DNA Barcodes of Tetragnathid Spiders (Araneae: Tetragnathidae) in Malaysia

Dzulhelmi Muhammad Nasir1,*, Suriyanti Su2, Van Lun Low3, Zulqarnain Mohamed1 and Norma-Rashid Yusoff1

1Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Sciences, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

2Department of Earth Sciences and Environment, Faculty of Science and Technology, University Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

3Tropical Infectious Diseases Research and Education Centre (TIDREC), University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

ABSTRACT

Although diverse groups of spiders are present in tropical countries, very little attention has been given on various types of differences that exist within these groups, particularly for the groups of tropical spiders in Malaysia. The morphological and genitalia characteristics are traditionally used to identify species variants. However, in this study, a molecular approach was utilized to produce a more precise and accurate result in an effort to identify, delineate and verify the species. Mitochondria-encoded cytochrome oxidase I (COI) and nuclear-encoded 18S rRNA (18S) genes) were adopted to establish DNA bacodes for 17 species of tetragnathid spiders (Araneae, Tetragnathidae) in Malaysia. Generally, the molecular data of tetragnathid spiders was consistent with their classification based upon morphological characteristics, though species boundary of Opadometa grata and Leucauge decorate could not be resolved by 18S gene.

Article Information

Received 10 September 2020

Revised 13 November 2020

Accepted 9 January 2021

Available online 09 May 2022

(early access)

Published 06 January 2023

Authors’ Contribution

DMN designed the study, conducted the survey, performed the labwork and prepare the manuscript. SS, LVL and ZM assisted the samplings and experiments. NRY supervised the work.

Key words

Orb-web spider, DNA barcoding, COI, 18S, Diversity.

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/20200910140935

* Corresponding author: dzul_3my@yahoo.com

0030-9923/2023/0002-881 $ 9.00/0

Copyright 2023 by the authors. Licensee Zoological Societ of Pakistan.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Introduction

The long-jawed, orb-weaver, spider family Tetragnathidae, contains 47 genera (World Spider Catalog, 2020) with at least 967 species throughout the world. It comprises three subfamilies, namely the Leucauginae Caporiacco 1955, Metainae and Tetragnathinae Menge 1866. The genus Tetragnatha Latreille 1804, is the genus type of this family (Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga, 2011). Members from this family are diverse in morphological and behavioral characteristics. Many of these characteristics are homoplasius to Araneidae and Nephilidae (Griswold et al., 1998; Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga, 2011). However, the morphological features within the family vary significantly, with some displaying distinctive characteristics that do not fit into the typical tetragnathid morphology. The body length of tetragnathids range between 2-23 mm. The habitats used by tetragnathid spiders in tropical and subtropical ecosystems are highly diverse, and include in low vegetation areas, in tree buttresses, at cave entrances, and near waterways (e.g. rivers, ponds) (Alvarez-Padilla, 2008; Dzulhelmi et al., 2014a, b; Dzulhelmi et al., 2017). However, some species appear to be confined to specific habitats, such as caves or mangroves (Koh and Ming, 2013; Dzulhelmi, 2016).

As with other tropical rainforests in Southeast Asia, Malaysia is home to many tetragnathid species (Barrion and Litsinger, 1995; Murphy and Murphy, 2000; Song et al., 2002; Jager, 2007; Jager and Praxaysombath, 2009, 2011; Jager et al., 2012; Koh and Ming, 2013; Dzulhelmi, 2016). Currently, there are at least six genera representing 32 species recorded in Malaysia. From these, six genera with 20 species are found in the Peninsular Malaysia (Norma-Rashid and Li, 2009; Dzulhelmi et al., 2014a), eight genera with eight species in Sarawak (Koh et al., 2013), and two genera with four species in Sabah (Dzulhelmi et al., 2014b). Only two known subfamilies, namely the Leucauginae and Tetragnathinae, are found in Malaysia. The subfamily Leucauginae is characterized by some specific modifications to the female genital system, such as a weakly sclerotized spermathecal wall (Alvarez-Padilla et al., 2009). This distinctively identifiable female physical characteristic has been extensively examined by researchers and has been established to be confined only to the species from the genera Leucauge, Opadometa, Mesida and Tylorida. On the other hand, the subfamily Tetragnathinae’s distinguishing characteristic is its lack of a sclerotized plate and fertilization ducts, where only the copulatory ducts are found to be present (Alvarez-Padilla et al., 2009). In Malaysia, the genus Tetragnatha is the only genus that has been documented within the Tetergnathinae subfamily.

The genetics of tetragnathid species from different parts of the world have been well-studied (i.e. Levi, 1980; Hormiga et al., 1995; Pan et al., 2004; Blackledge et al., 2009; Alvarez-Padilla et al., 2009; Dimitrov and Hormiga, 2011). These previous studies adopted combination sets of different markers to identify the relationships between the studied species, but the determination of the most suitable and reliable markers for taxonomic identification is important to reduce the cost and time (i.e. Fang et al., 2000; Astrin et al., 2006). Nonetheless, the genetic data on Malaysian tetragnathid species is still unknown, with no molecular studies being reported to date.

The objective of this study was to determine the sequence diversity of two gene fragments (mitochondria-encoded cytochrome oxidase I (COI) and the nuclear-encoded 18S rRNA (18S)) in 17 Malaysian tetragnathid species, and thereby attempting to establish DNA bacodes for members of the subfamilies Leucauginae (Leucauge, Opadometa, Mesida and Tylorida) and Tetragnathinae (Tetragnatha). The COI and 18S sequences were analyzed independently. The results were then cross-examined with the morphological characteristics of the regional tetragnathid species to categorize the specimens’ subfamily. The genetic information derived from the results of this molecular analysis would be highly useful for future species identification and taxonomic verification of Malaysian tetragnathids.

Materials and methods

Sample collection and identification

Random sampling was employed during the sample collection. Tetragnathid spiders were individually caught by hand following visual detection. The sampling was performed throughout the day and night, and was conducted at various types of diverse habitats available throughout Malaysia. The collected specimens were immediately preserved in individual jars containing 70% (v/v) ethanol, and subsequently stored in a freezer at -20°C.

For species identification, the preserved specimens were first observed under a 50× dissecting microscope (Amscope, USA and identified to species based on the morphology descriptions of the Leucauge and Opadometa (Yoshida, 2009; Dzulhelmi et al., 2015), Mesida (Jager and Praxaysombath, 2011), Tylorida (Tanikawa, 2004; Jager and Praxaysombath, 2009; Kulkarni, 2014) and Tetragnatha (Okuma, 1987, 1988) subfamilies, and further supported by other documented morphological references (Barrion and Litsinger, 1995; Murphy and Murphy, 2000; Song et al., 2002; Koh et al., 2013; Dzulhelmi and Suriyanti, 2015).

In this study, a total of 17 tetragnathid species were collected from 10 different locations in Malaysia (Table I). The Leucauginae subfamily is represented by the genera Leucauge (five out of six species), Opadometa (two out of three species), Mesida (two out of two species) and Tylorida (three out of four species). The Tetragnathinae subfamily is represented by the genus Tetragnatha (five out of 16 species). The genus Larinioides cornutus and Gasteracantha cancriformis were used as the basis and main reference for the COI gene, while the genus Gasteracantha kuhlii and Cyclosa conica were used as the basis and main reference for the 18S gene. Both groups of main references used were obtained from the GenBank and were used as outgroups (Table I).

DNA extraction, polymerase chain reaction and sequencing

For DNA extraction, two or more legs (depending on the spider’s size) were removed from the preserved specimen, rinsed several times with distilled water and then transferred into a 1.5-mL microcentrifuge tube containing lysis buffer and homogenized in liquid nitrogen for at least 5 min. Then, Proteinase K was added and the homogenized sample was incubated overnight at 65oC in a water bath before heating to 95oC for 10 min to deactivate the proteinase K. Finally, the genomic DNA was extracted from the resultant sample using the Qiagen DNeasy Tissue Kit according to the manufacturer’s recommended instructions.

Amplification of the mitochondrial COI and nuclear 18S gene fragments

For 18S gene fragment, the full length 18S region was amplified with the universal primer set 18Sa (3’-ATTAAAGTTGTTGCGGTTA-5’) and 9r (3’-GATCCTTCCGCAGGTTCACCTAC-5’) (Alvarez-Padilla, 2008). The total reaction volume used was 50 µL, consisting of 10 µL of dH2O, 5 µL of each primer (0.5 mM), 25 µL of the master mix (Lucigen, USA) and 5 µL (ca. 250 ng) of the DNA template. ‘Touchdown’ condition for the PCR reaction was set at 94oC for 2 min, followed by 13 cycles of 94oC for 20 s, 60oC for 35 s and 65oC for 30 s and then 21 cycles at 94oC for 15 s, 48oC for 35 s and 65oC for 30 s and then a final 72oC for 3 min (Dzulhelmi, 2016).

For COI, the PCR amplification was performed in the same manner except using the universal forward primer LCOI1490 (3’-GGTCAACAAATCATAAAGATATTGG-5’) and reverse primer HCOI2198 (3’-TAAACTTCAGGGTGACCAAAAAATCA-5’) (Alvarez-Padilla, 2008), and the thermal cycling was performed at 94oC for 2 min, followed by 34 cycles of 94oC for 20 s, 50oC for 35 s and 65oC for 30 s, and then a final 72oC for 3 min (Dzulhelmi, 2016).

Each PCR-amplified sample was resolved by agarose gel electrophoresis mixed with ethidium bromide to enable viewing of the amplified nuclear of the 18S gene under ultra-violet illumination. Finally, the products were then sent to Genomics Bioscience and Technology Co. Ltd., for purification and sequencing.

 

Table I.- Seventeen Tetragnathid species, localities, coordinates and GenBank accession numbers of specimens examined in this study.

Species	Locality	Coordinates	COI	18S
Leucauge argentina	Penang National Park, Pulau Pinang	5o26’16”N; 100o17’27”E	KU836866	KU836900
	Poring Hot Spring Nature Reserve, Ranau	6o2’35”N, 116o42’7”E	KU836869	KU836901
	Kubah National Park, Kuching	1o36’41”N, 110o11’44”E	KU836868	KU836899
	Gading National Park, Kuching	1o41’27”N, 109o50’45”E	KU836867	KU836898
Leucauge celebesiana	Poring Hot Spring Nature Reserve, Ranau	6o2’35”N, 116o42’7”E	KU836871	KU836903
	Mesilau Resort Nature Reserve, Ranau	6o02’5”N, 116o54’1”E	KU836872	KU836904
	Kubah National Park, Kuching	1o36’41”N, 110o11’44”E	KU836870	KU836902
Leucauge decorata	Crocker Range National Park, Keningau	5o58’5”N, 116o08’2”E	KU836874	KU836905
	Crocker Range National Park, Keningau	5o58’5”N, 116o08’2”E	KU836873	KU836906
Leucauge sp.	Gading National Park, Kuching	1o41’27”N, 109o50’45”E	KU836875	KU836907
Leucauge tessellata	Ulu Gombak Nature Reserve, Gombak	3o22’60”N, 101o47’20”E	KU836876	KU836909
	Ulu Gombak Nature Reserve, Gombak	3o22’60”N, 101o47’20”E	KU836877	KU836908
Opadometa grata	Rimba Ilmu Botanical Garden, Kuala Lumpur	3o7’29”N; 101o39’12”E	KU836883	KU836915
Opadometa kuchingensis	Bako National Park, Kuching	1o41’8”N, 110o26’10”E	KU836884	KU836916
	Bako National Park, Kuching	1o41’8”N, 110o26’10”E	KU836882	KU836914
Mesida gemmea	Kubah National Park, Kuching	1o36’41”N, 110o11’44”E	KU836879	KU836910
	Gading National Park, Lundu	1o41’27”N, 109o50’45”E	KU836878	-
	Ulu Gombak Nature Reserve, Gombak	3o22’60”N, 101o47’20”E	-	KU836911
Mesida yini	Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi	2o55’47”N, 101o46’44”E	KU836880	KU836912
	Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi	2o55’47”N, 101o46’44”E	KU836881	KU836913
Tetragnatha hasselti	Kubah National Park, Sarawak	1o36’41”N, 110o11’44”E	KU836891	-
	Kubah National Park, Sarawak	1o36’41”N, 110o11’44”E	-	KU836924
Tetragnatha lauta	Fraser Hill Forest Reserve, Pahang	3o43’7”N, 101o44’25”E	KU836892	KU836925
Tetragnatha maxillosa	Fraser Hill Forest Reserve, Pahang	3o43’7”N, 101o44’25”E	KU836893	KU836926
	Fraser Hill Forest Reserve, Pahang	3o43’7”N, 101o44’25”E	KU836894	KU836927
Tetragnatha pinicola	Kuala Selangor Nature Park, Kuala Selangor	3o20’16”N, 101o14’56”E	KU836895	KU836928
	Kuala Selangor Nature Park, Kuala Selangor	3o20’16”N, 101o14’56”E	KU836896	KU836929
Tetragnatha sp.	Bako National Park, Kuching	1o41’8”N, 110o26’10”E	KU836897	KU836930
1Tylorida striata	Naratiwat Province, Thailand	5o47’45”N, 101o50’4”E	EU003309	-
	Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi	2o55’47”N, 101o46’44”E	-	KU836919
Tylorida tianlin	Mesilau Resort Nature Reserve, Kundasang	6o02’5”N, 116o54’1”E	KU836885	KU836917
	Mesilau Resort Nature Reserve, Kundasang	6o02’5”N, 116o54’1”E	KU836886	KU836918
Tylorida ventralis	Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi	2o55’47”N, 101o46’44”E	KU836889	KU836923
	Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi	2o55’47”N, 101o46’44”E	KU836890	KU836922
	Kuala Selangor Nature Park, Kuala Selangor	3o20’16”N, 101o14’56”E	-	KU836920
	Ulu Gombak Nature Reserve, Gombak	3o22’60”N, 101o47’20”E	KU836888	-
	Fraser Hill Forest Reserve, Pahang	3o43’7”N, 101o44’25”E	-	KU836921
	Bako National Park, Kuching	1o41’8”N, 110o26’10”E	KU836887	-
2Larinioides cornutus	Point Pelee, Ontario, Canada	Unstated	JN308507	-
1Gasteracantha cancriformis	Heredia province, Costa Rica	10o25’53”N, 84o00’13”W	EU003287	-
3Gasteracantha kuhlii	-	Unstated	-	AB910478
1Cyclosa conica	Mon Hunoso Lake, Denmark	Unstated	-	EU003343

 

1Alvarez-Padilla et al. (2009); 2Blagoev et al. (2016); 3Tanikawa et al. (2014).

 

 

Multiple sequence alignment and sequence analyses

The electophoragram of forward and reverse sequences was checked manually and assembled using BioEdit Sequence Alignment Editor Version 7.0.5 (Hall, 2005). Multiple alignments of the cleaned sequences were performed using Clustal X version 1.81 (Thompson et al., 1997). The lengths of the COI and 18S gene fragment DNA sequences were 625 bp and 930 bp, respectively. The COI and 18S rRNA sequences obtained from this study were deposited into the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) GenBank DNA sequence database (Table I).

Phylogenetic tree reconstruction

The phylogenetic trees were constructed based on maximum parsimony (MP) and maximum likelihood (ML) analyses for the 18S and CO1 gene fragments, respectively, using (PAUP) software version 4.0 (Swofford, 2003). For the ML and MP analysis, the best model was suggested by Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), which was performed using the PhyML 3.0 software (Guindon et al., 2010). The phylogenetic trees were reconstructed using HKY85 and GTR model for COI and 18S, respectively. Pairwise genetic distance and neigbour joining distances of both the COI and 18S genes were calculated using the Kimura-two-parameter model. A full heuristic search was used for the MP analysis. The tree reliability was then estimated by bootstrapping the phylogenetic tree data with 1000 replications of data sets for MP, and 100 replications for ML. In addition, Bayesian Inference (BI) analysis, using four chains from the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) generations until it reached less than 0.01 was also performed for both the 18S and COI datasets using the MrBayes version 3.1.2 software (Ronquist and Huelsenbeck, 2003).

Results

The phylogenetic analyses produced almost similar topologies for both the COI (BI and ML analyses) and 18S (BI and MP analyses) gene fragments, but displayed different bootstrap support values. Both genes revealed two main clusters, corresponding to the Leucauginae and Tetragnathinae subfamilies. The Leucauginae cluster further formed two separate subclusters and one sub-cluster consisted of members from the genera Leucauge-Opadometa group (L. argentina, L. celebesiana, L. decorata, L. sabahan. L. tessellata, Opadometa grata and O. kuchingensis), while the second subcluster consisted of members from the genera Mesida-Tylorida group (M. gemmea, M. yini, T. striata, T. tianlin and T. ventralis). On the other hand, the Tetragnathinae cluster consisted of members from the genus Tetragnatha (T. hasselti, T. lauta, T. maxillosa, T. pinicola and Tetragnatha sp.). Oveall, the molecular data of tetragnathid spiders was consistent with their classification based upon morphological characteristics, though Opadometa grata and Leucauge decorate could not be resolved by 18S gene.

For COI gene fragment, the aligned sequences had 625 characters, with 25 uninformative and 238 parsimony informative sites. The genetic distances within the genus Leucauge ranged between 8.96-9.12% (L. celebesiana vs. L. tessellata) to 15.52-16.32% (L. argentina vs. L. sabahan). On the other hand, the genetic distances within the genus, Opadometa were 0.00-0.32% (O. grata vs. O. kuchingensis). Interspecific genetic distances within the Leucauge-Opadometa group ranged between 10.08-10.72% (L. celebesiana vs. O. kuchingensis) to 14.08-15.84% (L. argentina vs. O. grata and L. argentina vs. O. kuchingensis). The distances within the genus Mesida were 15.04-15.84% (M. gemmea vs M. yini). As for the genus Tylorida, the genetic distances ranged between 15.52-16.16% (T. striata vs. T. ventralis) to 17.12-17.76% (T. tianlin vs. T. ventralis). Interspecific genetic distances within the Mesida-Tylorida group ranged between 14.08-14.24% (M. yini vs. T. striata) to 18.24-18.88% (M. yini vs. T. tianlin). The genetic distances within the Tetragnatha group ranged between 14.24-15.04% (T. maxillosa vs. T. pinicola) to 20.08% (T. lauta vs. T. hasselti) (Table II).

For 18S rRNA gene, the aligned sequences consisted of 945 characters, of which there were 59 uninformative and 144 parsimony informative sites. The genetic distances within the genus Leucauge ranged from 0.21% (L. decorata vs. L. sabahan) to 1.73% (L. argentina vs. L. celebesiana), while within the Opadometa it was 0.11% (O. grata vs. O. kuchingensis). Interspecific genetic distances within the Leucauge-Opadometa group ranged from 0.11% (L. decorata vs. O. kuchingensis) to 1.51% (L. argentina vs. O. kuchingensis). The distance within the genus Mesida was 0.76% (M. gemmea vs. M. yini), while within the genus Tylorida the ranges were between 2.81% (T. tianlin vs. T. ventralis) to 4.54% (T. tianlin vs. T. striata). Interspecific genetic distances within the Mesida-Tylorida group ranged from 1.30% (M. yini vs. T. ventralis) to 3.68% (M. gemmea vs. T. striata). The genetic distances within the Tetragnatha group ranged from 1.73% (T. maxillosa vs. T. pinicola) to 6.66% (T. lauta vs. Tetragnatha sp.) (Table III).

The distance matrix calculated using the COI gene fragment sequences showed a wider range of values for each studied species, compared to 18S gene fragments. The existence of a higher number of informative sites in the COI genes could have been responsible for the wider range of genetic distances garnered compared to the more conservative 18S genes. For COI gene fragments, there were greater genetic distances between T. tianlin and other species within the Mesida-Tylorida group. Additionally, the genetic distance matrix using the 18S gene showed consistency within the Mesida-Tylorida group in this species.

Discussion

Two distinct and independent sequence alignments of the COI and 18S gene fragments produced two almost identical tree structures with only minor differences. It can be hypothesized that the lineage history of the mitochondrial and nuclear DNA could have caused the slight differences in the tree topology. For the family Tetragnathidae, the two subfamilies and three sub-groups were clearly identified, delineated and resolved within the both the COI and 18S phylogenetic trees (Fig. 1). The Leucauge-Opadometa and Mesida-Tylorida were both found clustered within the Leucauginae-group, while the Tetragnatha were clustered in the Tetragnathinae-group. Some of these groupings were strongly supported by high bootstrap values of greater than 70% (Hillis and Bull, 1993).

These phylogenetic trees, based on the BI and MP analyses of the 18S gene and the BI and ML analyses of the COI gene, were highly comparable and corroborated with the documented internal relationships hypothesis of the Tetragnathidae family group (Alvarez-Padilla et al., 2009; Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga, 2011). When taken together, the reconstructed phylogenetic trees in this study strongly support the separate groupings of Leucauge-Opadometa and Mesida-Tylorida within the subfamily Leucauginae are coherent with their morphological characteristics. Both these findings suggest that the COI and 18S genes are reliable genetic markers which can be used to identify, delineate and verify the natural groupings within the Tetragnathidae subfamilies (Alvarez-Padilla et al., 2009), as well as for other spider families, which are hypothetically highly similar and strongly related based on their morphological criteria (Astrin et al., 2006). Comparative analysis of both the COI and the 18S gene fragment sequences of Leucauge and Opadometa were located within the same clade, suggesting they may represent a sister relationship. However, this hypothesis required further verification by adopting multiple gene sequence analyses with larger sample size. Nevertheless, Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga (2011) showed that Opadometa was closely related to Leucauge based on the numerous similarities observed in their morphology, behaviour and DNA sequences.

 

 

To date, the reclassification of Opadometa species is still ongoing, but has never been successfully revised due to the difficulty of procuring the scarce male specimen that is necessary for precise species identification. However, the widely accepted view is that the general morphology of male Opadometa highly resembles the smaller-sized male of Leucauge species (Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga, 2011). As such, Opadometa species is grouped under Leucauge species (Yoshida, 2009). Similarly, L. argentina formed a separate subclade in the phylogenetic tree (Fig. 1). Although L. argentina was categorized as a sister group to the Leucauge-Opadometa family group in this study, it was the only small-sized species (< 6 mm) found in the present study.

Within the Mesida-Tylorida group, members share many similar morphological characteristics (Tanikawa, 2001; Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga, 2011) and so these two genera can only be distinguished by minor differences in their outer appearance (Tanikawa, 2001, 2004; Kulkarni, 2014). Tylorida striata was recognized as a sister-clade to M. argentiopunctata and the Mesida species (Tanikawa, 2001) based on a cladistic analysis of their morphological characteristics. Based on a previous study conducted by comparing their morphological characteristics, behaviour and DNA sequence, Tylorida was identified as a sister group to Orsinome species (Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga, 2011). However, since the specimens used in this study failed to include the Orsinome species from Malaysia, this observation cannot be fully verified as yet.

Meanwhile, the genus Tetragnatha is the only genus from the subfamily Tetragnathinae that has a readily available record in Malaysia. The genus Tetragnatha was documented as a sister clade in the grouping, as inferred from their genetics, morphology and behavior patterns, which were all highly similar to the Glenognatha and Pachygnatha (Alvarez-Padilla and Hormiga, 2011), albeit both genera are yet to be documented in Malaysia (Dzulhelmi et al., 2014a, b; Norma-Rashid and Li, 2009). In spite of their similarities, the Tetragnathinae-group was found to differ significantly from the Leucauginae-group in terms of their morphological characteristics (Alvarez-Padilla et al., 2009). Nevertheless, the species boundaries among Tetragnatha spp. in Malaysia could not be fully resolved. Tetragnatha pinicola from the present study was identical to some of the unpublished COI sequences of T. ceylonica from Malaysia.

A detailed morphological analysis of these T. ceylonica samples would be beneficial in confirming their species identity. There is also a possibility of the shared DNA barcodes among closely related members, hence a comparative genetic analysis between T. ceylonica and T. pinicola by adopting various genetic markers would be needed to unveil the differences or to identy if they are a species complex. The species status of T. pinicola was also complicated by the distinct COI genetic distances (>16%) between Malaysian strain and those from the GenBank (i.e., China, Germany, Italy, Spain Switzerland). This discrepancy also deserves additional research efforts to resolve its species status.

The tree-based taxa clustering in the present study indicated that the molecular evidence provided by the COI gene supports the morphological hypothesis. This DNA identification method has, therefore, been found to be scientifically reliable and useful for spider taxonomic studies. An important point to note is that the current findings indicate that the COI gene has adequate variable regions and is more informative than the 18S gene in resolving intra- and inter-specific relationships among the Tetragnathid species. For example, a single marker from the COI gene is already sufficient for studying the genetic relationships in other spider species (i.e. Garb et al., 2004; Tanikawa et al., 2006; Vink et al., 2009; Smith et al., 2012; Muslimin et al., 2015). Nonetheless, some groups of spiders achieve better results from using other genetic markers (i.e. Croom et al., 1991; Fang et al., 2000; Astrin et al., 2006), or a combination of several genetic markers (i.e. Benjamin et al., 2008; Alvarez-Padilla et al., 2009; Su et al., 2011; Franzini et al., 2013).

Conclusion

This study utilized COI and 18S gene sequences to the DNA barcodes of 17 studied tetragnathid spider species in Malaysia. However, their genetic diversity maybe underestimated because the low sample size used in the present study may not sufficient to disclose their intraspecific variation. Therefore, it is highly recommended that a wider range of the Malaysian tetragnathid species with larger sample size should be used in future studies to further compare and contrast the compatibility of these two gene sequences. Testing on other genetic markers is also warranted to resolve the species boundaries among some of the complex taxa.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (PERHILITAN), Sabah Parks and Sarawak Forestry Department for their permission to conduct the research. We are grateful to Ms. Ili Syazwana Abdullah, Mr. Mohd Taufiq Ahmad, Ms. Nurhafiza Dahniar Afandi and Dr. Teh Ser Huy and Dr. Salmah Yaakop for assisting in the molecular technique and explaining important information in phylogenetic analyses. We also thank anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments to improve the draft of this manuscript. This project was funded by MyBrain15 scholarships and University of Malaya IPPP grant (PG096-2012B) awarded to Dzulhelmi MN.

Statement of conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interests.

References

Alvarez-Padilla, F., 2008. Higher level systematics of the spider family Tetragnathidae and revision of the genus Metabus (Araneae). PhD dissertations, Columbian College of Arts and Sciences, George Washington University, Washington, DC, pp. 745.

Alvarez-Padilla, F., Dimitrov, D., Giribet, G. and Hormiga G., 2009. Phylogenetic relationships of the spider family Tetragnathidae (Araneae, Araneoidea) based on morphological and DNA sequence data. Cladistics, 25: 109-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2008.00242.x

Alvarez-Padilla, F. and Hormiga, G., 2011. Morphological and phylogenetic atlas of the orb-weaving spider family Tetragnathidae (Araneae: Araneoidea). Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 162: 713-879. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2011.00692.x

Astrin, J.J., Huber, B.A., Misof, B. and Klutsch, C.F.C., 2006. Molecular taxonomy in pholcid spiders (Pholcidae, Araneae): Evaluation of species identification methods using CO1 and 16S rRNA. Zool. Scr., 35: 441-457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1463-6409.2006.00239.x

Barrion, A.T. and Litsinger, J.A., 1995. Riceland spiders of South and South East Asia. CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 700.

Benjamin, S.P., Dimitrov, D., Gillespie, R.G. and Hormiga, G., 2008. Family ties: Molecular phylogeny of crab spiders (Araneae: Thomisidae). Cladistics, 2008: 708-722. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2008.00202.x

Blackledge, T.A., Scharff, N., Coddington, J., Szuts, T., Wenzel, J., Hayashi, C. and Agnarsson, I., 2009. Reconstructing web evolution and spider diversification in the molecular era. Proc. natl. Acad. Sci., 106: 5229-5234. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0901377106

Blagoev, G.A., Dewaard, J.R., Ratnasingham, S., Dewaard, S.L., Lu, L., Robertson, J., Telfer, A.C., Hebert, P.D., 2016. Untangling taxonomy: A DNA barcode reference library for Canadian spiders. Mol. Ecol. Resour., 16: 325-341. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12444

Croom, H.B., Gillespie, R.G. and Palumbi, S.R., 1991. Mitochondrial DNA sequences coding for a small portion of the RNA of the small ribosomal subunits of Tetragnatha mandibulata and Tetragnatha hawaiensis (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). J. Arachnol., 19: 210-214.

Dimitrov, D. and Hormiga, G., 2011. An extraordinary new genus of tetragnathid spiders from Western Australia with an expanded phylogenetic hypothesis for the generic relationships of Tetragnathidae (Araneae). Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 161: 725-768. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.2010.00662.x

Dzulhelmi, M.N., Suriyanti, S.N.P., Zulqarnain, M. and Norma, C.Y., 2014a. New distributional records of spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) from the west coast of Peninsular Malaysia. Pakistan J. Zool., 46: 1573-1584.

Dzulhelmi, M.N., Wong, C.X., Goh, T.G., Juhaida, H. and Faszly, R., 2014b. Spider fauna (Arachnida, Araneae) from Sabah, Malaysia. J. Ent. Zool. Stud., 2: 335-344.

Dzulhelmi, M.N., Suriyanti, S.N.P., Zulqarnain, M. and Norma, C.Y., 2015. Two new Opadometa species (Araneae, Tetragnathidae) from Sarawak, Malaysia. Annls Zool. Fenn., 65: 101-107. https://doi.org/10.3161/00034541ANZ2015.65.1.008

Dzulhelmi, M.N. and Suriyanti, S.N,P., 2015. Common Malaysian spiders. UPM Press, Serdang, pp 197.

Dzulhelmi, M.N., 2016. Distribution of spiders in Malaysia with special emphasis of the systematics and ecology of the orb-web spider (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). PhD dissertations, Faculty of Sciences, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.

Dzulhelmi, M.N. Thary, G.G., Asraf, B., Faszly, R., Zulqarnain, M. and Norma-Rashid, Y., 2017. Web characteristics determine niche partitioning for orb-web spiders (Araneae, Tetragnathidae) in Malaysia. Orient. Insects, 51: 262-275. https://doi.org/10.1080/00305316.2017.1282385

Fang, K., Yang, C.C., Lue, B.W., Chen, S.H. and Lue, K.Y., 2000. Phylogenetic corroboration of superfamily Lycosidae spiders (Araneae) as inferred from partial mitochondrial 12S and 16S ribosomal DNA sequences. Zool. Stud., 39: 107-113.

Franzini, P.Z.N., Dippenaar-Schoeman, A.S., Yessoufou, K. and Van-Der-Bank, F.H., 2013. Combined analyses of genetic and morphological data indicate more than one species of Cyrtophora (Araneae: Araneidae) in South Africa. Int. J. Mod. biol. Res., 1: 21-34. https://doi.org/10.4102/satnt.v31i1.339

Garb, J.E., Gonzalez, A. and Gillespie R.G., 2004. The black widow spider genus Latrodectus (Araneae: Theridiidae): Phylogeny, biogeography, and invasion history. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol., 31: 1127-1142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2003.10.012

Griswold, C.E., Coddington, J.A., Hormiga, G. and Scharff, N., 1998. Phylogeny of the orb-web building spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae: Deinopoidea, Araneoidea). Zool. J. Linn. Soc., 123: 1-99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-3642.1998.tb01290.x

Guindon, S., Dufayard, J.F., Lefort, V., Anisimova, M., Hordijk, W. and Gascuel, O., 2010. New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: Assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Syst. Biol., 59: 307-321. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syq010

Hall, T., 2005. Bioedit, biological sequence alignment editor for Win95/NT/2K/XP. Ibis Therapeutic, Carlsbad.

Hillis, D.M., Bull, J.J., 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol., 42: 182-192. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/42.2.182

Hormiga, G., Eberhard, W.G. and Coddington, J.A., 1995. Web-construction behaviour in Australian Phonognatha and the phylogeny of Nephiline and Tetragnathid spiders (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Aust. J. Zool., 43: 313-364. https://doi.org/10.1071/ZO9950313

Jager, P., 2007. Spiders from Laos with description of new species (Arachnida: Araneae). Acta Arachnol., 56: 29-58. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.56.29

Jager, P. and Praxaysombath, B., 2009. Spiders from Laos: New species and new records (Arachnida: Araneae). Acta Arachnol., 58: 27-51. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.58.27

Jager, P. and Praxaysombath, B., 2011. Spiders from Laos with forty-three new records and first results from the provinces Bolikhamsay and Champasak (Arachnida: Araneae). Acta Arachnol., 60: 9-31. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.60.9

Jager, P., Nophaseud, L. and Praxaysombath, B., 2012. Spiders from Laos with description of a new species and new records (Arachnida: Araneae). Acta Arachnol., 61: 77-92. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.61.77

Kimura, M., 1980. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotides sequence. J. mol. Evol., 16: 111-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01731581

Koh, J.K.H. and Ming, L.T., 2013. Biodiversity in the heart of Borneo: Spiders of Brunei Darussalam. Natural History Publications (Borneo), Kota Kinabalu, pp. 375.

Koh, J.K.H., Koh, Y., Norma-Rashid, Y. and Koh, J.W.B., 2013. A preliminary checklist of Sarawak spiders. Sarawak Mus. J., 92: 203-254.

Kulkarni, S., 2014. A new species of the genus Tylorida Simon, 1894 (Araneae: Tetragnathidae) from a rocky outcrop in the northern western Ghats, India. J. Threat. Taxa, 6: 5558-5561. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o3606.5558-61

Levi, H.W., 1980. The orb-weaver genus Mecynogea, the subfamily Metinae and the genera Pachygnatha, Glenognatha and Azilia of the subfamily Tetragnathidae north of Mexico. Bull. Mus. comp. Zool., 149: 1-74.

Murphy, F. and Murphy, J., 2000. An introduction to the spiders of South East Asia. Malayan Nature Society, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 625.

Muslimin, M., Wilson, J.J., Amir-Ridhwan, M.G., Braima, K.A., Jeffery, J., Wan-Nor, F., Alaa-Eldin, M.E., Mohd-Zin, S.W., Wan-Yusoff, W.S., Norma-Rashid, Y., Lau, Y.L., Rohela, M. and Abdul-Aziz N.M., 2015. First report of brown widow spider sightings in Peninsular Malaysia and notes on its global distribution. J. Venom. Anim. Toxins Trop. Dis., 21: 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40409-015-0010-2

Norma-Rashid, Y. and Li, D., 2009. A checklist of spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) from Peninsular Malaysia inclusive of twenty new records. Raffles Bull. Zool., 57: 305-322.

Okuma, C., 1987. A revision of the Australasian species of the genus Tetragnatha (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Esakia, 25: 37-96.

Okuma, C., 1988. A revision of the genus Tetragnatha Latreille (Araneae: Tetragnathidae) of Asia. Parts I and II. J. Facul. Agric. Kyushu Univ., 32: 165-213. https://doi.org/10.5109/23876

Pan, H.C., Zhou, K.Y., Song, D.X. and, Qiu, Y., 2004. Phylogenetic placement of the spider genus Nephila (Araneae: Araneoidea) inferred from rRNA and MaSp1 gene sequences. Zool. Sci., 1: 343-351. https://doi.org/10.2108/zsj.21.343

Ronquist, F. and Huelsenbeck, J.P., 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics, 19: 1572-1574. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btg180

Smith, H.M., Vink, C.J., Fitzgerald, B.M. and Sirvid, P.J., 2012. Redescription and generic placement of the spider Cryptachaea gigantipes (Keyserling, 1890) (Araneae: Theridiidae) and notes on related synanthropic species in Australasia. Zootaxa, 3507: 38-56. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3507.1.2

Song, D.X., Zhang, J.X. and Li, D., 2002. A checklist of spiders from Singapore (Arachnida: Araneae). Raffles Bull. Zool., 50: 359-388.

Su, Y.C., Chang, Y.H., Smith, D., Zhu, M.S., Kuntner, M. and Tso, I.M., 2011. Biogeography and speciation patterns of the golden orb spider genus Nephila (Araneae: Nephilidae) in Asia. Zool. Sci., 28: 47-55. https://doi.org/10.2108/zsj.28.47

Swofford, D.L., 2003. PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), Version 4.0b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.

Tanikawa, A., 2001. Okileucauge sasakii, a new genus and species of spider from Okinawajima Island, Southwest Japan (Araneae, Tetragnathidae). J. Arachnol., 29: 16-20. https://doi.org/10.1636/0161-8202(2001)029[0016:OSANGA]2.0.CO;2

Tanikawa, A., 2004. Japanese spiders of the genus Tylorida (Araneae: Tetragnathidae). Acta Arachnol., 53: 151-154. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.53.151

Tanikawa, A., Chang, Y.H. and Tso, I.M., 2006. Identity of a Japanese species recorded as “Pasilobus bufoninus” (Araneae: Araneidae), with description of the male considering the sequence of mtDNA. Acta Arachnol., 55: 45-49. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.55.45

Tanikawa, A., Shinkai, A. and Miyashita, T., 2014. Molecular phylogeny of moth-specialized spider sub-family Cyrtarachninae, which includes bolas spiders. Zool. Sci., 31: 716-720. https://doi.org/10.2108/zs140034

Thompson, J.D., Gibson, T.J., Plewniak, F., Jeanmougin, F. and Higgins, D.G., 1997. The clustalX windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by the quality analysis tools. Nucl. Acids Res., 24: 4876-4882. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/25.24.4876

Vink, C.J., Duperre, N., Paquin, P., Fitzgerald, B.M. and Sirvid, P.J., 2009. The cosmopolitan spider Cryptachaea blattea (Urquhart 1886) (Araneae: Theridiidae): Redescription, including COI sequence, and new synonymy. Zootaxa, 2133: 55-63. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.2133.1.5

World Spider Catalog, 2020. World spider catalog, Version 21.5. Natural History Museum, Bern. Available at: http:wsc.nmbe.ch (accessed on 5 December 2020).

Yoshida, H., 2009. The spider genus Leucauge (Araneae: Tetragnathidae) from Taiwan. Acta Arachnol., 58: 11-18. https://doi.org/10.2476/asjaa.58.11