The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Phylogeny of Eukaryotes Based on Ribosomal RNA: Long-Branch Attraction and Models of Sequence Evolution
Abstract
The molecular phylogeny of eukaryotes was first based on the comparison of the small-subunit ribosomal RNA (SSU rRNA) and quickly became a paradigm (Sogin 1991 ). However, serious criticisms have recently been raised against it. In particular, it has been suggested that the various protist lineages that emerged first (e.g., microsporidia, trichomonads, mycetozoans) were misplaced because of the long-branch attraction (LBA) artifact (Philippe and Adoutte 1998 ; Philippe and Laurent 1998 ; Germot and Philippe 1999 ; Moreira, Le Guyader, and Philippe 1999 ; Roger et al. 1999 ; Stiller and Hall 1999 ). Indeed, simulation studies (unpublished data) showed that when a distant outgroup was used, all the standard methods of phylogenetic reconstruction artifactually inferred a phylogeny with an asymmetrical base containing the fast-evolving lineages, leading to a tree shape very similar to the rRNA one. When the substitution rates are considerably variable for different lineages, the use of a model that reflects the actual substitution probability is of utmost importance for obtaining a correct tree topology (Lockhart et al. 1994 ; Swofford et al. 1996 ; Yang 1996 ; Takezaki and Gojobori 1999 ). In the case of rRNA-based eukaryotic phylogeny, the first model violation noticed was the variation of G + C content among species (Hasegawa and Hashimoto 1993 ). Yet, the overall picture of the rRNA tree remained unchanged when only species with similar G + C contents were included (Leipe et al. 1993 ) or when methods less sensitive to this bias, such as transversion parsimony (Woese et al. 1991 ) or log-Det distance (Lockhart et al. 1994 ), were applied. Variation in evolutionary rates across sites (RAS) is a further complexity of sequence evolution which also has a significant effect on evolutionary tree building (Olsen 1987 ; Yang 1996 ). For instance, the late emergence of fast-evolving lineages such as the nucleomorph of chloroarachniophytes (Van de Peer et al. 1996 ) or microsporidia (Peyretaillade et al. 1998 ) can be retrieved only when RAS models are assumed. Finally, the existence of covarion structure constitutes a further model violation that has just begun to be considered (Lockhart et al. 1998 ; Lopez, Forterre, and Philippe 1999 ). In this study, we sequenced the complete large-subunit (LSU) rRNA of Trichomonas vaginalis. We concatenated this sequence with that of the SSU rRNA for this taxon and compared these data with similar data from other eukaryotes. Using these data, we investigated the robustness of eukaryotic phylogeny with consideration for the model of sequence evolution used. The protocol for obtaining the LSU rRNA using several universal and specific primers was the same as that previously described (Germot, Philippe, and Le Guyader 1996 ), except that we sequenced both strands here. The size of the LSU rRNA was approximately 2,760 nt (the beginning and end were identified only by homology with other rRNAs), and its G + C content was 46%. The sequence of T. vaginalis was aligned manually with the available complete LSU rRNA sequences of 120 eukaryotes and of 15 archaebacteria, using the ED program of the MUST package (Philippe 1993 ). To increase the sequence lengths, we aligned SSU rRNA sequences for the same set of organisms whenever possible, and only the fusion of SSU and LSU rRNA was used for further analysis. A subset of only 32 species, encompassing as much biodiversity as possible (i.e., by eliminating numerous fungal, plant, and metazoan species), was used in order to reduce the computing time of our maximum-likelihood (ML) analysis. Only positions that could be unambiguously aligned were selected, leaving 875 and 1,604 positions for SSU and LSU rRNA, respectively. The alignment is available on request or at http://bufo.bc4.u-psud.fr. The G + C content of rRNA appeared to be significantly heterogeneous between species at the 5% level, as measured by the χ2 statistics implemented in PUZZLE (Strimmer and von Haeseler 1996 ). Rather than coping with this model violation using a nonhomogeneous model (e.g., Galtier and Gouy 1998 ), only transversions were considered, since the ratio of purines to pyrimidines appeared to be homogeneous for all of the considered organisms, as previously observed for prokaryotic rRNA (Woese et al. 1991 ). This allowed us to use complex RAS models, such as those using a Γ law distribution. Moreover, transitions were more saturated than transversions in a dot plot comparison (data not shown) and therefore were less likely to contain a reliable ancient phylogenetic signal. The ML tree that was inferred with a model assuming equal rates across sites was very similar to the ones inferred from the SSU rRNA only (fig. 1A ). The three “archezoan” lineages (trichomonads, microsporidia, and diplomonads) emerged first, followed by euglenozoans and mycetozoans, and then by the crown. Within the tree, the monophyly of the various phyla was recovered with good statistical supp
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
“the inclusion of outgroups very distant from the ingroup can cause reconstruction artifacts by attracting fast-evolving (long-branched) ingroup species toward the root (25, 27 -31)”
From Genomic data do not support comb jellies as the sister group to all other animals (2015) · cites this paper as [28]
Citations
Cites
MacClade 4.0: analysis of phylogeny and character evolution
(2001) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.39-2183 · Cited by 5,533
PAUP (phylogenetic analysis using parsimony)
(2008) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-6754-9_12413 · Cited by 4,424
Quartet Puzzling: A Quartet Maximum-Likelihood Method for Reconstructing Tree Topologies
Strimmer, K., & von Haeseler, A. (1996) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025664 · Cited by 2,531
Among-site rate variation and its impact on phylogenetic analyses
Yang, Z. (1996) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/0169-5347(96)10041-0 · Cited by 1,202
Recovering evolutionary trees under a more realistic model of sequence evolution.
Lockhart, P., Steel, M., Hendy, M., & Penny, D. (1994) · Molecular biology and evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040136 · Cited by 1,018
MOLPHY version 2.3 : programs for molecular phylogenetics based on maximum likelihood
Adachi, J. (1996) · Cited by 605
MUST, a computer package of Management Utilities for Sequences and Trees
Philippe, H. (1993) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/21.22.5264 · Cited by 600
Hirt, R. P., Logsdon, J. M., Jr., Healy, B., Dorey, M. W., Doolittle, W. F., & Embley, T. M. (1999) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.96.2.580 · Cited by 518
Early evolution and the origin of eukaryotes
Sogin, M. L. (1991) · Current Opinion in Genetics & Development · doi:10.1016/s0959-437x(05)80192-3 · Cited by 500
Fitch, W. M., & Markowitz, E. (1970) · Biochemical Genetics · doi:10.1007/bf00486096 · Cited by 464
Evolutionary relationships among protozoa.
Coombs, G. H., Vickerman, K., Sleigh, M. A., & Warren, A. (1998) · Kluwer Academic Publishers eBooks · Cited by 383
Galtier, N., & Gouy, M. (1998) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025991 · Cited by 335
How good are deep phylogenetic trees?
Philippe, H., & Laurent, J. (1998) · Current Opinion in Genetics & Development · doi:10.1016/s0959-437x(98)80028-2 · Cited by 324
Alpha-tubulin from early-diverging eukaryotic lineages and the evolution of the tubulin family
Keeling, P. J., & Doolittle, W. F. (1996) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025576 · Cited by 317
Origin and evolution of the slime molds (Mycetozoa)
Baldauf, S. L., & Doolittle, W. F. (1997) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.94.22.12007 · Cited by 312
Lockhart, P. J., Larkum, A., Steel, M. A., Waddell, P., & Penny, D. (1996) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · doi:10.1073/pnas.93.5.1930 · Cited by 240
Olsen, G. J. (1987) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.1987.052.01.090 · Cited by 234
Ribosomal RNA trees misleading?
Hasegawa, M., & Hashimoto, T. (1993) · Nature · doi:10.1038/361023b0 · Cited by 230
Leipe, D. D., Gunderson, J. H., Nerad, T. A., & Sogin, M. L. (1993) · Molecular and Biochemical Parasitology · doi:10.1016/0166-6851(93)90005-i · Cited by 223
Woese, C. R., Achenbach, L. A., Rouvière, P. E., & Mandelco, L. (1991) · Systematic and Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1016/s0723-2020(11)80311-5 · Cited by 206
Germot, A., Philippe, H., & Guyader, H. L. (1996) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.93.25.14614 · Cited by 191
Burger, G., Saint-Louis, D., Gray, M. W., & Lang, B. F. (1999) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.11.9.1675 · Cited by 191
de Peer, Y. V., Rensing, S. A., Maier, U., & Wächter, R. D. (1996) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.93.15.7732 · Cited by 157
Peyretaillade, E. (1998) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/26.15.3513 · Cited by 152
Hashimoto, T., Sánchez, L. B., Shirakura, T., Müller, M., & Hasegawa, M. (1998) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.95.12.6860 · Cited by 149
Long-Branch Attraction and the rDNA Model of Early Eukaryotic Evolution
Stiller, J. W., & Hall, B. D. (1999) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026217 · Cited by 146
The Root of the Tree of Life in the Light of the Covarion Model
Lopez, P., Forterre, P., & Philippe, H. (1999) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/pl00006572 · Cited by 139
A covariotide model explains apparent phylogenetic structure of oxygenic photosynthetic lineages
Lockhart, P. J., Steel, M., Barbrook, A. C., Huson, D. H., Charleston, M., & Howe, C. J. (1998) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026025 · Cited by 139
An evaluation of elongation factor 1 alpha as a phylogenetic marker for eukaryotes
Roger, A. J., Sandblom, O., Doolittle, W. F., & Philippe, H. (1999) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026104 · Cited by 138
The molecular phylogeny of eukaryota: solid facts and uncertainties
Phillipe, H. (1998) · Parasitology International · doi:10.1016/s1383-5769(98)80093-7 · Cited by 126
Correct and incorrect vertebrate phylogenies obtained by the entire mitochondrial DNA sequences
Takezaki, N., & Gojobori, T. (1999) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026141 · Cited by 105
Critical Analysis of Eukaryotic Phylogeny: A Case Study Based on the HSP70 Family
Germot, A., & Philippe, H. (1999) · Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1550-7408.1999.tb04594.x · Cited by 102
Moreira, D., Guyader, H. L., & Philippe, H. (1999) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026105 · Cited by 65
Keeling, P. J., Deane, J. A., & McFadden, G. I. (1998) · Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1550-7408.1998.tb05117.x · Cited by 57
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Swofford, D. L., G. J. Olsen, P. J. Waddell, and D. M. Hillis. 1996. Phylogenetic inference. Pp. 407–514 in D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B. K. Mable, eds. Molecular systematics. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Phylogenomics and the reconstruction of the tree of life
Delsuc, F., Brinkmann, H., & Philippe, H. (2005) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1603 · Cited by 1,264
A review of long-branch attraction
Bergsten, J. (2005) · Cladistics · doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.2005.00059.x · Cited by 1,162
Selecting the Best-Fit Model of Nucleotide Substitution
Posada, D., & Crandall, K. A. (2001) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150118469 · Cited by 937
Lartillot, N., Brinkmann, H., & Philippe, H. (2007) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-7-s1-s4 · Cited by 705
Philippe, H., Lartillot, N., & Brinkmann, H. (2005) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msi111 · Cited by 551
Metadata
- Authors
- Philippe* and, H., & Germot, A.
- ORCID
- Germot, Agnès
- Venue
- Molecular Biology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-05-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 830-834
- ISSN
- 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-1719
- OpenAlex
- W2117688872
- Cited by
- 154
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 5.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Protist diversity and phylogeny
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
- Keywords
- eukaryotic phylogeny, small subunit rRNA, long-branch attraction, protist phylogeny, microsporidia, trichomonads, nucleomorph, chlorarachniophytes, substitution rate heterogeneity, GC content, outgroup selection, sequence evolution models
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Base Sequence, Humans, Models, Genetic, Molecular Sequence Data, Phylogeny, RNA, Ribosomal, Likelihood Functions, Evolution, Molecular
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