Interspecific phylogenetic relationship among different species of the genus Buthacus (Scorpiones: Buthidae) inferred from 16S rRNA in Egypt and Saudi Arabia

Systematic Revision of the Sand Scorpions, Genus Buthacus Birula, 1908 (Buthidae C.L. Koch, 1837) of the Levant, with Redescription of Buthacus arenicola (Simon, 1885) from Algeria and Tunisia

“…These two clades may be separated by a number of morphological characters, e.g., the telson ventral surface, which is smooth and glabrous in the African clade but granular in the Asian clade, and the presence of a gap between the pedipalp chela fingers, proximally, when closed in the African clade and absent in the Asian clade. A similar finding was recently obtained by Alqahtani and Badry (2020), based on an analysis of mitochondrial 16S rDNA sequences for seven Buthacus terminals representing three ingroup exemplar species, and five outgroup taxa.…”

“…14), which recovered two subclades in the African clade, one comprising material formerly assigned to B. leptochelys, the other comprising material formerly assigned to B. arenicola. This finding, also recovered in the study of Alqahtani and Badry (2020), reflects the opinions of previous authors (Vachon, 1952;Levy and Amitai, 1980) who divided the species of Buthacus into two groups, the B. arenicola group and the B. leptochelys group, based on the dentition of the pedipalp chela movable finger.…”

“…White symbol denotes type locality whereas gray symbol denotes type locality of the junior synonym, Buthus pietschmanni Penther, 1912. assemblage because many of the putative diagnostic characters for the genus appear to be plesiomorphic. On the other hand, a phylogenetic analysis based on 16S rDNA sequences for seven Buthacus terminals representing three ingroup exemplar species, and five outgroup taxa, by Alqahtani and Badry (2020), recovered the monophyly of Buthacus. These findings raise questions about the validity of genera, i.e., Gint Kovařík et al, 2013, andTrypanothacus Lowe et al, 2019, described in the absence of phylogenetic analyses, to which species previously assigned to Buthacus, i.e., Buthacus calviceps (Pocock, 1900) and Buthacus buettikeri Hendrixson, 2006, were transferred, respectively (appendix 1).…”

“…For example, Lourenço (2006: 60) observed significant variation in the character within the B. arenicola and B. leptochelys groups, leading to the conclusion that "even if the two groups can be substantiated, the association of a given species to one or the other of them may pose some difficult problems. " Despite these concerns, retrolateral accessory denticles on the pedipalp chela fingers remain in widespread use as diagnostic characters in Buthacus Zambre and Lourenço, 2010;Lourenço and Sadine, 2015;Kovařík et al, 2016;Alqahtani and Badry, 2020).…”

“…The limits of Buthacus with respect to several other psammophilous Palearctic buthid genera, e.g., Buthiscus Birula, 1905, Liobuthus Birula, 1898, Pectinibuthus Fet, 1984, Plesiobuthus Pocock, 1900, and Vachoniolus Levy et al, 1973, also remains unclear (Kovařík et al, 2013(Kovařík et al, , 2016Lowe et al, 2019;Alqahtani and Badry, 2020). For example, Kovarik et al (2016: 2) suggested, without presenting any phylogenetic evidence, that Buthacus might be a paraphyletic FIGURE 3.…”