OK, I was planning to do something about this, but since my name has been taken in vain, I would like to make some comments. Most of the polychaetes were put on the list by polychaete people from about 1880 through 1920, including Ehlers, but especially Hermann Augener who had a bee in his bonnet about this issue. The reason why the list looks old-fashioned is that it is: Mainly the issue ended up being that Malmgren and others described the species from Scandinavia and especially from the Arctic during the period when people were running around looking for the Northwest or the Northeast Passage. Antarctic exploration was a few years later and as a consequence the scientists (not unreasonable) would use what literature was available. Furthermore, we ended up in a period when what was referred to as "minor differences" were disregarded, sometimes correctly, sometimes not. Later scientists have sorted out some of the matter, but a fair bit needs to be done, and we need new material since obviously molecular techniques will be needed to resolve many issues.
I have to look in detail at the list, if I am going to come up with something sensible as a sort of start, and will do so later this week (I am moving office and am in absolute chaos for the time being).
Kristian Fauchald
-----Original Message-----
From: annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu [mailto:annelida-bounces from oat.bio.indiana.edu] On Behalf Of Geoff Read
Sent: Wednesday, November 04, 2009 6:16 PM
To: Jan Strugnell; annelida from magpie.bio.indiana.edu
Subject: Re: [Annelida] polychaete tissue samples
Hi Jan & all,
I note my non-worm colleagues at my institute are also receiving
similar requests for their taxa. I would like to see a more detailed
science rationale for this project divorced from the press release &
intro I see at www.caml.aq. (quote "... highlighted 235 species
co-occurring in both polar regions. CAML identified this as a key
discovery" end quote. A discovery? Hopefully based on more than the
same names turning up in old monographs, or as quickly identified from
keys by non-specialists) Such as is there an ocean currents mechanism
that would carry larvae from pole to pole in biologically realistic
time? Is there a project proposal document available outlining the
science?
In the case of the polychaetes the list appears taxonomically naive,
consisting almost entirely of 19th century names (which may lack a
modern taxonomic revision). Who made this list? For instance Fauchald
1992 said in his revision that for Eunice pennata, type locality
Oslofjord, Antarctic records "have yet to be confirmed" (that usually
means in polite taxonomic speak such records are unbelievable), whereas
Orensanz's (1990) description was based only on the Antarctic material
without comparing the northern entity. Score that one taxonomically
confused, noting neither made the claim it was bi-polar. I doubt that
any taxonomic expert seriously thinks any of the polychaetes listed
really are at both poles (well there may be some support for at least
one species). That said it would be excellent, repeat EXCELLENT, to
collaborate to investigate certain related taxa molecularly, but without
buying into the bi-polar idea. Hyalinoecia tubicola and closely allied
taxa for example. Would love to see what is going on with that, but
there seems to be only one CO1 accession yet. Also I have some doubt on
whether Hyalinoecia spp fit the criteria by extending to the Antarctic
(or Arctic) proper. We haven't found them in the Ross Sea yet, though
there are plenty in NZ waters on the continental slopes to about 50 deg
S, and Orensanz didn't report them on the Antarctic Peninsula, although
there is one Smithsonian record from there. I can't see any Arctic
records in Obis at a quick look. So how did it get in the list? Anyway
it doesn't look like we've got ethanol-fixed even from local seas but I
will check again.
One exception with modern support that I noticed is Glycera capitata,
apparently the only Antarctic Glycera species, and which Markus
Böggemann (2002) was unable to subdivide in his revision, attributing
Arctic and Antarctic material to it. The distribution is really
disjunct, and the natural suggestion would be that the Southern
hemisphere has a different species - would like to see that tested. NIWA
does have ethanol-fixed Antarctic tissue we will make available (along
with whatever else will be useful).
Geoff
>>> On 5/11/2009 at 2:15 a.m., Jan Strugnell
<jan.strugnell from googlemail.com> wrote:
> Dear Annelid scientists!
>>> My name is Jan Strugnell and I am currently working on a Census of
> Marine Life initiative investigating species that have been suggested
> to be present at both polar regions (and possibly cosmopolitan) in
> their distribution. I include a list of polychaetes below which
have
> been suggested to be present in the Arctic and Antarctic.
>> I am trying to track down tissue samples of these polychaetes from
> both poles (and also places in between where they exist) that have
> been fixed in ethanol or frozen and could be used for DNA barcoding
> (through the Guelph barcoding facility).
>> I was wondering if any of you had any of these samples, (stored in
> ethanol or frozen) that could be barcoded for this project? Only a
> tiny piece of tissue would be required.
>> Yours sincerely,
>> Jan
>> Jan Strugnell
> Lloyd's Tercentenary Fellow
> Department of Zoology
> University of Cambridge
> Downing Street
> Cambridge CB2 3EJ UK
>>http://www.zoo.cam.ac.uk/zoostaff/amos/new/meg/jan.html>> Capitellida Maldane
sarsi Malmgren, 1865
>> Eunicida Eunice
pennata (O.F. Müller, 1776)
>> Eunicida Hyalinoecia tubicola (O.F.
Müller, 1776)
>> Eunicida Lumbrineris
tetraura (Schmarda, 1861)
>> Flabelligerida Brada
villosa (Rathke, 1843)
>> Opheliida Ophelina cylindricaudata (Hansen,
1878)
>> Orbiniida Levinsenia gracilis (Tauber,
1879)
>> Oweniida Myriochele
heeri Malmgren, 1867
>> Phyllodocida Ceratocephale
loveni Malmgren, 1867
>> Phyllodocida Eucranta
villosa Malmgren, 1866
>> Phyllodocida Glycera
capitata Örsted, 1843
>> Phyllodocida Harmothoe
impar (Johnston, 1839)
>> Phyllodocida Kefersteinia
cirrata (Keferstein, 1862)
>> Phyllodocida Laetmonice filicornis Kinberg,
1856
>> Phyllodocida Pelagobia longicirrata Gravier, 1911
>> Phyllodocida Phalacrophorus pictus Greeff, 1879
>> Phyllodocida Syllis
armillaris (O.F. Müller, 1776)
>> Phyllodocida Syllis cornuta Rathke,
1843
>> Phyllodocida Tomopteris septentrionalis Steenstrup,
1849
>> Phyllodocida Typhloscolex muelleri Busch,
1851
>> Spionida Aphelochaeta marioni (de
Saint-Joseph, 1894)
>> Spionida Laonice cirrata (M.
Sars, 1851)
>> Terebellida Amphicteis gunneri (Sars,
1835)
>> Terebellida Amphitrite
cirrata O. F. Müller, 1771 in
1776
>> Terebellida Artacama proboscidea Malmgren, 1866
>> Terebellida Lysilla
loveni Malmgren, 1866
>> Terebellida Thelepus
cincinnatus (Fabricius, 1780)
>> Terebellida Trichobranchus
glacialis Malmgren, 1866
--
Geoff Read <g.read from niwa.co.nz>
http://www.annelida.net/http://www.niwa.co.nz/about-niwa
***************************
NIWA is the trading name of the National Institute of Water &
Atmospheric Research Ltd.
_______________________________________________
Annelida mailing list
Post: Annelida from net.bio.net
Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida
Resources: http://www.annelida.net
