/
ORIGINAL SCIENCEEVOLUTION REVIEW Understanding Evolutionary Trees T ORIGINAL SCIENCEEVOLUTION REVIEW Understanding Evolutionary Trees T

ORIGINAL SCIENCEEVOLUTION REVIEW Understanding Evolutionary Trees T - PDF document

faustina-dinatale
faustina-dinatale . @faustina-dinatale
Follow
418 views
Uploaded On 2014-12-17

ORIGINAL SCIENCEEVOLUTION REVIEW Understanding Evolutionary Trees T - PPT Presentation

Ryan Gregory Published online 12 February 2008 Springer Science Business Media LLC 2008 Abstract Charles Darwin sketched his first evolutionary tree in 1837 and trees have remained a central metaphor in evolutionary biology up to the present Today ID: 25122

Ryan Gregory Published online

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "ORIGINAL SCIENCEEVOLUTION REVIEW Underst..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Phylogenetictreesarethemostdirect .ThepatternofbranchingknownastheÒtopologyÓofthetreeÑindicatesevolutionaryrelatedness.Forexample,speciesAandBsharearecentcommonancestorthatwasnotsharedbytheotherspeciesandarethereforecalledÒsistertaxa.ÓSimilarly,speciesDandEaresistertaxa.SpeciesFisthemostdistantlyrelatedofthesampleofspeciesandisknownastheÒoutgroup.ÓOutgroupspeciesarenecessarytoÒrootÓanevolutionarytreeÑthatis,toindicatethelastcommon 2005forseveralexamples).Thefollowingsectionsdescribeandseektocorrecttenofthemostcommonlyencounteredmisconcep-tionsaboutevolutionarytrees.Severaloftheseareinterrelatedandthereforeoverlaptoanextent,buteachcanbeillustratedusingdistinctexamples.Learning(andteachingstudents)toavoidthesemisunderstandingsrepre-sentsakeysteptowardthedevelopmentofadequatetreethinkingskills.Misconception#1:HigherandLowerNotionsofaÒGreatChainofBeingÓorscalanaturae(scalesofnature),inwhichlivingspecies(and,insomecases,nonlivingmatterand/orthedivine)arerankedfromlowesttohighestandextendbackatleastasfarasAristotle.AlthoughDarwin(1837)himselfnotedearlyonFig.4Evolutionarytreescanbepresentedinavarietyofways.Thisfigureshowssixcommonapproachestodepictingevolutionaryrelationshipsusingrootedtrees.Thetwomostcommontypes,diagonalandrectangular,areshownatthetop,butanyofthesemaybeencounteredinthescientificliteratureortextbooks.Inallsixtrees, Fig.5 earliestancestorattheroot,fromwhicharedescendedtheinternalnodesand,morerecently,theterminalnodes.Thatistosay,evolutionarytreesindicatethepassageoftimebeginningfromtheroot(oldest)totheterminalnodes(youngest).Timecannotbereadinanyotherdirectiononthetree(forexample,acrossthetips),becauseallterminalnodesrepresentcontemporaryspecies(seeFigs. phylogenyofanimals.Asmanyprominentauthorshavenoted,thereisnoscientificallydefensiblebasisonwhichtoranklivingspeciesinthisway,regardlessofhowinterestingoruniquesomeaspectoftheirbiologymaybetohumanobservers(e.g.,Dawkins1992;Gould1994,1996).Thiserrordoesnotsomuchreflectaspecificmisunderstandingofphylogeneticdiagramspersebutafailuretograsptheveryconceptofcommondescent.Therefore,theadjustmenttobemadeinthiscaseisfromimaginingevolutionasa cshowsthesametree,withanidenticaltopology,inanonladderizedformat.Thiswasdonesimplybyrotatingseveralnodes(Fig.6)sothatmorediversegroupsdonotalwaysappeartotheright(a)orleft(b)oftheinternalnodes.Althoughladderizedtreesappearlesscluttered,theyarenomoreaccuratethannonladderizedones,andinfacttheymaycausereaderstofalselyinterprettheinformationprovidedinthetree(Figs.11 ,meaningthattheterminalnodesarealignedwitheachotherandtheinternalbranchlengthsare TherearenoÒmainlinesÓorÒsidetracksÓinevolution.Undoubtedly,manyreaderswillconsiderthetreedepictedinatoreflectamainlineofevolutionaryprogressfromaprimitiveancestortoanÒadvancedÓspecieslikehumans,withothergroupssuchascartilaginousorbonyfishesappearingassidetracksoffthatline,despitethefactthatroughlyhalfofallvertebratespeciesareteleostfishes(andonly10%aremammals).Notably,thetreeinbisequallyvalidandbythesamefalselogicwouldhaveperchastheendpointofanassumedmainlineandallterrestrialvertebrates,includinghumans,asanapparentsidetrack.Itisimportantthatthepositionsofterminalnodes,allofwhichrepresentcontemporaryspecies,notbemistakenashavingsomesignificance,becausetheydonot(seealsoFig.11).Notealsothathumansaremorecloselyrelatedtobonyfishesthaneitheristosharks.Phylogeneticallyspeaking,ÒfishÓisaninvalidcategoryresultingfromdifferentratesofmorphologicalchangeamonglineagesanddoesnotreflectrealrelationshipsFig.9Someevolutionarytreesincludeinformationabouttimeanddiversity.ashowsanexampleofanevolutionarytreethatincludesnotonlyinformationabouttopologybutalsotimeasgivenintheaxisattheleftandrelativespeciesdiversityasindicatedbythewidthofbranches.Notethatnotallbranchesareofequallengthbecausethe bodysize.Inthiscase,informationisavailableaboutthecommonancestors,anditisclearthatbothdescendantshavebeenlargerthantheirsharedancestorfollowingeverybranchingevent.Onlyhistoricaldataorstatistically Fig.13Evolutionaryrelatednessandphysicalsimilarityarenotnecessarilylinked.Theratesatwhichphysicalfeatureschangecandifferamonglineages(Fig.8),andsuperficiallysimilarmorphologiescanevolveindependentlyinmorethanonelineage.Asaresult,closerelativesmaylookdifferentfromoneanotherordistantrelativesmay Fig.14 2007 diverseassemblageoforganismswithacomplexevolu-tionaryhistory.LookingAheadtoBetterUnderstandingthePastTwopointsareabundantlyclearwhenitcomestophylogeneticliteracy:(1)Itiscrucialforanunderstandingofmodernevolutionaryconcepts,and(2)itisinsufficientlycommon.MisconceptionsaboundregardingevolutionarytreesÑsometimesbecauseof,andsometimescreating,in-correctpreconceptionsabouthow,evolutionoperates.Manyareholdoversofprogressionistorevenpre-evolu-tionarythinkingaboutlifeÕsdiversity.Some,alongwithwidespreadmisunderstandingsofevolutionarymechanismssuchasnaturalselection,undoubtedlycontributetothestaggeringlylowpublicacceptanceoftheprincipleofcommondescentinNorthAmerica(AltersandNelson2002;Milleretal.2006).Thewayforwardonthisissueisunambiguous.Students,membersofthepublic,andothernonspecialistsmustbebettereducatedabouttheinformationthatevolutionarytreesdoanddonotconvey.Tothisend,severalteachingplansandsoftwareexercisesforconstructingand/orusingphylogenetichypotheseshavebecomeavailable(e.g.,BilardelloandValdes1998 EldredgeN.TheearlyÒevolutionÓofÒpunctuatedequilibriaÓ.EvoEduOutreach2008;2.DOI NeiM,KumarS.Molecularphylogeneticsandevolution.Oxford,UK:OxfordUniversityPress;2000.OÕHaraRJ.HomagetoClio,or,towardanhistoricalphilosophyforevolutionarybiology.SystZool1988;37:142Ð55.OÕHaraRJ.Tellingthetree:narrativerepresentationandthestudyofevolutionaryhistory.BiolPhilos1992;7:135HaraRJ.Evolutionaryhistoryandthespeciesproblem.AmZool1994;34:12Ð22.OÕHaraRJ.Populationthinkingandtreethinkinginsystematics.ZoolScr1997;26:323Ð9.PageRDM,HolmesEC.Molecularevolution:Aphylogeneticapproach.Malden,MA:Blackwell;1998.ProtheroDR.Evolution:Whatthefossilssayandwhyitmatters.NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress;2007.RambautA,RobertsonDL,PybusOG,PeetersM,HolmesEC.