The phylogeny of brown lacewings (Neuroptera: Hemerobiidae) reveals multiple reductions in wing venation.
The phylogeny of brown lacewings (Neuroptera: Hemerobiidae) reveals multiple reductions in wing venation.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12862-016-0746-5
复制
发表时间：
2016-09-20
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Winterton SL
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Garzón-Orduña IJ;Menchaca-Armenta I;Contreras-Ramos A;Liu X;Winterton SL
上次对 Hemerobiidae 科成员之间的系统发育关系进行定量研究是在 12 年前，并且完全基于形态学。我们的研究建立在这一形态学证据的基础上，通过添加来自三个基因位点的序列数据来提供棕色草蛉（神经翅目：Hemerobiidae）系统发育的总体证据。使用单个核基因 (CAD) 和两个线粒体（16S rDNA 和细胞色素氧化酶 I）基因进行贝叶斯分析和简约分析，将代表 19 个 Hemerobiidae 属的 37 个物种与来自 Ithonidae、Psychopsidae 和 Chrysopidae 的外群进行比较。我们比较了两种最常用的松弛时钟模型下 Hemerobiidae 分支发生的分歧时间估计，并讨论了该科中翅膀脉络的演化。尽管除了两个亚科（即 Notiobiellinae 和 Drepanacrinae）以外的所有亚科都被恢复为单系，但我们恢复的系统发育在很大程度上与之前发表的形态学研究不一致。我们发现Drepanacrinae 亚科与Psychobiellinae 并系，而Notiobiellinae 则为多系群。因此，我们提出了 Notiobiellinae 的修订概念，仅包括 Notiobiella Banks，并建立了一个新的亚科 Zachobiellinae，包括先前置于 Notiobiellinae 中的其余属。 Psychobiellinae 与 Drepanacrinae 是同义词。与之前提出的明显阶梯拓扑的假设不同，我们的树表明 hemerobiids 分为三个主要分支。此外，与静脉增殖假说相反，我们发现 hemerobiids 的桡静脉数量反而经历了多次减少，这种情况质疑这一特征作为各种亚科诊断的相关性。我们的系统发育假说和分歧时间分析表明，现存的 hemerobiids 起源于三叠纪末期，并进化为三个相互分化的不同分支 侏罗纪晚期到白垩纪早期。与早期的系统发育假说相反，Carobius Banks (Carobiinae) 是先前未放置的 Notherobius New 属的姐妹，属于与 Sympherobiinae、Megalominae 和 Zachobiellinae 亚科关系更密切的分支。十一月添加无法进行 DNA 测序的类群应该是未来研究的重点，尤其是 Adelphohhemerobius Oswald，这对于检验我们关于 Hemerobiidae 翅脉进化的推论尤为重要。本文的在线版本 (doi:10.1186/s12862-016-0746-5) 包含补充材料，可供授权用户使用。
The last time the phylogenetic relationships among members of the family Hemerobiidae were studied quantitatively was over 12 years ago and based exclusively on morphology. Our study builds upon this morphological evidence by adding sequence data from three gene loci to provide a total evidence phylogeny of brown lacewings (Neuroptera: Hemerobiidae). Thirty-seven species representing nineteen Hemerobiidae genera were compared with outgroups from the families Ithonidae, Psychopsidae and Chrysopidae in Bayesian and parsimony analyses using a single nuclear gene (CAD) and two mitochondrial (16S rDNA and Cytochrome Oxidase I) genes. We compare divergence time estimates of Hemerobiidae cladogenesis under the two most commonly used relaxed clock models and discuss the evolution of wing venation in the family. We recovered a phylogeny largely incongruent with previously published morphological studies, although all but two subfamilies (i.e., Notiobiellinae and Drepanacrinae) were recovered as monophyletic. We found the subfamily Drepanacrinae paraphyletic with respect to Psychobiellinae, and Notiobiellinae to be polyphyletic. We thus offer a revised concept of Notiobiellinae, comprising only Notiobiella Banks, and erect a new subfamily Zachobiellinae including the remaining genera previously placed in Notiobiellinae. Psychobiellinae is synonymized with Drepanacrinae. Unlike the previous hypothesis that proposed a remarkably laddered topology, our tree suggests that hemerobiids diverged as three main clades. Moreover, in contrast to the vein proliferation hypothesis, we found that hemerobiids have instead undergone multiple reductions in the number of radial veins, this scenario questions the relevance of this character as diagnostic of various subfamilies Our phylogenetic hypothesis and divergence times analysis suggest that extant hemerobiids originated around the end of the Triassic and evolved as three distinct clades that diverged from one another during the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous. Contrary to earlier phylogenetic hypotheses, Carobius Banks (Carobiinae) is sister to the previously unplaced genus Notherobius New in a clade more closely related to Sympherobiinae, Megalominae and Zachobiellinae subfam. nov. The addition of taxa which are not available for DNA sequencing should be the focus of future studies, especially Adelphohemerobius Oswald, which is particularly important to test our inferences regarding the evolution of wing venation in Hemerobiidae. The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12862-016-0746-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
10.7
作者：
Lepage, Thomas;Bryant, David;Lartillot, Nicolas
通讯作者：
Lartillot, Nicolas
影响因子：
9.8
作者：
Drummond AJ;Ho SY;Phillips MJ;Rambaut A
通讯作者：
Rambaut A
DOI：
10.1093/bioinformatics/bts199
发表时间：
2012-06-15
期刊：
Bioinformatics (Oxford, England)
影响因子：
--
作者：
Kearse M;Moir R;Wilson A;Stones-Havas S;Cheung M;Sturrock S;Buxton S;Cooper A;Markowitz S;Duran C;Thierer T;Ashton B;Meintjes P;Drummond A
通讯作者：
Drummond A
影响因子：
7.7
作者：
Ho, Simon Y. W.;Duchene, Sebastian;Duchene, David
通讯作者：
Duchene, David
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
Aspöck, U
通讯作者：
Aspöck, U