@ARTICLE{TreeBASE2Ref17302, author = {Christine Ruta and Arne Nygren and Vincent Rousset and Per Sundberg and Annie Tillier and Helena Wiklund and Fredrik Pleijel}, title = {Phylogeny of Hesionidae (Aciculata, Polychaeta), assessed from morphology, 18S rDNA, 28S rDNA, 16S rDNA and COI}, year = {2006}, keywords = {}, doi = {}, url = {}, pmid = {}, journal = {Zoologica Scripta}, volume = {}, number = {}, pages = {}, abstract = {We assess phylogenetic relationships within the polychaete family Hesionidae with morphological data together with nucleotide data from 18S rDNA, 28S rDNA, 16S rDNA and COI. Parsimony and Bayesian analyses are performed on two data sets, one based on a more restricted set of terminals with both morphological and molecular data (17 ingroup terminals), and one that includes additional taxa with morphological data only (25 ingroup terminals). The different sets of terminals yield fully congruent results, as does the parsimony and the Bayesian analyses. Our results indicate high levels of homoplasy in traditionally used morphological characters in the group, and that Hesioninae, Gyptini and Gyptis are non-monophyletic. Hesionini (mainly Hesione and Leocrates), Psamathini (mainly Hesiospina, Micropodarke, Nereimyra, Psamathe and Syllidia), Ophiodrominae (Gyptini and Ophiodromini) and Ophiodromini (mainly Heteropodarke, Ophiodromus and Podarkeopsis) are monophyletic and agree with previous classifications, and Hesionini is probably the sister to all other hesionids. The placements of the small hesionids capricornia and Lizardia, the hydrothermal vent taxa Hesiodeira and Hesiolyra, and the newly described Hesiobranchia, remain uncertain.} }

• Go to search
• Citation
• Taxa
• Matrices
• Trees
• Analyses
• 

CiteULike

Delicious

Connotea