A detailed phylogenetic analysis of tetraspanins from 10 fully sequenced metazoan genomes and several fungal and protist genomes gives insight into their evolutionary origins and organization. Our analysis suggests that the superfamily can be divided into four large families. These four families-the CD family, CD63 family, uroplakin family, and RDS family-are further classified as consisting of several ortholog groups. The clustering of several ortholog groups together, such as the CD9/Tsp2/CD81 cluster, suggests functional relatedness of those ortholog groups. The fact that our studies are based on whole genome analysis enabled us to estimate not only the phylogenetic relationships among the tetraspanins, but also the first appearance in the tree of life of certain tetraspanin ortholog groups. Taken together, our data suggest that the tetraspanins are derived from a single (or a few) ancestral gene(s) through sequence divergence, rather than convergence, and that the majority of tetraspanins found in the human genome are vertebrate (21 instances), tetrapod (4 instances), or mammalian (6 instances) inventions.

Three species of flying fox (Pteropus hypomelanus, P. vampyrus, and P. lylei) from Malaysia and Vietnam were screened for apicomplexan parasites by thin blood smears and polymerase chain reaction. Only 1 of 16 bats sampled from 3 localities in southeast Asia was found to be infected (P. hypomelanus from Pulau Pangkor, Malaysia). We observed micro- and macrogametocytes, with morphology consistent with Hepatocystis sp. parasites, using light microscopy. Phylogenetic analysis of the cytochrome b gene showed that the parasite from P. hypomelanus groups with 2 published sequences from Hepatocystis spp., including one from Cynopterus brachyotis, another fruit bat in the Pteropodidae.

The generalized/primitive nature of the hominoid dentition and often fragmentary nature of fossils, coupled with enthusiastic optimism for making revolutionary finds, has wreaked havoc with recognition of early human ancestors and reconstruction of fossil hominoid phylogeny. As such, the history of paleoanthropology is one of repeated misidentification of fossil ancestors and of occasional fraud. Although this history has led many workers to lose confidence in morphology based systematics (MBS), past and present misidentifications are actually due to a disregard of systematic methodology. Systematics depends on the continuity of life and gains its objectivity largely from the order alpha taxonomy imposes on morphologic discontinuities in closely related taxa (i.e., species and genera). Transformation of characters fixed in species into character complexes, as manifested in taxa nested at different levels of relationship, form the foundation for higher-level taxonomy and for phylogeny. Because in most cases, hominoid fossils are unable to provide the data needed to resolve alpha taxonomy, classification and phylogeny of fossil taxa must be guided by analogies to living taxa. Hominid and hominoid fossil taxonomy and phylogeny, however, has been based largely on preevolutionary notions and on misinterpretations of the polarity of assumed diagnostic characters. More often than not, fossils lack resolution for the taxonomic level or rank they are assigned to and taxa are erected without appropriate analogies to living forms. As such, phylogenies based on these classifications are unlikely to be correct. More in-depth anatomical studies that are in accordance with systematic methodology are likely to hold the key to correctly classifying fossils and unraveling hominoid and hominid phylogeny. Anat Rec (New Anat) 269:50 -66, 2002.