在细胞核不一致的情况下解决薄荷属Bartonia (Loasaceae)的关系

IF 0.9 3区 生物学 Q4 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
Abigail G. Moore, Khadijah Kelly, John J. Schenk
{"title":"在细胞核不一致的情况下解决薄荷属Bartonia (Loasaceae)的关系","authors":"Abigail G. Moore, Khadijah Kelly, John J. Schenk","doi":"10.1600/036364423x16936046516264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract— Phylogenetic studies conducted with two nuclear ribosomal markers created the first phylogenetic framework in which to understand evolutionary relationships in Mentzelia section Bartonia (Loasaceae), but low molecular variation resulted in several large polytomies and an incomplete understanding of species relationships. We applied a genome skimming approach to determine whether additional genetic variation generated from high-throughput sequencing could resolve relationships in one of the largest polytomies in the section. Among the 20 species sequenced, five species that have pinnatisect leaf morphology were previously hypothesized to be monophyletic and we tested whether additional data would resolve the group as monophyletic. For the chloroplast genome, reads were assembled with de novo and reference guided approaches, whereas reference guided approaches were taken for the nuclear ribosomal cistron region and a single anonymous nuclear locus. Significant discordance was identified among all three gene trees. Exhaustive measures were taken to ensure phylogenetic and assembly-based errors were not responsible for the observed discordance among gene trees. We attribute incongruence to a low phylogenetic signal to noise ratio that is likely caused by the clade radiating recently and rapidly and perhaps unique evolutionary histories among genomes. Despite incongruence, several well-supported relationships emerged across data sets, and although two out of three gene trees did not recover a monophyletic pinnatisect group, all hypothesis tests for a monophyletic pinnatisect group among gene trees failed to reject monophyly of the group.","PeriodicalId":54438,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Botany","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resolving Relationships in <i>Mentzelia</i> Section <i>Bartonia</i> (Loasaceae) in the Face of Cytonuclear Discordance\",\"authors\":\"Abigail G. Moore, Khadijah Kelly, John J. Schenk\",\"doi\":\"10.1600/036364423x16936046516264\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract— Phylogenetic studies conducted with two nuclear ribosomal markers created the first phylogenetic framework in which to understand evolutionary relationships in Mentzelia section Bartonia (Loasaceae), but low molecular variation resulted in several large polytomies and an incomplete understanding of species relationships. We applied a genome skimming approach to determine whether additional genetic variation generated from high-throughput sequencing could resolve relationships in one of the largest polytomies in the section. Among the 20 species sequenced, five species that have pinnatisect leaf morphology were previously hypothesized to be monophyletic and we tested whether additional data would resolve the group as monophyletic. For the chloroplast genome, reads were assembled with de novo and reference guided approaches, whereas reference guided approaches were taken for the nuclear ribosomal cistron region and a single anonymous nuclear locus. Significant discordance was identified among all three gene trees. Exhaustive measures were taken to ensure phylogenetic and assembly-based errors were not responsible for the observed discordance among gene trees. We attribute incongruence to a low phylogenetic signal to noise ratio that is likely caused by the clade radiating recently and rapidly and perhaps unique evolutionary histories among genomes. Despite incongruence, several well-supported relationships emerged across data sets, and although two out of three gene trees did not recover a monophyletic pinnatisect group, all hypothesis tests for a monophyletic pinnatisect group among gene trees failed to reject monophyly of the group.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54438,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Systematic Botany\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Systematic Botany\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1600/036364423x16936046516264\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Botany","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1600/036364423x16936046516264","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:用两个核糖体标记进行的系统发育研究创造了第一个系统发育框架,用于理解Mentzelia区段Bartonia (Loasaceae)的进化关系,但低分子变异导致了几个大的多裂和对物种关系的不完整理解。我们采用基因组略读方法来确定高通量测序产生的额外遗传变异是否可以解决该切片中最大的多解剖之一的关系。在测序的20个物种中,有5个具有羽状叶形态的物种先前被假设为单系植物,我们测试了额外的数据是否可以将该群体确定为单系植物。对于叶绿体基因组,采用从头组装和参考指导方法组装reads,而对核糖体反流子区域和单个匿名核位点采用参考指导方法。在所有三个基因树中发现了显著的不一致。采取了详尽的措施,以确保系统发育和基于装配的错误不负责观察到的基因树之间的不一致。我们将不一致归因于低的系统发育信噪比,这可能是由于进化支系最近和迅速辐射造成的,并且可能是基因组中独特的进化史。尽管不一致,几个良好支持的关系出现在数据集中,尽管三个基因树中有两个没有恢复单系裙带菜组,但基因树中对单系裙带菜组的所有假设检验都未能拒绝该组的单系性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resolving Relationships in Mentzelia Section Bartonia (Loasaceae) in the Face of Cytonuclear Discordance
Abstract— Phylogenetic studies conducted with two nuclear ribosomal markers created the first phylogenetic framework in which to understand evolutionary relationships in Mentzelia section Bartonia (Loasaceae), but low molecular variation resulted in several large polytomies and an incomplete understanding of species relationships. We applied a genome skimming approach to determine whether additional genetic variation generated from high-throughput sequencing could resolve relationships in one of the largest polytomies in the section. Among the 20 species sequenced, five species that have pinnatisect leaf morphology were previously hypothesized to be monophyletic and we tested whether additional data would resolve the group as monophyletic. For the chloroplast genome, reads were assembled with de novo and reference guided approaches, whereas reference guided approaches were taken for the nuclear ribosomal cistron region and a single anonymous nuclear locus. Significant discordance was identified among all three gene trees. Exhaustive measures were taken to ensure phylogenetic and assembly-based errors were not responsible for the observed discordance among gene trees. We attribute incongruence to a low phylogenetic signal to noise ratio that is likely caused by the clade radiating recently and rapidly and perhaps unique evolutionary histories among genomes. Despite incongruence, several well-supported relationships emerged across data sets, and although two out of three gene trees did not recover a monophyletic pinnatisect group, all hypothesis tests for a monophyletic pinnatisect group among gene trees failed to reject monophyly of the group.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Systematic Botany
Systematic Botany 生物-进化生物学
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
10.00%
发文量
72
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Botany Monographs is a series of peer-reviewed taxonomic monographs and revisions published the American Society of Plant Taxonomists. ISSN 0737-8211, ISBN prefix 978-0-912861. No; volumes of Systematic Botany Monographs must be ordered separately. ASPT membership inludes only a subscription to the quarterly journal Systematic Botany. SBM is supported by sales, author"s subsidies, and donations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信