Keogh J S, Shine R, Donnellan S
School of Biological Sciences AO8, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 1998 Aug;10(1):67-81. doi: 10.1006/mpev.1997.0471.
Phylogenetic relationships among the venomous Australo-Papuan elapid snake radiation remain poorly resolved, despite the application of diverse data sets. To examine phylogenetic relationships among this enigmatic group, portions of the cytochrome b and 16S rRNA mitochondrial DNA genes were sequenced from 19 of the 20 terrestrial Australian genera and 6 of the 7 terrestrial Melanesian genera, plus a sea krait (Laticauda) and a true sea snake (Hydrelaps). These data clarify several significant issues in elapid phylogeny. First, Melanesian elapids form sister groups to Australian species, indicating that the ancestors of the Australian radiation came via Asia, rather than representing a relict Gondwanan radiation. Second, the two major groups of sea snakes (sea kraits and true sea snakes) represent independent invasions of the marine environment. Third, the radiation of viviparous Australian elapids is much older than has been suggested from immunological data. Parsimony analyses were unable to resolve relationships among the Australian radiation, a problem previously encountered with analyses of other (morphological, electrophoretic, karyotypic, immunological) data sets on these species. These data suggest that the reason for this continued difficulty lies in the timing of speciation events: the elapids apparently underwent a spectacular adaptive radiation soon after reaching Australia, such that divergences are ancient even within genera. Indeed, intrageneric divergences are almost as large as intergeneric divergences. Although this timing means that our sequence data cannot fully resolve phylogenetic relationships among the Australian elapids, the data suggest a close relationship of the following clades: Pseudonaja with Oxyuranus; Ogmodon with Toxicocalamus; Demansia with Aspidomorphus; Echiopsis with Denisonia; the "Notechis" lineage with Drysdalia coronoides; and Rhinoplocephalus and Suta with Drysdalia coronata. At least two of the Australian genera (Drysdalia and Simoselaps) appear to be paraphyletic. These sequence data support many of the conclusions reached by earlier studies using other types of data, but additional information will be needed before the phylogeny of the Australian elapids can be fully resolved.
尽管应用了各种数据集,但澳大利亚-巴布亚地区有毒眼镜蛇科蛇类辐射的系统发育关系仍未得到很好的解决。为了研究这一神秘类群之间的系统发育关系,对澳大利亚20个陆生属中的19个属以及美拉尼西亚7个陆生属中的6个属的细胞色素b和16S rRNA线粒体DNA基因片段进行了测序,另外还包括一条海蛇(扁尾海蛇属)和一条真海蛇(长吻海蛇属)。这些数据澄清了眼镜蛇科系统发育中的几个重要问题。第一,美拉尼西亚眼镜蛇科蛇类与澳大利亚物种形成姐妹群,这表明澳大利亚辐射物种的祖先来自亚洲,而不是代表冈瓦纳古陆遗留的辐射物种。第二,海蛇的两个主要类群(扁尾海蛇属和真海蛇)代表了对海洋环境的独立入侵。第三胎生澳大利亚眼镜蛇科蛇类的辐射时间比免疫学数据所显示的要古老得多。简约分析无法解决澳大利亚辐射物种之间的关系,这是之前对这些物种的其他(形态学、电泳、核型、免疫学)数据集进行分析时遇到的问题。这些数据表明,持续存在这一难题的原因在于物种形成事件的时间:眼镜蛇科蛇类在抵达澳大利亚后不久显然经历了一次壮观的适应性辐射,以至于即使在属内分歧也很古老。实际上,属内分歧几乎与属间分歧一样大。尽管这个时间意味着我们的序列数据无法完全解决澳大利亚眼镜蛇科蛇类之间的系统发育关系,但数据表明以下几个进化枝之间关系密切:澳太攀蛇属与内陆太攀蛇属;澳西蛇属与澳毒蛇属;澳棕伊澳蛇属与澳拟眼镜蛇属;棘蛇属与澳棱蛇属;“虎蛇”谱系与冠澳蛇;以及澳盔头蛇属、澳蛇属与皇冠澳蛇。澳大利亚至少有两个属(澳蛇属和澳细盲蛇属)似乎是并系群。这些序列数据支持了早期使用其他类型数据的研究所得出的许多结论,但在澳大利亚眼镜蛇科蛇类的系统发育得到完全解决之前,还需要更多信息。