Draculoides bythius ( Harvey, Berry, Edward and Humphreys, 2008 )

Abrams, Kym M., Huey, Joel A., Hillyer, Mia J., Didham, Raphael K. & Harvey, Mark S., 2020, A systematic revision of Draculoides (Schizomida: Hubbardiidae) of the Pilbara, Western Australia, Part I: the Western Pilbara, Zootaxa 4864 (1), pp. 1-75 : 35-36

Draculoides bythius ( Harvey, Berry, Edward and Humphreys, 2008)

( Figs. 1–8 )

http://zoobank.org/NomenclaturalActs/ F6E7300F-381C-4DF5-8B96-DAE9B7D1F46A

Paradraculoides bythius Harvey, Berry, Edward and Humphreys 2008: 187–188 , figs. 1–3, 10, 36–42.

Draculoides bythius (Harvey, Berry, Edward and Humphreys) : Abrams et al. 2019 MPE 106532: 8, fig. 2.

Material examined. Holotype male. AUSTRALIA: Western Australia: Mesa B (Borehole 0016, trap 3), 37.9 km W of Pannawonica , 21°39’49”S, 115°57’2”E, 1 June 2005, M. Greenham, D. Kamien and L. Mould ( WAM T 63364).

Paratypes. AUSTRALIA: Western Australia: 1 ♀, same data as holotype ( WAM T 63365) ; 1 ♂, Mesa B, Bore- hole 0014 (trap 3), 37.9 km W of Pannawonica , 21°39’58”S, 115°57’27”E, March–May 2005, M. Greenham, D. Kamien and L. Mould ( WAM T 65759) ; 2 ♀, Mesa B, Borehole 0021 (trap 2), 38.1 km W of Pannawonica , 21°39’3”S, 115°57’2”E, March–May 2005, M. Greenham, D. Kamien and L. Mould ( WAM T 63340, T 66070) .

Other material. AUSTRALIA: Western Australia: See Harvey et al. (2008); Abrams et al. (2019).

Diagnosis. The shape of the male flagellum of Draculoides bythius most closely resembles D. affinis , D. anachoretus , D. cochranus , D. eremius , D. gnophicola , D. kryptus , D. mckechnieorum , D. noctigrassator and D. warramboo , especially in the presence of a broad base. It differs from D. affinis , D. eremius and D. gnophicola in the presence of a distally tapered end (blunt end in the aforementioned species). It differs from D. anachoretus , D. cochranus , D. mckechnieorum , D. noctigrassator and D. warramboo in the position of dm4 being in line with dl3, dm4 is anterior to dl 3 in the aforementioned species. It differs from D. kryptus in the anterior position of dm 4 in relation to dl3 (dm4 posterior to dl 3 in D. kryptus ). Females of this species differ from all other females by the position of microsetae between the two most anterior flagellomere of the flagellum. Draculoides bythius can be diagnosed from all other Draculoides species that were sequenced at COI and 12S by the 50bp mini-barcodes shown in Figures 3 and 5 . Draculoides bythius can be diagnosed from all other Draculoides species that were sequenced at ITS2 ( Fig. 7 ) except for Draculoides anachoretus , D. eremius , D. gnophicola , D. kryptus , D. mckechnieorum , D. warramboo , D. immortalis , D. belalugosii , D. christopherleei , D. piscivultus and D. akashae , which are not distinguishable using the ITS2 mini-barcode.

Description. See Harvey et al. (2008).

Remarks. Draculoides bythius is found in Mesas B and C situated west of Pannawonica in the Pilbara region of Western Australia ( Fig. 1A ).

Figures

FIGURE 1. Map of an area of the Pilbara described as “West Pilbara” for the purposes of this study, showing the distribution of the named Draculoides species. Inset maps show species distributions in finer detail encompassing areas A: Warramboo, Mesas A, B and C and “BudgieBore”; B: Bungaroo, Mesas G, H, J, K and L; C: Cochrane and Jewell, Kens Bore, Cane and Upper Cane River, Trinity Bore and Catho Well, Mt. Stuart Station; D: Middle Robe, Robe Valley; E: Bungaroo South, West Pit, Buckland Hills and Dragon deposit.

FIGURE 2. Maximum Likelihood tree, based on the reduced dataset. See Methods for details. Each terminal represents a single species or OTU, with named species in bold. Clades are identified using dashed boxes and shaded boxes encompass the species discussed in this study. Nodes with bootstrap support <80 are not shown, except for the common ancestor of the Draculoides radiation.

FIGURE 3. COI mini-barcodes for all Draculoides species including the operational taxonomic units used in Abrams et al. (2019). This barcode is the maximally diagnostic 50 bp fragment of DNA. Genetic variation within species is shown using IUPAC Ambiguity Codes. See Methods for details. The position of the mini-barcode is reported relative to a specimen of Draculoides celatus (WAM T98698, GenBank number MG913085). The blue tree on the left groups minibarcodes which are most similar to each other but does not represent an accurate phylogeny. The coloured bases in the figure are those that differ from the consensus reference sequence.

FIGURE 4. Maximum Likelihood tree based on COI mini-barcodes (Fig. 3) showing similarity of mini-barcode sequences, relative to species identity. This phylogeny does not recover an accurate tree topology, and evolutionary relationships should not be inferred from this figure.

FIGURE 5. 12S mini-barcodes for all Draculoides species including the operational taxonomic units used in Abrams et al. (2019). This barcode is the maximally diagnostic 50 bp fragment of DNA. Genetic variation within species is shown using IUPAC Ambiguity Codes. See Methods for details. The position of the mini-barcode is reported relative to a specimen of Draculoides celatus (WAM T98698, GenBank number MG913012). The blue tree on the left groups minibarcodes which are most similar to each other but does not represent an accurate phylogeny. The coloured bases in the figure are those that differ from the consensus reference sequence.

FIGURE 6. Maximum Likelihood tree based on COI mini-barcodes (Fig. 5) showing similarity of mini-barcode sequences relative to species identity. This phylogeny does not recover an accurate tree topology, and evolutionary relationships should not be inferred from this figure.

FIGURE 7. ITS2 mini-barcodes for all Draculoides species including the operational taxonomic units used in Abrams et al. (2019). This barcode is the maximally diagnostic 50 bp fragment of DNA. Genetic variation within species is shown using IUPAC Ambiguity Codes. See Methods for details. The position of the mini-barcode is reported relative to a specimen of Draculoides celatus (WAM T98698, GenBank number MG913105). The blue tree on the left groups minibarcodes which are most similar to each other but does not represent an accurate phylogeny. The coloured bases in the figure are those that differ from the consensus reference sequence.

FIGURE 8. Maximum Likelihood tree based on ITS2 mini-barcodes (Fig. 7) showing similarity of mini-barcode sequences, relative to species identity. This phylogeny does not recover an accurate tree topology, and evolutionary relationships should not be inferred from this figure.