Towards building the tree of life: A simulation study for all angiosperm genera

Systematic Biology

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 183-196

  Salamin, Nicolas ^a,b   Hodkinson, Trevor R ^a   Savolainen, Vincent ^b  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b JODRELL LABORATORY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Angiosperms; Maximum parsimony; Monte Carlo simulations; Neighbor joining; Taxon sampling; Tree of life

Indexed keywords

ANGIOSPERM; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CLASSIFICATION; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETICS; METHODOLOGY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SAMPLE SIZE;

ANGIOSPERMS; BASE SEQUENCE; CLASSIFICATION; CLUSTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MODELS, GENETIC; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SAMPLE SIZE;

MAGNOLIOPHYTA; THUJA;

EID: 19044382857     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10635150590923254     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Adkins, R. M., A. H. Walton, and R. L. Honeycutt. 2003. Higher-level systematics of rodents and divergence time estimates based on two congruent nuclear genes. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 26:409-420.
2. Baldauf, S. L. 2003. The deep roots of eukaryotes. Science 300:1703-1706.
3. Bininda-Emonds, O. R. P., S. G. Brady, J. Kim, and M. J. Sanderson. 2000. Scaling of accuracy in extremely large phylogenetic trees. Pages 547-558 in Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 6 (R. B. Altman, A. K. Dunker, L. Hunter, K. Lauderdale, and T. E. Klein, eds.). World Scientific Publishing Company, River Edge, New Jersey.
4. Bininda-Emonds, O. R. P., J. L. Gittleman, and M. A. Steel. 2002. The (Super)Tree of Life: Procedures, problems, and prospects. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33:265-289.
5. Chase, M. W., and A. V. Cox. 1998. Gene sequences, collaboration, and analysis of large data sets. Austr. Syst. Bot. 11:215-229.
6. Desper, R., and O. Gascuel. 2002. Fast and accurate phylogeny reconstruction algorithms based on the minimum evolution principle. J. Comp. Biol. 9: 687-705.
7. Donoghue, M. J., J. J. Doyle, J. Gauthier, A. G. Kluge, and T. Rowe. 1989. The importance of fossils in phylogeny reconstruction. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20:431-460.
8. Eisen, J. A., and C. M. Fraser. 2003. Phylogenomics: Intersection of evolution and genomics. Science 300:1706-1707.
9. Erdös, P. L., M. A. Steel, L. A. Székely, and T. J. Warnow. 1997. Local quartet splits of a binary tree infer all quartet splits via one dyadic inference rule. Comput. Artif. Intell. 16:217-227.
10. Farris, J. S., V. A. Albert, M. Kallersjo, D. Lipscomb, and A. G. Kluge. 1996. Parsimony jackknifing outperforms neighbor-joining. Cladistics 12:99-124.
11. Felsenstein, J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony and compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27:401-410.
12. Fusco, G., and Q. C. B. Cronk. 1995. A new method for evaluating the shape of large phylogenies. J. Theor. Biol. 175:235-243.
13. Gascuel, O. 1997. BioNJ: An improved version of the NJ algorithm based on a simple model of sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:685-695.
14. Gaut, B. S., and P. O. Lewis. 1995. Success of maximum-likelihood phylogeny inference in the 4-taxon case. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:152-162.
15. Gauthier, J., A. G. Kluge, and T. Rowe. 1988. Amniote phylogeny and the importance of fossils. Cladistics 12:152-162.
16. Graybeal, A. 1998. Is it better to add taxa or characters to a difficult phylogenetic problem? Syst. Biol. 47:9-17.
17. Guindon, S., and O. Gascuel. 2003. A simple, fast, and accurate algorithm to estimate large phylogenies by maximum likelihood. Syst. Biol. 52:696-704.
18. Hasegawa, M., H. Kishino, and T. Yano. 1985. Dating of the human-ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA. J. Mol. Evol. 21:160-174.
19. Hendy, M. D., and D. Penny. 1989. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 38:297-309.
20. Hillis, D. M. 1996. Inferring complex phylogenies. Nature 383:130-131.
21. Hillis, D. M. 1998. Taxonomic sampling, phylogenetic accuracy, and investigator bias. Syst. Biol. 47:1-8.
22. Hillis, D. M., J. P. Huelsenbeck, and C. W. Cunningham. 1994. Application and accuracy of molecular phylogenies. Science 264: 671-677.
23. Hillis, D. M., D. D. Pollock, J. A. McGuire, and D. J. Zwickl. 2003. Is sparse taxon sampling a problem for phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 52:124-126.
24. Huelsenbeck, J. P. 1995. Performance of phylogenetic methods in simulation. Syst. Biol. 44: 17-48.
25. Huelsenbeck, J. P., and K. M. Lander. 2003. Frequent inconsistency of parsimony under a simple model of cladogenesis. Syst. Biol. 52:641-648.
26. Huelsenbeck, J. P. and F. Ronquist. 2001. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17:754-755.
27. Källersjö, M., V. A. Albert, and J. S. Farris. 1999. Homoplasy increases phylogenetic structure. Cladistics 15:91-93.
28. Källersjö, M., J. S. Farris, M. W. Chase, B. Bremer, M. F. Fay, C. J. Humphries, G. Petersen, O. Seberg, and K. Bremer. 1998. Simultaneous parsimony jackknife analysis of 2538 rbcL DNA sequences reveals support for major clades of green plants, land plants, seed plants and flowering plants. Plant Syst. Evol. 213:259-287.
29. Kim, J. 1996. General inconsistency conditions for maximum parsimony: Effects of branch lengths and increasing numbers of taxa. Syst. Biol. 45:363-374.
30. Kim, J. 1998. Large-scale phylogenies and measuring the performance of phylogenetic estimators. Syst. Biol. 47:43-60.
31. 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.
32. Larget, B., and D. L. Simon. 1999. Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16:750-759.
33. Mabberley, D. J. 1993. The plant-book: A portable dictionary of the vascular plants, 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
34. Mace, G. M., J. L. Gittleman, and A. Purvis. 2003. Preserving the Tree of Life. Science 300:1707-1709.
35. Miadlikowska, J., and F. Lutzoni. 2000. Phylogenetic revision of the genus Peltigera (lichen-forming Ascomycota) based on morphological, chemical and large subunit nuclear ribosomal DNA data. Int. J. Plant Sci. 161:925-958.
36. Miya, M., and M. Nishida. 2002. Major patterns of actinopterygian phylogenies: A new perspective based on >200 complete mitochondrial DNA sequences. Integr. Comp. Biol. 42:1280.
37. Omilian, A. R., and D. J. Taylor. 2001. Rate acceleration and long-branch attraction in a conserved gene of cryptic Daphniid (Crustaceae) species. Mol. Biol. Evol. 18:2201-2212.
38. Purvis, A., and D. L. J. Quicke. 1997. Building phylogenies: Are the big easy? Trends Ecol. Evol. 12:49-50.
39. Qiu, Y.-L., J. Lee, F. Bernasconi-Quadroni, D. E. Soltis, P. S. Soltis, M. Zanis, Z. Chen, V. Savolainen, and M. W. Chase. 2000. Phylogeny of basal angiosperms: Analysis of five genes from three genomes. Int. J. Plant Sci. 161:S3-S27.
40. Quicke, D. L. J., J. Taylor, and A. Purvis. 2001. Changing the landscape: A new strategy for estimating large phylogenies. Syst. Biol. 50:60-66.
41. Rannala, B., J. P. Huelsenbeck, Z. H. Yang, and R. Nielsen. 1998. Taxon sampling and the accuracy of large phylogenies. Syst. Biol. 47:702-710.
42. Rannala, B., and Z. H. Yang. 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: A new methods of phylogenetic inference. J. Mol. Evol. 43:304-311.
43. Ronquist, F. 1998. Fast Fitch - Parsimony algorithms for large data sets. Cladistics 14:387-400.
44. Salamin, N., M. W. Chase, T. R. Hodkinson, and V. Savolainen. 2003. Assessing internal support with large phylogenetic DNA matrices. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 27:528-539.
45. Salamin, N., T. R. Hodkinson, and V. Savolainen. 2002. Building supertrees: An empirical assessment using the grass family (Poaceae). Syst. Biol. 51:112-126.
46. Sanderson, M. J., and A. C. Driskell. 2003. The challenge of constructing large phylogenetic trees. Trends Plant Sci. 8: 374-379.
47. Savolainen, V., M. W. Chase, C. M. Morton, S. B. Hoot, D. E. Soltis, C. Bayer, M. F. Fay, A. deBruijn, S. Sullivan, and Y.-L. Qiu. 2000a. Phylogenetics of flowering plants based upon a combined analysis of plastid atpB and rbcL gene sequences. Syst. Biol. 49:306-362.
48. Savolainen, V., M. W. Chase, N. Salamin, D. E. Soltis, P. S. Soltis, A. J. Lopez, O. Fedrigo, and G. J. P. Naylor. 2002. Phylogeny reconstruction and functional constraints in organellar genomes: Plastid atpB and rbcL sequences versus animal mitochondrion. Syst. Biol. 51:638-647.
49. Savolainen, V., M. F. Fay, D. C. Albach, A. Backlund, M. van der Bank, K. M. Cameron, S. A. Johnson, M. D. Lledó, J.-C. Pintaud, M. Powell, M. C. Sheahan, D. E. Soltis, P. S. Soltis, P. Weston, W. M. Whitten, K. J. Wurdack, and M. W. Chase. 2000b. Phylogeny of the eudicots: A nearly complete familial analysis based on rbcL gene sequences. Kew Bull. 55: 257-309.
50. Semple, C., and M. Steel. 2000. A supertree method for rooted trees. Discrete Appl. Math. 105: 147-158.
51. Soltis, D. E., P. S. Soltis, M. W. Chase, M. E. Mort, D. C. Albach, M. Zanis, V. Savolainen, W. H. Hahn, S. B. Hoot, M. F. Fay, M. Axtell, S. M. Swensen, L. M. Prince, W. J. Kress, K. C. Nixon, and J. S. Farris. 2000. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from 18S rDNA, rbcL, and atpB sequences. Bot. J. Linnean Soc. 133:381-461.
52. Soltis, D. E., P. S. Soltis, D. L. Nickrent, L. A. Johnson, W. J. Hahn, S. B. Hoot, J. A. Sweere, R. K. Kuzoff, K. A. Kron, M. W. Chase, S. M. Swensen, E. A. Zimmer, S. M. Chaw, L. J. Gillespie, W. J. Kress, and K. J. Sytsma. 1997. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from 18S ribosomal DNA sequences. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 84:1-19.
53. Steel, M. 2001. Sufficient conditions for two tree reconstruction techniques to succeed on sufficiently long sequences. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 14:36-48.
54. Stork, N. E. 1997. Measuring global diversity and its decline. Pages 41-68 in Biodiversity II: Understanding and protecting our biological resources (M. Reaka-Kudla, D. E. Wilson, and E. O. Wilson, eds.). Joseph Henry Press, Washington, DC.
55. Strimmer, K., and A. von Haeseler. 1996. Accuracy of neighbor joining for n-taxon trees. Syst. Biol. 45: 516-523.
56. Sullivan, J., and D. L. Swofford. 1997. Are guinea pigs rodents? The importance of adequate models in molecular phylogenetics. J. Mamml. Evol. 4:77-86.
57. Swofford, D. L. 2000. PAUP*4. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
58. Swofford, D. L., G. K. Olsen, P. J. Waddell, and D. M. Hillis. 1996. Phylogeny reconstruction. Pages 407-514 in Molecular systematics (D. M. Hillis, C. Moritz and B. K. Mable, eds.). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
59. Telford, M. J., A. E. Lockyer, C. Cartwright-Finch, and D. T. J. Littlewood. 2003. Combined large and small subunit ribosomal RNA phylogenies support a basal position of the acoelomorph flatworms. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270:1077-1083.
60. Vos. R. A. 2003. Accelerated likelihood surface exploration: The likelihood ratchet. Syst. Biol. 52:368-373.
61. Yang, Z. H. 1994. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic estimation from DNA sequence with variable rates over sites: Approximate methods. J. Mol. Evol. 39:306-314.
62. Yang, Z. H. 1998. On the best evolutionary rate for phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 47:125-133.
63. Yang, Z. H., and N. Goldman. 1997. Are big trees indeed easy? Trends Ecol. Evol. 12:357.
64. Zanis, M. J., P. S. Soltis, Y. L. Qiu, E. A. Zimmer, and D. E. Soltis. 2003. Phylogenetic analyses and perianth evolution in basal angiosperms. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 90:129-150.