scamit newsletter template€¦ · difficulties uncovered during the recent b’98 conflict...

SUBJECT: General Non-polychaete problems

GUEST SPEAKER: None

DATE: 13 March 2000

TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m.

LOCATION: City of San DiegoMarine Biology Lab4918 N. Harbor Dr. #201

FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BYTHE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC.

SCAMIT Newsletter is not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes.

January, 2000 Vol. 18, No. 9SCAMIT Newsletter

UP-COMING MEETINGS

With completion of the benthic data processingfrom the B’98 survey, we will resume ouronce-a-month schedule of SCAMIT meetings.The February 14th SCAMIT meeting is ageneral problem polychaete meeting to discussareas of continuing uncertainty anddissatisfaction with various groups. It will beheld at the Worm Lab of the Natural HistoryMuseum of Los Angeles County. Thefollowing meeting is scheduled for 13 March atthe San Diego lab, and will deal with generalnon-polychaete problems as well as newdifficulties uncovered during the recent B’98conflict resolution meetings. At a minimum,the subspecies of the amphipod Ampeliscacristata will be discussed along with theampeliscid genus Byblis in local waters. On 10April a workshop on pilargid polychaetes willbe held at the Worm Lab of the Natural HistoryMuseum of LA County. Dr. Sergio Salazar-Vallejo will be in attendance and he, along with

Philomedidae sp SD 1B’98 station 2476, 8-11-98, 11mPhoto by D. Pasko 2/2000

2


Vice-President Leslie Harris, will lead theworkshop. On 8 May a meeting oncorrections, additions, deletions, and changesto the SCAMIT Ed 3 Taxonomic Listing priorto final preparations for Edition 4 will be heldat SCCWRP.

BIG NEWS

At about nine p.m. on Thursday 27 January,Cheryl and Bob Brantley became the parents ofa 10 lb. 5 oz., 21 inch long baby boy, DanielDennis Brantley!!! We hope to be introduced to

this new future SCAMIT member as soon aspossible. CONGRATULATIONS to both ofthem, but especially to Cheryl who workedlong and hard to bring him among us.

SCUM RESURFACES

The fourth annual meeting of the SouthernCalifornia Unified Malacologists was recently(14 January) held at the Institute forGeophysics and Planetary Physics at ScrippsInstitution of Oceanography. SCAMIT stalwartLarry Lovell was a co-sponsor of the meetingalong with Hugh Bradford and Terry Arnold.Approximately 30 attendees enjoyed the usualslate of activities: an introduction to the

meeting, followed by introductions ofindividuals going around the room, and thenpresentations of works completed or inprogress. Other SCAMIT members inattendance included secretary Megan Lilly,Don Cadien, and John Ljubenkov. John gaveSCAMIT and Bight’98 a plug in his workstatement. Presentations were brief and mosteschewed visual aids. We did, however, haveseveral slide shows. A particularly beautifulone presented by Mike Miller dealt withPhilippine opisthobranchs (and a few otherinverts as well). Kent Trego presented slidesshowing sampling at Deception Island in thesouth Atlantic. This is the caldera of an extinctvolcano which is miles across and reachesdepths of nearly 100m within it’s interior. I gotthe impression it was like winter sampling inAlaska, only colder. The slides Kent showedwere quite beautiful and seeing scientistssampling from within international distressorange survival suits put a different spin onrough weather trawling off California.

Dr. Jim McLean of the Natural HistoryMuseum of Los Angeles County showed us asample plate from his monograph on Californiamollusks and opened up both volumes of thetext to give us a preview. Looks like this longterm project is fairly rapidly approaching itsend. We also heard from Jules Hertz that theCoan, Scott & Bernard California bivalvesmonograph was shopping for a new publisher.The rumor was that when the previouspublishers got a gander at the full size of thesubmitted MS they raised the publication costby 3X! We wish them well in their search for anew and less costly way of producing the long-awaited volume.

The San Diego Shell Club was wellrepresented at the meeting. The editor (CarolHertz) of their journal “The Festivus” was onhand and had copies of the latest supplement,her own “Illustration of the Types Named by S.Stillman Berry in his ‘Leaflets in Malacology’Revised”. This supplement to Volume 31 is arevision of the Supplement to Volume 15

3

January, 2000 Vol. 18, No.9SCAMIT Newsletter

(1984), providing additional information andimproved reproduction of the figures. Sincenearly all of Berry’s leaflets were totallywithout illustration, Carol’s volume is a virtualnecessity in interpreting his descriptions. Youcan obtain it, as well as other special andsupplemental volumes of the journal, bywriting her at:San Diego Shell Club, Inc.c/o 3883 Mt. Blackburn Ave.San Diego, CA 92111

Hans Bertsch also presented a brief slide showof preserved material of Bathydoris aiocaMarcus & Marcus 1962, based on re-collectionof the animal off Oregon.This is an extremelyrare and poorly known nudibranch, It wasoriginally described from deep water off BajaCalifornia and not reported again in theintervening 38 years. These specimens werelisted as Bathydoris sp. in Austin (1985), butwere not recognized at that time as beingconspecific with the Marcus’ species. A paperdescribing this find is expected soon.

The main purpose of, and activity at themeeting, was conversation. This ispredominantly a get and keep acquainted sortof meeting which provides a venue for oldassociations to be refreshed and new ones to beformed. It was a delight which continued untilnearly 4pm (after breaking for lunch). Towardsthe end of the day Larry Lovell led a tourthrough the new collections facilities for theInvertebrate Collection at SIO (which will soonbe ready for occupation). It was decided thatthe 2001 meeting will be held at the NaturalHistory Museum of Los Angeles County. Wewill provide more exact information on datesand locations towards the end of the year. Thiswas a very enjoyable get together and I amlooking forward to the next one. -Don Cadien(CSDLAC)

SAD START TO 2000

Once again we report, with considerable regret,the loss of two major crustacean workers. Dr.Gary Brusca died on 13 January after severalyears of illness. He is remembered below byhis brother Rick and by his students Drs. LesWatling and Tim Stebbins. Dr. Ray Manningcame to the end of a long and productive lifeon 18 January. Dr. Rafael Lemaitre provides abrief summary of his achievements and Drs.Jens Hoeg and Fred Schram reprise hisinvolvement with the Crustacean Society andoffer a personal memoir. A full obituary isscheduled for the March 2000 issue of theProceedings of the Biological Society ofWashington. Cancer claimed them both. Garyand Ray both leave a legacy of published work,and Gary, as a pedagogue, a group of studentswhose attitudes and approaches he shaped.While both contributed significantly to theirprimary taxonomic areas (hyperiid amphipodsand stomatopods, respectively), for much ofthe 20th century Ray Manning was stomatopodsystematics. While he also added significantlyto a number of areas of decapod taxonomy, hiswork with stomatopods will likely be his mostenduring contribution.

GARY J. BRUSCA

“With great sadness I report the death of mybrother, Gary J. Brusca, who passed away onJanuary 13, 2000. Gary received his BSc(1960) from California State PolytechnicUniversity (San Luis Obispo) as one of DaveMontgomery’s advisees; his MSc (1961) fromthe University of the Pacific (Stockton),working under John Tucker and Joel Hedgpeth;and his PhD (1965) from the University ofSouthern California (Los Angeles), under theguidance of Russell Zimmer. From 1972 to1974 he lived and worked as a fisheriesbiologist on the island of Mauritius, where hisyoungest son (James) was born. Gary is bestknown in the carcinology world for hisresearch on hyperiid amphipods, and for twobooks we published together, A Naturalist’s

4


Seashore Guide: Common Marine Life of theNorthern California Coast and Adjacent Shores(Mad River Press, 1978), and Invertebrates(Sinauer Associates, 1990). His “AnnotatedKeys to the Hyperiidea of North AmericanCoastal Waters” (Allan Hancock FoundationTech. Rpts. 5:1-76, 1981) is a benchmarksummary for the hyperiid (pelagic) amphipodsof North America. Gary also authored a generaltext on embryology (General Patterns ofInvertebrate Development., 1975, Mad RiverPress). However, for students of the Californiacoast Gary may be best remembered for hisexcellence in the classroom and the field wherehe trained legions of marine biology studentsover the years at University of the Pacific(1964-1967) and Humboldt State University(1967-1998).

One of his greatest joys in life were earlymorning field trips with students, arriving atthe coast just as the sun was rising and the fogwas lifting on those cold gray northernCalifornia beaches. From 1967 to 1990, Garywon countless awards in recognition of histeaching excellence, including the “Cal PolyHonored Alumnus in Science and Math”award. But more of interest to many was thefact that Gary was one of a small group ofPacific coast biologists who carried on thelegacy of Ed Ricketts and Joel Hedgpeth. Hewas co-founder and publisher of TheStomatopod, an eclectic and irreverent biologyjournal in the tradition of the 60’s and early70’s, that entertained and educated Pacificcoast biologists for many years. Gary’sminimalistic poetry, collectively publishedunder the pseudonym “Waren Stauls” (Nature’sLaws. Selected Poems of Waren Stauls)followed in the tradition of Joel Hedgpeth’sbooks published under the pseudonym JeromeTichner (Poems in Contempt of Progress,Scattered Poems). Gary retired in 1999,moving to the Sacramento (CA) area, wherehis wife Julie, 5 children, and 2 grandchildrensurvive him. At the time of his death, he and Iwere working on a new general zoology text(Concepts in Zoology, for Saunders

Publishing) and revisions of our Invertebratestext and California seashore guide. Cards canbe sent to Gary’s family c/o of: Julie Brusca,8058 Orange Ave., Fair Oaks, CA 95628.

FROM “NATURE’S LAWS”:

Life is tooshort to letyesterdaydestroy today,but never forget thattomorrow you may needa memory -and it will be there.”

Richard C. BruscaSenior Research Scientist and Interim Directorof EducationColumbia University Biosphere 2 Center[reprinted with the author’s permission fromthe CrustL list server]

“The passing of Gary is especially sad for me.Gary was my first graduate advisor while hewas at the University of the Pacific, bringingme into the marine sciences and crustaceanstudies when I was real young, having enteredgraduate school at 19. He set a strong tone ofexcellence in thought and enjoyment inresearch. The early morning field trips weren’tonerous with Gary, but that’s not to say theyweren’t painful. He made them a lot of fun andtrue adventures. But what I remember mostabout him was the detail of his courses. I cansay with some conviction that most of theinvertebrate knowledge I have at my fingertipsI acquired in Gary’s classes. Every course hadlong, detailed phylogenetic arguments at theircore — not because we all had good answers oreven techniques in those days for discussingphylogeny, but because you had to master thedetails to be able to argue anything. Garyknew the details and if your argument violatedsome feature of morphology, you wereinformed in short order. Perhaps the most

5


valuable of all the classes, though, was the oneon invertebrate embryology. There wasn’t atext to speak of, but there was, again, a teacherwith the details. We were all convinced thenthat the big phylogenetic conundrums would besolved with embryological help. Little did weknow how that field would change and theinformation it would ultimately give us.

I met him again just a few years ago. He didn’tseem to have changed all that much, so it was abig surprise to find out last year that he was ill.I’m sure his years at Humboldt produced manystudents with a strong appreciation for, as wellas a thorough understanding, of the marineworld.

In sum, I guess I feel that most importantly,Gary showed “how” to teach, not just “what”to teach.”

Les WatlingProfessor of Oceanography, andPew Fellow in Marine ConservationSchool of Marine SciencesDarling Marine CenterUniversity of Maine[reprinted with the author’s permission fromthe CrustL list server]

“I would also like to express my deepestsorrow on the passing of Gary Brusca and offera brief personal perspective on a remarkableindividual. Gary was one of my graduateadvisors at Humboldt State University, amentor and a good friend. He was withoutexception one of the finest instructors andfinest people I have had the privilege to know.Gary was a first-rate scientist, a first-rateinstructor, and a first-rate writer and editor. Itwas Gary who first introduced me to the joysof crustaceans, and it was Gary that ingrainedin me a respect for ‘natural history’ in thetradition of the great naturalists.

It is impossible here to truly capture who Garywas. Those of us who were fortunate to be hisstudents can only express a sense of awe at hiscontributions to our education. As Les Watling

has already pointed out, the detail of Gary’scourses was truly amazing. In fact, I think hisgraduate courses in invertebrate embryologyand crustacean biology were two of the mostchallenging and rewarding classes I ever took.They certainly made you think, and discuss,and argue, and....You never saw so many wornout graduate students after a Gary Brusca 2-week take-home midterm. Gary had an abilityto make you think beyond what you knew, or atleast try to. Perhaps what stood out even morein terms of classroom experience was simplywatching Gary teach undergraduateinvertebrate zoology (what a learningexperience it was to be his assistant). Althoughhe was remarkable in the laboratory, hislectures were even more so. He had aneloquence about the way he spoke that madeevery lecture seem like a story, inspiring andnever boring. I will never forget watching him‘tell his stories’ with his eyes on the students,while at the same time drawing the mostexquisite and detailed illustrations on theboard. I was never able to figure out when (orif) he looked at his notes, and hours later I wasstill unable to duplicate his drawings. PerhapsGary was a magician of sorts. Anyway, I stillhave those notes today.

Gary’s contributions were certainly not limitedto the classroom. In fact, I always felt the fieldwas his true laboratory and lecture hall. Someof my fondest memories are the two summersthat I worked with Gary as part of a NSFSummer Institute in Marine Biology foradvanced high school students. It was thosecountless field trips with all those inquisitiveyoung minds in tow that really showed Gary athis best. He didn’t seem to mind that I hadlittle idea how to drive, or double-shift, thatrickety old bus along the frontage roadsoverlooking the Humboldt coast. It was anadventure, and we were heading to thetidepools where we (or usually the students)never failed to discover something new.

6


Finally, and as Rick mentioned in hisannouncement, Gary was perhaps most of all aNaturalist in the spirit of Ed Ricketts and JoelHedgpeth. It seems it was this philosophy thatinfluenced everything he taught. In fact, thelast ‘course’ I took from Gary in the Spring of1982 was a seminar on the life of Edward F.Ricketts, not the typical biology fare. Ourtexts, so to speak, were John Steinbeck’s ‘TheLog from the Sea of Cortez,’ ‘Cannery Row,’and ‘Sweet Thursday,’ and Joel Hedgpeth’s twovolume ‘The Outer Shores’. What a fun andthought provoking experience that was! Aspart of the seminar, Gary (a.k.a. Waren Stauls)penned the poem below in honor of EdRicketts. It seems appropriate to reproduce ithere.”

Tim StebbinsCity of San Diego Marine Biology Laboratory

‘ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF HISDEATH’

Cling too tight to a memoryand it will fold upon itself,

Hiding all there is to seeas pages on a dusty shelf.

My memory of you is second hand,yet we are bound by sea’s life blood

By being drawn where tide meets land,revealed to us by ebb and flood.

Is that where true things rest foreverout of range of understanding?

Defying all of man’s endeavorsto glimpse beyond the surface trappings.

To walk at best along the edgeof some deep thing just out of sight,

Afraid to look beyond the ledge,comprehension may not make it right.

Unplumbed depths that beckon for us,we cannot fathom it from here,

To step inside where one bright chorusreveals it simple, crystal clear.

But then with all the truth unveiledthose absolutes become our bonds,

We are only free by what’s concealedand cannot search for that which has been found.

And if within the deep thing one resides,and all the interwoven threads unraveled,

It cannot be explained to those outsidewho’s mystic paths to truth remain untraveled.

Were these the things you tried to say,as creatures told them once to you?

To listen to the voice of death one daythat says, my friend it’s time for breaking through.

— Waren Stauls, 1982

[reprinted with Dr. Stebbins permission fromthe CrustL list server]

RAYMOND B. MANNING

“I am very saddened to inform you that in theearly morning hours of January 18, Dr.Raymond B. Manning, Senior Zoologist,National Museum of Natural History,Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.,passed away at Arlington Hospital, Virginia.He was 65, and had been suffering from lungcancer and a severe heart condition over thepast several years. Despite his frail health hecontinued working until the very end. The voidleft by Ray is immense. His invaluableexpertise, contagious energy, and warmfriendship will be sorely missed. Details of amemorial service will be announced separately.

Ray Manning received his BS (1956), MS(1959), and PhD (1963) from the University ofMiami, and was immediately hired in 1963 asAssociate Curator by the SmithsonianInstitution. He married Lilly King Manningwho was his life-long illustrator, and they had3 daughters, Marian, Barbara and Elaine.

7


In May of 1999 Ray was honored by TheCrustacean Society with its Excellence inResearch Award, in recognition of the qualityand impact of his many contributions publishedover 4 decades, and the critical role he playedin the founding of TCS and its earlydevelopment during his tenure as President(1981-1983). A special volume of the Journalof Crustacean Biology dedicated to him,containing papers by many of his colleagues,will appear later this year. A biographicalsketch and bibliography will also be includedin this volume.

Ray had an extraordinarily productive anddistinguished career at the SmithsonianInstitution where he excelled in every aspect ofcuratorial responsibility. He was a leader in thedevelopment of innovative techniques forsampling specimens and study literature, andwas energetic in the promotion ofcarcinological research and zoologicalnomenclature at a national and internationallevel. As a tireless collector he amassed morethan 50,000 decapod and stomatopod for theMuseum and other institutions. The penetrationof his papers in other fields of research, andreputation on the international level largely dueto his monographic works and collaborationswith scientists worldwide, are truly impressive.As many of you know, his research focusedprimarily on the systematics of stomatopodsand decapods. He published a total of 278papers, and named solely or jointly with co-authors, 279 species, 138 genera, 5subfamilies, 19 families, and 3 superfamilies ofextant decapods and stomatopods, and at least15 genera and 27 species of fossil decapods.”

Rafael LemaitreDepartment of Invertebrate ZoologyNational Museum of Natural History[reprinted with the author’s permission fromthe CrustL list server]

“What a series of losses we have suffered incarcinology these last several months. Now wemourn the passing of Raymond Manning. Thesense of sadness is almost overwhelming forthose of us who knew him personally. Howcan one adequately memorialize a person whoin a very real sense was the “godfather” of usall? It was Ray Manning who pushed for theformation of The Crustacean Society. It is hardto realize now that many people at that timewere not convinced such a society wasnecessary. Yet through it all, Ray held firm.He had a clear vision of what was needed andhow we had to go about getting it. He inspiredthe rest of us on the organizing council to “seeit through.” Those were troubled times, thelate 70s and early 80s, both economically andpolitically — not the best time to launch ascientific society. We councilors affectionatelycalled Ray our “ayatollah” and looked to himfor guidance. After the foundation period wasover and the first real elections were held, therewas absolutely no doubt in the minds ofanyone that Ray Manning had to be our firstpresident. That first term was even extra long(3 years instead of 2); we couldn’t see howanyone else was going to get us through thecritical first years. Combined with his 2 yearschairing the organizing council, he was at thehelm for half a decade.

Of course, Ray was correct in his vision. TheCrustacean Society, the Journal of CrustaceanBiology, the society’s various outreachprograms all stand in testimony to this. At hislaudatory banquet at the annual summermeeting in Lafayette, Louisiana last Spring,there were many speeches, personalrecollections, slides of events in his career, and(most importantly of all for Ray) lots of goodfood and drinks with friends. But his partingwords to us were, “And remember, you’re allhere tonight because of me.” The crowd roaredwith laughter, but it was a double punch line.We were indeed gathered that evening to

8


celebrate Ray Manning the person with a grandparty, but we were also gathered as members ofa Society that would not have been there butfor him. A great legacy indeed.

And then there are the research achievements.He was Mister Stomatopod! What had been aminor cluster of species scattered about a fewfamilies ended up with almost 500 species, andcounting, in 4 superfamilies. This came notonly from taxonomic revision of the oldliterature, but also from new fresh collectionsfrom around the world. His mastery of mantisshrimp was total. It was this mastery thatimmediately attracted one of us (FRS) as agraduate student visiting the collections of theNational Museum in Washington. To know agroup of animals that well was something to beaspired to. This expertise in stomatopodsseemed all the more amazing as it becameobvious through the years that it was matchedby an equally comprehensive expertise inreptant decapods. Ray never felt any need toapologize for his devotion to alpha-taxonomy.For him, species were the basis of everything.

His scientific achievements were backed upwith an ample supply of practical, commonsense, organizational skills. We saw this in thefoundation of The Crustacean Society.However, Ray applied this towards running thecrustacean section of the National Museumand, for many years, in chairing theDepartment of Invertebrates in theSmithsonian. Indeed his sense of responsibilitytowards the museum and the fate of itscollections were strong right up until the end.Anyone who has visited the museum or sentstudents have experienced Ray’s dedication tothe collections. A few months before he diedone of us (FRS) visited him in Washington.And what did he want to talk about? Not hisown research. Certainly not about his ownhealth. Rather, it was the health of theSmithsonian collections that concerned him,weighted by a sense of despair with museumadministrators over what he believed was theirshort sightedness.

Least we convey the false impression that RayManning was “all work,” we cannot closewithout reference to Ray’s love of life. Heloved people as much as he loved the animalshe worked on. He and his wife Lilly developeda web of friendships that extended around theworld. This included the Zoological Museumin Copenhagen (ZMUC). Ray always had aspecial connection to Denmark through Lilly,whose own roots are in this country. Not onlythe president of the TCS (JTH) but many otherfriends and colleagues in Denmark mourn thepassing of a great carcinologist and a goodfriend.

Time spent with Ray was never dull.“Heaven” for Ray was a good steak, somegood bourbon, in a setting of goodconversation with friends. That all of thismight get mixed in with a dose of science wasjust so much more spice. It was not the lengthof a life that was important to Ray, it was itsquality. Indeed, it stands as his final lesson tous.

So while we mourn for one of our founders,and share our sense of sadness over Ray’spassing with his wife Lilly and their daughtersand family, there is a lot to remember andrejoice about Ray Manning’s life. Truly, weare here because of him.”

Jens T. HoegPresident, The Crustacean Society, 2000-2001Frederick R SchramOrganizing Councilor, and Past-President, TheCrustacean Society, 1986-1987[reprinted with the permission of the authorsfrom the CrustL list server]

BIGHT’98 UPDATE

After seemingly endless meetings to discussthe rarer, more outre, and more problematicspecies we encountered in Bight’98 we havefinally reached the “truth or consequences”portion of the infaunal program. On 24 Januarywe had our first “conflict resolution” meetingto thrash out the differences in identification

9


between primary and review taxonomists. Allparticipating parties received and identified(some of) their portion of the 36 randomlyselected exchange samples and also receivedthe identifications produced by the initialidentification of the same material. Conflictingcounts and identities were reexamined by thereanalysis lab prior to going to the meeting sothat apparent, rather than real, errors did notoccupy our discussions. The results of thisprocedure in the SCBPP were a guide and mostof the discrepancies were easily resolved andusually without the need to change data. It willtake several meetings however, and theschedule calls for completion of this portion ofthe program by mid-February 2000. A kernel ofdispute will persist, however, and once allpoints of view have been entertained andspecimens reexamined if necessary, thetaxonomic coordinator(s) will have to reach adecision regarding the data (in the process ofsynoptic data review). Once any necessarychanges have been performed, the data can besubmitted in final form for analysis. This iscurrently scheduled for 1 April, not anauspicious date for the acceptance of anextensive database. We can make this deadline,yielding a collection-to-completed data settimeline of 18 months.

NEW LITERATURE

Analysis and interpretation of benthicmonitoring data is always a fertile area forexploration. In this newsletter there are threearticles of note dealing with data analysis. Thefirst (Drake et al 1999) is another stab atevading the costs and delays inherent in specieslevel identification of benthic data. This is afurther test of the technique introduced back in1993 for detection of community alteration byanthropogenic activities. High level (in thiscase phylum) abstractions of benthiccommunity data do provide one importantcharacteristic - they allow usage in a widespectrum of sites worldwide. Particularly at thephylum level one should be able to use thesame approach to samples from the Antarctic

and from the Southern California Bight, andfind similar patterns of response toanthropogenic influence. At the local scale ofinterest to monitoring agencies, however, theseanalyses are likely to be somewhat lacking insensitivity, particularly if the pollution signal isweak. In grossly polluted areas most anyanalysis will show a profound difference fromunaffected areas, and the current high-levelapproach would probably be viable. Fordepiction of the niceties of just where influenceof a point source declines to undetectable,however, all the information gathered isnecessary (and even that may not be sufficient).

As a taxonomist involved in species levelidentifications of benthic invertebrates I amhardly a neutral observer. I can, however, seeapplicability of the technique used by Drake etal in very large scale comparisons of sites indifferent oceans, or vastly differing habitats.For fine distinctions within a given region theuse of species, particularly if there isreplacement along the impact gradient, is moreaccurate and informative than use of family,order, or phylum level identifications.

Mackenzie (1999) provides information on adiffering approach, one using populations offish parasites rather than benthic communitystructure per se. If such examinations arerestricted to species which exhibit relativelyhigh site fidelity the approach he proposesmight be adaptable for use in a point sourcemonitoring context. He suggests that internalfish parasites, which have delicate andprobably highly pollution-sensitivetransmission stages, would serve as a good“canary in a coalmine” early warningindicators of ecosystem health. The idea isintriguing but applicability to point sourcemonitoring efforts is dubious at present.

Closer to home Maurer et al (1999) suggest adifferent slant on analysis of benthiccommunity data. They also favor an indicatorapproach using highly susceptible animals,substituting “rare” benthic species for the fish

10


endoparasites favored by Mackenzie. Ipersonally have great sympathy for use of lesscommon species in benthic analysis, havingchafed over the years at exclusion rules inanalysis of benthic data sets. Many discussions(or arguments if you prefer) with Dr. BobSmith have convinced me that rarity is aconcept which is difficult to pin down and evenmore difficult to evaluate in a samplingcontext. There are a multitude of possibleexplanations for a species absence oroccurrence at low density in a given sample.The authors seize on one of them (rangeextreme density attenuation) and discuss ithere. Since they provide a single operationaldefinition of rarity in the article they are able toconveniently ignore the other possible, andpossibly contradictory, explanations forobserved low population density. Theirmethodology does offer utility in that theyexamine “rare species” collectively, but this istantamount to maintaining that the same causeis responsible for low density in each of thecollectively considered populations - anexceedingly unlikely case. So, while I feel thatthey are on to something, I think the proposedmethod is only a suggestive first effort. Beforea more serious attempt to refine such anapproach is made, the theoretical bases of“rarity” need more thorough examination andmuch more explicit discussion.

Investigations continue on the ecology of oneof the lab rats of the benthic infaunal world,Capitella sp. I. Cohen & Pechenik (1999)report on the species relation with sedimentorganic carbon, while Horng & Taghon (1999)discuss particle selection in contaminatedsediments. The effects of different levels ofsediment organic carbon on larval settlementand metamorphosis, and the post-metamorphicgrowth of the animals were experimentallyexamined by Cohen & Pechenik. They foundthat larvae apparently responded to somefraction of the sediment organic load, but didnot select either the most organically enrichedsediments or those which would provideoptimal subsequent growth.

While Horng and Taghon found that Capitellasp. I fed on the smallest available particles,they also found that they did so regardless ofsediment phenanthrene concentration. Asorganic pollutants are adsorbed to surfaces offine particles they tend to be more concentrated(in equal weights of sediment) on sedimentscomposed of the finest particles. Inconsequence the feeding of particle selectivesediment consumers such as Capitella mayhelp lengthen the time taken to degrade organiccompounds in nature. As selective feeders onthe particles which have the highest percentageof contaminants by weight, they package(digestion is inefficient, passing most itemsthrough unaltered) particulates in long lastingfecal pellets, potentially preventing otherbiologically or chemically mediatedbreakdown of included organics. Glass beadswere used to determine that the preferredparticle size for the species was 17±4µm.

The pyramidellid mollusks have long been athorn in the side of practical marine monitoringin the Southern California Bight. A largenumber of species in several genera have beendescribed from the area and others from thenorth and south are either known or suspectedto occur here as well. The group, by allaccounts, was seriously over described onconchological grounds by W. H. Dall and PaulBartsch in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.Since these are generally small animals, fewwere willing to undertake the study of the softparts which might contradict the tales told bythe shells. In the last two decades a fewcourageous individuals have begun putting thenomenclature of the group on a more sensiblebasis. Schander et al (1999) contribute to thisby examining two of the odostomiid genera,Odostomella and Herviera. Members of bothgenera are predominantly Indo-Pacific indistribution with no representatives in our area.However, the nature of the character statesexamined, the analysis, and the biologicalnotes provided by the authors are all of interestto any mollusk student dealing with the familyand this thorough treatment is recommended.

11


Thollesson (1999) examined the phylogeneticrelations of dorid nudibranchs based onmolecular evidence gleaned from a 400 Bpsequence of the 16S rRNA molecule. Anotaspidean and a dendronotid were includedin the analysis as outgroups along with 24dorid species. The attempt was inconclusive asregards the status of higher taxa of interest(especially the Eudoridoidea andAnadoridoidea). The sequence used apparently(based on internal transition/transversionevidence) was subject to multiple substitutions.The authors suggest this may have contributedto the inability to resolve higher levelrelationships, while providing usefulinformation on low-level branching. It is likelythat inclusion of additional taxa belonging toneither the Chromodorididae nor theGoniodorididae would strengthen analysis. Weawait a reanalysis based on a wider samplingof dorids, but the article provides usefulinformation on relationships within the twofamilies whose members formed the bulk ofthe analyzed taxa.

In the last Newsletter the editor expressed hisview that cosmopolitanism was not nearly aswidespread among marine invertebrates asearlier believed. Support for this view isoffered by Klatau et al (1999), who examine a“cosmopolitan” marine sponge Chondrillanucula from a variety of locations in variousparts of its reported range. Both traditionalmorphological (spicule based) and allozymeanalyses were conducted. The authors foundthat there were probably five different crypticsibling species being referred to as C. nucula invarious areas. They extrapolate from theirfindings that many other invertebrates,particularly where species in a well-definedgenus have few distinguishing characters, mayoffer analogous cases of sibling speciation.They also found that compared to the allozymedata, spicule size data was a poor predictor ofspecies. They suggest that the relative merits ofsponge spicule size measurements be criticallyreexamined.

10 JANUARY MEETING

The meeting started with president Ron Velardementioning the upcoming B’98 Re-ID conflictresolution meeting. It will be held at SCCWRPon Monday, January 24. Don Cadien thenregaled us with stories of the SCAMITChristmas party which sounded entertainingand successful. There was some discussion asto whether the party should be moved to amore southern location next year as manyactive members of SCAMIT (as well as two ofthe four officers) live in the San Diego regionand find the party a bit far to attend most years.However, trying to find a location that wouldcompare with the venue of the Cabrillo MarineAquarium would be a challenge indeed. Nodecision was made at this time and the subjectwill probably be discussed again as Christmas2000 rolls around. Don Cadien then proceededto give a B’98 status report. All agencies havereceived their allotted QC samples, but noteveryone has completed these samples.Hopefully there will be some comparativematerial for the resolution meeting mentionedabove.

The SCAMIT Taxonomic Listing Edition 4 islooming on the horizon and Don is calling forany additions and/or changes to Edition 3.Uncirculated provisional SCAMIT speciessheets need to be completed and sent to Don intime for attachment to the May Newsletter toqualify the species for inclusion in the nextedition. A discussion ensued on exactly howan in-house lab provisional species becomes aSCAMIT provisional. The rule is that theprovisional species sheet (in SCAMIT format)has to be distributed and made available to themembership. There was some discussion as tothe definition of “distributed”. Those presentdecided that “distributed” is defined as beingattached to a SCAMIT Newsletter (both paperand electronic versions). The sheet can also beposted on the web-site as a taxonomic tool,handed out at meetings and/or mailed, but, at aminimum, it must be distributed as anattachment to a SCAMIT newsletter.

12


Next Don brought up the subject of a clearingagent to consider as an alternative to methylsalicylate. It is called d-limonene and is lesstoxic than most other clearing agents. To learnmore about it see Silverman (1999). CurrentlyDon, being sensitized to the methyl salicylate,is using cedarwood oil as a clearing agent. Thisworks well but some find it unpleasantlypungent as well. If d-limonene (which is thebasis of several commercial brands of clearingagent) is satisfactory in our application we canconsider using it in lieu of other agentspotentially disagreeable to one or more of ourmembers. It is the same material used to impartlemon flavor to foodstuffs and other productsand is considered safe for human consumption(in small doses) by the FDA. None of themembers have tried it yet but expect a reporton the subject in the future once tests arecompleted.

The taxonomy aspect of the meeting startedwith molluscs. Kelvin Barwick (CSDMWWD)had a small gastropod which he had tentativelyidentified as Leptogyra sp?. It was from one ofthe City of San Diego’s ITP (InternationalTreatment Plant) Regional stations (2655). Theanimal was collected in 88 feet of water. Aftersome examination it was determined that theanimal had a calcareous operculum and wastherefore not Leptogyra. ID was left atTurbinidae, although the animal was mostprobably a juvenile Homalopoma. The nextmollusc was a bivalve which turned out to be ajuvenile Periploma planiusculum. It wascollected from the ITP Regional station,2260(1) in 40 feet of water. The City of SanDiego rarely sees this species of Periploma asit seldom reaches depths at which routinemonitoring is undertaken.

Specimens of Vitreolina yod were discovered atITP Regional station 2655(2) in 88 feet ofwater. Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) expressedher concern that it could easily be confusedwith Melanella grippi. This latter species, nowknown as Vitreolina columbiana (followingMcLean 1996) and V. yod are conveniently

pictured together in Figure 1.14 of thatpublication which allows direct comparison ofall three species of Vitreolina taken inmonitoring of local waters. V. columbiana isthe most torted of the three, with pronouncedcurvature in at least two planes. The remainingtwo, V. macra and V. yod have very littlecurvature in the second plane (apertural toabapertural), with V. macra having much morecurvature in the first plane (lateral) than does V.yod. Vitreolina yod also has a less elongate ovalaperture, yielding both a broader body whorland a larger spire angle than found in either V.columbiana or V. macra. Use of McLean’sfigure should help avoid confusion inidentifying the three species.

Kelvin Barwick’s provisional species Philinesp SD 1 was then brought forth and examinedby Don Cadien. The animal was discovered atCSDMWWD ITP station I-14(2) in 87 feet ofwater. Don identified the animal as Philinebakeri based on the crenulation of the shellmargin and the nature of the attachment of theouter lip to the spire. Both characters arediscussed on the Philine sp A voucher sheet ascharacterizing this species. The odd thingabout this animal was a seeming absence ofgizzard plates upon dissection. As the originaldescription of P. bakeri was based on a deadshell, morphology of the animal, the structureof the radula, and presence of gizzard platescannot be determined for the holotype. Untilthe taxon can be more completely describedbased on topotypic or other neotype material,identifications must hinge on the fairly uniqueshell structure and ornamentation of thespecies. Please remember this is the P. bakeriof Dall, not the P. bakeri of either Abbott’s orBehrens’ handbooks, which is actually P. alba.

Amphissa was the next animal to beconsidered. Kelvin had dry mounted a sizeseries of Amphissa on a palaeo-slide. It wasdecided that the animals were Amphissaundata. The City of San Diego also had aspecimen of A. versicolor in their voucher

13


collection but the correctness of the ID ispending as the animal seemed to fallsomewhere between A. undata and A.versicolor.

After lunch Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD) wasready to dive into problems with Crustacea.The first animal brought forth was a smallostracod from a B’98 Channel Islands station(2476, 11 meters of water). The carapace wasoblong (i.e., broadly oval), with a broadrostrum with a large, straight ventral shelf, andnoticeable surface pitting. It was without acaudal extension or surface ridges. Based ongeneral appearance the specimen belonged inPhilomedidae. The anterior and ventral marginsof the carapace were crenulate with blunt/squared edges (“U” vs “V”), while the dorsaland posterior margins were smooth. The caudalfurca had 2L - 2s - 1t - 3s - 1t claws (where t =thick and small). The first claw was thelargest, the second about two-thirds of the firstand the other two thickened claws about 1/4 -1/5th of the largest. The two small, thickclaws were also displaced medially;alternatively, you could say the sets of smallclaws were displaced laterally. The caudalfurca was large, robust and rectangular inprofile with a pyramidal lateral face (i.e., thefour sides sloped outward from a centrallylocated high point). The animal was notrecognized by anyone present and its identityremains undetermined (see cover photo).

Jack Word’s key (a NAMIT handout) was usedto key out a Harbansus mayeri. The animalwas collected at a B’98 Channel Island station(2480) in 106 meters of water. Dean willcompare the animal to the full description toverify his ID. This is not an animal known tooccur this far south. Should the identity beconfirmed, this is an considerable southernrange extension.

Next, a small hermit crab proved to be aproblem. The animal was approximately 4mmin size but had eggs, indicating maturity.Haig’s 1990 key was used, but to no avail. The

specimen keyed to Pagurus setosus but bothDean and Don felt that it was not setosus forvarious morphological reasons. The crab wascollected in 112 meters of water from B’98station 2815. For the time being theidentification was left at Pagurus sp.

Lastly we turned our attention to Sipuncula.Dean showed us a specimen from B’98 station2480 (106 m). The animal had one large pairof retractors which appeared more fused andlarger, proportionately than those inThysanocardia. The animal also lackedmicrovilli on the intestine, and the anus waslocated far anterior on the body, just above thenephridia. It was left as a provisional species,Sipuncula sp SD2, for the time being.

TEREBELLID PARASITES

Tom Parker (CSDLAC) forwarded commentsposted to the Annelida Listserver. They wereprovided originally in response to a query onAnnelida by Aaron Baldwin. The e-mail replywas later posted by him to the AnnelidaListserver for the edification of us all. Wereprint this reply here, as it will undoubtedlyinterest members who have observed oddthings attached to their own terebellids:

“Your query regarding the terebellid parasiteswas passed on to me by a colleague whosubscribes to the Annelida list. I am not amember of the Annelida List and do not knowhow to post a reply so I thought I would e-mailyou directly. (Feel free to post my comments ifyou wish)

“I am a pollution monitoring biologist withabout 20 years experience on benthos in UKwaters. For 12 years I have been collectingcopepod parasites mostly of polychaetes,crustaceans, and molluscs. I published a briefhand guide to Polychaete parasites of UKwaters a few years ago plus a few other articlessince on polychaete parasites (O’Reilly,1991,1995a,1995b,1999). From your brief

14


description of the terebellid parasites I wouldbe fairly confident that they are copepods,either of the family Xenocoelomidae or of thefamily Melinnacheridae.

“The Xenocoelomidae has 2 genera (seeBresciani & Lutzen, 1966) and I have collectedboth in UK waters: the first contains a singlespecies Aphanodomus terebellae which isendoparasitic in various terebellids, Thelepusbeing a favourite host. Only a pair of ovisacsprotrude from the host.

“The second genus Xenocoeloma has 2 verysimilar species X. alleni, and X. brumpti whichare ectoparasites of Polycirrus species. Theyare oval, about 1-2mm long and devoid of anyappendages except a pair of ovisacs whenmature.

“The Melinnacheridae has 4 described species- Melinnacheres terebellidis and M. steenstrupiboth occur on Terebellides stroemi (attached tothe body or the gills respectively) while M.ergasiloides lives on Melinna cristata attachedto the posterior thoracic segments. (The fourthspecies is from a deep water terebellid offMexico) Descriptions of the Terebellidesparasites are available in Bresciani, 1961. Ihave material of both from the North Sea andthe west coast of Scotland. I have not seen M.ergasiloides though a good description andfigure appear in Bresciani & Lutzen, 1975.

“Without seeing your specimen or knowing itshost identity I could not be sure where it mightfit in. These families remain poorly known andit is possible that you may have a new speciesor genus. I have several new taxa already inmy collection including a bizarre ecto/endoparasite of Jasmineira . I would be happyto examine your parasite if you wish and wouldbe interested to hear about any other copepodparasites you may have come across oninvertebrates.”Myles O’Reilly

HELP NEEDED

A request has been forwarded through theCrustL list server for specimens to assist in aDNA investigation of crab relationships. It isreprinted here.

“I am working on a molecular phylogeneticsproject testing various hypotheses about therelationships among crayfishes, clawedlobsters, (Astacidea) and mud and ghostshrimps (Thalassinidea). I would be mostgrateful if you could provide specimens fromthe infraorder Thalassinidea for DNAextraction, i.e., freshly collected specimenspreserved in at least 95% EtOH and shippeddirectly to me. I would, of course, be happy topay all shipping costs. Let me know if you canhelp with this project.”

Dr. Keith A. Crandall574 Widtsoe BuildingDepartment of ZoologyBrigham Young UniversityProvo, UT 84602-5255email: [email protected]: (801) 378-3495FAX: (801) 378-7423Homepage: http://bioag.byu.edu/zoology/crandall_lab/index.htm

HELP WANTED

Two recent job postings with NOAA may be ofinterest to members. The jobs are described intoo much detail for inclusion here but both dealwith policy and policy implementation in theNational Marine Sanctuaries area. Both arebased in Silver Springs MD., and offerinteresting career possibilities. The closing datefor application is 16 February in each case. Thefull descriptions can be found on the web at:

http://www.usajobs.opm.gov/wfjic/jobs/BO9922.HTM






15


Those without internet access at home or atwork can use computers provided by mostlocal library systems to download hard copiesof the applications.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Austin, William C. 1985. An annotated checklist of marine invertebrates in the cold temperatenortheast Pacific. 3 vols., Cowichan Bay, British Columbia: Khoyatan MarineLaboratory.

Bresciani, Jose 1961. The anatomy of a parasitic copepod Saccopsis steenstrupi n. sp.Crustaceana 3(1):9-23

— & Jorgen Lützen. 1966. The anatomy of Aphanodomus terebellae with remarks on the familyXenocoelomidae. Bulletin du Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. 37(5):787-806.

— & —. 1975. Melinnacheres ergasiloides M. Sars, a parasitic copepod of the polychaeteMelinna cristata with notes on multiple infections caused by annelidicolous copepods.Ophelia 13:31-41.

Cohen, Risa A. & Jan A. Pechenik. 1999. Relationship between sediment organic content,metamorphosis, and postlarval performance in the deposit-feeding polychaete Capitellasp I. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 240(1):1-18.

Drake, Pilar, Francisco Baldó, Verónica Sáenz, & Alberto M. Arias. 1999. Macrobenthiccommunity structure in estuarine pollution assessment on the Gulf of Cádiz (SW Spain):is the phylum-level meta-analysis approach applicable? Marine Pollution Bulletin 38(11):1038-1047.

O’Foighil, Dairmid & C. J. Jozefowicz. 1999. Amphi-Atlantic phylogeography of direct-developing lineages of Lasaea, a genus of brooding bivalves. Marine Biology135(1):115-122.

Hertz, Carole M. 1999. Illustration of the Types Named by S. Stillman Berry in his “Leaflets inMalacology” Revised. The Festivus 31(Supplement):1-43.

Horng, Chiang-Yi & Gary L. Taghon. 1999. Effects of contaminated sediments on particle sizeselection by the polychaete Capitella sp I. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology andEcology 242(1):41-57.

Klautau, Michelle, Claudia A. M. Russo, Cristiano Lazoski, Nicole Boury-Esnault, John P.Thorpe, & Antonio M. Solé-Cava. 1999. Does cosmopolitanism result fromoverconservative systematics? A case study using the marine sponge Chondrilla nucula.Evolution 53(5):1414- 1422.

Mackenzie, Ken. 1999. Parasites as pollution indicators in marine ecosystems: a proposed earlywarning system. Marine Pollusiton Bulletin 38(11):955-959.

Marcus, Eveline duBois-Reymond & Ernst Marcus. 1962. A new species of Gnathodoridacea.Anaís da Academia Brasileira de Ciencas, Rio de Janeiro 34(2):269-275.

Mauer, Don, Tom Gerlinger, & George Robertson. 1999. Rare species as bioindicators in marinemonitoring. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 98(3):91-102.

16


McLean, James H. 1996. Chapter 1 - The Prosobranchia. Pp. 1-160 IN: Scott, Paul H., James A.Blake, & Andrew L. Lissner, eds. Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the SantaMaria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 9 - The Mollusca, Part 2: TheGastropoda. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California.228pp.

O’Reilly, Myles G. 1991. A guide to polychaete-infesting copepods from British waters.Porcupine Newsletter 5(3):63-70.

—. 1995a. A new genus of copepod (Copepoda: Poecilostomatoida) commensal with themaldanid polychaete Rhodine gracilior, with a review of the Family Clausiidae. Journalof Natural History 29:47-64.

—. 1995b. Parasitic and commensal Copepoda. IN: Mackie, A. S. Y., P. G. Oliver, & E.I.S. Rees(eds.) Benthic biodiversity in the southern Irish Sea. Studies in Marine Biodiversity andSystematics from the National Museum of Wales. BIOMAR Reports 1:62-69.

—. 1999. Notes on copepod parasites of polychaete worms in Scottish waters; including the firstUK records of the Californian copepod Spiophanicola spinosus Ho, 1984(Poecilostomatoida: Spiophanicolidae). Glasgow Naturalist 23(4):46-47.

Schander, Christoffer, Shigero Hori, & Joakim Lundberg. 1999. Anatomy, phylogeny andbiology of Odostomella and Herviera, with the description of a new species ofOdostomella (Mollusca, Heterostropha, Pyramidellidae). Ophelia 51(1):39-76.

Silverman, Jeff. 1999. d-Limonene - a serviceable and safe routine clearing agent. MicroscopyToday 99(10):18.

Thollesson, Mikael 1999. Phylogenetic analysis of dorid nudibranchs (Gastropoda : Doridacea)using the mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene. Journal of Molluscan Studies 65:335-353.

January, 2000 Vol. 18, No 9SCAMIT Newsletter

SCAMIT OFFICERS:

If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of theofficers e-mail addressPresident Ron Velarde (619)692-4903 [email protected] Leslie Harris (213)763-3234 [email protected] Megan Lilly (619)692-4901 [email protected] Ann Dalkey (310)648-5544 [email protected] issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows:

Volumes 1 - 4 (compilation)................................. $ 30.00Volumes 5 - 7 (compilation)................................. $ 15.00Volumes 8 - 15 ................................................ $ 20.00/vol.

Single back issues are also available at cost.

Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http://www.scamit.org

scamit newsletter template€¦ · difficulties uncovered during the recent b’98 conflict...

Documents