| Literature DB >> 17078887 |
April D Harlin-Cognato1, Rodney L Honeycutt.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dolphins of the genus Lagenorhynchus are anti-tropically distributed in temperate to cool waters. Phylogenetic analyses of cytochrome b sequences have suggested that the genus is polyphyletic; however, many relationships were poorly resolved. In this study, we present a combined-analysis phylogenetic hypothesis for Lagenorhynchus and members of the subfamily Lissodelphininae, which is derived from two nuclear and two mitochondrial data sets and the addition of 34 individuals representing 9 species. In addition, we characterize with parsimony and Bayesian analyses the phylogenetic utility and interaction of characters with statistical measures, including the utility of highly consistent (non-homoplasious) characters as a conservative measure of phylogenetic robustness. We also explore the effects of removing sources of character conflict on phylogenetic resolution.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2006 PMID: 17078887 PMCID: PMC1635737 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-6-87
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Figure 1Geographic distribution of the genus . The subfamily Lissodelphininae (sensu LeDuc et al. [13]) includes all Southern Hemisphere species and L. obliquidens from the North Pacific. Generic names suggested by the taxonomic revision of Le Duc et al. [13] are indicated in parentheses, with Lagenorhynchus retained for the original type specimen (L. albirostris) first described by Gray [7].
Figure 2A comparison of the simultaneous analysis tree derived from nuclear and mitochondrial genes to the single-locus cladogram of LeDuc et al. [13]. A). Strict consensus of 4 equally parsimonious trees (length = 1328, CI = 0.55, RI = 0.80) derived from the simultaneous analysis of Actin, RAG2, cytochrome b, and control region data. This tree is congruent with the results of the Bayesian analysis, except those nodes in the boxed insert (bottom left). Numbers to the left of each node are bootstrap proportions, decay indices, and posterior probabilities, respectively. Boxes mark nodes that have either improved resolution or are newly resolved in the simultaneous analysis; numbers in parentheses measure the change (increase, '+'; decrease, '-') in support indices. A circle denotes the Lissodelphininae clade. B). The cytochrome b cladogram of LeDuc et al. [13]. Node numbers match those of the simultaneous analysis tree. The asterisk '*' indicates an additional clade of species represented in the LeDuc et al. [13] study but absent in our data set.
Summary of support indices for branches in the simultaneous and independent analyses of data partitions.
| Out-i | 0.0503 | 60 | 35 | 0 | 58.6 | 6 | -1 | 17.4 | 15 | 0 | 23.0 | 3 | 0 | 3.0 |
| i-ii | 0.0046 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 4.9 | 4 | -1 | -0.8 | 0 | - | -1.1 | 0 | - | 0 |
| ii-iii | 0.0179 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 14.0 | 1 | -1 | -2.5 | 3 | - | -2.0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| iii-iv | 0.0034 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1.0 | 1 | 0 | 0.7 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| iv-v | 0.0008 | 0 | 0 | - | 1.0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| v-vi | 0.0003 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6.6 | 1 | -2 | 3.8 | 0 | - | -5.4 | 0 | - | 0 |
| vi-xi | 0.0157 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4.0 | 0 | -1 | 3.0 | 0 | - | 1 | 0 | - | 0 |
| vi-xii | 0.0044 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2.9 | 0 | -1 | 1.0 | 0 | - | -0.2 | 0 | - | 0 |
| v-x | 0.0105 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3.1 | 1 | 1 | 5.9 | 0 | - | -6.1 | 0 | - | 0 |
| x-Chea | 0.0115 | 5 | 4 | 0 | 14.0 | 1 | 0 | 7.0 | 0 | - | 2 | 0 | - | 0 |
| x-xvi | 0.0032 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3.0 | 0 | 0 | 6.0 | 0 | - | -6 | 0 | - | 0 |
| xvi-Chec | 0.0095 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 6.0 | 1 | 0 | 11.0 | 2 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| xvi-xvii | 0.0014 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 7.0 | 0 | 0 | -1.0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| xvii-Ceut | 0.0087 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1.0 | 1 | 0 | 4.0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| iv-ix | 0.0177 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 8.0 | 0 | - | -1.0 | 2 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| ix-Laus | 0.0052 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 10.0 | 1 | 0 | 3.0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| iii-viii | 0.0187 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 18.0 | 1 | - | -1.0 | 0 | - | -3.0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| viii-Lper | 0.0019 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| viii-Lbor | 0.0019 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 7.5 | 0 | 0 | 3.5 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| ii-vii | 0.0010 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5.0 | 0 | - | -4.0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| vii-xiii | 0.0284 | 10 | 8 | 0 | 21.0 | 0 | - | 3.0 | 2 | 0 | 3.0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| vii-x | 0.0031 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 6.0 | 1 | - | -5.0 | 0 | - | 0 | 0 | - | 0 |
| x-xiv | 0.0410 | 16 | 8 | 0 | 28.5 | 6 | - | 7.5 | 1 | 0 | 1.0 | 1 | 0 | 1.0 |
| x-xv | 0.0402 | 19 | 13 | 0 | 38.0 | 2 | - | 2.5 | 3 | 0 | 2.5 | 1 | - | 1.0 |
Branches are between nodes as numbered in Figure 2. 'CI1' is the frequency of the highly consistent characters (CI = 1) on a branch in the simultaneous analysis tree. A '-' represents a node not recovered in the independent analyses. 'HS' = hidden synapomorphy index [14] and 'PB' = partition Bremer support.
Figure 3A summary of the magnitude and distribution of partitioned branch support in the simultaneous analysis tree. At each node, bars represent the relative partitioned branch support (PBS) contributed by a given data partition to a node. Shaded bars above the branch indicate positive PBS values; below the branch are negative PBS values. Nodes are numbered as in Figure 2.
Figure 4Relationship between frequency of CI = 1 characters and branch lengths in the simultaneous analysis. Results of linear regression analysis, *P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01. Branch lengths were estimated as described in the text.
Figure 5Comparison of results from phylogenetic analyses without control region data. Maximum parsimony (left) and Bayesian (right) topologies are presented with bootstrap proportions and posterior probabilities (respectively) at each node. Patterned bars demarcate topological differences between the two phylogenies, and gray boxes highlight the regions of the trees where the majority of topological incongruence occurs. Note in each tree the lack of monophyly of Cephalorhynchus, the polyphyly of Lagenorhynchus, and the change in relationships among genera in the Lissodelphininae indicated by linked vertical bars.
Summary of statistical tests used to measure a posteriori the utility and interaction of data partitions.
| Tests | Question(s) | H0 | Statistical test |
| Utility of each data partition to tree resolution | Does the strength of the signal decay for each partition as branch lengths increase? | No relationship between frequency of CI1 characters and branch length | Linear regression |
| Is there variation in the contribution of data partitions to node support relative to branch length? | Equal frequency of CI1 characters for each data partition across branch lengths | Chi-square | |
| Is there variation in relative support a partition contributes to short and long branches? | Uniform proportion of CI1 for each data partition across branch lengths | Kruskal-Walis | |
| Utility of 3rd codon positions | Are third positions less informative than other codon positions? | Uniform frequency of CI1 characters among codon positions | Chi-square |
| Conflict among data partitions in the simultaneous analysis | Is there evidence for interaction among data partitions? | Even distribution of PBS across node heights | Spearman's rank correlation |
| Does simultaneous analysis displace synapomorphies? | No displacement of synapomorphies (HS ≤ 0) in combined analysis | Sign test |
CI1 = characters with consistency index of 1 (CI = 1); HS = hidden synapomorphy index; PBS = partitioned Bremer support.
Species, sample sizes, and sources of genetic materials used in this study.
| Taxon (abbreviation) | Cytb | D-loop | Actin | RAG2 |
| n | n | n | n | |
| 14a | 14a | 14a,r | 14a | |
| 6b | 6b | 6q | 6b | |
| 1h | 1l | - | 1g | |
| 3a,i | 3a | 3a | 3a | |
| 5s,c | 5s,c | 5s,c | 5s,c | |
| 4d | 4d | 4d | 4d | |
| 2j,g | 2m | 2g | 2g | |
| 1t | 1t | 1t | 1t | |
| 2k | 2n | - | - | |
| 2e | 2e | 2e | 2e | |
| 1u | 1u | - | 1u | |
| 4v | 4v | 4v | 4v | |
| 2c | 2c | 2c | 2c | |
| 1c | 1c | 1c | 1c | |
| 1c | 1c | 1c | 1c | |
| 1f | 1f | 1f | 1f | |
| 1f | 1o | 1f | 1f | |
| 1f | 1p | 1f | 1f | |
| TOTAL | 52 | 52 | 48 | 50 |
a. A. Harlin; c. Texas A&M Cooperative Wildlife Collection; d. R. L. Honeycutt; e. M. Meyer, Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Capetown, South Africa; f. C. S. Baker, University of Auckland, New Zealand; g. F. Pichler, University of Auckland, New Zealand. GenBank Accessions: h. AF084068; i. AF084069; j. AF084071; k. AF084072, U13128; l. AF084072; m. AF057997, AF057998; n. AF393555, AF393553; o. U09694; p. M60409; q. AF140826–AF140831; r. AF140832–AF140834; w. AY011968. SWFSC National Marine Mammal Tissue Bank, La Jolla, California: b. Z15004, Z15860, Z25424, Z25409–Z25411; s. Z17311, Z17318, Z17319, Z23522; t. Z40; u. Z6996; v. Z23163, Z25407, Z25408, Z26303