46
views
1
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Discovery of missing link between demosponges and hexactinellids confirms palaeontological model of sponge evolution

      research-article
      1 , 2 , 3 , , 2
      Scientific Reports
      Nature Publishing Group UK

      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

          The two major extant groups of siliceous sponges, Demospongiae and Hexactinellida, are generally regarded as sister groups forming the clade Silicea, although the nature of their last common ancestor is uncertain. The fossil record contains a diverse range of basal demosponges that appear to have evolved from hexactine-bearing reticulosan ancestors, although a compelling morphological intermediate has not previously been discovered. Here we describe a new species of fossil sponge, Conciliospongia anjiensis gen. et sp. nov., from the Late Ordovician (~444 Ma) Anji Biota of South China. This species has a reticulate, tufted skeleton of minute monaxon spicules, characteristic of the fossil demosponge family Hazeliidae and modern heteroscleromorphs, with hexactine spicules and a globose body form inherited from reticulosan ancestors. This transitional morphology had previously been hypothesized in palaeontological studies. This morphological intermediate between two extant classes further confirms siliceous sponge monophyly and demosponge–hexactinellid spicule homology, and supports the primitive, stem-silicean interpretation of simpler-structured fossil reticulosans.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

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

          Phylogenetic-signal dissection of nuclear housekeeping genes supports the paraphyly of sponges and the monophyly of Eumetazoa.

          The relationships at the base of the metazoan tree have been difficult to robustly resolve, and there are several different hypotheses regarding the interrelationships among sponges, cnidarians, ctenophores, placozoans, and bilaterians, with each hypothesis having different implications for the body plan of the last common ancestor of animals and the paleoecology of the late Precambrian. We have sequenced seven nuclear housekeeping genes from 17 new sponges, bringing the total to 29 species analyzed, including multiple representatives of the Demospongiae, Calcarea, Hexactinellida, and Homoscleromorpha, and analyzed a data set also including six nonmetazoan outgroups and 36 eumetazoans using a variety of phylogenetic methods and evolutionary models. We used leaf stability to identify rogue taxa and investigate their effect on the support of the nodes in our trees, and we identified clades most likely to represent phylogenetic artifacts through the comparison of trees derived using different methods (and models) and through site-stripping analyses. Further, we investigated compositional heterogeneity and tested whether amino acid composition bias affected our results. Finally, we used Bayes factors to compare our results against previously published phylogenies. All our maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian analyses find sponges to be paraphyletic, with all analyses finding three extant paraphyletic sponge lineages, Demospongiae plus Hexactinellida, Calcarea, and Homoscleromorpha. All but one of our ML and Bayesian analyses support the monophyly of Eumetazoa (here Cnidaria + Bilateria) and a sister group relationship between Placozoa (here Trichoplax adhaerens) and Eumetazoa. Bayes factors invariably provide decisive support in favor of poriferan paraphyly when compared against either a sister group relationship between Porifera and Cnidaria or with a monophyletic Porifera with respect to a monophyletic Eumetazoa. Although we were able to recover sponge monophyly using our data set, this was only possible under unrealistic evolutionary models, if poorly performing phylogenetic methods were used, or in situations where the potential for the generation of tree reconstruction artifacts was artificially exacerbated. Everything considered, our data set does not provide any support for a monophyletic Diploblastica (here Placozoa + Cnidaria + Porifera) and suggests that a monophyletic Porifera may be better seen as a phylogenetic artifact.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Where's the glass? Biomarkers, molecular clocks, and microRNAs suggest a 200-Myr missing Precambrian fossil record of siliceous sponge spicules.

            The earliest evidence for animal life comes from the fossil record of 24-isopropylcholestane, a sterane found in Cryogenian deposits, and whose precursors are found in modern demosponges, but not choanoflagellates, calcareans, hexactinellids, or eumetazoans. However, many modern demosponges are also characterized by the presence of siliceous spicules, and there are no convincing demosponge spicules in strata older than the Cambrian. This temporal disparity highlights a problem with our understanding of the Precambrian fossil record--either these supposed demosponge-specific biomarkers were derived from the sterols of some other organism and are simply retained in modern demosponges, or spicules do not primitively characterize crown-group demosponges. Resolving this issue requires resolving the phylogenetic placement of another group of sponges, the hexactinellids, which not only make a spicule thought to be homologous to the spicules of demosponges, but also make their first appearance near the Precambrian/Cambrian boundary. Using two independent analytical approaches and data sets--traditional molecular phylogenetic analyses and the presence or absence of specific microRNA genes--we show that demosponges are monophyletic, and that hexactinellids are their sister group (together forming the Silicea). Thus, spicules must have evolved before the last common ancestor of all living siliceans, suggesting the presence of a significant gap in the silicean spicule fossil record. Molecular divergence estimates date the origin of this last common ancestor well within the Cryogenian, consistent with the biomarker record, and strongly suggests that siliceous spicules were present during the Precambrian but were not preserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Deep phylogeny and evolution of sponges (phylum Porifera).

              Sponges (phylum Porifera) are a diverse taxon of benthic aquatic animals of great ecological, commercial, and biopharmaceutical importance. They are arguably the earliest-branching metazoan taxon, and therefore, they have great significance in the reconstruction of early metazoan evolution. Yet, the phylogeny and systematics of sponges are to some extent still unresolved, and there is an on-going debate about the exact branching pattern of their main clades and their relationships to the other non-bilaterian animals. Here, we review the current state of the deep phylogeny of sponges. Several studies have suggested that sponges are paraphyletic. However, based on recent phylogenomic analyses, we suggest that the phylum Porifera could well be monophyletic, in accordance with cladistic analyses based on morphology. This finding has many implications for the evolutionary interpretation of early animal traits and sponge development. We further review the contribution that mitochondrial genes and genomes have made to sponge phylogenetics and explore the current state of the molecular phylogenies of the four main sponge lineages (Classes), that is, Demospongiae, Hexactinellida, Calcarea, and Homoscleromorpha, in detail. While classical systematic systems are largely congruent with molecular phylogenies in the class Hexactinellida and in certain parts of Demospongiae and Homoscleromorpha, the high degree of incongruence in the class Calcarea still represents a challenge. We highlight future areas of research to fill existing gaps in our knowledge. By reviewing sponge development in an evolutionary and phylogenetic context, we support previous suggestions that sponge larvae share traits and complexity with eumetazoans and that the simple sedentary adult lifestyle of sponges probably reflects some degree of secondary simplification. In summary, while deep sponge phylogenetics has made many advances in the past years, considerable efforts are still required to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the relationships among and within the main sponge lineages to fully appreciate the evolution of this extraordinary metazoan phylum. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ydzhang@nigpas.ac.cn
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                13 July 2017
                13 July 2017
                2017
                : 7
                : 5286
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, 39 East Beijing Road, Nanjing, 210008 China
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2293 9551, GRID grid.422296.9, Department of Natural Sciences, , Amgueddfa Cymru – National Museum Wales, ; Cathays Park, Cardiff, CF10 3LP UK
                [3 ]CAS Key Laboratory of Economic Stratigraphy and Palaeogeography, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, 39 East Beijing Road, Nanjing, 210008 China
                Article
                5604
                10.1038/s41598-017-05604-6
                5509731
                28706211
                99691a48-7f0e-4fbf-84dc-f7118a394265
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 1 March 2017
                : 31 May 2017
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article