Pecten maximus (Linnaeus, 1758)
LINNAEUS, C. 1758. Sistema Naturae per Regna tria Naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Editio Decima, Reformata, iii, 824 p. Impensis Direct. Laurentii Salvii. Holmiae [Stockholm], 1758. [p. 696]
1758 Ostrea maxima Linnaeus, 1758
1778 Pecten vulgaris Da Costa, 1778
1817 Janira intermedia Schumacher, 1817
1778 Pecten vulgaris Da Costa, 1778
1817 Janira intermedia Schumacher, 1817
Pecten maximus, circiter 14 striis admodum crassis,...; M. Lister, 1678, Historiae Animalium Angliae, plate 5, figure 29.
|
CAROLUS LINNAEUS, 1758
|
«Distribución: Especie con una dispersión biostratigráfica muy reducida, registrada desde el Plioceno hasta la actualidad. Su presencia es poco citada en los yacimientos plio-pleistocenos del dominio MP (BROCCHI, 1814; COCCONI, 1873; STEFFANI & PANTANELLI, 1878; SACCO, 1897; GIGNOUX, 1913), ACE (CHOFFAT & DOLLFUS, 1905; LECOINTRE, 1952; LAURIAT-RAGE, 1989; PAIS & LEGOINHA, 2000) y NE (WOOD, 1851-1956; NYST, 1878). En la actualidad P. maximus posee un rango biogeográfico amplio, registrándose en la costa atlántica Este, desde Noruega hasta las Islas Canarias y Madeira, y en el Mediterráneo (GÓMEZ-RODRÍGUEZ & PÉREZ, 1997).»
RICO-GARCÍA, A. 2008. Pectínidos pliocenos de la Cuenca de Vejer (Cádiz, SO de España). Studia Geologica Salmanticensia, 44 (1): 91-140, figs. 1-12. [p. 132]
|
Pecten maximus (Linné, 1758); A. Rico-García, 2008, Pectínidos pliocenos de la Cuenca de Vejer, figures 11 A-E.
|
«Wilding et al. (1999) examined the genetic relationships of two European species, Pecten maximus and P. jacobaeus (Linnaeus, 1758), that have long been regarded as closely related but distinct species by malacologists and palaeontologists. Using allozyme electrophoresis and a type of mitochondrial DNA analysis (DNA PCR-RFLP) previously applied to populations, they found that genetic distances were of a magnitude "considerably lower than expected for congeneric species." However, rather than accepting the low genetic distances as evidence for conspecificity, the authors carefully reviewed the conflicting lines of evidence and suggested three possibilities for explaining the conflict: (a) The two are indeed valid species but this is not reflected in the particular genetic indices calculated. (b) These are not distinct species, meaning that both would carry the name Pecten maximus, the prior name in Linnaeus (1758). In this case the morphological differences would be ecophenotypic, i.e., reflecting local environmental conditions, and the allozyme differentiation "merely represents increased isolation by distance" between the two samples (P. maximus sampled from Britain, Ireland, and northern France, P. jacobaeus from southeastern Spain). This would require demonstration of range overlap and evidence of hybridisation in nature. Thus far, however, the authors point out that hybridisation to produce viable adults has been demonstrated only under laboratory conditions. The matter of range overlap is discussed further in the following section on new observations. (c) P. jacobaeus from southeastern Spain are interbreeding with P. maximus but interbreeding may not occur elsewhere, thus leading to an anomalously low genetic distance between the species. The authors discounted this possibility, however, in noting that there is an oceanographic front stretching across the Mediterranean from Almeria, Spain, to Oran, Algeria, that has been associated with genetic breaks in the distributions of other marine species. Logically this front could separate P. maximus, a species of the northeastern Atlantic, from P. jacobaeus, a Mediterranean species. In this case, however, the population of P. jacobaeus sampled came from the Mediterranean side of the front, where interbreeding would not be expected. Wilding et al. (1999) concluded, after considering these possibilities, that the conflict between genetic-distance data that indicate conspecificity and morphological, biogeographical, and paleontological data that indicate species distinctness is still unresolved.»
WALLER, T. R. 2006. New Phylogenies of the Pectinidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia): reconciling Morphological and Molecular Approaches. In S.E. Shumway & G.J. Parsons (Ed.) 2006: Scallops: Biology, Ecology and Aquaculture, 1-44. [p. 4, 5]
|
«Our data for 15 P. maximus and P. jacobaeus individuals confirm the observations of Canapa et al. (2000), who sequenced the same 16S rRNA region in a single P. jacobaeus individual and detected a single different nucleotide between their sequence and the P. maximus GenBank accession. In this study, we have detected additional haplotypes, which show larger differences. However, the fact that the two most common haplotypes appear in both taxa, and that the remaining haplotypes which appear exclusively in one taxon do not form separate branches in the phylogenetic trees, supports the held view of conspecificity between the two European taxa. A better understanding of the P. maximus/P. jacobaeus complex will need of a detailed population genetic study around their distribution limit across the Almeria-Oran Oceanographic Front (SE Spain) (Wilding et al., 1999; Ríos et al., 2002).»
SAAVEDRA, J. & J. B. PEÑA. 2004. Phylogenetic relationships of commercial European and Australasian king scallops (Pecten spp.) based on partial 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequences. Aquaculture, 235 (2004): 153-166. [p. 163, 164]
|
«The first reference cited by Linnaeus (1758: 696), to Lister, is incorrect, as mentioned by Hanley (1855: 102). Figure 161 is an illustrated title page, whereas figure 163.1 clearly represents a figured right valve similar to Ostrea maxima with the text “1. pecten magnus, albidus, circiter Duodecem striis, multis minutisq incisuris exasperatis donatus”. “Anglic”. According to Dillwyn (1823: 14) it is copied from the Historia Animalium Angliae (pl. 5, fig. 29). Linnaeus (1758: 696) also mentioned this reference with the addition “Pecten maximus”. Linnaeus’ reference to Gualtieri (1742: pl. 98, figs A, B) is incorrect; figures A (a left valve) and B (a right valve) clearly resemble Ostrea jacobaea Linnaeus, 1758. Subsequent additional references mentioned by Gmelin (1791: 3315) are not always relevant and sometimes refer to O. jacobaea or are indeterminable.»
DIJKSTRA, H. H. 1999. Type specimens of Pectinidae (Mollusca: Bivalvia) described by Linnaeus (1758-1771). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 125: 383-443. [p. 391]
|
Ostrea maxima Linnaeus, 1758; H. H. Dijkstra, Type specimens of Pectinidae described by Linnaeus, figures 1 A, B.
|