Li et al Comparison of the identification of Sebostes spp by restriction site analysis and by morpfiological cfiaractenstics 



379 



(as in the case of S. auriculatus) can help to differentiate 

 species with overlapping meristic ranges. 



Species that could not be identified from their morpho- 

 logical features were assigned to a complex of species 

 or a subgenus. Group 2 in Table 2 includes species that 

 have similar pigmentation patterns during their pelagic 

 juvenile stage. Meristics and head spination are used to 

 identify S. atrovirens. However, the remaining three, S. 

 cartiatus, S. caurinus, and S. chrysomelas, are assigned 

 as a species complex because of the uncertainty in iden- 

 tifying the species. The subgenus Sebastomus includes 

 ten rockfish species that were found in the collection 

 area and that cannot be distinguished by morphological 

 characters and meristics or by pigmentation. 



Results 



The way in which the specimens were handled and pre- 

 served affected DNA quality and limited the number 

 of genetic and morphological species assignments that 

 could be compared. Only the DNA of seven of the 25 

 specimens frozen at sea and later thawed and processed 

 was successfully amplified, whereas the DNA of 17 of 

 the 24 specimens preserved in 95% ethanol at the time 

 of capture was amplified. A total of 24 specimens were 

 identified to species or species group based on restric- 

 tion fragment patterns of the mtDNA using one or more 

 restriction endonucleases (Table 3) and without knowl- 

 edge of the morphological assignment. Table 4 sum- 



