Skip Navigation

Systematic Biology 2008 57(3):420-431; doi:10.1080/10635150802166053
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wiens, J. J.
Right arrow Articles by Reeder, T. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Wiens, J. J.
Right arrow Articles by Reeder, T. W.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2008 Society of Systematic Biologists

Branch Lengths, Support, and Congruence: Testing the Phylogenomic Approach with 20 Nuclear Loci in Snakes

John J. Wiens1, Caitlin A. Kuczynski1, Sarah A. Smith1, Daniel G. Mulcahy2, Jack W. Sites, Jr.2, Ted M. Townsend3 and Tod W. Reeder3

1 Department of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245, USA; E-mail: wiensj{at}life.bio.sunysb.edu (J.J.W.)
2 Department of Integrative Biology, Brigham Young University Provo, UT 84602, USA
3 Department of Biology, San Diego State University San Diego, CA 92182-4614, USA

Edited by Kelly Zamudio


   Abstract

Many authors have claimed that short branches in the Tree of Life will be very difficult to resolve with strong support, even with the large multilocus data sets now made possible by genomic resources. Short branches may be especially problematic because the underlying gene trees are expected to have discordant phylogenetic histories when the time between branching events is very short. Although there are many examples of short branches that are difficult to resolve, surprisingly, no empirical studies have systematically examined the relationships between branch lengths, branch support, and congruence among genes. Here, we examine these fundamental relationships quantitatively using a data set of 20 nuclear loci for 50 species of snakes (representing most traditionally recognized families). A combined maximum likelihood analysis of the 20 loci gives strong support for 69% of the nodes, but many remain weakly supported, with bootstrap values for 20% ranging from 21% to 66%. For the combined-data tree, we find significant correlations between the length of a branch, levels of bootstrap support, and the proportion of genes that are congruent with that branch in the separate analyses of each gene. We also find that strongly supported conflicts between gene trees over the resolution of individual branches are common (roughly 35% of clades), especially for shorter branches. Overall, our results support the hypothesis that short branches may be very difficult to confidently resolve, even with large, multilocus data sets. Nevertheless, our study provides strong support for many clades, including several that were controversial or poorly resolved in previous studies of snake phylogeny.

Keywords: Branch length; congruence; gene tree; phylogeny; phylogenomics; snakes

Received September 24, 2007; Revised November 26, 2007; Accepted February 22, 2008
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Mol Biol EvolHome page
S. Simon, S. Strauss, A. von Haeseler, and H. Hadrys
A Phylogenomic Approach to Resolve the Basal Pterygote Divergence
Mol. Biol. Evol., December 1, 2009; 26(12): 2719 - 2730.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Syst BiolHome page
J. J. Wiens
Paleontology, Genomics, and Combined-Data Phylogenetics: Can Molecular Data Improve Phylogeny Estimation for Fossil Taxa?
Syst Biol, May 19, 2009; (2009) syp012v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.