4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Phylogeography of the Chionodraco genus (Perciformes, Channichthydae) in the Southern Ocean

Journal

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
Volume 28, Issue 3, Pages 420-429

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/S1055-7903(03)00124-6

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Antarctic fish of the suborder Notothenoidei represent one of the most notable examples of adaptive radiation in the marine environment. The evolutionary relationships between and within the eight families of this suborder have been well established by numerous studies, whereas the microevolutionary processes of notothenioid species remain largely unexplored. In the present paper we investigated the evolutionary relationships between three closely related species of the genus Chionadraco (family Channichthyidae), namely Chionodraco hamatus, Chionodraco rastrospinosus, and Chionodraco myersi by analysing portions of the mitochondrial genome (D-loop and 16S rRNA). The taxonomic status of C. hamatus and C. rastrospinostis as separate species has been questioned because of the limited number of key morphological characters that distinguish these two taxa. Our results, based on the analysis of several specimens belonging to both morphological groups revealed a small genetic differentiation among haplotypes, however, a clear separation between the two nominal species emerged since all individuals of each of the two taxa clustered together in distinct monophyletic groups. C. myersi appeared more distantly related in the phylogenetic analysis. For one, species, C. hamatus, sampling was carried out at three different geographic locations in the area of the Ross Sea and Weddell Sea. The results showed that the partition of the genetic variation within this species is not compatible with the hypothesis of panmixia as gene flow between populations was significantly reduced. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science (USA). 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