4.2 Article

What Is Peromyscus? Evidence from nuclear and mitochondrial DNA sequences suggests the need for a new classification

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAMMALOGY
Volume 96, Issue 4, Pages 708-719

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jmammal/gyv067

Keywords

Habromys; Megadontomys; Neotomodon; Osgoodomys; Peromyscus; phylogeny; Podomys; species group; systematics; taxonomy

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [DHHS A141435-01]
  2. National Science Foundation [MCB-0841821, DEB-1020865]
  3. Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The evolutionary relationships between Peromyscus, Habromys, Isthmomys, Megadontomys, Neotomodon, Osgoodomys, and Podomys are poorly understood. In order to further explore the evolutionary boundaries of Peromyscus and compare potential taxonomic solutions for this diverse group and its relatives, we conducted phylogenetic analyses of DNA sequence data from alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh1-I2), beta fibrinogen (Fgb-I7), interphotoreceptor retinoid-binding protein (Rbp3), and cytochrome-b (Cytb). Phylogenetic analyses of mitochondrial and nuclear genes produced similar topologies although levels of nodal support varied. The best-supported topology was obtained by combining nuclear and mitochondrial sequences. No monophyletic Peromyscus clade was supported. Instead, support was found for a clade containing Habromys, Megadontomys, Neotomodon, Osgoodomys, Podomys, and Peromyscus suggesting paraphyly of Peromyscus and confirming previous observations. Our analyses indicated an early divergence of Isthmomys from Peromyscus (approximately 8 million years ago), whereas most other peromyscine taxa emerged within the last 6 million years. To recover a monophyletic taxonomy from Peromyscus and affiliated lineages, we detail 3 taxonomic options in which Habromys, Megadontomys, Neotomodon, Osgoodomys, and Podomys are retained as genera, subsumed as subgenera, or subsumed as species groups within Peromyscus. Each option presents distinct taxonomic challenges, and the appropriate taxonomy must reflect the substantial levels of morphological divergence that characterize this group while maintaining the monophyletic relationships obtained from genetic data.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available