Abstract
We revisit acanthuroid relationships based on an increasing body of evidence that tetraodontiforms, lophiiforms, and caproids share a close relationship with the acanthuroid fishes. Phylogenetic relationships among the acanthuroids, tetraodontiforms, lophiiforms, and caproids were reconstructed based on data from portions of five nuclear genes (RAG1, zic1, myh6, plagl2, and ENC1). The data were partitioned according to gene and codon position and analyzed using Bayesian, maximum parsimony, and maximum likelihood criteria. All methods of analysis corroborated a restricted Acanthuroidei comprising Acanthuridae, Zanclidae, and Luvaridae. They failed to corroborate the inclusion of Siganidae, Scatophagidae and Ephippidae. The primary reason for this is that two groups previously hypothesized to be basal within Acanthuroidei (scatophagids and siganids) grouped within a clade comprising Antigonia, Lophiiformes, and Tetraodontiformes, while the other presumed basal relatives (Drepane + Ephippidae) were recovered within a larger clade that also includes Monodactylidae, Emmelichthyidae, Sparoidea, Haemulidae, and Pomacanthidae. While the molecular data presented here appear to contradict the results of previous morphology-based studies, we suggest that such a conclusion is unjustified without first surveying putative morphological synapomorphies for the acanthuroids in a broader range of taxa.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bellwood DR, van Herwerden L, Konow N (2004) Evolution and biogeography of marine angelfishes (Pisces: Pomacanthidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 33:140–155
Chen W-J, Bonillo C, Lecointre G (2003) Repeatability of clades as a criterion of reliability: a case study for molecular phylogeny of Acanthomorpha (Teleostei) with larger number of taxa. Mol Phylogenet Evol 26:262–288
Clements KD, Gray RD, Choat JH (2003) Rapid evolutionary divergences in reef fishes of the family Acanthuridae (Perciformes: Teleostei). Mol Phylogenet Evol 26:190–201
Cope ED (1871) Observations on the systematic relations of the fishes. Am Nat 5:579–593
Dareste C (1872) On the natural affinities of the Balistidae. Ann Mag Nat Hist Ser 4(10):68–70
Dettai A, Lecointre G (2005) Further support for the clades obtained by multiple molecular phylogenies in the acanthomorph bush. C R Biol 328:674–689
Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791
Gosline WA (1968) The suborders of perciform fishes. Proc US Nat Mus 124:1–78
Gosline WA (1971) Functional morphology and classification of teleostean fishes. University Press Hawaii, Honolulu
Greenwood PH, Rosen DE, Weitzman SH, Myers GS (1966) Phyletic studies of teleostean fishes, with a provisional classification of living forms. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist 131:339–456
Groth JG, Barrowclough GF (1999) Basal divergences in birds and the phylogenetic utility of the nuclear RAG-1 gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 12:115–123
Hillis DM, Bull JJ (1993) An empirical test of bootstrap** as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst Biol 42:182–192
Holcroft NI (2004) A molecular test of alternative hypotheses of tetraodontiform (Acanthomorpha: Tetraodontiformes) sister group relationships using data from the RAG1 gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 32:749–760
Johnson GD, Patterson C (1993) Percomorph phylogeny: a survey of acanthomorph characters and a new proposal. Bull Mar Sci 52:554–626
Källersjö M, Albert VA, Farris JS (1999) Homoplasy increases phylogenetic structure. Cladistics 15:91–93
Le HLV, Lecointre G, Perasso R (1993) A 28S rRNA-based phylogeny of the gnathostomes: first steps in the analysis of conflict and congruence with morphologically based cladograms. Mol Phylogenet Evol 2:31–51
Li C, Ortí G, Zhang G, Lu G (2007) A practical approach to phylogenomics: the phylogeny of ray-finned fish (Actinopterygii) as a case study. BMC Evol Biol 7:44–55
Miya M, Takeshima H, Endo H, Ishiguro NB, Inoue JG, Mukai T, Satoh TP, Yamaguchi M, Kawaguchi A, Mabuchi K, Shirai SM, Nishida M (2003) Major patterns of higher teleostean phylogenies: a new perspective based on 100 complete mitochondrial DNA sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol 26:121–138
Miya M, Satoh TP, Nishida M (2005) The phylogenetic position of toadfishes (order Batrachoidiformes) in the higher ray-finned fish as inferred from partitioned Bayesian analysis of 102 whole mitochondrial genome sequences. Biol J Linn Soc 85:289–306
Nelson JS (2006) Fishes of the world, 4th edn. Wiley, New York
Nylander JAA (2004) MrModeltest 2.0. Distributed by the author, Uppsala
Peden J (2005) CodonW 1.4.2. Distributed by the author, Nottingham
Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP (2003) MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19:1572–1574
Rosen DE (1984) Zeiformes as primitive plectognath fishes. Am Mus Novit 2782:1–45
Saiki RK (1990) Amplification of genomic DNA. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (eds) PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. Academic Press, New York, pp 13–20
Swofford DL (2002) PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and Other Methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland
Tamura T, Nei M (1993) Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA data. Mol Biol Evol 10:512–526
Tang KL, Berendzen PB, Wiley EO, Johnson GD, Winterbottom R, Morrissey JF (1999) The phylogenetic relationships of the suborder Acanthuroidei (Teleostei: Perciformes) based on molecular and morphological evidence. Mol Phylogenet Evol 11:415–425
Tyler JC (1980) Osteology, phylogeny, and higher classification of the fishes of the order Plectognathi (Tetraodontiformes). NOAA Tech Rept NMFS Circ 434:1–422
Tyler JC, Johnson GD, Nakamura I, Collette BB (1989) Morphology of Luvarus imperialis (Luvaridae), with a phylogenetic analysis of the Acanthuroidei (Pisces). Smithson Contrib Zool 485:1–78
Wiens JJ (1998) Does adding characters with missing data increase or decrease phylogenetic accuracy? Syst Biol 47:625–640
Wiens JJ (2003) Missing data, incomplete taxa, and phylogenetic accuracy. Syst Biol 52:528–538
Wiley EO (1981) Phylogenetics. The theory and practice of phylogenetic systematics. Wiley, New York
Wiley EO, Johnson GD, Dimmick WW (2000) The interrelationships of Acanthomorph fishes: a total evidence approach using molecular and morphological data. Biochem Syst Ecol 28:319–350
Winterbottom R (1974) The familial phylogeny of the Tetraodontiformes (Acanthopterygii: Pisces) as evidenced by their comparative myology. Smithson Contrib Zool 155:1–201
Winterbottom R (1993) Myological evidence for the phylogeny of the recent genera of surgeonfishes (Percomorpha, Acanthuridae), with comments on the Acanthuroidei. Copeia 1993:21–39
Wright F (1990) The ‘effective number of codons’ used in a gene. Gene 87:23–29
Yamanoue Y, Miya M, Matsuura K, Yagishita N, Mabuchi K, Sakai H, Katoh M, Nishida M (2007) Phylogenetic position of tetraodontiform fishes within the higher teleosts: Bayesian inferences based on 44 whole mitochondrial genome sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 45:89–101
Zehren SJ (1987) Osteology and evolutionary relationships of the boarfish genus Antigonia (Teleostei: Caproidae). Copeia 1987:564–592
Zwickl DJ (2006) Genetic algorithm approaches for the phylogenetic analysis of large biological sequence datasets under the maximum likelihood criterion. PhD dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin. http://www.bio.utexas.edu/faculty/antisense/garli/Garli.html
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the following people for providing specimens used in this study: H. Choat (James Cook University), K. Clements (University of Auckland), K. Cole (University of Hawaii), D. Greenfield (California Academy of Sciences), R. Langston (Windward Community College), K. Longenecker (Bishop Museum), and M. McGrouther and J. Paxton (Australian Museum). We are also indebted to G. Ortí and C. Li (University of Nebraska) for suggesting the genes ENC1, myh6, plagl2, and zic1 and for providing primers and training for those genes. Maximum likelihood analyses performed with the program GARLI would not have been possible without the generous assistance and enduring patience of M. Davis and J. Sukumaran (University of Kansas). We also thank M. Davis and two anonymous reviewers for suggestions and comments on the manuscript. This study was supported by the National Science Foundation (DEB-9317881) and the Graduate Research Fund, University of Kansas. All research methods used to collect data analyzed in this paper comply with the current laws of the United States of America.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Holcroft, N.I., Wiley, E.O. Acanthuroid relationships revisited: a new nuclear gene-based analysis that incorporates tetraodontiform representatives. Ichthyol Res 55, 274–283 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-007-0026-x
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-007-0026-x