z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Hidden diversity of E uscorpius ( S corpiones: E uscorpiidae) in G reece revealed by multilocus species‐delimitation approaches
Author(s) -
Parmakelis Aristeidis,
Kotsakiozi Panayiota,
Stathi Iasmi,
Poulikarakou Stavroula,
Fet Victor
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
biological journal of the linnean society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.906
H-Index - 112
eISSN - 1095-8312
pISSN - 0024-4066
DOI - 10.1111/bij.12170
Subject(s) - paraphyly , biology , subgenus , zoology , genus , clade , polyphyly , evolutionary biology , taxonomy (biology) , phylogenetic tree , biochemistry , gene
Phylogenetic analysis of the genus E uscorpius ( S corpiones: E uscorpiidae) across the M editerranean region (86 specimens, 77 localities, four DNA markers: 16S rDNA , COI , COII , and ITS1 ), focusing on G reek fauna, revealed high variation, deep clade divergences, many cryptic lineages, paraphyly at subgenus level, and sympatry of several new and formerly known lineages. Numerous specimens from mainland and insular G reece, undoubtedly the least studied region of the genus' distribution, have been included. The reconstructed phylogeny covers representative taxa and populations across the entire genus of E uscorpius . The deepest clades detected within E uscorpius correspond (partially) to its current subgeneric division, outlining subgenera T etratrichobothrius and A lpiscorpius . The rest of the genus falls into several clades, including subgenus P olytrichobothrius and a paraphyletic subgenus E uscorpius s.s . Several cryptic lineages are recovered, especially on the islands. The inadequacy of the morphological characters used in the taxonomy of the genus to delineate species is discussed. Finally, the time frame of differentiation of E uscorpius in the study region is estimated and the distributional patterns of the lineages are contrasted with those of other highly diversified invertebrate genera occurring in the study region. © 2013 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society , 2013, 110 , 728–748.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here