The evolution of supertrees

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 19, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 315-322

  Bininda Emonds, Olaf R P ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENETICS; PHYLOGENY;

THUJA;

EID: 2942600199     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2004.03.015     Document Type: Review

References (79)

1. Sanderson M.J., et al. Phylogenetic supertrees: assembling the trees of life. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13:1998;105-109
2. Soltis P.S., Soltis D.E. Molecular systematics: assembling and using the Tree of Life. Taxon. 50:2001;663-677
3. Pennisi E. Modernizing the Tree of Life. Science. 300:2003;1692-1697
4. Gatesy J., Springer M.S. A critique of matrix representation with parsimony supertrees. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life. Vol. 3:2004;369-388 Kluwer Academic
5. Springer M.S., de Jong W.W. Phylogenetics. Which mammalian supertree to bark up? Science. 291:2001;1709-1711
6. Gatesy J., et al. Resolution of a supertree/supermatrix paradox. Syst. Biol. 51:2002;652-664
7. Gordon A.D. Consensus supertrees: the synthesis of rooted trees containing overlapping sets of labeled leaves. J. Classif. 3:1986;31-39
8. Ortolani A. Spots, stripes, tail tips and dark eyes: predicting the function of carnivore colour patterns using the comparative method. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 67:1999;433-476
9. Cardillo M., Bromham L. Body size and risk of extinction in Australian mammals. Conserv. Biol. 15:2001;1435-1440
10. Baum B.R. Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon. 41:1992;3-10
11. Ragan M.A. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylo. Evol. 1:1992;53-58
12. Doyle J.J. Gene trees and species trees: molecular systematics as one-character taxonomy. Syst. Bot. 17:1992;144-163
13. Aho A.V., et al. Inferring a tree from lowest common ancestors with an application to the optimization of relational expressions. SIAM J. Comput. 10:1981;405-421
14. Steel M. The complexity of reconstructing trees from qualitative characters and subtrees. J. Classif. 9:1992;91-116
15. Daniel P., Semple C. A supertree algorithm for nested taxa. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life. Vol. 3:2004;151-171 Kluwer Academic
16. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Sanderson M.J. Assessment of the accuracy of matrix representation with parsimony supertree construction. Syst. Biol. 50:2001;565-579
17. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., et al. The (super)tree of life: procedures, problems, and prospects. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33:2002;265-289
18. Gittleman, J.L., et al. (2004) Supertrees: using complete phylogenies in comparative biology. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 439-460, Kluwer Academic.
19. Purvis A. A composite estimate of primate phylogeny. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 348:1995;405-421
20. Barrett M., et al. Against consensus. Syst. Zool. 40:1991;486-493
21. Chippindale P.T., Wiens J.J. Weighting, partitioning, and combining characters in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 43:1994;278-287
22. Pisani D., Wilkinson M. Matrix representation with parsimony, taxonomic congruence, and total evidence. Syst. Biol. 51:2002;151-155
23. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. Novel versus unsupported clades: assessing the qualitative support for clades in MRP supertrees. Syst. Biol. 52:2003;839-848
24. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., Bryant H.N. Properties of matrix representation with parsimony analyses. Syst. Biol. 47:1998;497-508
25. Goloboff P.A., Pol D. Semi-strict supertrees. Cladistics. 18:2002;514-525
26. Chen, D., et al. (2003) Flipping: a supertree construction method. In Bioconsensus (Vol. 61) (Janowitz, M.F. et al., eds), pp. 135-160, American Mathematical Society.
27. Levasseur, C. and Lapointe, F-J. (2003) Increasing phylogenetic accuracy with global congruence. In Bioconsensus (Vol. 61) (Janowitz, M.F. et al., eds), pp. 221-230, American Mathematical Society.
28. Piaggio-Talice, R., et al. (2004) Quartet supertrees. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 173-191, Kluwer Academic.
29. Cognato A.I., Vogler A.P. Exploring data interaction and nucleotide alignment in a multiple gene analysis of Ips (Coleoptera: Scolytinae). Syst. Biol. 50:2001;758-780
30. Liu F.-G.R., et al. Molecular and morphological supertrees for eutherian (placental) mammals. Science. 291:2001;1786-1789
31. Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., et al. (2004) Garbage in, garbage out: data issues in supertree construction. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 267-280, Kluwer Academic.
32. Daubin V., et al. Bacterial molecular phylogeny using supertree approach. Genome Inform. 12:2001;155-164
33. Daubin V., et al. A phylogenomic approach to bacterial phylogeny: evidence of a core of genes sharing a common history. Genome Res. 12:2002;1080-1090
34. Kennedy M., Page R.D.M. Seabird supertrees: combining partial estimates of procellariiform phylogeny. Auk. 119:2002;88-108
35. Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P. Trees versus characters and the supertree/supermatrix 'paradox'. Syst. Biol. (in press).
36. Slowinski J.B., Page R.D.M. How should species phylogenies be inferred from sequence data? Syst. Biol. 48:1999;814-825
37. Burleigh, J.G., et al. (2004) MRF supertrees. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 65-85, Kluwer Academic.
38. Ross, H.A. and Rodrigo, A.G. (2004) An assessment of matrix representation with compatibility in supertree construction. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 35-63, Kluwer Academic.
39. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P., et al. Building large trees by combining phylogenetic information: a complete phylogeny of the extant Carnivora (Mammalia). Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 74:1999;143-175
40. Källersjö M., et al. 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. 213:1998;259-287
41. Scotland R.W., et al. Phylogeny reconstruction: the role of morphology. Syst. Biol. 52:2003;539-548
42. Felsenstein J. The number of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 27:1978;27-33
43. Roshan, U., et al. (2004) Performance of supertree methods on various data set decompositions. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 301-328, Kluwer Academic.
44. Mishler B.D. Cladistic analysis of molecular and morphological data. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 94:1994;143-156
45. Strimmer K., von Haeseler A. Quartet puzzling: a quartet maximum-likelihood method for reconstructing tree topologies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:1996;964-969
46. Ronquist, F., et al. (2004) Bayesian supertrees. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 193-224, Kluwer Academic.
47. Huson D.H., et al. Disk-covering, a fast-converging method for phylogenetic tree reconstruction. J. Comput. Biol. 6:1999;369-386
48. Sanderson M.J., et al. Obtaining maximal concatenated phylogenetic data sets from large sequence databases. Mol. Biol. Evol. 20:2003;1036-1042
49. Wilkinson M. Coping with abundant missing entries in phylogenetic inference using parsimony. Syst. Biol. 44:1995;501-514
50. Semple C., Steel M. A supertree method for rooted trees. Discrete Appl. Math. 105:2000;147-158
51. Lapointe F.-J., Cucumel G. The average consensus procedure: combination of weighted trees containing identical or overlapping sets of taxa. Syst. Biol. 46:1997;306-312
52. Page, R.D.M. (2002) Modified mincut supertrees. In Algorithms in Bioinformatics, Second International Workshop, WABI, 2002, Rome, Italy, September 17-21, 2002, Proceedings (Vol. 2452) (Guigó, R. et al., eds), pp. 537-552, Springer.
53. Bryant, D., et al. (2004) Supertree methods for ancestral divergence dates and other applications. In Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life (Vol. 3) (Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P., ed.), pp. 129-150, Kluwer Academic.
54. Purvis A. A modification to Baum and Ragan's method for combining phylogenetic trees. Syst. Biol. 44:1995;251-255
55. Lanyon S.M. Phylogenetic frameworks: towards a firmer foundation for the comparative approach. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 49:1993;45-61
56. Semple C., Steel M. Tree reconstruction from multi-state characters. Adv. Appl. Math. 28:2002;169-184
57. Thorley J.L., Page R.D. RadCon: phylogenetic tree comparison and consensus. Bioinformatics. 16:2000;486-487
58. Kelly C.M., et al. Phylogenetics of advanced snakes (Caenophidia) based on four mitochondrial genes. Syst. Biol. 52:2003;439-459
59. Gatesy, J., et al. Inconsistencies in arguments for the supertree approach: supermatrices versus supertrees of Crocodylia. Syst. Biol. (in press).
60. Pisani D., et al. A genus-level supertree of the Dinosauria. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 269:2002;915-921
61. Barker G.M. Phylogenetic diversity: a quantitative framework for measurement of priority and achievement in biodiversity conservation. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 76:2002;165-194
62. Mahon A.S. A molecular supertree of the Artiodactyla. Bininda-Emonds O.R.P. Phylogenetic Supertrees: Combining Information to Reveal the Tree of Life. Vol. 3:2004;411-437 Kluwer Academic
63. Jones K.E., et al. A phylogenetic supertree of the bats (Mammalia: Chiroptera). Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 77:2002;223-259
64. Grenyer R., Purvis A. A composite species-level phylogeny of the 'Insectivora' (Mammalia: Order Lipotyphla Haeckel, 1866). J. Zool. 260:2003;245-257
65. Stoner C.J., et al. The adaptive significance of coloration in lagomorphs. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 79:2003;309-328
66. Cardillo, M., et al. A species-level phylogenetic supertree of marsupials. J. Zool. (in press).
67. Purvis, A. and Webster, A.J. (1999) Phylogenetically independent comparisons and primate phylogeny. In Comparative Primate Socioecology (Lee, P.C., ed.), pp. 44-70, Cambridge University Press.
68. Plunkett G.M. Relationship of the order Apiales to subclass Asteridae: a re-evaluation of morphological characters based on insights from molecular data. Edinb. J. Bot. 58:2001;183-200
69. Davies T.J., et al. Darwin's abominable mystery: insights from a supertree of angiosperms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 101:2004;1904-1909
70. Barker N.P., et al. The paraphyly of Cortaderia (Danthonioideae; Poaceae): evidence from morphology and chloroplast and nuclear DNA sequence data. Ann. Miss. Bot. Gard. 90:2003;1-24
71. Wojciechowski M.F., et al. Molecular phylogeny of the "temperate herbaceous tribes" of papilionoid legumes: a supertree approach. Herendeen P., et al. Advances in Legume Systematics. Vol. 9:2000;277-298 Royal Botanic Gardens
72. Cannon C.H., Manos P.S. Combining and comparing morphometric shape descriptors with a molecular phylogeny: the case of fruit type evolution in Bornean Lithocarpus (Fagaceae). Syst. Biol. 50:2001;860-880
73. Schwilk D.W., Ackerly D.D. Flammability and serotiny as strategies: correlated evolution in pines. Oikos. 94:2001;326-336
74. Salamin N., et al. Building supertrees: an empirical assessment using the grass family (Poaceae). Syst. Biol. 51:2002;136-150
75. Galtier N., Gouy M. Molecular phylogeny of Eubacteria: a new multiple tree analysis method applied to 15 sequence data sets questions the monophyly of Gram-positive bacteria. Res. Microbiol. 145:1994;531-541
76. Zrzavy J., Rican O. Morphological and molecular supertrees for metazoan phyla: conflict and accord in diverse comparative. Cladistics. 19:2003;162-163
77. Morand S., Muller-Graf C.D.M. Muscles or testes? Comparative evidence for sexual competition among dioecious blood parasites (Schistosomatidae) of vertebrates. Parasitology. 120:2000;45-56
78. Ronquist F. Matrix representation of trees, redundancy, and weighting. Syst. Biol. 45:1996;247-253
79. Lapointe F.-J., et al. Matrix representations with parsimony or with distances: two sides of the same coin? Syst. Biol. 52:2003;865-868