Mitochondrial and nuclear markers support the monophyly of Dolichopodidae and suggest a rapid origin of the subfamilies (Diptera: Empidoidea)

Abstract. The Dolichopodidae is a species‐rich dipteran group with almost 7000 described species. The monophyly of the subfamilies and their relationships remain largely unknown because the polarities of key morphological characters are unclear and molecular data are available only for 9 of the 19 proposed subfamilies. Here we test whether molecular data from two nuclear (18S, 28S) and four mitochondrial (12S, 16S, Cytb, COI) genes can resolve the higher‐level relationships within the family. Our study is based on 76 Oriental species from 12 dolichopodid subfamilies and uses eight species of Empididae and Hybotidae as outgroups. Parsimony and likelihood analyses confirm the monophyly of the Dolichopodidae, as well as the monophyly of five of the ten subfamilies represented by more than two species [Sympycninae, Sciapodinae, Dolichopodinae, Hydrophorinae (excluding tribe Aphrosylini), Neurigoninae]. There is strong support for restoring the tribe Aphrosylini as a separate subfamily Aphrosylinae. The monophyly of Medeterinae, Peloropeodinae and Diaphorinae is dependent on which tree reconstruction technique is used, how indels are coded, and whether the fast‐evolving sites are excluded. Overall, we find that our sample of Oriental species is largely compatible with the subfamily concepts that were developed for the northern temperate fauna. However, our data provide little support for relationships between the subfamilies. Branch lengths, saturation, and distance plots suggest that this is probably the result of the rapid origin of dolichopodid subfamilies over a relatively short time. We find that genera that are difficult to place into subfamilies based on morphological characters are generally also difficult to place using molecular data. We predict that a dense, balanced taxon sample and protein‐encoding nuclear genes will be needed to resolve the higher‐level relationships in the Dolichopodidae.     

Untangling the Phylogeny of Amoeboid Protists1

ABSTRACT. The amoebae and amoeboid protists form a large and diverse assemblage of eukaryotes characterized by various types of pseudopodia. For convenience, the traditional morphology‐based classification grouped them together in a macrotaxon named Sarcodina. Molecular phylogenies contributed to the dismantlement of this assemblage, placing the majority of sarcodinids into two new supergroups: Amoebozoa and Rhizaria. In this review, we describe the taxonomic composition of both supergroups and present their small subunit rDNA‐based phylogeny. We comment on the advantages and weaknesses of these phylogenies and emphasize the necessity of taxon‐rich multigene datasets to resolve phylogenetic relationships within Amoebozoa and Rhizaria. We show the importance of environmental sequencing as a way of increasing taxon sampling in these supergroups. Finally, we highlight the interest of Amoebozoa and Rhizaria for understanding eukaryotic evolution and suggest that resolving their phylogenies will be among the main challenges for future phylogenomic analyses.     

Phylogeny of Sabellidae (Annelida) and relationships with other taxa inferred from morphology and multiple genes

The monophyly of Sabellidae, the phylogenetic relationships of its lineages, and the composition of Sabellida have been debated for many decades. Most studies on sabellid phylogeny have focused on morphological features but little DNA work has been published to date. We performed analyses using maximum‐parsimony methods that included 36 sabellids and members of previously related taxa. We integrated morphological and DNA sequence data to resolve relationships at different hierarchical levels (135 morphological features, fragments of the nuclear ribosomal RNA genes 18S and 28S, and the mitochondrial gene 16S). The results indicate the monophyly of Sabellida, including Sabellidae and Serpulidae. Monophyly of Fabriciinae and Serpulidae is assessed and the two groups are recovered as sister taxa, but with weak support. There is no significant support for the monophyly of Sabellinae. Relationships between members of the Sabellidae are still partially unresolved due to incongruence between partitions and low support for most clades. The evolution and transformation of certain characters within Sabellidae is explored.
© The Willi Hennig Society 2010.     

Evolution,biogeography and systematics of the western Palaearctic Zamenis ratsnakes

The phylogenetic relationships between western Palaearctic Zamenis and Rhinechis ratsnakes have been troubled, with recent estimates based on the supermatrix approach questioning their monophyly and providing contradictory results. In this study, we generated a comprehensive molecular data set for Zamenis and closely related ratsnakes to assess their phylogenetic and systematic relationships and infer their spatial and temporal modes of diversification. We obtained a fully resolved and well‐supported phylogeny, which is consistent across markers, taxon‐sets and phylogenetic methods. The close phylogenetic relationship between Rhinechis and Zamenis is well‐established. However, the early branching pattern within this clade, and the position of R. scalaris and Z. hohenackeri, remains poorly supported. The Persian ratsnake Z. persicus is sister to the Mediterranean species Z. situla, Z. longissimus and Z. lineatus, of which Z. situla is sister to a clade containing the latter two species. These results are consistent with a recent phylogenomic study on ratsnakes based on hundreds of loci. Whereas, topological tests based on our data and evidence from such phylogenomic study strongly rejected previous phylogenetic estimates based on the supermatrix approach and demonstrate that these “mega‐phylogenies”, with hundreds of taxa and high levels of missing data, have recovered inconsistent relationships with spurious nodal support. Biogeographical and molecular dating analyses suggest an origin of the ancestor of Rhinechis and Zamenis in the Aegean region with early cladogenesis during the Late Miocene associated with the Aegean arch formation and support a scenario of east‐to‐west diversification. Finally, while we have little morphological and phylogenetic evidence for the distinctiveness between Rhinechis and Zamenis, a classification of them in a single genus, and the designation of Zamenis scalaris (Schinz, 1822), reflects better their evolutionary relationships.     

Monophyly of Anthozoa (Cnidaria): why do nuclear and mitochondrial phylogenies disagree?

The phylum Cnidaria is usually divided into five classes: Anthozoa, Cubozoa, Hydrozoa, Scyphozoa and Staurozoa. The class Anthozoa is subdivided into two subclasses: Hexacorallia and Octocorallia. Morphological and molecular studies based on nuclear rDNA and recent phylogenomic studies support the monophyly of Anthozoa. On the other hand, molecular studies based on mitochondrial markers, including two recent studies based on mitogenomic data, supported the paraphyly of Anthozoa, and positioned Octocorallia as sister group to Medusozoa (the monophyletic group of Cubozoa, Hydrozoa and Scyphozoa). On the basis of 51 nuclear orthologs from four hexacorallians, four octocorallians, two hydrozoans and one scyphozoan (with poriferans and Homo sapiens as out‐groups), we built a multilocus alignment of 9 873 amino acids, which aimed at minimizing missing data and hidden paralogy, in order to understand the discrepancy between nuclear and mitochondrial phylogenies. Our phylogenetic analyses strongly supported the monophyly of Anthozoa. We compared the level of substitution saturation between our data set, the data sets of two recent phylogenomic studies and one of a mitogenomic study. We found that mitochondrial DNA is more saturated than nuclear DNA at all the phylogenetic levels studied. Our results emphasize the need for a good evaluation of phylogenetic signal.     

Phylogenetic analysis of the family Ariidae (Ostariophysi: Siluriformes), with a hypothesis on the monophyly and relationships of the genera

Ariid monophyly and intrafamilial relationships are investigated based on cladistic analysis of 230 morphological characters. Terminal taxa examined include whenever possible type‐species, or the most morphologically similar species to the type‐species of the nominal genera, and the largest possible number of species, including cleared and stained specimens, available in zoological collections. Previous hypotheses about monophyly of the Ariidae are strongly corroborated by new synapomorphies discovered in the present study. The subfamily Galeichthyinae and the remaining ariids are strongly supported by new morphological characters. The monotypic subfamily Bagreinae is recognized as the sister group to all nongaleichthyin ariids, supported by a large series of exclusive synapomorphies. A new concept of Ariinae is presented: the subfamily is found to be unequivocally monophyletic and includes all ariid genera, except Galeichthys and Bagre. New data supporting the monophyly of the genera included in the Ariinae are introduced and previous hypotheses of monophyly, species composition, morphological definition, and relationships are reviewed and discussed.     

Mitogenomic phylogeny of Trochoidea (Gastropoda: Vetigastropoda): New insights from increased complete genomes

Increased mitochondrial (mt) genomes can provide more sets of genome‐level characteristics for resolving deeper phylogeny. Limited information with respect to the Trochoidea mitochondrial genome organization is available; besides, monophyly and internal relationships of the superfamily still remain a matter of discussion. To resolve the monophyly and internal phylogenetic controversies of Trochoidea and expand our understanding for mt genomic characteristic evolution among Trochoidea, the phylogenetic trees were reconstructed using 13 newly sequenced complete mt genomes and 35 genomes from GenBank, and both the maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference analyses were highly supported. Vetigastropoda phylogenetic analyses recovered the monophyly of Trochoidea. Trochoidea phylogenetic analyses and genetic distances supported the non‐monophyly of Tegulidae and Tegula, indicating that the taxonomic status of several genera (Rochia, Tectus and Cittarium) should be revised and Tegula, Omphalius and Chlorostoma should be placed as a same genus. The close affinity between Tectus virgatus and Rochia was also revealed. Three‐nucleotide insertion in nad1, nine‐nucleotide insertion and six‐nucleotide deletion in nad5 are detected in Tegulidae, Tectus and Rochia, respectively. Gene orders within Trochoidea are stable, with gene rearrangements exclusive to tRNA genes observed. Homoplasious convergences because of trnT rearrangement display translocation in Turbinidae and reversion in Trochidae and Calliostomatida. For trnE and trnG, we identify 11 arrangement types, suggesting that the gene rearrangement history needs to be further evaluated. Our study emphasizes the importance of mt genomes in resolving phylogenetic relationships within Trochoidea. In addition, the mt genomic characters would contribute new insights into the classification of Trochoidea.     

Partitioned Gene-Tree Analyses and Gene-Based Topology Testing Help Resolve Incongruence in a Phylogenomic Study of Host-Specialist Bees (Apidae: Eucerinae)

Incongruence among phylogenetic results has become a common occurrence in analyses of genome-scale data sets. Incongruence originates from uncertainty in underlying evolutionary processes (e.g., incomplete lineage sorting) and from difficulties in determining the best analytical approaches for each situation. To overcome these difficulties, more studies are needed that identify incongruences and demonstrate practical ways to confidently resolve them. Here, we present results of a phylogenomic study based on the analysis 197 taxa and 2,526 ultraconserved element (UCE) loci. We investigate evolutionary relationships of Eucerinae, a diverse subfamily of apid bees (relatives of honey bees and bumble bees) with >1,200 species. We sampled representatives of all tribes within the group and >80% of genera, including two mysterious South American genera, Chilimalopsis and Teratognatha. Initial analysis of the UCE data revealed two conflicting hypotheses for relationships among tribes. To resolve the incongruence, we tested concatenation and species tree approaches and used a variety of additional strategies including locus filtering, partitioned gene-trees searches, and gene-based topological tests. We show that within-locus partitioning improves gene tree and subsequent species-tree estimation, and that this approach, confidently resolves the incongruence observed in our data set. After exploring our proposed analytical strategy on eucerine bees, we validated its efficacy to resolve hard phylogenetic problems by implementing it on a published UCE data set of Adephaga (Insecta: Coleoptera). Our results provide a robust phylogenetic hypothesis for Eucerinae and demonstrate a practical strategy for resolving incongruence in other phylogenomic data sets.     

Phylogenomics of Hemiptera (Insecta: Paraneoptera) based on mitochondrial genomes

Hemiptera is the largest order in Paraneoptera and the fifth largest in Insecta. Disputes about hemipteran phylogeny have concerned the monophyly of Auchenorrhyncha and relationships between the suborders Fulgoromorpha, Cicadomorpha, Coleorrhyncha and Heteroptera. In a phylogenomic study of Hemiptera, we add two new mitochondrial genomes of Peloridiidae (Coleorrhyncha) to those reported in GenBank, to complete the taxon sampling of all suborders. We used two types of data – amino acid sequences and nucleotides of various combinations between protein coding genes, tRNAs and rRNAs – to infer the phylogeny of Hemiptera. In total 27 taxa of Paraneoptera were sampled, 24 of them being hemipterans. Bayesian inference, maximum likelihood and maximum parsimony analyses were employed. The relationship of Cicadomorpha + Heteroptera is always stable in the results with different combinations between data types and phylogenetic methods, but our results challenge the monophyly of ‘Homoptera’ and Auchenorrhyncha. In evaluating the relative contribution of each gene, the phylograms generated by single genes CO1, ND1, ND2, ND4 and ND5, respectively, closely matched the tree yielded by the combined datasets. In light of the taxon‐sampling sensitivity of trees based on mitochondrial genomes, the results need to be tested with further data from nuclear genes.     

Target sequence data shed new light on the infrafamilial classification of Araceae

Premise

Recent phylogenetic studies of the Araceae have confirmed the position of the duckweeds nested within the aroids, and the monophyly of a clade containing all the unisexual flowered aroids plus the bisexual-flowered Calla palustris. The main objective of the present study was to better resolve the deep phylogenetic relationships among the main lineages within the family, particularly the relationships between the eight currently recognized subfamilies. We also aimed to confirm the phylogenetic position of the enigmatic genus Calla in relation to the long-debated evolutionary transition between bisexual and unisexual flowers in the family.

Methods

Nuclear DNA sequence data were generated for 128 species across 111 genera (78%) of Araceae using target sequence capture and the Angiosperms 353 universal probe set.

Results

The phylogenomic data confirmed the monophyly of the eight Araceae subfamilies, but the phylogenetic position of subfamily Lasioideae remains uncertain. The genus Calla is included in subfamily Aroideae, which has also been expanded to include Zamioculcadoideae. The tribe Aglaonemateae is newly defined to include the genera Aglaonema and Boycea.

Conclusions

Our results strongly suggest that new research on African genera (Callopsis, Nephthytis, and Anubias) and Calla will be important for understanding the early evolution of the Aroideae. Also of particular interest are the phylogenetic positions of the isolated genera Montrichardia, Zantedeschia, and Anchomanes, which remain only moderately supported here.     

Distinctive Architecture of the Chloroplast Genome in the Chlorodendrophycean Green Algae Scherffelia dubia and Tetraselmis sp. CCMP 881

The Chlorodendrophyceae is a small class of green algae belonging to the core Chlorophyta, an assemblage that also comprises the Pedinophyceae, Trebouxiophyceae, Ulvophyceae and Chlorophyceae. Here we describe for the first time the chloroplast genomes of chlorodendrophycean algae (Scherffelia dubia, 137,161 bp; Tetraselmis sp. CCMP 881, 100,264 bp). Characterized by a very small single-copy (SSC) region devoid of any gene and an unusually large inverted repeat (IR), the quadripartite structures of the Scherffelia and Tetraselmis genomes are unique among all core chlorophytes examined thus far. The lack of genes in the SSC region is offset by the rich and atypical gene complement of the IR, which includes genes from the SSC and large single-copy regions of prasinophyte and streptophyte chloroplast genomes having retained an ancestral quadripartite structure. Remarkably, seven of the atypical IR-encoded genes have also been observed in the IRs of pedinophycean and trebouxiophycean chloroplast genomes, suggesting that they were already present in the IR of the common ancestor of all core chlorophytes. Considering that the relationships among the main lineages of the core Chlorophyta are still unresolved, we evaluated the impact of including the Chlorodendrophyceae in chloroplast phylogenomic analyses. The trees we inferred using data sets of 79 and 108 genes from 71 chlorophytes indicate that the Chlorodendrophyceae is a deep-diverging lineage of the core Chlorophyta, although the placement of this class relative to the Pedinophyceae remains ambiguous. Interestingly, some of our phylogenomic trees together with our comparative analysis of gene order data support the monophyly of the Trebouxiophyceae, thus offering further evidence that the previously observed affiliation between the Chlorellales and Pedinophyceae is the result of systematic errors in phylogenetic reconstruction.     

Phylogenetic analysis of four nuclear protein-encoding genes largely corroborates the traditional classification of Bivalvia (Mollusca)

Revived interest in molluscan phylogeny has resulted in a torrent of molecular sequence data from phylogenetic, mitogenomic, and phylogenomic studies. Despite recent progress, basal relationships of the class Bivalvia remain contentious, owing to conflicting morphological and molecular hypotheses. Marked incongruity of phylogenetic signal in datasets heavily represented by nuclear ribosomal genes versus mitochondrial genes has also impeded consensus on the type of molecular data best suited for investigating bivalve relationships. To arbitrate conflicting phylogenetic hypotheses, we evaluated the utility of four nuclear protein-encoding genes-ATP synthase β, elongation factor-1α, myosin heavy chain type II, and RNA polymerase II-for resolving the basal relationships of Bivalvia. We sampled all five major lineages of bivalves (Archiheterodonta, Euheterodonta [including Anomalodesmata], Palaeoheterodonta, Protobranchia, and Pteriomorphia) and inferred relationships using maximum likelihood and Bayesian approaches. To investigate the robustness of the phylogenetic signal embedded in the data, we implemented additional datasets wherein length variability and/or third codon positions were eliminated. Results obtained include (a) the clade (Nuculanida+Opponobranchia), i.e., the traditionally defined Protobranchia; (b) the monophyly of Pteriomorphia; (c) the clade (Archiheterodonta+Palaeoheterodonta); (d) the monophyly of the traditionally defined Euheterodonta (including Anomalodesmata); and (e) the monophyly of Heteroconchia, i.e., (Palaeoheterodonta+Archiheterodonta+Euheterodonta). The stability of the basal tree topology to dataset manipulation is indicative of signal robustness in these four genes. The inferred tree topology corresponds closely to those obtained by datasets dominated by nuclear ribosomal genes (18S rRNA and 28S rRNA), controverting recent taxonomic actions based solely upon mitochondrial gene phylogenies.     

What is a Suiforme (Artiodactyla)?: Contribution of Cranioskeletal and Mitochondrial DNA Data

Suiformes (Artiodactyla) traditionally includes three families: Suidae, Tayassuidae, and Hippopotamidae but the monophyly of this suborder has recently been questioned from molecular data. A maximum parsimony analysis of molecular, morphological, and combined data was performed on the same set of taxa including representatives of the three Artiodactyla suborders (Suiformes, Ruminantia, and Tylopoda) and Perissodactyla as outgroup. Mitochondrial (cytochromeband 12S rRNA) sequence comparisons support the monophyly of Suina (Suidae and Tayassuidae) and Ancodonta (Hippopotamidae) but not the monophyly of Suiformes. Inversely, our preliminary morphological analysis supports the monophyly of Suiformes whereas relationships among the three families are not resolved. The combined data set does not resolve the relationships between Suina, Ancodonta, and Ruminantia. These results are discussed in relation to morphological characters and paleontological data. Some improvements are suggested to clarify the morphological definition of Suiformes and relationships among them.     

Complete Sequencing of Five Araliaceae Chloroplast Genomes and the Phylogenetic Implications

Background

The ginseng family (Araliaceae) includes a number of economically important plant species. Previously phylogenetic studies circumscribed three major clades within the core ginseng plant family, yet the internal relationships of each major group have been poorly resolved perhaps due to rapid radiation of these lineages. Recent studies have shown that phyogenomics based on chloroplast genomes provides a viable way to resolve complex relationships.

Methodology/Principal Findings

We report the complete nucleotide sequences of five Araliaceae chloroplast genomes using next-generation sequencing technology. The five chloroplast genomes are 156,333–156,459 bp in length including a pair of inverted repeats (25,551–26,108 bp) separated by the large single-copy (86,028–86,566 bp) and small single-copy (18,021–19,117 bp) regions. Each chloroplast genome contains the same 114 unique genes consisting of 30 transfer RNA genes, four ribosomal RNA genes, and 80 protein coding genes. Gene size, content, and order, AT content, and IR/SC boundary structure are similar among all Araliaceae chloroplast genomes. A total of 140 repeats were identified in the five chloroplast genomes with palindromic repeat as the most common type. Phylogenomic analyses using parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian inference based on the complete chloroplast genomes strongly supported the monophyly of the Asian Palmate group and the Aralia-Panax group. Furthermore, the relationships among the sampled taxa within the Asian Palmate group were well resolved. Twenty-six DNA markers with the percentage of variable sites higher than 5% were identified, which may be useful for phylogenetic studies of Araliaceae.

Conclusion

The chloroplast genomes of Araliaceae are highly conserved in all aspects of genome features. The large-scale phylogenomic data based on the complete chloroplast DNA sequences is shown to be effective for the phylogenetic reconstruction of Araliaceae.     

PHYLOGENOMICS AND SECONDARY PLASTIDS: A LOOK BACK AND A LOOK AHEAD1

Despite their importance to evolution, ecology, and cell biology, eukaryotes that acquired plastids through secondary endosymbiosis remain poorly studied from a genomic standpoint. Chromalveolata, a eukaryotic supergroup proposed to have descended from a heterotrophic eukaryote that acquired a red algal plastid by secondary endosymbiosis, includes four major lineages (alveolates, cryptophytes, haptophytes, and heterokonts). The chromalveolates exhibit remarkable diversity of cellular organization, and the available data suggest that they exhibit equal diversity in their genome organization. One of the most obvious differences in cellular organization is the retention of a highly reduced red algal nucleus in cryptophytes (also known as cryptomonads), but there are other major differences among chromalveolate lineages, including the loss of photosynthesis in multiple lineages. Although the hypothesis of chromalveolate monophyly is appealing, there is limited support for the hypothesis from nuclear genes, and questions have even been raised about the monophyly of chromalveolate plastids. Evidence for the chromalveolate hypothesis from large‐scale nuclear data sets is reviewed, and alternative hypotheses are described. The potential for integrating information from chromalveolate genomics into functional genomics is described, emphasizing both the methodological challenges and the opportunities for future phylogenomic analyses of these groups.     

New insight into the systematics of Tomoceridae (Hexapoda,Collembola) by integrating molecular and morphological evidence

Tomoceridae is common but among the most problematic groups of Collembola. Its position within Collembola and the relationships within the family remain obscure. This also extends to the generic division of the subfamily Tomocerinae that remains controversial. This study examines these issues by integrating both molecular and morphological evidence. Our molecular phylogeny based on rDNA sequences supports the monophyly of Tomoceridae and the sister relationship between Tomocerinae and Lepidophorellinae. Reconstructions and tree topology tests constraining monophyly did not resolve the relationships between Tomoceridae and other collembolan groups. We also examined the morphology of the first instar (primary) larvae, which has significant phylogenetic value among higher Collembola. Mapping primary chaetotaxy onto our molecular phylogeny provided further evidence for the unique position of Tomoceridae within Entomobryomorpha and Collembola. The monophyly and subfamilial classification within Tomoceridae were validated here, whereas its position among Collembola will need further studies in a broader consideration across the major collembolan orders. Within Tomocerinae, the monophyly of Pogonognathellus was demonstrated, but the status of Tomocerus and Tomocerina is still to be resolved.     

Basal teleosts and the question of elopomorph monophyly. Morphological and molecular approaches

The methodology used by previous authors to resolve the relationships of the elopomorphan taxa is criticized. The morphological characters that have been proposed to support the monophyly of the Elopomorpha are reviewed and it is shown that most of them are weak. A new hypothesis of relationships is proposed on the basis of nucleotidic sequences of ribosomal RNA 18S, 16S and 12S. In order to really test all the possible relationships, the monophyly of the Elopomorpha was not considered a priori. The tree was rooted on Amia calva and Lepisosteus osseus and the ingroup taxa sampling was subsequently increased. The obtained topology shows that the Elopomorpha is a non-monophyletic taxon. Elopiforms, anguilliforms, albuliforms and notacanthiforms are considered here as four monophyletic, incertae sedis taxa among basal teleosts.     

Molecular phylogenetics of Elateriformia (Coleoptera): evolution of bioluminescence and neoteny

Phylogenetic relationships in the coleopteran Series Elateriformia (click beetles, jewel beetles, fireflies and allies) were investigated using > 3800 nucleotides of partial nuclear (small and large subunit rRNA genes) and mitochondrial (large subunit rRNA and cytochrome oxidase subunit I) gene sequences. The Elateriformia includes several soft‐bodied lineages, some of which retain larviform features in the adult stage (neoteny), and several major bioluminescent groups, including the families Lampyridae (fireflies), Phengodidae and Rhagophthalmidae whose relationships have been contentious. All recognized superfamilies (Elateroidea, Cantharoidea, Byrrhoidea, Buprestoidea, Dascilloidea, Scirtoidea) and 28 of the 37 families, represented in 112 individuals, were included in the analysis. Sequence alignment was based on static and dynamic homology assignments and partial removal of sequences of uncertain homology. Alignment variable regions caused a great deal of uncertainty but also contributed much of the phylogenetic signal that was insufficient to resolve deep relationships when these were removed. The main features of most analyses were the monophyly of Elateroidea + Cantharoidea (= Elateroidea sensu lato), with Omethidae + Telegeusidae frequently occupying the basal node in this group; the affinities of Dascilloidea, Buprestoidea and a (broadly paraphyletic) Byrrhoidea, with unclear relationships among them; and the monophyly of Scirtoidea (including Decliniidae) as a rather distant outgroup to all others. When mapped on the resulting trees, soft‐bodied lineages were polyphyletic, contradicting the former Cantharoidea that had been united by this trait. Transitions to neoteny were either simultaneous with, or subsequent to, the origin of soft‐bodiedness in a minimum of seven lineages. The bioluminescent groups Lampyridae (including the enigmatic genus Drilaster) and the tightly allied Phengodidae + Rhagophthalmidae were never monophyletic. The former showed close relationship to the species‐rich, soft‐bodied families Lycidae and Cantharidae, while the latter grouped with poorly resolved lineages at the base of Elateridae (click beetles). Hence, although key features as soft‐bodiedness, neoteny and bioluminescence in Coleoptera are largely confined to the Elateriformia, they appear to result from multiple origins, showing the propensity of closely related lineages to acquire similar features independently. © The Willi Hennig Society 2007.