Increased gene sampling yields robust support for higher-level clades within Bombycoidea (Lepidoptera)
Increased gene sampling yields robust support for higher-level clades within Bombycoidea (Lepidoptera)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-3113.2010.00543.x
复制
发表时间：
2011-01-01
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
Cummings, Michael P.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Zwick, Andreas;Regier, Jerome C.;Cummings, Michael P.
这项研究的主要目的是在鳞翅目超科蚕蛾总科中建立更高级的关系。我们的研究建立在先前对50个分类群的5个基因（类似于6.6 kbp）测序的基础上，这些分类群来自于bombyco总科及其姊妹类群Lasiocampidae，以及其他大鳞翅目超科的代表。早期的研究未能提供强有力的支持，其中包括在蚕科的单一性和基部分裂。因此，为了增加对更高级别节点的支持，我们从50个瓢虫和lasiocamids类群中的24个类群的20个基因中获得了11.7 kbp的额外数据。这些基因的数据都来自于蛋白质编码的核基因，这些核基因以前被用来解决鳞翅目的其他关系。有了这些额外的数据，除了少数高级节点外，其他所有节点都得到了强有力的支持。考虑到我们决定通过增加50个分类群中的24个的基因来最小化项目成本，我们探讨了在组合基因矩阵中丢失数据的结果模式是否引入了非系统发育偏差，这是其他人报告的可能性。这是通过比较节点支持值（即非参数bootstrap值）来实现的，该值基于三个不同分类群数量和缺失数据水平的数据集的似然和简约性分析：50个分类群/5个基因（数据集A）， 50个分类群/25个基因（数据集B）和24个分类群/25个基因（数据集C）。尽管数据集B和C在普通节点上提供了类似的结果，但相对于数据集A，它们通常都产生了更高的节点支持，这表明：(i)更多的数据产生了更高的节点支持，（ii）部分基因增强不会引入明显的非系统发育偏差。单基因引导分析的比较确定了四个节点，其中25个基因中的一个或两个为组合基因结果无法恢复的分组提供了适度到强烈的支持。综上所述，这四种分类中有两种被认为是有问题的，被认为是未解决的三分法。由于替代分组总是高度定位在树上，我们没有判断一个组合基因分析，以提出一个问题以外的这些区域。在此基础上，对家蚕科的分类进行了修正，将家蚕科归入其命名亚科，将家蚕属提升为亚科（Epiinae stat.rev.），将家蚕亚科（Phiditiinae stat.rev.）恢复为一个独立的科（Phiditiidae stat.rev.）。瓢虫亚科oberthueriiinae Kuznetzov & Stekolnikov， 1985, syn1 .nov。和prismotictinae福布斯，1955年，syn11。科兹洛夫（Mirinidae Kozlov）， 1985年11月6日。在1828年被确立为Endromidae Boisduval的主观初级同义词。蚁科（蚁总科）被重新归入蚕总科。
This study has as its primary aim the robust resolution of higher-level relationships within the lepidopteran superfamily Bombycoidea. Our study builds on an earlier analysis of five genes (similar to 6.6 kbp) sequenced for 50 taxa from Bombycoidea and its sister group Lasiocampidae, plus representatives of other macrolepidoteran superfamilies. The earlier study failed to yield strong support for the monophyly of and basal splits within Bombycoidea, among others. Therefore, in an effort to increase support specifically for higher-level nodes, we generated 11.7 kbp of additional data from 20 genes for 24 of 50 bombycoid and lasiocampid taxa. The data from the genes are all derived from protein-coding nuclear genes previously used to resolve other lepidopteran relationships. With these additional data, all but a few higher-level nodes are strongly supported. Given our decision to minimize project costs by augmenting genes for only 24 of the 50 taxa, we explored whether the resulting pattern of missing data in the combined-gene matrix introduced a nonphylogenetic bias, a possibility reported by others. This was achieved by comparing node support values (i.e. nonparametric bootstrap values) based on likelihood and parsimony analyses of three datasets that differ in their number of taxa and level of missing data: 50 taxa/5 genes (dataset A), 50 taxa/25 genes (dataset B) and 24 taxa/25 genes (dataset C). Whereas datasets B and C provided similar results for common nodes, both frequently yielded higher node support relative to dataset A, arguing that: (i) more data yield increased node support and (ii) partial gene augmentation does not introduce an obvious nonphylogenetic bias. A comparison of single-gene bootstrap analyses identified four nodes for which one or two of the 25 genes provided modest to strong support for a grouping not recovered by the combined-gene result. As a summary proposal, two of these four groupings (one each within Bombycoidea and Lasiocampidae) were deemed sufficiently problematic to regard them as unresolved trichotomies. Since the alternative groupings were always highly localized on the tree, we did not judge a combined-gene analysis to present a problem outside those regions. Based on our robustly resolved results, we have revised the classification of Bombycoidea: the family Bombycidae is restricted to its nominate subfamily, and its tribe Epiini is elevated to subfamily rank (Epiinae stat.rev.), whereas the bombycid subfamily Phiditiinae is reinstated as a separate family (Phiditiidae stat.rev.). The bombycid subfamilies Oberthueriinae Kuznetzov & Stekolnikov, 1985, syn.nov. and Prismostictinae Forbes, 1955, syn.nov., and the family Mirinidae Kozlov, 1985, syn.nov. are established as subjective junior synonyms of Endromidae Boisduval, 1828. The family Anthelidae (Lasiocampoidea) is reincluded in the superfamily Bombycoidea.