Cited by 57Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesProtist diversity and phylogenyMarine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology

The Role of Homology and Orthology in the Phylogenomic Analysis of Metazoan Gene Content

Open access
Pett, Walker, Adamski, Marcin, Adamska, Maja, Francis, Warren R, Eitel, Michael, Pisani, Davide, Wörheide, Gert·2019·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Resolving the relationships of animals (Metazoa) is crucial to our understanding of the origin of key traits such as muscles, guts, and nerves. However, a broadly accepted metazoan consensus phylogeny has yet to emerge. In part, this is because the genomes of deeply diverging and fast-evolving lineages may undergo significant gene turnover, reducing the number of orthologs shared with related phyla. This can limit the usefulness of traditional phylogenetic methods that rely on alignments of orthologous sequences. Phylogenetic analysis of gene content has the potential to circumvent this orthology requirement, with binary presence/absence of homologous gene families representing a source of phylogenetically informative characters. Applying binary substitution models to the gene content of 26 complete animal genomes, we demonstrate that patterns of gene conservation differ markedly depending on whether gene families are defined by orthology or homology, that is, whether paralogs are excluded or included. We conclude that the placement of some deeply diverging lineages may exceed the limit of resolution afforded by the current methods based on comparisons of orthologous protein sequences, and novel approaches are required to fully capture the evolutionary signal from genes within genomes.

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/msz013

Cites

51 of 51 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

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?

  • Several studies have already shown that gene family and unpartitioned phylogenomic analyses using more sophisticated substitution models reject Ctenophora sister in favour of Porifera sister.

    “Several studies have already shown that gene family8,71 and unpartitioned phylogenomic analyses using more sophisticated substitution models8–10 reject Ctenophora sister in favour of Porifera sister.”

    From Evidence for sponges as sister to all other animals from partitioned phylogenomics with mixture models and recoding (2021) · cites this paper as [71]

    The Introduction and ‘Ortholog content vs homolog content in phylogenetic reconstruction’ (page unavailable) report gene-content analyses supporting sponges, rather than ctenophores, as sister to all other animals. The Phylogenetic analysis section describes binary substitution models applied to gene-content matrices, but our copy does not report an unpartitioned sequence-based phylogenomic analysis using more sophisticated substitution models. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Ctenophoran gene families frequently include paralogs of the missing genes otherwise found in eumetazoans.

    “they frequently include paralogs of the missing genes otherwise found in eumetazoans”

    From Cambrian Sessile, Suspension Feeding Stem-Group Ctenophores and Evolution of the Comb Jelly Body Plan (2019) · cites this paper as [28]

    In “Ortholog content vs homolog content in phylogenetic reconstruction” (page not provided), the paper suggests that related paralogs may have been retained in ctenophore gene families despite the apparent absence of many eumetazoan orthologs. It also offers an alternative: those sequences may be highly diverged orthologs. The claim presents the paralog interpretation as established and frequent, rather than as a possibility. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Among the phylogenetic hypotheses proposed for deep-branching animals, Coelenterata maximizes support from independent lines of evidence.

    “Among the phylogenetic hypotheses proposed for deep-branching animals, Coelenterata maximizes support from independent lines of evidence”

    From Cambrian Sessile, Suspension Feeding Stem-Group Ctenophores and Evolution of the Comb Jelly Body Plan (2019) · cites this paper as [28]

    In “Ortholog content vs homolog content in phylogenetic reconstruction” (page unavailable), the paper reports strong support for Coelenterata from homolog-content analysis. But its ortholog-content analysis supports a different placement of ctenophores, and the paper does not conclude that Coelenterata has the most support across independent lines of evidence. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The missing ctenophore-specific, eumetazoan orthologs represent losses rather than primary absences.

    “This suggests that the missing ctenophore-specific, eumetazoan orthologs represent losses [28”

    From Cambrian Sessile, Suspension Feeding Stem-Group Ctenophores and Evolution of the Comb Jelly Body Plan (2019) · cites this paper as [28]

    In “Ortholog content vs homolog content in phylogenetic reconstruction,” the paper suggests that many eumetazoan orthologs may have been lost in ctenophores. It also offers an alternative: the apparently missing orthologs may still be present but too divergent for OrthoMCL to identify. The passage therefore supports loss as a possibility, not a determination that the missing orthologs represent losses rather than primary absences. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Ctenophora as sister to Cnidaria (Coelenterata) has recently been recovered in morphological and gene family presence/absence analyses, as well as in preliminary efforts to eliminate heteropecilly in phylogenomics.

    “We see two plausible placements, the first of which is the traditional scenario as sister to Cnidaria (Coelenterata)14 (Fig. 5a), which has recently been recovered in morphological63 and gene family presence/absence71 analyses, as well as in preliminary efforts to eliminate heteropecilly in phylogenomics10.”

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
Pett, W., Adamski, M., Adamska, M., Francis, W. R., Eitel, M., Pisani, D., & Wörheide, G.
Affiliations
  • Iowa State University (US)
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Bayerische Staatssammlung für Paläontologie und Geologie (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Pett, Walker
  • Wörheide, Gert
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Published
2019-01-28
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
643-649
ISSN
  • 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-1719
OpenAlex
W2951811509
Cited by
57
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • French National Research Agency (ANR-10-BINF-01-01)
  • National Science Foundation (DEB-1556615, DEB-1256993)
  • NERC BETR (NE/P013643/1)
  • LMU Munich’s Institutional Strategy LMUexcellent
  • German Research Foundation (Wo896/19-1)
  • European Union’s Horizon
  • Marie Skłodowska-Curie (764840)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Marine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
Keywords
metazoan phylogeny, homology, orthology, gene family evolution, gene turnover, paralogs, deep divergence
MeSH terms
Animals, Multigene Family, Genetic Techniques, Humans, Invertebrates, Phylogeny, Genome, Chordata

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