首页 > 最新文献

Cladistics最新文献

英文 中文
A re-analysis of the data in Sharkey et al.’s (2021) minimalist revision reveals that BINs do not deserve names, but BOLD Systems needs a stronger commitment to open science 对Sharkey等人数据的重新分析。(2021)的极简主义修订表明,bin不值得命名,但BOLD系统需要对开放科学做出更大的承诺。
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-09-06 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12489
Rudolf Meier, Bonnie B. Blaimer, Eliana Buenaventura, Emily Hartop, Thomas von Rintelen, Amrita Srivathsan, Darren Yeo

Halting biodiversity decline is one of the most critical challenges for humanity, but monitoring biodiversity is hampered by taxonomic impediments. One impediment is the large number of undescribed species (here called “dark taxon impediment”) whereas another is caused by the large number of superficial species descriptions, that can only be resolved by consulting type specimens (“superficial description impediment”). Recently, Sharkey et al. (2021) proposed to address the dark taxon impediment for Costa Rican braconid wasps by describing 403 species based on COI barcode clusters (“BINs”) computed by BOLD Systems. More than 99% of the BINs (387 of 390) were converted into species by assigning binominal names (e.g. BIN “BOLD:ACM9419” becomes Bracon federicomatarritai) and adding a minimal diagnosis (consisting only of a consensus barcode for most species). We here show that many of Sharkey et al.’s species are unstable when the underlying data are analyzed using different species delimitation algorithms. Add the insufficiently informative diagnoses, and many of these species will become the next “superficial description impediment” for braconid taxonomy because they will have to be tested and redescribed after obtaining sufficient evidence for confidently delimiting species. We furthermore show that Sharkey et al.’s approach of using consensus barcodes as diagnoses is not functional because it cannot be applied consistently. Lastly, we reiterate that COI alone is not suitable for delimiting and describing species, and voice concerns over Sharkey et al.’s uncritical use of BINs because they are calculated by a proprietary algorithm (RESL) that uses a mixture of public and private data. We urge authors, reviewers and editors to maintain high standards in taxonomy by only publishing new species that are rigorously delimited with open-access tools and supported by publicly available evidence.

阻止生物多样性的下降是人类面临的最关键的挑战之一,但生物多样性的监测受到分类障碍的阻碍。一个障碍是大量未描述的物种(这里称为“暗分类群障碍”),而另一个障碍是由大量肤浅的物种描述引起的,这只能通过咨询模式标本来解决(“肤浅描述障碍”)。最近,Sharkey等人。(2021)提出通过BOLD Systems计算的COI条形码簇(“bin”)来描述403个物种,以解决哥斯达黎加bronid胡蜂的黑暗分类障碍。超过99%的BIN(390个中的387个)通过分配双名名(例如BIN“BOLD:ACM9419”变成Bracon federicomatarritai)和添加最小诊断(仅由大多数物种的共识条形码组成)被转换为物种。我们在这里展示了许多Sharkey等人。当使用不同的物种划分算法分析底层数据时,物种是不稳定的。再加上信息不足的诊断,这些物种中的许多将成为下一个“肤浅描述障碍”,因为在获得足够的证据来自信地划分物种之后,它们将不得不进行测试和重新描述。我们进一步证明了Sharkey等人。使用共识条形码作为诊断的方法是无效的,因为它不能一致地应用。最后,我们重申单独的COI不适合用于划分和描述物种,并对Sharkey等人表示担忧。因为它们是由一种混合使用公共和私有数据的专有算法(RESL)计算出来的。我们敦促作者、审稿人和编辑在分类学上保持高标准,只发表用开放获取工具严格划分并有公开证据支持的新物种。
{"title":"A re-analysis of the data in Sharkey et al.’s (2021) minimalist revision reveals that BINs do not deserve names, but BOLD Systems needs a stronger commitment to open science","authors":"Rudolf Meier,&nbsp;Bonnie B. Blaimer,&nbsp;Eliana Buenaventura,&nbsp;Emily Hartop,&nbsp;Thomas von Rintelen,&nbsp;Amrita Srivathsan,&nbsp;Darren Yeo","doi":"10.1111/cla.12489","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12489","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Halting biodiversity decline is one of the most critical challenges for humanity, but monitoring biodiversity is hampered by taxonomic impediments. One impediment is the large number of undescribed species (here called “dark taxon impediment”) whereas another is caused by the large number of superficial species descriptions, that can only be resolved by consulting type specimens (“superficial description impediment”). Recently, Sharkey et al. (2021) proposed to address the dark taxon impediment for Costa Rican braconid wasps by describing 403 species based on <i>COI</i> barcode clusters (“BINs”) computed by BOLD Systems. More than 99% of the BINs (387 of 390) were converted into species by assigning binominal names (e.g. BIN “BOLD:ACM9419” becomes <i>Bracon federicomatarritai</i>) and adding a minimal diagnosis (consisting only of a consensus barcode for most species). We here show that many of Sharkey et al.’s species are unstable when the underlying data are analyzed using different species delimitation algorithms. Add the insufficiently informative diagnoses, and many of these species will become the next “superficial description impediment” for braconid taxonomy because they will have to be tested and redescribed after obtaining sufficient evidence for confidently delimiting species. We furthermore show that Sharkey et al.’s approach of using consensus barcodes as diagnoses is not functional because it cannot be applied consistently. Lastly, we reiterate that <i>COI</i> alone is not suitable for delimiting and describing species, and voice concerns over Sharkey et al.’s uncritical use of BINs because they are calculated by a proprietary algorithm (RESL) that uses a mixture of public and private data. We urge authors, reviewers and editors to maintain high standards in taxonomy by only publishing new species that are rigorously delimited with open-access tools and supported by publicly available evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"38 2","pages":"264-275"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12489","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39388648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 67
A molecular phylogeny of Thuridilla Bergh, 1872 sea slugs (Gastropoda, Sacoglossa) reveals a case of flamboyant and cryptic radiation in the marine realm 1872年,一种名为Thuridilla Bergh的海蛞蝓(腹足目,棘足目)的分子系统发育揭示了海洋领域中闪光和隐蔽辐射的一个案例
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-08-28 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12465
María del Rosario Martín-Hervás, Leila Carmona, Manuel António E. Malaquias, Patrick J. Krug, Terrence M. Gosliner, Juan Lucas Cervera

The genus Thuridilla Bergh, 1872 comprises mostly tropical sap-sucking sea slugs species with flamboyantly coloured forms. However, the potential for cryptic or pseudocryptic species masked by convergent or polymorphic colour patterns has not been tested using molecular characters. In this study, we sampled 20 of the 23 recognized worldwide species and performed the most comprehensive molecular phylogenetic analysis of the genus to date using a multi-locus approach combining two mitochondrial (cytochrome c oxidase subunit I, 16S rRNA) and two nuclear (Histone H3, 28S rRNA) genes using maximum likelihood, maximum-parsimony and Bayesian criteria. Three molecular species delimitation methods (ABGD, GMYC, bPTP) and the morphology of radular teeth were additionally used to aid in species delimitation. Our analyses supported 35 species within Thuridilla, of which more than one-third (13) are part of a single radiation here named the Thuridilla gracilis (Risbec, 1928) species-complex. This complex includes T. gracilis, T. splendens (Baba, 1949), T. bayeri (Er. Marcus, 1965), and T. ratna (Er. Marcus, 1965), plus nine additional undescribed species. All 13 species are distinguishable by radular characters, external morphology and their DNA. The detection of this radiation led diversity of Thuridilla to be underestimated by about 25% and provides a new comparative system for studying the role of colour patterns in marine diversification.

Thuridilla Bergh属,1872年,主要由热带吸液海蛞蝓物种组成,具有艳丽的颜色形式。然而,被趋同或多态颜色模式掩盖的隐种或伪隐种的潜力尚未使用分子特征进行测试。在这项研究中,我们从全球已知的23个物种中选取了20个,并使用多位点方法结合两个线粒体(细胞色素c氧化酶亚基I, 16S rRNA)和两个核(组蛋白H3, 28S rRNA)基因,使用最大似然、最大简约和贝叶斯标准对该属进行了迄今为止最全面的分子系统发育分析。此外,还采用ABGD、GMYC、bPTP三种分子物种划分方法和根状牙形态来辅助物种划分。我们的分析支持了Thuridilla中的35个物种,其中超过三分之一(13)是单一辐射的一部分,这里命名为Thuridilla gracilis (Risbec, 1928)种复合体。该复群包括T. gracilis, T. splendens (Baba, 1949), T. bayeri (Er。Marcus, 1965)和T. ratna(呃。Marcus, 1965),另外还有9个未被描述的物种。所有13种都可以通过根状特征、外部形态和DNA来区分。这种辐射的检测导致了Thuridilla的多样性被低估了约25%,并为研究颜色图案在海洋多样性中的作用提供了一个新的比较系统。
{"title":"A molecular phylogeny of Thuridilla Bergh, 1872 sea slugs (Gastropoda, Sacoglossa) reveals a case of flamboyant and cryptic radiation in the marine realm","authors":"María del Rosario Martín-Hervás,&nbsp;Leila Carmona,&nbsp;Manuel António E. Malaquias,&nbsp;Patrick J. Krug,&nbsp;Terrence M. Gosliner,&nbsp;Juan Lucas Cervera","doi":"10.1111/cla.12465","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12465","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The genus <i>Thuridilla</i> Bergh, 1872 comprises mostly tropical sap-sucking sea slugs species with flamboyantly coloured forms. However, the potential for cryptic or pseudocryptic species masked by convergent or polymorphic colour patterns has not been tested using molecular characters. In this study, we sampled 20 of the 23 recognized worldwide species and performed the most comprehensive molecular phylogenetic analysis of the genus to date using a multi-locus approach combining two mitochondrial (cytochrome <i>c</i> oxidase subunit I, 16S rRNA) and two nuclear (Histone H3, 28S rRNA) genes using maximum likelihood, maximum-parsimony and Bayesian criteria. Three molecular species delimitation methods (ABGD, GMYC, bPTP) and the morphology of radular teeth were additionally used to aid in species delimitation. Our analyses supported 35 species within <i>Thuridilla</i>, of which more than one-third (13) are part of a single radiation here named the <i>Thuridilla gracilis</i> (Risbec, 1928) species-complex. This complex includes <i>T</i>. <i>gracilis</i>, <i>T</i>. <i>splendens</i> (Baba, 1949), <i>T</i>. <i>bayeri</i> (Er. Marcus, 1965), and <i>T. ratna</i> (Er. Marcus, 1965), plus nine additional undescribed species. All 13 species are distinguishable by radular characters, external morphology and their DNA. The detection of this radiation led diversity of <i>Thuridilla</i> to be underestimated by about 25% and provides a new comparative system for studying the role of colour patterns in marine diversification.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"37 6","pages":"647-676"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12465","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39674515","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Phylogenetic analysis of the family Megalopodidae (Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea): better taxon-sampling facilitates detection of new relationships and new taxa 大足足科(鞘翅目:金足总)的系统发育分析:更好的分类群取样有助于发现新的亲缘关系和新的分类群
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12466
Geovanni M. Rodríguez-Mirón, Santiago Zaragoza-Caballero, Juan J. Morrone

The systematics of Megalopodidae is not adequately known, in spite of it being a relatively small group of phytophagous beetles. The first phylogenetic analysis of Megalopodidae with a comprehensive generic representation (25 genera of 30 described, 10 subgenera and 77 species) is undertaken. A parsimony analysis under equal and implied weights was carried out based on 147 adult and larval morphological characters. Subfamilies Palophaginae and Zeugophorinae were recovered as monophyletic, by contrast with Megalopodinae, which proved to be paraphyletic. Atelederinae are proposed as a new subfamily. Also, three tribes and three subtribes within Megalopodinae are proposed: Leucasteini trib.n., Sphondyliini trib.n. and Megalopodini, the latter including Macrolophina subtrib.n., Temnaspidina subtrib.n. and Megalopodina. The genera Macrolopha, Kuilua, Poecilomorpha, Temnaspis, Antonaria, Agathomerus, Megalopus and Bothromegalopus were recovered as non-monophyletic. New delimitations of the polyphyletic genera Poecilomorpha and Macrolopha are proposed, Clythraxeloma is resurrected, and the subgenera of Agathomerus are suppressed. The following new combinations are proposed: Kuilua apicata (Fairmaire), K. nyassae (Jacoby), Poecilomorpha cribricollis (Pic), P. minuta (Pic), Clythraxeloma assamensis (Jacoby), C. bipartita (Lacordaeri), C. discolineata (Pic), C. downesii (Baly), C. gerstaeckeri (Westwood), C. laosensis (Pic), C. maculata (Pic), C. mouhoti (Baly), C. nigrocyanea (Motschulsky), C. pretiosa (Reineck), Temnaspis tricoloripes (Pic) and Barticaria faciatus (Dalman). Clythraxeloma cyanipennis Kraatz is a restored combination. Distribution patterns of Megalopodidae largely conform to the breakup of Gondwanaland, with its main clades having particular distributions: Andean-Australian (Palophaginae), Ethiopian (Leucasteini, Sphondyliini, and Macrolophina), Neotropical (Ateledrinae and Megalopodina) and Ethiopian-Oriental-Palaearctic (Temnaspidina the result of a secondary expansion. Zeugophorinae present a worldwide distribution, except for the Neotropical and Andean regions, which may be the result of geodispersal. The findings of the present study also shed light on groups with taxonomic issues, where phylogenetic analyses are strongly needed.

尽管巨足科是一个相对较小的植食性甲虫群,但其系统分类尚不清楚。本文首次对大足足科进行了系统发育分析,并对大足足科30个已描述的25个属,10个亚属,77个种进行了全面的系统发育分析。对147个成虫和幼虫的形态特征进行了等权和隐含权的简约性分析。Palophaginae亚科和Zeugophorinae亚科为单系,而Megalopodinae亚科为副系。Atelederinae是一个新的亚科。此外,在大足足亚科中还提出了3个部落和3个亚部落:; Sphondyliini部落;和巨藻迪尼,后者包括巨藻亚种。田螺亚科;和Megalopodina。Macrolopha属、Kuilua属、Poecilomorpha属、Temnaspis属、Antonaria属、Agathomerus属、Megalopus属和Bothromegalopus属被恢复为非单系植物。提出了多系属Poecilomorpha和Macrolopha的新划分,恢复了Clythraxeloma,抑制了Agathomerus亚属。提出了以下新组合:Kuilua apicata (Fairmaire)、K. nyassae (Jacoby)、Poecilomorpha cribricollis (Pic)、P. minuta (Pic)、Clythraxeloma assamensis (Jacoby)、C. bipartita (Lacordaeri)、C. discolineata (Pic)、C. downesii (Baly)、C. gerstaeckeri (Westwood)、C. laosensis (Pic)、C. maculata (Pic)、C. mouhoti (Baly)、C. nigrocyanea (Motschulsky)、C. pretiosa (Reineck)、Temnaspis tricoloripes (Pic)和Barticaria faciatus (Dalman)。cyanipennis Kraatz是一种修复组合。大足科的分布模式基本符合冈瓦纳大陆的分裂,其主要分支具有特定的分布:安第斯-澳大利亚(Palophaginae),埃塞俄比亚(Leucasteini, Sphondyliini和Macrolophina),新热带(Ateledrinae和Megalopodina)和埃塞俄比亚-东方-古北(Temnaspidina),这是二次扩张的结果。除新热带和安第斯地区外,zeeugophorinae在世界范围内均有分布,这可能是大地分散的结果。本研究的发现也揭示了群体与分类学问题,其中系统发育分析是迫切需要的。
{"title":"Phylogenetic analysis of the family Megalopodidae (Coleoptera: Chrysomeloidea): better taxon-sampling facilitates detection of new relationships and new taxa","authors":"Geovanni M. Rodríguez-Mirón,&nbsp;Santiago Zaragoza-Caballero,&nbsp;Juan J. Morrone","doi":"10.1111/cla.12466","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12466","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The systematics of Megalopodidae is not adequately known, in spite of it being a relatively small group of phytophagous beetles. The first phylogenetic analysis of Megalopodidae with a comprehensive generic representation (25 genera of 30 described, 10 subgenera and 77 species) is undertaken. A parsimony analysis under equal and implied weights was carried out based on 147 adult and larval morphological characters. Subfamilies Palophaginae and Zeugophorinae were recovered as monophyletic, by contrast with Megalopodinae, which proved to be paraphyletic. Atelederinae are proposed as a new subfamily. Also, three tribes and three subtribes within Megalopodinae are proposed: Leucasteini <b>trib.n</b>., Sphondyliini <b>trib.n</b>. and Megalopodini, the latter including Macrolophina <b>subtrib.n</b>., Temnaspidina <b>subtrib.n</b>. and Megalopodina. The genera <i>Macrolopha</i>, <i>Kuilua</i>, <i>Poecilomorpha</i>, <i>Temnaspis</i>, <i>Antonaria</i>, <i>Agathomerus</i>, <i>Megalopus</i> and <i>Bothromegalopus</i> were recovered as non-monophyletic. New delimitations of the polyphyletic genera <i>Poecilomorpha</i> and <i>Macrolopha</i> are proposed, <i>Clythraxeloma</i> is resurrected, and the subgenera of <i>Agathomerus</i> are suppressed. The following new combinations are proposed: <i>Kuilua apicata</i> (Fairmaire), <i>K. nyassae</i> (Jacoby), <i>Poecilomorpha cribricollis</i> (Pic), <i>P. minuta</i> (Pic), <i>Clythraxeloma assamensis</i> (Jacoby), <i>C</i>. <i>bipartita</i> (Lacordaeri), <i>C</i>. <i>discolineata</i> (Pic), <i>C</i>. <i>downesii</i> (Baly), <i>C</i>. <i>gerstaeckeri</i> (Westwood), <i>C</i>. <i>laosensi</i>s (Pic), <i>C</i>. <i>maculata</i> (Pic), <i>C</i>. <i>mouhoti</i> (Baly), <i>C</i>. <i>nigrocyanea</i> (Motschulsky), <i>C. pretiosa</i> (Reineck), <i>Temnaspis tricoloripes</i> (Pic) and <i>Barticaria faciatus</i> (Dalman). <i>Clythraxeloma cyanipennis</i> Kraatz is a restored combination. Distribution patterns of Megalopodidae largely conform to the breakup of Gondwanaland, with its main clades having particular distributions: Andean-Australian (Palophaginae), Ethiopian (Leucasteini, Sphondyliini, and Macrolophina), Neotropical (Ateledrinae and Megalopodina) and Ethiopian-Oriental-Palaearctic (Temnaspidina the result of a secondary expansion. Zeugophorinae present a worldwide distribution, except for the Neotropical and Andean regions, which may be the result of geodispersal. The findings of the present study also shed light on groups with taxonomic issues, where phylogenetic analyses are strongly needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"37 6","pages":"677-716"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12466","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39674514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Molecular phylogeny and evolution of Calaphidinae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) 蚜虫科分子系统发育与进化(半翅目:蚜虫科)
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-08-26 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12487
Yerim Lee, Mariusz Kanturski, Robert G. Foottit, Sora Kim, Seunghwan Lee

Calaphidinae is the second-largest subfamily in the family Aphididae. Despite their species diversity and some taxonomic controversy, no phylogenetic studies have been conducted on them thus far. Herein, we report the first molecular phylogeny of Calaphidinae and two related lineages, Phyllaphidinae and Saltusaphidinae, based on five genes (3418 bp) for 126 taxa. Maximum parsimony, maximum-likelihood and Bayesian inference phylogenetic analyses were performed on the multilocus dataset. Divergence time estimation, biogeographical reconstruction, ancestral host plant reconstruction and PhyloType analyses were performed to identify evolutionary trends in Calaphidinae. Our phylogenetic results lead to several conclusions: Phyllaphidinae is a sister group to Calaphidinae s.l.; Calaphidinae is paraphyletic with respect to the former “Saltusaphidinae”; the ingroup clade was subdivided into nine newly recognized lineages; and three subtribes of Calaphidinae (Monaphidina, Calaphdina and Panaphidina) and many genera were not recovered as monophyletic. A new classification is proposed with eight tribal divisions that reflect our phylogenetic results, including three new tribes (Pterocallidini trib.n., Pseudochromaphidini trib.n. and Shivaphidini trib.n.) and three new statuses (Saltusaphidini stat.n., Therioaphidini stat.n. and Myzocallidini stat.n.). The ancestral reconstruction results imply that the ingroup taxa’s common ancestor originated in the Eastern Palaearctic and might have fed on Fagaceae in the Late Cretaceous. Later, multiple host shifts and an expanding geographical distribution led to the current species diversity of Calaphidinae. Our reconstructions suggest that species diversification cannot solely be explained by speciation via host shifts and that geographical isolation probably also played a key role. Our results provide new insight into the natural classification and history of the host plant associations and biogeography of Calaphidinae s.l.

蚜虫科是蚜虫科的第二大亚科。尽管它们的物种多样性和一些分类上的争议,但迄今为止还没有对它们进行系统发育研究。本文基于126个类群的5个基因(3418 bp),首次建立了Calaphidinae和Phyllaphidinae和Saltusaphidinae两个亲缘系的分子系统发育。对多位点数据集进行了最大简约性、最大似然性和贝叶斯推理系统发育分析。通过分化时间估算、生物地理重建、寄主植物祖先重建和种型分析,确定了Calaphidinae的进化趋势。我们的系统发育结果得出以下几个结论:Phyllaphidinae是Calaphidinae s.l的姐妹类群;Calaphidinae相对于之前的“Saltusaphidinae”是副类群的;群内分支被细分为九个新认识的谱系;calaphidina、calaphidina和Panaphidina三个亚族和许多属未恢复为单系。根据系统发育的结果,提出了8个部落的新分类,其中包括3个新部落(Pterocallidini tribe .n.)。; Pseudochromaphidini tribe .;和Shivaphidini部落.n.)和三个新的状态(Saltusaphidini stat.n.)。;;;;和Myzocallidini statn .)。祖先重建结果表明,群内分类群的共同祖先起源于古北东部,可能在晚白垩世以壳斗科植物为食。后来,寄主的多次转移和地理分布的扩大导致了目前Calaphidinae的物种多样性。我们的重建表明,物种多样化不能仅仅通过宿主转移的物种形成来解释,地理隔离可能也起了关键作用。本研究结果为Calaphidinae s.l的自然分类、寄主植物联系史和生物地理学提供了新的认识。
{"title":"Molecular phylogeny and evolution of Calaphidinae (Hemiptera: Aphididae)","authors":"Yerim Lee,&nbsp;Mariusz Kanturski,&nbsp;Robert G. Foottit,&nbsp;Sora Kim,&nbsp;Seunghwan Lee","doi":"10.1111/cla.12487","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12487","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Calaphidinae is the second-largest subfamily in the family Aphididae. Despite their species diversity and some taxonomic controversy, no phylogenetic studies have been conducted on them thus far. Herein, we report the first molecular phylogeny of Calaphidinae and two related lineages, Phyllaphidinae and Saltusaphidinae, based on five genes (3418 bp) for 126 taxa. Maximum parsimony, maximum-likelihood and Bayesian inference phylogenetic analyses were performed on the multilocus dataset. Divergence time estimation, biogeographical reconstruction, ancestral host plant reconstruction and PhyloType analyses were performed to identify evolutionary trends in Calaphidinae. Our phylogenetic results lead to several conclusions: Phyllaphidinae is a sister group to Calaphidinae s.l.; Calaphidinae is paraphyletic with respect to the former “Saltusaphidinae”; the ingroup clade was subdivided into nine newly recognized lineages; and three subtribes of Calaphidinae (Monaphidina, Calaphdina and Panaphidina) and many genera were not recovered as monophyletic. A new classification is proposed with eight tribal divisions that reflect our phylogenetic results, including three new tribes (Pterocallidini <b>trib.n</b>., Pseudochromaphidini <b>trib.n</b>. and Shivaphidini <b>trib.n</b>.) and three new statuses (Saltusaphidini <b>stat.n</b>., Therioaphidini <b>stat.n</b>. and Myzocallidini <b>stat.n</b>.). The ancestral reconstruction results imply that the ingroup taxa’s common ancestor originated in the Eastern Palaearctic and might have fed on Fagaceae in the Late Cretaceous. Later, multiple host shifts and an expanding geographical distribution led to the current species diversity of Calaphidinae. Our reconstructions suggest that species diversification cannot solely be explained by speciation via host shifts and that geographical isolation probably also played a key role. Our results provide new insight into the natural classification and history of the host plant associations and biogeography of Calaphidinae s.l.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"38 2","pages":"159-186"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12487","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48278254","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Parsing a plethora of pollen: the role of pollen size and shape in the evolution of Boraginaceae 解析大量花粉:花粉大小和形状在琉璃苣科植物进化中的作用
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-08-17 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12488
Maryam Noroozi, Farrokh Ghahremaninejad, David Bogler, Jocelyn M. Witherspoon, Gillian L. Ryan, James S. Miller, Mehrshid Riahi, James I. Cohen

Pollen, the microgametophyte of seed plants, has an important role in plant reproduction and, therefore, evolution. Pollen is variable in, for example, size, shape, aperture number; these features are particularly diverse in some plant taxa and can be diagnostic. In one family, Boraginaceae, the range of pollen diversity suggests the potential utility of this family as a model for integrative studies of pollen development, evolution and molecular biology. In the present study, a comprehensive survey of the diversity and evolution of pollen from 538 species belonging to 72 genera was made using data from the literature and additional scanning electron microscopy examination. Shifts in diversification rates and the evolution of various quantitative characters were detected, and the results revealed remarkable differences in size, shape and number of apertures. The pollen of one subfamily, Boraginoideae, is larger than that in Cynoglossoideae. The diversity of pollen shapes and aperture numbers in one tribe, Lithospermeae, is greater than that in the other tribes. Ancestral pollen for the family was resolved as small, prolate grains that bear three apertures and are iso-aperturate. Of all the tribes, the greatest number of changes in pollen size and aperture number were observed in Lithospermeae and Boragineae, and the number of apertures was found to be stable throughout all tribes of Cynoglossoideae. In addition, the present study showed that diversification of Boraginaceae cannot be assigned to a single factor, such as pollen size, and the increased rate of diversification for species-rich groups (e.g. Cynoglossum) is not correlated with pollen size or shape evolution. The palynological data and patterns of character evolution presented in the study provide better resolution of the roles of geographical and ecological factors in the diversity and evolution of pollen grains of Boraginaceae, and provide suggestions for future palynological research across the family.

花粉是种子植物的小配子体,在植物繁殖和进化中起着重要作用。花粉在大小、形状、孔数等方面是可变的;这些特征在某些植物分类群中特别多样,可以用于诊断。在一个科,Boraginaceae中,花粉多样性的范围表明该科作为花粉发育、进化和分子生物学综合研究的模型的潜在效用。本文利用文献资料和扫描电镜技术,对中国植物72属538种花粉的多样性和进化进行了全面调查。研究结果表明,不同品种的种群多样性率和数量性状的演化均存在显著差异,孔径的大小、形状和数量均存在显著差异。其中一个亚科Boraginoideae的花粉比Cynoglossoideae的花粉大。石杨科(Lithospermeae)的花粉形态和气孔数的多样性大于其他部落。该科的祖先花粉被分解为具有三个孔和等孔的小的长形颗粒。在所有部落中,石杨科和硼砂科的花粉大小和开孔数变化最大,且开孔数在Cynoglossoideae所有部落中都保持稳定。此外,本研究表明,Boraginaceae的多样化不能归因于花粉大小等单一因素,物种丰富的类群(如Cynoglossum)的多样化率增加与花粉大小或形状进化无关。本研究提供的孢粉资料和特征演化模式,可以更好地解析地理和生态因子在绵苣苔科花粉粒多样性和进化中的作用,并为今后全科孢粉研究提供建议。
{"title":"Parsing a plethora of pollen: the role of pollen size and shape in the evolution of Boraginaceae","authors":"Maryam Noroozi,&nbsp;Farrokh Ghahremaninejad,&nbsp;David Bogler,&nbsp;Jocelyn M. Witherspoon,&nbsp;Gillian L. Ryan,&nbsp;James S. Miller,&nbsp;Mehrshid Riahi,&nbsp;James I. Cohen","doi":"10.1111/cla.12488","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12488","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Pollen, the microgametophyte of seed plants, has an important role in plant reproduction and, therefore, evolution. Pollen is variable in, for example, size, shape, aperture number; these features are particularly diverse in some plant taxa and can be diagnostic. In one family, Boraginaceae, the range of pollen diversity suggests the potential utility of this family as a model for integrative studies of pollen development, evolution and molecular biology. In the present study, a comprehensive survey of the diversity and evolution of pollen from 538 species belonging to 72 genera was made using data from the literature and additional scanning electron microscopy examination. Shifts in diversification rates and the evolution of various quantitative characters were detected, and the results revealed remarkable differences in size, shape and number of apertures. The pollen of one subfamily, Boraginoideae, is larger than that in Cynoglossoideae. The diversity of pollen shapes and aperture numbers in one tribe, Lithospermeae, is greater than that in the other tribes. Ancestral pollen for the family was resolved as small, prolate grains that bear three apertures and are iso-aperturate. Of all the tribes, the greatest number of changes in pollen size and aperture number were observed in Lithospermeae and Boragineae, and the number of apertures was found to be stable throughout all tribes of Cynoglossoideae. In addition, the present study showed that diversification of Boraginaceae cannot be assigned to a single factor, such as pollen size, and the increased rate of diversification for species-rich groups (e.g. <i>Cynoglossum</i>) is not correlated with pollen size or shape evolution. The palynological data and patterns of character evolution presented in the study provide better resolution of the roles of geographical and ecological factors in the diversity and evolution of pollen grains of Boraginaceae, and provide suggestions for future palynological research across the family.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"38 2","pages":"204-226"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12488","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46460320","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Exploring the role of climatic niche changes in the evolution of the southern South American genus Baripus (Coleoptera: Carabidae): optimization of non-hereditary climatic variables and phylogenetic signal measurement 探讨气候生态位变化在南美南部大腹足属(鞘翅目:蜈蚣科)进化中的作用:非遗传气候变量优化和系统发育信号测量
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-08-10 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12464
Federico A. Agrain, Cecilia M. Domínguez, Rodolfo Carrara, Mariana Griotti, Sergio A. Roig-Juñent

Baripus is a ground beetle genus endemic to southern South America, currently distributed across grassland and shrub habitats in mountain and lowland regions. The species of this genus are known to have been affected by the Andean orogeny and the climate changes that occurred during this process. In this study, we seek to understand how the orogeny of the Andes may have led to changes in the climatic niches of the species of Baripus over time. We integrated former ecological and historical biogeographic hypotheses, exploring the use of parsimony optimization of phylogenetically structured climate variables and ancestral character state reconstruction methods. We then performed regression analyses of the optimized climatic niche variables within the phylogenetic tree of Baripus. We were able to infer significant climatic niche constraints, and niche changes that provide new insights to the existing knowledge, supporting former ecological and biogeographic hypotheses for this genus. Such trends in climatic niche could be explained by the rain shadow effect caused by the Andean uplift as well as with other climate shifts associated with temperature and precipitation swings that occurred in this region from the Middle Miocene to the Pliocene.

Baripus是南美洲南部特有的一种地面甲虫属,目前分布在山地和低地地区的草地和灌木栖息地。已知该属的物种受到安第斯造山运动和在此过程中发生的气候变化的影响。在这项研究中,我们试图了解安第斯山脉的造山运动如何导致巴利普斯物种的气候生态位随着时间的推移而变化。我们整合了以往的生态学和历史生物地理学假设,探索了系统发育结构气候变量的简约优化和祖先特征状态重建方法的应用。在此基础上,对优化后的气候生态位变量进行了回归分析。我们能够推断出重要的气候生态位限制和生态位变化,为现有知识提供了新的见解,支持了该属以前的生态和生物地理学假设。这种气候位的变化趋势可以用安第斯隆起引起的雨影效应来解释,也可以用中中新世到上新世发生在该地区的与温度和降水波动相关的其他气候变化来解释。
{"title":"Exploring the role of climatic niche changes in the evolution of the southern South American genus Baripus (Coleoptera: Carabidae): optimization of non-hereditary climatic variables and phylogenetic signal measurement","authors":"Federico A. Agrain,&nbsp;Cecilia M. Domínguez,&nbsp;Rodolfo Carrara,&nbsp;Mariana Griotti,&nbsp;Sergio A. Roig-Juñent","doi":"10.1111/cla.12464","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12464","url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>Baripus</i> is a ground beetle genus endemic to southern South America, currently distributed across grassland and shrub habitats in mountain and lowland regions. The species of this genus are known to have been affected by the Andean orogeny and the climate changes that occurred during this process. In this study, we seek to understand how the orogeny of the Andes may have led to changes in the climatic niches of the species of <i>Baripus</i> over time. We integrated former ecological and historical biogeographic hypotheses, exploring the use of parsimony optimization of phylogenetically structured climate variables and ancestral character state reconstruction methods. We then performed regression analyses of the optimized climatic niche variables within the phylogenetic tree of <i>Baripus</i>. We were able to infer significant climatic niche constraints, and niche changes that provide new insights to the existing knowledge, supporting former ecological and biogeographic hypotheses for this genus. Such trends in climatic niche could be explained by the rain shadow effect caused by the Andean uplift as well as with other climate shifts associated with temperature and precipitation swings that occurred in this region from the Middle Miocene to the Pliocene.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"37 6","pages":"816-828"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12464","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39674516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Phylogenetic supergraphs 系统发育超图。
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-08-10 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12485
Ward C. Wheeler

Phylogenetic graph structures used in empirical and theoretical analysis have expanded beyond trees to more general directed acyclic graphs including networks and forests. Several methods to reconcile multiple such graphs are presented and discussed here, extending existing consensus and supertree techniques to form a set of phylogenetic supergraph methods. These graphs can be used as the summary of analytical results, or as heuristic initial graphs for further phylogenetic analysis.

在经验和理论分析中使用的系统发育图结构已经从树扩展到更一般的有向无环图,包括网络和森林。本文提出并讨论了几种调和多个这样的图的方法,扩展了现有的共识和超树技术,形成了一套系统发育超图方法。这些图可以作为分析结果的总结,或者作为进一步系统发育分析的启发式初始图。
{"title":"Phylogenetic supergraphs","authors":"Ward C. Wheeler","doi":"10.1111/cla.12485","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12485","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Phylogenetic graph structures used in empirical and theoretical analysis have expanded beyond trees to more general directed acyclic graphs including networks and forests. Several methods to reconcile multiple such graphs are presented and discussed here, extending existing consensus and supertree techniques to form a set of phylogenetic supergraph methods. These graphs can be used as the summary of analytical results, or as heuristic initial graphs for further phylogenetic analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"38 1","pages":"147-158"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12485","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39834915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
New troodontid theropod specimen from Inner Mongolia, China clarifies phylogenetic relationships of later-diverging small-bodied troodontids and paravian body size evolution 内蒙古新发现的兽脚亚目troodontid兽脚亚目标本,阐明了后来分化的小体兽脚亚目troodontid与副鸟体型进化的系统发育关系
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-07-23 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12467
Shuo Wang, Qiyue Zhang, Qingwei Tan, Qigao Jiangzuo, Huitao Zhang, Lin Tan

A new troodontid (LH PV39) recovered from the Upper Cretaceous Wulansuhai Formation, Inner Mongolia, China, is described, highlighting the dorsoventrally compressed sacral centra. The completely fused neurocentral junctions indicate that LH PV39 had reached adulthood at the time of death, but its size is nevertheless 20% smaller than that of the sympatric Philovenator, demonstrating that it is the second small-bodied troodontid recovered from the Wulansuhai Formation. Phylogenetic analyses scoring LH PV39 using different strategies and performed with different algorithms unambiguously recovered it as a troodontid. While the parsimony-based analysis scoring LH PV39 as an independent OTU with all of its available characteristics included recovered it as a basal troodontid, the Bayesian analysis suggests a closer relationship of LH PV39 to Almas and an unnamed troodontid from Ukhaa Tolgod, Mongolia (MPC-D100/1126+D100/3500). Body size analysis confirmed a single trend of gigantism throughout the evolution of troodontids, and suggests that the Late Cretaceous troodontids evolved in two directions: (i) several size-independent characteristics evolved while retaining the small sizes that are typical of the Early Cretaceous relatives, resulting in the Late Cretaceous small-bodied troodontids; and (ii) size-dependent characteristics (e.g., the elongation of the rostrum) evolved accompanying the size increase, resulting in large-bodied derived troodontids. The mosaic features of the Late Cretaceous small-bodied troodontids place them intermediate between their Early Cretaceous basal relatives and the Late Cretaceous large-bodied taxa in a well-resolved phylogeny, which is crucial for understanding the size and morphological evolution of troodontids.

本文报道了内蒙古上白垩统乌兰苏海组中发现的一种新的齿形动物(LH PV39),突出显示了骶中央的背侧压缩。完全融合的神经中枢连接表明,LH PV39在死亡时已经成年,但它的体积比同系的Philovenator小20%,表明它是在乌兰苏海组中发现的第二种小型齿形动物。系统发育分析使用不同的策略和不同的算法对LH PV39进行评分,明确地将其恢复为齿形动物。虽然基于简约性的分析将LH PV39作为一个独立的OTU,包括其所有可用特征,将其恢复为基础齿形动物,但贝叶斯分析表明LH PV39与Almas和来自蒙古Ukhaa Tolgod的未命名齿形动物(MPC-D100/1126+D100/3500)有更密切的关系。体型分析证实了巨人化贯穿于整个穴居动物进化过程的单一趋势,表明晚白垩世穴居动物的进化方向有两个:(1)在保留早白垩世穴居动物典型的小体型特征的同时,进化了若干与体型无关的特征,形成了晚白垩世体型较小的穴居动物;(ii)与体型相关的特征(例如,喙部的伸长)随着体型的增加而进化,从而产生了体型较大的原始齿类。晚白垩世小型穴居动物的嵌合特征使其处于早白垩世基缘和晚白垩世大型穴居动物类群之间,这对了解穴居动物的大小和形态演化具有重要意义。
{"title":"New troodontid theropod specimen from Inner Mongolia, China clarifies phylogenetic relationships of later-diverging small-bodied troodontids and paravian body size evolution","authors":"Shuo Wang,&nbsp;Qiyue Zhang,&nbsp;Qingwei Tan,&nbsp;Qigao Jiangzuo,&nbsp;Huitao Zhang,&nbsp;Lin Tan","doi":"10.1111/cla.12467","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12467","url":null,"abstract":"<p>A new troodontid (LH PV39) recovered from the Upper Cretaceous Wulansuhai Formation, Inner Mongolia, China, is described, highlighting the dorsoventrally compressed sacral centra. The completely fused neurocentral junctions indicate that LH PV39 had reached adulthood at the time of death, but its size is nevertheless 20% smaller than that of the sympatric <i>Philovenator</i>, demonstrating that it is the second small-bodied troodontid recovered from the Wulansuhai Formation. Phylogenetic analyses scoring LH PV39 using different strategies and performed with different algorithms unambiguously recovered it as a troodontid. While the parsimony-based analysis scoring LH PV39 as an independent OTU with all of its available characteristics included recovered it as a basal troodontid, the Bayesian analysis suggests a closer relationship of LH PV39 to <i>Almas</i> and an unnamed troodontid from Ukhaa Tolgod, Mongolia (MPC-D100/1126+D100/3500). Body size analysis confirmed a single trend of gigantism throughout the evolution of troodontids, and suggests that the Late Cretaceous troodontids evolved in two directions: (i) several size-independent characteristics evolved while retaining the small sizes that are typical of the Early Cretaceous relatives, resulting in the Late Cretaceous small-bodied troodontids; and (ii) size-dependent characteristics (e.g., the elongation of the rostrum) evolved accompanying the size increase, resulting in large-bodied derived troodontids. The mosaic features of the Late Cretaceous small-bodied troodontids place them intermediate between their Early Cretaceous basal relatives and the Late Cretaceous large-bodied taxa in a well-resolved phylogeny, which is crucial for understanding the size and morphological evolution of troodontids.</p>","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"38 1","pages":"59-82"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12467","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39925404","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
What is discoverable and what is interpreted 什么是可发现的,什么是可解释的
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-07-23 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12482
Andrew V. Z. Brower
<p> <span>Cladistics: A Guide to Biological Classification (third edition)</span>. By <span>David M. Williams</span> and <span>Malte C. Ebach</span>. The Systematics Association Special Volume 88, Cambridge University Press, <span>UK</span> <span>2020</span>. <span>435</span> pp. U.S. $99.13 (hardbound), ISBN 978-1-107-00810-6; U.S. $44.99 (paperback), ISBN 978-1-107-40041-2; U.S. $21.99 (ebook) ISBN 978-1-107-40041-4. </p><p>This book is a must-read for all who consider themselves taxonomists, most particularly for those inclined to reflect upon the conceptual basis of their discipline. However, it is neither a practical guide, nor a revision of its nominal predecessors (Forey et al., <span>1992</span>; Kitching et al., <span>1998</span>). Rather, the book is a manifesto on the independence of systematics, a fundamental critique of phylogenetics, a skeptical disquisition on “method” in general, and “a guide to de-cluttering the mind of myths and misconceptions” (p. 431). It is variously brilliant, idiosyncratic, profound, and infuriating. You may not agree with everything Williams and Ebach have written, but your thoughts will be provoked: what more can one ask from a book on systematic theory?</p><p>Both authors, and especially David Williams, have long been branded as “pattern cladists”, a label I also bear, although we do not agree on every point of what pattern cladistics entails. One difference is that Williams and Ebach have steadfastly defended the three-taxon approach originally proposed by Nelson and Platnick (<span>1991</span>), a perspective (method?) castigated by many other cladists. That topic is addressed at some length here, along with a blow-by-blow bibliographic history of controversy it engendered. However, in my view, 3TA is not “the subject” of this book, but a means to a more fundamental end. Therefore, even if you have already decided that 3TA is not your cup of tea, just skim chapters 11 and 12 (which contain extensive exemplar data tables that in my opinion are rather difficult to work through, whether you are a fan of 3TA or not), and you will find much of interest and value in the rest.</p><p>Williams and Ebach are not bound by a traditional linear structure, and several chapters have embedded “boxes” that explore tangents, such as classificatory diagrams of diatoms, or molecular homology, that are longer than the chapter itself. The chapters and boxes each contain their own reference sections, annotated lists of suggested readings, and endnotes, a format with advantages and disadvantages.1 As in their prior books, the citations are wide-ranging and exhaustive. The index is less than four pages long, and some terms I wanted to look up, such as character polarity and root, are not listed (perhaps for a reason—see below).</p><p>Although labeled as a third edition of the Systematics Association’s “Cladistics” books, a more natural progenitor for this book is Williams and Ebach’s (<span>2008</s
分类:生物分类指南(第三版)。大卫·m·威廉姆斯和马尔特·c·埃巴赫著。《系统学协会特别卷88》,剑桥大学出版社,英国2020年。435页,us $99.13(精装本),ISBN 978-1-107-00810-6;44.99美元(平装本),ISBN 978-1-107-40041-2;21.99美元(电子书)ISBN 978-1-107-40041-4。这本书是一个必读的所有谁认为自己的分类学家,尤其是那些倾向于反映在他们的学科的概念基础。然而,它既不是实用指南,也不是对其名义上的前身的修订(Forey等人,1992;Kitching et al., 1998)。更确切地说,这本书是关于系统分类学独立性的宣言,是对系统发育学的基本批判,是对一般“方法”的怀疑性研究,是“清理神话和误解思想的指南”(第431页)。它是各种各样的辉煌,独特,深刻,和愤怒。你可能不同意威廉姆斯和埃巴赫的所有观点,但你的想法会被激发:从一本关于系统理论的书中,你还能要求什么呢?两位作者,尤其是David Williams,长期以来都被贴上了“模式分支主义者”的标签,我也被贴上了这个标签,尽管我们在模式分支学所包含的每一点上都不一致。一个不同之处在于,Williams和Ebach坚定地捍卫了Nelson和Platnick(1991)最初提出的三分类单元方法,这一观点(方法?)受到了许多其他分支学家的批评。这个话题在这里讨论了一些长度,以及它所产生的争议的详尽的书目历史。然而,在我看来,3TA不是本书的“主题”,而是达到更根本目的的一种手段。因此,即使你已经决定3TA不是你的菜,只要浏览第11章和第12章(其中包含大量的范例数据表,在我看来,无论你是不是3TA的粉丝,都很难完成),你会在剩下的部分中发现很多兴趣和价值。Williams和Ebach没有被传统的线性结构所束缚,有几个章节嵌入了探索切线的“盒子”,比如硅藻的分类图,或者分子同源性,这些都比章节本身要长。每个章节和方框都包含自己的参考部分,建议阅读的注释列表和尾注,这是一种有优点和缺点的格式就像他们之前的书一样,这些引用是广泛而详尽的。索引不到四页长,而且我想查找的一些术语,如字符极性和根,没有列出(可能是出于某种原因——见下文)。虽然被称为系统分类学协会“分支学”书籍的第三版,但这本书更自然的前身是威廉姆斯和埃巴赫(2008)的“系统分类学和生物地理学基础”,该书追溯了歌德、海克尔和其他19世纪和20世纪早期系统学家的系统分类学历史脉络。一些评论家认为这本书也是一本有启发性的读物(Platnick, 2009;Brower, 2009),尽管其他人不那么乐观(Farris, 2011)。作者在这里扩展了前一本书中提出的一些观点,但也努力从其基础上为系统学建立一个认识论结构,这一努力的成功将在下文讨论。这篇评论将集中在我发现的一些最有趣和最有争议的观点上,而不是一章一章地对这本新书进行注释。Aphyly被定义为未被枝系参数捕获的类群的条件(第19页),这意味着类群的姊妹类群关系没有指定。一个例子是,当一个单系群被限定时,基于一个或多个突触形态,从一个更广泛的单系群中被留下的分类群,因此其余的需要进一步研究以确定它们的关系(一个经常出现的问题是大群的部分分类修订)。在这种背景下,“简单”是有意义的,在Ebach和Williams (2010;作者讨论了由于某种原因没有在英语词典中扎根的更古老的、定义相似的单词)。这些分类群之间的关系是不明确的:正如Williams和Ebach反复强调的那样,“单系不构成类系”(假设是这样的话,就等于承认了一个基于单系的互补“群”)。然而,他们扩展了他们的定义,以包括在我看来是不同的进一步概念:“一个分类单元的成员与另一个分类单元的成员的关系比他们与自己的群体的关系更密切”和“单个分类单元的成员太少,无法确定它是否是单系的”(第133页)。前者传统上被称为paraphyly;后者是单调的。我将分别处理这些问题。 对许多人来说,这个概念等同于“通过突触进行分组”,而不是通过总体相似性进行遗传分组,以及通过对祖先和分支长度的主观判断进行进化分类学分组。在这里,Williams和Ebach采用了一个更广泛的定义:分支学是“寻找生物自然分类的努力”(第8页),“旨在在自然分类中找到自然分类群的方法”(第19页),或者“分支学就是分类”(第403页)。关键是要理解威廉姆斯和埃巴赫所说的“自然”是什么意思——这就是问题在认识论上变得有争议的地方,我认为他们的论点中有一些不一致之处。形而上学地说,自然分类应该反映生物群体之间关系的真实模式,自达尔文以来,大多数生物学家都认为这是一种反映历史上谱系差异的等级制度。但经验主义科学家相信一种理论,是因为存在一种证明我们相信的证据模式。正如Williams和Ebach在第三章中所描述的那样,这种经验主义是一个重要的共识点,它将进化论者与更基本的形而上学的“系统发育学家”联系在一起。这一段拒绝了辛纯性和数据矩阵,概括了威廉姆斯和埃巴赫的书中最具挑战性的一些方面。他们似乎把分类学限定得既极其宽泛,如上文所述,又极其狭隘,因为他们拒绝“初级同源性”,理由是世界上所有的特征都是以可观察到的突触形态存在的。尽管“性格状态具有极性”和“只有突触才具有证据权重”的假设是分类学固有的,但性格极性的形而上存在和我们对性格极性的认识是不同的问题,就像系统发育关系的形而上存在和我们对系统发育关系的认识一样。存在是关于世界本质的本体论假设;知识是一个关于获取和解释证据的认识论问题。前者的假设并不能保证后者的可追溯性。突触性可能是“存在的”,但它们只能作为系统学家的经验假设来接触,这些假设允许对更复杂的关系理论进行后续推断,进而通过一致性为关于个体特征的假设提供检验。数据矩阵是一种启发式工具,用于组织有关分类群和特征的证据,以便观察结果与其他观察结果相对应,通常在指定转换序列或极性之前(Brower和Schawaroch, 1996;browwer and de Pinna, 2014)。在我看来,在21世纪认为数据矩阵受到了假象的污染,因此值得怀疑或不受欢迎是站不住脚的,原因有两个。首先,实践原因:矩阵服务于认识论目的。Williams和Ebach自己在本书中使用矩阵来说明方法,并广泛使用术语“矩阵”来描述他们的示例数据表。在解决实际的经验问题时,特别是在DNA序列证据方面,数据矩阵是必不可少的。我分析过的最大的数据集包含超过130万个细胞,与现在系统基因组学中常见的数据集规模相比,这是微不足道的。除非Williams和Ebach愿意拒绝来自DNA的证据,甚至是与系统学无关的大型形态学数据集,否则这些字符阵列太大了,如果没有计算机和矩阵表的帮助,就无法思考。我赞同这样一个普遍原则,即系统学家不应该把对数据的审查和对数据质量的判断随意交给算法,而是完全拒绝这些工具,转而使用铅笔、纸和“我认为”,这肯定会使该领域被边缘化。其次,作者声称表型图是枝状图(Williams and Ebach, 2008,本书),而“枝状图”包含了表型学。如果是这样的话,那么数据矩阵具有表现性的说法就没有决定性的力量,因为“表现性”只是“进化”工具
{"title":"What is discoverable and what is interpreted","authors":"Andrew V. Z. Brower","doi":"10.1111/cla.12482","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12482","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;\u0000 &lt;span&gt;Cladistics: A Guide to Biological Classification (third edition)&lt;/span&gt;. By &lt;span&gt;David M. Williams&lt;/span&gt; and &lt;span&gt;Malte C. Ebach&lt;/span&gt;. The Systematics Association Special Volume 88, Cambridge University Press, &lt;span&gt;UK&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span&gt;2020&lt;/span&gt;. &lt;span&gt;435&lt;/span&gt; pp. U.S. $99.13 (hardbound), ISBN 978-1-107-00810-6; U.S. $44.99 (paperback), ISBN 978-1-107-40041-2; U.S. $21.99 (ebook) ISBN 978-1-107-40041-4.\u0000 &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This book is a must-read for all who consider themselves taxonomists, most particularly for those inclined to reflect upon the conceptual basis of their discipline. However, it is neither a practical guide, nor a revision of its nominal predecessors (Forey et al., &lt;span&gt;1992&lt;/span&gt;; Kitching et al., &lt;span&gt;1998&lt;/span&gt;). Rather, the book is a manifesto on the independence of systematics, a fundamental critique of phylogenetics, a skeptical disquisition on “method” in general, and “a guide to de-cluttering the mind of myths and misconceptions” (p. 431). It is variously brilliant, idiosyncratic, profound, and infuriating. You may not agree with everything Williams and Ebach have written, but your thoughts will be provoked: what more can one ask from a book on systematic theory?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Both authors, and especially David Williams, have long been branded as “pattern cladists”, a label I also bear, although we do not agree on every point of what pattern cladistics entails. One difference is that Williams and Ebach have steadfastly defended the three-taxon approach originally proposed by Nelson and Platnick (&lt;span&gt;1991&lt;/span&gt;), a perspective (method?) castigated by many other cladists. That topic is addressed at some length here, along with a blow-by-blow bibliographic history of controversy it engendered. However, in my view, 3TA is not “the subject” of this book, but a means to a more fundamental end. Therefore, even if you have already decided that 3TA is not your cup of tea, just skim chapters 11 and 12 (which contain extensive exemplar data tables that in my opinion are rather difficult to work through, whether you are a fan of 3TA or not), and you will find much of interest and value in the rest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Williams and Ebach are not bound by a traditional linear structure, and several chapters have embedded “boxes” that explore tangents, such as classificatory diagrams of diatoms, or molecular homology, that are longer than the chapter itself. The chapters and boxes each contain their own reference sections, annotated lists of suggested readings, and endnotes, a format with advantages and disadvantages.1 As in their prior books, the citations are wide-ranging and exhaustive. The index is less than four pages long, and some terms I wanted to look up, such as character polarity and root, are not listed (perhaps for a reason—see below).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Although labeled as a third edition of the Systematics Association’s “Cladistics” books, a more natural progenitor for this book is Williams and Ebach’s (&lt;span&gt;2008&lt;/s","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"37 5","pages":"639-643"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12482","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46045992","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
All hail King Ludd 卢德国王万岁
IF 3.6 2区 生物学 Q1 EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY Pub Date : 2021-07-23 DOI: 10.1111/cla.12484
Ward C. Wheeler
<p> <span>Cladistics: a Guide to Biological Classification (third edition)</span>. By <span>Williams, D.</span>, & <span>Ebach, M.</span> (<span>2020</span>). Systematics Association Special Volume Series). <span>Cambridge</span>: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139047678 </p><p>This volume is identified as an updated third edition of the Systematics Association “Cladistics” and described as (on the back cover) “a contemporary review of cladistics”, “covers cladistics in the era of molecular data”, and as a “practical guide”. In my view, it is none of these things. The edition moniker is misleading, the book being in no way an updated extension of previous editions. Even the title “Cladistics” is misleading—at least in the way the term is used by practicing systematists today. The book would have been more descriptively titled “Three Item Analysis: A Resurrectionist Tale”. The volume offers a 1970s-centric view of systematics that bears almost no relationship to current cladistic practice, has very little to say about molecular data (other than it is “phenetic”, e.g. p 230, 269), modern computational tools (other than to say they “distort”—whatever that means—data, e.g. p 297), attempts to redefine commonly used terms, and as a “practical guide” is miscast.</p><p>I found many sections tough going requiring multiple readings of sentences and sections. This was not helped by non-standard use of terms and redefining those terms in ways that I found confusing. This includes frequent use of the word “true” in terms of analytical results, and synonymizing (p 28) taxonomy, classification, systematics, and phylogeny. This coupled with much epicycular attention paid to arguments long over, such as 1980s “meta-taxa”, do not enhance flow or intelligibility. As a general historical narrative such sections might be fine, but the authors are (to my reading) attempting to make an argument about how people should do systematics today.</p><p>There are many points that one can take issue with. I will focus on two here, first the use of the terms “parsimony” and “phenetics” and second, the general and specific tenor focused on Three-Item/Taxon-Analysis. Throughout the volume, “parsimony” as we know it in systematics is referred to as “Wagner parsimony”. Idiosyncratic, but not terrible. In its original sense, this was to signify the reversibility of character change, as opposed to models which biased change in favour of either origin or loss. The modern use of the term is simply “parsimony”. This appears to be done to remove the “unnatural” Wagner parsimony from its pedestal and replace it with the “natural” Three-Item-Analysis favoured by the authors. More jarring is the authors’ use of the term “phenetics”, which seems to apply to any procedure they do not like.</p><p>The common current use of the term phenetic applies to tree construction procedures that employ overall similarity as an optimality criterion or
这很难与一个活跃的研究课题相一致。据我所知,诺曼·普拉特尼克本人在他大量的实证研究中(如果有的话)并没有使用3IA。在机械方面,我发现这本书的组织方面有点欠缺。章节从5页到近70页不等,冗长的教科书式的“方框”章节无助于论点的流畅,因为它们可能长达数页,许多章节本可以并入文本中。如上所述,写作通常难以理解,使用未定义或半定义的术语(例如“自然”、“真实”),论证方案经常让人感觉扭曲。最后一章“进一步的神话和误解”批评了流行书籍,非系统论者对系统学的看法,并讨论了最近的人格和其他问题,包括所谓的“节俭门”事件。这一章似乎有点像狗的早餐,作者们想要讨论的话题似乎与该卷的前14章没有什么联系。总而言之,我不认为这本书是关于“分类:生物分类指南”。这本书是支持3IA的宣言,应该简单地命名为3IA。我不能把这本书作为“分类学”、“实用指南”或“分子数据时代”的有价值的读物推荐给学生。作者没有理由不把他们的观点发表在科学文献中——只是他们表达的观点和论点在同行评议的期刊文章(可能很长)中会更好。
{"title":"All hail King Ludd","authors":"Ward C. Wheeler","doi":"10.1111/cla.12484","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cla.12484","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;\u0000 &lt;span&gt;Cladistics: a Guide to Biological Classification (third edition)&lt;/span&gt;. By &lt;span&gt;Williams, D.&lt;/span&gt;, &amp; &lt;span&gt;Ebach, M.&lt;/span&gt; (&lt;span&gt;2020&lt;/span&gt;). Systematics Association Special Volume Series). &lt;span&gt;Cambridge&lt;/span&gt;: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139047678\u0000 &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This volume is identified as an updated third edition of the Systematics Association “Cladistics” and described as (on the back cover) “a contemporary review of cladistics”, “covers cladistics in the era of molecular data”, and as a “practical guide”. In my view, it is none of these things. The edition moniker is misleading, the book being in no way an updated extension of previous editions. Even the title “Cladistics” is misleading—at least in the way the term is used by practicing systematists today. The book would have been more descriptively titled “Three Item Analysis: A Resurrectionist Tale”. The volume offers a 1970s-centric view of systematics that bears almost no relationship to current cladistic practice, has very little to say about molecular data (other than it is “phenetic”, e.g. p 230, 269), modern computational tools (other than to say they “distort”—whatever that means—data, e.g. p 297), attempts to redefine commonly used terms, and as a “practical guide” is miscast.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I found many sections tough going requiring multiple readings of sentences and sections. This was not helped by non-standard use of terms and redefining those terms in ways that I found confusing. This includes frequent use of the word “true” in terms of analytical results, and synonymizing (p 28) taxonomy, classification, systematics, and phylogeny. This coupled with much epicycular attention paid to arguments long over, such as 1980s “meta-taxa”, do not enhance flow or intelligibility. As a general historical narrative such sections might be fine, but the authors are (to my reading) attempting to make an argument about how people should do systematics today.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;There are many points that one can take issue with. I will focus on two here, first the use of the terms “parsimony” and “phenetics” and second, the general and specific tenor focused on Three-Item/Taxon-Analysis. Throughout the volume, “parsimony” as we know it in systematics is referred to as “Wagner parsimony”. Idiosyncratic, but not terrible. In its original sense, this was to signify the reversibility of character change, as opposed to models which biased change in favour of either origin or loss. The modern use of the term is simply “parsimony”. This appears to be done to remove the “unnatural” Wagner parsimony from its pedestal and replace it with the “natural” Three-Item-Analysis favoured by the authors. More jarring is the authors’ use of the term “phenetics”, which seems to apply to any procedure they do not like.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The common current use of the term phenetic applies to tree construction procedures that employ overall similarity as an optimality criterion or","PeriodicalId":50688,"journal":{"name":"Cladistics","volume":"37 5","pages":"644-645"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6,"publicationDate":"2021-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/cla.12484","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46531794","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Cladistics
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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