Fig. 3.

Phylogenetic Tree for RbcL within Haptophyta showing branches under positive selection (magenta) and those with no positive selection (black) adapted from Young et al., [48]. Black numbers above branch is statistical significance (p-value) of positive selection after a likelihood ratio test comparing nested models and using Bonferroni correction. Grey bars denote 95% confidence intervals for date estimates and grey numbers are posterior probability values. Yellow diamonds with corresponding letter are fossil calibration dates. Also indicated is the presence/absence of some components of a CCM with a blue tick for the presence of a δCA (methodology from Heureux et al. [20]), and a red bar for the absence or presence (blue) of a pyrenoid (Eason Hubbard unpublished; P. lutheri (now Diacronema lutheri) [50,51] Pavlova pinguis [52,53], Pavlova salina (now Rebecca salina) [51,53], Exanthemachrysis gayraliae [51,54], Phaeocystis globosa [55], Phaeocystis pouchetii [56], Hyalolithus neolepis (now Prymnesium neolepis) [57], Prymnesium parvum [58], Prymnesium patelliferum (now Prymnesium parvum haploid stage) [59], Imantonia rotunda (now Dicrateria rotunda) [60], Gephyrocapsa oceanica [61], Helicosphaera carteri (Eason Hubbard unpubl), Emiliania huxleyi [62,63], Isochrysis galbana [64], Chrysotila lamellosa [65], Pleurochrysis placolithoides [66], Pleurochrysis carterae [67], Pleurochrysis elongate [68], Coccolithus pelagicus [69], Calcidiscus leptoporus (Eason Hubbard unpubl), Umbilicosphaera sibogae var foliosa [70], Calyptrosphaera sphaeroidea (now Holococcolithophora sphaeroidea) [71], Cruciplacolithus neohelis [72]. Also indicated is the RuBisCO specificity in numerical values where data is available. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)