2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2009.03.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Molecular phylogeny of parabasalids with emphasis on the order Cristamonadida and its complex morphological evolution

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

6
50
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
6
50
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The two sequences from Stephanonympha nelumbium from Cryptotermes domesticus, its type host, group together with only a few polymorphisms. However, the other two species of this genus, from Neotermes koshuensis and Cryptotermes cavifrons, branch separately in our analyses and in previous analyses (Gerbod et al, 2002;Noël et al, 2007;Noda et al, 2009;Cepicka et al, 2010). This separation is not supported, so it remains possible that with deeper taxon sampling, the genus Stephanonympha may yet resolve itself as monophyletic (Lecointre et al, 1993;Heath et al, 2008), although there is no indication of this from current data.…”
Section: Phylogeny Of the Family Calonymphidaesupporting
confidence: 54%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The two sequences from Stephanonympha nelumbium from Cryptotermes domesticus, its type host, group together with only a few polymorphisms. However, the other two species of this genus, from Neotermes koshuensis and Cryptotermes cavifrons, branch separately in our analyses and in previous analyses (Gerbod et al, 2002;Noël et al, 2007;Noda et al, 2009;Cepicka et al, 2010). This separation is not supported, so it remains possible that with deeper taxon sampling, the genus Stephanonympha may yet resolve itself as monophyletic (Lecointre et al, 1993;Heath et al, 2008), although there is no indication of this from current data.…”
Section: Phylogeny Of the Family Calonymphidaesupporting
confidence: 54%
“…3). Previously published SSU and multigene phylogenies agree that this group is a part of the order Cristamonadida, along with the devescovinids, lophomonads and members of the genus Coronympha, and branches sister to a clade of members of the genera Koruga and Deltotrichonympha from the deepest-branching termite, Mastotermes darwiniensis (Gerbod et al, 2002;Noël et al, 2007;Noda et al, 2009;Cepicka et al, 2010). While the monophyly of the cristamonads in general and calonymphids specifically are both well established, relationships among and within calonymphid genera are less certain and in some cases the monophyly of genera is untested or questionable.…”
Section: Phylogeny Of the Family Calonymphidaementioning
confidence: 88%
“…Because of a high level of sequence divergence of the SSU rRNA gene across parabasalid lineages, a lack of resolution and possible tree-construction artifacts have occurred, even though a large number of taxa have been investigated [26], [39], [43], [46]. To overcome this drawback, multiple protein-encoding genes such as glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), enolase, and tubulins have been examined [51][57].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among these indicators, GAPDH sequences that contain a greater phylogenetic signal have given well-resolved trees largely congruent with the SSU rRNA gene phylogeny. Consequently, the GAPDH sequences have been used gradually in phylogenetic reconstructions, and the data of many important taxa have accumulated to cover a wide range of parabasalid diversity [46], [47].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Phylogenetic relationships among the parabasalids were first proposed on the basis of morphological differences mostly linked to the structure and development of the cytoskeleton (Honigberg 1963;Brugerolle 1976). More recently, nuclear small subunit (SSU) rRNA gene sequences comparison was extensively used in parabasalid reconstructions (for recent references, see Gerbod et al 2002;Keeling 2002;Hampl et al 2004Hampl et al , 2006Hampl et al , 2007Ohkuma et al 2005;Carpenter and Keeling 2007;Dufernez et al 2007;Noël et al 2007;Noda et al 2009). The SSU rRNA analyses were globally incongruent with the morphology-based classification of this group (Honigberg 1963;Brugerolle 1976) and many authors pointed out the need to revise parabasalid systematics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%