The interrelationships of Acanthomorph fishes: A total evidence approach using molecular and morphological data

Biochemical Systematics and Ecology

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 319-350

  Wiley, E O ^a,b   David Johnson, G ^b   Wheaton Dimmick, Walter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

^b DEPARTMENT OF PALEOBIOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Acanthomorpha; Acanthopterygii; Ctenosquamata; Euacanthopterygii; Molecular systematics; Paracanthopterygii; Percomorpha; Phylogenetic analysis; Smegmamorpha

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DNA SEQUENCE; MOLECULAR GENETICS; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENY; TELEOST;

EID: 0342313719     PISSN: 03051978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0305-1978(99)00069-1     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Berg, L. 1947. Classification of Fishes Both Recent and Fossil. J. W. Edwards, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 517pp.
2. Bremer K. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution. 42:1988;795-803.
3. Bremer K. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics. 10:1994;295-304.
4. Clark C.G., Tagve B.W., Gerbi S.A. Xenopus laevis 285 ribosomal RNA. a secondary structure model and its evolutionary and functional implications Nucleic Acids Res. 12(15):1984;6197-6220.
5. Dyer B.S., Chernoff B. Phylogenetic relationships among atheriniform fishes (Teleostei: Atherinomorpha). Zool. J. Linnean Soc. London B. 117:1996;1-69.
6. Felsenstein J. Confidence limits on Phylogenies. An approach using the bootstrap Evolution. 39:1985;783-791.
7. Fink W.L. Basal euteleosts. Relationships Moser H.G. Ontogeny and Systematics of Fishes. 1984;202-206 American Society Ichthyologists and Herpetologists Spec. Publ. Allen Press, Lawrence, Kansas.
8. Fink W.L., Weitzman S.H. Relationships of the stomiiform fishes (Teleostei), with a description of Diplophos. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. 150:1982;31-93.
9. Gill A.C. Comments on an intercalar path for the glossopharyngeal (Cranial IX) nerve as a synapomorphy of the Paracanthopterygii and on the phylogenetic position of the Gobiesocidae (Teleostei: Acanthomorpha). Copeia. 1997(4):1997;1022-1029.
10. Hillis D.M., Dixon M.T. Ribosomal DNA. molecular evolution and phylogenetic inference Q. Rev. Biol. 66:1991;411-453.
11. Johnson, G.D., 1992. Monophyly of the Euteleostean Clades-Neoteleostei, Eurypterygii, and Ctenosquamata. Copeia (1) 1992, 8-25.
12. Johnson G.D., Patterson C. Percomorph phylogeny. a survey of acanthomorph characters and a new proposal Bull. Mar. Sci. 52:1993;554-626.
13. Johnson G.D., Patterson C. Relationships of lower euteleostean fishes. Stiassny M.L.J., Parenti L.R., Johnson G.D. The Interrelationships of Fishes. 1996;251-331 Academic Press, San Diego, California.
14. Kumar S., Tamura K., Nei M. MEGA. Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (1.01):1993;The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
15. Kocher T.T., Meyer A., Edwards S., Paabo S., Villablanca F., Wilson A. Dynamics of mitochondrial DNA evolution in animals. Amplification and sequencing with conserved primers Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 86:1989;6196-6200.
16. Lauder G.V., Leim K.F. The evolution and interrelationships of the actinopterygian fishes. Bull. Comp. Mus. Zool. 150:1983;95-197.
17. Leviton A.E., Gibbs R.H., Heal E., Dawson C.E. Standards in hertelology and Ichthyology. Part I. Standard symbolic codes for institutional resource collections in herpetology and Ichthyology Copeia. 1985:1985;802-832.
18. Maddison D.R. The discovery and importance of multiple islands of most-parsimonious trees. Syst. Zool. 40:1991;315-328.
19. Maniatis T., Fristch E.F., Sambrook J. Molecular Cloning. A Laboratory Manual. 1982;Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring, NY.
20. Parenti L.R. Relationships of atherinomorph fishes (Teleostei). Bull. Mar. Sci. 52:1993;170-196.
21. Patterson C., Rosen D.E. The Paracanthopterygii revisited. order and disorder Cohen D.M. Papers on the Systematics of Gadiform Fishes. 1989;5-36 Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, California.
22. Rosen D.E. Interrelationships of higher euteleostean fishes. Greenwood P.H., Miles S., Patterson C. Interrelationships of Fishes. 1973;397-513 J. Linn. Soc. (London) 53 Supplement 1. Academic Press, New York.
23. Rosen D.E. An essay on euteleostean classification. Am. Mus. Novit. 2827:1985;1-57.
24. Saiki R.K. Amplification of genomic DNA. Innis M.A., Gelfand D.H., Sninsky J.J., White T.J. PCR Protocols. A Guide to Methods and Applications. 1990;13-20 Academic Press, San Diego, California.
25. Sorenson M.D. TreeRot. 1996;University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
26. Starks E.C. The osteology and relationships of the family Zeidae. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus. 21:1898;469-476.
27. Stiassny M.L.J. The limits and relationships of the acanthomorph fishes. J. Zool. London B. 1:1986;411-460.
28. Stiassny, M.L.J., 1993. What are grey mullets? Bull. Mar. Sci. 52, 197-219.
29. Stiassny M.L.J., Moore J.A. A review of the pelvic girdle of acanthomorph fishes, with comments on hypotheses of acanthomorph interrelationships. Zool. J. Linnean Soc. London. 104:1992;209-242.
30. Swofford, D.L., 1993. PAUP: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony. Illinois Nat. Hist. Survey, Champaign, IL.
31. Tang K.L., Berendzen P.B., Wiley E.O., Morrissey J.F., Winterbottom R., Johnson G.D. The phylogenetic relationships of the suborder Acanthuroidei (Teleostei: Perciformes) based on molecular and morphological evidence. Mol. Phylogenetics Evol. 11:1999;415-425.
32. Van der Peer Y.I., Van den Broeck, De Rijk P., de Wachter R. Data base on the structure of small subunit RNA. Nucl. Acids. Res. 22(17):1994;3488-3494.
33. Wheeler, W., Gladstein, D., 1994. MALIGN 1.99. American Museum of Natrual History, New York.
34. Wiley, E.O., 1981. Phylogenetics. The Theory and Practice of Phylogenetic Systematics. Wiley-Interscience, New York, 439pp.
35. Wiley E.O., Johnson G.D., Dimmick W.W. The phylogenetic relationships of lampridiform fishes (Lampridiformes, Acanathomorpha), based on a total evidence analysis of Morphological and Molecular data. Mol. Phylogenetics Evol. 10(3):1998;417-425.