Skip to main content
bioRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search
New Results

Comprehensive species sampling and sophisticated algorithmic approaches refute the monophyly of Arachnida

Jesús A. Ballesteros, Carlos E. Santibáñez-López, Caitlin M. Baker, Ligia R. Benavides, Tauana J. Cunha, Guilherme Gainett, Andrew Z. Ontano, Emily V.W. Setton, Claudia P. Arango, Efrat Gavish-Regev, Mark S. Harvey, Ward C. Wheeler, Gustavo Hormiga, Gonzalo Giribet, Prashant P. Sharma
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.16.456573
Jesús A. Ballesteros
1Department of Integrative Biology; University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA 53706
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carlos E. Santibáñez-López
1Department of Integrative Biology; University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA 53706
2Department of Biology, Western Connecticut State University; Danbury, CT, USA, 06810
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Caitlin M. Baker
1Department of Integrative Biology; University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA 53706
3Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University; Cambridge, MA, USA, 02138
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ligia R. Benavides
3Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University; Cambridge, MA, USA, 02138
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tauana J. Cunha
3Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University; Cambridge, MA, USA, 02138
4Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, Panama City, Panama
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Guilherme Gainett
1Department of Integrative Biology; University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA 53706
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrew Z. Ontano
1Department of Integrative Biology; University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA 53706
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emily V.W. Setton
1Department of Integrative Biology; University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA 53706
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Claudia P. Arango
5Office for Research, Griffith University; Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Efrat Gavish-Regev
6National Natural History Collections, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Jerusalem, Israel 9190401
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark S. Harvey
7Collections & Research, Western Australian Museum; Welshpool, Western Australia 6106, Australia
8School of Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia; Crawley, Western Australia 6009, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ward C. Wheeler
9Division of Invertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History New York, NY, USA, 10024
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gustavo Hormiga
10Department of Biological Sciences, George Washington University; Washington, DC, USA, 20052
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gonzalo Giribet
3Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University; Cambridge, MA, USA, 02138
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Prashant P. Sharma
1Department of Integrative Biology; University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA 53706
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: prashant.sharma@wisc.edu
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Deciphering the evolutionary relationships of Chelicerata (arachnids, horseshoe crabs, and allied taxa) has proven notoriously difficult, due to their ancient rapid radiation and the incidence of elevated evolutionary rates in several lineages. While conflicting hypotheses prevail in morphological and molecular datasets alike, the monophyly of Arachnida is nearly universally accepted. Though a small number of phylotranscriptomic analyses have recovered arachnid monophyly, these did not sample all living chelicerate orders. We generated a dataset of 506 high-quality genomes and transcriptomes, sampling all living orders of Chelicerata with high occupancy and rigorous approaches to orthology inference. Our analyses consistently recovered the nested placement of horseshoe crabs within a paraphyletic Arachnida. This result was insensitive to variation in evolutionary rates of genes, complexity of the substitution models, and alternatives algorithmic approaches to species tree inference. Investigation of systematic bias showed that genes and sites that recover arachnid monophyly are enriched in noise and exhibit low information content. To test the effect of morphological data, we generated a 514-taxon morphological data matrix of extant and fossil Chelicerata, analyzed in tandem with the molecular matrix. Combined analyses recovered the clade Merostomata (the marine orders Xiphosura, Eurypterida, and Chasmataspidida), but nested within Arachnida. Our results suggest that morphological convergence resulting from adaptations to life in terrestrial habitats has driven the historical perception of arachnid monophyly, paralleling the history of numerous other invertebrate terrestrial groups.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 17, 2021.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about bioRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comprehensive species sampling and sophisticated algorithmic approaches refute the monophyly of Arachnida
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from bioRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the bioRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Comprehensive species sampling and sophisticated algorithmic approaches refute the monophyly of Arachnida
Jesús A. Ballesteros, Carlos E. Santibáñez-López, Caitlin M. Baker, Ligia R. Benavides, Tauana J. Cunha, Guilherme Gainett, Andrew Z. Ontano, Emily V.W. Setton, Claudia P. Arango, Efrat Gavish-Regev, Mark S. Harvey, Ward C. Wheeler, Gustavo Hormiga, Gonzalo Giribet, Prashant P. Sharma
bioRxiv 2021.08.16.456573; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.16.456573
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Comprehensive species sampling and sophisticated algorithmic approaches refute the monophyly of Arachnida
Jesús A. Ballesteros, Carlos E. Santibáñez-López, Caitlin M. Baker, Ligia R. Benavides, Tauana J. Cunha, Guilherme Gainett, Andrew Z. Ontano, Emily V.W. Setton, Claudia P. Arango, Efrat Gavish-Regev, Mark S. Harvey, Ward C. Wheeler, Gustavo Hormiga, Gonzalo Giribet, Prashant P. Sharma
bioRxiv 2021.08.16.456573; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.08.16.456573

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Evolutionary Biology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Animal Behavior and Cognition (4237)
  • Biochemistry (9155)
  • Bioengineering (6797)
  • Bioinformatics (24052)
  • Biophysics (12149)
  • Cancer Biology (9562)
  • Cell Biology (13814)
  • Clinical Trials (138)
  • Developmental Biology (7653)
  • Ecology (11729)
  • Epidemiology (2066)
  • Evolutionary Biology (15534)
  • Genetics (10663)
  • Genomics (14346)
  • Immunology (9502)
  • Microbiology (22876)
  • Molecular Biology (9113)
  • Neuroscience (49080)
  • Paleontology (357)
  • Pathology (1487)
  • Pharmacology and Toxicology (2576)
  • Physiology (3851)
  • Plant Biology (8347)
  • Scientific Communication and Education (1473)
  • Synthetic Biology (2299)
  • Systems Biology (6202)
  • Zoology (1302)