|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Благодаря любезности Германа Лафера редакция получила еще две очень важные статьи по филогении отдельных подотрядов жуков, опубликованные только что (одна из них уже датирована 2008 годом). Чрезвычайно интересно сравнить кладограммы этих двух статей с появившейся перед этим статьей о филогении всех жуков.
Rolf
G.
Beutel,
Ignacio
Ribera,
Olaf
R.P.
Bininda-Emonds
A
genus-level
supertree
of
Adephaga
(Coleoptera).
Organisms,
Diversity &
Evolution, 7
(2008):
255-269.
On-line version:
www.elsevier.de/ode
(Institut
fuer
Spezielle
Zoologie
und
Evolutionsbiologie,
FSU
Jena,
Germany;
Museo
Nacional
de
Ciencias
Naturales,
Madrid,
Spain)
Received
14
October
2005;
accepted
17
May
2006
Abstract
A
supertree
for
Adephaga
was
reconstructed
based
on
43
independent
source
trees -
including
cladograms
based
on
Hennigian
and
numerical
cladistic
analyses
of
morphological
and
molecular
data -
and
on a
backbone
taxonomy.
To
overcome
problems
associated
with
both
the
size
of
the
group
and
the
comparative
paucity
of
available
information,
our
analysis
was
made
at
the
genus
level
(requiring
synonymizing
taxa
at
different
levels
across
the
trees)
and
used
Safe
Taxonomic
Reduction
to
remove
especially
poorly
known
species.
The
final
supertree
contained
401
genera,
making
it
the
most
comprehensive
phylogenetic
estimate
yet
published
for
the
group.
Interrelationships
among
the
families
are
well
resolved.
Gyrinidae
constitute
the
basal
sister
group,
Haliplidae
appear
as
the
sister
taxon
of
Geadephaga+
Dytiscoidea,
Noteridae
are
the
sister
group
of
the
remaining
Dytiscoidea,
Amphizoidae
and
Aspidytidae
are
sister
groups,
and
Hygrobiidae
forms a
clade
with
Dytiscidae.
Resolution
within
the
species-rich
Dytiscidae
is
generally
high,
but
some
relations
remain
unclear.
Trachypachidae
are
the
sister
group
of
Carabidae
(including
Rhysodidae),
in
contrast
to a
proposed
sister-group
relationship
between
Trachypachidae
and
Dytiscoidea.
Carabidae
are
only
monophyletic
with
the
inclusion
of a
non-monophyletic
Rhysodidae,
but
resolution
within
this
megadiverse
group
is
generally
low.
Non-monophyly
of
Rhysodidae
is
extremely
unlikely
from a
morphological
point
of
view,
and
this
group
remains
the
greatest
enigma
in
adephagan
systematics.
Despite
the
insights
gained,
our
findings
highlight
that a
combined
and
coordinated
effort
of
morphologists
and
molecular
systematists
is
still
required
to
expand
the
phylogenetic
database
to
enable a
solid
and
comprehensive
reconstruction
of
adephagan
phylogeny.
2007,
Gesellschaft
fuer
Biologische
Systematik.
Published
by
Elsevier
GmbH.
All
rights
reserved.
See
also
supplementary
material
in
the
online
edition
at
doi:10.1016/j.ode.2006.05.003
Keywords:
Adephaga;
Cladistics;
Phylogenetic
systematics;
Safe
Taxonomic
Reduction;
Supertree
construction