Literature DB >> 9116163

Convergent evolution in invertebrates.

J Moore1, P Willmer.   

Abstract

Resemblance between animal taxa may be due to convergence rather than to recent common ancestry. Constraints on biological materials and adaptation to particular habits or habitats will produce widespread convergence. How may we distinguish the two causes of resemblance? The relationship between convergence and taxonomy is discussed, demonstrating that the choice of taxonomic method will itself determine the extent to which convergence is perceived. In particular, cladistic analysis based on parsimony will tend to minimise and thus conceal convergence: neither the resulting cladogram nor a consistency index derived from it can be used to assess the prevalence of convergence. With any taxonomic system, there can be no substitute for evaluation of the morphological characters used. Complementary use of molecular characters shows promise: we wait further understanding of constraints in genetic evolution and of the possibilities of convergence at this level also. These general principles are illustrated with a range of examples from within and between invertebrate phyla: the phylogeny of Cnidaria and Platyhelminthes cannot be traced with certainty, but where the fossil record allows clear rooting, as for the echinoderms and in particular the echinoids, combination of morphological and molecular methods has made much progress. Sub-groups within a phylum, for example opisthobranch molluscs and the dipteran Phoridae, may show an uncontested phylogeny, and here studies have precisely identified convergence and shown that it may be the commoner cause of resemblance. Adaptation to exacting environments shown by terrestial and freshwater nemertines may also result in a predominance of convergent resemblance. Traditional grouping of phyla breaks down on re-examination of supposedly key characters, such as segmentation, body cavities, germ layers and symmetry, each of which must have had multiple origins: nor are developmental stages (especially not larvae) a reliable guide to relationships. Demarcation of phyla may be difficult, as with arthropods, and location of phyla is even more difficult, due to their early and rapid radiation. Over-simplified definition of characters has bedevilled invertebrate classification and the use of molecular data has not yet resolved the major controversies. The question "How common is convergence?' remains unanswered and may be unanswerable. Our examples indicate that even the minimum detectable levels of convergence are often high, and we conclude that at all levels convergence has been greatly underestimated.

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9116163     DOI: 10.1017/s0006323196004926

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc        ISSN: 0006-3231


  13 in total

1.  Evolution: A sisterly dispute.

Authors:  Maximilian J Telford; Leonid L Moroz; Kenneth M Halanych
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Comparison of articulate brachiopod nuclear and mitochondrial gene trees leads to a clade-based redefinition of protostomes (Protostomozoa) and deuterostomes (Deuterostomozoa)

Authors:  B L Cohen; S Stark; A B Gawthrop; M E Burke; C W Thayer
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  1998-03-22       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  A Cladistic Approach for the Classification of Oligotrichid Ciliates (Ciliophora: Spirotricha).

Authors:  Sabine Agatha
Journal:  Acta Protozool       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 0.892

4.  Degeneracy: a link between evolvability, robustness and complexity in biological systems.

Authors:  James M Whitacre
Journal:  Theor Biol Med Model       Date:  2010-02-18       Impact factor: 2.432

Review 5.  Species diversity vs. morphological disparity in the light of evolutionary developmental biology.

Authors:  Alessandro Minelli
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 4.357

6.  Neurogenesis suggests independent evolution of opercula in serpulid polychaetes.

Authors:  Nora Brinkmann; Andreas Wanninger
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2009-11-23       Impact factor: 3.260

7.  Testing phylogenetic hypotheses of the subgenera of the freshwater crayfish genus Cambarus (Decapoda: Cambaridae).

Authors:  Jesse W Breinholt; Megan L Porter; Keith A Crandall
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  DNA and morphology unite two species and 10 million year old fossils.

Authors:  Simon F K Hills; James S Crampton; Steven A Trewick; Mary Morgan-Richards
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Phylogenetic classification at generic level in the absence of distinct phylogenetic patterns of phenotypical variation: a case study in graphidaceae (ascomycota).

Authors:  Sittiporn Parnmen; Robert Lücking; H Thorsten Lumbsch
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Annulonemertes (phylum Nemertea): when segments do not count.

Authors:  Per Sundberg; Malin Strand
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2007-10-22       Impact factor: 3.703

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.