Shared single copy genes are generally reliable for inferring phylogenetic relationships among polyploid taxa.

Polyploidy, or whole-genome duplication, is expected to confound the inference of species trees with phylogenetic methods for two reasons. First, the presence of retained duplicated genes requires the reconciliation of the inferred gene trees to a proposed species tree. Second, even if the analyses are restricted to shared single copy genes, the occurrence of reciprocal gene loss, where the surviving genes in different species are paralogs from the polyploidy rather than orthologs, will mean that such genes will not have evolved under the corresponding species tree and may not produce gene trees that allow inference of that species tree. Here we analyze three different ancient polyploidy events, using synteny-based inferences of orthology and paralogy to infer gene trees from nearly 17,000 sets of homologous genes. We find that the simple use of single copy genes from polyploid organisms provides reasonably robust phylogenetic signals, despite the presence of reciprocal gene losses. Such gene trees are also most often in accord with the inferred species relationships inferred from maximum likelihood models of gene loss after polyploidy: a completely distinct phylogenetic signal present in these genomes. As seen in other studies, however, we find that methods for inferring phylogenetic confidence yield high support values even in cases where the underlying data suggest meaningful conflict in the phylogenetic signals.