Without being in any of these papers and not really much into this topic, this manuscript was submitted and available way before the iscience one (October 2024). Nature took one year to publish? What were they doing!!!!
November 26, 2025 at 2:15 PM
Without being in any of these papers and not really much into this topic, this manuscript was submitted and available way before the iscience one (October 2024). Nature took one year to publish? What were they doing!!!!
Am sure if you threw your paper here, there would be enough reviewer 2 volunteers happy to tear it into pieces. For free, and in less than 2h. In X, even more.
November 24, 2025 at 7:41 PM
Am sure if you threw your paper here, there would be enough reviewer 2 volunteers happy to tear it into pieces. For free, and in less than 2h. In X, even more.
The last postlarval stages, the furcilia, they get closer and closer to an adult, so might be tricky. But, they keep adding pleopods at each molt. So, if you see a small adult with missing pleopods or with "weak" pleopods without the setae needed for swimming (like hairless buds), likely a furcilia.
November 19, 2025 at 12:39 PM
The last postlarval stages, the furcilia, they get closer and closer to an adult, so might be tricky. But, they keep adding pleopods at each molt. So, if you see a small adult with missing pleopods or with "weak" pleopods without the setae needed for swimming (like hairless buds), likely a furcilia.
TBH I just enjoy this beautiful come and forth and I use it in my invertebrate zoology class as an example of how we advance knowledge, and how well should keep challenging previous results. So, I will add this publication to the lectures pool! Congrats! And sorry for missing the Schulz citation!
November 14, 2025 at 12:20 AM
TBH I just enjoy this beautiful come and forth and I use it in my invertebrate zoology class as an example of how we advance knowledge, and how well should keep challenging previous results. So, I will add this publication to the lectures pool! Congrats! And sorry for missing the Schulz citation!
How do you reconcile this with Schulz 2023 (didn't see it cited on the paper)? Since I have seen many of the phylogenomic debate, but this one was giving a different approach doi.org/10.1038/s415...
How do you reconcile this with Schulz 2023 (didn't see it cited on the paper)? Since I have seen many of the phylogenomic debate, but this one was giving a different approach doi.org/10.1038/s415...