A molecular phylogeny of Hexapoda

By K. Kjer, F. Carle, Jessica R. Litman, J. Ware. Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny, 2006

170 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present a supermatrix approach to the phylogeny of Insecta that stemmed from a talk given at the 2nd Dresden Meeting on Insect Phylogeny (2005). The data included a fragment of the 28S (D1–D8) and complete sequences for the 18S, histone (H3), EF-1α, COI, COII, the 12S and 16S plus the intervening tRNA, and 170 morphological characters. Ribosomal RNA sequences were manually aligned to secondary structure. Two separate Bayesian likelihood analyses were performed, as well as a weighted parsimony analysis, on combined data. Partitioned datasets were also explored. Expected clades like Hexapoda, Insecta, Dicondylia, Pterygota, Neoptera, Dictyoptera, Paraneoptera, and Endopterygota were consistently recovered. However, conflicting hypotheses from independent datasets, as well as a lack of quantitative support from the combined supermatrix, suggest that the elucidation of relationships between non-holometabolous neopteran orders is far from resolved. Substitution rate heterogeneity among lineages, missing intermediate taxa, near simultaneous divergences, flawed phylogenetic models and nucleotide compositional bias are discussed as possible causes for unresolved interordinal relationships. The capacity of this dataset to convey information, its inherent limitations, and the role and responsibility of the systematist in interpreting data are explored

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Genetics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f9ec83a26d95c3bf87bc71aa7e96315904d335b3

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Genetics

Citations in the corpus

The phylogenetic system of Mantodea (Insecta: Dictyoptera) (2013, unknown): “The assumed monophyly of Dictyoptera has found strong support in many studies (e.g. Hennig 1969, 1981; Kristensen 1975, 1981, 1991, 1995; Klass 1995, 1997, 1998a, b, 2003a; Wheeler 1998; Maekawa et al. 1999; Beutel & Gorb 2001, 2006; Wheeler et al. 2001a, b; Deitz et al. 2003; Grimaldi 2003; Whiting”
Molecular Markers in Phylogenetic Studies-A Review (2014, methodology): “As depicted in Figure 1, a phylogenetic tree construction goes through essentially five steps: a) Selection of molecular markers; b) Performing multiple sequence alignments; c) Choosing an evolutionary model; d) Determining a tree building method and lastly e) Assessing tree reliability [52-70].”
On the head morphology of Grylloblattodea (Insecta) and the systematic position of the order, with a new nomenclature for the head muscles of Dicondylia (2011, background): “The monophyly of Xenonomia is also supported by the presence of specific neuropeptides (Gäde & Simek, 2010), and as noted above by the analyses of molecular data (Terry, 2003; Terry & Whiting, 2005; Kjer et al., 2006).”
Relationships among the major lineages of Dictyoptera: the effect of outgroup selection on dictyopteran tree topology (2008, methodology): “…the enigmatic Nocticolidae) had not yet been included in phylogenetic analyses, and dictyopteran taxon samples were generally mostly quite poor (Kambhampati, 1995; Kambhampati et al., 1996; Maekawa et al., 1999; Maekawa & Matsumoto, 2000; Lo et al., 2003; Terry & Whiting, 2005; Kjer et al., 2006a).”
Monophyletic Polyneoptera recovered by wing base structure (2011, methodology): “Kjer et al. (2006) analysed the insect phylogeny with various combinations of multiple nuclear and mitochondrial genes (18S, 28S, Histone 3, EF-1α, COI, COII, 12S and 16S) and morphology, and excluding the problematic taxon Zoraptera.”
A mitochondrial genome phylogeny of the Neuropterida (lace‐wings, alderflies and snakeflies) and their relationship to the other holometabolous insect orders (2009, methodology): “The only studies with comprehensive taxon sampling rely on the nuclear small subunit (¼ 18S) rRNA gene and all support neuropterid monophyly (Whiting 2002a; Kjer et al. 2006; Misof et al. 2007).”
The Systematics of the Hemiptera (2008, unknown): “2001; Paraneoptera paraphyletic with Psocodea as basal-most Neoptera and Polyneoptera as sister group of Heteropterodea + Auchenorrhyncha: Whiting 2002; Psocodea paraphyletic respect to Thysanoptera: Kjer et al. 2006).”
FOSSIL CALIBRATIONS FOR THE ARTHROPOD TREE OF LIFE (2016, background): “Phylogenetic analyses of transcriptomes (Misof et al., 2014), protein-coding genes (Regier et al., 2010; Sasaki et al., 2013), morphology (Blanke et al., 2014), and combined molecular and morphological data (Kjer et al., 2006) with partial taxon sampling support monophyly.”
The impact of rRNA secondary structure consideration in alignment and tree reconstruction: simulated data and a case study on the phylogeny of hexapods. (2010, background): “saccharina emerged as sister taxon to Pterygota, which is supported by recentmorphological andmolecular studies (von Lieven 2000; Staniczek 2000; Wheeler 2001; Kjer et al. 2006; Carapelli et al. 2007; von Reumont et al. 2009).”
Phylogeny of cockroaches (Insecta, Dictyoptera, Blattodea), with placement of aberrant taxa and exploration of out‐group sampling (2012, result): “…(i.e. Blattodea), a placement that is consistent with previous studies (Klass, 1995; Kristensen, 1995; Maekawa et al., 1999; Lo et al., 2000; Deitz et al., 2003; Terry & Whiting, 2005; Kjer et al., 2006; Klass & Meier, 2006; Inward et al., 2007a; Pellens et al., 2007; Svenson & Whiting, 2009).”
Insect mitochondrial genomics: implications for evolution and phylogeny. (2014, background): “[66] Kjer KM, Carle FL, Litman J, Ware J.”