Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Assessing alpha and beta taxonomy in eupelmid wasps: determinants of the probability of describing good species and synonyms

2009; Wiley; Volume: 48; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1111/j.1439-0469.2009.00523.x

1439-0469

Andrés Baselga, Jorge M. Lobo, Joaquín Hortal, Alberto Jiménez‐Valverde, J. F. Gómez,

Lepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy

Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary ResearchVolume 48, Issue 1 p. 40-49 Assessing alpha and beta taxonomy in eupelmid wasps: determinants of the probability of describing good species and synonyms Evaluación de la taxonomía alfa y beta en eupélmidos: determinantes de la probabilidad de descripción de buenas especies y sinónimos A. Baselga, A. Baselga Departamento de Zoología, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, SpainSearch for more papers by this authorJ. M. Lobo, J. M. Lobo Departamento de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), Madrid, SpainSearch for more papers by this authorJ. Hortal, J. Hortal NERC, Centre for Population Biology, Division of Biology, Imperial College London, Ascot, UKSearch for more papers by this authorA. Jiménez-Valverde, A. Jiménez-Valverde Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USASearch for more papers by this authorJ. F. Gómez, J. F. Gómez Departamento de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), Madrid, SpainSearch for more papers by this author A. Baselga, A. Baselga Departamento de Zoología, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, SpainSearch for more papers by this authorJ. M. Lobo, J. M. Lobo Departamento de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), Madrid, SpainSearch for more papers by this authorJ. Hortal, J. Hortal NERC, Centre for Population Biology, Division of Biology, Imperial College London, Ascot, UKSearch for more papers by this authorA. Jiménez-Valverde, A. Jiménez-Valverde Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USASearch for more papers by this authorJ. F. Gómez, J. F. Gómez Departamento de Biodiversidad y Biología Evolutiva, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales (CSIC), Madrid, SpainSearch for more papers by this author First published: 05 January 2010 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0469.2009.00523.xCitations: 16 Jose F. Gómez ([email protected]) Andrés Baselga ([email protected]), Jorge M. Lobo ([email protected]), Joaquín Hortal ([email protected]), Alberto Jiménez-Valverde ([email protected]) Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Abstracten We analysed the status of the taxonomical knowledge on Afrotropical and Palaearctic Eupelmidae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea), by assessing the historical accumulation of valid new species and synonyms through time, as well as the factors that have determined the process of description of good species and synonyms in these regions. The species accumulation curves for valid species names show that a significant proportion of the taxa remains to be described in both areas. On the contrary, the historical accumulation of synonymic names seems to reach an asymptote in both areas, although the proportion of synonyms compared with the total number of names is higher in the Palaearctic region. We assessed factors influencing the probability of a species being discovered and the probability of being described several times under different names. Both probabilities seem to be affected by the same factors. Distribution range size and geographical location of taxa affect both the processes of discovering good species and producing synonyms in either region. Models using all these predictors explain (1) 36% and 40% of the variance in the year of description of valid names for the Afrotropical and Palaearctic regions respectively, and (2) 56% and 40% of the variation in the number of synonyms per valid species in these two areas. For the species with available information, trophic specialization is also a significant determinant of these probabilities. However, its effect is also accounted for by geographical range size, which can thus be used as a surrogate of the ecological correlates of discovery and redundant description probabilities. In general, the ecologically generalist, widely distributed and early described taxa living in northern and western areas of both regions have been subject of redundant description more times. Further, taxonomical effort is needed in the south and east of the Palaearctic, as well as in the whole of the Afrotropics, where additional effort in a revision of Eupelmid systematics is needed. Resumenes Se analiza el estado del conocimiento taxonómico sobre los Eupelmidae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea) afrotropicales y paleárticos, mediante la evaluación de la acumulación histórica de nuevas especies válidas y sinónimos (descripciones redundantes de taxones previamente conocidos), así como los factores que han determinado el proceso de descripción de buenas especies y sinónimos en ambas regiones. Las curvas históricas de acumulación de especies válidas muestran que una proporción significativa de especies permanece sin describir en ambas áreas. Por el contrario, la acumulación histórica de sinónimos parece haber alcanzado una asíntota en las dos regiones, aunque la proporción de sinónimos sobre el total de nombres utilizados es mayor en la región paleártica. Se analizan también los factores que influyen en la probabilidad de que una especie sea descubierta y en la probabilidad de que sea redundantemente descrita varias veces, produciendo sinónimos. Ambas probabilidades parecen estar afectadas por los mismos factores. El tamaño del área de distribución y la localización geográfica de las taxones afecta tanto al proceso de descubrimiento de especies válidas como a la producción de sinónimos en ambas regiones. Los modelos construidos usando las citadas variables predictoras explican (i) el 36 y 40% de la varianza en el año de descripción de nombres válidos en las regiones afrotropical y paleártica, respectivamente, y (ii) el 56 y 40% de la varianza en el número de sinónimos por especie válida en esas dos regiones. Para las especies con información disponible, el grado de especialización trófica es también un determinante significativo de dichas probabilidades. Sin embargo, el tamaño del rango de distribución da cuenta del efecto de estas variables, por lo que puede ser utilizado como un indicador de los determinantes ecológicos de las tasas de descripción. En general, las especies generalistas, de amplia distribución y descritas más antiguamente que viven en las regiones más septentrionales y occidentales de ambas regiones han sido objeto de descripciones redundantes más numerosas (por tanto, poseen más sinónimos). Es necesario un mayor esfuerzo taxonómico en el Sur y Este de la región paleártica, así como en toda la región afrotropical, donde se necesita además un esfuerzo adicional en la revisión sistemática de los Eupelmidae. References Allsopp PG (1997) Probability of describing an Australian scarab beetle: influence of body size and distribution. J Biogeogr 24: 717– 724. Alroy J (2002) How many named species are valid? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 3706– 3711. Anitha PV (2004) Checklist of Eupelmidae (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea) from the Indian subcontinent. In: K Rajmohana, K Sudheer, P Girish Kumar, S Santhosh (eds), Perspectives on Biosystematics and Biodiversity. Prof. T.C. Narendran Commemoration Volume. Systematic Entomology Research Scholars Association, Kerala, pp 617– 625. Askew RR (2005) A new species of Anastatus Motschulsky (Hym., Eupelmidae). Ent Mon Mag 141: 215– 218. Askew RR, Nieves-Aldrey JL (2000) The genus Eupelmus Dalman, 1820 (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea, Eupelmidae) in peninsular Spain and the Canary Islands, with taxonomic notes and descriptions of new species. Graellsia 56: 49– 61. Askew RR, Nieves-Aldrey JL (2004) Further observations on Eupelminae (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea, Eupelmidae) in the Iberian Peninsula and Canary Islands, including descriptions of new species. Graellsia 60: 27– 39. Askew RR, Nieves-Aldrey JL (2006) Calosotinae and Neanastatinae in the Iberian Peninsula and Canary Islands, with descriptions of new species and a supplementary note on Brasema Cameron, 1884 (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea, Eupelmidae). Graellsia 62: 87– 100. Baselga A, Novoa F (2006) Diversity of Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera) in Galicia, Northwest Spain: estimating the completeness of the regional inventory. Biodivers Conserv 15: 205– 230. Baselga A, Hortal J, Jiménez-Valverde A, Gómez JF, Lobo JM (2007) Which leaf beetles have not yet been described? Determinants of the description of Western Palaearctic Aphthona species (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Biodivers Conserv 16: 1409– 1421. Blackburn TM, Gaston KJ (1995) What determines the probabilitiy of discovering a species?: a study of South American oscine passerine birds. J Biogeogr 22: 7– 14. Bouček Z (1988) Australasian Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera). C.A.B. International, Wallingford, UK, pp 832. Brown JH, Lomolino MV (1998) Biogeography, 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Inc, Sunderland, Massachussets, pp 692. Cabrero-Sañudo FJ, Lobo JM (2003) Estimating the number of species not yet described and their charactetristics: the case of Western Palaearctic dung beetle species (Coleoptera, Scarabaeoidea). Biodiver Conserv 12: 147– 166. Chevan A, Sutherland M (1991) Hierarchical partitioning. Am Stat 45: 90– 96. Collen B, Purvis A, Gittleman JL (2004) Biological correlates of description date in carnivores and primates. Global Ecol Biogeogr 13: 459– 467. Colwell RK, Coddington JA (1994) Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Phil Trans R Soc B 345: 101– 118. Cox CB (2001) The biogeographic regions reconsidered. J Biogeogr 28: 511– 523. De Grave S (2003) Historical patterns in the description of north east Atlantic Decapoda. J Crust Biol 23: 669– 677. Delvare G (2001) A revision of genus Pentacladia Westwood (Hymenoptera, Eupelmidae). Rev Fr Ent 23: 47– 62. Dennis RLH, Thomas CD (2000) Bias in butterfly distribution maps: the influence of hot spots and recorder's home range. J Insect Conserv 4: 73– 77. Diniz-Filho JAF, Bastos RP, Rangel TFLVB, Bini LM, Carvalho P, Silva R (2005) Macroecological correlates and spatial patterns of anuran description dates in the Brazilian Cerrado. Global Ecol Biogeogr 14: 469– 477. Flather CH (1996) Fitting species-accumulation functions and assessing regional land use impacts on avian diversity. J Biogeogr 23: 155– 168. Gaston KJ (1993) Spatial patterns in the description and richness of the Hymenoptera. In: J LaSalle, ID Gauld (eds), Hymenoptera and Biodiversity. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, pp 277– 293. Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM (1994) Are newly described bird species small-bodied? Biodivers Lett 2: 16– 20. Gaston KJ, Mound LA (1993) Taxonomy hypothesis testing and the biodiversity crisis. Proc R Soc B 251: 139– 142. Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM, Loder N (1995a) Which species are decribed first?: the case of North American butterflies. Biodivers Conserv 4: 119– 127. Gaston KJ, Scoble MJ, Crook A (1995b) Patterns in species description: a case study using Geometridae (Lepidoptera). Biol J Linn Soc 55: 225– 237. Gibbons MJ, Richardson AJ, Angel MV, Buecher E, Esnal G, Fernández Alamo MA, Gibson R, Itoh H, Pugh P, Boettger-Schnack R, Thuesen E (2005) What determines the likelihood of species discovery in marine holozooplankton: is size, range or depth important? Oikos 109: 567– 576. Gibson GA (1995) Parasitic Wasps of the Subfamily Eupelminae: Classification and Revision of World Genera (Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea: Eupelmidae). Memoirs on Entomology, International, 5, Gainesville, Florida, USA, pp 421. Guil N, Cabrero-Sañudo FJ (2007) Analysis of the species description process for a little known invertebrate group: the limnoterrestrial tardigrades (Bilateria, Tardigrada). Biodivers Conserv 16: 1063– 1086. Hortal J, Lobo JM, Jiménez-Valverde A (2007) Limitations of biodiversity databases: case study on seed-plant diversity in Tenerife (Canary Islands). Conserv Biol 21: 853– 863. Hortal J, Jiménez-Valverde A, Gómez JF, Lobo JM, Baselga A (2008) Historical bias in biodiversity inventories affects the observed realized niche of the species. Oikos 117: 847– 858. Jiménez-Valverde A, Ortuño VM (2007) The historical description process of Iberian endemic ground-beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae): which species are described first? Acta Oecol 31: 13– 31. Kalina V (1981) The Palaearctic species of the genus Macroneura Walker, 1837 (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea, Eupelmidae), with descriptions of new species. Sb Vedeck Lesnick Ust Vysoke Skoly Zemed v Praze 24: 83– 111. Kalina V (1988) Descriptions of new Palaearctic species of the genus Eupelmus Dalman with a key to species (Hymenoptera, Chalcidoidea, Eupelmidae). Silvaec Trop Subtrop 12: 3– 33. Legendre P, Legendre L (1998) Numerical Ecology, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 853. Lobo JM, Baselga A, Hortal J, Jiménez-Valverde A, Gómez JF (2007) How does knowledge of the spatial distribution of species accumulate? Divers Distrib 13: 772– 780. Mac Nally R (2000) Regression and model-building in conservation biology, biogeography and ecology: the distinction between – and reconciliation of –'predictive' and 'explanatory' models. Biodivers Conserv 9: 655– 671. Mac Nally R (2002) Multiple regression and inference in ecology and conservation biology: further comments on identifying important predictor variables. Biodivers Conserv 11: 1397– 1401. Mac Nally R, Horrocks G (2002) Relative influences of match, landscape and historical factors on birds in an Australian fragmented landscape. J Biogeogr 29: 395– 410. May RM (1988) How many species are there on earth? Science 241: 1441– 1449. May RM (1990) How many species? Phil Trans R Soc B 330: 171– 182. Mayr E (1969) Principles of Systematic Zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 428. Medellín RA, Soberón JM (1999) Predictions of mammal diversity of four land masses. Conserv Biol 13: 143– 149. Noyes JS (2003) Universal Chalcidoidea Database. World Wide Web electronic publication. http://www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/chalcidoids [last accessed 10 September 2008]. Pimm SL, Russell GJ, Gittleman JL, Brooks TM (1995) The future of biodiversity. Science 269: 347– 350. Quinn GP, Keough MJ (2002) Experimental Design and Data Analysis for Biologists. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 520. R Development Core Team (2006) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Available at http://www.r-project.org, Computer program, version 2.4.1 By R Development Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria [last accessed 15 September 2008]. Sheng JK (1998) A new species of genus Mesocomys (Hymenoptera: Eupelmidae) from China. Entomol Sin 5: 26– 28. Sheng JK, Wang GH, Yu YX, Yu JC (1997) Four new species of Anastatus Motschulsky (Hymenoptera: Euplemidae) from China. Kun Chong Fen Lei Xue Bao 19: 58– 64. Solow AR, Mound LA, Gaston KF (1995) Estimating the rate of synonymy. Syst Biol 44: 93– 96. Stork NE (1997) Measuring global biodiversity and its decline. In: ML Reaka-Kudla, DE Wilson, EO Wilson (eds), Biodiversity II: Understanding and Protecting our biological Resources. Joseph Henry Press, Washington DC, pp 41– 68. Vigna Taglianti A, Audisio PA, Belfiore C, Biondi M, Bologna MA, Carpaneto GM, De Biase A, De Felici S, Piattella E, Racheli T, Zapparoli M, Zoia S (1992) Riflessioni di gruppo sui corotipi fondamentali della fauna W-paleartica ed in particolare italiana. Biogeographia 15: 159– 179. Walsh C, Mac Nally R (2005) The hier.part Package. R package version 1.01. Available at http://www.cran.r-project.org/web/packages/hier.part/index.html [last accessed 15 September 2008]. Whittaker RJ, Araújo MB, Jepson P, Ladle RJ, Watson JEM, Willis KJ (2005) Conservation Biogeography: assessment and prospect. Divers Distrib 11: 3– 23. Yang ZQ (1996) Parasitic Wasps on Bark Beetles in China (Hymenoptera). Science Press, Beijing, China, pp 336. Citing Literature Volume48, Issue1February 2010Pages 40-49 ReferencesRelatedInformation