4.6 Article

Using Phylogenetic and Coalescent Methods to Understand the Species Diversity in the Cladia aggregata Complex (Ascomycota, Lecanorales)

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 7, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052245

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Scholarship of The Field Museum
  2. Graduate Fund of the Faculty of Science, Srinakharinwirot University
  3. National Research Council of Thailand

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Cladia aggregata complex is one of the phenotypically most variable groups in lichenized fungi, making species determination difficult and resulting in different classifications accepting between one to eight species. Multi-locus DNA sequence data provide an avenue to test species delimitation scenarios using genealogical and coalescent methods, employing gene and species trees. Here we tested species delimitation in the complex using molecular data of four loci (nuITS and IGS rDNA, protein-coding GAPDH and Mcm-7), including 474 newly generated sequences. Using a combination of ML and Bayesian gene tree topologies, species tree inferences, coalescent-based species delimitation, and examination of phenotypic variation we assessed the circumscription of lineages. We propose that results from our analyses support a 12 species delimitation scenario, suggesting that there is a high level of species diversity in the complex. Morphological and chemical characters often do not characterize lineages but show some degree of plasticity within at least some of the clades. However, clades can often be characterized by a combination of several phenotypical characters. In contrast to the amount of homoplasy in the morphological characters, the data set exhibits some geographical patterns with putative species having distribution patterns, such as austral, Australasian or being endemic to Australia, New Zealand or Tasmania.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available