Unravelling the evolution of mycetophagy and phytophagy in fungus weevils (Curculionoidea: Anthribidae): Phylogenomic insights into Anthribinae paraphyly and tribal non‐monophyly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fungus weevils (family Anthribidae) are morphologically and ecologically diverse, with highly varied feeding habits, mainly mycetophagy but also phytophagy, palynophagy and entomophagy. The phylogeny of the family is virtually unexplored, its evolutionary history obscure; thus, the existing classification is controversial and likely artificial. We generated the first multi‐gene higher‐level phylogeny estimate of Anthribidae using DNA data from 400 nuclear genes obtained via anchored hybrid enrichment from 40 species representing 17 tribes plus genera incertae sedis . As in previous studies, the family Anthribidae was consistently recovered as the sister group of Nemonychidae. We recovered two main clades in Anthribidae as sister groups with strong statistical support, viz. a monophyletic subfamily Urodontinae and the traditionally recognized Anthribinae, which was rendered paraphyletic by the subfamily Choraginae. Paraphyly and polyphyly among tribes of Anthribinae indicate that current tribal concepts—all based on morphology and without phylogenetic analysis—are artificial. Based on our results, we subsume the subfamily Choraginae into Anthribinae and place its six current tribes (Apolectini, Araecerini, Choragini, Cisanthribini, Valenfriesiini and Xenorchestini) in an expanded subfamily Anthribinae. We also transfer three genera currently treated as Anthribinae incertae sedis to three generally recognized tribes, namely Pleosporius Holloway to Sintorini, Xylanthribus Kuschel to Proscoporhinini and Anthribidus Fåhraeus to Platystomini. The phylogenetic positions of Urodontinae and Trigonorhinini suggest that phytophagy is the ancestral feeding mode of Anthribidae, with a few taxa of Anthribinae having secondarily evolved plant‐feeding from mycetophagy, the predominant feeding habit of the subfamily. Overall, our results provide the first molecular phylogenetic context for research on Anthribidae and a first step towards reconstructing a natural tribal classification of the Anthribinae. Our study highlights the need for a phylogenetic approach, sampling of type genera and deeper taxon sampling to identify natural tribal‐level groupings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".