Food Content of Six Commercial Fishes from Mississippi Sound

Specific dietary contents from six fishes collected in Mississippi Sound are recorded. In order of their importance, primary components grouped in major taxonomic categories were fishes, penaeid shrimps, and other crustaceans for Cynoscion nebulosus; Crustaceans and fishes for C. arenarius; fishes and crustaceans for C. nothus; crustaceans, pelecypods, and polychaetes for Pogonias cromis; crustaceans, molluscs, polychaetes, and fishes for Archosargus probatocephalus; and fishes and penaeid shrimps for Paralichthys lethostigma. Principal items in the diets of most of the fishes included Anchoa mitchilli, Penaeus aztecus, P. setiferus, and Callinectes sapidus. Those crustaceans show that competition exists for commercial shellfishes in Mississippi Sound. Ratios among the different dietary items vary, according at least to species of fish, length of fish, season, specific location, and abundance of available prey. Some of these variations are documented and are additionally related to selected findings by other authors sampling different localities. We suggest that examination of food items in Archosargus probatocephalus can serve as a practical means to sample and assess seasonal prevalence and abundance of a wide range of invertebrates throughout different habitats in Mississippi Sound and elsewhere.

A Study of Interdisciplinary Research Needs: Results from Input of Faculty in Six Engineering Departments in Prioritizing Serial Subscriptions

Baldwin, Virginia (2003) "A Study of Interdisciplinary Research Needs: Results from Input of Faculty in Six Engineering Departments in Prioritizing Serial Subscriptions," American Society for Engineering Education Conference, June 23, 2003, Nashville, TN,

Children’s Play in Cross-Cultural Perspective: A New Look at the Six Cultures Study

A qualitative and quantitative reanalysis of the Six Cultures data on children’s play, collected in the 1950s, was performed to revisit worlds of childhood during a time when sample communities were more isolated from mass markets and media than they are today. A count was performed of children aged 3 to 10 in each community sample scored as engaging in creative-constructive play, fantasy play, role play, and games with rules. Children from Nyansongo and Khalapur scored lowest overall, those from Tarong and Juxtlahuaca scored intermediate, and those from Taira and Orchard Town scored highest. Cultural norms and opportunities determined how the kinds of play were stimulated by the physical and social environments (e.g., whether adults encouraged work versus play, whether children had freedom for exploration and motivation to practice adult roles through play, and whether the environment provided easy access to models and materials for creative and constructive play).

CLARIFICATION ON THE NOMENCLATURAL STATUS OF SIX GENUS-GROUP NAMES IN THE TRIBE TRICHIINI (COLEOPTERA: SCARABAEIDAE: CETONIINAE)

Six genus-group names in the tribe Trichiini (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Cetoniinae) are discussed with regards to their availability and validity under the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Aleurostictus Kirby, Archimedius Kirby, Euclidius Kirby, Gymnodus Kirby, Tetrophthalmus Kirby, and Trichinus Kirby all have priority over most other generic names in the tribe but none of the names are in prevailing usage. Clarifications are needed due to the reemergence of Aleurostictus Kirby in current literature and confusion over the nomenclatural status of the other names. Type species are designated for Aleurostictus Kirby, Tetrophthalmus Kirby, and Stegopterus Burmeister and Schaum. The gender of the genera Trigonopeltastes Burmeister and Schaum and Apeltastes Howden is also discussed.

THE THIRD QUI, AND SIX WAYS TO RECOGNIZE IT, or “WHO HAPPENS, MAECENAS?”

All Latin students eventually have a problem with qui. To solve it, they need a third qui in their quiver. The problem shows up when they advance into third year, transitioning from Caesar to Roman Comedy, or to the poets. The familiar “who” often leads to nonsense, and they are at a loss. There are three qui’s: the relative pronoun, the interrogative adjective, and the old ablative instrumental, e.g. 1. qui dixit, who spoke 2. qui vir, which man 3. illud qui, that thing by means of which It is the third that causes problems. So this article addresses the question “how do you tell qui from qui ?” There are six main ways to tell when to say “how,” “whereby,” or “the way” for qui: 1. The whereby/how qui is usually interrogative. 2. It is often marked further by being paired with a following quia: qui? quia “How . . . ? Because . . .” 3. The most frequent associated idea is of knowing, with a form of scire or gnoscere: qui scis, qui noveris? “How do you know?” 4. Qui followed immediately by an adverb or comparative is whereby/how/the way: qui minus quam . . . “How less than . . .” 5. The obvious noun antecedent is not a person, but a tool: machinas qui, “tools to __ with” (“with which to__”). 6. If the context is of giving or seeking, qui is instrumental, “how,” “a way,” “the means, “ e.g. da mi qui comparem “Give me the means to buy . . .” There is no antecedent.