4.8 Article

Early cephalopod evolution clarified through Bayesian phylogenetic inference

Journal

BMC BIOLOGY
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12915-022-01284-5

Keywords

Cephalopoda; Phylogeny; Nautiloidea; Orthoceratoidea; Multiceratoidea; Endoceratoidea; Bayesian phylogenetics; Fossilized birth-death process; Posterior clade probabilities; Tree similarities

Categories

Funding

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [200020_169627]
  2. Research Plan of the Institute of Geology of the Czech Academy of Sciences [RVO67985831]
  3. Faculty of Science, Charles University [UNCE/SCI/006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite the excellent fossil record of cephalopods, their early evolution remains poorly understood. In this study, researchers conducted a comprehensive phylogenetic analysis of Cambrian and Ordovician cephalopods and resolved existing controversies. The results revealed three major monophyletic groups, and clarified the evolutionary pathways. The study also provided insights into the application of Bayesian phylogenetic inference on morphological datasets, suggesting the use of quartet similarity metrics and posterior pruned maximum clade credibility trees for assessing support for phylogenetic relationships among relevant taxa.
Background Despite the excellent fossil record of cephalopods, their early evolution is poorly understood. Different, partly incompatible phylogenetic hypotheses have been proposed in the past, which reflected individual author's opinions on the importance of certain characters but were not based on thorough cladistic analyses. At the same time, methods of phylogenetic inference have undergone substantial improvements. For fossil datasets, which typically only include morphological data, Bayesian inference and in particular the introduction of the fossilized birth-death model have opened new possibilities. Nevertheless, many tree topologies recovered from these new methods reflect large uncertainties, which have led to discussions on how to best summarize the information contained in the posterior set of trees. Results We present a large, newly compiled morphological character matrix of Cambrian and Ordovician cephalopods to conduct a comprehensive phylogenetic analysis and resolve existing controversies. Our results recover three major monophyletic groups, which correspond to the previously recognized Endoceratoidea, Multiceratoidea, and Orthoceratoidea, though comprising slightly different taxa. In addition, many Cambrian and Early Ordovician representatives of the Ellesmerocerida and Plectronocerida were recovered near the root. The Ellesmerocerida is para- and polyphyletic, with some of its members recovered among the Multiceratoidea and early Endoceratoidea. These relationships are robust against modifications of the dataset. While our trees initially seem to reflect large uncertainties, these are mainly a consequence of the way clade support is measured. We show that clade posterior probabilities and tree similarity metrics often underestimate congruence between trees, especially if wildcard taxa are involved. Conclusions Our results provide important insights into the earliest evolution of cephalopods and clarify evolutionary pathways. We provide a classification scheme that is based on a robust phylogenetic analysis. Moreover, we provide some general insights on the application of Bayesian phylogenetic inference on morphological datasets. We support earlier findings that quartet similarity metrics should be preferred over the Robinson-Foulds distance when higher-level phylogenetic relationships are of interest and propose that using a posteriori pruned maximum clade credibility trees help in assessing support for phylogenetic relationships among a set of relevant taxa, because they provide clade support values that better reflect the phylogenetic signal.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available