Alternative methods for concatenation of core genes indicate a lack of resolution in deep nodes of the prokaryotic phylogeny

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 83-91

  Bapteste, E ^a,c   Susko, E ^b   Leigh, J ^a   Ruiz Trillo, I ^a   Bucknam, J ^a   Doolittle, W F ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c NONE   (France)

Author keywords

Concatenation; Phylogeny; Prokaryotes; Simultaneous analysis; Tree of Life

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EVOLUTION; GENE MAPPING; GENE SEQUENCE; GENETIC ANALYSIS; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENY; PROKARYOTE; TREE OF LIFE;

ARCHAEA; BACTERIA; DNA, CONCATENATED; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENES, ARCHAEAL; GENES, BACTERIAL; PHYLOGENY; PROKARYOTIC CELLS; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA;

PROKARYOTA;

EID: 38349128272     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: 15371719     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msm229     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Baldauf SL. 1999. A search for the origins of animals and fungi: comparing and combining molecular data. Am Nat. 154:S178-S188.
2. Bapteste E, Brinkmann H, Lee JA, et al. (11 co-authors). 2002. The analysis of 100 genes supports the grouping of three highly divergent amoebae: Dictyostelium, Entamoeba, and Mastigamoeba. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 99(3):1414-1419.
3. Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 1999. Archaea sister group of bacteria? Indications from tree reconstruction artifacts in ancient phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol. 16(6):817-825.
4. Brochier C, Forterre P, Gribaldo S. 2005. An emerging phylogenetic core of Archaea: phylogenies of transcription and translation machineries converge following addition of new genome sequences. BMC Evol Biol. 5(1):36.
5. Brochier C, Philippe H. 2002. Phylogeny: a non-hyperthermophilic ancestor for bacteria. Nature. 417(6886):244.
6. Bucknam J, Boucher Y, Bapteste E. 2006. Refuting phylogenetic relationships. Biol Direct. 1:26.
7. Cavalier-Smith T. 2006. Rooting the tree of life by transition analyses. Biol Direct. 1(1):19.
8. Charlebois RL, Doolittle WF. 2004. Computing prokaryotic gene ubiquity: rescuing the core from extinction. Genome Res. 14(12):2469-2477.
9. Ciccarelli FD, Doerks T, von Mering C, Creevey CJ, Snel B, Bork P. 2006. Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of life. Science. 311(5765):1283-1287.
10. Dagan T, Martin W. 2006. The tree of one percent. Genome Biol. 7:118.
11. Doolittle WF, Bapteste E. 2007. Pattern pluralism and the Tree of Life hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 104(7):2043-2049.
12. Fast NM, Xue L, Bingham S, Keeling PJ. 2002. Re-examining alveolate evolution using multiple protein molecular phylogenies. J Eukaryot Microbiol. 49(1):30-37.
13. Guindon S, Gascuel O. 2003. A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Syst Biol. 52(5):696-704.
14. Keane TM, Creevey CJ, Pentony MM, Naughton TJ, McInerney JO. 2006. Assessment ofmethods for amino acid matrix selection and their use on empirical data shows that ad hoc assumptions for choice of matrix are not justified. BMC Evol Biol. 6:29.
15. Leigh J, Susko E, Baumgartner M, Roger AJ. Forthcoming 2007. Testing congruence in phylogenomic analysis. Syst Biol.
16. Lerat E, Daubin V, Moran NA. 2003. From gene trees to organismal phylogeny in prokaryotes: the case of the gamma-Proteobacteria. PLoS Biol. 1(1):E19.
17. Phillips MJ, Delsuc F, Penny D. 2004. Genome-scale phylogeny and the detection of systematic biases. Mol Biol Evol. 21(7):1455-1458.
18. Shimodaira H. 2002. An approximately unbiased test of phylogenetic tree selection. Syst Biol. 51(3):492-508.
19. Shimodaira H, Hasegawa M. 2001. CONSEL: for assessing the confidence of phylogenetic tree selection. Bioinformatics. 17(12):1246-1247.
20. Vinh le S, Von Haeseler A. 2004. IQPNNI: moving fast through tree space and stopping in time. Mol Biol Evol. 21(8): 1565-1571.