Cited by 169Protist diversity and phylogenyGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMarine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology

Phylogenetic Relationships within the Opisthokonta Based on Phylogenomic Analyses of Conserved Single-Copy Protein Domains

Open access
Torruella, G., Derelle, R., Paps, J., Lang, B. F., Roger, A. J., Shalchian-Tabrizi, K., Ruiz-Trillo, I.·2012·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Abstract

Many of the eukaryotic phylogenomic analyses published to date were based on alignments of hundreds to thousands of genes. Frequently, in such analyses, the most realistic evolutionary models currently available are often used to minimize the impact of systematic error. However, controversy remains over whether or not idiosyncratic gene family dynamics (i.e., gene duplications and losses) and incorrect orthology assignments are always appropriately taken into account. In this paper, we present an innovative strategy for overcoming orthology assignment problems. Rather than identifying and eliminating genes with paralogy problems, we have constructed a data set comprised exclusively of conserved single-copy protein domains that, unlike most of the commonly used phylogenomic data sets, should be less confounded by orthology miss-assignments. To evaluate the power of this approach, we performed maximum likelihood and Bayesian analyses to infer the evolutionary relationships within the opisthokonts (which includes Metazoa, Fungi, and related unicellular lineages). We used this approach to test 1) whether Filasterea and Ichthyosporea form a clade, 2) the interrelationships of early-branching metazoans, and 3) the relationships among early-branching fungi. We also assessed the impact of some methods that are known to minimize systematic error, including reducing the distance between the outgroup and ingroup taxa or using the CAT evolutionary model. Overall, our analyses support the Filozoa hypothesis in which Ichthyosporea are the first holozoan lineage to emerge followed by Filasterea, Choanoflagellata, and Metazoa. Blastocladiomycota appears as a lineage separate from Chytridiomycota, although this result is not strongly supported. These results represent independent tests of previous phylogenetic hypotheses, highlighting the importance of sophisticated approaches for orthology assignment in phylogenomic analyses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/molbev/msr185

Cites

104 of 104 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Torruella, G., Derelle, R., Paps, J., Lang, B. F., Roger, A. J., Shalchian-Tabrizi, K., & Ruiz-Trillo, I.
Affiliations
  • Institut de Recerca de la Biodiversitat de la Universitat de Barcelona (ES)
  • Barcelona Biomedical Research Park (ES)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Published
2011-07-18
Volume
29
Issue
2
Pages
531-544
ISSN
  • 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-1719
OpenAlex
W2150623567
Cited by
169
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 16
FWCI
8.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Harvard University
  • Broad Institute
  • Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U54HG003273)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Marine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
Keywords
Opisthokonta, eukaryotic phylogeny, orthology assignment, paralogy, Ichthyosporea, Choanoflagellata, animals, Blastocladiomycota, Chytridiomycota, systematic errors, cat model
MeSH terms
Animals, Bayes Theorem, Fungi, Models, Genetic, Phylogeny, Likelihood Functions, Sequence Alignment, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Protein Structure, Tertiary, Evolution, Molecular, Genomics, Eukaryota

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