4.7 Article

The tempo and mode of barnacle evolution

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 46, 期 1, 页码 328-346

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2007.10.004

关键词

barnacle; divergence times; DNA sequences; fossils; morphology; rhizocephala; systematics; taxonomy; Thoracica

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous phylogenetic attempts at resolving barnacle evolutionary relationships are few and have relied on limited taxon sampling. Here we combine DNA sequences from three nuclear genes (18S, 28S and H3) and 44 morphological characters collected from 76 thoracican (ingroup) and 15 rhizocephalan (outgroup) species representing almost all the Thoracica families to assess the tempo and mode of barnacle evolution. Using phylogenetic methods of maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood, and Bayesian inference and 14 fossil calibrations, we found that: (1) Iblomorpha form a monophyletic group; (2) pedunculated barnacles without shell plates (Heteralepadomorpha) are not ancestral, but have evolved, at least twice, from plated forms; (3) the ontogenetic pattern with 5 -> 6 -> 8 -> 12+ plates does not reflect Thoracica shell evolution; (4) the traditional asymmetric barnacles (Verrucidae) and the Balanomorpha are each monophyletic and together they form a monophyletic group; (5) asymmetry and loss of a peduncle have evolved twice in the Thoracica, resulting in neither the Verrucomorpha nor the Sessilia forming monophyletic groups in their present definitions; (6) the Scalpellomorpha are not monophyletic; (7) the Thoracica suborders evolved since the Early Carboniferous (340 mya) with the final radiation of the Sessilia in the Upper Jurassic (147 mya). These results, therefore, reject many of the underlying hypotheses about character evolution in the Cirripedia Thoracica. stimulate a variety of new thoughts on thoracican radiation, and suggest the need for a major rearrangement in thoracican classification based on estimated phylogenetic relationships. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据