Phylogeny of the superfamily Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera: Obtectomera), with an exploratory application on geometric morphometrics

The superfamily Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera: Obtectomera) has a high species diversity. It consists of more than 18,400 described species and has a global distribution. Among it, large numbers of species were reported to be economically important to people's production and life. However, relationships among families or subfamilies in Gelechioidea have been exceptionally difficult to resolve using morphology or single gene genealogies. Multiple gene genealogies had been used in the molecular phylogenetic studies on Gelechioidea during the past years, but their phylogenetic relationships remain to be controversial mainly due to their limited taxa sampling relative to such high species diversity. In this paper, 89 ingroup species representing 55 genera are sequenced and added to the data downloaded from GenBank, and six species representing four closely related superfamilies are chosen as outgroup. The molecular phylogeny of Gelechioidea is reconstructed based on the concatenated data set composed of one mitochondrial marker (COI) and seven nuclear markers (CAD, EF-1ɑ, GAPDH, IDH, MDH, RpS5, wingless). The phylogenetic results, taking into consideration of the comparative morphological study, show that the clade of Gelechioidea is strongly supported and separated from other superfamilies, which further proves its monophyly. Five families are newly defined: Autostichidae sensu nov., Depressariidae sensu nov., Peleopodidae sensu nov., Ashinagidae sensu nov. and Epimarptidae sensu nov. Meanwhile, a monophyletic “SSABM” clade considered to be closely related is proposed for the first time, consisting of Stathmopodidae, Scythrididae, Ashinagidae, Blastobasidae and Momphidae. Moreover, geometric morphometric analyses using merged landmark data set from fore and hind wings of 118 representative species are conducted. The phenetic tree shows that the monophyly and phylogenetic relationships correspond with the results of molecular phylogeny largely, which well proves its importance and potential application in both phylogenetic reconstruction and species identification.     

Use of the characters of trophic specialization in the taxonomy of the broad-winged moths (Lepidoptera: Oecophoridae,Chimabachidae, Amphisbatidae,Depressariidae)

Trophic specialization of the larvae of Oecophorid moths from the Palaearctic Region is investigated. The former family Oecophoridae (sensu lato) is presently considered a polyphyletic group and is divided into the separate families Oecophoridae sensu stricto (with subfamilies Deuterogoniinae, Oecophorinae and Pleurotinae), Chimabachidae, Amphisbatidae and Depressariidae. Xyloryctidae, Stathmopodidae, Ethmiidae and Autostichidae are also considered as separate families. In these taxa, two main modes of feeding occur: on dead plants and on living plants. The first mode is inhered in Oecophoridae (in subfamily Pleurotinae both the modes are known) and Autostichidae. The family Amphisbatidae occupies an intermediate position as the larvae of Amphisbatini use dead leaves, whereas the larvae of Fuchsiini and Hypercalliini use green plants. The rest of the families associate with living plants. Trophic specialization in the families formerly included in Oecophoridae mostly corresponds to the taxonomic division based mainly on the morphological characters, although some exceptions are known, e. g. feeding of larvae of Carcina quercana (Oecophoridae, Oecophorinae, Carcinini) on living leaves.     

To the knowledge of the fauna of Microlepidoptera of the “Kurshskaya Kosa” National Park: I

A list of 212 Microlepidoptera species found in the territory of the Curonian Spit (both in its Russian and Lithuanian parts) is given: Micropterigidae (1), Eriocraniidae (1), Nepticulidae (16), Opostegidae (1), Heliozelidae (1), Adelidae (3), Prodoxidae (2), Incurvariidae (2), Tineidae (8), Psychidae (1), Douglasiidae (2), Bucculatricidae (3), Gracillariidae (26), Yponomeutidae (12), Plutellidae (3), Acrolepiidae (2), Glyphipterigidae (3), Lyonetiidae (1), Ethmiidae (1), Depressariidae (12), Elachistidae (20), Chimabachidae (1), Oecophoridae (9), Stathmopodidae (1), Batrachedridae (2), Coleophoridae (25), Momphidae (3), Blastobasidae (2), Cosmopterigidae (3), Choreutidae (1), Schreckensteiniidae (1), Epermeniidae (1), Alucitidae (1), Pterophoridae (7) and Pyralidae (35 species). 113 species of 24 families have been collected in the territory of the “Kurshskaya Kosa” National Park, including 45 species new to the Curonian Spit and 32 species new to Kaliningrad Province.     

Phylogeny of the superfamily Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia): an exemplar approach

Phylogenetic relationships within the megadiverse lepidopteran superfamily Gelechioidea have been poorly understood and consequently the family level classification has been problematic. An analysis of phylogeny using 193 characters, including 241 informative character states, derived from larval, pupal and adult morphology and larval ecology, was performed to resolve the phylogeny of the Gelechioidea. 143 species representing the diversity of the putative Gelechioidea were included, supplemented with 13 species representing 11 other Ditrysian families. The monophyly of the Gelechioidea was supported, although only with homoplastic characters. The putative position of the Gelechioidea as the sister group of the Apoditrysia was not supported, since the Gelechioidea was nested within this clade. The Gelechioidea was divided into two main lineages: (1) the gelechiid lineage constituting Deoclonidae, Syringopainae, a re‐composed Coleophoridae (including Coelopoetinae and Batrachedrinae as paraphyletic with Stathmopodinae, and Coleophorinae nested within it), Momphidae, Pterolonchidae, Scythrididae, Cosmopterigidae, and Gelechiidae, and (2) the oecophorid lineage constituting the “autostichid” family assemblage (including taxa formerly assigned to Autostichinae, Holcopogoninae, Symmocinae, Glyphidoceridae and Lecithoceridae), Xyloryctidae s.l. (including a paraphyletic Xyloryctidae of authors, some oecophorids of authors, Deuterogoniinae and Blastobasinae), Oecophoridae s.s., Amphisbatidae s.s., Carcinidae, Stenomati[n/d]ae, Chimabachidae and Elachistidae (including Depressariinae s.s., Telechrysis, Ethmiinae, Hypertrophinae s.l., miscellaneous “amphisbatids”sensu authors, Aeolanthinae, Parametriotinae, Agonoxeninae and Elachistinae). Detritivory/fungivory may have evolved only twice within Gelechioidea, though the evolution of larval food substrate use frequently reverses. To avoid an unnecessary further proliferation of names, it is recommended that no further family group names are introduced within the Gelechioidea, unless based on a rigorous analysis of inter‐relationships.     

Phylogeny of the mega-diverse Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera): adaptations and determinants of success

The Gelechioidea, with 18,000 described and many more unnamed species ranks among the most diverse lepidopteran superfamilies. Nevertheless, their taxonomy has remained largely unresolved, and phylogenetic affinities among gelechioid families and lower taxa have been insufficiently understood. We constructed, for the first time, a comprehensive molecular phylogeny for the Gelechioidea. We sampled seven genes, in total 5466 base pairs, of 109 gelechioid taxa representing 32 of 37 recognized subfamilies, and two outgroup taxa. We used maximum likelihood methods and Bayesian inference to construct phylogenetic trees. We found that the families Autostichidae, Lecithoceridae, Xyloryctidae, and Oecophoridae s. str., in this order, are the most basally arising clades. Elachistidae s. l. was found to be paraphyletic, with families such as Gelechiidae and Cosmopterigidae nested within it, and Parametriotinae associated with several families previously considered unrelated to them. Using the phylogenetic trees, we examined patterns of life history evolution and determinants of the success of different lineages. Gelechioids express unusually wide variability in life-history strategies, including herbivorous, saprophagous, fungivorous, and carnivorous lineages. Most species are highly specialized in diet and other life history traits. The results suggest that either saprophagy was the ancestral feeding strategy from which herbivory evolved independently on multiple occasions, or that the ancestor was herbivorous with repeated origins of saprophagy. External feeding is an ancestral trait from which internal feeding evolved independently several times. In terms of species number, saprophages are dominant in Australia, while elsewhere several phytophagous lineages have extensively specialized and diversified. Internal feeding has remained a somewhat less generally adopted feeding mode, although in a few lineages significant radiations of leaf mining species have occurred. We conclude that diverse feeding modes, specialization among saprophages, repeated shifts to phytophagy, and a generally high specialization rate on single plant species (monophagy) are the major factors behind the success of the Gelechioidea.     

Morphology reinforces proposed molecular phylogenetic affinities: a revised classification for Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera)

Gelechioidea are one of the most species rich and least studied superfamilies of Lepidoptera. We examine the interrelationships within the superfamily using the densest taxon sampling to date, combined with the most extensive ever morphological and molecular character data. We perform partitioned and combined analyses using maximum likelihood, Bayesian and parsimony approaches. The combined dataset consists of 155 exemplar species of Gelechioidea, representing nearly all subfamilies recognized in recent classifications. Parsimony analyses are performed with a dataset including 28 additional terminal taxa with only morphological data available. We use eight genes with a total of 6127 bp, and morphological data with 253 characters derived from larval, pupal, and adult morphology. The analyses of combined data yield more resolved trees and significantly better‐supported groupings than either dataset when analysed alone. The recurrent monophyletic groupings in all our model‐based analyses support a revision of the family classification. Deeper relationships vary between analyses and data partitions, leaving them ambiguous. The place of the root remains a challenge for future research. We propose a revised classification and suggest the division of Gelechioidea into 16 families. We redefine Depressariidae Meyrick, 1883 for a monophylum that includes Acriinae, Aeolanthinae, Cryptolechiinae, Depressariinae, Ethmiinae, Hypercalliinae, Hypertrophinae, Peleopodinae, Oditinae, Stenomatinae, Carcina, and a diversity of predominantly New World taxa previously excluded from Lypusidae (Amphisbatidae s. authors) but left without family position. A monophyletic Oecophoridae s. s., including Deuterogoniinae and Pleurotinae, is obtained for the first time with significant support. Elachistidae s. l. is found to be polyphyletic, and Elachistidae is restricted to comprise Agonoxeninae, Elachistinae, and Parametriotinae. Batrachedridae are polyphyletic, with several genera pending further study. Apart from the core Batrachedra, the taxa previously included in this family are grouped in an expanded Pterolonchidae, together with Coelopoetinae and Syringopainae. Lypusidae s. s. and Chimabachidae form a monophylum; Chimabachinae is united with Lypusidae as a subfamily, stat. n. Our results contradict the subfamily classifications of several families, notably Lecithoceridae and Autostichidae, but due to insufficient sampling of taxa we refrain from comprehensive taxonomic conclusions on the subfamily level, and encourage focused studies to resolve these groups.     

Systematics and evolution of the cutworm moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): evidence from two protein-coding nuclear genes

Abstract. A broad molecular systematic survey of Noctuidae was undertaken to test recent hypotheses on the problematic definitions and relationships of the subfamilies, with special emphasis on the ‘trifines.’ An initial hypothesis of noctuid classification to the subtribal level was synthesized from recent reviews, and then sampled as broadly as possible. Concatenated sequences for the nuclear genes elongation factor‐1α (EF‐1α; 1200 bp) and dopa decarboxylase (DDC; 700–1100 bp) were analysed for a total of 146 exemplar species, twice that of a previous study. Trees were estimated using likelihood, distance, and both equally weighted and ‘six‐parameter’ parsimony. Of the 144 possible nodes, bootstrap support (BP) was ≥ 50% for ～80, and ≥ 80% for ～60. There was very strong support (BP ≥ 90%) for an ‘L.A.Q.’ clade encompassing nearly all quadrifine noctuids plus Arctiidae and Lymantriidae, decisively rendering Noctuidae paraphyletic. We present a new classification for Noctuoidea in which Noctuidae sensu stricto is restricted to trifines; most quadrifine subfamilies are raised to full families. Within the ‘L.A.Q.’ clade, Aganainae and Herminiinae were strongly grouped, but other relationships were weakly supported, probably due to limited taxon sampling. Nolidae and Euteliinae + Stictopterinae are generally grouped with the ‘L.A.Q.’ clade, but with weak support. All analyses favour the broadest definitions proposed for the trifine clade (our Noctuidae sensu stricto) although support is not strong, except that the exemplar of Eustrotiinae: Eublemmini is placed securely in the ‘L.A.Q.’ clade. Numerous recent proposals for dismantling and recombining the ‘Hampsonian’ traditional trifine subfamilies are strongly supported, most notably a broadly defined ‘true cutworm’ clade (Noctuinae s.l.), encompassing the greater part of the traditional subfamilies Amphipyrinae, Cuculliinae, Hadeninae and Noctuinae s.s. (BP ≥ 95%). Within this clade there is strong support for Apameini s.s.+ Xylenini s.l. and for Noctuinae s.s. and divisions thereof, but little support for monophyly or subdivision of Hadeninae. Noctuinae s.l. invariably are allied with Heliothinae, scattered remnants of the traditional Amphipyrinae, and several smaller groups in a broader ‘pest clade’, albeit with weak support. Relationships among the remaining ‘lower’ trifines are not strongly resolved. Mapping of a preliminary synopsis of species diversities, host use patterns and latitudinal distributions on the phylogeny suggests that the diversification of trifines may have been promoted, to a degree unique among Macrolepidoptera, by the Tertiary expansion of seasonal, open habitats and their associated herbaceous floras.     

Molecular systematics of New World suboscine birds

Phylogenetic relationships among New World suboscine birds were studied using nuclear and mitochondrial DNA sequences. New World suboscines were shown to constitute two distinct lineages, one apparently consisting of the single species Sapayoa aenigma, the other made up of the remaining 1000+ species of New World suboscines. With the exception of Sapayoa, monophyly of New World suboscines was strongly corroborated, and monophyly within New World suboscines of a tyrannoid clade and a furnarioid clade was likewise strongly supported. Relationships among families and subfamilies within these clades, however, differed in several respects from current classifications of suboscines. Noteworthy results included: (1) monophyly of the tyrant-flycatchers (traditional family Tyrannidae), but only if the tityrines (see below) are excluded; (2) monophyly of the pipromorphine flycatchers (Pipromorphinae of ) as one of two primary divisions of a monophyletic restricted Tyrannidae; (3) monophyly of the tityrines, consisting of the genus Tityra plus all sampled species of the Schiffornis group (), as sister group to the manakins (traditional family Pipridae); (4) paraphyly of the ovenbirds (traditional family Furnariidae), if woodcreepers (traditional family Dendrocolaptidae) are excluded; and (5) polyphyly of the antbirds (traditional family Formicariidae) and paraphyly of the ground antbirds (Formicariidae sensu stricto). Genus Melanopareia (the crescent-chests), although clearly furnarioid, was found to be distant from other furnarioids and of uncertain affinities within the Furnarii. Likewise, the species Oxyruncus cristatus (the Sharpbill), although clearly tyrannoid, was distantly related to other tyrannoids and of uncertain affinities within the Tyranni. Results of this study provide support for some of the more novel features of the suboscine phylogeny of, but also reveal key differences, especially regarding relationships among suboscine families and subfamilies. The results of this study have potentially important implications for the reconstruction of character evolution in the suboscines, especially because the behavioral evolution of many suboscine groups (e.g., Furnariidae) is of great interest.     

Gelechioidea (Insecta: Lepidoptera) systematics: a reexamination using combined morphology and mitochondrial DNA data

Phylogenies of Gelechioidea (Insecta: Lepidoptera) historically have been in disagreement and definitions vary at the family and subfamily levels. Addition of new taxa or new characters drastically changes relationships indicating that current phylogenetic schemes require more investigation. This study is the first phylogenetic analysis of Gelechioidea to include molecular data. Here we present a combined analysis using Maximum Parsimony to investigate sister-group relationships within Gelechioidea. The addition of Cytochrome oxidase I and II to revised published morphological matrices gives 453 parsimony informative characters for the 42 taxa for which we have sequence data. The combined analysis resulted in two trees with mostly novel sister-group relationships. These results challenge current concepts of Gelechioidea, suggesting that traditional morphological characters that have united taxa may not be homologous structures and are in need of further investigation. A combination of morphological data with new molecular data will be the most robust method of study for Gelechioidea phylogenetics.     

Phylogenetic synthesis of morphological and molecular data reveals new insights into the higher‐level classification of Tipuloidea (Diptera)

Tipuloidea, the crane flies, are a diverse lineage of true flies (Insecta: Diptera) whose phylogenetic classification and taxonomy remain a challenge. Here we present the results of a quantitative phylogenetic analysis of Tipuloidea based on combined morphological characters (adult, larvae and pupae) and nuclear gene sequence data (28S rDNA and CAD). Forty‐five species, from 44 genera and subgenera, were sampled, representing the four putative families of Tipuloidea (Cylindrotomidae, Limoniidae, Pediciidae and Tipulidae sensu stricto). Analyses of individual datasets, although differing in overall topology, support the monophyly of several major lineages within Tipuloidea. Parsimony and Bayesian analyses using individual morphological and molecular datasets resulted in incongruent topologies. Increased resolution and tree support was obtained when both datasets (morphology and genes) were combined, in both combined evidence parsimony and Bayesian analyses, than when analysed separately. The recovered consensus phylogeny was not consistent with any previously proposed Tipuloidea classification, with previous importance assigned to character states shown here to represent losses and reversals seen as a major factor influencing erroneous classification. The results provided here, together with evidence from previous analyses, were used to append the Tipuloidea classification to supported evolutionary lineages. Tipuloidea is presented as two families: Pediciidae and Tipulidae. Pediciidae is recovered as the sister group to all remaining Tipuloidea. Our current phylogenetic hypothesis is not consistent with the existing subfamilial classification of the ‘Limoniidae’, which is paraphyletic with respect to a well‐supported Tipulinae + Cylindrotominae clade, whereas the three ‘limoniid’ subfamilies are para‐ or polyphyletic. The recognition of ‘Limoniidae’ as a valid monophyletic family is discouraged and the subfamilies of ‘Limoniidae’ are amended and placed within Tipulidae. A revised phylogenetic classification is proposed for the crane flies based on a synthesis of evidence from multiple genes and morphology.     

Genus-level supertree of Cyprinidae (Actinopterygii: Cypriniformes), partitioned qualitative clade support and test of macro-evolutionary scenarios

We used the supertree approach of matrix representation with parsimony to reconstruct to date the most exhaustive (genus‐level) phylogeny of Cyprinidae. The supertree of Cyprinidae, representing 397 taxa (237 nominal genera) and 990 pseudocharacters, was well resolved (96%) through extended consensus majority rule, although 36 nodes (9.4%) were unsupported. The proportion of shared taxa among source trees was very low after calculation of the taxonomic coverage index (TCI = 0.059), which is proposed here as a more accurate alternative to the usual ratios calculated from the number of pseudo‐characters or source trees per taxon. We define a new index for the calculation of partitioned qualitative clade support, the partitioned rQS (_prQS), which offers a straightforward visualization of the relative supports of source tree partitions at supertree nodes.The use of _prQS showed that the molecular source tree partition contributed to most node supports within the supertree of Cyprinidae (73%, contra 21% for the morphological partition) and evidenced a fair proportion of conflict at nodes between the two partitions (21%), notably reflecting (i) the greater number and resolution of molecular source trees, and (ii) potential morphological convergences. Most of the higher‐level relationships within Cyprinidae were supported by both morphological and molecular source tree partitions. Our supertree showed a well‐supported dichotomy between a clade consisting of a ‘barbine’ + ‘rasborine’ lineage, sister group to (Barbinae [paraphyletic], (Cyprininae, Labeoninae)), and a clade consisting of other rasborines (large polytomy) and the two monophyletic groups ((Tincinae, Tanichthys), (Ecocarpia, (Acheilognathinae, (Gobioninae, Leuciscinae)))) and (Squaliobarbinae, (Xenocyprinae, Cultrinae)). Through the non‐monophyly of almost all the traditional subfamilies of Cyprinidae and 34 genera, our supertree exemplified the taxonomic chaos that reigns in the classification of the family. It also highlighted that further efforts should aim at increasing taxonomic sampling and generating alternative phylogenetic signals, notably for the still poorly apprehended Tincinae, Squaliobarbinae, Acheilognathinae, Gobioninae, and Rasborinae, the latter representing a key taxon for the understanding of early cyprinid evolution. Our supertree also proved useful for testing macro‐evolutionary scenarios at a wide taxonomic scale. Ancestral reconstructions using linear parsimony confirmed that the Oriental tropical region was the centre of origin of Cyprinidae, and identified three Oriental‐to‐Palaearctic, two Palaearctic‐to‐Nearctic, and one Oriental‐to‐Afrotropical major migration events. On the other hand, we almost completely rejected the hypothesis of presence of barbels as a plesiomorphic condition within Cyprinidae (although ambiguous for maxillary barbels of the Barbinae‐Cyprininae type). The supertree of Cyprinidae serves as a basis to discuss the applications and bias of the newly proposed _prQS, to provide future guidelines for a better achievement of cyprinid phylogeny, and to elaborate further on inter‐continental migrations and the adaptive value of barbels.     

Phylogeny of the tachyporine group subfamilies and 'basal' lineages of the Aleocharinae (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) based on larval and adult characteristics

Abstract. This paper reports the conclusions of studies into the phylogeny of tachyporine group subfamilies and the ‘basal’ lineages of the subfamily Aleocharinae (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae) based on both larval and adult morphological data (133 adult characters, twenty-seven larval characters). Representatives of forty species of the tachyporine group were used in the analysis, including representatives of the Aleocharinae, Trichophyinae, Habrocerinae, Phloeocharinae, Olisthaerinae, and Tachyporinae. The Aleocharinae included representatives of the tribes Gymnusini, Deinopsini, Mesoporini, the ‘subfamily’ Trichopseniinae, and representatives of nine major tribes in the ‘higher’ Aleocharinae (Athetini, Hoplandriini, Falagriini, Lomechisini, Oxypodini, Aleocharini, Myllaenini, Homalotini, and Hypocyphtini). Analyses were performed first with adult characters alone and then with both larval and adult characters in a simultaneous analysis. The analysis based on adult characters produced eighty-five equally parsimonious trees (length = 499, consistency index = 42; retention index = 69). In the consensus tree, the Tachyporinae are not monophyletic, and the sister-group relationship between the Trichophyinae + Habrocerinae and the Aleocharinae is not resolved. The Aleocharinae are monophyletic, but, among the ‘basal’ Aleocharinae, the relationships of Gymnusini + Deinopsini, the Mesoporini, and the Trichopseniinae are unresolved. The combined adult and larval data, using Tachinus as the outgroup, produced six equally parsimonious trees (tree length = 588; consistency index = 43; retention index = 69). The strict consensus tree of the combined larval and adult data supports the following conclusions: (1) larval characters substantially stabilize the tree; (2) the subfamily Tachyporinae is not supported to be monophyletic; (3) the subfamilies Trichophyinae and Habrocerinae are sister groups, and together they are sister to the Aleocharinae; (4) the ‘basal’ Aleocharinae are not a monophyletic group, but the ‘higher’ Aleocharinae are monophyletic; (5) the sister group of the remaining Aleocharinae is a lineage made up of genera currently in the tribes Gymnusini and Deinopsini; (6) within the Gymnusini–Deinopsini lineage, the monophyly of the Gymnusini is weakly supported, but the monophyly of the Deinopsini is strongly supported; (7) the subfamily Trichopseniinae is strongly supported to be a member of the ‘basal’ Aleocharinae; (8) the Myllaenini are resolved well within the ‘higher’ Aleocharinae; (9) strong support for the monophyly of some tribes of ‘higher’ Aleocharinae suggests that morphological characters provide substantial phylogenetic signal for analysis of higher-level phylogeny of the Aleocharinae in spite of the preliminary nature of the analysis at this taxonomic level.     

基于线粒体基因Cytb和COI的蝗科中五亚科分子系统发育关系分析（直翅目: 蝗总科）（英文）

本研究基于Cytb 基因和COI基因的部分序列来推断17种蝗虫之间的系统发育关系。这17种蝗虫均采自国内,代表了蝗科(Acrididae)5个亚科：黑蝗亚科(Melanoplinae)、斑腿蝗亚科(Catantopinae)、刺胸蝗亚科(Cyrtacanthacridinae)、斑翅蝗亚科(Oedipodinae)和大足蝗亚科(Gomphocerinae)。采用联合序列方法进行分析,结果显示：Cytb 和COI联合序列长度为1 998 bp,其中A和T总含量为72.13%,G和C总含量为27.87%。联合序列共包含了889个保守位点,1 109个变异位点,在这些变异位点中有838个简约信息位点。系统发生树采用邻接法（NJ）、最大简约法（MP）和最大似然法（ML）进行构建。使用蜢总科的变色乌蜢Erianthus versicolor 和 Erianthus sp. 两个种作为外群。结果表明：大足蝗亚科和斑腿蝗亚科的单系性没有得到支持。斑翅蝗亚科内部各种聚成一个大支,在本研究中该亚科的单系性得到支持,与前人的研究结论相同。大足蝗亚科、斑腿蝗亚科、刺胸蝗亚科和黑蝗亚科这4科关系非常近,可以考虑将其合并为一个亚科。同时,我们发现基于Cytb和COI基因联合序列推断蝗科内各亚科间的系统发生关系并不十分可靠。     

The ecological tale of Gonyleptidae (Arachnida,Opiliones) evolution: phylogeny of a Neotropical lineage of armoured harvestmen using ecological,behavioural and chemical characters

The large Neotropical family Gonyleptidae comprises nearly 820 species divided into 16 subfamilies. The majority of publications on harvestman ecology, behaviour and scent gland secretion chemistry have focused on this family. We used the information available in the literature and combined it with an intensive search for ecological, behavioural and chemical data to infer the phylogeny of the Gonyleptidae. We included 28 species belonging to 14 of the 16 gonyleptid subfamilies in the ingroup and four species belonging to the families Cosmetidae, Stygnidae and Manaosbiidae in the outgroup. We performed the analyses using equally weighted characters and coded 63 characters comprising 153 states, which makes this the largest non‐morphological, non‐molecular phylogenetic data matrix published to date. We obtained five most parsimonious trees, and the strict consensus resulted in six collapsed nodes. The results show that the monophyly of Gonyleptidae is equivocal because Metasarcinae is placed at a basal polytomy with the outgroups Cosmetidae and Stygnidae. Gonyleptinae, Pachylinae and Progonyleptoidellinae are polyphyletic groups, but the remaining subfamilies are monophyletic and have several synapomorphies. Based on the resulting topology, we discuss the performance of ecological, behavioural and chemical characters, and map a selected set of characters to discuss their evolutionary patterns in the family.     

Phylogenetic analysis of higher-level relationships of Odonata

Abstract. This is the most comprehensive analysis of higher‐level relationships in Odonata conducted thus far. The analysis was based on a detailed study of the skeletal morphology and wing venation of adults, complemented with a few larval characters, resulting in 122 phylogenetically informative characters. Eighty‐five genera from forty‐five currently recognized families and subfamilies were examined. In most cases, several species were chosen to serve as exemplars for a given genus. The seven fossil outgroup taxa included were exemplar genera from five successively more distant odonatoid orders and suborders: Tarsophlebiidae (the closest sister group of Odonata, previously placed as a family within ‘Anisozygoptera’), Archizygoptera, Protanisoptera, Protodonata and Geroptera. Parsimony analysis of the data, in which characters were treated both under equal weights and implied weighting, produced cladograms that were highly congruent, and in spite of considerable homoplasy in the odonate data, many groupings in the most parsimonious cladograms were well supported in all analyses, as indicated by Bremer support. The analyses supported the monophyly of both Anisoptera and Zygoptera, contrary to the well known hypothesis of zygopteran paraphyly. Within Zygoptera, two large sister clades were indicated, one comprised of the classical (Selysian) Calopterygoidea, except that Amphipterygidae, which have traditionally been placed as a calopterygoid family, nested within the other large zygopteran clade comprised of Fraser's ‘Lestinoidea’ plus ‘Coenagrionoidea’ (both of which were shown to be paraphyletic as currently defined). Philoganga alone appeared as the sister group to the rest of the Zygoptera in unweighted cladograms, whereas Philoganga + Diphlebia comprised the sister group to the remaining Zygoptera in all weighted cladograms. ‘Anisozygoptera’ was confirmed as a paraphyletic assemblage that forms a ‘grade’ towards the true Anisoptera, with Epiophlebia as the most basal taxon. Within Anisoptera, Petaluridae appeared as the sister group to other dragonflies.     

Phylogeny of the suborder Psocomorpha: congruence and incongruence between morphology and molecular data (Insecta: Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera’)

The largest suborder of bark lice (Insecta: Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera’) is Psocomorpha, which includes over 3600 described species. We estimated the phylogeny of this major group with family‐level taxon sampling using multiple gene markers, including both nuclear and mitochondrial ribosomal RNA and protein‐coding genes. Monophyly of the suborder was strongly supported, and monophyly of three of four previously recognized infraorders (Caeciliusetae, Epipsocetae, and Psocetae) was also strongly supported. In contrast, monophyly of the infraorder Homilopsocidea was not supported. Based on the phylogeny, we divided Homilopsocidea into three independent infraorders: Archipsocetae, Philotarsetae, and Homilopsocidea. Except for a few cases, previously recognized families were recovered as monophyletic. To establish a classification more congruent with the phylogeny, we synonymized the families Bryopsocidae (with Zelandopsocinae of Pseudocaeciliidae), Calopsocidae (with Pseudocaeciliidae), and Neurostigmatidae (with Epipsocidae). Monophyly of Elipsocidae, Lachesillidae, and Mesopsocidae was not supported, but the monophyly of these families could not be rejected statistically, so they are tentatively maintained as valid families. The molecular tree was compared with a morphological phylogeny estimated previously. Sources of congruence and incongruence exist and the utility of the morphological data for phylogenetic estimation is evaluated. © 2014 The Linnean Society of London     

Lecithoceridae (Lepidoptera: Gelechioidea) of New Guinea: Part II. Hamatina gen. nov., with descriptions of four new species

This is the second part in a series of taxonomic studies on the family Lecithoceridae (Lepidoptera: Gelechioidea) of New Guinea. A new genus, Hamatina gen. nov., is described, based on the type species, H. hemitoma (Diakonoff), comb. nov., and four new species are described: H. nabangae sp. nov., H. robdevosi sp. nov., H. jembatana sp. nov., and. iriana sp. nov. A key to four allied genera is given. Adults, heads, labial palpi, wing venations, and the male genitalia are illustrated.     

Further progress on the phylogeny of Noctuoidea (Insecta: Lepidoptera) using an expanded gene sample

Major progress has been made recently toward resolving the phylogeny of Noctuoidea, the largest superfamily of Lepidoptera. However, numerous questions and weakly supported nodes remain. In this paper we independently check and extend the main findings of multiple recent authors by performing maximum‐likelihood analyses of 5–19 genes (6.7–18.6 kb) in 74 noctuoids representing all the families and a majority of the subfamilies. Our results strongly support the six family system of Zahiri et al., with the former Lymantriidae and Arctiidae subsumed within the huge family Erebidae, and Noctuidae restricted largely to the subfamilies with so‐called trifine hindwing venation. Our data also strongly corroborate monophyly of the set of four families with quadrifid forewing venation, to the exclusion of Notodontidae, and removal from the latter of Oenosandridae. Other among‐family relationships, however, remain unsettled. Our evidence is equivocal on the position of Oenosandridae, which are sister group to either Notodontidae alone or to all other noctuoids. Like other recent nuclear gene studies, our results also provide no strong support for relationships among the four quadrifid forewing families. In contrast, within families our analyses significantly expand the list of robustly resolved relationships, while introducing no strong conflicts with previous molecular studies. Within Notodontidae, for which we present the largest molecular taxon sample to date, we find strong evidence for polyphyly for some, or all, recent definitions of the subfamilies Thaumetopoeinae, Pygaerinae, Notodontinae and Heterocampinae. Deeper divergences are incompletely resolved but there is strong support for multiple ‘backbone’ nodes subtending most of the subfamilies studied. Within Erebidae, we find much agreement and no strong conflict with a recent previous study regarding relationships among subfamilies, and somewhat stronger support. Although many questions remain, the two studies together firmly resolve positions for over half the subfamilies. Within Noctuidae, we find no strong conflict with previous molecular studies regarding relationships among subfamilies, but much stronger resolution along the ‘backbone’ of the phylogeny. Combining information from multiple studies yields strongly resolved positions for most of the subfamilies. Finally, our results strongly suggest that the tribes Pseudeustrotiini and Prodeniini, currently assigned to the largest subfamily, Noctuinae, do not belong there. In sum, our results provide additional corroboration for the main outlines of family‐level phylogeny in Noctuoidea, and contribute toward resolving relationships within families.     

Structural alignment of 18S and 28S rDNA sequences provides insights into phylogeny of Phytophaga (Coleoptera: Curculionoidea and Chrysomeloidea)

We performed a comparative study of partial rDNA sequences from a variety of Coleoptera taxa to construct an annotated alignment based on secondary structure information, which in turn, provides improved rRNA structure models useful for phylogenetic reconstruction. Subsequent phylogenetic analysis was performed to test monophyly and interfamilial relationships of the megadiverse plant feeding beetle group known as ‘Phytophaga’ (Curculionoidea and Chrysomeloidea), as well as to discover their closest relatives among the Cucujiformia. Parsimony and Bayesian analyses were performed based on the structural alignment of segments of 18S rRNA (variable regions V4‐V5, V7‐V9) and 28S rRNA (expansion segment D2). A total of 104 terminal taxa of Coleoptera were included: 96 species of Cucujiformia beetles, representing the families and most ‘subfamilies’ of weevils and chrysomeloids (Phytophaga), as well as several families of Cleroidea, Tenebrionoidea and Cucujoidea, and eight outgroups from three other polyphagan series: Scarabaeiformia, Elateriformia and Bostrichiformia. The results from the different methods of analysis agree — recovering the monophyly of the ‘Phytophaga’, including Curculionoidea and Chrysomeloidea as sister groups. The curculionoid and chrysomeloid phylogeny recovered from the aligned 18S and 28S rDNA segments, which is independent of morphological data, is in agreement with recent hypotheses or concepts based on morphological evidence, particularly with respect to familial relationships. Our results provide clues about the evolutionary origin of the phytophagan beetles within the megaclade Cucujiformia, suggesting that the sister group of ‘Curculionoidea + Chrysomeloidea’ is a clade of the ‘Cucujoidea’, represented in this study by species in Boganiidae, Erotylidae, Nitidulidae, Cucujidae and Silvanidae. The Coccinellidae and Endomychidae are not grouped with the latter, and the remaining terminal taxa are nested in Tenebrionoidea and Cleroidea. We propose that the combination of structurally aligned ribosomal RNA gene regions 18S (V4‐V5, V7‐V9) and 28S (D2) are useful in testing monophyly and resolving relationships among beetle superfamilies and families.