1 / 46

Exploring Evolutionary Relationships: Classifying Organisms

This chapter delves into the methods and findings of phylogenetic analysis to classify organisms into related groups based on shared evolutionary history. Explore the intricate paths from the universal ancestor of all life to Homo sapiens. Learn about monophyletic groups, maximum parsimony method, and the impact of long branches on analysis accuracy. Discover the relationships among primates, vertebrates, and more through molecular data and morphological characters. Uncover the complexities of gene trees, rapid evolutionary radiation, and hybridization in evolution.

jleone
Download Presentation

Exploring Evolutionary Relationships: Classifying Organisms

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Chapter 2 Opener How do we classify organisms?

  2. Figure 2.1 Tracing the path of evolution to Homo sapiens from the universal ancestor of all life

  3. Figure 2.2 The tree of life

  4. Figure 2.3 Darwin’s representation of hypothetical phylogenetic relationships

  5. Figure 2.4 A phylogenetic tree of human, chimpanzee, and bonobo taxa, illustrating major phylogenetic terms

  6. Figure 2.5 Different representations of phylogenies

  7. Figure 2.6 Phylogenetic analyses often use unrooted trees, which are converted to rooted trees

  8. Figure 2.7 Phylogenetic analysis has revealed the relationships of some formerly puzzling organisms

  9. Figure 2.8 Phylogenetically informative and uninformative similarities among species

  10. Figure 2.9 Monophyletic groups whose members share derived character states that evolved only once

  11. Figure 2.9 Monophyletic groups whose members share derived character states that evolved only once

  12. Figure 2.10 Two possible hypotheses for the phylogenetic relationships of humans

  13. Figure 2.10 Two possible hypotheses for the phylogenetic relationships of humans

  14. Figure 2.11 Steps in a phylogenetic analysis using the maximum parsimony method

  15. Figure 2.12 Members of the primate superfamily Hominoidea

  16. Figure 2.13 Evidence for phylogenetic relationships among primates

  17. Figure 2.13 Evidence for phylogenetic relationships among primates

  18. Table 2.1

  19. Figure 2.14 How long branches can lead a parsimony analysis astray

  20. Figure 2.14 How long branches can lead a parsimony analysis astray (Part 1)

  21. Figure 2.14 How long branches can lead a parsimony analysis astray (Part 2)

  22. Figure 2.15 A two-parameter model in which the rate of transition differs from the rate of transversion

  23. Figure 2.16 Relationships among hominoid primates, based on a maximum likelihood analysis of sequences of two genes

  24. Figure 2.17 The true phylogeny of the experimental populations of T7 bacteriophage studied by Hillis et al.

  25. Figure 2.17 The true phylogeny of the experimental populations of T7 bacteriophage studied by Hillis et al.

  26. Figure 2.18 Relationships among vertebrates, as estimated from morphological characters and DNA sequences

  27. Figure 2.19 Base pair differences ´ time since divergence suggests a fairly constant rate of sequence evolution

  28. Figure 2.19 Base pair differences ´ time since divergence suggests a fairly constant rate of sequence evolution

  29. Figure 2.20 The relative rate test for constancy of the rate of molecular divergence

  30. Figure 2.21 Proportions of base pairs at different codon positions in the DNA sequences of COI that differ between vertebrate species pairs, against time since their most recent common ancestor

  31. Figure 2.21 Proportions of base pairs at different codon positions in the DNA sequences of COI that differ between vertebrate species pairs, against time since their most recent common ancestor

  32. Figure 2.22 Results of a study of divergence times for some lineages of primates

  33. Figure 2.23 Relationships among haplotypes of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene in MacGillivray’s warbler

  34. Figure 2.23 Relationships among haplotypes of the mitochondrial cytochrome b gene in MacGillivray’s warbler

  35. Figure 2.24 Phylogenies of some Old World monkeys and cats

  36. Figure 2.25 A gene tree may or may not reflect the true phylogeny of the species from which the genes are sampled

  37. Figure 2.25 A gene tree may or may not reflect the true phylogeny of the species from which the genes are sampled

  38. Figure 2.25 A gene tree may or may not reflect the true phylogeny of the species from which the genes are sampled (Part 1)

  39. Figure 2.25 A gene tree may or may not reflect the true phylogeny of the species from which the genes are sampled (Part 2)

  40. Figure 2.25 A gene tree may or may not reflect the true phylogeny of the species from which the genes are sampled (Part 3)

  41. Figure 2.26 Four species of grasshoppers inferred from multiple samples of each of six genes in each species

  42. Figure 2.27 Relationships among 11 species of placental mammals, which represent four major clades

  43. Figure 2.28 Rapid evolutionary radiation

  44. Figure 2.28 Rapid evolutionary radiation

  45. Figure 2.29 Hybridization and reticulate evolution

  46. Figure 2.30 Chimpanzees and gorillas carry several clades of the parasite Plasmodium, from which human P. falciparum is derived

More Related