Animal phylogeny and large-scale sequencing: Progress and pitfalls

Journal of Systematics and Evolution

Volumn 46, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 274-286

  Brinkmann, Henner ^a   Philippe, Hervé ^a  

^a Universite de Montreal   (Canada)

Author keywords

Long branch attraction (LBA) artifact; New animal phylogeny; Phylogenomics; Random error; Systematic error

Indexed keywords

ANIMALIA; BUDDENBROCKIA; CONVOLUTA; MYXOZOA; NEMATODA; OIKOPLEURA; PLATYHELMINTHES;

EID: 56849114276     PISSN: 16744918     EISSN: 17596831     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1002.2008.08038     Document Type: Review

References (90)

1. Adoutte A, Balavoine G, Lartillot N, de Rosa R. 1999. Animal evolution. The end of the intermediate taxa? Trends in Genetics 15: 104-108.
2. Adoutte A, Balavoine G, Lartillot N, Lespinet O, Prud'homme B, de Rosa R. 2000. The new animal phylogeny: reliability and implications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 97: 4453-4456.
3. Aguinaldo AM, Turbeville JM, Linford LS, Rivera MC, Garey JR, Raff RA, Lake JA. 1997. Evidence for a clade of nematodes, arthropods and other moulting animals. Nature 387: 489-493.
4. Anderson FE, Cordoba AJ, Thollesson M. 2004. Bilaterian phylogeny based on analyses of a region of the sodium-potassium ATPase beta-subunit gene. Journal of Molecular Evolution 58: 252-268.
5. Baele G, Raes J, Van de Peer Y, Vansteelandt S. 2006. An improved statistical method for detecting heterotachy in nucleotide sequences. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23: 1397-1405.
6. Baguna J, Riutort M. 2004. The dawn of bilaterian animals: the case of acoelomorph flatworms. Bioessays 26: 1046-1057.
7. Baurain D, Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 2007. Lack of resolution in the animal phylogeny: closely spaced cladogeneses or undetected systematic errors? Molecular Biology and Evolution 24: 6-9.
8. Blair JE, Ikeo K, Gojobori T, Hedges SB. 2002. The evolutionary position of nematodes. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2: 7.
9. Blanquart S, Lartillot N. 2006. A Bayesian compound stochastic process for modeling nonstationary and nonhomogeneous sequence evolution. Molecular Biology and Evolution 23: 2058-2071.
10. Blanquart S, Lartillot N. 2008. A Site- and Time-Heterogeneous Model of Amino-Acid Replacement. Molecular Biology and Evolution 25: 842-858.
11. Brinkmann H, Giezen M, Zhou Y, Raucourt GP, Philippe H. 2005. An empirical assessment of long-branch attraction artefacts in deep eukaryotic phylogenomics. Systematic Biology 54: 743-757.
12. Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 1999. Archaea sister group of Bacteria? Indications from tree reconstruction artifacts in ancient phylogenies. Molecular Biology and Evolution 16: 817-825.
13. Brusca RC, Brusca GJ. 1990. Invertebrates. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
14. Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Chourrout D, Philippe H. 2006. Tunicates and not cephalochordates are the closest living relatives of vertebrates. Nature 439: 965-968.
15. Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 2005. Phylogenomics and the reconstruction of the tree of life. Nature Reviews Genetics 6: 361-375.
16. Dopazo H, Santoyo J, Dopazo J. 2004. Phylogenomics and the number of characters required for obtaining an accurate phylogeny of eukaryote model species. Bioinformatics 20: i116-i121.
17. Dunn CW, Hejnol A, Matus DQ, Pang K, Browne WE, Smith SA, Seaver E, Rouse GW, Obst M, Edgecombe GD, Sorensen MV, Haddock SH, Schmidt-Rhaesa A, Okusu A, Kristensen RM, Wheeler WC, Martindale MQ, Giribet G 2008. Broad phylogenomic sampling improves resolution of the animal tree of life. Nature 452: 745-749.
18. Felsenstein J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Systematic Zoology 27: 401-410.
19. Foster PG. 2004. Modeling compositional heterogeneity. Systematic Biology 53: 485-495.
20. Galtier N. 2001. Maximum-likelihood phylogenetic analysis under a covarion-like model. Molecular Biology and Evolution 18: 866-873.
21. Galtier N, Gouy M. 1995. Inferring phylogenies from DNA sequences of unequal base compositions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 92: 11317-11321.
22. Groth JG, Barrowclough GF. 1999. Basal divergences in birds and the phylogenetic utility of the nuclear RAG-1 gene. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 12: 115-123.
23. Guindon S, Gascuel O. 2003. A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Systematic Biology 52: 696-704.
24. Halanych KM. 2004. The new view of animal phylogeny. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 35: 229-256.
25. Halanych KM, Bacheller JD, Aguinaldo AM, Liva SM, Hillis DM, Lake JA. 1995. Evidence from 18S ribosomal DNA that the lophophorates are protostome animals. Science 267: 1641-1643.
26. Hedtke SM, Townsend TM, Hillis DM. 2006. Resolution of phylogenetic conflict in large data sets by increased taxon sampling. Systematic Biology 55: 522-529.
27. Hendy MD, Penny D. 1989. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Systematic Zoology 38: 297-309.
28. Hillis DM. 1996. Inferring complex phytogenies. Nature 383: 130-131.
29. Hordijk W, Gascuel O. 2005. Improving the efficiency of SPR moves in phylogenetic tree search methods based on maximum likelihood. Bioinformatics 21: 4338-4347.
30. Huelsenbeck JP. 2002. Testing a covariotide model of DNA substitution. Molecular Biology and Evolution 19: 698-707.
31. Jeffrey O, Brinkmann H, Delsuc F, Philippe H. 2006. Phylogenomics: the beginning of incongruence? Trends in Genetics 22: 225-231.
32. Jimenez-Guri E, Philippe H, Okamura B, Holland PW. 2007. Buddenbrockia is a cnidarian worm. Science 317: 116-118.
33. Jobb G, von Haeseler A, Strimmer K. 2004. TREEFINDER: a powerful graphical analysis environment for molecular phylogenetics. BMC Evolutionary Biology 4: 18.
34. Jukes TH, Cantor CR. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. In: Munro HN ed. Mammalian protein metabolism. New York: Academic Press.
35. Kluge AG. 1989. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Systematic Zoology 38: 7-25.
36. Kobayashi M, Wada H, Satoh N. 1996. Early evolution of the Metazoa and phylogenetic status of diploblasts as inferred from amino acid sequence of elongation factor-1 alpha. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 5: 414-422.
37. Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW. 2004. Performance of maximum parsimony and likelihood phylogenetics when evolution is heterogeneous. Nature 431: 980-984.
38. Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW. 2008. A mixed branch length model of heterotachy improves phylogenetic accuracy. Molecular Biology and Evolution. (in press)
39. Lartillot N, Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 2007. Suppression of long-branch attraction artefacts in the animal phytogeny using a site-heterogeneous model. BMC Evolutionary Biology 7 Suppl 1: S4.
40. Lartillot N, Philippe H. 2004. A Bayesian mixture model for across-site heterogeneities in the amino-acid replacement process. Molecular Biology and Evolution 21: 1095-1109.
41. Lartillot N, Philippe H. 2008. Improvement of molecular phylogenetic inference and the phytogeny of Bilateria. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 363: 1463-1472.
42. Lavrov DV, Lang BF. 2005. Poriferan mtDNA and animal phytogeny based on mitochondrial gene arrangements. Systematic Biology 54: 651-659.
43. Lopez P, Casane D, Philippe H. 2002. Heterotachy, an important process of protein evolution. Molecular Biology and Evolution 19: 1-7.
44. Marletaz F, Martin E, Perez Y, Papillon D, Caubit X, Lowe CJ, Freeman B, Fasano L, Dossat C, Wincker P, Weissenbach J, Le Parco Y. 2006. Chaetognath phylogenomics: a protostome with deuterostome-like development. Current Biology 16: R577-578.
45. Matus DQ, Copley RR, Dunn CW, Hejnol A, Eccleston H, Halanych KM, Martindale MQ, Telford MJ. 2006. Broad taxon and gene sampling indicate that chaetognaths are protostomes. Current Biology 16: R575-576.
46. McHugh D. 1997. Molecular evidence that echiurans and pogonophorans are derived annelids. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 94: 8006-8009.
47. Mogie M. 2007. Drop "higher" and "lower" to raise descriptive standards. Nature 448: 865.
48. Pagel M, Meade A. 2004. A phylogenetic mixture model for detecting pattern-heterogeneity in gene sequence or character-state data. Systematic Biology 53: 571-581.
49. Passamaneck Y, Halanych KM. 2006. Lophotrochozoan phytogeny assessed with LSU and SSU data: evidence of lophophorate polyphyly. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 40: 20-28.
50. Philip GK, Creevey CJ, McInerney JO. 2005. The Opisthokonta and the Ecdysozoa may not be clades: Stronger support for the grouping of plant and animal than for animal and fungi and stronger support for the Coelomata than Ecdysozoa. Molecular Biology and Evolution 22: 1175-1184.
51. Philippe H, Brinkmann H, Martinez P, Riutort M, Baguna J. 2007. Acoel flatworms are not Platyhelminthes: evidence from phylogenomics. PLOS One 2: e717.
52. Philippe H, Chenuil A, Adoutte A. 1994a. Can the Cambrian explosion be inferred through molecular phytogeny? Development 120: S15-S25.
53. Philippe H, Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Lartillot N. 2005a. Phylogenomics. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 36: 541-562.
54. Philippe H, Douzery E. 1994. The pitfalls of molecular phytogeny based on four species, as illustrated by the Cetacea/Artiodactyla relationships. Journal of Mammalian Evolution 2: 133-152.
55. Philippe H, Germot A, Moreira D. 2000. The new phytogeny of eukaryotes. Current Opinion in Genetics and Development 10: 596-601.
56. Philippe H, Lartillot N, Brinkmann H. 2005b. Multigene analyses of bilaterian animals corroborate the monophyly of Ecdysozoa, Lophotrochozoa, and Protostomia. Molecular Biology and Evolution 22: 1246-1253.
57. Philippe H, Snell EA, Bapteste E, Lopez P, Holland PW, Casane D. 2004. Phylogenomics of eukaryotes: impact of missing data on large alignments. Molecular Biology and Evolution 21: 1740-1752.
58. Philippe H, Sörhannus U, Baroin A, Perasso R, Gasse F, Adoutte A. 1994b. Comparison of molecular and paleontological data in diatoms suggests a major gap in the fossil record. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 7: 247-265.
59. Philippe H, Telford MJ. 2006. Large-scale sequencing and the new animal phytogeny. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 21: 614-620.
60. Phillips MJ, Delsuc F, Penny D. 2004. Genome-scale phytogeny and the detection of systematic biases. Molecular Biology and Evolution 21: 1455-1458.
61. Pisani D. 2004. Identifying and removing fast-evolving sites using compatibility analysis: An example from the arthropoda. Systematic Biology 53: 978-989.
62. Qiu Y-L, Estabrook GF. 2008. Inference of phylogenetic relationships among key angiosperm lineages using a compatibility method on a molecular data set. Journal of Systematics and Evolution 46: 130-141.
63. Regier JC, Shultz JW. 2001. Elongation factor-2: a useful gene for arthropod phylogenetics. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 20: 136-148.
64. Rodriguez-Ezpeleta N, Brinkmann H, Roure B, Lartillot N, Lang BF, Philippe H. 2007. Detecting and overcoming systematic errors in genome-scale phylogenies. Systematic Biology 56: 389-399.
65. Rokas A, Kruger D, Carroll SB. 2005. Animal evolution and the molecular signature of radiations compressed in time. Science 310: 1933-1938.
66. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19: 1572-1574.
67. Roure B, Rodriguez-Ezpeleta N, Philippe H. 2007. SCaFoS: a tool for Selection, Concatenation and Fusion of Sequences for phylogenomics. BMC Evolutionary Biology 7 Suppl 1: S2.
68. Roy SW, Gilbert W. 2005. Resolution of a deep animal divergence by the pattern of intron conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 102: 4403-4408.
69. Ruiz-Trillo I, Paps J, Loukota M, Ribera C, Jondelius U, Baguna J, Riutort M. 2002. A phylogenetic analysis of myosin heavy chain type II sequences corroborates that Acoela and Nemertodermatida are basal bilaterians. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 99: 11246-11251.
70. Ruiz-Trillo I, Riutort M, Fourcade HM, Baguna J, Boore JL. 2004. Mitochondrial genome data support the basal position of Acoelomorpha and the polyphyly of the Platyhelminthes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 33: 321-332.
71. Ruiz-Trillo I, Riutort M, Littlewood DT, Herniou EA, Baguna J. 1999. Acoel flatworms: earliest extant bilaterian Metazoans, not members of Platyhelminthes. Science 283: 1919-1923.
72. Saitou N, Nei M. 1986. The number of nucleotides required to determine the branching order of three species, with special reference to the human-chimpanzee-gorilla divergence. Journal of Molecular Evolution 24: 189-204.
73. Sanderson MJ, Shaffer HB. 2002. Troubleshooting molecular phylogenetic analyses. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 33: 49-72.
74. Schmidt HA, Strimmer K, Vingron M, von Haeseler A. 2002. TREE-PUZZLE: maximum likelihood phylogenetic analysis using quartets and parallel computing. Bioinformatics 18: 502-504.
75. Shultz JW, Regier JC. 2000. Phylogenetic analysis of arthropods using two nuclear protein-encoding genes supports a crustacean + hexapod clade. Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences 267: 1011-1019.
76. Sidow A, Thomas WK. 1994. A molecular evolutionary framework for eukaryotic model organisms. Current Biology 4: 596-603.
77. Stamatakis A, Ludwig T, Meier H. 2005. RAxML-III: a fast program for maximum likelihood-based inference of large phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 21: 456-463.
78. Sullivan J, Swofford DL. 2001. Should we use model-based methods for phylogenetic inference when we know that assumptions about among-site rate variation and nucleotide substitution pattern are violated? Systematic Biology 50: 723-729.
79. Sullivan JP, Lavoue S, Hopkins CD. 2000. Molecular systematics of the African electric fishes (Mormyroidea: Teleostei) and a model for the evolution of their electric organs. Journal of Experimental Biology 203: 665-683.
80. Vinh le S, Von Haeseler A. 2004. IQPNNI: moving fast through tree space and stopping in time. Molecular Biology and Evolution 21: 1565-1571.
81. Whelan S, Goldman N. 2001. A general empirical model of protein evolution derived from multiple protein families using a maximum-likelihood approach. Molecular Biology and Evolution 18: 691-699.
82. Woese CR, Achenbach L, Rouviere P, Mandelco L. 1991. Archaeal phylogeny: reexamination of the phylogenetic position of Archaeoglobus fulgidus in light of certain composition-induced artifacts. Systematic and Applied Microbiology 14: 364-371.
83. Wolf YI, Rogozin IB, Koonin EV. 2004. Coelomata and not Ecdysozoa: evidence from genome-wide phylogenetic analysis. Genome Research 14: 29-36.
84. Yang Z. 1994. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic estimation from DNA sequences with variable rates over sites: approximate methods. Journal of Molecular Evolution 39: 306-314.
85. Yang Z. 1996. Among-site rate variation and its impact on phylogenetic analyses. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 11: 367-370.
86. Yang Z. 1997. How often do wrong models produce better phylogenies? Molecular Biology and Evolution 144: 105-108.
87. Yang Z, Roberts D. 1995. On the use of nucleic acid sequences to infer early branchings in the tree of life. Molecular Biology and Evolution 12: 451-458.
88. Zheng J, Rogozin IB, Koonin EV, Przytycka TM. 2007. Support for the Coelomata clade of animals from a rigorous analysis of the pattern of intron conservation. Molecular Biology and Evolution 24: 2583-2592.
89. Zhou Y, Rodrigue N, Lartillot N, Philippe H. 2007. Evaluation of the models handling heterotachy in phylogenetic inference. BMC Evolutionary Biology 7: 206.
90. Zwickl DJ, Hillis DM. 2002. Increased taxon sampling greatly reduces phylogenetic error. Systematic Biology 51: 588-598.