2012
DOI: 10.1590/s1676-06032012000300009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New records confirming the occurrence of the ghost shrimps Biffarius biformis (Biffar, 1970) and B. fragilis (Biffar, 1971) (Decapoda, Callianassidae) in Brazil and the southwestern Atlantic

Abstract: (Carvalho et al. 1997) realizado em resumo durante uma conferência regional não pode ser considerado válido. Neste trabalho, o estudo dos espécimens examinados por Carvalho et al. (1997), combinados com o material coletado mais recentemente, confirma a presença dessas duas espécies na costa brasileira e no sudoeste do Atlântico. São fornecidas novas informações taxonômicas, ecológicas e ilustrações. Palavras-chave: Callianassidae, Biffarius, novos registros, Brasil, Oceano Atlântico. 89Biffarius biformis (Biff… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 15 publications
(26 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, evidence has been accumulating over many years that C. major is actually a species complex (Rodrigues and Shimizu 1997;Felder 1998, 1999a, b, c;Staton and Felder 1995;Felder and Robles 2009;Peiró 2012). Yet, the name continues to be widely and frequently used in ecological, distributional, morphological, checklists, and taxonomic researches carried out along its implied geographic distribution (Rodrigues 1966(Rodrigues , 1971(Rodrigues , 1983Souza and Borzone 1996;Blanco-Rambla 1997;Souza et al 1998;Coelho et al 2007;Botter-Carvalho et al 2007;Botter-Carvalho et al 2012;Rio et al 2019;Souza et al 2020). The current lack of clarity in the use of the name C. major has hence resulted in nomenclatural instability, but also in unreliability and miscommunication of the available ecological and distributional information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, evidence has been accumulating over many years that C. major is actually a species complex (Rodrigues and Shimizu 1997;Felder 1998, 1999a, b, c;Staton and Felder 1995;Felder and Robles 2009;Peiró 2012). Yet, the name continues to be widely and frequently used in ecological, distributional, morphological, checklists, and taxonomic researches carried out along its implied geographic distribution (Rodrigues 1966(Rodrigues , 1971(Rodrigues , 1983Souza and Borzone 1996;Blanco-Rambla 1997;Souza et al 1998;Coelho et al 2007;Botter-Carvalho et al 2007;Botter-Carvalho et al 2012;Rio et al 2019;Souza et al 2020). The current lack of clarity in the use of the name C. major has hence resulted in nomenclatural instability, but also in unreliability and miscommunication of the available ecological and distributional information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%