Phylogeny of the symphytan grade of Hymenoptera: new pieces into the old jigsaw(fly) puzzle

Phylogenies are usually dated by calibrating interior nodes against the fossil record. This relies on indirect methods that, in the worst case, misrepresent the fossil information. Here, we contrast such node dating with an approach that includes fossils along with the extant taxa in a Bayesian total-evidence analysis. As a test case, we focus on the early radiation of the Hymenoptera, mostly documented by poorly preserved impression fossils that are difficult to place phylogenetically. Specifically, we compare node dating using nine calibration points derived from the fossil record with total-evidence dating based on 343 morphological characters scored for 45 fossil (4--20 complete) and 68 extant taxa. In both cases we use molecular data from seven markers (∼5 kb) for the extant taxa. Because it is difficult to model speciation, extinction, sampling, and fossil preservation realistically, we develop a simple uniform prior for clock trees with fossils, and we use relaxed clock models to accommodate rate variation across the tree. Despite considerable uncertainty in the placement of most fossils, we find that they contribute significantly to the estimation of divergence times in the total-evidence analysis. In particular, the posterior distributions on divergence times are less sensitive to prior assumptions and tend to be more precise than in node dating. The total-evidence analysis also shows that four of the seven Hymenoptera calibration points used in node dating are likely to be based on erroneous or doubtful assumptions about the fossil placement. With respect to the early radiation of Hymenoptera, our results suggest that the crown group dates back to the Carboniferous, ∼309 Ma (95% interval: 291--347 Ma), and diversified into major extant lineages much earlier than previously thought, well before the Triassic. [Bayesian inference; fossil dating; morphological evolution; relaxed clock; statistical phylogenetics.]

To tackle incongruence, the topological conflict between different gene trees, phylogenomic studies couple concatenation with practices such as rogue taxon removal or the use of slowly evolving genes. Phylogenomic analysis of 1,070 orthologues from 23 yeast genomes identified 1,070 distinct gene trees, which were all incongruent with the phylogeny inferred from concatenation. Incongruence severity increased for shorter internodes located deeper in the phylogeny. Notably, whereas most practices had little or negative impact on the yeast phylogeny, the use of genes or internodes with high average internode support significantly improved the robustness of inference. We obtained similar results in analyses of vertebrate and metazoan phylogenomic data sets. These results question the exclusive reliance on concatenation and associated practices, and argue that selecting genes with strong phylogenetic signals and demonstrating the absence of significant incongruence are essential for accurately reconstructing ancient divergences.

A common problem in molecular phylogenetics is choosing a model of DNA substitution that does a good job of explaining the DNA sequence alignment without introducing superfluous parameters. A number of methods have been used to choose among a small set of candidate substitution models, such as the likelihood ratio test, the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), and Bayes factors. Current implementations of any of these criteria suffer from the limitation that only a small set of models are examined, or that the test does not allow easy comparison of non-nested models. In this article, we expand the pool of candidate substitution models to include all possible time-reversible models. This set includes seven models that have already been described. We show how Bayes factors can be calculated for these models using reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo, and apply the method to 16 DNA sequence alignments. For each data set, we compare the model with the best Bayes factor to the best models chosen using AIC and BIC. We find that the best model under any of these criteria is not necessarily the most complicated one; models with an intermediate number of substitution types typically do best. Moreover, almost all of the models that are chosen as best do not constrain a transition rate to be the same as a transversion rate, suggesting that it is the transition/transversion rate bias that plays the largest role in determining which models are selected. Importantly, the reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm described here allows estimation of phylogeny (and other phylogenetic model parameters) to be performed while accounting for uncertainty in the model of DNA substitution.