Back to Search Start Over

MicroRNAs resolve an apparent conflict between annelid systematics and their fossil record.

Authors :
Sperling EA
Vinther J
Moy VN
Wheeler BM
Sémon M
Briggs DE
Peterson KJ
Source :
Proceedings. Biological sciences [Proc Biol Sci] 2009 Dec 22; Vol. 276 (1677), pp. 4315-22. Date of Electronic Publication: 2009 Sep 15.
Publication Year :
2009

Abstract

Both the monophyly and inter-relationships of the major annelid groups have remained uncertain, despite intensive research on both morphology and molecular sequences. Morphological cladistic analyses indicate that Annelida is monophyletic and consists of two monophyletic groups, the clitellates and polychaetes, whereas molecular phylogenetic analyses suggest that polychaetes are paraphyletic and that sipunculans are crown-group annelids. Both the monophyly of polychaetes and the placement of sipunculans within annelids are in conflict with the annelid fossil record--the former because Cambrian stem taxa are similar to modern polychaetes in possessing biramous parapodia, suggesting that clitellates are derived from polychaetes; the latter because although fossil sipunculans are known from the Early Cambrian, crown-group annelids do not appear until the latest Cambrian. Here we apply a different data source, the presence versus absence of specific microRNAs--genes that encode approximately 22 nucleotide non-coding regulatory RNAs--to the problem of annelid phylogenetics. We show that annelids are monophyletic with respect to sipunculans, and polychaetes are paraphyletic with respect to the clitellate Lumbricus, conclusions that are consistent with the fossil record. Further, sipunculans resolve as the sister group of the annelids, rooting the annelid tree, and revealing the polarity of the morphological change within this diverse lineage of animals.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1471-2954
Volume :
276
Issue :
1677
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Proceedings. Biological sciences
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
19755470
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2009.1340