跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.200.194.255) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/07/15 00:15
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:蔡南益
論文名稱:台灣產杜鵑斑蛾屬之系統分類學研究
論文名稱(外文):Systematics of Rhodopsona (Zygaenidae, Chalcosiinae) species group in Taiwan
指導教授:徐堉峰徐堉峰引用關係顏聖紘顏聖紘引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsu, Yu-FengYen, Shen-Horn
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:生命科學系
學門:生命科學學門
學類:生物學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2010
畢業學年度:98
語文別:英文
論文頁數:48
中文關鍵詞:杜鵑斑蛾粒線體細胞色素氧化酶第一次單元分類學臺灣
外文關鍵詞:RhodopsonaCOITaxonomyTaiwan
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:604
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
杜鵑斑蛾屬(genus Rhodopsona)的成員包含近十種專食杜鵑科植物的日行性斑蛾,分布範圍西起喜馬拉雅山脈東側,包含整個中南半島以及中國西南,東抵台灣。井上寬曾在1987 年時對四種產於台灣的杜鵑斑蛾做過分類處理,然而在檢視過所有相關的模式標本後,我們發現他對於模式產地的詮釋以及同物異名的指定上有所衝突,因此該分類處理的可靠性存疑。本研究的目的就是要重新檢視台灣產杜鵑斑蛾的分類地位。我們利用粒腺體氧化酶第一次單元(COI)以及額外的一段核基因(Ef1α)的DNA序列進行親緣分析,並將親源分析的結果與形態以及生態資料結合,用以判斷台灣產杜鵑斑蛾的分類地位。結果顯示,台灣只有一種杜鵑斑蛾,那就是寬緣杜鵑斑蛾 Rhodopsona rutila
Jordan, 1910,而細緣杜鵑斑蛾 Rhodopsona marginata (Wileman,
1910,Rhodopsona decolorata Hering 1930 與 Rhodopsona formosana Matsumura, 1911 都是寬緣杜鵑斑蛾的新同物異名(syn. nov.)。因此,台灣族群在翅膀顏色以及發香構造上的變異被認定為種內的表形多型性。本研究是斑蛾科中第一個使用COI進行物種判別的例子,結果指出COI在判別杜鵑斑蛾種類時效率很高,但是我們也建議使用COI進行物種判別的時候,至少要加入兩種有良好形態分類基礎的種類一同分析,以獲得可靠的種間遺傳距離,並依此判別物種。
The genus Rhodopsona Jordan, 1907 comprises about ten species of diurnal zygaenid moths whose larvae exclusively feed on ericacean plants. They distribute from East Himalaya throughout Indochina Peninsula and South-West China to Taiwan. Inoue proposed a synonymy about four
Rhodopsona spp. relevant to Taiwan. However, several conflicts were identified after we examined all related type specimens and the taxonomic treatment was considered problematic. Aim of this study is to revise the chaotic taxonomy. We employed mitochondrial gene cytochrome c oxidase I (COI or cox1) and a supplementary nuclear gene
elongation factor I alpha (Ef1α) in phylogenetic analyses, and cooperated the results with morphological and ecological data to investigate taxonomy of Taiwanese Rhodopsona species. In results, we proposed there is only one Rhodopsona species in Taiwan, viz. Rhodopsona rutila
Jordan, 1910, and revised the status of Rhodopsona decolorata Hering, 1930 and Rhodopsona formosana Matsumura, 1911, and Rhodopsona marginata (Wileman, 1910) as new synonyms (syn. nov.) of rutila. Consequently, variation of wing color and androchonial organ was considered as intraspecifically phenotypic polymorphism. This study is
the first case among Zygaenidae using COI fragments to delimit species, and concludes COI having high efficiency in species delimitation among Rhodopsona species. Also we suggested that at least two outgroup species with well-developed morphological taxonomy should be included in order to obtain comparable interspecific genetic divergence while usingCOI to delimit species.
Table of contents

Table of contents--------------------------------------- 1
致謝 ---------------------------------------------------- 2
中文摘要-------------------------------------------------- 4
Abstract------------------------------------------------- 5
Introduction--------------------------------------------- 6
Material and methods------------------------------------- 10
Results-------------------------------------------------- 14
Discussion----------------------------------------------- 20
References----------------------------------------------- 25
Figures-------------------------------------------------- 30
Tables--------------------------------------------------- 38
Apendix-------------------------------------------------- 43
Alberti B. 1954. Über die stammesgeschichtliche Gliederung der Zygaenidae nebst Revision einiger Gruppen (Insecta, Lepidoptera). Mitteilungen aus den zoologischen Museum in Berlin 30(2): 115-480.
Ball SL & Armstrong KF. 2006. DNA barcodes for insect pest
identification: a test case with tussock moths (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Canadian Journal of Forest research 36(2): 337-350.
Barrett RDH & Hebert PDN. 2005. Identifying spiders through DNA barcodes. Canadian Journal of Zoology 83(3): 481-491.
Brower AVZ. 2006. Problems with DNA barcodes for species
delimitation: ‘ten species’ of Astraptes fulgerator reassessed (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae). Systematics and Biodiversity 4(2): 127-132.
Chu YI & Yamanaka T. 1973. A check list of the present and the old names of insect collected localities in Taiwan. Journal of the National Taiwan Museum 16(4): 31-72.
Clare EL, Lim BK, Engstrrom MK, Eger JL & Hebert PDN. 2006.
DNA barcoding of Neotropical bats: species identification and discovery within Guyana. Molecular Ecology Notes 7(2): 184-190.
Davenport JW & Conner WE. 2003. Dietary alkaloids and the
development of androconial organs in Estigmene acrea. Journal of Insect Science 3(3): 1-6.
Elias M, Hill RI, Willmott KR, Dasmahapatra KK, Brower AVZ,
Mallet J & Jiggins CD. 2007. Limited performance of DNA
barcoding in a diverse community of tropical butterflies. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 274(1627): 2881-2889.
Epstein ME, Henk G, Naumann CM & Tarmann GM. 1999. Chapter
10. The Zygaenidae. In: Kristensen NP, ed. Lepidoptera, moths and butterflies, Vol. 1: Evolution, systematics, and biogeography. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 159-180.
Hajibabaei M, Janzen DH, Burns JM, Hallwachs W & Hebert PDN. 2006. DNA barcodes distinguish species of tropical Lepidoptera. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103(4): 968-971.
Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, deWaard JR. 2003. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. roceedings of the Royal Society B 270(1512): 313-321.
Hebert PDN, Stoeckle MY, Zemlak TS & Francis CM. 2004.
Identification of birds through DNA barcodes. PLoS Biology 2(10): 1657-1663.
Hering M. 1930. Neue und alte Lepidopteren. Mitteilungen aus dem Zoologischen Museum in Berlin. 16(4): 513-522.
Hickerson MJ, Meyer CP & Moritz C. 2006. DNA barcoding will often fail to discover new animal species over broad parameter space. Systematic Biology 55(5): 729-739.
Huang J, Xu Q, Sun ZJ, Tang GL & Su ZY. 2007. Identifying
earthworms through DNA barcodes. Pedobiologia 51(4): 301-309.
Huelsenbeck JP & Ronquist F. 2001. Mrbayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17(8): 754-755.
Inoue H. 1987. Note on the Zygaenidae from Taiwan. Japan Heterocerists’ Journal 144: 293-301.
Janzen DH, Hajibabaei M, Burns JM, Hallwachs W, Remigio E & Hebert PDN. 2005. Wedding biodiversity inventory of a large and complex Lepidoptera fauna with DNA barcoding. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 360(1462): 1835-1845.
Jordan K. 1910. Some new moths. Novitates Zoologicae 17(2):
255-256.
Kaila L & Stahls G. 2006. DNA barcodes: Evaluating the potential of COI to diffentiate closely related species of Elachista (Lepidoptera: Gelechioidea: Elachistidae) from Australia. Zootaxa. 1170: 1-26.
Klots AB. 1970. Lepidoptera. In: Tuxen SL, ed. Taxonomist’s glossary of genitalia in insects 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, pp. 115-130.
Leech JH. 1898. Lepidoptera Heterocera from northern China, Japan, and Corea. Transactions of Entomological Society of London 1898: 261-397.
Lukhtanov VA, Sourakav A, Zakharov EV and Hebert PDN. 2009.
DNA barcoding Central Asian butterflies: increasing geographical dimension does not significantly reduce the success of species identification. Molecular Ecology Resources 9(5): 1302–1310.
Matsumura S. 1911. Thousand Insects of Japan( Supplement) Vol. 3. Tokyo: Keiseisha, pp. 58-59. (in English and Japanese)
Oberthür C. 1910. Description de nouvelles espèces de Lépidoptères Hétérocères. Bulletin de la Société Entomologique de France 1910: 314-315.
Owada M, Horie K. 1999. Note on some chalcosiine moths
(Lepidoptera, Zygaenidae) from the Indo-Chinese Peninsula, with description of two new species and two new subspecies. Japanese Journal of Systematic Entomology 5(2): 207-216.
Posada D & Carndall KA. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14(9): 817-818.
de Prins J, Mozūraitis R, Lopez-Vaamonde C & Rougerie R. 2009. Sex attractant, distribution and DNA barcodes for the Afrotropical leaf-mining moth Phyllonorycter melanosparta. Zootaxa 2281:53-67.
Roe AD & Sperling FA. 2007. Patterns of evolution of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase I and II DNA and implications for DNA barcoding. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 44(1): 325-345.
Smith MA, Rodriguez JJ, Whitfield JB, Deans AR, Jazen DH,
Hallwachs & Hebert PDN. 2008. Extreme diversity of tropical
parasitoid wasps exposed by iterative integration of natural history, DNA barcoding, morphology, and collections. Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105(34): 12359-12364.
Smith MA, Woodley NE, Janzen DH, Hallwachs W & Hebert PDN.
2006. DNA barcodes reveal cryptic host-specificity within the presumed polyphagous members of a genus of parasitoid flies (Diptera: Tachinidae). Proceeding of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 103(10): 3657-3662.
Steinke D, Zamlak TS, Boutillier JA, Hebert PDN. 2009. DNA
barcoding of Pacific Canada’s fishes. Marine Biology 156(12): 2641-2647.
Sugi S. 1987. Early stages of Rhodopsona rutila Jordan (Zygaenidae, Chalcosiinae). Japan Heterocerists’ Journal 144: 302-303.
Swinhoe CC. 1905. Note on eastern and Australian Heterocera, with descriptions of one new genus and thirteen new species. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 7(16): 142-154.
Swofford DL. 2002. PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and Other Methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts.
Tamura K, Dudley J, Nei M & Kumar S. 2007. MEGA4: Molecular
Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) software version 4.0.
Molecular Biology and Evolution 24(8): 1596-1599.
Vences M, Thomas M, Bonett RM & Vieites DR. 2005. Deciphering amphibian diversity through DNA barcoding: changes and challenges. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Science 360(1462): 1859-1868.
Wahlberg N, Oliveira R & Scott JA. 2003. Phylogenetic relationships of Phyciodes butterfly species (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): complex mtDNA variation and species delimitation. Systematic Entomology 28(2): 257-274.
Walker F. 1854. List of the specimens of lepidopterous insects in the collection of British Museum. London: British Museum. 2: 279-581.
Wang CL, Lin PC. 1997. Chapter 5. Pest insects of horticultural plants. Pests of Ornamental Plants in Taiwan. Taipei: Harvest Farm Magazine, pp. 113-114. (in Chinese)
Ward RD, Zemlak TS, Innes BH, Last PR & Hebert PDN. 2005. DNA barcoding Australia’s fish species. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 360(1460): 1847-1857.
Wileman AE. 1910. Some new Lepidoptera-Heterocera from Formosa. The Entomologist 43(564): 136-139.
Wu LW, Yen SH, Lees DC & Hsu YF. 2010. Elucidating genetic
signatures of native and introduced populations of the Cycad Blue, Chilades pandava to Taiwan: a threat both to Sago Palm and to native Cycas populations worldwide. Biological Invasions 10.1007/s10530-009-9672-4.
Yen SH, Robinson GS & Quicke DLJ. 2005. The phylogenetic
relationships of Chalcosiinae (Lepidoptera, Zygaenoidae,
Zygaenidae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. 143(2): 161-341.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊