[Taxacom] Order Homoptera probably not paraphyletic after all
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Tue Feb 24 16:20:02 CST 2015
2015
Even if Homoptera and Heteroptera are both monophyletic (which I doubt), it would make more sense to rank them as suborders of Hemiptera again, rather than as separate orders, unless you think Thysanoptera renders them paraphyletic! At any rate, I am skeptical that cladistic analysis can resolve the relationships here, even with full taxon sampling.
Stephen
--------------------------------------------
On Wed, 25/2/15, Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Order Homoptera probably not paraphyletic after all
To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Received: Wednesday, 25 February, 2015, 11:08 AM
Hi Mike,
Oh, I agree that the
Coleorrhyncha made Order Homoptera paraphyletic, and that it
should be placed in Heteroptera as the basalmost group.
But it is a very small group (just one living family if I
recall correctly), and I doubt that its inclusion would have
changed the conclusions of the PLOS ONE paper.
Yes, it would definitely be nice to
repeat their study with more complete sampling. However, I
strongly suspect that the long branch attraction problem
that they have uncovered is real, and that more sampling
would probably not make that much difference in their
overall phylogeny (Homoptera and Heteroptera as sister
groups). Only time will tell. In any case, I always
thought having separate Orders Homoptera and Heteroptera was
useful even when Homoptera was paraphyletic (before
Coleorrhyncha was moved to Heteroptera).
-----------Ken
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:16:10 -0700
> From: mivie at montana.edu
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Order Homoptera
probably not paraphyletic after all
>
> The idea of sister-groups Homoptera and
Hemiptera is not well supported,
> and
this has been the case for decades. Actually dating back
to China
> in the 1920s. North
Americans resisted this fact for some reason, but
> has now come to understand it better. The
analysis that Ken gleefully
> cites is
good only in giving the answer he is looking for. Really
bad
> taxon sampling, showing little
understanding of the issues with this
>
group. Best supported to date is a single linkage tree
with the
> Homopterans the first 2 (or
more depending on finding support for a
> monphylletic Auchenorrhyncha), the
Coleorrhyncha next and then the
>
Enicocephalomorphs and Dipiscoromorphs before the half-wing
synapomorphy
> that holds the groups
most dabblers consider to be Hemiptera together.
>
> Mike
>
> From a teaching
standpoint, the combined Order is far easier to explain
> to students using a phyllogenetic
framework.
> On 2/24/2015 12:44 PM, John
Grehan wrote:
> > I grew up with
Hempitera as the order and Homoptera and Heteroptera as
> > monophyletic suborders. Only when I
transitioned to the northern hemisphere
>
> did I run into their ranking as orders. Looks like
there are two options
> > for ranking
these groups.
> >
>
> John Grehan
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 2:12 PM,
Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com>
wrote:
> >
>
>> Dear All,
Many entomologists today regard
> >> Homoptera as paraphyletic, and
therefore have dumped them in with the
>
>> Heteroptera into an expanded Hemiptera sensu
lato. I never have liked this
>
>> great expansion of Hemiptera to also include all
the Homoptera, (and of
> >> course,
it is not necessary if one considers paraphyletic taxa as
natural
> >> and useful).
In any case, a fairly
recent paper
> >> (published a
little over 2 years ago) was published in PLOS ONE which
> >> presents molecular evidence that
Homoptera is probably holophyletic after
> >> all, and a sister group to
Heteroptera. They show that most trees actually
> >> show a holophyletic (strictly
monophyletic) Homoptera, and that those few
> >> trees showing a paraphyletic
Homoptera are skewed due to long branch
>
>> attraction with outgroup taxa.
So for those of you who still
>
>> use Order Homoptera and Order Heteroptera, instead
of a huge heterogenous
> >> Order
Hemiptera, I applaud you. If Homoptera isn't
paraphyletic, there is
> >> no
reason for the paraphyly haters to over split (or in this
case overlump)
> >> this perfectly
good taxon. Here's a weblink to the paper:
> >> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048778
> >>
------------------Cheers,
>
>> Ken
> >>
Kinman---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
_______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992
may be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >>
Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
> >>
> >
_______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Celebrating
28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
>
> --
>
__________________________________________________
>
> Michael A. Ivie,
Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
>
>
Montana Entomology Collection
> Marsh
Labs, Room 50
> 1911 West Lincoln
Street
> NW corner of Lincoln and
S.19th
> Montana State University
> Bozeman, MT 59717
>
USA
>
> (406)
994-4610 (voice)
> (406) 994-6029
(FAX)
> mivie at montana.edu
>
>
_______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 28 years
of Taxacom in 2015.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
Celebrating 28 years of
Taxacom in 2015.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list