| Literature DB >> 19900277 |
Ferran Palero1, Joao Lopes, Pere Abelló, Enrique Macpherson, Marta Pascual, Mark A Beaumont.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Molecular tools may help to uncover closely related and still diverging species from a wide variety of taxa and provide insight into the mechanisms, pace and geography of marine speciation. There is a certain controversy on the phylogeography and speciation modes of species-groups with an Eastern Atlantic-Western Indian Ocean distribution, with previous studies suggesting that older events (Miocene) and/or more recent (Pleistocene) oceanographic processes could have influenced the phylogeny of marine taxa. The spiny lobster genus Palinurus allows for testing among speciation hypotheses, since it has a particular distribution with two groups of three species each in the Northeastern Atlantic (P. elephas, P. mauritanicus and P. charlestoni) and Southeastern Atlantic and Southwestern Indian Oceans (P. gilchristi, P. delagoae and P. barbarae). In the present study, we obtain a more complete understanding of the phylogenetic relationships among these species through a combined dataset with both nuclear and mitochondrial markers, by testing alternative hypotheses on both the mutation rate and tree topology under the recently developed approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) methods.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19900277 PMCID: PMC2777881 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-9-263
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Evol Biol ISSN: 1471-2148 Impact factor: 3.260
Figure 1The geographic distribution of Palinurus species. Three species are present in the Northeastern Atlantic (P. elephas, P. mauritanicus and P. charlestoni) and other three in the Southeastern Atlantic and Southwestern Indian Oceans (P. gilchristi, P. delagoae and P. barbarae).
Figure 2Phylogenetic trees showing the alternative hypotheses tested in the present study. The North-to-South speciation model (topology 1, with P. charlestoni originating from a P. mauritanicus-like ancestor) and the South-to-North speciation model (topology 2, with P. charlestoni originating from a south-african ancestor).
Divergence time and mutation rate hyper-parameter priors used for the ABC analyses.
| t1 | First splitting time | Uniform (0, 2 My) | |
| t2 | Second splitting time | t1 values + Uniform (0, 1.5 My) | |
| t3 | Third splitting time | t2 values + Uniform (0, 1.5 My) | |
| t4 | Fourth splitting time | t3 values + Uniform (0, 2 My) | |
| t5 | Fifth splitting time | t4 values + Uniform (0, 5 My) | |
| ϑSTRm | mean of mutation rate for STR locus | Normal (-3.5, 0.25) | Normal (-3.5, 0.25) |
| ϑSTRsd | st. dev. of mutation rate for STR locus | Abs [Normal (0, 0.5)] | Abs [Normal (0, 0.5)] |
| ϑSNPm | mean of mutation rate for mtDNA locus | Normal (-4.630784, 0.25) | Normal (-5.267606, 0.25) |
| ϑSNPsd | st. dev. of mutation rate for mtDNA locus | Abs [Normal (0, 0.5)] | Abs [Normal (0, 0.5)] |
Figure 3Phylogenetic tree built from the individual-based distance matrix using the combined mtDNA-microsatellite dataset. The Neighbor Joining algorithm under Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards distance measure agrees with placing P. charlestoni samples next to P. elephas samples. Species are coded by colors.
Figure 4Species tree obtained using the Neighbor Joining algorithm on the Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards distance matrix from the combined mtDNA-microsatellite dataset. A well supported monophyletic southern hemisphere clade was obtained when dealing with populations instead of individuals. Only bootstrap support values over 70 are shown.
Posterior probabilities for different scenarios regarding the mutation rate (2a) and tree topology (2b) models
| a) | ||
| Topology 1 (North-to-South) | Slow | 0.10 |
| Standard | ||
| Topology 2 (South-to-North) | Slow | 0.11 |
| Standard | ||
| b) | ||
| Standard mutation rate | Topology 1 | |
| Topology 2 | 0.12 | |
Estimates for mode and 95% credible intervals when the simulation is conditional to the North-to-South speciation with a standard mutation rate.
| Ne1 | 57.079 | 32.208 | 97.228 | |
| Ne2 | 49.030 | 25.139 | 89.307 | |
| Ne3 | 49.752 | 26.376 | 92.307 | |
| Ne4 | 87.317 | 49.406 | 100.000 | |
| Ne5 | 47.426 | 25.733 | 86.020 | |
| Ne6 | 97.604 | 63.970 | 100.000 | |
| NeA1 | First ancestral population size | 34.762 | 1.000 | 87.000 |
| NeA2 | Second ancestral population size | 11.634 | 1.000 | 21.851 |
| NeA3 | Third ancestral population size | 28.861 | 1.000 | 66.139 |
| NeA4 | Fourth ancestral population size | 14.881 | 1.000 | 50.861 |
| NeA5 | Fifth ancestral population size | 46.089 | 1.000 | 62.218 |
| t1 | First splitting time | 89.209 | 15.602 | 213.021 |
| t2 | Second splitting time | 200.220 | 80.858 | 358.436 |
| t3 | Third splitting time | 552.555 | 280.528 | 886.589 |
| t4 | Fourth splitting time | 975.198 | 532.753 | 1.474.347 |
| t5 | Fifth splitting time | 1.765.377 | 952.895 | 2.625.863 |