Showing posts with label fromia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fromia. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

Gorgeous Goniasterid Starfish! & some Cousteau Connection??

 Bonjour from Paris! This week: a new post looking at some cool specimens I'm looking at while researching at the world famous Museum national d'Historie Naturelle!   Home of Lamark and many other natural history legends!

Today...two neat specimens with some interesting commentary and history, respectively...

First, a rarely encountered species & some taxonomic commentary... 

Paraferdina plakos! A new species I've described only recently! It LOOKS like Fromia monilis, but isn't....  (as I said here awhile back..)
They Key is in the arrangement of spines (or the lack thereof) on the underside of the tube foot groove...

which is unfortunate, as you often don't see people with pictures of these in the wild...
This looks like Paraferdina 

Here's a "proper" Fromia monilis.. similar but with smaller marginal plates and more slender arms. 

I will be going back to Flickr, where I will be beating my head into a hole in the wall, trying to figure all these different things out now... 

A starfish from Cousteau?? 
Here's some cool shots of the Atlantic "cookie" star Peltaster placenta, which I 'm showing you, to give you an intro to ANOTHER specimen of this species below... These generally live at SCUBA depth and much deeper...
A pic of this species alive...Note how the disk is much more swollen
I showed you the pic above, so I could share a cool specimen of this species I found... 
 WOW! Look at the name of the collector! Could this be THE Calypso of Jacques Cousteau fame??? 

The MNHN is of course, the "national repository" (i.e., where they put all their stuff) of France, in the same way that the Smithsonian is the national repository of the United States. So, yeah, in theory anything they collect would be here. 
The tag indicates "1964 (May), Greece".  Cousteau was in the nearby Red Sea in 1964 shooting his epic "Le Monde Sans Soleil" aka The World without Sun in 1964!! Could this have been collected before or perhaps as an excursion by the Calypso away from Red Sea??
What other interesting specimens will present themselves?? 

BONUS: And if you like the food porn? Here's some fresh, hand made donuts from a Farmer's Market.. Mmmmm....

Wednesday, July 9, 2014

The Colorful Challenge of Identifying Fromia monilis, an Indo-Pacific species complex!

From Wikipedia! 
Identifying animals is tricky business.

The other day, I was helping some folks out with an identification of a starfish they had photographed diving, but I stopped short of giving them the full species. "Why?" they asked. "Isn't this just the the XXX?" (they quoted the most common and easily identified species).

"Well.  Its complicated."

Hard to explain these things in a a few lines on Facebook or on Twitter so I thought I would take an example of how complicated the whole taxonomy and identification process is, using a widely photographed example, a starfish called Fromia monilis.

F. monilis occurs widely throughout the Indo-Pacific. It goes by many common names, Necklace star, Tiled star, Candycane star, Peppermint star, etc.  Scientists don't use those names because they're so inconsistently used and often because its a contrived name in a field guide, created as a convenience for readers.

This species is often seen in the wild and is a common species in the aquarium trade. You can see it in shallow-reefs from Okinawa to New Caledonia, in the Philippines, Indonesia, etc. and over to the edge of the Indian Ocean.

Bottom line: This species is distributed over a VAST area. Because it does, the range of variation (discussed below) is likely to be greater.

F. monilis is a bright red and white species with a distinctive color pattern. The plates on its body surface (i.e., the many circles and shapes you see on the body) are also pretty diagnostic. Most of these starfish are about 2-3 inches (about 5-6 cm) in diameter. So far so good.

Here is what I would say is the most commonly encountered and "typical" form of this species.
From Wikipedia. Here
But bear in mind, that often times, as biologists (such as myself) who specialize in describing and identifying these species, what we often end up working with is a specimen like this...
The dry specimen isn't as impressive as the real, living color one of course, but specimens like this are extremely useful for understanding the species definitions, evolution and ultimately, the taxonomy of these animals.

Some of these specimens have been in museums for, literally hundreds of years and remain essential to our understanding of how these species are defined.

Many of these species get distinguished by fine character differences on these specimens. Some might vary by plate pattern arrangements, or by the number of spines present on the underside, or the particular shape of granules present on the surface.  Its often difficult to synch up these characteristics (i.e. the species definitions) with qualities of the animal when it was alive.

BUT, because of dry specimens above, we can usually look at a specimen like this crazy thing below and tell that it is STILL Fromia monilis.
                 
Why?

Specimens in museums, accumulate over time and can be very abundant, giving us an idea of the natural VARIATION of a species. Size. Body forms. Aberrant shapes. etc.

So, you know how, some people have blond vs. brown hair? Or how some people can roll their tongue or perhaps more exceptionally,some folks have an extra toe or finger? Well, this kind of variation is present in all species and can make understanding classification and understanding evolutionary relationships...interesting.

For a species that we have virtually no understanding of, any character variation (without seeing its presence in the population) might be used to distinguish a separate species. Without an understanding of this kind of variation (or having population genetics data of course), someone who has never seen a human being before could separate me from Morgan Freeman as a different species. 

In the case of the above specimen of Fromia monilis, having seen MANY other specimens of this species, and understanding (we think?) the variation at play,  we know that most known individuals have 5 arms that don't bifurcate. The bifurcation is perhaps due to an attack or some damage during the animal's life time. The extra rays are just an unusual trait, perhaps equivalent to a person with an extra finger. 

Color in the individual above is also consistent. Red disk with red armtips. White in between. Okay. What could be more unusual than the 7 rayed crazy thing above??

Enter the 21st Century (and late 20th Century) and the era of Flickr and digital cameras ALL OVER THE WORLD!
So remember how the "typical" Fromia monilis had that particular color pattern??

What happens when you don't have the red color on the armtips?? Could this be a juvenile? (no size indicator on this pic unfortunately)?  This specimen is from Indonesia. Could these vary by region?
The one above (w/the red disk) is from Borneo.

Is this the same species? But simply with a different color pattern?? Or a different species??  Some species of starfish are thought to vary by color based on their food, does this one as well??  How important is the color as a feature in identification?

The same questions here. Color patterns vary even more drastically. No red on the disk, but there IS red on the armtips! The patterns are a little different?  Is this variation? Size? Or a new species? This one is from Lembeh Strait (Indonesia). 

This one from Papua New Guinea. Same color pattern as above. 
Here is a Fromia sp from Thailand. Color and plate patterns are different. Is this a new species?? Or the same species (F. monilis) showing the starfish equivalent to having lactose intolerance? Or blond hair?

Here is another closely related species, Fromia nodosa which occurs primarily in the Indian Ocean. This species is primarily distinguished based on the larger and more prominent round plates running down the radius of each arm. But it looks familiar, doesn't it??

This individual is from the Maldives (tropical Southern Indian Ocean). It shows the same pattern as F.monilis above and the distinguishing characteristic is kind of variable itself. In other words, it doesn't always hold up.  Does that mean it should just be consolidated into F. monilis??

Here's another indivdiual of Fromia nodosa, also from the Maldives. On both of these individuals, we also see the marginal plates as larger and uneven in one but NOT the other?? 
This one is from Thailand... Mayyybe?  its F. nodosa?? And what's going on with the dark armtips???
This strange thing is from the Philippines. It adheres to the definition of Fromia nodosa (big radial plates, etc.) but its a different color (or at least I assume this is not some photo artefact)!!
And then to make it even MORE confusing.. we have these things from the Red Sea and adjacent areas...

I initially thought this was Fromia monilis but in fact, they might actually be a separate, already established , but this species might actually be a species in a poorly known genus called Paraferdina. Further examination of specimens and research is needed to figure out which one is which... This specimen is from the Red Sea.

This one is from Egypt. The color pattern is familiar but the plate patterns on the arms?? Very different and yet, similar... F. nodosa? F. monilis? Paraferdina???


..and so on...

This is mainly to demonstrate the limits of how the colors and patterns get complicated quite quickly.

And yes, at some point, someone may work this out.. Lots of diving and subsequent DNA lab time. Plus looking over photos and museum visits! Woo!

But this also explains why scientists, such as myself,  are often more reluctant to give you a full species name for a picture when its sent for identification without a specimen. Are these one species? MANY species? Which ones correspond to pre-existing species?

Falling back on the one, most common name can often disguise the truly rich diversity in these wide-ranging, closely related species which are only now, just becoming understood. I argued that this was also the case with the "Bobbit worm" (Eunice aphroditois)

So, yes. Knowing more doesn't necessarily give you all the answers, but it does give you some pretty exciting questions! 

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Helping out our friends at National Geographic with some additional information...

(photo by Paul Nicklen, National Geographic)

GREETINGS!! and Happy Pre-Emptive End of the Year to all of you!

I have been sitting back after a good year of research and echinoblogging-and honestly, I was going to give you guys some videos and "best of" stuff for this holiday season, but I found something that I thought all of you might appreciate instead!

So, the good people over at National Geographic have a truly beautiful website with stunning images deserving of such a widely read and respected magazine.

I found that they had this delightful gallery of "sea stars" (click here).

Alas, there were some..inaccuracies and points that I thought a person with my particular eye might be able to contribute to their photo gallery (which regrettably lacks a comments section).

And so, what I present to you herein is a collection of THEIR pictures but with my added commentary and/or factoids/links that help to embellish their very fine figures!!

So, before I begin-I do recognize that a lot of these are just various starfish factoids applied liberally to give each picture a story...but y'know what? I can do these animals a bit more justice and so I will...

1. Pycnopodia helianthoides-the sunflower star (Asteriidae)
(photo by Paul Nicklen, National Geographic)

For the most part, the narrative for this image was correct, but I had to take some umbrage with the statement "only the five rayed species really resemble stars-others may boast as many as 40 appendages".

BUT, While most five rayed species are "stellate", not everything with five rays "resemble stars". Take for example:
This blog post featuring fossil Sphaeraster and LIVING Podosphaeraster (click).

This blog featuring the deep-sea asteroid-Tremaster mirabilis (click)

The tropical reef "cushion star" Culcita novaeguinae (click)

..and of course the holiday favorite-the cookie shaped Goniasteridae! (click)

and by the way...multi-rayed individuals can get up to 50 arms! (we'll see that below).

2. Fromia indica (Goniasteridae)
(photo by Tim Laman, National Geographic)
The original accompanying text calls this surface of this species "the backside".

hmm.

The bottom-also called- the oral surface- is where the mouth is located.
As a consequence, the opposite or upper side is called the aboral surface. In general, sea stars lack a "back" since there's no backbone.

Calling a starfish abactinal surface a "backside" is kind of like saying humans don't have enough ambulacral ossicles. It really doesn't make any sense.

The narrative also mentions this:
This star boasts a full complement of five arms but it may not always keep them. When grabbed by a predator, the sea star can simply lose a limb and later grow a replacement. In fact, some species can grow a new body from just a single severed limb and a small part of their central disk.
Parts of this are true for Fromia, which have a basic ability to regenerate arms.

But I'm not sure that cutting or damaging a starfish like Fromia to the extent that you have only an arm fragment+disk would result into a new animal.

Its true, that some species such as Linckia multifora or Asterias spp. can regrow a body from a chunk of the disk+arm. But from what I've seen, cutting something like this Fromia into two pieces-would most likely result in getting two halves of a dead Fromia!

3. OPHIUROIDS (aka Basket/Serpent/Brittle Stars) ARE NOT SEA STARS/STARFISH!!!

The following hits at two pictures described as "sea stars" in the National Geographic gallery...

So, as a person who studies and classifies animals for a living, I CAN assure you, this sort of thing is important! Asteroids and ophiuroids are two ENTIRELY separate animals that have been evolutionarily separated from one another LONGER than humans have EXISTED. So, please give them some respect!

What's the difference between asteroids (starfish or sea stars) Versus ophiuroids (basket stars and brittle stars)???

Take this post I wrote about structural differences for starters...

3a. Gorgonocephalus! okay? Now, THIS (original post here) ? is a member of the Class Ophiuroidea. It is a "basket star", a member of a whole family within the Ophiuroidea. Specifically, the genus Gorgonocephalus...
(photo by Emory Kristof, National Geographic)
AND by the way...do ya' wanna know more about these weird basket star things??
HERE is a post I wrote about them!

3b. Tiny Brittle Star & some stuff on Brittle Stars! Now, the pic on this tiny thing isn't enough to clearly tell even which family it is (looks like either a member of the Ophiothricidae or the Amphiuridae though..). Note that this tiny little brittle star? is itself sitting on a much larger starfish called Euretaster (not sure which species but you can see one example here in all of its glory!)
The narrative on this pic reads

Some 2,000 sea star species live throughout the world’s oceans. Some weigh as much as 11 pounds (5 kilograms) and stretch more than 2 feet (65 centimeters) across, but others are only half an inch (1 centimeter) in diameter. These animals reproduce prolifically, and some sea stars can release millions of eggs into the water for fertilization at the same time.
Now, if this were actually an asteroid (i.e. a sea star or starfish) this would be true. But the pic seems focused on the little tiny brittle star (ophiuroid).

Again- ophiuroids (including brittle stars and basket stars) is a member of a separate CLASS. A completely DIFFERENT group of animals that not only is VERY structurally different (again see here).. But one that has been evolutionarily separated from sea stars since the Paleozoic (for at LEAST 250 million years ago if not older). Ophiuroids are quite diverse on their own..and are probably the MOST numerous of all the living echinoderms! Asteroids number about 1800 maybe 1900 species. The number of ophiuroid species STARTS at about 2000 with MORE being discovered regularly!

Bottom line: Asteroids and Ophiuroids are NOT THE SAME THING. And should not be "lumped together" under the same common name.

Please make a note of it!

4. Pisaster giganteus (Asteriidae).What's going on Here? Probably SEX!
(photo by David Doubilet, National Geographic)

I think this is an unobserved reproductive stance! Go HERE to read about other species and their sexy starfish love positions!!

I honestly, don't know if this position has been recorded from Pisaster giganteus before! See what you miss if you don't know what you're looking at???

5. Labidiaster annulatus (Heliasteridae)

This is actually a pretty cool and novel image! I don't know that ANYONE has ever observed Labidiaster feeding on a BIRD before!

Ha! take that vertebrates!
Personally, I'm not sure calling these "sun stars" as a common name is either accurate or particularly original. Especially given that at least 3 other species in different families have been called "sun stars".

Labidiaster in the Antarctic are VERY specialized benthopelagic predators! Go here to read the full account!

6. Tosia neossia (Goniasteridae)
(photo by Jason Edwards, National Geographic)
Based on the colors and some of the other characters, this looked more to me like the brooding than the non-brooding species...

There is a GREAT story about cryptic species surrounding these Australian "biscuit stars"-Tosia australis and a new species Tosia neossia!! Go HERE to see it!


7. Oreaster reticulatus (Oreasteridae)
(photo by Tim Laman, National Geographic)

The narrative that goes along with this picture is correct in many general ways-asteroids are important in marine ecosystems, and they note "....including keeping populatinos of shellfish in check.."

Now, they may have simply been speaking in generalities again-but just to be clear-this species-Oreaster reticulatus? Does not feed on shellfish!

The known diet for most oreasterids-including Protoreaster nodosus (the so-called chocolate chip star known to the pet and tourist trade) and Oreaster reticulatus suggests that they feed on encrusting animals, such as sponges in addition to microalgal film and fine organic particles from the surrounding sediment and nearby bottoms.

Don't believe me? Go here and see this. This. And this.

8. Acanthaster planci (Acanthasteridae)
(photo by Brian J. Skerry, National Geographic)

The original story with this pic had a line that read "Scientists aren't sure exactly what causes such outbreaks, or what their ultimate impacts may be on coral reef health".

Hm. I think I can do a little better than that...

New research suggests that the plague-level outbreaks of this species are tied to a surge in nutrients. Read a blog about this here.

To be sure, there are always uncertainties around "big ideas" that explain natural phenomena such as huge population outbreaks..so who knows? Perhaps new explanations will present themselves in the years to come...

Monday, May 18, 2009

Because DSN Sex Week is Awesome! Echinoderm Sex Videos!!

In honor of Deep-Sea News' Sex Week theme...Its time for Echinoderm Sex Videos!!!

Please play..."shake, shake, shake" your booty to the following....

Fromia elegans emitting gametes!


Archaster engaged in Pseudocopulation!!



Sea Cucumber in provacative reproductive posture (at 0:14 into the video)


Shake, shake, shake...shake your booty! (Play this for inspiration)