Random sampling of constrained phylogenies: Conducting phylogenetic analyses when the phylogeny is partially known

Systematic Biology

Volumn 50, Issue 5, 2001, Pages 628-639

  Housworth, Elizabeth A ^a   Martins, Emília P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

Author keywords

Branching process; Combinatorics; Comparative method; Phylogenetic analysis; Phylogeny

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOMETRY; PHYLOGENY; RANDOMIZATION; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

BIOMETRY; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; RANDOM ALLOCATION; SPECIES SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0035527363     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/106351501753328776     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. ABOUHEIF, E. 1998. Random trees and the comparative method: A cautionary tale. Evolution 52:1197-1204.
2. ALDOUS, D. 1995. Darwin's log: A toy model of speciation and extinction. J. Appl. Prob. 32:279-295.
3. CHU, J., AND C. ADAMI. 1999. A simple explanation for taxon abundance patterns. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96:15017-15019.
4. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1978. The number of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 27:27-33.
5. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1985. Phylogenies and the comparative method. Am. Nat. 125:1-15.
6. FURNAS, G. W. 1984. The generation of random, binary unordered trees. J. Classif. 1:187-233.
7. GELMAN, A., J. B. CARLIN, H. S. STERN, AND D. B. RUBIN. 1995. Bayesian data analysis. Texts in statistical science. Chapman & Hall, London.
8. GRAFEN, A. 1989. The phylogenetic regression. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London B: Biol. Sci. 326:119-157.
9. GRAFEN, A. 1992. The uniqueness of the phylogenetic regression. J. Theoret. Biol. 156:405-424.
10. HANSEN, T. F. 1997. Stabilizing selection and the comparative analysis of adaptation. Evolution 51:1341-1351.
11. HANSEN, T. F., AND E. P. MARTINS. 1996. Translating between microevolutionary process and macroevolutionary patterns: The correlation structure of interspecific data. Evolution 40:1404-1417.
12. HARVEY, P. H., AND M. D. PAGEL. 1991. The comparative method in evolutionary biology. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, England.
13. HARVEY, P. H., AND A. RAMBAUT. 1998. Phylogenetic extinction rates and comparative methodology. Proc. R. Soc. London B 265:1691-1696.
14. HEY, J. 1992. Using phylogenetic trees to study speciation and extinction. Evolution 46:627-640.
15. HUDSON, R. R. 1990. Gene genealogies and the coalescent process. Oxford Surv. Evol. Biol. 7:1-44.
16. HUELSENBECK, J. P., B. RANNALA, AND J. P. MASLY. 2000. Accommodating phylogenetic uncertainty in evolutionary studies. Science 288:2349-2350.
17. KINGMAN, J. F. C. 1982. The coalescent. Stochastic Proc. Appl. 13:235-248.
18. KUHNER, M. K., J. YAMATO, AND J. FELSENSTEIN. 1995. Estimating effective population size and mutation rate from sequence data using Metropolis-Hastings sampling. Genetics 140:1421-1430.
19. LOSOS, J. B. 1994. An approach to the analysis of comparative data when a phylogeny is unavailable or incomplete. Syst. Biol. 43:117-123.
20. MADDISON, W. P., AND M. SLATKIN. 1991. Null models for the number of evolutionary steps in a character on a phylogenetic tree. Evolution 45:1184-1197.
21. MARTINS, E. P. 1996. Conducting phylogenetic comparative studies when the phylogeny is not known. Evolution 50:12-22.
22. MARTINS, E. P. 2000. COMPARE: For the statistical analysis of comparative data. Version 4.3. (Computer programs distributed by the author at http://compare.indiana.edu). Indiana Univ. Bloomington.
23. MARTINS, E. P., AND HANSEN, T. F. 1997. Phylogenies and the comparative method: A general approach to incorporating phylogenetic information into analysis of interspecific data. Am. Nat. 149:646-667 (erratum. Am. Nat. 153:448).
24. NIJENHUIS, A., AND H. WILF. 1978. Combinatorial algorithms for computers and calculators. Academic Press, New York.
25. PAGE, R. 1991. Random dendrograms and null hypotheses in cladistic biogeography. Syst. Zool. 40:54-62.
26. PAGEL, M. 1992. A method for the analysis of comparative data. J. Theor. Biol. 156:431-422.
27. PURVIS, A., AND T. GARLAND, JR. 1993. Polytomies in comparative analyses of continuous data. Syst. Biol. 42:569-575.
28. SLOWINSKI, J. B., AND C. GUYER. 1989. Testing the stochasticity of patterns of organismal diversity: An improved null model. Am. Nat. 134:907-921.