Hymenoptera: Apidae), with Distributional Modeling of Adventive Euglossines
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Comparative Genital Morphology, Phylogeny, and Classification of the Orchid Bee Genus Euglossa Latreille (Hymenoptera: Apidae), with Distributional Modeling of Adventive Euglossines BY ©2010 Ismael Alejandro Hinojosa Díaz Submitted to the graduate degree program in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Chairperson Michael S. Engel Charles D. Michener Edward O. Wiley Kirsten Jensen J. Christopher Brown Date Defended: November 10, 2010 The Dissertation Committee for Ismael Alejandro Hinojosa Díaz certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Comparative Genital Morphology, Phylogeny, and Classification of the Orchid Bee Genus Euglossa Latreille (Hymenoptera: Apidae), with Distributional Modeling of Adventive Euglossines Chairperson Michael S. Engel Date approved: November 22, 2010 ii ABSTRACT Orchid bees (tribe Euglossini) are conspicuous members of the corbiculate bees owing to their metallic coloration, long labiomaxillary complex, and the fragrance-collecting behavior of the males, more prominently (but not restricted) from orchid flowers (hence the name of the group). They are the only corbiculate tribe that is exclusively Neotropical and without eusocial members. Of the five genera in the tribe, Euglossa Latreille is the most diverse with around 120 species. Taxonomic work on this genus has been linked historically to the noteworthy secondary sexual characters of the males, which combined with the other notable external features, served as a basis for the subgeneric classification commonly employed. The six subgenera Dasystilbe Dressler, Euglossa sensu stricto, Euglossella Moure, Glossura Cockerell, Glossurella Dressler and Glossuropoda Moure, although functional for the most part, showed some intergradations (especially the last three), and no phylogenetic evaluation of their validity has been produced. A general paucity in the use of male genitalic morphology has also been characteristic for the lineage. Here a comparative study of the male genitalic morphology for Euglossa is presented, and in turn, along with other external morphological features, used as a source of characters included in a phylogenetic analysis. A total of 41 Euglossa species representing the taxonomic diversity within the genus (all subgenera and species groups) plus five taxa as outgroups, and 79 characters are included in a comprehensive cladistic treatment. The resulting 64 shortest trees combined in a strict 1 consensus tree recover as natural groups the subgenera Dasystilbe (monotypic), Euglossa s. str., and Euglossella (sister to all other Euglossa s. lat.). Glossura appears as paraphyletic in a derived clade that also includes Glossuropoda (sensu Moure) and some Glossurella; Glossura is proposed to be expanded to include all the species groups in this derived clade. Most Glossurella form a heterogeneous paraphyletic assemblage, and the subgenus is proposed to be narrowed to include the monophyletic group formed by E. bursigera Dressler and allies. A morphologically distinctive group in the Glossurella grade is also proposed as a new subgenus with E. oleolucens Dressler as type species, while the remaining species in the grade are classified as Euglossa incertae sedis. Recent molecular phylogenetic work largely agrees with the results here presented. The presence of two adventives orchid bee species in the USA is analyzed using occurrence data across their natural ranges to produce Species Distribution Models, so that the recently discovered naturalized populations of Euglossa viridissima Friese in southeastern Florida are projected not to expand beyond the Florida Peninsula, and the isolated records of Eulaema polychroma (Mocsáry) in the southwestern USA are most likely due to individual dispersion events or human introduction. 2 To the memory of my mother; you have always been with me 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The research here presented would not have been possible without the contributions from my graduate committee, Michael S. Engel, Charles D. Michener, Edward O. Wiley, Kirsten Jensen and Christopher Brown. Most of my time as a doctoral student at the University of Kansas was possible due to the funding by a scholarship from Conacyt (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología – México). I received several instances of funding from the Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, and the Natural History Museum at The University of Kansas; especially Entomology summer scholarships, Hungerford Travel Grant, and Panorama Grant. Other important sources of funding came from NSF grants EF-0341724 and DEB-0542909 to M.S. Engel. Through all my time as a graduate student at KU I received the influence of a good number of people who helped me reach this final goal, to all of them I express my deepest gratitude. I would like to individually express my gratitude to the late Dr. Steve Ashe, originally a member of my graduate committee, and with whom I had the great opportunity to share his last field expedition. Nothing of what I reached during this time would have been possible without the constant interaction, advice, guidance, help, but above all friendship of Michael Engel. I will always remember how my constant interaction with Charles Michener seemed so natural due to his innate kindness and willingness to share ideas and 4 knowledge, that at times I would forget that I was in the presence of the most prolific and important person in the field of bee systematics and evolution. Access to specimens from institutional collections was granted by Michael Engel and Zack Fallin (University of Kansas), William Norris (University of Florida), Gabriel Melo (Universidade Federal do Parana), George Else and David Notton (Natural History Museum, London), Jerry Rozen (American Museum of Natural History) and Armando Luis Martinez (Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México). I am especially indebted to Patricia Feria who helped to carry on methodological parts of the last chapter, and to Jaime Keeller for her invaluable help solving all the administrative intricacies that surrounded the finalization of this work. To my friends and fellow students in entomology (in no particular order): Steve Davis, Dan Bennett, Victor González, Stephanie Swenson, Stelios Chatzimanolis, Allan Smith, Ming Luen-Jeng, Molly Rightmyer, Jeff Cole, Lynn Villafuerte, Ginger Miller, Natapot Warrit, Choru Shin. To my friends and fellow students in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology: Matías Cafaro, Omar Torres, Hugo Alamillo, Juan Guayasamín, Arpi Nyari, Monica Papes, Andrés Lira, Yoshi Nakazawa, Elisa Bonaccorso, Matt Davis, Francine Abe, Merlin White, Liza Holeski, Andrea Romero, Andrea Crowther, Shannon DeVaney, Kathryn Mickle, Charles Linkem, Cameron Siler. Also to: Enrique Martínez, Miguel Ortega, Robert Rodriguez, Abel Leon, Juan Carrera, Sergio 5 Guerra, Pablo Palafox, Aida Ramos, Carola Ramirez, Jaime Ortega, Alberto Jiménez, Lucía Maltez, and especially to Elena Brebenel. To all of you thank you. Also to my family: Yolanda, Carla, Jair, Rodrigo, Edwviges, Lidia. Thank you. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1. A Briefing on Orchid Bees with emphasis on the genus Euglossa Latreille (Hymenoptera: Apidae) ....................................................................................................... 9 REFERENCES …...………………………………………………………………………………. 17 CHAPTER 2. Male Genitalic Morphology of Orchid Bees of the Genus Euglossa Latreille (Hymenoptera: Apidae) ………………………………………………………………………… 23 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 24 MATERIALS AND METHODS ............................................................................... 25 COMPARATIVE MORPHOLOGY, Euglossa imperialis Cockerell, 1922 ............... 26 Seventh metasomal sternum .................................................................... 29 Eighth metasomal sternum ....................................................................... 32 Genitalia ……………………………………………………………………… 36 Gonobase ……………………………………………………………………… 36 Gonocoxite …………………………………………………………………… 39 Gonostylus …………………………………………………………………… 45 Aedeagus ………………………………………………………………………. 50 Penis valve …………………………………………………………………… 51 Penis ......................................................................................................... 55 DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................... 58 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................... 61 CHAPTER 3. Phylogeny and Classification of the Orchid Bee Genus Euglossa Latreille (Hymenoptera: Apidae) ....................................................................................................... 65 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 66 METHODS ............................................................................................................. 73 RESULTS .............................................................................................................. 79 DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................... 80 General phylogenetic results .................................................................... 81 Previous phylogenetic statements ...........................................................