{"title":"加利福尼亚桨鱼记录(居维耶,1816)","authors":"Richard F. Feeney, R. Lea","doi":"10.3160/3294.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent oarfish strandings in California have generated enormous interest. Oarfishes are iconic and have been feared as ‘sea monsters or serpents’ in the past and ‘harbingers of earthquakes’ more recently. The amount of media coverage and subsequent misconceptions has motivated us to document the California stranding records as best we can based on the most reliable information. Most accounts over the last century have regarded Regalecus as monotypic, as R. glesne (Heemstra 1986; Olney 2002; Horn et al. 2006; Nelson 2006; Page et al. 2013; Kells et al. 2016). Historically, and more recently, a second species, R. russelii or with a modified species spelling as russellii [as russelii (Cuvier 1816 (ex Shaw)) by Eschmeyer et al. 2017], has been recognized (Jordan 1902, 1907; Jordan and Starks 1907; Fujii 1984; Hayashi 2002; Roberts 2012, 2016; Angulo and López-Sánchez 2017). Both species have circumglobal, but not entirely overlapping, distributions. However, only R. russelii has been found, so far, in the northeastern Pacific, including Mexico, Costa Rica, and central and southern California. Morphologically, Regalecus russelii is characterized by 3-6 rays in the first dorsal crest and a single ray in the second dorsal crest, not connected with a membrane to the other. Regalecus glesne has 6-8 rays in the first crest and 5-11 rays in the second crest (Roberts 2012). The total number of dorsal rays, vertebrae and gill rakers are also diagnostic. Mitochondrial DNA sequences indicate distinct separation between these species (Roberts 2012). We have attempted to access all sources of information related to oarfish strandings off California, including newspaper articles, natural history museum records, published accounts, and the files and correspondence of Boyd Walker, John Fitch, Vladimir Walters, and other ichthyologists interested in early oarfish strandings. We have examined all California specimens at The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM), Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History (SBMNH), Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO), and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA, now transferred to SIO). We have also searched VertNet (http://www.vertnet.org) and iDigBio (https://www.idigbio.org/) records. Length measurements are total lengths. In eight cases we feel the original measurements were by metric tape (numbers 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 18), one by John Fitch, two by LACM staff, one by scientists at the USC Wrigley Marine Science Center at Santa Catalina Island, one at the Catalina Island Marine Institute, one by researchers at California State University Fullerton, and two San Diego County specimens by researchers at Scripps Institute of Oceanography and the Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla.","PeriodicalId":90803,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin (Southern California Academy of Sciences)","volume":"22 1","pages":"169 - 179"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"California Records of the Oarfish, Regalecus russelii (Cuvier, 1816) (Actinopterygii: Regalecidae)\",\"authors\":\"Richard F. Feeney, R. Lea\",\"doi\":\"10.3160/3294.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recent oarfish strandings in California have generated enormous interest. Oarfishes are iconic and have been feared as ‘sea monsters or serpents’ in the past and ‘harbingers of earthquakes’ more recently. The amount of media coverage and subsequent misconceptions has motivated us to document the California stranding records as best we can based on the most reliable information. Most accounts over the last century have regarded Regalecus as monotypic, as R. glesne (Heemstra 1986; Olney 2002; Horn et al. 2006; Nelson 2006; Page et al. 2013; Kells et al. 2016). Historically, and more recently, a second species, R. russelii or with a modified species spelling as russellii [as russelii (Cuvier 1816 (ex Shaw)) by Eschmeyer et al. 2017], has been recognized (Jordan 1902, 1907; Jordan and Starks 1907; Fujii 1984; Hayashi 2002; Roberts 2012, 2016; Angulo and López-Sánchez 2017). Both species have circumglobal, but not entirely overlapping, distributions. However, only R. russelii has been found, so far, in the northeastern Pacific, including Mexico, Costa Rica, and central and southern California. Morphologically, Regalecus russelii is characterized by 3-6 rays in the first dorsal crest and a single ray in the second dorsal crest, not connected with a membrane to the other. Regalecus glesne has 6-8 rays in the first crest and 5-11 rays in the second crest (Roberts 2012). The total number of dorsal rays, vertebrae and gill rakers are also diagnostic. Mitochondrial DNA sequences indicate distinct separation between these species (Roberts 2012). We have attempted to access all sources of information related to oarfish strandings off California, including newspaper articles, natural history museum records, published accounts, and the files and correspondence of Boyd Walker, John Fitch, Vladimir Walters, and other ichthyologists interested in early oarfish strandings. We have examined all California specimens at The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM), Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History (SBMNH), Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO), and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA, now transferred to SIO). We have also searched VertNet (http://www.vertnet.org) and iDigBio (https://www.idigbio.org/) records. Length measurements are total lengths. In eight cases we feel the original measurements were by metric tape (numbers 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 18), one by John Fitch, two by LACM staff, one by scientists at the USC Wrigley Marine Science Center at Santa Catalina Island, one at the Catalina Island Marine Institute, one by researchers at California State University Fullerton, and two San Diego County specimens by researchers at Scripps Institute of Oceanography and the Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90803,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin (Southern California Academy of Sciences)\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"169 - 179\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin (Southern California Academy of Sciences)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3160/3294.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin (Southern California Academy of Sciences)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3160/3294.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
最近加州的皇带鱼搁浅事件引起了极大的兴趣。皇带鱼是一种标志性的生物,在过去被认为是“海怪或蛇”,而最近则被认为是“地震的先兆”。大量的媒体报道和随之而来的误解促使我们根据最可靠的信息,尽可能地记录下加州搁浅的记录。上个世纪的大多数研究都认为Regalecus是单型的,如R. glesne (Heemstra 1986;奥尔尼2002;Horn et al. 2006;尼尔森2006;Page et al. 2013;Kells et al. 2016)。历史上,最近,第二个物种,R. russelii或修改的物种拼写为russellii [as russelii(居维叶1816 (ex Shaw))由Eschmeyer等人。2017],已被确认(Jordan 1902, 1907;乔丹和斯塔克斯1907;藤井裕久1984;Hayashi 2002;Roberts 2012, 2016;Angulo and López-Sánchez 2017)。这两个物种都有环绕全球的分布,但并不完全重叠。然而,到目前为止,只在太平洋东北部,包括墨西哥、哥斯达黎加和加利福尼亚中部和南部发现了russelii。从形态上看,凤尾蝶在第一背峰上有3-6条射线,在第二背峰上有一条射线,两者之间没有膜连接。Regalecus glesne在第一个波峰有6-8条射线,在第二个波峰有5-11条射线(Roberts 2012)。背鳐、脊椎骨和鳃耙的总数也可用于诊断。线粒体DNA序列表明这些物种之间存在明显的分离(Roberts 2012)。我们试图获取与加州皇带鱼搁浅有关的所有信息来源,包括报纸文章、自然历史博物馆记录、出版的账户、Boyd Walker、John Fitch、Vladimir Walters和其他对早期皇带鱼搁浅感兴趣的鱼类学家的文件和通信。我们检查了洛杉矶县自然历史博物馆(LACM)、圣巴巴拉自然历史博物馆(SBMNH)、斯克里普斯海洋研究所(SIO)和加州大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA,现转移到SIO)的所有加州标本。我们还检索了VertNet (http://www.vertnet.org)和iDigBio (https://www.idigbio.org/)的记录。长度测量是总长度。在8个案例中,我们觉得最初的测量是用公制卷尺进行的(编号3、5、7、9、10、12、13和18),一个是约翰·费奇(John Fitch)进行的,两个是LACM工作人员进行的,一个是圣卡塔利娜岛南加州大学瑞格利海洋科学中心的科学家进行的,一个是卡塔利娜岛海洋研究所的科学家进行的,一个是加州州立大学富勒顿分校的研究人员进行的,还有两个是圣地亚哥县斯克里普斯海洋学研究所和拉霍亚西南渔业科学中心的研究人员进行的。
California Records of the Oarfish, Regalecus russelii (Cuvier, 1816) (Actinopterygii: Regalecidae)
Recent oarfish strandings in California have generated enormous interest. Oarfishes are iconic and have been feared as ‘sea monsters or serpents’ in the past and ‘harbingers of earthquakes’ more recently. The amount of media coverage and subsequent misconceptions has motivated us to document the California stranding records as best we can based on the most reliable information. Most accounts over the last century have regarded Regalecus as monotypic, as R. glesne (Heemstra 1986; Olney 2002; Horn et al. 2006; Nelson 2006; Page et al. 2013; Kells et al. 2016). Historically, and more recently, a second species, R. russelii or with a modified species spelling as russellii [as russelii (Cuvier 1816 (ex Shaw)) by Eschmeyer et al. 2017], has been recognized (Jordan 1902, 1907; Jordan and Starks 1907; Fujii 1984; Hayashi 2002; Roberts 2012, 2016; Angulo and López-Sánchez 2017). Both species have circumglobal, but not entirely overlapping, distributions. However, only R. russelii has been found, so far, in the northeastern Pacific, including Mexico, Costa Rica, and central and southern California. Morphologically, Regalecus russelii is characterized by 3-6 rays in the first dorsal crest and a single ray in the second dorsal crest, not connected with a membrane to the other. Regalecus glesne has 6-8 rays in the first crest and 5-11 rays in the second crest (Roberts 2012). The total number of dorsal rays, vertebrae and gill rakers are also diagnostic. Mitochondrial DNA sequences indicate distinct separation between these species (Roberts 2012). We have attempted to access all sources of information related to oarfish strandings off California, including newspaper articles, natural history museum records, published accounts, and the files and correspondence of Boyd Walker, John Fitch, Vladimir Walters, and other ichthyologists interested in early oarfish strandings. We have examined all California specimens at The Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County (LACM), Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History (SBMNH), Scripps Institution of Oceanography (SIO), and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA, now transferred to SIO). We have also searched VertNet (http://www.vertnet.org) and iDigBio (https://www.idigbio.org/) records. Length measurements are total lengths. In eight cases we feel the original measurements were by metric tape (numbers 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13 and 18), one by John Fitch, two by LACM staff, one by scientists at the USC Wrigley Marine Science Center at Santa Catalina Island, one at the Catalina Island Marine Institute, one by researchers at California State University Fullerton, and two San Diego County specimens by researchers at Scripps Institute of Oceanography and the Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla.