5,235 research outputs found
There'll Come / a Time / Song / Words by / Billy Howard / Music by / Elven Hedges / Sung by / HEDGES BROS & JACOBSON
No full textBox no. 6Elven Hedges: There'll Come a Time; music printItem type: single sheet | Content type: music | Counting of pages: page numbersVocal-instrumental score | staff notation; tonic sol-fa notation | voice; piano"No use running, he'll catch you someday [...]
William S. Hedges Papers
No full textWilliam S. Hedges (1895-1978) was one of the primary architects of American Broadcasting. During his career in broadcasting he established station WMAQ, the radio department of the Chicago Daily News (1922), co-founded the National Association of Broadcasters (1923) and served as its president and its director and chairman of the executive committee (1928-1930). Through his work on the Broadcast Pioneers History Project in 1964, Hedges was responsiible for assembling the core collection of the present Library of American Broadcasting. The collection documents Hedges' career, particularly in regards to the Broadcast Pioneers History Project
Hedges Lab : Evolutionary Biology
No full textEste portal web, desarrollado por el científico norteamericano Stephen Blair Hedges, Ph.D. (Carnell Professor and Director, Center for Biodiversity, Science Education & Research Center, Temple University, Philadelphia), reúne un conjunto valioso de recursos para el estudio y la investigación de la biología evolutiva. Hedges también tiene un amplio programa de investigación en el Caribe, donde ha estudiado la evolución y biogeografía de anfibios y reptiles con datos genéticos y ha mantenido una base de datos con información sobre estas especies. El trabajo de Hedges y su equipo en Haití ha definido "hotspots" de biodiversidad que han llevado a la creación de tres parques nacionales en este país. Junto con Philippe Bayard, fundó Haiti National Trust, una ONG de protección del medio ambiente
A replacement name for Isodactylus Hedges, Duellman, and Heinicke, 2008
No full textHedges, S. Blair, Duellman, William E., Heinicke, Matthew P. (2008): A replacement name for Isodactylus Hedges, Duellman, and Heinicke, 2008. Zootaxa 1795 (1): 67-68, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.1795.1.5, URL: https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1795.1.
Hedges, William S., 1860-1914
No full textBiographical information for William S. Hedges. Includes photos of Brook\u27s Arcade, Salt Lake City; McCune Mansion, Salt Lake City
Marisora magnacornae Hedges & Conn. 2012
No full textMarisora magnacornae Hedges & Conn Eastern Nicaraguan Skink Fig. 12 Marisora magnacornae Hedges & Conn 2012:129 (holotype MCZ R26976; type locality “Great Corn Island, Nicaragua ”); Sunyer et al. 2013:1386; HerpetoNica 2015:220. Marisora brachypoda: Hedges & Conn 2012:244 (in part). Diagnosis. Marisora magnacornae is a long-limbed, relatively stout, large species of Marisora characterized (21 males, 14 females; marked with an * in specimens examined; data incomplete for some specimens) by (1) maximum known SVL 85.7 mm in males; (2) maximum known SVL 95.1 mm in females; (3) snout width 3.4–4.2% SVL in males, 2.6–4.1% in females; (4) HL 17.8–21.6% SVL in males, 16.4–20.9% in females; (5) HW 12.3–15.5% SVL in males, 11.0–14.8% in females; (6) EAL 1.3–2.3% SVL in males, 1.2–1.4% in females; (7) Toe IV length 10.9–13.3% SVL in males, 10.7–13.3% in females; (8) prefrontals one per side; (9) supraoculars four per side; (10) supraciliaries four per side; (11) frontoparietals one per side; (12) supralabial five below orbit on 53 sides, 6 on 9 sides; (13) nuchal rows one per side, except 1–2 in one (longitudinally divided by insertion of tiny scale for most of division); (14) dorsals 52–59 in males, 54–59 in females; (15) ventrals 57–65 in males, 57–62 in females; (16) dorsals + ventrals 109–122 in males, 111–121 in females; (17) midbody scale rows 30 in 27, 28 in 2; (18) Finger IV lamellae 12–15 per side in males, 11–15 in females; (19) Toe IV lamellae 15–18 per side in males, 15– 17 females [17]; (20) Finger IV + Toe IV lamellae 28–33 per side in males, 28–31 in females; (21) supranasals in medial contact in 31, not in contact in 1, preventing frontonasal-rostral contact in 96.9%; (22) prefrontals widely separated in 30, in contact with each other in 2; (23) supraocular 1-frontal contact absent in 26, present in 5; (24) parietals in contact posterior to interparietal; (25) pale middorsal stripe absent; (26) dark, thin dorsolateral dark stripe of dashes present in 15, absent in 18, pale brown to cream dorsolateral stripe present in 29 of 33; (27) dark lateral stripe present, about 2 scale rows high; (28) each side of body with distinct white lateral stripe; (29) palms and soles cream to dark brown; (30) total lamellae for five fingers 47–55 in males, 44–54 in females; (31) total lamellae for five toes 56–66 in males, 54–62 in females. In addition, this is a long limbed species with a combined FLL + HLL/SVL 60.8–68.7% in males, 55.8–68.0% in females, and usually has 2 chinshields contacting infralabials (Table 3). Marisora magnacornae is apparently a member of the M. alliacea Group of Middle American Marisora (no genetic data available). Marisora magnacornae has been diagnosed from the four species of Marisora described herein (M. lineola, M. aquilonaria, M. syntoma, and M. urtica) in their respective diagnoses above. Marisora magnacornae differs from the more southern and also Caribbean lowland M. alliacea in having 30 scales around midbody in 93.1% and 28 in 6.9% (versus 28 in 48.5%, 26 in 40.0%, or rarely 27 or 29 midbody scales in M. alliacea) and having the fifth supralabial below the orbit in 85.5% (versus sixth supralabial below orbit in 73.8% of M. alliacea). Marisora magnacornae is distinguished from the slightly more northern Caribbean M. roatanae in having longer limbs (FLL + HLL/SVL 60.8–68.7% in males, 55.8–68.0% in females versus 53.5–58.4% in males and 47.8–57.7% in females in M. roatanae). Marisora magnacornae differs from M. brachypoda by having longer limbs (FLL + HLL/SVL 60.8–68.7% in males and 55.8–68.0% in females versus FLL + HLL/SVL 51.5–57.7% in males and 47.6–53.9% in females and in having a pale brown dorsolateral stripe (versus distinct pale brown dorsolateral stripe absent in M. brachypoda). Marisora magnacornae differs from the extralimital M. pergravis by having fewer ventrals (57–65 in males versus 70–73 in M. pergravis), fewer dorsals (52–59 versus 62–63 in M. pergravis). Marisora magnacornae differs from M. unimarginata of the M. unimarginata group by having the fifth supralabial below the orbit in 85.5% (versus sixth supralabial below orbit in 81.9% in M. unimarginata), 2 chinshields in con- tact with infralabials in 87.3% (versus 1 chinshield contacting an infralabial in 82.9% in M. unimarginata), and having only scattered and slightly darker brown dorsal spots (versus numerous dark brown dorsal spots present in M. unimarginata). Marisora magnacornae is known to differ from the extralimital and poorly known M. berengerae (incomplete morphological data from literature available only from the unsexed holotype) of the M. unimarginata group only from genetic data; furthermore a large geographical hiatus inhabited by other species of Marisora occurs between those two species. Distribution. Marisora magnacornae was described based on a single specimen from Big Corn Island, but is now better known from several mainland localities along the environs of the Río Escondido and tributaries, Atlántico Sur, Nicaragua (Fig. 6). Those mainland localities lie to the north, west, and south of Bluefields and lie in the lowlands on the Caribbean versant in eastern and south-central Nicaragua (about 4 to about 100 m elevation). Remarks. Barbour & Loveridge (1929) evasively reported a single specimen (MCZ R 26976) of Mabuya (= Marisora) from one of the Corn Islands; those authors did not refer to either of the two Corn Islands. Subsequently, no publication ever associated the Corn Islands with any discussion of these mabuyid skinks until Hedges & Conn (2012) described the MCZ specimen as the new species Marisora magnacornae (including all of those references listed in the synonymy of this species by Hedges & Conn). No specimens of Marisora have been collected on the Corn Islands since that original specimen in 1927–1928 (see Sunyer et al. 2013). Those circumstances might suggest that the single Corn Island specimen could have been introduced to that island by a boat carrying cargo from the mainland port of Bluefields, from which this skink is now known to occur to the north, west, and south. Marisora magnacornae might be most closely related to M. alliacea. Both species are similar in limb length and occur in mesic Caribbean lowland habitats. Unfortunately, genetic data for M. magnacornae remain unknown. Images of Marisora magnacornae are in Hedges & Conn (2012).Published as part of Mccranie, James R., Matthews, Amy J. & Hedges, S. Blair, 2020, A morphological and molecular revision of lizards of the genus Marisora Hedges & Conn (Squamata: Mabuyidae) from Central America and Mexico, with descriptions of four new species, pp. 301-353 in Zootaxa 4763 (3) on pages 333-334, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4763.3.1, http://zenodo.org/record/376268
Letter from J. H. Woodward, Wheeling, West Virginia, to J. S. Hedges, Mansfield, Ohio, January 31, 1882
No full textA document from an extensive collection spanning four generations of the Woodward family that operated merchant pig iron companies in West Virginia and Alabama. The collection begins with Stimpson Harvey Woodward (S. H. Woodward), a native of Massachusetts, who moved from Pittsburgh to Wheeling, West Virginia in 1852. He had interests in an iron company as early as 1852 in West Virginia and began Alabama operations in 1869. The family business continued in Alabama until the death of S. H. Woodward's great-grandson in 1965
Typhlops eperopeus Thomas & Hedges, 2007, new species
No full textTyphlops eperopeus new species (Figs. 3 E, 4 B) Holotype: USNM 564785 (field tag number 266250), an adult female, collected 3.9 km airline SSW Barahona (4.5 km S Barahona along coast road and 2.8 km inland), 18 ° 9.854 ' N, 71 ° 5.497 ' W, 305 m, on 30 July 1999 by R. Thomas. Paratypes: All from the Dominican Republic. Barahona Prov.: AMNH 51496, above Del Monte’s Finca (mountains southwest of Barahona), 697 m, 1 August 1932, W. G. Hassler; USNM 564788, 13.5 km by road SW Barahona, 580 m, 18 August 1984, S. B. Hedges; USNM 564787, 4.5 km S Barahona, thence 4.0 km W, 460 m, 8 August 1975, R. Thomas; USNM 564786, 2.4 km WNW Paraiso, 200 m, 12 August 1983, S. B. Hedges, R. Thomas; KU 272423, 6 km NE Paraiso; RT 3516, 4 km NW Enriquillo, 212 m, 8 August 1975, R. Thomas. Independencia Prov.: AMNH 41265 – 266, Duvergé; USNM 564789 –791, 6 km W Duvergé at La Zurza (N 18 ° 23.978 ' W 71 ° 34.358 ', minus 7 m, 22 March 2004, S. B. Hedges. Diagnosis: This is a large, 20 scalerow species of Typhlops, not reducing to 18 scale rows posteriorly or reducing about 2 / 3 the way along the body. Despite the fact that specimens of this species were previously included within T. hectus (Thomas, 1974), T. eperopeus agrees with T. titanops in the presence of reduction from 20 to 18 scale rows fairly far anteriorly (60–65 % of the TL) in some individuals (all T. titanops reduce at around midbody; T. hectus reduce at 73–94 % TL). It differs from T. titanops in having a greater number of middorsal scales (307–329 versus 231–264). In body size (TL), T. eperopeus averages larger: 140–281 (= 234) mm versus 145–216 (= 185) mm in T. titanops. From the standpoint of size, middorsal counts and head scale shapes, however, the major comparisons are with T. hectus and the other species described herein. Typhlops eperopeus is sympatric with T. proancylops and differs from that species in having a nearly parallelsided rostral (oval in T. proancylops), having a rostral wide point relatively far posterior (anterior in T. proancylops; Fig. 7 A) and having a preocular with rounded apex (two angles near the apex in T. proancylops; Fig. 3 B). Typhlops eperopeus differs from T. hectus in having a nearly parallelsided rostral (distinctly clavate in T. hectus), and having a preocular with rounded apex (pointed in T. hectus; Figs. 3, 7 B). Typhlops eperopeus differs from T. agoralionis in having a broader rostral (RW 1 /RL 1 0.51–0.58 versus 0.41–0.45 in T. agoralionis), having a straightedged (Vshaped) preocular extension (lower edge with angled bend in T. agoralionis; Fig. 3 C). Typhlops eperopeus differs from T. sylleptor in having a broader rostral (RW 1 /RL 1 0.51–0.58 versus 0.44–0.50 in T. sylleptor), a nearly parallelsided rostral (oval in T. sylleptor), and in having a rostral wide point relatively far posterior (Fig. 7 A). Description: Rostral nearly parallelsided or only slightly clavate with widest point beyond the midpoint; labial flare 1.3. Preocular angle 46–58 °, with a broad but angled apex; lower portion contacting only the 3 rd of the upper labials. Ocular length approximately 1 / 2 height, sinuosity 0.25 – 0.19. Rostronasal pattern parallel to slightly divergent. Postoculars 2 (cycloid). First parietal standard, spanning 2 scale rows, occasionally narrower, spanning slightly more than 1 scale row. Second parietal present and equal in size to first. TL 140– 281 mm (= 234, excluding 140 mm juvenile). TL/TA: 22–31. TL/MBD 29–39. Middorsal scales 305–329 (= 314). Scale rows 20 – 18, reduction occurring at 57–66 % TL. Coloration bicolor with dorsal pigmentation (pale tan to dark brown) fading ventrally; facial area generally pigmented, although the rostral may lack pigment, as in the holotype. AMNH 51496 and KU 272423 are very heavily pigmented individuals. No males of this species have been identified; see comments above for T. hectus. Distribution: Known from below sea level in the Valle de Neiba up to relatively high elevations in the eastern Sierra de Baoruco. The elevational range is 7 meters below sea level to 697 m. In the lower elevations of its range, this species occurs sympatrically with T. pusillus and T. sulcatus (Schwartz & Henderson, 1991), and with T. proancylops in the vicinity of Puerto Escondido and Duvergé. Etymology: Eperopeus, which we use appositionally, is Greek for deceiver, in allusion to the deceptive morphological similarity of this species to Typhlops hectus and the other species described herein, in contrast to its presumed relationship to T. titanops based on molecular and some morphological characters.Published as part of Thomas, Richard & Hedges, Blair, 2007, Eleven new species of snakes of the genus Typhlops (Serpentes: Typhlopidae) from Hispaniola and Cuba, pp. 1-26 in Zootaxa 1400 on pages 12-13, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17541
Eleutherodactylus montserratae Hedges 2022, sp. nov.
No full textEleutherodactylus montserratae sp. nov. Montserrat Whistling Frog (Figs. 3–5) Holotype (Fig. 3): ANSP 38773, adult female, on the grounds of the former Belham Valley Hotel, Old Towne, Saint Peter Parish, Montserrat, 50 m, 16.73 N, - 62.22 W, collected by S. Blair Hedges and Carla Hass on 13 August 1991. Field tag USNMFS 192724 (= SBH 192724). Paratypes (n = 21): ANSP 38772 (SBH 192723), 38767–768 (SBH 192712–713), from the type locality, with the same information as the holotype. ANSP 38765–766 (SBH 192710–711), from Woodlands Spring, Saint Peter Parish, Montserrat, 180 m (16.757, -62.217), collected by S. Blair Hedges and Carla Hass on 13 August 1991. ANSP 38755–764 (SBH 192684–685, 198688–689, 192692, 192695–698, 192700), ANSP 38769–771 (SBH 192714– 716), ANSP 38774–776 (SBH 192725–727), from the Galways Soufriere, at the caldera, Saint Anthony Parish, Montserrat, 180 m (16.704552, -62.18772), collected by S. Blair Hedges and Carla Hass on 14 August 1991. Diagnosis. A species of Eleutherodactylus in the martinicensis Species Group of the subgenus Eleutherodactylus (Hedges et al. 2008), which includes E. amplinympha Kaiser, Green & Schmid, E. barlagnei Lynch, E. johnstonei Barbour, E. martinicensis (Tschudi), and E. pinchoni Schwartz. Eleutherodactylus amplinympha, which occurs only on Dominica, is a larger species than E. montserratae sp. nov. (16.1–26.4 versus 16.1–21.2 mm SVL in males, 15.9–49.7 versus 16.7–29.7 mm SVL in females), with a 3-note call consisting of two notes and a “click,” with the second note rising in frequency. In contrast, E. montserratae sp. nov. has a two-note call, with the second note constant in pitch and higher in frequency (Kaiser et al. 1994). Eleutherodactylus barlagnei, which occurs only on Guadeloupe, is slightly larger than E. montserratae sp. nov. (19.6–22.8 versus 16.1–21.2 mm SVL in males, 22.9–31.7 versus 16.7–29.7 mm SVL in females) and has distinctive webbing and dermal flanges on the hands and feet, as adaptations to its aquatic lifestyle. The call of E. barlagnei is a series of four or more trilled notes, descending at the end (Schwartz 1967). Eleutherodactylus martinicensis (St. Martin, St. Barthélemy, Antigua, Guadeloupe, Dominica, Martinique, and St. Lucia) is a much larger species than E. montserratae sp. nov. (21.9–32.3 versus 16.1–21.2 mm SVL in males, 21.4–46.6 versus 16.7–29.7 mm SVL in females), has a slightly wider head and longer hind limbs (distinctly overlapping versus not overlapping in E. montserratae sp. nov.), brighter dorsal coloration, red on the hindlimbs and groin, and a different 2-note whistle call with a longer first note and rising second note versus a short first note and constant pitch second note of E. montserratae sp. nov. (Schwartz 1967; Kaiser 1992). Eleutherodactylus pinchoni, which occurs only on Guadeloupe, is a smaller species than E. montserratae sp. nov. (14.4–16.0 versus 16.1–21.2 mm SVL in males, 15.2–20.2 versus 16.7–29.7 mm SVL in females), with an orange venter heavily mottled or stippled in dark brown (versus venter pale or sparsely stippled), a pale (orange-red) groin spot (versus no groin spot), a dark vocal sac in males (versus unpigmented vocal sac), a median pale line on the throat in both sexes (versus no pale line), and a call consisting of a series of “tick’s followed by a single rising wheep” (Schwartz 1967) versus a two-note call with second note constant in pitch. Eleutherodactylus montserratae sp. nov. is most closely related to E. johnstonei (Yuan et al. 2022), with which it shares a general body shape and proportions, pattern variation, and a two-note whistle-like call (Schwartz 1967; Kaiser 1992). Structural similarities between the two species include a narrow (razor-thin) middorsal ridge, dorsal tubercles of variable size and density (fine to coarse), and similar body proportions such as END, THL, SHL, FTL, and FPW (see also Schwartz 1967). In coloration, the dorsal ground color is variable (brown, tan, reddish tan, or gray) and they share pattern variants (pale middorsal stripe, 1–2 medium or dark brown middorsal chevrons, or broad and pale dorsolateral stripes) and pattern elements such as interocular bar defining a paler dorsal surface of the snout, wide dark brown bars on the loreal, postocular, and supratympanic regions, and obscure (not bold) medium or dark brown leg barring. Eleutherodactylus johnstonei differs from E. montserratae sp. nov. in being larger (17.9–25.2 versus 16.1–21.2 mm SVL in males, 18.2–34.8 versus 16.7–29.7 mm SVL in females) and having a proportionately smaller tympanum (5.25–6.12 versus 6.10–7.06 % SVL in males, 5.12–6.13 versus 6.47–7.37 % SVL in females), a narrower head (35.4–38.2 versus 36.1–39.7 % SVL in males, 33.9–40.0 versus 37.1–41.7 % SVL in females), and smaller separation between the nostrils (8.69–9.27 versus 9.55–10.5 % SVL in males, 8.18–9.45 versus 9.52–10.5 % SVL in females). Photos in life (Figs. 4–5) show that E. johnstonei sensu stricto has the upper iris color golden rather than bluish-white. However, this difference in upper iris coloration needs to be confirmed in a larger sample size of living individuals. The calls are similar in being two-notes and constant in pitch, but one analysis of two calls indicated that the second (high frequency) note of E. johnstonei might be shorter than that of E. montserratae sp. nov. (Kaiser 1992). However, a more comprehensive analysis of vocalization in the two species will be needed to determine if that is a significant difference distinguishing the two species. Description of the holotype (Fig. 3). Adult female; head as wide as body, width less than length; snout subacuminate in dorsal view, subacuminate in lateral view, overhanging lower jaw; nostrils weakly protuberant, directed dorsolaterally; canthus rostralis rounded, slightly sinuous in dorsal view; loreal region slightly concave, sloping gradually; lips not flared; upper eyelid bearing moderate-sized, rounded tubercles; interorbital space without tubercles; supratympanic fold well defined, concealing upper edge of tympanic annulus; tympanum moderate-sized, round, separated from eye by a distance less than its own diameter; several postrictal tubercles, enlarged, subconical; choanae small, oval, partially concealed by palatal shelf of maxillary arch when roof of mouth is viewed from below; vomerine odontophores medial and posterior to choanae, each larger than a choana, straight and angled postero-medially, separated moderately at midline; posterior two-thirds of tongue not adherent to floor of mouth. Skin of dorsum weakly to strongly tuberculate, without dorsolateral folds; skin of flanks similar to dorsum; skin of venter strongly areolate, without discoidal folds; anal opening not extended in sheath; no supraxillary glandular areas present; ulnar tubercles low, flat; palmar tubercle single, larger than thenar, thenar tubercle oval, low; several moderate-sized low, supernumerary tubercles; subarticular tubercles of fingers round and subconical; well defined lateral ridge on finger; all fingers with expanded tips; fingertips rounded, semicircular pad on ventral surface of fingertip; circumferential groove bordering distal three-quarters of finger pad; width of largest pad (III) one-half as wide tympanum; first finger shorter than second when adpressed; heel tubercles absent; small, flattened, tubercles along outer edge of tarsus; metatarsal tubercles low, inner (elongate) twice size of outer (subconical); several small, low, supernumerary plantar tubercles; subarticular tubercles of toes round and subconical; toes unwebbed; well-defined lateral ridge on toe; all toes with expanded tips; toetips rounded; semicircular pad on ventral surface of toetip; circumferential groove bordering distal three-quarters of toe pad; heels overlap when flexed legs are held at right angles to sagittal plane. Variation. Other specimens are similar to the holotype. Males with vocal slits and vocal sac (confirmed by dissection); vocal sac median subgular and externally visible. The mean (± 1 SE) and range (in parentheses) of 11 adult males (listed first) and 9 adult females (holotype in bold) are, in mm: SVL 17.5 ± 0.35 (16.1–19.5), 20.7 ± 0.62 (18.4–22.9, 22.9); HL 7.08 ± 0.17 (6.26–7.82), 8.63 ± 0.33 (7.23–10.3, 8.83); HW 6.68 ± 0.17 (5.90–7.59), 8.12 ± 0.27 (6.83–9.13, 8.87); TYM 1.14 ± 0.02 (1.03–1.25), 1.43 ± 0.05 (1.19–1.67, 1.49); EYE 2.50 ± 0.05 (2.18–2.75), 3.00 ± 0.09 (2.54–3.35, 3.14); END 1.94 ± 0.05 (1.72–2.18), 2.45 ± 0.07 (2.12–2.79, 2.43); IND 1.74 ± 0.04 (1.60– 1.92), 2.05 ± 0.06 (1.76–2.25, 2.18); THL 7.21 ± 0.16 (6.50–8.11), 8.68 ± 0.25 (7.63–10.0, 8.82); SHL 7.78 ± 0.13 (7.23–8.40), 9.53 ± 0.28 (8.20–10.7, 10.2); FTL 6.63 ± 0.15 (6.03–7.66), 7.89 ± 0.31 (6.03–9.27, 8.45); and FTW 0.57 ± 0.02 (0.42–0.68), 0.76 ± 0.04 (0.54–0.89, 0.84). Distribution (Fig. 6). Eleutherodactylus montserratae sp. nov. is native to Montserrat and introduced on other islands in the western Lesser Antilles (Anguilla, St. Martin / St. Maarten, St. Barthélemy, Saba, St. Eustatius, St. Christopher, and Nevis), and on Bermuda (Breuil 2002; Yuan et al. 2022). This distribution is based on a combination of DNA sequences, morphology, and chromosomes. However, the species assignment here for the St. Barthélemy introduced population (Breuil 2002) is based only on distribution and requires confirmation. Bermuda is the only location where E. montserratae sp. nov. is known to co-occur with E. johnstonei (sensu stricto). Presumably, all introduced mainland records from the Americas (Leonhardt et al. 2019) are of E. johnstonei (Kaiser et al. 2002), confirmed for Venezuela by DNA sequence (Yuan et al. 2022) and for Venezuela and Guyana by chromosomes (Schmid et al. 2010). The genetic variation detected among Colombian samples was low (Leonhardt et al. 2019), consistent with a single species, presumably E. johnstonei sensu stricto. All European populations are apparently of that species as well, because they arose from a single introduction from Guadeloupe (Leonhardt et al. 2019; Moravec et al. 2020). However, additional genetic testing and morphological examination is needed to more comprehensively examine introduced populations and confirm their species identification. Ecology and conservation. The habitat preference of E. montserratae sp. nov. is similar to that of E. johnstonei, both of which have wide niches. In general, ecological details in the literature concerning E. johnstonei (sensu lato) (Schwartz 1967; Schwartz & Henderson 1991; Henderson & Powell 2009) apply equally to both included species, E. johnstonei (sensu stricto) and E. montserratae sp. nov. The most natural habitat of E. montserratae sp. nov. on Montserrat is mesic forest, presumably its original habitat. However, the species also occurs in a diversity of other habitats modified by humans, such as roadside herbaceous growth, gardens, ornamental shrubs around houses and buildings, sugarcane fields, and palm groves. Males usually call from elevated places (e.g., leaves) up to one meter above the ground. Although the type locality and localities of most paratypes were altered by volcanic eruptions that began in July 1995, scattered populations remain throughout the island and the species is abundant (Yuan et al. 2022). As Schwartz (1967) stated, in reference to E. johnstonei (sensu lato), it is regularly encountered during the day in “almost any terrestrial situation which offers concealment and some moisture.” Both species are often encountered in great abundance. These characteristics, with a wide niche and occurring in abundance, explain why they have been introduced to so many islands. Currently, E. johnstonei (sensu lato) is listed as Least Concern by the IUCN Redlist (IUCN 2022). That category should continue to be used for that species and E. montserratae sp. nov. Reproduction. Mean clutch size for 12 females of Eleutherodactylus montserratae sp. nov. is 15.8 (range, 8–40), mean body mass (live) is 1.08 g (range, 0.43–2.80), and relative clutch mass (clutch mass/body mass) is 10.8% (range 7–16%, n = 5). Mean live body mass of 33 adult males is 0.53 g (0.25–0.89). For comparison, mean clutch size for 10 gravid female E. johnstonei, sensu stricto, is 15.8 (range 12–29), mean live body mass is 1.24 g (range 0.47–2.21), and relative clutch mass is 11.1% (range 6–16%). Mean live body mass of 74 adult males is 0.69 g (range 0.47–1.10). Etymology. The species name (montserratae) is a feminine genitive singular noun, referring to the native distribution of the species on the island of Montserrat. Remarks. Schmid et al. (2010) examined chromosomes of seven individuals of E. johnstonei sensu lato from Bermuda and found all to be from the Western Clade (= E. montserratae sp. nov.). However, with DNA sequences of 15 individuals from Bermuda, Yuan et al. (2022) discovered that while most were members of the Western Clade, some were of the Eastern Clade (E. johnstonei sensu stricto), thus establishing the only known location where the two species are known to co-occur. There are believed to be two 19 th Century introductions to Bermuda, but there is confusion as to their origin (Kaiser 1997). Because of the major chromosomal difference between the two species, involving sex chromosomes (Schmid et al. 2010), and their long time of separation (~2 my), it is unlikely that they are able to hybridize. Nonetheless, those genetic markers, a potential call difference (Kaiser 1992), and the morphological markers revealed here, will allow future study of this mixed population to determine if hybridization is occurring. I propose “ Montserrat Whistling Frog” as the common name for E. montserratae sp. nov. following the conventions for common name formation outlined in Hedges et al. (2019). Using the same conventions, I propose the revised common name, “Lesser Antilles Whistling Frog,” for E. johnstonei.Published as part of Hedges, S. Blair, 2022, A new species of frog from the Caribbean island of Montserrat (Eleutherodactylidae, Eleutherodactylus), pp. 375-387 in Zootaxa 5219 (4) on pages 378-384, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5219.4.5, http://zenodo.org/record/742675
Calibrating and constraining molecular clocks
No full textCalibrating and constraining molecular clocks Pp. 35-86. In The timetree of Life, S. B. Hedges & S. Kumar (eds), OUP, 2009 In dating phylogenetic trees, it is important to work to the strengths of paleontology and molecular phylogeny estimation. Minimum constraints on calibrations (i.e., the oldest fossils in a crown clade) may be calculated with some precision and may be treated as hard bounds, while maximum constraints are soft bounds that may be represented most honestly by probability distributions that reflect the distribution of fossiliferous rocks around the time in question, but allow a small probability of truly ancient dates as well. We present detailed documentation of 63 key calibration dates, with thorough evidence and error expressions, for a wide range of organisms.Calibrating and constraining molecular clocks Pp. 35-86. In The timetree of Life, S. B. Hedges & S. Kumar (eds), OUP, 2009 In dating phylogenetic trees, it is important to work to the strengths of paleontology and molecular phylogeny estimation. Minimum constraints on calibrations (i.e., the oldest fossils in a crown clade) may be calculated with some precision and may be treated as hard bounds, while maximum constraints are soft bounds that may be represented most honestly by probability distributions that reflect the distribution of fossiliferous rocks around the time in question, but allow a small probability of truly ancient dates as well. We present detailed documentation of 63 key calibration dates, with thorough evidence and error expressions, for a wide range of organisms
- …
