Limits...
Morphological identification of Lucilia sericata, Lucilia cuprina and their hybrids (Diptera, Calliphoridae).

Williams KA, Villet MH - Zookeys (2014)

Bottom Line: Discriminant function analysis of the characters successfully separated the specimens into three unambiguous groups - L. sericata, L. cuprina and hybrids.This is the first evidence that hybrids of these two species can be identified from their morphology.The usefulness of the morphological characters is also discussed and photographs of several characters are included to facilitate their assessment.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Entomology Department, Durban Natural Science Museum, Durban, South Africa.

ABSTRACT
Hybrids of Lucilia sericata and Lucilia cuprina have been shown to exist in previous studies using molecular methods, but no study has shown explicitly that these hybrids can be identified morphologically. Published morphological characters used to identify L. sericata and L. cuprina were reviewed, and then scored and tested using specimens of both species and known hybrids. Ordination by multi-dimensional scaling indicated that the species were separable, and that hybrids resembled L. cuprina, whatever their origin. Discriminant function analysis of the characters successfully separated the specimens into three unambiguous groups - L. sericata, L. cuprina and hybrids. The hybrids were morphologically similar irrespective of whether they were from an ancient introgressed lineage or more modern. This is the first evidence that hybrids of these two species can be identified from their morphology. The usefulness of the morphological characters is also discussed and photographs of several characters are included to facilitate their assessment.

No MeSH data available.


Frontal stripe – Lucilia sericata (A) and Lucilia cuprina (B).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons-attribution
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4109482&req=5

Figure 2: Frontal stripe – Lucilia sericata (A) and Lucilia cuprina (B).

Mentions: The relative width of the frontal stripe (frontal vitta) (Table 2 and Suppl. material 1; Figure 2). Waterhouse and Paramonov (1950) suggested that this character was more reliable in males than females. We found that the width varied from being equal to the parafrontal to being more than twice the width in both species. The hybrids were not distinguishable from Lucilia cuprina. This character was included in the MDS and the DFA analyses.


Morphological identification of Lucilia sericata, Lucilia cuprina and their hybrids (Diptera, Calliphoridae).

Williams KA, Villet MH - Zookeys (2014)

Frontal stripe – Lucilia sericata (A) and Lucilia cuprina (B).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons-attribution
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4109482&req=5

Figure 2: Frontal stripe – Lucilia sericata (A) and Lucilia cuprina (B).
Mentions: The relative width of the frontal stripe (frontal vitta) (Table 2 and Suppl. material 1; Figure 2). Waterhouse and Paramonov (1950) suggested that this character was more reliable in males than females. We found that the width varied from being equal to the parafrontal to being more than twice the width in both species. The hybrids were not distinguishable from Lucilia cuprina. This character was included in the MDS and the DFA analyses.

Bottom Line: Discriminant function analysis of the characters successfully separated the specimens into three unambiguous groups - L. sericata, L. cuprina and hybrids.This is the first evidence that hybrids of these two species can be identified from their morphology.The usefulness of the morphological characters is also discussed and photographs of several characters are included to facilitate their assessment.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Entomology Department, Durban Natural Science Museum, Durban, South Africa.

ABSTRACT
Hybrids of Lucilia sericata and Lucilia cuprina have been shown to exist in previous studies using molecular methods, but no study has shown explicitly that these hybrids can be identified morphologically. Published morphological characters used to identify L. sericata and L. cuprina were reviewed, and then scored and tested using specimens of both species and known hybrids. Ordination by multi-dimensional scaling indicated that the species were separable, and that hybrids resembled L. cuprina, whatever their origin. Discriminant function analysis of the characters successfully separated the specimens into three unambiguous groups - L. sericata, L. cuprina and hybrids. The hybrids were morphologically similar irrespective of whether they were from an ancient introgressed lineage or more modern. This is the first evidence that hybrids of these two species can be identified from their morphology. The usefulness of the morphological characters is also discussed and photographs of several characters are included to facilitate their assessment.

No MeSH data available.