Morphometrical, biochemical and molecular tools for assessing biodiversity. An example in Plebeia remota (Holmberg, 1903) (Apidae, Meliponini)

We see today many efforts to quantify biodiversity in different biomes. It is very important then to develop and to apply other methodologies that allow us to assess biodiversity. Here we present an example of application of three tools with this goal. We analyzed two populations of Plebeia remota from two distinct biomes that already showed several differences in morphology and behavior. Based on these differences, it has been suggested that the populations of Cunha and Prudentopolis do not represent a single species. In order to verify the existence or absence of gene flow between these two groups, we characterized the patterns of mtDNA through RFLP, the patterns of wing venation through geometric morphometry, and the cuticular hydrocarbons through gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. We used bees collected in these two locations and also from colonies which have being kept for around 9 years at Sao Paulo University. We found six different haplotypes in these specimens, of which three of them occurred exclusively in the population of Cunha and three only in the Prudentopolis population. The fact that the populations do not share haplotypes suggests no maternal gene flow between them. The two populations were differentiated by the pattern of the wing veins. They also had different mixtures of cuticle hydrocarbons. Furthermore it was shown that the colonies kept at the university did not hybridize. These two groups may constitute different species. We also show here the importance of using other methodologies than traditional taxonomy to assess and understand biodiversity, especially in bees.

Taxonomic review of Haliclystus antarcticus Pfeffer, 1889 (Stauromedusae, Staurozoa, Cnidaria), with remarks on the genus Haliclystus Clark, 1863

Difficulties concerning the taxonomy of stauromedusae are long known, and there is a clear need for taxonomic revision of the genus Haliclystus, as well as the reevaluation of some species. Haliclystus antarcticus Pfeffer, 1889 is recorded from Admiralty Bay, King George Island, Antarctic Peninsula. Due to the lack of detailed information on this species, we provide a redescription, presenting new data on the cnidome, morphometry, geographical distribution and intraspecific variation. Based on these characters, we propose that our specimens and Haliclystus auricula from Chile and Argentina are synonymous and should be classified as H. antarcticus. We also review the worldwide distribution of the genus Haliclystus Clark, 1863 and discuss taxonomic issues, concluding that some characters traditionally used in the taxonomy of the group should be used cautiously.

A revision of the spider genera Chaetopelma ausserer 1871 and Nesiergus simon 1903 (Araneae, theraphosidae, ischnocolinae)

Chaetopelma Ausserer 1871 and Nesiergus Simon 1903 are revised. Cratorrhagus Simon 1891 is considered a junior synonym of Chaetopelma. Cratorrhagus tetramerus (Simon 1873) and the female of Cratorrhagus concolor (Simon 1873) are conspecific with C. olivaceum (C. L. Koch 1841). Ischnocolus gracilis Ausserer 1871, Ischnocolus syriacus Ausserer 1871, Chaetopelma shabati Hassan 1950 and Ischnocolus jerusalemensis Smith 1990 are also treated here as junior synonyms of C. olivaceum. Chaetopelma adenense Simon 1890 is proposed as a junior synonym of Ischnocolus jickelii L. Koch 1875. Chaetopelma gardineri Hirst 1911 is transferred to Nesiergus. Hence, Chaetopelma comprises three valid species: C. olivaceum (C. L. Koch 1841); C. karlamani Vollmer 1997; C. concolor (Simon 1873) n. comb. from the Middle East and northeastern Africa. Nesiergus, which appears endemic to the Seychelles archipelago, now comprises three valid species: N. gardineri (Hirst 1911) n. comb.; N. halophilus Benoit 1978; N. insulanus Simon 1903.