2004•Bulletin of Entomological ResearchRequires access

The classification of genus Anopheles (Diptera: Culicidae): a working hypothesis of phylogenetic relationships

Ralph E. Harbach

Open publisher page 335 citations

Abstract

The internal classification of genus Anopheles is updated to reflect taxonomic actions published since the classification was last reviewed in 1994. Both formal and informal taxa are included. The classification is intended to aid researchers and students who are interested in analysing species relationships, making group comparisons and testing phylogenetic hypotheses. The genus includes 444 formally named and 40 provisionally designated extant species divided between six subgenera: Anopheles, Cellia, Kerteszia, Lophopodomyia, Nyssorhynchus and Stethomyia. Subgenera Anopheles, Cellia and Nyssorhynchus are subdivided hierarchically into nested informal groups of morphologically similar species that are believed to represent monophyletic lineages based on morphological similarity. Changes to the classification include additional species, eliminated species and changes to the hierarchical organization and composition of supraspecific groups, some as a result of molecular studies.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The internal classification of genus Anopheles is updated to reflect taxonomic actions published since the classification was last reviewed in 1994. Both formal and informal taxa are included. The classification is intended to aid researchers and students who are interested in analysing species relationships, making group comparisons and testing phylogenetic hypotheses. The genus includes 444 formally named and 40 provisionally designated extant species divided between six subgenera: Anopheles, Cellia, Kerteszia, Lophopodomyia, Nyssorhynchus and Stethomyia. Subgenera Anopheles, Cellia and Nyssorhynchus are subdivided hierarchically into nested informal groups of morphologically similar species that are believed to represent monophyletic lineages based on morphological similarity. Changes to the classification include additional species, eliminated species and changes to the hierarchical organization and composition of supraspecific groups, some as a result of molecular studies.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 335 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The internal classification of genus Anopheles is updated to reflect taxonomic actions published since the classification was last reviewed in 1994. Both formal and informal taxa are included. The classification is intended to aid researchers and students who are interested in analysing species relationships, making group comparisons and testing phylogenetic hypotheses. The genus includes 444 formally named and 40 provisionally designated extant species divided between six subgenera: Anopheles, Cellia, Kerteszia, Lophopodomyia, Nyssorhynchus and Stethomyia. Subgenera Anopheles, Cellia and Nyssorhynchus are subdivided hierarchically into nested informal groups of morphologically similar species that are believed to represent monophyletic lineages based on morphological similarity. Changes to the classification include additional species, eliminated species and changes to the hierarchical organization and composition of supraspecific groups, some as a result of molecular studies.

Key concepts: Subgenus, Biology, Monophyly, Taxon, Zoology, Phylogenetic tree, Genus, Anopheles

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The classification of genus Anopheles (Diptera: Culicidae): a working hypothesis of phylogenetic relationships — Research Paper | ScholarLens