Search

Eulimnogammarus cyanoides (Sowinsky, 1915) Figures 2���7 Echinogammarus cyanoides. Sowinsky 1915, 154��� 155, figs 155, 156; Taf. XX, figs 16���19. Non Eulimnogammarus cyanoides. Bazikalova 1945, 209��� 210; Taf. XXV, fig. 3; Taf. XXVI, fig. 1. Material examined. Lectotype: female, 9.3 mm, ZIN 1 / 68949; Russia, Lake Baikal, 12.08. 1902, collected near the Solzan River at a depth of 1���3 sazhen (1 sazhen = 2.16 m). The lectotype is designated here. Paralectotypes: female 8.7 mm, ZIN 2 / 88512, from the same sample as the lectotype; male 10.2 mm and 1 dissected specimen, ZMK No. 356 b, the same sample as the lectotype. In addition, we determined that two further dissected specimens from the original sampling of Sowinsky did not belong to this species: 1 sp., ZMK No. 356 b, from the same sampling; 1 sp., ZMK No. 356 c, 15.06. 1900, Lake Baikal, collected by a diver in Maly Baranchik Bay at a the depth of 3���4 sazhen. All specimens in ZMK were in the status of syntypes (Kostyuk 1973); they are also marked as syntypes in a museum digital catalogue (http: // museumkiev.org / zoology / catalog / cat_ types _titul.html). Earlier (not later than 1989), an unknown person selected a lectotype and paralectotypes from this series of syntypes. Nevertheless, the lectotype status had not previously been published and therefore is not considered valid. The specimen, marked by the unknown person as a lectotype (collected from Baranchik Bay, ZMK No 356 c), does not belong to the species E. cyanoides, because it has the following characteristics: long setae already present on the second pleon segment whereas E. cyanoides has long setae that begin from the third segment. The eye is strongly curved, the lower part of which is markedly wider than the higher part, and its vertical diameter is 2.5 -fold bigger than horizontal diameter. The basal article of the peduncle in antenna 1 widens in the middle. The propodites of the gnatopod 1 are small (even in female of E. cyanoides they are very large) and shorter than the head and even shorter than the propodites of the gnatopod 2. The taxonomic status of this specimen must be defined separately; however, it cannot be considered a lectotype for E. cyanoides. One specimen from the collection unit ZMK No. 356 b also shows setae beginning from the second segment of the pleon in addition to two groups of spines in the third segment of the pleon, which strongly indicates that this specimen belongs to another species. Due to the ICZN requirements, the lectotype is designated in this report. Sowinsky (1915) indicated ���Solzan��� as the first site where the species was noted; we therefore assigned the lectotype from a number of syntypes collected at this place. There is one E. cyanoides specimen in the ���Catalogue of amphipod collection (including type specimens) stored in the Limnological institute SB RAS��� (Mekhanikova et al. 2010 ���2011), which was identified by Dorogostaisky and was collected from the Ushkanji islands region (№ 670, 12.08.1921). The revision of this one specimen revealed that it does not belong to the species E. cyanoides because segment 3 of the pleon is armed with 3 lines of spines, which contradicts the diagnosis. Its eyes are also quite wide. Diagnosis. Four posterior body segments with very long setae. Only segments of urosome armed with spines. Eyes wide-reniform, their height not more than twice time more then width. Antenna 1 exceeds 2 / 3 of body length; basal article of the peduncle distally with long thin posteromedial spine or two spines of varying lengths. Peduncles of antennae 1 and 2 with sparse bunches of setae. Gnathopod 1 propodi large, 1.5 times exceeding head length. Posterior-inferior angles of bases 6 and 7 without lobes. Uropods 1 and 2 with sparse long spines. Uropod 3 with sparse simple setae; outer ramus with rudimentary second article. Telson lobes with spines only on their apexes. Body length of adult females approximately 9 mm. Description. Female. Body smooth; habitus Gammarus -like (compact, laterally narrowed). Pleonites 1 and 2 without setae or spines. The 3 rd segment of pleon with many long setae in geminate-groups on the dorsal surface and along posterior margin; the longest setae markedly greater in length than urosomal segment 1. All three urosomites bear twin groups of 1���3 long, thin spines that are suberected or almost completely erected, and long setae (greater than length of segment bearing them) on posterior margin. Head slightly swollen from dorsally and terminated by very short rostrum; interantennal lobe poorly developed and smoothly rounded. Eyes dark and wide-reniform; their vertical diameter exceeding horizontal diameter by approximately 2 -fold and is slightly larger than diameter of basal article of antenna 1 peduncle. Antenna 1 is slightly longer than 2 / 3 of body length. Basal article approximately the length of head. On its anterior-inferior angle, it bears one long, thin spine or two spines���a long one and one that is 0.5���0.75 times as long as the other (cf. Fig. 3, 7). Inferior margin with a single seta (lectotype) or in one case, a single small thorn was observed (Fig. 7). Article 2 is marginally longer than basal article; article 3 is antenna 2 swollen, bearing 0���2 setae; antennal cone thin and sharp and slightly shorter than article 3 of peduncle; articles 4 and 5 long and thin, whereas article 5 is 0.75 times as long as article 4, and both bearing bunches of sparse but long setae on their inferior margin. Flagella with 9���10 articles noted bearing sparse, long setae. Calceoli absent. Mandibles. Incisors with 6 denticles, and dental row comprising 4 setae. Article 1 in the mandibular palp with 2 setae (one very short); article 2 wide with long setae on distal third; article 3 lanceolate with a brush (D 3 -setae) that is 2 / 3 its length with equal-length setae. Maxilla 1 (In lectotype damaged). Outer plate with 8 spine-teeth, two of which bifurcated, and others obliquepectinate. Inner plate bearing 11���16 plumose setae. Palp narrower than outer plate, extending over apexes of spineteeth on this plate. Distal end of palp with 2 setae. Maxilla 2 plates elongated, of equal size, and inner plate bearing 14 plumose setae on oblique row. Maxilliped. Outer plate wide, exceeding middle of third palp article; inner plate small, not exceeding middle of outer plate length. It bears 3 blunt, tapered teeth. Terminal article of palp slightly shorter than middle article and amplified on its apical part; dactylus thin and elongated, in proximal portion half as wide as terminal palp article (its distal portion). Lower lip: lobes wide, short; setules of inner margins poorly developed. Coxal plates bare; coxa 1 wide, tetragonal and shorter than coxa 2, with skewed anterior and posterior margins. Coxae 2 and 3 linguiform; coxa 4 with smooth, rounded lobes in the inferior 1 / 3 of posterior margins. Propodus of gnathopod 1 very large, oval, 1.5 times as long as head and twice as long as propodus of gnathopod 2. Palmar margin markedly oblique, and inferior margin swollen, with bunches of sparse short setae. Proximal 1 / 3 of palmar margin with thick, blunt spine together with group of boundary spines. Inferior margin without spines. Dactylus very curved. Carpus of gnathopod 1 short. Propodus of gnathopod 2 weak, tetragonal, and its anterior and posterior margins parallel. Palm margin short and swollen. Only boundary spines present. Posterior margin without spines, bearing dense setae. Carpus elongated. Pereopods 3 and 4 short, with sparse, long setae and only single spines. Meri longer and significantly wider than carpi and are approximately as long as propodi. Dactyli short, thick and curved. Pereopods 5���7 rather short. Pereopods 5 noticeably shorter than pereopods 6. Pereopods 7 slightly shorter than pereopods 6, articles bearing sparse, long spines and sparse bunches of setae, particularly long on anterior margins of articles. Bases of all three pairs bearing a single, short seta on their anterior and posterior margins. Length of basis 5 is 1.5 times width; posterior margin distinct, forming obtuse lobe. Basis of pereopod 6 more elongated, and its posterior margin slightly cut and its inferior portion not developed. Distal parts of merus and carpus of pereopods 5���7 twice as wide as proximal part of propodus. Propodi thin, slightly curved and not less than 1.5 times longer than carpi. Distal ends of propodi in pereopods 5 and 6 with bunches of very long setae; fifth propodi with setae along entire length of propodus. Dactyli length approximately 1 / 3 the length of propodi, robust and curved at apices. Epimera of pleonal segments almost unarmed; epimera 1 short and rounded; epimera 2 and 3 wide, without short spines along their inferior margin. Inferior-posterior angle of epimera 2 slightly dulled and in epimera 3 acuminated. Uropods 1 and 2 protruding backwards and of similar lengths, quite thin and armed by single, long, thin spines. Rami of uropod 1 equal in length; outer ramus of uropod 2 is 0.75 times as long as inner ramus; inner rami only with apical spines, whereas outer rami bearing additional medial spines. Uropod 3 is 1 / 4 the length of body; outer ramus 3 times as long as peduncle and 4���4.5 as long as inner ramus. It bears a rudimentary second article and sparse long spines and bunches of simple setae on both margins and apex (parts of setae apparently broken). Inner ramus with one long spine and simple seta on apex. Telson cleft up to the base; telson lobes tapering, with 1���2 spines and 2���3 setae; lateral margins of lobes with 1 seta each. Male: Inferior margin of propodus of gnathopod 1 with a row of short and rather wide, tapering thorns beginning from 1 / 3 of article���s length (Fig. 7). Propodus of gnathopod 2 narrower than in female. Body length 8.0��� 10.2 mm (our measurements). Sowinsky (1915) described the body length as being 12���13 mm. Specimens of this latter length are absent among the type specimens, recognized by us as belonging to this species. Comparative remarks. Based on a number of characteristics, this species corresponds to the later-described E. grandimanus Bazikalova, 1945. First, presence of spines only on three urosomital segments; the low eyes; presence of a spine on the peduncular article of antenna 1; and the characteristic large propodi of gnathopod 1 (see: Bazikalova 1945, taf. XXVII, fig. 2). It is notable that the propodus of gnathopod 1, depicted in this figure by Bazikalova, bears a hard, blunt thorn in the middle of the palmar margin and a group of the boundary thorns, which, as indicated above, is characteristic for female of E. cyanoides. And more, according to this description the lower margin carries paired blunt, short, small thorns, characteristic for male specimens of E. cyanoides (page 212). Using the key of Bazikalova (1945), all of the examined type specimens of E. cyanoides were identified as E. grandimanus. However, Bazikalova (1945) indicated great variability for E. grandimanus, which shows variation in the arming of the third pleonal segment (setae are absent in some cases but are dense, long and form two rows in other cases). Variability was also described for the uropod 3 structure (length of rami and vastly different densities of setae). These differences indicate that E. grandimanus is initially presumed to be a composite species. We assume that E. grandimanus sensu Bazikalova is a minor synonym of E. cyanoides. The revision of its holotype at the ZIN (1 / 50177) in 2013 showed that uropod 3 of the E. grandimanus holotype is equipped with curved simple setae, whereas no one of E. cyanoides are curved. A detailed study of the intraspecific polymorphisms of E. grandimanus sensu Bazikalova is necessary for a final decision to synonymize E. grandimanus with E. cyanoides or to divide first species into two or more species. Examination of the available specimens of E. grandimanus, collected in different areas of Lake Baikal (Bolshie Koty Bay, Cape Bolshoy Kadilnyi, Cape Pokoyniki, Bolshoy Ushkaniy Island) revealed the following inconsistent differences from the type specimens of E. cyanoides: setae on the last four body segments of E. grandimanus do not lay backwards, but are rather upright and often bend forward; basal article of the antenna 1 peduncle, articles of antenna 2 and its flagellum are comparatively shorter and thicker. Even in large (8���10 mm) specimens, the secondary flagellum comprises 2���3 distinct articles, one of which is rudimentary (if any exists). Pereopods 3 and 4 bear bunches of very short setae. The rami of uropods 1 and 2 are shorter. The outer ramus of uropod 3 is also significantly shorter than in E. cyanoides, and the setae vary in length and density; however, in most cases, they are more or less curved (as in the holotype). The differences comparison with other morphologically close species��� E. cyaneus (Dybowsky) and E. cyanellus Bazikalova���that could be confused with E. cyanoides are provided below. In all three species, only the last three urosomites are armed with spines and setae. E. cyanoides is different from E. cyaneus based on the following characteristics: 1. Setae on the third pleonal and on the first and second urosomal segments are significantly longer. 2. Setae on both antennae are less dense and are collected in a smaller number of bunches. The inferior-anterior angle of antenna 1 bears a long thorn without dense setae. 3. The terminal article of the mandibular palp carries a brush with setae of equal length (the setae in a brush of E. cyaneus are unequal). 4. All pereopods show less setae, and the posterior margin of the basis in pereopod 7 is poorly developed. E. cyanoides differs from E. cyanellus based on the following characteristics: 1. The inferior part of the eyes does not extend (in E. cyanellus, they are extended). 2. The setae on the last 4 body segments are quite dense and long (in E. cyanellus, they are sparse and short). 3. The basis of pereopod 5 is slightly concave on the posterior margin (in E. cyanellus, this margin is convex). However, besides spine armor being only on the final three segments of the body, both species show other characteristics that are similar: the structure of the basal article of antenna 1 (inferior-anterior angle bears 1���2 spines), uropods 1 and 2 (rami of the first pair are equal, the outer ramus of the second pair is shorter than the inner ramus) and the basis of pereopod 7 ���in E. cyanellus, the inferior-posterior angle protrudes slightly whereas in E. cyanoides, it is smoothly rounded (see Fig. 6). Distribution and ecology. Russia, Lake Baikal. Sowinsky (1915) described the following sampling points. 1. The Solzan River at a depth of 1���3 sazhen (approximately 2���7 m), stones, sand. 2. Maly Baranchik Bay, collected from sponges (at a depth of 3���4 sazhen). 3. Ushkanyi islands. Only the first point can be considered accurate. Identification of this species from the second sampling point is inaccurate (see above). It is necessary to consider that only a limited number of species show biocoenotic relationships with sponges in Lake Baikal. The third sampling point, from which no intact samples remain, may also be erroneous. As described by Sowinsky (1915, p. 155): ���Ushkanyi islands. Dredged from a depth of 20 sazhen (43 m), 12 specimens ���. However, a list of all of the species found in the description of the obtained material from the different areas of the lake (p. 60) exists, which states for the area of Ushkanyi islands: ��� Echinogammarus cyaneus (Dyb.) ��� 12 ex.���. Nevertheless E. cyanoides is absent from the list. However, the presence of E. cyaneus at that depth remains doubtful because this species inhabits only narrow areas of the water edge and can also be found up to depths of 5 m (Bazikalova 1945; Weinberg et al. 2002; Govorukhina 2005, etc.). After the re-examination of E. cyanoides specimens from the area of Solzan, it was found that one of the specimens (lectotype, ZIN 1 / 68949) was a female of the fifth stage and another (paralectotype, ZIN 2 / 88512) was a female of the second stage, indicating that at the moment of sampling, this species was approaching the end of the reproduction period. As stated above, Bazikalova (1945) described, under the name of E. cyanoides, another species that appears to be E. messerschmidtii sp. n. (original materials of Bazikalova are absent in LIN and ZIN). Therefore, it is unlikely that the reports of Bazikalova (1945) and of other authors (Golyshkina 1963; Kamaltynov 2001) on the new locations of E. cyanoides are accurate. Obviously the determination of this species by Golyshkina (1963) for silts with the detritus in the Irkutsk water reservoir is erroneous. However, if E. cyanoides (Sowinsky, 1915) and some representatives of E. grandimanus (Bazikalova, 1945) are synonymous, this species may be considered widespread in the Baikal littoral zone (0.5���15 m)., Published as part of Bedulina, Daria S., Ta, V., Pogrebnyak, Svyatoslav G., Govorukhina, Ekaterina B., Madyarova, Ekaterina V., Lubyaga, Yulia A., Vereshchagina, Kseniya P., Timofeyev, Maxim A. & Luckenbach, Till, 2014, On Eulimnogammarus messerschmidtii, sp. n. (Amphipoda: Gammaridea) from Lake Baikal, Siberia, with redescription of E. cyanoides (Sowinsky) and remarks on taxonomy of the genus Eulimnogammarus, pp. 518-544 in Zootaxa 3838 (5) on pages 521-529, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3838.5.2, http://zenodo.org/record/225127, {"references":["Sowinsky, V. K. (1915) Amphipoda of Lake Baikal. In: Zoological researches of Baikal. Vol. 9. No. 1. Kiev, 381 pp., 37 plates. [in Russian, part. German]","Bazikalova, A. Ya. (1945) Les Amphipodes du Baikal. Proceedings of the Baikal Limnological station USSR Academy of Sciences, 11, 1 - 440. [in Russian, with French summary]","Kostyuk, Yu. O. (1973) Catalogue of the types of Gammaridae (Crustacea, Amphipoda) described by V. K. Sowinsky and kept at the Institute of Zoology of the Academy of Sciences of the SSR Ukraine. In: Zbirnyk prats Zoologychnogo Muzeyu. No. 35. \" Naukova dumka \" Publ., Kiev, pp. 93 - 99. [in Ukrainian]","Mekhanikova, I. V., Sitnikova, T. Ya., Petryashev, V. V., Penzina, M. M. & Timoshkin, O. A. (2010 - 2011) Catalogue of amphipod collection (including type specimens), stored in the Limnological institute SB RAS (Irkutsk). In: Timoshkin, O. A. (Ed.), Index of animal species inhabiting Lake Baikal and its catchment area. Vol. II. Basins and Channels in the south of East Siberia and North Mongolia, Book 2. \" Nauka \" Publ., Novosibirsk, pp. 1270 - 1325. [in Russian]","Weinberg, I. V., Kamaltynov, R. M., Timofeyev, M. A., Glyzina, O. Yu. & Gavrilova, A. V. (2002) Biology and production of endemic Baikalian amphipod Eulimnogammarus cyaneus (Crustacea, Amphipoda). In: Ta k h t e e v, V. V. (E d.), Ecological, physiological and parasitological researches of the freshwater amphipods. Irkutsk State University Press, Irkutsk, pp. 59 - 66. [in Russian, with English summary]","Govorukhina, E. B. (2005) Biology of reproduction, seasonal and diurnal dynamics of the populations of the litoral and sublitoral amphipod species in Lake Baikal, PhD Thesis. Irkutsk State University, Irkutsk, 19 pp. [in Russian]","Golyshkina, R. A. (1963) Benthos of the Irkutsk water reservoir in the first years of its existence. Proceedings of the Institute of inland waters biology of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 6 (9), pp. 91 - 107. [in Russian]","Kamaltynov, R. M. (2001) Amphipoda: Gammaroidea. In: Timoshkin, O. A. (Ed.), Index of animal species inhabiting Lake Baikal and its catchment area. Vol. I. Lake Baikal. Book 1. \" Nauka \" Publ., Novosibirsk, pp. 572 - 831. [in Russian and English]"]}

Bedulina, Daria S., Ta, V., Pogrebnyak, Svyatoslav G., Govorukhina, Ekaterina B., Madyarova, Ekaterina V., Lubyaga, Yulia A., Vereshchagina, Kseniya P., Timofeyev, Maxim A., Luckenbach, Till (2014): On Eulimnogammarus messerschmidtii, sp. n. (Amphipoda: Gammaridea) from Lake Baikal, Siberia, with redescription of E. cyanoides (Sowinsky) and remarks on taxonomy of the genus Eulimnogammarus. Zootaxa 3838 (5): 518-544, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3838.5.2

Eulimnogammarus messerschmidtii Bedulina et Tachteew, sp. n. Figures 8���15 Eulimnogammarus cyanoides (part.). Bazikalova 1945: 209 ���210. Type specimens. Holotype: male, 16.0 mm, ���red��� morph., ISU 12 / 1114, 21.07. 2012, Russia, Lake Baikal, northern part near the delta of the Tyya River, the temporal island in the shoal, at a depth of 30���50 cm, pebbles and sand, macrophytes, sampling using a hand-net, temperature 15���20 ��C, pH 7.5 (Leg. D.S. Bedulina, T. Luckenbach). Type locality: coordinates, 55 �� 37 ��� 5.24 ���N, 109 �� 21 ��� 14.45 ���E (see Fig. 1, point 1). Paratypes: female, 15.0 mm, ���red��� morph., ZIN 1 / 88513, same sampling locality as the holotype; 2 females (15.2 and 17.5 mm), ���red��� morph., ISU 12 / 1115, same sampling locality as the holotype; male, 18.0 mm, ���blue��� morph., ISU 12 / 1116, same sampling locality as the holotype; 2 females (15.2 and 13.8 mm), ���blue��� morph., LIN 1131, same sampling locality as the holotype; 2 males (12.0 and 15.6 mm), 4 females (12.4, 12.5, 12.7 and 12.8 mm), ISU 12 / 1117, 25.06. 2006, Russia, Baikal Lake, Cape Bol���shoy Solontsovy, southern part, 54 �� 10 ��� 23 ��� N, 108 �� 21 ���01��� E (see Fig. 1, point 2), water edge, stones, temperature 5.5 ��C, sampling using a hand net (Leg. V.V. Takhteev, D.S. Bedulina); male, 12.5 mm, 3 females (12.7, 13.0 and 13.9 mm), ZMB 28096, same sample site; 2 males (13.0 and 14.3 mm), 2 females (12.3 and 13.4 mm), LIN 1132, same sampling site; male, 13.8 mm, 3 females (12.1, 13.3 and 13.3 mm), ZMK 246 (Inventory book of the stock collection of invertebrates, without insects) 96 (database of type materials of invertebrates, without insects), same sample site; 2 males (8.7 and 12.8 mm), female, 15.2 mm, ISU 12 / 1118, 22.06. 2002, Russia, Baikal Lake, Olkhon Island, Kharin-Irgi Bay, 53 ��04��� 10 ��� N, 106 �� 55 ��� 52 ��� E (see Fig. 1, point 3), water edge (at a depth of 0���30 cm), sampling using a hand net, stones, temperature 7.5 ��C (Leg. E.B. Govorukhina, V.V. Takhteev); male, 11.4 mm, 3 females (11.0, 11.4 and 13.3 mm), ZIN 2 / 88514, same sample site; 2 males (9.2 and 10.7 mm), 2 females (13.2 and 13.5 mm), ZMH K 43660, same sample site; male, 11.7 mm, female, 10.1 mm, MZH 125.886, same sample site. Other material examined. For the population analysis, an additional sample of 165 specimens collected from the sampling point 3 (Olkhon, Kharin-Irgi Bay, same date of collection) was used. Additionally, a pool of all paratypes (18 specimens) from the sampling point 3 (Cape Bol���shoy Solontsovy) was examined. Diagnosis. All characteristics should be considered together for species identification. Spines only on four last body segments, being combined with setae. Eyes narrow and curved. Flagella of antennae 1 and 2 with bunches of long, dense setae. Basal article of peduncle of antenna 1 without thorns on inferior-anterior angle. Antenna 1 not exceeding half of body length. Basis of pereopod 7 with poorly developed rectangular lobe on its inferior-posterior margin. Uropod 3 with dense simple setae, without plumose setae; outer ramus with small second article. Telson lobes bearing only apical spines and no lateral spines. Body length of adult specimens ranging from 7.5 to 18.0 mm in males and from 8.0 to 17.5 mm in females. Description. Male: Body smooth and Gammarus -like: compact, lateral narrowed. Pleon. Segment 1 bare, and segment 2 bearing only one pair of setae on posterior margin. Segment 3 with 3���4 paired rows of spines on dorsal surface, and sparse setae, quite long in two of the groups and sometimes protruding to the middle of next segment. Urosome. All three segments bearing two paired groups of spines (two median and two lateral); first and second segments with sparse, but quite long setae not protruding past the posterior margin of following segment. Head. Head slightly convex dorsally, with very short rostrum. Interantennal lobes with indistinct notch. Eyes black, narrow and curved (narrow-reniform), and their vertical diameter exceeding horizontal diameter by almost 3 -fold. Antenna 1 slightly shorter than 1 / 2 of body length and slightly longer than antenna 2. Basal peduncular article slightly shorter than head and without spines on its inferior-anterior margin. Distal half of inferior margin bearing dense setae, elongated at the end of article. Peduncle article 2 slightly longer than basal, whereas article 3 is 0,7 times as long as article 2. Both bearing rows of bunches of long setae on their inferior margin. Primary flagellum with 20���36 short articles; accessory flagellum with 3���5 and in rare cases, 7 articles. Antenna 2. Article 1 swollen, with a bunch of setae; antennal cone markedly shorter than third article of the peduncle; article 3 bearing a bunch of setae of varying lengths on its inferior-anterior angle. Article 4 slightly shorter than article 5, and both (in addition to the flagellum) bearing bunches of long, dense setae on their inferior margin. Flagella comprise up to 10���13 articles; calceoli absent. Mandible. Incisor with 5 long teeth. Dental row with 8 setae. Palp elongated; article 1 bearing a group of setae; article 2 narrow, with long, dense setae (D 2 -setae, after Lowry & Stoddart 1993) on its distal half. Terminal article lanceolate, with numerous A 3 - and E 3 -setae; D 3 -setae bunch 2 / 3 of article length; setae equal and gradually decreasing in length towards distal end. Maxilla 1. Outer plate containing 11 oblique-pectinate spine-teeth. Inner plate wide, bearing 17���18 plumose setae. Palp slightly narrower and longer than outer plate (together with spines). Maxilla 2. Outer plate slightly longer than inner plate, and both plates with dense setae on their distal ends. Inner plate bearing 17 plumose setae in oblique row. Maxilliped. Outer plate exceeding 2 / 3 of middle article of palp, and distal end widening and markedly wider than inner plate. Distal end of inner plate narrowing, trapeziform and bearing 3 large tapering teeth and several small, indistinct teeth at its distal end. Palp with dense groups of setae on its middle and terminal articles; middle article quite wide, whereas terminal article narrower than middle; dactylus 2 / 3 of length of terminal article. Coxal plates with smooth rounded anterior angles, bearing single short setae on margins and on outer side. Coxal plate 1 shorter than coxal plates 2���4. Coxal plates 1���3 linguiform, and coxa 4 with obtuse angle on inferior 1 / 3 of posterior margin. Gnathopod 1. Propodus narrow and amygdaline, shorter or equal to head length and 1 / 3 times as long as propodus of gnathopod 2; palmar margin with weak notch, gradually aligning to inferior. Inferior margin bearing 6 bunches of setae, all of which, with exception of first bunch, combined with spines increasing in length from proximal to distal. Dactylus curved markedly. Gnathopod 2. Propodus with parallel superior and inferior margins, and palmar margin delimited inferiorly by an angle; inferior margin bearing numerous bunches of dense setae. Pereopods 3 and 4 almost equal in length, and their bases curved. Carpi and propodi almost equal in length and slightly shorter than meri. Articles with bunches of spines and setae; longest setae on posterior margins of meri and carpi. Dactyli short and thick, and their tip curved markedly. Pereopods 5���7. Pereopod 6 almost a third longer than pereopod 5 and slightly shorter than pereopod 7. Basis of pereopod 5 wide (its length exceeding width by 1 / 4), posterior margin almost straight, and its inferior portion forming rather wide and slightly declining lobe. Basis of pereopod 6 tapering distally; posterior margin slightly excavated and with small rectangular lobe on the inferior margin. Basis of pereopod 7 twice as long as wide; posterior margin tapering in the inferior one-third and with more indistinct rectangular lobe. Posterior margins of bases 5���7 with slightly elongated setae (thus, this species��� morphology is different from the majority of other Eulimnogammarus). Meri and carpi equal in length, and propodi slightly longer, all bearing groups of spines and setae. Dactyli short and thick, with strongly curved tips. Epimeral plates of first pleonal segment small; on segment 2 with dulled inferior-posterior angle; on segment 3 wide and with a row of small spines along their inferior margins. Inferior-posterior angle of epimeral plates almost straight or slightly sharp or obtuse. Uropods 1 and 2 armed only with spines. Peduncles in both pairs of equal length, and rami slightly shorter than peduncles. Spines present at both ends and sides of rami. In uropod 1, rami long (longer than apexes of uropod 2 rami); outer ramus slightly longer than inner ramus. Outer ramus of uropod 2 slightly shorter than inner ramus. Uropod 3 is 1 / 5 ��� 1 / 6 the length of body; outer ramus> 3 -fold longer than peduncle and 4.0��� 4.5 -fold longer than inner ramus. Rudimentary article 2 present on outer ramus. Both rami with groups of spines and dense, simple setae; plumose setae absent. Telson notched up to the base; lobes tapering, and each with 3 apical spines and groups of setae on apexes and dorsal surface; setae not exceeding length of lobes; exterior and interior margins without spines. Body length up to 18 mm. Female. Propodus of gnathopod 1 is 0.7 times as long as head, its superior and inferior margins parallel, and palmar margin markedly skewed, but delimited with inferior margin and not concave; marginal spines large; inferior margin with fewer spines than in males. Propodus of gnatopod 2 slightly shorter and narrower than in gnatopod 1 and almost rectangular; superior and inferior margins parallel, and palmar and inferior margins forming almost right angle. Furthermore, there is a distinct difference between the right and left maxillae 1 of the paratype (female). Right maxilla 1 with considerably expanded apical article of palp, exceeding width of outer plate and bearing 6 tapering small teeth and sparse short setae on its distal margin. Lower lip lobes wide oval, with thin setules along inferior margins. Body length up to 17.5 mm. Sexual differences in body length are insignificant. Intravital color. Two sympatric morphs of the species were identified that clearly differ based on color but are highly similar after fixation. The first morph is blue-grey with antennae that have orange stripes (Fig 9 A). This morph is similar in color to another widespread species in the Baikal littoral zone��� Eulimnogammarus cyaneus (Dybowsky, 1874) (see ���Comparative remarks���). The second morph is ginger-red (light-orange) and has antennae with orange stripes that are darker than the stripes above; the urosomital segments carry a dark-red spot (Fig. 9 B). Color polymorphism has been described previously for other Baikal species: E. cyaneus, E. vittatus (Dybowsky, 1874) and Parapallasea puzyllii nigra (Garjajew, 1901) (Takhteev 1993; 2000). The carotenoid composition may affect the color (Goodwin, 1960; Wade et al., 2012). Variation. The length of the flagella of antennae 1 and 2 and uropod 3 may vary a bit. The notch on the anterior margin of the eye may be less indistinct or distinct. The setae on the posterior margin of basis pereopod 7 may be of varying length; however, in general, they are longer than normal for Eulimnogammarus species. The epimeral plates 2 and 3 may bear sparse, medial-length setae on their inferior and posterior margins; small spines on the third pair may be unapparent. Spines on the last body segments vary in size. The spine and setae armaments on the left and right sides of these segments may show fluctuating asymmetry (see Fig. 10). The spines on the third pleonal segment form 2���4 rows. Comparative remarks. Because of intravital color (���blue��� morph) of this species it may be confused with E. cyaneus (Dybowsky) and also this species may be inaccurately identified as E. cyanoides using the common key of Bazikalova (1945), differences between these species are stated below. The most considerable differences between E. messerschmidtii sp. n. and E. cyanoides: 1. Spines are present on the 4 last and not on the 3 last body segments; setae on the urosomital segments do not exceed the length of the following segment. 2. Eyes are narrow and curved. 3. The basal article of the peduncle of antennae 1 without spines, but with dense setae on the distal half. 4. The propodus of gnathopod 1 is considerably smaller and does not exceed the length of the head. Differences between E. messerschmidtii sp. n. and E. cyaneus: 1. The body size is larger (E. cyaneus ���up to 11���13 mm and rarely up to 15 mm). 2. Spines are present on the third pleonal segment (in E. cyaneus it has only dense setae). 3. The terminal article of the palp of the mandible bears ordinary brush (D 3 -setae). Setae do not differ significantly in length and are ���clipped��� equally (in E. cyaneus, the brush shows long unequal setae). 4. The posterior margin of the basis of pereopod 7 in E. cyaneus is distinct in its distal part and is elongated to a sharpened angle, whereas in E. messerschmidtii sp. n., the inferior portion of the posterior margin shows an indistinct rectangular lobe only. 5. The outer ramus of uropod 3 of E. messerschmidtii sp. n. is 4.0��� 4.5 -fold longer than the inner ramus, and its second article is rudimentary; the outer ramus of E. cyaneus is only 3 -fold longer than the inner ramus, and the second article is distinct. Etymology. This species is named in honour of the German scientist-encyclopedist Daniel Gottlieb Messerschmidt (1685���1735) who was one of the first members of the Russian (St. Petersburg) Academy of Sciences. D.G. Messerschmidt accomplished the first scientific expedition to Siberia (1720���1727). He was the first researcher of Lake Baikal who described the nature resources (including numerous plant species) and performed ethnologic studies of local tribes and peoples in regions from the Lake Baikal area to Eastern Siberia, which are described in his 4 -volume work ���Forschungsreise durch Sibirien (1720���1727)���. Distribution, ecology and biology of populations. To date, occurrence of E. messerschmidtii sp. n. is documented for the 3 sampling points stated above (see ��� Type specimens���; Fig. 1). Based on the descriptions of the sites of sampling, the species is assumed to inhabit the cold open shore and the shallow waters of Lake Baikal, the latter of which can warm up to 20 ��C or more during summer (Kharin-Irgi Bay, shallow water of the Tyya River). The dwelling substrata include boulders and pebbles with underlying sand. Apparently, E. messerschmidtii sp. n. is one of the typical, and even mass, species of the littoral zone of Lake Baikal; however, its distribution is limited by the northern half of the lake and the Maloe More strait (including its south tip���Olkhonskie Vorota). E. messerschmidtii may perform horizontal migrations because it is found to be either highly abundant or absent at the same sites; i.e., it was found en masse in Kharin-Irgi Bay (Olkhon island) on 22.06. 2002, but no specimens were found at the same site on 24.06. 2006. Fig. 16 demonstrates the sex-age structure of the population of E. messerschmidtii sp. n. in Kharin-Irgi Bay (point 3) on 22.06. 2002. Males comprised 33.7 % of the population, and the male:female ratio was 1: 2. Because the majority of the females��� 77.1 %���were carrying eggs (and some had released their eggs already), it can be assumed that the period of reproduction is not very extended and that it began in May or even at the end of April. This period of reproduction is typical for another highly abundant upper-shore species��� E. cyaneus (Bazikalova 1941; Weinberg et al. 2002; Govorukhina 2005). The small sample of E. messerschmidtii sp. n. from the Bolshoy Solontsovy cape, collected at the same time of year (25.06.2006), comprised 1 of 12 females in the 4 th stage and 11 in the 5 th stage of the life cycle (see: methods). Type specimens from the shallow water of the Tyya River delta (21.07.2012) included only one female in the 5 th stage and 4 females in the 2 nd stage. They were large, had apparently passed out of reproduction and had already molted. Despite the limited amount of available material, the second part of July may be assumed as the end of reproduction cycle. Based on reproduction time three main groups of amphipods from Lake Baikal are distinguished (Bazikalova 1941; Gavrilov 1949). The first group includes species that reproduce from spring prior to ice breakage until the summer months; species of the second group copulate during autumn and carry eggs until spring; reproduction of species from the third group is observed during most of the year or year-round. Apparently, E. messerschmidtii sp. n. belongs to the first group of species with a spring-summer reproduction period, which may be initiated by the increase in the photoperiod to 12 hours or more. Temperature cannot play a significant role because in the middle of May, the temperature in the Southern part of Lake Baikal does not exceed 2.5 ��C (Govorukhina 2006) and solid shore ice remains in the Northern part. Sex and age groups Body length, mm 7��� 8 ��� 9��� 10 ��� 11 ��� Males Weight, mg 6.5 �� 0.7 7.0 13.1 �� 0.7 16.7 �� 0.6 21.3 ��1.0 n 2 1 11 20 7 Females, Weight, mg ��� 10.4 �� 0.4 12.2 �� 0.5 15.3 �� 0.5 18.0 2 stage n ��� 5 11 3 1 Females, Weight, mg ��� 10.0 13.3 �� 0.4 17.3 �� 0.3 23.2 �� 0.6 3 stage Number of eggs ��� 6.0 10.4 �� 0.7 12.6 �� 0.4 19.0�� 0.9 n ��� 1 17 37 14 Sex and age groups Body length,mm 12��� 13 ��� 14��� 15 ��� 16��� 17 ��� 18 Males Weight, mg 26.8 �� 1.3 31.7 �� 0.8 37.0 ��� ��� 53.0 n 8 3 1 ��� ��� 1 Females, Weight, mg ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� 2 stage n ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� ��� Females, Weight, mg 29.7 �� 0.7 ��� 48.1 �� 1.9 51.3 �� 5.5 ��� ��� 3 stage Number of eggs 28.3 ��1.0 ��� 43.8 �� 4.7 39.7 ��9.0 ��� ��� n 10 ��� 6 3 ��� ��� The mean size of all males was 10.7 �� 0.2 mm (n= 54), whereas females were 10.4 �� 0.2 mm (n= 111). The mean weight of all males was 19.4 �� 1.1 mg (n= 54), whereas females weighed 20.0��1.0 mg (n= 111). There were no statistically significant intersexual differences in either size or weight. To further describe the population structure of E. messerschmidt, Published as part of Bedulina, Daria S., Ta, V., Pogrebnyak, Svyatoslav G., Govorukhina, Ekaterina B., Madyarova, Ekaterina V., Lubyaga, Yulia A., Vereshchagina, Kseniya P., Timofeyev, Maxim A. & Luckenbach, Till, 2014, On Eulimnogammarus messerschmidtii, sp. n. (Amphipoda: Gammaridea) from Lake Baikal, Siberia, with redescription of E. cyanoides (Sowinsky) and remarks on taxonomy of the genus Eulimnogammarus, pp. 518-544 in Zootaxa 3838 (5) on pages 530-541, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3838.5.2, http://zenodo.org/record/225127, {"references":["Bazikalova, A. Ya. (1945) Les Amphipodes du Baikal. Proceedings of the Baikal Limnological station USSR Academy of Sciences, 11, 1 - 440. [in Russian, with French summary]","Lowry, J. K. & Stoddart, H. E. (1993) Crustacea Amphipoda: Lysianassoids from Philippine and Indonesian waters, in: A. Crosnier (Ed.) Resultats des campagnes MUSORSTOM. Vol. 10. Memoires du Museum national d'Histoire naturelle A, No. 156, 55 - 109.","Takhteev, V. V. (1993) Fauna of amphipods of the coastal zone of Lake Baikal in the area of Bol'shiye Koty. Irkutsk State University, Irkutsk, 26 pp. [in Russian]","Takhteev, V. V. (2000) Essays on the amphipods of Lake Baikal: systematics, comparative ecology, evolution. Irkutsk State University Press, Irkutsk, 350 pp. [in Russian]","Goodwin, T. W. (1960) Biochemistry of pigments. In: Waterman, T. H. (Ed.), Physiology of Crustacea. Vol. 1. Metabolism and growth. Academic Press, New York & London, pp. 101 - 140.","Wade, N. M., Anderson, M., Sellars, M. J., Tume, R. K., Preston, N. P. & Glencross, B. D. (2012) Mechanisms of colour adaptation in the prawn Penaeus monodon. Journal of experimental biology, 215 (2), 343 - 350. http: // dx. doi. org / 10.1242 / jeb. 064592","Bazikalova, A. Ya. (1941) Contributions a la biologie des Amphipoda du lac Baikal. II. Reproduction. Bulletin de l'Academie des Sciences de l'URSS. Classe des sciences biologiques (Biology bulletin), No. 3, 407 - 426. [in Russian, with French summary]","Weinberg, I. V., Kamaltynov, R. M., Timofeyev, M. A., Glyzina, O. Yu. & Gavrilova, A. V. (2002) Biology and production of endemic Baikalian amphipod Eulimnogammarus cyaneus (Crustacea, Amphipoda). In: Ta k h t e e v, V. V. (E d.), Ecological, physiological and parasitological researches of the freshwater amphipods. Irkutsk State University Press, Irkutsk, pp. 59 - 66. [in Russian, with English summary]","Govorukhina, E. B. (2005) Biology of reproduction, seasonal and diurnal dynamics of the populations of the litoral and sublitoral amphipod species in Lake Baikal, PhD Thesis. Irkutsk State University, Irkutsk, 19 pp. [in Russian]","Gavrilov, G. B. (1949) On the problem of the time of reproduction in amphipods and isopods in Lake Baikal. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR, 64 (5), 739 - 742. [in Russian].","Govorukhina, E. B. (2006) Population biology of the mass amphipod species in littoral zone of the Lake Baikal. 1. Reproduction biology and growth of the amphipod Eulimnogammarus (Philolimnogammarus) vittatus Baz. In: Takhteev, V. V. (E d.), Hydrobiology of the basins in South of East Siberia. Irkutsk State University Press, Irkutsk, pp. 67 - 82. [in Russian, with English summary]"]}

Family Gammaridae Leach, 1814 Comments. Species are assigned to this family based on taxonomy criteria for Baikal amphipods presented by Bousfield (1977), with changes of Takhteev (2000). Taxonomic position of the genus is discussed in more detail below in ���Remarks on the taxonomy of Eulimnogammarus ���., Published as part of Bedulina, Daria S., Ta, V., Pogrebnyak, Svyatoslav G., Govorukhina, Ekaterina B., Madyarova, Ekaterina V., Lubyaga, Yulia A., Vereshchagina, Kseniya P., Timofeyev, Maxim A. & Luckenbach, Till, 2014, On Eulimnogammarus messerschmidtii, sp. n. (Amphipoda: Gammaridea) from Lake Baikal, Siberia, with redescription of E. cyanoides (Sowinsky) and remarks on taxonomy of the genus Eulimnogammarus, pp. 518-544 in Zootaxa 3838 (5) on page 521, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3838.5.2, http://zenodo.org/record/225127, {"references":["Bousfield, E. L. (1977) A new look at the systematics of gammaroidean amphipods of the world. Crustaceana, 4 (Supplement), 282 - 316.","Takhteev, V. V. (2000) Essays on the amphipods of Lake Baikal: systematics, comparative ecology, evolution. Irkutsk State University Press, Irkutsk, 350 pp. [in Russian]"]}

Genus Eulimnogammarus Bazikalova, 1945 Type species: Gammarus verrucosus Gerstfeldt, 1858, designated by Bazikalova (1945)., Published as part of Bedulina, Daria S., Ta, V., Pogrebnyak, Svyatoslav G., Govorukhina, Ekaterina B., Madyarova, Ekaterina V., Lubyaga, Yulia A., Vereshchagina, Kseniya P., Timofeyev, Maxim A. & Luckenbach, Till, 2014, On Eulimnogammarus messerschmidtii, sp. n. (Amphipoda: Gammaridea) from Lake Baikal, Siberia, with redescription of E. cyanoides (Sowinsky) and remarks on taxonomy of the genus Eulimnogammarus, pp. 518-544 in Zootaxa 3838 (5) on page 521, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3838.5.2, http://zenodo.org/record/225127, {"references":["Bazikalova, A. Ya. (1945) Les Amphipodes du Baikal. Proceedings of the Baikal Limnological station USSR Academy of Sciences, 11, 1 - 440. [in Russian, with French summary]"]}

[TODO] Add abstract here.

Progesterone receptor is a surrogate marker of estrogen receptor activity in breast cancer and its utility in helping predict clinical outcome has been established using biochemical assays. However, most laboratories worldwide have switched to immunohistochemistry to assess progesterone receptor, but unfortunately no validated immunohistochemical assay exists for progesterone receptor. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate an immunohistochemical assay for progesterone receptor in breast cancer. The assay was based on monoclonal antibody 1294 (DakoCytomation) and slides were scored microscopically using the 'Allred score' on a scale of 0-8. The assay was compared to ligand-binding assay in 1235 breast cancers, and a subset (n=362) that received only hormonal therapy was used to define a cutoff for progesterone receptor-positive. Clinical utility was validated in an independent set of samples (n=423) from a clinical trial randomizing premenopausal breast cancer patients to tamoxifen+oophorectomy vs observation following surgery. A cutoff of >2 (corresponding to >1% positive cells) dichotomized patients with significantly better or worse clinical outcome (P=0.0014). Progesterone receptor by immunohistochemistry provided significantly better results than progesterone receptor by ligand-binding assay in predicting clinical outcome. In the clinical trial, a positive result in univariate analyses was associated with significantly improved disease-free and overall survival both in untreated (hazard ratios/P=0.656/0.060 and 0.479/0.005, respectively) and hormonally treated patients (hazard ratios/P=0.529/0.017 and 0.451/0.007, respectively). Positive progesterone receptor remained significant for improved disease-free and overall survival (hazard ratios/P=0.666/0.038 and 0.549/0.007, respectively) in multivariate analyses including the standard variables of tumor size, nodal status, treatment, histological grade, and HER-2/neu status. Estrogen and progesterone receptors are codependent variables and progesterone receptor was a weaker predictor of response to endocrine therapy than estrogen receptor when both were included in multivariate analysis. This is the first comprehensive study assessing the clinical usefulness of progesterone receptor by immunohistochemistry in archival tissue in breast cancer. Progesterone receptor assessed by immunohistochemistry provides useful information about clinical outcome and it is better than progesterone receptor measured by ligand-binding assay.

The movement of any material from blood to brain involves not only its passage across the blood-brain barrier (BBB) but also its delivery to the capillary beds by blood. Within the blood flowing into the capillaries, the material can be carried by plasma water, plasma proteins, and blood cells. The partitioning of the material among these intravascular compartments, the dynamics of exchange among them, and the relative flows of each within the capillary system affects uptake. Influx across the BBB is a function of the capillary surface area (S) and permeability coefficient (P), both of which vary among brain areas. This joint dependency is clearly shown by the physiological expression of “capillary permeability,” the permeability-surface area (PS) product. The P of the PS product differs among materials and depends on variables such as the substance’s lipid solubility, molecular size, diffusion coefficient, extent of metabolism within the endothelial cell, and interaction with transporters that facilitate flux in one or the other or both directions across the BBB.