Identification of the notothenioid sister lineage illuminates the biogeographic history of an Antarctic adaptive radiation

Table 2 The three best biogeographic reconstructions for each major notothenioid clade using lagrange

Clade	Ancestral Rage	AIC Weight ( w _i)	Evidence Ratio
Notothenioidei	SA \| SA, AU, NZ, AN	0.942
	SA \| AU, NZ, AN	0.028	33.21
	NZ \| SA, AU, AN	0.020	47.28
Notothenioidea	SA \| SA, AU, AN	0.467
	SA \| SA, AN	0.102	4.59
	SA \| SA, AU	0.070	6.63
Pseudaphritioidea	AU \| SA, AN	0.500
	AU \| AU	0.125	3.99
	AN \| SA, AN	0.083	6.01
Bovichtidae	SA \| SA	0.632
	SA \| SA, AU	0.130	4.88
	SA \| SA, AU, NZ	0.101	6.31
Eleginopsioidea	SA \| AN	0.637
	SA, AU \| AN	0.064	9.90
	SA \| AU, AN	0.050	12.65
Cryonotothenioidea	AN \| AN	0.976
	AN \| AU, AN	0.011	88.54
	AN \| SA, AN	0.009	111.69

The reconstructions used a four-area Gondwanan model that included South America (SA), Australia (AU), New Zealand (NZ), and Antarctica (AN). The optimal ancestral range for each internal node (Figure 4) is listed first and the two less optimal reconstructions are italicized. The scenarios reflect the splitting of the ancestral range with areas to the left of the split represents the range inherited by the upper branch of the phylogeny in Figure 4 and ranges to the right of the split is the range inherited by the lower branch. For each reconstruction the Akaike weight (w _i) and evidence ratio are listed.

ISSN: 2730-7182