Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2014 A Revision and Phylogenetic Analysis of the Genus Eutyphlus LeConte (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Pselaphinae) with a Comparison of Sampling Methodologies Brittany Elin Owens Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Entomology Commons Recommended Citation Owens, Brittany Elin, "A Revision and Phylogenetic Analysis of the Genus Eutyphlus LeConte (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae: Pselaphinae) with a Comparison of Sampling Methodologies" (2014). LSU Master's Theses. 2503. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/2503 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A REVISION AND PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF THE GENUS EUTYPHLUS LECONTE (COLEOPTERA: STAPHYLINIDAE: PSELAPHINAE) WITH A COMPARISON OF SAMPLING METHODOLOGIES A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Entomology by Brittany E. Owens B.S., Tulane University, 2012 December 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author acknowledges Dr. Christopher Carlton, Dr. James Ottea, and Dr. Michael Stout and the LSU Staff and Faculty. The author personally thanks all of the staff of the Louisiana State Arthropod Museum, with special thanks to Victoria Bayless, Dr. Michael Ferro, Dr. Jong-Seok Park, Dr. Alexey Tishechkin, Forest Huval, and Brian Reilly. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………………………………….ii LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………………………………...v LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………………………………...vi ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………………………………………...xiii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………...…………...1 CHAPTER 2. “BERLESE VS. WINKLER”: COMPARISON OF TWO FOREST LITTER COLEOPTERA COLLECTION PROTOCOLS……..…………………………...….....5 2.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………...….…5 2.1.1 Forest litter: habitat challenges and sampling methods…..……....5 2.1.2 Historical review: Berleses and Winklers………………….……………7 2.1.3 Current challenges…………………………………………………………..…..10 2.2 Materials and methods………………………………….………………………………….14 2.3 Results…………………………………..…………………………………………………………20 2.3.1 Cumulative specimens…………………….…………………………………..20 2.3.1.1 Specimens per time interval…………………..……………….20 2.3.1.2 Temporal addition of specimens……………….……………25 2.3.2 Cumulative species………………..…………………….………………………28 2.3.2.1 Species per time interval………………………………………..28 2.3.2.2 Temporal addition of species……………………………….…33 2.3.2.3 New species per time interval………………………………...37 2.3.4 Curculionidae……………………………………………………………………...41 2.3.4.1 Temporal addition of specimens…………………................41 2.3.4.2 Temporal addition of species……………………………….…45 2.3.5 Staphylinidae……………………………………………………………………...50 2.3.5.1 Temporal addition of specimens………………………….…50 2.3.5.2 Temporal addition of species…………………………….……55 2.3.6 Rare species………………………………………………………………………..59 2.3.6.1 Specimens per time interval……………………….…………..59 2.3.6.2 New species per time interval………………………………...64 2.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………………….……………….…68 CHAPTER 3. REVISION OF EUTYPHLUS LECONTE (STAPHYLNIDAE: PSELAPHINAE) WITH A DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES……………83 3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………..…83 3.2 Materials and methods……..………………………………………………………...…….84 3.3 Genus diagnosis…………………………………………………………..……………….…..88 3.4 Species redescriptions and description of a single new species of Eutyphlus.………………………………………………………………..........…………………94 iii 3.4.1 Eutyphlus dybasi Park…………………………………………….……………94 3.4.2 Eutyphlus prominens Casey…………………………………………….….101 3.4.3 Eutyphlus schmitti Raffray………………………………….…………..….107 3.4.4 Eutyphlus similis LeConte………………………………….…………….…112 3.4.5 Eutyphlus n. sp. Owens & Carlton …………………….….…………..…130 3.4.6 Eutyphlus thoracicus Park……………………….…………………………133 3.5 Key to species………………………………………………….…………………….……….140 3.6 Checklist of species (Mod. after Chandler 1997)…………………..….……….142 CHAPTER 4. PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF THE SUBTRIBE PANAPHANTINA JEANNEL TESTING THE MONOPHYLY OF THE GENUS EUTYPHLUS LECONTE …………………………………………………………………………………...144 4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………...144 4.2 Materials and methods………………………………………………….………….…….144 4.3 Results…………………………………………...………………………….…………….….....150 4.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………….……………………..…153 CHAPTER 5. LITERATURE CITED…………………………………………………………………….156 APPENDIX. CHECKLIST OF TAXA IN PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS…………………….164 VITA………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..168 iv LIST OF TABLES 1. Collection sites, dates, and sample sizes…………………………………………………...17 2. List of taxa represented in six Berlese/Winkler funnel extraction trials……..73 3. Measurements of head and pronotum lengths and widths of E. similis and E. prominens females…………………………………………………………………………………116 4. List of characters and character states used in the data matrix……………..…145 5. Character matrix of the taxa and morphological characters…………………..…148 v LIST OF FIGURES 1. Berlese funnel………………………………………………………………………………………...16 2. Diagram of Berlese funnel……………………………………………………………..………...16 3. Winkler funnel……………………………………………..………………………………………….16 4. Diagram of Winkler funnel………………….…………………………………………………...16 5. Southern United States showing location of litter sample field sites…………..17 6. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from Alabama litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels……………………………………………21 7. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from Arizona litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………………………………………...22 8. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from Arkansas litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………………………………………...22 9. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from Louisiana litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………………………………………...23 10. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from New Mexico litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels……………………………………...23 11. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from North Carolina litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels……………………………………...24 12. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from the Alabama litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………...25 13. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from the Arizona litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels………...…26 14. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from the Arkansas litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels………...…26 15. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from the Louisiana litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………...27 16. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from the New Mexico litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………………………………………………………………………………………………....27 vi 17. Number of Coleoptera specimens obtained from the North Carolina litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels………….............................................................................................................................28 18. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Alabama litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………………………………………...30 19. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Arizona litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels……………………………………………30 20. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Arkansas litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels……………………………………………31 21. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Louisiana litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels……………………………………………31 22. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the New Mexico litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………………………………...…32 23. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the North Carolina litter sample per time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………………………………...…32 24. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Alabama litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels………......34 25. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Arizona litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………...34 26. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Arkansas litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………...35 27. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the Louisiana litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………...35 28. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the New Mexico litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels…………...36 29. Number of Coleoptera species obtained from the North Carolina litter sample, cumulatively, at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels……………………………………………………………………………………………………36 30. Number of new species obtained from the Alabama sample at each time interval by Winkler and Berlese funnels………………………………………………...…38 31. Number of new species