Biology subjects

Donoghue, P. C. J.

Publications and source records attributed to Donoghue, P. C. J..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2021

Integrated phylogenomics and fossil data illuminate the evolution of beetles

With over 380,000 described species and possibly several million more yet unnamed, beetles represent the most biodiverse animal order. Recent phylogenomic studies have arrived at considerably incongruent topologies and widely varying estimates of divergence dates for major beetle clades. Here we use a dataset of 68 single-copy nuclear protein coding genes sampling 129 out of the 194 recognized extant families as well as the first comprehensive set of fully-justified fossil calibrations to recover a refined timescale of beetle evolution. Using phylogenetic methods that counter the effects of compositional and rate heterogeneity we recover a topology congruent with morphological studies, which we use, combined with other recent phylogenomic studies, to propose several formal changes in the classification of Coleoptera: Scirtiformia and Scirtoidea sensu nov., Clambiformia ser. nov. and Clamboidea sensu nov., Rhinorhipiformia ser. nov., Byrrhoidea sensu nov., Dryopoidea stat. res., Nosodendriformia ser. nov., and Staphyliniformia sensu nov., alongside changes below the superfamily level. The heterogeneous former superfamily Cucujoidea is divided into three monophyletic groups: Erotyloidea stat. nov., Nitiduloidea stat. nov., and Cucujoidea sensu nov. Our divergence time analysis recovered an evolutionary timescale congruent with the fossil record: a late Carboniferous origin of Coleoptera, a late Paleozoic origin of all modern beetle suborders, and a Triassic-Jurassic origin of most extant families. While fundamental divergences within beetle phylogeny did not coincide with the hypothesis of a Cretaceous Terrestrial Revolution, many polyphagan superfamilies exhibited increases in richness with Cretaceous flowering plants.

zoology↗

bioRxiv2021

Does time matter in phylogeny? A perspective from the fossil record

The role of time (i.e. taxa ages) in phylogeny has been a source of intense debate within palaeontology for decades and has not yet been resolved fully. The fossilised birth-death range process is a model that explicitly accounts for information about species through time. It presents a fresh opportunity to examine the role of stratigraphic data in phylogenetic inference of fossil taxa. Here, we apply this model in a Bayesian framework to an exemplar dataset of well-dated conodonts from the Late Devonian. We compare the results to those obtained using traditional unconstrained tree inference. We show that the combined analysis of morphology and stratigraphic data under the FBD range process reduces overall phylogenetic uncertainty, compared to unconstrained tree inference. We find that previous phylogenetic hypotheses based on parsimony and stratophenetics are closer to trees generated under the FBD range process. However, the results also highlight that irrespective of the inclusion of age data, a large amount of topological uncertainty will remain. Bayesian inference provides the most intuitive way to represent the uncertainty inherent in fossil datasets and new flexible models increase opportunities to refine hypotheses in palaeobiology.

paleontology↗

bioRxiv2021

Unbiased clade age estimation using a Bayesian Brownian Bridge

In a recent paper1 we presented a new model, the Bayesian Brownian Bridge (BBB), to infer clade age based on fossil evidence and modern diversity. We benchmarked the method with extensive simulations, including a wide range of diversification histories and sampling heterogeneities that go well beyond the necessarily simplistic model assumptions. Applying BBB to 198 angiosperm families, we found that their fossil record is compatible with clade origins earlier than most contemporary palaeobotanical interpretations. In particular, we estimated with high probability that crown-angiosperms originated before the Cretaceous (> 145 Ma). Budd and colleagues2 critique our study, arguing that the BBB model is biased towards older estimates when fossil data are scarce or absent, that our underlying fossil dataset is unsound, that our clade age estimates are therefore biased by early diverging lineages that are underrepresented in the fossil record, and that pooling of fossil data for analysis at higher taxonomic ranks overcomes these biases. Here, we explore their points and perform new simulations to show that their critique has no merit.

paleontology↗