The impact of fossils and taxon sampling on ancient molecular dating analyses

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 24, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1889-1897

  Hug, Laura A ^a   Roger, Andrew J ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bayesian analysis; Fossil constraints; Molecular dating; Penalized likelihood; Taxon sampling

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CALIBRATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; EUKARYOTE; FOSSIL; GENETIC VARIABILITY; INFORMATION PROCESSING; METAZOON; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; NONHUMAN; STATISTICAL MODEL; TAXON;

ANIMALS; BAYES THEOREM; EUKARYOTIC CELLS; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; FOSSILS; INVERTEBRATES; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; VARIATION (GENETICS);

EUKARYOTA; METAZOA;

EID: 34547762740     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: 15371719     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msm115     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Aris-Brisou S, Yang Z. 2003. Bayesian models of episodic evolution support a late Precambrian explosive diversification of the Metazoa. Mol Biol Evol. 20:1947-1954.
2. Benton MJ, Ayala FJ. 2003. Dating the tree of life. Science. 300:1698-1700.
3. Benton MJ, Donoghue PC. 2007. Paleontological evidence to date the tree of life. Mol Biol Evol. 24:26-53.
4. Berney C, Pawlowski J. 2006. A molecular time-scale for eukaryote evolution recalibrated with the continuous microfossil record. Proc Biol Sci. 273:1867-1872.
5. Blair JE, Hedges SB. 2005. Molecular clocks do not support the Cambrian explosion. Mol Biol Evol. 22:387-390.
6. Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 2005. Phylogenomics and the reconstruction of the tree of life. Nat Rev Genet. 6:361-375.
7. Douzery EJ, Snell EA, Bapteste E, Delsuc F, Philippe H. 2004. The timing of eukaryotic evolution: does a relaxed molecular clock reconcile proteins and fossils? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 101:15386-15391.
8. Drummond AJ, Ho SY, Phillips MJ, Rambaut A. 2006. Relaxed phylogenetics and dating with confidence. PLoS Biol. 4:e88.
9. Glazko GV, Koonin EV, Rogozin IB. 2005. Molecular dating: ape bones agree with chicken entrails. Trends Genet. 21:89-92.
10. Graur D, Martin W. 2004. Reading the entrails of chickens: molecular timescales of evolution and the illusion of precision. Trends Genet. 20:80-86.
11. Gribaldo S, Philippe H. 2002. Ancient phylogenetic relationships. Theor Popul Biol. 61:391-408.
12. Hedges SB, Blair JE, Venturi ML, Shoe JL. 2004. A molecular timescale of eukaryote evolution and the rise of complex multicellular life. BMC Evol Biol. 4:2.
13. Hedges SB, Kumar S. 2004. Precision of molecular time estimates. Trends Genet. 20:242-247.
14. Hedtke SM, Townsend TM, Hillis DM. 2006. Resolution of phylogenetic conflict in large data sets by increased taxon sampling. Syst Biol. 55:522-529.
15. Kishino H, Thorne JL, Bruno WJ. 2001. Performance of a divergence time estimation method under a probabilistic model of rate evolution. Mol Biol Evol. 18:352-361.
16. Kumar S, Hedges SB. 1998. A molecular timescale for vertebrate evolution. Nature. 392:917-920.
17. Near TJ, Meylan PA, Shaffer HB. 2005. Assessing concordance of fossil calibration points in molecular clock studies: an example using turtles. Am Nat. 165:137-146.
18. Near TJ, Sanderson MJ. 2004. Assessing the quality of molecular divergence time estimates by fossil calibrations and fossilbased model selection. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 359:1477-1483.
19. Peterson KJ, Butterfield NJ. 2005. Origin of the Eumetazoa: testing ecological predictions of molecular clocks against the Proterozoic fossil record. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 102:9547-9552.
20. Peterson KJ, Lyons JB, Nowak KS, Takacs CM, Wargo MJ, McPeek MA. 2004. Estimating metazoan divergence times with a molecular clock. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 101:6536-6541.
21. Reisz RR, Muller J. 2004. The comparative method for evaluating fossil calibration dates: a reply to Hedges. Kumar. Trends Genet. 20:596-597.
22. Roger AJ, Hug LA. 2006. The origin and diversification of eukaryotes: problems with molecular phylogenetics and molecular clock estimation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 361:1039-1054.
23. Sanderson MJ. 1997. A nonparametric approach to estimating divergence times in the absence of rate constancy. Mol Biol Evol. 14:1218-1231.
24. Sanderson MJ. 2002. Estimating absolute rates of molecular evolution and divergence times: a penalized likelihood approach. Mol Biol Evol. 19:101-109.
25. Sanderson MJ. 2003. r8s: inferring absolute rates of molecular evolution and divergence times in the absence of a molecular clock. Bioinformatics. 19:301-302.
26. Schmidt HA, Strimmer K, Vingron M, von Haeseler A. 2002. TREE-PUZZLE: maximum likelihood phylogenetic analysis using quartets and parallel computing. Bioinformatics. 18:502-504.
27. Thorne JL, Kishino H. 2002. Divergence time and evolutionary rate estimation with multilocus data. Syst Biol. 51:689-702.
28. van Tuinen M, Hadly EA. 2004. Error in estimation of rate and time inferred from the early amniote fossil record and avian molecular clocks. J Mol Evol. 59:267-276.
29. Vinh le S, Von Haeseler A. 2004. IQPNNI: moving fast through tree space and stopping in time. Mol Biol Evol. 21:1565-1571.
30. Welch JJ, Bromham L. 2005. Molecular dating when rates vary. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20:320-327.
31. Yang Z. 1997. PAML: a program package for phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. CABIOS. 13:555-556.
32. Yang Z. 2006. Computational Molecular Evolution. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
33. Yang Z, Rannala B. 2006. Bayesian estimation of species divergence times under a molecular clock using multiple fossil calibrations with soft bounds. Mol Biol Evol. 23:212-226.
34. Yang Z, Yoder AD. 2003. Comparison of likelihood and Bayesian methods for estimating divergence times using multiple gene Loci and calibration points, with application to a radiation of cute-looking mouse lemur species. Syst Biol. 52:705-716.
35. Zuckerkandl E, Pauling L. 1965. Molecules as documents of evolutionary history. J Theor Biol. 8:357-366.