Phylogenetic Relationships of Eublepharid Geckos (Reptilia: Squamata): A Molecular Approach
Phylogenetic Relationships of Eublepharid Geckos (Reptilia: Squamata): A Molecular Approach
复制标题
真壁虎（爬行动物：有鳞）的系统发育关系：分子方法
DOI：
10.2108/zsj.16.659
复制
发表时间：
1999
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
T. Hikida
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Ota;M. Honda;Mari Kobayashi;Showichi Sengoku;T. Hikida
摘要 使用线粒体 12S 和 16S 核糖体 RNA 基因的 879 个碱基对的序列数据，对所有 eublepharid 属和一些其他壁虎类群的代表进行了系统发育分析。数据的邻接 (NJ) 距离分析表明，Coleonyx 和 Aeluroscalabotes 存在独立的巨大分歧，并且 Eublepharidae 内其余部分存在单系性（自举比例 [BP]=76%）。在后者中，两个非洲属，Hemitheconyx 和 Holodactylus，几乎可以肯定都是单系的 (BP=99%)，而它们与 Eublepharis 的姐妹群关系得到的支持较弱，但仍然很重要 (BP=68%)。在黑岩角龙 (Goniurosaurus kuroiwae) 中，G. k. splendens 首先与其余部分分叉（BP=100%），其次是 G. k.冲绳岛北部的黑岩 (BP=100%)：G. k.来自冲绳岛南部的黑岩和 G. k. orientalis 之间仅存在 7 个碱基差异，最终出现分歧（BP=99%）。关于两个非洲属的单系性和 G. kuroiwae 内的关系，简约分析得到的结果与 NJ 分析一致，但保留了 Eublepharidae 内的其他关系未解决。我们的结果虽然与根据形态学数据假设的真睑科属之间的关系没有严重差异，但对目前公认的黑岩 G. kuroiwae 群体系统学提出了严重怀疑。此外，两项分析的结果表明，双趾亚科（以粗吻鼠为代表）与真足科的亲和力比与壁虎亚科的亲和力更近。我们的研究为Eublepharidae科的劳亚起源提供了强有力的支持。
Abstract Phylogenetic analyses were carried out for representatives of all eublepharid genera and a few other gekkonoid taxa using sequence data for 879 base pairs of mitochondrial 12S and 16S ribosomal RNA genes. Neighbor-joining (NJ) distance analysis of the data suggested independent great divergences of Coleonyx and Aeluroscalabotes, and monophyly of the remainder within Eublepharidae (bootstrap proportion [BP]=76%). Of the latter, the two African genera, Hemitheconyx and Holodactylus, were almost certainly monophyletic altogether (BP=99%), whereas their sister-group relationship with Eublepharis received a weaker, but still substantial support (BP=68%). Within Goniurosaurus kuroiwae, G. k. splendens first diverged from the remainder (BP=100%), followed by G. k. kuroiwae from the northern part of Okinawajima (BP=100%): G. k. kuroiwae from the southern part of Okinawajima and G. k. orientalis, differing from each other at only seven bases, diverged finally (BP=99%). Parsimony analysis yielded results consistent with those of NJ analysis with respect to the monophyly of the two African genera and relationships within G. kuroiwae, but retained the other relationships within Eublepharidae unresolved. Our results, while showing no serious discrepancies with the relationships among eublepharid genera hypothesized from morphological data, cast a serious doubt to the currently accepted population systematics within G. kuroiwae. Furthermore, results of both analyses suggested a closer affinity of Diplodactylinae (as represented by Rhacodactylus trachyrhynchus) with Eublepharidae, rather than with Gekkoninae. Our study lends a robust support to the Laurasian origin of the family Eublepharidae.