Supraspecific taxa as terminals in cladistic analysis: Implicit assumptions of monophyly and a comparison of methods

Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Volumn 64, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 101-133

  Bininda Emonds, Olaf R P ^a   Bryant, Harold N ^b,d   Russell, Anthony P ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL ALBERTA MUSEUM   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^d ROYAL SASKATCHEWAN MUSEUM   (Canada)

Author keywords

Ancestor; C onsistency indices; Exemplar; Groundplan; Homoplasy; Molecular systematics; Paraphyly; Phocidae; Phylogenetic inference; Species

Indexed keywords

MAMMALIA; PHOCIDAE;

EID: 0031812580     PISSN: 00244066     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/bijl.1998.0215     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Adachi J, Hasegawa M. 1995. Phylogeny of whales: dependence of inference on species sampling. Molecular Biology and Evolution 12: 177-179.
2. Allard MW, Carpenter JM. 1996. On weighting and congruence. Cladistics 12: 183-198.
3. Arnason U, Bodin K, Gullberg A, Ledje C, Mouchaty S. 1995. A molecular view of pinniped relationships with particular emphasis on the true seals. Journal of Molecular Evolution 40: 78-85.
4. Arnason U, Gullberg A, Johnsson E, Ledje C. 1993. The nucleotide sequence of the mitochondrial DNA molecule of the grey seal, Halichoerus grypus, and a comparison with mitochondrial sequences of other true seals. Journal of Molecular Evolution 37: 323-330.
5. Arnason U, Johnsson E. 1992. The complete mitochondrial DNA sequence of the harbor seal, Phoca vitulina. Journal of Molecular Evolution 34: 493-505.
6. Arnold EN. 1981. Estimating phylogenies at low taxonomic levels. Zeitschrift für Zoologische Systematik und Evolutionsforschung 19: 1-35.
7. Berta A, Wyss AR. 1994. Pinniped phylogeny. In: Berta A, Deméré TA, eds. Contributions in marine mammal paleontology honoring Frank C. Whitmore, Jr. Proceedings of the San Diego Society of Natural History 29, 33-56.
8. Bininda-Emonds ORP, Russell AP. 1996. A morphological perspective on the phylogenetic relationships of the extant phocid seals (Mammalia: Carnivora: Phocidae). Bonner zoologische Monographien 41: 1-256.
9. Bryant HN. 1991. The polarization of character transformations in phylogenetic systematics: role of axiomatic and auxiliary assumptions. Systematic Zoology 40: 433-445.
10. Bryant HN, Russell AP, Fitch WD. 1993. Phylogenetic relationships within the extant Mustelidae (Carnivora): appraisal of the cladistic status of the Simpsonian subfamilies. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 108: 301-334.
11. Burns JJ, Fay FH. 1970. Comparative morphology of the skull of the Ribbon seal, Histriophoca fasciata, with remarks on systematics of Phocidae. Journal of Zoology, London 161: 363-394.
12. Cao Y, Adachi J, Hasegawa M. 1994. Eutherian phylogeny as inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequence data. Japanese Journal of Genetics 69: 455-472.
13. Cao Y, Adachi J, Yano TA, Hasegawa M. 1994. Phylogenetic place of guinea pigs: no support of the rodent-polyphyly hypothesis from maximum-likelihood analyses of multiple protein sequences. Molecular Biology and Evolution 11: 593-604.
14. Chapskii KK. 1955. An attempt at revision of the systematics and diagnostics of seals of the subfamily Phocinae. Trudy Zoologicheskovo Instituta Akademii Nauk SSSR 17: 160-199. [In Russian. English translation by Jeletzky TF. 1957. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Translation Series 114]
15. Chapskii KK. 1955. An attempt at revision of the systematics and diagnostics of seals of the subfamily Phocinae. Trudy Zoologicheskovo Instituta Akademii Nauk SSSR 17: 160-199. [In Russian. English translation by Jeletzky TF. 1957. Fisheries Research Board of Canada Translation Series 114]
16. Chase MW, Soltis DE, Olmstead RG, Morgan D, Les DH, Mishler BD, Duvall MR, Price RA, Hills HG, Qiu YL, Kron KA, Rettig JH, Conti E, Palmer JD, Manhart JR, Sytsma KJ, Michaels HJ, Kress WJ, Karol KG, Clark WD, Hedren M, Gaut BS, Jansen RK, Kim KJ, Wimpee CF, Smith JF, Furnier GR, Strauss SH, Xiang QY, Plunkett GM, Soltis PS, Swensen SM, Williams SE, Gadek PA, Quinn CJ, Eguiarte LE, Golenberg E, Learn GH, Graham SW, Barrett SCH, Dayanandan S, Albert VA. 1993. Phylogenetics of seed plants: an analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid gene rbcL. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 80: 528-580.
17. Cummings MP, Otto SP, Wakeley J. 1995. Sampling properties of DNA sequence data in phylogenetic analysis. Molecular Biology and Evolution 12: 814-822.
18. D'Erchia AM, Gissi C, Pesole G, Saccone C, Arnason U. 1996. The guinea-pig is not a rodent. Nature 381: 597-600.
19. Donoghue MJ, Doyle JA, Gauthier J, Kluge AG, Rowe T. 1989. The importance of fossils in phylogeny reconstruction. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20: 431-460.
20. Doyle JA, Donoghue MJ, Zimmer EA. 1994. Integration of morphological and ribosomal RNA data on the origin of angiosperms. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 81: 419-450.
21. Eldredge N, Novacek MJ. 1985. Systematics and paleobiology. Paleobiology 11: 65-74.
22. Farris JS. 1989. The retention index and the rescaled consistency index. Cladistics 5: 417-419.
23. Felsenstein J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791.
24. Freye MS, Hedges SB. 1995. Monophyly of the order Rodentia inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences of the genes for 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, and tRNA-valine. Molecular Biology and Evolution 12: 168-176.
25. Gaffney ES. 1977. An introduction to the logic of phylogeny reconstruction. In: Cracraft J, Eldredge E, eds. Phylogenetic Analysis and Paleontology. New York: Columbia University Press, 79-111.
26. Galtier N, Gouy M. 1994. Molecular phylogeny of Eubacteria: a new multiple tree analysis method applied to 15 sequence data sets questions the monophyly of Gram-positive bacteria. Research in Microbiology 145: 531-541.
27. Graur D, Hide WA, Li W-H. 1991. Is the guinea-pig a rodent? Nature 351: 649-652.
28. Hauser DL, Boyajian G. 1997. Proportional change and patterns of homoplasy: Sanderson and Donoghue revisited. Cladistics 13: 97-100.
29. Hendy MD, Penny D. 1989. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Systematic Zoology 38: 297-309.
30. Hennig W. 1966. Phylogenetic systematics. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
31. Hillis DM, Bull JJ. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Systematic Biology 42: 182-192.
32. Hillis DM, Huelsenbeck JP, Cunningham CW. 1994. Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies. Science 264: 671-677.
33. Kenyon KW. 1977. Caribbean monk seal extinct. Journal of Mammalogy 58: 97-98.
34. King JE. 1966. Relationships of the Hooded and Elephant seals (genera Cystophora and Mirounga). Journal of Zoology, London 148: 385-398.
35. Krettek A, Gullberg A, Arnason U. 1995. Sequence analysis of the complete mitochondrial DNA molecule of the hedgehog, Erinaceus europaeus, and the phylogenetic position of the Lipotyphla. Journal of Molecular Evolution 41: 952-957.
36. Kuma KI, Miyata T. 1994. Mammalian phylogeny inferred from multiple protein data. Japanese Journal of Genetics 69: 555-566.
37. Lanyon SM. 1994. Polyphyly of the blackbird genus Agelaius and the importance of assumptions of monophyly in comparative studies. Evolution 48: 679-693.
38. Lecointre G, Philippe H, V̂an Lê HL, Le Guyader H. 1993. Species sampling has a major impact on phylogenetic inference. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 2: 205-224.
39. Ledje C, Arnason U. 1996. Phylogenetic analyses of complete cytochrome b genes of the order Carnivora with particular emphasis on the Caniformia. Journal of Molecular Evolution 42: 135-144.
40. Lindahl T. 1993a. Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA. Nature 362: 709-715.
41. Lindahl T. 1993b. Recovery of antediluvian DNA. Nature 365: 700.
42. Logan GA, Boon JJ, Eglinton G. 1993. Structural biopolymer preservation in Miocene leaf fossils from the Clarkia site, northern Idaho. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 90: 2246-2250.
43. Ma D-P, Zharkikh A, Graur D, VandeBerg JL, Li W-H. 1993. Structure and evolution of opossum, guinea pig, and porcupine cytochrome b genes. Journal of Molecular Evolution 36: 327-334.
44. Mabee PM. 1996. Reassessing the ontogenetic criterion: a response to Patterson. Cladistics 12: 169-176.
45. Maddison WP. 1995. Calculating the probability distributions of ancestral states reconstructed by parsimony on phylogenetic trees. Systematic Biology 44: 474-181.
46. Maddison WP, Maddison DR. 1992. MacClade: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. Version 3.0. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates.
47. Martignetti JA, Brosius J. 1993. Neural BC1 RNA as an evolutionary marker: guinea pig remains a rodent. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 90: 9698-9702.
48. Mishler BD. 1994. Cladistic analysis of molecular and morphological data. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 94: 143-156.
49. Mouchaty S, Cook JA, Shields GF. 1995. Phylogenetic analysis of northern hair seals based on nucleotide sequences of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene. Journal of Mammalogy 76: 1178-1185.
50. de Muizon Ch. 1982. Phocid phylogeny and dispersal. Annals of the South African Museum 89: 175-213.
51. Patterson C. 1996. Comments on Mabee's 'Empirical rejection of the ontogenetic polarity criterion'. Cladistics 12: 147-168.
52. Penny D, Hendy MD. 1985. The use of tree comparison metrics. Systematic Zoology 34: 75-82.
53. Perry EA, Carr SM, Bartlett SE, Davidson WS. 1995. A phylogenetic perspective on the evolution of reproductive behavior in pagophilic seals of the Northwest Atlantic as indicated by mitochondrial DNA sequences. Journal of Mammalogy 76: 22-31.
54. Rice KA, Donoghue MJ, Olmstead RG. 1997. Analyzing large data sets: rbcL 500 revisited. Systematic Biology 46: 554-563.
55. Sanderson MJ, Donoghue MJ. 1989. Patterns of variation in levels of homoplasy. Evolution 43: 1781-1795.
56. Schreiber A, Erker D, Bauer K. 1994. Eutherian phylogeny from a primate perspective. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 51: 359-376.
57. Simonsen V. 1982. Electrophoretic variation in large mammals. II. The red fox, Vulpes vulpes, the stoat, Mustela erminea, the weasel, Mustela nivalis, the pole cat, Mustela putorius, the pine marten, Martes martes, the beech marten, Martes foina, and the badger, Meles meles. Hereditas 96: 299-305.
58. Soltis PS, Soltis DE. 1996. Phylogenetic analysis of large molecular data sets. Boletín de la Sociedad Botánica de México 59: 99-113.
59. Swofford DL. 1993. PAUP: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony. Version 3.1.1. Computer program distributed by the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.
60. Vrana PB, Milinkovitch MC, Powell JR, Wheeler WC. 1994. Higher level relationships of the arctoid Carnivora based on sequence data and 'total evidence'. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 3: 47-58.
61. Watrous LE, Wheeler QD. 1981. The out-group comparison method of character analysis. Systematic Zoology 30: 1-11.
62. Wayne RK, Benveniste RE, Janczewski DN, O'Brien SJ. 1989. Molecular and biochemical evolution of the Carnivora. In: Gittleman JL, ed. Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 465-494.
63. Wiens JJ. 1995. Polymorphic characters in phylogenetic systematics. Systematic Biology 44: 482-500.
64. Wyss AR. 1988. On 'retrogression' in the evolution of the Phocinae and phylogenetic affinities of the monk seals. American Museum Novitates #2924: 1-38.
65. Wyss AR, Flynn JJ. 1993. A phylogenetic analysis and definition of the Carnivora. In: Szalay FS, Novacek MJ, McKenna MC, eds. Mammal Phylogeny: Placentals. New York: Springer-Verlag, 32-52.
66. Yeates DK. 1995. Groundplans and exemplars: paths to the tree of life. Cladistics 11: 343-357.