Multi-locus genetic data are pivotal in phylogenetics. Today, high-throughput sequencing (HTS) allows scientists to generate an unprecedented amount of such data from any organism. However, HTS is resource intense and may not be accessible to wide parts of the scientific community. In phylogeography, the use of HTS has concentrated on a few taxonomic groups, and the amount of data used to resolve a phylogeographic pattern often seems arbitrary. We explore the performance of two genetic marker sampling strategies and the effect of marker quantity in a comparative phylogeographic framework focusing on six species (arthropods and plants). The same analyses were applied to data inferred from amplified fragment length polymorphism fingerprinting (AFLP), a cheap, non-HTS based technique that is able to straightforwardly produce several hundred markers, and from restriction site associated DNA sequencing (RADseq), a more expensive, HTS-based technique that produces thousands of single nucleotide polymorphisms. We show that in four of six study species, AFLP leads to results comparable with those of RADseq. While we do not aim to contest the advantages of HTS techniques, we also show that AFLP is a robust technique to delimit evolutionary entities in both plants and animals. The demonstrated similarity of results from the two techniques also strengthens biological conclusions that were based on AFLP data in the past, an important finding given the wide utilization of AFLP over the last decades. We emphasize that whenever the delimitation of evolutionary entities is the central goal, as it is in many fields of biodiversity research, AFLP is still an adequate technique.
Performance comparison of two reduced-representation based genome-wide marker-discovery strategies in a multi-taxon phylogeographic framework / Kirschner, P.; Arthofer, W.; Pfeifenberger, S.; Zaveska, E.; Schonswetter, P.; Frajman, B.; Gamisch, A.; Hilpold, A.; Paun, O.; Sanmartin, I.; Trucchi, E.; Steiner, F. M.; Schlick-Steiner, B. C.. - In: SCIENTIFIC REPORTS. - ISSN 2045-2322. - 11:1(2021), p. 3978. [10.1038/s41598-020-79778-x]