Interrogating Genomic Data in the Phylogenetic Placement of Treeshrews Reveals Potential Sources of Conflict

Abstract

The position of some taxa on the Tree of Life remains controversial despite the increase in genomic data used to infer phylogenies. While analyzing large datasets alleviates stochastic errors, it does not prevent systematic errors in inference, caused by both biological (e.g., incomplete lineage sorting, hybridization) and methodological (e.g., incorrect modeling, erroneous orthology assessments) factors. In our study, we systematically investigated factors that could result in these controversies, using the treeshrew (Scandentia, Mammalia) as a study case. Recent studies have narrowed the phylogenetic position of treeshrews to three competing hypotheses: sister to primates and flying lemurs (Primatomorpha), sister to rodents and lagomorphs (Glires), or sister to a clade comprising all of these. We sampled 50 mammal species including three treeshrews, a selection of taxa from the potential sister groups, and outgroups. Using a large diverse set of loci, we assessed support for the alternative phylogenetic position of treeshrews. A plurality of loci support treeshrews as sister to rodents and lagomorphs; however, only a few loci exhibit strong support for any hypothesis. Surprisingly, we found that a subset of loci that strongly support the monophyly of Primates, support treeshrews as sister to primates and flying lemurs. The overall small magnitude of differences in phylogenetic signal among the alternative hypotheses suggests that these three groups diversified nearly simultaneously. However, with our large dataset and approach to examining support, we provide evidence for the hypothesis of treeshrews as sister to rodents and lagomorphs, while demonstrating why support for alternate hypotheses has been seen in prior work. We also suggest that locus selection can unwittingly bias results.