Next Article in Journal
Spatial Distribution of Aedes aegypti Oviposition Temporal Patterns and Their Relationship with Environment and Dengue Incidence
Previous Article in Journal
Implications of Sublethal Insecticide Exposure and the Development of Resistance on Mosquito Physiology, Behavior, and Pathogen Transmission
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 12
Issue 10
10.3390/insects12100918
insects-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

Phylogenetic Position of the Genus Alulacris (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae: Podismini) Revealed by Complete Mitogenome Evidence

by
Haiyang Xu
1,2,3,
Benyong Mao
4,
Sergey Yu. Storozhenko
5,
Yuan Huang
6,
Zhilin Chen
2,* and
Jianhua Huang
1,2,3,*
1
Key Laboratory of Cultivation and Protection for Non–Wood Forest Trees (Central South University of Forestry and Technology), Ministry of Education, Changsha 410004, China
2
Guangxi Key Laboratory of Rare and Endangered Animal Ecology, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, China
3
Key Laboratory of Forest Bio-Resources and Integrated Pest Management for Higher Education in Hunan Province, Central South University of Forestry and Technology, Changsha 410004, China
4
College of Agriculture and Biology Science, Dali University, Dali 671003, China
5
Federal Scientific Center of the East Asia Terrestrial Biodiversity, Far East Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 690022 Vladivostok, Russia
6
College of Life Sciences, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2021, 12(10), 918; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100918
Submission received: 17 September 2021 / Revised: 2 October 2021 / Accepted: 4 October 2021 / Published: 8 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Insect Systematics, Phylogeny and Evolution)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

The phylogenetic position of the genus Alulacris is clarified based on complete mitogenome evidence. The results show that Alulacris consistently has the closest relationship to the genus Yunnanacris of the subfamily Melanoplinae in all phylogenetic trees and is extremely similar to Yunnanacris yunnaneus (Ramme, 1939) morphologically. Therefore, the genus Alulacris is transferred here from Catantopinae incertae sedis to the nominal subtribe Podismina of the tribe Podismini sensu Ito (2015) of the subfamily Melanoplinae.

Abstract

Whole mitogenomes are a useful data source for a wide variety of research goals due to the vastly cheaper sequencing cost and the far less demanding high-quality templates. The mitogenome has demonstrated great potential in resolving phylogenetic questions in Orthoptera at different taxonomic scales as well as exploring patterns of molecular and morphological character evolutions. In this study, the complete mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis (Zheng, 1977) was sequenced using next-generation sequencing, the characteristics of the mitogenome are presented briefly, and the phylogeny of the Melanoplinae and Catantopinae was reconstructed using a selected dataset of mitogenome sequences under maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference frameworks. The results show that the genus was consistently assigned to the subfamily Melanoplinae rather than Catantopinae in all phylogenetic trees deduced from different datasets under different frameworks, and this finding is entirely consistent with its morphological characters. Therefore, it is more appropriate to place the genus Alulacris in Melanoplinae rather than in Catantopinae.

1. Introduction

While the availability of other types of “–omics” data, in particular transcriptomes, is increasing rapidly, whole mitogenomes are still a useful data source for a wide variety of research goals due to the vastly cheaper sequencing cost and the far less demanding high-quality templates [1,2]. The mitogenome can be sequenced not only individually but also as a byproduct of all other ‘–omics’ approaches. The mitogenome has become the most widely used genomic resource available for systematic entomology over the past decade and now has been sequenced for all insect orders and in many instances representatives of each major lineage within orders (suborders, series or superfamilies depending on the group). These data have been applied to resolve systematic questions at all taxonomic scales from interordinal [3,4,5], through many intraordinal [6,7,8,9] and family-level relationships [10,11], to population/biogeographic studies [12].
As mentioned in a previous study [13], there are many controversial taxa in Acrididae, which have been designated different taxonomic positions by different authors. These issues must be resolved step by step as part of obtaining an improved classification scheme. The successful case study to clarify the phylogenetic positions of four genera in the subfamily Oxyinae using mitogenome data provides a valuable approach for resolving such issues [13].
The genus Alulacris is endemic to China, with Pseudogerunda shilinensis Zheng, 1977 as the type species and with three known species so far [14,15,16,17,18]. According to the original description, Alulacris is most similar to the genus Circocephalus Willemse, 1928 [15]. While not classified to any subfamily in the original reference, Alulacris was unambiguously considered a member of the subfamily Podisminae sensu Li & Xia [16], a taxonomic group corresponding to the tribe Podismini of the subfamily Melanoplinae [19]. However, in the Orthoptera Species File (OSF), it is placed without a definition of the tribe in the subfamily Catantopinae, possibly according to the general rule to treat the taxa of grasshoppers with a prosternal process [13,19]. Since the mitogenome has demonstrated great potential in resolving phylogenetic questions in Orthoptera at different taxonomic scales [12,13,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34] as well as exploring patterns of molecular and morphological character evolutions [35,36,37,38], we assess in this study the phylogenetic relationship of the genus Alulacris with the candidates of its close relatives through a mitochondrial phylogenomics approach and clarify the current position of this genus in the modern classification of grasshoppers.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Taxon Sampling

The type species, i.e., Alulacris shilinensis (Zheng, 1977), was selected as the representative of the genus Alulacris. The material of Alulacris shilinensis for generating mitogenome data (voucher number: mt1811) was collected at Shilin Scenic Spot, Shilin County, Kunming city, Yunnan Province, China; 103°19′16″ E, 24°48′19″ N, altitude 1778 m; on 15 August 2017, Bing Jiang leg. The specimens were identified by the last author according to the keys to species in Li & Xia’s (2006) and the Mao et al. (2011) monographs [16,17]. They were preserved in anhydrous ethanol and are stored at room temperature in the Insect Collection of the Central South University of Forestry and Technology.
Considering the fact that Catantopinae used to be defined by a series of negatives as a dumping ground for all those genera, which cannot be placed into any of the other subfamilies with a prosternal process [28,39], we included in this analysis nearly all presently available mitogenome data of species in Acrididae and Dericorythidae with a prosternal process (Supplementary Materials Table S1), representing 12 subfamilies and 48 genera in total. Among these genera, Choroedocus was provisionally considered a member of the subfamily Eyprepocnemidinae due to its high similarity to the genera of Eyprepocnemidinae. Coryphistes ruricola (MG993389, MG993390, MG993403, MG993406) in Catantopinae and Kosciuscola tristis (MG993402, MG993408, MG993414) in Oxyinae were not included in the analysis because they have only partial mitogenome sequences available [28].
All material was collected under appropriate collection permits and approved ethics guidelines.
The morphological terminology followed that of Uvarov (1966) [40] and Storozhenko et al. (2015) [41]. The terminology of male genitalia followed that of Dirsh (1956) [42].

2.2. Sequencing, Assembly, and Annotation

A hind femur of male Alulacris shilinensis was sent to Novogene Biotech Co., Ltd. (Beijing) for genomic sequencing using next-generation sequencing (NGS), and the remainder of the specimen was deposited as a voucher specimen (voucher number: mt1811) at the Central South University of Forestry and Technology. Whole genomic DNA was extracted from muscle tissue of the hind femur using a modified routine phenol/chloroform method. Separate 400-bp insert libraries were created from the whole genome DNA and sequenced using the Illumina HiSeq X Ten sequencing platform. Twenty Gb of 150-bp paired-end (PE) reads were generated in total for each sample.
Raw reads were filtered to remove reads containing adaptor contamination (>15 bp matching the adaptor sequence), poly-Ns (>5 bp Ns), or >1% error rate (>10-bp bases with quality score <20). The mitogenome sequence was assembled from clean reads in Mitobim [43], and two runs were implemented independently using the same reference with different starting points (one point was trnI and the other was COX1) to improve the sequence quality of the control region. The assembled raw mitogenome sequences were primarily annotated online using the MITOS Web Server (http://mitos.bioinf.unileipzig.de/index.py; 18 May 2021) [44] and were then checked and corrected in Geneious R11 [45]. The secondary structure of the RNA encoding genes predicted in MITOS were visualized and checked manually using VARNA [46]. The newly sequenced mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis has been deposited in GenBank under accession number MW810985 (Table 1). Base composition, A-T- and G-C-skews, and codon usage were calculated in MEGA X [47]. The formulas used to calculate the skews of the composition were (A − T)/(A + T) for the A−T-skew and (G − C)/(G + C) for the G−C-skew.

2.3. Phylogenetic Analyses

To clarify the phylogenetic position of Alulacris shilinensis, 94 complete mitogenome sequences representing 88 species in total, including 34 species in Melanoplinae and nine species in Catantopinae, were selected as ingroups, and four other Acridomorpha species, which included two species in Pamphagidae of Acridoidea and two in Pyrgomorphoidea, served as outgroups (Table S1). Three different datasets were prepared, which consisted of (1) the 13 protein-coding genes (PCGs), (2) the 2 rRNA genes, or (3) the combination of the 13 PCGs and the two rRNA genes.
The protein-coding genes were codon-based aligned using the MUSCLE algorithm in the TranslatorX online platform (http://translatorx.co.uk; 5 June 2021) [48] and toggled back to their nucleotide sequences, and the rDNA sequences were individually aligned in MUSCLE using default parameters. Finally, the alignments were manually optimized and concatenated into three different datasets using SequenceMatrix v.1.7.8 [49].
The dataset was divided into 41 data blocks (13 PCGs divided into individual codon positions and two ribosomal genes).The best-fitting models of nucleotide evolution and best-fitting partitioning schemes were selected using ModelFinder [50], and the models used for the phylogenetic analyses are shown in Table 1. The phylogenies were reconstructed in maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI) frameworks. The ML phylogenies were reconstructed using IQ-TREE [51], and the approximately unbiased branch support values were calculated using UFBoot2 [52]; the analysis was performed in W-IQ-TREE [53] using the default settings. Nodes with a bootstrap percentage (BP) of at least 70% were considered well supported in the ML analyses [54]. BI analyses were accomplished in MrBayes 3.2.1 (http://morphbank.Ebc.uu.SE/mrbayes/; 10 June 2021) [55], with two independent runs, each with four Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) chains. The analysis was run for 1 × 107 generations, sampling every 100 generations, and the first 25% generations were discarded as burn-in, whereas the remaining samples were used to summarize the Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP). BPPs > 0.95 were interpreted as strongly supported [56].

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of the Mitogenome of Alulacris Shilinensis

The complete mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis is a circular molecule with a total length of 16950 bp (Table 2). It has the typical metazoan mitochondrial gene set consisting of 13 PCGs, 22 tRNAs, two rRNAs (the large and small ribosomal subunits), and a putative A + T-rich region (control region, CR). Among the 37 genes coded by the mitogenome, 23 genes are coded at the J strand and 14 at the N strand. The gene order is the same as that of other published mitogenomes in Caelifera and is similar to the ancestral type of gene arrangements in Ensifera [23], with the only difference in the order of trnD and trnK. The order of trnD and trnK between COX2 and ATP8 is K→D in Ensifera, but the order in Caelifera is D→K. The base composition is clearly A-T biased with a total A + T content of 74.1% (Table 2). The total A-T- and G-C-skews are 0.1120 and -0.1274, respectively.
All PCGs have a typical initiation codon of ATN, with eight PCGs (ND2, COX2, ATP6, COX3, ND4, ND4L, ND6, and CYTB) initiated from ATG, two from ATC, two from ATT, and one from ATA (Table 3). In terms of termination codons, the majority of PCGs have a typical termination codon of TAA, with ND1 terminated by TAG, ND2 by the incomplete termination codon TA, and COX1 by T. The PCGs of the mitogenome have extremely similar codon usage pattern to other grasshoppers (Table 4). Among all codons of the PCGs, the most preferred codon with the highest average relative synonymous codon usage (RSCU) is UUA that codes for Leucine (Table 4) and has an RSCU value of 4.13%. The next common codons are UCA and UCU that code for Serine, followed by CGA (Glycine) and ACA (Threonine), with average RSCU values of 2.78%, 2.71%, 2.67% and 2.41%, respectively, indicating a distinct codon usage bias in grasshoppers [13].
The sizes of the 22 tRNAs vary over a very small range from the minimum of 64 bp for trnP to the maximum of 71bp for trnK and trnV (Table 3). Except for tRNASer-AGN lacking the DHU arm, all of the other 21 tRNAs can be folded into a typical clover structure (Supplementary Materials Figure S1).
The lrRNA and srRNA are located between the trnL1- and trnV- and the A + T-rich regions, respectively. Their lengths are 1377 bp (lrRNA) and 793 bp (srRNA), respectively. The control region is located between rrnS and trnI, with a length of 2121 bp, and, similar to most of the mitogenome, contains a high proportion of the A + T content of 72.5% (Table 2).

3.2. Phylogeny

Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Inference analyses produced largely congruent topologies from the PCGs and combined datasets, and five clades were consistently retrieved for the ingroup in all trees usually with high supporting values or posterior probabilities (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4): (A) Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris), (B) Oxyinae+Spathosterninae+Hemiacridinae, (C) Coptacrinae+Traulia+Conophymacris+Xiangelilacris, (D) Eyprepocnemidinae+Calliptaminae, and (E) Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae. The only difference in the relationship between clades is the position of clade D, which clusters with clade E in the trees from PCGs+rRNA sequences (Figure 2 and Figure 4), and with Clade C in those from PCGs sequences (Figure 1 and Figure 3). Clade E is well supported with a bootstrap value of 95% in the ML trees (Figure 1 and Figure 3) and with a posterior probability of 1 in the BI trees (Figure 3 and Figure 4). The relationship within clades is also extremely robust.
The monophyly of eight groups (Spathosterninae, Hemiacridinae, Coptacrinae, Eyprepocnemidinae, Calliptaminae, Cyrtacanthacridinae, the Catantopini clade, and the genus Traulia of the subfamily Catantopinae) is always well supported, and the monophyly of Melanoplinae is supported except for Xiangelilacris zhongdianensis, which clusters into a separate clade with Conophymacris viridis. Similarly, the monophyly of Oxyinae is supported, except for one species, Gesonula punctifrons, which clusters first with species of the subfamily Hemiacridinae.
At the species level, Alulacris shilinensis consistently has the closest relationship with the genus Yunnanacris (Melanoplinae, Podismini) in all trees, and the clade comprising the genera Alulacris and Yunnanacris is always extremely robust with a bootstrap value of 99–100% or a posterior probability of 1 and is located near the tip of the trees (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4).
Despite the high congruence among the trees from the PCG and PCG+rRNA sequences, the topology of the trees from the two rRNA genes is slightly different (Figures S2 and S3). Although three of the five clades retrieved in the trees from the PCG and PCG+rRNA sequences are still retrieved in the trees from rRNAs sequences, both clades C and E are split into two individual clades, the clade of Coptacrinae shows a closer relationship with the clade of Catantopini than with that of Conophymacris+Xiangelilacris; the placement of Alulacris shilinensis, Gesonula punctifrons, and Menglacri smaculata has little change, and the relationship among Alulacris shilinensis, Curvipennis wixiensis, and three other groups is unresolved (Figure S3). At a deeper level, the relationship among clades of Calliptaminae+Eyprepocnemidinae, Cyrtacanthacridinae, and the remaining groups is also unresolved (Figure S3). The relationship within clade B is a little different from that in the trees from the PCG and PCG+rRNA sequences, i.e., the subclade of Spathosterninae clustered first with Gesonula punctifrons and then with the subclade of Hemiacridinae, but not first with that of the majority of Oxyinae.

4. Discussion

According to the modern classification of grasshoppers, the subfamily Catantopinae is the largest subfamily of Acrididae, with 326 genera and 998 species widely distributed in the Eastern Hemisphere, including Palaearctic and Oriental regions, Australia, and Africa [19,57,58,59]. Previously, all grasshopper species with the prosternal process were grouped into Catantopinae sensu lato [60], but now the definition has been reduced. Catantopinae is not defined by any distinct morphological feature, and was usually used as a dumping ground for all genera with a prosternal process which cannot be placed into any of the other subfamilies [39]. Moreover, this subfamily is a non-monophyletic group [28,61,62].
On the contrary, monophyly of the subfamily Melanoplinae was always strongly supported [28,63]. Melanoplinae is the third largest subfamily of Acrididae, comprising 146 genera and 1196 species distributed throughout Eurasia and the Americas [19,57]. The origin of and the relationship within this subfamily were explored in a series of molecular studies [64,65,66,67,68,69]. As a morphologically well-characterized subfamily, the main diagnostic morphological characters of Melanoplinae are the smooth dorso-median carina of hind femora, the conical prosternal process with a sharply pointed apex, male 10th abdominal tergite with distinct furculae [16], the thick pallium, the species-specific male cerci [28], the male genitalia without sigmoid flexure but having a constricted point of articulation between the basal and apical penis valves [70], bridge-shaped, bridge broad, and undivided epiphallus, roughly trigonal ancorae and not detached from the bridge, elongated posterior projections of the epiphallus [42], and highly variable female genital complex [71].
Although Alulacris was considered most similar to the genus Circocephalus in the original reference [15], it is impossible to place the phylogenetic position of the genus Alulacris using the genus Circocephalus as a reference because the phylogenetic position of Circocephalus is also ambiguous. The genus Circocephalus was established by C. Willemse in 1928 and placed in the subfamily Catantopinae because of the presence of the prosternal process [72]. There is no further research on this genus except the description of two additional species [73,74], and its phylogenetic position was naturally classified by Otte to the subfamily Catantopinae with an uncertain tribe [57]. However, it was placed in the subfamily Coptacrinae by Bhowmik [75,76], making its position even more ambiguous.
Despite the similarity of Alulacris to Circocephalus clearly stated by the original author [15], it was unambiguously considered as a member of the subfamily Podisminaesensu Li & Xia (2006) [16]. In this study, Alulacris shilinensis always falls into the clade of Melanoplinae and has closest the relationship with the genus Yunnanacris in all phylogenetic trees (Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3 and Figure 4). Morphologically, Alulacris shilinensis also highly matches the characteristics of Melanoplinae and is extremely similar to the genus Yunnanacris in the external appearance (Figure 5 and Figure 6), the shape of prosternal process (Figure 5g and Figure 6g), the small semicircular furculae (Figure 5h and Figure 6h), the epiphallus with long posterior projections, large inner lophi, and roughly trigonal ancorae (Figure 5l,m and Figure 6k,l), but differs from the latter in the size of the tegmina (Figure 5a,b,d,e vs. Figure 6a,b,d,e) and the shape of the valves of the cingulum and the apical valves of the penis (Figure 5n–o vs. Figure 6m–n). Therefore, the genus Alulacris is transferred here from Catantopinae incertae sedis to the nominal subtribe Podismina of the tribe Podismini sensu Ito (2015) [77] of the subfamily Melanoplinae. Moreover, it is possible that Alulacris may be a synonym of Yunnanacris, but more molecular data on the species of the tribe Podismini are needed to clarify the taxonomic status and composition of Alulacris, Yunnanacris, and related genera.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/insects12100918/s1, Figure S1. Secondary structures of 22 tRNAs of the nine newly sequenced mitogenomes. Figure S2. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the two rRNAs using maximum likelihood. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. Figure S3. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the two rRNAs using Bayesian inference. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. Table S1. Accession numbers and references of the mitogenomes of the species sampled in this study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.Y.S., Y.H. and J.H.; Data curation, Visualization, Writing—original draft, H.X.; Formal analysis, H.X. and Z.C.; Funding acquisition, B.M. and J.H.; Investigation, Resources, B.M. and Z.C.; Methodology, Y.H.; Project administration, Supervision, J.H.; Validation, S.Y.S.; Writing—review & editing, B.M., S.Y.S., Y.H. and J.H. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported financially by the Open Foundation of Guangxi Key Laboratory of Rare and Endangered Animal Ecology, Guangxi Normal University (GKN21-A-02-03) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31760628, 31960110, 31540055).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The mitogenome sequence of Alulacrisshilinensis is deposited in GenBank under accession number MW810985.

Acknowledgments

We thank Bing Jiang for collecting the molecular materials of Alulacris shilinensis, Jingxiao Gu and Xiang Zeng for their help in the assembly and annotation of the mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis, and Dong Zhang (Lanzhou University) and Fangluan Gao (Fujian Agricultural and Forestry University) for their help in reconstructing phylogenetic trees using rRNA sequences.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Cameron, S.L. Insect mitochondrial genomics: Implications for evolution and phylogeny. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2014, 59, 95–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Cameron, S.L. How to sequence and annotate insect mitochondrial genomes for systematic and comparative genomics research. Syst. Entomol. 2014, 39, 400–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Cameron, S.L.; Sullivan, J.; Song, H.; Miller, K.B.; Whiting, M.F. A mitochondrial genome phylogeny of the Neuropterida (lace-wings, alderflies and snakeflies) and their relationship to the other holometabolous insect orders. Zool. Scr. 2009, 38, 575–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wan, X.; Kim, M.I.; Kim, M.J.; Kim, I. Complete mitochondrial genome of the free-living earwig, Challia fletcheri (Dermaptera: Pygidicranidae) and phylogeny of Polyneoptera. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e42056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Wang, Y.; Liu, X.; Winterton, S.L.; Yang, D. The first mitochondrial genome for the fishfly subfamily Chauliodinae and implications for the higher phylogeny of Megaloptera. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e47302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Cameron, S.L.; Lambkin, C.L.; Barker, S.C.; Whiting, M.F. A mitochondrial genome phylogeny of Diptera: Whole genome sequence data accurately resolve relationships over broad timescales with high precision. Syst. Entomol. 2007, 32, 40–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Dowton, M.; Cameron, S.L.; Austin, A.D.; Whiting, M.F. Phylogenetic approaches for the analysis of mitochondrial genome sequence data in the Hymenoptera—A lineage with both rapidly and slowly evolving mitochondrial genomes. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2009, 52, 512–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Timmermans, M.J.T.N.; Dodsworth, S.; Culverwell, C.L.; Bocak, L.; Ahrens, D.; Littlewood, D.T.J.; Pons, J.; Vogler, A.P. Why barcode? High-throughput multiplex sequencing of mitochondrial genomes for molecular systematics. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 38, e197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Zhao, F.; Huang, D.-Y.; Sun, X.-Y.; Shi, Q.-H.; Hao, J.-S.; Zhang, L.-L.; Yang, Q. The first mitochondrial genome for the butterfly family Riodinidae (Abisara fylloides) and its systematic implications. Zool. Res. 2013, 34, E109–E119. [Google Scholar]
  10. Nelson, L.A.; Lambkin, C.L.; Batterham, P.; Wallman, J.F.; Dowton, M.; Whiting, M.F.; Yeates, D.K.; Cameron, S.L. Beyond barcoding: Genomic approaches to molecular diagnostics in blowflies (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Gene 2012, 511, 131–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Zhao, J.; Winterton, S.L.; Liu, Z. Ancestral gene organization in the mitochondrial genome of Thyridosmylus langii (McLachlan, 1970) (Neuroptera: Osmylidae) and implications for lacewing evolution. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e62943. [Google Scholar]
  12. Ma, C.; Yang, P.; Jiang, F.; Chapuis, M.-P.; Shali, Y.; Sword, G.A.; Kang, L. Mitochondrial genomes reveal the global phylogeography and dispersal routes of the migratory locust. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21, 4344–4358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zeng, X.; Xu, H.Y.; Gu, J.X.; Mao, B.Y.; Chen, Z.L.; Huang, Y.; Huang, J.H. Phylogenetic position of the genera Caryandoides, Paratoacris, Fer and Longchuanacris (Orthoptera: Acrididae) revealed by complete mitogenome sequences. Invert. Syst. 2021, 35, 725–741. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zheng, Z.M. New genera and new species of Acrididae from Yunnan-Kweichou Platau, China. Acta Entomol. Sinica 1977, 20, 303–313. [Google Scholar]
  15. Zheng, Z.M. New genera and new species of grasshoppers from Yunnan, Guizhou and Sichuan, China. Acta Zootax. Sinica 1981, 6, 60–68. [Google Scholar]
  16. Li, H.C.; Xia, K.L. Fauna Sinica, Insecta, vol. 43, Orthoptera, Acridoidea, Catantopidae; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  17. Mao, B.Y.; Ren, G.D.; Ou, X.H. Fauna, Distribution Pattern and Adaptability on Acridoidea from Yunnan; China Forestry Publishing House: Beijing, China, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  18. Zheng, Z.M.; Deng, W.A.; Wei, S.Z. One new species of the genus Alulacris Zheng (Orthoptera, Catantopidae) from Guizhou Province China. Acta Zootax. Sinica 2013, 38, 90–92. [Google Scholar]
  19. Cigliano, M.M.; Braun, H.; Eades, D.C.; Otte, D. Orthoptera Species File. Version 5.0/5.0. 2021. Available online: http://Orthoptera.SpeciesFile.org (accessed on 15 August 2021).
  20. Fenn, J.D.; Song, H.; Cameron, S.; Whiting, M.F. A preliminary mitochondrial genome phylogeny of Orthoptera (Insecta) and approaches to maximizing phylogenetic signal found within mitochondrial genome data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2008, 49, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sheffield, N.C.; Hiatt, K.D.; Valentine, M.C.; Song, H.; Whiting, M.F. Mitochondrial genomics in Orthoptera using MOSAS. Mitochondrial DNA 2010, 21, 87–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhou, Z.; Ye, H.; Huang, Y.; Shi, F. The phylogeny of Orthoptera inferred from mtDNA and description of Elimaea cheni (Tettigoniidae: Phaneropterinae) mitogenome. J. Genet. Genom. 2010, 37, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zhou, Z.; Zhao, L.; Liu, N.; Guo, H.; Guan, B.; Di, J.; Shi, F. Towards a higher-level Ensifera phylogeny inferred from mitogenome sequences. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2017, 108, 22–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Leavitt, J.R.; Hiatt, K.D.; Whiting, M.F.; Song, H. Searching for the optimal data partitioning strategy in mitochondrial phylogenomics: A phylogeny of Acridoidea (Insecta: Orthoptera: Caelifera) as a case study. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2013, 67, 494–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Zhang, H.-L.; Huang, Y.; Lin, L.-L.; Wang, X.-Y.; Zheng, Z.-M. The phylogeny of the Orthoptera (Insecta) as deduced from mitogenomic gene sequences. Zool. Stud. 2013, 52, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Zhang, H.-L.; Zeng, H.-H.; Huang, Y.; Zheng, Z.-M. The complete mitochondrial genomes of three grasshoppers, Asiotmethis zacharjini, Filchnerella helanshanensis and Pseudotmethis rubimarginis (Orthoptera: Pamphagidae). Gene 2013, 517, 89–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Song, H.; Amédégnato, C.; Cigliano, M.M.; Desutter-Grandcolas, L.; Heads, S.W.; Huang, Y.; Otte, D.; Whiting, M.F. 300 million years of diversification: Elucidating the patterns of orthopteran evolution based on comprehensive taxon and gene sampling. Cladistics 2015, 31, 621–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Song, H.; Mariño-Pérez, R.; A Woller, D.; Cigliano, M.M. Evolution, Diversification, and Biogeography of Grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Insect Syst. Divers. 2018, 2, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Liu, H.; Yan, L.; Jiang, G. The complete mitochondrial genome of the jumping grasshopper Sinopodisma pieli (Orthoptera: Acrididae) and the phylogenetic analysis of Melanoplinae. Zootaxa 2017, 4363, 506–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Zhao, L.; Li, X.; Huang, Y. Characterization of the mitochondrial genomics and phylogeny of orthoptera (Insecta: Arthropoda). Chin. Bull. Life Sci. 2018, 30, 113–123. [Google Scholar]
  31. Li, R.; Shu, X.; Li, X.; Meng, L.; Li, B. Comparative mitogenome analysis of three species and monophyletic inference of Catantopinae (Orthoptera: Acridoidea). Genomics 2019, 111, 1728–1735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Li, R.; Shu, X.; Deng, W.; Meng, L.; Li, B. Complete mitochondrial genome of Atractomorpha sagittaris (Orthoptera: Pyrgomorphidae) and its phylogenetic analysis for Acrididea. Biologia 2020, 75, 1571–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Li, R.; Wang, Y.; Shu, X.; Meng, L.; Li, B. Complete mitochondrial genomes of three Oxya grasshoppers (Orthoptera) and their implications for phylogenetic reconstruction. Genomics 2020, 112, 289–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Qiu, Z.; Chang, H.; Yuan, H.; Huang, Y.; Lu, H.; Li, X.; Gou, X. Comparative mitochondrial genomes of four species of Sinopodisma and phylogenetic implications (Orthoptera, Melanoplinae). ZooKeys 2020, 969, 23–42. [Google Scholar]
  35. Li, X.-D.; Jiang, G.-F.; Yan, L.-Y.; Li, R.; Mu, Y.; Deng, W.-A. Positive selection drove the adaptation of mitochondrial genes to the demands of flight and high-altitude environments in grasshoppers. Front. Genet. 2018, 9, 605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. Chang, H.; Nie, Y.; Zhang, N.; Zhang, X.; Sun, H.; Mao, Y.; Qiu, Z.Y.; Huang, Y. MtOrt: An empirical mitochondrial amino acid substitution model for evolutionary studies of Orthoptera insects. BMC Evol. Biol. 2020, 20, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chang, H.; Qiu, Z.; Yuan, H.; Wang, X.; Li, X.; Sun, H.; Guo, X.; Lu, Y.; Feng, X.; Majid, M.; et al. Evolutionary rates of and selective constraints on the mitochondrial genomes of Orthoptera insects with different wing types. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2020, 145, 106734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Chen, L.-P.; Zheng, F.-Y.; Bai, J.; Wang, J.-M.; Lv, C.-Y.; Li, X.; Zhi, Y.-C.; Li, X.-J. Comparative analysis of mitogenomes among six species of grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acridoidea: Catantopidae) and their phylogenetic implications in wing-type evolution. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 159, 1062–1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Hollis, D. A review of the subfamily Oxyinae (Orthoptera: Acridoidea). Bull. Brit. Mus. (Nat. Hist.), Entomol. Ser. 1975, 31, 189–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Uvarov, B.P. Grasshoppers and Locusts. A Handbook of General Acridology. Vol. 1. Anatomy, Physiology, Development, Phase Polymorphism, Introduction to Taxonomy; University of Cambridge Press: Cambridge, UK, 1966. [Google Scholar]
  41. Storozhenko, S.Y.; Kim, T.W.; Jeon, M.J. Monograph of Korean Orthoptera; National Institute of Biological Resources: Incheon, Korea, 2015.
  42. Dirsh, V.M. The phallic complex in Acridoidea (Orthoptera) in relation to taxonomy. T. Roy. Entomol. Soc. London 1956, 108, 223–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hahn, C.; Bachmann, L.; Chevreux, B. Reconstructing mitochondrial genomes directly from genomic next-generation sequencing reads—A baiting and iterative mapping approach. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013, 41, e129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Bernt, M.; Donath, A.; Jühling, F.; Externbrink, F.; Florentz, C.; Fritzsch, G.; Pütz, J.; Middendorf, M.; Stadler, P.F. MITOS: Improved de novo metazoan mitochondrial genome annotation. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2013, 69, 313–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kearse, M.; Moir, R.; Wilson, A.; Stones-Havas, S.; Cheung, M.; Sturrock, S.; Buxton, S.; Cooper, A.; Markowitz, S.; Duran, C.; et al. Geneious basic: An integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics 2012, 28, 1647–1649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Darty, K.; Denise, A.; Ponty, Y. VARNA: Interactive drawing and editing of the RNA secondary structure. Bioinformatics 2009, 25, 1974–1975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Li, M.; Knyaz, C.; Tamura, K. MEGA X: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018, 35, 1547–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Abascal, F.; Zardoya, R.; Telford, M.J. TranslatorX: Multiple alignment of nucleotide sequences guided by amino acid translations. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010, 38, W7–W13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Vaidya, G.; Lohman, D.J.; Meier, R. SequenceMatrix: Concatenation software for the fast assembly of multi-gene datasets with character set and codon information. Cladistics 2011, 27, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kalyaanamoorthy, S.; Minh, B.Q.; Wong, T.K.F.; Haeseler, A.; Jermiin, L.S. ModelFinder: Fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nat. Methods 2017, 14, 587–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Nguyen, L.-T.; Schmidt, H.A.; Haeseler, A.; Minh, B.Q. IQ-TREE: A fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2014, 32, 268–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Hoang, D.T.; Chernomor, O.; Haeseler, A.; Minh, B.Q.; Vinh, L.S. UFBoot2: Improving the ultrafast bootstrap approximation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018, 35, 518–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Trifinopoulos, J.; Nguyen, L.-T.; Haeseler, A.; Minh, B.Q. W-IQ-TREE: A fast online phylogenetic tool for maximum likelihood analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016, 44, W232–W235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Hillis, D.M.; Bull, J.J. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 1993, 42, 182–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Ronquist, F.; Teslenko, M.; van der Mark, P.; Ayres, D.L.; Darling, A.; Hna, S.H.; Larget, B.; Liu, L.; Suchard, M.A.; Huelsenbeck, J.P. MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61, 539–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Erixon, P.; Svennblad, B.; Britton, T.; Oxelman, B. Reliability of Bayesian posterior probabilities and bootstrap frequencies in phylogenetics. Syst. Biol. 2003, 52, 665–673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Otte, D. Orthoptera Species File 4; The Orthopterists’ Society and The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  58. Key, K.H.L.; Colles, D.H. A higher classification of the Australian Acridoidea (Orthoptera). II. Subfamily Catantopinae. Invertebr. Tax. 1993, 7, 89–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Storozhenko, S.Y. A new species of the genus MesambriaStål, 1878 with notes on the tribe Mesambriini (Orthoptera: Acrididae, Catantopinae). Zootaxa 2018, 4418, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Mistshenko, L.L. Locusts and Grasshoppers, Catantopinae. Fauna of USSR, Orthoptera. Tome 4. No. 2; Academy of Sciences of USSR Publ.: Moscow-Leningrad, Russia, 1952. [Google Scholar]
  61. Liu, D.F.; Dong, Z.M.; Zhang, D.Y.; Gu, Y.Z.; Guo, P.J.; Han, R.H.; Jiang, G.F. Molecular phylogeny of the higher category of Acrididae (Orthoptera: Acridoidea). Zool. Res. 2008, 29, 585–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Chapco, W. A note on the molecular phylogeny of small sample of catantopine grasshoppers. J. Orth. Res. 2013, 22, 15–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Woller, D.A.; Fontana, P.; Mariño-Pérez, R.; Song, H. Studies in Mexican grasshoppers: Liladownsia fraile, a new genus and species of Dactylotini (Acrididae: Melanoplinae) and an updated molecular phylogeny of Melanoplinae. Zootaxa 2014, 3793, 475–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Chapco, W.; Litzenberger, G.; Kuperus, W.R. A molecular biogeographic analysis of the relationship between North American melanoploid grasshoppers and their Eurasian and South American relatives. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2001, 18, 460–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Litzenberger, G.; Chapco, W. Molecular phylogeny of selected Eurasian Podismine Grasshoppers (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2001, 94, 505–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Litzenberger, G.; Chapco, W. The North American Melanoplinae (Orthoptera: Acrididae): A molecular phylogenetic study of their origins and taxonomic relationships. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2003, 96, 491–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Amédégnato, C.; Chapco, W.; Litzenberger, G. Out of South America? Additional evidence for a southern origin of melanopline grasshoppers. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2003, 29, 115–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Chintauan-Marquier, I.C.; Jordan, S.; Berthier, P.; Amédégnato, C.; Pompanon, F. Evolutionary history and taxonomy of a short-horned grasshopper subfamily: The melanoplinae (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2011, 58, 22–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Chintauan-Marquier, I.C.; Amédégnato, C.; Nichols, R.A.; Pompanon, F.; Grandcolas, P.; Desutter-Grandcolas, L. Inside the Melanoplinae: New molecular evidence for the evolutionary history of the Eurasian Podismini (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2014, 71, 224–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Roberts, H.R. A comparative study of the subfamilies of the Acrididae primarily on the basis of their phallic structures. P. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1941, 93, 201–246. [Google Scholar]
  71. Rehn, J.A.G.; Randell, R.L. A preliminary analysis of the lines of the super-tribe Melanoplini (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Cyrtacanthacridinae). P. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1963, 115, 1–32. [Google Scholar]
  72. Willemse, C. Revision des Acridiodea, décrites par De Haan, avec descriptions de nouvelles espèces. Zool. Mededelingen 1928, 11, 1–27. [Google Scholar]
  73. Bhowmik, H.K.; Halder, P. A new species of Circocephalus Willemse, 1928 from the foothill of the eastern Himalaya. Geobios 1982, 1, 8–10. [Google Scholar]
  74. Zheng, Z.M. A new species of Circocephalus Willemse from Heilongjiang Province, China (Orthoptera: Catantopidae). Acta Zootax. Sin. 1985, 10, 403–405. [Google Scholar]
  75. Bhowmik, H.K. Grasshopper fauna of west Bengal, India (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Zool. Surv. India, Techn. Monogr. 1986, 14, 1–180. [Google Scholar]
  76. Bhowmik, H.K.; Saha, B.C.; Bhargava, R.N. Contribution to the Acridid fauna (Orthoptera) of north-eastern states of India. Rec. Zool. Surv. India 1990, 86, 217–227. [Google Scholar]
  77. Ito, G. A systematic study of the grasshopper tribe Podismini in Japan (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Insecta Mats. J. Fac. Agr. Hokkaido Univ. 2015, 71, 1–119. [Google Scholar]
Insects 12 00918 g001 550
Figure 1. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from the sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs (protein-coding genes) using maximum likelihood. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae+Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Figure 1. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from the sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs (protein-coding genes) using maximum likelihood. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae+Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Insects 12 00918 g001
Insects 12 00918 g002 550
Figure 2. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs (protein-coding genes) and two rRNAs using maximum likelihood. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae + Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Figure 2. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs (protein-coding genes) and two rRNAs using maximum likelihood. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae + Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Insects 12 00918 g002
Insects 12 00918 g003 550
Figure 3. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs (protein-coding genes) using Bayesian inference. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae+Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Figure 3. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs (protein-coding genes) using Bayesian inference. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae+Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Insects 12 00918 g003
Insects 12 00918 g004 550
Figure 4. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs(protein-coding genes) and two rRNAs using Bayesian inference. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae+Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Figure 4. Phylogenetic tree reconstructed from sequences of the 13 mitogenome PCGs(protein-coding genes) and two rRNAs using Bayesian inference. The asterisk indicates the species Alulacris shilinensis. (A). Melanoplinae (excluding the genus Xiangelilacris). (B). Oxyinae + Spathosterninae + Hemiacridinae. (C). Coptacrinae + Traulia + Conophymacris + Xiangelilacris. (D). Eyprepocnemidinae+Calliptaminae. (E). Cyrtacanthacridinae+Catantopinae.
Insects 12 00918 g004
Insects 12 00918 g005 550
Figure 5. Morphological characters of Alulacris shilinensis. (a–c) Male habitus. (d–f) Female habitus. (g) Head and pronotum of male showing the shape of the prosternal process. (h) Terminal abdomen of a male in dorsal view showing the furculum. (i) Terminal abdomen of a male in lateral view showing the shape of cercus. (j) Hind femur of a male in lateral view showing the absence of denticles at the upper median keels. (k) Terminal abdomen of a female in dorsal view. (l,m) Epiphallus in dorsal and anterodorsal view. (n,o) Phallic complex in dorsal and lateral view.
Figure 5. Morphological characters of Alulacris shilinensis. (a–c) Male habitus. (d–f) Female habitus. (g) Head and pronotum of male showing the shape of the prosternal process. (h) Terminal abdomen of a male in dorsal view showing the furculum. (i) Terminal abdomen of a male in lateral view showing the shape of cercus. (j) Hind femur of a male in lateral view showing the absence of denticles at the upper median keels. (k) Terminal abdomen of a female in dorsal view. (l,m) Epiphallus in dorsal and anterodorsal view. (n,o) Phallic complex in dorsal and lateral view.
Insects 12 00918 g005
Insects 12 00918 g006 550
Figure 6. Morphological characters of Yunnanacris yunnaneus. (a–c) Male habitus. (d–f) Female habitus. (g) Head and pronotum of a male showing the shape of the prosternal process. (h) Terminal abdomen of a male in dorsal view showing the furculum. (i) Terminal abdomen of aale in lateral view, showing the shape of the cercus. (j) Terminal abdomen of a female in dorsal view. (k,l) Epiphallus in dorsal and anterodorsal view. (m,n) Phallic complex in dorsal and lateral view.
Figure 6. Morphological characters of Yunnanacris yunnaneus. (a–c) Male habitus. (d–f) Female habitus. (g) Head and pronotum of a male showing the shape of the prosternal process. (h) Terminal abdomen of a male in dorsal view showing the furculum. (i) Terminal abdomen of aale in lateral view, showing the shape of the cercus. (j) Terminal abdomen of a female in dorsal view. (k,l) Epiphallus in dorsal and anterodorsal view. (m,n) Phallic complex in dorsal and lateral view.
Insects 12 00918 g006
Table
Table 1. The best-fitting models used for the phylogenetic analyses.
Table 1. The best-fitting models used for the phylogenetic analyses.
Model SelectionBest ModelPartition Names
AICCGTR + I + GATP6_pos1, ATP6_pos2, ATP6_pos3
ATP8_pos1, ATP8_pos2
COX1_pos1, COX1_pos2, COX1_pos3
COX2_pos1, COX2_pos2, COX2_pos3
COX3_pos2, COX3_pos3
CYTB_pos1, CYTB_pos2, CYTB_pos3
ND1_pos2, ND1_pos3
ND2_pos1, ND2_pos2, ND2_pos3
ND3_pos1, ND3_pos2
ND4_pos1, ND4_pos2, ND4_pos3
ND4L_pos3
ND5_pos1, ND5_pos2, ND5_pos3
ND6_pos3
GTR + GCOX3_pos1
ND1_pos1
ND3_pos3
ND4L_pos2
ND6_pos1, ND6_pos2
RrnL, rrnS
HKY+I+GATP8_pos3
COX3_pos2
ND4L_pos1
Table
Table 2. Nucleotide composition of the mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis.
Table 2. Nucleotide composition of the mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis.
FeatureLength(bp)A%C%G%T%A + T%AT-skewGC-skew
Whole genome16,95041.214.611.332.974.10.1120−0.1274
Protein-coding genes11,14531.812.912.942.474.2−0.14290.0000
First codon position371532.012.520.335.567.5−0.05190.2378
Second codon position371519.420.514.345.865.2−0.4049−0.1782
Third codon position371543.95.64.146.490.3−0.0277−0.1546
Protein-coding genes-J686735.915.212.329.165.00.1046−0.1055
First codon position228935.015.220.829.164.10.09200.1556
Second codon position228919.822.213.744.364.1−0.3822−0.2368
Third codon position228925.88.32.436.562.3−0.1717−0.5514
Protein-coding genes-N427825.29.114.051.877.0−0.34550.2121
First codon position142627.18.319.645.072.1−0.24830.4050
Second codon position142618.717.715.448.266.9−0.4410−0.0695
Third codon position142629.72.36.962.291.9−0.35360.5000
ATP667837.915.39.637.275.10.0093−0.2289
ATP816243.812.36.237.781.50.0748−0.3297
COX1154033.615.515.535.469.0−0.02610.0000
COX268436.516.113.633.870.30.0384−0.0842
COX379232.717.714.535.152.8−0.3295−0.0994
CYTB113734.314.712.538.572.8−0.0577−0.0809
ND194250.113.39.826.977.00.3013−0.1515
ND2101837.815.636.525.663.40.19240.4012
ND335335.714.212.238.073.7−0.0312−0.0758
ND4133552.514.58.824.376.80.3672−0.2446
ND4L29457.814.37.520.478.20.4783−0.3119
ND5171951.013.89.225.976.90.3264−0.2000
ND652242.010.76.940.482.40.0194−0.2159
rrnL137744.415.08.931.776.10.1669−0.2552
rrnS79339.816.610.533.072.80.0934−0.2251
D-loop212135.613.514.136.972.5−0.01790.0217
Table
Table 3. Annotation of the complete mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis.
Table 3. Annotation of the complete mitogenome of Alulacris shilinensis.
NameTypeMinimumMaximumLengthDirectionSTARTENDInterval
trnItRNA16666+ 4
trnQtRNA7113969− 1
trnMtRNA14120969+ 0
ND2CDS21012281019+ATGTA2
trnWtRNA1231129868+ −8
trnCtRNA1291135565− 8
trnYtRNA1364142966− −8
COX1CDS142229611540+ATCT0
trnL2tRNA2962302766+ 4
COX2CDS30323715684+ATGTAA−2
trnDtRNA3714377865+ 2
trnKtRNA3781385171+ 14
ATP8CDS38664027162+ATCTAA−7
ATP6CDS40214698678+ATGTAA4
COX3CDS47035494792+ATGTAA2
trnGtRNA5497556367+ 0
ND3CDS55645917354+ATTTAA−1
trnAtRNA5917598165+ 2
trnRtRNA5984604865+ 3
trnNtRNA6052612069+ 0
trnS1tRNA6121618767+ 0
trnEtRNA6188625366+ 0
trnFtRNA6254631966− 1
ND5CDS632180391719−ATTTAA15
trnHtRNA8055811965− 4
ND4CDS812494581335−ATGTAA−7
ND4LCDS94529745294−ATGTAA2
trnTtRNA9748981669+ 0
trnPtRNA9817988064− 2
ND6CDS988310,404522+ATGTAA6
CYTBCDS10,41111,5501140+ATGTAA1
trnS2tRNA11,55211,62170+ 16
ND1CDS11,63812,582945−ATATAG3
trnL1tRNA12,58612,65166− −51
rrnLrRNA12,60113,9771377− −14
trnVtRNA13,96414,03471− 2
rrnSrRNA14,03714,829793− 0
D-loopunsure14,83016,9502121+
Table
Table 4. Codon usage of the PCGs of Alulacrisshilinensis.
Table 4. Codon usage of the PCGs of Alulacrisshilinensis.
Amino AcidCodonNo.RSCU (%)Amino AcidCodonNo.RSCU
(%)
PheUUU2971.73TyrUAU1431.73
UUC470.27 UAC220.27
LeuUUA3694.13EndUAA00
UUG300.34 UAG00
LeuCUU740.83HisCAU551.53
CUC100.11 CAC170.47
CUA490.55GlnCAA601.85
CUG40.04 CAG50.15
IleAUU3341.8AsnAAU1441.71
AUC370.2 AAC240.29
MetAUA2271.79LysAAA651.41
AUG270.21 AAG270.59
ValGUU1042.12AspGAU681.74
GUC30.06 GAC100.26
GUA841.71GluGAA681.68
GUG50.1 GAG130.32
SerUCU1232.71CysUGU411.91
UCC50.11 UGC20.09
UCA1262.78TrpUGA891.78
UCG10.02 UGG110.22
ProCCU671.99ArgCGU171.19
CCC50.15 CGC00
CCA601.78 CGA382.67
CCG30.09 CGG20.14
ThrACU631.3SerAGU300.66
ACC110.23 AGC30.07
ACA1172.41 AGA751.65
ACG30.06 AGG00
AlaGCU761.72GlyGGU861.54
GCC80.18 GGC40.07
GCA892.01 GGA1152.05
GCG40.09 GGG190.34
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xu, H.; Mao, B.; Storozhenko, S.Y.; Huang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Huang, J. Phylogenetic Position of the Genus Alulacris (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae: Podismini) Revealed by Complete Mitogenome Evidence. Insects 2021, 12, 918. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100918

AMA Style

Xu H, Mao B, Storozhenko SY, Huang Y, Chen Z, Huang J. Phylogenetic Position of the Genus Alulacris (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae: Podismini) Revealed by Complete Mitogenome Evidence. Insects. 2021; 12(10):918. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100918

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xu, Haiyang, Benyong Mao, Sergey Yu. Storozhenko, Yuan Huang, Zhilin Chen, and Jianhua Huang. 2021. "Phylogenetic Position of the Genus Alulacris (Orthoptera: Acrididae: Melanoplinae: Podismini) Revealed by Complete Mitogenome Evidence" Insects 12, no. 10: 918. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100918

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