4.7 Article

Resolving evolutionary relationships in the lichen-forming genus Porpidia and related allies (Porpidiaceae, Ascomycota)

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 32, 期 1, 页码 66-82

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2003.11.012

关键词

Ascomycota; homoplasy; Lecanorales; molecular phylogenetics; Porpidia; resolution; taxon sampling

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The lichen-forming genus Porpidia (Porpidiaceae, Ascomycota) provides excellent opportunities for evolutionary, reproductive, and ecological studies of crustose epilithic lichen symbioses. However, despite the fact that the genus itself seemed to be clearly delimited, the group was thought to be a hopeless case with regard to intrageneric relationships and species delimitations due to apparently rampant homoplasy throughout most character systems. Contrary to the situation for non-molecular data, a robust and generally well-resolved phylogeny was recovered based on DNA-sequence data. Separate and combined analyses of nuclear ribosomal RNA large subunit and nuclear P-tubulin gene fragments were performed using maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood, and Bayesian approaches. Branch support was estimated using non-parametic bootstrapping and posterior probabilities, while monophyly of a priori defined groups was tested using posterior probabilities. The results reveal a highly supported Porpidia sensu lato, however, Porpidia itself is not monophyletic. Several smaller genera of the Porpidiaceac and probably the large genus Lecidea (Lecideaceae) are nested within the group. Most taxa analyzed fall into one of four major subgroups within Porpidia s.l., though the basal relationships among these subgroups could not be supported. This phylogeny will make it possible to re-evaluate morphological and chemical characters in the group, and to conduct detailed studies of species delimitations within the monophyletic subgroups. (C) 2003 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