Systematics and evolution of ground spiders revisited (Araneae, Dionycha, Gnaphosidae)

Abstract

Gnaphosidae Pocock are a very diverse spider family with remarkable spinning organ morphology. Although the family has received intense taxonomic attention in recent years, its intergeneric relationships remain obscure. A phylogenetic analysis of Gnaphosidae genera was performed to untangle the evolutionary history of the family. A matrix of 324 morphological characters, scored for 71 gnaphosid genera and 29 outgroup taxa, was analysed through parsimony and Bayesian phylogenetic inference. Gnaphosidae are not recovered as a monophyletic group, neither were most of the previously proposed intrafamiliar groupings. In accordance with the phylogenetic results obtained, Vectius Simon and Hemicloea Thorell are transferred to Trochanteriidae, and Xenoplectus Schiapelli & Gerschman de Pikelin to Liocranidae. Micaria Westring, Nauhea Forster and Verita Ram ırez & Grismado (and some related genera) are probably not gnaphosids, although their phylogenetic placement is uncertain. Gnaphosidae s.s. are defined as spiders with enlarged piriform gland spigots, longer and wider than the major ampullate gland spigots. Within Gnaphosidae s.s., well-supported clades allow the redefinition, on the basis of quantitative phylogenetic evidence, of Gnaphosinae Pocock, Zelotinae Platnick, Herpyllinae Platnick, Drassodinae Simon, Prodidominae Simon rank res. and the newly proposed Leptodrassinae subfam. nov. Many genera are not assigned to subfamily given their poorly supported and unstable relationships. The homology and evolution of structures such as the claw tuft clasper, the spinning organs and the modification of cheliceral promargin are discussed.

Cytogenetics of entelegyne spiders (Arachnida, Araneae) from southern Africa

“…Except for the cosmopolitan Oecobius putus Blackwall, 1859 (Oecobiidae), all taxonomically determined species were analysed for the first time. We also provide the first cytogenetic information for the spider families Ammoxenidae and Gallieniellidae, and the gnaphosid subfamily Prodidominae, which until recently (Azevedo et al 2018) was considered as an independent family. The 2n of the examined species ranged from 19 to 42.…”

“…Albeit with limited sampling, the phylogenomic analyses recovered the group as monophyletic, with its subdivision into two main clades concordant with the "Dionycha part A" and "Dionycha part B" (Fernández et al 2018). Based on a morphological analysis of Gnaphosoidea, the family Prodidomidae was transferred to Gnaphosidae, losing its family-level status (Azevedo et al 2018), whereas the remaining gnaphosoid families remained valid. In this paper, we analysed eight dionychan families from South Africa, including the subfamily Prodidominae (Gnaphosidae).…”

“…In molecular analyses, they were placed as a sister lineage to all remaining Dionycha (Wheeler et al 2016). However, based on morphological evidence, the family was recently transferred to Gnaphosidae and established as one of its subfamilies (Azevedo et al 2018). Prodidomines comprise over 300 species with a tropical and subtropical distribution, of which 26 species are known from South Africa (Dippenaar-Schoeman et al 2010, World Spider Catalog 2019).…”

Drivers of taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversities in dominant ground-dwelling arthropods of coastal heathlands

“…The spider phylogenetic tree was adapted from Wheeler et al (2017). Genera that were not present in Wheeler’s tree were placed using Arnedo et al (2009), Frick et al (2010) and Wang et al (2015) for Linyphiidae and Agnarsson (2004), Azevedo et al (2018), Maddison (2015), Millidge (1977), Piacentini & Ramírez (2019) and Scharff et al (2019) for other families. The carabid phylogenetic tree was adapted from López-López & Vogler (2017), Martínez-Navarro et al (2005), Ober & Maddison (2008), Ruiz et al (2009) and Sasakawa & Kubota (2007).…”

Taxonomic revision and cladistic analysis of ghost spiders of the genus Tafana Simon, 1903 (Araneae: Dionycha, Anyphaenidae), with the descriptions of twelve new species

“…They refer to the cephalothorax (3 characters), chelicerae (2), scopulae (1), spines (1), tracheae (1), male palp (6), copulatory bulb (15) and female genitalia (14). Sixteen of these characters were scored based on previous phylogenetic analyses by Ramírez ( , 2014 and Azevedo et al (2018).…”