taxonID	type	description	language	source
8A2E87C7FF9BFFCEADE45B5BDAD4FF61.taxon	description	Hincks (1952) downgraded Akantaka to a subgenus of Dorynota and synonymized the genus Trikona with Omoteina for sharing the type species (Cassida humeralis Olivier, 1808), a classification that was accepted in later works (Borowiec, 1999; Borowiec & Świętojańska, 2018). In 1999, Borowiec transferred Eremionycha to the tribe Cassidini Gyllenhal, resulting in the current composition of Dorynotini. Multiple cladistic analyses based on adult morphology (Borowiec, 1995; Chaboo, 2007; López-Pérez et al., 2017) and molecular data (12 S mitochondrial DNA; Hsiao & Windsor, 1999) have supported the monophyly of the Dorynotini. However, phylogenetic relationships among genera remain unresolved, and insights about the homology and function of the elytral spine / tubercle are still lacking. Spaeth (1923) observed that members of the tribe lacking the post-scutellar projection or with a tubercle-shaped projection are restricted to the Greater Antilles (Omoteina and Paratrikona) and the Amazon Basin region (Akantaka), whereas species with a spiniform post-scutellar projection occur throughout the Neotropics, with their diversity concentrated in the southern part of the tribal range. Based on this distribution pattern, he suggested that the presence and prominence of the post-scutellar projection would be correlated with environmental gradients across the distribution of the clade, allowing the species with the spine to invade cooler areas of the Neotropics. Simões et al. (2017) rejected the hypothesis posed by Spaeth (1923), concluding that morphological divergence occurs with high levels of environmental overlap, and suggested that the presence of the post-scutellar projection could be related to biotic interactions, perhaps as camouflage to guard against predation. The tribe Dorynotini was last reviewed by Monrós & Viana (1949), and no systematic work has been conducted at the tribal level since. Here, we combine morphological and molecular data to (1) test the monophyly of the tribe; (2) test the monophyly and relationships among the genera within the tribe; (3) elucidate biogeographical patterns; and (4) investigate the homology and evolution of the post-scutellar projection and other key characters using ancestral character state reconstruction (ACSR). This is the first systematic attempt to resolve relationships among dorynotine lineages, allowing further insight into their intriguing evolution and morphology.	en	Simões, M. V. P., Baca, S. M., Toussaint, E. F. A., Windsor, D. M., Short, A. E. Z. (2018): Solving a thorny situation: DNA and morphology illuminate the evolution of the leaf beetle tribe Dorynotini (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 185: 1123-1136
