Introduction Species identification is the basis for understanding species diversity, phylogenetic patterns, and evolutionary processes. Only correct identifications allow for comparisons between studies and the repetition or expansion of earlier experiments. In pest species, species identification is also important in the development of (biological) pest control strategies. 1998 Tetranychus Tetranychus urticae Tetranychus kanzawai Tetranychus 1999 T. urticae 1998 1998 T. urticae T. cinnabarinus 1979 1996 2000 2007 per se 2005 c 2003 2004 2001 2001 1999 1994 1996a 1996b 1998 2000 2006a 2007 T. urticae 1998 T. urticae T. urticae T. kanzawai T. urticae T. cinnabarinus T. urticae Wolbachia Cardinium Material and methods Additional tetranychid samples 1 1991 g g Table 1 Overview of samples sequenced in this study and the primer sequences used for COI amplification Strain Country Locality Host plant Collection date  b Common name Scientific name F R NL1 Netherlands Castricum European Spindle Euonymus europaeus Sep-06 1 2 NL2 Netherlands Castricum European Honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum Sep-06 1 2 F1 France Vireux Blackthorn Prunus spinosa Jul-06 1 2 T1 Unknown Unknown a Cucumis sativus a 1 2 T2 Netherlands Aalsmeer (greenhouse) a Rosa a 1 2 US1 United States Tucson (AZ) Unknown Unknown May-05 3 4 P1 Portugal Caldas de Monchique Citrus Citrus Feb-05 3 4 S1 Spain Mont-roig del camp Orange Citrus Apr-04 3 4 PL1 Poland Rabkowa Plumb Prunus Aug-05 3 4 a Phaseolus vulgaris b 2003 2001 1994 1994 1 1 2 Fig. 1 Drosophila melanogaster  1997 Database compilation Sequence collection 1 1 1999 1 Tetranychus Data validation: Incongruencies in the database T. neocaledonicus T. gloveri 1996b T. neocaledonicus T. gloveri Amphitetranychus quercivorus A. quercivorus 1997 A. quercivorus A. viennensis T. viennensis A. quercivorus A. viennensis Phylogenetic analysis 2002 2001 1998 2003 1974 2006 2005 Tetranychus T. kanzawai T. urticae T. truncatus 4 Petrobia harti Bryobia kissophila Tetranychus Panonychus Petrobia Bryobia 1998 2001 Results Data acquisition: New sequencing Eutetranychus banksi Panonychus citri Prunus P. ulmi T. urticae Alignment and analysis of patterns of molecular evolution 1 1996 1996b 2 2 1997 Fig. 2 Base compositions for each codon position of the 390-bp aligned COI region, averaged over all tetranychid samples. Error bars depict minimum to maximum range. Results of the homogeneity test are given for each codon position  3 3 Fig. 3 Saturation plots of transversion and transition rates against uncorrected p-distance at each codon position  Tetranychus Phylogenetic relationships between tetranychid genera 4 P. harti B. kissophila Eotetranychus Fig. 4 Maximum likelihood tree of the tetranychid dataset based upon COI sequences. GenBank accession numbers and associated species names are given. If a haplotype is found more than once, the accession number is followed by the haplotype number (see Appendix) and the number of times the haplotype is found between parentheses. Numbers on the branches indicate the percentage bootstrap values (>50) based on NJ bootstrapping with ML settings (1,000 replicates). Bar at the lower left corner depicts the branch length corresponding to 10% maximum likelihood distance  Tetranychus T. cinnabarinus T. cinnabarinus T. cinnabarinus T. cinnabarinus 1979 1996 T. urticae 1998 T. cinnabarinus Tetranychus 5 5 T. kanzawai T. urticae T. truncatus Tetranychus T. pacificus T. mcdanieli T. cinnabarinus Fig. 5 Tetranychus T. cinnabarinus T. turkestani 1998 1998  Tetranychus urticae Tetranychus kanzawai Tetranychus truncatus T. urticae T. kanzawai 5 T. kanzawai 2001 T. urticae 5 T. urticae 2007 T. truncatus T. urticae T. turkestani Discussion The phylogenetic analysis of all COI sequences available in GenBank revealed novel patterns, which alter current views on species delineation and phylogeographic patterns in spider mites. In addition, we found that a number of accessions are probably registered under a wrong species name. This may in the past have led to erroneous interpretations of phylogenetic patterns that included these GenBank accessions. 5 T. urticae T. urticae 1998 2001 2006a 5 2006a 1998 T. urticae 2006a T. urticae T. truncatus 2007 Tetranychus urticae Tetranychus turkestani T. urticae T. turkestani 5 2003 2003 T. turkestani Host plant relationships Tetranychus 1998 T. urticae 5 1998 T. kanzawai T. truncatus Phylogeographic patterns 2000 T. kanzawai T. kanzawai 1998 T. kanzawai T. truncatus 5 T. urticae 1998 1998 2001 T. urticae 2005 Wolbachia Cardinium 2005 Phylogenetic inferences and DNA barcoding 1998 2001 1 1994 2006 2006 3 2007 2003 2004 ( 2005 2003 2005 2007 2003 2004 2006 2005 6 T. urticae T. urticae T. kanzawai 2005 2006 Fig. 6 Histogram of pairwise differences (p-distance) between 91 COI sequences within the family Tetranychidae. Pairwise differences are separated into three categories: 1. between individuals in the same species; 2. between individuals in the same genus (excluding intraspecific differences); 3. between individuals in the same family (excluding intraspecific and intrageneric differences). n = number of pairwise comparisons  Reproductive parasites and selective sweeps 2005 2007 Protocalliphora Wolbachia 2002 Wolbachia Cardinium Rickettsia 1996 2003 2005 2006b 1997 2003 2006 2000 Conclusions and recommendations 2005 2000 2002 2007