4.7 Article

Molecular phylogenetics of cixiid planthoppers (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha):: New insights from combined analyses of mitochondrial and nuclear genes

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 48, 期 2, 页码 667-678

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2008.04.026

关键词

phylogenetic inference; cixiidae; fulgoromorpha; Bayesian inference; mixture models; partitioned analyses

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The planthopper family Cixiidae (Hemiptera: Fulgoromorpha) comprises approximately 160 genera and 2000 species divided in three subfamilies: Borystheninae, Bothriocerinae and Cixiinae, the later with 16 tribes. The current paper represents the first attempt to estimate phylogenetic relationships within Cixiidae based on molecular data. We use a total of 3652 bp sequence alignment of four genes: the mitochondrial coding genes Cytochrome c Oxidase subunit 1 (Cox1) and Cytochrome b (Cytb), a portion of the nuclear 18S rDNA and two non-contiguous portions of the nuclear 28S rDNA. The phylogenetic relationships of 72 terminal specimens were reconstructed using both maximum parsimony and Bayesian inference methods. Through the analysis of this empirical dataset, we also provide comparisons among different a priori partitioning strategies and the use of mixture models in a Bayesian framework. Our comparisons suggest that mixture models overcome the benefits obtained by partitioning the data according to codon position and gene identity, as they provide better accuracy in phylogenetic reconstructions. The recovered maximum parsimony and Bayesian inference phylogenies suggest that the family Cixiidae is paraphyletic in respect with Delphacidae. The paraphyly of the subfamily Cixiinae is also recovered by both approaches. In contrast to a morphological phylogeny recently proposed for cixiids, subfamilies Borystheninae and Bothriocerinae form a monophyletic group. (c) 2008 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