Introduction
Studying the phylogeny of Mesoamerican spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi), in relation to other spider monkeys, has been controversial because studies have failed to agree on what characteristics make these species separate or have failed to present complete taxonomic data. Additionally, researchers found little agreement between the sequence data and the previous taxonomic data, to infer phylogenetic relationships. The researchers who performed this study used mitochondrial DNA sequence data in hopes of showing that A. geoffroyi and another spider monkey (Ateles fusciceps) form two separate monophyletic groups.
The only other study to use molecular data for determining phylogeny in Mesoamerican spider monkeys was the Collins and …show more content…
This is due to the highly polymorphic nature of mitochondrial DNA.
2.3 DNA extraction, amplification, and sequencing
Each region sequenced was approximately 800 base pairs long. DNA was extracted and then amplified using PCR. Finally, capillary electrophoresis was performed to visualize the amplified PCR product.
2.4 Phylogenetic analyses
There were multiple softwares used in the analysis of spider monkey phylogeny. Muscle version 3.6 was used to align sequences, while Modeltest 3.7 and MrModeltest 2.2 were used for analysis of maximum likelihood Bayesian phylogenetic inference, respectively.
2.5 Divergence time estimation
Researchers grouped A. fisciceps and A. geoffroyi into two lineages using regions of mitochondrial DNA that are slow evolving. Additionally, all clades with more than 80% support, within A. geoffroyi and A. fusciceps, were assumed to form monophyletic clades.
Results
These researchers were able to identify three main clades from the samples of A. geoffroyi. Clades A, B, and C each yielded two subspecies, for a total of five subspecies. One subspecies was listed as being in both clades A and B. Other samples were not in agreement with the inferred phylogeny as …show more content…
The Collins and Dubach (2000) study had identified the A and C clades. However, with further sampling from this study, a third clade, B, was identified. The divergence of clades A and B showed the lowest confidence. The confidence for each of the three clades independent of each other was quite a bit higher (≥89%). This could be due to the almost 300 base pair increase in DNA length for this study, from the Collins and Dubach (2000) study. The divergence estimation time data indicated that clade C diverged approximately 1.7 Ma and that clades A and B quickly diverged soon after, approximately 1.3 Ma. This data suggests these Mesoamerican spider monkeys were separated by large distances which eventually isolated them from other Mesoamerican spider monkeys, leading to
Studying the phylogeny of Mesoamerican spider monkeys (Ateles geoffroyi), in relation to other spider monkeys, has been controversial because studies have failed to agree on what characteristics make these species separate or have failed to present complete taxonomic data. Additionally, researchers found little agreement between the sequence data and the previous taxonomic data, to infer phylogenetic relationships. The researchers who performed this study used mitochondrial DNA sequence data in hopes of showing that A. geoffroyi and another spider monkey (Ateles fusciceps) form two separate monophyletic groups.
The only other study to use molecular data for determining phylogeny in Mesoamerican spider monkeys was the Collins and …show more content…
This is due to the highly polymorphic nature of mitochondrial DNA.
2.3 DNA extraction, amplification, and sequencing
Each region sequenced was approximately 800 base pairs long. DNA was extracted and then amplified using PCR. Finally, capillary electrophoresis was performed to visualize the amplified PCR product.
2.4 Phylogenetic analyses
There were multiple softwares used in the analysis of spider monkey phylogeny. Muscle version 3.6 was used to align sequences, while Modeltest 3.7 and MrModeltest 2.2 were used for analysis of maximum likelihood Bayesian phylogenetic inference, respectively.
2.5 Divergence time estimation
Researchers grouped A. fisciceps and A. geoffroyi into two lineages using regions of mitochondrial DNA that are slow evolving. Additionally, all clades with more than 80% support, within A. geoffroyi and A. fusciceps, were assumed to form monophyletic clades.
Results
These researchers were able to identify three main clades from the samples of A. geoffroyi. Clades A, B, and C each yielded two subspecies, for a total of five subspecies. One subspecies was listed as being in both clades A and B. Other samples were not in agreement with the inferred phylogeny as …show more content…
The Collins and Dubach (2000) study had identified the A and C clades. However, with further sampling from this study, a third clade, B, was identified. The divergence of clades A and B showed the lowest confidence. The confidence for each of the three clades independent of each other was quite a bit higher (≥89%). This could be due to the almost 300 base pair increase in DNA length for this study, from the Collins and Dubach (2000) study. The divergence estimation time data indicated that clade C diverged approximately 1.7 Ma and that clades A and B quickly diverged soon after, approximately 1.3 Ma. This data suggests these Mesoamerican spider monkeys were separated by large distances which eventually isolated them from other Mesoamerican spider monkeys, leading to