Phylogeny of frogs of the Physalaemus Pustulosus species group, with an examination of data incongruence

Systematic Biology

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 311-335

  Cannatella, David C ^a   Hillis, David M ^a   Chippindale, Paul T ^a,b   Weigt, Lee ^c   Rand, A Stanley ^c   Ryan, Michael J ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT ARLINGTON   (United States)

^c FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Advertisement calls; Behavior; Combined data analysis; Data partitions; Frogs; Leptodactylidae; Physalaemus; Sensory exploitation hypothesis

Indexed keywords

ANURA; LEPTODACTYLIDAE; PHYSALAEMUS; PHYSALAEMUS PUSTULOSUS;

CYTOCHROME C OXIDASE; ISOENZYME; MITOCHONDRIAL DNA; PRIMER DNA; RIBOSOME DNA; RIBOSOME RNA; RNA, RIBOSOMAL, 12S;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; GENETICS; MOLECULAR GENETICS; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; TOAD;

ANIMALS; BASE SEQUENCE; BUFONIDAE; DNA PRIMERS; DNA, MITOCHONDRIAL; DNA, RIBOSOMAL; ELECTRON TRANSPORT COMPLEX IV; ISOENZYMES; MOLECULAR SEQUENCE DATA; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RNA, RIBOSOMAL; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY, NUCLEIC ACID; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0032095588     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/106351598260932     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. BARRETT, M., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND E. SOBER. 1991. Against consensus. Syst. Biol. 40:486-493.
2. BREMER, K. 1994. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics 10:295-304.
3. BULL, J. J., J. P. HUELSENBECK, C. W. CUNNINGHAM, D. L. SWOFFORD, AND P. J. WADDELL. 1993. Partitioning and combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42:384-397.
4. CANNATELLA, D. C., AND W. E. DUELLMAN. 1984. Leptodactylid frogs of the Physalaemus pustulosus group. Copeia 1984:902-921.
5. CHIPPINDALE, P. T., AND J. J. WIENS. 1994. Weighting, partitioning, and combining characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 43:278-87.
6. COCROFT, R. B., AND M. J. RYAN. 1995. Patterns of advertisement call evolution in toads and chorus frogs. Anim. Behav. 49:283-303.
7. DE QUEIROZ, A., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND J. KIM. 1996. Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:657-681.
8. DE QUEIROZ, A., AND P. H. WIMBERGER. 1993. The usefulness of behavior for phylogeny estimation: Levels of homoplasy in behavioral and morphological characters. Evolution 47:46-60.
9. DINGERKUS, G., AND L. D. UHLER. 1977. Enzyme clearing of alcian blue stained whole small vertebrates for demonstration of cartilage. Stain Tech. 52:229-232.
10. EERNISSE, D. J., AND A. G. KLUGE. 1993. Taxonomic congruence versus total evidence, and amniote phylogeny inferred from fossils, molecules, and morphology. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:1170-1195.
11. ERIKSSON, T. 1996. AutoDecay, version 2.9.5. Botaniska Institutionen, Stockholm University, Stockholm.
12. FAITH, D. P. 1991. Cladistic permutation tests for monophyly and nonmonophyly. Syst. Zool. 40:366-375.
13. FAITH, D. P., AND J. W. O. BALLARD. 1994. Length differences and topology-dependent tests: a response to Källersjö et al. Cladistics 10:57-64.
14. FAITH, D. P., AND P. S. CRANSTON. 1991. Could a cladogram this short have arisen by chance alone?: On permutation tests for cladistic structure. Cladistics 7:1-28.
15. FARRIS, J. S., M. KÄLLERSJÖ, A. G. KLUGE, AND C. BULT. 1994. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10:315-319.
16. FARRIS, J. S., M. KÄLLERSJÖ, A. G. KLUGE, AND C. BULT. 1995. Constructing a significance test for incongruence. Syst. Biol. 44:570-572.
17. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies with a molecular clock. Syst. Zool. 34:152-161.
18. FOSTER, S. A., W. A. CRESKO, K. P. JOHNSON, M. U. TLUSTY, AND H. E. WILLMOTT. 1996. Patterns of homoplasy in behavioral evolution. Pages 245-269 in Homoplasy: The recurrence of similarity in evolution (M. J. Sanderson and L. Hufford, eds.). Academic Press, San Diego.
19. GITTLEMAN, J. L., C. G. ANDERSON, M. KOT, AND H.-K. LUH. 1996. Phylogenetic lability and rates of evolution: a comparison of behavioral, morphological, and life history traits. Pages 166-205 in Phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior (E. P. Martins, ed.). Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
20. HENDY, M. D., C. H. C. LITTLE, AND D. PENNY. 1984. Comparing trees with pendant vertices labelled. SIAM J. Appl. Math. 44:1054-1065.
21. HILLIS, D. M. 1991. Discriminating between phylogenetic signal and random noise in DNA sequences. Pages 278-294 in Phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences (M. M. Miyamoto and J. Cracraft, eds.). Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, New York.
22. HILLIS, D. M., AND J. J. BULL. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42:182-192.
23. HILLIS, D. M., B. K. MABLE, A. LARSON, S. K. DAVIS, AND E. A. ZIMMER. 1996. Nucleic acids IV: Sequencing and cloning. Pages 321-381 in Molecular systematics, 2nd edition (D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B. K. Mable, eds.). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
24. HUELSENBECK, J. P. 1991. Tree-length distribution skewness: An indicator of phylogenetic information. Syst. Zool. 40:257-270.
25. HUELSENBECK, J. P. 1995. Performance of phylogenetic methods in simulation. Syst. Biol. 44:17-48.
26. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND J. J. BULL. 1996. A likelihood ratio test to detect conflicting phylogenetic signal. Syst. Biol. 45:92-98.
27. INTERNATIONAL UNION OF BIOCHEMISTRY, NOMENCLATURE. COMMITTEE. 1984. Enzyme nomenclature. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.
28. IRWIN, R. E. 1996. The phylogenetic content of avian courtship display and song evolution. Pages 234-252 in Phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior (E. P. Martins, ed.). Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
29. KÄLLERSJÖ, M., J. S. FARRIS, A. G. KLUGE, AND C. BULT. 1992. Skewness and permutation. Cladistics 8:275-287.
30. KENNEDY, M., H. G. SPENCER, AND R. D. GRAY. 1996. Hop, step, and gape: Do the social displays of the Pelecaniformes reflect phylogeny? Anim. Behav. 51:273-291.
31. KIRKPATRICK, M., AND M. J. RYAN. 1991. The paradox of the lek and the evolution of mating preferences. Nature 350:33-38.
32. LARSON, A. 1994. The comparison of morphological and molecular data in phylogenetic systematics. Pages 371-390 in Molecular ecology and evolution: Approaches and applications (B. Schierwater, B. Streit, G. P. Wagner and R. DeSalle, eds.). Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel.
33. LUTZONI, F. 1997. Phylogeny of lichen- and non-lichen-forming omphalinoid mushrooms and the utility of testing for combinability among multiple data sets. Syst. Biol. 46:373-406.
34. MADDISON, W. P., AND D. R. MADDISON. 1992. MacClade, version 3. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
35. MADDISON, W., AND M. SLATKIN. 1990. Parsimony reconstructions of ancestral states do not depend on the relative distances between linearly-ordered character states. Syst. Zool. 39:175-178.
36. MADDISON, D. R., D. L. SWOFFORD, AND W. P. MADDISON. 1997. NEXUS: An extensible file format for systematic information. Syst. Biol. 46:590-621.
37. MARTINS, E. P. (ed.). 1996. Phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
38. MASON-GAMER, R. J., AND E. A. KELLOGG. 1996. Testing for phylogenetic conflict among molecular data sets in the tribe Triticeae (Gramineae). Syst. Biol. 45:522-543.
39. MURPHY, R. M., J. W. SITES, JR., D. G. BUTH, AND C. H. HAUFLER. 1996. Proteins: Isozyme electrophoresis. Pages 51-120 in Molecular systematics, 2nd edition (D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B. K. Mable, eds.). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
40. OLMSTEAD, R. G., AND J. A. SWEERE. 1994. Combining data in phylogenetic systematics: An empirical approach using three molecular data sets in the Solanaceae. Syst. Biol. 43:467-481.
41. PALUMBI, S. R. 1996. Nucleic acids II: The polymerase chain reaction. Pages 205-247 in Molecular systematics, 2nd edition (D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B. K. Mable, eds.). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
42. PENNY, D., AND M. D. HENDY. 1985. The use of tree comparison metrics. Syst. Zool. 34:75-82.
43. POE, S. A. 1996. Data set incongruence and the phylogeny of crocodilians. Syst. Biol. 45:393-414.
44. POMIANKOWSKI, A. 1994. Swordplay and sensory bias. Nature 368:494-495.
45. RAND, A. S., M. J. RYAN, AND W. WILCZYNSKI. 1992. Signal redundancy and receiver permissiveness in acoustic mate recognition by the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus. Am. Zool. 32:81-90.
46. RICE, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223-225.
47. RYAN, M. J. 1980. Female mate choice in a neotropical frog. Science 209:523-525.
48. RYAN, M. J. 1985. The túngara frog: A study in sexual selection and communication. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago.
49. RYAN, M. J. 1990. Sensory systems, sexual selection, and sensory exploitation. Oxford Surveys Evolut. Biol. 7:157-195.
50. RYAN, M. J. 1996. Phylogenetics in behavior: some cautions and expectations. Pages 1-21 in Phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior (E. P. Martins, ed.). Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
51. RYAN, M. J., M. D. TUTTLE, AND A. S. RAND. 1982. Sexual advertisement and bat predation in a Neotropical frog. Am. Nat. 119:136139.
52. RYAN, M. J., R. B. COCROFT, AND A. S. RAND. 1990a. The role of environmental selection in intraspecific divergence of mate recognition signals in the cricket frog, Acris crepitans. Evolution 44:1869-1872.
53. RYAN, M. J., J. H. FOX, W. WILCZYNSKI, AND A. S. RAND. 1990b. Sexual selection for sensory exploitation in the frog Physalaemus pustulosus. Nature 343:66-67.
54. RYAN, M. J., AND A. S. RAND. 1993. Sexual selection and signal evolution: The ghost of biases past. Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. Ser. B. 340:187-195.
55. RYAN, M. J., AND A. S. RAND. 1995. Female responses to ancestral advertisement calls in túngara frogs. Science 269:390-392.
56. RYAN, M. J., A. S. RAND, AND L. WEIGT. 1996. Geographic variation in allozyme and advertisement calls in the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus. Evolution 50:2435-2453.
57. RYAN, M. J., AND W. WILCZYNSKI. 1988. Coevolution of sender and receiver: Effect on local mate preference in cricket frogs. Science 240:1786-1788.
58. RYAN, M. J., AND W. WILCZYNSKI. 1991. Evolution of intraspecific variation in the advertisement call of a cricket frog (Acris crepitans, Hylidae). Biol. Journal Linn. Soc. 44:249-271.
59. SHAW, K. L. 1996a. Sequential radiations and patterns of speciation in the Hawaiian cricket genus Laupala inferred from DNA sequences. Evolution 50:237-255.
60. SHAW, K. L. 1996b. Polygenic inheritance of a behavioral phenotype: Interspecific genetics of song in the Hawaiian cricket genus Laupala. Evolution 50:256-266.
61. STEEL, M. A., AND D. PENNY. 1993. Distributions of tree comparison metrics - Some new results. Syst. Biol. 42:126-141.
62. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1991. When are phytogeny estimates from molecular and morphological data incongruent? Pages 295-333 in Phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences (M. M. Miyamoto and J. Cracraft, eds.). Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
63. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1993. PAUP: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony, version 3.1. Formerly distributed by the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.
64. SWOFFORD, D. L., J. L. THORNE, J. FELSENSTEIN, AND B. M. WIEGMANN. 1996. The topology-dependent permutation test for monophyly does not test for monophyly. Syst. Biol. 46:575-579.
65. TEMPLETON, A. R. 1983. Phylogenetic inference from restriction endonuclease cleavage site maps with particular reference to the humans and apes. Evolution 37:221-244.
66. WHEELER, W. C., AND D. GLADSTEIN. 1992. MALIGN. American Museum of Natural History, New York, New York.
67. WIENS, J. J. 1995. Polymorphic characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 44:482-500.
68. WILCZYNSKI, W., A. S. RAND, AND M. J. RYAN. 1995. The processing of spectral cues by the call analysis system of the túngara frog, Physalaemus pustulosus. Anim. Behav. 49:911-929.
69. WIMBERGER, P. H., AND A. DE QUEIROZ. 1996. Comparing behavioral and morphological characters as indicators of phylogeny. Pages 203-233 in Phylogenies and the comparative method in animal behavior (E. P. Martins, ed.). Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
70. ZAR, J. 1974. Biostatistical analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.