DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Report 15/05/2009

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Report 15/05/2009 Final Report 15/05/2009 – 15/05/2011 Lot N°4 – Biology (SI2.531562) of the Service Contract No MARE/2008/03 on the Preparatory Actions for European Marine Observation and Data Network Simon Claus1, Leen Vandepitte1, Francisco Hernandez1 and project partners2 1: Flanders Marine Institute 2: Peter Herman, Netherlands Institute of Ecology; Centre for Estuarine and Marine Ecology Neil Holdsworth, International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Gilbert Maudire, Institut Français de Recherche pour l’Exploitation de la Mer Éamonn Ó Tuama, The Global Biodiversity Information Facility Stéphane Pesant, PANGAEA University of Bremen Dick Schaap, Marine Information Service Edward Vanden Berghe, iOBIS, Rutgers University; Institute for Marine and Coastal Sciences (IMCS) Vladimir Vladymyrov, Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine May 2011 1 2 Executive Summary A consortium of partners from across Europe and the US has joined together to deliver the requirements for EC Tender MARE/2008/03. The Biological Lot Partnership comprises government agencies and research institutions with proven national and international expertise in marine biological data management. The project builds upon the data integration activities of the FP6 NoE MarBEF, and the marine biological datasystems EurOBIS (European Ocean Biogeographic Information System) and WoRMS (World Register of Marine Species). By building the EMODnet Biological pilot upon these existing initiatives, a significant amount of European biological data became integrated, quality controlled and available online. The online data portal for EMODnet biology has been developed and is accessible at http://bio.emodnet.eu/portal/. The system can be considered as a network of distributed data systems, is OGC compliant, contains standardized data and integrates data with different levels of accessibility. The portal includes different functionalities such as the online data catalogue, a data querying service, a taxonomic ontology, a data mapping interface, a data downloading service and a help and feedback function. Both observation and monitoring data and data products can be integrated, visualized and redistributed through the data portal. From the 453 marine biological data sets and sampling programmes identified, about 60% make the presence and/or abundance data available through the portal. At this moment there are over 14 million records available in the EMODnet biological portal through EurOBIS. The best represented species groups are fish, benthos, plankton and birds. Most data come from the North Sea, English Channel, Celtic Sea, Skagerrak and Kattegat, and from between 1980-2005. Based on these data and information, a detailed gap analysis was performed, and suggestions for future incentives are proposed. During this project, several ways to improve coverage and precision of the data are explored, tested and set into practice. As biodiversity and biogeographic information are essential to measure and study the ecosystem health of maritime basins, some of the data could also be used to support the different descriptors for Good Environmental Status, currently under development by the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Information on distribution, abundance and diversity of marine species across Europe, identified as key descriptors for GES of marine waters, are available and can be retrieved from the EMODnet Biological data portal. 3 Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 3 Glossary ................................................................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction and objectives ................................................................................................................ 8 2. Description and content of the system ............................................................................................. 10 2.1. The biological data portal: system and functionalities .............................................................. 10 2.1.1. Data Portal System .............................................................................................................. 10 2.1.2. Portal Functionalities ........................................................................................................... 12 2.1.2. 1. Viewing a catalogue of the data available ................................................................... 12 2.1.2.2. Data querying ............................................................................................................... 13 2.1.2.3. Taxonomic ontology and taxa selection ....................................................................... 15 2.1.2.4. Data visualization ......................................................................................................... 16 2.1.2.5. Data attributes.............................................................................................................. 17 2.1.2.6. Data downloading ........................................................................................................ 18 2.1.2.7. Integration OGC compliant data layers ........................................................................ 19 2.1.2.8. Help and feedback function ......................................................................................... 19 2.2. Data content ............................................................................................................................... 21 2.2.1. Methodology (data management including standardization and quality control) ............. 21 2.2.1.1. General data management ........................................................................................... 21 2.2.1.2. Traceability datasets ..................................................................................................... 22 2.2.1.3. Quality control .............................................................................................................. 22 2.2.1.4. Standardization of abundance data ............................................................................. 25 2.2.2. Inventory of available data and gap analysis ...................................................................... 26 2.2.2.1. Inventory of existing datasets ...................................................................................... 26 2.2.2.2. Basic analyses of biological metadata .......................................................................... 28 2.2.2.3. Content and gaps of the European Ocean Biogeographic Information System .......... 30 2.2.2.4. Precision of EurOBIS data ............................................................................................. 37 2.2.3. Inventory of national monitoring programs per country .................................................... 39 2.2.3.1. National monitoring ..................................................................................................... 39 2.2.3.2. Regional monitoring ..................................................................................................... 43 2.2.4. Overview of data per species group, including 3 selected species per group .................... 44 2.2.4.1. Phytoplankton .............................................................................................................. 45 2.2.4.2. Zooplankton .................................................................................................................. 46 2.2.4.3. Angiosperms ................................................................................................................. 49 4 2.2.4.4. Macro-algae .................................................................................................................. 50 2.2.4.5. Invertebrate bottom fauna (benthos) .......................................................................... 51 2.2.4.6. Fish ................................................................................................................................ 53 2.2.4.7. Bird communities ......................................................................................................... 54 2.2.4.8. Sea mammals................................................................................................................ 56 2.2.4.9. Reptiles ......................................................................................................................... 58 2.2.4.10. Pigments ..................................................................................................................... 60 3. Analysis - Lessons learned ................................................................................................................. 62 3.1. Main barriers to the provision of data ....................................................................................... 62 3.2. Challenges to rendering data interoperable (including measurement techniques, standards, nomenclature …) ............................................................................................................................... 66 3.3. Challenges to producing contiguous data .................................................................................. 66 3.4. Fitness for purpose (measuring ecosystem health) ................................................................... 67 3.5. Improving accuracy, precision and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix to Taxonomic Revision of Leopold and Rudolf Blaschkas' Glass Models of Invertebrates 1888 Catalogue, with Correction
    http://www.natsca.org Journal of Natural Science Collections Title: Appendix to Taxonomic revision of Leopold and Rudolf Blaschkas’ Glass Models of Invertebrates 1888 Catalogue, with correction of authorities Author(s): Callaghan, E., Egger, B., Doyle, H., & E. G. Reynaud Source: Callaghan, E., Egger, B., Doyle, H., & E. G. Reynaud. (2020). Appendix to Taxonomic revision of Leopold and Rudolf Blaschkas’ Glass Models of Invertebrates 1888 Catalogue, with correction of authorities. Journal of Natural Science Collections, Volume 7, . URL: http://www.natsca.org/article/2587 NatSCA supports open access publication as part of its mission is to promote and support natural science collections. NatSCA uses the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ for all works we publish. Under CCAL authors retain ownership of the copyright for their article, but authors allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and/or copy articles in NatSCA publications, so long as the original authors and source are cited. TABLE 3 – Callaghan et al. WARD AUTHORITY TAXONOMY ORIGINAL SPECIES NAME REVISED SPECIES NAME REVISED AUTHORITY N° (Ward Catalogue 1888) Coelenterata Anthozoa Alcyonaria 1 Alcyonium digitatum Linnaeus, 1758 2 Alcyonium palmatum Pallas, 1766 3 Alcyonium stellatum Milne-Edwards [?] Sarcophyton stellatum Kükenthal, 1910 4 Anthelia glauca Savigny Lamarck, 1816 5 Corallium rubrum Lamarck Linnaeus, 1758 6 Gorgonia verrucosa Pallas, 1766 [?] Eunicella verrucosa 7 Kophobelemon (Umbellularia) stelliferum
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Identification of Octopodidae Species in Southern California Seafood Markets: Species Diversity and Resource Implications
    Genetic Identification of Octopodidae Species in Southern California Seafood Markets: Species Diversity and Resource Implications Chase Martin Center for Marine Biodiversity and Conservation Scripps Institution of Oceanography University of California San Diego Abstract Various species of Octopodidae are commonly found in seafood markets throughout Southern California. Most of the octopus available for purchase is imported, with the majority of imports coming from various Asian nations. Despite the diversity of global octopus species, products are most commonly labeled as simply “octopus,” with some distinctions being made in size, e.g., “baby” or “little octopus.” In efforts to characterize species diversity, this study genetically tested 59 octopus samples from a variety of seafood markets in Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego Counties. Universal 16S rRNA primers (ref) and CO1 primers developed by Folmer et al. (1994) were used for PCR amplification and sequencing of mtDNA. In all, 105 sequences were acquired. Seven species were identified with some confidence. Amphioctopus aegina was the most prevalent species, while two additional species were undetermined. Little available data exists pertaining to octopus fisheries of the countries of production of the samples. Most available information on octopus fisheries pertains to those of Mediterranean and North African nations, and identifies the Octopus vulgaris as the fished species. Characterizing octopus diversity in Southern California seafood markets and assessing labeling and countries of production provides the necessary first step for assessing the possible management implications of these fisheries and seafood supply chain logistics for this group of cephalopods. Introduction Octopuses are exclusively marine cephalopod mollusks that form the order Octopoda.
    [Show full text]
  • A Case Study with the Monospecific Genus Aegina
    MARINE BIOLOGY RESEARCH, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1080/17451000.2016.1268261 ORIGINAL ARTICLE The perils of online biogeographic databases: a case study with the ‘monospecific’ genus Aegina (Cnidaria, Hydrozoa, Narcomedusae) Dhugal John Lindsaya,b, Mary Matilda Grossmannc, Bastian Bentlaged,e, Allen Gilbert Collinsd, Ryo Minemizuf, Russell Ross Hopcroftg, Hiroshi Miyakeb, Mitsuko Hidaka-Umetsua,b and Jun Nishikawah aEnvironmental Impact Assessment Research Group, Research and Development Center for Submarine Resources, Japan Agency for Marine- Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), Yokosuka, Japan; bLaboratory of Aquatic Ecology, School of Marine Bioscience, Kitasato University, Sagamihara, Japan; cMarine Biophysics Unit, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology (OIST), Onna, Japan; dDepartment of Invertebrate Zoology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, USA; eMarine Laboratory, University of Guam, Mangilao, USA; fRyo Minemizu Photo Office, Shimizu, Japan; gInstitute of Marine Science, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska, USA; hDepartment of Marine Biology, Tokai University, Shizuoka, Japan ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Online biogeographic databases are increasingly being used as data sources for scientific papers Received 23 May 2016 and reports, for example, to characterize global patterns and predictors of marine biodiversity and Accepted 28 November 2016 to identify areas of ecological significance in the open oceans and deep seas. However, the utility RESPONSIBLE EDITOR of such databases is entirely dependent on the quality of the data they contain. We present a case Stefania Puce study that evaluated online biogeographic information available for a hydrozoan narcomedusan jellyfish, Aegina citrea. This medusa is considered one of the easiest to identify because it is one of KEYWORDS very few species with only four large tentacles protruding from midway up the exumbrella and it Biogeography databases; is the only recognized species in its genus.
    [Show full text]
  • Midwater Data Sheet
    MIDWATER TRAWL DATA SHEET RESEARCH VESSEL__________________________________(1/20/2013Version*) CLASS__________________;DATE_____________;NAME:_________________________; DEVICE DETAILS___________ LOCATION (OVERBOARD): LAT_______________________; LONG___________________________ LOCATION (AT DEPTH): LAT_______________________; LONG______________________________ LOCATION (START UP): LAT_______________________; LONG______________________________ LOCATION (ONBOARD): LAT_______________________; LONG______________________________ BOTTOM DEPTH_________; DEPTH OF SAMPLE:____________; DURATION OF TRAWL___________; TIME: IN_________AT DEPTH________START UP__________SURFACE_________ SHIP SPEED__________; WEATHER__________________; SEA STATE_________________; AIR TEMP______________ SURFACE TEMP__________; PHYS. OCE. NOTES______________________; NOTES_____________________________ INVERTEBRATES Lensia hostile_______________________ PHYLUM RADIOLARIA Lensia havock______________________ Family Tuscaroridae “Round yellow ones”___ Family Hippopodiidae Vogtia sp.___________________________ PHYLUM CTENOPHORA Family Prayidae Subfamily Nectopyramidinae Class Nuda "Pointed siphonophores"________________ Order Beroida Nectadamas sp._______________________ Family Beroidae Nectopyramis sp.______________________ Beroe abyssicola_____________________ Family Prayidae Beroe forskalii________________________ Subfamily Prayinae Beroe cucumis _______________________ Craseoa lathetica_____________________ Class Tentaculata Desmophyes annectens_________________ Subclass
    [Show full text]
  • Medusae in the Vicinity of Shimoda (With 3 Textfigures)
    Title Medusae in the Vicinity of Shimoda (With 3 textfigures) Author(s) UCHIDA, Tohru Citation 北海道大學理學部紀要, 9(4), 331-343 Issue Date 1948-07 Doc URL http://hdl.handle.net/2115/27066 Type bulletin (article) File Information 9(4)_P331-343.pdf Instructions for use Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers : HUSCAP 1 Medusae in the Vicinity of Shimoda ) By Tohru Uchida Zoological Institute, Faculty of Science, Hokkaido University (With 3 tex~,figU1'es) • This report is mainly based on the medusan specimens deposited in the museum of the Mitsui Oceanographicai Station at Shimada. The c@llection contains 28 species of Hydro- and Scyphomedusae. including several abyssal forms. Though a few deep-sea medusae were known in Japan, they w€re not studied in so great numbers as in this collection. Most of these abyssal medusae have been recorded from Japan for the first time and three species of them seem to be new to science. It seems to 'he very interesting to note -that two new 'species, Hybocodon ate;ntaculatus n. sp. and Proboscidactyla abyssicola n. sp. are featured in the lack of tentacles. The degeneration of the marginal tentacles appears to be correlated with their abyssal life. Before proceeding further, the writer should like to express his cordial thanks to Prof. 1. Ameniiya, director of the Oceanographical Station, and Tflembers of the station, ,,,ho made several facilities for the writer to study the specimens. In the following list, those with asterisk are abyssal forms and those with the mark EB are medusae which can be fo'und both in abyssal and shallow waters.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Analysis of the Locomotory Systems of Medusoid Cnidaria
    Helgol~nder wiss. Meeresunters. 25, 228-272 (1973) A comparative analysis of the locomotory systems of medusoid Cnidaria W. G. GLADFELTER Pacific Marine Station; Dillon Beach, California, USA KURZFASSUNG: Eine vergleichende Analyse der Iokomotorischen Systeme von Cnidarier- Medusen. Auf der Grundlage einer funktionell-morphologischen Analyse des lokomoto- rischen Systems bei Hydro- und Seyphomedusen wurde der Versuch unternommen, den Me- chanismus ihrer Schwimmbewegungen allgemein zu charakterisieren. An Vertretern yon ins- gesamt 42 Gattungen wurden der Bau und die funktionelle Variabilit~it des Schirmes, der Mesogloea, der Fibriiien der Mesogloea, der kontraktilen Elemente der Muskulatur und des Velums bzw. des Velariums untersucht und verglichen some eine Klassifizierung der Medusen nach der Struktur der Mesogloea und der Art der Fortbewegung vorgenommen. INTRODUCTION The most complete discussion to date of the medusa as a functioning musculo- skeletal system has been that of GLADFELTrR (1972a) for the hydromedusan Polyorchis montereyensis. In another study the very different locomotory system of the scypho- medusan Cyanea capillata has been discussed (GLADFrLT~R 1972b). Other published works on the functional morphology of medusan locomotory systems have been frag- mentary or have dealt with specialized aspects of the subiect (K~AslNSKA 1914, CHaVMAN 1953, 1959; MAC~IE 1964, CHAVMAN 1968 and others), and works on general anatomy (CguN I897, CONANT 1898, THIr~ 1938, HYMAN 1940a and others) though presenting some of the pertinent anatomy, have not discussed the locomotory system as a whole. A number of more speciaiized papers dealing with the physiology of medusan locomotion are also available but present only the essential rudiments of morphology (BULLOCK & HORRIDGE 1965, MACKIE 197t and others).
    [Show full text]
  • Description of Jubanyella Plemmyris Gen. Nov. Et Sp. Nov.(Cnidaria: Hydrozoa: Narcomedusae) from a Specimen Stranded Off Jubany Antarctic Station, with a New Diagnosis for the Family
    JOURNAL OF PLANKTON RESEARCH j VOLUME 28 j NUMBER 10 j PAGES 959–963 j 2006 SHORT COMMUNICATION Description of Jubanyella plemmyris gen. nov. et sp. nov. (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa: Narcomedusae) from a specimen stranded off Jubany Antarctic station, with a new diagnosis for the family Aeginidae VERO´ NICA FUENTES1,2* AND FRANCESC PAGE` S3 1 2 ALFRED-WEGENER-INSTITUT FU¨ R POLAR—UND MEERESFORSCHUNG, COLUMBUSSTRAßE, 27568 BREMERHAVEN, GERMANY, FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS 3 EXACTAS Y NATURALES, UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES, 1428 BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA AND INSTITUT DE CIE` NCIES DEL MAR (CSIC), PASSEIG MARI´TIM DE LA BARCELONETA 37-49, 08003 BARCELONA, CATALONIA, SPAIN *CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: [email protected] Received November 15, 2005; accepted in principle December 12, 2005; accepted for publication July 6, 2006; published online July 22, 2006 Communicating editor: K.J. Flynn Jubanyella plemmyris, a new genus and species of aeginid narcomedusan, is described from one complete specimen stranded on Potter Cove beach, King George Island, Southern Ocean. The new genus and species is proposed in order to accommodate the specimen described in the family Aeginidae; Jubanyella gen. nov. contains undivided stomach pouches, therefore necessitating a new diagnosis for this family. INTRODUCTION Descriptions of new species of medusae based on stranded specimens are unusual, and to our knowledge, only the Zooplankton mass strandings are occasionally reported in scyphomedusa Eupilema inexpectata from the Benguela the Southern Ocean (Davenport, 1995). In Potter Cove Current has previously been described in this way (Page`s beach, off the Argentinean base Jubany on King George et al., 1992). The present study describes the new genus and Island, this is a recurrent event in summer (Davenport, species, provides a new diagnosis of the family Aeginidae 1995; Favero, 1995; Pakhomov et al., 2003; V.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hydrozoa: a New Classification in the Ligth of Old Knowledge
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Open Marine Archive Phylogeny and Classification of Hydroidomedusae THE HYDROZOA: A NEW CLASSIFICATION IN THE LIGTH OF OLD KNOWLEDGE. Jean Bouillon (1) and Ferdinando Boero (2) (1) Laboratoire de Biologie Marine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 50 Ave F. D. Roosevelt, 1050 Bruxelles, Belgium. (2) Dipartimento di Biologia, Stazione di Biologia Marina, Università di Lecce, 73100 Lecce, Italy. RUNNING TITLE: Hydrozoa Classification Corresponding author: Ferdinando Boero Dipartimento di Biologia Università di Lecce 73100 Lecce Italy Tel. +39 0832 320619 Fax +39 0832 320702 Email: [email protected] 3 Thalassia Salentina n. 24/2000 ABSTRACT The Hydrozoa, on the basis of embryological, developmental and morphological features, are considered as a superclass of the phylum Cnidaria comprising three classes: the Automedusa (with the subclasses: Actinulidae, Narcomedusae and Trachymedusae), characterised by direct development of the planula into a medusa; the Hydroidomedusa (with the subclasses: Anthomedusae, Laingiomedusae, Leptomedusae, Limnomedusae, and Siphonophorae), characterised by a polyp stage budding medusae through a medusary nodule; and the Polypodiozoa, with complex endocellular parasitic life cycles. KEY WORDS: Cnidaria, Hydrozoa, Automedusa, Hydroidomedusa, Polypodiozoa, life cycles, development, classification, phylogeny 4 Phylogeny and Classification of Hydroidomedusae "If you look for new ideas, read old literature!!" Pierre Tardent, 1993. INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogeny of Medusozoa and the Evolution of Cnidarian Life Cycles
    Phylogeny of Medusozoa and the evolution of cnidarian life cycles A. G. COLLINS Museum of Palaeontology, Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA Keywords: Abstract Cubozoa; To investigate the evolution of cnidarian life cycles, data from the small development; subunit of the ribosome are used to derive a phylogenetic hypothesis for Hydrozoa; Medusozoa. These data indicate that Cnidaria is monophyletic and composed Scyphozoa; of Anthozoa and Medusozoa. While Cubozoa and Hydrozoa are well Stauromedusae. supported clades, Scyphozoa appears to be paraphyletic. Stauromedusae is possibly the sister group of either Cubozoa or all other medusozoans. The phylogenetic results suggest that: the polyp probably preceded the medusa in the evolution of Cnidaria; within Hydrozoa, medusa development involving the entocodon is ancestral; within Trachylina, the polyp was lost and subsequently regained in the parasitic narcomedusans; within Siphonophorae, the float originated prior to swimming bells; stauromedusans are not likely to be descended from ancestors that produced medusae by strobilation; and cubozoan polyps are simplified from those of their ancestors, which possessed polyps with gastric septa and four mesogleal muscle bands and peristomial pits. Introduction Anthozoa is the sister group of the remaining cnidarians, which are collectively referred to as Medusozoa The considerable morphological disparity present within (Petersen, 1979), or less often as Tesserazoa (Salvini- Cnidaria is evidenced by delicate siphonophores, massive Plawen, 1978). Particularly convincing evidence for the medusae and corals, feathery hydroids, interstitial polyps monophyly of medusozoans is their shared possession of and box jellies possessing complex eyes. Despite this linear mitochondrial genomes (Bridge et al., 1992) and diversity, these relatively simple metazoans are united in medusae.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysing the Content of the European Ocean Biogeographic Information System (Eurobis): Available Data, Limitations, Prospects and a Look at the Future
    Hydrobiologia (2011) 667:1-14 DOI 10.1007/s 10750-011 -0656-x REVIEW PAPER Analysing the content of the European Ocean Biogeographic Information System (EurOBIS): available data, limitations, prospects and a look at the future Leen Vandepitte • Francisco Hernandez • Simon Claus • Bart Vanhoorne • Nathalie De Hauwere • Klaas Deneudt • Ward Appeltans • Jan Mees Received: 30 August 2010/Revised: 26 January 2011/Accepted: 26 February 2011/Published online: 25 March 2011 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 Abstract The European Ocean Biogeographic million distribution records of which almost 12.5 Information System—EurOBIS—is an integrated data million records are species level identifications. It is system developed by the Flanders Marine Institute now the largest online searchable public source of (VLIZ) for the EU Network of Excellence “Marine European marine biological data, holding biogeo­ Biodiversity and Ecosystem Functioning” (MarBEF) graphical information on 26,801 species and 9,221 in 2004. Its principle aims are to centralise the largely genera. EurOBIS acts as the European node of OBIS, scattered biogeographical data on marine species the Ocean Biogeographic Information System of the collected by European institutions and to make these Census of Marine Life (CoML). EurOBIS shares its quality-controlled data freely available and easily data with OBIS, which in its turn shares its content accessible. It is in essence a distributed system in with the Global Biodiversity Information Facility which individual datasets go through a series of (GBIF). This article describes the status of the Euro­ quality control procedures before they are integrated pean Ocean Biogeographic Information System, into one large consolidated database.
    [Show full text]
  • Phylogenetics of Trachylina (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) with New Insights on the Evolution of Some Problematical Taxa Allen G
    Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 2008, 88(8), 1673–1685. #2008 Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom doi:10.1017/S0025315408001732 Printed in the United Kingdom Phylogenetics of Trachylina (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) with new insights on the evolution of some problematical taxa allen g. collins1, bastian bentlage2, alberto lindner3, dhugal lindsay4, steven h.d. haddock5, gerhard jarms6, jon l. norenburg7, thomas jankowski8 and paulyn cartwright2 1NMFS, National Systematics Laboratory, National Museum of Natural History, MRC-153, Smithsonian Institution, PO Box 37012, Washington, DC 20013-7012, USA, 2Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Kansas, 1200 Sunnyside Avenue, Lawrence, KS 66045, USA, 3Centro de Biologia Marinha—USP–Rodovia Manoel Hipo´lito do Rego, Km 131, 5—Sa˜o Sebastia˜o, SP, Brazil, 4Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), Yokosuka, Japan, 5Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, 7700 Sandholdt Road, Moss Landing, CA 95039, USA, 6Biozentrum Grindel und Zoologisches Museum, Universita¨t Hamburg, Martin-Luther-King Platz 3, 20146 Hamburg, Germany, 7Smithsonian Institution, PO Box 37012, Invertebrate Zoology, NMNH, W-216, MRC163, Washington, DC 20013-7012, USA, 8Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Du¨bendorf 8600, Switzerland Some of the most interesting and enigmatic cnidarians are classified within the hydrozoan subclass Trachylina. Despite being relatively depauperate in species richness, the clade contains four taxa typically accorded ordinal status: Actinulida, Limnomedusae, Narcomedusae and Trachymedusae. We bring molecular data (mitochondrial 16S and nuclear small and large subunit ribosomal genes) to bear on the question of phylogenetic relationships within Trachylina. Surprisingly, we find that a diminutive polyp form, Microhydrula limopsicola (classified within Limnomedusae) is actually a previously unknown life stage of a species of Stauromedusae.
    [Show full text]
  • Aegina Citrea – Case Study Treated As a Single Species for the Last >50 Years
    The perils of bad taxonomy for leading edge science: a case study with the genus Aegina, and the consequences for Deep Learning Dhugal Lindsay (JAMSTEC), Mary Grossmann, Mitsuko Hidaka (JAMSTEC/Kitasato U.), Jun Nishikawa (Tokai U.), Hiroshi Miyake (Kitasato U.), Ryo Minemizu, Russell Hopcro (U. Alaska), Basan Bentlage（U. Guam）, Allen Collins（Smithsonian）, Takehisa Yamakita (JAMSTEC), Hiroyuki Yamamoto (JAMSTEC) Aegina citrea – Case Study Treated as a single species for the last >50 years Narcomedusae Aeginidae Kramp (1961) synonymized 1 Aegina rosea Eschscholtz, 1829 2 Aegina rhodina Haeckel, 1879 3 Aegina eschscholtzii Haeckel, 1879 4 Aegina lactea Vanhöffen, 1908 5 Aegina brunnea Vanhöffen, 1908 6 Aegina alternans Bigelow, 1909 7 Aegina pentanema Kishinouye, 1910 8 Cunarcha aeginoides Haeckel, 1879 Basically, any narcomedusa with 4-6 tentacles, 8-12 stomach pouches and a peripheral canal system were all relegated to this one species Aegina citrea: A Poster Child for determining environmental niches and assessing the effects of climate change Aegina citrea What data is in OBIS? Aegina citrea (Year 2050 range) Suitable habitat for A. citrea based on current biogeographic data 三陸沖 the small, transparent morphotype with longEr tentacles occurred mainly in subducted sub-polar water masses surely a different species... We pointed out in this 2008 paper that Aegina citrea and A. rosea were genecally differEnt enough to be put in 2 separate families Dhugal Lindsayour “A. rosea” our “A. citrea” Sargasso Sea N-E Pacific combined 16S, SSU, and LSU data However to our dismay... Aegina rosea small subunit 18S ribosomal RNA gene, paral sequence GenBank: EU247813.1 Aegina rosea small subunit 18S ribosomal RNA gene FASTA Graphics PopSet Go to: LOCUS EU247813 1739 bp DNA linear INV 05-MAY-2014 DEFINITION Aegina rosea small subunit 18S ribosomal RNA gene, paral sequence.
    [Show full text]