鼻白蚁科系统发育研究述评

鼻白蚁科是社会性昆虫白蚁的一个重要类群,包括许多世界性大害虫,且在等翅目昆虫系统发育中占有特殊的地位.本文概述了应用于鼻白蚁科系统发育研究的系统分类学方法,探讨了鼻白蚁科系统发育研究现状及存在的问题.鼻白蚁科不具有单系性,其系统发育问题有待深入研究.     

七种白蚁消化道解剖形态的比较研究

本文对采自浙江省的7种白蚁（东方原白蚁、黄肢散白蚁、黑胸散白蚁、肖若散白蚁、家白蚁、杨之江近歪白蚁和和大鼻象白蚁）的消化道形态进行了解剖比较研究。并初步探讨了白蚁消化道形态在白蚁系统发育和进化中的意义。     

四种散白蚁的分子鉴定及系统发育地位(等翅目:鼻白蚁科)

【目的】目前对白蚁的物种鉴定主要依赖形态学特征,本文从分子水平对4种散白蚁进行了鉴定和系统发育分析。【方法】对4种散白蚁(湖南散白蚁Reticulitermes hunanensis Tsai et Peng、平额散白蚁Reticulitermes planifrons Li et Ping、近暗散白蚁Reticulitermes perilucifugus Ping和侏儒散白蚁Reticulitermes minuts Ping et Xu)的线粒体16Sr DNA和COⅡ基因序列进行扩增和测序,对序列进行比对及碱基组成分析后上传至GeneBank,并构建系统发育树对4种散白蚁进行系统发育分析。【结果】16S rDNA和COⅡ基因片段长度分别约380bp和720bp,两个基因的AT碱基含量均远远大于GC,16S rDNA序列的遗传距离普遍大于COⅡ序列,且两者的系统发育情况不一致。【结论】COⅡ基因系统发育与地理位置差距相关较为明显,16S rDNA基因序列碱基差异较COⅡ多,推断COⅡ基因更适合于白蚁由于地理位置引起的系统发育和地理迁徙及传入情况的研究,16S rDNA基因更适合于白蚁种类的鉴别。     

四种白蚁的线粒体DNA限制性片段长度多态性研究（等翅目：鼻白蚁？…

用６种限制性内切酶分析了４种白蚁的线粒体ＤＮＡ限制性片段长度多态性,根据限制性片段差异计算了４种白蚁之间的遗传距离,利用ＵＰＧＭＡ聚类分析法构建了分子聚类图。结果表明：尖唇异白蚁与散白蚁属关系很近,聚类分析结果显示应将其归于散白蚊属。     

四种白蚁的线粒体DNA限制性片段长度多态性研究(等翅目:鼻白蚁科,木白蚁科)

用６种限制性内切酶分析了４种白蚁的线粒体 Ｄ Ｎ Ａ 限制性片段长度多态性,根据限制性片段差异计算了４种白蚁之间的遗传距离,利用 Ｕ Ｐ Ｇ Ｍ Ａ 聚类分析法构建了分子聚类图。结果表明：尖唇异白蚁与散白蚁属关系很近,聚类分析结果显示应将其归于散白蚊属     

大白蚁属Macrotermes分子研究进展

大白蚁属Macrotermes是等翅目白蚁科大白蚁亚科(Isoptera: Termitidae: Macrotermitinae)中的一类高等培菌白蚁。本文综述了1996年来有关大白蚁属分子研究的文章,提供了截止目前大白蚁属Macrotermes 生物学信息,并分析了目前大白蚁属的分子研究现状,含等翅目系统关系,大白蚁属种间关系,大白蚁拟工蚁与食性演变,大白蚁属与其共生菌关系,及其分子研究的发展方向,特别是中国大白蚁属分子研究现状。     

线粒体Cyt b基因与昆虫分子系统学研究

细胞色素b(cytochrorrle b,Cyt b)是线粒体13个蛋白质编码基因中结构和功能被研究得最为清楚的基因之一,该基因的进化速度适中,适合研究种内到种间甚至科间的系统发育关系,研究内容涉及种及种下阶元的分类鉴定、种上阶元的系统发育分析、种群的遗传变异和进化研究、分子进化研究等方面,本文对Cyt b基因的分子特点及其在昆虫系统学研究中的应用进行综述。     

基于线粒体基因组全序列的鲟形目鱼类(Pisces: Acipenseriformes)的分子系统发育重建

为厘清鲟形目鱼类的系统发育, 研究新测定了中华鲟(Acipenser sinensis)、长江鲟(A. dabryanus)、短吻鲟(A. brevirostrum)、纳氏鲟(A. naccarii)、鳇(Huso dauricus)和匙吻鲟(Polyodon spathula)共6种鲟类的线粒体全基因组序列。联合已测的17种鲟类的线粒体基因组数据, 利用最大似然法和贝叶斯法重建了鲟形目鱼类的分子系统发育关系, 并采用似然值检验对不同的树拓扑结构进行了评价。结果表明, 6种新测鲟类的线粒体基因组大小为16521—16766 bp, 编码13个蛋白质编码基因、22个转运RNA基因和2个核糖体基因, 与大多数已测的鲟类的线粒体基因组结构高度相似。基于23种鲟形目鱼类线粒体基因组数据, 系统发育分析的结果表明: (1)鲟形目的两个科, 匙吻鲟科(Polyodontidae)和鲟科(Acipenseridae)均为单系; (2)鲟科的内部亲缘关系复杂, 鲟属和鳇属的物种均不构成单系群。鲟科鱼类按分子系统发育重建结果可以分为3个类群: 尖吻鲟类(A. sturio - A. oxyrinchus clade)、大西洋鲟类(Atlantic clade)和太平洋鲟类(Pacific clade)。树拓扑结构的检验结果表明, 鲟科的系统发育关系为(尖吻鲟类(太平洋鲟类, 大西洋鲟类))。铲鲟属(Scaphirhynchus)是大西洋鲟类的基部类群。研究也说明线粒体基因组数据在鲟形目鱼类系统与进化研究方面具有重要应用价值。     

秧鸡科部分鸟类线粒体基因组的比较及系统发育关系分析

秧鸡科鸟类的系统发育关系尚不明确,本研究通过对秧鸡科11属共17种鸟类的线粒体基因组中各基因进行变异位点和简约信息位点分析。选取变异位点和简约信息位点含量均较高的CR、ND2、ND4、ND5及线粒体基因组分别作为分子标记,采用NJ法、ML法和贝叶斯法分别构建系统发育树。通过对各系统树进行比较分析,结果表明:红胸田鸡、小田鸡、紫水鸡、南秧鸡、黑水鸡、白骨顶鸡、新西兰秧鸡、粟腹秧鸡、红眼斑秧鸡、冲绳秧鸡和奥岛秧鸡的系统发育关系明确;考虑将董鸡属划入苦恶鸟属、粟腹秧鸡划入到纹秧鸡属;支持侏秧鸡科独立成科;完整的线粒体基因组是解决秧鸡科鸟类系统发育关系的最优分子标记。研究结果将为后续增加种属,进一步解决秧鸡科鸟类的系统发育关系提供指导。     

四川白蚁名录

为了给基础研究和防治应用提供参考,笔者结合近年的研究成果和经验,对1923~2013年的文献涉及内容进行分析和甄别,确认四川地区(含重庆市)现发现白蚁4科14属96种。其中,草白蚁科:原白蚁属1种;木白蚁科:堆砂白蚁属1种,树白蚁属13种;鼻白蚁科:乳白蚁属1种,散白蚁属39种,杆白蚁属17种;白蚁科:土白蚁属5种,大白蚁属2种,亮白蚁属1种,华扭白蚁属5种,近扭白蚁属3种,象白蚁属4种,钝颚白蚁属3种,新白蚁属1种。四川省发现白蚁4科14属64种:其中草白蚁科:原白蚁属1种;木白蚁科:堆砂白蚁属1种,树白蚁属10种;鼻白蚁科:乳白蚁属1种,散白蚁属23种,杆白蚁属13种;白蚁科:土白蚁属1种,大白蚁属1种,亮白蚁属1种,华扭白蚁属3种,近扭白蚁属2种,象白蚁属4种,钝颚白蚁属2种,新白蚁属1种。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor