Title
Phylogenetic relationships of the tribe Toxotrypanini (Diptera: Tephritidae) based on molecular characters
Date Issued
01 August 2017
Access level
open access
Resource Type
research article
Author(s)
Mengual X.
Kerr P.
Norrbom A.L.
Barr N.B.
Lewis M.L.
Stapelfeldt A.M.
Scheffer S.J.
Woods P.
Islam M.S.
Korytkowski C.A.
Uramoto K.
Rodriguez E.J.
Sutton B.D.
Steck G.J.
Gaimari S.
Abstract
Current hypotheses of relationship among the species of the fruit fly genera Anastrepha and Toxotrypana are tested using sequence data from six DNA regions: the mitochondrial regions 16S, CAD, and COI, and the nuclear regions EF1a, PER, and PGD. DNA sequences were obtained from 146 species of Anastrepha, representing 19 of the 21 species groups as well as five of the six clades of the robusta group, and four species of Toxotrypana in addition to species of Hexachaeta, Pseudophorellia, Alujamyia, and 13 other tephritid genera used as outgroups. The results indicate that Hexachaeta is more closely related to the Molynocoelia group than to Toxotrypana and Anastrepha, and it is removed from the tribe Toxotrypanini. The group Anastrepha + Toxotrypana and the genus Toxotrypana are strongly supported as monophyletic, consistent with previous studies, but Toxotrypana arises within Anastrepha, confirming that Anastrepha as currently defined is paraphyletic. The placement of Toxotrypana within Anastrepha is clearly defined for the first time with high support, as the sister group to the cryptostrepha clade of the robusta group of Anastrepha. Within Anastrepha, the daciformis, dentata, leptozona, raveni, and striata species groups are highly supported clades. The serpentina group is recognized with lower support, and the fraterculus and pseudoparallela groups are supported with minor alterations. The robusta group is resolved as polyphyletic, but four of the six species clades within it are recovered monophyletic (one clade is not represented and another is represented by one species). The punctata and panamensis groups are resolved together in a clade. At least some species of the mucronota group are related, however this group requires further study. The benjamini, grandis, and spatulata groups appear to be polyphyletic. Relationships among the species groups are generally poorly resolved, with the following exceptions: (1) the lineage including Toxotrypana, the cryptostrepha clade, and the tripunctata group; (2) the sister group relationship of the daciformis + dentata groups; (3) a clade comprising the punctata and panamensis groups; and (4) the large clade comprising the pseudoparallela + spatulata + ramosa + grandis + serpentina + striata + fraterculus groups.
Start page
84
End page
112
Volume
113
Language
English
OCDE Knowledge area
Genética, Herencia
Scopus EID
2-s2.0-85019964474
PubMed ID
Source
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
ISSN of the container
10557903
Sponsor(s)
This study would not have been possible without the extensive samples provided by a myriad of sources. Some samples were collected via the USDA Farm Bill project “Enhancement of fruit fly immature stage identification and taxonomy” to FDACS-DPI; project numbers 3.0342 (2012), 13-8131-0291-CA (2013), and 3.0295.01 (2014). We also are indebted to all of the individuals and institutions who provided samples, particularly the following: Jorge López (Programa MoscaMed, Guatemala), Don Thomas (USDA, ARS), Fredy Colque (SENASAG, Bolivia), Juan José Lagrava Sánchez and Elizabeth Quisberth (Direccion de Sanidad Agroalimentaria, Santa Cruz, Bolivia), Giannfranco Egoávil Jump (Universidad Nacional Agraria de la Selva, Tingo María, Perú), and Martín Aluja (Instituto de Ecología, Xalapa, Mexico). Collection and analysis of Peruvian specimens was conducted under permits RD 614-2011-AG-DGFFS-DGEFFS, RD N° 209-2013-MINAGRI-DGFFS-DGEFFS, RDG N° 022-2015-SERFOR-DGGSPFFS RDG N° 022-2015-SERFOR-DGGSPFFS, and Contrato de Acceso Marco a Recursos Genéticos No. 003-2015-SERFOR-DGGSPFFS-DGSPFS. We thank Frank Azorsa and Ericka Paliza (Centro de Ecología y Biodiversidad), and Prof. Gerardo Lamas Müller, Luis Figueroa Reynoso, Juan Grados Arauco (Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos) who provided invaluable help to obtain permits in Peru, and numerous staff and volunteers of the Asociación para la Conservación de la Cuenca Amazónica and its U.S. partner, the Amazon Conservation Association, for their enthusiastic participation in trapping surveys and for allowing access to their field stations. George “Andy” Ball and Cesar Orozco (USDA, APHIS, IS) assisted in multiple ways with logistics and sampling efforts in Peru and Bolivia. We thank the Smithsonian Institution High Performance Cluster (SI/HPC) and all the Hydra team for support and help on running the analyses, and two anonymous reviewers for their comments and suggestions to improve a previous version of the manuscript.
Sources of information: Directorio de Producción Científica Scopus