Multiple data sets, congruence, and hypothesis testing for the phylogeny of basal groups of the lizard genus Sceloporus (squamata, phrynosomatidae)

Systematic Biology

Volumn 49, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 713-739

  Flores Villela, Oscar ^a,b   Kjer, Karl M ^a,c   Benabib, Miriam ^a,d   Sites Jr , Jack W ^a  

^a BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

^c RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d INSTITUTO DE ECOLOGÍA   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Biogeography; Character congruence; Maximum likelihood; Parsimony; Phylogeny; Sceloporus; Weighted parsimony

Indexed keywords

ENZYME;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; GENETICS; LIZARD; MOLECULAR GENETICS; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ANIMALS; BASE SEQUENCE; ENZYMES; LIZARDS; MOLECULAR SEQUENCE DATA; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0034351396     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/106351500750049798     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. AGOSTI, D., D. JACOBS, AND R. DESALLE. 1996. On combining protein sequences and nucleic acid sequences in phylogenetic analysis: the homeobox protein case. Cladistics 12:65-82.
2. ARÉVALO, E., S. K. DAVIS, AND J. W. SITES, JR. 1994. Mitochondrial DNA sequence divergence and phylogenetic relationships among eight chromosome races of the Sceloporus grammicus complex (Phrynosomatidae) in central Mexico. Syst. Biol. 43:387-418.
3. BALLARD, J. W. O., M. K. THAYER, A. F. NEWTON, JR., AND E. R. GRISMER. 1998. Data sets, partitions, and characters: philosophies and procedures for analyzing multiple data sets. Syst. Biol. 47:367-396.
4. BARBADILLA, A., L. M. KING, AND R. C. LEWONTIN. 1996. What does electrophoretic variation tell us about protein variation? Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:427-432.
5. BARRETT, M., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND E. SOBER. 1991. Against consensus. Syst. Zool. 40:486-493.
6. BENABIB, M., K. M. KJER, AND J. W. SITES, JR. 1997. Mitochondrial DNA sequence-based phylogeny and the evolution of viviparity in the Sceloporus scalaris group (Reptilia, Squamata). Evolution 51:1262-1275.
7. BOROWIK, O. A. 1995. Coding chromosomal data for phylogenetic analysis: phylogenetic resolution of the Pan-Homo-Gorilla trichotomy. Syst. Biol. 44:563-570.
8. BREMER, K. 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution 42:795-803.
9. 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.
10. CHIPPINDALE, P., AND J. J. WIENS. 1994. Weighting, partitioning, and combining characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 43:278-287.
11. COLLINS, T. M., P. H. WIMBERGER, AND J. P. NAYLOR. 1994. Compositional bias, character-state bias, and character-state reconstruction using parsimony. Syst. Biol. 43:482-196.
12. COYNE, J. 1982. Gel electrophoresis and cryptic protein variation. in Isozymes Curr. Top. Biol. Med. Res. 6:1-32.
13. CUNNINGHAM, C. W. 1997a. Can tree incongruence tests predict when data should be combined? Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:733-740.
14. CUNNINGHAM, C. W. 1997b. Is congruence between data partitions a reliable predictor of phylogenetic accurancy? Syst. Biol. 46:464-478.
15. DE QUEIROZ, K. 1982. The scleral ossicles of sceloporine iguanids: a reexamination with comments on their phylogenetic significance. Herpetologica 38:302-311.
16. DE QUEIROZ, A., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND J. KIM. 1995. Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:657-681.
17. DICKERSON, M. C. 1919. Diagnosis of twenty-three new species and a new genus of lizard from Lower California. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 61:461-477.
18. EMERSON, S. B., AND P. A. HASTINGS. 1998. Morphological correlations in evolution: consequences for phylogenetic analyses. Q. Rev. Biol. 73:141-162.
19. ESTES, R., K. DE QUEIROZ, AND J. GAUTHIER. 1988. Phylogenetic relationships within squamata. Pages 119-281 in Phylogenetic relationships of the lizard families (R. Estes and G. Pregill, eds.). Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, California.
20. ETHERIDGE, R. E., AND K. DE QUEIROZ. 1988. A phylogeny of Iguanidae. Pages 283-368 in Phylogenetic relationships of the lizard families (R. Estes and G. Pregill, eds.). Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, California.
21. FARRIS, J. S. 1969. A succesive approximations approach to character weighting. Syst. Zool. 18:374-385.
22. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27:401-410.
23. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1981a. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximum likelihood approach. J. Mol. Evol. 17:368-376.
24. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1981b. A likelihood approach to character weighting and what it tells us about parsimony and compatibility. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 16:183-196.
25. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783-791.
26. FROST, D. R., AND R. E. ETHERIDGE. 1989. A phylogenetic analysis and taxonomy of iguanian lizards (Reptilia: Squamata). Misc. Publ. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Kans. 81:1-65.
27. FROST, D. R., AND R. M. TIM. 1992. Phylogeny of plecotine bats (Chiroptera: "Vespertilionidae"): summary of the evidence and proposal for a logically consistent taxonomy. Am. Mus. Novit. 3034:1-16.
28. GIVNISH, T. J., AND K. J. SYTSMA. 1997. Consistency, characters, and the likelihood of correct phylogenetic inference. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 7:320-330.
29. GRISMER, L. L. 1994a. The origin and evolution of the peninsular herpetofauna of Baja California, Mexico. Herpetol. Nat. Hist. 2:51-106.
30. GRISMER, L. L. 1994b. Geographic origins for the reptiles on islands in the Gulf of California, Mexico. Herpetol. Nat. Hist. 2:17-40.
31. GUTELL, R. R. 1994. Collection of small subunit (16S and 16S-like) ribosomal RNA structures: 1994. Nucleic Acids Res. 22:3502-3507.
32. GUTELL, R. R., N. LARSEN, AND C. R. WOESE. 1994. Lessons from an evolving rRNA: 16S and 23S rRNA structures from a comparative perspective. Microbiol. Rev. 58:10-26.
33. HALL, W. P. 1973. Comparative population cytogenetics, speciation, and evolution of the crevice-using species of Sceloporus. Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Massachusetts.
34. HALL, W. P. 1980. Chromosomes, speciation, and evolution of Mexican iguanid lizards. Natl. Geogr. Soc. Res. Rep. 12:309-329.
35. HALL, W. P. 1983. Modes of speciation and evolution in sceloporine iguanid lizards. I. Epistemology of the comparative approach and introduction to the problem. Pages 643-679 in Advances in herpetology and evolutionary biology (A. G. J. Rhodin and K. Miyata, eds.). Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Massachusetts.
36. HASEGAWA, M., AND M. FUJIWARA, 1993. Relative efficiencies of the maximum likelihood, maximum parsomony, and neighbor-joining methods for estimating protein phylogeny. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2:1-5.
37. HASEGAWA, M., H. KISHINO, AND T. YANO. 1985. Dating the human-ape split by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Mol. Evol. 21:160-174.
38. HÅSTAD, O., AND M. BJÖRKLUND. 1998. Nucleotide substitution models and estimation of phylogeny. Mol. Biol. Evol. 15:1381-1389.
39. HILLIS, D. M., AND S. K. DAVIS. 1986. Evolution of ribosomal DNA: fifty million years of recorded history in the frog genus Rana. Evolution 40:1275-1288.
40. HILLIS, D. M., J. J. BULL, M. E. WHITE, M. R. BADGETT, AND I. J. MOLINEUX. 1992. Experimental phylogenetics: generation of a known phylogeny. Science 255:589-592.
41. HILLIS, D. M., J. P. HUELSENBECK, AND C. W. CUNNINGHAM. 1994a. Applications and accuracy of molecular phylogenies. Science 264:671-677.
42. HILLIS, D. M., J. P. HUELSENBECK, AND D. L. SWOFFORD. 1994b. Hobglobin of phylogenetics? Nature 36:363-364.
43. HOCHBERG, Y. 1988. A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 75:800-802.
44. HUELSENBECK, J. P. 1995. Performance of phylogenetic methods in simulation. Syst. Biol. 44:17-48.
45. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND K. A. CRANDALL. 1997. Phylogeny estimation and hypothesis testing using-maximum likelihood. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 28:437-466.
46. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND D. M. HILLIS. 1993. Success of phylogenetic methods in the four-taxon case. Syst. Biol. 42:247-264.
47. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND B. RANNALA. 1997. Phylogenetic methods come of age: testing hypotheses in an evolutionary context. Science 276:227-232.
48. HUELSENBECK, J. P., D. M. HILLIS, AND R. JONES. 1996a. Parametric bootstrapping in molecular phylogenetics: applications and performance. Pages 19-45 in Molecular zoology (J. D. Ferraris and S. R. Palumbi, eds.). Wiley, New York.
49. HUELSENBECK, J. P., D. M. HILLIS, AND R. NIELSEN. 1996b. A likelihood-ratio test of monophyly. Syst. Biol. 45:546-558.
50. INTERNATIONAL UNION OF BIOCHEMISTRY NOMENCLATURE COMMITTEE. 1984. Enzyme nomenclature, 1984. Academic Press, Orlando, Florida.
51. JUKES, T. H., AND C. R. CANTOR. 1969. Evolution of protein molecular. Pages 21-123 in Mammalian protein metabolism (H. N. Munro, ed.). Academic Press, New York.
52. KIM, J. 1993. Improving the accuracy of phylogenetic estimation by combining different methods. Syst. Biol. 42:331-340.
53. KISHINO, H., AND M. HASEGAWA. 1989. Evaluation of maximum likelihood estimate of the evolutionary tree topologies from DNA sequence data, and the branching order in Hominoidea. J. Mol. Evol. 29:170-179.
54. KJER, K. M. 1995. Use of rRNA secondary structure in phylogenetic studies to identify homologous positions: an example of alignment and data presentation from the frogs. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 4:314-330.
55. KJER, K. M. 1997. Conserved primary and secondary structural motifs of amphibian 12S rRNA, domain III. J. Herpetol. 31:599-604.
56. KJER, K. M., G. D. BALDRIDGE, AND A. M. FALLON. 1994. Mosquito large subunit ribosomal RNA: simultaneous alignment of primary and secondary structure. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1217:147-155.
57. KUMAR, S., K. TAMURA, AND M. NEI. 1993. MEGA: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis, ver. 1.01. Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pennsylvania.
58. KUMAZAWA, Y., AND M. NISHIDA. 1993. Sequence evolution of mitochondrial tRNA genes and deep-branch animal phylogenetics. J. Mol. Evol. 37:380-398.
59. LARSEN, K. R., AND W. W. TANNER. 1974. Numeric analysis of the lizard genus Sceloporus with special reference to cranial osteology. Great Basin Nat. 34:1-41.
60. LARSEN, K. R., AND W. W. TANNER. 1975. Evolution of the sceloporine lizards (Iguanidae). Great Basin Nat. 35:1-20.
61. LARSEN, N. 1992. Higher order interactions of 23S rRNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:5044-5048.
62. LARSON, A. 1994. The comparison of morphological and molecular data in phylogenetic systematics. Pages 371-390 in Molecular ecology and evolution (B. Schierwater, S. Streit, G. P. Wagner, and R. DeSalle, eds.). Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland.
63. LESSA, E. P., AND G. APPLEBAUM. 1993. Screening techniques for detecting allelic variation in DNA sequences. Mol. Ecol. 2:119-129.
64. MABEE, P. M., AND J. HUMPHRIES. 1993. Coding polymorphic data: examples from allozymes and ontogeny. Syst. Biol. 42:166-181.
65. MINK, D. G., AND J. W. SITES, JR. 1996. Species limits, phylogenetic relationships, and origins of viviparity in the Scalaris complex of the lizard genus Sceloporus (Phrynosomatidae: Sauria). Herpetologica 52:551-571.
66. MIYAMOTO, M. M., AND W. M. FITCH. 1995a. Testing species phylogenies and phylogenetic methods with congruence. Syst. Biol. 44:64-76.
67. MIYAMOTO, M. M., AND W. M. FITCH. 1995b. Testing the covarion hypothesis of molecular evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:503-513.
68. MORITZ, C., C. J. SCHNEIDER, AND D. B. WAKE. 1992. Evolutionary relationships within the Ensatina eschscholtzii complex confirm the ring species interpretation. Syst. Biol. 41:273-291.
69. MURPHY, R. W. 1975. Two new blind snakes (Serpentes: Leptotyphlopidae) from Baja California, Mexico with a contribution to the biogeography of peninsular and insular herpetofauna. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. 40:87-92.
70. MURPHY, R. W. 1983a. Paleobiogeography and genetic differentiaton of the Baja California Herpetofauna. Occ. Pap. Calif. Acad. Sci. 137:1-48.
71. MURPHY, R. W. 1983b. The reptiles: origins and evolution. Pages 130-158 in Island biogeography in the Sea of Cortez (T. J. Case and M. L. Cody, eds.). Univ. California Press, Los Angeles.
72. MURPHY, R. W., J. W. SITES, JR., D. G. BUTH, AND C. H. HAUFLER. 1996. Proteins: isozyme electrophoresis. Pages 51-120 in Molecular systematics. (D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B. K. Mable, eds.). Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
73. PORTER, C. A., M. J. HAMILTON, J. W. SITES, JR., AND R. J. BAKER. 1991. Location of ribosomal DNA in chromosomes of squamate reptiles: systematic and evolutionary implications. Herpetologica 47:271-280.
74. POSADA, D., AND K. A. CRANDALL. 1998. MODELTEST: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14:817-818.
75. REEDER, T. W. 1995. Phylogenetic relationships among phrynosomatid lizards as inferred from mitochondrial ribosomal DNA sequences: substitutional bias and information content of transitions relative to transversions. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 4:203-222.
76. REEDER, T. W., AND J. J. WIENS. 1996. Evolution of the lizard family Phrynosomatidae as inferred from diverse types of data. Herpetol. Monogr. 10:43-84.
77. RICE, W. R. 1989. Analyzing tables of statistical tests. Evolution 43:223-225.
78. RODRÍGUEZ, F. J., J. L. OLIVER, A. MARÍN, AND J. R. MEDINA. 1990. The general stochastic model of nucleotide substitution. J. Theor. Biol. 142:485-501.
79. SCHMIDT, K. P. 1922. The amphibians and reptiles of Lower California and neighboring islands. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 46:607-707.
80. SCHULTE, J. A., II, J. R. MACEY, A. LARSON, AND T. J. PAPENFUSS. 1998. Molecular tests of phylogenetic taxonomies: a general procedure and example using four subfamilies of the lizard family Iguanidae. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 10:367-376.
81. SIDDALL, M. E., AND A. G. KLUGE. 1997. Probabilism and phylogenetic inference. Cladistics 13:313-336.
82. SITES, J. W., JR., J. W. ARCHIE, C. J. COLE, AND O. FLORES-VILLELA. 1992. A review of phylogenetic hypotheses for lizards of the genus Scelaporus (Phrynosomatidae): implications for ecological and evolutionary studies. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 213:1-110.
83. SMITH, H. B. 1939. The Mexican and Central American lizards of the genus Sceloporus. Zool. Ser. Field Mus. Nat. Hist. 26:1-397.
84. SULLIVAN, J. 1996. Combining data with different distributions of among-site rate variation. Syst. Biol. 45:375-380.
85. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1993. PAUP: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony, ver. 3.1. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, Illinois.
86. TEMPLETON, A. 1983. Phylogenetic inference from restriction endonuclease cleavage site maps with particular reference to the evolution of humans and the apes. Evolution 37:221-244.
87. VAN DE PEER, J., M. NEEFS, P. DE RIJK, AND R. DE WACHTER. 1993. Reconstructing evolution from eukaryotic small-subunit RNA sequences: calibration of the molecular clock. J. Mol. Evol. 37:221-232.
88. VOELKER, G., AND S. V. EDWARDS. 1998. Can weighting improve bush trees? Models of cytochrome b evolution and the molecular systematics of pipits and wagtails (Aves: Motacillidae). Syst. Biol. 47:589-603.
89. WIENS, J. J. 1993. Phylogenetic relationships of phrynosomatid lizards and monophyly of the Sceloporus group. Copeia 1993:287-299.
90. WIENS, J. J. 1995. Polymorphic characters in phylogenetic systematics. Syst. Biol. 44:482-500.
91. WIENS, J. J. 1998a. Does adding characters with missing data increase or decrease phylogenetic accuracy? Syst. Biol. 47:625-640.
92. WIENS, J. J. 1998b. Combining data sets with different phylogenetic histories. Syst. Biol. 47:568-581.
93. WIENS, J. J., AND T. W. REEDER. 1995. Combining data sets with different numbers of taxa for phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 44:548-558.
94. WIENS, J. J., AND T. W. REEDER. 1997. Phylogeny of spiny lizards (Sceloporus) based on molecular and morphological evidence. Herpetol. Monogr. 11:1-101.
95. WYLES, J. S., AND G. C. GORMAN. 1978. Close relationship between the lizard genus Sator and Sceloporus utiformis (Reptilia, Lacertilia, Iguanidae): electrophoretic and immunological evidence. J. Herpetol. 12:343-350.
96. YANG, Z., N. GOLDMAN, AND A. FRIDAY. 1995. Maximum likelihood trees from DNA sequences: a peculiar statistical estimation problem. Syst. Biol. 44:384-399.