Phylogeny of snakes (Serpentes): combining morphological and molecular data in likelihood Bayesian and parsimony analyses

Copyright © 2007 The Natural history MuseumThe phylogeny of living and fossil snakes is assessed using likelihood and parsimony approaches and a dataset combining 263 morphological characters with mitochondrial (2693 bp) and nuclear (1092 bp) gene sequences. The ‘no common mechanism’ (NCMr) and ‘Markovian’ (Mkv) models were employed for the morphological partition in likelihood analyses; likelihood scores in the NCMr model were more closely correlated with parsimony tree lengths. Both models accorded relatively less weight to the molecular data than did parsimony, with the effect being milder in the NCMr model. Partitioned branch and likelihood support values indicate that the mtDNA and nuclear gene partitions agree more closely with each other than with morphology. Despite differences between data partitions in phylogenetic signal, analytic models, and relative weighting, the parsimony and likelihood analyses all retrieved the following widely accepted groups: scolecophidians, alethinophidians, cylindrophiines, macrostomatans (sensu lato) and caenophidians. Anilius alone emerged as the most basal alethinophidian; the combined analyses resulted in a novel and stable position of uropeltines and cylindrophiines as the second-most basal clade of alethinophidians. The limbed marine pachyophiids, along with Dinilysia and Wonambi, were always basal to all living snakes. Other results stable in all combined analyses include: Xenopeltis and Loxocemus were sister taxa (fide morphology) but clustered with pythonines (fide molecules), and Ungaliophis clustered with a boine-erycine clade (fide molecules). Tropidophis remains enigmatic; it emerges as a basal alethinophidian in the parsimony analyses (fide molecules) but a derived form in the likelihood analyses (fide morphology), largely due to the different relative weighting accorded to data partitions.Michael S. Y. Lee, Andrew F. Hugall, Robin Lawson & John D. Scanlo

Why do frog and toad forelimbs suddenly (but asynchronously) appear, every time metamorphosis is near?

The internal development and the emergence of the forelimbs at metamorphosis is a defining feature of anuran amphibians (frogs and toads). However, although forelimb emergence is considered sudden, it is rarely synchronous. Any asynchrony may or may not exacerbate the increased drag that is predicted to occur with the emergence of the forelimbs at metamorphic climax. Despite the impact forelimb emergence is hypothesized to have on individual survival and life-history evolution, the degree of asynchrony between forelimb emergence, and any consequences of such asymmetry, has not been investigated. The asynchrony in forelimb emergence also provides an opportunity to test the currently held evolutionary basis for the internal development and sudden emergence of the forelimbs in anurans. Using a diverse range of anuran taxonomic groups, we measured the time between, and pattern of, the emergence of the forelimbs across a range of species. To examine the evolutionary impacts of forelimb emergence, we assessed locomotory performance when individuals had zero, one or two forelimbs emerged. The duration of time between the emergence of the two forelimbs was longer and more variable than predicted. Furthermore, no species suffered impaired burst speeds nor was their angle of escape affected as the forelimbs emerged asynchronously. In fact, burst swimming speed was faster after the emergence of one and two forelimbs than prior to their emergence. Fundamentally, our results call into question the proposition, long accepted, that internal forelimb development is associated with locomotion and reducing drag during metamorphosis. This does not appear to be the case, and we suggest that anatomical or developmental constraints or advantages may be responsible