The incidence of species-level paraphyly in animals: A re-assessment

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution

Volumn 76, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 10-17

  Ross, Howard A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Gene tree; Meta analysis; Paraphyly; Polyphyly

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; BIRD; CLASSIFICATION; FISH; LINGUISTICS; PHYLOGENY; PROCEDURES; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ANIMALS; BIRDS; CLASSIFICATION; FISHES; LINGUISTICS; PHYLOGENY; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84896368289     PISSN: 10557903     EISSN: 10959513     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2014.02.021     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Arbogast B.S., Edwards S.V., Wakeley J., Beerli P., Slowinski J.B. Estimating divergence times from molecular data on phylogenetic and population genetic timescales. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 2002, 33:707-740.
2. Avise J.C. Molecular Markers, Natural History and Evolution 2004, Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, MA, USA.
3. Avise J.C., Arnold J., Ball R.M., Bermingham E., Lamb T., Neigel J.E., Reeb C.A., Saunders N.C. Intraspecific phylogeography: the mitochondrial DNA bridge between population genetics and systematics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1987, 18:489-522.
4. Barbanera F., Zuffi M.A.L., Guerrini M., Gentilli A., Tofanelli S., Fasola M., Dini F. Molecular phylogeography of the asp viper Vipera aspis (Linnaeus, 1758) in Italy: evidence for introgressive hybridization and mitochondrial DNA capture. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2009, 52:103-114.
5. Barraclough T.G., Nee S. Phylogenetics and speciation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2001, 16:391-399.
6. Baumsteiger J., Kinziger A.P., Aguilar A. Life history and biogeographic diversification of an endemic western North American freshwater fish clade using a comparative species tree approach. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2012, 65:940-952.
7. Bossu C.M., Near T.J. Gene trees reveal repeated instances of mitochondrial DNA introgression in orangethroat darters (Percidae: Etheostoma). Syst. Biol. 2009, 58:114-129.
8. Brelsford A., Milá B., Irwin D.E. Hybrid origin of Audubon's warbler. Mol. Ecol. 2011, 20:2380-2389.
9. Cassey P., Ewen J.G., Blackburn T.M., Møller A.P. A survey of publication bias within evolutionary ecology. Proc. R. Soc. B 2004, 271:S451-S454.
10. Castoe T.A., de Koning A.P.J., Kim H.-M., Gu W., Noona B.P., Naylor G., Jiang Z.J., Parkinson C.L., Pollock D.D. Evidence for an ancient adaptive episode of convergent molecular evolution. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106:8986-8991.
11. Claremont M., Vermeij G.J., Williams S.T., Reid D.G. Global phylogeny and new classification of the Rapaninae (Gastropoda: Muricidae), dominant molluscan predators on tropical rocky seashores. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2013, 66:91-102.
12. Darwin C. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life 1859, Murray, London.
13. de Queiroz K. Species concepts and species delimitation. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:879-886.
14. Desper R., Gascuel O. Fast and accurate phylogeny reconstruction algorithms based on the minimum-evolution principle. J. Comput. Biol. 2002, 9:687-705.
15. Edwards S.V. Is a new and general theory of molecular systematics emerging?. Evolution 2009, 63:1-19.
16. Fanelli D. Do pressures to publish increase scientists' bias? An empirical support from US states data. PLoS ONE 2010, 5:e10271.
17. Felsenstein, J., 1993. PHYLIP (Phylogeny Inference Package). Version 3.57c. <> http://evolution.genetics.washington.edu/phylip.html.
18. Funk D.J., Omland K.E. Species-level paraphyly and polyphyly: frequency, causes, and consequences, with insights from animal mitochondrial DNA. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2003, 34:397-423.
19. Good J.M., Hird S., Reid N., Demboski J.R., Steppan S.J., Martin-Nims T.R., Sullivan J. Ancient hybridization and mitochondrial capture between two species of chipmunks. Mol. Ecol. 2008, 17:1313-1327.
20. Grechko V.V. The problems of molecular phylogenetics with the example of squamate reptiles: mitochondrial DNA markers. Mol. Biol. 2013, 47:55-74.
21. Guindon S., Dufayard J.F., Lefort V., Anisimova M., Hordijk W., Gascuel O. New algorithms and methods to estimate maximum-likelihood phylogenies: assessing the performance of PhyML 3.0. Syst. Biol. 2010, 59:307-321.
22. Hebert P.D.N., Cywinska A., Ball S.L., deWaard J.R. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2003, 270:313-321.
23. Hein J., Schierup M.H., Wiuf C. Gene Genealogies, Variation and Evolution: A Primer in Coalescent Theory 2005, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
24. Heled J., Drummond A.J. Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010, 27:570-580.
25. Ho S.Y.W., Phillips M.J., Cooper A., Drummond A.J. Time dependency of molecular rate estimates and systematic overestimation of recent divergence times. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2005, 22:1561-1568.
26. Hudson R.R., Coyne J.A. Mathematical consequences of the genealogical species concept. Evolution 2002, 56:1557-1565.
27. Larkin M.A., Blackshields G., Brown N.P., Chenna R., McGettigan P.A., McWilliam H., Valentin F., Wallace I.M., Wilm A., Lopez R., Thompson J.D., Gibson T.J., Higgins D.G. Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics 2007, 23:2947-2948.
28. Maddison W.P. Gene trees in species trees. Syst. Biol. 1997, 46:523-536.
29. McKay B.D., Zink R.M. The causes of mitochondrial DNA gene tree paraphyly in birds. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2010, 54:647-650.
30. Meyer C.P., Paulay G. DNA barcoding: error rates based on comprehensive sampling. PLoS Biol. 2005, 3:e422.
31. Møller A.P., Jennions M.D. Testing and adjusting for publication bias. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2001, 16:580-586.
32. Neigel J.E., Avise J.C. Phylogenetic relationships of mitochondrial DNA under various demographic models of speciation. Evolutionary Processes and Theory 1986, 515-534. Academic Press, New York. E. Nevo, S. Karlin (Eds.).
33. Nichols R. Gene trees and species trees are not the same. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2001, 16:358-364.
34. Penny D. Relativity for molecular clocks. Nature 2005, 436:183-184.
35. Puillandre N., Modica M.V., Zhang Y., Sirovich L., Boisselier M.-C., Cruaud C., Holford M., Samadi S. Large-scale species delimitation method for hyperdiverse groups. Mol. Ecol. 2012, 21:2671-2691.
36. Ratnasingham S., Hebert P.D.N. BOLD: the Barcode of Life Data System (www.barcodinglife.org). Mol. Ecol. Notes 2007, 7:355-364.
37. Rodrigo A.G., Bertels F., Heled J., Noder R., Shearman H., Tsai P. The perils of plenty: what are we going to do with all these genes?. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2008, 363:3893-3902.
38. Rosenberg N.A. The shapes of neutral gene genealogies in two species: probabilities of monophyly, paraphyly, and polyphyly in a coalescent model. Evolution 2003, 57:1465-1477.
39. Spinks P.Q., Shaffer H.B. Conflicting mitochondrial and nuclear phylogenies for the widely disjunct Emys (Testudines: Emydidae) species complex, and what they tell us about biogeography and hybridization. Syst. Biol. 2009, 58:1-20.
40. Stenseth N.C., Maynard Smith J. Coevolution in ecosystems: Red Queen evolution or stasis?. Evolution 1984, 38:870-880.
41. Swofford, D.L., 2002. PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis using Parsimony (* and other methods). Version 4. <> http://paup.csit.fsu.edu/.
42. Tavaré S. Line-of-descent and genealogical processes, and their applications in population genetics models. Theor. Popul. Biol. 1984, 26:119-164.
43. Venditti C., Meade A., Pagel M. Phylogenies reveal new interpretation of speciation and the Red Queen. Nature 2010, 463:349-352.
44. White D.J., Wolff J.N., Pierson M., Gemmell N.J. Revealing the hidden complexities of mtDNA inheritance. Mol. Ecol. 2008, 17:4925-4942.
45. Yang Z., Rannala B. Bayesian species delimitation using multilocus sequence data. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107:9264-9269.
46. Zouros E. Biparental inheritance through uniparental transmission: the doubly uniparental inheritance (DUI) of mitochondrial DNA. Evol. Biol. 2013, 40:1-31.