107,591 research outputs found
Zooplankton abundance in Amini and Kadmat islands of Lakshadweep
No full textStudies on zooplankters collected from the lagoons of Amini and Kadmat islands of Lakshadweep Archipelago were carried out based on a survey conducted during January - February, 2014. The displacement volume ofzooplankton in Amini and Kadmat were 58.35 and 15ml per 100 m3 respectively. The density was also higher in Amini than in Kadmat which is estimated as 64480 and 47726 numbers per 100 m3 respectively. A total of twentyone groups of zooplankters viz., copepods,ostracods, chaetognaths, Lucifer sp., medusae, doliolids,mysids, tintinnids, euphausiids, appendicularians,siphonophores, cladocera, amphipods, isopods,polychaete larvae, prawn larvae, crab larvae, squilla larvae, molluscan larvae, fish eggs and fish larvae were recorded from these two ecosystems. Groupwise studies indicated the dominance of copepods in Amini forming 40% while in Kadmat, the maximum was contributed by crab larvae (50%). The dominance of crab larvae in Kadmat was due to a swarm of zoea stage of crab at station 2 in the western side of the island.Among the copepods, calanoid copepods contributed the maximum with 71% in Amini and 81% in Kadmat.Followed by the dominance of copepods in Amini,ostracods (33%) and crab larvae (14%) formed major components. In Kadmat, copepods formed the second dominant group which contributed 20% followed by prawn larvae (11%), ostracods (6%) and the share by other groups were less than 5%. Comparative studies on the occurrence of different groups of zooplankters in these two island ecosystems showed that copepods and ostracods were very much higher in Amini than in Kadmat while, crab larvae contributed more in Kadmat which was due to the swarming of zoea stage of crab. Both qualitative and quantitative abundance of zooplankters in these two ecosystems are presentedand discussed
Re-assessing the intensity values of Iranian earthquakes using EMS and ESI scales
No full textIran is a region with high seismicity but reliable seismometric networks were installed in this country only in the last decades. Hence, the analysis of macroseismic effects (seismic intensity) could be the only possible way for defining the parameters of most Iranian earthquakes. Various authors reported the intensity estimates of earthquakes in this region using different macroseismic scales. To apply modern methods of determining macroseismic parameters, intensity values need to be expressed in a uniform scale. In this study, we attempt such homogenization by considering all information we can find from the literature consisting of both descriptions of effects and intensity values to build a dataset of intensities for the Iran region as most complete as possible. We adopted the European Macroseismic Scale (EMS) as the reference scale as it is the most recent one and particularly detailed on building damage. We also considered the Environmental Seismic Intensity (ESI) scale in order to use information on environmental effects (ground deformation, landslides, liquefaction, etc.) that are poorly detailed by EMS. We compare our application of two scales based on a dataset of Iranian earthquakes for which we have descriptions of effects on both building (EMS) and environment (ESI), and found that, in about 80% of cases, assessed EMS and ESI intensities coincide one to other within one degree, that is the uncertainty which can be reasonably assumed for standard intensity estimates. In cases where we were not able to find the original descriptions of effects in literature and only intensity estimates reported in various scales, we convert these values by table of correspondence. In summary, we assessed intensities in a homogeneous scale for 512 Iranian earthquakes from 658 through 2013
Stigmaeus kurdistaniensis Khanjani & Amini & Khanjani 2015, n. sp.
No full text<i>Stigmaeus kurdistaniensis</i> n. sp. <p>(Figs. 1-2)</p> <p> Diagnosis — Prodorsum with large, reticulated shield; eyes absent and post-ocular bodies present; median hysterosomal shield with 2 pairs of setae; suranal shield entire, with 2 pairs of setae (<i> h 3</i> absent). All dorsal shields reticulated. Endopodal shields and coxal areas reticulated; dorsal setae long and serrate. Aggenital plate reticulated and with 3 pairs of setae (<i> ag 1 -ag 3</i> ) and genital shield with 1 pair of setae (<i>g</i>). Palp tarsus with one tridentae eupathidium and palp genu with 2 setae. Femora I-II with 6, 5 setae respectively; genua I-IV 3(+ <i>κ</i>)-3(+ <i>κ</i>)- 1-1. Palp and leg’s segments with reticulations.</p> <p> Type materials — Holotype female and 3 paratype females collected from soil under apple trees, <i>Malus domestica</i> Borkh. (Rosaceae), Iran: Kurdistan Province, Ghorveh city (35°10’ N, 47°48’ E, 1906 m a.s.l.) 4 September 2013, coll. F. Amini. The holotype female and 2 paratype females are deposited as slide-mounted specimens in the Collection of the Acarology Laboratory, University of Bu-Ali Sina, Hamadan, Iran and one paratype female will be deposited in the National Collection of Arachnida, Plant Protection Research, Pretoria, South Africa.</p> <p> <b>Description</b></p> <p> <i>Female</i> (n = 4) — Colour in life red. Idiosoma oval. Measurements of holotype with measurements of paratypes in parentheses: Length of body (excluding gnathosoma) 600 (559 – 618), (including gnathosoma) 761 (700 – 753); width 420 (313 – 415).</p> <p> Dorsum (Figure 1A) — All dorsal shields reticulated; prodorsum with large shield medially; bearing three pairs of setae (<i>vi, ve</i>, <i>sci</i>), post ocular bodies (<i>pob</i>) present and eyes absent, setae <i>sce</i> located on small plates laterally; hysterosomal area C-E with a large shield medially and 4 pairs of small plates, median hysterosomal shield with two setae (<i> c 1</i> , <i> d 1</i> ), setae <i> d 2</i> located on large, lateral, hysterosomal shields; ventro-lateral, humeral plate with setae <i> c 2</i> ; intercalary shields (F) with setae <i> f 1</i> ; suranal shield (H) entire, bearing 2 pairs of setae (<i> h 1-2</i> ). All dorsal setae long and with a cluster of barbs distally except setae <i> c 2</i> sparsely serrate; setae <i> c 2</i> longer than the others. Lengths of dorsal setae: <i>vi</i> 95 (93 – 97), <i>ve</i> 125 (114 – 123), <i>sci</i> 73 (67 – 75), <i>sce</i> 93 (93 – 98), <i> c 1</i> 86 (82 – 90), <i> c 2</i> 136 (130 – 137), <i> d 1</i> 88 (82 – 90), <i> d 2</i> 91 (86 – 94), <i> e 1</i> 90 (82 – 92), <i> e 2</i> 98 (87 – 99), <i> f 1</i> 96 (87 – 99), <i> h 1</i> 90 (90 – 92), <i> h 2</i> 85 (84 – 86). Distances between dorsal s <i>etae: vi-vi</i> 35 (39 – 40), <i>ve-ve</i> 100 (89 – 103), <i>sci-sci</i> 175 (154 – 180), <i>sce-sce</i> 235 (232 – 251), <i> c 1 -c 1</i> 89 (77 – 94), <i> c 2 -c 2</i> 420 (312 – 417), <i> d 1 -d 1</i> 92 (73 – 95), <i> d 2 -d 2</i> 291 (257 – 293), <i> e 1 -e 1</i> 83 (73 – 82), <i> e 2 -e 2</i> 292 (243 – 289), <i> f 1 -f 1</i> 165 (145 – 167), <i> h 1 -h 1</i> 68 (56 – 65), <i> h 2 -h 2</i> 141 (134 – 142), <i>vi-ve</i> 125 (62 – 125), <i>ve-sci</i> 58 (57 – 67), <i>sci-sce</i> 50 (37 – 47), <i> c 1 -c 2</i> 95 (99 – 157), <i> d 1 -d 2</i> 108 (92 – 106), <i> e 1 -e 2</i> 101 (82 – 94), <i> h 1 -h 2</i> 45 (37 – 45), <i> c 1 -d 1</i> 100 (93 – 105), <i> d 1 -e 1</i> 100 (81 – 102), <i> e 1 -f 1</i> 79 (75 – 83), <i> f 1 -h 1</i> 91 (72 – 89); <i>ratio: vi/vi-vi</i> 2.71 (2.38), <i> c 1 /c 1 -c 1</i> 0.97 (0.95 – 1.06), <i> d 1 /d 1 -d 1</i> 0.96 (0.99 – 1.17), <i> e 1 /e 1 - e 1</i> 1.08 (1.12 – 1.13), <i> f 1 /f 1 -f 1</i> 0.58 (0.59 – 0.6), <i> h 1 /h 1 -h 1</i> 1.32 (1.61 – 1.42), <i> c 1 -c 1: d 1 -d 1: e 1 -e 1: f 1 -f 1</i> : 0.53 (0.53 – 0.56): 0.55 (0.50 – 0.56): 0.50 (0.49 – 0.50): 1.0 (1.0).</p> <p> Venter (Figure 1B) — Ventral cuticle striated coxisternal regions I-II and III-IV with reticulations (Figure 1B). Lengths of setae <i>1a</i> 36 (35 – 40), <i>1b</i> 38 (31 – 40), <i>1c</i> 70 (65 – 72), <i>2b</i> 63 (59 – 67), <i>2c</i> 42 (39 – 43), <i>3a</i> 38 (38 – 42), <i>3b</i> 43 (38 – 45), <i>3c</i> 45 (31 – 40), <i>4a</i> 41 (36 – 43), <i>4b</i> 37 (37 – 41), <i>4c</i> 37 (33 – 38), <i> ag 1</i> 34 (33 – 37), <i> ag 2</i> 39 (37 – 40), <i> ag 3</i> 49 (47 – 50), <i>g</i> 27 (25 – 30), <i> ps 1</i> 65 (66 – 73), <i> ps 2</i> 37 (37 – 45), <i> ps 3</i> 40 (39 – 44). Aggenital area reticulated, with 3 setae (<i> ag 1-3</i> ), setae <i> ag 3</i> longer than <i> ag 1-2</i> ; genital shield with 1 pair of setae (<i>g</i>); anal plate with 3 pairs of setae (<i> ps 1-3</i> ), pseudanal setae <i> ps 1</i> distally serrated and almost two times longer than setae <i> ps 2-3</i> .</p> <p> Gnathosoma (Figure 1C) — Ventral infracapitulum with two pairs of infracapitular setae, <i>m</i> 43 (40 – 43) and <i>n</i> 34 (29 – 36), two pairs of adoral setae, <i>or1</i> 29 (30 – 32), <i>or2</i> 38 (37 – 39) (Figure 1C). Chelicerae free 95 (95 – 100), movable digit 127 (126 – 132) (Figure 1A). Palp five segmented, palp tarsus with 4 simple setae + one simple eupathidium + one solenidion (<i>ω</i>) + one tridentae eupathidium, palp tibia with two setae + one well developed claw + one accessory claw seta-like, palp genu with one seta and palp femur with three setae (Figure 1C).</p> <p> Legs (Figures 1 D-G) — Length of leg I 253 (243 – 273); leg II 221 (208 – 238); leg III 230 (223 – 243), leg IV 251 (253 – 270). Setal formulae of leg segments (solenidia in parentheses and not included in setal counts) as follows: coxae 2-2-2-2; trochanters 1-1-2-1; femora 6-5-3-2, genua 3(+ <i>κ</i>)- 3(+ <i>κ</i>)- 1-1; tibiae 5(+ <i>’</i>, + <i>’ρ</i>)- 5(+ <i>’ρ</i>)- 5(+ <i>’ρ</i>)- 5(+ <i>’ρ</i>); tarsi 13(+ <i>ω</i>)- 9(+ <i>ω</i>)-7(+ <i>ω</i>)-7(+ <i>ω</i>). Length of solenidia: I <i>ω</i> 25 (20 – 30), II <i>ω</i> 25 (26 – 28), III <i>ω</i> 15 (14 – 20), IV <i>ω</i> 15 (14 – 18); I <i>’ρ</i> 39 (37 – 39), I <i>’</i> 16 (12 – 18), II <i>’ρ</i> 32 (32 – 35), III <i>’ρ</i> 24 (24 – 29), IV <i>’ρ</i> 28 (27 – 29); I <i>κ</i> 72 (72 – 77), II <i>κ</i> 12 (10 – 11).</p> <p> <i>Male</i> (n = 1) — Idiosoma oval. Length of body (excluding gnathosoma) 587, (including gnathosoma) 655; width 275.</p> <p> Dorsum (Figure 2A) — Dorsal shields completely reticulated; prodorsal shield bearing four pairs of setae (<i>vi, ve</i>, <i>sci, sce</i>); post ocular bodies (<i>pob</i>) present; eyes absent; hysterosomal area C-F almost covered by large median and 3 pairs of plates laterally (Figure 2A); median and lateral hysterosomal shields fused, with setae <i> c 1</i> , <i> d 1</i> , <i> d 2</i> , <i> e 1</i> , intercalary shield divided with setae <i> f 1</i> ; suranal shield entire, with two pairs of setae (<i> h 1</i> , <i> h 2</i> ). All dorsal setae barbed. Lengths of dorsal setae: <i>vi</i> 92, <i>ve</i> 107, <i>sci</i> 70, <i>sce</i> 100, <i> c 1</i> 50, <i> c 2</i> 95, <i> d 1</i> 45, <i> d 2</i> 55, <i> e 1</i> 30, <i> e 2</i> 107, <i> f 1</i> 80, <i> h 1</i> 52, <i> h 2</i> 70. Distances between dorsal setae: <i>vi-vi</i> 37, <i>ve-ve</i> 85, <i>sci -sci</i> 67, <i>sce-sce</i> 232, <i> c 1 -c 1</i> 57, <i> c 2 -c 2</i> 275, <i> d 1 - d 1</i> 57, <i> d 2 -d 2</i> 182, <i> e 1 - e 1</i> 42, <i> e 2 -e 2</i> 150, <i> f 1 -f 1</i> 92, <i> h 1 -h 1</i> 37, <i> h 2 -h 2</i> 80, <i>vi-ve</i> 55, <i>ve-sci</i> 62, <i>sci-sce</i> 45, <i> c 1 -c 2</i> 50, <i> d 1 -d 2</i> 65, <i> e 1 - e 2</i> 60, <i> h 1 -h 2</i> 25, <i> c 1 -d 1</i> 67, <i> d 1 - e 1</i> 60, <i> e 1 -f 1</i> 42, <i> f 1 -h 1</i> 52. Ratio: <i>vi/vi-vi</i> 2.48, <i> c 1</i> / <i> c 1 -c 1</i> 0.87, <i> d 1</i> / <i> d 1 -d 1</i> 0.78, <i> e 1</i> / <i> e 1 - e 1</i> 0.71, <i> f 1</i> / <i> f 1 -f 1</i> 0.86, <i> h 1</i> / <i> h 1 -h 1</i> 1.4, <i> h 2</i> / <i> h 2 -h 2</i> 0.87, <i> h 1 /h 2</i> 0.74, <i> c 1 -c 1: d 1 -d 1: e 1 -e 1: f 1 -f 1</i> : 0.62: 0.62: 0.45: 1.0.</p> <p> Venter (Figure 2B) — Endopodal shields I-II and III-IV with reticulations. Lengths of setae <i>1a</i> 22, <i>1b</i> 35, <i>1c</i> 35, <i>2b</i> 35, <i>2c</i> 27, <i>3a</i> 2, <i>3b</i> 22, <i>3c</i> 17, <i>4a</i> 27, <i>4b</i> 25 and <i>4c</i> 20, <i> ag 1</i> 26, <i> ag 2</i> 30, <i> ag 3</i> 38, <i> ps 1</i> 27, <i> g 1</i> 2, <i> g 2</i> 2. Aggenital plate smooth with three setae (<i> ag 1-3</i> ).</p> <p> Gnathosoma (Figures 2 C-D) — Ventral infracapitulum reticulated and with two pairs of infracapitular setae, <i>m</i> 30 and <i>n</i> 22, two pairs of adoral setae, <i>or1</i> 22, <i>or2</i> 32 (Figure 2B). Chelicerae free 132, movable digit 65 (Figure 2D). Palp five segmented, palp tarsus with 4 simple setae + one simple eupathidium + one solenidion (<i>ω</i>) + one tridentate eupathidium, palp tibia with two setae + one well developed claw + one spine-like accessory claw, palp genu with two seta and palp femur with three setae (Figure 2C).</p> <p> Legs (Figures 2 E-H) — Length of leg I 224, leg II 195; leg III 185, leg IV 205. Setation same as female except tarsi I-IV with two solenidia and solenidia longer. Length of solenidia: I <i> ω 1</i> 43, I <i> ω 2</i> 25, II <i> ω 1</i> 38, II <i> ω 2</i> 22, III <i> ω 1</i> 32, III <i> ω 2</i> 12, IV <i> ω 1</i> 26, IV <i> ω 2</i> 12; I <i>’ρ</i> 35, I <i>’</i> 15, II <i>’ρ</i> 31, III <i>’ρ</i> 20, IV <i>’ρ</i> 23; I <i>κ</i> 55; II <i>κ</i> 8.</p> <p> Remarks — The new species <i>Stigmaeus kurdistaniensis</i> <b>n. sp.</b> resembles <i>S. siculus</i> (Berlese, 1883) in that dorsal shields are reticulated, median hysterosomal shield with two setae, <i>pob</i> present, eyes and <i>h3</i> absent. However it differs from the latter in: all dorsal and ventral setae longer than that of <i>S. siculus</i>; ventral infracapitulum and all leg and palp segments with reticulations in <i>E. kurdistaniensis</i> instead of smooth in <i>S. siculus</i> and <i>pob</i> small, between setae <i>ve -sci</i> in the new species instead of large in <i>S. siculus.</i></p> <p> The new species also resembles <i>S. echinopus</i> Summers, 1962, in having all leg and palp segments with reticulations, suranal shield entire and reticulated, <i>pob</i> present and median hysterosomal shield with two setae. However, <i>S. kurdistaniensis</i> differs from the latter in: aggenital shield reticulated instead of smooth in <i>S. echinopus</i>, all dorsal and ventral setae longer than those of <i>S. echinopus</i> and genual setae <i>κ</i> short in <i>S. kurdistaniensis</i> in contrast to long in <i>S. echinopus</i>.</p> <p>Immature stages — Unknown.</p> <p>Etymology — The species is named after the locality where it was collected, namely Kurdistan province.</p>Published as part of <i>Khanjani, M., Amini, F. & Khanjani, M., 2015, A new species of the genus Stigmaeus koch (Acari: Stigmaeidae) from Kurdistan province, Iran and description of male of Prostigmaeus khanjanii Bagheri and Ghorbani, pp. 49-60 in Acarologia 55 (1)</i> on pages 50-54, DOI: 10.1051/acarologia/20152153, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/5403892">http://zenodo.org/record/5403892</a>
Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Nearly-Zero Energy Buildings: An Introduction to the Methodologies
No full textGiven the paramount importance of a life cycle approach to the building sector and its significant share of the total energy consumption and the subsequent impacts on the economic aspects of the sustainable development goals, this chapter aims to review the current frameworks and provide an introduction for the standard methods of life cycle costing developed by international research and policy institutes. It discusses the life cycle costing application in assessing the economic performance of buildings, including the requirements and calculation methods with a life cycle approach. The economic indicators and the macroeconomic parameters in the life cycle cost analysis of the building sector will be elaborated on and discussed. The barriers to implementing a life cycle cost analysis will be reviewed and clarified. This chapter is, therefore, expected to draw attention from academies, industries, and policymakers working on evaluating the economic performance of the sustainable building and construction sector. It is anticipated to become a guide for future studies by introducing the existing methodologies and the solutions for the current barriers in the economic assessment of the building sector
Hemidactylus kurdicus Safaei-Mahroo & Ghaffari & Ghafoor & Amini 2017, sp. nov.
No full textHemidactylus kurdicus sp. nov. (Figures 2A–H; Table 3) Holotype. (CAS 262258, MorphoBank M 452298-M452302) was collected by Barbod Safaei-Mahroo on 0 5 September 2016 at 20h 45 in the Qara-Dagh Mountains (35°14.057’ N, 45°22.871’ E, elevation 1139 m), south west of Qara Dagh village, Sulaimani Province, Northeastern Iraq. Paratypes. (CAS 262259, MorphoBank M452303-M452307) and (CAS 262260, MorphoBank M452308- M452312), were collected by Barbod Safaei-Mahroo on 0 5 and 0 6 September 2016 from 23h30 to 01h00 in the Qara-Dagh Mountains (35°14.588’ N, 45°22.644’ E, elevation 1293 m), south west of Qara Dagh village, Sulaimani Province, Northeastern Iraq. Etymology. The generic nomen kurdicus is derived from the word “Kurd” which refers to the name for the Kurdish nation (Kurdistan Region), the location where the new species was found. Diagnosis. A species of the Arid species group of Hemidactylus that may be distinguished from other members of this group by the following morphological characters (based on 3 subadult types): single pair of postmental scales more-or-less in posterior contact with each other; 14–16 longitudinal rows of tubercles that are smallest dorsolaterally; 9–10 subdigital lamellae under first toe of pes, and 13 lamellae under fourth toe of pes. Description (data holotype with range for type series given parenthetically). CAS 262258, Subadult (undetermined sex). SVL 40.9 mm (39.8–40.9 mm); Head elongate, HL = 10.9 mm; HL/SVL = 0.27 (26.5–27.2) and wide HW = 8.6 mm; HW/HL = 0.79 (78.0–79.4), distinct from neck, not depressed HH = 5.9 mm (50.3–54.4); HH/HL = 0.54. Snout long SL = 5.35 mm; SL/HL = 0.49. Mental scale triangular; one pair of large triangular postmental scales not in contact with each other, one small granular scale separates the postmentals posteriorly; one third of postmental in contact with second infralabial; PI = II. Rostral large and wider than high, with median vertical crease. Nostrils have a teardrop shape, each surrounded by five scales (nasorostral, supranasal, two small postnasals and first supralabial). Supranasals divided by small vertical intersupranasal, ISN = 1. Supralabials (L/ R): 11/11 (11–12); Infralabials (L/R): 9/9 (8–9). Dorsal head scales intermixed with irregular round tubercles, becoming regular on dorsum; tubercles of body dorsum large and weakly keeled, three times larger than those on head, smaller dorsolaterally; TR = 14 (14–16). Scales on dorsal parts of forelimbs larger than dorsal body, tubercles absent on dorsal parts of forearms. Ventral scales small, smooth and uniform, becoming larger in the middle of abdomen, smallest on margins of flanks. Number of lamellae beneath each digit on pes (undivided + divided + entire apical; right/left, if different): LP 1st (L/R) = 2+6+1/3+6+1, LP 2nd (L/R) = 1+9+1/1+9+1, LP 3th (L/R) = 0+11+1/1+10+1, LP 4th (L/R) = 2+10+1/ 1+11+1, LP 5th (L/R) = 0+12+1/3+10+1. Tail longer than body TaL = 47.85 mm; TaL/TL = 0.53 (52.5–53.8); not thickened at base, tapering towards the tip; TW = 5.13 mm; subcaudals enlarged, arranged in a single row. Three keeled tubercles are on either side of each annulus on base of tail, TS = 6 (5–6). Number of dorsal markings 5, number of tail markings 13 (Table 3). Color in life. Subadults have a light brown head and creamy yellow body with five brown asterisk-shape dorsally markings extending from neck to the pelvic region, tail with 12–13 distinct brown bands. The ventral surface is pinkish to white. Variation. CAS 262259 and CAS 262260, subadult paratypes. Comparative measurements, scalation and color pattern of holotype and paratypes are presented in Table 3. Single pair of large, triangular postmentals not in contact in first specimen (as in holotype), but contacting one another in the second specimen. Body dorsum bearing 14–16 regular rows of weakly keeled tubercles. 9–10 subdigital lamellae under first toe of pes and 13 lamellae under fourth toe of pes. In one adult male specimen (MorphoBank M452313-M452317) that was caught and released in September 2015 these characters were observed: Large body size (approximately 60 mm SVL), postmentals in contact with one another along posterior one fourth of their length, and contacting the first and one third to one fourth of second infralabials. There are 10 precloacal pores in a curved line. Dorsal surface of head, body, and tail slightly yellowish with irregular dark brown blotches; limbs lighter than body; a dark brown stripe extending from nostril to ear; ventral surface white. Comparisons. We compared Hemidactylus kurdicus sp. nov. from the Kurdistan region of Iraq with the Hemidactylus species listed in the Appendix I (Baha el Din 2003, 2005; Busais & Joger 2011; Carranza & Arnold 2012; Garcia-Porta et al. 2016; Moravec et al. 2011; Šmíd et al. 2013, 2015, 2016; Torki 2011; Vasconcelos & Carranza 2014). H. kurdicus sp. nov. is distinguished from all other related Arid clade Hemidactylus species of the Middle East by having a single pair of postmental scales, also it differs from the species below based on the number of lamellae under the first and fourth toes of the pes (1st/ 4th). H. kurdicus sp. nov. has 9–10 lamellae under the first toe and 13 lamellae under the fourth toe of pes, which is more than the following species (mean values reported) H. adensis Šmíd, Moravec, Kratochvíl, Nasher, Mazuch, Gvoždík & Carranza, 2015 (5.3/ 9.3), H. alfarraji Šmíd, Shobrak, Wilms, Joger & Carranza, 2016 (7.1/10.8), H. alkiyumii Carranza & Arnold, 2012 (7/10.8), H. asirensis Šmíd, Shobrak, Wilms, Joger & Carranza, 2016 (6.2/10.1), H. awashensis Šmíd, Moravec, Kratochvíl, Nasher, Mazuch, Gvoždík & Carranza, 2015 (8/11.4), H. dawudazraqi (6.6/10.9), H. endophis Carranza & Arnold, 2012 (6/9), H. festivus Carranza & Arnold, 2012 (6.9/11.2), H. foudaii Baha El Din, 2003 (7/10.3), H. granosus Heyden, 1827 (7.4/11.5), H. hajarensis (8/12.1), H. homoeolepis Blanford, 1881 (5/9.8), H. inexpectatus Carranza & Arnold, 2012 (6/10.5), H. jumailiae Busais & Joger, 2011 (6.9/10.9), H. lavadeserticus (7.4/11.4), H. lemurinus Arnold, 1980 (7/11), H. mandebensis Šmíd, Moravec, Kratochvíl, Nasher, Mazuch, Gvoždík & Carranza, 2015 (5.3/8.3), H. masirahensis Carranza & Arnold, 2012 (6/10), H. mindiae Baha El Din, 2005 (6.2/10), H. minutus Vasconcelos & Carranza, 2014 (4.4/7.9), H. montanus Busais & Joger, 2011 (6.4/10.2), H. paucituberculatus Carranza & Arnold, 2012 (4.9/8.3), H. robustus (6.1/9.8), H. romeshkanicus Torki, 2011 (–/9), H. saba Busais & Joger, 2011 (8.1/11.1), H. shihraensis (6/10), H. sinaitus (5.2/9.7), H. turcicus (6.8/10.2), H. ulii Šmíd, Moravec, Kratochvíl, Gvoždík, Nasher, Busais, Wilms, Shobrak, Carranza, 2013 (5.4/8.6), and H. yerburii Anderson, 1895 (6.9/10.4).Published as part of Safaei-Mahroo, Barbod, Ghaffari, Hanyeh, Ghafoor, Aram & Amini, Saywan, 2017, A new species of Hemidactylus (Squamata: Gekkota: Gekkonidae) from Qara Dagh Mountains, Kurdistan Region, with a key to the genus in Iraq, pp. 377-392 in Zootaxa 4363 (3) on pages 382-383, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4363.3.4, http://zenodo.org/record/110809
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
No full textWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Anoplocheylus marivaniensis Khanjani, Hoseini & Amini, 2014, sp. nov.
No full textAnoplocheylus marivaniensis sp. nov. (Figs. 1–10) Female (n= 7). Dimensions of holotype (measurements of paratypes in parentheses): length of body (including gnathosoma) 725 (715–740), length of body (excluding gnathosoma) 570 (555–580); width 275 (305–317). Dorsum (Figs. 1–3). Peritremes (Fig. 2) present in membrane connecting gnathosoma and idiosoma, entirely chambered (approximately 28 chambers in each side); prodorsal shield with a pair of simple sensillae (sc 1) 72 (71–77) long (Fig. 3) and five pairs of simple setae v 1 27 (25–27), v 2 39 (41–44), sc 2 17 (16–18), sc 3 21 (20–23), with posterior pair (sc 4) very long 95 (96–99) and whip-like; one pair of eyes, located on anterolateral corners of prodorsal shield; opisthosoma with 17 pairs of short setae, (19–24) except for one pair of humeral setae (d 3) which is very long 102 (102–109), posterior opisthosomal setae (f 1) 67 (68–75) and two pairs of caudal setae 38 (30–45) anterior to anal opening are also much longer than most opisthosomal setae. Integument striated. Venter (Fig. 6). With 19 pairs of subequal setae 22 (20–22) (excluding pseudanal setae); anogenital area with three pairs of aggenital setae 15 (15–16) and three pairs of genital setae 10 (10–11); anal opening terminal with two pairs of pseudanal setae, ps 1 29 (28–33) dorsally and ps 2 35 (34–37) ventrally. FIGURES 1–6. Anoplocheylus marivaniensis sp. nov. (Female): 1. Dorsum, 2. Peritreme, 3. sensillae sc 1, 4. Gnathosoma, 5. Chelicera, 6. Venter. Gnathosoma (Fig. 4, 5). Infracapitulum with four pairs of setae, two pairs of subcapitular setae, seta m 18 (17–19), n 45 (43–49) and two pairs of adoral setae or 1–2 (43–49); chelicerae (Fig. 5) separate and with two setae, proximal setae 45 (42–45) more than twice length of anterior seta 15 (13–16). Palp (Fig. 4) four-segmented; trochanter without setae; femur with 4 simple setae; small genu with two setae; tibiotarsus with one terminal claw, two subapical spurs, one falcate seta and nine simple setae. Legs (Figs. 7–10). Legs with pretarsus stalked, annulated, bearing a pliable empodium; claws absent; measurements of leg I 453 (438 – 60), leg II 275 (260–290), leg III 346 (350–363), leg IV 410 (400–420). Leg femora divided; setal counts of leg segments (solenidia and seta κ not included) as follows: coxal fields 4 – 3 – 3 – 2, trochanters 1 – 1–2 – 1, basifemora 8 – 3 – 3 – 2, telofemora 6 – 3 – 3 – 3, genua 7 – 5 – 4 – 4 and tibiae 8 (φ+ 1 κ) – 5 – 5 – 5, tarsi 19 (1 ω) – 8 (1 ω) – 9 – 9. MALE. Unknown. Remarks. Anoplocheylus marivaniensis sp. nov. closely resembles A. tauricus Livshitz and Mitrofanov, 1973 in having setae sc 1 (sensillae) simple, five pairs of simple setae on the prodorsal shield, d 3 and f 1 the longest hysterosomal setae, and lengths of anal setae (ps 1 and ps 2) subequal, but it differs from the latter by: (1) coxal field I with four setae in the new species instead of three setae in A. tauricus, (2) basifemora I with eight setae vs. six in A. tauricus, (3) one pair of extra setae between setae f 2 and h 1 with one pair of extra setae opposed to absent in latter. The new species also is similar to A. aegypticus Baker & Atyeo, 1964 but can be readily distinguished from latter by: (1) lengths of pseudanal setae subequal [ps 1 (28-33) and ps 2 (34-37)] in the new species instead of ps 1 (28–35) shorter than ps 2 (41–54) in A. aegypticus, (2) basifemora I with eight setae instead of six setae in A. aegypticus, (3) one pair of extra setae between setae f 2 and h 1 opposed to absent in A. aegypticus. Etymology. This species is named after the type locality, the city of Marivan. Type materials. Holotype females and two paratype female from soil & rotten leaves of oak trees, Quercus brantii Lindl., and four paratype females from soil under Crataegus pontica L (Rosaceae), Marivan vicinity, Kurdistan province, (35 ° 26 ' N, 46 ° 13 ' E, 1320 m a.s.l.), 13 Apr. 2013; coll. Fatemeh Amini. The type materials are slide mounted specimens. The holotype female and five paratype females are deposited in the Acari collection of the Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Bu– Ali Sina, Hamedan, Iran and one paratype female will be deposited in the Arachnida Collection of ARC –Plant Protection Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa. Anoplocheylus qorvehiensis sp. nov. (Figs. 11–19) Female (n= 2). Dimensions of holotype (measurements of paratypes in parentheses): length of body (including gnathosoma) 648 (675), length of body (excluding gnathosoma) 500 (525); width 243 (230). Dorsum (Figs. 11–12). Peritremes present in membrane connecting gnathosoma and idiosoma, entirely chambered; prodorsal shield with a pair of plumose sensillae (sc 1) 62 (64) long (Fig. 12) and four pairs of simple setae (sc 2 absent), v 1 54 (56), v 2 27 (29), sc 3 22 (23), with posterior pair (sc 4) very long 117 (125) and whip-like; one pair of eyes, located on anterolateral corners of prodorsal shield; opisthosoma with 13 pairs of short setae, (20–25) except for one pair of humeral setae (d 3) which is very long 118 (122), posterior opisthosomal setae (f 1) 100 (106), f 2 59 (61) and two pairs of caudal setae (32–45) anterior to anal opening are also much longer than most opisthosomal setae. Integument striated. Venter (Fig. 15). With 16 pairs of subequal setae 22 (24) (excluding pseudanal setae); anogenital area with three pairs of aggenital setae 19 (20) and two pairs of genital setae 10 (11); anal opening terminal with six pairs of pseudanal setae, ps 1 20 (20), ps 2 39 (41) ventrally. Gnathosoma (Figs. 13–14). Infracapitulum with four pairs of setae, two pairs of subcapitular setae, seta m 8 (10), n 37 (41) and two pairs of adoral setae or 1–2 (3–5); chelicerae (Fig. 14) separate and with two setae, proximal setae 38 (40) more than twice length of anterior seta 13 (16). Palp (Fig. 13) four-segmented; trochanter without setae; femur with four simple setae; small genu with two setae; tibiotarsus with one terminal claw, two subapical spurs, 1 falcate seta and nine simple setae; Legs (Figs. 16–19). Legs with pretarsus stalked, annulated, bearing a pliable empodium; claws absent. Measurements of leg I 425 (445), leg II 265 (278), leg III 330 (325), leg IV 375 (385). Leg femora divided; setal counts of leg segments (solenidia and seta κ not included) as follows: coxal fields 4 – 3 – 3 – 2, trochanters 1 – 1–2 – 1, basifemora 5 – 2 – 2 – 1, telofemora 6 – 3 – 3 – 3, genua 7 – 5 – 4 – 4, tibiae 8 (1 φ + 1 κ) – 5 – 5 – 5, tarsi 18 (1 ω) – 7 (1 ω)– 9 – 9. MALE. Unknown. FIGURES 11–15. Anoplocheylus qorvehiensis n. sp. (Female): 11. Dorsum, 12. Sensillae sc 1, 13. Gnathosoma, 14. Chelicera, 15. Venter. Remarks. The new species is unique in the genus Anoplocheylus by having prodorsal sensillae (sc 1) plumose in shape, but it does resemble A. paraclavatus Van Dis and Ueckermann, 1991 in having five pairs of setae on prodorsal shield, but differs from the latter by: 1) setae sc 1 plumose in new species but claviform in A. paraclavatus; 2) telofemora I with six setae instead of five setae in A. paraclavatus; 3) tarsi I–IV with 18 (ω) – 7 (ω) – 9 – 9 setae in A. qorvehiensis but 19 (ω)- 7 (ω)- 7 - 7 in A. paraclavatus. Etymology. This species is named after the type locality Qorveh. Type materials. Holotype female and one paratype female from Qorveh vicinity, Kurdistan province, soil under Astragalus sp. bushes, (47 ° 47 ' 06.33'' N, 35 ° 09' 03.62'' E, 1472 m a.s.l.), 20 March 2013; coll. Fatemeh Amini. The type material are slide mounted specimens. The holotype female deposited in the Acari collection of the Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture, University of Bu-Ali Sina, Hamedan, Iran and one paratype female will be deposited in the Arachnida Collection of ARC –Plant Protection Research Institute, Pretoria, South Africa.Published as part of Khanjani, Mohammad, Hoseini, Mohammad Ahmad & Amini, Fatemeh, 2014, Two new Anoplocheylus species (Acari: Trombidiformes: Pseudocheylidae) from Kurdistan province of Iran, pp. 185-192 in Zootaxa 3861 (2) on pages 186-192, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3861.2.6, http://zenodo.org/record/22730
Hypothenemus eruditus
No full textHypothenemus eruditus (Westwood, 1834) Material examined. Guilan Province, Lakan, N 37º 09' 36", E 49º 34' 30", July 2011, breeding in twigs of Mulberry (Morus sp.) (Moraceae), Sudabe Amini leg., 3 specimens (females); Guilan, Kochesfehan, N 37º 16' 39", E 49º 45' 62", July 2011, breeding in twigs of fig tree (Ficus carica) (Moraceae), Sudabe Amini leg., 1 spec. (female), Golestan Provience, Gorgan, N 36º 21' 80", E 53º 18' 64", on Alnus sp., Sudabe Amini leg., July 2015. Golestan Province, Gonbadkavous, N 37º 20' 97", E 55º 40' 98", breeding in twigs of Diospyros sp. (Ebenaceae), Sudabe Amini leg., August 2015 (5 specimens), Guilan, Asalem, on Pterocarya fraxinifolia, Sudabe Amini leg., July 2015. H. eruditus was recorded on numerous host plants in Iran (Beaver et al. 2016), our new host plants records for this species in Iran are Alnus sp. and Pterocarya fraxinifolia.Published as part of Amini, Sudabe, Nozari, Jamasb, Mandelshtam, Michail Yu., Knížek, Miloš, Etemad, Vahid & Faccoli, Massimo, 2017, New records of Iranian bark beetles (Coleoptera: Curculionidae, Scolytinae) and their host plants in Zootaxa 4350 (2), DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4350.2.13, http://zenodo.org/record/105301
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
No full textWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
