Soral synapomorphies are significant for the systematics of the Ustilago-Sporisorium-Macalpinomyces complex (Ustilaginaceae)

The genera Ustilago, Sporisorium and Macalpinomyces are a polyphyletic complex of plant pathogenic fungi. The four main morphological characters used to define these genera have been considered homoplasious and not useful for resolving the complex. This study re-evaluates character homology and discusses the use of these characters for defining monophyletic groups recovered from a reconstructed phylogeny using four nuclear loci. Generic delimitation of smut fungi based on their hosts is also discussed as a means for identifying genera within this group. Morphological characters and host specificity can be used to circumscribe genera within the Ustilago-Sporisorium-Macalpinomyces complex.

Multi-gene phylogenetic analysis of south-east Asian pest members of the Bactrocera dorsalis species complex (Diptera: Tephritidae) does not support current taxonomy

Bactrocera dorsalis sensu stricto, B. papayae, B. philippinensis and B. carambolae are serious pest fruit fly species of the B. dorsalis complex that predominantly occur in south-east Asia and the Pacific. Identifying molecular diagnostics has proven problematic for these four taxa, a situation that cofounds biosecurity and quarantine efforts and which may be the result of at least some of these taxa representing the same biological species. We therefore conducted a phylogenetic study of these four species (and closely related outgroup taxa) based on the individuals collected from a wide geographic range; sequencing six loci (cox1, nad4-3′, CAD, period, ITS1, ITS2) for approximately 20 individuals from each of 16 sample sites. Data were analysed within maximum likelihood and Bayesian phylogenetic frameworks for individual loci and concatenated data sets for which we applied multiple monophyly and species delimitation tests. Species monophyly was measured by clade support, posterior probability or bootstrap resampling for Bayesian and likelihood analyses respectively, Rosenberg's reciprocal monophyly measure, P(AB), Rodrigo's (P(RD)) and the genealogical sorting index, gsi. We specifically tested whether there was phylogenetic support for the four 'ingroup' pest species using a data set of multiple individuals sampled from a number of populations. Based on our combined data set, Bactrocera carambolae emerges as a distinct monophyletic clade, whereas B. dorsalis s.s., B. papayae and B. philippinensis are unresolved. These data add to the growing body of evidence that B. dorsalis s.s., B. papayae and B. philippinensis are the same biological species, which poses consequences for quarantine, trade and pest management.

Variation in leaf morphology of the invasive cat's claw creeper Dolichandra unguis-cati (Bignoniaceae)

The invasive liana cat’s claw creeper Dolichandra unguis-cati (L.) L.G. Lohmann (syn. Macfadyena unguis-cati (L.) A.H. Gentry) exhibits intraspecific variation in leaf morphology, but this is rarely noted in the published literature. The present study documents variation in leaf morphology in two forms of the species that occur in Australia (long pod and short pod). Leaf morphology is compared between the two forms and the position of the shoots (trunk and ground) at the only two sites in which they co-occur. Leaves were categorised on the basis of leaflet number and the presence or absence of tendrils. Simple leaves were produced mainly on shoots growing along the ground and were more abundant in the short-pod form. Long-pod plants were dominated by bifoliate leaves with tendrils. Cat’s claw creeper exhibits considerably wider variation in leaf morphology than recorded previously. Variations in leaf morphology may be linked to differences in the genotype, developmental stage and plastic responses of the plants. Understanding these variations may have implications for taxonomic delimitation and improved management, particularly biological control involving leaf-feeding insects.

One and the same: Integrative taxonomic evidence that Bactrocera invadens (Diptera: Tephritidae) is the same species as the Oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis

The invasive fruit fly Bactrocera invadens Drew, Tsuruta & White, and the Oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) are highly destructive horticultural pests of global significance. Bactrocera invadens originates from the Indian subcontinent and has recently invaded all of sub-Saharan Africa, while B. dorsalis principally occurs from the Indian subcontinent towards southern China and South-east Asia. High morphological and genetic similarity has cast doubt over whether B. invadens is a distinct species from B. dorsalis. Addressing this issue within an integrative taxonomic framework, we sampled from across the geographic distribution of both taxa and: (i) analysed morphological variation, including those characters considered diagnostic (scutum colour, length of aedeagus, width of postsutural lateral vittae, wing size, and wing shape); (ii) sequenced four loci (ITS1, ITS2, cox1 and nad4) for phylogenetic inference, and; (iii) generated a cox1 haplotype network to examine population structure. Molecular analyses included the closely related species, Bactrocera kandiensis Drew & Hancock. Scutum colour varies from red-brown to fully black for individuals from Africa and the Indian subcontinent. All individuals east of the Indian subcontinent are black except for a few red-brown individuals from China. The postsutural lateral vittae width of B. invadens is narrower than B. dorsalis from eastern Asia, but the variation is clinal, with subcontinent B. dorsalis populations intermediate in size. Aedeagus length, wing shape and wing size cannot discriminate between the two taxa. Phylogenetic analyses failed to resolve B. invadens from B. dorsalis, but did resolve B. kandiensis. Bactrocera dorsalis and B. invadens shared cox1 haplotypes, yet the haplotype network pattern does not reflect current taxonomy or patterns in thoracic colour. Some individuals of B. dorsalis/B. invadens possessed haplotypes more closely related to B. kandiensis than to conspecifics, suggestive of mitochondrial introgression between these species. The combined evidence fails to support the delimitation of B. dorsalis and B. invadens as separate biological species. Consequently, existing biological data for B. dorsalis may be applied to the invasive population in Africa. Our recommendation, in line with other recent publications, is that B. invadens be synonymized with B. dorsalis.

The complexities of knowing what it is you are trapping

The effectiveness of any trapping system is highly dependent on the ability to accurately identify the specimens collected. For many fruit fly species, accurate identification (= diagnostics) using morphological or molecular techniques is relatively straightforward and poses few technical challenges. However, nearly all genera of pest tephritids also contain groups of species where single, stand-alone tools are not sufficient for accurate identification: such groups include the Bactrocera dorsalis complex, the Anastrepha fraterculus complex and the Ceratitis FAR complex. Misidentification of high-impact species from such groups can have dramatic consequences and negate the benefits of an otherwise effective trapping program. To help prevent such problems, this chapter defines what is meant by a species complex and describes in detail how the correct identification of species within a complex requires the use of an integrative taxonomic approach. Integrative taxonomy uses multiple, independent lines of evidence to delimit species boundaries, and the underpinnings of this approach from both the theoretical speciation literature and the systematics/taxonomy literature are described. The strength of the integrative approach lies in the explicit testing of hypotheses and the use of multiple, independent species delimitation tools. A case is made for a core set of species delimitation tools (pre- and post-zygotic compatibility tests, multi-locus phylogenetic analysis, chemoecological studies, and morphometric and geometric morphometric analyses) to be adopted as standards by tephritologists aiming to resolve economically important species complexes. In discussing the integrative approach, emphasis is placed on the subtle but important differences between integrative and iterative taxonomy. The chapter finishes with a case study that illustrates how iterative taxonomy applied to the B. dorsalis species complex led to incorrect taxonomic conclusions, which has had major implications for quarantine, trade, and horticultural pest management. In contrast, an integrative approach to the problem has resolved species limits in this taxonomically difficult group, meaning that robust diagnostics are now available.