Limits...
Redescription of two subterranean amphipods Niphargusmolnari Méhely, 1927 and Niphargusgebhardti Schellenberg, 1934 (Amphipoda, Niphargidae) and their phylogenetic position.

Angyal D, Balázs G, Zakšek V, Krízsik V, Fišer C - Zookeys (2015)

Bottom Line: Using three independent molecular markers we showed that Niphargusgebhardti belongs to the clade distributed between Central and Eastern Europe, whereas phylogenetic relationship of Niphargusmolnari to the rest of Niphargus species is not clear.The two species from the Mecsek Mts. are phylogenetically not closely related.Both species need to be treated as vulnerable according to IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Zoology, Hungarian Natural History Museum, Baross u. 13, 1088 Budapest, Hungary ; Doctoral School of Animal-and Agricultural Environmental Sciences, Department of Animal Sciences and Animal Husbandry, Georgikon Faculty, University of Pannonia, Deák Ferenc u. 16, 8360 Keszthely, Hungary.

ABSTRACT
A detailed redescription of two endemic, cave-dwelling niphargid species of the Hungarian Mecsek Mts., Niphargusmolnari Méhely, 1927 and Niphargusgebhardti Schellenberg, 1934 is given based on newly collected material. Morphology was studied under light microscopy and with scanning electon microscopy. Morphological descriptions are complemented with mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) sequences as barcodes for both species and with notes on their ecology. Using three independent molecular markers we showed that Niphargusgebhardti belongs to the clade distributed between Central and Eastern Europe, whereas phylogenetic relationship of Niphargusmolnari to the rest of Niphargus species is not clear. The two species from the Mecsek Mts. are phylogenetically not closely related. Both species need to be treated as vulnerable according to IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

No MeSH data available.


Niphargusmolnari, scanning electron micrographs. A epimeral plates (Ep1-3 = epimeral plates 1-3) B honeybee-cell pattern on the exosceleton (tipical feature of amphipods) C pleopod with two retinacles (pl-r = pleopod ramus, ret = retinaculum) D retinaculi on the pleopod (ret = retinaculum) E gnathopod II propodus (prop = propodus, sup-spine = supporting spine, dact = dactylus) F palmar region of gnathopod II propodus (dent-spine = denticulated spine, sup-spine = supporting spine, n = nail, palm-spine = palmar spine).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons-attribution
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4493343&req=5

Figure 4: Niphargusmolnari, scanning electron micrographs. A epimeral plates (Ep1-3 = epimeral plates 1-3) B honeybee-cell pattern on the exosceleton (tipical feature of amphipods) C pleopod with two retinacles (pl-r = pleopod ramus, ret = retinaculum) D retinaculi on the pleopod (ret = retinaculum) E gnathopod II propodus (prop = propodus, sup-spine = supporting spine, dact = dactylus) F palmar region of gnathopod II propodus (dent-spine = denticulated spine, sup-spine = supporting spine, n = nail, palm-spine = palmar spine).

Mentions: Body and telson. Small to medium-sized species, females are 6.4 mm to 9.0 mm, males are 7.8 mm to 10.6 mm. Head length up to 13% of body length; rostrum absent. Pereonites I–VI without setae; pereonite V, VI, VII with 1 postero-ventral seta each. Pleonites I–III with 3–6 setae along dorso-posterior margin (Fig. 3). Epimeral plate II ventral and posterior margins straight or sinusoid, ventro-postero-distal corner approximately perpendicular and pointed; along ventral margin 1–3 spiniform setae; along posterior margin 4–6 thin setae (Figs 3, 4). Epimeral plate III ventral margin convex and posterior margin straight, ventropostero-distal corner sharply inclined, strongly produced; along ventral margin 2–3 spiniform setae; along posterior margin 4–6 thin setae (Figs 3, 4). Urosomite I postero-dorso-laterally with 1–2 spiniform seta; urosomite II postero-dorso-laterally with 2–3 spiniform setae; urosomite III without setae. Near insertion of uropod I 1 spiniform seta (Fig. 3).


Redescription of two subterranean amphipods Niphargusmolnari Méhely, 1927 and Niphargusgebhardti Schellenberg, 1934 (Amphipoda, Niphargidae) and their phylogenetic position.

Angyal D, Balázs G, Zakšek V, Krízsik V, Fišer C - Zookeys (2015)

Niphargusmolnari, scanning electron micrographs. A epimeral plates (Ep1-3 = epimeral plates 1-3) B honeybee-cell pattern on the exosceleton (tipical feature of amphipods) C pleopod with two retinacles (pl-r = pleopod ramus, ret = retinaculum) D retinaculi on the pleopod (ret = retinaculum) E gnathopod II propodus (prop = propodus, sup-spine = supporting spine, dact = dactylus) F palmar region of gnathopod II propodus (dent-spine = denticulated spine, sup-spine = supporting spine, n = nail, palm-spine = palmar spine).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons-attribution
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4493343&req=5

Figure 4: Niphargusmolnari, scanning electron micrographs. A epimeral plates (Ep1-3 = epimeral plates 1-3) B honeybee-cell pattern on the exosceleton (tipical feature of amphipods) C pleopod with two retinacles (pl-r = pleopod ramus, ret = retinaculum) D retinaculi on the pleopod (ret = retinaculum) E gnathopod II propodus (prop = propodus, sup-spine = supporting spine, dact = dactylus) F palmar region of gnathopod II propodus (dent-spine = denticulated spine, sup-spine = supporting spine, n = nail, palm-spine = palmar spine).
Mentions: Body and telson. Small to medium-sized species, females are 6.4 mm to 9.0 mm, males are 7.8 mm to 10.6 mm. Head length up to 13% of body length; rostrum absent. Pereonites I–VI without setae; pereonite V, VI, VII with 1 postero-ventral seta each. Pleonites I–III with 3–6 setae along dorso-posterior margin (Fig. 3). Epimeral plate II ventral and posterior margins straight or sinusoid, ventro-postero-distal corner approximately perpendicular and pointed; along ventral margin 1–3 spiniform setae; along posterior margin 4–6 thin setae (Figs 3, 4). Epimeral plate III ventral margin convex and posterior margin straight, ventropostero-distal corner sharply inclined, strongly produced; along ventral margin 2–3 spiniform setae; along posterior margin 4–6 thin setae (Figs 3, 4). Urosomite I postero-dorso-laterally with 1–2 spiniform seta; urosomite II postero-dorso-laterally with 2–3 spiniform setae; urosomite III without setae. Near insertion of uropod I 1 spiniform seta (Fig. 3).

Bottom Line: Using three independent molecular markers we showed that Niphargusgebhardti belongs to the clade distributed between Central and Eastern Europe, whereas phylogenetic relationship of Niphargusmolnari to the rest of Niphargus species is not clear.The two species from the Mecsek Mts. are phylogenetically not closely related.Both species need to be treated as vulnerable according to IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Zoology, Hungarian Natural History Museum, Baross u. 13, 1088 Budapest, Hungary ; Doctoral School of Animal-and Agricultural Environmental Sciences, Department of Animal Sciences and Animal Husbandry, Georgikon Faculty, University of Pannonia, Deák Ferenc u. 16, 8360 Keszthely, Hungary.

ABSTRACT
A detailed redescription of two endemic, cave-dwelling niphargid species of the Hungarian Mecsek Mts., Niphargusmolnari Méhely, 1927 and Niphargusgebhardti Schellenberg, 1934 is given based on newly collected material. Morphology was studied under light microscopy and with scanning electon microscopy. Morphological descriptions are complemented with mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) sequences as barcodes for both species and with notes on their ecology. Using three independent molecular markers we showed that Niphargusgebhardti belongs to the clade distributed between Central and Eastern Europe, whereas phylogenetic relationship of Niphargusmolnari to the rest of Niphargus species is not clear. The two species from the Mecsek Mts. are phylogenetically not closely related. Both species need to be treated as vulnerable according to IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.

No MeSH data available.