Monophyly of terrestrial adephagan beetles as indicated by three nuclear genes (Coleoptera: Carabidae and Trachypachidae).

The beetle suborder Adephaga is traditionally divided into two sections on the basis of habitat, terrestrial Geadephaga and aquatic Hydradephaga. Monophyly of both groups is uncertain, and the relationship of the two groups has implications for inferring habitat transitions within Adephaga. Here we examine phylogenetic relationships of these groups using evidence provided by DNA sequences from all four suborders of beetles, including 60 species of Adephaga, four Archostemata, three Myxophaga, and ten Polyphaga. We studied 18S ribosomal DNA and 28S ribosomal DNA, aligned with consideration of secondary structure, as well as the nuclear protein-coding gene wingless. Independent and combined Bayesian, likelihood, and parsimony analyses of all three genes supported placement of Trachypachidae in a monophyletic Geadephaga, although for analyses of 28S rDNA and some parsimony analyses only if Coleoptera is constrained to be monophyletic. Most analyses showed limited support for the monophyly of Hydradephaga. Outside of Adephaga, there is support from the ribosomal genes for a sister group relationship between Adephaga and Polyphaga. Within the small number of sampled Polyphaga, analyses of 18S rDNA, wingless, and the combined matrix supports monophyly of Polyphaga exclusive of Scirtoidea. Unconstrained analyses of the evolution of habitat suggest that Adephaga was ancestrally aquatic with one transition to terrestrial. However, in analyses constrained to disallow changes from aquatic to terrestrial habitat, the phylogenies imply two origins of aquatic habit within Adephaga.

Hypothesis testing in evolutionary developmental biology: a case study from insect wings.

Developmental data have the potential to give novel insights into morphological evolution. Because developmental data are time-consuming to obtain, support for hypotheses often rests on data from only a few distantly related species. Similarities between these distantly related species are parsimoniously inferred to represent ancestral aspects of development. However, with limited taxon sampling, ancestral similarities in developmental patterning can be difficult to distinguish from similarities that result from convergent co-option of developmental networks, which appears to be common in developmental evolution. Using a case study from insect wings, we discuss how these competing explanations for similarity can be evaluated. Two kinds of developmental data have recently been used to support the hypothesis that insect wings evolved by modification of limb branches that were present in ancestral arthropods. This support rests on the assumption that aspects of wing development in Drosophila, including similarities to crustacean epipod patterning, are ancestral for winged insects. Testing this assumption requires comparisons of wing development in Drosophila and other winged insects. Here we review data that bear on this assumption, including new data on the functions of wingless and decapentaplegic during appendage allocation in the red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum.

Phylogenetic analysis of the Wnt gene family and discovery of an arthropod wnt-10 orthologue.

Wnt genes encode a conserved family of secreted signaling proteins that play many roles in arthropod and vertebrate development. We have investigated both the phylogenetic history and molecular evolution of this gene family. We have identified a novel Wnt gene in a diversity of arthropods that it is likely an orthologue of the vertebrate Wnt-10 group. Wnt-10 is one of only two cases in which orthology between protostome and deuterostome genes could be consistently assigned based on our analyses. Despite difficulties in assessing orthologies, all of our trees suggest that the most recent common ancestor of protostomes and deuterostomes possessed more than the five Wnt genes known from either arthropods or nematodes. This suggests that Wnt gene loss has occurred during protostome evolution. In addition, we examined the rate of amino acid evolution in the two arthropod/deuterostome orthology groups we identified. We found little rate variation across taxa, with the exception that Drosophila Wnt-1 is evolving more rapidly than all vertebrate and most arthropod orthologues.