Estimation of evolutionary parameters with phylogenetic trees

Journal of Molecular Evolution

Volumn 55, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 684-695

  Wang, Qiang ^a   Salter, Laura A ^b   Pearl, Dennis K ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

Bootstrapping; Evolutionary model parameters; Fisher information; Maximum likelihood; Monte Carlo sampling; Phylogenetics

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; MOLECULAR MODEL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NONHUMAN; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PAPILLOMA VIRUS; PHYLOGENETIC TREE; ANIMAL; HUMAN; PHYLOGENY;

MARTES PENNANTI; PAPILLOMAVIRUS;

ANIMALS; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; HUMANS; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 1842869297     PISSN: 00222844     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00239-002-2364-7     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Birch MW (1964) A new proof of the Pearson-Fisher theorem. Ann Math Stat 35:818-824
2. Bishop YM, Fienberg SE, Holland PW (1975) Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
3. Burk R (1999) Human Papillomaviruses and the Risk of Cervical Cancer. Hosp Pract (www.hosppract.com/issues/1999/11/burk.htm)
4. Chan SY, Bernard HU, Ong CK, Chan SP, Hoffman B, Delius H (1992) Phylogenetic analysis of 48 papillomavirus types and 28 subtypes and variants: A showcase for the molecular evolution of DNA viruses. J Virol 66:5714-5725
5. Chan SY, Delius H, Halpern A, Bernard HU (1995) Analysis of genomic sequences of 95 papillomavirus types: Uniting typing, phylogeny, and taxonomy. J Virol 69:3074-3082
6. Chang J (1996) Full reconstruction of Markov models on evolutionary trees: Identifiability and consistency. Math Biosci 137: 51-73
7. Davison AC, Hinkley DV (1997) Bootstrap Methods and their Application. Cambridge University Press, New York
8. Efron B (1982) The jackknife, the bootstrap, and other resampling plans, CBMS-NSF Regional Conference Series in Applied Mathematics, Monograph 38. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia
9. Efron B, Hinkley D (1978) Assessing the accuracy of the maximum likelihood estimator: Observed versus expected Fisher information. Biometrika 65:457-487
10. Efron B, Tibshirani R (1993) An Introduction to the Bootstrap. Chapman and Hall, New York
11. Efron B, Halloran E, Holmes S (1996) Bootstrap confidence levels for phylogenetic trees. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:13429-13434
12. Felsenstein J (1981) Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: A maximum likelihood approach. J Mol Evol 17:368-376
13. Felsenstein J (1984) Distance methods for inferring phylogenies: A justification. Evolution 38:16-24
14. Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783-791
15. Felsenstein J (1993) Phylogenetic Inference Package (PHYLIP), Version 3.5. University of Washington, Seattle
16. Fukami-Kobayashi K, Tateno Y (1991) Robustness of maximum likelihood tree estimation against different patterns of base substitutions. J Mol Evol 32:79-91
17. Gaut BS, Lewis PO (1995) Success of maximum likelihood phylogeny inference in the four-taxon case. Mol Biol Evol 12:152-162
18. Hasegawa M, Kishino H, Yano TA (1985) Dating of the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J Mol Evol 21:160-174
19. Hayasaka K, Gojobori T, Horai S (1988) Molecular phylogeny and evolution of primate mitochondrial DNA. Mol Biol Evol 5:626-644
20. Hillis D, Bull J (1993) An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst Biol 42:182-192
21. Hillis D, Mable B, Moritz C (1996) Applications of molecular systematics: The state of the field and a look to the future. In: Hillis D, Moritz C, Mable B (eds) Molecular Systematics, 2nd Ed. Sinauer Associater, Sunderland, MA, pp 515-543
22. Huelsenbeck J, Ronquist F (2001) MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees, Bioinformatics 17:754-755
23. Ina Y (1998) Estimation of the transition/transversion ratio. J Mol Evol 46:521-533
24. Kimura M (1980) A simple method for estimating evolutionary rate of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 16:111-120
25. Kuhner MK, Felsenstein J (1994) A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates. Mol Biol Evol 11:459-468
26. Larget B, Simon D (1999) Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 16:750-759
27. Li S, Pearl D, Doss H (2000) Phylogenetic tree construction using Markov chain Monte Carlo. J Am Stat Assoc 95:493-508
28. Mau B, Newton M, Larget B (1999) Bayesian phylogenetic inference via Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. Biometrics 55:1-12
29. Ong CK, Nee S, Rambaut A, Bernard HU, Harvey PH (1997) Elucidating the population histories and transmission dynamics of papillomaviruses using phylogenetic trees. J Mol Evol 44:199-206
30. Pollock DB, Goldstein DD (1995) A comparison of two methods for reconstructing evolutionary distances from a weighted contribution of transition and transversion differences. Mol Biol Evol 12:713-717
31. Purvis A, Bromham L (1997) Estimating the transition/transversion ratio from independent pairwise comparisons with an assumed phylogeny. J Mol Evol 44:112-119
32. Rambaut A, Grassly N (1996) Sequence Parameters of Trees: SPOT. Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford
33. Rambaut A, Grassly N (1997) Seq-Gen: An application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Comput Appl Biosci 13:235-238
34. Rogers J (2001) Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogenetic trees is consistent when substitution rates vary according to the invariable sites plus gamma distribution. Syst Biol 50:713-722
35. Salter L (1999) Simulation-Based Estimation of Phylogenetic Trees, PhD thesis. Ohio State University, Columbus
36. Salter L, Pearl D (2001) Stochastic search strategy for estimation of maximum likelihood phylogenetic trees. Syst Biol 50:7-17
37. Swofford D (1998) PAUP*. Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (* and other Methods); Version 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA
38. Tamura K, Nei M (1993) Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA in humans and chimpanzees. Mol Biol Evol 10:512-526
39. Wakeley J (1994) Substitution-rate variation among sites and the estimation of transition bias. Mol Biol Evol 11:436-442
40. Wakeley J (1996) The excess of transitions among nucleotide substitutions: New methods of estimating transition bias underscore its significance. TREE 11:158-163
41. Yang Z (1994) Statistical properties of the maximum likelihood method of phylogenetic estimation and comparison with distance matrix methods. Syst Biol 43:329-342
42. Yang Z (2000) Phylogenetic Analysis by Maximum Likelihood (PAML), Version 3.0. University College London, London
43. Yang Z, Kumar S (1996) New parsimony-based methods for estimating the pattern of nucleotide substitution and the variation of substitution rates among sites and comparison with likelihood methods. Mol Biol Evol 13:650-659
44. Yang Z, Rannala B (1997) Bayesian phylogenetic inference using DNA sequences: A Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Mol Biol Evol 14:717-724
45. Yang Z, Goldman N, Friday A (1994) Comparison of models for nucleotide substitution used in maximum likelihood phylogenetic estimation. Mol Biol Evol 11:316-324