A molecular phylogeny of the Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera)

Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera) are extremely diverse with more than 23,000 species described and over 500,000 species estimated to exist. This is the first comprehensive phylogenetic analysis of the superfamily based on a molecular analysis of 18S and 28S ribosomal gene regions for 19 families, 72 subfamilies, 343 genera and 649 species. The 56 outgroups are comprised of Ceraphronoidea and most proctotrupomorph families, including Mymarommatidae. Data alignment and the impact of ambiguous regions are explored using a secondary structure analysis and automated (MAFFT) alignments of the core and pairing regions and regions of ambiguous alignment. Both likelihood and parsimony approaches are used to analyze the data. Overall there is no impact of alignment method, and few but substantial differences between likelihood and parsimony approaches. Monophyly of Chalcidoidea and a sister group relationship between Mymaridae and the remaining Chalcidoidea is strongly supported in all analyses. Either Mymarommatoidea or Diaprioidea are the sister group of Chalcidoidea depending on the analysis. Likelihood analyses place Rotoitidae as the sister group of the remaining Chalcidoidea after Mymaridae, whereas parsimony nests them within Chalcidoidea. Some traditional family groups are supported as monophyletic (Agaonidae, Eucharitidae, Encyrtidae, Eulophidae, Leucospidae, Mymaridae, Ormyridae, Signiphoridae, Tanaostigmatidae and Trichogrammatidae). Several other families are paraphyletic (Perilampidae) or polyphyletic (Aphelinidae, Chalcididae, Eupelmidae, Eurytomidae, Pteromalidae, Tetracampidae and Torymidae). Evolutionary scenarios discussed for Chalcidoidea include the evolution of phytophagy, egg parasitism, sternorrhynchan parasitism, hypermetamorphic development and heteronomy.     

Phylogenetic implications of the mesofurca in Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera), with emphasis on Aphelinidae

The skeletomusculature of the mesofurcal–mesopostnotal complex is surveyed within the Chalcidoidea. Four internal character systems are assessed for their phylogenetic significance: the mesofurcal bridge, the structure and position of the furcal–laterophragmal muscle, the structure of the lateral arms of the mesofurca, and the supporting structures for the interfurcal muscles. Among Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea are unique in having the furcal–laterophragmal muscle attached along the entire length of the laterophragmal apodeme. Also the furcal–laterophragmal muscle originates medial to the junction of the mesofurcal bridge and lateral mesofurcal arm in most Chalcidoidea. Mymarommatidae do not share either of these apomorphic states with Chalcidoidea. Within Chalcidoidea, apomorphic character states were found in each of Aphelinidae, Encyrtidae, Eulophidae, Mymaridae, Rotoitidae, Signiphoridae, Tanaostigmatidae and Trichogrammatidae. For taxa classified as Aphelinidae, the plesiomorphic complement of structures and muscle attachments is retained in Eriaphytinae and Eriaporinae. The mesofurcal bridge is considered to have been lost at least twice in each of Aphelininae and Coccophaginae. Similar interfurcal processes, resulting from loss of the mesofurcal bridge, support the monophyly of Aphelininae (Aphelinini, Aphytini and Eutrichosomellini). Azotinae are placed as the sister group of Aphelininae because of a similar lateral origin of the laterophragmal muscle and the shape of the mesofurcal arms. Other than loss of the mesofurcal bridge, no character states were shared by Azotinae and Coccophaginae. Coccophaginae (Coccophagini and Pteroptricini) are regarded as monophyletic based on the loss of the mesofurcal bridge, the peculiar shape of the mesofurca, and a unique modification of the laterophragmal muscle. Euxanthellus is removed from synonomy with Coccophagus and may be best treated as a separate tribe of Coccophaginae based on the shape of the lateral mesofurcal arms and the presence of a mesofurcal bridge. The shape of the mesofurca suggests a monophyletic grouping of Cales, Eretmocerus and Trichogrammatidae that could render Aphelinidae paraphyletic.     

A phylogenetic analysis of the megadiverse Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera)

Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera) is extremely diverse with an estimated 500 000 species. We present the first phylogenetic analysis of the superfamily based on both morphological and molecular data. A web‐based, systematics workbench mx was used to score 945 character states illustrated by 648 figures for 233 morphological characters for a total of 66 645 observations for 300 taxa. The matrix covers 22 chalcidoid families recognized herein and includes 268 genera within 78 of 83 subfamilies. Morphological data were analysed alone and in combination with molecular data from ribosomal 18S (2105 bp) and 28S D2–D5 expansion regions (1812 bp). Analyses were analysed alone and in combined datasets using implied‐weights parsimony and likelihood. Proposed changes in higher classification resulting from the analyses include: (i) recognition of Eriaporidae, revised status; (ii) recognition of Cynipencyrtidae, revised status; (iii) recognition of Azotidae, revised status; (iv) inclusion of Sycophaginae in Agaonidae, revised status; (v) reclassification of Aphelinidae to include Aphelininae, Calesinae, Coccophaginae, Eretmocerinae and Eriaphytinae; (vi) inclusion of Cratominae and Panstenoninae within Pteromalinae (Pteromalidae), new synonymy; (vii) inclusion of Epichrysomallinae in Pteromalidae, revised status. At a higher level, Chalcidoidea was monophyletic, with Mymaridae the sister group of Rotoitidae plus the remaining Chalcidoidea. A eulophid lineage was recovered that included Aphelinidae, Azotidae, Eulophidae, Signiphoridae, Tetracampidae and Trichogrammatidae. Eucharitidae and Perilampidae were monophyletic if Eutrichosomatinae (Pteromalidae) was included, and Eupelmidae was monophyletic if Oodera (Pteromalidae: Cleonyminae) was included. Likelihood recovered a clade of Eupelmidae + (Tanaostigmatidae + (Cynipencyrtus + Encyrtidae). Support for other lineages and their impact on the classification of Chalcidoidea is discussed. Several life‐history traits are mapped onto the new phylogeny.     

The pretarsus in Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera Parasitica): functional morphology and possible phylogenetic implications

The structure of the pretarsus of chalcid wasps (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) was examined with light and scanning electron microscopy. The pretarsus of these wasps is characterized by a distal elastic widening of the planta that spreads over the arcus, by a pair of folding plates at the dorsal side of the arolium (the dorsal plates), and by the absence of auxiliary sclerites. The surface of the fully spread arolium of chalcids has a spongiform structure. The arcus of chalcids is an apodeme of the planta. The peculiarities of the inverting/everting biomechanics of the pretarsus of chalcids involve: 1) interactions between the elastic part of the planta, the dorsal plates and the manubrium, and 2) the functioning of the elastic part of the planta and the arcus together as a single unit. A single apical seta situated distally from the campaniform sensillae and proximal row of setae on the manubrium are regarded as putative synapomorphies of Chalcidoidea. A manubrium with a distinct proximal row of three setae characterizes almost all Eulophidae, Aphelinidae and Signiphoridae (‘eulophid lineage’) and Tetracampidae, whereas a row of two setae characterizes Mymaridae, Rotoitidae and Trichogrammatidae. Other studied families (Pteromalidae, Eurytomidae, Torymidae, Ormyridae, Eupelmidae, Encyrtidae, Perilampidae), which represent a ‘pteromalid lineage’, are characterized mostly by five setae in a proximal row, which could represent a synapomorphy for these groups, or a symplesiomorphy in Chalcidoidea, depending on rooting. However, the characters may be correlated with differences in body size that characterize the different lineages rather than being phylogenetically important. Other characters that may be phylogenetically informative are: 1) shape of the manubrium (spindle‐like in Mymaridae, Rotoitidae, Trichogrammatidae and the ‘eulophid lineage’, but mostly bottle‐like in representatives of the ‘pteromalid lineage’), and 2) pubescence of the proximal part of the planta (sparse, thick setae in Rotoitidae, Trichogrammatidae and the ‘eulophid lineage’, but dense, slender setae in representatives of the ‘pteromalid lineage’).     

Phylogeny of pteromalid parasitic wasps (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae): initial evidence from four protein-coding nuclear genes

Chalcidoidea (approximately 22,000 described species) is the most ecologically diverse superfamily of parasitic Hymenoptera and plays a major role in the biological control of insect pests. However, phylogenetic relationships both within and between chalcidoid families have been poorly understood, particularly for the large family Pteromalidae and relatives. Forty-two taxa, broadly representing Chalcidoidea but concentrated in the 'pteromalid lineage,' were sequenced for 4620 bp of protein-coding sequence from four nuclear genes for which we present new primers. These are: CAD (1719 bp) DDC (708 bp), enolase (1149 bp), and PEPCK (1044 bp). The combined data set was analyzed using parsimony, maximum likelihood, and Bayesian methods. Statistical significance of the apparent non-monophyly of some taxonomic groups on our trees was evaluated using the approximately unbiased test of Shimodaira [Shimodaira, H. 2002. An approximately unbiased test of phylogenetic tree selection. Syst. Biol. 51(3), 492-508]. In accord with previous studies, we find moderate to strong support for monophyly of Chalcidoidea, a sister-group relationship of Mymaridae to the remainder of Chalcidoidea, and a relatively basal placement of Encarsia (Aphelinidae) within the latter. The 'pteromalid lineage' of families is generally recovered as monophyletic, but the hypothesis of monophyly for Pteromalidae, which appear paraphyletic with respect to all other families sampled in that lineage, is decisively rejected (P < 10(-14)). Within Pteromalidae, monophyly was strongly supported for nearly all tribes represented by multiple exemplars, and for two subfamilies. All other multiply-represented subfamilies appeared para- or polyphyletic in our trees, although monophyly was significantly rejected only for Miscogasterinae, Ormocerinae, and Colotrechninae. The limited resolution obtained in the analyses presented here reinforces the idea that reconstruction of pteromalid phylogeny is a difficult problem, possibly due to rapid radiation of many chalcidoid taxa. Initial phylogenetic comparisons of life history traits suggest that the ancestral chalcidoid was small-bodied and parasitized insect eggs.     

Phylogenetic relationships among superfamilies of Hymenoptera

The first comprehensive analysis of higher‐level phylogeny of the order Hymenoptera is presented. The analysis includes representatives of all extant superfamilies, scored for 392 morphological characters, and sequence data for four loci (18S, 28S, COI and EF‐1α). Including three outgroup taxa, 111 terminals were analyzed. Relationships within symphytans (sawflies) and Apocrita are mostly resolved. Well supported relationships include: Xyeloidea is monophyletic, Cephoidea is the sister group of Siricoidea + [Xiphydrioidea + (Orussoidea + Apocrita)]; Anaxyelidae is included in the Siricoidea, and together they are the sister group of Xiphydrioidea + (Orussoidea + Apocrita); Orussoidea is the sister group of Apocrita, Apocrita is monophyletic; Evanioidea is monophyletic; Aculeata is the sister group of Evanioidea; Proctotrupomorpha is monophyletic; Ichneumonoidea is the sister group of Proctotrupomorpha; Platygastroidea is sister group to Cynipoidea, and together they are sister group to the remaining Proctotrupomorpha; Proctotrupoidea s. str. is monophyletic; Mymarommatoidea is the sister group of Chalcidoidea; Mymarommatoidea + Chalcidoidea + Diaprioidea is monophyletic. Weakly supported relationships include: Stephanoidea is the sister group of the remaining Apocrita; Diaprioidea is monophyletic; Ceraphronoidea is the sister group of Megalyroidea, which together form the sister group of [Trigonaloidea (Aculeata + Evanioidea)]. Aside from paraphyly of Vespoidea within Aculeata, all currently recognized superfamilies are supported as monophyletic. The diapriid subfamily Ismarinae is raised to family status, Ismaridae stat. nov. © The Will Henning Society 2011.     

Searching for natural lineages within the Cerylonid Series (Coleoptera: Cucujoidea)

Phylogenetic relationships within the diverse beetle superfamily Cucujoidea are poorly known. The Cerylonid Series (C.S.) is the largest of all proposed superfamilial cucujoid groups, comprising eight families and representing most of the known cucujoid species diversity. The monophyly of the C.S., however, has never been formally tested and the higher-level relationships among and within the constituent families remain equivocal. Here we present a phylogenetic study based on 18S and 28S rDNA for 16 outgroup taxa and 61 C.S. ingroup taxa, representing seven of the eight C.S. families and 20 of 39 subfamilies. We test the monophyly of the C.S., investigate the relationships among the C.S. families, and test the monophyly of the constituent families and subfamilies. Phylogenetic reconstruction of the combined data was achieved via standard static alignment parsimony analyses, Direct Optimization using parsimony, and partitioned Bayesian analysis. All three analyses support the paraphyly of Cucujoidea with respect to Tenebrionoidea and confirm the monophyly of the C.S. The C.S. families Bothrideridae, Cerylonidae, Discolomatidae, Coccinellidae and Corylophidae are supported as monophyletic in all analyses. Only the Bayesian analysis recovers a monophyletic Latridiidae. Endomychidae is recovered as polyphyletic in all analyses. Of the 14 subfamilies with multiple terminals in this study, 11 were supported as monophyletic. The corylophid subfamily Corylophinae and the coccinellid subfamilies Chilocorinae and Scymninae are recovered as paraphyletic. A sister grouping of Anamorphinae+Corylophidae is supported in all analyses. Other taxonomic implications are discussed in light of our results.     

Phylogenetic analysis of paraneopteran orders (Insecta: Neoptera) based on forewing base structure, with comments on monophyly of Auchenorrhyncha (Hemiptera)

Phylogenetic relationships among three paraneopteran clades (Psocodea, Hemiptera and Thysanoptera) were analysed based on the morphology of forewing base structure. Monophyly of Paraneoptera was supported by nine autapomorphies, monophyly of Condylognatha (= Thysanoptera + Hemiptera) by two autapo‐ morphies, monophyly of Thysanoptera by five autapomorphies and monophyly of Hemiptera by one autapomorphy. Thus, (Psocodea + (Thysanoptera + Hemiptera)) were proposed to be the phylogenetic relationships within Paraneoptera. A homoplastic similarity of the third axillary sclerite was observed between Thysanoptera and Heteroptera, and a possible evolutionary factor providing this homoplasy was discussed. The present analysis also suggested a monophyletic Auchenorrhyncha, and reduction of the proximal median plate was considered as an autapomorphy of this clade.     

Study of the larva of Nosodendron fasciculare (Olivier 1790) (Coleoptera: Nosodendridae) with implications for the phylogeny of Bostrichiformia

Internal and external features of larvae of Nosodendron fasciculare were examined and compared to character states found in other groups of Derodontoidea and Bostrichoidea. Synapomorphic larval features indicate a sistergroup relationship between Nosodendridae and Derodontidae: tubercular surface structure, body compressed dorsoventrally, tergites with lateral projections, spiracles located on tubular processus. These families share three derived character states with Jacobsoniidae in one of two equally parsimonious trees. However, the monophyletic origin of Nosodendridae + Derodontidae + Jacobsoniidae is not sufficiently established at present. The monophyly of Bostrichoidea (Dermestidae + Bostrichidae + Anobiidae + Ptinidae) is suggested by hypognathism. Larvae of these families are characterized by the absence of the mandibular mola and a robust apical part of the mandible. The monophyly of Bostrichidae + Anobiidae + Ptinidae is indicated by a C-shaped, grub like body and the abdominal apex formed by an enlarged and rounded segment IX. Bostrychiformia are probably paraphyletic. A closer relationship between Bostrichoidea with Cucujiformia is suggested by the possession of cryptonephric malpighian tubules in adults. The specific type of cryptonephridism in Bostrichoidea is probably derived from this condition and is considered autapomorphic. The monophyly of Nosodendridae ( Nosodendron ) is supported by several autapomorphies. The assignment of the supposed larva of Nosodendron ovatum remains unclear. An inclusion of the dermestid genus Orphilus in Nosodendridae is rejected. Muscular features of larvae of Nosodendron (and Derodontus ) are largely plesiomorphic.     

Molecular phylogeny of the apocritan wasps: the Proctotrupomorpha and Evaniomorpha

Phylogenetic relationships among the apocritan wasps were investigated using comparative sequence data from the mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene. The gene fragment contained three length polymorphic regions. Relationships that were not sensitive to the alignment procedure are discussed, but should be considered as preliminary only. Maximum parsimony analysis recovered the Evaniomorpha ( sensu Rasnitsyn, 1988) as a monophyletic group, with the pattern of relationships Ceraphronoidea + (Evanioidea + [Megalyroidea + Trigonalyoidea]). The Proctotrupomorpha ( sensu Rasnitsyn, 1988) were also recovered as a monophyletic group, while the Proctotrupoidea were recovered as paraphyletic. The Proctotrupoidea were only monophyletic if the Platygastroidea and Chalcidoidea were included (i.e. Proctotrupomorpha). Relationships of the Proctotrupomorpha that were supported by this analysis included Diapriidae + (Platygastroidea + Chalcidoidea), and the Vanhorniidae falling inside the Proctotrupidae. However, resolution of other relationships within the Proctotrupomorpha was less reliable, as indicated by low decay indices and low bootstrap proportions. Similarly, the placement of the Cynipoidea relative to the other apocritan lineages was also not recovered confidently.     

Phylogenetic relationships of Lecythidaceae: a cladistic analysis using rbcL sequence and morphological data

This study examined in detail the rbcL sequence and morphological support for subfamilial relationships and monophyly of Lecythidaceae. Initially we needed to establish relationships of Lecythidaceae among other dicot families. To complete this we examined 47 rbcL sequences of 25 families along with molecular observations from several large analyses of rbcL data. All analyses strongly support the monophyly of the asterid III grouping. This analysis revealed Lecythidaceae to be paraphyletic and indicated potential outgroup relationships with Sapotaceae. Once relationships had been evaluated using molecular data we then concentrated on analyzing separate and combined morphological and molecular databases. The topology of the morphological data set was similar to the rbcL sequence and combined data sets except for the positioning of Napoleonaeoideae, Grias, Gustavia, and Oubanguia. According to the combined results, Planchonioideae, Lecythidoideae. and Foetidioideae are monophyletic, whereas the subfamily Napoleonaeoideae are paraphyletic. Nested within Napolconaeoideae, we found Asteronthos forms a strongly supported clade with Oubanguia (Scytopetalaceae). Foetidia, the only genus of Foetidioideae, is sister to Planchonioideae, and this clade is sister to Lecythidoideae. The [(Planchonioideae, Foetidioideae) Lecythidoideae are sister to Asteranthos/Oubanguia. Napoleonaeoideae are sister to the rest of Lecythidaceae.     

Cotylea (Polycladida): a cladistic analysis of morphology

Abstract. Polyclad flatworms are acoelomate bilaterians found in benthic communities worldwide, predominantly in marine environments. Current polyclad systematics is unstable, with two non-concordant classification schemes resulting in a poor understanding of within-group relationships. Here we present the first phylogenetic framework for the suborder Cotylea using a morphological matrix. Representatives of 34 genera distributed among all cotylean families (except four, excluded due to their dubious taxonomic status) were investigated. The number of families included ranges from a conservative eight to a revisionary 11. Outgroup analysis indicated that the suborder is monophyletic and defined by the presence of a ventral adhesive structure, a short posteriorly positioned vagina, and cement glands. Of the eight to 11 families included, we confirmed that three were monophyletic: Boniniidae, Prosthiostomidae, and Pseudocerotidae. Boniniidae was consistently recovered as the sister group to other Cotylea, based on the retention of the plesiomorphic Lang's vesicle. The clade consisting of Anonymus, Marcusia , and Pericelis is sister to the Boniniidae and the rest of the Cotylea. Above this clade there is little resolution at the base of the sister group. The Euryleptidae are found to be paraphyletic and give rise to the Pseudocerotidae. Neither classification scheme received unequivocal support. The intrafamilial relationships of the diverse Pseudocerotidae and Euryleptidae were examined. Color pattern characters (used for species identification) were highly homoplasious but increased cladogram resolution within genera. The monophyly of seven genera within the Pseudocerotidae and Euryleptidae was not supported and many genera showed no autapomorphies, highlighting the need for taxonomic revision of these families.     

Phylogeny of the treehoppers (Insecta: Hemiptera: Membracidae): evidence from two nuclear genes

We present a molecular systematic investigation of relationships among family-group taxa of Membracidae, comprising nearly 3.5 kb of nucleotide sequence data from the nuclear genes elongation factor-1alpha (EF-1alpha: 958 bp) and 28S ribosomal DNA (28S rDNA: 2363 bp); data partitions are analyzed separately and in combination for 79 taxa. Analysis of the combined sequence data provided a better-resolved and more robust hypothesis of membracid phylogeny than did separate analyses of the individual genes. Results support the monophyly of the family Membracidae and indicate the presence of two major lineages (Centrotinae + Stegaspidinae + Centrodontinae and Darninae + Membracinae + Smiliinae). Within Membracidae, molecular data support the following assertions: (1) the previously unplaced genera Antillotolania and Deiroderes form a monophyletic group with Microcentrini; (2) Centrodontini and Nessorhinini are monophyletic clades that arise independently from within the Centrotinae; (3) Centrotinae is paraphyletic with respect to Centrodontinae; (4) the subfamily Membracinae is monophyletic and possibly allied with the darnine tribe Cymbomorphini; (5) the subfamily Darninae is paraphyletic; (6) the subfamily Smiliinae is paraphyletic, with molecular evidence indicating the exclusion of Micrutalini and perhaps Acutalini and Ceresini; and (7) Membracidae arose and diversified in the New World with multiple subsequent colonizations of the Old World. Our phylogenetic results suggest that morphology-based classifications of the Membracidae need to be reevaluated in light of emerging molecular evidence.     

Phylogeny and classification of the extant basal lineages of the Hymenoptera (Insecta)

The phylogeny of the basal hymenopteran lineages, including representatives of all ‘symphytan’ families, is anal; In total, 236 morphological characters were scored for 44 exemplars, including six outgroup, two xyelic tenthredinoid, five pamphilioid, three cephoid, five ‘siricoid’, one orussid, and six apocritan taxa. The datas analysed with parsimony under equal weights and under implied weights. The monophyly of the Hymenopte strongly supported but the sistergroup of the Hymenoptera cannot be identified with confidence. The relations of the ‘symphytan’ lineages are Xyeloidea +(Tenthredinoidea+ (Pamphilioidea + (Cephoidea + (Ariaxyelic (Siricidae + (Xiphydriidae +(Orussoidea+Apocrita))))))). Many of the relationships between the superfamilies, especially in the basal branching pattern, are only weakly corroborated. The monophyly of most superfamilies is supported, and all may be monophyletic except the ‘Siricoidea’, which is clearly paraphyletic. It is difficult to di whether the Siricidae or the Anaxyelidae are the closest relatives of Xiphydriidae + (Orussoidea + Apocrita). support for the sistergroup relationship between the Orussoidea and the Apocrita is substantial, putative apomorphies being provided by most character systems. There is also good evidence in favour of the monophj the Apocrita. The internal phylogeny of the Tenthredinoidea differs considerably from the results of earlier anal The Blasticotomidae are the sistergroup of the Tenthredinoidea s.s. Relationships at the base of the Tenthredini s.s. are weakly supported. It is uncertain whether the Tenthredinidae are monophyletic or comprise a 1 paraphyletic grade within the Tenthredinoidea s.s. The Diprionidae may be the sistergroup to Cimbicidae +(Argidae+ Pergidae). Most relationships within the Cimbicidae + (Argidae + Pergidae) clade are corroborated, with the exception of the monophyly of the Argidae. It is proposed to elevate the Anaxyelidae the Xiphydriida both to superfamily status. The family‐level classification of the Tenthredinoidea will probably have to be changed, but this must await further clarification of the phylogeny of this superfamily.     

The phylogeny of the superfamily Coccoidea (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha) based on the morphology of extant and extinct macropterous males

Currently, 49 families of scale insects are recognised, 33 of which are extant. Despite more than a decade of DNA sequence‐based phylogenetic studies of scales insects, little is known with confidence about relationships among scale insects families. Multiple lines of evidence support the monophyly of a group of 18 scale insect families informally referred to as the neococcoids. Among neococcoid families, published DNA sequence‐based estimates have supported Eriococcidae paraphyly with respect to Beesoniidae, Dactylopiidae, and Stictococcidae. No other neococcoid interfamily relationship has been strongly supported in a published study that includes exemplars of more than ten families. Likewise, no well‐supported relationships among the 15 extant scale insect families that are not neococcoids (usually referred to as ‘archaeococcoids’) have been published. We use a Bayesian approach to estimate the scale insect phylogeny from 162 adult male morphological characters, scored from 269 extant and 29 fossil species representing 43/49 families. The result is the most taxonomically comprehensive, most resolved and best supported estimate of phylogenetic relationships among scale insect families to date. Notable results include strong support for (i) Ortheziidae sister to Matsucoccidae, (ii) a clade comprising all scale insects except for Margarodidae s.s., Ortheziidae and Matsucoccidae, (iii) Coelostomidiidae paraphyletic with respect to Monophlebidae, (iv) Eriococcidae paraphyletic with respect to Stictococcidae and Beesoniidae, and (v) Aclerdidae sister to Coccidae. We recover strong support for a clade comprising Phenacoleachiidae, Pityococcidae, Putoidae, Steingeliidae and the neococcoids, along with a sister relationship between this clade and Coelostomidiidae + Monophlebidae. In addition, we recover strong support for Pityococcidae + Steingeliidae as sister to the neococcoids. Data from fossils were incomplete, and the inclusion of extinct taxa in the data matrix reduced support and phylogenetic structure. Nonetheless, these fossil data will be invaluable in DNA sequence‐based and total evidence estimates of phylogenetic divergence times.     

Phylogeny of caddisflies (Insecta, Trichoptera)

Trichoptera are holometabolous insects with aquatic larvae that, together with the Lepidoptera, comprise the Amphiesmenoptera. Previous phylogenetic hypotheses and progress on our ongoing data collection are summarized. Fragments of the large and small subunit nuclear ribosomal RNAs (D1, D3, V4–5), the nuclear elongation factor 1 alpha gene and a fragment of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase 1 (COI) were sequenced, and molecular data were combined with previously published morphological data. Equally and differentially weighted parsimony analyses were conducted in order to present a phylogeny of Trichoptera, including 43 of 45 families. Our phylogeny closely resembles that proposed by Herbert Ross with respect to the relationships among suborders, with a monophyletic Annulipalpia at the base of the tree, and a clade consisting of Spicipalpia plus a monophyletic Integripalpia. The monophyly of Spicipalpia is weakly supported in the combined equally weighted analysis, and Spicipalpia is paraphyletic in the differentially weighted analysis. Within Integripalpia, our phylogeny recovered monophyletic Plenitentoria, Brevitentoria and Sericostomatoidea. Leptoceroidea was unresolved in the equally weighted analysis and monophyletic in the differentially weighted analysis. Within Annulipalpia, we recovered a basal but paraphyletic Philopotamoidea and a monophyletic Hydropsychoidea.     

Phylogeny of thrips (Insecta: Thysanoptera) based on five molecular loci

The order Thysanoptera (Paraneoptera), commonly known as thrips, displays a wide range of behaviours, and includes several pest species. The classification and suggested relationships among these insects remain morphologically based, and have never been evaluated formally with a comprehensive molecular phylogenetic analysis. We tested the monophyly of the suborders, included families and the recognized subfamilies, and investigated their relationships. Phylogenies were reconstructed based upon 5299 bp from five genetic loci: 18S ribosomal DNA, 28S ribosomal DNA, Histone 3, Tubulin‐alpha I and cytochrome oxidase c subunit I. Ninety‐nine thrips species from seven of the nine families, all six subfamilies and 70 genera were sequenced. Maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood and Bayesian analyses all strongly support a monophyletic Tubulifera and Terebrantia. The families Phlaeothripidae, Aeolothripidae, Melanthripidae and Thripidae are recovered as monophyletic. The relationship of Aeolothripidae and Merothripidae to the rest of Terebrantia is equivocal. Molecular data support previous suggestions that Aeolothripidae or Merothripidae could be a sister to the rest of Terebrantia. Four of the six subfamilies are recovered as monophyletic. The two largest subfamilies, Phlaeothripinae and Thripinae, are paraphyletic and require further study to understand their internal relationships.