Aphids are a species rich group comprising many important pests. However, species identification can be very difficult for aphids due to their morphological ambiguity. DNA barcoding has been widely adopted for rapid and reliable species identification as well as cryptic species detection. In this study, we investigated cryptic diversity in the subfamily Calaphidinae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) based on 899 sequences of cytochrome c oxidase I (COI) for 115 morphospecies (78 species collected in this study and sequences of 73 species downloaded from Genbank). Among these 115 morphospecies, DNA barcoding results of 90 (78.3%) species were identical to results of morphological identification. However, 25 (21.7%) morphospecies showed discrepancies between DNA barcoding and traditional taxonomy. Among these 25 discordances, a total of 15 cryptic species were identified from 12 morphospecies. We also found three morphologically distinct species pairs that sharing DNA barcoding. Based on molecular operational taxonomic unit (MOTU) estimation, we discussed on species delimitation threshold value for these taxa. Our findings confirm that Calaphidinae has high cryptic diversity even though aphids are relatively well-studied.

The paper presents results of faunistic investigations of aphids (Aphidomorpha) in the Botanic Garden of the Jagiellonian University, Kraków, in the Kraków – Wieluń Upland. During two seasons of research (2011, 2012) two aphid species from the family Adelgidae and 50 species from the family Aphididae, associated with 66 host plants were recorded. The following species – Eriosoma anncharlotteae Danielsson, 1979, Capitophorus elaeagni (Del Guercio, 1894), Rhopalosiphoninus (Neorhopalosiphoninus) staphyleae staphyleae (Koch, 1854), Eulachnus brevipilosus Börner, 1940 and E. cembrae Börner, 1950 – are new for the Kraków – Wieluń Upland. Seven of the species recorded are regarded as alien to Poland.

The Chaitophorinae is a bionomically diverse Holarctic subfamily of Aphididae. The current classification includes two tribes: the Chaitophorini associated with deciduous trees and shrubs, and Siphini that feed on monocotyledonous plants. We present the first phylogenetic hypothesis for the subfamily, based on molecular and morphological datasets. Molecular analyses were based on the mitochondrial gene cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) and the nuclear gene elongation factor-1α (EF-1α). Phylogenetic inferences were obtained individually on each of genes and joined alignments using Bayesian inference (BI) and Maximum likelihood (ML). In phylogenetic trees reconstructed on the basis of nuclear and mitochondrial genes as well as a morphological dataset, the monophyly of Siphini and the genus Chaitophorus was supported. Periphyllus forms independent lineages from Chaitophorus and Siphini. Within this genus two clades comprising European and Asiatic species, respectively, were indicated. Concerning relationships within the subfamily, EF-1α and joined COI and EF-1α genes analysis strongly supports the hypothesis that Chaitophorini do not form a monophyletic clade. Periphyllus is a sister group to a clade containing Chaitophorus and Siphini. The Asiatic unit of Periphyllus also includes Trichaitophorus koyaensis. The analysis of morphological dataset under equally weighted parsimony also supports the view that Chaitophorini is an artificial taxon, as Lambersaphis pruinosae and Pseudopterocomma hughi, both traditionally included in the Chaitophorini, formed independent lineages. COI analyses support consistent groups within the subfamily, but relationships between groups are poorly resolved. These analyses were extended to include the species of closely related and phylogenetically unstudied subfamily Drepanosiphinae, which produced congruent results. Genera Drepanosiphum and Depanaphis are monophyletic and sister. The position of Yamatocallis tokyoensis differs in the molecular and morphological analyses, i.e. it is either an independent lineage (EF-1α, COI, joined COI and EF-1α genes) or is nested inside this unit (morphology). Our data also support separation of Chaitophorinae from Drepanosiphinae.