FIGURE 133. Phylogenetic trees showing the most recent result concerning the subfamily Diapheromerinae based on molecular data. Both trees are simplified with root lengths and support values ignored and showing only the section that includes the taxa of the subfamily Diapheromerinae. Names of taxa are updated and corrected according to the taxonomic changes conducted in the present study. Trees were generated with iTool v6 (https://itol.embl.de) based on the original files in newick format. Cladomorformia tax. n. is highlighted in green with the arrow indicating the corresponding node. The genus Calynda is marked by an orange star because it is here included in Cladomorformia based on morphological traits, which is in contradiction to the here shown molecular results. A. according to Bank & Bradler (2022, additional file 2, File S1), modified (Remarks: *Paraphanocles sp. (Trinidad) is apparently misidentified and not a member of Paraphanocles (= Phanocles); **Paraclynda picta (Bruinner v. Wattenwyl, 1907) and Paracalynda utilaensis Zompro, 2001 are undoubtedly congeneric, thus the result postulated in the tree is implausible); B. according to Forni et al. (2022, Supplementary figure 1), modified (Remark: ***Alienobostra remiformis (Rehn, 1904) appears twice in the tree with the position as sister to Phantasca quadrilobata (Chopard, 1911) implausible; "Bacteriformia" is split into three different lineages, which is in contradiction to the tree of Bank & Bradler (2022) shown in A, which in this aspect is considered more relieable and plausible).