Abstract

We tested the performance of DNA barcoding in Acridoidea and attempted to solve species boundary delimitation problems in selected groups using COI barcodes. Three analysis methods were applied to reconstruct the phylogeny. K2P distances were used to assess the overlap range between intraspecific variation and interspecific divergence. “Best match (BM)”, “best close match (BCM)”, “all species barcodes (ASB)” and “back-propagation neural networks (BP-based method)” were utilized to test the success rate of species identification. Phylogenetic species concept and network analysis were employed to delimitate the species boundary in eight selected species groups. The results demonstrated that the COI barcode region performed better in phylogenetic reconstruction at genus and species levels than at higher-levels, but showed a little improvement in resolving the higher-level relationships when the third base data or both first and third base data were excluded. Most overlaps and incorrect identifications may be due to imperfect taxonomy, indicating the critical role of taxonomic revision in DNA barcoding study. Species boundary delimitation confirmed the presence of oversplitting in six species groups and suggested that each group should be treated as a single species.

Highlights

  • Acridoidea is the largest group in Orthoptera, with more than 1000 species known from China to date

  • Using the degenerated primer pair designed for Orthoptera [67], COBU (59-TYTCAACAAAYCAYAARGATATTGG-39) and COBL (59-TAAACTTCWGGRTGWCCAAARAATCA-39), the 658-bp fragments were amplified from the 59 region of the cytochrome c oxidase 1 (COI) gene that has been adopted as the standard barcode for members of the animal kingdom [44]

  • Excepting the Spathosternum and Calliptamus groups, each of the species groups we focused on was comprised of species that did not form reciprocally monophyletic clades

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Acridoidea is the largest group in Orthoptera, with more than 1000 species known from China to date. Besides some researches that discussed the monophyly of Caelifera as well as Acridoidea [9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21], there were many investigations exploring the phylogenies and origins of their subordinate categories, including Acrididae [22,23], Pamphagidae [24,25], Catantopidae [26,27,28], Oedipodidae [29,30], Arcypteridae [31], Melanoplinae [32,33,34,35], Podisminae [36], Oedipodinae [37,38,39], Gomphocerinae [39,40,41], Proctolabinae [42], and so on. Because of the difference in taxon sampling, selection of genetic markers and analytical strategy, the results were frequently inconsistent to some extent among different case studies and the phylogenies remain unresolved in many taxa

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call