Department of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook NY, 11794-5245, USA.
BMC Evol Biol. 2011 Oct 13;11:300. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-11-300.
The use of mitochondrial DNA data in phylogenetics is controversial, yet studies that combine mitochondrial and nuclear DNA data (mtDNA and nucDNA) to estimate phylogeny are common, especially in vertebrates. Surprisingly, the consequences of combining these data types are largely unexplored, and many fundamental questions remain unaddressed in the literature. For example, how much do trees from mtDNA and nucDNA differ? How are topological conflicts between these data types typically resolved in the combined-data tree? What determines whether a node will be resolved in favor of mtDNA or nucDNA, and are there any generalities that can be made regarding resolution of mtDNA-nucDNA conflicts in combined-data trees? Here, we address these and related questions using new and published nucDNA and mtDNA data for Plethodon salamanders and published data from 13 other vertebrate clades (including fish, frogs, lizards, birds, turtles, and mammals).
We find widespread discordance between trees from mtDNA and nucDNA (30-70% of nodes disagree per clade), but this discordance is typically not strongly supported. Despite often having larger numbers of variable characters, mtDNA data do not typically dominate combined-data analyses, and combined-data trees often share more nodes with trees from nucDNA alone. There is no relationship between the proportion of nodes shared between combined-data and mtDNA trees and relative numbers of variable characters or levels of homoplasy in the mtDNA and nucDNA data sets. Congruence between trees from mtDNA and nucDNA is higher on branches that are longer and deeper in the combined-data tree, but whether a conflicting node will be resolved in favor mtDNA or nucDNA is unrelated to branch length. Conflicts that are resolved in favor of nucDNA tend to occur at deeper nodes in the combined-data tree. In contrast to these overall trends, we find that Plethodon have an unusually large number of strongly supported conflicts between data types, which are generally resolved in favor of mtDNA in the combined-data tree (despite the large number of nuclear loci sampled).
Overall, our results from 14 vertebrate clades show that combined-data analyses are not necessarily dominated by the more variable mtDNA data sets. However, given cases like Plethodon, there is also the need for routine checking of incongruence between mtDNA and nucDNA data and its impacts on combined-data analyses.
线粒体 DNA 数据在系统发育学中的应用存在争议,但将线粒体 DNA 和核 DNA(mtDNA 和 nucDNA)数据结合起来估计系统发育的研究很常见,尤其是在脊椎动物中。令人惊讶的是,结合这些数据类型的后果在很大程度上尚未得到探索,文献中仍有许多基本问题未得到解决。例如,mtDNA 和 nucDNA 产生的树有多大差异?这些数据类型之间的拓扑冲突通常如何在组合数据树中解决?是什么决定了一个节点将倾向于 mtDNA 还是 nucDNA 得到解决,对于组合数据树中 mtDNA-nucDNA 冲突的解决是否有任何普遍规律?在这里,我们使用新的和已发表的 Plethodon 蝾螈的 nucDNA 和 mtDNA 数据以及 13 个其他脊椎动物类群(包括鱼类、青蛙、蜥蜴、鸟类、海龟和哺乳动物)的已发表数据来解决这些问题和相关问题。
我们发现 mtDNA 和 nucDNA 产生的树之间存在广泛的分歧(每个类群有 30-70%的节点不一致),但这种分歧通常没有得到强有力的支持。尽管 mtDNA 数据通常具有更多数量的可变特征,但在组合数据分析中并不占主导地位,并且组合数据树通常与仅来自 nucDNA 的树共享更多节点。在组合数据树和 mtDNA 树之间共享的节点比例与 mtDNA 和 nucDNA 数据集的可变字符数量或同型数量之间没有关系。在组合数据树中,分支越长越深,mtDNA 和 nucDNA 产生的树之间的一致性越高,但冲突节点将倾向于 mtDNA 还是 nucDNA 得到解决与分支长度无关。在组合数据树中,在较深节点处解决的冲突往往更倾向于 nucDNA。与这些总体趋势相反,我们发现 Plethodon 数据类型之间存在大量强烈支持的冲突,这些冲突通常在组合数据树中倾向于 mtDNA(尽管采样了大量核基因座)。
总体而言,我们从 14 个脊椎动物类群中获得的结果表明,组合数据分析不一定受更多可变 mtDNA 数据集的主导。然而,鉴于 Plethodon 等情况,还需要经常检查 mtDNA 和 nucDNA 数据之间的不一致及其对组合数据分析的影响。