| Literature DB >> 19192302 |
Roberto V Vilela1, Taís Machado, Karen Ventura, Valéria Fagundes, Maria José de J Silva, Yatiyo Yonenaga-Yassuda.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The thin-spined porcupine, also known as the bristle-spined rat, Chaetomys subspinosus (Olfers, 1818), the only member of its genus, figures among Brazilian endangered species. In addition to being threatened, it is poorly known, and even its taxonomic status at the family level has long been controversial. The genus Chaetomys was originally regarded as a porcupine in the family Erethizontidae, but some authors classified it as a spiny-rat in the family Echimyidae. Although the dispute seems to be settled in favor of the erethizontid advocates, further discussion of its affinities should be based on a phylogenetic framework. In the present study, we used nucleotide-sequence data from the complete mitochondrial cytochrome b gene and karyotypic information to address this issue. Our molecular analyses included one individual of Chaetomys subspinosus from the state of Bahia in northeastern Brazil, and other hystricognaths.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19192302 PMCID: PMC2646700 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-9-29
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Figure 1Conventionally stained karyotype of a female of . 2n = 52 and FN = 76; assuming that the X chromosome is biarmed; the sexual pair could not be identified.
Figure 2Silver-nitrate stained NOR (Ag-NOR) metaphases of . Complete (a) and partial (b) Ag-NOR metaphases of Chaetomys subspinosus showing signals on the short arm of pair 14 (arrows). (c) Conventionally stained pair 14 showing terminal secondary constriction on the short arm (arrows).
Figure 3G-banded karyotype of .
Lengths of optimal branches and robustness estimators for representative nodes of the Hystricognathi cytochrome b trees.
| Hystricognathi | 86 | 83 | 85 | 87 | ||||
| Bathyergidae | 60 | 60 | 58 | 58 | ||||
| Hystricidae + Caviomorpha | 46 | 72 | 42 | 5 | 48 | 82 | 45 | |
| Caviomorpha | 58 | 50 | * | * | 55 | 67 | 55 | |
| Hystricidae + Erethizontidae | * | 38* | 52 | 3 | * | * | * | * |
| Erethizontidae | 49 | 70 | 54 | 51 | ||||
| Erethizontinae | 59 | 68 | 58 | 59 | ||||
| 43 | 44 | 7 | 43 | 43 | ||||
| 52 | 52 | 52 | 52 | |||||
| 60 | 60 | 64 | 60 | |||||
| Octodontoidea + Cavioidea | 51 | 59 | 36 | 5 | 52 | 71 | 49 | |
| Octodontoidea | 72 | 49 | 56 | 51 | ||||
| Echimyidae | * | 42* | 34 | 5 | 38 | 37 | ||
| Octodontidae + Ctenomyidae | * | 41* | 40 | 5 | 38 | 79 | 45 | 93 |
| Ctenomyidae | 115 | 70 | 76 | 77 | ||||
| Octodontidae | 97 | 49 | 11 | 48 | 47 | |||
| Cavioidea | 55 | 66 | 54 | 6 | 49 | 51 | ||
| Caviidae | 40 | 63 | 39 | 6 | 48 | 75 | 42 | 84 |
Lengths of optimal internal branches are given in number of steps. Bootstrap percentages (BP) were obtained using phylogenetic reconstructions under maximum parsimony (MP) and maximum likelihood (ML). Bremer support or decay index (DI) was implemented in MP. Support for the Bayesian analysis (BA) was given by Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP). BP and BPP were estimated under 50% majority-rule consensus. Star (*) indicates that the node was not recovered or was not supported in the corresponding analysis. Support values within Zander's [50] 0.95 binomial confidence intervals (CI) are highlighted in bold face.
Estimates of mean divergence times, and respective 95% HPD intervals given by Bayesian analyses of cytochrome b nucleotide sequences.
| Hystricomorpha | 44.5 | 39.2–50.1 | 47.1 | 39.8–55.3 | Middle Eocene |
| Ctenodactylidae | 15.6 | 12.2–19.3 | 16.1 | 10.0–22.2 | Middle Miocene |
| Hystricognathi | 41.7 | 37.4–46.6 | 43.7 | 37.9–50.1 | Middle Eocene |
| Bathyergidae | 19.3 | 14.8–24.0 | 20.1 | 12.8–27.7 | Early Miocene |
| Caviomorpha | 34.8 | 33.1–36.6 | 34.8 | 33.0–36.5 | Late Eocene |
| Erethizontidae | 21.2 | 17.0–25.4 | 21.0 | 15.1–27.0 | Early Miocene |
| Erethizontinae | 7.4 | 5.6–9.2 | 7.7 | 5.1–10.4 | Late Miocene |
| 4.1 | 2.9–5.4 | 4.2 | 2.5–6.0 | Early Pliocene | |
| 0.1 | 0.04–0.2 | 0.1 | 0.04–0.2 | Pleistocene | |
| 0.3 | 0.2–0.5 | 0.3 | 0.2–0.5 | Pleistocene | |
| Octodontoidea | 25.8 | 24.1–27.3 | 25.8 | 24.2–27.5 | Late Oligocene |
| Echimyidae | 20.0 | 18.5–21.5 | 20.0 | 18.4–21.7 | Early Miocene |
| Ctenomyidae | 5.6 | 4.2–7.2 | 5.6 | 3.4–8.1 | Late Miocene |
| Octodontidae | 12.3 | 9.8–14.5 | 12.5 | 9.2–16.1 | Middle Miocene |
| Cavioidea | 24.1 | 20.3–27.8 | 23.1 | 18.1–28.0 | Late Oli.-Early Mio. |
| Caviidae | 19.5 | 15.5–23.7 | 19.1 | 13.6–25.1 | Early Miocene |
Estimates of divergence times expressed in million years. CLOC: rates conformed to a molecular clock. UCLN: rates uncorrelated, with the rate in each branch independently drawn from a lognormal distribution. HPD: highest posterior densities. The geological epochs corresponding to divergence times followed the 1999 Geologic Time Scale of the Geological Society of America. Oli.: Oligocene; Mio.: Miocene.
Figure 4Divergence time estimates from the Bayesian analyses (BA), of cytochrome . Molecular time-scale for the Hystricomorpha. The chronogram was obtained using the Maximum Clade Credibility Tree (MCC) of phylogenetic reconstructions sampled under Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method, with rates conformed to a molecular clock (CLOC). The divergence times correspond to the mean posterior estimate of their age in millions of years (Ma). The blue bars represent the 95% HPD interval for the divergence time estimates. The geological epochs are reported according to the 1999 Geologic Time Scale of the Geological Society of America (Plei = Pleistocene). ES, Espírito Santo; RJ, Rio de Janeiro; SP, São Paulo.
Estimates of mean divergence times, and respective 95% CL intervals given by non-Bayesian analyses of cytochrome b nucleotide sequences.
| Hystricomorpha | 58.6 | 53.7–76.1 | 52.2 | 49.1–63.1 | Late Pal.-Early Eoc. |
| Ctenodactylidae | 26.3 | 22.7–33.4 | 17.68 | 14.8–20.5 | Late Oli.-Early Mio. |
| Hystricognathi | 46.4 | 42.4–54.0 | 44.1 | 41.5–49.6 | Middle Eocene |
| Bathyergidae | 23.5 | 17.8–26.9 | 20.9 | 16.6–24.2 | Early Miocene |
| Caviomorpha | 34.0 | - | 34.0 | - | Late Eocene |
| Erethizontidae | 23.9 | 22.3–26.4 | 22.2 | 18.9–25.9 | Late Oli.-Early Mio. |
| Erethizontinae | 9.5 | 7.2–14.8 | 7.7 | 3.4–9.5 | Late Miocene |
| 5.1 | 2.7–10.7 | 4.5 | 2.6–5.5 | Late Mio.-Early Pli. | |
| 0.1 | 0.1–0.7 | 0.1 | 0.02–0.2 | Pleistocene | |
| 0.2 | 0.1–0.8 | 0.2 | 0.1–0.5 | Pleistocene | |
| Octodontoidea | 27.0 | - | 27.0 | - | Late Oligocene |
| Echimyidae | 20.0 | - | 20.0 | - | Early Miocene |
| Ctenomyidae | 5.9 | 3.9–8.7 | 5.4 | 3.7–6.5 | Late Miocene |
| Octodontidae | 15.2 | 10.2–17.9 | 13.1 | 10.2–15.1 | Middle Miocene |
| OGL+SCY | 12.1 | 7.0–15.4 | 10.6 | 7.4–12.2 | Middle-Late Miocene |
| Cavioidea | 25.9 | 16.7–28.1 | 23.7 | 16.1–26.1 | Late Oli.-Early Mio. |
| Caviidae | 22.0 | 16.0–25.7 | 19.7 | 15.5–23.3 | Early Miocene |
Estimates of divergence times expressed in million years. NPRS-LOG: nonparametric rate smoothing with log-scale rates. GRMD: global rate minimum deformation method. CL: confidence limits. The geological epochs corresponding to divergence times followed the 1999 Geologic Time Scale of the Geological Society of America. Pal.: Paleocene; Eoc.: Eocene; Oli.: Oligocene; Mio.: Miocene; Pli.: Pliocene.
Figure 5NOR-bearing chromosomes found in Chaetomys subspinosus, Sphiggurus villosus, Euryzygomatomys spinosus, and Myocastor coypus. Comparison of NOR positions in chromosomes of: (a) Chaetomys subspinosus, (b) the erethizontid Sphiggurus villosus, and (c) the echimyids Euryzygomatomys spinosus and Myocastor coypus.
Figure 6Phylogeny of the Hystricomorpha. Distribution of the single pair of interstitial-NOR-bearing chromosomes as a character in the phylogeny of Hystricomorpha based on published data [43,45-47,51,56-58,81-84] and data herein presented. Blue branches indicate lineages with interstitial NORs. Yellow branches indicate lineages with terminal NORs. Blue circles indicate taxa with one pair bearing interstitial NORs. Yellow circles indicate taxa with one or more pairs bearing terminal NORs.
Specimens used in the phylogenetic analyses of cytochrome b, corresponding GenBank Accession Numbers, locality, geographical coordinates and reference data.
| -- | [ | ||||
| -- | [ | ||||
| De Riet, SAF | -30.1 | 17.4 | [ | ||
| Okavango Delta, BOT | -19.5 | 23.2 | [ | ||
| -- | [ | ||||
| Salvador, BA | -13.0 | -38.5 | this study | ||
| Eirunepé, Rio Juruá, AM | -6.6 | -60.9 | [ | ||
| UHE Manso, MT | -15.5 | -55.8 | [ | ||
| -- | this study | ||||
| UHE Rosal, ES | -20.9 | -41.7 | this study | ||
| Biritiba Mirim, SP | -23.6 | -46.0 | this study | ||
| Sumidouro, RJ | -22.1 | -42.7 | [ | ||
| Biritiba Mirim, SP | -23.6 | -46.0 | this study | ||
| Upper Rio Urucu, AM | -4.9 | -65.3 | [ | ||
| Biritiba Mirim, SP | -23.6 | -46.0 | this study | ||
| Biritiba Mirim, SP | -23.6 | -46.0 | this study | ||
| Vila Rica, MT | -9.9 | -51.2 | this study | ||
| Januária, MG | -15.5 | -44.4 | this study | ||
| Boracéia, SP | -22.2 | -48.8 | this study | ||
| Tilcara, Jujuy, ARG | -23.6 | -65.4 | [ | ||
| -- | [ | ||||
| -- | [ | ||||
| Tarija, BOL | -21.5 | -64.7 | [ | ||
| Perito Moreno, ARG | -41.1 | -71.0 | [ | ||
| Biritiba Mirim, SP | -23.6 | -46.0 | this study | ||
| Santa Cruz, ARG | -50.0 | -68.5 | [ | ||
| Altamira, Rio Juruá, AM | -6.6 | -68.9 | [ |
Countries: ARG, Argentina; BOL, Bolivia; BOT, Botswana; PAR, Paraguay; PER, Peru; SAF, South Africa; VEN, Venezuela. States in Brazil: AC, Acre; AM, Amazonas; BA, Bahia; ES, Espírito Santo; MG, Minas Gerais; MT, Mato Grosso; RJ, Rio de Janeiro; SP, São Paulo.