and phylogenetics (e.g. Jung et al., 2020; Layton et al., 2018; Soong et al., 2020) justifies the need for deriving reliable evolutionary rates for these loci and taxa.

This study seeks to estimate rates of divergence for chromodorid slug species, based on a geminate pair with broad phylogeographic sampling, using the emergence of the Isthmus of Panama as a calibration point. This will provide the first estimate of divergence rates for fossil‐less, chromodorid nudibranchs. Next, we address the hypothesis that C. sedna is a recent introduction to the western Atlantic by investigating phylogeographic structure in the region. Finally, we revise the taxonomic status of the western Atlantic Chromolaichma ‘sedna’.

2. METHODS

2.1. Specimen collection and DNA sequencing

A total of 20 specimens of C. ‘sedna’ were collected by hand on SCUBA at depths of 5–15 m at multiple sites in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, including near the type locality in the Sea of Cortez (Figure 1, Table 1). Two additional specimens were provided by Florida Natural History Museum and Museum of Comparative Zoology and sequence data for three individuals were sourced from Genbank (Table 1). All specimens were preserved in 96% ethanol in preparation for molecular analyses. Genomic DNA was extracted from a sample of the foot tissue using a DNeasy blood & tissue kit (Qiagen) following manufacturer's guidelines. PCR amplicons were purified using either Exo‐SapIT or gel purification. Two mitochondrial genes, cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) and 16S ribosomal RNA (16S), and one nuclear gene, adenine nucleotide translocase (ANT), were targeted for sequencing. For PCR and sequencing, Folmer et al. (1994) primers were used for COI, Palumbi et al. (1991) primers were used for 16S, and Audzijonyte and Vrijenhoek (2010) primers were used for ANT. Amplicons were bidirectionally sequenced on an Applied Biosystems 3730 capillary sequencer. Forward and reverse sequences were edited and assembled in Sequencher (Gene Codes Corporation) and Geneious Prime 2021 (http://www.geneious.com/) and aligned with MAFFT (Katoh et al., 2002). A second alignment was trimmed to equal length in Geneious Prime 2021 for haplotype network construction.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

Sampling locations for 25 Chromolaichma specimens collected from either side of the Isthmus of Panama. Sample numbers appear next to locations. Images derived from iNaturalist (on left, photographer: S. & J. Johnson) and Museum of Comparative Zoology (on right, photographer: G. Giribet).

TABLE 1.

Specimen information for 25 Chromolaichma ‘sedna’ samples collected in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean for this study, along with outgroup taxa.

Sample field ID Registration number Locality Lat Long COI 16S ANT
Western Atlantic
pinnA1 SIO‐BIC M11636 Florida: Key Largo, Molasses Reef, The Pinnacles 25.0139° N 80.3708° W EF535134 EF534062 PP133518
pinnA2 SIO‐BIC M18383 Florida: Key Largo, Molasses Reef, The Pinnacles 25.0104° N 80.3723° W PP133106 PP135512 PP133514
wellB1 SIO‐BIC M18384 Florida: Key Largo, Molasses Reef, Wellwood Grounding 25.0105° N 80.3728° W PP133107 PP135513 PP133515
wellB2 SIO‐BIC M18385 Florida: Key Largo, Molasses Reef, Wellwood Grounding 25.0105° N 80.3728° W PP133108 PP135514 PP133516
pickering SIO‐BIC M18386 Florida: Pickles Reef, Snapper ledge 24.9877° N 80.414° W PP133109 PP135515 PP133511
NDR FMNH‐UF‐411735 Florida: Keys, North Dry Rocks 25.0739° N 80.2817° W PP133110 PP135511 PP133510
G354a SIO‐BIC M18387 Panamá: Boca del Drago 9.4049° N 82.3251° W PP133112 PP135517 PP133517
G354b SIO‐BIC M18388 Panamá: Isla Bastimentos 9.4049° N 82.3251° W PP133113 PP135520 PP133520
G357 SIO‐BIC M18389 Panamá: Isla Bastimentos 9.2853° N 82.1917° W PP133114 PP135518 PP133512
G358 SIO‐BIC M18390 Panamá: Isla Bastimentos 9.2555° N 82.1252° W PP133115 PP135519 PP133519
MCZ MCZ381343 Panama: Isla Colón, STRI 9.3522° N 82.2569° W PP133105 PP135500 ‐
BAH SIO‐BIC M13673 Bahamas: Sweetings Cay 26.6193° N 77.868° W PP133111 PP135516 PP133513
Pacific
SC02‐05 SIO‐BIC M18397 Sea of Cortez: Isla San Idelfonso 26.5747° N 111.4112° W PP133116 PP135510 PP133528
CSLB SIO‐BIC M18392 Mexico: Cabo San Lucas, Land's End 22.8782° N 109.8966° W PP133117 PP135501 PP133525
SC09‐29 SIO‐BIC M18391 Sea of Cortez ‐ ‐ PP133118 PP135502 ‐
SMA SIO‐BIC M18393 Mexico: San Jose del Cabo, Santa Maria 22.9154° N 109.8214° W PP133122 PP135506 PP133522
SMB SIO‐BIC M18394 Mexico: San Jose del Cabo, Santa Maria 22.9154° N 109.8214° W PP133123 PP135505 PP133526
SMC SIO‐BIC M18395 Mexico: San Jose del Cabo, Santa Maria 22.9154° N 109.8214° W PP133124 PP135504 PP133524
SMD SIO‐BIC M18396 Mexico: San Jose del Cabo, Santa Maria 22.9154° N 109.8214° W PP133125 PP135503 ‐
PelA SIO‐BIC M13674 Mexico: Cabo San Lucas, Pelican Rock 22.8785° N 109.8988° W PP133119 PP135509 PP133527
PelB SIO‐BIC M13675 Mexico: Cabo San Lucas, Pelican Rock 22.8785° N 109.8988° W PP133120 PP135508 PP133521
PelC SIO‐BIC M13676 Mexico: Cabo San Lucas, Pelican Rock 22.8785° N 109.8988° W PP133121 PP135507 PP133523
CASIZ175430* CAS IZ175430 Costa Rica: Punta Carbon 10.3448° N 85.8639° W JQ727877 JQ727758 ‐
CASIZ175435* CAS IZ175435 Costa Rica: Playa Real 10.3877° N 85.8388° W JQ727879 JQ727759 ‐
CASIZ175446* CAS IZ175446 Panama: Golfo de Chiriquí, Isla Ulva 7.3091° N 81.7882° W JQ727878 JQ727760 ‐
Outgroups
Doriprismatica atromarginata CAS IZ177237 Philippines: Caban Island 13.6911° S 120.8414° E JQ727864 JQ727746 ‐
Tyrinna evelinae SIO‐BIC M18401 Mexico: Isla San Esteban 28.7202° N 112.6119° W ‐ ‐ PP236067
Open in a new tab

Note: GenBank accession numbers are provided for COI, 16S and ANT. An asterisk marks samples that derive from GenBank and a hyphen denotes missing information.

2.2. Phylogenetic analyses and species delimitation

Both individual gene and concatenated gene datasets were used for constructing maximum likelihood (ML) trees in RAxML (Stamatakis, 2006) implemented in the raxmlGUI v2.0 (Edler et al., 2020). Trees were built with a GTR + G model and 1000 bootstrap replicates with Doriprismatica atromarginata as an outgroup for the concatenated dataset, COI and 16S, and with Tyrinna evelinae as an outgroup for ANT. Total branch length (TBL) of each gene tree was summed and used to derive a mutation rate ratio for mitochondrial (μm) and nuclear loci (μn) following Duda (2021). For μm, an average TBL of both genes was used. Both the Assemble Species by Automatic Partition (ASAP) algorithm (Puillandre et al., 2021) and the Bayesian bPTPmodel (Zhang et al., 2013) were used to partition the COI dataset into unique genetic clusters using default parameters. A minimum spanning haplotype network was generated with trimmed COI data using the haploNet function in the pegas package in R (Paradis, 2010).

2.3. Estimating divergence rates

Pairwise distances were calculated for COI, 16S, and ANT in MEGAX (Kumar et al., 2018) using a maximum composite likelihood model and pairwise deletion. To calculate a rate of divergence for this species, we used the minimum sequence divergence between geminate pairs and a closing date of the Isthmus of Panama of 2.8 mya (O'Dea et al., 2016). We chose to use the more conservative minimum sequence divergence rather than mean divergence to prevent the inclusion of accumulated intraspecific changes. Rates of divergence were calculated for all genes. The substitution rate is presented as half of the divergence rate. To determine whether the data were evolving in a clock‐like fashion, a maximum likelihood clock test was conducted in MEGAX (Kumar et al., 2018) using a Tamura‐Nei model and rate heterogeneity for complete COI, 16S and ANT sequences. Divergence rates from other geminate pairs of marine invertebrates were retrieved from the literature for comparative purposes, along with relevant life history information. Life history information, including lifespan, reproductive mode and larval dispersal, were obtained for the genus where possible but may represent broader taxonomic patterns in some instances.

3. RESULTS

3.1. Deep divergence within and among ocean basins

A total 22 COI, 22 16S and 19 ANT sequences were generated for C. ‘sedna’ in this study, with 25 total sequences of COI and 16S including those sourced from GenBank. Data for these specimens and GenBank accession numbers are provided in Table 1. The final COI alignment was 658 bp in length, the 16S alignment was 459 bp and the ANT alignment was 553 bp. A trimmed COI alignment of 590 bp was used for the haplotype network. Mean intraspecific divergence of C. ‘sedna’ was 8.7% (range 0.0%–15.7%) at COI, 3.9% (range 0.0%–8.1%) at 16S and 0.3% (range 0.0%–0.7%) at ANT (Tables S1–S3).

The COI + 16S + ANT ML phylogeny showed that western Atlantic and eastern Pacific C. ‘sedna’ formed separate clades, with more structure in the western Atlantic than in the eastern Pacific (Figure 2a). These same patterns were recovered in individual gene trees (Figure S1). Three western Atlantic clades were strongly supported in the combined phylogeny (BP > 90), although support at interior nodes was weak (Figure 2a). These results were reinforced by the species delimitation analyses that partitioned western Atlantic individuals into three clusters, corresponding to geographic region (Bahamas, Panama, and Florida) (Figure 2a). The minimum divergence between individuals in the western Atlantic and eastern Pacific was 13.6% at COI, 5.7% at 16S and 0.5% at ANT. Within the western Atlantic clade mean intraspecific divergence at COI was 4.0%, with a mean divergence of 5.4% between Florida and Bahamas, 6.5% between Bahamas and Panama, and 6.5% between Florida and Panama. The minimum sequence divergence at COI among these clades were 5.4%, 6.3%, and 6.2%, respectively. Within the eastern Pacific clade mean intraspecific divergence at COI was 0.45%.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Open in a new tab

(a) Maximum‐likelihood phylogeny (COI + 16S + ANT) for Chromolaichma ‘sedna’ where triangles represent collapsed clades, hash marks indicate the branch was shortened by 50%, and bootstrap support is presented at nodes. Individual bars represent congruent clades from the ABGD and bPTP delimitation analyses. (b) COI haplotype network where color corresponds to geographic location and the size of circles corresponds to sample size. Roman numerals are assigned to unique haplotypes and black circles denote mutational steps. Images derive from iNaturalist and represent C. sedna and Chromolaichma hemera sp. nov. lineages from Baja California and Chetumal, Mexico (photographers: on left, A. Velasco and on right, María Ecléctica Photography).

The same patterns were also recovered in the haplotype network analysis, with different ocean basins showing significant differentiation, as well as regions within the western Atlantic showing deep haplotype divergence and no shared haplotypes (Figure 2b). In total, 8 and 9 unique haplotypes were identified from 12 and 13 western Atlantic and eastern Pacific individuals, respectively (Figure 2b). Within the Pacific, all haplotypes were closely related to the central haplotype in Mexico and the Sea of Cortez.

3.2. Rate variation

Given a minimum sequence divergence of 13.6% among C. ‘sedna’ individuals on either side of the Isthmus of Panama, and an estimated age of separation of 2.8 million years, COI is expected to diverge at a rate of 4.9% per million years. For 16S, with a minimum sequence divergence of 5.7%, this rate was 2.0% per million years. For ANT, with a minimum sequence divergence of 0.5%, this rate was 0.2% per million years. Divergence rates of 4.9%, 2.0%, and 0.2% correspond to substitution rates of 2.5% for COI, 1.0% for 16S, and 0.1% for ANT. COI and 16S rates are 25 and 10 times higher than the ANT rates, respectively. This variation in divergence rate also underpins differences in pairwise distance among loci (Figure S2). Total branch length of the COI, 16S, and ANT trees was 0.299, 0.136, and 0.006, respectively, with a μm/μn value of 39.5. The clock test was insignificant for COI, 16S, and ANT (p = .9, p = .7, p = .06), indicating that the null hypothesis of equal evolutionary rates throughout the tree could not be rejected (Table 2).

TABLE 2.

COI divergence rates (% per myr) across geminate pairs of marine invertebrates separated by the Isthmus of Panama.

Taxonomy (Class: Order) COI rate (%/myr) Number of species Lifespan Reproductive mode Larval dispersal References
Mollusca
Bivalvia
Arcidae 1.2% 301 Up to 25 y Gonochoric & sequential hermaphrodism Planktotrophic (↑) Breton et al. (2017), Marko (2002), Moran (2004), Puljas et al. (2015), Zeinalipour et al. (2014)
Gastropoda
Hydrobiidae: Peringia 2.6% 1 (1897) 1–2 y Gonochoric Planktotrophic (↑) Barnes (1990), Brownlow et al. (2008), Hershler and Davis (1980), Wilke (2003)
Tegulidae: Tegula 2.4% 48 (66) Up to 25 y Gonochoric Lecithotrophic (↓) Gallivan and Danforth (1999), Hellberg and Vacquier (1999), Kulikova and Omel'yanenko (2000), Moran (1997)
Chromodoridiidae: Chromolaichma 4.9% 3 (392) 1 y Simultaneous hermaphrodism Planktotrophic (↑) Aerts (1994), Rudman (2008), This study
Plakobranchidae: Elysia 4.0% 102 (136) Up to 1 y Simultaneous hermaphrodism

Poeciligonous (↑ ↓)

(planktotropic & lecithotrophic)

 Clark (1975), Ellingson and Krug (2016)
Annelida
Polychaeta
Alvinellidae: Alvinella 2.4% 2 (11) 2.7 y Gonochoric Lecithotrophic (↓) Chevaldonné et al. (2002), Desbruyères et al. (1998), Hilário et al. (2015), McHugh and Fong (2002), Wilke et al. (2009)
Arthropoda
Malacostraca
Alpheidae: Alpheus 1.4% 321 (1119) 1.2 y Gonochoric Lecithotrophic (↓) Knowlton and Keller (1986), Knowlton and Weigt (1998), Mossolin et al. (2006), Pavanelli et al. (2008)
Penaeidae: Penaeus 4.3% 33 (242) 1–2 y Gonochoric Lecithotrophic (↓) Baldwin et al. (1998), Champion (1987), Voltolina and Angulo (2007)
Echinodermata
Echinoidea
Cidaridae: Eucidaris 2.8–3.7% 12 (387) 4–5 y Gonochoric Planktotrophic (↑) Lessios et al. (1999), McPherson (1965)
Asteroidea
Oreasteridae: Oreaster 5.0% 2 (63) Up to 7 y Gonochoric Planktotrophic (↑) Hart et al. (1997)
Open in a new tab

Note: The number of species per taxonomic group was sourced from WoRMS, based on accepted records only, and are presented for both the genus and family (in brackets) where applicable. Information about th lifespan, reproductive mode, and larval dispersal were obtained for the genus where possible but may represent broader taxonomic patterns in some instances. Arrows indicate high or low larval dispersal potential and “y” represents the year.

3.3. Systematics

Chromodorididae Bergh, 1891

Chromolaichma Bertsch, 1977

Type Casella sedna Ev. Marcus & Er. Marcus 1967

Chromolaichma hemera sp. nov. (Figures 1, 2, 3).

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Open in a new tab

Chromolaichma hemera sp. nov. holotype collected from Smithsonian Tropical Research Station (STRI) (MCZ:M:381343) (photographer: G. Giribet).

Zoobank registration. LSID: 42E0650E‐C2F3‐4A2E‐A993‐2CED24D17F82

Chromolaichma sedna—Matsuda & Gosliner 2018 (in part).

Dorisprismatica sedna—Johnson & Gosliner 2012 (in part), Goodheart et al. 2016.

Glossodoris sedna—Bertsch 1988, Lyons 1989, Humann & Deloach 2002, Debelius & Kuiter 2007 (in part), Behrens & Hermosillo 2005 (in part), Valdés et al. 2006.

3.3.1. Holotype

MCZ:M:381343, Smithsonian Tropical Research Station (STRI), Isla Colón, Archipiélago de Bocas del Toro, Panamá, 9.35215000°, −82.256990°, Caribbean Sea. Collected: 2014‐03‐19/2014‐03‐23. Coll: G. Giribet [https://mczbase.mcz.harvard.edu/guid/MCZ:Mala:381343].

3.3.2. Paratype

SIO‐BIC M18386, Snapper Ledge 1, Pickles Reef, Key Largo, Florida, USA, 24.9877° N, 80.414° W, Western Atlantic. Collected: 2005‐10‐05, 5 m. Coll: N. Wilson.

3.3.3. Etymology

Named after the Greek goddess of the day, Hemera.

3.3.4. Distribution

Gulf of Mexico (Arrecife Alacranes), North Atlantic (Florida, The Bahamas) and the Caribbean Sea (Mexico, Belize, Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Turks and Caicos, Dominican Republic, Saint‐Barthélemy, Caribbean Netherlands). Not reported on the continental South American coastline.

3.3.5. Description

Body soft, elongate and translucent white, with some specimens (including the holotype) with some orange–red dusting on the dorsum and sides of foot. Mantle edge usually crenulated. Tail extends beyond mantle. Mantle with yellow marginal band, and thinner red submarginal band. Rarely, an opaque band sits inside the red submarginal band. Similar bands of color appear on the foot margin, although the red submarginal band can be very thin or absent. Rhinophore stalks, translucent white. Lower part of the rhinophore clubs are translucent white, with anterior top third lamellae red. For most specimens, posteriorly, the stem that the rhinophore lamellae are attached to is red, and anteriorly, white. Lamellae evenly red around the upper part of rhinophores. Some specimens show lateral rhinophoral lamellae as white. Simple pinnate gills form a double spiral, and wriggle rhythmically. Large specimens may be bipinnate at tips. Distal tips of outer rachis and lamellae are red.

Radular described fully in Bertsch (1988). In short, the radular formulae for two specimens from Tavenier Key were 133 × 54.1.54 and 128 × 49.1.49 (LACM 83–147 and CASIZ 064510, respectively). The central rachidian tooth is a small, reduced, triangular tooth. The innermost tooth in each row had 2–4 denticles on the inner side and 3–5 outer side denticles. The rest of the teeth in each half row have 4–8 denticles on the outer side, but these became smooth for the outermost 10–20 teeth. The jaw rodlets were mostly bifid.

The reproductive system of these two specimens were examined by Bertsch (1988), who stated that the morphology of the penis, vas deferens, and the arrangement and relative size of the vagina, insemination duct, bursa copulatrix and the receptaculum seminis were all identical to the holotype of C. sedna (Marcus & Marcus, 1967).

3.3.6. Remarks

Chromolaichma was only recently resurrected by Matsuda and Gosliner (2018) to encompass three species (C. dalli, C. edmundsi, C. sedna). In previous family‐level revisions, Rudman (1984) considered Chromolaichma as a synonym of Glossodoris, while Johnson and Gosliner (2012) placed it in ‘Doriprismatica’, later referred to as Doriprismatica.

Morphological conservation between C. hemera sp. nov. and C. sedna was noted by Bertsch (1988) who described them as nearly identical, noting slight differences in background color (not as white as C. sedna) and with possibly more crenulations in the mantle (Figure 4). Chromolaichma hemera sp. nov. also exhibits a wider yellow submarginal band than C. sedna (Figure 4). Bertsch noted that the reproductive system was identical to that illustrated in the original description of C. sedna (Marcus & Marcus, 1967) and that the radular morphology matched the holotype, and fell within the range for specimens described from the Gulf of California (Bertsch, 1978). Overall, he did not consider these slight morphological differences to warrant a new species, but the addition of molecular data that demonstrates deep genetic divergences does support the establishment of a new species for the western Atlantic and Caribbean specimens. Molecular data also demonstrates deep divergences among western Atlantic and Caribbean clades, which may represent additional cryptic species. A lack of geographically intermediate samples and additional morphological data prevents their description here, so for now, we refer to all lineages in the western Atlantic and Caribbean clades as C. hemera sp. nov. sensu lato. Upon interrogation of publicly available images, there are notable differences in rhinophore colouration between individuals in the lesser Antilles and the rest of the Caribbean, but additional work is needed to verify this preliminary finding. Finally, the name C. sedna is now restricted to specimens in the Gulf of California and the eastern Pacific.

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Open in a new tab

Images from iNaturalist representing Chromolaichma sedna (a–d) and Chromolaichma hemera sp. nov. (e–h) illustrating key differences in the color and crenulation of the mantle edge. C. sedna from (a, b) Mexico (photographers: V. Mas and M. Krampf), (c) El Salvador (photographer: A. Trejo), and (d) Costa Rica (photographer: K. Soto Venegas). C. hemera sp. nov. from (e) Florida (photographer: A. Shure), (f) Bahamas (photographer: M. Bokach), and (g, h) Belize (photographers: T. Heusse and A. McKinlay).

4. DISCUSSION

4.1. A new species in the western Atlantic and deep divergences within populations

This study uncovered strong geographic structuring of C. ‘sedna’, with reciprocal clades in the western Atlantic and eastern Pacific, providing support for a previously unrecognized geminate species pair. The minimum sequence divergence among individuals on either side of the Isthmus (13.6% at COI) is much greater than intraspecific divergences reported for other nudibranchs (0%–6%) (e.g. Fritts‐Penniman et al., 2020; Korshunova et al., 2018; Layton et al., 2018), and molluscs more generally (0%–5%) (e.g. Layton et al., 2014), and it aligns with divergences in other geminate species (e.g. 6.3%–26.5% in arcid bivalves, Marko & Moran, 2009; 8.9% in decapods, Pileggi et al., 2014). The monophyly of western Atlantic and eastern Pacific clades was strongly supported in the phylogenetic analyses and diagnostic morphological features set them apart. For instance, there are notable differences in the color of the marginal and submarginal bands and there are more crenulations in the mantle of the western Atlantic clade. Together, this evidence supports their status as separate species and a new name is established here for the western Atlantic clade (C. hemera sp. nov.). The discovery of a new species of nudibranch adds to a recent body of work employing molecular data to propel species discovery in this diverse group of invertebrates (e.g. Do et al., 2020; Epstein et al., 2019; Matsuda & Gosliner, 2018), but the nudibranch fauna of the western Atlantic has been less well studied than the Indo‐Pacific.

Our study also uncovered significant population structure within western Atlantic C. hemera sp. nov., as evidenced by deep haplotypic divergence among populations, negating the hypothesis that this species was recently introduced to the area through ship transport (e.g. Goodheart et al., 2016; Humann & Deloach, 2002). Bertsch (1988) mistakenly reported the location for a specimen shared with him by Lyons when the first tropical western Atlantic specimens were reported (see Lyons, 1989 for correction). Thus, Bertsch incorrectly reported that all known specimens were from a restricted locality, initiating the idea that they may represent an introduction, although not explicitly stating that. The earliest known specimens in the western Atlantic were identified from the Bahamas in 1978 (Lyons, 1989), only 11 years after the description of the eastern Pacific species C. sedna. The deep molecular divergences among tropical western Atlantic populations do not support a recent introduction scenario and instead may represent a cryptic species complex (C. hemera sp. nov. sensu lato). Conversely, we uncovered a lack of structure within the eastern Pacific clade. Although surprising, this has also been shown in Tripneustes sea urchins (Lessios et al., 2003) and the pronghorn spiny lobster (Panulirus penicillatus) (Chow et al., 2011) and it may be due to differences in oceanographic currents, habitat complexity and glacial sea level changes in the region.

There are several possible explanations for the deep divergence among western Atlantic clades. First, these deep divergences might reflect missing taxa given the high extinction rate in the region following the closure of the Isthmus (Lessios, 2008; Marko et al., 2015), or they might reflect rapid diversification following the split (Thacker, 2017). The discovery of a distinct genetic clade at each region in the western Atlantic (e.g. Panama, Bahamas and Florida) is congruent with patterns in other marine invertebrates in the area. For instance, DeBiasse et al. (2016) uncovered deep divergences among populations of the brooding sponge, Callyspongia vaginalis, with isolation among Central American and Caribbean clades and a further phylogeographic break between populations in Florida and the Bahamas. Alternatively, deep sequence divergences may be the result of accelerated rates of evolution. This is a particularly plausible scenario for nudibranchs given that the COI divergence rate derived here (4.9% per myr) is significantly higher than rates reported in other (shelled) gastropods, although very similar to rates in other shell‐less gastropods (e.g. Elysia, Ellingson & Krug, 2016).

4.2. Rate heterogeneity among geminate lineages

Rate heterogeneity has been invoked to explain variation in sequence divergence observed across marine geminate pairs (Marko, 2002), but this is the first study to summarize these rates. Here, we found significant rate heterogeneity among marine invertebrate genera that share a similar lifespan, reproductive mode and dispersal potential, suggesting that life history traits do not drive differences in mitochondrial rates. These findings align with recent work by Saclier et al. (2018), who found that while nuclear substitution rates were linked to generation time in isopods, mitochondrial substitution rates were independent of life history traits. Some of the seminal work linking mutation rates to life history traits was focused on only a few taxa and loci (e.g. Müller & Albach, 2010), thereby limiting our understanding of rate variation across the genomes of most species. In fact, we uncovered significant differences in nuclear and mitochondrial substitution and mutation rates, as evidenced by an elevated μm/μn ratio, similar to findings in other gastropods (Duda, 2021). Given the evidence for rate variation among both taxa and loci, future work will look to reassess substitution rates using transcriptome data from recent phylogenomic studies (Layton et al., 2020; Moles & Giribet, 2021). However, because COI, 16S, and ANT remain some of the most commonly used genes in species‐level nudibranch investigations, the lineage‐specific rates presented here will help improve understanding of divergence scenarios in this diverse group.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Kara K. S. Layton: Conceptualization (supporting); formal analysis (lead); investigation (equal); validation (equal); visualization (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). Nerida G. Wilson: Conceptualization (lead); formal analysis (supporting); funding acquisition (lead); investigation (equal); resources (lead); validation (equal); visualization (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing – review and editing (equal).

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Appendix S1

Click here for additional data file. (656.9KB, docx)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Greg Rouse (UCSD‐SIO), Pat Krug (Cal State LA), Liz Borda (Texas A&M), and Laeticia Serrano assisted with specimen collection and provided samples. John Slapscinsky and Mandy Bemis facilitated specimen loans from the Florida Museum of Natural History, Charlotte Seid facilitated loans from Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Benthic Invertebrates Collection and Jennifer Trimble and Emily Blank facilitated a specimen loan from the Museum of Comparative Zoology (Harvard). New collections for this study were made in the Gulf of California, Mexico under permit DGOPA.06754.240609.2003 to Carlos Ortiz, Universidad Autónoma de Baja Californias Sur. New collections in Florida were authorized by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (M‐E1N59101796) and NOAA Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary permit (FKNMS‐2005‐043) to NGW.

Layton, K. K. S. , & Wilson, N. G. (2024). Validating a molecular clock for nudibranchs—No fossils to the rescue. Ecology and Evolution, 14, e11014. 10.1002/ece3.11014

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

All sequence data are available on GenBank (accession numbers are provided in Table 1) and gene alignments can be retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ns1rn8q08. Tissue samples and DNA extractions are vouchered at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Florida Museum of Natural History and the Museum of Comparative Zoology.

REFERENCES

  1. Aerts, L. A. M. (1994). Seasonal distribution of nudibranchs in the southern delta area, SW Netherlands. Journal of Molluscan Studies, 60, 129–139. [Google Scholar]
  2. Audzijonyte, A. , & Vrijenhoek, R. C. (2010). Three nuclear genes for phylogenetic, SNP, and population genetic studies of molluscs and other invertebrates. Molecular Ecology Resources, 10, 200–204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Baldwin, J. D. , Bass, A. L. , Bowen, B. W. , & Clark, W. H. (1998). Molecular phylogeny and biogeography of the marine shrimp Penaeus . Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 10, 399–407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Barnes, R. S. K. (1990). Reproductive strategies in contrasting populations of the coastal gastropod Hydrobia ulvae. II. Longevity and life‐time egg production. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 138, 183–200. [Google Scholar]
  5. Behrens, D. W. , & Hermosillo, A. (2005). Eastern pacific nudibranchs. Sea Challengers. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bertsch, H. (1977). The Chromodoridinae nudibranchs from the Pacific coast of America. I. Investigative methods and supra‐specific taxonomy. The Veliger, 20(2), 107–118. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bertsch, H. (1978). The Chromodoridinae nudibranchs from the Pacific coast of America. III. The genera Chromolaichma and Mexichromis . The Veliger, 21(1), 70–86. [Google Scholar]
  8. Bertsch, H. (1988). Anatomy and zoogeography of Glossodoris sedna and Chromodoris grahami (Opisthobranchia: Nudibranchia) in the Tropical Western Atlantic and Caribbean. The Veliger, 30, 395–399. [Google Scholar]
  9. Breton, S. , Capt, C. , Guerra, D. , & Stewart, D. (2018). Sex determining mechanisms in bivalves. In Leonard J. (Eds.), Transitions Between Sexual Systems. Springer, pp 165–192. 10.1007/978-3-319-94139-4_6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Brownlow, R. J. , Dawson, D. A. , Horsburgh, G. J. , Bell, J. J. , & Fish, J. D. (2008). A method for genotype validation and primer assessment in heterozygote‐deficient species, as demonstrated in the prosobranch mollusc Hydrobia ulvae . BMC Genetics, 9, 55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Champion, H. F. B. (1987). The functional anatomy of the male reproductive system in Penaeus indicus . South African Journal of Zoology, 22, 297–307. [Google Scholar]
  12. Chevaldonné, P. D. , Jollivet, D. , Desbruyères, D. , Lutz, R. A. , & Vrijenhoek, R. C. (2002). Sister‐species of eastern Pacific hydrothermal‐vent worms (Ampharetidae, Alvinelidae, Vestimentifera) provide new mitochondrial clock calibration. Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 43, 367–370. [Google Scholar]
  13. Chow, S. , Jeffs, A. , Miyake, Y. , Konishi, K. , Okazaki, M. , Suzuki, N. , Abdullah, M. F. , Imai, H. , Wakabayasi, T. , & Sakai, M. (2011). Genetic isolation between the western and eastern pacific populations of pronghorn spiny lobster Panulirus penicillatus . PLoS One, 6, e29280. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Clark, K. (1975). Nudibranch life cycles in the northwest Atlantic and their relationship to the ecology of fouling communities. Helgoländer Wissenschaftliche Meeresuntersuchungen, 27, 28–69. [Google Scholar]
  15. Coppard, S. E. , Zigler, K. S. , & Lessios, H. A. (2013). Phylogeography of the sand dollar genus Mellita: Cryptic speciation along the coasts of the Americas. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 69, 1033–1042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Debelius, H. , & Kuiter, R. H. (2007). Nudibranchs of the world. IKAN. [Google Scholar]
  17. DeBiasse, M. B. , Richards, V. P. , Shivji, M. S. , & Hellberg, M. E. (2016). Shared phylogeographical breaks in a Caribbean coral reef sponge and its invertebrate commensals. Journal of Biogeography, 43, 2136–2146. [Google Scholar]
  18. Desbruyères, D. , Chevaldonné, P. , Alayse, A. M. , Jollivet, D. , Lallier, F. H. , Jouin‐Toulmond, C. , Zal, F. , Sarradin, P. M. , Cosson, R. , Caprais, J. C. , Arndt, C. , O'Brien, J. , Guezennec, J. , Hourdez, S. , Riso, R. , Gaill, F. , Laubier, L. , & Toulmond, A. (1998). Biology and ecology of the “Pompeii worm” (Alvinella pompejana Desbruyères and Laubier), a normal dweller of an extreme deep‐sea environment: A synthesis of current knowledge and recent developments. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 45, 383–422. [Google Scholar]
  19. Do, T. D. , Jung, D. W. , Kil, H. J. , & Kim, C. B. (2020). A report of a new species and new record of Cadlina (Nudibranchia, Cadlinidae) from South Korea. Zookeys, 996, 1–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Duda, T. F. (2021). Patterns of variation of mutation rates of mitochondrial and nuclear genes of gastropods. BMC Ecology and Evolution, 21, 13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Edler, D. J. , Klein, J. , Antonelli, A. , & Silvestro, D. (2020). raxmlGUI 2.0: A graphical interface and toolkit for phylogenetic analyses using RAxML. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 373–377. [Google Scholar]
  22. Ellingson, R. A. , & Krug, P. J. (2016). Reduced genetic diversity and increased reproductive isolation follow population‐level loss of larval dispersal in a marine gastropod. Evolution, 70, 18–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Epstein, H. E. , Hallas, J. M. , Johnson, R. F. , Lopez, A. , & Gosliner, T. M. (2019). Reading between the lines: Revealing cryptic species diversity and colour patterns in Hypselodoris nudibranchs (Mollusca: Heterobranchia: Chromodorididae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 186, 116–189. [Google Scholar]
  24. Folmer, O. , Black, M. , Hoeh, W. , Lutz, R. , & Vrijenhoek, R. (1994). DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology, 3, 294–299. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Fritts‐Penniman, A. L. , Gosliner, T. M. , Mahardika, G. N. , & Barber, P. H. (2020). Cryptic ecological and geographic diversification in coral‐associated nudibranchs. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 144, 106698. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Gallivan, G. , & Danforth, J. (1999). Phylum Mollusca. Marine Science Institute. [Google Scholar]
  27. Goodheart, J. A. , Ellingson, R. A. , Vital, X. G. , Galvão Filho, H. C. , McCarthy, J. B. , Medrano, S. M. , Bhave, V. J. , García‐Méndez, K. , Jiménez, L. M. , López, G. , & Hoover, C. A. (2016). Identification guide to the heterobranch sea slugs (Mollusca: Gastropoda) from Bocas del Toro, Panama. Marine Biodiversity Records, 9, 56. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hallas, J. M. , Simison, W. B. , & Gosliner, T. M. (2016). Dating and biogeographical patterns in the sea slug genus Acanthodoris Gray, 1850 (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Nudibranchia). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 97, 19–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Hart, M. W. , Byrne, M. , & Smith, M. J. (1997). Molecular phylogenetic analysis of life‐history evolution in asterinid starfish. Evolution, 51, 1848–1861. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Hellberg, M. E. , & Vacquier, V. D. (1999). Rapid evolution of fertilization selectivity and lysin cDNA sequences in teguline gastropods. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 16, 839–848. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Hershler, R. , & Davis, G. M. (1980). The morphology of Hydrobia truncata (Gastropoda: Hydrobiidae): Relevance to systematics of Hydrobia . The Biological Bulletin, 158, 195–219. [Google Scholar]
  32. Hilário, A. , Metaxas, A. , Gaudron, S. M. , Howell, K. L. , Mercier, A. , Mestre, N. C. , Ross, R. E. , Thurnherr, A. M. , & Young, C. (2015). Estimating dispersal distance in the deep sea: Challenges and applications to marine reserves. Frontiers in Marine Science, 2. 10.3389/fmars.2015.00006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Hipsley, C. A. , & Muller, J. (2014). Beyond fossil calibrations: Realities of molecular clock practices in evolutionary biology. Frontiers in Genetics, 5, 138. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Ho, S. Y. W. (2021). The molecular clock and evolutionary rates across the tree of life. In Ho S. Y. W. (Ed.), The molecular evolutionary clock (pp. 3–23). Springer. [Google Scholar]
  35. Ho, S. Y. W. , Tong, K. J. , Foster, C. S. P. , Ritchie, A. M. , Lo, N. , & Crisp, M. D. (2015). Biogeographic calibrations for the molecular clock. Biology Letters, 11, 20150194. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Holland, S. M. (2016). The non‐uniformity of fossil preservation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 371, 20150130. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Humann, P. , & Deloach, N. (2002). Reef creature identification: Florida, Caribbean, Bahamas (2nd ed.). New World Publications. [Google Scholar]
  38. Johnson, R. F. , & Gosliner, T. M. (2012). Traditional taxonomic groupings mask evolutionary history: A molecular phylogeny and new classification of the chromodorid nudibranchs. PLoS One, 7, e33479. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Jung, D. W. , Gosliner, T. M. , Choi, T. J. , Kil, H. J. , Chichvarkhin, A. , Goddard, J. H. R. , & Valdés, Á. (2020). The return of the clown: Pseudocryptic speciation in the North Pacific clown nudibranch, Triopha catalinae (Cooper, 1863) sensu lato identified by integrative taxonomic approaches. Marine Biodiversity, 50, 84. [Google Scholar]
  40. Katoh, K. , Misawa, K. , Kuma, K. , & Miyata, T. (2002). MAFFT: A novel method for rapid multiple sequence alignment based on fast Fourier transform. Nucleic Acids Research, 30, 3059–3066. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Knowlton, N. , & Keller, B. D. (1986). Larvae which fall far short of their potential: Highly localized recruitment in an alpheid shrimp with extended larval development. Bulletin of Marine Science, 39, 213–223. [Google Scholar]
  42. Knowlton, N. , & Weigt, L. A. (1998). New dates and new rates for divergence across the isthmus of Panama. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 265, 2257–2263. [Google Scholar]
  43. Korshunova, T. , Lundin, K. , Malmberg, K. , Picton, B. , & Martynov, A. (2018). First true brackish‐water nudibranch mollusc provides new insights for phylogeny and biogeography and reveals paedomorphosis‐driven evolution. PLoS One, 13, e0192177. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Kulikova, V. A. , & Omel'yanenko, V. A. (2000). Reproduction and larval development of the gastropod mollusk Tegula rustica in Peter the Great Bay, Sea of Japan. Russian Journal of Marine Biology, 26, 128–130. [Google Scholar]
  45. Kumar, S. , Stecher, G. , Li, M. , Knyaz, C. , & Tamura, K. (2018). MEGA X: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 35, 1547–1549. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Landis, M. J. (2020). Biogeographic dating of phylogenetic divergence times using priors and processes. In Ho S. Y. W. (Ed.), The molecular evolutionary clock (pp. 135–155). Springer. [Google Scholar]
  47. Layton, K. K. S. , Carvajal, J. I. , & Wilson, N. G. (2020). Mimicry and mitonuclear discordance in nudibranchs: New insights from exon capture phylogenomics. Ecology and Evolution, 10, 11966–11982. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Layton, K. K. S. , Gosliner, T. M. , & Wilson, N. G. (2018). Flexible colour patterns obscure identification and mimicry in Indo‐Pacific Chromodoris nudibranchs (Gastropoda: Chromodorididae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 124, 27–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Layton, K. K. S. , Martel, A. L. , & Hebert, P. D. N. (2014). Patterns of DNA barcode variation in Canadian marine molluscs. PLoS One, 9, e95003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Lessios, H. A. (2008). The great American schism: Divergence of marine organisms after the rise of the central American isthmus. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 39, 63–92. [Google Scholar]
  51. Lessios, H. A. , Kane, J. , & Robertson, D. R. (2003). Phylogeography of the pantropical sea urchin Tripneustes: Contrasting patterns of population structure between oceans. Evolution, 57, 2026–2036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Lessios, H. A. , Kessing, B. D. , Robertson, D. R. , & Paulay, G. (1999). Phylogeography of the pantropical sea urchin Eucidaris in relation to land barriers and ocean currents. Evolution, 53, 806–817. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Lindsay, T. , Kelly, J. , Chichvarkhin, A. , Craig, S. , Kajihara, H. , Mackie, J. , & Valdés, Á. (2016). Changing spots: Pseudocryptic speciation in the North Pacific dorid nudibranch Diaulula sandiegensis (Cooper, 1863) (Gastropoda: Heterobranchia). Journal of Molluscan Studies, 82, 564–574. [Google Scholar]
  54. Loeza‐Quintana, T. , Carr, C. M. , Khan, T. , Bhatt, Y. A. , Lyon, S. P. , Hebert, P. D. N. , & Adamowicz, S. J. (2018). Recalibrating the molecular clock for Arctic marine invertebrates based on DNA barcodes. Genome, 62, 200–216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Lyons, W. G. (1989). Atlantic records of Glossodoris sedna (Gastropoda: Nudibranchia): A correction. The Veliger, 32(4), 412. [Google Scholar]
  56. Marcus, E. , & Marcus, E. (1967). American opisthobranch mollusks part I, tropical American opisthobranchs, part II, opisthobranchs from the Gulf of California. Studies in Tropical Oceanography, 6, 1–256. [Google Scholar]
  57. Marko, P. B. (2002). Fossil calibration of molecular clocks and the divergence times of geminate species pairs separated by the Isthmus of Panama. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 19, 2005–2021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Marko, P. B. , Eytan, E. I. , & Knowlton, N. (2015). Do large molecular sequence divergences imply an early closure of the Isthmus of Panama? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, E5766. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Marko, P. B. , & Moran, A. L. (2009). Out of sight, out of mind: High cryptic diversity obscures the identities and histories of geminate species in the marine bivalve subgenus Acar . Journal of Biogeography, 36, 1861–1880. [Google Scholar]
  60. Matsuda, S. B. , & Gosliner, T. M. (2018). Glossing over cryptic species: Descriptions of four new species of Glossodoris and three new species of Doriprismatica (Nudibranchia: Chromodorididae). Zootaxa, 4444(5), 501–529. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. McHugh, D. , & Fong, P. P. (2002). Do life history traits account for diversity of polychaete annelids? Invertebrate Biology, 121, 325–338. [Google Scholar]
  62. McPherson, B. F. (1965). Contributions to the biology of the sea urchin Tripneustes ventricosus . Bulletin of Marine Science, 15, 228–244. [Google Scholar]
  63. Moles, J. , & Giribet, G. (2021). A polyvalent and universal tool for genomic studies in gastropod molluscs (Heterobranchia). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 155, 106996. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Moran, A. L. (1997). Spawning and larval development of the black turban snail Tegula funebralis (Prosobranchia: Trochidae). Marine Biology, 128, 107–114. [Google Scholar]
  65. Moran, A. L. (2004). Egg size evolution in tropical American arcid bivalves: The comparative method and the fossil record. Evolution, 58, 2718–2733. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Mossolin, E. C. , Shimizu, R. M. , & Bueno, S. L. S. (2006). Population structure of Alpheus armillatus (Decapoda, Alpheidae) in São Sebastião and Ilhabela, southeastern Brazil. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 26, 48–54. [Google Scholar]
  67. Müller, K. , & Albach, D. C. (2010). Evolutionary rates in Veronica L. (Plantaginaceae): Disentangling the influence of life history and breeding system. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 70, 44–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. O'Dea, A. , Lessios, H. A. , Coates, A. G. , Eytan, R. I. , Restrepo‐Moreno, S. A. , Cione, A. L. , Collins, L. S. , de Queiroz, A. , Farris, D. W. , Norris, R. D. , Stallard, R. F. , Woodburne, M. O. , Aguilera, O. , Aubry, M. P. , Berggren, W. A. , Budd, A. F. , Cozzuol, M. A. , Coppard, S. E. , Duque‐Caro, H. , … Jackson, J. B. (2016). Formation of the Isthmus of Panama. Science Advances, 2, e1600883. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Palumbi, S. , Martin, A. , Romano, S. , McMillan, W. O. , Stice, L. , & Grabowski, G. (1991). The simple fool's guide to PCR, version 2.0. Department of Zoology and Kewalo Marine Laboratory, University of Hawaii. [Google Scholar]
  70. Paradis, E. (2010). pegas: An R package for population genetics with an integrated–modular approach. Bioinformatics, 26, 419–420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Pavanelli, C. A. M. , Mossolin, E. C. , & Mantelatto, F. L. (2008). Reproductive strategy of the snapping shrimp Alpheus armillatus H. Milne‐Edwards, 1837 in the South Atlantic: Fecundity, egg features, and reproductive output. Invertebrate Reproduction & Development, 52, 123–130. [Google Scholar]
  72. Pileggi, L. G. , Rossi, N. , Wehrtmann, I. S. , & Mantelatto, F. L. (2014). Molecular perspective on the American transisthmian species of Macrobrachium (Caridea, Palaemonidae). In I. S. Wehrtmann, & R. T. Bauer (Eds.), Proceedings of the summer meeting of the Crustacean Society and the Latin American Association of Carcinology, Costa Rica, July 2013. ZooKeys, 457, 79–108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Puillandre, N. , Brouillet, S. , & Achaz, G. (2021). ASAP: Assemble species by automatic partitioning. Molecular Ecology Resources, 21, 609–620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Puljas, S. , Peharda, M. , Zupan, I. , & Buksa, F. (2015). Maximum recorded life span of Arca noae Linnaeus, 1758 in the marine protected area Telaščica, Adriatic Sea. Cahiers de Biologie Marine, 56, 163–168. [Google Scholar]
  75. Rudman, W. B. (1984). The Chromodorididae (Opisthobranchia: Mollusca) of the Indo‐West Pacific: A review of the genera. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 81(2–3), 115–273. [Google Scholar]
  76. Rudman, W. B. (2008). The Chromodorididae (Opisthobranchia: Mollusca) of the Indo‐West Pacific: Chromodoris quadricolor, C. lineolata and Hypselodoris nigrolineata colour groups. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 76, 183–241. [Google Scholar]
  77. Saclier, N. , Francois, C. M. , Konecny‐Dupre, L. , Lartillot, N. , Guéguen, L. , Duret, L. , Malard, F. , Douady, C. J. , & Lefébure, T. (2018). Life history traits impact the nuclear rate of substitution but not the mitochondrial rate in isopods. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 35, 2900–2912. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  78. Schultheiß, R. , Van Bocxlaer, B. , Wilke, T. , & Albrecht, C. (2009). Old fossils‐young species: Evolutionary history of an endemic gastropod assemblage in Lake Malawi. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 257, 2837–2846. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  79. Soong, G. Y. , Wilson, N. G. , & Reimer, J. D. (2020). Phylogenetic relationships of the red‐reticulate Goniobranchus species (Nudibranchia: Dorididae: Chromodorididae). Marine Biodiversity, 50, 25. [Google Scholar]
  80. Stamatakis, A. (2006). RAxML‐VI‐HPC: Maximum likelihood‐based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics, 22, 2688–2690. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  81. Thacker, C. E. (2017). Patterns of divergence in fish species separated by the Isthmus of Panama. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 17, 111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  82. Valdés, A. , Hamann, J. , Behrens, D. W. , & DuPont, A. (2006). Caribbean Sea slugs: A field guide to the opisthobranch mollusks from the tropical northwestern Atlantic. Sea Challengers Natural History Books. [Google Scholar]
  83. Voltolina, D. , & Angulo, C. (2007). Changes in composition, weight and energy content during the lecithotrophic development of the Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei . Saber, 19, 27–31. [Google Scholar]
  84. Wall‐Palmer, D. , Janssen, A. W. , Goetze, E. , Choo, L. Q. , Mekkes, L. , & Peijnenburg, K. T. C. A. (2020). Fossil‐calibrated molecular phylogeny of atlantid heteropods (Gastropoda, Pterotracheoidea). BMC Evolutionary Biology, 20, 124. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  85. Wilke, T. (2003). Salenthydrobia n. gen. (Rissooidea: Hydrobiidae): A potential relict of the Messinian salinity crisis. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 137, 319–336. [Google Scholar]
  86. Wilke, T. , Schultheiß, R. , & Albrecht, C. (2009). As time goes by: A simple fool's guide to molecular clock approaches in invertebrates. American Malacological Bulletin, 27, 25–45. [Google Scholar]
  87. Zeinalipour, M. , Kiabi, B. H. , Shokri, M. R. , & Ardalan, A. A. (2014). Population dynamic and distribution of Barbatia decussata (Bivalvia: Arcidae) on rocky intertidal shores in the northern Persian Gulf (Iran). Tropical Zoology, 27, 73–87. [Google Scholar]
  88. Zhang, J. , Kapli, P. , Pavlidis, P. , & Stamatakis, A. (2013). A general species delimitation method with applications to phylogenetic placements. Bioinformatics, 29, 2869–2876. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Appendix S1

Click here for additional data file. (656.9KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

All sequence data are available on GenBank (accession numbers are provided in Table 1) and gene alignments can be retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.ns1rn8q08. Tissue samples and DNA extractions are vouchered at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Florida Museum of Natural History and the Museum of Comparative Zoology.

Articles from Ecology and Evolution are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES