Comparative plastome analysis of Arundinelleae (Poaceae, Panicoideae), with implications for phylogenetic relationships and plastome evolution.
Arundinelleae
Chloroplast genome
Panicoideae
Plastome phylogenomics
Journal
BMC genomics
ISSN: 1471-2164
Titre abrégé: BMC Genomics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100965258
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Oct 2024
30 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
30
05
2024
accepted:
07
10
2024
medline:
31
10
2024
pubmed:
31
10
2024
entrez:
31
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Arundinelleae is a small tribe within the Poaceae (grass family) possessing a widespread distribution that includes Asia, the Americas, and Africa. Several species of Arundinelleae are used as natural forage, feed, and raw materials for paper. The tribe is taxonomically cumbersome due to a paucity of clear diagnostic morphological characters. There has been scant genetic and genomic research conducted for this group, and as a result the phylogenetic relationships and species boundaries within Arundinelleae are poorly understood. We compared and analyzed 11 plastomes of Arundinelleae, of which seven plastomes were newly sequenced. The plastomes range from 139,629 base pairs (bp) (Garnotia tenella) to 140,943 bp (Arundinella barbinodis), with a standard four-part structure. The average GC content was 38.39%, but varied in different regions of the plastome. In all, 110 genes were annotated, comprising 76 protein-coding genes, 30 tRNA genes, and four rRNA genes. Furthermore, 539 simple sequence repeats, 519 long repeats, and 10 hyper-variable regions were identified from the 11 plastomes of Arundinelleae. A phylogenetic reconstruction of Panicoideae based on 98 plastomes demonstrated the monophyly of Arundinella and Garnotia, but the circumscription of Arundinelleae remains unresolved. Complete chloroplast genome sequences can improve phylogenetic resolution relative to single marker approaches, particularly within taxonomically challenging groups. All phylogenetic analyses strongly support the monophyly of Arundinella and Garnotia, respectively, but the monophylly of Arundinelleae was not well supported. The intergeneric phylogenetic relationships within Arundinelleae require clarification, indicating that more data is necessary to resolve generic boundaries and evaluate the monophyly of Arundinelleae. A comprehensive taxonomic revision for the tribe is necessary. In addition, the identified hyper-variable regions could function as molecular markers for clarifying phylogenetic relationships and potentially as barcoding markers for species identification in the future.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Arundinelleae is a small tribe within the Poaceae (grass family) possessing a widespread distribution that includes Asia, the Americas, and Africa. Several species of Arundinelleae are used as natural forage, feed, and raw materials for paper. The tribe is taxonomically cumbersome due to a paucity of clear diagnostic morphological characters. There has been scant genetic and genomic research conducted for this group, and as a result the phylogenetic relationships and species boundaries within Arundinelleae are poorly understood.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We compared and analyzed 11 plastomes of Arundinelleae, of which seven plastomes were newly sequenced. The plastomes range from 139,629 base pairs (bp) (Garnotia tenella) to 140,943 bp (Arundinella barbinodis), with a standard four-part structure. The average GC content was 38.39%, but varied in different regions of the plastome. In all, 110 genes were annotated, comprising 76 protein-coding genes, 30 tRNA genes, and four rRNA genes. Furthermore, 539 simple sequence repeats, 519 long repeats, and 10 hyper-variable regions were identified from the 11 plastomes of Arundinelleae. A phylogenetic reconstruction of Panicoideae based on 98 plastomes demonstrated the monophyly of Arundinella and Garnotia, but the circumscription of Arundinelleae remains unresolved.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Complete chloroplast genome sequences can improve phylogenetic resolution relative to single marker approaches, particularly within taxonomically challenging groups. All phylogenetic analyses strongly support the monophyly of Arundinella and Garnotia, respectively, but the monophylly of Arundinelleae was not well supported. The intergeneric phylogenetic relationships within Arundinelleae require clarification, indicating that more data is necessary to resolve generic boundaries and evaluate the monophyly of Arundinelleae. A comprehensive taxonomic revision for the tribe is necessary. In addition, the identified hyper-variable regions could function as molecular markers for clarifying phylogenetic relationships and potentially as barcoding markers for species identification in the future.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39478489
doi: 10.1186/s12864-024-10871-5
pii: 10.1186/s12864-024-10871-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1016Subventions
Organisme : National Natural Science Foundation of China
ID : 31110103911
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Soreng RJ, Peterson PM, Zuloaga FO, Romaschenko K, Clark LG, Teisher JK, et al. A worldwide phylogenetic classification of the Poaceae (Gramineae) III: an update. J Syst Evol. 2022;60(3):476–21.
doi: 10.1111/jse.12847
Soreng RJ, Peterson PM, Romaschenko K, Davidse G, Teisher JK, Clark LG, et al. A worldwide phylogenetic classification of the Poaceae (Gramineae) II: an update and a comparison of two 2015 classifications. J Syst Evol. 2017;55(4):259–90.
doi: 10.1111/jse.12262
Sun BS, Hu ZH. Tribe Arundinelleae Stapf. Flora Reipublicae Population Sinicae. Beijing: Science; 1990. pp. 144–69.
Stapf O. Gramineae. Flora Capensis. London: L. Reeve & Co., Ltd.; 1898. p. 314.
Janowski M, Mez C. Arundinelleae. Repertorium Specierum Novarum Regni Vegetabilis. Berlin: Selbstverlag des Herausgebers; 1921. pp. 84–6.
Janowsky M, Arundinellearum. Graminum Tribus Conspectus. Bot Arch. 1922;1:21–8.
Hubbard CE. The genera of the tribe Arundinelleae. Bull Miscellaneous Inform. 1936; 317–22.
Bor NL. Notes on Asiatic grasses XXIII: Jansenella Bor, a new genus of Indian grasses. Kew Bull. 1955; 93–9.
Conert HJ. Beitrage Zur Monographie Der Arundinelleae. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik. Pflanzengeschichte Und Pflanzengeographie. 1957;77(2/3):226–353.
Phipps JB. Studies in the Arundinelleae III: check-list and key to the genera. Kirkia. 1966;5:235–58.
Phipps JB. The genera of the Arundinelleae Stapf (Gramineae): a study in numerical systematics using morphological data. Canada: The University of Weatern Ontario. 1969.
Clayton WD. Studies in the Gramineae X: Arundinelleae. Kew Bull. 1967;21:119–24.
doi: 10.2307/4108447
ClaytonWD. Studies in the Gramineae XXVI: numerical taxonomy of the Arundinelleae. Kew Bull. 1971;26(44):111–23.
doi: 10.2307/4117336
ClaytonWD, Renvoize SA. Genera Graminum: grasses of the world. Kew Bull. 1986; Additional Series 13.
Kellogg EA, Watson L. Phylogenetic studies of a large data set. I. Bambusoideae, Andropogonodae, and Pooideae (Gramineae). Bot Rev. 1993;59(4):273–343.
doi: 10.1007/BF02857419
Barker NP, Linder HP, Harley EH. Sequences of the grass-specific insert in the chloroplast rpoC2 gene elucidate generic relationships of the Arundinoideae (Poaceae). Syst Bot. 1999;23(3):327–50.
doi: 10.2307/2419509
Spangler R, Zaitchik B, Russo E, Kellogg E. Andropogoneae evolution and generic limits in Sorghum (Poaceae) using ndhF sequences. Syst Bot. 1999;24(2):267–81.
doi: 10.2307/2419552
Grass phylogeny working group. Phylogeny and subfamilial classification of the grasses (Poaceae). Ann Mo Bot Gard. 2001;88:373–457.
doi: 10.2307/3298585
Sánchez-Ken JG, Clark LG. Phylogenetic relationships within the centothecoideae + panicoideae clade (Poaceae) based on ndhF and rpl16 intron sequences and structural data. Aliso. 2007;23(1):487–502.
doi: 10.5642/aliso.20072301.38
Bouchenak-Khelladi Y, Salamin N, Savolainen V, Forest F, van der Bank M, Chase MW, et al. Large multi-gene phylogenetic trees of the grasses (Poaceae): progress towards complete tribal and generic level sampling. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2008;47(2):488–505.
doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2008.01.035
pubmed: 18358746
Christin PA, Besnard G, Samaritani E, Duvall MR, Hodkinson TR, Savolainen V, et al. Oligocene CO2 decline promoted C4 photosynthesis in grasses. Curr Biol. 2008;18(1):37–43.
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.11.058
pubmed: 18160293
Morrone O, Aagesen L, Scataglini MA, Salariato DL, Denham SS, Chemisquy MA, et al. Phylogeny of the Paniceae (Poaceae: Panicoideae): integrating plastid DNA sequences and morphology into a new classification. Cladistics. 2012;28(4):333–56.
doi: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2011.00384.x
pubmed: 34836451
Teerawatananon A, Jacobs SWL, Hodkinson TR. Phylogenetics of Panicoideae (Poaceae) based on chloroplast and nuclear DNA sequences. Telopea. 2009;13(1–2):115–42.
Sánchez-Ken JG, Clark LG. Phylogeny and a new tribal classification of the Panicoideae s.l. (Poaceae) based on plastid and nuclear sequence data and structural data. Am J Bot. 2010;97(10):1732–48.
doi: 10.3732/ajb.1000024
pubmed: 21616806
Kellogg EA. In: Kellogg EA, editor. Flowering plants. Monocots: Poaceae. Volume 13. New York, USA: Springer; 2015.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-15332-2
Soreng RJ, Peterson PM, Romaschenko K, Davidse G, Zuloaga FO, Judziewicz EJ, et al. A worldwide phylogenetic classification of the Poaceae (Gramineae). J Syst Evol. 2015;53(2):117–37.
doi: 10.1111/jse.12150
Bianconi ME, Hackel J, Vorontsova MS, Alberti A, Arthan W, Burke SV, et al. Continued adaptation of C4 photosynthesis after an initial burst of changes in the Andropogoneae grasses. Syst Biol. 2020;69(3):445–61.
doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syz066
pubmed: 31589325
Barker NP, Linder HP, Harley EH. Polyphyly of Arundinoideae (Poaceae): evidence from rbcL sequence data. Syst Bot. 1995;20(4):423–35.
doi: 10.2307/2419802
Xiang CL, Dong HJ, Landrein S, Zhao F, Yu WB, Soltis DE, et al. Revisiting the phylogeny of Dipsacales: new insights from phylogenomic analyses of complete plastomic sequences. J Syst Evol. 2020;58(2):103–17.
doi: 10.1111/jse.12526
Fu CN, Li HT, Milne R, Zhang T, Ma PF, Yang J, et al. Comparative analyses of plastid genomes from fourteen Cornales species: inferences for phylogenetic relationships and genome evolution. BMC Genom. 2017;18(1):956.
doi: 10.1186/s12864-017-4319-9
Wang R, Liu K, Zhang XJ, Chen WL, Qu XJ, Fan SJ. Comparative plastomes and Phylogenetic Analysis of Cleistogenes and closely related Genera (Poaceae). Front Plant Sci. 2021;12:638597.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.638597
pubmed: 33841465
Yu JJ, Fu J, Fang YP, Xiang J, Dong HJ. Complete chloroplast genomes of Rubus species (Rosaceae) and comparative analysis within the genus. BMC Genom. 2022;23(1):32.
Young HA, Lanzatella CL, Sarath G, Tobias CM. Chloroplast Genome Variation in Upland and Lowland Switchgrass. PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23980.
Wu ZQ, Ge S. The phylogeny of the BEP clade in grasses revisited: Evidence from the whole-genome sequences of chloroplasts. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2012;62(1):573–8.
Arthan W, McKain MR, Traiperm P, Welker CAD, Teisher JK, Kellogg EA. Phylogenomics of Andropogoneae (Panicoideae: Poaceae) of Mainland Southeast Asia. Syst. Bot. 2017;42(3):418–31.
Liu K, Wang R, Guo XX, Zhang XJ, Qu XJ, Fan SJ. Comparative and Phylogenetic Analysis of Complete Chloroplast Genomes in Eragrostideae (Chloridoideae, Poaceae). Plants (Basel). 2021;10(1):109.
Wu ZN, Tian CY, Yang YT, Li YH, Liu Q, Li ZY, Jin K. Comparative and Phylogenetic Analysis of Complete Chloroplast Genomes in Leymus (Triticodae, Poaceae). Genes (Basel). 2022;13(8): 1425.
Burke SV, Wysocki WP, Zuloaga FO, Craine JM, Pires JC, Edger PP, et al. Evolutionary relationships in Panicoid grasses based on plastome phylogenomics (Panicoideae; Poaceae). BMC Plant Biol. 2016;16:140.
Genome. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ . Accessed 5 Aug 2024.
Guo XX, Qu XJ, Zhang XJ, Fan SJ. Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of complete plastomes among Aristidoideae species (Poaceae). Biology (Basel). 2022;11(1):63.
pubmed: 35053061
Palmer JD, Nugent JM, Herbon LA. Unusual structure of geranium chloroplast DNA: a triple-sized inverted repeat, extensive gene duplications, multiple inversions, and two repeat families. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1987;84(3):769–73.
doi: 10.1073/pnas.84.3.769
pubmed: 16593810
Aii J, Kishima Y, Mikami T, Adachi T. Expansion of the IR in the chloroplast genomes of buckwheat species is due to incorporation of an SSC sequence that could be mediated by an inversion. Curr. Genet. 1997;31(3):276–9.
Liu LX, Wang YW, He PZ, Li P, Fu CX. Chloroplast genome analyses and genomic resource development for epilithic sister genera Oresitrophe and Mukdenia (Saxifragaceae), using genome skimming data. BMC Genom. 2018;19(1):235.
He SL, Yang Y, Li ZW, Wang XJ, Guo YB, Wu HZ. Comparative analysis of four Zantedeschia chloroplast genomes: Expansion and contraction of the IR region, phylogenetic analyses and SSR genetic diversity assessment. PeerJ. 2020;8:e9132.
Maier R, Döry I, Igloi G, Kössel H. The ndhH genes of gramminean plastomes are linked with the junctions between small single copy and inverted repeat regions. Curr. Genet. 1990;18(3):245–50.
Davis JI, Soreng RJ. Migration of endpoints of two genes relative to boundaries between regions of the plastid genome in the grass family (Poaceae). Am J Bot. 2010;97(5):874–92.
Peng L, Yamamoto H, Shikanai T. Structure and biogenesis of the chloroplast NAD(P)H dehydrogenase complex. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2011;1807(8):945–53.
Wicke S, Schneeweiss GM, Depamphilis CW, Müller KF, Quandt D. The evolution of the plastid chromosome in land plants: gene content, gene order, gene function. Plant Mol Biol. 2011;76(3–5):273–97.
Piot A, Hackel J, Christin PA, Besnard G. One-third of the plastid genes evolved under positive selection in PACMAD grasses. Planta. 2018;247(1):255–66.
Liere K, Link G. RNA-binding activity of the matK protein encoded by the chloroplast trnk intron from mustard (Sinapis alba L.). Nucleic Acids Res. 1995;23(6):917–21.
Millen RS, Olmstead RG, Adams KL, Palmer JD, Lao NT, Heggie L, et al. Many parallel losses of infA from chloroplast DNA during angiosperm evolution with multiple independent transfers to the nucleus. Plant Cell. 2001;13(3):645–58.
Shoji S, Dambacher CM, Shajani Z, Williamson JR, Schultz PG. Systematic chromosomal deletion of bacterial ribosomal protein genes. J. Mol. Biol. 2011;413(4):751–61.
Tiller N. Bock R. The translational apparatus of plastids and its role in plant development. Mol. Plant. 2014;7(7):1105–20.
Krawczyk K, Myszczyński K, Nobis M, Sawicki J. Insights into adaptive evolution of plastomes in Stipa L. (Poaceae). BMC Plant Biol. 2022;22:525.
Hilu K, Liang H. The matK gene: sequence variation and application in plant systematics. Am J Bot. 1997;84(6):830–9.
Kalia RK, Rai MK, Kalia S, Singh R, Dhawan AK. Microsatellite markers: an overview of the recent progress in plants. Euphytica. 2011;177(3):309–34.
He SL, Wang YS, Volis S, Li DZ, Yi TS. Genetic diversity and population structure: implications for conservation of wild soybean (Glycine soja Sieb. et Zucc.) based on nuclear and chloroplast microsatellite variation. Int J Mol Sci. 2012; 13(10):12608–28.
Tanaka H, Hirakawa H, Muguerza M, Hashiguchi M, Tabata S, Akashi R, et al. The complete chloroplast genome sequence of Zoysia matrella (L.) Merr. Crop Sci. 2016;56(3):1206–12.
Somaratne Y, Guan DL, Abbood NN, Zhao L, Wang WQ, Xu SQ. Comparison of the complete Eragrostis pilosa chloroplast genome with its relatives in Eragrostideae (Chloridoideae; Poaceae). Plants (Basel). 2019;8(11):e485.
Tripathy K, Singh B, Misra G, Singh NK. Identification, distribution and comparative analysis of microsatellites in the chloroplast genome of Oryza species. Indian J. Genet. Plant Breed. 2019;79(3):536–44.
Arthan W, Baker WJ, Barrett MD, Barrett RL, Bennetzen J, Besnard G, et al. Nuclear phylogenomics of grasses (Poaceae) supports current classification and reveals repeated reticulation. BioRxiv. [Preprint] August 25, 2024.
Tateoka T. Notes on Some Grasses. VIII. On Leaf Structure of Arundinellaand Garnotia. Bot Gaz. 1958;120(2):101–9.
Brown WV. The Kranz syndrome and its subtypes in grass systematics. Mem Torrey Bot Club. 1977;23:1–97.
Ueno O. Occurrence of distinctive cells in leaves of C4 species in Arthraxonand Microstegium (Andropogoneae-Poaceae) and the structural and immunocytochemical characterization of these cells. Int J Plant Sci. 1995;156(3):270–89.
Hongo A, Abe H, Yabiku T, Ueno O. Occurrence of distinctive cells and effects of irradiance on vascular formation in leaves of shade-tolerant C4 grass Paspalum conjugatum. J Plant Res. 2023;136(5):691–704.
Rokas A, Kruger D, Carroll SB. Animal evolution and the molecular signature of radiations compressed in time. Science. 2005;310(5756):1933–8.
Whitfield JB, Lockhart PJ. Deciphering ancient rapid radiations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2007;22(5):258–65.
Huang W, Zhang L, Columbus JT, Hu Y, Zhao Y, Tang L, et al. A well-supported nuclear phylogeny of Poaceae and implications for the evolution of C4 photosynthesis. Mol Plant. 2022;15(4):755–77.
Gallaher TJ, Peterson PM, Soreng RJ, Zuloaga FO, Li D, Clark LG, et al. Grasses through space and time: An overview of the biogeographical and macroevolutionary history of Poaceae. J. Syst. Evol. 2022;60(3):522–69.
doi: 10.1111/jse.12857
Liu Q, Liu H, Wen J, Peterson PM. Infrageneric phylogeny and temporal divergence of Sorghum (Andropogoneae, Poaceae) based on low-copy nuclear and plastid sequences. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e104933.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104933
pubmed: 25122516
Bernhardt N, Brassac J, Kilian B, Blattner FR. Dated tribe-wide whole chloroplast genome phylogeny indicates recurrent hybridizations within Triticeae. BMC Evol Biol. 2017;17:141.
Dunning LT, Olofsson JK, Papadopulos AST, Hibdige SGS, Hidalgo O, Leitch IJ, et al. Hybridisation and chloroplast capture between distinct Themeda triandra lineages in Australia. Mol Ecol. 2022;31(22):5846–60.
Doyle J, Doyle J. Genomic plant DNA preparation from fresh tissue-CTAB method. Phytochem Bull. 1987;19(11):11–5.
Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. Trimmomatic: A flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(15):2114–20.
Jin JJ, Yu WB, Yang JB, Song Y, dePamphilis CW, Yi TS, et al. GetOrganelle: a fast and versatile toolkit for accurate de novo assembly of organelle genomes. Genome Biol. 2020;21(1):241.
Wick RR, Schultz MB, Zobel J, Holt KE. Bandage: interactive visualization of de novo genome assemblies. Bioinformatics. 2015;31(20):3350–2.
Qu XJ, Moore MJ, Li DZ, Yi TS. PGA: a software package for rapid, accurate, and flexible batch annotation of plastomes. Plant Methods. 2019;15(1):1–12.
doi: 10.1186/s13007-019-0435-7
Matthew K, Richard M, Amy W, Steven SH, Matthew C, Shane S, et al. Geneious basic: an integrated and extendable desktop software platform for the organization and analysis of sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2012;28(12):1647–9.
doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bts199
Tillich M, Lehwark P, Pellizzer T, Ulbricht-Jones ES, Fischer A, Bock R, et al. GeSeq-versatile and accurate annotation of organelle genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017; 45(W1):W6–11.
Lowe TM, Chan PP. tRNAscan-SE On-line: integrating search and context for analysis of transfer RNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(W1):W54–7.
Frazer KA, Pachter L, Poliakov A, Rubin EM, Dubchak I. VISTA: computational tools for comparative genomics. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004;32(Web Server issue):W273–9.
Darling ACE, Blattner FR, Perna NT. Mauve: multiple alignment of conserved genomic sequence with rearrangements. Genome Res. 2004;14(7):1394–403.
doi: 10.1101/gr.2289704
pubmed: 15231754
pmcid: 442156
Katoh K, Standley DM. MAFFT multiple sequence alignment software version 7: improvements in performance and usability. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30(4):772–80.
Rozas J, Ferrer-Mata A, Sanchez-DelBarrio JC, Guirao-Rico S, Librado P, Ramos-Onsins SE, et al. DnaSP 6: DNA sequence polymorphism analysis of large data sets. Mol Biol Evol. 2017;34(12):3299–302.
Zhang D, Gao F, Jakovlić I, Zou H, Zhang J, Li WX, et al. PhyloSuite: An integrated and scalable desktop platform for streamlined molecular sequence data management and evolutionary phylogenetics studies. Mol Ecol Resour. 2020; 20(1):348–55.
Beier S, Thiel T, Münch T, Scholz U, Mascher M. MISA-web: a web server for microsatellite prediction. Bioinformatics. 2017;33(16):2583–5.
Stefan K, Choudhuri J, Enno O, Schleiermacher C, Stoye J, Giegerich R. REPuter: the manifold applications of repeat analysis on a genomic scale. Nucleic Acids Res. 2001;29(22):4633–42.
Zhao F, Chen YP, Salmaki Y, Drew BT, Wilson TC, Scheen AC, et al. An updated tribal classification of Lamiaceae based on plastome phylogenomics. BMC Biol. 2021;19(1):2.
Olmstead RG, Sweere JA. Combining data in phylogenetic systematics: an empirical-approach using 3 molecular-data sets in the Solanaceae. Syst Biol. 1994;43(4):467–81.
Miller MA, Pfeiffer W, Schwartz T. Creating the CIPRES Science Gateway for inference of large phylogenetic trees. In: Gateway Computing Environments Workshop (GCE), New Orleans; 2010. p. 1–8.
Stamatakis A. RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(9):1312–3.
Ronquist F, Teslenko M, van der Mark P, Ayres DL, Darling A, Hohna S, et al. MrBayes 3.2: efficient bayesian phylogenetic inference and model choice across a large model space. Syst Biol. 2012;61(3):539–42.
doi: 10.1093/sysbio/sys029
pubmed: 22357727
Darriba D, Taboada GL, Doallo R, Posada D. jModelTest 2: more models, new heuristics and parallel computing. Nat Methods. 2012;9(8):772.
doi: 10.1038/nmeth.2109
pubmed: 22847109
Schwarz G. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann Stat. 1978;6(2):461–4.
doi: 10.1214/aos/1176344136
Rambaut A, Drummond AJ, Xie D, Baele G, Suchard MA. Posterior summarization in bayesian phylogenetics using Tracer 1.7. Syst Biol. 2018; 67(5):901–4.
Stöver BC, Müller KF. TreeGraph 2: combining and visualizing evidence from different phylogenetic analyses. BMC Bioinform. 2010;11:7.