Field of Science

Showing posts with label Arthropoda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Arthropoda. Show all posts

Paramesochra acutata

Copepod taxonomy, it seems, is largely about counting setae. In his review of relationships within the interstitial harpacticoid family Paramesochridae, Huys (1987) recognised four species groups within the genus Paramesochra (which previously got a look-in at this site here). One of these groups, labelled the P. acutata-group, was characterised by reductions in numbers of setae, having lost the inner setae on the first segments of the endopods on the third and fourth legs.

Paramesochra taeana, a close relative of P. acutata, from Back & Lee (2010).


The group takes its name from the species Paramesochra acutata, described by Klie in 1935 from samples taken from coastal groundwater near the town of Schilksee on the northeastern coast of Germany, in the state of Schleswig-Holstein. Other notable features of P. acutata include the presence of four setae on the antennary exopod, well-developed narrow, triangular endopodal lobes on the modified fifth legs of the females, and conical caudal rami produced into spinose processes (Back & Lee 2013). I haven't been able to find whether P. acutata has been collected much beyond its initial locality but other members of its species group have been found around the world. One of these, P. hawaiensis, from (nach) Hawaii, is similar enough that it was until recently treated as a subspecies of P. acutata.

Appendages of female Paramesochra acutata, from Klie (1935).


So what, if anything, does all this mean? That, I'm afraid, is getting a bit beyond me. The fifth legs are used in spermatophore transfer and differences between species might presumably function in recognising suitable mates. Regarding the details of setation and ramus appearance, one wonders if there could be any relation to preferred micro-habitat. Are harpacticoids with fewer setae and more robust rami adapted for crawling among coarser sand grains? Honestly, I have no idea. Anyone care to find out?

REFERENCES

Back, J., & W. Lee. 2010. A new species of the genus Paramesochra (Copepoda: Harpacticoida) from Korean waters. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 123 (1): 47–61.

Back, J., & W. Lee. 2013. Three new species of the genus Paramesochra T. Scott, 1892 (Copepoda: Harpacticoida: Paramesochridae) from Yellow Sea, Korea with a redescription of Paramesochra similis Kunz, 1936. Journal of Natural History 47 (5–12): 769–803.

Huys, R. 1987. Paramesochra T. Scott, 1892 (Copepoda, Harpacticoida): a revised key, including a new species from the SW Dutch coast and some remarks on the phylogeny of the Paramesochridae. Hydrobiologia 144: 193–210.

Klie, W. 1935. Die Harpacticoiden des Küstengrundwassers bei Schilksee (Kieler Förde). Schriften des Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins für Schleswig-Holstein 20 (2): 409–421.

Kirkby's Small Ostracods (or Small Kirkby's Ostracods)

I do not envy those who find themselves working with ostracods. These minute crustaceans, typically less than a millimetre in length, seem altogether too fiddly to handle. Nevertheless, the long history of ostracods, together with their diversity and the high fossilisation potential of their calcified carapace valves, have made them a common focus for studying biostratigraphy and historical environments. The classification of modern ostracods is commonly informed by features of the legs and other appendages but such characters are not commonly preserved in fossil representatives. As a result, there are many groups of ostracods known from the Palaeozoic whose relationships remain uncertain.

Left valve of Kirkbyella delicata, from Hoare & Merrill (2004).


One such group is classified by Liebau (2005) as the superfamily Kirkbyelloidea. Members of this group are small ostracods with reticulate valves. The dorsal and ventral margins of the valves tend to be more or less straight. They are commonly impressed with a single dorsal sulcus, extending downwards from the dorsal margin about halfway along the valve's length. Below this sulcus is a protruding horizontal lobe ending in members of the family Kirkbyellidae in a small spine. Evidence of sexual dimorphism, a not-uncommon feature of Palaeozoic ostracods, is not known from kirkbyelloids.

Definite kirkbyelloids are known from the Devonian to the Permian. If the earlier family Ordovizonidae is included, their record extends all the way back to the Ordovician. As noted above, it is unclear where kirkbyelloids sit in the ostracod family tree. Becker (1994) suggested a relationship via Ordovizona to the Ordovician Monotiopleuridae which resemble kirkbyelloids in the outline of the carapace valves and features of the adductor muscle scars. Though long-lived, kirkbyelloids don't seem to have ever been massively diverse, and they can probably be counted among the many lineages of organisms that never made it past the end of the Palaeozoic.

REFERENCES

Becker, G. 1994. A remarkable Ordovician ostracod fauna from Orphan Knoll, Labrador Sea. Scripta Geologica 107: 1–25.

Hoare, R. D., & G. K. Merrill. 2004. A Pennsylvanian (Morrowan) ostracode fauna from Texas. Journal of Paleontology 78 (1): 185–204.

Liebau, A. 2005. A revised classification of the higher taxa of the Ostracoda (Crustacea). Hydrobiologia 538: 115–137.

Platybunus: the Wide-Eyed Harvestmen of Europe

The western Palaearctic region (that is, Europe and the immediately adjacent parts of Asia and northern Africa) is home to a diverse and distinctive fauna of harvestmen. Among the various genera unique to this part of the world are the forest- and mountain-dwellers of the genus Platybunus.

Platybunus pinetorum, copyright Donald Hobern.


Platybunus species are moderate-sized long-legged harvestmen of the family Phalangiidae, the central body in larger individuals being about eight millimetres long (Martens 1978). Their most characteristic feature is a relatively large eye-mound, distinctly wider than long and occupying a large section of the anterior carapace. As with other European phalangiids, they eye-mound is ornamented with a row of denticles each side though the body lacks denticles over the remainder of the dorsum. The body is often comparatively slender, tapering towards the rear (particularly in males), and is marked on the dorsum by a darker median band. The pedipalps have a pair of well-developed setose apophyses on the inner distal ends of the patella and tibia, and a series of long spine-like tubercles on the underside of the femur. These tubercles presumably function in the capture of prey, forming a basket that can be closed around the harvestman's victims. External sexual dimorphism in Platybunus is fairly minimal though females are overall larger and fatter. The penis is notably long and slender with a relatively small glans, offset from the shaft by a more or less marked constriction.

Platybunus bucephalus, copyright Adrian Tync.


Martens (1978) recognises four species of Platybunus found in higher altitude regions of central Europe with the species P. bucephalus and P. pinetorum occupying much of the genus' range. Platybunus bucephalus may be distinguished from P. pinetorum by, among other features, its relatively shorter legs. Platybunus pallidus is endemic to the Carpathians, and the tiny P. alpinorelictus inhabits the Garda Mountains of northern Italy. Another species, P. anatolicus, was described from Turkey by Roewer (1956)*. In general, Platybunus species inhabit alpine and subalpine forests, being found among the herbaceous undergrowth, under bark or on rock faces. Where their ranges overlap, P. bucephalus is more accustomed to extending beyond the forest margins than P. pinetorum and may be found above the tree-line. In recent years, the range of P. pinetorum has extended northwards, being first recorded from the UK in 2010 and Sweden in 2015 (Fritzén et al. 2015). At least some populations of P. pinetorum are capable of reproducing parthenogenetically and this may have played a part in its spread.

*Platybunus mirus was described by Loman (1892) on the basis of two male specimens that supposedly came from Sumatra. Though the identity of this species has never been resolved (Loman's illustration of the penis is at least suggestive of a true Platybunus), the claimed locality seems almost certain to be an error of some kind.

The internal classification of the Phalangiidae remains in need of further investigation. Platybunus has been recognised by some authors as forming a subfamily Platybuninae with a cluster of other western Palaearctic genera bearing similar ventrally spined pedipalps (Zhang & Zhang 2012). However, other authors have not separated this group from the subfamily Phalangiinae. The platybunines may represent a phylogenetically coherent grouping, or their shared features may reflect adaptations to a similar life style. The genital morphology of Platybunus is recognisably distinct from that of other platybunines which may argue against any relationship (Martens 1978). On the other hand, platybunines might possibly be distinguished from phalangiines by the chemical composition of their repugnatorial gland secretions (Raspotnig et al. 2015). A formal analysis of the family's evolution would be a welcome advance.

REFERENCES

Fritzén, N. R., V. Rinne, M. Sunhede, A. Uddström, S. Van de Poel & P. De Smedt. 2015. Platybunus pinetorum (Arachnida, Opiliones) new to Sweden. Memoranda Soc. Fauna Flora Fennica 91: 37–40.

Loman, J. C. C. 1892. Opilioniden von Sumatra, Java und Flores. In: M. Weber (ed.) Zoologische Ergebnisse einer Reise in Niederländisch Ost-Indien vol. 3 pp. 1–26, pl. 1. E. J. Brill: Leiden.

Martens, J. 1978. Spinnentiere, Arachnida: Weberknechte, Opiliones. Gustav Fischer Verlag: Jena.

Raspotnig, G., M. Schaider, P. Föttinger, V. Leutgeb & C. Komposch. 2015. Benzoquinones from scent glands of phalangiid harvestmen (Arachnida, Opiliones, Eupnoi): a lesson from Rilaena triangularis. Chemoecology 25: 63–72.

Roewer, C. F. 1956. Über Phalangiinae (Phalangiidae, Opiliones Palpatores). (Weitere Weberknechte XIX). Senckenbergiana Biologica 37 (3–4): 247–318.

Zhang, C., & F. Zhang. 2012. On the subfamilial assignment of Platybunoides (Opiliones: Eupnoi: Phalangiidae), with the description of a new species from China. Zootaxa 3190: 47–55.

The Dermacentor Ticks

Pacific Coast tick Dermacentor occidentalis, copyright Jerry Kirkhart.


Among the ticks of most concern to humans are species of the genus Dermacentor. This genus of about forty known species is widely distributed in Africa, Eurasia and the Americas. Examples include the meadow tick D. reticulatus in Europe, and the wood tick D. variabilis and Rocky Mountain wood tick D. andersoni in North America. They are parasites of mammals, including both generalist and more host-specific species; records of Dermacentor individuals from reptiles and even carpenter bees (Goddard & Bircham 2010) presumably represent incidental and/or accidental associations. Species of Dermacentor are responsible for the spread of bacteria causing diseases such as Rocky Mountain spotted fever (which, despite sounding like a 1950s dance craze, is presumably not much fun), Q fever and tularemia. The ticks can also be more directly hazardous, as their bites inject a toxin that can cause tick paralysis.

Distinguishing features of Dermacentor species relative to other ticks include a rectangular base to the capitulum, relatively short, broad palps, well-developed eyes and the presence of festoons (impressed divisions of the posterior margin of the body) (Keirans 2009). Most are ornate—that is, marked on the dorsum with contrasting pale patterns—with the notable exception of the tropical horse tick D. nitens of the Americas (until recently, often treated as forming its own genus Anocentor). The function of such markings is unknown though suggestions include environmental protection, warning predators of distastefulness, or sexual signalling.

Meadow tick Dermacentor reticulatus, copyright Ferran Turmo Gort.


The majority of Dermacentor species have a three-host life cycle, dropping off the host between each of the life stages of larva, nymph and adult, and seeking out a new host after moulting. However, at least two New World species, the aforementioned D. nitens and the winter tick D. albipictus (a parasite of deer), are one-host ticks that remain on their original host between instars. In general, Dermacentor species are more resilient to dry climates than many other tick species. Individual species can differ in their climate tolerance, however. In North America, the geographical divide between D. variabilis in the east of the continent and D. andersoni in the west seems to be driven by the need for the latter of drier conditions (Yoder et al. 2007). Older instars also tend to be hardier than younger. Females of the ornate sheep tick D. marginatus, a European species, leave their host after gorging at the beginning of winter and then wait for more amoenable spring conditions before laying their delicate eggs (Dörr & Gothe 2001).

Higher relationships within the genus do not appear to have been extensively studied. A preliminary molecular phylogeny of hard ticks has suggested the possibility of a basal division between Afrotropical, Eurasian and New World lineages (Barker & Murrell 2004). Comparison with related tick genera raises the possibility of an Afrotropical origin for Dermacentor, though the genus has only a relictual presence in that continent now. However, with only a handful of species subjected to broad phylogenetic analysis to date, further testing is demanded. Does the continental divide hold true? Do the one-host species form a single clade within the genus? Inquiring minds wish to know.

REFERENCES

Barker, S. C., & A. Murrell. 2004. Systematics and evolution of ticks with a list of valid genus and species names. Parasitology 129: S15–S36.

Dörr, B., & R. Gothe. 2001. Cold-hardiness of Dermacentor marginatus (Acari: Ixodidae). Experimental and Applied Acarology 25: 151–169.

Goddard, J., & L. Bircham. 2010. Parasitism of the carpenter bee, Xylocopa virginica (L.) (Hymenoptera: Apidae), by larval Dermacentor variabilis (Say) (Acari: Ixodidae). Systematic and Applied Acarology 15: 195–196.

Keirans, J. E. 2009. Order Ixodida. In: Krantz, G. W., & D. E. Walter (eds) A Manual of Acarology 3rd ed. pp. 111–123. Texas Tech University Press.

Yoder, J. A., D. R. Buchan, N. F. Ferrari & J. L. Tank. 2007. Dehydration tolerance of the Rocky Mountain wood tick, Dermacentor andersoni Stiles (Acari: Ixodidae), matches preference for a dry environment. International Journal of Acarology 33 (2): 173–180.

Pied Harvestmen of the Antilles

Harvestmen of the Neotropical family Cosmetidae have been featured on this site a couple of times before. Each time, I've commented on the dire taxonomic state of this diverse family, with many genera being poorly or inaccurately defined. Thanks to extensive (and continuing) studies in recent years by Braxilian researchers and their associates, this situation has been progressively improving, but we still have a lot to learn.

Cynortoides sp., copyright Damion Laren Whyte.


Cynortoides is a genus currently holding ten species of cosmetid. Most of these are found on the islands of the Greater Antilles—Cuba, Jamaica and Hispaniola—though the genus has also been recorded from adjoining regions of Mexico and Venezuela (Kury 2003). As with other cosmetids, Cynortoides has historically been defined largely be features of the external spination, including a lack of spines on the legs, two pairs of spines in the rear part of the dorsal scutum, and no spines on the free abdominal segments (Mello-Leitão 1933). Also as with other cosmetid genera, Cynortoides species are colourfully patterned. The name of one species, C. v-album, refers to its characteristic bright white V marking on the back (though personally, I would describe the pattern as more of a Y).

Though this genus does not yet appear to have been revised in detail, some of its species were included in a recent broader study of cosmetid phylogeny by Medrano et al. (2021). They found strong support for an association between the Cuban C. cubanus and the Hispaniolan C. v-album, together with two other Cuban species previously included in the related genus Cynorta. These last two species were consequently transferred to Cynortoides though Medrano et al. did not comment on whether this affected the genus' established diagnosis. The authors speculated that further studies might prove Cynortoides to be a strictly Greater Antillean genus with mainland records being misplaced. Cynortoides would not be unique in this regard: the islands of the Caribbean are home to a number of lineages found nowhere else, reflecting a long history independent of the adjoining continents.

REFERENCES

Kury, A. B. 2003. Annotated catalogue of the Laniatores of the New World (Arachida, Opiliones). Revista Ibérica de Aracnología, special monographic volume 1: 1–337.

Medrano, M., A. B. Kury & A. C. Mendes. In press 2021. Morphology-based cladistics splinters the century-old dichotomy of the pied harvestmen (Arachnida: Gonyleptoidea: Cosmetidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society.

Mello-Leitão, C. F. de. 1933. Notas sobre os opiliões do Brasil. Descritos na obra postuma de Sörensen: "Descriptiones Laniatorum". Boletim do Museu Nacional 9 (1): 99–114.

The Diosaccinae: Worldwide Sediment Dwellers

The harpacticoid copepods have been featured on this site a reasonable number of times now. These tiny crustaceans are among the most numerous animals in the world, both in terms of numbers of individuals and (in certain habitats) numbers of species. And among the most widespread representatives of the harpacticoids are members of the subfamily Diosaccinae.

Diosaccus tenuicornis, from Sars (1906).


The Diosaccinae are currently recognised as members of the family Miraciidae; earlier sources will usually refer to a family Diosaccidae but the recognition of the pelagic Miraciinae as derived members of this group (Willen 2000) requires use of the older name. Distinctive features of the Miraciidae compared to other harpacticoids include the presence of a relatively large, mobile rostrum and a number of distinctive arrangements of setae, including the inner seta on the basal endopodal segment of the first peraeopod (trunk leg) arising distally (Nicholls 1941, Willen 2000). Miraciids are also unusual in that females carry paired egg-sacs laterally; most other harpacticoid families carry only a single median egg-sac. Miraciids are divided between three subfamilies of which the Diosaccinae are the most diverse. Diosaccines are most readily distinguished by their retention of a number of plesiomorphic features such as crawling legs and relatively short caudal rami (Nicholls 1941; this author divided the current diosaccines between two subfamilies, the Diosaccinae sensu stricto and Amphiascinae, based on the presence or absence, respectively, of a clear distinction in breadth between the metasome and urosome, or 'trunk' and 'abdomen', but this division does not appear to have been recognised at this level by any subsequent authors). The great majority of diosaccines are marine, free-living and benthic. A handful of species have been described as associates of lobsters, whether commensals or semi-parasites. A small radiation of species of the genus Schizopera is known from Lake Tanganyika, and Karanovic & Reddy (2004) described a species Neomiscegenus indicus from subterranean fresh water in India. Marine diosaccines are found at all depths from the intertidal zone to the deep abyss. I don't know for sure but, though they are sediment dwellers, I don't get the impression (I could be wrong) that they are strictly meiofaunal. As noted earlier, many do not have the vermiform body shape characteristic of interstitial copepods. Many species also are around the half-millimetre size range, which I think may be relatively large for meiofauna?

Four species of Schizopera collected from Korea, from Karanovic & Cho (2016). Left to right: S. yeonghaensis, S. daejinensis, S. gangneungensis, S. sindoensis.


The other two subfamilies of Miraciidae are the aforementioned Miraciinae and the Stenheliinae, which have the endopod of the first peraeopod adapted for swimming rather than grasping and longer caudal rami. Though potential synapomorphies of the Diosaccinae were identified by Willen (2000), they're a bit weaksauce. There is a distinct possibility that further studies may identify the diosaccines as paraphyletic to the other two subfamilies. In particular, some diosaccines say a very unusual form of nauplius larva with the Stenheliinae, in which the body is strongly foreshortened and crab-like (Dahms et al. 2005). These nauplii also move sideways in a crab-like fashion and do not swim in the water column like the nauplii of other species. Practical considerations have lead most investigators of crustacean phylogeny to emphasis adult over larval morphology but the larval morphology of diosaccines raises some interesting questions.

REFERENCES

Karanovic, T., & Y. R. Reddy. 2004. A new genus and species of the family Diosaccidae (Copepoda: Harpacticoida) from the groundwaters of India. Journal of Crustacean Biology 24 (2): 246–260.

Nicholls, A. G. 1941. A revision of the families Diosaccidae Sars, 1906 and Laophontidae T. Scott, 1905 (Copepoda, Harpacticoida). Records of the South Australian Museum 7 (1): 65–110.

Willen, E. 2000. Phylogeny of the Thalestridimorpha Lang, 1944 (Crustacea, Copepoda). Cuvillier Verlag: Göttingen.

Where There's a Whip, There's a Scorpion

As our understanding of the higher relationships between organisms has improved vastly in recent decades, the arachnids have remained an intransigent bunch. Proposed connections between the various historically recognised orders have remained poorly supported and, even now, there are few that do not continue to jump about with gleeful abandon with each successive analysis. One small bastion of reliable support, however, has been been the tropical clade known as the Pedipalpi.

Whip spider Phrynus exsul, copyright Michel Candel.


Members of the Pedipalpi have traditionally been divided between two or three distinct orders: the whip spiders or tailless whip scorpions of the Amblypygi, the whip scorpions of the Uropygi, and the micro-whip scorpions of the Schizomida (alternative classifications have combined the last two in a single order Uropygi or Thelyphonida). All have a broad distribution in tropical and subtropical regions of the world. Representatives of the Pedipalpi are active hunters, united by the possession of large, raptorial pedipalps used in the capture of prey. All three groups also have the first pair of legs modified to become elongate and whip-like (Shultz 2007). These legs are not used in walking but are held forwards to function like antennae. The Uropygi and Schizomida are further united by the possession of a terminal appendage on the body, the 'whip' of a 'whip scorpion'. There is also a general agreement in recent years that the Pedipalpi are in turn the sister lineage to the spiders. Some researchers have argued for a closer relationship of the Amblypygi to the spiders rather than the whip scorpions, reflecting their (among other things) similar habitus, but this remains a minority view.

Syntype (one of the original described specimens) of Paracaron caecus, from Garwood et al. (2017). Scale bar = 5 mm.


Globally, the Pedipalpi are not a hugely diverse lineage, with a bit more than 600 known species overall. About 190 species belong to the Amblypygi, the whip spiders. As noted above, these arachnids are quite spider-like in appearance owing the lack of a terminal flagellum and the presence of a well-defined waist between cephalothorax and abdomen, but they lack the poison fangs and spinnerets of a spider. Most whip spiders have a distinctly flattened habitus, allowing them to enter narrow spaces under bark or between rocks. They also have the most remarkably elongate first legs among the Pedipalpi. Living whip spiders can be divided between two lineages, referred to as the Paleoamblypygi and Euamblypygi (Garwood et al. 2017). The Paleoamblypygi are represented in the modern fauna by only a single known (but little known) species, Paracharon caecus, a blind inhabitant of termite nests in western Africa. Paracharon caecus differs from other living whip spiders in retaining a vertical plane of motion of the pedipalps, like those of whip scorpions. In the Euamblypygi, the orientation of the pedipalps has shifted so they move in a horizontal plane only. In some whip spiders, the pedipalps have become remarkably long, perfect for clasping prey in a fatal hug.

Giant whip scorpion Mastigoproctus giganteus, copyright David Bygott.


The whip scorpions of the Uropygi are the least diverse of the three lineages of Pedipalpi, with about 110 known species. They are large, robust arachnids characterised by their long, filamentous terminal flagellum. Glands at the base of the flagellum produce noxious chemicals used in defense, giving some species the alternative name of 'vinegaroons'. The Schizomida are the most diverse subgroup of the Pedipalpi, including about half the known species. Some species have become widespread as a result of human transportation in association with greenhouses whereas others have even been collected among ice and snow in California (Harvey 2003). Schizomids are smaller and softer-bodied than the Uropygi and the terminal flagellum is shorter (as in Uropygi, the flagellum is flanked by repugnatorial glands). In male schizomids, the flagellum is often distinct in shape from that of the females, becoming bulbous. Schizomids also differ from most other arachnids in the presence of visible dorsal divisions between the segments of the cephalothorax.

Female schizomid Hubbardia briggsi, copyright Marshal Hedin.


In all subgroups of the Pedipalpi, reproduction involves mating displays in which the male deposits a spermatophore on the ground and then guides the female over it (Harvey 2003). The exact manner in which the male guides the female differs between subgroups. In schizomids, the female grasps onto the male's flagellum and he leads her. In Uropygi, the male grasps the female's fore legs with his pedipalps before turning to face the same direction as her with himself in front, and pulls her over the spermatophore. He then turns, embraces her abdomen with his pedipalps, and manually inserts the spermatophore into her genital operculum. Amblypygi have perhaps the most graceful option of the three: the male stands facing the female then gently beckons her forward, allowing her to approach and collect the spermatophore of her own volition.

REFERENCES

Garwood, R. J., J. A. Dunlop, B. J. Knecht & T. A. Hegna. 2017. The phylogeny of fossil whip spiders. BMC Evolutionary Biology 17: 105.

Harvey, M. S. 2003. Catalogue of the Smaller Arachnid Orders of the World: Amblypygi, Uropygi, Schizomida, Palpigradi, Ricinulei and Solifugae. CSIRO Publishing.

Shultz, J. W. 2007. A phylogenetic analysis of the arachnid orders based on morphological characters. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 150 (2): 221–265.

Sea Spiders

With arthropods being such a massively diverse sector of the global biota (and even that feels like an understatement; describing arthropods as 'very diverse' seems a bit like describing the Andromeda Galaxy as 'very far away'), it is only to be expected that it contains some very weird corners. And definitely among the weirder of those corners are the Pycnogonida, commonly known as the 'sea spiders'.

Anoplodactylus evansi, copyright Mick Harris & Claudia Arango.


Pycnogonids are a group of marine arthropods found around the world (not actual spiders, of course, though honest-to-goodness marine spiders are a thing that does exist). Their relationships to other arthropods have long been in dispute but the majority view is that they are distant relatives of the terrestrial arachnids. Pycnogonids are not uncommon in both coastal and deep-sea habitats but tend to go unnoticed: they feed on rock-encrusting colonial animals such as hydrozoans and are often coloured to disguise themselves against their prey. If one ever does see a sea spider, the first thing to stand out about them is how they are made of legs. The central body is often remarkably small compared to its limbs, to the extent that the dubbing of pycnogonids as 'no-bodies' by an early 20th Century author has become something of a cliché. Certain major organs, such as the gonads and parts of the digestive system, have even been diverted into the legs to make up for the lack of space in the body. Most pycnogonids possess four pairs of walking legs though there are species with more. At the front of the body on the underside of the head is a large proboscis that is used for sucking the juices out of prey, flanked by pairs of pincer-bearing chelifores and/or palps used for tearing it open. Near the first pair of walking legs there is often a pair of slender leg-like appendages known as the ovigers, used for carrying bundles of eggs until they hatch. The greater part of the body behind the head is taken up by the leg-bearing thorax; the legless abdomen is reduced to the merest nub like the docked tail of a dog.

Close-up on preserved male Anoplodactylus lentus, from Florida Museum of Natural History.


One of the largest recognised genera of pycnogonids is Anoplodactylus, with over 130 species worldwide and many continuing to be described (Lucena et al. 2015). This genus can be distinguished by the possession of chelifores with functional chelae (pincers) but palps are absent or reduced to buds. Both the chelifores and the proboscis are relatively short (Child 1998). Ovigers are five- or six-segmented and present in males only (male care of eggs is the standard pattern among pycnogonids). Species vary from 0.6 to 6 millimetres in body length. The majority of species of Anoplodactylus are found in shallow waters in temperate and tropical regions with a smaller number of species found in polar and deep waters. Alvarez & Ojeda (2018) record finding a single specimen of the species A. batangensis among vegetation on the surface of an anchialine pool in the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico. Though the surface of these pools is more or less fresh water, deeper sections are saline owing to subterranean connections to the sea. The collection of a pycnogonid near the surface of this pool suggests an ability to adjust to very low salinity though one questions whether it would be able to survive indefinitely.

Larvae of Anoplodactylus are very small compared to those of other pycnogonids and have what has been termed an 'encysting' development (Burris 2011). As bizarre as the appearance of adult pycnogonids is, their larvae are arguably even weirder, being essentially nothing more than a head bearing chelifores, proboscis, and two pairs of undifferentiated appendages. The remaining segments of the body are added over the course of development. In Anoplodactylus, the larvae develop as parasites, forming a cyst in the gastrocoel (the stomach cavity) of cnidarians (having presumably been placed there somehow by their fathers, though I haven't found if we know how). They become free-living upon reaching the first juvenile stage, emerging from their host to pursue their predatory lives.

REFERENCES

Alvarez, F., & M. Ojeda. 2018. First record of a sea spider (Pycnogonida) from an anchialine habitat. Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research 46 (1): 219–224.

Burris, Z. P. 2011. Larval morphologies and potential developmental modes of eight sea spider species (Arthropoda: Pycnogonida) from the southern Oregon coast. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 91 (4): 845–855.

Child, C. A. 1998. The Marine Fauna of New Zealand: Pycnogonida (Sea Spiders). National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA).

Lucena, R. A., J. F. de Araújo & M. L. Christoffersen. 2015. A new species of Anoplodactylus (Pycnogonida: Phoxichilidiidae) from Brazil, with a case of gynandromorphism in Anoplodactylus eroticus Stock, 1968. Zootaxa 4000 (4): 428–444.

Pseudogagrella: A Harvestman Torn

The Sclerosomatidae are one of the most diverse of the currently recognised harvestmen families, and one of the most problematic when it comes to classification. In various earlier posts, I have noted the challenges that bedevil sclerosomatid systematics, many reflecting a historical focus on superficial external features of questionable evolutionary significance. Perhaps no taxon more neatly exemplifies the problems with higher sclerosomatid classification than the eastern Asian genus Pseudogagrella.

Pseudogagrella sakishimensis, copyright Tomoya Suzuki.


Historically, the greater number of sclerosomatids have been divided between two major subfamilies, the Leiobuninae and Gagrellinae. The Leiobuninae have mostly been recognised as living in the northern temperate regions whereas the Gagrellinae were mostly tropical. The division between the two subfamilies has long been regarded as more than a little fuzzy, and has usually hinged on a single feature: the presence (Gagrellinae) or absence (Leiobuninae) of rings of flexible integument (noduli) in the femora of the legs. Pseudogagrella is a genus of sclerosomatid harvestmen recognised from Japan, Taiwan, China and Sumatra (Chen & Shih 2017). Members of this genus lack leg noduli so have historically been included in the Leiobuninae. The problem is that their overall appearance, with a tendency to bold coloration, a tall median spine rising from the hardened scute covering most of the abdomen, and legs that are not merely long but ludicrously so (even by harvestman standards), is extremely similar to species of Gagrellinae. So much so, in fact, that some species currently placed in Pseudogagrella were long included in the archetypical gagrelline genus, Gagrella (Suzuki 1977).

With the distinction between the two subfamilies being so vague, I don't think it really came as that much surprise to anyone when molecular phylogenetics underlined the need for a thorough re-working of sclerosomatid systematics. Though the analysis conducted by Hedin et al. (2012) did not support the prior distinction between 'leiobunines' and 'gagrellines', it did suggest the existence of distinct lineages occupying distinct geographical regions. One species of Pseudogagrella included in the analysis (the southern Japanese P. amamiana) was placed in a cluster of eastern Asian species including other Asian 'gagrellines', but also the 'leiobunine' 'Leiobunum' japonicum. So it seems likely that, should subfamilies of Sclerosomatidae continue to be recognised, Pseudogagrella will indeed be a member of Gagrellinae, but Gagrellinae itself shall not quite be what people think of it as being.

Pseudogagrella dorsomaculata, copyright Tyus Ma.


There is also, of course, the question of whether Pseudogagrella itself is a coherent unit. Hedin et al. (2012) included only the one Pseudogagrella species in their analysis and the need for an extensive revision of the Asian sclerosomatid genera still remains. A study of Chinese species assigned to the genus Melanopa (Zhang & Zhang 2013), which is primarily distinguished from Gagrella by having relatively shorter legs, suggested the possibility of this 'genus' being divided between groups of Palaearctic and Indo-Malayan species, and I've wondered if this division might carry further (unfortunately, I'm not aware of any Indo-Malayan 'gagrellines' being included in molecular phylogenies; I think all the Asian species covered by Hedin et al. were Palaearctic). The majority of Pseudogagrella species, found in Japan and Taiwan, can be comfortably compared to other sclerosomatids from that region, but the Sumatran P. multimaculata, and possibly the southern Chinese species, might turn out to be closer to their own geographical peers. As always, a great deal of research remains to be done.

REFERENCES

Chen, S.-L., & H.-T. Shih. 2017. Descriptions of three new species of the harvestmen genus Pseudogagrella (Opiliones: Sclerosomatidae: Gagrellinae) from Taiwan, supported by morphological and molecular evidence. Zootaxa 4268 (1): 34–52.

Hedin, M., N. Tsurusaki, R. Macías-Ordóñez & J. W. Shultz. 2012. Molecular systematics of sclerosomatid harvestmen (Opiliones, Phalangioidea, Sclerosomatidae): geography is better than taxonomy in predicting phylogeny. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 62 (1): 224–236.

Suzuki, S. 1977. Opiliones from Taiwan (Arachnida). Journal of Science of the Hiroshima University, Series B, Division 1 (Zoology) 27 (1): 121–157.

Zhang, C., & F. Zhang. 2013. Notes on some species of the genus Melanopa (Opiliones: Sclerosomatidae: Gagrellinae) from China, with description of a new species. Journal of Arachnology 41: 306–318.

The Concilitergans: Sitting Next to Trilobites

The last few decades have seen a vast increase in our understanding of life during the early Cambrian. Long one of the most famous groups of invertebrates of the Palaeozoic, the trilobites are now known to have shared their early environment with a number of related lineages that bore some resemblance in overall appearance but lacked their mineralisation of the exoskeleton. One such group was labelled by Hou & Bergström (1997) as the Conciliterga.

Reconstruction of the concilitergan Kuamaia lata from Hou & Bergström (1997). Note that the reconstructed appearance of the eyes is probably erroneous, as explained below.


Concilitergans are a group of flattened marine arthropods known from the early and middle Cambrian of a number of parts of the world, including North America, China and Australia. Most species were ovoid in shape (like a typical trilobite), tapering somewhat towards the rear and often ending in a point. An Australian species, Australimicola spriggi, was more elongate in form and ended in a pair of terminal spines. Some were quite sizable; one species, Tegopelte gigas, reached nearly a foot in length and was one of the largest known animals of its time. Concilitergans also resembled trilobites in possessing a more or less semi-circular head shield followed by a series of regular segments and often a final larger pygidial segment. Towards the front of the body, the segment boundaries were anteriorly reflexed (Paterson et al. 2012). In a number of species, the body segmentation was more prominent medially than laterally with the tergites overlapping slightly down the mid-line but not along the edges. A pair of antennae arose from the underside of the head near the front. In most species, with the exception of Australimicola, a pair of prominent teardrop-shaped bulges was also present dorsally near the front of the head. These bulges were interpreted as a pair of dorsal eyes by Hou & Bergström (1997) but re-interpreted by Edgecombe & Ramsköld (1999) as raised areas of the exoskeleton that provided accomodation for the actual eyes located on the underside of the head.

Reconstruction of Tegopelte gigas, copyright Marianne Collins.


Phylogenetic analyses have confirmed a close relationship between concilitergans and trilobites (Edgecombe & Ramsköld 1999) and the two groups probably resembled each other in life-style. With their ovoid shape, flattened body and down-cast eyes, concilitergans were also not dissimilar in overall conformation to modern cockroaches and a comparison is tempting. Study of trackways attributed to Tegopelte, owing to their size and structure, indicated that it mostly walked with a slow, low gait but was also capable of adopting a higher, faster gait for quickly skimming across the sediment surface (Minter et al. 2012). It should be noted that while news reports on the latter study (like this one) repeatedly refer to Tegopelte as a predator, the original paper consistently describes it as a "predator or scavenger". One can imagine concilitergans crawling along the sea-bed, picking up fragments of organic matter and scavenging on the remains of the less fortunate. Eventually, though, their lack of armament compared to their longer-surviving allies might have been their downfall as they were less prepared to deal with the diversification of active predators as the Cambrian progressed.

REFERENCES

Edgecombe, G. D., & L. Ramsköld. 1999. Relationships of Cambrian Arachnata and the systematic position of Trilobita. Journal of Paleontology 73 (2): 263–287.

Hou X. & J. Bergström. 1997. Arthropods of the Lower Cambrian Chengjiang fauna, southwest China. Fossils and Strata 45: 1–116.

Minter, N. J., M. G. Mángano & J.-B. Caron. 2012. Skimming the surface with Burgess Shale arthropod locomotion. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B—Biological Sciences 279: 1613–1620.

Paterson, J. R., D. C. García-Bellido & G. D. Edgecombe. 2012. New artiopodan arthropods from the Early Cambrian Emu Bay Shale Konservat-Lagerstätte of South Australia. Journal of Paleontology 86 (2): 340–357.

The Splanchnotrophidae: Comfy inside a Sea Slug

In previous posts, I've referred to the great significance of the minute crustaceans known as copepods to aquatic ecosystems. At the time, I was referring to free-living members of this group but the copepods also include a wide range of parasitic forms. Some of these parasitic copepods have evolved into forms so derived and bizarre that they are barely recognisable as crustaceans. One example of this is the family Splanchnotrophidae.

Sea slug Janolus fuscus with protruding egg sacs of a splanchnotrophid copepod, probably Ismaila belciki, copyright Michael D. Miller.


Splanchnotrophids are a group of copepods endoparasitic on two orders of shell-less marine gastropods (sea slugs), the Nudibranchia and Sacoglossa. They are characterised by reduced mouthparts and appendages though they retain a distinct pair of claw-like antennae. These antennae seem to be used to hold the copepod in place in their preferred location within the body cavity of their host. Though the exact means of feeding by splanchnotrophids is not certain, their rudimentary mouthparts, combined with a rarity of observations of actual tissue damage in parasitised hosts, indicate that they probably suck nutriment from their host's haemolymph. Females and males live in association within the host, the minute (and slightly more recognisably copepod-y) males holding close to their comparatively gigantic mates. As well as their size, female splanchnotrophids differ from males in the possession of elongate, tubular dorsal outgrowths of the thorax. These are most commonly presumed to function to provide more space for the female's enlarged ovaries, though some have suggested additional functions such as maintaining position within the host, respiration or absorbing nutrients (Anton & Schrödl 2013). The female's tubular egg-sacs extend through an opening in the host's body wall to release eggs into the water column. Usually, these egg-sacs will emerge close to some outgrowth of the host's own body, such as gills or papillae, and may be coiled if relatively long; these measures presumably help protect the egg-sacs from external damage. How the released larvae find and colonise new hosts remains unknown but it is possible the antennules (the smaller second pair of antennae possessed by most crustaceans) are used to locate hosts chemically, with their reduced condition in adults the result of a halt to development once their purpose has been fulfilled.

Female (left) and male Ismaila aliena dissected out from host, from Anton & Schrödl (2013).


Relatively few splanchnotrophids have been recognised to date, maybe about a dozen species divided between five genera. A few other species that had earlier been included in the family on little more grounds than that they were endoparasites of gastropods were excluded by Huys (2001)*. A sixth genus and species Chondrocarpus reticulosus is of uncertain relationships. If correctly associated with the splanchnotrophids, it is of interest in parasitising a different group of sea slugs (the pleurobranchids) and in its massive size (growing to twelve millimetres vs only a few millimetres for females of the other genera), but the only available description is inadequate for its proper characterisation. In some localities, splanchnotrophids have proven to be surprisingly abundant. A once-off survey of potential host species in Oregon found no less than 62% of individuals of one species to be infected (25 other potential host species were completely free of parasites), whereas a longer-term survey off the coast of Chile found an overall infection rate of 13% with some particular host species approaching 100% infection (Schrödl 2002). Host specificity seems to vary within the family: a study by Anton et al. (2018) found that species of the genus Ismaila tended to restrict themselves to a single host species, whereas species of Splanchnotrophus are more catholic and undiscriminating. Nevertheless, a lack of correlation between relationships of splanchnotrophid species and those of their host species suggests that, even in the more discriminating Ismaila, host changes may not have been uncommon.

*As a concise indication of just how sloppy some of the earlier work on 'splanchnotrophids' had been, one misattributed species was re-identified by Huys (2001) as having been based on the detached head of a pelagic amphipod.

The broader relationships of splanchnotrophids within copepods also remain poorly understood. A phylogenetic study by Anton & Schrödl (2013) suggested that Splanchnotrophidae may form a clade with another genus of copepods endoparasitic in gastropods, Briarella, with this clade being in turn derived from ectoparasitic ancestors. However, by the authors' own admission, this study was heavily biased in both taxon and character coverage to the Splanchnotrophidae, and may have been affected by insufficient scrutiny of non-splanchnotrophid taxa. Though derivation of the endoparasitic splanchnotrophids from ectoparasitic ancestors has a definite intuitive appeal, further study is required before we can feel confident about it.

REFERENCES

Anton, R. F., D. Schories, N. G. Wilson, M. Wolf, M. Abad & M. Schrödl. 2018. Host specificity versus plasticity: testing the morphology-based taxonomy of the endoparasitic copepod family Splanchnotrophidae with COI barcoding. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 98 (2): 231–243.

Anton, R. F., & M. Schrödl. 2013. The gastropod-crustacean connection: towards the phylogeny and evolution of the parasitic copepod family Splanchnotrophidae. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 167: 501–530.

Huys, R. 2001. Splanchnotropid systematics: a case of polyphyly and taxonomic myopia. Journal of Crustacean Biology 21 (1): 106–156.

Schrödl, M. 2002. Heavy infestation by endoparasitic copepod crustaceans (Poecilostomatoida: Splanchnotrophidae) in Chilean opisthobranch gastropods, with aspects of splanchnotrophid evolution. Organisms, Diversity & Evolution 2: 19–26.

The Origin of Hexapods

Insects have been described as the most evolutionarily successful group of animals in the modern world, and with good reason. Something like two-thirds of the currently known animal species are insects, and they are near-ubiquitous in the terrestrial and freshwater environments (for whatever reasons, they've never made that much of a go of it marine-wise). Nevertheless, the questions of how and when insects first came to be remains very much an open one.

The long-necked fungus beetle Diatelium wallacei, one of the countless weird oddballs in the insect world. Copyright Artour Anker.


Insects are usually recognised as including three main subgroups: the winged insects, silverfish and bristletails. They are readily united into a group known as the hexapods with a few less speciose assemblages: the springtails, the proturans and the diplurans. All living hexapods have the body divided into a head, thorax and abdomen, with three pairs of walking legs on the thorax and none on the abdomen. Though monophyly of the hexapods has been questioned in the past (which is why the springtails and the like are usually excluded from our concept of 'insect' these days despite having been included previously), the majority view is now firmly in favour of regarding them as a single, coherent lineage. How hexapods are related to other arthropods has been more vigorously debated. Earlier authors commonly associated them with the myriapods, the lineage including centipedes and millipedes. In more recent years, an increasing number of studies have instead associated insects with crustaceans. This realignment has primarily been pushed by molecular studies but there are also a number of interesting morphological features such as eye and brain structure that are more crustacean- than myriapod-like in insects. Indeed, it seems not unlikely that insects are not merely related to but are nested within crustaceans: for instance, a few recent studies have supported a relationship between hexapods and a rare group of crustaceans known as remipedes (Schwentner et al. 2017). The features previously seen as shared between insects and myriapods, such as tracheae and uniramous (unbranched) limbs, are then held to probably be convergent adaptations to a terrestrial lifestyle.

Whatever its relationships, it seems most likely that the immediate ancestor of the living hexapods was indeed terrestrial. Of the six basal hexapod lineages referred to above, five (all except winged insects) are almost exclusively terrestrial and were probably ancestrally so. The winged insects include a number of basal subgroups (such as mayflies and dragonflies) that are aquatic for at least the early part of their life cycle, but a terrestrial origin for winged insects as a whole remains credible.

Head of Rhyniella praecursor, from Dunlop & Garwood (2017).


From the perspective of the fossil record, the evidence related to hexapod origins is incredibly slight. The earliest fossil species that have been directly proposed as hexapod relatives are known from the Early Devonian and less than half a dozen such species have been mooted as such in recent years. The only named Devonian fossil whose status as a hexapod seems unimpeachable is Rhyniella praecursor, a springtail from the Rhynie chert of Scotland (Dunlop & Garwood 2017). The same deposit provided Rhyniognatha hirsti, a fragmentary fossil comprising a pair of mandibles and surrounding parts of the head capsule. Rhyniognatha has long been thought to be an insect, possibly even an early member of the winged insect lineage, but Haug & Haug (2017) recently argued that it could just as easily be the head of a centipede (a group already known from other fossils in the Rhynie chert).

Rhyniognatha hirsti, from the University of Aberdeen. Scale bar = 200 µm; m = mandible.


The Windyfield chert, a deposit of similar age and location to the Rhynie chert, has provided Leverhulmia mariae, originally described as a myriapod but reinterpreted as a hexapod relative by Fayers & Trewin (2005). Leverhulmia is a difficult beast to know what and how much to make of it. The original specimen is, speaking charitably, a bit of a mess: a flattened smear looking a bit like a sausage burst open after cooking for too long on the pan. The front and back ends of the animal both appear to be missing and the only features really distinguishable are a series of small jointed legs. Other specimens associated with this species by Fayers & Trewin (2005) are simply more legs detached from their original body. These legs, though, do preserve a reasonable amount of detail, including the presence of paired lateral claws at the ends of the tarsi like those of most insects (Leverhulmia also possesses a smaller median claw between the lateral claws, a feature not found in winged insects but present in silverfish and bristletails). In contrast, the legs of myriapods (as well as those of springtails and proturans) end in a single terminal claw.

Holotype specimen of Leverhulmia mariae, from Dunlop & Garwood (2017); the size of the scale bar was not specified but the entire specimen is about 12 mm long.


The overall appearance of Leverhulmia's legs might therefore be seen a suggestive of a relationship specifically to insects and not just to hexapods in general, but their number provides something of a barrier to accepting Leverhulmia as a bona fide insect. The train-wreck nature of Leverhulmia's preservation means we can't state confidently how many legs it had but there were at least five pairs: a couple more than the hexapods' standard-issue three. A number of structures on the abdomens of some living hexapods are potentially derived from modified legs, such as the springing furca of springtails and the ventral styli in hexapods other than springtails and winged insects, so some parallelism in appendage reduction is not out of the question. Nevertheless, unjointed styli are one thing; fully-jointed, functional walking legs are another. Supposed early members of the bristletail and silverfish lineages with jointed abdominal legs have been described from the Carboniferous by Kukalová-Peck (1987) but (as I've noted before) many of the more outlandish reconstructions of early insects by Kukalová-Peck have failed to stand up to subsequent scrutiny.

Similar interpretative difficulties surround Strudiella devonica, described as an early relative of the winged insects from the Late Devonian of Belgium. Though I was not unfavourable to this specimen when it was first described, Hörnschemeyer et al. (2013) would later argue against recognising it as an insect. The latter authors professed to be simply unable to discern many of the features cited by its original describers as evidence of insect affinity, and saw Strudiella as closer to a Rorschach blot than a dragonfly. Strudiella's status was defended by its original authors (Garrouste et al. 2013) but a number of subsequent authors seem to have taken Hörnschemeyer et al.'s caution to heart.

Close-up of the head of Strudiella devonica from Hörnschemeyer et al. (2013); the asterisk marks the base of a structure originally interpreted as an antenna.


The final candidate for stem-hexapod status worthy of consideration here is Wingertshellicus backesi from the Lower Devonian Hunsrück Slate of Germany. This marine fossil was interpreted as a stem-hexapod under the name Devonohexapodus bocksbergensis, with a thorax bearing three pairs of legs and an elongate abdomen with uniramous appendages. However, it was reinterpreted by Kühl & Rust (2009) who synonymised Devonohexapodus with the previously described Wingertshellicus, regarded the previously described 'thoracic legs' as appendages of the head, and did not accept the presence of differentiated thorax and abdomen. The appendages of the trunk (previously seen as the abdomen) were biramous rather than uniramous with a small endopod and a large flap-like exopod adapted for swimming, and the end of the body bore a pair of fluke-like appendages (comparable to the tail of a crayfish). Wingertshellicus thus lacked any resemblance to a hexapod, and Kühl & Rust doubted that it even belonged to the crown group of arthropods.

Laterally preserved specimen of Wingertshellicus backesi, from Kühl & Rust (2009); scale bar = 10 mm.


An attempt to estimate the age of divergence of hexapods from other arthropods using a molecular clock analysis by Schwentner et al. (2017) suggested that hexapods and remipedes went their separate ways in the late Cambrian or early Ordovician. This is up to 100 million years earlier than the fossils described above but we should be careful how much to read into this discrepancy. If most of the features associated with hexapods are related to adoption of a terrestrial lifestyle, then it might be difficult to recognise any early marine relatives if found. Conversely, while it is uncertain how much if any terrestrial vegetation was present prior to the Devonian, the only potential cover would have been low lichens, non-vascular plants or micro-algae. If stem-hexapods emerged onto land during this time, the environment would not be conducive to their preservation in the fossil record. Finally, not only are hexapods other than winged insects not found in the fossil record before the Devonian, they are barely found after it: after Rhyniella, none are known until the appearance of amber-producing trees during the Cretaceous. So if we can't find any sign of them for some 300 milion years that we know that they are around, then we obviously can't say too much about not finding them over the previous hundred million years. The stem-hexapods may have been around in this time but they remain in hiding.

REFERENCES

Dunlop, J. A., & R. J. Garwood. 2017. Terrestrial invertebrates in the Rhynie chert ecosystem. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B—Biological Sciences 373: 20160493.

Fayers, S. R., & N. H. Trewin. 2005. A hexapod from the Early Devonian Windyfield Chert, Rhynie, Scotland. Palaeontology 48 (5): 1117-1130.

Garrouste, R., G. Clément, P. Nel, M. S. Engel, P. Grandcolas, C. D'Haese, L. Lagebro, J. Denayer, P. Gueriau, P. Lafaite, S. Olive, C. Prestianni & A. Nel. 2013. Is Strudiella a Devonian insect? Garrouste et al. reply. Nature 494: E4–E5.

Haug, C., & J. T. Haug. 2017. The presumed oldest flying insect: more likely a myriapod? PeerJ 5: e3402.

Hörnschemeyer, T., J. T. Haug, O. Bethoux, R. G. Beutel, S. Charbonnier, T. A. Hegna, M. Koch, J. Rust, S. Wedmann, S. Bradler & R. Willmann. 2013. Is Strudiella a Devonian insect? Nature 494: E3–E4.

Kühl, G., & J. Rust. 2009. Devonohexapodus bocksbergensis is a synonym of Wingertshellicus backesi (Euarthropoda)—no evidence for marine hexapods living in the Devonian Hunsrück Sea. Organisms, Diversity & Evolution 9: 215–231.

Schwentner, M., D. J. Combosch, J. P. Nelson & G. Giribet. 2017. A phylogenomic solution to the origin of insects by resolving crustacean-hexapod relationships. Current Biology 27: 1818–1824.

Leptocaris: Living on the Edge

Some of the most remarkable faunal diversity in the marine environment is to be found in the interstitial spaces between grains of sand. Grazers, predators and scavengers can be found creating entire food webs at scales of less than one millimetre. The minute crustaceans known as copepods are among the more abundant inhabitants of the interstitial, and today's subject, Leptocaris, is among those interstitial copepods.

Dorsal habitus of female (left) and male Leptocaris ryukyuensis, from Song et al. (2012).


Leptocaris contains more than twenty-five species of extremely slender, cylindrical harpacticoid copepods growing to a bit over half a millimetre in length. Characteristic features of the genus include having the maxillipeds (one of the pairs of appendages making up the mouthparts) reduced or lost, and the proximal part of the endopod of the first swimming leg bearing a special anteriorly directed seta with a terminal comb (Song et al. 2012). Representatives of this genus have been collected from localities around the world though mostly in the Northern Hemisphere. Nevertheless, one can't help wondering how much of the genus' apparent rarity in the Southern Hemisphere is an artefact of low collection effort. This possibility should also be kept in mind when considering differences in the ranges of individual species: whereas many have only been collected from single localities (Song et al. 2012), the species L. trisetosus has been found from Finland to the Bahamas to South Africa, as well as in Korea with the last population being treated as a distinct subspecies (Lee & Chang 2008).

The majority of collections of Leptocaris have been from among sand but the genus has also been found in other microhabitats. In general, they are found in sediments with a high organic content. They are found in euryhaline and eurythermal habitats: that is, locations subject to wide variations in salinity and temperature. These may include beaches and brackish pools. They have been found among decomposing leaves in mangrove swamps (offhand, I haven't found if the diet of Leptocaris has been firmly established but I suspect they are probably detritivores). One species, L. kunzi, was described from an estuarine lake in Louisiana; another, L. stromatolicolus, is known from among stromatolites in Mexico. Two species, L. brevicornis and L. sibiricus, have even been found in continental fresh waters in Europe as well as in coastal brackish waters (Song et al. 2012). Overall, Leptocaris species seem to be most abundant in marginal habitats that may be too harsh and unstable for other copepods, making them fronteir harpacticoids.

REFERENCES

Lee, J. M., & C. Y. Chang. 2008. Copepods of the genus Leptocaris (Harpacticoida: Darcythompsoniidae) from salt marshes in South Korea. Korean Journal of Systematic Zoology 24 (1): 89–98.

Song, S. J., H.-U. Dahms & J. S. Khim. 2012. A review of Leptocaris including a description of L. ryukyuensis sp. nov. (Copepoda: Harpacticoida: Darcythompsoniidae). Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 92 (5): 1073–1081.

Ferreting up a Bird's Nose

Mites, as I may have commented before, seem to have an almost fractal level of diversity: the closer you look, the more there is of it. This is nowhere more apparent than when it comes to parasitic mites which infest almost any host in any way that you can imagine. For the subject of this post, I drew one such mite: the honeyeater nasal mite Ptilonyssus myzanthae.

Venter (left) and dorsum of female Ptilonyssus myzanthae, from Domrow (1964). The scale bar equals 500 µm.


Bird nasal mites of the family Rhinonyssidae are, as their name indicates, inhabitants of the nasal passages of birds. General adaptations of the family for their parasitic lifestyle include tendencies towards reduction of the body sclerotisation and reduction in the length and number of setae. They use the claws on their front legs to tear openings in the host's mucous membranes and then feed on its blood. Transmission of nasal mites seems to happen during bill-to-bill contact such as when parents are feeding their young or during mating activities, or indirectly through water or on the surface of perches or the like. Rhinonyssid nasal mites are not known to transmit any actual diseases between hosts but they can cause the formation of lesions or inflammation or the like. All in all, probably not very pleasant for the bird (see here for some more details).

Whole-body illustration of a different rhinonyssid species, from Greg Spicer.


Nevertheless, infection rates in bird populations can be very high and most (if not all) bird species will be host to some nasal mite species. Most species of nasal mite are very host specific, known on only one or a few bird species (it must be noted, though, that the question of just how many researchers choose to look up a bird's schnozz in search of mites may not be irrelevant here). Ptilonyssus myzanthae was described by Domrow (1964) from two species of honeyeater in Queensland, Australia: the noisy miner Manorina melanocephala and the little wattlebird Anthochaera chrysoptera. Distinctive features of this species compared to others in the genus include a subhexagonal anterior dorsal shield on the body, a narrow genital shield, and a divided pygidial shield (the small pair of shields near the rear of the dorsum). Both of the known hosts are widespread and common in eastern Australia and it is likely that this mite is similarly ubiquitous. Studies of honeyeater phylogeny tend to place the genera Manorina and Anthochaera as close relatives, so it is possible that P. myzanthae has been infesting them since before their lineages diverged. It would be worth looking for the species in other related honeyeaters to see if we find any further clues.

REFERENCE

Domrow, R. 1964. Fourteen species of Ptilonyssus from Australian birds (Acarina, Laelapidae). Acarologia 6 (4): 595–623.

The Other Silver Fish

A couple of years ago, I presented a post about the Lepismatidae, the family including the familiar household silverfishes. In that post, I made an offhand reference to other, less well known families of the wingless insect order Zygentoma. The time has come to look at those families.

Squamatinia algharbica, a subterranean nicoletiid from Portugal, copyright S. Reboleira.


The Zygentoma are divided between five or six living families, depending on how you count them. The largest of these other than the Lepismatidae is the Nicoletiidae, representatives of which may be found in most parts of the world if you know where to look. And therein lies the rub: the eyeless nicoletiids are usually to be found in subterranean habitats, burrowed into soil or within caves. They are pale in coloration, usually white or golden. Nicoletiids have less flattened bodies than lepismatids and often lack the covering of scales found in the latter. One subfamily of nicoletiids, the Atelurinae, is sometimes treated as a separate family (hence the uncertainty above): not only do they have the covering of scales most other nicoletiids lack, they are generally less elongate and are oval or teardrop-shaped in form. Atelurines are inquilines of social insects, making their living in the nests of ants or termites. While some observations have been made of atelurines taking food directly from their hosts, it seems that they mostly live as scavengers on items dropped within the nest. They avoid capture and/or eviction by their hosts through their slipperiness and speed (Smith 2017).

An atelurine silverfish from Tasmania, copyright Zosterops.


The other three families are more localised in their distributions. The Protrinemuridae are found in scattered, disjunct locations including the Middle East, eastern Asia and Chile. They are similar in appearance to the Nicoletiidae, being eyeless, scaleless and subcylindrical, and were classified with that family until fairly recently. Differences between the Nicoletiidae and Protrinemuridae include the nature of the cuticular plates making up the underside of the abdomen. In nicoletiids, these are divided between median sternites and lateral coxites; in protrinemurids, a single undivided plate covers the underside of each abdominal segment. Maindronia is a genus of silverfish placed in its own family that resembles Lepismatidae in possessing eyes and a covering of scales. This genus also has a disjunct distribution, being known from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Chile.

Tricholepidion gertschi, copyright Samuel DeGrey.


The fifth family of Zygentoma includes a single living species Tricholepidion gertschi known from the coastal region of northern California, where it is found under decaying tree bark. Tricholepidion retains a number of plesiomorphic features for Zygentoma and is universally accepted as the most divergent member of the order: it lacks scales, it possesses ocelli as well as the compound eyes, it has five rather than four or fewer segments in the tarsi, and it possesses a greater number of ventral styli on the abdomen. Tricholepidion is also hypognathous (that is, it has the head oriented so that its mouth is directed downwards) whereas other Zygentoma are generally prognathous, with the mouthparts directed forwards (Engel 2006). Tricholepidion has usually been included in the Lepidotrichidae, a family originally described for a fossil species Lepidothrix pilifera from the Eocene Baltic amber, but Engel (2006) argued that Lepidothrix was in some ways more derived than Tricholepidion (specifically, it lacks ocelli) and that Tricholepidion should be placed in its own family. Indeed, Tricholepidion is divergent enough that some have even suggested it be excluded from the Zygentoma and regarded as the sister taxon to the broader clade uniting silverfish with the winged insects. This is certainly a minority view, however: most authors continue to regard it as a true, albeit highly unusual, zygentoman.

REFERENCES

Engel, M. S. 2006. A note on the relic silverfish Tricholepidion gertschi (Zygentoma). Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 109 (3–4): 236–238.

Smith, G. B. 2017. The Australian silverfish fauna (order Zygentoma)—abundant, diverse, ancient and largely ignored. Gen. Appl. Ent. 45: 9–58.

Rhampsinitus Re-Redux

I've featured the African harvestman genus Rhampsinitus on this site twice before, but I'm going to have another dive into it today. There's still more I can say about this remarkable genus.

Male Rhampsinitus, possibly R. leighi, copyright Peter Vos. The individual ahead of the male is another Rhampsinitus, probably a female; there's also a short-legged harvestmen beneath the male.


There's more I could say about African phalangiids in general, in fact. There's never been a proper phylogenetic study of the long-legged harvestman family Phalangiidae, so we can't speak with confidence about the relationships between the African members of this group and their relatives elsewhere, but it would not be unexpected if the sub-Saharan phalangiids form an evolutionarily coherent group. Many of the family's most striking exemplars are to be found on the African continent: Cristina with their thick, spiky front legs; sleek, flattened Odontobunus, Guruia with their chelicerae like a pair of jar tongs held in a boxing glove. Rhampsinitus' current position as the best-known African harvestman genus is probably due not only to its diversity but also to its more temperate centre of distribution placing it closer to researchers than these other more equatorial genera.

As mentioned in my first post on the genus, there are currently over forty recognised species of Rhampsinitus. As alluded to in my second post, that number might be expected to change in the future. No reliable identification key is currently available for Rhampsinitus, nor is the information available for many species that would allow such a key to be written. A key to the southern African species was provided by Kauri (1961) but, while I did find this key invaluable when I conducted my own tentative foray into rhampsinitology, I couldn't recommend it to a novice. Kauri was simply unaware of the extreme variation that can be found among male Rhampsinitus belonging to a single species. There are only a handful of species for which both major and minor males have been described and, as I explained previously, minor males may not be identifiable to species without examining genitalia.

Probably a male Rhampsinitus vittatus, copyright Nanna.


This, obviously, is a problem for the handful of species that have been described from what appear to be minor males. Some of these, such as Rhampsinitus fissidens and R. hewittius, are probably doomed to remain mysteries at least until someone redescribes their types. Others may be more recognisable. Rhampsinitus qachasneki is an unusually spiny species described from the mountains of Lesotho, with some of the denticles along the front edge of the body multi-pointed. These distinctive denticles, like repurposed muntjak antlers, might reasonably be expected to be present in any major males of this species, if they exist. The challenge may be even greater for the handle of species that have been described from females. Nevertheless, the known female of R. maculatus, another Lesotho mountain species, has a distinctive spotted colour pattern and thick, remarkably hairy pedipalps that might be expected to show their analogues in the unknown males (again, if they exist: we're kind of glossing over the point that some harvestmen species are known to be parthenogenetic, because harvestmen systematics is so heavily predicated on male genital morphology that the idea of an all-female harvestman species is a trifle intimidating*).

*I assume that this is precisely what Zappa had in mind when he got to the end of Thing-Fish.

Then, of course, there's the persistent question of Rhampsinitus lalandei. This was the first species included in Rhampsinitus in 1879 and as such represents the type or sine qua non of the genus. As was not unusual for the time, its author Eugene Simon was a bit vague about where his original specimen(s) had come from, giving the locality as simply 'Cafrerie'. Cafrerie, rendered in English as Kaffraria or Kaffirland, is a geographical designation that has fallen out of favour these days for reasons I would hope to be obvious, but was commonly used during the 1800s to refer to the area around the eastern coast of modern South Africa, particularly around Port Elizabeth. Unfortunately, Simon's description of R. lalandei is not definitive by modern standards—most of the features described could apply to any number of Rhampsinitus species—and Simon's original specimen appears to have been lost. This presents a problem for any who would suggest that this large genus should be divided up as it might become uncertain which division represents the true Rhampsinitus. Starega (2009) suggested that R. lalandei might be the same as R. crassus, a species definitely found in the Port Elizabeth region. However, it should be noted that Simon described R. lalandei as being irregularly armed with denticles dorsally. In the majority of Rhampsinitus species, the denticles on the opisthosoma form very neat transverse rows, but in others they are a bit more messily placed. Rhampsinitus crassus is one of the former species but the description of R. lalandei suggests it may have been one of the latter. So if anyone's looking at harvestmen from around that area, keep your eyes open.

REFERENCES

Kauri, H. 1961. Opiliones. In: Hanström, B., P. Brinck & G. Rudebeck (eds) South African Animal Life: Results of the Lund University Expedition in 1950–1951 vol. 8 pp. 9–197. Almqvist & Wiksells Boktryckeri Ab: Uppsala.

Staręga, W. 2009. Some southern African species of the genus Rhampsinitus Simon (Opiliones: Phalangiidae). Zootaxa 1981: 43-56.