title: Cophenetic correlation analysis as a strategy to select phylogenetically informative proteins: an example from the fungal kingdom.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The construction of robust and well resolved phylogenetic trees is important for our understanding of many, if not all biological processes, including speciation and origin of higher taxa, genome evolution, metabolic diversification, multicellularity, origin of life styles, pathogenicity and so on. Many older phylogenies were not well supported due to insufficient phylogenetic signal present in the single or few genes used in phylogenetic reconstructions. Importantly, single gene phylogenies were not always found to be congruent. The phylogenetic signal may, therefore, be increased by enlarging the number of genes included in phylogenetic studies. Unfortunately, concatenation of many genes does not take into consideration the evolutionary history of each individual gene. Here, we describe an approach to select informative phylogenetic proteins to be used in the Tree of Life (TOL) and barcoding projects by comparing the cophenetic correlation coefficients (CCC) among individual protein distance matrices of proteins, using the fungi as an example. The method demonstrated that the quality and number of concatenated proteins is important for a reliable estimation of TOL. Approximately 40-45 concatenated proteins seem needed to resolve fungal TOL.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In total 4852 orthologous proteins (KOGs) were assigned among 33 fungal genomes from the Asco- and Basidiomycota and 70 of these represented single copy proteins. The individual protein distance matrices based on 531 concatenated proteins that has been used for phylogeny reconstruction before 14 were compared one with another in order to select those with the highest CCC, which then was used as a reference. This reference distance matrix was compared with those of the 70 single copy proteins selected and their CCC values were calculated. Sixty four KOGs showed a CCC above 0.50 and these were further considered for their phylogenetic potential. Proteins belonging to the cellular processes and signaling KOG category seem more informative than those belonging to the other three categories: information storage and processing; metabolism; and the poorly characterized category. After concatenation of 40 proteins the topology of the phylogenetic tree remained stable, but after concatenation of 60 or more proteins the bootstrap support values of some branches decreased, most likely due to the inclusion of proteins with lowers CCC values. The selection of protein sequences to be used in various TOL projects remains a critical and important process. The method described in this paper will contribute to a more objective selection of phylogenetically informative protein sequences.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study provides candidate protein sequences to be considered as phylogenetic markers in different branches of fungal TOL. The selection procedure described here will be useful to select informative protein sequences to resolve branches of TOL that contain few or no species with completely sequenced genomes. The robust phylogenetic trees resulting from this method may contribute to our understanding of organismal diversification processes. The method proposed can be extended easily to other branches of TOL.
authors: Yeast Research, CBS-Fungal Biodiversity Centre, Uppsalalaan 8, 3584 CT Utrecht, The Netherlands. e.kuramae@nioo.knaw.nl
authors: Eiko E
authors: EE
authors: Kuramae
authors: Vincent
authors: V
authors: Robert
authors: Carlos
authors: C
authors: Echavarri-Erasun
authors: Teun
authors: T
authors: Boekhout
mesh_terms: D030562:Databases, Protein; D019143:Evolution, Molecular; D005656:Fungal Proteins / Q000235:genetics*; D005658:Fungi / Q000145:classification / Q000235:genetics*; D016681:Genome, Fungal; D010802:Phylogeny
chemical_list: D005656:Fungal Proteins
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2000 Apr;17(4):540-52
references: 10742046
references: Nature. 1997 Jun 12;387(6634):708-13
references: 9192896
references: Genomics. 2006 Oct;88(4):387-93
references: 16904286
references: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2006 Mar 29;361(1467):403-12
references: 16524829
references: BMC Evol Biol. 2001 Oct 20;1:8
references: 11734060
references: FEMS Yeast Res. 2003 Jun;3(4):417-32
references: 12748053
references: Genome Res. 2004 Jun;14(6):1043-51
references: 15173111
references: BMC Bioinformatics. 2003 Sep 11;4:41
references: 12969510
references: Comput Appl Biosci. 1992 Jun;8(3):275-82
references: 1633570
references: Nature. 2003 Oct 23;425(6960):798-804
references: 14574403
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34(6):1816-35
references: 16600899
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 1997 Dec 15;25(24):4876-82
references: 9396791
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 2000 Sep 15;28(18):3442-4
references: 10982861
references: Bioinformatics. 2007 Apr 1;23(7):815-24
references: 17237036
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Sep 28;101(39):14144-9
references: 15381776
references: Syst Biol. 2003 Oct;52(5):696-704
references: 14530136
references: Fungal Genet Biol. 2006 Oct;43(10):715-25
references: 16781175
references: BMC Evol Biol. 2006;6:99
references: 17121679
references: Mycol Res. 2003 Aug;107(Pt 8):901-16
references: 14531615
references: FEMS Yeast Res. 2006 Dec;6(8):1213-20
references: 17156018
references: J Eukaryot Microbiol. 2004 Jan-Feb;51(1):30-7
references: 15068263
references: Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2006;44:337-66
references: 16704358
references: Am J Bot. 2004 Oct;91(10):1446-80
references: 21652303
references: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2005 Mar;34(3):512-24
references: 15683926
references: Nature. 2006 Oct 19;443(7113):818-22
references: 17051209
references: Genome Res. 2004 Jan;14(1):29-36
references: 14707168