We sampled 22 tubes of 10 species of Ceriantharia by SCUBA surveys in Argentina, Brazil, Japan, Norway, Portugal, and the United States (Table 1). All material, except for Isarachnanthus nocturnus den Hartog, 1977 and Ceriantheomorphe sp., was preserved along with their polyps and, before analyses, all polyps were removed from their tubes which were kept individually in labelled jars containing 70% ethanol.

Each tube was analyzed separately under a stereomicroscope in a bowl with dark craft foam in the bottom and full of freshwater. All tubes were longitudinally cut with surgical carbon steel scalpels, opened, and fixed in the craft foam using acupuncture needles. Both inner and outer walls were analyzed.

The fauna found in or on the tubes was removed, photographed, and measured using a Zeiss AxioCam MRc5 and Zeiss AxioVision SE64 Rel 4.8 imaging software. Afterwards, the associated fauna was morphologically identified with specific taxonomic keys for each group (see Suppl. material 1).

Molluscs (shells), polychaetes and peracaridan crustaceans in this study are deposited in the Museum of Zoology of the University of São Paulo (MZSP), NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim (NTNU-VM), and the Museum of Zoology, University of Campinas (UNICAMP) – (ZUEC).

Ceriantharians were deposited in the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), National Museum of Rio de Janeiro Federal University (MNRJ), Biology Institute of Rio de Janeiro Federal University (UFRJ Biologia), NTNU-VM, and MZSP.

38 mollusc shell specimens, including Gastropoda and Bivalvia (Fig. 1a), were observed and were always found adhered to the outside of the tubes, and none had a periostracum coating, indicating that they were not alive at the time of collection.

a

b

Figure 1.

Species found in/on ceriantharian tubes.

a: Some Mollusca found on ceriantharian tubes. (A) Schwartziella bryerea (B) Parvanachis obesa (C) Bittiolum varium (D) Cerithidea balteata (E) Chrysallida sp. (F) Liotella sp. (G) Emarginula sp. (H) Bostrycapulus odites (I) Collonista rubricincta (J) Eulima sp. (K) Microgaza rotella (L) Turbonilla sp. (M) Caecum regulare (N) Puncturella noachina (O) Basterotia elliptica (P) Ervilia nitens (Q) Macomopsis melo (R) Cumingia lamellosa (S) Musculus lateralis (T) Cardites micellus (U) Tivela sp. (V) Sphenia fragilis. Scale bars (A-N) 500 µm (O–U) 500 µm (V) 100 µm.  
b: Some Crustacea and Polychaeta found in/on ceriantharian tubes. (A) Monocorophium acherusicum (B) Idotea balthica (C) Cymadusa filosa (D) Paranthura urochroma (E) Photis sarae, female and male, respectively (F) Ampelisca burkei (G) Chondrochelia savignyi (H) Elasmopus pectenicrus (I) Nereis sp. (J) Phyllodocidae, indet. (K) Cirriformia sp. (L) Sternaspis sp. Scale bars: (A-H) 1000 μm (I) 2000 μm (J) 600 μm (K) 1000 μm (L) 3000 μm.  

We observed 29 peracaridans (Fig. 1b A-H), belonging to 8 families, including 5 amphipod species, 2 isopod species and 1 tanaidacean species on the tubes of three ceriantharian species.

Most peracaridans were found in areas far from the ceriantharian tentacles, thus not easily accessible to the ceriantharian. No specimen was found inside the tubes or amongst tube layers. On the tubes of Ceriantheomorphe brasiliensis, we observed the amphipods Ampelisca burkei J.L. Barnard & Thomas, 1989, Cymadusa filosa Savigny, 1816, Elasmopus pectenicrus Spence Bate, 1862 and Photis sarae Souza-Filho & Serejo, 2010, and the isopod Paranthura urochroma Pires, 1981 firmly attached to the tube external wall; both amphipods and isopods were surrounded by ptychocyst filaments. Additionally, we found tanaidaceans of species Chondrochelia savignyi Kroyer, 1842; however, those were free from ptychocyst filaments and were not firmly attached. Monocorophium acherusicum Costa, 1853 (Amphipoda) and Idotea balthica Pallas, 1772 (Isopoda) were also found surrounded by ptychocyst filaments and attached to the external wall of the tube of Ceriantheopsis lineata Stampar, Scarabino, Pastorino & Morandini, 2015. One specimen of P. sarae was noted amongst algae thalli covering the tube of Isarachnanthus nocturnus. It is noteworthy that the amphipod was not directly attached to the tube, but instead it was freely on its surface.

A total of 122 polychaetes (Fig. 1b I-L), including 17 families and 26 species, were found in or on tubes of six species of Ceriantharia. Some of the specimens were not possible to identify further than family or genus, as they were fragmented or in poor condition.

We observed one specimen of Lysilla loveni Malmgren, 1866 (Terebellidae), two cirratulids, two paraonids and two syllids in between layers of the tube of Botrucnidifer norvegicus Carlgren, 1912. On the external wall of the tube of Ceriantheomorphe brasiliensis, we found cirratulids (Cirriformia spp.), eunicids (Lysidice spp.), nereidids (Neanthes sp.), syllids (Exogone spp., Myrianida sp. and Syllis prolifera Krohn, 1852), and spionids (Aonides sp. and Dipolydora spp.), and one specimen each of Sabellidae (Branchiomma sp.), Flabelligeridae (Brada sp.), Magelonidae (Magelona sp.), Polynoidae (Malmgreniella sp.), Capitellidae (Mediomastus spp.), and Phyllodocidae. Only some specimens had ptychocyst filaments surrounding them and keeping them firmly attached to the tube. We observed Dipolydora spp. amongst algae thalli covering this tube, as well as in between folds of layers of the tube of C. brasiliensis from Guanabara Bay.

The heavy tubes of Ceriantheopsis lineata showed many perforations that were occupied by either deeply or superficially burrowed polychaetes between some layers. Beneath layers, we observed some spionids (Dipolydora spp.) and single specimens of capitellid (Mediomastus spp.), cirratulid (Cirriformia spp.), and oenonid (Notocirrus spp.). The removal of layers also revealed empty boring holes under them. Moreover, we found Syllis garciai Campoy, 1982 (Syllidae) and one phyllodocid on the tube surface, surrounded by ptychocyst filaments and mucus, respectively.

Some Parasabella sp., Lysidice spp., Cirriformia spp., and Spirobranchus sp. were found amongst algae thalli partially covering one of the tubes of Isarachnanthus nocturnus. However, they were not attached to the tube and neither had ptychocyst filaments surrounding them. Additionally, we observed Notocirrus spp. on the surface of this tube.

We observed one maldanid on the surface of the tube of Ceriantheomorphe sp., as well as large Nereis sp. partially burrowed, and small groups of Sternaspis sp. (3 specimens each group) both superficially anchored and deeply burrowed into tube layers.

Finally, we found 36 Notocirrus spp. and two syllids on tubes of Pachycerianthus schlenzae Stampar, Morandini & Silveira, 2014, either burrowed between layers or attached to the surface of the tubes. In both cases, there were some specimens coated by their own mucus, but none was firmly attached to the tubes.

We did not observe whether peracaridans and polychaetes voluntarily settle on ceriantharian tubes or are incorporated into the tubes by the ceriantharians. In spite of this, our results show that most of these specimens were found in areas of the tubes where the tentacles of the ceriantharian could not easily reach them. Thus, it is most likely that these species have actively recruited this alternative substrate than have been incorporated into it by the actions of the ceriantharian. As we could not evaluate this possibility, this hypothesis cannot be excluded.

Ptychocyst filaments are the most common material in ceriantharian tubes (Stampar et al. 2015). Notably, most amphipods and isopods firmly anchored to ceriantharian tubes were surrounded by filaments (e.g. A. burkei, C. filosa, I. balthica, M. acherusicum, P. urochroma, and P. sarae), while some other specimens, such as C. savignyi, were not. Likewise, some polychaetes were observed surrounded by filaments (e.g. S. garciai) and thus firmly anchored, while others were coated by their own mucus (e.g. phyllodocids and Notocirrus spp.) and only superficially anchored. Stampar et al. (2015) suggested that ptychocyst filaments have adhesive properties and our observations support this suggestion, as it is likely that the adhesive property of ptychocyst filaments is used by peracaridans and polychaetes as an anchoring method to settle on ceriantharian tubes. Otherwise, specimens not surrounded by ptychocyst filaments must have alternative anchoring methods to keep them on tubes.

Crustaceans, tubeworms and ceriantharians often acquire shelter against predators in self-built-tubes which may be rigid, as in some cirratulids, sabellids and serpulids (Fauchald and Jumars 1979, ten Hove and Vandenhurk 1993, Díaz-Castañeda and Reish 2009, Jumars et al. 2015, Silva and Lana 2018).

We observed the polychaetes Lysidice spp. anchored on ceriantharian tubes. As members of this genus commonly excavate galleries or temporarily occupy empty galleries/tubes of other organisms (Díaz-Castañeda and Reish 2009), it is possible that Lysidice spp. use ceriantharian tubes as alternative habitats.

Tube-dwelling amphipods, isopods, and tanaidaceans usually burrow directly into the soft bottom, forming mucous tubes for habitation (Greve 1967, Johnson and Attramadal 1982, Thistle et al. 1985). For instance, the amphipod Photis sarae was observed anchored on tubes of I. nocturnus and C. brasiliensis. However, this species is usually found in soft tubes built with mucus, small sediments and, sometimes, living organisms (e.g. algae) (Souza-Filho and Serejo 2010), similar to Ceriantharia. We also observed other tube-dwelling peracaridans coated by ptychocyst filaments and attached to the surface of ceriantharian tubes, suggesting that, by using ceriantharian tubes, peracaridans can be sheltered, without the necessity of building their own tubes.

Mollusk shells were observed on all ceriantharian tubes examined. However, the absence of periostracum coating these shells suggests that ceriantharians do not shelter living molluscs (Meenakshi et al. 1969, Taylor and Kennedy 1969), but instead they adhere empty shells to their tubes, using them as a relevant component for the tube construction. The addition of mollusc shells and other sediment remains as tube constituents may reinforce the tube, increasing its resistance and, thus, having an architectural role. Moreover, the external surfaces of all shells were usually very worn, indicating that they were part of the seafloor sediment rather than part of living assemblages. Although our data do not allow us to assess how the shells were obtained during tube construction, future studies would be useful to provide such information (e.g. is there any special behavior associated with inclusion of mollusc shells?) and to examine if it is possible that ceriantharian tubes shelter living molluscs.

Bürkli and Wilson (2017) have suggested that empty mollusc shells enable the understanding of biodiversity patterns of Mollusca fauna at a specific site and can thus be used to provide data on ecological and evolutionary timescales. Accordingly, a similar role could be attributed to the accumulation of shells in ceriantharian tubes, reflecting the species richness of living molluscs in the surrounding habitat.

This is the first record of Microgaza rotella (Mollusca) and Brada sp. (Polychaeta) in Laje de Santos, and Photis sarae (Peracarida) in São Sebastião and Laje de Santos, São Paulo State, in southeastern Brazil. To date, M. rotella had been reported as occurring from the southeastern United States to northern Brazil (Rios 2009), and, since that there have been no other records in literature regarding this species in southeastern Brazil M. rotella may occur naturally at this location (Laje de Santos) and may be rare or allochthonous (i.e. originated in a region other than where it was found) and transported by other species. Brada had been previously reported in Brazil only from Ubatuba City (Amaral et al. 2013), while P. sarae had only been previously reported in Rio de Janeiro State (Souza-Filho and Serejo 2010).

This is also the first record of Dipolydora in Rio de Janeiro State, and Notocirrus spp. and Syllis garciai in Espírito Santo State. Dipolydora had only been previously reported from Brazil in São Paulo, Paraná and Espírito Santo States. Notocirrus had been reported occurring in São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Paraná and Bahia States, while Syllis garciai had only been previously reported in São Paulo State (Amaral et al. 2013).

It is noteworthy that Lysilla loveni (Polychaeta) was found on the tube of a Nordic Ceriantharia species, Botrucnidifer norvegicus. This polychaete species has only rarely been found and usually as single occurrences scattered along the Norwegian coast (Holthe 1977, Holthe 1986).

Biogenic structures, such as ceriantharian tubes, play a major role in altering community structure, thus affecting species richness and individual abundances (Hoey et al. 2008). Tubes may affect the stability of the sea bottom and provide refugia from predation, as well as surfaces for the recruitment of benthic organisms (Woodin 1978, Woodin 1981). In fact, species abundance and richness have been observed to be greater around or on tubes than in areas without tubes (Callaway 2003, Callaway 2006, Rees et al. 2005). In our study, we did not compare the fauna from ceriantharian tubes to that from the surrounding sea bottoms however, our results demonstrate that ceriantharian tubes appear to be suitable alternative substrates for numerous species, especially tubicolous and infaunal invertebrates that usually spend much energy burrowing into sediments or anchoring on fixed or mobile habitats while seeking shelter. Moreover, other than shelter, residents on and in ceriantharian tubes may also acquire protection. Therefore, the tubes of Ceriantharia may play an important role as small-scale biodiversity hotspots.