Taxonomic Uncertainty and Phylogenomics: Rescuing a Contentious Species Complex from the Anomaly Zone

Species are an indisputable unit for biodiversity conservation, yet their delimitation is fraught with both conceptual and methodological difficulties. A classic example is the taxonomic controversy surrounding the Gila robusta complex in the lower Colorado River of southwestern North America. Three species were originally defined according to subtle morphological differences with weak diagnostic power, with traditional genetic analyses failing to support the nominal species. Consequently, the complex was re-defined as a single polytypic unit, with the proposed 9threatened9 status of two putative species withdrawn at the federal level. Here, we utilized dense spatial and genomic sampling (N=387 and >22k loci) to re-evaluate the status of the complex, based on SNP-based coalescent and polymorphism-aware phylogenetic models. In doing so, all three species were supported as evolutionarily independent lineages, despite widespread phylogenetic discordance. To understand this discrepancy with past studies, we categorized evolutionary mechanisms driving discordance. We tested (and subsequently rejected) prior hypotheses suggesting that phylogenetic discord in the complex was hybridization-driven. Instead, we found the G. robusta complex to have diverged within the 9anomaly zone9 of tree space and, as such, have accumulated inconsistent patterns of diversity which have confounded prior studies. After extending these analyses with phylogeographic modeling, we propose that this is reflective of a rapid radiation promoted by Plio-Pleistocene tectonism. Our results not only support resurrection of the three species as distinct entities, but also offer an empirical example of how phylogenetic discordance can be categorized in other recalcitrant taxa.