Marine Biotechnology

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 260–267 | Cite as

Molecular Species Identification of Spiny Lobster Phyllosoma Larvae of the Genus Panulirus from the Northwestern Pacific

  • Seinen Chow
  • Nobuaki Suzuki
  • Hideyuki Imai
  • Taku Yoshimura
Open Access
Original Article

Abstract

To identify lobster phyllosoma larvae of the genus Panulirus occurring in waters adjacent to Japan, genetic variation within and between 10 Indo-Pacific lobster species was investigated using restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) analysis for the 1300-base pair mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (COI) gene. RFLP analysis using two endonucleases (AluI and TaqI) enabled discrimination of all species, including the P. longipes complex. The diagnostic DNA markers, supplemented with nucleotide sequence analysis, were applied to 44 mid- to late-stage phyllosoma larvae (7.4 to 27.7 mm in body length) collected in the northwestern Pacific. These samples were unexpectedly variable in species composition, comprising P. japonicus (n = 16), P. longipesbispinosus (21), P. longipes longipes (1), P.aka” (1), and P. penicillatus (5). Comparison of larval size at similar stages revealed that P. l.bispinosus larvae were significantly larger than P. japonicus.

Keywords

Mitochondrial DNA phyllosoma larvae species identification spiny lobster 

Introduction

Spiny lobsters are one of the world's most valuable fisheries resources. The genus Panulirus, comprising 19 or more species, is the largest group in the family Palinuridae (George and Main, 1967; Holthuis, 1991; McWilliam, 1995), and all species are highly prized in many countries. Much attention has been paid to biological investigation of the bottom-living phase of the young and adult stages, while biological studies of the planktonic stage are scarce. This is mainly due to taxonomic uncertainty at the larval stage and to small sample sizes of wild-caught larvae. Larvae of the spiny lobster, called phyllosoma, are known to be peculiar, having highly transparent and dorsoventrally compressed bodies and a very long planktonic period extending from several months to more than a year (Chittleborough and Thomas, 1969; Inoue, 1981; Kittaka and Kimura, 1989; Yamakawa et al., 1989; Matsuda and Yamakawa, 2000). This long larval period accompanied by morphological change has made species identification of phyllosoma larvae very difficult, especially where multiple species share similar distribution ranges.

The Japanese spiny lobster, Panulirus japonicus, is the most abundant lobster in the temperate coastal area of Japan, followed by Panulirus longipes, which is widely distributed in tropical to subtropical waters of the Indo-Pacific (Holthuis, 1991). These two species are closely related and belong to species-group I or “P. japonicus” group (George and Holthuis, 1965; George and Main, 1967). Johnson (1971) pointed out that the larvae of the P. japonicus group may be very similar or indistinguishable from one another in morphology. Following Gurney's description (1936), Oshima (1942) reported that two Forms (E and F) occur in Japanese waters. Later, Murano (1971) observed five Forms (A to E) of late-stage phyllosoma larvae of Panulirus in waters adjacent to Japan and suggested his Form A corresponded to Oshima's Form F. Murano (1971), and subsequently Nonaka et al. (1989) suggested that phyllosoma larvae of P. japonicus and P. longipes both belong to Form A, but exact species identification was not possible. Sekiguchi (1986) proposed that late stage phyllosoma larvae of P. japonicus and P. longipes can be discriminated by the ratio of cephalic shield and thorax widths. Subsequently, however, the utility of this ratio in identifying these two species was questioned by Inoue and Sekiguchi (2001). Observations from complete larval rearing indicated that subfinal and final stages of phyllosoma larvae of P. japonicus and P. longipes conformed almost exactly with Murano's Form A and that there was very little morphological difference between these two species throughout their larval stages (Inoue, 1981; Matsuda and Yamakawa, 2000).

Morphological and recent molecular analyses have revealed P. longipes to be a species complex, making morphological identification at the larval stage even more difficult. Holthuis (1991) described two subspecies, Panulirus longipes longipes with spotted-legs and P. longipes femoristriga with striped-legs, in P. longipes. Subsequent taxonomic studies have revealed P. l. femoristriga is also a species complex, in which one subspecies and two species have been recognized as P. l. bispinosus (=P. l.shirahige”), P. femorstriga (=P. albifragellum) and P.aka” (Sekiguchi, 1991; Chan and Chu, 1996; George, 1997; Chan and Ng, 2001). Molecular phylogenetic analyses using mitochondrial DNA sequences (Ptacek et al., 2001; Ravago and Juinio-Meñez, 2003) have indicated close but distinct relationships between P. l. longipes and P. l. bispinosus and thedistinct specific status of P. femoristriga, while P.aka” has been not included in the molecular analyses. Although phyllosoma larvae of all of thesespecies may occur in Japanese waters, definitive morphological identification has been not possible even for the final stage (McWilliam, 1995; Yoshimura et al., 1999; Matsuda and Yamakawa, 2000; Inoue and Sekiguchi, 2001; Yoshimura et al., 2002). Yoshimura et al. (2002) suggested that morphological and DNA analyses for wild larvae, including those of the P. longipes complex, should bedeveloped for advancing the larval study of P.japonicus.

DNA analysis can support species identification, and in fact restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) and/or direct nucleotide sequencing analyses based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR) methods have become conventional and practical for identifying fish and crustacean species at all stages of life cycle (Silberman and Walsh, 1992; Chow et al., 1993, 2003; Imai et al., 2004). Furthermore, PCR amplification can be performed for any DNA region from a tiny piece of tissue, thus preserving the sample for subsequent morphological investigation.

In this study, we present diagnostic DNA markers able to identify 10 spiny lobster species of the genus Panulirus occurring in the Indo-Pacific, and report the results of species identification for mid- to late-stage phyllosoma larvae collected in the northwestern Pacific.

Materials and Methods

Lobster Samples and DNA Extraction

Collection location and sample sizes of the standard adult specimens are shown in Table 1. Adult individuals purchased at local landing sites or caught by local fisherman were transferred to the laboratory alive orfrozen. Tissue samples collected by foreign organizations were transferred to the laboratory in ethanol. Forty-four phyllosoma larvae (designated L1 to L45; L7 was lacking) collected by the RV Yoko-Maru using an Isaacs-Kidd Midwater Trawl (IKMT) net from January 14 to 30, 2002 in the northwestern Pacific (27°30′–30°27′N: 133°20′–135°E) were fixed in ethanol on board and transferred to the laboratory. The phyllosoma larvae were morphologically assigned to Forms A (n = 39) and C (n = 5) according to Murano (1971), and all Form A larvae were staged according to Inoue (1981) and Matsuda and Yamakawa (2000). Using a biopsy instrument (Disposable Biopsy Punch, Kai Group Ltd., Japan), a small piece of tissue (2 mm diameter) was punched from the thorax region of the larvae and stored in ethanol until use.
Table 1

Collection location and sample sizes of 10 lobster species of the genus Panulirus.

Species

Code

Catch locality, year

Supplied by

Sample size

P. “aka”

Pa

Ogasawara Islands, western Pacific, 2003

This study

6

P. femoristriga

Pf

Guiuan (Philippines), western Pacific, 1999

R.G. Ravago (Univ. Philippines)

3

P. homarus

Ph

Bari (Indonesia), 2003

G.N. Permana & A. Nakazawa (Gondol Res. Inst. Maricult.)

7

Amami (Japan), western Pacific, 2003

This study

1

Marquesas Islands, central Pacific, 1996

M. Childress (Clemson Univ.)

1

Oman, western Indian Ocean, 1995

M. Childress (Clemson Univ.)

2

P. japonicus

Pj

Chiba (Japan), western Pacific, 1994

This study

23

Nagasaki (Japan), western Pacific, 2004

This study

19

P. longipes longipes

Pll

Guiuan (Philippines), western Pacific, 1999, 2001

R.G. Ravago (Univ. Philippines)

3

Amami (Japan), western Pacific, 2003

This study

3

P. longipes bispinosus

Plb

Guiuan (Philippines), western Pacific, 1999

R.G. Ravago (Univ. Philippines)

3

Torres Strait (Australia), western Pacific, 1996

M. Childress (Clemson Univ.)

2

Amami (Japan), western Pacific, 2003

This study

10

P. marginatus

Pm

Hawaii (USA), central Pacific, 2003

J. Uchiyama (NMFS)

2

P. ornatus

Po

Torres Strait (Australia) , South Pacific, 1996

M. Childress (Clemson Univ.)

1

Bari (Indonesia), 2003

G.N. Permana and A. Nakazawa (Gondol Res. Inst. Maricult.)

8

Amami (Japan), western Pacific, 2002

This study

1

Okinawa (Japan), western Pacific, 2002

This study

1

P. penicillatus

Pp

Galapagos Islands, eastern Pacific, 1995

M. Childress (Clemson Univ.)

1

Torres Strait (Australia), South Pacific, 1996

M. Childress (Clemson Univ.)

1

Amami (Japan), western Pacific, 2003

This study

2

Okinawa (Japan), western Pacific, 2002

This study

1

P. versicolor

Pv

Torres Strait (Australia) , South Pacific, 1996

M. Childress (Clemson Univ.)

1

Amami (Japan), western Pacific, 2003

This study

1

Okinawa (Japan), western Pacific, 2002

This study

1

Palau, western Pacific, 2003

This study

1

Tissue samples from adult specimens were finely minced and those from the phyllosoma larvae were homogenized in 1.5 ml microcentrifuge tubes using a Teflon pestle. Crude DNA was extracted using a DNA extraction kit (GenomicPrep Cells and Tissue DNA Isolation Kit, Amersham Bioscience).

PCR Amplification

Silberman and Walsh (1992) demonstrated successful discrimination among phyllosoma larvae of three Panulirus species in the western Atlantic using restriction analysis on 28S rDNA amplified by PCR. However, we failed to discriminate two closely related species (P. l. bispinosus and P. l. longipes) using 11 endonucleases (AflIII, DdeI, HhaI, HinfI, MseI, MspI, NlaIII, NlaIV, RsaI, Sau96I, and TaqI) on this gene. Therefore, mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I gene (COI) was adopted for RFLP analysis, since partial COI sequences of almost all Panulirus species have been reported and are available from the GenBank database (Ptacek et al., 2001; Ravago and Juinio-Meñez, 2003). Primers for PCR amplification are shown in Table 2. All forward primers were designed to anneal to an identical site near the 5′-end, and reverse primers were designed to anneal at the 3′ region of the COI. First, a single pair of primers (COI65F1 and COI1342R1) was applied to all samples, and subsequently all eight primers were mixed and used for samples that were not well amplified by the first pair of primers. We observed that LATaq polymerase with GC buffer (TAKARA Ltd., Kyoto) greatly increased amplification efficiency for the spiny lobster COI compared to the standard Taq DNA polymerase. PCR amplification for all specimens was carried out in a 10 μl reaction mixture containing 5 μl of GC buffer, 1 mM of each dNTP, primers (1 μM each for single pair and 0.2μM each for a mixed one), 0.5 unit of LATaq polymerase, and DNA template. The reaction mixtures were preheated at 95°C for 3 min followed by 30 cycles of amplification (at 95°C for 1 min, 55°C for 30 s, and 72°C for 1.5 min) with a final extension at 72°C for 5 min. The amplification was usually very strong, and 10 to 20 μl of sterilized water was added to dilute the PCR products prior to subsequent analysis.
Table 2

Nucleotide sequences of four forward and reverse primers for amplifying the cytochrome oxidase I (COI) gene.

Forward

COI65F1

5′-GGAGCTTGAGCTGGAATAGT-3′

COI65F2

5′-GGAGCTTGAGCAGGAATGGT-3′

COI65F3

5′-GGAGCATGAGCAGGAATAGT-3′

COI65F4

5′-GGAGCATGAGCTGGAATAGT-3′

Reverse

COI 1342R1

5′-GTGTAGGCGTCTGGGTAGTC-3′

COI 1342R2

5′-GTGTATGCGTCTGGGTAGTC-3′

COI 1342R3

5′-GTGTAGGCGTCTGGATAATC-3′

COI 1342R4

5′-GTGTAAGCATCTGGATAATC-3′

RFLP and Nucleotide Sequence Analyses

We searched for restriction site differences among lobster species using published nucleotide sequence data reported by Ptacek et al. (2001) and Ravago and Juinio-Meñez (2003), and selected two endonucleases (AluI and TaqI) that provided diagnostic species patterns. The PCR products were directly digested by these enzymes and electrophoresed on a 2.5% agarose gel (Biogel, BIO101, Inc.) for 2 to 3 h, followed by ethidium bromide staining and photographic recording.

Nucleotide sequence analysis was performed on phyllosoma samples showing different RFLP profiles from those of the adult standards. In addition, two adult P.aka” individuals were analyzed, since the sequence of this species has not been reported. Oligonucleotide primers were removed from the PCR products using ExoSAP-IT (Amersham Biosciences) to prepare a DNA template. Sequences were generated on an automated sequencer (ABI Prism310) using the ABI Big-dye Ready Reaction kit following the standard cycle sequencing protocol. Since previous studies on lobster phylogeny adopted Kimura's two-parameter distance (K2P)(Ptacek et al., 2001; Ravago and Juinio-Meñez, 2003), we incorporated these published sequence data to calculate K2P distance and constructed neighbor-joining (NJ) tree (Saitou and Nei, 1987) using MEGA ver. 3 (Kumar et al., 2004). The max-mini branch-and-bound search algorithm implemented in MEGA was adopted for parsimony analysis.

Results

RFLP within and between Standard Species Samples

The size of amplified fragments was estimated to be approximately 1300 base pairs (bp), and no apparent size variation was observed among 107 adult standard specimens. RFLP within and between species are shown in Figure 1, in which AluI and TaqI digestions detected 19 and 14 restriction types, respectively. Size and distribution of fragments in each restriction type observed in AluI and TaqI digestions can be obtained from http://www.enyo.affrc.go.jp/chow/LobsterRFLP.htm. Composite haplotypes are summarized in Table 3. Intraspecific variation was observed in all species except P.aka” and P. versicolor. Almost all species showed distinct restriction profiles from each other except for P. l. bispinosus and P. l. longipes, which shared an identical profile in AluI digestion (type A5), and P.aka” and P. marginatus which shared an identical profile in TaqI digestion (type T8) (see Figure 1). No composite haplotype was observed to be shared by different species (Table3), indicating that all standard species of the genus Panulirus used in this study could be readily discriminated using these two restriction enzymes.
Fig. 1

AluI (top) and TaqI (bottom) restriction profiles of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (COI) gene fragment of standard lobster specimens. The sizes of the molecular markers (M: 100 bp DNA ladder, New England Biolab) are shown in the left margin. See Table 1 for abbreviations of spiny lobster species. U, Undigested PCR product.

Table 3

Composite haplotypes of 107 adult standard specimens.

Species

AluI/TaqI types

n

P. japonicus

A1/T1

1

A2/T1

33

A2/T2

6

A3/T1

1

A4/T1

1

P. l. longipes

A5/T3

2

A6/T4

6

P. l. bispinosus

A5/T5

14

A7/T6

1

P. femoristriga

A8/T7

2

A9/T7

1

P. “aka”

A10/T8

6

P. marginatus

A11/T8

1

A12/T8

1

P. penicillatus

A13/T9

9

A13/T10

1

A14/T9

1

P. homarus

A15/T11

9

A16/T11

1

A16/T12

1

P. versicolor

A17/T13

4

P. ornatus

A18/T14

5

A19/T14

2

Identification of Phyllosoma Larvae

The restriction analysis indicated that the morphological assignments were roughly correct. In addition, the restriction analysis further delineated species identity, and found several instances in which larvae showed novel restriction profiles not observed in the adult standards. Among 39 Form A larvae, species identification using RFLP analysis was accomplished for 34 larvae, comprising P. japonicus (n = 14), P. l. bispinosus (18), P. l. longipes (1), and P.aka” (1). Of the remaining five Form A larvae, two (L16 and 32) had novel restriction profiles in AluI digestion (designated as type A20) but shared an identical profile with the P. japonicus standard in TaqI digestion (type T1). The other three Form A larvae (L2, 22, and 31) shared identical restriction profiles with P. l. bispinosus and P. l. longipes in AluI digestion (type A5) but had novel profiles in TaqI digestion (types T15 and 16). In five Form C larvae, four individuals shared identical restriction profiles with P.penicillatus standards. One Form C larva (L6) had a novel profile in AluI digestion (type A21) but shared an identical profile with P. penicillatus in TaqI digestion (type T9). Nucleotide sequences of five of the six larvae (L2, 6, 16, 22, and 32), L21 with the P. l. longipes restriction profile and L45 with the P.aka” restriction profile, were determined and compared with published data. Nucleotide sequence of one larva (L31) sharing the identical restriction profiles with L22 was not analyzed. An entire COI sequence of P. japonicus was obtained from whole mtDNA sequence data reported by Yamauchi et al. (2002). Ptacek et al. (2001) sequenced near the 5′ upstream region of COI (approximately 640 bp) for almost all the Panulirus species. Ravago and Juinio-Meñez (2003) analyzed a further downstream region (approximately 560 bp) of fewer species but focused intensively on the P. longipes complex. Sarver et al. (1998) reported P. cygnus and P. marginatusCOI sequences corresponding to the region examined by Ravago and Juinio-Meñez (2003). Nucleotide sequences of Jasus edwardsii and Parribacus antarcticus were derived from Ptacek et al. (2001) and Ravago and Juinio-Meñez (2003), respectively, as out group species. Homology investigation and alignment among these published sequences and our data allowed us to sample 483 bp in the upstream region and 338 bp in the downstream region of COI for phylogenetic analysis. Nucleotide sequences of these larvae and two P.aka” standards are available in DDBJ under accession numbers AB193071 to AB193088. Neighbor-joining (NJ) and maximum parsimony (MP) trees constructed using upstream and downstream region sequence data are shown in Figure 2. All trees constructed using upstream and downstream region data supported two major lineages (groups I plus II and III plus IV as defined by George and Main, 1967). Although relationships among species within each lineage varied as observed byPtacek et al. (2001) and Ravago and Juinio-Meñez (2003), the close (mean K2P = 0.051 ± 0.01 and 0.063 ± 0.013 for upstream and downstream regions, respectively) but distinct relationships between P. l. bispinosus and P. l. longipes were evident. Mean nucleotide sequence divergences (K2P) between P. “aka” and other species were 0.230 ± 0.025 (SE) for the upstream and 0.198 ± 0.02 for the downstream sequences, comparable or even larger than those between other species. The deep branch of the P.aka” cluster and the large sequence divergence from the other species may well support the species status. Assignment of all six larvae unidentified by RFLP assay was unambiguously established in all tree construction methods. Thus, restriction analysis supplemented by the nucleotide sequencing indicated our phyllosoma sample to consist of 16 P. japonicus, 21 P. l. bispinosus, one P.l. longipes, one P.aka,” and 5 P. penicillatus.
Fig. 2

Neighbor-joining (NJ) (A, C) and maximum parsimony (MP) (B, D) phylogenetic trees drawn using the upstream (A, B) and downstream (C, D) region sequence data of COI. Assignments of all larvae (undetermined by RFLP analysis) were established, and the species status of P.aka” is strongly supported. Published sequence data are derived from \(^{\Psi } \)Sarver et al. (1998), *Ptacek et al. (2001), $Yamauchi et al. (2002), and \(^{\phi } \)Ravago and Juinio-Meñez (2003). Bootstrapping was run with 1000 replicates and values over 50% are shown at the nodes.

Heterogeneous larval body size between larvae of Form A species was observed. Based on the size and morphology, the larval stage of P. japonicus was determined to be VI to VII, comprising 10 and 6 individuals, respectively. Body length of stage VII P. japonicus larvae ranged from 12.6 to 15.5 mm with a mean of 13.8 mm ± 1.03 (SD). Phyllosoma larvae of P. l. bispinosus consisted of 5 VII, 15 VIII, and 1 IX stage larvae, in which body length of stage VII larvae ranged from 15.1 to 20.0 mm with a mean of 17.2 mm ± 2.29, significantly larger than that of P.japonicus (Mann-Whitney's U test, P < 0.05). Stage VIII larvae of 15 P. l. bispinosus ranged from18.6 to 27.3 mm with a mean of 23.1 mm ± 2.19, and that of stage IX larva was 27.6 mm. Body length of one stage IX larva of P. l. longipes was 27.7 mm, and that of one stage VII larva of P.aka” was 15.0 mm.

Discussion

The present study has introduced a simple RFLP assay to identify Pacific spiny lobster species of the genus Panulirus. Investigation of intraspecific variation may be essential for species identification, and larger sample sizes for several species would be useful to further substantiate the RFLP markers. However, the probability of mis-identification based on the RFLP analysis is very low, since substantial nucleotide sequence divergence has been observed among species of the genus Panulirus (Ptacek et al., 2001; Ravago and Juinio-Meñez, 2003; in this study) except for the two closely related subspecies (P. l. bispinosus and P. l. longipes). Relatively low levels of restriction site polymorphism within species and very little restriction profile sharing between species observed in the present study further corroborate the diagnostic utility of the RFLP markers presented here. Furthermore, the wide range of geographic locations represented in the standard samples in some species (see Table 1) may compensate for the limited sample size.

The present study is a step toward resolving problems in species identification for phyllosoma larvae of Panulirus lobsters and provides a breakthrough for studying distribution and transport of phyllosoma larvae. Inoue and Sekiguchi (2001) concluded all Form A phyllosoma larvae collected east of the Ryukyu Archipelago were P. japonicus. Despite the lack of morphological evidence for species identification, they also speculated on the transport and recruitment processes of phyllosoma larvae in this species. Phyllosoma larvae used in the present study were caught further to the north, but the species composition was unexpectedly variable in contrast to the implications of Inoue and Sekiguchi (2001). Interestingly, Form A individuals examined by Inoue and Sekiguchi (2001) were collected between March to July and consisted of two size groups (a subfinal stage ranging from 20 to 27 mm, and a final stage ranging from 29 to 34 mm), possibly corresponding to our identified larvae of P. japonicus (11.3 to 15.5 mm) and P. l.bispinosus (15.1 to 27.6 mm) collected earlier in the life cycle (i.e., January). In the present study, larval stages of P. japonicus and P. l. bispinosus were estimated to be stages VI and VII and VII to IX, respectively, and P. l. bispinosus larvae were significantly larger than P. japonicus. This is consistent with the observation in laboratory-reared phyllosoma larvae, in which larvae of P. longipes were found to be larger than those of P. japonicus at all stages (Inoue, 1981; Matsuda and Yamakawa, 2000). In contrast, larvae of P. longipes reared by Saisho and Nakahara (1960) were even smaller than those of P. japonicus. Staging of palinurid and scyllarid larvae may be arbitrary especially at later developmental stages (Johnson, 1971; Matsuda and Yamakawa, 2000), and the captive environment may significantly affect the growth of phyllosoma larvae (Matsuda and Yamakawa, 2000; Duggan and McKinnon, 2003). Nevertheless, size differences at similar larval stage observed in the present study may be key to primary sorting of Form A larvae occurring naturally in Japanese waters. Since our sample was collected within a limited area and season, more samples from a wider geographic range and a longer time span will be necessary to further investigate the dynamics of species composition and distribution of phyllosoma larvae.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank M. Childress and M.B. Ptacek and their colleague of the Lobster Phylogeny Project at Clemson University, R.G. Ravago and A. Juinio-Meñez of the Marine Science Institute, the University of Philippines, G. N. Permana and A. Nakazawa of the Gondol Research Institute of Mariculture, J.B. Wexler of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, and J. Uchiyama of the National Marine Fisheries Service, for generously providing invaluable lobster tissue samples and for their efforts to collect lobster samples. Some samples of adult lobster were kindly made available by Mr. K. Nishikiori and Mr. T. Yamamoto of the Tokyo Metropolitan Fisheries Experiment Station and Mr. T. Maekawa of the Maekawa Fishery Co., Ltd. We also like to thank the members of RV Yoko-Maru for assistance in sample collection, S. Clarke for reading and considerably improving this manuscript, and H. Hasegawa and M. Michibayashi, for their superb technical assistance in DNA analyses. This work was supported in part by grants from the Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries of Japan, and a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Priority Areas (B) from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture.

References

  1. Chan, TY, Chu, KH 1996On the different forms of Panulirus longipes femoristriga (Von Martens, 1872) (Crustacea: Decapoda: Palinuridae), with description of a new speciesJ Nat Hist30367387Google Scholar
  2. Chan, TY, Ng, PKL 2001On the nomenclature of the commercially important spiny lobsters Panulirus longipes femoristriga (Von Martens, 1872), P. bispinosus Borradaile, 1899, and P. albiflagellum Chan and Chu, 1996 (Decapoda, Palinuridae)Crustaceana74123127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chittleborough, RG, Thomas, LR 1969Larval ecology of Western Australian crayfish, with notes upon other Panulirus larvae from the eastern Indian OceanAustral J Mar Freshwat Res20199223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chow, S, Clarke, ME, Walsh, PJ 1993PCR-RFLP analysis on thirteen western Atlantic snappers (subfamily Lutjaninae): a simple method for species and stock identificationFish Bull91619627Google Scholar
  5. Chow, S, Nohara, K, Tanabe, T, Itoh, T, Tsuji, S, Nishikawa, Y, Ueyanagi, S, Uchikawa, K 2003Genetic and morphological identification of larval and small juvenile tunas (Pisces: Scombridae) caught by a mid-water trawl in the western PacificBull Fish Res Agency8114Google Scholar
  6. Duggan, S, McKinnon, AD 2003The early larval developmental stages of the spiny lobster Panulirus ornatus (Fabricius, 1798) cultured under laboratory conditionsCrustaceana76313332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. George, RW 1997Tectonic plate movements and the evolution of Jasus and Panulirus spiny lobsters (Palinuridae)Mar Freshwat Res4811211130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. George, RW, Holthuis, LB 1965A revision of the Indo-West Pacific spiny lobsters of the Panulirus japonicus groupZool Verhand Leiden72136Google Scholar
  9. George, RW, Main, AR 1967The evolution of spiny lobsters (Palinuridae): a study of evolution in the marine environmentEvolution21803820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gurney, R 1936Larvae of Decapod Crustacea, Part III. PhyllosomaDiscov Rep12400440Google Scholar
  11. Holthuis, LB 1991Marine Lobsters of the World: An Annotated and Illustrated Catalogue of Species of Interest to Fisheries Known to Date: FAO species Catalogue,Vol. 13FAORomeGoogle Scholar
  12. Imai, H, Cheng, J-H, Hamasaki, K, Numachi, K 2004Identification of four mud crab species (genus Scylla) using ITS-1 and 16S rDNA markersAquat Living Resour173134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Inoue, M 1981Studies on the cultured phyllosoma larvae of the Japanese spiny lobster, Panulirus japonicus (V. Siebold)Special Rep Kanagawa Pref Fish Exp St1191(in Japanese with English abstract)Google Scholar
  14. Inoue, N, Sekiguchi, H 2001Distribution of late-stage phyllosoma larvae of Panulirus japonicus in the Kuroshio SubgyreMar Freshwat Res5212011209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson, MW 1971On palinurid and scyllarid lobster larvae and their distribution in the South China Sea (Decapoda, Palinuridea)Crustaceana21247282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kittaka, J, Kimura, K 1989Culture of the Japanese spiny lobster Panulirus japonicus from egg to juvenile stageNippon Suisan Gakkaishi55963970Google Scholar
  17. Kumar, S, Tamura, K, Nei, M 2004MEGA3: integrated software for molecular evolutionary genetics analysis and sequence alignmentBrief Bioinform5150163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Matsuda, H, Yamakawa, T 2000The complete development and morphological changes of larval Panulirus longipes (Decapoda, Palinuridae) under laboratory conditionsFish Sci66278293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. McWilliam, PS 1995Evolution in the phyllosoma and puerulus phages of the spiny lobster genus Panulirus WhiteJ Crust Biol15542557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Murano, M 1971Five forms of palinurid phyllosoma larvae from JapanPubl Seto Mar Biol Lab191725Google Scholar
  21. Nonaka, M, Hataya, M, Aoyama, M, Yamamoto, K 1989The relative growth of Panulirus phyllosoma larvae in Japanese watersNippon Suisan Gakkaishi55605612Google Scholar
  22. Oshima, Y 1942On the phyllosoma of the genus PanulirusSuisan Gakkaiho93644(in Japanese)Google Scholar
  23. Ptacek, MB, Sarver, SK, Childress, MJ, Herrnkind, WF 2001Molecular phylogeny of the spiny lobster genus Panulirus (Decapoda: Palinuridae)Mar Freshwat Res5210371047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ravago, RG, Juinio-Meñez, MA 2003Phylogenetic position of the striped-legged forms of Panulirus longipes (A. Milne-Edwards, 1868) (Decapoda, Palinuridae) inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequencesCrustaceana7510471059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Saisho, T, Nakahara, K 1960On the early development of phyllosomas of Ibacus ciliatus (von Siebold) and Panulirus longipes (A. Milne Edwards)Mem Fac Fish Kagoshima Univ98490Google Scholar
  26. Saitou, N, Nei, M 1987The neighbour-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic treesMol Biol Evol4406425Google Scholar
  27. Sarver, S, Silberman, JD, Walsh, PJ 1998Mitochondrial DNA sequence evidence supporting the recognition of two subspecies or species of the Florida spiny lobster Panulirus argusJ Crust Biol18177186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sekiguchi, H 1986Identification of late-stage phyllosoma larvae of the scyllarid and palinurid lobsters in the Japanese watersBull Jap Soc Sci Fish5212891294Google Scholar
  29. Sekiguchi, H 1991Two forms of Panulirus longipes femoristriga (Crustacea, Palinuridae) from Ogasawara waters, JapanProc Jpn Soc Syst Zool441525Google Scholar
  30. Silberman, JD, Walsh, PJ 1992Species identification of spiny lobster phyllosome larvae via ribosomal DNA analysisMol Mar Biol Biotech1195205Google Scholar
  31. Yamakawa, T, Nishimura, M, Matsuda, H, Tsujigado, A, Kamiya, N 1989Complete larval rearing of the Japanese spiny lobster Panulirus japonicusNippon Suisan Gakkaishi55745Google Scholar
  32. Yamauchi, M, Miya, M, Nishida, M 2002Complete mitochondrial DNA sequence of the Japanese spiny lobster, P. japonicusGene2958996CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Yoshimura, T, Yamakawa, H, Kozasa, E 1999Distribution of final stage phyllosoma larvae and free-swimming pueruli of Panulirus japonicus around the Kuroshio Current off southern Kyushu, JapanMar Biol133293306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yoshimura, T, Morinaga, K, Shirai, S, Yamakawa, H 2002Palinurid phyllosoma larvae and their distribution in winter off the Pacific coast of JapanFish Sci68194197Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Seinen Chow
    • 1
  • Nobuaki Suzuki
    • 2
  • Hideyuki Imai
    • 3
  • Taku Yoshimura
    • 4
  1. 1.National Research Institute of Fisheries ScienceYokosukaJapan
  2. 2.National Research Institute of Far Seas FisheriesShizuokaJapan
  3. 3.University of the RyukyusNishiharaJapan
  4. 4.Seikai National Fisheries Research InstituteNagasakiJapan

Personalised recommendations