Phylogeny ofHeteronychia: the largest lineage ofSarcophaga(Diptera: Sarcophagidae)

Abstract

Sarcophaga Meigen is one of the megadiverse genera of true flies, with approximately 850 valid species worldwide. The genus is divided into about 160 subgenera, the validity of a vast majority of which has never been verified using cladistic methods. This paper deals with the mainly Palaearctic subgenus Heteronychia Brauer & Bergenstamm, which comprises 89 species and is thus the largest subunit of Sarcophaga. We performed a cladistic analysis of the group based exclusively on male morphological characters. Parsimony analyses were run on a matrix of 84 characters for 88 species. Species of the subgenera Discachaeta Enderlein and Notoecus Stein were also included in the matrix. A further analysis was carried out using a subset of characters from the terminalia alone (70 characters). The results show that the clade formed by Heteronychia, Discachaeta, and Notoecus is monophyletic, with Discachaeta emerging as polyphyletic whereas Sarcophaga (Notoecus) longestylata Strobl is nested within the Sarcophaga filia‐group. Character states supporting Heteronychia and the few well‐supported species‐groups are discussed in detail. The following synonymies are proposed: Discachaeta = Heteronychia (syn. nov.) and Notoecus = Heteronychia (syn. nov.). The paper also includes a historical background of the taxon in relation to the classification of the genus Sarcophaga over the past two centuries, as well as a terminological review of the male terminalia, particularly of the distiphallus. © 2013 The Linnean Society of London

Molecular phylogeny of the hyperdiverse genusSarcophaga(Diptera: Sarcophagidae), and comparison between algorithms for identification of rogue taxa

“…The classification of Sarcophaga consequently relies almost entirely on perceived shared similarities in the male terminalia, particularly in the complex morphology of the distiphallus (Giroux et al., ). Not surprisingly, the circumscription of this genus has undergone several changes since its description by Meigen (1826) (Whitmore et al., ), but contemporary workers seem to be converging towards the classification of the World Catalogue (Pape, ), apart from some quite disparate views on the issue of ranking. The genus Sarcophaga was subdivided into 133 subgenera by Pape (), but since then numerous genus‐group taxa have been proposed that would fall into the subgeneric category under that classification.…”

“…To date, Sarcophaga contains 169 subgenera (Pape and Thompson, ). Few of these subgenera have been comprehensively revised and analysed morphologically using cladistic methods (Blackith et al., ; Giroux and Wheeler, , ; Whitmore et al., ). Giroux et al.…”

“…Parallel to the recent increase in molecular studies including flesh flies (Kutty et al., ; Stamper et al., ; Singh and Wells, ; Piwczyński et al., ; Wong et al., ), morphological characters continue to provide a substantial amount of information (Giroux and Wheeler, , ; Giroux et al., ; Whitmore et al., ; Buenaventura and Pape, ). However, the remarkable morphological complexity of the male terminalia, which facilitates species‐level identification, also presents a formidable challenge in the homology assessments needed for reconstructing phylogenies and for a consistent subgeneric classification of Sarcophaga .…”

New records of Sarcophagidae from Turkey (Diptera)

“…Previously, 132 species of Sarcophagidae were listed from Turkey (Hayat et al 2008; Kara and Pape 2002; Koçak 2014; Koçak and Kemal 2009, 2012, 2013, 2015; Pape et al 2015; Pekbey 2011; Pekbey and Hayat 2011; Whitmore, 2011; Whitmore et al 2013). Our findings increase this number to 154.…”

“…Many authors have, through various studies, since brought the number of known Turkish species to 137 (Civelek and Tezcan 2005; Lehrer 2006; Aslan 2006; Hayat et al 2008; Aslan and Çalişkan 2009; Gözüaçik and Mart 2009; Karaman et al 2009; Pekbey and Hayat 2010; Xue et al 2011, 2015; Koçak 2014; Koçak and Kemal 2009, 2012, 2013, 2015; Whitmore 2011; Pekbey and Hayat 2011, 2013a, b, c; Whitmore et al 2013; Verves & Khrokalo 2015; Verves et al 2015b; Kemal and Koçak 2015; Pekbey 2011; Pekbey et al 2011 a, b). Other studies provided detailed data for the species causing obligate myiasis [ Wohlfahrtia magnifica (Schiner)], and several facultative myiasis-causing species (Kurtpinar 1950; Dinçer 1997; Çiftçioglu et al 1997; Şaki and Özer 1999a, b; Dinçer et al 2001; Sevgili et al 2004; Kökçam and Şaki 2005; Yuca et al, 2005; Ütük 2006; Büyükkurt et al 2008; Aydenizöz and Dik 2008; Yildirim et al 2008; Yazgi et al 2009; İpek et al 2009; Tuygun et al 2009; Bayındır et al 2010; İpek and Şaki 2010; Akduman et al 2010; Kara and Arslan 2011; Dik et al 2012; Övet et al 2012; Kılınç et al 2013; Ozsoy et al 2013; Köse et al 2013; Çevik et al 2014; Özdemir et al 2014; Gümüşsoy et al 2015).…”