Phylogenomics reveals conservation challenges and opportunities for cryptic endangered species in a rapidly disappearing desert ecosystem

<p><strong>A new species of melolonthine chafer in the endemic Californian genus <em>Dinacoma </em>Casey<em> </em>(Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae)</strong></p>

“…Recent phylogenomic analysis of Dinacoma concluded that the observed divergence between three extant populations is consistent with the existence of three species-level taxa: D. caseyi, D. marginata, and a third, cryptic species, occurring in the San Felipe Valley, east of the Laguna mountains in San Diego County, which we describe in this article (Rubinoff et al 2020). We adhere to the Phylogenetic Species Concept, which defines species as the smallest aggregation of populations diagnosable by a unique combination of character states (Wheeler and Platnick 2000).…”

“…In their genomic study, Rubinoff et al (2020) found that each of the populations of Dinacoma (which did not include topotypical D. marginata) was isolated genetically, suggesting the possibility that Dinacoma evolve into extremely isolated and geographically restricted species, as is the situation for D. caseyi. Further research on the group may reveal additional populations that confirm the isolated nature of each species, reflecting the importance of incorporating some invertebrate-based research when planning conservation reserves.…”

“…Due to widespread human-induced degradation of their highly localized and restricted habitats, conservation of these endemic Californian chafers is of serious and ongoing concern, which is only exacerbated by the fact that female Dinacoma are fossorial and flightless, limiting their dispersal ability and hence capacity to respond to environmental modification (Wright et al 2004, Rubinoff et al 2020.…”

Unraveling the Myotis Morass: Ultraconserved-Element Analysis Reveals Introgression, Cryptic Diversity, and Taxonomic Trouble in the Most Species-rich Bat Genus

“…By contrast, the mitogenome trees recovered a different phylogeny and did not have a single tree that was recovered with such high frequency. This is all rather problematic because inferences based on both mitochondrial and nuclear trees have been used to inform conservation efforts and to support evolutionary and population genetic hypotheses (Forest et al 2015;Rubinoff et al 2020;Grimshaw et al 2022). Korstian, Stevens, Lee Jr., Baker, and…”

“…By contrast, the mitogenome trees recovered a different phylogeny and did not have a single tree that was recovered with such high frequency. This is all rather problematic because inferences based on both mitochondrial and nuclear trees have been used to inform conservation efforts and to support evolutionary and population genetic hypotheses (Forest et al 2015;Rubinoff et al 2020;Grimshaw et al 2022) and possible cryptic speciation in the clade. We also incorporate the new species mentioned above into a single large-scale phylogenic inference, reconcile existing species designations with our UCE phylogeny, and assess the number of cryptic lineages requiring further investigation.…”