Can taxon-sampling effects be minimized by using branch supports?

Cladistics

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 264-275

  Hovenkamp, P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITEIT LEIDEN BRANCH   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PHYLOGENETICS; SAMPLING;

EID: 33745097839     PISSN: 07483007     EISSN: 10960031     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2006.00111.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Berry V. Gascuel O., 1996. On the interpretation of bootstrap trees: appropriate threshold of clade selection and induced gain. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13, 999 1011.
2. Donoghue M.J. Doyle J.A. Gauthier J. Kluge A.G. Rowe T., 1989. The importance of fossils in phylogeny reconstruction. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20, 431 460.
3. Duff R.J. Nickrent D.L., 1999. Phylogenetic relationships of land plants using mitochondrial small-subunit rDNA sequences. Am. J. Bot. 86, 372 386.
4. Goloboff P.A., 1998. Nona. Program and documentation. ver. 2.9. Distributed by the author, Tucumán, Argentina.
5. Goloboff P.A., 2005. Minority rule supertrees? MPR, Compatibility and Minimum Flip may display the least frequent groups. Cladistics 21, 282 294.
6. Goloboff P.A. Pol D., 2002. Semi-strict supertrees. Cladistics 18, 514 525.
7. Goloboff P.A. Farris J.S. Nixon K.C., 2004. TNT. Cladistics 20, 84.
8. Graham S.W. Olmstead R.G., 2000. Utility of 17 chloroplast genes for inferring the phylogeny of the basal angiosperms. Am. J. Bot. 87, 1712 1730.
9. Grandcolas P. D'Haese C., 2001. The phylogeny of cockroach families: Is the current molecular hypothesis robust? Cladistics 17, 48 55.
10. Graybeal A., 1998. Is it better to add taxa or characters to a difficult phylogenetic problem? Syst. Biol. 47, 9 17.
11. Hedges S.B., 1992. The number of replications need for accurate estimation of the bootstrap P value in phylogenetic studies. Mol. Biol. Evol. 9, 366 369.
12. Hillis D.M. Bull. J.J., 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 42, 182 192.
13. Holmes S., 2003. Bootstrapping phylogenetic trees: theory and methods. Stat. Sci. 18, 241 255.
14. Hovenkamp P.H., 1996. The inevitable instability of generic circumscriptions in Old World Polypodiaceae. In Camus J.M. Gibby M Johns R.J. (Eds Pteridology in Perspective. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, pp. 249 260.
15. Hovenkamp P., 1999. Unambiguous data or unambiguous results? Cladistics 15, 99 102.
16. In den Bosch H.A.J. Zandee M., 2001. Courtship behaviour in lacertid lizards: phylogenetic interpretations of the Lacerta kulzeri complex (Reptilia: Lacertidae). Neth. J. Zool. 51, 263 284.
17. Jenner R.A., 2001. Bilaterian phylogeny and uncritical recycling of morphological data sets. Syst. Biol. 50, 730 742.
18. Lanyon S.M., 1985. Detecting internal inconsistencies in distance data. Syst. Zool. 34, 397 403.
19. Lecointre G. Philippe H. Lê H.L.V. Le Guyader H., 1993. Species sampling has a major impact on phylogenetic inference. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 2, 205 224.
20. Leebens-Mack J. Raubeson L.A. Cui L.Y. Kuehl J.V. Fourcade M.H. Chumley T.W. Boore J.L. Jansen R.K. dePamphilis C.W., 2005. Identifying the basal angiosperm node in chloroplast genome phylogenies: sampling one's way out of the Felsenstein zone. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22, 1948 1963.
21. Maddison W.P. Donoghue M.J. Maddison D.R., 1984. Outgroup analysis and parsimony. Syst. Zool. 33, 83 103.
22. Poe S., 1998. Sensitivity of phylogeny estimation to taxonomic sampling. Syst. Bot. 47, 18 31.
23. Poe S. Swofford D., 1999. Taxon sampling revisited. Nature, 398, 299 300.
24. Pollock D.P. Zwickl D.J. McGuire J.A. Hillis D.M., 2002. Increased taxon sampling is advantageous for phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 51, 664 671.
25. Rodrigo A.G., 1993. Calibrating the bootstrap test of monophyly. Int. J. Parasitol. 23, 507 514.
26. Rosenberg M.S. Kumar S., 2001. Incomplete taxon sampling is not a problem for phylogenetic inference. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 98, 10751 10756.
27. Rydin C. Källersjö M., 2002. Taxon sampling and seed plant phylogeny. Cladistics 18, 485 513.
28. Savolainen V. Chase M.W. Hoot S.B. Morton C.M. Soltis D.E. Bayer C. Fay M.F. De Bruijn A.Y. Sullivan S. Qiu Y.L., 2000. Phylogenetics of flowering plants based on combined analysis of plastid atpB and rbcL gene sequences. Syst. Biol. 49, 306 362.
29. Siddall M.E., 1995. Another monophyly index: revisiting the jackknife. Cladistics, 11, 33 56.
30. Simmons M.P. Pickett K.M. Miya M., 2004. How meaningful are Bayesian support values? Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 188 199.
31. Soltis D.E. Soltis P.S. Mort M.E. Chase M.W. Savolainen V. Hoot S.B. Morton C.M., 1998. Inferring complex phylogenies using parsimony: an empirical approach using three large DNA data sets for angiosperms. Syst. Biol. 47, 32 42.
32. Soltis D.E. Albert V.A. Savolainen V. Hilu K. Qiu Y.L. Chase M.W. Farris J.S. Stefanovic S. Rice D.W. Palmer J.D. Soltis P.S., 2004. Genome-scale data, angiosperm relationships, and "ending incongruence": a cautionary tale in phylogenetics. Trends Plant Sci. 9, 477 483.
33. Tehler A. Farris J.S. Lipscomb D.L. Källersjö M., 2000. Phylogenetic analyses of fungi based on large rDNA data sets. Mycologia 92, 459 474.
34. Wenzel J.W. Siddall M.E., 1999. Noise. Cladistics 15, 51 64.
35. 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. Mol. Phyl. Evol. 25, 361 371.
36. Zwickl D.J. Hillis D.M., 2002. Increased taxon sampling greatly reduces phylogenetic error. Syst. Biol. 51, 588 598.