Mitochondrial DNA phylogenetic analysis of the genusLaparocerus(Coleoptera, Curculionidae, Entiminae). I. The Madeiran clade

Abstract

Laparocerusare plant‐chewing flightless weevils distributed on oceanic islands in Macaronesia, with a single species in Morocco. The genus has a complicated taxonomic history with several subgenera described. To assist in a taxonomical revision of the group, a molecular study was undertaken. In this first contribution, the species from the Azores and Madeira archipelagos are studied together with representatives of subgenera from the Canary Islands and the single known continental species (46 OTUs). Phylogenetic analyses are based on sequence data from mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase II (COII) and the ribosomal 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) genes (combined data set 1023 bp), with additional data from the nuclear elongation factor 1α (EF‐1α) for some selected species. Maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian analyses show that all Madeiran species are monophyletic and form a monophyletic group with the Afro‐Canarian samples. Species of the genusLichenophagusappear within the Madeiran and CanarianLaparocerusclades, but separated in accordance with their respective island origin. Thus,Lichenophagusis here restricted to Madeiran species and proposed as subgenus (status novo) ofLaparocerus.Conversely, theLaparocerussubgenusDrouetiusfrom the Azores is revealed to be a separate and distant outgroup, in agreement with its morphological distinctiveness, deserving an independent genus status. Internal relationships within the Madeiran clade are discussed and compared with morphologically defined species groups. The Madeiran monotypic subgenusCyphoscelisis not supported by the genetic data and synonymized (nov. syn.) withLaparocerus.SubgeneraLaparocerusandAtlantisprove to be polyphyletic. Consequently a restriction to monophyletic and morphologically congruent clades is proposed. A cryptic species vicariant ofLaparocerus moriowas detected and recognized asL. chaoensis,status novo. Other cases of discrepancy between the genetic results and the traditional taxonomy are discussed in detail in the light of mitochondrial introgression, incomplete lineage sorting or poor taxonomy hypotheses.