A molecular phylogeny of the Odonata (Insecta)

Abstract. We estimated the phylogeny of the order Odonata, based on sequences of the nuclear ribosomal genes 5.8 S, 18S, and ITS1 and 2. An 18S‐only analysis resolved deep relationships well: the order Odonata, as well as suborders Zygoptera and Epiprocta (Anisoptera + Epiophlebia ), emerged as monophyletic. Some other deep clades resolved well, but support for more recently diverged clades was generally weak. A second, simultaneous, analysis of the 5.8S and 18S genes with the intergenic spacers ITS1 and 2 resolved some recent branches better, but appeared less reliable for deep clades with, for example, suborder Anisoptera emerging as paraphyletic and Epiophlebia superstes recovered as an Anisopteran, embedded within aeshnoid‐like anisopterans and sister to the cordulegastrids. Most existing family levels in the Anisoptera were confirmed as monophyletic clades in both analyses. However, within the corduliids that form a major monophyletic clade with the Libellulidae, several subclades were recovered, of which at least Macromiidae and Oxygastridae are accepted at the family level. In the Zygoptera, the situation is complex. The lestid‐like family groups (here called Lestomorpha) emerged as sister taxon to all other zygopterans, with Hemiphlebia sister to all other lestomorphs. Platystictidae formed a second monophylum, subordinated to lestomorphs. At the next level, some traditional clades were confirmed, but the tropical families Megapodagrionidae and Amphipterygidae were recovered as strongly polyphyletic, and tended to nest within the clade Caloptera, rendering it polyphyletic. Platycnemididae were also non‐monophyletic, with several representatives of uncertain placement. Coenagrionids were diphyletic. True Platycnemididae and non‐American Protoneurids are closely related, but their relationship to the other zygopterans remains obscure and needs more study. New World protoneurids appeared relatively unrelated to old world + Australian protoneurids. Several recent taxonomic changes at the genus level, based on morphology, were confirmed, but other morphology‐based taxonomies have misclassified taxa considered currently as Megapodagrionidae, Platycnemididae and Amphipterygidae and have underestimated the number of family‐level clades.