Biology subjects

Kapli, P.

Publications and source records attributed to Kapli, P..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2021

SPART, a versatile and standardized data exchange format for species partition information

A wide range of data types can be used to delimit species and various computer-based tools dedicated to this task are now available. Although these formalized approaches have significantly contributed to increase the objectivity of SD under different assumptions, they are not routinely used by alpha-taxonomists. One obvious shortcoming is the lack of interoperability among the various independently developed SD programs. Given the frequent incongruences between species partitions inferred by different SD approaches, researchers applying these methods often seek to compare these alternative species partitions to evaluate the robustness of the species boundaries. This procedure is excessively time consuming at present, and the lack of a standard format for species partitions is a major obstacle. Here we propose a standardized format, SPART, to enable compatibility between different SD tools exporting or importing partitions. This format reports the partitions and describes, for each of them, the assignment of individuals to the "inferred species". The syntax also allows to optionally report support values, as well as original trees and the full command lines used in the respective SD analyses. Two variants of this format are proposed, overall using the same terminology but presenting the data either optimized for human readability (matricial SPART) or in a format in which each partition forms a separate block (SPART.XML). ABGD, DELINEATE, GMYC, PTP and TR2 have already been adapted to output SPART files and a new version of LIMES has been developed to import, export, merge and split them.

bioinformatics↗

bioRxiv2020

Systematic errors in orthology inference: a bug or a feature for evolutionary analyses?

Introductory paragraphThe availability of complete sets of genes from many organisms makes it possible to identify genes unique to (or lost from) certain clades. This information is used to reconstruct phylogenetic trees; to identify genes involved in the evolution of clade specific novelties; and for phylostratigraphy - identifying ages of genes in a given species. These investigations rely on accurately predicted orthologs. Here we use simulation to produce sets of orthologs which experience no gains or losses. We show that errors in identifying orthologs increase with higher rates of evolution. We use the predicted sets of orthologs, with errors, to reconstruct phylogenetic trees; to count gains and losses; and for phylostratigraphy. Our simulated data, containing information only from errors in orthology prediction, closely recapitulate findings from empirical data. We suggest published downstream analyses must be informed to a large extent by errors in orthology prediction which mimic expected patterns of gene evolution.

evolutionary biology↗

bioRxiv2020

Lack of support for Deuterostomia prompts reinterpretation of the first Bilateria.

The bilaterally symmetric animals (Bilateria) are considered to comprise two monophyletic groups, Protostomia and Deuterostomia. Protostomia contains the Ecdysozoa and the Lophotrochozoa; Deuterostomia contains the Chordata and the Xenambulacraria (Hemichordata, Echinodermata and Xenacoelomorpha). Their names refer to a supposed distinct origin of the mouth (stoma) in the two clades, but these groups have been differentiated by other embryological characters including embryonic cleavage patterns and different ways of forming their mesoderm and coeloms. Deuterostome monophyly is not consistently supported by recent studies. Here we compare support for Protostomia and Deuterostomia using five recently published, phylogenomic datasets. Protostomia is always strongly supported, especially by longer and higher quality genes. Support for Deuterostomia is always equivocal and barely higher than support for paraphyletic alternatives. Conditions that can cause tree reconstruction errors - inadequate models, short internal branch, faster evolving genes, and unequal branch lengths - correlate with statistical support for monophyletic deuterostomes. Simulation experiments show that support for Deuterostomia could be explained by systematic error. A survey of molecular characters supposedly diagnostic of deuterostomes shows many are not valid synapomorphies. The branch between bilaterian and deuterostome common ancestors, if real, is very short. This finding fits with growing evidence suggesting the common ancestor of all Bilateria had many deuterostome characteristics. This finding has important implications for our understanding of early animal evolution and for the interpretation of some enigmatic Cambrian fossils such as vetulicolians and banffiids.

evolutionary biology↗