Next Article in Journal
Alien Invasive Plant Effect on Soil Fauna Is Habitat Dependent
Next Article in Special Issue
Fine-Tuned Ecological Niche Models Unveil Climatic Suitability and Association with Vegetation Groups for Selected Chaetocnema Species in South Africa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)
Previous Article in Journal
Indication of Possible Shifts in Copepod Species Composition in St. Pauls Inlet, a Fjordal Estuary Connected to the Gulf of St. Lawrence
Previous Article in Special Issue
Phylogenetic Placement of the Plesioclytini (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae: Cerambycinae)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 14
Issue 1
10.3390/d14010060
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Study on the Relationship between Richness and Morphological Diversity of Higher Taxa in the Darkling Beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae)

by
Liangxue Cheng
1,
Yijie Tong
2,
Yuchen Zhao
1,
Zhibin Sun
3,
Xinpu Wang
1,*,
Fangzhou Ma
4,* and
Ming Bai
2,5,*
1
School of Agriculture, Ningxia University, Yinchuan 750021, China
2
Key Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Box 92, Beichen West Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100101, China
3
National Space Science Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences, NO.1 Nanertiao, Zhongguancun, Haidian District, Beijing 100190, China
4
National Key Laboratory of Environmental Protection and Biosafety, Nanjing Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Ecology and Environment, #8 Jiang-Wang-Miao-Jie, Xuanwu, Nanjing 210042, China
5
Hainan Yazhou Bay Seed Laboratory, Building 1, No.7 Yiju Road, Yazhou District, Sanya 572025, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2022, 14(1), 60; https://doi.org/10.3390/d14010060
Submission received: 17 December 2021 / Revised: 11 January 2022 / Accepted: 13 January 2022 / Published: 17 January 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diversity and Evolution of Coleoptera)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Many studies have found that the correlation between species richness (SR) and morphological diversity (MD) is positive, but the correlation degree of these parameters is not always consistent due to differences in categories and various ecological factors in the living environment. Based on this, related studies have revealed the good performance of using higher taxa in biodiversity research, not only by shifting the testing group scale from local communities to worldwide datasets but also by adding different taxonomic levels, such as the genus level. However, it remains unclear whether this positive correlation can also be applied to other categories or groups. Here, we evaluated the applicability of higher taxa in the biodiversity study of darkling beetles by using 3407 species (9 subfamilies, 89 tribes, and 678 genera), based on the correlation between taxa richness and morphological diversity in the tribe/genus/species. In addition, the continuous features prevalent in the tenebrionids, pronotum and elytron, were selected, and the morphological diversity of various groups was obtained by the geometric morphometric approach to quantify the morphologic information of features. This study found that genus/species richness in subfamilies Pimelinae and Stenochiinae was positively correlated with the change trend of MD, and the correlation between the MD of elytron and taxa richness gradually decreased from the tribe-level to the genus-level to the species-level test. The results confirm the stable morphology and simple function of the elytron and the applicability of tribe level in biodiversity research.

1. Introduction

Species richness (SR), an important indicator to evaluate biodiversity, reflects the number of species in a community, geographic area, or evolutionary unit [1,2]; morphological diversity (MD) is also used as an indicator in biodiversity studies, reflecting biological evolution and ecosystem functions [1,3]. Many studies targeted at specific geographic populations have found a positive correlation between SR and MD [2,4,5,6,7]. Neustupa investigated the species diversity and morphological disparity of benthic Desmidiales in Central European peatland pools and found that they were highly correlated [7]; Bell investigated the species diversity, richness, and morphological diversity of sponges that experienced different water flow conditions at Lough Hyne Marine Nature Reserve (Ireland), found that MD was significantly positively correlated with both species diversity and richness, and confirmed that it could be used as a qualitative predictor of species diversity and richness of sponges [4]. However, geographic populations are often affected by factors such as the environment and ecological niche of sample sites, leading to unstable relationships between biodiversity parameters, and some studies have found that the positive correlation between SR and MD is not applicable in all cases. By comparing the patterns of richness and morphodiversity of the genus Porites in the Pacific, Mohedano-Navarrete found that the relationship between SR and MD showed a logarithmic curve that tended to be asymptotic and nonlinear because of the saturation of niche availability and species boundaries [3]. Zhang evaluated the MD of the pronotum and elytron of 1303 stag beetles and found that the correlation between SR and MD was unstable in different test groups [8]. In addition, Foote found no correlation between the SR and MD of trilobites when comparing the morphological and taxonomic diversity of Blastoidea and Trilobita, as well as within the trilobite branch Libristoma, Asaphina, Proetida, Phacopida, and Scutelluina [9]. In recent years, studies on species biodiversity have gradually expanded from regional geographic populations to continent-level datasets in order to obtain more objective information by adding more diverse ecological factors and large-scale test indicators. Mindel analyzed the indicators of functional richness and divergence of benthic fish in the northeast Atlantic based on external morphological traits and found that the diversity indices were not always highly correlated by comparing the above indicators with the size diversity based on the individual body size and richness of the species [10]. Tong evaluated the relationship between genus/species-level richness and MD by using a worldwide dataset of jewel beetles and found that MD was positively correlated with genus richness but not significantly correlated with species-level richness, revealing the superiority of higher taxa in biodiversity [2]. However, the applicability of other higher taxonomic levels in biodiversity research has not been studied, and it remains unclear whether this positive correlation is always apparent in other groups.
Tenebrionidae, also known as darkling beetles, has about 2300 genera and 20,000 species all over the world, mainly in tropical, subtropical, and temperate regions and especially in equatorial regions [11,12,13]. The wide distribution, diverse habitats, and complex life history of darkling beetles allow this group to adapt to almost all biogeographical regions [12,14,15,16,17,18]. Their complex habitat in the process of evolution has also created the diverse external form of this population and has made this group an ideal research object of ecology and biogeography [19,20]. The pronotum, a common morphological feature of Coleoptera, connects the head with the mesothorax, which not only provides protection for the pterothorax but also plays an important role in the movement of the prothorax muscular system and the prothoracic legs. The elytron is a hard structure formed by highly specialized forewings that can protect the membranous hindwings and abdomen in addition to its flight function [21,22,23,24]. The rich ecological position and complex behavior of the tenebrionid make these two features become more important in their morphological evolution. Most studies focus on the taxonomy, molecular phylogeny, and biogeography of specific groups or geographic populations in Tenebrionidae [15,16,20,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]: Based on the phylogenetic analysis of abdominal terminalia and buccal apparatus, Aloquio revealed that the subfamily Diaperinae was polyphyletic, and the Nilioninae, which was once a tribe of Diaperinae, had been shown to be associated closely to Diaperini [34]; Kegoat analyzed the evolutionary history of 8 gene segments in 404 taxa of Tenebrionidae by using a variety of phylogenetic analysis methods, which strongly supported the monophyly of Tenebrionidae and highlighted that some important subfamilies and tribes may be paraphyletic or polygeneic, such as the subfamilies Diaperinae and Tenebrioninae. In addition, all of his phylogenetic analyses tend to support the traditional view that the family Tenebrionidae consists of three main lineages: the branches of ‘Lagrioid’, ‘Pimelioid’ and ‘Tenebrionoid’ [35,36,37]. While few studies pay attention to their biodiversity [2,8], the expression of higher taxa in biodiversity consisting of the phylogenetic results of this group is not yet clear. In this study, morphological information of test features was quantified by geometric morphometrics, and the MD index was obtained for comparison between taxa for more objective comparability of test features. By using the number of tribes/genera/species in each living subfamily as the richness standard based on the worldwide Tenebrionidae dataset, the continuous features (pronotum and elytron) common to each tenebrionid group were selected to analyze the relationship between MD and SR and show whether the test parameters have consistent change rules and positive correlations among different higher taxa.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Samples Collection and Arrangement

In this study, standard dorsal view images of each subfamily of Tenebrionidae were used as test samples to construct a dataset, including 3407 species of darkling beetles covering 9 subfamilies (100% of the described subfamilies around the world), 89 tribes (93% of the described tribes), and 678 genera (Table 1). The continuous features, pronotum and elytron, were selected to evaluate the morphological diversity [38,39], and their morphological information in standard dorsal view was extracted based on geometric morphometrics. In addition, Nilioninae and Zolodininae, which have no tribe category, were tested as independent groups with other tribes in the tribe-level analysis [40].
The sample images used in the analysis were collected from the beetle collection at the National Zoological Museum of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and published monographs and literature [11,17,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130], as well as taxonomic databases [131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148].

2.2. Richness Values and Morphological Diversity

In this study, a certain proportion of tribes (93% of the world’s described tribes), genera (29% of the world’s described genera), and species (17% of the world’s described species) in each subfamily of Tenebrionidae were sampled for more objective analysis, and the number of samples in each test taxon was used as the richness value of the group (Table 1 and Table 2) [11].
Geometric morphometrics were used to quantify the morphological information of the pronotum and elytron, according to the selection principles of homology, adequate representativeness, consistency of relative position, coplanarity, and repeatability [149]. The default shape of pronotum and elytron was symmetrical, and one contour curve was extracted from the left external contour of each (Figure 1A). The outer contour curve (curve 1) of the pronotum starts at the midpoint of the anterior margin and ends at the midpoint of the posterior margin; the outer contour curve of the elytron (curve 2) starts from the junction of the end of the scutellum and the leading edge of elytron and stops at the end of elytron (Figure 1B). Based on Tps-Dig (version 2.05) software, the shape information was digitized, and the outer contour curves of the test features were equally divided into 25 and 50 semi-landmarks with the same spacing to represent the morphological information of the test site [150]. We used Tps-Small (version 1.2) [151] to test whether the observed variation in shape was sufficiently small that the distribution of points in the tangent space can be used as a good approximation of their distribution in shape space. Based on Morpho J 1.06a software, Procrustes variance was used to remove the non-shape differences caused by size, direction, and position by scaling, overlaying, and rotating the feature semi-landmark set of each test sample [152]. The variation trend of topological patterns formed by test features in geometric space was used to show the variation of morphological information (Figure 2) [2,153] through principal component analysis (PCA) in Morpho J (version1.06a) (Table 2, Figure 3) [154].
Using SPSS Statistics (version 26) [155], Spearman correlation coefficient (single-tail) analysis was performed to analyze the correlation between morphological diversity and taxa richness at the level of tribe/genus/species (Table 3, Figure 4A). In addition, the changes in correlation between the test parameters in the pronotum and elytron were compared by regression analysis, and the applicability of morphological information of different features to biodiversity research was evaluated (Figure 4B).

3. Results

3.1. Morphological Variation of the Pronotum and Elytron

According to principal component analysis, the first three principal components (PCs) of the pronotum and elytron accounted for 91.122 and 92.154% of the morphological variation, respectively (Figure 2). For the deformation of the pronotum, along the positive direction of the first PC axis, the anterior and posterior margins obviously contract horizontally inward, the lateral margin expands outward, the base is nearly straight, and the overall contour is nearly rectangular; along the positive direction of the second PC axis, the anterior margin spreads obliquely outward, the lateral margin contracts inward, the posterior angle is obviously prominent, and the overall outline is nearly trapezoidal; along the positive direction of the third PC axis, the anterior margin shrinks inward, while the anterior and posterior angles expand outward, the deformation trend of the posterior angle is particularly obvious, and the lateral margin shrinks inward longitudinally and nearly straight, while the posterior margin shrinks inwardly, making the overall contour approximately square.
For the deformation of the elytron, along the positive direction of the first PC axis, the anterior margin shrinks inward, the anterior angle protrudes, the lateral margin expands in an arc from the middle forward, the elytron base shrinks inward, the elytron ends slightly protrude, the overall outline of the first half is broad, and from the middle to the end it narrows; along the positive direction of the second PC axis, the anterior margin expands outward, the anterior angle shrinks inward, the shape variation is not obvious, the middle of the lateral margin expands outward and uplifts, the elytron base shrinks inward, and the overall contours become slightly wider; along the positive direction of the third PC axis, the anterior margin and front of the lateral margin of the elytron shrink inward though not obviously, the lateral margin back end expands outward, the elytron base significantly shrinks inward, and the overall profile is nearly parallel on both sides.

3.2. Taxa Richness and Morphological Diversity of Test Subfamilies

Analyses of the dataset using Tps-Small were performed to assess whether the amount of test shape variation in our dataset is small enough to justify the use of standard multivariate statistical methods in the tangent space. The correlation (uncentred) between the tangent space, Y, regressed onto the Procrustes distance (geodesic distances in radians) was 0.999935/0.999998 for the pronotum test and elyron group, respectively. There is little doubt on the basis of the results from Tps-Small, which supported the hypothesis that the prontum and elytron based on subfamily-level dataset can be analyzed by geometric morphometric methods since the results from the statistical test performed by Tps-Small proved the acceptability of the dataset for further statistical analysis [156,157].
In this study, the relationship between the taxa richness and morphological diversity of each tested subfamily was not consistent. First, the genus/species richness of Pimeliinae and Stenochiinae (215/835 and 73/375) was higher than other subfamilies except Tenebrioninae (220/1198) (Table 1). Diaperinae showed the highest morphological diversity for pronotum (0.0295) and elytron (0.0066), and Pimeliinae (0.0267/0.0051) and Stenochiinae (0.0171/0.0042) also had relative high MD (Table 2). Among these subfamilies, Pimeliinae showed the highest tribe richness (33), followed by Tenebrioninae and Diaperinae (29/10), and Stenochiinae had the lowest (3). Second, the tribe/genus/species richness of Lagriinae (9/62/357) was higher than that of Alleculinae (2/54/317), but the morphological diversity of its pronotum was the opposite (0.0100/0.0111) (Figure 3). Phrenapatinae, Nilioninae, and Zolodininae had low tribe/genus/species richness (8/16 and 2/2), but the morphological diversity of the pronotum of Nilioninae (0.0130) and the elytron of Zolodininae and Phrenapatinae was not very low (0.0036/0.0026). Third, Tenebrioninae had high tribe/genus/species richness (29/220/1198), but the morphological diversity of the pronotum and elytron was within the average range for all subfamilies tested (0.0124/0.0041). Diaperinae had the highest species diversity index (0.0295/0.0066) but not the highest tribe/genus/species richness (13/43/286).
Diaperinae, Pimeliinae, and Stenochiinae were found to have high morphological diversity of pronotum (0.0295/0.0267/0.0171) and elytron (0.0066/0.0051/0.0042) (Table 2). However, the relationship between pronotum and elytron in the same taxonomic taxa was found to be not invariable: The subfamilies Tenebrioninae, Lagriinae, Zolodininae, and Phrenapatinae had lower MD of pronotum (0.0124/0.0100/0.0046/0.0074) than those in the elytron test (0.0041/0.0039/0.0036/0.0026); the morphological diversity of the pronotum of Nilioninae and Alleculinae (0.0130/0.0111) was higher than that of the elytron (0.0014/0.0019).

3.3. Correlation Analysis of Test Subfamilies

Spearman correlation analysis was conducted on the biodiversity index of the test taxa, and the relationship between the richness (each tribe/genus/species in the subfamily) and the morphological diversity of the test features was obtained (Table 3). First, the correlation between the morphological diversity of elytron and the richness of tribe/genus/species (0.782/0.600/0.571) was found to be higher than that in the pronotum test (0.521/0.350/0.500); second, there was a significant correlation between the morphological diversity of elytron and the richness of tribe/genus (p = 0.006/0.044). In addition, regression analysis of test parameters was carried out based on ordinary least square (OLS), and a scatterplot containing six best-fit lines was obtained (Figure 4A). The intercept value of test groups on the X-axis of the fitting line was more chaotic in the elytron test results, and the intercept value of test groups on the Y-axis was more concentrated in the pronotum test results; the slope of the tribe-level test was higher than both the genus-level and species-level test. Furthermore, in the morphological space consisting of the diversity of elytron morphology and pronotum, Alleculinae, Diaperinae, Phrenapatinae, Pimelinae, Stenochiinae, and Tenebrioninae are concentrated on both sides of the fitting line (Figure 4B), and Zolodininae, Lagriinae, and Nilioninae subfamilies are dispersed around the fitting line.

4. Discussion

Based on the dataset of darkling beetles, we explored the correlation between the morphological diversity and taxa richness of the tribes/genera/species in each subfamily and found that the correlation between the richness of the genus/species and the morphological diversity of test features in the test of specific groups was positive; the correlation between test parameters in other subfamilies was found to be inconsistent. According to the results of the pronotum and elytron tests, we found that the correlation between test parameters decreased as the order decreased from tribe to species, and the correlation between MD and taxa richness was higher in the elytron test than the pronotum test.
Taxonomic richness and morphological diversity are often used to evaluate the degree of biological diversity, and their importance as a basis for further understanding the development of taxa has been confirmed [9,158]. In this study, we found that the richness of genus/species level Pimeliinae and Stenochiinae was positively correlated with the variation trend of morphological diversity of test features, which was consistent with previous findings [2]. However, correlations between test parameters were not consistent in other subfamilies of Tenebrionidae, such as Tenebrioninae, which is highly abundant, accounting for about one-third of the whole test dataset but show low morphological diversity in the test. This may be because of three aspects: First, according to the classical niche theory, because regional communities are mainly formed by interactions between species (e.g., the principle of competitive exclusion and limit similarity) [159], there will be higher competition in the same habitat, which will differentiate into more distinct levels or regional niches [160,161,162,163,164,165]. For example, most members of Diaperinae (e.g., Diaperini, Gnathidiini, and Hypophlaeini) live in forests with moderate humidity, except some tribes which live in arid places such as sandy areas or beaches (e.g., Crypticini, Hyociini, Phaleriini, Ectychini, and Trachyscelini) [11,123]. Second, the influence of interspecific competition pressure driving organisms produces different external forms for better use of the surrounding resources (such as food and habitat) in their process of evolution [166,167,168]. This competitive pressure causes organisms to change their existing form in order to meet similar functional requirements, and they become diversified [169,170]; for example, Diaperinae had the most varied forms but relatively low richness in this study. Third, the adaptive evolution of darkling beetles is closely related to their functional morphology, and the multiple origins of external that morphological features evolved in various environments make the test results more complex. Some members of Tenebrionidae live in desert and semi-desert areas, where the harsh environment leads to adaptive changes in structure and function, with many of the morphological variations resulting in certain functional preservation [43,171,172,173,174].
The correlation between morphological and functional diversity explains the differences among taxa to some extent in this study [175]. For instance, Tenebrioninae, Pimeliinae, and Lagriinae, typical species with healing of elytron, are rich in species diversity. In order to make better use of the surrounding environmental resources, darkling beetles living in different ecological environments evolved diverse eating habits, resulting in a more complex mechanism of biodiversity. In studies of muscular and skeletal versatility in shrews, researchers found that diverse foraging habits and morphologies produce similar functional outputs, leading to ecological convergence between populations and a link between diverse morphological features [169,170]. As typical omnivorous animals, tenebrionid beetles consume various foods, including fresh or withered plants, animal carcasses, feces, and humus. For example, the beetles of Blaptini and Opatrini are generally phytophagous, feeding on the roots, leaves, flowers, and fruits of fresh or withered plants, and a few Blaptini insects prey on small insects [176]. This single foraging form makes this group very species abundant but with a low degree of morphological variation. However, the beetles of genus Diaperis under the Diaperini tribe live on the fruiting bodies of fungi, the arboreal Ceropria species mostly live under the bark of dead and rotting trees and feed on rotting trees infected by fungi, and warehouse-dwelling species often feed on damp, mildewed, and fungus-infected grains and have a wide diet [98]. Although the richness of these taxa in this study was not high, they had the highest morphological diversity.
Higher taxa are biological entities that are relatively easy to identify, and the origin of a new higher taxon has a long-term phylogenetic trend, involving the evolutionary changes of a large number of features [177,178]. The significance of higher taxa in the study of biodiversity patterns has been confirmed [179], and a strong correlation between the higher taxa and species composition of Coleoptera has also been revealed [180]. In this study, we also confirmed that the higher taxa have better applicability in biodiversity studies. Based on the morphological information of elytron, it was found that the correlation between taxa richness and morphological diversity was higher at the tribe level than at the genus or species level. However, this conclusion was not verified in the pronotum test. The correlation between the morphological diversity and genus richness of the pronotum was lower than the test results at the species level, while the correlation between tribe richness and morphological diversity was similar to that at the species level, which does not reflect the superiority of the higher taxa in biodiversity research. In addition, the study found that although the morphological diversity of elytron in all subfamilies was not as high compared to pronotum, the correlation between the morphological diversity of elytron and the richness of each taxon was higher. This may be due to the fact that the varied morphology of pronotum is affected by the darkling beetle’s feeding behavior and living environment, and this speculation has also been confirmed in biological studies. Manseguiao found that different environmental conditions lead to different shapes of the pronotum of Philippines reichei between populations, which is important in defense against predators, parasite resistance, resource utilization, and competitiveness [24]. Taravati found that the gradient of environmental conditions leads to changes in the gradient of the pronotum of Eliodontes sp. [181]. Dela found that the nutrition of rice black bug resulted in a difference in the morphology of the pronotum [182]. The darkling beetles’ pronotum provides mechanical protection, mimicry, and the exchange of visual signals with the same clan [24,183], and its internal muscles are also related to flight and movement [184,185], which enables it to adapt to diverse habitats. The variation of taxonomic morphology and feeding behavior under different habitats conditions is inconsistent, thus affecting the functional morphological development of the pronotum, so the diversity of ecological niches leads to the formation of the darkling beetles pronotum affected by more factors, which makes the variation more complex and unstable. The elytron can protect soft tissues on the notum of beetles and assist in flight and can heal and form sub-elytral cavities on the dorsal side of the abdomen in most Tenebrionidae [173,174]. With its stable morphology and simple function, elytron is more suitable for expressing the biodiversity of taxa.

5. Conclusions

Our study confirmed the applicability of higher categories in biodiversity research. We found positive correlations between the richness of the genus/species and the morphological diversity of the test features in the test of specific groups, and the correlation between test parameters decreased as the order decreased from tribe to species. However, during the experiment, we only controlled the coverage of the total sample, and only one image was collected for each species, which limited the objective to a certain extent. Therefore, more test features (such as foot and body color of darkling beetles) and a balanced sample size should be set to further explore the impact factors when objectively testing the relationships between biological indicators.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.B. and X.W.; methodology, M.B. and Y.T.; sample collection, L.C. and Y.T.; sample identification and sorting, L.C. and Y.Z.; data analysis and processing, L.C. and Y.T.; writing—original draft, L.C.; writing—review and editing, Y.T., Z.S., F.M. and M.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Science & Technology Fundamental Resources Investigation Program of China (Grant Nos. 2019FY100400, 2019FY101800), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31961143002), the Bureau of International Cooperation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, GDAS Special Project of Science and Technology Development (Nos. 2020GDASYL-20200102021, 2020GDASYL-20200301003), the Second Tibetan Plateau Scientific Expedition and Research Program (STEP), Grant No. 2019QZKK05010101, and a project from Hainan Yazhou Bay Seed Lab (No. B21HJ0102).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in article.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Guodong Ren and Xingke Yang for the discussion and advices. We are also grateful to Yandong Chen for his photos of Catapiestus sp. (Tenebrionidae, Stenochiinae, Cnodalonini) specimens for Figure 1.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Li, Z.; Colinet, G.; Zu, Y.; Wang, J.; An, L.; Li, Q.; Niu, X. Species diversity of Arabis alpina L. communities in two Pb/Zn mining areas with different smelting history in Yunnan Province, China. Chemosphere 2019, 233, 603–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Tong, Y.; Yang, H.; Yang, X.; Bai, M. The relationship between genus/species richness and morphological diversity among subfamilies of jewel beetles. Insects 2021, 12, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Mohedano-Navarrete, A.; Reyes-Bonilla, H.; López-Pérez, R. Species richness and morphological diversity of the genus Porites in the Pacific Ocean. In Proceedings of the 11th International Coral Reef Symposium, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA, 7–11 July 2008; pp. 7–11. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bell, J.; Barnes, D. Sponge morphological diversity: A qualitative predictor of species diversity? Aquat. Conserv. 2001, 11, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Gerovasileiou, V.; Voultsiadou, E. Sponge diversity gradients in marine caves of the eastern Mediterranean. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. UK 2015, 96, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Silva, R.; Brandão, C. Ecosystem-wide morphological structure of leaf-litter ant communities along a tropical latitudinal gradient. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e93049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Neustupa, J.; Erná, K.; T’astn, J. Diversity and morphological disparity of desmid assemblages in Central European peatlands. Hydrobiologia 2008, 630, 243–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Zhang, M.; Ruan, Y.; Wan, X.; Tong, Y.; Yang, X.; Bai, M. Geometric morphometric analysis of the pronotum and elytron in stag beetles: Insight into its diversity and evolution. ZooKeys 2019, 833, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Foote, M. Discordance and concordance between morphological and taxonomic diversity. Paleobiology 1993, 19, 185–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Mindel, B.; Neat, F.; Trueman, C.; Webb, T.; Blanchard, J. Functional, size and taxonomic diversity of fish along a depth gradient in the deep sea. Peer J 2016, 4, e2387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Matthews, E.; Lawrence, J.; Bouchard, P.; Steiner, W.; Slipinski, A. 11.14. Tenebrionidae Latreille, 1802. In Volume 2 Morphology and Systematics (Elateroidea, Bostrichiformia, Cucujiformia partim); De Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2011; pp. 574–659. [Google Scholar]
  12. Yunlong, W. Species Diversity of Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera) in the North Luo-River Basin. Master’s Thesis, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an, China, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  13. Guodong, R.; Youzhi, Y. Tenebrionidae from the Arid and Semi-Arid Region of China; Hebei University Press: Baoding, China, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zelditch, M.L.; Fink, W.L.; Swiderski, D.L. Morphometrics, homology, and phylogenetics: Quantified characters as synapomorphies. Syst. Biol. 1995, 44, 179–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Banaszkiewicz, M. Comparative study of female genitalia in Pedinini (sensu Iwan 2004) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Pedinini), with notes on the classification. Ann. Zool. 2006, 56, 59–77. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kamiński, M.J.; Kanda, K.; Lumen, R.; Smith, A.; Iwan, D. Molecular phylogeny of Pedinini (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) and its implications for higher-level classification. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 2019, 185, 77–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Juntong, L. Fauna Formation and Adaptive Evolution of the Darkling Beetles on Hainan Island. Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  18. Ye, L. “Fake” Carabid beetle—Darkling beetle. Knowl. Is Power 2009, 2, 10–13. [Google Scholar]
  19. Fattorini, S. Conservation biogeography of Tenebrionid beetles: Insights from Italian Reserves. Diversity 2020, 12, 348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Fattorini, S. Biogeography of the tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) on the Aegean Islands (Greece). J. Biogeogr. 2002, 29, 49–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Chapman, R.F.; Simpson, S.J.; Douglas, A.E. The Insects: Structure and Function, 5th ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2013; pp. 149–230. [Google Scholar]
  22. Frantsevich, L.; Dai, Z.; Wang, W.Y.; Zhang, Y. Geometry of elytra opening and closing in some beetles (Coleoptera, Polyphaga). J. Exp. Biol. 2005, 208, 3145–3158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Vonk, J.; Shackelford, T. Encyclopedia of Animal Cognition and Behavior; Springer International Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 920–926. [Google Scholar]
  24. Manseguiao, M.R.; Manseguiao, S.; Demayo, C. Morphological variations on the pronotum of the Hispid beetle P. reichei from eight Mindanao populations. Adv. Environ. Biol. 2015, 9, 46–55. [Google Scholar]
  25. Bunalski, M.; Ghahari, H. Contribution to the study of darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) from Golestan Province, Northern Iran. Wiadomości. Entomol. 2017, 36, 25–31. [Google Scholar]
  26. Fattorini, S.; Dapporto, L.; Strona, G.; Borges, P.A.V. Calling for a new strategy to measure environmental (habitat) diversity in Island Biogeography: A case study of Mediterranean tenebrionids (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Fragm. Entomol. 2015, 47, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fattorini, S.; Monaco, R.L.; Giulio, A.D.; Ulrich, W. Latitudinal trends in body length distributions of European darkling beetles (Tenebrionidae). Acta Oecol. 2013, 53, 88–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Fattorini, S.; Ulrich, W. Drivers of species richness in European Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera). Acta Oecol. 2012, 43, 22–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Fattorini, S. Testing the latitudinal gradient: A narrow-scale analysis of tenebrionid richness (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) in the Aegean archipelago (Greece). Ital. J. Zool. 2006, 73, 203–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Giraldo, A.E.; Flores, G.E. Peruvian Tenebrionidae: A review of present knowledge and biodiversity. Ann. Zool. 2016, 66, 499–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kamiński, M.; Lumen, R.; Kanda, K.; Iwan, D.; Johnston, M.A.; Kergoat, G.; Bouchard, P.; Li, X.; Guo-dong, R.; Smith, A. Reevaluation of Blapimorpha and Opatrinae: Addressing a major phylogeny-classification gap in darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Blaptinae). Syst. Entomol. 2021, 46, 140–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mas-Peinado, P.; Buckley, D.; Ruiz, J.; García-París, M. Recurrent diversification patterns and taxonomic complexity in morphologically conservative ancient lineages of Pimelia (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Syst. Entomol. 2018, 43, 522–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Soldati, L.; Condamine, F.L.; Clamens, A.L.; Kergoat, G.J. Documenting tenebrionid diversity: Progress on Blaps Fabricius (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Tenebrioninae, Blaptini) systematics, with the description of five new species. Eur. J. Taxon. 2017, 282, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Junior, A.; Zucateli, S. Systematics and Phylogeny of Diaperinae (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae); Universidade Federal de Viçosa: Viçosa, Brazil, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  35. Kergoat, G.J.; Soldati, L.; Clamens, A.L.; Jourdan, H.; Jabbour-Zahab, R.; Genson, G.; Bouchard, P.; Condamine, F.L. Higher level molecular phylogeny of darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Syst. Entomol. 2014, 39, 486–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Aalbu, R.L.; Triplehorn, C.A.; Campbell, J.M.; Brown, K.W.; Somerby, R.E.; Thomas, D.B. Tenebrionidae Latreille. In American Beetles, Vol. 2. Polyphaga: Scarabaeoidea through Curculionoidea; Ross, H., Arnett, M.C., Thomas, P.E., Skelley, J., Howard, F., Eds.; CRC Press: New York, NY, USA, 2002; pp. 463–509. [Google Scholar]
  37. McCormack, J.E.; Hird, S.M.; Zellmer, A.J.; Carstens, B.C.; Brumfield, R.T. 11.14. Tenebrionidae Latreille, 1802. In Handbook of zoology. A Natural History of the Phyla of the Animal Kingdom, Vol. IV—Arthropoda: Insecta. Part 38. Coleoptera, Beetles, Vol. 2: Systematics (Part 2); Leschen, R.A.B., Beutel, R.G., John, J.F.L., Eds.; Walter de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany, 2010; pp. 574–659. [Google Scholar]
  38. Daly, H.V. Insect morphometrics. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1985, 30, 415–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Yan, B.R.; Hua, B.Z. Geometric morphometrics and its application in the systematics and phylogenetics of insects. Entomotaxonomia 2010, 32, 313–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bouchard, P.; Bousquet, Y.; Davies, A.; Alonso-Zarazaga, M.; Lawrence, J.; Lyal, C.; Newton, A.; Reid, C.; Schmitt, M.; Slipinski, A.; et al. Family-Group Names In Coleoptera (Insecta). ZooKeys 2011, 88, 1–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Ren, G.D.; Jing, N.; Jia, L. A new species of the genus Cheirodes Gen-From Alxa plateau (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Melanimin). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2011, 36, 564–567. [Google Scholar]
  42. Ren, G.D. Six new species of the genus Uloma Gaoligong Mountain in China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2004, 29, 296–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yibin, B. Systematics of Pimeliinae and Its Distribution in China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  44. Haoyu, L. Fauna and Distribution of the Darkling Beetles in Qinghai-Xizang Plateau (Coleoptera: Tenebrionoidea). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  45. Yong, Z. Taxonomy of Lagriina from China (ColeoPtera, Lagriini). Ph.D. Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  46. Long, J. Fauna and Distribution of Tenebrionid Beetles in Alxa Plateau (Coleoptera: Tenebrionoidea). Ph.D. Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  47. Ping, L. A Preliminary Study on the Taxonomy of the Tribe Stenochiini from Hainan Island (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Ph.D. Thesis, Yanan University, Yan’an, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  48. Xiumin, L. Phylogenetic and Historical Biogeography of Partial Genera of the Tribe Blaptini from the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau. Ph.D. Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  49. Xue, L. Classification of Stored Products Darkling Beetles in China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  50. Li, L.; Yunzhen, L.; Aimin, S. A redescription of Bioramix aenescens (Blair, 1923) (Coleoptera: Tenbrionidae: Platyscelidini). J. Yunnan Agric. Univ. 2015, 30, 133–136. [Google Scholar]
  51. Xiaoli, L. Molecular Systematic Study on Partial Darkling Beetles Based on Sequences of Mitochondrial 16S rDNA and 18S rDNA. Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  52. Chuanxiong, N. Taxonomy of Cteniopinus from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Alleculinae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  53. Yan, W.; Xiaoning, L.; Ji, M. Pigmentation patterns on larval cephalic capsule of three desert beetles (Coleoptera: Tentyriini). Chin. J. Appl. Entomol. 2011, 48, 447–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Xiaoqing, Y.; Guodong, R. A new species of the genus Derispia Lewis from Hainan, China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Leiochrinini). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2011, 36, 571–573. [Google Scholar]
  55. Min, Z.; Ying, F.; Xiaoming, C.; Huanhong, J. Morphological and biological characteristics of Blaps rhynchopetera (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) J. Environ. Entomol. 2009, 31, 348–355. [Google Scholar]
  56. Xiaolin, Z.; Guodong, R. A new species of the genus Laena Dejean from Xizang, China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Lagriinae). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2011, 3, 568–570. [Google Scholar]
  57. Yu, Z. Faunistic and Geographic Distribution on Tenebrionid Beetles of the Ordos Plateau (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  58. Ming, B. Systematic Study of the Subfamily Alleculinae from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  59. Shanshan, L.; Guodong, R.; Jiashe, W. Three new species of the genus Uloma Dejean, 1821 from Wuyi Mountain in China with a new record (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Ulomini). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2007, 32, 70–75. [Google Scholar]
  60. Aloquio, S.; Lopes-Andrade, C. Redescription of immature stages and adults of Nilio (Nilio) brunneus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Nilioninae). Zoologia 2016, 33, e20150191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Ando, K.; Ruzzier, E. New species of Tenebrionidae Latreille, 1802 (Coleoptera: Tenebrionoidea) from the Philippines. Zootaxa 2016, 4175, 480–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Runraj, C.; Vineesh, P.; Sabu, T. Darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) of forest sites and agricultural fields in the south Western Ghats (South India). JIB 2017, 5, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Xing-long, B.; Guo-dong, R. Revision of the genus Bioramix Bates, 1879 (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Platyscelidini) from China. Zootaxa 2020, 4815, 1–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Xing-long, B.; Xiu-Min, L.; Guo-dong, R. A review of the genus Oodescelis Motschulsky, 1845 (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Platyscelidini) from China. Zootaxa 2019, 4656, 401–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bolaño, J.A.S.; Villero, J.M.B.; Puebla, P.B.d.l.; López-Colón, J.I. Aportación a la corología del género Prionychus Solier, 1835 (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae, Alleculinae) en Espaa y Marruecos. Boletín SEA 2010, 229–234. [Google Scholar]
  66. Bousquet, Y.; Thomas, D.; Bouchard, P.; Smith, A.; Aalbu, R.; Johnston, M.A.; Steiner, W. Catalogue of Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera) of North America. ZooKeys 2018, 728, 1–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Cid-Arcos, M.; Campodonico, J. Nueva especie de Psectrascelis Solier (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) de la Region del Maule, Chile. Rev. Chil. Entomol. 2017, 43, 55–60. [Google Scholar]
  68. Doyen, J.T. A new genus and four new species of Coelometopini from MesoAmerica (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Coleopts Bull. 1995, 49, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Liebherr, J. Fauna of New Zealand (Ko te Aitanga Pepeke o Aotearoa) No. 43, Carabidae (Insecta: Coleoptera): Catalogue. J. New York Entomol. Soc. 2002, 110, 260–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Bujalance, J.; Cárdenas, A.; Ferrer, J. The genus Tentyria (Latreille, 1802) in Doñana national park (Southern Iberian Peninsula) with descriptions of two new species (Insecta: Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Ann. Zool. 2016, 66, 345–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Ferrer, J.; Ødegaard, F. New species of darkling beetles from Central America with systematic notes (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Ann. Zool. 2005, 55, 633–661. [Google Scholar]
  72. Ferrer, J. The types of darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) described by Thunberg (1821, 1827) in "Coleoptera Capensia" and other papers, with taxonomic comments. Boletín SEA 2009, 44, 111–129. [Google Scholar]
  73. Witt, T. Das Weibchen von Anaea phoebe (Druce, 1877) (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae). Munich Entomol Ges Mitt 1968, 59, 32–34. [Google Scholar]
  74. Grimm, R. New and little known species of Tenebrionidae (Coleoptera) from Borneo (6). Stuttgarter Beiträge Zur Nat. A 2016, 9, 185–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  75. Hopp, K.J.; Ivie, M.A. First report of Tyrtaeus rufus Champion and Tyrtaeus dobsoni Hinton (Tenebrionidae: Diaperinae: Anopidiina) from Florida. Coleopts Bull. 2008, 62, 427–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Kamiński, M.J.; Gearner, O.M.; Kanda, K.; Swichtenberg, K.; Purchart, L.; Smith, A.D. First insights into the phylogeny of tok-tokkie beetles (Tenebrionidae: Molurina, Phanerotomeina) and examination of the status of the Psammodes vialis species-group. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 2020, 193, 889–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Kamiński, M.J.; Kanda, K.; Lumen, R.; Ulmer, J.M.; Wirth, C.C.; Bouchard, P.; Aalbu, R.; Mal, N.; Smith, A.D. A catalogue of the tribe Sepidiini Eschscholtz, 1829 (Tenebrionidae, Pimeliinae) of the world Launched to accelerate biodiversity research A peer-reviewed open-access journal. ZooKeys 2019, 844, 1–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Liu, S.; Ren, G. Two new species and one newly recorded species of Uloma Dejean, 1821 from Zhejiang, China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Ulomini). Zookeys 2016, 607, 103–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Masumoto, K.; Akita, K.; Lee, C.F. New Tenebrionid (Coleoptera) beetles from Taiwan. Elytra 2012, 15, 193–205. [Google Scholar]
  80. Matthews, E.G.; Lawrence, J.F. Trachelostenini sensu novo: Redescriptions of Trachelostenus Solier, Myrmecodema Gebien and Leaus Matthews & Lawrence, based on adults and larvae, and descriptions of three new species of Leaus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Zootaxa 2015, 4020, 289–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  81. Merkl, O. Redescription of Lagria (Apteronympha) tenenbaumi Pic, 1929, with a checklist of the Western Palaearctic species of the genus Lagria F. (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Lagriini). Proc. Russ. Entomol. Soc. 2006, 77, 219–225. [Google Scholar]
  82. Pollard, R.M. An Assessment of the Polytypic Status of the Namib Darkling Beetles Onymacris Unguicularis and Onymacris Rugatipennis. Bachelor’s Thesis, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  83. Ruzzier, E.; Martínez-Muoz, C.A. First record of the invasive Lagria villosa (Fabricius, 1781) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Lagriinae) in Europe. Zootaxa 2021, 4908, 147–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Schawaller, W. The Oriental species of Platydema Laporte & Brullé, part 2, with descriptions of 11 new species (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Diaperinae). Stuttg. Beiträge Zur Nat. A 2012, 5, 243–255. [Google Scholar]
  85. Schawaller, W. New species of the genus Laena Dejean (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) from southeastern Asia (2). Ann. Zool. 2014, 64, 287–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Schawaller, W. New species of the genus Menimus Sharp (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Gnathidiini) from Peninsular Malaysia and adjacent southern Thailand 1. Stuttg. Beiträge Zur Nat. A 2016, 9, 207–2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Smith, A.; Cifuentes-Ruiz, P. Revision of Diceroderes Solier (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Toxicini: Eudysantina), with descriptions of four new species. Coleopts Bull. 2015, 69, 55–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Smith, A.D.; Wilson, J.S.; Cognato, A.I. The evolution of Batesian mimicry within the North American Asidini (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Cladistics 2015, 31, 441–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Steiner, W.E.; Swearingen, J.M. New secords of three non-native darkling beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) established in California and Nevada, USA. Coleopts Bull. 2015, 69, 22–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Triplehorn, C.A. A review of the genus Phaleria Latreille from the Western Hemisphere (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Phaleriinae). Coleopts Bull. 1991, 45, 258–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Kamiński, M. Afrotropical Melambiina: Four New Species of Zadenos (Tenebrionidae: Pedinini), with Notes on Related Taxa. Ann. Zool. 2015, 65, 531–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Wenting, A. Systematics of the Tribe Platyopini in China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  93. Ming, B.; Guodong, R. Four new species of the genus Cteniopinus Seidlite, 1896 from China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Alleculinae). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2003, 28, 682–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Xinglong, B. Systematic Taxonomy of Platyscelidini from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Ph.D. Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  95. Junsheng, S. Diversity and Particularity of the Darkling Beetles of the Everest Nature Reserve. Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  96. Junsheng, S.; Guodong, R. Two New Species of the Genus Ascelosodis From Chinese Himalaya (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). J. Hebei Univ. 2016, 36, 175–179. [Google Scholar]
  97. Guodong, R. Two new species of the family Tenebrionidae from desert of northwest China (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae Tenebrio). Zool. Res. 1992, 13, 330–332. [Google Scholar]
  98. Chao, G. Taxonomy of Part Diaperini from China (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  99. Xiujuan, Y. Systematic Study on the Tribe Opatrini in China (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  100. Huiran, H. A systematic Study on the Genus Promethis from China (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  101. Guodong, R. Three New Species of Genus Melanesthes Lacord. from China (Coleoptera,Tenebrionidae). Acta Entomol. Sin. 1993, 36, 486–489. [Google Scholar]
  102. Shanshan, L. Study on the Taxonomy of the Genus Uloma from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae:Ulomini). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  103. Shanshan, L.; Guodong, R. Two new species of the genus Uloma Dejean,1821 from China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Ulomini). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2008, 33, 498–501. [Google Scholar]
  104. Shanshan, L.; Guodong, R. Taxonomic of the genus Uloma Dejean (Coleoptera, Tenebriondae, Ulomini) from Yunnan, China. Acta Zoot. Sin. 2013, 38, 559–565. [Google Scholar]
  105. Lei, M. Study on Taxonomy of the Tribe Platyscelidini from China (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  106. Lei, M.; Guodong, R. A systematic study on the genus Myatis Bates from China and adjacent areas (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2005, 30, 104–110. [Google Scholar]
  107. Akita, K.; Masumoto, K. New or little-known Tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) from Japan (11) descriptions of seven new species,up-grading of a subspecies to the species rank, and a new distributional record of a species. Elytra 2011, 1, 275–294. [Google Scholar]
  108. Guodong, R.; Qiqi, W. Study on the Taxonomy of the Genus Toxicum from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae:Toxicini). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2007, 32, 689–699. [Google Scholar]
  109. Guodong, R.; Chao, G. Study on the taxonomy of the genus Cerpria from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2007, 32, 200–207. [Google Scholar]
  110. Guodong, R.; Caixia, Y. Taxonomy of the genus Ainu Lewis, 1 894(Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae)from China, with description of a new specie. Entomotaxonomia 2015, 37, 129–133. [Google Scholar]
  111. Guodong, R.; Benyong, M. Resoure of darkling beetles from Yunnan and the species problems of Blaps in developing and ultilizing. In Proceedings of the National Symposium on Entomological Fauna Classification and Diversity, Kunming, China, 23–25 June 2005; pp. 176–182. [Google Scholar]
  112. Guodong, R.; Ximeng, W. Three new species of The Genus Adesmia Fisch. from China (Coleoptera: Tenebriondae, Adesmini). J. Ningxia Agric. Coll. 1993, 14, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  113. Guodong, R.; Ximeng, W.; Feng, M. Two new species and one new record of Platyope F.-W. from China (Coleoptera: Tenebriondae). J. Ningxia Agric. Coll. 1993, 14, 44–49. [Google Scholar]
  114. Guodong, R.; Youzhi, Y.; Feng, M.; Hong, J. Study on the genus Melanesthes lacord. and description of its three new species and five new recordeds species (Coleoptera: Tenebriondae) in China. J. Ningxia Agric. Coll. 1993, 14, 24–33. [Google Scholar]
  115. Aimin, S. Taxonomic and Faunistic Studies on the family Tenebrionidae from Xizang (Coleoptera:Tenebrionoidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  116. Aimin, S.; Guodong, R. A new species of Itagonia Reitter,1887(Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) from Xizang. J. China West Norm. Univ. 2007, 28, 176–178. [Google Scholar]
  117. Fengyan, W. Faunistic and Distribution Pattern Studies on Tenebrionidae of the North China Region (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidea). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  118. Zhonghua, W.; Guodong, R. Taxonomy of the genus Luprops from China, with description of the larva of Luprops horni (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). Entomotaxonomia 2019, 41, 299–312. [Google Scholar]
  119. Qiqi, W. Fauna and Biogeography of the Toxicini from China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  120. Qiqi, W.; Guodong, R. A taxonomic study of the genus Cryphaeus Klug (Coleoptera,Tenebrionidae,Toxicini) from China with descriptions of four new species. Acta Entomol. Sin. 2008, 51, 1065–1076. [Google Scholar]
  121. Wei, W.; Zhaotian, F.; Renxin, H. Three new species of Platyope (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) from Xinjiang, China. Entomotaxonomia 2005, 27, 283–288. [Google Scholar]
  122. Juan, X. Taxonomic Study on the Genus Bioramix Bates from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionoidea: Platyscelidini). Master’s Thesis, China West Normal University, Nanchong, China, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  123. Xiaoqing, Y. A taxonomic Study on Tribe Leiochrinini from China (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae: Diaperinae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  124. Caixia, Y. A preliminary Study on the Taxonomy of the Tribe Strongyliini from China (Coleoptera:Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  125. Caixia, Y.; Guodong, R. Study of the Genus Arboreal Darkling Beetles of the Strongylium from China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). Acta Zoot. Sin. 2005, 30, 399–406. [Google Scholar]
  126. Caixia, Y.; Guodong, R. A new record genus of Strongyliini (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) from China, with two new species and two new names. Acta Zoot. Sin. 2006, 31, 851–854. [Google Scholar]
  127. Chengli, Z. Faunistic and Evolution on Tenebrionidae of the Arid and Semi-Arid Region of China. Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  128. Qing, Z. Taxonomy of the Genus Eucyrtus and Its Five Related Genera from China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Stenochiinae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  129. Xiaolin, Z. Taxonomic of Laena and Hypolaenopsis from China (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae, Lagriinaeagriinae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  130. Xichao, Z. Taxonomic and Faunistic Studies on the Family Tenebrionidae from Qinghai (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  131. BugGuide. Available online: https://bugguide.net/node/view/152/ (accessed on 23 April 2021).
  132. BOLD Systems (Barcode of Life Data System). Available online: http://v3.boldsystems.org/ or https://www.boldsystems.org/ (accessed on 28 May 2021).
  133. Flickriver. Available online: https://www.flickriver.com/ (accessed on 23 July 2021).
  134. BioLib.cz (Biological Library). Available online: https://www.biolib.cz/ (accessed on 2 June 2021).
  135. iNaturalist. Available online: https://inaturalist.ca/ (accessed on 1 July 2021).
  136. Virtual-beetle. Available online: http://www.virtual-beetle.com (accessed on 7 June 2021).
  137. MNHN (Museum National d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, France). Available online: https://science.mnhn.fr/ (accessed on 7 June 2021).
  138. TENEBRIONIDAE DE CHILE. Available online: http://www.coleoptera-neotropical.org/paginas/2_PAISES/Chile/teneb_ch.html (accessed on 14 May 2021).
  139. SCAN (Symbiota Collections of Arthropods Network). Available online: https://scan-bugs.org/portal/ (accessed on 3 July 2021).
  140. Zoological Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences. Available online: https://www.zin.ru/animalia/coleoptera/eng/atl_te.htm (accessed on 18 July 2021).
  141. Insecta.pro. Available online: http://insecta.pro/ (accessed on 18 July 2021).
  142. Museum Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences. Available online: https://virtualcollections.naturalsciences.be/ (accessed on 17 July 2021).
  143. Ukrainian Biodiversity Information Network. Available online: https://ukrbin.com/ (accessed on 2 July 2021).
  144. Beetles of Africa. Available online: http://www.beetlesofafrica.com/ (accessed on 18 July 2021).
  145. TENEBRIONIDAE Latreille. 1802. Available online: http://www.tenebrionidae.net/ (accessed on 18 July 2021).
  146. Southern Alps Photography. Available online: https://www.southernalpsphotography.com/ (accessed on 1 July 2021).
  147. Wikispecies. Available online: https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page (accessed on 17 March 2021).
  148. Annals of the Transvaal Museum—BioNames. Available online: http://bionames.org/archive/issn/0255-0172/7/1.pdf (accessed on 11 June 2021).
  149. Bai, M.; Yang, X.K.; Jing, L.I.; Wang, W.C. Geometric Morphometrics, a super scientific computing tool in morphology comparison. Chin. Sci. Bull. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Rohlf, F.J. tpsDig, Digitize Landmarks and Outlines; Version 2.05; Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York: New York, NY, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  151. Rohlf, F.J. tps-SMALL. In Version 1.20 [Software and Manual]; Department of Ecology and Evolution, State University of New York: New York, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  152. Goodall, C. Procrustes methods in the statistical analysis of shape. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 1991, 53, 285–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Macleod, N. PalaeoMath: Part 18-Form & Shape Models. Palaeontology 2009, 101, 72. [Google Scholar]
  154. Klingenberg, C.P. MorphoJ: An integrated software package for geometric morphometrics. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2011, 11, 353–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Green, S.B.; Salkind, N.J. Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh, 7th ed.; Pearson: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  156. Pretorius, E.; Scholtz, C.H. Geometric morphometries and the analysis of higher taxa: A case study based on the metendosternite of the Scarabaeoidea (Coleoptera). Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 2001, 74, 35–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Bai, M.; Jarvis, K.; Wang, S.-Y.; Song, K.-Q.; Wang, Y.-P.; Wang, Z.-L.; Li, W.-Z.; Wang, W.; Yang, X.-K. A second new species of ice crawlers from China (Insecta: Grylloblattodea), with thorax evolution and the prediction of potential distribution. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e12850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  158. Roy, K.; Foote, M. Morphological approaches to measuring biodiversity. Trends. Ecol. Evol. 1997, 12, 277–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. DeLong, C.M.; Bragg, R.; Simmons, J.A. Evidence for spatial representation of object shape by echolocating bats (Eptesicus fuscus). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2008, 123, 4582–4598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  160. Miller, R.S. Pattern and process in competition. Adv. Ecol. Res. 1967, 4, 1–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Burns, J.; Strauss, S. More closely related species are more ecologically similar in an experimental test. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 5302–5307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  162. Kaplan, I.; Denno, R. Interspecific interactions in phytophagous insects revisited: A quantitative assessment of competition theory. Ecol. Lett. 2007, 10, 977–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Jenssen, T.A. Shift in the structural habitat of Anolis opalinus due to congeneric competition. Ecology 1973, 54, 863–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Boer, P.J. Exclusion or coexistence and the taxonomic or ecological relationship between species. Neth. J. Zool. 1979, 30, 278–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Fattorini, S.; Mantoni, C.; Di Biase, L.; Strona, G.; Pace, L.; Biondi, M. Elevational patterns of generic diversity in the tenebrionid beetles (Coleoptera Tenebrionidae) of latium (Central Italy). Diversity 2020, 12, 47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  166. Rundle, H.D.; Nosil, P. Ecological speciation. Ecol. Lett. 2005, 8, 336–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Schluter, D. Ecology and the origin of species. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2001, 16, 372–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Schluter, D. Evidence for ecological speciation and its alternative. Science 2009, 323, 737–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  169. Young, R.L.; Sweeney, M.J.; Badyaev, A.V. Morphological diversity and ecological similarity: Versatility of muscular and skeletal morphologies enables ecological convergence in shrews. Funct. Ecol. 2010, 24, 556–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Gould, S. A developmental constraint in Cerion, with comments on the definition and interpretation of constraint in evolution. Evolution 1989, 43, 516–539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Wainwright, P. Functional versus morphological diversity in macroevolution. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. S 2007, 38, 381–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Guodong, R.; Guohong, W. Study on the role of darkling beetles’ sub-elytralcavity in sandy areas. Entomol. Knowl. 1990, 27, 160–162. [Google Scholar]
  173. Ren, G.D.; Yu, Y.Z.; Ma, F. Desert envIronment and adaptatIon of darklIng beetles. J. Ningxia Agric. Coll. 1993, 14, 85–92. [Google Scholar]
  174. Xianlei, S. Morphological Characteristics of HEALING-elytron and Its Relationship with Habitat Selection of the Darkling Beetles. Master’s Thesis, Hebei University, Baoding, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  175. Foote, M. The evolution of morphological diversity. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evolut. Syst. 1997, 28, 129–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  176. Yu, Z.; Guodong, R. Species diversity and faunal distribution of darkling beetles (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae) on the Ordos Platean. J. Mong. Agric. Univ. 2014, 35, 19–25. [Google Scholar]
  177. Humphreys, A.; Barraclough, T. The evolutionary reality of higher taxa in mammals. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2014, 281, 20132750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  178. Kemp, T.S. The origin of higher taxa: Macroevolutionary processes, and the case of the mammals. Acta Zool. 2007, 88, 3–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. OOliveira, S.; Ortega, J.C.; Ribas, L.; Lopes, V.; Bini, L. Higher taxa are sufficient to represent biodiversity patterns. Ecol. Indic. 2020, 111, 105994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Timms, L.; Bowden, J.; Summerville, K.; Buddle, C. Does species-level resolution matter? Taxonomic sufficiency in terrestrial arthropod biodiversity studies. Insect Conserv. Divers. 2013, 6, 453–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Taravati, S.; Darvish, J.; Mirshamsi, O. Geometric morphometric study of twospecies of the psammophilous genusErodiontes (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) from the Lute desert, Central Iran. IJAB 2009, 5, 81–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Cruz, L.; Torres, M.A.; Barrion, A.; Joshi, R.; Sebastian, L.; Demayo, C. Geometric morphometric analysis of the head, pronotum and genitalia of the rice black bug associated with selected rice types. Egypt. Acad. J. Biol. Sci. A Entomol. 2011, 4, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Robin, W. Functional morphology of insect wings. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1992, 37, 113–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  184. Evans, M.E.G. Locomotion in the Coleoptera Adephaga, especially Carabidae. J. Zool. 2010, 181, 189–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Snodgrass, R.E. Principles of Insect Morphology; Cornell University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1935. [Google Scholar]
Diversity 14 00060 g001 550
Figure 1. Semi-landmarks selection of test features based on Geometric Morphometrics, Catapiestus sp. (Tenebrionidae, Stenochiinae, Cnodalonini) was selected as an example: (A) Pronotum (curve 1) was resampled into 25 semi-landmarks; (B) elytron (curve 2) was resampled into 50 semi-landmarks.
Figure 1. Semi-landmarks selection of test features based on Geometric Morphometrics, Catapiestus sp. (Tenebrionidae, Stenochiinae, Cnodalonini) was selected as an example: (A) Pronotum (curve 1) was resampled into 25 semi-landmarks; (B) elytron (curve 2) was resampled into 50 semi-landmarks.
Diversity 14 00060 g001
Diversity 14 00060 g002 550
Figure 2. Principal component analysis on subfamily level: first three principal components of pronotum (91.122%) and elytron (92.154%) were selected to represent shape variation. (A) Variation of test pronotum in space built by PC1 and PC2. (B) Variation of test pronotum in space built by PC2 and PC3. (C) Variation of test elytron in space built by PC1 and PC2. (D) Variation of test elytron in space built by PC2 and PC3. (Note: Circles in figures were set to include at least 90% of samples in each test subfamily).
Figure 2. Principal component analysis on subfamily level: first three principal components of pronotum (91.122%) and elytron (92.154%) were selected to represent shape variation. (A) Variation of test pronotum in space built by PC1 and PC2. (B) Variation of test pronotum in space built by PC2 and PC3. (C) Variation of test elytron in space built by PC1 and PC2. (D) Variation of test elytron in space built by PC2 and PC3. (Note: Circles in figures were set to include at least 90% of samples in each test subfamily).
Diversity 14 00060 g002
Diversity 14 00060 g003 550
Figure 3. Morphological diversity and tribe/genus/species richness among subfamilies. Purple and blue columns represent morphological diversity of test pronotum and elytron. MD, morphological diversity. Yellow, orange, and green columns represent tribe, genus, and species richness, respectively, of each subfamily.
Figure 3. Morphological diversity and tribe/genus/species richness among subfamilies. Purple and blue columns represent morphological diversity of test pronotum and elytron. MD, morphological diversity. Yellow, orange, and green columns represent tribe, genus, and species richness, respectively, of each subfamily.
Diversity 14 00060 g003
Diversity 14 00060 g004 550
Figure 4. Correlation analysis of subfamilies of Tenebrionidae: (A) Relationships between morphological diversity and tribe/genus/species richness; (B) correlation between morphological diversity of pronotum and elytron.
Figure 4. Correlation analysis of subfamilies of Tenebrionidae: (A) Relationships between morphological diversity and tribe/genus/species richness; (B) correlation between morphological diversity of pronotum and elytron.
Diversity 14 00060 g004
Table
Table 1. Sampling information of test subfamilies.
Table 1. Sampling information of test subfamilies.
Test GroupsSampling Number of TribesDescribed Number of TribesSampling Number of GeneraDescribed Number of GeneraSampling Number of Species
Zolodininae**232
Lagriinae9962270357
Nilioninae**1121
Phrenapatinae3382016
Pimeliinae3339215401835
Tenebrioninae29292209551198
Alleculinae2254140317
Diaperinae101143120286
Stenochiinae3373390375
Total899667823003407
Note: the ‘*’ represents the subfamily without tribe.
Table
Table 2. Morphological diversity (MD) of test features in the subfamily test.
Table 2. Morphological diversity (MD) of test features in the subfamily test.
Test GroupsMD of PronotumMD of Elytron
Zolodininae0.00460.0036
Lagriinae0.01000.0039
Nilioninae0.01300.0014
Phrenapatinae0.00740.0026
Pimeliinae0.02670.0051
Tenebrioninae0.01240.0041
Alleculinae0.01110.0019
Diaperinae0.02950.0066
Stenochiinae0.01710.0042
Table
Table 3. Spearman correlation coefficient between morphological diversity (MD) and richness in different test taxa.
Table 3. Spearman correlation coefficient between morphological diversity (MD) and richness in different test taxa.
Tribes RichnessGenera RichnessSpecies Richness
rprprp
MD of pronotum0.5210.0750.3500.1780.5000.085
MD of elytron0.7820.0060.6000.0440.5710.077
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Cheng, L.; Tong, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Sun, Z.; Wang, X.; Ma, F.; Bai, M. Study on the Relationship between Richness and Morphological Diversity of Higher Taxa in the Darkling Beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Diversity 2022, 14, 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14010060

AMA Style

Cheng L, Tong Y, Zhao Y, Sun Z, Wang X, Ma F, Bai M. Study on the Relationship between Richness and Morphological Diversity of Higher Taxa in the Darkling Beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Diversity. 2022; 14(1):60. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14010060

Chicago/Turabian Style

Cheng, Liangxue, Yijie Tong, Yuchen Zhao, Zhibin Sun, Xinpu Wang, Fangzhou Ma, and Ming Bai. 2022. "Study on the Relationship between Richness and Morphological Diversity of Higher Taxa in the Darkling Beetles (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae)" Diversity 14, no. 1: 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14010060

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop