The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A New Spiralian Phylogeny Places the Enigmatic Arrow Worms among Gnathiferans
Open accessAbstract
Chaetognaths (arrow worms) are an enigmatic group of marine animals whose phylogenetic position remains elusive, in part because they display a mix of developmental and morphological characters associated with other groups [1, 2]. In particular, it remains unclear whether they are a sister group to protostomes [1, 2], one of the principal animal superclades, or whether they bear a closer relationship with some spiralian phyla [3, 4]. Addressing the phylogenetic position of chaetognaths and refining our understanding of relationships among spiralians are essential to fully comprehend character changes during bilaterian evolution [5]. To tackle these questions, we generated new transcriptomes for ten chaetognath species, compiling an extensive phylogenomic dataset that maximizes data occupancy and taxonomic representation. We employed inference methods that consider rate and compositional heterogeneity across taxa to avoid limitations of earlier analyses [6]. In this way, we greatly improved the resolution of the protostome tree of life. We find that chaetognaths cluster together with rotifers, gnathostomulids, and micrognathozoans within an expanded Gnathifera clade and that this clade is the sister group to other spiralians [7, 8]. Our analysis shows that several previously proposed groupings are likely due to systematic error, and we propose a revised organization of Lophotrochozoa with three main clades: Tetraneuralia (mollusks and entoprocts), Lophophorata (brachiopods, phoronids, and ectoprocts), and a third unnamed clade gathering annelids, nemerteans, and platyhelminthes. Consideration of classical morphological, developmental, and genomic characters in light of this topology indicates secondary loss as a fundamental trend in spiralian evolution.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“CAT/CATGTR offers improved resilience to long-branch attraction artefacts (LBA)22 and is almost always better fitting than standard site-homogeneous amino acid substitution models (e.g. WAG)8–10,23–29.”
From Evidence for sponges as sister to all other animals from partitioned phylogenomics with mixture models and recoding (2021) · cites this paper as [25]
Citations
Cites
RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies
Stamatakis, A. (2014) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 · Cited by 32,291
IQ-TREE: A Fast and Effective Stochastic Algorithm for Estimating Maximum-Likelihood Phylogenies
Nguyen, L.-T., Schmidt, H. A., von Haeseler, A., & Minh, B. Q. (2015) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msu300 · Cited by 26,046
Full-length transcriptome assembly from RNA-Seq data without a reference genome
Grabherr, M. G., Haas, B. J., Yassour, M., Levin, J. Z., Thompson, D. A., Amit, I., Adiconis, X., Fan, L., Raychowdhury, R., Zeng, Q., et al. (2011) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.1883 · Cited by 21,201
Near-optimal probabilistic RNA-seq quantification
Bray, N. L., Pimentel, H., Melsted, P., & Pachter, L. (2016) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3519 · Cited by 9,723
Haas, B. J., Salzberg, S. L., Zhu, W., Pertea, M., Allen, J., Orvis, J., White, O. R., Buell, C. R., & Wortman, J. R. (2008) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2008-9-1-r7 · Cited by 4,208
Broad phylogenomic sampling improves resolution of the animal tree of life
Dunn, C. W., Hejnol, A., Matus, D. Q., Pang, K., Browne, W. E., Smith, S. A., Seaver, E., Rouse, G. W., Obst, M., Edgecombe, G. D., et al. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06614 · Cited by 1,921 · cited 3×
“Many early phylogenomic studies recovered a ‘Platyzoa’ clade that collected many morphologically-simple fast-evolving lineages, including platyhelminthes, rotifers, gastrotrichs, gnathostomulids and others [4].”
Criscuolo, A., & Gribaldo, S. (2010) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-10-210 · Cited by 1,667
A revised six-kingdom system of life
Cavalier‐Smith, T. (1998) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1017/s0006323198005167 · Cited by 1,213
Animal evolution: interrelationships of the living phyla
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.50-1469 · Cited by 1,041
Corset: enabling differential gene expression analysis for
Davidson, N., & Oshlack, A. (2014) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-014-0410-6 · Cited by 707
Cited by
Sorted by citations
NCBI Taxonomy: a comprehensive update on curation, resources and tools
Schoch, C. L., Ciufo, S., Domrachev, M., Hotton, C. L., Kannan, S., Khovanskaya, R., Leipe, D., Mcveigh, R., O’Neill, K., Robbertse, B., et al. (2020) · Database · doi:10.1093/database/baaa062 · Cited by 2,635
Revisiting metazoan phylogeny with genomic sampling of all phyla
Laumer, C. E., Fernández, R., Lemer, S., Combosch, D., Kocot, K. M., Riesgo, A., Andrade, S. C. S., Sterrer, W., Sørensen, M. V., & Giribet, G. (2019) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2019.0831 · Cited by 360
3D genomics across the tree of life reveals condensin II as a determinant of architecture type
Hoencamp, C., Dudchenko, O., Elbatsh, A. M. O., Brahmachari, S., Raaijmakers, J. A., van Schaik, T., Cacciatore, Á. S., Contessoto, V. G., van Heesbeen, R. G. H. P., van den Broek, B., et al. (2021) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abe2218 · Cited by 269
Monroig, Ó., Shu‐Chien, A. C., Kabeya, N., Tocher, D. R., & Castro, L. F. C. (2022) · Progress in Lipid Research · doi:10.1016/j.plipres.2022.101157 · Cited by 216
The ‘biomineralization toolkit’ and the origin of animal skeletons
Murdock, D. J. E. (2020) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12614 · Cited by 177
Metadata
- Authors
- Marlétaz, F., Peijnenburg, K. T. C. A., Goto, T., Satoh, N., & Rokhsar, D. S.
- Affiliations
- Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (JP)
- Naturalis Biodiversity Center (NL)
- Mie University (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Marlétaz, Ferdinand
- Venue
- Current Biology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 312-318.e3
- ISSN
- 0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2908647854
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 24 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 32
- FWCI
- 29.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Current Biology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University (Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University
- European Research Council (268513)
- Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (863.08.024, 016.161.351)
- NSF (OCE-1029478, OCE-1338959)
- UK NERC
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Marine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Keywords
- chaetognaths, Gnathifera, Lophotrochozoa, phylogenomics, transcriptome, rotifers, Lophophorata, secondary losses, bilaterian evolution, compositional heterogeneity
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Invertebrates, Phylogeny, Evolution, Molecular, Transcriptome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
