Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T12:48:23.992Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phylogenetic analyses using molecular markers reveal ecological lineages in Medetera (Diptera: Dolichopodidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2012

Marc Pollet ,
Christoph Germann  and
Marco Valerio Bernasconi
Marc Pollet
Affiliation:
Research Group Terrestrial Ecology, Department of Biology, Ghent University, K.L. Ledeganckstraat 35, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium, and Department of Entomology, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Vautierstraat 29, B-1000 Brussels, Belgium
Christoph Germann
Affiliation:
Zoological Museum, Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland
Marco Valerio Bernasconi*
Affiliation:
Zoological Museum, Institute of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of Zurich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland
*
Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Medetera Fischer von Waldheim is the most speciose genus in the Medeterinae, with a nearly ubiquitous global distribution. Phylogenetic relationships within Medetera and between Medetera and four other medeterine genera were investigated using mitochondrial (COI, 16S) and nuclear (18S) markers to test morphological hypotheses. Our results confirm most of Bickel's hypotheses. Thrypticus Gerstäcker shows a sister-group relationship with Medetera + Dolichophorus Lichtwardt. The Medetera species included here split into two clades. One clade corresponds to the M. diadema L. – veles Loew species group sensu Bickel. The second clade is largely composed of the M. apicalis (Zetterstedt) species group sensu Bickel and the M. aberrans Wheeler species group sensu Bickel + Dolichophorus. Although most Medeterinae are associated with plants (mainly trees), species in at least two separate lineages demonstrate a secondary return to terrestrial habitats. The implication of this evolutionary phenomenon is briefly discussed.

Résumé

Medetera Fischer von Waldheim est le genre des Medeterinae le plus riche en espèces, et est pratiquement ubiquiste dans sa distribution globale. Les relations phylogénétiques à l'intérieur de Medetera et entre Medetera et quatre autres genres de Medeterinae ont été étudiées à l'aide de marqueurs mitochondriaux (COI, 16S) et nucléaire (18S) pour tester les hypothèses morphologiques. Nos résultats confirment la plupart des hypothèses de Bickel. Thrypticus Gerstäcker montre une relation de groupe-sœur avec Medetera + Dolichophorus Lichtwardt. Les espèces de Medetera incluses se séparent en deux clades, dont l'un correspond au groupe d'espèces de M. diadema L. – veles Loew (sensu Bickel). Le second clade est composé en grande partie du groupe d'espèces de M. apicalis (Zetterstedt) (sensu Bickel), et du groupe d'espèces de M. aberrans Wheeler (sensu Bickel) + Dolichophorus Wheeler. Bien que la plupart des Medeterinae soient associés à des plantes (principalement des arbres), dans au moins deux lignées séparées des espèces montrent un retour secondaire à des habitats terrestres. L'implication de ce phénomène évolutionnaire est brièvement discuté.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 143 , Issue 6 , December 2011 , pp. 662 - 673
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bernasconi, M.V. Pollet, M. Varini-Ooijen, M. Ward, P.I. 2007a. Phylogeny of European Dolichopus and Gymnopternus (Diptera, Dolichopodidae) and the significance of morphological characters inferred from molecular data. European Journal of Entomology, 104: 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernasconi, M.V. Pollet, M. Ward, P.I. 2007b. Molecular systematics of Dolichopodidae (Diptera) inferred from COI and 12S rDNA gene sequences based on European exemplars. Invertebrate Systematics, 21: 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, D.J. 1985. A revision of the Nearctic Medetera (Diptera: Dolichopodidae). United States Department of Agriculture, Technical Bulletin No. 1692.Google Scholar
Bickel, D.J. 1986. Australian species of Systenus (Diptera: Dolichopodidae). Records of the Australian Museum, 38: 263–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, D.J. 1987. A revision of the Oriental and Australasian Medetera (Diptera: Dolichopodidae). Records of the Australian Museum, 39: 195–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bickel, D.J. 2009. 49. Dolichopodidae (long-legged flies). In Manual of Central American Diptera. Edited by Brown, B.V. Borkent, A. Cumming, J.M. Wood, D.M. Woodley, N.E. Zumbado, M. NRC Research Press, Ottawa, Ont. pp. 671–694.Google Scholar
Bickel, D.J. Hernandez, M.C. 2004. Neotropical Thrypticus (Diptera: Dolichopodidae) reared from water hyacinth, Eichhornia crassipes, and other Pontederiaceae. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 97: 437–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collin, J.E. 1941. The British species of the dolichopodid genus Medeterus Fisch. (Dipt.). Entomologist's Monthly Magazine, 77: 141–153.Google Scholar
Dyte, C.E. 1959. Some interesting habitats of larval Dolichopodidae (Diptera). Entomologist's Monthly Magazine, 95: 139–143.Google Scholar
Dyte, C.E. 1993. The occurrence of Thrypticus smaragdinus Gerst. (Diptera: Dolichopodidae) in Britain, with remarks on plant hosts in the genus. The Entomologist, 112: 81–84.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, T.D. Nagel, W.P. 1972. Oviposition and larval bark-surface orientation of Medetera aldrichii (Diptera: Dolichopodidae): response to a prey-liberated plant terpene. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 65: 328–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germann, C. Pollet, M. Tanner, S. Backeljau, T. Bernasconi, M.V. 2010. Legs of deception: disagreement between molecular markers and morphology of long-legged flies (Diptera, Dolichopodidae). Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 48: 238–247.Google Scholar
Grichanov, I.Y. 2002. A check list of Swedish Dolichopodidae (Diptera). Entomologisk Tidskrift, 123: 119–130.Google Scholar
Grichanov, I.Y. 2010. Two new genera of Systenini from South Africa and Madagascar (Diptera: Dolichopodidae: Medeterinae). International Journal of Dipterological Research, 21: 79–90.Google Scholar
Grichanov, I.Y. Mostovski, M.B. 2009. Discovery of Systenus in the Afrotropical Region with a description of a new species (Diptera: Dolichopodidae). Zoosystematica Rossica, 18: 285–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, M.C. 2008. Biology of Thrypticus truncatus and Thrypticus sagittatus (Diptera: Dolichopodidae), petiole miners of water hyacinth, in Argentina, with morphological descriptions of larvae and pupae. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 101: 1041–1049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulcr, J. Pollet, M. Ubik, K. Vrkoc, J. 2005. Exploitation of kairomones and synomones by Medetera spp. (Diptera: Dolichopodidae), predators of spruce bark beetles. European Journal of Entomology, 102: 655–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kowarz, F. 1877. Die Dipteren-Gattung Medeterus Fischer. Verhandlungen der Kaiserlich-Königlichen Zoologisch–Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 27: 39–76.Google Scholar
Krivosheina, N.P. 1974. Larval morphology of the genus Medetera Fisch. (Diptera, Dolichopodidae). Entomologicheskoe Obozrenie, 53: 309–323.Google Scholar
Kubota, M. Morii, T. Miura, K. 2005. In vitro cultivation of parthenogenesis-inducing Wolbachia in an Aedes albopictus cell line. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 117: 83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lim, G.S. Hwang, W.S. Kutty, S.N. Meier, R. Grootaert, P. 2010. Mitochondrial and nuclear markers support the monophyly of Dolichopodidae and suggest a rapid origin of the subfamilies (Diptera: Dolichopodidae). Systematic Entomology, 35: 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacGowan, I. 1988. A preliminary survey of Dolichopodidae (Diptera) in Scotland. Nature Conservancy Council, Newton Abbot, U.K..Google Scholar
Maes, D. Pollet, M. 1997. Dolichopodid communities (Diptera: Dolichopodidae) in “De Kempen” (eastern Belgium): biodiversity, faunistics and ecology. Bulletin et Annales de la Société royale belge d'Entomologie, 133: 419–438.Google Scholar
Nagel, W.P. Fitzgerald, T.D. 1975. Medetera aldrichii larval feeding behaviour and prey consumption [Dipt.: Dolichopodidae]. Entomophaga, 20: 121–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Negrobov, O.P. 1977. 29. Dolichopodidae. Die Fliegen der palaearktischen Region. Vol. 4. Edited by Lindner, E. pp. 347–354.Google Scholar
Negrobov, O.P., and von Stackelberg, A.A. 1971. 29. Dolichopodidae. In Die Fliegen der palaearktischen Region. Vol. 4. Edited by Lindner, E. pp. 225–256.Google Scholar
Negrobov, O.P., and von Stackelberg, A.A. 1972. 29. Dolichopodidae. Die Fliegen der palaearktischen Region. Vol. 4. Edited by Lindner, E. pp. 257–302.Google Scholar
Negrobov, O.P., and von Stackelberg, A.A. 1974a. 29. Dolichopodidae. In Die Fliegen der palaearktischen Region. Vol. 4. Edited by Lindner, E. pp. 303–324.Google Scholar
Negrobov, O.P., and von Stackelberg, A.A. 1974b. 29. Dolichopodidae. Die Fliegen der palaearktischen Region. Vol. 4. Edited by Lindner, E. pp. 325–346.Google Scholar
Nicolai, V. 1995. Der Einfluß von Medetera dendrobaena (Diptera, Dolichopodidae) auf Borkenkäferpopulationen. Mitteilungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft für allgemeine und angewandte Entomologie, 9: 465–469.Google Scholar
Nuorteva, M. 1956. Über den Fichtenstamm-Bastkäfer, Hylurgops palliatus Gyll., und seine Insektenfeinde. Acta Entomologica Fennica, 13: 7–116.Google Scholar
Nuorteva, M. 1959. Untersuchungen über einige in den Frassbildern der Borkenkäfer lebende Medetera-Arten (Dipt., Dolichopodidae). Suomen Hyönteistieteelinen Aikakauskirja, 25: 192–210.Google Scholar
Pape, T. Bickel, D. Meier, R. 2009. Appendix 1. Species of Diptera per family for all regions. In Diptera diversity: status, challenges and tools. Edited by Pape, T. Bickel, D. Meier, R. Koninklijke Brill NV., Leiden - Boston. pp. 430–435.Google Scholar
Pollet, M. 2000. A documented Red List of the dolichopodid flies (Diptera: Dolichopodidae) of Flanders. Communications of the Institute of Nature Conservation, 8: 1–190. [In Dutch with English summary.].Google Scholar
Pollet, M. Grootaert, P. 1994. Optimizing the water trap technique to collect Empidoidea (Diptera). Studia dipterologica, 1: 33–48.Google Scholar
Pollet, M. Grootaert, P. 1996. An estimation of the natural value of dune habitats using Empidoidea (Diptera). Biodiversity and Conservation, 5: 859–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollet, M. Brooks, S.E. Cumming, J.M. 2004. Catalog of the Dolichopodidae (Diptera) of America north of Mexico. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History, 283: 1–114.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollet, M. Germann, C. Tanner, S. Bernasconi, M.V. 2010. Hypotheses from mitochondrial DNA: congruence and conflicts with morphology in Dolichopodinae systematics (Diptera: Dolichopodidae). Invertebrate Systematics, 24: 32–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Posada, D. Crandall, K.A. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics, 14: 817–818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ringdahl, O. 1928. Förteckning över de i Sverige hittills iakttagna arterna av familjen Dolichopodidae (Diptera). Entomologisk Tidskrift, 49: 179–201.Google Scholar
Robinson, H. 1975. The family Dolichopodidae with some related Antillean and Panamanian species (Diptera). Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology, 185: 1–141.Google Scholar
Ronquist, F. Huelsenbeck, J.P. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics, 19: 1572–1574.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Runyon, J.B. Robinson, H. 2010. Hurleyella, a new genus of Nearctic Dolichopodidae (Diptera). Zootaxa, 2400: 57–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Švihra, P. 1972. Survey of the seasonal flight pattern of Ips typographus L. with an attractant trap in Slovakia. Zeitschrift für angewandte Entomologie, 72: 80–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, B.J. Brooks, S.E. Cumming, J.M. 2008. A critical review of the world catalogs of Empidoidea (Insecta: Diptera) by Yang et al. (2006, 2007). Zootaxa, 1846: 61–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stamatakis, A. Hoover, P. Rougemont, J. 2008. A rapid bootstrap algorithm for the RAxML web-Servers. Systematic Biology, 75: 758–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swofford, D.L. 2002. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4.0 b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass.Google Scholar
Tamura, K. Dudley, J. Nei, M. Kumar, S. 2007. MEGA4: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis (MEGA) software version 4.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 24: 1596–1599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaillant, F. 1978. Les Systenus et leur habitat dendrotelme (Dipt. Dolichopodidae). Bulletin de la Société entomologique de France, 83 (3–4): 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiting, M. 2002. Mecoptera is paraphyletic: multiple genes and phylogeny of Mecoptera and Siphonaptera. Zoologica Scripta, 31: 93–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wirth, W.W. 1952. Three new nearctic species of Systenus with a description of the immature stages from tree cavities (Diptera, Dolichopodidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 54: 236–244.Google Scholar
Yang, D. Zhu, Y. Wang, M. Zhang, L. 2006. World catalog of Dolichopodidae (Insecta: Diptera). China Agricultural University Press, Beijing, People's Republic of China.Google Scholar