Molecular evolution of the Wingless gene and its implications for the phylogenetic placement of the butterfly family riodinidae (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea)

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 684-696

  Campbell, Dana L ^a   Brower, Andrew V Z ^b   Pierce, Naomi E ^b  

^a Bldg 142   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

Gene utility; Lycaenidae; Maximum likelihood; Molecular phylogenetics; Nymphalidae; Riodinidae; Third codon positions; Wingless

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; BUTTERFLY; CONTROLLED STUDY; GENE FUNCTION; GENETIC ANALYSIS; LEPIDOPTERA; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; MOLECULAR GENETICS; NONHUMAN; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PHYLOGENY; TAXONOMY;

EID: 0034103013     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026347     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. BREMER, K. 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution 42:795-803.
2. _. 1994. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics 1: 295-304.
3. BROWER, A. V. Z. 1994. Phylogeny of Heliconius butterflies inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 3:159-174.
4. BROWER, A. V. Z., and R. DESALLE. 1998. Patterns of mitochondrial versus nuclear DNA sequence divergence among nymphalid butterflies: the utility of wingless as a source of characters for phylogenetic inference. Insect Mol. Biol. 7: 1-10.
5. BROWER, A. V. Z., and M. EGAN. 1997. Cladistic analysis of Heliconius butterflies and relatives (Nymphalidae: Heliconiiti): a revised phylogenetic position for Eueides based on sequences from mtDNA and a nuclear gene. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 264:969-977.
6. CAMPBELL, D. L., and N. E. PIERCE. 2000. Relationships of the Riodinidae (Lepidoptera) and phylogenetic placement with respect to other butterfly families: implications for the evolution of ant association? In C. BOGGS, W. WATT, and P. EHRLICH, eds. Ecology and evolution taking flight: butterflies as model study systems. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (in press).
7. CARPENTER, J. M. 1988. Choosing among equally parsimonious cladograms. Cladistics 4:291-296.
8. CARROLL, S. B., J. GATES, D. N. KEYS, S. W. PADDOCK, G. E. F. PANGANIBAN, J. E. SELEGUE, and J. A. WILLIAMS. 1994. Pattern formation and eyespot determination in butterfly wings. Science 265:109-114.
9. COUSO, J. P., S. A. BISHOP, and A. MARTINEZ ARIAS. 1994. The wingless signaling pathway and the patterning of the wing margin in Drosophila. Development 120:621-636.
10. CROZIER, R. H., and Y. C. CROZIER. 1993. The mitochondrial genome of the honeybee Apis mellifera: complete sequence and genome organization. Genetics 133:97-117.
11. DAVIS, J. I. 1995. A phylogenetic structure for the monocotyledons, as inferred from chloroplast DNA restriction site variation, and a comparison of measures of clade support. Syst. Bot. 20:503-527.
12. DE JONG, R., R. I. VANE-WRIGHT, and P. R. ACKERY. 1996. The higher classification of butterflies (Lepidoptera): problems and prospects. Entomol. Scand. 27:65-101.
13. DEVRIES, P. J. 1991. Evolutionary and ecological patterns in myrmecophilous riodinid butterflies. Pp. 143-156 in C. R. HUXLEY and D. F. CUTLER, eds. Oxford surveys in evolutionary biology, Vol. 4. Ant-plant interactions. Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.
14. _. 1997. The butterflies of Costa Rica and their natural history, Vol. 2. Riodinidae. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
15. DONOGHUE, M. J., R. G. OLMSTEAD, J. F. SMITH, and J. D. PALMER. 1992. Phylogenetic relationships of dipsacales based on rbcL sequences. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 79:333-345.
16. EHRLICH, P. R. 1958. The comparative morphology, phylogeny and higher classification of the butterflies (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea). Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 8:305-370.
17. EHRLICH, P. R., and A. EHRLICH. 1967. The phenetic relationships of the butterflies I. Adult taxonomy and the nonspecificity hypothesis. Syst. Zool. 16:301-317.
18. ELIOT, J. N. 1973. The higher classification of the Lycaenidae (Lepidoptera): a tentative arrangement. Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. 281-505.
19. FARRIS, J. S. 1969. A successive approximations approach to character weighting. Syst. Zool. 18:374-385.
20. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1995. PHYLIP (phylogeny inference package). Version 3.57. Distributed by the author, Department of Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle.
21. FIEDLER, K. 1991. Systematic, evolutionary and ecological implications of myrmecophily within the Lycaenidae (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea). Bonn. Zool. Monogr. 31:1-210.
22. FRATÍ, F., C. Simon, J. Sullivan, and D. L. SWOFFORD. 1997. Evolution of the mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase II gene in Collembola. J. Mol. Evol. 44:145-158.
23. FRIEDLANDER, T. P., J. C. REGIER, and C. MITTER. 1994. Phylogenetic information content of five nuclear gene sequences in animals: initial assessment of character sets from concordance and divergence studies. Syst. Biol. 43:511-525.
24. FRIEDLANDER, T. P., J. C. REGIER, C. MITTER, and D. L. WAGNER. 1996. A nuclear gene for higher level phylogenetics: phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase tracks Mesozoic-age divergences within Lepidoptera (Insecta). Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:594-604.
25. GALTIER, N., and M. GOUY. 1988. Inferring pattern and process: maximum-likelihood implementation of a nonhomogeneous model of DNA sequence evolution for phylogenetic analysis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 15:871-879.
26. GOLDMAN, N. 1993. Statistical tests of models of DNA substitution. J. Mol. Evol. 36:345-361.
27. HARVEY, D. J. 1987. The higher classification of the Riodinidae. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin.
28. _. 1991. Higher classification of the Nymphalidae. Pp. 255-273 in H. F. NIJHOUT, ed. The development and evolution of butterfly wing patterns. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.
29. HASEGAWA, M., and T. HASHIMOTO. 1993. Ribosomal RNA trees misleading? Nature 361:23.
30. HASEGAWA, M., M. KISHINO, and T. YANO. 1985. Dating the human-ape split by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Mol. Evol. 19:171-175.
31. HENIKOFF, S., and J. G. HENIKOFF. 1992. Amino acid substitution matrices from protein blocks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:10915-10919.
32. HILLIS, D. M., and J. P. HUELSENBECK. 1992. Signal, noise, and reliability in molecular phylogenetic analyses. J. Hered. 83:189-195.
33. JUKES, T. H., and C. R. CANTOR. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. Pp. 21-132 in H. N. MUNRO, ed. Mammalian protein metabolism. Academic Press, New York.
34. KÄLLERSJÖ, M., J. S. FARRIS, A. G. KLUGE, and C. BULT. 1992. Skewness and permutation. Cladistics 8:275-287.
35. KIMURA, M. 1980. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rate of base substitution through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 16:111-120.
36. KRISTENSEN, N. P. 1976. Remarks on the family-level phylogeny of butterflies (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Rhopalocera). Z. Zool. Syst. Evol. Forsch. 14:25-33.
37. KUMAR, S., K. TAMURA, and M. NEI. 1993. MEGA: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis. Version 1.01. Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
38. KYTE, J., and R. F. DOOLITTLE. 1982. A simple method for displaying the hydropathic character of a protein. J. Mol. Biol. 157:105-132.
39. LOCKHART, P. J., C. J. HOWE, D. A. BRYANT, T. J. BEANLAND, and A. W. D. LARKUM. 1992. Substitutional bias confounds inference of cyanelle origins from sequence data. J. Mol. Evol. 34:153-162.
40. LOCKHART, P. J., M. A. STEEL, M. D. HENDY, and D. PENNY. 1994. Recovering evolutionary trees under a more realistic model of sequence evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:605-612.
41. MADDISON, W. P., and D. R. MADDISON. 1996. MacClade: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution. Version 3.06. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.
42. MANIATIS T. E., F. FRITSCH, and J. SAMBROOK. 1989. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
43. MARTIN, J. A., and D. P. PASHLEY. 1992. A molecular systematic analysis of butterfly family and some subfamily relationships (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 85:127-139.
44. MASON-GAMER, R. J., C. F. WEIL, and E. A. KELLOGG. 1998. Granule-bound starch synthase: structure, function, and phylogenetic utility. Mol. Biol. Evol. 15:1658-1673.
45. NAYLOR, G. J. P., T. M. COLLINS, and W. M. BROWN. 1995. Hydrophobicity and phylogeny. Nature 373:565-566.
46. ORTÍ, G., and A. MEYER. 1996. Molecular evolution of Ependymin and the phylogenetic resolution of early divergences among euteleost fishes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:556-573.
47. PERRIMON, N. 1996. Serpentine proteins slither into the wingless and hedgehog fields. Cell 86:513-516.
48. RIJSEWIJK, F., M. SCHUERMANN, E. WAGENAAR, P. PARREN, D. WEIGEL, and R. NUSSE. 1987. The Drosophila homolog of the mouse mammary oncogene int-1 is identical to the segment polarity gene wingless. Cell 50:649-657.
49. ROBBINS, R. K. 1988a. Comparative morphology of the butterfly foreleg coxa and trochanter (Lepidoptera) and its systematic implications. Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 90:133-154.
50. _. 1988b. Male foretarsal variation in Lycaenidae and Riodinidae and the systematic placement of Styx infernalis (Lepidoptera). Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash. 90:356-368.
51. SACCONE, C., G. PESOLE, and G. PREPARATA. 1989. DNA microenvironments and the molecular clock. J. Mol. Evol. 29: 407-411.
52. SAITOU, N., and M. NEI. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4: 406-425.
53. SCOBLE, M. J. 1986. The structure and affinities of the Hedyloidea: a new concept of the butterflies. Bull. Br. Mus. Nat. Hist. Entomol. Ser. 53:251-286.
54. _. 1988. Hedylidae: a response to Weintraub and Miller. Cladistics 4:93-96.
55. SCOTT, J. A., and D. M. WRIGHT. 1990. Butterfly phylogeny and fossils. Pp. 152-208 in O. KUDRNA, ed. Butterflies of Europe. Vol. 2. Aula-Verlag, Wiesbaden, Germany.
56. SHIELDS, D. C., P. M. SHARP, D. G. HIGGINS, and F. WRIGHT. 1988. "Silent" sites in Drosophila genes are not neutral: evidence of selection among synonymous codons. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5:704-716.
57. SIDOW, A. 1992. Diversification of the Wnt gene family on the ancestral lineage of vertebrates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 89: 5098-5102.
58. STEEL, M. A., P. J. LOCKHART, and D. PENNY. 1993. Confidence in evolutionary trees from biological sequence data. Nature 364:440-442.
59. SULLIVAN, J., J. A. MARKERT, and W. KILPATRICK. 1997. Phylogeography and molecular systematics of the Peromyscus aztecus species group (Rodentia: Muridae) inferred using parsimony and likelihood. Syst. Bio. 46(3):426-440.
60. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1998. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony and other methods. Test versions 4.0.0 d54, d59. Laboratory of Molecular Systematics, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C.
61. SWOFFORD, D. L., G. J. OLSEN, P. J. WADDELL, and D. M. HILLIS. 1996. Phylogenetic inference. Pp. 407-514 in D. HILLIS, C. MORITZ, and B. K. MABLE, eds. Molecular systematics. 2nd edition. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.
62. TAYLOR, P. L. 1991. Gene Jockey. Version 1.20. BIOSOFT, Cambridge, England.
63. WAKELEY, J. 1996. The excess of transitions among nucleotide substitutions: new methods of estimating transition bias underscore its significance. TREE 11:158-163.
64. WELLER, S. J., D. P. PASHLEY, and J. A. MARTIN. 1996. Reassessment of butterfly family relationships using independent genes and morphology. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 89: 184-192.
65. WRIGHT, F. 1990. The 'effective number of codons' used in a gene. Gene 87:23-29.
66. YANG, Z. 1993. Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogeny from DNA sequences when substitution rates differ over sites. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:1396-1401.
67. _. 1994. Estimating the pattern of nucleotide substitution. J. Mol. Evol. 39:105-111.
68. _. 1996. Among-site rate variation and its impact on phylogenetic analyses. TREE 11:367-372.
69. _ 1997. Phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood (PAML). Version 1.3. Department of Integrative Biology, University of California at Berkeley.
70. _. 1998. On the best evolutionary rate for phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 47:125-133.
71. YANG, Z., N. GOLDMAN, and A. FRIDAY. 1994. Comparison of models for nucleotide substitution used in maximum-likelihood phylogenetic estimation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:316-324.