PL EN


Preferences help
enabled [disable] Abstract
Number of results
Journal
2009 | 58 | 3-4 | 485-498
Article title

Rekonstrukcja filogenezy i wnioskowanie filogenetyczne w badaniach ewolucyjnych

Content
Title variants
EN
Phylogeny estimation and phylogenetic inference in evolutionary studies
Languages of publication
PL EN
Abstracts
EN
Modern phylogenetics, although rooted in Darwin's and Haeckel's ideas on evolutionary relationships among organisms, dates back to the second half of the 20th century and the advance of numerical methods in taxonomy. Its beginnings were marked by a fierce debate between phenetics and cladistics but at present it incorporates a diverse array of methods including those based on distance and clustering algorithms, parsimony, maximum likelihood and Bayesian statistics. The phylogeny of extant organisms is usually inferred using molecular markers, because they are genetic, less arbitrary (do not require arbitrary coding), more additive, less prone to convergence and more universal than traditional morphological markers. Phylogenies inferred using molecular data are usually more stable and have better internal support than those obtained from morphology. However, the informed user of phylogenetics methods must be aware of their assumptions and caveats. The chosen sequences must be orthologous (resulting from a speciation event), as opposed to paralogous (resulting from a duplication event); choosing orthologous sequences does not guarantee that the phylogenetic signal is undisturbed. Reversals, multiple hits and parallel substitutions may result in a higher similarity of sequences than expected from their evolutionary history and therefore affect the phylogenetic reconstructions. Moreover, trees inferred from molecular data are usually gene trees rather than species trees. There are several processes that may result in discordance between a gene tree and an organism tree including interspecific hybridisation, horizontal gene transfer, incomplete lineage sorting and selection for allele polymorphism. The most commonly used phylogenetic methods include those based on parsimony, distance and clustering, maximum likelihood and Bayesian statistics. The last three employ nucleotide substitution models. Each method is based on certain evolutionary assumptions that may not necessarily apply to a given data set. Noteworthy are recent advances in methods of inferring divergence times using relaxed molecular clock. In evolutionary biology, molecular phylogenies are widely used in comparative studies, historical biogeography and for analysing character state evolution.
Keywords
Journal
Year
Volume
58
Issue
3-4
Pages
485-498
Physical description
Dates
published
2009
Contributors
  • Zakład Systematyki i Geografii Roślin, Instytut Botaniki, Uniwersytet Warszawski, Aleje Ujazdowskie 4, 00-478 Warszawa, Polska
  • Zakład Taksonomii i Geografii Roślin, Instytut Ekologii i Ochrony Środowiska, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika, Gagarina 9, 87-100 Toruń, Polska
References
  • Camin J. H., Sokal R. R., 1965. A method for deducing branching sequences in phylogeny. Evolution 19, 311-326.
  • Doolitte R. F., Blomback B., 1964. Amino-acid sequence investigations of fibrinopeptides from various mammals: evolutionary implications. Nature 202, 147-152.
  • Green R. E., Malaspinas A.-s., Krause J., Briggs A. W., Johnson P. L., Uhler C., Meyer M., Good J. M., Maricic T., Stenzel U., Prüfer K., Siebauer M., Burbano H. A., Ronan M., Rothberg J. M., Egholm M., Rudan P., Brajković D., Kućan Z., Gusić I., Wikström M., Laakkonen L., Kelso J., Slatkin M., Pääbo S., 2008. A complete Neandertal mitochondrial genome sequence determined by high-throughput sequencing. Cell 134, 416-26.
  • Grehan J. R., Schwartz J. H., 2009. Evolution of the second orangutan: phylogeny and biogeography of hominid origins. J. Biogeograph. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2699.2009.02141.x.
  • Hardy C. R., Linder H. P., 2005. Intraspecific variability and timing in ancestral ecology reconstruction: A test case from the Cape Flora. Systematic Biol. 54, 299-316.
  • Jukes T. h., Cantor C. R., 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. [W:] Mammalian protein metabolism. Munro H. N. (red.). Academic Press, New York, 21-123.
  • Kimura M., 1983. The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Margoliash E., 1963. Primary structure and evolution of cytochrome C. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 50, 672-679.
  • Smith S. A., Donoghue M. J, 2008. Rates of molecular evolution are linked to life history in flowering plants. Science 322, 86-89.
  • Webster A. j., Purvis A., 2002. Testing the accuracy of methods for reconstructing ancestral states of continuous characters. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Series B 269, 143-149.
  • Zuckerkandl E., Pauling L., 1965. Evolutionary divergence and convergence in proteins. [W:] Evolving genes and proteins. Bryson V., Vogel H. J. (red.). Academic Press, New York, 97-166.
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.bwnjournal-article-ksv58p485kz
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.