Evolution on the backbone: Apocynaceae phylogenomics and new perspectives on growth forms, flowers, and fruits
Evolution on the backbone: Apocynaceae phylogenomics and new perspectives on growth forms, flowers, and fruits
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ajb2.1067
复制
发表时间：
2018-03-01
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Foote, Abbey
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fishbein, Mark;Livshultz, Tatyana;Foote, Abbey
研究前提：我们在分类群和分子数据方面提供了迄今为止最大的夹竹桃科系统发育分析，作为分析营养和生殖性状进化的框架。方法：利用夹竹桃科1045种（占夹竹桃科近25%）的21个质体位点和73种夹竹桃科植物的完整质体，建立了夹竹桃科植物的最大似然系统发育模型。我们重建了祖先状态，并在似然框架中使用模型比较来分析夹竹桃科的特征进化。关键结果：我们获得了一个很好的支持的夹带科系统发育，解决了人们不太了解的部落和亚部落关系（例如，在Amsonieae和Hunterieae之间，在Asclepiadeae中），拒绝了Melodineae和Odontadenieae的单系性，并放置了以前未采样和神秘的分类群（例如，Pycnobotrya）。我们对夹竹桃科植物的进化提供了新的认识，包括草性和木性之间的频繁转换，缠绕的可逆性，花冠和雌蕊的综合进化，以及祖先的弓形果。结论：与以前的研究相比，增加了采样和选择最合适的进化模型，为系统发育和特征进化提供了更可靠的估计。进化推论对系统发育框架和模型的选择很敏感。
PREMISE OF THE STUDY: We provide the largest phylogenetic analyses to date of Apocynaceae in terms of taxa and molecular data as a framework for analyzing the evolution of vegetative and reproductive traits.METHODS: We produced maximum-likelihood phylogenies of Apocynaceae using 21 plastid loci sampled from 1045 species (nearly 25% of the family) and complete plastomes from 73 species. We reconstructed ancestral states and used model comparisons in a likelihood framework to analyze character evolution across Apocynaceae.KEY RESULTS: We obtained a well-supported phylogeny of Apocynaceae, resolving poorly understood tribal and subtribal relationships (e.g., among Amsonieae and Hunterieae, within Asclepiadeae), rejecting monophyly of Melodineae and Odontadenieae, and placing previously unsampled and enigmatic taxa (e.g., Pycnobotrya). We provide new insights into the evolution of Apocynaceae, including frequent shifts between herbaceousness and woodiness, reversibility of twining, integrated evolution of the corolla and gynostegium, and ancestral baccate fruits.CONCLUSIONS: Increased sampling and selection of best-fitting models of evolution provide more resolved and robust estimates of phylogeny and character evolution than obtained in previous studies. Evolutionary inferences are sensitive to choice of phylogenetic frameworks and models.