Comparative cheliceral morphology of the solifuge species<i>Biton zederbaueri</i>(Werner) and<i>Gluviopsilla discolor</i>(Kraepelin) through scanning electron microscopy

Bayram, Abdullah; Yiğit, Nazife; Erdek, Melek; Koç, Halіl; Sancak, Zafer; Melekoğlu, Abdullah; Öcal, İlkay Çorak

doi:10.1080/09397140.2011.10648869

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the observations of Hansen (1893) and Cloudsley- Thompson and Constantinou (1984), SEM images provided by later workers Carvalho et al, 2010;Erdek, 2010;Bayram et al, 2011;González Reyes and Corronca, 2013;Botero-Trujillo, 2014;Iuri et al, 2014), and material examined in the present study, the following family-level differences were identified.…”

Section: Stridulatory Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, a flagellum has been reported to be present in all known species (e.g., , in most species , or in all except Eremobatidae (e.g., Punzo, 1998a;Dunlop et al, 2004;Bayram et al, 2011). In character 34 of their morphological character matrix, Pepato et al (2010) coded the flagellum present in Chanbria Muma, 1952, the known species of which do not possess a flagellum as defined here, and absent in…”

Section: Absence Of the Flagellummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a mistaken perception that eremobatids are unique among Solifugae in lacking a flagellum (Kraepelin, 1901: 6, but not Kraepelin, 1908a: 223;Punzo, 1998a;Bayram et al, 2011) or in having the flagellum replaced by a suit of modified setae, i.e., a flagellar complex (e.g., Klann, 2009). Rocha (2002: 441) stated that "(t)he most distinctive shape of the flagellum is present in Eremobatidae, the only family with hairy flagella (which) consist of a complex of modified bristles."…”

Section: Absence Of the Flagellummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Snodgrass (1948) proposed new terminology for the mouthparts of Acari, based on careful investigations of mouthpart homology across arachnids (including terms recently promoted for the Solifugae rostrum; see , which was largely ignored by acarologists, because a relatively standardized terminology was already in place. Given the inconsistency in solifuge morphological terminology, and the renewed interest in solifuge research (e.g., Ballesteros and Francke, 2007;Catenazzi et al, 2009;Klann, 2009;Carvalho et al, 2010;Erdek, 2010;Reddick et al, 2010;Bayram et al, 2011;Cushing and Castro, 2012;Dunlop et al, 2012;González Reyes and Corronca, 2013;Karataş and Uçak, 2013;Cushing et al, 2014;Botero-Trujillo, 2014;Iuri et al, 2014, Wharton andReddick, 2014), it is an opportune time to unify and redefine solifuge morphological terminology in light of modern concepts of character homology, advances in technology, and the availability of new material.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cheliceral Morphology in Solifugae (Arachnida): Primary Homology, Terminology, and Character Survey

Bird¹,

Wharton²,

Prendini³

2015

Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CHELICERAL MORPHOLOGY OF SOLIFUGAE (ARACHNIDA): PRIMARY HOMOLOGY, TERMINOLOGY, AND CHARACTER SURVEYArachnids of the order Solifugae (solifuges, false spiders, sunspiders, camelspiders, Walzenspinne, windspiders) possess the largest jaws for body size in the Chelicerata. The chelicerae provide the most important character systems for solifuge systematics, including dentition and the male flagellum, both used extensively in species delimitation and diagnosis.However, the terminology used for cheliceral characters is unstandardized and often contradictory, in part because it fails to represent homologous structures among taxa. Misinterpretation of character homology may introduce errors in phylogenetic analysesconcerning relationships within Solifugae and among the orders of Chelicerata. This contribution presents the first comprehensive analysis of cheliceral morphology across the order Solifugae, the aims of which were to provide a broad survey of cheliceral characters for solifuge systematics, to identify and reinterpret structures based on primary homology, revise the terminology to be consistent with homology hypotheses, and provide a guide to synonyms of terminology and character interpretations in the literature. Chelicerae were studied in 188 exemplar species (17 % of the total), representing all twelve solifuge families, 17 of the 19 subfamilies, 64 genera (46 % of the total), and the full range of variation in cheliceral morphology across the order. In total, 157 species representing 49 genera and 17 subfamilies are illustrated. Hypotheses of character transformation, particularly concerning the male flagellum, and a standardized terminology, are presented. The functional morphology of the chelicerae is iii discussed and the role of sexually dimorphic modifications to the male chelicerae in mating behavior emphasized. The revised terminology, based on hypotheses of primary homology, will facilitate solifuge revisionary systematics and provide a stronger basis for reconstructing phylogenetic relationships within the order and evaluating its position within Chelicerata.

show abstract

Section: Stridulatory Apparatusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Absence Of the Flagellummentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Absence Of the Flagellummentioning

confidence: 99%