Abstract
To understand the phylogenetic status of Ariidae, Bagridae and Plotosidae catfishes, this study was planned using the barcode gene, cytochrome oxidase I (COI). Totally 71 species were used in phylogenetic reconstructions under maximum parsimony, maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference criteria. The one-way ANOVA showed that the three catfish families are significantly different (F= 19.79, d.f. = 3; 116, P< 0.0001 (Plotosidae); F= 44.21, d.f.= 3; 986, P< 0.0001 (Ariidae); F= 24.83, d.f.= 3; 1322, P< 0.0001 (Bagridae). In MP, ML and BI based phylogenetic tree of Ariidae, Plicofollis genus displayed as a monophyletic group with higher bootstrap and posterior probability values for all the species except two species of Neoarius, which intervened separating P. polystaphylodon. In the phylogenetic tree of Plotoside, Plotosus genus displayed as monophyletic group with higher bootstrap and posterior probability values for all the eight species. In the case of Bagridae phylogeentic tree, Mystus genus displayed as a monophyletic group with higher bootstrap and posterior probability values for all the species except Mystus montanus forming a distant and distinct clade whereas Mystus tengara collides into monophyletic clade when Neotropius genuswas removed. By this study we could establish a phylogenetic hypothesis for all the 36 catfish families and examine the monophyly status of the subfamilies and genera.
Highlights
In zoological and ecological literature, identification of unknown specimens based on cytochrome oxidase I (COI) has become known as DNA barcoding (Hebert et al, 2003; Remigio and Hebert, 2003; Moritz and Cicero, 2004)
Phylogenetic analysis at genus and family level Among the three reconstruction methods conducted (MP, maximum likelihood (ML)-RAxML, Bayesian inference (BI)) on the mitochondrial dataset, BI analysis resulted in least resolved tree
The sequence which consists more than 600 bp long suggested that PCR amplified products belongs to mitochondrial COI gene not to nuclear mitochondrial DNA (Numt)
Summary
In zoological and ecological literature, identification of unknown specimens based on cytochrome oxidase I (COI) has become known as DNA barcoding (Hebert et al, 2003; Remigio and Hebert, 2003; Moritz and Cicero, 2004). As in other protein-coding genes, the third-position nucleotides of COI show a high incidence of base substitution, leading to a rate of molecular evolution that is about three times greater than that of 12S or 16S rRNA (Knowlton and Weigt, 1998). They argued that 12S and 16S rRNA genes are having multiple insertions and deletions so they pose potential problems in their alignment. In cases, where reciprocal monophyly cannot safely be assumed, an analysis quantifying between-species and between-genera genetic variation forms a more correct basis of assignment Such analyses, require comprehensive different methods of phylogenetic coverage that is generally not available to the biologist. Different phylogenetic methods lead to improved accuracy and importantly, it provides a measure of statistical confidence associated with the barcoding assignment
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
