Characteristics of the complete mitochondrial genome ofSuhpalacsa longialata(Neuroptera, Ascalaphidae) and its phylogenetic implications

Abstract

The owlflies (Family Ascalaphidae) belong to the Neuroptera but are often mistaken as dragonflies because of morphological characters. To date, only three mitochondrial genomes of Ascalaphidae, namely Libelloides macaronius; Ascaloptynx appendiculatus; Ascalohybris subjacens, are published in GenBank, meaning that they are greatly under-represented in comparison with the 430 described species reported in this family. In this study, we sequenced and described the complete mitochondrial genome of Suhpalacsa longialata (Neuroptera, Ascalaphidae). The total length of the S. longialata mitogenome was 15,911 bp, which is the longest known to date among the available family members of Ascalaphidae. However, the size of each gene was similar to the other three Ascalaphidae species. The S. longialata mitogenome included a transposition of tRNACys and tRNATrp genes and formed an unusual gene arrangement tRNACys-tRNATrp-tRNATyr (CWY). It is likely that the transposition occurred by a duplication of both genes followed by random loss of partial duplicated genes. The nucleotide composition of the S. longialata mitogenome was as follows: A = 41.0%, T = 33.8%, C = 15.5%, G = 9.7%. Both Bayesian inference and ML analyses strongly supported S. longialata as a sister clade to (Ascalohybris subjacens + L. macaronius), and indicated that Ascalaphidae is not monophyletic.

Total‐evidence phylogeny of the owlflies (Neuroptera, Ascalaphidae) supports a new higher‐level classification

“…The Ascalaphidae have long been inferred to belong to an assemblage of families (Psychopsidae, Nymphidae, Nemopteridae, Myrmeleontidae and Ascalaphidae) within the superorder Neuropterida sharing several apomorphies and variously called Myrmeleonoidea (e.g., Withycombe, ; but see Canard, Aspöck, & Mansell, , where the Greek stem was shown to be incorrectly formed), Myrmeleontoidea (Henry, ; Mansell, ; Machado et al, ; New [minus Psychopsidae]; Stange, , ; Tillyard, ; Winterton et al, ) and Myrmeleontiformia (e.g., Aspöck, Plant, & Nemeschkal, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Cerretti, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Haring, ; Jones ; MacLeod, ; Michel et al, ; Song, Li, Zhai, Bozdoğan, & Yin, ; Winterton, Hardy, & Wiegmann, ). In every relational study conducted on these distinctive families, be it comparative anatomy or phylogenetic inference, Ascalaphidae have been placed together with Myrmeleontidae as a monophyletic assemblage (Aspöck et al, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Haring, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Cerretti, ; Gao, Cai, Yu, Storey, & Zhang, ; Henry, ; Jones, ; Kimmins, ; Lan, Chen, Li, & You, ; Machado et al, ; Mansell, ; Michel et al, ; New, ; Riek, ; Song et al, ; Song, Lin, & Zhao, ; Stange, ; Wang et al, ; Winterton et al, , ; Zhang & Yang, ). Thus far, estimation of their sister group relationship (referred to as the Ascalaphidae–Myrmeleontidae complex, or AMC, during analyses performed in the present study) has inconsistently been recovered as (i) a pairing of independent, parallel lineages; (ii, iii, iv) in some manner of nested arrangement; and (v) as grossly paraphyletic relative to one another (see next paragraph).…”

“…Thus far, estimation of their sister group relationship (referred to as the Ascalaphidae–Myrmeleontidae complex, or AMC, during analyses performed in the present study) has inconsistently been recovered as (i) a pairing of independent, parallel lineages; (ii, iii, iv) in some manner of nested arrangement; and (v) as grossly paraphyletic relative to one another (see next paragraph). Despite the lack of consensus regarding their relationships, their close affinity has been recognized for over a century based on several shared adult and larval characteristics (Henry, ; New, ; Riek, ; Stange, ; van der Weele, ), and over several recent decades, it has been supported by an increasing amount of phylogenetic data (Aspöck et al, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Haring, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Cerretti, ; Gao et al, ; Henry, ; Jones, ; Lan et al, ; Machado et al, ; Michel et al, ; Riek, ; Song et al, , ; Stange, ; Wang et al, ; Winterton et al, , ; Zhang & Yang, ).…”

“…Contrarily, Winterton et al () recovered a few of their many trees with (c) a paraphyletic Ascalaphidae (based on two included species) as sister to a monophyletic Stilbopteryx + Palpares , both traditionally placed within the Myrmeleontidae. And Gao et al () placed (d) a monophyletic Myrmeleontinae (five spp.) within a paraphyletic Ascalaphidae (four spp.)…”

“…These studies variously have been based on analyses of morphology (Aspöck et al, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Haring, ; Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Cerretti, ; Henry, ; Stange, ; Winterton et al, ); entire mitochondrial (mt) genomes (Gao et al, ; Lan et al, ; Song et al, , ; Wang et al, ); partial nuclear (nu) genomes (Machado et al, ; Winterton et al, ); partial nuclear genome amino acid sequences (Winterton et al, ); mt‐ and nu‐DNA markers (Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Haring, ; Michel et al, ); or combined mt‐DNA and nu‐DNA markers and morphology (=“total evidence”: Jones, ; Winterton et al, ). In a general sense, then, data sampling across these surveys has been broad.…”

“…His subsequent optimization (1978c), also based on larval characters but addressing intrafamilial relationships, grouped ascalaphids into two reciprocally monophyletic clades (Figure c): the “Neuropterynginae” (=Haplogleniinae sensu Tjeder, ) were united by scale‐like setae and consisted of two lineages, one in the Old World and one in the New; and the Ascalaphinae had the ventral scolus series of the abdomen reduced and the abdominal tergum bearing litter, and also were subdivided into two lineages, one Old World and one New World. Other recent works that have addressed the phylogeny of the Neuropterida, Myrmeleontiformia and/or the AMC and have included three or more owlfly species (Badano, Aspöck, Aspöck, & Cerretti, ; Gao et al, ; Henry, ; Lan et al, ; Machado et al, ; Michel et al, ; Song et al, , ; Wang et al, ), are reviewed and figured in the Appendix (Figures –).…”