Do orthologous gene phylogenies really support tree-thinking?
- PMID:15913459
- PMCID: PMC1156881
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-5-33
Do orthologous gene phylogenies really support tree-thinking?
Abstract
Background: Since Darwin's Origin of Species, reconstructing the Tree of Life has been a goal of evolutionists, and tree-thinking has become a major concept of evolutionary biology. Practically, building the Tree of Life has proven to be tedious. Too few morphological characters are useful for conducting conclusive phylogenetic analyses at the highest taxonomic level. Consequently, molecular sequences (genes, proteins, and genomes) likely constitute the only useful characters for constructing a phylogeny of all life. For this reason, tree-makers expect a lot from gene comparisons. The simultaneous study of the largest number of molecular markers possible is sometimes considered to be one of the best solutions in reconstructing the genealogy of organisms. This conclusion is a direct consequence of tree-thinking: if gene inheritance conforms to a tree-like model of evolution, sampling more of these molecules will provide enough phylogenetic signal to build the Tree of Life. The selection of congruent markers is thus a fundamental step in simultaneous analysis of many genes.
Results: Heat map analyses were used to investigate the congruence of orthologues in four datasets (archaeal, bacterial, eukaryotic and alpha-proteobacterial). We conclude that we simply cannot determine if a large portion of the genes have a common history. In addition, none of these datasets can be considered free of lateral gene transfer.
Conclusion: Our phylogenetic analyses do not support tree-thinking. These results have important conceptual and practical implications. We argue that representations other than a tree should be investigated in this case because a non-critical concatenation of markers could be highly misleading.
Figures



Similar articles
- An emerging phylogenetic core of Archaea: phylogenies of transcription and translation machineries converge following addition of new genome sequences.Brochier C, Forterre P, Gribaldo S.Brochier C, et al.BMC Evol Biol. 2005 Jun 2;5:36. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-5-36.BMC Evol Biol. 2005.PMID:15932645Free PMC article.
- Genome phylogenies indicate a meaningful alpha-proteobacterial phylogeny and support a grouping of the mitochondria with the Rickettsiales.Fitzpatrick DA, Creevey CJ, McInerney JO.Fitzpatrick DA, et al.Mol Biol Evol. 2006 Jan;23(1):74-85. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msj009. Epub 2005 Sep 8.Mol Biol Evol. 2006.PMID:16151187
- [Foundations of the new phylogenetics].Pavlinov IIa.Pavlinov IIa.Zh Obshch Biol. 2004 Jul-Aug;65(4):334-66.Zh Obshch Biol. 2004.PMID:15490579Russian.
- The tree of life viewed through the contents of genomes.House CH.House CH.Methods Mol Biol. 2009;532:141-61. doi: 10.1007/978-1-60327-853-9_8.Methods Mol Biol. 2009.PMID:19271183Review.
- Does the 'Ring of Life' ring true?Bapteste E, Walsh DA.Bapteste E, et al.Trends Microbiol. 2005 Jun;13(6):256-61. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2005.03.012.Trends Microbiol. 2005.PMID:15936656Review.
Cited by
- Pattern pluralism and the Tree of Life hypothesis.Doolittle WF, Bapteste E.Doolittle WF, et al.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Feb 13;104(7):2043-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0610699104. Epub 2007 Jan 29.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007.PMID:17261804Free PMC article.
- Evolutionary rate and gene expression across different brain regions.Tuller T, Kupiec M, Ruppin E.Tuller T, et al.Genome Biol. 2008;9(9):R142. doi: 10.1186/gb-2008-9-9-r142.Genome Biol. 2008.PMID:18811952Free PMC article.
- One fungus, which genes? Development and assessment of universal primers for potential secondary fungal DNA barcodes.Stielow JB, Lévesque CA, Seifert KA, Meyer W, Iriny L, Smits D, Renfurm R, Verkley GJ, Groenewald M, Chaduli D, Lomascolo A, Welti S, Lesage-Meessen L, Favel A, Al-Hatmi AM, Damm U, Yilmaz N, Houbraken J, Lombard L, Quaedvlieg W, Binder M, Vaas LA, Vu D, Yurkov A, Begerow D, Roehl O, Guerreiro M, Fonseca A, Samerpitak K, van Diepeningen AD, Dolatabadi S, Moreno LF, Casaregola S, Mallet S, Jacques N, Roscini L, Egidi E, Bizet C, Garcia-Hermoso D, Martín MP, Deng S, Groenewald JZ, Boekhout T, de Beer ZW, Barnes I, Duong TA, Wingfield MJ, de Hoog GS, Crous PW, Lewis CT, Hambleton S, Moussa TA, Al-Zahrani HS, Almaghrabi OA, Louis-Seize G, Assabgui R, McCormick W, Omer G, Dukik K, Cardinali G, Eberhardt U, de Vries M, Robert V.Stielow JB, et al.Persoonia. 2015 Dec;35:242-63. doi: 10.3767/003158515X689135. Epub 2015 Aug 28.Persoonia. 2015.PMID:26823635Free PMC article.
- Genetic Competence Drives Genome Diversity in Bacillus subtilis.Brito PH, Chevreux B, Serra CR, Schyns G, Henriques AO, Pereira-Leal JB.Brito PH, et al.Genome Biol Evol. 2018 Jan 1;10(1):108-124. doi: 10.1093/gbe/evx270.Genome Biol Evol. 2018.PMID:29272410Free PMC article.
- Understanding phylogenetic incongruence: lessons from phyllostomid bats.Dávalos LM, Cirranello AL, Geisler JH, Simmons NB.Dávalos LM, et al.Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2012 Nov;87(4):991-1024. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185X.2012.00240.x. Epub 2012 Aug 14.Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 2012.PMID:22891620Free PMC article.Review.
References
- O'Hara RJ. Population thinking and tree thinking in systematics. Zoologica Scripta. 1997;26:323–329.
- Bapteste E, Brinkmann H, Lee JA, Moore DV, Sensen CW, Gordon P, Durufle L, Gaasterland T, Lopez P, Muller M, Philippe H. The analysis of 100 genes supports the grouping of three highly divergent amoebae: Dictyostelium, Entamoeba, and Mastigamoeba. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002;99:1414–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.032662799. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Related information
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources