This is the entity page showing aggregated messages and images for the named entity.
Mark Farrer Blairgowrie 12/5/12 4mtrs approx 15mm long
Geoffrey Van Damme Got some nice nudis there mate well done,seems more show up as the water gets cooler.
Mark Farrer Ive only been diving since September last year Geoff and am addicted to these Nudibranchs this will be my first winter and looking forward to spotting a few more
Geoffrey Van Damme Yer it's good fun ,feel like a little boy in a lollie shop at Blairgowrie.There numbers should increase over the next few months.
Mark Farrer Looking forward to it Geoffrey also a great area to work on improving the photography skills
Geoffrey Van Damme That's foreshore plenty of variety there not just nudis.
Mark Farrer Very true the deeper and harder you look the more life you find
Ashley Missen Nice
chromodoris alternataPatrik Good Meeting of the beauty and the beast. Goniobranchus cf. reticulatus, 10/10/2011, 19:02 hrs, Gold Coast Seaway, size about 40mm, depth 3 metres. On the bottom of the picture a bit to the right side there is another branch (might be a bubble shell or a pleurobranchus of some sort) size about 15mm. Can anyone help with ID, please? It will be branch No. 18 in my Gold Coast Seaway Collection that is getting shape at the moment.
Blogie Robillo Very interesting little fella!
Gary Cobb Goniobranchus cf. reticulatus
Patrik Good Thank you, guys. Well, this picture seems to be a bit of a taxonomic challenge. One critter is lacking an ID as of yet and the other one's name should obviously be revised. To me, it doesn't make sense to change the parent species name but not the derived sp. individuals'. I mean how can I call it Chromodoris sp. when it is so similar (and supposedly closely related) to Goniobranchus tinctorius or Goniobranchus reticulatus. Are there any grave taxonomic reasons speaking against me calling it Goniobranchus sp. Sizes by the way are more like 50mm and 25mm (or 35mm - if what we can barely see is the critter's tail).
Bernard Picton Patrik, I think it's fairly clear that the name Chromodoris will now be used only for the longitudinally blue/black striped species, so I'd use Goniobranchus for others if appropriate. There is so much mimicry, though, that it will be a while before the generic names for all the species are certain.
Patrik Good Interesting, Bernard Picton, thank you. (My thoughts were based on a post with the suggestion that I should call the critter Chromodoris sp. by the way). So, you reckon, the species
Chromodoris splendida that is endemic to Australia should or will be Goniobranchus splendidus? We still have to wait for its reclassification, don't we?
Gary Cobb I dont think so!
Bernard Picton Johnson & Gosliner say, for Goniobranchus "This clade includes all of the Indo-Pacific species of Chromodoris that are not part of the black-lined, planar egg mass clade, except
Chromodoris alternata and Chromodoris ambiguus." They clearly intend us to call all these species Goniobranchus, though of course when they do get DNA sequenced the situation may get more complicated. The trouble with generic names is that they are a hypothesis (about how things are related), so new evidence can result in name changes.
Gary Cobb Yes it is quite confusing Bernard. Unfinished business.
Gary Cobb Is the speculation by the authors proven? I don't think so.
Bernard Picton The trouble with the Linnaean system of naming species is that it's always been unfinished business. With DNA sequence data we are getting closer to a true understanding of relationships, but that means changing the names every so often. Best to remember the specific part, but not get too hung up on the Generic part. Terry Gosliner put almost all the Flabellinidae into a single genus many years back, but there will certainly be several once they get sequenced. Then we'll have to dig Coryphella out again.
Erwin Koehler Dayrat & Gosliner, 2005 suggested using the family name,
so this one would be Chromodorididae sp.
Erwin Koehler I like to come back to the small one: how does
Umbraculum umbraculum look like in your region?
Patrik Good Thanks Erwin Koehler, interesting thoughts. The small critter seems to have a hat like
Umbraculum umbraculum. But the distinctive white dots on the mantle, the skin pattern and size remind me more of Pleurobranchaea maculata. What are your thoughts on calling it Pleurobranchaea cf. maculata? Often we find branchs that are crawling out or are stuck halfway in the substrate, so the 'hat' might be just that. But am happy about any suggestions.
Patrik Good Erwin, was Dayrat & Gosliner, 2005 widely accepted in the scientific community and adopted by 'amateur' branchers? I reckon this practice has pros and cons. Not sure yet, wether I am going to implement that or how.
Bernard Picton In relation to this change of names for many Chromodorididae, I'm not sure if you are all aware of the WORMS database.
It is often still flawed, but always worth checking if you want to try and track down original descriptions of species. I see that Phillippe Bouchet of the MNHN in Paris has changed the generic names for most of the Chromodorididae in line with Johnson and Gosliner. Philippe is a top authority, Gosliner too. So If they are both adopting it we all should do as well.
http://www.marinespecies.org
Patrik Good Erwin Koehler, I uploaded a picture of
Umbraculum umbraculum. Bernard Picton, I used to check out WoRMS. The database seemed not to be maintained at all any more and I didn't get a reply to an email I wrote a few month back. WoRMS didn't necessarily leave the impression of being the authority that the world of taxonomy is desperately in need of. Anyhow, will check it out again and thanks for the suggestion.
Erwin Koehler Yes, I think the small one looks like Pleurobranchaea maculata (Quoy & Gaimard, 1832)
