NEUROBIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS AND FLY SYSTEMATICS: HOW DIFFERENT TYPES OF NEURAL CHARACTERS CAN CONTRIBUTE TO A HIGHER LEVEL DIPTERAN PHYLOGENY
- 1 June 2000
- Vol. 54 (3) , 888-898
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2000.tb00089.x
Abstract
Much uncertainty still exists regarding higher level phylogenetic relationships in the insect order Diptera, and the need for independent analyses is apparent. In this paper, I present a parsimony analysis that is based on details of the nervous system of flies. Because neural characters have received little attention in modern phylogenetic analyses and the stability of neural traits has been debated, special emphasis is given to testing the robustness of the analysis itself and to evaluating how neurobiological constraints (such as levels of neural processing) influence the phylogenetic information content. The phylogenetic study is based on 14 species in three nematoceran and nine brachyceran families. All characters used in the analysis are based on anatomical details of the neural organization of the fly visual system. For the most part they relate to uniquely identifiable neurons, which are cells or cell types that can be confidently recognized as homologues among different species and thus compared. Parsimony analysis results in a phylogenetic hypothesis that favors specific previously suggested phylogenetic relationships and suggests alternatives regarding other placements. For example, several heterodactylan families (Bombyliidae, Asilidae, and Dolichopodidae) are supported in their placement as suggested by Sinclair et al. (1993), but Tipulidae and Syrphidae are placed differently. Tipulidae are placed at a derived rather than ancestral position within the Nematocera, and Syrphidae are placed within the Schizophora. The analysis suggests that neural characters generally maintain phylogenetic information well. However, by "forcing" neural characters onto conventional phylogenetic analyses it becomes apparent that not all neural centers maintain such information equally well. For example, neurons of the second-order visual neuropil, the medulla, contain stronger phylogenetic "signal" than do characters of the deeper visual center, the lobula plate. These differences may relate to different functional constraints in the two neuropils.Keywords
This publication has 42 references indexed in Scilit:
- Neuromuscular control of prey capture in frogsPhilosophical Transactions Of The Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 1999
- The Chemoarchitecture of the Forebrain of Lampreys: Evolutionary Implications by Comparisons with GnathostomesEuropean Journal of Morphology, 1999
- Functionally and anatomically segregated visual pathways in the lobula complex of a calliphorid flyJournal of Comparative Neurology, 1998
- Phylogeny of the nematocerous families of Diptera (Insecta)Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 1995
- The dipteran sperm tail: ultrastructural characteristics and phylogenetic considerationsZoologica Scripta, 1993
- A phylogenetic interpretation of the Brachycera (Diptera) based on the larval mandible and associated mouthpart structuresSystematic Entomology, 1992
- The Evolution of Neural Circuits Controlling Feeding Behavior in FrogsBrain, Behavior and Evolution, 1992
- Neuronal basis for parallel visual processing in the flyVisual Neuroscience, 1991
- On neuronal homology: A comparison of similar axons in Musca, Sarcophaga, and Drosophila (Diptera: Schizophora)Journal of Comparative Neurology, 1983
- Evolutionary loss of a neural pathway from the nervous system of a fly (Glossina morsitans/Diptera)Journal of Morphology, 1982