Hi Ron,
The classical biogeographic regions used for the Mollusca are beginning to show their age, and particularly so in your part of the world. The 'Japonic Province' is an area that traditionally encompassed Japan, the Japan Sea, sometimes the Kuril Islands and, er, maybe Taiwan. With more scientific collecting (as opposed to just getting things from trawlers that go who knows where) and publishing of results, however, we are finding that the shallow, slow-turnover East China Sea has its own interesting 'dead-end' fauna up in the Yellow Sea (a fauna that is fed from one direction only) and that Japan has two distinct faunas - both dead ends - the warm, western shallow-water fauna that has much in common with those of the Philippines and Taiwan, and the cold, deeper-water fauna of the northeast, which is pretty much Alaskan-Aleutian in nature. At the ends of distributions interesting things occur. On the Kii Peninsula in central Japan, for example, there are over 110 species of Conus recorded - but many are so infrequent and represented by such odd morphs that it seems likely that these are serial planktonic introductions rather than established populations.
As for the Indo-Pacific, well that was a good blanket province back when we knew the biogeography of about half the number of species that we do now. It still comes in handy in conversation, but I'd be wary of using it as some kind of formal delineator of a species's distribution.
Regards,
PC.
Paul Callomon
Collections Manager
Malacology, Invertebrate Paleontology and General Invertebrates
Department of Malacology
Academy of Natural Sciences
1900 Parkway, Philadelphia PA 19103-1195, USA
Tel 215-405-5096
Fax 215-299-1170
Secretary, American Malacological Society
On the web at www.malacological.org
>>> "Ron G. Noseworthy" <[log in to unmask]> 07/19/08 2:32 PM >>>
Hi, everyone!
I am presently researching the mollusk faunas of northeast China and South Korea. Are the old marine faunal provinces; eg. Japonic Province, Indo-Pacific Province, Boreal Province, still valid? Are there newer divisions that help define regional faunas more precisely?
I have some publications on this subject, but there is some disagreement on the number and boundaries of the regions, and the names themselves. I was wondering if there is some consensus on Conch-L as to the latest, most accurate delineation of biographical regions, particularly the North Pacific.
Any information on this subject will be greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Ron Noseworthy
__________________________________________________________________
Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail. Click on Options in Mail and switch to New Mail today or register for free at http://mail.yahoo.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
