Abstract:Species of the spider family Hypochilidae Marx, 1888 from China are studied, including two known species and two new species of the genus Ectatosticta Simon, 1892. The new species are E. wukongsp. nov. (♂♀) from Sichuan and E. xuanzangsp. nov. (♀) from Tibet.
“…Hypochilus spiders construct a mesh web resembling a lampshade attached to a rock overhang and the spider rests in the middle of the web (called “lampshade web”; Forster et al., 1987). Ectatosticta spiders construct sheet webs among rocks or tree trunks (Lin & Li, 2020). Marx (1888) who described the first hypochilid, Hypochilus thorelli Marx, 1888, remarked that this spider “is so anomalous that it appears like the representative of a prototype, in which characters were united in one individual which are now distributed into widely differing genera”.…”
In the last decade and a half, advances in genetic sequencing technologies have revolutionized systematics, transforming the field from studying morphological characters or a few genetic markers, to genomic datasets in the phylogenomic era. A plethora of molecular phylogenetic studies on many taxonomic groups have come about, converging on, or refuting prevailing morphology or legacy‐marker‐based hypotheses about evolutionary affinities. Spider systematics has been no exception to this transformation and the inter‐relationships of several groups have now been studied using genomic data. About 51 500 extant spider species have been described, all with a conservative body plan, but innumerable morphological and behavioural peculiarities. Inferring the spider tree of life using morphological data has been a challenging task. Molecular data have corroborated many hypotheses of higher‐level relationships, but also resulted in new groups that refute previous hypotheses. In this review, we discuss recent advances in the reconstruction of the spider tree of life and highlight areas where additional effort is needed with potential solutions. We base this review on the most comprehensive spider phylogeny to date, representing 131 of the 132 spider families. To achieve this sampling, we combined six Sanger‐based markers with newly generated and publicly available genome‐scale datasets. We find that some inferred relationships between major lineages of spiders (such as Austrochiloidea, Palpimanoidea and Synspermiata) are robust across different classes of data. However, several new hypotheses have emerged with different classes of molecular data. We identify and discuss the robust and controversial hypotheses and compile this blueprint to design future studies targeting systematic revisions of these problematic groups. We offer an evolutionary framework to explore comparative questions such as evolution of venoms, silk, webs, morphological traits and reproductive strategies.
“…Hypochilus spiders construct a mesh web resembling a lampshade attached to a rock overhang and the spider rests in the middle of the web (called “lampshade web”; Forster et al., 1987). Ectatosticta spiders construct sheet webs among rocks or tree trunks (Lin & Li, 2020). Marx (1888) who described the first hypochilid, Hypochilus thorelli Marx, 1888, remarked that this spider “is so anomalous that it appears like the representative of a prototype, in which characters were united in one individual which are now distributed into widely differing genera”.…”
In the last decade and a half, advances in genetic sequencing technologies have revolutionized systematics, transforming the field from studying morphological characters or a few genetic markers, to genomic datasets in the phylogenomic era. A plethora of molecular phylogenetic studies on many taxonomic groups have come about, converging on, or refuting prevailing morphology or legacy‐marker‐based hypotheses about evolutionary affinities. Spider systematics has been no exception to this transformation and the inter‐relationships of several groups have now been studied using genomic data. About 51 500 extant spider species have been described, all with a conservative body plan, but innumerable morphological and behavioural peculiarities. Inferring the spider tree of life using morphological data has been a challenging task. Molecular data have corroborated many hypotheses of higher‐level relationships, but also resulted in new groups that refute previous hypotheses. In this review, we discuss recent advances in the reconstruction of the spider tree of life and highlight areas where additional effort is needed with potential solutions. We base this review on the most comprehensive spider phylogeny to date, representing 131 of the 132 spider families. To achieve this sampling, we combined six Sanger‐based markers with newly generated and publicly available genome‐scale datasets. We find that some inferred relationships between major lineages of spiders (such as Austrochiloidea, Palpimanoidea and Synspermiata) are robust across different classes of data. However, several new hypotheses have emerged with different classes of molecular data. We identify and discuss the robust and controversial hypotheses and compile this blueprint to design future studies targeting systematic revisions of these problematic groups. We offer an evolutionary framework to explore comparative questions such as evolution of venoms, silk, webs, morphological traits and reproductive strategies.
“…Hypochilus spiders construct a mesh web resembling a lampshade attached to a rock overhang and the spider rests in the middle of the web (called "lampshade web"; . Ectatosticta spiders construct sheet webs among rocks or tree trunks (Lin & Li, 2020). Marx (1889) who described the first hypochilid-Hypochilus thorelli Marx, 1888, remarked that this spider "is so anomalous that it appears like the representative of a prototype, in which characters were united in one individual which are now distributed into widely differing genera".…”
In the last decade and a half, advances in genetic sequencing technologies have revolutionized systematics, transforming the field as studying morphological characters; a few genetic markers have given way to genomic data sets in the phylogenomic era. A plethora of molecular phylogenetic studies on many taxonomic groups have come about, converging on, or refuting prevailing morphology or legacy-marker-based hypotheses about evolutionary affinities. Spider systematics has been no exception to this transformation and the interrelationships of several groups have now been studied using genomic data. About 50,500 extant spider species have been described so far, all with a conservative body plan, but innumerable morphological and behavioral peculiarities. Inferring the spider tree of life using morphological data has been a challenging task. Molecular data have corroborated many hypotheses of higher-level relationships, but also resulted in new groups that refute previous hypotheses. In this review, we discuss recent advances in the reconstruction of the Spider Tree of Life and highlight areas where additional effort is needed with potential solutions. We base this review on the most comprehensive spider phylogeny to date, representing 131 of the currently known 132 (99%) spider families. To achieve this sampling, we combined a legacy data set of six Sanger-based markers with newly generated and publicly available genome-scale data sets. We find that some inferred relationships between major lineages of spiders (such as Austrochiloidea, Palpimanoidea, Synspermiata, etc.) are robust across different classes of data. However, several surprising new hypotheses have emerged with different classes of molecular data. We identify and discuss the robust and controversial hypotheses and compile this blueprint to design future studies targeting systematic revisions of these problematic groups. We offer an evolutionary framework to explore comparative questions such as evolution of venoms, silk, webs, morphological traits, and reproductive strategies.
“…These two species are known from the northern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. However, recent discoveries ( Lin & Li, 2020 , 2021 , Wang et al, 2021 ) have confirmed considerable Ectatosticta diversity in the southern Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, with higher species richness and wider distribution than that of Hypochilus in the USA. Thus, we conducted an in-depth study of Ectatosticta to challenge the Wallacean and Linnean shortfalls.…”
A: Phylogeny of 505 specimens inferred from IQTree and MrBayes using seven genetic markers. Support for each branch is shown at the nodes, with bootstrap percentages given first, followed by posterior probabilities. Different species delimitation methods are shown on the right. Photo by Ye-Jie Lin. B: Genitalia of females (a:
Ectatosticta xuanzang
; b:
Ectatosticta dapeng
; c:
Ectatosticta davidi
; d:
Ectatosticta baixiang
sp. nov.
; e:
Ectatosticta qingshi
sp. nov.
; f:
Ectatosticta helii
sp. nov.
; g:
Ectatosticta bajie
; h:
Ectatosticta shaseng
sp. nov.
; i:
Ectatosticta rulai
; j:
Ectatosticta yukuni
; k:
Ectatosticta puxian
sp. nov.
; l:
Ectatosticta wukong
; m:
Ectatosticta baima
sp. nov.
; n:
Ectatosticta deltshevi
; o:
Ectatosticta wenshu
sp. nov.
). C: Distribution of
Ectatosticta
spiders in China. Dark spots represent locations of samples and correspond to Supplemnetary Table S1. The asterisk represents the species
Ectatosticta shennongjiaensis
.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.