Annelid relationships are controversial, and molecular and morphological analyses provide incongruent estimates. Character loss is identified as a major confounding factor for phylogenetic analyses based on morphological data. A direct approach and an indirect approach for the identification of character loss are discussed. Character loss can frequently be found within annelids and examples of the loss of typical annelid characters, like chaetae, nuchal organs, coelomic cavities and other features, are given. A loss of segmentation is suggested for Sipuncula and Echiura; both are supported as annelid ingroups in molecular phylogenetic analyses. Moreover, character loss can be caused by some modes of heterochronic evolution (paedomorphosis) and, as shown for orbiniid and arenicolid polychaetes, paedomorphic taxa might be misplaced in phylogenies derived from morphology. Different approaches for dealing with character loss in cladistic analyses are discussed. Application of asymmetrical character state transformation costs or usage of a dynamic homology framework represents promising approaches. Identifying character loss prior to a phylogenetic analysis will help to refine morphological data matrices and improve phylogenetic analyses of annelid relationships.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Christoph Bleidorn (2007) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: