Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 1 SUBJECT: Cnidaria: A review of the MMS Atlas Vol. 3 with the authors GUEST SPEAKER: Dr. Eric Hochberg and John Jlubenkov DATE: 18 June 1999 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: Dancing Coyote Ranch 20355 Hwy 76 Pauma Valley, CA The next meeting will be our long delayed and much anticipated Cnidarian meeting. Speakers will be Dr. Eric Hochberg from the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, and John Ljubenkov. We will be going over our questions, comments and suggestions on the cnidarian volume of the Taxonomic Atlas of the Santa Maria Basin series. Other cnidarian questions arising from B’98 sampling will also be discussed; including counting conventions for colonial organisms, Tubularia vs. Ectopleura, The sea spp., and other gorgonians. The meeting will be held at John & Julie Ljubenkov’s Dancing Coyote Rancho at the foot of Mt. Palomar. This meeting is on 18 June, a Friday rather than a Monday. Those wanting to stay over at the rancho, or arrive early, are welcome. Accommodations are limited, however, and you should contact John or Julie at (760)742-2238 or via e-mail at ljubenko@pacbell.net to let them know. Chone mollis - staining pattern FUNDS FOR THIS PUBFICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter in not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 1 ELECTION RESULTS We were a bit slow in getting out the ballots (the fault of the editor I’m afraid) for the recent SCAMIT Election of Officers. In consequence we accepted ballots for a full two weeks after the nominal closing date. There were no surprises. Turnout was light, in the American tradition, and the full slate of officers was elected. Three were returnees, with Ron Velarde (CSDMWWD) returning as President, Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) as Secretary, and Ann Dalkey (CLAEMD) as Treasurer. Don Cadien did not run again for Vice-President, and Leslie Harris (NHMLAC) was elected as your new Vice-President. Several write-ins were received, but the one vote for each did not mount a serious challenge to the listed candidates. Members used the bottom of the ballot to forward a series of suggestions for meeting topics during the next year. These are being forwarded to the new Vice-President for her consideration and action. At the last minute an additional candidate for Vice-President was identified, but his candidate statement was not received in time for the election. Hopefully he will choose to run next year. All members are encouraged to consider running for office, and serving if elected. We are a small organization, and must include as much diversity as possible to remain viable. Please consider contributing to SCAMIT by running and serving; it really is not demanding of too much time, and we all benefit from broadening the scope of our officer pool. With the beginning of the new SCAMIT year our By-Law amendment takes effect, and the job of Newsletter Editor is no longer the responsibility of the Vice-President. We now have an appointed Newsletter Editor who is appointed by, and serving at the discretion of, the Executive Committee. Don Cadien has been offered, and has accepted the job. He will serve until removed by the Committee, or he resigns. NEW LITERATURE One of the suggested topics for the next year of SCAMIT meetings was a revisitation of the rationale for and methodology of formalin fixation of our biological materials. There are other ways of dealing with fixation, including the method of going straight into ethanol which is preferred for leaving the tissues suitable for later DNA analysis. Beladjal & Mertens (1999) discuss the dark side of alcohol “fixation” [alcohol does little to fix the sample, it only preserves it]. They report on a case where the method of specimen handling determined what species the specimens would prove to be. Not marine, but interesting and apropos. The subject of introduced species has frequently graced these pages. It is a “hot topic” and gets press in all the right places. Ruiz et al (1997) review the entire subject in a paper that was part of a symposium on Non- Indigenous Species (NIS). In a field where information accumulates so fast it is useful to have summary review articles quite frequently, if only to gather together the recent references in one place. The authors consider the consequences of NIS invasions for both the receiving environment, and for man’s exploitation of it. There is also the added dimension of human health effects which comes into play with some introduced species. Accidental introductions such as that of the abalone boring sabellid tube worm which has impacted California abalone rearing efforts can have major unforseen effects on a resource and/or its utilization. Such challenges always dare researchers to be innovative. Leighton (1998) describes experimental heat treatment of abalone which is a fairly efficacious means of damaging the polychaete without serious compromise to the snail. The stress of dealing with a detrimental introduced species is just one factor in the survival - or failure- of any population or species. In some cases a series of impacts all hammer the same population. This is 2 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.l apparently what happened to the white abalone Haliotis sorenseni in California waters. Impacts of both recreational and commercial harvest combined with prolonged warm water intrusions have lead to virtually a total collapse of the white abalone population. Recent census has found the species at a perilously low ebb, perhaps without the minimal spawn size to guarantee any successful reproduction. Davis et al (1998) suggest that the situation, while dire, is not hopeless. They list a series of steps to be taken if the species is not to be driven to extinction. Though these all succeed as hoped, the return from devastation is a slow process. Captive breeding and field release of other abalone species, combined with large areal closures of both the sport and commercial fisheries have yet to yield even one significant recovery in a California abalone stock. Coan (1999) adds yet another chapter to his ongoing series of treatments of bivalve families on a regional basis. This time he addresses the Sportellidae. A small family, but one with it’s share of nomenclatural problems. This is probably a preview of one section of the on- the-verge-of-completion Bivalves of California, a project of Dr. Coan and Paul Valentich Scott on a base of work by the late Dr. Frank Bernard. The author provides a comparison table of distinguishing characters for all regional species in the family. While none of these small clams are among the species we usually take during near-shore monitoring efforts, we should be aware of them, and this paper is a definite help in a fairly obscure corner of the local biota. Human transport, the usual agent of detrimental NIS movement, is also used for establishing non-native food organisms, both now and in the past. Man has moved some species around so often, that it is very difficult to determine their origin, or even what they are (as geograhically isolated non-interbreeding populations are brought into contact by transport, some species boundaries may blur or dissolve). Gene pools have been stirred vigorously for groups like oysters, by human transport and farming worldwide. The advent of molecular analyses has now made it feasible for researchers to attempt to unravel such puzzles, determining what the morphological boundaries of the various species are, and tracing their history via their DNA. Three recent papers (Josefowicz & O’ Foighil 1998, O’ Foighil et al 1998, and O’ Foighil et al 1999) are just such attempts. The first deals with the entire “flat oyster” group (subfamily Ostraeinae), and provides phylogenetic analysis of 41 taxa, including a group of 4 outgroup species from the related subfamily Lophinae. Not surprisingly the results of the molecular analysis differ markedly from the existing morphology based classification of the subfamily, and the authors suggest some changes. The other two papers deal with specific taxa, and attempt to track down their origins and dispersal. Use of a negative character, shell loss, is examined by Mikkelsen (1998) in both ‘traditional’ and phylogenetic analyses. Shell reduction and loss has occurred several times in the gastropod mollusks, and has been used as a key character in definition of some groups. Reductions in other hard parts such as radula and operculum are also considered. The nature of, and caveats necessary in use of such characters is the subject of the article. The author demonstrates, through different treatments of three existing data sets, the impact of coding choices on the analytic result. Once having lost the protective outer shell, or reduced and/or internalized it, mollusks must find some other protection from predators. Many of the shell-less or internally shelled gastropods have adopted chemical defenses instead, producing poisonous, noxious, or just plain distasteful substances from special glands. Others have become adept at producing copious mucus at a moment’s notice, a truly disgusting prospect for many potential predators, and quite an effective defense. Still others (including cephalopods) opt for stealth 3 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 1 and concealment as their weapons of choice in the battle not-to-get-eaten. Octopus, who must go out ‘shopping’ for prey themselves, must contend with the subsequent predator exposure. Hanlon et al (1999) provide a discussion and fascinating video/still camera documentation of behaviors adopted by foraging coral reef octopuses in the Indo-Pacific. All the tricks of quick change and deception practiced by these soft-bodied predators are on display in this paper. “It all depends on how you look at it” can be paraphrased without alteration of meaning to “it all depends on what data you use”. Price et al (1999) examine the effect of scale on perception and analysis of asteroid diversity in the Atlantic. On a small scale Deheyn & Jangoux (1999) have detected a sibling species hiding amidst the variability of color and bioluminosity in Amphipholis squamata. The authors determined that the differences were fully heritable, and represented different genotypes. The authors, while demonstrating the presence of the second form, did not provide it with a name, or associate it with an existing name within the synonymy of A. squamata. A different take on the variability in color and bioluminescence was provided by Deheyn et al (1998) who investigated the effect of symbionts on the color and luminosity of A. squamata. They did find an effect exerted by nearly all symbionts on the intensity/and or kinetics of light production in A. squamata, but found that the effects were expressed independent of the color of the ophiuroid (and thus in Tight’ of the preceding article) regardless of which sibling species was being examined. 3 MAY MINUTES The meeting was held at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History Worm Lab and was called to order by President Ron Velarde. He relayed a message from Don Cadien that very few ballots for the SCAMIT election had been turned in so far. Don will accept ballots until mid May, so please, if you haven’t voted yet, now is the time to do so. A ballot is available on the SCAMIT website. The SCAMIT website has undergone some updates and changes recently. Please take a look if you haven’t visited recently, and give your feedback to our webmaster Jay Shrake. Due to an initial interest from Cheryl Brantley and Ron Velarde regarding the taxonomy of Aphrodita, Larry Lovell is setting aside specimens within this genus while going through the collections at his new job at Scripps. If anyone has additional material, it would be very welcome, and it can be sent or given to Larry. They plan on re-examining this group in the future. By the way, congratulations to Larry Lovell on his new position at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. As of March 1, Larry is the Museum Scientist in charge of the Benthic Invertebrates Collection at SIO. He can be reached via phone or e-mail: Lawrence L. Lovell Museum Scientist Benthic Invertebrates Collection Scripps Institution of Oceanography 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla, CA. 92093-0206 (619) 822-2818 llovell@sio.ucsd.edu It has been quite awhile since the last polychaete meeting (January), so attendees brought numerous specimens from their Bight 98 samples to examine. A brief discussion about paraonids encountered in the Bight samples ensued. A general clarification was made that paraonid specimens previously identified as Acmira nr similis, then Acmira sp C, will now be identified as A. lopezi. 4 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.l The next family discussed was nephtyids. Rick Rowe has a relatively new key which includes 2 new species, Nephtys sp SD 2 and Nephtys simoni. Rick commented that he has identified similarly-sized N.ferruginea and N. simoni from the same sample. Tony Phillips found that he can observe the brain morphology of juvenile Nephtys by simply staining the entire animal with methyl green. However, larger specimens must be dissected first and then stained. Capitellidae was the next family considered. There has been some confusion with specimens that we have been calling Notomastus tenuis Moore, 1909 locally. The type specimen of Notomastus hemipodus Hartman, 1947 has been examined by Leslie Harris. Leslie originally noted at a SCAMIT meeting (August 12, 1996) that when she methyl green stained the type specimen of N. hemipodus the double, midventral racing stripe pattern was present. When she stained Moore’s type specimen of N. tenuis no staining pattern was revealed. Although not reported by Moore, 1909 in the original description, Leslie also noted that the first setiger in N. tenuis is uniramous. Based on Leslie’s examination of both type specimens and her familiarity with our local fauna, she reported that Moore’s Notomastus tenuis is probably a shallow, bay, mudflat, and harbor species and Notomastus hemipodus stains like our common offshore species. But since N. hemipodus was originally described from shallow waters in North Carolina use of that name locally requires further investigation. To avoid confusion reporting data for the Bight 98 project, we will continue to report the offshore species (the “double, ventral racing stripe” staining pattern specimens) as Notomastus tenuis. Rick Rowe has offered to produce a voucher sheet(s) for the embayment species using the name(s) Notomastus sp SD 1 (sp SD 2, etc.). Clarification of the proper names to apply to our local species of Notomastus , including the correction of the misuse of N. tenuis, will be considered at a future SCAMIT meeting. Next, Tony Phillips showed us a specimen of Pseudoleiocapitella that he identified using Fauchald 1977. In this genus, the thorax has ten segments, there is one asetigerous segment, and the first setiger is complete. On Tony’s specimen, there was a mixture of capillary and hooded hooks on setiger 10. Larry Lovell notified everyone that he has been getting Amastigos acutus at some shallow water stations. This species is small and threadlike with hooded hooks only (no capillary setae present). Tony Phillips has been encountering specimens of Anotomastus gordiodes in his bay samples. This species has a distinct prostomium, the thorax has 17-18 setigers with capillary setae, and the cuticle has a sheen to it. A methyl green pattern is solid staining on setigers 5-17, followed by a banding stain pattern from setiger 17 to about setiger 30. Leslie passed around a new journal article by Eijiroh Nashi (1999) titled “Redescription of Mesochaetopterus selangolus (Polychaeta: Chaetopteridae), based on type specimens and recently collected material from Morib Beach, Malaysia”. This article contains a table which compares characters of 12 species of Mesochaetopterus , including our local California species, M. taylori and M. ricketsii. The table should prove to be useful in our identifications of Mesochaetopterus. SCAMIT hopes to include this table as an attachment to the Newsletter in a future edition, but first, permission to distribute the table must be attained from Pacific Science. The next group discussed was scaleworms. Cheryl Brantley brought in a very nice specimen of Malmgreniella sanpedroensis from station 2204, west of White’s Point, Palos Verde, 76 m. Rick Rowe showed us some excellent digital images of M. sanpedroensis , and we discussed some of the distinguishing characteristics of this species. There are red pigmented spots on the ventral cirri and on the supra-acicular lobes. Most specimens also 5 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 1 have “clumps” of red pigment at the base of the dorsal cirri, although these are not present in all specimens. Pettibone (1993) does illustrate these red spots. Cheryl Brantley showed us an unknown scaleworm, small, with transparent elytra, a wide prostomium, and brown speckled pigment on the posterior of the prostomium. This specimen is from station 2205, off White’s Point, Palos Verde, 64 m. We speculated that it might be a new species of Malmgreniella. Cheryl continued her investigation the next day at her lab and posted a note to the Bight 98 Taxonomic Listserver (May 4,1999) regarding this specimen. She examined several specimens of Ysideria hastata and believes this specimen is a juvenile, and the large distinctive superior neurosetae are not fully developed yet. ‘The bifid teeth on the neurosetae and the serration on the shaft match very closely.” Thank you, Cheryl, for continuing your investigation and reporting back to us. The next polynoid up for discussion was Harmothoe “imbricata ”. There is considerable variation in the color and color pattern of the elytra of this species complex. Tony Phillips had a specimen from LA Harbor that exhibited a black-grey mottled pattern on the elytra. Larry Lovell reported that a specimen from Newport Harbor had black-grey pigment that formed a longitudinal, mid-dorsal band on the elytra. Both of these color morphs are figured in Pettibone 1953. Imajima (1997) has recently published a paper describing 6 new species of Harmothoe having sub-ventral eyes. We need to carefully compare our different color morphs of H. “ imbricata ” to see if they match one (or more) of Imajima’s new species. Next, Leslie Harris showed us an interesting spionid that was collected in Puget Sound. It was similar to Spio filicornis of Maciolek with the following differences: 1) the specimen had nuchal organs that were in a zig zag configuration and 2) the pigmentation didn’t match. Leslie had also seen these same specimens from local waters as well as from Vancouver. Let’s keep our eyes open for this little spionid in the Bight 98 samples. We then moved on to syllids. Tony Phillips had a Typosyllis collected from Fish Harbor in Los Angeles Harbor. Ron Velarde had a second similar specimen collected from San Diego Bay (station 2224). Leslie Harris identified both of these specimens as T. nipponica. She had pulled thousands of specimens off the docks in Richmond Harbor, San Francisco Bay. Upon a return visit, after the El Nino, these worms were gone, along with many other species, due to the flushing of the Bay with large amounts of freshwater. Ron Velarde brought a little syllid that was collected offshore of San Diego at a depth of 98 ft. It looked like a Typosyllis farallonensis except for a strange additional character. There were golden-colored caps covering the ends of some of the setae. We don’t know what this substance is, and we couldn’t tell by looking at the specimen whether they were secreted at the time of setal formation or were somehow added or accumulated later. We then examined a couple of specimens from the family Eunicidae. The first was a Marphysa brought in by Tony Phillips collected from Dana Pt. Harbor. It had palmate branchiae, and using Hartman’s Atlas, keyed out to the couplet with M. mortenseni and M. sanguinea. The specimen had some characters of each species and had tentacles that were intermediate in length. We found spinigers on this specimen (like M. sanguinea) but no falcigers. Larry Lovell brought a juvenile Marphysa from Newport Bay (station 2137), and we initially wondered whether it was the same species as Tony’s Marphysa. The juvenile specimen had only 3 antennae. Upon close examination, we did find falcigers on 6 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.l Larry’s small specimen, confirming that it was different than Tony’s specimen. The adult Marphysa specimen will be described as Morphysa sp 1. We then moved on to the family Sabellidae. Tony brought some Chone specimens for us to look at. The first specimen was his Chone sp 1 from Santa Cruz Island (station 2519). It had a large, non-staining half moon on the collar. Leslie Harris identified the specimen as Chone minuta and said the relatively large size of the non-staining area was within the range for this species. We next looked at Tony’s Chone sp 2. He had found them from Catalina (11 meters), Long Beach Harbor (16 meters), Santa Cruz Island (66 meters), and Santa Monica Bay (45 meters). These specimens had a high collar with a non-staining band all the way around the top. The setae were similar to C. mollis in that they were spatulate with mucronate tips. There was an interesting plaque on the collar; it stained darkly and evenly with methyl green. After further investigation at the meeting and looking at Banse 1972, we concluded that it was one of the two “morphs” of C. mollis that were described in Banse 1972. Tony’s specimen matched Banse’s C. mollis from Tomales Bay which is different in staining pattern from the C. mollis we typically encounter in S. California. 24 MAY Meeting The meeting was called to order by Ron Velarde, at approximately 9:40 a.m.. Unfortunately the only people in attendance were Ron Velarde (CSDMWWD), Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) and Don Cadien (CSDLAC) with brief morning visits by Kelvin Barwick (CSDMWWD) and Kathy Langan (CSDMWWD). During the business meeting Ron updated us on SCAMIT’s financial status. Our treasurer, Ann Dalkey, has transferred the SCAMIT savings into a CD with a higher annual yield. We were then reminded of the upcoming WSM at Cal State Fullerton from June 13 - 17. Ron passed around an annoucement for the meetings. Don Cadien will soon have a list of duplicate reprints for sale from his Jan Stock collection. The cost will consist of lcent per page for reprints and 3 cents per page for originals. These are likely to appeal only to crusty folks, as virtually all deal with crustaceans. Contact him if you think you might be interested, and he can send you the list (well over a thousand entries). In response to the recent article resurrecting the shrimp Eualus subtilis from it’s synonymy with E. lineatus (see last months NEW LITERATURE section), Ron Velarde has gone back and reviewed specimens of Eualus encountered by the City of San Diego’s Ocean Monitoring Program. He found the species taken off San Diego was E. subtilis. Ron is preparing a table of separatory characters for the three species of Eualus we might encounter. When completed it will be placed in the taxonomic tools section of the website. Next an in-depth discussion ensued on what to do with the Amphioplus hexacanthus problem. Hendler synonomized A. hexacanthus with Dougaloplus amphacanthus back in 1996, based on reexamination of the type specimens. However, many taxonomists at the various agencies feel that they are getting a distinct species from D. amphacanthus. This distinct species has an oral papillae pattern similar to D. amphacanthus , but has no superficial structures on the aboral surface of the disk. It has been called A. hexacanthus by most local taxonomists, but due to the synonomy, this name is no longer available. Therefore, what to do with this species? Kathy Langan and Megan Lilly have been collecting D. amphacathus, D. sp A, and A. hexacanthus since the SCAMIT meeting held with Dr. Hendler in ‘97 and have sent them off for his examination. Until Dr. Hendler can examine 7 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 1 the animals and give a recommendation as to how to treat what we’ve been calling A. hexacanthus, that name will continue to be used for the sake of data consistency, not just within the City of San Diego’s lab but for interagency calibration as well. Some of our continuing problems with these animals can be laid at the feet of H. L. Clark, whose original description of the animal was based on disk-less specimens. He as much as stated in his description that his material was insufficient to define the species, but then went ahead and gave a new species name to his disk¬ less specimens. When Hendler reexamined them he found himself unable to separate them from specimens of Dougaloplus amphacantha. Perhaps with the material collected and submitted by CSDMWWD he will locate additional characters which will allow Clark’s species to be resurrected, even with such imperfect type material. If not, action should be taken to remove Amphioplus hexacanthus from the synonymy of D. amphacantha , and declare it a nomen inquirendum, since the type material is not sufficient to determine the species accurately. Dr. Hendler may undertake such an action if he is convinced that there is a second species in the area with identical arm and oral field morphology, but with different disk morphology. As part of the discussion on this issue we came to the realization that we didn’t know with certainty what genus should receive the species currently being referred to as “A. hexacanthus , \ We will await guidance from Dr. Hendler following his examination of the material. During the taxonomic list server exchanges which preceded this meeting it was suggested that there might be a problem with separation of Amphioplus “hexacanthus ” from Amphioplus sp A. The latter species was synonymized with Amphiura diomedeae implicitly by Hendler (1996, pg. 147), as he listed among the material of A. diomedeae examined the primary voucher of Amphioplus sp A from Phase I of the MMS Santa Maria Basin study, the same specimen used to establish the provisional name [in effect the “type” of Amphioplus sp A]. The rest of the day was spent discussing and comparing some sipunculids ( Nephasoma eremita taken by CSDLAC and CSDMWWD and Golfingia margaritacea taken by CSDMWWD), a flatworm from San Diego Bay (a Eurylepta species, but too small for firm species level recognition), and one from offshore Seal Beach (Polycladida sp. 27 of MEC), and urochordates. Some of the urochordates were species encountered among the Voucher QC lots examined by Megan Lilly from the B’98 trawls, while several others were from the B’98 benthic sampling. The most interesting was a large animal with the branchial structure of Ascidia combined with the thick opaque rugose tunic typical of a Styela. BIBLIOGRPAHY Banse, Karl. 1972. Redescription of some species of Chone Kroyer and Euchone Malmgren, and three new species (Sabellidae, Polychaeta). Fishery Bulletin 70(2):459-495. Beladjal, Lynda & Johan Mertens. 1999. Direct preservation in alcohol causes deformation of taxonomic key-characters in Anostraca (Crustacea). International Review of Hydrobiology 84(1): 17-22. Coan, Eugene V. 1999. The eastern Pacific Sportellidae (Bivalvia). Veliger 42(2): 132-151. Davis, Gary E., Peter L. Haaker, & Daniel V. Richards. 1998. The perilous condition of white abalone Haliotis sorenseni, Bartsch, 1940. Journal of Shellfish Research 17(3):871-875. 8 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.l Deheyn, Dimitri & Michel Jangoux. 1999. Colour varieties as sibling species in the polychromatic ophiuroid Amphipholis squamata (Echinodermata): evidence from inheritance of body colour and luminescence characters. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 234(2):219-234. Deheyn, Dimitri, Nikki A. Watson, & Michel Jangoux. 1998. Symbioses in Amphipholis squamata (Echinodermata, Ophiuroidea, Amphiuridae): geographical variation of infestation and effect of symbionts on the host’s light production. International Journal for Parasitology 28(9): 1413-1424. Fauchald, Kristian. 1977. The polychaete worms. Definitions and keys to the orders, families, and genera. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Series 28:1-190. Hanlon, Roger T., John W. Forsythe, & David E. Joneschild. 1999. Crypsis, conspicuousness, mimicry and polyphenism as antipredator defenses of foraging octopuses on Indo-Pacific coral reefs, with a method of quantifying crypsis from video tapes. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 66(1): 1-22. Hendler, Gordon. 1996. Chapter 7. Class Ophiuroidea. Pp. 113-179 IN: Blake, James A., Paul H. Scott and Andrew Lissner (eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and the Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 14 - Miscellaneous Taxa. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. 305pp. Imajima, Minoru, 1997. Polychaetous annelids from Sagami Bay and Sagami Sea collected by the Emperor Showa of Japan and deposited at the Showa Memorial Institute, National Science Museum, Tokyo. Families Polynoidae and Acoetidae. National Science Museum Monographs No. 13. 131pp. Jozefowicz, Christopher J. & Diarmaid O’ Foighil. 1998. Phylogenetic analysis of southern hemisphere flat oysters based on partial mitochondrial 16S rDNA gene sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 10(3):426-435. Leighton, David L. 1998. Control of sabellid infestation in green and pink abalones, Haliotis Julgens and H. corrugata, by exposure to elevated water temperatures. Journal of Shellfish Research 17(3):701-705. Mikkelsen, Paula M. 1998. Review of shell reduction and loss in traditional and phylogenetic molluscan systematics, with experimental manipulation of a negative gain character. American Malacological Bulletin 14(2):201-218. Moore, J. Percy. 1909. The polychaetous annelids dredged by the U.S.S. Albatross off the coast of Southern California in 1904. 1. Syllidae, Sphaerodoridae, Hesionidae and Phyllodocidae. Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia 61:321- 351. Nashi, Eijiroh. 1999. Redescription of Mesochaetopterus selangolus (Polychaeta: Chaetopteridae), based on type specimens and recently collected material from Morib Beach, Malaysia. Pacific Science 53(l):24-36. O’ Foighil, Dairmaid, P. M. Gaffney, A. E. Wilbur, & Thomas J. Hilbish. 1998. Mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I gene sequences support an Asian origin for the Portuguese oyster Crassostrea angulata. Marine Biology 131(3):497-503. O’ Foighil, Diarmaid Marshall Bruce A., Thomas J. Hilbish, & Mario A. Pino. 1999. Trans¬ pacific range extension by rafting is inferred for the flat oyster Ostrea chilensis. Biological Bulletin 196(2): 122-126. 9 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 1 Pettibone, Marian H. 1953. Some scale-bearing polychaetes of Puget Sound and adjacent waters. 89 pp., 40 pis. University of Washington Press: Seattle. Pettibone, Marian H. 1993. Scaled polychaetes (Polynoidae) associated with ophiuroids and other invertebrates and review of species referred to Malmgrenia. Contributions to Zoology No. 538. 92 pp. Price, A. R. G., M. J. Keeling, & C. J. O’Callaghan. 1999. Ocean-scale patterns of ‘biodiversity’ of Atlantic asteroids determined from taxonomic distinctness and other measures. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 66(2): 187-203. Ruiz, Gregory M., James T. Carlton, Edwin D. Grosholz, & Anson H. Hines. December 1997. Global invasions of marine and estuarine habitats by non-indigenous species: Mechanisms, extent, and consequences. American Zoologist 37(6):621-632. 10 May, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.l Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 2 SUBJECT: Recent Research on the Crustacea of Mexico GUEST SPEAKER: Dr. Michel Hendrickx DATE: 5 July 1999 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. LOCATION: Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History Molecular Biology Lab 900 Exposition Blvd. Los Angeles, CA Alabina phalacra (Carpenter, 1864) (ID not fully confirmed) B’98 2240, 4August 98, 3.3 m. Image by K. Barwick 9 Apr 99 Our next meeting will be on 5 July (a holiday, unfortunately, for many) where Dr. Michel Hendrickx, director of the Mazatlan Marine Station, will discuss with us his recent research on crustaceans, and other matters. He, and his family, are “just passing through” on their way to Belgium, the Hendrickx ancestral home, and found time to talk to SCAMIT en route. This would be a particularly good time to deal with any questions on decapods and stomatopods which have arisen during B’98 sampling. We hope that you can attend the meeting, and enjoy our guest speaker, despite the holiday. The meeting will be held at the Molecular Biology Lab (adjacent to the Worm Lab) of the Natural History Museum. The museum staff will also be on vacation that day, but access will still be possible through the staff entrance FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter in not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 2 and the guard station at the rear of the building (as usual). There will be a second July meeting on 12 July to continue discussion of B’98 related polychaete problems. NEW LITERATURE In honor of the cnidarian subject of our last meeting, the literature presented there (and here) concentrates on that phylum. Studies of rift, seep, and mid-ocean ridge biotas have provided a base of new data on the inhabitants of deep sections of the ocean that is not commonly available. In some cases these efforts have taxonomic or nomenclatural ramifications in our own shallower-water fauna. Calder (1996, & 1997) and Calder & Vervoort (1998) all deal with the deep-water hydroid fauna of the Atlantic. Calder (1998) provides an interesting examination of depth zonation in the hydroid fauna from shallow coastal shelf waters into the deep sea off Bermuda, which helps show how the shallow and deep fauna differ, and where they are similar. For the most part there is no direct relationship with the hydroid fauna of the Bight, but the discussion of Ectopleura vs. Tubularia in Calder & Vervoort is apropos to our own fauna. The natural history of one hydroid is addressed by Cerrano et al (1998), who examine the hermit crab associated Podocoryna exigua from the Mediterranean. The authors’ careful observations in the laboratory demonstrate that presence of the hermit crab is necessary for the colonial commensal development of the hydroid, and that once the crab leaves the shell, a healthy active hydroid colony rapidly regresses. If a crab is reintroduced to the shell the colony remnant resumes it’s earlier active growth. Despite this, the relationship is not obligate, as solitary polyps are found in sediments. Observations of the hydroid feeding showed that different parts of a colony fed on different prey, with buried polyps selectively ingesting sediment particles, while exposed polyps feed more normally on plankters at the sediment/water interface. During regression of abandoned colonies the authors confirmed earlier observations that hydractinid spines are formed by polyp regression, and represent sites at which polyps were earlier situated. In Podocoryna the spines lasted only a few weeks before being abraded away. The crabs apparently benefit from the association as well (although the hydroids were observed to feed on newly released crab larvae) by stealing zooplankters caught by zooids near the aperture of the shell. Morphological variability in soft corals and the ability to detect the limits of variability in a given species were discussed by Benayahu (1998) and McFadden (1999). As many cnidarians adopt different ecophenotypes depending on the hydrodynamics of their attachment site, recognition of species boundaries is a continuing subject of debate in the group. Benayahu describes lobe variation in one soft coral, stressing the need to pay attention to the morphology of the entire colony when making species distinctions. McFadden also draws in genetic testing (examination of allozyme distributions) to “ground truth” morphology based observations. Both their discussions are useful in considering variability of local octocorals. Predator/prey interactions can also alter soft coral appearance and behavior. In addition to stinging cells (cnidae), production of toxic compounds to deter predators is often used by various cnidarians, not always successfully. Slattery et al (1998) discuss the uptake and sequestration of a soft-coral produced diterpene by an aeolid nudibranch. This mollusk has been able to co-opt the cnidarian’s defense to it’s own use, offering the soft bodied nudibranch protection from fish predation. 2 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.2 The relationship between local and regional scale variables and processes and resulting local and regional scale species richness in coral communities was examined in two recent papers (Karlson & Cornell 1998, 1999). Their analyses suggest that in many areas reef habitats are not species saturated, and that the reasons for this are not the traditional ones of competition and dominance. Their analyses indicate that larger scale factors are at least as important in determining saturation and community richness as are local factors. Both need to be taken into account when comparing community structure between different areas. The even larger scale issue of the development of symmetry was addressed by Martindale & Henry (1998). The derivation of bilateral symmetry from radial or biradial symmetry was an early and major event in the history of the Metazoa. The authors discuss how it may have happened. Kim et al (1999) provide another entry in the “lower metazoan relationships” cladistic sweepstakes. They use 18S rDNA sequences as their data of choice. The analysis upsets no applecarts, and instead offers good support to a “traditional” perception of this group of taxa. Poriferans were basal, with ctenophores the basal group of metazoans at tissue grade with a nervous system, and a monophyletic Cnidaria. MYSTERY SOLVED Several years ago a CSDLAC trawl sample yielded a small tubicolous amphipod scraped from debris caught in the net. This was not legitimate trawl catch, so was never reported. When time permitted this was examined and found to be a Corophium with an interesting double tooth on the 4 th article of antenna 2, and interesting telsonic armature. It couldn’t be identified as anything at the time, so was given the name Corophium sp A, and set aside. While working on the voucher sheets from B’98 infaunal sampling I came across a slide of a partially dissected specimen, and decided to try and identify it using the Bousfield and Hoover (1997) Corophiinae paper. This proved fairly easy, with the animal turning out to be Monocorophium californiense. This is the first Southern California Bight record, with the previous range from Monterey Bay north to British Columbia. Since it was taken in a routine monitoring sample, I’ll add it into the next edition of the SCAMIT listing. Another provisional bites the dust: Hooray!! - Don Cadien WSM MEETING The annual Western Society of Malacologists meeting was held June 13-16 at Cal. State Fullerton. The three symposiums were entitled; Recent Advances in Molluscan Research, Invasive Molluscs: Environmental and Conservation Impacts, and Current Research on West Coast Molluscan Paleontology. SCAMIT President Ron Velarde attended for one day and found the talks quite informative. BIGHT’98 UPDATE FOR OUR FRIENDS SOUTH OF THE BORDER The Mexican group working on the Bight 4 98 project collected both chemistry and benthic samples. They are going to work up the benthic samples and the data might be included with the main Bight’98 report or as an addition to the main report. In order to determine the level of expertise of the group participating in the identifications the San Diego Lab has volunteered to give 3 samples from their lab to the Mexican group for re-identification. That way if the Mexican group needs some intercalibration, the San Diego lab can provide it before work on the Mexican portion of the Bight samples begins. Resulting data will better coordinate with the southern California data if we are all on the same page taxonomically. 3 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 2 18 JUNE MEETING Secretary Megan Lilly was the OIC for this meeting, the President and Vice-President being unable to join us. She reminded attendees of the next two upcoming SCAMIT meetings - 5 July, a meeting with Michel Hendrickx regarding Crustacea at LACMNH and 12 July a B’98 problem polychaete meeting probably at LACMNH. The floor was then given to Don Cadien who reminded attendees of the upcoming B’98 intercalibration cruise on 29 June hosted by CSDLAC. Don also brought up a query he’d seen on the Crustacea list server by Dr. Judith Weiss on how to successfully tether glass shrimp out in the field. Dr. Weiss had tried numerous techniques and all had failed. There has subsequently been a flood of helpful comments and suggestions from folks with experience in shrimp bondage. If you have a need for this type of experimental deployment consult the archives on this thread [http:// www.vims.edu/~jeff/archive.htm]. Eric Hochberg then made a suggestion for an upcoming newsletter. With his help we will be following the Oregon State University (OSU) benthic collections of retiring Dr. Andrew Carey, which have been distributed to several west coast institutions. The collections have been split between Cal Academy, SBMNH, and LACMNH. Dr. Hochberg has a list of which taxa went to which institutions. Much of the material is deep water in its origin. Although each institution will probably make a list of the materials it has received, SCAMIT will provide a list of the entire distribution. The entire polychaete collection now resides at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles along with collections of most Crustacea, gastropods, and echinoderms. Smaller phyla groups have been split between the other two institutions. Also obtained by LACM were some of Dr. Carey’s unsorted samples. Most of these animals are from deep water off Oregon (Cascadia Abyssal Plain), Alaska, and the Bering and Chukchi Seas. With the business aspect of the meeting completed, John Ljubenkov plunged into the Cnidaria. He started by discussing the historical assumption that hydrozoan taxa could be separated on the basis of whether or not medusae were generated during an animal’s life cycle. He feels, along with a number of other workers, that this is an incorrect assumption. Medusa retention is an adaptation to keep larvae close to the adult in areas where they would otherwise be lost to sub-optimal or unacceptable habitat. It has occurred repeatedly in many lineages (is homoplaseous), and should not be used as a character in either a phenetic or cladistic analysis. One genus can have members with freely liberated swimming medusae, medusae which develop sessilely on the adult and drop off to metamorphose nearby, and total suppression of the medusoid generation. A rather animated discussion ensued on the whole concept of poecilogony and the ability of animals to modify their reproductive modes to meet various ecological/ environmental pressures. John then referred to a paper by Peterson (1990) which discussed the differences between Ectopleura and Tubularia. According to this paper, everything we’re getting here on the West Coast is now in the genus Ectopleura. Although Tubularia is still a valid taxon, none of the species we encounter belong to it. These generic categories are not viewed identically by all authors, however. The generic definitions of Calder & Vervoort (1998) parallel, but do not completely overlap those of Peterson. We also have considerable difficulty with specific separation within the west coast representatives of the genus. Peterson corrects the earlier usages of Fraser, who confused the species, and has confused us in turn. A request was then put forth by Eric Hochberg for people to send him specimens of Virgularia,Acanthoptilum, and Stylatula. He would appreciate, when possible, if people 4 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.2 would take notes when they see these organisms whether or not eggs are present, time of year and size of the animal. As well, he would like to see these animals with their commensals and/or predators still attached. In other words, preserve together the branch of the pen and the nudibranch, ovulid, etc.. Do not remove the commensal/predator and preserve it separately. He would also appreciate any specimens of Clavularia or Alcyonium that people may have and could spare. These animals are rocky substrate organisms not commonly seen in POTW’s monitoring programs. If you should run across any, please consider sending them to Eric. The request for pennatulid specimens is in support of a new examination of the west coast fauna; a continuation of the treatment in the Atlas. This will involve Dr. Gary Williams of the California Academy of Sciences as well. He has reviewed most, if not all, of the important types which are still extant. He has also recently been working on virgulariids from New Zealand and is now ready to tackle our problem ridden local species. We next discussed the Cnidaria volume of the Taxonomic Atlas series. Since our comments on the first two chapters, authored by Eric and John, were generally only editorial we decided to list them and send them along to Eric for correction in any future second edition. Our comments on the third chapter, the Anthozoa, were more critical and much more substantial. We generally felt, for instance, that the use of illustrations of related species, or of representatives of putatively wide ranging species from other oceans, was ill-advised. We also felt that the effort was particularly light in areas where much information is available locally, such as the edwardsiids. This may reflect the nature of the collection examined, but left us very unsatisfied. It was concluded that our issues and requests need to be clearly spelled out and forwarded to Daphne via Eric. A wonderful, healthy lunch of sandwiches and fruit was enjoyed by all outside on John’s property. The entertainment was provided by a mass of hummingbirds which swarmed John’s house in order to partake of the large feeders he had provided. These feisty little guys give new meaning to “eating like a bird”; they drain several gallons of sugar-water each week. The afternoon was spent examining specimens, mostly anthozoa. Among which were many Thesea, including the form called The sea sp A in the B’98 sampling by CSDLAC. As it turns out John never had a Thesea sp A, he started by adopting the Thesea sp B used by Dave Harden. This then became our commonly encountered form. A voucher sheet will be prepared by Don Cadien for Thesea sp A, a substantially more robust form than any other Thesea encountered locally. We also examined several uncommonly encountered anemones, and an odd gorgonian from about 90m on the rocky shelf off San Miguel Island. This was initially interpreted as similar to Gersemia , but both John and Eric recognized it as an early stage of a briariid gorgonian, probably in the genus Suberia. A similar form is illustrated by Kiikenthal (1924, pg. 33). We also reviewed a few hydroids, including a large clump of “Tubularia” to illustrate the morning Tubularia vs Ectopleura discussion. 21 JUNE MEETING We began the Bight’98 polychaete meeting discussing dorsal organs in spionids, a topic that Vice President Leslie Harris raised during a recent (2 June 99) posting to the Taxonomic Discussion List. Dorsal organs occur on the dorsum of several different genera and species of Spionidae. The structures are ciliated sideways “U” shaped or longitudinal structures that run down the dorsum of some spionids. These dorsal organs are neither sex-linked nor do they occur on any particular setiger. These organs are quite obvious when they do occur. They have been found on species of Spio and Microspio but these structures are not to be 5 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 2 confused with extended nuchal organs or intra- segmental transverse ciliated dorsal structures, which are seen in male Pygospio elegans (see Schlotzer-Schrehardt 1991). These dorsal organs may be a very worthwhile diagnostic character, although several past authors have not made mention of their presence and among the authors that have, opinions vary as to their origin and homology. Below is an illustration of Spio sp. A of Harris showing the distinct sideways “U” shaped dorsal organs. While this particular animal fits Maciolek’s 1990 description of Spio filicornis (Muller 1776) the dorsal organs of Leslie’s Spio sp. A are quite different from those illustrated for S. filicornis by Soderstrom 1920 & 1927 and also by Orrhage 1964. SCAMIT members may want to keep an eye open for these unusual organs on their spionids. If anyone does happen to notice these structures on one of their animals please bring it to a future SCAMIT polychaete meeting for show and tell. Although Tom Parker was unable to attend he sent several of his provisional polychaete species from the Bight’98 along with voucher sheets for members to examine. We first looked at a syllid referred to as Odontosyllis sp LA2. It was from station 2522 (86m), E. of Santa Cruz Island. Its distinguishing features included a reduced prostomial flap that barely covered 1/3 of the prostomium. It had a distinct pigment pattern consisting of 3 vertical rows of dorsal spots running down the body. Both Leslie Harris and Tony Phillips recognized this animal immediately. Tony has reported it for several years in Santa Monica Bay as Odontosyllis sp 1 of Harris 1977. However a description of Odontosyllis sp 1 of Harris has not been distributed thru SCAMIT and it is not on the SCAMIT species list so many members were unaware of its presence. Leslie mentioned that larger sized animals often have their spots connected forming 3 vertical lines running down the body where the center line is often the darkest. Next we examined another syllid of Tom’s referred to as Plakosyllis sp LAI from station 2490 (75m), W. of San Miguel Island. It had a very flat broad body with rounded or globular dorsal cirri. Eyes both dorsal and ventral and a proventricle 3-4 segments long. It also had several simple spines on the 2 nd to the last segment. No SCAMIT members present had seen anything like this. Leslie had a few undescribed Plakosyllis , one from a rocky area and one from shallow soft sediments but neither looked like this. It will remain as Plakosyllis sp LAI. Tom had also sent to the meeting an ampharetid, Schistocomus sp LAI. Anteriorly the body was broad and it tapered narrowly in the posterior. The prostomium was flared out as a shelf off the body. The animal was very pigmented with the dorsum crossed by orangish colored transverse bars and the base of each parapod with a dot of pigment. The branchia were also pigmented and the prostomium had a pigment “mask”. The lower lip had lateral and central pigmentation. When Leslie Harris examined the animal at the meeting she recognized this highly pigmented animal as Schistocomus sp A of SCAMIT 1987. She said that a live specimen of this species had all this pigmentation. Often strong pigmentation fades in alcohol, but not always. 6 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.2 Next we examined an interesting phyllodocid of the genus Eteone from a Bight’98 station in San Diego Bay that Ron Velarde brought to the meeting. It was from 3.3 m depth in sand. After comparing the specimen to Blake’s described species Eteone brigitteae 1992 in volume 4 of the MMS Atlas it seemed this animal most closely fit the related Eteone aestuarina Hartman-Shroder 1959 which was originally described from a shallow water estuarine habitat in El Salvador. So, perhaps another introduced species. However, without being able to compare this animal against the type it was decided by SCAMIT members to call the specimen Eteone cf. aestuarina for now. We also examined another phyllodocid of Ron’s from a sandy habitat in 171 ft from San Diego’s ITP survey station 1-7. There were 3 specimens total. They belong to the genus Protomystides. Most species described from this genus come from the deep sea and hydrothermal vents. There are very few described from California. In volume 4 of the MMS Atlas Blake includes one of his species Protomystides mariaensis described by him in 1992. These 3 animals don’t fit that description. Although this hasn’t been seen in any Bight’98 stations yet it may turn up so a voucher sheet will be forthcoming referring to the animal as Protomystides sp SD1. After lunch we examined another one of Tom Parker’s provisionals, an unusual Glycera from station 2490 (75m) west of San Miguel Island. Initially Tom was unable to see the dorsal ramus of the parapodia but finally did determine, after several dissections, it was biramous. The dorsal ramus was just very small. The specimen had a single large pointed presetal lobe with the postsetal lobe a minimum size to completely absent. The ventral cirri were large and pointed with the dorsal cirri up on the body wall. The proboscideal organs were of 2 kinds, both smooth walled types, most numerous were long and thin ones, with fewer shorter thicker ones. The most conspicuous character was the very large shafts of the compound setae. None of these diagnostic features seemed to fit any of the locally described Glycera so this was left as Glycera sp LAI. Another of Tom’s provisionals was a maldanid, Rhodine sp LAI. It was in two pieces, one included the prostomium and the other the pygidium. The head end was reduced in size and seemed to have been regenerated. The members present, after examining this specimen, concluded the prostomium and the pygidium were from different animals. So it was left as Rhodine sp. The last provisional of Tom Parker’s that we examined at the meeting was a Lacydonia from station 2491 (95m) west of San Miguel Island. The specimen had two large eyes and 5 antennae. There were pigment granules on the parapodia and pigment on the pygidium. Only one species has been described off California, Lacydonia hampsoni by Blake in volume 4 of the MMS Atlas, but it was found in very deep water, 985-1990m. Tom’s specimen actually more closely matched Lacydonia miranda except that this species was originally described from the Mediterranean and had been reported from all over Europe and even one report (Gathof 1984) from shallow water off western Llorida. It seemed likely that there might be several species going by the same name, Lacydonia miranda , because the several authors described different parapodial structures with some even lacking eyes and median antenna. The San Diego lab had reported 2 specimens of Lacydonia from off the mouth of San Diego Bay from 62 ft station 1-34 (not a Bight 4 98 station). They were smaller than Tom’s specimen and not as pigmented, but they did have eyes. Lor now Tom’s provisional will be referred to as Lacydonia sp LAI. 7 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 2 We then compared a couple of acrocirrids of Cheryl Brantley’s from 2 stations in Bight’98 with a few of Rick Rowe’s from San Diego’s ITP survey. Cheryl found a total of 5 specimens from station 2490 (75 m) west of San Miguel Island and 2 specimens from station 2491 (95 m) also west of San Miguel. Rick’s were from 63 ft and 171 ft both near the Mexican border. Despite Cheryl’s specimens being a little larger they seemed to be the same species. They most closely fit Hartman’s Atlas description for Acrocirrus crassifilis Moore 1923 except the notosetae were serrated and started on the same setiger as the neurosetae. Also, the small papillae on the ventrum didn’t appear to be in exact rows, but more scattered. A. crassifilis was described from much deeper water, 400- 600m. Rick had a partial voucher sheet already done on these acrocirrids. He will finish the sheet and distribute it to SCAMIT members. The unknown acrocirrids will be referred to as Acrocirrus sp SD1. CAN’T DODGE THIS BULLET Over the past two decades it has become increasingly apparent that the European edible mussel Mytilus edulis, which was routinely reported from the Pacific coast in popular accounts, in monitoring studies, and in the scientific literature, is not that species. At least two other species are known to occur on the Pacific coast (McDonald & Koehn 1988, Koehn 1991), both routinely identified as M. edulis until recent years. We have not had reason to be too concerned with this change, as POTW monitoring efforts normally do not encounter any species of Mytilus in their community sampling. B’98 samples specifically targeted areas frequented by mussels, however, and Mytilus were taken by several of the participating agencies. We finally have to consider how to differentiate the three species Mytilus edulis, M. galloprovincialis , and M. trossulus [as well as their hybrids] where they occur along the Pacific coast of North America (see distributional information in McDonald et al 1991, and Suchanek et al 1997). The most definitive methods are DNA analyses or allozyme analysis of tissues from each mussel (Comesana et al 1999), but this is both prohibitively time consuming and expensive in a non-research context. Several authors have proposed and attempted to apply morphometric characters to separate the species where they co-occur (McDonald et al 1991; Seed 1972, 1974; Gardner 1996; Kepel & Ozolinsh 1992). Those members with an interest in Mytilus identifications should acquire and digest the above publications. We will attempt to deal with the issue when we can schedule a meeting with Paul Valentich Scott on bivalves. By that time we should all be prepared with specimens, literature, and experience in applying the suggested morphological descriminators. Until then we’re on mussel watch, and we should probably refer to them as Mytilus sp in our data. Those of you who have a number of Mytilus to identify, and/or who have mixed lots with more than one of the species should speciate them as best you can, but make sure you keep a record of the separatory criteria used for later consideration. POLYCHAETES PLUS During the nemertean meeting at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History in February long-time member Sue Williams joined us for the first time in some years. She has been busy in the interim, mostly concentrating on education related work, although occasionally continuing her consulting work. She would be happy to renew old contacts and make new ones, although she’s not eager to leave Ventura to venture onto the L.A. Freeways. Her work in recent years has extended her interests far beyond polychaete taxonomy into wetland ecology and even to intertidal insects. It was great to see her 8 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.2 again, and hopefully it will happen more often in the future. Her help in interpreting labels at the nemertean meeting was invaluable, and Sue is a major resource in such arcana, as she was involved in most of the major monitoring activities in our area for decades. You can reach her at (805) 648-2628. PLAN AHEAD The first announcement of the Xth International Colloquium on Amphipoda has been sent out. It will be held at Heraklion, Crete, Greece on April 16-21,2000. It is open to anyone with interests in any aspect of the Amphipoda. Information on the gathering is available on the Amphipod Web Site at either http:/Avww.odu.edu/~jrhlOOf/amphome/ For specific questions contact Wanda Plaiti (wanda@imbc.gr) or Adam Baldinger (abaldinger @ oeb .harvard .edu). ATTACHMENTS Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD) was kind enough to provide taxonomic identification sheets on some of the new/difficult animals he’s been encountering in the B’98 samples. See the taxonomic tools section of the SCAMIT web site. http: //ww w.imbc .gr/whats_ne w/index .html BIBLIOGRAPHY Benayahu, Y. 1998. Lobe variation in Sinularia nanolobata Verseveldt, 1977 (Cnidaria: Alcyonacea). Bulletin of Marine Science 63(1):229-240. Blake, James A. 1994a. Family Phyllodocidae Oersted, 1843. Pp. 100-172 IN: Blake, James A., Brigitte Hilbig & Paul H. Scott (eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and the Western Santa Barbara Channel, Vol. 4. The Annelida Part 2 - Oligochaeta and Polychaeta: Phyllodocida (Phyllodocidae to Paralacydoniidae). Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. —. 1994b. Family Lacydoniidae Bergstrom 1914. Pp. 179-184 IN: Blake, James A., Brigitte Hilbig & Paul H. Scott (eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and the Western Santa Barbara Channel, Vol. 4. The Annelida Part 2 - Oligochaeta and Polychaeta: Phyllodocida (Phyllodocidae to Paralacydoniidae). Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. Bousfield, E. L. & P. M. Hoover. 1997. The amphipod superfamily Corophioidea on the Pacific Coast of North America. Part V. Family Corophiidae, Corophiinae, new subfamily. Systematics and distributional ecology. Amphipacifica 2(3):67-139. Calder, D. R. September 1996. Hydroids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) recorded from depths exceeding 3000 m in the abyssal western North Atlantic. Canadian Journal of Zoology - Revue Canadienne de Zoologie 74(9): 1721-1726. —. 1997. Synopsis of hydroids from 1000 m and deeper in the western North Atlantic. Proceedings of the 6 th International Conference on Coelenterate Biology: 85-90. 9 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 2 —. 1998. Hydroid diversity and species composition along a gradient from shallow waters to deep sea around Bermuda. Deep Sea Research Part I. Oceanographic Research Papers 45(11): 1843-1860. — & W. Vervoort. 1998. Some hy droids (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa) from the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, in the north Atlantic Ocean. Zoologische Verhandelingen 319:1-65. Cerrano, C., G. Bavestrello, S. Puce, & M. Sara. 1998. Biological cycle of Podocoryna exigua (Cnidaria : Hydrozoa) from a sandy bottom of the Ligurian Sea. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 78(4): 1101-1111. Comesana, A. S., J. E. Toro, D. J. Innes & R. J. Thompson. 1999. A molecular approach to the ecology of a mussel ( Mytilus edulis - M. trossulus) hybrid zone on the east coast of Newfoundland, Canada. Marine Biology 133:213-221. Gardner, J. P. A. 1996. The Mytilus edulis species complex in southwest England: effects of hybridization and introgression upon interlocus associations and morphometric variation. Marine Biology 125:385-399. Gathof, J. M. 1984. Chapter 34 - Family Lacydoniidae Bergstrom, 1914. Pp. 1-5 IN: Uebelacker, J. M. & P. G. Johnson (eds.). Polychaetes of the Northern Gulf of Mexico, Vol. 5. Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc., Mobile, Alabama. Hartman, Olga. 1969. Atlas of the Sedentariate Polychaetous Annelids from California. Allan Hancock Foundation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles. 828pp. Karlson, R. H. & H. V. Cornell. 1999. Integration of local and regional perspectives on the species richness of coral assemblages. American Zoologist 39(1): 104-112. Kepel, A. A. & A. V. Ozolinsh. 1992. Morphometric analysis of species from the genus Mytilus (Mollusca, Bivalvia, Mytilidae) of Russian Seas. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal 71(9):33-40. Kim, J. H., W. Kim, & C. W. Cunningham. 1999. A new perspective on lower metazoan relationships from 18S rDNA sequences. Molecular Biology and Evolution 16(3):423- 427. Koehn, Richard K. 1991. The genetics and taxonomy of species in the genus Mytilus. Aquaculture 94:125-145. Kiikenthal, Willi. 1924. Coelenterata Gorgonaria. Das Tierreich 47:1-478. Maciolek, Nancy J. 1990. A redescription of some species belonging to the genera Spio and Microspio (Polychaeta Annelida) and descriptions of three new species from the Northwestern Atlantic Ocean. Journal of Natural History 24:1109-1141. Martindale, M. Q. & J. Q. Henry. 1998. The development of radial and biradial symmetry: The evolution of bilaterality. American Zoologist 38(4):672-684. McDonald, J. H. & R. K. Koehn. 1988. The mussels Mytilus galloprovincialis and M. trossulus on the Pacific coast of North America. Marine Biology 99:111-118. —, R. Seed & R. K. Koehn. 1991. Allozymes and morphometric characters of three species of Mytilus in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres. Marine Biology 111:323-333. McFadden, C. S. 1999. Genetic and taxonomic relationships among Northeastern Atlantic and Mediterranean populations of the soft coral Alcyonium coralloides . Marine Biology 133(2): 171-184. Orrhage, Lars. 1964. Anatomische und morphologische studien liber die Polychaetenfamilien Spionidae, Disomidae und Poecilochaetidae. Zoologische Bidragen fra Uppsala 36(3):335-405. Peterson, K. W. 1990. Evolution and taxonomy in capitate hy droids and medusae (Cnidaria: Hydrozoa). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 100:101-231. 10 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.2 Slattery, M., C. Avila, J. Starmer, & V. J. Paul. August 1, 1998. A sequestered soft coral diterpene in the aeolid nudibranch Phyllodesmium guamensis Avila, Ballesteros, Slattery, Starmer and Paul. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 226(l):33-49. Schlotzer-Schrehardt, Ursula. 1991. Ultrastructural differences of nuchal and dorsal organs during post-embryologic and sexual development of Pygospio elegans Claparede (Polychaeta: Spionidae). Ophelia Supplement 5:633-640. Seed, R. 1972. Morphological variations in Mytilus from the French coasts in relation to the occurrence and distribution of M. galloprovincialis Lmk. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 13:357-384. —. 1974. Morphological variations in Mytilus from the Irish coasts in relation to the occurrence and distribution of M. galloprovincialis Lmk. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 15:1-25. Soderstrom, A. 1920. Studien liber die Polychaetenfamilie Spionidae. Diss. Almqvist & Wiksell, Uppsala, 1-286. —. 1927. Uber segmental widerholte “Nuchalorgane” bei Polychaeten. Zoologische Bidragen fra Uppsala 12:1-18. Suchanek,T. H., J. B. Geller, B. R. Kreiser, & J. B. Mitton. 1997. Zoogeographic distributions of the sibling species Mytilus galloprovincialis and M. trossulus (Bivalvia: Mytilidae) and their hybrids in the North Pacific. Biological Bulletin 193:187-194. 11 June, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.2 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter voi. is, no. 3 SUBJECT: B’98 Non-polychaete problem ID’s GUEST SPEAKER: None DATE: 16 August 1999 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: City of San Diego Marine Biology Lab 4918 N. Harbor Dr. #201 San Diego, CA 92106 Next meeting: Non-Polychaete problems from Bight’98 continued on 16 August at the San Diego Lab. The last Monday of the month, 30 August, a Polychaete problems meeting will be held, also at the San Diego Lab. Plan ahead, set aside specimens, and come prepared to amaze and be amazed by odd and unusual specimens from Bight’98 stations. Anticipated subjects for the 16 August meeting include juvenile Cancer, Photis (Part VIII), ... NEW LITERATURE We have recently discussed poecilogony with regard to cnidarians and mentioned articles dealing with evidence of poecilogony in polychaetes. Krug (1998) reports on poecilogony in the small estuarine opisthobranch Alderia modesta. The species produces eggs of different sizes which yield either planktotrophic veligers, or lecithotrophic veligers depending on their available yolk supply. Back-crosses of these two forms yield the same ratio of reproductive types seen Diopatra tridentata Hartman 1944 1-16(2), 22 July 1997,93 ft. Image by K. Langan FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter in not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 3 initially, and give evidence of their con- specificity. Starved individuals which had previously spawned exclusively or primarily lecithotrophic larvae switched to production of planktotrophic larvae after a period of only 3 days without food. Adults producing both types of larvae were gene sequenced, and showed the same level of heterogeneity at cytochrome c oxidase I sites observed in other marine invertebrate species, virtually ruling out the possibility that cryptic sibling species are involved. This appears to be another verified case of poecilogony. The assumption is always made that planktonic larvae are intended to, and do, provide wide dispersal of a population. This was tested by Todd et al (1998) who examined two co¬ occurring intertidal nudibranch species, one with planktotrophic (Goniodoris nodosa ) and one with pelagic lecithotrophic larvae (Adalaria proximo). Larvae of the former can persist in the plankton for up to 3 months, while those of Adalaria can delay metamorphosis for only a few weeks and generally settle after only a day or two. A series of populations within the region were tested for genetic heterogeneity to quantify gene exchange in each species. Populations of Goniodoris examined came from an order of magnitude larger area than did those of Adalaria. Despite this the Goniodoris populations were not significantly differentiated genetically. Those of Adalaria , however, showed very significant differentiation. The authors conclude that in species with pelagic larvae, larval behavior can significantly change the dispersal potential of any spawning event. This can render any extrapolations of dispersal ability based on laboratory larval rearing experiments suspect, a possibility not considered in the past. Just how wide is ‘wide’ anyway? Many species are characterized as having cosmopolitan, tropicopolitan, circum-subtropical, or circum- temperate distributions. Such claims have been viewed as increasingly suspect by many and have contributed to the on-going lumper vs. splitter debacle. While man’s influence has certainly enabled many species to expand their ranges by overcoming geographic barriers, there are many cases where human aided transport seems unlikely or impossible. Boury- Esnault et al (1999) provide another recent example of the rejection of broad distribution on close examination, in this case with supposedly conspecific sponge populations from the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of Panama. They found the two very distinct on morphological, cytological and genetic grounds. Neither was conspecific with the animal they were initially identified as, both being new species. The addition of genetic examination in the form of enzyme polymorphism or actual gene sequencing has added significant new tools to the taxonomic arsenal which allow objective rating of the relatedness of any two given examples. “Oh, they’re just variants” becomes a testable hypothesis, and the lumper vs. splitter debate becomes, at least locally, resolvable. A similar result was obtained when specimens from widely separated populations of a supposedly cosmopolitan interstitial polychaete were examined by Schmidt and Westheide (1999). Along the way they were able to demonstrate that a related fresh-water species (Hesionides riegerorum ) was most closely related genetically to the proximal geographic form. Based on their analyses several new taxa should be erected from Hesionides gohari, but the authors do not do so in the present paper. Variations of feeding rates are often reported to be related to concentration of available food, or temperature, but not usually to population density. In cases of resource limitation feeding rates are limited by competitive interactions, although such interactions are usually manifest in changed feeding efficiency rather than rate changes. Wheatcroft et al (1998) tested deposit-feeding rates in the polychaete Mediomastus ambiseta at different population densities and found that worms fed about an 2 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.3 order of magnitude more slowly in high- density treatments. The authors suggest that physical or chemical interference is the probable cause of the observed differences. Resource limitation may also be involved. Although particle availability was unaffected, the nutrient content of the particles with regard to carbon and nitrogen was not evaluated in the study. Though causation remains unresolved, the results clearly indicate that extrapolations of laboratory rate information to field bioturbation estimates must take population density into account. A number of years ago, while preparing a proposal to the State of Florida for monitoring of coral reef areas, Jerry Bernard asked me to provide an iron-clad rationale for use of limited funds to monitor the marine environment. Much to my surprise and chagrin I could not do so, at least to my own satisfaction. The question has been rephrased by Karr & Chu (1997) to evade the monetary issue and only address information need. They argue that biological monitoring, with results expressed in some easily interpretable index value, is an essential underpinning of informed decision making. To evaluate the impact and advisability of human activities, we need to monitor how man’s activity affects our natural surroundings. They insist that monitoring efforts “should stay focused on human impact”. I disagree. I think there is also a real need for continued appraisal of natural variability, for which continued monitoring of un-impacted areas is also required. Either way both the “pure” ecological research questions and the “applied” risk monitoring efforts are mutually informative. The authors’ commentary on why we need monitoring provides good and thought-provoking reading. If we monitor, how much definition in the taxonomy is enough? This perennial question has been answered differently by different authors. Several analyses had suggested that identification to family level is sufficient, and that additional work to take collected specimens to species level is largely wasted. This is based on power analyses which show that conclusions drawn from samples identified to species do not differ significantly from those based on samples identified to family. Myers (1997) approached the question from a different angle in an examination of biological diversity at different scales. He found that family level diversity showed no predictable relationship to species diversity in several tropical lagoons. He concluded “at least as far as concerns amphipods, there appears to be no simple way of assessing biodiversity without actually counting species.” And the debate continues... The isopod species Eurydice truncata is reported from a number of areas, including California. Macquart-Moulin (1998) provides some autecological data on the species from the eastern Atlantic. He found the species to migrate between the bottom and the surface during the night, apparently feeding on living neuston, particularly ‘passive’ neuston that doesn’t fight back. In this category are things like animals caught in the surface meniscus, fish eggs and other reproductive propagules. Gut fullness declined from inshore to offshore, so the individuals at the deep edge of the population may be at risk of starvation. Recent reviews of the subject have concluded that although scavenging is widespread in the marine environment, there is no evidence that obligate scavengers exist. Kaiser & Moore (1999) revisit this question and conclude the opposite. They single out the case of a small lysianassoid amphipod Orchomene nanus , which evidence suggests is a specialized and obligate scavenger on crustacean carrion. Others have previously described a guild of marine large food-fall scavengers, but these are not confirmed as being restricted to scavenging. It may not matter much what the ultimate outcome is, a scavenger is just a predator who has the habit of letting his prey die before eating it. 3 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 3 Sampling the organisms of a moving habitat can be a problem. It has been one for those attempting to sample intertidal beach swash animals quantitatively. Sampling based on beach position will never appropriately track the population, which is in constant motion in response to the tides. Jones et al (1998) propose a methodology which would allow accurate depiction of the population density and distribution for animals moving with the tide. Eusocial insects have attracted a great deal of attention from researchers, but most fail to realize that there are crustacean analogs to bee, termite, and ant societies. Duffy (1998) describes eusociality in snapping shrimps, and describes a second eusocial species of Synalpheus. Some past records of unusual social structures may indicate eusociality in other species, but this remains speculative. Eusocial species have reproductive effort concentrated in a single female [the “queen”], have multi-generational social aggregations, and engage in mutual nest defense. In the case of the crustaceans, the ‘nest’ is a large sponge which forms the microcosm within which the eusocial aggregation exists. No local species are known to exhibit this social structure, but the possibility that one of our crustaceans might be found to be eusocial is intriguing. 5 JULY MEETING A select group of SCAMIT members and guests met for the 5 July meeting adjacent to the Worm Lab of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. We had a brief business meeting, and then adjourned to a small adjacent room for a presentation by our guest speaker Dr. Michel Hendrickx, Director of the Mazatlan Marine Station. He summarized and discussed the work undertaken at the station over the past two decades. These efforts have concentrated on trawling investigations in the Gulf of California, and south of the Gulf along the coast of Nayarit and Jalisco. Students from the lab have also pursued research on the megafauna along the rockier coasts of Colima and Oaxaca further south. Trawling investigations were also undertaken in the Gulf of Tehuantepec, but on a more limited basis. Prior to these investigations there was virtually no information to be had from scientific sources, although a great deal of anecdotal information was available in the shrimp fishery community. The huge collections from these investigations were maintained at the Station, but their contents had not been reported in the scientific literature. To remedy this Dr. Hendrickx and his students began production of a large number of faunal listings (i.e. Hendrickx 1990b, 1992,1996a; Hendrickx & Estrada- Navarette 1989; Hendrickx, Wicksten & van der Heiden 1983; Paul & Hendrickx 1980; Salgado-Barragan & Hendrickx 1997; Wicksten & Hendrickx 1991 ). Later the opportunity arose to have faunal monographs published, and the collections formed the basis of these efforts. A series of valuable monographic treatments were produced through the UN/FAO (Hendrickx 1995a,b,c,d,e J,g), and through CONABIO (Hendrickx 1996b, 1997; Hendrickx & Estrada-Navarette 1996). Smaller papers dealing with description of individual taxa (Hendrickx 1989,1998; Hendrickx & Espinosa-Perez 1998a, b; Hendrickx & Salgado-Barragan 1987; Wicksten & Hendrickx 1986), small groups of species (Hendrickx 1984,1987; Hendrickx & Wicksten 1989), or range data (Hendrickx 1980,1990a; Hendrickx, Sanchez-Vargas & Vazquez- Cureno 1990; Hendrickx & van der Heiden 1984). This is only a partial list, many more papers have been published, a number in the Mexican “grey literature” of institutional reports [for a complete listing see their website @ http://ola.icmyl.unam.mx/default.htm]. 4 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.3 In addition to the numerous new species encountered, and the large number of range extensions, ecological information on the trawl caught animals was also provided. CTD casts in association with most of the trawls have yielded bottom temp., bottom DO levels, and sediment type information for the first time for most areas. These have been reported, where available, in the published papers. Synthesis of the distributional data has yielded several interesting patterns, including one of very low oxygen or anoxic conditions at and below 250 m depths on the upper slope off much of West Mexico. Catches in these depths were not very diverse, although the animals able to tolerate these low-oxygen conditions were often relatively abundant. A large gap in reports of many soft bottom species occurs off Colima and Oaxaca, where rocky bottom is the rule. Effort has been low in this area relative to others, so there have been few reports of any kind. Dr. Hendrickx is confident that ongoing field efforts in association with local captains and pilots will help locate the more scattered soft bottom habitat for sampling. South of this rocky intrusion the sandy bottom is again encountered, as are much the same suite of invertebrates which were seen north of it. Another area with fewer species taken than expected is the Gulf of Tehuantepec. In investigation after investigation fewer taxa are taken there than expected. Ranges of numerous species extend through the area, but diversity in any sample is always higher either north or south of the Gulf. No explanation is yet forthcoming. Current and future projects involve a broadening of his focus to accommodate the needs of his students. He is currently undertaking a complete inventory of the isopods of the western coast of Mexico. He and a student have already published the first papers on the group (Hendrickx & Espinosa- Perez 1998a,b), although the specimens on which the first of these papers is based have been siting on his desk since the 70’s: just too much to do. Fortunately in the next year or so his stint as director [along with all the associated administrative duties] will come to an end, and he will have a bit more time for research. The station is also deeply involved in increasing the computer-based accessibility of their collection data. Dr. Hendrickx indicated his hope that shortly their database will be fully accessible over the internet. Published lists of the holdings of the station museum have also been prepared and are available. Specimen resources so detailed become easily available to distant workers, at least in theory. Movement of specimens across international borders from Mexico to the U.S. and/or from the U.S. to Mexico remains difficult and involved. Most of the effort over the years has been expended on the decapods, and secondarily on the stomatopods (Dr. Hendrickx’ main interest when he first arrived in the late 1970’s). He showed us a table on the known biota of the Gulf of California, evaluation of which is an ongoing effort. Effort will gradually shift to fill in some of the “blanks”, the areas where little or nothing is known. The majority of the reported amphipods, for instance, were hyperiids (due to the efforts of a graduate student and a thesis project), plus those listed by Jerry Bernard in his Gulf paper. This list of gammarids is undoubtedly very incomplete, but no other information on the amphipod fauna of the Gulf is available. Leptostracans are even more poorly known; there are no species recorded from the Gulf. Small peracarid groups such as the cumaceans, tanaids, etc. are virtually unknown from the Gulf. Non-arthropods are poorly known, the exception being the mollusks, and to some extent the polychaetes. Larger cnidarians and echinoderms are relatively well known, but the small species in these phyla are largely unknown. Efforts will continue towards documenting the biota of this body of water in future. 5 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 3 It is fortunate for us that most of the publications of this group were available to us before we began the Bight 4 98 sampling. We found a number of southern species in our area for the first time, and having references for this southern fauna was most helpful. At the end of his presentation Dr. Hendrickx showed us slides of a number of species taken over the years in trawls. Various crabs and shrimp, plus the occasional stomatopod graced the screen. Some of the shrimp, in particular, were amazingly brightly colored for large non- palaemonid species. We then returned to the meeting area for a review of some specimens, although little time remained. He confirmed the Plesionika carinirostris specimen, then examined a series of drawings prepared by Todd Zimmerman of the Crustacea Section showing southern species Todd collected in southern California during the recent El Nino. Some were recognized, including a majid species described originally from Peru, found in the Gulf by Dr. Hendrickx, and intertidally at La Jolla by Todd. Others were not recognized, and may be new. We wrapped up the meeting with cordial handshakes and sent him off to rejoin his family, busy exploring the museum all day. SPECIMEN CONSERVATION At the Bight 4 98 polychaete problem meeting on 21 June, Leslie Harris brought to the attention of attendees a recent article on the pH of preservatives and how it is affected by Resistall labeling paper (Andrei & Genoways 1999). Resistall is specially treated to coat each of it’s fibers with a resin which markedly increases it’s wet strength, a most desirable quality for long term archival. The treatment also, however, yields a paper with a pH ranging from 4.5 to 5.2. Lor long term archival acid- free papers should be used, and Resistall is far from acid-free. The authors examined the actual impact of use of various sized labels of several paper weights in several fluids to determine if the acidity of the paper was a significant problem for long-term storage. Their tests show clearly that it is. They recognize in their report that the absolute pH of the solution cannot be measured because alcohol gives a skewed reading, but they found the trend of decline in preservative pH, due to the labels, identical in alcoholic and aqueous media. They made no recommendations as to what to do about the situation, sticking to just reporting the results. Because of fluctuation in preservative pH with temperature cycling, residual acidity of alcohol manufacture, leaching of alcohol soluble compounds from specimens, and leaching of fixative from specimens into the preservative medium, marble chips are being used in containers holding taxa with calcareous tests at CSDLAC. We will begin using the buffering capacity of marble chips to combat the acidity coming from labels in all samples now that we have been informed that it is a problem. We recommend that others follow suite. They are a cheap and readily available way of countering the acidity introduced by use of Resistall labels, without losing the benefit of the added label-strength such use provides. Thank you Leslie, for bringing the problem to the attention of the membership. Tom Parker (CSDLAC) has also provided a reference to a website (Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections) that deals with a number of similar problems of specimen conservation and storage. Connect with them at http://www.geo.ucalgary.ca/spnhc/ indextestside .htm -Don Cadien (CSDLAC). ANOTHER Plesionika We have added another pandalid shrimp to our local fauna as a result of the collections made on the recent Intercalibration cruise. On a trawl at about 150 m we brought up a single specimen of a shrimp that was unrecognized in 6 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.3 the field. It was viewed as a Plesionika, and bore a long upswept rostrum as do most in that genus, but was much larger than other local species and brightly colored. We returned it to the laboratory, where Dave Montagne took it to Plesionika carinirostris Hendrickx 1990 in the Hendrickx 1995d key. This was rather shocking, since the only known specimen of this species was taken in the Gulf of California. To find another was wonderful, and for that collection to be off California was unexpected. Despite damage in the tank after collection, the specimen was clearly identifiable based on the presence of only 2 movable spines at the base of the rostrum, by the carination and shape of the ventral rostral teeth, by the number of subdivisions of the carpus of the second legs, and by the large size (over 10cm). Our collection at 150 m was much shallower than the 360-380m depth at which the holotype was taken in the central Gulf of California. Dave’s identification was confirmed by Dr. Michel Hendrickx when he visited the Natural History Museum and spoke at the 5 July SCAMIT meeting. Color notes were taken on the animal, and may prove useful in recognizing it again. Other local Plesionika species have not been brightly colored when captured. 29 JUNE INTERCALIBRATION CRUISE Representatives from 11 groups met on board the CSDLAC monitoring vessel R/V Ocean Sentinel for an intercalibration cruise on 29 June. The first such cruise in June 1998 was made as one of the many quality assurance steps in preparation for the Bight’98 field season. This year the impetus was the positive experience of the first cruise. We anticipate that the series will continue on an annual basis between and during regional monitoring years. A series of stations along a transect crossing the western edge of the San Pedro Sea Shelf were occupied. We started at the deepest station(200 m) and worked shoreward sampling at 140, 80, 60,40, and 20 m. Since we experienced no gear-related delay we also had time to visit a nearby station and sample at 150 m in the throat of a slight defile leading down to the shelf edge. This nearly proved disastrous as we caught a string of abandoned crab traps, but the net was not damaged and an interesting trawl catch was recovered. Each tow followed the standard monitoring trawl protocol of 10 minute bottom time with a standard Marinovich net, and the same bridal length stipulated for the Bight’98 trawls. Once the catch was out of the net on deck it was divided into two holding tanks, one for fish and one for invertebrates. The participants were similarly divided, although a few individuals split their time between the two sides. Processing was as usual for monitoring trawls except that weights and measurements were not taken, and specimen number was estimated. All taxa taken were identified, and participants found little to differ over. Few new things were taken (the Plesionika mentioned above was a notable exception), but everyone saw at least a few things new to them. The fish catch was also pretty standard, providing good intercalibration material. Specimens were collected to fulfill requests from Dr. Gordon Hendler (NHMLAC), and Dr. Eric Hochberg (SBMNH), and Larry Lovell (SIO) was on hand to make representative collections of invertebrates from each trawl. Our main purpose was to examine together fresh trawl-caught animals hoping to benefit from each others experience, and make sure we were not using different field cues in our identifications. Several groups which are planning to undertake new trawling efforts in the near future were represented (OCSD, MLML), and were glad to gain some experience before venturing out on their new programs. It was particularly gratifying to have the Moss Landing folks down. Few links have been forged between the central-northern California monitoring community and their southern California counterparts. Distances separating them are considerable, and the effort 7 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 3 to bridge the distance sizeable. Benefits can also be great, and our visitors from the north (Cassandra Roberts and Alex Cully) were enthusiastic about the experience. The prize for greatest distance traveled went, however, to Lianna Jarecki, a college marine biology teacher from Tortola in the British Virgin Islands. She was visiting the Natural History Museum for her thesis research and found a berth on the cruise. 12 JULY MEETING The meeting was held in the Worm Lab at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History. President Ron Velarde opened the business aspect of the meeting by announcing the dates of the August meetings. There will again be two meetings. The non-polychaete meeting will be held August 16 th , and the polychaete meeting will be held August 30 th . The location for both meetings is the Marine Biology Laboratory in San Diego. Vice- President Leslie Harris said she welcomes ideas for future meeting topics and guest speakers. So if you have any ideas, please pass them along. Leslie Harris then passed around three books that she has recently acquired: 1) Hawai’i’s Sea Creatures: A guide to Hawaii’s marine invertebrates, by John P. Hoover, 1998. 2) The Fossils of the Burgess Shale, by Derek E.G. Briggs, Douglas H. Erwin, Frederick J. Collier, 1994. 3) Southeast Alaska’s Rocky Shores Animals, by Rita M. O’Clair and Charles E. O’Clair, 1998. Larry Lovell then passed around a reprint he just received from Elena Kupriyanova, 1999, The taxonomic status of Serpula cf. columbiana Johnson, 1901 from the American and Asian coasts of the North Pacific Ocean. Ophelia 50(l):21-34. It was mentioned by Leslie Harris there is a new cartoon premiering on the Nickelodeon channel titled “Sponge Bob,” featuring Sponge Bob himself and other invertebrate characters. Leslie also drew our attention to a request appearing on the SCAMIT website. It is an e- mail from Dr. Sepalika Jayamanne in Sri Lanka. He is working on benthic invertebrates in estuaries there, and they do not have taxonomic keys. Dr. Jayamanne is also looking for a place to perform studies. If anyone can offer some assistance, you can e-mail him at nara@itmin.com. We then dove into problematic polychaetes from the Bight’98 samples. The first family discussed was spionids. Leslie Harris gave us a review of dorsal organs and transverse intersegmental ciliated bands, continuing the discussion from last month’s polychaete meeting. Leslie had examined the holotype and paratype specimens of Spio maculata. The shape of the dorsal organs and the methyl green staining pattern matched those of Leslie’s S. maculata ( -S . sp B) that she illustrated in her Taxonomic Discussion List posting of June 2. The dorsal organs were circular in shape, and there were two per segment. The prostomium stained dark and solid, both dorsally and ventrally. In addition, methyl green staining revealed ventral transverse, rectangular patches. At the meeting, we examined specimens of Spio maculata from San Diego. In contrast to the holotype and Leslie’s specimens from Long Beach, the dorsal organs were straight, extending horizontally between intersegmental lines. There was faint brown pigmentation on the lateral and ventral surfaces of the peristomium. The methyl green staining pattern of the San Diego specimens were similar to that of the holotype with some subtle differences. The stain on the prostomium and peristomium was not as solid as in the holotype but was more accurately described as dense stippling. There were transverse patches on the ventrum and also some faint ones on the dorsum. The outlines of the branchiae stained 8 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.3 darkly on the San Diego specimens, in contrast to the holotype, which did not stain on the branchiae. It was decided that the San Diego specimens be described as a provisional species, Spio sp SD L Leslie retained some specimens for further examination. Kathy Langan-Cranford has examined other San Diego species of Spio and reported the shapes of dorsal organs of S.filicornis and Spio sp A. The dorsal organs of S.filicornis are sideways-U- shaped and discontinuous (not quite reaching the intersegmental lines). They closely resemble those of Leslie Harris’s Spio sp A which are figured in the SCAMIT June newsletter and the June 2 posting to the Taxonomic Discussion List. The dorsal organs of San Diego’s Spio sp A are sinuous in shape and continuous from segment to segment. We then examined some specimens of Dipolydora brought by Kathy Langan- Cranford. These were found from several stations at the Channel Islands and did not seem to match any described species. These specimens had an incised prostomium, the branchiae started on setiger 9, there was black pigment spots on some specimens, there was a collar on the convex side of the spines on setiger 5, notosetae were present on setiger 1, there was a superior and inferior fascicle present on setiger 5, and the pygidium had 2 rounded lobes and 2 elongate, tapering lobes. The methyl green staining pattern was small, paired patches starting on setiger 7, increasing in size posteriorly. These specimens had many shared characters with Dipolydora bidentata, so Leslie pulled the holotype for examination and comparison with the Channel Island specimens. We were particularly interested in viewing the so-called “needle packets” described in Blake and Woodwick 1971 and Radashevsky 1993, because no one at the meeting had seen these structures before. Radashevsky 1993 writes about them, “From setigers 20-30, notopodia with tight packets of needle-like double-edged spines, besides capillaries. The packets not protruding through cuticle, at first small and with short spines, but on succeeding setigers number of spines in packets increasing and spines becoming longer.” The needle packets on the holotype were located with close examination and were not nearly as apparent or distinct as illustrated in Blake and Woodwick 1971 or Radashevsky 1993. Kathy re-examined the San Diego specimens back at the lab and did find a few specimens with structures similar to the needle packets. However, most of the specimens examined did not have them. Additional characters that differentiate the Channel Island specimens from D. bidentata are: 1) the branchiae start on setiger 9 and 2) the hooded hooks are bidentate throughout the length of the animal. These specimens will be described as provisional species Dipolydora sp SD 1. Tony Phillips brought some specimens of Scolelepis sp Hyp 1 for us to examine. They were from Anaheim Bay, Bight station 2164, at a depth of approximately 6 meters. This species had an erect, occipital tentacle, 4 eyes in a trapezoidal arrangement, a broad prostomium ending in an anterior point, and palps that extended to setiger 20 and had a basal sheath bearing 8+ elongate, narrow papillae. These papillae were interesting and novel for some of the participants to see since palps are often missing from specimens of Scolelepis. The neurosetae on Tony’s specimens started on setiger 15 and were multidentate (one large fang with 3 smaller ones). They were very similar to those figured for S. geniculata in Imajima 1992. The broad prostomium on Tony’s specimens were similar to those figured for S. (Parascolelepis) yamaguchii in Imajima 1992. There was one specimen though that did not have a broad prostomium, and it was noted that this specimen also did not have the proboscis everted as did the other 3 specimens that did have a broad prostomium. It was hypothesized that perhaps the broadening of the prostomium is a result of the proboscis being everted. We stained one of Tony’s specimens with methyl green, and it had a “halo” of stain around the 9 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 3 edge of the prostomium. It was also noted that there was faint brown pigment around the base of the prostomial point. Leslie had some notes by Sue Williams that described a few characters of Scolelepis spA. The characters matched Tony’s specimens; however, due to the minimal description, it was judged not to be prudent to identify them as Williams’ S. sp A at this time. The next problematic polychaete was also brought in by Tony, Naineris sp Hyp 1. The animal was collected at Bight station 2149 in Dana Pt. Harbor at a depth of approximately 6 meters. The sediment was coarse shell debris. The characters of this specimen were: 1) a truncate prostomium, 2) branchiae started on setiger 6 and were equal in size to the branchiae of the other setigers, 3) the thoracic neurosetal lobe started on setiger one and was very long, spanning the entire length of the parapodia. Each lobe had a single papilla in a dorsal position, 4) the dorsal organs were roundish, 5) the transition took place at approximately setiger 25, and 6) the thoracic setae were geniculate and hooded acicular hooks. These specimens did not correspond to any of the species in Blake 1996. We referred to these as Naineris sp Hyp 1. Tom Parker shared 3 new species of syllids with us. The first was from the genus Proceraea. This specimen was collected from Bight station 2396 located off San Pedro at a depth of 31 meters. The animal had long, unsegmented antennae, 2 pairs of eyes, ventral cirri absent, the dorsal cirri were moderate in length and unarticulated, the setae were thick- shafted, simple bayonet, and the ventral lobe of the parapodia were expanded. This specimen will be described as Proceracea sp LA 1. The second syllid was Autolytus sp LA 1 collected from Bight station 2482 located S. of Santa Rosa Island at a depth of 44 meters. In this specimen, the antennae lacked articulation, the nuchal epaulettes were angled and large on the anterior dorsum, and there were no ventral cirri. Ron Velarde commented that there are hundreds of species of Proceraea and Autolytus worldwide, and they are very difficult to speciate. One reason is due to the fact that many species have been erroneously described from the stolen phase of the life cycle. Studies need to be done to observe and document the entire life cycles of this group of animals in order to begin sorting out the taxonomy. The third syllid brought in by Tom was a Sphaerosyllis. It was collected from Bight station 2490 located W. of San Miguel Island at a depth of 75 meters. The animal had 4 orangish-red eyes in a slightly arced transversed series, 2 very small orangish-red anterior eyes, compound setae that were unidentate and smooth, a proventriculus in 4-5 segments, the dorsal cirri were weakly inflated at the base with irregular swellings, the dorsal cirri were absent from setiger 2, there was one pair of moderately flask-shaped tentacular cirri, and there were 2 ciliated dorsal flaps on the antero-lateral part of the prostomium. We concluded that this animal be referred to as Sphaerosyllis sp LA 1. Rick Rowe distributed two identification sheets containing colorful digital images. The first is Poly cirrus sp OC 1 fide Phillips and Lovell, 1999. This species has 19 notosetigers, the uncini begin on setiger 9, there are cirriform postsetal lobes on the notopods, the lateral ventral scutes are separated by small midventral pads, the notosetae are hirsute, the peristomial pad is grooved, and the dorsal surface of the thorax is rugose. The methyl green staining pattern of this worm is also illustrated on the sheet. The second identification sheet is Chaetozone sp SD 3 fide Rowe, 1997. This species has a long pointed prostomium that is often directed upward, there are small dark eyes, the neuropodial spines start on setigers 40-65, segments are relatively long and uncrowded throughout, capillary setae progressively thicken, becoming spines posteriorly, dorsal tentacles are present on the 10 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.3 second pseudoannulation in front of the first setiger and the first branchiae on pseudoannulation are present in front of the first setiger. The methyl green staining pattern of the animal is illustrated on the sheet as well as a computer autotracing showing placement of tentacle and branchial scars. BIBLIOGRAPHY Andrei, Mary Anne & Hugh H. Genoways. 1999. Changes in pH in museum storage fluids, I. - Effects of Resistall paper labels. Collection Forum 13(2):63-75. Blake, James A. 1996. Chapter 1. Family Orbiniidae Hartman, 1942. Pp. 1-26 IN: Blake, James A., Brigitte Hilbig, and Paul H. Scott (eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Vol. 6, The Annelida Part 3. Polychaeta: Orbiniidae to Cossuridae. 418pp. Blake, J.A. & K.H. Woodwick 1971. New species of Polydora (Polychaeta: Spionidae) from the coast of California. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 70(2):72- 79. Boury-Esnault, N., M. Klautau, C. Bezac, J. Wulff, & A. M. Sole-Cava. 1999. Comparative study of putative conspecific sponge populations from both sides of the Isthmus of Panama. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 79(1):39- 50. Duffy, J. Emmett. 1998. On the frequency of eusociality in snapping shrimps (Decapoda : Alpheidae), with description of a second eusocial species. Bulletin of Marine Science 63(2):387-400. Hendrickx, Michel E. 1984. The species of Sicyonia H. Milne Edwards (Crustacea: Penaeoidea) of the Gulf of California, Mexico, with a key for their identification and a note on their zoogeography. Revista de Biologia Tropical 32(2):279-298. —. 1987. The species of Axiidae (Crustacea: Thalassinidea) from the Pacific coast of Mexico, with a key for their identification. Revista de Biologia Tropical 35(2):355-358. —. 1989. Glyptoplax consagae new species (Crustacea, Decapoda, Brachyura, Panopeidae). Bulletin du Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 4°serie llA(3):649-657. —. 1990. Range extension and host record for Dissodactylus ususfructus Griffith, 1987 (Crustacea: Brachyura: Pinnotheridae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 103(1): 106-107. —. 1990. The stomatopod and decapod crustaceans collected during the GUAYTEC II Cruise in the Central Gulf of California, Mexico, with the description of a new species of Plesionika Bate (Caridea: Pandalidae). Revista de Biologia Tropical 38(l):35-53. —. 1992. Distribution and zoogeographic affinities of decapod crustaceans of the Gulf of California, Mexico. Proceedings of the San Diego Society of Natural History 20:1-12. —. 1995a. Introduction; consideraciones generales sobre el area. Pp.1-7. IN: Fischer, W., Krupp, F., Schneider, W., Sommer, C., Carpenter, K. E., and Niem, V. H. (eds.), Guia FAO para la identificacion de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental Vol. I. Plantas e Invertebrados. FAO: Rome, Italy. July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 3 —. 1995b. Estomatopodos. Pp.355-382. IN: Fischer, W., Krupp, F., Schneider, W., Sommer, C., Carpenter, K. E., and Niem, V. H. (eds.), Guia FAO para la identificacion de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental Vol. I. Plantas e Invertebrados. FAO: Rome, Italy. —. 1995c. Fangostas. Pp.383-415. IN: Fischer, W., Krupp, F., Schneider, W., Sommer, C., Carpenter, K. E., and Niem, V. H. (eds.), Guia FAO para la identificacion de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental Vol. I. Plantas e Invertebrados. FAO: Rome, Italy. —. 1995d. Camarones. Pp.417-537. IN: Fischer, W., Krupp, F., Schneider, W., Sommer, C., Carpenter, K. E., and Niem, V. H. (eds.), Guia FAO para la identificacion de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental Vol. I. Plantas e Invertebrados. FAO: Rome, Italy. —. 1995e. Anomuros. Pp.539-564. IN: Fischer, W., Krupp, F., Schneider, W., Sommer, C., Carpenter, K. E., and Niem, V. H. (eds.), Guia FAO para la identificacion de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental Vol. I. Plantas e Invertebrados. FAO: Rome, Italy. —. 1995f. Cangrejos. Pp.565-636. IN: Fischer, W., Krupp, F., Schneider, W., Sommer, C., Carpenter, K. E., and Niem, V. H. (eds.), Guia FAO para la identificacion de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental Vol. I. Plantas e Invertebrados. FAO: Rome, Italy. —. 1995g. Equinodermos. Pp.637-646. IN: Fischer, W., Krupp, F., Schneider, W., Sommer, C., Carpenter, K. E., and Niem, V. H. (eds.), Guia FAO para la identificacion de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental Vol. I. Plantas e Invertebrados. FAO: Rome, Italy. —. 1996a. Habitats and biodiversity of decapod crustaceans in the SE Gulf of California, Mexico. Revista de Biologia Tropical 44(2A):603-617. —. 1996b. Eos Camarones Penaeoidea Bentonicos (Crustacea: Decapoda: Dendrobranchiata) del Pacifico Mexicano. Comision Nacional para et Conocimiento y uso de la Biodiversidad e Inst. Cienc. Mar y Fimno., UNAM, Mexico: Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. 148pp. —. 1997. Eos Cangrejos Braquiuros (Crustacea: Brachyura: Dromiidae, hasta Feucosiidae) del Pacifico Mexicano. Comision Nacional para et Conocimiento y uso de la Biodiversidad e Inst. Cienc. Mar y Fimno., UNAM, Mexico: Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. 178pp. —. 1998. A new genus and species of “goneplacid-like” brachyuran crab (Crustacea: Decapoda) from the Gulf of California, Mexico, and a proposal for the use of the family Pseudorhombilidae Alcock, 1900. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 111(3): 634-644. Hendrickx, Michel E. & Maria del Carmen Espinosa-Perez. 1998a. A new species of Cassidinidea Hansen (Isopoda: Sphaeromatidae) and first record of the genus from the eastern tropical Pacific. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington lll(2):295-302. —. 1998b. A new species of Excorallana Stebbing (Crustacea: Isopoda: Corallanidae) from the Pacific coast of Mexico, and additional records for E. bruscai Delaney. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 111(2):303-313. 12 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.3 Hendrickx, Michel E. & Flor d. Estrada-Navarrete. 1989. A checklist of the species of pelagic shrimps (Penaeoidea and Caridea) from the Eastern Pacific, with notes on their geographic and depth distribution. CalCOFI Report 30:104-121. — 1996. Los Camarones Pelagicos (Crustacea: Dendrobranchiata y Caridea) del Pacifico Mexicano. Comision Nacional para et Conocimiento y uso de la Biodiversidad e Inst. Cienc. Mar y Limno., UNAM, Mexico: Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. 157pp. Hendrickx, Michel E. & Jose Salgado-Barragan. 1987. A new species of stomatopod, Eurysquilla pumae (Crustacea: Stomatopoda: Eurysquillidae) from the Gulf of California, Mexico. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 100(3):529- 531. Hendrickx, Michel E., D. P. Sanchez-Vargas, & L. A. Vazquez-Cureno. 1990. New records of 20 species of Majoidea and Parthenopoidea (Crustacea: Decapoda) along the Pacific coast of Mexico. Revista de Biologia Tropical 38(1): 143-146. Hendrickx, Michel E. & Albert M. van der Heiden. 1983. New records of stomatopod and decapod crustaceans along the Pacific coast of Mexico. Revista de Biologia Tropical 31(2):337-339. —. 1984. Distributions of seven species of crustaceans along the Pacific coast of America. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 83(2): 110-112. Hendrickx, Michel E. & Mary K. Wicksten. 1989. Los Pandalidae (Crustacea: Caridea) del Pacifico Mexicano, con una clave para su identificacion. Caldasia 16(76):71-86. Hendrickx, Michel E., Mary K. Wicksten, & Albert M. van der Heiden. 1983. Studies of the coastal marine fauna of southern Sinaloa, Mexico. IV. Report on the caridean crustaceans. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 96(l):67-78. Imajima, Minoru. 1992. Spionidae (Annelida, Polychaeta) from Japan. VIII. The genus Scolelepis. Bulletin of the National Museum, Tokyo, Ser. A, 18(1): 1-34. Jones, A. R., A. Murray, & R. E. Marsh. 1998. A method for sampling sandy beach amphipods that tidally migrate. Marine and Freshwater Research 49(8):863-865. Kaiser, M. J. & P. G. Moore. 1999. Obligate marine scavengers: do they exist? Journal of Natural History 33(4):475-481. Karr, J. R. & E. W. Chu. December 1997. Biological monitoring: Essential foundation for ecological risk assessment. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 3(6):993-1004. Krug, Pat J. 1998. Poecilogony in an estuarine opisthobranch: planktotrophy, lecithotrophy, and mixed clutches in a population of the ascoglossan Alderia modesta. Marine Biology 132(3):483-494. Kupriyanova, Elena K. 1999. The taxonomic status of Serpula cf. Columbiana Johnson, 1901 from the American and Asian coasts of the North Pacific Ocean. Ophelia 50(l):21-34. Macquart-Moulin, Claude. 1998. Gut repletion during diel vertical migration in the benthopelagic crustacean Eurydice truncata Norman, 1868 (Isopoda, Cirolanidae). Journal of Plankton Research 20(5):817-829. Marques, Fernando & Gerhard Pohle. 1998. The use of structural reduction in phylogenetic reconstruction of decapods and a phylogenetic hypothesis for 15 genera of Majidae: testing previous larval hypotheses and assumptions. Invertebrate Reproduction & Development 33(2-3):241-262. Myers, Alan A. 1997. Biogeographic barriers and the development of marine biodiversity. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 44(2): 241-248. 13 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 3 Paul, R. K. G. & Michel E. Hendrickx. 1980. Crustaceans in the shrimp by-catch from off the coasts of Sinaloa and Nayarit, Mexico. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 79(3): 109-111. Radashevsky, Vasily I. 1993. Revision of the Genus Polydora and related genera from the North West Pacific (Polychaeta: Spionidae). Publications of the Seto Marine Biological Laboratory 36(1/2): 1-60. Salgado-Barragan, Jose & Michel E. Hendrickx. 1998. A new species of Nannosquilla (Crustacea: Stomatopoda: Nannosquillidae) from the eastern Pacific and new records of species of Neogonodactylus (Gonodactylidae) from the Pacific coast of Mexico. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 111(1):43-51. Salgado-Barragan, Jose & Michel E. Hendrickx. 1997. Decapod crustaceans from the Pacific coast of Mexico, including new records and taxonomic remarks. Revista de Biologia Tropical 45(lB):680-683. Schmidt, Hartmut & Winfried Westheide. 1999. Genetic relationships (RAPD-PCR) between geographically separated populations of the ‘’cosmopolitan” interstitial polychaete Hesionides gohari (Hesionidae) and the evolutionary origin of the freshwater species Hesionides riegerorum. Biological Bulletin 196(2): 216-226. Todd, Christopher D., Walter J. Lambert, & John P. Thorpe. 1998. The genetic structure of intertidal populations of two species of nudibranch molluscs with planktotrophic and pelagic lecithotrophic larval stages: are pelagic larvae ‘Tor” dispersal? Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 228(1): 1-28. Wheatcroft, Robert A., Victoria R. Starczak, & Cheryl Ann Butman. 1998. The impact of population abundance on the deposit-feeding rate of a cosmopolitan polychaete worm. Limnology and Oceanography 43(8): 1948-1953. Wicksten, Mary K. & Michel E. Hendrickx. 1986. Alpheopsis cortesiana, a new snapping shrimp from the Gulf of California. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 99(2): 196-197. —. 1991. Checklist of penaeoid and caridean shrimps (Decapoda: Penaeoidea, Caridea) from the eastern tropical Pacific. Proceedings of the San Diego Society of Natural History 9:1-11. 14 July, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.3 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet .gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. 15 Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 4 SUBJECT: B’98 Non-polychaete problem animals GUEST SPEAKER: none DATE: 13 September 1999 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: City of San Diego Marine Biology Lab 4918 N. Harbor Dr. #201 San Diego, CA Eucrassatella fluctuata (Carpenter 1864) station 2081, 7/24/98, 50m, Catalina Is. Photo ID by P. Scott 8/12/99 The first September Meeting will be held at the City of San Diego’s Marine Biology Lab on the 13th. It will be a continuation in a series of meetings dealing with all problem identifications arising from the B’98 project. All phyla except polychaeta are open for discussion. The second meeting of the month will deal with polychaete ID’s and is scheduled for 27 September at the Los Angeles County Museumof Natural History. NEW LITERATURE Biological invasions, their monitoring, their outcomes, and the perspectives they provide on ecological principles are an increasing area of attention in the literature. The invasion of North American freshwaters by the european Zebra Mussel is only the most conspicuous example of this trend. In California waters we have been closely watching the progress of the introduced New Zealand marine snail Philine auriformis , and now the European Green Crab FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter in not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 4 Carcinus maenas and the Chinese Wooly- Handed Crab Eriocheir sinensis. Fortunately the latter two have yet to penetrate into the waters of the southern California Bight, but they are on their way. We have a much more established invader still garnering its share of attention in the literature, the south-east Asian clam Musculista senhousia. We usually do not see this animal, as it is restricted to harbors, bays, and estuaries. During Bight ‘98, however, we encountered it in abundance. In the upcoming EMAP West Coast estuarine investigations it will also be prominent. Two recent papers provide additional information on the status of M. senhousia in southern California (Reusch 1998, Reusch & Williams 1998). In the first of these the author addresses how indigenous predators affect the invasion success of the introduced exotic. In this case the predator is the muricid snail Pteropurpurafestiva. It feeds preferentially on M. senhousia rather than co¬ occurring indigenous bivalves, probably because the locals have much thicker shells. In exclusion experiments he demonstrated that predation can potentially prevent establishment of the high density nest-beds of M. senhousia which smother subsurface fauna and prevent establishment of eel-grass, strongly impacting the indigenous biota. The relationship between M. senhousia and the eel-grass Zostera marina is a spatial competitive one. Both establish high density contiguous populations to the detriment of the other. It has been shown previously that M. senhousia byssal mat provides an inhospitable environment for the establishment of eel-grass beds, and now Reusch & Williams (1998) demonstrate that conversely eel-grass decreases growth and increases mortality of M. senhousia. It has often been observed that infaunal community composition and abundance are modified in ecotonal areas around benthic hard bottoms such as reefs (and outfalls). The mechanism is not always clear, and undoubtedly varies with the case examined. Dahlgren et al (1999) examined the effect of reef-based bioturbators on the adjacent infauna. They found that the sea-cucumber Holothuria princeps was the dominant bioturbator of the system, and that it’s activities in turning over surface sediments are of sufficient impact to be a significant structuring element of the infaunal community adjacent to the reef. Predation associated with reef attracted or reef resident fish and invertebrates is probably of even greater impact, but they found the bioturbation component far from negligible. Results of this study may not be directly applicable to the activities of Parastichopus californicus in our area, because, unlike H. princeps , our local species does not burrow. The authors’ results do, however, point to an effect which should be considered in examination of local hard/soft bottom ecotones. Childress & Seibel (1998) examine the adaptations of animals at another ecotone; that between oxic and anoxic waters. They specifically address the animals living in oxygen minimum layers such as that found off California. While the discussion is primarily illustrated with examples of midwater forms, the types of respiratory adaptations they exhibit also apply to benthic animals in the zone of impingement of the minimum layer on the upper slope. They point out that adaptations to this stable long-term minimum layer differ in kind from those of fluctuating or temporary low oxygen exposures such as intertidal mud¬ flats. Such environmental stresses as low oxygen, pollution, extremes of temperature, etc., impact the presence and abundance of parasites. In NPDES and other monitoring permits it is usually assumed that anthropogenic pollutants result in higher incidence and severity of parasite infestation. Lafferty & Kuris (1999) review how stress and parasites interact on host 2 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.4 populations. They report that the relationship between environmental stresses and parasite impact on hosts is not the simple linear one assumed in most monitoring. Parasite load is a stressor of both individuals and populations which may either augment or offset the effects of other stressors. They even discuss the case in which stress associated reductions in the host populations drop the host density beyond the threshold necessary for the parasite to exist, leading to its local extinction. Parasites are everywhere, and are usually under-examined in routine monitoring. We need to pay more attention to them, and the current review is helpful in fitting them into the broader ecological framework. “...and bigger fleas have smaller fleas...” is the case with the parasitism of a lithodid crab by the barnacle Briarosaccus callosus in the south Atlantic (Watters 1998). The barnacle is in its turn parasitized by an undescribed liriopsine cryptoniscid isopod hyperparasite. What is particularly interesting about this case is the isopod uses the same hormonal tricks to control it’s barnacle host as the barnacle uses to control the crab. Thus the barnacle, which has hormonally sterilized the crab, is hormonally sterilized by the isopod. Local king crabs in the genus Paralithodes host ostensibly the same barnacle, but no isopod hyperparasites have yet been noted. Bight ‘98 trawling around Catalina and the northern Channel Islands yielded several specimens of the hexactinellid sponge Rhabdocalyptus dawsoni. Ecological information on this form has been virtually non-existent. Now Leys & Lauzon (1998) discuss features of its natural history derived from monitoring of populations in the waters of Saanich Inlet and Barkley Sound in British Columbia. From their measured growth rates they estimated the age of average sized individuals at 35 yrs., and of specimens lm long at 220 yrs. They studied a number of individual sponges in situ, revisiting them over a three year period. An examination of nemertean interrelationships using data from mitochondrial 16S rDNA is provided by Envall (1998). Although a nemertean group is used as the test case, the test actually is of the method. Envall tests the impact of use and non-use of probability weighting of ribosomal DNA data on most parsimonious tree topology. Weighting has been used to counteract the differences in mutation frequency in different regions along this molecule. He reports that the greater the genetic distance between two organisms, the greater the impact of weighting. At genetic distances of less than 19% the weighted and unweighted treatments produced concordant results. Paucity of data is always a potential problem in this relatively early stage of genetic sequencing of invertebrates. Siddall et al (1998) definitely found this to be a problem in determining the phylogenetic position of the Echiura and Pogonophora. They present an examination of the results reported by McHugh (1997) which reported echiurans and pogonophores were derived annelids. While the current authors are not averse to that position, they found that McHugh’s analysis was laced with methodological problems, largely stemming from the nature of the selected gene, the EF-1 gene (elongation factor 1), and/or the 356 base pair fragment of it used. One of the approaches used by Siddall et al was inclusion of additional taxa for which equivalent molecular data was available. In so doing they found that the results presented by McHugh lost significance or were contradicted by information from the additional taxa. They conclude that reassessment of the relationship between annelids, echiurans, and pogonophorans should not be based on EF-1 data, and that McHugh’s conclusions were not sufficiently supported. The resolution of sibling species complexes using molecular evidence mentioned in the last newsletter continues apace. Simison & Lindberg (1999) tackle the Notoacmea 3 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 4 fascicularis complex. This was a single species whose variability of radular morphology suggested that it might contain more than a single taxon. Shell characters which might suggest a second sibling species within Notoacmea fascicularis were, however, never identified. A third line of evidence from Cytochrome c Oxidase subunit I was gathered from specimens exhibiting differing radular morphologies. The results coincide with the lack of variation in shell morphology, and suggest that there is a single taxon, Notoacmea fascicularis , which is clinally variable in radular morphology. Molecular data provided evidence, not of additional hidden taxa as in previous cases, but of considerable variability in a character of a single taxon. MINUTES OF 16 AUGUST MEETING First order of business was to pass around a picture of Susan Hamilton’s 3 year old nephew wearing a tiny SCAMIT t-shirt. A discussion ensued as to whether we still had SCAMIT t- shirts, and if so, where would they be located. I, (Megan Lilly), for one, would be interested in owning such a shirt, perhaps in a slightly larger size than the one pictured. It has been a number of years since SCAMIT has had “stuff” available for sale. Our supply of coffee mugs and hats is long since exhausted, and shirts, if any remain, are limited to sizes suitable for 3- year-old nephews [sorry Megan]. Let’s hear from the membership and/or NL readers concerning this. Are you interested in such paraphernalia? Should be make an attempt to recreate the old versions or do something different [tote-bags, mouse pads, cocktail napkins, anoraks]? All opinions welcome. Contact any of the officers, or send comments to Don Cadien for inclusion in the NL [end of digression]. We were fortunate to have Dot Norris from the City and County of San Francisco joining us for the day. She passed along a request that the SCAMIT meetings, when and where possible, be scheduled and announced six weeks in advance. It takes approximately this long for the paper work to be processed to allow CCSF workers to attend meetings in Southern California. There is a strong interest by our northern members to join us periodically, an interest we should do what we can to foster. Don Cadien then shared a story concerning a friend, nudibranchs and the Lacey Act. We have discussed the impact of the Lacey Act previously in the NL, but perhaps a brief review is in order. The act requires than any biological specimens entering the United States be demonstrably collected legally under the laws of the country of origin. That is, if you don’t have the appropriate paperwork from the source country you are in violation of U.S. law if you bring in specimens. This applies even if the country of origin has, but does not bother to enforce laws about the taking of biota. This was the case in the incident reported at the meeting. It stemmed from a trip into central west Mexico in January and early February, in which the participants did not attempt to obtain the appropriate permits. Previous experiences of themselves and others indicated that the average time to get permits was several years, and that they would only be issued for known quantities of particular species. The trip was intended to sample the fauna, so no such permit could reasonably be obtained. As in past years a series of living nudibranchs were returned for more refined photography and to be maintained until they produced nidosomes [eggmasses] which would in their turn be photographed as would the veliger larvae which hatched from them. While crossing the border, however, the customs agents decided that the animals required a consult from the Department of Fish and Wildlife. They in turn decided that this was potentially a violation of both the Lacey Act and of the CITES treaty. The animals were inventoried [as well as could be since roughly 2/3 of the taxa were undescribed] and released into the custody of the person carrying them 4 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.4 pending contacts with Mexican authorities, and higher level decisions about the nature of the violations, and the appropriate response of the agency. In July two agents showed up to examine the custodial animals and deliver paperwork formally charging 5 counts of violation of the Lacey Act [CITES was recognized to be uninvolved] and to present a notice that a fine of $200 would be imposed. The two companions of the bucket carrier were not charged, only the person in possession of the animals being viewed as culpable by the authorities. It is unclear how the number of counts was established [there were roughly 45 animals of 18 or so species], or how the fine was arrived at. We are subject to this law, and it’s violation may have consequences if the violator is detected. Whether or not it is possible to comply given the bureaucracies of many countries remains a moot point. Although it may be impossible to comply with some laws, it is certainly possible to enforce them, and to punish violators. Pictures of one of the nudibranchs mentioned above were then passed around. The species is believed to be Favorinus tsuruganus, originally from Southern Japan but in this instance collected in the state of Nayarit, on the northern shore of Banderas Bay. The animal is an egg-predator, feeding on the egg-masses of other opisthobranchs. One of the photographs showed the animal with it’s head inserted into the globose egg-sac of Melanochlamys diomedea, a cephalaspid found locally both on mud-flats and off-shore. Don Cadien informed the members of the loss of yet another noted taxonomist and systematist, Dr. Mihai Bacescu of Romania. A brief note of his passing was posted on the CrustL list server by Dr. Ileana Negoescu, a compatriot and co-worker of Dr. Bacescu. His work covered a broad spectrum of crustaceans, but most effort was on the taxonomy of cumaceans, tanaids, and mysids. He did publish one paper on the Californian fauna [describing several new mysids with Linda Gleye], but mostly worked on the tropical biota of the Atlantic and Indo-Pacific. His earliest work was concentrated on the Mediterranean and adjacent eastern waters. He will undoubtedly receive an obituary in either Crustaceana or in Journal of Crustacean Biology, and others in european journals such as Revue Roumaine de Biologie, Vie et Milieu, Revue Suisse de Zoology, and Travaux du Museum d’Histoire Naturelle “Grigore Antipa” where many of his papers were published. Watch them in upcoming issues for more detail on his life. A series of abstracts of articles pertinent to the care and feeding of natural history collections was sent to the meeting by Tom Parker (CSDLAC). They all came from Collections Forum, an on-line journal of the Society for the Preservation of Natural History Collections [http://www.geo.ucalgary.ca/spnhc] . We mentioned one in the last NL, and Tom provided a series of others from recent issues of the journal. A number of articles on preservatives, labeling, and long-term storage considerations in this journal are pertinent to our activities. Don shared with us some new books from Sea Challengers, since the descriptions provided on their website - http://www.seachallengers.com are brief . A general guide on Indo-Pacific marine invertebrates by H. Matsuda [in Japanese, but with beautiful color photos], Part III of the Marine Invertebrates of Southern Australia, and two slim volumes on sea stars and other echinoderms were examined. One, Sea Stars of Australasia and their relatives by Neville Coleman has no overlap with our biota, but the second (1998. A Field Guide to Sea Stars and other Echinoderms of Galapagos by Cleve Hickman) does. We had some concerns over some of the asteroids pictured in the book, doubting the identity of the illustrated animals . 5 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 4 The Astropecten armatus pictured was a brilliant red, a color form we don’t see here in Southern California. It also had a very different structure than our local A. armatus , appearing somewhat less robust, and bearing a very different arrangement of the lateral arm spines. In local specimens these are large, flattened, largest at the base of the ray, and overlapping in the interambulacra. In the illustrated Galapagan specimen they are longest about 1/3 of the way out the arm, are smaller and non¬ overlapping at the base of the ray, and do not appear flattened. The distal lateral arm spines are much longer in the illustrated individual than those seen in California specimens. No mention is made of the prominent spines of the interambulacral superomarginal plates in the text, and the photo is not large enough to demonstrate either presence or absence of such spines. The adjacent photo of Luidia folio lata looks much like Southern California Bight specimens, but seemed to show arms broader for their length, longer lateral arm spines, and an absence of the scattered individual white paxillae which are characteristic of the species in our area. It was finally time to start actually looking at specimens and mollusks were first up. Kelvin Barwick (CSDMWWD) brought an interesting and beautiful little opisthobranch from a Catalina Island station. After much examination it was determined that the animal belonged to the genus Akera. The genus has not hitherto been reported from the Eastern Pacific, and is almost certainly a new species. Two species are known from the tropical West Atlantic, several others from the western Indo- Pacific, and specimens of the genus were taken from the Pacific coast of Nicaragua in 1973. Their identity was never investigated, but they differed from the present specimen in being larger, and proportionately longer. The genus is the sole member of the family Akeratidae, and is related to the sea-hares. There are only a few species world-wide. A cephalaspid brought by Kelvin turned out to be a small Aglaja which was left as Aglaja sp. due to its small size. Another specimen which Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) had examined was represented by only a shell. The animal had totally dissolved in the bleach used to remove the shell and gizzard plates. No gizzard plates were found, and the remaining minute shell had a strengthening rib running along the sweep of the anterior margin. It was reminiscent of a very small notaspid shell, rather than a philinid or aglajid cephalaspid. The absence of gizzard plates also matches with a non-cephalaspid. In the absence of the animal this was left at Opisthobranchia. A few small bivalves were then brought forth and turned out to be Diplodonta sericata and Rochefortia coani. Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) brought two small clams she believed to be the Thyasiridae sp LA 1 examined at an earlier meeting. It was confirmed that these were indeed the same animals. They were the cover illustration on the April NL [Vol. 17 No. 12]. These specimens were also from the Channel Islands (B ‘98 Station 2523) and were taken at a depth of 106m. The differences between the gastropod genera Astyris and Alia were reviewed as small specimens of both were examined. The lamellae in the periostracum of Astyris aurantiaca were easily viewed once Don positioned the animal properly. These were very thin and transparent on the juvenile examined, and were not easy to see. The paucispiral protoconch of Astyris spp. was also present, but not well marked. The tiny Alia examined was too small for specific determination, but looked like it might well be an A. carinata juvenile. After lunch echinoderms were next on the agenda as we had Nancy Carder visiting us specifically for the purpose of examining this group. Kathy Langan (CSDMWWD) brought some holothuroids discovered at the Channel 6 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.4 Island station 2514 at 57 m. After looking at ossicle mounts from the two animals present it was determined that the animals most closely fit the description and keyed to the Havelockia variant pictured by Bergen in the Taxonomic Atlas (Figure 9.2IF page 235 ). The ID recorded for these specimens will be Havelockia sp. Astropecten were then examined. While out at sea a few weeks ago Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) was finding Astropecten in trawls from 90 ft that appeared to be Astropecten verrilli in most aspects, but had small spines on some of the superomarginal arm plates. After examination back at the lab, all the animals were concluded to be A. verrilli. The “spines” being seen were not the large spines seen in Astropecten armatus but small spinules on the superomarginal plates. This difference can be tricky and subtle, so don’t be fooled by it in the field. “A rose is a rose is a rose”, but a spine may not necessarily be a spine in a diagnostic sense. Rely on some of the other character differences, i.e., arm length to disk diameter ratio, and the appearance of the lateral arm spines to assist in the final determination of species. Dendraster excentricus and Dendraster terminalis were again compared side by side for the benefit of Nancy Carder and Dot Norris. Seeing the animals next to one another greatly assists understanding of the differences between the species, although the differences are well delineated in Rich Mooi’s recent treatment of the genus. Finally, the crustaceans were tackled. Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD) had a Cancer crab that at first appeared to be C. anthonyi. However, upon closer inspection the animal was seen not to be this species, differing in chelae, dorsal carapace tooth structure, and areolation of the carapace. It was also briefly thought to be Cancer amphioetus, however, this ID was incorrect as well due to the shape of the dorsal carapace teeth, the size of the animal (too big) and the configuration of the chelae. In addition, this animal was hirsute ventrally. It was decided to erect a provisional and call the specimen Cancer sp SD1. It does not match with any of the species treated by Nations (1975), but comes closest to a species from Japan, C. nadaensis Sakai 1969. Next, a Lophopanopeus of uncertain species was brought forth. After some examination Don Cadien recommended that Dean examine Menzies’ review of the genus (1948). The animal did seem peculiar; having relatively smooth carpi on the legs, and lacking pigment in the chelae. After further examination, the specimen was identified as L. leucomanus leucomanus. The next crab caused some excitement as it belonged to the family Palicidae and to the genus Palicus. This family has only been recorded once before from the Southern California Bight. The previous record was from off Palos Verde in 30m of water. The CSDMWWD specimen was from station 2101,124 ft, July 1996. This animal was not discovered during the B’98 project, rather it was captured during sampling for the City of San Diego’s ITP (International Treatment Plant) monitoring. The ID was left at Palicus sp. Dean will key the animal in Rathbun, hopefully arriving at a species identity. Caprellids were then the order of business. Dean Pasko previously sent out a message to the B’98 Taxonomic Listserver discussing two caprellids that he’d been seeing. A copy of the original message follows: “Dear Crustacean folks: I recently ran across two species of caprellids from San Diego Bay that appear to be new. Both are closely related to Mayerella banksia. Mayerella sp SD1 The first species, Mayerella sp SD1, is a dead ringer for M. banksia except for the composition of pereopod 5. Where P5 of true M. banksia consists of three subequal articles, 7 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 4 Mayerella sp SD1 has an elongate article 2 (approx twice the length of article 1) and a very small third article that is indistinctly separate (partially fused to article 2). After seeing several specimens, the new species can be readily distinguished by the two long, robust setae that emanate from the distal end of P5, article 2. M. banksia have relatively thin setae visible along the distal half of P5 (articles 2 and 3). Caprellidae sp SD1 The second species can also be easily mistaken for M. banksia if one is not careful. This species, Caprellidae sp SD1, has 2-segmented pereopods on pereonites III and IV, but no P5. Additionally, the mandibular palp appears to be vestigial, and seems to be represented by a single seta.” After examining Dean’s Mayerella sp SD1, Don suggested the next step would be to check Benedict 1977 and look at the description of M. acanthopoda. This has been done and the ID confirmed as M. acanthopoda. There was no resolution for Caprellidae sp SD1 other than it is being removed to ordinal level and will be referred to as Caprellidea sp SD1. Don and Dean discovered a strange “ping- pong” paddle shaped structure on the 5 th leg on closer examination. This will require some literature research to identify and deal with. The next group to be discussed were tanaids. Dean had a specimen he’d referred to as Paraleptognathia cf gracilis from a Channel Islands station in 106 m of water. The chelae did not match the description for those of P. cf. gracilis , more closely matching those of Scoloura phillipsi , but the animal keyed to P. cf. gracilis in Dojiri & Sieg 1997. At this point there was no resolution and the specimen was recorded as Tanaidacea sp SD1. Many points of the anatomy of the chelae, legs and urosome matched closely with Scoloura , but the specimen totally lacked the lateral urosomal spines which characterize S. phillip si, and are treated as generic level characters in definition of the genus. Lastly, a strange Euphilomedes from San Diego Bay. The carapace of the animal was very similar to E. carcharodonta, however, the formula of the caudal furca did not match the description of the aforementioned animal. The specimen will be referred to as Euphilomedes sp SD2. AMPHIPODS TOO During our monitoring trawl series at CSDLAC we routinely encounter fish parasites in abundance: (1) isopods on a variety of species; (2) copepods on Pacific Sanddabs, sharks and a few more; (3) leeches on many species, and (4) turbellarian flatworms on halibut. Now, after years of searching, I can report parasitic amphipods too. At our monitoring station T1-305 in 1000' of water we took an unusual fish [for us] during our August trawls; a large Sebastes melanostomus , or Black Gill Rockfish. While it was examined to determine it’s species small animals came off the head of the fish, and were picked up on the hands of my co-worker Bill Power. He directed my attention to them, and I collected 47 individuals from the fish by the time I was convinced there were no more to be had. They proved to be members of the exclusively parasitic amphipod family Laphystiidae, last reported from our waters by Brad Myers in the 70’s. Literature on the group is scant, but there is one paper which treats the North American species (Bousfield 1987). The current animals seem to belong to the genus Protolaphystius in having a coxal gill on the seventh leg. The rostral configuration and first urosomal segment do not, however, match with the only described species in the genus, Protolaphystius madillae Bousfield 1987. In that paper he mentions a second (undescribed) species which belongs to the genus. It had been reported in the literature as Laphystius 8 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.4 sturionis (by Jensen et al 1982), but was not that species in Bousfield’s estimation [he currently has it in MS as a new species, pers. comm. E. L. Bousfield 1999]. The earlier record was based on material collected by Brad Myers from Sebastes paucispinis, the Bocaccio. It is likely that our specimens belong to the same undescribed species as those Brad collected many years ago, but several species occur in the area, and the identity is not certain. The host of Protolaphystius madillae is Parophrys vetulus, the English Sole, a species quite common in southern California waters. In the sole the parasites are found on the gills, while on the rockfishes they inhabit the outer surface of the head. Many of the specimens taken from the Black Gill Rockfish were from the membrane covering the eye, and the sinus formed by that membrane as it lines first the orbit, and then the outer surface of the eye itself. Additional animals were plucked from small pits on the head of the fish, or freely crawling on the tissue covering the head. The animals ranged from translucent white through translucent pink with three dorsal opaque pinkish red longitudinal lines. A voucher sheet is in preparation for this species, which will become Protolaphystius sp A SCAMIT. My Life as a Biologist Donald J. Reish Chapter 15: I establish a research program at Long Beach State After a few years of teaching science to elementary teachers, the curriculum was changed in biology. Art Lockley had taught Invert Zoology as a 2 semester 3 unit course. We changed it to a one semester 4 unit class and I took over the teaching of Invert Zoology. It was a pleasure to be teaching it, and I made an effort to have a living animal in the lab each time. The source of most of my animals was Alamitos Bay which is located nearby. In a couple of years the enrollment became too large for one lab so we had 2 concurrent labs. Jack Anderson was my first TA for invert zoology. With the interest in invert zoology, we added invert systematics which I taught every other spring. At the same time we added algae which I alternated with invert systematics in the spring semester. Lloyd Finley was the only person to take all three of these classes from me and receive an A in all three. Years later I added Polychaete systematics which I taught 4 times. Still later I initiated the intern program in science and Ken Schiff was my TA for this. One final course that I taught was Oceanographic Techniques, through the Ocean Studies Consortium. Students from Fullerton, Northridge, Costa Mesa also joined the Long Beach Staters. It met all day on Friday and we spend a great deal of time on the Nautilus. As I described earlier, I had conducted a survey of Alamitos Bay for California Fish and Game and had published a paper on this study. While still at USC, I used Alamitos Bay as a more or less clean area for comparison with conditions at LA-LB Harbors. A fortunate thing happened in that the City of Long Beach began to dredge and build the Alamitos Bay Marina. Again, I took advantage of the opportunity and while still at USC, and saw it as an opportunity to study succession in the subtidal environment. My first year at Long Beach State, I applied for an NSF grant to study succession not only in Alamitos Bay but also in the marinas being constructed in Marina del Rey, Oxnard, and Ventura. I obtained the grant - a sum total of $21,000, the largest single grant to Long Beach State at the time. Al Stone became my first graduate student. I published several papers as a result of this grant. Studies included community development on the subtidal benthos, settlement on boat floats, and settlement on rocky jetties in Marina del Rey and Oxnard. I had just completed my study of the subtidal benthos in Alamitos Bay when the bay was hit by a severe red tide. The dissolved oxygen dropped to near zero. Again, I took advantage of the situation and studied the effect of the red tide on boat floats and subtidal benthos. California Fish and Game Quarterly published the paper. 9 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 4 In the early 1960’s I received a grant from the National Institutes of Health to study the effects of environmental variables on the species that I had used as indicators of pollution, namely Capitella capitata, Dorvillea articulata, Neanthes arenaceodentata , and Nereis grubei. My first attempt was unsuccessful, but in the meantime I had gone to New York to attend the First International Oceanographic Congress; I used the opportunity to stop at Washington, D.C. and meet the people at NIH and explain what I wanted to do. The second attempt was successful. One of my friends at USC (now at CalTech) had worked out a method of controlling the concentration of DO in an Erlenmeyer flask. I used over 1000 Erlenmeyer flasks, many of which I still have. Anybody want any of them? I established the culture of Neanthes from 6 worms collected in Los Angeles Inner Harbor in 1964. This was the beginning of my lab culture of this worm which has been in continuous culture since that time with no new bloodlines or genes added. Tom Richards and Jack Anderson helped me on this NIH grant. The technique of controlling the DO in the flask was used my many of my grad students. Not only did we measure survival, but sublethal effects, burrowing in Limnoria, amino acid compensation, hemoglobin compensation, and others. The use of this method was the beginning of our studies of sublethal effects of environmental variables which has continued to this day as growth rate of juvenile Neanthes. Next: I go to Europe. BIBLIOGRAPHY Benedict, B.R. 1977. Mayerella acanthopoda, a new species (Amphipoda, Caprellidae) from Southern California.. Crustaceana 33(1): 47-55. Bousfield, Edward L. 1987. Amphipod parasites of fishes of Canada. Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 217:1-37. Childress, James J. & Brad A. Seibel. 1998. Life at stable low oxygen levels: adaptations of animals to oceanic oxygen minimum layers. Journal of Experimental Biology 201(8): 1223-1232. Dahlgren, Craig P., Martin H. Posey, & Alan W. Hulbert. 1999. The effects of bioturbation on the infaunal community adjacent to an offshore hardbottom reef. Bulletin of Marine Science 64(l):21-34. Dojiri, Masahiro & Jurgen Sieg. 1997. Chapter 3: The Tanaidacea. Pp. 181-268 IN: Blake, James A. & Paul H. Scott (eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 11: The Crustacea Part 2 - The Isopoda, Cumacea and Tanaidacea. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. 278pp. Envall, Mats. 1998. General problems in estimating nemertean relationships on ribosomal sequence data - an example using six monostiliferous species and mitochondrial 16S rDNA. Hydrobiologia 365:19-31. Hickman, Cleveland P. Jr. 1998. A Field Guide to Sea Stars and other Echinoderms of Galapagos. Sugar Spring Press, Lexington, Virginia. 83pp. Jensen, L. A., R. A. Hickmann, M. Moser, & Murray D. Dailey. 1982. Parasites of Bocaccio, Sebastes paucipinnis, from southern and central California. Proceedings of the Helminthological Society of Washington 49:314-317. Lafferty, Kevin D. & Armand M. Kuris. 1999. How environmental stress affects the impacts of parasites. Limnology and Oceanography 44(3):925-931. 10 August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.4 Leys, Sally P. & Nelson R. J. Lauzon. 1998. Hexactinellid sponge ecology: growth rates and seasonality in deep water sponges. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 230(1): 111-129. McHugh, Damnait. 1997. Molecular evidence that echiurans and pogonophorans are derived annelids. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (U.S.A.)94:8006-8009. Menzies, Robert J. 1948. A revision of the brachyuran genus Lophopanopeus . Allan Hancock Foundation Publications, Occasional Paper 4:1-44. Nations, J. Dale. 1975. The genus Cancer (Crustacea, Brachyura): systematics, biogeography, and fossil record. Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Science Bulletin 23:1-114. Reusch, Thorsten B. H. 1998. Native predators contribute to invasion resistance to the non- indigenous bivalve Musculista senhousia in southern California, USA. Marine Ecology Progress Series 170:159-168. Reusch, Thorsten B. H. & Susan L. Williams. 1998. Variable responses of native eelgrass Zostera marina to a non-indigenous bivalve Musculista senhousia. Oecologia 113:428-441. Siddall, Mark E., Kirk Fitzhugh, & Kathryn A. Coates. 1998. Problems determining the phylogenetic position of echiurans and pogonophorans with limited data. Cladistics 14(4):401-410. Simison, W. Brian & David R. Lindberg. 1999. Morphological and molecular resolution of a putative cryptic species complex: A case study of Notoacmea fascicularis (Menke, 1851) (Gastropoda : Patellogastropoda). Journal of Molluscan Studies 65:99-109. Watters, George. 1998. Prevalences of parasitized and hyperparasitized crabs near South Georgia. Marine Ecology Progress Series 170:215-229. August, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.4 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet .gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 SUBJECT: Non-polychaete B’98 problem animals GUEST SPEAKER: none DATE: 18 October 1999 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: City of San Diego Marine Biology Lab 4918 N. Harbor Dr. #201 San Diego, CA 92106 Arcidae, B’98 station 2425 (Mission Bay), 24 July 98,3.7 m Image by K. Barwick Two October Meetings will be held, both addressing Bight’98 problems and specimens. The first, on non-polychaete topics, in San Diego on October 18; and the second on polychaete topics at the Worm Lab at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History on October 25. Be prepared to roll up your sleeves and dig deeply into our problem taxa. We will be done shortly with sample identification, and QC re-identification will begin in earnest. OPISTHOBRANCH WORKSHOP In June of this year the International Opisthobranch Workshop was held in Menfi, Italy. Commentary on the meetings from participants and photographs taken there are available on the web as a thread in the Sea Slug Forum (run by Dr. Bill Rudman) at http ://www.austmus .gov.au/science/division/ invert/mal/forum/menfwkshp.htm. FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter in not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 The abstracts of the presentations have also been made available on-line at http://www.futuralink.it/vannarotolo. NEW LITERATURE Nemerteans have proven to have a difficult taxonomy in many ways. Not the least of these is a basic disagreement between nemertean specialists on which characters have meaning in separating taxa. This provides a field ripe for a molecular based approach which can be used to either validate or refute morphologically based taxonomic hypotheses. Sundberg & Saur (1998) provide just such an analysis, dealing with lineids in the genera Riseriellus , Lineus, and Micrura. The outcome of their examination is directly applicable to local nemertean taxonomy as they found both “genera” Lineus and Micrura to be polyphyletic. Our local Lineus bilineatus is one of several species ascribed to the genus which are not in the same clade as the type species Lineus longissimus. If this analysis is confirmed by others, lineus will require a new genus or genera. We assume that the local form identified as L. bilineatus is the same as the European form of that name included in the present analysis. The authors similarly found Micrura species to be scattered between several clades, but as no local species were included in the analysis it is unclear how local members of the genus would be aligned. Further analysis of a broader spectrum of the many species described in each of these genera will be required to more completely resolve the issue. Larsen & Wilson (1998) shine a similar, if morphologically based, light on some of the characters currently considered as significant in defining families within the tanaids. They found, for instance that the number of uropodal articles in their new species was ambiguous because of partial fusion. The authors mention that tanaid family definitions are also difficult to apply because of problems in use of seta/ spine differentiations. Sieg, who is largely responsible for the current familial arrangement and definitions, did not use the seta/spine distinctions proposed by Watling in his family definitions, and efforts to do so lead to problems. The senior author is attempting to develop a better and more consistent separation between tanaidomorph families. In the present paper the family Paratanaidae has been redefined, and the status of the others declared unsatisfactory and in urgent need of re- evaluation. As in a paper mentioned in the last issue the methodology of cladistics is under continual review. Jenner (1999) and Jenner & Schram (1999) continue this trend and critically review the assumptions underlying several cladistic methodologies. The different results presented by workers using different sets of assumptions and different methods should hardly be surprising. It is however a bit disappointing to see in black and white just how method dependant the “objective and testable” approach of cladistics can be. Instead of a final great truth we are presented with a series of successively better approximations of the undisputed truth as methodological problems are discovered and counteracted. As an unregenerate “traditional” morphologist I must admit some satisfaction in having the clay feet of the cladistic god highlighted in this fashion. I have no doubt that as the methods mature and the weak or inappropriate ones are weeded out, the hope of a less subjective systematic technique will finally be realized. The authors point out quite effectively that we ain’t there yet, especially for phylogenetic reconstruction. The introduced seaweed Sargassum muticum hit our shores in the 70’s, and rapidly spread along the coast. It provided a new substrate for a host of small associates, mostly peracarids but also mollusks, bryozoans, urochordates, nemerteans, etc. Viejo (1999) examines the same algal species in northern Spain, where it is also introduced. She compares the biota of the invasive species with that of two local 2 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 seaweeds, one with similar and the other with dissimilar morphologies. The local associated microfauna proved well able to colonize and use the invading alga, and in areas where macroalgae had been in low abundance, the Sargassum provided additional habitat. As Sargassum also competes with native algae for space and light, this is not an unmixed blessing. In the Spanish case the associates of the native algae proved fickle, switching to the invader without compunction. Anecdotal observations suggest that the local situation is similar, with indigenous grazers readily switching to the introduced alga. Invasions do not always end so happily for the ecosystem involved. Ruiz et al. (1999) examine the more stressful interactions between the invader and the invaded. Using the invaders of Chesapeake Bay as a database, they found that 1 in 5 invading species had apparently had a significant impact on the Bay ecosystem, or one or more of it’s components. They also doubt that the behavior of an invader in the Bay can be used to predict it’s effect elsewhere. The potential differences in community composition and function are too great between locations to allow easy application of experience in one area to another. They also clearly perceived non-indigenous species as additional stressors to already anthropogenically stressed near-shore communities. As such their impacts, if negative, could be magnified by preexisting stress on the community from these other sources. Whether or not a species uses larval forms for dispersal is a part of the “life-history strategy” of that species; what it does to insure its persistence and spread. This is not always a single path which a species follows, as our recently mentioned examples of poecilogony have demonstrated. The consequences, both positive and negative, of producing larvae have not often been examined from a practical point of view; in essence a cost/benefit analysis of the larval method. Pechenik (1999) reviews the question and provides a nice summation of the costs and benefits of larval production. This greatly simplifies the decisions you out there need to make in your search for alternative modes of reproduction. 30 AUGUST MEETING President Ron Velarde (CSDMWWD) opened the business meeting promptly at 9:30a.m. at the San Diego Marine Biology Lab. The first order of business was scheduling meetings for the next two months. We will be continuing along the same theme with problematic specimens from the Bight’98 project. Meetings for non-polychaete topics will be held in San Diego on September 13 and October 18. Meetings for polychaete topics will be held at the Worm Lab at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History on September 27 and October 25. Sonya Foree from the City and County of San Francisco joined us for the day. During the afternoon session, Arleen Navarret (CCSF) and Victoria Diaz and Maricarmen Necoechea, (both from CICESE, Ensenada, Baja California) were also in attendance. Larry Lovell reported that the Aphrodita project is a “go”, and he is putting out a request for specimens. Larry, in conjunction with Cheryl Brantley and Ron Velarde, will be investigating and clarifying the taxonomy of Aphrodita. He would like to get as much material as possible. It would be especially useful to include wide size ranges. If you can supply specimens of Aphrodita to Larry, please either ship them to him at Scripps or give him a call (858) 822-2818 to arrange transportation. Larry also gave an update on the status of his work on the marine invertebrate collection at Scripps. There is a lot of re-organization and cleaning up that is going on and still much to be done. If anyone is interested in seeing the 3 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 collection and putting in a day to help organize a portion of the collection, please call Larry. Larry hopes to put out a projected schedule for the organization of various taxa. We then started our parade of problematic polychaete specimens. Tony Phillips (CLAEMD) handed out a voucher sheet for Marphysa sp B which is synonymous with his Morphysa sp HYP 1 Phillips 1999. This species was found at station 2151, Dana Point Harbor, with oyster shell hash, at a depth of 6 meters. In this species, the five occipital tentacles were short, reaching the anterior edge of the prostomium. The branchiae started on setiger 10 as a single filament and reached a maximum of three filaments on setigers 45 through setiger 102. Larry Lovell announced that he has contacted Andy Mackie regarding Paradoneis sp HYP 1 and Paradoneis sp SD 1, and Andy has agreed to look at our specimens. Larry graciously volunteered to collect specimens, send them to Andy, and also to prepare a voucher sheet on this species. Rick Rowe (CSDMWWD) then reported on four curious specimens from Catalina Island, station 2081, collected at a depth of 50 meters. After some investigation, it was determined that they were Pilargidae genus A of Williams. Next Kelvin Barwick (CSDMWWD) showed us a paraonid specimen, Aricidea (Acmira) sp SD1 from Santa Cruz Island. He had found this species at three stations. This specimen had a bluntly rounded prostomium, 12 pairs of branchiae starting on setiger 4, and 2 pygidial cirri were evident. There was reddish-brown pigment throughout the worm, and Kelvin commented that usually this pigment was faded. There were bristles on the modified setae that could be mistaken for hoods. Kelvin produced a voucher sheet for this species and posted it on the SCAMIT website. Next Rick Rowe distributed a voucher sheet on Macrochaeta sp A. He had found this species at San Miguel Island (station 2469,33 m depth) and also at two ITP stations (1-34, 63 ft depth and 1-7,171 ft depth). Cheryl Brantley had also found this species at San Miguel Island (station 2490 at 75 m depth and station 2491 at 95 m depth). This was a small animal which had unusually large setae. To view many of the characters for this species, such as the segmentation, palp and branchial scars, and papillation, stain the worm with alcian blue. Rick also reported on a specimen he called Nephtys sp SD 3 that was collected at station 2523, Santa Barbara Island. The dorsal lamellae were enlarged similar to N. squamosa Ehlers 1887. Kelvin next showed us a specimen of Pista. After examining the specimen, we concluded that it was Pista disjuncta, following the present convention for Pista identification. A discussion ensued about the difficulty of finding the long handled setae in specimens of Pista (present on setigers 1 and 2) which is a distinguishing characteristic for this genus. It was suggested that one may want to dissect a tissue sample from the animal, clean the tissue with a few drops of bleach, and then look for the long handled setae. One must observe the tissue frequently before the setae also dissolve in the bleach. Kelvin suggested an alternate method; after removing the tissue, he prepares a wet mount using methyl salicylate as the mounting medium. This clears the tissue enough to see the handles. This is the same method used for clearing flatworms. Next we examined a specimen of Aricidea (Acmira) cf cerruti brought in by Kelvin. He found two specimens at the Channel Islands station 2523 at 106 m depth. The specimen had a rounded prostomium; however, the median antenna was missing. There were 16 pairs of branchiae, and the modified setae were the same as illustrated in Laubier 1967. We 4 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 concluded that this specimen was probably a small Aricidea (Acmira) cerruti, but without the median antenna for confirmation, Kelvin will leave the identification as A(A.) cf cerruti. Larry and Tony both brought in specimens of Chone sp SD 1 from El Segundo and Bight station 2453. Kathy Langan confirmed the identification; this species had also been found at some Tijuana River stations as well as monitoring stations offshore of San Francisco. See San Diego voucher sheet from February 13,1998. We then examined a flabelligerid from San Diego Bay brought in by Rick Rowe. It was collected at station 2231 at 13 meters depth. It was sand encrusted, and anteriorly, it had a row of 4 small papillae across the dorsum. The setae were very similar to Piromis sp A fide Harris 1985. It was decided to call these Piromis sp SD 1. Continuing with another species from San Diego Bay, Kathy Langan showed us some specimens of Scolelepis. These keyed out to S. texana in Blake 1996 and keyed out to S. sp SD 1 in Lovell’s and Pasko’s spionid key of November 1995. This species had shown up at several stations in San Diego Bay. There were a few character differences between these specimens and the description of S. texana , so it was decided to call these S. sp SD 1 since they more closely matched that description. Kathy also showed us some Dipolydora from stations 2472 (Santa Cruz Island, 25 m depth), 2211 (Orange County Sanitation District, 41 m depth), and station 2493 (Santa Cruz Island, 44 m depth). These specimens were similar to D. bidentata but differed in some significant characters. The branchiae started on setiger 9 instead of setiger 8 for D. bidentata. The posterior hooded hooks were bidentate in these specimens in contrast to the posterior unidentate hooded hooks in D. bidentata. Also, no needle packets were seen in these specimens. However, with alcian blue stain, we observed some structures in the posterior of 2 worms that at first glance resembled needle packets. The structures were lobes containing a few to several pointed spines. Some of the points extended beyond the ends of the lobes. A voucher sheet will be prepared for this new species, Dipolydora sp SD 1. Tony brought a specimen of Nereiphylla from station 2404 which turned out to be Nereiphylla sp 3 fide Harris ( ^Nereiphylla sp SD 1). Ron brought a mystery phyllodocid from Santa Cruz Island station 2518, 112 m depth. He identified it as Eulalia ?. It had pigment circles around each segmental line on the dorsum. There was also pigment on the bases of the parapodia. No one had seen anything similar to this specimen before, so it remained as Eulalia ? for the time being. We could not put off addressing the cirratulids any longer, so Rick took the floor and started off with 2 specimens of Protocirrineris from San Diego Bay station 2226. Rick compared 2 different specimens. They were similar in that they had no methyl green staining pattern, no spines, and did have multiple cirri on setigers 3 and 4. One specimen was similar to P. sp A in that it had compressed segments, and the other specimen had longer segments that were not crowded. However, Protocirrineris sp A is usually found at deeper stations. Rick is looking for more specimens and for the time being will refer to these specimens as P. sp SD 1 . There were several new species of Monticellina that were discovered in the Bight’98 study. Rick reviewed several provisional species that he had encountered. Most of these had distinguishing methyl green staining patterns. The first was Monticellina sp SD 2 which is similar to M. elongata. This species was found in 80 m depth at the Channel Islands. Rick next described M. sp SD 4 from San Diego Bay and noted the differences between it and Blake’s M. serratiseta. It had: 1) a light dorsal methyl green stain on the 5 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 prostomium and peristomium and 2) a small amount of light banding on the anterior dorsum. Tony noted that he finds M. serratiseta at stations that are 80 m and deeper. Finally, M. sp SD 6 from San Diego Bay (15.6 m depth) and offshore San Diego (73 m depth) was described by Rick and had dark staining stripes ventrally on only a few posterior thoracic setigers and an inflated posterior end. The next cirratulid genus up for discussion was Aphelochaeta. Cheryl Brantley (CSDLAC) passed out two provisional voucher sheets. The first voucher sheet was for Aphelochaeta sp LA 1, found off Santa Cruz Island and Santa Rosa Island. A question was posed as to whether these were A. petersenae, and Rick offered to examine some specimens and see if he could answer this question. The second provisional species was Aphelochaeta sp LA 2. Five specimens were found at station 2521 (Santa Cruz Island) at 75 m depth. Tony Phillips had also reported Aphelochaeta specimens matching the description of A. sp LA 2 in samples from Santa Cruz Island station 2515 at a depth of 102 m. There were 45 individuals and he recorded them as Aphelochaeta sp HYP1. In this species the methyl green staining pattern revealed an unstained “ring” between the prostomium and peristomium. This ring extended around the entire animal at the anterior end. The presentation of novel Aphelochaeta continued as Rick outlined the description of Aphelochaeta sp SD 3. There were 11 specimens collected from Santa Cruz Island at 25 m depth. A discussion then ensued regarding A. petersenae , A. sp SD 4, and A. sp HYP 1. As we have been collecting and viewing more and more of these animals, we have been noticing that there are intermediate patterns in the methyl green staining. Rick will be examining more specimens with the possibility of lumping these provisional species. 13 SEPTEMBER MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Ron Velarde at approximately 9:45 a.m.. The first order of business Ron attended to was distributing City of San Diego B’98 samples which had been selected for re-identification for the QA/QC aspect of the project. Ron then passed around a flyer from SCCWRP which listed upcoming seminars in marine related topics. The flyer is included as an attachment in the paper version of this newsletter, or to those of you who have gone “electronic”, please go to SCCWRP’s website (www.sccwrp.org ) for information on these seminars. The current issue of the Festivus, the Newsletter/Journal of the San Diego Shell Club, was passed around as it contained an article on the Panamic pearl oyster, Pteria sterna in Carlsbad lagoon. Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) then brought up to those present the idea of having more SCAMIT t-shirts and hats created. It was pointed out that a new silkscreen would need to be made. We decided to see what kind of response Ann Dalkey receives for the few remaining items she has in stock. If those sell-out, then potentially we will look into re-newing our supply. We briefly discussed the SCAMIT website. Even though it’s been said previously, Jay has created a beautiful and functional on-line presence for SCAMIT, and we all owe him our thanks. We have recently received a series of new memberships on-line, most from other countries. An increasing percentage of website visits are also from other countries and it appears the site is now acting, in many instances, as an international hub for people searching for marine related links. If that is indeed the case, then we have achieved a good deal of our objective of engaging a broader audience. [ Now, if they would just write and submit some items to the NL...Ed.]. 6 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 We decided to finally turn our attention to animals and the first ones that caught our “eyes” were two strange looking crabs brought by Carol Paquette. The first animal was Cardisoma crassum which is normally found in river banks in mangrove/estuarine type habitats in southern Mexico and Central America; however, this animal was collected on a heat treatment screen at the Scattergood Generating Station in El Segundo. The cooling water intake, where the animal was collected, is at a depth of 7 m. The animal appeared to have been alive just prior to being taken based on its color and condition of its carapace, appendages, etc.. This posed an interesting question since this was obviously not a marine crab. When identifed by Todd Zimmerman (NHMLAC), he was surprised to hear of the locality at which it was collected. Some suggestions were that it was a pet store purchase that was mistakenly “returned to the sea” or perhaps it was dropped from the beak of a hungry gull (said with less seriousness). Whatever the answer, it remains a mystery at this time. Despite the presence of the animal in a live state at time of capture, it does not, and could never range into this area. Appropriate habitat is completely lacking in Southern California although an ersatz habitat in a terrarium could be constructed. Much like the occasional Maine lobsters which escape from experimental aquaculture rearing in Southern California, and find their way into benthic or trawl samples, presence of the species in our local waters is completely accidental. The second crab was not such a mystery, more of a rarity. It was Euphylax dovii taken again on a heat treatment screen but this time at the San Onofre power plant. This animal is not usually seen in nearshore collections, being an oceanic species, but has been previously seen and reported from our area. After much “oohing and ahhing” over the big crabs we turned our rapt attention to the mollusks. Kelvin Barwick (CSDMWWD) had been working on a sample from Mission Bay (Station 2425) that was “full” of interesting and unusual (for those of us accustomed to off¬ shore work) mollusks. The following animals discussed are all from this station. First Kelvin brought forth a small gastropod which turned out to be Barleeia subtenuis. The animal was present in high densities (748 individuals in the rep). This tiny rissoid is very common in Mission Bay, as is its congener B. californicus , grazing on the diatom film covering the sandy bay bottom, or on the diatom growth on attached algae and/or seagrass in the bay. There was a slightly different looking Turbonilla from this station as well, but it was decided to leave it at Turbonilla sp. due to the nomenclatural problems still clinging to this genus in local waters although Kelvin will compare it with the species described and illustrated in the pyramidellid monograph of Dali and Bartsch. Dr. Jim McLean says he thinks our pyramidellid problems have been resolved in his draft monograph on the gastropods of California, but it is not yet available. Next was a Lirularia parcipictum which the San Diego lab had not previously seen. The species ID was based on the presence of a basal carina, and the nature of the spiral ornamentation of the whorls. The examined specimens were also rather low spired for the species. A juvenile arcid clam was brought forth and not immediately recognized by those present. It was considered a probable Anadara, but was unfamiliar to all present. A digital image has been sent to Paul Scott and further ID is still pending at this time (see cover photo). Next, a juvenile Leporimetis obesa. Again, an animal not normally seen by the San Diego lab in their standard ocean monitoring program, this, combined with its small size, threw them for a loop. As with many other bivalves, the juvenile does not look much like the adult. 7 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 Uneroded adults do, however, carry around their developmental history in their shells, and provide the necessary evidence to connect the juveniles and adults. Two more juvenile clams were brought forth, one turned out to be a very small Semele venusta and the other, a young Cumingia californica. All of these animals can, on occasion, be taken offshore if the sediment particle mix and organic load are appropriate, but are much more commonly found in bays, harbors, and estuaries. Tony Phillips (CLAEMD) brought three variant forms of Ophiodermella to be examined by Ron Velarde (CSDMWWD). After much examination and discussion it was decided that the three animals were tentatively all Ophiodermella inermis with slight variations in color and sculpture. These animals will be checked by Dr. James McLean at LACMNH. Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) then brought forth the ugly question of Lirobittium. She had examples of various forms of the genus from different B’98 stations as well as the standard animal that the City of San Diego sees in its regular monitoring stations and calls Lirobittium larum. CSDLAC as well as Hyperion both call their common form Lirobittium rugatum There was some discussion as to standardizing the various lab approaches to this animal and no conclusion was reached. The animals brought by Megan were left at Lirobittium sp. for the time being. The question may be addressed at a later meeting on gastropods with Hank Chaney of the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History. We have already considered species of Lirobittium at a previous meeting with Paul Scott at Santa Barbara, but without much consensus on the boundaries of the taxa we see. The afternoon started (and ended) with Crustacea. Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD) brought forth a strange little animal found in one of the Channel Islands samples. The animal was recognized by Don Cadien as being a harpactacoid copepod of the genus Scutellidium. The examined specimen had a metallic sheen to its carapace. Although we had intended to consider a number of taxa within the amphipod family Oedicerotidae, including several provisional forms erected by Dean Pasko from San Diego samples, we got stuck on the Synchelidium. The question of proper generic usage was raised again. Don Cadien referred to his earlier arguments for not adopting the genus Americhelidium as proposed by Bousfield and Chevrier (1996), but suggested that the correction indicated by Bousfield (1997) might be adequate to address the problems posed by the defective generotype selection. He informed us that the draft Catalogue of North American Aquatic Invertebrates was using Americhelidium , and that by the publication of the SCAMIT Ed. 4 listing, we might need to change our current position on the subject (rejection of Americhelidium ). This genus (whether we use Americhelidium or Synchelidium ) has always proved to be troublesome. Shoemaker grappled with it, and passed it off to J. L. Barnard prior to his death. Barnard struggled with it for quite awhile, parsing out the intertidal micropleon, and leaving behind manuscript names for three other species. None of us were willing to tackle the problem which would involve critical examination of a large body of material from the Allan Hancock collections identified as his manuscript species by J. L. Barnard. This is accessible, now being on the shelves of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. Some desultory attempts were made but no real progress. Then Amphipacifica Vol. 2 No. 2 arrived in May of 1996 and we had the Bousfield and Chevrier attempt to make sense of these animals. They retained the two Mills species - rectipalmum and shoemakeri, and added another four from the Eastern Pacific - millsi , pectinatum, setosum , and variabilum. The key they included did not deal well with 8 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 the separation of the animals, and was critiqued by Don Cadien in NL Vol 15(6) [October 1996]. A replacement key was “in progress” but has never been sent out. Dissatisfaction was expressed over the nature of the characters used in both the Bousfield and Chevrier key, and in the pictorial key which Don Cadien had constructed in development of a replacement key. Sex linked characters such as the length of the third article of the mandibular palp were considered poor for general use, and were to be avoided if at all possible. Likewise characters which were difficult to distinguish, such as the shape and relative posterior extension of the coxae and pleonal epimera, the relative shape and size of the articles of the third leg, and the proportions of the maxilliped outer plate were deemed too difficult in application to provide a viable key. In essence, we stepped back a pace and started over. Between the members present at the meeting we agreed to try using a series of characters which we felt could be repeatably evaluated. These were: 1) the orientation of the G1 palm; 2) the setation of the anterodistal margin of the basis of Gl; 3) the pattern of setae on the ventral margin of coxa 1; 4) the ratio of dactyl to propod length of G2; 5) the number of dorsal setal groups on the propod of G2; 6 ) the number of ventral setal groups on the propod of G2; 7) the ratio of G2 propod length to maximum width; 8) maximal propod width vs. basis width on G2; 9) extent of posterodistal lobe on the basis of P7; and 10) the nature of, or lack of, posterior marginal setation on the basis of P7. Don Cadien also suggested characters based on the spine and serration pattern of the uropods had value, but were not well enough known as regards variability between individuals, sexual dimorphism, and ontogenic change for current application. We scored each of these characters as follows: 1. Gl palmar orientation - transverse [0], oblique [1], intermediate “can’t decide” [2]. This seemingly simple decision as to the orientation of the palm has proven to be quite difficult in practice. There is considerable perceptual difference between individuals in how a particular palm should be scored. In some cases there is an unequivocally transverse palm, but in numerous other cases a palm that is transverse at the hinge may taper off into obliquity before it joins the hind margin of the propod. Depending on just where this takes place such a palm could be scored as any of the above states. We must constrain ourselves to only the most clear cut cases for scores of 0 or 1, and place all other more problematic structures in 2. 2. the setation of the anterodistal margin of the basis of Gl - strongly setose, with 4- 10+ setae, usually long [0]; weakly setose, with 1-3 setae, usually very short [1]; setae lacking [2] 3. the pattern of setae on the ventral margin of coxa 1 - setae markedly longer at posteroventral edge of coxa [0], or setae of posteroventral edge the same length as elsewhere on the ventral margin of coxa [1] (this includes cases where long and short setae are interspersed along the entire ventral margin of the coxa) 4. the ratio of dactyl to propod length in G2 - 1/3 [0], 1/4 [1], 1/5 [2], 1/6 [3], 1/7 [4], 1/8 [5], 1/9 [6]. These are all rounded to the nearest choice based on optical micrometer measurements of the lengths of dactyl and propod. 5. the number of dorsal setal groups on the propod of G2 - scored directly 1=1,2=2, etc. Groups may have a single member and still be counted as a positional group. The group at the base of the dactyl is not counted, as it is present in all species. 9 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 CHARACTER recti mills i shoe mien) pect varia lati amer setos guij G1 palm orientation 0 2 2 1 2 0 2 0 1 0 G1 basis marginal setae 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G1 coxa setal pattern 0 1 0 ? 0 0 0 1 0 0 G2 dactyl/propod length ratio 0 5 2 6 2 3 1 5 2 1 G2 propod dorsal setal groups 2 8 1 2 1 3 1 5 0 0 G2 propod ventral setal groups 6 10 4 6 5 7 2 7 6 3 G2 propod length/max width 4 7 6 8 5 6 6 7 3 5 G2 propod width/basis width 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 0 P7 posterior lobe of basis 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 P7 post marginal setae on basis 0 2 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 Table 1. - Character table for Synchelidium 6. the number of ventral setal groups on the propod of G2 - scored directly 1=1, 2=2, etc. Groups may have a single member and still be counted as a positional group. The anterior-most group, which points anteriorly off the tip of the fixed finger is not counted. It is not considered a ventral group. 7. the ratio of G2 propod length to maximum width - expressed as nearest whole number, (i.e. .71mm/ .08mm = 8.875, score 9) 8. maximal propod width vs. basis width on G2 - wider than basis [0], subequal to basis [1], narrower than basis [2] 9. extent of posterodistal lobe on the basis of P7 - no lobe [0], a short lobe not reaching beyond the distal margin of article 3 [1], a long lobe extending along the posterior margin of article 4 [2] 10. the nature of, or lack of, posterior marginal setation on the basis of P7 - setae present throughout [0], setae absent [1], setae proximally only [2]. All setae on the posterior margin of the basis of P7 should be simple. There are in many species a series of long plumose setae attached to a ridge on the median face of the basis. These usually extend posteriorly, and reach beyond the posterior margin of the basis. THESE ARE NOT MARGINAL SETAE, they are facial setae, and are not counted in scoring this character. These ten characters seem to adequately separate the described species (the western Pacific species latipalpum, and gurjanovae, and the western Atlantic species americanum are also included in the table) according to Table 1. Character 2 - setae of the anterior margin of the basis of G1 is invariant for these species as scored. It is retained until we finish examining our own specimens. If it is not useful in separation after they are examined, the scoring 10 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 will be redefined to better discriminate between species. Please note the illustration of Bousfield and Chevrier of shoemakeri shows a condition which would have been scored as 1 in this character. In Mills original description, however, the illustrated condition was scored as 0 and this was used in the table. Comparison of specimens with the character table should yield presumptive identifications. These should be checked against the descriptions and illustrations of the species in Bousfield and Chevrier (1996) and, in the case of rectipalmum and shoemakeri , against the original descriptions of Mills (1962), which do not agree in all particulars with the later reports. The SCAMIT voucher sheet for Synchelidium rectipalmum was found to disagree with the original description in the configuration of the lobe on the basis of P7, and should be used with caution. Our discussion of oedicerotids, as well as other non-polychaete groups will continue at the meeting scheduled for 18 October at the San Diego lab. By then we should all have been able to apply the above character table to our specimens, and have comments to make about their applicability and validity as separatory tools. If you find them wanting, try and come up with suggested alternatives by the meeting. Sigambra ALERT - Tom Parker (CSDLAC) Licher & Westheide (1997) review the descriptions and taxonomy of Sigambra bassi and S. tentaculata. Previously local workers have relied upon various features to identify Sigambra species. The use of soft tissue features such as median antennal length relative to lateral antennal length, prostomial margin shape, and papillae on the proboscis have been utilized. Hard features such as the first occurrence of setigers with hooked setae have also been counted upon as final determinations of whether S. tentaculata , bassi , or setosa specimens were present. The following brief table (see Table 2., pg 12) is a synopsis comparing the relevant determining factors used in the MMS Atlas versus those reviewed by Licher & Westheide. It seems likely that a local review of practices and specimens is needed to standardize our identifications. FOLLOW UP The specimen of the crab genus Palicus seen at the meeting on 16 August has been further examined and is an example of Palicus lucasii from California. The first reported specimen from local waters was taken in 1994 by CSDLAC off Palos Verdes. Reexamination of that specimen with the comparative material of the second specimen, and additional material from the Galapagos, Panama, and the Gulf of California has shown the original ID as P. lucasii to be incorrect. This second specimen, like the first, is a male. Examination of the male pleopods by Dr. Todd Zimmerman (NHMLAC) confirmed the identity of the second specimen, which was taken in 124 ft. of water at ITP station 2101 off Imperial Beach. The identify of the first specimen from off Palos Verdes was later established by Todd as P. cortezi (Crane 1937), originally described from the Gulf of California. This is a new record for California, and will be added to the emendations to be made to the 3 rd Edition of the SCAMIT list. Many thanks to Todd for his efforts in clarifying the identity of these difficult animals. MORE CHANGE Our coast has two representatives of the synopiid amphipod genus Tiron, or it used to. It has finally been recognized that the presence of a mandibular palp in T. biocellata, and it’s absence in T. tropakis, is of no small significance. Reference to Barnard & Karaman (1991) shows both species still listed under Tiron. The same authors, however, include as a valid generic level taxon Metatiron Rabindranath 1972. As pointed out by Thomas (1993), Barnard & Karaman failed to reallocate 11 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 Sigambra Species Issues (S. bassi vs. S. tentaculata) Feature Hilbig 1994 Licher&Westheide 1997 relative length of antennae relied upon "rather irrelevant" number of prostomial papillae 8 vs. 14 14 for both posterior margin of prostomium not relied upon "of little value" both initial setiger. S. tentaculata has first setiger with notohook relied upon consistent initial occurrence in Setiger # 4. S. bassi often 11-15, but also as early as 3. Variability limits its taxonomic value. recognizes wide range may be shown via recognizes wide range may be molecular exam to be other species. depth/range shown requests critical re-exam of Exams to date have not provided specimens from great depth information necessary to distinguish new/dilferent taxa. notopodial spine+capillary+ hook not commented on unique for S. bassi nomenclature B & H 74 S’, tentaculata listed as B&H 68&74 S. tentaculata listed as S. dispute same bassi Table 2. - Sigambra spp. comparison 12 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 species originally described as Tiron into Metatiron. One of the salient differences between the two genera is the mandibular palp, which is absent in members of Metatiron. In consequence we must recognize that “T. ” tropakis belongs in Metatiron , while T. biocellata is properly allocated to Tiron. Barnard explicitly mentioned the absence of a mandibular palp in his original description of Tiron tropakis in 1972. In his original description of T. biocellata he indicated that the mouthparts were the same as T. spiniferum , the type of Tiron , with but two exceptions. The mandibular palp was neither illustrated nor described, but was not listed as an exception (Barnard 1962). Examination of locally collected T. biocellata and M. tropakis have confirmed the presence of a palp in the former, and its absence in the latter. Jim Roney (HYP) had mentioned this difference in a Taxonomic List Server communication earlier this year, but either did not appreciate (as I had not), or didn’t mention the consequent separation at the generic level. Edition 3 of the SCAMIT Taxonomic Listing is in error as regards Metatiron tropakis (Barnard 1972); a correction will be made in Ed. 4. - Don Cadien (CSDLAC) NEW ISOPOD Hi all, Just a quick “heads up” or “look out” regarding Southern California Bight Edotia. There appears to be a third species of Edotia in the SCB that we are tentatively calling EDOTIA SP SD 1 in our database. The specimens were collected in 60 m of water from one of the Bight’98 Channel Island stations. The species resembles E. sublittoralis very closely, especially in terms of pleonal morphology — i.e., they have an inflated pleon (or pleotelson) with large dorsal swellings rather then the non- inflated pleon with a distinct transverse ridge (carina) characteristic of Edotia sp B. In other words, they would key to E. sublittoralis in the key I distributed some time ago. However, the specimens looked a little “different” and were from relatively deep water more characteristic of the habitat of E. sp B. Consequently, I examined the pereopods of the “new” species and they appear to be distinct from either E. sublittoralis or E. sp B (the pereopods of these two species are quite distinct from each other). I will try and put out a sheet soon describing these differences and any others that may become apparent. In the meantime, I would appreciate it if you could pull any “suspect” specimens and send them to me for additional examination. I would consider suspect any “sublittoralis ” occurring at depths > about 45 m — actually perhaps any Channel Island critters in general. Finally, I am trying to complete my paper describing E. sp B and redescribing E. sublittoralis , although I guess I’ll now add the 3rd species as well. However, I still haven’t had the opportunity to examine any Edotia sp B specimens from waters north of the San Diego area. Consequently, any specimens or even location info (i.e., I need a Northern range limit) would be appreciated. Thanks, Tim Timothy D. Stebbins City of San Diego Marine Biology Laboratory 4918 North Harbor Drive, Suite 101 San Diego, CA 92106 USA Tel: (619) 692-4900; Fax: (619) 692-4902 E-mail: tds@sdcity.sannet.gov JOB OPPORTUNITY I recently received the following e-mail from Maggie Dutch and am posting this listing for any of you who may be interested (I for one, would love to live in Washington - M. Lilly, Secretary) Hi Megan, I work with the Washington State Department of Ecology’s Marine Monitoring 13 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 5 Unit. Our group conducts both sediment and water column monitoring throughout Puget Sound, as part of the Puget Sound Ambient Monitoring Program. The state Department of Personnel has recently opened the Environmental Specialist 2,3,4, and 5 registers from which we may hire new employees. Although we currently have no positions for which we are hiring, we may in the near future. I was hoping that you might be able to place a notice in the SCAMIT newsletter indicating that we are interested in having folks get on these registers who have 1) strong sediment chemistry, bioassay, and infaunal monitoring experience, 2) strong statistical/data analysis and report writing skills, and 3) an interest in moving to the state of Washington (rain and all:-) !!!). Anyone with the interest and qualifications can contact me and send a resume (address, phone, and e-mail below). To get on the Environmental Specialist (ES 2 through 5) registers (you must be on the registers to be hired), an application should be submitted to our state personnel office: Washington State Department of Personnel Applications Unit 600 South Franklin PO Box 47561 Olympia, WA 98504-7561 Information regarding these open registers, and an electronic version of the state application form can be found on Ecology’s Employment Opportunity web site: http://www.wa.gov/ecology/es/jobs.html Maggie Dutch Supervisor, Marine Monitoring Unit Washington State Department of Ecology 300 Desmond Drive PO Box 47710 Olympia, WA 98504-7710 mdut461@ecy.wa.gov 360-407-6021 BIBLIOGRAPHY Banse, Karl & Katharine D. Hobson. 1968. Benthic Polychaetes from Puget Sound Washington, with Remarks on Four Other Species. Proceedings of the United States National Museum 125:1-52. —. 1974. Benthic Errantiate Polychaetes of British Columbia and Washington. Bulletin of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 185:1-111. Barnard, J. Laurens. 1962. Benthic marine Amphipoda of southern California: families Tironidae to Gammaridae. Pacific Naturalist 3(2):73-115. —. 1972. A Review of the Family Synopiidae (= Tironidae), Mainly Distributed in the Deep Sea (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 124:1 —, & Gordan S. Karaman. 1991. The Families and Genera of Marine Gammaridean Amphipoda (Except Marine Gammaroids). Records of the Australian Museum Supplement 13:1-866. Blake, James A. 1996. Chapter 4. Family Spionidae Grube, 1850. Pp. 81-223 IN: Blake, James A., Brigitte Hilbig, and Paul H. Scott (eds.) Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Vol. 6, The Annelida Part 3. Polychaeta: Orbiniidae to Cossuridae. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, Ca. 418pp. 14 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 Bousfield, Edward L. 1997. Text Errata. Vol. 11(2). (Melitidae and Oedicerotidae). Amphipacifica 2(3): 140. Bousfield, Edward L., and Andree Chevrier. 1996. The amphipod family Oedicerotidae on the Pacific coast of North America. Part 1. The Monoculodes and Synchelidium generic complexes: systematics and distributional ecology. Amphipacifica 2(2):75-148. Ehlers, E. 1887. Report on the annelids of the dredging expedition of the U.S. coast survey steamer BLAKE. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard. Memoir 15:1-335 Hilbig, Brigitte. 1994. Chapter 9. Family Hesionidae. Pp. 243-270 IN: Blake, James A., & Brigitte Hilbig (eds.). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 4, The Annelida Part 1. Oligochaeta and Polychaeta: Phyllodocida (Phyllodocidae to Paralacydoniidae). Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, Ca. 377pp. Jenner, Ronald A. 1999. Metazoan phylogeny as a tool in evolutionary biology: Current problems and discrepancies in application. Belgian Journal of Zoology 129(1):245-261. —, & Frederick R. Schram. 1999. The grand game of metazoan phylogeny: rules and strategies. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 74(2): 121-142. Larsen, K. & George D. F. Wilson. 1998. Tanaidomorphan systematics - Is it obsolete? Journal of Crustacean Biology 18(2):346-362. Licher, Frank & Wilfried Westheide. 1997. Review of the genus Sigambra (Polychaeta: Hesionidae), redescription of S. bassi (Hartman, 1947), and descriptions of two new species from Thailand and China. Steenstrupia 23:1-20. Mills, Eric L. 1962. Amphipod crustaceans of the Pacific coast of Canada: II. Family Oedicerotidae. Natural History Papers, National Museum of Canada 15:1-21. Pechenik, Jan A. 1999. On the advantages and disadvantages of larval stages in benthic marine invertebrate life cycles. Marine Ecology Progress Series 177:269-297. Rabindranath, P. 1972. Three species of gammaridean Amphipoda (Crustacea) from the Trivandrum Coast, India. Zoologischer Anzeiger 188:84-97. Ruiz, Gregory M., Paul Fofonoff, Anson H. Hines, & Edwin D. Grosholz. 1999. Non- indigenous species as stressors in estuarine and marine communities: Assessing invasion impacts and interactions. Limnology and Oceanography 44(3):950-972. Sundberg, Per & Marianne Saur. 1998. Molecular phylogeny of some European heteronemertean (Nemertea) species and the monophyletic status of Riseriellus , Lineus , and Micrura. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 10(3):271-280. Thomas, James Darwin. 1993. Identification Manual for the Marine Amphipoda: (Gammaridea) I. Common Coral Reef and Rocky Bottom Amphipods of South Florida. Final Report to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Contract SP290. 80pp. Viejo, Rosa M. 1999. Mobile epifauna inhabiting the invasive Sargassum muticum and two local seaweeds in northern Spain. Aquatic Botany 64(2): 131-149. 15 September, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.5 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet .gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 6 SUBJECT: B’98 Non-polychaete problem taxa GUEST SPEAKER: none DATE: November 15, 1999 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. LOCATION: City of San Diego Marine Biology Lab 4918 N. Harbor Dr. # 201 San Diego, CA 92106 The first of the November meetings will take place at the San Diego lab on Monday, the 15 th . It will be devoted to Crustacea, and probably finish our series of meetings on the problem non-polychaete taxa taken in the Bight’98 benthic program. The second meeting, dealing with polychaete taxa, will take place in the Worm Lab of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County on Monday the 29 th LAST ONE OF THE MILLENNIUM With January 1 rapidly approaching, it is time to schedule our year-end events. Among those is the 1999 SCAMIT Christmas Party. Our millennium-ending gathering will be held once again in the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium. As in the past we will have the facilities to ourselves, a delightful experience, and one to be treasured. Attendees should plan on bringing some dish (it is, after all, a pot-luck), and if past parties are any guide, a feast should result. SCAMIT will provide a main dish of either turkey or ham, and will provide beverages. Chaetoderma mavinelli CSDA10(1), 1/12/93, 154 ft Photo by K. Barwick 8/97 FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter in not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 6 Those with a taste for a particular beverage can also bring that for their own consumption. Contact Vice-President Leslie Harris t< Hiharris@ bcf.usc.edu>] to coordinate dishes; although chili-mac is very tasty, 20 different editions is not a good thing. This is a Members Only event [non-member www readers - sorry], but family and a limited number of guests are welcome. We will try to arrange for Santa to be in attendance for the kids. This has usually been the case in the past. The combination of season, location, occasion, and congenial friends should once again guarantee a memorable experience. If Saturday, the 11 th of December, is an option for you, please plan to attend. Let Leslie know how many will be in your party, and how many kids are involved. Festivities will start at 6 p.m. and continue till the museum staffer who will be assisting us says it is time to close the doors. As in past years arrangements will be made to have the Gift Shop open for our perusal and topical Christmas shopping. Bring a list and find some unique items for friends and family. This is our last party before 2000, so let’s all get together for a big one. Hope you can make it! FIRST ONE OF THE NEXT SCUM, Southern California United Malacologists, will be holding their 4 th Annual Meeting on 15 January 2000 at the IGPP Building at Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla. With the flurry of year-end activities this year we need to mark our calendars early so that we won’t forget to attend this get-together. It’s a great opportunity to meet and mingle with others interested in and studying mollusks in our area. Attend if you can, you’ll enjoy yourself and make new contacts. Larry Lovell ( llovell@ucsd.edu ) can provide more information. He will be assisting in his capacity as Curator of the SIO Invertebrate Collections. NEW LITERATURE Further evidence of the relationship of the Porifera to other metazoan phyla was provided by Watkins & Beckenbach (1999) using a 2550 base pair sequence from the mitochondrial genome. They found a surprising level of correspondence between the genome of the sequenced sponge, Tetilla sp (T. spinosa/ villosa) and that of Metridium senile. This would seem to make the positioning of the Porifera in a separate and distinct subkingdom as recommended by Willmer (1990) inadvisable. Hox genes provide evidence to help resolve some of the earliest divergences of the major phyla. As reported by de Rosa et al (1999), their recent sequencing of Hox genes from a priapulid and a brachiopod lend support to the tripartite division of the Bilateria into Deuterostomia, Ecdysiozoa, and Lophotrochozoa. Hox complement seems well suited to recording this high level divergence, which is believed to have taken place prior to the formation of the major “crown” phyla before or at the beginning of the Cambrian. The Hox data match the phylum positioning of Halanych et al (1995), based on 18S ribosomal DNA analyses, and place the Brachiopoda firmly among the Lophotrochozoa, and not in the more traditional deuterostome position. Phylogeny within the holothurians was investigated by Kerr & Kim (1999). Their results, based both on molecular data and on morphological evaluation, suggest that the current organization within the class is incorrect. The authors do not present an explicit hierarchy differing from that currently accepted, but do present the data which causes them to think that arrangement faulty. Their reticence is based on a degree of incongruence between the molecular and morphological data¬ sets. Hopefully the discrepancies can be resolved, and a clear and more correct hierarchy subsequently proposed either by these or other authors . They also consider the 2 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.6 evolution of larval forms within the group, and suggest that the auricularia larva has evolved more than once. The symmetry of the title (bi- penta-bi-decaradial) is actually the evolutionary “track” taken by one group, the Rhopalodinidae. These animals have a decaradial symmetry derived from a biradial precursor, which in turn was derived from the typical pentaradial symmetry of the phylum. The phylum symmetry was derived from a bilateral base. This pathway yields a symmetry history of biradial, pentaradial, biradial, and lastly decaradial for this highly modified holothurian group. On a smaller scale Heupel and Bennett (1999) discuss the association of the praniza larvae of gnathiid isopods with sharks. Although the adults of these isopods are free-living in the benthos, the larvae are fish parasites. The individual parasites could be found at a variety of locations on the host (in this case the epaulette shark, HemiscyIlium ocellatum ), but most were found attached to the gill filaments. It is not currently known if any of our local Gnathia species are associated with particular fish hosts, or which hosts are involved. In recent years the impacts of trawling activities, particularly those of the large commercial trawling operations, have been increasingly recognized. With trawl sampling a standard part of NPDES monitoring for larger agencies, one must also wonder about the effects of the trawling associated with monitoring studies. While Prena et al (1999) used a large gear rather than the smaller otter trawl used locally, their experimental data can also shed light on our situation. They did report impacts of trawling on the epifauna. Thick shelled mollusks were the least damaged of the considered taxa, with crustaceans sustaining intermediate levels of damage, and relatively exposed and slow moving echinoderms the most affected. Biomass within experimentally trawled areas was about 25% less than that in reference areas upon re-trawl. Samples taken in Bight ‘98 from around the northern Channel Islands were frequently found to consist primarily of biogenic sediments. These bottoms have, in addition to some fine particles, large amounts of bryozoan debris, foraminiferal tests, barnacle plate fragments, mollusk shell fragments, echinoderm spine and test fragments, and other calcareous constituents. These bottoms are in many respects analogous to coral/coralline algal sediments in more tropical areas. Santa- Isabel et al (1998) report on the polychaetes of such a biogenic sand bottom off Brazil, and provide data with which Bight’98 biogenic sand samples can be compared. Ballast water transport of NIS (non-indigenous species) between widely separated areas in different parts of the world ocean is now well documented. After introduction into a new potential range, however, a successful invader needs to expand it’s initial beachhead. Lavoie et al (1999) discuss this aspect of species introductions, emphasizing the role that ballast water continues to play in dispersal of introduced species along a continental coast¬ line. While becoming established, an invading species can manifest impacts on existing populations as it elbows its way into the local ecosystem. Crooks and Khim (1999) experimentally investigate the nature of the impact of the introduced mytilid clam Musculista senhousia on the community it has invaded. Since Musculista is a nest building clam living in aggregations, it can have a profound effect on associated organisms just in it’s physical habitat modification. It also has the potential of biologically modifying the habitat by its activities of respiration, filtration, particle fixation (as mucous bound fecal strings), and larval predation. By using artificial mats simulating the physical disturbance of a Musculista surface nest aggregation, the authors teased out the physical 3 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 6 effect from the combined physical and biological effects. They found that the physical effect was consistently larger that the biological effects. Reise et al (1999) report on the status of NIS along the North Sea coasts. Invasions seemed to peak in the 1970’s, and over 80 species are believed to have been introduced. NIS now form between 6 and 20% of the fauna, depending on habitat (the numbers higher in estuaries and brackish environments). The authors data shows that in most cases the indigenous community could accommodate the invaders, suffering little as a result. They caution, however, that steps should be taken to reduce the number of new invaders, as each has the potential for serious disruption of the local biota. Armonies and Reise (1999) focus on a single species that fits the general trend noted in the last paper, the establishment of a NIS without serious damage or displacement of the existing community. In this case the clam Ensis americanus, introduced from the western Atlantic, has settled in to a coarse sand habitat not completely exploited previously. The under-exploited niche they occupy is that of subtidal/intertidal sands subjected to strong currents. Even though there is little evidence to suggest negative effects at present, the situation must be monitored. The authors note that the feeding activity of the new immigrants fixes fine particulates from the overlying water in the form of fecal material. While most of this is exported from the immediate vicinity of its production, in areas of high clam density there is a tendency for some to become incorporated in local sediments. This is gradually changing the grain size and organic content of the bottom, perhaps to the ultimate detriment of the indigenous community. 27 SEPTEMBER MEETING The meeting was held in the worm lab of the LA Natural History Museum. Attending were Tom Parker, Ron Velarde, Larry Lovell, Tony Phillips, Cheryl Brantley, Rick Rowe, Leslie Harris (off and on since she was setting up her computer data base of invertebrate images), and Dot Norris. Before the meeting Leslie extended an offer to the members from the San Lrancisco Laboratory who attend meetings in Los Angeles in future. If they fly into Burbank, she will pick them up before the meeting and if they need a place to stay, she has offered accommodation at her home in Pasadena. If you want to make such an arrangement contact her at . The business portion of the meeting included a circulation of the treasurer’s report, a discussion of the status of the Bight project, new publications including a new species of Eunoe from Russia (Rzhavsky & Shabad 1999), and the scheduling of future meetings. The title page of the Eunoe paper can be viewed at http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/ customhouse/60/rzsh99_17.gif). Other announcements included Larry Lovell’s discovery of a plastics firm (MGM plastics in San Marcos, 760-744-8909) which will make sorting trays for $ 16/tray. The bottom of the tray is scored into a grid of 1 cm squares and looks well crafted. The conversation turned to the problem Bight animals, but before the discussion got too involved we asked Larry to look at some problem Pholoe from San Lrancisco collections (they look like P. minuta but have a facial tubercle). Larry took a number of specimens of this form for examination and will render his opinion at a future meeting. A question was also raised about Eumida sp. B (whether it is actually E. longicornuta) . The members present agreed that it is indeed E. longicornuta. Larry said that we should be cautious of our Lumbrineris luti identifications (he suspects that some may be Scoletoma tetaura) and one character we should check is which setiger the hooks start on. It was also agreed that the genus for the species luti should be Scoletoma. 4 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.6 The discussion of Bight animals turned up a new Chone from Sta. 2330 off Ventura. It has a staining pattern similar to C. albocincta but no staining in the abdomen, and a relatively large dorsal separation of the collar. Ron introduced a Pherusa with ‘spindley spines’ and a Piromus from San Diego and Mission Bay. Leslie didn’t know the Pherusa and the Piromus she thought was probably P. capillata. Other specimens from Mission Bay included an acrocirrid, a large Cossura sp., a Neanthes (? acuminata) and a Hemipodus sp. General observation from Ron was that Mission Bay stations were extremely variable in their polychaete communities. Rick will put out a voucher sheet for the new Hemipodus. Ron also introduced a Eulalia sp (small with distinct ciliated bands starting on the 13th segment). Then someone brought out a cirratulid (they couldn’t be avoided any longer) and all semblance of order was shot. Chaetozone setosa specimens were agreed to represent a complex of species, but with the confusion in the literature (Blake’s name was used in vain) and absence of type specimens (again his name was used), they decided to leave all specimens fitting the general description as Chaetozone setosa. These are defined as all Chaetozone without a separation between cinctures in the posterior segments. Tony introduced some Chaetozone spinosal - characters included large extended head spines starting on setiger 35. There was some discussion that these specimens may be C. sp. L Other Chaetozone were C. sp. SD3 - (a harbor species with a defined staining pattern, dark setae, slight inflation at about setiger 20, long tapering prostomium and a dorsal ridge and small eyes, spines start at about setiger 40, the 3rd setiger separated from the 2nd at 1/2 the length of the separation between the 1st and 2nd) and C. senticosa (even staining pattern on the lateral sides of the peristomium and has few spines). The Aphelochaeta/Monticellina discussion uncovered controversy as to what is meant by“fimbriated” vs. “serrated” neurosetae. Both are visually similar at magnification 40X , but are the key characteristics for defining the genera. Distinction of the two genera on the basis of variable interpretation of these setal characters, often within the work of a single author, renders their use problematic. This is a central difficulty within this group, and SCAMIT needs to address it before any meaningful consensus on the definition of local cirratulid taxa can be obtained. This will come up with a vengeance during the B’98 QC sample exchange. Until it is resolved, the likelihood of having identical species in Aphelochaeta and Monticellina separated only by the interpretation of the marginal structure of the neurosetae is high. Such a separation/ duplication is unlikely to reflect reality. The presumption, in the case of such species pairs, is that definition of the setal character is suspect, and must be closely reconsidered. Rick suggested an easier character would be the relative length of the neurosetae to the notosetae (much shorter and sickle shaped in Monticellina , mostly). This, and other characters less problematic than the “fimbriated/serrated setae” need to be sought. The problems in cirratulids will not be resolvable until a character suite that can be more objectively used is developed. Some problems with the staining pattern of Aphelochaeta petersoni were discussed. Rick’s description and Blake’s MMS description do not match and both types are being observed in the samples. Consensus was that both types would be called A. petersoni. Aphelochaeta ?multifilis ‘fimbriated’ neurosetae were observed under the compound scope. At 40x these setae resemble the serrated setae of a 5 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 6 Monticellina. Rick again suggested taking into account the relative size of the neurosetae compared to the notosetae and neurosetae’s general shape in the determination of genera. Monticellina sp SD 6 was suggested to be M. serratiseta. The main difference was determined to be that M. serratiseta had wide ventral grooves and M. sp. SD 6 had deep grooves. Monticellina sp 1 from Lovell and Phillips was the same as M. sp. SD 4. Tony introduced a M. cryptica with a stain variation similar to Aphelochaeta sp SD2. The last worms discussed were a nephtyid with large dorsal lamellae and a Plakosyllis sp LA 1 from Catalina Island brought by MBC lab. Characters included a flat body, and dorsal globular cirri; it was close to Eurysyllis spicum. Larry will bring a copy of the E. spicum voucher sheet for the next meeting. Leslie had a good suggestion of using o-ring sealed plastic micro-centrifuge tubes with screw caps for transporting small preserved specimens. These can be ordered from VWR and most other scientific supply houses. She gave everyone a tube to check out. The tubes are polyethylene and can be used with either formalin solutions or with alcohol solutions. She also informed us of, and circulated, a special supplemental issue to Volume 42 of the Israel Journal of Zoology (1999) which deals with the ecology and taxonomy of lancelets. Although the status of our only local species, Branchiostoma californiense is not changed in these pages, the authorship of the taxon is corrected from J. G. Cooper 1893 to (Andrews 1893)(this correction will be made in Edition 4 of the SCAMIT list). 18 OCTOBER MEETING The meeting started off with Ron Velarde discussing the 13 October meeting at SCCWRP for QC and synoptic review of B’98 trawl data. Ron and Don Cadien (who also attended) were surprised at the number of errors made in everything from procedures to identifications. Even so the data was much cleaner and more uniform than in the SCBPP in 1994. The data for the invertebrates was cleaned up by the group, every agency was also given a copy of the original data set prior to “cleaning”, so the initial data-set could be reconstructed if the changes were later found to be unwarranted. Larry Cooper, SCCWRP data manager for the project, is also keeping a paper trail log of all modifications to the submitted data. Changes implemented at the meeting were: 1) those which resulted from inclusion of taxa from non-target communities (benthic infaunal and holopelagic taxa), 2) taxa judged too small to meet the minimum size criterion for data inclusion, 3) uncorrected field ID’s for which FID or voucher specimens had been examined - and new IDs generated, or 4) detected field or data entry errors. For instance, one database record of 185 Ascidiacea turned out, based on examination of the field sheets, to be a pull¬ down list data entry error, where Ascidiacea was grabbed instead of Allocentrotus fragilis. A set of secondary analytical data-set changes proposed by Dave Montagne and Don Cadien was circulated to the participants, but not acted upon. Changes of this second type would not be made to the base data-set, but only to the analytic data-set derived from it. These recommendations, if accepted by the analysts, would only be acted on later in the process. Fish data were also addressed at the same meeting. Ron then voiced his opinion/desire that most people should soon be finishing up their B’98 samples and the Re-ID process should begin fairly soon. A few of the QC exchange samples have already been distributed, but most are still awaiting action. John Ljubenkov proudly passed around a book he recently purchased off the web. It was British Sea Anemones and Corals by PH. Gosse, 1860. The book was quite impressive with beautiful hand-painted color plates all 6 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.6 throughout its pages. John maintains that this work, although nearly 140 years old, remains one of the best and most thorough examinations of a fauna in this group. He also passed around an interesting series of publications by Ernest Libby entitled “Internal Structure of Sea Shells”, which contained x-ray photos of many of the more popular and beautiful shells in three folios. If you’ve never seen the results of an x-ray photo of a shell, you should see this publication. Internal structures are characteristic for various groups, and emphasize the geometric nature of gastropod coiling. Hydroids were the animals to start the day. The first problem animals were small individuals in the family Corymorphidae from station 2229 in San Diego Bay at a depth of 11.5 m. The animals threw us all for a loop as they had capitate/moniliform oral tentacles but long, thin villiform aboral tentacles. No evidence of hydromedusae or budding of any kind was evident and neither were growth buds. It was decided to call the animal Corymorphidae sp SD 1 for the time being. As it turns out Dean Pasko also had a specimen of this same animal that he’d brought to the meeting. It was from station 2227, also in San Diego Bay, at a depth of 8.8 m. John Ljubenkov then brought forth a new hydroid, Euphysa sp C, that he’d found in samples from Willapa Bay Washington and Newport, Oregon (Yaquina Bay). Normally, in this area, one sees Euphysa ruthii. Euphysa sp C differs from E. ruthii in a number of ways. For one the stem in sp C is not nearly as long as that found on ruthii. Secondly, from what he’s seen at this point, E. sp C seems to have numerous individuals sharing a common perisarc, while E. ruthii is solitary. He needs to see more of these animals to further clarify the characters which separate them from E. ruthii. Both species seem to reproduce asexually with frustules, ball like bodies which form at the base of the polyp in E. sp C, and at the base of the stem in E. ruthii. These develop into buds which form new polyps. Next up was a rather bizarre situation. A polychaete, Poecilochaetus johnsoni had small hydroids attached to its body wall between consecutive parapods. The hydroids were discovered anterior to setiger 14, where the gills for this worm would start, so they were not being confused with such structures. The hydroids were so tiny as to discourage any attempt at definitive ID. The question remained as to whether these animals were actually parasitizing the polychaete or were acting as commensals and just “going along for the ride”. For those of you interested in parasite/host or commensal/host interactions, this would be an interesting one to study. John Ljubenkov then showed an in situ slide of the anemone Bunodeopsis. The animal is quite distinctive and shouldn’t be difficult to recognize. There are no tentacles on the oral face itself which is almost volcano-like with the mouth being the “rim”. The tentacles are typically curled and covered with white spots which upon closer examination are nematocysts. These animals are found in bays and estuaries living on or near eel grass beds. They like long, stringy substrate upon which to attach themselves and could also be found on frayed lines, etc. The stings from their nematocysts are not powerful enough to cause great agony, but if one stays in the water with them long enough a numbness around the face or potentially other exposed areas can be experienced. Anthozoa sp Hypl brought by Tony Phillips (Hyperion) was the next mystery beast. The specimens were found in 66 m of water at Santa Cruz Island. After some examination it was suggested that they could possibly be Zaolutus actius. They had the characteristic grey/purple pigment spot in the tentacles and the columns were appropriately wrinkled, and 7 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 6 about the right proportions to be Zaolutus. Tony took them back to the lab for further work up and will either confirm or refute this ID. With cnidarians completed (for the time being) nemerteans were next on the list. Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) brought forth a small nemertean that looked very similar to Carinoma mutablis with the exception that it was a creamy fleshy-pink color instead of the typical white. However, those present assured her that even with this color difference it was still C. mutablis. She then brought forth three very thin, long, white, non-descript looking nemerteans which upon clearing revealed one pair of small red eyes. A distinctive brown/ grey area existed in all three just behind the eyes. It was confirmed that these animals were Cryptonemertes actinophila. The second pair of eyes did indeed exist, but needed to be viewed under a compound scope. The brown/ grey area is the “brain” and is quite distinctive. Carol Paquette brought out some specimens that seemed to be Paranemertes californica, but were not typical of the species. After examining the animals and discussing the variability of the taxon, it was the consensus of those present that her specimens were within the range of variation normally seen in P. calif ornica. The afternoon started off with Mollusca. The first question was that of Solen rostiformis vs Solen sicarius. Megan Lilly had been examining some of the Solen from the bay (Mission and San Diego) samples and was wondering if they were potentially different from the off-shore Solen that the City of San Diego identifies as Solen rostiformis. This is the species we used to call S. rosaceus locally, but which was first put forward as a separate taxon, then identified as a senior synonym by Coan and Scott. Some bay specimens were examined and Don Cadien, John Ljubenkov and Tony Phillips all agreed that they were Solen sicarius based on the shape of the shell. After some discussion, however, it was revealed that these agencies/people only see Solen sicarius in their samples, whereas the City of San Diego had only identified rostiformis up to this point. As the bay animals didn’t differ greatly from the off-shore specimens, it remains to be seen if we are dealing with both species, or only one identified in two different ways. This question will be answered during the B’98 QC as, if we have different assumptions or ID protocols between agencies, it should be apparent during the specimen exchange. Next, some small Asthenothaerus were examined. It was originally assumed they were Asthenothaerus diegensis, but the animals were from off Orange County in 40 m of water. They will need to be examined further before a species ID can be assigned. They bore a remarkable resemblance to Periploma discus juveniles, but lacked an external ligament. A small “ Macoma - like” clam roused some excitement. No one present seemed able to identify it to species and there was even some question initially as to its genus. It was suggested to be not a Macoma , but a Cumingia. This was doubted because the shell lacked the concentric sculpture of that genus, which is evident even in juveniles. It was opened and confirmed to be Macoma but was left at genus as there was only one juvenile specimen, and there were several possible species to which it might belong. Don Cadien then did a “show and tell” with his recently encountered shell-less cephalaspid slug Runcina macfarlandi, found among filamentous red algae from a shallow station in the San Gabriel river tidal prism. The animal is small and offers few characters. There are no head appendages, the mouth is obscure, eyes are buried and only visible in the groove which separates the back from the foot. At the posterior end of the animal the centrally placed anus is flanked by two paddle shaped gill lamellae. These are smooth plates without secondary lamellae. The animal is a dark maroon in life, but fades to a dull tan in 8 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.6 preservation. A second species of runcinid, Runcinida sp., has been taken in intertidal and subtidal coralline algal scrapings from San Clemente Island. It can easily be differentiated from R. macfarlandi by the nature of the gills. In Runcinida there are five gills which arch over the anus. Each has both a primary lamellus and secondary lamellae. The animals are otherwise similar in size and general appearance. A different species of small aeolid, Cuthona sp A, was found at the same station. It is probably introduced, perhaps from Japan (Don will continue to try and tract it down). This small animal was characterized by conservative (remaining after preservation) dark pigment patches in the ceratal cores, and on the sides of the body, which do not match any of the species in the genus reported locally. It also displays the rounded head, thin finger-like anterior foot corners, and long simple rhinophores usually seen in these animals. The radula was unlike that of any other local Cuthona as well, having accessory spikes along the lateral edge of the tooth just above the base (one on each side). The radular formula is 0-1- 0, as it should be for a Cuthona , and each tooth has 5-7 lateral denticles(depending on position in the ribbon), and a pair of smaller accessory denticles flanking the central cusp, which is slightly shorter than the laterals. Ron thought that it had also been seen in San Diego Bay, but would have to check. The pending, heavy problem of the afternoon finally surfaced when it could no longer be avoided - Mytilus. In the past we have been able to avoid this issue since mussels of this genus did not occur in our benthic samples from offshore. When B’98 samples from within harbors were processed however, we were confronted with specimens forcing us to address the question of mussel speciation. John Ljubenkov started with a review of the three species that could potentially be found locally, M. trossulus, M. galloprovincialis, M. californianus and briefly covered the morphological differences he thought could be used to separate them. Mytilus californianus can be separated from the other two based on it’s surface ribbing. John and Don Cadien had previous examined a series of small specimens from offshore platform legs, and thought they had a method of separating them into two discrete taxa. However, John found in examining another fraction of the same sample that as the animals got larger the character lines between presumptive M. trossulus and M. galloprovincialis started to blur. He had brought a large size range of animals collected from the legs of an oil platform off Santa Barbara, CA., and although some animals looked somewhat different it would have been difficult to separate them reliably and consistently. We are not the first group to stumble across this problem and did not actually come up with any definitive answers or solutions at this meeting. The problem was laid before us as food for thought and will re¬ surface at another meeting, perhaps one devoted entirely to that subject. At this point it was late in the afternoon and attention spans were drifting. Unfortunately, crustaceans had not been covered and there is plenty of material in that phyla that needs to be addressed, therefore it was decided that the next non-polychaete meeting will be devoted to crustaceans. The meeting is scheduled for November 15 and will be at the City of San Diego. WWW NEWS The SCAMIT web-site is cruising along nicely, thank you. After our remodeling earlier this year we have settled in to the new look and feel of our site with little ado. Fortunately, others have noticed the improvements, and one appreciative visitor sent the following to Webmaster Jay Shrake:... “Dear Jay, I have browsed your SCAMIT web site today and agree with you that it should be linked into the NBII Biodiversity, Systematics and Collections web site. Yours is a very nice web site, easily 9 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 6 navigable, highly aesthetic, and rich in quality scientific content. As “content” manager for this section of the NBII, I will be adding your link to our website soon. I have also passed your URL to the taxonomists associated with the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) which is working on a somewhat similar standardized taxonomic database for biota of North America. I invite your group to learn more about ITIS at its main web site . ITIS is currently initiating a web site redesign project and your web site provides a nice example of how technical scientific information can be provided in a pleasing and effective manner. Thanks for your message and I invite you to link back to NBII or ITIS if you find that appropriate. Best regards, Gary Waggoner, NBII Biodiversity Coordinator, USGS, Denver, CO” I hope webmaster Jay takes this positive feedback to heart. We can never thank him enough for all he does for SCAMIT in maintaining our website, and constantly working to improve it. Members might follow Dr. Waggoner’s suggestion concerning the ITIS database and the NBII, both of which are among the links on our webpage. My Life as a Biologist by Donald J. Reish Chapter 16.1 go to Europe I made the first of many trips to Europe in 1962. I was asked to discuss a polychaete toxicological test at the First International Water Pollution Conference in London. I also presented a paper on the offshore State of California pollution study of 1955-59. The authors, Tibby and Barnard, could not make the trip. I took a 707 to Copenhagen with a midnight stop in Greenland. Wheeler North introduced me to the underground subway system in London. In those days you had to spend 2 weeks overseas otherwise the air fare was much higher. I made a trip to Plymouth and renewed by acquaintance with D. P. Wilson. I spent the week end with Robert and Mary Clark in Bristol. I also went to Gothenburg to visit some American friends. The conference was next to the Westminister Abbey and I walked through it each day on the way to the conference. I was startled to see the grave site of Sir Isaac Newton. I flew back to Copenhagen and went to the marine lab where I spent some time with Gunnar Thorson. My second trip was 4 years later. I was asked to present my D.O. studies with the polychaetes that I had used as pollution indicators to the 3 rd International Water Pollution Conference in Munich. I flew to Paris, saw some of the sights before flying to Marseille where I Met Gerard Bellan and his wife Denise Bellan-Santini. I went onto Monte Carlo and lost a few francs at the casino. Gerard Bellan was in Munich for the conference, and he discussed my presentation with me. After the conference I went to Amsterdam. As strange as it seems, the air fare to Europe today is about the same as it was then. Trip number 3 was my first of several associations with FAO, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. They sponsored an international pollution conference in Rome. I was also involved in a work shop associated with the conference. I presented a paper there on the use of polychaetes as indicators of marine pollution. The Bellans were there also. They had spent the summer before in Long Beach with me. I made my first of 3 runs on the Circus Maximus, the chariot track of Roman Days. I never managed to complete a lap in any try. My 4 th trip to Europe in 1973 was a very busy one. I attended an invertebrate development conference in the former Yugoslavia organized by John Costlow (Duke University). I took living Neanthes, Capitella and Ctenodrilus 10 October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.6 with me to demonstrate the larvae. I then went to another Yugoslavian city to present a paper and chair a session at the Medical Oceanographic Conference. I was elected Vice President of the group. Next stop was Paris where I participated in a work shop in preparation for a meeting the next year. I had flown to Marseille where I met the Bellans. We then traveled to Cherbourg where his parents lived. I saw the door to the lab where Herpin studied the early development of Neanthes and other polychaetes, but didn’t go inside. BIBLIOGRAPHY Armonies, W. & Karsten Reise. 1998. On the population development of the introduced razor clam Ensis americanus near the island of Sylt (North Sea). Helgolander Meeresuntersuchungen 52(3-4): 291 -300. Crooks, Jeffrey A. & Hugh S. Khim. 1999. Architectural vs. biological effects of a habitat- altering, exotic mussel, Musculista senhousia. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 240(l):53-75. de Rosa, Renaud, Jennifer K. Grenier, Tatiana Andreeva, Charles E. Cook, Andre Adoutte, Michael Akam, Sean B. Carroll, & Guillaume Balavoine. 1999. Hox genes in brachiopods and priapulids and protostome evolution. Nature 399(6738):772-776. Halanych, K. M., et al. 1995. Evidence from 18S ribosomal DNA that the lophophorates are protostome animals. Science 267: 1641-1643. Heupel, M. R. & M. B. Bennett. 1999. The occurrence, distribution and pathology associated with gnathiid isopod larvae infecting the epaulette shark, Hemiscyllium ocellatum. International Journal for Parasitology 29(2):321-330. Kerr, Alex M. & J. Kim. 1999. Bi-penta-bi-decaradial symmetry: A review of evolutionary and developmental trends in holothuroidea (Echinodermata). Journal of Experimental Zoology 285(2):93-103. Lavoie, Derek M., L. D. Smith, & G. M. Ruiz. 1999. The potential for intracoastal transfer of non-indigenous species in the ballast water of ships. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science 48(5): 551-564. Prena, Jens, Peter Schwinghamer, Terence W. Rowell, Donald C. Gordon Jr., Kent D. Gilkinson, W. Peter Vass, & David L. McKeown. 1999. Experimental otter trawling on a sandy bottom ecosystem of the Grand Banks of Newfoundland: analysis of trawl bycatch and effects on epifauna. Marine Ecology Progress Series 181:107-124. There were many more trips to Europe in the 1970s, mostly to France, Italy and Yugoslavia. In 1975 Janice, the boys, and my mother went with me to Rome where I had another workshop. We then drove through northern Italy, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and then to England before coming home. The longest trip was the one with my family; four weeks. The shortest was to Gothenburg, Sweden, to participate in an FAO workshop (it lasted only 2 days). Nearly all my trips to Europe have been paid by some organization and I think the primary reason was related to my studies with polychaetes and pollution. Gerard Bellan was about the only other person in the world who realized the importance of polychaetes in environmental studies at that time. [Next: Research Grants.] October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.6 Reise, Karsten, S. Gollasch, & W. J. Wolff. 1998. Introduced marine species of the North Sea coasts. Helgolander Meeresuntersuchungen 52(3-4):219-234. Rzhavsky, A. V. & L. V. Shabad. 1999. A new species of scaleworm, Eunoe hydroidopapillata, collected off the eastern coast of Kamchatka (Polychaete: Polynoidae: Harmothoinae). Zoosystematica Rossica 8(1): 17-20. Santa-Isabel, Leda Maria de , Marlene Campos Peso-Aguiar, Ana Clara Silva de Jesus, Francisco Kelmo, & Leo Ximenes Cabral Dutra. 1998. Biodiversity and spatial distribution of Polychaeta (Annelida) communities in coral-algal buildup sediment, Bahia, Brazil. Revista de Biologia Tropical 46:111-120. Watkins, Russell F. & Andrew T. Beckenbach. 1999. Partial sequence of a sponge mitochondrial genome reveals sequence similarity to cnidaria in cytochrome oxidase subunit II and the large ribosomal RNA subunit. Journal of Molecular Evolution 48(5):542-554. Willmer, Patricia. 1990. Invertebrate relationships: patterns in animal evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. October, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.6 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet .gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 SUBJECT: B’98 Problem Polychaetes GUEST SPEAKER: none DATE: 13 December 1999 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County Worm Lab Our next meetings will continue the theme of B’98 problem animal identification. In some cases reanalysis QC materials will also be discussed. There will a problem polychaete meeting on Monday, December 13 th , at the worm lab of the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum, and we hope to have a guest speaker in attendance. Consideration of B’98 problem animals will continue at meetings in January: a non-polychaete meeting on Monday 10 January in San Diego at the CSDMWWD lab, and a polychaete meeting on Tuesday 18 January at the Worm Lab of the Natural History Museum (Monday is the Martin Luther King Day holiday). The SCAMIT Christmas Party will be held on Saturday the 11 th of December at the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium in San Pedro. Members and their guests should arrive around 6pm. Diplodonta orbella (A.A. Gould 1851) Station 2423, Mission Bay, 7/24/98, 3.4 m Photo by K. Barwick 11/18/99 Scale bar = mm FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter in not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 WE LOSE BIG The month of October was particularly bad for students of the arthropods. On 16 October Dr. Arthur G. Humes died of a heart attack, and on 27 October Dr. Austin B. Williams lost his fight with liver cancer. Both of these men, giants in the fields of crustacean taxonomy and biology, will be missed often and sincerely. I never had the chance to meet Dr. Humes, but from all accounts he was as fine a man as he was a taxonomist. One of the contributors to the CrustL list server (many have written in giving observations and expressing regrets on the loss of both these workers) pointed out that he was the author of roughly 5% of the known species of copepods! He was also a terrific editor, and I was privileged to have him serve in that capacity on a paper I had in the last issue of Journal of Crustacean Biology. He was scheduled to step down completely at the end of the volume, but didn’t quite make it that long. I was able to meet Austin Williams at the 1992 J. L. Barnard Memorial gathering at the Smithsonian, where I was representing SCAMIT. He was an extremely affable individual who was easy to talk to about anything that came up. There is a picture of he and I from that gathering which I will continue to treasure. He read and graciously commented on the presentation on thalassinid shrimp I gave to SCAMIT in 1992, but the opportunity to work with him never quite materialized. His contributions to carcinology were many, valuable, of broad application, and continued until shortly before his death. There may yet be co-authored papers waiting in the wings for posthumous publication. Fortunately his on¬ going fight with terminal illness was known enough in advance that the summer meetings of the Crustacean Society could be dedicated to him in 1998. He received an advance impression of how much he was admired and respected by colleagues. As the taxonomic community continues to age, the number of noteworthy departures will continue to rise. It will be my sad duty to note them in the Newsletter. Drs. Ju-Shey Ho, Tom Duncan, and Mas Dojiri have put down thoughts and reminiscences of Dr. Humes below. Notes on Dr. Williams will be in the next NL. Those seeking further information on their life, work, and demise should watch the CrustL server, and the pages of Crustaceana, the Journal of Crustacean Biology, and Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington for obituaries and commentary. - Don Cadien (CSDLAC) In Memoriam Arthur Grover Humes 22 January 1916 - 16 October 1999 Arthur G. Humes died 16 October 1999 on his way to work at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts. He had devoted his professional life to research on copepods, particularly copepods symbiotic with marine invertebrates. Born on 22 January 1916 in Seekonk, Massachusetts, Arthur G. Humes graduated with a B.A. in 1937 from Brown University. Arthur originally considered a career as a parasitologist and entered Louisiana State University, earning his M.S. in Zoology in 1939. He entered the doctoral program of the eminent parasitologist H. J. Van Cleave at the University of Illinois and completed an extensive study of the parasitic ribbon worms Carcinonemertes. Arthur experienced his first close encounter with symbiotic copepods while collecting parasitic nemerteans from the gills and egg masses of various crabs. He was awarded his Ph.D. in 1941. In that year he published his first paper on copepods, about a new species of harpacticoid copepod, Cancrincola plumipes, recovered from the gill chamber of a marsh crab that he had collected while studying the parasitic ribbon worms of crabs at Louisiana State University’s Marine Laboratory located at Grand Isle, Louisiana. 2 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 Upon graduation, Arthur took a teaching position with the Department of Biology at the University of Buffalo in the upstate New York. However, with the outbreak of the World War II, he was drafted in 1942 to serve in the United States Navy and worked at its medical unit in charge of malaria control. There he had an opportunity to apply his knowledge of parasitology during his military service as a Lieutenant Commander stationed in the South Pacific. Toward the end of World War II in 1945, with the northward movement of the frontlines from the South Pacific to Saipan, Iwo Jima, and Okinawa, the military life in Kalimantan (Borneo) became relatively relaxed. Thus, Arthur found a little time to resume his life-long hobby of beach combing for invertebrates, and was able to collect copepods associated with crabs and mud shrimps at Tarakan on the northeast coast of Kalimantan, Indonesia. This collecting experience in Indonesia further stimulated Arthur’s interest in copepods, and throughout his life he made frequent trips to the tropics to collect symbiotic copepods. Arthur received his honorable discharge from the U.S.N.R. in 1946 and returned to the U. S. to teach at University of Connecticut for a year before taking a teaching position in 1947 at Boston University. He was affiliated with this institution till his retirement in 1981. In 1970 Arthur was asked to become Director of the Boston University Marine Program, newly established at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, the center of marine biology of North America. Accepting the position would require Arthur to move from Boston, and to assume administrative responsibility with which he was not especially comfortable. He did accept the directorship and made the Boston University Marine Program one of the finest marine programs in the world. In 1981, Arthur retired from the program, but continued work at the Marine Biological Laboratory. He soon agreed to a different set of responsibilities for the newly established The Crustacean Society, as editor of the Journal of Crustacean Biology. He produced the first issue of the journal in 1981. Under his guidance it has become the leading international journal of crustacean research with exacting standards of quality for published manuscripts. He was to retire from the editorship at the end of 1999. Knowing his firm intent to retire, The Crustacean Society secretly planned in 1998 to publish a special issue of the Journal in 2000 to honor Arthur’s great service and contribution to the Society. In June 1954, Arthur took his first sabbatical leave, supported by a fellowship from the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation. He traveled to the French-speaking West African countries of Senegal, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Nigeria, and Congo where he collected copepods associated with various marine invertebrates. Before returning to Boston in June 1955, Arthur made a decision of significance to his research career. With the remaining funds from his fellowship he decided to fly across Africa to Station Oceanographique de Nosy Be on a tiny island off the northeastern shore of Madagascar, the large island off the east coast of Africa. At Nosy Be he found a great diversity of marine invertebrates and their symbiotic copepods. So rewarding were his collecting efforts that he returned to Nosy Be three times in the 60’s to collect copepods: in 1960 during an expedition sponsored by the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia; in 1963-64 as a leader of the U. S. Program of Biology under the auspice of the International Indian Ocean Expedition; and in 1967 through a grant from the U. S. National Science Foundation. In 1993 Arthur published a catalogue containing 244 species of copepods that he had described and collected from Nosy Be. But, that is not all, he had not yet touched on the many collections of notodelphyids and ascidicolids that were obtained from the tunicates. His collecting effort was not confined to Nosy Be, Madagascar. With continuous support from the U. S. National Science Foundation, he went to collect in 1969 3 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 at Eniwetok Atoll of Marshall Islands, in 1971 at New Caledonia, and in 1975 during the Alpha Helix East Asia Bioluminescence Expedition to Moluccas. In the 50’s Arthur completed his studies of copepods collected during his sabbatical leave to West Africa. During the 60’s he published mostly on the copepods collected from West Indies and Nosy Be. In the 70’s there was a gradual shift in his studies from the Caribbean Sea and western Indian Ocean to the copepods living in association with various invertebrates occurring in Eniwetok Island, Mollucas, and New Caledonia. Arthur began in the 80’s to publish his works on the copepods collected in the water around deep-sea hydrothermal vents, which had been discovered in the late 70’s, as well as the copepods associated with vent animals. Arthur’s greatest contribution to copepodology is his discovery and description of many symbiotic copepods which occur in association with a diversity of marine animals, ranging from primitive sponges to more specialized marine mammals. In his half century (1941- 1999) of work, he published more than 250 papers and monographs on the symbiotic copepods, described no less than 650 new species and created more than 140 new genera and 16 new families. An exact number of species and genera of copepods new to science cannot be determined at this time because there are manuscripts by Arthur either in press or submitted for publication. In the history of copepodology, no copepod taxonomist has been as productive. More than a wonderfully effective taxonomist, Arthur was a distinguished teacher as well as an excellent editor and director of scientific programs. In 1983 he served as President of the American Microscopical Society; in 1990 he was elected President of the World Association of Copepodologists. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a Research Associate at the Museum of Comparative Zoology of Harvard University. In 1982, William Jaspersohn, a popular writer of a series of photodocumentary books, selected Arthur among the many eminent marine biologists in Woods Hole to be the model of his new book “A Day in the Life of a Marine Biologist”. The book describes Arthur’s day, work in his office and laboratory, plus a field trip with students in his class in marine invertebrate zoology. It is a book very pleasantly read, about a kind and considerate gentleman who also is an excellent biologist and scholar. Arthur is well known among his associates, colleagues, and students as a kind and considerate gentleman. This courteous nature of Arthur is also revealed in his works on the symbiotic copepods. From time to time he would produce review articles or monographs for a group of copepods or a group of hosts with all of the reported copepod associates, in order to facilitate an easy way for the interested biologists to follow. Some notable examples of such works are in his reviews of the lichomolgid-complex, xarifid copepods, poecilostomatoids associated with soft corals, copepods of holothurians, and copepods associated with sea anemones. In his more than half-a-century affiliation with Boston University, the hardworking Arthur enthusiastically directed many of his students along the path of parasitology, copepodology, and marine invertebrate zoology that he had gingerly paved. Aside from being the teacher, mentor, and director of his students, Arthur served also the role of guardian to them. Every day at work, he would have in his office a tea time in the morning and a coffee break in the afternoon for his students to get together to relax, joke around, and talk about anything. Five of his former students followed his footsteps in copepodology, they are Roger F. Cressey, Masahiro Dojiri, Ju-shey Ho, John P. Murnane, and David C. Rosenfield. Arthur will be greatly missed by his friends and colleagues around the world in addition to his 4 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 former students. - Ju-shey Ho (CSULB) [prepared with help from Frank D. Ferrari, NMNH-SI](Originally printed in Monoculus: reprinted here by permission of the author) Arthur G. Humes (1916 -1999) Arthur Grover Humes, world-renowned zoologist, Professor Emeritus of Biology at Boston University, retired founding director of the Boston University Marine Program at the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, and retired founding editor of the Journal of Crustacean Biology died on Saturday, 16 October at his home in Falmouth, Massachusetts. The son of Edwin Judson and Agnes (Gillis) Humes, Arthur was born on 22 January 1916 in Seekonk, Massachusetts. His interest in the sea and its organisms was piqued at an early age by summers at Falmouth Heights, where his family built and maintained a home from 1926 to the late 1930’s. He earned degrees from Brown University (A.B., 1937), Louisiana State University (M.S., 1939), and the University of Illinois (Ph.D., 1941). After holding teaching positions at the Universities of Buffalo and Connecticut and serving during World War II as a Lieutenant in the US Naval Reserve, he began an association with Boston University in 1947 that included his rise from assistant to full professor of biology. In 1970 he participated in the fruition of several years of labor when the Boston University Marine Program began in Woods Hole, and he commenced 11 years of service as its first director. He retired from active teaching and administration as Professor Emeritus of Biology in 1981. Arthur was a member of the editorial board of Crustaceana, an international journal of crustacean research from 1960 - 1992. In 1980 he was selected to be the editor of the Journal of Crustacean Biology , the new journal of the Crustacean Society. More than any other individual, he was responsible for this publication becoming widely recognized as the preeminent international journal in its field. He continued to edit this journal from his lab at the MBL until 1999. In addition, he was the coeditor of Volumes 9 & 10 of Microscopic Anatomy of Invertebrates and an editorial advisor to the Journal of Natural History from 1990 until his death. Arthur joined the Scientific Advisory Board of the Sea Education Association in 1975 and quickly assumed this board’s chairmanship and was elected to membership in the SEA Corporation. For the next 18 years he provided a focus on scientific and academic rigor that has been a major factor in this program’s academic credibility. In 1993 he resigned from the Corporation and the Academic Review Board of SEA. Arthur served as the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of Falmouth Academy from 1979 to 1984. His steadfast leadership during the early, difficult years of this institution was critical to its success and has been recognized by his election to the Academy’s “Tower Club,” its highest level of recognition for outstanding service. For more than 60 years, he maintained an extremely active research program which focused primarily on the taxonomy, systematics, and biogeography of copepod crustaceans, particularly those associated with other marine organisms or hydrothermal vents and cold seeps. To date, he has described and established 18 new families, over 135 new genera, and over 700 new species of copepods in 252 separate publications. He has personally described more species of copepods than anyone else in history. At the time of his death, the descriptions of a number of new species of copepods were in press or in various stages of preparation. Twenty-three different 5 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 species of animals have been named in his honor by other taxonomists, and in the pursuit of his research, he visited over 25 different countries, primarily in the tropics. His scholarship and leadership were widely recognized by various organizations. He was a life member of the Corporation of the Marine Biological Laboratory, a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, President of the American Microscopical Society, and President of the World Association of Copepodologists. He was also a member of Phi Beta Kappa, Sigma Xi, the American Society of Zoologists, the American Society of Parasitologists, and the Crustacean Society. In January, 2000, unbeknownst to him, Arthur was to have been presented with the Crustacean Society’s “Award for Research Excellence,” which the society’s Board of Governors is in the process of renaming the “Arthur G. Humes Award for Research Excellence,” in recognition of his contributions. He is survived by two brothers in Massachusetts, Edwin of Norfolk and Judson of Melrose, and a number of nieces and nephews. There will be a service in Arthur’s memory at 11 AM on Saturday, November 20, 1999 at St. Barnabas Memorial Church, 91 Main Street, Falmouth, Massachusetts. His life will be celebrated during a reception at 12:30 PM in the Meigs Room of the Swope Center, 5 North Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts. Individuals who are unable to attend the latter event are encouraged to forward reminiscences of Arthur to the Boston University Marine Program at the address below, so that they may be included in the celebration. Donations in his memory can be made to “The Arthur G. Humes Fund,” Boston University Marine Program, Marine Biological Laboratory, 7 MBL Street, Woods Hole, MA 02543. - Dr. Tom Duncan (WHOI) MY REMEMBRANCE OF DR. ARTHUR G. HUMES When I remember Dr. Humes, I recall two different people: one was an incredibly intelligent scientist and naturalist, whose attention to detail, organizational abilities, research drive, meticulousness, and breadth of knowledge are unmatched by anyone I have ever encountered. For example, I remember being invited to Dr. Carl Berg’s house in Woods Hole to view the original video tapes of the Galapagos Rift deep-sea hydrothermal vents that Dr. Ballard had discovered. The dandelion, spaghetti-like animals, and huge tube worms were all new to science. No one even knew what higher level taxa they belonged to. So, all the invertebrate zoologists were invited there to help identify these unique animals. I remember Dr. Humes whispering to me that the dandelions were probably siphonophores, the spaghetti was probably a hemichordate, and the tube worms were vestimentiferans. Then, he launched into a detailed historical account of vestimentiferans and their probable taxonomic relationships. It was truly an amazing display of knowledge. Needless to say, he was correct on all counts, but no one had bothered to ask him his opinion and he never offered it out loud. That day, I was the lone recipient of his knowledge. That was vintage Dr. Humes. However, I do not want to dwell on this side of Dr. Humes. I’m sure that everyone who ever knew him knows of his scientific abilities. But, what I remember fondly about Dr. Humes was the person that he was: kind, gentle, considerate, and funny. When I first met him in August of 1977,1 was an upstart Ph.D. graduate student standing at the Greyhound bus terminal in Woods Hole. I was fresh out of southern California, wearing my Hawaiian aloha shirt and flip-flop sandals; I looked more like someone in search of a beach volleyball game, rather than a high- caliber Ph.D. program. I don’t know what his first impression of me was. But, my first 6 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 impression of him was that he was very distinguished looking, very quiet, a bit cold, and unapproachable. I was wrong about the “cold” and “unapproachable”. In a short time, Dr. Humes, Tom Duncan, and I became very close friends, sharing what best friends share: food, whiskey, wine, conversation, jokes, and fun. I remember how frugal he was as director of the Boston University Marine Program. No marine invertebrate zoology teaching fellow will ever forget having to account of each and every BUMP bucket after a field trip. I also remember him at the MBL lunchtime seminars eating his sandwich, then folding the wax paper into a neat, perfect square. I always wondered if he did this because he was frugal and wanted to save the paper for another sandwich or because he was so meticulous that he folded, instead of crumbled, his trash. Once when I was invited to dinner at his home in Falmouth, I noticed that he did not throw his garbage in the garbage can, but that he placed it in his freezer. Upon asking him why he put his garbage in the freezer, he replied matter-a- factly “So it won’t stink up the house”. He was right: he had absolutely no odors in his home. I tried doing this myself; unfortunately, in order to do this procedure correctly, one must remember to take the garbage out of the freezer and throw it away on trash day. I’m sure Dr. Humes never forgot this part. I always did, so my roommates and I had a pile of garbage in our freezer. I remember how punctual Dr. Humes was. Some of the graduate students and I would joke that we could set our watches to his arrival at work every morning. Before he retired, he would pull into his parking space at the MBL near the Lillie Building about 7:00 AM. After he retired, he pulled in at about 7:15 AM. He never varied his routine by more than a few minutes. Most of all, I remember blow-out dinners at his house, Tom’s house, and my house, where we would sit around before dinner and drink whiskey, wine, or beer, eat some munchies, and laugh and laugh. This was followed by more food and drinks. Then, we would sit and talk for hours. He had such a great sense of humor and was the greatest conversationalist I have ever met. He had seemingly endless stories to tell of his field-collecting adventures and all of them were fascinating. Dr. Humes was my teacher, my coauthor, my mentor, and my quasi-father. But, most of all he was my friend. He helped mold me into the scientist and person that I am today. As such, I will carry a part of him wherever I go. But, I would have liked to see him one last time, .. .to have a drink with him one last time, .. .to laugh with him one last time, .. .and to thank him for what he has given to me one last time. I will miss my friend.- Mas Dojiri (CLAEMD) NEW LITERATURE The millennium edition of the ICZN code, whose provisions take effect on January 1, 2000, is now out and available (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999). The major changes from the preceding edition are listed in the Introduction, along with a presentation of the genesis of the changes, and a mention of proposals which were not incorporated into this code revision. A number of more radical suggestions to restructure the code, including discarding the principle of priority, were not accepted. A more detailed look at the code will be presented in the future, after enough time has passed to digest the changes and understand how they affect its application. A monographic revision of the genus Pandalus has just appeared (Komai, 1999). Two nomenclatural positions adopted in it affect taxonomy of eastern Pacific taxa. First is the validity of Pandalopsis. Hendrickx recently treated it as a synonym of Pandalus , based on cladistic analyses performed by others 7 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 (Hendrickx, 1995); reporting Pandalus amplus rather than Pandalopsis amplus in the eastern Pacific. Komai revisits this and finds that although the Pandalopsis clade is surrounded by the Pandalus clade, it is none-the-less morphologically distinct. He advocates retention of the taxon at full generic rank, maintaining that it is monophyletic where Pandalus is polyphyletic. He also disagrees with Wicksten’s synonymy of Pandalus gurneyi and Pandalus danae (Wicksten, 1991). He feels that the specimens, rather than forming a cline with gradual change from north to south in a single population, represent two distinct populations with a limited region of overlap. He views P. danae as the more northern species, ranging into Alaska; and P. gurneyi as the southern species. The ranges of the two overlap in southern and central California. He provides a key to the genus which allows separation of the two forms, and re-diagnoses and re-figures both. According to Komai there are several characters which separate the two morphologically, the most easily observed being the number of ventral rostral teeth - 6 or less in P. danae , 8 or more in P. gurneyi. Examination of CSDLAC vouchers with these characters in mind yields only specimens of P. gurneyi. This may not hold true for other agencies and other collections, but your vouchers should be re-identified with this paper in hand. Interestingly, Komai points out differences in live coloration and color patterning of the two species, using Wicksten’s descriptions. Anomuran crabs form a small part of the catch in our monitoring trawls and benthic infaunal grab samples. They are however, a very diverse group. This is amply demonstrated by the listing of 207 species which occur in the Eastern Tropical Pacific (Hendrickx & Harvey, 1999). A number of the species listed are only encountered in intertidal or subtidal rocky habitats which are not covered by most agencies. There are, however, a number of species listed which we do take, at least occasionally. This list provides a convenient and comprehensive source for distributional and nomenclatural changes in the group replacing earlier and more scattered literature records. Broadening concern for impacts of trawl fishing have prompted a flurry of papers concerning the subject in the last few years. A recent contribution is from Freese et al (1999) on impacts observed directly from a submersible in the Eastern Gulf of Alaska. They monitored the effects of a commercial rockfish trawl, normally fished over a boulder, cobble, pebble ground. Many of the large invertebrates on this bottom are sessile cnidarians or sponges. These form secondary structure and provide habitat for associated smaller motile invertebrates. Damage to them would have potential impacts on the food web, and constitution of the smaller invertebrate community. The authors report observation of movement of boulders and damage or removal of larger sessile epibenthic organisms in a single trawl pass. Damage to or changes in density of motile invertebrates was not observed, but such organisms are not easily evaluated from a submersible, and such damage may have gone undetected. A subsequent survey in the area will address longer term effects. Of equal concern is the impact of introduced artificial substrate on the marine environment. Does it actually expand the available habitat and increase the carrying capacity of coastal waters, or does it merely attract and concentrate organisms from adjacent habitat, reducing their productivity while appearing to enhance the ecosystem? Page et al (1999) address this issue with regard to crabs of potential commercial importance. They examined occurrence and abundance of a number of larger crabs around an oil platform in the Santa Barbara Channel. They found that the crab species studied showed differing responses to the platform depending on 8 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 species. Cancer antennarius appeared to recruit to the mussel masses on the platform legs as larvae, then remain as resident adults. Cancer anthonyi, in contrast, seemed to be attracted to the structure from adjacent areas, and did not recruit directly into the habitat. Cancer productus and Loxorhynchus grandis appeared to be merely visiting transients, with no long-term relationship to the structure. Their results point out the dangers of generalizing responses of groups of related organisms. The three species of Cancer considered each had its own response to the presence of the platform. An analysis based on Cancer spp. would have provided no useful information. Score one for careful taxonomy. OLD LITERATURE Much of our recent indecision and confusion regarding the identity of the amphipods Garosyrrhoe bigarra and G. disjuncta would have been avoided if we had not missed Barnard & Thomas 1989. This paper, while indicating in the title that it deals with Caribbean species, also has bearing on eastern Pacific amphipod taxonomy. In it the authors place G. disjuncta in the synonymy of G. bigarra , and state that the differences between the two are due to sexual dimorphism; G. disjuncta being the female and G. bigarra the male of a single species. Garosyrrhoe bigarra has a transisthmial distribution, occurring both in the Caribbean and in the temperate and tropical Eastern Pacific. We have recently discussed the amphipod genus Cerapus, and the status of west coast species. Description of a new genus by Lowry and Berents to accommodate some of the species currently in Cerapus was discussed as an upcoming event. Well, their publication actually came out several years back (Lowry & Berents 1996). They describe two new genera related to Cerapus , Bathypoma and Notopoma. Both these new genera have the expanded antennal basis forming a pseudo-operculum to close the anterior of the tube seen in our common California “Cerapus”. No mention is made, however, of the subrostral tooth, and complex frontal structure characteristic of our local species. It is not yet clear whether either of these new taxa can be stretched to accept the local animal as a member. Lor now it continues to be Cerapus sp. A SCAMIT. The authors also point out the constituents of the Ericthonius group are currently allocated to different families, with several genera being “non- aligned”. This points out the continuing difficulty in family definition in these corophioid taxa and calls for, at a minimum, a reexamination of the composition of the currently recognized families Ischyroceridae and Corophiidae. Although 2 years isn’t very “old” in the context of literature, J. D. Thomas’ monographic revision of the Anamixidae (Thomas, 1996) is another one that slipped by while we were looking elsewhere. The California amphipod fauna supports but one anamixid, Anamixis pacijica (Barnard 1955). Two taxa were described in that paper, Anamixis linsleyi, and Leucothoides pacijica. It was later discovered that the two were just different life stages of the same species. Since pacijica had page priority in the paper, the resulting taxon became Anamixis pacijica. Thomas’ paper provides much additional information on the family as a whole, and provides a comparison between the Californian species and others in the genus worldwide. Anamixids are generally symbiotically linked with invertebrate substrates, and as such, may be introduced along with their substrate to areas outside their normal range. We may eventually find more of the species described in this monograph are present in the area as either temporary or permanent introductions in the fouling community. The key and illustrations from the paper are present on Jim Thomas’ web site, and can be downloaded from there as a PDL file. 9 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 B’98 samples from the Northern Channel Islands have exposed us to animals we don’t normally see in our monitoring. Among these are small apseudid tanaids. Menzies covered them well at the specific level in his monograph on the group in our area (Menzies, 1953). A host of changes have taken place since 1953 in generic and higher rank apseudid taxa. These are summarized by Gutu (1996), who provides a list of the taxa, and a key to families and genera worldwide. Dr. Mihai Bacescu of Roumania was another major crustacean worker lost to us this year. Among his publications are two major contributions I have finally obtained, the Cumacea sections of the Crustaceorum Catalogus (Bacescu 1988 & 1992). For crustacean workers these compendia, which list taxa, authorship, type localities, and distribution (with citations of virtually all records in the literature of every species) form an irreplaceable resource. Other sections dealing with tanaids (by Sieg) and caprellids (by McCain & Steinberg) are also available. Unfortunately, neither of the Bacescu volumes provides a bibliography to assist with finding the records listed in the Catalogus, although each entry does bear an abbreviated citation listing. Unidentified species reported in the literature are included, but not provisional names per SCAMIT usages. Their inclusion appears to be for distributional completeness, and perhaps a sign that additional unnamed species are present in the reported area. Secondary distillations of the included information which provide lists of taxa reported by geographic area or bathymetry are also absent. MORE ON MYTILUS Member Dr. Jim Carlton sent the following comments in regard to mention in the last NL of concerns with identification of the Mytilus species found in our shallow water samples. “Re: “ Mytilus californianus can be separated from the other two based on its surface ribbing”. Actually, I would not rely on surface sculpture all of the time, as this can vary with age and habitat. Better perhaps is to use internal muscle scars (see Light’s Manual, 3rd ed., 1975, p. 553, plate 125, figs. 5B vs. fig. 7). Re: Mytilus trossulus vs. M. galloprovincialis : Two thoughts here: First, M. trossulus is rare- to-nonexistent generally in southern California, and thus of the tross-gallo-edulis guild, gallo should be the mussel one generally collects in southern California. This isn’t to say that one should identify a species by geography, but this is simply a “heads up” — that is, if M. trossulus *does* occur in southern California today, this is important news. See the paper by Jon Geller in the June 1999 issue of Conservation Biology (J. B. Geller, 1999. Decline of a native mussel masked by sibling species invasion. CB 13(3): 661-664) documenting the decline of M. trossulus in southern California, most likely at the “hands” of the M. gallo invasion. Second, as far as I know, there are no reliable external or internal morphocharacters that will distinguish trossulus from galloprovincialis from edulis : they are now defined as genospecies, not morphospecies. Without genetic confirmation, one cannot know, unfortunately and frustratingly, which mussel one has in hand.” 25 OCTOBER MEETING MINUTES The meeting was held in the Worm Lab at the Los Angeles County Natural History Museum. Before starting the business meeting, we viewed a video tape entitled “Life in the Deep” brought in by Leslie Harris. She purchased it at the Monterey Bay Aquarium while there the previous week. The video had some excellent footage of animals that live in the depths of Monterey Canyon. We saw animals from the mid-water habitat (the largest habitat on earth), the canyon walls, and the sea floor. Watching these beautiful and amazing life forms in their natural habitats was a nice way to start out. 10 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 Since we were in the Ichthyology Laboratory to watch the video, Jeff Siegel, who works in the lab, was nice enough to give us a tour of their collection. Their collection houses approximately 5 million specimens, many from Central and South America and Pakistan. The Allan Hancock Foundation Collection, primarily containing fishes of the temperate and tropical Eastern Pacific, is also housed at the museum. One of the collection strong points is mid-water fishes. They are a busy laboratory with 100-150 loans/year, 100 visiting researchers/year, and numerous tour groups. In addition to complete specimens, the fish lab collection contains about 7,000 skeletons, and consequently attracts anthropologists and paleontologists who need to identify fish from bones or otoliths alone. Jeff also told us that their lab possesses the world’s finest otolith collection with approximately 8,000-8,500 specimens. We then returned to the Worm Lab and proceeded with the business portion of the meeting. President Ron Velarde announced the next few meetings. He also announced that SCCWRP has approved the identifications of the Bight’98 special taxonomic groups; Larry Lovell will be identifying the lumbrinerids and the euclymenid maldanids, and John Ljubenkov will be identifying the cerianthids and the Edwardsiidae. Regarding the Bight’98 re-identifications, Ron announced that the numerous laboratories involved are in various stages of distribution. A reminder (obtained from Annelida, http:// www.bio.net/hypermail/ANNELIDA/9912/) for the 7 th International Polychaete Conference registration was circulated. The closing date for registration is November 1,1999. One can register by e-mail at: elins@ni.is. There is also a registration form available at the conference website which is: http://www.ni.is/7IPCI. The conference dates are 2-6 July, 2001, and it is being held in Reykjavik, Iceland. Next Vice-President Leslie Harris reported on her trip to the Monterey area in late October. She spent some time at Moss Landing Marine Labs looking at holdfast fauna with Mike Foster. She also stopped at MBARI (Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute). While there, Craig Smith, from the University of Hawaii, happened to walk into the lab and an interesting chain of events evolved. Craig Smith conducts research on the animal communities that live on benthic whale skeletons. When whales die, they sink to the ocean floor where they decay. After scavengers have reduced or removed most of the tissue a bacterial mass engulfs the skeleton. Animals then colonize this unusual habitat where metabolic pathways are similar to those of hydrothermal vent organisms. Craig has investigated skeletons at various geographical locations and estimates there is one whale skeleton every 200 km on the ocean floor. Faunal density estimates on the skeletons are 140 species per square meter. He has discovered that most of the species are unique to whale skeletons and are not found in other habitats. It was fortuitous that Leslie met him at MBARI, because not only did he give her some polychaete specimens to examine, but he will be depositing more polychaetes in the LA County Museum collections in the future. We were all fortunate to be able to look at one of Craig’s polychaete specimens at the meeting. It was unlike anything we had seen before, with some characteristics of phyllodocids, but probably in a new family. (This specimen had very small head appendages, 2 small palps and 2 small filiform antennae. The setae were beautiful and unique; being composite and chambered). Leslie described how these worms attach themselves to the skeleton and hang down in the water column. No one knows yet how these worms feed or what they eat. We hope to be able to look at more of these “whale skeleton worms” in the future. 11 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 Leslie circulated some books she had purchased at the Monterey Bay Aquarium: The Ambonese Curiosity Cabinet: George Everhardus Rumphius by E.M. Beekman, The Deep Sea by Bruce Robison and Judith Connor, Deep-Ocean Journeys: Discovering New Life at the Bottom of the Sea by Cindy Lee Van Dover, and Mysteries of the Deep: Exploring Life in the Deep Sea by Christina Joie Slager. To start off the Bight’98 discussion, Rick Rowe passed around a list of his Bight’98 polychaete voucher specimens as of October 22,1999. He next told us about a specimen of Armandia he found that doesn’t fit the description of Armandia brevis. The specimen was collected from San Miguel Island (Station 2476) on August 11, 1998 from a depth of 11 meters. Rick’s specimen had 39 setigers (A. brevis has 29/30 setigers), branchiae from setigers 2 to 39, and lateral eyespots on setigers 5 to 35/36 (A. brevis has eyespots to setiger 20). Leslie brought out a Master’s thesis on A. brevis by Sharon Hampton from Sonoma State University (Hampton 1997). There was no mention of specimens with variant characteristics like Rick’s specimen. We referred to this specimen as Armandia sp SD 1. We next viewed a specimen of Nephtys brought in by Rick Rowe. It was collected from Anacapa Island (Station 2476) on August 4, 1998 from a depth of 21 meters. It was a small specimen which keyed out to N. parva. A Lacydonia from Ron Velarde was up next for examination. It was collected from San Miguel Island (Station 2480) on July 21,1998 from a depth of 106 meters. We compared it to L. hampsoni Blake, 1994 described in the MMS Atlas. Ron’s specimen had some different characters, most obvious were the large, dark eyes. Another difference was that L. hampsoni occurs in deep water (985-1990 meters). We referred to Ron’s specimen as Lacydonia sp SD 1 . Concurrently with the examination of the previous specimens, attendees were treated to Leslie’s slide show of living polychaetes (and some nudibranchs) from the British Virgin Islands. She had set up an automated slide show on her labtop computer for us to enjoy while we waited to view specimens at the microscope. After lunch the discussion turned to Dipolydora. We talked about the character differences between Dipolydora bidentata and D. sp SD 1. The main difference is where the branchiae start. This lead to a discussion about how we identify D. bidentata. Most of us have been identifying D. bidentata using the setiger where branchiae start (setiger 8) and the morphology of the modified spines on setiger 5. Other characters defining D. bidentata are present in the posterior of the worm (needle packets and unidentate hooks) which we rarely get in the sample. Some people commented that they have never seen the needle packets or unidentate hooks on specimens they identified as D. bidentata. For incomplete specimens of Dipolydora , the only character separating D. bidentata and D. sp SD 1 is where the branchiae start. The question arose whether this is a good character to separate species or if it is within the range of variation for this species. We agreed to closely examine our complete specimens of D. bidentata and look specifically for the needle packets and unidentate hooks in the posterior. There’s a possibility that what we’ve been calling D. bidentata is really a different species. This will again be a topic at a future SCAMIT meeting. Next Cheryl Brantley brought forth a cirratulid collected off the Palos Verdes shelf (Station 0D) on July 8, 1998 from a depth of 30 meters. The anterior end looked similar to Chaetozone bansei, but on closer examination, it turned out to be a Cirriformia. A species identity could not be determined, so we left the identification at Cirriformia sp. 12 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 Tony Phillips introduced a specimen of Bispira collected off Ventura at B’98 Station 2400. We stained the worm with methyl green and saw the W-shaped stain on the collar which is characteristic of specimens of Bispira. The specimen was compared to several provisional species erected by Kirk Fitzhugh and Leslie Harris (see SCAMIT Newsletter, Vol. 12, No. 3 for descriptions of provisional species), but did not match any of them. The specimen had some characters of Bispira sp 2 and some characters of Bispira sp 4. It was decided to leave the identification of the specimen at Bispira sp. The next worms up for examination and discussion were specimens of Pholoe brought by Ron Velarde. He had found these in Channel Island samples as well as ITP (International Treatment Plant) samples. They differed from our common P. glabra in having about 50 segments (P. glabra has about 30 segments) and having a long facial tubercle which was quite obvious (P. glabra has a short facial tubercle). Tony Phillips remembered that he had seen specimens like these in Santa Monica Bay. If anyone encounters one of these Pholoe , please bring it to a SCAMIT meeting and give it to Ron. We compared Ron’s specimens to Pholoe courtneyae Blake, new species, described in the MMS Atlas. P. courtney ae was different though, in that it had no eyes, as well as other differing characters. The last polychaete we looked at that afternoon was an Eteone pigmentata brought in by Ron. It was collected from Santa Rosa Island (Station 2492) at a depth of 71 meters. Secretary Megan Lilly has been enjoying the assistance of others in minutes-taking during the polychaete focussed meetings. Normally this has been done by Kathy Langan-Cranford. Recently she was unable to attend several meetings, and would like to thank Cheryl Brantley and Dot Norris for taking the meeting minutes in her absence. Cheryl took the minutes for the June 21 st meeting, and Dot lent her hand for the September 27 th meeting. The entire membership should echo these thanks and extend them to Kathy and Megan as well, for keeping good track (and minutes) of the often chaotic proceedings at the meetings. Since so few of the members can actually attend these gatherings it is important to make the content of the discussions and the resolution of problems addressed, available via the newsletter to members not in attendance and any others who find us on the web. 15 NOVEMBER MEETING MINUTES The first order of the day was to present Don Cadien with a gift from the taxonomists of the City of San Diego Marine Lab. Over the years Don has been an untiring friend and mentor and in gratitude we purchased as a gift for Don, A Field Guide to Marine Molluscs of Galapagos. It is a special edition as the inside cover is personally signed by all of us. Thanks again Don for all that you do, not only for those of us here at CSD but also for SCAMIT! - M. Lilly, Secretary. [My thanks to all concerned, especially for the thoughts expressed inside the cover - D. Cadien, Editor] Kelvin Barwick (CSDMWWD) made a request for reconsideration of the Newsletter format. He finds the Newsletter’s two column format is difficult to read on a computer screen and that a single column format would be easier, at least for this use. However, it was felt by many that most members download the Newsletter and print it for reading and for archiving. We feel that the two column format is more attractive and practical for the paper version. So, we will potentially be seeking the opinion of the electronic subscribers as to which format they would prefer. Regardless of the outcome, the original paper version of the Newsletter will remain in two column format. However, the version that is posted on the web may have a new look soon if that’s what the members request. 13 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 Don reminded us of the upcoming SCUM (Southern California Unified Malacologists) meeting at UCSD in January. It is an excellent opportunity to meet fellow malacologists and hear what is the latest research. With the business meeting complete we began consideration of problem Crustacea, starting with Cumacea. Lamprops sp SD1 was collected at a Channel Islands station by Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD). The two female specimens had telsons with 5 terminal spines (two very short and three long—median one being slightly longer), and no lateral spines. The telson was short, approx. 2/3 the length of uropod peduncle, and the carapace was smooth, without ridges or sulci. Comparisons of the specimens with the CSDMWWD voucher of Lamprops carinata proved them to be the same. However, some discussion ensued about the presence of “real” L. carinata here in the SCB, since L. carinata is described from Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Don Cadien (CSDLAC) said that he would request specimens of L. carinata from the Puget Sound area to compare with local specimens. Next, a specimen of Lamprops sp D SCAMIT was also reviewed and the id was confirmed by Don and Tony Phillips (CLAEMD). The next animal to be examined was a Cumella sp. A small specimen was collected from the Channel Islands, originally identified as Cumella sp by Dean, it was then reviewed by Don and Tony. Don believed the specimen to represent a new species...at least new to SCAMIT. The specimen had very short uropods, which included the very short, blunt, rounded, and bare rami. The uropod peduncle had a mid-dorsal crest and the carapace was hirsute (i.e., few long setae). Amphipods were considered next. It was determined that Paradexamine sp SD1 is synonymous with Atylus sp 1 of Phillips and Paradexamine sp 1 of Phillips. This small introduced species has been taken sporadically over the past 7-10 years from various locations in southern California. It remains unclear if it is an undescribed species, or one of the numerous members of the genus described from elsewhere in the world. Next, a small pleustid from the Channel Islands (same station as the Cumella sp), collected by Dean, was examined and found to be Chromopleustes oculatus (Holmes) and not Parapleustes oculatus Holmes of Barnard and Given (1960). The latter was recognized as differing from Holmes’ species and given the provisional name Chromopleustes sp 1 by Bousfield & Hendrycks (1995). A Nasageneia quinsana (Barnard 1964) from Redondo Beach was brought in by Carol Paquette. Her identification was reviewed and found to be correct. Carol passed out a key she had made for the eusirid genera Pontogeneia and Tethygeneia. The key was modified to include Nasageneia quinsana. The species Aoroides secundus (Aoridae) was discussed. Dean found an Aoroides specimen without a terminal process on the peduncle of uropod 2 that keyed to the Hawaiian species A. secundus, in Mission Bay. Don mentioned that MBC used to see a similar species which was designated Aoroides sp A of MBC. Don recalled that there were some differences in the gnathopod structure between Aoroides sp A of MBC and A. secundus. Dean will attempt to compare his Mission Bay specimen to the description of A. secundus and create a voucher sheet. Caprellids were next in line. Carol Paquette brought a caprellid from the Long Beach power generating station closely matching Caprella californica except for the absence of a ventral spine between gnathopod 2 insertion points. The specimen had an extremely acute head spine, no lateral spines on the pereon and no spine between the insertions of gnathopod 2. Several keys were used to attempt to identify 14 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 the specimen - including the comprehensive keys to Japanese Caprella provided in Arimoto (1976), but to no avail. It was left at Caprella sp F of Paquette. Moving along to Leptostraca, several specimens of Nebalia sp were brought by Carol. The specimens were collected from Long Beach harbor intertidal and subtidal stations which were full of detritus. The specimens seemed to be part of the Nebalia pugetensis species complex, but they were distinguished by a broad, flat rostrum (very spatulate) and a very short ocular scale above the eye which extended 1/2 to 2/3 the length of the ocular peduncle (i.e., not reaching the eye proper). Specimens of Nebalia pugetensis complex typically have an elongate, tapering rostrum, which is much more triangular and dorsally arched in cross-section, and an ocular scale that extends the length of the eye peduncle to the eye proper. Carol volunteered to produce a SCAMIT voucher sheet on the animal. Tanaids were briefly reviewed during the examination of Synaptotanais notabilis recorded by CSD in the Bight’98 samples from San Diego and Mission Bay. We confirmed that these specimens were indeed S. notabilis and different from what Tony and Carol have been calling Zeuxo normani. Greg Williams and Janelle West from PERL (Pacific Estuarine Research Lab) brought specimens of Peneus calif orniensis (shrimp) for confirmation. Their ID was confirmed by Don. They also brought a Corophium sp (corophioid amphipod) which was identified as Monocorophium uenoi by Carol. Next, a Tethygeneia opata (eusirid amphipod) was identified using Carol’s key passed out earlier in the meeting. This estuarine species is seldom seen outside bays, but is listed in Ed. 3. It is easily separable from all other pontogeneoids found locally by the long triangular ventral lobe of the second gnathopod carpus. And finally, an Oxyurostylispacifica (Cumacea) was identified by Dean. He had recently compared a number of specimens of this taxon, and found it variable in the texture of the carapace. The examined specimens did not conform to the type description in that respect, and would have been suspect if Dean had not recently documented the variability. At this point the molluscs demanded the floor and staged a bloodless coup. Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) had been working on B’98 Station 2423 taken in Mission Bay (3.4 m) which was full of unusual molluscs. First up was a clam which turned out to be none other than Diplodonta orbellus, identified by Don Cadien. The animal was large (13 mm) for us and had nestled against a hard object and was slightly “tweaked”. Juvenile clams were up next. There were two Kellia sub orbicularis , and a small and strange looking Lyonsiidae (could get no further with the ID). Based on the strength of the radial incised lines on the valves this could represent a juvenile Entodesma rather than Lyonsia. Our current SCAMIT practice is not to identify specimens below 6mm to genus, so we left this one alone. Kelvin stated that he had perhaps made some headway in definitively separating small lyonsiids to at least genus, but his results are still preliminary. He will keep us informed. Several small gastropods were examined next. A very small Lithopoma undosum was identified by Don. This species has been transferred from Lithopoma to Megastraea in Turgeon et al (1998). The “stumper of the day” were two columbellids which were left at Columbellidae for the time being as they were not recognized by any of the members present. They seemed to be Mitrella or Astyris, but had shell patterns strongly reminiscent of an Anachis species from the Gulf of California. 15 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 Also examined at the meeting were specimens of Haminaea. These animals were juveniles and so we bleached out the gizzard plates to be sure we weren’t confusing them with small Bulla. They were identified by Don to be Haminaea virescens. Other interesting (at least to those of us who normally work on off-shore material) animals which were in this sample but which were not taken to the meeting were a juvenile Lepidozona left at species due to its small size, a specimen of Tectura depicta (an eelgrass limpet) and a few Teinostoma supravallatum (a vitrinellid gastropod). Greg Williams and Janelle West (PERL) had brought molluscs as well as crustaceans to the meeting. They had a small Saxidomus nuttalli which as a juvenile looks very different from the adult. They also had specimens of Cumingia californica and Leporimetis obesa, species not normally seen by the SCAMIT members due to their shallow water bay and/or estuary occurrence. All in all, quite a few animals were identified during the course of the day and it was a successful, if slightly hectic, meeting. UPCOMING MEETING The 72nd annual WEFTEC Conference and Exposition will be held in New Orleans, Louisiana from October 9-13, 2000. For any and all interested in wastewater treatment and water quality this is the one not to miss. More information can be found at: http://www.wef.org STATEMENT OF POSITION The following concerns year of publication usage in SCAMIT Ed. 4 for taxa described by Philip Pearsall Carpenter. While examining the second edition of the AFS Common and Scientific Names of Aquatic Invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Mollusks (Turgeon et al 1998) it became apparent that there were many differences of opinion concerning the correct year of publication for Carpenter taxa. The Edition 2 list was modified to reflect usages in the volumes of the Taxonomic Atlas of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel, and these changes were implemented in Edition 3. The AFS list was being compared with Edition 3 when it became clear something was amiss. Carpenter published a host of papers in the period 1864 to 1866, and just which are adequate to establish a given taxon is a matter of academic debate. Most of the taxa names were introduced in 1864 with brief indications rather than diagnoses. Fuller treatments of most species, including diagnoses, were given later in 1864 and in 1865 and 1866. This original literature is very hard to come by, but fortunately a compendium reprint of most of the originals [including the B.A.A.S. report] was published by the Smithsonian Institution in 1872.1 have a copy of that document, so have been able to check both the original B.A.A.S. usage, and the subsequent diagnoses myself. I also have a copy of Palmer (1958) which covers establishment and use of Carpenter’s names, and provides photographs of the extant types. In all cases that I have checked Palmer’s reported date against the reprinted texts, they have been in perfect agreement. I view her report as thus being quite authoritative and error-free. The AFS list, in its introduction, states that particular care was taken with the nomenclature of the second edition, including authorship and date of publication. That this was undertaken with some thoroughness is indicated by the notes on changes from first edition usage, but a number of patent errors still slipped through. A list of publications was given (indicated by asterisk in the bibliography) from which new information on taxon authorship was obtained. None of these apply directly to P. P. Carpenter, and Palmer’s monographic treatment is not referenced. I have been impressed with the level and 16 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 thoroughness of review of the Mollusks Edition 1 nomenclature evident in Mollusks Edition 2.1 am, however, disturbed that no mention is made of Palmer as a resource for Carpenter nomenclatural issues in Edition 2. As a result I find I cannot accept the changes proposed by Turgeon et al on faith, as I would like to do. To avoid endless wrangling with these dates, I propose to adopt the date indicated by Palmer (which generally also conforms to the usage in the Atlas series) for Carpenter dates in Ed. 4 ofthe SCAMIT list. In specific instances where the date of publication issue is directly referenced and explicitly laid out, changes from Palmer would be made. Lacking such definite indications, no revisionary date changes would be accepted, including those listed in the AFS Mollusk second edition. Other viewpoints should be brought forward, so that all sides of this issue may be reviewed prior to production of Edition 4. Your contribution to this discussion is solicited. The SCAMIT Newsletter seems the perfect place for such an exchange of opinion (and, hopefully, fact). Please send comments on this issue to me at dcadien@lacsd.org or via snail mail to D. Cadien, Marine Biology Lab - JWPCP, 24501 S. Figueroa St., Carson, CA., 90745. END NOTE The unkown Arcidae that graced the cover of our September Newsletter has since been indentified by Paul Scott. The animal is a juvenile Anadara multicostata (G. B. Sowerby I 1833). BIBLIOGRAPHY Arimoto, Ishitaro. 1976. Taxonomic studies of caprellids (Crustacea, Amphipoda, Caprellidae) found in the Japanese and adjacent waters. Special Publications from the Seto Marine Biological Laboratory, Series III. 229pp. Bacescu, Mihai. 1988. Pars 7 - Cumacea I. Crustaceorum Catalogus. Gruner, H.-E. & L. B. Holthuis (eds.). SPB Academic Publishing. Pp. 1-173. —. 1992. Pars 8 - Cumacea II. Crustaceaorum Catalogus. Gruner, H.-E. & L. B. Holthuis (eds.). SPB Academic Publishing. Pp. 175-468. Barnard, J. Laurens & Robert R. Given. 1960. Common pleustid amphipods of southern California, with a projected revision of the family. Pacific Naturalist l(17):37-48. Barnard, J. Laurens & James Darwin Thomas. 1989. Four species of Synopiidae from the Caribbean Region (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 102(2):362-374. Blake, James A. 1995. Chapter 5. Family Pholoidae Kinberg, 1858. Pp. 175-188 IN: Blake, James A., Brigitte Hilbig, and Paul H. Scott (eds). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Vol. 5, The Annelida Part 2. Polychaeta: Phyllodocida (Syllidae and Scale-Bearing Families), Amphinomida, and Eunicida. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. 378pp. 17 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 7 Blake, James A. 1997. Chapter 5. Family Lacydoniidae Bergstrom, 1914. Pp. 179-186 IN: Blake, James A., Brigitte Hilbig, and Paul H. Scott (eds). Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Vol. 4, The Annelida Part 2. Oligochaeta and Polychaeta: Phyllodocida (Phyllodocidae to Paralacydoniidae). Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California 369pp. Bousfield, Edward L. and Edward A. Hendrycks. 1995. The amphipod family Pleustidae on the Pacific Coast of North America. Part III. Subfamilies Parapleustinae, Dactylopleustinae, and Pleusirinae: Systematics and distributional ecology. Amphipacifica Vol II (1): 65- 133. Carpenter, Philip Pearsall. 1864. Supplementary report on the present state of our knowledge with regard to the Mollusca of the West Coast of North America. Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science for 1863, pp. 517-686. Freese, Lincoln, Peter J. Auster, Jonathan Heifetz, & Bruce L. Wing. 1999. Effects of trawling on seafloor habitat and associated invertebrate taxa in the Gulf of Alaska. Marine Ecology Progress Series 182:119-126. Gutu, Modest. 1996. The synoptic table and key to superspecific taxa of recent Apseudomorpha (Crustacea, Tanaidacea). Travaux du Museum nationale d’Histoire naturelle “Grigore Antipa” 35:135-146. Hampton, Sharon. 1997. The Ecology of Armandia brevis (Moore) 1906 (Polychaeta: Opheliidae). Master’s Thesis, Sonoma State University. 160pp. Hendrickx, Michel E. 1995. Camarones. Pp. 417-537 IN: Fischer, W., F. Krupp, W. Schneider, C. Sommer, K. E. Carpenter & V. H. Niem (eds.). Guia FAO para la identification de especies para los fines de la pesca. Pacifico centro-Oriental. Vol. 1. Plantas e Invertebrados. United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. 646pp. — & Alan W. Harvey. 1999. Checklist of anomuran crabs (Crustacea: Decapoda) from the Eastern Tropical Pacific. Belgian Journal of Zoology 129(2):363-389. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, Fourth Edition. The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature. 306pp. Komai, Tomoyuke. 1999. A revision of the genus Pandalus (Crustacea: Decapoda: Caridea: Pandalidae). Journal of Natural History 33:1265-1372. Lowry, James K. & Penny B. Berents. 1996. The Ericthonius group, a new perspective on an old problem (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Corophioidea). Records of the Australian Museum 49:75-109. Menzies, Robert James. 1953. The apseudid Chelifera of the eastern tropical and north temperate Pacific Ocean. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard 107(9):443- 496. Page, Henry M., Jenifer E. Dugan, Daniel S. Dugan, John B. Richards, & David M. Hubbard. 1999. Effects of an offshore oil platform on the distribution and abundance of commercially important crab species. Marine Ecology Progress Series 185:47-57. Palmer, Katherine van Winkle. 1958. Type specimens of marine Mollusca described by P. P. Carpenter from the west coast (San Diego to British Columbia), Geological Society of America Memoir 76. 376pp. Thomas, James Darwin. 1997. Systematics, ecology and phylogeny of the Anamixidae (Crustacea: Amphipoda). Records of the Australian Museum 49:35-98. 18 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 Turgeon, Donna D., James F. Quinn Jr., Arthur E. Bogan, Eugene V. Coan, Frederick G. Hochberg, William G. Lyons, Paula M. Mikkelsen, Richard J. Neves, Clyde F. E. Roper, Gary Rosenberg, Barry Roth, Amelie Scheltema, Fred G. Thompson, Michael Vecchione, & James D. Williams. 1998. Common and Scientific Names of Aquatic Invertebrates from the United States and Canada: Mollusks, second edition. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 26, 526pp. Wicksten, Mary K. 199E Pandalus gurneyi Stimpson synonymized with Pandalus danae Stimpson (Decapoda: Pandalidae). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 104(4):812-815 19 November, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.7 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet .gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 8 SUBJECT: General Polychaete Problems GUEST SPEAKER: None DATE: 14 February 2000 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History Worm Lab 900 Exposition Blvd. Los Angeles, CA Chaetoderma marinelli (Schwabl, 1963) Spicules viewed using cross polarizers on a light microscope. Tick marks = 0.01 mm Photo by K. Barwick, 1/2000 BEEN THERE: DONE WHAT? Last year, as the week, month, year, decade, century and millennium drew to a close we were all bombarded with ruminative analyses of what had preceded the moment, and what would follow. My turn! SCAMIT is a child of the Twentieth Century. Although we have been around for nearly two decades now, we are still quite a young organization (on the elephant, not the mayfly scale). What most of the members do as persons engaged in monitoring of the marine environment, is also an invention of the Twentieth Century. Even the biota itself, in terms of taxonomy, is largely a product of the century. Only a small portion of the subtidal biota of the Southern California Bight, primarily mollusks, large crustaceans, and large echinoderms was described prior to 1900. Much still remains to be described in the new millennium. FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter is not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 8 We have begun the process through preparation of uniform provisional species sheets which are distributed through the organization. Individual agencies also have internal sheets giving aids to recognition of forms believed or known to be undescribed. These have helped create a more stable regional taxonomy, one of the original aims of the organization. SCAMIT was available to function in the two full-scale trials of the regional monitoring concept which have been undertaken locally - the SCBPP in 1994, and Bight’98 in 1998. In both we contributed to program quality assurance and quality control. With increasingly diverse participation such control assumes a larger and larger role in the success of regional initiatives. Much of the credibility of the resulting analyses and reports will be due to rigorous pursuit of uniform and demonstrably high quality data throughout the effort. As we proceeded with these efforts we were forced to consider what was, and what was not, an accurate identification of a given organism, and how taxonomic sufficiency should be judged. Our success as an organization and the tangible benefits to local taxonomic practice has stimulated efforts to create similar groups in other areas. In the mid-eighties efforts were made to form a SCAMIT-like group on the East Coast. Since nearly all of the taxonomists in that area were employed by competing commercial firms, self-interest stymied the exchange of views and information essential to our success, and no viable organization could be created. In the nineties a more successful effort was undertaken in the Pacific Northwest, resulting in the creation of our sister organization NAMIT. During SCAMIT’s brief existence we have witnessed a strong trend of change in the taxonomy we practice. At our beginning there was a general belief that many of the animals we encountered were the same as those described in other portions of the world. Cosmopolitanism, based either on broad tolerance to environmental variability or to transport by human agency, was viewed as a normal distributional pattern. Now it is viewed as something to be proven, and assumed untrue until such proof is offered. While we have become increasingly aware of how often anthropogenic transport has inoculated one biota with species from another, it is also patent that only the very exceptional species is truly cosmopolitan (or even tropicopolitan). As the mind set of local taxonomists has changed, more and more species have been recognized as only grossly similar to related European congeners. While this can be fluffed off as part of the “lumpers vs. splitters” debate, I think that it represents something else; a closer attention to detail and a better understanding (often experimentally gained) of the limits of variation within a given population. Not that the members of SCAMIT are ever in unanimity, they continue to have different and non-compatible views on most issues. Because of this diversity of opinion and experience within the membership, the organization has admirably served its purpose of increasing and facilitating dialogue on taxonomic issues. Since our inception we have been a small, local organization of limited and specialized membership. Over the past few years, and with our expansion into the digital domain via the World Wide Web, we have begun to reach a wider audience. The majority of our membership is now electronic, and the number of members from outside the southern California uniopolis of Santa Barbara/Los Angeles/San Diego is greater than ever before. Webmaster Jay Shrake’s recent posting of the hit list for the website over one period demonstrated that only a minority of SCAMIT home-page visits originate in southern California. This is both an encouragement and a significant challenge. 2 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.8 Physical presence at SCAMIT’s monthly or bimonthly meetings is clearly not an option for most members. There has been a major effort from members in the San Francisco Bay area to come to our meetings in Southern California, and this is a wonderful development. But it is difficult for them to plan in advance, and even less possible for others of our more scattered members to be present. This makes communication through the NL (and SCAMIT’s on-line presence) of increasing importance to our more and more diffuse membership. The secretary (and others who assist her with minutes) and editor will continue to try to provide “virtual” attendance by reporting in detail the activities of the meetings, but we cannot speak for those not in attendance. We strongly encourage distant members to voice via e-mail or letter (or phone or fax) the comments, questions, problems, and concerns they were not able to express at a meeting. Previously unconsidered problems are also of interest and are solicited of the members. We also solicit the involvement of non-members who find something in the NL or on the Website interesting, provocative, or just plain wrong. Your comments are welcomed as well. We have enjoyed the support of several different commercial, governmental and academic agencies. In the early years we approached oil companies who were engaged in exploration off California’s coast and were interested in promoting taxonomy for both altruistic and business motives, for financial support. Financial grants were received from several firms, allowing us to function (paying expenses for printing and distribution of the Newsletter) and permitting the beginnings of our publications support activities. Later, an opportunity arose to pool our expertise in production of a listing of marine benthic invertebrates (the first SCAMIT list) for EPA in support of their oversight of marine discharges in Region 9. This resulted in SCAMIT receiving a monetary grant which allowed us to expand our publications support, and become more adventurous in NL production. It also provided the capital which allowed our transition onto the WWW by giving us the means to purchase ISP services, a bit of software, and our domain name. This major increase in the SCAMIT coffers was arranged by SCCWRP, a longtime proponent and staunch supporter of our organization. We are still functioning in the black because of this grant, even though membership dues have not covered costs for many years. Our non-profit status helps, but our monetary reserves are dwindling. We need to explore other outside funding options in the new millennium [Editors opinion - if yours differs please express it for inclusion in a later NL], or face the prospect of increasing dues to an unprecedented (and unacceptable) level. Our policy of financially supporting production of papers describing our fauna in the peer- reviewed literature has been modestly successful. SCAMIT has partially financed the preparation or publication of 14 contributions over the years, and has even had a species named after it (Pinnixa scamit of Martin & Zmarzly 1994). Journal costs have been rising rapidly, the availability of page-cost-free publication dwindling, and the size of SCAMIT publication grants increasing. If this program is to continue and expand we will need to funnel more funds into our coffers for distribution in our Publications Support mode. SCAMIT has had friends in many places. We lost one strong supporter with the death of Dr. J. L. Barnard in 1991. He had offered unwavering support for us from our earliest days through a series of workshops, and in a number of other ways. We have had similar support in smaller doses from Dr. J. D. Thomas, Dr. P. Scott, Dr. F. G. Hochberg, Dr. J. H. McLean, Dr J. W. Martin, Dr. R. Brusca, Dr. E. L. Bousfield, Dr. D. J. Reish, Dr. J. Blake, Dr. M. Wicksten, Dr. L. Watling, and Dr. C. Staude, all of whom have been involved in workshops conducted by SCAMIT over the 3 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 8 years. Many other outside experts (and “inside” experts, since some are SCAMIT members) have also contributed to our growth as taxonomists by speaking to our group, answering questions about particular taxa, or working with SCAMIT members to resolve vexing problems. We have had continuing institutional support from SCCWRP, and from the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium, our mailing address and erstwhile organizational home-base. Cabrillo has helped us since before they were an Aquarium, when they were known as the Cabrillo Marine Museum. They served as our usual meeting place for many years. In the last few years we have not been able to use their facilities for many meetings because of scheduling conflicts with other educational uses of the Aquarium. Hopefully we can return more often in future. We have continued our tradition of having the SCAMIT Christmas Party at the Aquarium, a great boon to us, and a unique opportunity for SCAMITeers to enjoy the facility in a leisurely fashion. They also have offered us storage space for our library and specimen collections over the years, and continue to do so. Without this support we would have been in considerable difficulty, and would probably have had to rent a space, or dispose of the materials (neither appealing options). We have also benefitted from use of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, SCCWRP, MBC Applied Environmental Sciences, the Marine Lab of the City of San Diego Metropolitan Wastewater Department, MEC Analytical Systems, the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Orange County Sanitation District, the San Diego Natural History Museum, the Marine Biology Lab of the County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County, and Dancing Coyote Ranch as venues for meetings and workshops. All of the above individuals and organizations have contributed to our continuing existence and success. We thank them all for their gracious assistance to our fledgling organization and their furthering of our organizational goals. The real core of SCAMIT and its accomplishments is, however, the volunteer work of its officers, active members, and committee persons over the years. In the beginning I was a doubter. John Shisko (CLAEMD) circulated a prospectus calling for the establishment of the organization which became SCAMIT among local agency and consultant groups. I immediately rejected the idea as impractical; monthly meetings on taxonomic issues - nobody could possibly do that!!! How glad I am that I was very wrong. All of the people who worked to make SCAMIT happen deserve our thanks, as do the employers who allowed (and even sometimes encouraged) their participation. That it has continued to survive is a tribute to the many who have participated by volunteering their time, or by just being there. As the traditional stalwarts age we need some new blood to come forward. Secretary Megan Lilly is one of these new recruits, and hopefully will continue to contribute for some time. Others in the audience need to try and find the time to become involved in the organization and its continuance. Wider involvement has been a priority over the years, and remains so. The broader the spectrum of opinion represented by the active participants the better SCAMIT fulfills its purpose. A big THANK YOU to those who have served in the past, and those who are doing so now. SCAMIT would not be possible without you. It can’t continue unless those who have not yet served fill the positions left by departing functionaries. Finding the hands to receive the passed torch is likely to be the most significant challenge of the new millennium for our organization. [The above has been the Editor’s attempt to briefly summarize what he sees as SCAMIT’s pertinent history. Comments from others who have been a part of it are welcome, as are divergent views of our future direction. Voice ‘em if you got ‘em. - Don Cadien (CSDLAC)] 4 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.8 NEW LITERATURE Our consideration of speciation in local Mytilus has just begun. In the last NL an e-mail from Dr. Jim Carlton opined that there was no morphological basis for separation of the species in the “edulis” group - M. edulis, M. galloprovincialis , and M. trossulus. He asserted that these three were morphologically one, and only separable genetically. Martel et al (1999) disagree, at least as far as juveniles are concerned, and present data to substantiate their claim of a method which allows identification of M. galloprovincialis, M. trossulus, and M. californianus juveniles (M. edulis was not included in their study). Separation of adult M. californianus from the remaining three species is not usually a problem as the former has shell ribbing absent in the other three. This is, however, not present in the newly recruited juveniles, and these have previously been identified as Mytilus spp. juveniles. Separation of the species hinges on only a few characters, although others might possibly be developed. Five characters were found to be useful: the location of the dorsal apex along the dorsal shell margin, the size of the posterior adductor scar, the relative distance of the posterior adductor scar from a line dropped from the dorsal apex, the dorsal angle of the dissoconch, and the presence/number of lateral hinge tooth demarcations. Identity of all the individuals used in the morphometric analysis was verified by DNA analysis. Statistically significant differences were found between species based on the selected characters, while differences between geographically separated populations of M. californianus were not significant. The samples examined were taken from areas which should support pure stands of either M. trossulus or M. galloprovincialis, and did not include areas of known hybridization of the two species along the Pacific coast. It remains to be shown that hybrids can be morphologically distinguished from the parent forms, and accurately assessed as hybrids. Previous work with adults in Europe, however, suggests that this may be the case. While not a completely definitive answer to our Mytilus dilemma, the present work represents a significant improvement in our ability to deal with this difficult group of animals. Additional work on Estuarine and intertidal communities in Southern California will give us all a chance to apply the techniques developed by Martel et al, and see if we can make them work . Imajima (1999) continues his long series of revisionary works on the Japanese polychaete fauna with a treatment of the Onuphidae (except the genus Onuphis itself). While many of the generic level taxa appear to be those represented in the Southern California Bight, there is little overlap at the specific level between our fauna and that of Japan. Dr. Imajima describes 10 new species in the monograph, and reports others from Japanese waters for the first time. The provided keys deal only with the Japanese fauna, and will not allow easy comparison of the Japanese species to a broader spectrum of species in each considered genus. Local workers should familiarize themselves with this fauna, which is sometimes introduced into local waters by the incessant flow of vessels from Japan to California ports. The small sipunculan worm Apionsoma misakianum is commonly reported from shallow coarse sediments in the Southern California Bight. It is also reported to occur in other widely separated areas of the Pacific, Atlantic, and Caribbean. Previous studies of early development in juveniles spawned by morphologically indistinguishable adults collected in eastern Florida suggested that large developmental differences existed within the populations of this species. Staton & Rice (1999) recently conducted an additional investigation to examine these differences using allozyme characterization of animals from different sources relative to the Florida 5 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 8 Current. The current which flows through the Strait of Florida between the Florida mainland and keys and adjacent areas of the Bahamas is quite strong, and continuously flowing. Although the geographic separation across the Strait is not large, the zoogeographic separation is considerable. Teleplanic larvae spawned on one side of this current are not likely to make it to the other side. The authors allozyme results suggest that this may be the case with populations of “A. misakianum” on opposing sides of the current. Their data supports the suggestion that this species is actually a complex of cryptospecies which are (as yet) morphologically indistinguishable as adults. Existence of cryptic species which form an Apionsoma misakianum complex in the western tropical Atlantic cast doubt on the identity of A. misakianum populations elsewhere in the world, including our own. Further investigations of separated populations elsewhere, especially those where the rather uninformative adult morphology is combined with DNA and further allozyme analyses, are needed to test for crypto-species in other oceans. Stay tuned. The reliability of traditionally used morphological characters has come under increasingly close examination of late. Case in point is the radula of gastropod mollusks. Several studies have suggested that this structure, whose characteristic tooth shapes and numbers have been the basis of erection of many taxa, is subject to ecophenotypic variation. Reid & Mak (1999) found this to be true in species of the genus Littoraria, where substrate on which individuals were collected strongly influenced some aspects of the radular teeth. Different substrate forms of radulae were found within a number of species, further substantiating the ecophenotypic plasticity of the structure in question. The recent trend in mollusk taxonomy is to rely less on hard parts (shell and radula) and more on the organization of soft tissues in definition of species and higher taxa. The original dependence on shell characters developed in large part from the lack of soft tissues in most mollusks brought back during the major explorations of the last two centuries. There was no alternative to study of just the shell. Then researchers began to extract radulae from dried animals still in live collected shells. These were assumed to vary little within a species, an assumption that usually went untested. It is only recently that the study of preserved animals has called into question the reliability of hard parts (shells, jaws, and radula) as defining characters of mollusk taxa. Studies such as the present one show that increasing emphasis on whole animal rather than just hard structure characters is not just desirable, but necessary. Passamonti et al (1999) used allozyme analysis on a number of Mediterranean venerid clams in a preliminary assessment of the systematics of the family. They found the current arrangement of genera based on morphology of the shell is very likely incorrect. Once again environmental influences have led to significant amounts of convergence in shell shape and ornamentation among species whose chemotaxonomy suggests they are only distantly related. The present allozyme results are in substantial agreement to earlier examinations using 16s ribosomal DNA or satellite DNA. Further examination of a broader range of taxa within the family should provide a good basis for a reassessment of the systematics of the group, and refinement of the existing morphology based classification. A phylogenetic analysis of the gastropod mollusk family Columbellidae (de Maintenon, 1999) 6 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.8 showed substantial, but not total, agreement with the current conchologically based taxonomy. She also found the clades indicated in the analysis to reflect the change in diet from carnivory to herbivory in this family. Internal evidence of strength of relationship was used to propose a series of nomenclatural changes, often reviving long unused but available names. None of our local species were affected by these proposed changes. The examination of the ecology of living hexactinellid sponges made possible by the existence of relatively shallow-water populations of Rhabdocalyptus dawsoni in British Columbia is continued by Wyeth (1999). Video documentation of feeding in thin sponge sections sandwiched between cover slips was carried out, as well as transmission EM examination of fixed sections. The study demonstrated that this species, and probably other hexactinellids, were non-specific particle feeders. They differ from demosponges in not having appreciable particle phagocytosis by collar bodies. Potential ecosystem impacts of the introduction of the European Green Crab, Carcinus maenas, into the Pacific Northwest are considered by Jamieson et al (1998). They suggest that the feeding of Carcinus on a variety of invertebrates in the intertidal and shallow sublittoral is likely to impact both the mariculture of bivalves, and the nutrition of migratory exploited populations such as salmon. They urge baseline surveys of areas currently not reached by the crab so that impacts, when this invasive species arrives, can be better documented. As invertebrate biologists we see it all; asexual reproduction by fragmentation, by fission, by gemmulation, by parthenogenesis, as well as a variety of sexual reproductive modes. Leonard (1999) examines hermaphroditism in light of the Modern Portfolio Theory, an economic theory with potential application to sex allocation. Those interested in sex in the theoretical sense may find this discussion of some interest. There are no pictures, however. While still deeply immersed in data production for Bight ‘98, those of us involved in the SCBPP and in development of the Benthic Response Index (BRI) look forward to the completion of the data generation portion of the program and the beginning of analysis. We want to try the BRI on the B’98 data to see if our attempt at honing a new analytic tool has succeeded. Engle & Summers (1999) present a somewhat different type of analysis for use with estuaries in the Gulf of Mexico. The end intent is the same; production of an index reflecting the degree of degradation of the considered ecosystem. The implication here, and in the BRI, is anthropogenic impact, although natural impacts are not a priori excluded. The BRI and the index created by Engle & Summers differ strongly in structure, however. Theirs is a multimetric index similar in design to those used in shallow Estuarine areas of the eastern U.S.(i.e. Weisberg et al 1997), and initially attempted here. Engle and Summers demonstrate its application, and provide validation testing to confirm its utility. XMAS PARTY The SCAMIT Christmas Party was held on Saturday, 11 December at the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium. A small but joyful gathering once again ate to repletion on succulent viands provided by those in attendance and by SCAMIT itself. Vice-President Leslie Harris (despite being under the weather) not only coordinated the festivities but provided another beautifully crafted worm-cake. Santa did not make an appearance this year but the youth in attendance (none under 12) did not mind his being occupied elsewhere. For a small group we seemed to make a rather loud noise, at least while talking. Later, when be began to sing carols to the instrumental accompaniment of Ann Dalkey (flute) and Larry Lovell 7 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 8 (trombone), the volume was more subdued. Dr. Don Reish used this occasion to donate to SCAMIT members papers culled from his reprint collection. Don Cadien, Tony Phillips, John Ljubenkov and Larry Lovell were the most active literature hounds. Larry was acting on behalf of the SIO Invertebrate Collection library which he says can use some fleshing out in taxonomic source literature. Dr. Reish only got through the “M”s, but will finish the job at a later date. Thanks to him on behalf of those present, and from SCAMIT in general for sharing his riches with us. We finally folded our tents and headed home about 10PM, still full and flushed with enjoyment at a nice opportunity to get together with good friends and celebrate the season. Hope more of you can join the celebration in 2000. 13 DECEMBER MEETING The polychaete meeting scheduled for the 13 th of December was canceled at the last minute. Calls to likely participants discovered that regular attendees would not be able to make this meeting. Vice-President Leslie Harris then called the remaining persons who might be coming and informed them of the cancellation. This worked well, but not perfectly. Hyperion was in the process of changing their voice mail system, so Tony Phillips did not get his message, and came to the non-meeting. Two folks from the Orange County Sanitation District, Mike McCarthy and Christina Thomas were also not informed and came to the meeting. A small polychaete oriented discussion was held, but only in the morning. We were to have had a guest speaker, Dr. Sepalika Jayamanne - an ecologist from Sri Lanka who was visiting the museum. Her sigh of relief at not having to present a program was palpable. I later met her at Leslie’s house where she had been staying since her arrival. A very nice lady whose doctoral work and present employ are both related to decapod aquaculture. She is Senior Research Officer and Officer in Charge of the Regional Center of NARA (the National Aquatic Resources Research & Development Agency) in Sri Lanka. PRO BONO Dr. Amy Wagner of EPA Region 9 has alerted us to the availability of benthic samples from the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. These are subsamples of grabs taken by the U.S. Geological Survey in the sanctuary’s northern portion from 1995-1997. She provided a description of the amount of material involved (large numbers of samples with only a few organisms in each). The EPA lab is attempting to find some way to get the samples worked up, but currently has no funding for the effort (still diligently looking for money though). Some interest in looking at them was expressed by the group at Moss Landing Marine Lab, which has considerable experience in the area. Dr. Wagner is also aware of SCAMIT and thought that some of us SCAMites might be interested in participating in some way (perhaps as QC or overflow taxonomists). Since they don’t currently have funding, any such effort should be considered pro bono until proven otherwise. Interested parties can get more information or volunteer their help by contacting Dr. Amy Wagner, USEPA Region 9 Laboratory, 1337 S. 46 th St., Bldg. 201, Richmond, CA, 94804 (Tel: 510- 412-2329, FAX: 510-412-2304). Our thanks to Ann Dalkey (CLAEMD) who initiated contact on this issue. 8 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.8 BIBLIOGRAPHY deMaintenon, Marta J. 1999. Phylogenetic analysis of the Columbellidae (Mollusca : Neogastropoda) and the evolution of herbivory from carnivory. Invertebrate Biology 118(3):258-288. Engle, Virginia D. & J. Kevin Summers. 1999. Refinement, validation, and application of a benthic condition index for northern Gulf of Mexico estuaries. Estuaries 22(3A):624- 635. Imajima, Minoru. 1999. Onuphidae (Annelida, Polychaeta) from Japan, excluding the genus Onuphis. National Science Museum Monographs (16): 1-115. Jamieson, G. S., E. D. Grosholz, D. A. Armstrong, & R. W. Elner. 1998. Potential ecological implications from the introduction of the European green crab, Carcinus maenas (Linneaus), to British Columbia, Canada, and Washington, USA. Journal of Natural History 32( 10-11): 1587-1598. Leonard, Janet L. 1999. Modern Portfolio Theory and the prudent hermaphrodite. Invertebrate Reproduction & Development 36(1-3): 129-135. Martel, AndrE L., Carlos Robles, Karen Beckenbach, & Michael J. Smith. 1999. Distinguishing early juveniles of Eastern Pacific mussels ( Mytilus spp.) using morphology and genomic DNA. Invertebrate Biology 118(2): 149-164. Passamonti, Marco, Barbara Mantovani, & Valerio Scab. 1999. Allozymic analysis of some Mediterranean Veneridae (Mollusca : Bivalvia): preliminary notes on taxonomy and systematics of the family. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 79(5): 899-906. Staton, Joseph L. & Mary E. Rice. 1999. Genetic differentiation despite teleplanic larval dispersal: Allozyme variation in sipunculans of the Apionsoma misakianum species- complex. Bulletin of Marine Science 65(2):467-480. Weisberg, Steven B., J. A. Ranasinghe, D. M. Dauer, L. C. Schaffner, R. J. Diaz, and J. B. Frithsen. 1997. An Estuarine benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries 20:149-158. Wyeth, Russell C. 1999. Video and electron microscopy of particle feeding in sandwich cultures of the hexactinellid sponge, Rhabdocalyptus dawsoni. Invertebrate Biology 118(3):236- 242. 9 December, 1999 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.8 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 SUBJECT: General Non-polychaete problems GUEST SPEAKER: None DATE: 13 March 2000 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: City of San Diego Marine Biology Lab 4918 N. Harbor Dr. #201 Philomedidae sp SD 1 B’98 station 2476, 8-11-98,11m Photo by D. Pasko 2/2000 UP-COMING MEETINGS With completion of the benthic data processing from the B’98 survey, we will resume our once-a-month schedule of SCAMIT meetings. The February 14 th SCAMIT meeting is a general problem polychaete meeting to discuss areas of continuing uncertainty and dissatisfaction with various groups. It will be held at the Worm Lab of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. The following meeting is scheduled for 13 March at the San Diego lab, and will deal with general non-polychaete problems as well as new difficulties uncovered during the recent B’98 conflict resolution meetings. At a minimum, the subspecies of the amphipod Ampelisca cristata will be discussed along with the ampeliscid genus Byblis in local waters. On 10 April a workshop on pilargid polychaetes will be held at the Worm Lab of the Natural History Museum of LA County. Dr. Sergio Salazar- Vallejo will be in attendance and he, along with FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter is not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 Vice-President Leslie Harris, will lead the workshop. On 8 May a meeting on corrections, additions, deletions, and changes to the SCAMIT Ed 3 Taxonomic Listing prior to final preparations for Edition 4 will be held at SCCWRP. BIG NEWS At about nine p.m. on Thursday 27 January, Cheryl and Bob Brantley became the parents of a 10 lb. 5 oz., 21 inch long baby boy, Daniel Dennis Brantley!!! We hope to be introduced to this new future SCAMIT member as soon as possible. CONGRATULATIONS to both of them, but especially to Cheryl who worked long and hard to bring him among us. SCUM RESURFACES The fourth annual meeting of the Southern California Unified Malacologists was recently (14 January) held at the Institute for Geophysics and Planetary Physics at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. SCAMIT stalwart Larry Lovell was a co-sponsor of the meeting along with Hugh Bradford and Terry Arnold. Approximately 30 attendees enjoyed the usual slate of activities: an introduction to the meeting, followed by introductions of individuals going around the room, and then presentations of works completed or in progress. Other SCAMIT members in attendance included secretary Megan Lilly, Don Cadien, and John Ljubenkov. John gave SCAMIT and Bight’98 a plug in his work statement. Presentations were brief and most eschewed visual aids. We did, however, have several slide shows. A particularly beautiful one presented by Mike Miller dealt with Philippine opisthobranchs (and a few other inverts as well). Kent Trego presented slides showing sampling at Deception Island in the south Atlantic. This is the caldera of an extinct volcano which is miles across and reaches depths of nearly 100m within it’s interior. I got the impression it was like winter sampling in Alaska, only colder. The slides Kent showed were quite beautiful and seeing scientists sampling from within international distress orange survival suits put a different spin on rough weather trawling off California. Dr. Jim McLean of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County showed us a sample plate from his monograph on California mollusks and opened up both volumes of the text to give us a preview. Looks like this long term project is fairly rapidly approaching its end. We also heard from Jules Hertz that the Coan, Scott & Bernard California bivalves monograph was shopping for a new publisher. The rumor was that when the previous publishers got a gander at the full size of the submitted MS they raised the publication cost by 3X! We wish them well in their search for a new and less costly way of producing the long- awaited volume. The San Diego Shell Club was well represented at the meeting. The editor (Carol Hertz) of their journal “The Festivus” was on hand and had copies of the latest supplement, her own “Illustration of the Types Named by S. Stillman Berry in his ‘Leaflets in Malacology’ Revised”. This supplement to Volume 31 is a revision of the Supplement to Volume 15 2 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.9 (1984), providing additional information and improved reproduction of the figures. Since nearly all of Berry’s leaflets were totally without illustration, Carol’s volume is a virtual necessity in interpreting his descriptions. You can obtain it, as well as other special and supplemental volumes of the journal, by writing her at: San Diego Shell Club, Inc. c/o 3883 Mt. Blackburn Ave. San Diego, CA 92111 Hans Bertsch also presented a brief slide show of preserved material of Bathydoris aioca Marcus & Marcus 1962, based on re-collection of the animal off Oregon .This is an extremely rare and poorly known nudibranch, It was originally described from deep water off Baja California and not reported again in the intervening 38 years. These specimens were listed as Bathydoris sp. in Austin (1985), but were not recognized at that time as being conspecific with the Marcus’ species. A paper describing this find is expected soon. The main purpose of, and activity at the meeting, was conversation. This is predominantly a get and keep acquainted sort of meeting which provides a venue for old associations to be refreshed and new ones to be formed. It was a delight which continued until nearly 4pm (after breaking for lunch). Towards the end of the day Larry Lovell led a tour through the new collections facilities for the Invertebrate Collection at SIO (which will soon be ready for occupation). It was decided that the 2001 meeting will be held at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. We will provide more exact information on dates and locations towards the end of the year. This was a very enjoyable get together and I am looking forward to the next one. -Don Cadien (CSDLAC) SAD START TO 2000 Once again we report, with considerable regret, the loss of two major crustacean workers. Dr. Gary Brusca died on 13 January after several years of illness. He is remembered below by his brother Rick and by his students Drs. Les Watling and Tim Stebbins. Dr. Ray Manning came to the end of a long and productive life on 18 January. Dr. Rafael Lemaitre provides a brief summary of his achievements and Drs. Jens Hoeg and Fred Schram reprise his involvement with the Crustacean Society and offer a personal memoir. A full obituary is scheduled for the March 2000 issue of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. Cancer claimed them both. Gary and Ray both leave a legacy of published work, and Gary, as a pedagogue, a group of students whose attitudes and approaches he shaped. While both contributed significantly to their primary taxonomic areas (hyperiid amphipods and stomatopods, respectively), for much of the 20 th century Ray Manning was stomatopod systematics. While he also added significantly to a number of areas of decapod taxonomy, his work with stomatopods will likely be his most enduring contribution. GARY J. BRUSCA “With great sadness I report the death of my brother, Gary J. Brusca, who passed away on January 13,2000. Gary received his BSc (1960) from California State Polytechnic University (San Luis Obispo) as one of Dave Montgomery’s advisees; his MSc (1961) from the University of the Pacific (Stockton), working under John Tucker and Joel Hedgpeth; and his PhD (1965) from the University of Southern California (Los Angeles), under the guidance of Russell Zimmer. From 1972 to 1974 he lived and worked as a fisheries biologist on the island of Mauritius, where his youngest son (James) was born. Gary is best known in the carcinology world for his research on hyperiid amphipods, and for two books we published together, A Naturalist’s 3 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 Seashore Guide: Common Marine Life of the Northern California Coast and Adjacent Shores (Mad River Press, 1978), and Invertebrates (Sinauer Associates, 1990). His “Annotated Keys to the Hyperiidea of North American Coastal Waters” (Allan Hancock Foundation Tech. Rpts. 5:1-76,1981) is a benchmark summary for the hyperiid (pelagic) amphipods of North America. Gary also authored a general text on embryology (General Patterns of Invertebrate Development., 1975, Mad River Press). However, for students of the California coast Gary may be best remembered for his excellence in the classroom and the field where he trained legions of marine biology students over the years at University of the Pacific (1964-1967) and Humboldt State University (1967-1998). One of his greatest joys in life were early morning field trips with students, arriving at the coast just as the sun was rising and the fog was lifting on those cold gray northern California beaches. From 1967 to 1990, Gary won countless awards in recognition of his teaching excellence, including the “Cal Poly Honored Alumnus in Science and Math” award. But more of interest to many was the fact that Gary was one of a small group of Pacific coast biologists who carried on the legacy of Ed Ricketts and Joel Hedgpeth. He was co-founder and publisher of The Stomatopod, an eclectic and irreverent biology journal in the tradition of the 60’s and early 70’s, that entertained and educated Pacific coast biologists for many years. Gary’s minimalistic poetry, collectively published under the pseudonym “Waren Stauls” (Nature’s Laws. Selected Poems of Waren Stauls) followed in the tradition of Joel Hedgpeth’s books published under the pseudonym Jerome Tichner (Poems in Contempt of Progress, Scattered Poems). Gary retired in 1999, moving to the Sacramento (CA) area, where his wife Julie, 5 children, and 2 grandchildren survive him. At the time of his death, he and I were working on a new general zoology text (Concepts in Zoology, for Saunders Publishing) and revisions of our Invertebrates text and California seashore guide. Cards can be sent to Gary’s family c/o of: Julie Brusca, 8058 Orange Ave., Fair Oaks, CA 95628. FROM “NATURE’S LAWS”: Life is too short to let yesterday destroy today, but never forget that tomorrow you may need a memory - and it will be there.” Richard C. Brusca Senior Research Scientist and Interim Director of Education Columbia University Biosphere 2 Center [reprinted with the author’s permission from the CrustL list server] “The passing of Gary is especially sad for me. Gary was my first graduate advisor while he was at the University of the Pacific, bringing me into the marine sciences and crustacean studies when I was real young, having entered graduate school at 19. He set a strong tone of excellence in thought and enjoyment in research. The early morning field trips weren’t onerous with Gary, but that’s not to say they weren’t painful. He made them a lot of fun and true adventures. But what I remember most about him was the detail of his courses. I can say with some conviction that most of the invertebrate knowledge I have at my fingertips I acquired in Gary’s classes. Every course had long, detailed phylogenetic arguments at their core — not because we all had good answers or even techniques in those days for discussing phylogeny, but because you had to master the details to be able to argue anything. Gary knew the details and if your argument violated some feature of morphology, you were informed in short order. Perhaps the most 4 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.9 valuable of all the classes, though, was the one on invertebrate embryology. There wasn’t a text to speak of, but there was, again, a teacher with the details. We were all convinced then that the big phylogenetic conundrums would be solved with embryological help. Little did we know how that field would change and the information it would ultimately give us. I met him again just a few years ago. He didn’t seem to have changed all that much, so it was a big surprise to find out last year that he was ill. I’m sure his years at Humboldt produced many students with a strong appreciation for, as well as a thorough understanding, of the marine world. In sum, I guess I feel that most importantly, Gary showed “how” to teach, not just “what” to teach.” Les Watling Professor of Oceanography, and Pew Fellow in Marine Conservation School of Marine Sciences Darling Marine Center University of Maine [reprinted with the author’s permission from the CrustL list server] “I would also like to express my deepest sorrow on the passing of Gary Brusca and offer a brief personal perspective on a remarkable individual. Gary was one of my graduate advisors at Humboldt State University, a mentor and a good friend. He was without exception one of the finest instructors and finest people I have had the privilege to know. Gary was a first-rate scientist, a first-rate instructor, and a first-rate writer and editor. It was Gary who first introduced me to the joys of crustaceans, and it was Gary that ingrained in me a respect for ‘natural history’ in the tradition of the great naturalists. It is impossible here to truly capture who Gary was. Those of us who were fortunate to be his students can only express a sense of awe at his contributions to our education. As Les Watling has already pointed out, the detail of Gary’s courses was truly amazing. In fact, I think his graduate courses in invertebrate embryology and crustacean biology were two of the most challenging and rewarding classes I ever took. They certainly made you think, and discuss, and argue, and....You never saw so many worn out graduate students after a Gary Brusca 2- week take-home midterm. Gary had an ability to make you think beyond what you knew, or at least try to. Perhaps what stood out even more in terms of classroom experience was simply watching Gary teach undergraduate invertebrate zoology (what a learning experience it was to be his assistant). Although he was remarkable in the laboratory, his lectures were even more so. He had an eloquence about the way he spoke that made every lecture seem like a story, inspiring and never boring. I will never forget watching him ‘tell his stories’ with his eyes on the students, while at the same time drawing the most exquisite and detailed illustrations on the board. I was never able to figure out when (or if) he looked at his notes, and hours later I was still unable to duplicate his drawings. Perhaps Gary was a magician of sorts. Anyway, I still have those notes today. Gary’s contributions were certainly not limited to the classroom. In fact, I always felt the field was his true laboratory and lecture hall. Some of my fondest memories are the two summers that I worked with Gary as part of a NSF Summer Institute in Marine Biology for advanced high school students. It was those countless field trips with all those inquisitive young minds in tow that really showed Gary at his best. He didn’t seem to mind that I had little idea how to drive, or double-shift, that rickety old bus along the frontage roads overlooking the Humboldt coast. It was an adventure, and we were heading to the tidepools where we (or usually the students) never failed to discover something new. 5 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 Finally, and as Rick mentioned in his announcement, Gary was perhaps most of all a Naturalist in the spirit of Ed Ricketts and Joel Hedgpeth. It seems it was this philosophy that influenced everything he taught. In fact, the last ‘course’ I took from Gary in the Spring of 1982 was a seminar on the life of Edward F. Ricketts, not the typical biology fare. Our texts, so to speak, were John Steinbeck’s ‘The Log from the Sea of Cortez,’ ‘Cannery Row,’ and ‘Sweet Thursday,’ and Joel Hedgpeth’s two volume ‘The Outer Shores’. What a fun and thought provoking experience that was! As part of the seminar, Gary (a.k.a. Waren Stauls) penned the poem below in honor of Ed Ricketts. It seems appropriate to reproduce it here.” Tim Stebbins City of San Diego Marine Biology Laboratory ‘ON THE ANNIVERSARY OF HIS DEATH’ Cling too tight to a memory and it will fold upon itself, Ffiding all there is to see as pages on a dusty shelf. My memory of you is second hand, yet we are bound by sea’s life blood By being drawn where tide meets land, revealed to us by ebb and flood. Is that where true things rest forever out of range of understanding? Defying all of man’s endeavors to glimpse beyond the surface trappings. To walk at best along the edge of some deep thing just out of sight, Afraid to look beyond the ledge, comprehension may not make it right. Unplumbed depths that beckon for us, we cannot fathom it from here, To step inside where one bright choms reveals it simple, crystal clear. But then with all the tmth unveiled those absolutes become our bonds, We are only free by what’s concealed and cannot search for that which has been found. And if within the deep thing one resides, and all the interwoven threads unraveled, It cannot be explained to those outside who’s mystic paths to truth remain untraveled. Were these the things you tried to say, as creatures told them once to you? To listen to the voice of death one day that says, my friend it’s time for breaking through. — Waren Stauls, 1982 [reprinted with Dr. Stebbins permission from the CrustL list server] RAYMOND B. MANNING “I am very saddened to inform you that in the early morning hours of January 18, Dr. Raymond B. Manning, Senior Zoologist, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., passed away at Arlington Hospital, Virginia. He was 65, and had been suffering from lung cancer and a severe heart condition over the past several years. Despite his frail health he continued working until the very end. The void left by Ray is immense. His invaluable expertise, contagious energy, and warm friendship will be sorely missed. Details of a memorial service will be announced separately. Ray Manning received his BS (1956), MS (1959), and PhD (1963) from the University of Miami, and was immediately hired in 1963 as Associate Curator by the Smithsonian Institution. He married Lilly King Manning who was his life-long illustrator, and they had 3 daughters, Marian, Barbara and Elaine. 6 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.9 In May of 1999 Ray was honored by The Crustacean Society with its Excellence in Research Award, in recognition of the quality and impact of his many contributions published over 4 decades, and the critical role he played in the founding of TCS and its early development during his tenure as President (1981-1983). A special volume of the Journal of Crustacean Biology dedicated to him, containing papers by many of his colleagues, will appear later this year. A biographical sketch and bibliography will also be included in this volume. Ray had an extraordinarily productive and distinguished career at the Smithsonian Institution where he excelled in every aspect of curatorial responsibility. He was a leader in the development of innovative techniques for sampling specimens and study literature, and was energetic in the promotion of carcinological research and zoological nomenclature at a national and international level. As a tireless collector he amassed more than 50,000 decapod and stomatopod for the Museum and other institutions. The penetration of his papers in other fields of research, and reputation on the international level largely due to his monographic works and collaborations with scientists worldwide, are truly impressive. As many of you know, his research focused primarily on the systematics of stomatopods and decapods. He published a total of 278 papers, and named solely or jointly with co¬ authors, 279 species, 138 genera, 5 subfamilies, 19 families, and 3 superfamilies of extant decapods and stomatopods, and at least 15 genera and 27 species of fossil decapods.” Rafael Lemaitre Department of Invertebrate Zoology National Museum of Natural History [reprinted with the author’s permission from the CrustL list server] “What a series of losses we have suffered in carcinology these last several months. Now we mourn the passing of Raymond Manning. The sense of sadness is almost overwhelming for those of us who knew him personally. How can one adequately memorialize a person who in a very real sense was the “godfather” of us all? It was Ray Manning who pushed for the formation of The Crustacean Society. It is hard to realize now that many people at that time were not convinced such a society was necessary. Yet through it all, Ray held firm. He had a clear vision of what was needed and how we had to go about getting it. He inspired the rest of us on the organizing council to “see it through.” Those were troubled times, the late 70s and early 80s, both economically and politically — not the best time to launch a scientific society. We councilors affectionately called Ray our “ayatollah” and looked to him for guidance. After the foundation period was over and the first real elections were held, there was absolutely no doubt in the minds of anyone that Ray Manning had to be our first president. That first term was even extra long (3 years instead of 2); we couldn’t see how anyone else was going to get us through the critical first years. Combined with his 2 years chairing the organizing council, he was at the helm for half a decade. Of course, Ray was correct in his vision. The Crustacean Society, the Journal of Crustacean Biology, the society’s various outreach programs all stand in testimony to this. At his laudatory banquet at the annual summer meeting in Lafayette, Louisiana last Spring, there were many speeches, personal recollections, slides of events in his career, and (most importantly of all for Ray) lots of good food and drinks with friends. But his parting words to us were, “And remember, you’re all here tonight because of me.” The crowd roared with laughter, but it was a double punch line. We were indeed gathered that evening to 7 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 celebrate Ray Manning the person with a grand party, but we were also gathered as members of a Society that would not have been there but for him. A great legacy indeed. And then there are the research achievements. He was Mister Stomatopod! What had been a minor cluster of species scattered about a few families ended up with almost 500 species, and counting, in 4 superfamilies. This came not only from taxonomic revision of the old literature, but also from new fresh collections from around the world. His mastery of mantis shrimp was total. It was this mastery that immediately attracted one of us (FRS) as a graduate student visiting the collections of the National Museum in Washington. To know a group of animals that well was something to be aspired to. This expertise in stomatopods seemed all the more amazing as it became obvious through the years that it was matched by an equally comprehensive expertise in reptant decapods. Ray never felt any need to apologize for his devotion to alpha-taxonomy. For him, species were the basis of everything. His scientific achievements were backed up with an ample supply of practical, common sense, organizational skills. We saw this in the foundation of The Crustacean Society. However, Ray applied this towards running the crustacean section of the National Museum and, for many years, in chairing the Department of Invertebrates in the Smithsonian. Indeed his sense of responsibility towards the museum and the fate of its collections were strong right up until the end. Anyone who has visited the museum or sent students have experienced Ray’s dedication to the collections. A few months before he died one of us (FRS) visited him in Washington. And what did he want to talk about? Not his own research. Certainly not about his own health. Rather, it was the health of the Smithsonian collections that concerned him, weighted by a sense of despair with museum administrators over what he believed was their short sightedness. Least we convey the false impression that Ray Manning was “all work,” we cannot close without reference to Ray’s love of life. He loved people as much as he loved the animals he worked on. He and his wife Lilly developed a web of friendships that extended around the world. This included the Zoological Museum in Copenhagen (ZMUC). Ray always had a special connection to Denmark through Lilly, whose own roots are in this country. Not only the president of the TCS (JTH) but many other friends and colleagues in Denmark mourn the passing of a great carcinologist and a good friend. Time spent with Ray was never dull. “Heaven” for Ray was a good steak, some good bourbon, in a setting of good conversation with friends. That all of this might get mixed in with a dose of science was just so much more spice. It was not the length of a life that was important to Ray, it was its quality. Indeed, it stands as his final lesson to us. So while we mourn for one of our founders, and share our sense of sadness over Ray’s passing with his wife Lilly and their daughters and family, there is a lot to remember and rejoice about Ray Manning’s life. Truly, we are here because of him.” Jens T. Hoeg President, The Crustacean Society, 2000-2001 Frederick R Schram Organizing Councilor, and Past-President, The Crustacean Society, 1986-1987 [reprinted with the permission of the authors from the CrustL list server] BIGHT’98 UPDATE After seemingly endless meetings to discuss the rarer, more outre, and more problematic species we encountered in Bight’98 we have finally reached the “truth or consequences” portion of the infaunal program. On 24 January we had our first “conflict resolution” meeting to thrash out the differences in identification 8 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.9 between primary and review taxonomists. All participating parties received and identified (some of) their portion of the 36 randomly selected exchange samples and also received the identifications produced by the initial identification of the same material. Conflicting counts and identities were reexamined by the reanalysis lab prior to going to the meeting so that apparent, rather than real, errors did not occupy our discussions. The results of this procedure in the SCBPP were a guide and most of the discrepancies were easily resolved and usually without the need to change data. It will take several meetings however, and the schedule calls for completion of this portion of the program by mid-February 2000. A kernel of dispute will persist, however, and once all points of view have been entertained and specimens reexamined if necessary, the taxonomic coordinator(s) will have to reach a decision regarding the data (in the process of synoptic data review). Once any necessary changes have been performed, the data can be submitted in final form for analysis. This is currently scheduled for 1 April, not an auspicious date for the acceptance of an extensive database. We can make this deadline, yielding a collection-to-completed data set timeline of 18 months. NEW LITERATURE Analysis and interpretation of benthic monitoring data is always a fertile area for exploration. In this newsletter there are three articles of note dealing with data analysis. The first (Drake et al 1999) is another stab at evading the costs and delays inherent in species level identification of benthic data. This is a further test of the technique introduced back in 1993 for detection of community alteration by anthropogenic activities. High level (in this case phylum) abstractions of benthic community data do provide one important characteristic - they allow usage in a wide spectrum of sites worldwide. Particularly at the phylum level one should be able to use the same approach to samples from the Antarctic and from the Southern California Bight, and find similar patterns of response to anthropogenic influence. At the local scale of interest to monitoring agencies, however, these analyses are likely to be somewhat lacking in sensitivity, particularly if the pollution signal is weak. In grossly polluted areas most any analysis will show a profound difference from unaffected areas, and the current high-level approach would probably be viable. For depiction of the niceties of just where influence of a point source declines to undetectable, however, all the information gathered is necessary (and even that may not be sufficient). As a taxonomist involved in species level identifications of benthic invertebrates I am hardly a neutral observer. I can, however, see applicability of the technique used by Drake et al in very large scale comparisons of sites in different oceans, or vastly differing habitats. For fine distinctions within a given region the use of species, particularly if there is replacement along the impact gradient, is more accurate and informative than use of family, order, or phylum level identifications. Mackenzie (1999) provides information on a differing approach, one using populations of fish parasites rather than benthic community structure per se. If such examinations are restricted to species which exhibit relatively high site fidelity the approach he proposes might be adaptable for use in a point source monitoring context. He suggests that internal fish parasites, which have delicate and probably highly pollution-sensitive transmission stages, would serve as a good “canary in a coalmine” early warning indicators of ecosystem health. The idea is intriguing but applicability to point source monitoring efforts is dubious at present. Closer to home Maurer et al (1999) suggest a different slant on analysis of benthic community data. They also favor an indicator approach using highly susceptible animals, substituting “rare” benthic species for the fish 9 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 endoparasites favored by Mackenzie. I personally have great sympathy for use of less common species in benthic analysis, having chafed over the years at exclusion rules in analysis of benthic data sets. Many discussions (or arguments if you prefer) with Dr. Bob Smith have convinced me that rarity is a concept which is difficult to pin down and even more difficult to evaluate in a sampling context. There are a multitude of possible explanations for a species absence or occurrence at low density in a given sample. The authors seize on one of them (range extreme density attenuation) and discuss it here. Since they provide a single operational definition of rarity in the article they are able to conveniently ignore the other possible, and possibly contradictory, explanations for observed low population density. Their methodology does offer utility in that they examine “rare species” collectively, but this is tantamount to maintaining that the same cause is responsible for low density in each of the collectively considered populations - an exceedingly unlikely case. So, while I feel that they are on to something, I think the proposed method is only a suggestive first effort. Before a more serious attempt to refine such an approach is made, the theoretical bases of “rarity” need more thorough examination and much more explicit discussion. Investigations continue on the ecology of one of the lab rats of the benthic infaunal world, Capitella sp. I. Cohen & Pechenik (1999) report on the species relation with sediment organic carbon, while Horng & Taghon (1999) discuss particle selection in contaminated sediments. The effects of different levels of sediment organic carbon on larval settlement and metamorphosis, and the post-metamorphic growth of the animals were experimentally examined by Cohen & Pechenik. They found that larvae apparently responded to some fraction of the sediment organic load, but did not select either the most organically enriched sediments or those which would provide optimal subsequent growth. 10 While Horng and Taghon found that Capitella sp. I fed on the smallest available particles, they also found that they did so regardless of sediment phenanthrene concentration. As organic pollutants are adsorbed to surfaces of fine particles they tend to be more concentrated (in equal weights of sediment) on sediments composed of the finest particles. In consequence the feeding of particle selective sediment consumers such as Capitella may help lengthen the time taken to degrade organic compounds in nature. As selective feeders on the particles which have the highest percentage of contaminants by weight, they package (digestion is inefficient, passing most items through unaltered) particulates in long lasting fecal pellets, potentially preventing other biologically or chemically mediated breakdown of included organics. Glass beads were used to determine that the preferred particle size for the species was 17±4pm. The pyramidellid mollusks have long been a thorn in the side of practical marine monitoring in the Southern California Bight. A large number of species in several genera have been described from the area and others from the north and south are either known or suspected to occur here as well. The group, by all accounts, was seriously over described on conchological grounds by W. H. Dali and Paul Bartsch in the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries. Since these are generally small animals, few were willing to undertake the study of the soft parts which might contradict the tales told by the shells. In the last two decades a few courageous individuals have begun putting the nomenclature of the group on a more sensible basis. Schander et al (1999) contribute to this by examining two of the odostomiid genera, Odostomella and Herviera. Members of both genera are predominantly Indo-Pacific in distribution with no representatives in our area. However, the nature of the character states examined, the analysis, and the biological notes provided by the authors are all of interest to any mollusk student dealing with the family and this thorough treatment is recommended. January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.9 Thollesson (1999) examined the phylogenetic relations of dorid nudibranchs based on molecular evidence gleaned from a 400 Bp sequence of the 16S rRNA molecule. A notaspidean and a dendronotid were included in the analysis as outgroups along with 24 dorid species. The attempt was inconclusive as regards the status of higher taxa of interest (especially the Eudoridoidea and Anadoridoidea). The sequence used apparently (based on internal transition/transversion evidence) was subject to multiple substitutions. The authors suggest this may have contributed to the inability to resolve higher level relationships, while providing useful information on low-level branching. It is likely that inclusion of additional taxa belonging to neither the Chromodorididae nor the Goniodorididae would strengthen analysis. We await a reanalysis based on a wider sampling of dorids, but the article provides useful information on relationships within the two families whose members formed the bulk of the analyzed taxa. In the last Newsletter the editor expressed his view that cosmopolitanism was not nearly as widespread among marine invertebrates as earlier believed. Support for this view is offered by Klatau et al (1999), who examine a “cosmopolitan” marine sponge Chondrilla nucula from a variety of locations in various parts of its reported range. Both traditional morphological (spicule based) and allozyme analyses were conducted. The authors found that there were probably five different cryptic sibling species being referred to as C. nucula in various areas. They extrapolate from their findings that many other invertebrates, particularly where species in a well-defined genus have few distinguishing characters, may offer analogous cases of sibling speciation. They also found that compared to the allozyme data, spicule size data was a poor predictor of species. They suggest that the relative merits of sponge spicule size measurements be critically reexamined. 10 JANUARY MEETING The meeting started with president Ron Velarde mentioning the upcoming B’98 Re-ID conflict resolution meeting. It will be held at SCCWRP on Monday, January 24. Don Cadien then regaled us with stories of the SCAMIT Christmas party which sounded entertaining and successful. There was some discussion as to whether the party should be moved to a more southern location next year as many active members of SCAMIT (as well as two of the four officers) live in the San Diego region and find the party a bit far to attend most years. However, trying to find a location that would compare with the venue of the Cabrillo Marine Aquarium would be a challenge indeed. No decision was made at this time and the subject will probably be discussed again as Christmas 2000 rolls around. Don Cadien then proceeded to give a B’98 status report. All agencies have received their allotted QC samples, but not everyone has completed these samples. Hopefully there will be some comparative material for the resolution meeting mentioned above. The SCAMIT Taxonomic Listing Edition 4 is looming on the horizon and Don is calling for any additions and/or changes to Edition 3. Uncirculated provisional SCAMIT species sheets need to be completed and sent to Don in time for attachment to the May Newsletter to qualify the species for inclusion in the next edition. A discussion ensued on exactly how an in-house lab provisional species becomes a SCAMIT provisional. The rule is that the provisional species sheet (in SCAMIT format) has to be distributed and made available to the membership. There was some discussion as to the definition of “distributed”. Those present decided that “distributed” is defined as being attached to a SCAMIT Newsletter (both paper and electronic versions). The sheet can also be posted on the web-site as a taxonomic tool, handed out at meetings and/or mailed, but, at a minimum, it must be distributed as an attachment to a SCAMIT newsletter. 11 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 Next Don brought up the subject of a clearing agent to consider as an alternative to methyl salicylate. It is called d-limonene and is less toxic than most other clearing agents. To learn more about it see Silverman (1999). Currently Don, being sensitized to the methyl salicylate, is using cedarwood oil as a clearing agent. This works well but some find it unpleasantly pungent as well. If d-limonene (which is the basis of several commercial brands of clearing agent) is satisfactory in our application we can consider using it in lieu of other agents potentially disagreeable to one or more of our members. It is the same material used to impart lemon flavor to foodstuffs and other products and is considered safe for human consumption (in small doses) by the FDA. None of the members have tried it yet but expect a report on the subject in the future once tests are completed. The taxonomy aspect of the meeting started with molluscs. Kelvin Barwick (CSDMWWD) had a small gastropod which he had tentatively identified as Leptogyra sp?. It was from one of the City of San Diego’s ITP (International Treatment Plant) Regional stations (2655). The animal was collected in 88 feet of water. After some examination it was determined that the animal had a calcareous operculum and was therefore not Leptogyra. ID was left at Turbinidae, although the animal was most probably a juvenile Homalopoma. The next mollusc was a bivalve which turned out to be a juvenile Periploma planiusculum. It was collected from the ITP Regional station, 2260(1) in 40 feet of water. The City of San Diego rarely sees this species of Periploma as it seldom reaches depths at which routine monitoring is undertaken. Specimens of Vitreolina yod were discovered at ITP Regional station 2655(2) in 88 feet of water. Megan Lilly (CSDMWWD) expressed her concern that it could easily be confused with Melanella grippi. This latter species, now known as Vitreolina Columbiana (following McLean 1996) and V. yod are conveniently pictured together in Figure 1.14 of that publication which allows direct comparison of all three species of Vitreolina taken in monitoring of local waters. V. Columbiana is the most torted of the three, with pronounced curvature in at least two planes. The remaining two, V. macra and V. yod have very little curvature in the second plane (apertural to abapertural), with V. macra having much more curvature in the first plane (lateral) than does V. yod. Vitreolina yod also has a less elongate oval aperture, yielding both a broader body whorl and a larger spire angle than found in either V. columbiana or V. macra. Use of McLean’s figure should help avoid confusion in identifying the three species. Kelvin Barwick’s provisional species Philine sp SD 1 was then brought forth and examined by Don Cadien. The animal was discovered at CSDMWWD ITP station 1-14(2) in 87 feet of water. Don identified the animal as Philine bakeri based on the crenulation of the shell margin and the nature of the attachment of the outer lip to the spire. Both characters are discussed on the Philine sp A voucher sheet as characterizing this species. The odd thing about this animal was a seeming absence of gizzard plates upon dissection. As the original description of P. bakeri was based on a dead shell, morphology of the animal, the structure of the radula, and presence of gizzard plates cannot be determined for the holotype. Until the taxon can be more completely described based on topotypic or other neotype material, identifications must hinge on the fairly unique shell structure and ornamentation of the species. Please remember this is the P. bakeri of Dali, not the P. bakeri of either Abbott’s or Behrens’ handbooks, which is actually P. alba. Amphissa was the next animal to be considered. Kelvin had dry mounted a size series of Amphissa on a palaeo-slide. It was decided that the animals were Amphissa undata. The City of San Diego also had a specimen of A. versicolor in their voucher 12 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.9 collection but the correctness of the ID is pending as the animal seemed to fall somewhere between A. undata and A. versicolor. After lunch Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD) was ready to dive into problems with Crustacea. The first animal brought forth was a small ostracod from a B’98 Channel Islands station (2476,11 meters of water). The carapace was oblong (i.e., broadly oval), with a broad rostrum with a large, straight ventral shelf, and noticeable surface pitting. It was without a caudal extension or surface ridges. Based on general appearance the specimen belonged in Philomedidae. The anterior and ventral margins of the carapace were crenulate with blunt/ squared edges (“U” vs “V”), while the dorsal and posterior margins were smooth. The caudal furca had 2L-2s- It - 3s - It claws (where t = thick and small). The first claw was the largest, the second about two-thirds of the first and the other two thickened claws about 1/4 - l/5th of the largest. The two small, thick claws were also displaced medially; alternatively, you could say the sets of small claws were displaced laterally. The caudal furca was large, robust and rectangular in profile with a pyramidal lateral face (i.e., the four sides sloped outward from a centrally located high point). The animal was not recognized by anyone present and its identity remains undetermined (see cover photo). Jack Word’s key (a NAMIT handout) was used to key out a Harbansus mayeri. The animal was collected at a B’98 Channel Island station (2480) in 106 meters of water. Dean will compare the animal to the full description to verify his ID. This is not an animal known to occur this far south. Should the identity be confirmed, this is an considerable southern range extension. Next, a small hermit crab proved to be a problem. The animal was approximately 4mm in size but had eggs, indicating maturity. Haig’s 1990 key was used, but to no avail. The specimen keyed to Pagurus setosus but both Dean and Don felt that it was not setosus for various morphological reasons. The crab was collected in 112 meters of water from B’98 station 2815. For the time being the identification was left at Pagurus sp. Lastly we turned our attention to Sipuncula. Dean showed us a specimen from B’98 station 2480 (106 m). The animal had one large pair of retractors which appeared more fused and larger, proportionately than those in Thysanocardia. The animal also lacked microvilli on the intestine, and the anus was located far anterior on the body, just above the nephridia. It was left as a provisional species, Sipuncula sp SD2, for the time being. TEREBELLID PARASITES Tom Parker (CSDLAC) forwarded comments posted to the Annelida Listserver. They were provided originally in response to a query on Annelida by Aaron Baldwin. The e-mail reply was later posted by him to the Annelida Listserver for the edification of us all. We reprint this reply here, as it will undoubtedly interest members who have observed odd things attached to their own terebellids: “Your query regarding the terebellid parasites was passed on to me by a colleague who subscribes to the Annelida list. I am not a member of the Annelida List and do not know how to post a reply so I thought I would e-mail you directly. (Feel free to post my comments if you wish) “I am a pollution monitoring biologist with about 20 years experience on benthos in UK waters. For 12 years I have been collecting copepod parasites mostly of polychaetes, crustaceans, and molluscs. I published a brief hand guide to Polychaete parasites of UK waters a few years ago plus a few other articles since on polychaete parasites (O’Reilly, 1991,1995a,1995b,1999). From your brief 13 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 description of the terebellid parasites I would be fairly confident that they are copepods, either of the family Xenocoelomidae or of the family Melinnacheridae. ‘The Xenocoelomidae has 2 genera (see Bresciani & Lutzen, 1966) and I have collected both in UK waters: the first contains a single species Aphanodomus terebellae which is endoparasitic in various terebellids, Thelepus being a favourite host. Only a pair of ovisacs protrude from the host. ‘The second genus Xenocoeloma has 2 very similar species X. alleni, and X. brumpti which are ectoparasites of Polycirrus species. They are oval, about l-2mm long and devoid of any appendages except a pair of ovisacs when mature. ‘The Melinnacheridae has 4 described species - Melinnacheres terebellidis and M. steenstrupi both occur on Terebellides stroemi (attached to the body or the gills respectively) while M. ergasiloides lives on Melinna cristata attached to the posterior thoracic segments. (The fourth species is from a deep water terebellid off Mexico) Descriptions of the Terebellides parasites are available in Bresciani, 1961. I have material of both from the North Sea and the west coast of Scotland. I have not seen M. ergasiloides though a good description and figure appear in Bresciani & Lutzen, 1975. “Without seeing your specimen or knowing its host identity I could not be sure where it might fit in. These families remain poorly known and it is possible that you may have a new species or genus. I have several new taxa already in my collection including a bizarre ecto/ endoparasite of Jasmineira . I would be happy to examine your parasite if you wish and would be interested to hear about any other copepod parasites you may have come across on invertebrates.” Myles O’Reilly HELP NEEDED A request has been forwarded through the CrustL list server for specimens to assist in a DNA investigation of crab relationships. It is reprinted here. “I am working on a molecular phylogenetics project testing various hypotheses about the relationships among crayfishes, clawed lobsters, (Astacidea) and mud and ghost shrimps (Thalassinidea). I would be most grateful if you could provide specimens from the infraorder Thalassinidea for DNA extraction, i.e., freshly collected specimens preserved in at least 95% EtOH and shipped directly to me. I would, of course, be happy to pay all shipping costs. Let me know if you can help with this project.” Dr. Keith A. Crandall 574 Widtsoe Building Department of Zoology Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602-5255 email: keith_crandall@byu.edu phone: (801) 378-3495 FAX: (801) 378-7423 Homepage: http: //bioag .byu .edu/zoology/ crandall_lab/index .htm HELP WANTED Two recent job postings with NOAA may be of interest to members. The jobs are described in too much detail for inclusion here but both deal with policy and policy implementation in the National Marine Sanctuaries area. Both are based in Silver Springs MD., and offer interesting career possibilities. The closing date for application is 16 February in each case. The full descriptions can be found on the web at: http://www.usaiobs.opm.gov/wfiic/iobs/ B09922.HTM http://www.usajobs.opm.gov/wfjic/jobs/ B09925.HTM 14 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.9 Those without internet access at home or at work can use computers provided by most local library systems to download hard copies of the applications. BIBLIOGRAPHY Austin, William C. 1985. An annotated checklist of marine invertebrates in the cold temperate northeast Pacific. 3 vols., Cowichan Bay, British Columbia: Khoyatan Marine Laboratory. Bresciani, Jose 1961. The anatomy of a parasitic copepod Saccopsis steenstrupi n. sp. Crustaceana 3(1): 9-23 — & Jorgen Liitzen. 1966. The anatomy of Aphanodomus terebellae with remarks on the family Xenocoelomidae. Bulletin du Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. 37(5):787- 806. — & —. 1975. Melinnacheres ergasiloides M. Sars, a parasitic copepod of the polychaete Melinna cristata with notes on multiple infections caused by annelidicolous copepods. Ophelia 13:31-41. Cohen, Risa A. & Jan A. Pechenik. 1999. Relationship between sediment organic content, metamorphosis, and postlarval performance in the deposit-feeding polychaete Capitella sp I. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 240(1): 1-18. Drake, Pilar, Francisco Baldo, Veronica Saenz, & Alberto M. Arias. 1999. Macrobenthic community structure in estuarine pollution assessment on the Gulf of Cadiz (SW Spain): is the phylum-level meta-analysis approach applicable? Marine Pollution Bulletin 38(11): 1038-1047. O’Foighil, Dairmid & C. J. Jozefowicz. 1999. Amphi-Atlantic phylogeography of direct- developing lineages of Lasaea, a genus of brooding bivalves. Marine Biology 135(1): 115-122. Hertz, Carole M. 1999. Illustration of the Types Named by S. Stillman Berry in his “Leaflets in Malacology” Revised. The Festivus 31 (Supplement): 1-43. Horng, Chiang-Yi & Gary L. Taghon. 1999. Effects of contaminated sediments on particle size selection by the polychaete Capitella sp I. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 242(l):41-57. Klautau, Michelle, Claudia A. M. Russo, Cristiano Lazoski, Nicole Boury-Esnault, John P. Thorpe, & Antonio M. Sole-Cava. 1999. Does cosmopolitanism result from overconservative systematics? A case study using the marine sponge Chondrilla nucula. Evolution 53(5): 1414- 1422. Mackenzie, Ken. 1999. Parasites as pollution indicators in marine ecosystems: a proposed early warning system. Marine Pollusiton Bulletin 38(ll):955-959. Marcus, Eveline duBois-Reymond & Ernst Marcus. 1962. A new species of Gnathodoridacea. Anars da Academia Brasileira de Ciencas, Rio de Janeiro 34(2):269-275. Mauer, Don, Tom Gerlinger, & George Robertson. 1999. Rare species as bioindicators in marine monitoring. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 98(3):91-102. 15 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 9 McLean, James H. 1996. Chapter 1 - The Prosobranchia. Pp. 1-160 IN: Scott, Paul H., James A. Blake, & Andrew L. Lissner, eds. Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Volume 9 - The Mollusca, Part 2: The Gastropoda. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. 228pp. O’Reilly, Myles G. 1991. A guide to polychaete-infesting copepods from British waters. Porcupine Newsletter 5(3):63-70. —. 1995a. A new genus of copepod (Copepoda: Poecilostomatoida) commensal with the maldanid polychaete Rhodine gracilior, with a review of the Family Clausiidae. Journal of Natural History 29:47-64. —. 1995b. Parasitic and commensal Copepoda. IN: Mackie, A. S. Y., P. G. Oliver, & E.I.S. Rees (eds.) Benthic biodiversity in the southern Irish Sea. Studies in Marine Biodiversity and Systematics from the National Museum of Wales. BIOMAR Reports 1:62-69. —. 1999. Notes on copepod parasites of polychaete worms in Scottish waters; including the first UK records of the Californian copepod Spiophanicola spinosus Ho, 1984 (Poecilostomatoida: Spiophanicolidae). Glasgow Naturalist 23(4):46-47. Schander, Christoffer, Shigero Hori, & Joakim Lundberg. 1999. Anatomy, phylogeny and biology of Odostomella and Herviera, with the description of a new species of Odostomella (Mollusca, Heterostropha, Pyramidellidae). Ophelia 51(l):39-76. Silverman, Jeff. 1999. d-Limonene - a serviceable and safe routine clearing agent. Microscopy Today 99(10): 18. Thollesson, Mikael 1999. Phylogenetic analysis of dorid nudibranchs (Gastropoda : Doridacea) using the mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene. Journal of Molluscan Studies 65:335-353. 16 January, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No 9 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. hU FORiV M Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 SUBJECT: General Non-polychaete problems GUEST SPEAKER: None DATE: 13 March 2000 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: City of San Diego Marine Biology Lab 4918 N. Harbor Dr. #201 NEXT MEETING Malmgreniella nigralba Anterior dorsal view LA Co. San District 0197-ID 30 meters Identified by and provided by Cheryl Brantley Image by R. Rowe 16July98 The March meeting will be held at the CSDMWWD Marine Facilities in San Diego on 13 March. The main topic will be ampeliscid amphipods, both Byblis and Ampelisca, but there will be room for other subjects choosen from among non-polychaete taxa. CAPRELLID UPDATE The following is a copy (edited) of an email from Dean Pasko and is reprinted here with his permission. I believe that Caprella sp F Paquette is actually immature Caprella californica. I was just reviewing a small specimen of Caprella sp which I believed to match the specimen of Caprella sp F Paquette discussed at the November 99 SCAMIT meeting and reported on in the Vol 18, No 7 NL (pages 14-15). I made a note to look into Caprella sp F because FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter is not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 Carol’s specimen reminded me of some specimens that I had seen in PT Loma samples. I recently found one in a Regional sample (IBWC station). The specimen is fairly small, 4 mm, relative to the 14+ mm adults available for comparison. It does not have a spine between the insertions of gnathopds 2, but it does have a “hump” at this point with a very small protuberance at the pinnacle. It turns out that the 14 mm C. californica specimens have very small spines between gn 2 (especially when compared to the rather large spine found in C. mendax , for example). So I believe this small hump is the pre-cursor to the adult spine. Additionally, one of the points we noted at the SCAMIT meeting was the acute tip and distinctly forward pointing head spine of Caprella sp F, which appeared different from what we all remembered of C. californica. It turns out that of my 5 adult specimens, 4 had long dorsally directed head spines (i.e., pointing upwards), while one had a forward, very acutely tapered head spine, just like this 4 mm specimen. Other characters of the antennae, gnathopods, etc. matched well, especially if allowances were made for the great difference in size. Consequently, without having noted the size of Carol’s specimen, I am pretty well convinced that her Caprella sp F is simply an immature Caprella californica. AUSTIN B. WILLIAMS The recent death of Dr. Williams was mentioned previously in the NL. Dr. Jody Martin (NHMLAC) provides below a personal reminiscence of him. “ Remembering Austin Williams” “As a graduate student at the University of Southwestern Louisiana, I had my first opportunity to visit the USNM / Smithsonian crustacean collections back in 1978, along with Darryl Felder, my advisor. I was in awe of the collection itself, and was looking forward to seeing it. But in truth I was actually a bit fearful of meeting some of the legends of carcinology who worked there. Among them was Austin Williams, whose book on the decapods of the Carolinas was something of a bible to me. How would such a revered worker react to the naive questions of a beginning student? How would he view an interruption of his research time? I vowed to keep a low profile, and to speak only when spoken to. My fears were unwarranted. Austin immediately welcomed us into his lab, canceled meetings that he had scheduled for the next several days, asked about our research and collection needs, showed us projects he was working on at the time, and in general did everything possible to make us feel at home. I returned to the Smithsonian often during the course of my graduate career, as a student at USL and later as a student at Florida State, and coffee with Austin was always one of the highlights. His collegial manner and relaxed style made our research time more productive, and our visits a delight. We would discuss at length the problems of the world, the future of the USNM collections, the systematics of decapods, and anything else that was on our minds. He was always interested, always enthusiastic, always willing to share his seemingly infinite knowledge of decapods. I suppose that the phrase “a gentleman and a scholar” is overused in our society, and employed sometimes when the fit is not perfect. In his case, it was; he was always a perfect gentleman, always a first rate scientist, always helpful, always willing to put your needs before his own. Austin left not only a legacy of beautiful work on crustacean systematics, but the indelible message that kindness and scientific rigor are not mutually exclusive. He will be missed by all who knew him.” Joel W. Martin, Curator of Crustacea Research & Collections Branch Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 2 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.10 CALL FOR NOMINATIONS With an eye to election of officers for the year 2000-2001 we call for interested parties to submit names of potential candidates (either their own or those of others). I hope that any members who have not had the chance to (or been in a position to) serve as a SCAMIT officer in the past will consider serving now. In most elections the incumbent runs unopposed. This makes us look uncomfortably totalitarian! We would much prefer that there were a variety of names on the ballot vying for positions as officers. Where is the “throw the rascals out” mentality that seems embodied in many governmental elections? Perhaps the difference is that SCAMIT officers serve as volunteers in service to the membership, and not in salaried positions within the organization. In any case, competition can only benefit us all. Please submit nominations for the offices of President, Vice-President, Secretary, or Treasurer to any of the present officers. Nominees need to provide a brief (one paragraph) statement regarding who they are, and their qualifications, for inclusion with the ballots to be distributed in March. Nominations can also be accepted at meetings from those in attendance. NEW CONTROVERSY Well, actually, this is not a new controversy, rather an existing one strongly rekindled by a recent paper (Pleijel 1999) in which use of hierarchical structure is avoided, each taxon is treated as an individual entity, and Linnean binomens are dispensed with. This is an outgrowth of the de Queiroz call (issued a decade ago) for abandonment of the Linnean system in favor of a cladistic system reflecting only evolutionary relationships. While most previous papers dealing with this conceptual change in taxonomic method have addressed the theoretical underpinnings and the differences between the current system and the “ideal” cladistic system, Dr. Pleijel’s paper was a concrete example of the result, and dealt with a “species” level revision of the hesionids which have been assigned to the taxon Heteropodarke. The debate is raging on the Taxacom List server, and those who are interested in hearing the arguments both pro and con for this approach might want to log on and monitor or even join the fray. Things get a bit heated at times, and personalities are not always excluded when deeply held personal opinions are dismissed, denigrated or ridiculed. Interested parties can find this cauldron of steaming hot controversy by subscribing to TAXACOM (the archives cannot be browsed by non-subscribers). Indicate your interest in subscribing (no charge) by e-mailing them at LLSTSERV@USOBI.ORG and stating in the body of the message SUBSCRIBE TAXACOM. Go to the archives for February and January 2000 to see what has been said on the topic “Farewell to Species”. Thanks to Tom Parker (CSDLAC) for pointing out this interesting exchange. NEW BOOKS An announcement was noted on the Annelida Listserver on the availability of a new book of interest to SCAMIT members. The announcement was posted by one of the authors, Dr. Pat Hutchings, of the book - Polychaetes and Allies. She indicated that the book was now in the printing process and that prepublication purchase was possible. The book, volume 4a of the CSIRO Fauna of Australia Series, deals with polychaetes, sipunculans, echiuroids, pogonophores, and myzostomids. Publication is expected in March of this year. The prepublication discount price is U.S. $90. This rises to $120 after publication. CSIRO has a website where additional information is available and orders can be placed: http://www.publish.csiro.au/poly 3 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 A somewhat more ambitious project is Helmut Debelius’ Crustacea - Guide of the World, published by IKAN - Unterwasserarchiv, Frankfurt. A book of 321 pages doesn’t have a snowball’s chance of actually describing [even briefly] the crustaceans of the world. The present volume, in that same length, concentrates on the decapods while also covering euphausiids, stomatopods, amphipods, isopods, cirripeds, mysids, and copepods. The title is appropriate in that the coverage is not limited to any particular geographic region, but coverage is incomplete for all regions in consequence. Over 1000 color photos, mostly in situ, are provided by the author. Remarks from those that have seen the volume are enthusiastic. The price is U.S. $45, or DM 70. The volume is available from the author at IKANUW@ aol .com. Other e-mail distributor contacts are: EUROPE: conchbooks@conchbooks.de (Klaus Groh) USA : fishid@leading.net (New World Publications) AUSTRALIA: oceans@netspace.net.au (Peter Stone) JAPAN: nexus@abox.so-net.ne.jp (Junko Maruoka) Notice and first impressions of the book were posted to the CrustL list server by Niel Bruce and Peter Wirtz. Most of the above comments are distilled from their notices. NEW LITERATURE The most recent issue of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington had several papers of interest or concern to local taxonomists. Hauswaldt & Pearson (1999) describe a local diving-depth anemone which has been known for some time as Tealia (and later Urticina ) sp A in several programs. It is fitting that this has now been given the patronymic mcpeaki in honor of Ron McPeak, who has contributed greatly over the years to our knowledge of the kelp forest community in general, and its anthozoans in particular. The new species is most similar to U. lofotensis , but differs in the color pattern of the tentacles and oral disk. Deeper water anthozoans from off our shores were treated by White et al (1999). One of these, Anthosactis nomados is very similar in habitus to a more shallow water anemone taken off central California (the ‘brown tent anemone’). The later, however, was typically taken on rocks rather than on biological substrates. Mollusk shells, particularly those of the scaphopod Fissidentalium actiniophorum are the attachments for A. nomados , which appears to have a symbiotic relationship with the mollusk. Both the scaphopod and the anemone are creatures of the abyssal plain, while our ‘brown tent anemone’ is found on the outer continental shelf and the upper fringes of the continental slope. They are perhaps congeneric, but that remains to be proven. Hopefully John Ljubenkov will find the time to compare specimens of the shallow water species with this description of A. nomados. Another deep water mollusk-associated anemone, Monactis vestita, was also discussed by the authors. Mori (1999) reconsiders the caprellid amphipod genus Metacaprella during the course of description of a new species from Japan, Caprella kuroshio. He concludes that the abdominal appendage characters which were used as autapomorphies for the genus are not sufficient to separate it from other Caprella. In consequence he rejects use of the genus Metacaprella , treating its member species as belonging in Caprella. His evidence is considerable, and his argument persuasive. We will institute this change in edition 4 of the SCAMIT Taxonomic Listing. A few specimens of ‘Metacaprella’ have been taken in the southern California bight, but their numbers are low compared to those of the major Caprella species in the area. In the north, however, folding Metacaprella back to Caprella will have major database consequences. 4 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.10 Metacaprella kennerlyi can be exceedingly abundant in some parts of Puget Sound, southeastern Alaska, and Prince William Sound. None of the sponge inhabiting barnacles are currently included on the SCAMIT listing, although at least one ( Membranobalanus orcutti ) is taken in the area. They are just not among the animals normally taken in a nearshore monitoring program. Still, it is nice to be aware of them and to have a little understanding of their biology and taxonomy. Van Syoc & Winther (1999) cover the group, naming a new species of Acasta, and providing a key to the known species from both the east and west coasts of the Americas. Since they list Spheciospongia confoederata among the hosts for our local species we should keep our eyes open for Membranobalanus orcutti in our sampling. Gnathiid isopods have complex life cycles and we see them in a number of different forms. Usually it is only the form of the adult male which is documented in the literature. Smit et al (1999) redescribe the adult male, but also describe the praniza larva of G. africana in some detail and discuss the development of species in the genus. They use a stage name unfamiliar to me (zuphea) to refer to juveniles which have passed the unsegmented praniza stage, but are still immature. Their thorough examination of these two stages of this species might prove a useful model for those of us evaluating local Gnathia and Caecognathia species to better speciate juveniles and females of species which co-occur. For years west coast chiton workers have dealt with a series of forms, usually ascribed as varieties within one variable species, Tonicella lineata. Clark (1999) has further examined the situation and concluded that there are actually a complex of sibling species, two of which are described as new in the paper. Four species are included in the T. lineata species complex, and all have overlapping distribution with one or more congener(s). Of the group, only T. lineata is not considered to occur within the southern California bight by Clark. Most of the records of ‘T. lineata’ from our area are probably his T. venusta, which can be easily separated from the other three siblings by presence of pleural flammulations (girdle barring) of lighter color within a dark girdle base color. The species also differ in scales, valve ornament, and radular characters. The author provides a useful summary character table, but does not construct a key to separate the species. Speciation in the huge gastropod genus Conus provides a much more complex problem, and one which requires very careful attention to detail in character definition. The structure of the radula is highly complex in these species; modified as a venom delivery system for hunting worms, mollusks, and fish. Kohn et al (1999) attempt to put the radular house in order with a careful analysis and development of character states from radular teeth. The complexity of the system has usually led past workers to ignore it as a source of characters, concentrating instead on the shell. Among the species included in their analysis is C. californicus , our only local representative of the genus. While the rapid radiation of the genus Conus since the Eocene has proven fascinating, older and higher level events are equally compelling. The origin of the specialized gastropod fauna now known to inhabit hydrothermal vent areas and mid-ocean spreading centers is one such example. The relative age of origin of these animals was investigated by McArthur & Koop (1999) using 28S rDNA sequence data As is often the case when technologies are new and first cuts must be made, the results were not definitive. Nevertheless they were quite interesting and this was far from a wasted effort. Monophyly of the Neritopsina, Vetigastropoda, Neomphalina, Caenogastropoda, and Heterobranchia was supported, although Kishino & Hasegawa 5 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 testing of the significance of the monophyly results showed that several were not statistically more likely than non-monophyly results. As to the age of the origin of the Neomphalina, results were somewhat equivocal and further investigations using both a broader sampling of taxa and longer sequences of the 28S rDNA molecule or other molecular data appear to be necessary. The Neomphalina, as a vent endemic taxon containing a number of the species restricted to vents, was used as a surrogate for the entire community in this analysis. While it did seem very likely that the group originated in the Mesozoic, other hypotheses could not be rejected. Other approaches based on the fossil record were also tried, but the record for non-mollusk endemic groups of interest (such as barnacles) is too incomplete to yield a reliable estimate of the evolutionary age of the vent biota (but also seems to point to a Mesozoic or earlier origin). A much longer sequence was used by Wollscheid & Wagele (1999) in their examination of the phylogeny of the nudibranchs. They used complete sequences of the 18S rDNA molecule, including between 1850 and 2100 bp. Even so, only about 600 of the sites were phylogenetically informative. Over 50 mollusk taxa were included, of which 19 were nudibranchs. Representatives from other groups were included (such as cephalaspids, sacoglossans, anaspids, gymnomorphs, and pulmonates) and the trees were rooted in either the Neritopsina or Littorinidae (depending on the nature of the analysis - all taxa, or opisthobranchs only). While this analysis, along with all others, might have benefitted from a broader sampling of nudibranch taxa, these initial results are most encouraging. Bootstrap values were for the most part quite high and the analysis yielded independent molecular support for most of the morphologically based conclusions regarding major group monophyly. Within the Doridoidea separation of the phanerobranch and cryptobranch groups were not supported based on the 15 dorids included. This tends to echo the problems mentioned last NL in a cladistic analysis of the dorids by themselves. A similar problem was found in the gymnomorphs, where the two taxa analyzed did not form a monophyletic group. I do question one of the nudibranch synapomorphies listed by the authors, that of loss of shell. This is a clearly homoplaseous character which has occurred numerous times in the Opisthobranchia and in other distantly related mollusk groups as well. Anyone who often watches marine invertebrates live will observe reproductive activity. Let’s face it, it is one of the essential activities of any species. Such observations are not always written down, leaving gaps in the knowledge of the natural history of many groups. Jensen (1999) provides first records of reproductive activity in two families of shelled sacoglossan gastropods. Combined with published information on reproduction in other sacoglossan groups (and other observations by the author) these new observations allow a survey of reproductive behavior in the Sacoglossa. The range of behavior in the group is fairly broad, although all are simultaneous hermaphrodites. While reciprocal copulation is the norm, in some cases it is refused, and in others the hypodermic “quickie” allows male function without reciprocation. Injection of sperm through the body wall and into the coelom of the recipient through a hollow penial stylet makes sex considerably more casual (no particular position is necessary, there is no need for obligate reciprocation, and no behavioral preliminaries). This non-reciprocal sexual mode may be preferred in some cases as it allows the animal to escape the energetic burden of female function while allowing production of progeny. This has been seen elsewhere among invertebrates, particularly in flatworms, where two hermaphroditic individuals have been observed to duel with their penes, each seeking to hypodermically 6 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.10 impregnate the other while avoiding it him/her self. In the flatworm case, impregnation forces the individual into the energetically expensive female role. In the examined sacoglossans there was a broad spectrum of copulatory periods from extremely short to quite long. The author points out that long copulations, while assuring the success of simple sperm transfer methods such as ciliary transport within reproductive ducting, expose both members of the pair to increased predation and other types of risk (dislodgement, for instance) which are much less in rapid exchanges. An interesting paper. Collin (2000) discusses another type of sexuality in gastropods, that in which the sex is environmentally determined. She considered several species of calyptraeids, a group known for protandry. Collin investigated the conditions under which sex change was initiated in members of two types of calyptraeids - those that live in stacks, and those that live singly. The former was represented by Crepidula adunca which lives in pair stacks, female larger and below, with the younger, smaller male holding onto the dorsal side of her shell. Once such a pair is established the male sex-change is probably suppressed (although the present data are not sufficient to show this). A second male may also become attached to the shell of the female, forming a stable three animal stack. Over 3/4 of the female C. adunca were in stacks, while nearly half the males were. This leaves a sufficient number of male individuals to undergo sex change into a female without drawing on those males already involved in reproductive stacks. In Crepidula lingulata (Crepipatella dorsata in current SCAMIT parlance) only 2% of the individuals were involved in female/male stacks. In the experiment males kept with females were significantly less likely to change sex than those kept alone or with other males. In some of the experiments both test males changed sex, showing the hormonal system involved does not always lead to optimal reproductive fitness in a given situation. Think how severe adolescent angst must be for young calyptraeids! The author also made a series of observations on the development of the species, one brooding eggs to young crawl-out (C. adunca) while the other releases swimming veligers (C. dorsata ). The end of pelagic existence and the adoption of life on the bottom for the moon snail Polinices lewisii (now Euspira lewisii ) are examined by Pedersen & Page (2000). It is astonishing how like the benthonic juvenile the last veliger is; the only obvious external difference is the retention of the veliger lobes. Once settled the juveniles rapidly begin pursuing a life style similar to that of the adults, although more limited to the sediment surface. One of the more interesting observations was that tiny juvenile moonsnails feed not only on tiny bivalves, but also on tiny ostracods. Perhaps this is just confusion or perhaps they like the variety. If it is confusion, it must be very disconcerting to bore through a shell only to get kicked in the chops! The authors provide a photograph of a snail-bored ostracod test in the paper. For a long time it has been recognized by permitting agencies that one of the more obvious impacts of organic discharge is bottom-water and/or pore-water oxygen depletion from COD, or COD and BOD combined. It is instructive to compare our local experience with this phenomenon with the large scale anoxic/hypoxic occurrences in the New York Bight, the Gulf Coast, and now the Pomeranian Bay in the Southern Baltic Sea (Powilleit & Kube 1999). The authors document both the original event, recording its severity at a range of sites, and the course of recovery of the macrobenthos over time. 7 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 RESOLVED: NO CONFLICT A group of taxonomists involved in the identification of the B’98 benthic samples met at SCCWRP on the 24 th of January to resolve discrepancies between the primary and secondary taxonomists. The discrepancies had come to light in comparison of the identifications provided for the same sample by primary and secondary taxonomists during Quality Control sample reanalysis. Thirty-six samples were exchanged between the laboratories involved, but not every lab got samples from every other lab. Effort in the QC reanalysis was as uneven (and in the same proportion) as the initial sample distribution; 10% of the samples from each laboratory were reidentified. After the secondary taxonomists had gone through each sample and independently arrived at identities and counts for the organisms contained, they were sent a copy of the results as submitted by the primary taxonomic lab. The secondary taxonomists then prepared a Discrepancy Report listing the taxa where primary and secondary nomenclature was not the same. Armed with this document we gathered to reexamined the samples (where necessary) and to attempt to explain the discrepancies. Although the results may be applied to the original dataset by the originating agency (i.e. - detected errors can be corrected) this will not be done in the overall dataset. The purpose of this exercise is generation of metadata that will allow others (and ourselves) to determine the accuracy of the taxonomic processing. Before we began Dave Montagne gave us a presentation of the nature of the process and a summarization of the results of its application to the SCBPP data in 1994. Most of the participants had been involved in the process in 1994 but we needed a refresher course before starting the process again. The SCCWRP Benthic Scientist in charge of the analysis of the B’98 data was in attendance, Dr. Ananda Ranasinghe. For many of us it was our first meeting with him. He got a chance to observe the process in action during the day. After our introductory comments we broke into small groups centered on the 3 dissecting and two compound scopes set up for the exercise. It was chaos, but an organized chaos, which yielded considerable progress during the day. Several participants had served on several teams, and so had a number of exchange samples with which they were involved. Consequently, during part of the day we were waiting our turn for either a particular colleague, or a microscope to be available. This melee of small group formation and dissolution continued the rest of the day, and a working lunch was brought in so that it could continue uninterrupted. Even so we were not able to resolve all issues at this first meeting. A second meeting was held on 9 February and a series of additional conflicts were addressed. A few of the first meeting participants were not able to attend the second meeting, but work continued without them. By the end of the day it was apparent that an additional meeting of the entire group would not be necessary. Instead, one or two smaller meetings would be held between much smaller groups of participants to resolve remaining discrepancies in shared samples. With continued effort on the part of the taxonomists involved we should be able to complete this portion of the project soon, making it possible to submit final versions of the benthic data for review by the Synoptic Review Committee. The review itself will require several meetings and should yield as completely standardized a dataset as is possible for a project with so many participating groups. Once this portion of the process is completed, the QC manager will examine the Discrepancy Resolution Reports and characterize the nature and extent of error in the data. Some of the issues will not be interpretable, however, until the synoptic data review is completed. During that effort some data which has been treated 8 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.10 unevenly by the participating groups may require ‘drop back’ modification to a higher taxonomic level within the combined dataset. Disagreements in lower level taxonomy within these groups then become moot. INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCES All three of the following notices were originally posted to the CrustL listserver. They are reprinted here although the orthography has been modified in some cases and some information not considered essential was deleted. Second Announcement - Xth International Colloquium on Amphipoda, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, April 16-21,2000. Although the pre-registration and abstract deadline for the upcoming Xth International Colloquium on Amphipoda in Crete, Greece (16-21 April 2000) has passed, registrations will continue to be accepted. For additional information on the meeting including author instructions, excursion information, etc. please visit the Institute of Marine Biology of Crete website http: //www.imbc .gr/whats_new/index.html Please contact either Wanda Plaiti (wanda@imbc.gr) or Adam Baldinger (abaldinger@oeb.harvard.edu) with questions. Also, please note the Amphipod Homepage http://www.odu.edu/~jrhl00f/amphome/ message.htm First Announcement - Fifth International Crustacean Congress and ‘Summer’ 2001 meeting of The Crustacean Society, 9-13 July 2001. University of Melbourne. The website is now open for registration of expressions of interest. http://www.unihouse.org.au/ICC5/index.htm For those of you with limited access to the web here is a summary of the contents: A week has been scheduled for the meeting, enough time to share ideas, meet colleagues and explore parts of Melbourne. The Congress will incorporate the annual ‘Summer’ meeting of The Crustacean Society. I urge you to think early about coming to Australia. It may be on the other side of the Earth from you and although flights are frequent many cheap fares go early. Between now and July 2001 the Congress website will be updated at frequent intervals. I invite you to register an interest in the congress. Program - The committee already has offers of special symposia but more are possible. These have been mooted so far: The Third Crustacean Larval Conference (convenor Paul Clark, pfc@nhm.ac.uk) Symposium on the systematics and biology of the Anomura (Rafael Lemaitre, lemaitre.rafael@nmnh.si.edu, and Christopher C. Tudge, tudge.Christopher@nmnh.si.edu - convenors) Copepods as colonizers and invaders (convenor Geoff Boxshall, g.boxshall@nhm.ac.uk) Ecotoxicology of crustaceans (convenor Malcolm Jones, M.Jones@plymouth.ac.uk) The impact of fishing on communities (convenor Les Watling, watling @ maine .maine .edu) Burrowing crustaceans (convenor Fiona Bird, f.bird@zoo.latrobe.edu.au) Biology of crustacean symbioses (convenor Peter Castro, pcastro@csupomona.edu) The unity of the Peracarida (convenor Buz Wilson, buzw@amsg.austmus.gov.au) Molecular systematics and taxonomy (convenor Chris Austin, cherax @ deakin .edu .au) 9 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 The biology and management of exploited crustaceans (convenors Brad Mitchell and Andrew Levings, bradm@deakin.edu.au & ahl @ deakin .edu .au) Congress website (consult the website for information on tours and accomodations): http://www.unihouse.org.au/ICC5/index.htm (for hyperlink see page 9). Fee - A $400 (about US$260) will include a reception, book of abstracts, congress proceedings, plus tea and coffee and lunches during the sessions. Students 1/3 off. First Announcement -Towards the New Ostracodology in the 21st Century. 14th International Symposium on Ostracoda, 1-4 August, 2001, Shizuoka University, Japan. The organising committee is planning the following two sessions: 1. Earth Environments and Dynamics of Ostracoda This theme will concentrate upon evaluating the potential of applying Ostracoda to study of long- and short-term environmental changes caused by either geological events or human activities. 2. Evolution and Diversity of Ostracoda This theme will focus on the latest developments in reconstructing phylogeny, in understanding the origin of Ostracoda and the relationship of Ostracoda to other crustaceans, and in the taxonomy, ontogeny and ecology of Ostracoda. Participants are invited to present scientific papers in the sessions either as oral presentations or posters. Those wishing to present papers must submit an abstract on or before December 10, 2000. Some renowned researchers (geochemists, micropaleontologists, and crustacean researchers) will be invited as keynote speakers. The contributions of the sessions will be edited and published in international journals in the geological and biological sciences. Six field excursions are in the planning: A) Paleozoic Ostracoda in China B) Mesozoic freshwater Ostracoda in Korea C) Recent and Pleistocene subtropical Ostracoda in Okinawa, Japan D) Recent and Pleistocene temperate/boreal Ostracoda in Hokuriku (Japan Sea coast) E) Miocene subtropical/temperate Ostracoda in Tochigi Prefecture (Central Japan) F) Boreal marine and freshwater Ostracoda in Hokkaido, Japan The official language of the meeting will be English. Suggestions for workshops are most welcome. We are also planning a cultural programme and sight-seeing tour for accompanying persons. The organising committee will make accommodation arrangements for the participants in a private high school dormitory near Shizuoka University and in various hotels in Shizuoka City. Key dates: * September, 2000 The Second Circular (registration fee for the meeting and field excursions, accommodation guide, format for the abstract) * December 10, 2000 Deadline for the abstract * March, 2001 Deadline of application of the meeting/excursions and payment of registration/deposits fees * May, 2001 The Third Circular (programme, list of participants) 10 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.10 To register your interest in attending this meeting please reply, giving your name, address, phone/fax and e-mail, to the following address as soon as possible: By Post to: ISO2001 Department of Biology and Geosciences Shizuoka University, Oya 836, Shizuoka 422- 8529,Japan Fax: (81) 54 238 0491 [81 is the Japan country code] E-mail: iso2001 @se-geomail.sci.shizuoka.ac.jp HISTORY IN THE TELLING Over the past 2+ years SCAMIT Newsletter readers have been treated to a very personal commentary on the life and professional experiences of Dr. Donald J. Reish. As he was (and is) mentor, major professor, and advisor to many SCAMIT members, this history is of special interest. As it covers the period of the development and blossoming of environmental consciousness in the U. S., and the changes in public policy, research and funding priorities, and work opportunities for marine biologists which resulted, it is also of general interest. The first installment came our way in October 1997 in NL 16(6), and the following one in October 1999 in NL 18(6). The series resumes below. My Life as A Biologist By Dr. Donald J. Reish Chapter 17: Research Grants and Major Contracts I have already written about my first research grant from the U.S. Public Health Service studying the relationship between polychaetes and pollution. This grant had a significant influence on my professional life. I have no idea of how many publications, invited presentations both domestic and foreign, and consulting jobs resulted from my 5 year study at SC. Just before joining the faculty at CSULB, the City of Long Beach began to develop the Alamitos Bay Marina by dredging. [Interestingly, if the City had attempted to start this development today, it would not have come to pass since they dredged wetlands.] I saw this development as a golden opportunity to study succession in the subtidal environment as well as on jetties and boat floats. I submitted a proposal to NSF my first semester at CSULB which was funded (3 years, $21,000 total). A1 Stone, my first graduate student, helped me on this project plus some undergraduate students. I also included Marina del Rey, and the two marinas in Ventura County. I found that there was really no succession in the subtidal environment. Settlement dependent upon what animals were reproducing at the time of dredging [in some instances, we sampled 2 weeks after the area was dredged]. There was a slight indication of succession on boat floats; however, again it depended on what organisms were reproducing at the time. Certainly, it was not the elaborate succession scheme that Scheer has published for Newport Bay. I was visiting Ventura City Marina and I met the contractor and he asked me what to do about the extensive bloom of algae [Ulva and Enteromorpha ]. I said nothing; it will be gone in 2 months. I saw him 2 months later and the green algae was gone. He said he thought that I had been crazy to suggest nothing! Many publications resulted from this three year study plus consulting jobs at Ventura City Marina and Marina del Rey. The next grant was from NIH to study the effect of environmental variables on polychaetes used as indicators of pollution. This was the study that resulted in my purchasing 1000 Erlenmeyer flasks. Jack Anderson and Tom Richards plus some undergraduate students helped me on this 3 year study ($35,000). The technique of controlling the dissolved oxygen in the flask was the key to this research. I had gotten the idea from Bill Hildemann from SC days 11 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 (actually he did the work as a grad student at CalTech). Many graduate students used this technique including Tom Richards who used it in his PhD work at Maine. Following the appearance of Rachael Carson’s book “Silent Spring” in the early 1960s, there was considerable concern about the effect of DDT on organisms including those in the marine environment. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requested Ken Maxwell and I to submit a proposal. We did; we studied the movement of DDT through a laboratory food chain- Enteromorpha to Neanthes to a fish (first an opaleye later a mollie). We had uptake in the algae which we fed the worm which also took DDT up, but we had difficulty with the fish. It was difficult to feed the fish a sufficient number of worms. Jack Word and Wayne Davis helped me on the biological phase of this research. Very little of this work resulted in publication, but I learned the difficulty of conducting a laboratory food chain. I have never attempted it again, but Joe LeMay did going from worm to fish and using radioactive tracers. He was successful. I had written earlier about the influence of C.M. Tarzwell had on my life. He became the first director of the newly established EPA lab in Rhode Island (He had offered me a job there, but I never applied.). Tarzy asked me to write a proposal to develop culture techniques for many species of polychaetes which could be used in marine toxicity tests. He funded me for 3.5 years and this was one of my largest grants ($250,000). Many graduate students worked on this grant. I assigned each student to a polychaete, and it was their responsibility to learn how to culture them and the results constituted their masters degree research. Kathy King, Boccardiaproboscidean Stan Rice, Polydora lignin Mark Rossi, Halosydna johnsonin John Shisko, Dexiospira brasiliensisn Doug Morgan, Cirriformia spirobrancha and C. luxuriosan Scott Carr came a little later in the study and he conducted toxicity tests with Ctenodrilus serratus and Dinophilus gyrociliatus . Mike Martin coordinated the efforts and conducted many toxicity tests with many of these species of polychaetes. EPA published the results of this study in their publication series. The results were also presented orally by these students at the Hartman memorial symposium. Environment Canada contacted me to study the long term effects of mine tailings on survival and reproduction on four species of polychaetes ( Capitella, Neanthes, Ctenodrilus, Ophryotrocha) at 15-20 C. Canada was considering discharging mine wastes into an Arctic Sea body of water. With my previous Arctic experience I suggested that they drain one of the thousands of Arctic slope lakes and empty the wastes into the dry bed. The permafrost would prevent the movement of the wastes. The Canadians ultimately did this but not before the study was done. Tom Gerlinger helped me on this project and some of the data was the basis for his masters degree thesis. We published some of the work. Dorothy Soule established Harbor Projects at SC and she contacted me for assistance in the biological aspects of LA-LB Harbor. They made benthic and monthly test panel collections. Most of the sorting and identification was done in my lab. I do not know how many people worked on this project over the next 5 years. I will not attempt to name them. My daughter Lisa began while still in high school and she later became the coordinator of the personnel. She trained the people in the identification of the invertebrates. I do not know the total amount of funds involved, but it must have been between $100,000 and 200,000. Dredging and disposal of marine sediments became an important environmental issue in the early 1970s. The LA district Army Corps (via Russ Bellmer) wrote several contracts with me including the preparation of a toxicity manual for them. This was a major effort (over $300,000) and Joe LeMay was my right hand 12 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.10 man over the 3-4 year study. We conducted toxicity tests (metals, DDT, PCBs, hydrocarbons) on 20 species of animals (7 crustaceans, 5 polychaetes, 4 bivalves, 4 fish). In general, crustaceans were usually the most sensitive with fish and pelecypods being the most tolerant. A manual was prepared and the results of some of this work was published. Jack Anderson, Murray Dailey and I received a contract from MMS to write a book summarizing the ecology of the Southern California Bight. Fred Piltz, a former student of mine, was the project manager for MMS. The 3 of us served as editors and we wrote a 1000 page book published by the Univ. of CA press with the help of over 20 contributors. Not many books of this type have been written and I think that it will be a source of valuable information for many years or decades. The last major contract I had was with Jack Anderson (then at SCCWRP) to study the effect of produced water from offshore platforms on 5 species (echinoderm fertilization test, Mysidopsis, Neanthes, Microtox® and fish). Ken Schiff, Steve Bay, and Andrew Jirik worked on the project. It is well to remember that one species is not the most sensitive to all toxicants; Neanthes was the most tolerant to produced water but was the most sensitive to the reference toxicant. Ken Schiff was the first author of the publication. The foregoing account describes the major grants and contracts that I have received over the years. I have also received many consulting contracts too numerous to mention. Next chapter: Some interesting consulting contracts. BIBLIOGRAPHY Clark, Roger N. 1999. The Tonicella lineata (Wood, 1815) species complex (Polyplacophora : Tonicellidae), with descriptions of two new species. American Malacological Bulletin 15(l):33-46. Collin, Rachel. 2000. Sex change, reproduction, and development of Crepidula adunca and Crepidula lingulata (Gastropoda: Calyptraeidae). Veliger 43(1):24-33. Hauswaldt, J. Susanne & Katherine E. Pearson. Urticina mcpeaki, a new species of sea anemone (Anthozoa: Actiniaria: Actiniidae) from the North American Pacific coast. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 112(4):652-660. Jensen, Kathe R. 1999. Copulatory behaviour in three shelled and five non-shelled sacoglossans (Mollusca, Opisthobranchia), with a discussion of the phylogenetic significance of copulatory behaviour. Ophelia 51(2):93-106. Kohn, Alan J., Manami Nishi, & Bruno Pernet. 1999. Snail spears and scimitars: a character analysis of Conus radular teeth. Journal of Molluscan Studies 65:461-481. McArthur, Andrew G. & Ben F. Koop. 1999. Partial 28S rDNA sequences and the antiquity of hydrothermal vent endemic gastropods. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 13(2): 255-274. Mori, Atsushi. 1999. Caprella kuroshio, a new species (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Caprellidae) with a redescription of Caprella cicur Mayer, 1903, and an evaluation of the genus Metacaprella Mayer, 1903. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 112(4):722-738. Pedersen, Roberta V. K. & Louise R. Page. 2000. Development and metamorphosis of the planktotrophic larvae of the moon snail, PoUnices lewisii (Gould, 1847) (Caenogastropoda: Naticoidea). Veliger 43(1):58-63. 13 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 10 Pleijel, Fredrik. 1999. Phylogenetic taxonomy, a farewell to species, and a revision of Heteropodarke ( Hesionidae , Polychaeta, Annelida) . Systematic Biology 48(4):755-789. [please note, the italicization of taxa traditionally not so treated is a consequence of the removal of special treatment for species level. The author intends all taxa to be equivalent and rank-less, thus all are italicized]. Powilleit, Martin & Jan Kube. 1999. Effects of severe oxygen depletion on macrobenthos in the Pomeranian Bay (Southern Baltic Sea): a case study in a shallow, sublittoral habitat characterised by low species richness. Journal of Sea Research 42(3):221-234. Smit, Nico J., Jo G. Van As, & Linda Basson. 1999. A redescription of the adult male and praniza of Gnathia africana Barnard, 1914 (Crustacea, Isopoda, Gnathiidae) from southern Africa. Folia Parasitologica 46(3):229-240. Van Syoc, Robert J. & Rasmus Winther. 1999. Sponge-inhabiting barnacles of the Americas: A new species of Acasta (Cirripedia, Archaeobalanidae), first record from the eastern Pacific, including discussion of the evolution of cirral morphology. Crustaceana 72:467- 486. White, Tracey R., April K. Wakefield Pagels, & Daphne G. Fautin. 1999. Abyssal sea anemones (Cnidaria: Actiniaria) of the northeast Pacific symbiotic with molluscs: Anthosactis nomados, a new species, and Monactis vestita (Gravier, 1918). Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 112(4):637-651. Wollscheid, Evi & Heike Wagele. 1999. Initial results on the molecular phylogeny of the Nudibranchia (Gastropoda, Opisthobranchia) based on 18S rDNA data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 13(2):215-226. 14 February, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No 10 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 SUBJECT: Pilargid Polychaetes GUEST SPEAKER: Dr. Sergio Salazar - Vallejo DATE: 10 April 2000 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: Worm Lab Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County 900 Exposition Blvd. Bivalvia sp From near the mouth of San Francisco Bay Photo by K. Barwick 3/00 Scale marks = 1mm The April Meeting will take place from 0930 a.m. to 3 p.m. on Monday, 10 April at the Worm Lab of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County. It will be a workshop on polychaetes lead by guest investigator Dr. Sergio Salazar-Vallejo. ELECTIONS Nominations for the 2000-2001 slate of officers closed on 24 March. Unfortunately, no new candidates presented themselves. Fortunately all the present officers were willing to allow their renomination as incumbents. At this point the election becomes pro forma, but we must continue to pursue the process just as if its outcome were not preordained. In consequence the brief candidate bios are appended, along with a ballot for the current elections. There were no special issues to be voted on this year, so the only item before the membership in this election is filling the officer positions. Please vote despite this. Your participation is more FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter is not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 important than the outcome. Electronic responses can still not be considered. Only paper ballots will be counted. As in the past, your comments and requests for future areas to be addressed in SCAMIT meetings should be added to the bottom of the ballot in the space provided. If your comments are more extensive please feel free to write on the back of the ballot or add additional sheets. The input would be welcomed. SCAS MEETINGS The 2000 meetings of the Southern California Academy of Sciences will be held on the campus of the University of Southern California on 19-20 May. Six symposia are scheduled: Understanding the Urban Influence on Santa Monica Bay, Coastal Habitat Restoration, The Ecology of Kelp Beds in Southern California, Research at Public Aquaria, New and Rare Fish and Invertebrate Species to California during the 1997-98 El Nino, and the Los Angeles River Symposium. Pre-registration is open until 15 April; registering for both days costs $ 50 for professionals ($40 if a member), $25 for 1 day, and $15 for students. Registration at the door or after 15 April will cost each category $10 more. Questions about registration should be addressed to Dr. Dan Guthrie at dguthrie@jsd.claremont.edu. More details are available on the SCAS web site http://earth.usc.edu/ seas/ A number of SCAMIT members will be presenting, and the selection of symposia for this session is strongly marine biased. Try and attend. NEW LITERATURE Pennington et al (1999) report on the development of larvae and juveniles of the local brachiopod Laqueus californianus. We only encounter the animal once in a while, when we stray near the shelf edge where it tends to live (as in the SCBPP trawls in 1994). In other areas it has a much broader distribution, from intertidal (British Columbia) to over 800m in the Monterey Submarine Canyon. You usually find many when you encounter any, and this is largely explained by the attractiveness of the adult test as a larval settlement site. Experiments by the authors conclusively demonstrate that larval settlement is largely on existing adults. The larvae also remain competent in the water column for some time (up to 71 days in culture), giving them ample opportunity to locate the scattered patches of adults. The authors intend to explore other facets of Laqueus ecology in subsequent papers. Not all propagule dispersal happens prior to metamorphosis as demonstrated by Hendler et al (1999a). Post-metamorphic juvenile brittle stars were caught in a tethered plankton net on a coral reef. They had evidently metamorphosed to a benthic form from free- swimming larvae, and then reentered the plankton by either active swimming, or by rafting on small algal fragments. As with other seemingly sessile benthic forms, unexpected behavior (such as clams floating suspended from mucous threads), adds to the dispersal potential of the species. Such considerations are often overlooked in modeling species dispersal, and should be quantified and included to refine such assessments. Even more behavioral complexity in brittle- stars is documented by Hendler et al (1999b) who found juveniles of one species (i Ophiomastix annulosa ) living on another (Ophiocoma scolopendrina) . As these were usually found in the genital bursae of the host, they can be considered brood parasites. They do not harm the host ophiuroid, but, in addition to protection from intertidal exposure and predators, they may benefit by stealing food from the adult. Juveniles of the host species are also found on the adult (as are juveniles of another species, Amphipholis squamata, which occurs locally), but they do not occupy the genital bursae as do the brood parasites. A 2 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 second heterospecific association was observed between juvenile Ophiomastix janualis and adults of Ophiomastix flaccida. In this case the juveniles clasp the aboral disc like little hats. A third association was observed in which juveniles of Ophiocoma aethiops occasionally occupied the genital bursae of adults. Normally juveniles on their own are suspected to be fair game for predators. We assume the above behaviors render survival more likely for the juveniles concerned. While in the final throes of preparation of the west coast bivalve monograph Gene Coan found time to continue his reviews of eastern Pacific bivalve genera and families with treatment of the myoid genus Sphenia (Coan 1999). In the process he removed Sphenia fragilis from the synonymy of S. luticola indicated by Bernard (1983) and currently on the SCAMIT list. Both species occur in the southern California Bight, but can be separated using the criteria listed in the paper by Coan. Even as recently as Coan & Scott (1995) only a single species, Sphenia luticola , was listed from the Northeast Pacific. Those of you who (like me) have been treating all local Sphenia as S. luticola need to reexamine your material and verify that S. fragilis is not involved. If you find some please make note of it for the May meeting, where we will discuss changes and additions to the SCAMIT list prior to issuance of Ed. 4. Being a clam, regardless of species, can be a very hazardous condition - especially right after you settle and metamorphose from a free- swimming larva. Two recent articles address the degree to which postlarval bivalves are consumed by amphipods (Ejdung & Elmgren 1998) or decapods (van der Veer et al 1998). With amphipods ( Monoporeia affinis and Pontoporeia femorata were tested) juvenile clams can attain a size refuge from predation relatively quickly, with Macoma balthica spat being safe from Monoporeia affinis predation by a size of 1mm. With the shrimps and crabs examined in the second paper, juveniles of Macoma balthica and Mya arenaria were consumed until at least 2mm, while juvenile Cerastoderma edule were still consumed at up to 3.5mm. Following early spring settlement bivalve spat density in the second study dropped by roughly 80% before leveling off through the summer. Nearly all of this mortality could be accounted for by the feeding activities of juvenile brown shrimp Crangon crangon. Even so, the density of the bivalve populations was not controlled by crustacean predation pressure according to the authors. The SCBPP in 1994 and the Bight’98 study in 1998 have been followed in 1999-2000 by the WEMAP project examining very shallow water and estuarine benthic communities in California, Oregon, and Washington. It remains to be seen if the Benthic Response Index (BRI) devised to evaluate degree of disturbance reflected by benthic community composition on the continental shelf (Smith et al 1998) will work for these shallow samples. Other approaches, such as that of Engle & Summers (1999) may prove more useful given the nature of the community. Although their measure was designed for application in northern Gulf of Mexico estuaries, it does not involve species specific information as does the BRI, and should not be geographically specialized. It is a multimetric index utilizing a variety of different data types. Bays and estuaries, such as those examined in the WEMAP sampling, tend to be depots for terrestrial (usually anthropogenic) contaminants. The recent examination of sediment contamination in San Francisco Bay (Thompson et al 1999) demonstrated again that the patterns of contamination and benthic response are complex. Two sediment toxicity tests were used; bulk sediment assay with amphipods {Eohaustorius survival), and elutriate toxicity assay with larval bivalves (Mytilus or Ostrea normal development). Results of the two types of toxicity tests did not show the same patterns, rather reflecting different aspects of sediment toxicity and 3 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 organism response. Many of the 14 sites tested within the Bay system showed toxicity in one or the other test. There was no significant influence of freshwater input into the Bay, either as rainfall or as riverine flow, on the toxicity of sediments. Not all sediment toxicity is anthropogenic. Bromophenols and other secondary metabolites of benthic infauna have been shown in the past to control settlement of competing larvae, or to keep areas around tubes or burrows free of spacial competitors. The hypothesis that 4- bromophenol exerted this influence by controlling the bacterial flora of the sediments was addressed by Lovell, Steward & Phillips (1999). Their results indicated that this hypothesis was unsupported; there was no significant effect of 4-bromophenol on sediment bacteria. OLD LITERATURE Dr. Michel Hendrickx of the Mazatlan Marine Institute has informed SCAMIT that he has copies of several of his large publications available free, and with a very modest shipping and handling cost. These include Hendrickx & Salgado-Barragan 1986, Hendrickx & Estrada Navarette 1996, and Hendrickx 1997. A new publication will also be available in the very near future; Hendrickx 1999. Interested parties should contact him via e-mail at michel@ola.icmyl.unam.mx. Handling is $5.00 per volume + the cost of the shipping itself (varying with number of items desired, and nature of shipment method i.e. express mail, air mail etc.) Dr Hendrickx will be able to tell you how much it will be once you contact him. He can also be reached at michel @ mar.icmyl .unam .mx. All of the volumes are in Spanish, but are very well illustrated, have fine keys, and should be useful to anyone with the courage to attempt their use (Spanish speaking or no). An old friend has resurfaced. It was with considerable surprise and great gladness that an e-mail message was recently received from Dr. E. L. Bousfield announcing the resumption of publication of the journal Amphipacifica. It had made it through one and 3/4 volumes prior to his having to cease publication due to ill- health. He has weathered that crisis, and has decided to continue with publication where he left off. There were a number of manuscripts in progress at the time publication ceased (Volume 2 No. 3 was released in May of 1997). With the release of the final issue of Volume 2 (expected June or July of 2000) these manuscripts should be addressed. Subscribers to Volume 2 will receive No. 4 without further charge. Others can purchase it for $10 (U.S.) or $12.50 (CAN). Subscription to the 4 issues of Volume III is available for $40 (U.S.) or $50 (CAN) including surface mail delivery. Subscription requests and other correspondence should go to elbousf@magma.ca or Dr. E. L. Bousfield, Managing Editior, 1710-1275 Richmond Rd., Ottawa, ON, Canada K2B 8E3. MYTILUS REVISITED In the December 1999 NL the editor provided a brief commentary on the paper by Martel et al (1999) dealing with separation of juvenile mussels. In those comments I stated that they provide data on characters which would allow separation of juvenile Mytilus trossulus from Mytilus galloprovincialis . Member Dr. Jim Carlton had also read the paper, and reached different conclusions. He sent the following e- mail stating his case, and inviting reassessment on my part (which is provided below). I and other SCAMIT readers owe him a debt of gratitude for his correction. I would encourage other readers to take issue with statements or evaluations set out in the NL, both to correct misstatements, and to express differing opinion. 4 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 “I see your note on p. 5 of the December 1999 SCAMIT newsletter, which reads in part, ‘Dr. Jim Carlton opined that there was no morphological basis for separation of the species in the “edulis” group — M. edulis, M. galloprovincialis, and M. trossulus... Martel et al. (1999) disagree...’ If one takes a peek, again, however, at Martel et al. (1999), they made no attempt to distinguish M. gallo (MG) from M. trossulus (MT), they did not try to do so, and they offer no clear way to do that. They only distinguished lumped MG-MT (which as a species bundle they simply call “bay mussels”) from M. californianus (MC). The most telling evidence for this is figure 2, where they draw a juvenile M. californianus, but the juvenile bay mussel is labeled “M. trossulus / galloprovincialis ” — clearly they were unable to draw these as two different species! While there are differences in the means between MG and MT for some characters, the standard deviations are large and pretty much capture the mean of the other species. On page 162 they put the nail in the coffin, and say, “No attempt was made to distinguish true breeding...individuals within the bay mussel species complex...”. I take the point of the paper to be able to tell baby MC from baby MT or MG, whatever one might happen to have in the neighborhood. At least, that’s the way I read it — what do you think?” On reexamining the evidence provided by Martel et al I must admit that Dr. Carlton’s less sanguine assessment is more accurate. Although two measures (PA ratio and Dorsal Apex ratio, Table 4) were significantly different statistically between M. trossulus and M. galloprovincialis, the ranges are strongly overlapping. In practice there would be no way to positively separate juveniles of these two species using the measurements which the authors analyzed. One might have a suspicion, based on the nature of the two measurements, but there could be no definitive identification. As the two species would only co-occur in areas where hybridization was possible, and no evaluation of hybrids was attempted, the situation is even less favorable for species level morphological discrimination of the two species. As Dr. Carlton states in his e-mail, the authors intent was separation of Mytilus californianus juveniles from bay mussel species at different points in the M. californianus range. The differences they detected between M. galloprovincialis and M. trossulus were only a byproduct of their investigation, and not sufficient to separate juveniles of the two bay mussel species in areas where they might co¬ occur. As M. edulis is only very rarely present on the West Coast, our main concern has been with separation of the other two members of the edulis or bay mussel group. The only basis for separating these two taxa locally is geographic unless molecular taxonomic data is available for each individual. In areas of range overlap all bets have been, and unfortunately remain, off. PERSISTENCE Despite the termination of El Nino conditions some time ago, and reversion to a La Nina cool water condition in the Southern California Bight, a few of the warm water elements just refuse to go away. The target shrimp Sicyonia penicillata, for instance, persists in our area. Three specimens were taken by OCSD on 10 January 2000, in their regular trawl sampling [thanks to Christina Thomas & Mike McCarthy for the opportunity to examine these specimens]. Both stations where they occurred were on the 60m isobath, and one of the returned specimens was a mature male. I presume that in some areas reproduction may 5 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 still occur, and that the species continues to be locally viable. January is the end of the major spawning period for this species in the Gulf of California (Lopez-Martinez et al 1999). THE DEEP END, OFF & ON Towards the end of February your editor finally made his planned trek to the north. As mentioned in the NL last year, the goal of this trip was to save a series of samples from being discarded. Dr. Andrew Carey, Jr., who is retiring after a long and productive career at Oregon State University, was tasked with cleaning out a bio-curation facility prior to his departure. This building held many of the collections made by OSU oceanographic cruises over the years. Much of the material held in species lots was distributed to various institutions (including a large group of specimens from grab and trawl collections to the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County), but no home could be found for one series of unsorted or partially sorted samples. The samples were taken with an epibenthic sled (EBS) which samples the upper sediment surface without digging too deep. It is towed for some distance over the bottom before filling, and, in consequence, tends to accumulate both large suites of animals, and rare species. Most of the samples were taken in 1974-75 as part of the thesis work of Dr. John Dickinson, who investigated the taxonomy and ecology of the amphipods of the Cascadia Abyssal Plain (see Dickinson & Carey 1978). They came predominantly from two sites, one near the base of the continental slope, and one removed from the slope; both at depths of around 2800m. At each site a series of EBS tows was made, around 70 in total, not all successful. Those which best served the thesis work were partially sorted (amphipods were removed), but the rest remained unsorted. A few samples were also obtained from the mid to lower portions of the Cascadia Slope at depths between 713 and 1372m. As the mesh on the sampler is 1.0mm, and rewash was done on a 0.42mm screen, many tiny animals were retained including forams. Along with the forams were great gouts of fecal pellets, and some light but coarse glauconitic sands. Maintained in ethanol, they remain in excellent condition following decades of storage. Gene Ruff (who worked with Carey at OSU) had already selected and removed a portion of these samples, leaving 51 5-gallon buckets of material at risk of being discarded. Additionally there were four one-gallon containers from EBS tows in the Tanner Basin made with the same gear by R. R. Hessler in 1971.1 picked up all this material from Dr. Carey, and trucked it down to Los Angeles. Some of the EBS tows yielded a great deal of material - one distributed into eight buckets! I plan to work on them when I can, but it will take many years before they are all sorted. The materials which result will eventually be deposited (with the remainder of my collections) at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, but in the interim will remain with me. Others in SCAMIT interested in looking beyond their sampling grids for comparative material are welcome to contact me about borrowing material or participating in this particular labor of love (that is...sorting). I will be keeping Dr. Carey informed of what the samples contain, and from time to time will write up particularly notable finds for the SCAMIT NL. Based on examination of seven samples to date, there is little overlap (at least in non-polychaetes) between the fauna contained in these samples and that of even the deepest monitoring stations among SCAMIT organizations (305m). - Don Cadien (CSDLAC) MINUTES OF THE 13 MARCH MEETING The meeting was called to order at approximately 9:40 a.m.. Ron Velarde started by passing around an email request he’d received. The European Standards 6 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 Organization has set up a task group to develop guidelines on quality assurance methods related to aquatic ecology. A request is being put forth for any information related to the above mentioned area. Anyone interested can respond to Martyn Kelly at Bowburn_Consultancy@ CompuServe .com. Ron also let us know that Paul Scott had sent an email with the well received news that his book is at the printers. The Mollusca specialists were over-joyed. Upcoming meetings were reiterated. The AMS will be holding its conference in conjunction with the WSM this year from July 7-12 at San Francisco State University. There is also a Coastal and Estuarine Risk Assessment Forum from July 20 - 21,2000 at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (William & Mary campus). For more information please see the VIMS web site at: http: //www. vims .edu/env/departments/ ri skchem/ev ents .html. The officers were then queried as to any issues they had. Secretary Megan Lilly voiced her concern over a recent trend she’s seen developing within the last year. Because of the number of taxonomic problems which arose during the B’98 survey, SCAMIT meetings have been being held on a bi-monthly basis for the last year or so (which, as of the writing of this newsletter, has ceased and we are back to the normal once a month schedule). Within the last 4 months a number of meetings have been canceled at the last minute (the Friday afternoon before the Monday meeting) because of a lack of interest on the part of many of the potential attendees (some people were burned out from the bi-monthly schedule). The secretary took issue with this because inevitably some attendees were not receiving the notice of cancellation in advance (it being a last minute decision) and were showing up to meetings which had been canceled. Setting aside time to attend a meeting, only to arrive and find it canceled, must be frustrating to say the least. So, the Secretary would like to put forth a request that in the future a minimum of a week’s notice of cancellation be given, if this cannot be done, then the meeting needs to go forward as planned. Don Cadien reminded those present that it is time to call for nominations for the upcoming SCAMIT officer elections. John Ljubenkov and Don then proceeded to nominate the existing suite of officers. Ron Velarde (president) accepted the nomination as well as Megan Lilly (secretary). John Ljubenkov told us about a web-site, http://www.sciplus.com/ where surplus microscopes and related equipment can be found relatively inexpensively. John has already purchased and received a dissecting scope, and is expecting a new compound scope as well. These items are coming from financially strapped institutions in Russia, and are good equipment at very advantageous prices ($595). The dissecting scope came with an integral substage, and a light source to fit it. We will report on the compound scope once John receives it and has a chance to evaluate its optics. The taxonomy portion of the meeting started with mollusca. We had Dot Norris joining us from the City and County and of San Francisco and she had brought a small, unidentified bivalve from just outside the mouth of SF Bay. It was studied with great fervor, but the members present were not able to identify it. It was felt that it was probably an introduced species and left at Bivalvia sp for the time being (see front page). Megan Lilly had brought a small Eulimidae from ITP Station 2685(1), 7/28/99,398 ft. Upon examination the animal was identified as Vitreolina macra.As well, a Cyclostremella californica was identified from ITP regional station 2679, 8/3/ 99,40 ft. Tony Phillips (CLAEMD) had 7 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 brought a strange looking Tellinid. The shape was more reminiscent of a Macoma, but its color pattern and over all gestalt pointed to Tellina carpenteri. A Turbonilla from B’98 station 2519, Santa Cruz Island, 7-23-98, 66m, was also brought by Tony. It was compared to many of the City of San Diego’s provisional species of Turbonilla , but was, in the end, considered distinct. For now it is being called Turbonilla sp Hyp 1. In the afternoon we examined a series of crustacean specimens. Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD) distributed several summary sheets he had assembled concerning problem animals. The first concerned one of our targets for the day; separation of the amphipods Ampelisca cristata cristata from A. cristata microdentata. There is some difference of opinion among members regarding the retention of microdentata as only a subspecific form. Several members feel that the differences warrant full specific recognition. At a recent Bight’98 conflict resolution meeting the question of separating the two had arisen again as a practical matter, with different taxonomists seeing the same specimens differently. Of particular interest was Dean’s use of a perceived dichotomy between the two involving either a single or double crest on the last pereonite. Doug Diener (MEC) [unfortunately unable to attend] circulated an e-mail providing data which indicated that this character was not reliable for separation of the two taxa. In the materials Dean provided at the meeting he recognized that the character had become unreliable, based on new material collected from the Pt. Loma area. He modified the information provided by Diener, adding additional characters of the head, gills, and epimeron 2. The result is assembled in an attached table (A). Dean then moved on to a second Ampelisca problem; separation of A. brevisimulata from the nearly allied provisional form A. cf brevisimulata. Although the latter, originally recognized by Carol Paquette (MBC) in the mid 80’s, has been a SCAMIT species since 1995, it has not achieved wide recognition. Dean finds both in his sampling area, and felt that the lack of reports from others stemmed from a lack of side-by-side comparison. He prepared another table directly comparing the character states of the two forms with regard to coxa 1,2nd pleonal epimeron, and 3rd uropod configuration (B). With this aid in hand perhaps more of us will be able to detect A. cf brevisimulata in our samples. Once data from a wider area is available ecological differences between the two forms may become apparent. We then visited another ampeliscid genus, Byblis, to examine the B. veleronis vs. B. millsi question. Some agencies report both, some only one. Dean finds both in his area, with a bathymetric separation between the two. He compares characters of the coxae, uropods 1 & 2, and size as well as bathymetric distribution in another distributed table (C). Ischyrocerus pelagops was very briefly considered. Dean was concerned that its status had not been addressed in the revision of the group that removed several species to a new genus Neoischyrocerus (Conian 1995). Currently it is apparently retained in Ischyrocerus , although this status may change with further work on the group. It continues to be a valid species. We reviewed the methods of separating Majoxiphalus major from Foxiphalus obtusidens. The former was originally described as a subspecies of the latter, then raised to specific status, and finally made the type of a new genus by Jarrett & Bousfield 1994. Dean had a specimen he thought was M. major , and upon review at the meeting this was confirmed. Dean uses primarily the relative position of the plumose setae on the telson to 8 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 separate the two species; they are very proximal in M. major , and removed from the base of the telson in F. obtusidens. Other characters of potential interest are the rostrum, the relative widths of the 4th and 5th articles of P5, the shape and posterior setation of pleonal epimera 2 and 3, the relative width of the second article of the mandibular palp, and a series of others listed by Barnard 1960, Barnard & Barnard 1982, and Jarrett & Bousfield 1994. Of these the easiest to see is the rostrum length, but it takes direct comparison of the two taxa and a little eye training to be able to separate them on only that basis. [This character, by the way, is evident even in fairly small juveniles of M. major based on the editor’s experience.] Dean brought a cumacean specimen he was calling Leucon sp. H, now known as Leucon declivis (Watling & McCann 1997). We examined the specimen and concluded that it was actually a Leucon magnadentata Given 1961 based on carapace and uropod details. Dean reached that ID using the earlier key of Cadien (a 1986 SCAMIT meeting handout). Both species are normally found in much deeper water than was Dean’s specimen, but both have a few shallower records, and the type of L. magnadentata came from only slightly deeper than the animal at hand. Neither species is currently on the SCAMIT list, so this animal represents a nice addition. Dot Norris (CCSF) brought several interesting species from the Bay area for examination.The first was an ampeliscid from near the mouth of San Francisco Bay which was either Ampelisca abdita or the very similar A. milleri. The introduced A. abdita is the dominant ampeliscid species in the Bay, but the specimen examined turned out to be A. milleri based on the criteria used by Chapman (1988) to separate the two. Most persuasive was the shape of the dactyl and relative proportions of articles 4, 5, & 6 on P6. She brought along a small Photis to confirm that it was P. macinerneyi, and it was. Dean provided her with a copy of his Photis key, which she did not have. She also brought down specimens of Synidotea believed to be S. laevidorsalis . These were examined by Tim Stebbins (CSDMWWD) who has been working with the group. We quote below from his e- mail on the subject: “I looked at your Synidotea specimens, mostly just at the larger one for the moment. I believe what you have is Synidotea consolidata Stimpson, 1856. This would correspond to S. bicuspida in Menzies and Miller’s (1972) account of the California Synidotea , as well as in the isopod chapter of Light’s Manual (Miller, 1975). Rafi and Laubitz (1990) discuss briefly the distribution of these two species, the end point being that S. consolidata is the beast ranging into your area, while S. bicuspida is now considered restricted to arctic waters. I talked to Rick [Brusca] and he is in agreement with this, thus this is what should be coming out in the new Light’s Manual (whenever that is). Briefly, your critters do have some body sculpturing, although it’s reduced to a few small tubercles or horns on the cephalon and transverse carinae (ridges) on the pereonites. These characters would eliminate the “smooth” bodied S. laticauda and S. harfordi. Synidotea laticauda is also pretty much restricted to estuarine habitats instead of the offshore environs where you found these beasts. A definitive character for S. consolidata is the morphology of the appendix masculinum (a.m.) in males: curved near the apex and densely spinulose. Your larger specimen is a male and I could see the “curved” aspect of the a.m. clearly, although I would need to remove it to get 9 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 a clear look at any spination, etc. I didn’t feel it was necessary since what I could see matched all the illustrations I had perfectly.” Lastly Dot brought out two specimens of an odd little isopod, Pleurogonium sp SF 1. This was unlike P. californiense , P. sp A, and P. rubicundum in totally lacking coxal spination. The animals were large for the genus and rather chalky (dead white - but blue stained). They were unknown to the members present, but Don Cadien suggested that they might be Sars species P. inerme , a potential circumboreal form. The literature was not at hand, and further checking was required after the meeting. He promised to send copies of the Sars plates to Dot so she could evaluate the possibility herself. The species was left at P. sp SF 1 pending further information. This was the first time the species had been encountered, and no additional specimens were available. My Life as a Biologist by Donald J. Reish Chapter 18: Some Interesting Consulting Contracts There will be some duplication of information from previous chapters. Disneyland contacted Ken Maxwell and me to investigate the problem they were having with leeches in their waterways. The divers, who enter the water every day to monitor tracks and pipes, would have leeches attached to them whenever they went in the water. They wanted extra hazard pay because of the leeches. Ken and I would go to Disneyland when it was not in operation and look for leeches. We never found any living leeches because they would poison the water just before we came. The director of maintenance claimed that the leeches came from the 1900 drug store on main street (no longer there). They had medicinal leeches on display which the director claimed that they emptied into the water. I found 3 cocoons in a far corner of the river which had developing leeches. I brought them to the lab and raised them by feeding them sludge worms. A person in Maine identified the leech as one that feeds on worms and snails and is not a blood sucker. Once again it proves the importance of correct species identification. The officials at Disneyland were happy! I do not know how it started but the radiation branch of EPA contacted me to determine if the drums containing low level radioactive wastes had any effect on the marine benthic environment. Thousands of these drums were dumped in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans in deep water in the 1950s. I went on the first trip in 1976 off Delaware about 125 miles. They brought a drum up from 10,000 feet. I noted serpulid tubes on the surface which I later studied and believe to be a new species (I don t know if I still have the specimens. Maybe my gradual clean up of my stuff will encounter them.) Steve Bay went on the second trip off Delaware; Randy McGlade went off San Francisco [Gulf of the Farallones Deep Water Dumpsite - Ed.] twice and Joe LeMay once. There did not seem to be any effect of the drums on the benthic fauna. Joe collected fish on his trip and preserved the stomachs and intestines. I was able to demonstrate that invertebrates can be identified from intestinal contents; furthermore, I was able to demonstrate that so-called planktonic feeders also feed on benthic animals. EPA published some of my reports in the radiation series. I was one of three (Herb Ward, editor of SETAC journal was one) asked to review data collected years earlier on the long term effects of oil well production on the ecology of the Gulf of Mexico. For 2 years I went to Houston about every 8 weeks to evaluate the data. None of the original data collected, which showed no effect, had been published. The oil companies who sponsored the original study wanted us to reevaluate the data, draw our own conclusions, and publish our findings. We found no effect, in fact, we found out that more oil enters the Gulf of Mexico each day via the Mississippi River than has been spilled in 30-40 years of 10 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 drilling. Only recently have we been focusing on the effect of storm water run off on the environment. Our reevaluation was published in the Rice University Monograph Series. One day Herb Ward called me and asked for me to come to the Kennedy Space Center to advise them on the effect of space shuttle take¬ offs on the marine environment. NASA had not considered that cooling water from the lift-off flows into the estuary adjacent to the pad. I trained their benthic staff with the help of Tony Phillips and Tom Gerlinger. There was some effect but this did not stop NASA. I became associated with Atlantic Scientific (no longer in existence, the owner died many years ago). Russ Bellmer had worked for them also. He specialized in the smaller contracts. Navy homeporting was one area and I did work in LA-LB Harbors, San Francisco Bay, and Newport, Rhode Island (I borrowed a bottom sampler from Wayne Davis). He was on the short list, unsuccessfully, to do work in Israel and Fiji. Marine Borers have been an area which has been a consulting field for me from the beginning to recent times. I had already written about monitoring the logs stored in the West Basin of LA Harbor which led to my finding and culturing Neanthes. I advised Southern California Edison Company about Teredo infested pilings. They wanted to use them in the construction of the Redondo Beach electrical generating station. We thought (Denis Fox and I) it was not wise. There was an explosion of the intact pipe (4 ft in diameter) for Standard Oil in El Segundo. They called me in to examine the pipe (I got the job through a father in my son’s Indian Guide Troup!). I crawled in the pipe a ways and found the inside of the pipe to be riddled by housands of pholads of the same age. There apparently had been a big reproductive bloom and the arvae settled on the inside of the pipe and eventually burrowed through the wall causing the explosion. I suggested that they abandon the use of the pipe. Unfortunately, as is often the case, I never learned what finally was decided. Rick Ware called me a couple of years ago. Huntington Harbor had a wood boring problem. It was potentially threatening their walkways. I do not remember how many LA-LB Harbor consulting jobs I have had. There were those through Dorothy Soule and Harbor Projects which I discussed earlier. I had several through Atlantis Scientific, ecology of the Navy Base through Tom McDonnell and Brown & Caldwell, ecology of the harbors based on 50 years of study and observations. This came through Karen Green and MEC Analytical. Over the years, my former students have been good to me via consulting jobs. Included in the list is Jack Anderson, Tom Gerlinger, Rick Ware, Tom McDonnell, Karen Green. Needless to say, I wish to thank them. [Next: Chapter 19 - The Graduate Students] CANDIDATE BIOGRAPHIES PRESIDENT Ron Velarde Ron is the current President of SCAMIT and a past Vice-President; he has been a Marine Biologist with the City of San Diego since 1983 and currently is the supervisor of Benthic Taxonomy for the Ocean Monitoring Program. His taxonomic interests include most groups, especially polychaetes and nudibranch mollusks. He earned his B.S. degree in Marine Biology from California State University, Long Beach, in 1976, and did post-graduate research on the systematics and ecology of autolytid polychaetes. 11 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 VICE-PRESIDENT TREASURER Leslie Harris Collections manager of the Allan Hancock Foundation Polychaete Collection, at the Los Angeles County Museum of natural History. Ongoing research centers on taxonomy of the polychaete fauna of pacific North America, polychaete-algal associations (especially in Macrocystis ), introduced species, and Caribbean reef polychaetes. SECRETARY Megan Lilly Graduated from Humboldt State University in 1991 with a B.S. in Marine Biology. From 1991 to 1993, worked at the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History where the taxonomy of marine mollusks was studied under Dr. Eric Hochberg, Paul Scott, and Hank Chaney. Currently working as a marine biologist for the City of San Diego’s Ocean Monitoring Program. Specialities include echinoderms and mollusks, with an emphasis on cephalopods. Ann Dalkey Ann is presently the Treasurer for SCAMIT and has held this position since SCAMIT was founded. Ann is a member of the water biology staff at the Hyperion Treatment Plant where she specializes in the identification of polychaetes and amphipod crustaceans. Prior to working at Hyperion, Ann was a member of the laboratory staff at the County Sanitation Districts of Orange County. She worked there for nearly 10 years, reaching a position of senior laboratory and research analyst. She received her B.S. from California State University Long Beach in Marine Biology in 1974 and her M.S. from the same university in 1982. Her thesis research pertained to polychaete bioassay. BIBLIOGRAPHY BARNARD, J. LAURENS. 1960. The amphipod family Phoxocephalidae in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, with analyses of other species and notes for a revision of the family. Allan Hancock Pacific Expeditions 18(3): 175-375. —, and Charline M. Barnard. 1982. Revision of Foxiphalus and Eobrolgus (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Phoxocephalidae) from American oceans. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 372:1-35. BERNARD, FRANK R. 1983. Catalogue of the living Bivalvia of the eastern Pacific Ocean: Bering Strait to Cape Horn. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 61:1-102 CHAPMAN, JOHN W. 1988. Invasions of the northeast Pacific by asian and Atlantic gammaridean amphipod crustaceans, including a new species of Corophium. Journal of Crustacean Biology 8(3):364-382. COAN, EUGENE V. 1999. The eastern Pacific species of Sphenia (Bivalvia : Myidae). Nautilus 113(4): 103-120. — & Paul H. Scott. 1995. Checklist of the marine bivalves of the northeastern Pacific Ocean. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History Contributions in Science 1:1-28. 12 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 CONLAN, KATHLEEN E. 1995. Thumbing doesn’t always make the genus: revision of Microjassa Stebbing (Crustacea: Amphipoda: Ischyroceridae). Bulletin of Marine Science 57(2):333-377. DICKINSON, JOHN J. & Andrew G. Carey, Jr. 1978. Distribution of gammarid Amphipoda (Crustacea) on Cascadia Abyssal Plain (Oregon). Deep-Sea Research 25:97-106. EJDUNG, GUNILLA & Ragnar Elmgren. 1998. Predation on newly settled bivalves by deposit¬ feeding amphipods: a Baltic Sea case study. Marine Ecology - Progress Series 168:87-94. ENGLE, VIRGINIA D. & J. Kevin Summers. 1999. Refinement, validation, and application of a benthic condition index for northern Gulf of Mexico estuaries. Estuaries 22(3A):624-635. GIVEN, ROBERT R. 1961. The cumacean fauna of the southern California continental shelf. No. 1, Family Leuconidae. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Sciences 60(2): 129-146. HENDLER, GORDON, Carole C. Baldwin, David G. Smith, & Christine E. Thacker. 1999a. Planktonic dispersal of juvenile brittle stars (Echinodermata : Ophiuroidea) on a Caribbean reef. Bulletin of Marine Science 65(l):283-288. HENDLER, GORDON, Mark J. Grygier, Elisa Maldonado, & Jessica Denton. 1999b. Babysitting brittle stars: heterospecific symbiosis between ophiuroids (Echinodermata). Invertebrate Biology 118(2):190-201. HENDRICKX, MICHEL E. 1997. Los cangrejos braquiuros (Crustacea: Brachyura: Domiidae hasta Leucosiidae) del Pacifico mexicano. Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO)/Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnologia Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. 178pp. —. 1999. Los cangrejos braquiuros (Crustacea: Brachyura: Majoidea y Parthenopoidea) del Pacifico mexicano. Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO)/Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnologia Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. 274pp. — , & Estrada Navarrete, Flor D. 1996. Los camarones pelagicos (Crustacea: Dendrobranchiata y Caridea) del Pacifico mexicano. Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO)/Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnologia Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. 157pp. — , & Jose Salgado-Barragan. 1986. Los estomatopodos (Crustacea: Hoplocarida) del Pacifico mexicano. Publicaciones Especiales, Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnologia, University Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. 200pp. HESSLER, ROBERT R. 1970. The Desmosomatidea (Isopoda, Asellota) of the Gay Head- Bermuda Transect. Bulletin of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography 15:1-185. JARRETT, NORMA E. & Edward L. Bousfield. 1994. The amphipod superfamily Phoxocephaloidea on the Pacific Coast of North America. Family Phoxocephalidae. Part 1. Metharpiniinae, new subfamily. Amphipacifica 1(1):58-140. LOPEZ-MARTINEZ, J., F. Garcia-Dominguez, E. Alcantara-Razo, & E. A. Chavez. 1999. Periodo reproductive y talla de madurez masiva del camaron de roca Sicyonia penicillata (Decapoda: Sicyoniidae) en Bahia Kino, Sonora, Mexico. Revista de Biologia Tropical 47(1-2): 109-117. LOVELL, CHARLES R., Charles C. Steward, & Tina Phillips. 1999. Activity of marine sediment bacterial communities exposed to 4-bromophenol, a polychaete secondary metabolite. Marine Ecology Progress Series 179:241-246. 13 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 MARTELL, ANDRE L., Carlos Robles, Karen Beckenbach, & Michael J. Smith. 1999. Distinguishing early juveniles of Eastern Pacific mussels (Mytilus spp.) Using morphology and genomic DNA. Invertebrate Biology 118(2): 149-164. MENZIES, ROBERT J. & Miller, Milton A. 1972. Systematics and zoogeography of the genus Synidotea (Crustacea: Isopoda) with an account of California species. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology 102:1-33. MILLER, MILTON A. 1975. Isopoda and Tanaidacea. Pp. 277-312 IN: Smith, Robert I. and James T. Carlton (eds.). Light’s Manual: Intertidal Invertebrates of the Central California Coast. University of California Press, Berkeley, California. 716pp. PENNINGTON, J. TIMOTHY, Mario N. Tamburri, & James P. Barry. 1999. Development, temperature tolerance, and settlement preference of embryos and larvae of the articulate brachiopod Laqueus californianus. Biological Bulletin 196(3):245-256. RAFI, FAHMIDA & Diana R. Laubitz. 1990. The Idoteidae (Crustacea: Isopoda: Valvifera) of the shallow waters of the northeastern North Pacific Ocean. Canadian Journal of Zoology 68:2649-2687. SMITH, ROBERT W., Mary Bergen, Stephen B. Weisberg, Don Cadien, Ann Dalkey, Dave Montagne, Janet K. Stull, and Ronald G. Velarde. 1999. Benthic Response Index for assessing infaunal communities on the mainland shelf of southern California. Pp. 156-178 in Weisberg, Stephen B. & Debbie Hallock (eds.). Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Annual Report 1997-1998. Southern California Coastal Water Research Project, Fountain Valley, California. 210pp. THOMPSON, BRUCE, B. Anderson, J. Hunt, K. Taberski, & B. Phillips. 1999. Relationships between sediment contamination and toxicity in San Francisco Bay. Marine Environmental Research 48(4-5):285-309. VAN DER VEER, HENK W., Robert J. Feller, Anke Weber, & Johannes I. J. Witte. 1998. Importance of predation by crustaceans upon bivalve spat in the intertidal zone of the Dutch Wadden Sea as revealed by immunological assays of gut contents. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 231(1): 139-157. WATLING, LES & Linda D. McCann. 1997. Chapter 2. Cumacea. Pp. 121-180 IN: Blake, James A. and Paul H. Scott (eds.) Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel Vol. 11 - The Crustacea, Part 2. The Isopoda, Cumacea and Tanaidacea. Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, California. 278pp. 14 March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)692-4903 rgv @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)692-4901 msl @ mwharbor.sannet.gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 Table A. Morphological characters which may be used to differentiate Ampelisca cristata cristata and A. cristata microdentata. The top three characters (in bold) appear to be the most reliable and easily distinguished characters. A more detailed review of both species is required to confirm the reliability of the secondary characters. Character Ampelisca cristata cristata Ampelisca cristata microdentata Epimeron 3, postero- ventral corner large broad tooth very small tooth Epimeron 2, postero- ventral corner acutely produced quadrate to rounded Head produced antero-distally into small “dome” (e.g., similar to A. careyi, but smaller) unproduced antero-distally Urosomal crest rounded on the ends, middle portion horizontal less rounded on ends, posterior portion higher than anterior Pereropod 7, basis squarish on bottom more rounded on bottom Gills narrowed distally and relatively small (see J.J. Dickinson, 1982, Fig 20, A. brevisimulata or A. hessleri) cylindrical (i.e., not narrowed distally) and relatively large (see J J. Dickinson, 1982, Fig 20, A. cristata) Compiled by Doug Deiner (MEC Analytical) and Dean Pasko (CSDMWWD). March, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 11 Table B. The following characters may be used to differentiate between Ampelisca brevisimulata and Ampelisca cf brevisimulata. (Characteristics of the first coxa and third uropod were later found to be unreliable.) Characters Ampelisca. brevisimulata Ampelisca cf brevisimulata coxae 1 postero-ventral tooth strong (see below) postero-ventral tooth short Pereopod 5 posterior margin of basis with 4—6 short, stout spines posterior margin of basis with few setae (spines absent) PI eon 2 postero-ventral margin with acute tooth postero-ventral margin rounded Uropod 3** long setae, equally dense along dorsal and ventral margins long setae dense dorsally, but sparse or absent ventral 1 y Table C. Characters which may be used to differentiate between Byblis veleronis and B. millsi. Characters Coxae 1-3 ventral margin Uropod 1 outer ramus Uropod 2 length Overall size Depth distribution Byblis veleronis strongly oblique w/ many lateral setae subequal to uropod 1 larger species (10- 14 mm) deeper 100+ m Byblis millsi obliquely rounded w/ few, small lateral spines shorter than uropod 1 smaller species (8 - 10 mm) shallower 40 - 100 m Southern California Association of Marine Invertebrate Taxonomists 3720 Stephen White Drive San Pedro, California 90731 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 12 SUBJECT: Spionid Polychaetes GUEST SPEAKER: Vasily Radashevsky DATE: 30 May 2000 TIME: 9:30 a.m. to 3:30 p. m. LOCATION: Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History Worm Lab 900 Exposition Blvd The May meeting was held on 8 May at SCCWRP in Fountain Valley. It was used to combine information from attendees on changes to the Edition 3 SCAMIT list prior to final preparations for issuance of Edition 4 later this year. We will inaugurate our new slate of officers at the May meeting. Please either attend with your comments, additions, and corrections to the existing list, or send your comments to either Don Cadien l dcadien@lacsd.orgl or Dave Montagne l dmontagne@lacsd.orgl or via snailmail to either at Marine Biology Lab, JWPCP, 24501 S. Figueroa St., Carson, Ca., 90745. NBII NEWSLETTER Tom Parker (CSDLAC) recently received a copy of the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII) newsletter “Access”. It is the first number of Volume 3, so it hasn’t been around too long. The newsletter provides a Tubulanus sp SD 1 San Deigo Bay, 7/98 Photo by D. Pasko FUNDS FOR THIS PUBLICATION PROVIDED, IN PART BY THE ARCO FOUNDATION, CHEVRON, USA, AND TEXACO INC. SCAMIT Newsletter is not deemed to be valid publication for formal taxonomic purposes. April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 12 contact point and information transfer medium for those dealing with biological databases. An interesting and useful item. You can also log on to the NBII website and find much the same content. WWW.nbii.gov SO THAT’S HOW... Among SCAMIT’s membership are several individuals who have already crossed over one particular Rubicon, describing a new taxon. Each has approached the task in their own fashion, using the work of a predecessor as a model to emulate. Winston (1999) has now produced a way for all descriptive activity to be approached by fully prepared taxonomists. All they have to do is read and digest her book. She managed to produce a work of over 500 pages dealing with the description of new biological taxa, and not by padding. It is quite thorough, examining all aspects of the process, providing both a practical and theoretical basis for anyone to use in preparing a new taxon description. Although most attention is paid to species, higher levels and the concerns peculiar to erection of new taxa above species, are also addressed. The author uses numerous examples throughout the text, usually providing several for each topic considered so a range of solutions is offered for each problem. She considers the entire process, from first suspicion that an animal may be new, verification that it is, analyzing material, handling literature, applying nomenclatural codes, and preparing a verbal and pictorial description of the organism concerned, to getting published. Along the way she deals with a series of topics pertinent to any practicing taxonomist. The book is recommended to all SCAMIT members as a fine summary of how to go about their work, whether they are considering description of new species or not. It is accessibly and engagingly written, and logically laid out. Emphasis is on traditional morphological systematics, but cladistic and molecular methods are discussed, and the reader is pointed to sources for more complete discussion of these evolving disciplines. At $65 you will have to give more than pin money for the book, but it is a worthwhile investment. Also in paperback at $35 from Columbia University Press at, http://www.columbia.edu/cu/cup/catalog/ idx_lists.html or from bookshops, or from on-line book purveyors (at last check it was back-ordered on Amazon.com). My favorable impression seems to be echoed elsewhere; the book was released last October, and is already in a second printing. [Thanks to Tom Parker for loaning me his copy to examine; he’s the first person on my block to have one]. NEW LITERATURE Valdes & Gosliner (1999) use morphological data in an analysis of the relationships of the radula-less dorids; traditionally treated together as the Porostomata. Since porostome species seem so unlike in other respects, there have been misgivings about the group since its establishment by Bergh at the end of the 19 th century. The current analysis shows such concerns to be unfounded It indicates loss of the radula has occurred only once among the dorids, and all radula-less dorids form a monophyletic group. Discovery of a new species with a dorsal gill-plume but lacking a radula, allowed resolution of the difficulties in earlier analyses. This animal (Mandelia microcornata ), placed in a new family (Mandeliidae), is the sister taxon to the rest of the radula-less dorids. The major finding of the authors is, however, that this monophyletic group lies within the cryptobranchiate dorids, rather than outside them. They retain Porostomata, for the present, as equal to and outside Cryptobranchia, 2 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.12 pending further analysis of the dorid nudibranchs as a whole. This leaves Cryptobranchia, at least temporarily, as a paraphyletic group. Blue mussels, mentioned again in the last NL, were also considered by Penny & Hart (1999). There I was forced to agree with Dr. Jim Carlton that a recent paper did not provide the evidence to allow separation of Mytilus trossulus from M. galloprovincialis on our coast without chemotaxonomic information on each specimen - a dour prospect. Penney & Hart, while dealing with M. trossulus and M. edulis in Newfoundland, report similar findings from a different perspective. They found that genotype and phenotype covaried, and that the genotype of hybrids was directly demonstrated in intermediate shell morphologies. Although it is not necessary to do chemotaxonomic analyses to establish the genetic composition of the specimen, there is a continuum of morphological variability. Any distinction between the species is likely to be reflected only statistically. Such a situation, while it may be helpful to the commercial shellfish industry in Newfoundland, won’t help us tell what species any given specimen belongs to. Somewhere in the morass of morphological variability may lie a series of key characters, even morphometric ones, which will allow accurate speciation of individuals. For now these remain obscure, although clearly, species identity is represented by shell characters even in these closely related congeners. More papers are coming on this issue. Dietary preferences of juvenile red octopus, Octopus rubescens, were examined by Anderson et al (1999). The animals they investigated averaged less than 2cm in mantle length, so were much smaller than most O. rubescens we encounter in trawl monitoring efforts. They were sampled and evaluated while using beer-bottle dens in Puget Sound at depths between 20-25m. The animals, at least at this stage, seem to be mollusk specialists, eating mostly small gastropods with the occasional clam thrown in. Some of the shells may actually have hosted hermit crabs, but no evidence of crab remains was found in investigated dens. The bottles were experimentally manipulated and rates of consumption could be calculated from the results of placement and subsequent harvest of bottles with known soak times. On deeper soft bottoms in the southern California bight the animals can also be taken in bottles, cans, and other partially enclosed debris, but also have been seen to use shallow depressions in the soft bottom as refuges. When approached in a submersible they attempt to hide in these depressions. If the approach continues they stand up tall and try to bluff the intruder away prior to fleeing themselves. These may be only temporary housing while hunting, but the possibility exists that shallow water object denning is a response to visual predation risk not present in darker waters offshore. It would certainly be less limiting to the animal to be able to hide in any unoccupied burrow mouth in the complex biologically altered bottoms at 200+ feet. Where den material is in short supply, temporary denning in irregular bottom features may be a common, if not optimal, condition [these latter comments are based on the editors experience with the species, and are not part of the paper]. Predator avoidance and food gathering both play roles in a thesis advanced by Marcotte (1999) concerning the importance of visual perception in generating diversity in the geologic past. He hypothesizes that high oceanic turbidity, fluctuating cyclically on a 400my scale, lead to major extinction events, and major changes in evolution of at least the arthropods in the phanerozoic. Turbidity is only the proximal agent and it reflects large scale changes in the ocean- atmosphere system and in tectonic plate arrangements. During periods of plate convergence and fusion, turbidity and 3 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 12 sedimentation in the ocean were minimal since sediment produced by erosion during orogeny was at least partially contained on land. During periods of plate divergence maxima of turbidity and sedimentation was obtained. These maximal and minimal periods correlate with a number of biological trends, and offer explanations for many inadequately explained evolutionary events. Marcotte marshals a diverse array of information drawn from various disciplines in support of his hypothesis. A number of points, considering the information provided in support, click with a “oh, that seems obvious” sort of reaction. Whether or not this hypothesis survives the challenges that will undoubtedly be brought against it, the article is a stimulating one which no one interested in the history of life will fail to enjoy. Giribet & Wheeler (1999), in a reanalysis of the dataset used earlier to place arthropods among other metazoans (Giribet & Ribera, 1998), suggest some changes in the previous analysis. They use an iterative method called “the parsimony rachet” in this effort, a sequential optimization strategy that significantly reduces the time to locate shorter tree lengths. In this paper they confirmed many of their previous conclusions and resolved a series of polychotomies in the earlier strict consensus tree, but it was unclear in the result if Tr chozoa represented a clade or a grade. Existence of Ecdysozoa, deuterostomes, and acoelomate platyhelminth clades within the Bilateria were supported by the analysis, but the included taxa sample was apparently not sufficient to fully resolve the status of the Trochozoa. The authors were very satisfied with the 18S rDNA gene as a substrate for high level analysis of metazoan relationships, but felt that it alone would not provide good resolution of relationships within the major clades. Wagele et al (1999) raise questions about the 18S rDNA evidence based on subsequent analyses, and are not sure that Ecdysozoa is valid, especially since the competing Articulata concept is well supported on long established morphological bases. The differing interpretations of 18S rDNA evidence mentioned above highlight the continuing methodological debates in cladistic analysis. Even more basic are the philosophical points discussed by Harlin, 1999 in consideration of the logical impropriety of emphasis on characters rather than trees in phylogenetic taxonomy. It has long been assumed that release of planktonic larvae results in relatively unconstrained dispersal of a population and good gene flow between subpopulations occupying disjunct habitat. Of late this assumption has been tested, sometimes with unexpected results. Cowen et al (2000) correctly note that the assumed genetic exchange is a vital part of studies concerning population dynamics of any individual species, and an essential basis for fishery management and environmental policy decisions. They then test the assumptions of the traditional “open system” concept of larval dispersal in the sea with computer modeling. Their model suggests dispersion can be up to 9 orders of magnitude less than would have been predicted from an unconstrained model if behavioral and additional oceanographic factors are included. This difference would yield a far different picture of the resulting population, and would dictate different management approaches for its control and exploitation. These results call for a reexamination of the assumptions of fishery management models, and could in part explain why performance of most fisheries under management has been so poor. Communication between investigators has always been an important part of advancement of knowledge. Standardization of terminology for description of the environment is a major advance in such communication. Just such a standardization is made possible by Greene et 4 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.12 al (1999), who propose a set of concepts and terms whose use could make description of marine habitats uniform. They have concentrated on the deep sea, but also mention continental shelf structure as well. Examples of application of the scheme are provided and seem satisfying. They carefully consider structures on the hierarchical basis of megahabitat, mesohabitat, macrohabitat, microhabitat, which spans from kilometer to centimeter scales. The resulting descriptions are succinct and explicit, and (most important of all) comparable to those provided by other investigators in other disciplines who use the same system. Since the proposed system is logical, well conceived, and comprehensive it can provide the standard which has eluded us previously. Sheppard (1999) provides a nice overview of power analysis designed to answer questions about sampling adequacy in monitoring programs. Most SCAMIT members do not have to deal with such questions, being instead handed a program and told to execute it. Those who have the opportunity of providing feedback at some point in the process may want to utilize the ideas and methods covered by Sheppard in evaluating whether too much (or not enough) sampling is currently done to provide data of the precision necessary to the program design. Numerous other sources are available to consider power analysis, but the present review is recent and easily accessible. The idea of Taxonomic Sufficiency (or TS, a seemingly appropriate acronym), an end-driven approach which assumes full analysis of environmental samples has no utility other than final statistical analysis, is discussed by Maurer (2000). He points out that significant portions of the Emperor’s attire are missing in TS , and that considerations of biodiversity, ecology, and information retrieval and correlation are left unaddressed by such analyses. We are all sensitive to the fact that TS frees up financial resources for an agency by devoting much less to the expensive and time-consuming process of taxonomic analysis, and can understand how its application can be so tempting to a hard- pressed administrator asked to reduce expenditure while sustaining the same level of service. Maurer points out that there are, however, a number of things sacrificed on this altar of short-term economy. He also discusses the entire question of taxonomy, its practitioners, and their nurture, and notes the continuing decline of the discipline. Along the way he gives SCAMIT a friendly nod as a local solution to the problems of taxonomic training. He concludes with the hope that his statement on the “dark side” of TS can help provide the “force” to begin to remedy problems of taxonomic support. Now, if we could only lay our hands of some of Reagan’s “star wars” funding... NEWER THAN NEW The latest edition of the ASC Newsletter (Vol. 28 No. 2) carries a notice that at long last the bivalve monograph is a reality. Coan, Scott & Bernard (2000) is announced as available for $99 [in paperback] from the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History. This is in error, the publication is hardbacked, and is expected to ship in early June. It will go to the bindery this month. The volume is 766pp., profusely illustrated with photos or drawings of every listed species and covers all bivalves which are known to occur from northern Alaska to southern California, and from the intertidal zone to depths of more than 4500 m. The bibliography alone is more than 4700 references. There are some keys to higher categories, but not at species level. Separation of species taxa is through comparison tables listing salient characters of each species occurring in the area within a genus or family. Orders should be addressed to the Department of Invertebrate Zoology at 805-682-4711x335, or via e-mail to psadeghian@sbnature2.org. Copies can be pre-publication ordered using credit cards once the shipping costs [additional 5 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 12 to the above listed price] have been determined. They are expected to run around $7.00, depending on the exact weight of the volume when bound. 10 APRIL MEETING MINUTES The meeting was held at the Worm Lab at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History. President Ron Velarde started the business portion of the meeting by announcing several upcoming meetings. On May 8, there will be a meeting at SCCWRP to update Edition 4 of the SCAMIT species list. On May 30, there will be a polychaete meeting at the Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History. The guest speaker will be spioniform specialist Vasily Radashevsky from the Institute of Marine Biology, Vladivostok, Russia. His talk’s tentative title is “Spionida (Annelida: Polychaeta): from observations of specimens to phylogenetic analysis (and a little bit more!)”. Our northern members will be pleased to know that Vasily will also speak at a NAMIT meeting on May 24 th , to be held at the University of Washington’s Tacoma campus. Email Val Macdonald, NAMIT secretary, for details: < val@biologica.bc.ca>. For both meetings people are encouraged to bring their problem spionida specimens - Spionidae, Poecilochaetidae, Trochochaetidae, Uncispionidae and Longosomatidae - for examination. The annual Southern California Academy of Sciences meeting will be held at the University of Southern California on May 19-20. On June 12, there will be a non-polychaete SCAMIT meeting; the location has not yet been determined. Literature circulated at the meeting included one of the classic ecological references for southern California monitoring, Gary Smith’s 1974 Ph.D. thesis, “Some effects of sewage discharge to the marine environment” (UCSD, 334 pp.). The specimens from this study are housed at LACM. When Leslie Harris tried to find a copy of the thesis to accompany the collection, she was greatly surprised to find none was available thru any of the local monitoring labs. Another classic brought out by Leslie, this one concerning polychaetes, was “A Catalogue of the British Non- parasitical worms in the collection of the British Museum by George Johnston”, M.D. Edin., London 1865. Don talked about the May meeting at SCCWRP. He encouraged everyone to attend and bring changes and comments for Edition 4. People who have new taxa which they would like to be included in Edition 4 must first distribute voucher sheets. It was suggested that a topic for discussion at the meeting should be whether to include species that were newly encountered during the Bight’98 project. We were then treated to a slide show from Leslie Harris. In March she visited our colleague Dr. Viviane Solis-Weiss at her lab in the Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnologia, U.N.A.M., Mexico. The primary reason for her trip was to pick up samples that Viviane very generously donated to LACM’s worm collection, and to promote future collaboration between the polychaete sections at LACM and ICML. Secondary was a quick trip to Acapulco with Viviane and some of her students to samples worms at sites visited by Dr. Enrique Rioja. All of Rioja’s type specimens have been lost, and neotypes need to be established to stabilize the taxonomy of his species. The beaches where Rioja sampled 50- 60 years ago have undergone considerable development in the intervening years. Where once there were small villages and minimal tourist accommodations are now continuous rows of high-rise hotels, restaurants, shops, and very crowded beaches. The group was forced to travel several hours north of Acapulco to find beaches comparable to what Rioja would have seen. They brought back samples which were split for sorting between LACM and ICML. With luck, new specimens of Rioja’s species will be found in the samples which will serve as neotypes. 6 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.12 Next, our guest speaker, Sergio Salazar-Vallejo, took the floor and gave us a very interesting presentation on the work he’s been doing on pilargids. Most of his current work is centered on faunal studies of Caribbean polychaetes, leaving less time then he would like for pilargids. Sergio has been working on this group since 1986 and is interested in all aspects of the group - morphology, life history, taxonomy, and phylogeny. Included in the newsletter bibliography are Sergio’s publications pertaining to pilargids. He had prepared packets of handouts ahead of time for all the attendees of the meeting. They were composites of some of his work as well as other authors’ work that compared and contrasted different characters among various species. Sergio used techniques such as SEM and histology to investigate the finer exterior and interior structures of pilargids. At the end of his presentation, we viewed the SEM and histological X-section images on Sergio’s laptop computer. There were SEM micrographs of Sigambra grubii, Parandalia tricuspis, and Loandalia riojai. There were also several images of Talehsapia annandalei Fauvel 1932, an unusual pilargid that Sergio received from Thailand. Previous authors (Emerson & Fauchald 1971) considered the genus to be incertae sedis and not a member of the pilargidae due to the presence of jaws and its prostomial features. Cross sections of the anterior region of the pharynx revealed a jaw¬ like structure on the inside surface. A discussion ensued as to whether this was a true jaw or a scleratized region that was present on the inside of the pharynx. Sergio’s conclusion, after examining syllid pharynxes, was that the structure had been mis-interpreted by Fauvel and was indeed a scleratized region. A similar structure was found in an undescribed species of Litocorsa from the Gulf of Thailand. A recurring problematic topic of local polychaete taxonomy has been the variation of characters in Pilargis berkeleyae , especially in the size and location of papillae, and the extent of the glandular material in the dorsal cirrophores. Sergio’s handouts included illustrations of P. berkeleyae from several authors (Monro 1933, Hartman 1947, Wolf 1984, and Imajima 1987). There was considerable variation in the size and location of the papillae shown by these authors. In order to solve this mystery once and for all, Leslie (who has been working on the local species) had previously borrowed the holotype of Pilargis berkeleyae from the British Museum. Included in our packets were Leslie’s illustrations of this animal. The papillae were extremely small, and only began to be visible at 40X magnification. This character was consistent in all of the specimens Leslie examined, which included topotype material sent to Hartman by Edith Berkeley, the collector of the holotype. Publications that illustrate large papillae on P. berkeleyae (Wolf 1984, Imajima 1987, and Blake 1997) are incorrect; these specimens are probably undescribed species. No doubt these illustrations have led to mis-identifications for many years. Also, many P. berkeleyae have been mis-identified as P. maculata. P. maculata is an intertidal species, and P. berkeleyae inhabits subtidal, soft bottom substrata. Nearly all of the P. maculata specimens held by LACM and examined by Leslie have turned out to be P. berkeleyae. Leslie gave some examples of variable characters that she noted for P. berkeleyae. One was the ratio of lengths of ventral to dorsal tentacular cirri; they ranged from 1:3 to subequal. Another variable character was the length of the dorsal cirrus on setiger 1 compared to the other dorsal cirri; it ranged from 3:1 to subequal. Leslie noted that the only consistent character she found in the anterior region was that ventral tentacular cirri were always basally thinner than the dorsal tentacular cirri. 7 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 12 Leslie went on to explain that there are two types of tissue contributing to the pigmentation on the cirrophores in P. berkeleyae and P. maculata. The first is subdermal, golden- brown clusters of glandular cells. Second, are dark-brown or black pigmented cells, also subdermal, but on top of the glandular cells and arranged in a single plane. Next we compared the cirrophores from the topotype specimen of Pilargis berkeleyae and the holotype of P. maculata. The cirrophores of P. berkeleyae were completely encircled subdermally by the glandular cells, with a few dark pigmented cells; there were a few, small papillae visible at 40X magnification. The cirrophores of P. maculata have an oval patch of the subdermal glandular cells on the dorso- anterior side of the parapodia, and dark brown areas of pigment cells were present. The papillae on the cirrophores of P. maculata were even smaller than those of P. maculata , visible at 100X magnification. Both species appear smooth when viewed at normal sorting magnifications. Leslie retrieved the specimens of Pilargis berkeleyae that Hartman (1947) had used for her description and illustrations. They had minute papillae (visible at 40X) that were located on the head region, dorsum, and parapodia. The ventrum lacked papillae. The largest papillae on the animal were on the last few segments and pygidial cirri. In Hartman’s illustration the size of the papillae were exaggerated. Consequently, many taxonomists were led to believe that P. berkeleyae had larger, more prominent papillae, and over the years, numerous pilargid specimens have been mis-identified based on this illustration. To add to the confusion, these specimens were strongly corrugated due to contraction, especially posteriorly. These corrugations could be mistaken for large, densely-packed papillae. There are 2 additional species of Pilargis on this coast, both undescribed. Both of them are densely covered with distinct papillae on both dorsum and ventrum; the papillae are largest in the mid-dorsal region. They are similar to the animal described as P. berkeleyae in Imajima 1987. Specimens of both species were brought in by Rick Rowe (CSDMWWD) and Tony Phillips (Hyperion) from San Diego Bay and Santa Monica Bay respectively. The specimen brought by Rick Rowe lacked pigment, had large papillae over all of the body, the dorsal tentacular cirri were longer than the ventral cirri, and the dorsal tentacular cirrus on setiger 1 was longer than on subsequent setigers. This animal turned out to be Pilargis sp B of Harris. P. sp. A Harris has subdermal brown or black pigment cells on the dorso-anterior side of most cirrophores but lacks the golden-brown glandular material. Sergio and Leslie are now working on a paper on Pacific coast Pilargis , including another new species from Baja. Next we examined a specimen of Pilargidae genus A Williams 1984 brought in by Rick Rowe. It was from Catalina Island at a depth of 50 meters, and has also been recorded from Tanner Bank, Santa Rosa Island, and Santa Cruz Island at shelf depth in medium to coarse sand. It was noted that this specimen was similar to Synelmis dineti in having bidentate hooks and lacking biarticulated palps. The animal will be described by Sergio, who has all of LACM’s specimens of this species (originally identified by Sue). Rick had another pilargid to examine, a specimen identified as Sigambra setosal from International Treatment Plant station 2651 at a depth of 487 feet. It was commented that this station was probably too shallow for S. setosa\ however, we could not put an identification on this animal. 8 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.12 Larry Lovell presented an unusual specimen of Spiophanes fimbriata collected during sampling of the LA County monitoring program. This specimen had a total of four antennae emanating from the prostomium MY LIFE AS A BIOLOGIST by Donald J. Reish Chapter 19: The Graduate Students During my academic career I had 57 students complete their masters under my direction. Most of the students came up the ranks by way of taking invert zool. or invert systematics. Some came from other universities after completing their bachelors. Kathy King, Scott Carr, and Fred Piltz came from UCI; Bob Galbraith from UCSB; Phil Oshida and Tom Kauwling from UC Berkeley; Wayne Davis from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo; Ken Schiff from San Diego State; Dave Russell from Pomona; Tom Gerlinger from Ohio State; Tom Biksey fom Pennsylvania; Tom McDonnell and Terry McCoppin from Loyola-Marymount; Eric Gonzalez from Panama University; Joe Tarfaro from Louisiana State University; I don’t remember where Rivian Lande, Don Moore, Wayne Brannon, Doug Morgan, or A1 Stone went as an undergraduate. What were my criteria for the selection of a potential graduate student? For those who did well in my classes, the choice was easy. I also considered such things as their curiosity, their ability to think creatively, and finally my gut feeling. I had 15 graduate students working under my direction at the same time. People would ask me how I handled this number of students. Basically, I would spend some time with them at the beginning and again at the end of their research and thesis writing. Grad students further along would help the beginners. During the time of my EPA grant Mike Martin worked for me full time and helped a lot. Joe LeMay did the same when I had the large Army Corps grant. While I didn’t spend much time with them during the “middle” period, I would talk with them. I think that a student just starting on a graduate program needs some attention. The slow part always seemed to be writing up their research. Some were good writers and others had to go through several drafts. How did we select a topic for their research? Partly it depended upon their interest and partly on my grants and contracts at the time. For example, there were several studies on the effect of reduced DO on an organism; we then went through a period of culturing polychaetes, and lastly toxicity studies. I think the one thing I miss most since retiring is the contact with the graduate students. I see many each year, but I have lost contact with others. Now for the roster [student, date of their Masters completion, thesis subject, and post-student life - with a ? if I lost track]: 1. A1 Stone, 1960. Effect of rain runoff on Estuarine polychaetes. High school teacher, then manager of a flower shop 2. Bob Galbraith, 1961. Homing in limpets. Crofton CC. 3. Dr. Dean Bok, 1965. Limnoria cytology. Faculty at UCLA in anatomy. 4. Dr. Jack Anderson, 1966. 3 species of Limnoria - temperature effects, published. Consulting firm. 5. Dr. Tom Richards, 1966. Life history of Stauronereis , published. Faculty at Cal Poly SLO. 6. Rivian Lande, 1966. Movement of Ophiodromus on starfish, published. Retired from faculty at Long Beach City College. 7. Don Moore, 1967. Seasonal reproduction in Mytilus edulis, published. ?. 8. Dr. Alan Mearns, 1967. Amino acids in Neanthes succinea , published. With NOAA. 9. Joe Tarfaro, 1967. Polychaetes of Palos Verdes Peninsula. With New Orleans P.D. 10. Dr. Don Perkins, 1968. Protozoa. Faculty at Oklahoma State. 11. Dr. Robert Crippen. 1968. Polychaetes on boat floats in LA Harbor, published. Consulting Firm in Canada. 9 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 12 12. Ken Hilger, 1968. Halosydna setal regeneration, published. High school teacher. 13. Dr. Kevin Eckelbarger, 1969. Life history of Lyrodus, published. Director of Marine Program, University of Maine. 14. Dr. Wayne Davis, 1969. Effect of low DO on Neanthes, published. At EPA in Rhode Island. 15. Dr. Marty Raps, 1969. Low DO and hemoglobin compensation, published. ?. 16. Dr. Norman Shields, 197E Effect of pressure on Protozoa. ?. 17. Dr. Raymond Cripps, 1911. Neanthes physiology. In Australia. 18. John Abati, 1971. Free amino acid in stressed Neanthes , published. Died 1974. 19. Robin Finley, 1971. Environmental effects on Hydroides life history. Died 1994 20. Tom Kauwling, 1972. Benthic polychaetes in Huntington Harbor, published. High school teacher in Long Beach. 21. Wayne Brannon, 1973. Limnoria and effect of low DO. ?. 22. Dr. Steve Rossi, 1973. Mytilus physiology, published. Researcher at UCSD Med School. 23. Dr. Fred Piltz, 1974. Effect of Cu on Neanthes. With MMS in Ventura. 24. Tray Schreiber, 1974. Benthic polychaetes in Huntington Harbor. ?. 25. Lee Hill, 1974. Polychaetes in Long Beach Naval Station. ?. 26. Mike Martin, 1974. Neanthes succinea population comparisons. ?. 27. Glenn Reilly, 1974. Neanthes succinea population comparisons. High school teacher. 28. Dr. Jack Word, 1974. Effect of Zn on Neanthes. Consulting firm. 29. Rick Rowe, 1974. Polychaetes at San Clemente Is., published. CSDMWWD 30. Dr. John Dorsey, 1974. Polychaetes at San Clemente Is., published. City of Los Angeles. 31. Dr. Stan Rice, 1975. Life history of Poly dor a ligni, published. Faculty at U. of Tampa. John Shisko, 1975. Life history of Dexiospira brasiliensis. CLAEMD. Doug Morgan, 1975. Life history of Cirriformia luxuriosa & C. spirobrancha. Consulting firm. Dr. Phil Oshida, 1975. Temperature effects on Neanthes , published. EPA in Washington D.C. Kathy King, 1976. Life history of Boccardia proboscidea. Consulting firm, then 2 kids. Husband just accepted a Dean position at U. of Wisconsin. Dr. Scott Carr, 1976. Effect of oil on small polychaetes. With USGS in Corpus Christi. Mark Rossi, 1976. Life history of Halosydna johnsoni. High school teacher. Randy McGlade, 1977. Effect of metals on Neanthes. Consulting firm - first in biology then after a masters in business in the business end. Steve Petrich, 1978. Effect of A1 and Ni on polychaetes, published. CLAEMD. Rick Ware, 1979. Food habits of white croaker, published. Owns consulting firm. Tom Gerlinger, 1979. Effect of mine tailings on polychaetes, published. Retired from OCSD, moved to Michigan. Owns consulting firm. Sue Williams, 1979. Systematics of terebellids, published. Teacher and consultant in Ventura. Dr. David Russell, 1980. Poly dor a nuchalis digestive tract. EPA in Maryland. Ricky James, 1981. Seasonal benthic population in LA River, published. ?. Steve Bay, 1982. Cr uptake in Neanthes. SCCWRP. Husband of Cathy Crouch. Tom McDonnell, 1982. Effect of metals on amphipods. Consulting firm. Ann Martin [now Dalkey], 1982. Effect of sewage on Neanthes. CLAEMD. Joe LeMay, 1983. Cd from Neanthes to arrow goby, published. Owns consulting firm. Terry McCoppin-Frohoff, 1983. Metals and reproduction in Neanthes. Teaching in community colleges. 32, 33 34 35 36 37, 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47, 48 49 10 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.12 50. Karen Green. 1984. Systematics of maldanids, published. Consulting firm. 51. Jim Shubsda, 1984. Cd effects on Neanthes. Last I heard he was in optometry college. 52. Cathy Crouch, 1984. Seasonal study of polychaetes in sea grass roots, published. Working on PhD at UCLA. Wife of #45. 53. Tom Biksey, 1987. Benthic study in outer LA Harbor, published. Consulting firm in Philadelphia. 54. Peter Striplin, 1987. Food habits of Astropecten. With wife’s consulting firm in Washington. 55. Ken Schiff, 1988. Effect of DDT on Capitella capitata. Consulting firm, then SCCWRP. 56. Stan Asato, 1988. Effect of metals on mysids, published. CLAEMD. 57. Eric Gonzalez, 1988. Intertidal polychaetes in Panama. L.A. City Health Dept. As you note, I have lost track of several of my graduate students. If any of you know the whereabouts of any of them, I would appreciate learning their address, [contact Dr. Reish at 562-985-4846] VOUCHER SHEET Please visit the Taxonomic Tools section of the SCAMIT website to view a voucher sheet for Fauveliopsis sp SD 1, produced by Kathy Langan (CSDMWWD). BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, Roland C., Paul D. Hughes, Jennifer A. Mather, & Craig W. Steele. 1999. Determination of the diet of Octopus rubescens Berry, 1953 (Cephalopoda : Octopodidae), through examination of its beer bottle dens in Puget Sound. Malacologia 41(2):455-460. Blake, James A. 1997. Chapter 10. Family Pilargidae Saint Joseph, 1899. Pp. 261-284 IN: Blake, James A., Brigitte Hilbig, and Paul H. Scott (eds.) Taxonomic Atlas of the Benthic Fauna of the Santa Maria Basin and Western Santa Barbara Channel. Vol. 4, The Annelida Part 2. Oligochaeta and Polychaeta: Phyllodocida (Phyllodocidae to Paralacydoniidae).Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara, Ca. 369pp. Cowen, Robert K., Kamazima M. M. Lwiza, Su Sponaugle, Claire B. Paris, & Donald B. Olson. 2000. Connectivity of marine populations: Open or closed? Science 287(5454):857-859. Emerson, R.R., Fauchald, K. 1971. A revision of the genus Loandalia Monro with description of a new genus and species of pilargiid polychaete. Bulletin of the Southern California Academy of Science 70:18-22. Fauvel, P. 1932. Annelida Polychaeta of the Indian Museum, Calcutta. Mem. Indian Mus. 12: 1- 262. Giribet, Gonzalo & C. Ribera. 1998. The position of arthropods in the animal kingdom: a search for a reliable outgroup for internal arthropod phylogeny. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9(3): 481-488. Giribet, Gonzalo & Ward C. Wheeler. 1999. The position of arthropods in the animal kingdom: Ecdysozoa, islands, trees, and the ‘’parsimony ratchet”. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 13(3):619-623. Greene, H. Gary, Mary M. Yoklavich, Richard M. Starr, Victoria M. O’Connell, W. Waldo Wakefield, Deidre E. Sullivan, James E. Jr. McRea, & Gregor M. Cailliet. 1999. A classification scheme for deep seafloor habitats. Oceanologica Acta 22(6):663-678. 11 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No. 12 Harlin, Mikael. 1999. The logical priority of the tree over characters and some of its consequences for taxonomy. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 68(4):497-503. Hartman, Olga. 1947. Polychaetous annelids. Part VIII. Pilargiidae. Allan Hancock Pacific Expeditions 10:483-452. Imajima, Minoru. 1987. Pilargidae (Annelida, Polychaeta) from Japan (Part 1). Bulletin of the National Science Museum, Tokyo 13:151-164. Marcotte, Brian M. 1999. Turbidity, arthropods and the evolution of perception: toward a new paradigm of marine phanerozoic diversity. Marine Ecology Progress Series 191:267-288. Monro, C.C.A. 1933. On a new species of Polychaeta of the genus Pilargis from Friday Harbour,Washington. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 11:673-675. Penney, R. W. & M. J. Hart. 1999. Distribution, genetic structure, and morphometry of Mytilus edulis and M. trossulus within a mixed species zone. Journal of Shellfish Research 18(2):367- 374. Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. 1986. Pilargidae (Annelida: Polychaeta) de Mexico: Lista de species, nueva especie y biografia. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 27:192-210. Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. 1990. Redescriptions of Sigambra grubii Muller, 1858 and Hermundura tricuspis Muller, 1858 from Brazil and designation of neotypes (Polychaeta:Pilargidae). Journal of Natural History 24:507-517. Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. Orensanz, Jose M.. 1991. Pilargids (Annelida: Polychaeta) de Uruguay y Argentina. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 32:267-279. Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. Reyes-Barraging, Maria del Pilar 1990. Parandalia vivianneae n.sp. and P. tricuspis (Muller), two estuarine polychaetes (Polychaeta: Pilargidae) from eastern Mexico. Revista de Biologia Tropical 38:87-90. Salazar-Vallejo, Sergio I. Solis-Weiss, Viviane 1992. Biogeography of the pilargid polychaetes (Polychaeta: Pilargiidae) of the subfamily Synelminae. Tulane Studies in Zoology and Botany Supplementary Publication 1:273-283. Sheppard, Charles R. C. 1999. How large should my sample be? Some quick guides to sample size and the power of tests. Marine Pollution Bulletin 38(6):439-447. Valdes, Angel & Terrence M. Gosliner. 1999. Phylogeny of the radula-less dorids (Mollusca, Nudibranchia), with the description of a new genus and a new family. Zoologica Scripta 28(3-4):315-360. Wagele, Johann Wolfgang, T. Erikson, P. Lockhart, & B. Misof. 1999. The Ecdysozoa: Artifact or monophylum? Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 37(4):211-223. Winston, Judith E. 1999. Describing Species: Practical Taxonomic Procedure for Biologists. Columbia University Press, New York. 518pp. Wolf, PS. 1984. Chapter 29. Family Pilargidae Saint-Joseph, 1899. IN: Uebelacker, J.M. and PG. Johnson (eds.) Taxonomic guide to the polychaetes of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Vol. 4: 29-1 to 29-41. Barry A. Vittor & Associates, Inc., Mobile AL. 12 April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No 12 Please visit the SCAMIT Website at: http ://www.scamit.org SCAMIT OFFICERS: If you need any other information concerning SCAMIT please feel free to contact any of the officers e-mail address (619)758-2331 rgv@mwharbor.sannet.gov (213)763-3234 lhharris@bcf.usc.edu (619)758-2336 msl@mwharbor.sannet.gov (310)648-5544 cam@san.ci.la.ca.us President Vice-President Secretary Treasurer Ron Velarde Leslie Harris Megan Lilly Ann Dalkey Back issues of the newsletter are available. Prices are as follows: Volumes 1-4 (compilation).$ 30.00 Volumes 5-7 (compilation).$ 15.00 Volumes 8- 15. $ 20.00/vol. Single back issues are also available at cost. April, 2000 SCAMIT Newsletter Vol. 18, No.12 SCAMIT TREASURY SUMMARY, 1999-2000 During the past fiscal year, April 1999 though March 2000, expenses totaled $1101.85. The major expenses covered publishing costs for producing the newsletter, $1,599.10 for hard copies (including printing, postage, and supplies) and $299.40 for online publishing, approximately 33% less than the 1998-99 fiscal year. The savings account was closed in May in order to open a money market account and a certificate of deposit account. This change substantially increased SCAMIT’s interest earnings, this year $626.20 of which $552.09 came from the CD. SCAMIT accepted a contract from SCCWRP to perform identifications on specialty groups for the Bight’98 project with the purpose of SCAMIT arranging subcontracts for the work. A 50% deposit was received in the amount of $8,866.50. Two subcontracts were given; Larry Lovell ($6,187.50) for Lumbrinerids and Euclyminids and John Ljubenkov ($2,679.00) for Edwardsiids and Ceriantherids. Grants and workshops will continue to be funded from the money collected for creating the Taxonomic Listing for SCCWRP during the 1994-95 fiscal year. The following is a summary of the expenses and income: Expenses Newsletter $1,599.10 Online publishing $299.40 Publications $0.00 Grants $0.00 Miscellaneous $309.11 Contract awards $8,866.50 Total $11074.11 Income Dues $2,085.00 Interest $626.20 T-Shirts and miscellaneous $0.00 Donations $0.00 Contract $8,866.50 Total $11,258.08 Account balances (March 31,2000) Checking $195.58 Savings $0.00 Money Market $3,461.95 Certificate of Deposit $8,552.09 Total $11,882.77