Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) mitogenomics: A cautionary tale of defining sub-species from mitochondrial sequence monophyly.
Balaenoptera physalus
Fin whale
Mitochondrial genome
North Atlantic Ocean
Subspecies
Journal
Molecular phylogenetics and evolution
ISSN: 1095-9513
Titre abrégé: Mol Phylogenet Evol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9304400
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
received:
30
10
2018
revised:
30
01
2019
accepted:
04
02
2019
pubmed:
17
2
2019
medline:
20
6
2019
entrez:
17
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The advent of massive parallel sequencing technologies has resulted in an increase of studies based upon complete mitochondrial genome DNA sequences that revisit the taxonomic status within and among species. Spatially distinct monophyly in such mitogenomic genealogies, i.e., the sharing of a recent common ancestor among con-specific samples collected in the same region has been viewed as evidence for subspecies. Several recent studies in cetaceans have employed this criterion to suggest subsequent intraspecific taxonomic revisions. We reason that employing intra-specific, spatially distinct monophyly at non-recombining, clonally inherited genomes is an unsatisfactory criterion for defining subspecies based upon theoretical (genetic drift) and practical (sampling effort) arguments. This point was illustrated by a re-analysis of a global mitogenomic assessment of fin whales, Balaenoptera physalus spp., published by Archer et al. (2013), which proposed to further subdivide the Northern Hemisphere fin whale subspecies, B. p. physalus. The proposed revision was based upon the detection of spatially distinct monophyly among North Atlantic and North Pacific fin whales in a genealogy based upon complete mitochondrial genome DNA sequences. The extended analysis conducted in this study (1676 mitochondrial control region, 162 complete mitochondrial genome DNA sequences and 20 microsatellite loci genotyped in 380 samples) revealed that the apparent monophyly among North Atlantic fin whales reported by Archer et al. (2013) to be due to low sample sizes. In conclusion, defining sub-species from monophyly (i.e., the absence of para- or polyphyly) can lead to erroneous conclusions due to relatively "trivial" aspects, such as sampling. Basic population genetic processes (i.e., genetic drift and migration) also affect the time to the most recent common ancestor and hence the probability that individuals in a sample are monophyletic.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30771513
pii: S1055-7903(18)30684-5
doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2019.02.003
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
DNA, Mitochondrial
0
Banques de données
Dryad
['10.5061/dryad.qt528n0']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
86-97Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.