Ontology of evolution and methodology of taxonomy

Rasnitsyn, Alexandr P.

doi:10.1134/s003103010612001x

Cited by 36 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Huber, personal communication). The oldest fossils belong to the family Xyelidae and date back to the middle Triassic (about 235 Ma) [2], but recent age estimates based on molecular data suggest a much earlier origin in the late Carboniferous (about 311 Ma) [3,4]. Hymenoptera assume a wide range of different life styles, from phytophagous to parasitic and predatory [1,5], occupy a wide range of ecological niches, and have undergone several transitions to eusociality [6,7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apocritans were further divided into the Parasitica (parasitoid wasps) and Aculeata (stinging wasps), with the latter believed to be nested within the former. Rasnitsyn, in a series of seminal papers examining the morphology of both recent and fossil taxa [2,13] (and references there-in), proposed a very influential phylogenetic hypothesis. One of the most innovative aspects of this hypothesis was the division of the Apocrita into four clades, the Evaniomorpha, Proctotrupomorpha, Ichneumonoidea (‘Ichneumonomorpha’) and Aculeata (‘Vespomorpha’), only the last two of which had been recognized previously.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Hymenopteran Tree of Life: Evidence from Protein-Coding Genes and Objectively Aligned Ribosomal Data

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous molecular analyses of higher hymenopteran relationships have largely been based on subjectively aligned ribosomal sequences (18S and 28S). Here, we reanalyze the 18S and 28S data (unaligned about 4.4 kb) using an objective and a semi-objective alignment approach, based on MAFFT and BAli-Phy, respectively. Furthermore, we present the first analyses of a substantial protein-coding data set (4.6 kb from one mitochondrial and four nuclear genes). Our results indicate that previous studies may have suffered from inflated support values due to subjective alignment of the ribosomal sequences, but apparently not from significant biases. The protein data provide independent confirmation of several earlier results, including the monophyly of non-xyelid hymenopterans, Pamphilioidea + Unicalcarida, Unicalcarida, Vespina, Apocrita, Proctotrupomorpha and core Proctotrupomorpha. The protein data confirm that Aculeata are nested within a paraphyletic Evaniomorpha, but cast doubt on the monophyly of Evanioidea. Combining the available morphological, ribosomal and protein-coding data, we examine the total-evidence signal as well as congruence and conflict among the three data sources. Despite an emerging consensus on many higher-level hymenopteran relationships, several problems remain unresolved or contentious, including rooting of the hymenopteran tree, relationships of the woodwasps, placement of Stephanoidea and Ceraphronoidea, and the sister group of Aculeata.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Hymenopteran Tree of Life: Evidence from Protein-Coding Genes and Objectively Aligned Ribosomal Data

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It can require only a brief period to generate a new microbe strain, whereas years are necessary to pro duce a new strain of cattle. That is reverse in the real evo lu tion where the highest rate is characteristic of whales and elephants, and lowermost of microorganisms, so that the halfmodern fauna (with half of constituent species being living and another half extinct) is 200 000 years in elephants and other big animals, and 15 000 000 years in algal diatoms (see Rasnitsyn 1987Rasnitsyn , 2006, for details and references).…”

Section: Epigenetic Theory Of Evolution In Briefmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the present, I can indicate at least one agent responsible in part for the paradoxical speed distribution across the living world, the very body size which is known to correlate at an extent with the com ple xity of organisms. Particularly indicative is the ob ser va tion that big and small mammals differ markedly in their pace of evolution (two or more times different; Rasnitsyn 1987Rasnitsyn , 2006) in spite of a comparable level of complexity. The reason is apparent at least in one respect: when envi ron ments change, a mouse still can locate a refuge while an elephant faces a choice either to go extinct or to break the adaptive tradeoff.…”

Section: Epigenetic Theory Of Evolution In Briefmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epigenetic theory of evolution in brief

Rasnit︠s︡yn¹,

Moscow²,

Sw³

2015

Bot Pac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetics predicts features of evolutionary processes such as qualitative corres pon dence between (i) genotypic and phenotypic changes in an individual, (ii) ge no typic and phenotypic population diversity and (iii) speed of changes in po pu lation gene pool on the one hand and tempo of evolution of the other. These predictions contradict obser va tions, that are resolvable based on epige ne tic rather than genetic approaches. Epi genetic theory deals with the relatively stable ontogenetic mechanisms and pro cesses (creods) interconnected in an en tire, holistic, evolutionary balanced sys tem, a shift of which beyond evolutionary elabora ted limits is by no means a trivial task (principle of the adaptive tradeoff). Genetic mechanisms play an impor tant role as switches and tuners which regu late interactions of creodes: they represent more labile evolutionary phenomena compared to the epigenetic system. Patterns of evolution are considered as spe cific consequences of epigenetic mechanisms. Гене ти ка предсказывает свойства эволюционного процесса (качественное соот вет ст вие) а) генотипических и фенотипических изменений организма, б) ге но типического и фенотипического разнообразия популяций и в) ско рос ти изменения генофонда популяции (скорости эволюции), которые не подтверждаются наблюдениями. Эти противоречия гораздо лучше объясня ют ся в рамках эпигенетической теории эволюции, где основным содержани ем эволюции предстает система относительно устойчивых онтогенетических механизмов и процессов (креодов), сопряженных в целостную, эволюцион но сбалансированную систему, изменение которой представляет нетриви аль ную задачу (принцип адаптивного компромисса), тогда как собственно генетические механизмы играют роль переключателей и модификаторов взаимодействия креодов и эволюционно более лабильны. Рассмотрены осо бенности эволюционного процесса как специфические результаты действия эпигенетических факторов. Epigenetic Theory of Evolution in BriefIt is customary to think that natural changes in the hereditary machinery (mutations, recombinations) cause par ti cular changes in an organism affecting its survival. This generates selection that modifies both composition and other features of a population. Accumulation of these mo di fications appears as evolution. This simple and clear scheme opens a space for testable predictions. Indeed, assu ming that the genotypical (cryptic) and phenotypical (open to observation and to selective agents) modifications are essentially interconnected means that these should be cor re lated in space and time both at individual and at higher le vels, including the process of evolution. Mutations and their phenotypical manifestations should be coordinated qua li tatively (the environmentally caused nonheritable pheno ty pical variations being set aside). This should cause at least a rough correlation between the genetical and phenetical di versity of populations. Equally, a rough correlation of tempos of genotypical and phenotypical evolution should be expected. And finally, speed of e...

show abstract

“…The family Xyelydidae is putatively the most ancient group of Pamphilioidea, itself comprising four lineages-Pamphiliidae, Megalodontesidae, Xyelydidae, and Praesiricidae (Rasnitsyn, 1983(Rasnitsyn, , 2006, although the monophyly and validity of the latter two families is questionable (Grimaldi and Engel, 2005). Hitherto six genera and 17 species have been assigned to the Xyelydidae (Rasnitsyn, 1963(Rasnitsyn, , 1968(Rasnitsyn, , 1983(Rasnitsyn, , 1988Rasnitsyn et al, 2006), all from the Jurassic (vide table 1 in Rasnitsyn et al, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%