期刊文献+

Taxon sampling and the accuracy of phylogenetic analyses 被引量:2

Taxon sampling and the accuracy of phylogenetic analyses
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 Appropriate and extensive taxon sampling is one of the most important determinants of accurate phylogenetic estimation. In addition, accuracy of inferences about evolutionary processes obtained from phyloge-netic analyses is improved significantly by thorough taxon sampling efforts. Many recent efforts to improve phylogenetic estimates have focused instead on increasing sequence length or the number of overall characters in the analysis, and this often does have a beneficial effect on the accuracy of phylogenetic analyses. However, phylogenetic analyses of few taxa (but each represented by many characters) can be subject to strong systematic biases, which in turn produce high measures of repeatability (such as bootstrap proportions) in support of incor-rect or misleading phylogenetic results. Thus, it is important for phylogeneticists to consider both the sampling of taxa, as well as the sampling of characters, in designing phylogenetic studies. Taxon sampling also improves estimates of evolutionary parameters derived from phylogenetic trees, and is thus important for improved applica-tions of phylogenetic analyses. Analysis of sensitivity to taxon inclusion, the possible effects of long-branch attraction, and sensitivity of parameter estimation for model-based methods should be a part of any careful and thorough phylogenetic analysis. Furthermore, recent improvements in phylogenetic algorithms and in computa-tional power have removed many constraints on analyzing large, thoroughly sampled data sets. Thorough taxon sampling is thus one of the most practical ways to improve the accuracy of phylogenetic estimates, as well as the accuracy of biological inferences that are based on these phylogenetic trees. Appropriate and extensive taxon sampling is one of the most important determinants of accurate phylogenetic estimation. In addition, accuracy of inferences about evolutionary processes obtained from phylogenetic analyses is improved significantly by thorough taxon sampling efforts. Many recent efforts to improve phylogenetic estimates have focused instead on increasing sequence length or the number of overall characters in the analysis, and this often does have a beneficial effect on the accuracy of phylogenetic analyses. However, phylogenetic analyses of few taxa (but each represented by many characters) can be subject to strong systematic biases, which in turn produce high measures of repeatability (such as bootstrap proportions) in support of incorrect or misleading phylogenetic results. Thus, it is important for phylogeneticists to consider both the sampling of taxa, as well as the sampling of characters, in designing phylogenetic studies. Taxon sampling also improves estimates of evolutionary parameters derived from phylogenetic trees, and is thus important for improved applica- tions of phylogenetic analyses. Analysis of sensitivity to taxon inclusion, the possible effects of long-branch attraction, and sensitivity of parameter estimation for model-based methods should be a part of any careful and thorough phylogenetic analysis. Furthermore, recent improvements in phylogenetic algorithms and in computational power have removed many constraints on analyzing large, thoroughly sampled data sets. Thorough taxon sampling is thus one of the most practical ways to improve the accuracy of phylogenetic estimates, as well as the accuracy of biological inferences that are based on these phylogenetic trees.
出处 《植物分类学报》 CSCD 北大核心 2008年第3期239-257,共19页 Acta Phytotaxonomica Sinica
关键词 动物 物种 分类方法 取样方法 consistency, long-branch attraction, phylogenetic accuracy, phylogenomics, systematic error, taxon sampling, Tree of Life.
  • 相关文献

参考文献203

  • 1Ackerly DD. 2000. Taxon sampling, correlated evolution, and independent contrasts. Evolution 54: 1480-1492.
  • 2Agapow PM, Purvis A. 2002. Power of eight tree shape statistics to detect nonrandom diversification: a comparison by simulation of two models of cladogenesis. Systematic Biology 51: 866-872.
  • 3Albrecht C, Kuhn K, Streit B. 2007. A molecular phylogeny of Planorboidea (Gastropoda, Pulmonata): insights from enhanced taxon sampling. Zoologica Scripta 36: 27-39.
  • 4Alfaro ME, Santini F,Brock CD. 2007.Do reefs drive diversification in marine teleosts? Evidence from the pufferfish and their allies (order Tetraodontiformes). Evolution 61: 2104-2126.
  • 5Ammerman LK, Hillis DM. 1992. A molecular test of bat relationships: Monophyly or diphyly? Systematic Biology 41: 222-232.
  • 6Anderson FE, Swofford DL. 2004. Should we be worried about long-branch attraction in real data sets? Investigations using metazoan 18S rDNA. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 33: 440-451.
  • 7Ane C, Burleigh JG, McMahon MM, Sanderson MJ. 2005. Covarion structure in plastid genome evolution: A new statistical test. Molecular Biology and Evolution 22: 914-924.
  • 8Ane C, Sanderson MJ. 2005. Missing the forest for the trees: Phylogenetic compression and its implications for inferring complex evolutionary histories. Systematic Biology 54: 146-157.
  • 9Baurain D,Brinkrnann H, Philippe H. 2007. Lack of resolution in the animal phylogeny: Closely spaced cladogeneses or undetected systematic errors? Molecular Biology and Evolution 24: 6-9.
  • 10Becerra JX. 2005. Timing the origin and expansion of the Mexican tropical dry forest. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 102: 10919-10923.

同被引文献67

  • 1CBOL Plant Working Group, 2009. A DNA barcode for land plants [ J ]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U- nited States of America, 106 (31): 12794-12797.
  • 2Valentini A, Pompanon F, Tabedet P, 2009. DNA barcoding for ecol- ogists [J]. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24 (2) : 110-117.
  • 3Webb CO, 2000. Exploring the phylogenetic structure of ecological communities: an example for rain forest trees [ J ]. The Ameri- can Naturalist, 15fi (2) : 145-155.
  • 4Webb CO, Ackerly DD, McPeek MA et al., 2002. Phylogenies and community ecology [ J]. Annual Review of Ecology and System- atics, 33 : 475-505.
  • 5Webb CO, Donoghue M J, 2005. Phylornatic: tree assembly for applied phylogenetics [J]. Molecular Ecology Notes, 5 (1) : 181-183.
  • 6Zhang SB, Slik JWF, Zhang JL et al., 2011. Spatial patterns of wood traits in China are controlled by phylogeny and environment [ J]. Global Ecology and Biogeography, 20 ( 2 ) : 241-250.
  • 7APG III, 2009. An update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group classifica- tion for the orders and families of flowering plants: APG III [ J ]. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 161 (2) : 105-121.
  • 8Burns JH, Strauss SY, 2011. More closely related species are more ecologically similar in an experimental test [ J ]. Proceedings ofthe National Academy of Sciences of the United States of Ameriea, 108 (13) : 5302-5307.
  • 9Cadotte MW, Davies TJ, Regetz Jet al., 2010. Phylogenetic diversity metrics for ecological communities: integrating species richness, abundance and evolutionary history [ J ]. Ecology Letters, 13 ( 1 ) : 96-105.
  • 10China Plant BOL Group, 2011. Comparative analysis of a large data- set indicates that internal transcribed spacer (ITS) should be in- corporated into the core barcode for seed plants [ J ]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of Ameri- ca, 108 (49): 19641-19646.

引证文献2

二级引证文献15

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部