CONTENT - International Society of Zoological Sciences

S1 ICZ2008 - Abstracts
Integrative taxonomy in a hyperdiverse group of marine molluscs:
the Turrinae (Gastropoda, Conoidea).
Nicolas Puillandre 1,2 , Sarah Samadi 1 , Marie-Catherine Boisselier 1 and
Philippe Bouchet 2
1
MNHN, Service de Systématique Moléculaire, 43 rue Cuvier, 75005
Paris, France.
2
MNHN, 55 rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France.
Conoidea, which includes subfamily Turrinae, is a hyperdiverse group
of marine gastropods, with about 10000 living species (Bouchet 1990)
defined mostly by shell characters. The great and sometimes
continuous variability of these morphological characters renders the
delimitation of species complicated. Recently, molecular taxonomy
has received increasing attention (Vogler 2006, Arhens 2007) to
better define species boundaries in poorly known groups, where
traditionnal characters are difficult to assess. Recent cruises in West-
Pacific have permitted the achievement of a sampling comprising
almost 1000 specimens of Turrinae. Species were not a priori defined
in order to accurately estimate intra and interspecific variabilities.
Sequencing was performed for two genes: the COI mitochondrial
gene used for the barcode project and a portion of the 28S nuclear
gene. Species boundaries were defined using the “barcode gap” as a
threshold but also phylogenetic reconstructions associated to the
method described in Pons et al. 2006. More than 80 clusters were
thus delimited, mostly including several specimens. Geographic and
morphologic informations were then used to discuss alpha-taxonomy
of the group. If some clusters appeared easily recognisable on the
basis of morphological characters, some gave the impression to
include specimens with identical shells, while several shell
morphologies were observed in others. Indeed, molecular taxonomy
appears to be a fast and accurate way to define clusters of individuals
within Turrinae.
New perspectives in the systematics of Limnadiid clam shrimps
(Crustacea, Branchiopoda, Spinicaudata): cyst morphology
provides solid elements to the revision of this group in the world
Nicolas Rabet
UPMC, UMR 7138 CNRS UPMC MNHN IRD, Case 05, 7 quai St
Bernard, F-75005 Paris, France.
The shape and surface ornamentation of cysts, resting embryos, are
very useful for systematic studies of Branchiopoda. These characters
were already frequently used in Anostraca at the genus and
sometimes species level (Thiéry 1996) but some important specific
variations were also recently described (Thiéry et al. 2007). Within the
Spinicaudata the cyst shells are always spherical, except in
Limnadiidae where they can also be cylindrical or spiralled with
numerous intermediate shapes. Contrary to Anostraca, the systematic
based on adult morphology is very difficult in limnadiid clam shrimps
because morphology is highly variable and classical taxonomy is
generally very confused. Some studies suggested that the variation of
shape and ornamentation of cysts are the best morphological
characters for the taxonomy of the genus Eulimnadia in America (Belk,
1989, Martin, 1989). Here I present the examination of numerous
specimens from different parts of the world (including newly collected
samples and samples from museum collections). In each population
the cyst morphology is relatively stable, confirming its interest
throughout the world to identify species of Eulimnadia and also of
other genera (Metalimnadia and a new genus). In addition, cyst
morphology allows species identification in the absence of adult
specimens by sampling soils from temporary pools, which could
increase rapidly our knowledge on this group.
Thiéry A. 1996. In: Grassé PP, ed., Traité de Zoologie, Anatomie,
Systématique, Biologie 7: 287–351. Paris: Masson.
Thiéry A, Rabet N, Neve G. 2007. Biol J Linnean Soc 90(1): 55-60.
Belk D. 1989. J Crust Biol 9(1): 115-125.
Martin JW. 1989. J Crust Biol 9(1): 104-114.
- 10 -
EDIT: creating a new environment in taxonomic institutions
Simon Tillier
EDIT, CP43, Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (UMR 7138), 57
rue Cuvier, 75231 Paris cedex 05, France
Methodological, scientific and technical progress is rapidly
transforming taxonomy and its environment, making these times more
exciting than ever for taxonomists. Pivotal to the development of
taxonomy are the rapidly expanding fields of high throughput DNA
sequencing, automated digital data-gathering and biodiversity
informatics. Incorporating these technologies will be critical to the
future of the science of taxonomy.
To employ these new tools, scientific collaborators and users of
taxonomy will require new ways of working and interacting with
taxonomists. Taxonomic scientists integrated into interdisciplinary
teams will be an essential way of working. There will have to be
substantial, even radical, changes in how taxonomy is done and its
supporting infrastructure operated, to exploit these opportunities to the
full.
In support of these radical changes in the way taxonomy is done and
made available to its users, EDIT is a consortium of the largest
taxonomic institutions in the world which unite their strengths to
develop and accompany the necessary change in infrastructure
planning, functioning and management. Beside progress toward
integration of research infrastructures, EDIT is elaborating the
computer tools which will be instrumental to further developments of
taxonomic research, and has set up projects for All Taxa Biodiversity
Inventories in Europe experimenting new standards and methods.
Metazoan phylogenetics: “surprising new results” and the
deceptive phylogenetic signal
Johann-Wolfgang Wägele
Zoological Research Museum Alexander Koenig (Bonn, Germany):
During the last years a large number of new, often mutually
incompatible hypotheses on the phylogeny of animals have been
published, most of them based on molecular data. The Ecdysozoa
hypothesis is not compatible with the Coelomata, the clade
Myriochelata disrupts the Mandibulata and Tracheata, the Serialia is
not compatible with the Conchifera, and at the base of the metazoan
tree we find alternatively sponges, placozoans, or ctenophorans. Each
author or team of authors claim to have found convincing evidence.
Obviously, some profound misunderstandings are misleading us. A
major issue is the missing analysis of data quality. Statistical support
values on trees are not adequate signs for the quality of data.
Different types of long branch artefacts require different measures.
Improvement of substitution models helps, but does not compensate
for the absence of phylogenetic information in raw data. New tools for
the evaluation of the suitability of alignments still have to be
developed.