Evolution and systematics of the Chelicerata

Experimental and Applied Acarology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 63-79

  Weygoldt, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Arthropod interrelationships; Arthropoda; Phylogenetic system of Chelicerata; Scorpiones

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031937720     PISSN: 01688162     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1006037525704     Document Type: Review

References (88)

1. Alberti, G. 1979. Zur Feinstruktur der Spermien und Spermiocytogenese von Prokoenenia wheeleri (Rucker, 1901) (Palpigradi, Arachnida). Zoomorphologie 94: 111-120.
2. Alberti, G. 1980a. Zur Feinstruktur des Hodenepithels und der Spermien von Eusimonia mirabilis Roewer, 1934 (Solifugae, Arachnida). Zool. Anz. 204: 345-352.
3. Alberti, G. 1980b. Zur Feinstruktur der Spermien und Spermiocytogenese der der Milben (Acari): I. Anactinotrichida. Zool. Jb. Anat. 104: 77-138.
4. Alberti, G. 1980c. Zur Feinstruktur der Spermien und Spermiocytogenese der Milben (Acari): II. Actinotrichida. Zool. Jb. Anat. 104: 144-203.
5. Alberti, G. 1983. Fine structure of scorpion spermatozoa (Buthus occitanus: Buthidae, Scorpiones). J. Morphol. 177: 205-212.
6. Alberti, G. 1984. The contribution of comparative spermatology to problems of acarine systematics. In Acarology VI. I. Sixth International Congress of Acarology, D.A. Griffiths and C.E. Bowman (eds), pp. 479-490. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.
7. Alberti, G. 1991. Spermatology in the Acari: systematic and functional implications. In The Acari - reproduction, development and life-history strategies, R. Schuster and P.W. Murphy. (eds), pp. 77-105. Chapman & Hall, London.
8. Alberti, G. 1995. Comparative spermatology of Chelicerata: review and perspective. In Advances in spermatozoal phylogeny and taxonomy, B.G.M. Jamieson, J. Ausio and J.-L. Justine (eds), vol. 166 pp. 203-230. Mém. Mus. Hist. Nat., Paris.
9. Anderson, D.T. 1972. The development of hemimetabolous insects, pp. In Developmental systems - insects, J. Counce and C.H. Waddington (eds), pp. 95-163. Academic Press, London.
10. Anderson, D.T. 1973. Embryology and Phylogeny in Annelids and Arthropods. Pergamon Press, Oxford.
11. Anderson, D.T. 1979. Embryos, fate maps, and the phylogeny of arthropods. In Arthropod phylogeny, A.P. Gupta (ed.), pp. 59-105. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
12. Ankel, W.E. 1958. Begegnung mit Limulus. Natur Volk 88: 101-110.
13. Averof, M. and Akam, M. 1995. Insect-Crustacean relationships: insights from comparative developmental and molecular studies. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B347: 293-303.
14. Ax, P. 1984. Das Phylogenetische System. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart.
15. Bergström, J. 1979. Morphology of fossil arthropods as a guide to phylogenetic relationships. In Arthropod phylogeny, A.P. Gupta (ed.), pp. 3-56. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
16. Bergström, J. 1980. Morphology and systematics of early arthropods. Abh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 23: 1-42.
17. Boore, J.F., Collins, T.M., Stanton, D., Daehler, L.L. and Brown, W.M. 1995. Deducing the pattern of arthropod phylogeny from mitochondrial DNA rearrangements. Nature 376: 163-165.
18. Boudreaux, H.B. 1979a. Significance of intersegmental tendon system in arthropod phylogeny and monophyletic classification of Arthropoda. In Arthropod phylogeny, A.P. Gupta (ed.), pp. 551-586. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
19. Boudreaux, H.B. 1979b. Arthropod Phylogeny. With Special Reference to Insects. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
20. Briggs, D.E.G. 1987. Scorpions take to the water. Nature 326: 645-646.
21. Briggs, D.E.G. and Fortey, R.A. 1989. The early radiation and relationships of the major arthropod groups. Science 246: 241-243.
22. Briggs, D.E.G., Fortey, R.A. and Wills, M.A. 1992. Morphological disparity in the Cambrian. Science 256: 1670-1673.
23. Dohle, W. 1980. Sind die Myriapoden eine monophyletische Gruppe? Abh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 23: 45-104.
24. Dohle, W. 1996. Myriapod-Insect relationships as opposed to a crustacean-insect sister group relationship (abstract). In International Symposium on the Relationships of Major Arthropod Groups, pp. 8-9. The Natural History Museum, London.
25. Emerson, J. and Schram, F.R. 1990. The origin of biramous appendages and the evolution of Arthropoda. Science 250: 667-669.
26. Evans, G.O. 1992. Principles of Acarology. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
27. Firstman, B. 1973. The relationship of the chelicerate arterial system to the evolution of the endosternite. J. Arachnol. 1: 1-54.
28. Fortey, R.A. and Whittington, H.B. 1989. The Trilobita as a natural group. Historical Biol. 2: 125-138.
29. Friedrich, M. and Tautz, D. 1995. Ribosomal DNA phylogeny of the major extant arthropod classes and the evolution of myriapods. Nature 376: 165-167.
30. Fryer, G. 1996. Reflections on arthropod evolution. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 58: 1-55.
31. Gould, S.J. 1989. Wonderful Life. The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History. Norton, New York.
32. Grashoff, M. 1978. A model of the evolution of the main chelicerate groups. Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 42: 273-284.
33. Hahn, G. 1989. Reconstruction of the phylogenetic relationships among the higher systematic taxa of trilobites. Abh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 28: 187-199.
34. Hennig, W. 1950. Grundzüge einer Theorie der Phylogenetische Systematik. Deutscher Zentralverlag, Berlin.
35. Hennig, W. 1966. Phylogenetic Systematics. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Chicago.
36. Kjellesvig-Waering, E.N. 1986. A restudy of the fossil Scorpionida of the world. Paleont. Am. 55: 1-287.
37. Kraus, O. 1996. Phylogenetic relationships between higher taxa of tracheate arthropods (abstract). In International Symposium on the Relationships of Major Arthropod Groups, pp.11-12. The Natural History Museum, London.
38. Kraus, O. and Kraus, M. 1994. Phylogenetic system of the Tracheata (Mandibulata): on 'Myriapoda'-Insecta interrelationships, phylogenetic age and primary ecological niches. Verh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 34: 5-31.
39. Kukalova-Peck, J. 1992. The Uniramia do not exist: the groundplan in the Pterygota as revealed by Permian Diaphanopterodea from Russia (Insecta, Palaeodictyopteroidea). Can. J. Zool. 70: 236-255.
40. Lauterbach, K.-E. 1973. Schlüsselereignisse in der Evolution der Stammgruppe der Euarthropoda. Zool. Beitr. Berlin (NF) 19: 251-299.
41. Lauterbach, K.-E. 1980a. Schlüsselereignisse in der Evolution des Grundplans der Mandibulata (Arthropoda). Abh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 23: 105-161.
42. Lauterbach, K.-E. 1980b. Schlüsselereigniss in der Evolution des Grundplans der Arachnata (Arthropoda). Abh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 23: 163-327.
43. Lauterbach, K.-E. 1983. Synapomorphien zwischen Trilobiten- und Cheliceratenzweig der Arachnata. Zool. Anz. Jena 210: 213-238.
44. Lauterbach, K.-E. 1989. Trilobites and phylogenetic systematics: a reply to G. Hahn. Abh. Naturwiss. Ver. Hamburg (NF) 28: 201-211.
45. Lindquist, E. E. 1984. Current theories on the evolution of major groups of Acari and on their relationships with other groups of Arachnida, with consequent implications for their classification. In Acarology VI, I, D.A. Griffiths and C.E. Bowman (eds), pp. 28-62. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.
46. Manton, S.M. 1973. Arthropod phylogeny - a modern synthesis. J. Zool. Lond. 171: 111-130.
47. Manton, S.M. 1977. The Arthropoda: Habits, Functional Morphology, and Evolution. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
48. Manton, S.M. 1979. Functional morphology and the evolution of the hexapod classes. In Arthropod phylogeny, A.P. Gupta (ed.), pp. 387-465. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
49. Manton, S.M. and Anderson, D.T. 1979. Polyphyly and the evolution of Arthropods. In The origin of major invertebrate groups, M.R. House (ed.), pp. 269-321. Academic Press, London, New York.
50. Paulus, H.F. 1979. Eye structure and the monophyly of the Arthropoda. In Arthropod phylogeny, A.P. Gupta (ed.), pp. 299-383. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
51. Petrunkevitch, A. 1955. Arachnida. In Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, part P, Arthropoda 2, R.C. Moore (ed.), pp. 42-162. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.
52. Ramsköld, L. and Edgecombe, G.D. 1991. Trilobite monophyly revisited. Historical Biol 4: 267-283.
53. Scholl, G. 1977. Beiträge zur Embryonalentwicklung von Limulus polyphemus L. (Chelicerata, Xiphosura). Zoomorphologie 86: 99-154.
54. Schram, F.R. 1978. Arthropods: a convergent phenomenon. Fieldiana Geol. 39: 61-108.
55. Schram, F.R. 1986. Crustacea. Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford.
56. Selden, P.A., Shear, W.A. and Bonamo, P.M. 1991. A spider and other arachnids from the Devonian of New York, and reinterpretations of Devonian Araneae. Palaeonotology 34: 241-281.
57. Shear, W.A. 1992. End of the Uniramia taxon. Nature 355: 477-478.
58. Shear, W.A. and Kukalova-Peck, J. 1990. The ecology of palaeozoic terrestrial arthropods: the fossil evidence. Can. J. Zool. 68: 1807-1834.
59. Shultz, J.W. 1989. Morphology of locomotor appendages in Arachnida: evolutionary trends and phylogenetic implications. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 97: 1-56.
60. Shultz, J.W. 1990. Evolutionary morphology and phylogeny of Arachnida. Cladistics 6: 1-38.
61. Smith, E.L. 1990. An arthropod morphologist looks at six hundred million years of chelicerate evolution. Newsl. Am. Arachnol. Soc. 42: 3-5.
62. Snodgrass, R.E. 1938. Evolution of Annelida, Onychophora and Arthropoda. Smithson. Misc. Coll. 138: 1-77.
63. Störmer, L. 1955a. Chelicerata. In Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, part P, Arthropoda 2, R.C. Moore (ed.), p. 1-3. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.
64. Störmer, L. 1955b. Merostomata. In Treatise on invertebrate paleontology, part P, Arthropoda 2, R.C. Moore (ed.), p. 4-41. University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.
65. Telford, M.J. and Thomas, R.H. 1995. Demise of the Atelocerata? Nature 376: 123-124.
66. Tiegs, O.W. and Manton, S.M. 1958. The evolution of the Arthropoda. Biol. Rev. Cambridge 33: 255-337.
67. Turbeville, J.M., Pfeifer, D.M., Field, K.G. and Raff, R.A. 1991. The phylogenetic status of arthropods, as inferred from 18S rRNA sequences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 8: 669-686.
68. Van der Hammen, L. 1972. A revised classification of the mites (Arachnidea, Acarida) with diagnosis, a key, and notes on phylogeny. Zool. Mededel. Leiden 47: 273-292.
69. Van der Hammen, L. 1977. A new classification of chelicerata. Zool. Mededel. Leiden 51: 307-319.
70. Van der Hammen, L. 1978. The evolution of the chelicerate life-cycle. Acta Biotheor. 27: 44-60.
71. Van der Hammen, L. 1982. Comparative studies in Chelicerat II. Epimerata (Palpigradi and Actinotrichida). Zool. Verh. Leiden 196: 3-70.
72. Van der Hammen, L. 1985. Functional morphology and affinities of extant Chelicerata in evolutionary perspective. Trans. R. Soc. Edinburgh 76: 137-146.
73. Van der Hammen, L. 1986a. Acarological and arachnological notes. Zool. Mededel. Leiden 60(14): 217-230.
74. Van der Hammen, L. 1986b. Comparative studies in Chelicerata IV. Apatellata, Arachnida, Scorpionida, Xiphosura. Zool. Verh. Leiden 236: 3-52.
75. Van der Hammen, L. 1986c. On some aspects of parallel evolution in Chelicerata. Acta Biotheor. 35: 15-37.
76. Wägele, J.W. 1993. Rejection of the Uniramia hypothesis and implications of the mandibulata concept. Zool. Jb. Systematik 120: 253-288.
77. Wägele, J.W. 1994. Review of methodological problems of 'computer cladistics' exemplified with a case study on isopod phylogeny (Crustacea: Isopoda). Z. Zool. Syst. Evolut.-forsch. 32: 81-107.
78. Waggoner, B.M. 1996. Phylogenetic hypotheses of the relationships of arthropods to Precambrian and Cambrian problematical taxa. System. Biol. 45: 190-222.
79. Weygoldt, P. 1979. Significance of later embryonic stages and head development in arthropod phylogeny. In Arthropod phylogeny, A.P. Gupta (ed.), pp. 107-135. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
80. Weygoldt, P. 1986. Arthropod interrelationships - the phylogenetic-systematic approach. Z. Zool. Systematik Evolut.-forsch. 24: 19-35.
81. Weygoldt, P. and Paulus, H.F. 1979a. Untersuchungen zur Morphologie, Taxonomie und Phylogenie der Chelicerata. I. Morphologische Untersuchungen. Z. Zool. Systematik Evolut.-forsch. 17: 85-116.
82. Weygoldt, P. and Paulus, H.F. 1979b. Untersuchungen zur Morphologie, Taxonomie und Phylogenie der Chelicerata. II. Cladogramme und die Entflatung der Chelicerata. Z. Zool. Systematik Evolut.-forsch. 17: 177-200.
83. Wheeler, Q.D., Cartwright, P. and Hayashi, C.Y. 1993. Arthropod phylogeny. A combined approach. Cladistics 9: 1-39.
84. Whittington, H. B. 1989. Olenelloid trilobites: type species, functional morphology and higher classification. Phil Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B324: 111-147.
85. Wills, M.A., Briggs, D.E.G. and Fortey, R.A. 1994. Disparity as an evolutionary index: a comparison of Cambrian and recent arthropods. Palaeobiology 20: 93-130.
86. Wills, M.A., Briggs, D.E.G., Fortey, R. and Wilkinson, M. 1995. The significance of fossils in understanding arthropod evolution. Verh. Dtsch. Zool. Ges. 88: 203-215.
87. Winter, G. 1980. Beiträge zur Morphologie und Embryologie des vorderen Körperabschnittes (Cephalosoma) der Pantopoda Gerstaecker 1863. I. Entstehung und Struktur des Zentralnervensystems. Z. Zool. Syst. Evolut.-forsch. 18: 27-61.
88. Zachvatkin, A. A. 1952. Acarina und ein Vorschlag für ein System der Chelicerata. Parasitol. Sbornik Inst. Zool. Akad. Nauk SSSR 14: 5-46.