Advertisement

Organisms Diversity & Evolution

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 311–329 | Cite as

Head morphology of Osmylus fulvicephalus (Osmylidae, Neuroptera) and its phylogenetic implications

  • Rolf G. Beutel
  • Dominique Zimmermann
  • Marcus Krauß
  • Susanne Randolf
  • Benjamin Wipfler
Original Article

Abstract

External and internal head structures of Osmylus fulvicephalus were examined and described in detail. Exo- and endoskeleton, musculature, elements of the central nervous system and tracheae are compared to conditions found in other groups of Neuropterida and other endopterygote lineages. Thirty-six adult cephalic characters were compiled, combined in a datamatrix with 64 characters of the larval head, and analysed cladistically. Mainly because many data on adults remain missing, most branches in the cladogram are mostly or exclusively supported by larval features. The shortening of the mesal mandibular wall and the resulting anterior shift of the adductor tendon possibly constitute an adult groundplan apomorphy of Neuropterida. Raphidioptera and Megaloptera share distinct prognathism and the presence of a sclerotised gula. However, the orthognathous head and the absence of a gula resulted as autapomorphies of Neuroptera in our analyses. Further potential autapomorphies are the asymmetry of the mandibles as well as the respective presence of dorsolateral furrows on the head capsule, of a shovel-like extension on the ventral mandibular cutting edge, and of a row of stiff hairs on the mandible’s ventral surface. The systematic affinities of Osmylidae remain ambiguous. Osmylus is mainly characterised by plesiomorphic features of the adult head such as a complete endoskeleton, long filiform antennae, largely unmodified orthopteroid mouthparts, and particularly the nearly complete set of muscles. The placement with a clade also comprising Hemerobiidae and Chrysopidae is poorly supported. The presence of a dense vestiture of long microtrichia on the distal galeomere resulted as a synapomorphy of the three families. An apparent plesiomorphy preserved in Osmylus but absent in all other groups of Neuroptera is the presence of well developed ocelli. The present study underlines the severe shortage of detailed morphological data on the adults. Intensive study of adult structures is required for a solid reconstruction of the phylogeny of Neuropterida, especially of the hemerobiform lineage of Neuroptera.

Keywords

Osmylus Neuroptera Head morphology Phylogeny 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to Ronald Bellstedt (Museum der Natur, Gotha) for providing adults and larvae of O. fulvicephalus and many other valuable specimens. A gift of specimens of Austroneurorthus from Shaun Winterton (California Department of Food and Agriculture) is also gratefully acknowledged. We cordially thank Ulrike Aspöck (Naturhistorisches Museum, Vienna) for critically reading the manuscript and for valuable suggestions. We are also very grateful for numerous helpful suggestions made by three anonymous reviewers. They have greatly helped to improve the manuscript. We also thank the DFG for the financial support of the more inclusive project on holometabolous insects (BE 1789/4-1).

Supplementary material

13127_2010_24_MOESM1_ESM.zip (7 kb)
ESM files (ZIP 7.48 kb)

References

  1. Achtelig, M. (1967). Über die Anatomie des Kopfes von Raphidia flavipes Stein und die Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen der Raphidiidae zu den Megalopteren. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Anatomie und Ontogenie der Tiere, 84, 249–312.Google Scholar
  2. Achtelig, M., & Kristensen, N. P. (1973). A re-examination of the relationships of the Raphidioptera (Insecta). Zeitschrift für Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung, 11, 268–274.Google Scholar
  3. Acker, T. S. (1958). The comparative morphology of Stenorrhachus walkeri (MacLachlan) and of Nemopterella sp. (Neuroptera: Nemopteridae). Microentomology, 23, 106–130.Google Scholar
  4. Aspöck, H., & Aspöck, U. (1971). Raphidioptera (Kamelhalsfliegen). Handbuch der Zoologie, vol. 4, 2nd half (Insecta), pt. 2, 15, 1–50.Google Scholar
  5. Aspöck, U. (2002). Phylogeny of the Neuropterida (Insecta: Holometabola). Zoologica Scripta, 31, 51–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aspöck, U., & Aspöck, H. (1980). Nyrma kervillea Navás—Wiederentdeckung einer systematisch isolierten Hemerobiiden-Spezies in Kleinasien. Zeitschrift der Arbeits-Gemeinschaft Österreichischer Entomologen, 31, 92–96.Google Scholar
  7. Aspöck, U., & Aspöck, H. (1985). Das Genus Lekrugeria Navás (Neuropteroidea: Planipennia: Berothidae: Berothinae). Zeitschrift der Arbeitsgemeinschaft Österreichischer Entomologen, 37, 85–98.Google Scholar
  8. Aspöck, U., & Aspöck, H. (2005). Verbreitungsgrenzen von Neuropterida in Mitteleuropa. Linzer Biologische Beiträge, 37, 29–38.Google Scholar
  9. Aspöck, U., & Aspöck, H. (2007). Verbliebene Vielfalt vergangener Blüte. Zur Evolution, Phylogenie und Biodiversität der Neuropterida (Insecta: Endopterygota). Denisia, 20, 451–516.Google Scholar
  10. Aspöck, U., & Aspöck, H. (2008). Phylogenetic relevance of the genital sclerites of Neuropterida (Insecta: Holometabola). Systematic Entomology, 33, 97–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Aspöck, U., Aspöck, H., & Haring, E. (2003). Phylogeny of the Neuropterida—morphological evidence and the molecular advocatus diaboli. Entomologische Abhandlungen, 61, 157–158.Google Scholar
  12. Aspöck, U., & Hynd, W. R. B. (1995). A new genus and species of Nosybinae (Neuropt., Berothidae) from eastern Africa. Entomologist’s Monthly Magazine, 131, 107–113.Google Scholar
  13. Aspöck, U., & Mansell, M. W. (1994). A revision of the family Rhachiberothidae Tjeder, 1959, stat.n. (Neuroptera). Systematic Entomology, 19, 181–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Aspöck, U., Plant, J. D., & Nemeschkal, H. L. (2001). Cladistic analysis of Neuroptera and their systematic position within Neuropterida (Insecta: Holometabola: Neuropterida: Neuroptera). Systematic Entomology, 26, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Baehr, M. (1979). Vergleichende Untersuchungen am Skelett und an der Coxalmuskulatur des Prothorax der Coleoptera. Ein Beitrag zur Klärung der phylogenetischen Beziehungen der Adephaga (Coleoptera, Insecta). Zoologica, 130, 1–76.Google Scholar
  16. Beutel, R. G., & Baum, E. (2008). A longstanding entomological problem finally solved? Head morphology of Nannochorista (Mecoptera, Insecta) and possible phylogenetic implications. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 46, 346–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Beutel, R. G., Friedrich, F., & Aspöck, U. (2010). The larval head of Nevrorthidae and the phylogeny of Neuroptera (Insecta). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 158, 533–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Beutel, R. G., Ge, S.-Q., & Hörnschemeyer, T. (2007). On the head morphology of Tetraphalerus, the phylogeny of Archostemata and the basal branching events in Coleoptera. Cladistics, 23, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Beutel, R. G., & Gorb, S. (2006). A revised interpretation of the evolution of attachment structures in Hexapoda (Arthropoda), with special emphasis on Mantophasmatodea. Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny, 64, 3–25.Google Scholar
  20. Beutel, R. G., & Pohl, H. (2006). Head structures of males of Strepsiptera (Hexapoda) with emphasis on basal splitting events within the order. Journal of Morphology, 267, 536–554.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Beutel, R. G., & Vilhelmsen, L. (2007). Head anatomy of Xyelidae (Hexapoda: Hymenoptera) and phylogenetic implications. Organismsm Diversity & Evolution, 7, 207–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Brauer, F. (1852). Versuch einer Gruppierung der Gattungen in der Zunft Planipennia mit besonderer Rücksicht auf die früheren Stände. Stettiner Entomologische Zeitung, 13, 71–77.Google Scholar
  23. Bremer, K. (1994). Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics, 10, 295–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cameron, S. L., Sullivan, J., Song, H., Miller, K. B., & Whiting, M. F. (2009). A mitochondrial genome phylogeny of the Neuropterida (lace-wings, alderflies and snakeflies) and their relationship to the other holometabolous insect orders. Zoologica Scripta, 38, 575–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Crampton, G. C. (1917). A phylogenetic study of the larval and adult head in Neuroptera, Mecoptera, Diptera, and Trichoptera. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 10, 337–344.Google Scholar
  26. Crampton, G. C. (1921). The sclerites of the head and the mouthparts of certain immature and adult insects. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 14, 65–103. + pls.Google Scholar
  27. Eisner, T. (1953). The histology of a sense organ in the labial palps of Neuroptera. Journal of Morphology, 93, 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Felsenstein, J. (1985). Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution, 39, 783–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ferris, G. F. (1940). The morphology of Plega signata (Hagen) (Neuroptera: Mantispidae). Microentomology, 5, 33–56. + pls.Google Scholar
  30. Gaumont, J. (1976). L’appareil digestif des larves de Planipennes. Annales des Sciences Naturelles / Zoologie et Biologie Animale, 18, 145–250.Google Scholar
  31. Güsten, R., & Dettner, K. (1992). The prothoracic gland of the Chrysopidae (Neuropteroidea: Planipennia). In L. Zombori, & L. Peregovits (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth European Congress of Entomology and the XIII. Internationales Symposium für die Entomofaunistik Mitteleuropas, 1-6 September, 1991, Gödöllö, Hungary (pp. 60–65). Budapest: Hungarian Natural History Museum.Google Scholar
  32. Haring, E., & Aspöck, U. (2004). Phylogeny of the Neuropterida: a first molecular approach. Systematic Entomology, 29, 415–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hennig, W. (1969). Die Stammesgeschichte der Insekten. Frankfurt am Main: W. KramerGoogle Scholar
  34. Hepburn, H. R. (1969). The skeleto-muscular system of Mecoptera: the head. University of Kansas Science Bulletin, 48, 721–765.Google Scholar
  35. Hoyt, C. P. (1952). The evolution of the mouth parts of adult Diptera. Microentomology, 17, 61–125.Google Scholar
  36. Kelsey, L. P. (1954). The skeleto-muscular mechanism of the Dobson Fly. Corydalus cornutus Part I. Head and prothorax. Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station Memoirs, 34, 1–52.Google Scholar
  37. Killington, F. J. (1936). A monograph of the British Neuroptera (Vol. 1). London: The Ray Society.Google Scholar
  38. Korn, W. (1943). Die Muskulatur des Kopfes und des Thorax von Myrmeleon europaeus und ihre Metamorphose. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Anatomie und Ontogenie der Tiere, 68, 273–330.Google Scholar
  39. Krenn, H. W., Gereben-Krenn, B.-A., Steinwender, B. M., & Popov, A. (2008). Flower visiting Neuroptera: Mouthparts and feeding behaviour of Nemoptera sinuta (Nemopteridae). European Journal of Entomology, 105, 267–277.Google Scholar
  40. Kristensen, N. P. (1975). The phylogeny of hexapod "orders". A critical review of recent accounts. Journal of Zoological Systematucs and Evolutionary Research, 13, 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kristensen, N. P. (1999). Phylogeny of endopterygote insects, the most successful lineage of living organisms. European Journal of Entomology, 96, 237–253.Google Scholar
  42. Link, E. (1909). Über die Stirnaugen der Neuropteren und Lepidopteren. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Anatomie und Ontogenie der Tiere, 27, 213–242. + 3 pls.Google Scholar
  43. MacLeod, E. G. (1964). A comparative morphological study of the head capsule and cervix of larval Neuroptera (Insecta). Unpublished PhD thesis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  44. Maki, T. (1936). Studies on the skeletal structure, musculature and nervous system of the Alder Fly Chauliodes formosanus Petersen. Memoirs of the Faculty of Science and Agriculture /Taihoku Imperial University, 16, 117–243. + errata, 10 pls.Google Scholar
  45. Matsuda, R. (1956). The comparative morphology of the thorax of two species of insects. Microentomology, 21, 1–65.Google Scholar
  46. Matsuda, R. (1970). Morphology and evolution of the insect thorax. Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada, 76, 1–431.Google Scholar
  47. Meinander, M. (1972). A revision of the family Coniopterygidae (Planipennia). Acta Zoologica Fennica, 136, 1–357.Google Scholar
  48. Miller, F. W. (1933). Musculature of the lacewing (Chrysopa florabunda) (Neuroptera). Journal of Morphology, 55, 29–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Morse, M. (1931). The external morphology of Chrysopa perla L. (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 39, 1–43.Google Scholar
  50. New, T. R. (1989). Planipennia (lacewings). In Handbuch der Zoologie, vol. IV (Arthropoda: Insecta), pt. 30. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  51. New, T. R., & Theischinger, G. (1993). Megaloptera, alderflies and dobsonflies. In Handbuch der Zoologie, vol. 4 (Arthropoda: Insecta), pt. 33. Berlin, New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  52. Oswald, J. D. (1993). Phylogeny, taxonomy and biogeography of extant silky lacewings (Psychopsidae). Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 191, 1–65.Google Scholar
  53. Röber, H. (1942). Morphologie des Kopfes und des Vorderdarmes der Larve und Imago von Sialis flavilatera. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Anatomie und Ontogenie der Tiere, 67, 61–118.Google Scholar
  54. Rousset, A. (1966). Morphologie céphalique des larves de Planipennes (Insectes Névroptéroides). Mémoires du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle / Série A Zoologie, 42, 1–199.Google Scholar
  55. Sanderson, M. J., Donoghue, M. J., Piel, W., & Eriksson, T. (1994). TreeBASE: a prototype database of phylogenetic analyses and an interactive tool for browsing the phylogeny of life. American Journal of Botany, 81, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sundermeier, W. (1940). Der Hautpanzer des Kopfes und des Thorax von Myrmeleon europaeus und seine Metamorphose. Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Anatomie und Ontogenie der Tiere, 66, 291–348.Google Scholar
  57. Swofford, D. L. (2001). PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony and other methods, version 4.0b10. Sunderland, Mass.: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar
  58. Tjeder, B. (1957). Neuroptera-Planipennia. The lace-wings of southern Africa. 1. Introduction and families Coniopterygidae, Sisyridae, and Osmylidae. In B. Hanstrom, P. Brinck, & G. Rudebec (Eds.), South African animal life, vol. 4 (pp. 95–188). Stockholm: Swedish National Science Research Council.Google Scholar
  59. Tjeder, B. (1959). Neuroptera-Planipennia. The lace-wings of southern Africa. 2. Family Berothidae. In B. Hanstrom, P. Brinck, & G. Rudebec (Eds.), South African animal life, vol. 6 (pp. 256–314). Stockholm: Swedish National Science Research Council.Google Scholar
  60. von Kéler, S. (1963). Entomologisches Wörterbuch. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
  61. Wiegmann, B. M., Trautwein, M. D., Kim, J.-W., Cassel, B. K., Bertone, M. A., Winterton, S. L., & Yeates, D. K. (2009). Single-copy nuclear genes resolve the phylogeny of the holometabolous insects. BMC Biology, 7(34) Google Scholar
  62. Williams, I. W. (1938). The comparative morphology of the mouthparts of the order Coleoptera treated from the standpoint of phylogeny. Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 46, 245–289.Google Scholar
  63. Winterton, S. L. (2003). Molecular phylogeny of Neuropterida with emphasis on the lacewings (Neuroptera). Entomologische Abhandlungen, 61, 158–160.Google Scholar
  64. Wundt, H. (1961). Der Kopf der Larve von Osmylus chrysops L. (Neuroptera, Planipennia). Zoologische Jahrbücher, Abteilung für Anatomie und Ontogenie der Tiere, 79, 557–662.Google Scholar
  65. Zimmermann, D., Klepal, W., & Aspöck, U. (2009). The first holistic SEM study on Coniopterygidae (Neuroptera)—structural evidence and phylogenetic implications. European Journal of Entomology, 106, 651–662.Google Scholar
  66. Zwick, P. (1967). Beschreibung der aquatischen Larve von Neurorthus fallax (Rambur) und Errichtung der neuen Planipennierfamilie Neurorthidae fam. nov. Gewässer und Abwässer, 44(45), 65–86.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Gesellschaft für Biologische Systematik 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rolf G. Beutel
    • 1
  • Dominique Zimmermann
    • 2
  • Marcus Krauß
    • 1
  • Susanne Randolf
    • 2
  • Benjamin Wipfler
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Spezielle Zoologie and EvolutionsbiologieJenaGermany
  2. 2.Naturhistorisches Museum WienViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations