Evaluating hypotheses on the origin and evolution of the New Zealand alpine cicadas (Maoricicada) using multiple-comparison tests of tree topology.

The statistical testing of alternative phylogenetic trees is central to evaluating competing evolutionary hypotheses. Fleming proposed that the New Zealand cicada species Maoricicada iolanthe is the sister species to the major radiation of both low-altitude and montane Maoricicada species. However, using 1,520 bp of mitochondrial DNA sequence data from the cytochrome oxidase subunit I, tRNA aspartic acid, and the ATPase subunit 6 and 8 genes, we inferred that both M. iolanthe and another low-altitude species, Maoricicada campbelli, are nested within the montane Maoricicada radiation. Therefore, we examined the stability of the inferred phylogenetic placement of these two species using the newly developed Shimodaira-Hasegawa test (SH test) implemented in a maximum-likelihood framework. The SH test has two advantages over the more commonly used Kishino-Hasegawa (KH) and Templeton tests. First, the SH test simultaneously compares multiple topologies and corrects the corresponding P: values to accommodate the multiplicity of testing. Second, the SH test is correct when applied to a posteriori hypotheses, unlike the KH test, because it readjusts the expectation of the null hypothesis (that two trees are not different) accordingly. The comparison of P: values estimated under the assumptions of both the KH test and the SH test clearly demonstrate that the KH test has the potential to be misleading when the issue of comparing of a posteriori hypotheses is ignored and when multiple comparisons are not taken into account. The SH test, in combination with a variety of character-weighting schemes applied to our data, reveals a surprising amount of ambiguity in the phylogenetic placement of M. iolanthe and M. campbelli.

[1]  W. Li,et al.  Maximum likelihood estimation of the heterogeneity of substitution rate among nucleotide sites. , 1995, Molecular biology and evolution.

[2]  C. Fleming,et al.  New Zealand cicadas of the genus Maoricicada (Homoptera: Tibicinidae) , 1978 .

[3]  C. Cunningham,et al.  Support for a monophyletic lemuriformes: overcoming incongruence between data partitions. , 1998, Molecular biology and evolution.

[4]  D. Hillis,et al.  BEST‐FIT MAXIMUM‐LIKELIHOOD MODELS FOR PHYLOGENETIC INFERENCE: EMPIRICAL TESTS WITH KNOWN PHYLOGENIES , 1998, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[5]  M. P. Cummings,et al.  PAUP* Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods) Version 4 , 2000 .

[6]  V. Markgraf,et al.  Flora and Fauna of Alpine Australasia: Ages and Origins , 1987 .

[7]  Michael D. Hendy,et al.  A Framework for the Quantitative Study of Evolutionary Trees , 1989 .

[8]  J. P. Duffels,et al.  Historical biogeography of the cicadas of Wallacea, new Guinea and the West Pacific: a geotectonic explanation , 1996 .

[9]  Hidetoshi Shimodaira,et al.  Multiple Comparisons of Log-Likelihoods with Applications to Phylogenetic Inference , 1999, Molecular Biology and Evolution.

[10]  P J Waddell,et al.  Using novel phylogenetic methods to evaluate mammalian mtDNA, including amino acid-invariant sites-LogDet plus site stripping, to detect internal conflicts in the data, with special reference to the positions of hedgehog, armadillo, and elephant. , 1999, Systematic biology.

[11]  E. L. Cabot,et al.  Simultaneous editing of multiple nucleic acid and protein sequences with ESEE , 1989, Comput. Appl. Biosci..

[12]  Kathy S. Williams,et al.  The Ecology, Behavior, and Evolution of Periodical Cicadas , 1995 .

[13]  J. Felsenstein Cases in which Parsimony or Compatibility Methods will be Positively Misleading , 1978 .

[14]  H. Kishino,et al.  Comparing the Likelihood Functions of Phylogenetic Trees , 2000 .

[15]  C. Cunningham Is congruence between data partitions a reliable predictor of phylogenetic accuracy? Empirically testing an iterative procedure for choosing among phylogenetic methods. , 1997, Systematic biology.

[16]  C. Chamberlain,et al.  Reconstructing the paleotopography of mountain belts from the isotopic composition of authigenic minerals , 2000 .

[17]  D. Tarling The geological history of New Zealand and its life , 1981 .

[18]  J. Felsenstein CONFIDENCE LIMITS ON PHYLOGENIES: AN APPROACH USING THE BOOTSTRAP , 1985, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[19]  J. Braun,et al.  Thermochronological analysis of the dynamics of the Southern Alps, New Zealand , 2000 .

[20]  M. Steel,et al.  General time-reversible distances with unequal rates across sites: mixing gamma and inverse Gaussian distributions with invariant sites. , 1997, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[21]  Yosiaki Itǒ,et al.  Why a cicada, Mogannia minuta Matsumura, became a pest of sugarcane: an hypothesis based on the theory of ‘escape’ , 1981 .

[22]  Kenneth M. Halanych,et al.  Multiple Substitutions Affect the Phylogenetic Utility of Cytochrome b and 12S rDNA Data: Examining a Rapid Radiation in Leporid (Lagomorpha) Evolution , 1999, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[23]  G. Hoelzer INFERRING PHYLOGENIES FROM mtDNA VARIATION: MITOCHONDRIAL‐GENE TREES VERSUS NUCLEAR‐GENE TREES REVISITED , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[24]  M. Nei,et al.  A new method of inference of ancestral nucleotide and amino acid sequences. , 1995, Genetics.

[25]  C. Bult,et al.  TESTING SIGNIFICANCE OF INCONGRUENCE , 1994 .

[26]  M. McGlone Plant biogeography and the late Cenozoic history of New Zealand , 1985 .

[27]  W. Fitch Toward Defining the Course of Evolution: Minimum Change for a Specific Tree Topology , 1971 .

[28]  T. Jukes CHAPTER 24 – Evolution of Protein Molecules , 1969 .

[29]  W. Moore MITOCHONDRIAL‐GENE TREES VERSUS NUCLEAR‐GENE TREES, A REPLY TO HOELZER , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[30]  W. Fitch,et al.  Phylogeny determination using dynamically weighted parsimony method. , 1990, Methods in enzymology.

[31]  P. Raven Evolution of subalpine and alpine plant groups in New Zealand , 1973 .

[32]  A. R. Templeton,et al.  PHYLOGENETIC INFERENCE FROM RESTRICTION ENDONUCLEASE CLEAVAGE SITE MAPS WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE EVOLUTION OF HUMANS AND THE APES , 1983, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[33]  G. Wallis,et al.  Phylogeographical pattern correlates with Pliocene mountain building in the alpine scree weta (Orthoptera, Anostostomatidae) , 2000, Molecular ecology.

[34]  B. Rannala,et al.  Phylogenetic methods come of age: testing hypotheses in an evolutionary context. , 1997, Science.

[35]  C. W. Kilpatrick,et al.  Phylogeography and molecular systematics of the Peromyscus aztecus species group (Rodentia: Muridae) inferred using parsimony and likelihood. , 1997, Systematic biology.

[36]  B. Crespi,et al.  Evolution, weighting, and phylogenetic utility of mitochondrial gene sequences and a compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers , 1994 .

[37]  A. Rodrigo,et al.  Likelihood-based tests of topologies in phylogenetics. , 2000, Systematic biology.

[38]  C. Fleming The geological history of New Zealand and its life , 1979 .

[39]  P. Sunnucks,et al.  Numerous transposed sequences of mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I-II in aphids of the genus Sitobion (Hemiptera: Aphididae). , 1996, Molecular biology and evolution.

[40]  P. Waddell,et al.  The complete mitochondrial DNA sequence of the shark Mustelus manazo: evaluating rooting contradictions to living bony vertebrates. , 1998, Molecular biology and evolution.

[41]  W. Moore INFERRING PHYLOGENIES FROM mtDNA VARIATION: MITOCHONDRIAL‐GENE TREES VERSUS NUCLEAR‐GENE TREES , 1995, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[42]  D. Swofford,et al.  Evolution of the Mitochondrial Cytochrome Oxidase II Gene in Collembola , 1997, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[43]  C. Simon,et al.  Exploring among-site rate variation models in a maximum likelihood framework using empirical data: effects of model assumptions on estimates of topology, branch lengths, and bootstrap support. , 2001, Systematic biology.

[44]  S. Jeffery Evolution of Protein Molecules , 1979 .