Monthly Archives: December 2018

Door #14: Annelids from the deep Norwegian waters

We have recently started a new mapping project funded by the Norwegian Taxonomy Initiative (Artsdatabanken) on the deep-sea annelids. The annelid fauna in the deep areas of the Norwegian Sea, deeper than 2000 m, has recently been shown to be significantly different from the upper slope and shelf fauna. Morphology-based studies indicate that as much as 40% of the deep-sea annelid species are new to science, and initial results from DNA-barcoding provided even higher numbers. This project aims to characterize, describe and map these unknown species of annelids and will provide much needed baseline knowledge for monitoring of environmental effects from future deep-sea mining and other human activities.

Figures: Tom selecting 96 specimens of annelids from HAUSGARTEN for DNA barcoding.

We have started the project by processing a number of samples from a German expedition on RV Polarstern to the long-term research observatory HAUSGARTEN located at the Fram Strait. The samples have been collected between 1000 and 5000 m depth and harbor more than 30 putative morphospecies. We are going to barcode 96 individuals from this material to supplement the barcode library of the Norwegian annelids and to help resolve taxonomical problems within several taxa.

-Nataliya

 

Door #13: The story you can find in a picture…

It is often said that a picture is worth a thousand words. We use both drawings and photos (and sometimes even films) when we are describing species, and without these illustrations, we would often have to make guesses as to what the author meant when describing the morphology of the species in interest.

Generally, the old literature did not make as much room for illustrations as we have the possibility to do today – the printing often needed entire plates (pages) produced much in the same way an artist still produces a carved or engraved print today – and when there is a plate in an old publication it quite often is a piece of art. But – the plates (figure-pages) were expensive to print (even more than the text-pages), and thus often limited to the bare necessities.

There are exceptions! C. Spence Bate and J. O. Westwood (both with so many letters behind their names that they included “etc” at the front page) commissioned J van Voorst in London to print  their book “ A History of the British Sessile-Eyed Crustacea” in two volumes. The first came in 1863, the second in 1868.

And it is enjoyable reading. “Sessile-eyed” crustaceans are explained as those crustaceans who do not have stalked eyes (as for instance the crabs and shrimp have) and it was used to classify crustaceans since Leach in 1814 named the gruop “Edriophthalma” (sessile-eyed in greek). This group included Isopods and Amphipods – but the discussion was still going strong about what taxa should be included in these groups, and how they were “connected” with the other crustaceans. The gentlemen Bate and Westwood decided to describe and discuss each of the species they knew of as sessile-eyed in Britain. This would be a basis for the further discussions on higher groupings. Interspersed in the text are figures of the species and special morphological structures they are discussing, making the book easy to follow and understand. An introduction on the general morphology, physiology, reproductive biology and geographical distribution of the sessile-eyed crustaceans, the rest of part 1 discusses the Amphipoda.

They really mention every species they have come across – ever – from anywhere in Britain. Sometimes that may be one single specimen of what they think must be a new genus and species (and that seems to have been forgotten later),  and in addition to the drawings of the morphology they add a drawing of the location where it was found.

It is at the end of volume 1 that we come to the picture that captures my imagination the most. Under the discussion of Corophium longicorne  (accepted name: Corophium volutator) they discuss the extraordinary strong second antennae of the species:

“The inferior antennas are very powerful, and in the male are longer than the animal itself; the pentultimate joint of the peduncle being armed upon the inferior distal extremity with a strong tooth, which appears to assist considerably in holding any object when the extremity of the antennae is folded upon itself; this organ appearing to possess the strongest prehensile power, and being no doubt used as a weapon of offence in its battles with other animals in its struggle for existence.”

Corophium are known from sandy and muddy shores – where they “dwell in small tubular galleries, excavated in the mud, over which the tide flows and ebbs”.  They go on to discuss their ecology – as predators of other shore-living invertebrates.

They cite “Rambles of a Naturalist” of Quaterfages on the feeding habits of this fierce amphipod:
“at about the end of April they come from the open sea in myriads (they are called Pernis by the fishermen of the coast of Saintoge) to wage war with the annelids, which they entirely destroy before the end of May; they then attack the mollusca and fish all through summer, and disappear in a single night about the end of October, and return again the following year.”

Bate and Westwood do not follow up the story from Quaterfages with any other documentation, but they ask their readers to send them more data if they have. Corophium volutator was described already in 1766 by Pallas, and is found on sandy or muddy beaches all around the North Sea. Maybe you will see a battle between a Corophium and an annelid? All later research into this species and the close group of related amphipods show us that these are detrivorous (eating organic matter from the mud where it lives). We might never know what inspired the fishermen that Quaterfages talked to. But if you see something like this, we would really like to know!

-Anne Helene

Literature:
Bate CS, Westwood JO.1863. A history of the British Sessile-Eyed Crustacea. Part 1. John van Voorst, London (Paternoster Row). 580 pp.

Door #12: Meet the chitons!

Some molluscs, like snails, clams, mussels and octopuses are familiar to most people, but others are more unknown. Among these are the flattened, shell-bearing chitons (skallus/leddsnegler in Norwegian). They are commonly found clinging to rocks in the intertidal zone, and can be found all along the coastline. Many species can be colourful, with stripes, dots and zigzag lines ornamenting the shell plates.

Tonicella marmorea, a common species of chiton in Norway. Photo N. Mikkelsen

The scientific name, Polyplacophora, translates to “bearer of many plates”, and refers to the eight hard shell plates covering the animal. The shell provides protection from predators, and the organization of the shell into eight separate plates also provides flexibility— if disturbed, some species can roll up into a ball like a hedgehog. Surrounding the shell is a tough girdle, which in many species is covered in scales or spines, which also serve to deter any predators.

On the underside, the chiton has a muscular foot that is used for movement and for attaching firmly to the rocks that they live on. They rasp food, like encrusting algae and animals, from the substrate with their radula, a tongue-like structure with several rows of tiny teeth. The teeth are often reinforced with minerals to make them extra durable for scraping on rocks.

The underside of the chiton Tonicella marmorea. The muscular foot can be seen the centre. The gills are seen around the foot to the right. The head with the mouth can be seen on the left side. Photo N. Mikkelsen

Chitons are found in habitats from the intertidal down to depths of several thousand meters, usually on stones or rocky surface. Some species have adapted to other habitats. One of the species we find in Norway is even specialized to live on large sponges in the deep-sea. This chiton grazes on the sponge, and in the process gradually digs out a depression in the sponge perfectly fitted for the chiton to sit in.

Hanleya nagelfar, a chiton that lives on sponges. Photo N. Mikkelsen

Chitons are a very old animal group, with fossil dating back 500 millions years. In fact, their body plan even still bears resemblances to the animals that were among the ancestors of the variety of molluscs in existence today. The chiton’s way of life is apparently an evolutionary successful recipe!

The next time you walk along the seashore, take a close look at a rock and you might find some colourful chitons!

-Nina

Door # 11: Animal rocks and flower animals

The phylum Cnidaria is a diverse group of animals united by their ability to synthesize a complex type of ‘stinging’ cells called cnidocytes, which they use to hunt for their prey. The more than 13 000 species of cnidarians come in many shapes and colors, from the familiar jellyfish and corals, to the less famous myxozoans, hydroids, and siphonophores (read some more about those here). Because cnidarians live and thrive in marine and freshwater environments all around the world, humans have become familiar with them since ancient times: they have been feared for their sting, worn as jewelry, or simply admired for their beauty.

Sea nettles (genus Chrysaora) and ‘terrestrial’ nettles (genus Urtica) belong to very different groups of organisms, but share their name because of their stinging abilities. In some languages, like Norwegian and Swedish, cnidarians are called “nettle animals” (nesledyr and nässeldjur, respectively). Photo: Luis Martell (left), Nannie Persson (right).

Despite this familiarity, the true nature of cnidarians long remained unclear to naturalists and non-professionals alike. Perhaps to a greater extent than any other large phylum in the animal kingdom, people have historically failed to recognize cnidarians as animals, or even as living beings. Early civilizations had some knowledge about corals, sea-anemones and large jellyfish, all of which were encountered frequently along the coasts, but although fishermen and sailors knew about the existence of coral reefs (the massive bodies of coral represented major hazards for navigation), the animals themselves were probably seen only as pieces of rock. Some of the sessile species of cnidarians with a hard skeleton were considered minerals until the second half of the 17th century, when the use of magnifying lenses and the invention of the microscope allowed scientists to realize that the stony coral fragments washed up on the shore were actually made up of small flower-like organisms.

With their tentacles surrounding a central disc, sea anemones (in the image a specimen of Aiptasia) look somewhat like submarine flowers. Their plant namesakes (for example the wood anemone Anemone nemorosa) are strictly terrestrial. Photo: Joan J. Soto-Àngel (left), Nannie Persson (right).

Historically, the most persistent confusion regarding the cnidarians has been with plants and algae. For more than 1 500 years, the immobile sea anemones, sea fans, and hydroids were thought to be strange marine flowers and were consequently studied by botanists, not zoologists. They grow attached to the substrate and many species die if detached, which left early naturalists in doubt as to whether they were plants or animals. Thus, the category ‘zoophytes’ (from Ancient Greek ζῷον, zoon, ‘animal’ and φυτόν, phytón, ‘plant’) was created for them. It was only in the first half of the eighteenth century when this view started to change, thanks to the observations of J. A. Peyssonnel and the work of botanist Bernard de Jussieu, who together managed to convince their colleagues about the animal nature of the zoophytes.

The ‘sea tomato’ (Actinia equina) is a common cnidarian along the Atlantic coasts of Europe. It may look like a tomato when it is not covered by water, but is not related to its vegetal look-alike. Photo: Nannie Persson

The flowers of submerged marine plants (like this Cymodocea nodosa) are usually not as colorful or conspicuous as sea anemones and corals. Photo: Joan J. Soto Àngel

Today we know more about these organisms and there are no longer doubts about their affiliation to the animal kingdom, although we can still see evidence of their botanical past in the names of several cnidarian groups. The word Cnidaria comes from the Greek word κνίδη (knídē, meaning ‘nettle’, referring to the plant genus Urtica), and was inspired by the stinging power of the plants. One of the largest groups of cnidarians, the Anthozoa (which includes the flower-looking sea anemones and corals) is aptly named with a word deriving from the ancient Greek roots for flower (antho-) and animal (-zoa). Because there are still many open questions in cnidarian biology, initiatives that chart the diversity of cnidarians (like the successful project HYPNO and the upcoming project NORHYDRO) are necessary to get to know more about the particularities of these interesting animals!

-Luis Martell and Nannie Persson 

References:

Jussieu, B. de, 1742. Examen de quelques productions marines qui ont été mises au nombre des plantes, et qui sont l’ouvrage d’une sorte d’insecte de mer. Mem. Acad. Roy. Sci. Paris, 1742, 392.

Edwards, C. 1972. The history and state of the study of medusa and hydroids. Proc. R. S. E. (B). 73, 25: 247-257.

Door #10: The Molluscan Forum 2018 in London

Special 20th anniversary 22.11.18
The Malacological Society of London
Conference talk about citizen scientists

A few weeks ago, Manuel Malaquias, Justine Siegwald and me travelled to London in order to attend the 20th anniversary conference of the Malacological Society of London, UK. This society is dedicated to research and education on molluscs. Although based in London (as the name refers to), the society is internationally orientated and welcomes all members interested in the scientific study of molluscs. The society was founded in 1893 and registered as a charity. One of the many activities of the society is to organize meetings and symposia, and this year it turned out to be a 20th anniversary of the molluscan forum!

It was an incredible interesting day with a lot of inspirational posters and talks. My mission for that day was to present our ‘Sea slugs of Southern Norway’ project with the emphasis on how citizen scientist made this project a success. I wanted to share with the audience how citizen scientists with the right approach could be the future for many scientific studies.

Cessa presenting at the Molluscan Forum, 22th of November 2018

But first let us have a look into the meaning of citizen science. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, citizen science is scientific work undertaken by members of the general public, often in collaboration with or under the direction of professional scientists and scientific institutions. The term was first coined during the nineties in the United States of America. Since than it has grown in popularity, with multiple projects in the world that rely on the input of data generated by the general public. Some big and well-known examples are eBird, with roughly 411K users, Nasa Globe with 640K users, iNaturalist, with almost 1 million users and OPAL with 930K users and counting.

Increase of popularity of citizenscience projects per year, Nature 2018

Since the beginning of this year we put a lot of effort in setting up a network of volunteers and underwater photographers. We got many good people willing to contribute to our project and most them are located in the South of Norway, but we also have a few located more further up North in Norway. Currently we have around 150 members directly and indirectly involved in helping us with our project. We try to involve our citizen scientist in the project as much as possible and one way is by reaching out to them via several social media platforms. For example, in our Facebook group community members can participate in discussions about species descriptions and share their findings etc. But we also have an Instagram account that functions as a pocket field guide for followers. Besides we try to keep everyone up to date about the project by regular posting blogs.

Cessa showing the different social media platforms used in the project during the Molluscan Forum

But our key element in this project definitely goes to the assembly and design of our sampling kits. These were designed specially for our citizen scientists in order to make collecting easier, more accessible and more standardized for everyone. By trying to standardize the collecting steps with so-called instructed sampling kits we minimized the errors that could occur during sampling of the data. The sampling kits contain plastic jars for the samples, fixative, preprinted labels and a USB flash drive with enough space for high-resolution pictures and a preset excel file that only needs filling in.

Example of the content of a citizen science sampling kit designed for the Sea slugs of Southern Norway project

We noticed that this approach worked out and the data quantity and quality increased as well the recruitment became easier. When we look at all the Norwegian sea slug records from the museum collection since the 19th century, it consists of roughly 1400 records. In just over six months time we see that the contribution of the citizen scientists covers almost half of that.

A comparison of the amount of records collected by citizen scientists since this year compared to our museum collection

Eubranchus farrani species complex, one species or multiple?

The material that is sent in by the citizen scientists is at the moment being studied by us. We have two master students who will start working in January on a variety of taxonomic challenges by studying the different geographical material.

 

An example of this is Eubranchus farrani species complexes that have different color morphotypes from different geographical locations. Do we deal here with one species or multiple?

Stay tuned for a follow up!

Furthermore
Sea slugs of Southern Norway recently got its own Instagram account! Perfect for on the go if you would like to quickly check some species, click here https://www.instagram.com/seaslugsofsouthernnorway/ and don’t forget to follow us.

Become a member of the sea slugs of southern Norway facebook group, stay updated and join the discussion; https://www.facebook.com/groups/seaslugsofsouthernnorway/

Explore the world, read the invertebrate blogs!

-Cessa

Door #9: To catch an Amphipod

As many of you might have read earlier in this blog, the projects NorAmph and Hypno have been regularly sampling in Hjeltefjorden for the past year. As a part of my master thesis, I was lucky to be able to come with! My thesis will be about amphipods and their seasonal variety in Hjeltefjorden, which is super exiting!

The RP-sled used for the sampling.

For each time we go out, we sample with a RP-sled, a WP3 plankton net and we collect CTD data. The samples from the RP-sled will be used for my thesis and other projects if we find something interesting. During the last year we collected samples 9 times, which has given us some great days out at sea!

During these cruises we have had lots of fun! We have had cake, snacks and regularly done yoga on deck! We have been mostly lucky with the weather (except for our original cruise day in February, which had to be moved due to lots of wind, which you can read about here: Solskinnstokt)

 

A great view from our February cruise, with a clear blue sky and no wind! (Photo: K. Kongshavn)

We have been mostly lucky in getting great samples!

Lots of exciting material to get our hands on! (photo: AH Tandberg)

But sometimes not so lucky…

It is not easy to be a happy master student when the codend is almost empty… (Photo: AH Tandberg)

In October we had our last cruise, which was a great end to a year of sampling! We were not as lucky with the weather this time, but the samples look very nice. We also had cake to celebrate the last cruise day!

A great view in Hjeltefjorden (Photo: C. Østensvig)

Coffee breaks on deck are always important! (Photo: AH Tandberg)

It is somewhat sad to be done with the sampling, but with all the material collected, it is time to hit the lab! With all the samples, I sort out and identify all the amphipods I find. So far, I have found lots of cool amphipods, and I am starting to see some patterns in the material.

Here are some of the Amphipods I have found. All photos: K. Kongshavn

My work in the lab is far from done, and I am excited to look for new cool amphipods and hopefully find something interesting in their seasonal variation.

-Christine

Door # 8: The DNA-barcode identification machine

In a previous blog post I explained briefly how DNA-sequences are produced for the DNA-barcode library. Now I will show how the BOLD database can be utilized to identify species from sequences.

Some of the equipment used to produce DNA-sequences in our lab.

Say you have access to a lab that can produce DNA-sequences and you have a sample of a crab you cannot identify because some of the key characters are on body parts that have been broken and lost. You produce a DNA-sequence from the “barcode-gene” and open the identification engine in BOLDSYSTEMS.org.

Internet start window for the BOLD identification engine where you paste your unknown DNA sequence into the bottom blank window. (Click on picture to expand)

Having submitted your query to BOLD, you wait for some seconds for results. In this example BOLD returned the following window.

Example of results from a query to the BOLD identification engine. (Click on picture to expand)

The results window lists the top matches in terms of sequence similarity, and in this case we have 100 % similarity match with the crab Atelecyclus rotundatus. There is also an option to display the results as a TREE BASED IDENTIFICATION. When clicking on the option tab, the closest hits are clustered in a so-called Neighbour Joining Tree. In the window below you see parts of the tree where our unknown DNA-sequence has been joined to a group of other sequences in BOLD that have been deposited as Atelecyclus rotundatus barcodes by other biodiversity labs.

Part of TREE BASED IDENTIFICATION of an unknown DNA sequence (in red). We see that the unknown clusters with with other sequence of Atelecyclus rotundatus. The nearest neighbour branch is Atelecyclus undecimdentatus. (Click on picture to enlarge.)

The species page for Atelecyclus rotundatus gives us more information about this crab and about its records in BOLD.

Species page for the individual we identified with the BOLD identification engine. (Click picture to enlarge.)

If in fact your sequence was produced from an unknown crab, this identification seems convincing. But sometimes you should think twice about search results, and this will be the topic of a future blog post.

-Endre

Door #7: New shipment of tissue samples for barcoding

In the upper right corner is a “plate”: the microplates with 96 wells where we deposit small tissue samples that are to be processed at the CCDB lab in Canada for NorBOL

On the third day of Christmas,
we sent eleven microplates away:
one plate cnidarians (A)
two with worms a-wriggle (B)
two plates of insects (C)
three plates crustaceans (D)
two (and a half) plates of mites (E)
and a half-plate assorted a-arthropods (F)!

Ahem. Yes.

As Endre explained in the fifth post of the calendar, collecting, identifying, documenting and keeping specimens used for DNA barcoding is an important part of what we do here at the invertebrate collections. Our mission in the NORBOL consortium is to produce DNA-barcodes, particularly for marine fauna in Norwegian waters and to make these barcodes available with open access to records and metadata in the BOLD database. These samples contribute to the building of a validated reference library of the genetic barcodes of the species found in Norway. You can search for different taxonomic groups here to see if they have been barcoded from Norwegian territory: Search NorBOL

The process is fairly straight forward (at least on paper!): Animals are collected and identified. Those species relevant for barcoding are selected, and a specimen (=1 animal) is chosen to be barcoded. We take a small tissue sample from the specimen, and keep the rest of the animal as the barcode voucher; if the need should arise to check if it really is what we initially thought, it is crucial to be able to go back and check the animal again. The tissue samples are collected in wells on a plate like the one pictured above, and the information about the animals – where they were collected, who collected them, what species they are, who identified them and so on is uploaded to BOLD together with images of the animals.

Representatives for the tissue sample plates that we just shipped off. Thank you Steffen, Anna and Per for contributing the terrestrial animals and images! Photos: L. Martell, A. Seniczak, S. Roth, K. Kongshavn. Illustration: K. Kongshavn

On Monday we shipped a new batch of plates – as (attempted) illustrated in song above.

Included is material from several of the Norwegian Taxonomy Initiative projects (artsprosjekt) that are happening at the University Museum of Bergen. We are coordinating the efforts on marine life, but are of course also facilitating the NorBOL barcoding of other organisms that take place at the UMB.  There are animals from NorAmph (Norwegian Amphipoda), Hydrozoan pelagic diversity in Norway (HYPNO), Orbatid mites, and the insects found associated with nutrient rich marshes in Hedmark in this shipment.

We have also prepared several plates of Crustaceans collected and identified by the Norwegian marine mapping programme Mareano – one of the great contributors of material to the collections.

Now we wait for the lab to process them, and for the genetic sequences to be uploaded to BOLD – fingers crossed for many interesting results!

-Katrine

Door # 6: The key to the question

We often say that without knowing the species you examine, you really can’t know a lot about whatever it is you are examining. But how do you get from knowing for example “this is an amphipod” to knowing “this is Amphilochoides serratipes”?

Three different Amphilochidae from Iceland

Most researchers would usually stop at the “this is an amphipod”-stage, and many specialists  would call it a day at “this amphipod belongs to the familily Amphilochidae”. but then there are the one or two researchers who have gone on to specialise in this family (I think there are three of us in the world at the moment).

But finally – those days are over!
As a special gift on this Nicholaus-day when all German colleagues get a special gift from St Nicholaus (who is Father Christmas) we present to all of you – regardless of nationality or faith:

The interactive and illustrated key to the NorthEast Atlantic species of Amphilochidae

The key is a product of a collaboration between the NorAmph-project and the German-lead IceAGE project that examines benthic animals around Iceland, and the technical production and web-hosting of the key is from the Norwegian Taxonomy Initiative (Artsprosjekt) (who – we have to say – also have financed the NorAmph-project!) Hurrah for a great collaboration!

Figure 14 from Tandberg et al

You might still wonder what an Amphilochid amphipod is?

The family Amphilochidae are amphipods that are quite small (1-6mm in length) and quite stout. They are not extremely good swimmers, though much of that can be from their small size – and from their short appendages. They can be found all over the world, and are common at many depths in our cold waters. Even though they are small and easily overlooked, they sometimes occur in relatively large numbers, and can contribute significantly to both the biomass and diversity of a sample. They have been found on hydrothermal vents at the southern part of the Mid-Atlantic ridge, and some have been found as loose associates of other invertebrates.

Also – they are quite cute, don’t you think?  Good luck with the identification!

-Anne Helene

Literature:

Brix S et. al. 2018. Amphipod family distributions around Iceland. ZooKeys 731: 1-53. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.731.19854

Tandberg AHS, Vader W 2018. On a new species of Amphilochus from deep and cold Atlantic waters, with a note on the genus Amphilochopsis (Amphipoda, Gammaridea; Amphilochidae). ZooKeys 731: 103-134. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.731.19899

Door #5: DNA-barcoding with BOLD

Much of the activities in our invertebrate collections are dedicated to so-called DNA-barcoding. Our mission in the NORBOL consortium is to produce DNA-barcodes, particularly for marine fauna in Norwegian waters and to make these barcodes available with open access to records and metadata in Boldsystems.com. In the same manner we have also worked to produce DNA-barcodes for marine invertebrates on the West-African continental shelf in a project called we call MIWA.

These QR-codes will take you to maps with plots of specimens that have been barcoded in our projects (or simply click on them. The red dots on the maps are interactive):

QR-code to view our barcoding efforts in NORBOL

QR-code to view our barcoding in the MIWA project

The basic idea motivating these activities is very simple in principle. You collect specimens and identify them, preferably to species, take digital photographs, and upload information about collection site and other relevant data to a database (BOLDsystems.org).

The specimen page has a picture and other data about the organism that the DNA sequence (presumably) was produced from (click picture to enlarge).

You take a tissue sample to extract DNA from the specimen and use DNA-sequencing technology to target a special fragment of DNA to read the sequence of nucleotides. The expectation is that this sequence may be unique for the particular species you identified.  If indeed the expectation is fulfilled, you can use that sequence as an unambiguous identifier (“bar-code”) of that species.  You have produced a DNA-barcode!

A sequence page in BOLD contains the DNA-sequence (the barcode), the aminoacid translation of the sequence, and the trace-files from the DNA-sequencing machine.(Click picture to enlarge)

Your barcode should enter a DNA-barcode library so that, with an appropriate web-interface to a powerful computer with a search algorithm that compares similarities, you should be able to search with a second sequence from another individual of the same species and find that it is identical, or at least very similar to the one you produced for the DNA-barcode library.  The benefits are potentially many. One advantage is that you may be able to identify a species although all the morphological characteristics have been lost. For the biologist DNA-barcodes may help to identify juvenile stages of a species or even the stomach contents of a predator or scavenger. For conservation, customs, trade, and food authorities DNA barcodes are a powerful means to monitor resource exploitation and attempts to swindle with species identities or area of origin of  biological products.

A taxon window in BOLD fro the crab Atelecyclus undecimdentatus. (Click picture to enlarge)

DNA-barcoding certainly also contributes to the mapping of species distributions and to survey genetic characteristics of taxa. Perhaps initially somewhat unexpected, it also reveals many problems in taxonomy that call for resolution through closer studies. More about this will follow in other blog posts.

-Endre