Fritz Uwe, Bininda-Emonds Olaf R P
Museum of Zoology, Natural History State Collections Dresden, A.B. Meyer Building, D-01109 Dresden, Germany.
Zoology (Jena). 2007;110(4):298-307. doi: 10.1016/j.zool.2007.02.003. Epub 2007 Jul 3.
We used a five-gene data set (mtDNA: 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, cyt-b; nDNA: Cmos, Rag2) comprising approximately two-thirds of all extant testudinid species and, for the first time, including all five Testudo species to investigate the question of whether all western Palaearctic testudinids are monophyletic. Further, we examined whether the recently suggested allocation of the African Geochelone pardalis in the otherwise exclusively South African genus Psammobates and of the Malagasy G. yniphora in the monotypic genus Angonoka is justified in the face of considerable morphological evidence against such placements. Our phylogenetic analyses do not support the paraphyly and generic break-up of Testudo, as suggested by previous papers using a smaller taxon sampling and mtDNA data only. We propose a continued usage of the generic name Testudo for all five western Palaearctic tortoise species. Within Testudo, two monophyletic subclades are present, one containing T. hermanni+T. horsfieldii, and the other comprising (T. kleinmanni+T. marginata)+T. graeca. Nomenclaturally, we demonstrate that Eurotestudo Lapparent de Broin et al., 2006, which was recently erected with the type species T. hermanni, is an objective junior synonym of Chersine Merrem, 1820 and Medaestia Wussow, 1916. Recognition of a monotypic genus Angonoka for G. yniphora is unwarranted according to both our re-analysis of sequence data and morphological data. Acknowledging the strong morphological similarity between G. yniphora and G. radiata, we suggest placing both species into the genus Astrochelys. Although sequence data for only one of the three Psammobates species was available for analysis, there is currently no cause to challenge the monophyly of this genus as established on the basis of morphological evidence. Thus, we hypothesize that G. pardalis is sister to a monophyletic Psammobates. In light of the clear morphological gap between G. pardalis and Psammobates species, the recognition of a distinct genus Stigmochelys for the former seems justified.
我们使用了一个包含约三分之二现存陆龟科物种的五基因数据集(线粒体DNA:12S rRNA、16S rRNA、细胞色素b;核DNA:Cmos、Rag2),并且首次纳入了所有五种陆龟属物种,以研究所有西古北区陆龟科动物是否为单系群这一问题。此外,鉴于有大量形态学证据反对将非洲豹纹陆龟(Geochelone pardalis)归入原本仅分布于南非的沙龟属(Psammobates)以及将马达加斯加的桑氏大星龟(G. yniphora)归入单型属安哥洛卡象龟属(Angonoka),我们检验了最近提出的这种分类是否合理。我们的系统发育分析并不支持之前仅使用较小分类单元样本和线粒体DNA数据的论文所提出的陆龟属并系性和属的分裂观点。我们建议继续对所有五种西古北区陆龟物种使用陆龟属这个通用名称。在陆龟属内,存在两个单系亚分支,一个包含赫曼陆龟(T. hermanni)和印度星龟(T. horsfieldii),另一个包含(埃及陆龟(T. kleinmanni)和缘翘陆龟(T. marginata))以及希腊陆龟(T. graeca)。在命名方面,我们证明了2006年拉帕尔 - 德布罗因等人新建立的以赫曼陆龟为模式种的欧洲陆龟属(Eurotestudo)是1820年的地纹属(Chersine)和1916年的地中海陆龟属(Medaestia)的客观次异名。根据我们对序列数据和形态数据的重新分析,为桑氏大星龟设立单型属安哥洛卡象龟属是没有必要的。鉴于桑氏大星龟和辐射陆龟(G. radiata)之间强烈的形态相似性,我们建议将这两个物种都归入蛛网龟属(Astrochelys)。虽然仅获得了三种沙龟属物种中一种的序列数据用于分析,但目前没有理由质疑基于形态学证据所确立的该属的单系性。因此,我们假设豹纹陆龟是单系沙龟属的姐妹群。鉴于豹纹陆龟与沙龟属物种之间明显的形态差异,为前者设立一个独特的属——纹龟属(Stigmochelys)似乎是合理的。