Search

Background: Comprehensive geriatric care (CGC) for older adults during hospitalization for hip fracture can improve mobility, but it is unclear whether CGC delivered after a return to community living improves mobility compared with usual post-discharge care. Objective: To determine if an outpatient clinic-based CGC regime in the first year after hip fracture improved mobility performance at 12 months. Methods: A two-arm, 1:1 parallel group, pragmatic, single-blind, single-center, randomized controlled trial at 3 hospitals in Vancouver, BC, Canada. Participants were community-dwelling adults, aged ≥65 years, with a hip fracture in the previous 3–12 months, who had no dementia and walked ≥10 m before the fracture occurred. Target enrollment was 130 participants. Clinic-based CGC was delivered by a geriatrician, physiotherapist, and occupational therapist. Primary outcome was the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB; 0–12) at 12 months. Results: We randomized 53/313 eligible participants with a mean (SD) age of 79.7 (7.9) years to intervention (n = 26) and usual care (UC, n = 27), and 49/53 (92%) completed the study. Mean 12-month (SD) SPPB scores in the intervention and UC groups were 9.08 (3.03) and 8.24 (2.44). The between-group difference was 0.9 (95% CI –0.3 to 2.0, p = 0.13). Adverse events were similar in the 2 groups. Conclusion: The small sample size of less than half our recruitment target precludes definitive conclusions about the effect of our intervention. However, our results are consistent with similar studies on this population and intervention.

OBJECTIVES To determine whether knowledge-based deficiencies are adequately addressed at the AO North America Basic Principles of Fracture Management course. DESIGN Pretest, posttest. SETTING Eighteen national trauma courses. PARTICIPANTS Two thousand one hundred forty-nine learners. INTERVENTION Pre- and postcourse 20-item tests of basic fracture knowledge, including 14 trauma topics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Deficiencies were defined as

Background:This study performed a psychometric analysis assessing and comparing the responsiveness of the relevant components of a generic (Short Form–36 [SF36]), a musculoskeletal-specific (Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment [SMFA]), and a foot and ankle–specific (Foot and Ankle Outcome Score [FAOS]) outcome score when evaluating surgically treated tibial plafond fractures over time.Methods:Fifty-one patients were followed for 12 months after their tibial plafond fracture. Responsiveness, or the ability to detect clinical change in a disease, was evaluated through the standardized response mean (SRM), the proportion meeting a minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and floor and ceiling effects.Results:The SRM of the SF36–Physical Component Summary (PCS) was significantly greater than the SMFA–dysfunction index (DI) ( P < .01) and FAOS–Activities of Daily Living (ADL) ( P = .01) between baseline and 6 months, whereas the SRMs of only SF36-PCS and FAOS-ADL differed ( P = .01) between 6 and 12 months. The proportion of patients achieving an MCID for SF36-PCS was higher than FAOS-ADL ( P = .03) between baseline and 6 months and higher than SMFA-DI ( P = .04) between 6 and 12 months. The FAOS-ADL showed substantial ceiling effects at baseline (88.2%) but much less at 6 months (5.9%) and 12 months (9.8%). Smaller ceiling effects were observed for the SMFA-DI (11.8%) at baseline, whereas none were observed for the SF36-PCS.Conclusions:This study found that the SF36-PCS had greater responsiveness in assessing tibial plafond fractures compared to the SMFA-DI and FAOS-ADL, particularly in the first 6 months after surgery. In addition, limitations were revealed in the SMFA-DI and FAOS-ADL. This study illustrates the necessary diligence required for selection of outcome measures, as musculoskeletal and anatomy specific scores are not necessarily superior.Level of Evidence:Level II, prospective cohort study.

To the Editor: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a lesser-known complication of hip fracture that may come about owing to decreased kidney perfusion and heightened inflammation from trauma, pain, bleeding, and fasting. Approximately 15%-20% of patients undergoing surgery for a hip fracture develop AKI, with 0.5%-1.8% receiving dialysis. [...]

International audience; Biological invasions are one of the main global threats to biodiversity in terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems worldwide, requiring effective inventorying and monitoring programs. Here, we present an updated list of non-indigenous species in French marine and transitional waters. Focused on eukaryote pluricellular species found throughout the three metropolitan French marine regions (Western Mediterranean Sea, Bay of Biscay and the Northern Seas), a total of 342 non-indigenous, including 42 cryptogenic, species are listed as having been introduced since the 13th century. The majority of the species originated from the temperate Northern Pacific. They mainly arrived through both ballast and hull fouling and also are associated with shellfish farming activities. Most of them have been introduced since the 1970s, a time when maritime and aquaculture trade intensified. Despite important human-aided opportunities for species transfer between the three marine regions (for instance, via recreational boating or aquaculture transfers), only a third of these NIS are common to all regions, as expected due to their environmental specificities.

Purpose Cloud computing has disrupted the information technology (IT) industry. Associated benefits such as flexibility, payment on an on-demand basis and the lack of no need for IT staff are among the reasons for its adoption. However, these services represent not only benefits to users but also threats, with cybersecurity issues being the biggest roadblock to cloud computing success. Although ensuring data security on the cloud has been the responsibility of providers, these threats seem to be unavoidable. In such circumstances, both providers and users have to coordinate efforts to minimize negative consequences that might occur from these events. The purpose of this paper is to assess how providers and users can rely on social media to communicate risky events. Design/methodology/approach Based on the Situational Theory of Publics and trust, the authors developed three research questions to analyze stakeholders’ communication patterns after a security breach. By gathering Twitter data, the authors analyzed the data security breach faced by the Premera Blue Cross’ Web application. Findings The results indicate that Premera acted as the main source of information for Twitter users, while trustworthy actors such as IT security firms, specialists and local news media acted as intermediaries, creating small communities around them. Theoretical and practical implications are also discussed. Originality/value Social media could be used for diffusing information of potential threats; no research has assessed its usage in a cloud-based security breach context. The study aims to fill this gap and propose a framework to engage cloud users in co-securing their data along with cloud providers when they face similar situations.

OBJECTIVES Describe the trajectory of functional recovery for patients with surgically treated unstable pelvic ring injuries from baseline to 5 years. DESIGN Prospective cohort study. SETTING Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS One hundred eight adult patients with surgically treated pelvic fractures (72% OTA/AO 61 B1-B3 and 28% OTA/AO 61 C1-C3) were enrolled into the institutions orthopaedic trauma database between 2004 and 2015. The cohort was 78% men with a mean age of 44.9 years and injury severity score of 16.9. INTERVENTION Surgical pelvic stabilization. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS Function was measured at baseline and prospectively at 6 months, 1, and 5 years postoperatively using the Short Form-36 Physical Component Score (SF-36 PCS). The trajectory was mapped, and the proportion of patients achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) between time points was determined. RESULTS The mean SF-36 PCS improved for the entire group between 6 and 12 months (P = 0.001) and between 1 and 5 years (P = 0.02), but did not return to baseline at 5 years (P < 0.0001). The proportion of patients achieving a MCID between 6 and 12 months and 1 and 5 years was 75% and 60%, respectively. The functional level was similar between type B and C groups at baseline (P = 0.5) and 6 months (P = 0.2); however, the type B cohort reported higher scores at 1 year (P = 0.01) and 5 years (P = 0.01). Neither group regained their baseline function (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Functional recovery for patients with surgically treated pelvic fractures is characterized by an initial decline in function, followed by sharp improvement between 6 and 12 months, and continued steady improvement between 1 and 5 years. Type B injuries show better early recovery than type C and reach a higher level of function at the final follow-up. Despite the proportion of patients achieving MCID, patients do not regain the preinjury level of function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Shallow water benthic communities from the Bizerte lagoon (northern Tunisia) were investigated at 33 stations sampled in April and July of 2016 and 2017. A total of 18 amphipod species were recorded among which two new species were recorded: one for Tunisian coasts (Jassa marmorata) and a second one for the Mediterranean Sea (Serejohyale spinidactylus). In addition, and compared to previous studies, nine amphipod species were collected for the first time in this lagoon. Amphipod assemblages were numerically dominated by the families Melitidae (28%), Caprellidae (14.5%) and Ampithoidae (11.7%). Three species: Cymadusa filosa, Dexamine spinosa and Elasmopus rapax were numerically dominant. According to their biogeography, most of the recorded amphipod species (11–18) showed an Atlantic–Mediterranean distribution, whereas four were cosmopolitan and three lessepsian Indo-Pacific migrants, but no species were Mediterranean endemic. Specimens of both Jassa marmorata and Serejohyale spinidactylus are illustrated and described.

Foliose species of the genus Ulva are notoriously difficult to identify due to their variable morphological characteristics and high phenotypic plasticity. We reassessed the taxonomic status of several distromatic foliose Ulva spp., morphologically related to Ulva rigida, using DNA barcoding with the chloroplastic tufA and rbcL (for a subset of taxa) genes for 339 selected attached Ulva specimens collected from three intertidal rocky sites. Two of the collection sites were in Brittany and one site was in Vendée, along the Atlantic coast of France. Molecular analyses included several museum specimens and the holotype of Ulva armoricana Dion, Reviers & Coat. We identified five different tufA haplotypes using a combination of phylogenetic analysis, with the support of several recently sequenced holotypes and lectotypes, and a species delimitation method based on hierarchical clustering. Four haplotypes were supported by validly named species: Ulva australis Areschoug, Ulva fenestrata Postels & Ruprecht, Ulva lacinulata (Kützing) Wittrock and U. rigida C. Agardh. The later was additionally investigated using rbcL. The fifth haplotype represented exact sequence matches to an unnamed species from European Atlantic coasts. Our results support: (1) the synonymy of both U. rigida sensu Bliding non C. Agardh and U. armoricana with U. lacinulata. This finding is based on current genetic analysis of tufA from the U. armoricana holotype and recent molecular characterization of the lectotype of U. laetevirens, which is synonymous to U. australis, (2) the presence of U. australis as a misidentified introduced species in Brittany, and (3) the presence of U. fenestrata and U. rigida in southern Brittany. The taxonomic history of each species is discussed, highlighting issues within distromatic foliose taxa of the genus Ulva and the need to genetically characterize all its available type specimens.

Family Thelepodidae Hessle, 1917 Figs 1F, 3���4 Diagnosis (after Hutchings et al. 2021a, most important diagnostic characters highlighted in bold) Transverse prostomium attached to dorsal surface of upper lip; basal part as thick crest, eyespots frequently present, in short lateral rows, or extending transversely across basal part of prostomium, usually progressively more spaced towards dorsal mid-line, with mid-dorsal gap or not; distal part of base of upper lip short, from nearly indistinct to shelf-like. Buccal tentacles all uniformly thin and cylindrical, to slightly spatulate distally (Figs 3D, F, 4B). Peristomium forming lips, sometimes also complete annulation, with dorso-lateral nuchal organs as ciliated grooves; lips expanded, relatively short upper lip, hood-like, about as long as wide; swollen, button-like, mid-ventral lower lip (Figs 3D, F, 4B���C). Segment 1 usually present all around, frequently with ventral lobe marginal to mouth (Figs 3D, F, 4B���C); SG II typically with anterior margin as protruding crest, at least ventrally (Figs 3D���E, 4B���C); lobes on following anterior segments sometimes present. Anterior segments highly glandular ventrally, smooth to highly corrugated between neuropodia within pairs, discrete shields absent (Figs 3D F, 4B); mid-ventral groove frequently extending from anterior segments with notopodia. Two to three pairs of branchiae, on SG II���III or II���IV, each pair with simple thin, curled and relatively short filaments progressively tapering to tips (Figs 3C, E, 4C), leaving mid-dorsal gap or not between filaments within pairs; branchial filaments originating directly from the body wall or from specialised dorsolateral cushion-like pads. Notopodia beginning on SG II���III, usually extending to mid-body, at least, sometimes until near posterior end; cylindrical to rectangular, distally bilobed notopodia, notochaetae originating between lobes; most taxa with winged notochaetae only, with wings of variable width (Fig. 4D), distally serrated notochaetae sometimes also present; bayonet-like and pinnate chaetae both absent. Neuropodia beginning posteriorly to notopodia, on SG IV���VI, typically on SG V; neuropodia in conjunction with notopodia as fleshy, swollen ridges, as raised rectangular to cylindrical pinnules after notopodia terminate; neurochaetae as avicular uncini frequently longer than high, with short triangular heel directed posteriorly, distinctly curved and wide base, and dorsal button near anterior margin of uncini, or within anterior third of distance between anterior margin of uncini and base of main fang (Fig. 4F). Nephridial and genital papillae usually present, on SG IV���VII, posterior to bases of notopodia or between parapodial lobes (Fig. 3C). Remarks A comprehensive phylogenetic analysis conducted by Nogueira et al. (2013) permitted the elevation of the previous Thelepodinae subfamily to Thelepodidae family level, as they represented a separate clade from other terebellids. This family is represented in European waters by three genera Euthelepus McIntosh, 1885 (a single species), Streblosoma Sars, 1872 (seven species) and Thelepus Leuckart, 1849 (nine species) (Table 1). Among these species, Thelepus japonicus Marenzeller, 1884, native from Japan, is considered as a non-indigeneous species in French waters, probably introduced with oyster transfers (Lavesque et al. 2020a) (Fig. 3C). Main morphological characters of European species BRANCHIAE. Both in Thelepus and Streblosoma genera, the number of pairs of branchiae varies between two (e.g., Streblosoma lindsayae or Thelepus nucleolata) and three (e.g., Streblosoma hutchingsae or Thelepus setosus). Branchiae in Thelepodidae are always cirriform (Figs 3C, E, 4C) but the number of branchial filaments varies among the species with for example 5���10 filaments on the second and third pairs of branchiae for Streblosoma cabiochi (Fig. 3E) and only three or less filaments for Streblosoma intestinale. Finally, the size of the medial dorsal gap separating the pairs of branchiae is a good diagnostic character. This gap is for example inconspicuous for T. parapari and wide for Thelepus cincinnatus (Nogueira 2019). PRESENCE OF EYESPOTS. The eyespots are very useful in differentiating species of Streblosoma and Thelepus for which they can be absent (e.g., Thelepus davehalli or Streblosoma hutchingsae) or present (e.g.m Thelepus corsicanus or Streblosoma nogueirai). Also, the arrangement of the eyespots, if in a continuous line, or leaving a medial gap is of taxonomic importance (Nogueira et al. 2010). START AND EXTENSION OF NOTOPODIA. The segment with the first appearance of notopodia permits the discrimination between the genus Streblosoma, for which notopodia begin on the second segment, and Euthelepus and Thelepus for which it begins on the third segment. These notopodia also extend for a variable number of segments, sometimes present only on the anterior half of the body (e.g., T. corsicanus) or present until the end of the body (T. japonicus). SHAPE OF NEUROPODIA AND UNCINI. In most of the species, the uncini start on SGV which could correspond to CH 3 (as in Thelepus) or CH 4 (as in Streblosoma). The uncini are arranged habitually in single rows but some have uncini forming loops (C-shaped arrangement) from mid thorax onwards. This last character is found for example in S. nogueirai. Between species, the uncini differ in the development of the prow (e.g., well developed in T. triserialis), the shape of the base (e.g., strongly curved in S. cabiochi), the position of the dorsal button (e.g., far from anterior margin in S. bairdi or in a terminal position for T. japonicus (Fig. 1F) and number of secondary of teeth. CREST AND LATERAL LOBES. The presence of lateral lobes on SG II���IV allows the separation of the genus Euthelepus from other genera of the family. The presence of lateral crests on SG II (= thick anterior margin) is an important character within the Streblosoma genus. For example, S. cabiochi has a very low crest on SG II (Fig. 4C) while S. bairdi has a protruding crest (Nogueira 2019). Key to European species of Thelopodidae (after Lavesque et al. 2020a ) 1. Notopodia from SG II (i.e., first branchiferous segment), start of uncini from CH 4.............................................................................................................................................................2 (Streblosoma) ��� Notopodia from SG III (i.e., second branchiferous segment), start of uncini from CH 3.................. 8 2. Two pairs of branchiae................................................................................................................................................................ Streblosoma lindsayae Lavesque, Londo��o-Mesa, Daffe & Hutchings, 2020 ��� Three pairs of branchiae.................................................................................................................... 3 3. Uncini arranged in C-shaped loops from mid thorax....................................................................... 4 ��� Uncini always in straight rows......................................................................................................... 6 4. Notopodia not extending to posterior body...................................................................................... 5 ��� Notopodia until posterior body................. Streblosoma pseudocomatus Lezzi & Giangrande, 2019 5. Eyespots absent.............................................. Streblosoma hutchingsae Lezzi & Giangrande, 2019 ��� Eyespots present................................................. Streblosoma nogueirai Lezzi & Giangrande, 2019 6- Branchiae on SG III and SG IV with 3 or less filaments on each side.......................................................................................................................... Streblosoma intestinale M. Sars in G.O. Sars, 1872 ��� Branchiae on SG III and SG IV with 5���10 filaments on each side.................................................. 7 7. Absence of prostomial process, presence of lateral crest on SG II, absence of branchial cushion............................................. Streblosoma cabiochi Lavesque, Londo��o-Mesa, Daffe & Hutchings, 2020 ��� Presence of prostomial process, absence of lateral crest on SG II, presence of branchial cushion................................................................................... Streblosoma bairdi (Malmgren, 1866) 8. Lateral lobes on SG II���IV................................................. Euthelepus setubalensis McIntosh, 1885 ��� Lateral lobes on SG I only.............................................................................................. 9 (Thelepus) 9. Two pairs of branchiae.................................................................................................................... 10 ��� Three pairs of branchiae................................................................................................................. 15 10. Uncini in a single row throughout...................................................................................................11 ��� Uncini in loops from SG XIV.............................................. Thelepus nucleolata (Clapar��de, 1870) 11. Notopodia present on 50���66% of body length............................................................................... 12 ��� Notopodia present on at least 90% of body length......................................................................... 13 12. Eyespots absent................................................................................ Thelepus davehalli Jirkov, 2018 ��� Eyespots present.............. Thelepus corsicanus Lavesque, Londo��o-Mesa, Daffe & Hutchings, 2020 13. Uncini of CH 1 with one tooth above main fang............................................................................ 14 ��� Uncini of CH 1 with two teeth above main fang............................. Thelepus parapari Jirkov, 2018 14. Eyespots present................................................................. Thelepus cincinnatus (Fabricius, 1780) ��� Eyespots absent................................................................................. Thelepus marthae Jirkov, 2018 15. Prow of uncini well developed; notch between the prow and dorsal button of the uncini well marked......................................................................................... Thelepus triserialis (Grube, 1855) ��� Prow of uncini poorly developed; notch between the prow and dorsal button of the uncini poorly marked............................................................................................................................................ 16 16. Notopodia present on about 60% of the body length............. Thelepus setosus (Quatrefages, 1866) ��� Notopodia present until end of the body length.................... Thelepus japonicus Marenzeller, 1884, Published as part of Lavesque, Nicolas, Hutchings, Pat, Londo��o-Mesa, Mario H., Nogueira, Jo��o M. M., Daffe, Guillemine, Nygren, Arne, Blanchet, Hugues, Bonif��cio, Paulo, Broudin, Caroline, Dauvin, Jean-Claude, Droual, Gabin, Gouillieux, Benoit, Grall, Jacques, Guyonnet, Benjamin, Houbin, C��line, Humbert, Suzie, Janson, Anne-Laure, Jourde, J��r��me, Labrune, C��line, Lamarque, Bastien, Latry, Lise, Garrec, Vincent Le, Pelaprat, Corine, Pezy, Jean-Philippe, Sauriau, Pierre-Guy & Montaudouin, Xavier De, 2021, The " Spaghetti Project ": the final identification guide to European Terebellidae (sensu lato) (Annelida, Terebelliformia), pp. 108-156 in European Journal of Taxonomy 782 (1) on pages 124-129, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2021.782.1593, http://zenodo.org/record/5781605, {"references":["Hessle C. 1917. Zur Kenntnis der terebellomorphen Polychaeten. Zoologiska bidrag fran Uppsala 5: 39 - 258. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 38891407 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Hutchings P., Nogueira J. M. N. & Carrerette O. 2021 a. Terebellidae Johnston, 1846. In: Schmidt- Rhaesa A. Hr., Beutel R. G., Glaubrecht M., Kristensen N. P., Prendini L., Purschke G., Richter S., Westheide, W. & Leschen R. Z. E. (eds) Handbook of Zoology. A Natural History of the Phyla of the Animal Kingdom: 1 - 64. Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin.","Nogueira J. M. M., Fitzhugh K. & Hutchings P. 2013. The continuing challenge of phylogenetic relationships in Terebelliformia (Annelida: Polychaeta). Invertebrate Systematics 27: 186 - 238. https: // doi. org / 10.1071 / IS 12062.","McIntosh W. C. 1885. Report on the Annelida Polychaeta collected by H. M. S. Challenger during the years 1873 - 1876. Report on the Scientific Results of the Voyage of H. M. S. Challenger during the years 1873 - 76. Zoology 12: 1 - 554. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 50688432 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Sars G. O. 1872. Diagnoser af nye Annelider fra Christianiaforden, efter Professor M. Sar's efterladte Manuskripter. Forhandlinger i Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania 1871: 406 - 417. Available from https: // biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 44067540 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021]","Leuckart R. 1849. Zur Kenntnis der Fauna von Island. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 15 (1): 149 - 208.","Marenzeller E. 1884. Sudjapanische Anneliden. II. Ampharetea, Terebellacea, Sabellacea, Serpulacea. Denkschriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe 49 (2): 197 - 224.","Lavesque N., Londono-Mesa M. H., Daffe G. & Hutchings P. 2020 a. A revision of the French Telothelepodidae and Thelepodidae (Annelida, Terebelliformia), with descriptions of three species and first European record of a non-indigenous species. Zootaxa 4810 (2): 305 - 327. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4810.2.4","Nogueira J. M. M. 2019. Redescriptions of Streblosoma bairdi (Malmgren, 1866) and Thelepus cincinnatus (Fabricius, 1780), based on types and material from type localities. Zootaxa 4544 (3): 419 - 428. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4544.3.7","Nogueira J. M. M., Hutchings P. & Fukuda M. V. 2010. Morphology of terebelliform polychaetes (Annelida: Polychaeta: Terebelliformia), with a focus on Terebellidae. Zootaxa 2460 (1): 1 - 185. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 2460.1.1","Lezzi M. & Giangrande A. 2019. New species of Streblosoma (Thelepodidae, Annelida) from the Mediterranean Sea: S. pseudocomatus sp. nov., S. nogueirai sp. nov. and S. hutchingsae sp. nov. Journal of Natural History 52 (43 - 44): 2857 - 2873. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222933.2018.1556357","Malmgren A. J. 1866. Nordiska Hafs-Annulater. Ofversigt af Kongliga Vetenskaps-Akademiens Forhandlingar 22: 355 - 410. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / part / 244483 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Claparede E. 1870. Les annelides chetopodes du Golfe de Naples. Supplement. Memoires de la Societe de Physique et d'Histoire naturelle de Geneve 20 (2): 365 - 542. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 2142","Fabricius O. 1780. Fauna Groenlandica, systematice sistens, Animalia Groenlandiae occidentalis hactenus indagata, quoad nomen specificum, triviale, vernaculumque synonyma auctorum plurium, descriptionem, locum, victum, generationem, mores, usum, capturamque singuli prout detegendi occasio fuit, maximaque parte secundum proprias observations. Impensis Ioannis Gottlob Rothe, Copenhagen et Leipzig [Hafniae et Lipsiae]. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 13489","Grube A. E. 1855. Beschreibungen neuer oder wenig bekannter Anneliden. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 21 (1): 81 - 136. Available from https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 13989 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Quatrefages A. de. 1866. Note sur la Classification des Annelides. Annales des Sciences Naturelles 5: 253 - 296."]}

Family Trichobranchidae Malmgren, 1866 Figs 1A, 7���8 Diagnosis (after Hutchings et al. 2021a, most important diagnostic characters highlighted in bold) Transverse prostomium attached to dorsal surface of upper lip; basal part as thick crest, eyespots sometimes present; distal part at base of upper lip or extending along lip. Buccal tentacles of two types, uniformly cylindrical and expanded at tips, spatulate. Peristomium forming lips, sometimes also a ventral lobe, as an extension of the lower lip; lips expanded, circular upper lip, distal margin folded or convoluted; lower lip button-like, usually continuing by ventral lobe, or expanded, forming large scoop-shaped process (Figs 7A���C, 8A, C���D). Segment I usually short, frequently only visible ventrally; anterior margin of anterior segments with lobes as low, even-length collars covering posterior margins of preceding segments, at least ventrally; ventro-lateral or lateral lobes on anterior segments sometimes present. Anterior segments poorly glandular ventrally, smooth, discrete shields absent; midventral groove extending from posterior segments with notopodia. Two to four pairs of branchiae, beginning from SGII, each pair with single, thick and elongate, tapered or foliaceous filament, or two pairs fused in single four lobed structure originating mid-dorsally between SGII���III or II���IV (Figs 7C, 8C���D). Notopodia beginning from SGIII���VI, typically terminating at SGXX; short, conical notopodia, chaetae emerging from central core on top, distal lobes absent; narrowly-winged notochaetae in both rows throughout. Neuropodia beginning on same segment as notopodia or slightly posteriorly, rarely beginning before notopodia; sessile neuropodia until termination of notopodia, neurochaetae emerging directly from body wall, as rectangular to foliaceous pinnules after termination of notopodia; thoracic neurochaetae as acicular uncini (Figs 1A, 7D, 8F), sometimes with small hood or beard below main fang; avicular abdominal uncini, with secondary teeth in rows on top and laterally to main fang. Nephridial papillae on SGIII usually present, other papillae sometimes present on SGVI and SGVII, but reduced to inconspicuous in most taxa. Pygidium smooth to slightly crenulate, sometimes bilobed. Remarks In the past, the Trichobranchidae family was considered to be a subfamily of Terebellidae (Fauvel 1927; Day 1967; Garrafoni & Lana 2004), but recent phylogenetic analyses support the hypothesis of a valid family (Glasby et al. 2004; Nogueira et al. 2013). The family includes only three genera, i.e., Octobranchus Marion & Bobretzky, 1875, Terebellides Sars, 1835, and Trichobranchus Malmgren, 1866. For Trichobranchus and Octobranchus, only three species of each occur in Europe. The genus Terebellides is very speciose and is represented in Europe by 19 species, 13 of them described in the last two years (Lavesque et al. 2019b; Parapar et al. 2020a) (Table 1). Main morphological characters for European species The number of branchiae is the best character to discriminate the different genera, with Terebellides having a single large branchia, Trichobranchus with two or three pairs of branchiae and finally Octobranchus with four pairs. Trichobranchus species are easy to differentiate based on the number of branchiae (two vs three) (Figs 7C, 8C) and the absence or presence of eyespots. In Octobranchus, the species differ by the shape of the branchiae (Fig. 8D) and the number of secondary teeth above the main fang of the uncini. Regarding Terebellides species, recent studies highlighted that several characters are very important for identification to the species level (Lavesque et al. 2019a; Parapar et al. 2020a, 2020b). However, as many cryptic species occur at a small geographical scale (Nygren et al. 2018), which currently are confirmed only by molecular analyses (Parapar et al. 2020a) much more work needs to be done to resolve all the species present. BRANCHIAE. Even if Terebellides branchiae seem to be very similar within the genus (Figs 7A���B, 8A���B), several morphological characters permit the discrimination of species, such as the presence of a fifth anterior branchial lobe (e.g., T. europaea), the degree of fusion of both upper and lower lobes (e.g.. not fused on T. ceneresi), the presence of long terminal filaments (e.g., in T. shetlandica) or short posterior processes (Fig. 7B), and finally the presence and the shape of papillae situated on the margins of the branchial lamellae (Fig. 8B) (e.g., T. lilasae). NOTOCHAETAE FROM FIRST CHAETIGER. The size of notochaetae of the first chaetiger varies between species. For most of the species, these chaetae are of a similar size compared to those of the following chaetigers. However, they can be absent or much shorter (e.g., T. ceneresi) or much longer (e.g., T. mediterranea). PRESENCE OF GENICULATE CHAETAE ON ONE OR TWO CHAETIGERS. The geniculate chaetae are exclusive to members of Terebellides and they are typically present on CH 6 (SG VIII) only (Fig. 8E), but in some species they are present on two chaetigers, as for example in T. bigeniculatus. UNCINI DENTICULATION. The different types of uncini follow the classifications provided by Parapar et al. (2020b) for thoracic uncini (Fig. 8F) and Parapar et al. (2020a) for abdominal uncini. These classifications are based on the ratio between the length of the main fang (rostrum) and the crest of secondary teeth (capitium), and the size and number of the secondary teeth. THORACIC CILIATED PAPILLAE. Following the recent study of Parapar et al. (2020a), the absence or the presence of thoracic ciliated papillae allow for the discrimination of Terebellides species. These papillae are situated dorsally to the thoracic notopodia (see for example Parapar et al. 2020a; Fig. 7B). METHYL GREEN PATTERN. The colouration of Terebellides specimens prior to identification is essential. Indeed, MG staining highlights the presence and the shape of the glandular region of the third thoracic chaetiger (e.g., undulating glandular region present and in members of T. gentili, oval for T. lilasae Fig. 7B) and the compact/striped pattern of the ventral part of anterior chaetigers (e.g., CH 4 (SG VI) white in T. ceneresi). Key to European species of Trichobranchidae (after Lavesque et al. 2019a and Parapar et al. 2020a) 1. One large branchia consisting of a stem and four lobes with transverse lamellae.....5 (Terebellides) ��� Two or three pairs of branchiae........................................................................... 2 (Trichobranchus) ��� Four pairs of branchiae........................................................................................... 4 (Octobranchus) 2. Two pairs of branchiae...................................................................................................................... 3 ��� Three pairs of branchiae, eyespots present................................................................................................................................................................................. Trichobranchus glacialis Malmgren, 1866 3. Eyespots absent......................................................................... Trichobranchus roseus Malm, 1874 ��� Eyespots present.................................................................................................................................... Trichobranchus demontaudouini Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 4. Pairs of branchiae of different shapes; abdominal uncini with three rows of secondary teeth above the main fang..................................................... Octobranchus floriceps Kingston & Mackie, 1980 ��� All pairs of branchiae similar; abdominal uncini with two rows of secondary teeth above the main fang..................................................................................... Octobranchus lingulatus (Grube, 1863) ��� Bases of branchiae covered by dorso-lateral lobes, abdominal uncini with two rows of secondary teeth above the main fang.............................. Octobranchus sikorskii (Leontovich & Jirkov. 2001) 5. Geniculate acicular chaetae on CH 5 (SG VII) and CH 6 (SG VIII)............................................................................................................. Terebellides bigeniculatus Parapar, Moreira & Helgason, 2011 ��� Geniculate acicular chaetae on CH 6 (SG VI) only........................................................................... 6 6. Branchial lamellae without marginal papillae.................................................................................. 7 ��� Branchial lamellae with marginal papillae..................................................................................... 15 7. Lower branchial lobes with long filaments....................................................................................... 8 ��� Lower branchial lobes with or without short projections................................................................. 9 8. Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) present; branchial lamellae pointed; notochaetae from CH 1 longer than following ones; dorsal papillae absent............................................................................................................... Terebellides parapari Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 ��� Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) absent; branchial lamellae rounded; all notochaetae equal-sized; dorsal papillae present........................ Terebellides shetlandica Parapar, Moreira & O���Reilly, 2016 9. Ventral white band present on CH 4 (SG VI) after MG staining..................................................... 10 ��� No distinct pattern on CH 4 (SG VI) after MG staining...................................................................11 10. Large species (> 30 mm); 5 th branchial lobe present; notochaetae of CH 1 (SG III) similar to following ones; main fang of thoracic uncini straight.................................... Terebellides gracilis Malm, 1874 ��� Small species (Terebellides ceneresi Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 11. First notopodia and notochaetae longer than following ones............................................................................................................................... Terebellides mediterranea Parapar, Mikac & Fiege, 2013 ��� First notopodia and notochaetae similar or shorter than following ones........................................ 12 12. Large-sized species (> 50 mm); dorsal rounded projections on CH 1��� CH 5 conspicuous............... 13 ��� Small-sized species (Terebellides kongsrudi Parapar, Capa, Nygren & Moreira, 2020 and Terebellides bakkeni Parapar, Capa, Nygren & Moreira, 2020 complex ��� Abdominal uncini of type 2 (capitium of about same length as main fang, capitium complex composed of a first row of 4(5) denticles and a variable number of teeth in two more rows)..................................................................................................................... Terebellides stroemii Sars, 1835 14. Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) and 5 th branchial lobe both absent................................................................................................................................................... Terebellides atlantis Williams, 1984 ��� Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) and 5 th branchial lobe both present............................................................................ Terebellides gralli Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 15. Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) rounded or oval......................................................................... 16 ��� Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) otherwise.................................................................................. 17 16. Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) staining in white, branchial lamellae with rounded papillae, CH 1��� 3 without conspicuous dorsal projection....................................................................................................................... Terebellides lilasae Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 ��� Glandular region on CH 3 (SG V) staining in blue, branchial lamellae with conical papillae, CH 1���3 with conspicuous dorsal projection................................................................................................................................ Terebellides bonifi Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 17. Most branchial lamellae with marginal papillae............................................................................. 18 ��� Only anterior branchial lamellae with marginal papillae................................................................ 19 18. Branchial lamellae with digitiform papillae, upper lip elongated; MG staining pattern as compact bands from CH 1���5.................................................................................................................................................... Terebellides resomari Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 ��� Branchial lamellae with widely spaced, small and elongated digitiform papillae; MG staining pattern leaving white stripes from CH 1���5................................................................................................................................ Terebellides gentili Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 19. Thoracic uncini type 1 (main fang vs capitium length ratio 2(3)/1; capitium with 2(3) large teeth, following ones much smaller).................................................................................................................................................................. Terebellides ronningae Parapar, Capa, Nygren & Moreira, 2020 ��� Thoracic uncini type 3 (main fang vs. capitium length ratio 1/1; capitium with 4(5) mid-sized teeth, following ones slightly smaller)..................................................................................................... 20 20. Deep-water species, mostly found below 200 m deep.............................................................................................................................. Terebellides norvegica Parapar, Capa, Nygren & Moreira, 2020 ��� Shallow-water species, mostly found above 100 m deep.................................................................................. Terebellides europaea Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe, Nygren & Londo��o-Mesa, 2019 and Terebellides scotica Parapar, Capa, Nygren & Moreira, 2020 complex, Published as part of Lavesque, Nicolas, Hutchings, Pat, Londo��o-Mesa, Mario H., Nogueira, Jo��o M. M., Daffe, Guillemine, Nygren, Arne, Blanchet, Hugues, Bonif��cio, Paulo, Broudin, Caroline, Dauvin, Jean-Claude, Droual, Gabin, Gouillieux, Benoit, Grall, Jacques, Guyonnet, Benjamin, Houbin, C��line, Humbert, Suzie, Janson, Anne-Laure, Jourde, J��r��me, Labrune, C��line, Lamarque, Bastien, Latry, Lise, Garrec, Vincent Le, Pelaprat, Corine, Pezy, Jean-Philippe, Sauriau, Pierre-Guy & Montaudouin, Xavier De, 2021, The " Spaghetti Project ": the final identification guide to European Terebellidae (sensu lato) (Annelida, Terebelliformia), pp. 108-156 in European Journal of Taxonomy 782 (1) on pages 136-141, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2021.782.1593, http://zenodo.org/record/5781605, {"references":["Malmgren A. J. 1866. Nordiska Hafs-Annulater. Ofversigt af Kongliga Vetenskaps-Akademiens Forhandlingar 22: 355 - 410. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / part / 244483 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Hutchings P., Nogueira J. M. N. & Carrerette O. 2021 a. Terebellidae Johnston, 1846. In: Schmidt- Rhaesa A. Hr., Beutel R. G., Glaubrecht M., Kristensen N. P., Prendini L., Purschke G., Richter S., Westheide, W. & Leschen R. Z. E. (eds) Handbook of Zoology. A Natural History of the Phyla of the Animal Kingdom: 1 - 64. Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin.","Fauvel P. 1927. Polychetes Sedentaires. Addenda aux Errantes, Archiannelides, Myzostomaires. Faune de France 16, Lechevalier, Paris.","Day J. H. 1967. A Monograph on the Polychaeta of Southern Africa. Part 2. Sedentaria. Trustees of the British Museum (Natural History), London. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 8596","Glasby C. J., Hutchings P. & Hall K. 2004. Assessment of monophyly and taxon affinities within the polychaete clade Terebelliformia (Terebellida). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 84: 961 - 971. https: // doi. org / 10.1017 / S 0025315404010252 h","Nogueira J. M. M., Fitzhugh K. & Hutchings P. 2013. The continuing challenge of phylogenetic relationships in Terebelliformia (Annelida: Polychaeta). Invertebrate Systematics 27: 186 - 238. https: // doi. org / 10.1071 / IS 12062.","Marion A. F. & Bobretzky N. V. 1875. Etude des Annelides du Golfe de Marseille. Annales des Sciences Naturelles, Sixieme Serie 2: 1 - 106. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 33155516 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Sars M. 1835. Beskrivelser og Iagttagelser over nogle maerkelige eller nye i Havet ved den Bergenske Kyst Levende Dyr af Polypernes, Acalephernes, Radiaternes, Annelidernes og Molluskernes classer, med en kort Oversigt over de hidtil af Forfatteren sammesteds fundne Arter og deres Forekommen. T. Hallager, Bergen. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 13017","Lavesque N., Daffe G., Grall J., Zanol J., Gouillieux B., Hutchings P. 2019 b. Guess who? On the importance of using appropriate name: case study of Marphysa sanguinea (Montagu, 1813). ZooKeys 859: 1 - 15. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 859.34117","Parapar J., Capa M., Nygren A. & Moreira J. 2020 a. To name but a few: descriptions of five new species of Terebellides (Annelida, Trichobranchidae) from the North East Atlantic. ZooKeys 992: 1 - 58. https: // doi: 10.3897 / zookeys. 992.55977","Lavesque N., Hutchings P., Daffe G., Nygren A. & Londono-Mesa M. H. 2019 a. A revision of the French Trichobranchidae (Polychaeta), with descriptions of nine new species. Zootaxa 4664 (2): 151 - 190. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4664.2.1","Parapar J., Martin D. & Moreira J. 2020 b. On the diversity of Terebellides (Annelida, Trichobranchidae) in West Africa, seven new species and the redescription of T. africana Augener, 1918 stat. prom. Zootaxa 4771 (1): 1 - 61. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4771.1.1.","Nygren A., Parapar J., Pons J., Meissner K., Bakken T., Kongsrud J. A., Oug E., Gaev D., Sikorski A., Johansen R. A., Hutchings P., Lavesque N. & Capa M. 2018. A megacryptic species complex hidden among one of the most common annelids in the North East Atlantic. PLoS One 13 (6): e 0198356. https: // doi. org / 10.1371 / journal. pone. 0198356","Grube A. E. 1863. Beschreibung neuer oder wenig bekannter Anneliden. Sechster Beitrag. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 29: 37 - 69. Available from https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 9306 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Malm A. W. 1874. Annulata i hafvet utmed Sveriges westkust och omkring Goteborg. Goteborgs Koniglich vetenskaps - och vitterhetssamhalles handlingar [Zoologiska observationer. VII.] 14: 67 - 105.","Kingston P. F. & Mackie A. S. Y. 1980. Octobranchus floriceps sp. nov. (Polychaeta: Trichobranchidae) from the northern North Sea with a re-examination of O. antarcticus Monro. Sarsia 65: 249 - 254. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00364827.1980.10431487","Parapar J., Moreira J. & Helgason G. V. 2011. Taxonomy and distribution of Terebellides (Polychaeta, Trichobranchidae) in Icelandic waters, with the description of a new species. Zootaxa 2983 (1): 1 - 20. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 2983.1.1","Parapar J., Moreira J. & O'Reilly M. 2016. A new species of Terebellides (Polychaeta: Trichobranchidae) from Scottish waters with an insight into branchial morphology. Marine Biodiversity 46 (3): 211 - 225. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / s 12526 - 015 - 0353 - 5","Parapar J., Mikac B. & Fiege D. 2013. Diversity of the genus Terebellides (Polychaeta: Trichobranchidae) in the Adriatic Sea with the description of a new species. Zootaxa 3691 (3): 333 - 350. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3691.3.3","Williams S. J. 1984. The status of Terebellides stroemi (Polychaeta; Trichobranchidae) as a cosmopolitan species, based on a worldwide morphological survey, including description of new species. In: Hutchings P. A. (ed.) Proceedings of the First International Polychaete Conference, Sydney, Australia, 1984: 118 - 142. The Linnean Society of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia."]}

Family Polycirridae Malmgren, 1866 Figs 1B, 2 Diagnosis (after Hutchings et al. 2021a; most important diagnostic characters highlighted in bold) Transverse prostomium attached to dorsal surface of upper lip; basal part usually as thick horse-shoe shaped crest, eye spots absent; distal part either as another thick crest, with flaring distal lobes, with or without mid-dorsal process, or extending along upper lip until near anterior margin of lip; prostomium frequently extending ventrally, terminating laterally to mouth (Fig. 2A���D). Buccal tentacles of two types at least, short ones thin, uniformly cylindrical, long tentacles stouter, expanded at tips to variable degrees, distally spatulate (Fig. 2B, D) or more specialised. Peristomium forming lips; lips expanded, upper lip large, frequently circular and convoluted, folded into three lobes; swollen lower lip, only midventral or cushion-like across ventrum, sometimes extending posteriorly for a few segments (Fig. 2A��� D). Segment I reduced, frequently only visible ventrally, sometimes completely hidden. Segment II distinctly narrower than following segments, constricting body posteriorly to ���lips head���; SG II usually with rectangular or pentagonal mid-ventral shield at beginning of mid-ventral groove, sometimes extending anteriorly through SG I until near posterior margin of lower lip (Fig. 2C). Anterior segments highly glandular ventrally, frequently papillose or tessellated, with paired ventro-lateral pads separated from each other within pairs by mid-ventral groove extending from SG II���IV to posterior body (Fig. 2A���D). Branchiae absent. Notopodia, if present, from SG III (Fig. 2A���D), extending for variable number of segments, usually few; bilobed, elongate notopodia, post-chaetal lobes sometimes longer, notochaetae originating between lobes along all extension of notopodia, separating lobes from base on ventral side of notopodia (Fig. 2A���D); notochaetae winged (Fig. 2E) and/or pinnate, wings of variable width. Neuropodia, if present, located posteriorly to notopodia, frequently from posterior thoracic segments or only on abdomen; neurochaetae as acicular spines or avicular uncini, of two types, and arranged in a single row (Figs 1C, 2F���G). Nephridial and genital papillae usually present, at anterior bases of all notopodia, or only at anteriormost notopodia (Fig. 2A). Pygidium smooth or with rounded ventral papilla. Remarks This family was previously considered as a subfamily of Terebellidae (Polycirrinae Malmgren, 1866), but was recently raised to familial level after a comprehensive phylogenetic analysis showed the monophyly of this group (Nogueira et al. 2013). Polycirridae is represented by six genera (Amaeana Hartman, 1959; Biremis Polloni, Rowe & Teal, 1973; Enoplobranchus Verrill, 1879; Hauchiella Levinsen, 1893; Lysilla Malmgren, 1866 and Polycirrus Grube, 1850), distinguished from each other by the presence/ absence of noto- and neuropodia, and if present, the type of neurochaetae. Only Amaeana (Fig. 2A, C), Hauchiella, Lysilla and Polycirrus (Fig. 2B, D���G) are represented in European waters (Lavesque et al. 2020b) (Table 1). Main morphological characters of European species PARAPODIA. The parapodia of the members of this family are extremely important to separate the different genera. The genus Hauchiella is characterised by the absence of parapodia and Lysilla by the absence of neuropodia only. The neuropodia of members of Amaeana are characterised by the presence of spines, while those of Polycirrus bear avicular uncini (Figs 1B, 2F���G). Within the genus Polycirrus, the number and location of segments with notopodia and/or neuropodia are of important taxonomic value. Particularly, some species have uncini present only on abdominal segments, i.e., on segments without notopodia, and others have uncini starting before the end of the thorax, on segments bearing also notopodia. SHAPE OF THE LIPS. As for other terebellids, polycirrids have a peristomium with well-defined upper and lower lips. The upper lip is large and can be trilobed (Fig. 2B) or with a single medial lobe (Fig. 2D). Generally, the upper lip is trilobed but the lobes differ in size and shape and lateral lobes can be reduced or well developed. The shape and the size of the lower lip is also highly variable between species. This lip can be rectangular, squared, rounded or subtriangular, swollen or not, longer than wide or wider than long (Fig. 2B���D). . NOTOCHAETAE. Two types of notochaetae can be present: winged chaetae as for P. glasbyi (Fig. 2E) and/ or pinnate as for P. plumosus. The winged notochaetae have wings of different width which are often conspicuous under light microscope but appear hirsute under SEM (Fig. 2E). UNCINI SHAPE AND DENTICULATION. In Polycirrus two types of uncini are present: Type 1 with a short occipitum (back) and a straight to slightly convex base (Fig. 1B); and Type 2 with a long occipitum and a concave base (Glasby & Hutchings 2014). To date, all described European species have Type 1 uncini. The denticulation of uncini is also helpful in separating species, with the presence (as for P. catalanensis) (Fig. 2F) or the absence (as for P. arenivorus) of a main tooth above the main fang, and the number of rows of secondary teeth. Key to European species of Polycirridae (after Lavesque et al. 2020b) 1. Parapodia absent (no chaetae)............................................. Hauchiella tribullata (McIntosh, 1869) ��� Parapodia present.............................................................................................................................. 2 2. Only notopodia present....................................................................................................... 3 (Lysilla) ��� Notopodia and neuropodia present................................................................................................... 4 3. Notochaetae with smooth tips, 6 pairs of thoracic papillae............... Lysilla loveni Malmgren, 1866 ��� Notochaetae with plumose tips, 9 pairs of thoracic papillae............ Lysilla nivea Langerhans, 1884 4. Neuropodia with spines..................................................................................................5 (Amaeana) ��� Neuropodia with avicular uncini..................................................................................6 (Polycirrus) 5. Upper lip without lobe, lower lip rounded, long achaetous region.......................................................................................................... A. gremarei Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020 ��� Upper lip with trilobed, lower lip rectangular, short achaetous region......................................................................................................................................................... Amaeana trilobata (Sars, 1863) 6. With 28 or more segments with notochaetae.................................................................................... 7 ��� With 22 or fewer segments with notochaetae................................................................................... 8 7. With 29 segments with notopodia, neuropodia from SG XII, lower lip longer than wide, uncini without a main tooth above the main fang........................... Polycirrus arenivorus (Caullery, 1915) ��� With 46 segments with notopodia, neuropodia from SG XIV, lower lip longer than wide, uncini with a main tooth above the main fang............................................. Polycirrus aurantiacus Grube, 1860 ��� With 28 segments with notopodia, neuropodia from SG XV, lower lip wider than long, uncini with a main tooth above the main fang........................................................................................................................................... Polycirrus gujanensis Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020 8. Neuropodia beginning before SG VIII............................................................................................. 9 ��� Neuropodia beginning between SG IX and SG XII....................................................................... 10 ��� Neuropodia beginning after SG XIII.............................................................................................. 14 9. Upper lip trilobed, lower lip wider than long, uncini with 2 rows of teeth above the main tooth.......................................................................................... Polycirrus asturiensis Cepeda & Lattig, 2016 ��� Upper lip with single medial lobe, lower lip longer than wide, uncini with 1 row of teeth above the main tooth........................... Polycirrus idex Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020b 10. Uncini without a main tooth about the main fang.............. Polycirrus norvegicus Wollebaek, 1912 ��� Uncini with a main tooth about the main fang................................................................................11 11. Lower lip subtriangular, pointed towards mouth............................................................................ 12 ��� Lower lip oval or oblong................................................................................................................ 13 12. With 12 or 13 segments with notopodia, lower lip longer than wide......................................................................................................................................... Polycirrus denticulatus Saint-Joseph, 1894 ��� With 16 segments with notopodia, lower lip wider than long........................................................................................................................................................... Polycirrus elisabethae McIntosh, 1915 13. With 18 or more segments with notopodia, lower lip oval, ventro-lateral pads not separated by a large mid-ventral groove............................................................................................................................................................... Polycirrus glasbyi Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020 ��� Fewer than 18 segments with notopodia, lower lip oblong, ventro-lateral pads separated by a large midventral groove................ Polycirrus readi Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020 14. With 16 or more segments with notopodia..................................................................................... 15 ��� Fewer than 16 segments with notopodia........................................................................................ 17 15. Neuropodia beginning from SG XIV���XVI.................................................................................... 16 ��� Neuropodia beginning from SG XVIII���XX....................... Polycirrus plumosus (Wollebaek, 1912) 16. Upper lip elongated, uncini with a main tooth above the main fang, ventro-lateral pads well developed..................... Polycirrus nogueirai Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020 ��� Upper lip semicircular, uncini without a main tooth above the main fang, ventro-lateral pads poorly defined................................................................................................ Polycirrus arcticus Sars, 1865 17. Neuropodia beginning from SG XIV, uncini with four teeth above the main fang arranged in single vertical series; lower lip large, shield-like, wider than long......... Polycirrus latidens Eliason, 1962 ��� Neuropodia beginning from SG XV or after, secondary teeth of uncini not as above................... 18 18. Upper lip trilobed, lower lip subtriangular pointed toward mouth............................................................................................................................................................... Polycirrus medusa Grube, 1850 ��� Upper lip with a single median lobe, lower lip not subtriangular.................................................. 19 19. Upper lip with thick medial lobe, uncini with two small lateral teeth above the main tooth, lower lip rectangular longer than wide................................................................................................................................................ Polycirrus catalanensis Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020 ��� Upper lip with elongated triangular medial lobe, uncini with two rows of teeth above the main tooth, lower lip oval and wider than long.................................................................................................................................................... P. pennarbedae Lavesque, Hutchings, Daffe & Londo��o-Mesa, 2020, Published as part of Lavesque, Nicolas, Hutchings, Pat, Londo��o-Mesa, Mario H., Nogueira, Jo��o M. M., Daffe, Guillemine, Nygren, Arne, Blanchet, Hugues, Bonif��cio, Paulo, Broudin, Caroline, Dauvin, Jean-Claude, Droual, Gabin, Gouillieux, Benoit, Grall, Jacques, Guyonnet, Benjamin, Houbin, C��line, Humbert, Suzie, Janson, Anne-Laure, Jourde, J��r��me, Labrune, C��line, Lamarque, Bastien, Latry, Lise, Garrec, Vincent Le, Pelaprat, Corine, Pezy, Jean-Philippe, Sauriau, Pierre-Guy & Montaudouin, Xavier De, 2021, The " Spaghetti Project ": the final identification guide to European Terebellidae (sensu lato) (Annelida, Terebelliformia), pp. 108-156 in European Journal of Taxonomy 782 (1) on pages 112-123, DOI: 10.5852/ejt.2021.782.1593, http://zenodo.org/record/5781605, {"references":["Malmgren A. J. 1866. Nordiska Hafs-Annulater. Ofversigt af Kongliga Vetenskaps-Akademiens Forhandlingar 22: 355 - 410. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / part / 244483 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Hutchings P., Nogueira J. M. N. & Carrerette O. 2021 a. Terebellidae Johnston, 1846. In: Schmidt- Rhaesa A. Hr., Beutel R. G., Glaubrecht M., Kristensen N. P., Prendini L., Purschke G., Richter S., Westheide, W. & Leschen R. Z. E. (eds) Handbook of Zoology. A Natural History of the Phyla of the Animal Kingdom: 1 - 64. Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin.","Nogueira J. M. M., Hutchings P. & Fukuda M. V. 2010. Morphology of terebelliform polychaetes (Annelida: Polychaeta: Terebelliformia), with a focus on Terebellidae. Zootaxa 2460 (1): 1 - 185. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 2460.1.1","Lavesque N., Londono-Mesa M. H., Daffe G. & Hutchings P. 2020 a. A revision of the French Telothelepodidae and Thelepodidae (Annelida, Terebelliformia), with descriptions of three species and first European record of a non-indigenous species. Zootaxa 4810 (2): 305 - 327. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4810.2.4","Lavesque N., Daffe G., Londono-Mesa M. H. & Hutchings P. 2021. Revision of the French Terebellidae sensu stricto (Annelida, Terebelliformia), with descriptions of nine species. Zootaxa 5038 (1): 1 - 63. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 5038.1.1","Lavesque N., Bonifacio P., Londono-Mesa M. H., Le Garrec V. & Grall J. 2017 a. Loimia ramzega sp. nov., a new giant species of Terebellidae (Polychaeta) from French waters (Brittany, English","Marenzeller E. 1884. Sudjapanische Anneliden. II. Ampharetea, Terebellacea, Sabellacea, Serpulacea. Denkschriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Classe 49 (2): 197 - 224.","Nogueira J. M. M., Fitzhugh K. & Hutchings P. 2013. The continuing challenge of phylogenetic relationships in Terebelliformia (Annelida: Polychaeta). Invertebrate Systematics 27: 186 - 238. https: // doi. org / 10.1071 / IS 12062.","Hartman O. 1959. Catalogue of the polychaetous annelids of the world. Part II. Occasional Papers of the Allan Hancock Foundation 23: 355 - 628.","Polloni P. T., Rowe G. T. & Teal J. M. 1973. Biremis blandi (Polychaeta: Terebellidae), new genus, new species, caught by D. S. R. V. \" Alvin \" in the Tongue of the Ocean, New Providence, Bahamas. Marine Biology 20: 170 - 175. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / BF 00351456","Verrill A. E. 1879. Preliminary Check-list of the marine Invertebrata of the Atlantic Coast, from Cape Cod to the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor, New Haven.","Levinsen G. M. R. 1893. Annulata, Hydroidae, Anthozoa, Porifera. Udbytte af Kanonbaaden \" Hauche \" togter i de Danske indenfor Skagen i Aarene 1893: 321 - 464.","Grube A. E. 1850. Die Familien der Anneliden. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 16 (1): 249 - 364. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 6958350 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Lavesque N., Hutchings P., Daffe G. & Londono-Mesa M. H. 2020 b. Revision of the French Polycirridae (Annelida, Terebelliformia), with descriptions of eight new species. Zootaxa 4869 (2): 151 - 186. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 4869.2.1","Sars M. 1863. Geologiske og zoologiske lagttagelser, anstillede paa en Reise i en Deel af Trondhjems stift i Sommeren 1862. Nyt magazin for naturvidenskaberne 12: 253 - 340. Available from https: // biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 8058512 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","McIntosh W. C. 1869. On the structure of the British nemerteans, and some new British annelids. Transactions Royal Society of Edinburgh 25: 249 - 252. https: // doi. org / 10.1017 / S 0080456800035262","Langerhans P. 1884. Die Wurmfauna von Madeira. IV. Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Zoologie 40: 247 - 285.","Sars M. 1865. Fortsatte Bidrag til Kundskaben om Norges Annelider. Forhandlinger i Videnskabs- Selskabet i Christiania 1864: 5 - 20. Available from https: // biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 44007149 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Caullery M. 1915. Sur les Terebelliens de la sous-famille Polycirridae Malmgr. 1. Delimitation des genres. 11. Polycirrus arenivorus n. sp. Societe Zoologique de France Bulletin 40: 239 - 248.","Cepeda D. & Lattig P. 2016. A new species of Polycirridae (Annelida: Terebellida) and three new reports for Cantabrian and Mediterranean Seas. Cahiers de Biologie Marine 57: 371 - 387. https: // doi. org / 10.21411 / CBM. A. AE 1327 D 3","Grube A. E. 1860. Beschreibung neuer oder wenig bekannter Anneliden. Beitrag: Zahlreiche Gattungen. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 26: 71 - 118. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 11291","Saint-Joseph A. 1894. Annelides Polychetes des cotes de Dinard. Troisieme Partie. Annales des Sciences naturelles Zoologie et Paleontologie 17: 1 - 395.","McIntosh W. C. 1915. Notes from the Gatty Marine Laboratory, St Andrews. Annals and Magazine of Natural History Series 8 15: 1 - 58. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222931508693614","Eliason A. 1962. Die Polychaeten der Skagerak-Expedition 1933. Zoologiska bidrag fran Uppsala 33: 207 - 293.","Wollebaek A. 1912. Nordeuropaeiske Annulata Polychaeta 1. Ammocharidae, Amphictenidae, Ampharetidae, Terebellidae og Serpulidae. Skrifter utgit av Videnskapsselskapet i Kristiana 1911. 1. Mathematisk-naturvidenskabelig klasse 1911 (18): 1 - 144. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 11634","Muller O. F. 1776. Zoologicae Danicae Prodromus, seu Animalium Daniae et Norvegiae indigenarum characteres, nomina et synonyma imprimis popularium. Hallageriis, Copenhagen [Havniae]. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 63795","Quatrefages A. de. 1866. Note sur la Classification des Annelides. Annales des Sciences Naturelles 5: 253 - 296.","Jirkov I., Ravara A. & Cunha M. R. 2018; Amphitrite fauveli sp. n. (Polychaeta: Terebellidae) from the Bay of Biscay and the Gulf of Cadiz (NE Atlantic). Invertebrate Zoology 15 (1): 85 - 91. https: // doi. org / 10.15298 / invertzool. 15.1.06","Dalyell J. G. 1853. The Powers of the Creator displayed in the Creation: or, Observations on Life amidst the various Forms of the humbler Tribes of animated Nature with practical Comments and Illustrations, Vol. 2. John van Voorst. London. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 10022","Risso A. 1826. Histoire naturelle des principales productions de l'Europe meridionale et particulierement de celles des environs de Nice et des Alpes Maritimes. Volume 4. Levrault, Paris. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 58984","Jirkov I. 2020. Review of the European Amphitrite (Polychaeta: Terebellidae) with description of two new species. Invertebrate Zoology 17 (4) 311 - 360. https: // doi. org / 10.3853 / j. 0067 - 1975.40.1988.150","Arvanitidis C. & Koukouras A. 1995. Amphitritides kuehlmanni sp. nov. (Polychaeta, Terebellidae, Amphitritinae) from the Aegean Sea, with comments on the genus Amphitritides Augener. Ophelia 40 (3): 219 - 227. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00785326.1995.10430587","Annenkova N. P. 1924. Neues uber die Verbreitung einiger Arten der Polychaeten. Comptes Rendus de l'Academie des Sciences de Russie 1924: 125 - 128.","Montagu G. 1819. Descriptions of five British species of the genus Terebella. Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 12 (2): 340 - 344. https: // doi. org / 10.1111 / j. 1095 - 8339.1817. tb 00231. x","Malm A. W. 1874. Annulata i hafvet utmed Sveriges westkust och omkring Goteborg. Goteborgs Koniglich vetenskaps - och vitterhetssamhalles handlingar [Zoologiska observationer. VII.] 14: 67 - 105.","Pallas P. S. 1766. Miscellanea Zoologica quibus novae imprimis atque obscurae animalium species describunture et observationibus iconibusque illustrantur. Apud Petrum van Cleef, the Hague [Hague Comitum]. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 69851","Savigny J. C. 1822. Systeme des annelides, principalement de celles des cotes de l'Egypte et de la Syrie, offrant les caracteres tant distinctifs que naturels des Ordres, Familles et Genres, avec la Description des Especes. Description de l'Egypte ou Recueil des Observations et des Recherches qui ont ete faites en Egypte pendant l'Expedition de l'Armee francaise, publie par les Ordres de sa Majeste l'Empereur Napoleon le Grand, Histoire Naturelle, Paris 1 (3): 1 - 128. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 66284","Orsted A. S. 1844. Zur Classification der Annulaten mit Beschreibung einiger neuer oder unzulanglich bekannter Gattungen und Arten. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 10 (1): 99 - 112. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 13704002 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Ssolowiew M. 1899. Polychaeten-Studien I. Die Terebelliden des Weissen Meeres. Annuaire du Musee Zoologique de l'Academie Imperiale des Sciences de St. Petersbourg 4 (2): 179 - 220. Available from https: // biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 39099726 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Southward E. C. 1956. On some Polychaeta of the Isle of Man. Annals and Magazine of Natural History Series 12 9 (100): 257 - 270. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222935608655812","Langerhans P. 1880. Die Wurmfauna von Madeira. III. Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Zoologie 34 (1): 87 - 143.","Mikac B. & Hutchings P. 2017. One new species of Pista Malmgren, 1866 (Annelida: Terebellidae) and one new species of Pistella Hartmann-Schroder, 1996 (Annelida: Terebellidae) from the Adriatic Sea (Mediterranean). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 97 (5): 943 - 953. https: // doi. org / 10.1017 / s 0025315417000868","Saphronova M. A. 1988. On cosmopolitan distribution of Pista cristata (Polychaeta, Terebellidae). Zoologicheskii zhurnal 67 (6): 888 - 897.","Labrune C., Lavesque N., Bonifacio P. & Hutchings P. 2019. A new species of Pista Malmgren, 1866 (Annelida, Terebellidae) from the Western Mediterranean Sea. ZooKeys 838: 71 - 83. https: // doi. org / 10.3897 / zookeys. 838.28634","Gaillande D. 1970. Une polychete Terebellidae nouvelle des cotes de Provence: Pista mediterranea n. sp. Tethys 2 (2): 443 - 448.","McIntosh W. C. 1885. Report on the Annelida Polychaeta collected by H. M. S. Challenger during the years 1873 - 1876. Report on the Scientific Results of the Voyage of H. M. S. Challenger during the years 1873 - 76. Zoology 12: 1 - 554. Available from https: // www. biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 50688432 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Pearson T. H. 1969. Scionella lornensis sp. nov., a new terebellid (Polychaeta: Annelida) from the west coast of Scotland, with notes on the genus Scionella Moore, and a key to the genera of the Terebellidae recorded from European waters. Journal of Natural History 3 (4): 509 - 516. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222936900770441","Linnaeus C. 1767. Systema Naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Editio duodecima reformata. Typis Ioannis Thomae von Trattner, Wien [Vindobonae]. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 156772","Lezzi M. & Giangrande A. 2019. New species of Streblosoma (Thelepodidae, Annelida) from the Mediterranean Sea: S. pseudocomatus sp. nov., S. nogueirai sp. nov. and S. hutchingsae sp. nov. Journal of Natural History 52 (43 - 44): 2857 - 2873. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00222933.2018.1556357","Sars G. O. 1872. Diagnoser af nye Annelider fra Christianiaforden, efter Professor M. Sar's efterladte Manuskripter. Forhandlinger i Videnskabs-Selskabet i Christiania 1871: 406 - 417. Available from https: // biodiversitylibrary. org / page / 44067540 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021]","Fabricius O. 1780. Fauna Groenlandica, systematice sistens, Animalia Groenlandiae occidentalis hactenus indagata, quoad nomen specificum, triviale, vernaculumque synonyma auctorum plurium, descriptionem, locum, victum, generationem, mores, usum, capturamque singuli prout detegendi occasio fuit, maximaque parte secundum proprias observations. Impensis Ioannis Gottlob Rothe, Copenhagen et Leipzig [Hafniae et Lipsiae]. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 13489","Grube A. E. 1855. Beschreibungen neuer oder wenig bekannter Anneliden. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 21 (1): 81 - 136. Available from https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 13989 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Kingston P. F. & Mackie A. S. Y. 1980. Octobranchus floriceps sp. nov. (Polychaeta: Trichobranchidae) from the northern North Sea with a re-examination of O. antarcticus Monro. Sarsia 65: 249 - 254. https: // doi. org / 10.1080 / 00364827.1980.10431487","Grube A. E. 1863. Beschreibung neuer oder wenig bekannter Anneliden. Sechster Beitrag. Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 29: 37 - 69. Available from https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. part. 9306 [accessed 8 Nov. 2021].","Williams S. J. 1984. The status of Terebellides stroemi (Polychaeta; Trichobranchidae) as a cosmopolitan species, based on a worldwide morphological survey, including description of new species. In: Hutchings P. A. (ed.) Proceedings of the First International Polychaete Conference, Sydney, Australia, 1984: 118 - 142. The Linnean Society of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.","Parapar J., Capa M., Nygren A. & Moreira J. 2020 a. To name but a few: descriptions of five new species of Terebellides (Annelida, Trichobranchidae) from the North East Atlantic. ZooKeys 992: 1 - 58. https: // doi: 10.3897 / zookeys. 992.55977","Parapar J., Moreira J. & Helgason G. V. 2011. Taxonomy and distribution of Terebellides (Polychaeta, Trichobranchidae) in Icelandic waters, with the description of a new species. Zootaxa 2983 (1): 1 - 20. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 2983.1.1","Parapar J., Mikac B. & Fiege D. 2013. Diversity of the genus Terebellides (Polychaeta: Trichobranchidae) in the Adriatic Sea with the description of a new species. Zootaxa 3691 (3): 333 - 350. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3691.3.3","Parapar J., Moreira J. & O'Reilly M. 2016. A new species of Terebellides (Polychaeta: Trichobranchidae) from Scottish waters with an insight into branchial morphology. Marine Biodiversity 46 (3): 211 - 225. https: // doi. org / 10.1007 / s 12526 - 015 - 0353 - 5","Sars M. 1835. Beskrivelser og Iagttagelser over nogle maerkelige eller nye i Havet ved den Bergenske Kyst Levende Dyr af Polypernes, Acalephernes, Radiaternes, Annelidernes og Molluskernes classer, med en kort Oversigt over de hidtil af Forfatteren sammesteds fundne Arter og deres Forekommen. T. Hallager, Bergen. https: // doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 13017","Glasby C. J. & Hutchings P. 2014. Revision of the taxonomy of Polycirrus Grube, 1850 (Annelida: Terebellida: Polycirridae). Zootaxa 3877 (1): 1 - 117. https: // doi. org / 10.11646 / zootaxa. 3877.1.1"]}

(IF 1.39; Q2); International audience; This paper is the conclusion of the “Spaghetti Project” aiming to revise French species of Terebellidae sensu lato (s.l.) belonging to the five families: Polycirridae, Telothelepodidae, Terebellidae sensu stricto (s.s.), Thelepodidae and Trichobranchidae. During this project, 41 species were observed, 31 of them new for science: eight species of Polycirridae, eleven species of Terebellidae s.s., three species of Thelepodidae and nine species of Trichobranchidae. We provide a comprehensive key for all European species of terebellids with a focus on the important diagnostic characters for each family. Finally, we discuss issues on taxonomy, biodiversity and cryptic and pseudo-cryptic species of polychaetes in European waters, based on results obtained during this project.

We gathered total organic carbon (%) and relative abundances of benthic foraminifera in intertidal areas and transitional waters from the English Channel/European Atlantic Coast (587 samples) and the Mediterranean Sea (301 samples) regions from published and unpublished datasets. This database allowed to calculate total organic carbon optimum and tolerance range of benthic foraminifera in order to assign them to ecological groups of sensitivity. Optima and tolerance range were obtained by mean of the weighted-averaging method. The data are related to the research article titled "Indicative value of benthic foraminifera for biomonitoring: assignment to ecological groups of sensitivity to total organic carbon of species from European intertidal areas and transitional waters The authors are grateful to the Swiss National Science Foundation, the Agence de l'Eau Artois-Picardie, the Communauté d'Agglomération du Boulonnais, the Université de Lille, the Université du Littoral Côte d'Opale, the Laboratoire d'Océanologie et de Géosciences for their financial support to FOBIMO workshops in Fribourg (Switzerland), Wimereux (France) and Texel (The Netherlands); Additional funding was provided by Spanish MINECO (RTI2018-095678-B-C21, MCIU/AEI/FEDER, UE)

International audience; This work contributes to the ongoing work aiming at confirming benthic foraminifera as a biological quality element. In this study, benthic foraminifera from intertidal and transitional waters from the English Channel/European Atlantic coast and the Mediterranean Sea were assigned to five ecological groups using the weighted-averaging optimum with respect to TOC of each species. It was however not possible to assign typical salt marsh species due to the presence of labile and refractory organic matter that hampers TOC characterization. Tests of this study species’ lists with Foram-AMBI on two independent datasets showed a significant correlation between Foram-AMBI and TOC, confirming the strong relation between foraminifera and TOC. For one of the validation datasets, associated macrofaunal data were available and a significant correlation was found between the foraminiferal Foram-AMBI and the macrofaunal AMBI. The here proposed lists should be further tested withsensitivity-based indices in different European regional settings.

To compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between patients who underwent intramedullary nail (IMN) fixation for tibial shaft fractures using an infrapatellar (IP) or the newer suprapatellar (SP) approach. Secondary outcomes included fluoroscopic radiation exposure, operative time, and radiographic outcomes.A systematic literature search of the databases Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Study Selection.Level I to III studies in which patients over the age of 18 years with acute tibial shaft fractures who underwent tibial IMN fixation using an IP or SP approach for fracture fixation were assessed for inclusion. Studies with a minimum of 10 patients in each cohort that reported on postoperative patient-reported outcomes with at least 6 months of follow-up were included for analysis.Twelve studies that reported PROMs and compared IP and SP intramedullary nailing of tibial shaft fractures were analyzed. This included 654 patients who underwent IP IMN fixation and 542 patients who underwent SP IMN fixation. A random-effects model for unadjusted/crude study estimates were pooled using inverse variance (IV) weighting for continuous variable analysis.This review found a significant improvement in PROM for patients with tibial shaft fractures when the SP IMN technique was used. In addition, there was a significant decrease in intraoperative fluoroscopy time consistent with other radiographic findings demonstrating improved start point accuracy and reduction with SP IMN fixation of tibial shaft fractures.Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

National audience; Sur le site SOMLIT Antioche des Pertuis charentais, sont présentées les 10 premières années de suivis après une court présentation du site, des méthodes et des outils d'analyse y compris la bancarisation sous contrôle qualité.

Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) rarely eliminate emerging contaminants from effluents they discharged into waterways, and therefore, represent significant contaminations sources with deleterious environmental risks. This paper presents a VIKOR-based model to assess the contamination risk posed by a cluster of WWTPs. A risk index was defined via building a membership function embodying the performance degrees of WWTPs and risks levels within the framework of fuzzy set theory. The proposed approach was tested using a case study of WWTPs cluster along the Pearl River. Sensitivity analyses were carried out to investigate the robustness of the model. The results confirmed the ability of the proposed approach to reveal the risk level of a given treatment point. Further, the comparison with a TOPSIS scheme as well as sensitivity analysis results substantiate the consistency, accuracy, and reliability of the proposed approach. It is therefore bounds to improve the decentralized management of WWTPs-induced river contamination.

A better development of the Sicilo-Sarde dairy sheep in Tunisia needs a review of its behavior by adopting early weaning and generalizing mechanical milking that involves an adaptation of the external mammary morphology (MM). Thirty ewes were divided into two groups (early and late weaning; EW and LW respectively) to study the effects of weaning system (WS) and milking time (MT) on milk and external MM traits in early milking period. MM was evaluated by six measurements and three scores of udder and teat. EW group had higher milk production (MP) and lower fat and protein amounts that increased with MT advancement (P0.001). WS did not affect MM traits (P>0.05), only teat length was higher for LW ewes (P0.05). Udder depth, teat diameter, distance between teats and teat angle score decreased with MT (P0.01). Significant interactions were noted between WS and MT for most traits studied. MP was negatively correlated with fat and protein amounts (-0.38 and -0.50 respectively) and moderately correlated with udder depth, cistern height, teat diameter (from 0.31 to 0.42). Fat and protein had negative correlation with udder depth, teat diameter and distance between teats. Higher correlation was determined between udder depth and distance between teats (r=0.60; P0.001). In conclusion, EW system allows a better start of the milk production in early milking period. Cistern height, teat length and teat angle score are the prominent traits which affect milk ability and adaptation of ewe to machine milking and consequently they must be included in selection program.

BACKGROUND: Measuring drilled bore depth in bone is an important part of osteosynthesis surgery. Current methods have substantial limitations in terms of reliability, leading to placement of incorrectly sized screws and unsatisfactory user experience. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Can a prototype laser range-finder measure bore depth in bone as well as or better than a conventional depth gauge in terms of accuracy and precision (that is, variability)? METHODS: A conventional analog orthopaedic surgical depth gauge was compared with a laser range-finder-based prototype. Experiments were conducted on four pig hind limbs, with bicortical holes drilled in the femur and the tibia. Two surgeons alternated drilling bores in three different clinically relevant conditions: straight drilling through the diaphysis, angled drilling through the diaphysis, and straight drilling through the metaphysis. Depth measurements were taken with the laser range-finder-based prototype, and the conventional depth gauge and compared against depth measurements obtained from a CT image that served as the reference measurement. RESULTS: In straight diaphyseal drilling the laser range-finder-based prototype had a larger mean error of 1.34 mm (± 0.7 mm) compared with a mean error of -0.06 mm (± 1.38 mm) using the conventional gauge (95% CI 0.824 to 1.976; p < 0.001). In angled diaphyseal drilling, there was no difference in mean error between the laser range-finder-based prototype (1.66 ± 0.86 mm) and the conventional gauge (2.36 ± 3.79 mm [95% CI -2.338 to 0.938]; p = 0.393). In straight metaphyseal drilling, there was no difference in mean error between the laser range-finder-based prototype (2.11 ± 0.8 mm) and the conventional gauge (1.51 ± 3.19 mm [95% CI -0.500 to 1.700]; p = 0.280). The laser range-finder-based prototype had greater precision (smaller variance) than the conventional depth gauge in straight diaphyseal drilling (p < 0.001), angled diaphyseal drilling (p < 0.001), and straight metaphyseal drilling (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A laser range-finder-based prototype mounted on a conventional surgical drill demonstrated overall similar accuracy and better precision in measuring drilled bore depth in bone compared with the conventional depth gauge. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A device based on this concept could improve the reliability of bore depth measurement in surgical practice and could therefore reduce the frequency of screw replacement and associated complications.

Bone, 125, ISSN:8756-3282

AimsThe aim of this study was to determine the trajectory of recovery following fixation of tibial plateau fractures up to five-year follow-up, including simple (Schatzker I-IV) versus complex (Schatzker V-VI) fractures.Patients and MethodsPatients undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for tibial plateau fractures were enrolled into a prospective database. Functional outcome, using the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS), was collected at baseline, six months, one year, and five years. The trajectory of recovery for complex fractures (Schatzker V and VI) was compared with simple fractures (Schatzker I to IV). Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated between timepoints. In all, 182 patients were enrolled: 136 (74.7%) in simple and 46 (25.3%) in complex. There were 103 female patients and 79 male patients with a mean age of 45.8 years (15 to 86).ResultsMean SF-36 PCS improved significantly in both groups from six to 12 months (p < 0.001) and one to five years (simple, p = 0.008; complex, p = 0.007). In both groups, the baseline scores were not reached at five years. The SF-36 PCS was significantly higher in the simple group compared with the complex group at both six months (p = 0.007) and 12 months (p = 0.01), but not at five years (p = 0.17). Between each timepoint, approximately 50% or more of the patients in each group achieved an MCID in their score change, indicating a significant clinical change in condition. The complex group had a much larger drop off in the first six months, with comparable proportions achieving MCID at the subsequent time intervals.ConclusionTibial plateau fracture recovery was characterized overall by an initial decline in functional outcome from baseline, followed by a steep improvement from six to 12 months, and ongoing recovery up to five years. In simple patterns, patients tended to achieve a higher functional score by six months compared with the complex patterns. However, comparable functional scores between the groups achieved only at the five-year point suggest later recovery in the complex group. Function does not improve to baseline by five years in either group. This information is useful in counselling patients about the course of prospective recovery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1009–1014.

Although multiple algorithms have been reported that focus on improving the accuracy of 2D–3D registration techniques, there has been relatively little attention paid to quantifying their capture range. In this paper, we analyze the capture range for a number of variant formulations of the 2D–3D registration problem in the context of pedicle screw insertion surgery. We tested twelve 2D–3D registration techniques for capture range under different clinically realistic conditions. A registration was considered as successful if its error was less than 2 mm and 2° in 95% of the cases. We assessed the sensitivity of capture range to a variety of clinically realistic parameters including: X-ray contrast, number and configuration of X-rays, presence or absence of implants in the image, inter-subject variability, intervertebral motion and single-level vs multi-level registration. Gradient correlation + Powell optimizer had the widest capture range and the least sensitivity to X-ray contrast. The combination of 4 AP + lateral X-rays had the widest capture range (725 mm2). The presence of implant projections significantly reduced the registration capture range (up to 84%). Different spine shapes resulted in minor variations in registration capture range (SD 78 mm2). Intervertebral angulations of less than 1.5° had modest effects on the capture range. This paper assessed capture range of a number of variants of intensity-based 2D–3D registration algorithms in clinically realistic situations (for the use in pedicle screw insertion surgery). We conclude that a registration approach based on the gradient correlation similarity and the Powell’s optimization algorithm, using a minimum of two C-arm images, is likely sufficiently robust for the proposed application.

This paper proposes an improved soil-water-structure coupled interaction model within the framework of smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH). The continuous penetration process of the spudcan in clayey soil was investigated along with the concomitant variation of pore water pressure. The proposed method enables the efficient capturing of excess pore water pressure variation in soil undergoing large deformations. Verification and validation performed using previous numerical investigations and centrifuge test data indicate that the proposed model is valid, robust, and effective. This model can be employed to solve various penetration problems and other problems involving complex soil-water-structure interaction and large soil deformations.

Marine wood-borers often live in sympatry, sharing deadwood scattered at sea, both as food and habitat. In this study, carbon and nitrogen isotope compositions were determined to test the hypothesis that the trophic niches of Chelura terebrans, Limnoria quadripunctata, and Nototeredo norvagica obtained from softwood boards maintained in running, unfiltered seawater are different. Comparison of isotope compositions supports niche partitioning, with N. norvagica foraging primarily on wood, and crustaceans foraging on decaying wood. Needs and acquisition routes for nitrogen determine the trophic behavior of the species. Results presented here are valuable for assessing the impact of wood-boring species on each other, but also for evaluating the effect of the separation of carbon and nitrogen sources on the diversity of the interactions between co-existing species belonging to the same trophic guild.

Background: Due to increasing use of new oral anticoagulants (NOACs), clinicians are faced more and more frequently with clinical issues related to these drugs. Objective: The objective of this publication is to make practical suggestions for the perioperative management of NOACs as well as for their handling in overdoses and bleedings. Recommendations: In elective surgery and creatinine clearance ≥ 50 ml/min, a NOAC should be discontinued 24-36 h before the intervention, and even earlier in case of reduced kidney function. In emergency interventions that cannot be delayed, the management is dependent on the NOAC plasma levels. With levels ≤ 30 ng/ml, surgery can be performed. With levels >30 ng/ml, reversal agents should be considered. In low bleeding risk surgery, NOACs can be re-started 24 h after the intervention, which is prolonged to 48-72 h after surgery with high bleeding risk. In case of NOAC overdose and minor bleedings, temporary discontinuation and supportive care are usually sufficient to control the situation. In severe or life-threatening bleedings, nonspecific and specific reversal agents should be considered.