Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40478838›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

A deep dive into the coelacanth phylogeny.

Christophe Ferrante, Lionel Cavin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Christophe FerranteNatural history Museum of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Lionel CavinNatural history Museum of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-9666-5864

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The discovery in 1938 of a living coelacanth, Latimeria chalumnae, triggered much research and discussion on the evolutionary history and phylogeny of these peculiar sarcopterygian fishes. Indeed, coelacanths were thought to represent the 'missing link' between fishes and tetrapods, a phylogenetic position which is now dismissed. Since the first analyses using a phylogenetic approach were carried out three decades ago, a relatively similar data matrix has been consistently used by researchers for running analyses, with no significant changes aside from the addition of new taxa and characters, and minor corrections to the states' definition and scorings. Here, we investigate the phylogeny of Actinistia with an updated data matrix based on a list of partially new or modified characters. From the initial list of characters available in the most recent studies, we removed 16 characters, modified 16 other characters' definition and added 18 new characters, resulting in a list of 112 characters. We also revised the data matrix by correcting 171 miscoding found for 37 taxa. Based on the new phylogeny, we propose a new classification of coelacanths including 46 coelacanth genera, part of them allocated within nine families and four sub-families. Most of these groups were already named but were not recognised as clades, or poorly or not diagnosed in previous phylogenetic analyses. We provide several new or emended diagnoses for each clade. For the first time, a set of Palaeozoic coelacanth genera are found gathered within a clade, namely the Diplocercidae. All Mesozoic coelacanths, including extant Latimeria, are resolved as members of the order Coelacanthiformes, a clade that arose in the Permian, with Coelacanthus diverging first. We also found that most Mesozoic coelacanths are gathered into a clade, the Latimerioidei, itself divided into the Latimeriidae and the Mawsoniidae, each of which is divided into two subfamilies. Although these important changes, the new phylogeny of the Actinistia shows no significant alteration, and it remains relatively similar compared to previous studies. This demonstrates that the coelacanth phylogeny is now rather stable despite the weak support for most nodes in the phylogeny, and despite the difficulty of defining relevant morphological characters to score in this relatively slowly evolving lineage.

Indexed as

FishesPhylogenyAnimalsBiological Evolution

Identifiers

PMID40478838
PMCPMC12143573

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.