Literature DB >> 20525582

Networks, trees, and treeshrews: assessing support and identifying conflict with multiple loci and a problematic root.

Trina E Roberts1, Eric J Sargis, Link E Olson.   

Abstract

Multiple unlinked genetic loci often provide a more comprehensive picture of evolutionary history than any single gene can, but analyzing multigene data presents particular challenges. Differing rates and patterns of nucleotide substitution, combined with the limited information available in any data set, can make it difficult to specify a model of evolution. In addition, conflict among loci can be the result of real differences in evolutionary process or of stochastic variance and errors in reconstruction. We used 6 presumably unlinked nuclear loci to investigate relationships within the mammalian family Tupaiidae (Scandentia), containing all but one of the extant tupaiid genera. We used a phylogenetic mixture model to analyze the concatenated data and compared this with results using partitioned models. We found that more complex models were not necessarily preferred under tests using Bayes factors and that model complexity affected both tree length and parameter variance. We also compared the results of single-gene and multigene analyses and used splits networks to analyze the source and degree of conflict among genes. Networks can show specific relationships that are inconsistent with each other; these conflicting and minority relationships, which are implicitly ignored or collapsed by traditional consensus methods, can be useful in identifying the underlying causes of topological uncertainty. In our data, conflict is concentrated around particular relationships, not widespread throughout the tree. This pattern is further clarified by considering conflict surrounding the root separately from conflict within the ingroup. Uncertainty in rooting may be because of the apparent evolutionary distance separating these genera and our outgroup, the tupaiid genus Dendrogale. Unlike a previous mitochondrial study, these nuclear data strongly suggest that the genus Tupaia is not monophyletic with respect to the monotypic Urogale, even when uncertainty about rooting is taken into account. These data concur with mitochondrial DNA on other relationships, including the close affinity of Tupaia tana with the enigmatic Tupaia splendidula and of Tupaia belangeri with Tupaia glis. We also discuss the taxonomic and biogeographic implications of these results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20525582      PMCID: PMC2715937          DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syp025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Syst Biol        ISSN: 1063-5157            Impact factor:   15.683


  23 in total

1.  Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities.

Authors:  N Myers; R A Mittermeier; C G Mittermeier; G A da Fonseca; J Kent
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-02-24       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  The tupaia model for the study of hepatitis B virus: direct infection and HBV genome transduction of primary tupaia hepatocytes.

Authors:  Fritz von Weizsäcker; Josef Köck; Sabine MacNelly; Shaotang Ren; Hubert E Blum; Michael Nassal
Journal:  Methods Mol Med       Date:  2004

3.  MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models.

Authors:  Fredrik Ronquist; John P Huelsenbeck
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2003-08-12       Impact factor: 6.937

4.  Using consensus networks to visualize contradictory evidence for species phylogeny.

Authors:  Barbara R Holland; Katharina T Huber; Vincent Moulton; Peter J Lockhart
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2004-04-14       Impact factor: 16.240

5.  Parallel Metropolis coupled Markov chain Monte Carlo for Bayesian phylogenetic inference.

Authors:  Gautam Altekar; Sandhya Dwarkadas; John P Huelsenbeck; Fredrik Ronquist
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2004-01-22       Impact factor: 6.937

6.  Gene tree distributions under the coalescent process.

Authors:  James H Degnan; Laura A Salter
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.694

7.  The importance of data partitioning and the utility of Bayes factors in Bayesian phylogenetics.

Authors:  Jeremy M Brown; Alan R Lemmon
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 15.683

8.  Evidence on mammalian phylogeny from sequences of exon 28 of the von Willebrand factor gene.

Authors:  C A Porter; M Goodman; M J Stanhope
Journal:  Mol Phylogenet Evol       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 4.286

9.  Intraordinal phylogenetics of treeshrews (Mammalia: Scandentia) based on evidence from the mitochondrial 12S rRNA gene.

Authors:  Link E Olson; Eric J Sargis; Robert D Martin
Journal:  Mol Phylogenet Evol       Date:  2005-02-24       Impact factor: 4.286

10.  Molecular and genomic data identify the closest living relative of primates.

Authors:  Jan E Janecka; Webb Miller; Thomas H Pringle; Frank Wiens; Annette Zitzmann; Kristofer M Helgen; Mark S Springer; William J Murphy
Journal:  Science       Date:  2007-11-02       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  4 in total

1.  Assembled Plastid and Mitochondrial Genomes, as well as Nuclear Genes, Place the Parasite Family Cynomoriaceae in the Saxifragales.

Authors:  Sidonie Bellot; Natalie Cusimano; Shixiao Luo; Guiling Sun; Shahin Zarre; Andreas Gröger; Eva Temsch; Susanne S Renner
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 3.416

2.  An early Oligocene fossil demonstrates treeshrews are slowly evolving "living fossils".

Authors:  Qiang Li; Xijun Ni
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Opsin genes of select treeshrews resolve ancestral character states within Scandentia.

Authors:  Gwen Duytschaever; Mareike C Janiak; Perry S Ong; Konstans Wells; Nathaniel J Dominy; Amanda D Melin
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 2.963

4.  Complete mitogenome of the endangered and endemic Nicobar treeshrew (Tupaia nicobarica) and comparison with other Scandentians.

Authors:  Shantanu Kundu; Avas Pakrashi; Manokaran Kamalakannan; Devkant Singha; Kaomud Tyagi; Dhriti Banerjee; Chinnadurai Venkatraman; Vikas Kumar
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-18       Impact factor: 4.379

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.