Target capture data resolve recalcitrant relationships in the coffee family (Rubioideae, Rubiaceae).

Angiosperms353 Rubiaceae Rubioideae incomplete lineage sorting non-coding DNA nuclear phylogeny phylogenomics target capture

Journal

Frontiers in plant science
ISSN: 1664-462X
Titre abrégé: Front Plant Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568200

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 12 06 2022
accepted: 03 08 2022
entrez: 26 9 2022
pubmed: 27 9 2022
medline: 27 9 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Subfamily Rubioideae is the largest of the main lineages in the coffee family (Rubiaceae), with over 8,000 species and 29 tribes. Phylogenetic relationships among tribes and other major clades within this group of plants are still only partly resolved despite considerable efforts. While previous studies have mainly utilized data from the organellar genomes and nuclear ribosomal DNA, we here use a large number of low-copy nuclear genes obtained via a target capture approach to infer phylogenetic relationships within Rubioideae. We included 101 Rubioideae species representing all but two (the monogeneric tribes Foonchewieae and Aitchinsonieae) of the currently recognized tribes, and all but one non-monogeneric tribe were represented by more than one genus. Using data from the 353 genes targeted with the universal Angiosperms353 probe set we investigated the impact of data type, analytical approach, and potential paralogs on phylogenetic reconstruction. We inferred a robust phylogenetic hypothesis of Rubioideae with the vast majority (or all) nodes being highly supported across all analyses and datasets and few incongruences between the inferred topologies. The results were similar to those of previous studies but novel relationships were also identified. We found that supercontigs [coding sequence (CDS) + non-coding sequence] clearly outperformed CDS data in levels of support and gene tree congruence. The full datasets (353 genes) outperformed the datasets with potentially paralogous genes removed (186 genes) in levels of support but increased gene tree incongruence slightly. The pattern of gene tree conflict at short internal branches were often consistent with high levels of incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) due to rapid speciation in the group. While concatenation- and coalescence-based trees mainly agreed, the observed phylogenetic discordance between the two approaches may be best explained by their differences in accounting for ILS. The use of target capture data greatly improved our confidence and understanding of the Rubioideae phylogeny, highlighted by the increased support for previously uncertain relationships and the increased possibility to explore sources of underlying phylogenetic discordance.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36160958
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.967456
pmc: PMC9493367
doi:

Banques de données

Dryad
['10.5061/dryad.d7wm37q44']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

967456

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Thureborn, Razafimandimbison, Wikström and Rydin.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Am J Bot. 2021 Jul;108(7):1143-1165
pubmed: 34254285
Syst Biol. 2022 Feb 10;71(2):367-381
pubmed: 34245291
BMC Bioinformatics. 2005 Feb 15;6:31
pubmed: 15713233
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2020 Feb;143:106685
pubmed: 31734453
PLoS Genet. 2006 May;2(5):e68
pubmed: 16733550
Bioinformatics. 2009 Jul 15;25(14):1754-60
pubmed: 19451168
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2020 Nov;152:106769
pubmed: 32081762
Nature. 2019 Oct;574(7780):679-685
pubmed: 31645766
Am J Bot. 2021 Jul;108(7):1252-1269
pubmed: 34287829
Mol Biol Evol. 1988 Sep;5(5):568-83
pubmed: 3193878
Appl Plant Sci. 2016 Jul 12;4(7):
pubmed: 27437175
Syst Biol. 2022 Feb 10;71(2):301-319
pubmed: 33983440
Appl Plant Sci. 2014 Aug 29;2(9):
pubmed: 25225629
Mol Biol Evol. 2013 Apr;30(4):772-80
pubmed: 23329690
Am J Bot. 2021 Jul;108(7):1087-1111
pubmed: 34297852
Syst Biol. 2009 Aug;58(4):452-60
pubmed: 20525599
Evolution. 2009 Jan;63(1):1-19
pubmed: 19146594
Front Plant Sci. 2015 Sep 17;6:710
pubmed: 26442024
Syst Biol. 2017 May 01;66(3):320-337
pubmed: 27637567
PLoS One. 2018 Dec 5;13(12):e0207615
pubmed: 30517138
Syst Biol. 2018 Mar 01;67(2):285-303
pubmed: 29029338
Bioinformatics. 2015 Jun 15;31(12):i44-52
pubmed: 26072508
BMC Evol Biol. 2010 Jul 13;10:210
pubmed: 20626897
Cladistics. 1987 Mar;3(1):35-51
pubmed: 34949045
Syst Biol. 2018 Jan 01;67(1):158-169
pubmed: 28973673
Bioinformatics. 2019 Feb 1;35(3):526-528
pubmed: 30016406
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2008 Jul;48(1):74-83
pubmed: 18492611
Appl Plant Sci. 2018 Apr 02;6(3):e1038
pubmed: 29732268
Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2010 Jun;2010(6):pdb.prot5448
pubmed: 20516186
Syst Biol. 2007 Feb;56(1):17-24
pubmed: 17366134
Theor Popul Biol. 2014 Dec 26;100C:56-62
pubmed: 25545843
BMC Evol Biol. 2015 Oct 12;15:221
pubmed: 26459325
Am J Bot. 2018 Mar;105(3):291-301
pubmed: 29603143
Genome Biol Evol. 2017 Aug 1;9(8):1998-2012
pubmed: 28830116
Front Plant Sci. 2020 Jan 09;10:1655
pubmed: 31998342
Genome Biol. 2008;9(3):R49
pubmed: 18315873
Syst Biol. 2022 Feb 10;71(2):410-425
pubmed: 34146111
Trends Ecol Evol. 2009 Jun;24(6):332-40
pubmed: 19307040
Syst Biol. 2016 May;65(3):366-80
pubmed: 25164915
Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 Jan;40(1):e3
pubmed: 22021376
Genes (Basel). 2018 Feb 28;9(3):
pubmed: 29495636
Nucleic Acids Res. 2006 Jul 1;34(Web Server issue):W609-12
pubmed: 16845082
Am J Bot. 2017 Sep;104(9):1407-1423
pubmed: 29885236
BMC Genomics. 2015;16 Suppl 10:S1
pubmed: 26450506
Syst Biol. 2012 Jul;61(4):691-701
pubmed: 22215721
Syst Biol. 2020 Sep 24;:
pubmed: 32970819
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2016 Feb;95:58-66
pubmed: 26639100
PLoS One. 2015 May 21;10(5):e0126690
pubmed: 25996595
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2014 Nov;80:231-66
pubmed: 25152276
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jun 16;106(24):9749-54
pubmed: 19470489
PeerJ. 2016 Jan 28;4:e1660
pubmed: 26835189
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2021 Jul;160:107123
pubmed: 33610647
Syst Biol. 2019 Jul 1;68(4):594-606
pubmed: 30535394
Bioinformatics. 2012 Jun 15;28(12):1647-9
pubmed: 22543367
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2014 Jan;70:182-94
pubmed: 24055546
Trends Ecol Evol. 2007 Jan;22(1):34-41
pubmed: 17046100
Syst Biol. 2016 May;65(3):465-77
pubmed: 26738927
Am J Bot. 2017 Mar;104(3):419-438
pubmed: 28274947
Mol Biol Evol. 2016 Jul;33(7):1654-68
pubmed: 27189547
Bioinformatics. 2013 Sep 15;29(18):2277-84
pubmed: 23842808
Mol Biol Evol. 2020 May 1;37(5):1530-1534
pubmed: 32011700
J Comput Biol. 2012 May;19(5):455-77
pubmed: 22506599
Appl Plant Sci. 2018 Apr 02;6(3):e1036
pubmed: 29732266
Bioinformatics. 2010 Jul 1;26(13):1669-70
pubmed: 20472542
Mol Biol Evol. 2018 Feb 1;35(2):518-522
pubmed: 29077904
Syst Biol. 2016 Nov;65(6):997-1008
pubmed: 27121966
Appl Plant Sci. 2019 Oct 25;7(10):e11295
pubmed: 31667023
Mol Biol Evol. 2020 Feb 1;37(2):599-603
pubmed: 31633786
Syst Biol. 2021 Apr 15;70(3):491-507
pubmed: 33169797
Appl Plant Sci. 2021 Jun 14;9(7):
pubmed: 34336399
New Phytol. 2018 Jun;218(4):1668-1684
pubmed: 29604235
Am J Bot. 2017 Oct;104(10):1522-1532
pubmed: 29885222
Syst Biol. 2022 Feb 10;71(2):476-489
pubmed: 34191012
Syst Zool. 1970 Jun;19(2):99-113
pubmed: 5449325
Am J Bot. 2021 Jul;108(7):1289-1306
pubmed: 34173225
Appl Plant Sci. 2020 Oct 25;8(10):e11394
pubmed: 33163293
Appl Plant Sci. 2018 May 17;6(5):e01148
pubmed: 30131890
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2021 Apr;157:107067
pubmed: 33412273
Am J Bot. 2014 Jul 20;101(7):1102-1126
pubmed: 25049266
Syst Biol. 2017 Jul 01;66(4):517-530
pubmed: 28003531
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2016 Jan;94(Pt A):447-62
pubmed: 26518740
Trends Ecol Evol. 2007 May;22(5):258-65
pubmed: 17300853
Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2008 Jul;48(1):207-23
pubmed: 18499483
BMC Bioinformatics. 2018 May 8;19(Suppl 6):153
pubmed: 29745866
BMC Genomics. 2016 Nov 11;17(Suppl 10):785
pubmed: 28185556
Mol Biol Evol. 2014 Nov;31(11):3081-92
pubmed: 25158799
Sci Rep. 2017 Oct 17;7(1):13411
pubmed: 29042575
Appl Plant Sci. 2020 Apr 14;8(4):e11337
pubmed: 32351798

Auteurs

Olle Thureborn (O)

Department of Ecology, Environment and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.

Sylvain G Razafimandimbison (SG)

Department of Botany, Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm, Sweden.

Niklas Wikström (N)

Department of Ecology, Environment and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Bergius Foundation, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden.

Catarina Rydin (C)

Department of Ecology, Environment and Plant Sciences, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden.
Bergius Foundation, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, Sweden.

Classifications MeSH