The oldest occurrence of immature Diptera (Insecta), Middle Triassic, France

Lukashevich, Elena D.; Пржиборо, А. А.; Marchal-Papier, Francine; Grauvogel‐Stamm, Léa

doi:10.1080/00379271.2010.10697636

Cited by 27 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A number of other dipteran fossils have been described from Grès à Voltzia; of special interest is Voltziapupa tentata Lukashevich et al, 2010, known only from well-preserved pupae, while G. arzvilleriana is known only from adult wings. The venation of the wing sheath in V. tentata is not well preserved, preventing a clear link of characters with G. arzvilleriana (Lukashevich et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fossil Calibrations for the Arthropod Tree of Life

Wolfe

Daley

Legg³

et al. 2016

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fossil age data and molecular sequences are increasingly combined to establish a timescale for the Tree of Life. Arthropods, as the most species-rich and morphologically disparate animal phylum, have received substantial attention, particularly with regard to questions such as the timing of habitat shifts (e.g., terrestrialisation), genome evolution (e.g., gene family duplication and functional evolution), origins of novel characters and behaviours (e.g., wings and flight, venom, silk), biogeography, rate of diversification (e.g., Cambrian explosion, insect coevolution with angiosperms, evolution of crab body plans), and the evolution of arthropod microbiomes. We present herein a series of rigorously vetted calibration fossils for arthropod evolutionary history, taking into account recently published guidelines for best practice in fossil calibration. These are restricted to Palaeozoic and Mesozoic fossils, no deeper than ordinal taxonomic level, nonetheless resulting in 79 fossil calibrations for 101 clades. This work is especially timely owing to the rapid growth of molecular sequence data and the fact that many included fossils have been described within the last five years. This contribution provides a resource for systematists and other biologists interested in deep-time questions in arthropod evolution.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fossil Calibrations for the Arthropod Tree of Life

Wolfe

Daley

Legg³

et al. 2016

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In our study, in contrast to Cranston et al (2010), the minimum constraint for the root of Culicomorpha can be derived from a fossil of an immature culicomorphan dipteran, Anisinodus crinitus (Lukashevich et al , 2010). The specimen, from the Grès à Meules facies of the Grès‐a‐Voltzia Formation in north‐east France, dated as Lower Anisian, came from the same deposits that contained the oldest definitive fossil dipteran, Grauvogelia arzvilleriana (Krzemiński et al , 1994), thereby giving the same minimum age of 240.5 Ma for Culicomorpha as was provided by the brachyceran, Gallia alsatica Krzemiński & Krzemińska in Cranston et al (2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our expanded out‐group selection provides a different basal node that may drive the earlier date. Notably, rendering a Permian date improbable, no fossil Diptera have been reported earlier than the early‐mid Triassic (ca 240 Ma; Lukashevich et al , 2010), despite several appropriate earlier deposits being studied. Nonetheless, it seems that morphological diversity of Culicomorpha was present already by the mid Triassic, including from variably preserved immature stages (Lukashevich et al , 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A dated molecular phylogeny for the Chironomidae (Diptera)

Cranston

Hardy

Morse

2011

Systematic Entomology

132

184

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We provide the first highly sampled phylogeny estimate for the dipteran family Chironomidae using molecular data from fragments of two ribosomal genes (18S and 28S), one nuclear protein‐coding gene (CAD), and one mitochondrial protein‐coding gene (COI), analysed using mixed‐model Bayesian and maximum likelihood inference methods. The most recently described subfamilies Chilenomyiinae and Usambaromyiinae proved elusive, and are unsampled. We confirm monophyly of all sampled subfamilies except Prodiamesinae, which contains Propsilocerus Kieffer, previously in Orthocladiinae. The semifamily Chironomoinae is confirmed only if Telmatogetoninae is included, which is closer to Brundin's original suggestion. Buchonomyiinae is excluded from Chironomoinae: it is a sister group to all remaining Chironomidae, conforming more to Murray and Ashe's argumentation. Semifamily Tanypodoinae is a grade and unsupported as monophyletic: the austral Aphroteniinae alone is sister to all Chironomidae (less Buchonomyiinae). Podonominae is weakly supported as the next sister group, in contrast to some estimates that place this subfamily as sister group to Tanypodinae alone. In Diamesinae, the southern African Harrisonini is confirmed as a member, but embedded within austral tribe Heptagiini, which is confirmed as sister to the undersampled Diamesini. Tribe Pentaneurini and ‘non‐Pentaneurini’ taxa are reciprocally monophyletic in Tanypodinae. Recent molecular findings concerning Podonominae are substantiated, with a monophyletic tribe Podonomini, Boreochlini forming a grade and Lasiodiamesa Kieffer placed as sister to all other Podonominae, but with uncertainty. In Orthocladiinae, a postulated two‐tribe system of Orthocladiini and Metriocnemini can be supported after exclusion of a Corynoneura group and a Brillia group, which is revealed as sister to Stictocladius Edwards. The marine Clunio Haliday and Thalassosmittia Strenzke & Remmert (given high rank in the past) are clearly embedded deep in Orthocladiinae. The finding of Shangomyia Sæther & Wang + Xyiaomyia Sæther & Wang as sister group to all other Chironominae justifies high rank, as their authors suggested. Pseudochironomini (untested by sampling shortfall) is sister to a monophyletic Tanytarsini (with a weakly supported inclusion of the enigmatic Nandeva Wiedenbrug, Reiss & Fittkau). The tribe Chironomini can be supported only by excluding Shangomyia + Xyiaomyia, and a postulated monophyletic clade comprising several taxa such as Microtendipes Kieffer, with six‐segmented larval antennae and alternate Lauterborn organs, that is sister group to Pseudochironomini + Tanytarsini. The tempo of diversification of the family, deduced by divergence time analysis (beast), shows Permian origination with subfamily stem‐group origination from the mid–late Triassic to the early Cretaceous. Crown‐group origination ranged from Podonominae on a short stem originating in the mid Jurassic to long‐stemmed Aphroteninae from the late Cretaceous. Node dates allow inference of some vicariance via Gondwanan...

show abstract

“…Th e diversity of treated topics is an excellent refl ects of the state of the art in palaeoentomology (taxonomy, phylogeny, palaeoecology, methodology, fossil insects from the Carboniferous to the Upper Cenozoic; in lacustrine rocks and amber). Despite the great progress made during the 20 last years, the present volume demonstrates that our knowledge on fossil Hexapoda diversity is still comparable to that on Vertebrates at the beginning of 20 th century: a new fossil family (Kirejtshuk et al 2010a), one new tribe (Szwedo & Stroiński 2010), and several new genera and species (Archibald 2010;Azar & Nel 2010a,b;Azar et al 2010a,c;Azar & Waller 2010;Chapelin-Viscardi et al 2010;Gao et al 2010;Heads 2010;Lukashevich et al 2010;Montreuil et al 2010;Kirejtshuk et al 2010b;Lin et al 2010;Loureiro et al 2010;Makarkin 2010;Montreuil et al 2010;Moseyko et al 2010;Nel et al 2010a;Ortuño & Arillo 2010;Pérez-de la Fuente et al 2010;Prokop & Nel 2010) are described; one family is recorded for the fi rst time as a fossil (Vitali 2010); oldest or youngest records of two families are given (Azar & Nel 2010;Peñalver & Grimaldi 2010); several examples confi rm that fossils can be crucial for phylogenetic, palaeoecological or palaeobiogeographical analyses (Minet et al 2010;Jolivet & Verma 2010;Poinar 2010). Lastly a new approach in palaeosynecological analyses based on the past distribution of morphological structures is proposed to improve the understanding of the evolution of the insects and their past ecosystems .…”

mentioning

confidence: 86%