Complete generic-level phylogenetic analyses of palms (arecaceae) with comparisons of supertree and supermatrix approaches

Systematic Biology

Volumn 58, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 240-256

  Baker, William J ^a   Savolainen, Vincent ^a,b   Asmussen Lange, Conny B ^c   Chase, Mark W ^a   Dransfield, John ^a   Forest, Félix ^a   Harley, Madeline M ^a   Uhl, Natalie W ^d   Wilkinson, Mark ^e  

^a ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS   (United Kingdom)

^b IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^d Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^e DEPARTMENT OF LIFE SCIENCES   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Arecaceae; Congruence; Matrix representation with parsimony (MRP); Palmae; Phylogeny; Supermatrix; Supertree

Indexed keywords

ARECACEAE; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GENETICS; PHYLOGENY;

ARECACEAE; PHYLOGENY;

ARECACEAE; MAGNOLIOPHYTA;

EID: 67749097725     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: 1076836X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syp021     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Asmussen C.B., Baker W.J., Dransfield J. 2000. Phylogeny of the palm family (Arecaceae) based on rps 16 intron and trn L-trn F plastid DNA sequences. In: Wilson K.L., Morrison D.A., editors. Monocots: systematics and evolution. Melbourne (Australia): CSIRO. p. 525-535.
2. Asmussen C.B., Chase M.W. 2001. Coding and noncoding plastid DNA in palm systematics. Am. J. Bot. 88:1103-1117.
3. Asmussen C.B., Dransfield J., Deickmann V., Barfod A.S., Pintaud J.C.,
4. Baker W.J. 2006. A new subfamily classification of the palm family (Arecaceae): evidence from plastid DNA phylogeny. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 151:15-38.
5. Bacon C.D., Feltus F.A., Paterson A.H., Bailey C.D. 2008. Novel nuclear intron-spanning primers for Arecaceae evolutionary biology. Mol. Ecol. Res. 8:211-214.
6. Baker W.J., Asmussen C.B., Barrow S.C., Dransfield J., Hedderson T.A. 1999. A phylogenetic study of the palm family (Palmae) based on chloroplast DNA sequences from the trn L-trn F region. Plant Syst. Evol. 219:111-126.
7. Baker W.J., Dransfield J., Hedderson T.A. 2000. Phylogeny, character evolution, and a new classification of the calamoid palms. Syst. Bot. 25:297-322.
8. Baker W.J., Hedderson T.A., Dransfield J. 2000. Molecular phylogenetics of subfamily Calamoideae (Palmae) based on nrDNA ITS and cpDNA rps 16 intron sequence data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 14:195-217.
9. Baker W.J., Zona S., Heatubun C.D., Lewis C.E., Maturbongs R.A., Norup M.V. 2006. Dransfieldia (Arecaceae) - a new palm genus from western New Guinea. Syst. Bot. 31:61-69.
10. Baum B.R. 1992. Combining trees as a way of combining datasets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon. 41:3-10.
11. Baum B.R., Ragan M.A. 1993. A comment on Baum's method for combining phylogenetic trees - reply. Taxon. 42:637-640.
12. Baum B.R., Ragan M.A. 2004. The MRP method. In: Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., editor. Phylogenetic supertrees: combining information to reveal the tree of life. Dordrecht (the Netherlands): Kluwer. p. 17-34.
13. Beck R.M.D., Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Cardillo M., Liu F.G.R., Purvis A. 2006. A higher-level MRP supertree of placental mammals. BMC Evol. Biol. 6:93.
14. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. 2003. Novel versus unsupported clades: assessing the qualitative support for clades in MRP supertrees. Syst. Biol. 52:839-848.
15. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. 2004a. The evolution of supertrees. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19:315-322.
16. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. 2004b. Trees versus characters and the supertree/supermatrix "paradox." Syst. Biol. 53:356-359.
17. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Bryant H.N. 1998. Properties of matrix representation with parsimony analyses. Syst. Biol. 47:497-508.
18. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Gittleman J.L., Steel M.A. 2002. The (super)tree of life: procedures, problems, and prospects. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33:265-289.
19. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Jones K.E., Cardillo S.A.M., Grenyer R., Purvis A. 2004. Garbage in, garbage out: data issues in supertree construction. In: Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., editor. Phylogenetic supertrees: combining information to reveal the tree of life. Dordrecht (the Netherlands): Kluwer. p. 267-280.
20. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Sanderson M.J. 2001. Assessment of the accuracy of matrix representation with parsimony analysis supertree construction. Syst. Biol. 50:565-579.
21. Bremer K. 2000. Early Cretaceous lineages of monocot flowering plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 97:4707-4711.
22. Bremer K., Friis E.M., Bremer B. 2004. Molecular phylogenetic dating of asterid flowering plants shows early Cretaceous diversification. Syst. Biol. 53:496-505.
23. Bryant H.N. 2004. The cladistics of matrix representation with parsimony analysis. In: Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., editor. Phylogenetic supertrees: combining information to reveal the tree of life. Dordrecht (the Netherlands): Kluwer. p. 353-368.
24. Burleigh J.G., Driskell A.C., Sanderson M.J. 2006. Supertree bootstrapping methods for assessing phylogenetic variation among genes in genome-scale data sets. Syst. Biol. 55:426-440.
25. Chase M.W., Fay M.F., Devey D.S., Maurin O., Ronsted N., Davies T.J., Pillon Y., Peterson G., Seberg O., Tamura M.N., Asmussen C.B., Hilu K., Borsch T., Davis J.I., Stevenson D.W., Pires J.C., Givnish T.J., Sytsma K.J., McPherson M.A., Graham S.W., Rai H.S. 2006. Multigene analyses of monocot relationships: a summary. Aliso. 22:63-75.
26. Creevey C.J., Fitzpatrick D.A., Philip G.K., Kinsella R.J., O'Connell
27. M.J., Pentony M.M., Travers S.A., Wilkinson M., McInerney J.O. 2004. Does a tree-like phylogeny only exist at the tips in the prokaryotes? Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 271:2551-2558.
28. Davies T.J., Barraclough T.G., Chase M.W., Soltis P.S., Soltis D.E., Savolainen V. 2004. Darwin's abominable mystery: insights from a supertree of the angiosperms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 101:1904-1909.
29. de Queiroz A., Gatesy J. 2007. The supermatrix approach to systematics. Trends Ecol. Evol. 22:34-41.
30. Dransfield J., Rakotoarinivo M., Baker W.J., Bayton R.P., Fisher J.B., Horn J.W., Leroy B., Metz X. 2008. A new coryphoid palm genus from Madagascar. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 156:79-91.
31. Dransfield J., Uhl N.W., Asmussen C.B., Baker W.J., Harley M.M., Lewis C.E. 2005. A new phylogenetic classification of the palm family, Arecaceae. Kew Bull. 60:559-569.
32. Dransfield J., Uhl N.W., Asmussen C.B., Baker W.J., Harley M.M., Lewis C.E. 2008. Genera Palmarum - the evolution and classification of palms. Richmond (UK): Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
33. Fritsch P.W., Cruz B.C., Almeda F., Wang Y.G., Shi S.H. 2006. Phylogeny of Symplocos based on DNA sequences of the chloroplast trn C-trn D intergenic region. Syst. Bot. 31:181-192.
34. Fulton T.L., Strobeck C. 2006. Molecular phylogeny of the Arctoidea (Carnivora): effect of missing data on supertree and supermatrix analyses of multiple gene data sets. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 41:165-181.
35. Gatesy J., Baker R.H., Hayashi C. 2004. Inconsistencies in arguments for the supertree approach: supermatrices versus supertrees of Crocodylia. Syst. Biol. 53:342-355.
36. Gatesy J., Matthee C., DeSalle R., Hayashi C. 2002. Resolution of a supertree/supermatrix paradox. Syst. Biol. 51:652-664.
37. Gatesy J., Springer M.S. 2004. A critique of matrix representation with parsimony supertrees. In: Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., editor. Phylogenetic supertrees: combining information to reveal the tree of life. Dordrecht (the Netherlands): Kluwer. p. 369-388.
38. Govaerts R., Dransfield J. 2005. World checklist of palms. Richmond (UK): Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew.
39. Gunn B.F. 2004. The phylogeny of the Cocoeae (Arecaceae) with emphasis on Cocos nucifera. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 91:505-522.
40. Hahn W.J. 2002a. A molecular phylogenetic study of the Palmae (Arecaceae) based on atp B, rbc L, and 18S nrDNA sequences. Syst. Biol. 51:92-112.
41. Hahn W.J. 2002b. A phylogenetic analysis of the Arecoid line of palms based on plastid DNA sequence data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 23:189-204.
42. Harley M.M. 2006. A summary of fossil records for Arecaceae. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 151:39-67.
43. Hughes J., Longhorn S.J., Papadopoulou A., Theodorides K., de Riva A., Mejia-Chang M., Foster P.G., Vogler A.P. 2006. Dense taxonomic EST sampling and its applications for molecular systematics of the Coleoptera (beetles). Mol. Biol. Evol. 23:268-278.
44. Kennedy M., Page R.D.M. 2002. Seabird supertrees: combining partial estimates of procellariiform phylogeny. Auk. 119:88-108.
45. Kluge A.G. 1989. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Zool. 38:7-25.
46. Levasseur C., Lapointe F.J. 2001. War and peace in phylogenetics: a rejoinder on total evidence and consensus. Syst. Biol. 50:881-891.
47. Levasseur C., Lapointe F.J. 2003. Increasing phylogenetic accuracy with global congruence. In: Janowitz M., Lapointe F.-J., McMorris F.R., Mirkin B., Roberts F.S., editors. Bioconsensus. Providence (RI): American Mathematical Society. p. 221-230.
48. Lewis C.E., Doyle J.J. 2001. Phylogenetic utility of the nuclear gene malate synthase in the palm family (Arecaceae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 19:409-420.
49. Lewis C.E., Doyle J.J. 2002. A phylogenetic analysis of tribe Areceae (Arecaceae) using two low-copy nuclear genes. Plant Syst. Evol. 236:1-17.
50. Lewis C.E., Zona S. 2008. Leucothrinax morrisii, a new name for a familiar Caribbean palm. Palms. 52:84-88.
51. Loo A.H.B., Dransfield J., Chase M.W., Baker W.J. 2006. Low-copy nuclear DNA, phylogeny and the evolution of dichogamy in the betel nut palms and their relatives (Arecinae; Arecaceae). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 39:598-618.
52. Moore B.R., Smith S.A., Donoghue M.J. 2006. Increasing data transparency and estimating phylogenetic uncertainty in supertrees: approaches using nonparametric bootstrapping. Syst. Biol. 55:662-676.
53. Nixon K.C. 1999. The parsimony ratchet, a new method for rapid parsimony analysis. Cladistics. 15:407-414.
54. Norup M.V., Dransfield J., Chase M.W., Barfod A.S., Fernando E.S., Baker W.J. 2006. Homoplasious character combinations and generic delimitation: a case study from the Indo-Pacific arecoid palms (Arecaceae: Areceae). Am. J. Bot. 93:1065-1080.
55. Peters H.A., Pauw A., Silman M.R., Terborgh J.W. 2004. Falling palm fronds structure Amazonian rainforest sapling communities. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci. 271:S367-S369. Pisani D., Wilkinson M. 2002. MRP, taxonomic congruence and total evidence. Syst. Biol. 51:151-155.
56. Price S.A., Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Gittleman A.L. 2005. A complete phylogeny of the whales, dolphins and even-toed hoofed mammals (Cetartiodactyla). Biol. Rev. 80:445-473.
57. Purvis A. 1995. A modification to Baum and Ragans method for combining phylogenetic trees. Syst. Biol. 44:251-255.
58. Ragan M.A. 1992a. Matrix representation in reconstructing phylogenetic relationships among the eukaryotes. Biosystems. 28:47-55.
59. Ragan M.A. 1992b. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1:53-58.
60. Rodrigo A.G. 1993. A comment on Baum's method for combining phylogenetic trees. Taxon. 42:631-636.
61. Roncal J., Francisco-Ortega J., Asmussen C.B., Lewis C.E. 2005. Molecular phylogenetics of tribe Geonomeae (Arecaceae) using nuclear DNA sequences of phosphoribulokinase and RNA polymerase II. Syst. Bot. 30:275-283.
62. Ronquist F. 1996. Matrix representation of trees, redundancy, and weighting. Syst. Biol. 45:247-253.
63. Salamin N., Chase M.W., Hodkinson T.R., Savolainen V. 2003. Assessing internal support with large phylogenetic DNA matrices. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 27:528-539.
64. Salamin N., Hodkinson T.R., Savolainen V. 2002. Building supertrees: an empirical assessment using the grass family (Poaceae). Syst. Biol. 51:112-126.
65. Sanderson M.J., Purvis A., Henze C. 1998. Phylogenetic supertrees: assembling the trees of life. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13:105-109.
66. Savolainen V., Anstett M.C., Lexer C., Hutton I., Clarkson J.J., Norup M.V., Powell M.P., Springate D., Salamin N., Baker W.J. 2006. Sympatric speciation in palms on an oceanic island. Nature. 441:210-213.
67. * implementation of the parsimony ratchet. Beta version 1. Available from: http://users.iab.uaf.edu/~derek-sikes/software2.htm.
68. *and other methods). Version 4. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer.
69. Thomas M.M., Garwood N.C., Baker W.J., Henderson S.A., Russell S.J., Hodel D.R., Bateman R.M. 2006. Molecular phylogeny of the palm genus Chamaedorea, based on the low-copy nuclear genes PRK and RPB2. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 38:398-415.
70. Uhl N.W., Dransfield J., Davis J.I., Luckow M.A., Hansen K.S., Doyle J.J. 1995. Phylogenetic relationships among palms: cladistic analyses of morphological and chloroplast DNA restriction site variation. In: Rudall P.J., Cribb P.J., Cutler D.F., Humphries C.J., editors. Monocotyledons: systematics and evolution. Richmond (UK): Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. p. 623-661.
71. Wiens J.J. 1998. Does adding characters with missing data increase or decrease phylogenetic accuracy? Syst. Biol. 47:625-640.
72. Wiens J.J. 2003. Missing data, incomplete taxa, and phylogenetic accuracy. Syst. Biol. 52:528-538.
73. Wiens J.J. 2006. Missing data and the design of phylogenetic analyses. J. Biomed. Inform. 39:34-42.
74. Wilkinson M., Cotton J.A. 2007. Supertree methods for building the tree of life: divide-and-conquer approaches to large phylogenetic problems. In: Hodkinson T.R., Parnell J.A.N., editors. Reconstructing the tree of life - taxonomy and systematics of species rich taxa. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press. p. 61-75.
75. Wilkinson M., Cotton J.A., Creevey C., Eulenstein O., Harris S.R., Lapointe F.J., Levasseur C., McInerney J.O., Pisani D., Thorley J.L. 2005. The shape of supertrees to come: tree shape related properties of fourteen supertree methods. Syst. Biol. 54:419-431.
76. Wilkinson M., Cotton J.A., Lapointe F.J., Pisani D. 2007. Properties of supertree methods in the consensus setting. Syst. Biol. 56:330-337.
77. Wilkinson M., Pisani D., Cotton J.A., Corfe I. 2005. Measuring support and finding unsupported relationships in supertrees. Syst. Biol. 54:823-831.
78. Wilkinson M., Thorley J.L., Pisani D., Lapointe F.J., McInerney J.O. 2004. Some desiderata for liberal supertrees. In: Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., editor. Phylogenetic supertrees: combining information to reveal the tree of life. Dordrecht (the Netherlands): Kluwer. p. 227-246.