Cyphophthalmi

Kury, Adriano B., 2015, Opiliones are no longer the same — on suprafamilial groups in harvestmen (Arthropoda: Arachnida), Zootaxa 3925 (3), pp. 301-340 : 324-328

Phylogeny of Cyphophthalmi

The mite-harvestmen ( Cyphophthalmi ) are here presented in more detail, separated from the rest of the Opiliones . In Figs. 20 to 23, are presented relevant hypotheses found in the literature concerning the branching pattern of the Cyphophthalmi . The six following genera are here used to represent the major groups of Cyphophthalmi as currently understood, because they are the oldest in each family: Parogovia Hansen, 1921 (for Neogoveidae Shear, 1980 ), Ogovea Roewer, 1923 (for Ogoveidae Shear, 1980 ), Pettalus Thorell, 1876 (for Pettalidae Shear, 1980 ), Siro Latreille, 1796 (for Sironidae C.L. Koch, 1839 ), Stylocellus Westwood, 1874 (for Stylocellidae Hansen and Sørensen, 1904 ) and Troglosiro Juberthie, 1979 (for Troglosironidae Shear, 1993 ).

Hypothesis C1 ( Fig. 20 ): Shear (1980) published the first cladistic analysis of the Cyphophthalmi , unfolding the group into five families, which resulted in a symmetrical arrangement. Shear called his two major clades Tropicophthalmi and Temperophthalmi. Later, Shear (1993) added a sixth family, Troglosironidae .

Hypothesis C2 ( Fig. 21 ): Giribet & Boyer (2002) attempted both a morphological and a molecular analyses, which turned out very unresolved and it is not shown here. With a much expanded matrix, Boyer et al. (2007) made an important molecular analysis of the Cyphophthalmi , but failed to include Ogoveidae because of a lack of material for molecular study. This asymmetrical tree has Stylocellidae as sister group to the rest.

Hypothesis C3 ( Fig. 22 ): Clouse et. al. (2010) analyzed the Stylocellidae , including also the other Cyphophthalmi families. They used molecular data, and also did not include Ogoveidae . It was substantially different from Boyer’s analysis. They have not proposed any superfamilial names, but did recover the clade later known as Boreophthalmi.

Hypothesis C4 ( Fig. 23 ): Giribet et al. (2011) finally obtained material of Ogoveidae for molecular study. The result showed Pettalidae as sister group of the rest as in Clouse et al. (2010) and some novel groups. They recovered only one of Shear’s clades, the Ogoveoidea. Three new infraordinal names were proposed.

Figures

FIGURE 20. Hypothesis C 1 of phylogeny of the Cyphophthalmi (Shear 1980 / 1993, morph). Shear (1980) was the first attempt ever of a cladistic analysis of the Cyphophthalmi. The analysis resulted in a symmetrical arrangement. Shear proposed the two infraorders Tropicophthalmi and Temperophthalmi. A sixth family was added in 1993. This graph is a combination of both works by Shear.

FIGURE 21. Hypothesis C 2 of phylogeny of the Cyphophthalmi (Boyer et al. 2007, mol). An important analysis, which failed to include Ogoveidae by lack of material for molecular study. This asymmetrical tree has Stylocellidae as sister group to the rest. They have not recovered any of Shear’s clades. A previous work (Giribet & Boyer 2002) included both morphological and molecular analyses, but both are remarkably lacking in resolution, even for the monophyly of the families themselves.

FIGURE 22. Hypothesis C 3 of phylogeny of the Cyphophthalmi (Clouse & Giribet 2010, mol; Clouse et. al. 2010, comb). Mostly molecular, which also did not include Ogoveidae. It was substantially different from Boyer’s analysis. They have not proposed any superfamilial names, but did recover the clade later known as Boreophthalmi.

FIGURE 23. Hypothesis C 4 of phylogeny of the Cyphophthalmi (Giribet et al. 2011). Finally material of Ogoveidae was obtained for molecular study. The result was this asymmetrical tree, with Pettalidae as sister group of the rest as in Clouse et al. (2010). They recovered one of Shear’s clades, the Ogoveoidea. Three new infraordinal names were proposed.