Geometridae Leach 1815
Creators: name: Murillo-Ramos, Leidys
name: Brehm, Gunnar
name: Sihvonen, Pasi
name: Hausmann, Axel
name: Holm, Sille
name: Ghanavi, Hamid Reza
name: Õunap, Erki
name: Truuverk, Andro
name: Staude, Hermann
name: Friedrich, Egbert
name: Tammaru, Toomas
name: Wahlberg, Niklas
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2019
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Lepidoptera
Geometridae

description: Geometridae Leach, 1815 The phylogenetic hypothesis presented in this study is by far the most comprehensive to date in terms of the number of markers, sampled taxa and geographical coverage. In total, our sample includes 814 genera, thus representing 41% of the currently recognized Geometridae genera (<i>Scoble &amp; Hausmann, 2007</i>). Previous phylogenetic hypotheses were based mainly on the European fauna and many clades were ambiguously supported due to low taxon sampling. The general patterns of the phylogenetic relationships among the subfamilies recovered in our study largely agrees with previous hypotheses based on morphological characters and different sets of molecular markers (<i>Holloway, 1997</i>; <i>Abraham et al., 2001</i>; <i>Yamamoto &amp; Sota, 2007</i>; <i>Sihvonen et al., 2011</i>). However, the results of our larger dataset differ in many details and shed light on the phylogenetic relationships of several, poorly resolved, small subfamilies. Sterrhinae are recovered as the sister subfamily to the remaining Geometridae. This result is not in concordance with <i>Sihvonen et al. (2011)</i>, <i>Yamamoto &amp; Sota (2007)</i> and <i>Regier et al. (2009)</i>, who found a sister group relationship between Sterrhinae and Larentiinae which in turn were sister to the rest of Geometridae. <i>Sihvonen et al. (2011)</i> showed the Sterrhinae + Larentiinae sister relationship with low support, while <i>Yamamoto &amp; Sota (2007)</i> and <i>Regier et al. (2009)</i> included only a few samples in their analyses. Our analyses include representatives from almost all known tribes currently included in Sterrhinae and Larentiinae. The higher number of markers, improved methods of analysis, the broader taxon sampling as well as the stability of our results suggests that Sterrhinae are indeed the sister group to the remaining Geometridae. Sterrhinae (after transfer of <i>Ergavia</i>, <i>Ametris</i> and <i>Macrotes</i>, see details below), Larentiinae, Archiearinae, Geometrinae and Ennominae were highly supported as monophyletic. Oenochrominae and Desmobathrinae formed polyphyletic and paraphyletic assemblages, respectively. Table 2 Summary of formally proposed taxonomic changes. <b>Transfer from Archiearinae to Ennominae</b> <i>Acalyphes</i> Turner, 1926, to Ennominae: Diptychini <i>Dirce</i> Prout, 1910, to Ennominae: Diptychini <b>Transfer from Oenochrominae to Desmobathrinae (Desmobathrini):</b> <i>Nearcha</i> Guest, 1887 <i>Racasta</i> Walker, 1861 <i>Zanclopteryx</i> Herrich-Schäffer, 1855 <b>Transfer from Oenochrominae to Epidesmiinae:</b> <i>Abraxaphantes</i> Warren, 1894 <i>Adeixis</i> Warren 1987 <i>Dichromodes</i> Guenée 1858 <i>Ecphyas</i> Turner, 1929 <i>Epidesmia</i> Duncan &amp; Westwood, 1841 <i>Phrixocomes</i> Turner, 1930 <i>Phrataria</i> Walker, 1863 <i>Systatica</i> Turner, 1904 <b>New tribe combinations in Ennominae</b> <i>Psilocladia</i> Warren, 1898, from unassigned to Gonodontini <i>Oedicentra</i> Warren, 1902, from Boarmiini to Gnophini <i>Hypotephrina</i> Janse, 1932, from unassigned to Gnophini <i>Capusa</i> Walker, 1857, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Mictodoca</i> Meyrick, 1892, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Furcatrox</i> McQuillan, 1996, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Amelora</i> Guest, 1897, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Archephanes</i> Turner, 1926, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Thalaina</i> Walker, 1855, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Niceteria</i> Turner, 1929, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Neazata</i> Warren, 1906 from Caberini to Diptychini <i>Idiodes</i> Guenée, 1858 from unassigned to Diptychini <i>Panhyperochia</i> Krüger, 2013, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Mauna</i> Walker, 1865, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Pareclipsis</i> Warren, 1894, from unassigned to Diptychini <i>Crambometra</i> Prout, 1915, from unassigned to Diptychini <i>Hebdomophruda</i> Warren, 1897, from Nacophorini to Diptychini <i>Pareclipsis</i> Warren, 1894, from unassigned to Diptychini <i>Capasa</i> Walker 1866, from unassigned to Hypochrosini <i>Omizodes</i> Warren, 1894, from unassigned to Hypochrosini <i>Metallospora</i> Warren, 1905, from unassigned to Cassymini <i>Obolcola</i> Walker, 1862, from unassigned to Abraxini <i>Chelotephrina</i> Fletcher, 1958 from unassigned to Abraxini <i>Cassephyra</i> Holloway, 1994 from Cassymini to Abraxini <i>Thenopa</i> Walker, 1855 from unassigned to Drepanogynini <i>Drepanogynis</i> Guenée, 1858 from Nacophorini to Drepanogynini The monophylies of Oenochrominae and Desmobathrinae have long been questioned. Morphological studies addressing Oenochrominae or Desmobathrinae have been limited and the majority of genera have never been examined in depth. In addition, it has been very difficult to establish the boundaries of these subfamilies on the basis of morphological structures (<i>Scoble &amp; Edwards, 1990</i>). <i>Sihvonen et al. (2011)</i> showed that neither Oenochrominae nor Desmobathrinae were monophyletic, but these results were considered preliminary due to the limited number of sampled taxa, and as a consequence no formal transfers of taxa were proposed. The systematic status of Orthostixinae remains uncertain because it was not included in our study. <i>Sihvonen et al. (2011)</i> included the genus <i>Naxa</i> Walker, 1856, formally placed in Orthostixinae, and found it to be nested within Ennominae. However, only three genes were successfully sequenced from this taxon, and its position in the phylogenetic tree turned out to be highly unstable in our analyses. It was thus excluded from our dataset. <i>Orthostixis</i> Hübner, 1823, the type genus of the subfamily, needs to be included in future analyses.
description: Published as part of <i>Murillo-Ramos, Leidys, Brehm, Gunnar, Sihvonen, Pasi, Hausmann, Axel, Holm, Sille, Ghanavi, Hamid Reza, Õunap, Erki, Truuverk, Andro, Staude, Hermann, Friedrich, Egbert, Tammaru, Toomas &amp; Wahlberg, Niklas, 2019, A comprehensive molecular phylogeny of Geometridae (Lepidoptera) with a focus on enigmatic small subfamilies, pp. 1-39 in PeerJ 7</i> on pages 15-18, DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7386, http://zenodo.org/record/5767530
description: {"references": ["Scoble MJ, Hausmann A. 2007. Online list of valid and available names of the Geometridae of the world. Available at http: // www. lepbarcoding. org / geometridae / species _ checklists. php.", "Holloway J. 1997. The moths of Borneo, part 10: family Geometridae, subfamilies Sterrhinae and Larentiinae. Malayan Nature Journal 51: 1 - 242.", "Abraham D, Ryrholm N, Wittzell H, Jeremy DH, Scoble MJ, Lofstedt C. 2001. Molecular phylogeny of the subfamilies in Geometridae (Geometroidea: Lepidoptera). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 20 (1): 65 - 77 DOI 10.1006 / mpev. 2001.0949.", "Yamamoto S, Sota T. 2007. Phylogeny of the Geometridae and the evolution of winter moths inferred from a simultaneous analysis of mitochondrial and nuclear genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 44 (2): 711 - 723 DOI 10.1016 / j. ympev. 2006.12.027.", "Sihvonen P, Mutanen M, Kaila L, Brehm G, Hausmann A, Staude HS. 2011. Comprehensive molecular sampling yields a robust phylogeny for geometrid moths (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). PLOS ONE 6 (6): e 20356 DOI 10.1371 / journal. pone. 0020356.", "Regier JC, Zwick A, Cummings MP, Kawahara AY, Cho S, Weller S, Roe A, Baixeras J, Brown JW, Parr C, Davis DR, Epstein M, Hallwachs W, Hausmann A, Janzen DH, Kitching IJ, Solis MA, Yen SH, Bazinet AL, Mitter C. 2009. Toward reconstructing the evolution of advanced moths and butterflies (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia): an initial molecular study. BMC Evolutionary Biology 9 (1): 280 DOI 10.1186 / 1471 - 2148 - 9 - 280.", "Guenee A. 1858. Histoire naturelle des insectes (Lepidoptera), Species General des Lepidopteres. Tom IX. X. Uranides et Phalenites I. II. Paris: Roret, 304.", "McQuillan PB, Edwards ED. 1996. Geometroidea. In: Nielsen ES, Edwards TE, Rangsi TV, eds. Checklist of the Lepidoptera of Australia. Clayton: CSIRO Publishing.", "Holloway J. 1994. The moths of Borneo, part 11: family Geometridae, subfamily Ennominae. Malayan Nature Journal 47: 1 - 309.", "Holloway J. 1996. The moths of Borneo, part 9: Geometridae (incl. Orthostixini), Oenochrominae, Desmobathrinae, Geometrinae. Ennominae Malayan Nature Journal 49: 147 - 326.", "Forbes WTM. 1948. Lepidoptera of New York and neighboring states. II. Memoirs of the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station 274: 1 - 263.", "Scoble MJ, Edwards ED. 1990. Parepisparis Bethune-Baker and the composition of the Oenochrominae (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). Entomologica Scandinavica 20 (4): 371 - 399 DOI 10.1163 / 187631289 X 00375."]}