Phylogeny of the Asian spiny frog tribe Paini
Transcription
Phylogeny of the Asian spiny frog tribe Paini
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ympev Phylogeny of the Asian spiny frog tribe Paini (Family Dicroglossidae) sensu Dubois Jing Che a,1, Jian-sheng Hu b,a,1, Wei-wei Zhou a, Robert W. Murphy c,a, Theodore J. Papenfuss d, Ming-yong Chen a,b, Ding-qi Rao e, Pi-peng Li f, Ya-ping Zhang a,g,* a State Key Laboratory of Genetic Resources and Evolution, Kunming Institute of Zoology, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650223, PR China College of Life Sciences, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, PR China c Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Biology, Royal Ontario Museum, 100 Queen’s Park, Toronto, Ont., Canada M5S 2C6 d University of California, Berkeley, Department of Integrative Biology, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 3101 Valley of Life Sciences Building #3160, Berkeley, CA 94720-3160, USA e Division of Amphibians and Reptiles, Kunming Institute of Zoology, The Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming 650223, PR China f Liaoning Key Laboratory of Biodiversity and Evolution, Shenyang Normal University, Shenyang 110034, PR China g Laboratory for Conservation and Utilization of Bio-resources, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, PR China b a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 11 May 2008 Revised 3 September 2008 Accepted 6 October 2008 Available online 21 October 2008 Keywords: Tribe Paini Dicroglossidae Mitochondrial DNA Nuclear DNA Phylogeny Geography China Southeast Asia a b s t r a c t The anuran tribe Paini, family Dicroglossidae, is known in this group only from Asia. The phylogenetic relationships and often the taxonomic recognition of species are controversial. In order to stabilize the classification, we used approximately 2100 bp of nuclear (rhodopsin, tyrosinase) and mitochondrial (12S, 16S rRNA) DNA sequence data to infer the phylogenetic relationships of these frogs. Phylogenetic trees reconstructed using Bayesian inference and maximum parsimony methods supported a monophyletic tribe Paini. Two distinct groups (I, II) were recovered with the mtDNA alone and the total concatenated data (mtDNA + nuDNA). The recognition of two genera, Quasipaa and Nanorana, was supported. Group I, Quasipaa, is widespread east of the Hengduan Mountain Ranges and consists of taxa from relatively low elevations in southern China, Vietnam and Laos. Group II, Nanorana, contains a mix of species occurring from high to low elevation predominantly in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan Mountain Ranges. The occurrence of frogs at high elevations appears to be a derived ecological condition. The composition of some major species groups based on morphological characteristics strongly conflicts with the molecular analysis. Some possible cryptic species are indicated by the molecular analyses. The incorporation of genetic data from type localities helped to resolve some of the taxonomic problems, although further combined analyses of morphological data from type specimens are required. The two nuDNA gene segments proved to be very informative for resolving higher phylogenetic relationships and more nuclear data should be explored to be more confident in the relationships. Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Genus Paa, Dubois, 1975, and its allies including Chaparana Bourret, 1939 and Nanorana Günther, 1896, are a rather poorly investigated group of dicroglossid frogs (Frost, 2008). Dubois (1992) established the tribe Paini to include the genera Paa and Chaparana. The tribe now also includes the genus Nanorana (Ohler and Dubois, 2006) (Table 1). These aquatic and semi-aquatic species live mostly in swift, boulder-strewn rivers and streams in the mountains (400–4700 m) of South and Southeast Asia. Most male frogs are characterized by keratinized spines on the chest, belly, or on other parts of their bodies (Fig. 1). In addition, most males also possess the secondary sex characteristic of * Corresponding author. Address: The Chinese Academy of Sciences, State Key Laboratory of Genetic Resources and Evolution, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Kunming 650223, PR China. Fax: +86 871 5032804. E-mail address: [email protected] (Y. Zhang). 1 These two authors contributed equally to this work. 1055-7903/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2008.10.007 hypertrophied forearms during the breeding season. These characters are thought to be adaptations to males grasping females during amplexus (Ohler and Dubois, 2006). Because they are closely tied to water, the species are probably poor overland dispersers. If true, then it is likely those populations in different drainages have high levels of genetic divergence and that more species exist than are currently recognized. Taxonomic controversy has reigned supreme in this group of frogs, and since Boulenger (1920), the taxonomy of this group has been revised numerous times (Dubois, 1975, 1987 (1986), 1992, 2005; Liu and Hu, 1961; Fei et al., 1990, 2005; Fei, 1999; Frost et al., 2006; Jiang et al., 2005; Ohler and Dubois, 2006; Roelants et al., 2004). Dubois (1975) established the subgenus Paa (genus Rana) for those species with distinct male secondary sexual characters and large eggs. Subsequently, Paa was given generic status, and together with the genus Chaparana, most of which lack spines, were united to form the tribe Paini within the subfamily Raninae (Dubois, 1992) (Table 1). The tribe Paini has been resolved to nest within the subfamily Dicroglossinae based on molecular 60 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Table 1 Different classifications of dicroglossid frogs in the tribe Paini. Specific epithet Dubois 1987 (1986) Fei et al. (1990) Dubois (1992) Fei (1999) Fei et al. (2005) Frost et al. (2006) Ohler and Dubois (2006) Ranidae Raninae Ranidae Raninae Paini Paa Gynandropaa Gynandropaa Gynandropaa Ranidae Raninae Ranidae Dicroglossinae Dicroglossidae bourreti yunnanensis liui Ranidae Raninae Ranini Rana Paa (yunnanensis group) Paa (yunnanensis group) — Paa — Paa (yunnanensis group) Paa (yunnanensis group) Paa — Paa (yunnanensis group) Paa (yunnanensis group) Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana conaensis liebigii arnoldi chayuensis medogensis maculosa boulengeri robertingeri spinosa shini exilispinosa jiulongensis verrucospin osa Paa Paa Paa — — Paa Paa — Paa Paa Paa — — Paa Paa — Paa — Paa Paa — Paa Paa Paa Paa — Paa Paa — Paa Paa Paa Paa — Paa Paa Paa Paa — Paa Paa — Paa Paa Paa Paa Paa Paa Paa Paa Paa — Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa unculuana (us) aenea taihangnica Rana (lateralis group) Paa (liebigii group) — Unculuana — — Paa (liebigii group) Paa (liebigii group) Paa (maculosa group) Paa (maculosa group) — Paa (maculosa group) Quasipaa — Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa — Chaparana Chaparana Chaparana — Unculuana — — Unculuana — Feiana Nanorana Nanorana quadrana (us) yei Paa (delacouri group) — Quadrana — Feirana — Feirana — Feiana Feiana Nanorana Quasipaa delacouri Paa (delacouri group) — — — Nanorana pleskei ventripunctata parkeri Nanorana — Altirana Nanorana Nanorana Altirana Annandia Ranini Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Altirana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Ranidae Dicroglossinae Paini Gynandropaa Gynandropaa Gynandropaa Gynandropaa Chaparana Paa Paa Paa Paa Paa Paa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Chaparana Chaparana Chaparana Paa Gynandropaa Feirana Quasipaa Limnonectini Annandia Paini Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Altirana (liebigii group) (liebigii group) (maculosa group) (maculosa group) (spinosa group) (spinosa group) (spinosa group) (spinosa group) Paa Paa Paa Paa Fig. 1. Male Paa yunnanensis collected from Luquan, Yunnan, China exhibiting nuptial spines and hypertrophied forearms. data (e.g., Roelants et al., 2004). Recent studies also indicated that Paa sensu Dubois (1992) is not monophyletic with respect to Chaparana and Nanorana (Che et al., 2007; Chen et al., 2005; Jiang et al., 2005; Roelants et al., 2004). Species related to Nanorana were originally treated as a subgenus of Rana by Boulenger (1920), and assigned to Altirana and Nanorana by Liu and Hu (1961). Subsequently, these species were included in the tribe Ranini in a single genus, Nanorana, by Dubois (1992) (Table 1). Ohler and Dubois (2006) proposed six genera including Allopaa, Chaparana, Chrysopaa, Gynandropaa, Nanorana, and Quasipaa within the tribe Paini based on 31 morphological characters. Curiously, their new generic assignments within the Paini were at odds with their own molecular assessment (Jiang et al., 2005) (see Fig. 2); a total evidence approach was not pursued. (liebigii group) (liebigii group) (liebigii group) (liebigii group) (liebigii group) (boulengeri group) (spinosa group) (boulengeri group) (spinosa group) (spinosa group) (liebigii group) (liebigii group) (maculosa group) (maculosa group) (maculosa group) (boulengeri group) (boulengeri group) (spinosa group) (boulengeri group) (spinosa group) (spinosa group) Many studies have resolved the tribe Paini as a monophyletic group (Che et al., 2007; Chen et al., 2005; Roelants et al., 2004). Jiang et al. (2005) depicted two groups (I, II) in the Paini when evaluating mtDNA data (12S, 16S rRNA) using phenetic neighbor-joining clustering. However, the monophyly of these groups became ambiguous when the analysis was based on a phylogenetic approach. Using the data of Jiang et al. (2005) and their own data, Frost et al. (2006) proposed two generic divisions for the tribe Paini: Nanorana and Quasipaa. The latter genus was earlier suggested by Jiang et al. (2005) (Table 1). Although much progress has been made in understanding the relationships of the tribe Paini, the relationships and taxonomic assignments within the group have remained obscure. In part, the various taxonomic arrangements arose from different approaches to systematics. The taxonomy of Dubois (1992) was based mostly on degrees of overall similarity, and not phylogeny (Inger, 1996). Presently, the tribe Paini includes 42 species (Ohler and Dubois, 2006), the majority of which (27) occur in China though the validation of some species deserve further study. Fei (1999) and Fei et al. (1990) placed the Chinese species into a single genus Paa, including three subgenera: P. (Paa), P. (Unculuanus), and P. (Feirana). The subgenera Unculuanus and Feirana corresponded to the genus Chaparana (Dubois, 1992), and were subsequently elevated to distinct generic status by Fei et al. (2005). Dubois 1987 (1986) proposed division of species groups within Paa. Subsequently, Dubois (1992) further delimited subgenera and species groups (Table 1). Mostly based on the suggestion of Dubois (1987 ‘‘1986”, 1992), Fei (1999) further divided the Chinese species of Paa into four species groups. Most recently, Fei et al. (2005) divided Paa into six species groups: P. spinosa, P. boulengeri, P. liebigii, P. yunnanensis, P. blanfordii, and P. maculosa (Table 1). J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 61 Fig. 2. Previous phylogenetic hypotheses: (a) phenetic relationships of 30 species of the tribe Paini inferred from 31 morphological characters (Ohler and Dubois, 2006), (b) cladistic relationships of 19 species of the tribe Paini estimated from molecular data (Jiang et al., 2005). Drawings are not to scale. The vertical and horizontal lines with different colors show the taxonomic rearrangements suggested by Ohler and Dubois (2006). The horizontal solid and dotted lines with the same color represent different assignments of subgenera. Many of these species show great phenotypic similarity to the extent that recognizing species is often a challenge. The species have been historically defined largely on the presence and distribution of body spinules in males during the breeding season. However, females, juveniles and males outside of the breeding season can be difficult to identify to species, much less to associate with a particular group. Fortunately, molecular genetic tools are very effective at identifying species, and especially at revealing morphologically cryptic species (e.g., Bain et al., 2003; Stuart et al., 2006). Phylogenetic reconstruction using molecular data now typically involves a diverse array of genes. Because mtDNA has limitations when used alone to form phylogenetic hypotheses (Moore, 1995), investigations have exploited other, independent sources of phylogenetic characters, e.g., nuDNA. Roelants et al. (2004) provided a molecular analysis of the ranoid relationships while incorporating sequence data from rhodopsin and tyrosinase. Their analysis only included five species of the tribe Paini. Frost et al. (2006) used additional nuclear genes in analyzing the phylogenetic relationships of extant amphibians. However, for the three species in tribe Paini included in their analysis, nuDNA data were obtained for two species only. Jiang et al. (2005) proposed a molecular phylogeny of the tribe Paini using approximately 900 bp of mtDNA sequence data. Herein, we extend pervious investigations and employ nuclear DNA, including exon 1 sequences from rhodopsin and tyrosinase in a phylogenetic study of the nominal tribe Paini. We have also expanded taxon sampling, and included portions of two mtDNA genes (12S, 16S rRNA). Our objectives were as follows: (1) test the monophyly of the tribe Paini sensu Dubois; (2) investigate the presence of cryptic species in the tribe; (3) investigate the validity of the current species groupings of Fei et al. (2005) based on the presence and distribution of body spines; and (4) provide a molecular phylogenetic framework for a phylogeny-based taxonomy. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Taxon sampling Species in the genera Paa, Nanorana, and Chaparana formed our ingroup, and species in the genera Hoplobatrachus, Limnonectes, and Fejervarya were used as outgroup taxa (Table 2). Ninety-nine specimens in total were used, among which 84 individuals representing 25 species formed the ingroup. For the Paini, the taxonomic arrangements by Dubois (1992) were followed for the purpose of discussion. Regarding P. taihangnica and P. yei, we used the original generic assignments (Chen and Jiang, 2002; Chen et al., 2002). Fieldwork in China coincided with the breeding season so that females and males in breeding condition would be included in the sampling. When possible, male specimens in breeding condition were used to confirm identity of the species and specimens were obtained from or nearby type localities to assure accurate genetic assessments of species. Two species, P. polunini and P. blanfordii, documented to occur in China (Fei et al., 2005) were not included due to difficulty in sampling. In addition, P. feae has remained unknown since its discovery and could not be included. For those species occuring in Laos and Vietnam, we included tissues from the FMNH (Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, USA), the MVZ (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Berkeley, USA), 62 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Table 2 Sampling information for dicroglossid frogs in the tribe Paini including voucher specimens, localities and GenBank accession numbers for species used in this study. Asterisks mark 26 sequences retrieved from Genbank. KIZ, Kunming Institute of Zoology, the Chinese Academy of Sciences; SCUM, Sichuan University Museum; YNU, Yunnan University; SYNU, Shenyang Normal University; CIB, Chengdu Institute of Biology, the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Species Locality Altitude (m) Reference specimens No. GenBank Accession Nos. mtDNA Nuclear DNA 12S-1 12S-2 16S Rhodopsin Tyrosinase Ingroup genus Paa P. arnoldi 1 P. arnoldi 2 P. arnoldi 3 P. arnoldi 4 P. boulengeri 1 P. boulengeri 2 P. boulengeri 3 P. boulengeri 4 P. boulengeri 5 P. cf. boulengeri 6 P. boulengeri 7 P. boulengeri 8 P. boulengeri 9 P. boulengeri 10 P. chayuensis 1 P. chayuensis 2 P. chayuensis 3 P. conaensis 1 P. exilispinosa 1 P. exilispinosa 2 P. exilispinosa 3 P. jiulongensis 1 P. jiulongensis 2 P. liebigii 1 P. liebigii 2 P. liui 1 P. liui 2 P. maculosa 1 P. maculosa 2 P. medogensis 1 P. medogensis 2 P. robertingeri 1 P. robertingeri 2 P. shini 1 P. shini 2 P. shini 3 P. spinosa 1 P. spinosa 2 P. spinosa 3 P. spinosa 4 P. spinosa 5 P. spinosa 6 P. spinosa 7 P. cf. spinosa 8 P. sp. P. taihangnica 1 P. taihangnica 2 P. verrucospinosa 1 P. verrucospinosa 2 P. verrucospinosa 3 P. verrucospinosa 4 P. yei 1 P. yunnanensis 1 P. yunnanensis 2 P. yunnanensis 3 P. yunnanensis 4 P. yunnanensis 5 P. yunnanensis 6 P. yunnanensis 7 P. yunnanensis 8 P. yunnanensis 9 P. bourreti P. sp. P. sp. China: Pian ma, Lushui Co., Yunnan (1) China: Pian ma, Lushui Co., Yunnan (1) China: Shangpa, Fugong Co., Yunnan (2) China: Shangpa, Fugong Co., Yunnan (2) China: Mt. Emei, Sichuan (3) China: Hunan (4) China: Maolan nature reserve, Guizhou (5) China: Longqing, Shizong Co., Yunnan (6) China: Longqing, Shizong Co., Yunnan (6) Vietnam: Tam Dao, Vinh Phu Prov. (7) China: Yihuang, Jiangxi (8) China: Yichang, Hubei (9) China: Yichang, Hubei (9) China: Lichuan, Hubei (10) China: Cibagou nature reserve, Xizang (11) China: Shama Village, Zayü Co., Xizang (12) China: Shama Village, Zayü Co., Xizang (12) China: Mama, Cona Co., Xizang (13) China: Sangang, Wuyi, Fujian (14) China: Sangang, Wuyi, Fujian (14) China: Hong Kong (15) China: Sangang, Wuyi, Fujian (16) China: Sangang, Wuyi, Fujian (16) China: Yakong Co., Xizang (17) China: Yakong Co., Xizang (17) China: Lugu Lake, Ninglang Co., Yunnan (18) China: Lugu Lake, Ninglang Co., Yunnan (18) China: Xinmin, Jingdong Co., Yunnan (19) China: Xinmin, Jingdong Co., Yunnan (19) China: 62 k, Medôg Co., Xizang (20) China: Medôg Co., Xizang (21) China: Zihuai, Hejiang Co., Sichuan (22) China: Zihuai, Hejiang Co., Sichuan (22) China: Huaping, Longsheng Co., Guangxi (23) China: Huaping, Longsheng Co., Guangxi (23) China: Dayao shan, Guangxi (24) China: Mt.Dawei, Pingbian Co., Yunnan (25) China: Mt.Dawei, Pingbian Co., Yunnan (25) China: Damenglong, Jinghong, Yunnan (26) China: Damenglong, Jinghong, Yunnan (26) China: Lu shan, Jiujiang, Jiangxi (27) China: Lu shan, jiujiang, Jiangxi (27) China: Huang shan, Anhui (28) Vietnam: Con Cuong vicinity, Nghe An (29) Vietnam: Ngoc Linh vicinity, Kon Tum (30) China: Taihangshan, Jiyuan, Henan (31) China: Taihangshan, Jiyuan, Henan (31) China: Mengsong, Jinghong, Yunnan (32) China: Mengsong, Jinghong, Yunnan (32) Vietnam: Tam Dao, Vinh Phu Prov. (33) Vietnam: Tam Dao, Vinh Phu Prov. (33) China: Shangcheng Co., Henan (34) China: Jiefanggou, Xichang, Sichuan (35) China: Mazong, Huili, Sichuan (36) China: Dongping, Qiaojia Co., Yunnan (37) China: Shiping Co., Yunnan (38) China: Pubei, Yimen Co., Yunnan (39) China: Leqiu, Nanjian Co., Yunnan (40) China: Jinping Co., Yunnan (41) China: Wulongmu, Yongde Co., Yunnan (42) Vietnam: Sa Pa vicinity, Lao Cai (43) Vietnam: Sa Pa vicinity, Lao Cai (44) Lao PDR: Phongsaly Dist, Phongsaly Prov (45) Lao PDR: Kaleum Dist, Xe Kong Prov (46) 2000 2000 1250 1250 1300 1050 900 1100 1100 950 800 <800 <800 1500 1593 1413 1413 3100 900 900 260 900 900 2700 2700 2600 2600 1900 1900 2126 2790 760 800 1000 1000 1000 1450 1450 1400 1400 500-1260 500-1260 500-600 308 1070 800 800 1600 1600 900 900-1100 400 2560 2300 1500 1400 1560 1600 1560 1700 1900 1900 600-800 1100-1280 SCUM050410CHX SCUM05152123WD YNU-HU200109012 YNU-HU200109006 SCUM37989 YNU-HUHU01 YNU-HU2003061301 YNU-HU20024060 YNU-HU20024061 MVZ226340 KIZ-JX246 KIZ-HUB292 KIZ-HUB293 KIZ-HUB274 SYNU-XZ54 SYNU-XZ67 SYNU-XZ64 KIZ-YP152 YNU-HU20026023 YNU-HU20026022 MVZ230391 YNU-HU200206036 YNU-HU200206037 KIZ-RDXZL1 KIZ-RDXZL2 YNU-HU200107010 YNU-HU200107016 YNU-HU2002322 YNU-HU2002308 SYNU-XZ75 SYNU-XZ35 YNU-HU20025105 YNU-HU20025106 YNU-HU20025002 YNU-HU20025001 SCUM060702L YNU-HU20024040 YNU-HU20024042 YNU-HU20051005 YNU-HU20051004 KIZ-JX0709001 KIZ-JX0709002 KIZ-C21 ROM35181 ROM37390 KIZ-HN0709001 KIZ-HN0709002 YNU-HU20030724006 YNU-HU20030724005 MVZ223858 MVZ223934 YNU-HU200205151 SCUM045183CJ SCUM20030091GP YNU-HU200208005 YNU-HU2004009 YNU-HU20024012 YNU-HU20010401 YNU-HU20010505 YNU-HU20011102 ROM27866 ROM41507 FMNH258389 FMNH258383 EU979714 EU979711 EU979712 EU979713 EU979674 EU979680 EU979679 EU979678 EU979677 No data EU979675 EU979672 EU979676 EU979673 EU979710 EU979708 EU979709 EU979703 EU979648 EU979647 EU979649 EU979651 EU979652 EU979702 EU979701 EU979682 EU979681 EU979707 EU979706 EU979704 EU979705 EU979671 EU979670 EU979653 EU979654 EU979655 EU979667 EU979668 EU979661 EU979659 EU979646 EU979645 EU979650 EU979665 EU979657 EU979724 EU979725 EU979658 EU979660 EU979669 No data No data EU979683 EU979685 EU979684 EU979687 EU979686 EU979690 EU979692 EU979691 EU979688 EU979689 EU979663 EU979656 EU979778 EU979776 DQ118467 EU979777 DQ118433 EU979761 EU979760 EU979759 DQ118435 EU979791 EU979757 EU979755 EU979758 EU979756 DQ116484 DQ118466 DQ118465 EU979774 DQ118440 DQ118439 EU979739 DQ118441 EU979741 DQ118455 DQ118456 DQ118449 EU979762 DQ118468 EU979775 DQ118463 DQ118462 EU979754 DQ118434 DQ118442 DQ118443 EU979742 DQ118436 DQ118437 EU979747 EU979746 EU979738 EU979737 EU979740 EU979751 EU979744 EU979782 EU979783 EU979745 DQ118438 EU979753 EU979790 DQ118444 DQ118448 EU979764 EU979763 DQ118450 EU979765 EU979768 DQ118451 EU979769 EU979766 EU979767 EU979749 EU979743 EU979838 EU979836 DQ118511 EU979837 DQ118477* EU979821 EU979820 EU979819 DQ118479 EU979851 EU979817 EU979815 EU979818 EU979816 DQ118508 DQ118510 DQ118509 EU979834 DQ118484 DQ118483 EU979799 DQ118485 EU979801 DQ118499 DQ118500 DQ118493 EU979822 DQ118512 EU979835 DQ118507 DQ118506 EU979814 DQ118478 DQ118486 DQ118487 EU979802 DQ118480 DQ118481 EU979807 EU979806 EU979798 EU979797 EU979800 EU979811 EU979804 EU979842 EU979843 EU979805 DQ118482 EU979813 EU979850 DQ118488 DQ118492* EU979824 EU979823 DQ118494 EU979825 EU979828 DQ118495 EU979829 EU979826 EU979827 EU979809 EU979803 EU979854 EU979856 EU979857 EU979858 DQ458264* EU979916 EU979917 EU979919 EU979918 EU979911 EU979939 EU979940 EU979942 EU979941 EU979855 EU979852 EU979853 EU979874 EU979925 EU979924 EU979922 EU979926 EU979927 EU979864 EU979863 EU979876 EU979875 EU979860 EU979859 EU979861 EU979862 EU979915 EU979914 EU979906 EU979907 EU979908 EU979912 EU979913 EU979899 EU979898 EU979892 EU979891 EU979923 EU979901 EU979921 EU979893 EU979894 EU979896 EU979897 EU979909 EU979910 EU979905 DQ458263* EU979880 EU979879 EU979878 EU979877 EU979883 EU979885 EU979884 EU979881 EU979882 EU979903 EU979920 EU979945 EU979947 EU979948 EU979949 DQ458279* EU980007 EU980008 EU980010 EU980009 EU980002 EU980030 EU980031 EU980033 EU980032 EU979946 EU979943 EU979944 EU979965 EU980016 EU980015 EU980013 EU980017 EU980018 EU979955 EU979954 EU979967 EU979966 EU979951 EU979950 EU979952 EU979953 EU980006 EU980005 EU979997 EU979998 EU979999 EU980003 EU980004 EU979990 EU979989 EU979983 EU979982 EU980014 EU979992 EU980012 EU979984 EU979985 EU979987 EU979988 EU980000 EU980001 EU979996 DQ458278* EU979971 EU979970 EU979969 EU979968 EU979974 EU979976 EU979975 EU979972 EU979973 EU979994 EU980011 genus Chaparana C. cf. delacouri 1 C. cf. delacouri 2 C. cf. delacouri 3 Lao PDR: Kaleum Dist, Xe Kong Prov (47) Vietnam: Con Cuong Dist, Nghe An (48) Lao PDR: Phongsaly Dist, Phongsaly Prov (45) 920-1000 700 600-800 FMNH258619 FMNH255623 FMNH258628 EU979666 EU979664 EU979662 EU979752 EU979750 EU979748 EU979812 EU979810 EU979808 EU979904 EU979900 EU979902 EU979995 EU979991 EU979993 63 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Table 2 (continued) Species C. C. C. C. C. C. C. C. quadranus 1 quadranus 2 quadranus 3 quadranus 4 quadranus 5 unculuanus 1 unculuanus 2 aenea Locality Altitude (m) Reference specimens No. GenBank Accession Nos. mtDNA Nuclear DNA 12S-1 12S-2 16S Rhodopsin Tyrosinase China: Sangzhi, Hunan (49) China: Maowen Co., Sichuan (50) China: An Co., Sichuan (51) China: Guanyang,Wushan Co., Chongqing (52) China: Guanyang,Wushan Co., Chongqing (52) China: Jingdong Co., Yunnan (53) China: Jingdong Co., Yunnan (53) Vietnam: Sa Pa vicinity, Lao Cai (54) no data 1370 1200 1750 1750 2150 2150 1400 KIZ-JJ7 SCUM20045195CJ SCUM20030031GP YNU-HU20025111 YNU-HU20025113 YNU-HU2002502601 YNU-HU2002502702 ROM37984 EU979696 EU979695 EU979694 EU979697 EU979698 EU979699 EU979700 EU979693 EU979772 DQ118470 EU979771 DQ118471 EU979773 DQ118446 DQ118447 EU979770 EU979832 DQ118514 EU979831 DQ118515 EU979833 DQ118490* DQ118491 EU979830 EU979888 EU979887 EU979886 EU979890 EU979889 DQ458262* EU979865 EU979895 EU979979 EU979978 EU979977 EU979981 EU979980 DQ458277* EU979956 EU979986 China: China: China: China: China: China: China: China: China: Nyingchi, Xizang (55) Damxung Co., Xizang (56) Damxung Co., Xizang (56) Zöiga, Sichuan (57) Zöiga, Sichuan (57) Zöiga, Sichuan (57) Zhongdian Co., Yunnan (58) Zhongdian Co., Yunnan (58) Zhongdian Co., Yunnan (58) 3436 4200 4200 3446 3446 3500 3284 3280 3280 CIB-XM1096 KIZ-RD005 KIZ-RD015 SCUM045853WD SCUM045860WD SCUM045856WD SCUM045886WD SCUM045881WD SCUM045887WD EU979722 EU979723 EU979721 EU979718 EU979719 EU979720 EU979716 EU979715 EU979717 DQ118454 DQ118452 DQ118453 DQ118460 EU979780 EU979781 DQ118459 EU979779 DQ118457 DQ118498* DQ118496 DQ118497 DQ118504 EU979840 EU979841 DQ118503 EU979839 DQ118501 DQ458261* EU979873 EU979872 EU979869 EU979870 EU979871 EU979867 EU979866 EU979868 DQ458276* EU979964 EU979963 EU979960 EU979961 EU979962 EU979958 EU979957 EU979959 Outgroup genus Hoplobatrachus H. rugulosus 1 China: Xishuangbanna, Yunnan H. rugulosus 2 Vietnam: Tam Dao, Vinh Phu Prov. H. occipitalis 1 Mauritania: Nouakchott District H. occipitalis 2 Tanzania: Mwanza Region 500 900 280 1145 SCUM0437941 MVZ224079 MVZ235754 MVZ234146 EU979726 EU979727 EU979728 EU979729 DQ458237* EU979784 EU979785 EU979786 DQ458251* EU979844 EU979845 EU979846 DQ458258* EU979933 EU979934 EU979935 DQ458273* EU980024 EU980025 EU980026 genus Limnonectes L. fragilis 1 L. fragilis 2 L. fujianensis L. kuhlii 1 L. kuhlii 2 L. shompenorum L. grunniens L. modestus China: Mt.Limu, Hainan China: Wuzhi Shan, Hainan China: Sangang,Wuyi, Fujian China: Jinping Co., Yunnan Vietnam: Tam Dao, Vinh Phu Prov. Indonesia: Bengkulu Prov. Indonesia: Sulawesi Tenggara Prov. Indonesia: Sulawesi Tenggara Prov. 600 no data 920 900 900 30 94 76 SCUM-H008 MVZ236675 YNU-HU20026017 KIZ-RD05DT1 MVZ223972 MVZ239426 MVZ239149 MVZ239413 EU979640 EU979641 EU979639 EU979637 EU979638 EU979642 EU979643 EU979644 DQ458235* EU979733 DQ118473 DQ118475 EU979732 EU979734 EU979735 EU979736 DQ458249* EU979793 DQ118517* DQ118519* EU979792 EU979794 EU979795 EU979796 DQ458270* EU979929 DQ458260* DQ458269* EU979928 EU979931 EU979932 EU979930 DQ458285* EU980020 DQ458275* DQ458284* EU980019 EU980022 EU980023 EU980021 genus Fejervarya F. limnocharis 2 F. limnocharis 3 F. cancrivora Vietnam: Tam Dao, Vinh Phu Prov. China: Sanya, Hainan Indonesia: Sulawesi Selatan Prov. 950 10 315 MVZ226347 SCUM-H003CJ MVZ239403 EU979730 EU979731 No data EU979787 EU979788 EU979789 EU979847 EU979848 EU979849 EU979936 EU979937 EU979938 EU980027 EU980028 EU980029 genus Nanorana N. parkeri 1 N. parkeri 2 N. parkeri 3 N. pleskei 1 N. pleskei 2 N. pleskei 3 N. ventripunctata 1 N. ventripunctata 2 N. ventripunctata 3 and the ROM (Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, Canada). Most of the identifications for these specimens took place in the field and are largely based on either female and/or juveniles and are considered to be very tentative (Table 2). A total of 15 specimens from 10 species were designated as outgroup taxa based on the results of Frost et al. (2006) and Roelants et al. (2004). All sampled species and locations are given in Table 2 and Fig. 3. 2.2. Extraction, amplification, and sequencing Muscle or liver tissue samples were stored in 95% or 100% ethanol, or frozen at 80 °C. DNA was extracted using the standard 3-step phenol/chloroform extractions (Sambrook et al., 1989). Amplification was performed in a 25–50 ll volume reaction with the following procedures for both the rhodopsin and tyrosinase genes: initial denaturation step with 4 min at 94 °C; 35 cycles of denaturation 1 min at 94 °C, annealing for 1 min at 51 °C (rhodopsin) and 49 °C (tyrosinase), extension for 1 min at 72 °C; final extension for 10 min at 72 °C. The same PCR protocols were used for the mtDNA genes except for annealing at 55 °C. Primer sequences are given in Table 3. Purified PCR products were directly sequenced with an ABI automated DNA sequencer in both directions for each species. They were submitted for a BLAST search in GenBank to ensure the target sequences had been amplified. 2.3. Data analysis Nucleotide sequences were aligned for each gene using Clustal X 1.81 (Thompson et al., 1997) with default parameters, and then verified by eye using MEGA 3.1 (Kumar et al., 2004). We plotted the transition to transversion ratios as determined by DAMBE (Xia, 2000) against the sequence divergence using F84 to test our data sets for saturation. The five sequence data sets showed no saturation effects, and thus all substitutions in these genes were used for further analyses. These plots are available from the authors upon request. Because mtDNA genes do not freely segregate and recombine, and are virtually inherited as one linkage group, the three mtDNA gene segments (12S rRNA-1, -2, 16S rRNA) were concatenated into a single partition and analyzed simultaneously. Two hypervariable regions, with a total of 110 bp, were excluded from further analysis due to ambiguity of alignment. Such exclusion increases the reliability of the phylogenetic analysis (Swofford et al., 1996). Phylogenetic history was hypothesized using Bayesian inference (BI) as implemented in MrBayes 3.1.2 (Ronquist and Huelsenbeck, 2003) incorporating both nonpartitioned and partitioned strategies. Each data set followed its own best-fit model in the analysis of the combined data set. The data were partitioned by gene and by codon position. The best-fitting nucleotide substitution models for each of the seven partitions and the unpartitioned data set were selected by using the Akaike Information Criterion as 64 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Fig. 3. Sampling sites of all ingroup taxa used in this study. Site names and coordinates are listed in Table 2. Two groups (I, II) were mapped, including Clade A (green circle), B (blue circle), C (red circle), D (yellow circle), and E (purple circle). Map is from Google Earth, Copyright 2008. All rights reserved. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this paper.) Table 3 Primers used in PCR and sequencing of dicroglossid frogs in the tribe Paini. Locus Primer Primer sequence Size (bp) Cited source 12S rRNA-1 FS01 R16 L02510 H03063 L1091 H1478 Rhod1A Rhod1D Tyr1G Tyr1B 50 -AAC GCT AAG ATG AAC CCT AAA AAG TTC T-30 50 -ATA GTG GGG TAT CTA ATC CCA GTT TGT TTT-30 50 -CGC CTG TTT ATC AAA AAC AT-30 50 -CTC CGG TTT GAA CTC AGA TC-30 50 -AAA AAG CTT CAA ACT GGG ATT AGA TAC CCC ACT AT-30 50 -TGA CTG CAG AGG GTG ACG GGC GGT GTG T-30 50 -ACC ATG AAC GGA ACA GAA GGY CC-30 50 -GTA GCG AAG AAR CCT TCA AMG TA-30 50 -TGC TGG GCR TCT CTC CAR TCC CA-30 50 -AGG TCC TCY TRA GGA AGG AAT G-30 411 Sumida and Ogata (1998) Sumida et al. (2000a,b) kocher et al. (1989) 12S rRNA-2 16S rRNA Exon 1 of rhodopsin gene Exon 1 of tyrosinase gene implemented in Modeltest 3.7 (Posada and Crandall, 1998). The model GTR + I + G was selected for the mtDNA sequences. The following models were selected for analysis of the nuDNA data: TrN + I + G for the first codon position in the rhodopsin partition; F81 + I for the second codon position in the rhodopsin partition; HKY + G for the third codon position in the rhodopsin partition; TVM + I + G for the first codon position in the tyrosinase partition; TVM + G for the second codon position in the tyrosinase partition; and GTR + G for the third codon position in the tyrosinase partition. BI involved 300 million generations with sampling trees every 100th generation. The first 8000 trees were discarded as burn-in, i.e., before the log-likelihood scores stabilized. Two independent runs with four Markov chains were performed. A 50% majority rule consensus of the sampled trees was constructed to calculate the Bayesian posterior probabilities (BPP) of the tree nodes. Maximum parsimony (MP) analyses were implemented using PAUP 4.0b10a (Swofford, 2003). For the final combined analyses, heuristic MP searches were executed for 1000 replicates with all characters treated as unordered and equally weighted. Treesearching used tree bisection reconnection (TBR) branch swapping. A heuristic MP search proved to be impossible for the separated data sets, i.e., mtDNA and nuDNA alone, owing to computational 400 550 316 Bossuyt and Milinkovitch (2000) 532 limitations. To assess nodal reliabilities using bootstrap analysis (BBP), a ‘‘fast” stepwise-addition bootstrap analysis (BBP) was conducted using 1000 replicates. The BBPs were subsequently mapped on the 50% majority rule BI tree. For the nodes in the total evidence dataset, we also conducted a partitioned Bremer support analysis (PBS; Bremer, 1988, 1994) using TreeRot.v2 (Sorenson, 1999). This measured the relative contribution of each gene class (mtDNA and nuDNA) towards the total Bremer support (Fig. 6b). 3. Results 3.1. Sequence characteristics All 99 specimens were sequenced for the 12S rRNA-2 and 16S rRNA fragments. Sequences of the 12S rRNA-1 fragment were incomplete for four specimens (see Table 2) although 422 bp of nucleotide positions were obtained for most specimens. For 12S rRNA-2, one region with 28 bp was excluded from analysis due to ambiguous alignment; the remaining 352 bp were used for analyses. The alignment of 16S gene sequences produced fragments 601 bp in length, of which one region with 82 bp was excluded J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 from further analysis due to ambiguous alignment. The final matrix of all aligned mtDNA data comprised 1292 nucleotide positions of which 528 were variable and 469 were potentially phylogenetically informative. For the two nuclear fragments, all 99 specimens were successfully sequenced (Table 2). All sequences were translated into amino acids without stop codons and the alignment did not contain indels. A total of 521 bp of tyrosinase and 315 bp of rhodopsin were resolved. Among these combined sequences, 243 sites were variable and 204 sites were potentially phylogenetically informative. All sequences were deposited in GenBank (Table 2). 3.2. Phylogenetic analysis of the nuDNA We analyzed the nuclear gene data using a total evidence approach. All nuDNA sequence data were combined unconditionally. The 50% majority rule consensus tree (partitioned strategies) inferred from BI resolved five Clades (A–E) (Fig. 4). No significant differences occurred between the topology of the nonpartitioned and partitioned strategies. All analyses differed only in the relationships among Clades A, B, and D, which were weakly supported (BPP < 90, BBP < 50). In total, 47 nodes received strong support (BPP > 90), among which 31 received good BBPs (>80) and 15 had poor BBPs (<50). The monophyly of the tribe Paini, comprising those taxa from genera Paa, Nanorana, and Chaparana, was strongly supported (99% BPP and 96% BBP). Clade A included Paa yei (34), P. exilispinosa (14, 15), P. spinosa (25, 27, and 28), P. jiulongensis (16), P. shini (23, 24), P. verrucospinosa (33), P. robertingeri (22), P. boulengeri (3–10), and two unidentified species of Paa (30, 46). Within Clade A, five subclades (A1–A5) were recovered but with unresolved relationships. Clade B contained two subclades (B1, B2). Subclade B1 only included one population of C. delacouri (47). Another two populations of C. delacouri (45, 48), one population of P. verrucospinosa (32), two population of P. spinosa (26, 29), and one unidentified species of Paa (45) constituted subclade B2. Clade C included four subclades (C1–C4). Paa yunnanensis (35–43), P. liui (18), and P. bourreti (44) constituted subclade C1. Subclade C2 contained C. aenea (54) and C. unculuanus (53). Subclades C3 and C4 only included C. quadranus (49–52), and P. taihangnica (31), respectively. Clade D consisted of two specimens of P. liebigii (17) only. Clade E contained three species of Nanorana sensu stricto, including N. ventripunctata (58), N. pleskei (57), and N. parkeri (55, 56) as subclade E2, and other five species of Paa, including P. conaensis (13), P. maculosa (19), P. medogensis (20, 21), P. arnoldi (1, 2), and P. chayuensis (11, 12) as subclade E1. 3.3. Phylogenetic analysis of the mtDNA Fig. 5 shows the 50% majority rule consensus tree from the BI analysis. In total, 72 nodes received strong support (BPP P 90), among which, 46 received strong BBPs (P90), 13 with moderate support (90 > BBP P 70) and 13 with poor BBPs (<50). Congruent with the results of the nuDNA data, monophyly of the tribe Paini was supported with a high BPP (100) and moderate BBP (86). Whereas analysis of the nuDNA data resolved five Clades, the mtDNA data yielded a tree with two distinct groups (I, II). Group I, with a high BPP (100) and moderate BBP (79), included those taxa resolved in Clades A and B with the nuDNA data. The monophyly of Clade A recovered with the nuDNA data was not recovered by the mtDNA analyses. The relationships of subclades A1–A5 and Clade B remained ambiguous. Group II included those taxa related to Clades C–E based on the nuDNA sequences. This group received high nodal support (BPP = 100, BBP = 99). The monophyly of Clade E recovered with nuDNA was not supported by mtDNA (Fig. 5), but mtDNA still recovered two subclades (Fig. 5: E1 and E2). 65 3.4. Phylogenetic analysis of the combined mitochondrial and nuclear genes (mtDNA + nuDNA) When mapped geographically, the clades contained neighboring localities (Fig. 3). Names were applied to these clades (Table 4) with fair certainty when the samples included the type localities of species, which was true for most taxa. Monophyly of the tribe Paini was supported by the combined data with strong nodal support (Fig. 6). The total evidence analysis resulted in a tree having a topology similar to that of our mtDNA data alone and major groups I and II were obtained with greater support (I: BPP = 99, BBP = 95; II: BPP = 99, BBP = 100). The five major Clades recovered with the nuDNA data were also supported by the combined data (Fig. 6). Clades A and B constituted Group I. However, the branching sequence for taxa within Clade A still remained enigmatic. Within Group II, Clades C and E were supported, but the relationships of Clade D (P. liebigii) remained unclear. The partitioned Bremer support analysis indicated that, of the 83 resolved nodes on the concatenated MP tree (Fig. 6), 50 received significant support (PBS > 4) from the mtDNA data alone. In particular, substantial support occurred in the terminal taxa (Fig. 6). Substantial Bremer support for 30 nodes was attributable to the nuDNA data, including four nodes with conflicting PBS values compared to the mtDNA data. Overall, the nuDNA data tended to resolve more basal nodes within all groups. 4. Discussion 4.1. Trees Our results presently provide the most comprehensive phylogeny for the endemic Asian tribe Paini. The study encompasses a substantial portion of the range of the majority of recognized species (25 species; Table 2) and it includes intraspecific samplings for several species. Analyses of these data recover major clades in the tribe Paini, and many terminal relationships are resolved. Analysis of the mtDNA (Fig. 5) recovered two major groups (I and II) within the tribe Paini as also attained by Jiang et al. (2005: Fig. 2b). Compared with Jiang et al. (2005), we added eight species to the phylogeny and, importantly, used a large number of samples for those species that are suspected to include cryptic species. Herein, we used both mtDNA and two nuclear genes to infer the phylogenetic relationships of the Asian spiny frogs. When evaluated separately, the rhodopsin and tyrosinase gene trees (not shown) resolved fewer branches than the combined nuDNA data. This result owed to limited sequence divergence. Nonetheless, our results indicated that these two nuclear genes were informative at the base of the tree, especially in recovering the five major clades (A–E) in the tribe Paini (Fig. 4). Analysis of the final concatenated data (mtDNA + nuDNA; Fig. 6) did not remarkably improve resolution and confidence, as might be expected, but rather resulted in loss of resolution and/ or support. This was particularly apparent in basal branching relationships. The total evidence data produced almost identical results to the mtDNA alone, particularly in recovering two groups. The mtDNA genes examined herein evolved at a much faster rate than the nuDNA and consequently the former data provided a greater number of informative characters. The difference in number of characters could have resulted in the mtDNA overpowering the signal from the nuDNA when the two data sets were combined. For example, nuDNA strongly supported the monophyly of Clade A (BPP = 100, BBP = 96) with five subclades (Fig. 4), but the monophyly was not recovered by the mtDNA alone. The partitioned Bremer support analyses (Fig. 6b) indicated that the mtDNA data had conflicting PBS values compared to the nuDNA data for Clade A 66 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Fig. 4. Phylogenetic hypothesis derived from a Bayesian inference analysis of nuclear rhodopsin and tyrosinase DNA sequence data. Numbers near branches are Bayesian posterior probabilities (P90) and bootstrap proportions from a maximum parsimony analysis (P70). Vertical bars indicate clade designation. Bold letters and numbers at the nodes refer to the clades recovered in the nuDNA analysis. Species names and localities are shown on the tips of the tree. J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 67 Fig. 5. Phylogenetic hypothesis derived from a Bayesian inference analysis of mtDNA sequence data. Numbers near branches are Bayesian posterior probabilities (P90) and bootstrap proportions from a maximum parsimony analysis (P70). Vertical bars indicate clade designation. Bold letters and numbers at the nodes refer to the clades recovered in the nuDNA analysis. Species names and localities are shown on the tips of the tree. (1/11). Clearly, Clade A based on the final concatenated data (Fig. 6a) had a lower support index of BPP = 99 and BBP = 87 compared to the nuclear data alone. Conflicting PBS values between mtDNA and nuDNA were also present in the basal nodes of Clade C. The clade is supported as being a monophyletic group in all analyses with high BPP support only. The PBS analysis indicated that most of the support may be attributed to the nuDNA gene sequence data, though still with low resolution (Fig. 6b: 1/3). 68 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Fig. 6. The phylogenetic hypothesis derived from the combined data including mtDNA and nuclear sequences. (a) The 50% majority rule consensus from a Bayesian inference analysis. Numbers near branches are Bayesian posterior probabilities (P90) and bootstrap proportions from a maximum parsimony analysis (P70). (b) The strict consensus tree from the maximum parsimony analysis. Numbers above the lines or beside the nodes are partitioned Bremer support (mtDNA/nuDNA). Vertical bars indicate species and clade designation. Species names and localities are shown on the tips of the tree. The trees obtained from the analyses of mtDNA and nuDNA sequence data were usually congruent. In areas where the two genomes disagreed, the conflicting nodes either were not resolved or they received low bootstrap support, reflecting a dearth of data. For example, the status of Clade D within the tribe Paini remained unresolved. Additional nuDNA sequences should be added to better test these hypotheses. The hypothesis based on the total evidence analysis (Fig. 6) forms the best current estimate of the phylogenetic relationships within the tribe Paini. This tree will be used for the discussions that follow. 4.2. Monophyly of the tribe Paini All analyses (Figs. 4–6) supported the monophyly of the nominal tribe Paini with strong nodal support. Partitioned Bremer support analyses indicated that the nuDNA data contributed 81% of the support and the mtDNA data offered 19% toward the concatenated parsimony tree (Fig. 6b: 13/3). These findings were concordant with the results of Che et al. (2007), Chen et al. (2005), and Roelants et al. (2004), but conflicted with the tree of Frost et al. (2006). The most likely explanation for the difference is taxon sampling. Frost et al. J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Table 4 Indicated nomendatorial adjustments for dicroglossid frogs in the tribe Paini evaluated in this study. Major clade Subclade Subclade Node Genus Species I A A1 A1a Quasipaa A2 A1b A2a Quasipaa Quasipaa A2b A3 A4 A5 Bl Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa Quasipaa B2 Quasipaa C1 Nanorana spinosa? exilispinosa? jiulongensis verrucospinosa? sp. nov.? boulengeri yei shini sp. nov. delacouri? sp. nov. ? verrucospinosa? sp. nov.? yunnanensis B II C C2 C2a C2b El E1a E1b E1c E1d Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana E2 E2a E2b E2c Nanorana Nanorana Nanorana C3 C4 D E Synonyms robertingeri liui, bourreti aenea unculuanus quadranus taihangnica liebigii conaensis medogensis maculosa chayuensis? arnoldi? ventripunctata pleskei parkeri (2006) evaluated all living groups of amphibians and most relationships were well resolved, particularly at higher taxonomic levels. However, their study included only three species in the tribe Paini. The large sampling of outgroup taxa may have caused a bias, possibly involving either long-branch attraction (Felsenstein, 1978) or longbranch repulsion (Siddall and Whiting, 1999). Furthermore, the difference between our trees and those of Frost et al. (2006) might owe to their use of incomplete sequence data for several taxa. The absence of nuDNA data for N. pleskei in Frost et al. (2006) precluded our re-evaluating their paraphyly of the tribe Paini. Using partial sequences of 12S and 16S rRNA, Jiang et al. (2005) obtained a united tribe Paini in their phenetic, neighbor-joining analysis, but this arrangement received no nodal support. Consistent with Frost et al. (2006, 138), our revaluation of Jiang et al.’s (2005) data confirmed that the monophyly of the group was ambiguous in their MP (Fig. 2b) and ML analyses. Our enlarged mtDNA data set supported the monophyly of the tribe (Fig. 5), and stronger support was obtained from the nuDNA and combined data (Figs. 4 and 6). Jiang et al. (2005) excluded all indel, missing and ambiguous sites, but in doing so likely deleted some useful characters (Giribet and Wheeler, 1999). The choice and number of outgroup taxa may also be contributing to the discrepancies between the results of Jiang et al. (2005) and this study because outgroup choice is critical (Cameron et al., 2004; Milinkovitch and Lyons-Weiler, 1998; Tarrio et al., 2000; Ware et al., 2008). 4.3. Geographic correspondence of clades 4.3.1. Alternative hypotheses In the following discussion, the primary subclades are denoted by a letter. The alphabetical sequence is derived from the total evidence tree (Fig. 6). In general, there is a high correspondence between DNA variation and location of samples (Figs. 3 and 6). On one hand, this is not surprising. These frogs occur in montane streams and most of the sample sites occur on isolated mountains. Thus, it is anticipated that most populations can be identified 69 genetically. On the other hand, because the montane streams are often part of the same drainage system, we could expect possible gene flow. The general absence of gene flow suggests that each isolated mountain region serves as a sky island for these frogs. If true, then the total number of species could be grossly underestimated. The labeled nodes on the cladogram of Fig. 6 correspond to grouped localities depicted in Fig. 3. Group I largely consists of species that occur east of Hengduan Mountain Ranges, including southern China, Vietnam, and Laos, and from relatively low elevations. Group II containes samples distributed in low to high elevations predominantly in Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan Mountain Ranges. The sister groups to the Paini (genera Hoplobatrachus, Limnonectes, and Fejervarya) occur mostly at low elevations (Table 2), suggesting that high elevation appears to be the derived ecological state for Paini. For the purpose of this discussion, we have defined low elevations as those occurring below about 1500 m, moderate elevations as 1500–2500 m, and high elevations as above 2500 m. These are generalized ranges of elevations for species and there are exceptions to distributional patterns, especially among the deep river valleys, particularly in the Hengduan Mountains of western China where opportunities for short distance vertical migration are possible (Yang, 1993). For example, P. arnoldi could be found from 1000 to 2000 m in western Yunnan (Table 2 and Appendix A). 4.3.2. Major Clade I Group I contains two major lineages, Clade A and Clade B (Fig. 6), which were also recovered by analyses of the nuDNA data only (Fig. 4). Clade A consists of low elevation frogs (mostly <1500 m; Table 2 and Appendix A) occurring throughout China southward from Sichuan province in the west to Henan Province in the east extending into south-central Vietnam and southern Laos (Fig. 3). Among the five major Clades, Clade A has the widest distribution. Subclade A1 (Fig. 6) includes samplings from five localities and could be divided into two populations (A1a, A1b). With strong nodal support, the phylogenetic analysis clearly unites these five localities. Localities 27 and 14 form a sister group relationship, and yet locality 14 is geographically near locality 16. Subclade A2a contains two populations, one from southern Yunnan province, China (25) near the border of Vietnam and the other from isolated Tam Dao Mountain in northern Vietnam (7, 33). These two populations are genetically well differentiated in their mtDNA only (Fig. 5). An assessment of gene flow within this assemblage using highly variable nuDNA markers is essential for recognizing subdivisions deserving of species recognition. North and east of these two sample sites, there is a widespread assemblage of slightly genetically differentiated populations, Subclade A2b (3–10, and 22). Subclade A3, along with A4 and A5, are sister group lineages of the monophyletic subclades A1 and A2. Resolution of relationships among subclades A3–A5 differs among the analyses of mtDNA, nuDNA and the total evidence data (Figs. 4–6). The nodes involved in the various associations are not supported and the relationships among these three clades could be considered to be unresolved. All three lineages (A3–A5) are very distinct genetically and those that include two sampling locations (A4, A5) show little differentiation within them. Clade B forms the sister group of Clade A. Subclade B1 (47) is a population in southern Laos. It occurs near another specimen from locality 46 in subclade A5. The two lineages exhibit significant mtDNA and nuDNA divergence, and undoubtedly constitute two different species. Subclade B2 contains a suite of localities ranging from southern Yunnan province, China southward into extreme northern Laos and northern Vietnam (Fig. 3). There is some mixing of haplotypes between Laos and Vietnam suggesting the occurrence of gene flow. 70 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 4.3.3. Major Clade II This group contains three major Clades: C–E (Fig. 6). The phylogenetic associations of these Clades vary depending on the data partition. Most species of Clade C, a mix of taxa occurring in low to high elevations, occur in the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and Hengduan Mountain Ranges. There are four major subclades: C1–C4. The monophyly of Clade C only received substantial BPP support (94, 95, and 99) in all analyses (Figs. 4–6). Subclade C1, a moderatehigh elevation group (Table 2 and Appendix A), is distributed from southern Sichuan province southward through Yunnan province into northern Vietnam. Given the topographic complexities in this region, it is possible that more detailed collecting might reveal substantial substructuring. Subclade C2 contains two highly differentiated populations that occur at moderate elevations (Table 2; Appendix A). One population (53) occurs in southern Yunnan province, China and the other (54) in Sa Pa, extreme northern Vietnam. The high level of divergence in both nuDNA and mtDNA supports the division of the two species. Interestingly, unlike the Vietnamese specimens (Dubois and Ohler, 2005), those from southern Yunnan lack nuptial spines in males (Liu and Hu, 1961; Yang, 1991). Monophyletic subclade C3 occurs in central China at low to moderate elevations. The clade has a wide distribution mostly occurring along the Qinling, Taihang, and Daba mountains. The group exhibits little genetic differentiation among the sample sites. Finally, subclade C4, located at a low elevation in east-central China, consists of a single sampling site. These frogs (C3, C4), which are also distinctly differentiated genetically, also lack nuptial spines. Clade D, as previously noted, has ambiguous relationships with respect to clades C and E. Further study will be needed to clarify the relationships of these groups. The isolated population (17) from the southern Himalayas occurs in Yakong County, Xizang province at a high elevation and it is very distinctive genetically. Finally, Clade E, a moderate to high altitude group, was recovered by an analysis of nuDNA only (Fig. 4). The mtDNA data (Fig. 5) did not resolve this association. All of the samples in this Clade occur on the Qinghai-Xizang (Tibetan) Plateau and in the Hengduan Mountains. Within this group, two major subclades occur. Subclade E1 mostly occurs from the slopes of the southern Himalayas eastward to the Hengduan Mountains of western Yunnan province, China. Subclade E2 is distributed on the hinterland of Xizang region with the highest elevation (mostly above 3000 m) among all species in the tribe Paini. This group is most often referred to the genus Nanorana. 4.4. Names and geography: taxonomic implications 4.4.1. Genera allocation Undoubtedly, the tribe Paini is monophyletic. The species among the nominal tribe Paini sensu Dubois have been suggested to comprise two to six genera (Liu and Hu, 1961; Fei, 1999; Fei et al., 2005; Frost et al., 2006; Dubois, 1987 ‘‘1986”, 1992; Dubois, 2005; Ohler and Dubois, 2006). Presently, a consensus for the taxonomy among members of this tribe Paini is wanting. Ohler and Dubois (2006) proposed six generic divisions including Allopaa, Chaparana, Chrysopaa, Gynandropaa, Nanorana, and Quasipaa (Fig. 2a, Table 1), among which Allopaa and Chrysopaa were monotypic genera. This taxonomic arrangement strongly conflicts with our analysis. The designation of genera in the absence of a phylogeny, whether based on morphology, molecular genetics or both, can result in taxonomic instability, if not chaos. Our phylogenetic hypothesis does not support the validity of two genera, Chaparana, and Gynandropaa. The taxa allied to Gynandropaa, including P. liui, P. yunnanensis, P. bourreti, and C. quadranus, did not constitute a monophyletic group based on any partition of our data or the combined data (Figs. 4–6). Furthermore, those species of Chaparana including C. aenea, C. unculuanus, P. taihangnica, P. arnoldi, P. conaensis, P. medogensis, P. maculosa, P. chayuensis, P. arnoldi, and P. liebigii, were not resolved as a monophyletic group. Nanorana (E2) sensu stricto is the only clearly supported monophyletic group of Ohler and Dubois (2006). The three species of Nanorana represent a classic example of adaptive evolution in high elevations (see Table 2 and Appendix A). For example, these species have secondarily reduced vocal sacs and columella (Hu et al., 1985; Zhao and Yang, 1997). Our molecular analyses supported the opinion of Boulenger (1920) that the high elevation species of Nanorana represented dwarfed, degraded forms derived from lower elevation ‘‘Paa”. Taxonomy should reflect evolutionary history and only monophyletic groups should be recognized as taxonomic ranks. A taxonomic arrangement based on phylogeny could unite all species in Group I into a single genus. The oldest available name for Group I is Quasipaa, as noted by Jiang et al. (2005). Similarly, all species in Group II should be referred to the genus Nanorana as suggested by Chen et al. (2005) and Frost et al. (2006) (Table 4). 4.4.2. Species designation Given the taxonomic confusion that often accompanies the identification of species in this tribe; we mapped the resolved clades before assigning names (Figs. 3 and 6). This served two goals: first, it allowed for the detection of any widespread species and second it allowed for the visualization of the geographic limits of each clade. Some, but not all samples were collected from type localities. Where type localities were sampled, it is possible to comment on the validity of some species. Paa spinosa is likely a species complex, rather than a single species. Both mitochondrial and nuclear data suggested that the populations currently under the name P. spinosa belong to at least three independent evolutionary lineages (subclades A1a, A2a, and B2). Unfortunately, we did not have samples from the type locality of P. spinosa. Further study should be conducted to clarify the relationship between P. spinosa and P. exilispinosa in A1a (Fig. 6). Furthermore, we identified the samples from Fujian province, China (A1b, 16) as P. jiulongensis. Clearly, present molecular data supported the morphological recognion that A1b is highly differentiated genetically from the remaining populations (A1a). Recently, Hu et al. (2005) reported P. verrucospinosa from Mengsong, Yunnan, China. We used the same specimens as Hu et al. (2005) and these specimens (32) unambiguously nested within subclade B2. They did not cluster with samples of P. verrucospinosa from Tam Dao, Vietnam (33) (A2a). Because it is possible that P. verrucospinosa from Sa Pa, Vietnam, the supposed type locality (given as Chapa), is not the same species as the populations from Tam Dao, Vietnam (designated as part of the original type series), specimens of P. verrucospinosa from Sa Pa are required to resolve this taxonomic conundrum. Subclade B2, including ‘‘P. spinosa”, P. verrucospinosa, P. sp., and C. cf. delacouri from locations 26, 29, 32, 45, and 48, received strong support. Samples from 47 were also originally identified as C. delacouri, which was highly differentiated genetically from the other two C. delacouri in B1. Unfortunately, the three C. delacouri we sequenced were not from the type locality, Bac-Kan, Vietnam. In the interest of nomenclatorial stability, any assignment of species names within subclades A1a, A2a, B1, and B2 is premature until the type localities of P. spinosa, P. exilispinosa, P. verrusospinosa, and C. delacouri can be sampled and analyzed genetically. Moreover, combined analyses of morphological data from type specimens are urgent to clarify the present taxonomic chaos (Table 4). Our molecular data clearly supported the subclade A5 as a new undescribed species, which coincided with our morphological observation (unpublished data). J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 71 Paa robertingeri nested deeply within P. boulengeri and does not appear to be a valid species. We therefore suggest that P. robertingeri should be synonymized into P. boulengeri. The specimens of P. boulengeri (9) and P. robertingeri (22) were collected from their respective type localities. Both P. liui (P. muta Su and Li, 1986) (18) and P. bourreti (43) from their respective type localities nested within P. yunnanensis (subclade C1), and they appear to be junior synonyms of the latter (Table 4). Given the plethora of available names in the tribe Paini, our analyses emphasize the necessity to morphologically evaluate type material and to collect molecular samples from type localities before proposing taxonomic changes. Informed sampling is essential for taxonomic accuracy and stability. Our analyses indicate that molecular tools, an important complement of morphology, are very effective at detecting cryptic species. ensis, was supported. This result is not surprising given that these species were once considered to be either conspecific with, or subspecies of P. maculosa. Due to the absence of specimens from the type locality of P. arnoldi (Pangnamdim, Nam Tamai Valley, Triangle, northern Myanmar), we could not evaluate the validity of this species in China (Yang, 1991), which is currently recognized as a junior synonym P. chayuensis (Fei et al., 2005). In summary, because the presence and distribution of nuptial spines are highly homoplastic, classifications based on these attributes do not reflect evolutionary history. This is particularly true in the formation of species groups. Regardless, spines can serve as informative characters for recognizing species. Further phylogenetic investigations should shed light on the evolution of spines. 4.5. The validity of utility of spinules Karyotype variation appears to correspond to the phylogeny of these frogs. As Figs. 4–6 reveal, P. taihangnica, C. quadranus, C. unculuanus, P. liui, and P. yunnanensis are members of Clade C. Within Clade C, P. yunnanensis, P. liui, and C. unculuanus, for which karyotypic data are known, have an increased number of chromosomes (Wu and Zhao, 1984; Liu and Jiu, 1984; Tan and Wu, 1987; Li and Hu, 1994, 1996). The karyotype of P. yunnanensis and P. liui, consists of 64T, and that of C. unculuanus is 2n = 40. These states represent chromosomal deviations from the standard ranid karyological formula of 2n = 26 biarmed chromosomes (Li and Hu, 1999). Fig. 6 shows that those species with 2n = 26 including P. boulengeri, P. chayuensis, P. exlispinosa, P. maculosa, P. jiulongensis, P. robertingeri, P. spinosa, P. taihangnica, C. quadranus, P. verrucospinosa, and N. parkeri (Hu, 2004; Pang et al., 2002) did not constitute a monophyletic group. They exhibit the plesiomorphic karotype. In contrast, the derived state of 64T is a clear synapomorphy for P. liui and P. yunnanensis. And it is possible that the 40 biarmed karyotype of C. unculuanus constitutes either a synapomorphic transitional state to the 64T karyotype or an autapomorphy. Body spinules, a secondary sexual characteristic of adult males, play an important role in the life history of these frogs and their allies. The lack of congruence between the molecular and morphological data sets indicates that some species have independently, secondarily, lost the nuptial spines. The parallel losses create havoc in the present classification. Clade C is composed of C. quadranus, C. unculuanus, P. taihangnica, P. yunnanensis, P. bourreti, and P. liui. Within this clade, C. quadranus, C. unculuanus, and P. taihangnica lack spines, and C. aenea, P. yunnanensis, P. bourreti, and P. liui are characterized by spines forming two patches on the chest (Dubois and Ohler, 2005; Fei et al., 2005). Our tree strongly conflicts with morphological assessments suggested by Ohler and Dubois (2006). For example, in their analyses, P. yunnanensis and P. bourreti were depicted as being distantly related to C. quadranus and C. unculuanus (Fig. 2a). The taxonomic validity of the two Chinese species, C. quadranus and C. unculuanus, has always been controversial. Dubois (1992) assigned these two species to genus Chaparana. Initially they were classified as Rana quadranus and R. unculuanus by Liu and Hu (1961), who suggested that R. quadranus is related to group Spinosae (now species of Paa) in ecological habits and body features. Dubois (1987 ‘‘1986”) once placed C. quadranus into Rana (Paa), and C. unculuanus in Rana (Rana). However, Zhao et al. (2000) proposed the two species should be retained in Rana due to their ambiguous status. Although these two species were placed in Paa by Fei et al. (1990) and Fei (1999), they were subsequently assigned to the genera Feirana and Unculuanus, respectively (Fei et al., 2005). The taxonomic disagreements reflect the fact that neither species possesses hypertrophied forearms and keratinized spines on chest of males, i.e., the secondary sex characters characteristic of male Paa. Paa yei (in Group I) and P. taihangnica (in Group II) are distinct species separated from C. quadranus (Chen and Jiang, 2002; Chen et al., 2002). However, these species were incorrectly transferred to Feirana by Fei et al. (2005), mainly due to the absence of hypertrophied forearms and keratinized spines. Our phylogeny also conflicts with other species groups assignments. Paa shini (A4), along with P. boulengeri and P. robertingeri (A2b), were placed in the P. boulengeri species group by Fei (1999) and Fei et al. (2005) due to similar distributions of spines (Table 1). However, our molecular phylogeny did not support this arrangement. Similarly, monophyly was not supported for the morphologically based P. liebigii species group, including P. liebigii and P. conaensis (Table 1). Unfortunately, we cannot evaluate the validity of the P. yunnanensis species group of Fei et al. (2005) because P. feae has remained unknown since its discovery (Sclater, 1892) in Yunnan, China (Yang and Wu, personal communication). Presently, only the P. maculosa species group, including P. chayuensis, P. maculosa, and P. medong- 4.6. Karyotypic evolution 4.7. Implications for conservation Most species of frogs in the Paini and their tadpoles live in swift, rocky streams in forested areas. The specific habitat requirements suggest that populations are likely to have high genetic divergences because the species are probably poor overland dispersers. Given the extensive genetic differentiation among sampling sites, this prediction appears to be reasonable. The recognition of subclades A1a, A2a, A5, B1, and B2 as separate evolutionary lineages should be further studied. It is important to analyze type material morphologically and give exact species designations for the five subclades. Individual cryptic species have smaller ranges than the entire group. Consequently, individual species have greater vulnerability to extinction. Biodiversity inventories of frogs based on morphology alone will not be sufficient to capture the extent of variability that conservation requires. Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge G.-f. Wu, H. Zhao, S.-q. Lu, S. Huang, D. Wang, P. Guo, X.-m. Wen, H.-x. Cai, J.-t. Li, X.-m. Zeng, and J.-p. Jiang for assistance in fieldwork or providing tissues in their care. We also would like to extend our sincere gratitude to the following people and institutions for the help during loan of material: H. Voris and A. Resetar (Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, USA), A. Lathrop and R. MacCulloch (Royal Ontario Museum, Canada) and C. Cicero (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Berkeley, USA). A. Lathrop kindly helped to prepare Figs. 1 and 3 and provided other essential assistance and feedback. R. MacCulloch assisted with accurate French translations. Technical support 72 J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 from workers in the lab of Y.-p. Zhang is gratefully acknowledged. We thank Dr. K. Adler, C. Blair, A. Lathrop, R. MacCulloch, E.-m. Zhao, and four anonymous reviewers for insightful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript. This work was supported by grants from the National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program, 2007CB411600), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (30621092), the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Natural Science Foundation of Yunnan Province, the Applied Fundmental Research Foundation of Yunnan Province, and the Bureau of Science and Technology of Yunnan Province. Appendix A The elevation information of some known species in the tribe Paini for reference in this study (Chen and Jiang, 2002; Chen et al., 2002; Fei, 1999; Fei et al., 1990; Hu, 2004; Hu et al., 2005; Yang, 1991). P. boulengeri: P. exlispinosa: P. jiulongensis: P. robertingeri: P. shini: P. spinosa: P. verrucospinosa: P. yei: P. chayuensis: P. conaensis: P. liebigii: P. liui: P. maculosa: P. medogensis: P. taihangnica: P. arnoldi: P. yunnanensis: C. quadranus: C. unculuanus: N. parkeri: N. pleskei: N. ventripunctata: 700–1900 m 500–1400 m >800 m 650–1500 m 1000 m 500–1500 m 1400, 1600 m 424 m 1000–1540 m 2900–3400 m 2000–3500 m 2100–2650 m 1800–2600 m 1000-2100 m 728–1230 m 1000–1540 m 1500–2400 m 500–1830 m 1650–2200 m 2850–4700 m 3300–4500 m 3120–4100 m References Bain, R.H., Lathrop, A., Murphy, R.W., Orlov, N.L., Cuc, H.T., 2003. Cryptic species of a cascade frog from Southeast Asia: taxonomic revisions and descriptions of six new species. Am. Mus. Novit. 3417, 1–60. Bossuyt, F., Milinkovitch, M.C., 2000. Convergent adaptive radiations in Madagascan and Asian ranid frogs reveal covariation between larval and adult traits. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 6585–6590. Boulenger, G.A., 1920. A Monograph of the South Asian, Papuan, Melanesian, and Australian Frogs of the Genus Rana. Rec. Indian Mus. 20, 1–126. Bremer, K., 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution 42, 795–803. Bremer, K., 1994. Branch support and tree stability. Cladistics 10, 295–304. Cameron, S.L., Miller, K.B., D’Haese, C.A., Whiting, M.F., Barker, S.C., 2004. Mitochondrial genome data alone are not enough to unambiguously resolve the relationships of Entognatha, Insecta and Crustacea sensu lato (Arthropoda). Cladistics 20, 534–557. Che, J., Pang, J., Zhao, H., Wu, G.F., Zhao, E.M., Zhang, Y.P., 2007. Molecular phylogeny of the Chinese ranids inferred from nuclear and mitochondrial DNA sequences. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 35, 29–39. Chen, L., Murphy, R.W., Lathrop, A., Ngo, A., Orlov, N.L., Ho, C.T., Somorjai, I.L.M., 2005. Taxonomic chaos in Asian ranid frogs: an initial phylogenetic resolution. Herpetol. J. 15, 231–243. Chen, X.H., Jiang, J.P., 2002. A new species of the genus Paa from China. Herpetol. Sin. 9, 231. Chen, X.H., QU, W.Y., Jiang, J.P., 2002. A new species of the subgenus Paa (Feirana) from China. Herpetol. Sin. 9, 230. Dubois, A., 1975. Un nouveau sous–genre (Paa) et trois nouvelles espèces du genre Rana. Remarques sur la phylogénie des Ranidés (Amphibiens, Anoures). Bull. Mus. Nat. Hist. Nat. 324 (Zoo. 231), 1093–1115. Dubois, A., 1987 (1986). Miscellanea taxinomica batrachologica (I). Alytes 5, 7–95. Dubois, A., 1992. Notes sur la classification des Ranidae (Amphibiens Anoures). Bull. Soc. Linn. Lyon 61, 305–352. Dubois, A., 2005. Amphibia Mundi 1.1. An ergotaxonomy of recent amphibians. Alytes 23, 1–24. Dubois, A., Ohler, A., 2005. Txonomic notes on the Asia frogs of the tribe Paini (Ranidae, Dicroglossidae): 1. Morphology and synonymy of Chaparana aenea (Smith, 1922), with proposal of a new statistical method for testing homogeneity of small samples. J. Nat. Hist. 39 (20), 1759–1778. Fei, L. (Ed.), 1999. Atlas of Amphibians of China. Henna Science and Techniques Press, Zhengzhou, China. Fei, L., Ye, C.Y., Huang, Y.Z., 1990. Key to Chinese Amphibia. Scientific and Technical Documents Publishing House, Chongqing, China. Fei, L., Ye, C.Y., Jiang, J.P., Xie, F., Huang, Y.Z., 2005. An Illustrated Key to Chinese Amphibians. Sichuan Publishing House of Science and Technology, Chengdu, China. Felsenstein, J., 1978. A likelihood approach to character weighting and what it tells us about parsimony and compatibility. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 16, 183–196. Frost, D.R., 2008. Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 5.2 (15 July, 2008). Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. New York, USA. Electronic Database Available from: <http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.php>. Frost, D.R., Grant, T., Faivovich, J., Bain, R.H., Haas, A., Haddad, C.F.B., de Sa0 , R.O., Channing, A., Wilkinson, M., Donnellan, S.C., Raxworthy, C.J., Campbell, J.A., Blotto, B.L., Moler, P., Drewes, R.C., Nussbaum, R.A., Lynch, J.D., Green, D.M., Wheeler, W.C., 2006. The amphibian tree of life. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 297, 1– 370. Giribet, G., Wheeler, W.C., 1999. On gaps. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 13, 132–143. Hu, J.S., Chen, M.Y., Dong, W.H., 2005. A new record of Amphibia (Paa verrucospinosa)—again confirmation in China. Sichuan J. Zool. 24 (3), 340–341 (in Chinese). Hu, J.S., 2004. Molecular Phylogenetic Studies on Spinosae Group (Genus Paa) in China (Amphibian, Anura, Ranidae). Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yunnan Univeristy, Kunming, China. (in Chinese). Hu, Q., Jiang, Y., Zhao, E., 1985. Studies on the Influence of the Hengduan Mountains on the Evolution of the Amphibians. Acta Herpetol. Sin. 4, 225–233. Inger, R.F., 1996. Commentary on a proposed classification of the family Ranidae. Herpetol. 52, 241–246. Jiang, J.P., Dubois, A., Ohler, A., Tillier, A., Chen, X.H., Xie, F., Stöck, M., 2005. Phylogenetic relationships of the tribe Paini (Amphibia, Anura, Ranidae) based on partial sequences of mitochondrial 12S and 16S rDNA genes. Zool. Sci. 22, 353–362. Kocher, T.D., Thomas, W.K., Meyer, A., Edwards, S.V., Pääbo, S., Villablanca, F.X., Wilson, A.C., 1989. Dynamics of mitochondrial DNA evolution in mammals: amplification and sequencing with conserved primers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86, 6169–6200. Kumar, S., Tamura, K., Nei, M., 2004. MEGA3: integrated software for molecular evolutionary genetics analysis and sequence alignment. Brief Bioinform. 5, 150– 163. Li, S.S., Hu, J.S., 1994. On the karyotypes and Ag-NORs of three sympatric Paa frogs in Yunnan province. Acta Zool. Sin. 40, 317–323 (in Chinese). Li, S.S., Hu, J.S., 1996. The study on the karyotypes, C-banding and Ag-NORs of four Paa species in China (Amphibia: Anura). Zool. Res. 17, 84–88 (in Chinese). Li, S.S., Hu, J.S., 1999. The karyotype evolution and infraspecies variation of geographical population of anura genus of Paa from China. Zool. Stud. China, 976–982 (in Chinese). Liu, C.C., Hu, S.Q., 1961. Tailless Amphibians of China. Science Press, Beijing, China. Liu, W.G., Jiu, R.G., 1984. A special karyotype in the genus Rana—an investigation of the karyotype, C-banding and Ag-stained NORs of Rana phrynoides Boulenger. Acta Genet. Sin. 11, 61–64 (in Chinese). Milinkovitch, M.C., Lyons-Weiler, J., 1998. Finding optimal ingroup topologies and convexities when the choice of outgroups is not obvious. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 9, 348–357. Moore, W.S., 1995. Inferring phylogenies from mtDNA variation: mitochondrial gene trees versus nuclear gene trees. Evolution 49, 718–726. Ohler, A., Dubois, A., 2006. Phylogenetic relationships and generic taxonomy of the tribe Paini (Amphibia, Anura, Ranidae, Dicroglossinae), with diagnoses of two new genera. Zoosystema 28 (3), 769–784. Pang, Q.P., Ye, Y., Wen, Y.T., 2002. Chromosome data of Chinese amphibians. Chin. J. Zool. 37 (4), 49–62. Posada, D., Crandall, K.A., 1998. Modeltest: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14, 817–818. Roelants, K., Jiang, J., Bossuyt, F., 2004. Endemic ranid (Amphibia: Anura) genera in southern mountain ranges of the Indian subcontinent represent ancient frog lineages: evidence from molecular data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 31, 730–740. Ronquist, F.R., Huelsenbeck, J.P., 2003. MRBAYES: Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Bioinformatics 19, 1572–1574. Sambrook, J., Fritsch, E.F., Maniatis, T., 1989. Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY. Sclater, W.K., 1892. List of the Batrachia in the Indian Museum. Trustees of the Indian Museum, London. Siddall, M.E., Whiting, M.F., 1999. Long-branch abstractions. Cladistics 15, 9– 24. Sorenson, M.D., 1999. TreeRot version 2. Boston University, Boston, MA. Stuart, B.L., Inger, R.F., Voris, H.K., 2006. High level of cryptic species diversity revealed by sympatric lineages of Southeast Asian forest frogs. Biol. Lett. 2, 470–474. J. Che et al. / Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 50 (2009) 59–73 Sumida, M., Ogata, M., 1998. Intraspecific differentiation in the Japanese brown frog Rana japonica inferred from mitochondrial DNA sequences of the cytochrome b gene. Zool. Sci. 15, 989–1001. Sumida, M., Kaneda, H., Kato, Y., Kanamori, Y., Yonekawa, H., Nishioka, M., 2000a. Sequence variation and structural conservation in the D-loop region and flanking genes of mitochondrial DNA from Japanese pond frogs. Genes Genet. Syst. 75, 79–92. Sumida, M., Ogata, M., Nishioka, M., 2000b. Molecular phylogenetic relationships of pond frogs distributed in the Palearctic region inferred from DNA sequences of mitochondrial 12S ribosomal RNA and cytochrome b genes. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 16, 278–285. Swofford, D.L., 2003. PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (* and Other Methods) Version 40b10. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA. Swofford, D.L., Olsen, G.J., Waddell, P.J., Hillis, D.M., 1996. Phylogenetic inference. In: Hillis, D.M., Moritz, C., Mable, B.K. (Eds.), Molecular Systematics, second ed. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, pp. 407–514. Tan, A.M., Wu, G.F., 1987. Preliminary studies on the karyotypes of three ‘‘spinefrogs” and the karyotypic evolution of the subgenus Paa (Anura: Ranidae, Rana). Acta Herpetol. Sin. 6, 35–38 (in Chinese). Tarrio, R., Rodriguez-Trelles, F., Ayala, F., 2000. Tree rooting with outgroups when they differ in their nucleotide compostion from the ingroup: the Drosophila saltans and willistoni groups, a case study. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 16, 344–349. 73 Thompson, J.D., Gibson, T.J., Plewniak, F., Jeanmougin, F., Higgins, D.G., 1997. The CLUSTAL X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 24, 4876– 4882. Ware, J.L., Litman, J., Klass, K.D., Spearman, L.A., 2008. Relationships among the major lineages of Dictyoptera: the effect of outgroup selection on dictyopteran tree topology. Syst. Entomol. 33, 429–450. Wu, G.F., Zhao, E.M., 1984. A rare karyotype of anurans, the karyotype of Rana phrynoides. Acta Herpetol. Sin. 3, 29–32 (in Chinese). Xia, X., 2000. DAMBE: Data Analysis in Molecular Biology and Evolution. Kluwer Academic, Boston. Available from: <http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~xxia/software/ software.htm>. Yang, D.T., 1991. The Amphibian-Fauna of Yunnan. China Forestry Publishing House. Yang, D.T., 1993. The habitats of Hengduan Mountain, the diversity of amphibians, and their relationships to the uplift of the mountain. In: Wu, Z.Y. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Yunnan Biodiversity Symposium. Yunnan Sci-Tech Publishing House, Kunming, pp. 17–22. Zhao, E.M., Chang, H.W., Zhao, H., Adler, K., 2000. Revised checklist of Chinese Amphibia & Reptilia. Sichuan J. Zool. 19, 196–207 (in Chinese). Zhao, E.M., Yang, D.T., 1997. Amphibians and Reptiles of the Hengduan Mountains Region. Science Press, Beijing.