War and peace in phylogenetics: A rejoinder on total evidence and consensus

Systematic Biology

Volumn 50, Issue 6, 2001, Pages 881-891

  Levasseur, Claudine ^a   Lapointe, FRANÇOIS JOSEPH ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Average consensus; Combined analysis; Global congruence; Separate analysis; Total evidence

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; GENETIC DATABASE; PHYLOGENY;

ANIMALS; CLASSIFICATION; DATABASES, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 0035527394     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/106351501753462858     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. BAKER, R. H., AND R. DESALLE. 1997. Multiple sources of character information and the phylogeny of Hawaiian Drosophilids. Syst. Biol. 46:654-673.
2. BARRETT, M., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND E. SOBER. 1991. Against consensus. Syst. Zool. 40:486-493.
3. BAUM, D. A., R. L. SMALL, AND J. F. WENDEL. 1998. Biogeography and floral evolution of baobabs (Adansonia, Bombacaceae) as inferred from multiple data sets. Syst. Biol. 47:181-207.
4. BREMER, K. 1990. Combinable component consensus. Cladistics 6:369-372.
5. 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.
6. CANNATELLA, D. C., D. M. HILLIS, P. T. CHIPPINDALE, L. WEIGT, A. S. RAND, AND M. J. RYAN. 1998. Phylogeny of frogs of the Physalaemus pustulosus species group, with an examination of data incongruence. Syst. Biol. 47:311-335.
7. CAVALLI-SFORZA, L. L., AND A. W. F. EDWARDS. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedures. Evolution 32:550-570.
8. CHIPPINDALE, P. T., AND J. J. WIENS. 1994. Weighting, partitioning, and combining characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 43:278-287.
9. CUCUMEL, G., AND F.-J. LAPOINTE. 2000. A general approach to test the pertinence of a consensus classification. Pages 125-130 in Data analysis, classification, and related methods (H. A. L. Kiers, J.-P. Rasson, P. J. F. Groenen, and M. Schader, eds.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
10. DE QUEIROZ, A. 1993. For consensus (sometimes). Syst. Biol. 42:368-372.
11. DE QUEIROZ, A., M. J. DONOGHUE, AND J. KIM. 1995. Separate versus combined analysis of phylogenetic evidence. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:657-681.
12. DONOGHUE, M. J., AND M. J. SANDERSON. 1992. The suitability of molecular and morphological evidence in reconstructing plant phylogeny. Pages 340-368 in Molecular systematics in plants (P. S. Soltis, D. E. Soltis, and J. J. Doyle, eds.). Chapman & Hall, New York.
13. DOYLE, J. J. 1992. Gene trees and species trees: Molecular systematics as one-character taxonomy. Syst. Bot. 17:144-163.
14. FARRIS, J. S., M. KÄLLERSJÖ, A. G. KLUGE, AND C. BULT. 1995. Testing significance of incongruence. Cladistics 10:315-319.
15. FLOOK, P. K., S. KLEE, AND C. H. F. ROWELL. 1999. Combined molecular phylogenetic analysis of the Orthoptera (Arthropoda, Insecta) and implications for their higher systematics. Syst. Biol. 48:233-253.
16. GATESY, J., M. MILINKOVITCH, V. WADDELL, AND M. STANHOPE. 1999a. Stability of cladistic relationships between Cetacea and higher-level artiodactyl taxa. Syst. Biol. 48:6-20.
17. GATESY, J., P. O'GRADY, AND R. H. BAKER. 1999b. Corroboration among data sets in simulataneous analysis: Hidden support for phylogenetic relationships among higher level artiodactyl taxa. Cladistics 15:271-314.
18. HILLIS, D. M. 1987. Molecular versus morphological approaches to systematics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 18:23-42.
19. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND J. J. BULL. 1996. A likelihood ratio test for detection of conflicting phylogenetic signal. Syst. Biol. 45:92-98.
20. HUELSENBECK, J. P., J. J. BULL, AND C. W. CUNNINGHAM. 1996. Combining data in phylogenetic analysis. Trends Ecol. Evol. 11:152-158.
21. HUELSENBECK, J. P., D. L. SWOFFORD, C. W. CUNNINGHAM, J. J. BULL, AND P. J. WADDELL. 1994. Is character weighting a panacea for the problem of data heterogeneity in phylogenetic analysis? Syst. Biol. 43:288-291.
22. KIM, J. 1993. Improving the accuracy of phylogenetic estimation by combining different methods. Syst. Biol. 42:331-340.
23. KIRSCH, J. A. W., F.-J. LAPOINTE, AND M. S. SPRINGER. 1997. DNA-hybridisation studies of marsupials and their implications for metatherian classification. Aust. J. Zool. 45:211-280.
24. KLUGE, A. G. 1989. A concern for evidence and a phylogenetic hypothesis of relationships among Epicrates (Boidae, Serpentes). Syst. Zool. 38:7-25.
25. KLUGE, A. G. 1998. Total evidence or taxonomic congruence: Cladistics or consensus classification. Cladistics 14:151-158.
26. KLUGE, A. G., AND A. J. WOLF. 1993. Cladistics: What's in a word? Cladistics 9:183-199.
27. LAPOINTE, F.-J. 1998a. For consensus (with branch lengths). Pages 73-80 in Advances in data science and classification (A. Rizzi, M. Vichi, and H.-H. Bock, eds.). Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
28. LAPOINTE, F.-J. 1998b. How to validate phylogenetic trees? A stepwise procedure. Pages 71-88 in Data science, classification, and related methods: Studies in classification, data analysis, and knowledge optimization (C. Hayashi, H. H. Bock, K. Yajima, Y. Tanaka, N. Oshumi, and Y. Baba, eds.). Springer-Verlag, Tokyo.
29. LAPOINTE, F.-J., AND G. CUCUMEL. 1997. The average consensus procedure: Combination of weighted trees containing identical or overlapping sets of taxa. Syst. Biol. 46:306-312.
30. LAPOINTE, F.-J., AND J. A. W. KIRSCH. Construction and verification of a large phylogeny of marsupials. Aust. Mammal, (in press).
31. LAPOINTE, F.-J., J. A. W. KIRSCH, AND R. BLEIWEISS. 1994. Jackknifing of weighted trees: Validation of phylogenies reconstructed from distance matrices. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 3:256-267.
32. LAPOINTE, F.-J., J. A. W. KIRSCH, AND J. M. HUTCHEON. 1999. Total evidence, consensus, and bat phylogeny: A distance-based approach. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 11:55-66.
33. 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.). Birkhauser Verlag, Basel.
34. LIU, F. R., AND M. M. MIYAMOTO. 1999. Phylogenetic assessment of molecular and morphological data for eutherian mammals. Syst. Biol. 48:54-64.
35. LUTZONI, F. M. 1997. Phylogeny of lichen-and non-lichen-forming omphalinoid mushrooms and the utility of testing for combinability among multiple data sets. Syst. Biol. 46:373-406.
36. MARGUSH, T., AND F. R. MCMORRIS. 1981. Consensus n-trees. Bull. Math. Biol. 43:239-244.
37. MASON-GAMER, R. J., AND E. A. KELLOGG. 1996. Testing for phylogenetic conflict among molecular data sets in the tribe Triticeae (Gramineae). Syst. Biol. 45:524-545.
38. MESSENGER, S. L., AND J. A. MCGUIRE. 1998. Morphology, molecules and the phylogenetics of Cetaceans. Syst. Biol. 47:90-124.
39. MICKEVICH, M. F. 1978. Taxonomic congruence. Syst. Zool. 27:143-158.
40. MICKEVICH, M. F., AND J. S. FARRIS. 1981. The implications of congruence in Menidia. Syst. Zool. 30:351-370.
41. MIYAMOTO, M. M. 1985. Consensus cladograms and general classifications. Cladistics 1:186-189.
42. MIYAMOTO, M. M., AND W. M. FITCH. 1995. Testing species phylogenies and phylogenetic methods with congruence. Syst. Biol. 44:64-76.
43. NELSON, G. 1979. Cladistics analysis and synthesis: Principles and definitions, with a historical note on Adanson's Familles des Plantes (1763-1764). Syst. Zool. 28:1-21.
44. 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.
45. OMLAND, K. E. 1994. Character congruence between a molecular and a morphological phylogeny for dabbling ducks (Anas). Syst. Biol. 43:369-386.
46. PAGE, R. D. M. 1996. TREEVIEW: An application to display phylogenetic trees on personal computers. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 12:357-358.
47. PENNINGTON, R. T. 1996. Molecular and morphological data provide phylogenetic resolution at different hierarchical levels in Andira. Syst. Biol. 45:496-515.
48. ROBINSON, D. F., AND L. R. FOULDS. 1981. Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53:131-147.
49. RODRIGO, A. G., M. KELLY-BORGES, P. R. BERGQUIST, AND P. L. BERGQUIST. 1993. A randomization test of the null hypothesis that two cladograms are sample estimates of a parametric phylogenetic tree. N. Z. J. Bot. 31:257-268.
50. ROHLF, F. J. 1982. Consensus indices for comparing classifications. Math. Biosci. 59:131-144.
51. SANDERSON, M. J., A. PURVIS, AND C. HENZE. 1998. Phylogenetic supertrees: Assembling the trees of life. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13:105-109.
52. SHAO, K., AND R. R. SOKAL. 1986. Significance tests of consensus indices. Syst. Zool. 35:582-590.
53. SOKAL, R. R., AND F. J. ROHLF. 1981. Taxonomic congruence in the Leptopodomorpha re-examined. Syst. Zool. 30:309-325.
54. STEEL, M. A., AND D. PENNY. 1993. Distributions of tree comparison metrics - Some new results. Syst. Biol. 42:126-141.
55. 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. J. Cracraft, eds.). Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford.
56. SWOFFORD, D. L. 1999. PAUP *: Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods), version 4, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.