Phylogenomic reconstruction influenced by assembly and annotation parameters: Using whole genome data to unravel the relationships of Spionidae (Annelida)
Viktoria E. Bogantes, Karin Meiβner, D. S. Waits, K. Kocot, K. M. Halanych
{"title":"Phylogenomic reconstruction influenced by assembly and annotation parameters: Using whole genome data to unravel the relationships of Spionidae (Annelida)","authors":"Viktoria E. Bogantes, Karin Meiβner, D. S. Waits, K. Kocot, K. M. Halanych","doi":"10.1111/zsc.12676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most efforts at improving accuracy in phylogenomic reconstructions have focused on improving tree‐building methods or orthology determination. Even though the use of whole genome sequence or transcriptome data is increasing, the degree to which accurate genome assembly and annotation influence phylogenetic inference has not been well explored. Here, we use low‐coverage whole genome sequencing of spionid annelids to explore the impact of different assemblers and annotation strategies on tree reconstruction. We also produce a phylogenetic hypothesis that spans the breadth of Spionidae, examining the current systematics of the group, which is based on morphological parsimony analyses and classical taxonomy. Our results show that both assembly and annotation can have important consequences for the pool of loci that may be available for tree reconstruction. When an identical phylogenomic pipeline is used, differences in assembly and annotation can account for variation in reconstructed topologies. Interestingly, the completeness and depth of the data used for training annotation software (i.e. data from model systems) appear to be more important, by some measures, than the degree of phylogenetic relatedness of the organism from which training data are drawn. Despite variation in recovered topologies, the recognised subfamily Spioninae is nested within Nerininae, suggesting that diagnostic characters of Nerininae (e.g. thick egg membrane, short‐headed sperm) are symplesiomorphies of Spionidae rather than apomorphies of a particular subclade. With the increased use of genomic data, our results advocate for a broader consideration of how assembly and annotation may impact data matrices used in phylogenomic analyses.","PeriodicalId":49334,"journal":{"name":"Zoologica Scripta","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zoologica Scripta","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/zsc.12676","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Most efforts at improving accuracy in phylogenomic reconstructions have focused on improving tree‐building methods or orthology determination. Even though the use of whole genome sequence or transcriptome data is increasing, the degree to which accurate genome assembly and annotation influence phylogenetic inference has not been well explored. Here, we use low‐coverage whole genome sequencing of spionid annelids to explore the impact of different assemblers and annotation strategies on tree reconstruction. We also produce a phylogenetic hypothesis that spans the breadth of Spionidae, examining the current systematics of the group, which is based on morphological parsimony analyses and classical taxonomy. Our results show that both assembly and annotation can have important consequences for the pool of loci that may be available for tree reconstruction. When an identical phylogenomic pipeline is used, differences in assembly and annotation can account for variation in reconstructed topologies. Interestingly, the completeness and depth of the data used for training annotation software (i.e. data from model systems) appear to be more important, by some measures, than the degree of phylogenetic relatedness of the organism from which training data are drawn. Despite variation in recovered topologies, the recognised subfamily Spioninae is nested within Nerininae, suggesting that diagnostic characters of Nerininae (e.g. thick egg membrane, short‐headed sperm) are symplesiomorphies of Spionidae rather than apomorphies of a particular subclade. With the increased use of genomic data, our results advocate for a broader consideration of how assembly and annotation may impact data matrices used in phylogenomic analyses.
期刊介绍:
Zoologica Scripta publishes papers in animal systematics and phylogeny, i.e. studies of evolutionary relationships among taxa, and the origin and evolution of biological diversity. Papers can also deal with ecological interactions and geographic distributions (phylogeography) if the results are placed in a wider phylogenetic/systematic/evolutionary context. Zoologica Scripta encourages papers on the development of methods for all aspects of phylogenetic inference and biological nomenclature/classification.
Articles published in Zoologica Scripta must be original and present either theoretical or empirical studies of interest to a broad audience in systematics and phylogeny. Purely taxonomic papers, like species descriptions without being placed in a wider systematic/phylogenetic context, will not be considered.