From sutevsk from univer.kharkov.ua Thu May 1 15:42:00 2008 From: sutevsk from univer.kharkov.ua (Serge Utevsky) Date: Thu May 1 15:48:31 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Aquafarming? [of leeches]: misidentification Message-ID: <55615.82.207.58.177.1209674520.squirrel@mail.univer.kharkov.ua> Dear All, The photo http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080428/55499f9d/clearphotoHM.jpg does NOT depict Hirudo medicinalis as suggested by the file name. The leech looks like Poecilobdella granulosa (Savigny, 1820). It has been recorded from the Indian subcontinent and adjacent areas of in South Asia. For futher information see: H. Nesemann & S. Sharma. 2001. Leeches of the suborder Hirudiniformes (Hirudinea: Haemopidae, Hirudinidae, Haemadipsidae) from the Ganga watershed (Nepal, India: Bihar). Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien. 103 B: 77-88. With best wishes, Serge -- Dr. Serge Utevsky Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology V.N.Karazin Kharkiv National University Pl. Svobody 4 Kharkiv 61077 UKRAINE E-mail: sutevsk@univer.kharkov.ua From yckingf from gmail.com Tue May 6 23:12:05 2008 From: yckingf from gmail.com (Francis King) Date: Wed May 7 01:42:28 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Aquafarming? [of leeches]: misidentification In-Reply-To: <55615.82.207.58.177.1209674520.squirrel@mail.univer.kharkov.ua> References: <55615.82.207.58.177.1209674520.squirrel@mail.univer.kharkov.ua> Message-ID: <2f7c12960805062112s2eacdf01g19871093294c813f@mail.gmail.com> To All, Thank you for your verification on type of leeches I posted in the Annelid research blog by Dr. Serge Yu.Utevsky. I really appreciate the contribution. I agree that the photo posted is not the Hirudo Medicinalis species. One Malaysian University identify these Malaysian locally aquafarm leeches is of Hirudinaria Manillensis ( the Buffalo leech ). Today, I send some Malaysian aquafarm leeches of 3 different characterised type for DNA analysis. Soonest the results is out, I shall inform the analysis results for expert advice cause even this research is new to the University. We have some DNA data of different known species from extract of American & British researcher's articles. We hope to match the DNA results with the available data on hand to identify the actual species of the locally aquafarm leeches if its the local Malaysian Buffalo Leech (Hirudinaria Manillensis) or the Indian Cattle Leeches. Frankly speaking, I am no expert in this field. I am only trying to help Malaysian aquafarmers to develop some methods of commercially viable ways to make use of those harvested leeches to good use. Other parts of the world is facing shortage of leeches and declare certain species to extinction but in Malaysia there are more and more people starting aquafarming of these leeches explored by a promoting company organising seminars (profiting millions in seminar fees) promoting leech farming for profits, unfortunately most of this farmers ended up having quarterly harvest with no demand for it. No doubt, the promoting company does buy back some for oil extraction at low prices but the quantity of leeches harvested from all farms in Malaysia is alarmingly too much that could change the natural ecology balance. Some of these farmers ask me to help them to sell their leeches because they are stuck with those live stock that is still multipying. I seek my local University to start research on leech properties, oil extraction compounds for important commercial usage hoping to start a program to make good use of those blown out proportion leeches from the farms. I truely feel these farmers is in urgent need help now facing blick futures with their leeches. Should anyone be able to provide me with ideas and methods to put all these leeches to good use, I welcome your suggestion, method and ideas that could be most helpful to me and for the farmers too.. Thank you, Francis King UTAR Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia +6019-3569724 On 02/05/2008, Serge Utevsky wrote: > Dear All, > > The photo > > http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080428/55499f9d/clearphotoHM.jpg > > does NOT depict Hirudo medicinalis as suggested by the file name. The > leech looks like Poecilobdella granulosa (Savigny, 1820). It has been > recorded from the Indian subcontinent and adjacent areas of in South Asia. > > For futher information see: > > H. Nesemann & S. Sharma. 2001. Leeches of the suborder Hirudiniformes > (Hirudinea: Haemopidae, Hirudinidae, Haemadipsidae) from the Ganga > watershed (Nepal, India: Bihar). Ann. Naturhist. Mus. Wien. 103 B: 77-88. > > With best wishes, > Serge > > > -- > Dr. Serge Utevsky > Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology > V.N.Karazin Kharkiv National University > Pl. Svobody 4 > Kharkiv 61077 > UKRAINE > > E-mail: sutevsk@univer.kharkov.ua > > _______________________________________________ > Annelida mailing list > Post: Annelida@net.bio.net > Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida > Resources: http://www.annelida.net > From g.read from niwa.co.nz Wed May 7 16:43:25 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Wed May 7 16:46:12 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Aquafarming? [of leeches]: misidentification In-Reply-To: <2f7c12960805062112s2eacdf01g19871093294c813f@mail.gmail.com> References: <55615.82.207.58.177.1209674520.squirrel@mail.univer.kharkov.ua> <2f7c12960805062112s2eacdf01g19871093294c813f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4822CB3D.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> >>> On 7/05/2008 at 4:12 p.m., "Francis King" wrote: > [...] Other > parts of the world is facing shortage of leeches and declare certain > species to extinction but in Malaysia there are more and more people > starting aquafarming of these leeches explored by a promoting company > organising seminars (profiting millions in seminar fees) promoting > leech farming for profits, unfortunately most of this farmers ended up > having quarterly harvest with no demand for it. No doubt, the > promoting company does buy back some for oil extraction at low prices > but the quantity of leeches harvested from all farms in Malaysia is > alarmingly too much that could change the natural ecology balance. Thank you Francis. All, I googled for Malaysian leech farms, finding the following stories worth a look if you're interested. http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2008/4/11/north/20890124&sec=North http://www.jphpk.gov.my/English/Feb08%2023c.htm http://alamlintah.com/ I also wondered (naive person that I am) what leech 'oil' might be used for, and googled that, with somewhat startling results. Suffice to say it may be used for claimed therapeutic benefits particularly applicable to men. Oh really? Back to the science. Geoff -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ From g.read from niwa.co.nz Thu May 8 14:53:49 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Thu May 8 14:56:42 2008 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Annelida] Aquafarming? [of leeches]: misidentification References: <55615.82.207.58.177.1209674520.squirrel@mail.univer.kharkov.ua> <2f7c12960805062112s2eacdf01g19871093294c813f@mail.gmail.com> <4822CB3D.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> <2f7c12960805080610h400053b1m6c87aac5a1f13c36@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4824030D.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> Fwd: Francis King response intended for the list. On 9/05/2008 at 1:10 a.m., "Francis King" wrote: Hi there Geoff, Thanks for the start off leads articles from my local Malaysian newsmedia and googled online websites. I have evaluated some of these websites promoting their farms. However, the Malaysian aquafarm leeches is going nowhere at this moment as there is no commercial programs kick starting the demand for these water flying ribbons (Hirudinaria Manillensis). I invite anyone interested to join me to explore further on creating realistic commercial program using these triangle jaws blood sucking leeches known for its anti-thrombin ingredient from its salivary glands. Currently as mentioned in my previous mail, I send in 3 different charactized leeches (1 type full dark green belly, 1 type full light brown belly and 1 type dark brown twin black stripes on sides) for DNA analysis to identify its actual species first. (I will post out the results of the analysis for expert advice on this issue). Follow up with extracting pure oil form these leeches to identify its compounds and research further to identify what compound fromthe oil is important for commercial usage. I am in contact with the pioneer researcher & pioneer for application and commercialization of Hirudin extraction method from Hirudinaria Manillensis leeches currently used on mass production in China for later stage implementation in Malaysia. Should anyone interested in this field of research I will be happy to work with you. As recent report form America on the Heparin Death Case investigation by its Health authority. The recombinant drug has shown set back. Could it be possible to restart natural Hirudin production for safer medicine?. I awaits to see the possibility. My current focus is mainly to research on leeches anti-thrombin properties ingrediant for implementation to skin care & cosmatic production industry. Anyone having knowledge from these fields?. Anti-clotting arteries for old age patients theraphy is also very good ideas. Will surely appreciate getting some realistic leads. I have received mail mentioning survival rates on transportation of leeches is difficult as it does not survive more the 3 - 4 days between destination. My proven experiance of longer time survival of live leeches for trans continental logistic is the preparation of the transporting enviroment medium most important. I suggest using distilled water leech salt mixture to make hydroponic gel placed with individual live leech into 50 ml cylindrical air tight plastic tube and place into secondary cardboard box then into primary carton box. It should survive for minimum 7 days provided the carton box is placed in cool places and not under the sun for long time. Try it, my leeches survived from Malaysia to Canada about 5 days normal courier service logistic routing. I hope with my suggestion, I could be of contributing to this blog. Anybody can contribute articles on DNA data for Hirudinaria Manillensis & Poecilobdella Granulosa?. It could help me to match the DNA results from y Malaysia aquafarm leeches. Any contribution is appreciated. Geoff, as the leech oil sold in the Malaysian local market and online website. My personal opinion for the current moment, I will not use it on my prize one or even on my skin without finalizing the breakdown analysis of the oil extract. Most oil extract sold is just crude oil and not refined with further isolation of harmful compound. Suspecting side effect on continuous usage. Skin bactrial contemination possible. Known active leech gut bacteria the Aeromonas Hydrophila present. Anyone interested to contribute on PDF articles on Hirudin extraction method from leeches. It would give me an early start on preparation for Hirudin Extraction practice. If anyone interested to obtain lower cost live triangle jaws blood sucking leeches for your research, I will be happy to help out on sending to you. However, logistic cost is as usually the highest cost that you have to pay. Hope to hear some suggestion and contribution from all of you. Regards, Francis King UTAR Malaysia +6019-3569724 2008/5/8 Geoff Read : > >>> On 7/05/2008 at 4:12 p.m., "Francis King" wrote: > > [...] Other > > parts of the world is facing shortage of leeches and declare certain > > species to extinction but in Malaysia there are more and more people > > starting aquafarming of these leeches explored by a promoting company > > organising seminars (profiting millions in seminar fees) promoting > > leech farming for profits, unfortunately most of this farmers ended up > > having quarterly harvest with no demand for it. No doubt, the > > promoting company does buy back some for oil extraction at low prices > > but the quantity of leeches harvested from all farms in Malaysia is > > alarmingly too much that could change the natural ecology balance. > > Thank you Francis. > > All, > > I googled for Malaysian leech farms, finding the following stories worth a > look if you're interested. > > > http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2008/4/11/north/20890124&sec=North > > http://www.jphpk.gov.my/English/Feb08%2023c.htm > > http://alamlintah.com/ > > I also wondered (naive person that I am) what leech 'oil' might be used > for, and googled that, with somewhat startling results. Suffice to say it > may be used for claimed therapeutic benefits particularly applicable to men. > Oh really? > > Back to the science. > > Geoff -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Header Type: application/octet-stream Size: 1486 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080509/d451032b/Header.exe From radashevsky from hotmail.com Sat May 10 04:11:14 2008 From: radashevsky from hotmail.com (Vasily Radashevsky) Date: Sat May 10 16:36:19 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Streblospio shrubsol..ei..ii Message-ID: <17161354.post@talk.nabble.com> Dear all, Buchanan (1890) described new spionid worms from England and called them after a person who collected the worms, Mr. Shrubsole, as Hekaterobranchus shrubsolii (later referred to as Streblospio shrubsolii). "shrubsolii", with double "i" at the end, has widely been accepted by taxonomists and was also spelled this way by Olga Hartman (1959) in her " Catalogue of the Polychaetous Annelids of the World". My question is should we continue using this incorrect spelling or change the name to "shrubsolei", as it is required by the ICZN? Waiting for opinions! Vasily Radashevsky -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Streblospio-shrubsol..ei..ii-tp17161354p17161354.html Sent from the Bio.net - Annelida mailing list archive at Nabble.com. From g.read from niwa.co.nz Sun May 11 16:29:33 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Sun May 11 16:33:54 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Streblospio shrubsol..ei..ii In-Reply-To: <17161354.post@talk.nabble.com> References: <17161354.post@talk.nabble.com> Message-ID: <48280DFC.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> >>> On 10/05/2008 at 9:11 p.m., Vasily Radashevsky > Buchanan (1890) described new spionid worms from England and called them > after a person who collected the worms, Mr. Shrubsole, as Hekaterobranchus > shrubsolii (later referred to as Streblospio shrubsolii). > "shrubsolii", with double "i" at the end, has widely been accepted by > taxonomists and was also spelled this way by Olga Hartman (1959) in her " > Catalogue of the Polychaetous Annelids of the World". > My question is should we continue using this incorrect spelling or > change the name to "shrubsolei", as it is required by the ICZN? > > Waiting for opinions! Dear Vasily, Who are we to give an opinion if it is indeed a mandatory change under the current ICZN code articles? Someone will use 'shrubsolei' and there is no going back. Of course we can ignore the change, but some smart referee will point out the error of our ways. One could give an opinion on whether it is in general wise or useful still to require grammar-based changes to the text strings devised by original authors, text strings serving only as human-friendly identifier tags for each entity, the entities as in this case possibly having a considerable literature over 100 years. So I will - it is neither. But since I am not a S. shrubsolii investigator this instance is not going to have any effect on me. If I were I would soon accommodate to the change. Cheers, Geoff -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ From a.glover from nhm.ac.uk Mon May 12 11:13:47 2008 From: a.glover from nhm.ac.uk (Adrian Glover) Date: Mon May 12 12:50:48 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Announcement of Siboglinidae Workshop Message-ID: <12D76FF8-07A0-4218-9180-65ACC17A1E41@nhm.ac.uk> Announcement of ChEss Sponsored Workshop Siboglinidae: a model system for the understanding of evolution, adaptive radiation, microbial symbioses and ecology at extreme environments Organizing committee: Dr Adrian Glover, The Natural History Museum, London; Dr Ana Hilário, University of Aveiro; Dr Thomas Dahlgren, University of Göteborg; Dr Maria Baker, University of Southampton; Dr Eva Ramirez Llodra, Institute of Marine Sciences, Barcelona A 4 day workshop to be held October 28-31 2008, at the East-West Centre, Honolulu, Hawaii. Details to be posted on the ChEss website soon: http://www.noc.soton.ac.uk/chess/ Rationale. Recent years have seen a revolution in our understanding of Siboglinidae – an enigmatic clade of deep-sea worms known from extreme deep-sea environments such as hydrothermal vents, cold hydrocarbon seeps and the carcasses of dead whales. Molecular systematic methods now place the former phyla Pogonophora and Vestimentifera within the highly derived polychaete clade Siboglinidae. Within the last 4 years, an entirely new radiation of siboglinids, Osedax, has been discovered living on whale-carcasses. New advances in our knowledge of siboglinid anatomy coupled with molecular characterization of microbial symbiont communities is revolutionizing our knowledge of host-symbiont relationships in the metazoa. The unique evolutionary association of siboglinids with both geology, in the formation of spreading centres and seeps, and biology with the evolution of large whales, offers opportunities for studies of vicariant evolution and the calibration of molecular clocks. Despite these advances, there has been a lack of synthesis between research teams working on different aspects of Siboglinidae. The mud- dwelling frenulates remain poorly studied. Vent and seep siboglinid research has largely been separated from that going on within the polychaete community, and the recent discoveries from whale-falls need to be integrated with that from vents and seeps. The goals of our workshop will be to: • Present and discuss the latest research on siboglinids within a small, informal workshop/discursive environment • Inspire and train young researchers in the evolution and ecology of siboglinids from extreme environments • Highlight taxonomic gaps and develop new break-out teams with future taxonomic exchange proposals to CoML • Integrate systematic, ecological and microbial research using Siboglinidae as a model system • Develop an outline and writing-tasks for a large multi-author review paper for Advances in Marine Biology (or similar journal) to coincide with CoML 2009 events Funding. The workshop is funded by ChEss who will cover the registration fees, tea, coffee, lunch, social events etc. for all participants. Additional funding for travel and subsistence is also available, priority will be given to junior researchers, graduate students and those with co-funding. Funding applications for travel and subsistence need to be submitted by June 15 2008, as a max 400 word email outlining your research interests, talk to be presented and reason for requiring funding to thomas.dahlgren@zool.gu.se Applications will be reviewed by the organizing committee by July 15 2008. For further information please contact: Dr Adrian Glover a.glover@nhm.ac.uk Dr Ana Hilário ahilario@bio.ua.pt _____________________________________ Dr Adrian Glover Zoology Department The Natural History Museum Cromwell Rd, London SW7 5BD, UK _____________________________________ +44 (0)20 7942 5056 (office) +44 (0)77 666 48 440 (mobile) _____________________________________ mail: a.glover@nhm.ac.uk OR adrianglover@mac.com web: http://web.mac.com/adrianglover From a.muir from nhm.ac.uk Mon May 12 10:59:49 2008 From: a.muir from nhm.ac.uk (Alexander Muir) Date: Mon May 12 12:52:01 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Streblospio shrubsol..ei..ii In-Reply-To: <17161354.post@talk.nabble.com> References: <17161354.post@talk.nabble.com> Message-ID: Dear all, Hekaterobranchus shrubsolii Buchanan, 1890, was published after the "British Association Code" of 1842, but before the "Regles internationales de la Nomenclature zoologique" of 1905 and the first edition of the "International Code of Zoological Nomenclature" (1961). One could argue, therefore, that Buchanan was not formally bound by any rules when she erected the name. Personally, I am in favour of stability in nomenclature. Changing the name of a species from H. shrubsolii to H. shrubsolei after 118 years would mean that inexperienced people looking up the new version on the internet might miss most of the available information for the species. Also, the way I read the rules, they say that the name should not change. If the name were to be erected today, it would certainly come under rule 31.1.2 of the fourth edition of the "International Code of Zoological Nomenclature" (1999), which points to the name being shrubsolei (although the example given in Article 31 suggests the original author of the name could drop the letter e if she wanted). However, Article 32.5 lists "Spellings that must be corrected", and this case is not covered therein (Incorrect ............ latinization ............ not to be considered inadvertent errors). Article 33 states "The correction of an incorrect original spelling in accordance with Article 32.5 is a justified emendation ........................... Any other emendation is an unjustified emendation ........................". So, even though nowadays it would count as an "incorrect original spelling", my opinion is that it should not be changed. I hope this helps! Alex Muir. P.S. Changing the subject slightly, Hartmann-Schroder synonymised Streblospio shrubsolii of Fauvel (1927), Friedrich (1940), Hartmann-Schroder (1971) and Kirkegaard (1996) with Streblospio benedicti Webster, 1879. Mr. A.I. Muir Polychaete Research Group, Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, South Kensington, LONDON SW7 5BD, UNITED KINGDOM Tel: +44 (0)20 7942 5567 Fax: +44 (0)20 7942 5054 http://www.nhm.ac.uk//research-curation/staff-directory/zoology/cv-5565. html -----Original Message----- From: annelida-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:annelida-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of Vasily Radashevsky Sent: 10 May 2008 10:11 To: annelida@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Subject: [Annelida] Streblospio shrubsol..ei..ii Dear all, Buchanan (1890) described new spionid worms from England and called them after a person who collected the worms, Mr. Shrubsole, as Hekaterobranchus shrubsolii (later referred to as Streblospio shrubsolii). "shrubsolii", with double "i" at the end, has widely been accepted by taxonomists and was also spelled this way by Olga Hartman (1959) in her "Catalogue of the Polychaetous Annelids of the World". My question is should we continue using this incorrect spelling or change the name to "shrubsolei", as it is required by the ICZN? Waiting for opinions! Vasily Radashevsky -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Streblospio-shrubsol..ei..ii-tp17161354p17161354.h tml Sent from the Bio.net - Annelida mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Annelida mailing list Post: Annelida@net.bio.net Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida Resources: http://www.annelida.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080512/abaf1794/attachment.html From Andy.Mackie from museumwales.ac.uk Mon May 12 09:04:09 2008 From: Andy.Mackie from museumwales.ac.uk (Andy Mackie) Date: Mon May 12 12:53:21 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Streblospio shrubsol..ei..ii In-Reply-To: <17161354.post@talk.nabble.com> Message-ID: <9881077E009EC04B966B613958F5BB1501CC97C8B469@CDFMSC2.nmgw.ac.uk> Vasily, Geoff As I understand it, Buchanan has named the species for Shrubsole fafter latinising his name to Shrubsolius. The specific name would then correctly be shrubsolii. If the name wasn't first latinised then shrubsolei would be correct. I see can no reason to change the original name shrubsolii. See articles 31.1.1 & 33.4 of the code Regards Andy .................................................... Dr Andrew S. Y. Mackie Marine Biodiversity Department of Biodiversity & Systematic Biology Amgueddfa Cymru - National Museum Wales From msjoneser from gmail.com Mon May 12 13:05:56 2008 From: msjoneser from gmail.com (Scott Jones) Date: Mon May 12 14:40:05 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Polychaete detective work Message-ID: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> Hello- I am working on a small, incomplete specimen with few characters to go with for the bare minimum of family-level identification. My question for the list is as follows: Is there another polychaete family whose neuroseta is a rostrate uncinus with subrostral hairs below the main fang beside the Maldanids? This is the one of very few discernable characters I can find on this worm. Thanks in advance for any help on this!! Scott Jones Benthic Ecology Smithsonian Marine Station, Fort Pierce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080512/b59d6f37/attachment.html From g.read from niwa.co.nz Mon May 12 14:56:39 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Mon May 12 15:02:09 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Fwd: Next Polychaete conference, 2010 References: Message-ID: <482949B6.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> On 12/05/2008 at 9:16 p.m., ADRIANA GIANGRANDE wrote: ================================================= 1st announcement 1st May 2008 THE TENTH INTERNATIONAL POLYCHAETE CONFERENCE will be held in LECCE, ITALY from JUNE 20th to 26th, 2010. We are pleased to announce that the 10th International Polychaete Conference will be held in Lecce, Apulia, Italy, June 20-26, 2010. The Conference will be hosted by the University of Salento (DiSTeBA Department, Lecce). The venue will be the Grand Hotel TIZIANO, a major Hotel and Convention Center serving in Lecce. We anticipate that all of the participants and their families will be accommodated in the Grand Hotel TIZIANO, meaning that both housing and the Conference will be in the same building. The Grand Hotel TIZIANO has the various exhibit and working halls that will be the location for our poster and communication sessions, and those exhibitors who will be at the Conference. The size of one of the exhibit hall is such that all posters can be exhibited for the entire Conference. Adriana Giangrande, from DiSTeBA Lecce (gianadri@ilenic.unile.it) and Maria Cristina Gambi from the Stazione Zoologica ?Anton Dohrn? of Naples (gambimc@szn.it) are the Organizers. ANTHEUS (antheus@unile.it) will be the Events Coordinator for all the logistic aspects. Organizing Committee: Margherita Licciano, Luigi Musco, Cataldo Pierri, Loredana Stabili, Roberto Schirosi. Scientific Committee: Carlo Nike Bianchi, Grazia Cantone, Alberto Castelli, Miriam Gherardi, Luisa Nicoletti, Francesco Paolo Patti, Daniela Prevedelli, Gabriella Sella. The guide-line of the Conference will be: Polychaetes as Biological and Ecological Models: from taxonomy to applied research. Development, Genetics and Physiology are included within Biological issues. All the applied aspects are included within Ecological issues. Obviously Taxonomy is a basic topic for both. Contributions of all aspects of polychaete research, spanning from taxonomy to applied issues, can be accepted for presentation. Priority for oral presentations will be given to those contributions which address, through the use of polychaetes, more general scientific questions. Pure alpha-taxonomy papers (description of new species, genus or family revisions etc.) will be accepted only as posters. We agreed to publish the Proceedings of the Conference in the Journal MARINE ECOLOGY an EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE, Wiley-Blackwell Publishing (I.F. 2007 = 0.936). For further information, you can go to the Journal web site www.blackwellpublishing.com/mae. All the papers (oral presentations and posters) will be allowed to be submitted for publication in the Proceedings after a preliminary selection based on research general relevance, and after a peer review, as has been the practice in past Conference Proceedings. Other announcements will be posted to the Annelida List this summer. Updates will be at the Conference WWW site: http://www.polychaeta.it. We send to everyone our best regards and hope each of you already would plan to come visit us for the Conference in Lecce in 2010, and maybe profit to stay longer for holidays? Adriana Giangrande and Maria Cristina Gambi -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Polychaete conference.doc Type: application/msword Size: 32256 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080513/26235dbb/Polychaeteconference.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Header Type: application/octet-stream Size: 1849 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080513/26235dbb/Header.exe From g.read from niwa.co.nz Mon May 12 16:01:31 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Mon May 12 16:04:27 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Polychaete detective work In-Reply-To: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> References: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <482958EB.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> >>> On 13/05/2008 at 6:05 a.m., "Scott Jones" wrote: > Is there another polychaete family whose neuroseta is a rostrate uncinus > with subrostral hairs below the main fang beside the Maldanids? Scott, Polikey, by Chris Glasby & Kristian Fauchald, suggests only Arenicolidae juveniles might also have only bearded neurochaetal hooks (ie long handled forms). http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/abrs/online-resources/polikey/index.html Maldanid neurochaeta are not regarded as uncini, which is a term more used for chaetae typically squat and plate-like in form. If uncini have a handle, the head is usually still squat and substantially beak-like. However so-called 'acicular uncini' in sabellids would be similar to maldanid neurochaetae - minus the beard as far as I know, except damaged forms may possibly appear to have a beard. (Sabellid experts may wish to correct me on the nuances or possibly the gross errors of the above). Geoff -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ From nogueira from ib.usp.br Tue May 13 07:01:49 2008 From: nogueira from ib.usp.br (Joao Miguel de Matos Nogueira) Date: Tue May 13 10:20:55 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Polychaete detective work In-Reply-To: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> References: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080513114735.M94119@ib.usp.br> Dear Scott Such "beard" below main fang occurs in several taxa. In terebelline terebellids, for instance, they are usually present, at least on thoracic chaetigers (see Nogueira & Amaral Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 114(1): 285-296; Nogueira, Hutchings & Amaral J. mar. Biol. Ass. UK 83:761-770; Nogueira Sci. Mar. 67(4): 403-411; Nogueira & Alves Zootaxa 1205: 31-54), but these uncini are avicular, not acicular. In?regards to bearded acicular uncini, I saw them in Trichobranchus bunnabus (Trichobranchidae; unpublished)?and I described a species of Branchiomaldane (Arenicolidae; Nogueira & Rizzo? J. mar. Biol. Ass. UK 81:415-421) with hairs placed laterally to main fang. However, I believe such beard is also present in other families of interstitial polychaetes. I suggest you write to Katrine Worsaae (kworsaee@bi.ku.dk) and ask her about that. I hope this helps you. Best regards Jo?o Nogueira On Mon, 12 May 2008 14:05:56 -0400, Scott Jones wrote > Hello- > > ? I am working on a small, incomplete specimen with few characters to go with for the bare minimum of family-level identification.? > > ? My question for the list is as follows: > > ? Is there another polychaete family whose neuroseta is a rostrate uncinus with subrostral hairs below the main fang beside the Maldanids?? > > This is the one of very few discernable characters I can find on this worm. > ?Thanks in advance for any help on this!! > > Scott Jones > Benthic Ecology > Smithsonian Marine Station, Fort Pierce -- Prof. Dr Jo?o Miguel de Matos Nogueira Departamento de Zoologia Instituto de Biociencias - USP -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080513/b69b70e4/attachment.html From g.read from niwa.co.nz Tue May 13 17:03:25 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Tue May 13 17:12:24 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Polychaete detective work In-Reply-To: <482958EB.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> References: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> <482958EB.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> Message-ID: <482AB8EC.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> Come to think of it, 'acicular uncinus' (a needle hook) for a long-handled 'uncinus' is contradictory, bordering on an oxymoron, like 'loose tights', but then various non-terebellomorph hooks were once (maybe still are) called crochets, which is a hooked needle. Oh dear! Geoff From kfitzhug from nhm.org Tue May 13 18:30:01 2008 From: kfitzhug from nhm.org (J. Kirk Fitzhugh) Date: Tue May 13 18:45:40 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Polychaete detective work In-Reply-To: <482AB8EC.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> References: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> <482958EB.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> <482AB8EC.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> Message-ID: <482A2479.9070603@nhm.org> No more contradictory, or an oxymoron, than attempting to compare cladograms based on partitioned data. At least 'acicular uncinus' has the proper empirical relation. Geoff Read wrote: > Come to think of it, 'acicular uncinus' (a needle hook) for a long-handled 'uncinus' is contradictory, bordering on an oxymoron, like 'loose tights', but then various non-terebellomorph hooks were once (maybe still are) called crochets, which is a hooked needle. Oh dear! > > Geoff > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Annelida mailing list > Post: Annelida@net.bio.net > Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida > Resources: http://www.annelida.net > > From yckingf from gmail.com Wed May 14 13:43:16 2008 From: yckingf from gmail.com (Francis King) Date: Wed May 14 14:48:50 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Salivary lipid profiles of the leeches Hirudo medicinalis Message-ID: <2f7c12960805141143q212a52c2j56edd6626c1e98ec@mail.gmail.com> To all I requires help on this topic. My university is proforming oil extraction from our local leeches. We need to have the data of salivary lipid profiles of leech species Hirudo Medicinalis. I hope any contribution of this data for our research comparison purposes. Kindly assist in this matter. Thank you, Francis King UTAR Malaysia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080515/82a615e9/attachment.html From g.read from niwa.co.nz Wed May 14 15:57:35 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Wed May 14 16:01:10 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Polychaete detective work In-Reply-To: <482A2479.9070603@nhm.org> References: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> <482958EB.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> <482AB8EC.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz><482AB8EC.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> <482A2479.9070603@nhm.org> Message-ID: <482BFAFF.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> >>> On 14/05/2008 at 11:30 a.m., "J. Kirk Fitzhugh" wrote: > [...] At least 'acicular uncinus' has the proper empirical relation. > > Geoff Read wrote: >> Come to think of it, 'acicular uncinus' (a needle hook) for a long-handled > 'uncinus' is contradictory [...] A hook is a hook is a hook. One can call it an acicular uncinus if that is traditional for taxonomists in a particular family. But to most working on Polychaeta it is simply a hook, whereas uncinus brings to mind forms that somewhere are not cylindrical but flattened (plate-like). The extra verbiage of the combo I suggest is not helpful for clarity for the non-specialist. Hence possibly the treatment adopted in the Intkey family key of Chris & Kristian. Here FWIW are the notes in the family key "Hooks are unjointed, stout, distally bent chaetae which are generally bifid or multidentate (exceptions are those in some Eunicidae and Onuphidae). They differ from spines in being thicker and more recurved distally, and from uncini by having a long shaft. Chaetae referred to in the literature as 'long-handled uncini', such as those in the thoracic neuropodia of Trichobranchidae, are considered here as hooks. Hooks may have various types of guards or hoods covering the apex, or they may be unprotected." "Uncini are short, beak-like chaetae usually with a heavily dentate crest and no shaft (the shaft may be replaced by two ligaments attached to each end of the uncinus); rarely is the shaft extended into a long-handle." Cheers, Geoff -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ From kworsaae from bio.ku.dk Thu May 15 04:32:40 2008 From: kworsaae from bio.ku.dk (Katrine Worsaae) Date: Thu May 15 14:42:32 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Polychaete detective work In-Reply-To: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> References: <171f92f0805121105q1a12a1f9q2d1f069c693686e7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <25D79323E8D7A340A913F6C5EAE0491D1D7EF5@MAILSERVER2.akizci.ku.dk> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/png Size: 12149 bytes Desc: image002.png Url : http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080515/e84c4e27/attachment.png From julio4cro from yahoo.com Thu May 15 03:31:03 2008 From: julio4cro from yahoo.com (Julijan Sutlović) Date: Thu May 15 14:49:15 2008 Subject: [Annelida] eunice gigantea (aphroditois) Message-ID: <528481.59079.qm@web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> heloo!!! http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/1999-July/001251.html on this link someone named Kristian Fauchald, (please don't be offended cause I've written someone, cause you're title isn't written) has written something about eunices. he has written that eunice gigantea is not a valid name and that it's classified as eunice aphroditois. so i did a small scientific research back in high school about eunice gigantea, i researched their number on certain surface on two kinds of littoral (sea bottom, i don't know how to say this, sorry). and i was wondering about the name aphroditois, i found it only once or twice and i was a bit confused but now I'm totally confused!?!?!? and i also couldn't find enough literature about the eunice gigantea, why doesn't anyone do researches about them? will you please tell me some more about the name aphroditois, and maybe suggest some literature??? thank you in advance, and many greetings from the sunny Croatian coast!!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080515/0132c12e/attachment.html From g.read from niwa.co.nz Thu May 15 19:14:08 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Thu May 15 19:16:22 2008 Subject: [Annelida] eunice gigantea (aphroditois) In-Reply-To: <528481.59079.qm@web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <528481.59079.qm@web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <482D7A8E.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> >>> On 15/05/2008 at 8:31 p.m., "Julijan Sutlovi;" wrote: > heloo!!! > > http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/1999-July/001251.html > on this link someone named Kristian Fauchald, (please don't be offended > cause I've written someone, cause you're title isn't written) has written > something about eunices. he has written that eunice gigantea is not a valid > name and that it's classified as eunice aphroditois. so i did a small > scientific research back in high school about eunice gigantea, i researched > their number on certain surface on two kinds of littoral (sea bottom, i don't > know how to say this, sorry). and i was wondering about the name aphroditois, > i found it only once or twice and i was a bit confused but now I'm totally > confused!?!?!? and i also couldn't find enough literature about the eunice > gigantea, why doesn't anyone do researches about them? will you please tell > me some more about the name aphroditois, and maybe suggest some literature??? > > thank you in advance, and many greetings from the sunny Croatian coast!!! Hello Julijan. I wonder if for a Croatian coast Eunice whether the correct species name might be Eunice roussaei as discussed in this paper? Zanol, J. & Bettoso, N. (2006) Identity of Eunice roussaei (Eunicidae: Polychaeta: Annelida) from the Adriatic and Mediterranean Seas. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 86, 1017-1024. Abstract; "The long discussion on the identity of the large Eunice species from the Adriatic and Mediterranean Seas is a result of the broader discussion on the identity and synonymy of Eunice roussaei and Eunice aphroditois. Here we show that the species occurring in the Adriatic Sea is Eunice roussaei and how this species can be differentiated from Eunice aphroditois; we also characterize the Mediterranean Eunice roussaei." I will try to send a pdf copy of this directly to you. -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ From gambimc from szn.it Fri May 16 03:15:00 2008 From: gambimc from szn.it (Maria Cristina Gambi) Date: Fri May 16 05:13:52 2008 Subject: [Annelida] 10th Polychaete Conference: 1st announcement Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.1.20080516101221.01e627a8@in.szn.it> Hi to everybody, sorry for cross-posting the message (1st announcement of the next Polychaete Conference in Lecce-Italy 2010), but as the Latins said... "Repetita juvant" (repetitions help).... Maria Cristina 1st announcement 1st May 2008 THE TENTH INTERNATIONAL POLYCHAETE CONFERENCE will be held in LECCE, ITALY from JUNE 20th to 26th, 2010. We are pleased to announce that the 10th International Polychaete Conference will be held in Lecce, Apulia, Italy, June 20-26, 2010. The Conference will be hosted by the University of Salento (DiSTeBA Department, Lecce). The venue will be the Grand Hotel TIZIANO, a major Hotel and Convention Center serving in Lecce. We anticipate that all of the participants and their families will be accommodated in the Grand Hotel TIZIANO, meaning that both housing and the Conference will be in the same building. The Grand Hotel TIZIANO has the various exhibit and working halls that will be the location for our poster and communication sessions, and those exhibitors who will be at the Conference. The size of one of the exhibit hall is such that all posters can be exhibited for the entire Conference. Adriana Giangrande, from DiSTeBA Lecce (gianadri@ilenic.unile.it) and Maria Cristina Gambi from the Stazione Zoologica ?Anton Dohrn? of Naples (gambimc@szn.it) are the Organizers. ANTHEUS (antheus@unile.it) will be the Events Coordinator for all the logistic aspects. Organizing Committee: Margherita Licciano, Luigi Musco, Cataldo Pierri, Loredana Stabili, Roberto Schirosi. Scientific Committee: Carlo Nike Bianchi, Grazia Cantone, Alberto Castelli, Miriam Gherardi, Luisa Nicoletti, Francesco Paolo Patti, Daniela Prevedelli, Gabriella Sella. The guide-line of the Conference will be: Polychaetes as Biological and Ecological Models: from taxonomy to applied research. Development, Genetics and Physiology are included within Biological issues. All the applied aspects are included within Ecological issues. Obviously Taxonomy is a basic topic for both. Contributions of all aspects of polychaete research, spanning from taxonomy to applied issues, can be accepted for presentation. Priority for oral presentations will be given to those contributions which address, through the use of polychaetes, more general scientific questions. Pure alpha-taxonomy papers (description of new species, genus or family revisions etc.) will be accepted only as posters. We agreed to publish the Proceedings of the Conference in the Journal MARINE ECOLOGY an EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE, Wiley-Blackwell Publishing (I.F. 2007 = 0.936). For further information, you can go to the Journal web site www.blackwellpublishing.com/mae. All the papers (oral presentations and posters) will be allowed to be submitted for publication in the Proceedings after a preliminary selection based on research general relevance, and after a peer review, as has been the practice in past Conference Proceedings. Other announcements will be posted to the Annelida List this summer. Updates will be at the Conference WWW site: http://www.polychaeta.it. We send to everyone our best regards and hope each of you already would plan to come visit us for the Conference in Lecce in 2010, and maybe profit to stay longer for holidays Adriana Giangrande and Maria Cristina Gambi ------------------------------ Maria Cristina Gambi Laboratorio di Ecologia del Benthos (Stazione Zoologica "Anton Dohrn" di Napoli) Punta S. Pietro 80077 Ischia (Napoli, Italy) tel ++39 081 991410 or ++39 081 5833513 fax ++39 081 984201 e-mail:gambimc@szn.it ------------------------------------------- From FAUCHALD from si.edu Fri May 16 09:45:40 2008 From: FAUCHALD from si.edu (Fauchald, Kristian) Date: Fri May 16 14:39:53 2008 Subject: [Annelida] eunice gigantea (aphroditois) In-Reply-To: <528481.59079.qm@web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <528481.59079.qm@web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <707264088F25964398B036DDCEB1C0F0044583A3@SI-ECL01.US.SINET.SI.EDU> Juljan and others, I saw that Joana Zanol already responded to this for me. Let me expand a bit on the problem. Early in taxonomy, i.e. about 1760-80, up to about 1825, scientists reported huge specimens of Eunice from a variety of more or less circumtropical locations (old Tehthys sea??) and gave them a variety of names. Pierre Fauvel and others, decided that this all represented one widespread species, so all of them were referred by a single name. The first name safely applied to this set of species was Nereis aphroditois Pallas. This species was later moved into Eunice. The type species for the genus Eunice is E. gigantea, but this species name is junior synonym (according to Fauvel and others) of E. aphroditois. So, that is the reason why the name, for years was considered to be E. aphroditois for all of this mess of huge worms. Now, Joana Zanol and others, have demonstrated that at least some of the species lumped by Fauvel, are recognizable, separate species, and one of these is Eunice roussaei. I would not be particularly surprised if it does not turn out that there are several distinct species, perhaps molecular systematics may be the best way of distinguishing them, but I would be surprised if it turns out that more than one species is present in any given area. Thus, in the Adriatic, you probably have E. roussaei. Best, Kristian Fauchald ________________________________ From: annelida-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:annelida-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of Julijan Sutlovi? Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 4:31 AM To: annelida@magpie.bio.indiana.edu Subject: [Annelida] eunice gigantea (aphroditois) heloo!!! http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/1999-July/001251.html on this link someone named Kristian Fauchald, (please don't be offended cause I've written someone, cause you're title isn't written) has written something about eunices. he has written that eunice gigantea is not a valid name and that it's classified as eunice aphroditois. so i did a small scientific research back in high school about eunice gigantea, i researched their number on certain surface on two kinds of littoral (sea bottom, i don't know how to say this, sorry). and i was wondering about the name aphroditois, i found it only once or twice and i was a bit confused but now I'm totally confused!?!?!? and i also couldn't find enough literature about the eunice gigantea, why doesn't anyone do researches about them? will you please tell me some more about the name aphroditois, and maybe suggest some literature??? thank you in advance, and many greetings from the sunny Croatian coast!!! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080516/e8311119/attachment.html From g.read from niwa.co.nz Fri May 16 23:11:24 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Fri May 16 23:14:52 2008 Subject: [Annelida] 10th Polychaete Conference: 1st announcement References: <6.1.2.0.1.20080516101221.01e627a8@in.szn.it> Message-ID: <482F03AA.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> Forwarded for Sergio Salazar by request. On 17/05/2008 at 2:12 a.m., Sergio Salazar wrote: From: savs551216@hotmail.comTo: gambimc@szn.it; annelida@magpie.bio.indiana.eduSubject: RE: [Annelida] 10th Polychaete Conference: 1st announcementDate: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:07:04 +0000 Dear Maria Cristina, Adriana and colleagues, Since I regard myself as a key-maker, and a key-maker only, which might be way below the so-called "pure alpha-taxonomy", I was surprised about the emphasis given to the relevance of the taxonomical issues, and their surprising 'glorification' to be presented only as posters. It is true that there is an increasing time and effort needed as you move from a species list, to a species description, to a family revision. Why would they be regarded as equivalent? Since there is an increasing trend to do phylogenetic studies using morphology or molecular methods, but without making the traditional revisions, I fear we, as an academic society, are rejecting basic taxonomy. If this is actually the case, then we are in trouble. Despite the many phylogeny publications to date, there are still many problems regarding the delimitation of species, genera, and even families. If we do not encourage any attempts to solve these, or at least are more supportive of the efforts involved in them, who would be interested on any further pursuit? May I suggest you to have a more balanced approach, and evaluate the abstracts before deciding which would be the best means for its presentation? The critical factors might be the creativity involved, the novelty of the approach, or the amount of new subjects (genes, specimens, species, genera, families) being involved. If these features are not detailed in the abstract, they might be evaluated after a critical reading, combined with some knowledge about the specific literature. Taking these features in mind, even the description of a new species, or the analysis of a single biological feature, might deserve oral presentations, provided there are unique features or problems that have not been studied before. Thus, let research quality drive the type of presentation. Un abrazo cordial, Sergio > Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 10:15:00 +0200> To: annelida@magpie.bio.indiana.edu> From: gambimc@szn.it> CC: > Subject: [Annelida] 10th Polychaete Conference: 1st announcement> > Hi to everybody, sorry for cross-posting the message (1st announcement of > the next Polychaete Conference in Lecce-Italy 2010), but as the Latins > said... "Repetita juvant" (repetitions help)....> Maria Cristina> > > > 1st announcement 1st May 2008> > THE TENTH INTERNATIONAL POLYCHAETE CONFERENCE will be held in LECCE, ITALY > from JUNE 20th to 26th, 2010.> > The guide-line of the Conference will be: Polychaetes as Biological and > Ecological Models: from taxonomy to applied research.> Development, Genetics and Physiology are included within Biological issues. > All the applied aspects are included within Ecological issues. Obviously > Taxonomy is a basic topic for both. Contributions of all aspects of > polychaete research, spanning from taxonomy to applied issues, can be > accepted for presentation. Priority for oral presentations will be given to > those contributions which address, through the use of polychaetes, more > general scientific questions. Pure alpha-taxonomy papers (description of > new species, genus or family revisions etc.) will be accepted only as posters. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Header Type: application/octet-stream Size: 1332 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080517/dc354c4c/Header.exe From jablake9 from gmail.com Sat May 17 08:14:56 2008 From: jablake9 from gmail.com (James Blake) Date: Sat May 17 15:58:18 2008 Subject: [Annelida] 10th Polychaete Conference: 1st announcement In-Reply-To: <482F03AA.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> References: <6.1.2.0.1.20080516101221.01e627a8@in.szn.it> <482F03AA.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> Message-ID: <663258900805170614t5bb74ca7ib9fc6fff9903db72@mail.gmail.com> Dear Friends, The restriction on presentation of purely alpha taxonomic papers to Posters at the IPC was imposed by the Executive Committee of the IPA about 5-6 conferences past. This was not intended to denigrate the importance of good species descriptions, but to spare the audience from hearing details of uncini, numbers of branchiae, and so forth and also to avoid concurrent sessions. Of course, papers that provide a synthesis of a taxonomic units from a systematic, phylogenetic, or ecological perspective are in a different category. However, requests for oral presentations are all reviewed carefully and that is why it is very important that all contributors whether requesting space for a Poster or Oral presentation ensure that their abstract includes sufficient detail for evaluation. Those of us who organize these conferences are also well aware that certain individuals may need to present their paper orally in order to obtain travel support. Such contributors are encouraged to develop their presentations in such a manner that single species descriptions are avoided in lieu of the larger picture and relevance of their work to polychaete systematics, ecology, or perhaps biogeography. However, everyone should keep in mind that with PowerPoint and CAD printers, very elegant poster presentations can be prepared that are often more effective than oral presentations in a large room with poor accoustics. Jim Blake President International Polychaetology Assn. On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 12:11 AM, Geoff Read wrote: > Forwarded for Sergio Salazar by request. > > On 17/05/2008 at 2:12 a.m., Sergio Salazar wrote: > > From: savs551216@hotmail.comTo: gambimc@szn.it; > annelida@magpie.bio.indiana.eduSubject: RE: [Annelida] 10th Polychaete > Conference: 1st announcementDate: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:07:04 +0000 > > Dear Maria Cristina, Adriana and colleagues, Since I regard myself as a > key-maker, and a key-maker only, which might be way below the so-called > "pure alpha-taxonomy", I was surprised about the emphasis given to the > relevance of the taxonomical issues, and their surprising 'glorification' to > be presented only as posters. It is true that there is an increasing time > and effort needed as you move from a species list, to a species description, > to a family revision. Why would they be regarded as equivalent? Since there > is an increasing trend to do phylogenetic studies using morphology or > molecular methods, but without making the traditional revisions, I fear we, > as an academic society, are rejecting basic taxonomy. If this is actually > the case, then we are in trouble. Despite the many phylogeny publications to > date, there are still many problems regarding the delimitation of species, > genera, and even families. If we do not encourage any attempts to solve > these, or at least are more supportive of the efforts involved in them, who > would be interested on any further pursuit? May I suggest you to have a more > balanced approach, and evaluate the abstracts before deciding which would be > the best means for its presentation? The critical factors might be the > creativity involved, the novelty of the approach, or the amount of new > subjects (genes, specimens, species, genera, families) being involved. If > these features are not detailed in the abstract, they might be evaluated > after a critical reading, combined with some knowledge about the specific > literature. Taking these features in mind, even the description of a new > species, or the analysis of a single biological feature, might deserve oral > presentations, provided there are unique features or problems that have not > been studied before. Thus, let research quality drive the type of > presentation. Un abrazo cordial, Sergio > > > Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 10:15:00 +0200> To: > annelida@magpie.bio.indiana.edu> From: gambimc@szn.it> CC: > Subject: > [Annelida] 10th Polychaete Conference: 1st announcement> > Hi to everybody, > sorry for cross-posting the message (1st announcement of > the next > Polychaete Conference in Lecce-Italy 2010), but as the Latins > said... > "Repetita juvant" (repetitions help)....> Maria Cristina> > > > 1st > announcement 1st May 2008> > THE TENTH INTERNATIONAL POLYCHAETE CONFERENCE > will be held in LECCE, ITALY > from JUNE 20th to 26th, 2010.> > The > guide-line of the Conference will be: Polychaetes as Biological and > > Ecological Models: from taxonomy to applied research.> Development, Genetics > and Physiology are included within Biological issues. > All the applied > aspects are included within Ecological issues. Obviously > Taxonomy is a > basic topic for both. Contributions of all aspects of > polychaete research, > spanning from taxonomy to applied issues, can be > accepted for > presentation. Priority for oral presentations will be given to > those > contributions which address, through the use of polychaetes, more > general > scientific questions. Pure alpha-taxonomy papers (description of > new > species, genus or family revisions etc.) will be accepted only as posters. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Annelida mailing list > Post: Annelida@net.bio.net > Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida > Resources: http://www.annelida.net > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080517/39dbe0ac/attachment.html From Dieter.Fiege from senckenberg.de Mon May 19 08:33:28 2008 From: Dieter.Fiege from senckenberg.de (dfiege) Date: Mon May 19 14:45:32 2008 Subject: [Annelida] eunice gigantea (aphroditois) In-Reply-To: <707264088F25964398B036DDCEB1C0F0044583A3@SI-ECL01.US.SINET.SI.EDU> References: <528481.59079.qm@web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <707264088F25964398B036DDCEB1C0F0044583A3@SI-ECL01.US.SINET.SI.EDU> Message-ID: <483181A8.6060500@senckenberg.de> Dear colleagues, last summer I received two large eunicid specimens from Croatia. One was complete (141,5 cm) and the other was missing obviously quite a number of posterior segments but was still 104 cm long. Both were about 2 cm in diameter. I identified both as E. roussaei Quatrefages, 1866 and came across a paper by Pruvot & Racovitza (1895) in which they mention a specimen of E. roussaei measuring 3.3 m length. It had been discovered in Banyuls when a large exterior basin was cleaned. I guess this record might be responsible for those 3 m length that are often given as maximum length for polychaetes.... E. roussaei indeed is big game among polychaetes. Cheers, Dieter Fauchald, Kristian schrieb: > Juljan and others, I saw that Joana Zanol already responded to this > for me. Let me expand a bit on the problem. Early in taxonomy, i.e. > about 1760-80, up to about 1825, scientists reported huge specimens of > Eunice from a variety of more or less circumtropical locations (old > Tehthys sea??) and gave them a variety of names. Pierre Fauvel and > others, decided that this all represented one widespread species, so > all of them were referred by a single name. The first name safely > applied to this set of species was Nereis aphroditois Pallas. This > species was later moved into Eunice. The type species for the genus > Eunice is E. gigantea, but this species name is junior synonym > (according to Fauvel and others) of E. aphroditois. So, that is the > reason why the name, for years was considered to be E. aphroditois for > all of this mess of huge worms. Now, Joana Zanol and others, have > demonstrated that at least some of the species lumped by Fauvel, are > recognizable, separate species, and one of these is Eunice roussaei. > I would not be particularly surprised if it does not turn out that > there are several distinct species, perhaps molecular systematics may > be the best way of distinguishing them, but I would be surprised if it > turns out that more than one species is present in any given area. > Thus, in the Adriatic, you probably have E. roussaei. > > > > Best, Kristian Fauchald > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* annelida-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu > [mailto:annelida-bounces@oat.bio.indiana.edu] *On Behalf Of *Julijan > Sutlovi? > *Sent:* Thursday, May 15, 2008 4:31 AM > *To:* annelida@magpie.bio.indiana.edu > *Subject:* [Annelida] eunice gigantea (aphroditois) > > > > heloo!!! > > http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/1999-July/001251.html > on this link someone named Kristian Fauchald, (please don't be > offended cause I've written someone, cause you're title isn't written) > has written something about eunices. he has written that eunice > gigantea is not a valid name and that it's classified as eunice > aphroditois. so i did a small scientific research back in high school > about eunice gigantea, i researched their number on certain surface on > two kinds of littoral (sea bottom, i don't know how to say this, > sorry). and i was wondering about the name aphroditois, i found it > only once or twice and i was a bit confused but now I'm totally > confused!?!?!? and i also couldn't find enough literature about the > eunice gigantea, why doesn't anyone do researches about them? will you > please tell me some more about the name aphroditois, and maybe suggest > some literature??? > > thank you in advance, and many greetings from the sunny Croatian coast!!! > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Annelida mailing list >Post: Annelida@net.bio.net >Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida >Resources: http://www.annelida.net > -- Dr. Dieter Fiege Curator Marine Invertebrates (Polychaeta) Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Senckenberganlage 25 D-60325 Frankfurt/Main Germany ph: +49-(0)69-7542 1265 Fax: +49-(0)69-746238 www.senckenberg.de From gambimc from szn.it Tue May 20 08:45:44 2008 From: gambimc from szn.it (Maria Cristina Gambi) Date: Tue May 20 15:01:46 2008 Subject: [Annelida] X Polychaete Conference Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.1.20080520153107.01e0e1d0@in.szn.it> Dear Sergio, dear all, we have just received, through the forum, the response to your message given by Jim Blacke who focused and interpreted correctly our purposes and intentions as regards "pure alpha-taxonomy", and which we wish to thank. We would like to add , and clarify that taxonomic revisions involving genus or family levels, will have a more balanced evaluation, and their specifi approach and general interest (to a wider audience) will be carefully considered before any decision. We hope we have clarified.... Un abrazo cordial, a friendly hug, un abbraccio Adriana and Maria Cristina ------------------------------ Maria Cristina Gambi Laboratorio di Ecologia del Benthos (Stazione Zoologica "Anton Dohrn" di Napoli) Punta S. Pietro 80077 Ischia (Napoli, Italy) tel ++39 081 991410 or ++39 081 5833513 fax ++39 081 984201 e-mail:gambimc@szn.it ------------------------------------------- From barbara.mikac from cim.irb.hr Wed May 21 03:22:12 2008 From: barbara.mikac from cim.irb.hr (Barbara Mikac) Date: Wed May 21 05:13:19 2008 Subject: [Annelida] problems in Sprirorbids identification and counting Message-ID: <58954.193.204.79.157.1211358132.squirrel@www.cim.irb.hr> Dear colleagues, I have doubts and difficulties with determination and counting of the Sporobidae in my research so I would like to ask you for the advice on how to solve these problems. I'm analyzing polychaetes from hard bottom from the northern Adriatic Sea from 1,5 m, 5 m and 25 m depths. On every depth three replicates are taken - 10x10 cm square. In the 1,5 m samples, and in smaller number also on 5 m, there are many many serpulids, attached on the algae. The algae are mostly Corallina sp., Flabelia petiolata and Padina pavonica, but there are also other algae. And among them, on Corallina, the abundance of serpulids is the biggest, since this one is, due to it's complex structure, offering the biggest surface for the attachment. These serpulids are too small to remove each of them from the algae and determine because they are too fragile and get easily broken, and even only to count them it would take too much time (if possible at all). Can you maybe recommend me some way to solve this problem? Is there some method to estimate the number of Serpulids and the species in the whole sample (withouth looking through each of them), by counting them only in one part? Can you recommend me some literature? I came to the idea to count the number of serpulids in one part of the sample, than weighting this part and by weighting the whole sample try to estimate how many of serpulids are in the whole. But I suppose this would be wrong because peaces of algae thalus in the sample are of different sizes and sometimes containing only 5 serpulids, sometimes 40, so generalization for the whole sample is not possible. Even more considering the small size and equivalently small weight of Serpulids in comparing to the algae on which they are attached. I certainly wouldn't like to neglect it and just say in my future paper that serpulids were not taken into consideration (as I've seen in some papers), because considering their number they are obviouly the most abundant family in the samples (for the number of species I wouldn't know) so their importance in the community is big. Thank you very much for your help! Many greetings, Barbara Mikac ____________ Barbara Mikac, M.Sc. Marine Research Centre Rudjer Boskovic Institute G. Paliaga 5 52210 Rovinj Croatia tel: 00385 52 506065 fax: 00385 52 506065 e-mail: barbara.mikac@cim.irb.hr From g.read from niwa.co.nz Wed May 21 23:41:39 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Wed May 21 23:44:44 2008 Subject: [Annelida] An answer to an age-old earthworm question Message-ID: <4835A243.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> FYI "Why do those foolish earthworms venture out of their safe burrows and get washed down my garden path overnight," Mr Darwin asked himself. He scratched in his beard thoughtfully. "And will they ever adapt to the built environment? Well, time will tell I suppose. Best get on with the blasted book." Chuang, Shu-Chun & Chen, Jiun Hong. (2008) Role of diurnal rhythm of oxygen consumption in emergence from soil at night after heavy rain by earthworms. Invertebrate Biology, 127, 80-86. doi:10.1111/j.1744-7410.2007.00117.x Reprint author: chenjh@ntu.edu.tw Two species of earthworms were used to unravel why some earthworm species crawl out of the soil at night after heavy rain. Specimens of Amynthas gracilis, which show this behavior, were found to have poor tolerance to water immersion and a diurnal rhythm of oxygen consumption, using more oxygen at night than during the day. The other species, Pontoscolex corethrurus, survived longer under water and was never observed to crawl out of the soil after heavy rain; its oxygen consumption was not only lower than that of A. gracilis but also lacked a diurnal rhythm. Accordingly, we suggest that earthworms have at least two types of physical strategies to deal with water immersion and attendant oxygen depletion of the soil. The first is represented by A. gracilis; they crawl out of the waterlogged soil, especially at night when their oxygen consumption increases. The other strategy, shown by P. corethrurus, allows the earthworms to survive at a lower concentration of oxygen due to lower consumption; these worms can therefore remain longer in oxygen-poor conditions, and never crawl out of the soil after heavy rain. http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1744-7410.2007.00117.x -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ From romunov from gmail.com Wed May 21 23:56:26 2008 From: romunov from gmail.com (romunov) Date: Thu May 22 00:20:20 2008 Subject: [Annelida] An answer to an age-old earthworm question In-Reply-To: <4835A243.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> References: <4835A243.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> Message-ID: <63a206010805212156x58aaa3f2t769fcbd154e673d9@mail.gmail.com> We've been told at our U that the rain excursions can also be the result of overcrowdness. When I was confronted with this question during the course of lectures, the oxygen hypothesis seemed the most intuitive. I would, of course, love to read a paper discussing territorial behavior between earthworms. Cheeri-o! Roman On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 6:41 AM, Geoff Read wrote: > FYI > > "Why do those foolish earthworms venture out of their safe burrows and get > washed down my garden path overnight," Mr Darwin asked himself. He scratched > in his beard thoughtfully. "And will they ever adapt to the built > environment? Well, time will tell I suppose. Best get on with the blasted > book." > > Chuang, Shu-Chun & Chen, Jiun Hong. (2008) Role of diurnal rhythm of oxygen > consumption in emergence from soil at night after heavy rain by earthworms. > Invertebrate Biology, 127, 80-86. > > doi:10.1111/j.1744-7410.2007.00117.x Reprint author: chenjh@ntu.edu.tw > > Two species of earthworms were used to unravel why some earthworm species > crawl out of the soil at night after heavy rain. Specimens of Amynthas > gracilis, which show this behavior, were found to have poor tolerance to > water immersion and a diurnal rhythm of oxygen consumption, using more > oxygen at night than during the day. The other species, Pontoscolex > corethrurus, survived longer under water and was never observed to crawl out > of the soil after heavy rain; its oxygen consumption was not only lower than > that of A. gracilis but also lacked a diurnal rhythm. Accordingly, we > suggest that earthworms have at least two types of physical strategies to > deal with water immersion and attendant oxygen depletion of the soil. The > first is represented by A. gracilis; they crawl out of the waterlogged soil, > especially at night when their oxygen consumption increases. The other > strategy, shown by P. corethrurus, allows the earthworms to survive at a > lower concentration of oxygen due to lo! > wer consumption; these worms can therefore remain longer in oxygen-poor > conditions, and never crawl out of the soil after heavy rain. > > http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1744-7410.2007.00117.x > > -- > > Geoff Read > http://www.annelida.net/ > http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Annelida mailing list > Post: Annelida@net.bio.net > Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida > Resources: http://www.annelida.net > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/annelida/attachments/20080522/8005f132/attachment.html From g.read from niwa.co.nz Thu May 22 03:38:05 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Thu May 22 03:40:33 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Asetocalamyzas laonicola is a family-swapping male dwarf Message-ID: <4835D9AC.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> FYI, Vortsepneva, E., Tzetlin, A., Purschke, G., Mugue, N., Hass-Cordes, E. & Zhadan, A. (2008) The parasitic polychaete known as Asetocalamyzas laonicola (Calamyzidae) is in fact the dwarf male of the spionid Scolelepis laonicola (comb. nov.). Invertebrate Biology, efirst status, DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7410.2008.00137.x http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1744-7410.2008.00137.x Reprint requests: vortcepneva@mail.ru Abstract: The morphology of the obligately ectoparasitic polychaete Asetocalamyzas laonicola was studied by light and electron microscopy, and its taxonomic position was determined using molecular methods. The parasite has an extensive coelomic cavity, complete septae, and well-developed segmental nephridia, circulatory, and digestive systems. The nervous system is rudimentary and without ganglia. The parasite?s anterior region penetrates the tissues of the host, and opens into the host?s body cavity. The epidermal tissues of the parasite and the host are highly integrated in the area of contact, and the parasite?s cuticle is continuous with that of the host. Blood vessels of the parasite and the host may interlace in the fusion zone. The dorsal side of the parasite faces the dorsal side of the host. All parasites were males, but all hosts were females. In order to elucidate the uncertain systematic position of the parasite, molecular systematic studies were conducted. Parasite and host 18S rDNA sequences were virtually identical and revealed that both belong to the spionid cluster. These sequences differed from those of Scolelepis squamata and Scolelepis bonnieri by 2.7% and 0.9%, respectively. In addition, of seven partial sequences of the mitochondrial COI gene obtained from three parasites and four hosts, six were identical, and in one host?parasite pair, COI sequences differed by one substitution. Partial ITS2 sequences from one host?parasite pair were analyzed and also found to be similar but not identical, with two indels in a 645-bp alignment. We conclude that the parasite is in fact a dwarf male of its conspecific spionid female host. Consequently, A. laonicola is transferred to Scolelepis (Spionidae), forming the new combination Scolelepis laonicola Previously: Vortsepneva, E.V., Zhadan, A.E. & Tzetlin, A.B. (2006) Spermiogenesis and sperm ultrastructure of Asetocalamyzas laonicola Tzetlin, 1985 (Polychaeta), an ectoparasite of the large spionid Scolelepis cf. matsugae Sikorsfi, 1994, from the White Sea. Scientia Marina, 70, 343-350. Tzetlin, A.B. (1985) [Asetocalamyzas laonicola gen. et sp. n., a new ectoparasitic polychaete from the White Sea.] Zoologicheskii Zhurnal, 64, 296-298. Most interesting! Have fun updating your databases (and your textbooks). Geoff -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/ From g.read from niwa.co.nz Thu May 29 02:37:13 2008 From: g.read from niwa.co.nz (Geoff Read) Date: Thu May 29 02:41:50 2008 Subject: [Annelida] Sabella spallanzanii in Lyttelton NZ? Message-ID: <483F05E9.8045.00D5.0@niwa.co.nz> FYI The intrepid Sabella spallanzanii may have made the inevitable trans Tasman transition. Just one on a wharf pile, but where there's one ... better have another look there soonest I'd say. http://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/media/28-05-08/mediterranean-fanworm "MAF Biosecurity New Zealand acts on marine pest find in Lyttelton Port May 28, 2008 MAF Biosecurity New Zealand (MAFBNZ), is responding to the detection of a new and unwanted marine species in Lyttelton Port." etc. All news reports you can Google will be derived (with varying accuracy) from the above release. Geoff -- Geoff Read http://www.annelida.net/ http://www.niwascience.co.nz/ncabb/