skip to main content

Explore Research Products in the NSF-PAR

Title: Beyond Drosophila: resolving the rapid radiation of schizophoran flies with phylotranscriptomics
Abstract Background The most species-rich radiation of animal life in the 66 million years following the Cretaceous extinction event is that of schizophoran flies: a third of fly diversity including Drosophila fruit fly model organisms, house flies, forensic blow flies, agricultural pest flies, and many other well and poorly known true flies. Rapid diversification has hindered previous attempts to elucidate the phylogenetic relationships among major schizophoran clades. A robust phylogenetic hypothesis for the major lineages containing these 55,000 described species would be critical to understand the processes that contributed to the diversity of these flies. We use protein encoding sequence data from transcriptomes, including 3145 genes from 70 species, representing all superfamilies, to improve the resolution of this previously intractable phylogenetic challenge. Results Our results support a paraphyletic acalyptrate grade including a monophyletic Calyptratae and the monophyly of half of the acalyptrate superfamilies. The primary branching framework of Schizophora is well supported for the first time, revealing the primarily parasitic Pipunculidae and Sciomyzoidea stat. rev. as successive sister groups to the remaining Schizophora. Ephydroidea, Drosophila ’s superfamily, is the sister group of Calyptratae. Sphaeroceroidea has modest support as the sister to all non-sciomyzoid Schizophora. We define two novel lineages corroborated by morphological traits, the ‘Modified Oviscapt Clade’ containing Tephritoidea, Nerioidea, and other families, and the ‘Cleft Pedicel Clade’ containing Calyptratae, Ephydroidea, and other families. Support values remain low among a challenging subset of lineages, including Diopsidae. The placement of these families remained uncertain in both concatenated maximum likelihood and multispecies coalescent approaches. Rogue taxon removal was effective in increasing support values compared with strategies that maximise gene coverage or minimise missing data. Conclusions Dividing most acalyptrate fly groups into four major lineages is supported consistently across analyses. Understanding the fundamental branching patterns of schizophoran flies provides a foundation for future comparative research on the genetics, ecology, and biocontrol.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1754376 2030345
NSF-PAR ID:
10274855
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
BMC Biology
Volume:
19
Issue:
1
ISSN:
1741-7007
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ( , PLOS ONE)
    Cerretti, Pierfilippo (Ed.)
    The schizophoran superfamily Ephydroidea (Diptera: Cyclorrhapha) includes eight families, ranging from the well-known vinegar flies (Drosophilidae) and shore flies (Ephydridae), to several small, relatively unusual groups, the phylogenetic placement of which has been particularly challenging for systematists. An extraordinary diversity in life histories, feeding habits and morphology are a hallmark of fly biology, and the Ephydroidea are no exception. Extreme specialization can lead to “orphaned” taxa with no clear evidence for their phylogenetic position. To resolve relationships among a diverse sample of Ephydroidea, including the highly modified flies in the families Braulidae and Mormotomyiidae, we conducted phylogenomic sampling. Using exon capture from Anchored Hybrid Enrichment and transcriptomics to obtain 320 orthologous nuclear genes sampled for 32 species of Ephydroidea and 11 outgroups, we evaluate a new phylogenetic hypothesis for representatives of the superfamily. These data strongly support monophyly of Ephydroidea with Ephydridae as an early branching radiation and the placement of Mormotomyiidae as a family-level lineage sister to all remaining families. We confirm placement of Cryptochetidae as sister taxon to a large clade containing both Drosophilidae and Braulidae–the latter a family of honeybee ectoparasites. Our results reaffirm that sampling of both taxa and characters is critical in hyperdiverse clades and that these factors have a major influence on phylogenomic reconstruction of the history of the schizophoran fly radiation. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ( , Systematic Entomology)
    Abstract

    The diverse superfamily Oestroidea with more than 15 000 known species includes among others blow flies, flesh flies, bot flies and the diverse tachinid flies. Oestroidea exhibit strikingly divergent morphological and ecological traits, but even with a variety of data sources and inferences there is no consensus on the relationships among major Oestroidea lineages. Phylogenomic inferences derived from targeted enrichment of ultraconserved elements or UCEs have emerged as a promising method for resolving difficult phylogenetic problems at varying timescales. To reconstruct phylogenetic relationships among families of Oestroidea, we obtained UCE loci exclusively derived from the transcribed portion of the genome, making them suitable for larger and more integrative phylogenomic studies using other genomic and transcriptomic resources. We analysed datasets containing 37–2077 UCE loci from 98 representatives of all oestroid families (except Ulurumyiidae and Mystacinobiidae) and seven calyptrate outgroups, with a total concatenated aligned length between 10 and 550 Mb. About 35% of the sampled taxa consisted of museum specimens (2–92 years old), of which 85% resulted in successful UCE enrichment. Our maximum likelihood and coalescent‐based analyses produced well‐resolved and highly supported topologies. With the exception of Calliphoridae and Oestridae all included families were recovered as monophyletic with the following conclusions: Oestroidea is monophyletic with Mesembrinellidae as sister to the remaining oestroid families; Oestridae is paraphyletic with respect to Sarcophagidae; Polleniidae is sister to Tachinidae; Rhinophoridae sister to (Luciliinae (Toxotarsinae (Melanomyinae + Calliphorinae))); Phumosiinae is sister to Chrysomyinae and Bengaliinae is sister to Rhiniidae. These results support the ranking of most calliphorid subfamilies as separate families.

     
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al ( , Studies in Mycology)
    The subphylum Saccharomycotina is a lineage in the fungal phylum Ascomycota that exhibits levels of genomic diversity similar to those of plants and animals. The Saccharomycotina consist of more than 1 200 known species currently divided into 16 families, one order, and one class. Species in this subphylum are ecologically and metabolically diverse and include important opportunistic human pathogens, as well as species important in biotechnological applications. Many traits of biotechnological interest are found in closely related species and often restricted to single phylogenetic clades. However, the biotechnological potential of most yeast species remains unexplored. Although the subphylum Saccharomycotina has much higher rates of genome sequence evolution than its sister subphylum, Pezizomycotina , it contains only one class compared to the 16 classes in Pezizomycotina . The third subphylum of Ascomycota , the Taphrinomycotina , consists of six classes and has approximately 10 times fewer species than the Saccharomycotina . These data indicate that the current classification of all these yeasts into a single class and a single order is an underappreciation of their diversity. Our previous genome-scale phylogenetic analyses showed that the Saccharomycotina contains 12 major and robustly supported phylogenetic clades; seven of these are current families ( Lipomycetaceae , Trigonopsidaceae , Alloascoideaceae , Pichiaceae , Phaffomycetaceae , Saccharomycodaceae , and Saccharomycetaceae ), one comprises two current families ( Dipodascaceae and Trichomonascaceae ), one represents the genus Sporopachydermia , and three represent lineages that differ in their translation of the CUG codon (CUG-Ala, CUG-Ser1, and CUG-Ser2). Using these analyses in combination with relative evolutionary divergence and genome content analyses, we propose an updated classification for the Saccharomycotina , including seven classes and 12 orders that can be diagnosed by genome content. This updated classification is consistent with the high levels of genomic diversity within this subphylum and is necessary to make the higher rank classification of the Saccharomycotina more comparable to that of other fungi, as well as to communicate efficiently on lineages that are not yet formally named. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al ( , Cladistics)
    Abstract

    We present a phylogenetic analysis of spiders using a dataset of 932 spider species, representing 115 families (only the family Synaphridae is unrepresented), 700 known genera, and additional representatives of 26 unidentified or undescribed genera. Eleven genera of the orders Amblypygi, Palpigradi, Schizomida and Uropygi are included as outgroups. The dataset includes six markers from the mitochondrial (12S, 16S,COI) and nuclear (histone H3, 18S, 28S) genomes, and was analysed by multiple methods, including constrained analyses using a highly supported backbone tree from transcriptomic data. We recover most of the higher‐level structure of the spider tree with good support, including Mesothelae, Opisthothelae, Mygalomorphae and Araneomorphae. Several of our analyses recover Hypochilidae and Filistatidae as sister groups, as suggested by previous transcriptomic analyses. The Synspermiata are robustly supported, and the families Trogloraptoridae and Caponiidae are found as sister to the Dysderoidea. Our results support the Lost Tracheae clade, including Pholcidae, Tetrablemmidae, Diguetidae, Plectreuridae and the family Pacullidae (restored status) separate from Tetrablemmidae. The Scytodoidea include Ochyroceratidae along with Sicariidae, Scytodidae, Drymusidae and Periegopidae; our results are inconclusive about the separation of these last two families. We did not recover monophyletic Austrochiloidea and Leptonetidae, but our data suggest that both groups are more closely related to the Cylindrical Gland Spigot clade rather than to Synspermiata. Palpimanoidea is not recovered by our analyses, but also not strongly contradicted. We find support for Entelegynae and Oecobioidea (Oecobiidae plus Hersiliidae), and ambiguous placement of cribellate orb‐weavers, compatible with their non‐monophyly. Nicodamoidea (Nicodamidae plus Megadictynidae) and Araneoidea composition and relationships are consistent with recent analyses. We did not obtain resolution for the titanoecoids (Titanoecidae and Phyxelididae), but the Retrolateral Tibial Apophysis clade is well supported. Penestomidae, and probably Homalonychidae, are part of Zodarioidea, although the latter family was set apart by recent transcriptomic analyses. Our data support a large group that we call the marronoid clade (including the families Amaurobiidae, Desidae, Dictynidae, Hahniidae, Stiphidiidae, Agelenidae and Toxopidae). The circumscription of most marronoid families is redefined here. Amaurobiidae include the Amaurobiinae and provisionally Macrobuninae. We transfer Malenellinae (Malenella, from Anyphaenidae), Chummidae (Chumma) (new syn.) and Tasmarubriinae (Tasmarubrius,TasmabrochusandTeeatta, from Amphinectidae) to Macrobuninae. Cybaeidae are redefined to includeCalymmaria,Cryphoeca,EthobuellaandWillisius(transferred from Hahniidae), andBlabommaandYorima(transferred from Dictynidae). Cycloctenidae are redefined to includeOrepukia(transferred from Agelenidae) andPakehaandParavoca(transferred from Amaurobiidae). Desidae are redefined to include five subfamilies: Amphinectinae, withAmphinecta,Mamoea,Maniho,ParamamoeaandRangitata(transferred from Amphinectidae); Ischaleinae, withBakalaandManjala(transferred from Amaurobiidae) andIschalea(transferred from Stiphidiidae); Metaltellinae, withAustmusia,Buyina,Calacadia,Cunnawarra,Jalkaraburra,Keera,Magua,Metaltella,PenaoolaandQuemusia; Porteriinae (new rank), withBaiami,Cambridgea,CorasoidesandNanocambridgea(transferred from Stiphidiidae); and Desinae, withDesis, and provisionallyPoaka(transferred from Amaurobiidae) andBarahna(transferred from Stiphidiidae).Argyronetais transferred from Cybaeidae to Dictynidae.Cicurinais transferred from Dictynidae to Hahniidae. The generaNeoramia(from Agelenidae) andAorangia,MarplesiaandNeolana(from Amphinectidae) are transferred to Stiphidiidae. The family Toxopidae (restored status) includes two subfamilies: Myroinae, withGasparia,Gohia,Hulua,Neomyro,Myro,OmmatauxesisandOtagoa(transferred from Desidae); and Toxopinae, withMidgeeandJamara, formerly Midgeeinae,new syn.(transferred from Amaurobiidae) andHapona,Laestrygones,Lamina,ToxopsandToxopsoides(transferred from Desidae). We obtain a monophyletic Oval Calamistrum clade and Dionycha; Sparassidae, however, are not dionychans, but probably the sister group of those two clades. The composition of the Oval Calamistrum clade is confirmed (including Zoropsidae, Udubidae, Ctenidae, Oxyopidae, Senoculidae, Pisauridae, Trechaleidae, Lycosidae, Psechridae and Thomisidae), affirming previous findings on the uncertain relationships of the “ctenids”AncylometesandCupiennius, although a core group of Ctenidae are well supported. Our data were ambiguous as to the monophyly of Oxyopidae. In Dionycha, we found a first split of core Prodidomidae, excluding the Australian Molycriinae, which fall distantly from core prodidomids, among gnaphosoids. The rest of the dionychans form two main groups, Dionycha part A and part B. The former includes much of the Oblique Median Tapetum clade (Trochanteriidae, Gnaphosidae, Gallieniellidae, Phrurolithidae, Trachelidae, Gnaphosidae, Ammoxenidae, Lamponidae and the Molycriinae), and also Anyphaenidae and Clubionidae.Orthobulais transferred from Phrurolithidae to Trachelidae. Our data did not allow for complete resolution for the gnaphosoid families. Dionycha part B includes the families Salticidae, Eutichuridae, Miturgidae, Philodromidae, Viridasiidae, Selenopidae, Corinnidae and Xenoctenidae(new fam., includingXenoctenus,ParavulsorandOdo, transferred from Miturgidae, as well asIncasoctenusfrom Ctenidae). We confirm the inclusion ofZora(formerly Zoridae) within Miturgidae.

     
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ( , Systematic Entomology)
    ABSTRACT

    Adephaga is the second largest suborder of beetles (Coleoptera) and they serve as important arthropod predators in both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. The suborder is divided into Geadephaga comprising terrestrial families and Hydradephaga for aquatic lineages. Despite numerous studies, phylogenetic relationships among the adephagan families and monophyly of the Hydradephaga itself remain in question. Here we conduct a comprehensive phylogenomic analysis of the suborder using ultraconserved elements (UCEs). This study presents the first in vitro test of a newly developed UCE probe set customized for use within Adephaga that includes both probes tailored specifically for the suborder, alongside generalized Coleoptera probes previously found to work in adephagan taxa. We assess the utility of the entire probe set, as well as comparing the tailored and generalized probes alone for reconstructing evolutionary relationships. Our analyses recovered strong support for the paraphyly of Hydradephaga with whirligig beetles (Gyrinidae) placed as sister to all other adephagan families. Geadephaga was strongly supported as monophyletic and placed sister to a clade composed of Haliplidae + Dytiscoidea. Monophyly of Dytiscoidea was strongly supported with relationships among the dytiscoid families resolved and strongly supported. Relationships among the subfamilies of Dytiscidae were strongly supported but largely incongruent with prior phylogenetic estimates for the family. The results of our UCE probe comparison showed that tailored probes alone outperformed generalized probes alone, as well as the full combined probe set (containing both types of probes), under decreased taxon sampling. When taxon sampling was increased, the full combined probe set outperformed both tailored probes and generalized probes alone. This study provides further evidence that UCE probe sets customized for a focal group result in a greater number of recovered loci and substantially improve phylogenomic analysis.

     
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email