Conflict and resolution between phylogenies inferred from molecular and phenotypic data sets for hagfish, lampreys, and gnathostomes

Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution

Volumn 312, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 749-761

  Near, Thomas J ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMINO ACID; RIBOSOME RNA;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGY; CLASSIFICATION; GENETICS; HAGFISH; LAMPREY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; THELAZIA;

AMINO ACIDS; ANIMALS; BAYES THEOREM; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GNATHOSTOMA; HAGFISHES; LAMPREYS; PHYLOGENY; RNA, RIBOSOMAL;

HAGFISH; MYXINIDAE; PETROMYZONTIDAE; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 70350343702     PISSN: 15525007     EISSN: 15525015     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jez.b.21293     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Anderson FE, Swofford DL. 2004. Should we be worried about long-branch attraction in real data sets? Investigations using metazoan 18S rDNA. Mol Phylogenet Evol 33: 440-451.
2. Baker RH, Yu X, DeSalle R. 1998. Assessing the relative contribution of molecular and morphological characters in simultaneous analysis trees. Mol Phylogenet Evol 9:427-436.
3. Blair JE, Hedges SB. 2005. Molecular phylogeny and divergence times of deuterostome animals. Mol Biol Evol 22:2275-2284.
4. Brandley MC, Schmitz A, Reeder TW. 2005. Partitioned Bayesian analyses, partition choice, and the phylogenetic relationships of scincid lizards. Syst Biol 54:373-390.
5. Bromham L, Woolfit M, Lee MSY, Rambaut A. 2002. Testing the relationship between morphological and molecular rates of change along phylogenies. Evolution 56:1921-1930.
6. Cope ED. 1889. Synopsis of the families of Vertebrata. Am Nat 23:849-877.
7. Dean B. 1895. Fishes, living and fossil. New York: Columbia University Press. 300p.
8. Delarbre C, Gallut C, Barriel V, Janvier P, Gachelin G. 2002. Complete mitochondrial DNA of the hagfish, Eptatretus burgeri: the comparative analysis of mitochondrial DNA sequences strongly supports the cyclostome monophyly. Mol Phylogenet Evol 22:184-192.
9. Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Chourrout D, Philippe H. 2006. Tunicates and not cephalochordates are the closest living relatives of vertebrates. Nature 439:965-968.
10. de Queiroz A, Donoghue MJ, Kim J. 1995. Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 26.
11. Donoghue MJ. 1989. Phylogenies and the analysis of evolutionary sequences, with examples from seed plants. Evolution 43:1137-1156.
12. Donoghue MJ, Doyle JA, Gauthier J, Kluge AG, Rowe T. 1989. The importance of fossils in phylogeny reconstruction. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:431-460.
13. Donoghue PCJ, Sansom IJ. 2002. Origin and early evolution of vertebrate skeletonization. Microsc Res Tech 59:352-372.
14. Donoghue PCJ, Smith MP. 2001. The anatomy of Turinia pagei (Powrie), and the phylogenetic status of the Thelo-donti. Trans R Soc Edin-Earth 92:15-37.
15. Donoghue PCJ, Forey PL, Aldridge RJ. 2000. Conodont affinity and chordate phylogeny. Biol Rev 75:191-251.
16. Donoghue PCJ, Smith MP, Sansom IJ. 2004. The origin and early evolution of chordates: molecular clocks and the fossil record. In: Donoghue PCJ, Smith MP, editors. Telling the evolutionary time. London: Taylor & Francis. p 190-223.
17. Doyle JA, Donoghue MJ. 1987. The importance of fossils in elucidating seed plant phylogeny and macroevolution. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 50:63-95.
18. Eldredge N, Gould SJ. 1972. Punctuated equilibria: an alternative to phyletic gradualism. In: Schopf TJM, editor. Models in paleobiology. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper and Co. p 82-115.
19. Farris JS, Kallersjo M, Kluge AG, Bult C. 1994. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10:315-319.
20. Felsenstein J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst Zool 27:401-410.
21. Felsenstein J. 1988. Phylogenies from molecular sequences: inference and reliability. Annu Rev Genet 22:521-565.
22. Felsenstein J. 2004. Inferring phylogenies. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer. 664p.
23. Forey P, Janvier P. 1993. Agnathans and the origin of jawed vertebrates. Nature 361:129-134.
24. Forey PL. 1995. Agnathans recent and fossil, and the origin of jawed vertebrates. Rev Fish Biol Fisheries 5:267-303.
25. Furlong RF, Holland PWH. 2002. Bayesian phylogenetic analysis supports monophyly of ambulacraria and of cyclostomes. Zool Sci 19:593-599.
26. Gauthier J, Kluge AG, Rowe T. 1988. Amniote phylogeny and the importance of fossils. Cladistics 4:105-209.
27. Gess RW, Coates MI, Rubidge BS. 2006. A lamprey from the Devonian period of South Africa. Nature 443:981-984.
28. Goldman N. 1993. Statistical tests of models of DNA substitution. J Mol Evol 36:182-198.
29. Goodrich ES. 1909. Verebrata Craniata. First fascicle: cyclostomes and fishes. In: Lankester RE, editor. A treatise on zoology, Vol. 9. London: A. & C. Black. p 1-518.
30. Goodrich ES. 1930. Studies on the structure and developtment of vertebrates. London: Macmillan. 837p.
31. Hardisty MW. 1979. The biology of cyclostomes. London: Chapman and Hall. 428p.
32. Hardisty MW. 1982. Lampreys and hagfishes: analysis of cyclostome relationships. In: Hardisty MW, Potter IC, editors. The biology of lampreys. London: Academic Press. p 165-260.
33. Hedges SB. 2001. Molecular evidence for the early history of living vertebrates. In: Ahlberg PE, editor. Major events in early vertebrate evolution: paleontology, phylogeny, genetics and development. London: Taylor & Francis. p 119-134.
34. Hendy MD, Penny D. 1989. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Syst Zool 38:297-309.
35. Hubbs CL, Potter IC. 1971. Distribution, phylogeny and taxonomy. In: Hardisty MW, Potter IC, editors. The biology of lampreys. London: Academic Press. p 1-65.
36. Huelsenbeck JP. 1998. Systematic bias in phylogenetic analysis: is the Strepsiptera problem solved? Syst Biol 47:519-537.
37. Huelsenbeck JP, Bull JJ, Cunningham CW. 1996a. Combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Trends Ecol Evol 11:152-158.
38. Huelsenbeck JP, Hillis DM, Jones R. 1996b. Parametric bootstrapping in molecular phylogenetics: applications and performance. In: Ferraris JD, Palumbi SR, editors. Molecular Zoology. New York: Wiley-Liss. p 19-45.
39. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F, Nielsen R, Bollback JP. 2001. Bayesian inference of phylogeny and its impact on evolutionary biology. Science 294:2310-2314.
40. Huxley TH. 1876. On the nature of the cranio-facial apparatus of Petromyzon. J Anat Physiol 10:412-429.
41. Janvier P. 1981. The phylogeny of Craniata, with particular reference to the significance of fossil "agnathans". J Vert Paleontol 1:121-159.
42. Janvier P. 1996a. The dawn of the vertebrates: characters versus common ascent in the rise of current vertebrate phylogenies. Palaeontology 39:259-287.
43. Janvier P. 1996b. Early vertebrates. New York: Oxford University Press. 393p.
44. Janvier P. 2007a. Bornagain hagfishes. Nature 446:622-623.
45. Janvier P. 2007b. Living primitive fishes and fishes from deep time. In: McKenzie DJ, Farrell AP, Brauner CJ, editors. Primitive fishes. San Diego: Elsevier. p 1-51.
46. Janvier P. 2008. Early jawless vertebrates and cyclostome origins. Zool Sci 25:1045-1056.
47. Janvier P, Blieck A. 1979. New data on the internal anatomy of Heterostraci (Agnatha) with general remarks on the phylogeny of Craniota. Zool Scr 8:287-296.
48. Jarvik E. 1968. Aspects of vertebrate phylogeny. In: Orvig T, editor. Curent problems of lower vertebrate phylogeny. New York: Interscience Publishers. p 497-527.
49. Jollie M. 1962. Chordate morphology. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation. 478p.
50. Kass RE, Raftery AE. 1995. Bayes factors. J Am Stat Assoc 90:773-795.
51. Kikugawa K, Katoh K, Kuraku S, Sakurai H, Ishida O, Iwabe N, Miyata T. 2004. Basal jawed vertebrate phylogeny inferred from multiple nuclear DNA-coded genes. BMC Biology 2:1-11.
52. Kuraku S. 2008. Insights into cyclostome phylogenomics: pre-2R or post-2R? Zool Sci 25:960-968.
53. Kuraku S, Kuratani S. 2006. Time scale for cyclostome evolution inferred with a phylogenetic diagnosis of hagfish and lamprey cDNA sequences. Zool Sci 23:1053-1064.
54. Kuraku S, Hoshiyama D, Katoh K, Suga H, Miyata T. 1999. Monophyly of lampreys and hagfishes supported by nuclear DNA-coded genes. J Mol Evol 49:729-735.
55. Lanfranchi G, Pallavicini A, Laveder P, Valle G. 1994. Ancestral hemoglobin switching in lampreys. Dev Biol 164:402-408.
56. Larget B, Simon DL. 1999. Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 16:750-759.
57. Lewis PO. 2001. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Syst Biol 50:913-925.
58. Lipscomb DL, Farris JS, Kallersjo M, Tehler A. 1998. Support, ribosomal sequences and the phylogeny of the eukaryotes. Cladistics 14:303-338.
59. LØvtrup S. 1977. The phylogeny of vertebrata. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 330p.
60. Maisey JG. 1986. Heads and tails: a chordate phylogeny. Cladistics 2:201-256.
61. Mallatt J, Sullivan J. 1998. 28S and 18S rDNA sequences support the monophyly of lampreys and hagfishes. Mol Biol Evol 15:1706-1718.
62. Mallatt J, Winchell CJ. 2007. Ribosomal RNA genes and deuterostome phylogeny revisited: more cyclostomes, elas-mobranchs, reptiles, and a brittle star. Mol Phylogenet Evol 43:1005-1022.
63. Mallatt J, Sullivan J, Winchell CJ. 2001. The relationship of lampreys to hagfishes: a spectral analysis of ribosomal DNA sequences. In: Ahlberg P, editor. Major events in early vertebrate evolution. London: Taylor & Francis. p 106-118.
64. Meyer A, Zardoya R. 2003. Recent advances in the (molecular) phylogeny of vertebrates. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:311-338.
65. Mickevich MF, Farris JS. 1981. The implications of congruence in Menidia. Syst Zool 30:351-370.
66. Müller J, Reisz RR. 2006. The Phylogeny of early eureptiles: comparing parsimony and Bayesian approaches in the investigation of a basal fossil clade. Syst Biol 55:503-511.
67. Nylander JAA, Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP, Nieves-Aldrey JL. 2004. Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of combined data. Syst Biol 53:47-67.
68. Parker WK. 1883. On the skeleton of Marsipobranch fishes. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 174:411-458.
69. Patterson C, Williams DM, Humphries CJ. 1993. Congruence between molecular and morphological phylogenies. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 24:153-188.
70. Posada D, Crandall KA. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14:817-818.
71. Rambaut A, Grassly NC. 1997. Seq-Gen: an application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Comput Appl Bio Sci 13:235-238.
72. Riedl R. 1978. Order in living organisms. New York: Wiley.
73. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19:1572-1574.
74. Shaeffer B, Thomson KS. 1980. Reflections on agnathangnathostome relationships. In: Jacobs LL, editor. Aspects of vertebrate history. Flagstaff: Museum of Northern Arizona Press. p 19-33.
75. Shu D-G, Luo H-L, Morris SC, Zhang X-L, Hu S-X, Chen L, Han J, Zhu M, Li Y, Chen L-Z. 1999. Lower Cambrian vertebrates from South China. Nature 402:42-46.
76. Simpson GG. 1944. Tempo and mode in evolution. New York: Columbia University Press. 237p.
77. Simpson GG. 1953. The major features of evolution. New York: Columbia University Press. 434p.
78. Stensiö E. 1968. The cyclostomes with special reference to the diphyletic origin of the Petromyzontida and Myxinoidea. In: Ørvig T, editor. Curent problems of lower vertebrate phylogeny. New York: Interscience Publishers. p 13-71.
79. Stiassny MLJ, Wiley EO, Johnson GD, Carvalho MRd. 2004. Gnathostome fishes. In: Cracraft J, Donoghue MJ, editors. Assembling the tree of life. New York: Oxford University Press. p 410-429.
80. Stock DW, Whitt GS. 1992. Evidence from 18S ribosomal RNA sequence that lampreys and hagfishes form a natural group. Science 257:787-789.
81. Swofford DL. 2003. PAUP. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and other methods). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.
82. Swofford DL, Waddell PJ, Huelsenbeck JP, Foster PG, Lewis PO, Rogers JS. 2001. Bias in phylogenetic estimation and its relevance to the choice between parsimony and likelihood methods. Syst Biol 50:525-539.
83. Takezaki N, Figueroa F, Zaleska-Rutczynska Z, Klein J. 2003. Molecular phylogeny of early vertebrates: monophyly of the Agnathans as revealed by sequences of 35 genes. Mol Biol Evol 20:287-292.
84. Yalden DW. 1985. Feeding mechanisms as evidence for cyclostome monophyly. Zool J Linn Soc 84:291-300.
85. Yu SY, Zhang WW, Li L, Huang HF, Ma F, Li QW. 2008. Phylogenetic analysis of 48 gene families revealing relationships between hagfishes, lampreys, and Gnathostomata. J Genet Genomics 35:285-290.
86. Zharkikh A, Li W-H. 1993. Inconsistency of the maximum parsimony method: the case of five taxa with a molecular clock. Syst Biol 42:113-125.