DOCSLIB.ORG

Hiatella “Arctica” (Bivalvia, Heterodonta) in the Mediterranean Sea

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Hiatella “Arctica” (Bivalvia, Heterodonta) in the Mediterranean Sea DIPLOMARBEIT Titel der Diplomarbeit Species delineation and genetic variation of Hiatella “arctica” (Bivalvia, Heterodonta) in the Mediterranean Sea angestrebter akademischer Grad Magistra der Naturwissenschaften (Mag. rer.nat.) Verfasserin Miriam Oberlechner Matrikel-Nummer: 9703291 Studienrichtung (lt. Biologie Studienblatt): Betreuer: a.o. Univ. Prof. Dr. Gerhard Steiner Wien, am 13. August 2008 Ich komme mir wie ein Mädchen vor, das am Strand spielt und sich damit vergnügt, ein noch glatteres Kieselsteinchen oder eine noch schönere Muschel als gewöhnlich zu finden, während das große Meer der Wahrheit völlig unerforscht vor mir liegt. frei nach Sir Isaac Newton Contents I Abstract ....................................................................................................................... I II Deutsche Zusammenfassung ...................................................................................II 1. Introduction............................................................................................................1 1.1. Morphological and systematic assignment.............................................................1 1.1.1. Bivalvia ..................................................................................................................1 1.1.2. Classification of the Bivalvia................................................................................1 Heterodonta......................................................................................................2 Hiatelloidea.......................................................................................................2 Hiatellidae.........................................................................................................2 1.2. The genus Hiatella.....................................................................................................3 1.2.1. Morphological characteristics .............................................................................3 1.2.2. Geographic range..................................................................................................3 1.2.3. Habitat ...................................................................................................................4 1.2.4. Fossil record ..........................................................................................................5 1.2.5. Nutrition ................................................................................................................5 1.2.6. Development..........................................................................................................5 1.2.7. Taxonomy ..............................................................................................................6 1.3. Differentiation of Hiatella arctica and Hiatella striata...........................................7 1.3.1. Species diagnosis: Shell morphology...................................................................7 1.3.2. Species diagnosis: Habitat choice ........................................................................7 1.3.3. Species diagnosis: Reproductive cycle and larval development .......................8 1.3.4. Species diagnosis: Fossil record...........................................................................8 1.4. Aims of this study......................................................................................................9 1.4.1. Species delineation ................................................................................................9 1.4.2. Genetic variation...................................................................................................9 1.5. Molecular markers .................................................................................................10 2. Material and Methods .........................................................................................11 2.1. Data collection.........................................................................................................11 2.1.1. Sample collection and conservation ..................................................................11 2.1.2. DNA isolation ......................................................................................................12 2.1.3. PCR ......................................................................................................................12 2.1.4. Purification of PCR products ........................................................................... 16 2.1.5. Sequencing reaction ........................................................................................... 16 2.1.6. Alignment and sequence analysis ..................................................................... 16 2.2. Genealogical analyses ............................................................................................ 18 2.2.1. Bayesian Inference ............................................................................................. 18 2.2.2. Network analysis using the statistical parsimony approach .......................... 18 2.3. Genetic variation.................................................................................................... 19 2.3.1. Distance method ................................................................................................. 20 2.3.2. Analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA)...................................................... 20 3. Results ...................................................................................................................23 3.1. Sequence analyses .................................................................................................. 23 3.1.1. Proteins (COI, ATP6, COIII)............................................................................ 23 3.1.2. 16S rRNA............................................................................................................ 24 3.1.3. NC_tRNA (NC_1, NC_2, tRNA Gln) ............................................................... 24 3.1.4. All data................................................................................................................ 25 3.2. Genealogical relationships..................................................................................... 26 3.2.1. Proteins ............................................................................................................... 26 Bayesian Inference ............................................................................................. 26 Network analysis ................................................................................................ 28 3.2.2. 16S rRNA............................................................................................................ 29 Bayesian Inference ............................................................................................. 29 Network analysis ................................................................................................ 31 3.2.3. NC_tRNA............................................................................................................ 32 Bayesian Inference ............................................................................................. 32 Network analysis ................................................................................................ 34 3.2.4. All data................................................................................................................ 35 Bayesian Inference ............................................................................................. 35 Network analysis ................................................................................................ 37 3.2.5. Haplogroups ....................................................................................................... 38 3.3. Genetic variation.................................................................................................... 39 3.3.1. Populations ......................................................................................................... 39 3.3.2. Habitats............................................................................................................... 45 4. Discussion..............................................................................................................49 4.1. Comparison of the different datasets ................................................................... 49 4.2. Species delineation ..................................................................................................50 4.3. Genetic differentiation of populations ..................................................................51 4.4. Correlation between genetic differentiation and geographic distance ..............52 4.5. Genetic differentiation of habitats.........................................................................52 4.6. Gene flow .................................................................................................................53 4.6.1. Dispersal abilities ................................................................................................53 4.6.2. Mode of habit ......................................................................................................53 4.6.3. Habitat distribution in the Mediterranean Sea................................................54 4.6.4. Sea currents.........................................................................................................55 4.6.5. Anthropogenic influence
Load more

Recommended publications
  • §4-71-6.5 LIST of CONDITIONALLY APPROVED ANIMALS November
    §4-71-6.5 LIST OF CONDITIONALLY APPROVED ANIMALS November 28, 2006 SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME INVERTEBRATES PHYLUM Annelida CLASS Oligochaeta ORDER Plesiopora FAMILY Tubificidae Tubifex (all species in genus) worm, tubifex PHYLUM Arthropoda CLASS Crustacea ORDER Anostraca FAMILY Artemiidae Artemia (all species in genus) shrimp, brine ORDER Cladocera FAMILY Daphnidae Daphnia (all species in genus) flea, water ORDER Decapoda FAMILY Atelecyclidae Erimacrus isenbeckii crab, horsehair FAMILY Cancridae Cancer antennarius crab, California rock Cancer anthonyi crab, yellowstone Cancer borealis crab, Jonah Cancer magister crab, dungeness Cancer productus crab, rock (red) FAMILY Geryonidae Geryon affinis crab, golden FAMILY Lithodidae Paralithodes camtschatica crab, Alaskan king FAMILY Majidae Chionocetes bairdi crab, snow Chionocetes opilio crab, snow 1 CONDITIONAL ANIMAL LIST §4-71-6.5 SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME Chionocetes tanneri crab, snow FAMILY Nephropidae Homarus (all species in genus) lobster, true FAMILY Palaemonidae Macrobrachium lar shrimp, freshwater Macrobrachium rosenbergi prawn, giant long-legged FAMILY Palinuridae Jasus (all species in genus) crayfish, saltwater; lobster Panulirus argus lobster, Atlantic spiny Panulirus longipes femoristriga crayfish, saltwater Panulirus pencillatus lobster, spiny FAMILY Portunidae Callinectes sapidus crab, blue Scylla serrata crab, Samoan; serrate, swimming FAMILY Raninidae Ranina ranina crab, spanner; red frog, Hawaiian CLASS Insecta ORDER Coleoptera FAMILY Tenebrionidae Tenebrio molitor mealworm,
    [Show full text]
  • Paleoenvironmental Interpretation of Late Glacial and Post
    PALEOENVIRONMENTAL INTERPRETATION OF LATE GLACIAL AND POST- GLACIAL FOSSIL MARINE MOLLUSCS, EUREKA SOUND, CANADIAN ARCTIC ARCHIPELAGO A Thesis Submitted to the College of Graduate Studies and Research in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in the Department of Geography University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon By Shanshan Cai © Copyright Shanshan Cai, April 2006. All rights reserved. i PERMISSION TO USE In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised my thesis work or, in their absence, by the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which my thesis work was done. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis. Requests for permission to copy or to make other use of material in this thesis in whole or part should be addressed to: Head of the Department of Geography University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A5 i ABSTRACT A total of 5065 specimens (5018 valves of bivalve and 47 gastropod shells) have been identified and classified into 27 species from 55 samples collected from raised glaciomarine and estuarine sediments, and glacial tills.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing the Hypothesis of Tolerance Strategies in Hiatella Arctica L. (Mollusca: Bivalvia)
    Helgol Mar Res (2005) 59: 187–195 DOI 10.1007/s10152-005-0218-6 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Vjacheslav V. Khalaman Testing the hypothesis of tolerance strategies in Hiatella arctica L. (Mollusca: Bivalvia) Received: 15 April 2004 / Revised: 14 February 2005 / Accepted: 14 February 2005 / Published online: 6 April 2005 Ó Springer-Verlag and AWI 2005 Abstract The physiological and biocenotic optima of Keywords Fluctuating asymmetry Æ Directional Hiatella arctica L. inhabiting shallow water fouling asymmetry Æ Hiatella arctica Æ Biofouling Æ communities of the White Sea were compared. The Tolerance strategy Æ The White Sea biomass and proportion of H. arctica in communities were used for the estimation of biocenotic optima or community success. The physiological state of popula- tions was assessed by means of the fluctuating asym- Introduction metry. The fluctuating asymmetry of H. arctica was calculated using the valve weights. It was determined Ramenskii (1935) described three main survival strat- that the shell of H. arctica possesses a slight directional egies in terrestrial plants: tolerance (S), ruderal (R) asymmetry, the right valve usually being larger (and and competitive (K) strategies. This classification was heavier) than the left one. The relationship between adopted in the Russian literature, but received little fluctuating and directional asymmetries is discussed. attention elsewhere. Almost 40 years later the classifi- High biomass and proportion of H. arctica in the cation of survival strategies was ‘‘rediscovered’’ by community generally correspond with high levels of Grime (1974), became widely adopted by plant ecol- fluctuating asymmetry. Thus, a discrepancy between ogists, and was then developed further. Tolerance physiological and ecological optima is observed, which strategies were divided into two categories, referring to is recognised as being characteristic of a tolerance plants that are tolerant to unfavourable abiotic envi- strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth O[ Juvenile Arctica Islandica Under Experimental Conditions
    HELGOL*NI)ER MEERESUNTERSUCHUNGEN Helgol~inder Meeresunters. 51, 417-431 (1997) Growth o[ juvenile Arctica islandica under experimental conditions R. Witbaard*, R. Franken & B. Visser Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, PO Box 59 1790 AB Den Burg, The Netherlands ABSTRACT: In two laboratory experiments, the effects of temperature and food availability on the growth of 10- to 23-mm high specimens of the bivalve Arctica islrmdica were estimated. Each experimental set-up consisted of 5 treatments in which either the food supply or the temperature differed. It was demonslrated that Arctica is able to grow at temperatures as low as 1 ~ A tenfold incredse of shell growth was observed at temperatures between 1~ and 12 :C. The greatest change in growth rate took place between 1~ and 6 ~ Average instantaneous shell growth varies between 0.00t)3 at I ~ to 0.0032/day at 12 ~C'. The results suggest that temperature hardly alfects the time spent in filtration, whereas particle density strongly influences that response. Starved am- reals at 9 ~ have their siphons open durmg only 12% of the time, whereas the siphons ol opti- mally fed animals were open on average during 76% of the observations. Increased siphon activity corresponded to high shell and tissue growth. At 9 ~ average shell growth at the optimum cell density o[ 20xlO" cell/1 was 3 I mm corresponding to an instantaneous rate of 0.0026/day. An algal cell density (Lsochry.sis gulbanu, Dunuliella marina) ranging between 5 and 7x10" cell/l is just enough to keep shells alive at 9 ~ (.'arbon conversion efticiency at 9 ~ is estimated to vary between 11 and 14 %.
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of Environment on Arctica Islandica Shell Formation and Architecture
    Biogeosciences, 14, 1577–1591, 2017 www.biogeosciences.net/14/1577/2017/ doi:10.5194/bg-14-1577-2017 © Author(s) 2017. CC Attribution 3.0 License. The effects of environment on Arctica islandica shell formation and architecture Stefania Milano1, Gernot Nehrke2, Alan D. Wanamaker Jr.3, Irene Ballesta-Artero4,5, Thomas Brey2, and Bernd R. Schöne1 1Institute of Geosciences, University of Mainz, Joh.-J.-Becherweg 21, 55128 Mainz, Germany 2Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Am Handelshafen 12, 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany 3Department of Geological and Atmospheric Sciences, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011-3212, USA 4Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research and Utrecht University, P.O. Box 59, 1790 AB Den Burg, Texel, the Netherlands 5Department of Animal Ecology, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Correspondence to: Stefania Milano ([email protected]) Received: 27 October 2016 – Discussion started: 7 December 2016 Revised: 1 March 2017 – Accepted: 4 March 2017 – Published: 27 March 2017 Abstract. Mollusks record valuable information in their hard tribution, and (2) scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was parts that reflect ambient environmental conditions. For this used to detect changes in microstructural organization. Our reason, shells can serve as excellent archives to reconstruct results indicate that A. islandica microstructure is not sen- past climate and environmental variability. However, animal sitive to changes in the food source and, likely, shell pig- physiology and biomineralization, which are often poorly un- ment are not altered by diet. However, seawater temperature derstood, can make the decoding of environmental signals had a statistically significant effect on the orientation of the a challenging task.
    [Show full text]
  • OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES an Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals
    OREGON ESTUARINE INVERTEBRATES An Illustrated Guide to the Common and Important Invertebrate Animals By Paul Rudy, Jr. Lynn Hay Rudy Oregon Institute of Marine Biology University of Oregon Charleston, Oregon 97420 Contract No. 79-111 Project Officer Jay F. Watson U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 500 N.E. Multnomah Street Portland, Oregon 97232 Performed for National Coastal Ecosystems Team Office of Biological Services Fish and Wildlife Service U.S. Department of Interior Washington, D.C. 20240 Table of Contents Introduction CNIDARIA Hydrozoa Aequorea aequorea ................................................................ 6 Obelia longissima .................................................................. 8 Polyorchis penicillatus 10 Tubularia crocea ................................................................. 12 Anthozoa Anthopleura artemisia ................................. 14 Anthopleura elegantissima .................................................. 16 Haliplanella luciae .................................................................. 18 Nematostella vectensis ......................................................... 20 Metridium senile .................................................................... 22 NEMERTEA Amphiporus imparispinosus ................................................ 24 Carinoma mutabilis ................................................................ 26 Cerebratulus californiensis .................................................. 28 Lineus ruber .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Response of Arctica Islandica to North Atlantic Oceanographic Conditions Since 1850
    fmars-06-00483 August 2, 2019 Time: 17:16 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 06 August 2019 doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00483 Growth Response of Arctica Islandica to North Atlantic Oceanographic Conditions Since 1850 Pierre Poitevin1*, Julien Thébault1, Valentin Siebert1, Sébastien Donnet2, Philippe Archambault3, Justine Doré1, Laurent Chauvaud1 and Pascal Lazure4 1 Laboratoire des Sciences de l’Environnement Marin, Institut Universitaire Européen de la Mer, Université de Bretagne Occidentale, Plouzané, France, 2 Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Centre, Newfoundland, NL, Canada, 3 Département de Biologie, Québec-Océan, Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada, 4 Ifremer, Laboratoire d’Océanographie Physique et Spatiale, Institut Universitaire Européen de la Mer, Plouzané, France The Northwest Atlantic is a key region with an essential role in global climate regulation, redistributing heat and influencing the carbon cycle. However, little is known about its evolution before 1950, mainly because of the lack of long-term instrumental measurements. The hard parts of long-lived marine biota hold the potential to extend instrumentally derived observation by several decades or centuries and enhance our understanding of global climate processes. Here, we investigate the effects of local, regional, and large-scale climate variability on the marine bivalve, Arctica islandica Edited by: (Linnaeus, 1767) from Saint-Pierre and Miquelon (SPM). This archipelago lies at the Paul E. Renaud, boundary zone between the cold Labrador Current in the north and the warm Gulf Akvaplan-niva, Norway Stream waters to the south, an excellent site to capture changes in North Atlantic Reviewed by: Nina Whitney, climate and oceanography. This study presents the northernmost, statistically robust Iowa State University, United States A.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity of Kelp Forests and Coralline Algae Habitats in Southwestern Greenland
    diversity Article Biodiversity of Kelp Forests and Coralline Algae Habitats in Southwestern Greenland Kathryn M. Schoenrock 1,2,* , Johanne Vad 3,4, Arley Muth 5, Danni M. Pearce 6, Brice R. Rea 7, J. Edward Schofield 7 and Nicholas A. Kamenos 1 1 School of Geographical and Earth Sciences, University of Glasgow, Gregory Building, Lilybank Gardens, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK; [email protected] 2 Botany and Plant Science, National University of Ireland Galway, Ryan Institute, University Rd., H91 TK33 Galway, Ireland 3 School of Engineering, Geosciences, Infrastructure and Society, Heriot-Watt University, Riccarton Campus, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK; [email protected] 4 School of Geosciences, Grant Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH28 8, UK 5 Marine Science Institute, The University of Texas at Austin, College of Natural Sciences, 750 Channel View Drive, Port Aransas, TX 78373-5015, USA; [email protected] 6 Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, School of Life and Medical Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK; [email protected] 7 Geography & Environment, School of Geosciences, University of Aberdeen, Elphinstone Road, Aberdeen AB24 3UF, UK; [email protected] (B.R.R.); j.e.schofi[email protected] (J.E.S.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +353-87-637-2869 Received: 22 August 2018; Accepted: 22 October 2018; Published: 25 October 2018 Abstract: All marine communities in Greenland are experiencing rapid environmental change, and to understand the effects on those structured by seaweeds, baseline records are vital. The kelp and coralline algae habitats along Greenland’s coastlines are rarely studied, and we fill this knowledge gap for the area around Nuuk, west Greenland.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.Spatial Distribution, Density and Population Structure of The
    Revista de Biología Marina y Oceanografía ISSN: 0717-3326 [email protected] Universidad de Valparaíso Chile Aragón-Noriega, E. Alberto; Calderon-Aguilera, Luis E.; Alcántara-Razo, Edgar; Mendivil- Mendoza, Jaime E. Spatial distribution, density and population structure of the Cortes geoduck, Panopea globosa in the Central Gulf of California Revista de Biología Marina y Oceanografía, vol. 51, núm. 1, abril, 2016, pp. 1-10 Universidad de Valparaíso Viña del Mar, Chile Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=47945599001 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative Revista de Biología Marina y Oceanografía Vol. 51, Nº1: 1-10, abril 2016 DOI 10.4067/S0718-19572016000100001 ARTÍCULO Spatial distribution, density and population structure of the Cortes geoduck, Panopea globosa in the Central Gulf of California Distribución espacial, densidad y estructura poblacional de la almeja de sifón Panopea globosa en la parte central del Golfo de California E. Alberto Aragón-Noriega1, Luis E. Calderon-Aguilera2, Edgar Alcántara-Razo1 and Jaime E. Mendivil-Mendoza1 1Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, Unidad Sonora, Km 2.35 Camino al Tular, Estero Bacochibampo, Guaymas, Sonora 85454, México. [email protected] 2Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada. Carretera Ensenada-Tijuana 3918, Ensenada, Baja California 22860, México Resumen.- La almeja de sifón Panopea globosa es una especie de importancia comercial por su alta demanda en el mercado de Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Cleaning by Beaching: Introducing a New Alternative for Hull Biofouling Management in Argentina
    Aquatic Invasions (2020) Volume 15, Issue 1: 63–80 Special Issue: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions Guest editors: Amy Fowler, April Blakeslee, Carolyn Tepolt, Alejandro Bortolus, Evangelina Schwindt and Joana Dias CORRECTED PROOF Research Article Cleaning by beaching: introducing a new alternative for hull biofouling management in Argentina Karen Lidia Castro1,2,3,*, Clara Belen Giachetti1,2,4, Nicolás Battini1,2,4, Alejandro Bortolus1,5 and Evangelina Schwindt1,2 1Grupo de Ecología en Ambientes Costeros (GEAC), Argentina 2Instituto de Biología de Organismos Marinos (IBIOMAR-CONICET), Blvd. Brown 2915, Puerto Madryn (U9120ACD), Chubut, Argentina 3Centro Regional Universitario Bariloche, Universidad Nacional del Comahue (CRUB, UNCo), Argentina 4Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Universidad de Buenos Aires (FCEyN, UBA), Argentina 5Instituto Patagónico para el Estudio de los Ecosistemas Continentales (IPEEC-CONICET), Blvd. Brown 2915, Puerto Madryn (U9120ACD), Chubut, Argentina Author e-mails: [email protected] (KLC), [email protected] (CBG), [email protected] (NB), [email protected] (AB), [email protected] (ES) *Corresponding author Co-Editors’ Note: This study was first presented at the 10th International Conference Abstract on Marine Bioinvasions held in Puerto Madryn, Argentina, October 16–18, 2018 Recreational vessels favor the secondary spread of exotic marine species hosted on (http://www.marinebioinvasions.info). Since hull biofouling communities
    [Show full text]
  • Strong Linkages Between Depth, Longevity and Demographic Stability Across Marine Sessile Species
    Departament de Biologia Evolutiva, Ecologia i Ciències Ambientals Doctorat en Ecologia, Ciències Ambientals i Fisiologia Vegetal Resilience of Long-lived Mediterranean Gorgonians in a Changing World: Insights from Life History Theory and Quantitative Ecology Memòria presentada per Ignasi Montero Serra per optar al Grau de Doctor per la Universitat de Barcelona Ignasi Montero Serra Departament de Biologia Evolutiva, Ecologia i Ciències Ambientals Universitat de Barcelona Maig de 2018 Adivsor: Adivsor: Dra. Cristina Linares Prats Dr. Joaquim Garrabou Universitat de Barcelona Institut de Ciències del Mar (ICM -CSIC) A todas las que sueñan con un mundo mejor. A Latinoamérica. A Asun y Carlos. AGRADECIMIENTOS Echando la vista a atrás reconozco que, pese al estrés del día a día, este ha sido un largo camino de aprendizaje plagado de momentos buenos y alegrías. También ha habido momentos más difíciles, en los cuáles te enfrentas de cara a tus propias limitaciones, pero que te empujan a desarrollar nuevas capacidades y crecer. Cierro esta etapa agradeciendo a toda la gente que la ha hecho posible, a las oportunidades recibidas, a las enseñanzas de l@s grandes científic@s que me han hecho vibrar en este mundo, al apoyo en los momentos más complicados, a las que me alegraron el día a día, a las que hacen que crea más en mí mismo y, sobre todo, a la gente buena que lucha para hacer de este mundo un lugar mejor y más justo. A tod@s os digo gracias! GRACIAS! GRÀCIES! THANKS! Advisors’ report Dra. Cristina Linares, professor at Departament de Biologia Evolutiva, Ecologia i Ciències Ambientals (Universitat de Barcelona), and Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • A Phylogenetic Backbone for Bivalvia: an RNA-Seq Approach
    A phylogenetic backbone for Bivalvia: an RNA-seq approach The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation González, Vanessa L., Sónia C. S. Andrade, Rüdiger Bieler, Timothy M. Collins, Casey W. Dunn, Paula M. Mikkelsen, John D. Taylor, and Gonzalo Giribet. 2015. “A phylogenetic backbone for Bivalvia: an RNA-seq approach.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 282 (1801): 20142332. doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.2332. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2014.2332. Published Version doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.2332 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:14065405 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA A phylogenetic backbone for Bivalvia: an rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org RNA-seq approach Vanessa L. Gonza´lez1,†,So´nia C. S. Andrade1,‡,Ru¨diger Bieler2, Timothy M. Collins3, Casey W. Dunn4, Paula M. Mikkelsen5, Research John D. Taylor6 and Gonzalo Giribet1 1 Cite this article: Gonza´lez VL, Andrade SCS, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA Bieler R, Collins TM, Dunn CW, Mikkelsen PM, 2Integrative Research Center, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, IL 60605, USA Taylor JD, Giribet G. 2015 A phylogenetic 3Department of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA backbone for Bivalvia: an RNA-seq approach.
    [Show full text]