Comments on: What in Darwin’s Name Are Chaetognaths?! http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/ All the news on the Earth's largest environment. Wed, 23 May 2012 14:14:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: ResearchBlogging.org News » Blog Archive » Editor’s Selection: Eco/Evo Doubleshot! http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/comment-page-1/#comment-15298 ResearchBlogging.org News » Blog Archive » Editor’s Selection: Eco/Evo Doubleshot! Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:46:07 +0000 http://deepseanews.com/?p=8516#comment-15298 [...] Let’s begin by asking the burning question on everyone’s minds: What in Darwin’s name are Chaetognaths? [...] [...] Let’s begin by asking the burning question on everyone’s minds: What in Darwin’s name are Chaetognaths? [...]

]]> By: Lancashire MCS Blog » Blog Archive » Science roundup 14th June 2010 http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/comment-page-1/#comment-15080 Lancashire MCS Blog » Blog Archive » Science roundup 14th June 2010 Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:02:17 +0000 http://deepseanews.com/?p=8516#comment-15080 [...] Chaetognaths give scientists the run-around: Fitting the Chaetognaths (or arrow worms) into the classification system is proving difficult, with even DNA analysis is showing conflicting results. This is at least partly due to the fact that the group splits off at the early period of species radiation when the deuterostomes (urochordata, including us, and echinoderms), true worms and the cnidaria all split apart. Mapping exactly when they split out is, however, proving difficult. There is a very nice video of an arrow worm feeding on this Japanese site ‘the biology of the chaetognaths‘. [...] [...] Chaetognaths give scientists the run-around: Fitting the Chaetognaths (or arrow worms) into the classification system is proving difficult, with even DNA analysis is showing conflicting results. This is at least partly due to the fact that the group splits off at the early period of species radiation when the deuterostomes (urochordata, including us, and echinoderms), true worms and the cnidaria all split apart. Mapping exactly when they split out is, however, proving difficult. There is a very nice video of an arrow worm feeding on this Japanese site ‘the biology of the chaetognaths‘. [...]

]]> By: Kevin Zelnio http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/comment-page-1/#comment-14624 Kevin Zelnio Tue, 08 Jun 2010 12:26:40 +0000 http://deepseanews.com/?p=8516#comment-14624 I don't know about the ESTs but think about all the phylogenies out there based on single or a few markers, like COI or 16s, 18s, 28S, etc... the usual suspects in invert phylogeny. It is hard to keep in mind when doing molecular phylogenies that one is really tracking the gene history (I'm guilty too!), not the species history. To really do a good phylogeny, you need to make a case using morphology, fossils, select genes (or the genome), and maybe some behavior/ecology. Then you are still only guessing, but the argument is much stronger. Lateral gene transfer really puts a wrench in things and with recent, exciting research it seems to be a much bigger player in eukaryotes. I find it exciting though, maybe my research will take me there in one shape or another. I don’t know about the ESTs but think about all the phylogenies out there based on single or a few markers, like COI or 16s, 18s, 28S, etc… the usual suspects in invert phylogeny. It is hard to keep in mind when doing molecular phylogenies that one is really tracking the gene history (I’m guilty too!), not the species history. To really do a good phylogeny, you need to make a case using morphology, fossils, select genes (or the genome), and maybe some behavior/ecology. Then you are still only guessing, but the argument is much stronger. Lateral gene transfer really puts a wrench in things and with recent, exciting research it seems to be a much bigger player in eukaryotes. I find it exciting though, maybe my research will take me there in one shape or another.

]]> By: I know what you linked last summer « Evolving Thoughts http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/comment-page-1/#comment-14611 I know what you linked last summer « Evolving Thoughts Tue, 08 Jun 2010 07:41:54 +0000 http://deepseanews.com/?p=8516#comment-14611 [...] taxonomic matters, Kevin Zelnio asks what Chaetognaths are, given that they were defined in molecular, not morphological, terms. And the [...] [...] taxonomic matters, Kevin Zelnio asks what Chaetognaths are, given that they were defined in molecular, not morphological, terms. And the [...]

]]> By: Tweets that mention What in Darwin’s Name Are Chaetognaths?! | Deep Sea News -- Topsy.com http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/comment-page-1/#comment-14564 Tweets that mention What in Darwin’s Name Are Chaetognaths?! | Deep Sea News -- Topsy.com Mon, 07 Jun 2010 20:10:11 +0000 http://deepseanews.com/?p=8516#comment-14564 [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by ResearchBlogging.org and Krystal D'Costa, Chris Rowan. Chris Rowan said: What in Darwin’s Name Are Chaetognaths?! http://bit.ly/d4Ls2T [...] [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by ResearchBlogging.org and Krystal D'Costa, Chris Rowan. Chris Rowan said: What in Darwin’s Name Are Chaetognaths?! http://bit.ly/d4Ls2T [...]

]]> By: John Wares http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/comment-page-1/#comment-14561 John Wares Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:19:04 +0000 http://deepseanews.com/?p=8516#comment-14561 I have to admit I've about given up on invert phylogeny and systematics. I'm so out of date after only a few years not paying attention to it, and it seems a hopeless web. None of these papers are considering the potential for lateral gene transfer, I suppose some entire phyla could have some funky origins if Mike Arnold is right.... I have to admit I’ve about given up on invert phylogeny and systematics. I’m so out of date after only a few years not paying attention to it, and it seems a hopeless web. None of these papers are considering the potential for lateral gene transfer, I suppose some entire phyla could have some funky origins if Mike Arnold is right….

]]> By: jebyrnes http://deepseanews.com/2010/06/what-in-darwins-name-are-chaetognaths/comment-page-1/#comment-14560 jebyrnes Mon, 07 Jun 2010 18:57:06 +0000 http://deepseanews.com/?p=8516#comment-14560 I remember taking inverts back in '99. The papers that first proposed the Lophotrochozoan/Ecdysozoan split were just really gaining traction, although the textbooks hadn't been revised yet. For my class project, I wrote them up and explained the new phylogeny as opposed to the one we were being taught. I thought it was pretty cool stuff, and often chuckled at the old/new split. The final exam for the class was to draw the tree of invertebrate life down to the class level. So, I went up to my prof and asked him which I should do. He just laughed, called me a smartass, and told me to write up whichever. (Also, the whole acoel thing still blows my mind.) I remember taking inverts back in ’99. The papers that first proposed the Lophotrochozoan/Ecdysozoan split were just really gaining traction, although the textbooks hadn’t been revised yet. For my class project, I wrote them up and explained the new phylogeny as opposed to the one we were being taught. I thought it was pretty cool stuff, and often chuckled at the old/new split.

The final exam for the class was to draw the tree of invertebrate life down to the class level. So, I went up to my prof and asked him which I should do. He just laughed, called me a smartass, and told me to write up whichever.

(Also, the whole acoel thing still blows my mind.)

]]>