Phylogenomic re-evaluation of Triaenonychoidea (Opiliones : Laniatores), and systematics of Triaenonychidae, including new families, genera and species

Abstract

The Opiliones superfamily Triaenonychoidea currently includes two families, the monogeneric New Zealand–endemic Synthetonychiidae Forster, 1954 and Triaenonychidae Sørensen, 1886, a diverse family distributed mostly throughout the temperate Gondwanan terranes, with ~110 genera and ~500 species and subspecies currently described. Traditionally, Triaenonychidae has been divided into subfamilies diagnosed by very few morphological characters largely derived from the troublesome ‘Roewerian system’ of morphology, and classifications based on this system led to many complications. Recent research within Triaenonychoidea using morphology and traditional multilocus data has shown multiple deeply divergent lineages, non-monophyly of Triaenonychidae, and non-monophyly of subfamilies, necessitating a revision based on phylogenomic data. We used sequence capture of ultraconserved elements across 164 samples to create a 50% taxon occupancy matrix with 704 loci. Using phylogenomic and morphological examinations, we explored family-level relationships within Triaenonychoidea, including describing two new families: (1) Lomanellidae Mendes & Derkarabetian, fam. nov., consisting of Lomanella Pocock, 1903, and a newly described genus Abaddon Derkarabetian & Baker, gen. nov. with one species, A. despoliator Derkarabetian, sp. nov.; and (2) the elevation to family of Buemarinoidae Karaman, 2019, consisting of Buemarinoa Roewer, 1956, Fumontana Shear, 1977, Flavonuncia Lawrence, 1959, and a newly described genus Turonychus Derkarabetian, Prieto & Giribet, gen. nov., with one species, T. fadriquei Derkarabetian, Prieto & Giribet, sp. nov. With our dataset we also explored phylogenomic relationships within Triaenonychidae with an extensive taxon set including samples representing ~80% of the genus-level diversity. Based on our results we (1) discuss systematics of this family including the historical use of subfamilies, (2) reassess morphology in the context of our phylogeny, (3) hypothesise placement for all unsampled genera, (4) highlight lineages most in need of taxonomic revision, and (5) provide an updated species-level checklist. Aside from describing new taxa, our study provides the phylogenomic context necessary for future evolutionary and systematic research across this diverse lineage. ZooBank Registration: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:81683834-98AB-43AA-B25A-C28C6A404F41