Is congruence between data partitions a reliable predictor of phylogenetic accuracy? Empirically testing an iterative procedure for choosing among phylogenetic methods

Systematic Biology

Volumn 46, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 464-478

  Cunningham, Clifford W ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Congruence; Incongruence tests; Maximum likelihood; Phylogenetic accuracy; Six parameter parsimony; Successive weighting; Transversion parsimony; Weighted parsimony

Indexed keywords

VERTEBRATA;

MITOCHONDRIAL DNA;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOMETRY; CLASSIFICATION; CODON; GENETICS; METHODOLOGY; MURIDAE; PEROMYSCUS; PHYLOGENY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; BIOMETRY; CODON; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DNA, MITOCHONDRIAL; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, GENETIC; MURIDAE; PEROMYSCUS; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 0031224810     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/46.3.464     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. ALLARD, M., AND J. CARPENTER. 1996. On weighting and congruence. Cladistics 12:183-198.
2. ALLARD, M. W., AND M. M. MIYAMOTO. 1992. Testing phylogenetic approaches with empirical data, as illustrated with the parsimony method. Mol. Biol. Evol. 9:778-786.
3. ALROY, J. 1994. Permutation tests for the presence of phylogenetic structure. Syst. Biol. 43:430-437.
4. BARRETT, M., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND E. SOBER. 1991. Against consensus. Syst. Zool. 40:486-493.
5. BRIDGE, D., C. W. CUNNINGHAM, L. BUSS, AND R. DESALLE. 1995. Class-level relationships in the phylum Cnidaria: Molecular and morphological evidence. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:679-689.
6. BROWN, W. M., E. M. PRAGER, A. WANG, AND A. C. WILSON. 1982. Mitochondrial DNA sequences of primates: Tempo and mode of evolution. J. Mol. Evol. 18:225-239.
7. BULL, J. J., J. P. HUELSENBECK, C. W. CUNNINGHAM, D. L. SWOFFORD, AND P. J. WADDELL. 1993. Partitioning and combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42:384-397.
8. CARLETON, M. D. 1989. Systematics and evolution. Pages 7-141 in Advances in the study of Peromyscus (G. L. Kirkland and J. N. Layne, eds.). Texas Tech Univ. Press, Lubbock.
9. CHIPPINDALE, P. T., AND J. J. WIENS. 1994. Weighting, partitioning, and combining characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 43:278-287.
10. COLLINS, T. M., F. KRAUS, AND G. ESTABROOK. 1994a. Compositional effects and weighting of nucleotide sequences for phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 43: 449-459.
11. COLLINS, T. M., P. H. WIMBERGER, AND G. J. P. NAYLOR. 1994b. Compositional bias, character-state bias, and character-state reconstruction using parsimony. Syst. Biol. 43:482-496.
12. CUNNINGHAM, C. W. 1997. Can three incongruence tests predict when data should be combined? Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:733-740.
13. DAYHOFF, M. Q., R. M. SCHWARTZ, AND B. C. ORCUTT. 1978. A model of evolutionary change in proteins. Pages 345-352 in Atlas of protein sequence and structure, Volume 5, Supplement 3 (M. O. Dayhoff, ed.). National Biomedical Research Foundation, Washington, D.C.
14. DE QUEIROZ, A. 1993. For consensus (sometimes). Syst. Biol. 42:368-372.
15. DE QUEIROZ, A., M. DONOGHUE, AND J. KIM. 1995. Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:657-681.
16. DESALLE, R., T. FREEDMAN, E. M. PRAGER, AND A. C. WILSON. 1987. Tempo and mode of sequence evolution in mitochondrial DNA of Hawaiian Drosophila. J. Mol. Evol. 26:157-164.
17. FAITH, D. P., AND P. S. CRANSTON. 1991. Could a cladogram this short have arisen by chance alone? On permutation tests for cladistic structure. Cladistics 7:1-28.
18. FARRIS, J. S. 1969. A successive approximations approach to character weighting. Syst. Zool. 18:374-385.
19. FARRIS, J. S., M. KÄLLERSJÖ, A. G. KLUGE, AND C. BULT. 1994. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10:315-319.
20. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27:401-410.
21. FRIEDLANDER, T. P., J. C. REGIER, AND C. MITTER. 1992. Nuclear gene sequences for higher level phylogenetic analysis: 14 promising candidates. Syst. Biol. 41:483-490.
22. FRIEDLANDER, T. P., J. C. REGIER, C. MITTER, AND D. L. WAGNER. 1996. A nuclear gene for higher level phylogenetics: Phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase tracks Mesozoic-age divergences within Lepidoptera. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:594-604.
23. GATESY, J., R. DESALLE, AND W. C. WHEELER. 1993. Alignment-ambiguous nucleotide sites and the exclusion of systematic data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2: 152-157.
24. GOLDMAN, N. 1993. Statistical tests of models of DNA substitution. J. Mol. Evol. 36:182-198.
25. GRAYBEAL, A. 1994. Evaluating the phylogenetic utility of genes: A search for genes informative about deep divergences among vertebrates. Syst. Biol. 43: 174-193.
26. HASEGAWA, M., H. KISHINO, AND T. YANO. 1985. Dating of the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Mol. Evol. 22:160-174.
27. HIGGINS, D. G., A. J. BLEASBY, AND R. FUCHS. 1992. CLUSTAL V: Improved software for multiple sequence alignment. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 8:189-191.
28. HILLIS, D. M. 1987. Molecular versus morphological approaches to systematics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18: 23-42.
29. HILLIS, D. M. 1991. Discriminating between phylogenetic signal and random noise in DNA sequences. Pages 278-294 in Phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences (M. M. Miyamoto and J. Cracraft, eds.). Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
30. HILLIS, D. M. 1995. Approaches for assessing phylogenetic accuracy. Syst. Biol. 44:3-16.
31. HILLIS, D. M., AND M. T. DIXON. 1991. Ribosomal DNA: Molecular evolution and phylogenetic inference. Q. Rev. Biol. 66:411-453.
32. HILLIS, D. M., J. HUELSENBECK, AND C. W. CUNNINGHAM. 1994. Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies. Science 264:671-676.
33. HOGAN, K. M., M. C. HEDIN, H. S. KOH, AND S. K. DAVIS. 1993. Systematic and taxonomic implications of karyotypic, electrophoretic, and mitochondrial-DNA variation in Peromyscus from the Pacific Northwest. J. Mammal. 74:819-831.
34. HOLMQUIST, R. 1983. Transitions and transversions in evolutionary descent. J. Mol. Evol. 19:134-144.
35. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND J. J. BULL. 1996. A likelihood ratio test to detect conflicting phylogenetic signal. Syst. Biol. 45:92-93.
36. HUELSENBECK, J. P., J. J. BULL, AND C. W. CUNNINGHAM. 1996. Combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11:152-157.
37. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND D. M. HILLIS. 1993. Success of phylogenetic methods in the four-taxon case. Syst. Biol. 42:247-264.
38. HUELSENBECK, J. P., D. L. SWOFFORD, C. W. CUNNINGHAM, J. J. BULL, AND P. W. WADDELL. 1994. Is character weighting a panacea for the problem of data heterogeneity in phylogenetic analysis? Syst. Biol. 43:288-291.
39. JUKES, T. H., AND C. H. CANTOR. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. Pages 21-123 in Mammalian protein metabolism (H. M. Munro, ed.). Academic Press, New York.
40. KJER, K. M. 1995. Use of rRNA secondary structure in phylogenetic studies to identify homologous positions: An example of alignment and data presentation from the frogs. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 4:314-330.
41. KLUGE, A. G. 1989. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Zool. 38:7-25.
42. KLUGE, A. G., AND J. S. FARRIS. 1969. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Syst. Zool. 18:1-32.
43. KNIGHT, A., AND D. P. MINDELL. 1993. Substitution bias, weighting of DNA sequence evolution, and the phylogenetic position of Fea's viper. Syst. Biol. 42: 18-31.
44. KUMAZAWA, Y., AND M. NISHIDA. 1993. Sequence evolution of mitochondrial tRNA genes and deep-branch animal phvlogenetics. J. Mol. Evol. 37:380-398.
45. LAKE, J. 1991. The order of sequence alignment can bias the selection of tree topology. Mol. Biol. Evol. 8:378-385.
46. LANYON, S. M. 1993. Phylogenetic frameworks: Towards a firmer foundation for the comparative approach. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 49:45-61.
47. LARSON, A. 1994. The comparison of morphological and molecular data in phylogenetic systematics. Pages 371-390 in Molecular ecology and evolution: Approaches and applications (B. Schierwater, B. Streit, G. P. Wagner, and R. DeSalle, eds.). Birkhäuser Verlag, Berlin.
48. LUTZONI, F., AND R. VILGALYS. 1995. Integration of morphological and molecular data sets in estimating fungal phylogenies. Can. J. Bot. 73:S649-S659.
49. MADDISON, W. P., AND D. R. MADDISON. 1992. MacClade: Analysis of phylogeny and character evolution, version 3.0. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
50. MARSHALL, C. R. 1992. Substitution bias, weighted parsimony, and amniote phylogeny as inferred from 18S rRNA sequences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 9:370-373.
51. MICKEVICH, M. F., AND J. S. FARRIS. 1981. The implications of congruence in Menidia. Syst. Zool. 30:351-370.
52. MIYAMOTO, M. M., M. W. ALLARD, R. M. ADKINS, L. L. JANECEK, AND R. L. HONEYCUTT. 1994. A congruence test of reliability using linked mitochondrial DNA sequences. Syst. Biol. 43:236-249.
53. MIYAMOTO, M. M., AND W. M. FITCH. 1995. Testing species phylogenies and phylogenetic methods with congruence. Syst. Biol. 44:64-76.
54. OLMSTEAD, R. G., AND J. A. SWEERE. 1994. Combining data in phylogenetic systematics: An empirical approach using three molecular data sets in the Solanaceae. Syst. Biol. 43:467-481.
55. OMLAND, K. E. 1994. Character congruence between a molecular and a morphological phylogeny for dabbling ducks (Anas). Syst. Biol. 43:369-386.
56. PENNY, D., AND M. D. HENDY. 1985. The use of tree comparison metrics. Syst. Zool. 34:75-82.
57. RODRIGO, A. G. 1992. A modification to Wheeler's combinatorial weights calculations. Cladistics 8: 165-170.
58. RODRIGO, A. G., M. KELLY-BORGES, P. R. BERGQUIST, AND P. L. BERGQUIST. 1993. A randomisation test of the null hypothesis that two cladograms are sample estimates of a parametric phylogenetic tree. N.Z. J. Bot. 31:257-268.
59. RUSSO, C., N. TAKEZAKI, AND M. NEI. 1996. Efficiencies of different genes and different tree-building methods in recovering a known phylogeny. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:525-536.
60. SACCONE, C., C. LANAVE, AND G. PESOLE. 1993. Time and biosequences. J. Mol. Evol. 37:154-159.
61. SANKOFF, D., AND R. J. CEDERGREN. 1983. Simultaneous comparison of three or more sequences related by a tree. Pages 253-263 in Time warps, string edits, and macromolecules: The theory and practice of sequence comparison (D. Sankoff and J. B. Kruskal, eds.). Addison-Wesley, Reading, Pennsylvania.
62. SULLIVAN, J., K. E. HOLSINGER, AND C. SIMON. 1995. Among-site variation and phylogenetic analysis of 12S rRNA in sigmodontine rodents. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:988-1001.
63. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1991. When are phylogeny estimates from molecular and morphological data incongruent? Pages 295-333 in Phylogenetic analysis of DNA sequences (M. M. Miyamoto and J. Cracraft, eds.). Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
64. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1997. PAUP*: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4.0. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
65. SWOFFORD, D. L., AND G. J. OLSEN. 1990. Phylogeny reconstruction. Pages 411-501 in Molecular systematics, 1st edition (D. M. Hillis and C. Moritz, eds.). Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
66. WHEELER, W. C. 1990. Combinatorial weights in phylogenetic analysis: A statistical parsimony procedure. Cladistics 6:269-275.
67. WHEELER, W. C. 1995. Sequence alignment, parameter sensitivity, and the phylogenetic analysis of molecular data. Syst. Biol. 44:321-331.
68. WHEELER, W. C., AND D. GLADSTEIN. 1994. MALIGN, version 1.91 for Macintosh. American Museum of Natural History, New York.
69. WILLIAMS, P. L., AND W. M. FITCH. 1989. Finding the minimal change in a given tree. Pages 453-470 in The hierarchy of life (B. Fernholm, K. Bremer, and H. Jörnvall, eds.). Elsevier, New York.
70. WILLIAMS, P. L., AND W. M. FITCH. 1990. Phylogeny determination using the dynamically weighted parsimony method. Methods Enzymol. 183:615-626.
71. YANG, Z., N. GOLDMAN, AND A. FRIDAY. 1994. Comparison of models for nucleotide substitution used in maximum-likelihood phylogenetic estimation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:316-324.