25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A phylogenomic perspective on the radiation of ray-finned fishes based upon targeted sequencing of ultraconserved elements

      Preprint

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Ray-finned fishes constitute the dominant radiation of vertebrates with over 30,000 species. Although molecular phylogenetics has begun to disentangle major evolutionary relationships within this vast section of the Tree of Life, there is no widely available approach for efficiently collecting phylogenomic data within fishes, leaving much of the enormous potential of massively parallel sequencing technologies for resolving major radiations in ray-finned fishes unrealized. Here, we provide a genomic perspective on longstanding questions regarding the diversification of major groups of ray-finned fishes through targeted enrichment of ultraconserved nuclear DNA elements (UCEs) and their flanking sequence. Our workflow efficiently and economically generates data sets that are orders of magnitude larger than those produced by traditional approaches and is well-suited to working with museum specimens. Analysis of the UCE data set recovers a well-supported phylogeny at both shallow and deep time-scales that supports a monophyletic relationship between Amia and Lepisosteus (Holostei) and reveals elopomorphs and then osteoglossomorphs to be the earliest diverging teleost lineages. Divergence time estimation based upon 14 fossil calibrations reveals that crown teleosts appeared ~270 Ma at the end of the Permian and that elopomorphs, osteoglossomorphs, ostarioclupeomorphs, and euteleosts diverged from one another by 205 Ma during the Triassic. Our approach additionally reveals that sequence capture of UCE regions and their flanking sequence offers enormous potential for resolving phylogenetic relationships within ray-finned fishes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references3

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Basal actinopterygian relationships: a mitogenomic perspective on the phylogeny of the “ancient fish”

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            The sister-group of Teleostei: consensus and disagreements

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The Clupeocephala re-visited: Analysis of characters and homologies

              The characters supporting the monophyly of Clupeocephala are revised. The re-evaluation of these characters demonstrates that: 1) several characters as previously interpreted, are not unique, but homoplastic occurring elsewhere in non clupeocephalans (e.g., †crossognathiforms and osteoglossomorphs); 2) other characters are absent in most basal clupeocephalans; 3) some are variably present in basal clupeocephalans; 4) other characters seem to be wrong; and 5) several characters as previously defined, represent ambiguous homologies. Nevertheless, the present study reveals that the monophyly of Clupeocephala is supported by several unambiguous characters. Three of them are, apparently, uniquely derived novelties (early ossification of autopalatine; hyoidean artery piercing ventral hypohyal; toothplate of last pharyngobranchial or pharyngobranchial cartilage 4 corresponds to growth of only one toothplate), and seven are homoplastic, but are interpreted here as independently acquired in the different teleostean subgroups where they occur (e.g., anguloarticular present; retroarticular excluded from articular facet for quadrate; toothplates on pharyngobranchial 1 absent; six or fewer hypurals present). One character previously interpreted as a clupeocephalan synapomorphy (neural arch of ural centrum 1 [polyural terminology] reduced or lost) is proposed as a euteleostean synapomorphy. Additionally, the results reveal the need for further developmental, morphological, ontogenetic and phylogenetic studies, including many basal and advanced elopomorph, osteoglossomorph, and clupeocephalan species, to understand the meaning and distribution of the homoplastic characters and to test those interpreted as unique novelties of teleostean subgroups.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                2012-09-29
                Article
                10.1371/journal.pone.0065923
                1210.0120
                68a96f40-132c-4c81-8187-c7e3af20c5c5

                http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

                History
                Custom metadata
                (2013) PLoS ONE 8(6): e65923
                q-bio.PE q-bio.GN

                Evolutionary Biology,Genetics
                Evolutionary Biology, Genetics

                Comments

                Comment on this article