A comparison of two models for estimating phylogenetic effect on trait variation

Evolution

Volumn 51, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 262-266

  Christman, Mary C ^a   Jernigan, Robert W ^a   Culver, David ^a  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Comparative methods; evolutionary biology; Gammarus minus; mixed model; phylogeny; spatial autocorrelation model

Indexed keywords

GAMMARUS; GAMMARUS MINUS;

EID: 0030934327     PISSN: 00143820     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1997.tb02407.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. CHANG, J. C. 1995. Phylogenetic analysis of adaptation in the crustacean Gammarus minus. Master's thesis, Univ. of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.
2. CHEVERUD, J. M., AND M. M. DOW. 1985. An autocorrelation analysis of the effect of lineal fission on genetic variation among social groups. Am. J. Phys. Anthro. 67:113-121.
3. CHEVERUD, J. M., M. M. DOW, AND W. LEUTENEGGER. 1985. The quantitative assessment of phylogenetic constraints in comparative analyses: Sexual dimorphism in body weight among primates. Evolution 39:1335-1351.
4. CRESSIE, N. A. C. 1993. Statistics for spatial data. Rev. ed. Wiley, New York.
5. CULVER, D.C., T. C. KANE, AND D. W. FONG. 1995. Adaptation and natural selection in caves. The evolution of Gammarus minus. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA.
6. DEMPSTER, A. P., N. M. LAIRD, AND D. B. RUBIN. 1977. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 39:1-38.
7. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1981. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach. J. Mol. Evol. 17:368-376.
8. FONG, D. W. 1989. Morphological evolution of the amphipod Gammarus minus in caves: Quantitative genetic analysis. Am. Mid. Nat. 121:361-378.
9. HARVEY, P. H., AND M. D. PAGEL. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
10. JERNIGAN R. W., D. C. CULVER, AND D. W. FONG. 1994. The dual role of selection and evolutionary history as reflected in genetic correlations. Evolution 48:587-596.
11. LOSOS, J. B., AND D. B. MILES. 1994. Adaptation, constraint, and the comparative method: Phylogenetic issues and methods. Pp. 60-98 in P. C. Wainwright and S. T. Reilly, ed. Ecological morphology: Integrative organismal biology. Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago.
12. LYNCH, M. 1991. Methods for the analysis of comparative data in evolutionary biology. Evolution 45:1065-1080.
13. MILES, D. B. AND A. E. DUNHAM. 1992. Comparative analyses of phylogenetic effects in the life-history patterns of iguanid reptiles. Am. Nat. 139:848-869.
14. _. 1993. Historical perspectives in ecology and evolutionary biology: The use of phylogenetic comparisons. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 24:587-619.
15. MOLER, C. 1993. The MATLAB reference guide. The Mathworks, Natick, MA.
16. ORD, K. 1975. Estimation methods for models of spatial interaction. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 70:120-126.
17. THOMPSON, E. A., AND R. G. SHAW. 1990. Pedigree analysis for quantitative traits: Variance components without matrix inversion. Biometrics 46:399-413.
18. _. 1992. Estimating polygenic models for multivariate data in large pedigrees. Genetics 131:971-978.