DOCSLIB.ORG

COSEWIC List of Prioritized Crustaceans Related Groups at Risk

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COSEWIC List of Prioritized Crustaceans Related Groups at Risk COSEWIC List of Prioritized Crustaceans and Related Groups at Risk in Canada April 2012 Funding provided by Environment Canada OBJECTIVE OF CONTRACT: Develop a prioritized candidate species list of crustaceans and related groups potentially at risk in Canada. This prioritized candidate list will serve as the primary basis for prioritizing crustaceans and related groups for future COSEWIC assessments. PART 1: ANNOTATED LISTS A general assessment of the following crustaceans and related groups listed below: 1. Phoronida – horseshoe worms 2. Pentastomida – tongue worms 3. Symphyla – Symphylans 4. Pauropoda - Pauropods 5. Chilopoda – Centipedes 6. Diplopoda – Millipedes 7. Crustacea – Ostracoda 8. Crustacea – Branchiopoda 9. Crustacea – Maxillopoda 10. Crustacea – Malacostraca PART 2: CANDIDATE SPECIES FORMS: List of 10 of the species in the crustaceans and related groups listed in Part 1 that are most likely to be at risk. Assessment of the species was done using the one page criteria form currently used by COSEWIC in assessing candidate wildlife species PART 3: LIST OF KNOWLEDGEABLE PEOPLE: List of knowledgeable persons (with address, email and phone) with respect to the crustaceans and related groups listed in Part 1 PART4: REFERENCES: List of references with respect to the crustaceans and related groups listed under deliverable (1) as well as a list of general information sources including people and websites as well as primary literature. TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1: Annotated lists of crustaceans and related groups ............................................ 5 1. Phoronida- Horseshoe Worms ................................................................................. 5 2. Pentastomida- Tongue Worms ................................................................................. 9 3. Symphyla ............................................................................................................... 11 4. Pauropoda .............................................................................................................. 13 5. Chilopoda ............................................................................................................... 16 6. Diplopoda ............................................................................................................... 21 7. Ostracoda (Seed or Mussel Shrimps) .................................................................... 30 8. Branchiopoda ......................................................................................................... 43 9. Maxillopoda ............................................................................................................ 61 10. Malacostraca ........................................................................................................ 87 PART 2: CANDIDATE SPECIES LIST ......................................................................... 108 Austrotyla borealis Shear ......................................................................................... 108 Branchinecta campestris Lynch ............................................................................... 109 Ornate Fairy Shrimp, Eubranchipus ornatus Holmes ............................................... 111 Leptodora kindtii Focke ............................................................................................ 112 Limnocythere liporeticulata Delorme ........................................................................ 114 Pollicipes polymerus Sowerby .................................................................................. 115 Stygobromus canadensis Holsinger ......................................................................... 117 Stygobromus quatsinensis Holsinger & Shaw .......................................................... 118 Tropocyclops extensus Kiefer .................................................................................. 120 Tubaphe levii Causey ............................................................................................... 121 References ............................................................................................................... 122 PART 3: LIST OF KNOWLEDGEABLE PEOPLE ........................................................ 122 Pauropoda ................................................................................................................ 122 Symphyla ................................................................................................................. 123 Diplopoda ................................................................................................................. 123 Chilopoda ................................................................................................................. 124 Branchiopoda ........................................................................................................... 124 Ostracoda ................................................................................................................. 125 Maxillopoda .............................................................................................................. 126 Malacostraca ............................................................................................................ 127 PART 4: REFERENCES FOR CRUSTACEANS AND RELATED TAXA ..................... 129 Phoronida ................................................................................................................. 129 Pentastomida ........................................................................................................... 130 Pauropoda ................................................................................................................ 130 Symphyla ................................................................................................................. 130 Diplopoda ................................................................................................................. 131 Chilopoda ................................................................................................................. 133 Branchiopoda ........................................................................................................... 133 Ostracoda ................................................................................................................. 137 Maxillopoda .............................................................................................................. 138 Malacostraca ............................................................................................................ 143 Contacts ................................................................................................................... 147 List of Tables Table 1. Taxa of Canadian phoronids showing distribution and status. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental. ........................... 8 Table 2. Distribution and status of Pentastomida in Canada. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental. ......................... 10 Table 3. Distribution and status of Symphyla in Canada. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental. ....................................................... 12 Table 4. Distribution and status of Canadian pauropods. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental. ....................................................... 14 Table 5. Distribution and status of Canadian Chilopoda, based on Kevan (1983) and Mercurio (2010). 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental; * = based on unpublished or unconfirmed accounts; ? = status needs further clarification. For species having several synonyms the currently accepted name as listed by Kevan (1983) or Mercurio (2010) is provided. ... 19 Table 6. Distribution and status of Canadian Diplopoda. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental; † = identified pest species. ............ 25 Table 7. Distribution and status of Canadian ostracoda. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental; ? = status needs further clarification. .................................................................................................... 35 Table 8. Distribution and status of Canadian branchiopoda. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental; ? = status needs further clarification. ........................................................................................ 52 Table 9. Distribution and Status of Canadian Maxillopoda. 0.1 = extirpated, 0.2 = extinct, 1 = at risk, 2 = may be at risk, 3 = sensitive, 4 = secure, 5 = undetermined, 6 = not assessed, 7 = exotic, 8 = accidental; ? = status needs further clarification. .......................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Monitoring Program for Biodiversity and Non-Indigenous Species in Egypt
    UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAM MEDITERRANEAN ACTION PLAN REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTRE FOR SPECIALLY PROTECTED AREAS National monitoring program for biodiversity and non-indigenous species in Egypt PROF. MOUSTAFA M. FOUDA April 2017 1 Study required and financed by: Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas Boulevard du Leader Yasser Arafat BP 337 1080 Tunis Cedex – Tunisie Responsible of the study: Mehdi Aissi, EcApMEDII Programme officer In charge of the study: Prof. Moustafa M. Fouda Mr. Mohamed Said Abdelwarith Mr. Mahmoud Fawzy Kamel Ministry of Environment, Egyptian Environmental Affairs Agency (EEAA) With the participation of: Name, qualification and original institution of all the participants in the study (field mission or participation of national institutions) 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS page Acknowledgements 4 Preamble 5 Chapter 1: Introduction 9 Chapter 2: Institutional and regulatory aspects 40 Chapter 3: Scientific Aspects 49 Chapter 4: Development of monitoring program 59 Chapter 5: Existing Monitoring Program in Egypt 91 1. Monitoring program for habitat mapping 103 2. Marine MAMMALS monitoring program 109 3. Marine Turtles Monitoring Program 115 4. Monitoring Program for Seabirds 118 5. Non-Indigenous Species Monitoring Program 123 Chapter 6: Implementation / Operational Plan 131 Selected References 133 Annexes 143 3 AKNOWLEGEMENTS We would like to thank RAC/ SPA and EU for providing financial and technical assistances to prepare this monitoring programme. The preparation of this programme was the result of several contacts and interviews with many stakeholders from Government, research institutions, NGOs and fishermen. The author would like to express thanks to all for their support. In addition; we would like to acknowledge all participants who attended the workshop and represented the following institutions: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Additions to and Revisions of the Amphipod (Crustacea: Amphipoda) Fauna of South Africa, with a List of Currently Known Species from the Region
    Additions to and revisions of the amphipod (Crustacea: Amphipoda) fauna of South Africa, with a list of currently known species from the region Rebecca Milne Department of Biological Sciences & Marine Research Institute, University of CapeTown, Rondebosch, 7700 South Africa & Charles L. Griffiths* Department of Biological Sciences & Marine Research Institute, University of CapeTown, Rondebosch, 7700 South Africa E-mail: [email protected] (with 13 figures) Received 25 June 2013. Accepted 23 August 2013 Three species of marine Amphipoda, Peramphithoe africana, Varohios serratus and Ceradocus isimangaliso, are described as new to science and an additional 13 species are recorded from South Africa for the first time. Twelve of these new records originate from collecting expeditions to Sodwana Bay in northern KwaZulu-Natal, while one is an introduced species newly recorded from Simon’s Town Harbour. In addition, we collate all additions and revisions to the regional amphipod fauna that have taken place since the last major monographs of each group and produce a comprehensive, updated faunal list for the region. A total of 483 amphipod species are currently recognized from continental South Africa and its Exclusive Economic Zone . Of these, 35 are restricted to freshwater habitats, seven are terrestrial forms, and the remainder either marine or estuarine. The fauna includes 117 members of the suborder Corophiidea, 260 of the suborder Gammaridea, 105 of the suborder Hyperiidea and a single described representative of the suborder Ingolfiellidea.
    [Show full text]
  • The Malacostracan Fauna of Two Arctic Fjords (West Spitsbergen): the Diversity And
    + Models OCEANO-95; No. of Pages 24 Oceanologia (2017) xxx, xxx—xxx Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect j ournal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/oceanologia/ ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE The malacostracan fauna of two Arctic fjords (west Spitsbergen): the diversity and distribution patterns of its pelagic and benthic components Joanna Legeżyńska *, Maria Włodarska-Kowalczuk, Marta Gluchowska, Mateusz Ormańczyk, Monika Kędra, Jan Marcin Węsławski Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Sopot, Poland Received 14 July 2016; accepted 6 January 2017 KEYWORDS Summary This study examines the performance of pelagic and benthic Malacostraca in two Malacostraca; glacial fjords of west Spitsbergen: Kongsfjorden, strongly influenced by warm Atlantic waters, Arctic; and Hornsund which, because of the strong impact of the cold Sørkapp Current, has more of Svalbard; an Arctic character. The material was collected during 12 summer expeditions organized from Diversity; 1997 to 2013. In all, 24 pelagic and 116 benthic taxa were recorded, most of them widely Distribution distributed Arctic-boreal species. The advection of different water masses from the shelf had a direct impact on the structure of the pelagic Malacostraca communities, resulting in the clear dominance of the sub-arctic hyperiid amphipod Themisto abyssorum in Kongsfjorden and the great abundance of Decapoda larvae in Hornsund. The taxonomic, functional and size compositions of the benthic malacostracan assemblages varied between the two fjords, and also between the glacier-proximate inner bays and the main fjord basins, as a result of the varying dominance patterns of the same assemblage of species. There was a significant drop in species richness in the strongly disturbed glacial bays of both fjords, but only in Hornsund was this accompanied by a significant decrease in density and diversity, probably due to greater isolation and poorer quality of sediment organic matter in its innermost basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Facts and Arguments for Darwin
    22102077550 Med K3642 #• Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2017 with funding from Wellcome Library https://archive.org/details/b29338426 FACTS AND ARGUMENTS FOR DARWIN. BY FRITZ MÜLLER. WITH ADDITIONS BY THE AUTHOR TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN By W. S. DALLAS, F.L.S., ASSISTANT SECRETARY TO THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON. WITH ILLUSTRATIONS. LONDON: JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET. 1869. EI'/fL.U TT Cblj T« til ! 1a^: MB. DARWIN’S WORKS. A NATURALIST’S VOYAGE ROUND THE WORLD ; being a Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of Couktries Visited. Post 8vo. 9s. THE ORIGIN of SPECIES, by MEANS of NATURAL SELECTION"; or, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 15s. THE VARIOUS CONTRIVANCES by wbicb BRITISH and FOREIGN ORCHIDS are FERTILIZED by INSECTS, and on the GOOD EFFECTS of INTERCROSSING. Woodcuts. Post 8vo. 9s. THE VARIATION OF ANIMALS AND PLANTS UNDER DOMESTICATION. Illustrations. 2 vols., 8vo. 28s. TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE. My principal reason for undertaking the translation of Dr. Fritz Muller’s admirable work on the Crustacea, entitled ‘Für Darwin,’ was that it was still, although published as long ago as 1864, and highly esteemed by the author’s scientific countrymen, absolutely unknown to a great number of English naturalists, including some who have occupied themselves more or less specially with the subjects of which it treats. It possesses a value quite independent of its reference to Darwinism, due to the number of highly interesting and important facts in the natural history and par¬ ticularly the developmental history of the Crustacea, which its distinguished author, himself an unwearied and original investigator of these matters, has brought together in it.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetic Analysis of 18S Rdna of Freshwater Copepods Neodiaptomus Species and Mesocyclops Species
    See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313010364 Phylogenetic analysis of 18s rDNA of freshwater copepods neodiaptomus species and mesocyclops species Article in Journal of Advanced Zoology · December 2016 CITATION READS 1 202 5 authors, including: Sivakumar Kandasamy M.R Dhivya Shree Karpaga Vinayaga College of Engineering and Technology KLE Institute of Technology 27 PUBLICATIONS 80 CITATIONS 2 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE P. Muthupriya Kareem Altaff D.G.Vaishnav College AMET DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY 17 PUBLICATIONS 17 CITATIONS 66 PUBLICATIONS 350 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: Meiofaunal studies of Palk bay sandy beaches View project Copepods View project All content following this page was uploaded by Sivakumar Kandasamy on 28 January 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. J. Adv. Zool. 2016: 37(2): 64-74 ISSN-0253-7214 PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF 18S rDNA OF FRESHWATER COPEPODS NEODIAPTOMUS SPECIES AND MESOCYCLOPS SPECIES K. Sivakumar1, K. Archana1, M. Shree Rama1, P. Muthupriya2 and K. Altaff3 1Department of Biotechnology Karpaga Vinayaga College of Engineering and Technology GST Road, Chinna Kolambakkam, Padalam-603 308, Kanchipuram (Dt.), India 2Department of Biotechnology DG Vaishnav College, Chennai – 600 106 3Department of Zoology The New College, Chennai-600 014 †corresponding author: [email protected] ABSTRACT: The present work is emphasized on analyzing the molecular characteristics of Mesocyclops sp. and Neodiaptomus sp. Molecular markers 18s rDNA region was used to resolve the evolutionary relationship between the species. The Mesocyclops sp.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Parasitic Copepods and Their Hosts in the Western Wadden Sea in 1968 and 2010
    INVENTORY OF PARASITIC COPEPODS AND THEIR HOSTS IN THE WESTERN WADDEN SEA IN 1968 AND 2010 Wouter Koch NNIOZIOZ KKoninklijkoninklijk NNederlandsederlands IInstituutnstituut vvooroor ZZeeonderzoekeeonderzoek INVENTORY OF PARASITIC COPEPODS AND THEIR HOSTS IN THE WESTERN WADDEN SEA IN 1968 AND 2010 Wouter Koch Texel, April 2012 NIOZ Koninklijk Nederlands Instituut voor Zeeonderzoek Cover illustration The parasitic copepod Lernaeenicus sprattae (Sowerby, 1806) on its fish host, the sprat (Sprattus sprattus) Copyright by Hans Hillewaert, licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license; CC-BY-SA-3.0; Wikipedia Contents 1. Summary 6 2. Introduction 7 3. Methods 7 4. Results 8 5. Discussion 9 6. Acknowledgements 10 7. References 10 8. Appendices 12 1. Summary Ectoparasites, attaching mainly to the fins or gills, are a particularly conspicuous part of the parasite fauna of marine fishes. In particular the dominant copepods, have received much interest due to their effects on host populations. However, still little is known on the copepod fauna on fishes for many localities and their temporal stability as long-term observations are largely absent. The aim of this project was two-fold: 1) to deliver a current inventory of ectoparasitic copepods in fishes in the southern Wadden Sea around Texel and 2) to compare the current parasitic copepod fauna with the one from 1968 in the same area, using data published in an internal NIOZ report and additional unpublished original notes. In total, 47 parasite species have been recorded on 52 fish species in the southern Wadden Sea to date. The two copepod species, where quantitative comparisons between 1968 and 2010 were possible for their host, the European flounder (Platichthys flesus), showed different trends: Whereas Acanthochondria cornuta seems not to have altered its infection rate or per host abundance between years, Lepeophtheirus pectoralis has shifted towards infection of smaller hosts, as well as to a stronger increase of per-host abundance with increasing host length.
    [Show full text]
  • MIAMI UNIVERSITY the Graduate School Certificate for Approving The
    MIAMI UNIVERSITY The Graduate School Certificate for Approving the Dissertation We hereby approve the Dissertation of Sandra J. Connelly Candidate for the Degree: Doctor of Philosophy __________________________________________ Director Dr. Craig E. Williamson __________________________________________ Reader Dr. Maria González __________________________________________ Reader Dr. David L. Mitchell __________________________________________ Graduate School Representative Dr. A. John Bailer ABSTRACT EFFECTS OF ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION (UVR) INDUCED DNA DAMAGE AND OTHER ECOLOGICAL DETERMINANTS ON CRYPTOSPORIDIUM PARVUM, GIARDIA LAMBLIA, AND DAPHNIA SPP. IN FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS Sandra J. Connelly Freshwater ecosystems are especially susceptible to climatic change, including anthropogenic-induced changes, as they are directly influenced by the atmosphere and terrestrial ecosystems. A major environmental factor that potentially affects every element of an ecosystem, directly or indirectly, is ultraviolet radiation (UVR). UVR has been shown to negatively affect the DNA of aquatic organisms by the same mechanism, formation of photoproducts (cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers; CPDs), as in humans. First, the induction of CPDs by solar UVR was quantified in four aquatic and terrestrial temperate ecosystems. Data show significant variation in CPD formation not only between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems but also within a single ecosystem and between seasons. Second, there is little quantitative data on UV-induced DNA damage and the effectiveness of DNA repair mechanisms on the damage induced in freshwater invertebrates in the literature. The rate of photoproduct induction (CPDs) and DNA repair (photoenzymatic and nucleotide excision repair) in Daphnia following UVR exposures in artificial as well as two natural temperate lake systems was tested. The effect of temperature on the DNA repair rates, and ultimately the organisms’ survival, was tested under controlled laboratory conditions following artificial UVB exposure.
    [Show full text]
  • Crustaceans Topics in Biodiversity
    Topics in Biodiversity The Encyclopedia of Life is an unprecedented effort to gather scientific knowledge about all life on earth- multimedia, information, facts, and more. Learn more at eol.org. Crustaceans Authors: Simone Nunes Brandão, Zoologisches Museum Hamburg Jen Hammock, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution Frank Ferrari, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution Photo credit: Blue Crab (Callinectes sapidus) by Jeremy Thorpe, Flickr: EOL Images. CC BY-NC-SA Defining the crustacean The Latin root, crustaceus, "having a crust or shell," really doesn’t entirely narrow it down to crustaceans. They belong to the phylum Arthropoda, as do insects, arachnids, and many other groups; all arthropods have hard exoskeletons or shells, segmented bodies, and jointed limbs. Crustaceans are usually distinguishable from the other arthropods in several important ways, chiefly: Biramous appendages. Most crustaceans have appendages or limbs that are split into two, usually segmented, branches. Both branches originate on the same proximal segment. Larvae. Early in development, most crustaceans go through a series of larval stages, the first being the nauplius larva, in which only a few limbs are present, near the front on the body; crustaceans add their more posterior limbs as they grow and develop further. The nauplius larva is unique to Crustacea. Eyes. The early larval stages of crustaceans have a single, simple, median eye composed of three similar, closely opposed parts. This larval eye, or “naupliar eye,” often disappears later in development, but on some crustaceans (e.g., the branchiopod Triops) it is retained even after the adult compound eyes have developed. In all copepod crustaceans, this larval eye is retained throughout their development as the 1 only eye, although the three similar parts may separate and each become associated with their own cuticular lens.
    [Show full text]
  • National Monitoring Program for Biodiversity and Non-Indigenous Species in Egypt
    National monitoring program for biodiversity and non-indigenous species in Egypt January 2016 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS page Acknowledgements 3 Preamble 4 Chapter 1: Introduction 8 Overview of Egypt Biodiversity 37 Chapter 2: Institutional and regulatory aspects 39 National Legislations 39 Regional and International conventions and agreements 46 Chapter 3: Scientific Aspects 48 Summary of Egyptian Marine Biodiversity Knowledge 48 The Current Situation in Egypt 56 Present state of Biodiversity knowledge 57 Chapter 4: Development of monitoring program 58 Introduction 58 Conclusions 103 Suggested Monitoring Program Suggested monitoring program for habitat mapping 104 Suggested marine MAMMALS monitoring program 109 Suggested Marine Turtles Monitoring Program 115 Suggested Monitoring Program for Seabirds 117 Suggested Non-Indigenous Species Monitoring Program 121 Chapter 5: Implementation / Operational Plan 128 Selected References 130 Annexes 141 2 AKNOWLEGEMENTS 3 Preamble The Ecosystem Approach (EcAp) is a strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way, as stated by the Convention of Biological Diversity. This process aims to achieve the Good Environmental Status (GES) through the elaborated 11 Ecological Objectives and their respective common indicators. Since 2008, Contracting Parties to the Barcelona Convention have adopted the EcAp and agreed on a roadmap for its implementation. First phases of the EcAp process led to the accomplishment of 5 steps of the scheduled 7-steps process such as: 1) Definition of an Ecological Vision for the Mediterranean; 2) Setting common Mediterranean strategic goals; 3) Identification of an important ecosystem properties and assessment of ecological status and pressures; 4) Development of a set of ecological objectives corresponding to the Vision and strategic goals; and 5) Derivation of operational objectives with indicators and target levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarkable Convergent Evolution in Specialized Parasitic Thecostraca (Crustacea)
    Remarkable convergent evolution in specialized parasitic Thecostraca (Crustacea) Pérez-Losada, Marcos; Høeg, Jens Thorvald; Crandall, Keith A Published in: BMC Biology DOI: 10.1186/1741-7007-7-15 Publication date: 2009 Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (APA): Pérez-Losada, M., Høeg, J. T., & Crandall, K. A. (2009). Remarkable convergent evolution in specialized parasitic Thecostraca (Crustacea). BMC Biology, 7(15), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7007-7-15 Download date: 25. Sep. 2021 BMC Biology BioMed Central Research article Open Access Remarkable convergent evolution in specialized parasitic Thecostraca (Crustacea) Marcos Pérez-Losada*1, JensTHøeg2 and Keith A Crandall3 Address: 1CIBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Universidade do Porto, Campus Agrário de Vairão, Portugal, 2Comparative Zoology, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark and 3Department of Biology and Monte L Bean Life Science Museum, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA Email: Marcos Pérez-Losada* - [email protected]; Jens T Høeg - [email protected]; Keith A Crandall - [email protected] * Corresponding author Published: 17 April 2009 Received: 10 December 2008 Accepted: 17 April 2009 BMC Biology 2009, 7:15 doi:10.1186/1741-7007-7-15 This article is available from: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/7/15 © 2009 Pérez-Losada et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
    [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]
  • Cirripedia: Acrothoracica), a New Burrowing Barnacle from Hawaii
    Lhhoglyptes hirsutus (Cirripedia: Acrothoracica), A New Burrowing Barnacle from Hawaii JACK T. TOMLINSON! Two SAMPLES of coral from Kaneohe Bay, spine or hook ; aperture length exceeds Y2 of Oahu, H awaii , have each yielded a number mantle width, aperture armed with numerous of specimens of a new species of acroth oracican teeth and long flexible hairs, especially on the burrowing barnacle of the family Lithoglypti­ outer edge of the lip area; anterior and pos­ dae. Samples of Psamm ocora oerrilli Vaughan terior rami of mouth cirri with 5 and 3 articles, collected by Stephen A. W ainwright,2 and of respectively; caudal appendage with 2 seg­ Porites compressa Dana collected by Charles ments; head with acute projection opposite Srasek," were referred to me by William A. mouth area; burrow pointed oval in surface N ewman." These barnacles are the first repre­ view. H olotyp e 1.2 X 0.67 mm ; about 30 dried sentatives of the order Acrothoracica known specimens in Psamm ocora verrilli from a depth from H awaii. of 3-6 fr on Sand Bar Reef and in Porites com­ pressa from NE side Checker Reef, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Ha waii. The species is named for FAMILY LITHOGLYPTIDAE Aurivillius 1892 the presence of numerous hairs on the mantle aperture. Lithoglyptidae em end. Tomlinson and New­ TYPE MATERIAL : Holotype USNM 107544. man 1960. Para type material: San Francisco State College, Mouth cirri well developed, on a· 2-jointed San Francisco, Californi a; California Academy pedicle; 4-5 pairs of term inal cirri, but if only of Sciences, San Francisco, California; Plymouch 4 pairs, caudal app endage present; no gut teeth Laboratory, England; Seto Marine Biological or gizzard in digestive tract; with adhesive disc Laboratory, Japan; Porrobello Marine Station, on mantle ; lateral bar absent ; burrows in coral New Zealand.
    [Show full text]