1. نهاوندی، ر.، رضوانی گیل کلایی، س.، وثوقی، غ.ح. و کاظمی، ب. گزارش نهایی طرح‌های تحقیقاتی بررسی تنوع ژنتیکی در جمعیت ماهی مرکب (Sepia pharaonis) خلیج فارس و دریای عمان با استفاده از روشPCR- RFLP. موسسه تحقیقات شیلات ایران.٨٠ صفحه، 1384.
2. ولی نسب، ت.، گزارش نهایی بررسی بیولوژی ماهی مرکب در آبهای سواحل سیستان و بلوچستان. مرکز تحقیقات شیلات آبهای دور چابهار. ٤٥ صفحه، 1372.
3. Aoyama,T. and Nguyan, T., Stock assessment of cuttlefish off the coast of the People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen. Shimonosaki University of Fisheries, Vol. 37, No. 203, pp.61-112, 1989.
4. Berthold, T. and Engeser, T., Phylogenetic analysis and systematic- zation of the cephalopoda (Mollusca). Comparative reviews, Vol. I. Academic Press, London. pp. 187-220, 1987.
5. Boletzky, S.V., Cephalopod eggs and egg masses. Bulletin of Marine Science, Vol. 21. pp. 964-969, 1998.
6. Bounnaud, L., Boucher – Rodoni, R. and Monnert, M. Phylogeny of decapoda based on partial 16s rDNA nucleotide sequences. C.R. Academic Science. Vol.111, No. 317. pp. 581 – 588, 1994.
7. Bounnaud, L., Boucher – Rodoni, R. and Monnert, M. Relationship of some coleoid cephalopods established by 3 end of the 16s Rdna and cytochrom c oxidase 3 gene sequence comparison. Animal Malacology Bulletin. Vol.12. pp. 87 – 90, 1996.
8. Bounnaud, L.; Boucher – Rodoni, R. and Monnert, M. 1997. Phylogeny of cephalopods inferred from mitoch-ondrial DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogeny Evolution. Vol. 7. pp. 44 – 54, 1997.
9. Bounnaud, L., Rodhouse, P.G and Boucher – Rodoni, R. A phylogenetic study of the squid family Onychoteuthidae (Cephalopoda: Oegopsida),. Academic Press, London. Vol. B 265. pp. 197 – 208, 1998.
10.Carlini, D.B. and Graws, E., Phylogenetic analysis of cytochrome c oxidase I sequences to determine higher-level relationships within the coleoid cephalopods. Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol. 64. pp. 57-76, 1999.
11. FAO Species Identification Sheets for Fishery Purposes, Wesern Indian ocean fishing area. Universal software for fishery statistical time series, version 2.3. publisher, Rome. pp. 44-50, 1984.
12. Graham, J. P., Mastic, L.C. and Boyle, P.R., Morphometric variation in Loligo forebsi and L. vulgaris: Regional, seasonal, sex, maturity and worker differences. Fisheries Research, Vol. 21. pp. 127-148, 1994.
13. Inaba, A., Notes on the chromosomes of two species of octopods (Cephalopoda, Mollusca), Japanes Journal of Genetic. Vol. 34. pp. 137-139, 2007.
14.Long,S.E. Chromosome methodology in domestic animal cytogenetic. Cytogenetic and reproduction Unit, Department of Clinical Veterinary Science, University of Bristol. Longford House. Vol. 72. No. 2-3. pp. 162-163, 1990.
15. Miquelis, A., Martini,J.F., Carson, E.W., Brun, G. and Gilles. A., Performance of 18s rDNA helix E23 for phylogenetic relationships within and between the Rotifera- Acanthocephala clades, Comparative reviews, Academic Science Paris, Series ΙΙΙ. Vol. 323. pp: 925 – 941, 2000.
16. Nabhitabhata, J., 1995. The culture of cephalopods in Thailand. Info fish International. Vol. 6, pp. 28 – 33, 1995.
17. Nakamura, H.K., A review of molluscan cytogenetic for molluscan chromosome. Bivalvia, Polyplacoph-ora and Cephalopoda, venus Japens Journal Malacology.Vol. 44, pp. 193-226, 1985.
18. Nishinguchi, M.K. and Mapes, R., Cephalopoda. In: Molluscan evolution. Journal of Molluscan Studies, pp. 1464-3766, 2007.
19. Pierteny, S. B., Hudelot, C., Hochberg, F.G. and Collins, M.A., Phylogenetic relationships among cirrate octopuds (Mollusca: Cephalopoda) resolved using mitochondrial 16 S ribosomal DNA sequences. Molecularly Phylogenetic Evolution, Vol. 27, pp. 348-353, 2003.
20. Silas, E.G., Sarvesan, R., Nair, K.P., Sastri, Y. A., Sreenivasan, P.V., Meiyappan, M. M., Vidyasagar, K., Rao, K.S. and Rao, B.N., Some aspects of the biology of cuttlefishes. Cephalopod bionomics fisheries and resources of the exclusive economic zone on India. Central marine Fisheries Research Institue. Cochin, India. No. 37, pp.49-70, 1985.
21. Yoshida, M.A., Tsuneki, K. and Furuya, H., Phylogeny of selected sepiidae based on 12S, 16S and Col sequences with comments on the taxonomic reliability of several morphological characters. Zoological Science, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 341-351, 2006.
)