MOLECULAR SYSTEMATICS OF THE FLORIDEOPHYCEAE (RHODOPHYTA) USING NUCLEAR LARGE AND SMALL SUBUNIT rDNA SEQUENCE DATA

Sequence data are presented for approximately 85% of the nuclear large subunit (LSU) rDNA gene for one member of the Bangiophyceae and 47 members of the Florideophyceae, the latter representing all but one of the currently recognized florideophyte orders. Distance, parsimony, and maximum likelihood...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of phycology 2001-12, Vol.37 (6), p.1073-1082
Hauptverfasser: Harper, James T., Saunders, Gary W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Sequence data are presented for approximately 85% of the nuclear large subunit (LSU) rDNA gene for one member of the Bangiophyceae and 47 members of the Florideophyceae, the latter representing all but one of the currently recognized florideophyte orders. Distance, parsimony, and maximum likelihood analyses of these data were used to generate phylogenetic trees, and bootstrap resampling was implemented to infer robustness for distance and parsimony results. LSU phylogenies were congruent with published nuclear small subunit (SSU) rDNA results in that four higher level florideophyte lineages were resolved: lineage 1, containing the order Hildenbrandiales; lineage 2, recovered only under distance analysis, composed of the orders Acrochaetiales, Balliales, Batrachospermales, Corallinales, Nemaliales, Palmariales, and Rhodogorgonales; lineage 3, containing the Ahnfeltiales; and lineage 4, composed of the orders Bonnemaisoniales, Ceramiales, Gelidiales, Gigartinales, Gracilariales, Halymeniales, Plocamiales, and Rhodymeniales. Analyses were also performed on a combined LSU–SSU data set and an SSU‐only data set to account for differences in taxon sampling relative to published studies using this latter gene. Combined LSU–SSU analyses resulted in phylogenetic trees of similar topology and support to those obtained from LSU‐only analyses. Phylogenetic trees produced from SSU‐only analyses differed somewhat in particulars of branching within lineages 2 and 4 but overall were congruent with the LSU‐only and combined LSU–SSU results. We close with a discussion of the phylogenetic potential that the LSU has displayed thus far for resolving relationships within the Florideophyceae.
ISSN:0022-3646
1529-8817
DOI:10.1046/j.1529-8817.2001.00160.x