April, 2000 
SCAMIT Newsletter 
Vol. 18, No.12 
al (1999), who propose a set of concepts and 
terms whose use could make description of 
marine habitats uniform. They have 
concentrated on the deep sea, but also mention 
continental shelf structure as well. Examples of 
application of the scheme are provided and 
seem satisfying. They carefully consider 
structures on the hierarchical basis of 
megahabitat, mesohabitat, macrohabitat, 
microhabitat, which spans from kilometer to 
centimeter scales. The resulting descriptions 
are succinct and explicit, and (most important 
of all) comparable to those provided by other 
investigators in other disciplines who use the 
same system. Since the proposed system is 
logical, well conceived, and comprehensive it 
can provide the standard which has eluded us 
previously. 
Sheppard (1999) provides a nice overview of 
power analysis designed to answer questions 
about sampling adequacy in monitoring 
programs. Most SCAMIT members do not 
have to deal with such questions, being instead 
handed a program and told to execute it. Those 
who have the opportunity of providing 
feedback at some point in the process may 
want to utilize the ideas and methods covered 
by Sheppard in evaluating whether too much 
(or not enough) sampling is currently done to 
provide data of the precision necessary to the 
program design. Numerous other sources are 
available to consider power analysis, but the 
present review is recent and easily accessible. 
The idea of Taxonomic Sufficiency (or TS, a 
seemingly appropriate acronym), an end-driven 
approach which assumes full analysis of 
environmental samples has no utility other than 
final statistical analysis, is discussed by Maurer 
(2000). He points out that significant portions 
of the Emperor’s attire are missing in TS , and 
that considerations of biodiversity, ecology, 
and information retrieval and correlation are 
left unaddressed by such analyses. We are all 
sensitive to the fact that TS frees up financial 
resources for an agency by devoting much less 
to the expensive and time-consuming process 
of taxonomic analysis, and can understand how 
its application can be so tempting to a hard- 
pressed administrator asked to reduce 
expenditure while sustaining the same level of 
service. Maurer points out that there are, 
however, a number of things sacrificed on this 
altar of short-term economy. He also discusses 
the entire question of taxonomy, its 
practitioners, and their nurture, and notes the 
continuing decline of the discipline. Along the 
way he gives SCAMIT a friendly nod as a local 
solution to the problems of taxonomic training. 
He concludes with the hope that his statement 
on the “dark side” of TS can help provide the 
“force” to begin to remedy problems of 
taxonomic support. Now, if we could only lay 
our hands of some of Reagan’s “star wars” 
funding... 
NEWER THAN NEW 
The latest edition of the ASC Newsletter (Vol. 
28 No. 2) carries a notice that at long last the 
bivalve monograph is a reality. Coan, Scott & 
Bernard (2000) is announced as available for 
$99 [in paperback] from the Santa Barbara 
Museum of Natural History. This is in error, 
the publication is hardbacked, and is expected 
to ship in early June. It will go to the bindery 
this month. 
The volume is 766pp., profusely illustrated 
with photos or drawings of every listed species 
and covers all bivalves which are known to 
occur from northern Alaska to southern 
California, and from the intertidal zone to 
depths of more than 4500 m. The bibliography 
alone is more than 4700 references. There are 
some keys to higher categories, but not at 
species level. Separation of species taxa is 
through comparison tables listing salient 
characters of each species occurring in the area 
within a genus or family. 
Orders should be addressed to the Department 
of Invertebrate Zoology at 805-682-4711x335, 
or via e-mail to psadeghian@sbnature2.org. 
Copies can be pre-publication ordered using 
credit cards once the shipping costs [additional 
5 
