昆虫学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 67 ›› Issue (8): 1163-1172.doi: 10.16380/j.kcxb.2024.08.012

• 综 述 • 上一篇    下一篇

膜翅目广腰亚目扁叶蜂科化石研究进展

庄佳亮1,2, 任东2, 王梅1,*   

  1. (1. 中国林业科学研究院森林生态环境与自然保护研究所, 国家林业和草原局生物多样性保护重点实验室, 北京 100091;2. 首都师范大学生命科学学院, 昆虫演化与环境变迁重点实验室, 北京 100048)
  • 出版日期:2024-08-20 发布日期:2024-09-23

Research progress of fossil Pamphiliidae (Hymenoptera: Symphyta)

ZHUANG Jia-Liang1,2, REN Dong2, WANG Mei1,*   

  1. (1. Key Laboratory of Biodiversity Conservation of National Forestry and Grassland Administration, Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Beijing 100091, China; 2. Key Laboratory of Insect Evolution and Environmental Changes, College of Life Sciences, Capital Normal University, Beijing 100048, China)
  • Online:2024-08-20 Published:2024-09-23

摘要: 扁叶蜂科(Pamphiliidae)是扁叶蜂总科(Pamphilioidea)下最大的科级阶元,有着种类丰富的现生类群。该科一些种类是重要的林业害虫,历史上曾在欧洲以及我国北方多次暴发成灾,危害林木。全世界已报道的扁叶蜂科化石种类7属14种,均分布于北半球,从中侏罗晚期到中新世各时期均有记录。综合现生与化石类群的扁叶蜂总科系统发育研究证实了扁叶蜂科的单系性,但扁叶蜂科内部分化石属以及纽扁叶蜂属Neurotoma的位置仍存疑。此外,现有的分类体系将扁叶蜂科分为侏罗扁叶蜂亚科(Juralydinae)、腮扁叶蜂亚科(Cephalciinae)与扁叶蜂亚科(Pamphiliinae),其中侏罗扁叶蜂亚科仅包含大部分的化石属种,另外2个亚科主要由现生属种构成。现生亚科依据体表颜色、胫端距尖端质地、爪内齿排列等细微结构进行区分。而侏罗扁叶蜂亚科受化石材料限制,主要依据翅脉以及触角等易于保存的特征进行鉴定与区分。近年来随着标本的积累,侏罗扁叶蜂亚科历经3次修订后仅保留前翅1-Rs近乎1-M的一半或稍长为明显的鉴别特征。近期,另外一些特征如跗爪内齿的大小与排列方式、后翅Sc脉的分叉等得到关注,但这些特征仅在部分化石属种中观察到,是否稳定仍需后续进一步的探讨。化石类群与现生类群分类体系间的差异不仅在扁叶蜂科出现,在其他昆虫类群中也屡见不鲜。只有不断积累标本,运用更先进更全面的手段深入挖掘每件标本的信息,才能架好连接化石与现生类群的桥梁,科学探讨类群的演化。

关键词: 扁叶蜂总科, 侏罗扁叶蜂亚科, 分类学, 昆虫化石, 系统发育

Abstract:  Pamphiliidae, the most prominent family of Pamphilioidea, have a rich variety of living species. Some species of this family are important forest pests, and have historically broken out and done harm to forest trees in Europe and the north of China. A total of 7 genera with 14 species have been reported worldwide in Pamphiliidae. All of them are distributed in the Northern Hemisphere and recorded from the Middle Jurassic to the Miocene. In a phylogenetic study of Pamphilioidea which combines living and fossil species, the monophyly of Pamphiliidae has been confirmed, but the position of some fossil genera and Neurotoma remains questionable in Pamphiliidae. Additionally, the current phylogenetic classification divides Pamphiliidae into three subfamilies: Juralydinae, Cephalciinae and Pamphiliinae. The former one only contains most of the fossil genera, while the latter two are mainly composed of living genera and species. Living subfamilies are distinguished by tiny structures such as the body color, the texture of apical spurs in the tibia, and the arrangement of the tarsal inner tooth. In contrast, Juralydinae are mainly identified and distinguished by easily preserved features such as wing veins and antennae due to the limitation of fossil materials. With the accumulation of specimens in recent years, Juralydinae have undergone three revisions and only 1-Rs about half as long as, or slightly longer than, 1-M in forewing is treated as the diagnostic characteristic. Some other potential features, such as the size and arrangement of the tarsal inner teeth, and the bifurcation of Sc in hind wing are also noticed. But these features have only been observed in part of fossil genera and species, and whether they are stable still needs to be explored. The differences between the taxonomic system of fossil taxa and living taxa are not only found in Pamphiliidae but also common in other insect taxa. Only by continuously accumulating specimens and using more advanced and comprehensive methods to tap into the information of each specimen can we build a bridge connecting between fossil and living taxa and scientifically explore their evolution.

Key words: Pamphilioidea, Juralydinae, taxonomy, insect fossils, phylogeny