2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2021.107087
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Habitat preference and diversification rates in a speciose lineage of diving beetles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 85 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our results are compatible with the previous molecular phylogenetic analyses of the Hydroporini (Toussaint et al, 2016; Villastrigo et al, 2021). Nevertheless, minor topological differences were found due to the unsupported backbones within the genus Paroster , but also at the subtribal level.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 94%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Our results are compatible with the previous molecular phylogenetic analyses of the Hydroporini (Toussaint et al, 2016; Villastrigo et al, 2021). Nevertheless, minor topological differences were found due to the unsupported backbones within the genus Paroster , but also at the subtribal level.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 94%
“…Nevertheless, minor topological differences were found due to the unsupported backbones within the genus Paroster , but also at the subtribal level. For example, the latest phylogenetic reconstruction of Hydroporini recovered Paroster as sister of a clade composed by Antiporus + Brancuporus + Chostonectes + Megaporus + Tiporus , although only supported in one out of three branch support estimations (Villastrigo et al, 2021). Here, we found Paroster as sister of Barretthydrus + Carabhydrus + Necterosoma + Sternopriscus with maximum support values for all branch support tests.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our understanding of the timing of evolution of Adephaga is currently provisioned by studies of all Coleoptera (Hunt et al ., 2007; McKenna et al ., 2015, 2019; Toussaint et al ., 2017a; Zhang et al ., 2018a, 2018b; see also Misof et al ., 2014; Rainford et al ., 2014; Tong et al ., 2015), or studies of specific adephagan lineages too narrow in scope to generalize to the entirety of Adephaga (e.g. Vogler & Pearson 1996; Balke et al ., 2004; Pons et al ., 2004; Ribera et al ., 2008; Ober & Heider 2010; Andújar et al ., 2012, 2016, 2017; Hawlitschek et al ., 2012; Faille et al ., 2013, 2014; Bukontaite et al ., 2014, 2015; Moore & Robertson 2014; Toussaint et al ., 2015, 2017b; López‐López et al ., 2016; Morinière et al ., 2016; Tsuji et al ., 2016; Gustafson et al ., 2017; Désamoré et al ., 2018; Gustafson 2018; Toussaint & Gillett 2018; Villastrigo et al ., 2018, 2021; Baca & Short, 2020). Some of the studies that estimated divergence times at the broader coleopteran level included tree topologies for Adephaga inconsistent with those recovered by the aforementioned phylogenomic and morphological investigations specifically focused on this suborder (Mckenna et al ., 2015; Toussaint et al ., 2017a; Zhang et al ., 2018a, 2018b) or were too broad in scope to weigh in on key relationships (Mckenna et al ., 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consistent with the evolutionary dead end view of specialists, the prevailing historical viewpoint was that specialists evolve from generalist ancestors (Schluter 2000). Prior studies have found mixed support for this viewpoint, with inferences from phylogenetic comparative methods showing that generalists regularly evolve from specialists in many clades (Day et al 2016; Sexton et al 2017; Villastrigo et al 2021). These results indicate that the dominant direction of evolutionary transitions involving specialization should be treated as an open question for any specialization scenario.…”
Section: Figurementioning
confidence: 99%