Quote:
Originally posted by StephenH
Luis and Andy,
I realize that they are in the same genus, but the differences in ontogeny makes me wonder whether they should be. For other shrimp genera which are commonly cultured (e.g. Penaeus, Litopenaeus, Palaemonetes, Macrobrachium) you are hard pressed to find vague differences in larval morphology and development among numerous species within a genus. Since larval development is such a primal characteristic, and since members of a genus are supposed to have common ancestors, it just does not make sense that wurdemanii and ambionensis would both be Lysmata. Has anyone ever done any DNA work on these species?
-steve hopkins
Oh, and I fixed the PM thing, Luis.
|
Steve, the larval morphology between wurdemanni and amb. are very similar. The only major differences are the addition of paddles on the 3rd and 4th pereiopods. I had look at splitting out the cleaners, they are a sub group in the genus, but the differences in morphology are not that different, in fact their are more raditcal differences in the larval development and morphology between Lysmata with an accessory branch and those that lack one; that might be where a split back to two genera would occur.
I have the genetic data tree for most of the genus, and it perfecly confirms the morphology and larval development information. I am still working up the morhpology of the two groups of Lysmata; before we can draw any conclusions we hvae to get a better handle on the taxonomy of the genus, its a complete disaster.
andy