Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33681996›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2021

Extensive Genome-Wide Phylogenetic Discordance Is Due to Incomplete Lineage Sorting and Not Ongoing Introgression in a Rapidly Radiated Bryophyte Genus.

Olena Meleshko, Michael D Martin, Thorfinn Sand Korneliussen, Christian Schröck, Paul Lamkowski, Jeremy Schmutz, Adam Healey, Bryan T Piatkowski, A Jonathan Shaw, David J Weston and 4 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Importance of thePlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Phylogenetic Insights from a NovelPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Olena MeleshkoDepartment of Natural History, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-4256-3544
Michael D MartinDepartment of Natural History, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Thorfinn Sand KorneliussenCentre for GeoGenetics, Natural History Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christian SchröckBiology Centre of the Upper Austrian State Museum, Linz, Austria.
Paul LamkowskiInstitute of Botany and Landscape Ecology, University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.
Jeremy SchmutzUnited States Department of Energy, Joint Genome Institute, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Adam HealeyHudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology, Huntsville, AL, USA.
Bryan T PiatkowskiDepartment of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1334-8431
A Jonathan ShawDepartment of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.
David J WestonBiosciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, USA.
Kjell Ivar FlatbergDepartment of Natural History, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Péter SzövényiDepartment of Systematic and Evolutionary Botany & Zurich-Basel Plant Science Center, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Kristian HasselDepartment of Natural History, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Hans K StenøienDepartment of Natural History, NTNU University Museum, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relative importance of introgression for diversification has long been a highly disputed topic in speciation research and remains an open question despite the great attention it has received over the past decade. Gene flow leaves traces in the genome similar to those created by incomplete lineage sorting (ILS), and identification and quantification of gene flow in the presence of ILS is challenging and requires knowledge about the true phylogenetic relationship among the species. We use whole nuclear, plastid, and organellar genomes from 12 species in the rapidly radiated, ecologically diverse, actively hybridizing genus of peatmoss (Sphagnum) to reconstruct the species phylogeny and quantify introgression using a suite of phylogenomic methods. We found extensive phylogenetic discordance among nuclear and organellar phylogenies, as well as across the nuclear genome and the nodes in the species tree, best explained by extensive ILS following the rapid radiation of the genus rather than by postspeciation introgression. Our analyses support the idea of ancient introgression among the ancestral lineages followed by ILS, whereas recent gene flow among the species is highly restricted despite widespread interspecific hybridization known in the group. Our results contribute to phylogenomic understanding of how speciation proceeds in rapidly radiated, actively hybridizing species groups, and demonstrate that employing a combination of diverse phylogenomic methods can facilitate untangling complex phylogenetic patterns created by ILS and introgression.

Indexed as

Gene FlowGenetic IntrogressionGenetic SpeciationPhylogenyGenome, PlantPhylogeographySphagnopsidaincomplete lineage sortingintrogressionpeatmossphylogenomicsrapid diversificationspeciation

Identifiers

PMID33681996
PMCPMC8233498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.