Phylogenetic Relationships in the Mite Fa[.:Ily Sarcoptidae (Acari: Asticmata)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PHYLOGENETIC RELATIONSHIPS IN THE MITE FA[.:ILY SARCOPTIDAE (ACARI: ASTICMATA) BY J. S. H. KLOMPEN MISCELLANEOUS PULLICATIONS MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN NO. 180 Ann Arbor, July 15, 1992 tSSN 0076-8405 MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN NO. 180 The publication of the Museum of Zoology, The University of Michigan, consist primarily of two series-the Occasional Papers and the Miscellaneous Publications. Both series were founded by Dr. Bryant Walker, Mr. Bradshaw H. Swales, and Dr. W.W. Newcomb. Occasion- ally the Museum publishes contributions outside of these series; beginning in 1990 these are titled Special Publications and are numbered. All submitted manuscripts receive external re- view. The Occasional Papers, publication of which was begun in 1913, serve as a medium for original studies based principally upon the collections in the Museum. They are issued sepa- rately. When a sufficient number of pages has been printed to make a volume, a title page, table of lontents, and an index are supplied to libraries and individuals on the mailing list for the series. The Miscellaneous Publications, which include monographic studies, papers on field and museum techniques, and other contributions not within the scope of the Occasional Papers, are published separately. It is not intended that they be grouped into volumes. Each number has a title page and, when necessary, a table of contents. A complete list of publications on Birds, Fishes, Insects, Mammals, Mollusks, Reptiles and Amphibians, and other topics is available. Address inquiries to the Director, Museum of Zool- ogy, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1079. RECENT PUBLICATIONS Rohlf, F.J. & F.L. Bookstein (eds.). 1990. Proceedings of the Michigan Morphometrics Work- shop. Spec. Publ. 2. With software, $25.00. Without software, $17.50. Alexander, R.D. 1990. How did humans evolve? Reflections on the uniquely unique species. Spec. Publ. 1. $4.00. McKitrick, M.C. 1991. Phylogenetic analysis of avian hindlimb musculature. Misc. Publ. 179. $9.60 Kluge, A.G. 1991. Boine snake phylogeny and research cycles. Misc. Publ. 178. $6.00 Myers, P, J.L. Patton, and M.F. Smith. 1990. A review of the boliviens~group of Akodon (Muri- dae: Sigmodontinae), with emphasis on Peru and Bolivia. $13.20. Ryan, J.M. 1989. Comparative myology and phylogenetic systematics of the Heteromyidae (Mammalia, Rodentia). Misc. Publ. 176. $9.20. Bailey, R.M. & D.A. Etnier. 1989. Comments on the subgenera of darters (Percidae) with descriptions of two new species of Etheostoma (Ulocentra) from southeastern United States. Misc. Publ. 175. $8.60. Prum, R.O. 1990. A test of the monophyly of the Manakins (Pipridae) and of the Cotingas (Cotingidae) based on morphology. Occ. Pap. 723. $3.70. Suttkus, R.D. and R.M. Bailey. 1990. Characters, relationships, distribution, and biology of Notropk melanostomus, a recently named cyprinid fish from southeastern United States. Occ. Pap. 722. $2.20. Myers, P. & J.L. Patton. 1989. Akodon of Peru and Bolivia-Revision of the fumeus group (Rodentia: Sigmodontidae). Occ. Pap. 721. $3.80. Myers, P. & J.L. Patton. 1989. A new species of Akodon from the cloud forests of eastern Cochabamba Department, Bolivia (Rodentia: Sigmodontinae). Occ. Pap. 720. $3.70. Storer, R.W. 1989. Notes on Paraguayan birds. Occ. Pap. 719. $2.00. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY Deane Baker, Ann Arbor Paul W. Brown, Mackinac Island Shirley M. McFee, Battle Creek Neal D. Nielsen, Brighton Philip H. Power, Ann Arbor Veronica Latta Smith, Grosse Ile Nellie M. Varner, Detroit James L. Waters, Muskegon James J. Duderstadt, ex officio Phylogenetic Relationships in the Mite Family Sarcoptidae (Acari: Astigmata) by J. S. H. Klompen Museum of Zoology The University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1079" MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATIONS MUSEUM OF ZOOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN NO. 180 Ann Arbor, July 15, 1992 "Present address: Institute of Arthropodology and Parasitology and Department of Biology, Georgia Southern University, Statesboro, Georgia 30460-8056 ABSTRACT Klompen, J.S.H. 1991. Phylogenetic relationships in the mite family Sarcoptzdae (Acari: Astigmata). Misc. Publ. Univ. Michigan, Mus. Zool., 180: 1-155, 265figs. A phylogenetic analysis of relationships among the 117 recognizable species ofthe mite family Sarcoptidae Murray, 1877 is carried out based on 215 morphological and ontogenetic characters. The putative sister group of the Sarcoptidae, the family Rhyncoptidae, and more distantly related families in the Sarcoptoidea (Psoroptidae, Lobalgidae, Myocoptidae) are used as outgroups. All of these taxa are obligate, permanent ectoparasites of mammals. Due to the large quantity of missing data and the overall size of the matrix, the analysis is carried out in parts. Initial analyses, including only those taxa for which the quantity of missing data is low, are used to establish a hypothesis of relationships among the larger subgroups. Relationships within each subgroup are analyzed separately. The subgroup analyses are rooted using hypothetical ancestors which are con- structed based on the results of the initial analyses. A new classification of the Sarcoptidae is proposed based on the results of the systematic analysis. The family is divided in three subfamilies, the Diabolicoptinae Fain & Domrow, 1974 (2 genera, 3 species), Sarcoptinae Murray, 1877 (4 genera, 8 species) and Teinocoptinae Fain, 1959 (9 genera, 106 species). These groupings include two newly described genera and 18 newly described species. Within the Sarcopti- nae, the genus Pithesarcoptes Fain, 1965 is synonymized with Prosarcoptes Lavoipierre, 1960 and the subge- nus T7ixacarus (caviacoptes)Fain et al., 1972 with Trixucaw (s.s.) Sellnick, 1944. At the species level, Prosar- coptes faini Lavoipierre, 1970 is synonymized with P. pitheci (Philippe, 1948). The Teinocoptinae includes the formerly recognized families Teinocoptidae Fain, 1959 and Bakerocoptidae Fain, 1962, as well as the subfamily Notoedrinae Fain, 1968 (Sarcoptidae). Within this lineage the genus Bakerocoptes Fain, 1962 is synonymized with Nycteridocoptes Oudemans, 1898, the subgenus Chirnyssozdes (Carollicoptes)Fain & Luko- schus, 1971 with Chirnyssoides (s.s.) Fain, 1959, and the genera Chirnyssus Fain, 1959 and Suncicoptes Fain & Lukoschus, 1976, and subgenera Notoedres (Neonotoedres)Fain, 1963, N. (Metanotoedres)Fain, 1959, and N. uanmotoedres) Fain, 1965 with Notoedres (s.s.) Railliet, 1893. At the species level, Notoedres dohanyi Klompen et al., 1983 is synonymized with N. tadaridne Fain, 1959, N. schoutedeni hyatti Fain, 1963 with N. chiropteralis (Trouessart, 1896), and N. douglmi Lavoipierre, 1964 with N. centrifera Jansen, 1963. New combinations include Tychosarcoptes amphipterinon (Klompen et al., 1984) and Chirobia brevior (Fain et a]., 1982), both transferred from Teinocoptes; Teinocoptes harfqionycteris (Klompen & OConnor, 1987), transferred from Chirobia; Notoedres (Bakeracarus)plecoti Fain, 1959, transferred from N. (Notoedres);N. (B.) eptesicw (Fain & Lukoschus, 1971),N. (B.)corynorhini (Fain, 1961), and N. (B.)anisothk (Fain & Lukoschus, 1975), formerly subspecies ofN. (B.)hionycteris (Boyd & Bernstein, 1950). Data on ecology, pathology and host associations are summarized for all species of the family, and identification keys to all species are included. Key words: Acari, Astigmata, cladistics, classification, ectoparasites, Mammalia, ontogeny, phylogeny, Sarcoptidae. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE List of Illustrations ............................................................................. iv List of Tables .................................................................................. v Introduction ................................................................................... 1 Material and Methods .......................................................................... 2 Terminology ................................................................................. 2 Specimen collection and preparation ........................................................... 2 Phylogenetic analysis ......................................................................... 3 Morphology and Character Analysis .............................................................. 4 Gnathosoma ................................................................................. 4 Body shape .................................................................................. 4 Idiosomal shields ............................................................................. 5 Cuticular spines and scales .................................................................... 6 Miscellaneous cuticular structures .............................................................. 8 Dorsal body setation .......................................................................... 8 Ventral body setation ........................................................................ 12 Genital area and reproduction ................................................................ 13 Apodemes ............................................................................ 14 Anterior legs ............................................................................... 15 Posterior legs ............................................................................... 18 PhylogeneticAnalysis .......................................................................... 22 Discussion of Lineages and Classification .......................................................