196,079 research outputs found
Hippolytidae Spence Bate 1888
No full textFamily Hippolytidae Spence Bate, 1888 <p>Hippolyte obliquimanus Dana, 1852 (Figure 2A)</p> <p> <i>Hippolyte obliquimanus</i> Dana, 1852: 24.</p> <p> <b>Material examined.</b> Brazil, São Paulo: 35 ♂, 102 ♀ (42 ♀ ov), CCDB 1825, Ubatuba, Enseada de Ubatuba, Praia Itaguá, coll. M. Terossi <i>et al</i>., iii.2005; 89 ♂, 185 ♀ (42 ♀ ov), CCDB 1826, Ubatuba, Enseada de Ubatuba, Praia Itaguá, coll. M. Terossi <i>et al</i>., v.2005; 34 ♂, 63 ♀ (11 ♀ ov), CCDB 1827, Ubatuba, Enseada de Ubatuba, Praia Itaguá, coll. M. Terossi <i>et al</i>., vii.2005; 4 ♂, 13 ♀, CCDB 1828, Ubatuba, Enseada de Ubatuba, Praia Itaguá, coll. M. Terossi <i>et al</i>., ix.2005; 1 ♂, 7 ♀ (1 ♀ ov), CCDB 1829, Ubatuba, Enseada de Ubatuba, Praia Itaguá, coll. M. Terossi <i>et al</i>., xi.2005; 48 ♂, 93 ♀ (28 ♀ ov), CCDB 1830, Ubatuba, Enseada de Ubatuba, Praia Itaguá, coll. M. Terossi <i>et al</i>., i.2006; 8 ♂, 12 ♀, CCDB 2523, Ubatuba, Enseada de Ubatuba, Praia Itaguá, coll. M. Terossi <i>et al</i>., v.2007; 3 ♂, 4 ♀, CCDB 2378, Ubatuba, Enseada do Flamengo, Praia Lamberto/Saco do Codó, coll. F. Mantelatto, 02.vi.2008; 47 ♂, 173 ♀, CCDB 1426, Ubatuba, Praia Domingas Dias, coll. F. Mantelatto <i>et al</i>., 1995.</p> <p> <b>Distribution.</b> Western Atlantic—USA (North Carolina, Florida), Mexico, Belize, Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, West Indies, Brazil (Ceará to Santa Catarina) (Ramos-Porto & Coelho 1993, as <i>H. curacaoense</i> Schmitt, 1924; d’Udekem d’Acoz 1997; Terossi & Mantelatto 2012).</p> <p> <b>Previous records.</b> Ubatuba (Mantelatto <i>et al</i>. 1999; Morgado & Tanaka 2001, as <i>H. curacaoensis</i> Schmitt, 1924; Terossi <i>et al</i>. 2008; 2010a; 2010b; Terossi & Mantelatto 2010; 2012; Terossi <i>et al.</i> 2017); São Sebastião (Amaral <i>et al</i>. 2010, as <i>H. curacaoensis</i>).</p> <p> <b>Remarks.</b> <i>Hippolyte exilirostratus</i> Dana, 1852 and <i>H. curacaoensis</i> were considered synonyms of <i>H. obliquimanus</i> by d’Udekem d’Acoz (1997). Some genetic and larval variations were reported between specimens from Caribbean Sea and Brazil, but these did not support the separation of <i>H. obliquimanus</i> into two or more species (Terossi <i>et al.</i> 2010a; Terossi & Mantelatto 2012). Many studies were carried out with this species on São Paulo coast, including population and reproductive features (Mantelatto <i>et al.</i> 1999; Terossi & Mantelatto 2010; Terossi <i>et al</i>. 2008; 2010b), sperm morphology (Terossi <i>et al</i>. 2012), and phylogenetic positioning (Terossi <i>et al.</i> 2017). Sequences accession number (GenBank): CCDB 2147 - 16S (JF794696), COI (JF794728).</p>Published as part of <i>Terossi, Mariana, Almeida, Alexandre O., Buranelli, Raquel C., Castilho, Antonio L., Costa, Rogério C., Zara, Fernando J. & Mantelatto, Fernando L., 2018, Checklist of decapods (Crustacea) from the coast of the São Paulo state (Brazil) supported by integrative molecular and morphological data: I. Infraorder Caridea: families Hippolytidae, Lysmatidae, Ogyrididae, Processidae and Thoridae in Zootaxa 4370 (1)</i>, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4370.1.6, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/1138546">http://zenodo.org/record/1138546</a>
FIGURE 2. Alpheus malleator Dana, 1852. Zoea I. A in First zoeal stage of the snapping shrimps Alpheus formosus Gibbes, 1850 and Alpheus malleator Dana, 1852 (Caridea: Alpheidae), with new characters to the genus
No full textFIGURE 2. Alpheus malleator Dana, 1852. Zoea I. A. Lateral view; B. Carapace; C. Left antennule; D. Left antenna; E. Left maxillule; F. Left maxilla; G. Left first maxilliped; H. Left second maxilliped; I. Left third maxilliped; J. Left first pereopod; K. Pleon, lateral view; L. Fourth somite of pleon, lateral view; M. Telson, dorsal view. Scale bars: A, L, K. 0.15mm; B–D, G–J, M. 0.07 mm; E, F. 0.04 mm.Published as part of Pasinatto, Karmine, Mantelatto, Fernando L. & Terossi, Mariana, 2020, First zoeal stage of the snapping shrimps Alpheus formosus Gibbes, 1850 and Alpheus malleator Dana, 1852 (Caridea: Alpheidae), with new characters to the genus, pp. 540-550 in Zootaxa 4820 (3) on page 544, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4820.3.7, http://zenodo.org/record/444107
Alpheus buckupi Almeida, Terossi, Araújo-Silva & Mantelatto, 2013, spec. nov.
No full text<i>Alpheus buckupi</i> spec. nov. <p>(Figs. 1–4)</p> <p> Type material: Brazil, state of Pernambuco. Holotype: 1 m (CL = 10.6 mm), Paulista, Timbó River (07º51’38.3”S, 34º50’21.4”W), colls. A.O. Almeida & R.J.C. Paiva, 09.IV.2008, under rocks with <i>Alpheus carlae</i> Anker, 2012, <i>Salmoneus carvachoi</i> Anker, 2007, and unidentified gobiid fish, muddy bottom, salinity 30 (MZUSP 27548). Paratypes: 1 ovf (CL = 12.3 mm), same data as holotype (MZUSP 27549); 1 m (CL = 11.6 mm), same data as holotype (UESC 1366) (specimen used in genetic analysis); 1 m (CL = 8.5 mm), 1 ovf (CL = 9.5 mm), Recife, confluence between Pina and Capibaribe rivers (08º04’12.15”S, 34º52’19.11”W), colls. A.O. Almeida, R.J.C. Paiva & F.S. Santana, 19.VIII.2008, under rocks, sandy bottom, salinity 25 (CCDB 3966); 1 m (CL = 8.5 mm), Recife, confluence between Pina and Capibaribe rivers (08º04’12.15”S, 34º52’19.11”W), colls. A.O. Almeida & R.J.C. Paiva, 13.VII.2007, under rocks covered with <i>Mytella</i> sp., dead oysters, and live barnacles, muddy bottom, salinity 21 (UESC 1530).</p> <p> Additional material: VENEZUELA: 2 m, 1 ovf, Orinoco Delta, XI-5234, coll. G. Pereira, 2003, AA fcn 03-030 (OUMNH.ZC. 2011-06.003); 1 m, Orinoco Delta, XI-5234, coll. G. Pereira, 2003 (OUMNH.ZC. 2011-06.009); 1 m, 1 ovf (in bad condition), Orinoco Delta, XI-5040, coll. G. Pereira, 2003 (OUMNH.ZC. 2011-06.011). BRAZIL: Rio Grande do Norte: 2 m, 3 f (1 ovf), Natal, Ponta Negra, Morro do Careca (05°51.858’S; 35°10.809’W), coll. R. Robles, 07.VI.2011, under rocks (rocky shore) (CCDB 3822). Pernambuco: 8 m, 10 f (6 ovf), Itamaracá, Paripe River near Vila Velha (07º48’38.6”S, 34º51’23.0”W), colls. A.O. Almeida, R.J.C. Paiva & F.S. Santana, 01.IX.2008, in cavities of estuarine sponge, 0–0.3 m depth (UESC 1367); 1 m, Olinda, Casa Caiada Beach (07º59’21.31”S, 34º50’17.58”W), coll. F.S. Santana, 18.VIII.2008, under rocks, sandy bottom (UESC 1368); 2 f (1 ovf), Recife, confluence between Pina and Capibaribe rivers (08º04’12.15”S, 34º52’19.11”W), colls. A.O. Almeida & R.J.C. Paiva, 13.VII.2007, under rocks covered with <i>Mytella</i> sp., dead oysters, and live barnacles, muddy bottom, salinity 21 (UESC 1369). Alagoas: 3 m, Passo de Camaragibe, Morro do Camaragibe, Station E5, littoral, colls. W. Santana, M. Cardoso Jr. & N. Oliveira, 30.V.2011 (MZUSP 25369). Bahia: 1 m, 1 ovf, Todos os Santos Bay, PROAMB, Poço Dom João, Station 12, 07.IX.2002 (UESC 1520); 1 m, 1 f, Cairu, Boipeba Island, Tassimirim Beach (13°34’49.6”S; 38°54’49.4”W), colls. A.O. Almeida, P.S. Santos & G.O. Soledade, 19.V.2011, under rocks, salinity 31 (UESC 1521) (one specimen used in genetic analysis); 1 m, 2 f (1 ovf), Cairu, Boipeba Island, Moreré Beach (13°36’49.5”S; 38°54’16.2”W), colls. A.O. Almeida, P.S. Santos & G.O. Soledade, 20.V.2011, under rocks, salinity 38 (UESC 1522); 1 m, 1 f, Itacaré, Contas River, coll. G.O. Soledade, 14.VIII.2011, under rocks (UESC 1523). São Paulo: 1 ovf, Ubatuba, Grande Beach (23°28'01"S; 45°03'36"W), coll. F.L. Mantelatto, 27.XI.2002, at low tide under rocks in small subtidal pools (CCDB 3494); 3 m, Ilhabela, Engenho d’Água Beach (23°47’43.3”S, 45°21’55.4”W), coll. E.C. Mossolin, between III.2000 and II.2002 (UESC 1524); 1 ovf, São Sebastião, Araçá, 14.I.2004 (CCDB 1205); 1 ovf, São Sebastião, Araçá, coll. F.L. Mantelatto, 04.V.2007, at low tide under rocks (CCDB 1907); 1 m, 1 ovf, Santos, Ponta da Praia, coll. C. Magenta, VIII.2008, under rocks, low tide (MZUSP 18903).</p> <p> EASTERN ATLANTIC: SÃO TOMÉ AND PRÍNCIPE: 1 f, São Tomé and Príncipe, Lagarto Beach, near Hospital, Station 2A, colls. N. Knowlton & A. Anker, 02.II.2006, sand with <i>Montastrea</i>, zoanthids, and rocks embedded in sand, intertidal (extreme low tide), AA fcn 06-129 (OUMNH.ZC. 2011-06.005) (specimen used in genetic analysis); 1 m, São Tomé and Príncipe, Lagarto Beach, near Hospital, coll. A. Anker, 09.II.2006, upper intertidal under rocks and zoanthid colonies, in burrows, low tide, AA fcn 06-194 (OUMNH.ZC. 2011-06.012).</p> <p> Comparative material of <i>Alpheus</i> cf. <i>lobidens</i>: 1 m, Low Isles, Queensland, Great Barrier Reef (NMV - J5860); 1 m, 1 f, New South Wales, Lennox Head (NMV - J21615).</p> <p>Description: Carapace smooth, glabrous, laterally not compressed; rostrum triangular, with acute tip reaching approximately midlength of first segment of antennular peduncle (Fig. 1 A); rostral carina sharply delimited between orbital hoods, reaching posterior margin of orbital hoods, not broadening posteriorly (Fig. 1 A); adrostral furrows moderately deep, not abruptly delimited posteriorly (Fig. 1 A); orbital hoods inflated dorsally, distally rounded, unarmed (Fig. 1 A); pterygostomial angle rounded (Figs. 1 B, C); cardiac notch well developed.</p> <p>Abdominal somites smooth, glabrous; ventral and posterior margins of pleurae 1–4 broadly rounded and pleura 5 forming angle of approximately 90° with tip rounded; sixth pleura without articulated plate (Fig. 1 G); protopod pleopods without spines; male pleopod 2 with appendix masculina slightly shorter than appendix interna; preanal plate with rounded tip. Telson broad, tapering distally, approximately 1.2 times as long as wide at base; lateral margins slightly sinuous; dorsal surface slightly convex, without median groove, with two pairs of spiniform setae, inserted at some distance from lateral margins, first pair slightly anterior to midlength, second pair well posterior to telson midlength (Fig. 1 H, I); posterior margin broadly rounded, fringed with spinules (short spiniform setae) and long setae, posterolateral angle each with two pairs of spiniform setae, lateral seta approximately 1/2 length of mesial seta (Fig. 1 H, I); anal tubercles well developed.</p> <p>Eyes totally concealed in lateral, dorsal, and frontal views; cornea well developed, rounded (Fig. 1 A–C). Ocellar beak protruding dorsally between eyes, apically rounded (Fig. 1 B).</p> <p>Antennular peduncle moderately slender (Fig. 1 A). Stylocerite distally acute, reaching distal margin of first segment of antennular peduncle (Fig. 1 A); ventromesial carina of first segment with tooth ending rounded, anterior margin slightly concave (Fig. 1 D); visible part of first segment as long as wide; second segment longest, 2.5 times as long as wide; third segment as long as wide, 0.4 times length of second segment (Fig. 1 A); lateral antennular flagellum with row of aesthetascs starting at 15th segment. Antenna with basicerite bearing robust acute distolateral tooth (Fig. 1 B, C); carpocerite stout, reaching distinctly beyond end of antennular peduncle and tip of distolateral tooth of scaphocerite (Fig. 1 C); scaphocerite with lateral margin slightly concave; blade broad, separated from distolateral tooth by deep cleft running about 1/3 length of blade (Fig. 1 E); distolateral tooth well developed, distinctly overreaching distal margin of blade and end of antennular peduncle (Fig. 1 E).</p> <p>Mouthparts not dissected, appearing typical in external view. Third maxilliped relatively slender, conspicuously longer than antennular peduncle and carpocerite when extended; lateral plate with subacute point; antepenultimate segment not flattened or expanded, mesial margin distinct, distodorsal portion not protruding (Fig. 1 F); penultimate segment about three times as long as wide, lateral margin smooth, with tufts of setae; last segment tapering distally, smooth, with several bands of setae; exopod reaching slightly beyond distal margin of antepenultimate segment (Fig. 1 F).</p> <p>Major male cheliped with short, stout ischium; merus slightly excavated ventrally; ventrolateral margin straight, with blunt distal end; ventromesial margin also straight, ending in strong tooth distally (Fig. 2 A); carpus short, cup-shaped; chela somewhat compressed; fingers closing in same plane as palm; palm with dorsal and ventral margins convex, with broad transverse grooves; dorsal and ventral grooves extending to mesial and lateral surfaces as deep depressions, latter extending posteriorly; dorsal shoulder rounded, slightly overhanging groove; ventral groove broad, oblique, deep, also extending mesially and laterally as well-delimited deep depressions, latter not extending posteriorly; ventral shoulder rounded, slightly protruding; lateral and mesial surfaces mostly smooth; linea impressa well marked; mesial surface ending bluntly distally (Figs. 2 A–C); fingers compressed, longer than half palm length (Figs. 2 A, B); pollex with tip curved upward, with V-shaped notch on cutting edge anterior to deep fossa; proximal mesial surface surrounding fossa forming obtuse angle, fringed with rows of setae; dactylus reaching slightly beyond pollex, with rounded tip, cutting edge with stout plunger (Fig. 2 D); adhesive disks conspicuous (Figs. 2 C, D). Female major cheliped similar in shape, but proportionally smaller than that of male.</p> <p>Minor male cheliped with ischium short and stout; merus proportionally longer than that of major cheliped, slightly excavated ventrally; ventrolateral and ventromesial margins as in major cheliped; tooth on distal portion of ventromesial margin generally smaller than that of major cheliped (Fig. 2 E); carpus short, cup-shaped; chela roughly cylindrical in transverse section; palm sculpturing resembling that of major cheliped, with dorsal and ventral margins slightly convex, with transverse grooves (Figs. 2 E–G); dorsal and ventral grooves also extend to mesial and lateral surfaces as deep depressions, latter extending posteriorly; dorsal shoulder rounded, not overhanging groove; ventral groove not as broad and deep as that of major cheliped; ventral shoulder rounded, not protruding; lateral and mesial surfaces mostly smooth; linea impressa well marked; dorsomesial angle of palm with blunt tooth (Fig. 2 F); fingers as long as palm, with conspicuous rows of balaeniceps setae, cutting edges sharp, tip curved (Figs. 2 E, F); dactylus expanded laterally, with dorsal disk similar to adhesive disk of dactylus of major cheliped, and conspicuous carina on proximal region (Fig. 2 G). Female minor cheliped more slender than that of males. Palm inconspicuously sculptured; dorsal and ventral grooves absent; linea impressa well marked (Figs. 3 A– C). Fingers slightly longer than palm, without balaeniceps setae, cutting edges blade-like, tip curved (Figs. 3 A–C); dactylus not expanded laterally, without proximal carina on dorsal margin, but with inconspicuously marked disk similar to that of male minor chela.</p> <p>Second pereiopod slender, ischium and merus subequal in length; carpus five-segmented, first segment longest; segment ratio (proximal to distal) subequal to 4: 2.5: 1: 1: 2; chela simple, fingers slightly longer than palm and bearing tufts of curved setae distally (Fig. 3 D). Third and fourth pereiopods similar in shape and length, both with ischium armed with spiniform seta on ventrolateral surface; merus longer than propodus, about four times as long as wide, distoventral margin unarmed; carpus unarmed, about half merus length and slightly shorter than propodus length (Fig. 3 E, G, H); propodus with about 12 strong spiniform setae along ventral margin, often arranged in pairs, plus one distal pair of spiniform setae near dactylus; dactylus around 0.4 propodus length, simple, conical, slightly curved, acute distally (Fig. 3 F, I). Fifth pereiopod with ischium and merus unarmed; merus slender, about six times as long as wide; carpus about 3/4 merus length (Fig. 3 J); propodus slightly longer than carpus, with nine spiniform setae along ventral margin plus one distal pair of spiniform setae near dactylus; distolateral surface with cleaning brush consisting of about 12 transverse rows of short setae; dactylus similar in shape to that of third and four pereiopods, proportionally slightly longer, corresponding to almost 1/2 propodus length (Fig. 3 K).</p> <p>Uropods with bifid protopods, each lobe ending in acute tooth (Fig. 1 H); exopod slightly longer than endopod; distolateral spiniform setae slender, distinctly shorter than posterior margin of exopods, not pigmented; exopodal diaeresis with two slightly lobes separated by median notch; distolateral tooth acute, approximately 1/2 length of distolateral spiniform seta (Fig. 1 H, J).</p> <p>Gill formula typical for genus.</p> <p>Morphological variation: The V-shaped notch on the cutting edge of the pollex is in general obvious in larger individuals and inconspicuous or absent in smaller individuals. The shape of the notch varies from obtuse to acute in larger individuals (see Fig. 2 D, H). However, this notch may also be inconspicuous in large individuals, as in the material from Venezuela (OUMNH.ZC. 2011-06.003, 2011-06.009, 8.7–9.5 mm CL).</p> <p> Another important variation lies in the sculpturing of the palm of the male minor chelae, which resembles that of the major chelae in fully adult male specimens (see Fig. 2 A, B, E, F). In larger individuals, palm sculpturing (depth of the grooves on the dorsal and ventral margins and depressions on the mesial and lateral surfaces) is well developed, whereas the sculpturing in small individuals is, in general, little developed. Medium-sized individuals vary in sculpturing, with some degree of overlapping. Similar variation was noted for <i>A. lobidens</i> (see Banner & Banner 1981).</p> <p> The presence of a tooth on the distal portion of the ventromesial margin of the meri of the major and minor chelipeds is a typical trait of <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov. (see Fig. 2 A, E). In general, this tooth is strong and acute, but it may be less developed and sometimes is obsolescent or missing, especially on the minor cheliped. This type of variation was also noted in <i>A. lobidens</i> (see Banner & Banner 1981).</p> <p>The eastern Atlantic material consists of two small specimens from São Tomé and Príncipe (male, CL = 6.1 mm; female, CL = 5 mm) that agree well with the western Atlantic material. The sculpturing on the male minor chela is well developed, with deep dorsal and ventral grooves on the palm extending to the mesial and lateral margins. On the other hand, the V-notch on the cutting edge of the pollex of the major chela is absent in the male and inconspicuous in the female. The ischium of pereiopod 5 is unarmed in the male and armed in the female. Although rare, the condition observed in this female is also present in some eastern Atlantic specimens.</p> <p>Color pattern (based on analyses of color photographs of fresh specimens): Carapace, abdomen, and uropods dark green in larger animals (paired females frequently darker than males) (Fig. 4 D); palm major and minor chelae usually pale greenish, fingers darker than palm; walking legs semitransparent (Fig. 4 B), sometimes with reddish to brownish chromatophores (Fig. 4 D). Body of smaller individuals usually greenish, semitransparent, frequently with reddish to brownish chromatophores on chelipeds, carapace, abdomen, and uropods (Fig. 4 C). Ovaries and eggs light green (Fig. 4 E).</p> <p>Etymology: It is our great pleasure to name this new species in honor of the Brazilian carcinologist, Prof. Dr. Ludwig Buckup (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil) in recognition of his dedication and contributions to the knowledge of crustaceans.</p> <p>Type locality: Northeastern Brazil, state of Pernambuco, Paulista, Timbó River (07º51’38.3”S, 34º50’21.4”W).</p> <p>Distribution: Western Atlantic: Venezuela (Orinoco Delta) and Brazil (Ceará, based on color photographs provided by Arthur Anker; Rio Grande do Norte, Pernambuco, Alagoas, Bahia, and São Paulo). Eastern Atlantic: São Tomé and Príncipe.</p> <p> Ecology: Free-living species, occurring mainly in estuaries, but also in bays and protected beaches, living in male-female pairs under rocks and in cavities of an unidentified estuarine sponge, on mud, mud-sand, and finesand bottoms, salinity range 21–38, depth range 0–0.3 m. At the type locality, two other alpheids were observed occurring syntopically, <i>A. carlae</i> and <i>S. carvachoi</i>. They were obtained together with unidentified gobiid fish, with small hand-net under the same rocks and stones where the type material was collected.</p> <p> <b>Discussion</b></p> <p> In the Atlantic basin, <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov. has some morphological similarities with other species of the <i>A. edwardsii</i> group, such as <i>A. heterochaelis</i> Say, 1818 (western Atlantic), <i>A. pontederiae</i> de Rochebrune, 1883 (amphi-Atlantic), <i>A. chacei</i> Carvacho, 1979 (western Atlantic), and <i>A. estuariensis</i> Christoffersen, 1984 (western Atlantic), and also with species of the <i>A. armillatus</i> H. Milne Edwards, 1837 complex (western Atlantic). Most of those taxa also occur in the same habitats where the new species is found.</p> <p> Similarly to <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov., <i>A. heterochaelis</i> and <i>A. pontederiae</i> have well-developed balaeniceps setae on the male minor chelae, differing from <i>A. chacei</i> and <i>A. estuariensis,</i> in which the male minor chelae lack these setae (see Christoffersen 1984). <i>Alpheus buckupi</i> spec. nov. differs from <i>A. heterochaelis</i> by the presence of a tooth on the distal portion of the ventromesial margin of the meri of the major and minor chelipeds (absent in <i>A. heterochaelis</i>), by the stronger sculpturing of the male minor chelae, and by the presence of spiniform setae on the ischium of pereiopods 3 and 4 [<i>vs</i>. on pereiopods 3–5 in <i>A. heterochaelis</i>, see McClure (1995)]. The presence of a ventromesial tooth on the distal portion of the meri of the chelipeds also distinguishes <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov. from <i>A. pontederiae</i>, <i>A. euphrosyne</i> De Man, 1897, and <i>A. microrhynchus</i> De Man, 1897, two Indo-Pacific species close to <i>A. pontederiae</i>. These three species also differ from <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov. by the presence of an oblique groove flanked by two ridges on the mesial surface of the pollex of the major chela (absent in <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov.) and by the distolateral tooth of the scaphocerite usually reaching the distal margin of the adjoining blade or sometimes shorter (<i>vs</i>. distinctly overreaching the distal margin of the blade in <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov.).</p> <p> Members of the <i>A. armillatus</i> species complex also have a tooth on the distal portion of the ventromesial margin of the meri of the major and minor chelipeds (Anker 2012). Based on morphology alone, males of <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov. can easily be differentiated from species of the <i>A. armillatus</i> complex by the presence of rows of balaeniceps setae on the mesial and lateral margins of the minor cheliped (absent in species of the <i>A. armillatus</i> complex; see Anker 2012). Females of the two species are similar, especially young females. Adult females of <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov. can be differentiated from those of the <i>A. armillatus</i> complex by the shallower adrostral furrows that are not abruptly delimited posteriorly, and the rostral carina that is not flattened posteriorly (<i>vs</i>. deeper adrostral furrows that are markedly delimited posteriorly and the carina flattened posteriorly, forming a more-orless V- or U-shaped post-rostral plate; see Anker 2012).</p> <p> <i>Alpheus buckupi</i> spec. nov. is morphologically very similar to members of the <i>A. lobidens</i> species complex, including <i>A. inopinatus</i> Holthuis & Gottlieb, 1958 and possibly various undescribed taxa (Anker 2001; Yang & Anker 2003; A. Anker pers. com.), especially regarding on major and minor chelae configuration. For this reason, material from Australia (NMV J5860 and J21615) that we previously identified as <i>A</i>. cf. <i>lobidens</i> was analyzed and compared to our material.</p> <p> The most conspicuous difference between <i>A. buckupi</i> spec. nov. and <i>A. inopinatus</i> is the presence of a tooth on the distal portion of the ventromesial margin of the meri of the
Dr. Duane M. Jackson, Morehouse College, July 2011
No full textThis video is a conversation with Dr. Duane M. Jackson. Dr. Jackson talks about his paper, "Recall and the Serial Position Effect: The Role of Primacy and Recency on Accounting Students' Performance." Jackie Daniel, AUC Woodruff Library, is the interviewer
"Reflections on the subject of Emigration from Europe with a view to Settlement in the United States" By M. Carey.
No full text"Reflections on the subject of Emigration from Europe with a view to Settlement in the United States: containing bried sketches of the moral and political character of those states.
By M. Carey, member of the American philosophical, and of the American Antiquarian Society, and author of The Olive Branch, Cindiciae Hibernicae, essays on banking, on political economy, and on internal improvement.
To which are now added the English editor's comments on the subject; together with Important Advice to Emigrants, and Cautions Against Impositions Practiced in the Outports
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
Dr. Glendon Swarthout
No full textHosted by Roger M. Busfield, MSU Assistant Professor of Speech and Theater, Meet the Author is designed to introduce a general audience to a contemporary author and their work through in-depth interviews. This episode features a conversation between Dr. Glendon Swarthout, prolific author and English professor at MSU, and assistant professors Sam S. Baskett and Theodore B. Strandness
Simulation of thermal plant optimization and hydraulic aspects of thermal distribution loops for large campuses
No full textFollowing an introduction, the author describes Texas A&M University and its utilities system. After that, the author presents how to construct simulation models for chilled water and heating hot water distribution systems. The simulation model was used in a $2.3 million Ross Street chilled water pipe replacement project at Texas A&M University. A second project conducted at the University of Texas at San Antonio was used as an example to demonstrate how to identify and design an optimal distribution system by using a simulation model. The author found that the minor losses of these closed loop thermal distribution systems are significantly higher than potable water distribution systems. In the second part of the report, the author presents the latest development of software called the Plant Optimization Program, which can simulate cogeneration plant operation, estimate its operation cost and provide optimized operation suggestions. The author also developed detailed simulation models for a gas turbine and heat recovery steam generator and identified significant potential savings. Finally, the author also used a steam turbine as an example to present a multi-regression method on constructing simulation models by using basic statistics and optimization algorithms. This report presents a survey of the author??s working experience at the Energy Systems Laboratory (ESL) at Texas A&M University during the period of January 2002 through March 2004. The purpose of the above work was to allow the author to become familiar with the practice of engineering. The result is that the author knows how to complete a project from start to finish and understands how both technical and nontechnical aspects of a project need to be considered in order to ensure a quality deliverable and bring a project to successful completion. This report concludes that the objectives of the internship were successfully accomplished and that the requirements for the degree of Degree of Engineering have been satisfied
Intern experience at CH���M Hill, Inc.: an internship report
No full textIncludes author's vita"Submitted to the College of Engineering of Texas A&M University in partial
fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Engineering."Includes bibliographical referencesA review of the author's internship experience with CH���M HILL, Inc.
during the period September 1975 through May 1976 is presented. During this nine month
internship the author worked as an Engineer II in the Industrial Processes discipline of this
large consulting engineering firm... The author's prime responsibility was as one of three
lead design engineers on the design of a large wastewater treatment facility for a pulp mill
in Hoquiam, Washington owned by ITT Rayonier Inc. The work generally consisted of the design
of individual treatment units and associated piping and pumping. The purpose of the project
was to provide wastewater treatment capabilities that would satisfy the effluent limitations
(standards) imposed upon the mill by the State of Washington Department of Ecology and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The author's assignment also entailed necessary
interaction with the project manager and other CH���M HILL design engineers and support staff
members, the client's representatives, and representatives of two other consulting engineering
firms working on the project. Thus, the internship position at CH���M HILL provided considerable
experience coordinating the author's work with the work of other engineers, guiding the design
and administrative efforts of a support staff, and interacting regularly with the client and
other consulting firms. This broad exposure to a variety of engineering and organizational
problems provided a valuable educational experience
Transition to turbulence in a qblique shock-wave/boundary-layer interaction at M=15
No full textDirect numerical simulations are carried out for different forcing techniques to trigger transition during the interaction between an oblique shock-wave and a laminar boundary-layer at M = 1.5. Three forcing methods are used: a) forcing of oblique unstable modes, whose shape and behaviour are determined by the local linear stability theory, b) broadband free-stream acoustic disturbances, and c) a cold plasma flow control device. While the oblique-mode breakdown is dominant for low-amplitude forcing, long streaky structures drive the transition process in a high-amplitude disturbance environment. LES are also performed on the experimental setup by the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics (ITAM) from Novosibirsk State University with cold plasma actuation. As well as the disturbance type, the effect of Reynolds number and forcing amplitude will be investigated
- …
