2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3113.2011.00603.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A dated molecular phylogeny for the Chironomidae (Diptera)

Abstract: We provide the first highly sampled phylogeny estimate for the dipteran family Chironomidae using molecular data from fragments of two ribosomal genes (18S and 28S), one nuclear protein‐coding gene (CAD), and one mitochondrial protein‐coding gene (COI), analysed using mixed‐model Bayesian and maximum likelihood inference methods. The most recently described subfamilies Chilenomyiinae and Usambaromyiinae proved elusive, and are unsampled. We confirm monophyly of all sampled subfamilies except Prodiamesinae, whi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
181
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 121 publications
(196 citation statements)
references
References 60 publications
(101 reference statements)
13
181
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Restricting the discussion to the presently described species, the most contrasting evidence is probably the one given by the steinboecki group, created on the basis of adult males (Kownacki 1980) In this context building a phylogenetic tree of the genus Diamesa is a difficult task. When molecular data become available, this information will give some light about the matter, but at present molecular studies considering Diamesa species are very scanty and do not aid so much (Willassen 2005;Cranston et al 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Restricting the discussion to the presently described species, the most contrasting evidence is probably the one given by the steinboecki group, created on the basis of adult males (Kownacki 1980) In this context building a phylogenetic tree of the genus Diamesa is a difficult task. When molecular data become available, this information will give some light about the matter, but at present molecular studies considering Diamesa species are very scanty and do not aid so much (Willassen 2005;Cranston et al 2012).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Having more than three macrosetae has evolved independently in all these taxa and its occurrence is not indicative of a relationship between any of them. Preliminary molecular data in Cranston et al (2012) indicates that Propsilocerus should be placed in the Prodiamesinae but no formal change removing it from the Orthocladiinae has yet been made pending further molecular analysis. Among Holarctic genera pedes spurii B on tergite I is otherwise only reported in some Halocladius s. str.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To exacerbate this, many of the taxa were highly derived members of their prospective families. For example, the Chironomidae were represented by Chironomus tepperi, a member of one of the most advanced lineages within the family (Cranston et al, 2012) and Cecidomyiidae by Mayetiola destructor, also belonging to a highly advanced lineage (Gagné, 1989;Jaschhof & Jaschhof, 2009). With the morphological portion restricted to just these exemplars, variation known and present within a given family was ignored, making the analysis easier but the results strongly suspect.…”
Section: Genomes Vs Phenotypementioning
confidence: 99%