117,987 research outputs found
Tenagomysis macropsis Tattersall 1923
No full text10. Tenagomysis macropsis Tattersall, 1923 Tenagomysis macropsis Tattersall W.M. 1923, 294–295, pl. III, figs. 1–12; Bary 1956, 434, figs. 3a–b, 4a–h; Fukuoka & Bruce 2005, 10–11, 14, figs. 6 A–L. Type material: NHML, reference 1925.7.9.795–814, from “Terra Nova” expedition. Distribution: New Zealand Distribution in New Zealand: Northern and western Foveaux Strait, southern New Zealand (Bary 1956); Avon-Heathcote estuary, Christchurch, Akaroa, Ocean Beach Dunedin, (Jones et al. 1989); Spirits Bay near North Cape, Bay of Islands (Tattersall W.M. 1923). Ecology: Littoral.Published as part of Jocque, M. & Blom, W., 2009, Mysidae (Mysida) of New Zealand; a checklist, identification key to species and an overview of material in New Zealand collections, pp. 1-20 in Zootaxa 2304 (1) on page 14, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.2304.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/530489
Xenuraega Tattersall 1909
No full textGenus Xenuraega Tattersall, 1909 Xenuraega Tattersall, 1909: 215; 1911: 198.— Bruce, 1993: 618. Type species: Xenuraega ptilocera Tattersall, 1909; by monotypy (Bruce 1993). Diagnosis (diagnostic characters in bold). Body narrow, elongate, about 3.3–4.3 times as long as wide. Cephalon anterior margin forming median point. Coxae present, all shorter than respective pereonite, not posteriorly produced. Pleon about 30–45% total BL, pleonites 1–5 all visible, with free lateral margins, epimera not posteriorly produced. Pleotelson relatively small, not containing or concealing pleopods. Antennula peduncle 3-articled. Antenna peduncle articles 4 and 5 without long plumose setae, flagellum extending to or beyond pleotelson. Frontal lamina absent, clypeus and narrow labrum present. Mandibular incisor unicuspid or absent. Maxillula slender, styliform with four or five terminal spines; mesial lobe absent. Maxilla with two terminal robust setae, mesial lobe fused to lateral lobe or absent. Maxilliped with three articles; article 3 folded across axis of article 2, with one small and two large terminal recurved robust setae. Pereopods 1–3 robust, dactylus subequal in length to propodus, propodal palm not expanded or plate-like; pereopods 4–7 elongate; dactylus shorter than propodus; all dactyli strongly curved. Pleopods 1–5 with both rami elongate; pleopods 1–5 peduncles with coupling hooks; pleopods 3–5 endopods without PMS; pleopod rami extending laterally and posteriorly beyond pleon and pleotelson. Uropod peduncle lacking mesial lobe; one or both rami elongate (22–80% BL). Mature sexual characters not observed. Remarks. Xenuraega Tattersall, 1909 differs from all other genera in lacking a frontal lamina, the maxillula lacking a mesial lobe and the pleonites are laterally free without any posterior extension or point (see Bruce 2009 for comparison to other genera). In addition, the uropod peduncle lacks a mesial lobe and one or both rami may be greatly elongate, from 22–80% total body length, and in the case of Xenuraega bythionekta sp. nov., which has the shorter uropods, the rami as still seven times as long as proximal width. The most similar genus is Syscenus Harger, 1880 (see Bruce 2005, 2009) and Xenuraega can be distinguished from that genus by exceptionally elongate uropodal rami that are provided with numerous long plumose setae. The relationships of Xenuraega with the Aegidae were discussed by Bruce (1993) and are not repeated here.Published as part of Shimomura, Michitaka & Bruce, Niel L., 2019, A new species of the mesopelagic isopod genus Xenuraega Tattersall, 1909 (Crustacea: Isopoda: Aegidae) from Japan, the second species in the genus, pp. 431-438 in Zootaxa 4683 (3) on page 432, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4683.3.7, http://zenodo.org/record/347903
Tenagomysis producta Tattersall 1923
No full textTenagomysis producta Tattersall, 1923 (Fig 1 E, F, 7) Tenagomysis producta Tattersall, 1923, 297– 298, plate III figs. 13–18. Material examined All material Timaru, South Is., New Zealand. NIWA 3952: 1 ɗ (10.7 mm), stn TM058, 44 ° 39.2´S 171 °26.0´E, 13 Feb. 2002, 9 m, epibenthic sled. NIWA 3953: 1 Ψ (15.7 mm), stn TM059, 44 ° 39.2´S 171 °26.0´E, 13 Feb. 2002, 9 m, epibenthic sled. NIWA 3954: 2 ɗ (8.1 mm, broken) and 1 Ψ (8.4 mm), stn TM060, 44 ° 39.1´S 171 ° 25.8´E, 13 Feb. 2002, 9 m, epibenthic sled. NIWA 3955: 1 Ψ (14.8 mm), stn TM062, 44 ° 39.1´S 171 ° 25.8´E, 13 Feb. 2002, 9 m, epibenthic sled. NIWA 3956: 1 ɗ (10.5 mm), stn TM065, 44 ° 38.7´S 171 °26.0´E, 13 Feb. 2002, 7 m, epibenthic sled. Remarks Tenagomysis producta has only been previously recorded from the Bay of Islands, northern New Zealand (Tattersall 1923). The material reported here agrees with the original description except for the armature of the uropodal endopod, which is armed with four to eight spines arranged irregularly on the ventral surface of the basal part in addition to the spines on the mesial ventral margin (Fig. 7 G); in the original description the existence of these spines was not noted, possibly having been overlooked. All the pleopods of the present female specimens are knifeshaped, as are those of T. longisquama. The apex is rounded however.Published as part of Fukuoka, Kouki & Bruce, Niel L., 2005, A new species of Tenagomysis (Crustacea: Mysida: Mysidae) from New Zealand with notes on three Tenagomysis species, pp. 1-15 in Zootaxa 878 on page 11, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17089
Preclinical and clinical aspects of P2X receptors as a common route in different diseases: a meeting report
No full textPRESTO was established in 2022 and is a concerted effort by leading European experts in the field of P2XRs and extracellular ATP to promote and advance the transition to the clinic of P2XR-targeting therapies. Following the inaugural meeting in Ferrara which set the foundations of the action and generated interest from many groups and institutes, the second meeting covered the preclinical and clinical aspects of P2XRs as a common route in different diseases, recognising the multidisciplinary and collaborative approach required for a number of medical conditions
Tenagomysis macropsis Tattersall 1923
No full text<i>Tenagomysis macropsis</i> Tattersall, 1923 (Figs 1C, D, 6) <p> <i>Tenagomysis macropsis</i> Tattersall, 1923, 294–295, plate III figs. 1–12.</p> <p> <i>Material examined</i></p> <p>All material Timaru, South Is., New Zealand. NIWA 3950: 1 Ψ (10.5 mm), stn TM060, 44°39.1´S 171°25.8´E, 13 Feb. 2002, 9 m, epibenthic sled. NIWA 3951: 2 ɗ (9.1, 9.2 mm) and 5 Ψ (10.3–12.1 mm), stn TM065, 44°38.7´S 171°26.0´E, 13 Feb. 2002, 7 m, epibenthic sled.</p> <p> <i>Remarks</i></p> <p> <i>Tenagomysis macropsis</i> was established on the basis of specimens collected from northern New Zealand by Tattersall (1923). This species had not since been recorded.</p> <p>The Timaru specimens agree with the original description except for the carpopropodus of the eighth thoracopod. In the original description the distal subsegment of the carpopropodus is shorter than the middle subsegment, whereas it is twice as long as the middle subsegment in the present specimens (Fig. 6 G).</p> <p> The mouthparts of <i>T. macropsis</i> are first illustrated here (Fig. 6 C–E).</p> <p> The female pleopods of <i>T. macropsis</i> differ from those of <i>T. longisquama</i> in that they are slender and gradually narrowed distally (Fig. 6 J) as opposed to the knife­shaped pleopods of <i>T. longisquama</i> (Fig. 3E–I).</p>Published as part of <i>Fukuoka, Kouki & Bruce, Niel L., 2005, A new species of Tenagomysis (Crustacea: Mysida: Mysidae) from New Zealand with notes on three Tenagomysis species, pp. 1-15 in Zootaxa 878</i> on pages 10-11, DOI: <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/170897">10.5281/zenodo.170897</a>
Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 (Tattersall 1925
No full textGenus Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 (Tattersall, 1925: 241) Figures 29–31. Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 (Tattersall, 1925: 241) — Schellenberg, 1931: 500.— Barnard & Barnard, 1983: 675 –676.— Bamber, 2003: 206. Melita — Sawicki, Holsinger & Iliffe, 2005: 66. Type species. Paraniphargus annandalei Tattersall, 1925: 242. Species. Paraniphargus contains 8 species P. almagosa (Sawicki & Holsinger, 2005), P. annandalei Tattersall, 1925, P. cognata (Stock & Vonk, 1992), P. dulcicola (Stock & Vonk, 1990), P. latiflagella (Ren & Andress, 2008), P. oba (J.L. Barnard, 1972), P. ruttneri Schellenberg, 1931, P. valesi (Karaman, 1955). Diagnosis (new composition). Body slender. Head, anterior and posterior lobes protruding, rounded, sinus developed, obsolescent or absent. Eyes present or absent. Pleon segments without dorsal teeth. Urosome segment 1 with or without dorsal tooth. Urosome segment 2 without or with paired dorsal teeth and / or spine groups. Antennae strong; antenna 1 longer than 2. Mandible (Fig. 29 a–f), right lacinia spike-like, multidenticulate; left lacinia 4-dentate, molar seta present on both left and right mandibles; palp is short, medium reduced, 3-articulate, article 3 is subequal or slightly shorter to article 2, article 2 with single seta, article 3 with 1–4 setae only. Maxilla 1 (Fig. 29 g–l), outer plate with 9 apical strong setae; inner plate subquadratic, elongated, with truncated distal margin, only 3–4 setae located along the distal margin, not on the inner margin. Maxilla 2, inner plate without or with distal medial marginal setae only. Maxilliped plates strong; palp segment 2 sublinear; article 3 bilobed or with rounded protruding on the inner margin; dactyl stout, curved. Coxae 1–4 (Figs. 29 m–p, s; 30b–d, g) medium, uniformly deep, rounded below. Pereopod 1 (gnathopod 1) of males (Fig. 29 n–s), basis anteriorly setose or with only single seta; carpus slender, sublinear or long-triangular; propodus shorter, anterior margin convex, palm usually slightly excavated at basal part or no, usually without protruding rounded lobe at the posterior part; dactylus thin, curved, is not bulging basally. Pereopod 1 of female (Fig. 29 m), carpus relatively deep, lower margin convex; palm of propodus oblique or transverse, dactylus regular. Pereopod 2 (gnthopod 2) of males (Fig. 30 a–g), basis without anterior long setae; carpus short, deep, length of posterior lobe about half anterior margin; palm regulary convex, oblique, without distinct palmar angle and palmar tooth, setose; dactyl relatively short. Pereopod 2 of female relatively small, carpus and propodus shallow, subequal in length or carpus shorter than propodus; palm oblique, nearly straight, without palmar corner tooth. Pereopod 3 subequal to pereopod 4, dactylus medium size or short. Pereopods 6 and 7 (Fig. 30 l–q) larger than pereopod 5; coxae 5 and 6 distinctly anterolobate; coxae 6 of females (Fig. 30 h–k), anterior lobe forming a shallow lobate or gently curved hook-like processes; bases broadened proximally and narrowed distally, lower lobes usually absent. Pereopod 5–7, merus long, thin; margins of propodus with short stout setae; dactylus short. Pleon plate 3, hind corner with small tooth or rectangular. Uropod 1 (Fig. 31 a–c), peduncle with interramal spur, rami subequal or outer ramus slightly shorter. Uropod 2, rami subequal or outer ramus short, margins with 1– 2 lateral strong setae “spinose” each. Uropod 3 (Fig. 31 d–h), inner ramus very small; outer ramus strong, about twice length of, and broader than peduncle, margins of segment 1 with up to 8 clusters of stout setae (“spines”), segment 2 short or vestigial or absent. Telson (Fig. 31 i–o) lobes short, narrowing distally, inner margins without or with one short stout seta (“spine”), apices subacute, each with 2–3 strong stout setae, lateral notches absent. Coxal gills on pereopods 2–5 medium large, oval or suboval; gill on pereopod 6 distinctly smaller, less broad. Distribution. Tropical and equatorial regions of Pacific, Indian and Atlantic Oceans. Fresh and coastal sea waters; subterranean and interstitial. Relationships: The genus Paraniphargus has intermediate features between the genera Melita and Tegano: mandibular palp medium reduced, 3-articulated, article 3 with 1–4 setae only; coxae 6 of females, anterior lobe forming a shallow lobate or gently curved hook-like process.Published as part of Labay, Vjacheslav S., 2016, Review of amphipods of the Melita group (Amphipoda: Melitidae) from the coastal waters of Sakhalin Island (Far East of Russia). III. Genera Abludomelita Karaman, 1981 and Melita Leach, 1814, pp. 1-73 in Zootaxa 4156 (1) on pages 61-63, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4156.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/25719
EU COST Action CA21130 PRESTO ‘P2X receptors as therapeutic targets’ inaugural meeting report
No full textThe inaugural meeting of the EU COST Action CA21130 PRESTO was held in February 2023, at the University of Ferrara, Italy. Our meeting report provides an overview of PRESTO, a tribute to Professor Jim Wiley, overviews of the talk, and a speaker synopsis that discusses the resources, models, equipment, and techniques available in different lab groups throughout Europe, increasing the prospect of collaborative research
Paraniphargus Tattersall 1925
No full textGenus Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925 Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925: 241; Barnard and Barnard, 1983: 675, fig. 5, map 54. Melita: Sawicki et al., 2005: 66 (in part) [not Leach, 1814: 403]. Type species Paraniphargus annandalei Tattersall, 1925 by monotypy. Emended diagnosis Head, rostrum weak, eyes absent. Antennae slender; antenna l peduncular article 1 longer than article 3, accessory flagellum 2- or 3-articulated; antenna 2 shorter than 1, flagellum short. Mandibular palp slender, with 3 articles; article 1 short, articles 2 – 3 long, article 3 linear, weakly setose. Lower lip with developed inner lobes. Maxilla 1, inner plate ovate, with 3 – 4 apical setae, not setose medially; outer plate with 6 – 9 robust setae distally; palp 2-articulated, with apical robust setae. Maxilla 2, inner plate without facial or medial setae. Coxae relatively long, coxa 4 lobate. Gnathopod 1 small, subchelate; carpus weakly elongate, unlobed; propodus shorter than carpus, trapezoidal, palm transverse, dactylus fitting palm; no sexual dimorphism. Gnathopod 2 enlarged, subchelate; carpus of medium length, weakly lobate; propodus large, roundish rectangular, palm oblique; dactylus long, curved posteriorly; no sexual dimorphism. Pereopods 3 – 4 slender; bases of pereopods 5 – 7 relatively expanded, slightly lobate posterodistally, posterior margins serrate. Uropods biramous; uropods 1 – 2 rami extending subequally, with robust setae marginally; uropod 3 elongate; peduncle short; parviramous, outer ramus long, 1- articulated, with marginal and terminal setae, inner ramus shorter than 20% length of outer. Telson of ordinary length, fully cleft, lobes tapering, each with 2 apical robust setae. Remarks Four species have been described in the genus Paraniphargus: P. annandalei Tattersall, 1925 from a freshwater stream in the Andaman Islands; Paraniphargus ruttneri Schellenberg, 1931 from a freshwater lake in Java; Paraniphargus leleuporum Monod, 1970 from groundwater in the Galapagos Islands; Paraniphargus vermiamicus Bamber, 2003 from marine waters in Hong Kong. Paraniphargus leleuporum was subsequently transferred to a new genus, Galapsiellus Barnard, 1976 by Barnard (1976), and P. vermiamicus was transferred to Tegano Barnard and Karaman, 1982 by Horton and Lowry (2012), leaving only two species in the genus. Several studies have dealt with the difference between Paraniphargus and the related genus, Melita Leach, 1814. Schellenberg (1931) pointed out that they differ only in the 1- articulated outer ramus of the uropod 3, the lack of the anteroventral cusp on the head, the weak mandibular palp, and the naked medial margin of the inner lobes of both maxillae. Barnard and Barnard (1983) stated that many species of Melita have lost article 2 on the uropod 3 outer ramus, and that Paraniphargus differs from Melita in the loss of eyes and medial maxillary setae. Stock and Ilife (1995) suggested that there were only slight differences between Paraniphargus, Melita and a third genus Josephosella Ruffo, 1985. More recently, Sawicki et al. (2005) synonymized Paraniphargus with Melita citing a lack of distinction in the setation of maxilla 2 and the number of articles in the uropod 3 outer ramus between these genera. The present study recognizes the sexually monomorphic gnathopod 2 as a distinctive generic character of Paraniphargus separating it from Melita species that have a sexually dimorphic gnathopod 2 (Barnard and Barnard 1983; Jarrett and Bousfield 1996). Although the original description of P. annandalei and P. ruttneri by Tattersall (1925) and Schellenberg (1931), respectively, do not include details of the presence or absence of sexually dimorphic characters, Barnard (1976) proposed the absence of sexual dimorphism in the gnathopods without stating the basis for this observation. The medial margin of the maxilla 2 inner plate is quite bare of setae in all species of Paraniphargus including P. shiosai sp. nov., whereas in the Melita species, number of setae on the medial margin varies from very many to a few but never without setae. Based on the above characters Paraniphargus is here reinstated as a distinct genus from Melita. Included taxa Three species: P. annandalei Tattersall, 1925; P. ruttneri Schellenberg, 1931; P. shiosai sp. nov.Published as part of Ariyama, Hiroyuki, 2016, Two new species of eyeless amphipods from a coastal area in Japan (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Hadziidae, Melitidae), with reinstatement of the genus Paraniphargus Tattersall, 1925, pp. 2277-2297 in Journal of Natural History 50 on pages 2287-2289, DOI: 10.1080/00222933.2016.1198838, http://zenodo.org/record/399316
Resistance to an herbivore through engineered cyanogenic glucoside synthesis
No full textTattersall, David B. ; Bak, Soren ; Jones, Patrik R. ; Olsen, Carl Erik ; Nielsen, Jens K. ; Hansen, Mads L. ; Hoj, Peter B. ; Moller, Birger Lindber
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
