Find research datasets worth reusing

opennotspecifiedDec 2013View details →

FIGURES 1–10 in Macrobothriotaenia ficta (Cestoda: Proteocephalidea), a parasite of sunbeam snake (Xenopeltis unicolor): example of convergent evolution

FIGURES 1–10. Macrobothriotaenia ficta (Meggitt, 1931) from Xenopeltis unicolor. Scanning electron micrographs. 1. Scolex, apical view. 2. Scolex, lateral view. 3. Detail of a sucker, apical view. 4. Lower part of the exterior surface of a sucker. 5. Capilliform filitriches at level of the apex surface. 6. Capilliform filitriches at the upper marginal surface of a sucker. 7. Luminal surface of suckers covered with capilliform filitriches and few gladiate spinitriches. 8. Non-adherent surface of suckers covered with long capilliform filitriches and few gladiate spinitriches. 9, 10. Posterior part of suckers and proliferation zone covered with long gladiate spinitriches. Note: small black numbers correspond to the figures showing higher magnification images of these surfaces.

FIGURE 11 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 11. Condition of the leg IV tarsal process in all newly described Paktongius species. Paktongius suzukii sp. nov., left leg IV of female paratype (a). Paktongius spiculosus sp. nov., left leg IV of male paratype (b). Paktongius paritensis sp.nov., left leg IV of female holotype (c). Paktongius furculus sp. nov., left leg IV tarsus of female holotype (d). Location of tarsal process indicated by white arrowheads. Scale bars: 100 µm.

FIGURE 10 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 10. Paktongius furculus sp. nov. Appendages are presented in ectal view unless otherwise indicated. Left chelicera of female holotype (a). Left pedipalp of female holotype (b). Left leg I of female holotype (c). Left leg II of female holotype (d). Left leg III of female holotype (e). Left leg IV of female holotype (f). Scale bars: 500 µm (a–b), 1 mm (c, e), 2 mm (d, f).

FIGURE 12 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 12. Distribution of Paktongius species in the Thai-Malay Peninsula. Icons correspond to the following species: star: Paktongius suzukii sp. nov.; circle: Paktongius spiculosus sp. nov.; square: Paktongius paritensis sp. nov.; triangle: Paktongius furculus sp. nov.; pentagon: Paktongius distinctus Suzuki, 1969; ten-pointed star: Paktongius thaiensis (Suzuki, 1985) comb. nov.

FIGURE 8 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 8. Paktongius paritensis sp. nov. Appendages are presented in ectal view unless otherwise indicated. Left chelicera of female holotype (a). Left pedipalp of female holotype (b). Right pedipalp of female holotype, mesal view (c). Left leg I of female holotype (d). Left leg II of female holotype (e). Left leg III of female holotype (f). Left leg IV of female holotype (g). Scale bars: 400 µm (a), 500 µm (b–c), 1 mm (d), 2 mm (e–g).

FIGURE 9 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 9. Paktongius furculus sp. nov. Female holotype, dorsal view (a). Female holotype, ventral view (b). Scale bars: 1.0 mm.

FIGURE 7 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 7. Paktongius paritensis sp. nov. Female holotype, dorsal view (a). Female holotype, ventral view (b). Scale bars: 1.0 mm.

FIGURE 6 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 6. Paktongius spiculosus sp. nov. Appendages are presented in ectal view unless otherwise indicated. Left chelicera of male paratype (a). Left pedipalp of male paratype (b). Left leg I of male paratype (c). Left leg II of male paratype (d). Left leg III of male paratype (e). Left leg IV of male paratype (f). Genitalia of male paratype, dorsal view (g). Genitalia of male paratype, ventral view (h). Scale bars: 500 µm (a–b), 1 mm (c–d), 2 mm (e–f), 100 µm (g–h).

FIGURE 2 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 2. Paktongius suzukii sp. nov. Appendages are presented in ectal view unless otherwise indicated. Left chelicera of male holotype (a). Right pedipalp of male holotype, mesal view (b). Left pedipalp of male holotype (c). Left leg I of male holotype (d). Left leg II of male holotype (e). Left leg III of male holotype (f). Left leg IV of male holotype (g). Genitalia of male holotype, dorsal view (h). Genitalia of male holotype, ventral view (i). Scale bars: 500 µm (a–c), 1 mm (d, f), 2 mm (e, g), 100 µm (h–i).

FIGURE 5 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 5. Paktongius spiculosus sp. nov. Appendages are presented in ectal view unless otherwise indicated. Left chelicera of female holotype (a). Left pedipalp of female holotype (b). Right pedipalp of female holotype, mesal view (c). Left leg I of female holotype (d). Left leg II of female holotype (e). Left leg III of female holotype (f). Left leg IV of female holotype (g). Scale bars: 500 µm (a–c), 1 mm (d–g).

FIGURE 4 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 4. Paktongius spiculosus sp. nov. Female holotype, dorsal view (a). Female holotype, ventral view (b). Male paratype, dorsal view (c). Male paratype, ventral view (d). Scale bars: 1.0 mm.

FIGURE 3 in New species of Paktongius and convergent evolution of the gonyleptoid-like habitus in Southeast Asian Assamiidae (Opiliones: Laniatores)

FIGURE 3. Paktongius suzukii sp. nov. Appendages are presented in ectal view unless otherwise indicated. Left chelicera of female paratype (a). Left pedipalp of female paratype (b). Right pedipalp of female paratype, mesal view (c). Left leg I of female paratype (d). Left leg II of female paratype (e). Left leg III of female paratype (f). Left leg IV of female paratype (g). Scale bars: 500 µm (a–c), 1 mm (d), 2 mm (e–g).

Fig. 7 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 7. Ancestral state estimation and mapping of binary states of male A) male flagellar groove and B) fondal notch. Absent = no flagellar groove/no fondal notch, present = flagellar groove/fondal notch.

Fig. 4 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 4. Maximum likelihood topology of Eremobatidae inferred using IQ-TREE 2 and the 75% occupancy concatenated UCE matrix with taxa that rendered>10 UCE loci with outgroups removed. Nodal support for major clades refer to maximum likelihood bootstrap values (ML) on the left and local posterior probabilities estimated based on gene tree quartet frequencies in ASTRAL (MSC) on the right.Tip colors illustrate generic designations as per current eremobatid taxonomy. Male (left column) and female (right column) structures of eremobatid species are shown on the right of the topology. Images are ordered phylogenetically. A) Eremochelis andreasana (♂, DMNS ZA.41919; ♀, DMNS ZA.40822). B) Hemerotrecha marathoni (♂, CNAN loan; ♀, CNAN loan). C) Hemerotrecha xena (♂, DMNS ZA.16469; ♀, DMNS ZA.42101). D) Eremochelis bilobatus (♂, DMNS ZA.17629; ♀, DMNS ZA.17359). E) Horribates spinigerus (♂, DMNS ZA.40086; ♀, AMNH_ Holotype). F) Chanbria regalis (♂, DMNS ZA.25443; ♀, DMNS ZA.25442). G) Hemerotrecha serrata (♂, DMNS ZA.16059; ♀, DMNS ZA.22169). H) Eremochelis flexacus (♂, DMNS ZA.16134; ♀, DMNS ZA.23593). I) Hemerotrecha parva (♂, DMNS ZA.42131; ♀, DMNS ZA.42131). J) Eremochelis larreae (♂, CASENT9033550; ♀, DMNS ZA.33721). K) Eremochelis insignatus (♂, DMNS ZA.28260; ♀, DMNS ZA.26390). L) Eremochelis striodorsalis (♂, DMNS ZA.31773; ♀, DMNS ZA.23593). M) Hemerotrecha californica (♂, DMNS ZA.18288; ♀, DMNS ZA.32217). All scale bars represent 1 mm.

Fig. 8 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 8. Ancestral state estimation and mapping of Gaussian mixture modeling (GMM) cluster membership onto our phylogram for ingroup male eremobatid species inferred from Elliptical Fourier coefficients for chelicerae. Character states 1−4 refer to the 4 distinct clusters in morphospace (Fig. 5B).

Fig. 1. Male chelicera variation from the family Eremobatidae. A in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 1. Male chelicera variation from the family Eremobatidae. A) Hemerotrecha parva (DMNS ZA.42131), B) Hemerotrecha macra (DMNS ZA.35652), C) Eremochelis branchi (DMNS ZA.38315), D) Eremochelis flexacus (DMNS ZA.16134), E) Chanbria regalis (DMNS ZA.25444), F) Eremorhax magnus (DMNS ZA.42055. Photograph credit: Cole Logan), G) Hemerotrecha hanfordana (DMNS ZA.37358), H) Horribates spinigerus (DMNS ZA.40086), I) Eremobates leechi (DMNS ZA.37070. Photograph credit: Quincy Hansen). All scale bars refer to 1 mm, except F, which refers to 2.5 mm.

Fig. 3 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 3. Summary of the quantitative and qualitative traits considered in this study for eremobatid males and females. A) Right, retrolateral view of male Eremochelis insignatus (DMNS ZA.33749) chelicera. Measurements considered in this study are illustrated. B) Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of papillated texturing inside flagellar groove of Eremochelis branchi (DMNS ZA.37135). C) SEM image of prolateral view of male fixed finger and associated flagellar groove belonging to Eremochelis branchi (DMNS ZA.37135). D) Right, retrolateral view of female chelicera of Hemerotrecha delicatula (DMNS ZA.41812) depicting the fixed finger tooth pattern and tip (apex) of fixed finger to fixed finger distal tooth (FF-to-FD) measure. Coloration and abbreviations follow Bird et al. (2015).Terminology abbreviations are FD = fixed finger, distal teeth, FSD = fixed finger, subdistal teeth, FM = fixed finger, medial teeth, FSM = fixed finger, submedial teeth, FP = fixed finger, proximal teeth. E) Operculum length, width, and diagonal measures on female Eremochelis plicatus (DMNS ZA.41887).

Fig. 2 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 2. Female cheliceral morphology from representatives of the family Eremobatidae. A) Hemerotrecha delicatula (DMNS ZA.41812), B) Eremochelis striodorsalis (DMNS ZA.18968), C) Horribates spinigerus (AMNH Holotype), D) Chanbria rectus (DMNS ZA.25456), E) Eremochelis andreasana (DMNS ZA.40822), F) Hemerotrecha serrata (DMNS ZA.25449), G) Hemerotrecha sp. (CIDA107821), H) Hemerotrecha prenticei (DMNS ZA.18169), I) Eremochelis bilobatus (DMNS ZA.17685). All scale bars refer to 1 mm.

Fig. 6 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 6. Ancestral state reconstruction of EFA coefficients. A) PC1 from the PCA of male chelicera EF coefficients and B) PC1 from the PCA of female opercula EF coefficients.

Fig. 5 in Camel spider trait evolution demonstrates repeated patterns of convergence (Arachnida: Solifugae: Eremobatidae)

Fig. 5. Morphospace plots based on PCA analysis of EF coefficients and GMM cluster assignments recovered from the first 3 PCs as input. Individuals with uncertain cluster membership are displayed in gray.Top row pertains to male chelicera, central row depicts female chelicera, and bottom row refers to female opercula. All PCA plots summarize PC1 and PC2 and illustrate: A) male cheliceral shape by genus, B) male cheliceral shape by cluster membership with mean shapes of each cluster to the right (cluster 1 was not supported after implementing the 0.95 uncertainty threshold), C) female cheliceral shape by genus, D) female cheliceral shape by cluster membership with mean shapes of each cluster to the right, E) female opercula shape by genus, F) female opercula shape by cluster membership with reconstructed operculum from the single opercula median shape. All shapes are not to scale.