2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2011.07.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Additional gene data and increased sampling give new insights into the phylogenetic relationships of Neogastropoda, within the caenogastropod phylogenetic framework

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
40
2
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
14
40
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The relationships we can test are largely in agreement with prior morphological [10,[55][56][57] and molecular [58][59][60] analyses. We find a sister group relationship of Ampullarioidea (represented by Pomacea) to Sorbeoconcha, which comprise the remaining sampled caenogastropods (figure 3a).…”
Section: (B) Relationships Within Major Gastropod Cladessupporting
confidence: 82%
“…The relationships we can test are largely in agreement with prior morphological [10,[55][56][57] and molecular [58][59][60] analyses. We find a sister group relationship of Ampullarioidea (represented by Pomacea) to Sorbeoconcha, which comprise the remaining sampled caenogastropods (figure 3a).…”
Section: (B) Relationships Within Major Gastropod Cladessupporting
confidence: 82%
“…The tree used in this paper was created based on expert opinion to merge and expand existing molecular and morphological phylogenies (Nützel, 1998;Colgan et al, 2007;Ponder & Lindberg, 2008;Barco et al, 2010Barco et al, , 2015Oliverio & Modica, 2010;Aktipis & Giribet, 2011;Dayrat et al, 2011;Puillandre et al, 2011;Simone, 2011;Strong et al, 2011;Zou, Li & Kong, 2011;Takano & Kano, 2014;Galindo et al, 2016), as a comprehensive gastropod phylogeny with sufficient resolution or sufficient varicate taxa is not yet available. Taxa were included either due to the presence of varices or as large or important avaricate groups to show where varices are absent.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All these analyses failed to recover Buccinidae as monophyletic due to the intercalation of Nassariidae and/or Fasciolariidae. There are no phylogenetic hypotheses that deal specifically with the family Fasciolariidae, based either on morphological or molecular characters, and the studies that do include some fasciolariid species (e.g., Hayashi, 2005;Kosyan et al, 2009;Zou et al, 2011) lack the resolution and coverage to clarify its relationships or to test its monophyly, as the family may potentially comprise multiple paraphyletic groups (Fedosov and Kantor, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%