20.2 Determining Evolutionary Relationships

Key Concepts

By the end of this section, you will be able to do the following:

  • Compare homologous and analogous traits
  • Discuss the purpose of cladistics
  • Describe maximum parsimony

Scientists must collect accurate information that allows them to make evolutionary connections among organisms. Similar to detective work, scientists must use evidence to uncover the facts. In the case of phylogeny, evolutionary investigations focus on two types of evidence: morphologic (form and function) and genetic.

Two Options for Similarities

In general, organisms that share similar physical features and genomes are more closely related than those that do not. We refer to such features that overlap both morphologically (in form) and genetically as homologous structures. They stem from developmental similarities that are based on evolution. For example, the bones in bat and bird wings have homologous structures. This is an example of morphological homology (Figure 20.7).

Photo a shows a bird in flight with a corresponding drawing of a bird wing. Photo b is a bat in flight with a corresponding drawing of a bat wing. Both the bird wing and the bat wing share common bones, analogous to the bones in the arms and fingers of humans. However, in the bat wing, the finger bones are long and separate and form a scaffolding on which the wing's membrane is stretched. In the bird wing, the finger bones are short and fused together at the front of the wing.
Figure 20.7 Bat and bird wings are homologous structures, indicating that bats and birds share a common evolutionary past. (credit a: modification of work by Steve Hillebrand, USFWS; credit b: modification of work by U.S. DOI BLM)

Notice it is not simply a single bone, but rather a grouping of several bones arranged in a similar way. The more complex the feature, the more likely any kind of overlap is due to a common evolutionary past. Imagine two people from different countries both inventing a car with all the same parts and in exactly the same arrangement without any previous or shared knowledge. That outcome would be highly improbable. However, if two people both invented a hammer, we can reasonably conclude that both could have the original idea without the help of the other. The same relationship between complexity and shared evolutionary history is true for homologous structures in organisms.

Misleading Appearances

Some organisms may be very closely related, even though a minor genetic change caused a major morphological difference to make them look quite different. Similarly, unrelated organisms may be distantly related, but appear very much alike. This usually happens because both organisms share common adaptations that evolved within similar environmental conditions. When similar characteristics occur because of environmental constraints and not due to a close evolutionary relationship, it is an analogy or homoplasy. For example, insects use wings to fly like bats and birds, but the wing structure and embryonic origin is completely different. These are analogous structures (Figure 20.8).

Similar traits can be either homologous or analogous. Homologous structures share a similar embryonic origin. Analogous organs have a similar function. For example, the bones in a whale’s front flipper are homologous to the bones in the human arm. These structures are not analogous. A butterfly or bird’s wings are analogous but not homologous. Scientists must determine which type of similarity a feature exhibits to decipher the organisms’ phylogeny.

Photo a shows a bat wing, photo b shows a bird wing, and photo c shows a honeybee wing, and all three are similar in overall shape. However, the bird wing and bat wing are both made from homologous bones that are similar in appearance. The honeybee wing is made of a thin, membranous material rather than bone.
Figure 20.8 The (c) wing of a honeybee is similar in shape to a (b) bird wing and (a) bat wing, and it serves the same function. However, the honeybee wing is not composed of bones and has a distinctly different structure and embryonic origin. These wing types (insect versus bat and bird) illustrate an analogy—similar structures that do not share an evolutionary history. (credit a: modification of work by U.S. DOI BLM; credit b: modification of work by Steve Hillebrand, USFWS; credit c: modification of work by Jon Sullivan)

Link to Learning

This website has several examples to show how appearances can be misleading in understanding organisms’ phylogenetic relationships.

Molecular Comparisons

The advancement of DNA technology has given rise to molecular systematics, which is use of molecular data in taxonomy and biological geography (biogeography). New computer programs not only confirm many earlier classified organisms, but also uncover previously made errors. As with physical characteristics, even the DNA sequence can be tricky to read in some cases. For some situations, two very closely related organisms can appear unrelated if a mutation occurred that caused a shift in the genetic code. Inserting or deleting a mutation would move each nucleotide base over one place, causing two similar codes to appear unrelated.

Sometimes two segments of DNA code in distantly related organisms randomly share a high percentage of bases in the same locations, causing these organisms to appear closely related when they are not. For both of these situations, computer technologies help identify the actual relationships, and, ultimately, the coupled use of both morphologic and molecular information is more effective in determining phylogeny.

Evolution Connection

Why Does Phylogeny Matter?

Evolutionary biologists could list many reasons why understanding phylogeny is important to everyday life in human society. For botanists, phylogeny acts as a guide to discovering new plants that can be used to benefit people. Think of all the ways humans use plants—food, medicine, and clothing are a few examples. If a plant contains a compound that is effective in treating cancer, scientists might want to examine all of the compounds for other useful drugs.

A research team in China identified a DNA segment that they thought to be common to some medicinal plants in the family Fabaceae (the legume family). They worked to identify which species had this segment (Figure 20.9). After testing plant species in this family, the team found a DNA marker (a known location on a chromosome that enabled them to identify the species) present. Then, using the DNA to uncover phylogenetic relationships, the team could identify whether a newly discovered plant was in this family and assess its potential medicinal properties.

The illustration shows a Dalbergia sissoo plant, which is short with pods and teardrop-shaped leaves.
Figure 20.9 Dalbergia sissoo (D. sissoo) is in the Fabaceae, or legume family. Scientists found that D. sissoo shares a DNA marker with species within the Fabaceae family that have antifungal properties. Subsequently, researchers found that D. sissoo had fungicidal activity, supporting the idea that DNA markers are useful to screen plants with potential medicinal properties.

Building Phylogenetic Trees

How do scientists construct phylogenetic trees? After they sort the homologous and analogous traits, scientists often organize the homologous traits using cladistics. This system sorts organisms into clades: groups of organisms that descended from a single ancestor. For example, in Figure 20.10, all the organisms in the orange region evolved from a single ancestor that had amniotic eggs. Consequently, these organisms also have amniotic eggs and make a single clade, or a monophyletic group. Clades must include all descendants from a branch point.

Visual Connection

The illustration shows the V-shaped Vertebrata clade, which includes lampreys, fish, lizards, rabbits, and humans. Lampreys are at the left tip of the V, and humans are at the right tip. Three more lines are drawn parallel to the lamprey line; each of these lines starts further up the right arm of the V than the next. At the end of each line, from left to right, are fish, lizards, and rabbits. Lizards, rabbits, and humans are in the clade Amniota, which form a small V nested in the upper right-hand corner of the V-shaped Vertebrata clade.
Figure 20.10 Lizards, rabbits, and humans all descend from a common ancestor that had an amniotic egg. Thus, lizards, rabbits, and humans all belong to the clade Amniota. Vertebrata is a larger clade that also includes fish and lamprey.

Which animals in this figure belong to a clade that includes animals with hair? Which evolved first, hair or the amniotic egg?

Clades can vary in size depending on which branch point one references. The important factor is that all organisms in the clade or monophyletic group stem from a single point on the tree. You can remember this because monophyletic breaks down into “mono,” meaning one, and “phyletic,” meaning evolutionary relationship. Figure 20.11 shows various clade examples. Notice how each clade comes from a single point; whereas, the non-clade groups show branches that do not share a single point.

Visual Connection

Illustrations show a phylogenetic tree that includes eukaryotic species. A central line represents the trunk of the tree. From this trunk, various groups branch. In order from the bottom, these are diplomonads, microsporidia, trichomonads, flagellates, entamoebae, slime molds, and ciliates. At the top of the tree, animals, fungi and plants all branch from the same point and are shaded to show that they belong in the same clade. Flagellates are on a branch by themselves, and they also form their own clade and are shaded to show this. In another image, Flagellates and ciliates are shaded to show that they branch from different points on the tree and are not considered clades. Likewise, a grouping of animals and plants but not fungi would not be considered a clade cannot exclude a branch originating at the same point as the others.
Figure 20.11 All the organisms within a clade stem from a single point on the tree. A clade may contain multiple groups, as in the case of animals, fungi and plants, or a single group, as in the case of flagellates. Groups that diverge at a different branch point, or that do not include all groups in a single branch point, are not clades.

What is the largest clade in this diagram?

Link to Learning

Building a phylogenetic tree from Kahn Academy:
https://youtu.be/6_XMKmFQ_w8

Shared Characteristics

Organisms evolve from common ancestors and then diversify. Scientists use the phrase “descent with modification” because even though related organisms have many of the same characteristics and genetic codes, changes occur. This pattern repeats as one goes through the phylogenetic tree of life:

  1. A change in an organism’s genetic makeup leads to a new trait which becomes prevalent in the group.
  2. Many organisms descend from this point and have this trait.
  3. New variations continue to arise: some are adaptive and persist, leading to new traits.
  4. With new traits, a new branch point is determined (go back to step 1 and repeat).

If a characteristic is found in the ancestor of a group, it is considered a shared ancestral character because all of the organisms in the taxon or clade have that trait. The vertebrate in Figure 20.10 is a shared ancestral character. Now consider the amniotic egg characteristic in the same figure. Only some of the organisms in Figure 20.10 have this trait, and to those that do, it is called a shared derived character because this trait derived at some point but does not include all of the ancestors in the tree.

The tricky aspect to shared ancestral and shared derived characters is that these terms are relative. We can consider the same trait one or the other depending on the particular diagram that we use. Returning to Figure 20.10, note that the amniotic egg is a shared ancestral character for lizards, rabbits, and humans, while having hair is a shared derived character only for humans and rabbits. For the Amniotes as a group, however, the amniotic egg is a shared derived character that is not seen in fish. These terms help scientists distinguish between clades in building phylogenetic trees.

Choosing the Right Relationships

Imagine being the person responsible for organizing all department store items properly—an overwhelming task. Organizing the evolutionary relationships of all life on Earth proves much more difficult: scientists must span enormous blocks of time and work with information from long-extinct organisms. Trying to decipher the proper connections, especially given the presence of homologies and analogies, makes the task of building an accurate tree of life extraordinarily difficult. Add to that advancing DNA technology, which now provides large quantities of genetic sequences for researchers to use and analyze. Taxonomy is a subjective discipline: many organisms have more than one connection to each other, so each taxonomist will decide the order of connections.

To aid in the tremendous task of describing phylogenies accurately, scientists often use the concept of maximum parsimony, which means that events occurred in the simplest, most obvious way. For example, if a group of people entered a forest preserve to hike, based on the principle of maximum parsimony, one could predict that most would hike on established trails rather than forge new ones.

For scientists deciphering evolutionary pathways, the same idea is used: the pathway of evolution probably includes the fewest major events that coincide with the evidence at hand. Starting with all of the homologous traits in a group of organisms, scientists look for the most obvious and simple order of evolutionary events that led to the occurrence of those traits.

Link to Learning

Head to this website to learn how researchers use maximum parsimony to create phylogenetic trees.

These tools and concepts are only a few strategies scientists use to tackle the task of revealing the evolutionary history of life on Earth. Recently, newer technologies have uncovered surprising discoveries with unexpected relationships, such as the fact that people seem to be more closely related to fungi than fungi are to plants. Sound unbelievable? As the information about DNA sequences grows, scientists will become closer to mapping the evolutionary history of all life on Earth.

License

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Biology 2e for Biol 111 and Biol 112 Copyright © 2023 by Mary Ann Clark; Jung Choi; and Matthew Douglas is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book