WoRMS source details

Gonzalez, Brett C.; Martínez, Alejandro; Borda, Elizabeth; Iliffe, Thomas M.; Eibye-Jacobsen, Danny; Worsaae, Katrine. (2018). Phylogeny and systematics of Aphroditiformia. Cladistics. 34(3): 225-259.
278644
10.1111/cla.12202 [view]
Gonzalez, Brett C.; Martínez, Alejandro; Borda, Elizabeth; Iliffe, Thomas M.; Eibye-Jacobsen, Danny; Worsaae, Katrine
2018
Phylogeny and systematics of Aphroditiformia
Cladistics
34(3): 225-259
Publication
World Polychaeta Database (WPolyDb). Online in June 2017 but not registered in ZooBank. In print May 2018
Available for editors  PDF available [request]
Aphroditiformia represents one of the most successful radiations of annelids, and is therefore an interesting model to understand morphological and functional evolution. Previous phylogenetic analyses yielded most families as monophyletic but excluded anchialine and interstitial species while failing to recover relationships within Sigalionidae. Here we address these shortcomings through the analysis of four molecular markers and 87 morphological characters sampled across 127 species under the assumptions of parsimony and model-based methods. Of the 34 newly sequenced taxa, five anchialine and 24 interstitial species were included, with increased representation of Sigalionidae. An additional 28 elusive Sigalionidae taxa were included, represented only by morphological partitions. Molecular and morphological partitions were evaluated under exhaustive sensitivity analyses, testing the effects of alignment algorithms and optimization criteria on tree topologies. Our trees congruently recovered six clades corresponding to the families within Aphroditiformia: Acoetidae, Aphroditidae, Eulepethidae, Iphionidae, Polynoidae and Sigalionidae, respectively. An anchialine polynoid lineage was nested among strictly deep sea species, and interstitial pisionids and pholoids formed two independent clades nested within Sigalionidae. Additionally, Sigalionidae resulted in four clades, defined by combinations of apomorphies, and hereby we propose the subfamilies Pelogeniinae, Pholoinae, Pisioninae, Sthenelanellinae, as well as the provisionally included polyphyletic Sigalioninae.
Systematics, Taxonomy
RIS (EndNote, Reference Manager, ProCite, RefWorks)
BibTex (BibDesk, LaTeX)
Date
action
by
2017-06-14 01:49:52Z
created
2018-05-14 23:42:56Z
changed

 Authority

Authority corrected to Ehlers (1901). Rouse & Pleijel (2001:84) pointed out that Southern (1914) is not the author, ... [details]

 Classification

One of fourteen sigalionid genera included in the nominal subfamily Sigalioninae by Gonzalez et al (2018) [details]

 Classification

Subfamily status as Pisioninae. Molecular reports on the position of Pisione and Pisionidae in 2012 and 2017 simply ... [details]

 Classification

includes former separated families Peisidicidae (aka Pholoididae) as a synonym, and families Pisionidae and ... [details]

 Classification

As they add further subfamilies, Gonzalez et al (2018: 245) implemented Sigalioninae, the nominal Sigalionidae ... [details]

 Classification

Monogeneric subfamily erected for Sthenelanella Moore, 1910 (six valid species). Gonzalez et al (2018) reported ... [details]

 Diagnosis

According to Gonzalez et al (2018 - edited quote) Iphionidae is distinct in morphology among Aphroditiformia for ... [details]

 Editor's comment

As well as Pisione, the other minor genera apparently belonging in Pisionidae (Anoplopisione, Fauveliella (synonym ... [details]

 Taxonomy

Pettibone (1969): "Species of Sthenelanella are unique among the Sigalionidae in having notopodial spinning glands ... [details]

 Type designation

Gonzalez et al (2008: 245) report the type taxon as "Type taxon: Sthenelanella uniformis Moore, 1910", but this is ... [details]