Molecular phylogeny of Anomalodesmata (Mollusca: Bivalvia) inferred from 18S rRNA sequences

The origin of the anomalodesmatan bivalves and the relationships of the constituent families are far from being settled. Phylogenetic uncertainties result from the morphological heterogeneity of the Anomalodesmata and from parallel/convergent evolution of several character complexes due to similar life habits. Here, we assess these problems with 26 near-complete anomalodesmatan 18S rRNA sequences from 12 out of 15 families and a selection of heteroconch outgroup taxa. The robustly monophyletic Anomalodesmata share insertions in the V2 and V4 expansion regions. Both parsimony and maximum-likelihood analyses confirm their position among the basal heterodonts rooting between Carditidae and Lucinidae or, together with the latter, between Carditidae and the remaining Heterodonta. There is no support for monophyletic Myoida, nor for a close relationship of Anomalodesmata with any myoid taxon. At the base of the Anomalodesmata is an unstable cluster of long-branch species belonging to the Poromyidae, Verticordiidae, Lyonsiellidae and Thraciidae. The remaining Anomalodesmata split consistently but with varying branch support into three major clades: the Cuspidariidae excluding Myonera ; a 'thraciid' clade consisting of (Euciroidae, ( Myonera ( Thracia, Cleidothaerus , Myochamidae))); and a 'lyonsiid' clade with Laternulidae, Pandoridae, diphyletic Lyonsiidae due to a robust clade of Lyonsia norwegica and the clavagellid Brechites vaginiferus . Tests of various alternative topologies showed that all are significantly longer but optimal likelihood trees with monophyletic carnivorous taxa and/or Thraciidae are not significantly less likely. These results differ greatly from previous morphological studies. Palaeontological data and homology decisions for selected characters are evaluated in the light of the molecular trees.  © 2003 The Linnean Society of London, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society , 2003, 139 , 229–246.     

The fitness costs of developmental canalization and plasticity

Organisms are capable of an astonishing repertoire of phenotypic responses to the environment, and these often define important adaptive solutions to heterogeneous and unpredictable conditions. The terms ‘phenotypic plasticity’ and ‘canalization’ indicate whether environmental variation has a large or small effect on the phenotype. The evolution of canalization and plasticity is influenced by optimizing selection‐targeting traits within environments, but inherent fitness costs of plasticity may also be important. We present a meta‐analysis of 27 studies (of 16 species of plant and 7 animals) that have measured selection on the degree of plasticity independent of the characters expressed within environments. Costs of plasticity and canalization were equally frequent and usually mild; large costs were observed only in studies with low sample size. We tested the importance of several covariates, but only the degree of environmental stress was marginally positively related to the cost of plasticity. These findings suggest that costs of plasticity are often weak, and may influence phenotypic evolution only under stressful conditions.     

Electrofusion of Trichoderma reesei protoplasts

Protoplasts of Trichoderma reesei were fused according to the method of Zimmermann. For optimizing the fusion parameters the central composite design was used. Genetic evidence for fusion has been obtained by segregation of the auxotrophic markers in the haploid conidia. The parameters which were optimized were: pulse voltage, pulse duration and number of pulses. The optimal parameters for the fusion of T. reesei protoplasts are 90 V pulse voltage, 37 μS pulse duration and six pulses at intervals of 1-0 s.