4.7 Article

A reappraisal of the evolution of Asian snakehead fishes (Pisces, Channidae) using molecular data from multiple genes and fossil calibration

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 56, 期 2, 页码 707-717

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2010.03.027

关键词

Channa; Chronogram; Divergence time; Fossil calibration; Freshwater fish; Multi-locus; Phylogeny; Southeast Asia biogeography

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Freshwater snakehead fishes (Channidae) provide an interesting target for phylogenetic analysis for the following reasons, their unusual biology, potential for cryptic diversity and availability of a good fossil record. Here, a multi-locus molecular phylogeny was constructed and calibrated using two fossil dates to estimate divergence times within the family. Sampling aimed to explore interspecific divergence of Channa species across Southeast Asia and intra-specific variation where species possessed natural geographical ranges that were extensive. Results contradict divergence times estimated previously independently from single locus mitochondrial data or the fossil record and suggest that after divergence from African taxa 40-50 Ma, evolution of Asian snakeheads has been heavily influenced by multiple broad scale dispersal events across India and Southeast Asia. A similar pattern of divergence within multiple clades suggests that west-east dispersal was limited for many taxa during the Miocene. Deep intra-specific divergence was inferred for C. striata, indicating that long historical periods of isolation (similar to 8 Ma) have not resulted in the evolution of reproductive isolation within this species. Results support suggestions that C marulia like fishes in northern Cambodia may constitute an undescribed species, and that Indian C. diplogramma warrants taxonomic recognition as being distinct from Southeast Asian C. micropeltes, with the two taxa last sharing a common ancestor in the mid- to late-Miocene. (C) 2010 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