Search

Statistical fisheries data are usually obtained during landings, through rapid fish classification and their categorization under the trade names given to species or groups of species. However, species classification is often difficult, particularly concerning elasmobranchs whose fins and heads have been removed, leading to labelling errors. The aim of this paper is to identify the ray species composition landed in south‐east Brazil, providing identification strategies to support a plan for more efficient labelling and management. Samples were obtained from artisanal fleet landings, between November 2012 and May 2014. For taxonomic identification of whole or processed animals (n = 279, belonging to 10 species), morphological, metric, and molecular techniques were employed. The common name used by fishermen was more related to the location where they lived than the fishing gear used. Morphometric analyses resulted in pectoral fin to length and weight conversion equations of whole individuals for each species, and 10 variables were found to be diagnostic of each genus. A genetic identification, based on sequencing of the mitochondrial genes cytochrome b and cytochrome oxidase I, was applied to verify morphological identification. A dichotomous key that allowed ray identification at the species level from pectoral fin morphology was developed. The approach was field tested and deemed adequate, leading to a robust monitoring strategy for estimating the biomass of specific landed rays.

It has been widely believed since the nineteenth century that modern science provides a serious challenge to religion, but less agreement as to the reason. One main complication is that whenever there has been broad consensus for a scientific theory that challenges traditional religious doctrines, one finds religious believers endorsing the theory or even formulating it. As a result, atheists who argue for the incompatibility of science and religion often go beyond the religious implications of individual scientific theories, arguing that the sciences taken together provide a comprehensive challenge to religious belief. Scientific theories, on this view, can be integrated to form a general vision of humans and our place in nature, one that excludes the existence of supernatural phenomena to which many religious traditions refer. The most common name given to this general vision is the scientific worldview. The purpose of my paper is to argue that the relation of a worldview to science is more complex and ambiguous than this position allows, drawing upon recent work in the history and philosophy of science. While there are other ways to complicate the picture, this paper will focus on differing views that scientists and philosophers have on the proper scope and limits of scientific inquiry. I will identify two different types of science – Baconian and Cartesian – that have different ambitions with respect to scientific theories, and thus different answers about the possibility of a scientific worldview. The paper will conclude by showing how their differing intuitions about scientific inquiry are evident in contemporary debates about reductionism, drawing upon the work of two physicists, Steven Weinberg and John Polkinghorne. History is more complex than this simple schema allows, of course, but these types provide a useful first approximation into the ambiguities of modern science.

Haemanthus albiflos is a flowering plant native to South Africa and Namibia. A member of the family Amaryllidaceae, it is an evergreen bulbous perennial with unusual flowers that give it the common name of paintbrush. Tolerance for…

Ogyris halmaturia (Tepper, 1890) was unwittingly founded on two different taxons, comprising the O. halmaturia and also O. otanes (C. & R. Felder, 1865). For the past 116 years, O. halmaturia has been treated primarily either as a geographical subspecies or as a synonym of Ogyris idmo (Hewitson, 1862). Recently in 2008, it was proposed to synonymise O. halmaturia with O. otanes, and Ogyris waterhouseri (Bethune-Baker, 1905) was elevated as the replacement name for O. halmaturia. In this paper the taxonomic status of O. halmaturia is reviewed and it is considered to be valid, while O. waterhouseri is considered to be a junior subjective synonym of O. halmaturia. Comparisons of adult and juvenile morphologies for allied species, and of DNA attributes indicate O. halmaturia is specifically distinct. The common name Eastern Large Bronze Azure is proposed for O. halmaturia.

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is a common name for cereal grasses of a genus of the grass family, cultivated for food since prehistoric times by the people of the temperate zones and now the most important grain crop of those regions. It has allelopathic potential if used as a cover crop for weed control in various cropping systems. Research results indicate that, among modern varieties, there is a variable resistance potential against weeds. Numerous allelochemicals have been identified in wheat, mainly belonging to the categories of phenolic acids, hydroxamic acids and short-chain fatty acids. Some researchers conceived that wheat allelopathy is genetically controlled, but systematic research on gene behaviors is lacking. The negative effects of wheat on other crops under different agricultural production systems have been reported. Research is needed to determine the genetic control of wheat allelopathy prior to the development of allelopathic wheat varieties. Further research is needed to conduct in vitro studies to isolate, identify and quantify allelochemicals from living wheat plants at different growth stages. Also, the relationship between heritages of modern varieties and the allelopathic characteristics of wheat during their evolution and selection by humans is still unclear. There is also a lack of research on the modern varieties as to whether the allelopathic potential can be genetically transferred to the next generation. In the future, more models and assessment systems must be developed to illuminate the essence of allelopathy and the genomes of wheat with allelopathic traits should be constructed to make available allelopathic bioinformation on wheat.

I would like to bring to the attention of colleagues that whenever publishing an article or sending notifications about animal disease outbreaks, it would be good to always mention the zoological name and/or the common name of the animal concerned, even if they are domestic. Today I was looking …

Most insects do not have common names, and this is a significant barrier to public interest in them, and to their study by non-specialists. This holds for even highly familiar insect groups such as ants. Here, I propose common names for all major native Australian ant genera and species-groups, as well as for many of the most abundant and distinctive species. Sixty-two genera, 142 species-groups and 50 species are given names. The naming system closely follows taxonomic structure; typically a genus is given a general common name, under which species-group and species names are nested.

A single, indirect exposure to a novel word provides information that could be used to make a fast mapping between the word and its referent, but it is not known how well this initial mapping specifies the function of the new word. The four studies reported here compare preschoolers' (N = 64) fast mapping of new proper and common names following an indirect exposure requiring inference with their learning of new names following ostension. In Study 1, 3-year-olds were shown an animate-inanimate pair of objects and asked to select, for example, Dax, a dax, or one. Children spontaneously selected an animate over an inanimate object as the referent for a novel proper name, but had no animacy preference in common name or baseline conditions. Next, the children were asked to perform actions on, for example, Dax or a dax, when presented with an array of three objects: the one they had just selected, another member of like kind, and a distracter. An indirectly learned proper name was treated as a marker for the originally selected object only, whereas a new common name was generalized to include the other category member. Study 2 showed that mappings made by inference were as robust as those made by ostension. Studies 3 and 4 demonstrated that even 2-year-olds can learn as much about the function of a new word from an indirect exposure as from ostension.

Two bovid frontlets with horns collected in 1929 and now housed in the collections of the University of Kansas Natural History Museum (KU) from Suoi Kiet, Binh Tuy Province, Vietnam, were previously identified as koupreys ( Bos sauveli ). We believe that they are specimens of the recently discovered bovid, Pseudonovibos spiralis Peter & Feiler, 1994. The KU specimens are represented by the posterior half of the frontal bones, the parietals, the horn cores and horns, and the anteriormost supraoccipitals, and are the most complete, best documented, and oldest specimens known of this poorly known species. We believe that both an adult male and an adult female are represented. Although the specimens are fragmentary, they still provide significant information that allows us to describe some aspects of P. spiralis , and they are especially critical to our understanding of the relationships of this animal to other bovids. We propose the English name spiral-horned ox, which reflects both its distinctively shaped horns and close relationship to other wild oxen. The Khmer name, Khting Vor , is also an appropriate common name. Previously overlooked references from the 1880s and 1950s document that the spiral-horned ox was believed to have magical powers over poisonous snakes.

Nine sixth-grade students were asked to identify plants seen in a set of slides and examined in two outdoor field trips. When the students did not know the correct common name for a plant (e.g., oak, dandelion), they relied on a variety of response strategies to deal with their lack of knowledge. Three patterns of response emerged when students lacked knowledge of names for plants. Student responses may represent avoidance strategies: avoidance of admission of ignorance, avoidance of being wrong, or avoidance of giving a name more abstract than the common name (e.g., tree, wildflower). These strategies did not result in names that would be acceptable to a science teacher, but the strategies had the effect of hiding the students' lack of knowledge or preventing a “wrong” answer. The study demonstrated that students prefer to identify plants at the generic level (e.g., calling a plant oak rather than tree), which suggests that elementary students should be introduced to the concept of genus (e.g., oak, lily) before being introduced to the more abstract levels of the botanical classification scheme (e.g., class monocot, dicot). © 1994 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

The value of Bam owl pellet analysis for monitoring elusive small mammal species is emphasized and the occurrence of Harvest mouse remains in Barn owl pellets is reviewed for the British Isles. It is suggested that, as a result of changes in agricultural practice, there have been significant changes in the habitat of both Harvest mouse and Barn owl such that neither common name is now strictly appropriate.

The purpose of this study was to examine the interests that supported the inclu sion of home economics education in early vocational legislation. Primary and secondary sources were used to record the emergence of support for vocational education in the early 1900s, to identify the interests that supported the inclusion of home economics in the federal legislation, and to identify the issues faced by the supporting interests. It was a major achievement that home economics was included in the Smith-Hughes Act three years before women were granted the right to vote. Many interests such as the National Society for the Promotion of Industrial Education, National Education Association, American Federation of La bor, National Association of Manufacturers, and American Home Economics As sociation all supported inclusion of home economics education. The Smith- Hughes Act mentioned home economics 18 times and included funding for the total program and for teacher training. The article concludes with implications for today's program, such as the importance of maintaining coalitions, retaining ser vice area identity, using a common name, and meeting society's needs.

Introduction The species names Brassica rapa and B. campestris were published simultaneously by Linnaeus (1753). It may be concluded from his descriptions that B. rapa relates to the turnip, an important vegetable and fodder crop in that era, and B. campestris to the weedy annual Brassica plants growing abundantly along roads and arable fields all over Europe. Metzger (1833), who made a very detailed study of the cultivated Brassica species in Western Europe, was the first author to combine both species. Later this view was supported by cytogenetic studies (U, 1935) and crossing experiments (Olsson, 1954). Since Metzger (1833) chose B. rapa as the name for the combined species, this choice must be followed (ICBN, 1983; Art. 57) as long as the sensu lato is accepted. Unfortunately, many authors (such as Ito, in Ito and Matsumura, 1900; Makino, in Iinuma and Makino, 1912; Sinskaia, 1928; Olsson, 1954; Prakash and Hinata, 1980) have not acted in accordance with the ICBN, Art. 57. Consequently, the name B. campestris is frequently used for the combined species. In order to help in the solving of this inconsistency in the use of B. rapa vs. B. campestris, and also as part of a taxonomic study of cultivated Brassica species (Toxopeus and Oost, 1985; Oost, 1986; Oost and Toxopeus, 1986), a lectotypification of both species is presented here. Neotypification of B. chinensis L. (common name: Pak Choi; a Chinese vegetable crop) is also included in this paper since this Linnaean species is nowadays generally treated as an infraspecific entity of B. rapa s.l.

According to Hogbin, the Wogeo believe that their culture heroes (nanarang), one of several classes of spirits, provide the ulimate supernatural sanction1 for their whole land tenure system. He divides the culture heroes into two species ? those still living on the island and those who left it in the past ? which have so little in common that he was surprised that a common name is used for them. He dismisses the existing culture heroes with a few words as having scarcely any relevance for the land tenure system and subdivides the departed culture heroes into four varieties. "The first two varieties between them give a sanction for the occupation of the island by the present population; the third gives the same type of sanction for the tenancy of the districts; and the fourth provides authority for the exercise of rights of residence and cultivation" (1939 40:151).

Sir William Jones (1746-1794), the great oriental scholar, linguist and prodigy of learning who founded the Asiatic Society of Bengal, had a considerable interest in Natural History, particularly Botany "that most lovely and fascinating branch of natural knowledge" as he described it. His life, work and letters have been more than adequately discussed by several recent authors (Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1948; Arberry, 1949; Mukerjee, 1968 and Cannon (1964), (1970)), and there are a number of earlier biographies. Several of these refer to Jones' botanical fervour and to the fact that he planned an exhaustive work on Indian botany"". Yet he lived long enough to publish only four papers on Indian plants, two of which appeared posthumously in the Society's journal, Asiatick Researches, for the year 1795. I find it surprising that these papers, especially the last, have not received more consideration by botanists, particularly students of the Indian flora, since considerable problems arise in trying to interpret the nomenclatural system used by Jones. The last and most important posthumous paper, "Botanical observations on select Indian plants", published in Asiatick Researches 4: 237-312 (i795) was Jones's most extensive study on the subject and the result of a decade or more of botanical research in and around Krishnagar. The "Observations" describe seventy-eight plants wich were all selected by the author for their "novelty, beauty, poetic fame, reputed use in medicine or supposed holiness" and which are mentioned in the sacred poems of the ancient Hindus. For their time, the botanical descriptions were very systematic and detailed, but the nomenclature used by Jones is extremely complicated, as will be explained below. In the "Observations" each of the seventy-eight plants is given its Sanskrit name, a uninomial, which is followed beneath by its common name ("name in the vulgar dialect"), "synonym" (? presumably also dialect names) and beneath these its Linnaean or other scientific equivalent where known, often with the epithet anglicised. Thus "IPOMOEA Quamoclit of Linnaeus" (p. 256) becomes CAMALATA, whereas SRINGATA (p. 253) is called "floating TRAPA"; CARAVIRA (p. 265) is said to refer to "NERIUM Oleander, and other species", and CHAMPACA (p. 287) refers to "Michelia of Linnaeus". Most of the plants are given very ample descriptions, the structure of the flowers being particularly well described considering Jones's extremely poor eye-sight. There is generally a short paragraph at the end of each description where the various virtues of the plant are extolled.

had been used in the boiler-house filter for over twenty months, that they might be easily due to sampling. The only important change was an increase in manganese from 0 to 0.28 per cent. This was expected after so long contact with a water containing manganese. It is remarkable that there had been so little accumulation. Microscopical examination of the used material showed it to be free from coating and to consist of partly rounded brownish grains. The raw material which is used in the zeolite process is called "Glauconite" by the geologists. The word "Glauconite" is derived from the Greek word "glaukos" meaning bluish gray or greenish gray and the raw glauconite fits this descriptive name very well. The common name for glauconite is "Greensand" and it is this name that the Government bulletins use. At the pits where it is dug it is usually called "marl" or more properly "potash marl." This material of many names is extensively distributed over the face of the earth but the largest and purest deposits known are in New Jersey. They here form a bed stretching some 100 miles from Sandy Hook on the north to Delaware Bay on the south and are some 10 miles in breadth. Continuing south they cross Delaware, Maryland and Virginia, but the deposits in these other states are not as

The genus Hydrophyllum L. (Hydrophyllaceae) comprises eight North American species of predominantly perennial mesophytic herbs. In no sector of its range does any of the species incorporate features of an aquatic or a succulent plant. Accordingly, the common name "water leaf," the literal translation of Hydrophyllumn, is seemingly inappropriate. Fernald (1950) speculates that the name derives from the fact that the original specimen (H. virginianltm) had very watery stems. While interpretation of the original meaning of the name Hydrophyllumn may be of itself only a nomenclatural curiosity, it is interwoven with the more substantive problem of typification of the two Linnaean species, H. virginianum and H. canadense. The name Hydrophyllon (from the Greek) first appears in the volume by Morin (1658). Later accounts lead us to assume that Morin's Hvdrophyllon was Hydrophylhlum virginianum L.; however, documentary specimens are not known to exist. The name Hydrophyllirm (using a standard romanization of the Greek name), without diagnostic description or references, first appears in Linnaeus' Systerna Natlurae (1735). The genus Hydrophyllum L. is monotypic. As published in Edition I of Species Plantarum (1753), Hydrophyllhim appears as a generic name and in the combination Hydrophyllirm lvirginianlnm. Accompanying the names are three references (Linnaeus, 1737; Royen, 1740; Gronovius, 1739) and a descriptive phrase (Morison, 1715). Also cited is the illustration (Morison, 1715) of a specimen of H. virginianilmn apparently cultivated in Oxford. Only in Gronovius (1739) is it possible to identify an actual specimen (Clayton 249) employed in describing the plant (Mackenzie, 1928). Typification is necessarily based on these cited works. Hydrophyllumn species are identified by a combination of floral and vegetative features, with leaf characters being of particular taxonomic value. Hydrophylliumn virginianum is recognized by its pinnatifid leaves, the principal divisions of which are ovate-lanceolate and acute. By contrast, H. canadense produces an overwintering rosette of oblong pinnatifid leaves characterized by ovate, obtuse divisions. In early spring, numerous palmately-shaped leaves with acuminate lobes are formed in this latter species. The description (1753) ofH. virginianurm indicates that, like most Linnaean species (Svenson, 1945), more than one currently recognized species is included. These species are H. virginianumn and the latter named (1759, p. 918) H. canadense. Lin