Abstract.Here we present a phylogeny of beetles (Insecta: Coleoptera) based on DNA sequence data from eight nuclear genes, including six single-copy nuclear protein-coding genes, for 367 species representing 172 of 183 extant families. Our results refine existing knowledge of relationships among major groups of beetles. Strepsiptera was confirmed as sister to Coleoptera and each of the suborders of Coleoptera was recovered as monophyletic. Interrelationships among the suborders, namely Polyphaga (Adephaga (Archostemata, Myxophaga)), in our study differ from previous studies. Adephaga comprised two clades corresponding to Hydradephaga and Geadephaga. The series and superfamilies of Polyphaga were mostly monophyletic. The traditional Cucujoidea were recovered in three distantly related clades. Lymexyloidea was recovered within Tenebrionoidea. Several of the series and superfamilies of Polyphaga received moderate to maximal clade support in most analyses, for example Buprestoidea, Chrysomeloidea, Coccinelloidea, Cucujiformia, Curculionoidea, Dascilloidea, Elateroidea, Histeroidea and Hydrophiloidea. However, many of the relationships within Polyphaga lacked compatible resolution under maximum-likelihood and Bayesian inference, and/or lacked consistently strong nodal support. Overall, we recovered slightly younger estimated divergence times than previous studies for most groups of beetles. The ordinal split between Coleoptera and Strepsiptera was estimated to have occurred in the Early Permian. Crown Coleoptera appeared in the Late Permian, and only one or two lineages survived the end-Permian mass extinction, with stem group representatives of all four suborders appearing by the end of the Triassic. The basal split in Polyphaga was estimated to have occurred in the Triassic, with the stem groups of most series and superfamilies originating during the Triassic or Jurassic. Most extant families of beetles were estimated to have Cretaceous origins. Overall, Coleoptera experienced an increase in diversification rate compared to the rest of Neuropteroidea. Furthermore, 10 family-level clades, all in suborder Polyphaga, were identified as having experienced significant increases in diversification rate. These include most beetle species with phytophagous habits, but also several groups not typically or primarily associated with plants. Most of these groups originated in the Cretaceous, which is also when a majority of the most species-rich beetle families first appeared. An additional 12 clades showed evidence for significant decreases in diversification rate. These clades are species-poor in the Modern fauna, but collectively exhibit diverse trophic habits. The apparent success of beetles, as measured by species numbers, may result from their associations with widespread and diverse substrates -especially plants, but also including fungi, wood and leaf litter -but what facilitated these associations in the first place or has allowed these associations to flourish likely varies within and between lineages. Our results pr...

Peruvian biodiversity is pivotal for conserving and managing natural resources, food security, poverty reduction, health, biosecurity, new industrial product development, and ecotourism (Smith et al., 2011). Geotrupidae Diversity in Peru: 1 subfamily, 4 genera, and 11 species. Recognition: The body shape is oval or round, and the head is not deflexed. The antennae are 11-segmented with a 3-segmented, opposable club with all antennomeres tomentose. The eyes are completely or partially divided by a canthus. The clypeus is often with a tubercle or horn. The labrum is truncate, prominent, and produced beyond the apex of the clypeus. The mandibles are prominent and produced beyond the apex of the labrum. The pronotum is convex with a base wider than or subequal to the elytral base and with or without tubercles, ridges, horns, or sulci. The elytra are convex, with or without striae. The pygidium is concealed by the elytra (Jameson, 2002a). Habitat: Life histories of the geotrupids are diverse, and food habits vary from saprophagous to coprophagous and mycetophagous. Adults of most species are secretive, living most of their life in burrows. Although adults do not tend larvae, adults provision food for larvae in brood burrows. Adults dig vertical burrows (15-200 cm in depth) and provision larval cells with dead leaves, cow dung, horse dung, or humus. Burrows of some species extend to a depth of 3.0 m (Jameson, 2002a). Notes: The family Geotrupidae includes 68 genera and about 620 species (Scholtz and Browne, 1996). The subfamily Geotrupinae does not occur in South America.

The pelidnotine scarabs (Scarabaeidae: Rutelinae: Rutelini) are a speciose, paraphyletic assemblage of beetles that includes spectacular metallic species (“jewel scarabs”) as well as species that are ecologically important as herbivores, pollinators, and bioindicators. These beetles suffer from a complicated nomenclatural history, due primarily to 20th century taxonomic and nomenclatural errors. We review the taxonomic history of the pelidnotine scarabs, present a provisional key to genera with overviews of all genera, and synthesize a catalog of all taxa with synonyms, distributional data, type specimen information, and 107 images of exemplar species. As a result of our research, the pelidnotine leaf chafers (a paraphyletic group) include 27 (26 extant and 1 extinct) genera and 420 valid species and subspecies (419 extant and 1 extinct). Our research makes biodiversity research on this group tractable and accessible, thus setting the stage for future studies that address evolutionary and ecological trends. Based on our research, 1 new species is described, 1 new generic synonym and 12 new species synonyms are proposed, 11 new lectotypes and 1 new neotype are designated, many new or revised nomenclatural combinations, and many unavailable names are presented. The following taxonomic changes are made:New generic synonym: The genus Heteropelidnota Ohaus, 1912 is a new junior synonym of Pelidnota MacLeay, 1819.New species synonyms: Plusiotis adelaida pavonacea Casey, 1915 is a syn. n. of Chrysina adelaida (Hope, 1841); Odontognathus gounellei Ohaus, 1908 is a revised synonym of Pelidnota ebenina (Blanchard, 1842); Pelidnota francoisgenieri Moore & Jameson, 2013 is a syn. n. of Pelidnota punctata (Linnaeus, 1758); Pelidnota genieri Soula, 2009 is a syn. n. of Pelidnota punctata (Linnaeus, 1758); Pelidnota lutea (Olivier, 1758) is a revised synonym of Pelidnota punctata (Linnaeus, 1758); Pelidnota (Pelidnota) texensis Casey, 1915 is a revised synonym of Pelidnota punctata (Linnaeus, 1758); Pelidnota (Strigidia) zikani (Ohaus, 1922) is a revised synonym of Pelidnota tibialis tibialis Burmeister, 1844; Pelidnota ludovici Ohaus, 1905 is a syn. n. of Pelidnota burmeisteri tricolor Nonfried, 1894; Rutela fulvipennis Germar, 1824 is syn. n. of Pelidnota cuprea (Germar, 1824); Pelidnota pulchella blanda Burmeister, 1844 is a syn. n. of Pelidnota pulchella pulchella (Kirby, 1819); Pelidnota pulchella scapularis Burmeister, 1844 is a syn. n. of Pelidnota pulchella pulchella (Kirby, 1819); Pelidnota xanthogramma Perty, 1830 is a syn. n. of Pelidnota pulchella pulchella (Kirby, 1819).New or revised statuses: Pelidnota fabricelavalettei Soula, 2009, revised status, is considered a species; Pelidnota rioensis Soula, 2009, stat. n., is considered a species; Pelidnota semiaurata semiaurata Burmeister, 1844, stat. rev., is considered a subspecies.New or comb. rev. and revised status: Plusiotis guaymi Curoe, 2001 is formally transferred to the genus Chrysina (C. guaymi (Curoe, 2001), comb. n.); Plusiotis transvolcanica Morón & Nogueir...

The scarab beetle tribe Cyclocephalini (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Dynastinae) is the second largest tribe of rhinoceros beetles, with nearly 500 described species. This diverse group is most closely associated with early diverging angiosperm groups (the family Nymphaeaceae, magnoliid clade, and monocots), where they feed, mate, and receive the benefit of thermal rewards from the host plant. Cyclocephaline floral association data have never been synthesized, and a comprehensive review of this ecological interaction was necessary to promote research by updating nomenclature, identifying inconsistencies in the data, and reporting previously unpublished data. Based on the most specific data, at least 97 cyclocephaline beetle species have been reported from the flowers of 58 plant genera representing 17 families and 15 orders. Thirteen new cyclocephaline floral associations are reported herein. Six cyclocephaline and 25 plant synonyms were reported in the literature and on beetle voucher specimen labels, and these were updated to reflect current nomenclature. The valid names of three unavailable plant host names were identified. We review the cyclocephaline floral associations with respect to inferred relationships of angiosperm orders. Ten genera of cyclocephaline beetles have been recorded from flowers of early diverging angiosperm groups. In contrast, only one genus, Cyclocephala, has been recorded from dicot flowers. Cyclocephaline visitation of dicot flowers is limited to the New World, and it is unknown whether this is evolutionary meaningful or the result of sampling bias and incomplete data. The most important areas for future research include: 1) elucidating the factors that attract cyclocephalines to flowers including floral scent chemistry and thermogenesis, 2) determining whether cyclocephaline dicot visitation is truly limited to the New World, and 3) inferring evolutionary relationships within the Cyclocephalini to rigorously test vicarance hypotheses, host plant shifts, and mutualisms with angiosperms.

Stimulated in large part by the advent of the Internet, research productivity in many academic disciplines has changed dramatically over the last two decades. However, the assessment system that governs professional success has not kept pace, creating a mismatch between modes of scholarly productivity and academic assessment criteria. In this article, we describe the problem and present ideas for solutions. We argue that adjusting assessment criteria to correspond to modern scholarly productivity is essential for the success of individual scientists and of our discipline as a whole. The authors and endorsers of this article commit to a number of actions that constitute steps toward ensuring that all forms of scholarly productivity are credited. The emphasis here is on systematic biology, but we are not alone in experiencing this mismatch between productivity and assessment. An additional goal in this article is to begin a conversation about the problem with colleagues in other subdisciplines of biology.