DOCSLIB.ORG

Campodeidae (Hexapoda, Diplura) from Caves of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Campodeidae (Hexapoda, Diplura) from Caves of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg A. Sendra, Y. Garcia, D. Weber Campodeidae from caves of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg Campodeidae (Hexapoda, Diplura) from caves of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg Alberto Sendra Asociación para el Estudio del Medio Subterráneo Avenida Contitución, 83-12 460019 Valencia (Spain) [email protected] Yolanda Garcia Asociación para el Estudio del Medio Subterráneo Avenida Contitución, 83-12 460019 Valencia (Spain) [email protected]. Dieter Weber Kirchgasse 124 D-67454 Haßloch [email protected] Zusammenfassung Von 2007 bis 2011 wurden in 82 Höhlen und künstlichen Neu für Luxemburg sind alle 7 Arten: Campodea Hohlräumen des Großherzogtums Luxemburg Tiere (Campodea) lankesteri, Campodea (Campodea) lubbocki, gesammelt. Unter rund 90.000 gesammelten Tieren waren 37 Campodea (Campodea) plusiochaeta, Campodea (Campodea) Doppelschwänze. Sie teilen sich in 7 Arten auf, von denen die remyi, Campodea (Campodea) subdives, Campodea folgenden cavernicol sind: Campodea (Campodea) lankesteri, (Campodea) wallacei, Litocampa humilis humilis. Campodea (Campodea) wallacei, Litocampa humilis humilis. Abstract From 2007 to 2011, animals were collected from 82 caves All 7 species are new for Luxembourg: Campodea in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. Within 90,000 (Campodea) lankesteri, Campodea (Campodea) lubbocki, individuals, 37 were diplurans representing 7 species. Campodea (Campodea) plusiochaeta, Campodea (Campodea) The following species are classified as cavernicolous: remyi, Campodea (Campodea) subdives, Campodea Campodea (Campodea) lankesteri, Campodea (Campodea) (Campodea) wallacei, and Litocampa humilis humilis. wallacei, and Litocampa humilis humilis. Résumé Entre 2007 et 2011, 90 000 spécimens d' animaux ont été Toutes les espèces sont signalées pour la première fois récoltés dans 82 cavités naturelles et artificielles du Grand- dans ce pays: Campodea (Campodea) lankesteri, Campodea Duché de Luxembourg, dont eux 37 diploures représentant (Campodea) lubbocki, Campodea (Campodea) plusiochaeta, 7 espèces. Les espèces suivantes sont considérées comme Campodea (Campodea) remyi, Campodea (Campodea) cavernicoles: Campodea (Campodea) lankesteri, Campodea subdives, Campodea (Campodea) wallacei, Litocampa humilis (Campodea) wallacei, Litocampa humilis humilis. humilis. 216 Ferrantia • 69 / 2013 A. Sendra, Y. Garcia, D. Weber Campodeidae from caves of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg 1 Introduction 2 Results References about Diplurans in the Grand Duchy Campodea (Campodea) lankesteri Silvestri 1912 of Luxembourg do not exist so far, but we can Diagnosis: Body length (excluding cerci) 5-7 mm. find some Dipluran bibliography from the Epicuticle with thick microdenticles. Clothing Campodeidae family in countries close by (see as setae thin and glabrous. Antennae with 26 to 28 antennomeres, cupuliform organ with 4 bare example Arevad 1957; Bareth 2006; Condé 1947a, sensilla, sensillum of third antennomere in 1954; Condé & Bareth 1998; Paclt 1961, 1965). Very sternal position. Notal macrochaetae thick with few information exist from caves and subter- few barbs: 1, 1, 1 ma, 1, 1, 0 la, 1, 1, 1 lp; marginal ranean environment in all areas of Europe north setae with barbs. Calcars robust with thick barbs. of the Alps: North of France, Belgium, Ireland, Urotergites macrochaetae: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 ma; 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0 la; 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 5 Great Britain, Denmark, Germany, Benelux and lp. Urosternite I male with glandular g1-setae in Scandinavian countries (Bareth 1999, 2000). The several continuous rows, trapezoidal appendages greater part of the summarizing publications on with glandular a2-setae. Cerci shorter than the cave fauna in Central Europe (Belgium: Leruth body worn long macrochaetae with distal barbs 1939; Switzerland: Strinati 1965; Germany: Dobat and clothing setae scarcity. Spermatozoid fascicles 60 mm in diameter, 30 mm wide; filament 100 mm 1975, 1978; Weber 1988, 1989, 1991, 2001, 2012; long in 8 to 9 spiral turns. Zaenker 2001) do not list diplurans to species Distribution: Wide distribution range throug level. Recently Weber (unpublished) collected septentrional Europe: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, diplurans in caves from Rhenish Palatinate and France, Great Britain, Ireland and Sweden (Agrell Saarland (South West Germany) with 8 species, 5 1944; Arevad 1957; Bagnall 1915, 1918a; Christian of them identical to those found in Luxembourg. 1992; Condé 1947a; Condé & Barbier 1957; Good, Blackith & Higgins 1989; Leleup 1948; Marten Out of 90,000 collected animals in the years from 1939; Silvestri 1912; Womersley 1927; Wygodz- 2007 to 2011 in Luxembourg caves, 37 specimens insky 1941a). were Diplurans. Diplurans are therefore a rare With 14 specimens, it is the mostly found Diplura group. All collected Diplurans are determined. species in Luxembourg caves. However, it is found Campodea (Campodea) lankesteri 140# Abundance 130# 9 8 120# 7 110# 6 5 100# 4 90# 3 80# 2 # 1 70# N 0 # upto 5 upto 10 upto 20 upto 50 upto 100 over 100 60 0 10Km # # # # # # # 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Distance from Entrance (m) Fig. 1: Caves with Campodea (C.) Fig. 2: Numbers of Campodea (C.) lankesteri caught at lankesteri in Luxembourg. different distances from the entrance in Luxembourg caves. Ferrantia • 69 / 2013 217 A. Sendra, Y. Garcia, D. Weber Campodeidae from caves of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg only in one casemate in Luxembourg City. Even mm wide; filament 180-200 mm long, 1,5-2 mm in another casemate very close by contains another wide, in 2,5 to 3 spiral turns. species. C. lankesteri was found only in traps, over We found it in 1 specimen in a casemate in Luxem- the whole year and only deep inside the artificial bourg City, 75 m distant from the entrance. Due to cave (Fig. 2). We assume that it generates stable the limited findings in caves so far, we classify it subterranean populations and is therefore eutroglo- as eutrogloxene. phile. To prove that we kwon some references of C. lankesteri in subterranean habitats, such as Leleup Distribution: The species has a wide distribution (1948) (confused with Campodea giardi Silvestri, through northwest of Europe: Austria, Belgium, 1912) in the Grotte de Goyet (Belgium) (Condé France, Great Britain, Italy, Norway, Sweden 1947a) and also Bareth (2000) reported this species and Switzerland (Agrell 1944; Bagnall 1918a; as very abundant in a MSS (Mesovoid shallow Bareth 2007; Christian 1992; Condé 1947a, 1947b, stratum or Superficial underground compartment) 1961; Condé & Barbier 1957; Condé & Bareth location in Liège, a province of Belgium. 1998; Condé & Mathieu 1958; Denis 1924, 1930; Husson 1946; Olsen 1996; Orelli 1956; Pagés 1951; Campodea (Campodea) lubbocki Silvestri 1912 Ramanelli 1990; Silvestri 1912; Womersley 1927). Diagnosis: Body length (excluding cerci) 3.5 Outside Europe it is located in USA (Condé 1973) mm. Epicuticle without ornamentation. Clothing and also cited in Santa Helena Island (Azores) setae short. Antennae with 19 to 23 antenomeres, where it could be considered as invasive species cupuliform organ with 4 bare sensilla, sensillium (Condé & Bareth 1970) due to it is frequent in of third antennomere in sternal position. Notal urban gardens. Bareth (2000) refers this species macrochaetae small: 1, 1, 1 ma, 1, 1, 0 la, 1, 1, 1 in a location from the MSS in Liège province lp; marginal setae with few barbs. One trocanteral (Belgium) and in Husson (1946) it is cited inside of sensillum; calcars with few barbs. Urotergites humid cave in Nancy (France). macrochaetae: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 ma (short Campodea (Campodea) plusiochaeta and small), 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0 la, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, Silvestri 1912 1, 1, 3, 5 lp. Urosternite I male with glandular g1-setae in some continuous rows, subtrapezoidal Diagnosis: Body length (excluding cerci) 2-4 mm. appendages with seasonal glandular a2-setae. Epicuticle with thin microdenticles and rosette Cerci as long as the body with 9 to 15 articles worn formations. Clothing setae short and glabrous. short macrochaeta and abundant clothing setae. Antennae with 19 to 23 antennomeres (until 27 Spermatozoid fascicles 30 mm in diameter, 10-12 antennomeres in some Greece population (Condé Campodea (Campodea) lubbocki Campodea plusiochaeta 140# 140# 130# 130# 120# 120# 110# 110# 100# 100# 90# 90# 80# 80# # 70# 70# N N 60# # 0 10Km 60 # 0 10Km # # # # # # # # # # # # # # 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Fig. 3: Caves with Campodea (C.) Fig. 4: Caves with Campodea (C.) lubbocki in Luxembourg. plusiochaeta in Luxembourg. 218 Ferrantia • 69 / 2013 A. Sendra, Y. Garcia, D. Weber Campodeidae from caves of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg Campodea (Campodea) remyi 1984); cupuliform organ with 4 bare sensilla; 140# sensillum of third antennomere in tergal position (or in sternal position in the septentrional popula- 130# tions -form gardneri by Bagnall 1918a). Notal 120# # macrochaetae with thin barbs: 1, 1, 1 ma, 1, 1, 0 la, 1, 1, 1 lp. Sedas marginales with some few thin 110# barbs. Calcars with 2-3 thick barbs. Urotergites 100# macrochaetae: 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0 la, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 1, 1, 3, 5 lp. Urosternite I male with glandular 90# # g1-setae in several continuous rows, subtrap- 80# ezoidal appendages with glandular a2-setae. Cerci shorter than the body with 6-7 articles worn 70# long macrochaeta and clothing setae scarcity, N # latero-internal macrochaetae with 1-2 thin barbs. 60 0 10Km # # # # # # # Spermatozoid fascicles 45-50 mm diameter, 20-23 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 mm wide, filament 550-600 mm long, 5-6 mm Fig. 5: Caves with Campodea (C.) diameter, in 5-6 spiral turn. remyi in Luxembourg. Distribution in Luxemburg + map. antennomere in tergal position. Notal macro- Only one specimen was found in an iron mine in chaetae with few barbs: 1, 0, 0 ma, 1, 1, 0 la, 1, 1, 0 South Luxembourg, surprisingly more than 100 lp; marginal setae thick and with plenty of barbs m distant from the entrance. Due to the lack of almost spiny. One small trocanteral sensillum; findings in other caves, we classify C.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Diplura and Protura of Canada
    A peer-reviewed open-access journal ZooKeys 819: 197–203 (2019) Diplura and Protura of Canada 197 doi: 10.3897/zookeys.819.25238 REVIEW ARTICLE http://zookeys.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity research Diplura and Protura of Canada Derek S. Sikes1 1 University of Alaska Museum, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska 99775-6960, USA Corresponding author: Derek S. Sikes ([email protected]) Academic editor: D. Langor | Received 23 March 2018 | Accepted 12 April 2018 | Published 24 January 2019 http://zoobank.org/D68D1C72-FF1D-4415-8E0F-28B36460E90A Citation: Sikes DS (2019) Diplura and Protura of Canada. In: Langor DW, Sheffield CS (Eds) The Biota of Canada – A Biodiversity Assessment. Part 1: The Terrestrial Arthropods. ZooKeys 819: 197–203.https://doi.org/10.3897/ zookeys.819.25238 Abstract A literature review of the Diplura and Protura of Canada is presented. Canada has six Diplura species documented and an estimated minimum 10–12 remaining to be documented. The Protura fauna is equally poorly known, with nine documented species and a conservatively estimated ten undocumented. Only six and three Barcode Index Numbers are available for Canadian specimens of Diplura and Protura, respectively. Keywords biodiversity assessment, Biota of Canada, Diplura, Protura Diplura, sometimes referred to as two-pronged bristletails, and Protura, sometimes called coneheads, are terrestrial arthropod taxa that have suffered from lack of scientific attention in Canada as well as globally. As both groups are undersampled and under- studied in Canada, the state of knowledge is considered to be poor, although there have been some modest advances since 1979. Both of these taxa are soil dwelling, and, given the repeated glaciations over most of Canada, the Canadian diversity is expected to be relatively low except possibly in unglaciated areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Formation of the Entognathy of Dicellurata, Occasjapyx Japonicus (Enderlein, 1907) (Hexapoda: Diplura, Dicellurata)
    S O I L O R G A N I S M S Volume 83 (3) 2011 pp. 399–404 ISSN: 1864-6417 Formation of the entognathy of Dicellurata, Occasjapyx japonicus (Enderlein, 1907) (Hexapoda: Diplura, Dicellurata) Kaoru Sekiya1, 2 and Ryuichiro Machida1 1 Sugadaira Montane Research Center, University of Tsukuba, Sugadaira Kogen, Ueda, Nagano 386-2204, Japan 2 Corresponding author: Kaoru Sekiya (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract The development of the entognathy in Dicellurata was examined using Occasjapyx japonicus (Enderlein, 1907). The formation of entognathy involves rotation of the labial appendages, resulting in a tandem arrangement of the glossa, paraglossa and labial palp. The mandibular, maxillary and labial terga extend ventrally to form the mouth fold. The intercalary tergum also participates in the formation of the mouth fold. The labial coxae extending anteriorly unite with the labial terga, constituting the posterior region of the mouth fold, the medial half of which is later partitioned into the admentum. The labial appendages of both sides migrate medially, and the labial subcoxae fuse to form the postmentum, which posteriorly confines the entognathy. The entognathy formation in Dicellurata is common to that in another dipluran suborder, Rhabdura. The entognathy of Diplura greatly differs from that of Protura and Collembola in the developmental plan, preventing homologization of the entognathies of Diplura and other two entognathan orders. Keywords: Entognatha, comparative embryology, mouth fold, admentum, postmentum 1. Introduction The Diplura, a basal clade of the Hexapoda, have traditionally been placed within Entognatha [= Diplura + Collembola + Protura], a group characterized by entognathy (Hennig 1969). However, Hennig’s ‘Entognatha-Ectognatha System’, especially the validity of Entognatha, has been challenged by various disciplines.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of the Diplura (Hexapoda: Entognatha) of California
    Zootaxa 3780 (2): 297–322 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2014 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3780.2.5 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:DEF59FEA-C1C1-4AC6-9BB0-66E2DE694DFA Annotated Checklist of the Diplura (Hexapoda: Entognatha) of California G.O. GRAENING1, YANA SHCHERBANYUK2 & MARYAM ARGHANDIWAL3 Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, Sacramento 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819-6077. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract The first checklist of California dipluran taxa is presented with annotations. New state and county records are reported, as well as new taxa in the process of being described. California has a remarkable dipluran fauna with about 8% of global richness. California hosts 63 species in 5 families, with 51 of those species endemic to the State, and half of these endemics limited to single locales. The genera Nanojapyx, Hecajapyx, and Holjapyx are all primarily restricted to California. Two species are understood to be exotic, and six dubious taxa are removed from the State checklist. Counties in the central Coastal Ranges have the highest diversity of diplurans; this may indicate sampling bias. Caves and mines harbor unique and endemic dipluran species, and subterranean habitats should be better inventoried. Only four California taxa exhibit obvious troglomorphy and may be true cave obligates. In general, the North American dipluran fauna is still under-inven- toried. Since many taxa are morphologically uniform but genetically diverse, genetic analyses should be incorporated into future taxonomic descriptions.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Classification Standards 2020
    RECOMMENDED INSECT CLASSIFICATION FOR UGA ENTOMOLOGY CLASSES (2020) In an effort to standardize the hexapod classification systems being taught to our students by our faculty in multiple courses across three UGA campuses, I recommend that the Entomology Department adopts the basic system presented in the following textbook: Triplehorn, C.A. and N.F. Johnson. 2005. Borror and DeLong’s Introduction to the Study of Insects. 7th ed. Thomson Brooks/Cole, Belmont CA, 864 pp. This book was chosen for a variety of reasons. It is widely used in the U.S. as the textbook for Insect Taxonomy classes, including our class at UGA. It focuses on North American taxa. The authors were cautious, presenting changes only after they have been widely accepted by the taxonomic community. Below is an annotated summary of the T&J (2005) classification. Some of the more familiar taxa above the ordinal level are given in caps. Some of the more important and familiar suborders and families are indented and listed beneath each order. Note that this is neither an exhaustive nor representative list of suborders and families. It was provided simply to clarify which taxa are impacted by some of more important classification changes. Please consult T&J (2005) for information about taxa that are not listed below. Unfortunately, T&J (2005) is now badly outdated with respect to some significant classification changes. Therefore, in the classification standard provided below, some well corroborated and broadly accepted updates have been made to their classification scheme. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions about this classification.
    [Show full text]
  • Zootaxa, New Species, New Records, and Distribution of Campodeidae
    Zootaxa 2639: 40–52 (2010) ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2010 · Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) New species, new records, and distribution of Campodeidae (Diplura) in Anatolia ALBERTO SENDRA1, SANTIAGO TERUEL1, ALI SATAR2, SADREDDIN TUSUN2 & CENGIZHAN ÖZBAY2 1Museu Valencià d’Història Natural (Fundación Entomológica Torres Sala). Paseo de la Pechina 15, E-46008 Valencia (Spain). E-mail: [email protected] 2Dicle University, Arts and Science Faculty, Department of Biology, 21280 Diyarbakir (Turkey) Abstract The campodeid dipluran fauna from Anatolia was studied from samples collected from the Black Sea, southeastern, Aegean, and eastern regions of Turkey. A total of 16 species were collected: Campodea s. str. (10 species), Dicampa (2), Eutrichocampa (2), Libanocampa (1), and Edriocampa (1). Two new species are described: Campodea (Campodea) anae Sendra & Teruel n. sp. from northern Anatolia and Campodea (Campodea) sarae Sendra & Teruel n. sp. from Denizli, in southeastern Turkey. These results suggest that additional sampling is needed in other parts of Turkey to adequately characterize the campodeid fauna. The known campodeid biodiversity of Anatolia stands at 23 species, 3 times less than the Iberian peninsula. Key words: Diplura, Campodeidae, Campodea, Dicampa, Eutrichocampa, Edriocampa, Libanocampa, taxonomy, Turkey Nouveaux espèces, contribution et distribution à les Campodéidés (Diplura) de l’Anatolie. On examine la faune de diploures campodéidés de l’Anatolie originaire en majorité d’échantillons des régions de la Mer Noire, sud-est, Égée et est de la Turquie. Un total de 16 espèces est cité, comprises dans les genres et sous-genres suivants : Campodea s. str.
    [Show full text]
  • The Genome of the Blind Soil-Dwelling and Ancestrally Wingless Dipluran Campodea Augens, a Key Reference Hexapod for Studying the Emergence of Insect Innovations
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/585695; this version posted June 29, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. The genome of the blind soil-dwelling and ancestrally wingless dipluran Campodea augens, a key reference hexapod for studying the emergence of insect innovations Mosè Manni1*, Felipe A. Simao1, Hugh M. Robertson2, Marco A. Gabaglio1, Robert M. Waterhouse3, Bernhard Misof4, Oliver Niehuis5, Nikolaus U. Szucsich6, Evgeny M. Zdobnov1* 1Department of Genetic Medicine and Development, University of Geneva Medical School, and Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Geneva, Switzerland. 2Department of Entomology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA. 3Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, and Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, Lausanne, Switzerland. 4Center for Molecular Biodiversity Research, Zoological Research Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn, Germany. 5Department of Evolutionary Biology and Ecology, Albert Ludwig University, Institute of Biology I (Zoology), Freiburg, Germany. 6Natural History Museum Vienna, 3rd Zoological Dept., Vienna, Austria. *Authors for Correspondence: Evgeny M. Zdobnov, email: [email protected] Mosè Manni, email: [email protected] 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/585695; this version posted June 29, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
    [Show full text]
  • Annotated Checklist of the Diplura (Hexapoda: Entognatha) of California
    Zootaxa 3780 (2): 297–322 ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition) www.mapress.com/zootaxa/ Article ZOOTAXA Copyright © 2014 Magnolia Press ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition) http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3780.2.5 http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:DEF59FEA-C1C1-4AC6-9BB0-66E2DE694DFA Annotated Checklist of the Diplura (Hexapoda: Entognatha) of California G.O. GRAENING1, YANA SHCHERBANYUK2 & MARYAM ARGHANDIWAL3 Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, Sacramento 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819-6077. E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Abstract The first checklist of California dipluran taxa is presented with annotations. New state and county records are reported, as well as new taxa in the process of being described. California has a remarkable dipluran fauna with about 8% of global richness. California hosts 63 species in 5 families, with 51 of those species endemic to the State, and half of these endemics limited to single locales. The genera Nanojapyx, Hecajapyx, and Holjapyx are all primarily restricted to California. Two species are understood to be exotic, and six dubious taxa are removed from the State checklist. Counties in the central Coastal Ranges have the highest diversity of diplurans; this may indicate sampling bias. Caves and mines harbor unique and endemic dipluran species, and subterranean habitats should be better inventoried. Only four California taxa exhibit obvious troglomorphy and may be true cave obligates. In general, the North American dipluran fauna is still under-inven- toried. Since many taxa are morphologically uniform but genetically diverse, genetic analyses should be incorporated into future taxonomic descriptions.
    [Show full text]
  • First Faunistic Study of Diplura in North of Iran with Records of Two Species of Campodea (Campodeidae)
    © Entomologica Fennica. 31 August 2016 First faunistic study of Diplura in north of Iran with records of two species of Campodea (Campodeidae) Saeed Azadbakhsh & Jamasb Nozari Azadbakhsh, S. & Nozari, J. 2016: First faunistic study of Diplura in north of Iran with records of two species of Campodea (Campodeidae). — Entomol. Fennica 27: 53–56. The hexapod fauna of Iran is still very incompletely known. The current study is the first report of dipluran species from Iran. Our studies and sampling were done in two northern provinces Mazandaran and Alburz during March to August 2012. Forty-five specimens of this order were collected. All the specimens were identi- fied as Campodea (Dicampa) sprovierii Silvestri, 1932 or Campodea (Campo- dea) fragilis Meinert, 1865 (Campodeidae). Both the species are reported from Iran for the first time. S. Azadbakhsh & J. Nozari, Department of Plant Protection, University of Teh- ran, Karaj, Iran; Corresponding author’s email: [email protected] Received 11 August 2015, accepted 16 October 2015 1. Introduction There are no data about the diversity and distribution of diplurans in Iran. Rahmani and The order Diplura commonly known as diplurans Mayvan (2004) just mentioned the order Diplura or “two-pronged bristletails” are wingless arthro- in a faunistic study on soil-dwelling arthropods of pods in the superclass Hexapoda and has about Iran, without any information about the species 800 described species (Allen 1994). They have diversity. The aim of the current study is to shed no eyes and their small body is soft and un- light on the species diversity of Campodeidae pigmented, but some species of the genus Japyx family in north of Iran, particularly in the Mazan- Haliday are bigger and may reach the length of 50 daran province.
    [Show full text]
  • Arthropod Phylogeny Based on Eight Molecular Loci and Morphology
    letters to nature melanogaster (U37541), mosquito Anopheles quadrimaculatus (L04272), mosquito arthropods revealed by the expression pattern of Hox genes in a spider. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 95, Anopheles gambiae (L20934), med¯y Ceratitis capitata (CCA242872), Cochliomyia homi- 10665±10670 (1998). nivorax (AF260826), locust Locusta migratoria (X80245), honey bee Apis mellifera 24. Thompson, J. D., Higgins, D. G. & Gibson, T. J. CLUSTALW: Improving the sensitivity of progressive (L06178), brine shrimp Artemia franciscana (X69067), water ¯ea Daphnia pulex multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-speci®c gap penalties and weight (AF117817), shrimp Penaeus monodon (AF217843), hermit crab Pagurus longicarpus matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res. 22, 4673±4680 (1994). (AF150756), horseshoe crab Limulus polyphemus (AF216203), tick Ixodes hexagonus 25. Foster, P. G. & Hickey, D. A. Compositional bias may affect both DNA-based and protein-based (AF081828), tick Rhipicephalus sanguineus (AF081829). For outgroup comparison, phylogenetic reconstructions. J. Mol. Evol. 48, 284±290 (1999). sequences were retrieved for the annelid Lumbricus terrestris (U24570), the mollusc 26. Castresana, J. Selection of conserved blocks from multiple alignments for their use in phylogenetic Katharina tunicata (U09810), the nematodes Caenorhabditis elegans (X54252), Ascaris analysis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 17, 540±552 (2000). suum (X54253), Trichinella spiralis (AF293969) and Onchocerca volvulus (AF015193), and 27. Muse, S. V. & Kosakovsky Pond, S. L. Hy-Phy 0.7 b (North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh, 2000). the vertebrate species Homo sapiens (J01415) and Xenopus laevis (M10217). Additional 28. Strimmer, K. & von Haeseler, A. Quartet puzzlingÐa quartet maximum-likelihood method for sequences were analysed for gene arrangements: Boophilus microplus (AF110613), Euhadra reconstructing tree topologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Dip Iura of Belgium
    Meigen (Diptera, Syrphidae) in Central Europe, observed in Chrysotoxum cautum, C. vernale and Volucella 2 (1/2), 77-85. Merodon avidus (Diptera, Syrphidae), Volucella 1, DOCZKAL D., 2002 - Further presumed host plant 217-218. relationship of Cheilosia Meigen (Diptera, ROTHERA Y G .E., 1993 - Colour Guide to Hoverfly Syrphidae) obtained from observing egg-laying Larvae (Diptera, Syrphidae), Dipterists Digest No. females, Volucella 6, 163-166. 11 9, Sheffield, England. GILBERT F .S., 1993 - Hoverflies, Naturalists' STUBBS A.E. & FALK S.J., 2002- British Hoverflies, . Handbooks 5, Company of Biologists Ltd, Slough, an illustrated identification guide, British England. Entomological and Natural History. Society. KALTENBACH J.H., 1874 - Die Pfanzenfeinde aus VERLINDEN L., 1994- Syrphides (Syiphidae). Faune Klasse der Insekten- VIII+846p. Stuttgart (Juluis de Belgique, Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles Hofmann). de Belgique, 289 p. REEMER M. & GOUDSMITS K., 2004 - Oviposition Bulletin S.R.B.E./K.B. V. E., 145 (2009) : 35-39 DipIura of Belgium byKoenLOCK Laboratory of Environmental Toxicology and Aquatic Ecology, Ghent University, J. Plateaustraat 22, B-9000 Gent ( e-mail: Koen_ [email protected]) Abstract A checklist of the Diplura occurring in Belgium is presented and the existing literature about the Belgian fauna is discussed. Thirteen species were found of which five are new to the Belgian fauna: Campodea meinerti, C. plusiochaeta, C. remyi, C. rhopalota and C. wallacei. An identification key to the Belgian Diplura was developed, which also includes several species that might be expected in Belgium. Keywords: checklist, identification key, Belgian fauna, diversity. Samenvatting Een soortenlijst van de Belgische Diplura wordt voorgesteld en de literatuur over de Belgische fauna wordt bediscussieerd.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammoth Cave: a Hotspot of Subterranean Biodiversity in the United States
    diversity Article Mammoth Cave: A Hotspot of Subterranean Biodiversity in the United States Matthew L. Niemiller 1,*, Kurt Helf 2 and Rickard S. Toomey 3 1 Department of Biological Sciences, The University of Alabama in Huntsville, 301 Sparkman Dr NW, Huntsville, AL 35899, USA 2 Cumberland Piedmont Network, National Park Service, Mammoth Cave National Park, 61 Maintenance Rd., Mammoth Cave, KY 42259, USA; [email protected] 3 Division of Science and Resources Management, Mammoth Cave National Park, P.O. Box 7, Mammoth Cave, KY 42259, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected] Abstract: The Mammoth Cave System in the Interior Low Plateau karst region in central Kentucky, USA is a global hotspot of cave-limited biodiversity, particularly terrestrial species. We searched the literature, museum accessions, and database records to compile an updated list of troglobiotic and stygobiotic species for the Mammoth Cave System and compare our list with previously published checklists. Our list of cave-limited fauna totals 49 species, with 32 troglobionts and 17 stygobionts. Seven species are endemic to the Mammoth Cave System and other small caves in Mammoth Cave National Park. The Mammoth Cave System is the type locality for 33 cave-limited species. The exceptional diversity at Mammoth Cave is likely related to several factors, such as the high dispersal potential of cave fauna associated with expansive karst exposures, high surface productivity, and a long history of exploration and study. Nearly 80% of the cave-limited fauna is of conservation concern, many of which are at an elevated risk of extinction because of small ranges, few occurrences, Citation: Niemiller, M.L.; Helf, K.; and several potential threats.
    [Show full text]
  • Fossil Perspectives on the Evolution of Insect Diversity
    FOSSIL PERSPECTIVES ON THE EVOLUTION OF INSECT DIVERSITY Thesis submitted by David B Nicholson For examination for the degree of PhD University of York Department of Biology November 2012 1 Abstract A key contribution of palaeontology has been the elucidation of macroevolutionary patterns and processes through deep time, with fossils providing the only direct temporal evidence of how life has responded to a variety of forces. Thus, palaeontology may provide important information on the extinction crisis facing the biosphere today, and its likely consequences. Hexapods (insects and close relatives) comprise over 50% of described species. Explaining why this group dominates terrestrial biodiversity is a major challenge. In this thesis, I present a new dataset of hexapod fossil family ranges compiled from published literature up to the end of 2009. Between four and five hundred families have been added to the hexapod fossil record since previous compilations were published in the early 1990s. Despite this, the broad pattern of described richness through time depicted remains similar, with described richness increasing steadily through geological history and a shift in dominant taxa after the Palaeozoic. However, after detrending, described richness is not well correlated with the earlier datasets, indicating significant changes in shorter term patterns. Corrections for rock record and sampling effort change some of the patterns seen. The time series produced identify several features of the fossil record of insects as likely artefacts, such as high Carboniferous richness, a Cretaceous plateau, and a late Eocene jump in richness. Other features seem more robust, such as a Permian rise and peak, high turnover at the end of the Permian, and a late-Jurassic rise.
    [Show full text]