Cited by 1,609Invertebrate Taxonomy and EcologyGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesTardigrade Biology and Ecology

Evidence for a clade of nematodes, arthropods and other moulting animals

Aguinaldo, Anna Marie A., Turbeville, James M., Linford, Lawrence S., Rivera, Maria C., Garey, James R., Raff, Rudolf A., Lake, James A.·1997·Nature

Abstract

The arthropods constitute the most diverse animal group, but, despite their rich fossil record and a century of study, their phylogenetic relationships remain unclear. Taxa previously proposed to be sister groups to the arthropods include Annelida, Onychophora, Tardigrada and others, but hypotheses of phylogenetic relationships have been conflicting. For example, onychophorans, like arthropods, moult periodically, have an arthropod arrangement of haemocoel, and have been related to arthropods in morphological and mitochondrial DNA sequence analyses. Like annelids, they possess segmental nephridia and muscles that are a combination of smooth and obliquely striated fibres. Our phylogenetic analysis of 18S ribosomal DNA sequences indicates a close relationship between arthropods, nematodes and all other moulting phyla. The results suggest that ecdysis (moulting) arose once and support the idea of a new clade, Ecdysozoa, containing moulting animals: arthropods, tardigrades, onychophorans, nematodes, nematomorphs, kinorhynchs and priapulids. No support is found for a clade of segmented animals, the Articulata, uniting annelids with arthropods. The hypothesis that nematodes are related to arthropods has important implications for developmental genetic studies using as model systems the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans and the arthropod Drosophila melanogaster, which are generally held to be phylogenetically distant from each other.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/387489a0

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aguinaldo, A. M. A., Turbeville, J. M., Linford, L. S., Rivera, M. C., Garey, J. R., Raff, R. A., & Lake, J. A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Arkansas at Fayetteville (US)
  • Duquesne University (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
Venue
Nature
Published
1997-05
Volume
387
Issue
6632
Pages
489-493
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2029482176
Cited by
1,609
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 54
FWCI
136.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Tardigrade Biology and Ecology
Keywords
arthropod phylogeny, nematodes, Ecdysozoa, molting, Onychophora, tardigrades, nematomorphs, Kinorhyncha, priapulids, Articulata, 18S rDNA phylogeny, Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila melanogaster, developmental genetics, hemocoel
MeSH terms
Animals, Arthropods, Biological Evolution, Molecular Sequence Data, Nematoda, Phylogeny, RNA, Ribosomal, 18S

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