
Amphitretus pelagicus
There are many more photos of adorable creatures of the deep sea at this site.

There are many more photos of adorable creatures of the deep sea at this site.

By the way, did you know that creationists hate cephalopods because they can’t stuff them in a sack and throw them in the water to drown? Also because they’re cute and lovable and beautiful.
Figure from Cephalopods: A World Guide (amzn/b&n/abe/pwll), by Mark Norman.
Brian O’Brien of Gustavus Adolphus College has sent along an important message for those of you who like big flowers that stink of rotting meat—they’ve got one.
Kids underfoot? Are they pestering you for entertainment? Tell them to go look up dinosaurs in Dinobase, and to come back when they’ve got them all memorized. I remember as a kid it was easy to wow the grownups by memorizing a few dozen genera, but now … whoa. There’s more minutia there than you’ll find in packs of baseball cards, that’s for sure.

I’ve been looking forward to seeing these little jewels in print since I saw Kuratani talk about them at the SICB meetings in January. Hagfish are wonderfully slimy jawless chordates that have been difficult to raise in the lab—although if you poke a whale corpse rotting in the cold deeps you’ll find them swarming everywhere. The Kuratani lab has managed to keep animals of the species Eptatretus burgeri alive and healthy in a lab aquarium maintained at cold temperatures (16°C), and has even had success in breeding them. That object to the right is a single hagfish egg, brown and leathery-shelled and surprisingly big—it’s an inch and a half long!
They collected 92 eggs, and then another limitation emerged: it took 5-7 months for embryos to develop in a small number of the eggs. Hagfish aren’t going to be your typical fast-developing model system, I’m afraid, but they are extraordinarily cool animals, and it’s good to see work beginning on them.
NOVA is going to be showing a program on the cuttlefish Tuesday evening, 3 April — it’s called Kings of Camouflage, and the website for it is also very well done, with nice illustrations of anatomy and behavior, and one excellent clip of color changes. I’m definitely going to tune in, check it out!
I must disagree with Larry Moran, who accuses the field of evo-devo of animal chauvinism — not that it isn’t more or less true that we do tend to focus on metazoans, but I disagree with an implication that this is a bad thing or that it is a barrier to respectability. Larry says we need to cover the other four kingdoms of life in greater breadth, which I agree is a fine idea. I would like to have a complete description of the genome of every species on earth, a thorough catalog of every epistatic interaction between those genes during development, a hundred labs working on each species, and a massive collection of papers for each one documenting every step and every protein and every variation in their development. I would like it tomorrow.
I think we all agree that that would be impractical. The question is how we will focus our research to maximize our use of limited resources, and get us useful answers that will lead us in productive directions. Larry is advocating maximizing our phyletic breadth by following organisms representative of the greatest amount of diversity. He is proposing this in opposition to the proposal from Jenner and Wills, who suggest a different strategy — and I find myself agreeing more with Jenner and Wills than with Moran.
The mammalian tree is rooted deeply and branched early!

That’s the message of a new paper in Nature that compiled sequence data from 4,510 mammalian species (out of 4,554) to assembly that lovely diagram above. Challenging the ‘conventional wisdom’ that mammalian diversity is the product of an opportunistic radiation of species after the dinosaurs were wiped out at the end of the Cretaceous 65 million years ago, the authors instead identified two broad periods of evolutionary expansion among the mammals: an early event 100-85 million years ago when the extant orders first appeared, and a radiation of modern families in the late Eocene/Miocene. A key point is that there is no change in rates of taxon formation across the Cretaceous/Tertiary (K/T) boundary—mammalian diversity was rich before the dinosaurs disappeared.
