A New Species of Myxidium (Myxosporea: Myxidiidae), from the Western Chorus Frog, Pseudacris triseriata triseriata, and Blanchard's Cricket Frog, Acris crepitans blanchardi (Hylidae), from Eastern Nebraska: Morphology, Phylogeny, and Critical Comments on Amphibian Myxidium Taxonomy

During March 2001-April 2004, 164 adult anurans of 6 species (47 Rana blairi, 35 Rana catesbeiana, 31 Hyla chrysoscelis, 31 Pseudacris triseriata triseriata, 11 Bufo woodhousii, and 9 Acris crepitans blanchardi) from Pawnee Lake, Lancaster County, Nebraska, were surveyed for myxozoan parasites. Of these, 20 of 31 (65%) P. triseriata triseriata and 1 of 9 (11%) A. crepitans blanchardi were infected with a new species of Myxidium. Myxidium melleni n. sp. (Myxosporea) is described from the gallbladder of the western chorus frog, P. triseriata triseriata (Hylidae). This is the second species of Myxidium described from North American amphibians. Mature plasmodia are disc-shaped or elliptical 691 (400-1,375) × 499 (230-1,200) × 23 (16-35) μm, polysporic, producing many disporic pansporoblasts. The mature spores, 12.3 (12.0-13.5) × 7.6 (7.0-9.0) × 6.6 (6.0-8.0) μm, containing a single binucleated sporoplasm, are broadly elliptical, with 2-5 transverse grooves on each valve, and contain two equal polar capsules 5.2 (4.8-5.5) × 4.2 (3.8-4.5) μm positioned at opposite ends of the spore. Myxidium melleni n. sp. is morphologically consistent with other members of Myxidium. However, M. melleni n. sp. was phylogenetically distinct from other Myxidium species for which DNA sequences are available. Only with improved morphological analyses, accompanied by molecular data, and the deposit of type specimens, can the ambiguous nature of Myxidium be resolved. Guidelines for descriptions of new species of Myxidium are provided.

A Land-Use and Water-Quality History of White Rock Lake Reservoir, Dallas, Texas, Based on Paleolimnological Analyses

White Rock Lake reservoir in Dallas, Texas contains a 150-cm sediment record of silty clay that documents land-use changes since its construction in 1912. Pollen analysis corroborates historical evidence that between 1912 and 1950 the watershed was primarily agricultural. Land disturbance by plowing coupled with strong and variable spring precipitation caused large amounts of sediment to enter the lake during this period. Diatoms were not preserved at this time probably because of low productivity compared to diatom dissolution by warm, alkaline water prior to burial in the sediments. After 1956, the watershed became progressively urbanized. Erosion decreased, land stabilized, and pollen of riparian trees increased as the lake water became somewhat less turbid. By 1986 the sediment record indicates that diatom productivity had increased beyond rates of diatom destruction. Neither increased nutrients nor reduced pesticides can account for increased diatom productivity, but grain size studies imply that before 1986 diatoms were light limited by high levels of turbidity. This study documents how reservoirs may relate to land-use practices and how watershed management could extend reservoir life and improve water quality.

Review of Deep Time and the Texas High Plains: History and Geology by Paul H. Carlson

This brief book is a history of the Lubbock Lake Landmark site, a nationally recognized archeological site located on the Texas southern High Plains on the north side of the city of Lubbock. The location has been the subject of intense investigations by archaeologists since 1939. Paul H. Carlson, a noted author and professor of history at Texas Tech University, states that his purpose was to go back through what John McPhee called "deep time" to show how the Lubbock Lake location was formed and was used by humans through time. He accomplishes this in five chapters.

Literacy Research: Issues of Authority, Ownership, and Representation

With the “social turn” of language in the past decade within English studies, ethnographic and teacher research methods increasingly have acquired legitimacy as a means of studying student literacy. And with this legitimacy, graduate students specializing in literacy and composition studies increasingly are being encouraged to use ethnographic and teacher research methods to study student literacy within classrooms. Yet few of the narratives produced from these studies discuss the problems that frequently arise when participant observers enter the classroom. Recently, some researchers have begun to interrogate the extent to which ethnographic and teacher research methods are able to construct and disseminate knowledge in empowering ways (Anderson & Irvine, 1993; Bishop, 1993; Fine, 1994; Fleischer. 1994; McLaren, 1992). While ethnographic and teacher research methods have oftentimes been touted as being more democratic and nonhierarchical than quantitative methods—-which oftentimes erase individuals lived experiences with numbers and statistical formulas—-researchers are just beginning to probe the ways that ethnographic and teacher research models can also be silencing, unreflective, and oppressive. Those who have begun to question the ethics of conducting, writing about, and disseminating knowledge in education have coined the term “critical” research, a rather vague and loose term that proposes a position of reflexivity and self-critique for all research methods, not just ethnography or teacher research. Drawing upon theories of feminist consciousness-raising, liberatory praxis, and community-action research, theories of critical research aim to involve researchers and participants in a highly participatory framework for constructing knowledge, an inquiry that seeks to question, disrupt, or intervene in the conditions under study for some socially transformative end. While critical research methods are always contingent upon the context being studied, in general they are undergirded by principles of non-hierarchical relations, participatory collaboration, problem-posing, dialogic inquiry, and multiple and multi-voiced interpretations. In distinguishing between critical and traditional ethnographic processes, for instance, Peter McLaren says that critical ethnography asks questions such as “[u]nder what conditions and to what ends do we. as educational researchers, enter into relations of cooperation. mutuality, and reciprocity with those who we research?” (p. 78) and “what social effects do you want your evaluations and understandings to have?” (p. 83). In»the same vein, Michelle Fine suggests that critical researchers must move beyond notions of the etic/emic dichotomy of researcher positionality in order to “probe how we are in relation with the contexts we study and with our informants, understanding that we are all multiple in those relations” (p. 72). Researchers in composition and literacy stud¬ies who endorse critical research methods, then, aim to enact some sort of positive transformative change in keeping with the needs and interests of the participants with whom they work.