Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T06:08:00.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetics and Molecular Systematics of Brachiopods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2017

Bernard L. Cohen
Bernard L. Cohen*
Affiliation:
University of Glasgow, Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, Division of Molecular Genetics, Pontecorvo Building, 56 Dumbarton Road, Glasgow G11 6NU Scotland, UK
Get access

Extract

When Charles Darwin wrote that “Our classifications will come to be, as far as they may be so made, genealogies…we have to discover and trace the many diverging lines of descent in our natural genealogies by characters…which have long been inherited” (Darwin, 1859), he presciently laid down aims and objectives of systematics that have become attainable only since the development of genetics and of molecular approaches to systematics. Genetics elucidates the heredity of characters; molecular systematics measures the degrees of relationship between diverging lineages (Griffiths et al., 1993; Page and Holmes, 1998; Graur and Li, 2000). This article attempts to review these essential aids to the art and science of brachiopod classification as they stand today. Every step so far taken to promote molecular approaches to brachiopod systematics has yielded new, unexpected, and valuable information, but there remains massive scope for new work and new workers.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Paleontological Society Papers , Volume 7: Brachiopods Ancient and Modern: A Tribute to G. Arthur Cooper , November 2001 , pp. 53 - 68
Copyright
Copyright © 2001 by The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adoutte, A., and Philippe, H. 1993. The major lines of metazoan evolution: summary of traditional evidence and lessons from ribosomal RNA sequence analysis., p. 1–30. In Pichon, Y. (ed.), Comparative Molecular Neurobiology. Birkhauser, Basel.Google Scholar
Ayala, F. J., Valentine, J. W., Delaca, T. E., and Zumwalt, G. S. 1975. Genetic variability of the Antarctic brachiopod Liothyrella notorcadensis and its bearing on mass extinction hypotheses. Journal of Palaeontology, 49:1–9.Google Scholar
Baker, P. G. 1990. The classification, origin and phylogeny of thecideidine brachiopods. Palaeontology, 33:175–191.Google Scholar
Balakirev, E. S., and Manchenko, G. P. 1985. High levels of allozymic variation in brachiopod Coptothyris grayii and Ascidia Halocynthia aurantium . Genetika, 21:239–244.Google Scholar
Banta, W. C., and Backus, B. T. 1995. 18S rDNA from lophophorates. Science, 270:1852.Google Scholar
Benson, D. A., Boguski, M., Lipman, D. L., Ostell, J., and Ouellette, B. F. F. 1998. GenBank. Nucleic Acids Research, 26:1–7.Google Scholar
Boore, J. L. 1999. Animal mitochondrial genomes. Nucleic Acids Research, 27:1767–1780.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Britten, R. J., and Davidson, E. H. 1971. Repetitive and non-repetitive DNA sequences and a speculation on the origins of evolutionary novelty. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 46:111–133.Google Scholar
Brusca, R. C., and Brusca, G. J. 1990. Invertebrates. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland, Mass., 922 p.Google Scholar
Carlson, S. J. 1995. Phylogenetic relationships amongst brachiopods. Cladistics, 11:131–197.Google Scholar
Cavalier-Smith, T. 1998. A revised six-kingdom system of life. Biological Reviews, 73:203–266.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. L. 2000. Monophyly of brachiopods and phoronids: reconciliation of molecular evidence with Linnaean classification (the subphylum Phoroniformea nov.). Proceedings of the Royal Society, London, Series B., 267:225–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, B. L. In press. Brachiopod molecular phylogeny advances. In Brunton, C. H. C., Cocks, R., and Long, S. (eds.), Brachiopods Past and Present. Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. L., Balfe, P., and Curry, G. B. 1986. Genetics of the brachiopod Terebratulina . 1èr Congrès sur les Brachiopodes: les Brachiopodes fossiles et actuels, Brest, France: 55–63.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. L., and Gawthrop, A. B. 1996. Brachiopod molecular phylogeny, p. 73–80. In Copper, P. and Jin, J. (eds.), Brachiopods: Proceedings of the Third International Brachiopod Congress, Sudbury, Ontario. 1995. A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. L., and Gawthrop, A. B. 1997. The brachiopod genome, p. 189–211. In Kaesler, R. L. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part H, revised, Brachiopoda. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. L., Balfe, P., Cohen, M., and Curry, G. B. 1991. Genetic divergence within and between populations of the North Atlantic morphospecies Terebratulina retusa and T. septentrionalis , p. 109–114. In McKinnon, D. I., Lee, D. E., and Campbell, J. D. (eds.), Brachiopods through time. Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. L., Balfe, P., Cohen, M., and Curry, G. B. 1993. Molecular and morphometric variation in European populations of the articulate brachiopod Terebratulina retusa . Marine Biology, 115:105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, B. L., Gawthrop, A. B., and Cavalier-Smith, T. 1998a. Molecular phylogeny of brachiopods and phoronids based on nuclear-encoded small subunit ribosomal RNA gene sequences. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B., 353:2039–2061.Google Scholar
Cohen, B. L., Stark, S., Gawthrop, A. B., Burke, M. E., and Thayer, C. W. 1998b. Comparison of articulate brachiopod nuclear and mitochondrial gene trees leads to a clade-based redefinition of protostomes (Protostomozoa) and deuterostomes (Deuterostomozoa). Proceedings of the Royal Society, London, Series B., 265:475–482.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S., Cohen, B. L., Gawthrop, A. B., Cavalier-Smith, T., and Winnepenninckx, B. 1996. Lophophorate phylogeny. Science, 272:282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, G. A. 1973. Fossil and Recent Cancellothyridacea (Brachiopoda). Tohoku University Scientific Reports, 2nd Ser. (Geol) (Special Vol.), 6:371–390.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. 1859. On the Origin of Species. John Murray, London, 502 p.Google Scholar
De Rosa, R., Grenier, J. K., Andreeva, T., Cook, C. E., Adoutte, A., Akam, M., Carroll, S. B., and Balavoine, G. 1999. Hox genes in brachiopods and priapulids and protostome evolution. Nature, 399:772–776.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eernisse, D. J., Albert, J. S., and Anderson, F. E. 1992. Annelida and arthropoda are not sister taxa: a phylogenetic analysis of spiralian metazoan morphology. Systematic Biology, 41:305–330.Google Scholar
Emig, C. C. 1979. British and other Phoronids. Synopses of the British Fauna (New Series) 13, Academic Press, London, 57 p.Google Scholar
Emig, C. C. 1982. The biology of Phoronida. Advances in Marine Biology, 19:1–89.Google Scholar
Endo, K. In press. The phylogenetic position of brachiopods inferred from mitochondrial gene order. In Brunton, C. H. C., Cocks, R., and Long, S. (eds.), Brachiopods Past and Present. Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
Endo, K., Ozawa, T., and Kojima, S. in press. Nuclear and mitochondrial gene sequences reveal unexpected genetic heterogeneity among northern Pacific populations of the brachiopopd Lingula anatina . Marine Biology.Google Scholar
Erber, A., Riemer, D., Bovenschulte, M., and Weber, K. 1998. Molecular phylogeny of metazoan intermediate filament proteins. Journal of Molecular Evolution, 47:751–762.Google Scholar
Field, K. G., Olsen, G. J., Lane, D. J., Giovannoni, S. J., Ghiselin, M. T., Raff, E. C., Pace, N. R., and Raff, R. 1988. Molecular phylogeny of the animal kingdom. Science, 239:748–753.Google Scholar
Giribet, G., Distel, D. L., Polz, M., Sterrer, W., and Wheeler, W. C. 2000. Triploblastic relationships with emphasis on the acoelomates, and the position of Gnathostomulida, Cycliophora, Platyhelminthes and Chaetognatha; a combined approach of 18S rDNA sequences and morphology. Systematic Biology, 49:539–562.Google Scholar
Graur, D., and Li, W.-H. 2000. Fundamentals of molecular evolution. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass., 481 p.Google Scholar
Griffiths, A. J. F., Miller, J. H., Suzuki, D. T., Lewontin, R. C., and Gelbart, W. M. 1993. An introduction to genetic analysis. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York, 840 p.Google Scholar
Halanych, K. 1995. The phylogenetic position of the pterobranch hemichordates based on 18S rDNA sequence data. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 4:72–76.Google Scholar
Halanych, K. M., Bacheller, J. D., Aguinaldo, A. M. A., Liva, S. M., Hillis, D. M., and Lake, J. A. 1995. Evidence from 18S ribosomal DNA that the lophophorates are protostome animals. Science, 267:1641–1643.Google Scholar
Halanych, K. M., Bacheller, J. D., Aguinaldo, A. M. A., Liva, S. M., Hillis, D. M., and Lake, J. A. 1996. Lophophorate phylogeny. Science, 272:283.Google Scholar
Hammond, L. S., and Poiner, I. R. 1984. Genetic structure of three populations of the “living fossil” brachiopod Lingula from Queensland, Australia. Lethaia, 17:139–143.Google Scholar
Helfenbein, K. 2000. Phoronids and articulate brachiopods: mitochondrial genomes, phylogeny and molecular evolution. The Millenium Brachiopod Congress, London, Abstracts.Google Scholar
Hyman, L. H. 1959. The Invertebrates V: Smaller coelomate groups. McGraw-Hill, New York, Toronto, London, 783 p.Google Scholar
Jenner, R. A. 2000. Evolution of animal body plans: the role of metazoan phylogeny at the interface between pattern and process. Evolution and Development, 2:208–221.Google Scholar
Kusumi, T., Ozawa, T., and Endo, K. 1994. Genetic variation in Lingula anatina . Fossils, 57:37–44.Google Scholar
Laurin, B. 1992. Découverte d'un squelette de soutien du lophophore de type “crura” chez un brachiopods inarticulé: déscription de Neoancistrocrania norfolki gen. sp. nov. (Craniidae). Comptes Rendues de l'Academy des Sciences, Paris, Life Sciences, 314:343–350.Google Scholar
Lindahl, T. 1996. Endogenous damage to DNA. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B., 351:1529–1538.Google Scholar
Logan, A., MacKinnon, D. I., and Phorson, J. E. 1997. Ecology, morphology and taxonomic affinities of the Recent micromorphic brachiopod Gwynia capsula (Jeffreys). P.S.Z.N.I: Marine Ecology, 18:239–252.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, D. I. 1993. Loop ontogeny and ultrastructure in brachiopods of the Family Terebratellidae, p. 313–340. In Kobayashi, I., Mutvei, H., and Sahni, A. (eds.), Structure, formation and evolution of fossil hard tissues. Tokai University Press, Tokyo.Google Scholar
MacKinnon, D. I., and Gaspard, D. 1995. Similarity of early loop ontogeny in the Recent brachiopods Macandrevia King and Ecnomiosa Cooper: taxonomic and phylogenetic implications. Third International Brachiopod Congress, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada, Abstracts:49.Google Scholar
Morse, E. S. 1873. On the systematic position of the Brachiopoda. Proceedings of the Boston Society for natural History, 15:315–372.Google Scholar
Nielsen, C. 1991. The development of the brachiopod Crania (Neocrania) anomala (Muller, O. F.) and its phylogenetic significance. Acta Zoologica, 72:7–28.Google Scholar
Nielsen, C. 1995 and 2001. Animal evolution: interrelationships of the living phyla. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 467 p.Google Scholar
Nielsen, C., Scharff, N., and Eibye-Jacobsen, D. 1996. Cladistic analysis of the animal kingdom. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 57:385–410.Google Scholar
Noguchi, Y., Endo, K., Tajima, F., and Ueshima, R. 2000. The mitochondrial genome of the brachiopod Laqueus rubellus . Genetics, 155:245–259.Google Scholar
Ostrow, G. 2000. Genetic differentiation in the New Zealand fiords: a dispersal barrier in the marine environment. The Millenium Brachiopod Congress, London, Abstracts.Google Scholar
Ostrow, D. G., Wing, S. R., Mladenov, P. V., and Roy, M. S. In press. Genetic differentiation of Terebratella sanguinea in the New Zealand fiords: a dispersal barrier in the marine environment. In Brunton, C. H. C., Cocks, R., and Long, S. (eds.), Brachiopods Past and Present. Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
Page, R. D. M., and Holmes, E. C. 1998. Molecular evolution: a phylogenetic approach. Blackwell Science, Oxford, 346 p.Google Scholar
Robinson, M., Gouy, M., Gautier, C., and Mouchiroud, D. 1998. Sensitivity of the relative-rate test to taxonomic sampling. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 15:1091–1098.Google Scholar
Russell, G. R., and Subak-Sharpe, J. H. 1977. Similarity of the general designs of protochordates and invertebrates. Nature, 266:533–535.Google Scholar
Saito, M. 1998. Brachiopod phylogeny inferred from mitochondrial COI sequences. , University of Tokyo, Tokyo, 109 p.Google Scholar
Saito, M., and Endo, K. In press. Molecular phylogeny and morphological evolution of laqueoid brachiopods. Paleontological Research.Google Scholar
Saito, M., Endo, K., and Cohen, B. L. In press. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution of long-looped brachiopods. In Brunton, C. H. C., Cocks, R., and Long, S. (eds.), Brachiopods Past and Present. Taylor and Francis, London.Google Scholar
Saito, M., Kojima, S., and Endo, K. 2000. Mitochondrial COI sequences of brachiopods: genetic code shared with protostomes; limits of utility for phylogenetic reconstruction. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 15:331–344.Google Scholar
Sarich, V. M., and Wilson, A. C. 1973. Generation time and genomic evolution in primates. Science, 179:1144–1147.Google Scholar
Stechmann, A. In press. Phylogenetic relationships within the metazoa based on complete mitochondrial DNA sequences. In Brunton, C. H. C., Cocks, R., and Long, S. (eds.), Brachiopods Past and Present. Taylor & Francis, London.Google Scholar
Stechmann, A., and Schlegel, M. 1999. Analysis of the complete mitochondrial DNA sequence of the brachiopod Terebratulina retusa places Brachiopoda within the protostomes. Proceedings of the Royal Society, London, Series B, 266:2043–2052.Google Scholar
Vachot, A.-M., and Monnerot, M. 1996. Extraction, amplification and sequencing of DNA from formaldehyde-fixed specimens, ancient Biomolecules, 1:3–16.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W., and Ayala, F. J. 1975. Genetic variation in Freileia halli, a deep sea brachiopod. Deep-Sea Research, 22:37–44.Google Scholar
Williams, A., Carlson, S. J., Brunton, H. C., Holmer, L., and Popov, L. 1996. A supra-ordinal classification of the Brachiopoda. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 351:1171–1193.Google Scholar
Williams, A., Cohen, B. L., Cusack, M., and Long, S. L. 2000. Provenance of Atlantic lingulid brachiopods. Palaeontology, 46:999–1018.Google Scholar
Williams, A., and others. 1997 et seq. Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part H, revised, Brachiopoda. Geological Society of America and University of Kansas Press, Lawrence.Google Scholar
Wray, G. A., Levinton, J. S., and Shapiro, L. H. 1996. Molecular evidence for deep Precambrian divergences among metazoan phyla. Science, 274:568–573.Google Scholar
Yatsu, N. 1902. On the development of Lingula anatina . Journal of the College of Science, Imperial University, Tokyo, Japan., XVII: 1–112 with plates I–VIII.Google Scholar
Zrzavy, J., Mihulka, S., Kepka, P., Bezdek, A., and Tietz, D. 1998. Phylogeny of the metazoa based on morphological and 18S ribosomal DNA evidence. Cladistics, 14:249–285.Google Scholar