Insects are the most speciose group of animals, but the phylogenetic relationships of many major lineages remain unresolved. We inferred the phylogeny of insects from 1478 protein-coding genes. Phylogenomic analyses of nucleotide and amino acid sequences, with site-specific nucleotide or domain-specific amino acid substitution models, produced statistically robust and congruent results resolving previously controversial phylogenetic relations hips. We dated the origin of insects to the Early Ordovician [~479 million years ago (Ma)], of insect flight to the Early Devonian (~406 Ma), of major extant lineages to the Mississippian (~345 Ma), and the major diversification of holometabolous insects to the Early Cretaceous. Our phylogenomic study provides a comprehensive reliable scaffold for future comparative analyses of evolutionary innovations among insects.

Polyneoptera represents one of the major lineages of winged insects, comprising around 40,000 extant species in 10 traditional orders, including grasshoppers, roaches, and stoneflies. Many important aspects of polyneopteran evolution, such as their phylogenetic relationships, changes in their external appearance, their habitat preferences, and social behavior, are unresolved and are a major enigma in entomology. These ambiguities also have direct consequences for our understanding of the evolution of winged insects in general; for example, with respect to the ancestral habitats of adults and juveniles. We addressed these issues with a large-scale phylogenomic analysis and used the reconstructed phylogenetic relationships to trace the evolution of 112 characters associated with the external appearance and the lifestyle of winged insects. Our inferences suggest that the last common ancestors of Polyneoptera and of the winged insects were terrestrial throughout their lives, implying that wings did not evolve in an aquatic environment. The appearance of the first polyneopteran insect was mainly characterized by ancestral traits such as long segmented abdominal appendages and biting mouthparts held below the head capsule. This ancestor lived in association with the ground, which led to various specializations including hardened forewings and unique tarsal attachment structures. However, within Polyneoptera, several groups switched separately to a life on plants. In contrast to a previous hypothesis, we found that social behavior was not part of the polyneopteran ground plan. In other traits, such as the biting mouthparts, Polyneoptera shows a high degree of evolutionary conservatism unique among the major lineages of winged insects.

Background: Whenever different data sets arrive at conflicting phylogenetic hypotheses, only testable causal explanations of sources of errors in at least one of the data sets allow us to critically choose among the conflicting hypotheses of relationships. The large (28S) and small (18S) subunit rRNAs are among the most popular markers for studies of deep phylogenies. However, some nodes supported by this data are suspected of being artifacts caused by peculiarities of the evolution of these molecules. Arthropod phylogeny is an especially controversial subject dotted with conflicting hypotheses which are dependent on data set and method of reconstruction. We assume that phylogenetic analyses based on these genes can be improved further i) by enlarging the taxon sample and ii) employing more realistic models of sequence evolution incorporating nonstationary substitution processes and iii) considering covariation and pairing of sites in rRNA-genes.

Background The latest advancements in DNA sequencing technologies have facilitated the resolution of the phylogeny of insects, yet parts of the tree of Holometabola remain unresolved. The phylogeny of Neuropterida has been extensively studied, but no strong consensus exists concerning the phylogenetic relationships within the order Neuroptera. Here, we assembled a novel transcriptomic dataset to address previously unresolved issues in the phylogeny of Neuropterida and to infer divergence times within the group. We tested the robustness of our phylogenetic estimates by comparing summary coalescent and concatenation-based phylogenetic approaches and by employing different quartet-based measures of phylogenomic incongruence, combined with data permutations. Results Our results suggest that the order Raphidioptera is sister to Neuroptera + Megaloptera. Coniopterygidae is inferred as sister to all remaining neuropteran families suggesting that larval cryptonephry could be a ground plan feature of Neuroptera. A clade that includes Nevrorthidae, Osmylidae, and Sisyridae (i.e. Osmyloidea) is inferred as sister to all other Neuroptera except Coniopterygidae, and Dilaridae is placed as sister to all remaining neuropteran families. Ithonidae is inferred as the sister group of monophyletic Myrmeleontiformia. The phylogenetic affinities of Chrysopidae and Hemerobiidae were dependent on the data type analyzed, and quartet-based analyses showed only weak support for the placement of Hemerobiidae as sister to Ithonidae + Myrmeleontiformia. Our molecular dating analyses suggest that most families of Neuropterida started to diversify in the Jurassic and our ancestral character state reconstructions suggest a primarily terrestrial environment of the larvae of Neuropterida and Neuroptera. Conclusion Our extensive phylogenomic analyses consolidate several key aspects in the backbone phylogeny of Neuropterida, such as the basal placement of Coniopterygidae within Neuroptera and the monophyly of Osmyloidea. Furthermore, they provide new insights into the timing of diversification of Neuropterida. Despite the vast amount of analyzed molecular data, we found that certain nodes in the tree of Neuroptera are not robustly resolved. Therefore, we emphasize the importance of integrating the results of morphological analyses with those of sequence-based phylogenomics. We also suggest that comparative analyses of genomic meta-characters should be incorporated into future phylogenomic studies of Neuropterida.

Delimitation of species is often complicated by discordance of morphological and genetic data. This may be caused by the existence of cryptic or polymorphic species. The latter case is particularly true for certain snail species showing an exceptionally high intraspecific genetic diversity. The present investigation deals with the Trochulus hispidus complex, which has a complicated taxonomy. Our analyses of the COI sequence revealed that individuals showing a T. hispidus phenotype are distributed in nine highly differentiated mitochondrial clades (showing p-distances up to 19%). The results of a parallel morphometric investigation did not reveal any differentiation between these clades, although the overall variability is quite high. The phylogenetic analyses based on 12S, 16S and COI sequences show that the T. hispidus complex is paraphyletic with respect to several other morphologically well-defined Trochulus species (T. clandestinus, T. villosus, T. villosulus and T. striolatus) which form well-supported monophyletic groups. The nc marker sequence (5.8S–ITS2–28S) shows only a clear separation of T. o. oreinos and T. o. scheerpeltzi, and a weakly supported separation of T. clandestinus, whereas all other species and the clades of the T. hispidus complex appear within one homogeneous group. The paraphyly of the T. hispidus complex reflects its complicated history, which was probably driven by geographic isolation in different glacial refugia and budding speciation. At our present state of knowledge, it cannot be excluded that several cryptic species are embedded within the T. hispidus complex. However, the lack of morphological differentiation of the T. hispidus mitochondrial clades does not provide any hints in this direction. Thus, we currently do not recommend any taxonomic changes. The results of the current investigation exemplify the limitations of barcoding attempts in highly diverse species such as T. hispidus.