Next Article in Journal
Distribution, Population Dynamics, and Management of Moroccan Locust Dociostaurus maroccanus (Thunberg, 1815) (Orthoptera, Acrididae) in Tajikistan
Previous Article in Journal
De Novo Transcriptome Profiling of Mustard Aphid (Lipaphis erysimi) and Differential Expression of Transcripts Associated with Feeding and Non-Feeding Conditions and Developmental Stages
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Unravelling the Molecular Identity of Bulgarian Jumping Plant Lice of the Family Aphalaridae (Hemiptera: Psylloidea)

by
Monika Pramatarova
1,*,
Daniel Burckhardt
2,
Igor Malenovský
3,
Ilia Gjonov
1,
Hannes Schuler
4,5 and
Liliya Štarhová Serbina
4,6
1
Department of Zoology and Anthropology, Faculty of Biology, Sofia University, Dragan Tzankov 8, 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria
2
Naturhistorisches Museum, Augustinergasse 2, 4001 Basel, Switzerland
3
Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, 611 37 Brno, Czech Republic
4
Faculty of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Sciences, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, 39100 Bolzano, Italy
5
Competence Center for Plant Health, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, 39100 Bolzano, Italy
6
Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Discovery, Museum für Naturkunde, 10115 Berlin, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Submission received: 24 July 2024 / Revised: 31 August 2024 / Accepted: 5 September 2024 / Published: 10 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Insect Systematics, Phylogeny and Evolution)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Correct taxonomic identification is essential for conducting successful biological research, especially with regard to economically important insects, such as jumping plant lice or psyllids. In the present study, we identify and diagnose the morphologically characterised aphalarid species from Bulgaria using two molecular markers, cytochrome c oxidase I and cytochrome b. A total of 80 sequences of 25 Aphalaridae species were obtained and included in the BOLD and GenBank databases. This should enable even non-experts to identify these species quickly and accurately. The results of the current study show that two barcode genes are sufficient to distinguish most aphalarid species.

Abstract

Psyllids (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) are plant sap-sucking insects whose identification is often difficult for non-experts. Despite the rapid development of DNA barcoding techniques and their widespread use, only a limited number of sequences of psyllids are available in the public databases, and those that are available are often misidentified. Here, we provide 80 sequences of two mitochondrial genes, cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) and cytochrome b (Cytb), for 25 species of Aphalaridae, mainly from Bulgaria. The DNA barcodes for 15 of these species are published for the first time. In cases where standard primers failed to amplify the target gene fragment, we designed new primers that can be used in future studies. The distance-based thresholds for the analysed species were between 0.0015 and 0.3415 for COI and 0.0771 and 0.4721 for Cytb, indicating that the Cytb gene has a higher interspecific divergence, compared to COI, and therefore allows for more accurate species identification. The species delimitation based on DNA barcodes is largely consistent with the differences resulting from morphological and host plant data, demonstrating that the use of DNA barcodes is suitable for successful identification of most aphalarid species studied. The phylogenetic reconstruction based on maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference analyses, while showing similar results at high taxonomic levels to previously published phylogenies, provides additional information on the placement of aphalarids at the species level. The following five species represent new records for Bulgaria: Agonoscena targionii, Aphalara affinis, Colposcenia aliena, Co. bidentata, and Craspedolepta malachitica. Craspedolepta conspersa is reported for the first time from the Czech Republic, while Agonoscena cisti is reported for the first time from Albania.

1. Introduction

The accurate identification of species is key to successful biological research. Over the last three decades, molecular methods have become increasingly popular, often replacing taxonomic expertise founded in morphology [1]. DNA barcoding is expected to provide a rapid and reliable method for species identification, especially for specimens lacking conspicuous morphological features (e.g., immature insects, cryptic species) or species exhibiting seasonal or sexual dimorphism [2,3]. Consequently, molecular identification is now widely used for the detection of quarantine species and plant pests [4,5,6]. However, the use of DNA barcoding for reliable species identification is only possible if the gene sequences of correctly identified individuals are available in reference databases such as BOLD or GenBank [7]. Unfortunately, these databases are quite incomplete for many groups and are plagued by misidentifications [8] as they lack a quality control mechanism.
Jumping plant lice or psyllids (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) constitute a group of Sternorrhyncha. Some psyllid species are serious pests of crops or ornamental plants, while others are used as biological control agents [9,10,11,12]. Psyllids are small (1–10 mm body length, including the wings when folded over the body), sap-sucking, generally host-specific insects that are predominantly associated with eudicots and magnoliids and only exceptionally with monocots or conifers [13,14]. Slightly more than 4000 species have been described from all biogeographical regions, except Antarctica, but at least as many are still undescribed [14]. From Europe, a comparatively well-studied region, about 400 species are known, representing six (Aphalaridae, Calophyidae, Carsidaridae, Liviidae, Psyllidae, and Triozidae) of the seven currently recognised psyllid families [15]. The molecular data available in GenBank “https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/ (accessed on 12 November 2023)” and BOLD “http://boldsystems.org (accessed on 12 November 2023)” mostly concern pest psyllids such as Bactericera cockerelli (Šulc), pear psyllids of the genus Cacopsylla Ossiannilsson, and Diaphorina citri Kuwayama, while information on non-pest psyllids is often limited [6,16].
Aphalaridae are the third largest family of Psylloidea, with 770 described species [15]. Their phylogeny is still controversial as to whether they are monophyletic or paraphyletic [16,17]. Wang et al. [18], however, provided evidence in favour of the monophyly of the family. Burckhardt et al. [14] recognised seven subfamilies worldwide, of which only Aphalarinae and Rhinocolinae are native to Europe and Bulgaria, while several introduced pests of Eucalyptus sp. from Spondyliaspidinae also occur in Europe [19,20,21,22]. The monophyly of Aphalarinae and Rhinocolinae is strongly supported by molecular and morphological data ([14] and the literature cited therein). The phylogenetic relationships within the two subfamilies have been analysed at the generic level using morphological data [23,24,25] and for a limited set of taxa using molecular data [16,17].
In Bulgaria, Aphalaridae are represented by 20 species of Aphalarinae [26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36] and four species of Rhinocolinae [23,28]. Aphalara Foerster and Craspedolepta Enderlein are two species-rich genera of Aphalarinae with a predominantly Holarctic distribution. In the past, both genera were divided into two or more genera or subgenera, which led to artificial groupings, as shown by Burckhardt and Lauterer [32], who defined the genera as putatively monophyletic.
Due to minor morphological differences and overlapping host ranges between some species, the identification of Aphalaridae, especially Aphalara, Craspedolepta, and Agonoscena Enderlein, may prove difficult for non-experts. Here, we evaluate the accuracy and efficiency of DNA barcoding of the two protein-coding mitochondrial gene fragments COI and Cytb for the identification of 25 species of Aphalaridae (23 spp. from Bulgaria, 1 sp. from the Czech Republic, 1 sp. from Albania). We also use the newly obtained molecular data to shed more light on the phylogenetic relationships within Aphalaridae.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Material

A total of 75 specimens of 25 Aphalaridae species were collected from 27 localities in Bulgaria (23 spp.), Albania (1 sp.), and the Czech Republic (1 sp.) (Table 1 and Figure 1). The specimens were collected during faunistic surveys in different types of vegetation using a sweep net and an aspirator. The host plants were identified in the field and are listed in Table 1. Specimens collected after 2016 were preserved in 70% or 96% ethanol, while specimens collected before 2016 were mounted dry. The material was primarily identified on the basis of morphological characters of the adults according to the identification keys and taxonomic descriptions of Ossiannilsson [37] and Burckhardt and Lauterer [32] for Aphalara spp., Loginova [38] and Burckhardt [39] for Colposcenia Enderlein, Ossiannilsson [37], Loginova [40,41], Dobreanu and Manolache [42], Conci and Tamanini [43], and Burckhardt and Lauterer [44] for Craspedolepta, Conci and Tamanini [45] and Burckhardt [46] for Rhodochlanis Loginova, and Burckhardt and Lauterer [23] for Rhinocolinae. The nomenclature and classification follow the Psyl’list database [15]. The voucher specimens are deposited in the Zoological Collection of the University of Sofia.

2.2. DNA Extraction, Amplification, Sequencing and Alignment

DNA extraction, amplification, and sequencing of the COI gene fragment of 21 species were performed by the Canadian Centre for DNA Barcoding (CCDB) using non-destructive DNA extraction from the whole specimen. The non-destructive method was chosen to preserve the morphological integrity of these specimens for future analysis. Later, nineteen samples of 18 species were destructively extracted with DNeasy Blood and Tissue (QIAGEN) in the molecular laboratory of the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The fragments of the two mitochondrial genes COI and Cytb were amplified there with DreamTaq DNA Polymerase (Thermo Fisher, Waltham, MA, USA). We chose these two genes because of their utility in species identification and phylogeographic studies, with COI being widely used for DNA barcoding and Cytb often used as an additional marker [2,4,8,47,48]. We designed new primers and developed protocols for the amplification of Cytb when the universal primer pairs Cytbf/Cytbr [16,49] failed to amplify the targeted gene fragment. The newly developed primers were designed manually using the conserved gene regions. Their suitability and the compatibility of the forward and reverse primer pairs were assessed using the PCR Primer Stats tools “https://www.bioinformatics.org/sms2/pcr_primer_stats.html (accessed on 15 December 2023)”. All primer sequences and PCR conditions are listed in Table 2. PCR products were purified and Sanger sequenced by Eurofins Genomics (Ebersberg, Germany). For the following seven species, Agonoscena pistaciae, Aphalara freji, Aph. polygoni, Craspedolepta bulgarica, Cr. conspersa, Cr. innoxia, and Cr. omissa, only the COI gene fragment was sequenced as no additional DNA was available.
The PCR products were sequenced in both directions. The sequences were aligned and trimmed using Geneious v.8.1.9 (Dotmatics, Boston, MA, USA) [50]. The alignment of the sequences was performed manually with MEGA v.11 [51]. The gene sequences were concatenated with SEAVIEW v.5.0.5 [52].
Table 1. Collecting data for the specimens of Aphalaridae associated with DNA barcodes or included in the phylogenetic analyses, with references to BOLD and GenBank databases. Abbreviations used in the table: M: male, F: female. The accession numbers of the sequences that were sequenced for the first time, are printed in bold. Psyllid species that represent new records for Bulgaria, Albania, or the Czech Republic are marked with an asterisk (*). For some voucher entries, only limited information about the locality is available in GenBank.
Table 1. Collecting data for the specimens of Aphalaridae associated with DNA barcodes or included in the phylogenetic analyses, with references to BOLD and GenBank databases. Abbreviations used in the table: M: male, F: female. The accession numbers of the sequences that were sequenced for the first time, are printed in bold. Psyllid species that represent new records for Bulgaria, Albania, or the Czech Republic are marked with an asterisk (*). For some voucher entries, only limited information about the locality is available in GenBank.
SubfamilySpeciesLocalityHost PlantLatitudeLongitudeAltitude (m)Collection DateSexSofia University Catalog NumberProcess ID (BOLD)Barcode Index Number (BIN)Accession N (GenBank)ReferenceFigure
Aphalarinae* Aphalara affinis (Zetterstedt, 1828)Bulgaria, Western Rhodopi Mts., Smolyanski ezera lakes-41.620324.6771152015 September 2021MBFUS-I-IG026770PSYBG001-23BOLD:AFM2800PQ109732This studyFigure 1j
Bulgaria, Western Rhodopi Mts., Smolyanski ezera lakes-41.620324.6771152015 September 2021MBFUS-I-IG026975PSYBG100-24-PQ100053This studyFigure 1j
AphalarinaeAphalara itadori (Shinji, 1938)Japan---------KP113670[53]-
United Kingdom---------MG988914[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
AphalarinaeAphalara avicularis Ossiannilsson, 1981Bulgaria, Western Stara Planina Mts., ChurekPolygonum aviculare L.42.776723.715779627 August 2023MBFUS-I-IG026773PSYBG004-23BOLD:ACY0265PQ109737This studyFigure 1k
Bulgaria, Western Stara Planina Mts., Churek42.776723.715779627 August 2023FBFUS-I-IG026977PSYBG115-24-PQ100054This studyFigure 1k
AphalarinaeAphalara freji Burckhardt & Lauterer, 1997Bulgaria, Eastern Stara Planina Mts., Bardarevo-42.898327.62197227 July 2011MBFUS-I-IG005891PSYBG062-23BOLD:ACY0265PQ109739This study-
AphalarinaeAphalara maculipennis Löw, 1886Bulgaria, Western Stara Planina Mts., Aldomivsko lake-42.884822.999866013 May 2022FBFUS-I-IG026960PSYBG096-24BOLD:AFT1810PQ109740
PQ100055
This studyFigure 1l
AphalarinaeAphalara nigrimaculosa Gegechkori, 1981Bulgaria, Western Rhodopi Mts., Pamporovo, Snezhanka peakRumex acetosella L.41.637024.6835185016 September 2021MBFUS-I-IG026982PSYBG097-24BOLD:AFT1810PQ109742
PQ100056
This studyFigure 1m
AphalarinaeAphalara polygoni Foerster, 1848Bulgaria, Western Rhodopi Mts., Cigov chark-41.931824.1292138018 June 2016FBFUS-I-IG005903PSYBG063-23BOLD:AFL6229PQ109743This study-
Aphalarinae* Colposcenia aliena (Löw, 1881)Bulgaria, East Danube plain, Poveljanovo districtTamarix sp.43.212227.6480746 July 2023MBFUS-I-IG026791PSYBG016-23BOLD:AFN1581PQ109745This studyFigure 1d
Bulgaria, East Danube plain, Poveljanovo district43.212227.6480746 July 2023MBFUS-I-IG027010PSYBG102-24-PQ100058This studyFigure 1d
Aphalarinae* Colposcenia bidentata Burckhardt, 1988Bulgaria, Eastern Rhodopi Mts., Meden bukTamarix sp.41.369626.05451106 July 2012 BFUS-I-IG020788PSYBG066-23BOLD:AFN1583PQ109747This study-
Bulgaria, Eastern Rila-Rhodopi Massif, near Arda river41.651425.868714027 August 2022FBFUS-I-IG027009PSYBG103-24-PQ100059This studyFigure 1e
AphalarinaeColposcenia osmanica Vondráček, 1953Bulgaria, Vlahina Planina Mts., SimitliTamarix sp.41.894523.11842908 May 2022MBFUS-I-IG026785PSYBG019-23BOLD:AFN1582PQ109749This study-
Bulgaria, Krumovgrad41.504425.394825510 October 2023MBFUS-I-IG027006PSYBG104-24-PQ100060This study-
AphalarinaeColposcenia traciana (Klimaszewski, 1970)Bulgaria, Strandzha Mts., TsarevoTamarix sp.42.136327.799214212 July 2023MBFUS-I-IG026788PSYBG022-23BOLD:AFL7588PQ109752This studyFigure 1g
Bulgaria, Strandzha Mts., Tsarevo42.136327.799214212 July 2023MBFUS-I-IG027003PSYBG105-24-PQ100061This studyFigure 1g
AphalarinaeColposcenia sp.Bulgaria, Meden buk -41.369626.05451106 July 2012----MG989005
MG988706
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta anomola (Crawford, 1914)Canada---------MG989006
MG988707
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta bulgarica Klimaszewski, 1961Bulgaria, Western Stara planina Mts., BuhovoAchillea sp.42.770323.566374310 June 2023MBFUS-I-IG026794PSYBG025-23BOLD:AFM9464PQ109753This studyFigure 1n
Aphalarinae* Craspedolepta conspersa (Löw, 1888)Czech Republic, South Moravia, SedlecArtemisia vulgaris L.48.774616.699817825 June 2023FBFUS-I-IG026829PSYBG026-23BOLD:AFM9463PQ109754This study-
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta innoxia (Foerster, 1848)Bulgaria, Western Stara planina Mts., Buhovo-42.770323.566374310 June 2023FBFUS-I-IG026795PSYBG027-23BOLD:AFM9464PQ109756This study-
Aphalarinae* Craspedolepta malachitica (Dahlbom, 1851)Bulgaria, Western Stara Planina Mts., Negovan, lakeArtemisia absinthium L.42.766023.400751314 July 2022FBFUS-I-IG026799PSYBG030-23BOLD:AFL5094PQ109759This study-
Bulgaria, Western Stara Planina Mts., Negovan, lake42.766023.400751314 July 2022FBFUS-I-IG026992PSYBG106-24-PQ100062This study-
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta nebulosa (Zetterstedt, 1828)Bulgaria, Rila-Rhodopi Massif, Rila Mts., MaljovitsaChamaenerion angustifolium (L.) Scop.42.208323.3889175023 July 2021FBFUS-I-IG026801PSYBG032-23BOLD:AFM9466PQ109760This study-
Bulgaria, Rila Mts, Maljovitsa hut42.188023.3736201015 June 2019MBFUS-I-IG026998PSYBG107-24-PQ100063This study-
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta nervosa (Foerster, 1848)Bulgaria, Western Stara planina Mts., BuhovoAchillea sp.42.770323.566374310 June 2023FBFUS-I-IG026796PSYBG036-23BOLD:ACY1733PQ109765This study-
Bulgaria, Western Stara planina Mts., Buhovo42.770323.566374310 June 2023FBFUS-I-IG026987PSYBG108-24-PQ100064This study-
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta omissa Wagner, 1944Bulgaria, Rila-Rhodopi Massif, Rila Mts., Kartala districtArtemisia vulgaris L.42.0423223.3663814642 August 2020MBFUS-I-IG026806PSYBG038-23BOLD:AFM9465PQ109768This study-
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta pontica Dobreanu & Manolache, 1962Bulgaria, Maleshevska Planina Mts., Stara Kresna, tourist shelterAchillea clypeolata Sibth. & Sm.41.769123.17585607 May 2022MBFUS-I-IG026808PSYBG040-23BOLD:AFM1102PQ109770This study-
Bulgaria, Maleshevska Planina Mts., road to Stara Kresna41.765623.165935030 April 2023FBFUS-I-IG026985PSYBG109-24-PQ100065This studyFigure 1r
AphalarinaeCraspedolepta subpunctata (Foerster, 1848)Bulgaria, Rila Mts, Alen mak hotelChamaenerion angustifolium (L.) Scop.42.212123.3870171214 June 2019MBFUS-I-IG026811PSYBG043-23BOLD:AAV0240PQ109771This study-
Bulgaria, Rila Mts., Alen mak hotel42.212123.3870171214 June 2019MBFUS-I-IG026989PSYBG114-24-PQ100066This study-
AphalarinaeLanthanaphalara mira Tuthill, 1959Peru---------NC038111[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
AphalarinaeLimataphalara lautereri Burckhardt & Queiroz, 2013Brazil---------MG988785
MG989094
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
AphalarinaeNeaphalara fortunae Brown & Hodkinson, 1988Costa Rica---------MG988801
MG989115
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
AphalarinaeRhodochlanis bicolor (Scott, 1880)Bulgaria, Black Sea coast, Pomorie, salt lakeSalicornia europaea (Moss) Lambinon & Vanderp.42.599827.62611623 July 2022MBFUS-I-IG026956PSYBG099-24BOLD:AFT3392PQ109781
PQ100069
This studyFigure 1h
RhinocolinaeAgonoscena atlantica Bastin, Burckhardt & Ouvrard, 2023Canary Islands---------OR027209
OR067180
[54]-
Rhinocolinae* Agonoscena cisti (Puton, 1882)Albania, MemoraqPistacia lentiscus L.39.852220.147019010 June 2022FBFUS-I-IG027025PSYBG098-24BOLD:AEB2674PQ109723
PQ100051
This study-
RhinocolinaeAgonoscena pistaciae Burckhardt & Lauterer, 1989Bulgaria, Eastern Rila-Rhodopi Massif, Gaberovo, GjurgenaPistacia terebinthus L.41.620625.885128027 August 2022FBFUS-I-IG026831PSYBG067-23BOLD:AFM5846PQ109726This study-
RhinocolinaeAgonoscena sinuata Bastin, Burckhardt & Ouvrard 2023Canary Islands---------OR027214
OR067162
[54,55]-
Rhinocolinae* Agonoscena targionii (Lichtenstein, 1874)Bulgaria, Maleshevska Planina Mts., Kresna, Peyo Yavorov stationPistacia terebinthus L.41.748223.161521713 August 2022MBFUS-I-IG026813PSYBG111-24BOLD:AFL7612PQ109729
PQ100052
This studyFigure 1a
RhinocolinaeApsylla cistellata (Buckton, 1896)Madagascar---------MG988642
MG988918
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
RhinocolinaeLisronia echidna Loginova, 1976Canary Islands---------OR864739
OR067189
[55]
RhinocolinaeMegagonoscena gallicola Burckhardt & Lauterer, 1989Bulgaria, Maleshevska Planina Mts., Stara KresnaPistacia terebinthus L.41.765023.16623607 May 2022MBFUS-I-IG026820PSYBG051-23BOLD:AFN1666PQ109777This studyFigure 1c
Bulgaria, Maleshevska Planina Mts., Stara Kresna41.765023.16623607 May 2022FBFUS-I-IG027016PSYBG112-24-PQ100067This studyFigure 1c
RhinocolinaeRhinocola aceris (Linnaeus, 1758)Bulgaria, Western Stara Planina Mts., ChurekAcer sp.42.780523.713781721 May 2022MBFUS-I-IG026822PSYBG055-23BOLD:ACK6660PQ109778This study-
Bulgaria, Transitional region, Lozenska Mts., Lozen42.594423.508176827 July 2022MBFUS-I-IG026979PSYBG113-24-PQ100068This studyFigure 1i
PhacopteroninaePseudophacopteron sp.Australia---------MG989234[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaeAnoeconeossa unicornuta Taylor, 1987Australia---------NC_038108[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaeAustralopsylla sp.Australia---------MG988646
MG988933
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaeBlastopsylla occidentalis Taylor, 1985Australia---------NC_038147[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaeBoreioglycaspis melaleucae Moore, 1964Australia---------MG988659
MG988952
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaeCardiaspina retator Taylor, 1962Australia---------MG988694
MG988991
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaeCreiis sp.Australia---------MG988715
MG989015
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaeCtenarytaina eucalypti (Maskell, 1890)Canary Islands---------OR068450
OR067182
[55]-
SpondyliaspidinaeGlycaspis brimblecombei Moore, 1964Canary Islands---------OR068451
OR067183
[55]-
SpondyliaspidinaeLasiopsylla rotundipennis Froggatt, 1900Australia---------MG988781
MG989090
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
SpondyliaspidinaePlatyobria sp. Australia---------MG988812
MG989131
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
Liviidae,
Euphyllurinae
Psyllospsis fraxini (Linnaeus, 1758)United Kingdom---------MG988820
MG989139
[16]; Percy, pers. comm.-
Psyllidae,
Psyllinae
Cacopsylla melanoneura (Foerster, 1848)Italy---------OQ304120[56]-
Czech Republic---------OR346833[57]-
Figure 1. Habitus of the studied species of Aphalaridae from Bulgaria. (a) Agonoscena targionii; (b) A. pistaciae; (c) Megagonoscena gallicola; (d) Colposcenia aliena; (e) Co. bidentata; (f) Co. osmanica; (g) Co. traciana; (h) Rhodochlanis bicolor; (i) Rhinocola aceris; (j) Aphalara affinis; (k) Aph. avicularis; (l) Aph. maculipennis; (m) Aph. nigrimaculosa; (n) Craspedolepta bulgarica; (o) Cr. conspersa, specimen from Austria, photo credit to T. Oswald; (p) Cr. innoxia; (q) Cr. nervosa; (r) Cr. pontica.
Figure 1. Habitus of the studied species of Aphalaridae from Bulgaria. (a) Agonoscena targionii; (b) A. pistaciae; (c) Megagonoscena gallicola; (d) Colposcenia aliena; (e) Co. bidentata; (f) Co. osmanica; (g) Co. traciana; (h) Rhodochlanis bicolor; (i) Rhinocola aceris; (j) Aphalara affinis; (k) Aph. avicularis; (l) Aph. maculipennis; (m) Aph. nigrimaculosa; (n) Craspedolepta bulgarica; (o) Cr. conspersa, specimen from Austria, photo credit to T. Oswald; (p) Cr. innoxia; (q) Cr. nervosa; (r) Cr. pontica.
Insects 15 00683 g001
Table 2. PCR primers and conditions.
Table 2. PCR primers and conditions.
GenePrimer SetPrimer Sequence′ (5′–3′)Amplicon Size (bp)PCR ConditionsPrimer References
COILCOP-FAGAACWAAYCATAAAAYWATTGG65495 °C for 3 min; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 50 °C 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min; 72 °C for 10 min[54]
HCO2198RTAAACTTCAGGGTGACCAAAAAATCA
C_LepFolFATTCAACCAATCATAAAGATATTGG65894 °C for 1 min, 5 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 45–50 °C for 40 s, 72 °C for 1 min, 30–35 cycles of 94 °C for 30 s, 51–54 °C for 40 s and 72 °C for 1 min, 72 °C for 10 min[58]
C_LepFolRTAAACTTCTGGATGTCCAAAAAATCA
LCO1490FGGTCAACAAATCATAAAGATATTGG65495 °C for 3 min; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 51 °C 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min; 72 °C for 10 min[58]
HCO2198RTAAACTTCAGGGTGACCAAAAAATCA
VpmCOIF2TACCTYTGAATTTGCAATTC64695 °C for 3 min; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 46 °C 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min; 72 °C for 10 min[59]
VpmCOIR4AATAARTGTTGGTATAARATAGG
CytbCytbfTGAGGNCAAATATCHTTYTGA39395 °C for 3 min; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 53 °C 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min; 72 °C for 10 min[16,49]
CytbrGCAAATARRAARTATCATTCDG
CytbnewF2TGATTATGRGGAGGDTTYGC33095 °C for 3 min; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 53 °C 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min; 72 °C for 10 minThis study
CytbnewRGTTGAATATGDATDGGDGTWAC
CytbnewF1TATGAGGAGGDTTYGCWGTTG24895 °C for 3 min; 35 cycles of 95 °C for 30 s, 53 °C 30 s and 72 °C for 1 min; 72 °C for 10 minThis study
CytbnewRGTTGAATATGDATDGGDGTWAC

2.3. Species Delimitation Based on Molecular Data

In order to verify the identification of the aphalarids, several species delimitation methods were applied to the molecular data. The Barcode Index Number (BIN) system was used to assign unique identifiers (BINs), corresponding to operational taxonomic units (OTUs), after the COI sequences were subjected to Refined Single Linkage (RESL) analysis in the BOLD system [60]. In addition, to evaluate the genetic distances and compare our results with those of other studies that did not use the BIN system, the Kimura 2-parameter (K2P) model was calculated for each COI and Cytb using MEGA v.11 [51]. The threshold of 3% K2P distance was used to delimit OTUs as an alternative to RESL analysis for Cytb data. Subsequently, Assemble Species by Automatic Partitioning (ASAP) and Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD) methods were performed using K2P distances for each COI and Cytb [61,62]. Finally, ultrametric trees were generated using the K2P model in BEAST v. 10.5.0 [63] with 10 million replicates, followed by a 10% burn-in via TreeAnnotator. The resulting trees were saved in NEXUS format using FigTree v. 1.4.4 “http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree (accessed on 8 January 2024)”, and the trees were tested with the Bayesian implementation of the Poisson Tree Processes (bPTP) [64] (implemented in the web server http://species.h-its.org/ptp/, accessed on 26 August 2024) and the multi-rate Poisson Tree Processes (mPTP) [65] (implemented in the web server http://mptp.h-its.org/#/tree, accessed on 26 August 2024).

2.4. Phylogenetic Analyses

In addition to the 25 aphalarid species sequenced in the current study, a further 21 species from the subfamilies Aphalarinae (6), Phacopteroninae (1), Rhinocolinae (4) and Spondyliaspidinae (10) were included in the phylogenetic analyses. Psyllopsis fraxini (Liviidae) and Cacopsylla melanoneura (Psyllidae), which are representatives of two psyllid families distantly related to Aphalaridae, were selected as outgroups.
All sequences not from this study were obtained from GenBank (Table 1). COI and Cytb sequences were extracted from the whole mitochondrial genome for the following species: Anoeconeossa unicornuta, Blastopsylla occidentalis, Lanthanaphalara mira, and Pseudophacopteron sp., while all other representatives were selected based on the availability of their COI and Cytb sequences in GenBank. Most of the sequence data are from Percy et al. [16], Bastin et al. [54,55], and Corretto et al. [56]. We consider their identifications to be reliable.
Prior to the phylogenetic analyses, the best partitioning scheme was determined using PartitionFinder2 [66], and the concatenated dataset was divided into four partitions according to gene regions and codon position. Setting of codon position for protein-coding gene fragments was performed with MESQUITE v.3.61 [67].
Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis was performed with IQ-TREE v.1.6.12. [68]. Nodal support was obtained through a standard non-parametric bootstrap with 1000 replicates. A suitable substitution model for each partition was calculated by IQ-TREE. Bayesian inference (BI) analysis was run using MrBayes v.3.2.7a [69] on the CIPRES platform [70]. The best substitution model for each gene was estimated using jModelTest v.2.1.10 [71] and a comparison of scores from Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) (Table S2). For the BI analysis, two independent runs were performed, each with four Metropolis-coupled Markov chains for 15 million generations, sampling every 1000th generation. The priors for tree topology and speciation rates were set to uniform, the gamma distribution category number was set to 4, and the probability distribution for branch lengths was set to exponential. A Dirichlet prior was used to cover the substitution rates of the evolutionary models and the stationary nucleotide frequencies. The priors for all other parameters were left at the default values. Nodal support was assessed using posterior probabilities after discarding 30% of the samples as burn-in. The convergence of the MCMC chains was assessed with the average standard deviation of split frequencies (ASDSF). The ML and BI trees were visualised using iTOL v.5 [72] and FigTree v.1.4.4 “http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree (accessed on 20 January 2024)”. Nodal support for ML analysis was assessed by the frequency of clade occurrence across the resampled datasets and is expressed as bootstrap values in %, while nodal support for BI analysis was expressed as posterior probability (PP), which indicates the probability that a given clade is correct based on the observed data and the specified model and ranges from 0 to 1. We considered significantly high nodal support for bootstrap values (BS) > 90% and for posterior probabilities (PP) > 0.95, and moderately good support for BS > 70–90% and for PP > 0.90–0.94 [73].

3. Results

3.1. Molecular Identification of the Bulgarian Aphalarids

We sequenced 25 species (1–6 specimens per species) of Aphalaridae, belonging to the two subfamilies Aphalarinae and Rhinocolinae with four and three genera, respectively, which were identified morphologically. The DNA of most analysed species was successfully amplified using the applied protocols. The COI gene fragment was amplified in 25 species, while Cytb was only successfully amplified in 18 species.
DNA barcodes were generated for the first time for the following 15 species: Aphalara affinis, Aph. freji, Aph. nigrimaculosa, Colposcenia aliena, Co. bidentata, Co. osmanica, Co. traciana, Craspedolepta bulgarica, Cr. conspersa, Cr. innoxia, Cr. malachitica, Cr. omissa, Cr. pontica, Megagonoscena gallicola, and Rhodochlanis bicolor.
All sequences of COI generated in the present study are available in BOLD (generic address), and the sequences of COI and Cytb of the analysed species are available in GenBank “https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/ (accessed on 30 July 2024)” (see also Data Availability Statement).
The Barcode Index Number (BIN) implemented in the BOLD system showed that our 61 COI sequences from 25 species are grouped in 22 BINs. Unique new BINs were generated for 15 species, and eight species were assigned to eight non-unique, pre-existing BINs. The majority of COI sequences generated were over 500 bp in length. Within Aphalarinae, the newly generated BIN BOLD:AFM9464 contained the 658 bp sequences of Aphalara maculipennis and Aph. nigrimaculosa, respectively. In addition, one of the pre-existing BINs (BOLD:ACY0265) contained the following three species: Aph. avicularis, Aph. freji, and Aph. polygoni. Aphalara polygoni from the current study was assigned to a separate, newly generated BIN (BOLD:AFL6229). In Colposcenia, Co. aliena (BOLD:AFN1581), Co. bidentata (BOLD:AFN1583), and Co. traciana (BOLD:AFL7588) were assigned new unique BINs, while C. osmanica was assigned to a pre-existing BIN (BOLD:AFN1582). In fact, as a result of our study we can identify the species assigned to the latter as Cr. osmanica. In Craspedolepta, all species received separate BINs, with the sole exception of Cr. bulgarica and Cr. innoxia, which were grouped together in the same BIN (BOLD:AFM9464). In Agonoscena (Rhinocolinae), A. pistaciae received two BINs. One of the sequences was assigned to a newly generated BIN (BOLD:AFL7611), while the other sequences were assigned to an already existing BIN (BOLD:AFM5846).
In addition to the BIN (RESL) analysis, we performed analyses of K2P genetic distance for both COI and Cytb gene fragments separately (Table S1). In Aphalarinae, rather high genetic distances for COI were observed between Aphalara affinis and Aph. maculipennis (0.1644), while a very low distance-based threshold was observed between Aph. avicularis and Aph. freji (0.0026). In Colposcenia, the interspecific distance for COI ranged from 0.1622 to 0.2365. Within the Craspedolepta species analysed, there were comparatively high genetic distances between Cr. conspersa and Cr. nervosa (0.1823), in contrast to the threshold between Cr. bulgarica and Cr. innoxia (0.0015), with the lowest genetic distance observed in our study. Within Agonoscena (Rhinocolinae), the genetic distance for COI was highest between A. pistaciae and A. targionii (0.2430), while the lowest genetic distance was found between A. cisti and A. pistaciae (0.1736).
In addition, the species boundaries based on the COI marker were tested with ASAP, ABGD, bPTP, and mPTP analyses (Figure 2). All analyses consistently combined Aphalara avicularis with Aph. freji, Aph. maculipennis with Aph. nigrimaculosa, and Craspedolepta bulgarica with Cr. innoxia, indicating that the COI gene is unsuitable for the delimitation of these species. Similar to the results of the BIN (RESL) analysis, almost all delimitation analyses separated A. pistaciae into two distinct species groups, highlighting the need for a more thorough molecular and morphological investigation of Agonoscena spp. in future studies. The only analysis that clustered A. pistaciae sequences together was ABGD. However, the same analysis suggested the separation of Aph. avicularis into two species. In total, only 17 OTUs could then be delimited using the COI marker.
With respect to Cytb, the interspecific divergence within the genera analysed was usually somewhat higher than that observed for COI. The maximum genetic distance within Aphalara was 0.1681 between Aph. avicularis and Aph. nigrimaculosa, while the distance between Aph. affinis and Aph. avicularis was the smallest (0.0771) of the species pairs that could be compared. In Colposcenia and Craspedolepta, the interspecific divergence ranged from 0.2571 to 0.3243 and from 0.1108 to 0.2803, respectively (however, Cytb data were available only for some Craspedolepta spp.). In Agonoscena, the interspecific distance between Agonoscena cisti and A. pistaciae was 0.2598. In most cases, the Cytb gene fragments gave comparable or better results for the separation of Aphalaridae species than the COI gene fragments. Using the 3% genetic distance threshold (as an alternative to RESL analysis for COI), ASAP, and bPTP, all 18 species analysed were successfully delimited. However, ABGD produced slightly different results and merged Aphalara affinis and Aph. avicularis into a single cluster, while mPTP was less effective and failed to delimit the taxa to species level, with the exception of Aph. nigrimaculosa, and instead grouped them into five clusters at the subfamily or genus level (Figure 3).

3.2. Phylogeny of Aphalaridae

In addition to the 25 aphalarid species sequenced in the current study, 21 species from the subfamilies Aphalarinae, Phacopteroninae, Rhinocolinae, and Spondyliaspidinae were included in the phylogenetic analyses. The final sequence alignment of 46 species of Aphalaridae and two outgroups contained 1043 characters. As both Bayesian inference (BI) and maximum likelihood (ML) analysis yielded very similar results, only the phylogenetic tree from the BI is shown in Figure 4 in the main text, while the ML tree is included as a Supplementary File (Figure S1).
In both analyses, support for monophyly of Aphalaridae was weak or virtually absent (0.52 PP, 24% BS). The subfamily Aphalarinae was strongly supported in both BI and ML analyses (1.00 PP, 95% BS). Aphalara was recovered as paraphyletic (0.89 PP, 66% BS), with Aph. itadori forming the sister taxon to the remaining Aphalara and Craspedolepta. The internal relationships of Aphalara were well supported in BI (0.94–1.00 PP) and ML analyses (92–99% BS), with the exception of Aph. itadori (66% BS) and Aph. maculipennis (74% BS). Craspedolepta was a strongly supported clade in both BI and ML analyses (1.00 PP, 96% BS). Four clades were strongly supported within the genus: Cr. omissa + (Cr. nervosa + Cr. pontica) (1.00 PP, 97% BS); Cr. nervosa + Cr. pontica (1.00 PP, 98% BS); Cr. nebulosa + Cr. subpunctata (1.00 PP, 96% BS); and Cr. bulgarica + Cr. innoxia (1.00 PP, 100% BS).
The support for monophyly of Rhinocolinae was weak in the ML analysis (72% BS) but strong in the BI (0.97 PP). Agonoscena was strongly supported in both analyses (1.00 PP, 90% BS), while support for the other genera was moderate to weak.
A sister group relationship between Phacopteroninae, represented only by Pseudophacopteron sp., and Aphalarinae was moderately supported (0.93 PP, 85% BS). The phylogenies of the two analyses also shared the same topology in terms of the strongly supported Spondyliaspidinae (1.00 PP, 97% BS) with a strongly supported clade Blastopsylla occidentalis Taylor, 1985 + Platyobria sp. (1.00 PP, 96% BS). The other nodes of the clade Spondyliaspidinae were weakly to moderately supported in the ML analysis. In the BI, Anoeconeossa unicornuta was strongly supported (0.99 PP) as a sister species to the clade Boreioglycaspis melaleucae + Glycaspis brimblecombei (1.00 PP). Lasiopsylla rotundipennis, Australopsylla sp., and Creiis sp. together constituted, with strong support (0.98 PP), the sister clade to Cardiaspina retator.

3.3. Faunistic Data

The following five species represent new records for Bulgaria: Agonoscena targionii, Aphalara affinis, Colposcenia aliena, Co. bidentata and Craspedolepta malachitica. Craspedolepta conspersa is reported for the first time from the Czech Republic, while Agonoscena cisti is reported for the first time from Albania (Table 1).

4. Discussion

4.1. Molecular Identification of Species

The highest species diversity among the psyllids is probably found in tropical and southern temperate regions [14], but there are also some characteristic northern temperate genera, such as Psylla Geoffroy and Spanioneura Foerster (Psyllidae) [14] or the species-rich Aphalara and Craspedolepta [32] (Aphalaridae). The latter family comprises about 60 described species in Europe, about half of which also occur in Bulgaria [15]. Aphalara and Craspedolepta are particularly diverse in Bulgaria, with seven and eleven species, respectively. The taxonomic knowledge of the two genera, based on morphology, is good for Europe [37], fair for the rest of the Palaearctic (e.g., [32,40,41]), but poor for the Nearctic [74]. Some species groups are morphologically homogeneous, which makes species identification difficult for non-experts. Here, we show that most of the 25 studied aphalarid species from seven genera, including Aphalara and Craspedolepta, differ significantly in molecular barcodes (COI and Cytb), which can be used to identify species that are difficult to separate morphologically. The DNA barcodes for 15 species are published here for the first time.
In other similar studies on psyllids, a distance-based threshold of 3% for mitochondrial markers was suggested as appropriate for distinguishing species of psyllids in New Zealand [2] or Cacopsylla species developing on pear in the Palaearctic [8]. We found a good correlation between molecular, morphological, and biological evidence for species delimitation, with a relatively high genetic divergence for most species supporting the 3% threshold. We suggest here that the COI and Cytb barcoding genes are useful for the molecular identification of most aphalarid species. However, the COI gene fragment alone was not sufficient to clearly separate six morphologically supported species of Aphalara and Craspedolepta in our study. Some other studies, e.g., on grasshoppers and fungus gnats, comparing morphological and molecular species identification [75,76] also showed contradictory results, with morphologically distinct taxa being indistinguishable in a single gene fragment.
The observed small interspecific difference in the COI between Aphalara avicularis and Aph. freji (0.0026), which could be due to genuine genetic proximity or limitations in the resolution of the COI gene, is also reflected in the morphological similarities between these two species [32,37]. Within Aphalara, there are several morphologically homogeneous species groups whose species differ in the distribution of surface spinules on the forewings and often subtle details of the terminalia [32]. These differences are paralleled by the host ranges. Aphalara avicularis and Aph. freji develop on the Polygonum aviculare aggregate and Persicaria spp., respectively, and differ from each other by the shape of the distal segment of the aedeagus and, to a certain extent, in the spacing of the surface spinules on the forewings. In the morphologically similar and closely related Aph. polygoni, which develops on Rumex spp., the surface spinules of the forewings are arranged in transverse rows. Two congeneric but morphologically different species, Craspedolepta bulgarica and Cr. innoxia, also showed only a slight genetic divergence. In morphology and host plant association [77], Cr. bulgarica is more similar to Cr. nervosa and Cr. pontica, which all develop on Achillea spp., than Cr. innoxia, which is associated with Daucus carota and Seseli leucospermum [78]. On the other hand, the interspecific genetic distances based on the COI for Agonoscena were significantly higher in our study than those found by Lashkari, et al. [47] for a different set of species in Iran (A. bimaculata, A. pegani, and A. pistaciae). Further studies on the genus are needed to clarify whether these discrepancies are due to differences in methodology, sample selection, or actual genetic divergence between species. All species delimitation methods based on COI yielded similar results and recognised 17 of 25 aphalarid species. However, the ABGD analysis yielded some contradictory results, suggesting cryptic lineages within Aphalara avicularis. This interpretation seems unlikely, as all other species delimitation methods and morphological observations consistently supported the conclusion that the Aph. avicularis specimens belong to a single species. On the other hand, the ABGD was the only method that recognised Agonoscena pistaciae specimens as a single species, which is consistent with morphological evidence.
In contrast to the COI delimitation results, where a maximum of 68% of the species were recognised, the Cytb gene allowed the correct assignment of all 100% of the species analysed using the 3% genetic distance threshold, ASAP, and bPTP, suggesting that this gene is an efficient marker for the recognition of aphalarid species, which was already suggested for Agonoscena by Lashkari et al. [47]. As we did not sequence Cytb for all species in this study, the comparison of the two genes remains preliminary.

4.2. Phylogenetic Relationships within Aphalaridae

The phylogenetic results of our study on Aphalaridae are similar to other phylogenetic analyses based on genomic or multilocus DNA sequence data [16,17]. The phylogenetic reconstruction inferred by the BI and ML analyses resulted in a similar tree topology, albeit with some differences (Figure 4 and Figure S1). In both analyses we performed, Aphalaridae were recovered as monophyletic, albeit with very low or virtually absent clade support. In their comprehensive amino-acid-based analysis, Wang et al. [18] found Aphalaridae to be monophyletic, in contrast to Percy et al. [16] and Cho et al. [17], who considered the family as paraphyletic.
In several studies [16,17,23,24,25], the monophyly of Aphalarinae and Rhinocolinae was well supported. Similarly, both subfamilies were strongly supported in our BI analysis. In contrast, the ML analysis in our study showed strong support for Aphalarinae, while Rhinocolinae was only weakly supported. Our analyses strongly supported the sister-group relationship between the Spondyliaspidinae and the moderately supported clade Aphalarinae + Phacopteroninae. Representatives of the three small subfamilies of Aphalaridae (Cecidopsyllinae, Microphyllurinae, and Togepsyllinae) were not included in our analyses, which may partly explain deviations from the previously published tree topologies [14,16,17,18].
Within Aphalarinae, our results are generally consistent with these from the previous studies [16,25,32]. There are two important differences in our analyses. Aphalara was recovered as paraphyletic with respect to Craspedolepta, as Aph. itadori formed a sister group to the remaining Aphalara + Craspedolepta. Craspedolepta bulgarica formed a strongly supported clade together with Cr. innoxia. Based on the morphological and host plant data [32,77], both groupings are highly unlikely and could result from the use of the limited number of exclusively mitochondrial gene markers.
Within Rhinocolinae, our results are in agreement with other studies [23,24]. Agonoscena was strongly supported as monophyletic, and its internal relationships are consistent with those proposed by Burckhardt and Lauterer [23] based on morphology and by Bastin et al. [79] based on molecular data.
The phylogenetic results of our study, especially the higher-level relationships, must be interpreted with caution, as only two short mitochondrial gene fragments were analysed here. For a more accurate investigation of the phylogenetic relationships within the group, additional nuclear markers should be used in future studies.

4.3. New Data on the Distribution of Aphalarid Species

The psyllid fauna of Bulgaria has been treated in a number of works (e.g., [23,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,80]), in which less than a hundred species were reported [15,35]. The revision of existing museum collections and more intensive faunistic research in recent years have revealed additional species [35,36,81]. Here we report five species for the first time from Bulgaria. Aphalara affinis is a species with a boreomontane distribution in northern Europe and Siberia as well as in the mountains of Central and Eastern Europe; it is associated with Stellaria graminea (Caryophyllaceae) in grasslands and forest clearings [15,37,82]. In Bulgaria, Aph. affinis was found in the Western Rhodopi Mountains. Colposcenia aliena and Co. bidentata are both associated with Tamarix spp. (Tamaricaceae), which in Bulgaria usually grow on sandy or stony substrates along rivers and the Black Sea coast. Colposcenia aliena is widespread in southern Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia [15,38,83]. Colposcenia bidentata is so far only known from Turkey [39,84]. Craspedolepta malachitica is widespread in Europe and temperate Asia on Artemisia absinthium and A. maritima (Asteraceae) in open habitats, such as disturbed dry grassland or salty sites [15,37,44]. Finally, Agonoscena targionii is widespread in its native range in the Mediterranean Basin and was introduced to Britain and Saint Helena; it is associated with Pistacia spp. (P. lentiscus, P. terebinthus, and P. vera; Anacardiaceae) [23,85].
The psyllid fauna of the Czech Republic is quite well known, with a rather long history of investigation and a total number of over 130 recorded species [86,87,88]. Here we report for the first time on Craspedolepta conspersa from the Czech Republic. The species was collected on its known host plant, Artemisia vulgaris (Asteraceae), in a ruderal habitat in southern Moravia, the warmest part of the country. Craspedolepta conspersa is known from southern parts of Central and Eastern Europe [43,44] and was recently reported for the first time from neighbouring Austria [89]. The Czech record is located at the northern limit of the species’ currently known range.
Compared to Bulgaria and the Czech Republic, Albania has only been very sparsely studied for Psylloidea. Agonoscena cisti, which is newly recorded here from Albania, is, similar to A. targionii, widely distributed in the Mediterranean region on Pistacia lentiscus and P. palaestina [23,90]. Given the presence of the species in neighbouring countries, its occurrence in Albania is not surprising.

5. Conclusions

Our study investigated the suitability of two barcoding genes, COI and Cytb, for the identification of species from the subfamilies Aphalarinae and Rhinocolinae (Aphalaridae). We provide the DNA barcodes for 25 species collected mainly in Bulgaria, of which 15 species were barcoded for the first time. The use of correctly identified barcodes will help to improve the dubious quality of repositories, such as GenBank and BOLD in the future. We have designed new primers for Cytb that can be used in future studies. In our study, the Cytb gene fragment showed better results by correctly delimiting 100% of the analysed species, compared to COI (68%), and thus could be a useful tool for efficient and accurate identification of aphalarid species. Overall, we believe that molecular data are a valuable tool, providing new insights for the diagnosis of aphalarid species, especially when combined with reliable morphological characters. We found good agreement between the resulting species definitions based on molecular, morphological and ecological (e.g., host plant) data. However, the low genetic divergence between some aphalarid species found in our study also demonstrates the importance of using an integrative taxonomic approach [2,48,91], including the study of psyllid morphology, ecological data and multilocus molecular data, for accurate species identification.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/insects15090683/s1, Figure S1: Phylogenetic tree based on the maximum likelihood analysis of concatenated COI and Cytb gene fragments of representatives of the family Aphalaridae. Nodal support is assessed by bootstrap values; Table S1: Interspecific K2P distances (COI and Cytb gene fragments) of the analysed species of Aphalaridae; Table S2: Gene partitions with estimated nucleotide substitution models used in Bayesian inference (BI) analysis based on a comparison of scores from Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) in JModeltest.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, M.P., L.Š.S. and D.B.; methodology, M.P., L.Š.S., D.B. and I.G.; validation, L.Š.S., I.M. and D.B.; formal analysis, M.P. and L.Š.S.; investigation, M.P. and L.Š.S.; resources, M.P., I.G. and H.S.; data curation, M.P. and I.G.; writing—original draft preparation, M.P. and L.Š.S.; writing—review and editing, I.M. and D.B.; visualisation, M.P.; supervision, L.Š.S., I.M. and D.B.; project administration, M.P. and I.G.; funding acquisition, M.P. and H.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Monika Pramatarova was funded by Scientific Research Fund of SU “St. Kliment Ohridski” (grant number 80-10-5/2024) and Sofia University Student Council. Hannes Schuler was funded by a joint project of the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) and the Province of Bolzano-Bozen.

Data Availability Statement

All DNA sequences can be accessed in BOLD under the project name “PSYBG” (Process ID: PSYBG001-23–PSYBG067-23, PSYBG096-24–PSYBG116-24), available also in GenBank (COI accession numbers: PQ109723–PQ109782, Cytb accession numbers: PQ100051–PQ100069).

Acknowledgments

M.P. is grateful to the Sofia University Student Council for funding her stay at the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano. We thank D. Percy (University of British Columbia, Canada) for providing detailed locality data for the published sequences and T. Oswald (Karl-Franzens-Universität, Graz, Austria) for the photograph of Cr. conspersa. We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for their critical comments, which significantly improved the quality of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Löbl, I.; Klausnitzer, B.; Hartmann, M.; Krell, F.-T. The Silent Extinction of Species and Taxonomists—An Appeal to Science Policymakers and Legislators. Diversity 2023, 15, 1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Martoni, F.; Bulman, S.; Pitman, A.; Taylor, G.; Armstrong, K. DNA Barcoding Highlights Cryptic Diversity in the New Zealand Psylloidea (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha). Diversity 2018, 10, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Yin, Y.; Yao, L.F.; Hu, Y.; Shao, Z.K.; Hong, X.Y.; Hebert, P.D.N.; Xue, X.F. DNA Barcoding Uncovers Cryptic Diversity in Minute Herbivorous Mites (Acari, Eriophyoidea). Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2022, 22, 1986–1998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hebert, P.D.; Cywinska, A.; Ball, S.L.; DeWaard, J.R. Biological Identifications through DNA Barcodes. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2003, 270, 313–321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Suh, S.-J.; Choi, D.-S. Using DNA Barcoding for Identification of Some Psyllids (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) Intercepted at South Korea Ports-of-Entry. Insecta Mundi 2020, 816, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sumner-Kalkun, J.; Sjölund, M.; Arnsdorf, Y.; Carnegie, M.; Highet, F.; Ouvrard, D.; Greenslade, A.; Bell, J.; Sigvald, R.; Kenyon, D. A Diagnostic Real-Time PCR Assay for the Rapid Identification of the Tomato-Potato Psyllid, Bactericera cockerelli (Šulc, 1909) and Development of a Psyllid Barcoding Database. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0230741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Moesges, Z.; Brandis, D.; Ewers, C. Detailed Integrative Taxonomic Analysis Reveals Large-Scale Species Misidentification of Barnacles Based on DNA Barcoding Data. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 2023, 201, zlad145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cho, G.; Malenovský, I.; Burckhardt, D.; Inoue, H.; Lee, S. DNA Barcoding of Pear Psyllids (Hemiptera: Psylloidea: Psyllidae), a Tale of Continued Misidentifications. Bull. Entomol. Res. 2020, 110, 521–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Burckhardt, D. Psylloid Pests of Temperate and Subtropical Crop and Ornamental Plants (Hemiptera, Psylloidea): A Review. Trends Agric. Sci. Entomol. 1994, 2, 173–186. [Google Scholar]
  10. De Morais, E.G.F.; Picanço, M.C.; Barreto, R.W.; Silva, N.R.; Campos, M.R. Biological Performance of Diclidophlebia smithi (Hemiptera: Psyllidae), a Potential Biocontrol Agent for the Invasive Weed Miconia calvescens. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2010, 20, 107–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Munyaneza, J.E. Psyllids as Vectors of Emerging Bacterial Diseases of Annual Crops. Southwest. Entomol. 2010, 35, 471–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Moreno, A.; Miranda, M.P.; Fereres, A. Psyllids as Major Vectors of Plant Pathogens. Entomol. Gen. 2021, 41, 419–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Burckhardt, D.; Ouvrard, D.; Queiroz, D.L.; Percy, D.M. Psyllid Host-Plants (Hemiptera: Psylloidea): Resolving a Semantic Problem. Fla. Entomol. 2014, 97, 242–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Burckhardt, D.; Ouvrard, D.; Percy, D.M.M. An Updated Classification of the Jumping Plant-Lice (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) Using Molecular and Morphological Evidence. Eur. J. Taxon. 2021, 736, 137–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Ouvrard, D. Psyl’list—The World Psylloidea Database. Available online: http://psyllist.hemiptera.infosyslab.fr/psyllist/ (accessed on 20 June 2024).
  16. Percy, D.M.; Crampton-Platt, A.; Sveinsson, S.; Lemmon, A.R.; Lemmon, E.M.; Ouvrard, D.; Burckhardt, D. Resolving the Psyllid Tree of Life: Phylogenomic Analyses of the Superfamily Psylloidea (Hemiptera). Syst. Entomol. 2018, 43, 762–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Cho, G.; Malenovský, I.; Lee, S. Higher-level Molecular Phylogeny of Jumping Plant Lice (Hemiptera: Sternorrhyncha: Psylloidea). Syst. Entomol. 2019, 44, 638–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Wang, W.; Dong, Z.; Du, Z.; Wu, P. Genome-Scale Approach to Reconstructing the Phylogenetic Tree of Psyllids (Superfamily Psylloidea) with Account of Systematic Bias. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2023, 189, 107924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Burckhardt, D. Ctenarytaina eucalypti (Maskell) (Hemiptera, Psylloidea) Neu Für Mitteleuropa Mit Bemerkungen Zur Blattflohfauna von Eucalyptus. Mitt. Ent. Ges. 1998, 48, 59–67. [Google Scholar]
  20. Valente, C.; Manta, A.; Vaz, A. First Record of the Australian Psyllid Ctenarytaina spatulata Taylor (Homoptera: Psyllidae) in Europe. J. Appl. Entomol. 2004, 128, 369–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Valente, C.; Hodkinson, I. First Record of the Red Gum Lerp Psyllid, Glycaspis brimblecombei Moore (Hemiptera: Psyllidae), in Europe. J. Appl. Entomol. 2008, 133, 315–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mifsud, D. The Jumping Plant-Lice (Hemiptera: Pysilloidea) of the Maltese Islands. Bull. Entomol. Soc. 2020, 11, 103–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Burckhardt, D.; Lauterer, P. Systematics and Biology of the Rhinocolinae (Homoptera: Psylloidea). J. Nat. Hist. 1989, 23, 643–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Burckhardt, D.; Basset, Y. The Jumping Plant-Lice (Hemiptera, Psylloidea) Associated with Schinus (Anacardiaceae): Systematics, Biogeography and Host Plant Relationships. J. Nat. Hist. 2000, 34, 57–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Burckhardt, D.; Queiroz, D.L. Phylogenetic Relationships within the Subfamily Aphalarinae Including a Revision of Limataphalara (Hemiptera: Psylloidea: Aphalaridae). Acta Musei Morav. Sci. Biol. 2013, 98, 35–56. [Google Scholar]
  26. Joakimov, D. Po Faunata Na Hemiptera va Balgaria (On the Fauna of Hemiptera of Bulgaria). Nar. Umotvor. Nauk. Knizhnina. 1909, 25, 1–34. [Google Scholar]
  27. Klimaszewski, S. Psyllidologische Notizen XII–XIV (Homoptera). Ann. Zool. 1965, 23, 195–209. [Google Scholar]
  28. Harizanov, A.; Lauterer, P. Beitrag Zur Fauna Der Blattflöhe (Homoptera-Psylloidea) in Bulgarien. Landwirtsch. Hochsch. Wassil Kolar. 1968, 17, 139–145. [Google Scholar]
  29. Klimaszewski, S. Psyllidologische Notizen XVIII—XX (Homoptera). Ann. Zool. 1970, 27, 417–428. [Google Scholar]
  30. Głowacka, E.; Harizanov, A. The Jumping Plant Lice (Homoptera, Psylloidea) from Western Rodope Mountains (Bulgaria). Acta Biol. 1983, 12, 62–69. [Google Scholar]
  31. Głowacka, E. Jumpin Plant-Lice (Homaptera: Psylloidea) of the Pirin Mountains (Bulgaria). Acta Biol. 1989, 13, 14–19. [Google Scholar]
  32. Burckhardt, D.; Lauterer, P. Systematics and Biology of the Aphalara exilis (Weber & Mohr) Species Assemblage (Hemiptera: Psyllidae). Entomol. Scand. 1997, 28, 271–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lauterer, P.; Malenovský, I. New Distributional and Biological Data on European Psylloidea (Hemiptera, Sternorrhyncha), with Special Reference to the Fauna of the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Entomol. Basiliensia 2002, 24, 161–177. [Google Scholar]
  34. Labina, E.S. The Jumping-Lice (Homoptera, Psyllinea) Fauna of the Republic of Altai. Entomol. Rev. 2008, 88, 277–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pramatarova, M.; Malenovský, I.; Gjonov, I. Notes on Jumping Plant-Lice (Hemiptera, Psylloidea) from the Sarnena Gora Mountains. In Fauna of Sarnena Sredna Gora Mts, Part 2 ZooNotes, Supplement 10; Georgiev, D., Bechev, D., Yancheva, V., Eds.; Plovdiv University Press “Paisii Hilendarski”: Plovdiv, Bulgaria, 2021; pp. 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Pramatarova, M.; Malenovský, I.; Gjonov, I. Psyllids (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) in the Entomological Collection of the National Museum of Natural History, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Hist. Nat. Bulg. 2023, 45, 261–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ossiannilsson, F. The Psylloidea (Homoptera) of Fennoscandia and Denmark. Fauna Entomol. Scand. 1992, 26, 1–347. [Google Scholar]
  38. Loginova, M. Jumping Plant Lice of the Tribe Stigmaphalarini Vondr. (Psylloidea, Aphalaridae) from Arid Regions of Palaearctic. Rev. Entomoogie URSS 1974, LIII, 150–170. [Google Scholar]
  39. Burckhardt, D. Angaben Zur Psyllidenfauna Der Nordosttürkei (Homoptera: Psylloidea). Mitteilungen Entomol. Gesellschafi 1988, 38, 31–44. [Google Scholar]
  40. Loginova, M.M. A Revision of the Species of the Genera Aphalara Frst. and Craspedolepta Enderl. (Homoptera, Psylloidea) in the Fauna of the USSR. I. Rev. Entomoogie URSS 1961, XL, 602–623. [Google Scholar]
  41. Loginova, M. Revision of the Species of the Genera Aphalara Frsr. and Craspedolepta Enderl. (Homoptera, Psylloidea) in the Fauna of the USSR. II. Rev. Entomoogie URSS 1963, XLII, 621–648. [Google Scholar]
  42. Dobreanu, E.; Manolache, C. Insecta, Homoptera, Psylloidea. In Fauna Republicii Populare Romane; Botnariuc, N., Ed.; Academia Română: Bucharest, Romania, 1962; pp. 1–376. [Google Scholar]
  43. Conci, C.; Tamanini, L. Craspedolepta conspersa, Nuova per l’Italia, Da Artemisia vulgaris (Insecta: Homoptera: Psylloidea). Stud. Trentini Sci. Nat. Acta Biol. 1983, 60, 77–85. [Google Scholar]
  44. Burckhardt, D.; Lauterer, P. Faunistic and Taxonomic Notes on Jumping Plant-Lice from the Alps (Hemiptera: Psylloidea: Aphalarinae). Contrib. Nat. Hist. 2009, 12, 341–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Conci, C.; Tamanini, L. Rhodochlanis salicorniae Klim. Nuovo per l’Italia, R. Hodkinsoni n. Sp. Di Puglia, Da Suaeda vera e Considerazioni Sul Genere. Atti Soc. Ital. Sci. Nat. Mus. Civ. Stor. Nat. 1984, 125, 61–80. [Google Scholar]
  46. Burckhardt, D. Les Psylles (Insecta, Homoptera, Psylloidea) de l’Algerie. Arch. Sci. 1989, 42, 367–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lashkari, M.; Burckhardt, D.; Gushki, R.S. Molecular and Morphometric Identification of Pistachio Psyllids with Niche Modeling of Agonoscena pistaciae (Hemiptera: Aphalaridae). Bull. Entomol. Res. 2019, 110, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Percy, D.M. Making the Most of Your Host: The Metrosideros-Feeding Psyllids (Hemiptera, Psylloidea) of the Hawaiian Islands. Zookeys 2017, 649, 1–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. 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]
  50. 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]
  51. Tamura, K.; Stecher, G.; Kumar, S. MEGA11: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 11. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2021, 38, 3022–3027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Gouy, M.; Guindon, S.; Gascuel, O. SeaView Version 4: A Multiplatform Graphical User Interface for Sequence Alignment and Phylogenetic Tree Building. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010, 27, 221–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Andersen, J.C.; Bourchier, R.S.; Grevstad, F.S.; Van Driesche, R.; Mills, N.J. Development and Verification of SNP Arrays to Monitor Hybridization between Two Host-Associated Strains of Knotweed Psyllid, Aphalara itadori. Biol. Control. 2016, 93, 49–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Bastin, S.; Percy, D.M.; Siverio, F. Establishing Reliable DNA Barcoding Primers for Jumping Plant Lice (Psylloidea, Hemiptera). BMC Res. Notes 2023, 16, 322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Bastin, S.; Reyes-Betancort, J.A.; Siverio, F.; Percy, D.M. Origins of the Central Macaronesian Psyllid Lineages (Hemiptera; Psylloidea) with Characterization of a New Island Radiation on Endemic Convolvulus floridus (Convolvulaceae) in the Canary Islands. PLoS ONE 2024, 19, e0297062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Corretto, E.; Trenti, M.; Serbina, L.; Howie, J.; Dittmer, J.; Kerschbamer, C.; Candian, V.; Tedeschi, R.; Janik, K.; Schuler, H. Multiple Factors Driving the Acquisition Efficiency of Apple Proliferation Phytoplasma in Cacopsylla melanoneura. J. Pest Sci. 2023, 97, 1299–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Šafářová, D.; Zrníková, E.; Holušová, K.; Ouředníčková, J.; Starý, M.; Navrátil, M. Molecular Characterization of Mitogenome of Cacopsylla picta and Cacopsylla melanoneura, Two Vector Species of ‘Candidatus Phytoplasma Mali’. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Folmer, O.; Black, M.; Hoeh, W.; Lutz, R. DNA Primers for Amplification of Mitochondrial Cytochrome c Oxidase Subunit I from Diverse Metazoan Invertebrates. Mol. Mar. Biol. Biotechnol. 1994, 3, 294–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Oettl, S.; Schlink, K. Molecular Identification of Two Vector Species, Cacopsylla melanoneura and Cacopsylla picta (Hemiptera: Psyllidae), of Apple Proliferation Disease and Further Common Psyllids of Northern Italy. J. Econ. Entomol. 2015, 108, 2174–2183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ratnasingham, S.; Hebert, P.D.N. A DNA-Based Registry for All Animal Species: The Barcode Index Number (BIN) System. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e66213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Puillandre, N.; Lambert, A.; Brouillet, S.; Achaz, G. ABGD, Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery for Primary Species Delimitation. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21, 1864–1877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Puillandre, N.; Brouillet, S.; Achaz, G. ASAP: Assemble Species by Automatic Partitioning. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 2021, 21, 609–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Suchard, M.A.; Lemey, P.; Baele, G.; Ayres, D.L.; Drummond, A.J.; Rambaut, A. Bayesian Phylogenetic and Phylodynamic Data Integration Using BEAST 1.10. Virus Evol. 2018, 4, vey016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Zhang, J.; Kapli, P.; Pavlidis, P.; Stamatakis, A. A General Species Delimitation Method with Applications to Phylogenetic Placements. Bioinformatics 2013, 29, 2869–2876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Kapli, P.; Lutteropp, S.; Zhang, J.; Kobert, K.; Pavlidis, P.; Stamatakis, A.; Flouri, T. Multi-Rate Poisson Tree Processes for Single-Locus Species Delimitation under Maximum Likelihood and Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Bioinformatics 2017, 33, 1630–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Lanfear, R.; Frandsen, P.; Wright, A.; Senfeld, T.; Calcott, B. Partitionfinder 2: New Methods for Selecting Partitioned Models of Evolution for Molecular and Morphological Phylogenetic Analyses. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2016, 34, 772–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Maddison, W.; Maddison, D. Mesquite: A Modular System for Evolutionary Analysis. Version 3.81. 2023. Available online: http://www.mesquiteproject.org (accessed on 19 January 2024).
  68. Trifinopoulos, J.; Nguyen, L.; Haeseler, A.; Minh, B. W-IQ-TREE: A fast online phylogenetic tool for maximum likelihood analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016, 44, W232–W235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Ronquist, F.; Teslenko, M.; Van Der Mark, P.; Ayres, D.; Darling, A.; Höhna, S.; Larget, B.; Liu, L.; Suchard, M.; Huelsenbeck, J. Mrbayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference and Model Choice across a Large Model Space. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61, 539–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Miller, M.; Pfeiffer, W.; Schwartz, T. Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In Proceedings of the 2010 Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE), New Orleans, LA, USA, 14 November 2010; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  71. Darriba, D.; Taboada, G.; Doallo, R.; Posada, D. JModelTest 2: More Models, New Heuristics and Parallel Computing. Nat. Methods 2012, 9, 772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Letunic, I.; Bork, P. Interactive Tree of Life (ITOL) v5: An Online Tool for Phylogenetic Tree Display and Annota-tion. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021, 49, W293–W296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Burckhardt, D.; Serbina, L.; Malenovský, I.; De Queiroz, D.L.; Aléné, D.C.; Cho, G.; Percy, D.M. Phylogeny and Classification of Jumping Plant Lice of the Subfamily Liviinae (Hemiptera: Psylloidea: Liviidae) Based on Molecular and Morphological Data. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 2023, 201, 387–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Halbert, S.E.; Burckhardt, D. The Psyllids (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) of Florida: Newly Established and Rarely Collected Taxa and Checklist. Insecta Mundi 2020, 788, 1–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Dowle, E.J.; Morgan-Richards, M.; Trewick, S.A. Morphological Differentiation despite Gene Flow in an Endangered Grasshopper. BMC Evol. Biol. 2014, 14, 19–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Kurina, O.; Õunap, E.; Põldmaa, K. Two New Neuratelia rondani (Diptera, Mycetophilidae) Species from Western Palaearctic: A Case of Limited Congruence between Morphology and DNA Sequence Data. Zookeys 2015, 129, 105–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Lauterer, P. A Contribution to the Knowledge of the Psyllid Fauna of Czechoslovakia II. Acta Musei Morav. Sci. Biol. 1965, 50, 171–190. [Google Scholar]
  78. Burckhardt, D. Vorläufiges Verzeichnis Der Blattflöhe Mitteleuropas Mit Wirtspflanzenangaben (Insecta, Hemiptera, Psylloidea). Beiträge Zikadenkd. 2002, 5, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  79. Bastin, S.; Burckhardt, D.; Reyes-Betancort, J.A.; Hernández-Suárez, E.; Ouvrard, D. A Review of the Jumping Plant-Lice (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) of the Canary Islands, with Descriptions of Two New Genera and Sixteen New Species. Zootaxa 2023, 5313, 1–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Percy, D.M.; Cronk, Q. Salix Transect of Europe: Patterns in the Distribution of Willow-Feeding Psyllids (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) from Greece to Arctic Norway. Biodivers. Data J. 2020, 8, e53788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Pramatarova, M. Taxonomic, Faunistic, and Ecological Studies of the Superfamily Psylloidea in Bulgaria. Master’s Thesis, Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”, Sofia, Bulgaria, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  82. Malenovský, I.; Kment, P.; Sychra, J. True Bugs, Leafhoppers, Planthoppers and Psyllids (Hemiptera: Heteroptera, Auchenorrhyncha, Psylloidea) of the Environs of Přebuz in the Krušné Hory Mountains (Czech Republic). Klapalekiana 2014, 50, 181–234. [Google Scholar]
  83. Malenovský, I.; Lauterer, P.; Burckhardt, D.; Labina, E.S.; Burckhardt, D. Jumping Plant-Lice (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) of Afghanistan. Acta Entomol. Musei Natl. Pragae 2012, 52, 1–22. [Google Scholar]
  84. Burckhardt, D.; Önuçar, A. A Review of Turkish Jumping Plant-Lice (Homoptera, Psylloidea). Rev. Suisse Zool. 1993, 100, 547–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Luker, S. A Pistachio Psyllid Agonoscene targionii (Hemiptera: Aphalaridae) New to Britain. Bull. Nat. Hist. Mus. Entomol. 2015, 28, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  86. Vondráček, K. Mery-Psylloidea [Jumping Plant Lice—Psylloidea]. In Fauna ČSR, Svazek 9. [Fauna of Czechoslovakia, Vol. 9]; Československá akademie věd: Praha, Czech Republic, 1957; pp. 1–430. [Google Scholar]
  87. Lauterer, P. Psyllodea. Psylloidea. In Enumeratio Insectorum Bohemoslovakiae. Check List Tschechoslowakische Insektenfauna; Dlabola, J., Ed. Acta Faun. Entomol. Mus. Natl. Pragae 1977, 15 (Suppl. 4), 97–100. [Google Scholar]
  88. Malenovský, I.; Lauterer, P. Psylloidea (Mery). In Red List of Threatened Species of the Czech Republic. Invertebrates; Hejda, R., Farkač, J., Chobot, K., Eds. Příroda 2017, 36, 161–165. [Google Scholar]
  89. Oswald, T. Erstfunde von Bactericera perrisii Puton, 1876 Und Craspedolepta conspersa (Löw, 1888) Aus Österreich (Hemiptera: Psylloidea). Cicadina 2024, 23, 23–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Pramatarova, M.; Mifsud, D.; Gjonov, I. First Record of the Pistachio Psyllid Agonoscena cisti (Puton, 1882) (Hemiptera, Psylloidea) in the Maltese Islands (Central Mediterranean). Check List 2024, 20, 991–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Masonick, P.; Weirauch, C. Integrative Species Delimitation in Nearctic Ambush Bugs (Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Phymatinae): Insights from Molecules, Geometric Morphometrics and Ecological Associations. Syst. Entomol. 2020, 45, 205–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 2. Results of species delimitation methods based on the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene. Each vertical colour bar represents different delimitation schemes obtained with ASAP, ABGD, RESL, bPTP, and mPTP methods, with the corresponding number of specimens. The tree is based on ASAP analysis, with nodes colour coded depending on their p-value (black: p < 0.001, red: p < 0.05, orange: p < 0.1, yellow: p > 0.1, grey: not applicable).
Figure 2. Results of species delimitation methods based on the cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene. Each vertical colour bar represents different delimitation schemes obtained with ASAP, ABGD, RESL, bPTP, and mPTP methods, with the corresponding number of specimens. The tree is based on ASAP analysis, with nodes colour coded depending on their p-value (black: p < 0.001, red: p < 0.05, orange: p < 0.1, yellow: p > 0.1, grey: not applicable).
Insects 15 00683 g002
Figure 3. Results of species delimitation methods based on the cytochrome b (Cytb) gene. Each vertical colour bar represents different delimitation schemes obtained with ASAP, ABGD, bPTP and mPTP methods, with the corresponding number of specimens. Grouping based on a threshold of 3% using the Kimura 2-parameter pairwise distance (PDK2P) is presented as an alternative to RESL analysis of COI data. The tree is based on ASAP analysis, with nodes colour coded depending on their p-values (yellow: p > 0.1, grey: not applicable).
Figure 3. Results of species delimitation methods based on the cytochrome b (Cytb) gene. Each vertical colour bar represents different delimitation schemes obtained with ASAP, ABGD, bPTP and mPTP methods, with the corresponding number of specimens. Grouping based on a threshold of 3% using the Kimura 2-parameter pairwise distance (PDK2P) is presented as an alternative to RESL analysis of COI data. The tree is based on ASAP analysis, with nodes colour coded depending on their p-values (yellow: p > 0.1, grey: not applicable).
Insects 15 00683 g003
Figure 4. Phylogenetic tree based on Bayesian inference (BI) analysis of concatenated COI and Cytb gene fragments of representatives of the family Aphalaridae. Nodal support is given as posterior probability values.
Figure 4. Phylogenetic tree based on Bayesian inference (BI) analysis of concatenated COI and Cytb gene fragments of representatives of the family Aphalaridae. Nodal support is given as posterior probability values.
Insects 15 00683 g004
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pramatarova, M.; Burckhardt, D.; Malenovský, I.; Gjonov, I.; Schuler, H.; Štarhová Serbina, L. Unravelling the Molecular Identity of Bulgarian Jumping Plant Lice of the Family Aphalaridae (Hemiptera: Psylloidea). Insects 2024, 15, 683. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15090683

AMA Style

Pramatarova M, Burckhardt D, Malenovský I, Gjonov I, Schuler H, Štarhová Serbina L. Unravelling the Molecular Identity of Bulgarian Jumping Plant Lice of the Family Aphalaridae (Hemiptera: Psylloidea). Insects. 2024; 15(9):683. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15090683

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pramatarova, Monika, Daniel Burckhardt, Igor Malenovský, Ilia Gjonov, Hannes Schuler, and Liliya Štarhová Serbina. 2024. "Unravelling the Molecular Identity of Bulgarian Jumping Plant Lice of the Family Aphalaridae (Hemiptera: Psylloidea)" Insects 15, no. 9: 683. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15090683

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