Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Acanthuroid relationships revisited: a new nuclear gene-based analysis that incorporates tetraodontiform representatives

  • Full Paper
  • Published:
Ichthyological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We revisit acanthuroid relationships based on an increasing body of evidence that tetraodontiforms, lophiiforms, and caproids share a close relationship with the acanthuroid fishes. Phylogenetic relationships among the acanthuroids, tetraodontiforms, lophiiforms, and caproids were reconstructed based on data from portions of five nuclear genes (RAG1, zic1, myh6, plagl2, and ENC1). The data were partitioned according to gene and codon position and analyzed using Bayesian, maximum parsimony, and maximum likelihood criteria. All methods of analysis corroborated a restricted Acanthuroidei comprising Acanthuridae, Zanclidae, and Luvaridae. They failed to corroborate the inclusion of Siganidae, Scatophagidae and Ephippidae. The primary reason for this is that two groups previously hypothesized to be basal within Acanthuroidei (scatophagids and siganids) grouped within a clade comprising Antigonia, Lophiiformes, and Tetraodontiformes, while the other presumed basal relatives (Drepane + Ephippidae) were recovered within a larger clade that also includes Monodactylidae, Emmelichthyidae, Sparoidea, Haemulidae, and Pomacanthidae. While the molecular data presented here appear to contradict the results of previous morphology-based studies, we suggest that such a conclusion is unjustified without first surveying putative morphological synapomorphies for the acanthuroids in a broader range of taxa.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bellwood DR, van Herwerden L, Konow N (2004) Evolution and biogeography of marine angelfishes (Pisces: Pomacanthidae). Mol Phylogenet Evol 33:140–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen W-J, Bonillo C, Lecointre G (2003) Repeatability of clades as a criterion of reliability: a case study for molecular phylogeny of Acanthomorpha (Teleostei) with larger number of taxa. Mol Phylogenet Evol 26:262–288

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clements KD, Gray RD, Choat JH (2003) Rapid evolutionary divergences in reef fishes of the family Acanthuridae (Perciformes: Teleostei). Mol Phylogenet Evol 26:190–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cope ED (1871) Observations on the systematic relations of the fishes. Am Nat 5:579–593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dareste C (1872) On the natural affinities of the Balistidae. Ann Mag Nat Hist Ser 4(10):68–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Dettai A, Lecointre G (2005) Further support for the clades obtained by multiple molecular phylogenies in the acanthomorph bush. C R Biol 328:674–689

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosline WA (1968) The suborders of perciform fishes. Proc US Nat Mus 124:1–78

  • Gosline WA (1971) Functional morphology and classification of teleostean fishes. University Press Hawaii, Honolulu

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood PH, Rosen DE, Weitzman SH, Myers GS (1966) Phyletic studies of teleostean fishes, with a provisional classification of living forms. Bull Am Mus Nat Hist 131:339–456

    Google Scholar 

  • Groth JG, Barrowclough GF (1999) Basal divergences in birds and the phylogenetic utility of the nuclear RAG-1 gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 12:115–123

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hillis DM, Bull JJ (1993) An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst Biol 42:182–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holcroft NI (2004) A molecular test of alternative hypotheses of tetraodontiform (Acanthomorpha: Tetraodontiformes) sister group relationships using data from the RAG1 gene. Mol Phylogenet Evol 32:749–760

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson GD, Patterson C (1993) Percomorph phylogeny: a survey of acanthomorph characters and a new proposal. Bull Mar Sci 52:554–626

    Google Scholar 

  • Källersjö M, Albert VA, Farris JS (1999) Homoplasy increases phylogenetic structure. Cladistics 15:91–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Le HLV, Lecointre G, Perasso R (1993) A 28S rRNA-based phylogeny of the gnathostomes: first steps in the analysis of conflict and congruence with morphologically based cladograms. Mol Phylogenet Evol 2:31–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Li C, Ortí G, Zhang G, Lu G (2007) A practical approach to phylogenomics: the phylogeny of ray-finned fish (Actinopterygii) as a case study. BMC Evol Biol 7:44–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miya M, Takeshima H, Endo H, Ishiguro NB, Inoue JG, Mukai T, Satoh TP, Yamaguchi M, Kawaguchi A, Mabuchi K, Shirai SM, Nishida M (2003) Major patterns of higher teleostean phylogenies: a new perspective based on 100 complete mitochondrial DNA sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol 26:121–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miya M, Satoh TP, Nishida M (2005) The phylogenetic position of toadfishes (order Batrachoidiformes) in the higher ray-finned fish as inferred from partitioned Bayesian analysis of 102 whole mitochondrial genome sequences. Biol J Linn Soc 85:289–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson JS (2006) Fishes of the world, 4th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nylander JAA (2004) MrModeltest 2.0. Distributed by the author, Uppsala

    Google Scholar 

  • Peden J (2005) CodonW 1.4.2. Distributed by the author, Nottingham

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP (2003) MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics 19:1572–1574

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen DE (1984) Zeiformes as primitive plectognath fishes. Am Mus Novit 2782:1–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Saiki RK (1990) Amplification of genomic DNA. In: Innis MA, Gelfand DH, Sninsky JJ, White TJ (eds) PCR protocols: a guide to methods and applications. Academic Press, New York, pp 13–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Swofford DL (2002) PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and Other Methods). Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamura T, Nei M (1993) Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA data. Mol Biol Evol 10:512–526

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tang KL, Berendzen PB, Wiley EO, Johnson GD, Winterbottom R, Morrissey JF (1999) The phylogenetic relationships of the suborder Acanthuroidei (Teleostei: Perciformes) based on molecular and morphological evidence. Mol Phylogenet Evol 11:415–425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler JC (1980) Osteology, phylogeny, and higher classification of the fishes of the order Plectognathi (Tetraodontiformes). NOAA Tech Rept NMFS Circ 434:1–422

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler JC, Johnson GD, Nakamura I, Collette BB (1989) Morphology of Luvarus imperialis (Luvaridae), with a phylogenetic analysis of the Acanthuroidei (Pisces). Smithson Contrib Zool 485:1–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JJ (1998) Does adding characters with missing data increase or decrease phylogenetic accuracy? Syst Biol 47:625–640

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JJ (2003) Missing data, incomplete taxa, and phylogenetic accuracy. Syst Biol 52:528–538

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley EO (1981) Phylogenetics. The theory and practice of phylogenetic systematics. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley EO, Johnson GD, Dimmick WW (2000) The interrelationships of Acanthomorph fishes: a total evidence approach using molecular and morphological data. Biochem Syst Ecol 28:319–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Winterbottom R (1974) The familial phylogeny of the Tetraodontiformes (Acanthopterygii: Pisces) as evidenced by their comparative myology. Smithson Contrib Zool 155:1–201

    Google Scholar 

  • Winterbottom R (1993) Myological evidence for the phylogeny of the recent genera of surgeonfishes (Percomorpha, Acanthuridae), with comments on the Acanthuroidei. Copeia 1993:21–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright F (1990) The ‘effective number of codons’ used in a gene. Gene 87:23–29

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yamanoue Y, Miya M, Matsuura K, Yagishita N, Mabuchi K, Sakai H, Katoh M, Nishida M (2007) Phylogenetic position of tetraodontiform fishes within the higher teleosts: Bayesian inferences based on 44 whole mitochondrial genome sequences. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 45:89–101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zehren SJ (1987) Osteology and evolutionary relationships of the boarfish genus Antigonia (Teleostei: Caproidae). Copeia 1987:564–592

  • Zwickl DJ (2006) Genetic algorithm approaches for the phylogenetic analysis of large biological sequence datasets under the maximum likelihood criterion. PhD dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin. http://www.bio.utexas.edu/faculty/antisense/garli/Garli.html

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the following people for providing specimens used in this study: H. Choat (James Cook University), K. Clements (University of Auckland), K. Cole (University of Hawaii), D. Greenfield (California Academy of Sciences), R. Langston (Windward Community College), K. Longenecker (Bishop Museum), and M. McGrouther and J. Paxton (Australian Museum). We are also indebted to G. Ortí and C. Li (University of Nebraska) for suggesting the genes ENC1, myh6, plagl2, and zic1 and for providing primers and training for those genes. Maximum likelihood analyses performed with the program GARLI would not have been possible without the generous assistance and enduring patience of M. Davis and J. Sukumaran (University of Kansas). We also thank M. Davis and two anonymous reviewers for suggestions and comments on the manuscript. This study was supported by the National Science Foundation (DEB-9317881) and the Graduate Research Fund, University of Kansas. All research methods used to collect data analyzed in this paper comply with the current laws of the United States of America.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Science Department, Johnson County Community College, Overland Park, KS, 66210-1299, USA

    Nancy I. Holcroft

  2. Division of Ichthyology, Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, 66045-7593, USA

    Nancy I. Holcroft & E. O. Wiley

  3. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, 66045-7534, USA

    E. O. Wiley

Authors
  1. Nancy I. Holcroft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. O. Wiley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy I. Holcroft.

About this article

Cite this article

Holcroft, N.I., Wiley, E.O. Acanthuroid relationships revisited: a new nuclear gene-based analysis that incorporates tetraodontiform representatives. Ichthyol Res 55, 274–283 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-007-0026-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10228-007-0026-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation