Literature DB >> 11470837

Shared nucleotide composition biases among species and their impact on phylogenetic reconstructions of the Drosophilidae.

R Tarrío1, F Rodríguez-Trelles, F J Ayala.   

Abstract

Compositional changes are a major feature of genome evolution. Overlooking nucleotide composition differences among sequences can seriously mislead phylogenetic reconstructions. Large compositional variation exists among the members of the family Drosophilidae. Until now, however, base composition differences have been largely neglected in the formulations of the nucleotide substitution process used to reconstruct the phylogeny of this important group of species. The present study adopts a maximum-likelihood framework of phylogenetic inference in order to analyze five nuclear gene regions and shows that (1) the pattern of compositional variation in the Drosophilidae does not match the phylogeny of the species; (2) accounting for the heterogeneous GC content with Galtier and Gouy's nucleotide substitution model leads to a tree that differs in significant aspects from the tree inferred when the nucleotide composition differences are ignored, even though both phylogenetic hypotheses attain strong nodal support in the bootstrap analyses; and (3) the LogDet distance correction cannot completely overcome the distorting effects of the compositional variation that exists among the species of the Drosophilidae. Our analyses confidently place the Chymomyza genus as an outgroup closer than the genus Scaptodrosophila to the Drosophila genus and conclusively support the monophyly of the Sophophora subgenus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11470837     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003932

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Biol Evol        ISSN: 0737-4038            Impact factor:   16.240


  19 in total

1.  A new Drosophila spliceosomal intron position is common in plants.

Authors:  Rosa Tarrio; Francisco Rodríguez-Trelles; Francisco J Ayala
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-05-15       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  GC-biased segregation of noncoding polymorphisms in Drosophila.

Authors:  Nicolas Galtier; Eric Bazin; Nicolas Bierne
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-09-12       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Codon-usage bias versus gene conversion in the evolution of yeast duplicate genes.

Authors:  Yeong-Shin Lin; Jake K Byrnes; Jenn-Kang Hwang; Wen-Hsiung Li
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-09-13       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  What is the phylogenetic signal limit from mitogenomes? The reconciliation between mitochondrial and nuclear data in the Insecta class phylogeny.

Authors:  Gerard Talavera; Roger Vila
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2011-10-27       Impact factor: 3.260

5.  Erratic overdispersion of three molecular clocks: GPDH, SOD, and XDH.

Authors:  F Rodríguez-Trelles; R Tarrío; F J Ayala
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2001-09-11       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Molecular phylogeny of the Drosophila melanogaster species subgroup.

Authors:  Wen-Ya Ko; Ryan M David; Hiroshi Akashi
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 2.395

7.  Convergent neofunctionalization by positive Darwinian selection after ancient recurrent duplications of the xanthine dehydrogenase gene.

Authors:  Francisco Rodríguez-Trelles; Rosa Tarrío; Francisco J Ayala
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2003-10-23       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Six-State Amino Acid Recoding is not an Effective Strategy to Offset Compositional Heterogeneity and Saturation in Phylogenetic Analyses.

Authors:  Alexandra M Hernandez; Joseph F Ryan
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2021-10-13       Impact factor: 15.683

9.  Sources of signal in 62 protein-coding nuclear genes for higher-level phylogenetics of arthropods.

Authors:  Jerome C Regier; Andreas Zwick
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Can comprehensive background knowledge be incorporated into substitution models to improve phylogenetic analyses? A case study on major arthropod relationships.

Authors:  Björn M von Reumont; Karen Meusemann; Nikolaus U Szucsich; Emiliano Dell'Ampio; Vivek Gowri-Shankar; Daniela Bartel; Sabrina Simon; Harald O Letsch; Roman R Stocsits; Yun-xia Luan; Johann Wolfgang Wägele; Günther Pass; Heike Hadrys; Bernhard Misof
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2009-05-27       Impact factor: 3.260

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.