01282nas a2200145 4500008004100000022001400041245009000055210006900145260001200214300001000226520079400236100002701030700002001057856005901077 2020 eng d a0242-177100aMyriapodes chilopodes et diplopodes des souterrains de Paris et de sa proche banlieue0 aMyriapodes chilopodes et diplopodes des souterrains de Paris et  c03/2020 a39-473 a

Une campagne d’échantillonnage des invertébrés a été menée dans les réseaux souterrains de la ville de Paris et de la banlieue proche. Le présent travail présente les résultats obtenus concernant les myriapodes (chilopodes et diplopodes) issus de ces récoltes. Six espèces de chilopodes (Classe Chilopoda) et neuf espèces de diplopodes (Classe Diplopoda) ont pu être identifiées. Parmi ces dernières, certaines espèces sont nouvelles pour les départements des Yvelines, des Hauts-de-Seine et de la Seine-Saint-Denis. Ces résultats contribuent à l'enrichissement des inventaires et atlas des myriapodes de France (project INAMYFRA).

1 aGeoffroy, Jean-Jacques1 aFerrand, Marina uhttps://publications.ffspeleo.fr/bulletin.php?id=2599903914nas a2200505 4500008004100000022001400041245012800055210006900183260001500252300000900267490000700276520241600283653002402699653001302723653002302736653002102759653001802780653001802798653002102816653001202837653001902849100002702868700002002895700002202915700002102937700002202958700001802980700001702998700001703015700001803032700002303050700002003073700002303093700002403116700001803140700002403158700002803182700002703210700001903237700002003256700001403276700001903290700002103309856007803330 2020 eng d a1471-214800aFour myriapod relatives – but who are sisters? No end to debates on relationships among the four major myriapod subgroups0 aFour myriapod relatives but who are sisters No end to debates on c04/11/2020 a1-150 v203 a

Background: Phylogenetic relationships among the myriapod subgroups Chilopoda, Diplopoda, Symphyla and Pauropoda are still not robustly resolved. The first phylogenomic study covering all subgroups resolved phylogenetic relationships congruently to morphological evidence but is in conflict with most previously published phylogenetic trees based on diverse molecular data. Outgroup choice and long-branch attraction effects were stated as possible explanations for these incongruencies. In this study, we addressed these issues by extending the myriapod and outgroup taxon sampling using transcriptome data.

Results: We generated new transcriptome data of 42 panarthropod species, including all four myriapod subgroups and additional outgroup taxa. Our taxon sampling was complemented by published transcriptome and genome data resulting in a supermatrix covering 59 species. We compiled two data sets, the first with a full coverage of genes per species (292 single-copy protein-coding genes), the second with a less stringent coverage (988 genes). We inferred phylogenetic relationships among myriapods using different data types, tree inference, and quartet computation approaches. Our results unambiguously support monophyletic Mandibulata and Myriapoda. Our analyses clearly showed that there is strong signal for a single unrooted topology, but a sensitivity of the position of the internal root on the choice of outgroups. However, we observe strong evidence for a clade Pauropoda+Symphyla, as well as for a clade Chilopoda+Diplopoda.

Conclusions: Our best quartet topology is incongruent with current morphological phylogenies which were supported in another phylogenomic study. AU tests and quartet mapping reject the quartet topology congruent to trees inferred with morphological characters. Moreover, quartet mapping shows that confounding signal present in the data set is sufficient to explain the weak signal for the quartet topology derived from morphological characters. Although outgroup choice affects results, our study could narrow possible trees to derivatives of a single quartet topology. For highly disputed relationships, we propose to apply a series of tests (AU and quartet mapping), since results of such tests allow to narrow down possible relationships and to rule out confounding signal.

 

10aArthropod phylogeny10aconflict10aConfounding signal10aInternal rooting10aPhylogenetics10aphylogenomics10aQuartet topology10aRNA-Seq10aTranscriptomes1 aSzucsich, Nikolaus, U.1 aBartel, Daniela1 aBlanke, Alexander1 aBöhm, Alexander1 aDonath, Alexander1 aFukui, Makiko1 aGrove, Simon1 aLiu, Shanlin1 aMacek, Oliver1 aMachida, Ryuichiro1 aMisof, Bernhard1 aNakagaki, Yasutaka1 aPodsiadlowski, Lars1 aSekiya, Kaoru1 aTomizuka, Shigekazu1 aVon Reumont, Björn, M.1 aWaterhouse, Robert, M.1 aWalzl, Manfred1 aMeng, Guanliang1 aZhou, Xin1 aPass, Günther1 aMeusemann, Karen uhttps://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12862-020-01699-0