The comparative study of intra-specific variations in the various populations of Clinopodes flavidus (Geophlilomorpha, Geophilidae) in Alborz Mountain, using geometric morphometrics

Zarei, Roghaieh; Seifali, Mahvash

doi:10.52547/nbr.7.3.304

The comparative study of intra-specific variations in the various populations of Clinopodes flavidus (Geophlilomorpha, Geophilidae) in Alborz Mountain, using geometric morphometrics

Authors

Roghaieh Zarei

Mahvash Seifali

Alzahra University

https://doi.org/10.52547/nbr.7.3.304

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the variations among cephalic plates of individuals in two populations of Clinopodes flavidus in Alborz Mountains, by means of landmark-based techniques of geometric morphometrics. Therefore, 17 landmarks and semi-landmarks on the coxosternite of poison claw and seven landmarks and semi-landmarks on the tarsangulum of poison claw were selected using TpsDig2 software. Data of landmarks, after procrust analysis, were subjected to various multivariate analyses, such as Principle Component Analysis (PCA) and Canonical Variate Analysis (CVA) by means of PAST and MorphoJ softwares. The results obtained demonstrated that shape variations in coxosternite were significantly different among various populations (p<0.001). This study revealed the usefulness of landmark-based geometric morphometrics in the differentiation of various populations of Clinopodes flavidus in Alborz Mountains.

Keywords

Chilpoda

coxosternite

Iran’s fauna

landmark

tarsangulum

20.1001.1.24236330.1399.7.3.11.7

Adams, D.C. 1999. Methods for shape analysis of landmark data from articulated structures. Evolutionary Ecology Research 1: 959-970.
Adams, D.C., Rohlf, F.J. & Slice, D.E. 2004. Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the ‘revolution’. Italian Journal of Zoology 71: 5-16.
Baiocco, M., Bonato, L., Cardini, A. & Fusco, G. 2017. Shape variation of prey-catching structures in geophilomorph centipedes: A preliminary investigation using geometric morphometrics. Zoologischer Anzeiger 268: 11-18.
Bookstein, F. L. 1997. Morphometric tools for landmark data: geometry and biology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 435 pp.
Bolton, S.J., MacLeod, N. & Edgecombe, G.D. 2009. Geometric approaches to the taxonomic analysis of centipede gonopods (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 156: 239-259.
Bonato, L., Edgecombe, G.D., Lewis, J.G., Minelli, A., Pereira, L.A., Shelley, R.M. & Zapparoli, M. 2010. A common terminology for the external anatomy of centipedes (Chilopoda). ZooKeys 69: 17-51.
Bonato, L., Iorio, É. & Minelli, A. 2011. The centipede genus Clinopodes CL Koch, 1847 (Chilopoda, Geophilomorpha, Geophilidae): reassessment of species diversity and distribution, with a new species from the Maritime Alps (France). Zoosystema 33: 175-205.
Bonato, L. & Minelli, A. 2014. Chilopoda Geophilomorpha of Europe: a revised list of species, with taxonomic and nomenclatorial notes. Zootaxa 3770: 1-136.
Cardini, A. L. & Loy, A. 2013. On growth and form in the" computer era": from geometric to biological morphometrics. Hystrix Italian Journal of Mammalogy 24: 1-6.
Edgecombe, G.D. & Giribet, G., 2007. Evolutionary biology of centipedes (Myriapoda: Chilopoda). Annual Review Entomology. 52: 151-170.
Gutierrez, B.L., MacLeod, N. & Edgecombe, G.D. 2011. Detecting taxonomic signal in an under-utilised character system: geometric morphometrics of the forcipular coxae of Scutigeromorpha (Chilopoda). ZooKeys 156: 49-66.
Klingenberg, C.P. 2011. MorphoJ: an integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Molecular Ecology Resources 11: 353-357.
Lewis, J. G. E. 2006. The biology of centipedes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 488 pp.
MacLeod, N. 2002. Geometric morphometrics and geological shape-classification systems. Earth-Science Reviews 59: 27-47.
Manton, S. M. 1965. The evolution of arthropodan locomotory mechanisms. Part 8. Functional requirements and body design in Chilopoda, together with a comparative account of their skeleto-muscular systems and an appendix on a comparison between burrowing forces of annelids and chilopods and its
bearing upon the evolution of the arthropodan haemocoel. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 45: 251-484.
Mitić, B.M., Ilić, B.S., Tomić, V.T., Makarov, S.E. & Ćurčič, B.P. 2010. Parental Care in Clinopodes flavidus Koch (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha: Geophilidae). Annales Zoologici 60: 633-638.
Murphy, D.D., Freas, K.E. & Weiss, S.B. 1990. An environment‐metapopulation approach to population viability analysis for a threatened invertebrate. Conservation Biology 4: 41-51.
Popovici, G. & Stratan, A.A. 2019. New insights into Romanian Chilopoda: Redescription of Clinopodes intermedius Dărăbanţu and Matic, 1969 (Geophilomorpha: Geophilidae). Biologia 74: 1501-1507.
Savriama, Y., Gerber, S., Baiocco, M., Debat, V. & Fusco, G. 2017. Development and evolution of segmentation assessed by geometric morphometrics: The centipede Strigamia maritima as a case study. Arthropod Structure & Development 46: 419-428.
Simaiakis, S. & Mylonas, M. 2006. Intraspecific variation in segment number in Pachymerium ferrugineum (CL Koch, 1835) (Chilopoda: Geophilomorpha) in the south Aegean Archipelago (north-east Mediterranean, Greece). Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 88: 533-539.
Siriwut, W., Edgecombe, G.D., Sutcharit, C. & Panha, S. 2015. The centipede genus Scolopendra in mainland Southeast Asia: molecular phylogenetics, geometric morphometrics and external morphology as tools for species delimitation. PLOS One 10: 1-37
Valentin, A. E., Penin, X., Chanut, J.P., Sévigny, J.M. & Rohlf, F.J. 2008. Arching effect on fish body shape in geometric morphometric studies. Journal of Fish Biology 73: 623-638.
Zarei, R., Rahimian, H., Mirmonsef, H. & Bonato, L. 2020. Geophilomorpha from Alborz Mountains and a checklist of Chilopoda from Iran. Zootaxa 4780: 132-146.