Cargando…

On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?

BACKGROUND: Phylogenomic analyses recently became popular to address questions about deep metazoan phylogeny. Ribosomal proteins (RP) dominate many of these analyses or are, in some cases, the only genes included. Despite initial hopes, phylogenomic analyses including tens to hundreds of genes still...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bleidorn, Christoph, Podsiadlowski, Lars, Zhong, Min, Eeckhaut, Igor, Hartmann, Stefanie, Halanych, Kenneth M, Tiedemann, Ralph
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19570199
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-150
_version_ 1782169804348588032
author Bleidorn, Christoph
Podsiadlowski, Lars
Zhong, Min
Eeckhaut, Igor
Hartmann, Stefanie
Halanych, Kenneth M
Tiedemann, Ralph
author_facet Bleidorn, Christoph
Podsiadlowski, Lars
Zhong, Min
Eeckhaut, Igor
Hartmann, Stefanie
Halanych, Kenneth M
Tiedemann, Ralph
author_sort Bleidorn, Christoph
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Phylogenomic analyses recently became popular to address questions about deep metazoan phylogeny. Ribosomal proteins (RP) dominate many of these analyses or are, in some cases, the only genes included. Despite initial hopes, phylogenomic analyses including tens to hundreds of genes still fail to robustly place many bilaterian taxa. RESULTS: Using the phylogenetic position of myzostomids as an example, we show that phylogenies derived from RP genes and mitochondrial genes produce incongruent results. Whereas the former support a position within a clade of platyzoan taxa, mitochondrial data recovers an annelid affinity, which is strongly supported by the gene order data and is congruent with morphology. Using hypothesis testing, our RP data significantly rejects the annelids affinity, whereas a platyzoan relationship is significantly rejected by the mitochondrial data. CONCLUSION: We conclude (i) that reliance of a set of markers belonging to a single class of macromolecular complexes might bias the analysis, and (ii) that concatenation of all available data might introduce conflicting signal into phylogenetic analyses. We therefore strongly recommend testing for data incongruence in phylogenomic analyses. Furthermore, judging all available data, we consider the annelid affinity hypothesis more plausible than a possible platyzoan affinity for myzostomids, and suspect long branch attraction is influencing the RP data. However, this hypothesis needs further confirmation by future analyses.
format Text
id pubmed-2716322
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27163222009-07-28 On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong? Bleidorn, Christoph Podsiadlowski, Lars Zhong, Min Eeckhaut, Igor Hartmann, Stefanie Halanych, Kenneth M Tiedemann, Ralph BMC Evol Biol Research Article BACKGROUND: Phylogenomic analyses recently became popular to address questions about deep metazoan phylogeny. Ribosomal proteins (RP) dominate many of these analyses or are, in some cases, the only genes included. Despite initial hopes, phylogenomic analyses including tens to hundreds of genes still fail to robustly place many bilaterian taxa. RESULTS: Using the phylogenetic position of myzostomids as an example, we show that phylogenies derived from RP genes and mitochondrial genes produce incongruent results. Whereas the former support a position within a clade of platyzoan taxa, mitochondrial data recovers an annelid affinity, which is strongly supported by the gene order data and is congruent with morphology. Using hypothesis testing, our RP data significantly rejects the annelids affinity, whereas a platyzoan relationship is significantly rejected by the mitochondrial data. CONCLUSION: We conclude (i) that reliance of a set of markers belonging to a single class of macromolecular complexes might bias the analysis, and (ii) that concatenation of all available data might introduce conflicting signal into phylogenetic analyses. We therefore strongly recommend testing for data incongruence in phylogenomic analyses. Furthermore, judging all available data, we consider the annelid affinity hypothesis more plausible than a possible platyzoan affinity for myzostomids, and suspect long branch attraction is influencing the RP data. However, this hypothesis needs further confirmation by future analyses. BioMed Central 2009-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2716322/ /pubmed/19570199 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-150 Text en Copyright © 2009 Bleidorn et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bleidorn, Christoph
Podsiadlowski, Lars
Zhong, Min
Eeckhaut, Igor
Hartmann, Stefanie
Halanych, Kenneth M
Tiedemann, Ralph
On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?
title On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?
title_full On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?
title_fullStr On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?
title_full_unstemmed On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?
title_short On the phylogenetic position of Myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?
title_sort on the phylogenetic position of myzostomida: can 77 genes get it wrong?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716322/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19570199
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-9-150
work_keys_str_mv AT bleidornchristoph onthephylogeneticpositionofmyzostomidacan77genesgetitwrong
AT podsiadlowskilars onthephylogeneticpositionofmyzostomidacan77genesgetitwrong
AT zhongmin onthephylogeneticpositionofmyzostomidacan77genesgetitwrong
AT eeckhautigor onthephylogeneticpositionofmyzostomidacan77genesgetitwrong
AT hartmannstefanie onthephylogeneticpositionofmyzostomidacan77genesgetitwrong
AT halanychkennethm onthephylogeneticpositionofmyzostomidacan77genesgetitwrong
AT tiedemannralph onthephylogeneticpositionofmyzostomidacan77genesgetitwrong