DISCOVER Magazine. Science, Technology and The Future
Current Issue
Subscribe Today »
  • Renew
  • Give a Gift
  • Archives
  • Customer Service
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Newsletter
  • Health & Medicine
  • Mind & Brain
  • Technology
  • Space
  • Human Origins
  • Living World
  • Environment
  • Physics & Math
  • Video
  • Photos
  • Podcast
  • RSS
The Loom
« Tagged
Two Become One (Becoming Two) »

Why Weird Animals Matter, Continued: Untangling the Branches

comb%20jelly%20250.jpgIn my last post I wrote about how scientists are learning about the origin of animals by studying their genomes. One of the surprising findings of the latest research is that a group of animals called comb jellies (ctenophores) belong to the oldest lineage of living animals. Comb jellies look a bit like jellyfish–soft, tentacled creatures without brains or eyes but with a nervous system. As I wrote in the Boston Globe Monday, earlier studies had generally pointed to sponges as belonging to the oldest lineage. If comb jellies take their place, that may mean that the ancestors of sponges lost their nerve(s) and became anchored filter-feeders.

David Marjanovic then left this comment:

IMHO the tree is full of long-branch attraction. The position of the ctenophores is probably spurious.

So what’s David talking about? Long-branch attraction refers to a pesky problem that evolutionary biologists face when trying to reconstruct ancient episodes in the history of life. In my article I only referred briefly to these sorts of challenges, but fortunately blogs give me a little room to stretch out.

Long-branch attraction is a new twist on a classic phenenomon in evolution called convergence. This happens when two lineages evolve into very similar forms. Legless lizards and snakes, for example, independently evolved a serpent body shape. The octopus eye forms images like a camera, just as ours do. Several strains of E. coli have evolved into disease-causing bacteria that invade intestinal cells. On the surface, two convergent species may look as if they share a close common ancestry. It can take some close scrutiny to discover that they are not.

A segment of DNA can also evolve convergenty in two lineages. Imagine that a particular segment of DNA in the ancestors of insects had a sequence, AAATAAA. Imagine that vertebrates had a sequence AATTGAA. It takes only one mutation in each lineage for them to both evolve into AAATGAA. Now they have an identical segment that they did not inherit through common ancestry.

This sort of convergence is unlikely to happen soon after two lineages split apart. But as more time passes–as branches get longer–it becomes more likely. Branches that are not in fact closely related get attracted to each other when scientists study their DNA. Hence, long-branch attraction. In the case of this new study, David is suggesting that sponges ended up looking more closely related to us than comb jellies because the DNA the scientists studied happened to evolve convergently.

I dropped a note to Casey Dunn, the lead author of the new study in Nature, and he fired back some enlightening comments…

Long branch attraction is one of the most common types of systematic error encountered in phylogenetic inference…It is the primary reason we say in the paper that the ctenophore result “should be viewed as provisional”. Unfortunately, the Nature format is very restrictive in its length so we did not have room to explicitly discuss this issue, though we were very mindful of it and much of the experimental design was structured specifically to address it.

That design included finding lots of weird animals. Adding branches to an evolutionary tree essentially chops down long branches to shorter lengths, because the new species are more closely related to some of the animals than to others. That’s why one of Dunn’s colleagues fished up a second species of comb jelly when the startling results first emerged. The long branch of the original comb jelly now became split in two, reducing the amount of long-branch attraction.

Another possibility might be that the ancestors of comb jellies have evolved faster than other animals. Their rapid evolution would give rise to more differences between their DNA and the DNA of other animals. As a result, the more slowly-evolving animals, including sponges and us, would appear more similar. But when they measured the rate of change on each branch, the comb jellies didn’t appear at all peculiar.

By taking these extra steps (and others), Dunn and his colleagues felt confident enough to go into print with their results. Fortunately, scientists can continue to test for the possibility of long-branch attraction by adding more species to the tree. Animals that belong to deep lineages are the best. The bizarre, balloon-bodied Trichoplax would be a good place to start, since its genome is already sequenced. Science, thankfully, marches on.

Comb jelly photo from bzibble

Share

April 30th, 2008 3:36 PM Tags: Evolution
by Carl Zimmer in Uncategorized | 6 comments | RSS feed | Trackback >

6 Responses to “Why Weird Animals Matter, Continued: Untangling the Branches”

  1. 1.   My Sockpuppet's Concern Troll Says:
    April 30th, 2008 at 7:15 pm

    Good post, Carl, but I have to take issue with this:

    As I wrote in the Boston Globe Monday, earlier studies had generally pointed to sponges as belonging to the oldest lineage.

    All tips are equidistant from their most recent common ancestor (MRCA). The oldest lineage doesn’t make sense when comparing extant taxa. I think it would be more appropriate to refer to sponges/comb-jellies as the outgroup to all other mammals (whichever one happens to be the right one).

    And if I didn’t do this, Ryan Gregory would have.

  2. 2.   Diego Says:
    April 30th, 2008 at 8:40 pm

    Well, at least the authors used Maximum Likelihood. ML is not immune to long-branch attraction, but it is much less susceptible to that particular problem than parsimony.

  3. 3.   Allen Collins Says:
    May 1st, 2008 at 10:34 am

    I am confident that Dunn et al. tested for long-branch attraction problems and carefully assessed their data in order to discern any systematic bias.

    Nevertheless, my gut tells me that this early diverging ctenophore result is most likely spurious. That said, it is perfectly appropriate for it to have been published. The data presented certainly indicate that this is the case. Personally, I would be more worried about taxon-sampling issues. What happens when all or most of the longer-branched bilaterians are excluded from the analysis? What will the results be when more opithokont protists are included in future analyses? We shall see.

  4. 4.   Derek Sikes Says:
    May 1st, 2008 at 5:26 pm

    “The long branch of the original comb jelly now became split in two, reducing the amount of long-branch attraction.”

    If the new comb jelly joined near the top of the branch, as I expect it did, then although the branch may be cut into two pieces the pieces are not of equal size, and the long bit will remain problematic.

  5. 5.   Doug Says:
    May 2nd, 2008 at 7:38 am

    Hi Carl,

    Your picture of a ctenophore in this post reminds me of this NASA drawing of the Heliosphere.

    Is motion at such vastly different scales coincidental or related to mechanics?

  6. 6.   John Monfries Says:
    May 4th, 2008 at 11:47 pm

    Thanks from a layman for the explanation of long branch attraction.

    I read about this in Dawkins “Ancestor’s Tale” but didn’t quite get it. This explanation is clearer.

Leave a Reply





    • About The Loom

      "Celebrated curiosity monger"

      --Brain Pickings

      Carl Zimmer writes about science regularly for the New York Times and magazines such as Discover, where he is a contributing editor and columnist.

      He is the author of twelve books, the most recent of which is Science Ink: Tattoos of the Science Obsessed. His website is carlzimmer.com and his address is blog at carlzimmer dot com .




    • Google Profile


    • Facebook

    • RSS Recent Posts

      • A Planet of Viruses: Autographed Book Sale
      • Animal Friendships: My cover story for Time magazine
      • The Future of E-books–podcast of my interview on Wisconsin Public Radio
      • Thursday, February 16: Science and social media panel in New York
      • A Scientific Jonah: My profile of Joy Reidenberg in tomorrow’s New York Times
    • Science Tattoo Emporium

      I once wondered aloud if scientists had tattoos of their science. The answer was yes, and this ever-growing collection is the evidence. I've turned them into a book about art and science called Science Ink: Tattoos of Science Obsessed.


    • Loom Junior

      My Tumblr home for scattershot
    • Books

      Carl Zimmer is the author of twelve books and counting.



      "Beautiful. Packed with fascinating stories"-Nature
      Order a copy




      "Whether discussing the common cold and flu, little-known viruses that attack bacteria or protect oceans, or the world’s viral future as seen through our encounters with HIV or SARS, Zimmer’s writing is lively, knowledgeable, and graced with poetic touches.”—Rebecca Skloot, author of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks
      Available in hardback or Kindle




      “Carl Zimmer takes us behind the scenes in our own heads. He has ferreted out all the most wondrous, bizarre stories and studies and served them up in this delicious, sizzling, easy-to-digest platter of neuro-goodness.” —Mary Roach, author of Packing for Mars and Stiff
      An ebook exclusive: Amazon, Barnes and Noble, carlzimmer.com




      New! More Brain Cuttings:
      Further Explorations of the Mind
      Order from Amazon and Barnes & Noble and Apple



      The Tangled Bank: An Introduction to Evolution

      "The Tangled Bank is the best written and best illustrated introduction to evolution of the Darwin centennial decade, and also the most conversant with ongoing research."--Edward O. Wilson, Harvard University
      Order a copy



      Microcosm: E. coli and The New Science of Life

      "Superb...quietly revolutionary"--Boston Globe
      Order a copy



      Soul Made Flesh: The Discovery of the Brain and How It Changed the World

      "Fascinating...thrilling... Zimmer has produced a top-notch work of popular science."--Los Angeles Times
      Order a copy



      Evolution: The Triumph of An Idea

      "As thorough as it is graceful...This is as fine a book as one will find on the subject."--Scientific American
      Order a copy



      Parasite Rex

      "A book capable of changing how we see the world."--The Los Angeles Times
      Reissued with a new epilogue by the author.
      Order a copy



      At the Water's Edge: Fish With Fingers, Whales With Legs, and How Life Came Ashore But Then Went Back to The Sea

      "A fascinating story, which Zimmer unfolds as a tale of high-stakes scientific sleuthing."--Booklist
      Order a copy

    • Twitter Updates

        follow me on Twitter
      • Comment Policy

        Light but firm. Details here.
      • Recent comments

        • jg shelley on A Planet of Viruses: Autographed Book Sale
        • Versatile Blogger award « Simian Rivalry on Science Tattoo Emporium
        • Carl Zimmer on A Planet of Viruses: Autographed Book Sale
      • Categories

      • Blogroll

        • A Blog Around the Clock
        • Aetiology
        • Babel’s Dawn
        • Bad Science
        • Creature Cast
        • Culture Dish (Rebecca Skloot)
        • Dan Ariely
        • David Dobbs
        • dechronization
        • Developing Intelligence
        • Evolution & Medicine Review
        • Gene Expression
        • Genome Boy
        • Genomicron (Ryan Gregory)
        • io9
        • john hawks
        • John Rennie
        • Jonah Lehrer
        • Knight Science Journalism Tracker
        • Laelaps (Brian Switek)
        • Language Log
        • Mind Hacks
        • Mind Matters (David Berreby)
        • Mixing Memory
        • Mystery Rays From Outer Space
        • Nobel Intent
        • Not Exactly Rocket Science
        • Oscillator
        • Pharyngula
        • Prerogative of Harlots
        • RealClimate
        • Robert Krulwich
        • Sandwalk
        • Science Cheerleader
        • Science Made Cool
        • Skeptical Science
        • Small Things Considered
        • Speakeasy Science (Deborah Blum)
        • Steve Silberman
        • Steven Johnson’s blog
        • Superbug
        • synthesis
        • Tetrapod Zoology
        • The Intersection
        • The Inverse Square Blog
        • The Last Word On Nothing
        • The Panda's Thumb
        • The Tree of Life
        • This Week in Evolution
        • Why Evolution Is True
        • Word Routes (Ben Zimmer)
        • Zooillogix
      • My stuff

        • CarlZimmer.com
        • Facebook
        • microcosm: E. coli and the New Science of Life
        • My article archive
      • Archives

      • Nifty Fifty

      • Why “The Loom”?

        "...among the joyous, heartless, ever-juvenile eternities, Pip saw the multitudinous, God-omnipresent, coral insects, that out of the firmament of waters, heaved the colossal orbs. He saw God's foot upon the treadle of the loom, and spoke it; and therefore his shipmates called him mad." --Moby Dick


    • Kalmbach Publishing Co.

      Copyright © 2012, Kalmbach Publishing Co.

      Privacy - Terms - Reader Services - Subscribe Today - Advertise - About Us