Phylogeny of Medusozoa and the evolution of cnidarian life cycles

By A. Collins. 2002

345 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cancer Research, Global and Planetary Change, Paleontology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bc7bb314132b0c31d3a0668d85d85c2acd3acbc2

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cancer Research

In Global and Planetary Change

In Paleontology

Citations in the corpus

The phylum Cnidaria: A review of phylogenetic patterns and diversity 300 years after Linnaeus (2007, methodology): “studies of larger rDNA datasets (France et al. 1996; Odorico & Miller 1997; Song & Won 1997; Berntson et al. 1999; Collins 2002) support anthozoan monophyly.”
Reverse development in Cnidaria (2004, background): “Reversible metamorphosis in Anthozoa Anthozoa are considered the ancestral group of Cnidaria (Bridge et al. 1992; Collins 2002).”
Reassessment of the phylogenetic position of conulariids (?Ediacaran‐Triassic) within the subphylum medusozoa (phylum cnidaria) (2006, methodology): “Based on comparisons of the anatomy, morphogenesis and palaeoautecology of conulariids and extant taxa, many investigators (e.g. Kiderlen 1937; Moore & Harrington 1956; Werner 1973«; Bischoff 1978; von Salvini-Plawen 1978; Bouillon 1981; Van Iten 1991a, \992a,h\ Jerre 1994; Wade 1994; Bergström 1995”
The New View of Animal Phylogeny (2004, background): “Information on relationships within Cnidaria may be found in Bridge et al. (1995) and Collins (2000, 2002).”
Cladistic analysis of Medusozoa and cnidarian evolution (2005, neutral): “Our morphological results are very consistent with those based on molecular data, which like-wise suggest that scyphozoans may not be monophyletic, as stauromedusans branch closer to other medusozoans (Collins 2002).”
Medusan morphospace: phylogenetic constraints, biomechanical solutions, and ecological consequences (2008, background): “Both are recognized as distinct, monophyletic clades based on morphometric and developmental (Bouillon & Boero 2000; Marques & Collins 2004) or molecular criteria (Collins 2002; Collins et al. 2006).”
Tempo and mode of early animal evolution: inferences from rocks, Hox, and molecular clocks (2005, background): “1), and the primitiveness of the cnidarian polyp stage (e.g., Bridge et al. 1995; Collins 2002), implies that the last common ancestor of metazoans, the last common ancestor of calcisponges and eumetazoans, and the last common ancestor of bilaterians all had an obligate benthic adult stage.”
Global diversity of inland water cnidarians (2007, background): “The freshwater species fall into four phylogenetically disparate groups, all save perhaps one belonging to Hydrozoa (Bouillon & Boero, 2000a, b; Collins, 2002): (1): the common Hydra, a group of secondarily simple, solitary polyps (Fig.”
Phylogenomics provides a robust topology of the major cnidarian lineages and insights on the origins of key organismal traits (2018, neutral): “In addition, the adult staurozoan body plan includes features common to both the polyp and medusa stages of other cnidarians, thus adding to their phylogenetic significance [15, 16, 17, 18].”
A review and synthesis on the systematics and evolution of jellyfish blooms: advantageous aggregations and adaptive assemblages (2008, methodology): “Recent exceptions are the genus Dactylometra and the species Pelagia colorata, which are now both considered members of the confamilial genus Chrysaora (Gershwin & Collins, 2002).”