Genetic relationship of three butterfly lizard species (Leiolepis reevesii rubritaeniata, Leiolepis belliana belliana, Leiolepis boehmei, Agamidae, Squamata) inferred from nuclear gene sequence analyses

Kasetsart Journal - Natural Science

Volumn 44, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 424-435

  Srikulnath, Kornsorn ^a,b   Matsubara, Kazumi ^b   Uno, Yoshinobu ^b   Thongpan, Amara ^a   Suputtitada, Saowanee ^a   Nishida, Chizuko ^b   Matsuda, Yoichi ^b,c   Apisitwanich, Somsak ^a  

^a KASETSART UNIVERSITY   (Thailand)

^b HOKKAIDO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^c NAGOYA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

Butterfly lizard; C mos; Leiolepidinae; Phylogeny; RAG1

Indexed keywords

AGAMIDAE; AGAMINAE; CHAMAELEONIDAE; LEIOLEPIS; LEIOLEPIS BELLIANA BELLIANA; LEIOLEPIS REEVESII; REPTILIA; SQUAMATA;

EID: 77954451175     PISSN: 00755192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Albert, E.M., D. San Mauro, M. García-París, L. R,ber and R. Zardoya. 2009. Effect of taxon sampling on recovering the phylogeny of squamate reptiles based on complete mitochondrial genome and nuclear gene sequence data. Gene 441: 12-21.
2. Aranyavalai, V. 2003. Species Diversity and Habitat Characteristics of Butterfly Lizards (Leiolepis spp.) in Thailand. Ph.D. Thesis. Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok.
3. Aranyavalai, V., K. Thirakhupt, P. Pariyanonth and W Chulalaksananukul. 2004. Karyotype and unisexualiry of Leiolepis boehmei Darevsky and Kupriyanova, 1993 (Sauria: Agamidae) from Southern Thailand. Nat. Hist. J. Chulalongkorn Univ. 4: 15-19.
4. Farris, J.S., M. Kallersjo, A.G. Kluge and C. Bult. 1995. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10: 315-319.
5. Graybeal, A. 1998. Is it better to add taxa of characters to a difficult phylogenetic problem? Syst Biol. 47: 9-17. (Pubitemid 128449782)
6. Godinho, R., V. Domingues, E.G. Crespo and N. Ferrand. 2006. Extensive intraspecific polymorphism detected by SSCP at the nuclear C-mos gene in the endemic Iberian lizard Lacerta schreiberi. Mol. Ecol. 15:731-738. (Pubitemid 43344789)
7. Guindon, S. and O. Gascuel. 2003. A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Syst. Biol. 52: 696-704. (Pubitemid 37365050)
8. Harris, D.J., J.C. Marshall and K.A. Crandall. 2001. Squamate relationships based on C-mos nuclear DNA sequences: increased taxon sampling improves bootstrap support. Amphib-reptil. 22: 235-242.
9. Harris, D.J. 2003. Codon bias variation in C-mos between squamate families might distort phylogenetic inferences. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 27: 540-544.
10. Huelsenbeck, J.P. and F. Ronquist. 2001. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference ofphylogeny. Bioinformatics 17: 754-755.
11. Kumar, S., K. Tamura and M. Nei. 2004. MEGA3: integrated software for molecular evolutionary genetics analysis and sequence alignment. Brief. Bioinform. 5: 150-163.
12. Kumazawa, Y. 2007. Mitochondrial genomes from major lizard families suggest their phylogenetic relationships and ancient radiations. Gene 388: 19-26. (Pubitemid 46014009)
13. Lee, M.S.Y. 2005. Squamate phylogeny, taxon sampling, and data congruence. Org. Divers. Evol. 5: 25-45.
14. Peters, V.G. 1971. Die intragenerischen gruppen und die Phylogenese der Schmetterlingsagamen (Agamidae: Leiolepis). Zool. Jahrb. Syst. 98: 11-152.
15. Posada, D. and K.A. Crandall. 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14: 817-818. (Pubitemid 28552116)
16. Saint, K.M., C.C. Austin, S.C. Donnellan and M.N. Hutchison. 1998. C-mos, a nuclear marker useful for squamate phylogenetic analysis. Mol. Phylogenet Evol. 10: 259-263.
17. rd ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York. 2,344 pp.
18. San Mauro, D., D.J. Gower, O.V. Oommen, M. Wilkinson and R. Zardoya. 2004. Phylogeny of caecilian amphibians (Gymnophiona) based on complete mitochondrial genomes and nuclear RAG1. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 33:413-427. (Pubitemid 39182626)
19. Schatz, G.G., M.A. Oettinger and D. Baltimore. 1989. The V(D)J recombination activating gene, RAG-1. Cell. 59: 1035-1048.
20. Schulte, J.A., J.R. Macey, A. Larson and T.J. Papenfuss. 1998. Molecular tests of phylogenetic taxonomies: a general procedure and example using four subfamilies of the lizard family Iguanidae. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 10: 367-376.
21. Schulte, J.A. and E.M. Cartwright. 2009. Phylogenetic relationships among iguanian lizards using alternative partitioning methodsand TSHZ1: a new phylogenetic marker for reptiles. Mol. Phylogenet Evol. 50:391-396.
22. Srikulnath, K., K. Matsubara, Y. Uno, A. Thongpan, S. Suputtitada, S. Apisitwanich, Y. Matsuda and C. Nishida. 2009. Karyological characterization of the butterfly lizard (Leiolepis reevesii rubritaeniata, Agamidae, Squamata) by molecular cytogenetic approach. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 125: 213-223.
23. Stayton, C.T. 2005. Morphological evolution of the lizard skull: a geometric morphometries survey. J. Morphol. 263:47-59.
24. Swofford, D.L. 2002. PUAP* Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (*and Other Methods). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
25. Tarrio, R.F., F. Rodriguez-Trelles and F.J. Ayala. 2000. Tree rooting with outgroups when they differ in their nucleotide composition from the ingroup: the Drosophila saltans and willistoni groups, a case study. Mol. Phylogenet Evol. 16: 344-349.
26. Thompson, J.D., T.J. Gibson, F. Plewniak, F. Jeanmougin and D.G. Higgins. 1997. The clustalX windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acid Res. 24: 4876-4882.
27. Townsend, T.M., A. Larson, E. Louis and J.R. Macey. 2004. Molecular phylogenetics of Squamata: the position of snakes, amphisbaenians, and dibamids, and the root of the squamate tree. Syst Biol. 53:735-757.
28. Uetz, P. 2009. The TIGR reptile database. The EMBL reptile database. [Cited on 18, September 2009]. Available from: http://www.reptile-database.org/
29. Vidal, N. and S.B. Hedges. 2004. Molecular evidence for a terrestrial origin of snakes. Proc. Biol. Sci. 271: s226-s229.
30. Yew, N.M. Strobel and G.F.V. Woude. 1993. Mos and the cell cycle: the molecular basis of the transformed phenotype. Curr. Opin. Genet Devel. 3: 19-25.