Morphology of bromeliad-associated immature stages of Daiphron bipartitus and its adults confirms the non-monophyly of the genus (Coleoptera: Cantharidae)

Biffi, Gabriel; Rosa, Simone Policena

doi:10.2478/aemnp-2019-0012

Cited by 310 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Drawings were made under a stereomicroscope coupled to a camera lucida. For morphological terminology, we followed Beutel (1995) and Branham (2010) for immature stages, and Silveira & Mermudes (2014) for adults.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bromeliad tanks can be thought of as complex ecosystems which house several species, including beetles. Although the study of bromeliad-inhabiting beetles in South America dates back to 1900 (Ohaus, 1900), recently there has been renewed interest (e.g., Albertoni et al, 2016;Biffi & Rosa, 2019). Because bromeliads provide important environmental needs of firefly larvae, viz.…”

Section: Bromeliad-inhabiting Firefliesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Morphology and life cycle of a new species of Psilocladus Blanchard, 1846 (Coleoptera, Lampyridae, Psilocladinae), the first known bromeliad-inhabiting firefly

Vaz¹,

Silveira²,

Rosa³

2020

Pap. Avulsos Zool.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fireflies (Coleoptera: Lampyridae) are soft-bodied beetles usually associated with mesic and hydric habitats. As such, terrestrial firefly larvae are commonly found in marshy environments and stream banks, while aquatic larvae might dwell in ponds, streams, mangroves, and even brackish water. Larval biology is especially important in fireflies, as the majority of species are extremely semelparous – that is, adults rely on resources gathered during larval stages. Despite their crucial relevance in firefly biology, larvae of only near 1% firefly species have been studied, and the majority of species remain known only from adult stages. That is especially true in the Neotropical region, where they are most diverse. Here, we describe Psilocladus costae sp. nov. after the study of adults and immature stages, the latter reported for the first time for the monotypic subfamily Psilocladinae McDermott, 1964. Interestingly, adults were first obtained by rearing the larvae, the former usually fly fairly high (ca. 10 m) and are therefore seldom collected at ground level by conventional methods (e.g., active search, Malaise traps). The new species is found in the Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest, inhabiting canopy bromeliads, an unprecedented habit for fireflies.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Bromeliad-inhabiting Firefliesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphology and life cycle of a new species of Psilocladus Blanchard, 1846 (Coleoptera, Lampyridae, Psilocladinae), the first known bromeliad-inhabiting firefly

Vaz¹,

Silveira²,

Rosa³

2020

Pap. Avulsos Zool.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the scattered plumose setae and dense granulation found on the integument of Neoontelus larva (Figs 7F, 8B) are unique and we would assume that these would not be overlooked in prior species descriptions. The integument of P. laterale is densely covered with very short fasciculate pubescence, especially on the head G. Biffi et al / Insect Systematics & Evolution (2022) DOI 10.1163/1876312X-bja10041 Verhoeff (1917Verhoeff ( , 1923, Bøving & Craighead (1931), Larsson (1938), Gardner (1947), Striganova (1962), Janssen (1963), Fitton (1976), Gambardella & Vaio (1978), Costa et al (1988), Gambardella & Gonzáles-Vainer (1991), Klausnitzer (1997), Biffi & Casari (2017), Biffi & Rosa (2019) G. Biffi et al / Insect Systematics & Evolution (2022) DOI 10.1163/1876312X-bja10041 capsule (Fig. 3F); upon closer examination, the pubescence is comprised of clusters tiny simple setae (Fig.…”

Section: Comparative Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nasale: The form of the nasale and the anterior angles of head are important characters for reliable separation of subfamilies, genera and species (e.g., Larsson 1938;Fitton 1976;Biffi & Casari 2017;Biffi & Rosa 2019). The nasale of Chauliognathinae differs from all other subfamilies by the numerous small teeth in the anterior margin and a median incision instead of a median projecting tooth.…”

Section: Comparative Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cantharidae larvae are usually easily recognised by their soft body densely covered with short pubescence, giving them a velvety appearance; other characters, like the prognathous and slightly flattened head, and body with lateral and transversal ampullae with pairs of glandular pores are also diagnostic (Crowson 1972;Ramsdale 2010). They have a rich diversity of structures useful for characterising lineages of Cantharidae and have enabled the production of identification keys, the recognition of genera and groups of species, and the definition of subfamilies (cf., Bøving & Craighead 1931;Striganova 1962;Fitton 1976;Klausnitzer 1997;Biffi & Casari 2017;Biffi & Rosa 2019;Biffi et al 2022). As highlighted by Crowson (1972), the known Cantharidae larvae seem to fall readily into groups corresponding to the four commonly accepted subfamilies of the adults at that time (Cantharinae Imhoff, Malthininae Kiesenwetter, Chauliognathinae LeConte, and Silinae Mulsant) apart from one, an 'aberrant' cantharid larva.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The systematics of Dysmorphocerinae (Cantharidae) based on larvae

Biffi

Leschen²,

Hsiao

et al. 2022

Insect Syst. Evol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dysmorphocerinae is a subfamily of Cantharidae erected for a group of genera with a mainly gondwanan distribution whose adult forms could not be reliably assigned to any other subfamily. The systematic position and monophyly of Dysmorphocerinae remains questionable, as recent molecular and morphological studies have produced conflicting results. Despite the importance of immature morphology for characterising lineages of Cantharidae, so far, the larvae of only two dysmorphocerine species had been briefly described: Neoontelus sp., from New Zealand, and Afronycha picta (Wiedemann), from South Africa. Their morphologies considerably differ from one another, and the larvae cannot be readily attributed to any subfamily, as usually occurs with cantharid larvae. Here, we fully describe for the first time the larvae of Asilis Broun (New Zealand) and Plectonotum laterale Pic (Brazil) and redescribe Neoontelus Wittmer (New Zealand). We also diagnose larvae of Heteromastix Boheman (Australia) and A. picta. Dysmorphocerinae cannot be clearly diagnosed because each genus has a unique combination of features, though Neoontelus is the most divergent. We conclude that the Dysmorphocerinae may not be monophyletic with Plectonotum laterale, Asilis, Neoontelus, Heteromastix showing a closer relationship to Malthininae and Afronycha more aligned with Silinae or Cantharinae. The double gland openings present on the body of Neoontelus reported by Crowson (1972) are reinterpreted as a complex character involving a single posterior pore linked to a gland and an anterior sensillum that may serve as a trigger for the release of defensive chemicals. These are also reported in Asilis and Heteromastix and may be a potential synapomorphy for part of the Dysmorphocerinae. Neoontelus has a series of unique features, including a cotyliform glandular pore on abdominal segment IX.

show abstract

Untangling the evolution of soldier beetles (Coleoptera: Cantharidae) and the evaluation of the morphological phylogenetic signal in a soft‐bodied elateroid lineage

Motyka,

Kusy,

Biffi

et al. 2023

Cladistics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study addresses the long‐standing uncertainty about the internal classification of soldier beetles (Elateroidea: Cantharidae). Four datasets were compiled and analysed: 66 genes for 14 terminals, 15 mtDNA genes for 79 terminals, one mtDNA and two rRNA genes for 217 terminals, and barcodes for 576 terminals. Based on congruent topologies, Chauliognathinae is proposed as a sister to the remaining Cantharidae, followed by the redefined Malthininae (including Tytthonyxini), the paraphyletic “dysmorphocerine” lineages (Dysmorphocerinae sensu stricto and Heteromastiginae subfam. nov.), and Silinae + Cantharinae as a terminal clade. The present phylogeny supersedes earlier morphology and short‐fragment molecular hypotheses that have not converged on a consensus. Few morphological characters corroborate the DNA‐based relationships (see the adults and larval keys). However, morphology‐based hypotheses have relied on a few informative characters, and no evidence strongly rejects the preferred molecular topology. The interpretation of morphological characters and uncertain polarity resulting from the high phenotypic disparity of Elateroidea are discussed in detail. The dated phylogeny hypothesizes the earliest split within the Cantharidae in the Berriasian stage (Early Cretaceous, ~141 Myr) and the diversification of most extant subfamilies and tribes already in the Late Cretaceous. The most diverse subfamily, Cantharinae, represents a delayed radiation that started during the Eocene climatic optimum, 55.5 Myr. The late origin of Cantharinae questions the classification of Cretaceous Cantharidae as members of Cantharinae. Instead, the results suggest their deeper rooting after separating from dysmorphocerine lineages and before the node between Cantharinae and Silinae.

show abstract

Morphology of bromeliad-associated immature stages of Daiphron bipartitus and its adults confirms the non-monophyly of the genus (Coleoptera: Cantharidae)

Cited by 310 publications

References 10 publications

Morphology and life cycle of a new species of Psilocladus Blanchard, 1846 (Coleoptera, Lampyridae, Psilocladinae), the first known bromeliad-inhabiting firefly

Morphology and life cycle of a new species of Psilocladus Blanchard, 1846 (Coleoptera, Lampyridae, Psilocladinae), the first known bromeliad-inhabiting firefly

The systematics of Dysmorphocerinae (Cantharidae) based on larvae

Untangling the evolution of soldier beetles (Coleoptera: Cantharidae) and the evaluation of the morphological phylogenetic signal in a soft‐bodied elateroid lineage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About