Phylogenetic Relationships of Clawed Lobster Genera (Decapoda : Nephropidae) Based on Mitochondrial 16S rRNA Gene Sequences

Approximately 350 base pairs (bp) of the mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene were used to study the phylogenetic relationships among 5 genera of the clawed lobster family Nephropidae (infraorder Astacidea), including Homarus, Homarinus, Metanephrops, Nephrops, and Nephropsis. Maximum-parsimony analysis, using a hermit crab, Pagurus pollicaris (infraorder Anomura), as an outgroup. produced a tree topology in which Homarus and Nephrops formed a well-supported clade that excluded Homarinus. The same tree topology was obtained from both neighbor-joining and maximum-likelihood analyses, Some morphological characters that appear synapomorphic for Nephrops and Metanephrops may be due to convergence rather than symplesiomorphy. The current taxonomy, therefore, does not reflect the phylogeny of this group as suggested by the molecular data. More molecular data and studies using homologous morphological characters me needed to reach a better understanding of the phylogenetic history of clawed lobsters.

Inference in Ecology: The Sea Urchin Phenomenon in the Northwestern Atlantic

We have reviewed the considerable body of research into the sea urchin phenomenon responsible for the alternation between macroalgal beds and coralline barrens in the northwestern Atlantic. In doing so, we have identified problems with both the scientific approach and the interpretation of results. Over a period of approximately 20 years, explanations for the phenomenon invoked four separate scenarios, which changed mainly as a consequence of extraneous events rather than experimental testing. Our specific concerns are that results contrary to the keystone-predator paradigm for the American lobster were circumvented, system components of the various scenarios became accepted without testing, and modifications of some components appeared arbitrary. Our review illustrates dilemmas that, we suggest, have hindered ecological progress in general. We argue for a more rigorous experimental approach, based on sound natural-history observations and strong inference. Moreover, we believe that the scientific community needs to be cautious about allowing paradigms to become established without adequate scrutiny.