91,543 research outputs found
Glossodoris acosti Matsuda & Gosliner 2018, sp. nov.
No full textGlossodoris acosti Matsuda and Gosliner, sp. nov. Figures (2E, 6C, D, 8E, F, 9A–E) Glossodoris cincta (Bergh, 1888), (Rudman 1986 in part, misidentification: 155, figs, 30C, 33B, 35). Glossodoris sp. D Matsuda & Gosliner 2017. Type Material. Holotype: CASIZ-191352, one specimen, dissected, 18 mm preserved, Papua New Guinea, Madang Province, Rempi, coll: D. Uyeno, 20 November 2012, Papua New Guinea Biodiversity Expedition 2012, orig. fixative 95% EtOH. Tissue sample was removed from the foot for DNA sequencing in Matsuda & Gosliner (2017), GenBank: KT600698 (COI). Paratypes: CASIZ- 191109, one specimen, 6 mm preserved, Papua New Guinea, Madang Province, coll: Expedition by vacuum, 10 Nov 2012, Papua New Guinea Biodiversity Expedition 2012, orig. fixative 98% EtOH. Tissue sample was removed from the foot for DNA sequencing in Matsuda & Gosliner (2017). CASIZ-158809, one specimen, dissected, 31 mm preserved, Philippines, Luzon, Batangas Province, Mabini (Calumpan Peninsula), Maricaban Strait, Arthur’s Rock, coll: B. Castillo, 7 May 2001, 10 meters, orig. fixative Bouin’s solution. A tissue sample was removed from the foot for DNA sequencing by Johnson & Gosliner (2012) and the extraction was additionally used in Matsuda & Gosliner (2017). CASIZ-175327, one specimen 42mm preserved, Philippines, Bohol Island, Panglao, Sungcolan Bay, fringe mangrove, sand and seagrass, coll: T.M. Gosliner, Y. Camacho, J. Templado, M. Malaquias, M. Poddubetskaia, 9 June 2004, Panglao Expedition 2004, 1–5 meters, orig. fixative Bouin’s solution or 10% formalin. Etymology. Glossodoris acosti is named after Robert Acosta, a longtime friend and mentor of the first author. Distribution. Specimens identified in Philippines and Papua New Guinea (present study) and possibly Christmas Island (Indian Ocean) (Rudman 1986). External morphology. Glossodoris acosti have an elongate oval mantle that sits high on the well-elevated sides of the body (Fig. 6C, D). The mantle edge consists of small permanent and semi-permanent undulations with a larger fold on both sides at the midpoint of the mantle. The coloration of the mantle and foot range from brick red to brown, which is covered with small white spots that are denser closer to the edge of the mantle giving it a textured appearance. Three marginal bands run along the outer edge of the mantle and foot, the outermost light blue, followed by dark green and then a lighter yellow-green (Fig. 2E). The color bands on the mantle are more intense than on the foot. The gill forms an arch around the anus that opens posterior, and the gills at both ends of the arc curl inwards. The posterior gill branches form two spirals that are found dorsal to the anterior branches. The gill is large and extends all the way to the mantle margins when fully extended. The lamellae are covered in small white spots with dark colored tips, and while the majority are forked, some are not. In one specimen, the lamellae at the middle of the arc had a notably long fork. The base of the rhinophores are the same color as the mantle that become increasingly whiter approaching the dark tips. The genital pore is located on the right side of the body below the mantle and posterior to the rhinophores. Internal morphology. Radular structure (Fig. 9A–E). The radular ribbon is long and wide (Fig. 9D) (radular formula for an 18 mm preserved specimen CASIZ-191352 is approximately 106 x 65.1.65). The rachidian tooth (Fig. 9A) is two-thirds of the length of the first lateral tooth and narrows to a dull point. The first lateral tooth has a long central cusp with six well-defined small denticles on each side of the tooth. The inner edges of the first laterals have a thicker ridge behind the denticles. The cusps of the inner laterals are slightly longer and there are approximately 12–15 denticles only on the outer edge. The mid-laterals (Fig. 9B) have a more pronounced peen than the inner teeth, and have 8–10 denticles on the outer edge. The outer laterals (Fig. 9C) are reduced with a shorter central cusp, a reduced peen, and only small indentations where the denticles are on the inner and midlaterals. The outer three teeth entirely lack any trace of denticles. The jaw rodlets have a unicuspid tip and are slightly curved (Fig. 9E). Reproductive system (Fig. 8E, F). The vagina is very long and folded and the bursa copulatrix is of comparable size to the receptaculum seminis sac. The bursa and receptaculum have a common insertion. The penial sac is long and twisted and wraps around the more distal part of the penis. The muscular vas deferens and glandular prostatic portion are also highly convoluted. Remarks. The color pattern is distinctly different than G. bonwanga and G. andersonae, however closely resembles that of G. sp. cf. cincta. In G. bonwanga, there are only two marginal bands of color (outer black and inner yellow) compared to the three bands of G. acosti (outer light blue, middle dark green and outer yellowish green). Similarly, G. andersonae has a white to light blue outer band, followed by a middle band of dark blue and a yellowish green band that contains numerous opaque white markings. There appear to be subtle, but consistent differences in the external morphology between G. acosti and G. sp. cf. cincta. In G. acosti, the marginal bands are much wider and more subdued than in G. sp. cf. cincta. When fully extended, the gill of G. acosti is much larger (extending to the outer margins of the mantle) and has two distinct spirals found above the lower gill branches (Fig. 6D), whereas the gill of G. sp. cf. cincta is smaller and has all branches at one level. Glossodoris acosti closely matches the description of Rudman’s (1986) Philippines-Indonesia color group. This is especially evident in the light blue mantle band noted in Rudman’s Philippines specimen (Fig. 5). It also shares similarities to Rudman’s (1986: figs. 33B, 35) Christmas Island specimen in its reproductive system structure and radular morphology. The radula in G. acosti and G. sp. cf. cincta are also very similar, however the rachidian tooth in G. acosti (Fig. 9A) is less pointed than in G. sp. cf. cincta (Fig. 9F) and lacks the bulbous swelling below the apex. The outer laterals in G. acosti have faint indentations where the denticles would be, whereas in G. sp. cf. cincta the outer denticles are completely smooth in the Philippines and Papua New Guinea specimens, although the Madagascar specimen has well-defined denticles all the way to the edge. Further study is needed to determine the range of variation of these radular characters. The vagina of G. acosti is very long and convoluted, which is similar to G. bonwanga, however it is significantly longer than in G. andersonae and G. sp. cf. cincta. Similarly, the penial papilla of G. acosti (Fig. 8E, F) is elongate and twists around the distal portion of the penis, where as it is much shorter and evenly curved in G. sp. cf. cincta (Fig. 8G, I). The ABGD analysis clearly separates G. acosti from other members of the G. cincta clade. The intraspecific pdistances are less than or equal to 2, and interspecific p-distances Ž7 (Matsuda & Gosliner 2017) (Fig. 5).Published as part of Matsuda, Shayle B. & Gosliner, Terrence M., 2018, Glossing over cryptic species: Descriptions of four new species of Glossodoris and three new species of Doriprismatica (Nudibranchia: Chromodorididae), pp. 501-529 in Zootaxa 4444 (5) on pages 513-515, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4444.5.1, http://zenodo.org/record/143722
Highly diastereoselective Heck–Matsuda reaction with pyrazolyl diazonium salts
No full textThe Heck–Matsuda (HM) reaction is a powerful synthetic approach
cut out for C–C bonds formation under mild conditions. We
demonstrated that pyrazolyl diazonium salts are suitable reagents
in this protocol, allowing us to deliver highly substituted cyclopentenols and cyclopentenamines with an excellent degree of
diastereoselectivity and a control of enantioselectivit
HOMA-IR and the Matsuda Index as predictors of progression to type 1 diabetes in autoantibody-positive relatives
No full textAim/hypothesis: We assessed whether HOMA-IR and the Matsuda Index are associated with transitions through stages of type 1 diabetes. Methods: Autoantibody (AAb)-positive relatives of individuals with type 1 diabetes (n=6256) from the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention were studied. Associations of indicators of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and insulin sensitivity (Matsuda Index) with BMI percentile (BMIp) and age were assessed with adjustments for measures of insulin secretion, Index60 and insulinogenic index (IGI). Cox regression was used to determine if tertiles of HOMA-IR and Matsuda Index predicted transitions from Not Staged (<2 AAbs) to Stage 1 (≥2 AAbs and normoglycaemia), from Stage 1 to Stage 2 (≥2 AAbs with dysglycaemia), and progression to Stage 3 (diabetes as defined by WHO/ADA criteria). Results: There were strong associations of HOMA-IR (positive) and Matsuda Index (inverse) with baseline age and BMIp (p<0.0001). After adjustments for Index60, transitioning from Stage 1 to Stage 2 was associated with higher HOMA-IR and lower Matsuda Index (HOMA-IR: HR=1.71, p<0.0001; Matsuda Index, HR=0.40, p<0.0001), as with progressing from Stages 1 or 2 to Stage 3 (HOMA-IR: HR=1.98, p<0.0001; Matsuda Index: HR=0.46, p<0.0001). Without adjustments, associations of progression to Stage 3 were inverse for HOMA-IR and positive for Matsuda Index, opposite in directionality with adjustments. When IGI was used in place of Index60, the findings were similar. Conclusions/interpretation: Progression to Stages 2 and 3 of type 1 diabetes increases with HOMA-IR and decreases with the Matsuda Index after adjustments for insulin secretion. Indicators of insulin secretion appear helpful for interpreting associations of progression to type 1 diabetes with HOMA-IR or the Matsuda Index in AAb-positive relatives
F in Review of the immature stages of the family Lycidae (Insecta: Coleoptera)
No full textF 1–6. Lycostomus ferrugineus: (1)–(3) thorax and abdominal segment A1; (4) abdominal segments A6–A9; (5) and (6) abdominal segments A6–A10.Published as part of BOCAK, L. & MATSUDA, K., 2003, Review of the immature stages of the family Lycidae (Insecta: Coleoptera), pp. 1463-1507 in Journal of Natural History 37 (12) on page 1473, DOI: 10.1080/00222930210125362, http://zenodo.org/record/526007
Glossodoris buko Matsuda & Gosliner 2018, sp. nov.
No full textGlossodoris buko, Matsuda & Gosliner sp. nov. Figures (1A–C, 2A, 3A–E, 4C–D) Glossodoris pallida (Rüppell & Leuckart 1830), misidentification, Rudman 1990: figs. 9c, 10e–f; Gosliner et al. 2008: 240, third photo; Turner & Wilson 2008; Gosliner et al. 2015: 237, upper right photo. Glossodoris xantholeuca Ehrenberg 1831: 92; Rudman 1984. Glossodoris sp. A Matsuda & Gosliner 2017. Type Material. Holotype: CASIZ-223284 (ex CASIZ- 191102 B) 4 mm preserved, Papua New Guinea, Madang Province, Bilbil Island, coll: V. Knutson, 10 November 2012, orig. fixative 95% EtOH, GenBank: KT600713 (COI). Paratypes: CASIZ- 191102 A, 13 specimens,1 dissected, 3–8 mm, same collection data as holotype. CASIZ- 0 86381, 6 specimens, 1 dissected, 6.5–11 mm, Papua New Guinea, North Coast, North of Madang, approx. 1 km South of Cape Croisilles, South side of The Quarry, coll: T.M. Gosliner, 13 June 1992, orig. fixative Bouin’s solution. CASIZ-181594, one specimen 6 mm preserved, Philippines, Bohol Island, Panglao, Pontog Lagoon I, reef wall with small caves, coll: T.M. Gosliner, Y. Camacho, J. Templado, M. Malaquias, M. Poddubetskaia, 2 Jul 2004, Panglao Expedition 2004, 17–25 meters, orig. fixative 95% EtOH. CASIZ-177264, one specimen, Philippines, Luzon Island, Batangas Province, Tingloy, Caban Island, Layaglayag, coll: T. Gosliner, A. Valdés, M. Pola, L. Witzel, B. Moore, A. Alejandrino, 16 Mar 2008. Comparative material of Glossodoris pallida (Figs. 1D–1E): CASIZ-173393, one specimen, dissected, 9 mm preserved, Madagascar, Iles Radama, Nosy Valiha, W of Nosy Valiha, coll: T.M. Gosliner, 20 Oct 2005, 12– 13 m, orig. fixative Bouin’s solution. CASIZ-173395, one specimen, dissected, 9 mm preserved, Madagascar, Iles Radama, Nosy Kalakajoro, West of Nosy Kalakajoro and Nosy Beratia, coll: T.M. Gosliner, 19 Oct 2005, 13– 15 m, orig. fixative Bouin’s solution. CASIZ-176997, one specimen, 14.5 mm preserved, Mozambique, Inhambane Province, Jangamo, Pandane Beach, coll: M. Pola and J. Reis, 6 Feb 2008, 1.5 meters, orig. fixative 95% EtOH. CASIZ-175548, one specimen 4 mm preserved (large portion missing from tissue sample), Madagascar, Iles Radama, Nosy Kalakajoro, coll: S. Fahey and T. M. Gosliner, 13 Oct 2005, CAS-WCS Radama Islands Expedition, 15-20 meters, orig. fixative 95% EtOH. CASIZ-194338, one specimen, dissected, 6 mm preserved, Madagascar, South Madagascar, “Pointe Evatra, crique fond rocheux et gazon d’algues”, coll. South Madagascar Expedition, 30 Apr 2006 – May 2010, 3–8 meters, orig. fixative 95% EtOH. CASIZ-175554, one specimen, dissected, 2 mm preserved, Madagascar, Iles Radama, Nosy Faly, NW of Nosy Faly, coll: S. Fahey and T.M. Gosliner, CAS-WCS Radama Islands Expedition, 13–16 meters, orig. fixative 95% EtOH. Etymology. The name Glossodoris buko comes from buko (young coconut) owing to the resemblance of this species to the cream-colored coconut meat from the Philippines, where this species is found. Geographical Distribution. Specimens identified by Matsuda & Gosliner (2017) range from the Philippines to Papua New Guinea and Australia (Turner & Wilson 2008). External Morphology. Glossodoris buko has a long and slender body that is transparent white in color (Fig. 1A–C). There is an opaque white band that starts anteriorly on the mantle, narrows between the rhinophores and then widens again and narrows between the two major folds in the middle of the mantle, and ends circling the gills (Fig. 2A). In most specimens, the band is continuous, however there was a break in the band posterior to the rhinophores in some. A white opaque band runs the length of the foot on both sides and connects posteriorly. The mantle edge is rippled with the semi-permanent undulations that are characteristic of all Glossodoris. One primary pair of undulations midway on the mantle is identifiable by an indentation of the white dorsal band. A thin, light yellow marginal band runs the length of the outer edge of the mantle and opaque white mantle dermal formations that appear as a thick white band that lies partly under the yellow band. The degree and number of the smaller semi-permanent undulations varies between individuals, but larger specimens have more pronounced undulations. A yellow band borders the foot, however no white band is visible due to the absence of mantle dermal formations. The rhinophores are elongate and conical with 11–12 lamellae. The bases of the rhinophores are white and the tips are yellow. The gill forms a semicircle surrounding the anus opening posteriorly, consisting of approximately 5–8 unipinnate branches. The lamellae are white with yellow tips and are shorter at the ends of the arc. The genital pore is located on the right side of the body below the mantle and behind the rhinophores. Internal Anatomy. Radula and buccal armature (Fig. 3A–E). The radular ribbon (Fig. 3E) is short and wide with a radula formula for a preserved specimen of 3 mm of approximately 28 x 14.1.14 (CASIZ- 191102 A) and 13.1.13 for a 6.5 mm preserved specimen (CASIZ-086381). The rachidian tooth (Fig. 3A) is very reduced and quasi-triangular. The first lateral tooth is almost bilaterally symmetrical. It is wide and has a relatively short triangular pointed central cusp. There are approximately five well-defined denticles, each about half the length of the central cusp, that point down and outward on the inner and outer sides of the central cusp. The mid-lateral teeth (Fig. 3B) are longer and have a shorter central cusp with approximately 6–8 loosely packed and well defined denticles solely on the outer edge. Unlike the first lateral, the central cusp on the mid-laterals is almost indistinguishable from the denticles next to it. The denticles in the mid-laterals are almost indistinguishable in size and shape from the central cusp, and maintain this shape and their size integrity to the edge of the ribbon (Fig. 3C). The jaw rodlets are short and well-spaced with distinct gaps between rodlets. They are predominantly bifid (Fig. 3D) with a few trifid rodlets. The ventral side of the buccal mass has a glandular sheath covering the oral tube that contains numerous densely packed white opaque glands (Fig. 4D). Reproductive system (Fig. 4C). The penial bulb is long and folded and leads to a coiled vas deferens followed by an approximately equal in length prostate gland. The receptaculum seminis duct and the vagina are relatively short. The receptaculum seminis is slightly smaller than the bursa copulatrix, and they are found adjacent to each other rather than being aligned linearly. Remarks. At first glance, G. buko and G. pallida could be easily confused, as there are few external morphological differences (Fig. 1; Rudman 1984: fig 1b; Gosliner et al. 2015: 237, upper right fig.; Matsuda & Gosliner 2017: fig. 1). The holotype of G. pallida was collected from the Red Sea and subsequently examined by Rudman (1984) together with a specimen from Tanzania. Both specimens share the same color pattern, radular structure and reproductive system morphology as the five specimens of G. pallida we comparatively examined here from Madagascar and Mozambique (Figs. 1D–F, 3F–J). In Rudman’s (1990) G. pallida description, he noted that specimens from East Australia have yellow gills and rhinophores, which are consistent with G. buko, whereas his Tanzania and Sudan specimens, the rhinophores and gills are white. However, he further remarks that yellow tips were reported from specimens in the Red Sea and Reunion Island, indicating that yellow tips may not be a consistent identifier for G. buko. The rhinophores and gills of our G. pallida specimens from Madagascar and Mozambique all have frosted yellow tips, although the yellow is not as bright as in the G. buko specimens. The most striking differences between the two species are found in the radula, jaws and buccal mass. The radular ribbon of G. pallida (Fig. 3J) is elongate (~ 85 x 23.1.23 CASIZ-173395), whereas it is short and squat in G. buko (Fig. 3E) (~ 28 x 14.1.14) for specimens of comparable size. This is confirmed in Rudman’s G. pallida specimen from the Red Sea (type locality), which has a radular formula of 108(+4) x 39.1.39 (15 mm specimen alive) and 23.1.23 for his Australian specimen (9 mm preserved) (Rudman 1984), and while no length was reported, the number of lateral teeth and presence of a rachidian tooth suggest that this specimen is likely G. buko. Glossodoris pallida has a more prominent and pointed rachidian tooth (Fig. 3F), whereas the rachidians are significantly reduced and amorphous in G. buko. There are also significant dissimilarities in the lateral teeth. The East African G. pallida specimens examined here share the same lateral tooth structure as Rudman’s Red Sea specimen (1984), with a long narrow hook-shaped central cusp with well-defined short denticles resting flat against the outer edge (Fig. 3G, H). Glossodoris buko has a lateral tooth that is broad and concave with a central cusp that is almost indistinguishable from the denticles in size and shape that shares no similarities with G. pallida. These differences are also visible in the jaw. Glossodoris pallida’ s rodlets are long, curved, and tightly packed with bifid tips where one of the points protrudes from slightly below the adjacent rodlet (Fig. 3I). Glossodoris buko has short and loosely packed rodlets that are less consistent in shape (Fig. 3D). Finally, the large glandular sheath on the ventral side of the buccal mass in G. buko (Fig. 4D) is not present in G. pallida (Fig. 4B). The reproductive system appears similar to the description by Rudman (1983) for G. pallida from Tanzania and the Red Sea and examined here from Madagascar (Fig. 4A). The only noteworthy distinction in the reproductive systems of the two species is that the ejaculatory portion of the vas deferens of G. pallida (Fig. 4A) contains many more convolutions than does that of G. buko (Fig. 4C). Glossodoris buko is distinct from G. pallida in both internal morphology as shown here, and based on molecular analyses (Matsuda & Gosliner 2017). This distinction is also maintained geographically. Glossodoris pallida has only been recorded off the coast of eastern Africa and the Red Sea, and G. buko is solely from the western Pacific. Matsuda & Gosliner’s (2017) phylogeny of Glossodoris provides support for the splitting of the previously hypothesized Glossodoris pallida into two distinct species. This is further supported through p-distance values (Matsuda & Gosliner 2017). Within G. buko, a grade and one clade are supported (a grade from the Philippines and a clade from Australia and Papua New Guinea). However, there were no observed morphological differences and only a 5–6% p-distance between them and these were not recovered as distinct lineages in the ABGD analysis conducted by Matsuda and Gosliner (Fig. 5). This strongly supports that the western Pacific specimens represent a single species distinct from the Indian Ocean specimens (Matsuda & Gosliner 2017).Published as part of Matsuda, Shayle B. & Gosliner, Terrence M., 2018, Glossing over cryptic species: Descriptions of four new species of Glossodoris and three new species of Doriprismatica (Nudibranchia: Chromodorididae), pp. 501-529 in Zootaxa 4444 (5) on pages 503-508, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4444.5.1, http://zenodo.org/record/143722
Storeyandra frenchi Santos-Silva & Heffern & Matsuda 2010
No full text<i>Storeyandra frenchi</i> (Blackburn, 1895) <p>(Fig. 16, 17, 76, 124, 125, 202, 217, 260, 321, 355-359)</p> <p> <i>Parandra Frenchi</i> Blackburn, 1895: 57; Lameere 1902: 95.</p> <p> <i>Parandra frenchi</i>; Lea 1919: 260 (plate XXVII, fig. 91, 92); Illidge 1924: 78; Duffy 1963: 31; Hawkeswood 1992: 208 (host); Webb 1994: 325-327 (distribution, host).</p> <p> <i>Parandra</i> (<i>Parandra</i>) <i>Frenchi</i>; Lameere 1913: 6 (cat.); 1919: 17.</p> <p> <i>Parandra</i> (<i>Parandra</i>) <i>frenchi</i>; Arigony 1984: 89, 90, 94, 95, 97, 98 (fig. 54, 63, 64, 65, 66); Santos-Silva 2002: 32 (note).</p> <p> <i>Birandra</i> (<i>Birandra</i>) <i>frenchi</i>; Santos-Silva and Shute 2009: 32.</p> <p> <b>Description</b>. Integument dark-brown; parts of head and mandibles blackish.</p> <p>Male (Fig. 355). Head and prothorax together longer than elytral length. Head proportionally very wide in relation to body length; dorsal surface slightly convex; punctures on gibbosities fine and abundant, clearly coarser and confluent towards eyes and occiput; area behind eyes coarsely and confluently punctate, except on protuberances where eyes are inserted, that are finer and sparsely punctate; area between gibbosities and ocular carina barely depressed; ocular carina (Fig. 355) not bifurcated in “Y”; pilosity microscopic and sparse between eyes, very short and sparse on protuberances where eyes are inserted. Eyes as in Fig. 76. Clypeus coarsely and confluently punctate; pilosity short, moderately sparse. Central projection of labrum (Fig. 16) with short, moderately abundant hair. Submentum with transverse and wide carinae; punctures coarse, oblong, deep and confluent in central region, and clearly finer towards mentum; pilosity moderately long and sparse; margin close to mentum just elevated. Antennae (Fig. 217) reaching apical fourth of pronotum; dorsal sensorial area of antennomere XI divided by carina at its apical third. Maxillary palp as in Fig. 202.</p> <p>Pronotum finely, abundantly punctate in central area, with punctures somewhat coarser and sparser laterally. Elytra with punctures sparse and barely fine on anterior two-thirds, and fine on apical third; each elytron with shallow depression, longitudinal, that begins at basal fourth and finishes just after middle of elytron. Femora (Fig. 356) short and wide. Metatarsus (without claws) (Fig. 260) shorter than metatibia; metatarsomere V shorter than I-III together.</p> <p>Female (Fig. 357). Punctures and pilosity on dorsal surface of head and of clypeus as in male. Punctures of pronotum as in male. Elytral punctures fine and abundant towards the suture, and coarser laterally. Submentum coarsely and abundantly punctate; anterior margin as in males.</p> <p> <b>Variability</b>. Integument brown to dark-brown; margins of pronotum blackish. Male: punctures on gibbosities of dorsal face of head rather fine and not notably abundant; labrum with short hair, moderately punctate throughout extension; submentum with transverse carinae only laterally; antennae reaching only to middle of pronotum; sensorial dorsal area of antennomere XI not divided by carina; elytra with fine punctures throughout length, but more abundant on apical third.</p> <p> <b>Dimensions in mm (M / F)</b>. Total length (including mandibles), 15.0-25.3/13.5-22.4; prothorax: length, 3.7-6.2/2.8-4.7; anterior width, 4.8-8.4/3.0-4.9; posterior width, 3.6-6.0/3.0-4.8; humeral width, 4.1-6.8/ 3.8-6.0; elytral length, 7.2-11.7/8.5-13.8.</p> <p> <b>Geographical distribution</b> (Fig. 321). Australia (Queensland, New South Wales).</p> <p> <b>Material examined</b>. (11 M, 21 F), as follows: AUSTRALIA. F, 1878, Deyrolle coll. (MCGD); 2 F, [date not indicated] (IRSN). <i>New South Wales</i>: F, XII.10.1923, W. W. Froggatt coll. (AUMU); Cascade, F, [date not indicated] (AUMU); M, F, I.1934, F. E. Wilson coll. (MZSP); F, I.1934, F. E. Wilson coll. (AUMU); 4 F, I.1934, F. E. Wilson coll. (MVMA); Condong (Tweed River), M, [date not indicated], Brown coll. (MVMA); Dorrigo, M (ex. Tippmann Collection), [date not indicated] (USNM); M, [date not indicated] (AUMU); 2 M, [date not indicated], W. Heron coll. (AUMU); M, F, [date not indicated] (MVMA); M, F, [date not indicated], W. Heron coll. (MVMA); M, F, I.1931, C. Oke coll. (MVMA); Sydney, F, XI.03.1923, W. W. Froggatt coll. (AUMU); Ulong, M, [date not indicated], W. Heron coll. (MVMA). <i>Queensland</i>: Mount Bithongabel, F, XII.1963, F. T. Fricke coll. (AUMU); Mountains Bunya, F, XII.14.1937, N. Geary coll. (AUMU); F, XII.15.1937, N. Geary coll. (AUMU); 2 F, XII.21.1937, N. Geary coll. (AUMU); F, II.07.1961, D. K. McAlpine coll. (AUMU); N. Queensland, M, III.02.1905, (MVMA).</p> <p> <b>Type, type locality.</b> Holotype F, from Australia, Queensland. Dr. Peter Lillywhite (Senior Collection Manager, Entomology / Arachnology Sciences Department) sent us photographs of a female (Fig. 358) identified as the holotype of <i>Parandra frenchi</i> Blackburn, 1895, deposited at MVMA. Among those photographs is one with the labels (Fig. 359). One of those labels, not handwritten, refers to locality of collection: “Endeavour River”. That river is in Queensland and not in New South Wales. Blackburn (1895) wrote: “N.S. Wales; in the collection of Mr. French”. Lillywhite (pers. comm.) explained: “Charles French (Sr) is quote as saying to Musgrave that he “did not take up the insects again until about 1860, when my friend, Tom Gulliver, late of Townsville, gave me a start.” I may be drawing a long bow but Queensland was a part of NSW up until 1859. As Townsville is also in what is now North Queensland it is possible that French was collecting there around the time that Statehood was conferred. He would have labeled his material in his collection at the time as NSW. We received this collection in 1908, after the date of Blackburn’s publishing of the species. The Queensland on the photograph may have been a later addition. Please also note that this is the only <i>P. frenchi</i> we have from the collection of C. French”.</p>Published as part of <i>Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel & Matsuda, Kiyoshi, 2010, Revision of Hawaiian, Australasian, Oriental, and Japanese Parandrinae (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae), pp. 1-120 in Insecta Mundi 2010 (130)</i> on pages 62-63, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/5164485">10.5281/zenodo.5164485</a>
Melanesiandra solomonensis Santos-Silva & Heffern & Matsuda 2010
No full textMelanesiandra solomonensis (Arigony, 1983) (Fig. 24, 25, 83, 136, 137, 223, 266, 327, 379-381) Parandra solomonensis Arigony, 1983: 40, fig. 1-18; 1984: 89, 94, 95, 96, 97, 111, 115, fig. 51, 63-66; Santos-Silva 2002: 32 (note). Birandra (Birandra) solomonensis; Santos-Silva and Shute 2009: 32. Description. Integument shining, dark-brown; anterior edge of head, parts of mandibles, lateral edges of pronotum and of scutellum, and elytral suture blackish or very dark-brown. Male (Fig. 379). Head wide, proportionally very large in relation to body size; gibbosities of dorsal surface with punctures coarse, abundant and not confluent; area between gibbosities and ocular carina smooth; area near ocular posterior edge and of occiput with coarse punctation; area behind eyes with punctures very coarse, abundant, in part confluent. Central region of clypeus strongly convex together with labrum. Central projection of labrum (Fig. 24), very distinct, wide, and with one small projection on each side. Eyes (Fig. 83) emarginate. Mandibles (Fig. 136) falciform, as long as or just shorter than head; inner margin with two large teeth together protracted. Submentum clearly delimited by fine suture; surface coarsely and abundantly punctate; margin close to mentum wide and barely elevated; pilosity moderately short and very sparse. Antennae not notably short (reaching basal fourth of pronotum); ventral sensorial area of antennae (Fig. 223) visible from side only in apical antennomeres; ventral sensorial area of antennomeres III-V not divided by carina; remaining antennomeres divided by carina gradually more elevated towards antennomere XI; dorsal sensorial area of antennomere XI large. Pronotum convex; disc punctation fine and sparse, gradually coarser laterally (mainly towards anterior angles); anterior margin concave; anterior angles not projected forward; lateral angles well marked, rounded or obtuse; posterior angle well marked. Elytra finely and abundantly punctate (punctures just coarser laterally); elytral carinae absent. Metasternum with some coarse punctures. Metafemur (Fig. 380) moderately short. Metatarsus (without claws) (Fig. 266) longer than metatibia; metatarsomere V longer than I-III together. Female (Fig. 381). Dorsal surface of head and area behind eyes with same kind of punctuation as in males, except sparser. Central projection of labrum (Fig. 25) narrow and rounded or subacute, without lateral projections. Mandibles as in Fig. 137. Variability. Integument brown to dark-brown. Males: dorsal surface of head, between gibbosities and ocular carina, with some fine punctures; submentum clearly delimited by fine suture just laterally; antennae notably short (reaching the basal third of pronotum); antennomeres III-VI or III-VII not divided by carina; elytral punctures fine; elytral carinae barely visible. Dimensions in mm (M / F). Total length (including mandibles), 16.8-20.5/17.7-20.0; prothorax: length, 3.4-4.3/3.5-4.2; anterior width, 4.5-5.5/4.4-4.8; posterior width, 3.6-4.3/4.1-4.6; humeral width, 4.4-5.4/ 5.0-5.7; elytral length, 9.4-11.3/10.3-11.9. Geographical distribution (Fig. 327). Solomon Islands (Santa Ana Island, Santa Isabel Island). Material examined. (6 M, 4 F), as follows: SOLOMON ISLANDS. Isabel: Santa Isabel Island (Molao), paratype F, VI.29.1960, C. W. O’Brien coll. (MCNZ). Makira-Ulawa: Santa Ana Island, 2 paratypes M, 1 paratype F, [no date indicated] (MCNZ); 3 M, 2 F [no date indicated] (USNM); M, [no date indicated] (MZSP); paratype F, [no date indicated] (MZSP). Types, type locality. Holotype M, from Solomon Islands, Santa Ana Island, deposited at SMTD. Arigony (1983) stated that the material examined from the Solomon Islands included two pairs (deposited at the Museu de Ciências Naturais da FundaÇÃo Zoobotânica [MCN], Porto Alegre), the holotype and some paratypes (from Staaliches Mueum für Tierkunde [SMTD] Dresden), and the other paratypes at Bernice P. Bishop Museum (BPBM), Honolulu and Smithisonian Institution – United States National Museum (USNM), Washington. However, in the list of type material she listed: holotype at SMTD; 3 M and 2 F at MCN (paratypes), therefore, 5 paratypes and not two pairs; 3 M and 4 F at SMTD (paratypes); 1 F at BPBM. Therefore, there are not any types deposited at USNM, and there are five paratypes deposited at MCNZ (= MCN). Besides, one of the paratypes (female) deposited at MCNZ is not from Santa Ana Island, but from Santa Isabel Island, and the paratypes are 2 M and 3 F, not 3 M and 2 F. The number of males and females deposited at MCNZ was clearly an error, because Arigony (op.cit.) wrote in the list of type material: “3 [male symbol] MCN 56502, 56503, 2 [female symbol] MCN 56501, 56504, 61212”. We received all specimens of Parandrinae from the Oriental province deposited at USNM, among which, there are specimens of M. solomonensis, but none of them have a type label. Additionally, even if one of those specimens had a type label, it would not be a type, because it was not recorded in the list of type material. One paratype female originally deposited at MCNZ is currently deposited at MZSP (donation of Dr. Maria Helena Galileo). We concluded that the paratype female from Santa Isabel Island belongs to BPBM, and was forgotten in MCNZ by Tania Arigony. Dr. Maria Helena Galileo (MCNZ) authorized us to return the paratype to BPBM. This paratype from Santa Isabel Island was collected on VI.29.1960, and not VI.24.1960, as written by Arigony (1983). Additionally, this paratype has the number 61212, the same number listed by Arigony (1983) as a female from Santa Ana Island, deposited at MCNZ. The most important problem, related to the “ paratype ” from Santa Isabel Island, is that the specimen is not a female of M. solomonensis, but a female of M. bougainvillensis. Comments. Although the general appearance of the males of M. solomonensis (Fig. 379) is very different from that of M. striatifrons (Fig. 376), the females of both species are very similar, mainly in head shape.Published as part of Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel & Matsuda, Kiyoshi, 2010, Revision of Hawaiian, Australasian, Oriental, and Japanese Parandrinae (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae), pp. 1-120 in Insecta Mundi 2010 (130) on pages 45-47, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.516448
Applicative Bidirectional Programming with Lenses
No full textA bidirectional transformation is a pair of mappings between source and view data objects, one in each direction. When the view is modified, the source is updated accordingly with respect to some laws. One way to reduce the development and maintenance effort of bidirectional transformations is to have specialized languages in which the resulting programs are bidirectional by construction---giving rise to the paradigm of bidirectional programming.
In this paper, we develop a framework for applicative-style and higher-order bidirectional programming, in which we can write bidirectional transformations as unidirectional programs in standard functional languages, opening up access to the bundle of language features previously only available to conventional unidirectional languages. Our framework essentially bridges two very different approaches of bidirectional programming, namely the lens framework and Voigtlander’s semantic bidirectionalization, creating a new programming style that is able to bag benefits from both
Enhancing Semantic Bidirectionalization via Shape Bidirectionalizer Plug-ins
No full textMatsuda et al. (2007) and Voigtlander (2009) have introduced two techniques that given a source-to-view function provide an update propagation function mapping an original source and an updated view back to an updated source, subject to standard consistency conditions. Previously, we developed a synthesis of the two techniques, based on a separation of shape and content aspects (Voigtlander et al. 2010). Here, we carry that idea further, reworking the technique of Voigtlander such that any shape bidirectionalizer (based on the work of Matsuda et al. or not) can be used as a plug-in, to good effect. We also provide a data-type-generic account, enabling wider reuse, including the use of
pluggable bidirectionalization itself as a plug-in
Papuandra araucariae Santos-Silva & Heffern & Matsuda 2010
No full text<i>Papuandra araucariae</i> (Gressitt, 1959) <p>(Fig. 1, 2, 86, 141, 142, 201, 210, 226, 269, 318, 387-389)</p> <p> <i>Parandra araucariae</i> Gressitt, 1959: 65, fig. 1.</p> <p> <i>Parandra</i> (<i>Parandra</i>) <i>araucariae</i>; Arigony 1984: 89, 90, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 100, 116, fig. 27, 28, 33, 40, 49, 56, 63-66; Santos-Silva 2002: 32 (note).</p> <p> <b>Description</b>. Integument shining, pale-brown; parts of head, parts of mandibles, margins of pronotum and of scutellum, and elytral suture, blackish.</p> <p>Male (Fig. 387). Dorsal surface of head finely, sparsely punctate; gibbosities separated by deep furrow, and with projection in posterior part near longitudinal furrow; area between gibbosities and ocular carina with depression well defined; ocular carina narrow, without bifurcation in “Y” near posterior edge of eyes; area behind eyes more coarsely punctate than dorsal surface of head. Eyes (Fig. 86) moderately narrow; posterior ocular edge (Fig. 387) distinct, but without abrupt declivity towards posterior part of head. Central area of clypeus oblique. Labrum tumid at middle-basal area; central projection (Fig. 1) moderately wide, truncate at apex. Submentum barely depressed, sparsely, shallowly punctate; pilosity short and very sparse; anterior margin moderately narrow and elevated. Mandibles (Fig. 141) not falciform; inner margin with two teeth together protracted and distinctly separated at their apices; dorsal carina narrow and not notably elevated. Galea (Fig. 201). Ventral sensorial area of antennomeres III-XI visible from side (Fig. 226) and divided by clear carina; dorsal sensorial area of antennomere XI moderately large.</p> <p>Pronotum finely, sparsely punctate at central area, and coarser and more abundantly punctate laterally; anterior edge slightly concave centrally; anterior angles clearly projected forward. Elytra abundantly, somewhat coarsely punctate, but finer and sparser towards suture on basal two-thirds, and all of apical third; each elytron with one carina visible. Wings as in Fig. 210. Metasternum glabrous, with punctures shallow, coarser laterally. Metafemur (Fig. 388) moderately elongate. Dorsal face of metatibiae longitudinally sulcate. Metatarsomere V approximately as long as I-III together (Fig. 269).</p> <p>Female (Fig. 389). Central projection of labrum (Fig. 2). Mandibles as in Fig. 142. Punctation of head, pronotum, and elytra as in males.</p> <p> <b>Variability</b>. Integument brown. Males: gibbosities of dorsal surface of head separated by shallow furrow; projection of gibbosities in posterior part near longitudinal furrow, barely visible; central area of clypeus barely oblique; central projection of labrum rounded at apex; submentum not depressed; submentum flat; submentum transversely striate; anterior margin of submentum barely elevated. Female: punctation of basal two-thirds of elytra, close to suture, and laterally.</p> <p> <b>Dimensions in mm (M / F)</b>. Total length (including mandibles), 13.0-16.0/15.1-18.2; prothorax: length, 2.9-3.3/3.2-4.0; anterior width, 3.3-4.0/3.6-4.4; posterior width, 2.6-3.5/3.6-4.2; humeral width, 3.2-4.1/ 4.0-5.0; elytral length, 7.5-9.0/9.0-11.1.</p> <p> <b>Geographical distribution</b> (Fig. 318). Papua New Guinea (New Guinea, Normamby Island), and Indonesia (Irian Jaya).</p> <p> <b>Material examined</b>. (15 M, 7 F), as follows: PAPUA NEW GUINEA. <i>Morobe</i>: Bulolo M, 1964, (UNCO); F, II.1974, J. Sedlacek coll. (EVCO); F, (in dead trunk of <i>Araucaria cunninghamii</i>), 12.II.1974, J. Sedlacek coll. (EVCO); M, XII.24-29.1994, K. Hiramatsu coll. (NOCO); M, XII.25.1994, M. Takagi coll. (NOCO); (800m), F, I.15-II.14.1979, J. Sedlacek coll. (IRSN); (700m), F, I.16.1970, (JCCO); M, [date not indicated], J. Sedlacek coll. (MZSP); (1020m), paratype M, VIII.24.1956, E. J. Ford Jr. coll. (BPBM); M, XII.12.1971, J. Sedlacek coll. (DHCO); M, III.5.1972, J. Sedlacek coll. (DHCO); Wau (Wau Ecology Institut; 1200m), 3 M, 1 F, II.15-18.2000, A. Weigel coll. (AWCO); F, II.15-18.2000, A. Weigel coll. (MZSP); (1200m), M, VIII.30.1971, (CHKC). <i>Madang</i>: Wum (Upper Jimmi Valley; 840m), paratype M, VII.17.1955, J. L. Gressitt coll. (BPBM). <i>Eastern Highlands</i>: Okapa - Okasa, M, F, XII.18.1964, R. Hornabrook coll. (CHKC). INDONESIA, New Guinea, Irian Jaya, <i>Papua</i>: Epomani-Ugida, km 179 (Paniai region; 1350-1400m), 2 M, I.19- 20.1996, A. Riedel coll. (ZSMC).</p> <p> <b>Type, type locality</b>. According to Gressitt (1959) the holotype male is from Western Highlands (Wum), deposited at BPBM, and there are twenty-eight (28) paratypes, deposited at BMNH, USNM, CASC, BPBM, CSIR, RMNH, MZBI, CNHM, and DASF. Gressitt (1959) recorded that the holotype and some paratypes from Wum collected July 16, 1955 by him, and some from Bulolo collected August 22-23, 1956 by him are deposited at BPBM. We examined two paratypes males from Wum and Bulolo, deposited at BPMB, that don’t agree with that data (see “Material examined”).</p> <p> <b>Comments</b>. <i>Papuandra araucariae</i> is the only species in this genus with the mandibles of the male and female similar. It was common to find specimens from New Guinea in many collections misidentified as <i>P. araucariae</i>. See comments on <i>P. norfolkensis</i>, from Norfolk Island.</p>Published as part of <i>Santos-Silva, Antonio, Heffern, Daniel & Matsuda, Kiyoshi, 2010, Revision of Hawaiian, Australasian, Oriental, and Japanese Parandrinae (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae), pp. 1-120 in Insecta Mundi 2010 (130)</i> on pages 71-72, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/5164485">10.5281/zenodo.5164485</a>
- …
