Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing the taxonomic resolution of southern African trapdoor spiders (Araneae: Ctenizidae; Cyrtaucheniidae; Idiopidae) and implications for their conservation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Taxonomic classifications simultaneously represent hypotheses of taxon identity and relationships to taxonomists, and real, unchanging entities to users of taxonomic information. Taxonomic changes, while representing scientific progress, can be a source of frustration for users. A method for assessing confidence in the taxonomy of a group of organisms would assist users of the taxonomy. A method is presented for determining the degree of development of a taxonomy, a concept termed ‘taxonomic resolution’. The method was applied to six groups of southern African mygalomorph trapdoor spiders, namely Stasimopus Simon 1892 (Ctenizidae Thorell 1877), Ancylotrypa Simon 1889 (Cyrtaucheniidae Simon 1889), four genera of Idiopidae Simon 1889 assessed as a single group, Galeosoma Purcell 1903, the families Migidae Simon 1889 and Microstigmatidae Roewer 1942, and the burrowing scorpion genus Opistophthalmus C. L. Koch 1837 (Scorpionidae Latreille 1802). The method was based on the assumption that species delimitation in a group of organisms, the taxonomy of which is based on morphological characters, depends on whether the sample of material examined is adequate for assessing variation in those characters. Five assessment criteria were identified and scored for a group of species using the taxonomic literature. Estimates of the number of species remaining to be discovered and described in each group were also included in the assessment. The results obtained for the trapdoor spiders ranged from 15 to 29%, indicating a potentially significant degree of uncertainty in the taxonomy. Results for Migidae and Microstigmatidae were 51 and 78% respectively, whereas the result for Opistophthalmus was 93%. The applied value of a measure of taxonomic resolution, the limitations of the method, and a strategy for developing a more generally applicable method are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson MJ, Connel SD, Gillanders BM, Diebel CE, Blom WM, Saunders JE, Todd JL (2005) Relationships between taxonomic resolution and spatial scales of multivariate variation. J Anim Ecol 74:636–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck J, Kitching IJ (2007) Estimating regional species richness of tropical insects from museum data: a comparison of geography-based and museum-based methods. J Appl Ecol 44:672–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chao A (2005) Species estimation and applications. In: Balakrishnan N, Read CB, Vidakovic B (eds) Encyclopedia of statistical sciences. Wiley, New York, pp 7907–7916

    Google Scholar 

  • Chessman B, Williams S, Besley C (2007) Bioassessment of streams with macroinvertebrates: effect of sampled habitat and taxonomic resolution. J N Am Benthol Soc 26(3):546–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell RK (2009) EstimateS: statistical estimation of species richness and shared species from samples. Version 8.2. User’s guide and application published at: http://purl.oclc.org/estimates. Accessed 22 June 2010

  • Colwell RK, Coddington JA (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 345:101–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cracraft J (1983) Species concepts and speciation analysis. Curr Ornithol 1:159–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayrat B (2005) Towards integrative taxonomy. Biol J Linn Soc 85:407–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford ED (2000) Scientific method for ecological research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gaston KJ, Mound MA (1993) Taxonomy, hypothesis testing and the biodiversity crisis. Proc R Soc Lond B 251:139–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfray HCJ, Knapp S (2004) Introduction: taxonomy in the 21st century. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 359:559–569

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ (2004) A taxonomic wishlist for community ecology. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 359:585–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotelli NJ, Colwell RK (2001) Quantifying biodiversity: procedures and pitfalls in the measurement and comparison of species richness. Ecol Lett 4:279–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griswold CE (1985) A revision of the African spiders of the family Microstigmatidae (Araneae: Mygalomorphae). Ann Natal Mus 27(1):1–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Griswold CE (1987a) The African members of the trap-door spider family Migidae (Araneae: Mygalomorphae) 1: the genus Moggridgea O. P. Cambridge, 1875. Ann Natal Mus 28(1):1–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Griswold CE (1987b) The African members of the trap-door spider family Migidae (Araneae: Mygalomorphae) 2: the genus Poecilomigas Simon 1903. Ann Natal Mus 28(2):475–497

    Google Scholar 

  • Guralnick R, Van Cleve J (2005) Strengths and weaknesses of museum and national survey datasets for predicting regional species richness: comparative and combined approaches. Divers Distrib 11:349–359

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond PM (1994) Practical approaches to the estimation of the extent of biodiversity in speciose groups. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 345:119–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harte J, McCarthy S, Taylor K et al (1999) Estimating species-area relationships from plot to landscape scale using species spatial turnover data. Oikos 86(1):45–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendixson BE, Bond JE (2004) A new species of Stasimopus from the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa (Araneae, Mygalomorphae, Ctenizidae), with notes on its natural history. Zootaxa 619:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1910) Description of two trapdoor spiders from Pretoria (female of Acanthodon pretoriae Poc. and Stasimopus robertsi, n. sp.). Ann Transvaal Mus 2:74–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1913a) Descriptions of new and little known species of trapdoor spiders (Ctenizidae and Migidae) from South Africa. Rec Albany Mus 2:404–434

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1913b) Descriptions of new species of Arachnida from Cape Colony. Rec Albany Mus 2:462–481

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1914) Descriptions of new Arachnida from South Africa. Rec Albany Mus 3:1–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1915a) Descriptions of new South African Arachnida. Rec Albany Mus 3:70–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1915b) Descriptions of several new or rare species of Araneae from the Transvaal and neighborhood. Ann Transvaal Mus 5:89–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1915c) New South African Arachnida. Ann Natal Mus 3:289–327

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1915d) Notes on several four-lunged spiders in the collection of the Durban Museum, with descriptions of two new forms. Ann Durban Mus 1:125–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1916) Descriptions of new South African spiders. Ann Transvaal Mus 5:180–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1917) Descriptions of new South African Arachnida. Ann Natal Mus 3:687–711

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1919a) Descriptions of new South African Araneae and Solifugae. Ann Transvaal Mus 6:63–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1919b) Descriptions of new South African spiders and a solifuge of the genus Chelypus. Rec Albany Mus 3:196–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1923) On certain South African Arachnida, with descriptions of three new species. Ann Natal Mus 5:55–66

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1925) Descriptions of some African Arachnida. Rec Albany Mus 3:277–299

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1927) On some new arachnids from South Africa. Rec Albany Mus 3:416–429

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1934) On several solifuges, scorpions and a trapdoor spider from South West Africa. Ann Transvaal Mus 15:401–412

    Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt J (1935) Scientific results of the Vernay-Lang Kalahari Expedition, March to September 1930. The trap-door spiders, scorpions and solifuges. Ann Transvaal Mus 16:459–479

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirzel A, Guisan A (2002) Which is the optimal sampling strategy for habitat suitability modeling? Ecol Modell 157:331–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hortal J, Lobo JM (2005) An ED-based protocol for optimal sampling of biodiversity. Biodivers Conserv 14:2913–2947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber BA (2003) Rapid evolution and species specificity of arthropod genitalia: fact or artifact? Org Divers Evol 3:63–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2001) IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (2010) Guidelines for using the IUCN categories and criteria Version 8.0. IUCN Standards and Petitions Subcommittee. http://intranet.iucn.org/webfiles/doc/SSC/RedList/RedListGuidelines.pdf

  • Jobe RT (2008) Estimating landscape scale species richness: reconciling frequency- and turnover-based approaches. Ecology 89(1):174–182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jones FC (2008) Taxonomic sufficiency: the influence of taxonomic resolution on freshwater bioassessments using benthic macroinvertebrates. Environ Rev 16(1):45–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones OR, Purvis A, Baumgardt E et al (2009) Using taxonomic revision data to estimate the geographic and taxonomic distribution of undescribed species richness in the Braconidae (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonoidea). Insect Conserv Divers 2:204–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence RF (1927) Contributions to a knowledge of the fauna of South-West Africa. V. Arachnida. Ann S Afr Mus 25(1):1–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence RF (1937) A collection of Arachnida from Zululand. Ann Natal Mus 8:211–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipscomb D, Platnick N, Wheeler Q (2003) The intellectual content of taxonomy: a comment on DNA taxonomy. Trends Ecol Evol 18(2):65–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mace GM (2004) The role of taxonomy in species conservation. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 359:711–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mace GM, Collar NJ, Gaston KJ et al (2008) Quantification of extinction risk: IUCN’s system for classifying threatened species. Conserv Biol 22(6):1424–1442

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB et al (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probability is less than one. Ecology 83(8):2248–2255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Sutton N et al (2005) Improving inferences in population studies of rare species that are detected imperfectly. Ecology 86(5):1101–1113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meier R, Dikow T (2004) Significance of specimen databases from taxonomic revisions for estimating and mapping global species diversity of invertebrates and for repatriating reliable specimen data. Conserv Biol 18(2):478–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller JA (2003) Assessing progress in systematics with continuous jackknife function analysis. Syst Biol 52(1):55–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison WR, Lohr JL, Duchen P et al (2009) The impact of taxonomic change on conservation: does it kill, can it save, or is it just irrelevant? Biol Conserv 142:3201–3206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nixon KC, Wheeler QD (1990) An amplification of the phylogenetic species concept. Cladistics 6:211–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen FT, Meier R (2003) Testing species richness estimation methods on single sample collection data using the Danish Diptera. Biodivers Conserv 12:667–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen FT, Meier R, Larsen MN (2003) Testing species richness estimation methods using museum label data on the Danish Asilidae. Biodivers Conserv 12:687–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Platnick NI (2008) The World Spider Catalog. Version 8.5. American Museum of Natural History, New York. http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog/index.html. Accessed January 2008

  • Pocock RI (1897) On the spiders of the suborder Mygalomorphae from the Ethiopian Region, contained in the collection of the British Museum. Proc Zool Soc Lond 1879:724–774

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock RI (1898a) On the Arachnida taken in the Transvaal and in Nyasaland by Mr W. L. Distant and Dr. Percy Randall. Ann Mag Nat Hist 7:308–321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock RI (1898b) The Arachnida from the province of Natal, South Africa, contained in the collection of the British Museum. Ann Mag Nat Hist 7:197–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock RI (1900) Some new Arachnida from the Cape Colony. Ann Mag Nat Hist 7:316–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock RI (1901) Descriptions of some new African Arachnida. Ann Mag Nat Hist 7:284–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock RI (1902a) Descriptions of some new species of African Solifugae and Araneae. Ann Mag Nat Hist 7:6–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pocock RI (1902b) Some new African spiders. Ann Mag Nat Hist 7:315–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polis GA, Sissom WD (1990) Life history. In: Polis GA (ed) The biology of scorpions. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp 161–223

    Google Scholar 

  • Possingham HP, Andelman SJ, Burgman MA et al (2002) Limits to the use of threatened species lists. Trends Ecol Evol 17(11):503–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prendini L (2001) A review of synonyms and subspecies in the genus Opistophthalmus C. L. Koch (Scorpiones: Scorpionidae). Afr Ent 9(1):17–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Punzo F (1998) The biology of camel-spiders (Arachnida: Solifugae). Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Purcell WF (1902) New South African trap-door spiders of the family Ctenizidae in the collection of the South African Museum. Trans S Afr Mus 11:348–382

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell WF (1903a) New Arachnida collected by Mr S. C. Conwright Schreiner at Hanover, Cape Colony. Ann S Afr Mus 3:13–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell WF (1903b) New South African spiders of the families Migidae, Ctenizidae, Barychelidae, Dipluridae and Lycosidae. Ann S Afr Mus 3:69–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Purcell WF (1904) Descriptions of new genera and species of South African spiders. Trans S Afr Philos Soc 15:115–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purcell WF (1908) Araneae. In: Schultze L (ed) Forschungsreise in Sudafrika 1(2). Denkschr med naturw Ges Jena 13, pp 203–246

  • Raven RJ (1985) The spider infraorder Mygalomorphae (Araneae): cladistics and systematics. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist 182:1–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Sites JW, Marshall JC (2003) Delimiting species: a Renaissance issue in systematic biology. Trends Ecol Evol 18(9):462–470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solow AR, Mound LA, Gaston KJ (1995) Estimating the rate of synonymy. Syst Biol 44:93–96

    Google Scholar 

  • Strand E (1906) Über einege Vogelspinnen und afrikanische Spinnen des naturhistorischen Museums zu Wiesbaden. Jahrb nassau Ver Naturk 59:1–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Strand E (1907) Vorläufige Diagnosen afrikanischer und südamerikanischer Spinnen. Zool Anz 31:525–558

    Google Scholar 

  • Strand E (1917) Zur Kenntnis afrikanischer Arten der Aviculariiden gattungen Idiops Perty, Harpactira Auss. und Pterinochilus Poc. Jahrb nassau Ver Naturk 70:162–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiele K, Yeates D (2002) Tension arises from duality at the heart of taxonomy. Nature 419:337

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker RWE (1917) On some South African Aviculariidae (Arachnida). Families Migidae, Ctenizidae, Diplotheleae and Dipluridae. Ann S Afr Mus 17:79–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Tucker RWE (1920) Contributions to the South African Arachnid Fauna. II. Ann S Afr Mus 17:439–488

    Google Scholar 

  • Ugland KI, Gray JS, Ellingson KE (2003) The species accumulation curve and estimation of species richness. J Anim Ecol 72:888–897

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valdecasas AG, Williams D, Wheeler QD (2008) ‘Integrative taxonomy’ then and now: response to Dayrat (2005). Biol J Linn Soc 93:211–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JJ, Servedio MR (2000) Species delimitation in systematics: inferring diagnostic differences between species. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:631–636

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (2004) Taxonomy as a fundamental discipline. Proc R Soc Lond B 359:739

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The following people are graciously acknowledged for supplying taxonomic literature for trapdoor spiders: Ansie Dippenaar-Schoeman of the Agricultural Research Council, Plant Protection Research Institute, Pretoria; Tersia Peregil of the Transvaal Museum, Pretoria; and Sadeck Casoojee of the South African Museum, Cape Town. Gavin Masterson, Siyabonga Buthelezi and six anonymous referees are thanked for their comments and suggestions on the manuscript. Lorenzo Prendini was supported by National Science Foundation DEB grants 0228699 and 0413453.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, 73 Market St., Johannesburg, South Africa

    Ian Engelbrecht

  2. Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

    Ian Engelbrecht

  3. Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY, 10024-5192, USA

    Lorenzo Prendini

Authors
  1. Ian Engelbrecht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lorenzo Prendini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ian Engelbrecht.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Engelbrecht, I., Prendini, L. Assessing the taxonomic resolution of southern African trapdoor spiders (Araneae: Ctenizidae; Cyrtaucheniidae; Idiopidae) and implications for their conservation. Biodivers Conserv 20, 3101–3116 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0115-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0115-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation