|From Puttick et al 2018. Current Biology 28:1-13.|
Paraphyletic “bryophytes” might indeed be monophyletic bryophytes. In a recent paper, lots of transcriptome data and different types of phylogenetic analyses reveal support for bryophyte monophyly: [[[green algae [[hornworts, [liverworts, mosses]] tracheophyta]]]. The paper is:
Puttick MN et al. 2018. The Interrelationships of Land Plants and the Nature of the Ancestral Embryophyte. Current Biology 28: 1-13.This new paper provides a synthesis of many different types of data (transcriptomic amino-acids), various models and inference methods for a large sample of exemplars from algae and embryophytes (103 terminals). The main results obviously challenge the idea of a progressive elaboration of cells, biochemical pathways, and simple morphologies from an ancestor similar to liverworts towards the complex morphologies in mosses and early vascular plants. Rather it seems that the ancestral embryophyte was more complex than previously proposed, complex enough to prompt research on the possible re-interpretation of several early land plant fossils.
|@E. De Luna|
For the last 25 years I have been so comfortable with the idea that “bryophytes” are not monophyletic. I learned that mosses are sisters to vascular plants, then hornworts sisters to both, and liverworts are placed at the base of phylogeny of land plants. This is the phylogeny of Embryophytes presented at the Tree of Life web project web site as a summary of available knowledge (http://tolweb.org/Embryophytes/20582 accessed June 13, 2018).
|From Bowman JL et al 2017. Cell 171: 287-304|