Heterotachy and long-branch attraction in phylogenetics

BMC Evolutionary Biology

Volumn 5, Issue , 2005, Pages

  Philippe, Hervé ^a   Zhou, Yan ^a   Brinkmann, Henner ^a   Rodrigue, Nicolas ^a   Delsuc, Frédéric ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b INSTITUT DES SCIENCES DE L EVOLUTION   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MITOCHONDRIAL DNA;

ANIMAL; BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETIC PROCEDURES; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOMICS; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY; PROCEDURES; STATISTICAL MODEL; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ANIMALS; BAYES THEOREM; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DNA, MITOCHONDRIAL; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENETIC TECHNIQUES; GENETIC VARIATION; GENOMICS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY;

EID: 27744488568     PISSN: 14712148     EISSN: 14712148     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-5-50     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Felsenstein J: Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst Zool 1978, 27:401-410.
2. Hendy MD, Penny D: A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Syst Zool 1989, 38:297-309.
3. Huelsenbeck JP, Hillis DM: Success of phylogenetic methods in the four-taxon case. Syst Biol 1993, 42:247-264.
4. Huelsenbeck JP: The robustness of two phylogenetic methods: four-taxon simulations reveal a slight superiority of maximum likelihood over neighbor joining. Mol Biol Evol 1995, 12:843-849.
5. Philippe H: Long branch attraction and protist phylogeny. Protist 2000, 51:307-316.
6. Kuhner MK, Felsenstein J: A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates. Mol Biol Evol 1994, 11:459-468.
7. Gaut BS, Lewis PO: Success of maximum likelihood phylogeny inference in the four-taxon case. Mol Biol Evol 1995, 12:152-162.
8. Swofford DL, Waddell PJ, Huelsenbeck JP, Foster PG, Lewis PO, Rogers JS: Bias in phylogenetic estimation and its relevance to the choice between parsimony and likelihood methods. Syst Biol 2001, 50:525-539.
9. Ho SY, Jermiin L: Tracing the decay of the historical signal in biological sequence data. Syst Biol 2004, 53:623-637.
10. Huelsenbeck JP: Is the Felsenstein zone a fly trap? Syst Biol 1997, 46:69-74.
11. Huelsenbeck JP: Systematic bias in phylogenetic analysis: is the Strepsiptera problem solved? Syst Biol 1998, 47:519-537.
12. Anderson FE, Swofford DL: Should we be worried about longbranch attraction in real data sets? Investigations using metazoan 18S rDNA. Mol Phylogenet Evol 2004, 33:440-451.
13. Bergsten J: A review of long-branch attraction. Cladistics 2005, 21:163-193.
14. Whelan S, Lio P, Goldman N: Molecular phylogenetics: state-ofthe-art methods for looking into the past. Trends Genet 2001, 17:262-272.
15. Holder M, Lewis PO: Phylogeny estimation: Traditional and Bayesian approaches. Nat Rev Genet 2003, 4:275-284.
16. Philippe H, Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Lartillot N: Phylogenomics. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 2005, in press:.
17. Siddall ME: Success of parsimony in the four-taxon case: longbranch repulsion by likelihood in the Farris zone. Cladistics 1998, 14:209-220.
18. Jukes TH, Cantor CR: Evolution of protein molecules. In Mammalian protein metabolism Edited by: Munro HN. New York, Academic Press; 1969:21-132.
19. Uzzell T, Corbin KW: Fitting discrete probability distributions to evolutionary events. Science 1971, 172:1089-1096.
20. Lartillot N, Philippe H: A Bayesian mixture model for acrosssite heterogeneities in the amino-acid replacement process. Mol Biol Evol 2004, 21:1095-1109.
21. Pagel M, Meade A: A phylogenetic mixture model for detecting pattern-heterogeneity in gene sequence or character-state data. Syst Biol 2004, 53:571-581.
22. Sullivan J, Swofford DL: Should we use model-based methods for phylogenetic inference when we know that assumptions about among-site rate variation and nucleotide substitution pattern are violated? Syst Biol 2001, 50:723-729.
23. Fitch WM, Markowitz E: An improved method for determining codon variability in a gene and its application to the rate of fixation of mutations in evolution. Biochem Genet 1970, 4:579-593.
24. Philippe H, Lopez P: On the conservation of protein sequences in evolution. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 2001, 26:414-416.
25. Lopez P, Casane D, Philippe H: Heterotachy, an important process of protein evolution. Mol Biol Evol 2002, 19:1-7.
26. Ane C, Burleigh JG, McMahon MM, Sanderson MJ: Covarion structure in plastid genome evolution: a new statistical test. Mol Biol Evol 2005, 22:914-924.
27. Lockhart PJ, Larkum AW, Steel M, Waddell PJ, Penny D: Evolution of chlorophyll and bacteriochlorophyll: the problem of invariant sites in sequence analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996, 93:1930-1934.
28. Lopez P, Forterre P, Philippe H: The root of the tree of life in the light of the covarion model. J Mol Evol 1999, 49:496-508.
29. Lockhart PJ, Huson D, Maier U, Fraunholz MJ, Van De Peer Y, Barbrook AC, Howe CJ, Steel MA: How molecules evolve in Eubacteria. Mol Biol Evol 2000, 17:835-838.
30. Philippe H, Germot A: Phylogeny of eukaryotes based on ribosomal RNA: long-branch attraction and models of sequence evolution. Mol Biol Evol 2000, 17:830-834.
31. Inagaki Y, Susko E, Fast NM, Roger AJ: Covarion shifts cause a long-branch attraction artifact that unites Microsporidia and Archaebacteria in EF-1{alpha} phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol 2004, 21:1340-1349.
32. Lockhart PJ, Novis P, Milligan BG, Riden J, Rambaut A, Larkum AW: Heterotachy and tree building: a case study with plastids and eubacteria. Mol Biol Evol 2005, Published in Advance Access on September 8, 2005.:.
33. Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW: Performance of maximum parsimony and likelihood phylogenetics when evolution is heterogeneous. Nature 2004, 431:980-984.
34. Gadagkar SR, Kumar S: Maximum likelihood outperforms maximum parsimony even when evolutionary rates are heterotachous. Mol Biol Evol 2005, 22:2139-2141.
35. Spencer M, Susko E, Roger AJ: Likelihood, parsimony, and heterogeneous evolution. Mol Biol Evol 2005, 22:1161-1164.
36. Gaucher EA, Miyamoto MM: A call for likelihood phylogenetics even when the process of sequence evolution is heterogeneous. Mol Phylogenet Evol 2005, in press:.
37. Brinkmann H, van der Giezen M, Zhou Y, Poncelin de Raucourt G, Philippe H: An empirical assessment of long branch attraction artifacts in phylogenomics. Syst Biol 2005, 54:743-757.
38. Philippe H, Lartillot N, Brinkmann H: Multigene analyses of bilaterian animals corroborate the monophyly of Ecdysozoa, Lophotrochozoa, and Protostomia. Mol Biol Evol 2005, 22:1246-1253.
39. Matte-Tailliez O, Brochier C, Forterre P, Philippe H: Archaeal phylogeny based on ribosomal proteins. Mol Biol Evol 2002, 19:631-639.
40. Brochier C, Bapteste E, Moreira D, Philippe H: Eubacterial phylogeny based on translational apparatus proteins. Trends Genet 2002, 18:1-5.
41. Meunier J, Lopez P, Casane D, Philippe H: A versatile method for detecting heterotachous sites. Evolutionary Bioinformatics Submitted:.
42. Rodriguez-Ezpeleta N, Brinkmann H, Burey SC, Roure B, Burger G, Loffelhardt W, Bohnert HJ, Philippe H, Lang BF: Monophyly of primary photosynthetic eukaryotes: green plants, red algae, and glaucophytes. Curr Biol 2005, 15:1325-1330.
43. Fitch WM: The nonidentity of invariable positions in the cytochromes c of different species. Biochem Genet 1971, 5:231-241.
44. Dayhoff MO, Eck RV, Park CM: A model of evolutionary change in proteins. In Atlas of protein sequence and structure Volume 5. Edited by: Dayhoff MO. Washington, DC, National Biomedical Research Fundation; 1972:89-99.
45. Kimura M: A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J Mol Evol 1980, 16:111-120.
46. Lockhart PJ, Howe CJ, Bryant DA, Beanland TJ, Larkum AW: Substitutional bias confounds inference of cyanelle origins from sequence data. J Mol Evol 1992, 34:153-162.
47. Felsenstein J: Inferring phylogenies. Sunderland, MA, USA, Sinauer Associates, Inc.; 2004:645.
48. Lockhart PJ, Steel MA, Barbrook AC, Huson D, Charleston MA, Howe CJ: A covariotide model explains apparent phylogenetic structure of oxygenic photosynthetic lineages. Mol Biol Evol 1998, 15:1183-1188.
49. Steel M: Should phylogenetic models be trying to 'fit an elephant'? Trends Genet 2005, 21:307-309.
50. Thornton JW, Kolaczkowski B: No magic pill for phylogenetic error. Trends Genet 2005, 21:310-311.
51. Rambaut A, Grassly NC: Seq-Gen: an application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Comput Appl Biosci 1997, 13:235-238.
52. Swofford DL: PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony and other methods. 4b10 edition. , Sinauer, Sunderland, MA; 2000.
53. The R Project for Statistical Computing [http://www.rproject. org/]