03040nas a2200385   4500008004100000024001700041245012400058210006900182300001200251490000700263520200900270653001602279653001302295653000802308653001902316653001802335653000802353653001702361653001602378653001502394653001102409653001402420653001602434653001602450653001602466653001202482653001302494100001702507700001602524700001502540700001502555700001802570700001702588856004902605       2008                        eng d  aPapyrus 805700aPhylogenetic relationships of wild silkmoths (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae) inferred from four protein-coding nuclear genes0 aPhylogenetic relationships of wild silkmoths Lepidoptera Saturni  a219-2280 v333 a<p>&quot;The Saturniidae, or wild silkmoths, number approximately 1861 species in 162 genera and nine subfamilies including Cercophaninae and Oxyteninae. They include some of the largest and most spectacular of all Lepidoptera, such as the moon or luna moths, atlas moths, emperor moths, and many others. Saturniids have been important as sources of wild silk and/or human food in a number of cultures, and as models for comparative studies of genetics, development, physiology, and ecology. Seeking to improve the phylogenetic framework for such studies, we estimated relationships across Saturniidae, sampling all nine subfamilies plus all five tribes of Saturniinae. Seventy-five exemplars (45 Saturniidae plus 30 bombycoid outgroups) were sequenced for four protein-coding nuclear gene regions (5625 bp total), namely CAD (the fusion protein carbamoylphosphate synthetase/aspartate transcarbamylase/dihydroorotase), DDC (dopa decarboxylase), period, and wingless. The data, analyzed by parsimony and likelihood, gave a strongly resolved phylogeny at all levels. Relationships among subfamilies largely mirrored the pre-cladistic hypothesis of Michener, albeit with significant exceptions, and there was definitive support for the morphology-based proposal that Ludiinae form a tribe (Micragonini) within Saturniinae. In the latter subfamily, the African tribe Urotini was shown to be paraphyletic with respect to Bunaeini and Micragonini, also in accord with recent morphological findings. Relationships within the New World subfamilies Arsenurinae, Ceratocampinae and Hemileucinae nearly always accord with previous morphology-based phylogenies when both are clearly resolved. Within Hemileucinae, Hemileucini are paraphyletic with respect to the monotypic Polythysanini. A preliminary biogeographical analysis supports ancestral restriction to the New World, followed by dispersal and/or vicariance splitting most of the family into a largely New World versus a largely Old World clade.&quot;</p>
10aARSENURINAE10aBUNAEINI10aCAD10aCERATOCAMPINAE10aCERCOPHANINAE10aDDC10aHEMILEUCINAE10aMICRAGONINI10aOXYTENINAE10aPERIOD10aPHYLOGENY10aPOLYTHYSANA10aSATURNIIDAE10aSATURNIINAE10aUROTINI10aWINGLESS1 aRegier, J.C.1 aGrant, M.C.1 aMitter, C.1 aCook, C.P.1 aPeigler, R.S.1 aRougerie, R.  uhttps://sphingidae.myspecies.info/node/2151903668nas a2200361   4500008004100000024001700041245016700058210006900225300001200294490000700306520265600313653001502969653001602984653001603000653000803016653000803024653000803032653001203040653001603052653002103068653002303089653001403112653001103126653001403137653001603151653001503167653001303182100001703195700001503212700001503227700001503242856004903257       2008                        eng d  aPapyrus 802200aA phylogenetic study of the 'bombycoid complex' (Lepidoptera) using five protein-coding nuclear genes, with comments on the problem of macrolepidopteran phylogeny0 aphylogenetic study of the bombycoid complex Lepidoptera using fi  a175-1890 v333 a<p>&quot;This study had two aims. First, we tested the monophyly of and relationships within the &lsquo;bombycoid complex&rsquo;, an assembly of approximately 5300 species postulated by Minet to represent 12 families in three superfamilies, by sequencing five protein-coding nuclear gene regions (CAD, DDC, enolase, period, wingless; approximately 6750 bp total) in 66 representatives of most of the subfamilies and tribes. Second, we sought initial evidence on the utility of these genes for estimating relationships among Macrolepidoptera more broadly (11 superfamilies total), by adding representatives of eight families from four other superfamilies, and by assessing the phylogenetic information content of the individual genes and partitions thereof. Analysis of the combined data by likelihood and parsimony upholds monophyly for the bombycoid complex and for Bombycoidea sensu stricto (includes Anthelidae, see below), but with weak bootstrap support. Minet&rsquo;s assignment of Phiditiinae to Bombycoidea rather than to Noctuoidea is strongly upheld, but Anthelidae, placed in Lasiocampoidea by Minet, group securely within Bombycoidea sensu stricto. Within the latter, the basal split segregates a strongly supported &lsquo;BALE&rsquo; group [Apatelodinae + (Eupterotidae + (Brahmaeidae + Lemoniidae))]. The remaining families form a consistently but weakly supported clade, within which the basal split segregates the very strongly supported &lsquo;CAPOPEM&rsquo; group [Carthaeidae, Anthelidae, Phiditiinae, (Prismostictini + (Endromidae + (Oberthueriini + Mirinidae)))]. The remaining bombycoids are grouped, very weakly, as Sphingidae + (Bombycinae + Saturniidae). All multiply-sampled families are strongly recovered, in both outgroups and ingroups, except that Bombycidae sensu Minet are rendered decisively polyphyletic. All genes make important contributions to the combined data results, and there is little strong conflict among genes or between synonymous and nonsynonymous change, although two instances of inter-gene conflict were notable, one in Lasiocampidae and one in Mimallonidae. Overall, about 75% of nodes are strongly supported (i.e. bootstrap value &ge;80%). Superfamilies are recovered, but not always strongly, whereas relationships among superfamilies are recovered only weakly and inconsistently; even within the reasonably well-sampled Bombycoidea sensu stricto, a (to us) surprising number of interfamily relationships remain uncertain. Thus, it seems clear that substantially more genes, plus additional taxon sampling in most superfamilies, will be required to resolve macrolepidopteran phylogeny.&quot;</p>
10aBOMBYCIDAE10aBOMBYCOIDEA10aBRAHMAEIDAE10aCAD10aDDC10aDNA10aENOLASE10aLEPIDOPTERA10aMACROLEPIDOPTERA10aMAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD10aPARSIMONY10aPERIOD10aPHYLOGENY10aSATURNIIDAE10aSPHINGIDAE10aWINGLESS1 aRegier, J.C.1 aCook, C.P.1 aMitter, C.1 aHussey, A.  uhttps://sphingidae.myspecies.info/node/21496