Boreskov

wrong interpretation I can refer to the own experience of working with a widely usedmolecular marker – cytochrome b. While analyzing the phylogeny of Asian mountain voles ofthe genus Alticola (Lebedev et al., 2007) we tried to take in account all possible methodicalissues listed above and obtained quite robust tree with good statistical support, so thatinferred phylogeny seemed to be reliable. The phylogenetic relationships thus recoveredshowed that the genus Alticola is paraphyletic. However the analysis of a number of nucleargenes carried on later convincingly indicates the monophyly of the genus (Bodrov,Abramson, 2011). The wrong interpretation of the results in the given case evidently wasdue to introgression of mitochondrial genes caused by past hybridization.Alongside with phylogenies inferred from the use of single gene wrong ideas may bededuced from analysis based on incomplete taxa sampling.In conclusion I would like to emphasize that “the danger of generating incorrect results isgreater in computational molecular phylogenetics than in many other fields of science”(Hillis, Moritz, Mable, 1996) and phylogenetic analysis require thorough thought whereasquite often it viewed as a black box where one put the data and take the result.References[1]. Bodrov S.Yu., Abramson N.I. 2011.Phylogenetic relationships of Alticola olchonensis inferred fromsequences of nuclear and mitochondrial genes. Abstracts of the 9 Russian theriological Congress. P.25.[2]. Lebedev V.S., Bannikova A.A., Tesakov A.S. and Abramson N.I. 2007. Molecular phylogeny of the genusAlticola (C ricetidae, Rodentia) as inferred from the sequence of the cytochrom b gene. Zoologica Scripta,36, 6, p. 547‐563.[3]. Molecular Systematics, 2nd ed. 1996. D.M. Hillis, C. Moritz, and B.K. Mable, eds. Sinauer Associates,Sunderland, MA. 655 pp.126