@article {1509, title = {Millipedes and centipedes in German greenhouses (Myriapoda: Diplopoda, Chilopoda)}, journal = {Biodiversity Data Journal}, volume = {2}, year = {2014}, month = {11/04/2014}, pages = {1-43}, abstract = {

A review is given of all the literature records of millipedes and centipedes that have been found in German greenhouses together with additional records for 29 such sites. Species lists are given for 46 greenhouses investigated throughout Germany. Thirty-five diplopod and 18 chilopod species were found to occur in greenhouses, of which 15 (3 Chilopoda, 12 Diplopoda) are restricted to this type of habitat. First records for Germany include Anadenobolus monilicornis (Porat, 1876), Epinannolene cf. trinidadensis Chamberlin, 1918, Epinannolene sp., Mesoiulus gridellii Strasser, 1934, Leptogoniulus sorornus (Butler, 1876), Rhinotus purpureus (Pocock, 1894), Cryptops doriae Pocock, 1891, Lamyctes coeculus (Br\ölemann, 1889) and Tygarrup javanicus (Attems, 1907). The millipedes Oxidus gracilis (C. L. Koch, 1847) and Amphitomeus attemsi (Schubart, 1934) and the centipedes Lithobius forficatus (Linnaeus, 1758) and Cryptops hortensis (Donovan, 1810) are the species most frequently found in greenhouses.

}, keywords = {centipedes, first records, Germany, hothouse, millipedes, review}, issn = {1314-2828}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.2.e1066}, url = {https://bdj.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=1066}, author = {Decker, Peter and Reip, Hans S. and Voigtl{\"a}nder, Karin} } @article {1499, title = {Feeding habits and multifunctional classification of soil-associated consumers from protists to vertebrates}, journal = {Biological Reviews}, volume = {97}, year = {2022}, month = {20/01/2022}, pages = {1057-1117}, abstract = {

Soil organisms drive major ecosystem functions by mineralising carbon and releasing nutrients during decomposition processes, which supports plant growth, aboveground biodiversity and, ultimately, human nutrition. Soil ecologists often operate with functional groups to infer the effects of individual taxa on ecosystem functions and services. Simultaneous assessment of the functional roles of multiple taxa is possible using food-web reconstructions, but our knowledge of the feeding habits of many taxa is insufficient and often based on limited evidence. Over the last two decades, molecular, biochemical and isotopic tools have improved our understanding of the feeding habits of various soil organisms, yet this knowledge is still to be synthesised into a common functional framework. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of the feeding habits of consumers in soil, including protists, micro-, meso- and macrofauna (invertebrates), and soil-associated vertebrates. We have integrated existing functional group classifications with findings gained with novel methods and compiled an overarching classification across taxa focusing on key universal traits such as food resource preferences, body masses, microhabitat specialisation, protection and hunting mechanisms. Our summary highlights various strands of evidence that many functional groups commonly used in soil ecology and food-web models are feeding on multiple types of food resources. In many cases, omnivory is observed down to the species level of taxonomic resolution, challenging realism of traditional soil food-web models based on distinct resource-based energy channels. Novel methods, such as stable isotope, fatty acid and DNA gut content analyses, have revealed previously hidden facets of trophic relationships of soil consumers, such as food assimilation, multichannel feeding across trophic levels, hidden trophic niche differentiation and the importance of alternative food/prey, as well as energy transfers across ecosystem compartments. Wider adoption of such tools and the development of open interoperable platforms that assemble morphological, ecological and trophic data as traits of soil taxa will enable the refinement and expansion of the multifunctional classification of consumers in soil. The compiled multifunctional classification of soil-associated consumers will serve as a reference for ecologists working with biodiversity changes and biodiversity?ecosystem functioning relationships, making soil food-web research more accessible and reproducible.

}, keywords = {fatty acids, feeding preferences, food resources, functional traits, gut content, omnivory, Soil fauna, soil food web, stable isotopes, trophic guilds}, issn = {1464-7931}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12832}, url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.12832}, author = {Potapov, Anton M. and Beaulieu, Fr{\'e}d{\'e}ric and Birkhofer, Klaus and Bluhm, Sarah L. and Degtyarev, Maxim I. and Devetter, Miloslav and Goncharov, Anton A. and Gongalsky, Konstantin B. and Klarner, Bernhard and Korobushkin, Daniil I. and Liebke, Dana F. and Maraun, Mark and Mc Donnell, Rory J. and Pollierer, Melanie M. and Schaefer, Ina and Shrubovych, Julia and Semenyuk, Irina I. and Sendra, Alberto and Tuma, Jiri and T{\r u}mov{\'a}, Michala and Vassilieva, Anna B. and Chen, Ting-Wen and Geisen, Stefan and Schmidt, Olaf and Tiunov, Alexei V. and Scheu, Stefan} } @article {937, title = {Invertebrados ex{\'o}ticos nuevos o poco conocidos (Tricladida, Gastropoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla, Isopoda, Arachnida) en la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina}, journal = {Acta Zool{\'o}gica Lilloana}, volume = {64}, year = {2020}, month = {19/05/2020}, pages = {13-29}, abstract = {

Resumen: La fauna de planarias terrestres (Tricladida, Geoplanoidea), babosas (Mollusca, Gastropoda), dipl\ópodos (Myriapoda, Diplopoda), s\ínfilos (Myriapoda, Symphylla) y ar\ácnidos (Chelicerata) de la Ciudad Aut\ónoma de Buenos Aires (CABA, Argentina) permanece pobremente conocida. En la presente contribuci\ón se dan a conocer nuevos registros de especies de estos grupos, naturalizadas en el \ámbito urbano de CABA y alrededores. Las colectas y observaciones fueron realizadas sin un m\étodo sistem\ático. Se reportan: Rhynchodemus sylvaticus (Tricladida, Geoplanidas; primer registro para la provincia de Buenos Aires y segundo para Argentina), Obama nungara (Tricladida, Geoplanidae; primera cita para CABA), Imbira flavonigra (Tricladida, Geoplanidae; primer registro para Argentina), Milax gagates (Mollusca, Milacidae; primer registro para CABA), Cylindroiulus latestriatus (Diplopoda, Julidae; primer registro para Argentina), Ophyiulus pilosus (Diplopoda, Julidae; primer registro para Argentina), Brachydesmus superus (Diplopoda, Paradoxomatidae; primer registro para CABA y segundo para Argentina), Symphylella vulgaris (Symphyla, Scolopendrellidae; primer registro para Argentina), Cylisticus convexus (Oniscidea, Cylisticidae; segunda cita para Argentina, luego de 90 a\ños), Uloborus plumipes (Arachnida, Uloboridae; segunda cita para CABA y para Argentina) y Leucauge argyra (Arachnida, Tetragnathidae; primera cita para la provincia de Buenos Aires y segunda cita para Argentina). Diversos autores indican para Europa un r\ápido incremento en el n\úmero de especies invertebradas introducidas, un patr\ón extrapolable a Argentina. Lamentablemente, hasta la fecha, no se cuenta con datos certeros acerca de los patrones de distribuci\ón o abundancia de estas especies. En este sentido es necesario priorizar su conocimiento, incluso de aquellas potencialmente perjudiciales para ambientes nativos.

New or Little Known Exotic Invertebrates (Tricladida, Gastropoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla, Isopoda, Arachnida) in Buenos Aires City, Argentina

Abstract: The terrestrial flatworm (Tricladida, Geoplanoidea), slug (Mollusca, Gastropoda), diplopodan (Myriapoda, Diplopoda), symphilan (Myriapoda, Symphyla) and spider (Chelicerata) faunas of Buenos Aires City (CABA, Argentina) are poorly known. The aim of the present contribution is to report new records of exotic species belonging to those clades. Collection and observation of specimens were made without a systematic method. The following species are reported: Rhynchodemus sylvaticus (Tricladida, Geoplanidae; first record for Buenos Aires province and second record for tArgentina), Obama nungara (Tricladida, Geoplanidae; CABA), Imbira flavonigra (Tricladida, Geoplanidae; first record for Argentina), Milax gagates (Mollusca, Milacidae; first record for CABA), Cylindroiulus latestriatus (Diplopoda, Julidae; first record for Argentina), Ophyiulus pilosus (Diplopoda, Julidae; first record for Argentina), Brachydesmus superus (Diplopoda, Paradoxomatidae; first record for CABA and second record for Argentina), Symphylella vulgaris (Symphyla, Scolopendrellidae; first record for Argentina), Cylisticus convexus (Oniscidea, Cylisticidae; second record for the city by most than 90 years), Uloborus plumipes (Arachnida, Uloboridae; second record for CABA and the country), and Leucauge argyra (Arachnida, Tetragnathidae; first record for Buenos Aires province and second record for Argentina). Several authors have indicated that the number of exotic invertebrates in European cities has been dramatically increased in the last years. This pattern should be extrapolated to Argentina. Unfortunately, up to the date we entirely lack information about dispersal and distribution of exotic invertebrates in the city. It is necessary to prioritize the study of exotic species, especially those that are potentially problematic for native environments.

}, keywords = {Buenos Aires City, Ciudad Aut{\'o}noma de Buenos Aires, exotic invertebrates, invertebrados ex{\'o}ticos, new records, nuevos registros}, issn = {1852-6098}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.30550/j.azl/2020.64.1/2}, url = {http://www.lillo.org.ar/journals/index.php/acta-zoologica-lilloana/article/view/v64n1a02}, author = {Agnolin, Federico and Agnolin, Agust{\'\i}n and Garcia-Mars{\`a}, Jordi and Olejnik, Nicol{\'a}s} } @article {419, title = {Four myriapod relatives {\textendash} but who are sisters? No end to debates on relationships among the four major myriapod subgroups}, journal = {BMC Evolutionary Biology}, volume = {20}, year = {2020}, month = {04/11/2020}, pages = {1-15}, abstract = {

Background: Phylogenetic relationships among the myriapod subgroups Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla and Pauropoda are still not robustly resolved. The first phylogenomic study covering all subgroups resolved phylogenetic relationships congruently to morphological evidence but is in conflict with most previously published phylogenetic trees based on diverse molecular data. Outgroup choice and long-branch attraction effects were stated as possible explanations for these incongruencies. In this study, we addressed these issues by extending the myriapod and outgroup taxon sampling using transcriptome data.

Results: We generated new transcriptome data of 42 panarthropod species, including all four myriapod subgroups and additional outgroup taxa. Our taxon sampling was complemented by published transcriptome and genome data resulting in a supermatrix covering 59 species. We compiled two data sets, the first with a full coverage of genes per species (292 single-copy protein-coding genes), the second with a less stringent coverage (988 genes). We inferred phylogenetic relationships among myriapods using different data types, tree inference, and quartet computation approaches. Our results unambiguously support monophyletic Mandibulata and Myriapoda. Our analyses clearly showed that there is strong signal for a single unrooted topology, but a sensitivity of the position of the internal root on the choice of outgroups. However, we observe strong evidence for a clade Pauropoda+Symphyla, as well as for a clade Chilopoda+Diplopoda.

Conclusions: Our best quartet topology is incongruent with current morphological phylogenies which were supported in another phylogenomic study. AU tests and quartet mapping reject the quartet topology congruent to trees inferred with morphological characters. Moreover, quartet mapping shows that confounding signal present in the data set is sufficient to explain the weak signal for the quartet topology derived from morphological characters. Although outgroup choice affects results, our study could narrow possible trees to derivatives of a single quartet topology. For highly disputed relationships, we propose to apply a series of tests (AU and quartet mapping), since results of such tests allow to narrow down possible relationships and to rule out confounding signal.

}, keywords = {Arthropod phylogeny, conflict, Confounding signal, Internal rooting, Phylogenetics, phylogenomics, Quartet topology, RNA-Seq, Transcriptomes}, issn = {1471-2148}, doi = {10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0}, url = {https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0}, author = {Szucsich, Nikolaus U. and Bartel, Daniela and Blanke, Alexander and B{\"o}hm, Alexander and Donath, Alexander and Fukui, Makiko and Grove, Simon and Liu, Shanlin and Macek, Oliver and Machida, Ryuichiro and Misof, Bernhard and Nakagaki, Yasutaka and Podsiadlowski, Lars and Sekiya, Kaoru and Tomizuka, Shigekazu and Von Reumont, Bj{\"o}rn M. and Waterhouse, Robert M. and Walzl, Manfred and Meng, Guanliang and Zhou, Xin and Pass, G{\"u}nther and Meusemann, Karen} }