Phylogenomics of Lophotrochozoa with Consideration of Systematic Error


Meeting Abstract

18-4  Thursday, Jan. 5 11:00 – 11:15  Phylogenomics of Lophotrochozoa with Consideration of Systematic Error KOCOT, KM*; STRUCK, TH; MERKEL, J; WAITS, DS; TODT, C; BRANNOCK, PM; WEESE, DA; CANNON, JT; MOROZ, LL; LIEB, B; HALANYCH, KM; Univ. of Alabama; Univ. of Oslo; Johannes Gutenberg Univ.; Auburn Univ.; Univ. Museum of Bergen; Auburn Univ.; Georgia College and State University; Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet Stockholm; Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience; Johannes Gutenberg University, Institute of Zoology; Auburn Univ. kmkocot@ua.edu http://www.kocotlab.com

Phylogenomic studies have improved understanding of deep metazoan phylogeny and show promise for resolving incongruences among analyses based on limited numbers of loci. One region of the animal tree that has been especially difficult to resolve, even with phylogenomic approaches, is relationships within Lophotrochozoa. Here, we investigated why lophotrochozoan phylogeny has been such a difficult question to answer by identifying and reducing sources of systematic error. We supplemented existing data with 32 new transcriptomes spanning the diversity of Lophotrochozoa and constructed a new set of Lophotrochozoa-specific core orthologs. In order to reduce possible sources of systematic error, we calculated branch-length heterogeneity, evolutionary rate, percent missing data, compositional bias, and saturation for each of 638 orthologous group (OG) analyzed increasingly stricter subsets of only the best OGs for these five variables. Principal component analysis of the values for each factor examined for each OG revealed that compositional heterogeneity and average patristic distance contributed most to the variance observed along the first principal component while branch-length heterogeneity and, to a lesser extent, saturation contributed most to the variance observed along the second. Missing data did not strongly contribute to either. Although our analyses do not unambiguously resolve lophotrochozoan phylogeny, we advance the field by reducing the list of viable hypotheses. Moreover, our systematic approach for dissection of phylogenomic data can be applied to explore sources of incongruence and poor support in any phylogenomic dataset.

the Society for
Integrative &
Comparative
Biology