Advertisement

Zoomorphology

, Volume 129, Issue 3, pp 175–183 | Cite as

A scanning electron microscopic survey of the cuticle in Cyphophthalmi (Arachnida, Opiliones) with the description of novel sensory and glandular structures

  • Rodrigo H. WillemartEmail author
  • Gonzalo Giribet
Original Paper

Abstract

The cuticular surfaces of Cyphophthalmi (Opiliones) were studied in detail, covering a wide range of their taxonomic diversity. Previously unknown structures are described, including a sexually dimorphic row of spines and glandular openings on leg I of Fangensis cavernarum. Scanning electron micrographs of the prosomal paired hairs and the subapical process are provided for the first time. Evidence for the multi-pored nature of the shaft of solenidia as well as the hollowed nature and absence of wall pores of sensilla chaetica are also shown for the first time using scanning electron microscopy. The prosomal paired hairs may constitute a novel autapomorphy for Cyphophthalmi, as they are absent in all studied members of the other species of Opiliones. Finally, the variation in shape of some of the structures examined may be of great taxonomic value.

Keywords

Glands Sensilla Sensory structures Sexual dimorphism Taxonomy 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Ron Clouse greatly helped with SEM micrographs. Richard Schalek of the Harvard Center for Nanoscale Systems assisted with the SEM. Thomas Bartolomaeus and three anonymous reviewers provided suggestions that greatly improved an earlier version of the manuscript. R.H.W. received research fellowship from FAPESP (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo) # 03/02557-0 and from CAPES (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de pessoal de Nível Superior). This material is based on work partly supported by the US National Science Foundation under grant no. 0236871 to G.G.

References

  1. Altner H, Prillinger L (1980) Ultrastructure of invertebrate chemo-, thermo-, and hygroreceptors and its functional significance. Int Rev Cyt 67:69–139CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson M (1994) Sexual selection. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  3. Barth FG (2002) A spider’s world: senses and behavior. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. Berland L (1932) Les Arachnides (Scorpions, Araignées, etc.), biologie systématique, 500p. In: Encyclopédie Entomologique série A XVI. Paul Lechevalier & Fils, Paris, pp 761–793Google Scholar
  5. Boyer SL, Giribet G (2009) Welcome back New Zealand: regional biogeography and Gondwanan affinities of three endemic genera of mite harvestmen (Arachnida, Opiliones, Cyphophthalmi). J Biogeogr 36:1084–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyer SL, Baker JM, Giribet G (2007a) Deep genetic divergences in Aoraki denticulata (Arachnida, Opiliones, Cyphophthalmi): a widespread ‘mite harvestman’ defies DNA taxonomy. Mol Ecol 16:4999–5016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyer SL, Clouse RM, Benavides LR, Sharma P, Schwendinger PJ, Karunarathna I, Giribet G (2007b) Biogeography of the world: a case study from cyphophthalmid Opiliones, a globally distributed group of arachnids. J Biogeogr 34:2070–2085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradbury JW, Vehrencamp SL (1998) Principles of animal communication. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapman RF (1998) The insects: structure and function. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  10. Clouse RM, de Bivort BL, Giribet G (2009) A phylogenetic analysis for the South-east Asian mite harvestman family Stylocellidae (Opiliones: Cyphophthalmi)—a combined analysis using morphometric and molecular data. Invertebr Syst 23:515–529. doi: 10.1071/IS09044 Google Scholar
  11. de Bivort BL, Giribet G (2004) A new genus of cyphophthalmid from the Iberian Peninsula with a phylogenetic analysis of the Sironidae (Arachnida : Opiliones : Cyphophthalmi) and a SEM database of external morphology. Invertebr Syst 18:7–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Edgecombe GD, Koch M (2008) Phylogeny of scolopendromorph centipedes (Chilopoda): morphological analysis featuring characters from the peristomatic area. Cladistics 24:872–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foelix R (1976) Rezeptoren und periphere synaptische verschaltungen bei verschiedenen Arachnida. Ent Germ 3:83–87Google Scholar
  14. Giribet G (2003) Karripurcellia, a new pettalid genus (Arachnida: Opiliones: Cyphophthalmi) from Western Australia, with a cladistic analysis of the family Pettalidae. Invertebr Syst 17:387–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Giribet G, Boyer SL (2002) A cladistic analysis of the cyphophthalmid genera (Opiliones, Cyphophthalmi). J Arachnol 30:110–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Giribet G, Prieto CE (2003) A new Afrotropical Ogovea (Opiliones, Cyphophthalmi) from Cameroon, with a discussion on the taxonomic characters in the family Ogoveidae. Zootaxa 329:1–18Google Scholar
  17. Giribet G, Sharma PP, Bastawade DB (2007) A new genus and species of Cyphophthalmi (Arachnida: Opiliones) from the north-eastern states of India. Zool J Linnean Soc 151:663–670Google Scholar
  18. Giribet G, Vogt L, Pérez González A, Sharma P, Kury AB (2010) A multilocus approach to harvestman (Arachnida: Opiliones) phylogeny with emphasis on biogeography and the systematics of Laniatores. Cladistics 26:408–437. doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2009.00296.x
  19. Greenfield MD (2002) Signalers and receivers: mechanisms and evolution of Arthropod communication. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Grygier MJ, Ohtsuka S (2008) A new genus of monstrilloid copepods (Crustacea) with anteriorly pointing ovigerous spines and related adaptations for subthoracic brooding. Zool J Linn Soc 152:459–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hansen HJ (1921) Studies on Arthropoda I. The Pedipalpi, Ricinulei, and Opiliones (exc. Op. Laniatores) collected by Mr. Leonardo Fea in tropical West Africa and adjacent Islands. Gyldendalske Boghandel, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  22. Hansen HJ, Sørensen W (1904) On two orders of Arachnida: Opiliones, especially the suborder Cyphophthalmi, and Ricinulei, namely the family Cryptostemmatoidae. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  23. Juberthie C (1964) Recherches sur la biologie des opilions. Ann Spéléol 19:5–244Google Scholar
  24. Juberthie C (1965) Données sur l’écologie, le développement et la reproduction des opilions. Rev Ecol Biol Sol 2:377–396Google Scholar
  25. Juberthie C (1970) Les genres d’opilions Sironinae (Cyphophthalmes). Bull Mus Nat Hist Nat 41:1371–1390Google Scholar
  26. Juberthie C (1979) Un cyphophthalme nouveau d’une grotte de Nouvelle-Calédonie: Troglosiro aelleni n. gen., n. sp. (Opilion Sironinae). Rev Suisse Zool 86:221–231Google Scholar
  27. Juberthie C (1988) Un nouvel opilion cyphophthalme aveugle d’Australie: Austropurcellia gen. nov., scoparia n.sp. Mem Biospéleol 18:133–140Google Scholar
  28. Juberthie C (2000) A new blind Cyphophthalmi (Opiliones) from Queensland (Australia). Mem Biospéleol 27:149–154Google Scholar
  29. Karaman I (2005) Evidence of spermatophores in Cyphophthalmi (Arachnida, Opiliones). Rev Suisse Zool 112:3–11Google Scholar
  30. Keil TA, Steinbrecht RA (1984) Mechanosensitive and olfactory sensilla of insects. In: King RC, Akai H (eds) Insect ultrastructure, 2ed. Plenum Press, New York and London., pp 477–516Google Scholar
  31. Martens J (1975) Ischyropsalis hellwigi (Opiliones) Paarungsverhalten. Encyclopaedia. Cinematographica E 2128/1875Google Scholar
  32. McAloon FM, Durden LA (2000) Attachment sites and frequency distribution of erythraeid mites, Leptus indianensis (Acari: Prostigmata), ectoparasitic on harvestmen, Leiobunum formosum (Opiliones). Exp App Acarol 24:561–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Millot J (1949) Classe des Arachnides. In: Grassé PP (ed) Traité de Zoologie, vol 6. Masson et Cie, Paris, pp 263–319Google Scholar
  34. Murienne J, Karaman I, Giribet G (2010) Explosive evolution of an ancient group of Cyphophthalmi (Arachnida: Opiliones) in the Balkan Peninsula. J Biogeogr 37:90–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Novak T (2005) Notes on spermatophores in Cyphophthalmus duricorius Joseph (Arachnida: Opiliones: Sironidae). Ann Ser Hist Nat 15:277–280Google Scholar
  36. Ochoa R, Pettis JS, Erbe E, Wergin WP (2005) Observations on the honey bee tracheal mite Acarapis woodi (Acari: Tarsonemidae) using low-temperature scanning electron microscopy. Exp App Acarol 35:239–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pittard K, Mitchell RW (1972) Comparative morphology of the life stages of Cryptocellus pelaezi (Arachnida, Ricinulei). In: Graduate studies Texas Tech University. Texas Tech Press, LubbockGoogle Scholar
  38. Rafalski J (1958) A description of Siro carpaticus sp. n. with remarks on the morphology and systematics of the Cyphophthalmi (Opiliones). Acta Zool Cracov 2:521–556Google Scholar
  39. Savory TH (1962) Daddy longlegs. Sci Amer 207:119–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schuh RT, Weirauch C, Henry TJ, Halbert SE (2008) Curaliidae, a new family of Heteroptera (Insecta: Hemiptera) from the Eastern United States. Ann Entomol Soc Am 101:20–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schwendinger PJ, Giribet G (2005) The systematics of the south-east Asian genus Fangensis Rambla (Opiliones: Cyphophthalmi: Stylocellidae). Invertebr Syst 19:297–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sharma P, Giribet G (2005) A new Troglosiro species (Opiliones, Cyphophthalmi, Troglosironidae) from New Caledonia. Zootaxa 1053:47–60Google Scholar
  43. Sharma PP, Giribet G (2009) The family Troglosironidae (Opiliones: Cyphophthalmi) of New Caledonia. In: Zoologia Neocaledonica 7. Biodiversity Studies in New Caledonia, Paris, pp 83–123Google Scholar
  44. Shear WA (1980) A review of the Cyphophthalmi of the United States and México, with a proposed reclassification of the Suborder (Arachnida, Opiliones). Am Mus Nov 2705:1–34Google Scholar
  45. Talarico G, Palacios-Vargas JG, Silva MF, Alberti G (2006) Ultrastructure of tarsal sensilla and other integument structures of two Pseudocellus species (Ricinulei, Arachnida). J Morph 267:441–463CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. van der Hammen L (1985) Comparative studies in Chelicerata. III Opilionida. Zool Verhand Leiden 220:1–60Google Scholar
  47. Weygoldt P, Paulus HF (1979) Untersuchungen zur morphologie, taxonomie und phylogenie der Chelicerata. II. Cladogramme und die entfaltung der Chelicerata. Z Zool Syst Evolut-Forsch 17:177–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Willemart RH, Farine J-P, Peretti AV, Gnaspini P (2006) Behavioral roles of the sexually dimorphic structures in the male harvestman, Phalangium opilio (Opiliones, Phalangiidae). Can J Zool 84:1763–1774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Willemart RH, Farine JP, Gnaspini P (2009a) Sensory biology of Phalangida harvestmen (Arachnida, Opiliones): a review, with new morphological data on 18 species. Acta Zool 90:209–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Willemart RH, Osses F, Chelini MC, Macías-Ordóñez R, Machado G (2009b) Sexually dimorphic legs in a neotropical harvestman (Arachnida, Opiliones): ornament or weapon? Behav Proc 80:51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Willemart RH, Pérez González A, Farine J-P, Gnaspini P (2010) Sexually dimorphic tegumental gland openings in Laniatores (Arachnida, Opiliones), with new data on 23 species. J Morph 271:641–653PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Zacharuk RY (1985) Antennae and sensilla. In: Kerkut GA, Gilbert LI (eds) Comprehensive insect physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology, vol 6. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 1−69Google Scholar
  53. Zhang J-X, Zhu M-S, Song D-X (2004) A review of the Chinese nursery-web spiders (Araneae, Pisauridae). J Arachnol 32:353–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Escola de Artes Ciências e HumanidadesUniversidade de São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology and Museum of Comparative ZoologyHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations