Addition Request for an Isopod Species

Marketplace Support Genetics & Species
1

This template contains both “gene addition” and “gene review” forms, please delete the one which is not applicable to your request

Gene Request Form - #1

Please fill the below form out to the best of your ability. Answers do not need to be lengthy. If appropriate you may forward this request to someone who is more able to supply the answers.

Facts

Species: Cubaris Sp. Panda King
Name of Gene: Panda King
First produced by whom: unknown
Year First Produced: unknown
Genetics Type (Incdom/Codom/Recessive/Polygenic/etc): Normal Base
In complex with other genes?: unknown
Other names/aliases for it?: no
Description: The standard base morph of the cubaris species “panda king”

Appearance; What it does/looks like?

  • Head: Gray head.
  • Body: Large white stripe across dorsal along three body plates.
  • Belly:
  • Tail: Gray with white tips.

**Proven Lines: n/a **
**Related Genes: n/a **

Proven: It is the standard morph of the species.
Unique: It is a unique species that has not been added to the isopod category yet.

Problems: no
History: unknown
Disagreement or Controversy: unknown
References here on the community: unknown

If anyone wants to put pictures here I would appreciate it! I have a really bad phone camera for the macro shots needed and my images would suck terribly. :sob:

2

Explicit categorization of a taxon legally prohibited in the US (i.e. Cubaris not identified to the species level) might be controversial. I don’t know what other current categories there are that might serve as a precedent, though.

2 Likes
3

The USDA currently categorizes all Cubaris Sp. as Cubaris Murina, an allowed species. When applying for permits the department lead for pests and noxious weeds will alert you to this and ask for application revision.

I don’t know I think that’s such a strange and interesting fun fact I had to say it even if it bears little weight to the conversation. Very interesting to see how the feds view taxonomy.

4

Since USDA/APHIS operates under a whitelist sort of program (they issue permits only for those isopods and other inverts covered under PPQ regulations that are naturalized in the specified state), this isn’t very plausible. Could you share some evidence for your claim (such as correspondence with APHIS)?

This is from a correspondence with Carlos at APHIS, mid-2024 (all from the same message):

Me: “Is an isopod that is only identifiable to genus open for legal possession and trade, and if so under what permit conditions?” APHIS: “No, isopods must be identified to the species level, and they must belong to the approved list.”

Me: “Is an isopod that is not identified — that is, is not one of the species on the list of approved isopods — open for legal possession and trade, and if so under what permit conditions?” APHIS: No, it is not, unless you show me evidence (published papers, Extension Service websites) that describe the species established in certain part of the country.

Me: “Can it be safely assumed that an isopod that is not native or naturalized in the US, and is traded without any claim to a taxonomic identification, had originally entered the US illegally?” APHIS: “Yes, must likely” (sic).

5

This discussion is not pertinent to the topic at hand. All necessary consideration regarding additions will be made by staff. Please try not to derail threads from their original focus.

1 Like