Bernardino Rivadavia Natural Sciences Museum

Abstract The evidentiary basis of the currently accepted classification of living amphibians is discussed and shown not to warrant the degree of authority conferred on it by use and tradition. A new taxonomy of living amphibians is proposed to correct the deficiencies of the old one. This new taxonomy is based on the largest phylogenetic analysis of living Amphibia so far accomplished. We combined the comparative anatomical character evidence of Haas (2003) with DNA sequences from the mitochondrial transcription unit H1 (12S and 16S ribosomal RNA and tRNAValine genes, ≈ 2,400 bp of mitochondrial sequences) and the nuclear genes histone H3, rhodopsin, tyrosinase, and seven in absentia, and the large ribosomal subunit 28S (≈ 2,300 bp of nuclear sequences; ca. 1.8 million base pairs; x̄ = 3.7 kb/terminal). The dataset includes 532 terminals sampled from 522 species representative of the global diversity of amphibians as well as seven of the closest living relatives of amphibians for outgroup comparisons. The primary purpose of our taxon sampling strategy was to provide strong tests of the monophyly of all “family-group” taxa. All currently recognized nominal families and subfamilies were sampled, with the exception of Protohynobiinae (Hynobiidae). Many of the currently recognized genera were also sampled. Although we discuss the monophyly of genera, and provide remedies for nonmonophyly where possible, we also make recommendations for future research. A parsimony analysis was performed under Direct Optimization, which simultaneously optimizes nucleotide homology (alignment) and tree costs, using the same set of assumptions throughout the analysis. Multiple search algorithms were run in the program POY over a period of seven months of computing time on the AMNH Parallel Computing Cluster. Results demonstrate that the following major taxonomic groups, as currently recognized, are nonmonophyletic: Ichthyophiidae (paraphyletic with respect to Uraeotyphlidae), Caeciliidae (paraphyletic with respect to Typhlonectidae and Scolecomorphidae), Salamandroidea (paraphyletic with respect to Sirenidae), Leiopelmatanura (paraphyletic with respect to Ascaphidae), Discoglossanura (paraphyletic with respect to Bombinatoridae), Mesobatrachia (paraphyletic with respect to Neobatrachia), Pipanura (paraphyletic with respect to Bombinatoridae and Discoglossidae/Alytidae), Hyloidea (in the sense of containing Heleophrynidae; paraphyletic with respect to Ranoidea), Leptodactylidae (polyphyletic, with Batrachophrynidae forming the sister taxon of Myobatrachidae + Limnodynastidae, and broadly paraphyletic with respect to Hemiphractinae, Rhinodermatidae, Hylidae, Allophrynidae, Centrolenidae, Brachycephalidae, Dendrobatidae, and Bufonidae), Microhylidae (polyphyletic, with Brevicipitinae being the sister taxon of Hemisotidae), Microhylinae (poly/paraphyletic with respect to the remaining non-brevicipitine microhylids), Hyperoliidae (para/polyphyletic, with Leptopelinae forming the sister taxon of Arthroleptidae + Astylosternidae), Astylosternidae (paraphyletic with respect to Arthroleptinae), Ranidae (paraphyletic with respect to Rhacophoridae and Mantellidae). In addition, many subsidiary taxa are demonstrated to be nonmonophyletic, such as (1) Eleutherodactylus with respect to Brachycephalus; (2) Rana (sensu Dubois, 1992), which is polyphyletic, with various elements falling far from each other on the tree; and (3) Bufo, with respect to several nominal bufonid genera. A new taxonomy of living amphibians is proposed, and the evidence for this is presented to promote further investigation and data acquisition bearing on the evolutionary history of amphibians. The taxonomy provided is consistent with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN, 1999). Salient features of the new taxonomy are (1) the three major groups of living amphibians, caecilians/Gymnophiona, salamanders/Caudata, and frogs/Anura, form a monophyletic group, to which we restrict the name Amphibia; (2) Gymnophiona forms the sister taxon of Batrachia (salamanders + frogs) and is composed of two groups, Rhinatrematidae and Stegokrotaphia; (3) Stegokrotaphia is composed of two families, Ichthyophiidae (including Uraeotyphlidae) and Caeciliidae (including Scolecomorphidae and Typhlonectidae, which are regarded as subfamilies); (4) Batrachia is a highly corroborated monophyletic group, composed of two taxa, Caudata (salamanders) and Anura (frogs); (5) Caudata is composed of two taxa, Cryptobranchoidei (Cryptobranchidae and Hynobiidae) and Diadectosalamandroidei new taxon (all other salamanders); (6) Diadectosalamandroidei is composed of two taxa, Hydatinosalamandroidei new taxon (composed of Perennibranchia and Treptobranchia new taxon) and Plethosalamandroidei new taxon; (7) Perennibranchia is composed of Proteidae and Sirenidae; (8) Treptobranchia new taxon is composed of two taxa, Ambystomatidae (including Dicamptodontidae) and Salamandridae; (9) Plethosalamandroidei new taxon is composed of Rhyacotritonidae and Xenosalamandroidei new taxon; (10) Xenosalamandroidei is composed of Plethodontidae and Amphiumidae; (11) Anura is monophyletic and composed of two clades, Leiopelmatidae (including Ascaphidae) and Lalagobatrachia new taxon (all other frogs); (12) Lalagobatrachia is composed of two clades, Xenoanura (Pipidae and Rhinophrynidae) and Sokolanura new taxon (all other lalagobatrachians); (13) Bombinatoridae and Alytidae (former Discoglossidae) are each others' closest relatives and in a clade called Costata, which, excluding Leiopelmatidae and Xenoanura, forms the sister taxon of all other frogs, Acosmanura; (14) Acosmanura is composed of two clades, Anomocoela (= Pelobatoidea of other authors) and Neobatrachia; (15) Anomocoela contains Pelobatoidea (Pelobatidae and Megophryidae) and Pelodytoidea (Pelodytidae and Scaphiopodidae), and forms the sister taxon of Neobatrachia, together forming Acosmanura; (16) Neobatrachia is composed of two clades, Heleophrynidae, and all other neobatrachians, Phthanobatrachia new taxon; (17) Phthanobatrachia is composed of two major units, Hyloides and Ranoides; (18) Hyloides comprises Sooglossidae (including Nasikabatrachidae) and Notogaeanura new taxon (the remaining hyloids); (19) Notogaeanura contains two taxa, Australobatrachia new taxon and Nobleobatrachia new taxon; (20) Australobatrachia is a clade composed of Batrachophrynidae and its sister taxon, Myobatrachoidea (Myobatrachidae and Limnodynastidae), which forms the sister taxon of all other hyloids, excluding sooglossids; (21) Nobleobatrachia new taxon, is dominated at its base by frogs of a treefrog morphotype, several with intercalary phalangeal cartilages—Hemiphractus (Hemiphractidae) forms the sister taxon of the remaining members of this group, here termed Meridianura new taxon; (22) Meridianura comprises Brachycephalidae (former Eleutherodactylinae + Brachycephalus) and Cladophrynia new taxon; (23) Cladophrynia is composed of two groups, Cryptobatrachidae (composed of Cryptobatrachus and Stefania, previously a fragment of the polyphyletic Hemiphractinae) and Tinctanura new taxon; (24) Tinctanura is composed of Amphignathodontidae (Gastrotheca and Flectonotus, another fragment of the polyphyletic Hemiphractinae) and Athesphatanura new taxon; (25) Athesphatanura is composed of Hylidae (Hylinae, Pelodryadinae, and Phyllomedusinae, and excluding former Hemiphractinae, whose inclusion would have rendered this taxon polyphyletic) and Leptodactyliformes new taxon; (26) Leptodactyliformes is composed of Diphyabatrachia new taxon (composed of Centrolenidae [including Allophryne] and Leptodactylidae, sensu stricto, including Leptodactylus and relatives) and Chthonobatrachia new taxon; (27) Chthonobatrachia is composed of a reformulated Ceratophryidae (which excludes such genera as Odontophrynus and Proceratophrys and includes other taxa, such as Telmatobius) and Hesticobatrachia new taxon; (28) Hesticobatrachia is composed of a reformulated Cycloramphidae (which includes Rhinoderma) and Agastorophrynia new taxon; (29) Agastorophrynia is composed of Bufonidae (which is partially revised) and Dendrobatoidea (Dendrobatidae and Thoropidae); (30) Ranoides new taxon forms the sister taxon of Hyloides and is composed of two major monophyletic components, Allodapanura new taxon (microhylids, hyperoliids, and allies) and Natatanura new taxon (ranids and allies); (31) Allodapanura is composed of Microhylidae (which is partially revised) and Afrobatrachia new taxon; (32) Afrobatrachia is composed of Xenosyneunitanura new taxon (the “strange-bedfellows” Brevicipitidae [formerly in Microhylidae] and Hemisotidae) and a more normal-looking group of frogs, Laurentobatrachia new taxon (Hyperoliidae and Arthroleptidae, which includes Leptopelinae and former Astylosternidae); (33) Natatanura new taxon is composed of two taxa, the African Ptychadenidae and the worldwide Victoranura new taxon; (34) Victoranura is composed of Ceratobatrachidae and Telmatobatrachia new taxon; (35) Telmatobatrachia is composed of Micrixalidae and a worldwide group of ranoids, Ametrobatrachia new taxon; (36) Ametrobatrachia is composed of Africanura new taxon and Saukrobatrachia new taxon; (37) Africanura is composed of two taxa: Phrynobatrachidae (Phrynobatrachus, including Dimorphognathus and Phrynodon as synonyms) and Pyxicephaloidea; (38) Pyxicephaloidea is composed of Petropedetidae (Conraua, Indirana, Arthroleptides, and Petropedetes), and Pyxicephalidae (including a number of African genera, e.g. Amietia [including Afrana], Arthroleptella, Pyxicephalus, Strongylopus, and Tomopterna); and (39) Saukrobatrachia new taxon is the sister taxon of Africanura and is composed of Dicroglossidae and Aglaioanura new taxon, which is, in turn, composed of Rhacophoroidea (Mantellidae and Rhacophoridae) and Ranoidea (Nyctibatrachidae and Ranidae, sensu stricto). Many generic revisions are made either to render a monophyle

Functional traits offer a rich quantitative framework for developing and testing theories in evolutionary biology, ecology and ecosystem science. However, the potential of functional traits to drive theoretical advances and refine models of global change can only be fully realised when species-level information is complete. Here we present the AVONET dataset containing comprehensive functional trait data for all birds, including six ecological variables, 11 continuous morphological traits, and information on range size and location. Raw morphological measurements are presented from 90,020 individuals of 11,009 extant bird species sampled from 181 countries. These data are also summarised as species averages in three taxonomic formats, allowing integration with a global phylogeny, geographical range maps, IUCN Red List data and the eBird citizen science database. The AVONET dataset provides the most detailed picture of continuous trait variation for any major radiation of organisms, offering a global template for testing hypotheses and exploring the evolutionary origins, structure and functioning of biodiversity.

• Paleobotanists have long used models based on leaf size and shape to reconstruct paleoclimate. However, most models incorporate a single variable or use traits that are not physiologically or functionally linked to climate, limiting their predictive power. Further, they often underestimate paleotemperature relative to other proxies. • Here we quantify leaf-climate correlations from 92 globally distributed, climatically diverse sites, and explore potential confounding factors. Multiple linear regression models for mean annual temperature (MAT) and mean annual precipitation (MAP) are developed and applied to nine well-studied fossil floras. • We find that leaves in cold climates typically have larger, more numerous teeth, and are more highly dissected. Leaf habit (deciduous vs evergreen), local water availability, and phylogenetic history all affect these relationships. Leaves in wet climates are larger and have fewer, smaller teeth. Our multivariate MAT and MAP models offer moderate improvements in precision over univariate approaches (± 4.0 vs 4.8°C for MAT) and strong improvements in accuracy. For example, our provisional MAT estimates for most North American fossil floras are considerably warmer and in better agreement with independent paleoclimate evidence. • Our study demonstrates that the inclusion of additional leaf traits that are functionally linked to climate improves paleoclimate reconstructions. This work also illustrates the need for better understanding of the impact of phylogeny and leaf habit on leaf-climate relationships.

We present a phylogenetic analysis of spiders using a dataset of 932 spider species, representing 115 families (only the family Synaphridae is unrepresented), 700 known genera, and additional representatives of 26 unidentified or undescribed genera. Eleven genera of the orders Amblypygi, Palpigradi, Schizomida and Uropygi are included as outgroups. The dataset includes six markers from the mitochondrial (12S, 16S, COI) and nuclear (histone H3, 18S, 28S) genomes, and was analysed by multiple methods, including constrained analyses using a highly supported backbone tree from transcriptomic data. We recover most of the higher-level structure of the spider tree with good support, including Mesothelae, Opisthothelae, Mygalomorphae and Araneomorphae. Several of our analyses recover Hypochilidae and Filistatidae as sister groups, as suggested by previous transcriptomic analyses. The Synspermiata are robustly supported, and the families Trogloraptoridae and Caponiidae are found as sister to the Dysderoidea. Our results support the Lost Tracheae clade, including Pholcidae, Tetrablemmidae, Diguetidae, Plectreuridae and the family Pacullidae (restored status) separate from Tetrablemmidae. The Scytodoidea include Ochyroceratidae along with Sicariidae, Scytodidae, Drymusidae and Periegopidae; our results are inconclusive about the separation of these last two families. We did not recover monophyletic Austrochiloidea and Leptonetidae, but our data suggest that both groups are more closely related to the Cylindrical Gland Spigot clade rather than to Synspermiata. Palpimanoidea is not recovered by our analyses, but also not strongly contradicted. We find support for Entelegynae and Oecobioidea (Oecobiidae plus Hersiliidae), and ambiguous placement of cribellate orb-weavers, compatible with their non-monophyly. Nicodamoidea (Nicodamidae plus Megadictynidae) and Araneoidea composition and relationships are consistent with recent analyses. We did not obtain resolution for the titanoecoids (Titanoecidae and Phyxelididae), but the Retrolateral Tibial Apophysis clade is well supported. Penestomidae, and probably Homalonychidae, are part of Zodarioidea, although the latter family was set apart by recent transcriptomic analyses. Our data support a large group that we call the marronoid clade (including the families Amaurobiidae, Desidae, Dictynidae, Hahniidae, Stiphidiidae, Agelenidae and Toxopidae). The circumscription of most marronoid families is redefined here. Amaurobiidae include the Amaurobiinae and provisionally Macrobuninae. We transfer Malenellinae (Malenella, from Anyphaenidae), Chummidae (Chumma) (new syn.) and Tasmarubriinae (Tasmarubrius, Tasmabrochus and Teeatta, from Amphinectidae) to Macrobuninae. Cybaeidae are redefined to include Calymmaria, Cryphoeca, Ethobuella and Willisius (transferred from Hahniidae), and Blabomma and Yorima (transferred from Dictynidae). Cycloctenidae are redefined to include Orepukia (transferred from Agelenidae) and Pakeha and Paravoca (transferred from Amaurobiidae). Desidae are redefined to include five subfamilies: Amphinectinae, with Amphinecta, Mamoea, Maniho, Paramamoea and Rangitata (transferred from Amphinectidae); Ischaleinae, with Bakala and Manjala (transferred from Amaurobiidae) and Ischalea (transferred from Stiphidiidae); Metaltellinae, with Austmusia, Buyina, Calacadia, Cunnawarra, Jalkaraburra, Keera, Magua, Metaltella, Penaoola and Quemusia; Porteriinae (new rank), with Baiami, Cambridgea, Corasoides and Nanocambridgea (transferred from Stiphidiidae); and Desinae, with Desis, and provisionally Poaka (transferred from Amaurobiidae) and Barahna (transferred from Stiphidiidae). Argyroneta is transferred from Cybaeidae to Dictynidae. Cicurina is transferred from Dictynidae to Hahniidae. The genera Neoramia (from Agelenidae) and Aorangia, Marplesia and Neolana (from Amphinectidae) are transferred to Stiphidiidae. The family Toxopidae (restored status) includes two subfamilies: Myroinae, with Gasparia, Gohia, Hulua, Neomyro, Myro, Ommatauxesis and Otagoa (transferred from Desidae); and Toxopinae, with Midgee and Jamara, formerly Midgeeinae, new syn. (transferred from Amaurobiidae) and Hapona, Laestrygones, Lamina, Toxops and Toxopsoides (transferred from Desidae). We obtain a monophyletic Oval Calamistrum clade and Dionycha; Sparassidae, however, are not dionychans, but probably the sister group of those two clades. The composition of the Oval Calamistrum clade is confirmed (including Zoropsidae, Udubidae, Ctenidae, Oxyopidae, Senoculidae, Pisauridae, Trechaleidae, Lycosidae, Psechridae and Thomisidae), affirming previous findings on the uncertain relationships of the "ctenids" Ancylometes and Cupiennius, although a core group of Ctenidae are well supported. Our data were ambiguous as to the monophyly of Oxyopidae. In Dionycha, we found a first split of core Prodidomidae, excluding the Australian Molycriinae, which fall distantly from core prodidomids, among gnaphosoids. The rest of the dionychans form two main groups, Dionycha part A and part B. The former includes much of the Oblique Median Tapetum clade (Trochanteriidae, Gnaphosidae, Gallieniellidae, Phrurolithidae, Trachelidae, Gnaphosidae, Ammoxenidae, Lamponidae and the Molycriinae), and also Anyphaenidae and Clubionidae. Orthobula is transferred from Phrurolithidae to Trachelidae. Our data did not allow for complete resolution for the gnaphosoid families. Dionycha part B includes the families Salticidae, Eutichuridae, Miturgidae, Philodromidae, Viridasiidae, Selenopidae, Corinnidae and Xenoctenidae (new fam., including Xenoctenus, Paravulsor and Odo, transferred from Miturgidae, as well as Incasoctenus from Ctenidae). We confirm the inclusion of Zora (formerly Zoridae) within Miturgidae.

Abstract Angiosperms are the cornerstone of most terrestrial ecosystems and human livelihoods 1,2 . A robust understanding of angiosperm evolution is required to explain their rise to ecological dominance. So far, the angiosperm tree of life has been determined primarily by means of analyses of the plastid genome 3,4 . Many studies have drawn on this foundational work, such as classification and first insights into angiosperm diversification since their Mesozoic origins 5–7 . However, the limited and biased sampling of both taxa and genomes undermines confidence in the tree and its implications. Here, we build the tree of life for almost 8,000 (about 60%) angiosperm genera using a standardized set of 353 nuclear genes 8 . This 15-fold increase in genus-level sampling relative to comparable nuclear studies 9 provides a critical test of earlier results and brings notable change to key groups, especially in rosids, while substantiating many previously predicted relationships. Scaling this tree to time using 200 fossils, we discovered that early angiosperm evolution was characterized by high gene tree conflict and explosive diversification, giving rise to more than 80% of extant angiosperm orders. Steady diversification ensued through the remaining Mesozoic Era until rates resurged in the Cenozoic Era, concurrent with decreasing global temperatures and tightly linked with gene tree conflict. Taken together, our extensive sampling combined with advanced phylogenomic methods shows the deep history and full complexity in the evolution of a megadiverse clade.

Engel, Michael S, Ceríaco, Luis M P, Daniel, Gimo M, Dellapé, Pablo M, Löbl, Ivan, Marinov, Milen, Reis, Roberto E, Young, Mark T, Dubois, Alain, Agarwal, Ishan, Lehmann A., Pablo, Alvarado, Mabel, Alvarez, Nadir, Andreone, Franco, Araujo-Vieira, Katyuscia, Ascher, John S, Baêta, Délio, Baldo, Diego, Bandeira, Suzana A, Barden, Phillip, Barrasso, Diego A, Bendifallah, Leila, Bockmann, Flávio A, Böhme, Wolfgang, Borkent, Art, Brandão, Carlos R F, Busack, Stephen D, Bybee, Seth M, Channing, Alan, Chatzimanolis, Stylianos, Christenhusz, Maarten J M, Crisci, Jorge V, D'elía, Guillermo, Da Costa, Luis M, Davis, Steven R, De Lucena, Carlos Alberto S, Deuve, Thierry, Fernandes Elizalde, Sara, Faivovich, Julián, Farooq, Harith, Ferguson, Adam W, Gippoliti, Spartaco, Gonçalves, Francisco M P, Gonzalez, Victor H, Greenbaum, Eli, Hinojosa-Díaz, Ismael A, Ineich, Ivan, Jiang, Jianping, Kahono, Sih, Kury, Adriano B, Lucinda, Paulo H F, Lynch, John D, Malécot, Valéry, Marques, Mariana P, Marris, John W M, Mckellar, Ryan C, Mendes, Luis F, Nihei, Silvio S, Nishikawa, Kanto, Ohler, Annemarie, Orrico, Victor G D, Ota, Hidetoshi, Paiva, Jorge, Parrinha, Diogo, Pauwels, Olivier S G, Pereyra, Martín O, Pestana, Lueji B, Pinheiro, Paulo D P, Prendini, Lorenzo, Prokop, Jakub, Rasmussen, Claus, Rödel, Mark-Oliver, Rodrigues, Miguel Trefaut, Rodríguez, Sara M, Salatnaya, Hearty, Sampaio, Íris, Sánchez-García, Alba, Shebl, Mohamed A, Santos, Bruna S, Solórzano-Kraemer, Mónica M, Sousa, Ana C A, Stoev, Pavel, Teta, Pablo, Trape, Jean-François, Dos Santos, Carmen Van-Dúnem, Vasudevan, Karthikeyan, Vink, Cor J, Vogel, Gernot, Wagner, Philipp, Wappler, Torsten, Ware, Jessica L, Wedmann, Sonja, Zacharie, Chifundera Kusamba (2021): EDITORIAL The taxonomic impediment: a shortage of taxonomists, not the lack of technical approaches. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 193 (2): 381-387, DOI: 10.1093/zoolinnean/zlab072, URL: https://academic.oup.com/zoolinnean/article/193/2/381/6374389

Abstract Scientists have repeatedly argued that transformative, multiscale global scenarios are needed as tools in the quest to halt the decline of biodiversity and achieve sustainability goals. As a first step towards achieving this, the researchers who participated in the scenarios and models expert group of the Intergovernmental Science‐Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) entered into an iterative, participatory process that led to the development of the Nature Futures Framework (NFF). The NFF is a heuristic tool that captures diverse, positive relationships of humans with nature in the form of a triangle. It can be used both as a boundary object for continuously opening up more plural perspectives in the creation of desirable nature scenarios and as an actionable framework for developing consistent nature scenarios across multiple scales. Here we describe the methods employed to develop the NFF and how it fits into a longer term process to create transformative, multiscale scenarios for nature. We argue that the contribution of the NFF is twofold: (a) its ability to hold a plurality of perspectives on what is desirable , which enables the development of joint goals and visions and recognizes the possible convergence and synergies of measures to achieve these visions and (b), its multiscale functionality for elaborating scenarios and models that can inform decision‐making at relevant levels, making it applicable across specific places and perspectives on nature. If humanity is to achieve its goal of a more sustainable and prosperous future rooted in a flourishing nature, it is critical to open up a space for more plural perspectives of human–nature relationships. As the global community sets out to develop new goals for biodiversity, the NFF can be used as a navigation tool helping to make diverse, desirable futures possible. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

The marine areas of South America (SA) include almost 30,000 km of coastline and encompass three different oceanic domains--the Caribbean, the Pacific, and the Atlantic--ranging in latitude from 12∘N to 55∘S. The 10 countries that border these coasts have different research capabilities and taxonomic traditions that affect taxonomic knowledge. This paper analyzes the status of knowledge of marine biodiversity in five subregions along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts of South America (SA): the Tropical East Pacific, the Humboldt Current,the Patagonian Shelf, the Brazilian Shelves, and the Tropical West Atlantic, and it provides a review of ecosystem threats and regional marine conservation strategies. South American marine biodiversity is least well known in the tropical subregions (with the exception of Costa Rica and Panama). Differences in total biodiversity were observed between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans at the same latitude. In the north of the continent, the Tropical East Pacific is richer in species than the Tropical West Atlantic, however, when standardized by coastal length, there is very little difference among them. In the south, the Humboldt Current system is much richer than the Patagonian Shelf. An analysis of endemism shows that 75% of the species are reported within only one of the SA regions, while about 22% of the species of SA are not reported elsewhere in the world. National and regional initiatives focusing on new exploration, especially to unknown areas and ecosystems, as well as collaboration among countries are fundamental to achieving the goal of completing inventories of species diversity and distribution.These inventories will allow accurate interpretation of the biogeography of its two oceanic coasts and latitudinal trends,and will also provide relevant information for science based policies.

Abstract Although Brazil is a megadiverse country and thus a conservation priority, no study has yet quantified conservation gaps in the Brazilian protected areas (PAs) using extensive empirical data. Here, we evaluate the degree of biodiversity protection and knowledge within all the Brazilian PAs through a gap analysis of vertebrate, arthropod and angiosperm occurrences and phylogenetic data. Our results show that the knowledge on biodiversity in most Brazilian PAs remain scant as 71% of PAs have less than 0.01 species records per km 2 . Almost 55% of Brazilian species and about 40% of evolutionary lineages are not found in PAs, while most species have less than 30% of their geographic distribution within PAs. Moreover, the current PA network fails to protect the majority of endemic species. Most importantly, these results are similar for all taxonomic groups analysed here. The methods and results of our countrywide assessment are suggested to help design further inventories in order to map and secure the key biodiversity of the Brazilian PAs. In addition, our study illustrates the most common biodiversity knowledge shortfalls in the tropics.

The oldest unequivocal records of Dinosauria were unearthed from Late Triassic rocks (approximately 230 Ma) accumulated over extensional rift basins in southwestern Pangea. The better known of these are Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis, Pisanosaurus mertii, Eoraptor lunensis, and Panphagia protos from the Ischigualasto Formation, Argentina, and Staurikosaurus pricei and Saturnalia tupiniquim from the Santa Maria Formation, Brazil. No uncontroversial dinosaur body fossils are known from older strata, but the Middle Triassic origin of the lineage may be inferred from both the footprint record and its sister-group relation to Ladinian basal dinosauromorphs. These include the typical Marasuchus lilloensis, more basal forms such as Lagerpeton and Dromomeron, as well as silesaurids: a possibly monophyletic group composed of Mid-Late Triassic forms that may represent immediate sister taxa to dinosaurs. The first phylogenetic definition to fit the current understanding of Dinosauria as a node-based taxon solely composed of mutually exclusive Saurischia and Ornithischia was given as "all descendants of the most recent common ancestor of birds and Triceratops". Recent cladistic analyses of early dinosaurs agree that Pisanosaurus mertii is a basal ornithischian; that Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis and Staurikosaurus pricei belong in a monophyletic Herrerasauridae; that herrerasaurids, Eoraptor lunensis, and Guaibasaurus candelariensis are saurischians; that Saurischia includes two main groups, Sauropodomorpha and Theropoda; and that Saturnalia tupiniquim is a basal member of the sauropodomorph lineage. On the contrary, several aspects of basal dinosaur phylogeny remain controversial, including the position of herrerasaurids, E. lunensis, and G. candelariensis as basal theropods or basal saurischians, and the affinity and/or validity of more fragmentary taxa such as Agnosphitys cromhallensis, Alwalkeria maleriensis, Chindesaurus bryansmalli, Saltopus elginensis, and Spondylosoma absconditum. The identification of dinosaur apomorphies is jeopardized by the incompleteness of skeletal remains attributed to most basal dinosauromorphs, the skulls and forelimbs of which are particularly poorly known. Nonetheless, Dinosauria can be diagnosed by a suite of derived traits, most of which are related to the anatomy of the pelvic girdle and limb. Some of these are connected to the acquisition of a fully erect bipedal gait, which has been traditionally suggested to represent a key adaptation that allowed, or even promoted, dinosaur radiation during Late Triassic times. Yet, contrary to the classical "competitive" models, dinosaurs did not gradually replace other terrestrial tetrapods over the Late Triassic. In fact, the radiation of the group comprises at least three landmark moments, separated by controversial (Carnian-Norian, Triassic-Jurassic) extinction events. These are mainly characterized by early diversification in Carnian times, a Norian increase in diversity and (especially) abundance, and the occupation of new niches from the Early Jurassic onwards. Dinosaurs arose from fully bipedal ancestors, the diet of which may have been carnivorous or omnivorous. Whereas the oldest dinosaurs were geographically restricted to south Pangea, including rare ornithischians and more abundant basal members of the saurischian lineage, the group achieved a nearly global distribution by the latest Triassic, especially with the radiation of saurischian groups such as "prosauropods" and coelophysoids.

Untangling the Web Interspecific interactions link species within complex trophic and nontrophic webs (see the Perspective by Lewinsohn and Cagnolo ). Theoretical work has suggested that certain characteristics of species, or even interactions, may predispose them to extinction from a network. Aizen et al. (p. 1486 ) provide empirical evidence that plant-pollinator interactions are lost nonrandomly following habitat reduction in isolated hills in the Argentine pampas. Some types of interaction were more vulnerable to disruption than others, particularly when the specialization of the interacting was high and when the interactions were infrequent. Stouffer et al. (p. 1489 ) applied network theory to predict the dynamical importance of species across different food webs. Characteristic three-node motifs were identified, and species were characterized according to the relative frequencies with which they occupied unique positions within the motifs. These relative frequencies and the dynamic importance of the motifs were then used to identify a species-level importance within a food web.

Phylogenetic analyses of long-tongued bees were made using up to 82 taxa, 131 adult characters, and 77 lanal characters. Only two families of long-tongued bees are recognized, Megachilidae and Apidae. The Pararhophitini and Fideliini form a subfamily, Fideliinae, of Megachilidae. The subfamilies of Apidae recognized are Nomadinae, Xylocopinae, and Apinae. The tribes Isepeolini, Osirini, and Protepeolini are part of the Apinae, ncjt part of the Nomadinae. Prolepeolus'xs a junior synonym oi Leiopodus. The tribes Euglossini, Bombini, Apini, and Meliponini form a distinctive clade arising from within the subfamily Apinae. The Ctenoplectridae is reduced to tribal status within the Apinae. The Exomalopsini of authors is dismembered, forming the tribes Exomalopsini and Tapinotaspini, and the genus /lo/o,vr('//.s joining the Emphorini as a subtribe. Eucninoda is included in its own subtribe in the Eucerini and the Aicylini are tentatively separate from but close to the Eucerini. New family-group names (tribal and subtribal) proposed are Hexepeolini, Brachynomadini, Tapinotaspini, and Aicyloscelina.

Americanae nace como un proyecto conjunto que surge dentro de la Red Europea de Información y Documentación sobre América Latina (REDIAL), y que ha afrontado la Biblioteca de la Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el Desarrollo (AECID). Esta nueva biblioteca virtual hace más accesibles los libros digitales de tema americanista a los investigadores y usuarios interesados de cualquier parte del mundo.

Some of the relatively recent literature correlating morphological variation in benthic foraminifera with environmental parameters such as temperature, salinity, carbonate solubility, depth, nutrition, substrate, dissolved oxygen, illumination, pollution, water motion, trace elements, and rapid environmental fluctuation is reviewed. It appears some variables (most notably depth) are recorded more frequently, which may affect some conclusions. Although each variable is treated separately, it appears that almost no variables act independently on test morphologies. In reviewing the literature, it becomes clear that there are many individual trends, especially with shell ornamentation, but few broad ones, and that it is almost impossible, with exception of some of the larger reef-dwelling, symbiont-bearing foraminifera, to predict how any species will react to various parameters. The broad trends concern thinning or thickening of carbonate tests with changing carbonate availability, temperature, and salinity. It appears that many observations of morphological changes within species may not be recorded in the literature, perhaps because authors did not recognize the importance of small details that would be of importance at a later time.

Crown group Archosauria, which includes birds, dinosaurs, crocodylomorphs, and several extinct Mesozoic groups, is a primary division of the vertebrate tree of life. However, the higher-level phylogenetic relationships within Archosauria are poorly resolved and controversial, despite years of study. The phylogeny of crocodile-line archosaurs (Crurotarsi) is particularly contentious, and has been plagued by problematic taxon and character sampling. Recent discoveries and renewed focus on archosaur anatomy enable the compilation of a new dataset, which assimilates and standardizes character data pertinent to higher-level archosaur phylogeny, and is scored across the largest group of taxa yet analysed. This dataset includes 47 new characters (25% of total) and eight taxa that have yet to be included in an analysis, and total taxonomic sampling is more than twice that of any previous study. This analysis produces a well-resolved phylogeny, which recovers mostly traditional relationships within Avemetatarsalia, places Phytosauria as a basal crurotarsan clade, finds a close relationship between Aetosauria and Crocodylomorpha, and recovers a monophyletic Rauisuchia comprised of two major subclades. Support values are low, suggesting rampant homoplasy and missing data within Archosauria, but the phylogeny is highly congruent with stratigraphy. Comparison with alternative analyses identifies numerous scoring differences, but indicates that character sampling is the main source of incongruence. The phylogeny implies major missing lineages in the Early Triassic and may support a Carnian-Norian extinction event.

Herrerasauridae from the Ischigualasto Formation (San Juan Province, Argentina) included Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis Reig, 1963, Ischisaurus cattoi Reig, 1963, and Frenguellisaurus ischigualastensis Novas, 1986. Review of type and referred specimens of those taxa suggests that Ischisaurus and Frenguellisaurus are junior synonyms of Herrerasaurus. At present, Herrerasaurus is the only Herrerasauridae documented in the Ischigualasto Formation, and the record of a cf. Staurikosaurus in those beds is here dismissed. Cladistic analysis counters previous hypotheses supporting the outgroup position of Herrerasauridae with respect to the remaining dinosaurs. Instead, new evidence supports this group as saurischian dinosaurs: the posterior process of the jugal is forked, a hyposphene-hypantrum articulation is present in dorsal vertebrae, the distal shaft of the ischium is rod-like, and six other saurischian synapomorphies are present. Moreover, herrerasaurids share with other theropods 11 synapomorphies including prong-shaped epipophyses on the cervical vertebrae, elongate prezygapophyses in distal caudals, humerus nearly 50% of femoral length, strongly reduced metacarpals IV and V, and distally enlarged pubis. In the context of the hypothesis accepted here, the presence of two sacral vertebrae and absence of a brevis fossa on the ilium in the Herrerasauridae are interpreted as apomorphic reversals within Dinosauria.

We describe the skull and neck of Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis from specimens discovered recently in the Upper Triassic Ischigualasto Formation of northwestern Argentina. The skull has a rectangular profile and a transversely narrow snout. Marked supratemporal depressions for jaw adductor musculature on the skull roof and a well-developed, sliding intra-mandibular joint suggest that Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis was an active predator. The neck is relatively slender with prominent epipophyses on all of the cervical vertebrae. Diagnostic features of the species include the semicircular shape of the antorbital fossa and the long, slender posterodorsal process of the dentary. Other features of the skull, such as the loss of the postfrontal and small post-temporal opening, constitute dinosaurian synapomorphies. These synapomorphies, however, remain equivocal at the level of Dinosauria because they cannot be evaluated in immediate dinosaurian outgroups for which cranial information is lacking. Comparisons of the skull and neck of Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis to other basal dinosaurs reveals several derived similarities with saurischians and, in particular, theropods. These synapomorphies include a subnarial foramen (between premaxilla and maxilla) shared with saurischians and an intra-mandibular joint shared with theropods. The cervical and cranial anatomy of Herrerasaurus ischigualastensis, however, is remarkably primitive compared to that in other basal dinosaurs.

Despite a large and multifaceted effort to understand the vast landscape of phenotypic data, their current form inhibits productive data analysis. The lack of a community-wide, consensus-based, human- and machine-interpretable language for describing phenotypes and their genomic and environmental contexts is perhaps the most pressing scientific bottleneck to integration across many key fields in biology, including genomics, systems biology, development, medicine, evolution, ecology, and systematics. Here we survey the current phenomics landscape, including data resources and handling, and the progress that has been made to accurately capture relevant data descriptions for phenotypes. We present an example of the kind of integration across domains that computable phenotypes would enable, and we call upon the broader biology community, publishers, and relevant funding agencies to support efforts to surmount today's data barriers and facilitate analytical reproducibility.

A NEW AND HUGE TITANOSAUR SAUROPOD FROM RIO LIMAY FORMATION (ALBIAN-CENOMANIAN), OF NEUQUEN PROVINCE, ARGENTINA. Argentinosaurus huinculensis gen et sp. nov. is a giant titanosaur sauropod characterized by dorsal vertebrae with large hyposphene-hypantrum bearing extra articulations; bodies of sacral vertebrae 2-5 very reduced; hollow cylindrical ribs; slender tibia 155 cm long. The family Andesauridae is proposed as a new rank to include Andesaurus, Argentinosaurus and Epachthosaurus considering that the presence of hyposphene-hypantrum is a character not recorded in the Titanosauridae sensu Powell (1986). The systematics of the titanosaurs is briefly discussed and the new taxon Titanosauria is proposed to include the families Andesauridae and Titanosauridae.

The archosaur species Teleocrater rhadinus, part of the new clade Aphanosauria, is an example of the earliest divergence of the avian stem lineage (Avemetatarsalia), the lineage that contains dinosaurs (including birds). The early history of the bird-line archosaurs, a group including dinosaurs, birds and pterosaurs, but excluding crocodilians, is not well defined. This is due in part to a fragmentary fossil record, but the distinctive morphology of pterosaurs has also obscured their ancestry. Sterling Nesbitt and colleagues describe a new species, Teleocraterrhadinus, from the Middle Triassic of Tanzania, that represents the most primitive known member of the bird-line archosaurs. Teleocrater provides the best guide so far to the ancestral bird-line condition. It was a lightly built, quadrupedal carnivore, so more like a crocodile than the small bipeds often depicted at this point in archosaur evolution. These are long-awaited findings on Teleocrater, which was undergoing study by the late Alan Charig of the Natural History Museum in London, and remained unpublished on his death in 1997. The relationship between dinosaurs and other reptiles is well established1,2,3,4, but the sequence of acquisition of dinosaurian features has been obscured by the scarcity of fossils with transitional morphologies. The closest extinct relatives of dinosaurs either have highly derived morphologies5,6,7 or are known from poorly preserved8,9 or incomplete material10,11. Here we describe one of the stratigraphically lowest and phylogenetically earliest members of the avian stem lineage (Avemetatarsalia), Teleocrater rhadinus gen. et sp. nov., from the Middle Triassic epoch. The anatomy of T. rhadinus provides key information that unites several enigmatic taxa from across Pangaea into a previously unrecognized clade, Aphanosauria. This clade is the sister taxon of Ornithodira (pterosaurs and birds) and shortens the ghost lineage inferred at the base of Avemetatarsalia. We demonstrate that several anatomical features long thought to characterize Dinosauria and dinosauriforms evolved much earlier, soon after the bird–crocodylian split, and that the earliest avemetatarsalians retained the crocodylian-like ankle morphology and hindlimb proportions of stem archosaurs and early pseudosuchians. Early avemetatarsalians were substantially more species-rich, widely geographically distributed and morphologically diverse than previously recognized. Moreover, several early dinosauromorphs that were previously used as models to understand dinosaur origins may represent specialized forms rather than the ancestral avemetatarsalian morphology.