Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Character Coding (character + coding)
Selected AbstractsPhylogeny of Dicranophoridae (Rotifera: Monogononta) , a maximum parsimony analysis based on morphological charactersJOURNAL OF ZOOLOGICAL SYSTEMATICS AND EVOLUTIONARY RESEARCH, Issue 1 2009O. Riemann Abstract This study presents the first phylogenetic analysis of Dicranophoridae (Rotifera: Monogononta), a species rich rotifer family of about 230 species currently recognized. It is based on a maximum parsimony analysis including 77 selected ingroup and three outgroup taxa and a total of 59 phylogenetically informative morphological characters. Character coding is based on personal investigation of material collected by the authors and an extensive survey of the literature. Apart from covering general body organization, character coding primarily relies on scanning electron microscopic preparations of the mastax jaw elements. Our study suggests monophyly of Dicranophoridae with a clade of Dicranophorus and Dorria as the sister taxon of all other dicranophorid species. Monophyly of Encentrum, the most species rich genus within Dicranophoridae, cannot be demonstrated. Within Dicranophoridae our study identifies the monophyletic taxa Caudosubbasifenestrata, Intramalleata, Praeuncinata and Proventriculata, each based on unambiguous character transformations evolved in their stem lineages. However, resolution within Praeuncinata and Proventriculata is very limited. Although some terminal clades within Praeuncinata and Proventriculata are recognized, basal splits remain obscure. Probably, other characters such as DNA sequence data are needed to further our understanding of phylogenetic relationships within these poorly resolved taxa. Zusammenfassung Die hier vorgelegte Studie stellt die erste phylogenetische Analyse des Taxons Dicranophoridae (Rotifera: Monogononta) dar, einer artenreichen Familie der Rotiferen mit zurzeit etwa 230 validen Arten. Die resultierenden phylogenetischen Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen fußen auf einer Maximum Parsimonie Analyse mit 77 ausgewählten Vertretern der Innen, und 3 Vertretern der Außengruppe bei insgesamt 59 Parsimonie,informativen Merkmalen. Die Kodierung der Merkmale basiert einerseits auf Material, das von den Autoren selbst gesammelt und bestimmt wurde und andererseits auf einem ausgedehnten Studium der relevanten Literatur. Neben der Erfassung von Merkmalen zur allgemeinen Körperorganisation stützt sich die Merkmalskodierung vor allem auf rasterelektronenmikroskopische Präparationen der Hartelemente des Mastax. Das Ergebnis der Analyse stützt die Monophylie der Dicranophoridae. Innerhalb der Dicranophoridae stellt ein monophyletisches Taxon, das die Gattungen Dicranophorus und Dorria umfasst, die Schwestergruppe aller übrigen Dicranophoridae dar. Die bei weitem artenreichste Gattung Encentrum lässt sich nicht als Monophylum begründen. Als monophyletische Teilgruppen innerhalb der Dicranophoridae identifiziert unsere Analyse die Taxa Caudosubbasifenestrata, Intramalleata, Praeuncinata und Proventriculata, die jeweils durch mindestens eine unzweideutige Merkmalstransformation in ihren Stammlinien begründet werden. Innerhalb der Taxa Praeuncinata und Proventriculata bietet unsere Analyse nur sehr begrenzte Auflösung. Obgleich sich einzelne Teilgruppen über unzweideutige Merkmalstransformationen als Monophyla begründen lassen, fehlen Merkmale für die Auflösung der basalen Verzweigungen innerhalb der Praeuncinata und Proventriculata. Es ist zu erwarten, dass andere Merkmalssysteme, wie zum Beispiel DNA Sequenzdaten, bei der Aufklärung der Verwandtschaftsbeziehungen innerhalb dieser Teilgruppen Klärung erbringen. [source] Chordate phylogeny and evolution: a not so simple three-taxon problemJOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY, Issue 2 2008T. Stach Abstract Traditional concepts of chordate phylogeny have recently been in turmoil: in a large-scale molecular study, the traditional hypothesis that cephalochordates are sister taxon to craniates was replaced by the hypothesis of a sister group relationship between tunicates and craniates. It was claimed that the morphological evidence that supported traditional phylogeny was weak and that morphological characters at least equally strong could be mustered in support of the ,new phylogeny.' In the present review, it is shown that the uncritical use of published codings of morphological characters in recent phylogenetic analyses is responsible for this perception. To ameliorate this situation, the main focus of the present publication is a review of the morphological evidence that has been deemed relevant in chordate phylogeny. Characters are presented in enough detail to allow readers to make self-reliant informed decisions on character coding. I then analyze these characters cladistically, and it is demonstrated that support of the traditional hypothesis is substantial. I briefly evaluate molecular systematic studies and criticize ,evo-devo' studies for lack of cladistic rigor in the evolutionary interpretations of their data by (1) failing to formally code their characters (2) failing to subject their data to the congruence test with other characters, the crucial test in phylogenetic analyses. Finally, a short and by necessity eclectic discussion of suggested evolutionary scenarios is presented. [source] Conodont affinity and chordate phylogenyBIOLOGICAL REVIEWS, Issue 2 2000PHILIP C. J. DONOGHUE ABSTRACT Current information on the conodonts Clydagnathus windsorensis (Globensky) and Promissum pulchrum Kovács- Endrödy, together with the latest interpretations of conodont hard tissues, are reviewed and it is concluded that sufficient evidence exists to justify interpretation of the conodonts on a chordate model. A new phylogenetic analysis is undertaken, consisting of 17 chordate taxa and 103 morphological, physiological and biochemical characters; conodonts are included as a primary taxon. Various experiments with character coding, taxon deletion and the use of constraint trees are carried out. We conclude that conodonts are cladistically more derived than either hagfishes or lampreys because they possess a mineralised dermal skeleton and that they are the most plesiomorphic member of the total group Gnathostomata. We discuss the evolution of the nervous and sensory systems and the skeleton in the context of our optimal phylogenetic tree. There appears to be no simple evolution of free to canal-enclosed neuromasts; organised neuromasts within canals appear to have arisen at least three times from free neuromasts or neuromasts arranged within grooves. The mineralised vertebrate skeleton first appeared as odontodes of dentine or dentine plus enamel in the paraconodont/euconodont feeding apparatus. Bone appeared later, co-ordinate with the development of a dermal skeleton, and it appears to have been primitively acellular. Atubular dentine is more primitive than tubular dentine. However, the subsequent distribution of the different types of dentine (e.g. mesodentine, orthodentine), suggests that these tissue types are homoplastic. The topology of relationships and known stratigraphic ranges of taxa in our phylogeny predict the existence of myxinoids and petromyzontids in the Cambrian. [source] Phylogeny of the genus Palmanura (Collembola: Neanuridae)CLADISTICS, Issue 5 2010José G. Palacios Vargas In order to assess the phylogenetic structure of the springtail genus Palmanura, as well as to test the monophyly of the tribe Sensillanurini (Neanuridae: Neanurinae), a data matrix of morphological (chaetotactic and other) characters of members of this group was assembled and analysed in the light of Wagner parsimony. The data matrix included all the known members of the Neotropical genus Palmanura, plus representatives of Sensillanura and Americanura. Although not all the clades obtained were highly supported by bootstrap resampling, some structures were relatively constant under different approaches. Alternative analyses (unordered and ordered character states, rescaled weighting procedure) were applied. While alternative solutions were obtained, a number of structures were shared by the results irrespective of the method used. On this basis, the results suggest that some further reassessment is required to confirm formally the monophyly of the tribe Sensillanurini. The genera Palmanura and Americanura are mutually poly/paraphyletic; we thus suggest that Palmanura should be considered as a synonym of Americanura, although some character reassessment and more varied outgroup species may be necessary before a formal generic redefinition can be proposed. Finally, a comparison of the performance of the characters under Wagner parsimony analysis indicated that differences in the characters' retention indexes are due not to the topological (tagmal) position of the traits involved, but to character coding: the characters describing quantitative features (generally numbers of setae) generally performed worse than other types of characters under parsimony. An updated list of the known members of the Sensillanurini (Collembola: Neanuridae: Neanurinae) is presented. © The Willi Hennig Society 2009. [source] Cladistic analysis of languages: Indo-European classification based on lexicostatistical dataCLADISTICS, Issue 2 2003ina Rexová The phylogeny of the Indo-European (IE) language family is reconstructed by application of the cladistic methodology to the lexicostatistical dataset collected by Dyen (about 200 meanings, 84 speech varieties, the Hittite language used as a functional outgroup). Three different methods of character coding provide trees that show: (a) the presence of four groups, viz., Balto-Slavonic clade, Romano-Germano-Celtic clade, Armenian-Greek group, and Indo-Iranian group (the two last groups possibly paraphyletic); (b) the unstable position of the Albanian language; (c) the unstable pattern of the basalmost IE differentiation; but (d) the probable existence of the Balto-Slavonic,Indo-Iranian ("satem") and the Romano-Germano-Celtic (+Albanian?) superclades. The results are compared with the phenetic approach to lexicostatistical data, the results of which are significantly less informative concerning the basal pattern. The results suggest a predominantly branching pattern of the basic vocabulary phylogeny and little borrowing of individual words. Different scenarios of IE differentiation based on archaeological and genetic information are discussed. [source] Taxon combinations, parsimony analysis (PAUP*), and the taxonomy of the yellow-tailed woolly monkey, Lagothrix flavicaudaAMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY, Issue 3 2008Luke J. Matthews Abstract The classifications of primates, in general, and platyrrhine primates, in particular, have been greatly revised subsequent to the rationale for taxonomic decisions shifting from one rooted in the biological species concept to one rooted solely in phylogenetic affiliations. Given the phylogenetic justification provided for revised taxonomies, the scientific validity of taxonomic distinctions can be rightly judged by the robusticity of the phylogenetic results supporting them. In this study, we empirically investigated taxonomic-sampling effects on a cladogram previously inferred from craniodental data for the woolly monkeys (Lagothrix). We conducted the study primarily through much greater sampling of species-level taxa (OTUs) after improving some character codings and under a variety of outgroup choices. The results indicate that alternative selections of species subsets from within genera produce various tree topologies. These results stand even after adjusting the character set and considering the potential role of interobserver disagreement. We conclude that specific taxon combinations, in this case, generic or species pairings, of the primary study group has a biasing effect in parsimony analysis, and that the cladistic rationale for resurrecting the Oreonax generic distinction for the yellow-tailed woolly monkey (Lagothrix flavicauda) is based on an artifact of idiosyncratic sampling within the study group below the genus level. Some recommendations to minimize the problem, which is prevalent in all cladistic analyses, are proposed. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2008. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] | ||||||||||