1981
DOI: 10.1080/00288330.1981.9515904
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Description of a new species of incubatory oyster from northern New Zealand, with notes on its ecology and reproduction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

1988
1988
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The duration of the freeliving period of larvae could not be followed here, but the incubation period for laboratory oysters varied between 8 and 16 days and larval growth was observed before their release. Within the genus, Ostrea puelchana is second only to O. aupouria (Dinamani, 1981) in having the smallest larvae at release. Castellanos (1957) observed in Ostrea puelchana from wild populations that the fertilization of ovules was simultaneous for each individual.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The duration of the freeliving period of larvae could not be followed here, but the incubation period for laboratory oysters varied between 8 and 16 days and larval growth was observed before their release. Within the genus, Ostrea puelchana is second only to O. aupouria (Dinamani, 1981) in having the smallest larvae at release. Castellanos (1957) observed in Ostrea puelchana from wild populations that the fertilization of ovules was simultaneous for each individual.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, divergent mitochondrial genotypes were encountered in this sample in addition to that of O. chilensis, which had been previously characterized for this gene fragment (Ó Foighil, unpublished). Careful morphological analysis of the specimens exhibiting the divergent haplotypes revealed them to be O. aupouria which co-occurs with O. chilensis in northern New Zealand (Dinamani, 1981). DNA was extracted from mantle tissue of all specimens except O. conchaphila for which adductor muscle tissue was used.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Undocumented anthropogenic introduction is the probable source of some oyster biogeographic puzzles (Buroker et al, 1979); however, we can definitively rule this out in the case of O. puelchana and C. permollis which differ markedly in ecological niches and in reproductive modes (Forbes, 1966;Morriconi and Calvo, 1978;Pascual et al, 1989). Sufficient differences in shell sculpture and coloration exist between O. aupouria and T. weberi (Olsson, 1951;Dinamani, 1981) to also cast doubt on the probability of recent human transfer between New Zealand and Florida. Harry (1985) erroneously assumed that O. angasi shares the abbreviated pelagic larval development unique to O. chilensis and offered no legitimate morphological distinction to separate it from O. edulis.…”
Section: Figmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Of course, an ultimate origin outside both New Zealand and Chile is equally likely, and would not rule out geologically recent rafting from New Zealand to Chile. Torigoe (2004) recognised that "Ostrea" aupouria Dinamani (1981) is a junior synonym of Ostreola virescens (Angas, 1868), a species recorded in eastern Australia from the Gulf of Carpentaria to Port Jackson, New South Wales. Torigoe placed Ostreola Monterosato, 1884 in "incertae sedis", whereas Kirkendale et al (2004), based on gene sequences from New Zealand material of O.…”
Section: Journal Of the Royal Society Of New Zealand Volume 36 2006mentioning
confidence: 99%