TreeBASE Search-Trees for study 640

@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref15220, author = {Rienk de Jong and R. I. Vane-Wright and P. R. Ackery}, title = {The higher classification of butterflies: problems and prospects.}, year = {1996}, keywords = {}, doi = {10.1163/187631296X00205}, url = {http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/brill/ise/1996/00000027/00000001/art00004}, pmid = {}, journal = {Entomologica Scandinavica}, volume = {27}, number = {1}, pages = {65--101}, abstract = {Progress in understanding the higher classification of butterflies has not kept pace with increase in the number of described species. Important points of uncertainty or contention include, apart from ranking problems, monophyly of Papilionoidea plus Hesperioidea, their relationship with other Lepidoptera in general and the Hedyloidea in particular, the question of the sister group of the Pieridae (either Papilionidae, or Lycaenidae + Nymphalidae), and the division of families into subfamilies. Traditional groupings are discussed and compared with the results of a cladistic analysis using 103 characters and 74 species (59 butterflies and 15 moths). The cladistic analysis supports a number of currently held views about butterfly classification, such as monophyly of five major family groupings (Hesperiidae, Papilionidae, Pieridae, Lycaenidae and Nymphalidae) and suggests sister group relationships between Papilionoidea and Hesperioidea, and Pieridae and (Lycaenidae + Nymphalidae). Most traditional subfamilies, however, are not supported on the basis of the data set used but the Riodininae, which always appeared as a monophyletic, subordinate group within the Lycaenidae, are a notable exception. Further, the analysis suggests that, contrary to traditional ideas, the Parnassiinae, not Baroniinae, are sister to the remainder of the Papilionidae, Pseudopontiinae are internal to (Pierinae + Coliadinae), Dismorphiinae are sister to all other Pieridae, and that Liptena, Poritia and Miletus represent the closest relatives of the Riodininae. The data set is not well suited for an assessment of the position of the butterflies amongst other Lepidoptera. Nevertheless, of the moths used, Macrosoma (Hedylidae, Hedyloidea) and Urania (Uraniidae, Geometroidea) appear to be the closest relatives of the butterflies. With regard to the higher classification of the butterflies many problems thus remain, and several ways to tackle these are discussed. The need for some form of international co-operation between fieldworkers, comparative morphologists and molecular systematists is stressed.} }

Delicious

Connotea

Trees for Study 640

Citation title: "The higher classification of butterflies: problems and prospects.".

This study was previously identified under the legacy study ID S471 (Status: Published).

Trees

ID	Tree Label	Tree Title	Tree Type	Tree Kind	Taxa
Tr1147	Fig. 15	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1145	Fig. 13	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1148	Fig. 16	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1143	Fig. 10	Lepidoptera	Consensus	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1154	Fig. 11	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1142	Fig. 8	Lepidoptera	Consensus	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1150	Fig. 18	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1144	Fig. 12	Lepidoptera	Consensus	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1140	Fig. 6b	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1151	Fig. 7a	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1138	Fig. 4	Lepidoptera	Consensus	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1146	Fig. 14	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1139	Fig. 5	Lepidoptera	Consensus	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1141	Fig. 6a	Lepidoptera	Consensus	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1153	Fig. 9	Lepidoptera	Consensus	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1152	Fig. 7b	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa
Tr1149	Fig. 17	Lepidoptera	Single	Species Tree	View Taxa