Weitere biologische Literatur (eingeschränkter Zugriff)
Refine
Year of publication
- 1985 (8) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (6)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Other (1)
Language
- English (8) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (8)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (8)
Keywords
- Apoprionospio (1)
- Aquilaspio (1)
- Atlantic Ocean (1)
- Minuspio (1)
- Paraprionospie (1)
- Polychaeta (1)
- Prionospio (1)
- Spionidae (1)
- systematics (1)
The 70 Frullania species (+ 1 subspecies, 9 varieties, and 3 formae) belonging to 9 subgenera are confirmed in China, among which 1 subgenus and 4 species are new to science, and 12 species are newly reported from China. A new name (nom. nov.) and 12 combinations are proposed and several species are reduced to synonyms of other species. This study reveals the Frullania flora of China, particularly Yunnan and the neighboring provinces, to be most highly differentiated, containing many phytogeographic ally interesting taxa, and may be regarded as a center of the Paleotropic Frullania flora.
Several generic schemes used in classifying species belonging to Prionospio Malmgren, 1867 sensu lato have been reviewed; three taxa have been retained at the generic level, and three additional taxa at the subgeneric level. The following genera and subgenera are recognized: Prionospio Malmgren, 1867, including the subgenera Minuspio Foster, 1971, Aquilaspio Foster, 1971 and Prionospio Malmgren (sensu striclo); Apoprionospio Foster, 1969, and Paraprionospio Caullery, 1914. Prionospio sensu lata includes species with various combinations of branchiae which are smooth (apinnate), wrinkled, or with digitiform pinnules, beginning on setiger 2. Apoprionospio includes species having branchiae from setiger 2, with at least one pair having plate-like pinnules. Paraprionospio includes species with branchiae from setiger 1, with all pairs having platelike pinnules. Fifteen species, including seven new species, belonging to the genus Prionospio are described. Prionospio (Prionospio) steenstrupi Malmgren, 1867 is described from the syntype series, and is newly synonymized with P. fallax Söderström, 1920. The validity of P. bocki Söderström, 1920 as a separate species is discussed, as is the indeterminable nature of P. malmgreni Claparède, 1869. Prionospio (Prionospio) dubia Day, 1961 originally described as a new variety of P. malmgreni from S Africa, is raised to full species status. Prionospio (P.) cristata Foster, 1971 and P. (P.) heterobranchia Moore, 1907 are redescribed. Prionospio (P.) tripinnata, a new species with three pairs of pinnate branchiae, is described from the Mediterranean Sea and compared with P. plumosa Sars, 1872. A new synonymy is proposed for P. lobulata Fauchald, 1972 with P. (P.) ehlersi Fauvel, 1928. Two new species, P. (Minuspio) fauchaldi and P. (M.) laciniosa, are described in which the apinnate branchiae are distinctly wrinkled or sculptured, rather than smooth. P. (M.) laciniosa is also distinguished by dorsal crests modified into semicircular flaps. Several species previously referred to Prionospio (Minuspio) cirrifera Wirén, 1883 are reviewed and described. The seven species recognized by Foster in the genus Minuspio are considered; several are retained, and new species and new synonymies are proposed. Because the types are apparently lost, a description of P. (M.) cirrifera is given based on specimens from near the type locality. Prionospio (M.) aluta new species is separated from P. (M.) cirrifera on the basis of the presence of lateral pouches in P. aluta and their absence in P. cirrifera. Prionospio (M.) delta Hartman, 1965 is retained as a valid species; P. (M.) longibranchiata Reish, 1968 and P. (M.) minor Fauchald & Hancock, 1981 are newly synonymized with P. delta. P. (M.) multibranchiata Berkeley, 1927 is also retained as a valid species, and P. (M.) perkinsi, P. (M.) lighti and P. (M.) wireni are newly described from shallow water. Two species are recognized as belonging to Apoprionospio Foster: A. pygmaea (Hartman, 1961) and A. dayi Foster, 1969. New records and range extensions are given for both species. New records are also presented for Paraprionospio pinnata (Ehlers, 1901). The specimens examined as part of this study are based primarily on deep-sea materials collected in the Atlantic Ocean, but also include shallow-water specimens from the east, west, and gulf coasts of N America.
Keys to the hairs of 44 species of southern African Cricetidae and Muridae have been devised for the identification of these species. The keys are based primarily on the cuticular scale patterns and groove characters. Distribution data and descriptions of the hairs are presented with micrographs to assist in identification.
Neogastropods are usualiy accepted as the most advanccd prosobranchs, though their organization is approached in several respects in some higher families of Mesogastropoda. This seems, however, to be due to parallel evolution and the neogastropods originated from a much lower grade of mesogastropod. Although some workers derive them from an archaeogastropod stock there are too many features in their anatomy characteristic of mesogastropods rather than of archaeogastropods for this to bc acceptable. On the whofe, neogastropods are a rather uniform group of prosobranchs in their shell, external features, and internal anatomy. In only one System do they show, by comprison with archaeo- and mesogastropods, both extreme specialization and considerable variation: this is the gut, which is in several ways unlike that of any other prosobranch. This is to be associated with their carnivorous way of life, in which respect they again differ markedly from meso- and archaeogastropods. Taylor, Morris Br Taylor (1980) have shown how neogastropod species differ amongst themselves not, primarily, in their rnode of life, but in their often narrow choice of prey. Since the anatomical requirements for predation are more or less constant, the different species remain similar in organization and are often sympatric. In these respects neogastropods differ markedly from mesogastropods, whose adaptive radiation has been extensive and primarily in relation to mode of life. Separation of neogastropods from mesogastropods rests mainly on the siphonal canal in the shell, the siphon on the mantle edge, the rachiglossate or toxoglossate radula, and the presence of a pleurembolic proboscis or one of its varieties (Smith, 1967). The osphradium is large and its axis carries a double series of lamellae, giving it a gill-like appearance. Males always have a penis and females usually a ventral pedal gland. lnternally the anterior part of the alimentary caiial has becorne elaborate, with a complex glandular equipment, and the wall of the kidney is more folded than in mesogastropods. The nervous systern is concentrated, though the visceral ganglia remain posteriorly placed. Eggs are laid in capsules attached to the substratum. A free larval stage is often suppressed and food eggs are common, but neither of these features has much taxonomic significance, occurring apparently randomly throughout the group. Because of their general similarity classification of the Neogastropoda has proved to be no easy task, and there is still no universally-accepted subdivision of the order into superfamilies. It is generally agreed, however, that the order may be split into two groups, primarily on the basis of radular structure. The more primitive of these, the Rachiglossa, has a radula with typically 3 teeth per row; the more advanced, the Toxoglossa, has a radula which, in more primitive genera, resembles the rachiglossate, but which Comes, in more advanced toxoglossans, to have only a single tooth in action at a time. Each tooth has then become scroll-like and is used for the injection of poison from a poison gland into the prey (Shimek & Kohn, 1981). The group Toxoglossa is agreed to contain the superfamily Conacea which includes (as Recent forms) the families Turridae, Conidae, and Terebridae, all with poison apparatus, though with very different shells. Risbec (1955), followed by Taylor & Sohl (1962), has added a second superfamily Mitracea containing, in the family Mitridae, a grouping of genera selected from that family as earlier understood. These have a rachiglossate radula and an apparent poison gland not irnrnediately comparable with that of undoubted toxoglossans. This reclassification of mitrids has not found favour with subsequent workers (Cernohorsky, 1966, 1970; Ponder, 1972). Ponder (1973) made a case for adding a third suborder to the two mentioncd above. This was to contain the single superfamily Cancellariacea with the one family Cancellariidae. The case rests on the unique character of their radula. It is, however, when one turns to the remaining rachiglossan families and- attempts to assign them to superfamilies that difficulties mount. Three groupings Iiave been conventionally recognized - Muricacea, Buccinacea, and Volutacea, though it has often appeared that the last was a collection of animals not obviously assignable to the other two rather than clearly related amongst thernselves. Ponder (1973) came to the somewhat pessimistic conclusion that all rachiglossans should be put into a single taxon, for which he used the name Muricacea. It seems to us, however, that certainly within the limited group of anirnals with which we have to deal here, but even in a broader context, there is still some validity - and certainly convenience - in the older Separation, when due importance is given to internal anatomy; we propose, therefore, to retain the three superfamilies in dealing with a group which is otherwise too large for easy treatment. We adopt this arrangement the more readily as we have no volutacean mernbers of the fauna with which we have to deal, provided that we accept Ponder's proposal to create a separate superfamily for cancellariids. This allows the remaining superfamilies to be split into Muricacea and Buccinacea, and it is between these two superfamilies that lines of division may most obviously be drawn. Taylor & Sohl (1962) noted about 800 genera and subgenera in the rachiglossan group. The Buccinacea, with nearly 400, is rivalled for size only by the superfamilies Rissoacea and Cerithiacea amongst all the prosobranchs. A difficulty arises at this point in relation to the number of species which have been described. Many neogastropods are not intertidal in occurrence. Their capture is dependent upon dredging, a method which can often do no more than sample a few isolated spots on the ocean bed. Many species have been described on the basis of these samples without any real knowledge of the variation whjch may affect populations. It seems, indeed, probable that many of these are no more than local varieties, especially when it is remembered that the anatomy of many is very imperfectly known. We have, therefore, been conservative in nomenclature and tended to use broad generic groupings where others might have used narrower ones. The latter may be right, but it is prernature to be sure of this.
This paper deals with the anthomyiid-flies from Korea. A total of 81 species belonging to 22 genera are represented in Korean fauna as the result, among them the following 9 species are proposed here new to science as: Anthomyia koreana sp. nov., Botanophila seungrnoi sp. nov., Acklandia koreacola sp. nov., Lasiomma monticola sp nov., Egle podulparia sp. nov., Delia expansa sp. nov., Phorbia soyosana sp. nov., P. dissimiiis sp. nov., P. taeguensis sp. nov., and 2 genera, Acklandia Hennig, 1976, Egle Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830, with the below 12 species are newly recorded from Korea as: Parapegomyia schineri, Nupedia debilis, Botanophila striolata, Egle muscaria, E. longipalpis, E. parvaeformis, E. panta, E. korpokkur, Paregle vetula, Delia tenuiventris, D. coronariae, Phorbia longipilis. Keys are given for all the taxa respectively, some illustrations of various characters for identification are provided. Arranged are host plants and domestic localities for each species.