mrt. 2008
Photo of the day (3): Amphibulima
31-03-2008 16:25
Just received some photo's from someone who was in
Dominica and hiked high in the mountains there. He
took several pictures of snails, one of which is this
Amphibulima patula (Bruguière, 1789)
Photo: Clayton Kern
Photo: Clayton Kern
Comments welcome!
31-03-2008 10:51
Comments have now been switched on in my blog. I look
forward to see your reactions :-)
Old maps never die
31-03-2008 10:07
Once again an old map shed light on the type locality
of a species described in the early 19th century.
This time I was wondering where "Reipublicae
Venezuela, Provinciae Cumana, juxta vicum Caripe, in
vicinitate cavernae Guacharo" could be located. It is
the home of several species described by Jonas and
Nyst.
In modern Venezuela administrative boundaries have changed and a Province Cumaná no longer exist (subdivisions in this country are called Estado or State). The place Caripe can still be located and there is even a 'Caripe Viejo', referring to an old place with that name. This could probably indicate the place I was looking for; it is in Estado Monagas. But still I was curious about the extent of the former province of Cumaná. A quick search on the net revealed the following map:
Map of Provincia de Cumana.
Author: Agustin Codazzi, 1840. Lith. Thierry frères, Caracas. (Source: davidrumsey.com)
Caripe is shown in the mountaneous part of the province and undoubtedly the cave was near that place.
In modern Venezuela administrative boundaries have changed and a Province Cumaná no longer exist (subdivisions in this country are called Estado or State). The place Caripe can still be located and there is even a 'Caripe Viejo', referring to an old place with that name. This could probably indicate the place I was looking for; it is in Estado Monagas. But still I was curious about the extent of the former province of Cumaná. A quick search on the net revealed the following map:
Map of Provincia de Cumana.
Author: Agustin Codazzi, 1840. Lith. Thierry frères, Caracas. (Source: davidrumsey.com)
Caripe is shown in the mountaneous part of the province and undoubtedly the cave was near that place.
Choose your colour
30-03-2008 15:59
In the blogosphere there is a battle going on which
invertebrate group is better,
mollusks or
echinoderms.
Although this is clearly pertaining to the marine
members, I wouldn't be a good malacologist if I
didn't choose for mollusks :-) But hey, we will
always lose the battle when we start counting
numbers of species going extinct. More than
100,000 seems a fair number, but arthropods are
said to start at 5,000,000. Are we speaking about
numbers only? What about ease of collecting? joy
of collecting? human interest? biodiversity value?
And so on, and so on...
Can we go back to science please?
Can we go back to science please?
Photo of the day (2): Plekocheilus
28-03-2008 18:13
Today I even have two new photographs (and more
coming), thanks to the courtesy of Toine Cleef who
searched through his old slides from field work.
This time a rather common species from the Bogotá region, Plekocheilus (Aeropictus) succinoides (Petit, 1840), taken at Páramo de la Rusia, Colombia.
This time a rather common species from the Bogotá region, Plekocheilus (Aeropictus) succinoides (Petit, 1840), taken at Páramo de la Rusia, Colombia.
CLAMA is here again
25-03-2008 11:15
The seventh Latin American Congress of Malacology
(VII CLAMA) will be held at Universidad Austral de
Chile, Valdivia, from November 3 to 7, 2008. These
congresses on Neotropical malacology are held every
three years and cover a wide range of topics.
Further information can be found on the CLAMA website.
Further information can be found on the CLAMA website.
Words of wisdom
25-03-2008 10:09
Two words in an email exchange with a colleague
present food for thought. We talked about the
checklists that each of us are preparing.
"...but a checklist is not the place to introduce taxonomic changes". Here it hinges on the interpretation of the word 'checklist'. In a strict sense one could say a checklist is merely a compilation from literature what others have presented. The checklist as a mirror of points of views from other experts. Its only aim is to present an overview and to bring together in one place what might be scattered in a wide array of literature. No own judgement need to be added.
In my 'annotated checklist' for Ecuador I make some taxonomic changes by introducing a few new synonymies. I think the word 'annotated' clearly indicates that some expert judgement is included.
"Also, in all but a few instances I have not included new locality records, even though the [...] collection contains many new records. My reason for not including these is that the data are not yet based on careful taxonomic study". Here the point implies a trade-off between on the one hand presenting quality data only, having useful data that could part turn out erroneous to stay unnoticed in collections and on the other hand, presenting all available data, scrutinized as good as possible, hoping to keep the number of errors within limits.
What is the best way? To me this dilemma reminds me of the dancing procession of Echternach (a village in Luxembourg). Three steps forwards, two steps backwards.
I would say: progress may be slow, but at least there is progress. Just make sure that you don't include the obvious misidentifications and illogical new distribution records that may be based on them. Keep on the safe side of taxonomy, but don't to be too shy to make an error. "One must always be open for new evaluations (critique) of one's work". And I would like to add: one must always be open to admit an error. It can even be a good starting point for a new paper :-)
Anyway, words of wisdom that can make you think twice. Thanks F!
"...but a checklist is not the place to introduce taxonomic changes". Here it hinges on the interpretation of the word 'checklist'. In a strict sense one could say a checklist is merely a compilation from literature what others have presented. The checklist as a mirror of points of views from other experts. Its only aim is to present an overview and to bring together in one place what might be scattered in a wide array of literature. No own judgement need to be added.
In my 'annotated checklist' for Ecuador I make some taxonomic changes by introducing a few new synonymies. I think the word 'annotated' clearly indicates that some expert judgement is included.
"Also, in all but a few instances I have not included new locality records, even though the [...] collection contains many new records. My reason for not including these is that the data are not yet based on careful taxonomic study". Here the point implies a trade-off between on the one hand presenting quality data only, having useful data that could part turn out erroneous to stay unnoticed in collections and on the other hand, presenting all available data, scrutinized as good as possible, hoping to keep the number of errors within limits.
What is the best way? To me this dilemma reminds me of the dancing procession of Echternach (a village in Luxembourg). Three steps forwards, two steps backwards.
I would say: progress may be slow, but at least there is progress. Just make sure that you don't include the obvious misidentifications and illogical new distribution records that may be based on them. Keep on the safe side of taxonomy, but don't to be too shy to make an error. "One must always be open for new evaluations (critique) of one's work". And I would like to add: one must always be open to admit an error. It can even be a good starting point for a new paper :-)
Anyway, words of wisdom that can make you think twice. Thanks F!
Scattered sources, partial view
24-03-2008 11:49
Searching for sources about Dutch malacologists who
have contributed to our knowledge of tropical land
snails, I found some scattered sources. A very useful
overview is found on
Tom Meijer's
website.
Besides a bibliography he lists many malacologists
and data on biographies, collection whereabouts
and in some cases portraits. It is hoped that Coan
et al. have covered these data in their
magnificent
2400
years of malacology,
as web sites tend to be transient.
I also digged up some data on persons that were mentioned as collectors for Colombian land shells. They appeared to be geologists (Wilhelm Reiss, Alfons Stübel) or botanists (Gustav Wallis) who travelled through South America primarily for other interests and made some collections on their way.
I also digged up some data on persons that were mentioned as collectors for Colombian land shells. They appeared to be geologists (Wilhelm Reiss, Alfons Stübel) or botanists (Gustav Wallis) who travelled through South America primarily for other interests and made some collections on their way.
Blessing or disguise?
17-03-2008 15:18
Information technology penetrates our lives deeper
and deeper. Some are warning for the privacy crisis
that is becoming manifest. So far in biology IT has
been more a blessing in disguise, opening up
tremendous opportunities in different field and
making us all far more productive.
However, the cyber era is coming rapidly and invading taxonomy now in earnest. The opening of the ZooBank is the latest milestone in cybertaxonomy, requiring all new names and papers to be registered in their official registry.
In Zootaxa recently the first paper appeared that described new species registered in ZooBank and also made use of several other modern bioinformatic tools, like MorphBank, links to online collection databases, GBIF and GenBank. References are also registered in ZooBank and some are available through the Biodiversity Heritage Library. The paper also uses descriptive data standards (making use of XML, but several standards seem to be around!) and this part of the bioinformatica certainly does not make me happy. I think it will be laborious and time-consuming to get everything into prescribed formats, databases, etc. before even a page can be published.
Progress comes at a cost!
However, the cyber era is coming rapidly and invading taxonomy now in earnest. The opening of the ZooBank is the latest milestone in cybertaxonomy, requiring all new names and papers to be registered in their official registry.
In Zootaxa recently the first paper appeared that described new species registered in ZooBank and also made use of several other modern bioinformatic tools, like MorphBank, links to online collection databases, GBIF and GenBank. References are also registered in ZooBank and some are available through the Biodiversity Heritage Library. The paper also uses descriptive data standards (making use of XML, but several standards seem to be around!) and this part of the bioinformatica certainly does not make me happy. I think it will be laborious and time-consuming to get everything into prescribed formats, databases, etc. before even a page can be published.
Progress comes at a cost!
Beast blog
08-03-2008 11:17
Only today I found a reference to a blog on
Computational Biology and
Evolution
that was started by Alexei Drummond last November. He
is one of the authors of the software suite around
BEAST (Beauti, Beast, FigTree, LogCombiner, Tracer,
TreeAnnotator and Treestat), but is also
professionally involved in the development of the
phylogenetic package Geneiosus.
Currently there are subjects in categories like Bayesian MCMC, phylogenetics, population genetics and - of course - software. If some of these topics are interesting you, tap this blog right from the source.
Currently there are subjects in categories like Bayesian MCMC, phylogenetics, population genetics and - of course - software. If some of these topics are interesting you, tap this blog right from the source.
New entries to old literature
07-03-2008 23:53
Taxonomy is a field where many papers and books
remain of value, even many decades after their
publication. Systematic biology depends to a large
extend on historic literature, and the 'half life' or
'decay time' is substantially longer than in other
fields of science.
At the same time it is obvious that many old books and journals are difficult to consult, as they are often confined to the larger libraries in de developed world. The Biodiversity Heritage Library is likely to change this drastically. It aims to make major literature available through open access.
Currently one of the interesting titles is the Manual of Conchology, *the* landmark publication for me in malacology. Vols. 1-26 are now available, although all text is in uncorrected OCR. And text only! Still this is a major breakthrough in making taxonomy literature available 'for the masses'.
At the same time it is obvious that many old books and journals are difficult to consult, as they are often confined to the larger libraries in de developed world. The Biodiversity Heritage Library is likely to change this drastically. It aims to make major literature available through open access.
Currently one of the interesting titles is the Manual of Conchology, *the* landmark publication for me in malacology. Vols. 1-26 are now available, although all text is in uncorrected OCR. And text only! Still this is a major breakthrough in making taxonomy literature available 'for the masses'.
Embarrassing or what?
05-03-2008 15:29
Sometimes I really feel embarrassed, like today when
I received the picture of the lectotype of Bulimus
nigrolimbatus Pfeiffer, 1854. It was described from
the 'Andes of New Grenada', which is not very
informative at all as it could be anywhere in
northwestern South America. Nobody has ever since
recollected this species or recognized it in
collections. It is the type species of Stenostylus
Pilsbry 1898, originally described as a section of
Drymaeus Albers, 1850, but erected to generic level
by Weyrauch in 1956. According to him there were
three characteristics that separated this new genus
from Drymaeus:
1) a thin cuticula that peels off the shell, 2) the
surface of the postembryonic whorls with incrassate
growth striae, 3) a pearly luster on the inside of
the aperture.
Bulimus nigrolimbatus Pfr.,
lectotype BMNH 1975549
Do you see a cuticula that peels off? Or a pearly luster within the aperture? Does this seem to be an adult specimen to you? No-no-yes to me when I found this type in the BMNH, back in 1975. We didn't have digital cameras in those days, so I had to be very dainty in the photographs I took. Anyhow, this shell was not included.
Several years later I received shells from Toine Cleef, collected by him at Páramo de Almorzadero in Colombia. Typical Drymaeus protoconch, totally different from what I had seen from that country. To keep this story short: it was published as a new species (Breure & Eskens, 1981). Today I realized that these shells are the adult form of nigrolimbatus, which was apparently described from a subadult specimen.
This new synonymy will be published in a paper on enigmatic species, to appear later this year. I found the home of a "ghost species", but still feel somewhat embarrassed.
References:
Breure, A.S.H. & A.A.C. Eskens (1981). Notes on and descriptions of Bulimulidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda), 2. Zoologische Verhandelingen 186: 1-111.
Bulimus nigrolimbatus Pfr.,
lectotype BMNH 1975549Do you see a cuticula that peels off? Or a pearly luster within the aperture? Does this seem to be an adult specimen to you? No-no-yes to me when I found this type in the BMNH, back in 1975. We didn't have digital cameras in those days, so I had to be very dainty in the photographs I took. Anyhow, this shell was not included.
Several years later I received shells from Toine Cleef, collected by him at Páramo de Almorzadero in Colombia. Typical Drymaeus protoconch, totally different from what I had seen from that country. To keep this story short: it was published as a new species (Breure & Eskens, 1981). Today I realized that these shells are the adult form of nigrolimbatus, which was apparently described from a subadult specimen.
This new synonymy will be published in a paper on enigmatic species, to appear later this year. I found the home of a "ghost species", but still feel somewhat embarrassed.
References:
Breure, A.S.H. & A.A.C. Eskens (1981). Notes on and descriptions of Bulimulidae (Mollusca, Gastropoda), 2. Zoologische Verhandelingen 186: 1-111.