World Congress of Malacology Antwerp ... - Unitas Malacologica

The species listed suppose the 46´7 % of the total (1501) cited in the year 1995 by Espinosa,
Fernández-Garcés and Rolán for the whole island of Cuba. That species richness emphasizes the
importance of Guanahacabibes as larvae emitter center to the Mexico Gulf and Atlantic North
America because much of the species have planktotrophic larvae.
Biogeographic relationships among benthic opisthobranchs in the Atlantic
Calado, Gonçalo 1 ; Coelho, Rita 2
1. Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Lisbon, Portugal &
IMAR, FCT/UNL, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal,
Email: bagoncas@gmail.com
2. Instituto Português de Malacologia, Zoomarine, N125 km 65 Guia 8201-864
Albufeira, Portugal,
Email: ipm@zoomarine.pt
With the help of many recent publications on the opisthobranch fauna of several regions of the
Atlantic Ocean (including the Caribbean and the Mediterranean Seas) it is now possible to work out
an almost complete puzzle of the distributions of these species in the area. In this work we build a
presence-absence (1/0) data matrix based on virtually all published references and on-line databases
on benthic opisthobranch species with explicit references to the Atlantic region. A cluster analysis
was performed as an exploratory technique where three main Atlantic clusters were recovered: (1)
North Atlantic, including British Isles, Greenland, Scandinavian Peninsula and Atlantic North
America; (2) Mediterranean and Macarronesia (Azores, Madera and Canary islands), including the
Atlantic coast of the Iberian Peninsula and (3) Central west and SW Atlantic, including Gulf of
Mexico, Caribbean Sea, Brazil and Patagonia. This last cluster is also grouped together with East
Pacific species that acted together as an outgroup. A parsimonial analysis of endemicity (PAE) was
also applied to the same dataset and the same basic grouping was obtained, although Eastern Pacific
species appeared linked to group (1). These results reinforce the ideas of specific areas of endemicity
and speciation, although some conclusions should be taken with care due to the lack of information in
some important areas such as the West African coast.
Expanding museum collections by indirect field work
Callomon, Paul
Academy of Natural Sciences, 1900 Parkway, Philadelphia PA 19103-1195, USA,
Email: callomon@ansp.org
Natural history museums house specimens collected by their own scientists together with those
acquired in donated or purchased collections.
Direct collecting yields dense and comprehensive assemblages of specimens with very good data, and
thus greatly enhances the museum’s holdings in those families for that area. Similar gap-filling can
also be achieved by the selective acquisition of private collections. Some enthusiasts devote a
lifetime of effort to field collecting within defined areas, and keep meticulous records. Such
collections often represent repeated sampling over time, and accurately dated material has a particular
value. The tracking of such collections should be part of any collection’s growth plans, and in order
to acquire them similar levels of planning and expense to those involved in field work can be
justified.
The decision to acquire a collection depends on the presence or absence of an electronic catalog, the
strength of the institution’s existing holdings for the geographical area and families involved and the
likelihood of overlapping field work in the foreseeable future. The condition of the specimens is also
important, particularly if they are preserved in a wet medium. The availability of funding outside
granted research budgets nevertheless remains the prime consideration in most cases.
30