Phylogeny of the subfamilies of Ichneumonidae (Hymenoptera)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A combined morphological and molecular phylogenetic analysis was performed to evaluate the subfamily relationships of the parasitoid wasp family Ichneumonidae (Hymenoptera). Data were obtained by coding 135 morphological and 6 biological characters for 131 exemplar species of ichneumonids and 3 species of Braconidae (the latter as outgroups). The species of ichneumonids represent all of the 42 currently recognized subfamilies. In addition, molecular sequence data (cytochrome oxidase I “DNA barcoding” region, the D2 region of 28S rDNA and part of the F2 copy of elongation factor 1-alpha) were obtained from specimens of the same species that were coded for morphology (1309 base pairs total). The data were analyzed using parsimony and Bayesian analyses. The parsimony analysis using all data recovered previously recognized informal subfamily groupings (Pimpliformes, Ophioniformes, Ichneumoniformes), although the relationships of these three groups to each other differed from previous studies and some of the subfamily relationships within these groupings had not previously been suggested. Specifically, Ophioniformes was the sister group to (Ichneumoniformes + Pimplformes), and Labeninae was placed near Ichneumoniformes, not as sister group to all Ichneumonidae except Xoridinae. The parsimony analysis using only morphological characters was poorly resolved and did not recover any of the three informal subfamily groupings and very few of the relationships were similar to the total-evidence parsimony analysis. The molecular-only parsimony analysis and both Bayesian analyses (total-evidence and molecular-only) recovered Pimpliformes, a restricted Ichneumoniformes grouping and many of the subfamily groupings recovered in the total-evidence parsimony analysis. A comparison and discussion of the results obtained by each phylogenetic method and different data sets is provided. It is concluded that the molecular characters produced results that were relatively consistent with traditional, non-phylogenetic concepts of relationships between the ichneumonid subfamilies, whereas the morphological characters did not (at least not by themselves). The inclusion of both molecular and morphological characters using parsimony produced a topology that was the closest to the traditional subfamily relationships. The method of analysis did not greatly affect the overall topology for the molecular-only analyses, but there were differences between Bayesian and parsimony results for the total-evidence analyses (especially near the root of the tree). The Bayesian results did not seem to be altered very much by the inclusion of morphological characters, unlike in the parsimony analysis. In summary, the following groups were supported in multiple analyses regardless of the characters used or method of tree-building: Pimpliformes, higher Ophioniformes, higher Pimpliformes, (Claseinae + Pedunculinae), (Banchinae + Stilbopinae), Campopleginae, Cremastinae, Diplazontinae, Ichneumoninae (including Alomya ), Labeninae, Ophioninae, Poemeniinae, Rhyssinae, and Tersilochinae sensu stricto. Conversely, Ctenopelmatinae and Tryphoninae were never recovered without inclusion of other taxa. Based on the hypothesis of relationships obtained by the total-evidence parsimony analysis, the following formal taxonomic changes are proposed: Alomyinae Förster (= Alomya Panzer and Megalomya Uchida) is once again synonymized with Ichneumoninae and is now considered a tribe (Alomyini rev. stat. ); and Notostilbops Townes is transferred from Stilbopinae to Banchinae, tribe Atrophini.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».