Bias-corrected paralinear and LogDet distances and tests of molecular clocks and phylogenies under nonstationary nucleotide frequencies

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 13, Issue 10, 1996, Pages 1375-1383

  Gu, Xun ^a   Li, Wen Hsiung ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

bias correction; LogDet distance; molecular clock; nonstationary nucleotide frequencies; paralinear distance; phylogenetic reconstruction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COVARIANCE; DNA SEQUENCE; EVOLUTION; GENE FREQUENCY; GENETIC DISTANCE; MODEL; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PHYLOGENY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VARIANCE;

EID: 0029856519     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025584     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. BAR-HEN, A., and D. PENNY. 1996. Estimating the bias on the LogDeterminant transformation for evolutionary trees. Appli. Math. Lett, (in press).
2. BARRY, D., and J. A. HARTIGAN. 1987. Asynchronous distances between homologous DNA sequences. Biometrics 43: 261-276.
3. BISHOP, M. J., and A. E. FRIDAY. 1988. Estimating the interrelationship of tetrapod groups on the basis of molecular sequence data. Pp. 35-38 in M. J. BENTON, ed. The phylogeny and classification of tetrapods. Vol. 1. Clarendon, Oxford.
4. BULMER, M. 1991. Use of the method of generalized least squares in reconstructing phylogenies from sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 8:868-883.
5. CAVENDER, J. A., and J. FELSENSTEIN. 1987. Invariants of phylogenies: simple case with discrete states. J. Classif. 4: 57-71.
6. DAYHOFF, M. O., R. M. SCHWARTZ, and B. C. ORCUTT. 1978. A model of evolutionary change in proteins. Pp. 345-352 in M. O. DAYHOFF, ed. Atlas of protein sequence structure. Vol. 5, suppl. 3. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington, D.C.
7. FITCH, W. M. 1981. A non-sequential method for constructing trees and hierarchical classifications. J. Mol. Evol. 18:30-37.
8. GASCUEL, O. 1994. A note on Sattach and Tversky's, Saitou and Nei's, and Studier and Keppler's algorithms for inferring phylogenies from evolutionary distances. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:961-963.
9. GOLDMAN, N., and Z. YANG. 1994. A codon-based model of nucleotide substitution for protein-coding DNA sequences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:725-736.
10. Gu, X., and W. H. LI. 1992. Higher rates of amino acid substitution in rodents than in humans. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 234:185-192.
11. _. 1996. A general additive distance with time-reversibility and rate variation among nucleotide sites. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:4671-4676.
12. HASEGAWA, M., and T. HASHIMOTO. 1993. Ribosomal RNA trees misleading? Nature 361:23.
13. HEDGES, S. B., K. D. MOBERG, and L. R. MAXSON. 1990. Tetrapod phylogeny inferred from 18S and 28S ribosomal sequences and a review of the evidence for amniote relationships. Mol. Biol. Evol. 7:607-633.
14. JUKES, T. H., and C. R. CANTOR. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. Pp. 21-32 in H. R. MUNRO, ed. Mammalian protein metabalism. Vol. 3. Academic Press, New York.
15. KIMURA, M. 1980. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rate of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 16:111-120.
16. LAKE, J. A. 1994. Reconstructing evolutionary trees from DNA and protein sequences: paralinear distances. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:1455-1459.
17. LANAVE, C., G. PREPARATA, C. SACCONE, and G. SERIO. 1984. A new method for calculating evolutionary substitution rates. J. Mol. Evol. 20:86-93.
18. LI, W. H., and A. ZHARKIKH. 1995. Statistical tests of DNA phylogenies. Syst. Biol. 44:49-63.
19. LOCKHART, P. J., M. A. STEEL, M. D. HENDY, and D. PENNY. 1994. Recovering evolutionary trees under a more realistic model of sequence evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:605-612.
20. MUSE, S. V., and B. S. GAUT. 1994. A likelihood approach for comparing synonymous and nonsynonymous nucleotide substitution rates, with application to the chloroplast genome. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:715-724.
21. NEI, M., J. C. STEPHENS, and N. SATTOU. 1985. Methods for computing the standard errors of branching points in an evolutionary tree and their application to molecular data from humans and apes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2:66-85.
22. RZHETSKY, A., and M. NEI. 1992. A simple method for estimating and testing minimum-evolution trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 9:945-967.
23. SAITOU, N., and M. NEI. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstruction of phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4:406-425.
24. SATTATH, S., and A. TVERSKY. 1977. Additive similarity trees. Psychometrika 42:319-345.
25. SOGIN, M. L., G. HINKLE, and D. D. LEIPE. 1993. Universal tree of life. Nature 362:795.
26. STEEL, M. A. 1994. Recovering a tree from the leaf colourations it generates under a Markov model. Appl. Math. Lett. 7:19-24.
27. STUDIER, J. A., and K. J. KEPPLER. 1988. A note on the neighbor-joining method of Saitou and Nei. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5: 729-731.
28. WU, C-I., and W.-H. LI. 1985. Evidence for higher rates of nucleotide substitution in rodents than in man. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 82:1741-1745.
29. ZHARKIKH, A. 1994. Estimation of evolutionary distances between nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 39:315-329.