Cargando…
Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies
Mollusks are the most morphologically disparate living animal phylum, they have diversified into all habitats, and have a deep fossil record. Monophyly and identity of their eight living classes is undisputed, but relationships between these groups and patterns of their early radiation have remained...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4395843/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25472575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu105 |
_version_ | 1782366501754372096 |
---|---|
author | Sigwart, Julia D. Lindberg, David R. |
author_facet | Sigwart, Julia D. Lindberg, David R. |
author_sort | Sigwart, Julia D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Mollusks are the most morphologically disparate living animal phylum, they have diversified into all habitats, and have a deep fossil record. Monophyly and identity of their eight living classes is undisputed, but relationships between these groups and patterns of their early radiation have remained elusive. Arguments about traditional morphological phylogeny focus on a small number of topological concepts but often without regard to proximity of the individual classes. In contrast, molecular studies have proposed a number of radically different, inherently contradictory, and controversial sister relationships. Here, we assembled a data set of 42 unique published trees describing molluscan interrelationships. We used these data to ask several questions about the state of resolution of molluscan phylogeny compared with a null model of the variation possible in random trees constructed from a monophyletic assemblage of eight terminals. Although 27 different unique trees have been proposed from morphological inference, the majority of these are not statistically different from each other. Within the available molecular topologies, only four studies to date have included the deep sea class Monoplacophora; but 36.4% of all trees are not significantly different. We also present supertrees derived from two data partitions and three methods, including all available molecular molluscan phylogenies, which will form the basis for future hypothesis testing. The supertrees presented here were not constructed to provide yet another hypothesis of molluscan relationships, but rather to algorithmically evaluate the relationships present in the disparate published topologies. Based on the totality of available evidence, certain patterns of relatedness among constituent taxa become clear. The internodal distance is consistently short between a few taxon pairs, particularly supporting the relatedness of Monoplacophora and the chitons, Polyplacophora. Other taxon pairs are rarely or never found in close proximity, such as the vermiform Caudofoveata and Bivalvia. Our results have specific utility for guiding constructive research planning to better test relationships in Mollusca as well as other problematic groups. Taxa with consistently proximate relationships should be the focus of a combined approach in a concerted assessment of potential genetic and anatomical homology, whereas unequivocally distant taxa will make the most constructive choices for exemplar selection in higher level phylogenomic analyses. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4395843 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43958432015-04-15 Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies Sigwart, Julia D. Lindberg, David R. Syst Biol Regular Articles Mollusks are the most morphologically disparate living animal phylum, they have diversified into all habitats, and have a deep fossil record. Monophyly and identity of their eight living classes is undisputed, but relationships between these groups and patterns of their early radiation have remained elusive. Arguments about traditional morphological phylogeny focus on a small number of topological concepts but often without regard to proximity of the individual classes. In contrast, molecular studies have proposed a number of radically different, inherently contradictory, and controversial sister relationships. Here, we assembled a data set of 42 unique published trees describing molluscan interrelationships. We used these data to ask several questions about the state of resolution of molluscan phylogeny compared with a null model of the variation possible in random trees constructed from a monophyletic assemblage of eight terminals. Although 27 different unique trees have been proposed from morphological inference, the majority of these are not statistically different from each other. Within the available molecular topologies, only four studies to date have included the deep sea class Monoplacophora; but 36.4% of all trees are not significantly different. We also present supertrees derived from two data partitions and three methods, including all available molecular molluscan phylogenies, which will form the basis for future hypothesis testing. The supertrees presented here were not constructed to provide yet another hypothesis of molluscan relationships, but rather to algorithmically evaluate the relationships present in the disparate published topologies. Based on the totality of available evidence, certain patterns of relatedness among constituent taxa become clear. The internodal distance is consistently short between a few taxon pairs, particularly supporting the relatedness of Monoplacophora and the chitons, Polyplacophora. Other taxon pairs are rarely or never found in close proximity, such as the vermiform Caudofoveata and Bivalvia. Our results have specific utility for guiding constructive research planning to better test relationships in Mollusca as well as other problematic groups. Taxa with consistently proximate relationships should be the focus of a combined approach in a concerted assessment of potential genetic and anatomical homology, whereas unequivocally distant taxa will make the most constructive choices for exemplar selection in higher level phylogenomic analyses. Oxford University Press 2015-05 2014-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4395843/ /pubmed/25472575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu105 Text en © The Author(s) 2014. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Society of Systematic Biologists. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Regular Articles Sigwart, Julia D. Lindberg, David R. Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies |
title | Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies |
title_full | Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies |
title_fullStr | Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies |
title_full_unstemmed | Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies |
title_short | Consensus and Confusion in Molluscan Trees: Evaluating Morphological and Molecular Phylogenies |
title_sort | consensus and confusion in molluscan trees: evaluating morphological and molecular phylogenies |
topic | Regular Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4395843/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25472575 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu105 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sigwartjuliad consensusandconfusioninmolluscantreesevaluatingmorphologicalandmolecularphylogenies AT lindbergdavidr consensusandconfusioninmolluscantreesevaluatingmorphologicalandmolecularphylogenies |