Crustacea: Amphipoda

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Crustacea: Amphipoda Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde, 60 (3/4) 277-282 (1990) SPB Academie Publishing bv, The Hague Comparison of oostegite shapes in some gammaroidean species (Crustacea: Amphipoda) D.H. Steele Dept. of Biology, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada A1B 3X9 Keywords: Oostegites, gammaroideans, Crustacea, Amphipoda Abstract Whilethese revisions have found support, not all of the changes have been accepted (e.g. Barnard& Within the superfamily Gammaroidea oostegites vary from Barnard, 1983; Barnard & Karaman, 1980; Lin- broad (primitive) to narrow (advanced). Broad oostegites are coln, 1979; Ruffo, 1982; and Stock, 1980). As a found in members of the Acanthogammaridae, Macrohectopi- result, amphipod taxonomy, especially as it relates dae and a few of the Gammaridae. Most species of the family to the family Gammaridae "is still in a state of Gammaridae have broad anterior oostegites and narrow poste- flux" (Stock, 1980). rior ones. Marine Gammarus species and Echinogammarus The of the is resolve show a narrowing trend in the anterior oostegites as well. purpose present study not to this controversy, since this is probably impossible given our present inadequate data base, but rather Résumé to illustrate how the structure of the brood pouch can provide data that will contribute to the resolu- Dans la superfamille Gammaroidea les oostégites varient depuis tion of the problem. ceuxélargis (aspect primitif) à ceux étroits (aspect évolué). Des oostégites larges sont présents chez des membres des familles Oostegites have been recognized as morphologi- et chez certains Gam- Acanthogammaridae,Macrohectoptidae, cal structures that should be more stable ("change maridae. La plupart des espèces de la famille Gammaridae ont resistant") than the traditional characters of the des oostégites antérieurs larges et des oostégites postérieurs mouthparts, antennae, telson, etc. (Bousfield, étroits. On observe chez les espèces marines de Gammarus et However, I have concluded in chez Echinogammarus une tendance au rétrécissement aussi 1977). (Steele, press) that the pour les oostégites antérieurs. appearance of the major amphipod super- families has predated changes in the oostegites, since several of the superfamilies contain the full of Introduction range oostegite types. Thus the structure of the brood pouch should not be used to demonstrate Prior to 1977, between of gammarid amphipods (family Gam- relationships major groups gammaride- maridae) made up the major portion of all de- an amphipods but may be used to follow trends within scribed species and generaof amphipods. Bousfield these groups. The present study consists of revised this and of the structure ofthe (1977) group assigned the species to an analysis oostegites in some six superfamilies, each containing several families. of the species in the superfamily Gammaroidea, this which Subsequently revision was extended to all gam- prior to 1977 were all placed in the family maridean amphipods (Bousfield, 1979; 1982; Gammaridae. 1983). 278 D.H. Steele - Comparison of oostegite shapes in some gammaroidean species Methods Previous characterizationsof the oostegites for tax- observations onomie have been based on purposes this is inade- of one or two oostegites. However, quate as the oostegites on adjacent peraeopods can differmarkedly. The oostegites attached to the sec- ond to fifth peraepods function as a unit to form the brood pouch and the structure of all of them must be considered. They are numbered here ac- cording to the peraeopod to which they are at- tached. The illustrations have been adjusted such that size oostegite three is of the same on each figure. Only the basal setae on the anterior and posterior margins and the distal setae have been illustrated. In order not to prejudge the situation, the "gam- marid" species have been referred to as Gammarus. A number of other species have been examined which are not illustrated here. Results been For comparative purposes, the species have grouped more or less as outlined by Bousfield (1977; 1982; 1983). Gammaracanthus loricatus (Sabine, 1821) (Fig. 1A) is here considered to have the most primitive Fig. 1. Oostegites of Acanthogammaridae:A, Gammaracanthus and type of brood pouch (see discussion). The ooste- loricatus; B, Garjajewia sarsi; C, Spinacanthusparasiticus; Macrohectopidae: D, Macrohectopus branickii. gites are all broad, with relatively short marginal se- tae thatextend to the base of the oostegite. Gamma- in racanthus was placed the family Acanthogam- Macrohectopidae, has broad oostegites quite dis- maridae by Bousfield (1977), but the bilobed tinct from those in the Acanthogammaridae. structure of its gills indicates that its affinities prob- The brood pouch of the Gammarus species (Figs. ably lie elsewhere. In the family Acanthogammari- 2, 3, 4) has a combinationof broad and narrow dae the available specimen of Garjajewia sarsi oostegites. The anterior oostegites (two and often Sowinsky, 1915 (Fig. IB) lacked marginal setae, three) are broad, whereas four and especially five probably indicating ovarian diapause. The ooste- are narrow. The freshwater G. fossarum Koch, gites are similar in shape to those of Gammaracan- 1835, G. minus Say, 1818 and G. roeseli Gervais, thus, except that four and five are more elongated 1835 have oostegites similar to those of G. pulex and five is also slightly narrowed. However, in (Linnaeus, 1758) (Fig. 2A), whereas G. lawrencia- Spinacanthus parasiticus (Dybowsky, 1874) (Fig. nus Bousfield, 1956, G. fasciatus Say, 1818, G. 1C) of the same family, the oostegites are similar to locusta (Linnaeus, 1758), G. crinicornis Stock, those of the freshwater Gammarus (Fig. 2). 1966, G. duebeni Liljeborg, 1852, G. salinus branickii Macrohectopus (Dybowsky, 1874) Spooner, 1947, G. zaddachi Sexton, 1912, G. ocea- (Fig. ID), the sole representative of the family nicus Segerstràle, 1947 and G. wilkitzkii Birula, - 279 Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde, 60 (3/4) 1990 Fig. 2. Oostegites of freshwater Gammaridae with subequal rami on uropod 3: A, Gammarus pulex; B, Gammarus pseu- dolimnaeus; C, Gammarus pseudosyriacus Karaman & Pink- ster, 1977. Fig. 3. Oostegites of marine Gammaridae with subequal rami on 1897have oostegites similar to the marine species il- uropod 3 and Anisogammaridae: A, Gammarus setosus Demen- lustrated in 3. The with markedly un- Fig. species tieva, 1931; B, Gammarus mucronatus Say, 1818; C, Gammarus equal rami on uropod 3 (Echinogammarus grouped tigrinus Sexton, 1939; D, Eogammarus oclairi. in Fig. 4) tend to have narrower oostegites than those with subequal rami. However, Echinogam- The “Gammarus” species of Tasmania were as- has the Bous field marus stoerensis (Reid, 1938) (Fig. 5C) quite signed to Crangonyctoidea by (1977) and different oostegites. In this species, oostegites two, and assigned to the genera Austrogammarus Williams & Barnard How- three, and four are expanded, and only oostegite Antipodeus by (1988). observations of live of five is narrow. Eogammarus oclairi Bousfield, 1979 ever, specimens Antipodeus (family Anisogammaridae) (Fig. 3D) has oostegites showed they behaved much like northern hemi- those of Gam- Gammarus rather than In that are indistinguishable from sphere Crangonyx. par- walk their sides than marus. ticular, they on (rather up- six and reflexed In many species of Gammarus, oostegite two and right) using peraeopods five, seven curved and have their dorsal surface. This is form to alesser extent oostegite three are over a specialized of locomotion of Gammarus and ob- a concave posterior margin (Figs. 2, 3, 4). In others typical not yet the such as G. pulex and G. pseudolimnaeus Bousfield, served in the other amphipod groups, including The of 1958 (Figs. 2A, B) these oostegites have a straight crangonyctoids. oostegites Antipodeus niger posterior margin similar to that found in Gam- Williams & Barnard, 1988conform to the Gamma- rather than maracanthus (Fig. 1A) or Crangonyx (Fig. 5A). rus type (Fig. 5B) to Crangonyx (Fig. 280 D.H. Steele - Comparison of oostegite shapes in some gammaroidean species Fig. 5. Oostegites of Gammaroidea: A, Crangonyx richmonden- sis Ellis, 1940; B, Antipodeus niger; C, Echinogammarus stoerensis. maroidea the from broad oostegites vary to nar- in to described for the row, a pattern parallel that Haustorioidea (Steele, in press). This observation supports the conclusion that the oostegites have Fig. 4. Oostegites of Gammaridae with markedly unequal rami evolved independently in the major amphipod on uropod 3: A, Echinogammarus marinus (Leach, 1815); B, Echinogammarusfinmarchicus ( Dahl, 1938); C, Echinogamma- groups. with is found rus obtusatus (Dahl, 1938); D, Echinogammarus planicrurus A broad oostegite short setae which (Reid, 1940); E, Echinogammarusfoxi (Schellenberg, 1928). in mysids, isopods and amphipods is the most whereas with primitive type, a narrow oostegite 5A). It might be noted that crangonyctoids do oc- long setae known only in amphipods is the ad- in cur Tasmania, but none with developed ooste- vanced type. gites were available for study. Withinthe Gammaroidea, the Acanthogammari- dae (Gammaracanthus, Garjajewia) have the most primitive type of brood pouch. However, the struc- Discussion ture of thebrood pouch on Spinacanthus indicates that either it has evolved towards the gammarid Although the oostegites of only a small fraction of (see below) or, as seems more likely, the species the described gammaroidean species have been in- type has been misclassified. vestigated, it is possible to make some
Recommended publications
  • Keys to the Hawaiian Marine Gammaridea, 0-30 Meters
    J. LAURENS BARNt Keys to the Hawaiian Marine Gammaridea, 0-30 Meters SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY NUMBER 58 SERIAL PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION The emphasis upon publications as a means of diffusing knowledge was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. In his formal plan for the Insti- tution, Joseph Henry articulated a program that included the following statement: "It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge not strictly professional." This keynote of basic research has been adhered to over the years in the issuance of thousands of titles in serial publications under the Smithsonian imprint, commencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series: Smithsonian Annals of Flight Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology Smithsonian Contributions to Astrophysics Smithsonian Contributions to Botany Smithsonian Contributions to the Earth Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology Smithsonian Contributions to Z0°l°iy Smithsonian Studies in History and Technology In these series, the Institution publishes original articles and monographs dealing with the research and collections of its several museums and offices and of professional colleagues at other institutions of learning. These papers report newly acquired facts, synoptic interpretations of data, or original theory in specialized fields. Each publica- tion is distributed by mailing lists to libraries, laboratories, institutes, and interested specialists throughout the world. Individual copies may be obtained from the Smith- sonian Institution Press as long as stocks are available. S. DILLON RIPLEY Secretary Smithsonian Institution SMITHSONIAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZOOLOGY NUMBER 58 j.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Current State of Taxonomy of the Baikal Lake Amphipods (Crustacea: Amphipoda) and the Typological Ways of Constructing Their System
    Arthropoda Selecta 28(3): 374–402 © ARTHROPODA SELECTA, 2019 On the current state of taxonomy of the Baikal Lake amphipods (Crustacea: Amphipoda) and the typological ways of constructing their system Î ñîâðåìåííîì ñîñòîÿíèè òàêñîíîìèè áàéêàëüñêèõ àìôèïîä (Crustacea: Amphipoda) è òèïîëîãè÷åñêîì ñïîñîáå ïîñòðîåíèÿ èõ ñèñòåìû V.V. Takhteev1, 2 Â.Â. Òàõòååâ1, 2 1 Department of Biological and Soil Science at Irkutsk State University, Karl Marx St. 1, Irkutsk 664003, Russia. E-mail: [email protected] 1 Иркутский государственный университет, биолого-почвенный факультет, ул. К. Маркса, 1, Иркутск 664003, Россия. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Baikal Museum of Irkutsk Scientific Center SB RAS, Akademicheskaya St. 1, Listvyanka Settl., Irkutsk Region 664520, Russia. 2 Байкальский Музей Иркутского научного центра Сибирского отделения Российской академии наук, ул. Академическая, 1, пос. Листвянка Иркутской обл. 664520, Россия. KEY WORDS: amphipods, Lake Baikal, taxonomy, taxonomic inflation, archetype, core, deviations, estab- lishment of families. КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: амфиподы, озеро Байкал, таксономия, таксономическая инфляция, архетип, ядро, отклонения, установление семейств. Editorial note On the publication “On the current state of taxonomy of the Baikal Lake amphipods (Crustacea, Amphipoda) and the typological ways of constructing their system” by V.V. Takhteev In this issue we present an extensive article prepared by Prof. Vadim V. Takhteev, which is based on his long time effort in the study of diversity of amphipods in Lake Baikal and its watershed. This paper is highly polemical and may even seem either archaic or heretical in the time of domination of the phylogenetic paradigms in systematics. The author advocates classical morphological taxonomy, which own tradition, methods (disregarding whether we call it typology or not) and the language are significantly older than the modern phylogenetic approach.
    [Show full text]
  • The 17Th International Colloquium on Amphipoda
    Biodiversity Journal, 2017, 8 (2): 391–394 MONOGRAPH The 17th International Colloquium on Amphipoda Sabrina Lo Brutto1,2,*, Eugenia Schimmenti1 & Davide Iaciofano1 1Dept. STEBICEF, Section of Animal Biology, via Archirafi 18, Palermo, University of Palermo, Italy 2Museum of Zoology “Doderlein”, SIMUA, via Archirafi 16, University of Palermo, Italy *Corresponding author, email: [email protected] th th ABSTRACT The 17 International Colloquium on Amphipoda (17 ICA) has been organized by the University of Palermo (Sicily, Italy), and took place in Trapani, 4-7 September 2017. All the contributions have been published in the present monograph and include a wide range of topics. KEY WORDS International Colloquium on Amphipoda; ICA; Amphipoda. Received 30.04.2017; accepted 31.05.2017; printed 30.06.2017 Proceedings of the 17th International Colloquium on Amphipoda (17th ICA), September 4th-7th 2017, Trapani (Italy) The first International Colloquium on Amphi- Poland, Turkey, Norway, Brazil and Canada within poda was held in Verona in 1969, as a simple meet- the Scientific Committee: ing of specialists interested in the Systematics of Sabrina Lo Brutto (Coordinator) - University of Gammarus and Niphargus. Palermo, Italy Now, after 48 years, the Colloquium reached the Elvira De Matthaeis - University La Sapienza, 17th edition, held at the “Polo Territoriale della Italy Provincia di Trapani”, a site of the University of Felicita Scapini - University of Firenze, Italy Palermo, in Italy; and for the second time in Sicily Alberto Ugolini - University of Firenze, Italy (Lo Brutto et al., 2013). Maria Beatrice Scipione - Stazione Zoologica The Organizing and Scientific Committees were Anton Dohrn, Italy composed by people from different countries.
    [Show full text]
  • (Crustacea : Amphipoda) of the Lower Chesapeake Estuaries
    W&M ScholarWorks Reports 1971 The distribution and ecology of the Gammaridea (Crustacea : Amphipoda) of the lower Chesapeake estuaries James Feely Virginia Institute of Marine Science Marvin L. Wass Virginia Institute of Marine Science Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/reports Part of the Marine Biology Commons, Oceanography Commons, Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons, and the Zoology Commons Recommended Citation Feely, J., & Wass, M. L. (1971) The distribution and ecology of the Gammaridea (Crustacea : Amphipoda) of the lower Chesapeake estuaries. Special papers in marine science No.2. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, College of William and Mary. http://doi.org/10.21220/V5H01D This Report is brought to you for free and open access by W&M ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Reports by an authorized administrator of W&M ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE DISTRIBUTION AND ECOLOGY OF THE GAMMARIDEA (CRUSTACEA: AMPHIPODA) OF THE LOWER CHESAPEAKE ESTUARIES James B. Feeley and Marvin L. Wass SPECIAL PAPERS IN MARINE SCIENCE NO. 2 VIRGIN IA INSTITUTE OF MARINE SC IE NCE Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062 1971 THE DISTRIBUTION AND ECOLOGY OF THE GAMMARIDEA (CRUSTACEA: AMPHIPODA) OF THE LOWER 1 CHESAPEAKE ESTUARIES James B. Feeley and Marvin L. Wass SPECIAL PAPERS IN MARINE SCIENCE NO. 2 1971 VIRGINIA INSTITUTE OF MARINE SCIENCE Gloucester Point, Virginia 23062 This document is in part a thesis by James B. Feeley presented to the School of Marine Science of the College of William and Mary in Virginia in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts.
    [Show full text]
  • Crustacea: Amphipoda) in Texas and New Mexico, Usa
    ANALYSIS OF THE GAMMARUS-PECOS COMPLEX (CRUSTACEA: AMPHIPODA) IN TEXAS AND NEW MEXICO, USA GERALD A. COLE Route 4, Box 892 Flagstaff, Arizona 86001 ABSTRACT A comparative study was made of representatives from seven populations of Gammarus in Texan and New Mexican fresh-to-miohaline waters in areas once overlain by Permian seas. They included the described species: G. pecos Cole and Bousfield (symbolized P) from Pecos Co., TX; G. hyalelloides Cole (H) from Phantom Lake Spring, Jeff Davis Co., TX; and G. desperatus Cole (D) from Chaves Co., NM. Members of other populations were examined from: San Solomon Spring (S), Toyahvale, Reeves Co., TX; a large species (C) co-occurring with H in Phantom Lake Spring; a small form (M) that came either from Phantom Lake Spring or from a spring 350 m to the north; and a species (E) from a pool near Carlsbad, Eddy Co., NM. All members of the group lack calceoli, bear C-setae on their mandibular palps, and have narrow oostegites. Coxae 1-4, in the larger individuals, are armed abundantly with long setae, and all animals have at least one spine at the posterodistal corner of the first peduncular article of the antennule. Twenty Mann-Whitney U tests were applied to certain morphologic attributes of the seven populations. The results suggest that: P and S are conspecific, with the latter showing some affinities to the larger animals (C) in the nearby Phantom Lake Spring system; C probably is a new species although more closely related to M and H than are the other four; G.
    [Show full text]
  • Amphipod Newsletter 39 (2015)
    AMPHIPOD NEWSLETTER 39 2015 Interviews BIBLIOGRAPHY THIS NEWSLETTER PAGE 19 FEATURES INTERVIEWS WITH ALICJA KONOPACKA AND KRZYSZTOF JAŻDŻEWSKI PAGE 2 MICHEL LEDOYER WORLD AMPHIPODA IN MEMORIAM DATABASE PAGE 14 PAGE 17 AMPHIPOD NEWSLETTER 39 Dear Amphipodologists, Statistics from We are delighted to present to you Amphipod Newsletter 39! this Newsletter This issue includes interviews with two members of our amphipod family – Alicja Konopacka and Krzysztof Jazdzewski. Both tell an amazing story of their lives and work 2 new subfamilies as amphipodologists. Sadly we lost a member of our amphipod 21 new genera family – Michel Ledoyer. Denise Bellan-Santini provides us with a fitting memorial to his life and career. Shortly many 145 new species members of the amphipod family will gather for the 16th ICA in 5 new subspecies Aveiro, Portugal. And plans are well underway for the 17th ICA in Turkey (see page 64 for more information). And, as always, we provide you with a Bibliography and index of amphipod publications that includes citations of 376 papers that were published in 2013-2015 (or after the publication of Amphipod Newsletter 38). Again, what an amazing amount of research that has been done by you! Please continue to notify us when your papers are published. We hope you enjoy your Amphipod Newsletter! Best wishes from your AN Editors, Wim, Adam, Miranda and Anne Helene !1 AMPHIPOD NEWSLETTER 39 2015 Interview with two prominent members of the “Polish group”. The group of amphipod workers in Poland has always been a visible and valued part of the amphipod society. They have organised two of the Amphipod Colloquia and have steadily provided important results in the world of amphipod science.
    [Show full text]
  • Viewed in [1–4])
    The Author(s) BMC Genomics 2016, 17(Suppl 14):1016 DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-3357-z RESEARCH Open Access Evolution of mitochondrial genomes in Baikalian amphipods Elena V. Romanova1, Vladimir V. Aleoshin2,3, Ravil M. Kamaltynov1, Kirill V. Mikhailov2,3, Maria D. Logacheva2,3,4, Elena A. Sirotinina1, Alexander Yu. Gornov5, Anton S. Anikin5 and Dmitry Yu. Sherbakov1,6* From The International Conference on Bioinformatics of Genome Regulation and Structure\Systems Biology (BGRS\SB-2016) Novosibirsk, Russia. 29 August-2 September 2016 Abstract Background: Amphipods (Crustacea) of Lake Baikal are a very numerous and diverse group of invertebrates generally believed to have originated by adaptive radiation. The evolutionary history and phylogenetic relationships in Baikalian amphipods still remain poorly understood. Sequencing of mitochondrial genomes is a relatively feasible way for obtaining a set of gene sequences suitable for robust phylogenetic inferences. The architecture of mitochondrial genomes also may provide additional information on the mechanisms of evolution of amphipods in Lake Baikal. Results: Three complete and four nearly complete mitochondrial genomes of Baikalian amphipods were obtained by high-throughput sequencing using the Illumina platform. A phylogenetic inference based on the nucleotide sequences of all mitochondrial protein coding genes revealed the Baikalian species to be a monophyletic group relative to the nearest non-Baikalian species with a completely sequenced mitochondrial genome - Gammarus duebeni.Thephylogeny of Baikalian amphipods also suggests that the shallow-water species Eulimnogammarus has likely evolved from a deep-water ancestor, however many other species have to be added to the analysis to test this hypothesis. The gene order in all mitochondrial genomes of studied Baikalian amphipods differs from the pancrustacean ground pattern.
    [Show full text]
  • Cladistic Revision of Talitroidean Amphipods (Crustacea, Gammaridea), with a Proposal of a New Classification
    CladisticBlackwell Publishing, Ltd. revision of talitroidean amphipods (Crustacea, Gammaridea), with a proposal of a new classification CRISTIANA S. SEREJO Accepted: 8 December 2003 Serejo, C. S. (2004). Cladistic revision of talitroidean amphipods (Crustacea, Gammaridea), with a proposal of a new classification. — Zoologica Scripta, 33, 551–586. This paper reports the results of a cladistic analysis of the Talitroidea s.l., which includes about 400 species, in 96 genera distributed in 10 families. The analysis was performed using PAUP and was based on a character matrix of 34 terminal taxa and 43 morphological characters. Four most parsimonious trees were obtained with 175 steps (CI = 0.617, RI = 0.736). A strict consensus tree was calculated and the following general conclusions were reached. The superfamily Talitroidea is elevated herein as infraorder Talitrida, which is subdivided into three main branches: a small clade formed by Kuria and Micropythia (the Kurioidea), and two larger groups maintained as distinct superfamilies (Phliantoidea, including six families, and Talitroidea s.s., including four). Within the Talitroidea s.s., the following taxonomic changes are proposed: Hyalellidae and Najnidae are synonymized with Dogielinotidae, and treated as subfamilies; a new family rank is proposed for the Chiltoniinae. Cristiana S. Serejo, Museu Nacional/UFRJ, Quinta da Boa Vista s/n, 20940–040, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. E-mail: [email protected] Introduction Table 1 Talitroidean classification following Barnard & Karaman The talitroideans include amphipods ranging in length from 1991), Bousfield (1996) and Bousfield & Hendrycks (2002) 3 to 30 mm, and are widely distributed in the tropics and subtropics. In marine and estuarine environments, they are Superfamily Talitroidea Rafinesque, 1815 Family Ceinidae Barnard, 1972 usually found in shallow water, intertidally or even in the supra- Family Dogielinotidae Gurjanova, 1953 littoral zone.
    [Show full text]
  • Amphipod Newsletter 23
    −1− NEW AMPHIPOD TAXA IN AMPHIPOD NEWSLETTER 23 Wim Vader, XII-2001 All references are to papers found in the bibliography in AN 23 A. Alphabetic list of new taxa 1. New subfamilies Andaniexinae Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae AndaniopsinaeBerge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Bathystegocephalinae Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Parandaniinae Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae 2. New genera Alania Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Apolochus Hoover & Bousfield 2001 Amphilochidae Austrocephaloides Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Austrophippsia Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Bouscephalus Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Exhyalella (rev.)(Lazo-Wasem & Gable 2001) Hyalellidae Gordania Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Hourstonius Hoover & Bousfield 2001 Amphilochidae Marinohyalella Lazo-Wasem & Gable 2001 Hyalellidae Mediterexis Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Metandania (rev.) (Berge 2001) Stegocephalidae Miramarassa Ortiz, Lalana & Lio 1999 Aristiidae Othomaera Krapp-Schickel, 2001 Melitidae Parafoxiphalus Alonso de Pina 2001 Phoxocephalidae Pseudo Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Schellenbergia Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Stegomorphia Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Stegonomadia Berge & Vader 2001 Stegocephalidae Zygomaera Krapp-Schickel 2001 Melitidae 3. New species and subspecies abei (Anonyx) Takakawa & Ishimaru 2001 Uristidae abyssorum (rev.) (Andaniotes) (Berge 2001 ) Stegocephalidae −2− africana (Andaniopsis) Berge, Vader & Galan 2001 Stegocephalidae amchitkana (Anisogammarus) Bousfield 2001 Anisogammaridae
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Data Suggest Multiple Origins and Diversification Times Of
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Molecular data suggest multiple origins and diversifcation times of freshwater gammarids on the Aegean archipelago Kamil Hupało1,3*, Ioannis Karaouzas2, Tomasz Mamos1,4 & Michał Grabowski1 Our main aim was to investigate the diversity, origin and biogeographical afliations of freshwater gammarids inhabiting the Aegean Islands by analysing their mtDNA and nDNA polymorphism, thereby providing the frst insight into the phylogeography of the Aegean freshwater gammarid fauna. The study material was collected from Samothraki, Lesbos, Skyros, Evia, Andros, Tinos and Serifos islands as well as from mainland Greece. The DNA extracted was used for amplifcation of two mitochondrial (COI and 16S) and two nuclear markers (28S and EF1-alpha). The multimarker time- calibrated phylogeny supports multiple origins and diferent diversifcation times for the studied taxa. Three of the sampled insular populations most probably represent new, distinct species as supported by all the delimitation methods used in our study. Our results show that the evolution of freshwater taxa is associated with the geological history of the Aegean Basin. The biogeographic afliations of the studied insular taxa indicate its continental origin, as well as the importance of the land fragmentation and the historical land connections of the islands. Based on the fndings, we highlight the importance of studying insular freshwater biota to better understand diversifcation mechanisms in fresh waters as well as the origin of studied Aegean freshwater taxa. Te Mediterranean islands are considered natural laboratories of evolution, exhibiting high levels of diversity and endemism, making them a vital part of one of the globally most precious biodiversity hotspots and a model system for studies of biogeography and evolution1–4.
    [Show full text]
  • Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List
    Section IV – Guideline for the Texas Priority Species List Associated Tables The Texas Priority Species List……………..733 Introduction For many years the management and conservation of wildlife species has focused on the individual animal or population of interest. Many times, directing research and conservation plans toward individual species also benefits incidental species; sometimes entire ecosystems. Unfortunately, there are times when highly focused research and conservation of particular species can also harm peripheral species and their habitats. Management that is focused on entire habitats or communities would decrease the possibility of harming those incidental species or their habitats. A holistic management approach would potentially allow species within a community to take care of themselves (Savory 1988); however, the study of particular species of concern is still necessary due to the smaller scale at which individuals are studied. Until we understand all of the parts that make up the whole can we then focus more on the habitat management approach to conservation. Species Conservation In terms of species diversity, Texas is considered the second most diverse state in the Union. Texas has the highest number of bird and reptile taxon and is second in number of plants and mammals in the United States (NatureServe 2002). There have been over 600 species of bird that have been identified within the borders of Texas and 184 known species of mammal, including marine species that inhabit Texas’ coastal waters (Schmidly 2004). It is estimated that approximately 29,000 species of insect in Texas take up residence in every conceivable habitat, including rocky outcroppings, pitcher plant bogs, and on individual species of plants (Riley in publication).
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents.................................................................................................................1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................3 Amphipod Superfamilies.....................................................................................................4 Index of Families.................................................................................................................7 I Suborder Ingolfiellidea....................................................................................................12 Suborder Senticaudata Infraorder Talitrida II. Superfamily Talitroidea........................................................................20 Infraorder Corophiida III. Superfamily Aoroidea.........................................................................65 IV. Superfamily Cheluroidea.....................................................................91 V. Superfamily Chevalioidea....................................................................96 VI. Superfamily Corophioidea.................................................................100 Infraorder Caprellida VII. Superfamily Caprelloidea................................................................142 VIII. Superfamily Neomegamphopoidea................................................191 IX. Superfamily Photoidea......................................................................199 Infraorder Hadziida X.
    [Show full text]