四个多足动物亲戚——但谁是姐妹?关于四种主要多足亚群之间关系的争论没有结束。

IF 3.4 Q1 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Nikolaus U Szucsich, Daniela Bartel, Alexander Blanke, Alexander Böhm, Alexander Donath, Makiko Fukui, Simon Grove, Shanlin Liu, Oliver Macek, Ryuichiro Machida, Bernhard Misof, Yasutaka Nakagaki, Lars Podsiadlowski, Kaoru Sekiya, Shigekazu Tomizuka, Björn M Von Reumont, Robert M Waterhouse, Manfred Walzl, Guanliang Meng, Xin Zhou, Günther Pass, Karen Meusemann
{"title":"四个多足动物亲戚——但谁是姐妹?关于四种主要多足亚群之间关系的争论没有结束。","authors":"Nikolaus U Szucsich,&nbsp;Daniela Bartel,&nbsp;Alexander Blanke,&nbsp;Alexander Böhm,&nbsp;Alexander Donath,&nbsp;Makiko Fukui,&nbsp;Simon Grove,&nbsp;Shanlin Liu,&nbsp;Oliver Macek,&nbsp;Ryuichiro Machida,&nbsp;Bernhard Misof,&nbsp;Yasutaka Nakagaki,&nbsp;Lars Podsiadlowski,&nbsp;Kaoru Sekiya,&nbsp;Shigekazu Tomizuka,&nbsp;Björn M Von Reumont,&nbsp;Robert M Waterhouse,&nbsp;Manfred Walzl,&nbsp;Guanliang Meng,&nbsp;Xin Zhou,&nbsp;Günther Pass,&nbsp;Karen Meusemann","doi":"10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Phylogenetic relationships among the myriapod subgroups Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla and Pauropoda are still not robustly resolved. The first phylogenomic study covering all subgroups resolved phylogenetic relationships congruently to morphological evidence but is in conflict with most previously published phylogenetic trees based on diverse molecular data. Outgroup choice and long-branch attraction effects were stated as possible explanations for these incongruencies. In this study, we addressed these issues by extending the myriapod and outgroup taxon sampling using transcriptome data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We generated new transcriptome data of 42 panarthropod species, including all four myriapod subgroups and additional outgroup taxa. Our taxon sampling was complemented by published transcriptome and genome data resulting in a supermatrix covering 59 species. We compiled two data sets, the first with a full coverage of genes per species (292 single-copy protein-coding genes), the second with a less stringent coverage (988 genes). We inferred phylogenetic relationships among myriapods using different data types, tree inference, and quartet computation approaches. Our results unambiguously support monophyletic Mandibulata and Myriapoda. Our analyses clearly showed that there is strong signal for a single unrooted topology, but a sensitivity of the position of the internal root on the choice of outgroups. However, we observe strong evidence for a clade Pauropoda+Symphyla, as well as for a clade Chilopoda+Diplopoda.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our best quartet topology is incongruent with current morphological phylogenies which were supported in another phylogenomic study. AU tests and quartet mapping reject the quartet topology congruent to trees inferred with morphological characters. Moreover, quartet mapping shows that confounding signal present in the data set is sufficient to explain the weak signal for the quartet topology derived from morphological characters. Although outgroup choice affects results, our study could narrow possible trees to derivatives of a single quartet topology. For highly disputed relationships, we propose to apply a series of tests (AU and quartet mapping), since results of such tests allow to narrow down possible relationships and to rule out confounding signal.</p>","PeriodicalId":9111,"journal":{"name":"BMC Evolutionary Biology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0","citationCount":"12","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Four myriapod relatives - but who are sisters? No end to debates on relationships among the four major myriapod subgroups.\",\"authors\":\"Nikolaus U Szucsich,&nbsp;Daniela Bartel,&nbsp;Alexander Blanke,&nbsp;Alexander Böhm,&nbsp;Alexander Donath,&nbsp;Makiko Fukui,&nbsp;Simon Grove,&nbsp;Shanlin Liu,&nbsp;Oliver Macek,&nbsp;Ryuichiro Machida,&nbsp;Bernhard Misof,&nbsp;Yasutaka Nakagaki,&nbsp;Lars Podsiadlowski,&nbsp;Kaoru Sekiya,&nbsp;Shigekazu Tomizuka,&nbsp;Björn M Von Reumont,&nbsp;Robert M Waterhouse,&nbsp;Manfred Walzl,&nbsp;Guanliang Meng,&nbsp;Xin Zhou,&nbsp;Günther Pass,&nbsp;Karen Meusemann\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Phylogenetic relationships among the myriapod subgroups Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla and Pauropoda are still not robustly resolved. The first phylogenomic study covering all subgroups resolved phylogenetic relationships congruently to morphological evidence but is in conflict with most previously published phylogenetic trees based on diverse molecular data. Outgroup choice and long-branch attraction effects were stated as possible explanations for these incongruencies. In this study, we addressed these issues by extending the myriapod and outgroup taxon sampling using transcriptome data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We generated new transcriptome data of 42 panarthropod species, including all four myriapod subgroups and additional outgroup taxa. Our taxon sampling was complemented by published transcriptome and genome data resulting in a supermatrix covering 59 species. We compiled two data sets, the first with a full coverage of genes per species (292 single-copy protein-coding genes), the second with a less stringent coverage (988 genes). We inferred phylogenetic relationships among myriapods using different data types, tree inference, and quartet computation approaches. Our results unambiguously support monophyletic Mandibulata and Myriapoda. Our analyses clearly showed that there is strong signal for a single unrooted topology, but a sensitivity of the position of the internal root on the choice of outgroups. However, we observe strong evidence for a clade Pauropoda+Symphyla, as well as for a clade Chilopoda+Diplopoda.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our best quartet topology is incongruent with current morphological phylogenies which were supported in another phylogenomic study. AU tests and quartet mapping reject the quartet topology congruent to trees inferred with morphological characters. Moreover, quartet mapping shows that confounding signal present in the data set is sufficient to explain the weak signal for the quartet topology derived from morphological characters. Although outgroup choice affects results, our study could narrow possible trees to derivatives of a single quartet topology. For highly disputed relationships, we propose to apply a series of tests (AU and quartet mapping), since results of such tests allow to narrow down possible relationships and to rule out confounding signal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Evolutionary Biology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0\",\"citationCount\":\"12\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Evolutionary Biology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Evolutionary Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

摘要

背景:多足亚群中足足亚群、双足亚群、合足亚群和足足亚群之间的系统发育关系尚未得到明确的解决。第一个涵盖所有亚群的系统发育研究与形态学证据一致地解决了系统发育关系,但与大多数先前发表的基于不同分子数据的系统发育树存在冲突。外群体选择和长分支吸引效应被认为是这些不一致的可能解释。在这项研究中,我们通过使用转录组数据扩展多足类和外类群取样来解决这些问题。结果:我们获得了42种全节肢动物的转录组数据,包括所有4个多足亚群和额外的外群分类群。我们的分类群样本与已发表的转录组和基因组数据相补充,形成了覆盖59个物种的超基质。我们编制了两个数据集,第一个是每个物种基因的完整覆盖(292个单拷贝蛋白质编码基因),第二个是不太严格的覆盖(988个基因)。我们使用不同的数据类型、树推理和四重奏计算方法来推断多足类动物之间的系统发育关系。我们的结果明确支持单系的下颌目和多足目。我们的分析清楚地表明,对于单一的无根拓扑有很强的信号,但内部根的位置对外群的选择有敏感性。然而,我们观察到强有力的证据表明一个进化分支为保足纲+合足纲,以及一个进化分支为七足纲+双足纲。结论:我们的最佳四重奏拓扑结构与另一项系统基因组学研究支持的当前形态系统发生不一致。AU测试和四重奏映射拒绝四重奏拓扑与用形态特征推断的树一致。此外,四重奏映射表明,数据集中存在的混杂信号足以解释由形态特征导出的四重奏拓扑的弱信号。虽然外群体选择会影响结果,但我们的研究可以将可能的树缩小到单个四重奏拓扑的导数。对于高度争议的关系,我们建议应用一系列测试(AU和四重奏映射),因为这些测试的结果可以缩小可能的关系并排除混淆信号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Four myriapod relatives - but who are sisters? No end to debates on relationships among the four major myriapod subgroups.

Four myriapod relatives - but who are sisters? No end to debates on relationships among the four major myriapod subgroups.

Four myriapod relatives - but who are sisters? No end to debates on relationships among the four major myriapod subgroups.

Four myriapod relatives - but who are sisters? No end to debates on relationships among the four major myriapod subgroups.

Background: Phylogenetic relationships among the myriapod subgroups Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla and Pauropoda are still not robustly resolved. The first phylogenomic study covering all subgroups resolved phylogenetic relationships congruently to morphological evidence but is in conflict with most previously published phylogenetic trees based on diverse molecular data. Outgroup choice and long-branch attraction effects were stated as possible explanations for these incongruencies. In this study, we addressed these issues by extending the myriapod and outgroup taxon sampling using transcriptome data.

Results: We generated new transcriptome data of 42 panarthropod species, including all four myriapod subgroups and additional outgroup taxa. Our taxon sampling was complemented by published transcriptome and genome data resulting in a supermatrix covering 59 species. We compiled two data sets, the first with a full coverage of genes per species (292 single-copy protein-coding genes), the second with a less stringent coverage (988 genes). We inferred phylogenetic relationships among myriapods using different data types, tree inference, and quartet computation approaches. Our results unambiguously support monophyletic Mandibulata and Myriapoda. Our analyses clearly showed that there is strong signal for a single unrooted topology, but a sensitivity of the position of the internal root on the choice of outgroups. However, we observe strong evidence for a clade Pauropoda+Symphyla, as well as for a clade Chilopoda+Diplopoda.

Conclusions: Our best quartet topology is incongruent with current morphological phylogenies which were supported in another phylogenomic study. AU tests and quartet mapping reject the quartet topology congruent to trees inferred with morphological characters. Moreover, quartet mapping shows that confounding signal present in the data set is sufficient to explain the weak signal for the quartet topology derived from morphological characters. Although outgroup choice affects results, our study could narrow possible trees to derivatives of a single quartet topology. For highly disputed relationships, we propose to apply a series of tests (AU and quartet mapping), since results of such tests allow to narrow down possible relationships and to rule out confounding signal.

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
BMC Evolutionary Biology
BMC Evolutionary Biology 生物-进化生物学
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Evolutionary Biology is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of molecular and non-molecular evolution of all organisms, as well as phylogenetics and palaeontology.
×
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