1,721,702 research outputs found
FIGURE 2. A in A new species of the congrid eel genus Conger (Anguilliformes: Congridae) from the southwest coast of India
No full textFIGURE 2. A. lateral; B. dorsal; C. ventral view of head, Conger melanopterus sp. nov., NBFGR/CONCMEL, 569 mm TL.Published as part of Kodeeswaran, Paramasivam, Smith, Id. G., Dhas, Deepa, Ajith Kumar, T. T. & Lal, Kuldeep Kumar, 2023, A new species of the congrid eel genus Conger (Anguilliformes: Congridae) from the southwest coast of India, pp. 474-484 in Zootaxa 5244 (5) on page 477, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5244.5.4, http://zenodo.org/record/766385
FIGURE 5 in Morphological and molecular approaches revealed a new species of snapping shrimp genus Alpheus Fabricius, 1798 (Decapoda: Caridea: Alpheidae) from Lakshadweep Islands, India
No full textFIGURE 5. Phylogenetic tree of Alpheus sulcipalma sp. nov. and all available sequences of congener species using partial sequences of COI gene.Published as part of Purushothaman, P., Bharathi, S., Damodhar, A. T., Ajith Kumar, T. T. & Lal, K. K., 2023, Morphological and molecular approaches revealed a new species of snapping shrimp genus Alpheus Fabricius, 1798 (Decapoda: Caridea: Alpheidae) from Lakshadweep Islands, India, pp. 426-442 in Zootaxa 5227 (4) on page 437, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5227.4.2, http://zenodo.org/record/751886
Decapoda Latreille 1802
No full textOrder: Decapoda Latreille, 1802 Infraorder: Caridea Dana, 1852Published as part of Purushothaman, P., Bharathi, S., Damodhar, A. T., Ajith Kumar, T. T. & Lal, K. K., 2023, Morphological and molecular approaches revealed a new species of snapping shrimp genus Alpheus Fabricius, 1798 (Decapoda: Caridea: Alpheidae) from Lakshadweep Islands, India, pp. 426-442 in Zootaxa 5227 (4) on page 428, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5227.4.2, http://zenodo.org/record/751886
FIGURE 2 in New record of Urocaridella antonbruunii (Bruce, 1967) from Southern India with taxonomic Keys of Urocaridella Borradaile, 1915 (Decapoda; Palaemonidae)
No full textFIGURE 2. Urocaridella antonbruunii (Bruce, 1967) (Male, CL 3.5 mm) from Gulf of Mannar, Bay of Bengal, India.Published as part of Paramasivam, Purushothaman, Madhavan, Manu, Ajith Kumar, T. T. & Lal, Kuldeep Ku- Mar, 2022, New record of Urocaridella antonbruunii (Bruce, 1967) from Southern India with taxonomic Keys of Urocaridella Borradaile, 1915 (Decapoda; Palaemonidae), pp. 563-574 in Zootaxa 5138 (5) on page 567, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5138.5.4, http://zenodo.org/record/657190
Conger melanopterus Kodeeswaran & Smith & Dhas & Ajith Kumar & Lal 2023, new species
No full textConger melanopterus, new species New English Name: Indian Black-fin Conger (Figures 1–5; Tables 1–3) Holotype: NBFGR /CONCMEL, (569 mm TL, spent female) collected from deep-sea trawl, Colachel fishing harbour (8°10′21.92″N, 77°15′2.98″E), Southwest coast of India, Indian Ocean, Deepa Dhas, D. S., 08 July 2021. Diagnosis. A moderate sized dark-coloured eel of the genus Conger, distinguished from its congeners by having the following combination of characters: dorsal-fin origin behind the pectoral-fin tip; larger head, 18.5% TL; longer predorsal length 24.0% TL; relatively shorter trunk, 52.4% PAL; smaller eye, 12.9% HL; trunk length is 1.1 times in head length; vomer with seven uniserial teeth at posterior end; body fully blackish to dark brown; pectoral fin much darker than body; cephalic pores with whitish rims; SO pores 3; first two pores located at snout tip; small adnasal pore, which is positioned adjacent to third SO pore; IO pores 6, 5 before rictus and 1 behind rictus; pectoral rays 19; total vertebrae 141+. Description. Morphometric measurements in proportion of total length: head length 5.4 in TL; preanal length 2.5; predorsal length 4.2; trunk length 4.7; tail length 1.7; depth at gill opening 15.6. Measurements in proportion of head length: snout length 4.0 in HL; eye diameter 7.7; interorbital width 6.1; upper jaw 2.8; gill opening width 6.8; interbranchial width 3.7; pectoral fin 3.3. Meristic data and morphometric proportion of % TL, PAL and HL are provided in Table 1. Moderately elongate eel with anus positioned before mid-length, preanal length 40.6% TL. Relatively slender tail with flexible caudal fin. DFO behind pectoral-fin tip, predorsal length 24.0% of TL and continuous with caudal and anal fins. Snout moderate, fleshy part projecting slightly beyond intermaxillary tooth patch. Head relatively large, 18.5% TL. Anterior nostril rather large; posterior nostril moderate pore in front of eye. Both jaws almost equal in length with well-developed flanges. Tongue large and broad, anterior half free from mouth floor, with pointed tip. Head pores small, positioned on head instead of flanges. SO pores 3; first two pores located at snout tip; small adnasal pore, which is positioned adjacent to third SO pore. IO pores 6; 5 before rictus and 1 behind rictus. ST canal with 1 pore; preoperculo-mandibular pores 9, 6 before rictus and 3 behind rictus (Fig. 3). Lateral line almost complete, pores inconspicuous; 5 prepectoral pores, 13 predorsal pores, 34 preanal pores and 138 total pores. 14 predorsal vertebrae; 36 preanal vertebrae; 141+ total vertebrae; 19 pectoral rays. Teeth small, pointed or blunt and acute. Rounded intermaxillary tooth patch with 4 transverse rows, not well separated from maxillary and vomerine teeth. Maxillary and dentary teeth in two rows, those of outer row pointed, those of inner row blunt and reaching more than half length of outer maxillary rows. Vomerine teeth pointed or blunt, forming a long patch, 3 or 4 transverse rows in the anterior portion, followed by seven uniserial teeth posteriorly (Fig. 4). Morphometric data of holotype (in mm): TL 569, HL 105.4, depth at gill opening 36.4, depth at anus 35.7, predorsal length 136.7, preanal length 231.2, trunk length 121.0, tail length 333.5, snout length 26.4, eye diameter 13.6, interorbital width 17.2, upper jaw length 37.2, gill opening width 15.5, interbranchial width 28.3, pectoral fin length 32.4. Colouration. For general appearance see Figs. 1 & 2. Body uniformly blackish to dark brown (not much brown), median fin bases and distal margins also black (Figs. 1 & 2A). Ventral surface of head blackish; anterior nostril pale pinkish to brown; rims of cephalic pores milky white (Figs. 2B, 2C). Inner surface of flanges whitish; tongue white to pale brown with numerous melanophores on side margins and lower surface, but not at the tip. Pectoral fin completely black, much darker than body. In preservative: body remains the same, but darker than when fresh. Etymology. The species name “ melanopterus ” derived from two Greek words melano (μελανός) = black and pterus (πτερόν) = winged, denotes black pectoral fin. Distribution. Southwest coast of India, Arabian Sea, Indian Ocean. The species was collected at a depth of 300 m along the EEZ of Indian Waters in the Western Indian Ocean. Molecular analysis. The K2P genetic analysis reveals that new the species is closely related to C. verreauxi from Australian waters with a divergence of 5.7%. Further, the genetic divergence between the new species and C. macrocephalus from Indonesian and Taiwan waters was 5.9%. The new species differs from the species commonly treated as Conger wilsoni (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) in Australian waters and Conger myriaster (Brevoort, 1856) from Taiwan waters with 6.4% and 6.8% divergence respectively. The new species shows a maximum genetic divergence between Conger triporiceps Kanazawa, 1958 with 22.7%, followed C. cinereus with 22.0%, Conger oceanicus (Mitchill, 1818) with 15.2%, and Conger orbignianus Valenciennes 1837 with 15.1% and Conger conger (Linnaeus, 1758) with 10.9% (Table 2). In the maximum likelihood tree (Fig. 6), C. melanopterus forms a distinct lineage sister to known congeners with high bootstrap values supporting the status as a new species. Comparison. Conger melanopterus differs from all other congeners but shares few characters with C. macrocephalus such as larger head 18.5% (vs. 15.4–21.0% in C. macrocephalus) and maxillary teeth with 2 rows. It differs from C. macrocephalus in having more total vertebrae (141+ vs. 132–139), a larger gill opening length (14.7% HL vs. 10.7–13.1% HL), trunk length 1.1 times in head length (vs. 1.2–1.6), smaller eye (12.9% HL vs. 13.7–18.7%), shorter tail (58.6% TL vs. 59.3–62.2% TL), more pectoral rays (19 vs. 17), pectoral fin completely dark (vs. pale or with large black patch), body completely dark including median fins and margin (vs. pale greyish to brown, median fins whitish with black margin) and vomerine teeth forming seven uniserial teeth in posterior end (vs. vomerine forming short patch, see Fig. 3C in Smith & Ho 2018) (Smith et al. 2017; Smith & Ho 2018). Conger melanopterus differs from the Indian congener, C. cinereus, in having more predorsal vertebrae (14 vs. 9–11), longer predorsal length (24.0% vs. 12.8–14.1% TL), DFO behind the pectoral-fin tip (vs. DFO at middle of the pectoral fin), pectoral fin completely dark (vs. dark spot on pectoral fin), maxillary teeth in 2 rows (vs. 1), and larger head (18.5% vs. 11.5–12.7% TL) (Smith & Ho 2018). The new species further differs from C. conger, Conger marginatus Valenciennes, 1850, C. orbignianus, C. triporiceps, C. verreauxi, and C. wilsoni in having fewer vertebrae (141+ vs. 148–161 in C. conger; 148–153 in C. marginatus; 160–161 in C. orbignianus; 156–160 in C. triporiceps; 152–157 in C. verreauxi; 146–147 in C. wilsoni) (Kanazawa 1958). Further, C. melanopterus differs from Conger esculentus Poey, 1861, Conger oligoporus Kanazawa, 1958 and Conger philippinus Kanazawa, 1958 in having more total vertebrae (141+ vs. 132–133 in C. esculentus; 136–139 in C. oligoporus; 127–135 C. philippinus) (Kanazawa 1958; Smith & Ho 2018). The new species shares total vertebrae and body colouration with Conger jordani Kanazawa, 1958, but is readily distinguishable from the latter in having 3 SO pores (vs. 4), trunk length 1.1 in times the head length (1.4–1.9), vertical fins bases black (vs. white), larger head (18.5% TL vs. 13.3–14.3%), smaller eye (12.9% HL vs. 15.5–17.1% HL), trunk length 52.4% PAL (vs. 59.6–64.5% PAL), longer predorsal length (24% TL vs. 18.8–20.6% TL), and shorter tail (58.6% TL vs. 61.7–64.7% TL) (Kanazawa 1958; Smith & Ho 2018). The new species shares similar total vertebrae, pectoral rays, and colouration with Conger erebennus (Jordan & Snyder, 1901) from the Western North Pacific. But it readily differs from the latter in having fewer preanal vertebrae (36 vs. 40–42), preanal pores (34 vs. 37–40), head larger (18.5% HL vs. 16.3–17.3% HL), and pectoral fin 3.3 in HL (vs. 3 in HL) (Jordan & Snyder 1901; Kanazawa 1958; Smith et al. 2016). 1 Previously treated as Conger wilsoni Conger myriaster from the waters off Japan, Taiwan and China has a close total vertebrae count to C. melanopterus, and one specimen from Taiwan shares similar body colouration (See Fig. 6C in Smith & Ho 2018). But C. melanopterus readily differs from C. myriaster in having a larger head (18.5% TL vs. 12.3–14.9% TL), longer predorsal length (24.0% TL vs. 17.7–18.9% TL), trunk length 52.4% PAL (vs. 61.8–67.9% PAL), relatively smaller pectoral fin (30.7% HL vs. 35.9–43.1% HL), trunk length 1.1 times in head length (vs. 1.6–2.1), and maxillary teeth inner row ½ of outer row (vs. short) (Smith & Ho 2018). Remarks. Although several species of the genus Conger undergo changes in body colour, variation in pectoral fin shape, eyes shape, tooth loss and vertebral decalcification during maturity (see Smith & Ho 2018; Battaglia et al. 2020), the new species is significantly different in that teeth are retained and vertebral decalcification is not as intense and in possessing a larger head than all other species except C. macrocephalus, but differs from this species in other characters and genetically. We described the first new species of the genus Conger in 65 years. This joins C. cinereus and C. wilsoni as the third species of Conger known from the Western Indian Ocean. Further attempts to collect additional specimens were unsuccessful due to the difficulty of deep-sea collection and rarity. Though the species of the genus Conger are well-known for their large size and commercial value, knowledge of the taxonomic status and diversity of the species is limited (Smith & Ho 2018). After Kanazawa (1958), no new species have been described from this genus until now, and only a very few authors such as Asano (1962), Castle (1964, 1968), Smith (1989) and Smith & Ho (2018) had worked on the systematics of the genus Conger. Hence, the revision of this genus along with both morphological and phylogenetic analysis is needed to resolve the taxonomic and diversity ambiguity.Published as part of Kodeeswaran, Paramasivam, Smith, Id. G., Dhas, Deepa, Ajith Kumar, T. T. & Lal, Kuldeep Kumar, 2023, A new species of the congrid eel genus Conger (Anguilliformes: Congridae) from the southwest coast of India, pp. 474-484 in Zootaxa 5244 (5) on pages 475-483, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5244.5.4, http://zenodo.org/record/766385
Alpheus sulcipalma Purushothaman & Bharathi & Damodhar & Ajith Kumar & Lal 2023, sp. nov.
No full textAlpheus sulcipalma sp. nov. (Fig. 1–4) Material examined Holotype: male, CL 9.0 mm, Accession No.: NBFGR/ALPASUL–00, ID No. NBFGR: DBTLD220, Rocky dead coral, Agatti Island, Lakshadweep, India (10° 50ʹ 38.6" N, 072° 11ʹ 22.1" E), 0.5–1.0 m, hand net, December 2018. Paratypes: 1 male, CL 7.0 mm, Accession No: NBFGR/ALPASUL–01, ID No. NBFGR: DBTLD:42; 1 female, CL 4.5 mm, Accession No: NBFGR/ALPASUL–02, ID No. NBFGR: DBTLD:138, rocky dead coral, Agatti Island, Lakshadweep, India, 0.5–1.0 m, hand net, January 2019. 7 males, 10 females (CL 4.5–9.0 mm; Table 2) deposited in the Peninsular and Marine Fish Genetic Resources (PMFGR) centre, ICAR–NBFGR, India. ......Continued on the next page IN—India; FB—French Polynesia; US—United States Description Small-sized species (CL 3.5–9.0 mm). Carapace (Figs. 1A, B) glabrous, smooth, not setose or tubercle. Rostrum slender, acute, straight directed forward, overreaching mid-length of first article of antennular peduncle, lateral margin bearing few small setae on each side, without rostral carina. Orbital hood moderately swollen, slightly higher than rostrum; anterior margin unarmed; margin between rostrum and orbital hood slightly concave. Pterygostomial angle broadly rounded. Cardiac notch well developed and V-shaped. Pleon smooth, subcylindrical, and slightly compressed laterally; pleura of pleomeres 1–4 marginally rounded, pleuron of pleomere 2 subtriangular, pleuron of pleomere 5 with leaf-like process in posteroventrally (Fig. 3H). Telson (Fig. 1C) glabrous, trapezoidal, tapering posteriorly, about 2.6–3.1 times as long as posterior width and 2.0- 2.2 times as long as proximal width, dorsal surface smooth with 2 pairs of movable spines, proximal and second pairs located at 0.4 and 0.65 of telson length, respectively; posterior margin convex, fringed with numerous long plumose setae, posterolateral angle with 2 pairs of movable spines, mesial spine slender and about 2.0 times as long as a lateral one. Eyes (Figs. 1A, B) small, fully covered with orbital hood in both dorsal and lateral view; cornea dark in colour with globular shaped; anteromesial margin moderately produced and rounded in anteriorly. Antennular peduncle (Fig. 1B) moderately slender, almost reaching distal margin of antennal scaphocerite; stylocerite flatted, terminating an acute spine, overreaching distal margin of first article of peduncle; first article short, with broad ventromesial carina; second article long, about 2.1–2.4 times as long as maximum width and 1.6–1.7 times of first article; third article slightly longer than first article; antennular flagella asymmetrical in length; outer flagellum longest, slender, gradually tapering towards terminal units; outer flagellum short and thicker than inner flagellum with numerous aesthetascs on about 10–12 segments. Antenna (Fig. 1A, B) with basicerite rather moderate, ventrolateral margin armed with a slender spine; scaphocerite subovate, thin, tapering distally, about 3.1–3.2 times as long as maximum width, lateral margin straight and barely concave proximally, distolateral tooth well- developed, sharp, overreaching well beyond distal margin of lamella and third article of antennular peduncle; carpocerite long, thick, overreaching distal margin of scaphocerite; flagellum thick, tapering towards to terminal end and longer than antennular flagella. Mouthparts not dissected and typical for this genus in external observation. Third maxilliped (Fig. 1E) slender, slightly overreaching distal margin of antennal scaphocerite; antepenultimate article broad, longest, about 4.1–4.4 times as long as maximum width, dorsolateral margin with thick longitudinal ridge with numerous long setae, ventral surface with a sharp carina mesial to distal margin with numerous small setae; penultimate article short, about 0.42 times of antepenultimate and 2.3 times of maximum width, slightly widen distally, numerous long setae on dorsal and lateral surface; ultimate article about 4.6 times as long as maximum width and 1.8 times of penultimate article, tapering gradually towards terminal end, lateral and dorsal surface furnished with numerous rows of long serrulate setae, distal margin with stout long setae; exopod long, overreaching distal margin of antepenultimate article with numerous small setae on distally. Arthrobranch large with a faint terminal tooth with few setae on laterally (Figs. 1E, F). Male major cheliped (first pereiopod: Figs. 2A–D) broad, larger, laterally compressed, extending beyond distal margin of antennal scaphocerite by half length of palm and dactylus; ischium very short and stout; merus stout, broad, about 1.9 times as long as broad, distodorsal margin rounded and extended somewhat angled; mesial margin smooth, with few simple small and long setae, distomesial angle blunt, without tooth; carpus very short, cup-shaped, distodorsal margin with few long setae; chela broad, stout, slightly compressed, about 2.3 times as long as broad, 1.5 times of CL, surface almost smooth with numerous minute hairy form setae, minute granulated with numerous setae on distal half of palm and fingers; dorsal shoulder rounded, strongly overhanging, latter deep notch, moderately broad; dorsolateral surface of palm with deep shallow triangular groove extending from posterior of dorsal notch, mixing with linea impressa and continued posteroventral of lateral surface; dorsomesial surface with longitudinal groove extending from dorsal notch to near linea impressa anteriorly; ventral shoulder blunt, rounded, protruding forward, with deep ventral notch, somewhat 'V' shaped; ventromesial and ventrolateral surface with broad and deep groove on each side; fingers about 0.63 times as long as palm; pollex stout, terminating acute tip and curved, distolateral margin of socket for plunger sinuous with a small tooth like process, distomesial margin with sinuous; dactylus slightly longer than pollex, distal margin broadly rounded, acute tip, with few stout setae; plunger stout, broad, smooth, anteriorly rounded and thick in distally; adhesive discs well found on dactylus and palm. Female major cheliped (first pereiopod Figs. 2E, F) broad, extending beyond the distal antennal scaphocerite by three fourth of chela; ischium, merus and carpus similar with male; chela broad, stout, slightly swollen, about 2.4 times as long as broad, 1.1 times of CL, surface with numerous minute and long hairy form setae; dorsal shoulder rounded, strongly overhanging with deep broad notch; dorsolateral surface of palm with deep shallow and narrow triangular groove extending from posterior of dorsal notch, mixing with linea impressa and continued posteroventral of lateral surface; dorsomesial surface with narrow triangular groove extending from dorsal notch to near linea impressa; ventral shoulder blunt, rounded, protruding forward, with deep ventral notch, more or less 'U' shaped; ventromesial and ventrolateral surface with broad and deep groove on each side; fingers compressed, about 0.51 times as long as palm; pollex stout, terminating acute tip and curved, distomesial margin with sinuous; dactylus slightly longer than pollex, distal margin very broadly rounded, with few small setae; plunger stout, smooth, rounded anteriorly and thick in distally; adhesive discs well found on both dactylus and palm. Minor cheliped (Figs. 2G, H) slender, simple, and non-balaeniceps in males and females. Minor cheliped of male very smaller than major cheliped; ischium very short; merus stout, about 2.1–2.9 times as long as broad, distodorsal margin somewhat angle sharped in lateral view; mesial margin with few simple small and long setae, distomesial angle blunt and rounded; carpus short, cup-shaped; chela moderately stout, about 3.8 times as long as broad, surface smooth with few setae, especially dorsolateral surface with very setose; palm about 1.6 times as long as height with a prominent form of linea impressa proximally, distodorsal margin slightly depressed; fingers equal in length, about 1.3 times as long as palm, without any ridges or grooves, with a strong hook-like tooth and crossing distally, covered with small and long setae; dactylus slightly slender than pollex, a proximal site with two small crests, cutting edges simple, thin, blade-like with small setae throughout the edges; adhesive discs small on dactylus and palm. Female minor cheliped similar with the male. Second pereiopod (Fig. 3A) slender, simple, overreaching distal margin of scaphocerite by the length of carpus and chela; ischium long, about 6.0 times as long as broad; merus equal length to ischium without any spine; carpus subdivided into five segments, proximal segment longest and about 5.5 times as long as width, fifth segment twice the length of fourth; a ratio of carpal segments 4.0: 2.7: 1.0: 1.0: 2.0; chela simple, about 1.8 times as long as a terminal segment of carpus; fingers slightly longer than palm furnished with several groups of simple setae. Third pereiopod (Figs. 3B, C) moderately slender, overreaching distal margin of scaphocerite by length of dactylus; ischium with a movable spine; merus broad, about 4.0 times as long as maximum width with minute several setae on dorsally, distomesial margin unarmed; carpus about 4.1 times as long as width, 0.6 times of merus, and slender than merus; propodus about 6.0 times of maximum width, 0.7 times of merus, ventral margin with a row of 7–8 spiniform setae and a pair of spiniform setae in distoventral margin; dactylus simple, conical, long, curved, with acute terminal end, about 0.4 times as long as propodus. Fourth pereiopod (Figs. 3D, E) similar to third one, slightly slender, overreaching scaphocerite by length of dactylus; ischium with a movable spine; propodus about 6.1 times as long as width, ventral margin armed with 7–8 stout spiniform setae and a pair in distoventral margin with several simple and long setae; dactylus similar with third pereiopod. Fifth pereiopod (Figs. 3F, G) more slender than third and fourth, reaching mid-length of scaphocerite; ischium without ventrolateral spine; merus about 6.7 times as long as maximum width, 0.75 times of carpus; carpus slender than merus about 6.3 times of width; propodus about 7.3 times as long as width, with numerous long setae in dorsal and ventral surface, a row of 6–7 spiniform setae in ventral margin with a pair in distally, and distoventral half covered with 8–10 transverse rows of serrulate setae found as cleaning brush; dactylus about 0.38 times of propodus and similar with third pereiopod. Male first pleopod (Fig. 1G) with a reduced form of endopod, much smaller than exopod, bearing few stiff setae along the distal margin, about 0.2 lengths of exopod. Male second pleopod with similar length of exopod and endopod, along the distal margin covered with long setae; appendix masculina small and thin about 0.82 times as long as appendix interna, lateral and distal margin covered with long stiff setae (Fig. 1H). Female first pleopod (Fig. 1I) endopod reduced, spatulate shaped, with few distal setae; second pleopod similar to those of male; protopod broad, thick with several long setae on inner margin (Fig. 1J). Uropod (Fig. 1D) broadly rounded and slightly overreaching distal margin of telson; protopod with inner and outer lobes each produced into a triangular acute tooth, distolateral margin with few long tuft setae; exopod broad and almost equal length to endopod, bearing a small distolateral tooth and a stout spiniform distolateral seta; diaeresis barely trilobed, distal margin fringed with long plumose setae; endopod fringed with long setae from inner to distal margins. Colour pattern The live colour pattern (Fig. 4A) of the new species shows exhibits sexual dimorphism. Generally, males with carapace, antennal segments, abdomens, pereiopods, pleopods, uropod, and telson translucent light greenish; major pereiopod fingers with light violet in distally. In dead condition, body with a translucent light brown ( Fig. 4B). Female body and appendages are generally translucent light violet; distal of half of the fingers in major pereiopod with light violet. Habitat All the specimen were found in the crevices of dead and live coral rocks in the intertidal zone of Agatti Island at 0.5 to 1.0 m depths (see Table 2). M—Male; F B—Female Berried; F—Female Distribution Presently known only from waters of Agatti Island of Lakshadweep, India. Parasite Some of the individuals of A. sulcipalma sp. nov. were found infested with bopyrid parasite, Argeiopsis inhacae Kensley, 1974, in branchial region of cephalothorax. Carapace shows a bulbous structure which can be seen in lateral view (fig 4B–D). Most of the boyprid parasites were adult females carrying numerous matured eggs. Etymology The species name is derived from Latin, Sulcus (= groove or depression) and palma (palm), which refer to the strong triangular structure of groove on the dorsolateral surface of palm in major cheliped of both the sexes.Published as part of Purushothaman, P., Bharathi, S., Damodhar, A. T., Ajith Kumar, T. T. & Lal, K. K., 2023, Morphological and molecular approaches revealed a new species of snapping shrimp genus Alpheus Fabricius, 1798 (Decapoda: Caridea: Alpheidae) from Lakshadweep Islands, India, pp. 426-442 in Zootaxa 5227 (4) on pages 428-434, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5227.4.2, http://zenodo.org/record/751886
A Framework for Implementing Value-Based Approach in Asset Management
Full text linkISO 55000 puts ‘value’ at the core of asset management. This paper provides a framework to help production companies implement value-based Asset Management (AM) in a way that it contributes to operational excellence. Value-based AM is achieved when the value delivered by assets is used by the organization as the key decision criterion to choose between different AM options (both at tactical and operational level). Given this perspective, it is vital that organizations are able to quantify the value delivered by their assets and manage that value through informed and coherent decision-making. Value-based AM is still a concept more quoted in theory than described in practical terms. A clear understanding about the main elements that are needed to enable it is still missing in industrial practice. The framework presented in this paper provides the key elements needed for successful integration of a value quantification model with the AM system to ensure the effective implementation of value-based approach in AM
Figure 8 in Redescription of the fish parasite Nerocila serra Schioedte and Meinert, 1881 (Isopoda: Cymothoidae) from India, with a lectotype designation, and Nerocila pulicatensis Jayadev Babu and Sanjeeva Raj, 1984 placed into synonymy
No full textFigure 8. Variation among Nerocila serra, Nerocila trivitata, Nerocila arres and Nerocila sigani: (a, e, i, m) Nerocila serra Schioedte and Meinert, 1881, lectotype ovig. female (21.0 mm; NRS TYPE-9047 (previously NRS-4974)); (b, f, j, n) Nerocila trivitata Bleeker, 1857; (c, g, k, o) Nerocila arres Bowman and Tareen, 1983, holotype ovig. female (30.5 mm; USNM 189264); (d, h, l, p) Nerocila sigani Bowman and Tareen, 1983, holotype ovig. female (18.6 mm; USNM 190714). (a–d) dorsal view; (e–h) uropod; (i–l) pereopod 1; (m–p) pereopods 7. Nerocila trivitata, Nerocila arres and Nerocila sigani drawings are adapted and redrawn from the original descriptions.Published as part of Vigneshwaran, P., Ravichandran, S. & Ajith Kumar, T.T., 2022, Redescription of the fish parasite Nerocila serra Schioedte and Meinert, 1881 (Isopoda: Cymothoidae) from India, with a lectotype designation, and Nerocila pulicatensis Jayadev Babu and Sanjeeva Raj, 1984 placed into synonymy, pp. 513-531 in Journal of Natural History 56 (9-12) on page 525, DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2022.2075290, http://zenodo.org/record/701243
Current marketing practices and market orientation in the context of an emerging economy: the case of Uruguay
Full text linkThis research explores the link between contemporary marketing practices, market orientation and business performance in Uruguay, an emergent country that has recovered from an economic crisis. These approaches seem to be related, but there is no existing evidence to confirm this impression. Lessons can be learned from understanding how effective is the adoption of marketing practices under a crisis scenario. Using data from interviews with 143 micro and small enterprises’ managers, we identify three clusters dependant on the combination of marketing practices: a multi-marketing cluster, a medium-level relationship marketing cluster and a transactional cluster. A model relating market orientation components and various performance measures is tested for the three clusters, showing that the multi-marketing and transactional clusters are more effective in translating efforts and resources into business outcomes.Contemporary marketing practices, Market orientation, Performance, Clusters, Structural equation modeling, Uruguay
Marketing practices and performance in a post-crisis scenario
Full text linkThis research explores the link between contemporary marketing practices, market orientation and business performance in Uruguay, an emergent country that has recovered from an economic crisis. These approaches seem to be related, but there is no existing evidence to confirm this impression. Lessons can be learned from understanding how effective is the adoption of marketing practices under a crisis scenario. Using data from interviews with 143 micro and small enterprises’ managers, we identify three clusters dependant on the combination of marketing practices: a multi-marketing cluster, a medium-level relationship marketing cluster and a transactional cluster. A model relating market orientation components and various performance measures is tested for the three clusters, showing that the multi-marketing and transactional clusters are more effective in translating efforts and resources into business outcomes
- …
