Molecular phylogenetics of Oestroidea (Diptera: Calyptratae) with emphasis on Calliphoridae: insights into the inter-familial relationships and additional evidence for paraphyly among blowflies

The superfamily Oestroidea, comprising ∼15,000 species, is a large and ecologically diverse clade within the order Diptera. Among its six commonly recognized families, Calliphoridae seems to be crucial for understanding evolutionary relationships in the group, as it is recognized as a controversial paraphyletic grouping. To further investigate this matter, the ITS2, 28S, COI and 16S regions were used to infer phylogenetic relationships in Oestroidea with maximum-parsimony (MP), maximum-likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI) methods. For the BI analyses, a deep evaluation of different data partitioning strategies was conducted, including consideration of structural conformation (ITS2 and 16S) and codon position (COI) information

Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016

Global prevalence and genotype distribution of hepatitis C virus infection in 2015 : A modelling study

Publisher Copyright: © 2017 Elsevier LtdBackground The 69th World Health Assembly approved the Global Health Sector Strategy to eliminate hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection by 2030, which can become a reality with the recent launch of direct acting antiviral therapies. Reliable disease burden estimates are required for national strategies. This analysis estimates the global prevalence of viraemic HCV at the end of 2015, an update of—and expansion on—the 2014 analysis, which reported 80 million (95% CI 64–103) viraemic infections in 2013. Methods We developed country-level disease burden models following a systematic review of HCV prevalence (number of studies, n=6754) and genotype (n=11 342) studies published after 2013. A Delphi process was used to gain country expert consensus and validate inputs. Published estimates alone were used for countries where expert panel meetings could not be scheduled. Global prevalence was estimated using regional averages for countries without data. Findings Models were built for 100 countries, 59 of which were approved by country experts, with the remaining 41 estimated using published data alone. The remaining countries had insufficient data to create a model. The global prevalence of viraemic HCV is estimated to be 1·0% (95% uncertainty interval 0·8–1·1) in 2015, corresponding to 71·1 million (62·5–79·4) viraemic infections. Genotypes 1 and 3 were the most common cause of infections (44% and 25%, respectively). Interpretation The global estimate of viraemic infections is lower than previous estimates, largely due to more recent (lower) prevalence estimates in Africa. Additionally, increased mortality due to liver-related causes and an ageing population may have contributed to a reduction in infections. Funding John C Martin Foundation.publishersversionPeer reviewe

Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with 125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000 species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species. Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct efforts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil, but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those in science, health, conservation efforts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, anthropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others

Molecular Phylogenetics Of Oestroidea (diptera: Calyptratae) With Emphasis On Calliphoridae: Insights Into The Inter-familial Relationships And Additional Evidence For Paraphyly Among Blowflies.

The superfamily Oestroidea, comprising ∼15,000 species, is a large and ecologically diverse clade within the order Diptera. Among its six commonly recognized families, Calliphoridae seems to be crucial for understanding evolutionary relationships in the group, as it is recognized as a controversial paraphyletic grouping. To further investigate this matter, the ITS2, 28S, COI and 16S regions were used to infer phylogenetic relationships in Oestroidea with maximum-parsimony (MP), maximum-likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference (BI) methods. For the BI analyses, a deep evaluation of different data partitioning strategies was conducted, including consideration of structural conformation (ITS2 and 16S) and codon position (COI) information. Results suggest the existence of two main clades in Oestroidea: (Tachinidae+Mesembrinellinae) and (Rhiniinae, (Sarcophagidae+Calliphoridae sensu stricto)). Oestridae was recovered as sister group of the remaining Oestroidea in the MP trees while it was placed closer to the (Rhiniinae+Sarcophagidae+Calliphoridae sensu stricto) group in the ML and BI trees. A paraphyletic Calliphoridae was recovered, confirming the exclusion of Rhiniinae, a clade recently promoted to family status and therefore already excluded. Mesembrinellinae could also be considered a distinct group apart from Calliphoridae, although further studies are required. Consideration of structural and codon position information led to a significant increase in the log-likelihoods of the analyses, which were accompanied by small changes in the inferred topologies, branch lengths and posterior probability support values. However, as model complexity increases, so does uncertainty across the estimated parameters, including tree topologies, and phylogenies inferred under very parameter-rich models may be less reliable even when possessing higher log-likelihoods.65840-5

Correction: Targeting Neutrophils to Prevent Malaria-Associated Acute Lung Injury/Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Mice.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006054.]