Annelida, the ringed worms, is a highly diverse animal phylum that includes more than 15,000 described species and constitutes the dominant benthic macrofauna from the intertidal zone down to the deep sea. A robust annelid phylogeny would shape our understanding of animal body-plan evolution and shed light on the bilaterian ground pattern. Traditionally, Annelida has been split into two major groups: Clitellata (earthworms and leeches) and polychaetes (bristle worms), but recent evidence suggests that other taxa that were once considered to be separate phyla (Sipuncula, Echiura and Siboglinidae (also known as Pogonophora)) should be included in Annelida. However, the deep-level evolutionary relationships of Annelida are still poorly understood, and a robust reconstruction of annelid evolutionary history is needed. Here we show that phylogenomic analyses of 34 annelid taxa, using 47,953 amino acid positions, recovered a well-supported phylogeny with strong support for major splits. Our results recover chaetopterids, myzostomids and sipunculids in the basal part of the tree, although the position of Myzostomida remains uncertain owing to its long branch. The remaining taxa are split into two clades: Errantia (which includes the model annelid Platynereis), and Sedentaria (which includes Clitellata). Ancestral character trait reconstructions indicate that these clades show adaptation to either an errant or a sedentary lifestyle, with alteration of accompanying morphological traits such as peristaltic movement, parapodia and sensory perception. Finally, life history characters in Annelida seem to be phylogenetically informative.

What is a drug target? And how many such targets are there? Here, we consider the nature of drug targets, and by classifying known drug substances on the basis of the discussed principles we provide an estimation of the total number of current drug targets.

Evolutionary relationships among the eight major lineages of Mollusca have remained unresolved despite their diversity and importance. Previous investigations of molluscan phylogeny, based primarily on nuclear ribosomal gene sequences1–3 or morphological data4, have been unsuccessful at elucidating these relationships. Recently, phylogenomic studies using dozens to hundreds of genes have greatly improved our understanding of deep animal relationships5. However, limited genomic resources spanning molluscan diversity has prevented use of a phylogenomic approach. Here we use transcriptome and genome data from all major lineages (except Monoplacophora) and recover a well-supported topology for Mollusca. Our results strongly support the Aculifera hypothesis placing Polyplacophora (chitons) in a clade with a monophyletic Aplacophora (worm-like molluscs). Additionally, within Conchifera, a sister-taxon relationship between Gastropoda and Bivalvia is supported. This grouping has received little consideration and contains most (>95%) molluscan species. Thus we propose the node-based name Pleistomollusca. In light of these results, we examined the evolution of morphological characters and found support for advanced cephalization and shells as possibly having multiple origins within Mollusca.

BackgroundWithin the complex metazoan phylogeny, the relationships of the three lophophorate lineages, ectoprocts, brachiopods and phoronids, are particularly elusive. To shed further light on this issue, we present phylogenomic analyses of 196 genes from 58 bilaterian taxa, paying particular attention to the influence of compositional heterogeneity.ResultsThe phylogenetic analyses strongly support the monophyly of Lophophorata and a sister-group relationship between Ectoprocta and Phoronida. Our results contrast previous findings based on rDNA sequences and phylogenomic datasets which supported monophyletic Polyzoa (= Bryozoa sensu lato) including Ectoprocta, Entoprocta and Cycliophora, Brachiozoa including Brachiopoda and Phoronida as well as Kryptrochozoa including Brachiopoda, Phoronida and Nemertea, thus rendering Lophophorata polyphyletic. Our attempts to identify the causes for the conflicting results revealed that Polyzoa, Brachiozoa and Kryptrochozoa are supported by character subsets with deviating amino acid compositions, whereas there is no indication for compositional heterogeneity in the character subsets supporting the monophyly of Lophophorata.ConclusionOur results indicate that the support for Polyzoa, Brachiozoa and Kryptrochozoa gathered so far is likely an artifact caused by compositional bias. The monophyly of Lophophorata implies that the horseshoe-shaped mesosomal lophophore, the tentacular feeding apparatus of ectoprocts, phoronids and brachiopods is, indeed, a synapomorphy of the lophophorate lineages. The same may apply to radial cleavage. However, among phoronids also spiral cleavage is known. This suggests that the cleavage pattern is highly plastic and has changed several times within lophophorates. The sister group relationship of ectoprocts and phoronids is in accordance with the interpretation of the eversion of a ventral invagination at the beginning of metamorphosis as a common derived feature of these taxa.

Phylogenetic analyses based on 79 ribosomal proteins of 38 metazoans, partly derived from 6 new expressed sequence tag projects for Ectoprocta, Entoprocta, Sipuncula, Annelida, and Acanthocephala, indicate the monophyly of Bryozoa comprising Ectoprocta and Entoprocta, 2 taxa that have been separated for more than a century based on seemingly profound morphological differences. Our results also show that bryozoans are more closely related to Neotrochozoa, including molluscs and annelids, than to Syndermata, the latter comprising Rotifera and Acanthocephala. Furthermore, we find evidence for the position of Sipuncula within Annelida. These findings suggest that classical developmental and morphological key characters such as cleavage pattern, coelomic cavities, gut architecture, and body segmentation are subject to greater evolutionary plasticity than traditionally assumed.