Fulcidacini

Gómez-Zurita, Jesús & Cardoso, Anabela, 2021, Molecular systematics, higher-rank classification and Gondwanan origins of Cryptocephalinae leaf beetles, Zoologica Scripta 50 (5), pp. 592-615 : 605

4.3.2 | Fulcidacini

The Fulcidacini (i.e. the Chlamisinae /-ini of most studies, or warty leaf beetles; Chamorro-Lacayo & Konstantinov, 2009) is a relatively small pantropical tribe of Cryptocephalinae , with some 500 species in eleven genera, most diverse in the Neotropics ( Chamorro, 2014a; Chamorro-Lacayo & Konstantinov, 2009; Reid, 1991a). This group had been traditionally related to the Lamprosomatinae ( Achard, 1914; Chapuis, 1874; Kasap & Crowson, 1976), an association grounded in part because of some putatively shared traits with the Sphaerocharitini, which were interpreted as a transitional stage between these two groups. However, Monrós (1956) challenged this view, unambiguously relating the Sphaerocharitini to Lamprosomatinae , and Reid (1990) demonstrated analytically the convergent nature of characters supporting this relationship and the alliance of Fulcidacini with other Cryptocephalinae instead. While the internal classification in this group has not been exempt of controversy ( Chamorro-Lacayo & Konstantinov, 2009; Karren, 1972; Monrós, 1951; Reid, 1991a), the monophyly of Fulcidacini as originally defined has never been questioned ( Lacordaire, 1848; Reid, 1991a). Our sample of Fulcidacini is small, yet it represents five of the eleven currently accepted genera of Fulcidacini , including Palaearctic and some Oriental representatives of the genus Chlamisus . These data support an original claim by Reid (1991a), recognizing that there might exist a deep taxonomic split, supported by synapomorphic traits for instance in the shape of pronotum and first abdominal ventrite, between American and southeast Asian Fulcidacini , and challenging the validity of genera that are currently believed to have ranges occupying these two regions. We could not reject statistically the monophyly of Chlamisus (Table 2), but our sample only included Old World representatives of the genus. It remains imperative testing in the future whether they will cluster with New World Chlamisus or if the hypothesis of natural groups bounded by biogeographic regions holds instead.