Gelişmiş Arama

Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorKaraytuğ, Süphan
dc.contributor.authorSak, Serdar
dc.contributor.authorAlper, Alp
dc.contributor.authorSönmez, Serdar
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-16T11:46:11Z
dc.date.available2022-06-16T11:46:11Z
dc.date.issued2021en_US
dc.identifier.issn1175-5326 - 1175-5334
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5051.1.15
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12462/12334
dc.descriptionSak, Serdar (Balikesir Author)en_US
dc.description.abstractAn attempt was made to test if Lourinia armata (Claus, 1866)-as it is currently diagnosed-represents a species complex. Detailed examination and comparisons of several specimens collected from different localities suggest that L. armata indeed represents a complex of four closely related morphospecies that can be differentiated from one another by only detailed observations. One of the four species is identified as Lourinia aff. armata and the other three species are described as new to science and named as Lourinia wellsi sp. nov., L. gocmeni sp. nov., and L. aldabraensis sp. nov. Detailed review of previous species records indicates that the genus Lourinia Wilson, 1924 is distributed worldwide. Ceyloniella nicobarica Sewell, 1940, originally described from Nicobar Island and previously considered a junior subjective synonym of L. armata is reinstated as Lourinia nicobarica (Sewell, 1940) comb. nov. on the basis of the unique paddle-shaped caudal ramus seta V. It is postulated that almost all of these records are unreliable in terms of representing true Lourinia aff. armata described herein. On the other hand, the comparative evaluation of the illustrations and descriptions in the published literature indicates the presence of several new species waiting to be discovered in the genus Lourinia. It has been determined that, according to updated modern keys, the recent inclusion of the monotypic genus Archeolourinia Corgosinho & Schizas, 2013 in the Louriniidae is not justified since Archeolourinia shermani Corgosinho & Schizas, 2013 does not belong to this family but should be assigned to the Canthocamptidae. On the other hand, it has been argued that the exact phylogenetic position of the Louriniidae still remains problematic since none of the diagnostic characters supports the monophyly of the family within the Oligoarthra. It has also been argued that the close relationship between Louriniidae and Canthocamptidae is supported since both families share the homologous sexual dimorphism (apophysis) on P3 endopod. The most important characteristic that can possibly be used to define Louriniidae is the reduction of maxilliped.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherMagnolia Pressen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.11646/zootaxa.5051.1.15en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectCryptic Speciationen_US
dc.subjectHarpacticoidaen_US
dc.subjectLouriniidaeen_US
dc.subjectNew Speciesen_US
dc.subjectTaxonomyen_US
dc.titleResolving the Lourinia armata (Claus, 1866) complex with remarks on the monophyletic status of Louriniidae, Monard 1927 (Copepoda: Harpacticoida)en_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalZootaxaen_US
dc.contributor.departmentFen Edebiyat Fakültesien_US
dc.contributor.authorID0000-0001-5507-4072en_US
dc.contributor.authorID0000-0001-8980-4133en_US
dc.contributor.authorID0000-0002-4370-0539en_US
dc.contributor.authorID0000-0002-4955-3162en_US
dc.identifier.volume5051en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage346en_US
dc.identifier.endpage386en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

DosyalarBoyutBiçimGöster

Bu öğe ile ilişkili dosya yok.

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster