Multimodal species abundance distributions: a deconstruction approach reveals the processes behind the pattern

Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Oikos © 2014 Nordic Society Oikos.

Deep ocean species. The little that is known mostly comes from collected specimens. Comment on L.A. Rocha et al. Letter "Specimen collection: An essential tool" (23 May, 344: 814).

Deep Ocean Species. The little that is known mostly comes from collected specimens. L.A. Rocha et al. Letter "Specimen collection: An essential tool" (23 May, 344: 814) brilliantly discuss the importance of specimen collection and present the evolution of collecting since the mid-19th century until our present strict codes and conducts. However, it is also important to emphasize the fact that the vast majority of deep ocean macro-organisms are only known to us because of collection and this is a strong argument that should be present in our actions as scientists. If the deep is considered the least known of Earth’s habitats (1% or so according to recent estimates) then what awesome collection of yet to discover species are still there to be properly described? As the authors point citing (1), something around 86% of species remain unknown. Voucher specimens are fundamental for the reasons pointed out and perhaps the vast depths of the World’s oceans are the best example of that importance. The resumed report of 2010 Census of Marine Life (2) showed that among the millions of specimens collected in both familiar and seldom-explored waters, the Census found more than 6,000 potentially new species and completed formal descriptions of more than 1,200 of them. It also found that a number of rare species are in fact common. Voucher specimens are essential and, again agreeing with L.A. Rocha et al. Letter (see above), the modern approach for collecting will not be a cause for extinctions but instead a valuable tool for knowledge, description and even, as seen above, a way to find out that supposed rare species may not be that rare and even prove to reach abundant populations.

A trophic analysis of target species of macrobenthos in a subtropical coast community: a taxa relationship essay

Studies on the feeding habits of aquatic organisms are a requirement for the management and sustainable use of marine ecosystems. The aim of the present research was to analyze the habits and trophic similarities of decapods, starfish and fish in order to propose trophic relationships between taxa, using Hennigian methods of phylogenetic systematics. This new grouping hypothesis, based on shared and exclusive food items and food types, corresponds to the broad taxonomic groups used in the analysis. Our results indicate that algae, Mollusca, Polychaeta, Crustacea, Echinodermata and Actinopterygii are the most exploited common resources among the species studied. Starfish were differentiated from other organisms for being stenophagic, and were grouped for feeding on bivalve mollusks. A larger group of fish and crustaceans shares algae and mainly crustaceans as food items. A third group united all eight species of Actinopterygii. This largest subgroup of fish is typically carnivorous, feeding on Anthozoa and a great quantity of Crustacea. Synodus foetens has a special position among fishes, due to its unique feeding on nematodes. A Euclidean distance dendrogram obtained in a previous publication grouped S. foetens with starfish. That result was based on a few non-exclusive shared similarities in feeding modes, as well as on shared absences of items, which are not an adequate grouping factor. Starfish are stenophagic, eating bivalves almost exclusively. Synodus foetens and Isopisthus parvipinnis have restricted food items, and are thus intermediary in relation to starfish, decapods, and other fish, which are euryphagous. The trophic cladogram displays details of food items, whether or not shared by all species. The resulting trophic analysis is consistent with known historical relationships.