The Diversity of the Seas: a Regional Approach

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Diversity of the Seas: a Regional Approach 1 WCMC Biodiversity Series No 4 AWnuiiiu, W i •-MJia i.r.»tuwi The Diversity of the Seas: a regional approach r i1 r Ara 1_ 'A1 1 1/W m&tilUMi ,fl UNEP WORLD CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE LIB— RY ~ ration Mon WCMC Biodiversity Series No. 4 The Diversity of the Seas: a regional approach by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre ff W J At 1 1WHMtW 1 WORLD CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE Editors B. Groombridge and M.D. Jenkins World Conservation Press December 1996 W Prepared and published by the World Conservation Monitoring Centre with funding from the United Nations Environment Programme, IUCN - The World Conservation Union, and the UK Joint Nature Conservation Committee, within the funding arrangements made by IUCN, WWF and UNEP in support of the Centre. This support is gratefully acknowledged. The World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), based in Cambridge, UK is a joint-venture between the three partners in the World Conservation Strategy and its successor Caring For The Earth: IUCN - The World Conservation Union, UNEP - United Nations Environment Programme, and WWF - World Wide Fund for Nature. The Centre provides information services on the conservation and sustainable use of living resources and helps others to develop information systems of their own. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was established in 1972 on the basis of the UN Conference on the Environment: The Stockholm Conference. UNEP's role is that of a secretariat within the United Nations which has been charged with the responsibility of working with governments to promote environmentally sound forms of development, and to co-ordinate global action for development without destruction of the environment. Significant information programmes coordinated by UNEP include EARTHWATCH, the Environment Assessment Programme (ERS), the International Environment Information System (INFOTERRA), and the International Register of Potentially Toxic Chemicals (IRPTC). JOIN TCfD NATURE CONSERVATION WORLD CONSERVATION IUCN COMMITTEE MONITORING CENTRE The World Conservation Union UNEP WWF Published by: World Conservation Press, Cambridge, UK. ISBN: 1 - 899628 - 03 - 7 Copyright: (1996) World Conservation Monitoring Centre Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non-commercial purposes is authorised without prior permission from the copyright holder. Reproduction for resale or other commercial purpose is prohibited without the prior written permission of the copyright holders. The designations of geographical entities in this report and the presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WCMC or UNEP or other participating organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Citation: World Conservation Monitoring Centre. 1996. 77ie Diversity of the Seas: a regional approach. Groombridge, B. and Jenkins, M.D. (Eds), World Conservation Press, Cambridge, UK. 132pp. Cover Design: Michael Edwards Printed by: Staples Printers Rochester. A member of the Martins Printing Group Available from: IUCN Publications Services Unit, 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge, CB3 ODL, UK. Tel : +44 1223 277314 Fax: +44 1223 277136 e-mail - [email protected] 11 The Diversity of the Seas: a regional approach CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 MARINE BIODIVERSITY 3 THE MARINE BIOSPHERE 3 DIVERSITY IN THE SEAS 6 PRESSURES ON MARINE RESOURCES 14 REGIONAL ACCOUNTS 28 REVIEW OF REGIONAL DATA 28 NOTES & SOURCES 32 Black Sea 35 Mediterranean 39 North Atlantic 43 Caribbean 5 Southwest Atlantic 57 West & Central Africa 61 South Africa 67 East Africa 71 Red Sea & Gulf of Aden 75 Kuwait 79 South Asia 81 East Asian Seas 85 Northwest Pacific 89 Northeast Pacific 95 Southeast Pacific 101 South Pacific 105 Southwest Australia 1 1 Antarctica 115 Arctic 1 19 ANNEX I. The role of UNEP in Conservation of Marine Biodiversity 121 ANNEX II. FAO fishery areas 125 ANNEX III. Acronyms 127 REFERENCES 129 This document This report has its origin in a compilation of country-level coastal and marine biodiversity data prepared under contract to UNEP in 1995. The structure of the material was revised in late 1995 to give an overview of biodiversity in sea areas covered by the UNEP Regional Seas programme. New information was added in 1996, and additional support to allow the document to be completed in its present format was provided by IUCN, the UK Joint Nature Conservation Committee, and WCMC. Acknowledgements WCMC is very grateful to a number of collaborators, especially the following: Monica Borobia for providing information on marine biodiversity activities of UNEP Water Branch (including the former Oceans and Coastal Areas/Programme Activity Centre or OCA/PAC) and for continuing commitment to this project, and to Ian Dight of the Water Branch for review comments. Kenneth Sherman of NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service for encouragement, providing information on Large Marine Ecosystems, and suggesting several improvements to the draft text. Magnus Ngoile, Coordinator, Marine and Coastal Programme at IUCN - The World Conservation Union, for interest and support. Clare Eno, UK Joint Nature Conservation Committee, for helpful review comments. Particular thanks to Alessandra Vanzella-Khouri (UNEP Caribbean Environment Programme, Regional Coordinating Unit) and Sue Miller (South Pacific Regional Environment Programme) for valuable review; thanks also to Jack Sobel (Centre for Marine Conservation, Washington D.C.) for remarks on an early draft, and to Teresa Mulliken (TRAFFIC International) for kindly allowing access to documentation on fisheries. While the above have contributed to this document in various ways, they do not necessarily endorse its content, for which WCMC is responsible. Credits Project concept: Richard Luxmoore (WCMC) and Monica Borobia (UNEP). Project team: Angela Barden, Neil Cox, Belinda Gray, Brian Groombridge, Martin Jenkins, Tim Johnson, Julie Reay (Production), Jamie Tratalos. Maps 1-3: Simon Blyth. Other assistance: Ian Barnes, Esther Byford, Rachel Cook, Mary Cordiner, Jeremy Eade, Rosalie Gardiner, Jonathan Rhind, Tim Inskipp, Richard Peck, Mark Spalding, Jo Taylor. INTRODUCTION Purpose The marine component of biological diversity is of immense importance to humankind. Despite this, information on the status of marine living resources and ecosystems remains much less complete, or less readily available, than that for terrestrial ecosystems. Clearly there is a need for far more attention to be paid to marine systems in order to improve our current state of knowledge; indeed this issue has been given explicit emphasis by the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The Second Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD identified the need for a comprehensive ecosystem-based approach to marine and coastal biodiversity (Annex II to decision 11/10) (CBD, 1996). We seek here to present information in a format that begins to meet the need for an integrated approach as identified by the CBD, and which is capable of modification or further elaboration as appropriate. It is not the purpose of this document to review systematically the principal issues involved in conservation and management of marine biodiversity. Several such reviews exist, among them: Committee on Biological Diversity in Marine Systems (CBDMS) (1995), Norse (1993), Thorne-Miller and Catena (1991). Numerous research, planning and management activities are currently being developed in relation to the focus provided by the CBD, its Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) and the International Waters portfolio of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Contents The major part of this document consists of a region by region presentation of information on different themes central to marine biodiversity management. The regional framework adopted is based on the UNEP Regional Seas programme (see Annex I). Within each regional setting we have assembled information on Large Marine Ecosystems, biodiversity and fisheries issues. Please consult Notes and Sources (p 32) for details of information quality and sources. In further developing this approach it will be desirable to integrate these classes of information more explicitly and more fully, and to consider additional data sets, eg. coastal settlement patterns, cultural factors, non-fishery use of marine resources, other elements of biodiversity, and so on. The regional material is prefaced by a brief introduction in which key aspects of marine biodiversity are outlined and information on forces for change presented. Coverage Map 1 shows the approximate geographic area covered by each Regional Seas agreement (note that this is not an official UNEP representation of these areas and it implies no expression of opinion in respect of national boundaries). The map distinguishes those regions to which a formal Convention applies from those covered by an Action Plan (or where such a plan is under discussion). The exact geographic coverage of each Regional Seas area is not precisely delineated. The map is based on the assumption that Regional Seas in general extend to the limit of the maritime boundary of each state concerned. There remains a number of countries or regions that either are not associated with a UNEP Regional Sea or have parts of the coast thus associated, but not all parts (eg. Australia). Such areas have been The Diversity of the Seas here defined as 'regions'
Recommended publications
  • A Classification of Living and Fossil Genera of Decapod Crustaceans
    RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY 2009 Supplement No. 21: 1–109 Date of Publication: 15 Sep.2009 © National University of Singapore A CLASSIFICATION OF LIVING AND FOSSIL GENERA OF DECAPOD CRUSTACEANS Sammy De Grave1, N. Dean Pentcheff 2, Shane T. Ahyong3, Tin-Yam Chan4, Keith A. Crandall5, Peter C. Dworschak6, Darryl L. Felder7, Rodney M. Feldmann8, Charles H. J. M. Fransen9, Laura Y. D. Goulding1, Rafael Lemaitre10, Martyn E. Y. Low11, Joel W. Martin2, Peter K. L. Ng11, Carrie E. Schweitzer12, S. H. Tan11, Dale Tshudy13, Regina Wetzer2 1Oxford University Museum of Natural History, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3PW, United Kingdom [email protected] [email protected] 2Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90007 United States of America [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 3Marine Biodiversity and Biosecurity, NIWA, Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie Wellington, New Zealand [email protected] 4Institute of Marine Biology, National Taiwan Ocean University, Keelung 20224, Taiwan, Republic of China [email protected] 5Department of Biology and Monte L. Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602 United States of America [email protected] 6Dritte Zoologische Abteilung, Naturhistorisches Museum, Wien, Austria [email protected] 7Department of Biology, University of Louisiana, Lafayette, LA 70504 United States of America [email protected] 8Department of Geology, Kent State University, Kent, OH 44242 United States of America [email protected] 9Nationaal Natuurhistorisch Museum, P. O. Box 9517, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands [email protected] 10Invertebrate Zoology, Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History, 10th and Constitution Avenue, Washington, DC 20560 United States of America [email protected] 11Department of Biological Sciences, National University of Singapore, Science Drive 4, Singapore 117543 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] 12Department of Geology, Kent State University Stark Campus, 6000 Frank Ave.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 7: Species Changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015)
    IUCN Red List version 2015.4: Table 7 Last Updated: 19 November 2015 Table 7: Species changing IUCN Red List Status (2014-2015) Published listings of a species' status may change for a variety of reasons (genuine improvement or deterioration in status; new information being available that was not known at the time of the previous assessment; taxonomic changes; corrections to mistakes made in previous assessments, etc. To help Red List users interpret the changes between the Red List updates, a summary of species that have changed category between 2014 (IUCN Red List version 2014.3) and 2015 (IUCN Red List version 2015-4) and the reasons for these changes is provided in the table below. IUCN Red List Categories: EX - Extinct, EW - Extinct in the Wild, CR - Critically Endangered, EN - Endangered, VU - Vulnerable, LR/cd - Lower Risk/conservation dependent, NT - Near Threatened (includes LR/nt - Lower Risk/near threatened), DD - Data Deficient, LC - Least Concern (includes LR/lc - Lower Risk, least concern). Reasons for change: G - Genuine status change (genuine improvement or deterioration in the species' status); N - Non-genuine status change (i.e., status changes due to new information, improved knowledge of the criteria, incorrect data used previously, taxonomic revision, etc.); E - Previous listing was an Error. IUCN Red List IUCN Red Reason for Red List Scientific name Common name (2014) List (2015) change version Category Category MAMMALS Aonyx capensis African Clawless Otter LC NT N 2015-2 Ailurus fulgens Red Panda VU EN N 2015-4
    [Show full text]
  • Sardinops Sagax Neopilchardus in Australia and New Zealand in 1995
    DISEASES OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS Vol. 28: 1-16, 1997 Published January 16 Dis Aquat Org Epizootic mortality in the pilchard Sardinops sagax neopilchardus in Australia and New Zealand in 1995. I. Pathology and epizootiology 'New South Wales Agriculture, Elizabeth Macarthur Agricultural Institute, Private Bag 8, Camden, New South Wales 2570, Australia 'Fisheries Department of Western Australia, Animal Health Laboratory, 3 Baron-Hay Court, South Perth, Western Australia 6151. Australia 3National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, PO Box 14-901. Wellington, New Zealand "SIRO, Australian Animal Health Laboratory, PO Bag 24, Geelong, Victoria 3220, Australia ABSTRACT A large-scale eplzootic occurred In the Austialas~anpllchard Sard~nopssagax neo- p~lchardusbetween March and September 1995 ovei more than 5000 km of the Australian coastline and 500 km of the New Zealand coastline Affected fish died wlthln a tew mlnutes of cl~nicalslgns of respiratory distress and death was associated wlth hypoxaemla and hypercapnea Significant leslons were confined to the gllls and comprised acute to subacute inflammation followed by blzal re epithelia1 hypertrophy and hyperplasia The lesions were initially focal but progressed to become generalised over about 4 d Pathological changes in atfeded fish from xvestern Australia eastern Australia and New Zealand were simila~,suggesting a common aetiology The lesions were unllke those associated w~th ichthyotoxic algae, s~l~ceousalgae, phys~cochemicalfactors fungi, bacterla dinoflagellates, amoebde, other protozoa and inetazoa A herpesvlrus was consistently present In gills of affected flsh and absent from unaffected pilchards and IS proposed as the aetiological agent The late of spread of the mortal~ty front (approulmately 30 km d ') In relation to the migration late of pilchaids and plevaillng currents suggests that a vector was involved The dlsease may have been newly introduced lnto Australian wateis KEY WORDS Clupeoldel .
    [Show full text]
  • Final Report
    Overseas Countries and Territories: Environmental Profiles FINAL REPORT PART 2 – DETAILED REPORT SECTION E – SOUTH ATLANTIC REGION Consortium January 201 5 EuropeAid/127054/C/SER/multi Request n° 2013/325768 DISCLAIMER This report has been prepared with the financial assistance of the European Commission. The views expressed herein are those of the consultants and therefore in no way reflect the official opinion of the European Commission Authors of the Report Contractor’s name and address José de Bettencourt Safège Consortium Helena Imminga-Berends Gulledelle 92 B-1200 Brussels - BELGIUM Project manager Camille Vassart on behalf of Prospect C&S Please consider the environment before printing this document Page 2 / 115 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACAP Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels ACOR Association Française pour les Récifs Coralliens ACP Africa Caribbean and the Pacific ACS Association of Caribbean States AEPS Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy AFD French Development Agency AMAP Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme AMOC Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation AOSIS Alliance of Small Island States APEC Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation BAS British Antarctic Survey BEST EU Voluntary Scheme for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Territories of European Overseas BRGM Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières CAFF Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna CANARI Caribbean Natural Resources Institute CARICOM Caribbean Community CARIFORUM Caribbean Forum CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CCAMLR
    [Show full text]
  • Lobsters-Identification, World Distribution, and U.S. Trade
    Lobsters-Identification, World Distribution, and U.S. Trade AUSTIN B. WILLIAMS Introduction tons to pounds to conform with US. tinents and islands, shoal platforms, and fishery statistics). This total includes certain seamounts (Fig. 1 and 2). More­ Lobsters are valued throughout the clawed lobsters, spiny and flat lobsters, over, the world distribution of these world as prime seafood items wherever and squat lobsters or langostinos (Tables animals can also be divided rougWy into they are caught, sold, or consumed. 1 and 2). temperate, subtropical, and tropical Basically, three kinds are marketed for Fisheries for these animals are de­ temperature zones. From such partition­ food, the clawed lobsters (superfamily cidedly concentrated in certain areas of ing, the following facts regarding lob­ Nephropoidea), the squat lobsters the world because of species distribu­ ster fisheries emerge. (family Galatheidae), and the spiny or tion, and this can be recognized by Clawed lobster fisheries (superfamily nonclawed lobsters (superfamily noting regional and species catches. The Nephropoidea) are concentrated in the Palinuroidea) . Food and Agriculture Organization of temperate North Atlantic region, al­ The US. market in clawed lobsters is the United Nations (FAO) has divided though there is minor fishing for them dominated by whole living American the world into 27 major fishing areas for in cooler waters at the edge of the con­ lobsters, Homarus americanus, caught the purpose of reporting fishery statis­ tinental platform in the Gul f of Mexico, off the northeastern United States and tics. Nineteen of these are marine fish­ Caribbean Sea (Roe, 1966), western southeastern Canada, but certain ing areas, but lobster distribution is South Atlantic along the coast of Brazil, smaller species of clawed lobsters from restricted to only 14 of them, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Fishery Status for Whaler Sharks (Carcharhinus Spp.) in South Australian and Adjacent Waters
    Review of the Fishery Status for Whaler Sharks (Carcharhinus spp.) in South Australian and adjacent waters Keith Jones FRDC Project Number 2004/067 January 2008 SARDI Aquatic Sciences Publication No. F2007/000721-1 SARDI Research Series No. 154 1 Review of the fishery status for whaler sharks in South Australian and adjacent waters. Final report to the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation. By: G.Keith Jones South Australian Research & Development Institute 2 Hamra Ave, West Beach SA 5022 (Current Address: PIRSA (Fisheries Policy) GPO Box 1625 Adelaide, SA 5001. Telephone: 08 82260439 Facsimile: 08 82262434 http://www.pirsa.saugov.sa.gov.au DISCLAIMER The author warrants that he has taken all reasonable care in producing this report. The report has been through the SARDI internal review process, and has been formally approved for release by the Chief Scientist. Although all reasonable efforts have been made to ensure quality, SARDI Aquatic Sciences does not warrant that the information in this report is free from errors or omissions. SARDI does not accept any liability for the contents of this report or for any consequences arising from its use or any other reliance placed upon it. © Copyright Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and South Australian Research & Development Institute, 2005.This work is copyright. Except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 (Commonwealth), no part of this publication may be reproduced by any process, electronic or otherwise, without the specific permission of the copyright owners. Neither may information be stored electronically in any form whatsoever without such permission. The Fisheries Research and Development Corporation plans, invests in and manages fisheries research and development throughout Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Pterodromarefs V1-5.Pdf
    Index The general order of species follows the International Ornithological Congress’ World Bird List. A few differences occur with regard to the number and treatment of subspecies where some are treated as full species. Version Version 1.5 (5 May 2011). Cover With thanks to Kieran Fahy and Dick Coombes for the cover images. Species Page No. Atlantic Petrel [Pterodroma incerta] 5 Barau's Petrel [Pterodroma baraui] 17 Bermuda Petrel [Pterodroma cahow] 11 Black-capped Petrel [Pterodroma hasitata] 12 Black-winged Petrel [Pterodroma nigripennis] 18 Bonin Petrel [Pterodroma hypoleuca] 19 Chatham Islands Petrel [Pterodroma axillaris] 19 Collared Petrel [Pterodroma brevipes] 20 Cook's Petrel [Pterodroma cookii] 20 De Filippi's Petrel [Pterodroma defilippiana] 20 Desertas Petrel [Pterodroma deserta] 11 Fea's Petrel [Pterodroma feae] 8 Galapágos Petrel [Pterodroma phaeopygia] 17 Gould's Petrel [Pterodroma leucoptera] 19 Great-winged Petrel [Pterodroma macroptera] 3 Grey-faced Petrel [Pterodroma gouldi] 4 Hawaiian Petrel [Pterodroma sandwichensis] 17 Henderson Petrel [Pterodroma atrata] 16 Herald Petrel [Pterodroma heraldica] 14 Jamaica Petrel [Pterodroma caribbaea] 13 Juan Fernandez Petrel [Pterodroma externa] 13 Kermadec Petrel [Pterodroma neglecta] 14 Magenta Petrel [Pterodroma magentae] 6 Mottled Petrel [Pterodroma inexpectata] 18 Murphy's Petrel [Pterodroma ultima] 6 Phoenix Petrel [Pterodroma alba] 16 Providence Petrel [Pterodroma solandri] 5 Pycroft's Petrel [Pterodroma pycrofti] 21 Soft-plumaged Petrel [Pterodroma mollis] 7 Stejneger's Petrel [Pterodroma longirostris] 21 Trindade Petrel [Pterodroma arminjoniana] 15 Vanuatu Petrel [Pterodroma occulta] 13 White-headed Petrel [Pterodroma lessonii] 4 White-necked Petrel [Pterodroma cervicalis] 18 Zino's Petrel [Pterodroma madeira] 9 1 General Bailey, S.F. et al 1989. Dark Pterodroma petrels in the North Pacific: identification, status, and North American occurrence.
    [Show full text]
  • Fishery Bulletin/U S Dept of Commerce National Oceanic
    ASPECTS OF THE BIOWGY OF TWO SCYLIORHINID SHARKS, APRISTURUS BRUNNEUS AND PARMATURUS XANIURUS, FROM THE UPPER CONTINENTAL SWPE OFF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA JEFFREY N. CROSSI ABSTRACf The distribution. abundance, reproductive cycle. and food habits of two scyliorhinid sharks are discussed. Catsharks occurred on 87% of 71 longline sets and in 6% of 48 trawls. Longline catches were stratified by habitat into banks (hard substrate) and mud (soft substrate). ApriBtu'l"lUl brllnnell.8 occurred more frequently on mud sets than on bank sets. but its abundance was similar in both habitats. Pa'MIlaturus :l'a·t/.iu~ oC<.'l1rred equally frequently on mud and bank sets, but it was more abundant on bank sets. Catches of both species consisted of adults and adolescents; juveniles were rare or absent. Historical collections suggest that juveniles are mesopelagic. Male P. zaniurull matured ata smaller size than male A. brrt1meus. Females of both species matured at about the same size and fecundity increased with female size. The proportion of body weight devoted to gonads and maximum oocyte size were greater among P. 2:a1liurus, but fecundity and the proportion of females carrying egg cases were greater among A. brun'IU.l1ts. Seasonal changes in gonadal develop­ ment were not well defined for either species. Members of both populations may have been reproduc­ tively active throughout the year. The diets of both species comprised. in order of importance, crustaceans, teleosts, and squids. Most prey consumed were pelagic; however, it is not known where in the water column the catsharks obtained their prey. The Scyliorhinidae is the largest family of living ParmatWr1"S Xa11Jiu1'US Gilbert, the filetail cat­ sharks with about 94 valid species (Nelson 1984).
    [Show full text]
  • The White Shark (Carcharodon Carcharias) in the Ancient Peruvian Ceremonial Centre of Huaca Pucllana
    International Journal of Osteoarchaeology Int. J. Osteoarchaeol. 26: 114–120 (2016) Published online 9 March 2014 in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/oa.2401 The White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias) in the Ancient Peruvian Ceremonial Centre of Huaca Pucllana A. ALTAMIRANO-SIERRAa* AND P. VARGAS-NALVARTEb a Áreas Costeras y Recursos Marinos (ACOREMA), Pisco, Peru b Museo de Sitio Huaca Pucllana, Calle General Borgoño cuadra 8 S/N, Lima 18, Peru ABSTRACT New data regarding the white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) at the archaeological complex Huaca Pucllana (200–700 AD) are presented on the basis of the recent discovery of teeth in ritual offering features. Previous information of this species from fossil, archaeological and modern records is reviewed. The use of the white sharks as an El Niño indicator is rejected. Past and present white shark distribution in the South East Pacificis reviewed, and the extermination of pinniped colonies as a factor in the poor modern record is discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key words: Carcharodon carcharias; ENSO; Huaca Pucllana; Lima culture; palaeoecology; Peru Introduction investigated this culture include Julio C. Tello (1999), Pedro Villar Córdova (1935), Max Uhle The white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) is a large apex (1970), Thomas C. Patterson (1966) and Isabel Flores predator species distributed in most of the world’s (1981, 2005). Huaca Pucllana was mainly a village of oceans. Its habitat comprises coastal and offshore farmers and fishermen. Inhabitants of this site built waters of continental and insular shelves. This shark large adobe pyramids, where they worshiped deities species has a wide range of prey items, including birds, symbolized by figures associated with the sea and cetaceans, pinnipeds, osteichthyians, chondricthyians marine life (waves, sharks, sea lions, etc.).
    [Show full text]
  • XENOPHON PAPER “Blue Growth As a Driver for Regional Development”
    Matt eo Bocci, Frédérick Herpers, Thanos Smanis, Christophe Le Visage Thodoros E. Kampouris • Andrew Kennedy • Nataliia Korzhunova Emmanouil Nikolaidis • Natalia Zubchenko No16 XENOPHON PAPER “Blue Growth as a Driver for Regional Development” October 2018 2 XENOPHON PAPER no 16 The International Centre for Black Sea Studies (ICBSS) was founded in 1998 as a not-for-profit organisation. It has since fulfilled a dual function: on the one hand, it is an independent research and training institution focusing on the Black Sea region. On the other hand, it is a related body of the Organisation of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) and in this capacity serves as its acknowledged think-tank. Thus the ICBSS is a uniquely positioned independent expert on the Black Sea area and its regional cooperation dynamics. ___________________________________ The ICBSS launched the Xenophon Paper series in July 2006 with the aim to contribute a space for policy analysis and debate on topical issues concerning the Black Sea region. As part of the ICBSS’ independent activities, the Xenophon Papers are prepared either by members of its own research staff or by externally commissioned experts. While all contributions are peer-reviewed in order to assure consistent high quality, the views expressed therein exclusively represent the authors. The Xenophon Papers are available for download in electronic version from the ICBSS’ webpage under www.icbss.org. In its effort to stimulate open and engaged debate, the ICBSS also welcomes enquiries and contributions from its read- ers under [email protected]. XENOPHON PAPER no 16 3 Matt eo Bocci • Frédérick Herpers • Thanos Smanis • Christophe Le Visage Thodoros E.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep-Water Decapod Crustacea from Eastern Australia: Lobsters of the Families Nephropidae, Palinuridae, Polychelidae and Scyllaridae
    Records of the Australian Museum (1995) Vo!. 47: 231-263. ISSN 0067-1975 Deep-water Decapod Crustacea from Eastern Australia: Lobsters of the Families Nephropidae, Palinuridae, Polychelidae and Scyllaridae D.J.G. GRIFFIN & H.E. STODDART Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia ABSTRACT. Twenty-three species of deep-water lobsters in the families Nephropidae, Palinuridae, Polychelidae and Scyllaridae are recorded from the continental shelf and slope off eastern Australia. Ten species and two genera have not been previously recorded from Australia. These are Acanthacaris tenuimana, Projasus parkeri, Polycheles baccatus, P. euthrix, P. granulatus, Stereomastis andamanensis, S. helleri, S. sculpta, S. suhmi and Willemoesia bonaspei. The deep­ water lobster fauna of eastern Australia is compared with those of other Indo-Pacific areas. A key is given to all deep-water lobster species recorded from Australian waters. GRIFFIN, D.J.O. & H.E. STODDART, 1995. Deep-water decapod Crustacea from eastern Australia: lobsters of the families Nephropidae, Palinuridae, Polychelidae and Scyllaridae. Records of the Australian Museum 47(3): 231-263. The deep-water lobster fauna of the Australian region fauna of southern Australia is as yet poorly known but first became known from collections made by the British extensive collections have been made by the Museum Challenger Expedition (Bate, 1888), the 1911-14 of Victoria on the continental shelf and slope of south­ Australasian Antarctic Expedition (Bage, 1938), the eastern Australia and Bass Strait. Commonwealth of Australia fishing experiments on the This paper is the third of a series dealing with deep­ Endeavour (1909-1914); various local trawling excursions water decapods taken by the New South Wales Fisheries (e.g., Grant, 1905) and serendipitous catches by Research Vessel Kapala, which has carried out trawling professional fishermen (e.g., McNeill, 1949, 1956).
    [Show full text]
  • How to Become a Crab: Phenotypic Constraints on a Recurring Body Plan
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 25 December 2020 doi:10.20944/preprints202012.0664.v1 How to become a crab: Phenotypic constraints on a recurring body plan Joanna M. Wolfe1*, Javier Luque1,2,3, Heather D. Bracken-Grissom4 1 Museum of Comparative Zoology and Department of Organismic & Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, 26 Oxford St, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA 2 Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Balboa–Ancon, 0843–03092, Panama, Panama 3 Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520-8109, USA 4 Institute of Environment and Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, Biscayne Bay Campus, 3000 NE 151 Street, North Miami, FL 33181, USA * E-mail: [email protected] Summary: A fundamental question in biology is whether phenotypes can be predicted by ecological or genomic rules. For over 140 years, convergent evolution of the crab-like body plan (with a wide and flattened shape, and a bent abdomen) at least five times in decapod crustaceans has been known as ‘carcinization’. The repeated loss of this body plan has been identified as ‘decarcinization’. We offer phylogenetic strategies to include poorly known groups, and direct evidence from fossils, that will resolve the pattern of crab evolution and the degree of phenotypic variation within crabs. Proposed ecological advantages of the crab body are summarized into a hypothesis of phenotypic integration suggesting correlated evolution of the carapace shape and abdomen. Our premise provides fertile ground for future studies of the genomic and developmental basis, and the predictability, of the crab-like body form. Keywords: Crustacea, Anomura, Brachyura, Carcinization, Phylogeny, Convergent evolution, Morphological integration 1 © 2020 by the author(s).
    [Show full text]