Morphological Characters Can Strongly Influence Early Animal Relationships Inferred from Phylogenomic Data Sets

Evaluating the Accuracy of Methods for Detecting Correlated Rates of Molecular and Morphological Evolution

Determining the link between genomic and phenotypic change is a fundamental goal in evolutionary biology. Insights into this link can be gained by using a phylogenetic approach to test for correlations between rates of molecular and morphological evolution. However, there has been persistent uncertainty about the relationship between these rates, partly because conflicting results have been obtained using various methods that have not been examined in detail. We carried out a simulation study to evaluate the performance of 5 statistical methods for detecting correlated rates of evolution. Our simulations explored the evolution of molecular sequences and morphological characters under a range of conditions. Of the methods tested, Bayesian relaxed-clock estimation of branch rates was able to detect correlated rates of evolution correctly in the largest number of cases. This was followed by correlations of root-to-tip distances, Bayesian model selection, independent sister-pairs contrasts, and likelihood-based model selection. As expected, the power to detect correlated rates increased with the amount of data, both in terms of tree size and number of morphological characters. Likewise, greater among-lineage rate variation in the data led to improved performance of all 5 methods, particularly for Bayesian relaxed-clock analysis when the rate model was mismatched. We then applied these methods to a data set from flowering plants and did not find evidence of a correlation in evolutionary rates between genomic data and morphological characters. The results of our study have practical implications for phylogenetic analyses of combined molecular and morphological data sets, and highlight the conditions under which the links between genomic and phenotypic rates of evolution can be evaluated quantitatively.

Phylogenetic congruence, conflict and consilience between molecular and morphological data

Morphology and molecules are important data sources for estimating evolutionary relationships. Modern studies often utilise morphological and molecular partitions alongside each other in combined analyses. However, the effect of combining phenomic and genomic partitions is unclear. This is exacerbated by their size imbalance, and conflict over the efficacy of different inference methods when using morphological characters. To systematically address the effect of topological incongruence, size imbalance, and tree inference methods, we conduct a meta-analysis of 32 combined (molecular + morphology) datasets across metazoa. Our results reveal that morphological-molecular topological incongruence is pervasive: these data partitions yield very different trees, irrespective of which method is used for morphology inference. Analysis of the combined data often yields unique trees that are not sampled by either partition individually, even with the inclusion of relatively small quantities of morphological characters. Differences between morphology inference methods in terms of resolution and congruence largely relate to consensus methods. Furthermore, stepping stone Bayes factor analyses reveal that morphological and molecular partitions are not consistently combinable, i.e. data partitions are not always best explained under a single evolutionary process. In light of these results, we advise that the congruence between morphological and molecular data partitions needs to be considered in combined analyses. Nonetheless, our results reveal that, for most datasets, morphology and molecules can, and should, be combined in order to best estimate evolutionary history and reveal hidden support for novel relationships. Studies that analyse only phenomic or genomic data in isolation are unlikely to provide the full evolutionary picture.

Multiple Outgroups Can Cause Random Rooting in Phylogenomics

Outgroup selection has been a major challenge since the rise of phylogenetics, and it has remained so in the phylogenomic era. Our goal here is to use large phylogenomic animal datasets to examine the impact of outgroup selection on the final topology. The results of our analyses further solidify the fact that distant outgroups can cause random rooting, and that this holds for concatenated and coalescent-based methods. The results also indicate that the standard practice of using multiple outgroups often causes random rooting. Most researchers go out of their way to get multiple outgroups, as this has been standard practice for decades. Based on our findings, this practice should stop. Instead, our results suggest that a single (most closely) related relative should be selected as the outgroup, unless all outgroups are roughly equally closely related to the ingroup.

The Cambrian cirratuliform Iotuba denotes an early annelid radiation

The principal animal lineages (phyla) diverged in the Cambrian, but most diversity at lower taxonomic ranks arose more gradually over the subsequent 500 Myr. Annelid worms seem to exemplify this pattern, based on molecular analyses and the fossil record: Cambrian Burgess Shale-type deposits host a single, early-diverging crown-group annelid alongside a morphologically and taxonomically conservative stem group; the polychaete sub-classes diverge in the Ordovician; and many orders and families are first documented in Carboniferous Lagerstätten. Fifteen new fossils of the 'phoronid' Iotuba (=Eophoronis) chengjiangensis from the early Cambrian Chengjiang Lagerstätte challenge this picture. A chaetal cephalic cage surrounds a retractile head with branchial plates, affiliating Iotuba with the derived polychaete families 'Flabelligeridae' and Acrocirridae. Unless this similarity represents profound convergent evolution, this relationship would pull back the origin of the nested crown groups of Cirratuliformia, Sedentaria and Pleistoannelida by tens of millions of years-indicating a dramatic unseen origin of modern annelid diversity in the heat of the Cambrian 'explosion'.

Exploring genome gene content and morphological analysis to test recalcitrant nodes in the animal phylogeny

An accurate phylogeny of animals is needed to clarify their evolution, ecology, and impact on shaping the biosphere. Although datasets of several hundred thousand amino acids are nowadays routinely used to test phylogenetic hypotheses, key deep nodes in the metazoan tree remain unresolved: the root of animals, the root of Bilateria, and the monophyly of Deuterostomia. Instead of using the standard approach of amino acid datasets, we performed analyses of newly assembled genome gene content and morphological datasets to investigate these recalcitrant nodes in the phylogeny of animals. We explored extensively the choices for assembling the genome gene content dataset and model choices of morphological analyses. Our results are robust to these choices and provide additional insights into the early evolution of animals, they are consistent with sponges as the sister group of all the other animals, the worm-like bilaterian lineage Xenacoelomorpha as the sister group of the other Bilateria, and tentatively support monophyletic Deuterostomia.

Total evidence phylogeny of platyrrhine primates and a comparison of undated and tip-dating approaches

There have been multiple published phylogenetic analyses of platyrrhine primates (New World monkeys) using both morphological and molecular data, but relatively few that have integrated both types of data into a total evidence approach. Here, we present phylogenetic analyses of recent and fossil platyrrhines, based on a total evidence data set of 418 morphological characters and 10.2 kilobases of DNA sequence data from 17 nuclear genes taken from previous studies, using undated and tip-dating approaches in a Bayesian framework. We compare the results of these analyses with molecular scaffold analyses using maximum parsimony and Bayesian approaches, and we use a formal information theoretic approach to identify unstable taxa. After a posteriori pruning of unstable taxa, the undated and tip-dating topologies appear congruent with recent molecular analyses and support largely similar relationships, with strong support for Stirtonia as a stem alouattine, Neosaimiri as a stem saimirine, Cebupithecia as a stem pitheciine, and Lagonimico as a stem callitrichid. Both analyses find three Greater Antillean subfossil platyrrhines (Xenothrix, Antillothrix, and Paralouatta) to form a clade that is related to Callicebus, congruent with a single dispersal event by the ancestor of this clade to the Greater Antilles. They also suggest that the fossil Proteropithecia may not be closely related to pitheciines, and that all known platyrrhines older than the Middle Miocene are stem taxa. Notably, the undated analysis found the Early Miocene Panamacebus (currently recognized as the oldest known cebid) to be unstable, and the tip-dating analysis placed it outside crown Platyrrhini. Our tip-dating analysis supports a late Oligocene or earliest Miocene (20.8-27.0 Ma) age for crown Platyrrhini, congruent with recent molecular clock analyses.

Let’s end taxonomic blank slates with molecular morphology

Many known evolutionary lineages have yet to be described formally due to a lack of traditional morphological characters. This is true for genetically distinctive groups within the amoeboid Placozoa animals, the protists in ponds, and the bacteria that cover nearly everything. These taxonomic tabula rasae, or blank slates, are problematic; without names, communication is hampered and other scientific progress is slowed. We suggest that the morphology of molecules be used to help alleviate this issue. Molecules, such as proteins, have structure. Proteins are even visualizable with X-ray crystallography, albeit more easily detected by and easier to work with using genomic sequencing. Given their structured nature, we believe they should not be considered as anything less than traditional morphology. Protein-coding gene content (presence/absence) can also be used easily with genomic sequences, and is a convenient binary character set. With molecular morphology, we believe that each taxonomic tabula rasa can be solved.

Phylogenomics and the first higher taxonomy of Placozoa, an ancient and enigmatic animal phylum

Placozoa is an ancient phylum of extraordinarily unusual animals: miniscule, ameboid creatures that lack most fundamental animal features. Despite high genetic diversity, only recently have the second and third species been named. While prior genomic studies suffer from incomplete placozoan taxon sampling, we more than double the count with protein sequences from seven key genomes and produce the first nuclear phylogenomic reconstruction of all major placozoan lineages. This leads us to the first complete Linnaean taxonomic classification of Placozoa, over a century after its discovery: This may be the only time in the 21st century when an entire higher taxonomy for a whole animal phylum is formalized. Our classification establishes 2 new classes, 4 new orders, 3 new families, 1 new genus, and 1 new species, namely classes Polyplacotomia and Uniplacotomia; orders Polyplacotomea, Trichoplacea, Cladhexea, and Hoilungea; families Polyplacotomidae, Cladtertiidae, and Hoilungidae; and genus Cladtertia with species Cladtertia collaboinventa, nov. Our likelihood and gene content tree topologies refine the relationships determined in previous studies. Adding morphological data into our phylogenomic matrices suggests sponges (Porifera) as the sister to other animals, indicating that modest data addition shifts this node away from comb jellies (Ctenophora). Furthermore, by adding the first genomic protein data of the exceptionally distinct and branching Polyplacotoma mediterranea, we solidify its position as sister to all other placozoans; a divergence we estimate to be over 400 million years old. Yet even this deep split sits on a long branch to other animals, suggesting a bottleneck event followed by diversification. Ancestral state reconstructions indicate large shifts in gene content within Placozoa, with Hoilungia hongkongensis and its closest relatives having the most unique genetics.

Renewed perspectives on the sedentary-pelagic last common bilaterian ancestor

Various evaluations of the last common bilaterian ancestor (lcba) currently suggest that it resembled either a microscopic, non-segmented motile adult; or, on the contrary, a complex segmented adult motile urbilaterian. These fundamental inconsistencies remain largely unexplained. A majority of multidisciplinary data regarding sedentary adult ancestral bilaterian organization is overlooked. The sedentary-pelagic model is supported now by a number of novel developmental, paleontological and molecular phylogenetic data: (1) data in support of sedentary sponges, in the adult stage, as sister to all other Metazoa; (2) a similarity of molecular developmental pathways in both adults and larvae across sedentary sponges, cnidarians, and bilaterians; (3) a cnidarian-bilaterian relationship, including a unique sharing of a bona fide Hox-gene cluster, of which the evolutionary appearance does not connect directly to a bilaterian motile organization; (4) the presence of sedentary and tube-dwelling representatives of the main bilaterian clades in the early Cambrian; (5) an absence of definite taxonomic attribution of Ediacaran taxa reconstructed as motile to any true bilaterian phyla; (6) a similarity of tube morphology (and the clear presence of a protoconch-like apical structure of the Ediacaran sedentary Cloudinidae) among shells of the early Cambrian, and later true bilaterians, such as semi-sedentary hyoliths and motile molluscs; (7) recent data that provide growing evidence for a complex urbilaterian, despite a continuous molecular phylogenetic controversy. The present review compares the main existing models and reconciles the sedentary model of an urbilaterian and the model of a larva-like lcba with a unified sedentary(adult)-pelagic(larva) model of the lcba.

Integrative Phylogenetics: Tools for Palaeontologists to Explore the Tree of Life

The modern era of analytical and quantitative palaeobiology has only just begun, integrating methods such as morphological and molecular phylogenetics and divergence time estimation, as well as phenotypic and molecular rates of evolution. Calibrating the tree of life to geological time is at the nexus of many disparate disciplines, from palaeontology to molecular systematics and from geochronology to comparative genomics. Creating an evolutionary time scale of the major events that shaped biodiversity is key to all of these fields and draws from each of them. Different methodological approaches and data employed in various disciplines have traditionally made collaborative research efforts difficult among these disciplines. However, the development of new methods is bridging the historical gap between fields, providing a holistic perspective on organismal evolutionary history, integrating all of the available evidence from living and fossil species. Because phylogenies with only extant taxa do not contain enough information to either calibrate the tree of life or fully infer macroevolutionary dynamics, phylogenies should preferably include both extant and extinct taxa, which can only be achieved through the inclusion of phenotypic data. This integrative phylogenetic approach provides ample and novel opportunities for evolutionary biologists to benefit from palaeontological data to help establish an evolutionary time scale and to test core macroevolutionary hypotheses about the drivers of biological diversification across various dimensions of organisms.

Ontogeny, Phylotypic Periods, Paedomorphosis, and Ontogenetic Systematics

The key terms linking ontogeny and evolution are briefly reviewed. It is shown that their application and usage in the modern biology are often inconsistent and incorrectly understood even within the “evo-devo” field. For instance, the core modern reformulation that ontogeny not merely recapitulates, but produces phylogeny implies that ontogeny and phylogeny are closely interconnected. However, the vast modern phylogenetic and taxonomic fields largely omit ontogeny as a central concept. Instead, the common “clade-” and “tree-thinking” prevail, despite on the all achievements of the evo-devo. This is because the main conceptual basis of the modern biology is fundamentally ontogeny-free. In another words, in the Haeckel’s pair of “ontogeny and phylogeny,” ontogeny is still just a subsidiary for the evolutionary process (and hence, phylogeny), instead as in reality, its main driving force. The phylotypic periods is another important term of the evo-devo and represent a modern reformulation of Haeckel’s recapitulations and biogenetic law. However, surprisingly, this one of the most important biological evidence, based on the natural ontogenetic grounds, in the phylogenetic field that can be alleged as a “non-evolutionary concept.” All these observations clearly imply that a major revision of the main terms which are associated with the “ontogeny and phylogeny/evolution” field is urgently necessarily. Thus, “ontogenetic” is not just an endless addition to the term “systematics,” but instead a crucial term, without it neither systematics, nor biology have sense. To consistently employ the modern ontogenetic and epigenetic achievements, the concept of ontogenetic systematics is hereby refined. Ontogenetic systematics is not merely a “research program” but a key biological discipline which consistently links the enormous biological diversity with underlying fundamental process of ontogeny at both molecular and morphological levels. The paedomorphosis is another widespread ontogenetic-and-evolutionary process that is significantly underestimated or misinterpreted by the current phylogenetics and taxonomy. The term paedomorphosis is refined, as initially proposed to link ontogeny with evolution, whereas “neoteny” and “progenesis” are originally specific, narrow terms without evolutionary context, and should not be used as synonyms of paedomorphosis. Examples of application of the principles of ontogenetic systematics represented by such disparate animal groups as nudibranch molluscs and ophiuroid echinoderms clearly demonstrate that perseverance of the phylotypic periods is based not only on the classic examples in vertebrates, but it is a universal phenomenon in all organisms, including disparate animal phyla.

Comprehensive species sampling and sophisticated algorithmic approaches refute the monophyly of Arachnida

Deciphering the evolutionary relationships of Chelicerata (arachnids, horseshoe crabs, and allied taxa) has proven notoriously difficult, due to their ancient rapid radiation and the incidence of elevated evolutionary rates in several lineages. Although conflicting hypotheses prevail in morphological and molecular data sets alike, the monophyly of Arachnida is nearly universally accepted, despite historical lack of support in molecular data sets. Some phylotranscriptomic analyses have recovered arachnid monophyly, but these did not sample all living orders, whereas analyses including all orders have failed to recover Arachnida. To understand this conflict, we assembled a data set of 506 high-quality genomes and transcriptomes, sampling all living orders of Chelicerata with high occupancy and rigorous approaches to orthology inference. Our analyses consistently recovered the nested placement of horseshoe crabs within a paraphyletic Arachnida. This result was insensitive to variation in evolutionary rates of genes, complexity of the substitution models, and alternative algorithmic approaches to species tree inference. Investigation of sources of systematic bias showed that genes and sites that recover arachnid monophyly are enriched in noise and exhibit low information content. To test the impact of morphological data, we generated a 514-taxon morphological data matrix of extant and fossil Chelicerata, analyzed in tandem with the molecular matrix. Combined analyses recovered the clade Merostomata (the marine orders Xiphosura, Eurypterida, and Chasmataspidida), but merostomates appeared nested within Arachnida. Our results suggest that morphological convergence resulting from adaptations to life in terrestrial habitats has driven the historical perception of arachnid monophyly, paralleling the history of numerous other invertebrate terrestrial groups.

On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology

Contrasting definitions of organs based either on function or on strictly morphological criteria are the legacy of a tradition starting with Aristotle. This floating characterization of organs in terms of both form and function extends also to organ systems. The first section of this review outlines the notions of organ and body part as defined, explicitly or implicitly, in representative works of nineteenth century’s comparative morphology. The lack of a clear distinction between the two notions led to problems in Owen’s approach to the comparative method (definition of homolog vs. nature of the vertebrate archetype) and to a paradoxical formulation, by Anton Dohrn, of the principle of functional change. Starting from the second half of the twentieth century, with the extensive use of morphological data in phylogenetic analyses, both terms – organ and body part – have been often set aside, to leave room for a comparison between variously characterized attributes (character states) of the taxa to be compared. Throughout the last two centuries, there have been also efforts to characterize organs or body parts in terms of the underlying developmental dynamics, both in the context of classical descriptive embryology and according to models suggested by developmental genetics. Functionally defined organ are occasionally co-extensive with morphologically defined body parts, nevertheless a clear distinction between the former and the latter is a necessary prerequisite to a study of their evolution: this issue is discussed here on the example of the evolution of hermaphroditism and gonad structure and function.

Fossils improve phylogenetic analyses of morphological characters

Fossils provide our only direct window into evolutionary events in the distant past. Incorporating them into phylogenetic hypotheses of living clades can help time-calibrate divergences, as well as elucidate macroevolutionary dynamics. However, the effect fossils have on phylogenetic reconstruction from morphology remains controversial. The consequences of explicitly incorporating the stratigraphic ages of fossils using tip-dated inference are also unclear. Here, we use simulations to evaluate the performance of inference methods across different levels of fossil sampling and missing data. Our results show that fossil taxa improve phylogenetic analysis of morphological datasets, even when highly fragmentary. Irrespective of inference method, fossils improve the accuracy of phylogenies and increase the number of resolved nodes. They also induce the collapse of ancient and highly uncertain relationships that tend to be incorrectly resolved when sampling only extant taxa. Furthermore, tip-dated analyses under the fossilized birth-death process outperform undated methods of inference, demonstrating that the stratigraphic ages of fossils contain vital phylogenetic information. Fossils help to extract true phylogenetic signals from morphology, an effect that is mediated by both their distinctive morphology and their temporal information, and their incorporation in total-evidence phylogenetics is necessary to faithfully reconstruct evolutionary history.