Cargando…

Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity

Perspectives on the classification of eukaryotic diversity have changed rapidly in recent years, as the four eukaryotic groups within the five-kingdom classification—plants, animals, fungi, and protists—have been transformed through numerous permutations into the current system of six “supergroups.”...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parfrey, Laura Wegener, Barbero, Erika, Lasser, Elyse, Dunthorn, Micah, Bhattacharya, Debashish, Patterson, David J, Katz, Laura A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1713255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17194223
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0020220
_version_ 1782131311160328192
author Parfrey, Laura Wegener
Barbero, Erika
Lasser, Elyse
Dunthorn, Micah
Bhattacharya, Debashish
Patterson, David J
Katz, Laura A
author_facet Parfrey, Laura Wegener
Barbero, Erika
Lasser, Elyse
Dunthorn, Micah
Bhattacharya, Debashish
Patterson, David J
Katz, Laura A
author_sort Parfrey, Laura Wegener
collection PubMed
description Perspectives on the classification of eukaryotic diversity have changed rapidly in recent years, as the four eukaryotic groups within the five-kingdom classification—plants, animals, fungi, and protists—have been transformed through numerous permutations into the current system of six “supergroups.” The intent of the supergroup classification system is to unite microbial and macroscopic eukaryotes based on phylogenetic inference. This supergroup approach is increasing in popularity in the literature and is appearing in introductory biology textbooks. We evaluate the stability and support for the current six-supergroup classification of eukaryotes based on molecular genealogies. We assess three aspects of each supergroup: (1) the stability of its taxonomy, (2) the support for monophyly (single evolutionary origin) in molecular analyses targeting a supergroup, and (3) the support for monophyly when a supergroup is included as an out-group in phylogenetic studies targeting other taxa. Our analysis demonstrates that supergroup taxonomies are unstable and that support for groups varies tremendously, indicating that the current classification scheme of eukaryotes is likely premature. We highlight several trends contributing to the instability and discuss the requirements for establishing robust clades within the eukaryotic tree of life.
format Text
id pubmed-1713255
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-17132552006-12-27 Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity Parfrey, Laura Wegener Barbero, Erika Lasser, Elyse Dunthorn, Micah Bhattacharya, Debashish Patterson, David J Katz, Laura A PLoS Genet Research Article Perspectives on the classification of eukaryotic diversity have changed rapidly in recent years, as the four eukaryotic groups within the five-kingdom classification—plants, animals, fungi, and protists—have been transformed through numerous permutations into the current system of six “supergroups.” The intent of the supergroup classification system is to unite microbial and macroscopic eukaryotes based on phylogenetic inference. This supergroup approach is increasing in popularity in the literature and is appearing in introductory biology textbooks. We evaluate the stability and support for the current six-supergroup classification of eukaryotes based on molecular genealogies. We assess three aspects of each supergroup: (1) the stability of its taxonomy, (2) the support for monophyly (single evolutionary origin) in molecular analyses targeting a supergroup, and (3) the support for monophyly when a supergroup is included as an out-group in phylogenetic studies targeting other taxa. Our analysis demonstrates that supergroup taxonomies are unstable and that support for groups varies tremendously, indicating that the current classification scheme of eukaryotes is likely premature. We highlight several trends contributing to the instability and discuss the requirements for establishing robust clades within the eukaryotic tree of life. Public Library of Science 2006-12 2006-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC1713255/ /pubmed/17194223 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0020220 Text en © 2006 Parfrey et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Parfrey, Laura Wegener
Barbero, Erika
Lasser, Elyse
Dunthorn, Micah
Bhattacharya, Debashish
Patterson, David J
Katz, Laura A
Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity
title Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity
title_full Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity
title_fullStr Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity
title_short Evaluating Support for the Current Classification of Eukaryotic Diversity
title_sort evaluating support for the current classification of eukaryotic diversity
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1713255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17194223
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.0020220
work_keys_str_mv AT parfreylaurawegener evaluatingsupportforthecurrentclassificationofeukaryoticdiversity
AT barberoerika evaluatingsupportforthecurrentclassificationofeukaryoticdiversity
AT lasserelyse evaluatingsupportforthecurrentclassificationofeukaryoticdiversity
AT dunthornmicah evaluatingsupportforthecurrentclassificationofeukaryoticdiversity
AT bhattacharyadebashish evaluatingsupportforthecurrentclassificationofeukaryoticdiversity
AT pattersondavidj evaluatingsupportforthecurrentclassificationofeukaryoticdiversity
AT katzlauraa evaluatingsupportforthecurrentclassificationofeukaryoticdiversity