DOCSLIB.ORG

Ch. 15 Classification Systems Why Classify?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ch. 15 Classification Systems Why Classify? Ch. 15 Classification Systems Taxonomy Why Classify? • 2.5 million known species! • Another 20 million unknown species! • We need a system of biological classification that names and orders organisms in a logical manner. – Universally accepted name. – Groups with real biological meaning 1 Biological Classification • Early biological classification used a lot of detail. – Example: “Oak with deeply divided leaves that have no hairs on their undersides and no teeth around their edges” – Problems with this system • Too difficult to use. • Different scientists used different descriptions for the same organism. • Latin is used in classification. – Understood by scientists everywhere. Carolus Linnaeus (Carl von Linne) • Binomial nomenclature – Each organism has a two part name. – Genus species – Must be italicized – The first letter of the genus must be capital. – Examples: Acer rubrum (red maple), Acer palmatum (leaf that resembles a human hand) 2 Carolus Linnaeus • Organisms that share characteristics are grouped together. • Taxa – the group to which an organism is assigned. • Taxonomy – the science of naming organisms and assigning them to these groups. • Current classification rules governed by the International Codes of Zoological or of Botonical Nomenclature (ICZN or ICBN) Linnaeus’ Classification System – Hierarchy • Species – population of organisms that share similar characteristics and that can breed with one another.** 3 Linnaeus’ Classification System – Hierarchy • Genus – Similar species but cannot breed with one another. – Examples: Felis domesticus (house cat) and Felis concolor (mountain lion) – Examples: Ursus arctos (Grizzly bear) and Ursus americanus (Black bear) • Similar feet, teeth and claws but are distinct species. Linnaeus’ Classification System – Hierarchy • Families – Groups of genera (genus plural) which share many common characteristics. – Examples: Panthera leo (lions) , Panthera tigris (tigers), Felis domesticus (house cat), and Felis concolor (mountain lion) • Belong to the family Felidae (catlike animals) – Examples: Ursus arctos (Grizzly bear), Ursus americanus (Black bear) and Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant panda) • Belong to the family Ursidae (Bear like animals) 4 Linnaeus’ Classification System – Hierarchy • Order – Several families of similar organisms. – Example: Felidae (cats) and Canidae (dogs). – Examples: Ursus arctos (Grizzly bear), Ursus americanus (Black bear), Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant panda) and Vulpes vulpes (Red fox) • Belong to the order Carnivora (meat eaters) Linnaeus’ Classification System – Hierarchy • Class – Grouping of orders – Examples: Ursus arctos (Grizzly bear), Ursus americanus (Black bear), Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant panda), Vulpes vulpes (Red fox) and Sciurus carolinensis (grey squirrel) • Belong to the class Mammalia • A “class of vertebrate, air-breathing animals whose females are characterized by the possession of mammary glands while both males and females are characterized by sweat glands, hair and/or fur, three middle ear bones used in hearing, and a neocortex region in the brain.” - Wikipedia 5 Linnaeus’ Classification System – Hierarchy • Phylum – several classes can be placed into a phylum – Examples: Ursus arctos (Grizzly bear), Ursus americanus (Black bear), Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant panda), Vulpes vulpes (Red fox), Sciurus carolinensis (grey squirrel) and Aspidelaps lubricus (coral snake) – Belong to the phylum chordata (Have a nerve cord) Linnaeus’ Classification System – Hierarchy • Kingdom – All phyla belong to one of the six kingdoms. 6 The Species Dilemma. • There is a debate among scientists on the definition of a species. • Some closely related species interbreed. – Example: Different species of mice may interbreed, some species of monkey interbreed. • Some organisms within a species are slightly different and some may consider them a separate species. – Example: Birds of the same species may have slightly different coloration. The Species Dilemma. • Some organisms reproduce asexually. – Example: bdelloid rotifers are all female and produce embryos without the need for sperm. • What about microorganisms such as bacteria? – Classifying them by what they eat (metabolism) is not easy. • Example: Some E.Coli are harmless while others are deadly. Both eat the same type of food. – They all look alike. – Rarely reproduce sexually. 7 8 Phylocode • Linnaeus lived a century before Darwin’s publication of Origin of the Species. • Push for a new system based on evolutionary relationships not based on common characteristics. • Phylocode – Names organized based on evolutionary relationships – Look for common ancestors and group into “clades” – International Society for Phylogenic Nomenclature 9 The Species Dilemma • The solution may be to define a species using several approaches. 10 11.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dental and Temporomandibular Joint Pathology of the Kit Fox (Vulpes Macrotis)
    Author's Personal Copy J. Comp. Path. 2019, Vol. 167, 60e72 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/jcpa DISEASE IN WILDLIFE OR EXOTIC SPECIES Dental and Temporomandibular Joint Pathology of the Kit Fox (Vulpes macrotis) N. Yanagisawa*, R. E. Wilson*, P. H. Kass† and F. J. M. Verstraete* *Department of Surgical and Radiological Sciences and † Department of Population Health and Reproduction, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of California, Davis, California, USA Summary Skull specimens from 836 kit foxes (Vulpes macrotis) were examined macroscopically according to predefined criteria; 559 specimens were included in this study. The study group consisted of 248 (44.4%) females, 267 (47.8%) males and 44 (7.9%) specimens of unknown sex; 128 (22.9%) skulls were from young adults and 431 (77.1%) were from adults. Of the 23,478 possible teeth, 21,883 teeth (93.2%) were present for examina- tion, 45 (1.9%) were absent congenitally, 405 (1.7%) were acquired losses and 1,145 (4.9%) were missing ar- tefactually. No persistent deciduous teeth were observed. Eight (0.04%) supernumerary teeth were found in seven (1.3%) specimens and 13 (0.06%) teeth from 12 (2.1%) specimens were malformed. Root number vari- ation was present in 20.3% (403/1,984) of the present maxillary and mandibular first premolar teeth. Eleven (2.0%) foxes had lesions consistent with enamel hypoplasia and 77 (13.8%) had fenestrations in the maxillary alveolar bone. Periodontitis and attrition/abrasion affected the majority of foxes (71.6% and 90.5%, respec- tively).
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Bear (Ursus Arctos) John Schoen and Scott Gende Images by John Schoen
    Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) John Schoen and Scott Gende images by John Schoen Two hundred years ago, brown (also known as grizzly) bears were abundant and widely distributed across western North America from the Mississippi River to the Pacific and from northern Mexico to the Arctic (Trevino and Jonkel 1986). Following settlement of the west, brown bear populations south of Canada declined significantly and now occupy only a fraction of their original range, where the brown bear has been listed as threatened since 1975 (Servheen 1989, 1990). Today, Alaska remains the last stronghold in North America for this adaptable, large omnivore (Miller and Schoen 1999) (Fig 1). Brown bears are indigenous to Southeastern Alaska (Southeast), and on the northern islands they occur in some of the highest-density FIG 1. Brown bears occur throughout much of southern populations on earth (Schoen and Beier 1990, Miller et coastal Alaska where they are closely associated with salmon spawning streams. Although brown bears and grizzly bears al. 1997). are the same species, northern and interior populations are The brown bear in Southeast is highly valued by commonly called grizzlies while southern coastal populations big game hunters, bear viewers, and general wildlife are referred to as brown bears. Because of the availability of abundant, high-quality food (e.g. salmon), brown bears enthusiasts. Hiking up a fish stream on the northern are generally much larger, occur at high densities, and have islands of Admiralty, Baranof, or Chichagof during late smaller home ranges than grizzly bears. summer reveals a network of deeply rutted bear trails winding through tunnels of devil’s club (Oplopanx (Klein 1965, MacDonald and Cook 1999) (Fig 2).
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of Cougars (Puma Concolor) in North-Central Montana
    Ecology of Cougars (Puma concolor) in north-central Montana: Distribution, resource selection, dynamics, harvest, and conservation design Chippewa Cree Tribal Wildlife Program In cooperation with World Wildlife Fund Northern Great Plains Program Bozeman, Montana Final Report April 2012 Kyran Kunkel1, Tim Vosburgh2, and Hugh Robinson3 1World Wildlife Fund; presently University of Montana, Gallatin Gateway, MT; 2Chippewa Cree Tribal Wildlife Program; presently Bureau of Land Management, Lander, WY; 3University of Montana; presently Panthera, New York, NY Space for Cougar photo Photo credit: Kyran Kunkel 1 Ecology of Cougars (Puma concolor) in north-central Montana: Distribution, resource selection, dynamics, harvest, and conservation design Kyran Kunkel, Tim Vosburgh, and Hugh Robinson Chippewa Cree Tribal Wildlife Program in cooperation with World Wildlife Fund, Final Report April 2012 Citation: Kunkel, K, T. Vosburgh, and H. Robinson. 2012. Ecology of cougars (Puma concolor) in north-central Montana. Final Report to the US Fish and Wildlife Service. World Wildlife Fund Northern Great Plains Program 202 S. Black, Ste 3 Bozeman, MT 59715 P.O. Box 7276 Bozeman, Montana 59771 (406) 582-0236 To learn more, visit www.worldwildlife.org/ngp/ ©2010 WWF. All rights reserved by the World Wildlife Fund, Inc. 2 1. Introduction opportunity. Information about cougar recolonization and ecol- Increasing attention is being directed to ecological ogy of established populations will greatly enhance restoration in North American grasslands (Forrest et understanding and management of cougars in the al. 2004), particularly with respect to species that grasslands and prairie breaks of north-central Mon- have been lost or eliminated from these systems. tana. This is especially important because cougars Some species, notably wolf (Canis lupus), bear (Ursus have been little studied in this type of landscape (Wil- spp.), and cougar are expanding in Montana through liams 1992) and very little work has been conducted reintroductions and natural recolonization.
    [Show full text]
  • History and Status of the American Black Bear in Mississippi
    History and status of the American black bear in Mississippi Stephanie L. Simek1,5, Jerrold L. Belant1, Brad W. Young2, Catherine Shropshire3, and Bruce D. Leopold4 1Carnivore Ecology Laboratory, Forest and Wildlife Research Center, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA 2Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Parks, 1505 Eastover Drive, Jackson, MS 39211, USA 3Mississippi Wildlife Federation, 517 Cobblestone Court, Suite 2, Madison, MS 39110, USA 4Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Aquaculture, Mississippi State University, Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA Abstract: Historically abundant throughout Mississippi, American black bears (Ursus americanus) have declined due to habitat loss and overharvest. By the early 1900s, the bear population was estimated at ,12 individuals, and Mississippi closed black bear hunting in 1932. However, habitat loss continued and by 1980 suitable habitat was estimated at 20% (20,234 km2) of historic levels (101,171 km2) with the decline continuing. Although black bear abundance is currently unknown, a recent increase in occurrence reports and documented reproduction suggests the population may be increasing. There have been 21 reported nuisance complaints since 2006, of which 7 were apiary damage. Additionally, 31 bear mortalities were reported since 1972; 80% were human caused. Government and private organizations have emphasized education on bear ecology and human–bear coexistence, while habitat restoration through land retirement programs (e.g.,
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of the European Badger (Meles Meles) in the Western Carpathian Mountains: a Review
    Wildl. Biol. Pract., 2016 Aug 12(3): 36-50 doi:10.2461/wbp.2016.eb.4 REVIEW Ecology of the European Badger (Meles meles) in the Western Carpathian Mountains: A Review R.W. Mysłajek1,*, S. Nowak2, A. Rożen3, K. Kurek2, M. Figura2 & B. Jędrzejewska4 1 Institute of Genetics and Biotechnology, Faculty of Biology, University of Warsaw, Pawińskiego 5a, 02-106 Warszawa, Poland. 2 Association for Nature “Wolf”, Twardorzeczka 229, 34-324 Lipowa, Poland. 3 Institute of Environmental Sciences, Jagiellonian University, Gronostajowa 7, 30-387 Kraków, Poland. 4 Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Waszkiewicza 1c, 17-230 Białowieża, Poland. * Corresponding author email: [email protected]. Keywords Abstract Altitudinal Gradient; This article summarizes the results of studies on the ecology of the European Diet Composition; badger (Meles meles) conducted in the Western Carpathians (S Poland) Meles meles; from 2002 to 2010. Badgers inhabiting the Carpathians use excavated setts Mustelidae; (53%), caves and rock crevices (43%), and burrows under human-made Sett Utilization; constructions (4%) as permanent shelters. Excavated setts are located up Spatial Organization. to 640 m a.s.l., but shelters in caves and crevices can be found as high as 1,050 m a.s.l. Badger setts are mostly located on slopes with southern, eastern or western exposure. Within their territories, ranging from 3.35 to 8.45 km2 (MCP100%), badgers may possess 1-12 setts. Family groups are small (mean = 2.3 badgers), population density is low (2.2 badgers/10 km2), as is reproduction (0.57 young/year/10 km2). Hunting by humans is the main mortality factor (0.37 badger/year/10 km2).
    [Show full text]
  • Periodic Status Review for the Steller Sea Lion
    STATE OF WASHINGTON January 2015 Periodic Status Review for the Steller Sea Lion Gary J. Wiles The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife maintains a list of endangered, threatened, and sensitive species (Washington Administrative Codes 232-12-014 and 232-12-011, Appendix E). In 1990, the Washington Wildlife Commission adopted listing procedures developed by a group of citizens, interest groups, and state and federal agencies (Washington Administrative Code 232-12-297, Appendix A). The procedures include how species listings will be initiated, criteria for listing and delisting, a requirement for public review, the development of recovery or management plans, and the periodic review of listed species. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife is directed to conduct reviews of each endangered, threatened, or sensitive wildlife species at least every five years after the date of its listing. The reviews are designed to include an update of the species status report to determine whether the status of the species warrants its current listing status or deserves reclassification. The agency notifies the general public and specific parties who have expressed their interest to the Department of the periodic status review at least one year prior to the five-year period so that they may submit new scientific data to be included in the review. The agency notifies the public of its recommendation at least 30 days prior to presenting the findings to the Fish and Wildlife Commission. In addition, if the agency determines that new information suggests that the classification of a species should be changed from its present state, the agency prepares documents to determine the environmental consequences of adopting the recommendations pursuant to requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act.
    [Show full text]
  • SPECIES REPORT Sierra Nevada Red Fox (Vulpes Vulpes Necator)
    SPECIES REPORT Sierra Nevada Red Fox (Vulpes vulpes necator) U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE August 14, 2015 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 4 ACRONYMS AND SUBSTITUTIONS USED ............................................................................. 4 SPECIES AND SUBSPECIES DESCRIPTION ............................................................................ 5 TAXONOMY AND GENETICS ................................................................................................... 6 Taxonomic History and Relationship to Other Fox Subspecies ........................................... 6 Genetics ...................................................................................................................................... 7 RANGE AND DISTRIBUTION .................................................................................................... 8 Historical Range ........................................................................................................................ 8 Map 1: SNRF Historical Range in California .................................................................... 9 Current Distribution ............................................................................................................... 10 Map 2: SNRF Sighting Areas............................................................................................. 12 Table 1: SNRF Sighting Areas ..........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Os Répteis De Angola: História, Diversidade, Endemismo E Hotspots
    CAPÍTULO 13 OS RÉPTEIS DE ANGOLA: HISTÓRIA, DIVERSIDADE, ENDEMISMO E HOTSPOTS William R. Branch1,2, Pedro Vaz Pinto3,4, Ninda Baptista1,4,5 e Werner Conradie1,6,7 Resumo O estado actual do conhecimento sobre a diversidade dos répteis de Angola é aqui tratada no contexto da história da investigação herpe‑ tológica no país. A diversidade de répteis é comparada com a diversidade conhecida em regiões adjacentes de modo a permitir esclarecer questões taxonómicas e padrões biogeográficos. No final do século xix, mais de 67% dos répteis angolanos encontravam‑se descritos. Os estudos estag‑ naram durante o século seguinte, mas aumentaram na última década. Actualmente, são conhecidos pelo menos 278 répteis, mas foram feitas numerosas novas descobertas durante levantamentos recentes e muitas espécies novas aguardam descrição. Embora a diversidade dos lagartos e das cobras seja praticamente idêntica, a maioria das novas descobertas verifica‑se nos lagartos, particularmente nas osgas e lacertídeos. Destacam‑ ‑se aqui os répteis angolanos mal conhecidos e outros de regiões adjacentes que possam ocorrer no país. A maioria dos répteis endémicos angolanos é constituída por lagartos e encontra ‑se associada à escarpa e à região árida do Sudoeste. Está em curso a identificação de hotspots de diversidade de 1 National Geographic Okavango Wilderness Project, Wild Bird Trust, South Africa 2 Research Associate, Department of Zoology, P.O. Box 77000, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth 6031, South Africa 3 Fundação Kissama, Rua 60, Casa 560, Lar do Patriota, Luanda, Angola 4 CIBIO ‑InBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, Laboratório Associado, Campus de Vairão, Universidade do Porto, 4485 ‑661 Vairão, Portugal 5 ISCED, Instituto Superior de Ciências da Educação da Huíla, Rua Sarmento Rodrigues s/n, Lubango, Angola 6 School of Natural Resource Management, George Campus, Nelson Mandela University, George 6530, South Africa 7 Port Elizabeth Museum (Bayworld), P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 POLAR BEAR (Ursus Maritimus): Chukchi/Bering Seas Stock STOCK
    Revised: 01/01/2010 POLAR BEAR (Ursus maritimus): Chukchi/Bering Seas Stock STOCK DEFINITION AND GEOGRAPHIC RANGE Polar bears are circumpolar in their distribution in the northern hemisphere. They occur in several largely discrete stocks or populations (Harington 1968). Polar bear movements are extensive and individual activity areas are enormous (Garner et al. 1990, Amstrup et al. 2000). The parameters used by Dizon et al. (1992) to classify stocks based on the phylogeographic approach were considered in the determination of stock separation in Alaska. Several polar bear stocks are known to be shared between countries (Amstrup et al. 1986, Amstrup and DeMaster 1988). Lentfer hypothesized that in Alaska two stocks exist, the Southern Beaufort Sea (SBS) and the Chukchi/Bering seas (CBS), based upon: (a) variations in levels of heavy metal contaminants of organ tissues (Lentfer 1976, Figure 1. Map of the Southern Beaufort Sea and the Chukchi/ Lentfer and Galster 1987); (b) morphological Bering seas polar bear stocks. characteristics (Manning 1971, Lentfer 1974, Wilson 1976); (c) physical oceanographic features which segregate the Chukchi Sea and Bering Sea stock from the Beaufort Sea stock (Lentfer 1974); and (d) movement information collected from mark and recapture studies of adult female bears (Lentfer 1974, 1983) (Figure 1). Information on contaminants (Woshner et al. 2001, Evans 2004a, Evans 2004b, Kannan et al. 2005, Smithwick et al. 2005, Verreault et al. 2005, Muir et al. 2006, Smithwick et al. 2006, Kannan et al. 2007, Rush et al. 2008) and movement data using satellite collars (Amstrup et al. 2004, Amstrup et al. 2005) continue to support the presence of these two stocks.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Biology of the Tibetan Fox (Vulpes Ferrilata)
    Harris et al. Biology of Tibetan fox Canid News Copyright © 2008 by the IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group. ISSN 1478-2677 The following is the established format for referencing this article: Harris et al. 2008. Notes on the biology of the Tibetan fox. Canid News 11.1 [online] URL: http://www.canids.org/canidnews/11/ Biology_of_Tibetan_fox.pdf. Research Report Notes on the biology of the Tibetan fox Richard B. Harris1*, Wang Zhenghuan2, Zhou Jiake1, and Liu Qunxiu2 1 Department of Ecosystem and Conservation Sciences, College of Forestry and Conservation, Univer- sity of Montana, Missoula, Montana, USA. 2 School of Life Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China. * Correspondence author. Email: [email protected] Keywords: body size; brown bear; China; mating; Ursus arctos; Vulpes ferrilata; whelping Abstract Introduction We report on three aspects of the biology of Until recently, biological data on the Tibetan Tibetan foxes Vulpes ferrilata for which existing fox was gained mostly from anecdotal reports, literature is either absent or misleading. Our observations of their sign, or hunting records two field studies in western China each in- (e.g. Gong and Hu 2003; Schaller and Gisnberg volved capture (and subsequent radio- 2004; Wang et al. 2003, 2004, 2007). Because marking) of foxes, allowing us to refine exist- Tibetan foxes live in remote, mountainous en- ing information on body size and mass. Ti- vironments and are rarely observed in the betan foxes we captured were somewhat lar- wild, some aspects of their biology have been ger and heavier than the current literature difficult to document.
    [Show full text]
  • Early German Herpetological Observations and Explorations in Southern Africa, with Special Reference to the Zoological Museum of Berlin
    Bonner zoologische Beiträge Band 52 (2003) Heft 3/4 Seiten 193–214 Bonn, November 2004 Early German Herpetological Observations and Explorations in Southern Africa, With Special Reference to the Zoological Museum of Berlin Aaron M. BAUER Department of Biology, Villanova University, Villanova, Pennsylvania, USA Abstract. The earliest herpetological records made by Germans in southern Africa were casual observations of common species around Cape Town made by employees of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) during the mid- to late Seven- teenth Century. Most of these records were merely brief descriptions or lists of common names, but detailed illustrations of many reptiles were executed by two German illustrators in the employ of the VOC, Heinrich CLAUDIUS and Johannes SCHUMACHER. CLAUDIUS, who accompanied Simon VAN DER STEL to Namaqualand in 1685, left an especially impor- tant body of herpetological illustrations which are here listed and identified to species. One of the last Germans to work for the Dutch in South Africa was Martin Hinrich Carl LICHTENSTEIN who served as a physician and tutor to the last Dutch governor of the Cape from 1802 to 1806. Although he did not collect any herpetological specimens himself, LICHTENSTEIN, who became the director of the Zoological Museum in Berlin in 1813, influenced many subsequent workers to undertake employment and/or expeditions in southern Africa. Among the early collectors were Karl BERGIUS and Ludwig KREBS. Both collected material that is still extant in the Berlin collection today, including a small number of reptile types. Because of LICHTENSTEIN’S emphasis on specimens as items for sale to other museums rather than as subjects for study, many species first collected by KREBS were only described much later on the basis of material ob- tained by other, mostly British, collectors.
    [Show full text]
  • First Osteosarcoma Reported from a New World Elapid Snake and Review of Reptilian Bony
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/461202; this version posted November 4, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 1 First Osteosarcoma Reported from a New World Elapid Snake and Review of Reptilian Bony 2 Tumors 3 Alexander S. Hall1,2,3, Justin L. Jacobs1, and Eric N. Smith1 4 5 Suggested running head: Elapid osteosarcoma 6 7 8 1Department of Biology, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas 76019, USA 9 2Present address: Thermo Fisher Scientific, 16700 Park Row Drive, Houston, Texas 77084, USA 10 3Corresponding author. Phone number: 713-375-1318. E-mail: [email protected] 11 12 Running Head: Elapid Osteosarcoma bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/461202; this version posted November 4, 2018. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. Elapid Osteosarcoma 2 13 Abstract 14 Cancer chiefly occurs in vertebrates. Rare in amphibians, and perhaps common in 15 reptiles, various neoplasms and malignant cancers have been reported with erratic frequency by 16 museums, paleontologists, veterinarians, and pet hobbyists. Unsurprisingly, most herpetofaunal 17 diversity has never been systematically surveyed for the presence of neoplasms owing to the 18 extreme rarity or obscurity of many species.
    [Show full text]