Research Article |
Corresponding author: José A. Jurado-Rivera ( jajurad@gmail.com ) Academic editor: Michael Schmitt
© 2015 José A. Jurado-Rivera, Eduard Petitpierre.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Jurado-Rivera JA, Petitpierre E (2015) New contributions to the molecular systematics and the evolution of host-plant associations in the genus Chrysolina (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Chrysomelinae). In: Jolivet P, Santiago-Blay J, Schmitt M (Eds) Research on Chrysomelidae 5. ZooKeys 547: 165–192. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.547.6018
|
The taxonomic circumscription of the large and diverse leaf beetle genus Chrysolina Motschulsky is not clear, and its discrimination from the closely related genus Oreina Chevrolat has classically been controversial. In addition, the subgeneric arrangement of the species is unstable, and proposals segregating Chrysolina species into new genera have been recently suggested. In this context, the availability of a phylogenetic framework would provide the basis for a stable taxonomic system, but the existing phylogenies are based on few taxa and have low resolution. In the present study we perform a phylogenetic analysis based on mitochondrial (cox1 and rrnL) and nuclear (H3) DNA sequences from a sample of fifty-two Chrysolina species representing almost half of the subgeneric diversity of the group (thirty out of sixty-five subgenera) and most of the morphological, ecological and karyological variation in the genus. In addition, five Oreina species from two subgenera have also been analysed. The resulting phylogeny is used to evaluate some of the most relevant taxonomic hypotheses for Chrysolina, and also to reconstruct its ancestral host plant associations in a Bayesian framework. Our findings support the paraphyly of Chrysolina as currently defined due to the inclusion of Oreina, the monophyly of the Chrysolina (plus Oreina) species including the divergent Ch. (Polysticta) vigintimaculata (Clark, 1864), and enable inferences of deep-level evolutionary relationships among the studied subgenera. The plant family Lamiaceae is inferred as the ancestral host of the study group, whose evolution is characterized by continuous host-shifting among pre-existing host plant families. Some Chrysolina clades include mixtures of species with different levels of diet breadth, indicating that niche width has varied through time.
Coleoptera , Chrysomelidae , Chrysolina , Oreina , Phylogeny, Insect-plant interaction, cox1, rrnL , H3
The genus Chrysolina Motschulsky is a very large and diverse group of leaf-beetles that are mainly distributed in Europe, Asia and Africa (
Phylogenetic studies focused on Chrysolina are scarce and limited to a reduced number of taxa.
Apart from taxonomic purposes, the availability of a phylogenetic hypothesis for the species of Chrysolina may allow for the study of evolutionary processes such as their ancestral host plant affiliations. In this regard, this leaf beetle genus constitutes a suitable and interesting study group as most of the species are oligophagous, each of them feeding on a narrow range of closely related plants (
In this work we present the results of a phylogenetic study based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences from a sample of Chrysolina and Oreina species, using Bayesian and maximum likelihood (ML) inference approaches. We expand the taxon sampling of previous molecular studies (
We have studied 52 Chrysolina species representing 30 out of the ca. 65 subgenera currently recognized for the genus (
Studied taxa, sources, host plants and GenBank accession numbers. Species groups defined by
Species | Source | Host(s) | Host(s) references |
|
cox1 | rrnL | H3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ch. aeruginosa (Faldermann, 1835) | SE Tuva, Siberia, Russia | Asteraceae (Artemisia), Lamiaceae (Thymus) | b | LN833682 | LN833808 | LN833745 | |
Ch. baetica (Suffrian, 1851) | Murcia, Spain | Lamiaceae (Satureja, Thymus) | i | 2 | LN833683 | LN833809 | LN833746 |
Ch. americana (Linnaeus, 1758) | Almuñecar, Spain | Lamiaceae (Lavandula, Rosmarinus) | b, h | 2 | LN833684 | LN833810 | LN833747 |
Ch. aurichalcea (Gebler in Mannerheim, 1825) | Ticino, Switzerland | Apocynaceae (Vincetoxicum officinale), Asteraceae (Arctium, Artemisia, Aster, Kalimerus, Petasites) | b, j | 9 | LN833685 | LN833811 | LN833748 |
Ch. banksi (Fabricius, 1775) | Balearic Islands, Spain | Lamiaceae, Plantaginaceae | h | 2 | LN833686 | LN833812 | LN833749 |
Ch. bicolor (Fabricius, 1775) | Canary Islands, Spain | Lamiaceae (Saccocalyx, Salvia, Thymus) | h | 2 | LN833687 | LN833813 | LN833750 |
Ch. carnifex (Fabricius, 1792) | Barcelona, Spain | Asteraceae (Artemisia, Santolina) | b | 9 | LN833688 | LN833814 | LN833751 |
Ch. cerealis cyaneoaurata (Motschulsky, 1860) | Altai, Siberia, Russia | 2 | LN833689 | LN833815 | LN833752 | ||
Ch. colasi (Cobos, 1952) | Granada, Spain | Lamiaceae (Sideritis glacialis) | o | 1 | LN833690 | LN833816 | LN833753 |
Ch. convexicollis (Jakobson, 1901) | SE Tuva, Siberia, Russia | Asteraceae (Artemisia) | c | LN833691 | LN833817 | LN833754 | |
Ch. costalis (Olivier, 1807) (=Ch. obsoleta Brullé, 1838 sensu Bieńkowski 2014 unpubl.) | Canary Islands, Spain | Ranunculaceae (Ranunculus) | e | 2 | LN833714 | LN833818 | LN833777 |
Ch. diluta (Germar, 1824) | Granada, Spain | Plantaginaceae (Plantago) | h | 3 | LN833693 | LN833819 | LN833756 |
Ch. eurina (Frivaldszky, 1883: 17) | Mundybash, Kemerovskaya oblast’, Russia | Asteraceae (Tanacetum vulgare) | b | 9 | LN833694 | LN833820 | LN833757 |
Ch. fastuosa (Scopoli, 1763) | Lleida, Spain | Lamiaceae (Galeopsis, Lamium, Leonorus, Prunella) | h, i | 2 | LN833695 | LN833821 | LN833758 |
Ch. femoralis (Olivier, 1790) | Girona, Spain | Lamiaceae (Satureja, Thymus) | h, i | 2 | LN833696 | LN833822 | LN833759 |
Ch. fuliginosa (Olivier, 1807) | Lleida, Spain | Asteraceae (Centaurea) | h | 9 | LN833697 | LN833823 | LN833760 |
Ch. gemina (Brullé, 1838) | Canary Islands, Spain | Lamiaceae (Lavandula) | h | 2 | LN833698 | LN833824 | LN833761 |
Ch. geminata (Paykull, 1799) | Lleida, Spain | Hypericaceae (Hypericum) | b | 10 | LN833699 | LN833825 | LN833762 |
Ch. haemochlora (Gebler, 1823) | Ust’-Koksa, Altai Republic, Russia | Apiaceae (Aegopodium, Angelica, Conioselinum, Heracleum, Pleurospermum) | c | LN833700 | LN833826 | LN833763 | |
Ch. haemoptera (Linnaeus, 1758) | La Coruña, Spain | Plantaginaceae (Plantago) | m | 7 | LN833701 | LN833827 | LN833764 |
Ch. helopioides (Suffrian, 1851) | Málaga, Spain | Apiaceae (Ferula) | h | 4 | LN833702 | LN833828 | LN833765 |
Ch. herbacea (Duftschmid, 1825) | Teruel, Spain | Lamiaceae (Mentha) | b, h | 2 | LN833703 | LN833829 | LN833766 |
Ch. hyperici (Forster, 1771) | Bragança, Portugal | Hypericaceae (Hypericum) | b | 10 | LN833704 | LN833830 | LN833767 |
Ch. jakowlewi (Weise, 1894) | Sayan Mts., Tuva, Russia | LN833705 | LN833831 | LN833768 | |||
Ch. janbechynei Cobos, 1953 [= Ch. curvilinea (Weise, 1884)] | Murcia, Spain | Asteraceae (Artemisia) | f | 9 | LN833692 | LN833832 | LN833755 |
Ch. kocheri (Codina Padilla, 1961) | Smimou, Morocco | Plantaginaceae (Plantago coronopus) | d | 3 | LN833706 | LN833833 | LN833769 |
Ch. kuesteri (Helliesen, 1912) | Tejeda, Granada, Spain | Lamiaceae, Scrophulariaceae (Linaria) | b, e | 1 | LN833707 | LN833834 | LN833770 |
Ch. lepida (Olivier, 1807) | Huéscar, Granada, Spain | Asteraceae (Mantisalca salmantica) | e | 9 | LN833708 | LN833835 | LN833771 |
Ch. lucida (Olivier, 1807) | Almería, Spain | Lamiaceae (Mentha) | h | 2 | LN833709 | LN833836 | LN833772 |
Ch. lucidicollis grossepunctata (Lindberg, 1950) | Canary Islands, Spain | Scrophulariaceae (Linaria) | e | 1 | LN833710 | LN833837 | LN833773 |
Ch. marginata (Linnaeus, 1758) | Girona, Spain | Asteraceae (Achillea) | b, e, h | 9 | LN833711 | LN833838 | LN833774 |
Ch. affinis mesatlantica (Kocher, 1958) | Moyen Atlas, Morocco | 2 | LN833712 | LN833839 | LN833775 | ||
Ch. obscurella (Suffrian, 1851) | Var, France | Apiaceae | e | 4 | LN833713 | LN833840 | LN833776 |
Ch. oirota Lopatin, 1990 | Ivanovsky massif, Kazakhstan | Asteraceae (Saussurea latifolia), Lamiaceae (Lamium) | k | LN833715 | LN833841 | LN833778 | |
Ch. pedestris (Gebler, 1823) | Sekisovka, Kazakhstan | Apiaceae (Seselis) | c | LN833716 | n.a. | LN833779 | |
Ch. peregrina (Herrich-Schaeffer, 1839) | Balearic Islands, Spain | Apiaceae (Daucus, Phoeniculum) | g, h | 8 | LN833717 | n.a. | LN833780 |
Ch. perforata (Gebler, 1830) | Erzin, Russia | Asteraceae, Lamiaceae | c | LN833718 | LN833842 | LN833781 | |
Ch. petitpierrei Kippenberg, 2004 | Lleida, Spain | LN833719 | LN833843 | LN833782 | |||
Ch. polita (Linnaeus, 1758) | Girona, Spain | Lamiaceae (Lycopus, Mentha, Origanum, Satureja) | b, h, i | 2 | LN833720 | LN833844 | LN833783 |
Ch. quadrigemina (Suffrian, 1851) | Bragança, Portugal | Hypericaceae (Hypericum) | h | 10 | LN833721 | LN833845 | LN833784 |
Ch. reitteri (Weise, 1884) | Susuz, Turkey | LN833722 | LN833846 | LN833785 | |||
Ch. rossia (Illiger, 1802) | Torino, Italy | Lamiaceae (Mentha piperita), Scrophulariaceae (Linaria, Veronica) | b, n | 1 | LN833723 | LN833847 | LN833786 |
Ch. rufoaenea (Suffrian, 1851) | Zamora, Spain | Apiaceae (Carum verticillatum) | a, i | 8 | LN833724 | LN833848 | LN833787 |
Ch. soiota (Jakobson, 1924) | Kulumys range, Oisky pass, Russia | LN833726 | LN833849 | LN833789 | |||
Ch. sturmi (Westhoff, 1882) | Chelyabinsk, Russia | Asteraceae (Cirsium), Lamiaceae (Glechoma), Scrophulariaceae (Linaria) | b | LN833727 | n.a. | LN833790 | |
Ch. sylvatica (Gebler, 1823) | Kulumys range, Oisky pass, Russia | Ranunculaceae (Aquilegia glandulosa) | l | LN833728 | LN833850 | LN833791 | |
Ch. timarchoides (Brisout de Barneville, 1882) | Girona, Spain | Apiaceae (Bupleurum, Heracleum) | h | 4 | LN833729 | LN833851 | LN833792 |
Ch. tundralis (Jakobson, 1910) | Serebryansky Mount, Russia | Asteraceae (Arnica, Saussurea), Lamiaceae (Lamium purpureum) | c | LN833730 | LN833852 | LN833793 | |
Ch. vernalis pyrenaica (Dufour, 1843) | Lleida, Spain | Plantaginaceae (Plantago) | m | 7 | LN833731 | LN833853 | LN833794 |
Ch. vigintimaculata (Clark, 1864) | KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa | LN833732 | n.a. | LN833795 | |||
Ch. viridana (Kuster, 1844) | Riofrio, Granada, Spain | Lamiaceae (Mentha) | h | 2 | LN833733 | LN833854 | LN833796 |
Ch. wollastoni (Bechyné, 1957) [=Ch. rutilans (Wollaston, 1864)] | Canary Islands, Spain | Lamiaceae (Mentha) | h | 2 | LN833725 | LN833855 | LN833788 |
Oreina cacaliae (Schrank, 1785) | Lleida, Spain | Asteraceae (Adenostyles, Petasites) | i | 6 | LN833735 | LN833857 | LN833798 |
Oreina fairmairiana (De Gozis, 1882) [=Oreina splendidula (Fairmaire, 1865)] | Lleida, Spain | Apiaceae, Asteraceae (Senecio) | e | 6 | LN833739 | LN833858 | LN833802 |
Oreina ganglbaueri (Jakob, 1953) | Lleida, Spain | Apiaceae (Angelica, Heracleum, Meum) | i | 5 | LN833736 | LN833859 | LN833799 |
Oreina speciosa (Linnaeus, 1767) | Massif des Vosges, Haut-Rhin, France | Apiaceae (Angelica, Heliosiadium, Laserpitium, Peucedanum) | i | 5 | LN833737 | n.a. | LN833800 |
Oreina speciosissima (Scopoli, 1763) | Lleida, Spain | Asteraceae (Adenostyles, Cirsinus, Petasites, Senecio) | i | 6 | LN833738 | LN833860 | LN833801 |
Lamprolina aeneipennis (Boisduval, 1835) | Mount Keira, NSW, Australia | LN833734 | LN833856 | LN833797 | |||
Paropsis atomaria Olivier, 1807 | Molonglo Gorge Nature Reserve, ACT, Australia | LN833740 | LN833862 | LN833803 | |||
Paropsisterna liturata (Marsham, 1808) | Black Mountain, ACT, Australia | LN833741 | LN833861 | LN833804 | |||
Phyllocharis cyanicornis (Fabricius, 1801) | Royal National Park, NSW, Australia | LN833742 | LN833863 | LN833805 | |||
Poropteromela epipleuralis Lea, 1916 | Mount Moombil, NSW, Australia | LN833743 | LN833864 | LN833806 | |||
Timarcha sinuatocollis Fairmaire 1861 | Lleida, Spain | LN833744 | LN833865 | LN833807 |
Total DNA was purified from beetle head and pronotum using the DNeasy Tissue kit (Qiagen, West Sussex, UK) and following the manufacturer’s protocol. Elutions were done in 200 μL volume and one microliter was used in PCR reactions. Three different molecular markers were selected for the study, including a partial sequence of the mitochondrial 16S rDNA (rrnL; primers LR-N-13398 and LR-J-12887;
Heterogeneity in base composition across taxa was explored for each codon position of the protein-coding genes and for rrnL using the chi-square test for base frequency differences implemented in PAUP*4.0b10 (
Bayesian phylogenetic inference was conducted using MrBayes 3.2 (
Specific hypotheses of monophyly were tested using a ML framework and the Approximately Unbiased test (AU test,
Ancestral host plant affiliations were reconstructed using BayesTraits v. 2.0 (
We also used BayesTraits to evaluate different ancestral host plant affiliations scenarios at the root of the Chrysolina tree. Analyses were conducted by enforcing the ancestral state of the most recent common ancestor (mrca) for the core Chrysolina node (excluding the divergent species Ch. vigintimaculata) to be one of the eight host plant families recorded for the studied Chrysolina species. MCMC was used to explore the samples and the space rate parameter of 1000 post-burnin trees generated in the MrBayes analysis. We performed two independent runs of 10·106 generations for each one of the constrained searches, and sampling rate parameters every 100 generations. The constrained runs were then compared by calculating the Bayes factors between the best and second best models based on the harmonic mean of the likelihood from each analysis as indicated in BayesTraits manual.
Lengths of the amplified gene fragments ranged from 581 to 794 bp for cox1, 278 to 512 bp for rrnL, and 294 to 363 for H3. Total length of the concatenated DNA sequence matrix was 1682 bp. In cox1, 48.36% of the aligned positions were variable, indicating high divergence level among the studied sequences. Indeed, accumulation of mutations for cox1 was higher than for the other markers, as shown by the pairwise sequence divergence (p-distance), which ranged between 0.0063 and 0.2236 (average: 0.1331±0.0105) for cox1, 0.0012 and 0.1723 (average: 0.0924±0.0100) for rrnL, and 0.0027 and 0.1077 (average: 0.0641±0.0108) for H3. Also, cox1 and rrnL sequences showed the well-known A+T bias typical of insect mtDNA (69.9% and 76,4%, respectively), whereas base frequency was more balanced in the nuclear H3 marker (54,8%). Chi-squared tests for bias in base composition showed no significant heterogeneity in our datasets (P>0.99). On the other hand, ILD test revealed no evidence of incongruence among molecular markers (P= 0.24), and we therefore performed all subsequent phylogenetic analyses following a supermatrix approach.
The best-fit partitioning scheme selected by PartitionFinder under BIC divided the data into seven subsets, each with its own model of molecular evolution (Table
Bayesian phylogenetic tree obtained from the combined analysis of cox1, rrnL and H3. Node numbers represent Bayesian posterior probability values. Only support values higher than 0.9 are shown. Numbers accompanying the subgeneric classification of the Chrysolina species on the right correspond to the systematic groups defined by
Maximum likelihood phylogenetic tree obtained from the combined analysis of cox1, rrnL and H3. Node numbers represent bootstrap support values. Only support values higher than 0.7 are shown. Numbers accompanying the subgeneric classification of the Chrysolina species on the right correspond to the systematic groups defined by
Optimal partitioning strategy and evolutionary models selected using PartitionFinder under the Bayesian Information Criterion.
Partition | Model |
---|---|
cox1 codon pos. 1 | GTR+I+G |
cox1 codon pos. 2 | HKY+I+G |
cox1 codon pos. 3 | GTR+G |
rrnL | GTR+I+G |
H3 codon pos. 1 | SYM+G |
H3 codon pos. 2 | JC |
H3 codon pos. 3 | HKY+I+G |
Inferred phylogenetic relationships among Chrysolina and Oreina subgenera and their statistical supports. Nodes have been coded according to Figures
Node (Bayesian posterior probability; ML bootstrap) | Subgenera included | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B (1.00; 99) | Chrysolinopsis | |||||
C (1.00; 100) | Chrysomorpha | |||||
Melasomoptera | ||||||
Synerga | ||||||
D (0.97; <70) | Centoptera | |||||
Chrysocrosita | ||||||
Erythrochrysa | ||||||
E (1.00; 98) | Colaphosoma | |||||
Maenadochrysa | ||||||
G (0.96; 81) | Fastuolina | |||||
Oreina subgenus Chrysochloa | ||||||
I (1.00; 97) | Oreina s. str. | |||||
Timarchoptera partim. | ||||||
K (0.99; <70) | Sulcicollis | |||||
M (1.00; 100) | Threnosoma | |||||
O (1.00; 100) | Crositops | |||||
Timarchoptera partim. | ||||||
P (1.00; 80) | Hypericia | |||||
R (1.00; 87) | Anopachys | |||||
Allochrysolina | ||||||
S’ (<0.9; 74) | Chalcoidea | |||||
Pezocrosita | ||||||
T (0.91; <70) | Chrysolina s. str. | |||||
V (1.00; 89) | Allohypericia | |||||
X (1.00; 88) | Palaeosticta | |||||
Y (0.93; <70) | Y’ (1.00; 98) | Arctolina | ||||
Pleurosticha | ||||||
Y’’ (0.97; 81) | Colaphodes | |||||
Ovosoma | ||||||
Z (1.00; 90) | Stichoptera | |||||
Taeniosticha |
Constrained ML searches were used to evaluate a number of taxonomic hypotheses for Chrysolina and Oreina using the AU test (Table
Results of the Approximately Unbiased test (AU test,
Hypothesis of monophyly | Authorship | AU test |
---|---|---|
Ch. timarchoides + Maenadochrysa |
|
0.000 |
Palaeosticta + Taeniosticha |
|
0.198 |
Craspeda as a different genus from Chrysolina |
|
0.007 |
Allochrysolina + Chalcoidea + Pezocrosita |
|
0.205 |
Allochyrsolina + Chalcoidea + Pezocrosita as a different genus from Chrysolina |
|
0.003 |
Species “group 2” |
|
0.000 |
Species “group 6” |
|
0.527 |
Allochrysolina + Anopachys |
|
0.215 |
Colaphodes + Taeniochrysa |
|
0.000 |
Paraheliostola + Timarchoptera |
|
0.001 |
Ch. haemochlora + Threnosoma |
|
0.000 |
Chalcoidea + Hypericia |
|
0.066 |
Anopachys species | 0.212 | |
Chalcoidea species | 0.383 | |
Chrysochloa species | 0.528 | |
Oreina as a different genus from Chrysolina | 0.016 | |
Ch. vigintimaculata + rest of the Chrysolina species + Oreina | 0.165 | |
Species feeding on Apiaceae | 0.000 | |
Species feeding on Asteraceae | 0.000 | |
Species feeding on Lamiaceae | 0.000 | |
Species feeding on Plantaginaceae | 0.000 | |
Species feeding on Ranunculaceae | 0.001 | |
Species feeding on Scrophulariaceae | 0.000 |
The Bayesian reconstruction of ancestral host plant associations showed an ancient affiliation with Lamiaceae at the root of the core Chrysolina clade (Figure
Ancestral reconstruction of host plant affiliations in the studied species of Chrysolina and Oreina. Terminal taxa are coded according to the available host plants records from the literature (Table
Posterior probability values of ancestral host-plant affiliations calculated in BayesTraits for the selected nodes in the Chrysolina-Oreina phylogeny. The highest probability value(s) for each node are highlighted in bold. Ast.=Asteraceae, Api.=Apiaceae, Hyp.=Hypericaceae, Lam.=Lamiaceae, Plant.=Plantaginaceae, Scro.=Scrophulariaceae, Ran.=Ranunculaceae, Apo.=Apocynaceae.
Host-plant family | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Node | Ast. | Api. | Hyp. | Lam. | Plant. | Scro. | Ran. | Apo. |
A | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.980 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
A’ | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.959 | 0.006 | 0.003 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
A’’ | 0.002 | 0.010 | 0.000 | 0.852 | 0.020 | 0.001 | 0.011 | 0.104 |
B | 0.002 | 0.006 | 0.002 | 0.937 | 0.011 | 0.010 | 0.008 | 0.024 |
C | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.987 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
D | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.952 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
D’ | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.952 | 0.008 | 0.006 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
D’’ | 0.048 | 0.010 | 0.001 | 0.732 | 0.033 | 0.023 | 0.024 | 0.129 |
E | 0.022 | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.910 | 0.008 | 0.036 | 0.008 | 0.006 |
G’ | 0.536 | 0.374 | 0.001 | 0.023 | 0.012 | 0.008 | 0.002 | 0.044 |
G’’ | 0.531 | 0.300 | 0.001 | 0.027 | 0.029 | 0.015 | 0.009 | 0.089 |
I | 0.001 | 0.979 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
K | 0.036 | 0.387 | 0.000 | 0.200 | 0.093 | 0.007 | 0.049 | 0.227 |
K’ | 0.040 | 0.005 | 0.013 | 0.499 | 0.158 | 0.007 | 0.049 | 0.227 |
K’’ | 0.080 | 0.624 | 0.001 | 0.124 | 0.028 | 0.009 | 0.029 | 0.104 |
P | 0.262 | 0.005 | 0.511 | 0.019 | 0.064 | 0.039 | 0.047 | 0.053 |
Q | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.967 | 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.008 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
R | 0.941 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.010 | 0.042 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
T | 0.011 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.709 | 0.153 | 0.015 | 0.041 | 0.068 |
U | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.890 | 0.039 | 0.004 | 0.034 | 0.031 |
V | 0.059 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.257 | 0.555 | 0.034 | 0.033 | 0.060 |
W | 0.498 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.501 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
X | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.033 | 0.908 | 0.018 | 0.014 | 0.023 |
X’ | 0.005 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.055 | 0.736 | 0.128 | 0.028 | 0.047 |
Y | 0.052 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.103 | 0.757 | 0.011 | 0.026 | 0.050 |
Y’ | 0.492 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.498 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
Z | 0.009 | 0.008 | 0.016 | 0.327 | 0.023 | 0.586 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
Z’ | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.344 | 0.000 | 0.656 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Results from Bayes factor comparisons of the constraint hypotheses for the ancestral plant family at the root of the core Chrysolina clade (node A) corroborated MCMC ancestral state reconstruction, offering positive to very strong statistical support for an ancestral trophic association with Lamiaceae (Table
Comparing model support with the Bayes factor. Bayes factors were calculated as described in the BayesTraits manual: BF=2(ln LhA−ln LhB), where ln Lhx is the marginal likelihood from the harmonic mean of the post-convergence. The plant family Lamiaceae is the most likely ancestral host at the root of the core Chrysolina clade with the highest harmonic mean. The right column indicates the Bayes factor compared against Lamiaceae as the favoured ancestral host. * Indicates positive evidence, ** indicates strong evidence, and *** indicates very strong evidence for the favoured hypothesis.
Host plant family | ln Lh | Bayes Factor |
---|---|---|
Apiaceae | -62.77 | 5.27** |
Apocynaceae | -63.78 | 7.30** |
Asteraceae | -65.71 | 11.16*** |
Hypericaceae | -65.59 | 10.92*** |
Lamiaceae | -60.13 | - |
Plantaginaceae | -62.44 | 4.61* |
Ranunculaceae | -62.57 | 4.86* |
Scrophulariaceae | -63.24 | 6.20** |
The mitochondrial and nuclear genes used here provided an expanded and better-resolved tree topology for the genus Chrysolina, significantly improving previous phylogenetic hypotheses. Our results support the reciprocal monophyly of the studied species of Chrysolina (plus Oreina) including the divergent Ch. (Polysticta) vigintimaculata, whose relationship with the core Chrysolina-Oreina clade could not be rejected by the AU test. The inferred tree topologies recovered Ch. vigintimaculata as a well-differentiated lineage sister to the rest of the ingroup taxa. This species has been traditionally assigned to the subgenus Atechna Chevrolat (
The inferred topology also supported most of the current subgeneric taxonomy of Chrysolina (
The new molecular phylogeny also sheds light on the contentious issue of the taxonomic status of Oreina. Our analyses supported the inclusion of the studied Oreina species within the core Chrysolina clade, which was also backed up statistically in the AU test constraining these genera to be reciprocally monophyletic (Table
Excluding the divergent species Ch. vigintimaculata, Chrysolina could be subdivided into four major clades (Figures
Clade D defined the monophyletic origin of seven Chrysolina subgenera traditionally associated with the “group 2” proposed by
Interestingly, our results regarding the clade K were fully consistent with most species groupings established by
The initial stages of the evolutionary history of the genus Chrysolina were closely related to the plant family Lamiaceae (Figure
The most basal clades in our Chrysolina phylogeny are those living on Lamiaceae. However, the phylogenetic uncertainty affecting this region of the tree prevents us for drawing firm conclusions about the number of lineages that have adapted to this plant family at the early stages of the evolution of the genus. In contrast, our phylogenetic analyses allowed for the identification of a minimum of eight host plant family shifts in the Chrysolina tree, thus indicating that the feeding spectrum of the extant Chrysolina species is the result of frequent and abrupt host shifts in their evolutionary history. While some of these shifts are between plant families belonging to the same order (Lamiaceae, Plantaginaceae, Scrophulariaceae; order Lamiales;
Chrysolina leaf beetles are highly specialized herbivores feeding on a narrow range of host plants (
The combined phylogenetic analysis of mitochondrial (cox1 and rrnL) and nuclear (H3) DNA sequences allows for the identification of the main evolutionary lineages in a sample of Chrysolina species representing almost half of the subgeneric diversity and most of the morphological and ecological variation in the genus. Our results reveal the paraphyly of the genus Chrysolina as currently described, due to the inclusion of the Oreina representatives within the Chrysolina clade. In this regard, the recognition of the genera Craspeda and Chalcoidea (sensu
We would like to thank the following colleagues who kindly provided us several specimens for this study: Dr. Yuri Mikhailov (Ural State Forestry Engineering University, Ekaterinburg, Russia; the species from Russia and Kazakhstan), Jean-Claude Bourdonné (Lesparrou, Ariège, France; two species from France) and Prof. José Serrano (Univ. Murcia, Spain; the species from Turkey).