Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:51:05.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BIOLOGICAL CHARACTER ANALYSIS, CLASSIFICATION, AND HISTORY OF THE NORTH AMERICAN CICINDELA SPLENDIDA HENTZ GROUP TAXA (COLEOPTERA: CICINDELIDAE)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Larry Aldo Schincariol  and
Richard Freitag
Larry Aldo Schincariol
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada P7B 5E1
Richard Freitag
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada P7B 5E1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Comparisons of selected biological attributes were made to establish a phylogenetic basis for the classification of the Cicindela splendida Hentz group taxa. Recognized members of the group, C. splendida, C. limbalis Klug, and C. denverensis Casey, are spring-fall species, and northern populations emerge later during spring than southern populations. Despite differences in time of peak abundance, the three species overlap in time and space. The absence of large numbers of hybrids of these three species suggests that although closely related, their adults can distinguish from each other, and thus their rank as species should be retained.

Comparison of geographical distribution of these species with that of dominant soil types revealed that they had similar soil preferences. The geographical distribution of all three species was smaller than the range of their preferred soil types, probably because of the same factors that influence their local distributions.

Morphometric analyses of these species revealed a closer similarity between C. splendida and C. limbalis. In both sexes elytral pattern, percentage maculation, elytral colour, and non-sensory setae number collectively distinguish these species from each other, whereas body measurements, body ratios, sensory setae, and labral setae collectively fail to distinguish them.

Based on plesiomorph/apomorph character polarization, and the C. purpurea Olivier group as outgroup, it was determined that C. denverensis represents an early lineage of the C. splendida group, whereas C. splendida and C. limbalis are more recent sister species.

The ancestor of the C. splendida group probably evolved during late stages of the Tertiary Period as a North American resident and was a continental, riparian, cool-temperate form that ranged across Canada and northeastern and central United States. Extant forms speciated during the late Pleistocene as a result of spatial fragmentation of populations, isolation, and adaptation during glacial and interglacial periods.

Résumé

La comparaison de caractéristiques biologiques choisies a permis d’établir une base phylogenétique à la classification du groupe de taxons de Cicindela splendida Hentz. Les membres reconnus du groupe. C. splendida, C. limbalis Klug et C. denverensis Casey sont des espèces de printemps–automne et les populations nordiques émergent plus tôt au printemps que les populations plus australes, L’abondance maximale ne se produit pas au même moment chez les trois espèces, mais il y a chevauchement des trois taxons dans le temps et dans l’espace. L’absence de nombreux hybrides semble indiquer que, bien que les trois espèces soient très apparentées, les adultes peuvent se reconnaître les uns des autres et leur statut d’espèces doit donc être retenu.

La comparaison des répartitions géographiques de ces espèces en fonction du type de sol a révélé qu’elles préfèrent toutes trois les mêmes types de sol. La répartition géographique des trois taxons esi plus limitée que celle de leurs types de sols favoris, probablement en raison des facteurs qui régissent aussi leurs répartitions locales.

Des analyses morphométriques de ces espèces ont mis en lumière une similarité plus grande entre C. splendida et C. limbalis. Chez les mâles et les femelles, la combinaison des dessins sur les élytres, de la surface occupée par les taches (pourcent), de la couleur des élytres et du nombre de soies non sensorielles permet de distinguer ces espèces l’une de l’autre, mais la mesure des structures, leur allométrie, les soies sensorielles et les soies sur le labre ne permettent pas dans leur ensemble de le faire.

D’après la polarisation des caractéristiques plésiomorphes/apomorphes et l’utilisation de C. purpurea Olivier comme groupe externe, il est possible d’établir que C. denverensis est un représentant d’une lignée primitive du groupe C. splendida et que C. splendida et C. limbalis sont des espèces soeurs apparues pius récemment.

L’ancêtre du groupe C. splendida a probablement évolué au cours des dernières étapes du Tertiaire en Amérique du Nord; il s’agissait d’une forme continentale, riparienne, tempérée-froide, répartie dans tout le Canada et dans le centre et le nord-est des États-Unis. Les formes actuelles sont apparues vers la fin du Pléistocène à la suite de la fragmentation spatiale des populations, de leur isolement et de leur adaptation au cours des périodes glaciaires et interglaciaires.

[Traduit par la rédaction]

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 123 , Issue 6 , December 1991 , pp. 1327 - 1353
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armson, K.A. 1977. Forest Soils: Properties and Processes. University of Toronto Press, Toronto and Buffalo. 390 pp.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, H.P., and Associates. 1982. Checklist of Cicindelidae: The Tiger Beetles. Plexus Publishing, Inc., Marlton, NJ. 31 pp.Google Scholar
Casey, T.L. 1897. Coleopterological Notices. VII. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 9: 285–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casey, T.L. 1913. Studies in the Cicindelidae and Carabidae of America. Mem. Coleopt. IV, Lancaster 4: 1–193.Google Scholar
Casey, T.L. 1914. Miscellaneous notes and new species. Mem. Coleopt. V, Lancaster 5: 355–378.Google Scholar
Clayton, J.S., Ehrlich, W.A., Cann, D.B., Day, J.H., and Marshall, I.B.. 1977. Soils of Canada. Vol. I. Soil Report. Vol. II. Soil Inventory. Agriculture Canada, Ottawa, Ont. 243 pp. and 239 pp.Google Scholar
Criddle, N. 1907. Habits of some Manitoba “Tiger Beetles” (Cicindela). Can. Ent. 39: 105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Criddle, N. 1910. Habits of some Manitoba tiger beetles (Cicindelidae). No. 2. Can. Ent. 42: 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Criddle, N. 1919. Fragments in the life-habits of Manitoba insects. Can. Ent. 51: 97–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eckhoff, D.E. 1939. The Cicindelidae of Iowa (Coleoptera). Iowa State Coll. J. Sci. 13: 201–230.Google Scholar
Eckhoff, D.E. 1970. A new name for Cicindela cyanocephalata Eckhoff. Coleopt. Bull 24(1): 32Google Scholar
EMR. 1974. The National Atlas of Canada. 4th ed. (Revised). The Macmillan Company of Canada Limited, Toronto, Ont., in association with the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources and Information Canada, Ottawa. Ont., Canada. 254 pp.Google Scholar
FitzPatrick, E.A. 1980. Soils: Their Formation, Classification and Distribution. Longman Inc., New York, NY. xix + 353 pp.Google Scholar
Freitag, R. 1965. A revision of the North American species of the Cicindela maritima group with a study of hybridization between Cicindela duodecimguttata and oregona. Quaest. Ent. 1: 87–170.Google Scholar
Freitag, R. 1966. The female genitalia of four species of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Can. Ent. 98: 942–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freitag, R., Schincariol, L.A., and Barnes, B.L.. 1985. A review of nomenclature for genitalic structures of Cicindela. Cicindela 17(2): 17–27.Google Scholar
Gaumer, G.C. 1977. The variation and taxonomy of Cicindela formosa say (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Ph.D. dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. 253 pp.Google Scholar
Graves, R.C., and Pearson, D.L.. 1973. The tiger beetles of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Trans. Am. ent. Soc. 99: 157–203.Google Scholar
Green, R.H. 1979. Sampling Design and Statistical Methods for Environmental Biologists. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, NY. xiii + 257 pp.Google Scholar
Hamilton, C.C. 1925. Studies on the morphology, taxonomy, and ecology of the larvae of holarctic tiger beetles (family Cicindelidae). Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 65: 1–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, R.J. 1975. A Primer of Multivariate Statistics. Academic Press, Inc., New York, NY. xiv + 332 pp.Google Scholar
Hentz, N.M. 1830. Description of eleven new species of North American insects. Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. 3: 253–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hori, M. 1982. The biology and population dynamics of the tiger beetle, Cicindela japonica (Thunberg). Physiol. Ecol. Japan 19(2): 77–212.Google Scholar
Horn, W. 1908. Coleoptera. Adephaga. Family Carabidae. Subfamily Cicindelinae. Wytsman Genera Insectorum. Bruxelles, fasc. 82A (1908), 82B (1910), 82C (1915). 486 pp., 23 pls.Google Scholar
Huie, L.H. 1915. The bionomics of the tiger beetle (Cicindela campestris). Proc. R. Phys. Soc. Edinburgh 20: 1–11.Google Scholar
Johnson, W.N. 1983. Notes on Cicindela splendida Hentz – limbalis Klug – denverensis Casey and ludoviciana Leng. Unpublished manuscript. 14 pp. Located at R. Freitag library, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ont.Google Scholar
Kaulbars, M.M. 1982. Systematics and ecology of the sexquttata species group, genus Cicindela (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). M.Sc. thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ont. 237 pp.Google Scholar
Kelly, K.L., and Judd, D.B.. 1965. The ISCC-NBS method of designating colors and a dictionary of color names. National Bureau of Standards Circular 553, and Supplement to NBS Circular 553: ISCC-NBS color-name charts illustrated with centroid colors. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. v + 158 pp. and 18 color charts.Google Scholar
Klug, J.C.F. 1834. Jarbucher der Insectenkunde mit besonderer Rucksicht auf die sammlung in Konigl. Museum in Berlin herausgegeben, Berlin. 1: 1–396.Google Scholar
Lawton, J.K. 1972. Collecting notes on the tiger beetles in southwestern and southcentral United States—spring trip 1970. Cicindela 4(2): 35–48.Google Scholar
LeConte, J.L. 1848. A descriptive catalogue of the Geodephagous Coleoptera inhabiting the United States east of the Rocky Mountains. Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. N.Y. 4: 173–474.Google Scholar
LeConte, J.L. 1856. Revision of the Cicindelae of the United States. Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. 11: 27–63.Google Scholar
Leng, C.W. 1902. Revision of the Cicindelidae of Boreal America. Trans. Am. ent. Soc. 28: 93–186.Google Scholar
Martin, J.E.H. 1978. The insects and arachnids of Canada. Part 1. Collecting and Publishing Supply and Services Canada, Hull, P.Q., Canada. 182 pp.Google Scholar
Matthews, J.V. Jr, 1979. Tertiary and Quaternary environments: Historical background for an analysis of the Canadian insect fauna. pp. 31–86. In Danks, H.V. (Ed.), Canada and its Insect Fauna. Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 108. 573 pp.Google Scholar
Moore, R. 1906. Notes on the habits of Cicindela. Ent. News 17(11): 338–343.Google Scholar
Morgan, A.V. 1987. Late Wisconsin and Early Holocene paleoenvironments of east-central North America based on assemblages of fossil Coleoptera. pp. 353–370. in Ruddiman, W.F., and Wright, H.E. Jr, (Eds.), The Geology of North America, Vol. K–3, North America and Adjacent Oceans during the Last Deglaciation. Geological Society of America, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
Morgan, A.V., and Freitag, R.. 1982. The occurrence of Cicindela limbalis Klug (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae) in a late-glacial site at Brampton, Ontario. Coleopt. Bull. 36(1): 105–108.Google Scholar
Morgan, A.V., and Morgan, A.. 1980. Faunal assemblages and distributional shifts of Coleoptera during the late Pleistocene in Canada and the northern United States. Can. Ent. 112: 1105–1128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mury-Meyer, E.J. 1983. An analysis of survivorship and foraging methods in the larvae of three sympatric species of tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae) occurring in central Pennsylvania. Ph.D. dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. 148 pp.Google Scholar
Nagano, C.D., Miller, S.E., and Morgan, A.V.. 1982. Fossil tiger beetles (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae): Review and new Quaternary records. Psyche 89(3–4): 339–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolay, A.S., and Weiss, H.B.. 1932. Synopsis of the Cicindelidae. I. General Introduction, Bibliography and Purpurea Group. J.N.Y. ent. Soc. 40: 341–355.Google Scholar
Norusis, M.J. 1983. SPSS-X Introductory Statistics Guide. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, and McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY, USA. 276 pp.Google Scholar
Norusis, M.J. 1985. SPSS-X Advanced Statistics Guide. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, and McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY, USA. 505 pp.Google Scholar
Palmer, M.K. 1976. Natural history and behavior of Pseudoxychila tarsalis Bates. Cicindela 8(4): 61–92.Google Scholar
Palmer, M.K. 1979. Rearing tiger beetles in the laboratory. Cicindela 11(1): 1–11.Google Scholar
Pimentel, R.A. 1979. Morphometrics: The Multivariate Analysis of Biological Data. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, Dubuque, IA. 276 pp.Google Scholar
Rivalier, E. 1954. Demembrement du genre Cicindela Linne. II. Faune Americaine. Rev. Fran. d'Ent. 21: 249–268.Google Scholar
Rumpp, N.L. 1980. A study leading to a revision of the Purpurea and Formosa groups of the genus Cicindela (Cicindelidae-Coleoptera). Unpublished manuscript. 32 pp. Located at R. Freitag library, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ont.Google Scholar
Rumpp, N.L. 1981. A study to determine differences between Cicindela splendida and Cicindela limbalis. Unpublished manuscript. 10 pp.Google Scholar
Rumpp, N.L. 1983. Afterthoughts on C. denverensis. Unpublished manuscript. 1 p.Google Scholar
Rumpp, N.L. 1984. A study of the female genitalia leading to a revision of the Purpurea group of the genus Cicindela. Unpublished manuscript. 9 pp. Located at R. Freitag library, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ont.Google Scholar
Schaupp, F.G. 1883. Synoptic tables of Coleoptera. Cicindelidae. Bull. Brook. ent. Soc. 6: 73–108, 121–126.Google Scholar
Schincariol, L.A. 1988. Mating behaviour, spermatophore structure, ecology and systematics of the Cicindela splendida group (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae): M.Sc. thesis, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ont. 236 pp.Google Scholar
Shelford, V.E. 1907. Preliminary note on the distribution of the tiger beetles (Cicindela) and its relation to plant succession. Biol. Bull. 14: 9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shelford, V.E. 1908. Life-histories and larval habits of the tiger beetles (Cicindelidae). J. Linn. Soc. Zool. 30: 157–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shelford, V.E. 1911. Physiological animal geography. J. Morph. 22: 551–618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shelford, V.E. 1917. Color and color-pattern mechanism of tiger beetles. Illinois Biol. Monogr. 3(4): 395–532.Google Scholar
Smyth, E.G. 1933. On the Nicolay and Weiss “Synopsis of the Cicindelidae” (Coleop.). Ent. News 44(8): 197–204.Google Scholar
Soils of Canada. 1972. Pedology and Cartographic Sections of the Soil Research Institute, Research Branch, Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, Ont., Canada. Scale 1:5,000,000. Lambert conformal conic projection, standard parallels 49°N and 77°N. Modified polyconic projection North of Latitude 80°. Printed by the Surveys and Mapping Branch, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.Google Scholar
Soil Survey Staff. 1960. Soil classification — a comprehensive system — 7th approximation: U.S.D. Soil Conserv. Service. 265 pp.Google Scholar
Soil Survey Staff. 1967. Supplement to soil classification system (7th approximation): U.S.D. Soil Conserv. Service. 207 pp.Google Scholar
Spanton, T.G. 1988. The Cicindela sylvatica group: Geographical variation and classification of the Nearctic taxa, and reconstructed phylogeny and geographical history of the species (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Quaest. Ent. 24(1): 51–161.Google Scholar
SPSS-X. 1986. User's Guide, 2nd ed. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, and McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, NY, USA. 988 pp.Google Scholar
USDI. 1970. The National Atlas of the United States of America. Distribution of Principal Kinds of Soils: Orders, Suborders and Great Groups. National Cooperative Soil Survey Classification of 1967. Compiled by the Soil Conservation Service, 1967. Scale 1:7,500,000. Albers Equal Area Projection. United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Varas-Arangua, E. 1928. IV Contribucion al estudio de los Cicindelidae (Notas sobre las variedades de algunas especies de Cicindela del grupo formosa purpurea oregona). Rev. Chil. Hist. Nat. 32: 231–251.Google Scholar
Wickham, H.F. 1899. The habits of American Cicindelidae. Proc. Davenport Acad. Nat. Sci. 7: 206–228.Google Scholar
Willis, H.L. 1967. Bionomics and zoogeography of tiger beetles of saline habitats in the central United States (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull. 47(5): 145–313.Google Scholar
Willis, H.L. 1968. Artificial key to the species of Cicindela of North America north of Mexico (Coleoptera: Cicindelidae). J. Kans. ent. Soc. 41(3): 303–317.Google Scholar
Zikan, J.J. 1929. Zur biologie der Cicindeliden Brasiliens. Zool. Anz. 82: 269–414.Google Scholar