Phylogenetic Position Of Turtles Research Articles

A Spatially Explicit Model of Stabilizing Selection for Improving Phylogenetic Inference

Ultraconserved elements (UCEs) are stretches of hundreds of nucleotides with highly conserved cores flanked by variable regions. Although the selective forces responsible for the preservation of UCEs are unknown, they are nonetheless believed to contain phylogenetically meaningful information from deep to shallow divergence events. Phylogenetic applications of UCEs assume the same degree of rate heterogeneity applies across the entire locus, including variable flanking regions. We present a Wright–Fisher model of selection on nucleotides (SelON) which includes the effects of mutation, drift, and spatially varying, stabilizing selection for an optimal nucleotide sequence. The SelON model assumes the strength of stabilizing selection follows a position-dependent Gaussian function whose exact shape can vary between UCEs. We evaluate SelON by comparing its performance to a simpler and spatially invariant GTR+ model using an empirical data set of 400 vertebrate UCEs used to determine the phylogenetic position of turtles. We observe much improvement in model fit of SelON over the GTR+ model, and support for turtles as sister to lepidosaurs. Overall, the UCE-specific parameters SelON estimates provide a compact way of quantifying the strength and variation in selection within and across UCEs. SelON can also be extended to include more realistic mapping functions between sequence and stabilizing selection as well as allow for greater levels of rate heterogeneity. By more explicitly modeling the nature of selection on UCEs, SelON and similar approaches can be used to better understand the biological mechanisms responsible for their preservation across highly divergent taxa and long evolutionary time scales.

Toward consilience in reptile phylogeny: miRNAs support an archosaur, not lepidosaur, affinity for turtles.

Understanding the phylogenetic position of crown turtles (Testudines) among amniotes has been a source of particular contention. Recent morphological analyses suggest that turtles are sister to all other reptiles, whereas the vast majority of gene sequence analyses support turtles as being inside Diapsida, and usually as sister to crown Archosauria (birds and crocodilians). Previously, a study using microRNAs (miRNAs) placed turtles inside diapsids, but as sister to lepidosaurs (lizards and Sphenodon) rather than archosaurs. Here, we test this hypothesis with an expanded miRNA presence/absence dataset, and employ more rigorous criteria for miRNA annotation. Significantly, we find no support for a turtle + lepidosaur sister-relationship; instead, we recover strong support for turtles sharing a more recent common ancestor with archosaurs. We further test this result by analyzing a super-alignment of precursor miRNA sequences for every miRNA inferred to have been present in the most recent common ancestor of tetrapods. This analysis yields a topology that is fully congruent with our presence/absence analysis; our results are therefore in accordance with most gene sequence studies, providing strong, consilient molecular evidence from diverse independent datasets regarding the phylogenetic position of turtles.

A phylogenomic approach to vertebrate phylogeny supports a turtle-archosaur affinity and a possible paraphyletic lissamphibia.

In resolving the vertebrate tree of life, two fundamental questions remain: 1) what is the phylogenetic position of turtles within amniotes, and 2) what are the relationships between the three major lissamphibian (extant amphibian) groups? These relationships have historically been difficult to resolve, with five different hypotheses proposed for turtle placement, and four proposed branching patterns within Lissamphibia. We compiled a large cDNA/EST dataset for vertebrates (75 genes for 129 taxa) to address these outstanding questions. Gene-specific phylogenetic analyses revealed a great deal of variation in preferred topology, resulting in topologically ambiguous conclusions from the combined dataset. Due to consistent preferences for the same divergent topologies across genes, we suspected systematic phylogenetic error as a cause of some variation. Accordingly, we developed and tested a novel statistical method that identifies sites that have a high probability of containing biased signal for a specific phylogenetic relationship. After removing putatively biased sites, support emerged for a sister relationship between turtles and either crocodilians or archosaurs, as well as for a caecilian-salamander sister relationship within Lissamphibia, with Lissamphibia potentially paraphyletic.

Timing of organogenesis support basal position of turtles in the amniote tree of life

BackgroundThe phylogenetic position of turtles is the most disputed aspect in the reconstruction of the land vertebrate tree of life. This controversy has arisen after many different kinds and revisions of investigations of molecular and morphological data. Three main hypotheses of living sister-groups of turtles have resulted from them: all reptiles, crocodiles + birds or squamates + tuatara. Although embryology has played a major role in morphological studies of vertebrate phylogeny, data on developmental timing have never been examined to explore and test the alternative phylogenetic hypotheses. We conducted a comprehensive study of published and new embryological data comprising 15 turtle and eight tetrapod species belonging to other taxa, integrating for the first time data on the side-necked turtle clade.ResultsThe timing of events in organogenesis of diverse character complexes in all body regions is not uniform across amniotes and can be analysed using a parsimony-based method. Changes in the relative timing of particular events diagnose many clades of amniotes and include a phylogenetic signal. A basal position of turtles to the living saurian clades is clearly supported by timing of organogenesis data.ConclusionThe clear signal of a basal position of turtles provided by heterochronic data implies significant convergence in either molecular, adult morphological or developmental timing characters, as only one of the alternative solutions to the phylogenetic conundrum can be right. The development of a standard reference series of embryological events in amniotes as presented here should enable future improvements and expansion of sampling and thus the examination of other hypotheses about phylogeny and patterns of the evolution of land vertebrate development.

Sister Group Relationship of Turtles to the Bird-Crocodilian Clade Revealed by Nuclear DNA–Coded Proteins

The phylogenetic position of turtles is a currently controversial issue. Recent molecular studies rejected a traditional view that turtles are basal living reptiles (Hedges, S. B., and L. L. Poling. 1999. A molecular phylogeny. Science 83:998-1001; Kumazawa, Y., and M. Nishida. 1999. Complete mitochondrial DNA sequences of the green turtle and blue-tailed mole skink, statistical evidence for archosaurian affinity of turtles. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16:784-792). Instead, these studies grouped turtles with birds and crocodiles. The relationship among turtles, birds, and crocodiles remained unclear to date. To resolve this issue, we have cloned and sequenced two nuclear genes encoding the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase alpha and glycinamide ribonucleotide synthetase-aminoimidazole ribonucleotide synthetase-glycinamide ribonucleotide formyltransferase from amniotes and an amphibian. The amino acid sequences of these proteins were subjected to a phylogenetic analysis based on the maximum likelihood method. The resulting tree showed that turtles are the sister group to a monophyletic cluster of archosaurs (birds and crocodiles). All other possible tree topologies were significantly rejected.

Phylogenetic position of turtles among amniotes: evidence from mitochondrial and nuclear genes

Maximum likelihood analysis, accounting for site-heterogeneity in evolutionary rate with the Γ-distribution model, was carried out with amino acid sequences of 12 mitochondrial proteins and nucleotide sequences of mitochondrial 12S and 16S rRNAs from three turtles, one squamate, one crocodile, and eight birds. The analysis strongly suggests that turtles are closely related to archosaurs (birds+crocodilians), and it supports both Tree-2: (((birds, crocodilians), turtles), squamates) and Tree-3: ((birds, (crocodilians, turtles)), squamates). A more traditional Tree-1: (((birds, crocodilians), squamates), turtles) and a tree in which turtles are basal to other amniotes were rejected with high statistical significance. Tree-3 has recently been proposed by Hedges and Poling [Science 283 (1999) 998–1001] based mainly on nuclear genes. Therefore, we re-analyzed their data using the maximum likelihood method, and evaluated the total evidence of the analyses of mitochondrial and nuclear data sets. Tree-1 was again rejected strongly. The most likely hypothesis was Tree-3, though Tree-2 remained a plausible candidate.