Affiliation:
1. Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaya Emb. 1, 199034 St. Petersburg, Russia
Abstract
The alteration of approaches, methods and hypotheses in phylogeny of Platyhelminthes, mainly Neodermata, has been considered. It has been shown that the principal conflict in modern flatworm phylogeny is monophyly of Neodermata, supported by both molecular and comparative morphological data, which collides with current viewpoint on the origin and evolution of Trematoda.
Publisher
Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Subject
Insect Science,Animal Science and Zoology,Aquatic Science,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference39 articles.
1. Быховский Б.Е. 1937. Онтогенез и филогенетические взаимоотношения плоских паразитических червей. Известия АН СССР, сер. биолог., 4: 1353–1383.
2. Быховский Б.Е. 1957. Моногенетические сосальщики, их система и филогения. Академия Наук СССР, Москва–Ленинград, 509 с.
3. Baguñà J., Carranza S., Paps J., Ruiz-Trillo I. and Ruitort M. 2001. Molecular taxonomy and phylogeny of the Tricladida. In: D.T.J. Littlewood and R.A. Bray (Eds.). Interrelationships of the Platyhelminthes. Taylor and Francis, London and New York: 49–56.
4. Baverstock P.R., Fielke R., Johnson A.M., Bray R.A. and Beveridge I. 1991. Conflicting phylogenetic hypotheses for the parasitic Platyhelminthes tested by partial sequencing of 18S ribosomal RNA. International Journal for Parasitoogy, 21: 329–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7519(91)90035-6
5. Blair D. 1993. The phylogenetic position of the Aspidobothrea within the parasitic flatworms inferred from ribosomal RNA sequence data. International Journal for Parasitology, 23: 169–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7519(93)90138-O