4.6 Article

Conflicting phylogenomic signals reveal a pattern of reticulate evolution in a recent high-Andean diversification (Asteraceae: Astereae: Diplostephium)

Journal

NEW PHYTOLOGIST
Volume 214, Issue 4, Pages 1736-1750

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/nph.14530

Keywords

ddRAD; Diplostephium; genome skimming; hybridization; introgression; phylogenomics; rapid diversification; reticulate evolution

Categories

Funding

  1. University of Texas at Austin
  2. Garden Club of America
  3. National Science Foundation [FESD 1338694, DEB 1240869]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

High-throughput sequencing is helping biologists to overcome the difficulties of inferring the phylogenies of recently diverged taxa. The present study analyzes the phylogenetic signal of genomic regions with different inheritance patterns using genome skimming and ddRAD-seq in a species-rich Andean genus (Diplostephium) and its allies. We analyzed the complete nuclear ribosomal cistron, the complete chloroplast genome, a partial mitochondrial genome, and a nuclear-ddRAD matrix separately with phylogenetic methods. We applied several approaches to understand the causes of incongruence among datasets, including simulations and the detection of introgression using the D-statistic (ABBA-BABA test). We found significant incongruence among the nuclear, chloroplast, and mitochondrial phylogenies. The strong signal of hybridization found by simulations and the D-statistic among genera and inside the main clades of Diplostephium indicate reticulate evolution as a main cause of phylogenetic incongruence. Our results add evidence for a major role of reticulate evolution in events of rapid diversification. Hybridization and introgression confound chloroplast and mitochondrial phylogenies in relation to the species tree as a result of the uniparental inheritance of these genomic regions. Practical implications regarding the prevalence of hybridization are discussed in relation to the phylogenetic method.

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