Abstract

The caddisfly subfamily Drusinae BANKS comprises roughly 100 species inhabiting mountain ranges in Europe, Asia Minor and the Caucasus. A 3-gene phylogeny of the subfamily previously identified three major clades that were corroborated by larval morphology and feeding ecologies: scraping grazers, omnivorous shredders and filtering carnivores. Larvae of filtering carnivores exhibit unique head capsule complexities, unknown from other caddisfly larvae. Here we assess the species-level relationships within filtering carnivores, hypothesizing that head capsule complexity is derived from simple shapes observed in the other feeding groups. We summarize the current systematics and taxonomy of the group, clarify the systematic position of Cryptothrix nebulicola, and present a larval key to filtering carnivorous Drusinae.We infer relationships of all known filtering carnivorous Drusinae and 34 additional Drusinae species using Bayesian species tree analysis and concatenated Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of 3805bp of sequence data from six gene regions (mtCOI5-P, mtCOI3-P, 16S mrDNA, CADH, WG, 28S nrDNA), morphological cladistics from 308 characters, and a total evidence analysis.All analyses support monophyly of the three feeding ecology groups but fail to fully resolve internal relationships. Within filtering carnivores, variation in head setation and frontoclypeus structure may be associated with progressive niche adaptation, with less complex species recovered at a basal position. We propose that diversification of complex setation and frontoclypeus shape represents a recent evolutionary development, hypothetically enforcing speciation and niche specificity within filtering carnivorous Drusinae.

Highlights

  • IntroductionAquatic invertebrates have evolved a staggering diversity of different feeding types (e.g., grazers, shredders, scrapers, gatherers, filter feeders, predators, and piercers) (Cummins and Klug, 1979; Mecom, 1972; Wallace and Merritt, 1980)

  • Aquatic invertebrates have evolved a staggering diversity of different feeding types (Cummins and Klug, 1979; Mecom, 1972; Wallace and Merritt, 1980)

  • Molecular dataset In all analyses monophyly of Drusinae, and monophyly of larval feeding groups within Drusinae were highly supported

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Aquatic invertebrates have evolved a staggering diversity of different feeding types (e.g., grazers, shredders, scrapers, gatherers, filter feeders, predators, and piercers) (Cummins and Klug, 1979; Mecom, 1972; Wallace and Merritt, 1980). Most filter-feeding Diptera and all filter-feeding Ephemeroptera develop specialized structures, whereas the majority of Trichoptera employ silken-nets for filter-feeding (McCafferty and Bae, 1992; Merrit and Wallace, 1984). Within Trichoptera, most families of Annulipalpia sensu Malm et al (2013) are net-spinning filter-feeders that construct specialized nets, befitting their ecological niche (Holzenthal et al, 2007; Malm et al, 2013).

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.