information about principal investigators ... - our...

INFORMATION ABOUT PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS/PROJECT DIRECTORS(PI/PD) andco-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS/co-PROJECT DIRECTORS

Submit only ONE copy of this form for each PI/PD and co-PI/PD identified on the proposal. The form(s) should be attached to the originalproposal as specified in GPG Section II.B. Submission of this information is voluntary and is not a precondition of award. This information willnot be disclosed to external peer reviewers. DO NOT INCLUDE THIS FORM WITH ANY OF THE OTHER COPIES OF YOUR PROPOSAL ASTHIS MAY COMPROMISE THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE INFORMATION.

PI/PD Name:

Gender: Male Female

Ethnicity: (Choose one response) Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Latino

Race: (Select one or more)

American Indian or Alaska Native

Asian

Black or African American

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

White

Disability Status: (Select one or more)

Hearing Impairment

Visual Impairment

Mobility/Orthopedic Impairment

Other

None

Citizenship: (Choose one) U.S. Citizen Permanent Resident Other non-U.S. Citizen

Check here if you do not wish to provide any or all of the above information (excluding PI/PD name):

REQUIRED: Check here if you are currently serving (or have previously served) as a PI, co-PI or PD on any federally fundedproject

Ethnicity Definition:Hispanic or Latino. A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardlessof race.Race Definitions:American Indian or Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America), and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment.Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam.Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa,or other Pacific Islands.White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.

WHY THIS INFORMATION IS BEING REQUESTED:

The Federal Government has a continuing commitment to monitor the operation of its review and award processes to identify and addressany inequities based on gender, race, ethnicity, or disability of its proposed PIs/PDs. To gather information needed for this importanttask, the proposer should submit a single copy of this form for each identified PI/PD with each proposal. Submission of the requestedinformation is voluntary and will not affect the organization’s eligibility for an award. However, information not submitted will seriously underminethe statistical validity, and therefore the usefulness, of information recieved from others. Any individual not wishing to submit some or all theinformation should check the box provided for this purpose. (The exceptions are the PI/PD name and the information about prior Federal support, thelast question above.)

Collection of this information is authorized by the NSF Act of 1950, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1861, et seq. Demographic data allows NSF togauge whether our programs and other opportunities in science and technology are fairly reaching and benefiting everyone regardless ofdemographic category; to ensure that those in under-represented groups have the same knowledge of and access to programs and otherresearch and educational oppurtunities; and to assess involvement of international investigators in work supported by NSF. The informationmay be disclosed to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers to complete assigned work; and to other governmentagencies in order to coordinate and assess programs. The information may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potentialcandidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems of Records, NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/ProposalFile and Associated Records", 63 Federal Register 267 (January 5, 1998), and NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records",63 Federal Register 268 (January 5, 1998).

Ward C Wheeler



PI/PD Name:

Gender: Male Female




Asian



White


Hearing Impairment

Visual Impairment


Other

None








Jonathan A Coddington



PI/PD Name:

Gender: Male Female




Asian



White


Hearing Impairment

Visual Impairment


Other

None








Gustavo Hormiga



PI/PD Name:

Gender: Male Female




Asian



White


Hearing Impairment

Visual Impairment


Other

None








Lorenzo Prendini



PI/PD Name:

Gender: Male Female




Asian



White


Hearing Impairment

Visual Impairment


Other

None








Petra Sierwald

List of Suggested Reviewers or Reviewers Not To Include (optional)

SUGGESTED REVIEWERS:Not Listed

REVIEWERS NOT TO INCLUDE:Not Listed

Conflict of Interests Last Name First Name Institution Conflict Type Acevedo P. Smithsonian Co-author with J.C. Agnarsson I. GWU Ph. D. advisee for J.C. Allard Marc GWU Collaborator for G.H. Alvarez Fernando GWU Advisee for J.C. Arnedo Miquel NHM, London Collaborator for G.H. Arnedo Miquel NHM, London Co-author for J.C. Baptista R. L. P. Museu Nacional, Rio Postdoctoral advisee for J.C. Bieler Rüdiger Field Museum Chicago Collaborator with P.S. Chanzy M. H. CNRS-CERMAV Co-author for J.C. Clark Jim GWU Collaborator for G.H. Coddington Jonathan Smithsonian Advisor and Collaborator for G.H. Cole D. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Colwell R. K. U. of Connecticut Co-author for J.C. Craig C. L. Harvard University Co-author for J.C. Crowe Tim M. U. Cape Town Advisor and collaborator for L.P. De Laet Jan AMNH Postdoctoral advisee for W.W. DeSalle Rob AMNH Collaborator for W.W. & L.P. D’Haese Cyrille AMNH Postdoctoral advisee for W.W. Donoghue Michael Yale U. Collaborator for W.W. Draney Michael U. of Wisconsin Collaborator with P.S. Elgar M. A. U. of Melbourne Co-author for J.C. Erwin T. L. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Gardner K. H. DuPont Co-author for J.C. Gillespie Rosie U. California, Berkeley Collaborator for G.H. Gillespie Rosie U. California, Berkeley Co-author and co-PI for J.C. Giribet Gonzalo Harvard U. Collaborator for G.H. Goloboff Pablo INSUE Co-PI for J.C. Griswold Charles CAS, San Francisco Collaborator for G.H. Griswold Charles CAS, San Francisco Co-author for J.C. Hanner Rob AMNH Collaborator for L.P. Hayashi Cheryl U.C. Riverside Ph.D. advisee W.W. Hellerstein Joseph U. California Berkeley Collaborator for W.W. Herberstein M. E. U of Melbourne Co-author for J.C. Herendeen Pat GWU Collaborator for G.H. Heyer W. R. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Hillis David M. U. Texas Austin Collaborator for W.W. Hoffman Richard VA Nat History Museum Collaborator with P.S. Honeycutt Rodney Texas A&M Ph.D. advisor for W.W. Hormiga G. GWU Co-author, Ph. D. advisee for J.C. Huelsenbeck John U. Rochester Collaborator for W.W. Huhndorf Sabine Field Museum Chicago Collaborator with P.S. Jackson M. L. NIST Co-author for J.C. Janies Daniel AMNH Collaborator for W.W. Jansen Robert K. U. Texas Austin Collaborator for W.W. Kearney Maureen Field Museum Chicago Collaborator with P.S. Kim Junhyong Yale U. Collaborator for W.W. Kraus Otto U of Hamburg Graduate advisor for P.S. Kress W. J. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C.

1

Kuntner M. GWU Ph. D. advisee for J.C. Levi H. W. Harvard U Advisor for J.C. Lewis Paul U. Conn Collaborator for W.W. Linder H. Peter` U. Cape Town Advisor and collaborator for L.P. Lipscomb Diana GWU Collaborator for G.H. Litt Amy CUNY Ph.D. advisee for W.W. Longino J. T. Evergreen St College Co-author for J.C. Lopardo L. GWU Ph. D. advisee for J.C. Maddison David U. Arizona Collaborator for W.W. Maddison Wayne U. Arizona Collaborator for W.W. Meggers B. J. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Miller J. GWU Ph. D. advisee for J.C. Miranker Daniel U. Texas Austin Collaborator for W.W. Mishler Brent U. California Berkeley Collaborator for W.W. Mitter Charles U. Maryland Advisor for G.H. Moret Bernard M.E. U. New Mexico Collaborator for W.W. Muller Gerbus J. U. Stellenbosch Collaborator for L.P. Muse Spencer V. North Carolina State U. Collaborator for W.W. O’Leary Maureen Stony Brook Collaborator with P.S. Papadimitriou Cristos U. California Berkeley Collaborator for W.W. Philips Aloyisius Columbia University Advisee for W.W. Platnick Norman AMNH Ph.D. advisee for J.C. Pogue M. G. U.S.D.A. Co-author for J.C. Prendini Lorenzo AMNH Collaborator for G.H. Prendini Lorenzo AMNH Co-author for J.C. Rao Satish U. California Berkeley Collaborator for W.W. Raty G. CNRS-CERMAV Co-author for J.C. Scharff Nikolaj Z. M. U. Copenhagen Collaborator for G.H. Scharff Nikolaj Z. M. U. Copenhagen Co-author for J.C. Shear William Hampden-Sydney Coll Collaborator with P.S. Shelley Rowland N Carolina St Museum Collaborator with P.S. Sierwald Petra Field Museum Chicago Co-PI for J.C. Sierwald Petra Field Museum Chicago Collaborator for G.H. Sorensen L. L. Z. M. U. Copenhagen Co-author for J.C. Swofford David Florida State U. Collaborator for W.W. Thorington R. W. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Tytgat Jan Katolieke U. Leuven Collaborator L.P. van der Walt Jurg J. Potchefstroom U. Collaborator for L.P. Vari R. P. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Vrana Paul Columbia U. Ph.D. advisee for W.W. Wagner Andreas U. New Mexico Collaborator for W.W. Warnow Tandy U. Texas Austin Collaborator for W.W. Weitzman M. J. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Weitzman S. H. Smithsonian Co-author for J.C. Weygoldt Peter U. Freiburg Collaborator for L.P. Wheeler Ward AMNH Collaborator for GH and L.P. Wheeler Ward AMNH Co-PI for J.C. Whiting Michael Brigham Young U. Ph.D. advisee W.W.

2

COVER SHEET FOR PROPOSAL TO THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONFOR NSF USE ONLY

NSF PROPOSAL NUMBER

DATE RECEIVED NUMBER OF COPIES DIVISION ASSIGNED FUND CODE DUNS# (Data Universal Numbering System) FILE LOCATION

FOR CONSIDERATION BY NSF ORGANIZATION UNIT(S) (Indicate the most specific unit known, i.e. program, division, etc.)

PROGRAM ANNOUNCEMENT/SOLICITATION NO./CLOSING DATE/if not in response to a program announcement/solicitation enter NSF 02-2

EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (EIN) ORTAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (TIN)

SHOW PREVIOUS AWARD NO. IF THIS ISA RENEWALAN ACCOMPLISHMENT-BASED RENEWAL

IS THIS PROPOSAL BEING SUBMITTED TO ANOTHER FEDERALAGENCY? YES NO IF YES, LIST ACRONYM(S)

NAME OF ORGANIZATION TO WHICH AWARD SHOULD BE MADE ADDRESS OF AWARDEE ORGANIZATION, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE

AWARDEE ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN)

IS AWARDEE ORGANIZATION (Check All That Apply)(See GPG II.C For Definitions) FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATION SMALL BUSINESS MINORITY BUSINESS WOMAN-OWNED BUSINESS

NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE ADDRESS OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION, IF DIFFERENT, INCLUDING 9 DIGIT ZIP CODE

PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE (IF KNOWN)

TITLE OF PROPOSED PROJECT

REQUESTED AMOUNT

$

PROPOSED DURATION (1-60 MONTHS)

months

REQUESTED STARTING DATE SHOW RELATED PREPROPOSAL NO.,IF APPLICABLE

CHECK APPROPRIATE BOX(ES) IF THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDES ANY OF THE ITEMS LISTED BELOWBEGINNING INVESTIGATOR (GPG I.A)

DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (GPG II.C)

PROPRIETARY & PRIVILEGED INFORMATION (GPG I.B, II.C.6)

HISTORIC PLACES (GPG II.C.9)

SMALL GRANT FOR EXPLOR. RESEARCH (SGER) (GPG II.C.11)

VERTEBRATE ANIMALS (GPG II.C.11) IACUC App. Date

HUMAN SUBJECTS (GPG II.C.11)Exemption Subsection or IRB App. Date

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES: COUNTRY/COUNTRIES INVOLVED

(GPG II.C.9)

HIGH RESOLUTION GRAPHICS/OTHER GRAPHICS WHERE EXACT COLORREPRESENTATION IS REQUIRED FOR PROPER INTERPRETATION (GPG I.E.1)

PI/PD DEPARTMENT PI/PD POSTAL ADDRESS

PI/PD FAX NUMBER

NAMES (TYPED) High Degree Yr of Degree Telephone Number Electronic Mail Address

PI/PD NAME

CO-PI/PD

CO-PI/PD

CO-PI/PD

CO-PI/PD

Page 1 of 2

0228699DEB - Systematic Biology

NSF 02-074 05/17/02

136162659

American Museum Natural History

4000790000

American Museum Natural HistoryCentral Park West at 79th StreNew York, NY. 100245192

Assembling the Tree of Life: Phylogeny of Spiders

2,993,624 60 06/01/03

Division of Invertebrate Zoology

212-769-5495

Central Park West at 79th StreetAmerican Museum of Natural HistoryNew York, NY 100245192United States

Ward C Wheeler Ph.D 1988 212-769-5754 [email protected]

Jonathan A Coddington Ph.D 1984 202-357-4148 [email protected]

Gustavo Hormiga PhD 1995 202-994-0302 [email protected]

Lorenzo Prendini PhD 2002 212-769-5843 [email protected]

Petra Sierwald PhD 1985 312-665-7744 [email protected]

061202768

CERTIFICATION PAGE

Certification for Authorized Organizational Representative or Individual Applicant:By signing and submitting this proposal, the individual applicant or the authorized official of the applicant institution is: (1) certifying thatstatements made herein are true and complete to the best of his/her knowledge; and (2) agreeing to accept the obligation to comply with NSFaward terms and conditions if an award is made as a result of this application. Further, the applicant is hereby providing certificationsregarding debarment and suspension, drug-free workplace, and lobbying activities (see below), as set forth in GrantProposal Guide (GPG), NSF 02-2. Willful provision of false information in this application and its supporting documents or in reports requiredunder an ensuing award is a criminal offense (U. S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001). In addition, if the applicant institution employs more than fifty persons, the authorized official of the applicant institution is certifying that the institution has implemented a written and enforced conflict of interest policy that is consistent with the provisions of Grant Policy Manual Section 510; that to the bestof his/her knowledge, all financial disclosures required by that conflict of interest policy have been made; and that all identified conflicts of interest will havebeen satisfactorily managed, reduced or eliminated prior to the institution’s expenditure of any funds under the award, in accordance with theinstitution’s conflict of interest policy. Conflicts which cannot be satisfactorily managed, reduced or eliminated must be disclosed to NSF.

Drug Free Work Place Certification By electronically signing the NSF Proposal Cover Sheet, the Authorized Organizational Representative or Individual Applicant is providing the Drug Free Work Place Certification contained in Appendix A of the Grant Proposal Guide.

Debarment and Suspension Certification (If answer "yes", please provide explanation.)

Is the organization or its principals presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any Federal department or agency? Yes No

By electronically signing the NSF Proposal Cover Sheet, the Authorized Organizational Representative or Individual Applicant is providing the Debarment and Suspension Certification contained in Appendix B of the Grant Proposal Guide.

Certification Regarding LobbyingThis certification is required for an award of a Federal contract, grant, or cooperative agreement exceeding $100,000 and for an award of a Federal loan ora commitment providing for the United States to insure or guarantee a loan exceeding $150,000.

Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans and Cooperative AgreementsThe undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that:

(1) No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influencean officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connectionwith the awarding of any federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement,and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.

(2) If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer oremployee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with thisFederal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, ‘‘Disclosure of Lobbying Activities,’’ in accordance with its instructions.

(3) The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers includingsubcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly.

This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of thiscertification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, Title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file therequired certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure.

AUTHORIZED ORGANIZATIONAL REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE DATE

NAME

TELEPHONE NUMBER ELECTRONIC MAIL ADDRESS FAX NUMBER

*SUBMISSION OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS IS VOLUNTARY AND WILL NOT AFFECT THE ORGANIZATION’S ELIGIBILITY FOR AN AWARD. HOWEVER, THEY ARE ANINTEGRAL PART OF THE INFORMATION SYSTEM AND ASSIST IN PROCESSING THE PROPOSAL. SSN SOLICITED UNDER NSF ACT OF 1950, AS AMENDED.

Page 2 of 2

Directorate for Biological SciencesDivision of Environmental Biology

Systematic Biology

Proposal Classification FormPI: / Proposal Number: 0228699

CATEGORY I: INVESTIGATOR STATUS (Select ONE) Beginning Investigator - No previous Federal support as PI or Co-PI, excluding fellowships, dissertations, planning grants, etc.

Prior Federal support only

Current Federal support only

Current & prior Federal support

CATEGORY II: FIELDS OF SCIENCE OTHER THAN BIOLOGY INVOLVED IN THIS RESEARCH (Select 1 to 3)

Astronomy

Chemistry

Computer Science

Earth Science

Engineering

Mathematics

Physics

Psychology

Social Sciences

None of the Above

CATEGORY III: SUBSTANTIVE AREA (Select 1 to 4) BIOGEOGRAPHY

Island Biogeography

Historical/ Evolutionary Biogeography

Phylogeography

Methods/Theory

CHROMOSOME STUDIES

Chromosome Evolution

Chromosome Number

Mutation

Mitosis and Meiosis

COMMUNITY ECOLOGY

Community Analysis

Community Structure

Community Stability

Succession

Experimental Microcosms/ Mesocosms

Disturbance

Patch Dynamics

Food Webs/ Trophic Structure

Keystone Species

COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY

CONSERVATION & RESTORATION BIOLOGY

DATABASES

ECOSYSTEMS LEVEL

Physical Structure

Decomposition

Biogeochemistry

Limnology/Hydrology

Climate/Microclimate

Whole-System Analysis

Productivity/Biomass

System Energetics

Landscape Dynamics

Chemical & Biochemical Control

Global Change

Climate Change

Regional Studies

Global Studies

Forestry

Resource Management (Wildlife, Fisheries, Range, Other)

Agricultural Ecology

EXTREMOPHILES

GENOMICS (Genome sequence, organization, function)

Viral

Microbial

Fungal

Plant

Animal

MARINE MAMMALS

MOLECULAR APPROACHES

Molecular Evolution

Methodology/Theory

Isozymes/ Electrophoresis

Nucleic Acid Analysis (general) Restriction Enzymes

Nucleotide Sequencing

Nuclear DNA

Mitochondrial DNA

Chloroplast DNA

RNA Analysis

DNA Hybridization

Recombinant DNA

Amino Acid Sequencing

Gene/Genome Mapping

Natural Products

Serology/Immunology

PALEONTOLOGY

Floristic

Faunistic

Paleoecology

Biostratigraphy

Palynology

Micropaleontology

Paleoclimatology

Archeozoic

Paleozoic

Mesozoic

Cenozoic

POPULATION DYNAMICS & LIFE HISTORY

Demography/ Life History

Population Cycles

Distribution/Patchiness/ Marginal Populations

Population Regulation

Intraspecific Competition

Reproductive Strategies

Gender Allocation

Metapopulations

Extinction

POPULATION GENETICS & BREEDING SYSTEMS

Variation

Microevolution

Speciation

Hybridization

Inbreeding/Outbreeding

Gene Flow Measurement

Inheritance/Heritability

Quantitative Genetics/ QTL Analysis

Ecological Genetics

Gender Ratios

Apomixis/ Parthenogenesis

Vegetative Reproduction

SPECIES INTERACTIONS

Predation

Herbivory

Omnivory

Interspecific Competition

Niche Relationships/ Resource Partititioning

Pollination/ Seed Dispersal

Parasitism

Mutualism/ Commensalism

Plant/Fungal/ Microbial Interactions

Mimicry

Animal Pathology

Plant Pathology

Coevolution

Biological Control

STATISTICS & MODELING

Methods/ Instrumentation/ Software

Modeling (general)

Statistics (general) Multivariate Methods

Spatial Statistics & Spatial Modeling

Sampling Design & Analysis

Experimental Design & Analysis

SYSTEMATICS

Taxonomy/Classification

Nomenclature

Monograph/Revision

Phylogenetics

Phenetics/Cladistics/ Numerical Taxonomy

Macroevolution

NONE OF THE ABOVE

CATEGORY IV: INFRASTRUCTURE (Select 1 to 3) COLLECTIONS/STOCK CULTURES

Natural History Collections

DATABASES

FACILITIES

Controlled Environment Facilities

Field Stations Field Facility Structure

Field Facility Equipment

LTER Site

INDUSTRY PARTICIPATION

Technique Development

TRACKING SYSTEMS

Geographic Information Systems

Remote Sensing

NONE OF THE ABOVE

CATEGORY V: HABITAT (Select 1 to 2)

TERRESTRIAL HABITATS GENERAL TERRESTRIAL

TUNDRA

BOREAL FOREST

TEMPERATE Deciduous Forest

Coniferous Forest

Rain Forest

Mixed Forest

Prairie/Grasslands

Desert

SUBTROPICAL Rain Forest

Seasonal Forest

Savanna

Thornwoods

Deciduous Forest

Coniferous Forest

Desert

TROPICAL Rain Forest

Seasonal Forest

Savanna

Thornwoods

Deciduous Forest

Coniferous Forest

Desert

CHAPPARAL/ SCLEROPHYLL/ SHRUBLANDS

ALPINE

MONTANE

CLOUD FOREST

RIPARIAN ZONES

ISLANDS (except Barrier Islands)

BEACHES/ DUNES/ SHORES/ BARRIER ISLANDS

CAVES/ ROCK OUTCROPS/ CLIFFS

CROPLANDS/ FALLOW FIELDS/ PASTURES

URBAN/SUBURBAN

SUBTERRANEAN/ SOIL/ SEDIMENTS

EXTREME TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT

AERIAL

AQUATIC HABITATS GENERAL AQUATIC

FRESHWATER Wetlands/Bogs/Swamps

Lakes/Ponds

Rivers/Streams

Reservoirs

MARINE

Open Ocean/Continental Shelf

Bathyal

Abyssal

Estuarine

Intertidal/Tidal/Coastal

Coral Reef

HYPERSALINE

EXTREME AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT

CAVES/ ROCK OUTCROPS/ CLIFFS

MANGROVES

SUBSURFACE WATERS/ SPRINGS

EPHEMERAL POOLS & STREAMS

MICROPOOLS (Pitcher Plants, Tree Holes, Other)

MAN-MADE ENVIRONMENTS LABORATORY THEORETICAL SYSTEMS OTHER ARTIFICIAL SYSTEMS

NOT APPLICABLE NOT APPLICABLE

CATEGORY VI: GEOGRAPHIC AREA OF THE RESEARCH (Select 1 to 2) WORLDWIDE

NORTH AMERICA United States

Northeast US (CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT)

Northcentral US (IA, IL, IN, MI, MN, ND, NE, OH, SD, WI)

Northwest US (ID, MT, OR, WA, WY)

Southeast US (DC, DE, FL, GA, MD, NC, SC, WV, VA)

Southcentral US (AL, AR, KS, KY, LA, MO,MS, OK, TN, TX)

Southwest US (AZ, CA, CO, NM, NV, UT)

Alaska

Hawaii

Puerto Rico

Canada

Mexico

CENTRAL AMERICA (Mainland) Caribbean Islands

Bermuda/Bahamas

SOUTH AMERICA

Eastern South America (Guyana, Fr. Guiana, Suriname, Brazil)

Northern South America (Colombia, Venezuela)

Southern South America (Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay)

Western South America (Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia)

EUROPE Eastern Europe

Russia

Scandinavia

Western Europe

ASIA Central Asia

Far East

Middle East

Siberia

South Asia

Southeast Asia

AFRICA

North Africa

African South of the Sahara

East Africa

Madagascar

South Africa

West Africa

AUSTRALASIA Australia

New Zealand

Pacific Islands

ANTARCTICA

ARCTIC

ATLANTIC OCEAN

PACIFIC OCEAN

INDIAN OCEAN

OTHER REGIONS (Not defined)

NOT APPLICABLE

CATEGORY VII: CLASSIFICATION OF ORGANISMS (Select 1 to 4) VIRUSES

Bacterial

Plant

Animal

PROKARYOTES Archaebacteria

Cyanobacteria

Eubacteria

PROTISTA (PROTOZOA) Amoebae

Apicomplexa

Ciliophora

Flagellates

Foraminifera

Microspora

Radiolaria

FUNGI Ascomycota

Basidiomycota

Chytridiomycota

Mitosporic Fungi

Oomycota

Zygomycota

LICHENS

SLIME MOLDS

ALGAE Bacillariophyta (Diatoms)

Charophyta

Chlorophyta

Chrysophyta

Dinoflagellata

Euglenoids

Phaeophyta

Rhodophyta

PLANTS N0N-VASCULAR PLANTS

BRYOPHYTA

Anthocerotae (Hornworts)

Hepaticae (Liverworts)

Musci (Mosses)

VASCULAR PLANTS

FERNS & FERN ALLIES

GYMNOSPERMS

Coniferales (Conifers)

Cycadales (Cycads)

Ginkgoales (Ginkgo)

Gnetales (Gnetophytes)

ANGIOSPERMS

Monocots

Arecaceae (Palmae)

Cyperaceae

Liliaceae

Orchidaceae

Poaceae (Graminae)

Dicots

Apiaceae (Umbelliferae)

Asteraceae (Compositae)

Brassicaceae (Cruciferae)

Fabaceae (Leguminosae)

Lamiaceae (Labiatae)

Rosaceae

Solanaceae

ANIMALS INVERTEBRATES

MESOZOA/PLACOZOA

PORIFERA (Sponges)

CNIDARIA

Hydrozoa (Hydra, etc.)

Scyphozoa (Jellyfish)

Anthozoa (Corals, Sea Anemones)

CTENOPHORA (Comb Jellies)

PLATYHELMINTHES (Flatworms)

Turbellaria (Planarians)

Trematoda (Flukes)

Cestoda (Tapeworms)

Monogenea (Flukes)

GNATHOSTOMULIDA

NEMERTINEA (Rynchocoela) (Ribbon Worms)

ENTOPROCTA (Bryozoa) (Plant-like Animals)

ASCHELMINTHES

Gastrotricha

Kinorhyncha

Loricifera

Nematoda (Roundworms)

Nematomorpha (Horsehair Worms)

Rotifera (Rotatoria)

ACANTHOCEPHALA (Spiny-headed Worms)

PRIAPULOIDEA

BRYOZOA (Ectoprocta) (Plant-like Animals)

PHORONIDEA (Lophophorates)

BRACHIOPODA (Lamp Shells)

MOLLUSCA

Monoplacophora

Aplacophora (Solenogasters)

Polyplacophora (Chitons)

Scaphopoda (Tooth Shells)

Gastropoda (Snails, Slugs, Limpets)

Pelecypoda (Bivalvia) (Clams, Mussels, Oysters, Scallops)

Cephalopoda (Squid, Octopus, Nautilus)

ANNELIDA (Segmented Worms)

Polychaeta (Parapodial Worms)

Oligochaeta (Earthworms)

Hirudinida (Leeches)

POGONOPHORA (Beard Worms)

SIPUNCULOIDEA (Peanut Worms)

ECHIUROIDEA (Spoon Worms)

ARTHROPODA

Cheliceriformes

Merostomata (Horseshoe Crabs)

Pycnogonida (Sea Spiders)

Scorpionida (Scorpions)

Araneae (True Spiders)

Pseudoscorpionida (Pseudoscorpions)

Acarina (Free-living Mites)

Parasitiformes (Parasitic Ticks & Mites)

Crustacea

Branchiopoda (Fairy Shrimp, Water Flea)

Ostracoda (Sea Lice)

Copepoda

Cirripedia (Barnacles)

Amphipoda (Skeleton Shrimp, Whale Lice, Freshwater Shrimp)

Isopoda (Wood Lice, Pillbugs)

Decapoda (Lobster, Crayfish, Crabs, Shrimp)

Hexapoda (Insecta) (Insects)

Apterygota (Springtails, Silverfish, etc.)

Odonata (Dragonflies, Damselflies)

Ephemeroptera (Mayflies)

Orthoptera (Grasshoppers, Crickets)

Dictyoptera (Cockroaches, Mantids, Phasmids)

Isoptera (Termites)

Plecoptera (Stoneflies)

Phthiraptera (Mallophaga & Anoplura) (Lice)

Hemiptera (including Heteroptera) (True Bugs)

Homoptera (Cicadas, Scale Insects,Leafhoppers)

Thysanoptera (Thrips)

Neuroptera (Lacewings, Dobsonflies, Snakeflies)

Trichoptera (Caddisflies)

Lepidoptera (Moths, Butterflies)

Diptera (Flies, Mosquitoes)

Siphonaptera (Fleas)

Coleoptera (Beetles)

Hymenoptera (Ants, Bees, Wasps, Sawflies)

Chilopoda (Centipedes)

Diplopoda (Millipedes)

Pauropoda

Symphyta (Symphyla)

PENTASTOMIDA (Linguatulida) (Tongue Worms)

TARDIGRADA (Tardigrades, Water Bears)

ONYCHOPHORA (Peripatus)

CHAETOGNATHA (Arrow Worms)

ECHINODERMATA

Crinoidea (Sea Lilies, Feather Stars)

Asteroidea (Starfish, Sea Stars)

Ophiuroidea (Brittle Stars, Serpent Stars)

Echinoidea (Sea Urchins, Sand Dollars)

Holothuroidea (Sea Cucumbers)

HEMICHORDATA (Acorn Worms, Pterobranchs)

UROCHORDATA (Tunicata) (Tunicates, Sea Squirts, Salps, Ascideans)

CEPHALOCHORDATA (Amphioxus/Lancelet)

VERTEBRATES

AGNATHA (Hagfish, Lamprey)

FISHES

Chondrichthyes (Cartilaginous Fishes) (Sharks, Rays, Ratfish)

Osteichthyes (Bony Fishes)

AMPHIBIA

Anura (Frogs, Toads)

Urodela (Salamanders, Newts)

Gymnophiona (Apoda) (Caecilians)

REPTILIA

Chelonia (Turtles, Tortoises)

Serpentes (Snakes)

Sauria (Lizards)

Crocodylia (Crocodilians)

AVES (Birds)

Passeriformes (Passerines)

MAMMALIA

Monotremata (Platypus, Echidna)

Marsupalia (Marsupials)

Eutheria (Placentals)

Insectivora (Hedgehogs, Moles, Shrews, Tenrec, etc.)

Chiroptera (Bats)

Primates

Humans

Rodentia

Lagomorphs (Rabbits, Hares, Pikas)

Carnivora (Bears, Canids, Felids, Mustelids, Viverrids, Hyena, Procyonids)

Perissodactyla (Odd-toed Ungulates) (Horses, Rhinos, Tapirs, etc.)

Artiodactyla (Even-toed Ungulates) (Cattle, Sheep, Deer, Pigs, etc.)

Marine Mammals (Seals, Walrus, Whales, Otters, Dolphins, Porpoises)

TRANSGENIC ORGANISMS

FOSSIL OR EXTINCT ORGANISMS

NO ORGANISMS

CATEGORY VIII: MODEL ORGANISM (Select ONE) NO MODEL ORGANISM

MODEL ORGANISM (Choose from the list)

Escherichia coli

Mouse-Ear Cress (Arabidopsis thaliana)

Fruitfly (Drosophila melanogaster)

The Tree of Life: Phylogeny of Spiders Project Summary

Our aim is to produce a robust phylogeny of all the deepest branches within a mega-diverse group, the spiders, by combining a massive amount of newly generated comparative genomic data with a substantial set of new and re-assessed data on morphology and behavior.

Spiders are among the oldest and most diverse groups of organisms on our planet, with fossils dating back to the Devonian (c. 380 million years ago) and a current diversity of over 37,500 described species placed in 3,471 genera and 109 families. Among the few other mega-diverse groups that comprise similarly large branches of the tree of life on Earth, spiders stand out because of their ecological importance as the dominant non-vertebrate predators in most terrestrial ecosystems. It is probably no exaggeration to say that without spiders, human populations would be greatly affected, as insect pests would devour even more than the one-third of our crops they already destroy. Spiders in many ways "replicate" the evolutionary experiment insects represent. In contrast to other non-vertebrate groups of comparable size, the cornerstones for a comprehensive phylogenetic study of spiders are at hand. Spiders uniquely enjoy a completely up-to-date, on-line, species-level taxonomic database extending from Linnaeus to the present -- essential to taxonomic and phylogenetic research. Deep branches of spider phylogeny have been investigated in over 50 modern, quantitative cladistic analyses that overlap to cover a surprising proportion of total spider diversity (102 of 109 families, 23% of all genera, almost 2,400 homology hypotheses), although the complete matrix jointly implied by these studies has never been assembled, much less analyzed. These studies provide an initial hypothesis of relationships far more detailed than that available for any similarly large and important non-amniote group; probably only fishes have received comparable cladistic scrutiny. However, these analyses have been based almost entirely on morphological (and a small amount of behavioral) data. The insignificant amount of genomic work to date on spiders has been uncoordinated and of little utility for broad-scale phylogenetic investigation. The advent of high-throughput DNA sequencing, however, makes it feasible to examine substantial parts of the genome across a dense sampling of spider taxa. We propose to sequence at least 50 "loci" (genome samples of 500-1,000 or more base pairs that can be sequenced as single pieces in both directions simultaneously) for representatives of at least 500 genera of spiders and their closest relatives (the whipscorpion orders Amblypygi, Uropygi, and Schizomida). These genera will be carefully selected by a sampling strategy designed to maximize the resolution of deep branches within spider phylogeny, and will purposefully include all the previously most-favored study organisms of ethologists, ecologists, physiologists, and developmental and molecular biologists, thus integrating and contextualizing their research. Data matrices will be produced that combine the new genomic data with a new, comprehensive survey of morphological and behavioral homologies, thus offering a unique "index" to all comparative data on one large group. The more than 20 million entries in these matrices will dwarf those of all previous studies taken together. The computational challenges posed by such huge matrices were insoluble until recently. New computer software, designed in large part by members of our group and using massively parallel processing to achieve supercomputing capability, makes such analyses feasible for the first time. We will use parsimony and maximum likelihood methods of phylogenetic reconstruction to analyze our data. We will also quantitatively assess the robustness of the results and the contribution of various data partitions to phylogenetic patterns implied by these data. Many of the leading researchers in phylogenetic systematics are arachnologists; this proposal involves an unusually integrated, collaborative, and informed team involving 5 PIs and 10 senior researchers, postdoctoral fellows, and graduate students, working in 14 labs housed in 13 institutions and 4 countries. We propose to collect a huge amount of genomic information in order to test and improve the results achieved by over 50 detailed morphological cladistic analyses conducted by more than 30 investigators during the past 15 years. For three decades, the lack of well-tested phylogenies, rather than comparative data, has been the rate-limiting step in broad-scale evolutionary research. We propose to remove that obstacle for one large group entirely. These data and the resulting phylogeny will have ramifications that extend far beyond systematics. Spiders are already model organisms in behavioral (especially sexual and web-building behaviors) and ecological (foraging, predator-prey systems, integrated pest management) research. A robust and comprehensive phylogeny for the deepest branches of this large branch of the tree of life will greatly aid expanded research in all areas of comparative biology.

TABLE OF CONTENTSFor font size and page formatting specifications, see GPG section II.C.

Section Total No. of Page No.*Pages in Section (Optional)*

Cover Sheet for Proposal to the National Science Foundation

A Project Summary (not to exceed 1 page)

B Table of Contents

C Project Description (Including Results from Prior

NSF Support) (not to exceed 15 pages) (Exceed only if allowed by aspecific program announcement/solicitation or if approved inadvance by the appropriate NSF Assistant Director or designee)

D References Cited

E Biographical Sketches (Not to exceed 2 pages each)

F Budget (Plus up to 3 pages of budget justification)

G Current and Pending Support

H Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources

I Special Information/Supplementary Documentation

J Appendix (List below. )

(Include only if allowed by a specific program announcement/solicitation or if approved in advance by the appropriate NSFAssistant Director or designee)

Appendix Items:

*Proposers may select any numbering mechanism for the proposal. The entire proposal however, must be paginated.Complete both columns only if the proposal is numbered consecutively.

1

1

15

8

27

52

15

6

20

1

Project Description Results from Prior NSF Support G. Hormiga and J. Coddington, Monographic Research in Araneoid Spider Systematics, DEB-9712353, $415,480, 1997-2002. Three Ph.D. students are working on the research projects funded by this grant. Jeremy (Zujko-) Miller (working on Neotropical Erigoninae) is expected to defend his dissertation by September 02. Ingi Agnarsson (revising Anelosimus; started Fall 98) has been advanced to candidacy and is expected to complete his dissertation by the end of 2003. Matjaz Kuntner (revising Nephilinae; started his Ph.D. Spring 99) has completed his coursework and will take his orals in Fall 02. We have made important progress in understanding the taxonomy and phylogenetics of our target groups of araneoid spiders. Fieldwork carried out in Colombia (1998), Myanmar (1998), Costa Rica (1999), Guyana (1999), Chile (2000-01), South Africa (2001), Madagascar (2001) and Australia (2002); we are currently planning fieldwork in Thailand for Spring 2003. All lab members have participated in most of these field trips. The following products are available through our PEET project web site (www.gwu.edu/~clade/spiders/peet.htm): Neotropical linyphiid spider taxonomic catalog; on-line catalog of the USNM spider collection; cladograms from past and upcoming papers on araneoid systematics (linked to their phylogenetic databases); on-line images of the linyphioid genera of the world (99% completed; copyright permissions pending before upload). Publications supported by this grant include: Agnarsson (2000), Agnarsson (in press), Coddington & Colwell (2001); Griswold et al. (1999); Griswold, Long & Hormiga (1999); Herberstein et al. (2000); Hormiga (1998, 1999, 2000, in press); Hormiga & Coddington (2001); Hormiga, Scharff & Coddington (2000); Hormiga, Arnedo & Gillespie (in press); Kress et al. (1999); Kuntner & Hormiga (in press); Kuntner (in press); Kuntner & Sereg (2002); Miller (submitted); and Zujko-Miller (1999a, b).

G. Hormiga, Scanning Electron Microscope for Systematic Biology, NSF DBI-0070362; G. Hormiga; PI & P. Herendeen, D. Lipscomb, J. Clark, D. Lieberman, Co-PIs, $118,274, 2000-2001. This grant provided funds to help establish a SEM facility at the Department of Biological Sciences (GWU). A LEO 1430VP variable SEM and accessory equipment (critical point drier, sputter coater) were purchased in 2000. Publications resulting from the use of this equipment include: Hormiga (in press); Hormiga, Arnedo & Gillespie (in press).

R. Gillespie and J. Coddington, Systematics of Spider Family Theridiidae, NSF DEB-9707744, 1997- 2000, $200,900. This grant provided funds to estimate the phylogeny of the spider family Theridiidae from morphological and molecular data, based on a comprehensive sample of genera. The morphological work is nearly completion and the molecular work is done, although not yet published. Five gene fragments have been sequenced and 255 morphological characters coded for 51 genera (143 terminals), and papers on molecular, morphological, and combined analysis are in preparation. The grant has contributed to the support of two post-docs and 2 graduate students. Publications supported by this grant include: Agnarsson (2000), Agnarsson (in press), Coddington & Colwell (2001), Gillespie & Oxford (1998), Griswold et al. (1999), Herberstein et al. (2000), Hormiga & Coddington (2001), Hormiga, Scharff & Coddington (2000), Hormiga, Arnedo & Gillespie (in press), Scharff & Coddington (1997), Oxford & Gillespie (1998, 2001), Sorensen et al. (2002) and Tan et al. (1999).

P. Sierwald, The Diplopoda: Research, Taxonomic Training and Computerization, NSF DEB 97-12438, $740,000, 1998 - 2002. . Co-PI: W. A. Shear, Hampden-Sydney College, VA.; 2 grad students, 1 post doc, 2 masters student interns, 6 undergraduate interns; FMNH millipede collection completely computerized, type collection separated. Web page: www.fmnh.org/research_collections/zoology/zoo_sites/millipeet/home.html; Publications supported by this grant include: Bond, J.E. & P. Sierwald (In press a, b); Shelley R, P. Sierwald, S.B. Kiser & S. Golovatch (2000); Sierwald P. & S. I. Golovatch (2001); Shear, W. A. & D. A. Hubbard (1998a); Shear, W. A. & D. A. Hubbard (1998c); Shear, W. A. (1999a, 1999b, 1999c, 2000a, 2000b); Shear, W. A., M. Harvey & H. Hoch (2000); Shear, W. A. & P. Selden (2001). One on-line publication: 2001, Version 1.0, Editor: Petra Sierwald, Nomenclator Generum Diplopodorum. A complete genus listing of all genus-group names in the class Diplopoda from 1758 through 1999. Authors: Jeekel, C. A.W., R. L. Hoffman, R. M. Shelley, P. Sierwald, S. B. Kiser & S. I. Golovatch.

W. Wheeler (with R. T. Schuh), The Evolution and Phylogeny of the True Bugs (Heteroptera), DEB 97-26587, $65,000, 1998-2001. During this three-year project, we attempted to acquire and sequence the broadest possible sample of heteropteran taxa. Many of the specimens were obtained through fieldwork conducted by Schuh in Australia during the grant period. Initially, new taxa were easy to acquire, and within a relatively short period we made tremendous progress toward having comparable sequences for most of the families and many of the subfamilies within the Heteroptera, as well as a dense sampling of outgroups.

2

The remaining 20% of the taxa were much harder to acquire. Through continued fieldwork and contacts with colleagues, we have now sequenced 76 family-level taxa within the Heteroptera, this number being based on the revised classification of the Lygaeoidea recently published by Henry. We have sequenced 17 outgroup families within the Hemiptera, including the Coleorrhyncha. Sampling at the subfamily level was most dense in the Cimicomorpha and Pentatomomorpha. The total sample includes about 445 taxa for which at least some sequence data were acquired. The densest sampling is within the Miridae, where we have a relatively complete set of sequences for 170 taxa representing virtually all recognized suprageneric groupings. We chose to sequence the following gene regions, known to contain phylogenetic signal on the basis of prior studies: 18S rDNA (~1000 bases), CO1 ( ~1000 bases), 28s (~350 bases), 16s (~650 bases), or about 3000 bases per taxon for a total of more than 1.2 million bases. Using these sequence data in concert with existing and newly acquired morphological data allowed testing of the following phylogenetic hypotheses: 1) suprafamilial relationships within the Hemiptera (with densest sampling for the Heteroptera); 2) family-group relationships within the Cimicomorpha; 3) family-group relationships within the Lygaeoidea; 4) family-group relationships within the Pentatomoidea; and 5) tribal-level relationships within the Miridae. Preliminary analyses for the Cimicomorpha and Lygaeoidea indicate corroboration of the basic outlines of the hypotheses proposed by Schuh and Stys for the Cimicomorpha and by Henry for the Lygaeoidea. Publications supported by this grant: Wheeler, Whiting, Carpenter, and Wheeler (2001). Introduction Among the most fundamental missions of biology are a complete global inventory of the species on our planet, and a natural classification of those species on the basis of their phylogenetic relationships; the importance of both missions is well delineated in the reports and recommendations of Systematics Agenda 2000 (1994). Phylogenetic classifications are scientific hypotheses that are crucial to all aspects of comparative biology; not only do they provide maximally efficient descriptions of the data on organismic attributes already at hand, they allow maximally effective predictions about the distributions of attributes not yet studied in detail. Imagine that we find a newly discovered species, and are able to identify it as a spider (for example, by discovering that it has abdominal silk glands and spinnerets, features unique to spiders). From that information alone, we can predict, for example, that this new species will have male pedipalps that are modified for sperm transfer (another feature unique to spiders). We can also predict that it will have the features characteristic of the larger groups to which spiders belong; as an arachnid, we can predict that the newly discovered species will have two body regions and four pairs of legs; as an arthropod, we can predict that it will have jointed appendages, etc. Every grouping of species in a hierarchical classification enables such predictions, and the accuracy of the predictions depends on the degree to which the classification reflects the evolutionary history of the groups (i.e., the phylogenetic interrelationships of their component taxa). Groups of organisms are not all equally well known, of course, either in terms of inventorying all their component species, or of understanding the interrelationships among those species already described. Estimates of species richness yet to be discovered range from about 8 million to 100 million species (Hammond, 1992), and only for the most conspicuous groups of large organisms (vertebrate animals, green plants) are we at all close to having a complete global inventory of species. Unfortunately, vertebrate animals and green plants together represent only about 3% of the world's biota (and quite possibly the least representative 3% at that; Hammond, 1992; Platnick, 1999). This historical bias against smaller and less conspicuous organisms is also evident in the phylogenetic aspects of systematics, where it has severely hampered comparative biology. Groups whose interrelationships are poorly understood are often actively avoided by the research community as model subjects for inquiry, leading to a vicious circle of continuing, comparative neglect. It is for all these reasons that the report of a recent NSF-sponsored workshop on "Assembling the Tree of Life: Research Needs in Phylogenetics and Phyloinformatics" calls for a major new initiative to resolve the basic outlines of the Tree of Life, with emphasis on the deeper branches of the tree (i.e., the oldest and most diverse groups). We propose here to focus on spiders (Araneae), as a group that is an especially well-suited target for this initiative, by combining a massive, comparative sampling of spider genomes -- something never before undertaken, and only now achievable � with an equally thorough synthesis of the existing and new morphological and behavioral data on the same set of taxa.

3

Why Spiders? Even among smaller and less conspicuous organisms, some groups have fared better than others. Spiders are among the oldest and most diverse of such groups. The earliest spider fossils are from 380 million year old Devonian deposits at Gilboa, New York (Shear et al., 1989), and the earliest fossils of the most closely related groups of arachnids are Devonian as well. At present, there are over 37,500 currently valid species of spiders, grouped into 3,471 genera and 109 families. By comparison, among the other animal groups ranked as Orders, only the five largest insect groups (Coleoptera, Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera, Diptera, and Heteroptera) and the mites (Acari) are larger. Current estimates of the world's total spider diversity range from 76,000 (Platnick, 1999) to 170,000 (Coddington and Levi, 1991) -- in other words, somewhere between 20 and 50% of the world's total spider species have already been described and classified. This contrasts well with other non-vertebrate taxa; the 8,000 known species of millipedes, for example, are thought to represent at most 10% of the actual total diversity, and the figure for mites would be much lower. Over recent decades, spider systematics has advanced dramatically, through the efforts of a relatively large number of specialists. By way of comparison, both the Coleopterist's Society (which covers all beetles) and the American Arachnological Society (which covers all arachnids other than mites) have approximately 600 members (not all of which are systematists, of course), even though the number of beetle species in the world is an order of magnitude greater than the number of non-mite arachnids. This disparity among research communities is also reflected in taxonomic activity; between 1978 and 1987, for example, an average of 2,300 new beetle species were described per year, whereas more than half as many (1,350) new arachnid species were described annually (Hammond, 1992), with spiders representing the lion�s share of those new descriptions. In addition, unlike most groups of non-vertebrates, our existing knowledge of spiders is well cataloged. The taxonomically important contents of a series of 14 large volumes of printed catalogs (Roewer, 1942-55; Bonnet, 1945-59; Brignoli, 1983; Platnick, 1989, 1993, 1998) are now available electronically in "The World Spider Catalog" (Platnick, 2002), already on-line as >13 megabytes of text (at http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog81-87/index.html), and on CD-ROM in database format as well, with on-line database versions to follow. The world catalog provides fast and easy access to information on original and all subsequent descriptions, synonymies, transfers, and geographical distribution. Mutual links are being installed between entries in The World Spider Catalog and those for spiders in GenBank (Platnick has had oversight responsibility for the systematics of the spider listings in GenBank for several years). Moreover, spider diversity encompasses the taxonomic levels that are most crucial to research in comparative and evolutionary biology. In spiders, most natural history attributes (e.g., foraging styles and ecological guilds, sexual dimorphism and sex-ratio characteristics, suites of behavioral characters, and major adaptive attributes) characterize genera or at most families. For example, all members of the family Salticidae (jumping spiders) are diurnal sight-hunters. Larger groups, such as orders, tend not to be so coherent with regard to the biological attributes of their members (i.e., a much wider variety of foraging modes, reproductive biology, and habitats exists among the other arachnid orders). Species, on the other hand, tend to share most such biological attributes; for example, all members of the genus Deinopis (family Deinopidae) spin identical and unique webs. Genera and families often demarcate evolutionary novelties, e.g., shifts in foraging mode or web-construction. Therefore, research on these "mid-level" (familial and generic) phylogenies is an absolute necessity to place most of the comparative data from other biological disciplines (especially ecological, behavioral, physiological, and developmental studies) into a predictive framework. Why Now? Despite the immense size of the order, spiders have benefited from a relatively long history of modern phylogenetic research (Table 1, below, at end of Project Description). Focusing just at the generic level and above, explicit morphological matrices analyzed by quantitative techniques cover 805 of the 3,471 described genera and 102 of the 109 currently recognized families. Ignoring overlaps in characters, these studies involved 2329 morphological characters (when overlaps are taken into account we estimate the number will reduce to perhaps 1500-- a rough indication of the number of morphological homology hypotheses to date for spiders). In contrast, molecular data are available for fewer than 50 taxa, and with a few exceptions were gathered in order to exemplify Araneae in higher-level studies on chelicerates or arthropods, or for intrageneric studies.

4

Taken together, these studies occurred over a span of 15 years and involved over 30 different investigators, methodological approaches, and systematic goals (Table 1). Only about 200+ genera are shared between two or more matrices. Character state definitions (even of the same homology hypothesis) vary significantly among studies, depending on the taxon sample used and the goal of the study. If combined and edited for overlaps, these matrices can be the basis for a comprehensive database of comparative morphological information on spiders. Nevertheless, key deep nodes in spider phylogeny have not been addressed by these previous studies, for example the relationship between Palpimanoidea and the remaining entelegynes. The internal structure of Palpimanoidea and Gnaphosoidea, as well as the placements of Periegopidae, Cryptothelidae, and Zodariidae, have never been tested quantitatively. Indeed, except for Orbiculariae, no interfamilial relationships in spiders have been tested by substantial taxon sampling of the contained genera; results to date are based purely on exemplars and very sparse taxon sampling. Dionychan monophyly requires test. Mygalomorph phylogeny is contentious: the classical families Dipluridae, Nemesiidae, Theraphosidae, and Cyrtaucheniidae seem to be para- or polyphyletic. The higher level phylogeny of the suborder Mygalomorphae is currently being investigated by project participants Bond and Hedin, funded by a NSF grant (see under �Plan of Work: Ingroup�). Within Araneomorphae, the higher-level phylogeny of Dionycha (17 families) is almost unknown (but is currently under study by project participant Ramirez), and the important tropical family Ctenidae may be polyphyletic. Seven spider families have never been included in any cladistic quantitative study (although phylogenetic arguments exist for some): Periegopidae, Cryptothelidae, Cybaeidae, Halidae, Chummidae, Hahniidae, and Homalonychidae. Periegopids are obviously haplogynes, the remainder entelegynes. Cybaeids and hahniids together comprise 36 genera and show many critical character combinations that are sure to rearrange the provisional topologies suggested by the few multi-family cladistic studies published to date. Many of the deeper nodes within Entelegynae, therefore, have only been superficially explored, and will certainly change to some extent. Many families are probably not monophyletic -- most obviously Ctenidae, but also Pisauridae, Miturgidae, Liocranidae, Corinnidae, Clubionidae, Amaurobiidae, Dictynidae, and Mysmenidae. This proposal seeks to produce a completely scored, internally consistent morphological and molecular matrix for at least 500 carefully chosen generic taxa that will sample all spider families; family and higher relationships will emerge as a result of detailed analysis at lower levels. In short, morphological analyses of spider interrelationships have now advanced to the point where our current hypotheses need to be severely tested, and refined, by an entirely separate source of data. Genomic information is the best available source of that test, and now needs to be collected on a scale comparable with that already achieved for morphology. Plan of Work: Outgroups A phylogenetic study of any group must collect and analyze data on the closest relatives (outgroups) of the study group (ingroup), in order to root the resulting tree. Two competing hypotheses on the sister group of spiders exist. One hypothesis maintains that whipspiders (order Amblypygi) constitute the sister group (Weygoldt and Paulus, 1979); the competing hypothesis maintains that Pedipalpi (Amblypygi, Uropygi and Schizomida together) is the sister group (Shultz, 1990; Wheeler and Hayashi, 1998). If the latter hypothesis is true, including all three orders might still provide only one outgroup node. We therefore propose to obtain genomic information on representatives of all three orders as well as Palpigradi in order to assure at least two outgroup nodes in order to unambiguously polarize homology hypotheses within spiders. Work on both the morphological and molecular characters of these outgroups will be under the primary direction of Lorenzo Prendini.

Amblypygi. The order Amblypygi includes ca. 141 species assigned to 19 genera and 5 families, two of which have two subfamilies each. The Amblypygi are the best studied of the outgroup taxa; a cladogram based on morphological data is available for the families and genera, most of which are monophyletic (Weygoldt, 1996, 1999, 2000). However, Charinus is seemingly paraphyletic and charinids are in serious need of revision (Delle Cave, 1986; Weygoldt, 2000; Harvey, in prep.). The phrynichid subfamily Damoninae may also be paraphyletic or, if not, Trichodamon should be transferred to the Phrynichinae (P. Weygoldt, pers. comm.). Our sampling strategy will minimally include representatives of the Damoninae and Phrynichinae (Phrynichidae), Heterophryninae and Phryninae (Phrynidae), Charinidae, and Charontidae. Ideally, sampling would include representatives of as many of the 19 genera as possible. The larger genera, especially Charinus, would be represented by two or more species, including (where possible) the type species. Paracharon, from Guinea-Bissau, presently placed in a monotypic family and

5

suborder, is considered to be the sister group of all other amblypygids (Weygoldt, 1996, 2000) and would therefore be an important (if perhaps elusive) target.

Amblypygid genera and species are thinly spread across tropical and subtropical countries, often with only a single species recorded per country. DNA samples are already in hand for eleven genera in four families and three subfamilies. Neotropical collecting could yield four additional genera. Phrynichosarax can be collected in India, Malaysia or Singapore, also important locales for schizomids and uropygids (see below). The remaining genera are geographically restricted and would require collecting in Myanmar (Catageus) and South Africa (Phrynichodamon).

Schizomida. The order Schizomida includes ca. 217 species assigned to 34 genera and two families (one with two subfamilies). The higher classification of schizomids is explicitly phylogenetic, although not yet supported by quantitative analyses (Cokendolpher and Reddell, 1992). However, the monophyly of most schizomid genera remains untested; Schizomus is particularly problematic because many older descriptions do not mention the characters now considered diagnostic (Reddell and Cokendolpher, 1995; J. C. Cokendolpher, pers. comm.). The Schizomida are the least studied of the three outgroup orders; Harvey (unpublished) estimates that over 500 species may eventually be recognized globally. The African and Asian schizomid faunas are the most poorly known. Our sampling strategy will minimally include representatives of the two genera of the Protoschizomidae, the one genus of the hubbardiid subfamily Megaschizominae, and two genera of the Hubbardiinae. Ideally, sampling would include as many of the genera as possible, with the larger genera represented by two or more species, including the type species, where necessary, but our minimal strategy addresses the most important areas of schizomid phylogeny. Megaschizomus (from Mozambique and South Africa) is considered to be the sister group of the Hubbardiinae (Cokendolpher and Reddell 1992) and is therefore an important target for resolving hubbardiine relationships. The endemic Mexican Protoschizomidae, which comprise the sister group of the Hubbardiidae (Cokendolpher and Reddell, 1992), are also of considerable interest because the female genitalia resemble those of diplurid spiders and charinid amblypygids (J. Cokendolpher, pers. com.).

Schizomid genera and species are also tropical and subtropical, and the optimal collecting strategy thus overlaps completely that for spiders, amblypygids, and uropygids. Collecting in Australia and Mexico could provide species from 14 genera and both families. Exemplars from 11 additional genera could be added by collecting in Brazil, Costa Rica, Cuba, Indonesia, and Singapore. The remaining genera are each geographically restricted and would generally not be cost-effective to secure.

Uropygi. The order Uropygi, generally considered the sister group of the Schizomida (Weygoldt and Paulus, 1979; Shultz, 1990; Wheeler and Hayashi, 1998) is the least speciose of the three orders, comprising 16 genera and 102 species assigned to a single family with four subfamilies. Uropygids are poorly known and lack a phylogenetically sound classification. Harvey�s unpublished preliminary analysis confirms the finding by Haupt and Song (1996) that the Hypoctonidae are not monophyletic. Dunlop and Horrocks (1996) have even provided a conflicting hypothesis in which uropygid monophyly was violated by grouping the �hypoctonids� with schizomids rather than the remaining uropygids. Several large uropygid genera (e.g., Thelyphonus) lack supporting apomorphies (Harvey, unpublished) and the status of some of the smaller genera (e.g., those erected by Speijer, 1933, 1936) is also dubious (Rowland and Cooke, 1973). Our sampling strategy will minimally include representatives of each of the four subfamilies; ideally, as many of the 16 genera as possible would be included, with problematic groups like Thelyphonus represented by two or more species, including the type species.

The two major areas of uropygid endemism are in Asia and the Indo-Pacific (12 genera found from India to Fiji) and in the Americas (three genera found from the southern U.S. to Brazil). DNA samples are already in hand for four genera from two subfamilies. Collecting efforts in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Brazil could provide exemplars from an additional nine genera and one subfamily. Exemplars from the remaining three genera and one subfamily could be added by collecting in India (Labochirus, Uroproctus), and West Africa (Etiennius). Inclusion of the African and Indian species is of considerable interest from a biogeographic perspective and may be important in resolving relationships among the American and remaining Asian genera. Plan of Work: Ingroup Responsibilities for the various aspects of the ingroup analyses will be divided among the investigators (see Management Plan). Co-PIs Coddington, Hormiga, Prendini and Sierwald and senior collaborators Arnedo, Bond, Griswold, Maddison, Ramirez, Scharff and Shear will compile the morphological and behavioral parts of the matrices. Because so much basic work on spider anatomy and behavior has

6

already been organized cladistically, we will make every effort to include and test all of it against the genomic data. For 500 taxa, just synthesizing and concatenating the roughly 2400 homology hypotheses to date will require roughly 800,000 novel entries, as only about 15% of the total implied matrix is currently in hand. Four sources will augment the estimated 1,500 unique homology hypotheses in the literature. First, many highly informative sources of morphological data have been examined in some but not all spider families; among these are spinneret spigot, setal, and tarsal organ morphology, studied through scanning electron microscopy. Previous surveys of these and other characters will be expanded to cover the full taxon set. Second, the taxonomic literature for many taxa suggests diagnostic characters and morphological oddities not yet assessed cladistically, e.g. onychia, details of male genitalia, male epiandrous spigots, female reproductive systems, spination patterns, cheliceral modifications, and male sperm duct trajectories. Third, comparative biologists other than systematists have proposed many homologies over the years never assessed by rigorous systematic research (e.g. details of eye morphology, sperm ultrastructure, musculature, various gland systems, mating postures, attack behaviors, eggsac features, dragline/line climbing behavior, and especially ultrastructural features such as stridulatory structures, pore fields, hair types, and cuticular textures). Fourth, many groups at multiple hierarchical levels have never been studied phylogenetically, and are sure to yield myriad new discoveries. We will marshal all of these morphological, behavioral, microanatomical, and ultrastructural data and unite them with newly collected molecular data to create one unified, consistent, modern encyclopedia of comparative, heritable information on spiders and their closest relatives.

All collaborators will be involved in the data analysis, which will be spearheaded by Wheeler, Goloboff, and Maddison who have developed most of the software involved (see Data Analysis section, below). The choice of taxonomic exemplars is obviously crucial, but intermediate results will be required before we can identify issues such as long branches that need to be broken up by taxon addition, or important character optimizations that are made ambiguous by the omission of critical taxa. We seek a robust phylogeny that will strongly impact comparative biology, be used widely, and be broadly applicable. The following mix of theoretically and practically driven criteria seem important to those goals: 1) The cladistically most crucial representatives of a group�s groundplan are the two most basal lineages; when the composition of this �first doublet� is suggested by an existing analysis, we will sample those lineages first. Thus for example, within the Theridiosomatidae, we would choose Plato (Platoninae) and Epeirotypus (Epeirotypinae) over Wendilgarda and Epilineutes (Theridiosomatinae). Filistatinella among filistatids and either Filistata or Kukulcania, but not both, is another example of basal lineage selection. 2) Except for monotypic families, at least two non congeneric species will be sampled from every family, if possible, to ensure that putative family-level synapomorphies are cladistically informative and tested against the full dataset. For small or dubiously monophyletic families (Liocranidae, Miturgidae, Nemesiidae, etc.), the type genus will be sampled in addition to component lineages. 3) We will use existing cladistic information to select the most basally branching genera from all significant clades. Where no such cladograms or modern classifications exist, we will consult the most detailed classification available (Roewer's 1942-55 catalog arrangement, which included 183 subfamilies and 351 tribal groupings). Although the family-level classification proposed by Roewer has been thoroughly refuted, many of his lower-level groupings (often taken from the previous work of Simon) may be monophyletic, and should provide a better-than-random map of the internal cladistic structure of families that have not yet been studied phylogenetically. 4) To ensure that we have sufficiently dense sampling of those genera most crucial to establishing the deeper branches of spider phylogeny, we will bias sampling against the seven largest families (Salticidae, Linyphiidae, Araneidae, Theridiidae, Thomisidae, Lycosidae, and Gnaphosidae). Each of these large groups is currently considered monophyletic. We will sample them sufficiently to test current hypotheses of their internal structure (and monophyly), but five of them already have (or will have, from on-going work in our laboratories) supported phylogenies that are more detailed than the average resolution we hope to achieve for deeper clades. For the purposes of this project, we are less interested in the details of the distal branches of the internal phylogenies of those families than in what those families have to tell us about interfamilial relationships among araneoids, lycosoids, and dionychans in general. These seven families jointly account for almost half of the described spider genera (1,693 genera); by undersampling their terminal branches, we can achieve very dense coverage of all remaining lineages, and hence the deepest, most contentious, and most difficult questions of spider phylogeny. We will consult widely with colleagues

7

working on the seven large families, to achieve a choice of exemplars that will maximize synergy with their efforts and on-going studies (as, of course, we will do for the smaller families as well). 5) To maximize the impact of our results on related fields, we will choose taxa that have been (or are likely to be) the subjects of detailed study by behaviorists, ecologists, physiologists, and other non-systematic biologists, so that their past and future results map easily to the phylogenetic and evolutionary context we will provide. These taxa tend to be easy to find, and abundant, so choosing them is also pragmatic. 6) As the success of high-throughput sequencing depends on the availability of high-quality DNA samples, we will attempt (through our own fieldwork and that of our colleagues) to secure fresh, adult material of all taxa if such is not already available. Newly collected specimens, fixed in absolute ethanol, amplify much more successfully than do standard museum specimens that have been stored in 70-80% ethanol for extended periods. Newly collected specimens also have the advantage that successful DNA amplification is usually possible using only one or two legs, so that the remaining parts of the specimen are fully useful as vouchers and for normal systematic investigation (in all cases, the genitalic structures necessary for specific-level identifications will be vouchered). Using legs only also has the advantage of greatly reducing the possibilities of contamination by sequencing prey DNA from the digestive system of whole animals.

The drawback, of course, is that fieldwork is required at multiple sites around the world. Our budgeted fieldwork will "piggy-back" on existing projects wherever possible. Charles Griswold is funded to conduct field surveys of spiders in Madagascar and China; he and his field crews will collect material in absolute alcohol for sequencing. Bond and Hedin are currently funded to travel to South Africa, western Australia, and South America to collect mygalomorphs, and will be preserving spiders from other families for DNA and morphological work. Our continuing PEET projects allow sampling in the Neotropics, southeast Asia, and Australia. The Smithsonian budget offers competitive funding opportunities that have supplemented substantially prior NSF-funded projects in which Coddington is a co-PI. In other cases, it will be cheaper to provide funding to colleagues already working at target sites than to visit them ourselves, and we will aggressively pursue all such opportunities to secure needed specimens at the lowest possible cost.

Given the two ABI 3700 sequencers, the BIOMEK sequencing robot, and a single technician line, the cost of sequencing supplies, not personnel or equipment, is the rate-limiting factor. Were supply costs not a factor, we would aim for sequencing 100 loci for each of 1000 taxa, and we will attempt to find other sources of funding to allow additional taxa to be included. Bond and Hedin are currently funded by NSF to conduct work on the systematics of the Mygalomorphae. This work will combine morphological and molecular data for a comprehensive sample of mygalomorph genera from all 15 families - the target sample includes about 120 total taxa (about 110 different genera). Clearly, this effort overlaps with the proposed goals of this grant, but we see this overlap as generally synergistic in two obvious ways. First, the Bond and Hedin phylogenetic sample will be a perfect forum to explore gene utility for all spiders - mygalomorphs are an obvious clade with several well-defined subclades. Furthermore, the group includes both deep- and shallow-diverging lineages. Because Bond and Hedin will have DNA samples available for key taxa/clades before most of the TOL work begins, exploratory analyses of gene utility might best be conducted in this group. Second, the genomics results of the TOL work will feed back into the efforts of Bond and Hedin. New genes, found to be informative for the broader spider sample, might be applied to the large taxon sample of mygalomorphs. This feedback will greatly strengthen the molecular systematics component of the mygalomorph research.

The list of the 109 spider families showing the current number of described genera in each family, followed by the minimum number of genera we hope to sample, is presented in the Management Plan of the proposal, under �Morphological data� (see Supplementary Documentation).

Sequencing Techniques

Primer Search: We will take three approaches to generate a set of at least 50 loci that will pcr-amplify and sequence from the spider and outgroup taxa. These three approaches are: PCR-primer design and genomic DNA probing, EST-cDNA library generation and overlap, and a combination of the first two.

Through literature sources (e.g. Colgan et al., 1998; Damen, Weller & Tautz, 2000; Masta, 2000; Regier & Shultz, 1997; Tatarenkov et al., 1999; Wheeler, 1989; Wheeler, Cartwright & Hayashi, 1993; Whiting et al., 1997) we have designed primers that amplify and sequence 22 loci (18S-[1,800bp], 28S-[2,315bp], 16S-[550bp], CO1-[1,100bp], 12S-[300bp], H3a-[350bp], beta actin-[3,600bp], ITS1-[500bp], ITS2-[500bp], RNAHel-[500bp], Ntid-[~900bp], Amy-[500bp], Kuz-[800bp], C1-J-2309/C2-N-3389-[1,000bp-amplifies 717bp of COI and 300bp of COII], U2-[150bp], POLII-[600bp], DDC-[700bp], cmos-[441bp], Boss-[400bp], Hb16S/HbND1-[1,569bp-amplifies 50bp of 12S, 51bp of tRNA Val, 1020bp of 16S, 53bp of tRNA

8

Leu[CUN], and 395bp of ND1], EF-1a-[500bp, Runt gene-[400bp], Hunchback gene-[450bp]). Six of these loci (18S rDNA, 28S rDNA, 12S mtrDNA, 16S mtrDNA, Cytochrome Oxidase I, and Histone 3a) have been examined in detail and results presented for over 100 taxa in the preliminary data section of this proposal. Given our success with this approach, we feel confident that these methods will continue to yield loci amenable to genomic PCR amplification.

A second approach we will take is based on EST analysis and cDNA generation. The general methodology for generating new primers is constructing cDNA libraries for a group of taxa representing the diversity of the targeted group (Carninci et al., 2000). This targeted group may be spiders as a whole, or sub-clades may be more intensively sampled. From these libraries we will generate EST (random sequences of the cDNA). Sequences common to multiple libraries are then used to design primers for that specific locus. The major problem facing this method is the frequency of overlap. Since sequences are generated at random, they have a very low probability of overlapping across libraries. Fortunately, there are several ways to improve overlap frequency (Piao et al., 2001; Ko, 1990) such as basing libraries on specific tissue thereby reducing the diversity of expressed genes.

Our third approach is to combine the first two by �fishing� the libraries with primers derived from whole genome computational analysis and literature-based primer design. Tools exist within GeneBank (ftp://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/HomoloGene/ and http://sea-urchin.caltech.edu:8000/genome/databases/) for such procedures and should enrich our yield of homologous loci.

When candidate loci are identified, and suitable primers developed, loci will be sequenced for a small subset of taxa (ten or so) including broadly distributed representatives. From these initial data, we will assess the level of variability (or conservation) and decisions will be made as to the suitability of continuing to collect data from that locus. Furthermore, confounding issues such as paralogy can be explored through this initial foray. Multiple PCR bands, wildly discordant sequences, huge size variation would all lead to suspicions of homology problems with that locus. Issues such as intron variation may be very useful information systematically, but will make sequencing efforts and primer design much more complex. If the introns were small, and easily characterized, we would attempt to make use of this information. If intron variation is large, however, in size of complexity, we would be unlikely to continue to invest time and energy in that system.

Isolation of DNA: Genomic DNA samples are obtained from fresh, frozen, or ethanol-preserved tissues in a solution of guanidinium thiocyanate homogenization buffer following a modified protocol for RNA extraction (Chirgwin et al., 1979). Alternative automated DNA preparation is accomplished using the Qiagen Dneasy Tissue Kit: Dneasy Protocol for Animal Tissues.

PCR amplification and Sequencing: Our molecular lab currently uses one ABI 3700 automated sequencing machine and has added a second (NASA-funded) to accomplish its comparative sequencing projects. A Biomek sequencing robot was recently added to the facility to automate PCR purification and sequencing procedures. The combination of these pieces of equipment has increased our ability to sequence DNA by an order of magnitude. The robotic sequencing machines interact directly with two Tetrad 4-head Thermocyclers. In general, amplification is carried out in a 50 µL volume reaction, with 1.25 units of AmpliTaq® DNA Polymerase (Perkin Elmer), 200 µM of dNTPs and 1 µM of each primer or using Ready-To-Go PCR beads made by Amersham Pharmacia Biotech to which we add 1 µl per reaction of each 10µM primer, 23 µl of water, and 2 µl of DNA. The PCR program consists of a initial denaturing step at 94ºC for 60 seconds, 35 amplification cycles (94ºC for 15 sec, 49ºC for 15 sec, 72ºC for 15 sec), and a final step at 72ºC for 6 minutes in a GeneAmp® PCR System 9700 (Perkin Elmer) or in Tetrad 4 head Thermocyclers. Specific conditions are optimized for taxa and primer pairs. PCR samples are purified with the Qiagen Qiaquick 96 PCR Purification Kit by eluting PCR product into 60 µl buffer EB (on the Biomek Robot using a 96 well format). The samples are then dried about one hour in a speed vac and resuspended in 10 ul water with the Biomek. The isolated products are then directly sequenced using an automated ABI 3700 DNA sequencer. Cycle-sequencing with AmpliTaq® DNA Polymerase, FS (Perkin-Elmer) using dye-labeled terminators (ABI PRISMTM BigDyeTM Terminator Cycle Sequencing Ready Reaction Kit) is performed in a GeneAmp® PCR System 9700 (Perkin Elmer) and in Tetrad 4 head Thjermocyclers. Sequencing combines 3 µl water, 2 µl Big Dye, 2 µl Big Dye Extender, 1 µl 3.2 µM primer, 2 µl DNA 96 at a time using the Biomek. The amplification program is as follows: 96ºC for 15sec, 50ºC for 15sec x 25, 60ºC for 4 min. Sequencing reactions are then cleaned using Isopropanol/Ethanol Precipitation: 40 µl 70% isopropanol; spin 30 min at 3500rpm; flip plate upside down and spin 1 min at 500 rpm; add 40 µl 70% ethanol and repeat spins; dry on bench 30 min; resuspend in 10

9

µl formamide. The cleaned products (in microtiter plate) are then loaded directly onto the 3700, four plates at a time. Sequences are edited and contigs assembled using "SEQUENCHER" (Gene Codes Corporation). The combination of the Tetrad Thermocycler, Biomek robot, and ABI 3700 make it possible for one technician to amplify or sequence several hundred reactions in a day. The 3700�s have the capacity (using POP5 buffer) to sequence 8x96 (768) samples per day and the AMNH molecular lab has two of these machines. The Biomek allows the complete automation of PCR purification and sequencing (on 96 or 384 well micro titer plates), thus saving the technician thousands of pipetting steps, improving accuracy and consistency (as well as state of mind), freeing the researcher to perform more intellectual tasks. This level of automation is what makes such an ambitious sequencing project possible; our lab has the capacity to perform approximately 8000 sequencing reactions per week.

Choice of genes. Our explorations of genes will cover many parts of the genome, but will focus on ribosomal and nuclear protein coding genes. It is likely that some genes that pass our initial assessment of utility will be evolving too quickly to be useful at this deep phylogenetic level. Hence, we will first sample a relatively small number of taxa (about 50) for each of 50 genes, then run separate phylogenetic analyses for each. Those genes whose trees show considerable concordance with those of other genes will be judged as retaining sufficient historical information to be made targets for the full 500 taxon sampling. Additional "well-behaved" genes will be sought by a similar strategy until the total number of genes with apparent deep phylogenetic signal reaches at least 50.

Archiving of Samples: The AMNH has established a modern frozen tissue storage facility, the Ambrose Monell Collection for Molecular and Microbial Research, intended to become a core sample resource center for comparative genomics. The facility can store one million samples from around the world, thus representing a comprehensive range of species, both pure cultured samples of taxa under study as well as taxa that cannot currently be cultured. These samples are housed at liquid nitrogen temperatures so that the highest quality, maximum stability conditions are maintained for biomolecules indefinitely. Several thousand spider specimens will be added to the tissue storage facility as a result of our proposed work. Ultimately, these samples might form the kernel of an international effort to store and disseminate the genomes of all described spider genera Data Analysis

Reconstructing the phylogenetic tree for spiders will not be an easy task analytically, both because of the depth of time spanned by the tree and the size of the data set. Because of the time depth (deepest divergences probably extending into the Paleozoic), some branches of the tree may be long and isolated, having accumulated so many differences from other taxa that relationships are obscured. With such noise in the data set, methods are challenged to extract the correct signal. The size of the data set, in number of characters but particularly in number of taxa, will provide perhaps the greatest computational challenge. For example, an analysis of 500 taxa must select, implicitly or explicitly, among the 7.8 x 101275 possible trees.

Our analyses will therefore provide not exact but heuristic estimates, and require exploration of varied optimality criteria and creative approaches to tree searches. Trees will be inferred under both the parsimony (Farris, 1970, 1983; Kluge, 1984) and maximum likelihood (Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards, 1967; Felsenstein, 1973, 1979, 1981a, b, 1983; Huelsenbeck and Crandall, 1997) criteria using several programs (POY, Gladstein and Wheeler, 1997; NONA and PEE-WEE, Goloboff, 1997a,b; TNT, Goloboff, Farris, and Nixon, in prep.; PAUP*, Swofford, 2002; MrBayes, Huelsenbeck, 2000; Huelsenbeck & Ronquist, 2001). We take this broad approach to take advantage of the diverse skills of our team, and to cross-check the quality of our heuristic estimates. Should varied approaches give substantially similar conclusions, it will suggest that those results are robust against both violation of assumptions and differing efficacies of the alternative programs.

Available to us are programmers experienced in phylogenetic computation, as well as excellent computational facilities. The presence of programmers on the research team -- Wheeler, with the program POY; Goloboff, with PEE-WEE, NONA, and TNT; Maddison, with MacClade (D. Maddison & W. Maddison 2000) and Mesquite (W. Maddison & D. Maddison, 2001) -- will give us an unparalleled opportunity to refine software in the context of a massive empirical project. In addition to state-of-the-art desktop computers in many of the participating laboratories, we will have access to a large parallel cluster. In 1999, the AMNH installed a 256-processor (500 Mhz Pentium III) cluster and in 2001 upgraded this to 560-processors (through the addition of 1 Ghz Pentium III and 1Gig RAM per node) designed especially for phylogenetic analysis of genomic data. This parallel cluster is the fastest installed in any evolutionary biology laboratory to date. Its size is presently being doubled and its capacity tripled, and we anticipate upgrading it again in

10

2003. Parallel applications that have been developed by us include integer-intensive DNA sequence alignment and direct optimization software (written in-house); column vector-based phylogenetic algorithms, such as pNONA and a parallel version of TNT currently under development; and simulated annealing modeling of gene circuits. The new hardware and the 2003 upgrade, along with algorithmic improvements, should keep run times for 500 taxa within 50-100 hours. Speed is important because we intend to perform many runs to address parameter sensitivity and to explore thoroughly the analytical space implied by the data. The total time required for these analyses may be months on this machine -- but it would be over a century on even a current, state-of-the-art single-processor PC.

Searches for most parsimonious trees will be undertaken with the programs POY, NONA, TNT, and PAUP*, each of which has parallel versions that are operational or under development. Members of the team will divide use of the programs according to expertise (e.g., Wheeler and Goloboff, POY, NONA and TNT; Maddison and Hedin, PAUP*) and compare results. One fundamental difference among these programs concerns alignment of nucleotide sequences: NONA, TNT and PAUP* expect pre-aligned sequences, while POY searches simultaneously for alignment and tree. Simultaneous alignment and tree-search is generally regarded as ideal in principle (Wheeler, 1994, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001; Slowinski 1998; Giribet & Wheeler, 1999; Giribet et al., 2000, 2001; Wahlberg & Zimmermann, 2000), although it carries a much higher computational cost. For analyses by NONA/TNT/PAUP*, alignments will be provided either by POY runs or by gene-by-gene application of CLUSTAL (Higgins & Sharp, 1988, 1989; Higgins et al., 1992; Thompson et al., 1994, 1997; Jeanmougin et al., 1998), using elision techniques (Wheeler et al., 1995) to choose alignment parameters (Hedin & Maddison, 2001), supplemented by manual alignment.

Maximum likelihood analyses will be done by both PAUP* and the newly-implemented likelihood routines in POY. Likelihood analyses are computationally more intensive than parsimony analyses of pre-aligned data, and thus we will restrict likelihood analyses to subsets of up to 150 taxa. Subsets will be chosen in some analyses to maximize dispersion over the expected relationships, in other analyses to focus on detailed relationships within clades that appear well-corroborated otherwise. The resulting overlapping but partial trees will be combined by supertree methods (Gordon, 1986; Baum, 1992; Ragan, 1992a, b; Bininda-Emonds & Bryant, 1998; Steel et al., 2000; Semple & Steel, 2000; Bininda-Emonds & Sanderson, 2001) and by "eye". In addition to conventional likelihood analyses, we will use the closely related Bayesian methods (Rannala & Yang, 1996; Mau & Newton, 1997; Mao et al., 1999) as implemented in MrBayes (Huelsenbeck, 2000; Huelsenbeck & Ronquist, 2001). In addition to allowing us to explore an alternative criterion, use of Bayesian methods will make analysis of the entire set of taxa, by a likelihood-related method, computationally feasible.

Analyses of different data partitions (morphology, different genes) will be done separately and simultaneously. The simultaneous analysis approach, because it uses all available evidence, will be given more weight than any other single analysis in determining our primary estimate of the tree. This analysis (and any other analysis involving morphological data) will be restricted to parsimony methods, because likelihood's usual assumption of uniform stochastic behavior is especially problematical for morphological data. The data partitions will be analyzed separately for several reasons. First, it will allow more refined gene-specific estimation of models for likelihood analysis. Second, it will reveal to what extent different genetic regions (possibly evolving by different processes) offer independent corroboration for the same tree. Partitioned bremer support (Baker & DeSalle 1997, Baker et al. 1998) will be used to address the relative contributions of different genes and different morphological character systems (genitalia vs. somatic) to results of the simultaneous analysis. Third, concordance among genes will indicate which are retaining the most historical information, and thus should be the target of sequencing during denser taxon sampling. The relative degree of support for nodes in all trees obtained will be assessed with branch support indices (Bremer, 1988, 1994; Donoghue et al., 1992) and bootstrap percentages (Felsenstein, 1985; Sanderson, 1989).

We noted above that likelihood analyses will require decomposing the set of taxa into smaller subsets, analyzing, then grafting the resulting trees together. We anticipate that this approach will be useful for some of the larger parsimony analyses as well. Similarly, as some clades emerge as well-corroborated by many characters and analyses, to simplify computation we may perform subsequent analyses by constraining their monophyly, reducing the number of their sampled representatives, or analyzing the clades (with outgroups) in isolation. Because the large number of taxa is one of the greatest burdens on the analyses, we will also use the techniques of parametric bootstrapping to study how best to increase taxon sampling. In development in Mesquite are modules that can simulate increased taxon sampling (randomly adding taxa to a skeletal tree, perhaps to specific regions of the tree). Characters are simulated on the

11

augmented tree, the tree reconstructed from them, and the ability to recover the skeletal tree is compared to simulations with the skeletal tree unaugmented. Such studies will help guide us as to how important increased taxon sampling might be, and what regions of the tree most need it.

These diverse analyses will produce many, sometimes conflicting results. How to reconcile them? Points of agreement will, obviously, be considered especially well supported. However, we expect to encounter some irreconcilable differences whose resolution will await future study. Preliminary results

The very preliminary molecular data (Fig. 1A) show a number of classically recognized groups as well as numerous problematic groupings, at least from a morphological point of view. This result, based solely on sparse preliminary data for a very broad range of taxa, is expected because to date we still lack about 30% of the sequences for the taxa in Fig. 1A, and because the range of time represented in Fig. 1A clearly exceeds the ability of only six genes (of which three are mitochondrial) to provide robust phylogenetic signal on deep nodes. Obviously important genes for deep nodes, such as EF1a and Pol II, are missing. In the few months available before the TOL deadline, we produced an impressive amount of preliminary molecular data: 617 sequenced fragments from six genes of 98 taxa. The choice of taxa was largely drawn from the fresh material on hand during a north temperate winter at one museum: lycosoids, symphytognathoids, and cribellate groups were undersampled, and dionychans and trochanteriids oversampled. We present results here not to argue that the choice of genes or taxa in this preliminary data set was ideal, much less that our results are definitive in any way, but simply to show that the ambitious DNA sequencing schedule is feasible. Given the full range of genes envisaged above, we anticipate that the concordance between molecules and morphology will dramatically improve. Fig. 1A recovers many accepted shallow nodes in spider phylogeny, and recovers many of the deeper nodes approximately. For example, the orders Uropygi and Amblypygi are monophyletic, as are the families Austrochilidae, Archaeidae, Theridiidae, Synotaxidae, Agelenidae, Desidae, Deinopidae, Zodariidae, Eresidae, Liocranidae, Clubionidae, Anyphaenidae, Salticidae, and Oxyopidae. The doublets Scytodidae-Sicariidae, Oonopidae-Orsolobidae, Diguetidae-Plectreuridae, Amphinectidae-Desidae, and Oecobiidae-Hersiliidae are recovered. Malkarids group with pararchaeids, which is not unreasonable. Corinnids may be polyphyletic. Thomisid, filistatid, and trochanteriid genera largely group together, suggesting perhaps problems with the individual sequences or taxa. Of course, the results are also very noisy. To name a few, liphistiids are definitely spiders, archaeids are not sister to austrochilids, linyphioids are not monophyletic, deinopids and Tengella probably do not belong in dionychans. Both Palpimanoidea and Deinopoidea are scattered throughout the tree. Deeper nodes are less convincing and the large clades often include taxa that clearly do not belong, but the molecular data do find some previously hypothesized higher groups of spiders. Araneomorphae, Haplogynae, Entelegynae, Divided Cribellum Clade, the RTA Clade, Fused Paracribellar Clade, Araneoidea, and Gnaphosoidea are substantially intact. The rooting of Araneoidea within Entelegynae, however, is upside down.

The combined analysis (Fig. 1B) corrects some of the problems with deeper nodes (Araneae, Opisthothelae), but in fact the morphological data for this particular set of taxa are quite preliminary as well, especially as regards dionychans. Although being actively studied, the morphological evidence bearing on dionychan relationships has never been assessed, and no one has attempted to concatenate morphological homology hypotheses at this sampling density across all spiders. The morphology dataset used here by itself yields 1664 most parsimonious trees and contains large polytomies. Given more time to �stitch� together morphological knowledge, we are confident that comparative morphology will supply a very strong phylogenetic signal for spiders.

POY (vers. 3.0) now supports maximum likelihood analysis with simultaneous dynamic sequence alignment on combined data of any sort (morphological, fossil, molecular, etc.). We treated the molecular data as nine complex characters (six molecules, plus three distinct 18S regions) under a seven parameter substitution model (GTR+indels) with adjustments for invariant sites and 4 class gamma rate distribution, empirically estimating five "base" frequencies (A, C, G,T, and "gap"). Each parameter was independently estimated for each of the nine molecular "characters." Morphological data were analyzed using the model of Tuffley & Steel (1997). The results are roughly comparable to the parsimony results, recovering, for example, Amblypygi, Pedipalpi, Austrochilidae, Deinopidae, Archaeidae, Theridiidae, Synotaxidae, Agelenidae, Desidae, Eresidae, Liocranidae, Clubionidae, Anyphaenidae, Salticidae, Oxyopidae, Scytodidae-Sicariidae, Oonopidae-Orsolobidae, and Amphinectidae-Desidae, but losing, for example, zodariid monophyly. Problems are still evident at deeper nodes. We believe these problems are data-

12

dependent and will be evanescent, but wish to emphasize that our computational capabilities now include various implementations of maximum likelihood and parsimony, whether of partitioned or simultaneously analyzed data, and constitute uniquely powerful tools for exploratory data analysis. Broad Impacts

Mega-diverse groups like spiders are a major element of our planet�s biocomplexity, performing crucial roles in the ecological processes that support human life. Because of the historical emphasis on larger, more conspicuous organisms, groups like spiders have been comparatively neglected, and a full appreciation of their role in the evolutionary history of life on earth has been impossible to achieve. By combining a massive comparative genomic survey of spiders with an equally thorough survey of new and existing morphological and behavioral data, we will be able to elucidate the history of a major chunk of the tree of life, on a global scale.

Through this project we will help train at least three postdoctoral fellows and at least three graduate students, in all aspects of this interdisciplinary effort, from morphological and molecular data collection to the details of modern computational techniques for phylogenetic analysis. New and encyclopedic archives of all the available comparative data on a wide range of taxa, and the results of our analyses of those data, will be made available electronically to colleagues everywhere through the www.

Training and Education. This research proposal brings in a strong training and educational commitment covering a wide range of educational levels, from high school students to postdoctoral trainees. Four postdoctoral trainees will be trained during the duration of the grant. We favor postdoctoral tenures of two years. These trainees will have their �home base� at the AMNH, CAS, GWU and the Smithsonian. If this project were to be funded, CAS would match to hire a postdoc for two years to work on this research (see letter from Griswold in Supplementary Documentation). We will implement a system of laboratory rotation that will allow postdocs to work on project areas complementary to their primary research responsibilities. For example, the postdoc at GWU will be responsible primarily for collecting the morphological data of a particular clade (or group of clades). During his/her two year tenure at GWU this trainee will carry out a smaller project at a molecular lab (e.g., the AMNH�s) so he/she can complement their expertise by becoming familiar with the collection and analysis of sequence data. This hands-on approach will help trainees to become familiar with the diversity of data and analytical approaches involved in the project as a whole.

Several graduate students will be actively involved in this research project. The following project participants are based at academic institutions that offer graduate programs in systematics (e.g., www.gwu.edu/~clade) and can act as primary graduate advisors: Arnedo (U. Barcelona), Bond (ECU), Hedin (SDSU), Hormiga (GWU), Maddison (U. Arizona), and Scharff (U. Copenhagen). All the remaining PIs and collaborators have formal ties with academic institutions, such as adjunct professorships at local universities, and can co-direct theses and dissertations (see Biographical Sketches). The diversity of participating institutions (universities, museums, research institutes, etc.) and approaches (morphologists, molecular systematists, theoreticians, programmers, etc.) will provide a fertile milieu for research exchanges that will be particularly beneficial for students. In total our group has more than 106 years of experience as biology educators and have been involved, in cumulative terms, in the training of more than 56 graduate students and 19 postdoctoral associates. Given the magnitude and scope of the TOL project we favor training doctoral students over M.S., but are open to latter. As stated for the postdoctoral trainees, we will implement a system of lab rotation for graduate students to ensure training in all aspects of systematics. In addition, we will try to integrate existing (or future) graduate students in our labs within the TOL project, by complementing the scope of their doctoral projects. For example, a graduate student working on species-level systematics for his/her dissertation could contribute to the TOL project by placing the genus in the higher-level cladistic context by using and contributing to TOL data. Such an approach would be mutually beneficial since it illuminates both the doctoral research problem and the TOL project. Graduate students (and postdocs) will be actively recruited at an international level. We will use the existing electronic discussion groups and societies newsletters (e.g., American Arachnology) to advertise position in our labs. Graduate assistantships and fellowships (stipend plus tuition remission) are available for potential grad students at GW.

Undergraduate and high school students. Opportunities for undergraduate students will be provided through the Summer Systematics Institute (SSI) at the CAS. The CAS has hosted the NSF sponsored SSI for several years. This eight-week course offers college undergraduates class work and hands-on research experience, in many cases leading to research publications. For example, the world

13

generic phylogeny of migid trap door spiders (Griswold and Ledford 2001) originated as an SSI project and was carried through to publication by mentor and intern. More than 40 students have been mentored through this program, with many going on to advanced degrees in systematic biology. The CAS is actively recruiting SSI interns from groups underrepresented in the sciences. During the project Griswold intends to mentor three summer interns from such groups though the SSI program. Co-PI Sierwald�s research component will involve at least two, most likely three, undergraduate students in one-year-long projects each. In years 3 and 4, a high school summer intern will assist the Co-PI and the undergraduate student. Co-PI Sierwald has extensive experience and significant success involving undergraduate students in research. In previous projects (spider diversity studies; millipede systematics funded by NSF grant DEB 97-12438; pauropod systematics) seven undergraduates produced excellent data, sorted and identified specimens and developed into taxon specialists. So far, two undergraduate interns applied for graduate school in arthropod systematics subsequent to the internship; one was accepted into an ecology PhD program. Sierwald was organizer of two high school summer-intern programs, which were highly successful, both in terms of work performed by the students in the Insect collection as well as impact on the high school students academic choices (several of them returning in subsequent summers to similar internships and activities). The rationale for involving undergraduates and high school students is straightforward: current college-university-based undergraduate education lacks a taxon-biodiversity focus. Morphological and systematic training is severely neglected, resulting in a lack of taxon specialists. This researcher found that younger students are often highly motivated and interested in basic morphology and enthusiastically embark on acquiring taxon expertise. This grant project provides the opportunity to recruit new students into the field, and by involving high school students, to motivate even teenagers into taxon-focused biodiversity research.

The Smithsonian's Research Training Program brings 20-30 motivated undergraduates to the Museum each summer for an intensive ten-week research experience. The program is especially successful in recruiting Native American and other minority populations. The Program Director has expressed strong support for this proposal and is willing to recruit an intern specifically for this project if funding is available. Coddington will host the student and direct a project in original research to complete portions of the morphological database envisaged here

In addition we will actively pursue opportunities offered by the American Museum�s National Center for Science Literacy, Education, and Technology for communicating our results and their importance to the public at large, and especially to children.

Improvement Of Research Collections. Collaboration among six of the major world spider collections is a significant component of this grant. 500 of the roughly 3,500 known genera on Earth is a very large fraction of total spider diversity, at least by arthropod standards, and especially considering that a fair percentage of those 3,500 names (many are still unrevised) are probably synonyms. If funded, the resulting conventional and frozen tissue collection of spider genera will effectively constitute the nucleus of an international resource for spider genomics. Deposited in public institutions, this resource would be available to all spider systematists from now until the foreseeable future. Nearly all of the museums represented in this proposal (AMNH, CAS, FMNH, MACN, NMNH, ZMUC) either have or soon will have on-line databases of their holdings, and we will work to make sure that information on genomic collections, as well as the conventional taxonomic and geographic information for all taxa will be available to the public. The dispersed nature of our research team already requires that we use servers on the internet to communicate, and, if a net-based application to serve taxonomic matrices becomes available (e.g. Morphobank), we will certainly include pointers to genomic data sources as well.

Figure 1 (next page). A, Optimal topology found by POY for the molecular data (18S rDNA, 28S rDNA, 12S mtrDNA, 16S mtrDNA, Cytochrome Oxidase I, and Histone 3a). B, Optimal topology for the total evidence analysis (282 morphological characters plus the six loci aforementioned) found by POY. Clades classically recognized on morphological grounds are indicated with heavy branches. A �+� under a heavy branch indicates that it includes one (or more) taxon not currently thought to belong to that lineage. Conversely, a �-� under a heavy branch indicates a taxon thought to belong to that lineage is missing. Some classic suprafamilial groups are labeled in the figure.

15

Table 1. Cladistic studies on spiders. Taxa and Gen are no. terminals and genera, �new� Gen excludes overlaps between studies. Morph, Mol, and Trees are numbers of each per study. �new� Study Taxon Year Taxa Gen Morph Mol Gen Trees Baehr & Baehr, 1993 Hersiliidae 1993 7 7 20 0 7 1 Bosselaers, 1999 Oecobiidae 1999 8 2 14 0 1 3 Bosselaers, 2002 Liocranoids 2002 43 41 157 0 36 7 Bond & Opell, 1997 Mallos 1997 20 5 26 0 4 1 Coddington & Levi, 1991 Review 1991 1 1 na na 1 na Coddington, 1986 Theridiosomatidae 1986 9 9 47 0 9 1 Coddington, 1990a (Fig. 108) Orbiculariae 1990 34 34 87 0 30 5 Coddington, 1990a (Fig. 2) Araneae 1990 7 7 28 0 7 1 Coddington, 1990a (Fig. 3) Araneoclada 1990 12 12 25 0 9 1 Coddington, 1990b Araneoclada 1990 19 19 60 0 8 5 Coyle, 1995 Ischnothelinae 1995 28 9 44 0 6 237 Croeser, 1996 Sparassidae 1996 6 4 20 0 3 1 Davies, 1998 Metaltellinae 1998 22 22 27 0 8 448 Davies, 1998 Tasmarubrius 1999 16 12 23 0 1 4 Davies, 1999 Carbinea 1999 22 19 37 0 22 1 Davies & Lambkin, 2001 Procambridgea 2001 42 24 51 0 4 36 Forster & Platnick, 1984 Palpimanoidea 1984 19 13 na 0 1 na Forster, 1995 Periegopidae 1996 1 1 na 0 1 na Goloboff, 1993a Mygalomorphae 1993 42 42 71 0 41 36 Goloboff, 1995 Nemesiidae 1995 84 32 112 0 19 72 Gray, 1995 Filistatidae 1995 11 11 18 0 9 1 Griswold, 1990 Phyxelidinae 1990 55 12 101 0 12 na Griswold, 1993 Lycosoidea 1993 32 26 68 0 24 9 Griswold et al., 1998 Araneoidea 1998 31 31 93 0 12 1 Griswold et al., 1999 Entelegynae 1999 43 43 136 0 15 3 Griswold, 2001 Cyatholipidae 2001 38 23 59 0 20 1 Griswold & Ledford, 2001 Migidae 2001 27 13 45 0 12 1 Harvey, 1995 Megadictynidae 1995 29 9 57 0 9 32 Hedin & Maddison, 2001 Dendryphantinae 2001 30 29 0 2771 29 3 Hormiga, 1994 Linyphiidae 1994 16 12 47 0 10 Hormiga, 2000 Erigoninae 2000 43 43 73 0 29 6 Hormiga et. al., 1995 Tetragnathidae 1995 22 22 61 0 9 3 Huber, 2000 Pholcidae 2000 61 41 61 0 40 >100 Huber et al., 1993 Ctenidae 1993 9 7 0 446 4 >1 Jocqué, 1991 Zodariidae 1991 47 47 79 0 47 >10,000 Zujko-Miller, 1999a Sisicottus 1999 19 11 41 0 1 3 Zujko-Miller, 1999b Carorita 1999 44 44 75 0 1 39 Pérez-Miles et al., 1996 Theraphosidae 1996 30 30 27 0 29 >10,000 Piel & Nutt, 1998 Zygiella 1998 5 5 0 208 1 2 Platnick, 1990 Gnaphosoidea 1990 15 15 na 0 13 na Platnick, 2000 Lamponidae 2000 30 30 30 0 28 24 Platnick et al., 1991 Haplogynae 1991 43 43 67 0 27 10 Ramírez & Grismado, 1997 Filistatidae 1997 12 12 29 0 2 3 Ramírez, 1995a Anyphaenidae 1995 9 9 20 0 8 1 Ramírez, 1995b Monapia 1995 16 9 29 0 4 1 Ramírez, 1997 Acanthoceto 1997 18 13 43 0 7 1 Rodrigo & Jackson 1992 Coccalodes 1992 18 18 23 0 18 6 Scharff & Coddington, 1997 Araneidae 1997 70 70 82 0 55 12 Sierwald, 1998 Pisaurinae 1998 14 7 34 0 7 1 Silva, submitted Ctenoids 2003 98 89 146 0 70 4 1394 1130 2329 3425 805

References Cited Agnarsson, I. 2000. Adansonia is a baobab tree, not a theridiid spider. J. Arachnol. 28: 351-352. Agnarsson, I. In press. Sharing a web - on the relation of sociality and kleptoparasitism in theridiid spiders

(Theridiidae, Araneae). J. Arachnol. Baehr, M. and B. Baehr. 1993. The Hersiliidae of the Oriental Region including New Guinea. Taxonomy,

phylogeny, zoogeography (Arachnida, Araneae). Spixiana (Suppl.) 19: 1-96. Baker, R.H., and R. DeSalle. 1997. Multiple sources of character information and the phylogeny of Hawaiian

Drosophilids. Systematic Biology 46: 654-673. Baker, R. H., X. B. Yu, and R. DeSalle. 1998. Assessing the relative contribution of molecular and

morphological characters in simultaneous analysis trees. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9:427-436.

Baum, B.R. 1992. Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon 41:3-10.

Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P and Sanderson, M.J. 2001. Assessment of the Accuracy of Matrix Representation with Parsimony Analysis Supertree Construction. Systematic Biology 50:565-579.

Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P. and Bryant, H.N. 1998. Properties of Matrix Representation with Parsimony Analyses. Systematic Biology 47:497-508.

Bond, J. E. and B. D. Opell. 1997. Systematics of the spider genera Mallos and Mexitlia (Araneae, Dictynidae). Zool. Jour. Linn. Soc. 119: 389-445.

Bond, J.E. and P. Sierwald. In press. Cryptic speciation in the Anadenobolus excisus millipede species complex on the island of Jamaica. Evolution (June issue).

Bond, J.E. and P. Sierwald. In press. Eurhinocricus rosenbergi, a new species of rhinocricid from the Caribbean island of Jamaica (Spirobolida: Rhinocricidae). The Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington.

Bonnet, P. 1945-59. Bibliographia Araneorum. Toulouse, vols. 1, 2A-E, 3. Bremer, K. 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction.

Evolution 42: 795�803. Bremer, K. 1994. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics 10: 295�304. Brignoli, P. M. 1983. A catalogue of the Araneae described between 1940 and 1981. Manchester Univ.

Press, Manchester, 755 pp. Carninci P, Shibata Y, Hayatsu N, Sugahara Y, Shibata K, Itoh M, Konno H, Okazaki Y, Muramatsu M,

Hayashizaki Y. 2000. Normalization and subtraction of cap-trapper-selected cDNAs to prepare full-length cDNA libraries for rapid discovery of new genes. Genome Research 10:1617-1630

Carpenter, J. M. and W. C. Wheeler. 1999. Towards simultaneous analysis of morphological and molecular data in Hymenoptera. Zool. Scripta 28: 251-260.

Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. and A. W. F. Edwards. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedure. Evolution 32:550-570 and Am. J. Hu. Genet. 19:233-257.

Chase, M. W. et al. 1993. Phylogenetics of seed plants: An analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid gene rbcL. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard. 80: 528-580.

Chirgwin, J. M. et al. 1979. Isolation of biologically active ribonucleic acid from sources enriched in ribonuclease. Biochemistry 18: 5294-5299.

Coddington, J. A. 1986. The genera of the spider family Theridiosomatidae. Smithson. Contrib. Zool. 422: 1-96.

Coddington, J. A. 1990a. Ontogeny and homology in the male palpus of orb-weaving spiders and their relatives, with comments on phylogeny (Araneoclada: Araneoidea, Deinopoidea). Smithson. Contrib. Zool. 496: 1-52.

Coddington, J. A. 1990b. Cladistics and spider classification: Araneomorph phylogeny and the monophyly of orbweavers (Araneae: Araneomorphae, Orbiculariae). Acta Zool. Fennica 190: 75-87.

Coddington, J. A. and H. W. Levi. 1991. Systematics and evolution of spiders (Araneae). Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 22: 565-592.

Coddington, J. A. and R. K. Colwell. 2001. Arachnida. In: Levin, S. C. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Biodiversity. Academic Press, New York, vol. 1, pp. 199-218.

Cokendolpher, J. C. and J. R. Reddell. 1992. Revision of the Protoschizomidae (Arachnida: Schizomida) with notes on the phylogeny of the order. Texas Mem. Mus. Speleol. Monogr. 3: 31-74.

Colgan, D. J. et al. 1998. Histone H3 and U2 snRNA DNA sequences and arthropod molecular evolution. Austral. Jour. Zool. 46: 419-437.

Coyle, F. A. 1995. A revision of the funnelweb mygalomorph spider subfamily Ischnothelinae (Araneae, Dipluridae). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 226: 1-133.

Croeser, P. M. C. 1996. A revision of the African huntsman spider genus Palystes L. Koch 1875 (Araneae: Heteropodidae). Ann. Natal Mus. 37: 1-122.

Damen, W. G. M., M. Weller and D. Tautz. 2000. Expression patterns of hairy, even-skipped, and runt in the spider Cupiennius salei imply that these genes were segmentation genes in a basal arthropod. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 97: 4515-4519.

Davies, V. T. 1998. A revision of the Australian metaltellines (Araneae: Amaurobioidea: Amphinectidae: Metaltellinae). Invertebr. Taxon. 12: 211-243.

Davies, V. T. 1999. Carbinea, a new spider genus from north Queensland, Australia (Araneae, Amaurobioidea, Kababininae). Jour. Arachnol. 27: 25-36.

Delle Cave, L. 1986. Biospeleology of the Somaliland Amblypygi (Arachnida Chelicerata) of the caves of Showli Beerdi and Mugdile (Barbera, Somaliland). Redia 69: 143-170.

Donoghue, M.J., Olmstead, R.G., Smith, J.F. and Palmer, J.D. 1992. Phylogenetic relationships of Dipsacales based on rbcL sequence data. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 79: 333�345.

Dunlop, J. A. and C. A. Horrocks. 1996. A new Upper Carboniferous whip scorpion (Arachnida: Uropygi: Thelyphonida) with a revision of the British Carboniferous Uropygi. Zool. Anz. 234: 293-306.

Farris, J.S. 1970. Methods for computing Wagner trees. Systematic Zoology 19: 83�92. Farris, J.S. 1983. The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis. In, Platnick, N.I., and V.A. Funk (eds.),

Advances in Cladistics, vol. 2: Proceedings of the second meeting of the Willi Hennig Society. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 7-36.

Felsenstein, J. 1973. Maximum likelihood and minimum-steps methods for estimating evolutionary trees from data on discrete characters. Systematic Zoology 22: 240�249.

Felsenstein, J. 1979. Alternate methods of phylogenetic inference and their interrelationship. Systematic Zoology 28: 49�62.

Felsenstein, J. 1981a. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach. Journal of Molecular Evolution 17: 368�376.

Felsenstein, J. 1981b. A likelihood approach to character weighting and what it tells us about parsimony and compatibility. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 16: 183�196.

Felsenstein, J. 1983. Statistical inference of phylogenies. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society (A) 146: 246�272.

Felsenstein, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783�791.

Forster, R. R. 1995. The Australasian spider family Periegopidae Simon, 1893 (Araneae: Sicarioidea). Rec. West. Aust. Mus. Suppl. 52: 91-105.

Forster, R. R. and N. I. Platnick. 1984. A review of the archaeid spiders and their relatives, with notes on the limits of the superfamily Palpimanoidea (Arachnida, Araneae). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 178: 1-106.

Gillespie, R. G., Oxford, G. S. 1998. Selection on the color polymorphism in Hawaiian happy face spiders: Evidence from genetic structure and temporal fluctuations. Evolution, 52(3): 775-783.

Giribet, G. and Wheeler, W.C. 1999. On gaps. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 13: 132�143. Giribet, G., Distel, D.L., Polz, M., Sterrer, W. and Wheeler, W.C. 2000. Triploblastic relationships with

emphasis on the acoelomates and the position of Gnathostomulida, Cycliophora, Platyhelminthes and Chaetognatha: A combined approach of 18S rDNA sequences and morphology. Systematic Biology 49: 539�562.

Giribet, G., Edgecombe, G.D. and Wheeler, W.C. 2001. Arthropod phylogeny based on eight molecular loci and morphology. Nature 413: 157�161.

Gladstein, D. S. and W. C. Wheeler. 1997. POY: The optimization of alignment characters. Program and documentation, available at ftp:amnh.org/pub/molecular.

Goloboff, P. A. 1993a. A reanalysis of mygalomorph spider families (Araneae). Amer. Mus. Novit. 3056: 1-32.

Goloboff, P. A. 1993b. NONA: A tree searching program. Program and documentation, available at ftp:unt.edu.ar/pub/parsimony.

Goloboff, P. A. 1995. A revision of the South American spiders of the family Nemesiidae (Araneae, Mygalomorphae). Part I: species from Peru, Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 224: 1-189.

Goloboff, P. A. 1999. Analyzing large data sets in reasonable times: solutions for composite optima. Cladistics 15: 415-428.

Goloboff, P.A. 1997a. NONA, Version 1.6. Computer software and documentation distributed by the American Museum of Natural History, New York.

Goloboff, P.A. 1997b. Pee-Wee, Version 2.6. Computer software and documentation distributed by the American Museum of Natural History, New York.

Gordon, A. D. 1986. Consensus Supertrees: The Synthesis of Rooted Trees Containing Overlapping Sets of Labelled Leaves. Journal of Classification 3:335-348.

Gray, M. R. 1995. Morphology and relationships within the spider family Filistatidae (Araneae: Araneomorphae). Rec. West. Aust. Mus. Suppl. 52: 79-89.

Griswold, C. E. 1990. A revision and phylogenetic analysis of the spider subfamily Phyxelidinae (Araneae, Amaurobiidae). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 196: 1-206.

Griswold, C. E. 1993. Investigations into the phylogeny of the lycosoid spiders and their kin (Arachnida: Araneae: Lycosoidea). Smithson. Contrib. Zool. 539: 1-39.

Griswold, C. E. 2001. A monograph of the living world genera and Afrotropical species of cyatholipid spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae, Cyatholipidae). Mem. Calif. Acad. Sci., 26: 1-251.

Griswold, C. E., C. Long and G. Hormiga. 1999. A new spider of the genus Pimoa from the Gaoligongshan Mts., Yunnan, China (Araneae, Pimoidae). Acta Botanica Yunnanica, Suppl. 11: 91-97.

Griswold, C. E., J. A. Coddington, G. Hormiga and N. Scharff. 1998. Phylogeny of the orb-web building spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae: Deinopoidea, Araneoidea). Zool. Jour. Linn. Soc. 123: 1-99.

Griswold, C. E., J. A. Coddington, N. I. Platnick and R. R. Forster. 1999. Towards a phylogeny of entelegyne spiders (Araneae, Entelegynae). J. Arachnol. 27: 53-63.

Griswold, C., and J. Ledford. 2001. A monograph of the migid trap-door spiders of Madagascar, with a phylogeny of world genera (Araneae, Mygalomorphae, Migidae). Occas. Pap. Calif. Acad. Sci., 151: 1-120.

Hammond, P. M. 1992. Species inventory. In: Groombridge, B. (ed.), Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's Living Resources. Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 17-39.

Harvey, M. S. 1995. The systematics of the spider family Nicodamidae (Araneae: Amaurobioidea). Invertebr. Taxon. 9: 279-386.

Harvey, M. S. In prep. Catalogue of the minor arachnid orders. Sections Amblypygi, Schizomida and Uropygi. Unpaginated MS-Access output, provided by the author, January, 2000.

Haupt, J. and D. X. Song. 1996. Revision of East Asian whip scorpions (Arachnida Uropygi Thelyphonida). I. China and Japan. Arthropoda Selecta 5: 43-52.

Hedin, M. C. and W. P. Maddison. 2001. A combined molecular approach to phylogeny of the jumping spider subfamily Dendryphantinae (Araneae: Salticidae). Molec. Phylogen. Evol. 18(1): 1-18.

Herberstein, M. E., C. L. Craig, J. A. Coddington and M. A Elgar. 2000. The functional significance of silk decorations of orb-web spiders: a critical review of the empirical evidence. Biol. Rev. 75: 649-669.

Higgins, D.G. and Sharp, P.M. 1988. CLUSTAL: A package for performing multiple sequence alignment on a microcomputer. Gene 73: 237�244.

Higgins, D.G. and Sharp, P.M. 1989. Fast and sensitive multiple sequence alignments on a microcomputer. Computer Applications in the Biosciences 5: 151�153.

Higgins, D.G., Bleasby, A.J. and Fuchs, R. 1992. CLUSTAL V: Improved software for multiple sequence alignment. Computer Applications in the Biosciences 8: 189�191.

Hoffman, R. 1998. Reassessment of the milliped family Platyrhacidae, a family of polydesmidan millipeds. Myriapodologica 5: 125-141.

Hoffman, R. 1999. Checklist of the millipeds of North and Middle America. Special Publication No. 8, Virginia Museum of Natural History, 584pp.

Hormiga, G. 1994. Cladistics and the comparative morphology of linyphiid spiders and their relatives (Araneae, Araneoidea, Linyphiidae). Zool. Jour. Linn. Soc. 111: 1-71.

Hormiga, G. 1998. The spider genus Napometa (Araneae, Araneoidea, Linyphiidae). J. Arachnol. 26: 125-132.

Hormiga, G. 1999. Cephalothoracic sulci in linyphiine spiders (Araneae, Araneoidea, Linyphiidae). J. Arachnol. 27: 94-102.

Hormiga, G. 2000. Higher level phylogenetics of erigonine spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae, Erigoninae). Smithson. Contrib. Zool. 609: 1-160.

Hormiga, G. In press (2002). Orsonwelles, a new genus of giant linyphiid spiders from Hawaii (Araneae, Linyphiidae). Invertebrate Systematics. 88 mss. pages, 59 plates.

Hormiga, G. and J. Coddington. 2001. Patrones filogenéticos de dimorfismo sexual de tamaño en las arañas tejedoras de telas orbiculares (Araneae, Orbiculariae). In Enfoques contemporáneos para el estudio de la biodiversidad, H.M. Hernández, A.N. García Aldrete, F. Alvarez and M. Ulloa, Eds., Fondo Universitario de Cultura, UNAM, México, pp. 149-168.

Hormiga, G., M.A. Arnedo, and R. Gillespie. In press. Speciation on a conveyor belt: sequential colonization of the Hawaiian Islands by Orsonwelles spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae). Systematic Biology. 51 mss. pages, 8 figures. Accepted pending minor revision.

Hormiga, G., N. Scharff and J. Coddington. 2000. The phylogenetic basis of sexual size dimorphism in orb-weaving spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae). Syst. Biol. 49: 435-462.

Hormiga, G., W. G. Eberhard and J. A. Coddington. 1995. Web-construction behaviour in Australian Phonognatha and the phylogeny of nephiline and tetragnathid spiders (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Aust. J. Zool. 43: 313-364.

Huber, B. A. 2000. New World pholcid spiders (Araneae: Pholcidae): A revision at generic level. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 254: 1-348.

Hulsenbeck, J. P. 2000. MrBayes: Bayesian inference in phylogeny. Distributed by the author. Department of Biology, University of Rochester.

Huelsenbeck, J.P. and Ronquist, F. 2001. MrBayes: A Program for the Bayesian Inference of Phylogeny. Computer software and documentation available at: http://morphbank.ebc.uu.se/mrbayes. Documentation by J.P. Huelsenbeck, F. Ronquist and B. Hall.

Huelsenbeck, J.P., and K.A. Crandall. 1997. Phylogeny estimation and testing using maximum likelihood. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28: 437-466.

Jeanmougin, F., Thompson, J.D., Gouy, M., Higgins, D.G. and Gibson, T.J. 1998. Multiple sequence alignment with Clustal X. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 20: 403�405.

Jocqué, R. 1991. A generic revision of the spider family Zodariidae (Araneae). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 201: 1-160.

Kluge, A.G. 1984. The relevance of parsimony to phylogenetic inference. In: Duncan, T. and Stuessy, T.F. (Eds.) Cladistics: Perspectives on the Reconstruction of Evolutionary History. Columbia University Press, New York, 24�38.

Ko, M.S.H. (1990). An "equalized cDNA library" by the reassociation of short double-stranded cDNAs. Nucleic Acids Research 18: 5705-5711.

Kress, W. J. et al. 1999. Amazonian biotic data and conservation decisions. Cîencia e Cultura 51: 372-385.

Kuntner, M. and G. Hormiga. In press. The African spider Genus Singafrotypa Benoit 1962 (Araneae, Araneoidea, Araneidae). J. Arachnol. 21 mss. pages, 17 figs.

Kuntner, M. In press.. The placement of Perilla (Araneae, Araneidae) with comments on araneid phylogeny. Journal of Arachnology.

Kuntner. M. and I. �ereg. 2002. Additions to the spider fauna of Slovenia, with a comparison of spider species richness among European countries. Bulletin of the British Arachnological Society 12(4)

Masta, S. E. 2000. Mitochondrial sequence evolution in spiders: Intraspecific variation in tRNAs lacking the TC arm. Mol. Biol. Evol. 17: 1091-1100.

Mau, B. and Newton, M. 1997. Phylogenetic inference for binary data on dendrograms using Markov chain Monte Carlo. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 6: 122�131.

Mau, B., Newton, M. and Larget, B. 1999. Bayesian phylogenetic inference via Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. Biometrics 55: 1�12.

Miller, J.A. (submitted). Assessing Progress in Systematics with Continuous Jackknife Function Analysis. Systematic Biology. 22 ms. pp., 3 figs. (ms. submitted April 2002)

Nixon, K. C. 1999. The parsimony ratchet, a new method for rapid parsimony analysis. Cladistics 15: 407-414.

Oxford, G. S., Gillespie, R. G. 2001. Portraits of evolution: studies of coloration in Hawaiian spiders. Bioscience, 51(7): 521-528.

Oxford, G.S., Gillespie, R.G., 1998. Color polymorphisms in spiders. Annual Review of Entomology, vol. 43: 619-643.

Pérez-Miles, F., S. M. Lucas, P. I. da Silva Jr., and R. Bertani. 1996. Systematic revision and cladistic analysis of Theraphosinae (Araneae: Theraphosidae). Mygalomorph 1: 33-68.

Piao, Y., Naomi T. Ko, Meng K. Lim, Minoru S.H. Ko. 2001. Construction of Long-Transcript enriched cDNA libraries from submicrogram amounts of total RNAs by a Universal PCR Amplification Method Genome Research 11:1553-1558.

Piel, W. H. and K. J. Nutt. 1998. Kaira is a likely sister group to Metepeira, and Zygiella is an araneid (Araneae, Araneidae): Evidence from mitochondrial DNA. Jour. Arachnol. 25: 262-268.

Platnick, N. I. 1989. Advances in Spider Taxonomy 1981-1987: A Supplement to Brignoli's A Catalogue of the Araneae described between 1940 and 1981. Manchester Univ. Press, Manchester, 673 pp.

Platnick, N. I. 1990. Spinneret morphology and the phylogeny of ground spiders (Araneae, Gnaphosoidea). Amer. Mus. Novit. 2978: 1-42.

Platnick, N. I. 1993. Advances in spider taxonomy 1988-1991, with synonymies and transfers 1940-1980. New York Entomol. Soc., New York, 846 pp.

Platnick, N. I. 1998. Advances in spider taxonomy 1992-1995 with redescriptions 1940-1980. New York Entomol. Soc., New York, 976 pp.

Platnick, N. I. 1999. Dimensions of biodiversity: targeting megadiverse groups. In: Cracraft, J. and F. T. Grifo (eds.), The Living Planet in Crisis: Biodiversity Science and Policy. Columbia Univ. Press, New York, pp. 33-52.

Platnick, N. I. 2000. A relimitation and revision of the Australasian ground spider family Lamponidae (Araneae: Gnaphosoidea). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 245: 1-330. (web version at http://research.amnh.org/entomology/lamponid)

Platnick, N. I. 2002. The world spider catalog, version 2.5. American Museum of Natural History, online at http://research.amnh.org/entomology/spiders/catalog81-87/index.html

Platnick, N. I., J. A. Coddington, R. R. Forster and C. E. Griswold. 1991. Spinneret morphology and the phylogeny of haplogyne spiders (Araneae, Araneomorphae). Amer. Mus. Novit. 3016: 1-73.

Ragan, M.A. 1992a.Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 1:53-58.

Ragan, M.A. 1992b. Matrix representation in reconstructing phylogenetic relationships among the eukaryotes. Biosystems 28:47-55.

Ramírez, M. J. 1995a. A phylogenetic analysis of the subfamilies of Anyphaenidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Ent. Scand. 26: 361-384.

Ramírez, M. J. 1995b. Revisión y filogenia del género Monapia, con notas sobre otras Amaurobioidinae (Araneae, Anyphaenidae). Bol. Soc. Biol. Concepción 66: 71-102.

Ramírez, M. J. 1997. Revisión y filogenia de los géneros Ferrieria y Acanthoceto (Araneae: Anyphaenidae, Amaurobioidinae). Iheringia (Zool.) 82: 173-203.

Ramírez, M. J. and C. J. Grismado. 1997. A review of the spider family Filistatidae in Argentina (Arachnida, Araneae), with a cladistic reanalysis of filistatid genera. Ent. Scand. 28: 319-349.

Ramírez, M. J. 1999. New species and cladistic reanalysis of the spider genus Monapia (Araneae: Anyphaenidae, Amaurobioidinae). J. Arachnol. 27: 415-431.

Ramírez, M. J. 2000. Respiratory system morphology and the phylogeny of haplogyne spiders (Araneae, Araneomorphae). J. Arachnol. 28: 149-157.

Rannala, B. and Yang, Z. 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: a new method of phylogenetic inference. Journal of Molecular Evolution 43: 304�311.

Reddell, J. R. and J. C. Cokendolpher. 1995. Catalogue, bibliography, and generic revision of the order Schizomida (Arachnida). Texas Mem. Mus, Speleol. Monogr. 4: 1-170.

Regier, J. C. and J. W. Shultz. 1997. Molecular phylogeny of the major arthropod groups indicates polyphyly of crustaceans and a new hypothesis for the origin of hexapods. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14: 902-913.

Rodrigo, A. G. and R. R. Jackson. 1992. Four jumping spider genera of the Cocalodes-group are monophyletic with genera of the Spartaeinae (Araneae: Salticidae). New Zealand Nat.Sci. 19: 61-67.

Roewer, C. F. 1942-55. Katalog der Araneae. Bremen, Brussels, vols. 1, 2A, 2B. Rowland, J. M. and J. A. L. Cooke. 1973. Systematics of the arachnid order Uropygida (=Thelyphonida).

Jour. Arachnol. 1: 55-71. Sanderson, M.J. 1989. Confidence limits on phylogenies: The bootstrap revisited. Cladistics 5: 113�129.

Scharff, N. and J. A. Coddington. 1997. A phylogenetic analysis of the orb-weaving spider family Araneidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Zool. Jour. Linn. Soc. 120: 355-434.

Scharff, N. and J. A. Coddington. 1997. A phylogenetic analysis of the orb-weaving spider family Araneidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 120:355-434.

Semple, C. and Steel, M. 2000. A supertree method for rooted trees. Discrete Applied Mathematics 105:147-158.

Shear, W. A. 1999a. Millipeds. Amer. Scientist 87: 232-240. Shear, W. A. 1999b. A new troglobitic milliped of the genus Nepalella from China (Diplopoda,

Chordeumatida, Megalotylidae). Myriapodologica 6: 1-10. Shear, W. A. 1999c. The milliped genus Diplomaragna confirmed for Taiwan, with the description of a new

species (Diplopoda, Chordeumatida, Diplomaragnidae). Myriapodologica 6: 11-18. Shear, W. A. 2000a. On the milliped family Heterochordeumatidae, with comments on the higher

classification of the order Chordeumatida. Invert. Taxon. 14: 363-376. Shear, W. A. 2000b. A new genus and species of callipodidan milliped from Vietnam (Callipodida,

Schizopetalidae). Myripodologica 6: 95-100. Shear, W. A. and D. A. Hubbard. 1998a. Cave millipeds of the United States. IV. A new genus and species

from a high altitude cave in Colorado.Myriapodologica 5:95-104. Shear, W. A. and D. A. Hubbard. 1998c. New milliped records for Virginia and Georgia: Ameriactis satis

(Zosteractinidae, Julida, Diplopoda). Banisteria 12:41-42. Shear, W. A. and P. Selden. 2001. Rustling in the undergrowth: animals in early terrestrial ecosystems. In

Plants Invade the Land, ed. by P. G. Gensel and D. Edwards, pp. 29-51. Shear, W. A., J. M. Palmer, J. A. Coddington and P. M. Bonamo. 1989. A Devonian spinneret: early

evidence of spiders and silk use. Science 246: 479-481. Shear, W. A., M. Harvey and H. Hoch. 2000c. Onychophora, Arachnida, Myriapoda and Insecta in

Subterranean Ecosystems (Ecosystems of the World 30) ed. by H.Wilkins, D. Culver and W. Humphreys, pp. 79-94

Shear, W. A.1998b. The fossil record and evolution of the myriapods. Systematics Assoc. Special Vol. 55:211-220.

Shear, W. A.2000a. On the milliped family Heterochordeumatidae, with comments on the higher classification of the Order Chordeumatida.Inver. Taxon. 14:363-376.

Shear, W. A.2000b. A new genus and species of callipodidan milliped from Vietnam (Callipodida, Schizopetalidae) Myripodologica 6:95-100.

Shelley, R., P. Sierwald and S. Golovatch. 2000. Nomenclator generum et familiarum Diplopodorum II: A list of the genus and family-group names in the Class Diplopoda from 1958 through 1999. Pensoft Publ., Bulgaria, 167 pp.

Shultz, J. W. 1990. Evolutionary morphology and phylogeny of Arachnida. Cladistics 6: 1-38. Sierwald P. and S. I. Golovatch. 2001. Revue of the genus Poratia (Diplopoda, Polydesmida,

Pyrgodesmidae). Arthropoda Selecta, Volume 9(3): 181-192. Sierwald, P. 1998. Phylogenetic analysis of pisaurine nursery web spiders, with revisions of

Tetragonophthalma and Perenethis (Araneae, Lycosoidea, Pisauridae). J. Arachnol. 25: 361-407. Slowinski, J.B. 1998. The number of multiple alignments. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 10: 264�

266. Sorensen, L.L., J. A. Coddington, and N. Scharff. 2002. Inventorying and estimating sub-canopy spider

diversity using semi-quantitative sampling methods in an Afromontane forest. Environmental Entomology, 31(2): 319-330.

Speijer, E. A. M. 1933. IV, Verslag 66ste wintervergardering Ned. Ent. Verslag.Tijdschr. Entomol. 76: 4-5. Speijer, E. A. M. 1936. Die orientalischen Pedipalpen des Zoologischen Museums der Universität Berlin.

Mitt. Zool. Mus. Berlin 21: 249-263. Steel, M., Dress, A.W.M., and Bocker, S. 2000. Simple but fundamental limitations on supertree and

consensus tree methods. Systematic Biology 49:363-368. Swofford, D.L., Olsen, G.J., Waddell, P.J. and Hillis, D.M. 1996. Phylogenetic inference. In: Hillis, D.M.,

Moritz, C. and Mable, B.K. (Eds.) Molecular Systematics. 2nd edition. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, 407�514.

Systematics Agenda 2000. 1994. Systematics Agenda 2000: Exploring the Biosphere. Technical Report. American Society of Plant Taxonomists, Society of Systematic Biologists, and Willi Hennig Society, New York, 34 pp.

Tan, A. M., R. G. Gillespie, Oxford. G. S. 1999. Paraphyly of the Enoplognatha ovata group (Araneae, Theridiidae) based on DNA sequences. J. Arachnol., 27(2):481-488.

Tatarenkov, A. et al. 1999. On the evolution of Dopa decarboxylase (Ddc) and Drosophila systematics. Jour. Mol. Evol. 48: 445-462.

Thompson, J.D., Gibson, T.J., Plewniak, F., Jeanmoougin, F. and Higgins, D.G. 1997. The Clustal X windows interface: Flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Research 25: 4876�4882.

Thompson, J.D., Higgins, D.G. and Gibson, T.J. 1994. Clustal W: Improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, positions-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Research 22: 4673�4680.

Tuffley, C. and M. Steel. 1997. Links between maximum likelihood and maximum parsimony under a simple model of site substitution. Bull. Math. Biol. 59: 581-607.

Wahlberg, N. and Zimmermann, M. 2000. Pattern of phylogenetic relationships among members of the tribe Melitaeini (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Cladistics 16: 347�363.

Weygoldt, P. 1996. Evolutionary morphology of whip spiders: towards a phylogenetic system (Chelicerata: Arachnida: Amblypygi). J. Zool. Syst. Evol. Res. 34: 185-202.

Weygoldt, P. 1999. Spermatophores and the evolution of female genitalia in whip spiders (Chelicerata, Amblypygi). J. Arachnol. 27: 103-116.

Weygoldt, P. 2000. Whip Spiders (Chelicerata: Amblypygi). Their Biology, Morphology and Systematics. Apollo Books, Stenstrup.

Weygoldt, P. and H. F. Paulus. 1979. Untersuchungen zur Morphologie, Taxonomie und Phylogenie der Chelicerata. II. Cladogramme und die Entfaltung der Chelicerata. Zeit. Zool. Syst. Evol.-forsch. 17: 177-200.

Wheeler , W. C., M. F. Whiting, J. C. Carpenter, and Q. D. Wheeler. 2001. �The phylogeny of the insect orders.� Cladistics, 12:1-57.

Wheeler, W. C. 1989. The systematics of insect ribosomal DNA. In: Fernholm, B. et al. (eds.), The Hierarchy of Life. Elsevier Press, Amsterdam. pp. 307-321.

Wheeler, W. C. 1996. Optimization alignment, parameter sensitivity, and the phylogenetic analysis of molecular data. Syst. Biol. 44: 321-332.

Wheeler, W. C. 1999. Fixed character states and the optimization of molecular sequence data. Cladistics 15: 379-385.

Wheeler, W. C. and C. Y. Hayashi. 1998. The phylogeny of the extant chelicerate orders. Cladistics 14: 173-192.

Wheeler, W. C., P. Cartwright and C. Y. Hayashi. 1993. Arthropod phylogeny: a combined approach. Cladistics 9: 1-39.

Wheeler, W.C. 1994. Sources of ambiguity in nucleic acid sequence alignment. In: Schierwater, B., Streit, B., Wagner, G.P. and DeSalle, R. (Eds.) Molecular Ecology and Evolution: Approaches and Applications. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 323�352.

Wheeler, W.C. 1996. Optimization alignment: The end of multiple sequence alignment in phylogenetics? Cladistics 12: 1�9.

Wheeler, W.C. 1998. Alignment characters, dynamic programming and heuristic solutions. In: DeSalle, R. and Schierwater, B. (Eds.) Molecular Approaches to Ecology and Evolution. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 243�251.

Wheeler, W.C. 1999. Fixed character states and the optimisation of molecular sequence data. Cladistics 15: 379�386.

Wheeler, W.C. 2000. Heuristic reconstruction of hypothetical-ancestral DNA sequences: Sequence alignment versus direct optimisation. In: Scotland, R.W. and Pennington, R.T. (Eds.) Homology and systematics: Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis. Taylor and Francis, London, 106�113.

Wheeler, W.C. 2001. Homology and the optimization of DNA sequence data. In: Giribet, G., Wheeler, W.C. and Janies, D.A. (Eds.) One day symposium in numerical cladistics. Cladistics 17: S3�S11.

Wheeler, W.C., Gatesy, J. and DeSalle, R. 1995. Elision: A method for accommodating multiple molecular sequence alignments with alignment-ambiguous sites. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 4: 1�9.

Wheeler,W.C., Gladstein, DS, and DeLaet, J. 2002. POY version 3.0. Program and Documentation. New York, NY. Available at ftp.amnh.org/pub/molecular. Documentation by D. Janies and W. C. Wheeler

Whiting, M. F., J. C. Carpenter, Q. D. Wheeler and W. C. Wheeler. 1997. The Strepsiptera problem: phylogeny of the holometabolous insect orders inferred from 18S and 28S ribosomal DNA sequences and morphology. Syst. Biol. 46: 1-68.

Wheeler , W. C., M. F. Whiting, J. C. Carpenter, and Q. D. Wheeler. 2001. The phylogeny of the insect orders. Cladistics, 12:1-57

Zujko-Miller, J. 1999a. On the phylogenetic relationships of Sisicottus hibernus (Araneae, Linyphiidae, Erigoninae). J. Arachnol. 27: 44-52.

Zujko-Miller, J. 1999b. Revision and cladistic analysis of the erigonine spider genus Sisicottus (Araneae, Linyphiidae, Erigoninae). J. Arachnol. 27: 553-603.

Ward Christopher Wheeler Curator, Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History

Central Park West at 79th St. New York, NY 10024-5192 TEL (212) 769-5754 FAX (212) 769-5277

e-mail [email protected] Education Yale College B. A. cum Laude Biology 1981 to 1985 Harvard University Ph. D. Biology 1985 to 1988 Professional Employment Curator of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History 1999 to present Associate Curator of Invertebrates, American Museum of Natural History 1994 to 1999 Assistant Curator of Invertebrates, American Museum of Natural History 1989 to 1994 Postdoctoral Fellow, University of California at Los Angeles 1988 to 1989 Adjunct Appointments Adjunct Professor, Columbia University 1991 to present Adjunct Professor, New York University 1991 to present Adjunct Professor, City University of New York 1989 to present

Five Relevant Publications Wheeler, W. C. 2002. “Optimization Alignment: Down, Up, Error, and Improvements.”

In R. Desalle, G. Giribet and W. Wheeler eds. Molecular Systematics and Evolution: Theory and Practise. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel Switzerland.

Giribet, G., G. D. Edgecombe, and W. C. Wheeler. 2001. Arthropod phylogeny based on eight molecular loci and morphology. Nature 413: 157-161.

Wheeler , W. C., M. F. Whiting, J. C. Carpenter, and Q. D. Wheeler. 2001. “The phylogeny of the insect orders.” Cladistics, 12:1-57.

Giribet, G., D. L. Distel, M. Polz, W. Sterrer, and W. C. Wheeler. 2000. Triploblastic relationships with emphasis on the acoelomates, and the position of Gnathostomulida, Cycliophora, Platyhelminthes, and Chaetognatha; a combined approach of 18S rDNA and Morphology. Systematic Biology, 49:539-562..

Wheeler, W. C. and C. Y. Hayashi. 1998. “The phylogeny of the extant chelicerate orders.” Cladistics 24:173-192.

Five Other Significant Publications Janies, D., and W. Wheeler. 2001. Efficiency of parallel direct optimization. Cladistics,

17:S71-S82. Phillips, A., D. Janies, and W. C. Wheeler. 2000. Multiple sequence alignment in

phylogenetic analysis. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 16:317-330. Wheeler, W. C. 1999. Fixed Character States and the Optimization of Molecular Sequence

Data. Cladistics 15: 379-386. Wheeler, W. C. 1996. “Optimization Alignment: the end of multiple sequence alignment in

phylogenetics?” Cladistics, 12:1-9.

11

Wheeler, W. C. 1995. Sequence alignment, parameter sensitivity, and the phylogenetic analysis of molecular data. Systematic Biology 44:321-331.

Synergistic Activities 1. Mount Sinai Hospital Recombinant DNA Safety Committee 1997 to 2000 2. International Teaching: Molecular Evolution and Systematics— 2002 Tucumán, Argentina

DNA Analysis.—Espoo, Finland 2001 DNA sequence alignment et seq.—Helsinki, Finland 1999 Molecular Systematics—Uppsala, Sweden; Helsinki, 1998 Finland Molecular Systematics—Helsinki, Finland 1995 Molecular Character Analysis--Tulgarn, Sweden 1993

3. Willi Hennig Society: Fellow 1989 to Present

Council 1993 to 1996; 1999 Vice President 2000 to present

4. Organizing Conferences: Symposium on Numerical Cladistics 1998

AMNH/NASA Evolutionary Biology Meeting 1999 AMNH/NASA/NSF Cluster Supercomputing Meeting 2001

5. Software Development Malign 1991-1998 POY: The Optimization of Alignment Characters 1997-2001 (both available at ftp.amnh.org/pub/molecular) Collaborators & Other Affiliations Collaborators in Last Four Years: James Carpenter, Rob De Salle, Gregory

Edgecombe, Gonzalo Giribet, Mordecai-mark MacLow, Jyrki Muona Randall Schuh, Quentin Wheeler, Michael Whiting.

PhD. Advisor: Dr. Rodney Honeycutt Postdoctoral Advisor: Dr. James Lake Postdoctoral Fellows (last five years): Dr. Jan De Laet 2001 to present Dr. Cyrille D’Haese 2001 to present Dr. Daniel Janies 1995 to present Dr. Gonzalo Giribet 1997 to 1999 Graduate Students: Amy Litt Ph. D. 1999, CUNY

Aloyisius Philips 4th Year, Columbia Paul Vrana Ph. D. 1994, Columbia Michael Whiting Ph. D. 1995, Cornell

Cheryl Hayashi Ph. D. 1996, Yale

22

ftp://ftp.amnh.org/pub/molecular

JONATHAN A. CODDINGTON

Systematic Biology, National Museum Of Natural History Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20560

202-357-4148 Fax 202-786-2894 [email protected]

http://entomology.si.edu/entomology/staff http://www.gwu.edu/~clade/spiders/jc.htm

Education

Yale University, New Haven, CT. Biology B. S. (1975) Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Biology M. A. (1978) Harvard University, Cambridge, MA. Biology Ph.D. (1984)

Appointments

Curator and Research Scientist, Smithsonian Institution 1990-present Associate Curator and Research Scientist, Smithsonian Institution 1984-1990

Adjunct Appointments Adjunct Professor University of Maryland at College Park 1984-present Adjunct Professor George Washington University 1997-present Adjunct Professor Western Carolina University 1992-present

Publications (mostly closely related) 1. Griswold, C. E., J. A. Coddington, N. I. Platnick, and R. R. Forster. 1999. Towards a

phylogeny of entelegyne spiders (Araneae, Entelegynae). J. Arachnol. 27(1): 53-63. 2. Griswold, C. E., J. A. Coddington, G. Hormiga, and N. Scharff. 1998. Phylogeny of the

orb-web building spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae: Deinopoidea, Araneoidea). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 123: 1-99.

3. Scharff, N. and J. A. Coddington. 1997. A phylogenetic analysis of the orb-weaving spider family Araneidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 120(4): 355-434.

4. Coddington, J. A. and H. W. Levi. 1991. Systematics and evolution of spiders (Araneae). Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 22:565-592.

5. Hormiga, G., W. G. Eberhard, J. A. Coddington. 1995. Web construction behavior in Australian Phonognatha and the phylogeny of nephiline and tetragnathid spiders (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). Australian J. Zoology, 43: 313-343

Publications (other) 6. Coddington, J. A., G. Hormiga, and N. Scharff. 1997. Giant females or dwarf male

spiders? Nature (Lond.). 385 (6618): 687-688. 7. Colwell, R. K. and J. A. Coddington. 1994. Estimating the extent of terrestrial biodiversity

through extrapolation. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. (B), 345:101-118. 8. Coddington, J. A. 1994. The roles of homology and convergence in studies of adaptation.

Pp. 53-78 in: Vane-Wright, R. and Eggleton, P. (eds.) Phylogenetics and Ecology, Academic Press, London.

9. Coddington, J. A. 1988. Cladistic tests of adaptational hypotheses. Cladistics, 4(1): 1-20. 10. Coddington, J. A. 1986. The genera of the spider family Theridiosomatidae. Smithsonian

Contributions to Zoology, 422: 1-96

Synergistic activities Editorial Board, Journal of Arachnology (1995-present), Biota Colombiana (1999-present). Advisory Council, Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, American Museum of Natural History(1996-present). Secretary of the International Society of Arachnology (1997-2001). Councilor, Society for Systematic Biology (1996-1999). International teaching: Phylogenetic Analysis, Argentina (2002); Conceptos y Estrategias para Estimar y Analizar la Biodiversidad, Hildago, Mexico (2002); Curso-Taller de Sistemática-filogenética, Colombia (1997); Avaliação da Diversidade de Espécies, Brazil (1997). Curation of the National Collections of Arachnida and Myriapoda. Research Associate, Harvard University. Lead Curator for NMNH and SITES Traveling Exhibit “Spiders!” 1995-1997 (ca. 12 million visitors). Field research in USA, Antilles, throughout Central and South America, Africa, Madagascar, Nepal, Australia, Burma (1979-2000).

Collaborators and other affiliations

Acevedo, P. , T. L. Erwin, D. Cole, R. W. Heyer, W. J. Kress, B. J. Meggers, R. W. Thorington, R. P. Vari, M. J. Weitzman, S. H. Weitzman, all at National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution. Hormiga, G. and I. Agnarsson, Department of Biological Sciences, George Washington University. Arnedo, M. A. and R. G. Gillespie at Division of Insect Biology, ESPM, University of California, Berkeley. Chanzy, M. H. G. Raty, Centre de Recherches sur les Macromolecules Vegetales, CNRS-CERMAV. Colwell, R. K. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut. Craig, C. L. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University. Elgar, M. A., Heberstein, M. E. both at Department of Zoology, University of Melbourne. Gardner, K. H., DuPont Central Research & Development Department, Wilmington. Goloboff, P. INSUE, Inst. Miguel Lillo, 205, 4000 San Miguel de Tucuman, Argentina. Griswold, C. E. Department of Entomology, California Academy of Sciences. Jackson, M. L., National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Longino, J. T. The Evergreen State College. Platnick, N. I., L. Prendini, W. Wheeler, all at Department of Invertebrates, American Museum of Natural History. Pogue, M. G. Systematic Entomology Laboratory, U.S.D.A. Scharff, N.. L. L. Sørensen, both at Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen. Sierwald, P. The Field Museum, Chicago.

Graduate Advisor Levi, H. W. Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

02138, USA

Thesis Advisor/Postgraduate Scholar advisor Current co-advisor for Ingi Agnarrson (Ph. D.), Fernando Alvarez, (Ph. D.), Matjaz

Kuntner, (Ph. D.), Lara Lopardo (Ph. D.) Jeremy Miller (Ph. D.), all at Department of Biological Sciences, George Washington University, 2023 G Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20052. Thesis committee for C. Valderrama, Dept. Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA. Career total graduate students advised: 17; career total postgraduate students advised: 8

Biographical Sketch

GUSTAVO HORMIGA Department of Biological Sciences

George Washington University; Washington, D.C. 20052 (202) 994-0302 (lab), 994-1095 (office), FAX (202) 994-6100

E-mail: [email protected] http://www.gwu.edu/~clade/faculty/hormiga/

http://www.gwu.edu/~spiders/ Education University of Maryland, College Park Entomology Ph.D. 1995 University of Maryland, College Park Entomology M.S. 1992 Universitat de Barcelona (Spain) Biology/Zoology B.S. 1985 Appointments 1996-present Ruth Weintraub Assistant Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, George Washington University 1997-present Research Associate, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University 1996-present Research Associate, Department of Systematic Biology, Smithsonian Institution 1992-1995 Gahan Fellow, Department of Entomology, University of Maryland 1990-1995 Curatorial Fellow, Department of Entomology, Smithsonian Institution 1988-1990 Teaching Assistant, Department of Entomology, University of Maryland Publications (most closely related) Hormiga, G. 2000. Higher level phylogenetics of erigonine spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae,

Erigoninae). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 609: 1-160. Griswold, C., J. Coddington, G. Hormiga, and N. Scharff. 1998. Phylogeny of the orb web

building spiders (Araneomorphae, Orbiculariae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 123:1-99.

Hormiga, G., W.G. Eberhard, and J.A. Coddington. 1995. Web construction behavior in Australian Phonognatha and the phylogeny of nephiline and tetragnathid spiders (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). Australian Journal of Zoology, 43:313-364.

Hormiga, G. 1994. Cladistics and the comparative morphology of linyphiid spiders and their relatives (Araneae, Araneoidea, Linyphiidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 111:1-71.

Hormiga, G. 1994. A revision and cladistic analysis of the spider family Pimoidae (Araneae: Araneoidea). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 549:1-105.

Publications (other) Hormiga, G., M.A. Arnedo, and R. Gillespie. Submitted. Speciation on a conveyor belt:

sequential colonization of the Hawaiian Islands by Orsonwelles spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae). Systematic Biology. 51 mss. pages, 8 figures. Accepted pending minor revision.

Hormiga, G. In press. Orsonwelles, a new genus of giant linyphiid spiders from Hawaii

(Araneae, Linyphiidae). Invertebrate Systematics. 88 mss. pages, 59 plates. Hormiga, G., N. Scharff, and J. Coddington. 2000. The Phylogenetic Basis of Sexual Size

Dimorphism in Orb-Weaving Spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae). Systematic Biology 49(3):435-462.

Hormiga, G. 1998. The Spider Genus Napometa (Araneae, Araneoidea, Linyphiidae). Journal of Arachnology, 26:125-132.

Coddington, J.A., G. Hormiga, and N. Scharff. 1997. Giant Female or Dwarf Male Spiders? Nature, 385:687-688.

Synergistic Activities Associate Editor, Cladistics (2000-present). Editorial Board of Systematic Biology (1996-1998) and Revista Ibérica de Aracnología (2000-present). Development and teaching of three graduate courses in systematics (at GWU). Training of graduate students in systematic and monographic research. Developed and taught a course on Spider Biology and Classification for the Para-taxonomist training program at the Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (INBio), Costa Rica (1995). Management and training of SEM facility at the Department of Biological Sciences, GWU (joint with P. Herendeen). Field work (1987-present) in Australia, Brazil, Cameroon, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Europe, Guyana, Hawaii, North America, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, and British West Indies. Collaborators M. Allard (Geo. Washington Univ., Wash. D.C.); M.A. Arnedo (Universitat de Barcelona); J. Clark (Geo. Washington Univ., Wash. D.C.); J.A. Coddington (NMNH, Smithsonian Institution); B.D. Farrell (Harvard University), R. Gillespie (Univ. Calif., Berkeley); G. Giribet (Harvard University); C.E. Griswold (California Academy of Sciences); P. Herendeen (Geo. Washington Univ., Wash. D.C.); D. Lipscomb (Geo. Washington Univ., Wash. D.C.); L. Prendini (AMNH, New York); N. Scharff (Zoological Museum, Univ. of Copenhagen); P. Sierwald (Field Museum, Chicago); W. Wheeler (AMNH, New York). Graduate Advisors J.A. Coddington and C. Mitter (Smithsonian Institution and Univ. of Maryland, respectively; MS and Ph.D. advisors) Advisees Current primary advisor at GWU for: Jeremy Miller (Ph.D.), Ingi Agnarsson (Ph.D.), Matjaz

Kuntner (Ph.D.), Fernando Alvarez Padilla (Ph.D.), Lara Lopardo (Ph.D.). Total graduate students advised (past and present): 15; Undergraduate: 3.

Biographical Sketch Lorenzo Prendini

Professional Preparation. B.Sc. University of the Witwatersrand 1994 B.Sc.Hons University of Cape Town 1995 Ph.D. University of Cape Town 2001 Appointments 2002 - present Assistant Curator (Arachnids and Myriapods), Division of Invertebrate Zoology,

American Museum of Natural History Five Relevant Publications Prendini, L. 2000. Phylogeny and classification of the superfamily Scorpionoidea Latreille 1802

(Chelicerata, Scorpiones): An exemplar approach. Cladistics 16(1): 1–78. Prendini, L. 2000. A new species of Parabuthus Pocock (Scorpiones, Buthidae), and new records of

Parabuthus capensis (Ehrenberg), from Namibia and South Africa. Cimbebasia 16: 201–214. Prendini, L. 2000. Chelicerata (Scorpiones). In: Kirk-Spriggs, A.H. and Marais, E. (Eds.) Dâures –

Biodiversity of the Brandberg Massif, Namibia. Cimbebasia Memoir 9: 109–120. Prendini, L. 2001. Phylogeny of Parabuthus (Scorpiones, Buthidae). Zoologica Scripta 30(1): 13–35. Prendini, L. 2001. Two new species of Hadogenes (Scorpiones, Ischnuridae) from South Africa, with a

redescription of Hadogenes bicolor and a discussion on the phylogenetic position of Hadogenes. Journal of Arachnology 29(2): 146–172.

Other Significant Publications Prendini, L. 2001. Species or supraspecific taxa as terminals in cladistic analysis? Groundplans versus

exemplars revisited. Systematic Biology 50(2): 290–300. Prendini, L., Hanner, R. and DeSalle, R. 2002. Obtaining, storing and archiving specimens and tissue

samples for molecular study. pp. 176–242 In: DeSalle, R., Giribet, G. and Wheeler, W.C. (Eds.) Methods and Tools in Biosciences and Medicine: Techniques in Molecular Evolution and Systematics, Birkhauser.

Collaborators H. Peter Linder, Department of Botany, University of Cape Town, South Africa Tim M. Crowe, Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, University of Cape Town, South Africa Ward C. Wheeler, Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York Gerbus J. Müller, Department of Pharmacology, Unisversity of Stellenbosch, South Africa Jurg J. van der Walt, Department of Physiology, Potchefstroom University, South Africa Jan Tytgat, Department of Physiology, Katolieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Rob DeSalle, Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York Rob Hanner, Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, New York Peter Weygoldt, Institut für Biologie I (Zoologie), University of Freiburg, Germany Graduate and Postdoctoral Advisors Tim M. Crowe, Percy FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology, University of Cape Town, South Africa H. Peter Linder, Department of Botany, University of Cape Town, South Africa

PETRA SIERWALD PROFESSIONAL PREPARATION University of Hamburg; Germany, Zoology, PhD (Dr. rer. nat.), 1985. University of Hamburg; Germany, Biology, Geography, Biology-Education MSc (Staatsexamen), 1982. APPOINTMENTS January 2000 – present: Assistant Curator, The Field Museum September 1999 – present: Adjunct Professor, University of Illinois at Chicago. 1991 – present: Lecturer (part-time), Biological Sciences, Collegiate Division, University of Chicago. September 1994 – 1999: Adjunct Curator, Field Museum (part time). 1996 – 1999: Zoology Point person and Exhibit Content Specialist, Underground Exhibit, Field Museum 1990 – 1996: Research Associate, The Field Museum, Chicago 1986 – present: Research Associate, Smithsonian Institution, Washington 1988 – 1990: Research Associate, Delaware Museum, Wilmington, Delaware. 1986 – 1988: German Science Foundation funded Postdoctoral Fellow, Smithsonian Institution. 1985 – 1986: Postdoctoral Fellow, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC. PUBLICATIONS 21 Publications: 19 research articles, 1 book review, 2 popular articles. 1 on-line publication FIVE PUBLICATIONS RELEVANT TO THE PROPOSAL Sierwald, P. 1997. Phylogenetic analysis of pisaurine nursery web spiders, with revisions of

Tetragonophthalma and Perenethis) (Araneae: Lycosoidea: Pisauridae). Journal of Arachnology, 25: 361-40, 101 figs.

Sierwald, P. 1993. Revision of the spider genus Paradossenus, with notes on the family Trechaleidae and the subfamily Rhoicininae (Araneae: Lycosoidea). Review Arachnologique, 10(3): 53-74.

Sierwald, P. 1990. Morphology and homologous features in the male palpal organs in spiders, with special reference to Pisauridae (Arachnida: Araneae). Nemouria, 35; 1-70, 51 figs.

Sierwald, P. 1989. Morphology and ontogeny of female copulatory organs in American Pisauridae, with special reference to homologous features. Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 462: 1-24, 62 figs.

Sierwald, P. 1988. with J.A. Coddington. Functional aspects of the male palpal organ in Dolomedes tenebrosus, with notes on the mating behavior (Araneae, Pisauridae). Journal of Arachnology, 16: 262 - 265, 2 figs.

Sierwald, P. 1987. Revision der Gattung Thalassius (Arachnida: Araneae: Pisauridae). Verhandlungen des naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins zu Hamburg, (NF) 29: 51 - 142, 148 figs.

FIVE OTHER SIGNIFICANT PUBLICATIONS Sierwald P., W.A. Shear, R.M. Shelley & J.E. Bond. In Press. Millipede phylogeny revisited in the

light of the enigmatic order Siphoniulida. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research.

Bond, J.E. & P. Sierwald. In Press. Cryptic speciation in the Anadenobolus excisus millipede species complex on the island of Jamaica. Evolution (June issue).

Sierwald, P. & S. I. Golovatch. 2001. Revue of the genus Poratia (Diplopoda, Polydesmida, Pyrgodesmidae). Arthropoda Selecta, Volume 9(3): 181-192.

Shelley, Rowland, P. Sierwald & S. Golovatch. 2000. Nomenclator generum et familiarum Diplopodorum II. A list of the Genus and Family-group names in the Class Diplopoda from 1958 through 1999. Pensoft Publisher, Bulgaria.

1

Sierwald, P. 1987. Revision der Gattung Thalassius (Arachnida: Araneae: Pisauridae). Verhandlungen des naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins zu Hamburg, (NF) 29: 51 - 142, 148 figs.

SYNERGISTIC ACTIVITIES

Editorial Service: 1995 – 2001: Associate and Managing Editor, Journal of Arachnology published by the American Arachnological Society; responsible for scientific review process for all manuscripts and acceptance decisions, in collaboration with three subject editors. Editorial Board: 2001: Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research (formerly Zeitschrift für zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung); 2001: Journal of Arachnology, 2001-2002: Guest Editor for the Southeastern Naturalist.

Exhibits and Education: Underground Exhibit, Field Museum; development of travelling “Spiders!” exhibit.Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC. Education: Formal Teaching: courses taught at University of Hamburg (Invertebrate Zoology laboratory courses), University of Chicago (Evolution; Diversity and Evolution of Arthropods, with P. Goldstein, Field Museum) and others.

Informal Education: Biodiversity Explorers, summer internship program for gifted high school students. Systematics Study Group of Field Museum's Interns. Development of curricular material for grade school students (Field Museum, Delaware Museum)

Collection/Curation: Development of sorting program from Insect Collection bulk sample collection, with interns and volunteers.Computerization of the Field Museum millipede collection in a lot-based database, separation of type specimens (see publication of type catalogue). Development of separate Illinois spider reference collection, for ongoing Illinois-based survey and inventory studies and training purposes.Field work with extensive specimen acquisition in Southern Africa, Panama, Belize and the U.S. Studies at arachnid and myriapod collections at many major European and American natural history museums.

Congresses and Conferences: Chairperson and organizer of the International Congress of Arachnology 1998 Attendance and presentation of papers at national and international meetings (American Arachnological Society: International Congress of Systematic and Evolutionary Biology ; Phylogenetic Symposium (Germany); African Arachnid Symposium; Willi-Hennig Meetings; Evolution Meeting (1999). International Congress for Myriapodology. Invited Seminars: University of Chicago, Smithsonian Institution, University of Delaware, University of Illinois at Chicago, Loyola University, DePaul University, Lake Forest College, Field Museum. RECENT COLLABORATORS Dr. William A. Shear, Hampden-Sydney College; Dr. Rowland M. Shelley, North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences; Dr. Richard Hoffman, Virginia Natural History Museum; Dr. Sergei Golovatch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow; Dr. Robert Mesibov (Tasmania, collaborative millipede studies planed); Dr. Michael Draney, University of Wisconsin, Green Bay. GRADUATE ADVISOR Prof. Dr. O. Kraus, Zoologisches Institut und Museum, Hamburg Germany. Postdotoral advisor: Dr. J. Coddington, Smithsonian Institution THESIS ADVISOR TO THE FOLLOWING GRADUATE STUDENTS (Total 1) Julian Bueno Villegas (PH.D) POSTGRADUATE – SCHOLAR SPONSOR (Total 1) Dr. Jason Bond, East Carolina University

2

Miquel Àngel Arnedo-Lombarte - Biographical Sketch Personal data Date of birth: 19th April 1969 Nationality: Spanish Current Address: The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Rd., South Kensington, London

SW7 5BD, UK. New Address from November 1st, 2002 on: Dept. Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona,

Av. Diagonal 645, E-08028 Barcelona, Spain Personal address: 281B, Sandycombe Rd., Surrey, TW9 3LU, UK. Daytime telephone: (until 11/1/02) 44 (0)20 7942 5048/ (from 11/1/02) 34 93 402 1446 Evening telephone: (until 11/1/02) 44 (0)20 8948 1558/ (from 11/1/02) 34 93 245 9757 Fax: (until 11/1/02) 44 (0)20 7942 5229/ (from 11/1/02) 34 93 403 57 40 E-mail: [email protected] Professional Preparation Undergraduate: Universitat de Barcelona (Spain). Degree in Biology (Zoology). June 1992. Graduate: Dept. Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona (Spain). PhD. Degree in Biology (cum

laude, with honors). May 1998. Postdoctoral positions: The Natural History Museum, London, UK. Spider systematics and

biology. UC-Berkeley, Division of Insect Biology, ESPM. Spider systematics and biology. University of Hawaii, Center for Conservation Research & Training. Spider systematics and biology.

Appointments 2002-2007 (and beyond). ‘Ramón y Cajal’ Tenure-track researcher, Dept. Biologia Animal,

Universitat de Barcelona, Spain. January 2002-present. The Natural History Musuem, London, UK. European Union funded ‘Marie

Curie’ postdoctoral fellow with Dr. A. Vogler. September 1999-November 2001. UC-Berkeley, Division of Insect Biology, ESPM. Spanish

Ministry of Education funded postdoctoral fellow with Dr. R. G. Gillespie. June 1998-Setember 1999. University of Hawaii, Center for Conservation Research & Training.

NSF funded postdoctoral fellow with Drs. R. G. Gillespie and J. A. Coddington. 1993-1997. Departament de Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona. Teaching Assistant. Five Relevant Publications Hormiga, G., Arnedo, M.A., & Gillespie, R.. (in press). Speciation on a Conveyor Belt:

Sequential Colonization of the Hawaiian Islands by Orsonwelles spiders (Araneae, Linyphiidae). Systematic Biology.

Arnedo, M.A., Oromí, P. & Ribera, C. 2001. Radiation of the spider genus Dysdera (Araneae, Dysderidae) in the Canary Islands: Cladistic assessment based on multiple data sets. Cladistics 17: 313-353.

Arnedo, M.A., Oromí, P. & Ribera, C. 2000. Systematics of the genus Dysdera (Araneae, Dysderidae) in the Eastern Canaries. Journal of Arachnology 28: 261-292.

1

Arnedo, M.A. 1999. Cladismo: La reconstrucción filogenética basada en parsimonia [Cladism: the phylogenetic reconstruction based on parsimony]. In Evolución y Filogenia de Arthropoda, Volumen Monográfico nº 26 del Boletín de la SEA.

Bagunyà, J., Carranza, S., Pala, M., Ribera, C., Giribet, G., Arnedo, M. A., Ribas, M. & Riutort, M. 1999. From morphology and karyology to molecules. New methods for taxonomical identification of asexual populations of freshwater planarians. A tribute to Professor Mario Benazzi. Italian Journal of Zoology 66: 207-214.

Five Other Significant Publications Taiti, S. Arnedo, M.A., Lew, S.E. & Rodericj, G.K. (in press). Evolution of terrestriality in the

genus Ligia (Crustacea, Oniscidea) from the Hawaiian Islands. Crustaceana. Arnedo, M.A. & Ribera, C. 1999. Radiation of the genus Dysdera (Araneae, Dysderidae) in the

Canary Islands: The island of Tenerife. Journal of Arachnology 27: 604-662. Pujade, J., Ros, P. & Arnedo, M. A.. 1998. Phylogenetic position of Neuroterus anthracinus

(Curtis, 1838) comb. nov. (Hymenoptera, Cynipidae). Butlletí de la ICHN 66: 111-112. Arnedo, M.A. & Ribera, C.. 1997. Radiation of the genus Dysdera (Arachnida, Araneae,

Haplogynae) in the Canary Islands: The island of Gran Canaria. Zoologica Scripta 26(3): 205-243.

Arnedo, M.A., Oromí, P. & Ribera, C. 1996. Radiation of the genus Dysdera (Arachnida, Araneae, Haplogynae) in the Canary Islands: The Western Islands. Zoologica Scripta 25(3): 241-274.

Collaborators & Other Affiliations Collaborators: Jaume Baguñá. Dept. Genética., Universitat de Barcelona, Spain. Jonathan Coddington. Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History,

Department of Entomology, Washington, D.C, USA. Rosemary Gillespie. Division of Insect Biology, ESPM, University of California-Berkeley,

USA. Gustavo Hormiga. Department of Biological Sciences, George Washington University,

Washington, D.C, USA. Pedro Oromí. Dept. Biologia Animal, Universidad de La Laguna, Spain. Juli Pujade. Dept. Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain. Carles Ribera. Dept. Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain. George Roderick. Division of Insect Biology, ESPM, University of California-Berkeley, USA. Stefano Taiti. Centro di Studio per la Faunistica ed Ecologia Tropicali del C.N.R., Firenze,

Italy. Alfried Vogler. The Natural History Museum, London, UK. Graduate advisor: Carles Ribera. Dept. Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain. Postdoctoral sponsor: Rosemary Gillespie. Division of Insect Biology, ESPM, University of California-Berkeley, USA.

2

1

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH:

JASON E. BOND

A. Professional Preparation

Western Carolina University, B.S., 1993Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Zoology, M.S., 1995Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Evolutionary Genetics andSystematics, Ph.D., 1999

The Field Museum of Natural History Postdoctoral Research Associate, October 1999-December 2001

B. Appointments

Assistant Professor (January 2002 – present)East Carolina University, Department of Biology, Greenville, NC 27858

Instructor, Evolutionary Biology (January 1999 – June 1999)Department of Biology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg,VA 24061

C. Five Publications Related to Proposed Project

Bond JE & FA Coyle. 1995. Observations on the natural history of an Ummidia trap-door spider from Costa Rica (Araneae, Ctenizidae). Journal of Arachnology, 24: 157-164.

Bond JE & BD Opell. 1997. Systematics of the spider genera Mallos and Mexitlia(Araneae, Dictynidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 119: 389-445.

Bond JE & BD Opell. 1998. Testing adaptive radiation and key innovation hypotheses inspiders. Evolution 52: 407-418.

Bond, J.E., M. C. Hedin, M. G. Ramirez, and B. D. Opell. 2001. Deep Moleculardivergence in the absence of morphological and ecological change in the Californiancoastal dune endemic trapdoor spider Aptostichus simus. Molecular Ecology, 10: 899-910.

Bond JE & BD Opell. Phylogeny and taxonomy of the genera of North AmericanEuctenizinae trapdoor spiders and their relatives (Araneae: Mygalomorphae:Cyrtaucheniidae). in revision, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society.

2

Other Publications

Bond JE & BD Opell. 1997. The functional significance of a medially divided cribellain the spider genus Mallos (Araneae, Dictynidae). Bulletin of the British ArachnologicalSociety 10: 239-241.

Opell BD & JE Bond 2000. Capture thread extensibility of orb-weaving spiders: Testingpunctuated and associative explanations of character evolution. Biological Journal of theLinnean Society 70: 107-120.

Opell, BD & JE Bond. 2001. Changes in the Mechanical Properties of Capture Threadsand the Evolution of Modern Orb-weaving Spiders. Evolutionary Ecology Research, 3:567-581.

Smith, SD & Bond, JE. in press. The secondary structure of the spider mitochondriallarge subunit rRNA gene (16S) and its implications for phylogenetic reconstruction.Journal of Arachnology.

Bond JE & P. Sierwald. in press. Cryptic speciation in the Anadenobolus excisusmillipede species complex on the island of Jamaica. 48 manuscript pages. Evolution.

D. Synergistic Activities

Ad hoc reviewer for: NSF Systematics panel, Journal of Arachnology, Journal of NaturalHistory, The Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, The Biological Journal of theLinnean Society, and the journal Evolution. Editorial board member: Arthropoda Selecta

Current undergraduate and graduate research directed: Ms. Bonnie Forbes(undergraduate ECU), Mr. Julian Bueno (Ph.D. student, University of Mexico, Xalapa),Ms. Debbie Whittle (M.S. student, University of the West Indies, Mona).

Field work: Extensive field work throughout the southwestern US (1993-present), NewZealand (1995), Southeastern US (1995-present), Guatemala and Mexico (June 2000),Jamaica (February and October 2000), South Africa (March 2001).

E. Collaborators & Other Affiliations

(i)Collaborators: Dr. Marshal Hedin, San Diego State UniversityDr. William Shear, Hampden Sydney CollegeDr. Martin Ramirez, Loyola Marymount UniversityMr. Paul Marek, California Academy of Sciences

(ii)Graduate and Post Doctoral Advisors:M.S. & Ph.D., Dr. Brent D. Opell, VA TechPostdoc., Dr. Petra Sierwald, The Field Museum of NaturalHistory

Biographical Sketch

PABLO A. GOLOBOFF Instituto Superior de Entomología, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales,

Miguel Lillo 205, 4000 S.M. Tucumán, Argentina Education Universidad de Buenos Aires, Licenciado en Ciencias Biológicas, 1989 Cornell University, Entomology, Ph.D., 1994 Appointments Investigador Independiente, Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas

(Argentina), 1994 to date Publications (most closely related) Goloboff, P. 2002. Optimization of polytomies: state set and parallel operations. Molecular

Phylogenetics and Evolution 22:269-275. Goloboff, P., and J. S. Farris. 2001. Methods for quick consensus estimation. Cladistics

17:S26-S34. Goloboff, P. 1999. Analyzing large data sets in reasonable times: solutions for composite

optima. Cladistics 15: 415-428. Goloboff, P. 1996. Methods for faster parsimony analysis. Cladistics 12: 199-220. Goloboff, P. 1993. A reanalysis of mygalomorph spider families. Amer. Mus. Novitates 3056:

1-32. Publications (other) Goloboff, P. and D. Pol. In press. Semi-Strict Supertrees. Cladistics. Goloboff, P. 1998. Tree searches under Sankoff parsimony. Cladistics 14: 229-237. Goloboff, P. 1997. Self-weighted optimization: character state reconstructions and tree searches

under implied transformation costs. Cladistics 13: 225-245. Goloboff, P. 1995. A revision of the South American spiders of the family Nemesiidae

(Araneae, Mygalomorphae). Part I: Species from Peru, Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 224: 1-189.

Goloboff, P. 1993. Estimating character weights during tree search. Cladistics 9: 83-91. Synergistic activitities Development of several programs for phylogenetic analysis. Most widely used programs are NONA and Pee-Wee (Goloboff, 1993) (available from ftp://ftp.aki.ku.dk/ZMUC/golo), with 300-400 users in the systematic community. A beta version of a newer program, T.N.T (written in collaboration with James S. Farris and Kevin C. Nixon), is available at www.cladistics.com. T.N.T., now under active development, is the fastest available program for parsimony analysis. Collaborators Miquel Arnedo (NHM, London) James M. Carpenter (American Museum of Natural History, New York) Jonathan A. Coddington (National Museum of Natural History, Washington) James S. Farris (Molekylarsystematiska laboratoriet, Naturhistoriska riksmuseet, Stockholm)

1

Gustavo Hormiga (George Washington Univ., Washington) Kevin C. Nixon (Bailey Hortorium, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY) Norman I. Platnick (American Museum of Natural History, New York) Lorenzo Prendini (Univ. of Cape Town, South Africa) Petra Sierwald (Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago) Ward Wheeler (American Museum of Natural History, New York) Graduate Advisors James K. Liebherr (Cornell University, Ithaca, NY) Advisees Jonathan Liria, Miembro Comision Doctorado (Universidad Central de Venezuela - current). José A. Corronca, Miembro Comisión Doctorado (Universidad de Tucumán (thesis defended

1995). Marcela Peralta, Miembro Comisión Tesis Doctoral (Universidad Nacional de Tucumán

(current). Sara Bertelli, Co-Director Beca Iniciación (CONICET, 1996-1997), and Co-director Tesis de

Doctorado (Universidad Nacional de Tucumán (current). Adriana E. Chalup, Director Beca (Consejo de Investigaciones de la Universidad Nacional de

Tucumán, 1998-2000), and Director Tesis (Universidad Nacional de Tucumán (thesis defended 2001).

Camilo I. Mattoni, Miembro Comisión Doctorado (Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (current). José A. Ochoa Camera, Miembro Comisión Doctorado (Universidad Nacional de Cordoba

(current).

2

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Charles E. Griswold Professional Preparation: University of California, Berkeley Conservation of Natural Res. B.Sc. 1972 University of California, Berkeley Entomology M.Sc. 1977 University of California, Berkeley Entomology Ph.D. 1983 American Museum of Natural History Entomology Postdoc. 1987-1988 Smithsonian Institution Entomology Postdoc. 1988-1991 Appointments: California Academy of Sciences (CAS), Curator (1999-present) California Academy of Sciences (CAS), Associate Curator (1994-1999) California Academy of Sciences (CAS), Assistant Curator (1992-1994) Smithsonian Institution, Research Entomologist (1991-1992) Smithsonian Institution, Post Doctoral Fellow in Entomology (1988-1991) American Museum of Natural History, Post Doctoral Fellow in Entomology (1987-1988) Natal Museum, Chief Professional Officer of Arachnology Department (1983-1986) San Francisco State Univ. (SFSU), Dept. of Biology, Research Professor (1998-present) Five Publications Most Closely Related to Proposed Project: Griswold, C. E. 2001. A monograph of the living world genera and Afrotropical species of cyatholipid

spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae, Cyatholipidae). Memoirs of the California Academy of Sciences, Number 26: 1-251.

Griswold, C. E. 1993. Investigations into the phylogeny of the Lycosoid spiders and their kin (Arachnida, Araneae, Lycosoidea). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 539: 1-39.

Griswold, C. E., J. Coddington, G. Hormiga, & N. Scharff. 1998. Phylogeny of the orb-web building spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae: Deinopoidea, Araneoidea). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 122: 1-99.

Griswold, C. E., J. Coddington, N. Platnick, & R. Forster. 1999. Towards a phylogeny of entelegyne spiders (Araneae, Opisthothele, Araneomorphae). Journal of Arachnology, 27: 53-63.

Griswold, C., & J. Ledford. 2001. A monograph of the migid trap-door spiders of Madagascar, with a phylogeny of world genera (Araneae, Mygalomorphae, Migidae). Occasional Papers of the California Academy of Sciences. Number 151: 1-120.

Five Other Publications (of 55): Griswold, C. E. 2000. Afromontane spider families in Madagascar (Araneae, Araneomorphae:

Cyatholipidae, Phyxelididae, Zorocratidae). pp. 345--354 In: W. R. Lorenço & S. M. Goodman (Eds.). Diversity and Endemism in Madagascar. Mémoires de la Société de Biogéographie, Paris.

Griswold, C. E. 1991. Cladistic Biogeography of Afromontane Spiders. Australian Systematic Botany, 4(1): 73-89.

Griswold, C. E. 1990. A revision and phylogenetic analysis of the spider subfamily Phyxelidinae (Araneae, Amaurobiidae). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 196: 1-206.

Griswold, C. E. 1987. The African members of the trap-door spider family Migidae (Araneae: Mygalomorphae), I: The genus Moggridgea O. P. Cambridge, 1875. Annals of the Natal Museum, 28: 1-118.

Griswold, C., & X.P. Wang. 2001. Character Data to accompany "Towards a phylogeny of entelegyne spiders (Araneae, Entelegynae)" by Griswold, C., J. Coddington, N. Platnick, and R. Forster. 1999. J. Arachnol. 27: 53--63." http://www.calacademy.org/research/entomology/griswold/n/.htm

1

Synergistic Activities: 1. Member of the design team for “Doing Science: Madagascar” a low-cost, high-tech, interactive kiosk

at CAS that presents many levels of content regarding the aim and process of science, need for conservation, and appreciation of nature and culture.

2. “The California Academy of Sciences Summer Systematics Institute as an REU Site” NSF BIR-9531307 (and renewals). Advisor for undergraduate summer interns, 1996, 1997, 1999, and lecturer (1996-1999).

3. Vice President, International Society of Arachnology (formerly Centre International de Documentation Arachnologique) 1993-present.

4. I designed and gave lectures on spider classification and biogeography to students, staff, and park rangers at Parc National Ranomafana (1998) and presented general lectures to the public in Yaoundé, Cameroon (1992).

5. I provided field experience and scientific development for African scientists and students: Dr. C. Wanzie, United Republic of Cameroon, 1992; Mr. Rijarivony Andriamasamanana (1993), and Ms. Marie Jeanne Raherilalao and Mr. Samuelson Randrianarisoa (1998), Ms. Daniella Andriamalala (2000), Madagascar; Mr. Samuel Fue, Tanzania (1995).

Graduate and Postdoctoral Advisors: Jonathan Coddington, Smithsonian Institution; Norman Platnick, American Museum of Natural History;

Evert I. Schlinger, Santa Ynez, California.

Collaborators/Co-authors (last four years): Bruce Bartholomew (California Academy of Sciences [CAS]); Jonathan Coddington (Smithsonian Institution); Rollin E. Coville (Richmond, California); Robert C. Drewes (CAS); Carl J. Ferraris Jr. (CAS); Brian Fisher (CAS); Peter W. Fritsch (CAS); Gustavo Hormiga (George Washington University); Michael Irwin (University of Illinois, Urbana); Tomio Iwamoto (CAS); David H. Kavanaugh (CAS); Joel Ledford (University of California, Davis); Chun-Lin Long (Kunming Institute of Botany); Norman D. Penny (CAS); Norman Platnick (American Museum of Natural History), Nikolaj Scharff (University of Copenhagen); Evert I. Schlinger (Santa Ynez, California); Diana Silva Dávila (CAS), Darrell Ubick (CAS), Xinping Wang (Illinois Natural History Survey), Chang-Min Yin (Hunan Normal University [HNU]), Heng-Mei Yan (HNU), and Xiang Xu (HNU). Thesis Advisor and Postgraduate Scholar Sponsor: Peter Croeser, University of Natal, M.Sc., 1996; Leon Lotz, University of the Orange Free State, M.Sc., 1996; Joel Ledford, San Francisco State University, M.Sc., 2001. Dr. Diana Silva Dávila, Post Doctoral Fellow, 2001 to present.

2

1

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH:

MARSHAL CLINTON HEDIN

A. Professional Preparation

Humboldt State University, Zoology, B.A., 1987Texas A&M University, Genetics, M.S., 1989Washington University, Evolutionary and Population Biology, Ph.D., 1995University of Arizona, Phylogenetic Biology, Postdoctoral Research, 1995-1999

B. Appointments

Assistant Professor (1999 – present), Department of Biology, San Diego State University

C. Publications Related to Proposed Project

Hedin, M.C. 1997. Speciational history in a diverse clade of habitat-specialized spiders(Araneae: Nesticidae: Nesticus): Inferences from geographic-based sampling. Evolution51:1927-1943.

Hedin, M. C. and W. P. Maddison. 2001. Phylogenetic utility and evidence for multiplecopies of elongation factor-1a in the spider genus Habronattus (Araneae: Salticidae).Mol. Biol. Evol. 18 (8):1512-1521.

Hedin, M. C. 2001. Molecular insights into species phylogeny, biogeography, andmorphological stasis in the ancient spider genus Hypochilus (Araneae: Hypochilidae).Mol. Phylo. Evol. 18(2): 238-251.

Hedin, M. C., and W. P. Maddison. 2001. A combined molecular approach to phylogeny of thejumping spider subfamily Dendryphantinae (Araneae: Salticidae). Mol. Phylo. Evol. 18(3): 386-403.

Maddison, W.P. and M.C. Hedin. 2002. Phylogeny of Habronattus jumping spiders(Araneae: Salticidae), with consideration of genitalic and courtship evolution. SystematicEntomology, In Press.

Other Publications

Hedin, M.C. 1997. Molecular phylogenetics at the population / species interface in cavespiders of the southern Appalachians (Araneae: Nesticidae: Nesticus). Mol. Biol. Evol.14:309-324.

Hedin, M.C. and D. Wood. 2002. Genealogical exclusivity in geographically proximatepopulations of Hypochilus thorelli Marx (Araneae, Hypochilidae) on the CumberlandPlateau of North America. Molecular Ecology, In Press.

2

Bond, J.E., M. C. Hedin, M. G. Ramirez, and B. D. Opell. 2001. Deep moleculardivergence in the absence of morphological and ecological change in the Californiancoastal dune endemic trapdoor spider Aptostichus simus. Molecular Ecology: 10:899-910.

Hogan K.M., M.C. Hedin, H.S. Koh, S.K. Davis and I.F. Greenbaum. 1993. Systematic andtaxonomic implications of karyotypic, electrophoretic and mitochondrial DNA variation inPeromyscus from the Pacific Northwest. J. Mammalogy 74:819-831.

D. Synergistic Activities

Editorial Board - Systematic Biology, The Journal of Arachnology

Spring 2002 NSF Population Biology panelist

Coauthor, WWW (www.bio.sdsu.edu/pub/spiders/CaHabro.html) site devoted to theNatural History and Evolution of Californian Habronattus (Salticidae). Introducing thepublic and others to a component of the rich biodiversity of California.

Curator, SDSU Terrestrial Arthropods Collection. I am developing this neglectedcollection into a collections and identification center for terrestrial arthropods of thesouthern California region. This resource will be particularly useful to conservationbiologists interested in the many endemic, but poorly-known, arthropods of the region.

E. Collaborators & Other Affiliations

(i)Collaborators: Wayne Maddison, University of ArizonaJason Bond, East Carolina UniversityBob Dellinger, Great Smoky Mountains NPDave Clark, Alma College

(ii)G r ad u a t e an d P os t Do ct o r a l A d v i s or s : M . S . , Dr . I r a F. G r ee n b a u m P h . D . , Dr . Al a n R. T e m p l e t o nP o st d o c . , Dr . Way n e P . M a dd i s o n

( i i i ) T h es i s A dv i s o r & P o s t - G r a d ua t e Spo n s o r : M i ch a e l L o wd e r ( M . S . st u de n t ) S a r a h Cr ew s ( M . S . st u de n t ) K r i s t a P e as e ( M . S . st u de n t ) P i er r e P a qu i n ( p o st d o c )

Biographical Sketch Wayne Paul Maddison

Professional Preparation

University of Toronto Specialist in Zoology BSc 1980 Harvard University Biology PhD 1988 U. California Berkeley Evolutionary Biology Postdoc 1988-1990

Appointments

1995-present, Associate Professor, Dept. Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona

1990-1995, Assistant Professor, Dept. Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona

Five Most Relevant Publications

Maddison, W.P. and M.C. Hedin. In press. Phylogeny of Habronattus jumping spiders (Araneae: Salticidae), with consideration of genitalic and courtship evolution. Systematic Entomology.

Hedin, M.C. and W.P. Maddison. 2001. A combined molecular approach to phylogeny of the jumping spider subfamily Dendryphantinae (Araneae, Salticidae). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 18: 386-403.

Hedin, M. and W.P. Maddison. 2001. Phylogenetic utility and evidence for multiple copies of elongation factor – 1alpha in the spider genus Habronattus (Araneae: Salticidae). Mol. Biol. Evol. 18(8): 1512-1521

Maddison, W.P. 1996. Pelegrina and other jumping spiders formerly placed in the genus Metaphidippus (Araneae: Salticidae). Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology. l54(4): 215-368.

Maddison, W.P. and D.R. Maddison. 2001. Mesquite: A modular system for evolutionary analysis. version 0.98 beta. http://mesquiteproject.org

Other Significant Publications

Maddison, D.R. and W.P. Maddison. 2000. MacClade version 4: Analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland Massachusetts.

Maddison, W.P. 2000. Testing character correlation using pairwise comparisons on a phylogeny. Journal of Theoretical Biology. 202: 195-204.

Maddison, W.P. 1997. Gene trees in species trees. Systematic Biology 46:523-536. Maddison, W.P. 1990. A method for testing the correlated evolution of two binary

characters: are gains or losses concentrated on certain branches of a phylogenetic tree?. Evolution 44: 539-557.

Maddison, W.P., M.J. Donoghue and D.R. Maddison. 1984. Outgroup analysis and parsimony. Syst. Zool. 33: 83-103.

Synergistic Activities

MacClade (1986 through present)— a research tool for phylogenetic biology with strong emphasis in concept development and exploration via visualization, also used extensively in teaching phylogenetic principles from beginning biology through graduate courses. W. Maddison created it in 1986 and has worked with D. Maddison since 1987 on subsequent versions.

1

Mesquite — also a research tool with emphasis on exploration, has been designed to synthesize programming efforts of various workers; various tools (picture window, picture attachment to tree, hyperlinks, file switching) designed for use in presentations and teaching. W. Maddison began the project in 1997 and continues as co-designer and co-programmer.

Tree of Life Web Project (1994 - present) — a multipurpose database, pedagogical and outreach vehicle displaying diversity of organisms in a phylogenetic framework. W. Maddison participated in original design and implementation.

Salticidae (Jumping Spiders) section of Tree of Life (1995) — a presentation of jumping spider diversity with photographs of several hundred species, designed for researchers and students; its home page has received over 100,000 hits.

Collaborators & Other Affiliations

(i) Collaborators Avilés, Leticia University of Arizona Dyreson, Eric Green Mountain College Frumkin, Jeremy University of Arizona Garland, Theodore, Jr. University of California, Riverside Hedin, Marshal San Diego State University Huelsenbeck, John University of Rochester Knowles, Laura University of Arizona Lewis, Paul University of Connectictut Maddison, David University of Arizona McMahon, Michelle Washington State University Midford, Peter University of Arizona Peréz, Tila María Universidad Autonomia de Mexico Shulz, Katja University of Arizona Strimmer, Korbinian Oxford University Swofford, David Florida State University

(ii) Graduate and Postdoctoral Advisors

Levi, Herbert Harvard University Slatkin, Montgomery University of California, Berkeley

(iii) Thesis Advisor and Postgraduate-Scholar Sponsor

Binford, Greta University of Arizona Bodner, Gitanjali University of Arizona Burt, D. Brent Stephen F. Austin University Buschbeck, Elke Cornell University Dyreson, Eric Green Mountain College Hebets, Eileen University of Arizona Hedin, Marshal San Diego State University Kaplan, Matthew University of Arizona Masta, Susan San Francisco State University Michel, Ellinor University of Amsterdam Midford, Peter University of Arizona Knowles, Laura University of Arizona Total number of graduate students advised: 13; Postdocs: 3.

2

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Martín J. Ramírez Professional Preparation: Universidad de Buenos Aires Biological Sciences Lic. 1972 Universidad de Buenos Aires Biological Sciences Ph.D. 1999 American Mus. of Natural History Invertebrate Zoology Posdoc. 2000--present Appointments: Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Investigador

Asistente, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales (2001--present). American Museum of Natural History, Post Doctoral Fellow in Invertebrate Zoology

(2002--present). Universidad de Buenos Aires, Jefe de Trabajos Prácticos, full time, Department of

Biology (2000--present). Five Publications Most Closely Related to Proposed Project: Ramírez, M. J. 1995. A phylogenetic analysis of the subfamilies of Anyphaenidae

(Arachnida, Araneae). Entomologica scandinavica 26:361-384. Ramírez, M. J. 2000. Respiratory system morphology and the phylogeny of haplogyne

spiders (Araneae, Araneomorphae). Journal of Arachnology 28: 149-157. Ramírez, M. J. & C. J. Grismado. 1997. A review of the spider family Filistatidae in

Argentina (Arachnida, Araneae), with a cladistic reanalysis of filistatid genera. Entomologica scandinavica 28: 319-349.

Ramírez, M. J., L. Lopardo y A. Bonaldo. 2001. A revision of the Chilean spider genus Olbus, with notes on the relationships of the Corinnidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Insect Systematics and Evolution 31: 441-462.

Ramírez, M. J. 1999. New species and cladistic reanalysis of the spider genus Monapia (Araneae: Anyphaenidae, Amaurobioidinae). Journal of Arachnology 27: 415-431.

Five Other Publications (of 16): Platnick, N. I., C. J. Grismado & M. J. Ramírez. 1999. On the genera of the spider

subfamily Otiothopinae (Araneae, Palpimanidae). American Museum Novitates 3257: 1-25.

Ramírez, M. J. 1995. Revisión y filogenia del género Monapia (Araneae, Anyphaenidae), con notas sobre otras Amaurobioidinae. Boletín de la Sociedad de Biología de Concepción 66:79-110.

Ramírez, M. J., A. B. Bonaldo & A. D. Brescovit. 1997. Revisión del género Macerio y comentarios sobre la ubicación de Cheiracanthium, Tecution y Helebiona (Araneae, Miturgidae, Eutichurinae). Iheringia (Zool.) 82: 43-66.

Ramírez, M. J. 1997. Revisión y filogenia de los géneros Ferrieria y Acanthoceto (Araneae: Anyphaenidae, Amaurobioidinae). Iheringia (Zool.) 82: 173-203.

Ramírez, M. J. 1996. The genus Callevopsis Tullgren, 1902 (Araneae, Dictynoidea). Revista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales (NS) 144: 1-8.

1

Synergistic Activities:

1. Member of the organizing comitee fot the II Argentinian Meeting of Cladistics and Biogeography, Buenos Aires, March 1999

2. Convener in the symposium on Spider Phylogeny at the III Meeting of Arachnologists of Southern South America

3. I oriented the scientific development of the students Lara Lopardo (1997--2000), Luis Compagnucci (1997--1999), Cristian Grismado (1994--2000), and Violeta Medán (1999).

4. Systematic samplings of litter fauna with members of the Administración de Parques Nacionales, in Argentina, P. Nac. Iguazú.

5. Organization of the spider collection in the Museo Nacional de Historia Natural, Chile.

Graduate and Postdoctoral Advisors: Norman Platnick, American Museum of Natural History; María Elena Galiano, Museo

Argentino de Ciencias Naturales; Axel Bachmann, Universidad de Buenos Aires; Juan Carlos Giacchi, Universidad de Buenos Aires.

Collaborators/Co-authors (last four years): Norman Platnick (American Museum of Natural History); Pablo Goloboff, Claudia Szumik (Instituto Miguel Lillo); Alexandre Bonaldo (Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi); Antonio Brescovit (Instituto Butantan); Charles Griswold (California Academy of Sciences [CAS]); Jonathan Coddington (Smithsonian Institution); Diana Silva Dávila (CAS); Luis Pereira, Alda González (Museo de La Plata); Cristian Grismado, Lara Lopardo, Luis Compagnucci (Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales); Lone Aagesen (Instituto de Botánica Darwinion).

2

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Nikolaj Scharff Professional Preparation: University of Copenhagen Biology B.Sc. 1980 University of Copenhagen Entomology M.Sc. 1985 University of Copenhagen Entomology Ph.D. 1989 University of Copenhagen Entomology Postdoc. 1989-1992 University of Copenhagen Entomology Postdoc. 1992-1993 Smithsonian Institution Entomology Research Entomologist 1993-1994 Appointments: Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen (ZMUC), Associate Professor/Curator (1994-present). Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen (ZMUC), Chairman of Entomology (1999-2002). Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen (ZMUC), Deputy Director of ZMUC (1999-2002). Smithsonian Institution, Research Entomologist (1993-1998; moved to permanent position in Denmark

15 month into this appointment, in 1994). Smihsonian Institution, Research Associate, 1994-present. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen (ZMUC), Post Doctoral Fellow in Entomology, 1992-

1993. Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen (ZMUC), Post Doctoral Fellow in Entomology, 1989-

1992. Five Publications Most Closely Related to Proposed Project: Hormiga, G., N. Scharff., & J.A. Coddington, 2000. The Phylogenetic Basis of Sexual Size Dimorphism

in Orb-Weaving Spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae). Systematic Biology 49(3): 435-462. Griswold, C.E., Coddington, J.A., Hormiga, G., & N. Scharff. 1998. Phylogeny of the orb-web building

spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae: Deinopoidea, Araneoidea). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 123: 1-99.

Scharff, N. & J.A. Coddington, 1997. A phylogenetic analysis of the orb weaving spider family Araneidae (Arachnida, Araneae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. 120(4): 355-434.

Coddington, J.A., G. Hormiga, & N. Scharff. 1997. Giant females or dwarf male spiders? Nature 385(6618): 687

Nielsen, C., N. Scharff., & D. Eibye-Jacobsen, 1996. Cladistic Analyses of the Animal Kingdom. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 57: 385-410.

Five Other Publications: Sørensen, L., Coddington, J.A., & N. Scharff, 2002. Inventorying and Estimating Spider Diversity using

Semi-quantitative Sampling Methods in an Afrotropical Montane Forest. Environmental Entomology 31(2): 319-330.

Coddington, J.A. & N.Scharff, 1996. Problems with “soft” polytomies. Cladistics 12(2): 139-145. Coddington, J.A. & N.Scharff, 1994. Problems with Zero-Length Branches. Cladistics 10: 415-423. Scharff, N. 1993. The linyphiid spider fauna (Araneae, Linyphiidae) of mountain forests in the Eastern

Arc mountains. pp. 115-132, In: Lovett, J. & Wasser, S.K. (Eds.). Biogeography and ecology of the rain forests of Eastern Africa. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Scharff, N. 1990. Spiders of the family Linyphiidae from the Uzungwa mountains, Tanzania (Araneae). Entomologica Scandinavica Supplement 36: 1-95.

1

Synergistic Activities: 1. Associate Editor (Arachnology), Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2001-present. 2. Science expert on “Ask Science (Spoerg Naturvidenskaben)” (http://www.formidling.dk/sn/); on-line

service for the general Danish public (used widely by university and high-school students). The project is sponsored by the Danish Research Agency (http://www.forsk.dk/eng/index.htm).

3. Board member of NIK (http://www.nik.ku.dk/index-uk.html; ICT center of the Faculty of Science at the University of Copenhagen). The subject area of NIK is IT-didactics and -pedagogy, as well as studies of ICT in the modern society, including use and effect of ICT- and network technologies in scientific research and teaching. NIK is also a knowledge center and coordinator on ICT technology for the Faculty of Science at the University of Copenhagen. NIK performs research, provides courses for staff and students at the Faculty of Science, and executes development work within ICT-didactics and -technology. The center also carries out consultant services and routine ICT support functions.

4. Initiator and co-developer of the the ZMUC Entomology homepages (http://www.zmuc.dk/EntoWeb/index3.htm) including the on-line system for collection holdings.

5. Provided field experience and scientific development for African and European scientists and students: Dr. C. Wanzie, United Republic of Cameroon (1992); Mr. Rijarivony Andriamasamanana, Madagascar (1993); Mr. Samuel Fue, Tanzania (1995); Mrs. Johanna Heinonen, Finland (1997); Mr. Innocent Zilihona, Tanzania (1997); Dr. Bruno Nyundo, Tanzania (1997); Mr. Elia Mulungu, Tanzania (1997).

Graduate and Postdoctoral Advisors: Henrik Enghoff, Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen; Jonathan Coddington, Smithsonian Institution.

Collaborators/Co-authors (last five years): Jonathan Coddington (Smithsonian Institution); Gustavo Hormiga (George Washington University); Tamas Szuts (Natural History Museum, Budapest); Søren Toft (University of Aarhus); Peter Gajdos (Institute of Landscape Ecology, Bratislava ); Julianne Waldock (Western Australian Museum, Perth); Charles Griswold (California Academy of Sciences); Claus Nielsen (ZMUC); Danny Eibye-Jacobsen (ZMUC); Søren Langemark (ZMUC); Line L. Sørensen (ZMUC); Sidsel Larsen (ZMUC); Per de Place Bjørn (Global Biodiversity Information Facility, Copenhagen). Thesis Advisor and Postgraduate Scholar Sponsor: Per de Place Bjørn, M.Sc. 1996 & Ph.D. 2000 (University of Copenhagen); Line Louise Sørensen, Ph.D. 2001 (University of Copenhagen); Christian Rigelsen, M.Sc. 2002 (University of Copenhagen); Sidsel Larsen, M.Sc. to be finished in 2002 (University of Copenhagen); Furthermore co-advisor to Ph.D. student Pedro Cardoso (Faculdade de Ciencias de Lisboa) and advisor to Soeren Jensen (University of Copenhagen; 6th year graduate student) and Jesper Schmidt (University of Copenhagen; 6th year graduate student).

2

http://www.formidling.dk/sn/

http://www.forsk.dk/eng/index.htm

William A. Shear

Professional Preparation:

College of Wooster AB, 1963 University of New Mexico M.S., 1965 Harvard University Ph.D., 1971 Appointments:

Charles Patterson Distinguished Professor of Biology, Hampden-Sydney College, 1991-present

Adjunct Graduate Professor, University of North Carolina System (Western Carolina University), 1988-present

Adjunct Professor, Center for Evolution and the Palaeoenvironment, State University of New York, Binghamton, 1987-1993

Senior Scientific Associate, Virginia Museum of Natural History, 1996-present (lifetime appointment)

Research Associate, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, 1987-1990 Research Associate, American Museum of Natural History, 1973-present Publications related to proposed project:

1. Shear, W. A. 1991a. The early development of terrestrial ecosystems. Nature 351:283-289.

2. Selden, P. A., Shear, W. A., and P. M. Bonamo. 1991b. A spider and other

arachnids from the Devonian of Gilboa, New York, USA, with reinterpretations of other Devonian Araneae. Palaeontology 34: 241-281.

3. Shear, W. A. 1994. Palaeocharinids, the ancestors of spiders? A reply to Dunlop.

Newsl. Br. arachnol. Soc. 70:6-7 4. Shear, W. A. 2000. Gigantocharinus szatmaryi, a new trigonotarbid arachnid from

the Late Devonian of North America (Chelicerata, Arachnida, Trigonotarbida). J. Paleontol. 74:25-31.

5. Shear, W. A., and P. A. Selden. 2001. Rustling in the undergrowth: animals in early

terrestrial ecosystems. In Plants Invade the Land, ed. by P. G. Gensel and D. Edwards, pp. 29-51.

1

Other significant publications:

1. Shear, W. A. 1990a. Silurian/Devonian Terrestrial Arthropods. Pp. 197-213 in Arthropod Paleobiology. D. G. Mikulic, ed., Short Course Notes 3, Paleontol. Soc., Knoxville, TN.

2. Shear, W. A., and J. Kukalova-Peck. 1990. The ecology of Paleozoic terrestrial

arthropods: the fossil evidence. Canad. J. Zool. 68: 1807-1834. 3. Shear, W. A. 1992. End of the ‘Uniramia’ taxon. Nature 359:477-478. 4. Shear, W. A. 1994. Untangling the evolution of the web. Amer. Sci. 82:256-266 5. Popadic, A., Panganiban, G., Rusch, D., Shear W. A., and T. C. Kaufmann. 1998b.

Molecular evidence for the gnathobasic derivation of arthropod mandibles and for the appendicular origin of the labrum and other structures. Development, Genes and Evolution 208:142-152.

Collaborators:

P. Sierwald, Department of Entomology, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago IL R. Shelley, Department of Invertebrates, North Carolina Museum of Natural History,

Raliegh NC J. Bond, Department of Biological Sciences, East Carolina University, Greensboro NC P. Selden and V. MacEwan, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Manchester,

Manchester UK Graduate and Postdoctoral Advisors: Hoff, C.C. (deceased) formerly Department of Biology, University of New Mexico

(Graduate advisor) Levi, Herbert W., Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard

University, 26 Oxford Street (Graduate advisor)

2

SUMMARYPROPOSAL BUDGET

FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)

Date Checked Date Of Rate Sheet Initials - ORG

NSF FundedPerson-mos.

FOR NSF USE ONLYORGANIZATION PROPOSAL NO. DURATION (months)

Proposed Granted

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR / PROJECT DIRECTOR AWARD NO.

A. SENIOR PERSONNEL: PI/PD, Co-PI’s, Faculty and Other Senior Associates (List each separately with title, A.7. show number in brackets) CAL ACAD SUMR

$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. ( ) OTHERS (LIST INDIVIDUALLY ON BUDGET JUSTIFICATION PAGE)

7. ( ) TOTAL SENIOR PERSONNEL (1 - 6)

B. OTHER PERSONNEL (SHOW NUMBERS IN BRACKETS)

1. ( ) POST DOCTORAL ASSOCIATES

2. ( ) OTHER PROFESSIONALS (TECHNICIAN, PROGRAMMER, ETC.)

3. ( ) GRADUATE STUDENTS

4. ( ) UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

5. ( ) SECRETARIAL - CLERICAL (IF CHARGED DIRECTLY)

6. ( ) OTHER

TOTAL SALARIES AND WAGES (A + B)

C. FRINGE BENEFITS (IF CHARGED AS DIRECT COSTS)

TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS (A + B + C)

D. EQUIPMENT (LIST ITEM AND DOLLAR AMOUNT FOR EACH ITEM EXCEEDING $5,000.)

TOTAL EQUIPMENT

E. TRAVEL 1. DOMESTIC (INCL. CANADA, MEXICO AND U.S. POSSESSIONS)

2. FOREIGN

F. PARTICIPANT SUPPORT COSTS

1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER

TOTAL NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS ( ) TOTAL PARTICIPANT COSTS

G. OTHER DIRECT COSTS

1. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES

2. PUBLICATION COSTS/DOCUMENTATION/DISSEMINATION

3. CONSULTANT SERVICES

4. COMPUTER SERVICES

5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER

TOTAL OTHER DIRECT COSTS

H. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS (A THROUGH G)

I. INDIRECT COSTS (F&A)(SPECIFY RATE AND BASE)

TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS (F&A)

J. TOTAL DIRECT AND INDIRECT COSTS (H + I)

K. RESIDUAL FUNDS (IF FOR FURTHER SUPPORT OF CURRENT PROJECTS SEE GPG II.C.6.j.)

L. AMOUNT OF THIS REQUEST (J) OR (J MINUS K) $ $

M. COST SHARING PROPOSED LEVEL $ AGREED LEVEL IF DIFFERENT $

PI/PD NAME FOR NSF USE ONLYINDIRECT COST RATE VERIFICATION

ORG. REP. NAME*

*ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR REVISED BUDGET

1YEAR

1


Ward

Ward

Ward

C

C

C

Wheeler

Wheeler

Wheeler - Curator 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Jonathan A Coddington - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Gustavo Hormiga - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Lorenzo Prendini - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Petra Sierwald - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 12.00 0.00 0.00 34,0000 00 00 00 0

34,0008,500

42,500

9,500$Critical Point Drier15,903Microptics basic setup

240,000Microptics digital microscopy system (8)35,040Others (See Budget Comments Page...)

300,4436,000

10,000

19,8319,500

016,700

5 46,031

65,000000

104,09731,000

200,097 605,071

73,779Onsite MTDC (Rate: 59.7400, Base: 123500)

678,8500

678,8500

SUMMARY PROPOSAL BUDGET COMMENTS - Year 1

** D- EquipmentMicroscopes (Amount: $ 8500) Parallel Computer Cluster (Amount: $ 12500) PCR machines (Amount: $ 13500) Two Fiber Optic Illum (Amount: $ 540)


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


2YEAR

2


Ward

Ward

Ward

C

C

C

Wheeler

Wheeler


5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 12.00 0.00 0.00 35,3601 12.00 0.00 0.00 35,3600 00 00 00 0

70,72017,680

88,400

660$Image Server8,500Microscopes

13,500PCR machine

22,6608,500

12,000

28,99717,300

016,700

5 62,997

67,600000

181,23332,200

281,033 475,590


581,0310

581,0310


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


3YEAR

3


Ward

Ward

Ward

C

C

C

Wheeler

Wheeler


5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 12.00 0.00 0.00 36,7741 12.00 0.00 0.00 36,7740 00 00 00 0

73,54818,387

91,935

06,000

12,000

48,99712,500

016,700

5 78,197

70,304000

228,30333,448

332,055 520,187


627,8620

627,8620


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


4YEAR

4


Ward

Ward

Ward

C

C

C

Wheeler

Wheeler


5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 12.00 0.00 0.00 38,2451 12.00 0.00 0.00 38,2450 00 00 00 0

76,49019,123

95,613

50,000$Cluster Growth

50,0008,500

10,000

48,9979,500

016,700

5 75,197

73,116000

156,53934,746

264,401 503,711


615,5620

615,5620


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


5YEAR

5


Ward

Ward

Ward

C

C

C

Wheeler

Wheeler


5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 12.00 0.00 0.00 39,7751 12.00 0.00 0.00 39,7750 00 00 00 0

79,55019,888

99,438

50,000$Cluster Growth

50,0006,000

10,000

28,9979,500

016,650

5 55,147

76,041000

43,20736,096

155,344 375,929


490,3190

490,3190


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


Cumulative

C


Ward

Ward

Ward

C

C

C

Wheeler

Wheeler

Wheeler - Curator 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Jonathan A Coddington - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Gustavo Hormiga - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Lorenzo Prendini - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0Petra Sierwald - none 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

4 48.00 0.00 0.00 150,1545 60.00 0.00 0.00 184,1540 00 00 00 0

334,30883,578

417,886

423,103$

423,10335,00054,000

175,81958,300

083,450

25 317,569

352,061000

713,379167,490

1,232,930 2,480,488

513,136

2,993,6240

2,993,6240

American Museum of Natural History Budget Justification

Personnel. Four years of funding are requested for a postdoctoral fellow; although the budget is based on the American Museum's postdoctoral fellowship salary levels, this salary line, and its associated fringe benefits and indirect costs, will be moved to another institution if the collaborators jointly decide that the funded fellow would be better placed at another of the collaborating institutions. Five years of funding are requested for a full-time sequencing technician who will work at AMNH under the supervision of the PI. Equipment. The critical point drier, Microptics basic setup, and fiber optic illuminators are for the Ramirez lab in Argentina; the parallel computing cluster is for the Goloboff lab in Argentina; the image server is for the Griswold lab at the California Academy of Sciences. The full Microptics systems for morphological specimen imaging are for the AMNH, plus the Bond, Scharff, Shear, Maddison, Hormiga, Coddington, and Griswold labs; they will be purchased together, to achieve a quantity discount that will allow us to purchase the 8 systems for over $100,000 less than the competing systems from Syncroscopy. The PCR machines, microscopes, and cluster growth are needed to expand the AMNH molecular lab's facilities sufficiently to handle the project. Twenty cluster nodes are requested in year 4 and 20 in year 5 for a total cost of $100,000. The AMNH operates a 560-CPU (I Gig PIII) LINUX cluster for analysis of large phylogenetic data sets. This facility, although capable, will require augmentation to handle the burden of the data sets generated by this project. Similarly, two PCR machines are requested in years 1 and 2 to allow the amplification and sequencing of spider DNA. Travel. Domestic travel is requested under the AMNH budget for AMNH, Griswold, Maddison, and Shear's participations in the annual meetings of collaborators, and for visits by Shear to paleontological collections at Harvard's Museum of Comparative Zoology and Peabody Museum. Foreign travel requested includes AMNH and CAS foreign field work to secure specimens for sequencing. AMNH staff domestic (participants meeting)

$3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $15,000

AMNH foreign (field work) $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $50,000 Griswold domestic $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $5,000 Griswold foreign $2,000 $2,000 $4,000 Maddison, Shear Travel $2,000 $4,500 $2,000 $4,500 $2,000 $15,000 Total Travel $16,000 $20,500 $18,000 $18,500 $16,000 $89,000

Participant Support Costs. These include many of the training components of the project, plus travel by foreign collaborators to the US for annual meetings and collaborative research. The full breakdown is as follows: Summer Undergrad Intern (Griswold)

$9,166 $9,166 $9,166 $9,166 $36,664

Grad Student (Maddison) $20,000 $20,000 $40,000 Technician (Arnedo) $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $50,000 CDNA Library Costs (Arnedo)

$16,000 $16,000 $16,000 $16,000 $16,000 $80,000

Grad Student (Ramirez) $9,831 $9,831 $9,831 $9,831 $9,831 $49,155 Travel (Arnedo) $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $12,500 SEM Costs (Arnedo) $700 $700 $700 $700 $650 $3,450 Goloboff Travel $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $12,500 Ramirez Travel $3,000 $10,800 $6,000 $3,000 $3,000 $25,800 Scharff Travel $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500 $7,500 Total Participant Support $46,031 $62,997 $78,197 $75,197 $55,147 $317,569

Materials and Supplies. For the sequencing aspects of the project, approximately $65,000/year (with annual increments) is requested for supplies. The AMNH is the primary sequencing center for the project, with two ABI 3700 sequencers and a BIOMEK sequencing robot), and the funds requested will be used for DNA isolation, amplification, sequencing, primer synthesis, cloning procedures (where required), and other molecular aspects of the project. Other. Budgeted here are costs for one graduate student in the joint AMNH/City University of New York Ph.D. program; the likely initial candidate is Ms. Joyce Fassbender, who will be entering the program in Sept. 2002. Also included here is $1,000/year in SEM costs at the California Academy of Sciences. Indirect Costs. Indirect costs are calculated at the onsite rate of 59.74% of MTDC, excluding the equipment, participant support, and other categories.


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


1YEAR

1

East Carolina University

Jason

Jason

Jason

E

E

E

Bond

Bond

Bond - Co-PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 00 00 00 0

00

0

01,0006,000

00000 0

000000

0 7,000

2,765ECU (Rate: 39.5000, Base: 7000)

9,7650

9,7650


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


2YEAR

2


Jason

Jason

Jason

E

E

E

Bond

Bond

Bond 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 3,2000 00 0

3,200245

3,445

01,000

0

00000 0

7,00000000

7,000 11,445

4,521ECU MTDC (Rate: 39.5000, Base: 11445)

15,9660

15,9660


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


3YEAR

3


Jason

Jason

Jason

E

E

E

Bond

Bond

Bond 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 18,1350 00 00 0

18,1352,319

20,454

01,000

0

00000 0

000000

0 21,454


29,9280

29,9280


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


4YEAR

4


Jason

Jason

Jason

E

E

E

Bond

Bond

Bond 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 18,1350 00 00 0

18,1352,319

20,454

01,000

0

00000 0

000000

0 21,454


29,9280

29,9280


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


5YEAR

5


Jason

Jason

Jason

E

E

E

Bond

Bond

Bond 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 00 00 00 0

00

0

01,000

0

00000 0

000000

0 1,000

395ECU MTDC (Rate: 39.5000, Base: 1000)

1,3950

1,3950


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


Cumulative

C


Jason

Jason

Jason

E

E

E

Bond

Bond

Bond 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02 36,2701 3,2000 00 0

39,4704,883

44,353

05,0006,000

00000 0

7,00000000

7,000 62,353

24,629

86,9820

86,9820

Salaries & Wages I have requested two years of support for a Ph.D. student, Brent Hendrixson. Mr. Hendrixson will be starting in the Ph.D. program at ECU in August of 2002. During his first 2 years at ECU a University Graduate Fellowship will support him. His salary will be used for time spent conducting fieldwork, collecting morphological and molecular data, and performing phylogenetic analyses. A full � time salary for one undergraduate summer intern is requested for the second year of the granting period. This intern will be involved morphological and molecular data collection. Travel Travel funds are requested for J. Bond and B. Hendrixson for travel to Japan during year one for collecting. Travel costs to Japan ($6000) include airfare from RDU to Tokyo, car rental and lodging for two weeks. Other Direct Costs PCR- Funds during the second year are requested for the purchase of supplies involved in the generation of DNA template for sequencing. Template preparation: 1) DNA extraction ($500), 2) agarose, buffers, ethidium bromide, polyacrylamide, DNA size standards ($500), 3) PCR purification kits ($700), 4) Taq polymerase, dNTP�s, PCR primers, PCR optimization kits ($2800), 5) aerosol resistant tips, PCR tubes, gloves ($500). SEM- I have estimated an additional $2000 to cover costs of supplies and scanning electron microscope use.


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


1YEAR

1

Field Museum of Natural History

Petra

Petra

Petra

Sierwald

Sierwald

Sierwald 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 00 00 00 0

00

0

000

00000 0

000000

0 0

0 (Rate: , Base: )

00

00


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


2YEAR

2


Petra

Petra

Petra

Sierwald

Sierwald

Sierwald 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 7,7000 00 0

7,7001,155

8,855

01,000

0

00000 0

1,00000000

1,000 10,855

5,741MTDC (Rate: 52.8900, Base: 10855)

16,5960

16,5960


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


3YEAR

3


Petra

Petra

Petra

Sierwald

Sierwald

Sierwald 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 7,7000 01 2,000

9,7001,455

11,155

000

00000 0

1,00000000

1,000 12,155

6,429MTDC (Rate: 52.8900, Base: 12155)

18,5840

18,5840


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


4YEAR

4


Petra

Petra

Petra

Sierwald

Sierwald

Sierwald 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 7,7000 01 2,000

9,7001,455

11,155

01,000

0

00000 0

2,00000000

2,000 14,155

7,487MTDC (Rate: 52.8900, Base: 14155)

21,6420

21,6420


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


5YEAR

5


Petra

Petra

Petra

Sierwald

Sierwald

Sierwald 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 00 00 00 0

00

0

000

00000 0

1,0001,000

0000

2,000 2,000

1,058MTDC (Rate: 52.8900, Base: 2000)

3,0580

3,0580


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


Cumulative

C


Petra

Petra

Petra

Sierwald

Sierwald

Sierwald 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 03 23,1000 02 4,000

27,1004,065

31,165

02,000

0

00000 0

5,0001,000

0000

6,000 39,165

20,715

59,8800

59,8800

Budget JustificationSubcontract, Temporary Proposal number: 6137274

Co-PI Petra Sierwald, Field Museum

Senior PersonnelThe Co-PI commits 2 months per year for the duration of the five year project to the workon the proposal project. No summer salary is requested.

Junior PersonnelFunds are requested to employ one undergraduate student 10 hours per week during thesemester and full time during the summer (350 h total) for three years. During thesummer in years 3 and 4, a high school intern will assist with the undergraduate studentat a stipend rate. Main tasks: light and scanning electron microscopy, including specimenpreparation, dissection, mounting and image capture (mainly digitally/electronically),literature compilation, limited amount of image interpretation, specimen maintenance andtracking of the project specimens, data entry and data management and tracking.There are over 30 universities and colleges in the Chicago area. During past and ongoingprojects I have worked with over 20 undergraduate students with very good researchresults. Moreover, several of them now continue in graduate school or are applying for it.for two years I supervised an Internship program for high school students (BiodiversityExplorers) in the Insect Division, who collected specimens and did curatorial work.Undergraduate student $7,700 per year, $23,100 for three years; high school studentintern: $ 2,000, per year, $4,000 for two years. Fringe for both part-time positionscalculated at 15.0%, resulting in a total of $4,065 for all junior personnel.

Funds are also requested for supplies totaling $5,000 over the three year period,consisting mainly of dissecting tools, SEM supplies, electronic storage supplies (e.g., zipdisks) and office supplies, including color toner cartridges.

Funds are requested to cover two trips to meet with collaborators ($2,000) and funds arerequested to cover publication costs ($1,000).

Field Museum contribution to the projectGenerating images available for morphological analysis will be a significant part of thisgrant. At the time of this grant Field Museum will have two scanning electronmicroscopes available for use at no charge (except for supplies). Field Museum is in theprocess of negotiating purchase of the new scanning electron microscope allowingexamination of uncoated specimens. Field Museum will continue to maintain its olderAmray scanning electron microscope.For light microscopy high quality dissecting and compound scopes (purchased through anongoing NSF grant to the Co-PI, DEB 97-12438) are available. In addition, I have aMicropticsTM set-up available to generate multiple digital photographic images of wet-submerged specimens using flashes. In-focus images are produced through image-

handling software, e.g., Adobe PhotoShop. I anticipate to use this set-up (shared withonly one researcher) for generating images for morphological analysis during this project.


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


1YEAR

1

George Washington University

Gustavo

Gustavo

Gustavo

Hormiga

Hormiga

Hormiga - Co PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 5,0000 00 0

5,000345

5,345

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 14,345

7,029M TDC (Rate: 49.0000, Base: 14345)

21,3740

21,3740


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


2YEAR

2


Gustavo

Gustavo

Gustavo

Hormiga

Hormiga

Hormiga - Co PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 5,0000 00 0

5,000345

5,345

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 14,345

7,029MTDC (Rate: 49.0000, Base: 14345)

21,3740

21,3740


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


3YEAR

3


Gustavo

Gustavo

Gustavo

Hormiga

Hormiga

Hormiga - Co PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 12.00 0.00 0.00 34,9000 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 5,0000 00 0

39,9007,255

47,155

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 56,155

27,516MOD. TDC (Rate: 49.0000, Base: 56155)

83,6710

83,6710


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


4YEAR

4


Gustavo

Gustavo

Gustavo

Hormiga

Hormiga

Hormiga - Co PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 12.00 0.00 0.00 36,2960 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 5,0000 00 0

41,2967,532

48,828

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 57,828

28,336M.TDC (Rate: 49.0000, Base: 57828)

86,1640

86,1640


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


5YEAR

5


Gustavo

Gustavo

Gustavo

Hormiga

Hormiga

Hormiga - Co PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 01 5,0000 00 0

5,000345

5,345

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 14,345

7,029MOD TDC (Rate: 49.0000, Base: 14345)

21,3740

21,3740


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


Cumulative

C


Gustavo

Gustavo

Gustavo

Hormiga

Hormiga

Hormiga - Co PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

2 24.00 0.00 0.00 71,1960 0.00 0.00 0.00 00 05 25,0000 00 0

96,19615,822

112,018

07,500

30,000

00000 0

7,50000000

7,500 157,018

76,939

233,9570

233,9570

Budget Justification Page

This budget should be considered jointly with that submitted by the SmithsonianInstitution, as I collaborate closely with Dr. Jonathan Coddington to train studentsalready, and we will be working closely together to form the "Washington" node of thisproject. Personnel. I have requested 2 years of funding for a postdoctoral fellow to preparespecimens, SEM, illustrate, capture and document original morphological data from theapproximately 20 families of spiders for which I share responsibility. The postdoctoralfellow will also help to supervise the technician/contractor (probably an undergraduatestudent or intern) to capture and document legacy data/images from published sources aswell as my own and other’s data archives. This will require scanning, manipulating, andmodifying probably thousands of images for addition to the data file, which will thusbecome a comprehensive encyclopedia of comparative morphological information on spiders. The technician will work in collaboration with both laboratories, depending on need andpriorities.

Travel. The domestic travel funds ($1,500 per year for five years) will be used to meetwith co-PI’s and project participants to discuss progress and issues. The foreign travel funds ($6,000 per year for five years) will support field work (for twopeople) to obtain necessary fresh material for study and especially molecular work. Thisfigure is based on extensive experience, on average it costs no less than $3,000 perperson to do about 3-4 weeks of field work in a tropical country (it covers airfare,lodging, car rentals, gasoline and food).

Consumable supplies. We have asked for $1,500 per year for five years to cover expensessuch as photographic film and processing, SEM supplies (specimen boxes, mounting media),storage media (disks, CDs, etc), illustration supplies, chemicals, alcohol and vials.


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


1YEAR

1

San Diego State University Foundation

Marshal

Marshal

Marshal

C

C

C

Hedin

Hedin

Hedin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0

0

0

0

0 0

0 (Rate: , Base: )

0

0


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


2YEAR

2


Marshal

Marshal

Marshal

C

C

C

Hedin

Hedin

Hedin - Co-PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 0.00 0.00 3.00 10,0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 7,0000 00 00 0

17,0004,240

21,240

06,0002,500

00000 0

5,00000000

5,000 34,740

17,717MTDC (Rate: 51.0000, Base: 34740)

52,4570

52,4570


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


3YEAR

3


Marshal

Marshal

Marshal

C

C

C

Hedin

Hedin

Hedin - Co-PI 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 0.00 0.00 3.00 10,0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 7,0000 00 00 0

17,0004,240

21,240

06,000

0

00000 0

5,00000000

5,000 32,240

16,442MTDC (Rate: 51.0000, Base: 32240)

48,6820

48,6820


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


4YEAR

4


Marshal

Marshal

Marshal

C

C

C

Hedin

Hedin

Hedin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0

0

0

0

0 0

0 (Rate: , Base: )

0

0


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


5YEAR

5


Marshal

Marshal

Marshal

C

C

C

Hedin

Hedin

Hedin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0

0

0

0

0 0

0 (Rate: , Base: )

0

0


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


Cumulative

C


Marshal

Marshal

Marshal

C

C

C

Hedin

Hedin

Hedin 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

2 0.00 0.00 6.00 20,0000 0.00 0.00 0.00 02 14,0000 00 00 0

34,0008,480

42,480

012,0002,500

00000 0

10,00000000

10,000 66,980

34,159

101,1390

101,1390

1

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION � Hedin Lab Salaries & Wages Summer salaries (three-month, full time) are requested for a postdoc and a graduate student, fringe benefits included. These interns will be trained in various aspects of spider molecular systematics during their summer-long tenures at SDSU. Travel Funds are requested to cover domestic travel costs for summer interns (2K per year per intern). Four thousand dollars is requested for domestic travel, mostly for collection of rare taxa in California. Two thousand, five hundred dollars is requested for international travel to Japan. Other Direct Costs Funds are needed to cover costs of lab supplies for summer interns.


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


1YEAR

1

Smithsonian Institution

Jonathan

Jonathan

Jonathan

A

A

A

Coddington

Coddington

Coddington - Co-PI 3.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 3.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 9.00 0.00 0.00 35,0001 2.00 0.00 0.00 5,0000 00 00 00 0

40,00010,000

50,000

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 59,000

13,958G&A OH (Rate: 4.9000, Base: 69550) (Cont. on Comments Page)

72,9580

72,9580


** I- Indirect CostsG&C OH (Rate: 21.1000, Base 50000)


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


2YEAR

2


Jonathan

Jonathan

Jonathan

A

A

A

Coddington

Coddington


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 3.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 9.00 0.00 0.00 36,4001 3.00 0.00 0.00 5,0000 00 00 00 0

41,40010,350

51,750

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 60,750


75,1810

75,1810


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


3YEAR

3


Jonathan

Jonathan

Jonathan

A

A

A

Coddington

Coddington


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 2.00 0.00 0.00 0

1 4.00 0.00 0.00 18,9281 3.00 0.00 0.00 5,0000 00 00 00 0

23,9285,982

29,910

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 38,910


47,4370

47,4370


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


4YEAR

4


Jonathan

Jonathan

Jonathan

A

A

A

Coddington

Coddington


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 2.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 3.00 0.00 0.00 5,0000 00 00 00 0

5,0001,250

6,250

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 15,250


17,3810

17,3810


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


5YEAR

5


Jonathan

Jonathan

Jonathan

A

A

A

Coddington

Coddington


0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 2.00 0.00 0.00 0

0 0.00 0.00 0.00 01 3.00 0.00 0.00 5,0000 00 00 00 0

5,0001,250

6,250

01,5006,000

00000 0

1,50000000

1,500 15,250


17,3810

17,3810


FundsRequested By

proposer

Fundsgranted by NSF

(if different)




Proposed Granted



$ $1.

2.

3.

4.

5.









6. ( ) OTHER





TOTAL EQUIPMENT


2. FOREIGN


1. STIPENDS $

2. TRAVEL

3. SUBSISTENCE

4. OTHER







5. SUBAWARDS

6. OTHER










ORG. REP. NAME*


Cumulative

C


Jonathan

Jonathan

Jonathan

A

A

A

Coddington

Coddington

Coddington - Co-PI 12.00 0.00 0.00 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 01 12.00 0.00 0.00 0

3 22.00 0.00 0.00 90,3285 14.00 0.00 0.00 25,0000 00 00 00 0

115,32828,832

144,160

07,500

30,000

00000 0

7,50000000

7,500 189,160

41,178

230,3380

230,3380

Budget Justification Page

This budget should be considered jointly with that submitted by the George WashingtonUniversity, as I collaborate closely with Dr. Gustavo Hormiga to train students already,and we will be working closely together to form the "Washington" node of this project.

Personnel. I have requested 2.5 years of funding for a postdoctoral fellow to preparespecimens, SEM, illustrate, capture and document original morphological data from theapproximately 20 families of spiders for which I share responsibility. The postdoctoralfellow will also help to supervise the technician/contractor (probably an undergraduatestudent or intern) to capture and document legacy data/images from published sources aswell as my own and other’s data archives. This will require scanning, manipulating, andmodifying probably thousands of images for addition to the data file, which will thusbecome a comprehensive encyclopedia of comparative morphological information on spiders.The technician will work in collaboration with both laboratories, depending on need andpriorities. Travel. The domestic travel funds ($1,500 per year for five years) will be used to meetwith co-PI’s and project participants to discuss progress and issues. The foreign travelfunds ($6,000 per year for five years) will support field work (for two people) to obtainnecessary fresh material for study and especially molecular work. This figure is based onextensive experience, on average it costs no less than $3,000 per person to do about 3-4weeks of field work in a tropical country (it covers airfare, lodging, car rentals,gasoline and food).

Consumable supplies. We have asked for $1,500 per year for five years to cover expensessuch as photographic film and processing, SEM supplies (specimen boxes, mounting media),storage media (disks, CDs, etc), illustration supplies, alcohol, chemicals and vials.

Current and Pending Support(See GPG Section II.D.8 for guidance on information to include on this form.)

The following information should be provided for each investigator and other senior personnel. Failure to provide this information may delay consideration of this proposal.

Investigator:Other agencies (including NSF) to which this proposal has been/will be submitted.

Support: Current Pending Submission Planned in Near Future *Transfer of Support

Project/Proposal Title:

Source of Support:Total Award Amount: $ Total Award Period Covered:Location of Project:Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: Acad: Sumr:












Source of Support:Total Award Amount: $ Total Award Period Covered:Location of Project:Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project. Cal: Acad: Summ:

*If this project has previously been funded by another agency, please list and furnish information for immediately preceding funding period.

USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARYPage G-

Ward Wheeler

Joint Planning Educational and Outreach Activities BetweenNASA-Ames and American Museum of Natural History

NASA89,280 03/01/99 - 04/30/03

AMNH1.00 0.00 0.00

New Directions in Cluster Computing: A Conference at theAmerican Museum of Natural History, "New Directions inCluster SuperComputing"NSF

15,000 09/15/01 - 08/31/02AMNH

1.00 0.00 0.00

Numerical and Computational Techniques in PhylogeneticAnalysis

NASA692,729 03/01/00 - 02/28/03

AMNH1.00 0.00 0.00

Large Data Set Analysis: Deuterostome Evolution

NASA445,957 04/01/00 - 03/31/03

AMNH1.00 0.00 0.00

ITR: Building the Tree of Life: A National Resource forPhyloinformatics and Computational Phylogenetics

NSF711,015 09/01/02 - 08/31/03

AMNH1.00 0.00 0.00

1





















Ward Wheeler


National Science Foundation2,993,624 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

American Museum of Natural History2.00 0.00 0.00

An integrated genomic approach to the origin anddiversification of the Metazoa



22





















Jonathan Coddington

Monographic Research in Araneoid Spider Systematics

NSF DEB-9712353415,481 09/01/97 - 08/31/02

George Washington University0.00 2.00 1.00

Collaborative: Morphobank - An Interactive Web Data MatrixFor Storage And Retrieval Of Morphological Data ForPhylogenetic Analysis.National Science Foundation

599,957 01/01/03 - 01/01/07National Museum of Natural History

2.00 1.00 0.00


National Science Foundation230,338 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

National Museum of Natural History5.00 0.00 0.00

33





















Gustavo Hormiga

Monographic Research in Araneoid Spider Systematics

NSF DEB-9712353415,480 09/01/97 - 08/31/02





44





















Lorenzo Prendini

Collaborative Research: MorphoBank-An Interactive Web DataMatrix for Storage and Retrieval of Morphological Data forPhylogenetic AnalysisNational Science Foundation

535,725 01/01/03 - 12/31/07American Museum of Natural History

1.00 0.00 0.00




55





















Petra Sierwald

Collaborative Research: MorphoBank - An interactive web datamatrix for storage and retrieval of morphological data forphylogenetic analysisNSF,

608,338 01/01/00 - 01/01/00Collaborative Research: The Field Museum

0.00 0.00 1.00


NSF, DEB59,880 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

Subcontract, The Field Museum0.00 2.00 0.00

NEON-Cripton workshop, supplement to: The Diplopoda:Research, taxonomic training and computerization.Supplement, NSF sponsored workshop in June 2002NSF DEB 227440

35,951 06/01/02 - 12/31/02The Field Museum

0.00 0.00 0.00

The Diplopoda: Research, taxonomic training andcomputerization

NSF, DEB 97-12438740,000 01/01/98 - 12/31/02

The Field Museum0.00 4.00 0.00

66





















Miquel Angel Arnedo-Lombarte


NSF140,000 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

Spain2.00 0.00 0.00

77





















Jason Bond

Molecular and Morphological Systematics of the SpiderInfraorder Mygalomorphae (Araneae)


San Diego State University & East Carolina University0.00 3.00 1.00

Evolution of the New Zealand Spider Genus Amaurobioides(Anyphaenidae): Patterns of Genetic and MorphologicalDivergence in Coastal SpidersNational Science Foundation

345,806 11/01/02 - 11/01/05Virginia Tech & East Carolina University

0.00 2.00 1.00


NSF86,982 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

East Carolina University1.00 0.00 0.00

88





















Pablo Goloboff


NSF30,000 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

Argentina2.00 0.00 0.00

99





















Charles Griswold

Terrestrial Arthropod Inventory of Madagascar


California Academy of Science, San Francisco6.00 0.00 0.00

Biotic Survey of the Gaoligongshan, a Biodiversity Hotspotin Western Yunnan, China


California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco1.00 0.00 0.00



California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco2.00 0.00 0.00

1010





















Marshal Hedin

Molecular and Morphological Systematics of the SpiderInfraorder Mygalomorphae (Araneae)

NSF Systematics213,303 11/01/01 - 11/01/04

San Diego State Univ. & East Carolina University0.00 0.00 1.00

Species Level Identification of Immature Eyeless Cicurina &Texella

US Dept of the Interior, Fish & Wildlife Service32,071 01/01/02 - 12/31/02

San Diego State University0.00 0.00 0.00

Biological Survey of Nesticus (Araneae, Nesticidae)Occurring in Pisgah and Nantahala National Forests, NorthCarolinaUSDA Forest Service Grant

25,000 07/01/01 - 12/31/02San Diego State University

0.00 0.00 1.00





NSF101,139 06/01/03 - 05/31/08


1111





















Wayne Maddison

Research Training Group: The Analysis of BiologicalDiversification


University of Arizaon0.25 0.00 0.00

ITR: COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH: Building the Tree of Life: ANational Resource for Phyloinformatics and ComputationalPhylogeneticsNational Science Foundation

1,697,603 09/01/02 - 08/31/07Florida State University

1.00 0.00 0.00


NSF70,000 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

Arizona1.00 0.00 0.00

1212





















Martin Ramirez

Molecular and Morphological Phylogeny of Spiders

Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas3,000 01/01/03 - 12/31/03

Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales, Buenos Aires0.00 0.00 0.00

Systematics of South American Arthropods

Universidad de Buenos Aires2,000 01/01/01 - 12/31/02

Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina0.00 0.00 0.00


NSF75,000 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

Argentina2.00 0.00 0.00

1313





















Nikolaj Scharff

Centre for Large Scale Phylogenetic Systematics

Danish Natural Science Research Council868 01/01/03 - 12/31/05

Botanical Institute, University of Copenhagen1.00 0.00 0.00


NSF40,000 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

Denmark2.00 0.00 0.00

1414





















William Shear

The Diplopoda: Research, taxonomic training andcomputerization (unfunded two-year extension approved)


Hampden-Sydney College1.00 0.00 0.00

Systematics, biogeography and evolutionary radiations ofCyphophthalmi (Arachnida, Opiliones)


Hampden-Sydney College0.00 0.00 1.00


NSF50,000 06/01/03 - 05/31/08

Virginia1.00 0.00 0.00

1515

Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources American Museum of Natural History The American Museum spider lab includes the world's largest spider collection (>1 million specimens), and the collections of the National and Field Museums are also substantial. All our labs are well equipped with microscopes (dissecting and compound), computers, and digital cameras. The Museum’s frozen tissue collection is capable of housing up to one million DNA specimens in liquid nitrogen cooled (-80°C) storage for molecular. Since the collection opened in 2001, more than 5,400 samples have been accessioned. In addition, the American Museum currently houses a 560-node Intel Pentium-based commodity cluster (ABACUS-100 Gflop sustained/432 Gflop peak performance). Built by Dr. Wheeler and colleagues with “off the shelf” components, it is the fastest parallel computing cluster in an evolutionary biology laboratory and one of the fastest installed in a non-defense environment. All of the equipment listed below will be made available for the completion of the work in this proposal. 1. 2 Clinical centrifuges 2. 10 Microcentrifuges 3. Beckman J-22 preparative high speed centrifuge (and rotors) 4. Beckman L-7-65 ultracentrifuge (and rotors) 5. (3) Kelvinator -80°C ultracold freezers 6. New Brunswick bacterial Incubator- Shaker 7. Autoclave 8. Glassware washer and dryer 9. Ice Machine 10. US Filter water purification system 11. (5) Perkin-Elmer-Cetus 480 Thermocyclers 12. Biorad DNA sequencing rigs 13. Fisher DNA sequencing power packs 14. Beckman liquid scintillation counter 15. Beckman Spectrophotometer 16. (2) Kelvinator -20°C freezers 17. Kelvinator 4°C Dairy case 18. Horizontal and vertical gel rigs/power packs 19. ABI Oligonucleotide synthesizer 20. Incubators 21. Stratagene Posiblotter Souther blot apparatus 22. Stratagene UV cross-linker 23. Kodak MP-4 camera system 24. Automated X-ray film processor 25. IbI gel reader/Macintosh IIcx computer 26. UV transilluminator 27. X-ray transilluminator 28. X-ray cassettes and intensifying screens 29. Gel drier - vacuum pump 30. Rotary evaporator 31. Geiger counter 32. Plexiglass radioactivity shielding 33. Light table 34. (3) ABI 377 automated DNA sequencer with sequencing and genescan software.

1

35. (2)ABI 3700 automated DNA sequencer 36. BIOMEC Pipetting Robot 37. 1.2 Gflop HP cluster computer 38. Taylor-Warton 38K Cryostorage system 39. (12) Perkin-Elmer thermocyclers 40. Digital gel documentation system processor 41. Kodak M35A X-OMAT x-ray film 42. (20) PowerMac MacIntosh computers 43. (5) Pentium class PC’s 44. 4 SEQUENCHER sequence analysis stations George Washington University Laboratory: Hormiga's lab is located at Bell Hall Room 405. It is equipped with 3 Leica MZAPO dissecting scopes and a Leica compound microscope. Computer: Hormiga's lab is equipped with three PCs and one PowerMac (all of them connected to the internet), flatbed scanner, slide scanner and a digital camera. Office: Hormiga office is located in Lisner Hall. The main office of the Department of Biological Sciences is equipped with the standard office equipment, including photocopying machine and FAX. Major Equipment: LEO 1430VP Variable Pressure Scanning Electron Microscope and auxiliary equipment (critical point drier and sputter coater). Digital film recorder. The Field Museum The Field Museum with its extensive and world-renowned specimen collections (zoology, botany, anthropology and geology) offers all necessary laboratories and services required for collections-based systematic and biodiversity research, such as extensive light microscopy equipment, scanning electron microscopy, molecular biology laboratory including automated sequencer, histology laboratory, photography and photographic archives, and scientific illustration. The Museum also has a large library and extensive computer services. Field Museum has a strong tradition and long history of undergraduate and graduate research. On average more than 70 graduate students enrolled in a wide range of Chicago-area universities are actively conducting research in the Museum’s collections and laboratories, many of them with primary advisors among Field Museum’s faculty. Most members of Field Museum’s faculty hold adjunct appointments at area universities and frequently teach courses in their respective specialties. The Museum is actively engaged in undergraduate education, offering numerous internships on a regular basis. Specially funded programs support high-school students to participate in a wide range of Field Museum’s research and education programs. Scanning Electron Microscope Facility. --- Field Museum’s Scanning Electron Microscopy facility (partially funded by NSF grant # DIR-8811296) has an AMRAY Inc. Model 1810/D, including all required peripherals such as critical point dryer, sputter coater and darkroom. The Amray is equipped for standard photography, as well as electronic image capture and handling. A Field Museum staff member is devoted exclusively to the upkeep of the facility, technical assistance and training of users of the facility. No lab fees are assessed, the user provides supplies (mainly film and stubs). Field Museum is in the process of acquiring a new state-of-the-art Variable Pressure SEM, which will feature an extra

2

large chamber, and will allow use of coated as well as uncoated specimens. The new SEM is slated be operational by mid 2003. Information Services Staffing: William K. Barnett, is the CIO and Vice President of Information Services in charge of 36 staff. Currently this area is organized into six administrative areas with the respective number of staff in parentheses: Information Service (6), Photography (3), Library (9), Computer Services (9), Web Publishing (3), and Media and Broadcasting (6). Currently the Departments of Computer Services and Photography are under review. Library . --- The Library maintains and develops research collections essential to The Field Museum's scientific, exhibition and educational missions. Approximately 250,000 volumes of books and journals support the Museum's programs in biological systematics, evolutionary biology and ecology, and in the study of the world's cultures. The Library currently receives more than 3,000 journals from sources worldwide, nearly two-thirds of these arriving in exchange for the Museum's scientific publication series, Fieldiana, which is sent to 1,000 scientific institutions. The Field Museum library is one of the best in the country for systematic studies and contains a wide range of periodicals relevant to systematics and phylogenetics in general and journals relevant for taxon groups under study by Field Museum researchers. It also includes an extensive collection of old literature essential for nomenclatural purposes. Museum staff, visiting researchers and graduate students, interns and volunteers have ready access to the Library collections and to varied services offered by Library staff, from reference and bibliographic assistance to interlibrary loans. Computing Infrastructure. --- Servers: The Field Museum currently maintains more than 55 servers that support museum administrative, research and educational activities. Each server is backed up nightly and tapes are taken to our off-site storage facility on a weekly basis. This summer we will begin construction of a newly designed Data Center and Information Services staff offices. We expect to migrate our servers to this area in the fall of 2002 when the center has been completed. Thereafter, we will install a high capacity NAS / SAN array to improve our data storage capabilities. Client PCs and printers: The Museum has a compliment of about 650 client computers. Of these about a third of them are Apple computers and the balance are Windows system. We also currently support approximately eighty networked and 220 non-networked printers. Network: The museum currently has a diverse network that is comprised of multi-mode fiber optic cables, thin-thin wire and category 5e cabling connecting a combination of switches, hubs and routers. We are currently installing multiple single-mode fiber backbone segments that will greatly improve and simply the over-all network topology. Together with the new Data Center we are building a new MDF and new IDFs in strategic locations throughout the museum. We will expand our use of Cisco high-speed switches in these areas. Currently we support an OC3 connection to the Internet protected by two Cisco PIX firewalls. Databases: The Information Services staff supports a variety of database application software including Oracle, MySQL, MS-Access, MS SQL Server, FileMaker Pro, C/base and others. Many of the collection databases are made available on the web. We are investigating ways of reducing the number and kinds of application software to improve efficiency, reduce cost and improve support. HPCC at the Pritzker Lab: The Field Museum houses an NSF/MRI-funded (DEB #9871374) high performance computing cluster (HPCC), which consists of a Sun Enterprise Server (4 processors) and a Microway Linux cluster (six dual alpha processor compute nodes). These UNIX-based machines are available for phylogenetic and population genetic analyses to all Field Museum research staff, post docs, students, and visitors; with personnel devoted to assisting users with molecular analysis. The Field Museum matched this computer grant with a postdoctoral research associate who manages this

3

computer system, trains new users, and performs research. See (http://www.fieldmuseum.org/research_collections/hpcc/) Photography. --- Services offered include: 1) New photography of specimens and objects, ranging in size from large to small (not microscopic). These subjects can be reflective or translucent, 2-D or 3-D. Equipment offered includes conventional film or hi-resolution digital capture. 2) Lab services include various types of processing, copying and duplicating, either in-house or through outsourcing. Includes conventional film or hi-resolution digital. Input and output includes print, film, or digital." Photographic Collection. --- The Photographic Collection (databased and partially digitized) serves as an important supplement to The Field Museum's exhibits and research, and it increases the educational value of the artifacts and specimens. Associated collector's field notes and diaries also strengthen the importance of the Photographic Collection. PI equipment The PI’s lab and office are fully equipped with either Power MAC G4 and PC Pentium 4 processor computers, scanner, color printer and other peripherals. Software is updated regularly and for many packages site-licenses are available. Histological Laboratory. --- The histology laboratory in Field Museum’s Invertebrate Division is fully equipped for anatomical work. It includes automated embedding facilities, paraffin and plastic serial thick and semi-thin sectioning equipment (including JB-4A microtome, glass knife maker etc.), as well as standard laboratory equipment [partly funded through NSF-grants to R. Bieler, NSF grant Numbers DEB 93-18231, DEB 95-09324]. No lab fees are assessed, the user must bring own supplies (chemicals for processing, stains, microscope slides, embedding medium etc.). If required for the analysis of histological slides, 3-D reconstruction software and digitizing hardware is available and can be used during this grant project. If required, this laboratory can be used for work in this grant. Optical Equipment. --- The PI’s lab is equipped with dissecting scopes (Wild-Leica, Zeiss and Olympus; incl. drawing tube) and compound scopes (Olympus BH-2). For morphological studies under this proposal, a newly installed MicropticsTM equipment allowing digital photography of dry and wet (alcohol submerged) of large to small specimens is available (shared with one other invertebrate researcher). Multiple images can be taken in an automated fashion and combined to in-focus images through AutoMontageTM software available in the Zoology Department. Scientific Illustration. --- The Zoology Department’s staff includes a scientific illustrator, well versed in graphic software applications as well as traditional scientific illustration. Smithsonian Institution: National Museum of Natural History The national biological collections and their associated systematics research programs at the Smithsonian are one of the primary sources of biodiversity information, data, and knowledge. The biological collections include 83 million biological specimens, 40 million fossils, plus smaller living collections, forming one of the greatest collections of biodiversity in the world. Seventy Smithsonian research systematists work with these collections, along with 40 systematists in associated federal agencies and more than 50 research associates. This represents a unique federal partnership, begun in 1881, in which the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, and Interior co-locate their systematics researchers and identification services with the Smithsonian. Our role in graduate education is highlighted by hosting eight NSF Partnerships in Enhancing Expertise in Taxonomy (PEET) grants in collaboration with several universities. Our role in undergraduate education is highlighted by our Research Training Program providing ten-week summer internships to select undergraduate students.

4

http://www.fieldmuseum.org/research_collections/hpcc/

The Department of Systematic Biology was formed on February 7, 2001, combining the former departments of Vertebrate Zoology, Invertebrate Zoology, Entomology, and Botany. Each of these former departments remains as an administrative unit at the level of Section. Coddington is a curator in the Section of Entomology. Coddington is a curator in the Section of Entomology, which has 10 curators, a Fund Manager, two secretaries, two scientific illustrators in addition to a collections management staff bringing the total number of Entomology staff to 31. Management of the budgets of grants and contracts in the Section is carried out by the cognizant PI in consultation with the Fund Manager. Back-up is provided by staff in the other Systematic Biology sections. Each curator in Systematic Biology maintains a laboratory with a minimum of a high quality dissecting microscope and computer work station. Each Section has at least one shared imaging workstation that includes high quality scanners and color printers, as well as imaging software. Research assistance is limited and each Section has vacant curatorial and collections positions. The Museum maintains a Laboratory of Analytical Biology, combining the facilities of the former Laboratory of Molecular Systematics as well as a Scanning Electron Microscopy Laboratory. A Transmission Electron Microscopy Facility is maintained in the Section of Invertebrate Zoology. A Digital Radiograph facility was established in the Division of Fishes in 2001 and is available to all staff. Photo and Automated Data Processing services are provided by separately administered units in the Museum. Since the late 1960s the Museum has been capturing text information about the specimens (and more recently, images) in electronic form, organizing it in databases, and making it accessible to museum staff for collections management, to scientists for research on them, and to the public for educational, policy, and decision-making purposes. The museum is currently implementing a new Multimedia Catalogue (using KE Software’s EMu product) and is in the process of migrating all of its existing electronic records from legacy systems. Over time the Multimedia Catalogue will integrate and fully automate more than five million existing electronic specimen records now held in multiple legacy systems, as well as additional objects and specimens that have been and will be accessioned by the Museum. Implementation, operation, and enhancement of Multimedia Catalogue will require spending of about $32 million during the FY 2001-FY 2007 period, a relatively modest amount when compared to the approximately $258 million it will cost to physically maintain and manage Natural History’s invaluable collections during the same period. The Multimedia Catalogue system will provide a central repository for many types of data, most importantly: • Specimen/sample level data (catalogue data, storage data, physical characteristics, etc.); • Collection event/locality data (date, site, geographical location, GIS referencing where available,

ecological data from collection notes, and with look-up to geographical data); • Biological taxonomy data (the names themselves and their hierarchical relationships, synonymy,

etc.); • Bibliographic and citation data; • Research data (limited but with attributions for the persons who did the work); and • People and organizations data related to any of the above (e.g., researchers, catalogers, authors,

collectors, identifiers). In the Catalogue, these data types will be linked together in various ways, allowing, for example: • Specimens/samples to be linked to the locality data to describe when and where they were collected; • Specimens/samples to be linked to the taxonomy data via identification data that lists the various

identifications that a specimen/sample has had through time and who made the identification; • Specimens/samples to be linked to bibliographic reference(s) in which they were cited; and

5

• Taxon names to be linked to bibliographic reference(s) in which they were cited or described. Because of the way these links are made, many important questions can be easily answered in the future that are impossible now. In future, the list of taxon names and associated hierarchy will be extremely useful to link to other information about the taxon, e.g., morphology, biochemistry, ecology, physiology, with the appropriate literature references. The taxon names will also have complete synonymy, so they can be used for linking back to the currently recognized name (and the names will also be associated with the person(s) using them so that alternate taxonomies can be referenced as well). Data migration and implementation will be completed in 2003 and will bring together data now residing in multiple locations and formats. However, there will still be much work to do. Many of the 5 million legacy records contain only basic information and nearly all lack images. The 5 million records represent less than 10 % of the museum’s collections but will nevertheless form the largest museum database in the world. About 80 million records are needed to adequately represent all the Museum’s collections (some of the museum’s collections are catalogued as “lots”; a “lot” represents a group of objects that have the same name, that were collected at the same place at the same time). Collections information is widely distributed throughout the museum’s collecting units in non-automated records. Collating and manually entering this information, enhancing the data content, and creating and linking digital images, sounds, and video to Multimedia Catalogue records is a continuous, ongoing initiative of the Museum. The Smithsonian Institution Libraries (SIL) is a major research library with 22 branch libraries at Smithsonian museums and research facilities. With holdings of over 1.5 million volumes, the collections include many rare or hard to locate taxonomic materials. Located in Smithsonian museum and research facilities in the United States and Panama, the SIL is a key supporter of research done by Smithsonian scientists as well as visiting researchers and scholars. Over 100 SIL staff work in the areas of research support, bibliographic description and metadata, and acquisitions. A contributor to international databases (OCLC WorldCat, the RLG Union Catalog), SIL adheres to strict international standards for data collection and presentation. SIL bibliographic data is also a major component of the Smithsonian Institution Research Information System (SIRIS) available over the WWW. SIL’s Digital Library Program has pioneered in the conversion of text-based scientific resources to web-accessible objects. SIL operates a state-of-the-art digital Imaging Center as well employing digitizing contractors for specialized jobs. Digital objects that SIL produces are served both from SIRIS and the main SI Web site. Large projects SIL is currently engaged in include: (1) Creating a digital edition of the publications from the U.S. Exploring Expedition (1833-1840) (~13,000 pages) including bitmapped images, navigational devices, and full text searching, linked with various historical and education contextual aids. (2) Creating a fully integrated electronic version of the massive 63 volume set of the seminal records on Central American taxa, Biologia Centraliericana.(~35,000 pages). This will include bitmapped images, navigational devices, and fully XML-coded text that will be integrated with major biological collection datasets held by major repositories including the National Museum of Natural History, Natural History Museum, London, the American Museum of Natural History, the Missouri Botanical Garden, and Kew Botanical Gardens.

The Smithsonian Institution Archives (SIA) is the official repository for all records of the Smithsonian Institution. There are twenty-seven staff members within the Archives, which are divided into four divisions, the Archives Division, Institutional History Division, Technical Services Division, National Collections Program and a director. Holdings of Smithsonian and non-Smithsonian records, personal papers, and special collections number 24,500 cubic feet. SIA is headquartered in the Arts and Industries Building. In addition, it operates two facilities in the Washington area and one facility in Boyers, Pennsylvania.

6

X-Originating-IP: [132.248.28.167] From: "pablo goloboff" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: is this what you wanted? Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 17:11:11 +0000 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 May 2002 17:11:11.0467 (UTC) FILETIME=[2E3023B0:01C1FAA1] Dear Dr. Wheeler, I will be pleased to participate of your project on spider systematics. I anticipate contributing with development of new and enhanced software, in particular, by working on improvement and parallelization of the existing algorithms for tree searches under parsimony. My preliminary work on this area is promising, but the funding requested will make it possible to build a small cluster at my own institution, which is required for better experimenting with different possible implementations of the parallelization. With no more for the moment, and with my best regards, I remain, yours sincerely, --Pablo A. Goloboff _________________________________________________________________ Hable con sus amigos en línea, pruebe MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.es

X-Sender: [email protected] Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 15:27:21 -0700 To: [email protected] From: Wayne Maddison <[email protected]> Subject: Participation in spider ATOL Ward Wheeler AMNH Dear Ward, I'm enthusiastic about participating in the Assembling the Tree of Life proposal that you are leading, focused on spider phylogeny. The three primary contributions that I am expecting to make are: (1) Coding morphological data and designing taxon sampling for molecular data within one of the largest clades of spiders, the salticids. This work will be aided by my ongoing work on salticid phylogeny, but it will also greatly enhance future success in salticid phylogenetic work by providing both a skeletal structure for the family and a series of tested genes that can be sampled at greater taxon density. (2) Assisting with the phylogenetic analysis of the data gathered on all taxa. This may involve both use of existing software packages, and some programming for specialized analysis (e.g. parametric bootstrapping to study taxon sampling strategies). (3) Helping design the data storage protocol, and implement tools for data editing and storage by programming in the Mesquite environment, of which I am lead developer. This would involve improving facilities to annotate characters and taxa, and also translation among different file formats. I look forward to working with you and the other members of the team. Sincerely, Wayne Wayne Maddison Associate Professor ------------------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Maddison Associate Professor Department of Ecology email: [email protected] and Evolutionary Biology phone: (520) 621-7218 University of Arizona FAX: (520) 621-9190 Tucson, AZ 85721 Mesquite: http://mesquiteproject.org MacClade: http://macclade.org Salticidae: http://spiders.arizona.edu/salticidae/salticidae.html Tree of Life: http://tolweb.org

X-Authentication-Warning: egg.amnh.org: ramirez owned process doing -bs Date: Sat, 11 May 2002 18:51:20 -0400 (EDT) From: Martin Ramirez <[email protected]> To: [email protected] cc: [email protected] Subject: attention Merrily Sterns 11 May 2002 Ward Wheeler Division of Invertebrate Zoology American Museum of Natural History [email protected] Dear Ward, By this letter I wish to confirm my intention to participate in the NSF Tree of Life project on the phylogeny of spiders. I will participate in the project from the Argentinean Museum of Natural History (MACN). I have a position as Research Scientist from the Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas (Argentina). The MACN has a rich tradition in the study of systematics of spiders, plus excellent collections and facilities. My main areas of contribution will be some groups of spider families on which I have specialized (Dionycha, the subject of my ongoing postdoctoral fellow in AMNH, and basal Araneomorphae), morphology and anatomy of araneomorph spiders (e.g., spinnerets, respiratory system), and collecting specific taxa for the molecular studies. I expect also to collaborate in the analysis of sequences on the cluster supercomputer, on which I have some experience. Sincerely yours, Martin J. Ramirez Division of Invertebrate Zoology American Museum of Natural History

X-Originating-IP: [213.96.110.96] From: "miquel arnedo" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Tree of Life proposal to National Science Foundation Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 15:20:14 +0100 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 May 2002 14:20:14.0953 (UTC) FILETIME=[226A8D90:01C1F9C0] Dear Merrily, Thanks for your email. I'm writing you this email to express my intent to participate in the Tree of Life project on the subject of the phylogeny of spiders with Ward Wheeler as a PI and submitted by the AMNH and collaborating institutions. On November 1st, 2002 I will begin an appointment at the Universitat de Barcelona. The appointment is a five year tenure track research position at the assistant professor level. The position is officially known as "Ramón y Cajal" researcher and is co-sponsored by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Spanish government and the University of Barcelona. I do not have any other current or pending grant support from the US. I'm currently Marie Curie postdoctoral fellow at the Natural History Museum of London, UK. I already talked with Gustavo who explained me the way they were intending to budget my costs and I agree with it. Thank you, Miquel Arnedo Marie Curie Research Fellow, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Rd. London, SW7 5BD, UK. Phone: 00 44 207 9425048 Ramon y Cajal Assisstant Researcher, Dept. Biologia Animal, Universitat de Barcelona. Av. Diagonal 645, E08028 Barcelona, Spain. Phone: 00 34 93402 1446.

To: Ward Wheeler From: Bill Shear Subject: Participation in TOL: Spiders Date: 15 May 2002 Dear Ward, This is to confirm my intention to participate in the Tree of Life: Spiders project as outlined in the proposal text. I will collect character scores from fossil spiders and also from such extant taxa as fall within the area of my expertise. I'm looking forward to working with you and the other collaborators on this extremely important project. Bill Shear Department of Biology Hampden-Sydney College Hampden-Sydney VA 23943 (434)223-6172 FAX (434)223-6374 email<[email protected]>

1

MANAGEMENT PLAN Morphological data The morphological work will be carried out by co-PIs Coddington, Hormiga, Prendini and Sierwald jointly with senior collaborators Arnedo, Bond, Maddison, Griswold, Ramirez, Scharff and Shear. Several trainees will be also involved (see under Education in �Broad Impacts� section). We will divide the collection of morphological character data according to our areas of taxonomic expertise: fossil taxa (Shear); outgroup taxa (Prendini); mygalomorphs and liphistiids (Bond); hypochilids and austrochiloids (Ramirez); haplogynes (Arnedo); eresoids (Hormiga, Coddington, Shear (oecobiids)); palpimanoids (Coddington); orbicularians (Coddington, Hormiga, Scharff); nicodamids (Hormiga); amaurobioids, titanoecids (Griswold, Sierwald); dionychans, dictynids and zodarioids (Ramirez, Maddison).

The following listing of the 109 spider families shows the current number of described genera in each family, followed by the minimum number of genera we hope to sample. This listing is intended only to show the scope, breadth, and depth of our survey. The actual allocations will doubtless change as the project proceeds, and as funding allows. Actinopodidae 3/2 Dictynidae 48/9 Mecysmaucheniidae 7/2 Psechridae 4/2 Agelenidae 42/10 Diguetidae 3/2 Micropholcommatidae8/3 Salticidae 531/10 Amaurobiidae 58/14 Dipluridae 24/8 Microstigmatidae 6/2 Scytodidae 5/2 Ammoxenidae 2/2 Drymusidae 1/1 Migidae 10/2 Segestriidae 3/2 Amphinectidae 31/6 Dysderidae 24/5 Mimetidae 12/5 Selenopidae 3/2 Anapidae 34/8 Eresidae 10/3 Miturgidae 28/10 Senoculidae 1/1 Antrodiaetidae 3/2 Filistatidae 16/4 Mysmenidae 24/8 Sicariidae 2/2 Anyphaenidae 54/8 Gallieniellidae 4/2 Nemesiidae 38/10 Sparassidae 87/10 Araneidae 167/10 Gnaphosidae 115/10 Neolanidae 1/1 Stenochilidae 2/1 Archaeidae 3/2 Gradungulidae 7/2 Nesticidae 9/2 Stiphidiidae 9/4 Atypidae 3/2 Hahniidae 26/5 Nicodamidae 9/4 Symphytognathidae6/2 Austrochilidae 3/2 Halidae 2/2 Ochyroceratidae 13/3 Synotaxidae 13/3 Barychelidae 44/8 Hersiliidae 7/2 Oecobiidae 6/2 Telemidae 7/2 Caponiidae 11/3 Hexathelidae 11/3 Oonopidae 56/8 Tengellidae 7/2 Chummidae 1/1 Holarchaeidae 1/1 Orsolobidae 28/5 Tetrablemmidae 30/6 Cithaeronidae 2/2 Homalonychidae 1/1 Oxyopidae 9/2 Tetragnathidae 58/8 Clubionidae 16/5 Huttoniidae 1/1 Palpimanidae 15/3 Theraphosidae 105/10 Corinnidae 65/10 Hypochilidae 2/2 Pararchaeidae 1/1 Theridiidae 73/9 Cryptothelidae 1/1 Idiopidae 20/3 Paratropididae 4/2 Theridiosomatidae 12/2 Ctenidae 38/14 Lamponidae 22/6 Periegopidae 1/1 Thomisidae 165/10 Ctenizidae 9/2 Leptonetidae 15/3 Philodromidae 29/5 Titanoecidae 5/2 Cyatholipidae 23/2 Linyphiidae 555/10 Pholcidae 66/8 Trechaleidae 12/3 Cybaeidae 10/3 Liocranidae 43/14 Phyxelididae 12/3 Trochanteriidae 7/3 Cycloctenidae 5/2 Liphistiidae 2/2 Pimoidae 1/1 Uloboridae 19/3 Cyrtaucheniidae 19/8 Lycosidae 100/10 Pisauridae 51/8 Zodariidae 59/8 Deinopidae 4/2 Malkaridae 4/2 Plectreuridae 2/1 Zoridae 11/3 Desidae 37/14 Mecicobothriidae 4/2 Prodidomidae 26/6 Zorocratidae 5/2 Zoropsidae 2/1

Morphological techniques are fairly standard, but in contrast to most current single-author publications, we plan to document every debatable matrix cell with images for eventual dissemination on the internet. We will therefore rely heavily on scanning electron microscopy and single and/or composite digital photographs, stored as TIF files. Legacy images from the literature will be scanned and/or re-drawn. As much as possible, our taxon selection will build on genera already studied cladistically. The first step will be to review and concatenate or flag potentially identical character concepts that have been coded differently in different groups (see Table 2). Second, we will ensure uniform character concepts by exchanging data among collaborators and comparing homology hypotheses (for example, this second pass may result in splitting one character into two, fusing or adding character states, or establishing inapplicabilities). We will designate �type� images of characters to tie character concepts to actual morphology, analogous to the type specimen procedure in taxonomy. This process will require scoring more than 1,500 characters per taxon (a

2

substantial fraction of those will be inapplicable; e.g., cribellum characters in ecribellate spiders). To store and manage the morphological character data in this project we need a desktop software platform that can do at least the two following main tasks: (1) editing of matrices with annotated taxon, character, character state names, and cell entries, and (2) an ability to share the data among members of the research group. The first requirement is partially or wholly satisfied by available software packages such as Winclada, MacClade, Nexus Data Editor, and Mesquite, but each program has its own limitations (e.g., MacClade, the most sophisticated of nexus format programs, does not fuse matrices, taxa, or characters and cannot import or export ss format character descriptions; Winclada will not save taxon or character comments in ASCII and does not completely import/export nexus files). The second need is satisfied by translation facilities such as those of Mesquite, which can be enhanced as needed by members of the team. The common currency for participating researchers will be the ASCII text data files, rather than the programs used. If additional enhancements are required by team members (e.g., translating annotations between file formats) W. Maddison will work with participants to try to implement those in Mesquite.

Three co-PI�s (Coddington, Prendini and Sierwald) on this project are also co-PI�s on collaborative proposals annexed to the Morphobank proposal also submitted to this TOL competition. In brief, Morphobank will be the morphological analog of Genbank: an internet-based, publicly accessible, indefinitely expandable database of all comparative morphological information for all of life. The data will consist of homology statements and, most importantly, of labeled images that document the homologies. As in Genbank, investigators will be able to upload and download matrices of selected taxa and characters. Different interpretations of the same morphology will be possible. The Morphobank proposal seeks funding to implement the data model and to write the server and desktop application software required; the only funding to collect data is part of the �outreach� section of the grant. If both projects are funded, these overlapping involvements will synergize both projects. This project would benefit from a sophisticated database platform to enable simultaneous access and editing of the master database. Morphobank needs projects to beta test its software. Coddington and Sierwald are committed in year 2 of the Morphobank project to supply comparative data on spiders as one of several test projects. The overlap is complementary and will greatly benefit both projects.

Even if Morphobank is funded, beta (much less version 1.0) software is not scheduled until the second year. Therefore, during at least the early stages of this project, co-PI Coddington will act as �data matrix master.� He will maintain the master concatenated data matrix, will make copies available to researchers in their preferred format, and will be responsible for integrating new data, translating it, and will coordinate the standardization of character definition among collaborators. He has already translated the matrices of Table 1 to both ss and nexus formats, fused them into preliminary matrices, and verified the translation and fusion in all the major software packages. While the Morphobank concept promises to expedite such work, our goals can be accomplished with existing software (Mesquite, MacClade, Winclada, NDE) using a diversity of work-around strategies to compensate for incompatibilities or missing functionalities in the various packages. An additional product of this research, therefore, will be a model and protocol for producing a heavily documented (text, images, etc.) data matrix for phylogenetic analysis. Molecular data

Wheeler will oversee the sequencing effort of the proposal (Table 2). We envision a large amount of sequence generation and the two ABI 3700 automated sequencers and BIOMEK sequencing robot at the AMNH will be crucial to this effort. The technician in this area will perform the DNA preparation and sequencing. Wheeler (with Goloboff) will also direct the algorithmic and computational analyses. The software implementations (POY) of the novel character types and analytical methods will be included in this effort.

Prendini will coordinate the acquisition and management of molecular data obtained from the outgroup taxa.

Arnedo�s role will be in EST- cDNA libraries including library construction, proper approaches to cDNA synthesis, vector choice for cloning and procedures for sequencing. Arnedo will do the sequencing, archiving and interpretation of the cDNA clones. During the course of cDNA analysis, adjustments may need to be made to the synthesis steps, to the cloning steps and to the sequencing steps and Arnedo will be responsible for such adjustments.

Hedin has gathered and analyzed a large amount of spider molecular systematic data, and has developed and assessed phylogenetic utility for several molecular markers that are used today (e.g., various mtDNA genes, rDNA genes, EF1a). This experience in molecular systematics and molecular evolution will

3

add to the TOL grant in three ways: 1) Direct training of postdocs and graduate students. We have requested funds that would allow trainees to travel to the Hedin lab during summer months, where they would learn both methodological and conceptual aspects of spider molecular systematics. This would include training in spider-devoted molecular techniques, primer design, utility analysis, etc. Although similar experience will be gained at the AMNH, we view the diversity of experience as positive. 2) Preliminary datasets will be "farmed out" to Hedin for molecular phylogenetic analysis, adding another senior person to those responsible for assessing gene utility, looking for orthology/paralogy problems, etc. This will help to maximize the number of experienced molecular systematics that are working on "in progress" problems. 3) Final data analysis. Final molecular datasets will be large and complex, requiring a diversity of analytical methods and experience. In particular, exploring the phylogenetic implications of single gene datasets will be a primary focus of the Hedin lab. Data accessibility and exchange

Morphological and genetic data will be centralized at the GWU and AMNH servers, respectively. Web sites at these two institutions will be used to exchange data (e.g. character matrices) between project participants and to disseminate results. We will develop a new web page to serve as the main http site for the project. This new site will have the appropriate links to the web pages of project participants and to a myriad of relevant sites (spiders, systematics, taxonomic data bases, etc.). Images of morphological and behavioral characters produced by this project will be available through this web site. Griswold already has a rough equivalent going for the entelegyne phylogeny project (Griswold et al., 1999) at http://www.calacademy.org/research/entomology/griswold/n/introduction.htm. The goal is to illustrate (with SEMs, drawings, web photos, etc.) the homology hypotheses that will be generated and tested during the duration of this research project. We also will submit results to Tree of Life (http://www.tolweb.org/) and to Tree Base (www.treebase.org). Field Work

Many, if not most, of the specimens necessary to carry out the morphological work are available at the collections of the participating museums. Fieldwork will be necessary to collect additional specimens for molecular work or to complement some of the series available for morphological work (see Project Description section). Project participants Hormiga and Scharff recently concluded three weeks of collecting in Australia, and have set aside numerous specimens in absolute ethanol for the molecular work of this project. All participants in the morphological component of this grant have active fieldwork research programs and will coordinate efforts to meet our taxonomic sampling goals. Graduate students and postdocs will be actively involved in the fieldwork as part of their training.

Annual Group Meetings

We will hold annual meetings with all project participants (PIs, collaborators, postdocs and students). Funds have been requested in the project budget for participants to attend these meetings. The general goals of these meetings would be:

1. To coordinate research efforts. In a first meeting we will present a summary of spider phylogenetic data

(characters, genes, taxa) available in the literature with a two-fold goal. First, we will develop a list of available homologies to be discussed among project participants as the characters to be scored in our initial efforts. Second, we will prepare an annotated list of the taxonomic sample to be used in the study in light of the available cladistic data. This taxon list will require an assessment of specimens available in collections, with the goal of obtaining specimen series that can be used for both morphological and molecular work. For example, a particular species may be well represented in collections and be suitable for morphological work, but those specimens may be old enough that additional specimens are required for sequencing. A specimen �wish list� will be developed to be used as a guideline to plan future fieldwork and to inform colleagues with ongoing field projects of specimen needs. We will also coordinate software platforms at all labs (programs, hardware platforms, file formats and style sheets).

2. To update project participants on results of the ongoing research. These meetings will keep project participants aware of each other�s results. This is especially important, as results provided by one kind of evidence will influence the complementary work. For example, the sequence data may produce topological results that suggest a taxon that is particularly difficult to place. Regularly

4

sharing this type of information among team members is critical for making progress and to keep an integral vision of the project.

3. To trouble-shoot common problems. These meetings will provide opportunities to discuss and trouble shoot problems of general interest. These will be diverse in nature, varying from character homology issues to primer development. The meetings will also serve as a forum for discussion of software issues with programmers, such as those related to management of character matrices or phylogenetic analyses.

4. To coordinate laboratory rotations for trainees. During the first annual meeting we will try to identify prospective trainees to the TOL project (for example, recent graduates from our institutions). Once trainees and students have been placed in labs the annual meetings will provide a vehicle to plan and schedule lab rotations according to availability and the interests and needs of the trainees.

5. To assess productivity and progress. At the end of each annual meeting we will outline a set of research goals to be met within the following 12 months, so we can assess our progress and productivity in the next meeting. This set of goals will be developed as a group. At least initially these goals may be structured taxonomically (by clades) for the morphological work. See Table 2

The first �formal� group meeting would take place very shortly after initiation of project. GWU could

potentially host the first meeting as dormitories, classroom facilities, etc. are available.

Needless to say that these annual meetings will not in any way preempt regular communication among team members (e.g., by email). Many of us have been collaborating in numerous research projects over the last decade or so, as attested by our publication record (e.g., Griswold, Coddington, Hormiga and Scharff, 1999; Hedin and Maddison, 2001; Hormiga, Arnedo and Gillespie, in press; Bond and Sierwald, in press; Scharff and Coddington, 1997) and by numerous joint field expeditions among team members (e.g., Tanzania 1997, Guyana 1999, Hawaii 2000, South Africa 2001, Australia 2002).

5

Table 2 Year 1 2 3 4 5 General Task Coordinate software, hardware platforms X Group Establish web page, ftp site (images, matrices) X GWU, AMNH Establish research, database protocols, style sheets, etc. X Group Identify potential generic terminals X Group Refine and/or emend list of terminal taxa X X X X Group Compile database of relevant museum holdings for molecular and morphological study X X AMNH, CAS, FMNH, MACN, NMNH, ZMUC Detailed coordination with Bond-Hedin NSF Mygalomorph project X Bond, Hedin Plan fieldwork for target taxa for 5 years X Group Recruit post-docs, technician X X Griswold, Coddington, Hormiga. Wheeler Integrate with existing PhD, postdoctoral projects X Coddington, Hormiga, Bond, Hedin Ramirez, Wheeler Develop projects for interns, students, etc. X X X X X Coddington, Griswold, Sierwald, Wheeler Fieldwork X X X X X Group Quarterly analysis of current grand matrix X X X X X Goloboff, Wheeler, Maddison, Group Collaborate with Morphobank, if funded X X X X Coddington, Sierwald, Prendini Morphology Compile and post copies of all vetted matrices (peer-reviewed, PhD thesis, unpublished, etc.) X Coddington Fuse existing matrices to form "backbone" matrix X Coddington, specialists Analyze backbone matrix, discriminate well vs. poorly supported nodes X Goloboff, specialists Refine and improve backbone data matrix X X X X morphology specialists Identify and resolve problematic character concepts X morphology specialists Assign taxonomic responsibilities X morphology specialists Assign and document "holotype" characters X X X X X Griswold, Ramirez, Coddington, Hormiga, Sierwald, Prendini Document and justify debatable character codings X X X X morphology specialists Capture legacy images X X X Coddington, Hormiga, Griswold, Ramirez Code fossils for fused concatenated matrix X Shear Annual meeting and assessment of progress by taxonomic responsibility X X X X X Group Quarterly analysis of morphological data partitioned by lineage and in toto X X X X X Goloboff, specialists Data matrix coordination and distribution X X X X X Coddington Add new terminals X X X X X morphology specialists Add new characters/homology hypotheses X X X X X morphology specialists Data matrix growth X X X X X morphology specialists Molecules Obtaining samples for sequencing X X X X Group Archiving spider taxa and RNA preparation techniques X X Wheeler Sequence available samples X X X X Wheeler, Prendini, Hedin, Bond cDNA synthesis and library construction X X X Arnedo Sequencing and analysis of first set cDNA libraries X Arnedo Archiving of cDNA libraries X X X Arnedo Sequencing and analysis of second set of cDNA libraries X Arnedo Archiving of sequence data X X Wheeler, Prendini Exhaustively analyze preliminary data X X X X Group Analyse all data individually and in combination X Group Quarterly analysis of molecular data partitioned by lineage, gene, and in toto X X X X Wheeler, Maddison, Goloboff, specialists

information about principal investigators ... - our...

Documents