ALBERT

Description: W\xc3\xa4hrend n\xc3\xa4chtliches Sammeln am Licht in Suriname (S\xc3\xbcd-amerika) im Jahre 1962, fing ich ein M\xc3\xa4nnchen von Protambulyx strigilis (L.) das, zu meiner \xc3\x9cberraschung, stridulieren konnte. Beim Abt\xc3\xb6ten des Schw\xc3\xa4rmers mittels direkter Einspritzung von Alkohol im Thorax, wodurch eine blitzschnelle Immobilisation der Fl\xc3\xbcgel und Beine erreicht wird, fing das Tier an zu zirpen mit einem klaren \xe2\x80\x9ezietie, zietie, zietie...". Als ich daraufhin die Motte n\xc3\xa4her an das Licht brachte, sah ich am Hinterleib, welches nach einer solchen Einspritzung noch einige Zeit am Leben bleibt, das letzte sichtbare Segment, n\xc3\xa4mlich die Valven, ein und ausschieben, im gleichen Rythmus wie der Laut produziert wurde. Durch diese Beobachtung war ich im stande das Stridulationsorgan ohne weiteres zu lokalisieren.\nAusser das bekannte \xe2\x80\x9ePfeiffen" des Totenkopfschw\xc3\xa4rmers, Acherontia atropos (L.), das offenbar auch eines anderen Mechanismus zu Grunde liegt und das von beiden Geschlechtern erzeugt werden kann (Wagner, 1836; Landois, 1874; Prell, 1920; Dumortier, 1960), war mir kein anderer Fall von Stridulation bei Imagines von Sphingiden bekannt. Und auch in den \xc3\xbcblichen entomologischen Handb\xc3\xbcchern war nichts dar\xc3\xbcber zu finden. Aus der darauf von mir vorgenommenen Literaturuntersuchung ergab sich aber, dass \xc3\xbcber Laute, hervorgebracht von anderen Sphingiden als Acherontia, verschiedene Wahrnehmungen aufgezeichnet worden sind, von den die meisten aber nicht n\xc3\xa4her untersucht wurden. So berichtet Kr\xc3\xbcger (1877): ,,Mehr oder weniger schw\xc3\xa4chere T\xc3\xb6ne [als die von Acherontia] verm\xc3\xb6gen noch von sich zu geben : der grosse Weinschw\xc3\xa4rmer (Sphinx Elpenor), der Wolfsmilchschw\xc3\xa4rmer (Sph. euphorbiae), der Ligusterschw\xc3\xa4rmer (Sph. ligustri), der Fichtenschw\xc3\xa4rmer (Sph. pinastri), der Windenschw\xc3\xa4rmer (Sph. con-

Description: 1. This paper presents the taxonomy of the Bryozoa Phylactolaemata. The group is found to contain a number of series. The present classification reveals that a number of specific names are synonyms. 2. The evolution of the group is described on the basis of the development of the zoarium and the species-specific statoblasts. 3. The Phylactolaemata are to be considered as a group that have completed their evolution with the development of giant species with giant and specialized forms of statoblasts; this has been accompanied by a reduction in the number of tentacles. 4. The distribution of the species was assessed from the available data. The main concentration is found to occur in the southern hemisphere. 5. The distribution supports the conclusion that the continents were formerly connected; the present distributional pattern can be explained only on this basis. 6. The statoblasts were investigated with particular attention to various types of illumination and certain histochemical methods. The electron-microscopical study forming part of this investigation led to interesting results. The histochemical study also produced new information. 7. The statoblasts are illustrated with characteristic microphotographs. 8. The characters are given according to groups in the keys. Various data are presented in tables. 9. A short historical review is provided. 10. Wherever possible, relevant data on subjects other than the taxonomy of the various species have been added.

Description: CONTENTS\nPage A \xe2\x80\x94\nGENERAL\nIntroduction............... 3\nDistribution............... 7\nComparison of different faunal regions........ 7\nHost relationship and flower records......... 8\nAcknowledgements ............. 9\n\xce\x92 \xe2\x80\x94\nSYSTEMATIC\nI. Taxonomic and group characters........ 11\nII. Key to the Palearctic species of Thyreus Panzer ... 13\nIII. Group of Thyreus dimidiatipuncta (Spinola)..... 35\nIV. Group of Thyreus scutellaris (F.)........ 45\nV. Other species of Thyreus Panzer........ 6r VI. Species incertae sedis........... 129\nVII. Addenda............... 135\nC \xe2\x80\x94 CATALOGUE OF PALEARCTIC SPECIES OF Thyreus PANZER AND INDEX . . 137 A \xe2\x80\x94\nGENERAL\nIntroduction The present account is the fourth and last instalment1) of a partial revision of Thyreus Panzer, a melectine genus of parasitic anthophorid bees, geographically restricted to the Eastern Hemisphere. 1) References to communications published earlier on the same subject are to be found in the writer\'s last review of the Indo-Australian fauna, which appeared in this journal (Lieftinck, 1962, Zoologische Verhandelingen, Leiden 53: 1-212, 72 figs. &

Description: CONTENTS\nIntroduction................... 3\nHistory.................... 4\nMaterial.................... 6\nMethods.................... 8\nTaxonomic morphology................ 9\nTaxonomy................... 14\nThe genus Dysdercus................ 18\nKey to the American species.............. 19\nThe Dysdercus mimus group............. 23\nThe Dysdercus jamaicensis group............ 42\nThe Dysdercus flavolimbatus group............ 60\nThe Dysdercus maurus group............. 93\nThe Dysdercus albofasciatus group............ 144\nThe Dysdercus fernaldi group............. 157\nInfrageneric relationships............... 170\nHost plants................... 183\nNatural enemies.................. 189\nColour patterns and mimicry.............. 192\nAppendix : External morphology of Dysdercus.......... 199\nLiterature................... 202\nIndex to the species; survey of type status and type locations.....214\nINTRODUCTION\nBugs of the genus Dysdercus are often serious pests of cotton. In piercing the bolls, they introduce micro-organisms which cause boll rot or a discolo-

Description: This study was undertaken, in April 1964, at the suggestion of Prof. Dr. J. Lanjouw. The need for such a revision, was, however, stressed by the authors of the subtribe, viz. PAX et K. HOFFMANN, who, while delimiting these genera, remarked that the Systematics of both the (main) genera of this subtribe (viz. Paronychia and Herniaria) required a thorough study. By that remark they implicitly wanted to convey the difficulties encountered in studying the two genera. As a matter of fact theirs is the only account covering the whole group. There is no previous review of all the species of Paronychia, and CORE\xe2\x80\x99s account (1941 of the 21 North American species is the only study of this genus. Herniaria has been studied by F. N. WILLIAMS (1896) and F. HERMANN (1937), but both the accounts are brief and sketchy reviews, and cannot be described as revisions. The present study was, therefore, undertaken to clear up the taxonomic position of these genera. The study was greatly facilitated by the extensive collections made by various workers (in some areas for the first time in history) in recent years, particularly during the past two or three decades. It is indeed immensely gratifying to note that well over 13500 herbarium sheets (about 10500 of them obtained on loan from nearly 45 herbaria) were available for study. A thorough examination of such a vast collection has necessitated a re-evaluation most of the infra-generic groupings, and, moreover, resulted in a considerable increase in the number of species belonging to the two main genera. Of the nine genera originally included by PAX et HOFFMANN in this subtribe, viz. Sphaerocoma, Corrigiola, Gymnocarpos, Lochia, Sclerocephalus, Paronychia, Siphonychia, Herniaria and Philippiella, only eight are retained in this account, the ninth (i.e. Siphonychia) is merged with Paronychia. The latter is subdivided (for the first time) into three subgenera (Siphonychia, Paronychia and Anoplonychia); the subgenus Paronychia includes 57 species of which all but one belong to the section Paronychia. The latter in turn comprises 5 sub-sections and 8 series, all of them being set up for the first time. The second major subgenus, Anoplonychia, includes 48 species grouped into two sections and four subsections. In all there are 29 species being described for the first time (20 in Paronychia, 7 in Herniaria and 2 in Corrigiola) in addition to a number of infra-specific taxa. These figures, however, do not include the taxa published by me in two earlier papers (1966, 1967).\nIn spite of the extensive collecting, however, most of the new species as well as the infra-specific taxa are known from one or a few gatherings only, and are, accordingly, described in this account as endemics. Obviously, in some of these cases more material is highly desirable. Some regions are still rather poorly known or botanized. This is particularly true of Central and Eastern Turkey, NE Spain, and parts of Morocco, Ethiopia, Peru and Chile. Moreover, leaving aside matters of taxonomic interest, which I have endeavoured to clarify in this account, there still remain some problems which require further investigation. The main genera require population studies, and the evidence available so far for hybridization needs to be substantiated. Similarly, cytotaxonomic and experimental studies are needed to help solve some of the problems concerning the delimitation of the infra-specific taxa, especially in the genus Herniaria. Another highly intriguing matter that requires further investigation concerns the correct interpretation of the petals which in most of the genera of this group are filiform structures resembling staminodia, but in two of the genera (viz. Corrigiola and Sphaerocoma) they are quite well-developed. Yet another issue that still remains to be settled, though on a much broader scale, is the long-standing controversy as to whether or not these genera, along with the other members of the subfamily Paronychioideae, are sufficiently distinct from the rest of the family Caryophyllaceae so as to justify their inclusion in a separate family. This is a matter that cannot be settled by the study of a small group of genera, or a small tribe of a large family. I have, therefore, not gone into this problem, and have followed the treatment of PAX & HOFFMANN in the disposition of this group of genera.

Description: Plutonium-beryllium source neutron dating in water and mixtures of tungsten rods and water

Description: Measurements have continued with the 6 L counter. A counter of similar design but with 1 L volume has recently been brought into operation. Despite replacement of the teflon parts, the 1.5 L Oeschger-type counter has not worked consistently and has not been used for dating. Results are not corrected for δ C13. Errors quoted refer only to the standard deviation calculated from a statistical analysis of count rates and the Libby half-life of 5570 ± 30 yr.Alkali pretreatment is used for all samples of charcoal, peat, wood, and plant material provided they are of sufficient quantity. It is now standard practice to boil the sample in 5% HCl solution and filter, both before and after boiling it in 2% NaOH solution. Between each treatment it is washed in boiling distilled water and is finally oven dried at 110°C. Concentrations of acid and alkalis are varied to suit each sample but the sequence of the pretreatment is always the same. In some cases a humate extract is obtained by precipitation with weak acid from the alkali solution filtrate.The collagen fraction is obtained from samples of bone using the method of Krueger (1966) by treatment with dilute acid under reduced pressure. The gas evolved during the treatment is usually discarded but is occasionally retained and dated as the mineral fraction.After mechanical cleaning, samples of shell are dissolved in stages with 6N HCl to divide them into two or three fractions corresponding to the outer, middle, and inner layers of the shell. Normally the outer fraction is discarded when three fractions have been prepared.

Description: In my work for the Index Muscorum it became apparent that dating problems existed for publications of the years 1825-1827, which were important for the nomenclature of Musci. The article by Arnott, Nouvelle disposition m\xc3\xa9thodique des esp\xc3\xa8ces de mousses, was indicated from 1825 in some sources, but the copy of the periodical consulted had the title\xe2\x80\x94date 1827 and the fascicle conderned probably was issued in 1826, Bridel, Bryologia universa, had the internal date 16 Dec. 1826 in the preface, usually bound with vol.1 the year 1826 for this volume, therefore, could be doubted. Moreover a supplement to the same volume was apparently published later than the main text, but the date 1827, assigned to this part in the preparation of Index Muscorum, was not fully confirmed. Some of the 11 parts of Schwaegrichen, Species Muscorum ... Supplementum, had to be dated with more precision, in connection with other works, th than was possible during the work for the Index Muscorum. Within the framework of the project Bibliographic Huntiana of the Hunt Botanical Library, Pittsburgh, Pa., it was possible to select a chapter of botanical bibliography, and the bryological publications of these three years were chosen with the literature related thereto. An effort was made to trace every book containing names of Musci. Articles in periodicals were not checked as thoroughly as the books. To bridge the gap between 1825 and 1821, the last year studied by Dr. Sayre in her Dates of publications treating Musci ... , bryological publications of the years 1822-1824 were studied too, but no effort was made to treat this period exhaustively. The publications included in this thesis are described according to the method of descriptive bibliography, as developed by W.W. Greg, F. Bowers, and for botanical books by Allan Stevenson. This method is adapted to the problems of the books of the period, by omitting the description of some features (binding, type-font) and by using page references in the descriptions of the contents instead of signature references. Some refinements in the method are proposed and applied. A new key for determination of books of handmade paper, especially laid paper, is included, Information concerning the dates of publication was derived from the references to reviews and announcements in contemporaneous periodicals, collected by a team of workers of the Hunt Botanical Library; I checked the original sources in many cases which might be critical. Moreover I studied several manuscript collections in botanical libraries and in archives. Completeness in these two fields, reviews and manuscripts, of course, is impossible, but some important sources remained untapped because of time restrictions.\nThe result is the first analytical bibliography of all publications on a plant group of a certain period, at least to my knowledge. A considerable number of dates of publication are given with more precision than was the case up to now. Some of the important solutions to special problems or new points which came to light are enumerated below. 1. The article of Arnott was published in no less than 5 variants. The first one certainly is the quarto separate, which has the title-date 1825. My research made it probable that this was issued in January 1826. The later variants may be of importance because of indirect references to Schwaegrichen and Gaudichaud. 2. The two volumes of Bridel: Bryologia universa, were indeed published in 1826 and 1827, as the titles indicate; however, the supplement to vol.1 and the preliminaries were published together with vol.2. 3. The several parts of Schwaegrichen\xe2\x80\x99s supplements are placed in the chronological order with the other important publications. For some parts, however, more accurate dates would be welcome. 4. The relative dates of Greville: Flora Edinensis, and the relevant fascicle of his Scottish cryptogamic flora were better established than those used in the Index Muscorum. 5. The contents, of the fascicles of a number of books and periodicals were determined, mainly with the help of internal bibliographical evidence. These were in several cases not known to the last details, e.g. Hooker: Musci exotici and Exotic flora. Off-sets of fascicle-titles in a particular copy of the latter work were helpful in establishing the breaks and dates of some fascicles. 6. Some publications were found, of which the new names of Musci were overlooked in the bryological literature (Cambess\xc3\xa8des, Chevallier). 7. The first color prints of mosses, to my knowledge, are indicated: of protonema in T.F.L. Nees von Esenbeck, 1824, and of complete plants in Sommerfelt, 1826, and Chevallier, 1826. 8. Of several books cancellantia are described which were not yet indicated before, including some in the starting-point book, Hedwig: Species Muscorum frondosorum. 9. Wove paper, originally used for expensive paper states of books, apparently became available in larger quantities and at relatively lower prices in the period treated, since several books show a shift from laid to wove paper. Machine-made paper was not yet often used for books; I only saw this paper type with certainty in the Transactions of the Linnean Society [London] of 1827 (see Greville n.9).\nAs a general result of this research I can discuss the development of bryology in the first three decades of the 19th century, stressing the application of the natural classification to bryophytes, and the diverse opinions on the life cycle of mosses.

Description: Electronic integration of international ionosphere satellite

Description: Heat-transfer rates and coefficients and coolant pressure loss characteristics in regeneratively cooled liquid hydrogen-liquid fluorine rocket engine thrust chambers

Description: Description of Loxothylacus engeli nov. spec., parasitic on the crab Anasimus latus Rathbun from the mouth of the Suriname River. The new species is compared with two others having a smooth or nearly smooth external cuticle, viz. L. bicorniger Boschma, 1950 and L. scaber (Boschma, 1931).

Description: Electronic checkout, environmental qualification and integration of OGO by spacecraft simulator and performance analysis system

Description: Accommodation coefficients ratio of He 4 to He 3 measured on W and K clean surfaces

Description: Solar abundance of Y derived from Y II lines by computing transition probabilities and oscillator strength involving several configurations

Description: Ligia oceanica lebt in der Ostsee bis etwa an die Salinitätsgrenze 6-7‰. Gegenüber Tieren der Nordsee sind keine strukturellen Änderungen festzustellen. Das Gros der Jungtiere verläßt im Juli-August das Marsupium der Weibchen und wächst bis November auf eine Größe von über 10 mm heran. Diese Tiere sind im nächsten Sommer fortpflanzungsfähig. Nach einer Fortpflanzungsperiode sterben die meisten ab. Nur wenige Tiere werden älter und erreichen Längen über 20 mm. Erwachsene Ligien sind nachtaktiv, junge zeigen eine aperiodisch verteilte Aktivität und sind selbst im hellen Sonnenschein zu sehen. Ihre Vorzugstemperatur liegt höher als die der adulten Tiere. Günstige Nahrung kann ungünstige Salinitätsgrade im Substrat kompensieren; günstige Salzgehalte im Substrat können ungünstige Nahrung ausgleichen. The isopod Ligia oceanica lives on the shores of the Baltic up to a minimum salinity of 6-7‰. Fresh juveniles appear in June, July, and August; one female may produce more than one brood a summer. The young ones reach a length of about 10 mm in November. From then to April-May all Ligiae hide under stones and spend the winter with very little activity. In June, the young reach sexual maturity. After producing one or two broods most of them die (in September-October). A smaller proportion survives another winter; these animals become langer than 20 mm. Ligia oceanica lives upon marine plants and animals that are cast ashore; it may overcome even living animals (smaller Ligiae; Orchestia; Enchytraeidae). The greatest part in the diet of Ligia play brown algae (Fucus). Such food can compensate insufficient salinity of the substratum; good salinity of the substratum (15-30‰) compensates unfavorable food. The osmoregulation of Ligia seems to be part of the energy metabolism.