Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A critique of biramous interpretations of the crustacean antennule

A critique of biramous interpretations of the crustacean antennule A CRITIQUE OF BIRAMOUS INTERPRETATIONS OF THE CRUSTACEAN ANTENNULE BY GEOFF A. BOXSHALL 1,6 ) , DAN L. DANIELOPOL 2,7 ) , DAVID J. HORNE 1,3,8 ) , ROBIN J. SMITH 4,9 ) and IONEL TABACARU 5,10 ) 1 ) Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom 2 ) Commission of the Stratigraphical & Palaeontological Research of Austria, Austrian Academy of Sciences, c/o Institute of Earth Sciences (Geology and Palaeontology), University of Graz, Heinrichstrasse 26, A-8010 Graz, Austria 3 ) Queen Mary University of London, Department of Geography, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom 4 ) Lake Biwa Museum, Oroshimo 1091, 525-0001 Kusatsu, Japan 5 ) “Emil Racovitza” Speleological Institute, Calea 13 Septembrie 13, Sect. 5, RO-050711 Bucharest, Roumania ABSTRACT For several groups of Crustacea (especially Remipedia, Malacostraca, and Ostracoda) it has been repeatedly suggested that the antennula (first antenna) is serially homologous with the post- antennular limbs, particularly with regard to the existence of an endopodite and an exopodite. This opinion is critically reviewed and, based on arguments derived from comparative morphology, developmental biology, and phylogeny of various groups belonging to the Arthropoda, ultimately refuted. Available evidence indicates http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Crustaceana Brill

A critique of biramous interpretations of the crustacean antennule

Download PDF
15 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/a-critique-of-biramous-interpretations-of-the-crustacean-antennule-rvSJ7grk0U

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
© 2010 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0011-216x
eISSN
1568-5403
DOI
10.1163/001121609X12530988607434
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

A CRITIQUE OF BIRAMOUS INTERPRETATIONS OF THE CRUSTACEAN ANTENNULE BY GEOFF A. BOXSHALL 1,6 ) , DAN L. DANIELOPOL 2,7 ) , DAVID J. HORNE 1,3,8 ) , ROBIN J. SMITH 4,9 ) and IONEL TABACARU 5,10 ) 1 ) Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, United Kingdom 2 ) Commission of the Stratigraphical & Palaeontological Research of Austria, Austrian Academy of Sciences, c/o Institute of Earth Sciences (Geology and Palaeontology), University of Graz, Heinrichstrasse 26, A-8010 Graz, Austria 3 ) Queen Mary University of London, Department of Geography, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom 4 ) Lake Biwa Museum, Oroshimo 1091, 525-0001 Kusatsu, Japan 5 ) “Emil Racovitza” Speleological Institute, Calea 13 Septembrie 13, Sect. 5, RO-050711 Bucharest, Roumania ABSTRACT For several groups of Crustacea (especially Remipedia, Malacostraca, and Ostracoda) it has been repeatedly suggested that the antennula (first antenna) is serially homologous with the post- antennular limbs, particularly with regard to the existence of an endopodite and an exopodite. This opinion is critically reviewed and, based on arguments derived from comparative morphology, developmental biology, and phylogeny of various groups belonging to the Arthropoda, ultimately refuted. Available evidence indicates

Journal

Crustaceana – Brill

Published: Jan 1, 2010

There are no references for this article.