Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42201933›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Progress in the molecular phylogeny of Cotesia acuminata and C. melitaearum cryptic species complexes.

Julian Schach, Federica Valerio, Anne Duplouy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Julian SchachDepartment of Organismal and Evolutionary Biology, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, The University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-0387-8611
Federica ValerioDepartment of Organismal and Evolutionary Biology, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, The University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Anne DuplouyDepartment of Organismal and Evolutionary Biology, Faculty of Biological and Environmental Sciences, The University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7147-5199

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cryptic species present major challenges for biodiversity and evolutionary research due to the morphological similarity and frequent lack of available genetic and ecological data. In parasitoid wasps, this is especially true for lineages with limited taxonomic and genetic sampling and unclear geographic ranges. Here we reconstruct the phylogeny of Cotesia wasps parasitizing Melitaeini butterflies, including two cryptic species complexes (Cotesia acuminata agg. and C. melitaearum agg.). Using a ten-gene dataset from samples collected in Europe, Asia, and North America, we inferred relationships among 22 Cotesia species using maximum likelihood. We also included non-Melitaeini associated Cotesia to assess whether the parasitoids of Melitaeini form a monophyletic group. Our analyses yielded a highly supported phylogeny, revealing four major clades, three of which included the Melitaeini associated species. This confirms that the Cotesia parasitizing Melitaeini butterflies are polyphyletic, likely resulting from independent host shifts across the genus. Each clade is further subdivided into subclades corresponding to the different cryptic species complexes, clarifying previously unresolved relationships. These results provide a robust framework for future studies on the evolution, ecology, and host use dynamics of Cotesia wasps and highlight the utility of multi-locus data for resolving phylogenies in morphologically cryptic taxa.

Indexed as

PhylogenyWaspsAnimalsButterfliesEvolution, MolecularSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID42201933
PMCPMC13215553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.