HUSCAP logo Hokkaido Univ. logo

Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers >
Graduate School of Agriculture / Faculty of Agriculture >
Peer-reviewed Journal Articles, etc >

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

Files in This Item:
2014ZJLS.pdf900.9 kBPDFView/Open
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:http://hdl.handle.net/2115/56874

Title: Phylogeny of the suborder Psocomorpha: congruence and incongruence between morphology and molecular data (Insecta: Psocodea: ‘Psocoptera’)
Authors: Yoshizawa, Kazunori Browse this author →KAKEN DB
Johnson, Kevin P. Browse this author
Keywords: higher level classification
infraorder
Archipsocetae
Philotarsetae
synonym
Bryopsocidae
Calopsocidae
Neurostigmatidae
Issue Date: Aug-2014
Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
Journal Title: Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society
Volume: 171
Issue: 4
Start Page: 716
End Page: 731
Publisher DOI: 10.1111/zoj.12157
Abstract: 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.
Rights: The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com
Type: article (author version)
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2115/56874
Appears in Collections:農学院・農学研究院 (Graduate School of Agriculture / Faculty of Agriculture) > 雑誌発表論文等 (Peer-reviewed Journal Articles, etc)

Submitter: 吉澤 和徳

Export metadata:

OAI-PMH ( junii2 , jpcoar )


 

Feedback - Hokkaido University