Bayesian inference of phylogenetics revisited: Developments and concerns

Taxon

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 9-15

  Randle, Christopher P ^a   Mort, Mark E ^a   Crawford, Daniel J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PHYLOGENETICS;

EID: 15944399106     PISSN: 00400262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/25065298     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Aikaike, H. 1974. A new look at statistical model identification. IEEE Trans. Autom. Contr. 19: 716-723.
2. Alfaro, M. E., Zoller, S. & Lutzoni, F. M. 2003. Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confidence. Molec. Biol. Evol. 20: 255-266.
3. Archibald, J. K., Mort, M. E. & Crawford, D. J. 2003. Bayesian inference of phylogeny: a non-technical primer. Taxon 52: 187-191.
4. Bollback, J. P. 2002. Bayesian model adequacy and choice in phylogenetics. Molec. Biol. Evol. 19: 1171-1180.
5. Brown, J. K. M. 1994. Probabilities of evolutionary trees. Syst. Biol. 43: 78-91.
6. Cummings, M. P., Handley, S. A., Myers, D. S., Reed, D. L., Rokas, A. & Winka, K. 2003. Comparing bootstrap and posterior probability values in the four-taxon case. Syst. Biol. 52: 477-487.
7. Douady, C. J., Delsuc, F., Boucher, Y., Doolittle, W. F. & Douzery, E. J. P. 2003. Comparison of Bayesian and maximum likelihood bootstrap measures of phylogenetic reliability. Molec. Biol. Evol. 20: 248-254.
8. Efron, B., Halloran, E. & Holmes, S. 1996. Bootstrap confidence levels for phylogenetic trees. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 93: 13429-13434.
9. Erixon, P., Svennblad, B., Britton, T. & Oxelman, B. 2003. Reliability of Bayesian posterior probabilities and bootstrap frequencies in phylogenetics. Syst. Biol. 52: 665-673.
10. Felsenstein, J. 2003. Inferring Phylogenies. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts. [Pp. 288-306.]
11. Goldman, N. 1993. Statistical tests of models of DNA substitution. J. Molec. Evol. 36: 182-198.
12. Hastings, W. K. 1970. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 57: 97-109.
13. Holder, M. & Lewis, P. O. 2003. Phylogeny estimation: traditional and Bayesian approaches. Nat. Rev. Gen. 4: 275-284.
14. Huelsenbeck, J. P. & Bollback, J. P. 2001. Empirical and hierarchical Bayesian estimation of ancestral states. Syst. Biol. 50: 351-366.
15. Huelsenbeck, J. P., Larget, B. & Alfaro, M. E. 2004. Bayesian phylogenetic model selection using reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo. Molec. Biol. Evol. 21: 1123-1133.
16. Huelsenbeck, J. P., Larget, B., Miller, R. E. & Ronquist, F. 2002. Potential applications and pitfalls of Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Syst. Biol. 51: 673-688.
17. Huelsenbeck, J. P., Rannala, B. & Masly, J. P. 2000. Accomodating phylogenetic uncertainty in evolutionary studies. Science 288: 2349-2350.
18. Huelsenbeck, J. P. & Ronquist, F. 2001. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Biometrics 17: 754-755.
19. Huelsenbeck, J. P., Ronquist, F., Nielsen, R. & Bollback, J. P. 2001. Bayesian inference of phylogeny and its impact on evolutionary biology. Science 294: 2310-2314.
20. Kass, R. E. & Wasserman, L. 1996. The selection of prior distributions by formal rules. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. 91: 1343-1370.
21. Kolaczkowski, B. & Thornton, J. W. 2004. Performance of maximum parsimony and likelihood phylogenetics when evolution is heterogeneous. Nature 431: 980-984.
22. Larget, B. & Simon, D. L. 1999. Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of phylogenetic trees. Molec. Biol. Evol. 16: 750-759.
23. Lemmon, A. R. & Moriarty, E. C. 2004. The importance of proper model assumption in Bayesian phylogenetics. Syst. Biol. 53: 265-277.
24. Lewis, P. O. 2001. Phylogenetic systematics turns over a new leaf. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 30-37.
25. Lewis, P. O. 2001. A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data. Syst. Biol. 50: 913-925.
26. Li, S. 1996. Phylogenetic Reconstruction Using Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Ph.D. Thesis, Ohio State Univ., Columbus.
27. Mau, B. 1996. Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference via Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Wisconsin, Madison.
28. Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A. W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A. H. & Teller, E. 1953. Equations of state calculations by fast computing machines. J. Chem. Phys. 21: 1087-1092.
29. Miller, R. E., Buckley, T. R. & Manos, P. S. 2002. An examination of the monophyly of morning glory taxa using Bayesian phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 51: 740-753.
30. Miller, R. E., McDonald, J. A. & Manos, P. S. 2004. Systematics of Ipomoea subgenus Quamoclit (Convolvulaceae) based on ITS sequence data and a Bayesian phylogenetic analysis. Amer. J. Bot. 91: 1208-1218.
31. Nixon, K. C. 1999. The parsimony ratchet, a new method for rapid parsimony analysis. Cladistics 15: 407-414.
32. Pickett, K. M. & Randle, C. P. 2005. Strange Bayes indeed: uniform topological priors imply non-uniform clade priors. Molec. Phyl. Evol. 34: 203-211.
33. Posada, D. & Buckley, T. R. 2004. Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: advantages of akaike information criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Syst. Biol. 53: 793-808.
34. Posada, D. & Crandall, K. A. 1998. MODELTEST: testing the model of DNA substitution. Bioinformatics 14: 817-818.
35. Posada, D. & Crandall, K. A. 2001. Selecting the best-fit model of nucleotide substitution. Syst. Biol. 50: 580-601.
36. Rannala, B. 2002. Identifiability of parameters in MCMC Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Syst. Biol. 51: 754-760.
37. Rannala, B. & Yang, Z. H. 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: a new method of phylogenetic inference. J. Molec. Evol. 43: 304-311.
38. Reed, D. L., Carpenter, K. E. & deGravelle, M. J. 2002. Molecular systematics of the Jacks (Perciformes: Carangidae) based on mitochondrial cytochrome b sequences using parsimony, likelihood, and Bayesian approaches. Molec. Phyl. Evol. 23: 513-524.
39. Sanderson, M. J. 1995. Objections to bootstrapping phylogenies: a critique. Syst. Biol. 44: 299-320.
40. Schwarz, G. 1974. Estimating the dimension of a model. Ann. Stat. 6: 461-464.
41. Simmons, M. P., Pickett, K. M. & Miya, M. 2004. How meaningful are Bayesian support values? Molec. Biol. Evol. 21: 188-199.
42. Sober, E. 2004. The contest between parsimony and likelihood. Syst. Biol. 53: 644-653.
43. Suzuki, Y., Glazko, G. V. & Nei, M. 2002. Overcredibility of molecular phylogenies obtained by Bayesian phylogenetics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99: 16138-16143.
44. Thorne, J. L., Kishino, H. & Painter, I. S. 1998. Estimating the rate of evolution of the rate of molecular evolution. Molec. Biol. Evol. 15: 1647-1657.
45. Tierney, L. 1994. Markov-Chains for exploring posterior distributions. Ann. Stat. 22: 1701-1728.
46. Wilcox, T. P., Zwickl, D. J., Heath, T. A. & Hillis, D. M. 2002. Phylogenetic relationships of the dwarf boas and a comparison of Bayesian and bootstrap measures of phylogenetic support. Molec. Phyl. Evol. 25: 361-371.
47. Yang, Z. H. & Nielsen, R. 2002. Codon-substitution models for detecting molecular adaptation at individual sites along specific lineages. Molec. Biol. Evol. 19: 908-917.
48. Yang, Z. H. & Swanson, W. J. 2002. Codon-substitution models to detect adaptive evolution that account for heterogeneous selective pressures among site classes. Molec. Biol. Evol. 19: 49-57.