A discussion on the Heteracanthocephalidae Petrochenko, 1956 (Acanthocephala : Palaeacanthocephala)

Several heteracanthocephalid specimens were recovered from the flatfish Rhombosolea leporina (Gunther), a host of Heteracanthocephalus peltorhamphi (Baylis, 1944) Petrochenko, 1956 from New Zealand. Unlike H. peltorhamphi, these new specimens have trunk spines. Measurements and proboscis armament of the new specimens are consistent with the worms being Aspersentis minor Edmonds & Smales, 1992 originally described from the Australian flounder Rhombosolea tapirina Gunther. A review of the family Heteracanthocephalidae Petrochenko, 1956 was undertaken to assess the validity of its four genera and eight species. The validity of Aspersentis megarhynchus (Linstow, 1892) Golvan, 1960 (syn. Echinorhynchus megarhynchus Linstow, 1892) is questioned. E. megarhynchus is not considered to be an heteracanthocephalid and is relegated to a species inquirenda. A. megarhynchus (Linstow, 1892) of Golvan (1960) nec E. megarhynchus Linstow, 1892 is considered a synonym of A. austrinus Van Cleave, 1929. The monotypic genus Heteracanthocephalus Petrochenko, 1956 is proposed as a synonym of Aspersentis Van Cleave, 1929 because there appear to be insufficient morphological differences between them. Aspersentis peltorhamphi n. comb. is proposed for Heteracanthocephalus peltorhamphi. The monotypic genus Sachalinorhynchus Krotov & Petrochenko in Petrochenko, 1956 is considered valid, but the other heteracanthocephalid genus, Bullockrhynchus Chandra, Rao & Shyamasundari, 1985, also monotypic, is not. B. indicus Chandra, Rao & Shyamasundari, 1985 possesses more features resembling rhadinorhynchids than heteracanthocephalids but only females are known, and therefore the genus and species cannot be placed. There are currently four valid species of Aspersentis and one of Sachalinorhynchus.

The 23rd October 2002 dust storm in eastern Australia: characteristics and meteorological conditions

The dust storm of 23 October 2002 covered most of eastern Australia and carried one of the largest recorded dust loads in Australia. In the 6 months leading up to the event, severe drought conditions in eastern Australia, plus above average maximum temperatures resulted in high potential evapo-transpiration rates, producing severe soil moisture deficits and reduced vegetation cover. Although increased wind speeds associated with a fast moving cold front were the meteorological driving force, these winds speeds were lower than those for the previously documented large dust storms. The dust storm was 2400 km long, up to 400 km across and 1.5-2.5 km in height. The plume area was estimated at 840,860 km 2 and the dust load at 0900 h was 3.35-4.85 million tones (Mt). These dust load estimates are highly sensitive to assumptions, regarding visibility-dust concentration relationships, vertical dust concentration profiles and dust ceilings. The event is examined using meteorological records, remote sensing and air quality monitoring. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.