• Home
  • About Alex Wild
  • Articles
  • Galleries
  • Myrmecology News

Myrmecos Blog

the little things matter

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Saturday links
Sunday Night Movie: Frontier Psychiatrist (The Avalanches) »

Paratrechina is so 2009 – Nylanderia is back in

January 9, 2010 by myrmecos

Nylanderia guatemalensis

What are ant taxonomists buzzing about this week?*

Well. A hot new paper by John LaPolla, Seán Brady, and Steve Shattuck in Systematic Entomology has killed Paratrechina as we know it.  Nearly all those adorable, hairy little formicines we knew as Paratrechina– like the phantom sand ant and the rasberry crazy ant– have been pulled out and placed in a resurrected genus Nylanderia. All that remains of Paratrechina is but a single species, the fabled Black Crazy Ant Paratrechina longicornis. Which, incidentally, is the species in this blog’s header photo.

Here’s what happened. LaPolla et al sequenced 5 genes from 50 ants in Prenolepis, Paratrechina, Euprenolepis, and Pseudolasius. Turns out that when they ran the phylogenetic analyses, Paratrechina longicornis– the name-bearing species for the genus- just wasn’t closely related to any of the other nominal Paratrechina.  Look:

Simplified cladogram from LaPolla et al 2010, based on DNA sequence data from 5 loci and 50 specimens. Red indicates lineages included in the old Paratrechina.

If you follow the red, you’ll see that Paratrechina longicornis is in fact closer to the genera Pseudolasius and Euprenolepis. Most of the other Paratrechina, those that had been placed at various times in the subgenera Paraparatrechina and Nylanderia, are independent lineages. Taxonomists had long recognized that the black crazy ant was structurally different, but the more precise geneaology was unknown until now.

With the tree in hand, LaPolla et al set about crafting a new taxonomy based on evolutionary relationships. That meant reviving Nylanderia and the unfortunately-named Paraparatrechina as full genera. As the authors made a thorough job of describing morphological traits that diagnose each lineage, this paper is one of the finest ant examples yet of a productive interplay between molecular phylogenetics and morphological taxonomy.

One unsolved problem is the matter of Prenolepis. A Caribbean species, P. albimaculata, does not group with the others. I’m not sure why the authors let this example of paraphyly stand, but presumably that lineage could be renamed something highly aggravating like Pseudoparaparatrechina, in keeping with the rest of the clade.

One last thing. I’d like to reproduce this lovely figure from the paper, a depiction of nomenclatural history:

Fig. 1 (from LaPolla et al 2010). Taxonomic changes at the generic level. Circles indicate establishment of genus; widely separated lines indicate status as a full genus, closely spaced lines indicate status as a subgenus, and joined lines indicate synonymy; squares indicate status proposed in this study.

It reminds me of this.

*Finally, someone is not afraid to ask the questions on everyone’s mind.

Source: LaPolla, J.S., Brady, S.G., Shattuck, S.O. 2010. Phylogeny and taxonomy of the Prenolepis genus-group of ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae). Systematic Entomology 35: 118-131.

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Ants, Science, Taxonomy | Tagged Ants, Evolution, myrmecology, Paratrechina, Taxonomy | 8 Comments

8 Responses

  1. on January 9, 2010 at 9:40 am James C. Trager

    It seems we were thinking along the same lines re: the nomenclature question. With Prenolepis now rendered paraphyletic, I have urged the authors not to fall prey to the temptation to call the new genus “Paraparaparatrechina”!


    • on January 9, 2010 at 3:17 pm Ainsley S

      As an advocate for maximum ridiculousness in taxonomy, I for one am in favor of Paraparaparatechina! Maybe I can prevail upon Steve to this end.

      I love that chronotaxonogram too– were there originally author names associated with the date labels?


  2. on January 9, 2010 at 9:50 am James C. Trager

    By the way, lovely to see all your Nylanderia images bunched together (as an artifact of relabeling?) at http://www.alexanderwild.com/Ants/Taxonomic-List-of-Ant-Genera/Paratrechina/9336745_rK3YY#722319112_xEtV4

    Still wondering “What the heck?” about the yellow one in the acorn … Maybe its molecules can tell us something


  3. on January 9, 2010 at 11:16 am Kai

    I’m really confused about why systematists would /ever/ allow a paraphyletic grouping to stand publication.


    • on January 10, 2010 at 12:24 pm John LaPolla

      First off, thank you Alex for the very kind words regarding our paper. As for Prenolepis, the question as to whether or not it is monophyletic or paraphyletic is still unclear. In the current paper we left it as is because the support for placing it with Paraparatrechina was weak (the weakest branch on the whole tree) and it is still possible that Prenolepis will be recovered monophyletic. We didn’t want to create yet another genus unless absolutely necessary and only if we had strong phylogenetic support for so doing. The good news is we are working on this very problem right now. We have a nice data set of Prenolepis from around the world and should have an answer as for what is going on here very soon. So James, Paraparaparatrechina still has a chance!


  4. on January 9, 2010 at 2:31 pm Psi Wavefunction

    @Kai,

    You should check out Cavalier-Smith’s papers.

    On the other hand, perhaps you may actually value your mental health/sanity. ^^

    He’s the master of resurrecting dead taxa as new paraphyletic groupings. It ranges from mildly annoying to absolutely infuriating sometimes. And since I’m just ‘working on’ (attempting to read) one of his papers at the moment:

    “I did not say that they ‘might not be monophyletic’. […] I said they might be paraphyletic, which in the classical and proper nomenclature that I use is a form of monophyly.” (Cavalier-Smith 2006 Biol Direct, response to reviewer#3 comment about Chlorobacteria)

    Can anyone help me comprehend that statement? I thought monophyly is generally synonymous with holophyly? Otherwise, since the line between paraphyly and polyphyly can become somewhat blurred, especially when the traits of the common ancestor are determined strictly by phylogeny rather than other data, wouldn’t this make ‘monophyly’ a rather useless term…?

    On the other hand, paraphyletic groupings could be convenient in informal situations. It’s easier to call something a ‘protist’ rather than ‘a eukaryote that is not a fungus, plant or animal’ or listing ‘chromalveolates, rhizaria, excavates, amoebozoans, ichthyosporeans, choanoflagellates’ etc. But that probably doesn’t justify using ‘protista’ as a taxon, IMO.

    Meh, that’s why I’m not a taxonomist! =P


  5. on January 9, 2010 at 5:49 pm summerwino

    It’s great when you find papers that use morphological and molecular means to support an evolutionary hypotheses. Always gives interesting answers.

    The clade which Prenolepis albimaculata falls in to hasn’t got huge support to support it’s position there. Bayesian is low and no MP/ML values. I don’t know how much you would want to read into the paraphyly, based on that?

    Perhaps Paraparatrechnia and Prenolepis need further morphological work to ascertain monophyly? Always easier said than done!

    Hi from Australia, btw!


  6. on January 12, 2010 at 10:24 pm Sean Brady

    Although Alex highlights the circuitry and disturbing Star Wars parallels (disturbing to me, at least) of our Fig. 1, I would like to point out that our Fig. 2 comprises four fantastic photographs generously provided by Alex. Thanks, and perhaps we’ll be hitting you up soon for some more “Paraparaparatrechina” shots….



Comments are closed.


  • This blog is an archive; the Myrmecos blog has moved.

    Please update your bookmarks!
  • Alex’s Galleries

    alexanderwild.com

  • Recent Photos

    # SaloméArtificial Street Photography 1Kettering, Ohio, 2022IN WINTER'S GRIPVegetazione metallica.Un regard hypnotisant / A mesmerizing gaze
    More Photos
  • Biology Links

    • Tree of Life
    • Understanding Evolution
  • Blogroll

    • Ainsley Vs Livejournal
    • Ammonite
    • Anna’s Bee World
    • Archetype
    • Arthropoda blog
    • Backyard Arthropod Project
    • Beetles in the Bush
    • biodiversity in focus
    • Bug Dreams
    • Bug Eric
    • Bug Girl’s Blog
    • Burrard-Lucas Photoblog
    • Catalogue of Organisms
    • Creature Cast
    • Dan Heller
    • Debbie's Insect Blog
    • Dechronization
    • Drawing the MotMot
    • Entomoblog
    • Evolving Thoughts
    • Fall to Climb
    • Generant
    • Historias de Hormigas
    • Life on Six Legs
    • Macromite
    • microecos
    • mirmekolozi
    • myrmecoid
    • Myrmician
    • Natural Imagery
    • Nature in the Ozarks
    • NCSU Insect Blog
    • No Cropping Zone
    • omit needless words
    • Photo Synthesis
    • Princess Peppercloud
    • Science Blogs
    • Snail’s Tales
    • Stu Jenks
    • The Ant Hunter
    • The Ant Room
    • The Bug Whisperer
    • The Loom
    • This Week in Evolution
    • What's Bugging You?
    • Wild about Ants
    • Xenogere
  • Insect Links

    • Ant Farm Forum
    • Ant Insights
    • Antweb
    • Bug Squad
    • bugguide.net
    • Xerces Society
  • Photography Links

    • Canon Photography Forums
    • Digital Photography Review
    • DIY Photography
    • Igor Siwanowicz
    • Mark Plonsky
    • photo.net
    • Piotr Naskrecki
    • The Strobist
  • Popular Posts

    • Rover Ants (Brachymyrmex patagonicus), an emerging pest species
    • The eggs that weren't
    • About Alex Wild
    • Articles
    • How to Identify the Argentine Ant, Linepithema humile
    • My, what big eyes you have...
    • Army Ants of the North
    • Reader question: who discovered the sex of ant workers?
    • Ants of the Paraná, then and now
    • Are ants left-handed?
  • Recent Posts

    • This blog has moved.
    • Friday Beetle Blogging: The Hollyhock Weevil
    • The Friday Beetle will be late…
    • Bed bugs reach an all-time high
    • Answer to the Monday Night Mystery
  • Recent Comments

    • Donald Byron Johnson on Reader question: who discovered the sex of ant workers?
    • Anonymous on Update on the Rogue Taxonomist
    • Ant on Arizona Daily Star covers “Planet of the Ants”
    • Ga. Girl on Beware the Cow-Killer
    • Anonymous on Beware the Cow-Killer
  • Categories

  • Archives

  • animation Ants aphids arachnids Argentina arizona army ants art Bees beetles behavior biodiversity biology Biology Links bugs Canon carabidae coleoptera copyright Darwin desert diptera E. O. Wilson ecology entomology Evolution fail fire ants Flies formicidae genetics google haiku Harpegnathos imaging Insect Links Insects invasive species lighting Linepithema macro macrophotography macro photography Martialis media miniscule muppets music myrmecology mystery natural history Nature new species odontomachus Parasites Paratrechina pests pheidole Photography Photography business photoshop phylogenetics phylogeny Pogonomyrmex politics predation Scarabaeidae Science SEM social insects spiders Taxonomy termites travel wasps
  • Nature Blog Network
    Add to Technorati Favorites

    Follow this blog

Blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


  • Follow Following
    • Myrmecos Blog
    • Join 91 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Myrmecos Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: