Bias in phylogenetic estimation and its relevance to the choice between parsimony and likelihood methods

Systematic Biology

Volumn 50, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 525-539

  Swofford, David L ^a,f   Waddell, Peter J ^b   Huelsenbeck, John P ^c   Foster, Peter G ^a,g   Lewis, Paul O ^d   Rogers, James S ^e  

^a National Museum of Natural History   (United States)

^b MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^e University of New Orleans   (United States)

^f DEPARTMENT OF LIFE SCIENCES   (United Kingdom)

^g FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; PHYLOGENY; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, GENETIC; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PHYLOGENY; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

EID: 0035527406     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/106351501750435086     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. BRUNO, W. J., AND A. L. HALPERN. 1999. Topological bias and inconsistency of maximum likelihood using wrong models. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16:564-566.
2. CHANG, J. T. 1996a. Inconsistency of evolutionary tree topology reconstruction methods when substitution rates vary across characters. Math. Biosci. 134:189-215.
3. CHANG, J. T. 1996b. Full reconstruction of Markov models on evolutionary trees: Identifiability and consistency. Math. Biosci. 137:51-73.
4. FARRIS, J. S. 1983. The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis. Pages 7-36 in Advances in cladistics, Volume 2 (N. I. Platnick and V. A. Funk, eds.). Columbia Univ. Press, New York.
5. FARRIS, J. S. 1997. "Who, really is a statistician?" Paper presented at the Sixteenth Meeting of the Willi Hennig Society. George Washington Univ. Washington, DC.
6. FARRIS, J. S. 1999. Likelihood and inconsistency. Cladistics 15:199-204.
7. FARRIS, J. S., V. A. ALBERT, D. LIPSCOMB, AND A. G. Kluge. 1996. Parsimony jackknifing outperforms neighbor-joining. Cladistics 12:99-124.
8. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony and compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27:401-410.
9. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783-791.
10. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1988. Phylogenies from molecular sequences: Inference and reliability. Annu. Rev. Genet. 22:521-565.
11. GAUT, B. S., AND P. O. LEWIS. 1995. Success of maximum likelihood in the four-taxon case. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:152-162.
12. HENDY, M. D., and D. PENNY. 1989. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 38:297-309.
13. HILLIS, D. M., HUELSENBECK, J. P. AND D. L. SWOFFORD. 1994. Hobgoblin of phylogenetics? Nature 369:363-364.
14. HUELSENBECK, J. 1995. Performance of phylogenetic methods in simulation. Syst. Biol. 44:17-48.
15. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND D. M. HILLIS. 1993. Success of phylogenetic methods in the four-taxon case. Syst. Zool. 42:247-264.
16. JUKES, T. H., AND C. R. CANTOR. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. Pages 21-132 in Mammalian protein metabolism. (H. N. Munro, ed.). Academic Press, New York.
17. KENDALL, M., AND A. STUART. 1979. Advanced theory of statistics, 2nd edition. Charles Griffin, London.
18. KIM, J. 1996. General inconsistency conditions for maximum parsimony: Effects of branch lengths and increasing numbers of taxa. Syst. Biol. 45:363-374.
19. KISHINO, H., AND M. HASEGAWA. 1989. Evaluation of the maximum likelihood estimate of the evolutionary tree topologies from DNA sequence data, and the branching order in Hominoidea. J. Mol. Evol. 29:170-179.
20. KUHNER, M. K., and J. FELSENSTEIN. 1994. A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:459-468.
21. LOCKHART, P. J., A. W. LARKUM, M. A. STEEL, P. J. WADDELL, AND D. PENNY. 1996. Evolution of chlorophyll and bacteriochlorophyll: The problem of invariant sites in sequence analysis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:1930-1934.
22. PENNY, D., AND M. D. HENDY. 1986. Estimating the reliability of evolutionary trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 3:403-417.
23. ROGERS, J. S. 1997. On the consistency of maximum likelihood estimation of phylogenetic trees from nucleotide sequences. Syst. Biol. 46:354-357.
24. SIDDALL, M. E. 1998. Success of parsimony in the four-taxon case: Long-branch repulsion by likelihood in the Farris zone. Cladistics 14:209-220.
25. SIDDALL, M. E., AND A. G. KLUGE. 1997. Probabilism and phylogenetic inference. Cladistics 13:313-336.
26. SIDOW, A. 1994. Parsimony or statistics? Nature 367:26-27.
27. SULLIVAN, J., AND D. L. SWOFFORD. 1997. Are guinea pigs rodents? The importance of adequate models in molecular phylogenetics. J. Mammal. Evol. 4:77-86.
28. SWOFFORD, D. L., P. O. LEWIS, AND F. J. WADDELL. 1995. "The phylogenetic utility of LogDet/paralinear distances for more realistic evolutionary models. I. Is there a heavy price for using them when a simpler model would suffice?" Paper presented at annual meeting of the Society for the Study of Evolution/Society of Systematic Biologists, Montreal, Canada.
29. WADDELL, P. J. 1995. Statistical methods of phylogenetic analysis, including Hadamard conjugations, LogDet transforms, and maximum likelihood. Massey Univ., Palmerston North, New Zealand.
30. WADDELL, P. J., D. PENNY, AND T. MOORE. 1997. Hadamard conjugations and modeling sequence evolution with unequal rates across sites. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 8:33-50.
31. WALD, A. 1949. Note on the consistency of maximum likelihood. Ann. Math. Stat. 20:595-601.
32. YANG, Z. 1996. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony and likelihood methods. J. Mol. Evol. 42:294-307.