Literature DB >> 31146023

Incongruence between gene trees and species trees and phylogenetic signal variation in plastid genes.

Deise J P Gonçalves1, Beryl B Simpson2, Edgardo M Ortiz3, Gustavo H Shimizu4, Robert K Jansen5.   

Abstract

The current classification of angiosperms is based primarily on concatenated plastid markers and maximum likelihood (ML) inference. This approach has been justified by the assumption that plastid DNA (ptDNA) is inherited as a single locus and that its individual genes produce congruent trees. However, structural and functional characteristics of ptDNA suggest that plastid genes may not evolve as a single locus and are experiencing different evolutionary forces. To examine this idea, we produced new complete plastid genome (plastome) sequences of 27 species and combined these data with publicly available sequences to produce a final dataset that includes 78 plastid genes for 89 species of rosids and five outgroups. We used four data matrices (i.e., gene, exon, codon-aligned, and amino acid) to infer species and gene trees using ML and multispecies coalescent (MSC) methods. Rosids include about one third of all angiosperms and their two major clades, fabids and malvids, were recovered in almost all analyses. However, we detected incongruence between species trees inferred with different matrices and methods and previously published plastid and nuclear phylogenies. We visualized and tested the significance of incongruence between gene trees and species trees. We then measured the distribution of phylogenetic signal across sites and genes supporting alternative placements of five controversial nodes at different taxonomic levels. Gene trees inferred with plastid data often disagree with species trees inferred using both ML (with unpartitioned or partitioned data) and MSC. Species trees inferred with both methods produced alternative topologies for a few taxa. Our results show that, in a phylogenetic context, plastid protein-coding genes may not be fully linked and behaving as a single locus. Furthermore, concatenated matrices may produce highly supported phylogenies that are discordant with individual gene trees. We also show that phylogenies inferred with MSC are accurate. We therefore emphasize the importance of considering variation in phylogenetic signal across plastid genes and the exploration of plastome data to increase accuracy of estimating relationships. We also support the use of MSC with plastome matrices in future phylogenomic investigations.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alternative topologies; Coalescence; Gene trees; Plastome; Species trees; Tree space

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31146023     DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2019.05.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Phylogenet Evol        ISSN: 1055-7903            Impact factor:   4.286


  30 in total

1.  Duplication of Symbiotic Lysin Motif Receptors Predates the Evolution of Nitrogen-Fixing Nodule Symbiosis.

Authors:  Luuk Rutten; Kana Miyata; Yuda Purwana Roswanjaya; Rik Huisman; Fengjiao Bu; Marijke Hartog; Sidney Linders; Robin van Velzen; Arjan van Zeijl; Ton Bisseling; Wouter Kohlen; Rene Geurts
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2020-07-15       Impact factor: 8.340

2.  First de novo genome specific development, characterization and validation of simple sequence repeat (SSR) markers in Genus Salvadora.

Authors:  Maneesh S Bhandari; Rajendra K Meena; Arzoo Shamoon; Shanti Saroj; Rama Kant; Shailesh Pandey
Journal:  Mol Biol Rep       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 2.316

3.  Conflicting phylogenetic signals in plastomes of the tribe Laureae (Lauraceae).

Authors:  Tian-Wen Xiao; Yong Xu; Lu Jin; Tong-Jian Liu; Hai-Fei Yan; Xue-Jun Ge
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-10-15       Impact factor: 2.984

4.  Comparative Chloroplast Genomics of Seven Endangered Cypripedium Species and Phylogenetic Relationships of Orchidaceae.

Authors:  Jun-Yi Zhang; Min Liao; Yue-Hong Cheng; Yu Feng; Wen-Bing Ju; Heng-Ning Deng; Xiong Li; Andelka Plenković-Moraj; Bo Xu
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2022-06-22       Impact factor: 6.627

5.  Exploration of Plastid Phylogenomic Conflict Yields New Insights into the Deep Relationships of Leguminosae.

Authors:  Rong Zhang; Yin-Huan Wang; Jian-Jun Jin; Gregory W Stull; Anne Bruneau; Domingos Cardoso; Luciano Paganucci De Queiroz; Michael J Moore; Shu-Dong Zhang; Si-Yun Chen; Jian Wang; De-Zhu Li; Ting-Shuang Yi
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 15.683

6.  Plastome evolution in the Caesalpinia group (Leguminosae) and its application in phylogenomics and populations genetics.

Authors:  Paulo Aecyo; André Marques; Bruno Huettel; Ana Silva; Tiago Esposito; Elâine Ribeiro; Inara R Leal; Edeline Gagnon; Gustavo Souza; Andrea Pedrosa-Harand
Journal:  Planta       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 4.116

7.  Analysis of Paralogs in Target Enrichment Data Pinpoints Multiple Ancient Polyploidy Events in Alchemilla s.l. (Rosaceae).

Authors:  Diego F Morales-Briones; Berit Gehrke; Chien-Hsun Huang; Aaron Liston; Hong Ma; Hannah E Marx; David C Tank; Ya Yang
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2021-12-16       Impact factor: 15.683

8.  Complete chloroplast genome of novel Adrinandra megaphylla Hu species: molecular structure, comparative and phylogenetic analysis.

Authors:  Huu Quan Nguyen; Thi Ngoc Lan Nguyen; Thi Nhung Doan; Thi Thu Nga Nguyen; Mai Huong Phạm; Tung Lam Le; Danh Thuong Sy; Hoang Ha Chu; Hoang Mau Chu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Comparative analyses of Mikania (Asteraceae: Eupatorieae) plastomes and impact of data partitioning and inference methods on phylogenetic relationships.

Authors:  Verônica A Thode; Caetano T Oliveira; Benoît Loeuille; Carolina M Siniscalchi; José R Pirani
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Phylogenomics With Hyb-Seq Unravels Korean Hosta Evolution.

Authors:  Mi-Jeong Yoo; Byoung-Yoon Lee; Sangtae Kim; Chae Eun Lim
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2021-07-08       Impact factor: 5.753

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.