Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-15T14:53:19.132Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ORIGINS OF THE NORTH AMERICAN EPHEMEROPTERA FAUNA, ESPECIALLY THE LEPTOPHLEBIIDAE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

William L. Peters
William L. Peters*
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA 32307
Get access

Abstract

The complex origins of the North American Ephemeroptera fauna extended from the Lower Permian to the Recent. This paper discusses origins of North American genera of the cosmopolitan family Leptophlebiidae with a few examples from other mayfly families. The two extant subfamilies, Leptophlebiinae and Atalophlebiinae, probably evolved at least by the mid-Cretaceous, or about 100 million years before present. The primitive Leptophlebiinae are distributed throughout most of the Northern Hemisphere and the ancestors of the Leptophlebia–Paraleptophlebia complex within this subfamily dispersed widely by the North Atlantic route as early as the mid-Cretaceous and later probably by northern trans-Pacific dispersals through Beringia. The ancestors of Habrophlebia dispersed through the North Atlantic route at an early time, but the vicariant distribution of Habrophlebiodes in several areas of the Oriental Region and eastern North America correlates with the Arcto-Tertiary forest that covered most of the Northern Hemisphere including Beringia from the Early Tertiary into the Pleistocene. Within the nearly cosmopolitan Atalophlebiinae, Traverella is austral in origin and probably dispersed north through the Mexican Transition Zone during the mid-Tertiary as an ancient dispersal and then dispersed to its northern and eastern limits following the last Pleistocene deglaciation by way of the Missouri River tributaries. Thraulodes and Farrodes are both austral in origin and probably dispersed north through the Mexican Transition Zone during the Early Pleistocene as a relatively recent dispersal. The origins of Choroterpes sensu stricto and Neochoroterpes in North America are unknown. The mayfly fauna of the West Indies is Neotropical in origins, and no affinities between the West Indies and North America through Florida have ever been confirmed.

Résumé

Les origines complexes des Ephemeroptera d'Amérique du Nord s'étendent du Permien inférieur jusqu'au Récent. Cet article discute des origines des genres nord américains de la famille cosmopolite des Leptophlebiidae et de quelques membres d'autres familles. Les deux sous-familles contemporaines Leptophlebiinae et Atalophlebiinae sont apparues au moins depuis la mi-Crétacé, il y a environ 100 millions d'années. Les Leptophlebiinae sont répartis sur la majeure partie de l'Hémisphère Nord et les ancêtres du complexe Leptophlebia–Paraleptophlebia de cette sous-famille se sont dispersés largement, d'abord par la route de l'Atlantique Nord depuis le milieu du Crétacé, et plus tard par des dispersions trans-pacifiques via la route du Beringia. Les ancêtres d'Habrophlebia se sont dispersés par la route de l'Atlantique Nord à une époque ancienne, mais la répartition d'Habrophlebiodes dans plusieurs parties de la Région Orientale et l'est de l'Amérique du Nord est corrélée avec la forêt arcto-Tertiaire qui recouvrait la majeure partie de l'Hémisphère Nord du début du Tertiaire jusqu'au Pléistocène. Parmi les Atalophlebiinae cosmopolites, Traverella est d'origine australe et s'est probablement dispersé au nord par la Zone de Transition Mexicaine au milieu du Tertiaire dans un premier temps, et a ensuite atteint ses limites nordique et orientale après la dernière déglaciation du Pléistocène, via les tributaires du Missouri. Thraulodes et Farrodes sont tous deux d'origine australe et se sont probablement dispersés au nord par la Zone de Transition Mexicaine tôt au cours du Pléistocène, lors d'une dispersion relativement récente. Les origines de Choroterpes sensu stricto et de Neochoroterpes en Amérique du Nord sont inconnues. La faune éphéméroptérienne des Caraïbes est d'origine neotropicale, aucune affinité n'ayant été confirmée entre les Caraïbes et l'Amérique du Nord via la Floride.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada , Volume 120 , Supplement S144 , 1988 , pp. 13 - 24
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1988

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

Allen, D.M., and Allen, R.K.. 1989. Distribution patterns of North and Central American mayflies (Ephemeroptera). Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Ephemeroptera. (Marysville, Australia, Feb. 1987. sponsored by Water Studies Centre, Chisholm Institute of Technology, East Caulfield.) In press.Google Scholar
Allen, R.K. 1973. Generic revisions of mayfly nymphs. I. Traverella in North and Central America (Lepto-phlebiidae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 66: 1287–1295.Google Scholar
Allen, R.K. 1974. Neochoroterpes, a new subgenus of Choroterpes from North America (Ephemeroptera: Lepto-phlebiidae). Can. Ent. 106: 161–168.Google Scholar
Allen, R.K. 1980. Geographic distribution and reclassification of the subfamily Ephemerellinae (Ephemeroptera: Ephemerellidae). pp. 71–91 in Flannagan, J.F., and Marshall, K.E. (Eds.), Advances in Ephemeroptera Biology. Plenum Press, New York. 552 pp.Google Scholar
Allen, R.K., and Allen, D.M.. 1989. Distribution of southwest mayfly genera (Ephemeroptera) in the Mexican Transition Zone. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Ephemeroptera. (Marysville, Australia, Feb. 1987, sponsored by Water Studies Centre, Chisholm Institute of Technology, East Caulfield.) In press.Google Scholar
Allen, R.K., and Brusca, R.C.. 1973. The known geographic distribution of the Mexican mayfly genera in North America (Insecta: Ephemeroptera). pp. 49–63 in Peters, W.L., and Peters, J.G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ephemeroptera. E.J. Brill, Leiden. 312 pp.Google Scholar
Allen, R.K., and Brusca, R.C.. 1978. Generic revisions of mayfly nymphs. II. Thraulodes in North and Central America (Leptophlebiidae). Can. Ent. 110: 413–433.Google Scholar
Allen, R.K., and Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1965. A revision of the genus Ephemerella (Ephemeroptera, Ephemerellidae). VIII. The subgenus Ephemerella in North America. Misc. Publs. ent. Soc. Am. 4: 243–282.Google Scholar
Berner, L. 1950. The Mayflies of Florida. University of Florida Press, Gainesville, 267 pp.Google Scholar
Berner, L. 1978. A review of the mayfly family Metretopodidae. Trans. Am. ent. Soc. 104: 91–137.Google Scholar
Burks, B.D. 1953. The mayflies, or Ephemeroptera, of Illinois. Bull. Ill. Nat. Hist. Surv. 26(1). 216 pp.Google Scholar
Cobb, D.G., and Flannagan, J.F.. 1980. The distribution of Ephemeroptera in northern Canada, pp. 155–166. in Flannagan, J.F., and Marshall, K.E. (Eds.), Advances in Ephemeroptera Biology. Plenum Press, New York. 552 pp.Google Scholar
Croizat, L. 1958. Panbiogeography. Volume II a. Published by the author, Caracas. 1731 pp.Google Scholar
Demoulin, G. 1970 a. Troisième contribution à la connaissance des Ephéméroptères de l'ambre oligocène de la Baltique. Bull Inst. r. Sci. nat. Belg. 46 (2): 1–11.Google Scholar
Demoulin, G. 1970 b. Contribution à l'étude morphologique, systématique et phylogénique des Ephéméroptères jurassiques d'Europe centrale V Hexagenitidae = Paedephemeridae (syn. nov.). Bull. Inst. r. Sci. nat. Belg. 46(4): 1–8.Google Scholar
Dominguez, E., and Savage, H.M.. 1987. Two new species of Farrodes from continental South America with comments on the distribution of faunal components in Argentina (Ephemeroptera: Leptophlebiidae). Stud. Neotrop. Fauna Environ. 22: 43–52.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1957. Metretopus borealis (Eaton) in Canada (Ephemeroptera: Ametropodidae). Can. J. Zool. 35: 161–162.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1972. Biogeography and evolution of Ephemeroptera. A. Rev. Ent. 17: 21–42.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1975. Phylogenetic biogeography of mayflies. Ann. Mo. bot. Gdn 62: 251–263.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1981. Discussion. pp. 287–297 of Melville, R., Vicarious plant distributions and paleography of the Pacific region, pp. 238–274 in Nelson, G., and Rosen, D.E. (Eds.), Vicariance Biogeography: A Critique. Columbia University Press, New York. 593 pp.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1982. Historical and life history factors in the biogeography of mayflies. Am. Zool. 22: 371–374.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1984. Ephemeroptera. pp. 94–125 in Merritt, R.W., and Cummins, K.W. (Eds.), An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America, 2nd ed. Kendall/Hunt Publ. Co., Dubuque, Iowa. 722 pp.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr.,, and Edmunds, C.H.. 1980. Predation, climate, and emergence and mating of mayflies. pp. 277–285 in Flannagan, J.F., and Marshall, K.E. (Eds.), Advances in Ephemeroptera Biology. Plenum Press, New York. 552 pp.Google Scholar
Edmunds, G.F. Jr.,, Jensen, S.L., and Berner, L.. 1976. The mayflies of North and Central America. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. 330 pp.Google Scholar
Flannagan, P.M., and Flannagan, J.F.. 1982. Present distribution and the post-glacial origin of the Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera of Manitoba. Man. Dep. Nat. Resourc. Fish. Tech. Rep. 82–1. 79 pp.Google Scholar
Flannagan, P.M., and Flannagan, J.F.. 1984. The post-glacial origin and present distribution of the mayflies (Ephemeroptera) of Manitoba, Canada. pp. 149–169 in Landa, V. et al. , (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Ephemeroptera. Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, Cěské Budějovice. 345 pp.Google Scholar
Flowers, R.W. 1978. Occurrence of Cloeon cognatum Stephens in the United States (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Ent. News 89: 79–80.Google Scholar
Halffter, G. 1974. Eléments anciens de l'entomofaune néotropicale: ses implications biogéographiques. Quaest. ent. 10: 223–262.Google Scholar
Harper, F., and Harper, P.P.. 1981. Northern Canadian mayflies (Insects: Ephemeroptera), records and descriptions. Can. J. Zool. 59: 1784–1789.Google Scholar
Herron, E.M., Dewey, J.F., and Pitman, W.C. III. 1974. Plate tectonics model for the evolution of the Arctic. Geology 1974. 377–380.Google Scholar
Hubbard, M.D., and Kukalová-Peck, J.. 1980. Permian mayfly nymphs: new taxa and systematic characters. pp. 19–31 in Flannagan, J.F., and Marshall, K.E. (Eds.), Advances in Ephemeroptera Biology. Plenum Press, New York. 552 pp.Google Scholar
Hubbard, M.D., and Peters, W.L.. 1984. 12. Ephemeroptera of Sri Lanka: an introduction to their ecology and biogeography. pp. 257–274 in Fernando, C.H. (Ed.), Ecology and Biogeography in Sri Lanka. Dr. W. Junk Publishers, The Hague. 505 pp.Google Scholar
Hubbard, M.D., and Savage, H.M.. 1981. The fossil Leptophlebiidae (Ephemeroptera): a systematic and phylogenetic review. J. Paleont. 55: 810–813.Google Scholar
Kukalová, J. 1968. Permian mayfly nymphs. Psyche 75: 310–327.Google Scholar
Landa, V., Soldán, T., and Peters, W.L.. 1980. Comparative anatomy of larvae of the family Leptophlebiidae (Ephemeroptera) based on ventral nerve cord, alimentary canal, malpighian tubules, gonads and tracheal system. Acta ent. bohemoslov. 77: 169–195.Google Scholar
Leech, R. 1972. A revision of the Nearctic Amaurobiidae (Arachnida: Aranida). Mem. ent. Soc. Can. 84: 182 pp.Google Scholar
Lehmkuhl, D.M. 1973. A new species of Baetis (Ephemeroptera) from ponds in the Canadian arctic, with biological notes. Can. Ent. 105: 343–346.Google Scholar
Lehmkuhl, D.M. 1976. Additions to the taxonomy, zoogeography, and biology of Analetris eximia (Acanthametropodinae: Siphlonuridae: Ephemeroptera). Can. Ent. 108: 199–207.Google Scholar
Leonard, J.W., and Leonard, F.A.. 1962. Mayflies of Michigan Trout Streams. Cranbrook Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills. 139 pp.Google Scholar
Lestage, J.A. 1938. Contribution à l'étude des Ephéméroptères XVI. — Recherches critiques sur le complexe amétropo–métrétopodidien. Bull. Annls. Soc. ent. Belg. 78: 155–182.Google Scholar
Levanidova, I.M. 1976. Ephemeroptera and Trichoptera of the Chukotska Peninsula. Trud. Biol.–Pochven. Inst., Dal'nesvost. Nauchn. Tsentr, Akad. Nauk SSSR 36 (139): 38–56. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Levanidova, I.M. 1982. Amphibiotic insects of the mountain regions of Far Eastern USSR. Biol.–Pochven. Inst., Dal'nevost. Nauchn. Tsentr, Akad. Nauk SSSR. “Nauka,” Leningrad. 214 pp. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Li, H.L. 1952. Floristic relationships between eastern Asia and eastern North America. Trans. Am. phil. Soc., New Ser. 42: 371–429.Google Scholar
Linsley, E.G. 1963. Bering arc relationships of Cerambycidae and their host plants. pp. 159–178 in Gressitt, J.L. (Ed.), Pacific Basin Biogeography. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. 561 pp.Google Scholar
Mackerras, I.M. 1970. Composition and distribution of the fauna, pp. 187–203 in Waterhouse, D.F. (Ed.), The Insects of Australia. Melbourne University Press. 1029 pp.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P. 1973. Systematic and zoogeographic aspects of Asiatic Ephemeridae (Ephemeroptera). Oriental Insects 7: 49–67.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P. 1975. The burrowing mayflies (Ephemeroptera: Ephemeroidea) of the United States. Trans. Am. ent. Soc. 101: 447–504.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P. 1984. The relationship between north and middle American Stenonema (Ephemeroptera: Heptageniidae). Great Lakes Ent. 17: 125–128.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P. 1985. The Ephemeroptera of Alaska. Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 87: 381–386.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P., and Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1979. The higher classification of the Ephemeroptera and its evolutionary basis. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 72: 5–12.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P., and Gillies, M.T.. 1979. The Africa Ephemeridae (Ephemeroptera). Aquatic Insects 1: 169–178.Google Scholar
McCafferty, W.P., and Sinitshenkova, N.D.. 1983. Litobrancha from the Oligocene in Eastern Asia (Ephemeroptera: Ephemeridae). Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 76: 205–208.Google Scholar
McKenna, M.C. 1973. Sweepstakes, filters, corridors, Noah's Arks, and beached Viking funeral ships in paleography. pp. 293–308 in Tailung, D.H., and Runcom, S.K. (Eds.), Implications of Continental Drift to the Earth Sciences, Vol. 1. Academic Press, London. 622 pp.Google Scholar
Morihara, D.K., and McCafferty, W.P.. 1979. Subspecies of the trans-atlantic species, Baetis macani (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 81: 34–37.Google Scholar
Müller–Liebenau, I. 1970. Revision der europäischen Arten der Gattung Baetis Leach, 1815 (Insecta, Ephemeroptera). Gewäss. Abwäss. 48/49: 1–214. 1969.Google Scholar
Needham, J.G., and Murphy, H.E.. 1924. Neotropical mayflies. Bull. Lloyd Lib. (Ent. Ser.) 4: 1–79.Google Scholar
Pescador, M.L., and Peters, W.L.. 1980. Phylogenetic relationships and zoogeography of cool-adapted Lepto-phlebiidae (Ephemeroptera). pp. 43–56 in Flannagan, J.F., and Marshall, K.E. (Eds.), Advances in Ephemeroptera Biology. Plenum Press, New York. 552 pp.Google Scholar
Pescador, M.L., and Peters, W.L.. 1982. Four new genera of Leptophlebiidae (Ephemeroptera: Atalophlebiinae) from southern South America. Aquatic Insects 4: 1–19.Google Scholar
Peters, W.L. 1971. A revision of the Leptophlebiidae of the West Indies (Ephemeroptera). Smithson. Contrib. Zool. 62: 1–48.Google Scholar
Peters, W.L. 1979. Taxonomic status and phylogeny of Habrophlebia and Habroleptoides (Leptophlebiidae: Ephemeroptera). pp. 51–56 in Pasternak, K., and Sowa, R. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Ephemeroptera. Pánstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Warszawa, Kraków. 312 pp.Google Scholar
Peters, W.L. 1980. Phylogeny of the Leptophlebiidae (Ephemeroptera): an introduction. pp. 33–41 in Flannagan, J.F., and Marshall, K.E. (Eds.), Advances in Ephemeroptera Biology. Plenum Press, New York. 552 pp.Google Scholar
Peters, W.L., and Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1970. Revision of the generic classification of the Eastern Hemisphere Leptophlebiidae (Ephemeroptera). Pacif. Insects. 12: 157–240.Google Scholar
Peters, W.L., and Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1984. A redescription and phylogenetic relationships of Nesophlebia (Ephemeroptera, Leptophlebiidae, Atalophlebiinae). pp. 27–35 in Landa, V. et al. , (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Ephemeroptera. Czechoslovak Academy of Science, Cěské Budějovice. 345 pp.Google Scholar
Peters, W.L., Peters, J.G., and Edmunds, G.F. Jr., 1978. The Leptophlebiidae of New Caledonia (Ephemeroptera) Part 1. — Introduction and systematics. Cah. O.R.S.T.OM., sér. Hydrobiol. 12: 97–117.Google Scholar
Peters, W.L., and Tsui, P.T.P.. 1972. New species of Thraulus from Asia (Leptophlebiidae: Ephemeroptera). Oriental Insects 6: 1–17.Google Scholar
Pielou, E.C. 1979. Biogeography. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 351 pp.Google Scholar
Raven, P.H., and Axelrod, D.I.. 1974. Angiosperm biogeography and past continental movements. Ann. Mo. bot. Gdn. 61: 539–673.Google Scholar
Riek, E.F. 1973. The classification of the Ephemeroptera. pp. 160–178 in Peters, W.L., and Peters, J.G. (Eds.), Proceedings of the First International Conference on Ephemeroptera. E.J. Brill, Lieden. 312 pp.Google Scholar
Ross, H.H. 1956. Evolution and Classification of the Mountain Caddisflies. University of Illinois Press, Urbana. 213 pp.Google Scholar
Savage, H.M. 1986. Systematics of the Terpides lineage from the Neotropics: definition of the Terpides lineage, methods, and revision of Fittkaulus Savage & Peters (Insecta, Ephemeroptera, Leptophlebiidae). Spixiana 9: 255–270.Google Scholar
Savage, H.M., and Peters, W.L.. 1983. Systematics of Miroculis and related genera from northern South America (Ephemeroptera: Leptophlebiidae). Trans. Am. ent. Soc. 108: 491–600.Google Scholar
Schwarzbach, M., and Pflug, H.D.. 1957. Das Klima des zungeren Tertiars in Island. Neues Jb. Geol. Paläontol. 104: 279–298.Google Scholar
Sinitchenkova, N.D. 1984. The mesozoic mayflies (Ephemeroptera) with special reference to their ecology. pp. 61–66 in Landa, V. et al. , (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Ephemeroptera. Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, České Budějovice. 345 pp.Google Scholar
Sivaramakrishnan, K.G., and Peters, W.L.. 1984. Description of a new species of Notophlebia from India and reassignment of the ascribed nymph of Nathanella (Ephemeroptera: Leptophlebiidae). Aquatic Insects 6: 115–121.Google Scholar
Smith, A.G., Briden, J.C., and Dewry, G.E.. 1973. Phanerozoic world maps. In Hughes, N.F. (Ed.), Organisms and Continents through Time. Palaeontol. Assoc. London, Spec. Paper Palaeontol. 12: 1–43.Google Scholar
Solbrig, O.T. 1976. The origin and floristic affinities of the South American temperate desert and semidesert regions, pp. 7–49 in Goodall, D.W. (Ed.), Evolution of Desert Biota. University of Texas Press, Austin. 250 pp.Google Scholar
Towns, D.R., and Peters, W.L.. 1979. New genera and species of Leptophlebiidae (Ephemeroptera) from New Zealand. New Zealand J. Zool. 6: 439–452.Google Scholar
Towns, D.R., and Peters, W.L.. 1980. Phylogenetic relationships of the Leptophlebiidae of New Zealand (Ephemeroptera). pp. 57–69 in Flannagan, J.F., and Marshall, K.E. (Eds.), Advances in Ephemeroptera Biology. Plenum Press, New York. 552 pp.Google Scholar
Traver, J.R. 1947. Notes on neotropical mayflies. Part II. Family Baetidae, subfamily Leptophlebiinae. Revta Ent., Rio de J. 18: 149–160.Google Scholar
Traver, J.R. 1962. Cloeon dipterum (L.) in Ohio (Ephemeroptera: Baetidae). Bull. Brooklyn ent. Soc. 57: 47–50.Google Scholar
Tshernova, O.A. 1970. On the classification of fossil and recent Ephemeroptera. Ent. Obozr. 49: 124–145. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Tshernova, O.A. 1971. A mayfly (Ephemeroptera, Leptophlebiidae) from fossil resin of Cretaceous deposits in the polar regions of Siberia. Ent. Obozr. 50: 612–618. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Tshernova, O.A. 1980. Order Ephemerida. Mayflies. Trud. Paleontol. Inst., Akad. Nauk SSSR 175: 31–36. [In Russian]Google Scholar
Whyte, R.O. 1976. Bioclimatic and taxonomic consequences of tectonic movement and orogeny. Ann. Arid Zone 15: 247–269.Google Scholar