Results of the GMYC analysis: Bayesian tree inferred from the <i>Cryptomonas</i> data set under the assumption of a molecular clock (top) and the corresponding lineage-through-time (LTT) plot (bottom).

2012-08-24T02:14:30Z (GMT) by Kerstin Hoef-Emden
<p>Due to a lack of cryptophyte fossil record the tree could not be calibrated, thus branch lengths and abscissa of the LTT plot represent only relative time scales. The vertical red and turquoise lines in the LTT plot demarcate the two thresholds predicted by the multiple threshold model with speciation to the left and coalescence events to the right <a href="" target="_blank">[63]</a>. The red and turquoise branches in the tree indicate clusters of species identified by the two thresholds, respectively. The bars to the right of the tree’s terminal nodes represent the species predicted by the multiple threshold GMYC model (1), by GMYC with a single threshold (2) and according to previous revisions using a combination of multiple molecular markers and morphology <a href="" target="_blank">[33] </a><a href="" target="_blank">[20]</a>. Black bars represent singletons, gray bars unrevised putative species. Clade PyrX has not been merged to one species in the previous revisions due to considerable divergence in internal transcribed spacers 2, whereas the single strain of <i>Cryptomonas gyropyrenoidosa</i> has been described due to a unique set of morphological characters. The ordinate of the LTT plot has been logarithmized. 0.000 in the abscissa represents present. Cbo, <i>Cryptomonas borealis</i>; Cco, <i>Cryptomonas commutata</i>; Ccu, <i>Cryptomonas curvata</i>; Cer,<i>Cryptomonas erosa</i>; Cgy, <i>Cryptomonas gyropyrenoidosa</i>; Clo, <i>Cryptomonas loricata</i>; Clu, <i>Cryptomonas lundii</i>; Cma, <i>Cryptomonas marssonii</i>; Cob, <i>Cryptomonas obovoidea</i>; Cov, <i>Cryptomonas ovata</i>; Cpa, <i>Cryptomonas paramaecium</i>; Cph, <i>Cryptomonas phaseolus</i>; Cpy, <i>Cryptomonas pyrenoidifera</i>; Cte, <i>Cryptomonas tetrapyrenoidosa.</i></p>