DOCSLIB.ORG

Phylogeny of the Spider Subfamily Mynogleninae (Araneae: Linyphiidae)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Phylogeny of the Spider Subfamily Mynogleninae (Araneae: Linyphiidae) Cladistics Cladistics 30 (2014) 67–106 10.1111/cla.12025 Phantoms of Gondwana?—phylogeny of the spider subfamily Mynogleninae (Araneae: Linyphiidae) Holger Fricka,b,* and Nikolaj Scharffb,c aDepartment of Invertebrates, Natural History Museum of Bern, Bernastrasse 15, 3005 Bern, Switzerland; bDepartment of Entomology, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark; cCenter of Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Biological Institute, Universitetsparken 15, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark Accepted 25 February 2013 Abstract This is the first genus-level phylogeny of the subfamily Mynogleninae. It is based on 190 morphological characters scored for 44 taxa: 37 mynoglenine taxa (ingroup) representing 15 of the 17 known genera and seven outgroup taxa representing the sub- families Stemonyphantinae, Linyphiinae (Linyphiini and Micronetini), and Erigoninae, and a representative of the family Pimoi- dae, the sister-group to Linyphiidae. No fewer than 147 of the morphological characters used in this study are new and defined for this study, and come mainly from male and female genitalia. Parsimony analysis with equal weights resulted in three most parsimonious trees of length 871. The monophyly of the subfamily Mynogleninae and the genera Novafroneta, Parafroneta, Laminafroneta, Afroneta, Promynoglenes, Metamynoglenes, and Haplinis are supported, whereas Pseudafroneta is paraphyletic. The remaining seven mynoglenine genera are either monotypic or represented by only one taxon. Diagnoses are given for all genera included in the analysis. The evolution of morphological traits is discussed and we summarize the diversity and distribu- tion patterns of the 124 known species of mynoglenines. The preferred topology suggests a single origin of mynoglenines in New Zealand with two dispersal events to Africa, and does not support Gondwana origin. © The Willi Hennig Society 2013. Introduction The family represents the second most diverse family of spiders, with 4429 described species (Platnick, 2013) Linyphiidae are the most species-rich spider family in 590 genera, surpassed only by the family Salticidae, within the superfamily Araneoidea, a large clade that with 5570 species in 591 genera. includes one-third of all described spider species The spider family Linyphiidae has been divided into (Blackledge et al., 2009). Linyphiidae have a world- a number of different subfamilies, most of which are wide distribution but are most diverse in colder not monophyletic according to modern phylogenetic regions. At higher latitudes, this family dominates the studies. Currently used subfamilies of Linyphiidae are spider faunas. For instance, 41% of the Danish spider Stemonyphantinae, Mynogleninae, Erigoninae, and fauna (216 of the 523 species) are linyphiids (Scharff Linyphiinae (Micronetini plus Linyphiini; Arnedo and Gudik-Sørensen, 2006) and most species are et al., 2009), of which Mynogleninae with 17 genera widely distributed in northern Europe. At lower lati- and 124 species are one of the smallest and most tudes, the family is well represented but constitutes a recently established. Most species have been described much smaller fraction of the total spider fauna within the past 35 years. The subfamily Mynogleninae (Scharff, 1992, 1993; Sørensen et al., 2002). was established by Lehtinen (1967: 250) for Mynog- lenes insolens Simon, 1905 (now Haplinis rufocephala *Corresponding author. (Urquhart, 1888)) and is “mainly characterized by the E-mail address: [email protected] presence of numerous metatarsal trichobothria and the © The Willi Hennig Society 2013 68 H. Frick and N. Scharff / Cladistics 30 (2014) 67–106 exceptional type of modification of the carapace”. The first mynoglenine was described by Urquhart Unfortunately, Lehtinen (1967) did not specify what (1886) and placed in the well known European genus kind of “exceptional modifications of the carapace” he Linyphia. Simon described the genera Haplinis (1894) used to define the subfamily. A quick look at the cara- and Mynoglenes (1905), but neither Simon nor Urqu- pace of any known mynoglenine reveals that it cannot hart mentions the special cephalic pits in their descrip- be anything but the very characteristic cephalic pits tions. Today we know that most members of this with which all mynoglenines are equipped—males as subfamily occur in the Southern Hemisphere, and that well as females, and juveniles—just below the anterior they have a disjunct distribution pattern with centres lateral eyes (subocular sulci; Figs 14b and 15c: SOS). of diversity in tropical Africa (33 species) and New This is still the best morphological character to distin- Zealand (90 species; including the South Pacific guish between mynoglenines and members of all other islands) and in Australia (one species; Tasmania). linyphiid subfamilies (Blest, 1979: 96). Members of the More species undoubtedly remain to be discovered, subfamily are otherwise rather indistinct, being small especially in Africa where the mynoglenine fauna is to medium in size (2–10 mm) and without any other still very poorly surveyed, but even if more species cephalic modifications or characteristic abdominal should turn up in Africa, the subfamily is still small markings (Fig. 13e and 15a). compared to the Erigoninae, another well defined sub- Pimoa altioculata Stemonyphantes lineata Linyphia triangularis 1 3 >20/100 1/- Bolyphantes luteolus 2 7/93 Australolinyphia remota 4 Diplostyla concolor 3/70 5 Hilaira excisa 5/87 Cassafroneta forsteri 6 5/79 Novafroneta gladiatrix 9 7 11/100 Novafroneta vulgaris 5/84 Hyperafroneta obscura 11 6/86 Metafroneta sinuosa 8 5/72 Protoerigone otagoa 13 1/- Pseudafroneta perplexa Mynogleninae Pseudafroneta pallida 10 1/- 16 Parafroneta minuta 1/- 17 Parafroneta haurokoae 1/- 18 Parafroneta demota clade 15 1/- 19 Parafroneta confusa 12 15 1/- 1/- 20 Parafroneta marrineri 1/- 1/- 21 1/- Parafroneta westlandica Trachyneta jocquei 22 Gibbafroneta gibbosa 1/- Laminafroneta bidentata 23 1/- 25 14 8/99 Laminafroneta brevistyla 1/- 24 1/- Afroneta bamilekei 26 Afroneta subfusca 1/- 27 Afroneta guttata 1/- 28 Afroneta lobeliae 1/- 29 7/99 Afroneta tenuivulva Afromynoglenes parkeri Promynoglenes silvestris 32 30 9/99 Promynoglenes nobilis 2/- 33 5/82 Promynoglenes grandis clade 30 31 Metamynoglenes helicoides 6/95 35 Metamynoglenes gracilis 5/97 36 2/- Metamynoglenes incurvata 34 2/- Haplinis insignis Haplinis abbreviata 37 7/83 Haplinis diloris 40 38 1/- 3/76 Haplinis horningi Haplinis subdola 41 Haplinis tegulata 1/- 42 7/99 Haplinis titan Fig. 1. Strict consensus tree of three most parsimonious trees found using equal weights (L = 873, CI = 0.28, RI = 0.62) including support val- ues (Bremer before and Jackknife after the slash). Node numbers in circles (monophyletic genera in black). The recent distribution is indicated for Africa (dark grey) and Oceania (light grey). Note that node 39 collapses and is not depicted in the consensus tree. H. Frick and N. Scharff / Cladistics 30 (2014) 67–106 69 ra lexa rp pe obscu a ta a et Figure 2b Figure 4 Figure 3 one a r tago o 6 rafron 15 30 udaf pe se Hy P gone i r 144 0 190 0 e 11 6 0 adiatrix 188 1 l lgaris 87 1 178 2 to g 168 0 u 190 1 86 2 ta 165 0 163 0 185 2 85 1 a o 1591 157 0 t 183 1 84 1 Pro 156 0 e 158 1 m 165 1 83 1 142 0 155 0 Metafroneta sinuos Metafroneta e 157 1 79 0 137 0 154 0 153 1 78 1 121 0 90 1 187 1 143 1 169 0 72 1 ia r 120 0 67 2 162 2 100 2 163 0 70 1 11 5 1 60 1 184 1 158 2 87 1 159 1 65 1 ph 104 2 32 1 95 1 151 1 85 1 158 2 56 1 y 101 1 21 0 74 1 Novafron 133 1 81 1 151 1 50 0 Diplostyla concolor Diplostyla 87 0 19 1 39 0 Novafroneta v 121 1 79 0 133 1 45 1 86 0 4 1 25 0 94 1 72 1 104 0 22 1 81 0 1 2 81 91 1 38 1 67 0 17 1 164 2 65 1 176 1 11 39 0 25 0 14 141 1 40 0 174 2 164 2 Linyphia triangularis Linyphia 12 20 1 168 1 149 0 187 1 ustralolin 84 1 31 1 11 7 0 Bolyphantes luteolus 13 83 1 12 0 121 1 142 0 149 0 11 4 0 A 5 67 0 140 0 146 0 189 1 105 1 187 1 62 0 100 2 145 1 184 1 98 2 186 1 178 1 183 0 38 1 61 0 131 1 11 8 1 59 1 184 2 172 0 179 1 177 0 25 0 39 0 127 1 91 35 0 183 2 170 1 171 1 175 0 9 91 1 81 31 0 182 2 169 1 149 1 174 0 89 0 12 148 1 172 0 165 1 86 4 173 2 165 0 i 168 2 159 1 146 0 170 0 144 1 84 1 148 1 167 2 158 1 134 1 169 0 143 1 57 1 147 1 164 2 141 1 133 1 159 1 11 7 0 56 1 138 0 161 1 138 1 11 0 1 158 2 11 6 0 50 2 134 1 147 1 127 1 100 2 152 0 95 1 49 1 11 2 1 145 0 126 1 98 2 150 0 forster 82 1 36 1 43 1 144 2 121 0 90 1 145 0 a 74 1 10 139 0 107 1 88 1 144 2 68 1 137 0 103 0 85 1 143 0 44 1 120 1 125 0 97 1 74 1 138 1 42 1 86 1 ronet 41 0 59 0 122 1 91 0 69 2 11 6 0 f 11 9 1 87 0 63 1 107 1 31 0 48 1 11 5 1 84 2 55 1 99 0 28 1 47 1 11 4 1 66 0 11 1 27 2 20 1 35 1 70 1 35 1 4 71 2 1 31 1 1 9 1 27 2 Cassa 6 1 23 1 184 0 8 3 178 0 176 0 182 2 185 1 11 7 0 190 1 178 1 106 1 105 2 167 0 177 1 65 1 104 1 154 0 174 1 antes lineata antes 60 1 81 1 151 0 169 1 45 1 75 0 141 1 163 1 ph 22 0 40 1 130 0 162 1 y 17 1 28 2 128 1 159 2 12 10 127 1 158 3 on 0 1 2 126 1 142 1 11 5 0 138 2 ata l 189 0 102 0 137 1 99 1 11 4 1 Stem 188 0 cu 186 0 98 2 11 1 1 o 185 0 95 2 11 0 1 ti l 183 1 89 0 101 0 187 1 180 0 62 0 91 0 182 2 171 0 57 1 65 0 173 2 140 1 56 1 22 0 149 1 121 1 28 0 21 1 142 0 120 1 12 19 2 138 2 11 4 0 Pimoa a ira excisa 7 133 1 96 1 a 125 0 64 1 182 1 11 9 1 62 1 149 1 Hil 184 2 103 0 61 1 11 7 1 183 2 84 2 47 1 11 6 1 181 1 83 1 34 0 11 3 1 179 2 23 1 29 0 164 0 108 1 176 2 11 4 0 158 1 106 1 174 2 1 155 0 92 1 168 2 140 0 79 1 167 2 177 1 125 0 77 0 164 2 175 1 78 1 69 1 163 2 157 1 66 0 67 1 162 2 143 1 41 0 63 1 158 4 11 7 1 35 1 55 1 153 1 76 1 34 1 47 0 84 1 75 1 32 1 39 1 41 2 54 1 29 1 27 1 26 1 27 1 28 3 25 1 91 22 1 10 0 19 1 81 12 1 (a) 5 1 61 (b) 6 Fig.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ARTHROPOD COMMUNITIES and PASSERINE DIET: EFFECTS of SHRUB EXPANSION in WESTERN ALASKA by Molly Tankersley Mcdermott, B.A./B.S
    Arthropod communities and passerine diet: effects of shrub expansion in Western Alaska Item Type Thesis Authors McDermott, Molly Tankersley Download date 26/09/2021 06:13:39 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/11122/7893 ARTHROPOD COMMUNITIES AND PASSERINE DIET: EFFECTS OF SHRUB EXPANSION IN WESTERN ALASKA By Molly Tankersley McDermott, B.A./B.S. A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Biological Sciences University of Alaska Fairbanks August 2017 APPROVED: Pat Doak, Committee Chair Greg Breed, Committee Member Colleen Handel, Committee Member Christa Mulder, Committee Member Kris Hundertmark, Chair Department o f Biology and Wildlife Paul Layer, Dean College o f Natural Science and Mathematics Michael Castellini, Dean of the Graduate School ABSTRACT Across the Arctic, taller woody shrubs, particularly willow (Salix spp.), birch (Betula spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.), have been expanding rapidly onto tundra. Changes in vegetation structure can alter the physical habitat structure, thermal environment, and food available to arthropods, which play an important role in the structure and functioning of Arctic ecosystems. Not only do they provide key ecosystem services such as pollination and nutrient cycling, they are an essential food source for migratory birds. In this study I examined the relationships between the abundance, diversity, and community composition of arthropods and the height and cover of several shrub species across a tundra-shrub gradient in northwestern Alaska. To characterize nestling diet of common passerines that occupy this gradient, I used next-generation sequencing of fecal matter. Willow cover was strongly and consistently associated with abundance and biomass of arthropods and significant shifts in arthropod community composition and diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Redescriptions of Nuisiana Arboris (Marples 1959) and Cambridgea Reinga Forster & Wilton 1973 (Araneae: Desidae, Stiphidiidae)
    Zootaxa 2739: 41–50 (2011) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2011 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) Reuniting males and females: redescriptions of Nuisiana arboris (Marples 1959) and Cambridgea reinga Forster & Wilton 1973 (Araneae: Desidae, Stiphidiidae) COR J. VINK1,2,5, BRIAN M. FITZGERALD3, PHIL J. SIRVID3 & NADINE DUPÉRRÉ4 1Biosecurity Group, AgResearch, Private Bag 4749, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected] 2Entomology Research Museum, PO Box 84, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, New Zealand. 3Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, PO Box 467, Wellington 6140, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] 4Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York New York 10024, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] 5Corresponding author Abstract Two New Zealand endemic spider species, Nuisiana arboris (Marples 1959) (Desidae) and Cambridgea reinga Forster & Wilton 1973 (Stiphidiidae), are redescribed, including notes on their distribution and DNA sequences from the mitochon- drial gene cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1. Based on morphological evidence and mitochondrial DNA sequences, Mata- chia magna Forster 1970 is a junior synonym of Nuisiana arboris, and Nanocambridgea grandis Blest & Vink 2000 is a junior synonym of Cambridgea reinga. Two forms of male morph in C. reinga are recorded. Key words: cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (COI), DNA, Matachia, new synonymy, New Zealand, Nanocambridgea Introduction New Zealand’s spider fauna is diverse with an estimated 1990 species, of which 93% are endemic (Paquin et al. 2010). Most of the 1126 named species were described during the last 60 years and about 60% were described by one man, Ray Forster (Patrick et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Higher-Level Phylogenetics of Linyphiid Spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae) Based on Morphological and Molecular Evidence
    Cladistics Cladistics 25 (2009) 231–262 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00249.x Higher-level phylogenetics of linyphiid spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae) based on morphological and molecular evidence Miquel A. Arnedoa,*, Gustavo Hormigab and Nikolaj Scharff c aDepartament Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, Av. Diagonal 645, E-8028 Barcelona, Spain; bDepartment of Biological Sciences, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052, USA; cDepartment of Entomology, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark Accepted 19 November 2008 Abstract This study infers the higher-level cladistic relationships of linyphiid spiders from five genes (mitochondrial CO1, 16S; nuclear 28S, 18S, histone H3) and morphological data. In total, the character matrix includes 47 taxa: 35 linyphiids representing the currently used subfamilies of Linyphiidae (Stemonyphantinae, Mynogleninae, Erigoninae, and Linyphiinae (Micronetini plus Linyphiini)) and 12 outgroup species representing nine araneoid families (Pimoidae, Theridiidae, Nesticidae, Synotaxidae, Cyatholipidae, Mysmenidae, Theridiosomatidae, Tetragnathidae, and Araneidae). The morphological characters include those used in recent studies of linyphiid phylogenetics, covering both genitalic and somatic morphology. Different sequence alignments and analytical methods produce different cladistic hypotheses. Lack of congruence among different analyses is, in part, due to the shifting placement of Labulla, Pityohyphantes,
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Climate Change on Arctic Arthropod Assemblages and Distribution Phd Thesis
    Effects of climate change on Arctic arthropod assemblages and distribution PhD thesis Rikke Reisner Hansen Academic advisors: Main supervisor Toke Thomas Høye and co-supervisor Signe Normand Submitted 29/08/2016 Data sheet Title: Effects of climate change on Arctic arthropod assemblages and distribution Author University: Aarhus University Publisher: Aarhus University – Denmark URL: www.au.dk Supervisors: Assessment committee: Arctic arthropods, climate change, community composition, distribution, diversity, life history traits, monitoring, species richness, spatial variation, temporal variation Date of publication: August 2016 Please cite as: Hansen, R. R. (2016) Effects of climate change on Arctic arthropod assemblages and distribution. PhD thesis, Aarhus University, Denmark, 144 pp. Keywords: Number of pages: 144 PREFACE………………………………………………………………………………………..5 LIST OF PAPERS……………………………………………………………………………….6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………………...7 SUMMARY……………………………………………………………………………………...8 RESUMÉ (Danish summary)…………………………………………………………………....9 SYNOPSIS……………………………………………………………………………………....10 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………...10 Study sites and approaches……………………………………………………………………...11 Arctic arthropod community composition…………………………………………………….....13 Potential climate change effects on arthropod composition…………………………………….15 Arctic arthropod responses to climate change…………………………………………………..16 Future recommendations and perspectives……………………………………………………...20 References………………………………………………………………………………………..21 PAPER I: High spatial
    [Show full text]
  • Surface-Active Spiders (Araneae) in Ley and Field Margins
    Norw. J. Entomol. 51, 57–66. 2004 Surface-active spiders (Araneae) in ley and field margins Reidun Pommeresche Pommeresche, R. 2004. Surface-active spiders (Araneae) in ley and field margins. Norw. J. Entomol. 51, 57-66. Surface-active spiders were sampled from a ley and two adjacent field margins on a dairy farm in western Norway, using pitfall traps from April to June 2001. Altogether, 1153 specimens, represent- ing 33 species, were found. In total, 10 species were found in the ley, 16 species in the edge of the ley, 22 species in the field margin “ley/forest” and 16 species in the field margin “ley/stream”. Erigone atra, Bathyphantes gracilis, Savignia frontata and Collinsia inerrans were the most abun- dant species in the ley. C. inerrans was not found in the field margins. This species is previously recorded only a few times in Norway. Diplocephalus latifrons, Tapinocyba insecta, Dicymbium tibiale, Bathyphantes nigrinus and Diplostyla concolor were most abundant in the field margin “ley/ forest”. D. latifrons, D. tibiale and Pardosa amentata were most abundant in the field margin “ley/ stream”, followed by E. atra and B. gracilis. The present results were compared to results from ley and pasture on another farm in the region, recorded in 2000. A Detrended Correspondence Analyses (DCA) of the data sets showed that the spider fauna from the leys were more similar, independent of location, than the fauna in ley and field margins on the same locality. The interactions between cultivated fields and field margins according to spider species composition, dominance pattern and habitat preferences are discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • A Summary List of Fossil Spiders
    A summary list of fossil spiders compiled by Jason A. Dunlop (Berlin), David Penney (Manchester) & Denise Jekel (Berlin) Suggested citation: Dunlop, J. A., Penney, D. & Jekel, D. 2010. A summary list of fossil spiders. In Platnick, N. I. (ed.) The world spider catalog, version 10.5. American Museum of Natural History, online at http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog/index.html Last udated: 10.12.2009 INTRODUCTION Fossil spiders have not been fully cataloged since Bonnet’s Bibliographia Araneorum and are not included in the current Catalog. Since Bonnet’s time there has been considerable progress in our understanding of the spider fossil record and numerous new taxa have been described. As part of a larger project to catalog the diversity of fossil arachnids and their relatives, our aim here is to offer a summary list of the known fossil spiders in their current systematic position; as a first step towards the eventual goal of combining fossil and Recent data within a single arachnological resource. To integrate our data as smoothly as possible with standards used for living spiders, our list follows the names and sequence of families adopted in the Catalog. For this reason some of the family groupings proposed in Wunderlich’s (2004, 2008) monographs of amber and copal spiders are not reflected here, and we encourage the reader to consult these studies for details and alternative opinions. Extinct families have been inserted in the position which we hope best reflects their probable affinities. Genus and species names were compiled from established lists and cross-referenced against the primary literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Orsolobidae Hickmanolobus
    Three new species of the Australian orsolobid spider genus HickmanoloLJus (Araneae: Orsolobidae) Barbara C. Baehr' and Helen M. Smith2 'Queensland Museum, PO.Box 3300, South Brisbane, Queensland 4101, Australia. E-mail: [email protected]. 'Australian Museum, (, College Street, Sydney, New South W,lles 2010, Australia. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract - Three new species of the Australian orsolobid spider genus llicKIIIII/IO!O!JIIS Forster and PI,ltnick 19H5 are described from Queensland and New South \Vales. lficKIIIIIIlO!O!JIIS i!lisCil sI'.. nov., l1iCKlIlilIlO/O!JIIS sI'.. novo and HicKIIlIII/O/O/JlIS lillllilci sI'.. novo are the first l1iCKIlIilIlO!O!liIS species to be described from the mainland of Austrillia. INTRODUCTION stages of 95'1" and 100% ethanol and then critical The tribe Orsolobini Cooke was separated from point drying. SEM's were taken with a Hitachi the Dysderidae by Forster and Platnick (1985), LEO 435VP SEM using a Robinson backscatter who established the family Orsolobidae. With detector. Descriptions were generated with the aid about 180 described species in 28 genera the of the PBI descriptive goblin spider database and Orsolobidae are an important component of the shortened where possible. The map was created forest litter fauna of the southern hemisphere with Biolink version 1.5 (CSIRO Entomology, (Eorster and Forster 1999; Griswold and Platnick Canberra, Australia; http://www.biolink.csiro. 1987; Platnick and Brescovit 1994). To date there au/). All measurements are in millimetres. are only four genera known from Australia. The Throughout the text, figures cited from other most common Australian genus, TOSIIlOIlOOIlOps publications are listed as "figure", those given in liickman 1930, with 29 species, occurs mainly in this paper as "Figure".
    [Show full text]
  • 19 4 273 282 Tanasevitch2 for Inet.P65
    Arthropoda Selecta 19(4): 273282 © ARTHROPODA SELECTA, 2010 On synonymy of linyphiid spiders of the Russian fauna (Arachnida: Aranei: Linyphiidae). 1 Î ñèíîíèìèè ïàóêîâ-ëèíèôèèä ôàóíû Ðîññèè (Arachnida: Aranei: Linyphiidae). 1 Andrei V. Tanasevitch À.Â. Òàíàñåâè÷ Centre for Forest Ecology and Production, Russian Academy of Sciences, Profsoyuznaya Str. 84/32, Moscow 117997 Russia. E-mail: and- [email protected] Öåíòð ïî ïðîáëåìàì ýêîëîãèè è ïðîäóêòèâíîñòè ëåñîâ ÐÀÍ, Ïðîôñîþçíàÿ óë. 84/32, Ìîñêâà 117997 Ðîññèÿ. E-mail: and- [email protected] KEY WORDS: Spiders, Linyphiidae, new synonym, new combination, Russian fauna. ÊËÞ×ÅÂÛÅ ÑËÎÂÀ: Ïàóêè, Linyphiidae, íîâûé ñèíîíèì, íîâàÿ êîìáèíàöèÿ, ôàóíà Ðîññèè. ABSTRACT. Seven new synonyms are established Introduction for the Russian fauna: Agyneta yakutsaxatilis Marusik et Koponen, 2002, syn.n. = Agyneta amersaxatilis Hundreds of new taxa of the linyphiid spiders have Saaristo et Koponen, 1998; Bolyphantes palaeformis been described during the last three decades from the (Tanasevitch, 1989), syn.n. = Bolyphantes bipartitus territory of the former Soviet Union, mainly from the (Tanasevitch, 1989), both comb.n. (ex Lepthyphantes Caucasus, Siberia, the Far East and Central Asia. A Menge, 1866); Epigytholus tuvensis Tanasevitch, 1996, significant progress in the taxonomy of the family syn.n. = Epigytholus kaszabi (Wunderlich, 1995), Linyphiidae, as well as abundant material from various comb.n. (ex Lepthyphantes); Hybauchenidium holmi Palearctic regions which has been recently accumulated, Marusik, 1988, syn.n. = Hybauchenidium aquilonare allow one to not only critically consider some of the (L. Koch, 1879); Poeciloneta yanensis Marusik et Ko- earlier described species and genera but also, in some ponen, 2002, syn.n. = Poeciloneta variegata (Black- cases, to dispel any doubts in their invalidity.
    [Show full text]
  • Tarantulas and Social Spiders
    Tarantulas and Social Spiders: A Tale of Sex and Silk by Jonathan Bull BSc (Hons) MSc ICL Thesis Presented to the Institute of Biology of The University of Nottingham in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Nottingham May 2012 DEDICATION To my parents… …because they both said to dedicate it to the other… I dedicate it to both ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost I would like to thank my supervisor Dr Sara Goodacre for her guidance and support. I am also hugely endebted to Dr Keith Spriggs who became my mentor in the field of RNA and without whom my understanding of the field would have been but a fraction of what it is now. Particular thanks go to Professor John Brookfield, an expert in the field of biological statistics and data retrieval. Likewise with Dr Susan Liddell for her proteomics assistance, a truly remarkable individual on par with Professor Brookfield in being able to simplify even the most complex techniques and analyses. Finally, I would really like to thank Janet Beccaloni for her time and resources at the Natural History Museum, London, permitting me access to the collections therein; ten years on and still a delight. Finally, amongst the greats, Alexander ‘Sasha’ Kondrashov… a true inspiration. I would also like to express my gratitude to those who, although may not have directly contributed, should not be forgotten due to their continued assistance and considerate nature: Dr Chris Wade (five straight hours of help was not uncommon!), Sue Buxton (direct to my bench creepy crawlies), Sheila Keeble (ventures and cleans where others dare not), Alice Young (read/checked my thesis and overcame her arachnophobia!) and all those in the Centre for Biomolecular Sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • 196 Arachnology (2019)18 (3), 196–212 a Revised Checklist of the Spiders of Great Britain Methods and Ireland Selection Criteria and Lists
    196 Arachnology (2019)18 (3), 196–212 A revised checklist of the spiders of Great Britain Methods and Ireland Selection criteria and lists Alastair Lavery The checklist has two main sections; List A contains all Burach, Carnbo, species proved or suspected to be established and List B Kinross, KY13 0NX species recorded only in specific circumstances. email: [email protected] The criterion for inclusion in list A is evidence that self- sustaining populations of the species are established within Great Britain and Ireland. This is taken to include records Abstract from the same site over a number of years or from a number A revised checklist of spider species found in Great Britain and of sites. Species not recorded after 1919, one hundred years Ireland is presented together with their national distributions, before the publication of this list, are not included, though national and international conservation statuses and syn- this has not been applied strictly for Irish species because of onymies. The list allows users to access the sources most often substantially lower recording levels. used in studying spiders on the archipelago. The list does not differentiate between species naturally Keywords: Araneae • Europe occurring and those that have established with human assis- tance; in practice this can be very difficult to determine. Introduction List A: species established in natural or semi-natural A checklist can have multiple purposes. Its primary pur- habitats pose is to provide an up-to-date list of the species found in the geographical area and, as in this case, to major divisions The main species list, List A1, includes all species found within that area.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Australian Linyphiid Spider Alaxchelicera Ordinaria Butler, 1932 (Araneae)
    Zootaxa 3750 (2): 193–196 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Correspondence ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2013 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3750.2.8 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:9515170F-60D0-43D3-A936-81E16EBEE6C3 On the Australian linyphiid spider Alaxchelicera ordinaria Butler, 1932 (Araneae) NIKOLAJ SCHARFF1 & GUSTAVO HORMIGA2 1Natural History Museum of Denmark, Zoological Museum and Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. E-mail: [email protected] 2Department of Biological Sciences, The George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 20052, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Very few studies have addressed the linyphiid fauna of Australia. Most of the existing taxonomic work on Australian linyphiids consists of isolated species descriptions (e.g., Rainbow 1912) or at most are based on small number of species also described outside a revisionary context (e.g., Wunderlich 1976) (but see van Helsdingen 1972 for a revision of the Australian species of the genera Laperousea Dalmas, 1917 and Laetesia Simon, 1908). Microctenonyx subitaneus (O. P.-Cambridge, 1875) is a Holarctic erigonine (Linyphiidae) which has been introduced in many parts of the world, including Australia (Brennan 2004). In this paper we report a new junior synonym of Microctenonyx subitaneus described by Butler (1932) under the name Alaxchelicera ordinaria Butler, 1932. In 1932 L.S.G. Butler, a Melbourne-based arachnologist, published a paper in which he described six new spider genera from Victoria and New South Wales, all of them monotypic. Three of these new genera (Microlinypheus, Plectochetos and Alaxchelicera) he placed in the family Linyphiidae, the remaining three (Platycephala, Eterosonycha and Perissopmeros) were placed in Zodariidae.
    [Show full text]
  • Spiders from the Coolola Bioblitz 24-26 August 2018
    SPIDERS FROM THE COOLOOLA BIOBLITZ 24-26 AUGUST 2018 ROBERT WHYTE SPIDERS OF COOLOOLA BIO BLITZ 24 -26 AUGUST 2018 Acknowledgements Introduction Thanks to Fraser Island Defenders Organisation and Midnight Spiders (order Araneae) have proven to be highly For the 2018 Cooloola BioBlitz, we utilised techniques Cooloola Coastcare who successfully planned and rewarding organisms in biodiversity studies1, being to target ground-running and arboreal spiders. To implemented the Cooloola BioBlitz from Friday 24 to an important component in terrestrial food webs, an achieve consistency of future sampling, our methods Sunday 26 August 2018. indicator of insect diversity and abundance (their prey) could be duplicated , producing results easily compared The aim of the BioBlitz was to generate and extend and in Australia an understudied taxon, with many new with our data. Methods were used in the following biodiversity data for Northern Cooloola, educate species waiting to be discovered and described. In 78 sequence: participants and the larger community about the Australian spider families science has so far described • careful visual study of bush, leaves, bark and ground, area’s living natural resources and build citizen science about 4,000 species, only an estimated quarter to one to see movement, spiders suspended on silk, or capacity through mentoring and training. third of the actual species diversity. spiders on any surface Cooloola is a significant natural area adjoining the Spiders thrive in good-quality habitat, where • shaking foliage, causing spiders to fall onto a white Great Sandy Strait Ramsar site with a rich array of structural heterogeneity combines with high diversity tray or cloth habitats from bay to beach, wallum to rainforest and of plant and fungi species.
    [Show full text]