Display options
Share it on

Zookeys. 2015 Oct 05;(525):1-75. doi: 10.3897/zookeys.525.6020. eCollection 2015.

Taxonomic review and phylogenetic analysis of fifteen North American Entomobrya (Collembola, Entomobryidae), including four new species.

ZooKeys

Aron D Katz, Rosanna Giordano, Felipe Soto-Adames

Affiliations

  1. Department of Entomology, University of Illinois, 320 Morrill Hall, 505 S. Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.
  2. Department of Entomology, University of Illinois, 320 Morrill Hall, 505 S. Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801, USA ; Department of Biology, University of Puerto Rico, San Juan, PR 00931, USA.

PMID: 26487816 PMCID: PMC4607850 DOI: 10.3897/zookeys.525.6020

Abstract

The chaetotaxy of 15 species of eastern North American Entomobrya is redescribed in order to determine potential characters for the diagnosis of cryptic lineages and evaluate the diagnostic and phylogenetic utility of chaetotaxy. As a result, four new species (Entomobrya citrensis Katz & Soto-Adames, sp. n., Entomobrya jubata Katz & Soto-Adames, sp. n., Entomobrya neotenica Katz & Soto-Adames, sp. n. and Entomobrya unifasciata Katz & Soto-Adames, sp. n.) are described, and new diagnoses are provided for Entomobrya assuta Folsom, Entomobrya atrocincta Schött, Entomobrya decemfasciata (Packard), Entomobrya ligata Folsom, Entomobrya multifasciata (Tullberg), and Entomobrya quadrilineata (Bueker). Furthermore, previously undocumented levels of intraspecific variation in macrosetal pattern are reported, tempering the exclusive use of chaetotaxy for species delimitation. Phylogenetic relationships, estimated using both morphological and molecular data, indicate that Entomobrya is likely paraphyletic. The phylogenies also suggest that unreliable character homology, likely fostered by Entomobrya's profusion of macrosetae, may limit the phylogenetic utility of chaetotaxy in groups characterized by an abundance of dorsal macrosetae.

Keywords: Chaetotaxy; Willowsia; cryptic species; phylogeny; species diagnosis

References

  1. Ontogenez. 2008 Jul-Aug;39(4):245-58 - PubMed
  2. Development. 1990 Jul;109(3):509-19 - PubMed
  3. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2008 Dec;49(3):728-35 - PubMed
  4. Syst Biol. 2012 May;61(3):539-42 - PubMed
  5. Syst Biol. 2001 Nov-Dec;50(6):913-25 - PubMed
  6. Mol Biol Evol. 2008 Jul;25(7):1253-6 - PubMed
  7. Genetics. 1996 Jul;143(3):1271-86 - PubMed
  8. Development. 1999 Apr;126(7):1349-64 - PubMed
  9. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2002 Oct;25(1):27-42 - PubMed
  10. Proc Biol Sci. 2002 Jun 7;269(1496):1143-51 - PubMed
  11. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2000 Dec;17(3):456-61 - PubMed
  12. Mech Dev. 1996 Sep;59(1):63-72 - PubMed
  13. Mol Ecol. 2010 Jan;19(2):386-400 - PubMed
  14. PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e46056 - PubMed
  15. Mol Ecol. 2013 Nov;22(21):5382-96 - PubMed
  16. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2014 Jan;70:231-9 - PubMed

Publication Types