4.7 Article

A Malvaceae mystery: A mallow maelstrom of genome multiplications and maybe misleading methods?

Journal

JOURNAL OF INTEGRATIVE PLANT BIOLOGY
Volume 61, Issue 1, Pages 12-31

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jipb.12746

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [1354268]
  2. Cotton Incorporated
  3. Division Of Environmental Biology
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences [1354268] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Previous research suggests that Gossypium has undergone a 5- to 6-fold multiplication following its divergence from Theobroma. However, the number of events, or where they occurred in the Malvaceae phylogeny remains unknown. We analyzed transcriptomic and genomic data from representatives of eight of the nine Malvaceae subfamilies. Phylogenetic analysis of nuclear data placed Dombeya (Dombeyoideae) as sister to the rest of Malvadendrina clade, but the plastid DNA tree strongly supported Durio (Helicteroideae) in this position. Intraspecific Ks plots indicated that all sampled taxa, except Theobroma (Byttnerioideae), Corchorus (Grewioideae), and Dombeya (Dombeyoideae), have experienced whole genome multiplications (WGMs). Quartet analysis suggested WGMs were shared by Malvoideae-Bombacoideae and Sterculioideae-Tilioideae, but did not resolve whether these are shared with each other or Helicteroideae (Durio). Gene tree reconciliation and Bayesian concordance analysis suggested a complex history. Alternative hypotheses are suggested, each involving two independent autotetraploid and one allopolyploid event. They differ in that one entails an allopolyploid origin for the Durio lineage, whereas the other invokes an allopolyploid origin for Malvoideae-Bombacoideae. We highlight the need for more genomic information in the Malvaceae and improved methods to resolve complex evolutionary histories that may include allopolyploidy, incomplete lineage sorting, and variable rates of gene and genome evolution.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available