Phylogeny and reclassification of Pristocera Klug (Hymenoptera: Bethylidae)

in Insect Systematics & Evolution
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

The current classification of Pristocera does not have taxonomic or cladistic support, which results in mistakes during the allocation of its species, especially within the genera Dicrogenium, Kathepyris, Neodicrogenium and Diepyris. This study aimed to verify the monophyly and to present a cladistic hypothesis for the genus. The analyses were based on 147 characters of 50 terminal taxa. Parsimony analyses under both equal and implied weightings were performed. All cladograms obtained by the implied weighting recovered Pristocera and all four related genera as polyphyletic. A monophyletic group with Pristocera and the other genera of the inner group was formed. This group was supported by 13 synapomorphies, with one of them exclusive, as follows: the presence of a hypopygium that was divided into two parts. Based on our results, the following new genus-group synonyms were established: Dicrogenium, Kathepyris, Neodicrogenium and Diepyris syn.n. for Pristocera, and their 39 species were combined with the latter. The following new names are proposed to avoid homonyms: Pristocera zata nom.n. for Dicrogenium bequaerti Benoit, Pristocera zela nom.n. for Kathepyris katangensis Benoit, Pristocera zintica nom.n. for Kathepyris uelensis Benoit, Pristocera zonta nom.n. for Neodicrogenium bequaerti Benoit and Pristocera zuncra nom.n. for Neodicrogenium tuberculatum (Turner). Therefore, Pristocera now comprises 124 species from the Old World.

Insect Systematics & Evolution

An International Journal of Systematic Entomology

Sections

References

AzevedoC. O. (1999) Revision of Neotropical Dissomphalus Ashmead, 1983 (Hymenoptera, Bethylidae) with median tergal processes. Arquivos de Zoologia 35: 301394.

AzevedoC. O. (2004) A new species of Caloapenesia from Vietnam, with discovery of the female of the genus (Insecta, Hymenoptera, Bethylidae). Spixiana 27: 143146.

AzevedoC. O. & AlencarI. D. C. C (2009) Rediscovery of Pristepyris Kieffer (Hymenoptera, Bethylidae) a new synonym of Acrepyris Kieffer. Zootaxa 2287: 4554.

BenoitP. L. G. (1957) Hymenoptera Bethylidae. Exploration du Parc National Albert. Mission G. F. De Witte, 1933–1935. Bruxelles. Institut des Parcs Nationaux du Congo Belge 88: 157.

BenoitP. L. G. (1963) Monographie des Bethylidae d´Afrique noire (Hymenoptera) I. Sous-famille Pristocerinae Tribu Dicrogeniini Tribu Pristocerini, Gen. Pristocera Klug. Annales Musée Royal de l´Afrique Centrale, Tervuren, Belgique. Sciences Zoologiques 119: 3295.

BenoitP. L. G. (1982) Bethylidae Africans II. (Hymenoptera). Le Genre Kathepyris Kieffer. Revue de Zoologie Africaine 96: 185192.

CarpenterJ. M. (1999) What do we know about chrysidoid (Hymenoptera) relationships? Zoologica Scripta 28: 215231.

ComstockJ. H. & NeedhamJ. G. (1898–1899) The wings of insects. The American Naturalist, 3233.

DallwitzM. J. (1980) A general system for coding taxonomic descriptions. Taxon 29: 4146.

DallwitzM.J.; PaineT.A. & ZurcherE.J. (1993 onwards) User´s guide to the DELTA System: a general system for processing taxonomic descriptions. 4th edn, available online at http://biodiversity.uno.edu/delta/.

EvansH.E. (1963) A revision of the genus Apenesia in the Americas (Hymenoptera, Bethylidae). Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 130: 249359.

EvansH.E. (1964) A Synopsis of the American Bethylidae (Hymenoptera: Aculeata). Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 132: 1222.

FinnamoreA.T. & GauldI.D. (1995) Bethylidae. In: HansonP. E. & GauldI. D. (Eds.), Hymenoptera of Costa Rica. Oxford University Press, Oxford: pp. 470479.

GauldI. & BoultonB. (1988) The Hymenoptera. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

GauldI. D. (1986) Taxonomy, its limitations and role in understanding parasitoid biology. In: WaageJ. K. & GreatheadD. (Eds.), Insect Parasitoids, pp. 122. Academic Press, London.

GobbiF. T. & AzevedoC. O. (2010) Taxonomia de Pseudisobrachium (Hymenoptera, Bethylidae) da Mata Atlântica Brasileira. Revista Brasileira de Entomologia 54: 173224.

GoloboffP. (1993) Estimating character weights during tree search. Cladistics 9: 8391.

GoloboffP., FarrisJ. & NixonK. (2003) T.N.T.: Tree Analysis Using New Technology. Program and documentation, available online at http://www.zmuc.dk/public/phylogeny.

HarrisR. A. (1979) A glossary of surface sculpturing. Occasional Papers in Entomology 28: 131.

KiefferJ. J. (1908) Bethylidae. Fascicule 76 In: WytsmanP. (Ed.), Genera Insectorum 76: 150.

LanesG. O. & AzevedoC. O. (2007) Redescription and placement of the Oriental Scaphepyris rufus Kieffer (Hymenoptera: Bethylidae). Zootaxa 1654: 5560.

MasonW. R. M. (1986) Stardant drawing conventions and definitions for venational and other features of wings of Hymenoptera. Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington 88: 17.

NixonK. C. (1999-2002) Winclada ver. 1.00.08. Published by the author. Ithaca, NY.

StadelmannH. (1894) Eine neue Hymenopterengattung aus der Familie der Prototrupiden. Entomologische Nachrichten 20: 199202.

SorgM. (1988) Zur Phylogenie und Systematik der Bethylidae (Insecta: Hymenoptera: Chrysidoidea). Sonderveröffentlichungen des Geologisches Institut der Universität zu Köln 63: 1146.

TerayamaM. (1996) The phylogeny of the Bethylid wasp subfamily Pristocerinae (Hymenoptera, Bethylidae). Japanese Journal Entomology 64: 587601.

TerayamaM. (2003). Phylogeny systematics of the family Bethylidae (Insecta: Hymenoptera) Part II. Keys to subfamilies, tribes and genera in the world. The Academic Reports of the Faculty of Engineering Tokyo Polytechnic University 26: 1629.

TerayamaM. & YamaneS. (1998) Four new species of the genus Pristocera Klug (Hymenoptera: Bethylidae) from east and southeast Asia. Entomological Science 1: 219225.

TurnerR. E. (1915) Notes on fossorial Hymenoptera. XVII. On new Ethiopian species. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 16: 286299.

YasumatsuK. (1955) Taxonomic notes on three wireworm parasites of the genus Pristocera from the Far East (Hymenoptera: Bethylidae). Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture Kyushu University 10: 233249.

Figures

  • (1, 2) Terms of the aedeagus. (1) Acrepyris sp. ♂. (2) Kathepyris sp. 6 ♂. a. apical lobe; b. ventral valve; c. median valve; d. dorsal valve. Scale = 200 μm. (3) Terms of the paramere. Kathepyris sp. 6 ♂. a. apical margin; b. ventral corner; c. dorsal corner; d. finger-like appendix. Scale = 300 μm. (4) Terms adopted for the hypopygium. Pristocera axitiosa ♂. a. basal region; b. apical region; c. basal margin; d. outer margin; e. inner margin. Scale = 300 μm. This figure is published in colour in the online edition of this journal, which can be accessed via http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/1876312x.

    View in gallery
  • Characters of head. Head in dorsal view. (5) Kathepyris nyassica; (6) Neodicrogenium tuberculatum; (7) Dicrogenium spiniceps; (8) Pristocera depressa; (9) Diepyris brunneus; (10) Prosapesenia bilobata; (11) Goniozus sp.; (12) Pristocera depressa. Scale = 300 μm. This figure is published in colour in the online edition of this journal, which can be accessed via http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/1876312x.

    View in gallery
  • Characters of head and mesosoma. (13–15) Head in lateral view. (13) Diepyris brunneus; (14) Pristocera porieri; (15) Dicrogenium spiniceps; (16–17) Pronotum in lateral view; (16) Pristocera formosana; (17) Foenobethylus gracilis; (18–20) Mesosoma in dorsal view; (18) Pristocera depressa; (19) Caloapenesia sp.; (20) Pristocera obliterata. Scale = 300 μm. This figure is published in colour in the online edition of this journal, which can be accessed via http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/1876312x.

    View in gallery
  • Characters of mesosoma. (21–23) Mesosoma in dorsal view. (21) Lytopsenella testaceicornis; (22) Foenobethylus gracilis; (23) Kathepyris sp. 1; (24–28) Mesosoma in ventral view. (24) Neodicrogenium tuberculatum; (25) Kathepyris sp. 1; (26) Pristocera poirieri; (27) Caloapenesia sp.; (28) Dissomphalus amplifoveatus. Scale = 300 μm. This figure is published in colour in the online edition of this journal, which can be accessed via http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/1876312x.

    View in gallery
  • Characters of mesopleuron and forewing. (29–30) Mesopleuron. (29) Foenobethylus gracilis; (30) Kathepyris sp. 1; (31–32) Forewing. (31) Diepyris congoensis; (32) Caloapenesia sp. (spectral vein digitally marked). Scale = 300 μm.

    View in gallery
  • Characters of hypopygium in ventral view. (33) Pristocera axitiosa; (34) Prosapenesia lacteipennis; (35) Apenesia acuta; (36) Apenesia tagala (as in Apenesia minor); (37) Acrepyris armiferus; (38) Apenesia elongata; (39) Diepyris lembanus; (40) Pristocera silvatica. Scale = 300 μm. This figure is published in colour in the online edition of this journal, which can be accessed via http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/1876312x.

    View in gallery
  • Characters of genitalia in ventral view. (41) Kathepyris uelensis; (42) Dicrogenium auratum; (43) Diepyris congoensis; (44) Kathepyris nyassica; (45) Neodicrogenium sampwense; (46) Diepyris lembanus; (47) Kathepyris katangensis; (48) Prosapenesia bilobata. Scale = 300 μm. This figure is published in colour in the online edition of this journal, which can be accessed via http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/1876312x.

    View in gallery
  • Strict consensus of four equally parsimonious cladograms obtained by equal weighting analysis.

    View in gallery
  • Strict consensus of K = 1 and 2 obtained by implied weighting analysis.

    View in gallery
  • (A) Strict consensus cladogram of K = 1 and 2, illustrating one of the hypotheses for the distribution of characters. (B) Strict consensus cladogram of K = 1 and 2, illustrating one of the hypotheses for the distribution of characters. (C) Strict consensus cladogram of K = 1 and 2, illustrating one of the hypotheses for the distribution of characters.

    View in gallery
  • Strict consensus of K = 3 and 6 obtained by implied weighting analysis.

    View in gallery

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 6 6 4
Full Text Views 4 4 4
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0