Cited by 80Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesEvolution and Paleontology StudiesInvertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology

Phylogenomic Insights into the Cambrian Explosion, the Colonization of Land and the Evolution of Flight in Arthropoda

Open access
Wheat, Christopher W., Wahlberg, Niklas·2013·Systematic Biology

Abstract

The timing of the origin of arthropods in relation to the Cambrian explosion is still controversial, as are the timing of other arthropod macroevolutionary events such as the colonization of land and the evolution of flight. Here we assess the power of a phylogenomic approach to shed light on these major events in the evolutionary history of life on earth. Analyzing a large phylogenomic dataset (122 taxa, 62 genes) with a Bayesian-relaxed molecular clock, we simultaneously reconstructed the phylogenetic relationships and the absolute times of divergences among the arthropods. Simulations were used to test whether our analysis could distinguish between alternative Cambrian explosion scenarios with increasing levels of autocorrelated rate variation. Our analyses support previous phylogenomic hypotheses and simulations indicate a Precambrian origin of the arthropods. Our results provide insights into the 3 independent colonizations of land by arthropods and suggest that evolution of insect wings happened much earlier than the fossil record indicates, with flight evolving during a period of increasing oxygen levels and impressively large forests. These and other findings provide a foundation for macroevolutionary and comparative genomic study of Arthropoda.

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/sysbio/sys074

Cites

78 of 78 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

3 of the 81 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wheat, C. W., & Wahlberg, N.
Affiliations
University of Helsinki (FI)
Corresponding author
Wheat, Christopher W.
Venue
Systematic Biology
Published
2012-11-17
Volume
62
Issue
1
Pages
93-109
ISSN
  • 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1076-836X
OpenAlex
W2149409778
Cited by
80
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10
FWCI
3.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Systematic Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
China Scholarship Council
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Invertebrate Taxonomy and Ecology
Keywords
Cambrian explosion, flight evolution, insect wings, arthropods, phylogenomics, relaxed molecular clock, divergence time estimation, macroevolution, oxygen concentration, fossil record
MeSH terms
Animals, Arthropods, Computer Simulation, Fossils, Phylogeny, Time Factors, Genomics

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