4.7 Article

Phylogenetic analysis of honey bee behavioral evolution

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 43, 期 2, 页码 543-552

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2006.10.013

关键词

honey bees; Apis; mtDNA; cytochrome c oxidase 2; large subunit RNA; inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate receptor; molecular phylogeny; comparative analysis; dance language; nesting behavior

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DNA sequences from three mitochondrial (rrnL, cox2, nad2) and one nuclear gene (iipr) from all 9 known honey bee species (Apis), a 10th possible species, Apis dorsata binghanii, and three outgroup species (Bombus terrestris, Melipona bicolor and Trigona fumbriata) were used to infer Apis phylogenetic relationships using Bayesian analysis. The dwarf honey bees were confirmed as basal, and the giant and cavity-nesting species to be monophyletic. All nodes were strongly supported except that grouping Apis cerana with A. nigrocincta. Two thousand post-burnin trees from the phylogenetic analysis were used in a Bayesian comparative analysis to explore the evolution of dance type, nest structure, comb structure and dance sound within Apis. The ancestral honey bee species was inferred with high support to have nested in the open, and to have more likely than not had a silent vertical waggle dance and a single comb. The common ancestor of the giant and cavity-dwelling bees is strongly inferred to have had a buzzing vertical directional dance. All pairwise combinations of characters showed strong association, but the multiple comparisons problem reduces the ability to infer associations between states between characters. Nevertheless, a buzzing dance is significantly associated with cavity-nesting, several vertical combs, and dancing vertically, a horizontal dance is significantly associated with a nest with a single comb wrapped around the support, and open nesting with a single pendant comb and a silent waggle dance. (C) 2006 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