Evolution of the lizard family Phrynosomatidae as inferred from diverse types of data

IF 1.1 2区 生物学 Q3 ZOOLOGY Herpetological Monographs Pub Date : 1996-01-01 DOI:10.2307/1466980
T. Reeder, J. Wiens
{"title":"Evolution of the lizard family Phrynosomatidae as inferred from diverse types of data","authors":"T. Reeder, J. Wiens","doi":"10.2307/1466980","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The phylogenetic relationships within the iguanian lizard family Phrynosomatidae are inferred from diverse types of data (i.e., mitochondrial rDNA, osteology, coloration, scalation, karyology, and behavior). All 10 currently recognized genera (Callisaurus, Cophosaurus, Holbrookia, Petrosaurus, Phrynosoma, Sator, Sceloporus, Uma, Urosaurus, and Uta) are included in the phylogenetic analyses. The phylogenies inferred from the separate analyses of the DNA sequence data (779 bp; 162 informative characters; 40 species) and non-DNA data (155 informative characters; 59 species) share 26% (10) of their respective clades. Four of the congruent clades (i.e., sand lizards + Phrynosoma, Petrosaurus, Urosaurus, Uta) are strongly supported (-70% bootstrap) in both of the separate analyses while five others are strongly supported in only one, but not both, of the separate analyses. All conflicting hypotheses leading to the taxonomic incongruence (e.g., Sceloporus group interrelationships) are weakly supported (<70% bootstrap) in one or both of the separate analyses. Combining the DNA and non-DNA data for phylogenetic analysis results in a single shortest tree. Overall, the phylogeny from the combined analysis shares more clades in common with the hypotheses inferred from the separate DNA analysis (74%) than with the separate analysis of the non-DNA data (53%). The intergeneric relationships inferred from the combined analysis are more similar to recently published hypotheses based on morphological data, except the Sceloporus group is paraphyletic. Although phrynosomatid intergeneric relationships are well resolved by the combined analysis of the DNA and non-DNA data, the relationships among most genera are nevertheless weakly supported by the separate and combined analyses. This weak support is most likely the result of rapid speciation. The monophyly of the speciose genus Sceloporus (exclusive of Sator) is supported by the separate non-DNA and combined analyses. The inclusion of numerous incomplete taxa (19 species lacking DNA data) in the combined analysis did not decrease resolution among the complete taxa (40 species with DNA and non-DNA data), but the addition of the incomplete taxa did affect the relationships among the complete taxa. Overall, the DNA data are more homoplastic than the non-DNA data, but the degree of character incongruence exhibited within the different partitions and/or sources of the DNA and non-DNA data sets varies greatly.","PeriodicalId":56309,"journal":{"name":"Herpetological Monographs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"1996-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2307/1466980","citationCount":"131","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Herpetological Monographs","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/1466980","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ZOOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 131

Abstract

The phylogenetic relationships within the iguanian lizard family Phrynosomatidae are inferred from diverse types of data (i.e., mitochondrial rDNA, osteology, coloration, scalation, karyology, and behavior). All 10 currently recognized genera (Callisaurus, Cophosaurus, Holbrookia, Petrosaurus, Phrynosoma, Sator, Sceloporus, Uma, Urosaurus, and Uta) are included in the phylogenetic analyses. The phylogenies inferred from the separate analyses of the DNA sequence data (779 bp; 162 informative characters; 40 species) and non-DNA data (155 informative characters; 59 species) share 26% (10) of their respective clades. Four of the congruent clades (i.e., sand lizards + Phrynosoma, Petrosaurus, Urosaurus, Uta) are strongly supported (-70% bootstrap) in both of the separate analyses while five others are strongly supported in only one, but not both, of the separate analyses. All conflicting hypotheses leading to the taxonomic incongruence (e.g., Sceloporus group interrelationships) are weakly supported (<70% bootstrap) in one or both of the separate analyses. Combining the DNA and non-DNA data for phylogenetic analysis results in a single shortest tree. Overall, the phylogeny from the combined analysis shares more clades in common with the hypotheses inferred from the separate DNA analysis (74%) than with the separate analysis of the non-DNA data (53%). The intergeneric relationships inferred from the combined analysis are more similar to recently published hypotheses based on morphological data, except the Sceloporus group is paraphyletic. Although phrynosomatid intergeneric relationships are well resolved by the combined analysis of the DNA and non-DNA data, the relationships among most genera are nevertheless weakly supported by the separate and combined analyses. This weak support is most likely the result of rapid speciation. The monophyly of the speciose genus Sceloporus (exclusive of Sator) is supported by the separate non-DNA and combined analyses. The inclusion of numerous incomplete taxa (19 species lacking DNA data) in the combined analysis did not decrease resolution among the complete taxa (40 species with DNA and non-DNA data), but the addition of the incomplete taxa did affect the relationships among the complete taxa. Overall, the DNA data are more homoplastic than the non-DNA data, but the degree of character incongruence exhibited within the different partitions and/or sources of the DNA and non-DNA data sets varies greatly.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从不同类型的资料推断的蜥科蜥科的进化
鬣蜥科Phrynosomatidae的系统发育关系是从不同类型的数据(即,线粒体rDNA,骨学,颜色,鳞片学,核学和行为)推断出来的。所有10个目前确认的属(Callisaurus, Cophosaurus, Holbrookia, Petrosaurus, Phrynosoma, Sator, Sceloporus, Uma, Urosaurus和Uta)都包括在系统发育分析中。从DNA序列数据(779 bp;162个信息字符;40种)和非dna数据(155个信息字符;59种)共享26%(10种)的分支。四个相同的进化支(即沙蜥蜴+ Phrynosoma, Petrosaurus, Urosaurus, Uta)在两个单独的分析中都得到了强烈的支持(-70% bootstrap),而其他五个只在一个单独的分析中得到了强烈的支持,但不是两个单独的分析。所有导致分类不一致的相互矛盾的假设(例如,Sceloporus类群的相互关系)在一个或两个单独的分析中都得到弱支持(<70% bootstrap)。结合DNA和非DNA数据进行系统发育分析,得到一个最短树。总的来说,综合分析得出的系统发育与单独DNA分析得出的假设(74%)相比,与单独非DNA数据分析得出的假设(53%)有更多的共同之处。从综合分析中推断出的属间关系与最近发表的基于形态学数据的假设更相似,除了Sceloporus类群是副属的。虽然通过DNA和非DNA数据的联合分析可以很好地解决了虫属间的关系,但大多数属间的关系仍然不能得到单独和联合分析的有力支持。这种微弱的支撑很可能是物种快速形成的结果。单独的非dna分析和组合分析支持了种属Sceloporus(不包括Sator)的单系性。大量不完整分类群(19种缺乏DNA数据)的加入并没有降低完整分类群(40种具有DNA和非DNA数据)之间的分辨率,但不完整分类群的加入确实影响了完整分类群之间的关系。总体而言,DNA数据比非DNA数据更具同质性,但在DNA和非DNA数据集的不同分区和/或来源中表现出的特征不一致程度差异很大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Herpetological Monographs
Herpetological Monographs 生物-动物学
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Since 1982, Herpetological Monographs has been dedicated to original research about the biology, diversity, systematics and evolution of amphibians and reptiles. Herpetological Monographs is published annually as a supplement to Herpetologica and contains long research papers, manuscripts and special symposia that synthesize the latest scientific discoveries.
期刊最新文献
Hyperpredation of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises by Subsidized Corvids A Contribution to the Systematics of Sunda Shelf Angle-Headed Dragons (Agamidae: Gonocephalus) with the Description of New Taxa from Sumatra Calling Frogs by Their Name: Long-Lasting Misidentification of Tetraploid Frogs of the Genus Odontophrynus (Anura: Odontophrynidae) Genus-specific and Habitat-dependent Plant Ingestion in West African Sabre-toothed Frogs (Anura, Odontobatrachidae: Odontobatrachus) Miniaturization in Direct-Developing Frogs from Mexico with the Description of Six New Species
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1