Phylogenomics of phrynosomatid lizards: conflicting signals from sequence capture versus restriction site associated DNA sequencing
Sequence capture and restriction site associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) are popular methods for obtaining large numbers of loci for phylogenetic analysis. These methods are typically used to collect data at different evolutionary timescales; sequence capture is primarily used for obtaining conserve...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Genome biology and evolution 2015-03, Vol.7 (3), p.706-719 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 719 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 706 |
container_title | Genome biology and evolution |
container_volume | 7 |
creator | Leaché, Adam D Chavez, Andreas S Jones, Leonard N Grummer, Jared A Gottscho, Andrew D Linkem, Charles W |
description | Sequence capture and restriction site associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) are popular methods for obtaining large numbers of loci for phylogenetic analysis. These methods are typically used to collect data at different evolutionary timescales; sequence capture is primarily used for obtaining conserved loci, whereas RADseq is designed for discovering single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) suitable for population genetic or phylogeographic analyses. Phylogenetic questions that span both "recent" and "deep" timescales could benefit from either type of data, but studies that directly compare the two approaches are lacking. We compared phylogenies estimated from sequence capture and double digest RADseq (ddRADseq) data for North American phrynosomatid lizards, a species-rich and diverse group containing nine genera that began diversifying approximately 55 Ma. Sequence capture resulted in 584 loci that provided a consistent and strong phylogeny using concatenation and species tree inference. However, the phylogeny estimated from the ddRADseq data was sensitive to the bioinformatics steps used for determining homology, detecting paralogs, and filtering missing data. The topological conflicts among the SNP trees were not restricted to any particular timescale, but instead were associated with short internal branches. Species tree analysis of the largest SNP assembly, which also included the most missing data, supported a topology that matched the sequence capture tree. This preferred phylogeny provides strong support for the paraphyly of the earless lizard genera Holbrookia and Cophosaurus, suggesting that the earless morphology either evolved twice or evolved once and was subsequently lost in Callisaurus. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/gbe/evv026 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5322549</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3712927681</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-a14c6ace5969af9563f15392ad273a7a21b5e8f0d4febf42a3a8fefa91f8ff643</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkc1rFTEUxYMotlY3_gEScCPCs_meGRdCqR8tFHWh63Bf5mZeykzyTGYevG79x53htaV2lQs553cP9xDymrMPnDXytFvjKe52TJgn5JhXulkZo-XTB_MReVHKNWPGKCOfkyOhjZGqro7J35-bfZ86jGkIrtDk6XaT9zGVNMAYWtqHG8ht-Uhdir4PbgyxoyV0EfpCfU4DLfhnwuiQOtiOU0a6w1ymQjOWMS-GFGfDiBRKSS7AiC39_P3szjfzXpJnfsbhq9v3hPz--uXX-cXq6se3y_Ozq5XTsh5XwJUz4FA3pgHfaCM917IR0IpKQgWCrzXWnrXK49orARJqjx4a7mvvjZIn5NOBu53WA7YO45iht9scBsh7myDY_39i2Ngu7ayWQmjVzIB3t4Cc5vBltEMoDvseIqapWG6MMIqJZtn19pH0Ok15udqsqiujas0W4PuDyuVUSkZ_H4Yzu3Rr527todtZ_OZh_HvpXZnyH0vCpgk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1687648509</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Phylogenomics of phrynosomatid lizards: conflicting signals from sequence capture versus restriction site associated DNA sequencing</title><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Leaché, Adam D ; Chavez, Andreas S ; Jones, Leonard N ; Grummer, Jared A ; Gottscho, Andrew D ; Linkem, Charles W</creator><creatorcontrib>Leaché, Adam D ; Chavez, Andreas S ; Jones, Leonard N ; Grummer, Jared A ; Gottscho, Andrew D ; Linkem, Charles W</creatorcontrib><description>Sequence capture and restriction site associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) are popular methods for obtaining large numbers of loci for phylogenetic analysis. These methods are typically used to collect data at different evolutionary timescales; sequence capture is primarily used for obtaining conserved loci, whereas RADseq is designed for discovering single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) suitable for population genetic or phylogeographic analyses. Phylogenetic questions that span both "recent" and "deep" timescales could benefit from either type of data, but studies that directly compare the two approaches are lacking. We compared phylogenies estimated from sequence capture and double digest RADseq (ddRADseq) data for North American phrynosomatid lizards, a species-rich and diverse group containing nine genera that began diversifying approximately 55 Ma. Sequence capture resulted in 584 loci that provided a consistent and strong phylogeny using concatenation and species tree inference. However, the phylogeny estimated from the ddRADseq data was sensitive to the bioinformatics steps used for determining homology, detecting paralogs, and filtering missing data. The topological conflicts among the SNP trees were not restricted to any particular timescale, but instead were associated with short internal branches. Species tree analysis of the largest SNP assembly, which also included the most missing data, supported a topology that matched the sequence capture tree. This preferred phylogeny provides strong support for the paraphyly of the earless lizard genera Holbrookia and Cophosaurus, suggesting that the earless morphology either evolved twice or evolved once and was subsequently lost in Callisaurus.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1759-6653</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1759-6653</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evv026</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25663487</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Animals ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; DNA ; DNA Restriction Enzymes ; Genes ; Genomics ; Lizards - classification ; Lizards - genetics ; Phylogenetics ; Phylogeny ; Sequence Analysis, DNA - methods</subject><ispartof>Genome biology and evolution, 2015-03, Vol.7 (3), p.706-719</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution.</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. 2015</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-a14c6ace5969af9563f15392ad273a7a21b5e8f0d4febf42a3a8fefa91f8ff643</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-a14c6ace5969af9563f15392ad273a7a21b5e8f0d4febf42a3a8fefa91f8ff643</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5322549/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5322549/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25663487$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Leaché, Adam D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chavez, Andreas S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Leonard N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grummer, Jared A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gottscho, Andrew D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linkem, Charles W</creatorcontrib><title>Phylogenomics of phrynosomatid lizards: conflicting signals from sequence capture versus restriction site associated DNA sequencing</title><title>Genome biology and evolution</title><addtitle>Genome Biol Evol</addtitle><description>Sequence capture and restriction site associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) are popular methods for obtaining large numbers of loci for phylogenetic analysis. These methods are typically used to collect data at different evolutionary timescales; sequence capture is primarily used for obtaining conserved loci, whereas RADseq is designed for discovering single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) suitable for population genetic or phylogeographic analyses. Phylogenetic questions that span both "recent" and "deep" timescales could benefit from either type of data, but studies that directly compare the two approaches are lacking. We compared phylogenies estimated from sequence capture and double digest RADseq (ddRADseq) data for North American phrynosomatid lizards, a species-rich and diverse group containing nine genera that began diversifying approximately 55 Ma. Sequence capture resulted in 584 loci that provided a consistent and strong phylogeny using concatenation and species tree inference. However, the phylogeny estimated from the ddRADseq data was sensitive to the bioinformatics steps used for determining homology, detecting paralogs, and filtering missing data. The topological conflicts among the SNP trees were not restricted to any particular timescale, but instead were associated with short internal branches. Species tree analysis of the largest SNP assembly, which also included the most missing data, supported a topology that matched the sequence capture tree. This preferred phylogeny provides strong support for the paraphyly of the earless lizard genera Holbrookia and Cophosaurus, suggesting that the earless morphology either evolved twice or evolved once and was subsequently lost in Callisaurus.</description><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Deoxyribonucleic acid</subject><subject>DNA</subject><subject>DNA Restriction Enzymes</subject><subject>Genes</subject><subject>Genomics</subject><subject>Lizards - classification</subject><subject>Lizards - genetics</subject><subject>Phylogenetics</subject><subject>Phylogeny</subject><subject>Sequence Analysis, DNA - methods</subject><issn>1759-6653</issn><issn>1759-6653</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkc1rFTEUxYMotlY3_gEScCPCs_meGRdCqR8tFHWh63Bf5mZeykzyTGYevG79x53htaV2lQs553cP9xDymrMPnDXytFvjKe52TJgn5JhXulkZo-XTB_MReVHKNWPGKCOfkyOhjZGqro7J35-bfZ86jGkIrtDk6XaT9zGVNMAYWtqHG8ht-Uhdir4PbgyxoyV0EfpCfU4DLfhnwuiQOtiOU0a6w1ymQjOWMS-GFGfDiBRKSS7AiC39_P3szjfzXpJnfsbhq9v3hPz--uXX-cXq6se3y_Ozq5XTsh5XwJUz4FA3pgHfaCM917IR0IpKQgWCrzXWnrXK49orARJqjx4a7mvvjZIn5NOBu53WA7YO45iht9scBsh7myDY_39i2Ngu7ayWQmjVzIB3t4Cc5vBltEMoDvseIqapWG6MMIqJZtn19pH0Ok15udqsqiujas0W4PuDyuVUSkZ_H4Yzu3Rr527todtZ_OZh_HvpXZnyH0vCpgk</recordid><startdate>20150301</startdate><enddate>20150301</enddate><creator>Leaché, Adam D</creator><creator>Chavez, Andreas S</creator><creator>Jones, Leonard N</creator><creator>Grummer, Jared A</creator><creator>Gottscho, Andrew D</creator><creator>Linkem, Charles W</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150301</creationdate><title>Phylogenomics of phrynosomatid lizards: conflicting signals from sequence capture versus restriction site associated DNA sequencing</title><author>Leaché, Adam D ; Chavez, Andreas S ; Jones, Leonard N ; Grummer, Jared A ; Gottscho, Andrew D ; Linkem, Charles W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c538t-a14c6ace5969af9563f15392ad273a7a21b5e8f0d4febf42a3a8fefa91f8ff643</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Deoxyribonucleic acid</topic><topic>DNA</topic><topic>DNA Restriction Enzymes</topic><topic>Genes</topic><topic>Genomics</topic><topic>Lizards - classification</topic><topic>Lizards - genetics</topic><topic>Phylogenetics</topic><topic>Phylogeny</topic><topic>Sequence Analysis, DNA - methods</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Leaché, Adam D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chavez, Andreas S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jones, Leonard N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grummer, Jared A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gottscho, Andrew D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Linkem, Charles W</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Genome biology and evolution</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Leaché, Adam D</au><au>Chavez, Andreas S</au><au>Jones, Leonard N</au><au>Grummer, Jared A</au><au>Gottscho, Andrew D</au><au>Linkem, Charles W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Phylogenomics of phrynosomatid lizards: conflicting signals from sequence capture versus restriction site associated DNA sequencing</atitle><jtitle>Genome biology and evolution</jtitle><addtitle>Genome Biol Evol</addtitle><date>2015-03-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>706</spage><epage>719</epage><pages>706-719</pages><issn>1759-6653</issn><eissn>1759-6653</eissn><abstract>Sequence capture and restriction site associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) are popular methods for obtaining large numbers of loci for phylogenetic analysis. These methods are typically used to collect data at different evolutionary timescales; sequence capture is primarily used for obtaining conserved loci, whereas RADseq is designed for discovering single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) suitable for population genetic or phylogeographic analyses. Phylogenetic questions that span both "recent" and "deep" timescales could benefit from either type of data, but studies that directly compare the two approaches are lacking. We compared phylogenies estimated from sequence capture and double digest RADseq (ddRADseq) data for North American phrynosomatid lizards, a species-rich and diverse group containing nine genera that began diversifying approximately 55 Ma. Sequence capture resulted in 584 loci that provided a consistent and strong phylogeny using concatenation and species tree inference. However, the phylogeny estimated from the ddRADseq data was sensitive to the bioinformatics steps used for determining homology, detecting paralogs, and filtering missing data. The topological conflicts among the SNP trees were not restricted to any particular timescale, but instead were associated with short internal branches. Species tree analysis of the largest SNP assembly, which also included the most missing data, supported a topology that matched the sequence capture tree. This preferred phylogeny provides strong support for the paraphyly of the earless lizard genera Holbrookia and Cophosaurus, suggesting that the earless morphology either evolved twice or evolved once and was subsequently lost in Callisaurus.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>25663487</pmid><doi>10.1093/gbe/evv026</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1759-6653 |
ispartof | Genome biology and evolution, 2015-03, Vol.7 (3), p.706-719 |
issn | 1759-6653 1759-6653 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5322549 |
source | Oxford Journals Open Access Collection; MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Animals Deoxyribonucleic acid DNA DNA Restriction Enzymes Genes Genomics Lizards - classification Lizards - genetics Phylogenetics Phylogeny Sequence Analysis, DNA - methods |
title | Phylogenomics of phrynosomatid lizards: conflicting signals from sequence capture versus restriction site associated DNA sequencing |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-18T23%3A20%3A40IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Phylogenomics%20of%20phrynosomatid%20lizards:%20conflicting%20signals%20from%20sequence%20capture%20versus%20restriction%20site%20associated%20DNA%20sequencing&rft.jtitle=Genome%20biology%20and%20evolution&rft.au=Leach%C3%A9,%20Adam%20D&rft.date=2015-03-01&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=706&rft.epage=719&rft.pages=706-719&rft.issn=1759-6653&rft.eissn=1759-6653&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/gbe/evv026&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E3712927681%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1687648509&rft_id=info:pmid/25663487&rfr_iscdi=true |