Search

How many species are there on Earth and to what groups do these species belong? These fundamental questions span systematics, ecology, and evolutionary biology. Yet, recent estimates of overall global biodiversity have ranged wildly, from the low millions to the trillions. Insects are a pivotal group for these estimates. Insects make up roughly half of currently described extant species (across all groups), with ~1 million described species. Insect diversity is also crucial because many other taxa have species that may be unique to each insect host species, including bacteria, apicomplexan protists, microsporidian fungi, nematodes, and mites. Several projections of total insect diversity (described and undescribed) have converged on ~6 million species. However, these projections have not incorporated the morphologically cryptic species revealed by molecular data. Here, we estimate the extent of cryptic insect diversity. We perform a systematic review of studies that used explicit species-delimitation methods with multilocus data. We estimate that each morphology-based insect species contains (on average) 3.1 cryptic species. We then use these estimates to project the overall number of species on Earth and their distribution among major groups. Our estimates suggest that overall global biodiversity may range from 563 million to 2.2 billion species. [Biodiversity; cryptic species; insects; species delimitation; species richness.] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Alignment is a crucial issue in molecular phylogenetics because different alignment methods can potentially yield very different topologies for individual genes. But it is unclear if the choice of alignment methods remains important in phylogenomic analyses, which incorporate data from hundreds or thousands of genes. For example, problematic biases in alignment might be multiplied across many loci, whereas alignment errors in individual genes might become irrelevant. The issue of alignment trimming (i.e. removing poorly aligned regions or missing data from individual genes) is also poorly explored. Here, we test the impact of 12 different combinations of alignment and trimming methods on phylogenomic analyses. We compare these methods using published phylogenomic data from ultraconserved elements (UCEs) from squamate reptiles (lizards and snakes), birds, and tetrapods. We compare the properties of alignments generated by different alignment and trimming methods (e.g. length, informative sites, missing data). We also test whether these data sets can recover well-established clades when analyzed with concatenated (RAxML) and species-tree methods (ASTRAL-III), using the full data (⁠|$\sim $| 5000 loci) and subsampled data sets (10% and 1% of loci). We show that different alignment and trimming methods can significantly impact various aspects of phylogenomic data sets (e.g. length, informative sites). However, these different methods generally had little impact on the recovery and support values for well-established clades, even across very different numbers of loci. Nevertheless, our results suggest several "best practices" for alignment and trimming. Intriguingly, the choice of phylogenetic methods impacted the phylogenetic results most strongly, with concatenated analyses recovering significantly more well-established clades (with stronger support) than the species-tree analyses. [Alignment; concatenated analysis; phylogenomics; sequence length heterogeneity; species-tree analysis; trimming] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]