The Rhyacophila fasciata Group in Europe: Rhyacophila fasciata Hagen 1859 and formerly synonymized species (Trichoptera: Rhyacophilidae), with new description of Rhyacophila fasciata and Rhyacophila septentrionis McLachlan 1865 (stat. prom.).

The presence and distribution of Rhyacophila fasciata Hagen 1859 in Europe were revised, based on bibliographic study, collection specimens, and new material collected in different countries. The status of formerly synonymized species, Rhyacophila ferruginea (Scopoli 1763) and Rhyacophila septentrionis McLachlan 1865 was also assessed. The type of R. ferruginea is missing, the taxon is still unidentified, and thus we propose Rhyacophila ferruginea as a nomen dubium. Morphological features and genetic evidence revealed that R. septentrionis differs from R. fasciata, so we propose to change its status to status resurrectus. We therefore include new descriptions of the different stages (larva, pupa, male, and female) of R. fasciata and of R. septentrionis, together with a molecular analysis based on mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (mtCOI) and ecological notes. The species R. coppai Oláh 2020 NEW SYNONYM and R. soreda Coppa Oláh 2020 NEW SYNONYM are synonyms of R. sociata Navás 1916; the species R. kopasa Oláh Coppa 2020 NEW SYNONYM and R. rova Oláh Coppa 2020 NEW SYNONYM are synonyms of R. denticulata McLachlan 1879; the species R. matrensis Oláh Szczesny 2020 is probably a synonym of R. fasciata, so more study of this species is needed in order to confirm or deny that it is a valid species.

The Trichoptera barcode initiative: a strategy for generating a species-level Tree of Life.

DNA barcoding was intended as a means to provide species-level identifications through associating DNA sequences from unknown specimens to those from curated reference specimens. Although barcodes were not designed for phylogenetics, they can be beneficial to the completion of the Tree of Life. The barcode database for Trichoptera is relatively comprehensive, with data from every family, approximately two-thirds of the genera, and one-third of the described species. Most Trichoptera, as with most of life's species, have never been subjected to any formal phylogenetic analysis. Here, we present a phylogeny with over 16 000 unique haplotypes as a working hypothesis that can be updated as our estimates improve. We suggest a strategy of implementing constrained tree searches, which allow larger datasets to dictate the backbone phylogeny, while the barcode data fill out the tips of the tree. We also discuss how this phylogeny could be used to focus taxonomic attention on ambiguous species boundaries and hidden biodiversity. We suggest that systematists continue to differentiate between 'Barcode Index Numbers' (BINs) and 'species' that have been formally described. Each has utility, but they are not synonyms. We highlight examples of integrative taxonomy, using both barcodes and morphology for species description.This article is part of the themed issue 'From DNA barcodes to biomes'.