63
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Contentious relationships in phylogenomic studies can be driven by a handful of genes

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          Phylogenomic studies have resolved countless branches of the tree of life (ToL), but remain strongly contradictory on certain, contentious relationships. Here, we employ a maximum likelihood framework to quantify the distribution of phylogenetic signal among genes and sites for 17 contentious branches and 6 well-established control branches in plant, animal, and fungal phylogenomic data matrices. We find that resolution in some of these 17 branches rests on a single gene or a few sites, and that removal of a single gene in concatenation analyses or a single site from every gene in coalescence-based analyses diminishes support and can alter the inferred topology. These results suggest that tiny subsets of very large data matrices drive the resolution of specific internodes, providing a dissection of the distribution of support and observed incongruence in phylogenomic analyses. We submit that quantifying the distribution of phylogenetic signal in phylogenomic data is essential for evaluating whether branches, especially contentious ones, are truly resolved. Finally, we offer one detailed example of such an evaluation for the controversy regarding the earliest-branching metazoan phylum, where examination of the distributions of gene-wise and site-wise phylogenetic signal across 8 data matrices consistently supports ctenophores as sister group to all other metazoans.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

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

          ASTRAL-II: coalescent-based species tree estimation with many hundreds of taxa and thousands of genes

          Motivation: The estimation of species phylogenies requires multiple loci, since different loci can have different trees due to incomplete lineage sorting, modeled by the multi-species coalescent model. We recently developed a coalescent-based method, ASTRAL, which is statistically consistent under the multi-species coalescent model and which is more accurate than other coalescent-based methods on the datasets we examined. ASTRAL runs in polynomial time, by constraining the search space using a set of allowed ‘bipartitions’. Despite the limitation to allowed bipartitions, ASTRAL is statistically consistent. Results: We present a new version of ASTRAL, which we call ASTRAL-II. We show that ASTRAL-II has substantial advantages over ASTRAL: it is faster, can analyze much larger datasets (up to 1000 species and 1000 genes) and has substantially better accuracy under some conditions. ASTRAL’s running time is O ( n 2 k | X | 2 ) , and ASTRAL-II’s running time is O ( n k | X | 2 ) , where n is the number of species, k is the number of loci and X is the set of allowed bipartitions for the search space. Availability and implementation: ASTRAL-II is available in open source at https://github.com/smirarab/ASTRAL and datasets used are available at http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~phylo/datasets/astral2/. Contact: smirarab@gmail.com Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Is a new and general theory of molecular systematics emerging?

            The advent and maturation of algorithms for estimating species trees-phylogenetic trees that allow gene tree heterogeneity and whose tips represent lineages, populations and species, as opposed to genes-represent an exciting confluence of phylogenetics, phylogeography, and population genetics, and ushers in a new generation of concepts and challenges for the molecular systematist. In this essay I argue that to better deal with the large multilocus datasets brought on by phylogenomics, and to better align the fields of phylogeography and phylogenetics, we should embrace the primacy of species trees, not only as a new and useful practical tool for systematics, but also as a long-standing conceptual goal of systematics that, largely due to the lack of appropriate computational tools, has been eclipsed in the past few decades. I suggest that phylogenies as gene trees are a "local optimum" for systematics, and review recent advances that will bring us to the broader optimum inherent in species trees. In addition to adopting new methods of phylogenetic analysis (and ideally reserving the term "phylogeny" for species trees rather than gene trees), the new paradigm suggests shifts in a number of practices, such as sampling data to maximize not only the number of accumulated sites but also the number of independently segregating genes; routinely using coalescent or other models in computer simulations to allow gene tree heterogeneity; and understanding better the role of concatenation in influencing topologies and confidence in phylogenies. By building on the foundation laid by concepts of gene trees and coalescent theory, and by taking cues from recent trends in multilocus phylogeography, molecular systematics stands to be enriched. Many of the challenges and lessons learned for estimating gene trees will carry over to the challenge of estimating species trees, although adopting the species tree paradigm will clarify many issues (such as the nature of polytomies and the star tree paradox), raise conceptually new challenges, or provide new answers to old questions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The genetic causes of convergent evolution.

              The evolution of phenotypic similarities between species, known as convergence, illustrates that populations can respond predictably to ecological challenges. Convergence often results from similar genetic changes, which can emerge in two ways: the evolution of similar or identical mutations in independent lineages, which is termed parallel evolution; and the evolution in independent lineages of alleles that are shared among populations, which I call collateral genetic evolution. Evidence for parallel and collateral evolution has been found in many taxa, and an emerging hypothesis is that they result from the fact that mutations in some genetic targets minimize pleiotropic effects while simultaneously maximizing adaptation. If this proves correct, then the molecular changes underlying adaptation might be more predictable than has been appreciated previously.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                101698577
                46074
                Nat Ecol Evol
                Nat Ecol Evol
                Nature ecology & evolution
                2397-334X
                18 March 2017
                10 April 2017
                10 April 2017
                10 October 2017
                : 1
                : 5
                : 126
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37235, USA
                [2 ]Laboratory of Genetics, Genome Center of Wisconsin, DOE Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, Wisconsin Energy Institute, J. F. Crow Institute for the Study of Evolution, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA
                Author notes
                Article
                NIHMS856835
                10.1038/s41559-017-0126
                5560076
                28812701
                df654e7a-b64a-402c-9cd4-8635432dabcc

                Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms

                History
                Categories
                Article

                phylogenetics,conflict,incongruence,gene tree
                phylogenetics, conflict, incongruence, gene tree

                Comments

                Comment on this article