Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids
Identifieur interne : 000608 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000607; suivant : 000609Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids
Auteurs : Nerida G. Wilson ; Greg W. RouseSource :
- Zoologica Scripta [ 0300-3256 ] ; 2010-11.
Abstract
Wilson, N. G. & Rouse, G. W. (2010). Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids. —Zoologica Scripta, 39, 551–558. The phylogeny and classification of the charismatic Syngnathidae (e.g. pipefish, seahorses) has not been comprehensively examined to date. In particular, we assessed morphological hypotheses that previously suggested the three ‘seadragon’ genera (Phycodurus, Phyllopteryx, Haliichthys) do not form a monophyletic group. We used three mitochondrial markers to investigate evolutionary relationships within Syngnathidae, and demonstrated that Phycodurus + Phyllopteryx formed a clade that excluded Haliichthys, indicating the elaborate appendages used for camouflage have evolved independently. A time‐calibrated tree revealed the divergence of true seadragons as coincident with other kelp‐associated fauna. We found evidence for the resurrection of neglected subfamily names, and recovered Doryrhampinae, Nerophinae, Soleganthinae, Phyllopteryginae, Sygnathoidinae and Haliichthyinae as clades. Even after removing these groups from what is currently recognized as Syngnathinae, we showed that the remaining members of Syngnathinae are not monophyletic. In the light of this information, some conclusions about the diversity of reproductive strategies found within ‘Syngnathinae’ need to be re‐examined and further revision of syngnathid classification is needed.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00449.x
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title><author><name sortKey="Wilson, Nerida G" sort="Wilson, Nerida G" uniqKey="Wilson N" first="Nerida G." last="Wilson">Nerida G. Wilson</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rouse, Greg W" sort="Rouse, Greg W" uniqKey="Rouse G" first="Greg W." last="Rouse">Greg W. Rouse</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5</idno><date when="2010" year="2010">2010</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00449.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000608</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title><author><name sortKey="Wilson, Nerida G" sort="Wilson, Nerida G" uniqKey="Wilson N" first="Nerida G." last="Wilson">Nerida G. Wilson</name></author><author><name sortKey="Rouse, Greg W" sort="Rouse, Greg W" uniqKey="Rouse G" first="Greg W." last="Rouse">Greg W. Rouse</name></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Zoologica Scripta</title><idno type="ISSN">0300-3256</idno><idno type="eISSN">1463-6409</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2010-11">2010-11</date><biblScope unit="volume">39</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="551">551</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="558">558</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0300-3256</idno></series><idno type="istex">21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00449.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">ZSC449</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0300-3256</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Wilson, N. G. & Rouse, G. W. (2010). Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids. —Zoologica Scripta, 39, 551–558. The phylogeny and classification of the charismatic Syngnathidae (e.g. pipefish, seahorses) has not been comprehensively examined to date. In particular, we assessed morphological hypotheses that previously suggested the three ‘seadragon’ genera (Phycodurus, Phyllopteryx, Haliichthys) do not form a monophyletic group. We used three mitochondrial markers to investigate evolutionary relationships within Syngnathidae, and demonstrated that Phycodurus + Phyllopteryx formed a clade that excluded Haliichthys, indicating the elaborate appendages used for camouflage have evolved independently. A time‐calibrated tree revealed the divergence of true seadragons as coincident with other kelp‐associated fauna. We found evidence for the resurrection of neglected subfamily names, and recovered Doryrhampinae, Nerophinae, Soleganthinae, Phyllopteryginae, Sygnathoidinae and Haliichthyinae as clades. Even after removing these groups from what is currently recognized as Syngnathinae, we showed that the remaining members of Syngnathinae are not monophyletic. In the light of this information, some conclusions about the diversity of reproductive strategies found within ‘Syngnathinae’ need to be re‐examined and further revision of syngnathid classification is needed.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Nerida G. Wilson</name></json:item><json:item><name>Greg W. Rouse</name></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>ZSC449</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Wilson, N. G. & Rouse, G. W. (2010). Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids. —Zoologica Scripta, 39, 551–558. The phylogeny and classification of the charismatic Syngnathidae (e.g. pipefish, seahorses) has not been comprehensively examined to date. In particular, we assessed morphological hypotheses that previously suggested the three ‘seadragon’ genera (Phycodurus, Phyllopteryx, Haliichthys) do not form a monophyletic group. We used three mitochondrial markers to investigate evolutionary relationships within Syngnathidae, and demonstrated that Phycodurus + Phyllopteryx formed a clade that excluded Haliichthys, indicating the elaborate appendages used for camouflage have evolved independently. A time‐calibrated tree revealed the divergence of true seadragons as coincident with other kelp‐associated fauna. We found evidence for the resurrection of neglected subfamily names, and recovered Doryrhampinae, Nerophinae, Soleganthinae, Phyllopteryginae, Sygnathoidinae and Haliichthyinae as clades. Even after removing these groups from what is currently recognized as Syngnathinae, we showed that the remaining members of Syngnathinae are not monophyletic. In the light of this information, some conclusions about the diversity of reproductive strategies found within ‘Syngnathinae’ need to be re‐examined and further revision of syngnathid classification is needed.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>6.439</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>595.276 x 788.031 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><keywordCount>0</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1471</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>4195</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>30402</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>8</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>187</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title><genre><json:string>article</json:string></genre><host><volume>39</volume><publisherId><json:string>ZSC</json:string></publisherId><pages><total>8</total><last>558</last><first>551</first></pages><issn><json:string>0300-3256</json:string></issn><issue>6</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1463-6409</json:string></eissn><title>Zoologica Scripta</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1463-6409</json:string></doi></host><publicationDate>2010</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2010</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00449.x</json:string></doi><id>21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5</id><score>0.11827378</score><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><availability><p>© 2010 The Authors. Zoologica Scripta © 2010 The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters</p></availability><date>2010</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Nerida G.</forename><surname>Wilson</surname></persName></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Greg W.</forename><surname>Rouse</surname></persName></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Zoologica Scripta</title><idno type="pISSN">0300-3256</idno><idno type="eISSN">1463-6409</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1463-6409</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2010-11"></date><biblScope unit="volume">39</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">6</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="551">551</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="558">558</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00449.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">ZSC449</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2010</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Wilson, N. G. & Rouse, G. W. (2010). Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids. —Zoologica Scripta, 39, 551–558. The phylogeny and classification of the charismatic Syngnathidae (e.g. pipefish, seahorses) has not been comprehensively examined to date. In particular, we assessed morphological hypotheses that previously suggested the three ‘seadragon’ genera (Phycodurus, Phyllopteryx, Haliichthys) do not form a monophyletic group. We used three mitochondrial markers to investigate evolutionary relationships within Syngnathidae, and demonstrated that Phycodurus + Phyllopteryx formed a clade that excluded Haliichthys, indicating the elaborate appendages used for camouflage have evolved independently. A time‐calibrated tree revealed the divergence of true seadragons as coincident with other kelp‐associated fauna. We found evidence for the resurrection of neglected subfamily names, and recovered Doryrhampinae, Nerophinae, Soleganthinae, Phyllopteryginae, Sygnathoidinae and Haliichthyinae as clades. Even after removing these groups from what is currently recognized as Syngnathinae, we showed that the remaining members of Syngnathinae are not monophyletic. In the light of this information, some conclusions about the diversity of reproductive strategies found within ‘Syngnathinae’ need to be re‐examined and further revision of syngnathid classification is needed.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2010-11">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley, elements deleted: body"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1463-6409</doi><issn type="print">0300-3256</issn><issn type="electronic">1463-6409</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="ZSC"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="ZOOLOGICA SCRIPTA">Zoologica Scripta</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="11106"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/zsc.2010.39.issue-6</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="39">39</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="6">6</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2010-11">November 2010</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="3" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00449.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="ZSC449"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="8"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="tocHeading1">Original Articles</title></titleGroup><copyright>© 2010 The Authors. Zoologica Scripta © 2010 The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters</copyright><eventGroup><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.23 mode:FullText" date="2010-10-21"></event><event type="publishedOnlineEarlyUnpaginated" date="2010-09-10"></event><event type="firstOnline" date="2010-09-10"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2010-10-21"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-11"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-11-04"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="551">551</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="558">558</numbering></numberingGroup><correspondenceTo>Corresponding authors: <i>Nerida G. Wilson, The Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney NSW 2010 Australia; and Greg W. Rouse, Marine Biology Research Division, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA 92093‐0202, USA. E‐mails: </i><email>Nerida.Wilson@austmus.gov.au</email><i> and </i><email>grouse@ucsd.edu</email></correspondenceTo><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:ZSC.ZSC449.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><unparsedEditorialHistory>Submitted: 23 April 2010 Accepted: 12 August 2010</unparsedEditorialHistory><countGroup><count type="figureTotal" number="2"></count><count type="tableTotal" number="3"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title><title type="shortAuthors"><i>N. G. Wilson & G. W. Rouse</i></title><title type="short">Phylogeny of ‘seadragons’</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1"><personName><givenNames>Nerida G.</givenNames><familyName>Wilson</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2"><personName><givenNames>Greg W.</givenNames><familyName>Rouse</familyName></personName></creator></creators><supportingInformation><p><b>Figure S1.</b> Maximum likelihood phylogeny of syngnathids based on three mitochondrial genes, with support tested by 1000 bootstrap replicates. Support below 50 is not shown unless it appears alongside greater support at a node representative of relationships among subfamilial rankings. These nodes also show support values under Bayesian inference (posterior probabilities) and maximum parsimony (jackknife). *Support is for a node that does not include <i>Haliichthys</i>. Square brackets surround <i>H.</i> <i>grayi</i>, indicating likely contamination of Cyt<i>b</i> in NCBI.</p><p><b>Figure S2.</b> beast (Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees)‐generated chromogram showing relationships among Syngnathidae. Values given at nodes indicate the mean value of the 95% highest posterior density interval, which is highlighted by grey bars. Scale bar indicates time in millions of years.</p><p><b>Table S1.</b> Primer combinations used in this study</p><supportingInfoItem><mediaResource alt="supporting info item" href="urn-x:wiley:03003256:media:zsc449:ZSC_449_sm_FigS1"></mediaResource><caption>Supporting info item</caption></supportingInfoItem><supportingInfoItem><mediaResource alt="supporting info item" href="urn-x:wiley:03003256:media:zsc449:ZSC_449_sm_FigS2"></mediaResource><caption>Supporting info item</caption></supportingInfoItem><supportingInfoItem><mediaResource alt="supporting info item" href="urn-x:wiley:03003256:media:zsc449:ZSC_449_sm_st1-REV"></mediaResource><caption>Supporting info item</caption></supportingInfoItem></supportingInformation><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>Wilson, N. G. & Rouse, G. W. (2010). Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids. —<i>Zoologica Scripta</i>, <i>39</i>, 551–558.</p><p>The phylogeny and classification of the charismatic Syngnathidae (e.g. pipefish, seahorses) has not been comprehensively examined to date. In particular, we assessed morphological hypotheses that previously suggested the three ‘seadragon’ genera (<i>Phycodurus</i>, <i>Phyllopteryx</i>, <i>Haliichthys</i>) do not form a monophyletic group. We used three mitochondrial markers to investigate evolutionary relationships within Syngnathidae, and demonstrated that <i>Phycodurus </i>+ <i>Phyllopteryx</i> formed a clade that excluded <i>Haliichthys</i>, indicating the elaborate appendages used for camouflage have evolved independently. A time‐calibrated tree revealed the divergence of true seadragons as coincident with other kelp‐associated fauna. We found evidence for the resurrection of neglected subfamily names, and recovered Doryrhampinae, Nerophinae, Soleganthinae, Phyllopteryginae, Sygnathoidinae and Haliichthyinae as clades. Even after removing these groups from what is currently recognized as Syngnathinae, we showed that the remaining members of Syngnathinae are not monophyletic. In the light of this information, some conclusions about the diversity of reproductive strategies found within ‘Syngnathinae’ need to be re‐examined and further revision of syngnathid classification is needed.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated" lang="en"><title>Phylogeny of ‘seadragons’</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="en"><title>Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Nerida G.</namePart><namePart type="family">Wilson</namePart><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Greg W.</namePart><namePart type="family">Rouse</namePart><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="article" displayLabel="article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2010-11</dateIssued><edition>Submitted: 23 April 2010 Accepted: 12 August 2010</edition><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2010</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType><extent unit="figures">2</extent><extent unit="tables">3</extent></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Wilson, N. G. & Rouse, G. W. (2010). Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids. —Zoologica Scripta, 39, 551–558. The phylogeny and classification of the charismatic Syngnathidae (e.g. pipefish, seahorses) has not been comprehensively examined to date. In particular, we assessed morphological hypotheses that previously suggested the three ‘seadragon’ genera (Phycodurus, Phyllopteryx, Haliichthys) do not form a monophyletic group. We used three mitochondrial markers to investigate evolutionary relationships within Syngnathidae, and demonstrated that Phycodurus + Phyllopteryx formed a clade that excluded Haliichthys, indicating the elaborate appendages used for camouflage have evolved independently. A time‐calibrated tree revealed the divergence of true seadragons as coincident with other kelp‐associated fauna. We found evidence for the resurrection of neglected subfamily names, and recovered Doryrhampinae, Nerophinae, Soleganthinae, Phyllopteryginae, Sygnathoidinae and Haliichthyinae as clades. Even after removing these groups from what is currently recognized as Syngnathinae, we showed that the remaining members of Syngnathinae are not monophyletic. In the light of this information, some conclusions about the diversity of reproductive strategies found within ‘Syngnathinae’ need to be re‐examined and further revision of syngnathid classification is needed.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Zoologica Scripta</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><note type="content"> Figure S1. Maximum likelihood phylogeny of syngnathids based on three mitochondrial genes, with support tested by 1000 bootstrap replicates. Support below 50 is not shown unless it appears alongside greater support at a node representative of relationships among subfamilial rankings. These nodes also show support values under Bayesian inference (posterior probabilities) and maximum parsimony (jackknife). *Support is for a node that does not include Haliichthys. Square brackets surround H. grayi, indicating likely contamination of Cytb in NCBI. Figure S2. beast (Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees)‐generated chromogram showing relationships among Syngnathidae. Values given at nodes indicate the mean value of the 95% highest posterior density interval, which is highlighted by grey bars. Scale bar indicates time in millions of years. Table S1. Primer combinations used in this study Figure S1. Maximum likelihood phylogeny of syngnathids based on three mitochondrial genes, with support tested by 1000 bootstrap replicates. Support below 50 is not shown unless it appears alongside greater support at a node representative of relationships among subfamilial rankings. These nodes also show support values under Bayesian inference (posterior probabilities) and maximum parsimony (jackknife). *Support is for a node that does not include Haliichthys. Square brackets surround H. grayi, indicating likely contamination of Cytb in NCBI. Figure S2. beast (Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees)‐generated chromogram showing relationships among Syngnathidae. Values given at nodes indicate the mean value of the 95% highest posterior density interval, which is highlighted by grey bars. Scale bar indicates time in millions of years. Table S1. Primer combinations used in this study Figure S1. Maximum likelihood phylogeny of syngnathids based on three mitochondrial genes, with support tested by 1000 bootstrap replicates. Support below 50 is not shown unless it appears alongside greater support at a node representative of relationships among subfamilial rankings. These nodes also show support values under Bayesian inference (posterior probabilities) and maximum parsimony (jackknife). *Support is for a node that does not include Haliichthys. Square brackets surround H. grayi, indicating likely contamination of Cytb in NCBI. Figure S2. beast (Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees)‐generated chromogram showing relationships among Syngnathidae. Values given at nodes indicate the mean value of the 95% highest posterior density interval, which is highlighted by grey bars. Scale bar indicates time in millions of years. Table S1. Primer combinations used in this studySupporting Info Item: Supporting info item - Supporting info item - Supporting info item - </note><identifier type="ISSN">0300-3256</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1463-6409</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1463-6409</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">ZSC</identifier><part><date>2010</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>39</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>6</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>551</start><end>558</end><total>8</total></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1463-6409.2010.00449.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">ZSC449</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© 2010 The Authors. Zoologica Scripta © 2010 The Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>WILEY</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><enrichments><json:item><type>multicat</type><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5/enrichments/multicat</uri></json:item></enrichments><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/CyberinfraV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000608 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000608 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Ticri/CIDE
|area= CyberinfraV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:21E6F77F54E40F62AD507A1BDC157DC413B6B7A5
|texte= Convergent camouflage and the non‐monophyly of ‘seadragons’ (Syngnathidae: Teleostei): suggestions for a revised taxonomy of syngnathids
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.25. |  |