Multilocus phylogeny of the New-World mud turtles (Kinosternidae) supports the traditional classification of the group

A Review of the Fossil Record of Turtles of the CladePan-Kinosternoidea

“…Phylogenetic placement of K. rincon does not affiliate this taxon with any particular extant kinosternine, but rather outside a large clade consisting of the K. scorpioides and K. subrubrum groups, and nested between this clade and stem and crown members of the K. flavescens group (Bourque, in press). However, given that the overall topology of this analysis does not conform closely with recent molecular analyses (e.g., Spinks et al 2014), this result should be viewed with caution for the moment.…”

“…Iverson (1979) much later synonymized K. arizonense with the extant taxon K. f. stejnegeri because he noted that they broadly overlap in morphology and both occur in Arizona. Although Iverson (1979) classified arizonense as a subspecies of K. flavescens, most studies now regard it as a full species, as it appears to be genetically distinct from K. flavescens (e.g., Spinks et al 2014). We nevertheless tentatively accept the recent conclusion of McCord (2016) that the Piazanian material is distinct from the extant K. stejnegeri and restrict K. arizonense to the Pliocene.…”

“…Although these analyses generally confirm the monophyly of Kinosternidae and Kinosterninae, some fail to produce a monophyletic Kinosternon or Sternotherus (e.g., Rogers 1972;Seidel et al 1986;Iverson 1991;Iverson et al 2013). However, it appears that better sampling and more refined tree-finding techniques retrieve the traditional arrangement (e.g., Iverson 1998;Spinks et al 2014).…”

“…The most important comprehensive studies utilizing molecular data include Rogers (1972), Seidel et al (1986), Iverson (1991Iverson ( , 1998, Iverson et al (2013) and Spinks et al (2014). Although these analyses generally confirm the monophyly of Kinosternidae and Kinosterninae, some fail to produce a monophyletic Kinosternon or Sternotherus (e.g., Rogers 1972;Seidel et al 1986;Iverson 1991;Iverson et al 2013).…”

Phylogenetic Uncertainty and Taxonomic Re-revisions: An Example from the Australian Short-necked Turtles (Testudines: Chelidae)

“…As one recent example, Iverson et al (2013) generated phylogenies for the mud and musk turtles (family Kinosternidae) based on three mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and three nuclear DNA (nuDNA) loci, recovered the longrecognized turtle genus Kinosternon as paraphyletic with respect to Sternotherus, and reassigned six species of Kinosternon to the new genus Cryptochelys. However, in a follow up analysis, Spinks et al (2014) generated phylogenies for the Kinosternidae based on 14 nuclear loci and recovered Kinosternon as monophyletic with respect to Sternotherus with strong support, but Cryptochelys as nonmonophyletic with respect to the more restricted Kinosternon. In this case, the tree topology of Iverson et al (2013) was driven by mitochondrial sequence variation, and not subsequently well supported by more extensive nuclear data.…”