title: Inferring ancient divergences requires genes with strong phylogenetic signals.
abstract: To tackle incongruence, the topological conflict between different gene trees, phylogenomic studies couple concatenation with practices such as rogue taxon removal or the use of slowly evolving genes. Phylogenomic analysis of 1,070 orthologues from 23 yeast genomes identified 1,070 distinct gene trees, which were all incongruent with the phylogeny inferred from concatenation. Incongruence severity increased for shorter internodes located deeper in the phylogeny. Notably, whereas most practices had little or negative impact on the yeast phylogeny, the use of genes or internodes with high average internode support significantly improved the robustness of inference. We obtained similar results in analyses of vertebrate and metazoan phylogenomic data sets. These results question the exclusive reliance on concatenation and associated practices, and argue that selecting genes with strong phylogenetic signals and demonstrating the absence of significant incongruence are essential for accurately reconstructing ancient divergences.
authors: Department of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37235, USA.
authors: Leonidas
authors: L
authors: Salichos
authors: Antonis
authors: A
authors: Rokas
mesh_terms: D002175:Candida / Q000235:genetics; D030541:Databases, Genetic; D019143:Evolution, Molecular; D005800:Genes, Fungal; D016681:Genome, Fungal / Q000235:genetics; D008957:Models, Genetic; D010802:Phylogeny; D012440:Saccharomyces / Q000235:genetics; D016415:Sequence Alignment; D013997:Time Factors
references: Nature. 2006 Nov 2;444(7115):85-8
references: 17051155
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jan 26;107(4):1476-81
references: 20080632
references: Nature. 2006 Feb 23;439(7079):965-8
references: 16495997
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2006 Feb;23(2):254-67
references: 16221896
references: G3 (Bethesda). 2011 Jun;1(1):11-25
references: 22384314
references: PLoS Genet. 2012;8(4):e1002660
references: 22536161
references: Bioinformatics. 2003 Aug 12;19(12):1572-4
references: 12912839
references: FEMS Yeast Res. 2012 Nov;12(7):859-63
references: 22776361
references: Bioinformatics. 2006 Nov 1;22(21):2688-90
references: 16928733
references: Mol Biol Evol. 1994 May;11(3):459-68
references: 8015439
references: Nature. 2006 Mar 16;440(7082):341-5
references: 16541074
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2010 Feb;27(2):441-51
references: 19864469
references: Nature. 2003 Oct 23;425(6960):798-804
references: 14574403
references: Syst Biol. 2007 Aug;56(4):564-77
references: 17654362
references: Syst Biol. 2012 Oct;61(5):835-49
references: 22389443
references: Nature. 2008 Apr 10;452(7188):745-9
references: 18322464
references: Bioinformatics. 2004 Jun 12;20(9):1464-5
references: 14962934
references: Genome Res. 2005 Oct;15(10):1456-61
references: 16169922
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jun 1;107(22):10136-41
references: 20479238
references: Science. 2005 Dec 23;310(5756):1933-8
references: 16373569
references: BMC Evol Biol. 2006 Nov 22;6:99
references: 17121679
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Sep 28;101(39):14144-9
references: 15381776
references: PLoS Biol. 2006 Nov;4(11):e352
references: 17105342
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 Jul;40(Web Server issue):W573-9
references: 22675075
references: PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e23408
references: 21829732
references: Mol Biol Evol. 1997 Jul;14(7):733-40
references: 9214746
references: Nat Genet. 2000 May;25(1):25-9
references: 10802651
references: PLoS Biol. 2009 Jan 27;7(1):e20
references: 19175291
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Sep 22;106(38):16333-8
references: 19805302
references: PLoS Biol. 2011 Mar;9(3):e1000602
references: 21423652
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2009 Jun;24(6):332-40
references: 19307040
references: Syst Biol. 2009 Oct;58(5):468-77
references: 20525601
references: Bioinformatics. 2005 May 1;21(9):2104-5
references: 15647292
references: Nature. 2010 Feb 25;463(7284):1079-83
references: 20147900
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2004 Jul;21(7):1459-61
references: 15084681
references: Nature. 2011 Oct 26;480(7377):364-7
references: 22031330
references: Math Biosci. 2004 Feb;187(2):189-203
references: 14739084
references: Nature. 2011 Sep 04;477(7365):452-6
references: 21892190
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2004 Jul;21(7):1455-8
references: 15084674
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2001 May;18(5):691-9
references: 11319253
references: Curr Biol. 2009 Apr 28;19(8):706-12
references: 19345102
references: Yeast. 2007 Nov;24(11):929-42
references: 17621376
references: Syst Biol. 1997 Dec;46(4):654-73
references: 11975337
references: Trends Genet. 2006 Apr;22(4):225-31
references: 16490279
references: BMC Genomics. 2010 May 10;11:290
references: 20459735
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2005 May;22(5):1337-44
references: 15746014
references: PLoS One. 2011;6(8):e22783
references: 21850235
references: Eukaryot Cell. 2005 Jun;4(6):1102-15
references: 15947202
references: Nat Rev Genet. 2010 Jul;11(7):512-24
references: 20559329
references: Syst Biol. 2008 Dec;57(6):920-38
references: 19085333
references: PLoS One. 2011 Apr 13;6(4):e18755
references: 21533202
references: Brief Bioinform. 2008 Jul;9(4):286-98
references: 18372315
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2012 Feb;29(2):457-72
references: 21873298
references: Mol Biol Evol. 2007 Apr;24(4):1080-90
references: 17299026