From Gene to Organismal Phylogeny: Reconciled Trees and the Gene Tree/Species Tree Problem

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 231-240

  Page, Roderic D M ^a   Charleston, Michael A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADENOSINE TRIPHOSPHATASE (POTASSIUM SODIUM); INTERLEUKIN 1; LACTATE DEHYDROGENASE;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GENE; GENE DELETION; GENETICS; HUMAN; MULTIGENE FAMILY; PHYLOGENY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ANIMALS; GENE DELETION; GENES; HUMANS; INTERLEUKIN-1; L-LACTATE DEHYDROGENASE; MODELS, GENETIC; MULTIGENE FAMILY; NA(+)-K(+)-EXCHANGING ATPASE; PHYLOGENY; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0031110886     PISSN: 10557903     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/mpev.1996.0390     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Adams E. N. N-trees as nestings: Complexity, similarity, and consensus. J. Classif. 3:1986;299-317.
2. Allard M. W., McNiff B. E., Miyamoto M. M. Support for interordinal eutherian relationships with an emphasis on primates and their archontan relatives. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 5:1996;78-88.
3. Baum B. R. Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon. 41:1992;3-10.
4. Brooks D. R. Hennig's parasitological method: A proposed solution. Syst. Zool. 30:1981;229-249.
5. Charleston M. A. Towards a characterization of landscapes of combinatorial optimisation problems, with special reference to the phylogeny problem. J. Comput. Biol. 2:1995;439-450.
6. Doyle J. J. Gene trees and species trees: Molecular systematics as one-character taxonomy. Syst. Bot. 17:1992;144-163.
7. Felsenstein J. The number of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 27:1978;27-33.
8. Fitch W. M. Cautionary remarks on using gene expression events in parsimony procedures. Syst. Zool. 28:1979;375-379.
9. Fitch W. M. Uses for evolutionary trees. New Uses for New Phylogenies. 1996;Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. p. 116-133.
10. Goodman M., Czelusniak J., Moore G. M. Further remarks on the parameter of gene duplication and expression events in parsimony reconstructions. Syst. Zool. 28:1979a;379-385.
11. Goodman M., Czelusniak J., Moore G. W., Romero-Herrera A. E., Matsuda G. Fitting the gene lineage into its species lineage: A parsimony strategy illustrated by cladograms constructed from globin sequences. Syst. Zool. 28:1979b;132-168.
12. Hughes A. L. Evolution of the interleukin-1 gene family in mammals. J. Mol. Evol. 39:1994;6-12.
13. Iwabe N., Kuma K., Miyata T. Evolution of gene families and relationship with organismal evolution: Rapid divergence of tissue-specific genes in the early evolution of chordates. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:1996;483-493.
14. Kluge A. G. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships amongEpicrates. Syst. Zool. 38:1989;7-25.
15. W. P. Maddison, Gene trees in species trees, Syst. Biol.
16. Mirkin B., Muchnik I., Smith T. F. A biologically consistent model for comparing molecular phylogenies. J. Comput. Biol. 2:1995;493-507.
17. Nelson G., Platnick N. I. Systematics and Biogeography: Cladistics and Vicariance. 1981;Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
18. Page R. D. M. COMPONENT: Tree comparison software for Microsoft Windows, version 2.0. 1993a;The Natural History Museum, London.
19. Page R. D. M. Genes, organisms, and areas: the problem of multiple lineages. Syst. Biol. 42:1993b;77-84.
20. Page R. D. M. Maps between trees and cladistic analysis of historical associations among genes, organisms, and areas. Syst. Biol. 43:1994;58-77.
21. Page R. D. M. Parallel phylogenies: reconstructing the history of host-parasite assemblages. Cladistics. 10:1995;155-173.
22. R. D. M. Page, On consensus, confidence, and "total" evidence, Cladistics.
23. Pamilo P., Nei M. Relationships between gene trees and species trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5:1988;568-583.
24. Quattro J. M., Woods H. A., Powers D. A. Sequence analysis of teleost retina-specific lactate dehydrogenase C: Evolutionary implications for the vertebrate lactate dehydrogenase gene family. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci USA. 90:1993;242-246.
25. Ragan M. A. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1:1992;53-58.
26. Reeves C. R. Modern Heuristic Techniques for Combinatorial Problems. 1995;McGraw Hill, New York.
27. Rodrigo A. G. A comment on Baum's method for combining phylogenetic trees. Taxon. 42:1993;631-636.
28. Ronquist F. Reconstructing the history of host-parasite associations using generalised parsimony. Cladistics. 11:1995;73-89.
29. Swofford D. L., Olsen G. J. Phylogeny reconstruction. Hillis D. M., Moritz C. Molecular Systematics. 1990;411-501 Sinauer Associates, Sunderland.
30. Takahata N. Gene genealogy in three related populations: Consistency probability between gene and population trees. Genetics. 122:1989;957-966.
31. Tsuji S., Qureshi M. A., Hou E. W., Fitch W. M., Li S. S.-L. Evolutionary relationships of lactate dehydrogenases (LDHs) from mammals, birds, an amphibian, fish, barley, and bacteria: LDH cDNA sequences fromXenopus, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 91:1994;9392-9396.
32. Wu C.-I. Inferences of species phylogeny in relation to segregation of ancient polymorphisms. Genetics. 127:1991;429-435.