Lauri Kaila

Species richness of Coleoptera in mature managed and old-growth boreal forests in southern Finland

The beetle (Coleoptera) fauna of old-growth spruce (Picea abies) forest was compared with that from managed mature and overmature forests in southern Finland. Samples were collected from 9–11 sample plots in each case using 10 window-flight traps in each stand. These yielded a total of 43,289 beetles and 553 species of which 232 were associated with dead wood. The species richness of these saproxylic species was significantly higher in old-growth forests than in managed forests, and had very significant positive correlations with most dead-wood variables. Seventy eight percent of the saproxylic species were more abundant in old-growth than in mature managed forests, and their assemblages in managed and old-growth forests were distinctive with almost no overlap. On the other hand, species richness and assemblages of non-saproxylic species did not differ between the managed and old-growth forests. Obviously these species do not require as much attention as saproxylic species when conservation measures are planned in managed forests. An increase in the general level of decaying wood would improve the situation of many declining saproxylic species. Although the species richness of Coleoptera as a whole was higher in overmature than in mature managed stands, the value of long-rotation stands in preserving species assemblages typical of old-growth forests may be limited.

Dead trees left in clear-cuts benefit saproxylic Coleoptera adapted to natural disturbances in boreal forest

Forest management alters the pattern of forest dynamics from that in natural conditions in the boreal region. In order to examine how certain forestry measures matching natural dynamics affect forest insects, we compared assemblages of saproxylic Coleoptera on dead, standing birch trunks left behind in eight clear-cut areas with corresponding assemblages in seven mature forests in southern and eastern Finland. We used trunk-window traps for sampling. Distinct beetle assemblages were associated with the different habitats. Median numbers of species or specimens caught did not differ between closed forests and clear-cuts, but individual beetle species occurred unevenly among the habitats. Several beetle species associated with open forest habitat, e.g. burned forests or storm-damage areas, including species regarded as threatened in Finland, were found almost exclusively, in clear-cuts. Correspondingly, a number of beetle species occurring frequently in closed forests were not found in clear-cuts. We conclude that dead trunks left in the clear-cut areas may host not only generalist saproxylic species but also many beetle species specialized to warm, sun-exposed environments, and such species may not be able to survive in closed forests. Management measures matching suppressed natural disturbances are found useful in preserving diversity in managed forests.

Comprehensive gene and taxon coverage elucidates radiation patterns in moths and butterflies

Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths) represent one of the most diverse animals groups. Yet, the phylogeny of advanced ditrysian Lepidoptera, accounting for about 99 per cent of lepidopteran species, has remained largely unresolved. We report a rigorous and comprehensive analysis of lepidopteran affinities. We performed phylogenetic analyses of 350 taxa representing nearly 90 per cent of lepidopteran families. We found Ditrysia to be a monophyletic taxon with the clade Tischerioidea + Palaephatoidea being the sister group of it. No support for the monophyly of the proposed major internested ditrysian clades, Apoditrysia, Obtectomera and Macrolepidoptera, was found as currently defined, but each of these is supported with some modification. The monophyly or near-monophyly of most previously identified lepidopteran superfamilies is reinforced, but several species-rich superfamilies were found to be para- or polyphyletic. Butterflies were found to be more closely related to ‘microlepidopteran’ groups of moths rather than the clade Macrolepidoptera, where they have traditionally been placed. There is support for the monophyly of Macrolepidoptera when butterflies and Calliduloidea are excluded. The data suggest that the generally short diverging nodes between major groupings in basal non-tineoid Ditrysia are owing to their rapid radiation, presumably in correlation with the radiation of flowering plants.

A new molecular phylogeny offers hope for a stable family level classification of the Noctuoidea (Lepidoptera)

Zahiri, R., Kitching, I. J., Lafontaine, J. D., Mutanen, M., Kaila, L., Holloway, J. D. & Wahlberg, N. (2010). A new molecular phylogeny offers hope for a stable family level classification of the Noctuoidea (Lepidoptera). —Zoologica Scripta, 40, 158–173.

Cretaceous origin and repeated tertiary diversification of the redefined butterflies

Although the taxonomy of the ca 18 000 species of butterflies and skippers is well known, the family-level relationships are still debated. Here, we present, to our knowledge, the most comprehensive phylogenetic analysis of the superfamilies Papilionoidea, Hesperioidea and Hedyloidea to date based on morphological and molecular data. We reconstructed their phylogenetic relationships using parsimony and Bayesian approaches. We estimated times and rates of diversification along lineages in order to reconstruct their evolutionary history. Our results suggest that the butterflies, as traditionally understood, are paraphyletic, with Papilionidae being the sister-group to Hesperioidea, Hedyloidea and all other butterflies. Hence, the families in the current three superfamilies should be placed in a single superfamily Papilionoidea. In addition, we find that Hedylidae is sister to Hesperiidae, and this novel relationship is supported by two morphological characters. The families diverged in the Early Cretaceous but diversified after the Cretaceous–Palaeogene event. The diversification of butterflies is characterized by a slow speciation rate in the lineage leading to Baronia brevicornis, a period of stasis by the skippers after divergence and a burst of diversification in the lineages leading to Nymphalidae, Riodinidae and Lycaenidae.

Phylogeny of the superfamily Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia): an exemplar approach

Phylogenetic relationships within the megadiverse lepidopteran superfamily Gelechioidea have been poorly understood and consequently the family level classification has been problematic. An analysis of phylogeny using 193 characters, including 241 informative character states, derived from larval, pupal and adult morphology and larval ecology, was performed to resolve the phylogeny of the Gelechioidea. 143 species representing the diversity of the putative Gelechioidea were included, supplemented with 13 species representing 11 other Ditrysian families. The monophyly of the Gelechioidea was supported, although only with homoplastic characters. The putative position of the Gelechioidea as the sister group of the Apoditrysia was not supported, since the Gelechioidea was nested within this clade. The Gelechioidea was divided into two main lineages: (1) the gelechiid lineage constituting Deoclonidae, Syringopainae, a re‐composed Coleophoridae (including Coelopoetinae and Batrachedrinae as paraphyletic with Stathmopodinae, and Coleophorinae nested within it), Momphidae, Pterolonchidae, Scythrididae, Cosmopterigidae, and Gelechiidae, and (2) the oecophorid lineage constituting the “autostichid” family assemblage (including taxa formerly assigned to Autostichinae, Holcopogoninae, Symmocinae, Glyphidoceridae and Lecithoceridae), Xyloryctidae s.l. (including a paraphyletic Xyloryctidae of authors, some oecophorids of authors, Deuterogoniinae and Blastobasinae), Oecophoridae s.s., Amphisbatidae s.s., Carcinidae, Stenomati[n/d]ae, Chimabachidae and Elachistidae (including Depressariinae s.s., Telechrysis, Ethmiinae, Hypertrophinae s.l., miscellaneous “amphisbatids”sensu authors, Aeolanthinae, Parametriotinae, Agonoxeninae and Elachistinae). Detritivory/fungivory may have evolved only twice within Gelechioidea, though the evolution of larval food substrate use frequently reverses. To avoid an unnecessary further proliferation of names, it is recommended that no further family group names are introduced within the Gelechioidea, unless based on a rigorous analysis of inter‐relationships.

Comprehensive Molecular Sampling Yields a Robust Phylogeny for Geometrid Moths (Lepidoptera: Geometridae)

Background The moth family Geometridae (inchworms or loopers), with approximately 23 000 described species, is the second most diverse family of the Lepidoptera. Apart from a few recent attempts based on morphology and molecular studies, the phylogeny of these moths has remained largely uninvestigated. Methodology/Principal Findings We performed a rigorous and extensive molecular analysis of eight genes to examine the geometrid affinities in a global context, including a search for its potential sister-taxa. Our maximum likelihood analyses included 164 taxa distributed worldwide, of which 150 belong to the Geometridae. The selected taxa represent all previously recognized subfamilies and nearly 90% of recognized tribes, and originate from all over world. We found the Geometridae to be monophyletic with the Sematuridae+Epicopeiidae clade potentially being its sister-taxon. We found all previously recognized subfamilies to be monophyletic, with a few taxa misplaced, except the Oenochrominae+Desmobathrinae complex that is a polyphyletic assemblage of taxa and the Orthostixinae, which was positioned within the Ennominae. The Sterrhinae and Larentiinae were found to be sister to the remaining taxa, followed by Archiearinae, the polyphyletic assemblage of Oenochrominae+Desmobathrinae moths, Geometrinae and Ennominae. Conclusions/Significance Our study provides the first comprehensive phylogeny of the Geometridae in a global context. Our results generally agree with the other, more restricted studies, suggesting that the general phylogenetic patterns of the Geometridae are now well-established. Generally the subfamilies, many tribes, and assemblages of tribes were well supported but their interrelationships were often weakly supported by our data. The Eumeleini were particularly difficult to place in the current system, and several tribes were found to be para- or polyphyletic.

Intensity of forest management and bark beetles in non-epidemic conditions: a comparison between Finnish and Russian Karelia

Abstract: The population levels of bark beetles in non‐epidemic conditions were compared between intensively managed forests in Finnish Karelia and extensively managed forests in Russian Karelia. Thirty randomly chosen sample plots with five window flight traps in each were established in both countries. The numbers of species and individuals of bark beetles did not differ between the countries. This indicates that extensive forest management has not increased the general level of bark beetle populations. Species assemblages were, however, different between the countries and between the forest site types. Hylastes brunneus and Pityogenes bidentatus, which are common in stumps or in logging residue of Scots pine, were more abundant in Finland. Crypturgus subcribrosus, Polygraphus punctifrons, and Hylurgops glabratus, which prefer dead spruce trees in shady conditions, and Trypodendron signatum, which live in dead deciduous trees, were more common in Russia. Bark beetles were most abundant in old mesic forests. The amount of decaying wood on the ground did not correlate with the numbers of bark beetles caught.

Phylogeny of the mega-diverse Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera): Adaptations and determinants of success

The Gelechioidea, with 18,000 described and many more unnamed species ranks among the most diverse lepidopteran superfamilies. Nevertheless, their taxonomy has remained largely unresolved, and phylogenetic affinities among gelechioid families and lower taxa have been insufficiently understood. We constructed, for the first time, a comprehensive molecular phylogeny for the Gelechioidea. We sampled seven genes, in total 5466 base pairs, of 109 gelechioid taxa representing 32 of 37 recognized subfamilies, and two outgroup taxa. We used maximum likelihood methods and Bayesian inference to construct phylogenetic trees. We found that the families Autostichidae, Lecithoceridae, Xyloryctidae, and Oecophoridae s. str., in this order, are the most basally arising clades. Elachistidae s. l. was found to be paraphyletic, with families such as Gelechiidae and Cosmopterigidae nested within it, and Parametriotinae associated with several families previously considered unrelated to them. Using the phylogenetic trees, we examined patterns of life history evolution and determinants of the success of different lineages. Gelechioids express unusually wide variability in life-history strategies, including herbivorous, saprophagous, fungivorous, and carnivorous lineages. Most species are highly specialized in diet and other life history traits. The results suggest that either saprophagy was the ancestral feeding strategy from which herbivory evolved independently on multiple occasions, or that the ancestor was herbivorous with repeated origins of saprophagy. External feeding is an ancestral trait from which internal feeding evolved independently several times. In terms of species number, saprophages are dominant in Australia, while elsewhere several phytophagous lineages have extensively specialized and diversified. Internal feeding has remained a somewhat less generally adopted feeding mode, although in a few lineages significant radiations of leaf mining species have occurred. We conclude that diverse feeding modes, specialization among saprophages, repeated shifts to phytophagy, and a generally high specialization rate on single plant species (monophagy) are the major factors behind the success of the Gelechioidea.

Morphology reinforces proposed molecular phylogenetic affinities: a revised classification for Gelechioidea (Lepidoptera)

Gelechioidea are one of the most species rich and least studied superfamilies of Lepidoptera. We examine the interrelationships within the superfamily using the densest taxon sampling to date, combined with the most extensive ever morphological and molecular character data. We perform partitioned and combined analyses using maximum likelihood, Bayesian and parsimony approaches. The combined dataset consists of 155 exemplar species of Gelechioidea, representing nearly all subfamilies recognized in recent classifications. Parsimony analyses are performed with a dataset including 28 additional terminal taxa with only morphological data available. We use eight genes with a total of 6127 bp, and morphological data with 253 characters derived from larval, pupal, and adult morphology. The analyses of combined data yield more resolved trees and significantly better‐supported groupings than either dataset when analysed alone. The recurrent monophyletic groupings in all our model‐based analyses support a revision of the family classification. Deeper relationships vary between analyses and data partitions, leaving them ambiguous. The place of the root remains a challenge for future research. We propose a revised classification and suggest the division of Gelechioidea into 16 families. We redefine Depressariidae Meyrick, 1883 for a monophylum that includes Acriinae, Aeolanthinae, Cryptolechiinae, Depressariinae, Ethmiinae, Hypercalliinae, Hypertrophinae, Peleopodinae, Oditinae, Stenomatinae, Carcina, and a diversity of predominantly New World taxa previously excluded from Lypusidae (Amphisbatidae s. authors) but left without family position. A monophyletic Oecophoridae s. s., including Deuterogoniinae and Pleurotinae, is obtained for the first time with significant support. Elachistidae s. l. is found to be polyphyletic, and Elachistidae is restricted to comprise Agonoxeninae, Elachistinae, and Parametriotinae. Batrachedridae are polyphyletic, with several genera pending further study. Apart from the core Batrachedra, the taxa previously included in this family are grouped in an expanded Pterolonchidae, together with Coelopoetinae and Syringopainae. Lypusidae s. s. and Chimabachidae form a monophylum; Chimabachinae is united with Lypusidae as a subfamily, stat. n. Our results contradict the subfamily classifications of several families, notably Lecithoceridae and Autostichidae, but due to insufficient sampling of taxa we refrain from comprehensive taxonomic conclusions on the subfamily level, and encourage focused studies to resolve these groups.