3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      North-Western Palaearctic species of Pristiphora (Hymenoptera, Tenthredinidae)

      , , ,

      Journal of Hymenoptera Research

      Pensoft Publishers

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          North-Western Palaearctic species of PristiphoraLatreille, 1810 are revised. Altogether, 90 species are treated, two of which are described as new: P.caraganaeVikberg & Prous, sp. n.from Finland and P.dedearaListon & Prous, sp. n.from Germany. Host plant of P.caraganaeis CaraganaarborescensLam. Pristiphoradasiphorae(Zinovjev, 1993) (previously known from East Palaearctic) and P.cadmaWong & Ross, 1960 (previously known from North America) are recorded for the first time from Europe. NematusnigricansEversmann, 1847 [= Pristiphoranigricans(Eversmann, 1847), comb. n.], N.breviusculusEversmann, 1847 [= Euuramelanocephalus(Hartig, 1837)], and N.caudalisEversmann, 1847 [= E.caudalis(Eversmann, 1847), comb. n.] are removed from synonymy with P.pallidiventris(Fallén, 1808), N.paralellusHartig, 1840 [= P.paralella(Hartig, 1840), comb. n.] is removed from synonymy with P.bufo(Brischke, 1883), and P.mesatlanticaLacourt, 1976 is removed from synonymy with P.insularisRohwer, 1910. The following 29 new synonymies are proposed: P.nigropuncticepsHaris, 2002, syn. n.with P.albitibia(Costa, 1859); LygaeonematuskarvoneniLindqvist, 1952, syn. n.with P.alpestris(Konow, 1903); P. (P.) anivskiensis Haris, 2006, syn. n.with P.appendiculata(Hartig, 1837); NematuscanaliculatusHartig, 1840, syn. nwith P.carinata(Hartig, 1837); P.nigrogroenblomiHaris, 2002, syn. n.with P.cinctaNewman, 1837; TenthredoflavipesZetterstedt, 1838, syn. n., NematuscongenerW.F. Kirby, 1882, syn. n., and P.thomsoniLindqvist, 1953, syn. n.with P.dochmocera(Thomson, 1871); P.atrataLindqvist, 1975, syn. n.with P.friesei(Konow, 1904); P.gelidaWong, 1968, syn. n.with P.frigida(Boheman, 1865); PachynematusnigricorpusTakagi, 1931, syn. n.with P.laricis(Hartig, 1837); Nematus (Pikonema) piceae Zhelochovtsev in Zhelochovtsev and Zinovjev, 1988, syn. n.and P. (P.) hoverlaensis Haris, 2001, syn. n.with P.leucopodia(Hartig, 1837); MesoneuraarcticaLindqvist, 1959, syn. n., PachynematusincisusLindqvist, 1970, syn. n., PachynematusintermediusVerzhutskii, 1974, syn. n., and P.mongololaricisHaris, 2003, syn. n.with P.malaisei(Lindqvist, 1952); NematusanderschiZaddach, 1876, syn. n., P.inocreataKonow, 1902, syn. n., and P.discolorLindqvist, 1975, syn. n.with P.nigricans(Eversmann, 1847); LygaeonematustenuicornisLindqvist, 1955, syn. n.with P.paralella(Hartig, 1840); LygaeonematusconcolorLindqvist, 1952, syn. n.with P.pseudocoactula(Lindqvist, 1952); P.flavipictaLindqvist, 1975, syn. n., P.flavopleuraHaris, 2002, syn. n., P.mongoloexiguaHaris, 2002, syn. n., and P.mongolofaustaHaris, 2003, syn. n.with P.punctifrons(Thomson, 1871); P.listoniLacourt, 1998, syn. n.with P.sootryeniLindqvist, 1955; P.gaunitziLindqvist, 1968, syn. n.with P.testacea(Jurine, 1807); and NematusbreviusculusEversmann, 1847, syn. n.with Euuramelanocephalus(Hartig, 1837). The valid name of Pachynematus (Pikonema) carpathiensis Haris, 2001 is Nematinuscarpathiensis(Haris, 2001) comb. n.Lectotypes are designated for 43 taxa. An illustrated electronic key made with Lucid and a traditional dichotomous key are provided to facilitate identification of the species. Species belonging to the carinata(previously Lygaeotus), micronematica(previously Lygaeophora), and rufipes(also known as thalictrior aquilegiae) groups are not keyed to the species level, because additional research is needed to delimit the species more reliably in these groups. Phylogeny of Pristiphorais reconstructed based on one mitochondrial (COI) and two nuclear (NaK and TPI) genes. Remarkably, around 50–60% (depending on the exclusion or inclusion of the carinata, micronematica, and rufipesgroups) of the species cannot be reliably identified based on COI barcodes. Limited data from nuclear genes indicate a better identification potential (about 20% remain problematic).

          Related collections

          Most cited references 62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          An inexpensive, automation-friendly protocol for recovering high-quality DNA

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Problems with mitochondrial DNA as a marker in population, phylogeographic and phylogenetic studies: the effects of inherited symbionts.

            Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) has been a marker of choice for reconstructing historical patterns of population demography, admixture, biogeography and speciation. However, it has recently been suggested that the pervasive nature of direct and indirect selection on this molecule renders any conclusion derived from it ambiguous. We review here the evidence for indirect selection on mtDNA in arthropods arising from linkage disequilibrium with maternally inherited symbionts. We note first that these symbionts are very common in arthropods and then review studies that reveal the extent to which they shape mtDNA evolution. mtDNA diversity patterns are compatible with neutral expectations for an uninfected population in only 2 of 19 cases. The remaining 17 studies revealed cases of symbiont-driven reduction in mtDNA diversity, symbiont-driven increases in diversity, symbiont-driven changes in mtDNA variation over space and symbiont-associated paraphyly of mtDNA. We therefore conclude that these elements often confound the inference of an organism's evolutionary history from mtDNA data and that mtDNA on its own is an unsuitable marker for the study of recent historical events in arthropods. We also discuss the impact of these studies on the current programme of taxonomy based on DNA bar-coding.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sex determination in the hymenoptera.

              The dominant and ancestral mode of sex determination in the Hymenoptera is arrhenotokous parthenogenesis, in which diploid females develop from fertilized eggs and haploid males develop from unfertilized eggs. We discuss recent progress in the understanding of the genetic and cytoplasmic mechanisms that make arrhenotoky possible. The best-understood mode of sex determination in the Hymenoptera is complementary sex determination (CSD), in which diploid males are produced under conditions of inbreeding. The gene mediating CSD has recently been cloned in the honey bee and has been named the complementary sex determiner. However, CSD is only known from 4 of 21 hymenopteran superfamilies, with some taxa showing clear evidence of the absence of CSD. Sex determination in the model hymenopteran Nasonia vitripennis does not involve CSD, but it is consistent with a form of genomic imprinting in which activation of the female developmental pathway requires paternally derived genes. Some other hymenopterans are not arrhenotokous but instead exhibit thelytoky or paternal genome elimination.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal of Hymenoptera Research
                JHR
                Pensoft Publishers
                1314-2607
                1070-9428
                September 01 2017
                September 01 2017
                : 59
                : 1-190
                Article
                10.3897/jhr.59.12656
                © 2017

                Comments

                Comment on this article