Direct Optimization, Sensitivity Analysis, and the Evolution of the Hymenopteran Superfamilies

Abstract

even as recent studies have focused on the construction of larger and more diverse datasets, the proper placement of the hymenopteran superfamilies remains controversial. in order to explore the implications of these new data, we here present the first direct optimizationsensitivity analysis of hymenopteran superfamilial relationships, based on a recently published total evidence dataset. Our maximum parsimony analyses of 111 terminal taxa, four genetic markers (18s, 28s, COi, eF-1α), and 392 morphological/behavioral characters reveal areas of clade stability and volatility with respect to variation in four transformation cost parameters. While most parasitican superfamilies remain robust to parameter change, the monophyly of Proctotrupoidea sensu stricto is less stable; no set of cost parameters yields a monophyletic Diaprioidea. While Apoidea is monophyletic under eight of the nine parameter regimes, no set of cost parameters returns a monophyletic Vespoidea or a monophyletic Chrysidoidea. The relationships of the hymenopteran superfamilies to one another demonstrate marked instability across parameter regimes. The preferred tree (i.e., the one that minimizes character incongruence among data partitions) includes a paraphyletic Apocrita, with (Orussoidea + stephanoidea) sister to all other apocritans, and a monophyletic Aculeata. "Parasitica" is rendered paraphyletic by the aculeate clade, with Aculeata sister to (trigonaloidea + Megalyroidea).

New Evanioid Wasps from the Cenomanian of Myanmar (Hymenoptera: Othniodellithidae, Aulacidae), with a Summary of Family-Group Names Among Evanioidea

“…Since the works of Bischoff (1927), Hedicke (1930Hedicke ( , 1939aHedicke ( , 1939bHedicke ( , 1939c, and Crosskey (1951Crosskey ( , 1962, the most consistent classification considers the superfamily to comprise three extant familes-Aulacidae, Gasteruptiidae, and Evaniidae (e.g., Mason, 1993;Grimaldi and Engel, 2005;Sharkey et al, 2012). The monophyly of evanioids is abundantly supported in analyses of morphological and molecular data sources (e.g., Dowton and Austin, 1994;Dowton et al, 1997;Vilhelmsen et al, 2010;Sharkey et al, 2012;Payne et al, 2013), and they are also one of the few superfamilies for which there have been comparatively comprehensive modern phylogenetic studies and revisions (e.g., Aulacidae [Jennings and Austin, 2000;Smith, 2001;Turrisi, 2006Turrisi, , 2007Turrisi, , 2014Turrisi et al, 2009;Turrisi and Madl, 2013], Gasteruptiidae [Jennings and Austin, 2002;Macedo, 2009Macedo, , 2011Zhao et al, 2012;Achterberg and Talebi, 2014], Evaniidae [Deans and Huben, 2003;Deans, 2005;Deans et al, 2006;Kawada and Azevedo, 2007;Mullins et al, 2012]). …”

Including fossils in phylogeny: a glimpse into the evolution of the superfamily Evanioidea (Hymenoptera: Apocrita) under tip-dating and the fossilized birth–death process

“…The most recent works have estimated robust time-calibrated phylogenies for Hymenoptera based on analyses of genomic data, and have found evidence that Evanioidea is the sister lineage of Stephanoidea (Peters et al, 2017;Tang et al, 2019). Additionally, molecular and morphological studies strongly support the monophyly of Evanioidea (Dowton & Austin, 1994;Dowton et al, 1997;Vilhelmsen et al, 2010;Heraty et al, 2011;Sharkey et al, 2012;Klopfstein et al, 2013;Payne et al, 2013;Li et al, 2018;Sharanowski et al, 2018). The superfamily Evanioidea is currently composed of five fossil families ( †Praeaulacidae, †Anomopterellidae, †Andreneliidae, †Baissidae, and †Othniodellithidae) that are widely represented in Mesozoic deposits, plus three extant families (Evaniidae, Aulacidae, Gasteruptiidae) with a rather extensive fossil record.…”

New evanioid wasps (Hymenoptera: Praeaulacidae, Aulacidae) from Cenomanian Burmese amber

“…Molecular and morphological studies strongly support the monophyly of the Evanioidea (Dowton and Austin, 1994;Dowton et al, 1997;Vilhelmsen et al, 2010;Heraty et al, 2011;Sharkey et al, 2012;Klopfstein et al, 2013;Payne et al, 2013;Li et al, 2018). And the monophyly of its constituent families are also well supported, e.g., Aulacidae (Jennings and Austin, 2000;Smith, 2001;Turrisi, 2006Turrisi, , 2007Turrisi, , 2014Turrisi et al, 2009;Turrisi and Madl, 2013), Gasteruptiidae (Jennings and Austin, 2002;Macedo, 2009Macedo, , 2011Zhao et al, 2012; van Achterberg and Talebi, 2014), Evaniidae (Deans and Huben, 2003;Deans, 2005;Deans et al, 2006;Kawada and Azevedo, 2007;Mullins et al, 2012).…”