Phylogenetic signal in nucleotide data from seed plants: Implications for resolving the seed plant tree of life

American Journal of Botany

Volumn 91, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 1599-1613

  Burleigh, J Gordon ^a   Mathews, Sarah ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Gnetales; Multilocus analyses; Phylogenetic signal; Rate class; Seed plant phylogeny; Taxonomic sampling

Indexed keywords

EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; PLANT; SEED;

CONIFEROPHYTA; GNETALES; PINACEAE; SPERMATOPHYTA; THUJA;

EID: 10644238478     PISSN: 00029122     EISSN: 00029122     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3732/ajb.91.10.1599     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. ALBERT, V. A., A. BACKLUND, K. BREMER, M. W. CHASE, J. R. MANHART, B. D. MISHLER, AND K. C. NIXON. 1994. Functional constraints and rbcL evidence for land plant phylogeny. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 81: 534-567.
2. ANTONOV, A. S., A. V. TROITSKY, T. H. SAMIGULLIN, V. K. BOBROVA, K. M. VALIEJO-ROMAN, AND W. MARTIN. 2000. Early events in the evolution of angiosperms deduced from cp rDNA ITS 2-4 sequence comparisons. In Y. Liu, H. Fan, Z. Chen, Q. Wu, and Q. Zeng [eds.], Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Family Magnoliaceae, 210-214. Science Press, Beijing, China.
3. ARBER, E. A. N., AND J. PARKIN. 1907. On the origin of angiosperms. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 38: 29-80.
4. ARBER, E. A. N., AND J. PARKIN. 1908. Studies on the evolution of the angiosperms. The relationship of the angiosperms to the Gnetales. Annals of Botany 22: 489-515.
5. ARIS-BROSOU, S. 2003. Least and most powerful phylogenetic tests to elucidate the origin of the seed plants in the presence of conflicting signals under misspecified models. Systematic Biology 52: 781-793.
6. BAILEY, I. W. 1944. The development of vessels in angiosperms and its significance in morphological research. American Journal of Botany 31: 421-428.
7. BECKER, A., AND G. THEISSEN. 2003. The major clades of MADS-box genes and their role in the development and evolution of flowering plants. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 29: 464-489.
8. BENTON, M. J., AND G. W. STORRS. 1994. Testing the quality of the fossil record: paleontological knowledge is improving. Geology 22: 111-114.
9. BIERHORST, D. W. 1971. Morphology of vascular plants. Macmillan, New York, New York, USA.
10. BOWE, L. M., G. COAT, AND C. W. DE PAMPHILIS. 2000. Phylogeny of seed plants based on all three genomic compartments: extant gymnosperms are monophyletic and Gnetales' closest relatives are conifers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA 97: 4092-4097.
11. BRAY, N., I. DUBCHAK, AND L. PACHTER. 2003. AVID: a global alignment program. Genome Research 13: 97-102.
12. CARLQUIST, S. 1996. Wood, bark, and stem anatomy of Gnetales: a summary. International Journal of Plant Sciences 157: S58-S76.
13. CHAMBERLAIN, C. J. 1935. Gymnosperms. Structure and evolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
14. CHAW, S.-M., A. ZHARKIKH, H.-M. SUNG, T.-C. LAU, AND W.-H. LI. 1997. Molecular phylogeny of extant gymnosperms and seed plant evolution: analysis of nuclear 18S rRNA sequences. Molecular Biology and Evolution 14: 56-68.
15. CHAW, S.-M., C. L. PARKINSON, Y. CHENG, T. M. VINCENT, AND J. D. PALMER. 2000. Seed plant phylogeny inferred from all three plant genomes: monophyly of extant gymnosperms and the origin of Gnetales from conifers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 97: 4086-4091.
16. CRANE, P. R. 1985. Phylogenetic analysis of seed plants and the origin of angiosperms. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 72: 716-793.
17. CRANE, P. R. 1987. Vegetational consequences of angiosperm diversification. In E. M. Friis, W. G. Chaloner, and P. R. Crane [eds.], The origins angiosperms and their biological consequences, 107-144. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
18. CRANE, P. R. 1996. The fossil history of Gnetales. International Journal of Plant Sciences 157: S50-S57.
19. CRONQUIST, A. 1968. The evolution and classification of flowering plants. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
20. DONOGHUE, M. J., AND J. A. DOYLE. 2000. Seed plant phylogeny: demise of the anthophyte hypothesis? Current Biology 10: R106-R109.
21. DOYLE, J. A. 1978. Origin of angiosperms. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 9: 365-392.
22. DOYLE, J. A. 1996. Seed plant phylogeny and the relationships of Gnetales. International Journal of Plant Sciences 157: S3-S39.
23. DOYLE, J. A. 1998a. Molecules, morphology, fossils, and the relationship of angiosperms and Gnetales. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9: 448-462.
24. DOYLE, J. A. 1998b. Phylogeny of vascular plants. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29: 567-599.
25. DOYLE, J. A., AND M. J. DONOGHUE. 1986. Seed plant phylogeny and the origin of angiosperms: an experimental cladistic approach. Botanical Review 52: 321-431.
26. DOYLE, J. A., AND M. J. DONOGHUE. 1987. The origin of angiosperms: a cladistic approach. In E. M. Friis, W. G. Chaloner, and P. R. Crane [eds.], The origins angiosperms and their biological consequences, 17-49. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
27. DOYLE, J. A., AND M. J. DONOGHUE. 1992. Fossils and seed plant phylogeny reanalyzed. Brittonia 44: 89-106.
28. DOYLE, J. A., AND P. K. ENDRESS. 2000. Morphological phylogenetic analysis of basal angiosperms: comparison and combination with molecular data. International Journal of Plant Sciences 161: S121-S153.
29. EAMES, A. J. 1952. Relationships of the Ephedrales. Phytomorphology 2: 79-100.
30. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Systematic Zoology 27: 401-410.
31. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791.
32. FELSENSTEIN, J. 2003. Inferring phylogenies. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
33. FLORIN, R. 1951. Evolution in cordaites and conifers. Acta Horti Bergiani 15: 285-388.
34. FRIEDMAN, W. E., AND S. K. FLOYD. 2001. Perspective: the origin of flowering plants and their reproductive biology - a tale of two phylogenies. Evolution 55: 217-231.
35. FROLICH, M.W., AND D. S. PARKER. 2000. The mostly male theory of flower evolutionary origins: from genes to fossils. Systematic Botany 25: 155-170.
36. GOREMYKIN, V., V. BOBROVA, J. PAHNKE, J. TROITSKY, A. ANTONOV, AND W. MARTIN. 1996. Noncoding sequences from the slowly evolving chloroplast inverted repeat in addition to the rbcL data do not support gnetalean affinities of angiosperms. Molecular Biology and Evolution 13: 383-396.
37. GUGERLI, F., C. SPERISEN, U. BÜCHLER, I. BRUNNER, S. BRODBECK, J. D. PALMER, AND Y.-L. QIU. 2001. The evolutionary split of Pinaceae from other conifers: evidence from an intron loss and a multigene phylogeny. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 21: 167-175.
38. HAMBY, R. K., AND E. A. ZIMMER. 1992. Ribosomal RNA as a phylogenetic tool in plant systematics. In P. S. Soltis, D. E. Soltis, and J. J. Doyle [eds.], Molecular systematics of plants, 50-91. Chapman and Hall, New York, New York, USA.
39. HANSEN, A., S. HANSMANN, T. SAMIGULLIN, A. ANTONOV, AND W. MARTIN. 1999. Gnetum and the angiosperms: molecular evidence that their shared morphological characters are convergent rather than homologous. Molecular Biology and Evolution 16: 1006-1009.
40. HART, J. A. 1987. A cladistic analysis of conifers: preliminary results. Journal of the Arnold Arboretum of Harvard University 68: 269-307.
41. HASEBE, M., R. KOFUKI, M. ITO, M. KATO, K. IWATSUKI, AND K. UEDA. 1992. Phylogeny of gymnosperms inferred from rbcL gene sequences. Botanical Magazine, Tokyo 105: 673-679.
42. HERNANDEZ-CASTILLO, G. R., G. W. ROTHWELL, AND G. MAPES. 2001. Thucydiaceae fam. nov., with a review and reevaluation of Paleozoic walchian conifers. International Journal of Plant Sciences 162: 1155-1185.
43. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND B. RANNALA. 1997. Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogeny using stratigraphic data. Paleobiology 23: 174-180.
44. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND B. RANNALA. 2000. Using stratigraphic information in phylogenetics. In J. J. Wiens [ed.], Phylogenetic analysis of morphological data, 165-191. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
45. JENSEN, R. A., AND S. AHMAD. 1990. Nested gene fusions as markers of phylogenetic branchpoints in prokaryotes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 5: 219-224.
46. KNOLL, A. H. 1984. Patterns of extinction in the fossil record of vascular plants. In M. H. Nitecki [ed.], Extinctions, 21-68. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
47. KOSSACK, D. S., AND C. S. KINLAW. 1999. IFG, a gypsy-like retrotransposon in Pinus (Pinaceae), has an extensive history in pines. Plant Molecular Biology 39: 417-426.
48. LIDHOLM, J., A. E. SZMIDT, J.-E. HÄLLGREN, AND P. GUSTAFSSON. 1988. The chloroplast genomes of conifers lack one of the rRNA-encoding inverted repeats. Molecular and General Genetics 212: 6-10.
49. LOCONTE, H., AND D. W. STEVENSON. 1990. Cladistics of the Spermatophyta. Brittonia 42: 197-211.
50. MAGALLÓN, S., AND M. J. SANDERSON. 2001. Absolute diversification rates in angiosperm clades. Evolution 55: 1762-1780.
51. MAGALLÓN, S., AND M. J. SANDERSON. 2002. Relationships among seed plants inferred from highly conserved genes: sorting conflicting phylogenetic signals among ancient lineages. American Journal of Botany 89: 1991-2006.
52. MATHEWS, S., AND M. J. DONOGHUE. 1999. The root of the angiosperm phylogeny inferred from duplicate phytochrome genes. Science 286: 947-950.
53. MATHEWS, S., AND M. J. DONOGHUE. 2002. Analyses of phytochrome data from seed plants: exploration of conflicting results from parsimony and Bayesian approaches. Available at website, http://www.2002.botanyconference.org/ section12/abstracts/238.shtml.
54. MUSE, S. V., AND S. K. POND. 2002. HYPHY: hypothesis testing using phylogenies, beta 0.95. Software program in statistical genetics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA.
55. NICKERSON, J., AND G. DROUIN. 2004. The sequence of the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II is a useful marker for inferring seed plant phylogeny. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 31: 403-415.
56. NICKRENT, D. L., C. L. PARKINSON, J. D. PALMER, AND R. J. DUFF. 2000. Multigene phylogeny of land plants with special reference to bryophytes and the earliest land plants. Molecular Biology and Evolution 17: 1885-1895.
57. NIXON, K. C., W. L. CREPET, D. STEVENSON, AND E. M. FRIIS. 1994. A reevaluation of seed plant phylogeny. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden 81: 484-533.
58. PARENTI, L. R. 1980. A phylogenetic analysis of the land plants. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 13: 225-242.
59. PARKINSON, C. L., K. L. ADAMS, AND J. D. PALMER. 1999. Multigene analyses identify the three earliest lineages of extant flowering plants. Current Biology 9: 1485-1488.
60. POLLOCK, D. D., D. J. ZWICKL, J. A. MCGUIRE, AND D. M. HILLIS. 2002. Increased taxon sampling is advantageous for phylogenetic inference. Systematic Biology 51: 664-671.
61. PRYER, K. M., H. SCHNEIDER, A. R. SMITH, R. CRANFILL, P. WOLF, J. S. HUNT, AND S. D. SIPES. 2001. Horsetails and ferns are a monophyletic group and the closest living relatives to seed plants. Nature 409: 618-622.
62. QIU, Y.-L., J. LEE, F. BERNASCONI-QUADRONI, D. E. SOLTIS, P. S. SOLTIS, M. ZANIS, E. A. ZIMMER, Z. CHEN, V. SAVOLAINEN, AND M. W. CHASE. 1999. The earliest angiosperms: evidence from mitochondrial, plastid, and nuclear genomes. Nature 402: 404-407.
63. QUINN, C. J., R. A. PRICE, AND P. A. GADEK. 2002. Familial concepts and relationships in the conifers based on rbcL and matK sequence comparisons. Kew Bulletin 57: 513-531.
64. RAI, H. S., H. E. O'BRIEN, P. A. REEVES, R. G. OLMSTEAD, AND S. W. GRAHAM. 2003. Inference of higher-order relationships in the cycads from a large chloroplast data set. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 29: 350-359.
65. RAUBESON, L. A., AND R. K. JANSEN. 1992. A rare chloroplast-DNA structural mutation is shared by all conifers. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 20: 17-24.
66. ROKAS, A., AND P. W. H. HOLLAND. 2000. Rare genomic changes as a tool for phylogenetics. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 15: 454-459.
67. ROSENBERG, M. S., AND S. KUMAR. 2001. Incomplete taxon sampling is not a problem for phylogenetic inference. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 98: 10751-10756.
68. ROTHWELL, G. R., AND R. SERBET. 1994. Lignophyte phylogeny and the evolution of spermatophytes: a numerical cladistic analysis. Systematic Botany 19: 443-482.
69. RYDIN, C., AND M. KÄLLERSJÖ. 2002. Taxon sampling and seed plant phylogeny. Cladistics 18: 484-513.
70. RYDIN, C., M. KÄLLERSJÖ, AND E. M. FRIIS. 2002. Seed plant relationships and the systematic position of Gnetales based on nuclear and chloroplast DNA: conflicting data, rooting problems, and the monophyly of conifers. International Journal of Plant Sciences 163: 197-214.
71. SAMIGULLIN, T. KH., W. F. MARTIN, A. V. TROITSKY, AND A. S. ANTONOV. 1999. Molecular data from the chloroplast rpoC1 gene suggests a deep and distinct dichotomy of contemporary spermatophytes into two monophyla: gymnosperms (including Gnetales) and angiosperms. Journal of Molecular Evolution 49: 310-315.
72. SANDERSON, M. J., M. F. WOJCIECHOWSKI, J.-M. HU, T. S. KHAN, AND S. G. BRADY. 2000. Error, bias, and long-branch attraction in data for two chloroplast photosystem genes in seed plants. Molecular Biology and Evolution 17: 782-797.
73. SCHMIDT, M., AND H. A. W. SCHNEIDER-POETSCH. 2002. The evolution of gymnosperms redrawn by phytochrome genes: the Gnetatae appear at the base of the gymnosperms. Journal of Molecular Evolution 54: 715-724.
74. SHARROCK, R. A., AND S. MATHEWS. In press. Phytochrome genes in higher plants and their expression. In Photomorphogenesis in plants, 3rd ed. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrect, Netherlands.
75. SHUTOV, A. D., H. BRAUN, Y. V. CHESNOKOV, C. HORSTMANN, I. A. KAKHOVSKAYA, AND H. BÄUMLEIN. 1998. Sequence peculiarity of Gnetalean legumin-like seed storage proteins. Journal of Molecular Evolution 47: 486-492.
76. SNEDECOR, G. W., AND W. G. COCHRAN. 1995. Statistical methods, 8th ed. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA.
77. SOLTIS, D. E., P. S. SOLTIS, AND M. J. ZANIS. 2002. Phylogeny of seed plants based on evidence from eight genes. American Journal of Botany 89: 1670-1681.
78. STEFANOVIC, S., M. JAGER, J. DEUTSCH, J. BROUTIN, AND M. MASSELOT. 1998. Phylogenetic relationships of conifers inferred from partial 28S rRNA gene sequences. American Journal of Botany 85: 688-697.
79. STEWART, W. N., AND G. W. ROTHWELL. 1993. Paleobotany and the evolution of plants, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
80. STRAUSS, S. H., J. D. PALMER, G. T. HOWE, AND A. H. DOERKSEN. 1988. Chloroplast genomes of two conifers lack a large inverted repeat and are extensively rearranged. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 85: 3898-3902.
81. SULLIVAN, J., K. E. HOLSINGER, AND C. SIMON. 1996. The effect of topology on estimates of among-site rate variation. Journal of Molecular Evolution 42: 308-312.
82. SULLIVAN, J., D. L. SWOFFORD, AND G. P. NAYLOR. 1999. The effect of taxon sampling on estimating rate heterogeneity parameters of maximum-likelihood models. Molecular Biology and Evolution 16: 1347-1356.
83. SWOFFORD, D. L. 2002. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4.0b10. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
84. SWOFFORD, D. L., G. J. OLSEN, P. WADDELL, AND D. M. HILLIS. 1996. Phylogenetic inference. In D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B. K. Mable [eds.], Molecular systematics, 407-425. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA.
85. TAKHTAJAN, A. L. 1969. Flowering plants: origin and dispersal. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., USA.
86. TAVARÉ, S. 1986. Some probabilistic and statistical problems on the analysis of DNA sequences. In R. M. Miura [ed.], Lectures on mathematics in the life sciences, 5786. American Mathematics Society, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
87. THORNE, R. F. 1976. A phylogenetic classification of the Angiospermae. Evolutionary Biology 9: 35-106.
88. TOMLINSON, P. B., AND T. TAKASO. 2002. Seed cone structure in conifers in relation to development and pollination: a biological approach. Canadian Journal of Botany 80: 1250-1273.
89. TSUDZUKI, J., K. NAKASHIMA, T. TSUDZUKI, J. HIRATSUKA, M. SHIBATA, T. WAKASUGI, AND M. SUGIURA. 1992. Chloroplast DNA of black pine retains a residual inverted repeat lacking rRNA genes: nucleotide sequences of trnZ, trnK, psbA, trnI, and trnH and the absence of rps16. Molecular and General Genetics 232: 206-214.
90. WAKASUGI, T., J. TSUDZUKI, S. ITO, K. NAKASHIMA, T. TSUDZUKI, AND M. SUGIURA. 1994a. Loss of all ndh genes as determined by sequencing the entire chloroplast genome of the black pine Pinus thunbergii. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 91: 9794-9798.
91. WAKASUGI, T., J. TSUDZUKI, S. ITO, M. SHIBATA, AND M. SUGIURA. 1994b. A physical map and clone bank of the black pine (Pinus thunbergii) chloroplast genome. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter 12: 227-241.
92. WETTSTEIN, R. R. 1907. Handbuch der Systematischen Botanik. Deuticke, vol. 2. Leipzig, Germany.
93. WIENS, J. J. 2003. Missing data, incomplete taxa, and phylogenetic accuracy. Systematic Biology 52: 528-538.
94. WILDE, M. H. 1944. A new interpretation of the coniferous cones: I. Podocarpaceae (Podocarpus). Annals of Botany 8: 1-41.
95. WINTER, K.-U., A. BECKER, T. MUNSTER, J. T. KIM, H. SAEDLER, AND G. THEISSEN. 1999. MADS-box genes reveal that gnetophytes are more closely related to conifers than to flowering plants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 96: 7342-7347.
96. YANG, Z. 1994. Maximizing likelihood phylogenetic estimation from DNA sequences with variable rates over sites: approximate methods. Journal of Molecular Evolution 39: 306-314.
97. YANG, Z. 1998. On the best evolutionary rate for phylogenetic analysis. Systematic Biology 47: 125-133.
98. YANG, Z., N. GOLDMAN, AND A. FRIDAY. 1994. Comparison of models for nucleotide substitution used in maximum-likelihood phylogenetic estimation. Molecular Biology and Evolution 11: 316-324.