Cryptic genetic divergence in the giant Tasmanian freshwater crayfish Astacopsis gouldi (Decapoda: Parastacidae): implications for conservation : Genetic structure in A. gouldi

Despite their widespread use as model organisms, the phylogenetic status of the around 520 species of freshwater crayfish is still in doubt. One hypothesis suggests two distinct origins of freshwater crayfish as indicated by their geographical distribution, with two centres of origin near the two present centres of diversity; one in south-eastern United States and the other in Victoria, Australia. An alternative theory proposes a single (monophyletic) origin of freshwater crayfish. Here we use over 3000 nucleotides from three different gene regions in estimating phylogenetic relationships among freshwater crayfish and related Crustacea. We show clear evidence for monophyly of freshwater crayfish and for the sister-group relationship between crayfish and clawed lobsters. Monophyly of the superfamilies Astacoidea and Parastacoidea is also supported. However, the monophyly of the family Cambaridae is questioned with the genus Cambaroides being associated with the Astacidae. Show more

Background We present a series of simulation studies that explore the relative performance of several phylogenetic network approaches (statistical parsimony, split decomposition, union of maximum parsimony trees, neighbor-net, simulated history recombination upper bound, median-joining, reduced median joining and minimum spanning network) compared to standard tree approaches, (neighbor-joining and maximum parsimony) in the presence and absence of recombination. Principal Findings In the absence of recombination, all methods recovered the correct topology and branch lengths nearly all of the time when the substitution rate was low, except for minimum spanning networks, which did considerably worse. At a higher substitution rate, maximum parsimony and union of maximum parsimony trees were the most accurate. With recombination, the ability to infer the correct topology was halved for all methods and no method could accurately estimate branch lengths. Conclusions Our results highlight the need for more accurate phylogenetic network methods and the importance of detecting and accounting for recombination in phylogenetic studies. Furthermore, we provide useful information for choosing a network algorithm and a framework in which to evaluate improvements to existing methods and novel algorithms developed in the future. Show more