Cited by 76Evolution and Paleontology StudiesGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesPlant Diversity and Evolution

Amino acid sequence versus morphological data and the interordinal relationships of mammals.

André R. Wyss, Michael J. Novacek, Malcolm C. McKenna·1987·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Abstract

To a large extent, the mutual affinities of the mammalian orders continue to puzzle systematists, even though comparative anatomy and amino acid sequencing offer a massive data base from which these relationships could potentially be adduced. In the present paper the consistency index--the number of character states less the number of characters in a data set, divided by the total number of changes in the character states on a cladogram--was used to examine the relative resolving powers of recently published morphological and molecular-sequence data. Consistency indices were calculated for previously published alpha crystallin A chain and myoglobin amino acid-sequence cladograms and for four original amino acid-sequence cladograms (alpha crystallin A, myoglobin, and alpha and beta hemoglobin); these were found to be comparable to the consistency indices of morphologically based cladograms. Qualitative comparisons between the morphologically based and molecularly based trees were also made; only moderate congruence between the two was observed. Moreover, there was a general lack of congruence between the cladograms specified by each of the four proteins. Amino acid-sequence and morphological data agreed on the placement of edentates as an early eutherian offshoot and on the grouping of hyracoids, proboscideans, and sirenians. Otherwise there was only limited congruence: morphology strongly supported the grouping of lagomorphs and rodents and the alliance of pholidotes and edentates, but sequence analyses did not. The placement of tubulidentates differed widely among proteins. Morphology indicated the close association of sirenians with proboscideans; proteins suggested a pairing of sirenians with hyracoids. Sequence data did not identify many (morphologically well-diagnosed) orders as monophyletic (e.g., Lagomorpha).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040435

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Wyss, A. R., Novacek, M. J., & McKenna, M. C.
Affiliations
American Museum of Natural History (US)
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Published
1987-03
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
99-116
ISSN
  • 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-1719
OpenAlex
W2111585257
Cited by
76
References
17
Citations by year
2023: 1
FWCI
10.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Diversity and Evolution
Keywords
mammalian phylogeny, morphological data, consistency index, myoglobin, hemoglobin, edentates, Proboscidea, sirenians, lagomorphs, rodents, monophyly
MeSH terms
Amino Acid Sequence, Animals, Crystallins, Biological Evolution, Hemoglobins, Mammals, Myoglobin, Phylogeny

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