Sources of signal in 62 protein-coding nuclear genes for higher-level phylogenetics of arthropods

PLoS ONE

Volumn 6, Issue 8, 2011, Pages

  Regier, Jerome C ^a,b,c   Zwick, Andreas ^c,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b Bldg 142   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BIOTECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE   (United States)

^d STAATLICHES MUSEUM FÜR NATURKUNDE   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTHROPOD; ARTICLE; BIOINFORMATICS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DNA SEQUENCE; GENE; GENE CLUSTER; GENETIC ANALYSIS; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR GENE; PHYLOGENY; ANIMAL; CLASSIFICATION; GENETICS;

ARTHROPODA;

NUCLEAR PROTEIN;

ANIMALS; ARTHROPODS; NUCLEAR PROTEINS; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 79961144454     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023408     Document Type: Article

References (90)

1. Strausfeld, NJ, (1998) Crustacean- Insect relationships: The use of brain characters to derive phylogeny amongst segmented invertebrates. Brain Behav Evol 52: 186-206.
2. Fanenbruck M, Harzsch S, Wägele JW, (2004) The brain of the Remipedia (Crustacea) and an alternative hypothesis on their phylogenetic relationships. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 101: 3868-3873.
3. Mallatt J, Giribet G, (2006) Further use of nearly complete 28S and 18S rRNA genes to classify Ecdysozoa: 37 more arthropods and a kinorhynch. Molec Phylogenet Evol 40: 772-794.
4. Dunn CW, Hejnol A, Matus DQ, Pang K, Browne WE, et al. (2008) Broad phylogenomic sampling improves resolution of the animal tree of life. Nature 452: 745-750.
5. Regier JC, Shultz JW, Ganley ARD, Hussey A, Shi D, et al. (2008) Resolving arthropod phylogeny: Exploring phylogenetic signal within 41 kb of protein-coding nuclear gene sequence. Syst Biol 57: 920-938.
6. Aleshin VV, Mikhailov KV, Konstantinova AV, Nikitin MA, Rusin LY, et al. (2009) On the phylogenetic position of insects in the Pancrustacea clade. Molecular Biology 43: 804-818.
7. Ertas B, von Reumont BM, Wägele J-W, Misof B, Burmester T, (2009) Hemocyanin suggests a close relationship of Remipedia and Hexapoda. Mol Biol Evol 26: 2711-2718.
8. Roeding F, Borner J, Kube M, Klages S, Reinhardt R, Burmester T, (2009) A 454 sequencing approach for large scale phylogenomic analysis of the common emperor scorpion (Pandinus imperator). Mol Phylogenet Evol 53: 826-834.
9. Koenemann S, Jenner RA, Hoenemann M, Stemme T, von Reumont BM, (2010) Arthropod phylogeny revisited, with a focus on crustacen relationships. Arthropod Structure & Development 39: 88-110.
10. Meusemann K, von Reumont BM, Simon S, Roeding F, Strauss S, et al. (2010) A phylogenomic approach to resolve the arthropod tree of life. Mol Biol Evol 27: 2451-2464.
11. Regier JC, Shultz JW, Zwick A, Hussey A, Ball B, et al. (2010) Arthropod relationships revealed by phylogenomic analysis of nuclear protein-coding sequences. Nature 463: 1079-1083.
12. Baurain D, Brinkmann H, Philippe H, (2006) Lack of resolution in animal phylogeny: Closely spaced cladogeneses or undetected systematic errors? Mol Biol Evol 24: 6-9.
13. Pick, KS, Philippe H, Schreiber F, Erpenbeck D, Jackson DJ, et al. (2010) Improved phylogenomic taxon sampling noticeably affects nonbilaterian relationships. Mol Biol Evol 27: 1983-1987.
14. Hillis DM, Huelsenbeck JP, Cunningham CW, (1994) Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies. Science 264: 671-677.
15. Gatesy J, DeSalle R, Wahlberg N, (2007) How many genes should a systematist sample? Conflicting insights from a phylogenomic matrix characterized by replicated incongruence. Syst Biol 56: 355-363.
16. Lartillot N, Brinkmann H, Philippe H, (2007) Suppression of long-branch attraction artefacts in the animal phylgoeny using a site-heterogeneous model. BMC Evol Biol 7 (Suppl): S4.
17. Rodríguez-Ezpeleta N, Brinkmann H, Roure B, Lartillot N, Lang BF, et al. (2007) Detecting and overcoming systematic errors in genome-scale phylogenies. Syst Biol 56: 389-399.
18. Rannala B, Yang Z, (2008) Phylogenetic inference using whole genomes. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum Genet 9: 217-231.
19. Brinkmann H, Philippe H, (1999) Archaea sister group of bacteria? Indications from tree reconstruction artifacts in ancient phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol 16: 817-825.
20. Pisani D, (2004) Identifying and removing fast-evolving sites using compatibility analysis: An example from the Arthropoda. Syst Biol 53: 978-989.
21. Hampl V, Hug L, Leigh JW, Dacks JB, Lang BF, et al. (2009) Phylogenomic analyses support the monophyly of Excavata and resolve relationships among eukaryotic "supergroups". Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 3859-3864.
22. Inagaki Y, Nakajima Y, Sato M, Sakaguchi M, Hashimoto T, (2009) Gene sampling can bias multi-gene phylogenetic inferences: The relationship betwee red algae and green plants as a case study. Mol Biol Evol 26: 1171-1178.
23. Philippe H, (2009) Early-branching or fast-evolving eukaryotes? An answer based on slowly evolving positions. Proc R Soc Lond B 267: 1213-1221.
24. Pratt RC, Gibb GC, Morgan-Richards M, Phillips MJ, Hendy MD, et al. (2009) Toward resolving deep neoaves phylogeny: Data, signal enhancement, and priors. Mol Biol Evol 26: 313-326.
25. Björklund M, (1999) Are third positions really that bad? A test using vertebrate cytochrome b. Cladistics 15: 191-197.
26. Springer MS, Amrine HM, Burk A, Stanhope MJ, (1999) Additional support for Afrotheria and Paenungulata, the performance of mitochondrial versus nuclear genes, and the impact of data partitions with heterogeneous base composition. Syst Biol 48: 65-75.
27. Albu M, Min XJ, Hickey D, Golding B, (2008) Uncorrected nucleotide bias in mtDNA can mimic the effects of positive Darwinian selection. Mol Biol Evol 24: 2521-2524.
28. Dávalos LM, Perkins SL, (2008) Saturation and base composition bias explain phylogenomic conflict in Plasmodium. Genomics 5: 433-442.
29. Yang Z, (1998) On the best evolutionary rate for phylogenetic analysis. Syst Biol 47: 125-133.
30. Källersjö M, Albert VA, Farris JS, (1999) Homoplasy increases phylogenetic structure. Cladistics 15: 91-93.
31. Simmons MP, Carr TG, O'Neill K, (2004) Relative character-state space, amount of potential phylogenetic information, and heterogeneity of nucleotide and amino acid characters. Mol Phylogenet Evol 32: 913-926.
32. Kjer KM, Honeycutt RL, (2007) Site specific rates of mitochondrial genomes and the phylogeny of eutheria. BMC Evol Biol 7: 8.
33. Seo T-K, Kishino H, (2008) Synonymous substitutions substantially improve evolutionary inference from highly divergence proteins. Syst Biol 57: 367-377.
34. Gowri-Shankar V, Rattray M, (2005) On the correlation between composition and site-specific evolutionary rate: Implications for phylogenetic inference. Mol Biol Evol 23: 352-364.
35. Gruber KF, Voss RS, Jansa SA, (2007) Base-compositional heterogeneity in the RAG1 locus among didelphid marsupials: Implications for phylogenetic inference and the evolution of GC content. Syst Biol 56: 83-96.
36. Lockhart PJ, Howe CJ, Bryant DA, Beanland TJ, Larkum AWD, (1992) Substitutional bias confounds inference of cyanelle origins from sequence data. J Mol Evol 34: 153-162.
37. Galtier N, Gouy M, (1995) Inferring phylogenies from DNA sequences of unequal base compositions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 92: 11317-11321.
38. Foster PG, Hickey DA, (1999) Compositional bias may affect both DNA-based and protein-based phylogenetic reconstructions. J Mol Evol 48: 284-290.
39. Tarrío R, Rodríguez-Trelles F, Ayala FJ, (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.
40. Tarrío R, Rodríguez-Trelles F, Ayala FJ, (2001) Shared nucleotide composition biases among species and their impact on phylogenetic reconstructions of the Drosophilidae. Mol Biol Evol 18: 1464-1473.
41. Rosenberg MS, Kumar S, (2003) Heterogeneity of nucleotide frequencies among evolutionary lineages and phylogenetic inference. Mol Biol Evol 20: 610-621.
42. Jermiin LS, Ho SYW, Ababneh F, Robinson J, Larkum AWD, (2004) The biasing effect of compositional heterogeneity on phylogenetic estimates may be underestimated. Syst Biol 53: 638-643.
43. Naylor GJ, Brown WM, (1998) Amphioxus mitochondrial DNA, chordate phylogeny, and the limits of inferrence based on comparisons of sequences. Syst Biol 47: 61-76.
44. Phillips MJ, Delsuc F, Penny D, (2004) Genome-scale phylogeny and the detection of systematic biases. Mol Biol Evol 21: 1455-1458.
45. Collins TM, Fedrigo O, Naylor GJP, (2005) Choosing the best genes for the job: The case for stationary genes in genome-scale phylogenetics. Syst Biol 54: 493-500.
46. Herbeck, JT, Degnan PH, Wernegreen JJ, (2005) Nonhomogeneous model of sequence evolution indicates independent origins of primary endosymbionts within the Enterobacteriales (gamma-Proteobacteria). Mol Biol Evol 22: 520-532.
47. Cox CJ, Foster PG, Hirt RP, Harris SR, Embley TM, (2008) The archaebacterial origin of eukaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105: 20356-20361.
48. Harshman J, Braun EL, Braun MJ, Huddleston CJ, Bowie RC, et al. (2008) Phylogenomic evidence for multiple losses of flight in ratite birds. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105: 13462-13467.
49. Rota-Stabelli O, Telford MJ, (2008) A multi criterion approach for the selection of optimal outgroups in phylogeny: Recovering some support for Mandibulata over Myriochelata using mitogenomics. Mol Phylogenet Evol 48: 103-111.
50. Whelan S, (2008) Spatial and temporal heterogeneity in nucleotide sequence evolution. Mol Biol Evol 25: 1683-1694.
51. Song H, Sheffield NC, Cameron SL, Miller KB, Whiting MF, (2010) When phylogenetic assumptions are violated: Based compositional heterogeneity and among-site rate variation in beetle mitochondrial phylogenomics. Syst Ent 35: 429-448.
52. Conant GC, Lewis PO, (2001) Effects of nucleotide composition bias on the success of the parsimony criterion in phylogenetic inference. Mol Biol Evol 18: 1024-1033.
53. Lockhart PJ, Steel MA, Hendy MD, Penny D, (1994) Recovering evolutionary trees under a more realistic model of sequence evolution. Mol Biol Evol 1: 605-612.
54. Foster, PG, (2004) Modeling compositional heterogeneity. Syst Biol 53: 485-495.
55. Jayaswal V, Robinson J, Jermiin L, (2007) Estimation of phylogeny and invariant sites under the general Markov model of nucleotide sequence evolution. Syst Biol 56: 155-162.
56. Sheffield NC, Song H, Cameron S L, Whiting M F, (2009) Nonstationary evolution and compositional heterogeneity in beetle mitochondrial phylogenomics. Syst Biol 58: 381-394.
57. Seo T-K, Kishino H, (2009) Statistical comparison of nucleotide, amino acid, and codon substitution models for evolutionary analysis of protein-coding sequences. Syst Biol 58: 199-210.
58. Inagaki Y, Roger AJ, (2006) Phylogenetic estimation under codon models can be biased by codon usage heterogeneity. Mol Phylogenet Evol 40: 428-434.
59. Holder MT, Zwickl DJ, Dessimoz C, (2008) Evaluating the robustness of phylogenetic methods to among-site variability in substitution processes. Phil Trans R Soc B 363: 4013-4021.
60. Li C, Lu G, Ortí, G, (2008) Optimal data partitioning and a test case for ray-finned fishes (Actinopterygii) based on ten nuclear loci. Syst Biol 57: 519-539.
61. Zwick A, Regier JC, Mitter C, Cummings, MP, (2010) Increased gene sampling yields robust support for higher-level clades within Bombycoidea (Lepidoptera). Syst Entomol In Press.
62. Cho S, Zwick A, Regier JC, Mitter C, Cummings MP, et al. (2011) Deliberately unequal gene sampling: Boon or bane for phylogenetics of Lepidoptera (Hexapoda)? Syst Biol. In Press.
63. Phillips MJ, Penny D, (2002) The root of the mammalian tree inferred from whole mitochondrial genomes. Mol Phylogenet Evol 28: 171-185.
64. Delisle I, Strobeck C, (2005) A phylogeny of the Caniformia (order Carnivora) based on 12 complete protein-coding mitochondrial genes. Mol Phylogenet Evol 37: 192-201.
65. Li C, Ortí G, Zhang G, Lu G, (2007) A practical approach to phylogenomics: The phylogeny of ray-finned fish (Actinopterygii) as a case study. BMC Evol Biol 7: 44.
66. Regier JC, Zwick A, Cummings MP, Kawahara AY, Cho S, et al. (2009) Toward reconstructing the evolution of advanced moths and butterflies (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia): an initial molecular study. BMC Evol Biol 9: 280.
67. Snodgrass RE, (1935) Principles of Insect Morphology. New York McGraw-Hill Book Co.
68. Snodgrass RE, (1938) Evolution of the Annelida, Onychophora, and Arthropoda. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 97 (6): 1-159.
69. Field KG, Olsen GJ, Lane DJ, Giovannoni SJ, Ghiselin MT, et al. (1988) Molecular phylogeny of the animal kingdom. Science 239: 748-753.
70. Budd GE, Telford MJ, (2009) The origin and evolution of arthropods. Nature 457: 812-817.
71. Edgecombe GD, (2010) Arthropod phylogeny: An overview from the perspectives of morphology, molecular data and the fossil record. Arthropod Struct & Develop 39: 74-87.
72. Taylor DJ, Piel WH, (2004) An assessment of accuracy, error, and conflict with support values from genome-scale phylogenetic data. Mol Biol Evol 21: 1534-1537.
73. Suzuki Y, Glazko GV, Nei M, (2002) Overcredibility of molecular phylogenies obtained by Bayesian phylogenetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99: 16138-16143.
74. Susko E, Roger AJ, (2007) On reduced amino acid alphabets for phylogenetic inference. Mol Biol Evol 24: 2139-2150.
75. Lewis P, Holder MT, Holsinger KE, (2005) Polytomies and Bayesian phylogenetic inference. Syst Biol 54: 241-253.
76. Sullivan J, Joyce P, (2005) Model selection in phylogenetics. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 36: 445-466.
77. Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW, (2009) Long-branch attraction bias and inconsistency in Bayesian phylogenetics. PLoS ONE 4: e7891.
78. Pamilo P, Nei M, (2008) Relationships between gene trees and species trees. Mol Biol Evol 5: 568-583.
79. Delsuc F, Phillips MJ, Penny D, (2003) Comment on "hexapod origins: Monophyletic or paraphyletic?". Science 301: 1482.
80. Dunlop JA, Arango CP, (2005) Pycnogonid affinities: a review. J Zoological Syst & Evol Res 43: 8-21.
81. Brenneis G, Ungerer P, Scholtz G, (2008) The chelifores of sea spiders (Arthropoda, Pycnogonida) are the appendages of the deutocerebral segment. Evolution & Development, 10: 717-724.
82. Townsend JP, (2007) Profiling phylogenetic informativeness. Syst Biol 56: 222-231.
83. Townsend JP, López-Giráldez F, Friedman R, (2007) The phylogenetic informativeness of nucleotide and amino acid sequences for reconstructing the vertebrate tree. J Molec Evol 67: 437-447.
84. Shultz, JW, (2007) A phylogenetic analysis of the arachnid orders based on morphological characters. Zool J Linn Soc 150: 221-265.
85. Belinky F, Cohen O, Huchon D, (2010) Large-scale parsimony analysis of metazoan indels in protein-coding genes. Mol Biol Evol 27: 441-451.
86. Katoh K, Kuma K, Toh H, Miyata T, (2005) MAFFT version 5: improvement in accuracy of multiple sequence alignment. Nucleic Acids Res 33: 511-518.
87. Zwickl, DJ, (2006) Genetic algorithm approaches for the phylogenetic analysis of large biological sequence datasets under the maximum likelihood criterion. Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin.
88. Cummings MP, Huskamp JC, (2005) Grid computing. EDUCAUSE Review 40: 116-117.
89. Bazinet AL, Cummings MP, (2009) The Lattice Project: a Grid research production environment combining multiple Grid computing models. In: Weber MHW, editors. Distributed & Grid Computing-- Science Made Transparent for Everyone Principles, Applications and Supporting Communities. Marburg:Rechenkraft.net pp. 2-13.
90. Dietz L, Mayer C, Arango CP, Leese F, (2011) The mitochondrial genome of Colossendeis megalonyx supports a basal position of Colossendeidae within the Pycnogonida. Molec Phylog Evol 58: 553-558.