Michael HenkeRisbecia pulchella
Nikon D300, ISO200, 105mm, f/29, 1/200
Did anybody know, what the extra "nose" at the middle front of the nudi is?
Sylvie Omnès it's not the first time I see pics of nudi's "malformation"; some have extra gills or rhinophores; there was something about that on the Sea Slug website, but I haven't been able to find it ...
Sylvie Omnès found ! http://www.seaslugforum.net/find/19582 http://www.seaslugforum.net/showall/abnormal
Sylvie Omnès Michael's Id is the right one : Risbecia Pulchella : you can see on the 2d link that abnormalities are observed on many species of nudis ...
Sylvie Omnès I forgot : beautiful pic !
Michael Henke @Sylvie Omnès - thanks for the tip of the Sea Slug website
It is a mantle abnormality.
http://www.seaslugforum.net/find/1797
http://www.seaslugforum.net/find/1506
Best regards,
Michael
Amir Abramovich "Take a look at my girlfriend she's the only one I got (ba ba da da ) "
Canon S110 +5 diopter.
ISO 8 f8 1/125
Visit my UWP page:
www.facebook.com/amirunderwaterphotographypage.
Tony Strazzari Not much of a girlfriend...
Ron SilverRisbecia pulchella
Ron Silver Actually, in the nudi world, there are no girlfriends or boy friends as the slugs are hermaphroditic. When they mate, both partners end up pregnant and lay an egg ring. :-D
Amir Abramovich I know but ... Remember the next line ..
Michael HenkeRisbecia pulchella
Nikon D300, ISO200, 105mm, f/29, 1/200
Did anybody know, what the extra "nose" at the middle front of the nudi is?
Sylvie Omnès it's not the first time I see pics of nudi's "malformation"; some have extra gills or rhinophores; there was something about that on the Sea Slug website, but I haven't been able to find it ...
Sylvie Omnès found ! http://www.seaslugforum.net/find/19582 http://www.seaslugforum.net/showall/abnormal
Sylvie Omnès Michael's Id is the right one : Risbecia Pulchella : you can see on the 2d link that abnormalities are observed on many species of nudis ...
Sylvie Omnès I forgot : beautiful pic !
Michael Henke @Sylvie Omnès - thanks for the tip of the Sea Slug website
It is a mantle abnormality.
http://www.seaslugforum.net/find/1797
http://www.seaslugforum.net/find/1506
Best regards,
Michael
Dani BarchanaChromodoris annulata _ Red Sea, Israel
Canon PowerShot G12
Flash Used Sea&SEA YS-01
Focal Length 13.8 mm
Exposure Time 1/500 sec
Aperture f/8
ISO Equivalent 80
Ron Silver Dani, could these nudis be Risbecia pulchella? C. annulata is very similar, but has large purple circles on the dorsal surface.
Dani Barchana Ron Silver I think you are right, I stand corrected, Thanks.
Ron Silver No problem. Some would say I'm a bit anal about IDs. Thanx for posting your photos. :-D
Dani Barchana I appreciate the correct ID, I wouldn't like to post mistakes,as UI have an album of Nudis, I also corrected it there ( http://www.pbase.com/dani_barchana/sea_slugs ) thank you (Y)
Ron Silver Thanx again. I have been quite surprised at the reactions from some when I have suggested an alternate ID. :-(
Dani Barchana Well, it is the Nudis Ego, not mine :-P :-D
Dani Barchana BTW, Ron Silver , if you find mistakes in the Pbase Album above, fill free to comment
Ron Silver I quickly looked and see you do have some great photos of C. annulata from the Med and just one shot of R. pulchella from the Red Sea. Nice compilation of nudis.
Dani Barchana Thanks, The Annulatas are invaders from the red sea to the Mediterranean sea, it is called Lessepsian migration (after Ferdinand de Lesseps the Suez canal engineer) - But I guess you know that.....
Ron Silver Invasive Biology 401 as I recall, but it was a l-o-n-g time ago! Thanx.
Orietta RivoltaRisbecia pulchella ???
Kilifi,Kenya
April 2012
Jeff Rosenfeld I'm thinking it's Hypselodoris bollandi Gosliner & Johnson, 1999. See http://www.nudipixel.net/photo/00011986/
Ashley Missen Looks like one
Orietta Rivolta Thanks Jeff
Ashley Missen Still Reckon it Risbecia pulchella as the Risbecia has more gill branches like this one the Hypselodoris tend to have less and are more stuck out from the body at the base of the gills -- How big was it
Gary Cobb Definitely Risbecia pulchella (Ruppell & Leuckart, 1828)
Orietta Rivolta Thanks for the explanation __B- )
Ashley Missen Your welcome
Gary Cobb Hey Ash don't get too carried away with morphology...in the new paper this species is moved to Hypselodoris!! In our opinion the paper is incomplete and there are a lot of errors. This being the case, I will not change anything until all the species are valid. The new Nudibranch ID Australia / New Zealand App is uploaded to iTunes and is awaiting review!
Jeff Rosenfeld Gary, I'm curious as to what in their paper you consider to be in error.
Blogie Robillo Me too
Gary Cobb Hi guys I'm glad you asked!
In my opinion and from what I have heard from other acedmics is that when the paper was 'completed' a more thorough proof reading should have been done! Please don't get me wrong, this work is very important and a first. It is helping to right a lot of wrongs in our nudibranch taxonomy. However with a paper of this magnitude, all the work should have been completed before submitting.
Firstly, there are a few species with the wrong author and date in Table 2. And I can't understand why the authors of this paper would 'hypothesize' all the species they did, they are to be changed or they aren't. Guessing is not a good enough reason to make changes.
Another issue I have is the use of single 'quotes' are they valid changes or not? And if not why include them in this paper?
There have been changes to the species side of the names as well, due to gender. I was under the impression that this could not be done. Once a name has been given to a new species it must stay, or so I thought!
Keep in mind that this paper presents alot of work to authors of Apps, books and websites. If half the genus changes are not valid and real why have them.
As for me, I have 3 Nudibranch ID Apps that will need to be revised and a website as well. Before I do this huge amount of work I want to be convinced these changes are real! I will wait until all the work is verified, corrected and accepted by all the taxonomy world. After all we do need this however it has to be right.
Gary Cobb Comments are most welcome to this discussion. Thanks all!
Ashley Missen I Agree Gary - start to have a read today - I think it raised more questions for me
Orietta Rivolta Well done guys,keep it up,I learn a lot from your discussion! Thanks
Orietta RivoltaRisbecia pulchella ???
Kilifi,Kenya
April 2012
Jeff Rosenfeld I'm thinking it's Hypselodoris bollandi Gosliner & Johnson, 1999. See http://www.nudipixel.net/photo/00011986/
Ashley Missen Looks like one
Orietta Rivolta Thanks Jeff
Ashley Missen Still Reckon it Risbecia pulchella as the Risbecia has more gill branches like this one the Hypselodoris tend to have less and are more stuck out from the body at the base of the gills -- How big was it
Gary Cobb Definitely Risbecia pulchella (Ruppell & Leuckart, 1828)
Orietta Rivolta Thanks for the explanation __B- )
Ashley Missen Your welcome
Gary Cobb Hey Ash don't get too carried away with morphology...in the new paper this species is moved to Hypselodoris!! In our opinion the paper is incomplete and there are a lot of errors. This being the case, I will not change anything until all the species are valid. The new Nudibranch ID Australia / New Zealand App is uploaded to iTunes and is awaiting review!
Jeff Rosenfeld Gary, I'm curious as to what in their paper you consider to be in error.
Blogie Robillo Me too
Gary Cobb Hi guys I'm glad you asked!
In my opinion and from what I have heard from other acedmics is that when the paper was 'completed' a more thorough proof reading should have been done! Please don't get me wrong, this work is very important and a first. It is helping to right a lot of wrongs in our nudibranch taxonomy. However with a paper of this magnitude, all the work should have been completed before submitting.
Firstly, there are a few species with the wrong author and date in Table 2. And I can't understand why the authors of this paper would 'hypothesize' all the species they did, they are to be changed or they aren't. Guessing is not a good enough reason to make changes.
Another issue I have is the use of single 'quotes' are they valid changes or not? And if not why include them in this paper?
There have been changes to the species side of the names as well, due to gender. I was under the impression that this could not be done. Once a name has been given to a new species it must stay, or so I thought!
Keep in mind that this paper presents alot of work to authors of Apps, books and websites. If half the genus changes are not valid and real why have them.
As for me, I have 3 Nudibranch ID Apps that will need to be revised and a website as well. Before I do this huge amount of work I want to be convinced these changes are real! I will wait until all the work is verified, corrected and accepted by all the taxonomy world. After all we do need this however it has to be right.
Gary Cobb Comments are most welcome to this discussion. Thanks all!
Ashley Missen I Agree Gary - start to have a read today - I think it raised more questions for me
Orietta Rivolta Well done guys,keep it up,I learn a lot from your discussion! Thanks