Employing Phylogenomics to Resolve the Relationships among Cnidarians, Ctenophores, Sponges, Placozoans, and Bilaterians

Integrative and Comparative Biology

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1084-1095

  Whelan, Nathan V ^a   Kocot, Kevin M ^b   Halanych, Kenneth M ^a  

^a AUBURN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; CLASSIFICATION; CNIDARIA; CTENOPHORA; GENETICS; INVERTEBRATE; PHYLOGENY; PLACOZOA; SPONGE (PORIFERA);

ANIMALS; CNIDARIA; CTENOPHORA; INVERTEBRATES; PHYLOGENY; PLACOZOA; PORIFERA;

EID: 84947992589     PISSN: 15407063     EISSN: 15577023     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/icb/icv037     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (112)

1. Ax P. 1996. Multicellular animals: a new approach to the phylogenetic order in nature. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
2. Bergsten J. 2005. A review of long-branch attraction. Cladistics 21:163-93.
3. Bond JE, Garrison NL, Hamilton CA, Godwin RL, Hedin M, Agnarsson I. 2014. Phylogenomics resolves a spider backbone phylogeny and rejects a prevailing paradigm for orb web evolution. Curr Biol 24:1765-71.
4. Borowiec ML, Lee EK, Chiu JC, Plachetzki DC. 2015. Dissecting phylogenetic signal and accounting for bias in whole-genome data sets: a case study of the Metazoa. bioRxiv Published online January 16, 2015. http://dx.doi. org/10.1101/013946.
5. Brown JM, Hedtke SM, Lemmon AR, Lemmon EM. 2010. When trees grow too long: Investigating the causes of highly inaccurate Bayesian branch-length estimates. Syst Biol 59:145-61.
6. Cannon JT, Kocot KM, Waits DS, Weese DA, Swalla BJ, Santos SR, Halanych KM. 2014. Phylogenomic resolution of the hemichordate and echinoderm clade. Curr Biol 24:2827-32.
7. Capella-Gutiérrez S, Silla-Martnez JM, Gabaldón T. 2009. trimAl: A tool for automated alignment trimming in large-scale phylogenetic analyses. Bioinformatics 25:1972-3.
8. Castresana J. 2000. Selection of conserved blocks from multiple alignments for their use in phylogenetic analyses. Mol Biol Evol 17:540-52.
9. Cavalier-Smith T, Fiore-Donno AM, Chao E, Kudryavtsev A, Berney C, Snell EA, Lewis R. 2014. Multigene phylogeny resolves deep branching of Amoebozoa. Mol Phylogenet Evol 81:71-85.
10. Chan CX, Ragan MA. 2013. Next-generation phylogenomics. Biol Direct 8:3.
11. Dunn CW, Hejnol A, Matus DQ, Pang K, Browne WE, Smith SA, Seaver E, Rouse GW, Obst M, Edgecombe GD, et al. 2008. Broad phylogenomic sampling improves resolution of the animal tree of life. Nature 452:745-9.
12. Dunn CW, Giribet G, Edgecombe GD, Hejnol A. 2014. Animal phylogeny and its evolutionary implications. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 45:371-95.
13. Dunn CW, Howison M, Zapata F. 2013. AGALMA: An automated phylogenomics workflow. BMC Bioinformatics 14:330.
14. Dutilh BE, van Noort V, van der Heijden RTJM, Boekhour T, Snel B, Huynen MA. 2007. Assessment of phylogenomic and orthology approaches for phylogenetic ineference. Bioinformatics 23:815-24.
15. Ebersberger I, Strauss S, von Haeseler A. 2009. HaMStR: Profile hidden markov model based search for orthologs in ESTs. BMC Evol Biol 9:157.
16. Edgar RC. 2004. MUSCLE: Multiple sequence alignment with high accuracy and high throughput. Nucleic Acids Res 32:1792-7.
17. Eitel M, Osigus H-J, deSalle R, Schierwater B. 2013. Global diversity of the placozoa. PLoS One 8:e57131.
18. Eitel M, Schierwater B. 2010. The phylogeography of the Placozoa suggests a taxon rich phylum in tropical and subtropical waters. Mol Ecol 19:2315-27.
19. Ekman S, Blaalid R. 2011. The devil in the details: Interactions between the branch-length prior and likelihood model affect node support and branch lengths in the phylogeny of the Psoraceae. Syst Biol 60:541-61.
20. El-Metwally S, Hamza T, Zakaria M, Helmy M. 2013. Nextgeneration sequence assembly: Four stages of data processing and computational challenges. PLoS Comp Biol 9:e1003345.
21. Enright AJ, Van Dongen S, Ouzounis CA. 2002. An efficient algorithm for large-scale detection of protein families. Nucleic Acids Res 30:1575-84.
22. Felsenstein J. 1973. Maximum likelihood and minimum-steps for methods for estimating evolutioanry trees from data on discrete characters. Syst Zool 22:240-9.
23. Felsenstein J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony and compatability methods will be positively misleading. Syst Zool 27:401-10.
24. Felsenstein J. 1981. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 17:368-76.
25. Felsenstein J. 1985. Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am Zool 125:1-15.
26. Fernández R, Laumer CE, Vahtera V, Libro S, Kaluziak S, Sharma PP, Pérez-Porro AR, Edgecombe GD, Giribet G. 2014. Evaluating topological conflict in centipede phylogeny using transcriptome data sets. Mol Biol Evol 31:1500-13.
27. Gatsey 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 56:355-63.
28. Gilks WR, Richardson S, Spiegelhalter DJ. 1996. Markov Chain Monte Carlo in practiceLondon: Chapman & Hall.
29. Golombek A, Tobergte S, Struck TH. 2015. Elucidating the phylogenetic position of Gnathostomulida and first mitochondrial genomes of Gnathostomulida, Gastrotricha and Polycladida (Platyhelminthes). Mol Phylogenet Evol 86:49-63.
30. Halanych KM. 2015. The ctenophore lineage is older than sponges That cannot be right! Or can it J Exp Biol 218:592-7.
31. Hampl V, Hug L, Leigh JW, Dacks JB, Lang BF, Simpson AGB, Roger AJ. 2009. Phylogenomic analyses support monophyly of Excavata and resolve relationships among eukaryotic "supergroups". Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:3859-64.
32. Hartmann S, Vision TJ. 2008. Using ESTs for phylogenomics: Can one accurately infer a phylogenetic tree from a gappy alignment BMC Evol Biol 8:95.
33. Heath TA, Hedtke SM, Hillis DM. 2008. Taxon sampling and the accuracy of phylogenetic analyses. J Syst Evol 46:239-57.
34. Hejnol A, Obst M, Stamatakis A, Ott M, Rouse GW, Edgecombe GD, Martinez P, Bagunã J, Bailly X, Jondelius U, et al. 2009. Assessing the root of bilaterian animals with scalable phylogenomic models. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 276:4261-70.
35. Hendy MD, Penny D. 1989. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Syst Zool 38:297-309.
36. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F, Nielsen R, Bollback JP. 2001. Bayesian inference of phylogeny and its impact on evolutionary biology. Science 294:2310-4.
37. Janussen D, Reiswig HM. 2009. Hexactinellida (Porifera) from the ANDEEP III expedition to the Weddel Sea, Antarctica. Zootaxa 2136:1-20.
38. Jarvis ED, Mirarab S, Aberer AJ, Li B, Houde P, Li C, Ho SYW, Faircloth BC, Nabholz B, Howard JT, et al. 2014. Whole-genome analyses resolve early branches in the tree of life of modern birds. Science 346:1320-31.
39. Jékely G, Paps J, Nielsen C. 2015. The phylogenetic position of ctenophores and the origin(s) of nervous systems. EvoDevo 6:1.
40. Johnson BR, Borowiec ML, Chiu JC, Lee EK, Atallah J, Ward PS. 2013. Phylogenomics resolves evolutionary relationships among ants, bees, and wasps. Curr Biol 23:2565.
41. Kaiser D. 2001. Building a multicellular organism. Annu Rev Genet 35:103-23.
42. Katoh K, Standley DM. 2013. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: Improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol 30:772-80.
43. King N, Westbrook MJ, Young SL, Kuo A, Abedin M, Chapman J, Fairclough S, Hellsten U, Isogai Y, Letunic I, et al. 2008. The genome of the choanoflagellate Monosiga brevicollis and the origin of metazoans. Nature 451:783-8.
44. Kocot KM, Cannon JT, Todt C, Citarella MR, Kohn AB, Meyer A, Santos SR, Schander C, Moroz LL, Lieb B, et al. 2011. Phylogenomics reveals deep molluscan relationships. Nature 477:452-6.
45. Kocot KM, Citarella MR, Moroz LL, Halanych KM. 2013. PhyloTreePruner: A phylogenetic tree-based approach for selection of orthologous sequences for phylogenomics. Evol Bioinform Online 9:429-35.
46. Koonin EV. 2005. Orthologs, paralogs, and evolutionary genomics. Annu Rev Genet 39:309-38.
47. Kück P, Meusemann K, Dambach J, Thormann B, von Reumont BM, Wägele JW, Misof B. 2010. Parametric and non-parametric masking of randomness in sequence alignments can be improved and leads to better resolved trees. Front Zool 7:10.
48. Kück P, Struck TH. 2014. BaCoCa-a heuristic software tool for the parallel assessment of sequence biases in hundreds of gene and taxon partitions. Mol Phylogenet Evol 70:94-8.
49. Lartillot N, Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 2007. Suppression of long-branch attraction artifacts in the animal phylogeny using a site-heterogeneous model. BMC Evol Biol 7:S4.
50. Lartillot N, Philippe H. 2005. A Bayesian mixture model for across-site heterogeneities in the amino-acid replacement process. Mol Biol Evol 21:1095-1109.
51. Lartillot N, Rodrigue N, Stubbs D, Richer J. 2013. PhyloBayes MPI: Phylogenetic reconstruction with infinite mixtures of profiles in a parallel environment. Syst Biol 62:611-5.
52. Lechner M, Findeiß S, Steiner L, Marz M, Stadler PF, Prohaska SJ. 2011. Proteinortho: Detection of (co-)orthologs in large-scale analysis. BMC Bioinformatics 12:124.
53. Lemer S, Kawauchi GY, Andrade SCS, González VL, Boyle MJ, Giribet G. 2015. Re-evaluating the phylogeny of Sipuncula through transcriptomics. Mol Phylogenet Evol 83:174-83.
54. Lemmon AR, Brown JM, Stanger-Hall K, Moriarty-Lemmon E. 2009. The effect of ambiguous data on phylogenetic estimates obtained by maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference. Syst Biol 58:130-45.
55. Li L, Stoeckert CJ, Roos DS. 2003. OrthoMCL: Identification of ortholog groups for eukaryotic genomes. Genome Res 13:2178-89.
56. Mah JL, Christensen-Dalsgaard KK, Leys SP. 2014. Choanoflagellate and choanocyte collar-flagellar systems and the assumption of homology. Evol Dev 16:25-37.
57. Martin JA, Wang Z. 2011. Next-generation transcriptome assembly. Nat Rev Genet 12:671-82.
58. Misof B, Misof K. 2009. A Monte Carlo approach successfully identifies randomness in multiple sequence alignments: A more objective means of data exclusion. Syst Biol 58:21-34.
59. Moroz LL. 2009. On the independent origins of complex brains and neurons. Brain Behav Evol 74:177-90.
60. Moroz LL, Kocot KM, Citarella MR, Dosung S, Norekian TP, Povolotskaya IS, Grigorenko AP, Dailey C, Berezikov E, Buckley KM, et al. 2014. The ctenophore genome and the evolutionary origins of neural systems. Nature 510:109-14.
61. Morrison DA, Ellis JT. 1997. Effects of nucleotide sequence alignment on phylogeny estimation: A case study of 18S rDNAs of Apicomplexa. Mol Biol Evol 14:428-41.
62. Nagarajan N, Pop M. 2013. Sequence assembly demystified. Nat Rev Genet 14:157-67.
63. Nekrutenko A, Taylor J. 2012. Next-generation sequencing data interpretation: Enhancing reproducibility and accesibility. Nat Rev Genet 13:667-72.
64. Nesnidal MP, Helmkampf M, Bruchhaus I, Hausdorf B. 2010. Compositional heterogeneity and phylogenomic inference of metazoan relationships. Mol Biol Evol 27:2095-104.
65. Nesnidal MP, Helmkampf M, Bruchhaus I, El-Matbouli M, Hausdorf B. 2013. Agent of whirling disease meets oprhan worm: Phylogenomic analyses firmly place Myxozoa in Cnidaria. PLOS One 8:e54576.
66. Nielsen C. 2008. Six major steps in animal evolution: Are we derived from sponge larvae Evol Dev 10:241-57.
67. Nosenko T, Schreiber F, Adamska M, Adamski M, Eitel M, Hammel J, Maldonado M, Müller WEG, Nickel M, Schierwater B, et al. 2013. Deep metazoan phylogeny: When different genes tell different stories. Mol Phylogenet Evol 67:223-33.
68. Oakley TH, Alexandrou MA, Ngo R, Pankey MS, Churchill CKC, Chen W, Lopker KB. 2014. Osiris: Accessible and reproducible phylogenetic and phylogenomic analyses with the Galaxy workflow management system. BMC Bioinformatics 15:239.
69. Ogden TH, Rosenberg MS. 2005. Multiple sequence alignment accuracy and phylogenetic inference. Syst Biol 55:314-28.
70. Osigus H-J, Eitel M, Bernt M, Donath A, Schierwater B. 2013. Mitogenomics at the base of metazoa. Mol Phylogenet Evol 69:339-51.
71. Pearse VB, Voigt O. 2007. Field biology of placozoans (Trichoplax): Distribution, diversity, biotic interactions. Integr Comp Biol 47:677-92.
72. Pearson WR, Sierk ML. 2005. The limits of protein sequence comparision Curr Opin Struct Biol 15:254-60.
73. Philippe H, Brinkmann H, Lavrov DV, Littlewood DTJ, Manuel M, Wörheide G, Baurain D. 2011. Resolving difficult phylogenetic questions: Why more sequences are not enough. PLoS Biol 9:e1000602.
74. Philippe H, Derelle R, Lopez P, Pick K, Borchiellini C, Boury-Esnault N, Vacelet J, Renard E, Houliston E, Queínnec E, et al. 2009. Phylogenomics revives traditional views on deep animal relationships. Curr Biol 19:706-12.
75. Philippe H, Lartillot N, Brinkmann H. 2005. Multigene analyses of bilaterian animals corroboratae the monophyly of Ecdysozoa, Lophotrochozoa, and Protostomia. Mol Biol Evol 22:1246-53.
76. Pick KS, Philippe H, Schreiber F, Erpenbeck D, Jackson DJ, Wrede P, Wiens M, Alié A, Morgenstern B, Manuel M, et al. 2010. Improved phylogenomic taxon sampling noticeably affects nonbilaterian relationships. Mol Biol Evol 27:1983-7.
77. Pickett KM, Randle CP. 2005. Strange Bayes indeed: Uniform topological priors imply non-uniform clade priors. Mol Phylogenet Evol 34:203-11.
78. Podar M, Haddock SHD, Sogin ML, Harbison GR. 2001. A molecular phylogenetic framework for the phylum Ctenophora using 18S rRNA genes. Mol Phylogenet Evol 21:218-30.
79. Price MN, Dehal PS, Arkin AP. 2010. FastTree 2-Approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PLOS One 5:e9490.
80. Rannala B, Yang Z. 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: A new method of phylogenetic inference. J Mol Evol 43:304-11.
81. Rannala B, Zhu T, Yang Z. 2012. Tail paradox, partial identifiability, and influential priors in Bayesian branch length inference. Mol Biol Evol 29:325-35.
82. Raup DM. 1986. Biological extinction in earth history. Science 231:1528-33.
83. Regier JC, Shultz JW, Ganley ARD, Hussey A, Shi D, Ball B, Zwick A, Stajich JE, Cummings MP, Martin JW, et al. 2008. Resolving arthropod phylogeny: Exploring phylogenetic singal withn 41 kb of protein-coding nuclear gene sequence. Syst Biol 57:920-38.
84. Riesgo A, Farrar N, Windsor PJ, Giribet G, Leys SP. 2014. The analysis of eight transcriptomes from all Poriferan classes reveals surprising genetic complexity in sponges. Mol Biol Evol 31:1102-20.
85. Ronquist F, Teslenko M, van der Marl P, Ayres DL, Darling A, Höhna S, Larget B, Liu L, Suchard MA, Huelsenbeck JP. 2012. MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayes inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst Biol 61:539-42.
86. Rota-Stabellia O, Telford MJ. 2008. A multi criterion appraoch for the selection of optimal outgroups in phylogeny: Recovering some support for Mandibulata over Myriochelata using mitogenomics. Mol Phylogenet Evol 48:103-11.
87. Roure B, Baurain D, Philippe H. 2013. Impact of missing data on phylogenies inferred from empirical phylogenomic datasets. Mol Biol Evol 30:197-214.
88. Ryan JF, Pang K, Schnitzler CE, Nguyen A-D, Moreland RT, Simmons DK, Koch BJ, Francis WR, Havlak P, Smith SA, et al. 2013. The genome of the ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi and its implications for cell type evolution. Science 342:1242592.
89. Salichos L, Rokas A. 2013. Inferring ancient divergences requires genes with strong phylogenetic signals. Nature 497:327-33.
90. Sharma PP, Kaluziak ST, Pérez-Porro AR, González VL, Hormiga G, Wheeler WC, Giribet G. 2014. Phylogenomic interrogation of Arachnida reveals systemic conflicts in phylogenetic signal. Mol Biol Evol 31:2963-84.
91. Simion P, Bekkouche N, Jager M, Queínnec E, Manuel M. 2015. Exploring the potential of small RNA subunit and ITS sequences for resolving the phylogenetic relationships within the phylum Ctenophora. Zoology 118:102-14.
92. Simpson GG. 1952. How many species Evolution 6:342.
93. Sperling EA, Pisani D, Peterson KJ. 2007. Poriferan paraphyly and its implications for Precambrian paleobiology. Geol Soc Lond Spec Publ 286:355-68.
94. Smith SA, Dunn CW. 2008. Phyutility: A phyloinformatics tool for trees, alignments and molecular data. Bioinformatics 24:715-6.
95. Stamatakis A. 2014. RAxML version 8: A tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30:1312-3.
96. Straub SCK, Moore MJ, Soltis PS, Soltis DE, Liston A, Livshultz T. 2014. Phylogenetic signal detection from an ancient rapid radiation: Effects of noise reduction, longbranch attraction, and model selection in crown clade Apocynaceae. Mol Phylogenet Evol 80:169-85.
97. Struck TH. 2013. The impact of paralogy on phylogenomic studies-A case study on Annelid Relationships. PLoS One 8:e62892.
98. Struck TH. 2014. TreSpEx-detection of misleading signal in phylogenetic reconstructions based on tree information. Evol Bioinform Online 10:51-67.
99. Struck TH, Paul C, Hill N, Hartmann S, Hosel C, Kube M, Lieb B, Meyer A, Tiedemann R, Purschke G, et al. 2011. Phylogenomic analyses unravel annelid evolution. Nature 471:95-8.
100. Struck TH, Wey-Fabrizius AR, Golombek A, Hering L, Weigert A, Bleidorn C, Klebow S, Iakovenko N, Hausdorf B, Petersen M, et al. 2014. Platyzoan paraphyly based on phylogenomic data supports a noncoelomate ancestrsy of Spiralia. Mol Biol Evol 31:1833-49.
101. Suga H, Chen Z, de Mendoza A, Sebé-Pedró s A, Brown MW, Kramer E, Carr M, Kerner P, Vervoort M, Sánchez-Pons N, et al. 2013. The Capsaspora genome reveals a complex unicellular prehistory of animals. Nat Commun 4:2325.
102. Telford MJ, Lowe CJ, Cameron CB, Ortega-Martinex O, Aronowicz J, Oliveri P, Copley RR. 2013. Phylogenomic analysis of echinoderm class relationships supports Asterozoa. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 281:20140479.
103. Thorley J, Wilkinson M. 1999. Testing the phylogenetic stability of early tetrapods. J Theor Biol 200:343-4.
104. UniProt Consortium. 2015. UniProt: A hub for protein information. Nucleic Acids Res 43:D204-12.
105. van Djik EL, Auger H, Jaszczyszyn Y, Thermes C. 2014. Ten years of next-generation sequencing technology. Trends Genet 30:418-26.
106. Weisburg WG, Giovannoni SJ, Woese CR. 1989. The Deinococcus-Thermus phylum and the effect of rRNA composition on phylogenetic tree construction. Syst Appl Microbiol 11:128-34.
107. Whelan NV, Kocot KM, Moroz LL, Halanych KM. 2015. Error, signal, and the placement of Ctenophora sister to all other animals. Proc Natl Scad Sci USA. doi:10.1073/pnas.1503453112.
108. Wickett NJ, Mirarab S, Nguyen N, Warnow T, Carpenter E, Matasci N, Ayyampalayam S, Barker MS, Burleigh JG, Gitzendanner MA, et al. 2014. Phylotranscriptomic analysis of the origin and early diversification of land plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:E4859-68.
109. Yang Y, Smith SA. 2014. Orthology inference in nonmodel organisms using transcriptomes and low-coverage genomes: Improving accuracy and matrix occupancy for phylogenomics. Mol Biol Evol 31:3081-92.
110. Yang Z. 1996. Among-site rate variation and its impact on phylogenetic analyses. Trends Ecol Evol 11:367-72.
111. Yang Z, Rannala B. 2005. Branch-length prior influences Bayesian posterior probability of phylogeny. Syst Biol 54:455-70.
112. Zwickl DJ, Hillis DM. 2002. Increased taxon sampling greatly reduces phylogenetic error. Syst Biol 51:588-98.