103urn:lsid:arphahub.com:pub:77d0745d-c3a1-5248-81de-8cdc02bed84aurn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:F56F6CF9-7502-4001-A751-35D5F2EF6CA0Arthropod Systematics & PhylogenyASP1863-72211864-8312Senckenberg Gesellschaft für Naturforschung10.3897/asp.84.e176700176700Research ArticleCleridaeMolecular systematicsTaxonomyClarification of the taxonomic status of the North American clerid Thanasimusnubilus stat. rev. (Coleoptera: Cleridae) by DNA barcodes and morphologyEberleJonasjonas.eberle@plus.ac.athttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2519-06401ConceptualizationWriting - original draftWriting - review and editingData curationFormal analysisFunding acquisitionInvestigationMethodologyValidationVisualizationSchalleggerRaphael1Writing - review and editingFormal analysisMethodologySikesDerek S.https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4336-23652ConceptualizationWriting - review and editingFunding acquisitionInvestigationMethodologyResourcesValidationLebelMichelhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3499-71743ConceptualizationWriting - original draftWriting - review and editingData curationFunding acquisitionInvestigationResourcesValidationGerstmeierRolandhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0041-57034ConceptualizationWriting - original draftWriting - review and editingInvestigationResourcesValidationEvolutionary Zoology, Environment & Biodiversity Department, University of Salzburg, Hellbrunner Straße 34, 5020 Salzburg, AustriaZoologische StaatssammlungMünchenGermanyhttps://ror.org/04rekk491Department of Biology & Wildlife, University of Alaska Museum / University of Alaska Fairbanks, 1962 Yukon Drive, Fairbanks, AK 99775-6960, United StatesUniversité LavalQuébecCanadahttps://ror.org/04sjchr03Université Laval, 1050 avenue de la Médecine, Québec, Québec, G1V 0A6, CanadaUniversity of SalzburgSalzburgAustriahttps://ror.org/05gs8cd61Zoologische Staatssammlung München, Münchhausenstraße 21, 81247 München, GermanyUniversity of Alaska MuseumFairbanksUnited States of America
Corresponding author: Jonas Eberle (jonas.eberle@plus.ac.at)
2026060320268420521456082B02-A66C-5D31-8982-BD7A5717F2564346F17A-FF83-40B7-91C3-4E8400B124A9190608753110202527012026This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC0 Public Domain Dedication.https://zoobank.org/4346F17A-FF83-40B7-91C3-4E8400B124A9
Abstract
The North American checkered beetle (Cleridae) Thanasimusnubilus Klug, 1842 is currently listed as a subspecies of Thanasimusundatulus (Say, 1835). We test the species status of T.nubilus by investigation of DNA barcodes and morphological measurements of multiple specimens of each of the two taxa as well as of multiple specimens of two additional North American species of the genus. We use four species delimitation methods based on gene tree and clustering algorithms (barcode gap threshold clustering, Assemble Species by Automatic Partitioning [ASAP], and single and multi-rate Poisson Tree Processes [mPTP]). Evidence from mtDNA clearly supported treating these two subspecies as distinct species which was also supported by a morphometric analysis. We therefore propose Thanasimusnubilus Klug, 1842 stat. rev. to be reinstated as a valid species.
The checkered beetles (Coleoptera: Cleridae) of the Nearctic region are relatively well-known taxonomically, although some species-rich genera (e.g. Cymatodera, Enoclerus, Phyllobaenus) need more revisionary work. Among them is the Holarctic genus Thanasimus Latreille, 1806, aka the ant beetles. Thanasimusformicarius (Linné, 1758) (originally in Attelabus), a Palaearctic representative, belongs to the first five beetles described by Linné (1758) within the family Cleridae, which Latreille (1806) made the type species of the genus Thanasimus. Their common name, ‘ant beetles’ is a misnomer, because it refers to their similarity to the aposematic coloration of the wasps known as Velvet Ants (Mutillidae). Thanasimus beetles prey on a wide range of scolytid beetles (Curculionidae: Scolytinae) and therefore play an important role as pest control in forestry. They are mainly found on the true firs (Abies), true spruces (Picea) and Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga) where they are attracted to both scolytid pheromones and to volatiles produced by damaged host trees. However, despite being the subject of a wealth of publications on chemical responses to kairomones and other substances (Aukema and Raffa 2002; Bakke and Kvamme 1981; Costa and Reeve 2011; Erbilgin and Raffa 2001; Hellmund 2013; Herms et al. 1991; Poland, T.M.; Borden 1997; Zhou et al. 2001), the taxonomy is not satisfyingly established for all species.
Nearctic Thanasimus species comprise T.dubius (Fabricius, 1776), T.repandus Horn, 1871, T.trifasciatus (Say, 1825), T.undatulus (Say, 1835), and possibly the introduced T.formicarius (Linné, 1758). After Thanasimusundatulus underwent some taxonomic confusion as described below, it currently has two subspecies, T.u.undatulus and T.u.nubilus. Since specimens of the two subspecies have often been collected in the same locations (Webster et al. 2016), the subspecies status of T.undatulusundatulus and T.undatulusnubilus is an open question. Thanasimusundatulus was first described by Say (1835) as Clerusundatulus. Kirby (1837) gave a description of T.undatulusnubilus as T.abdominalis. Klug (1842) indicated that the epithet abdominalis was already used by Germar for the description of clerid specimens from East India and by Chevrolat for the description of Mexican clerid specimens. As such, Klug (1842) proposed nubilus as a replacement species name for the North American specimens. LeConte (1863) listed T.undatulus Say and nubilus Klug as valid species for North America and mentioned T.abdominalis Kirby “vix a praec. differt.” under nubilus. Horn (1876) indicated in a side sentence that nubilus is a variety of undatulus. Still, Wickham (1895) included T.undatulus Say and nubilus Klug in his work on the Cleridae of Ontario and Quebec. Wolcott (1909) again indicated that nubilus Klug was a variety of T.undatulus Say. Also Schenkling (1910) indicated the var. nubilus Klug from North America under the species T.undatulus Say. From that point on, modern authors have considered nubilus Klug as a variety or subspecies of T.undatulus Say (Blackwelder and Blackwelder 1948; Bousquet et al. 2013; Chapman et al. 2025; Downie and Arnett 1996; Knull 1951; van Dyke 1923; Wolcott 1947). However, consistent morphological differences exist between nubilus Klug and T.undatulus Say and their distributions overlap. Likewise, currently available molecular data (www.boldsystems.org, accessed 2025-08-06) of the two species show considerable differentiation which has never been properly investigated, which we set out to do.
We applied contemporary species delimitation methods on available and newly sequenced DNA barcode data of seven species of the genus Thanasimus including T.undatulus and T.nubilus. Evidence from morphometric measurements of body length of the two species complemented the results of DNA barcoding and allowed a conclusion on the species status of T.nubilus. Results from mtDNA gave hints to an interesting biogeographic history of the investigated species.
2. Material and Methods2.1. Sampling
We analyzed DNA barcodes and/or morphology of a total of 274 adult Thanasimus specimens (DNA: 233, morphology: 49, DNA and morphology could be investigated for three of these individuals) of six ingroup and four outgroup species (Table S1; Fig. 1). We personally investigated or at least saw pictures of 153 specimens (DNA: 107, morphology: 49, both: 3) from 89 locations. These 153 specimens were used in all reported analyses, however, a gene tree including all 233 DNA sequences was additionally estimated. Thirty-nine existing DNA barcodes were taken from Gerstmeier et al. (2019), 36 that had a photograph and had less than 2% missing data were downloaded from the BOLD (www.boldsystems.org, accessed 2025-08-06), and 119 additional public sequences determined to the genus Thanasimus were likewise downloaded from the BOLD, some of which were generated by Sikes et al. (2017). No records of T.repandus could be acquired. We newly sequenced 32 specimens that were collected as part of a work on the detection of invasive alien species with alpha-pinene and ethanol baited funnel traps (Lindgren 1983) by the Forest Pest Management Services from the Province of Québec’s Ministère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts from the months of May to September in 2020 and 2021. The collecting jars contained propylene glycol. After harvesting the samples, insects were visually identified and kept in ethanol at –20°C in 2 ml vials until further analysis. One specimen of the subspecies T.undatulusrubriventris was collected by hand in ethanol. For molecular work, T.undatulus (Say 1835) and T.nubilus (Klug 1842) were represented by 33 and 20 specimens, respectively. At eight localities, syntopic specimens from both T.undatulus and T.nubilus could be sampled (Table S1; Fig. 1). DNA barcodes of Clerusmutillarius (FBCOE355-12), Opilomollis (FBCOF859-12), Trichodesornatus (BBCCA4236-12), like Thanasimus from the subfamily Clerinae, and Tilluselongatus (FBCOF1054-12) from Tillinae (Gunter et al. 2013) were downloaded from BOLD for use as an outgroup in phylogenetic analysis.
Samples analyzed at Université Laval were processed using the following protocol. For the extraction of genomic DNA, the abdomen was excised and its content was transferred into an Eppendorf tube containing 250 µL of proteinase K solution. The samples were incubated at 50°C for five hours. Approximately 80 µg of glycogen was added to each tube and then 125 µL of 6 M NaCl was added to the tubes. The samples were vortexed 2 min and then kept on ice for 10 min. Tubes were centrifuged at 16,000 g for 10 min at 4°C and the supernatant were transferred into 1 mL of cold 95% ethanol. Samples were then centrifuged at 16,000 g for 5 min at 4°C. The DNA/glycogen pellets were washed with 70% ethanol and recentrifuged. Pellets were air dried and then resuspended in 12 µL of HPLC pure water. Two µL of DNA were used for each polymerase chain reaction (PCR). All samples were PCR amplified with the primers CLepFolF (5’-ATTCAACCAATCATAAAGATATTGG-3’) and CLepFoIR (5’-TAAACTTCTGGATGTCCAAAAAATCA-3’) (Gerstmeier et al. 2019) for the barcoding fragment (5’ mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 – CO1). Amplifications were performed in 50 µL of solution containing 20 pmole of each primer, 1 µL of 10 mM dNTP mix, 5 µL of 10X Taq buffer, and 5 Units of Taq polymerase enzyme (from Bio Basic, Inc., ON, Canada). The PCR products (658 base pairs) were analyzed on a 2% agarose gel. For samples that did not show a PCR band, a nested PCR was performed with the primers FiveCOIP (5’-GGAACTTCTTTAAGACTATTA-3’) and TreeCOIP (5’-AAATAAATGTTGATATAAAATTGG-3’) to obtain a smaller PCR product of 573 base pairs with one µL of the primary CLepFolF/ CLepFoIR PCR reaction. The reactions for all the PCR were 1 min at 94°C, 2 min at 54°C, and 2 min at 72°C for 35 cycles. The PCR products were sent to the Genomic Platform of the Centre de Recherche du CHU de Québec – Université Laval (Québec City, PQ, Canada) for Sanger sequencing. The PCR products were sequenced on both strands with the same PCR primers. The sequence data and trace files were uploaded to BOLD (Accession Numbers CLSPQ001-21– CLSPQ011-21).
From samples processed at the University of Salzburg (PLUS), genomic DNA was extracted from the middle-left leg using the Qiagen® (Hilden, Germany) Blood & Tissue kit, following the manufacturers protocol. The Qiagen® Multiplex PCR kit was used to amplify the same fragment as above, using 1.6 μl of each primer LCO1490-JJ (CHACWAAYCATAAAGATATYGG) and HCO2198-JJ (AWACTTCVGGRTGVCCAAARAATCA) (Astrin and Stüben 2008) with 1.5 μl undiluted DNA in 20 μl reaction mixes. We applied a touch down PCR program, reducing the annealing temperature by 1° per cycle during the first 15 cycles, starting at 55 °C, and subsequent 25 cycles at 50 °C annealing temperature and 90 s elongation time. Samples were sent to Eurofins Genomics (Ebersberg, Germany) for forward and reverse Sanger sequencing with the same primers. Forward and reverse sequences were assembled in Geneious Prime (Biomatters Ltd., Version 2021.1.1) and obvious mismatches between strands were manually corrected. The sequence data were uploaded to BOLD (Accession Numbers THANA001-25–THANA021-25).
2.3. Multiple sequence alignment and phylogenetic analyses
Sequences were aligned with MAFFT v. 7.520 (Katoh and Standley 2013). Remaining parts of primers were pruned from the alignments. We also assured that no stop codons occurred in the sequences. We used IQ-TREE (v. 2.1.3 Minh et al. 2020) to infer a gene tree for downstream analyses. The best fit substitution models and partitions (cox1-1: TN+F+I, cox1-2: HKY+F+I, cox1-3: TN+F+G4) were inferred with ModelFinder (Kalyaanamoorthy et al. 2017) based on initial partitions of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd codon positions. The algorithm was run ten times with the edge-linked partition model, allowing each partition to have its own substitution rate. The tree with the best likelihood was subsequently chosen. Branch support was assessed with 1000 Ultrafast Bootstrap (UFB) replicates (Hoang et al. 2018) which are interpreted as strong evidence when ≥95%. The tree was rooted with Tilluselongatus in Dendroscope (v. 3.8.10 Huson and Scornavacca 2012), treating branch supports as such, and subsequently plotted with ggtree (version 3.13.0.001, Yu et al. 2017) in R (v. 4.3.1 R Core Team 2024). The same procedure was applied to the dataset including all Thanasimus sequences from the BOLD.
2.4. Molecular species delimitation
We used four methods to infer putative species based on molecular data (excluding outgroups): a simple distance threshold-based clustering, a more sophisticated recursive clustering method, and two gene-tree based partitioning method. Barcode gap (Meyer and Paulay 2005) threshold clustering used raw genetic distances calculated from the sequence data in a pairwise manner using ape (v. 5.7-1 Paradis and Schliep 2019). Local minima in the distribution of pairwise genetic distances were inferred using spider (v. 1.5.0 Brown et al. 2012). The smallest local minimum was then used as the threshold for clustering with spider (Meier et al. 2008).
Hierarchical clustering is also used in the ASAP algorithm (Linux version as downloaded on 2023-10-05; https://bioinfo.mnhn.fr/abi/public/asap; Puillandre et al. 2021). However, the final putative species entities are inferred without the need for a predefined distance threshold. Rather, an ASAP score, calculated from the probability that a partition constitutes a species and the width of the barcode gap, is assigned to all potential sets of partitions of sequences and tested for significance. The probability is derived from a comparison of the average pairwise distance of a partition with theoretical values obtained from a simulated panmictic species. The resulting partitions are then recursively tested for the presence of multiple putative species. We used the Kimura model of nucleotide substitution, which came closest to the model inferred by ModelFinder during the IQ-TREE analysis.
A different approach is used by mPTP (v. 0.2.5; Kapli et al. 2017), which is based on patristic distances from a gene tree. Assuming exponential distributions of branch lengths within putative species clusters as well as in-between species clusters, the optimal partitioning of specimens to putative species is determined by a maximum likelihood fit. Likelihood-ratio tests were applied among partitions at the significance level of 0.001. We applied the single-rate and the multi-rate Poisson tree process and report the results of both methods. Inferences were done on the gene tree that was inferred with IQ-TREE, after pruning the outgroup from the tree.
2.5. Morphometric measurements
Body length measurements were taken from 49 North American Thanasimus specimens (7 T.dubius, 6 T.nubilus, 5 T.trifasciatus, 31 T.undatulus). We measured total body length (from the apical clypeal margin to the elytral apices, L), maximum eye width from dorsal view (EyW), minimum distance between eyes (EyD), length of pronotum (PL), width of pronotum at the broadest extreme (PW), length of elytra along the middle line (EL), and width of elytra at the broadest extreme (EW). Measurements were analyzed by principal component analysis using the prcomp-function from the base-R-package stats. Data were not scaled, i.e., analyses were based on the covariance matrix. Biplots were created with ggbiplot (Vu and Friendly 2024).
3. Results
Based on two independent lines of evidence, DNA barcoding and morphological analysis, we provide support for the reinstatement of T.nubilus as a species distinct from T.undatulus. Notable intraspecific genetic divergence was observed among T.undatulus populations sampled from California, western Canada, and Alaska (Fig. 1). Based on the combined findings from morphological traits and mtDNA analysis, we formally elevate T.nubilusstat. rev. to species status.
The mitochondrial cox1-gene tree showed monophyly of T.nubilus (UFB 100) and T.undatulus (UFB 99) and high mean interspecific genetic differentiation between the two species of 9.4% (8.2%–11.5%) (Figs 2, S1), including between syntopically sampled specimens. Intraspecific distances were distinctly lower in T.nubilus (mean: 1.6%, ranging from 0.0%–3.6%) but higher in T.undatulus (mean: 3.2%, ranging from 0.0%–9.6%). Interspecific genetic distances between T.nubilus and T.undatulus were comparable to cross-continental divergence with T.formicarius (T.undatulus: mean: 12.0%, ranging from 10.0%–14.6%; T.nubilus: mean: 10.7%, ranging from 9.6%–11.7%) and other well-established North American species (T.trifasciatus: mean: 11.6%, ranging from 11.1%–12.2%; T.dubius: mean: 9.7%, ranging from 8.7%–10.4%). All applied species delimitation algorithms identified the species boundary between T.undatulus and T.nubilus and all other valid Thanasimus species (Fig. 2). Except for T.femoralis and T.trifasciatus, all methods oversplit currently valid species. The barcode gap threshold tended to oversplit more compared to other algorithms. While T.nubilus was otherwise consistently recovered, the western lineage (Fig. 2) of T.undatulus was inferred as separate potential species with all methods.
Maximum likelihood gene tree of six Thanasimus species, that was inferred from DNA barcodes with IQ-TREE. A bold “W” indicates the T.undatulus-lineage west of the Rocky Mountains (western lineage). The five columns to the right of the tree indicate delimitations of species as preferred based on total evidence and putative species inferred by four automated species delimitation methods based on DNA barcodes. Mismatches with morphology due to over- or under-splitting are highlighted in yellow. The histogram shows pairwise raw genetic distances of all specimens except outgroups. Ultrafast Bootstraps are displayed on nodes with > 80% support.
https://binary.pensoft.net/fig/1555428
In contrast to the molecular analyses, the morphological separation of the two species T.undatulus and T.nubilus was rather difficult. The body length allowed a relatively reliable differentiation (T.nubilus, mean: 7.90 mm, range: 6.25–9.33 mm; T.undatulus, mean: 6.68 mm, range: 5.08–8.83 mm; Fig. 3 inset). The base of the elytra and the pronotum of all T.nubilus examined were black, while the abdomen, antennae and legs were reddish brown. In T.undatulus, the pronotum was red (except for an apical black margin), the elytra were black with the base narrowly to more-or-less broadly red. Several T.undatulus from Alaska that nested in the western clade (Fig. 2) only had the elytral humeri red and the pronotum entirely black. The elytra of both T.nubilus and T.undatulus bear two sinuate transverse bands of white pubescence with the anterior band extending along the suture (Fig. 2). Overall, the main driver of the separation of T.nubilus and T.undatulus was total body size (L). Finally, our multivariate measurements of 49 specimens resulted in clear separation of T.dubius and T.trifasciatus (Fig. 3).
Morphological differentiation of four North American Thanasimus species as inferred by principal component analysis of seven body length measures. The biplot of principal component scores and loadings indicates that T.nubilus are mainly separated from T.undatulus by total body length (L). The inset shows color-coded boxplots of the total body length in mm of the two species. See the material and methods section for explanation of measurement acronyms.
Although members of the family Cleridae exhibit a relatively distinct appearance and comprise a modest number of species, they continue to pose significant taxonomic challenges. These difficulties are largely attributable to the variability in external morphological traits and coloration, which can obscure species-level distinctions. Consequently, the integration of molecular data proves valuable for accurate species delimitation and identification. For example, a larval specimen that was included in the study (BOLD-Accession: SSGLC5295-15) was identified as T.undatulus. However, analysis of the DNA sequence data placed this larval specimen within the nubilus-clade (Fig. S1). While results based on the DNA barcoding data that were available for the current study must be interpreted with caution, they clearly suggested different species in the case of T.nubilus and T.undatulus. Both species were monophyletic and not sister lineages in the cox1-gene tree, but this should be interpreted with caution, given the saturation of the cox1-gene at deeper time scales. However, the low intraspecific genetic variation in both species except for the western lineage (Fig. 2) of T.undatulus, in combination with the very clear interspecific differentiation of 20 syntopic specimens that were caught in the same trap at eight localities, suggested a lack of gene flow, and two separately evolving metapopulations (De Queiroz 2007). One of the delimitation methods we used, mPTP, is reported to have a tendency to overlump species (Jiang et al. 2024) and yet it supported the separation of T.nubilus from T.undatulus which we interpret as a conservative result. Due to the evidence of mtDNA and the weaker but present support by morphological characteristics, we therefore reinstate Thanasimusnubilus Klug, 1842 stat. rev. as a valid species.
Over the past two decades, DNA barcoding (Hebert et al. 2003) has emerged as a powerful and widely adopted tool in taxonomy. By comparing a short fragment of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase c subunit 1 gene (cox1) across and within species (Hebert et al. 2003), this method has often proven effective in distinguishing intra- and interspecific genetic variation (Čandek and Kuntner 2015), as demonstrated in European Thanasimus (Gerstmeier et al. 2019). While studies have highlighted challenges—such as limited interspecific variation and elevated intraspecific divergence that may complicate species delineation (Eberle et al. 2016, 2019; Lukic et al. 2021; Meyer and Paulay 2005; Ranasinghe et al. 2022, 2023; Zhang and Bu 2022)—these insights have spurred methodological refinements and integrative approaches. Thanks to extensive reference databases, user-friendly protocols, and cost-effectiveness, DNA barcoding continues to provide valuable molecular data and often yields reliable estimates of species boundaries, especially when combined with species delimitation methods. To further enhance accuracy, the integration of complementary data from nuclear genes, morphology, and ecology remain essential (Ahrens et al. 2021; Zamani et al. 2022).
An exception from the very clear separation of intraspecific and interspecific genetic variation was found in specimens that stem west of the Rocky Mountains (western clade, Fig. 2), which showed a certain variability in their coloration. Increased intraspecific variation in these lineages might be a consequence of repeated glacial cycles, which caused isolation of small populations west of the Rocky Mountains from larger populations east of the mountain range (Schmitt 2020). The ice sheets repeatedly forced populations to small coastal glacial refugia (Schmitt 2020) where they could survive, although in diminished populations. Similar observations were found for the American black bear (Ursusamericanus) and the nematode Soboliphymebaturini (Byun et al. 1997; Koehler et al. 2009; Schmitt 2020). Genetic drift alone might have caused the observed genetic differentiation since populations with small effective size (Ne) tend to accumulate substitutions more rapidly than large populations (Eberle et al. 2019; Galtier et al. 2009). Also, the morphological variation might reflect this effect. The genus Thanasimus appears to be a potentially interesting showcase of North American biogeography. Future studies should emphasize the use of nuclear DNA, preferably at a genomic scale. We need a more comprehensive geographic sampling of the populations west of the Rocky Mountains, which are partly difficult to collect (e.g. T.undatulus var. rubriventris), and also of Eurasian species to better understand the Holarctic biogeography of the genus.
5. Declarations
Authors’ contributions. JE, ML, DS, and RG conceived the study; ML and DS collected the newly sequenced specimens; ML, DS, and JE generated DNA barcodes from them; RS and JE prepared and analyzed the data; JE, ML, DS, and RG drafted the manuscript; all authors proofread the final manuscript.
Competing interests. The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
6. Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Michael Geiser, who put extraordinary effort in the investigation of the type locality of T.abdominalis; to Thomas Schmitt for his comments on the biogeography of North-Western America as well as to Évelyne Barrette et Marie-Chantal Emond from the Service de la gestion des ravageurs forestiers, Direction de la protection des forêts at the Québec’s Ministère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec, PQ, Canada) for letting us analyze the Thanasimus species collected as part of their work on the detection of invasive alien species. We also thank Jacques Rifkind, who provided us with a specimen of T.u.rubriventris. We thank Renee Miskie from the Centre for Biodiversity Genomics at University of Guelph (Ontario, Canada) for providing us with photos and information on several Thanasimus specimens and Remus Naeve, who processed several specimens in the molecular laboratory. We greatly appreciate the efforts of Jiri Kolibác and John M. Leavengood, Jr. in reviewing the manuscript draft. This research was funded in part by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), doi: 10.55776/P36167. For open access purposes, the authors have applied a CC BY public copyright license to any author accepted manuscript version arising from this submission.
7. ReferencesAhrens D, Ahyong ST, Ballerio A, Barclay MVL, Eberle J, Espeland M, Huber BA, Mengual X, Pacheco TL, Peters RS, Rulik B, Vaz-De-Mello F, Wesener T, Krell F-T 2021) Is it time to describe new species without diagnoses?—A comment on Sharkey et al. (2021). Zootaxa 5027(2): 151–159. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5027.2.1Astrin JJ, Stüben PE (2008) Phylogeny in cryptic weevils: molecules, morphology and new genera of western Palaearctic Cryptorhynchinae (Coleoptera:Curculionidae). Invertebrate Systematics 22(5): 503. https://doi.org/10.1071/IS07057Aukema BH, Raffa KF (2002) Relative effects of exophytic predation, endophytic predation, and intraspecific competition on a subcortical herbivore: Consequences to the reproduction of Ipspini and Thanasimusdubius. Oecologia 133(4): 483–491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-002-1054-xBakke A, Kvamme T (1981) Kairomone response in Thanasimus predators to pheromone components of Ipstypographus. Journal of Chemical Ecology 7(2): 305–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00995753Blackwelder RE, Blackwelder RM (1948) Fifth Supplement 1937–1947 (inclusive) to the Leng Catalogue of Coleoptera of America, North of Mexico. Mount Vernon, N. Y., John D. Sherman, Jr.Bousquet Y, Bouchard P, Davies A, Sikes D (2013) Checklist of beetles (Coleoptera) of Canada and Alaska. Second edition. ZooKeys 360: 1–44. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.360.4742Brown SDJ, Collins RA, Boyer S, Lefort M-C, Malumbres-Olarte J, Vink CJ, Cruickshank RH (2012) Spider: An R package for the analysis of species identity and evolution, with particular reference to DNA barcoding. Molecular Ecology Resources 12(3): 562–565. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2011.03108.xByun SA, Koop BF, Reimchen TE (1997) North American Black Bear mtDNA Phylogeography: Implications for Morphology and the Haida Gwaii Glacial Refugium Controversy. Evolution 51(5): 1647–1653. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1997.tb01487.xČandek K, Kuntner M (2015) DNA barcoding gap: reliable species identification over morphological and geographical scales. Molecular Ecology Resources 15(2): 268–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12304Chapman EG, Leavengood JM, Dupuis JR (2025) The cleridae and thanerocleridae of eastern North America, with illustrated keys, updated distributions, and special emphasis on the kentucky fauna. Zootaxa 5639(1): 1–88. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5639.1.1Costa A, Reeve JD (2011) Upwind flight response of the bark beetle predator Thanasimusdubius towards olfactory and visual cues in a wind tunnel. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 13(3): 283–290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-9563.2011.00519.xDe Queiroz K (2007) Species Concepts and Species Delimitation. Systematic Biology 56(6): 879–886. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150701701083Downie NM, Arnett RH (1996) The beetles of northeastern North America. Volume II: Polyphaga: Series Bostrichiformia through Curculionoidea (ix + 891–1721). Gainsville, Florida: The Sandhill Crane Press.Eberle J, Bazzato E, Fabrizi S, Rossini M, Colomba M, Cillo D, Uliana M, Sparacio I, Sabatinelli G, Warnock RCM, Carpaneto G, Ahrens D (2019). Sex-Biased Dispersal Obscures Species Boundaries in Integrative Species Delimitation Approaches. Systematic Biology 68(3): 441–459. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syy072Eberle J, Warnock RCM, Ahrens D (2016) Bayesian species delimitation in Pleophylla chafers (Coleoptera) – the importance of prior choice and morphology. BMC Evolutionary Biology 16(1): 94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-016-0659-3Erbilgin N, Raffa KF (2001) Kairomonal range of generalist predators in specialized habitats: responses to multiple phloeophagous species emitting pheromones vs. host odors. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 99: 205–210. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1570-7458.2001.00818.xGaltier N, Nabholz B, Glémin S, Hurst GDD (2009) Mitochondrial DNA as a marker of molecular diversity: a reappraisal. Molecular Ecology 18(22): 4541–4550. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2009.04380.xGerstmeier R, Morinière J, Hendrich L (2019) High genetic variation within mitochondrial CO1 in Middle European Thanasimusformicarius (Linné, 1758) (Coleoptera: Cleridae). Zootaxa 4674(3): 386–392. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4674.3.7Gunter NL, Leavengood JM, Bartlett JS, Chapman EG, Cameron SL (2013) A molecular phylogeny of the checkered beetles and a description of Epiclininae a new subfamily (Coleoptera: Cleroidea: Cleridae). Systematic Entomology, 38(3), 626–636. https://doi.org/10.1111/syen.12019Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, deWaard JR (2003) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 270(1512): 313–321. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2218Hellmund M (2013) Aggregation von Borkenkäferprädatoren unter Ausnutzung des Prinzips der allochthonen Kairomone in ausgewählten Nadelwaldhabitaten unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Ameisenbuntkäfer. Dissertation, Technische Universität Dresden, 1–199.Herms DA, Haack RA, Ayres BD (1991) Variation in semiochemical-mediated prey-predator interaction: Ipspini (Scolytidae) and Thanasimusdubius (Cleridae). Journal of Chemical Ecology 17(8): 1705–1714. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00984698Hoang DT, Chernomor O, von Haeseler A, Minh BQ, Vinh LS (2018) UFBoot2: Improving the Ultrafast Bootstrap Approximation. Molecular Biology and Evolution 35(2): 518–522. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msx281Horn H (1876) Synonymy of the Coleoptera of the Fauna Boreali-Americana, Kirby. The Canadian Entomologist 8(7): 126–193.Huson DH, Scornavacca C (2012) Dendroscope 3: An Interactive Tool for Rooted Phylogenetic Trees and Networks. Systematic Biology 61(6): 1061–1067. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/sys062Jiang Y, Yang J, Folk RA, ZhaoJ, LiuJ, HeZ, Peng H, Yang S, Xiang C, Yu X (2024). Species delimitation of tea plants (Camellia sect. Thea) based on super-barcodes. BMC Plant Biology 24(1): 181. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870-024-04882-3Kalyaanamoorthy S, Minh BQ, Wong TKF, von Haeseler A, Jermiin LS (2017) ModelFinder: fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nature Methods 14(6): 587–589. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4285Kapli P, Lutteropp S, Zhang J, Kobert K, Pavlidis P, Stamatakis A, Flouri T (2017). Multi-rate Poisson Tree Processes for single-locus species delimitation under Maximum Likelihood and Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Bioinformatics: btx025. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btx025Katoh K, Standley DM (2013) MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: Improvements in Performance and Usability. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30(4): 772–780. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst010Kirby W (1837) Fauna Boreali-Americana: the Insects (Vols 1–4, Vol. 4). Norwich: Josiah Fletcher. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139151948Klug JCF (1842) Versuch einer systematischen Bestimmung und Auseinandersetzung der Gattungen und Arten der Clerii, einer Insectenfamilie aus der Ordnung der Coleopteren. Abhandlungen der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, 259–398.Knull JN (1951) The checkered beetles of Ohio (Coleoptera: Cleridae). Ohio Biological Survey Bulletin 8(42): 268–350.Koehler AVA, Hoberg EP, Dokuchaev NE, Tranbenkova NA, Whitman JS, Nagorsen DW, Cook JA (2009) Phylogeography of a Holarctic nematode, Soboliphymebaturini, among mustelids: climate change, episodic colonization, and diversification in a complex host–parasite system. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 96(3): 651–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8312.2008.01145.xLeConte JL (1863) List of the Coleoptera of North America prepared for the Smithsonian institution. Part 1 (p. 78). Washington: Smithsonian Institution.Lindgren BS (1983) A multiple funnel trap for scolytid beetles (Coleoptera). The Canadian Entomologist 115(3): 299–302. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent115299-3Lukic D, Eberle J, Thormann J, Holzschuh C, Ahrens D (2021) Excluding spatial sampling bias does not eliminate oversplitting in DNA-based species delimitation analyses. Ecology and Evolution 11(15): 10327–10337. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7836Meier R, Zhang G, Ali F (2008) The use of mean instead of smallest interspecific distances exaggerates the size of the “barcoding gap” and leads to misidentification. Systematic Biology 57(5): 809–813. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150802406343Meyer CP, Paulay G (2005) DNA Barcoding: Error Rates Based on Comprehensive Sampling. PLoS Biology 3(12): e422. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030422Minh BQ, Schmidt HA, Chernomor O, Schrempf D, Woodhams MD, von Haeseler A, Lanfear R (2020) IQ-TREE 2: new models and efficient methods for phylogenetic inference in the genomic era. Molecular Biology and Evolution 37(5): 1530–1534. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msaa015Paradis E, Schliep K (2019) ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 35(3): 526–528. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bty633Poland TM, Borden JH (1997) Attraction of a bark beetle predator, Thanasimusundatulus (Coleoptera: Cleridae), to pheromones of the spruce beetle and two secondary bark beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae). Journal of the Entomological Society of British Columbia 94: 35–42.Puillandre N, Brouillet S, Achaz G (2021) ASAP: assemble species by automatic partitioning. Molecular Ecology Resources 21(2): 609–620. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13281R Core Team (2024) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria https://www.R-project.org/. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.orgRanasinghe UGSL, Eberle J, Thormann J, Bohacz C, Benjamin SP, Ahrens D (2022) Multiple species delimitation approaches with COI barcodes poorly fit each other and morphospecies – An integrative taxonomy case of Sri Lankan Sericini chafers (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Ecology and Evolution 12(5): https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.8942Ranasinghe UGSL, ThormannJ, BenjaminSP, BezděkA, EberleJ, Ahrens D (2023) Contrasting results of multiple species delimitation approaches cause uncertainty in synecological studies: A case study on Sri Lankan chafers. Insect Conservation and Diversity: icad.12684. https://doi.org/10.1111/icad.12684Say T (1835) Descriptions of new North American coleopterous insects, and observations on some already described. Boston Journal of Natural History 1(1): 151–203.Schenkling S (1910) Coleopterorum Catalogus. Pars 23 Fam. Cleridae (pp. 92–274). W. Junk.Schmitt T (2020) Molekulare Biogeographie: Gene in Raum und Zeit (1. Auflage). Bern: Haupt Verlag.Sikes DS, BowserM, Morton JM, Bickford C, Meierotto S, Hildebrandt K (2017) Building a DNA barcode library of Alaska’s non-marine arthropods. Genome 60(3): 248–259. https://doi.org/10.1139/gen-2015-0203van Dyke, EC (1923) New species of Coleoptera from California. Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society 18: 37–53.Vu V, Friendly M (2024) ggbiplot: A Grammar of Graphics Implementation of Biplots. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggbiplotWebster RP, Webster VL, Alderson CA, Hughes CC, Sweeney JD (2016) Further contributions to the Coleoptera fauna of New Brunswick with an addition to the fauna of Nova Scotia, Canada. ZooKeys (573): 265–338. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.573.7327Wickham HF (1895) The Coleoptera of Canada. XIII. The Cleridae of Ontario and Quebec. The Canadian Entomologist 27(9): 247–253. https://doi.org/10.4039/ent27247-9Wolcott AB (1909) The Cleridae of the public museum of the city of Milwaukee. Bulletin of the Wisconsin Natural History Society 7: 93–102.Wolcott AB (1947). Catalogue of North American beetles of the family Cleridae. Fieldiana Zoology 32: 63–105.Yu G, Smith DK, Zhu H, Guan Y, Lam TT (2017) ggtree: an r package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 8(1): 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12628Zamani A, Fric ZF, Gante HF, Hopkins T, Orfinger AB, Scherz MD, Sucháčková Bartoňová A, Dal Pos D (2022) DNA barcodes on their own are not enough to describe a species. Systematic Entomology 47(3): 385–389. https://doi.org/10.1111/syen.12538Zhang H, Bu W (2022) Exploring Large-Scale Patterns of Genetic Variation in the COI Gene among Insecta: Implications for DNA Barcoding and Threshold-Based Species Delimitation Studies. Insects 13(5): 425. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13050425Zhou J, Ross DW, Niwa CG (2001) Kairomonal response of Thanasimusundatulus, Enoclerussphegeus (Coleoptera: Cleridae), and Temnochilachlorodia (Coleoptera: Trogositidae) to bark beetle semiochemicals in Eastern Oregon. Environmental Entomology 30(6): 993–998. https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225X-30.6.993Supplementary materials10.3897/asp.84.e176700.suppl1D1603530-075B-559C-901E-963FE6A25C0C
Table S1
: .xlsx
: Details on all specimens in the study used for molecular analyses. IDs, localities, and further sampling information are given along with sequence origin. Equal letters in the syntopy column indicate pairs of syntopically collected T.undatulus and T.nubilus.
https://binary.pensoft.net/file/1555430This dataset is made available under the Open Database License (http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0). The Open Database License (ODbL) is a license agreement intended to allow users to freely share, modify, and use this dataset while maintaining this same freedom for others, provided that the original source and author(s) are credited. Eberle J, Schallegger R, Sikes DS, Lebel M, Gerstmeier R (2026)10.3897/asp.84.e176700.suppl20699380D-75CD-529F-BED5-A9C8C6ED1246
Figure S1
: .pdf
: Maximum likelihood gene tree of seven Thanasimus species, that was inferred with IQ-TREE from all DNA barcodes of the genus Thanasimus that were available at the BOLD. Ultrafast Bootstraps are displayed on nodes with > 80% support. Specimens CNCCH1946-12, NGSFT333-16, NGSFT3334-16, GMOFA013-21 all exhibit a black pronotum and base of the elytra and were thus identified to be T.nubilus in this study.
https://binary.pensoft.net/file/1555431This dataset is made available under the Open Database License (http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0). The Open Database License (ODbL) is a license agreement intended to allow users to freely share, modify, and use this dataset while maintaining this same freedom for others, provided that the original source and author(s) are credited. Eberle J, Schallegger R, Sikes DS, Lebel M, Gerstmeier R (2026)