Literature DB >> 28569006

HYBRIDS AND PHYLOGENETIC SYSTEMATICS II. THE IMPACT OF HYBRIDS ON CLADISTIC ANALYSIS.

Lucinda A McDade1.   

Abstract

I examined three aspects of the cladistic treatment of a set of 17 F1 hybrids of known parental origin: (1) impact of hybrids on consistency index (CI) and number of most parsimonious trees (Trees), (2) placement of hybrids in cladograms, and (3) impact of hybrids on hypotheses of relationship among species. The hybrids were added singly and in randomly selected sets of two to five to a data set composed of Central American species of Aphelandra (including the parents of all hybrids). Compared to analyses with the same number of OTUs all of which were species, the analyses with hybrids yielded results with significantly higher CI. There was no difference in Trees between analyses with hybrids versus species. There was thus no evidence that hybrids would appear to be more problematic for cladistic methods than species. Accordingly, hybrids will not be readily identifiable as taxa that cause marked change in these indices. About % of the hybrids were placed as the cladistically basal members of the lineage that included the most apomorphic parent. Relatively apomorphic hybrids were placed proximate to the most derived parent (ca. 13% of hybrids). Other placements occurred more rarely. The most frequent placements of hybrids thus did not distinguish them from normal intermediate or apomorphic taxa. When analyses with hybrids yielded multiple most parsimonious trees, these were no more different from each other than were the equally parsimonious trees that resulted from analyses with species. Most analyses with one or two hybrids resulted in minor or no change in topology. When hybrids caused topological change, they frequently caused rearrangements of weakly supported portions of the cladogram that did not include their parents. When they disrupted the cladistic placement of their parents, they often caused their parents to change positions, with at least one topology bringing the parental lineages into closer proximity with the hybrid placed between them. Hybrids between parents from the two main lineages of the group caused total cladistic restructuring. In fact, the degree of relationship between a hybrid's parents (measured by both cladistic and patristic distance) was strongly correlated with CI (negatively) and with the degree of disturbance to cladistic relationships (positively). Thus, hybrids between distantly related parents resulted in cladograms with low CI and major topological changes. This study suggests that hybrids are unlikely to cause breakdown of cladistic structure unless they are between distantly related parents. However, these results also indicate that cladistics may not be specially useful in distinguishing hybrids from normal taxa. The applicability of these results to other kinds of hybrids is examined and the likely cladistic treatment of hybrids using other sources of data is discussed. © 1992 The Society for the Study of Evolution.

Keywords:  Acanthaceae; Aphelandra; cladistics; hybrids; phylogenetic systematics

Year:  1992        PMID: 28569006     DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1992.tb01127.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  13 in total

Review 1.  Contributions of plant molecular systematics to studies of molecular evolution.

Authors:  E D Soltis; P S Soltis
Journal:  Plant Mol Biol       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.076

2.  Evolution by hybridisation. The influence of reticulate evolution on biosymmetrical patterns and processes in plants.

Authors:  Volker Wissemann
Journal:  Theory Biosci       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 1.919

3.  Polymorphism and concerted evolution in a tandemly repeated gene family: 5S ribosomal DNA in diploid and allopolyploid cottons.

Authors:  R C Cronn; X Zhao; A H Paterson; J F Wendel
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 2.395

4.  A genetic legacy of introgression confounds phylogeny and biogeography in oaks.

Authors:  John D McVay; Andrew L Hipp; Paul S Manos
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Testing introgressive hybridization hypotheses using statistical network analysis of nuclear and cytoplasmic haplotypes in the leaf beetle Timarcha goettingensis species complex.

Authors:  J Gómez-Zurita; A P Vogler
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2006-03-22       Impact factor: 2.395

6.  Nuclear ribosomal ITS functional paralogs resolve the phylogenetic relationships of a late-Miocene radiation cycad Cycas (Cycadaceae).

Authors:  Long-Qian Xiao; Michael Möller
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Promiscuous speciation with gene flow in silverside fish genus Odontesthes (Atheriniformes, Atherinopsidae) from south western Atlantic Ocean basins.

Authors:  Graciela García; Néstor Ríos; Verónica Gutiérrez; Jorge Guerra Varela; Carmen Bouza Fernández; Belén Gómez Pardo; Paulino Martínez Portela
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-15       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Unravelling hybridization in Phytophthora using phylogenomics and genome size estimation.

Authors:  Kris Van Poucke; Annelies Haegeman; Thomas Goedefroit; Fran Focquet; Leen Leus; Marília Horta Jung; Corina Nave; Miguel Angel Redondo; Claude Husson; Kaloyan Kostov; Aneta Lyubenova; Petya Christova; Anne Chandelier; Slavcho Slavov; Arthur de Cock; Peter Bonants; Sabine Werres; Jonàs Oliva Palau; Benoit Marçais; Thomas Jung; Jan Stenlid; Tom Ruttink; Kurt Heungens
Journal:  IMA Fungus       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 3.515

9.  Phylogeny of a genomically diverse group of elymus (poaceae) allopolyploids reveals multiple levels of reticulation.

Authors:  Roberta J Mason-Gamer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Romance of the three domains: how cladistics transformed the classification of cellular organisms.

Authors:  Chi-Chun Ho; Susanna K P Lau; Patrick C Y Woo
Journal:  Protein Cell       Date:  2013-07-19       Impact factor: 14.870

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.