End‐products of behaviour versus behavioural characters: a phylogenetic investigation of pupal cocoon construction and form in some North American black flies (Diptera: Simuliidae)

Abstract

Cocoon spinning was analysed, using video recording and playback, in eighteen Nearctic black fly species, comparing nine Simulium species, six Eusimulium species, Stegopterna mutata, Cnephia dacotensis and Prosimulium mixtum. Fourteen behavioural characters were revealed that produced twenty‐two equally parsimonious trees (CI = 0.93, RI = 0.96). Another tree was constructed on the basis of five characters relating to the cocoon structure (end‐product characters). The goal of the study was to determine whether characters relating to behavioural components of black fly cocoon spinning or those based on end‐products of the behaviour are superior for revealing phylogenetic relationships. This was accomplished by comparing both data sets to a phylogeny constructed with the use of cytological and morphological characters. If taxa are grouped according to end‐products (the cocoons) there are some spurious groupings. The behavioural analysis only required one extra step to duplicate the morphological and cytological tree. In the case of black flies, it is more informative to use characters resulting from the analysis of the cocoon spinning behaviour than cocoon morphology.

The cocoon‐spinning behaviour ofAustrosimulium australense(Diptera: Simuliidae) with a discussion of phylogenetic implications

“…A study of the cocoon-spinning behaviour of two simuliine genera with well-formed cocoons (Ectemnia and Simulium), found a suite of shared, derived behavioural character states (synapomorphies) (Stuart & Hunter 1998a). This observation supported the earlier conclusions of Moulton & Adler (1997), who stated explicitly that a well-formed cocoon was a synapomorphy uniting Ectemnia, Metacnephia, and Simulium.…”

Trolling for water striders: active searching for prey and the evolution of reduced webs in the spiderWendilgardasp. (Araneae, Theridiosomatidae)

“…Thus, unless this detail was missed in observations of the other species ( I can be certain it was not only with W . clara), an apparently homologous structure (multiple vertical sticky lines attached to a suspension line) was built utilizing non-homologou s behaviour (see Hansell, 1984;Eberhard, 1990a;Wenzel, 1992;Stuart and Hunter, 1998 for discussions of the di culties of determining behavioural homologies) .…”

Larval Case Architecture and Implications of Host‐Plant Associations for North AmericanColeophora(Lepidoptera; Coleophoridae)1

“…Wenzel (1993) andde Queiroz andWimberger (1993) have demonstrated that behavioral characters are no more homoplasious than morphological characters, and should be treated as such. Nest architecture and building behavior has been used to investigate the phylogeny of several groups of animals, including spiders (Coddington, 1986;Eberhard, 1982), wasps (Wenzel, 1993), birds (Patterson et al, 1995;Kennedy et al, 1996), fish (McLennan et al, 1988;McLennan, 1993), and black flies (Stuart and Hunter, 1998). In most analyses, the phylogeny as determined by nest architecture and building behavior agrees with those determined by morphology and molecular data.…”