4.7 Article

A robust phylogeny among major lineages of the East African cichlids

Journal

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
Volume 100, Issue -, Pages 234-242

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2016.04.012

Keywords

Cichlidae; Lake Tanganyika; Maximum-likelihood analysis; Next generation sequencer; Restriction site-associated DNA sequencing; Tribe

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan [23370043, 26291078]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26291078, 23370043] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The huge monophyletic group of the East African cichlid radiations (EAR) consists of thousands of species belonging to 12-14 tribes; the number of tribes differs among studies. Many studies have inferred phylogenies of EAR tribes using various genetic markers. However, these phylogenies partly contradict one another and can have weak statistic support. In this study, we conducted maximum-likelihood (ML) phylogenetic analyses using restriction site-associated DNA (RAD) sequences and propose a new robust phylogenetic hypothesis among Lake Tanganyika cichlid fishes, which cover most EAR tribes. Data matrices can vary in size and contents depending on the strategies used to process RAD sequences. Therefore, we prepared 23 data matrices with various processing strategies. The ML phylogenies inferred from 15 large matrices (2.0 x 10(6) to 1.1 x 10(7) base pairs) resolved every tribe as a monophyletic group with 100% bootstrap support and shared the same topology regarding relationships among the tribes. Most nodes among the tribes were supported by 100% bootstrap values, and the bootstrap support for the other node varied among the 15 ML trees from 70% to 100%. These robust ML trees differ partly in topology from those in earlier studies, and these phylogenetic relationships have important implications for the tribal classification of EAR. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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