A Bayesian compound stochastic process for modeling nonstationary and nonhomogeneous sequence evolution

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 23, Issue 11, 2006, Pages 2058-2071

  Blanquart, Samuel ^a   Lartillot, Nicolas ^a  

^a LIRMM   (France)

Author keywords

Compositional bias; Compound stochastic process; MCMC; Nonhomogeneous; Nonstationary; Phylogeny

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; BAYES THEOREM; DNA BASE COMPOSITION; EUBACTERIUM; EVOLUTION; GENETIC DRIFT; MODEL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NONHOMOGENEOUS MODEL; NONHUMAN; NONSTATIONARY MODEL; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PHYLOGENETIC TREE; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY; SPECIES DIFFERENTIATION; STOCHASTIC MODEL; TAXON; YEAST;

ANIMALS; BAYES THEOREM; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; HUMANS; MODELS, GENETIC; MODELS, THEORETICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

EID: 33749595631     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: 15371719     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msl091     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Bernardi G. 1993. The vertebrate genome: isochores and evolution. Mol Biol Evol 10:186-204.
2. Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 1999. Archaea sister group of Bacteria? Indications from tree reconstruction artifacts in ancient phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol 16:817-25.
3. Brown WM, Prager EM, Wang A, Wilson AC. 1982. Mitochondrial DNA sequences of primates: tempo and mode of evolution. J Mol Evol 18:225-39.
4. Canbäck B, Tamas I, Andersson SG. 2004. A phylogenomic study of endosymbiotic bacteria. Mol Phylogenet Evol 21:1110-22.
5. Chang JT. 1996. Full reconstruction of Markov models on evolutionary trees: identifiability and consistency. Math Biosci 137:51-73.
6. Cole JR, Chai B, Marsh TL, et al. (11 co-authors). 2003. The Ribosomal Database Project (RDP-II): previewing a new autoaligner that allows regular updates and the new prokaryotic taxonomy. Nucleic Acids Res 31:442-3.
7. Delsuc F, Phillips MJ, Penny D. 2003. Comment on "Hexapod origins: monophyletic or paraphyletic?". Science 301:1482.
8. Delsuc F, Scally M, Madsen O, Stanhope MJ, de Jong WW, F.M.C., Springer MS, Douzery EJ. 2002. Molecular phylogeny of living Xenarthrans and the impact of character and taxon sampling on the placental tree rooting. Mol Biol Evol 19:1656-71.
9. Eisen JA. 1995. The RecA protein as a model molecule for molecular systematic studies of bacteria: comparison of trees of RecAs and 16S rRNAs from the same species. Mol Biol Evol 41:1105-23.
10. Embley TM, Thomas RH, Williams RAD. 1993. Reduced thermophilic bias in the 16S rDNA sequence from Thermus ruber provides further support for a relationship between Thermus and Deinococcus. Syst Appl Microbiol 16:25-9.
11. Felsenstein J. 1981. Evolutionary trees from DNA sequences: a maximun likelihood approach. Mol Evol 17:368-76.
12. Foster PG. 2004. Modeling compositional heterogeneity. Syst Biol 53:485-95.
13. Foster PG, Hickey DA. 1999. Compositional bias may affect both DNA-based and protein-based phylogenetic reconstructions. J Mol Evol 48:284-90.
14. Foster PG, Jermiin LS, Hickey DA. 1997. Nucleotide composition bias affects amino acid content in protein coded by animal mitochondria. J Mol Evol 44:282-8.
15. Galtier N, Gouy M. 1995. Inferring phylogenies from DNA sequences of unequal base composition. Evolution 92:11317-21.
16. Galtier N, Gouy M. 1998. Inferring pattern and process: maximum-likelihood implementation of a nonhomogeneous model of DNA sequence evolution for phylogenetic analysis. Mol Biol Evol 15:871-9.
17. Galtier N, Tourasse N, Gouy M. 1999. A nonhyperthermophilic common ancestor to extant life forms. Science 283:220-1.
18. Gelman A, Carlin JB, Stern HS, Rubin DB. 2004. Bayesian data analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC.
19. Geyer CJ. 1992. Practical Markov chain Monte Carlo. Stat Sci 7:473-83.
20. Green PJ. 2003. Trans-dimensional Markov Chain Monte Carlo. In: Green PJ, Hjort NL, Richardson S, editors. Highly structured stochastic systems. Oxford University Press. p 179-98.
21. Gupta RS. 1998. Protein phylogenies and signature sequences: a reappraisal of evolutionary relationship among Archaebacteria, Eubacteria, and Eukaryotes. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 62:1435-91.
22. Hasegawa M, Hashimoto T. 1993. Ribosomal RNA trees misleading? Nature 361:23.
23. Herbeck JT, Degnan PH, Wernegreen JJ. 2004. Nonhomogeneous model of sequence evolution indicates independent origins of primary endosymbionts within the enterobacteriales (c-Proteobacteria). Mol Biol Evol 22:520-32.
24. Higgs PG. 2000. RNA secondary structure: physical and computational aspects. Q Rev Biophys 33:199-253.
25. Holder MT, Lewis PO, Swofford DL, Larget B. 2005. Hastings ratio of the LOCAL proposal used in Bayesian phylogenetics. Syst Biol 54:961-5.
26. Hrdy I, Hirt R, Dolezal P, Bardonova L, Foster P, Tachezy J, Embley T. 2004. Trichomonas hydrogenosomes contain the NADH dehydrogenase module of mitochondrial complex I. Nature 432:618-22.
27. Huelsenbeck JP, Larget B, Miller RE, Ronquist F. 2002. Potential applications and pitfalls of Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Syst Biol 51:673-88.
28. Huelsenbeck JP, Larget B, Swofford D. 1999. A compound poisson process for relaxing the molecular clock. Genetics 154:1879-92.
29. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F. 2001. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 17:754-5.
30. Jeffroy O, Brinkmann H, Delsuc F, Philippe H. 2006. Phylogenomics: the beginning of incongruence? Trends Genet 22:225-31.
31. Jukes TH, Bhushan V. 1986. Silent nucleotide substitutions and G + C content of some mitochondrial and bacterial genes. J Mol Evol 24:39-44.
32. Lake JA. 1994. Reconstructing evolutionary trees from DNA and protein sequences: paralinear distances. Evolution 91:1455-9.
33. Larget B, Simon DL. 1999. Markov Chain Monte Carlo algorithms for the Bayesian analysis of phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol 16:750-9.
34. Lartillot N, Philippe H. 2004. A Bayesian mixture model for across-site heterogeneities in the amino-acid replacement process. Mol Biol Evol 21:1095-109.
35. Lartillot N, Philippe H. 2006. Computing Bayes factors using thermodynamic integration. Syst Biol 55:195-207.
36. Lockhart PJ, Howe CJ, Bryant DA, Beanland TJ, Larkum AW. 1992. Substitutional bias confounds inference of Cyanelle origin from sequence data. J Mol Evol 34:153-62.
37. Lockhart PJ, Steel MA, Hendy MD, Penny D. 1994. Recovering evolutionary trees under a more realistic model of sequence evolution. Mol Biol Evol 11:605-12.
38. Maidak BL, Olsen GJ, Larsen N, Overbeek R, McCaughey MJ, Woese CR. 1996. The Ribosomal Database Project (RDP). Nucleic Acids Res 24:82-5.
39. Margush T, McMorris FR. 1981. Consensus n-trees. Bull Math Biol 43:239-44.
40. Montero LM, Salinas J, Matassi G, Bernardi G. 1990. Gene distribution and isochore organization in the nuclear genome of plants. Nucleic Acids Res 18:1859-67.
41. Mooers AO, Holmes EC. 2000. The evolution of base composition and phylogenetic inference. Trends Ecol Evol 15:365-9.
42. Murray RGE. 1991. The family Deinococcaceae. In: Balows A, Trüper HG, Dworkin M, Harder W, Schleifer KH, editors. The prokaryotes. Volume 4. London: Springer. p 3733-44.
43. Neal RM. 1993. Probabilistic inference using Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods. Technical Report CRG-TR-93-1.
44. Ogata Y. 1989. A Monte Carlo method for high dimensional integration. Numerishe Mathemetik 55:137-57.
45. Olsen GJ, Woese CR, Overbeek R. 1994. The winds of (evolutionary) change: breathing new life into microbiology. J Bacteriol 176:1-6.
46. Philippe H, Germot A, Moreira D. 2000. The new phylogeny of eukaryotes. Curr Opin Genet Dev 10:596-601.
47. Phillips MJ, Penny D. 2002. The root of the mammalian tree inferred from whole mitochondrial genomes. Mol Phylogenet Evol 28:171-85.
48. Raftery AE, Lewis SM. 1992. [Practical Markov chain Monte Carlo]: comment: one long run with diagnostics: implementation strategies for Markov Chain Monte Carlo. Stat Sci 7:493-7.
49. Rokas A, Carroll SB. 2005. More genes or more taxa? The relative contribution of gene number and taxon number to phylogenetic accuracy. Mol Biol Evol 22:1337-44.
50. Swofford DL, Olsen GJ, Waddell PJ, Hillis DM. 1996. Phylogenetic inference. In: Hillis DM, Moritz G, Mable BK, editors. Molecular systematics. Volume 11. Sinauer Associates.
51. Tamura K, Kumar S. 2002. Evolutionary distance estimation under heterogeneous substitution pattern among lineages. Mol Biol Evol 19:1727-36.
52. Tarrio R, Rodriguez-Trelles F, Ayala FJ. 2001. Shared nucleotide composition biases among species and their impact on phylogenetic reconstructions of the Drosophilidae. Mol Phylogenet Evol 18:1464-73.
53. Wilson IJ, Weale ME, Balding DJ. 2003. Inferences from DNA data: population histories, evolutionary processes and forensic match probabilities. Royal Stat Soc 166:155-201.
54. Woese CR, Achenbach L, Rouviere P, Mandelco L. 1991. Archaeal phylogeny: reexamination of the phylogenetic position of Archaeoglobus Fulgidus in light of certain composition-induced artifacts. Syst Appl Microbiol 14:364-71.
55. Yang Z, Roberts D. 1995. On the use of nucleic acid sequences to infer branchings in the tree of life. Mol Biol Evol 12:451-8.