Furthermore, we were able to address whether the newly proposed Kowmunginae is at least compatible with the traditionally recognized subfamily-level classification.
In our analysis, the only representative, Phacaspis mitis, occupies different phylogenetic positions depending on analysis conditions (Fig. 3),
but Phacaspis mitis is never placed within any of Robinson’s (1970) subfamilies; in other words, although our data cannot address the validity of the subfamily we can at least conclude that there is no evidence that creating the Kowmunginae causes a traditional subfamily to become paraphyletic.