Assessing the Relative Contribution of Molecular and Morphological Characters in Simultaneous Analysis Trees

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 427-436

  Baker, Richard H ^a,b   Yu, Xiaobo ^c   Desalle, Rob ^a  

^a DIVISION OF INVERTEBRATE ZOOLOGY   (United States)

^b YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c KEAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; DECISION TREE; FACTUAL DATABASE; GENETICS; INVERTEBRATE; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; PLANT; VERTEBRATE;

ANIMALS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DECISION TREES; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; INVERTEBRATES; PHYLOGENY; PLANTS; VERTEBRATES;

EID: 0032088099     PISSN: 10557903     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/mpev.1998.0519     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Ackery P. R., Vane-Wright R. I. Milkweed Butterflies, Their Cladistics and Biology. 1984;Cornell Univ. Press, New York.
2. Baker R. H., DeSalle R. Multiple sources of molecular characters and the phylogeny of Hawaiian drosophilids. Syst. Biol. 46:1997;654-673.
3. Birstein V. J., Hanner R., DeSalle R. Phylogeny of the Acipenseriformes: Cytogenetic and molecular approaches. Environ. Biol. Fishes. 48:1997;127-155.
4. Bremer B. Combined and separate analyses of morphological and molecular data in the plant family Rubiaceae. Cladistics. 12:1996;21-40.
5. Bremer K. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution. 42:1988;795-803.
6. Bremer K. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics. 10:1994;295-304.
7. Bridge D., Cunningham C., DeSalle R., Buss L. Class-level relationships in the phylum Cnidaria: Molecular and morphological evidence. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:1995;679-689.
8. Brown J., Pellmyr O., Thompson J. N., Harrison R. G. Phylogeny of Greya (Lepidoptera: Proxidae), based on nucleotide sequence variation in mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I and II: Congruence with morphological data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:1994;128-141.
9. Brown K. S. The biology of Heliconius and related genera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 26:1981;427-456.
10. Bull J. J., Huelsenbeck J., Cunningham C., Swofford D., Waddell P. Partitioning and combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42:1993;384-397.
11. Chavarría G., Carpenter J. M. Cladistics. 10:1994;229-258.
12. Chippendale P. T., Wiens J. Weighting, partitioning and combining characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 43:1994;278-287.
13. Davis D. R., Pellmyr O., Thompson J. N. Biology and systematics of Greya Busck and Tetragma n. gen. (Lepidoptera: Proxidae). Smithsonian Contrib. Zool. 524:1992;1-88.
14. deQuiroz A., Donoghue M., Kim J. Y. Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:1995;657-681.
15. Donoghue M. J., Olmstead R. G., Smith J. F., Palmer J. D. Phylogenetic relationships of the Dipsicales based on rbcL sequences. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 81:1992;419-450.
16. Doyle J. A., Donoghue M. J., Zimmer E. A. Integration of morphological and ribosomal RNA data on the origin of angiosperms. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 81:1994;419-450.
17. Doyle J. J. Gene trees and species trees: Molecular systematics as a one-character taxonomy. Syst. Bot. 17:1992;144-163.
18. Eernisse D. J., Kluge A. G. Taxonomic congruence versus total evidence and amniote phylogeny inferred from fossils, molecules and morphology. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:1993;1170-1195.
19. Farris, J. S. 1988, Hennig86, ver. 1.5, Program and Documentation, Port Jefferson Station, New York.
20. Farris J. S., Källersjö M., Kluge A. G., Bult C. Testing significance of congruence. Cladistics. 10:1994;315-320.
21. Farris J. S., Källersjö M., Kluge A. G., Bult C. Constructing a significance test for incongruence. Syst. Biol. 44:1995;570-572.
22. Funk D. J., Futuyma D. J., Orti G., Meyer A. Mitochondrial DNA sequences and multiple data sets: A phylogenetic study of phytophaagous beetles (Chrysomelidae: Ophraella). Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:1995;627-640.
23. Futuyma D. J., McCaferty S. Phylogeny and the evolution of host plant associations in the leaf beetle genusOphraella. Evolution. 44:1990;1885-1913.
24. Gale A. S. Phylogeny and classification of the Asteroidea (Echinodermata). Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 89:1984;107-132.
25. Givnish T. J., Sytsma K. J. Consistency, characters, and the likelihood of correct phylogenetic inference. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 7:1997;320-330.
26. Goloboff P. A. Homoplasy and the choice among cladograms. Cladistics. 7:1991;251-232.
27. Grimaldi D. A phylogenetic revised classification of genera in the Drosophilidae (Diptera). Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 197:1991.
28. Hedges S. B., Maxson L. R. Re: Molecules and morphology in amniote phylogeny. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 6:1996;312-314.
29. Hills D. Molecular versus morphological approaches to systematics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18:1987;23-42.
30. Huelsenbeck J. P., Bull J. J. A likelihood ratio test to detect conflicting phylogenetic signal. Syst. Biol. 45:1996;92-98.
31. Huelsenbeck J., Bull J., Cunningham C. Combining data in phylogenetic analyses. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11:1996;152-157.
32. Jackman T. R., Applebaum G., Wake D. B. Phylogenetic relationships of Bolitoglossine salamanders: A demonstration of the effects of combining morphological and molecular data sets. Mol. Biol and Evol. 14:1997;883-891.
33. Källersjö M., Farris J. S., Kluge A. G., Bult C. Skewness and permutation. Cladistics. 8:1992;275-287.
34. Kim C. B., Moon S. Y., Gelder S. R., Kim W. Phylogenetic relationships of annelids, molluscs and arthropods evidenced from molecules and morphology. J. Mol. Evol. 43:1996;207-215.
35. Kim K.-J., Jansen R. K. Comparisons of phylogenetic hypotheses among different data sets in dwarf dandelions (Krigia, Asteracae): Additional information from internal transcribed spacer sequences of nuclear ribosomal DNA. Plant Syst. Evol. 190:1994;157-185.
36. Kluge A. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Zool. 38:1989;7-25.
37. Kluge A., Farris J. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Syst. Zool. 18:1969;1-32.
38. Lafay B., Smith A. B., Christen R. A combined morphological and molecular approach to the phylogeny of asteroids (Asteroidea: Echinodermata). Syst. Biol. 44:1995;190-208.
39. Lamboy W. F. The accuracy of the maximum parsimony method for phylogenetic reconstruction with morphological characters. Syst. Biol. 19:1994;489-505.
40. Lanyon S. Phylogenetic frameworks: Towards a finer foundation for comparative approach. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 49:1993;45-61.
41. Larson A. The comparison of morphological and molecular data in phylogenetic systematics. Molecular Ecology and Evolution: Approaches and Applications. 1994;Birkhausr Verlag, Basel. p. 371-390.
42. Lee C. S., McCool B. A., Hillis D. M., Gilbert L. E. Phylogenetic study of heliconiine butterflies based on morphology and restriction analysis of ribosomal RNA genes. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 106:1992;121-132.
43. Livezy B. A phylogenetic analysis and classification of recent dabbling ducks (tribe Anatini) based on comparative anatomy. Auk. 108:1991;471-507.
44. Lutzoni F., Vilgalys R. Integration of morphological and molecular data sets in estimating fungal phylogenies. Can. J. Bot. 73:1994;S649-S659.
45. Lutzoni F. M. Phylogeny of lichen- and non-lichen-forming omphalinoid mushrooms and the utility of testing for combinability among multiple data sets. Syst. Biol. 46:1997;373-406.
46. Mayden R. L., Kuhajda B. R. Systematics, taxonomy and conservation of the endangered Alabama sturgeon,Scaphirhynchus suttkusi. Copeia. 2:1996;241-273.
47. Mickevich M., Farris S. The implications of congruence in Menidia. Syst. Zool. 30:1981;351-370.
48. Miller J. S. Phylogeny of the moth tribe Josiini (Neotontidae: Dioptinae): A hidden case of Mullerian mimicry. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 118:1996;1-45.
49. Miller J. S., Brower A. V. Z., DeSalle R. Phylogeny of the neotropical moth tribe Josiini (Notodontidae: Dioptinae): Comparing and combining evidence from DNA sequences and morphology. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 60:1997;297-316.
50. Miyamoto M. Consensus cladograms and general classifications. Cladistics. 1:1985;186-189.
51. Miyamoto M., Fitch W. Testing species phylogenies and phylogenetic methods with congruence. Syst. Biol. 44:1995;64-76.
52. Miyamoto M. M. A congruence study of the molecular and morphological data for eutherian mammals. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 6:1996;373-390.
53. Morton C. M., Mori S. A., Prance G. T., Karol K. G., Chase M. W. Phylogenetic relationships of Lecythidiaceae: A cladistic analysis using rbcL sequence and morphological data. Amer. J. Bot. 84:1997;530-540.
54. Nixon K., Carpenter J. On simultaneous analysis. Cladistics. 12:1996;221-241.
55. Omland K. C. Character congruence between molecular and morphological phylogeny for dabbling ducks. Syst. Biol. 43:1994;369-386.
56. Parker A. Combining molecular and morphological data in fish systematics: Examples from Cyprinodontiformes. Stepien C. A., Kocher T. D. Molecular Evolution of Fishes. 1997;163-183 Academic Press, San Diego.
57. Patterson C. Molecules and Morphology in Evolution: Conflict or Compromise. 1988;Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
58. Patterson C., Williams D. M., Humphries C. J. Congruence between molecular and morphological phylogenies. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 24:1993;153-188.
59. Pennington R. T. Molecular and morphological data provide phylogenetic resolution at different hierarchical levels of Andira. Syst. Biol. 45:1996;496-515.
60. Piano F., Craddock E. M., Kambysellis M. P. Phylogeny of the island populations of the HawaiianDrosophila grimshawi. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 7:1997;173-184.
61. Poe S. Data set incongruence and the phylogeny of crocodilians. Syst. Biol. 45:1996;393-414.
62. Potter D., Doyle J. J. Phylogeny and systematics of Sphenostylis and Nesphostylis (Leguminosae: Phaseolae) based on morphological and chloroplast DNA data. Syst. Bot. 19:1992;389-406.
63. Pryer K. M., Smith A. R., Skog J. E. Phylogenetic relationships of extant ferns based on evidence from morphology and rbcL sequences. Amer. Fern. J. 85:1995;205-282.
64. Reeder T. W., Weins J. J. Evolution of the lizard family Phrysomatidae as inferred from diverse types of data. Herp. Monogr. 10:1996;43-84.
65. Remsen J., DeSalle R. Character congruence of multiple data partitions and the origin of the Hawaiian Drosophilidae. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 9:1998;225-235.
66. Sanderson M., Donoghue M. Patterns of variation in levels of homoplasy. Evolution. 43:1989;1781-1795.
67. Shaffer H. B., Meylan P., McKnight M. L. Tests of turtle phylogeny: Molecular, morphological, and paleontological approaches. Syst. Biol. 46:1997;235-268.
68. Sheahan M. C., Chase M. W. A phylogenetic analysis of Zygophyllaceae R.Br. based on morphological, anatomical and rbcL DNA sequence data. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 122:1996;279-300.
69. Siddall, M. 1997, ARNIE.EXE. Program and Documentation in the Random Cladistics Package, ftp://zoo.toronto.edu/pub.
70. Sites J. W., Davis S. K., Guerra T., Iverson J. B., Snell H. L. Character congruence and phylogenetic signal in molecular and morphological data sets: A case study in the living iguanas (Squamata, Iguanidae). Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:1996;1087-1105.
71. Smith A. B., LaFay B., Christen R. Comparative variation of morphological and molecular evolution through geologic time: 28S ribosomal RNA versus morphology in echinoids. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London B. 338:1992;365-382.
72. Swofford, D. 1993, Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony, version 3.1.1, Illinois Natural History Museum, Champaign.
73. Tehler A. Morphological data, molecular data and total evidence in phylogenetic analysis. Can. J. Bot. 73:1995;S667-S676.
74. Titus T., Frost D. Molecular homology assessment and phylogeny in the lizard family Opluridae (Squamata: Iguania). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 6:1995;49-62.
75. Tolson P. J. Phylogenetics of boid snake genusEpicrates. Occ. Papers Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 715:1987;1-68.
76. Vane-Wright R. I., Schulz S., Boppre M. The cladistics of Amauris butterflies: Congruence, consensus and total evidence. Cladistics. 8:1992;125-138.
77. Williams S. E., Albert V. A., Chase M. W. Relationships of Droseraceaea: A cladistic analysis of rbcL sequence and morphological data. Amer. J. Bot. 81:1994;1027-1037.
78. Yoder A. Relative position of the Cheirogaleidae in strepsihrine phylogeny: A comparison of morphological and molecular methods and results. Am. J. Phys. Anthropoe. 94:1994;25-46.
79. Yoder A., Cartmill M., Ruvolo M., Smith K., Gilgalys R. Ancient single origin for Malagasy primates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 93:1996;5122-5126.