Phylogenetic revision of the Hippasterinae (Goniasteridae; Asteroidea): systematics of deep sea corallivores, including one new genus and three new species
Article first published online: 28 SEP 2010
© 2010 The Linnean Society of London
Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society
Volume 160, Issue 2, pages 266–301, October 2010
How to Cite
MAH, C., NIZINSKI, M. and LUNDSTEN, L. (2010), Phylogenetic revision of the Hippasterinae (Goniasteridae; Asteroidea): systematics of deep sea corallivores, including one new genus and three new species. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 160: 266–301. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00638.x
- Issue published online: 28 SEP 2010
- Article first published online: 28 SEP 2010
- Received 23 June 2009; accepted for publication 8 October 2009
- deep-sea coral;
- deep-sea echinoderm;
- feeding biology;
The Hippasterinae is a subfamily within the Goniasteridae, consisting of five genera and 26 species, which occur in cold-water settings ranging from subtidal to abyssal depths. All known genera were included in a cladistic analysis resulting in two most parsimonious trees, supporting the Hippasterinae as monophyletic. Our review supports Sthenaster emmae gen. etsp. nov. as a new genus and species from the tropical Atlantic and two new Evoplosoma species, Evoplosoma claguei sp. nov. and Evoplosoma voratus sp. nov. from seamounts in the North Pacific. Hippasteria caribaea is reassigned to the genus Gilbertaster, which previously contained a single Pacific species. Our analysis supports Evoplosoma as a derived deep water lineage relative to its continental-shelf, shallow water sister taxa. The genus Hippasteria contains approximately 15 widely distributed, but similar-looking species, which occur in the northern and southern hemispheres. Except for Gilbertaster, at least one species in each genus has been observed or is inferred to prey on deep-sea corals, suggesting that this lineage is important to the conservation of deep-sea coral habitats. The Hippasterinae shares several morphological similarities with Circeaster and Calliaster, suggesting that they may be related.
© 2010 The Linnean Society of London, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2010, 160, 266–301.