Effects of branch length uncertainty on Bayesian posterior probabilities for phylogenetic hypotheses

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 24, Issue 9, 2007, Pages 2108-2118

  Kolaczkowski, Bryan ^a   Thornton, Joseph W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian phylogenetics; Branch length prior; Empirical bayes; Posterior probability

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY; STATISTICAL MODEL;

BAYES THEOREM; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY;

EID: 35748954378     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: 15371719     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msm141     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Alfaro ME, Holder MT. 2006. The posterior and the prior in Bayesian phylogenetics. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 37:19-42. (Pubitemid 44907611)
2. Alfaro ME, Zoller S, Lutzoni F. 2003. Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of BayesianMarkov chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confidence. Mol Biol Evol. 20(2):255-266. (Pubitemid 36237384)
3. Anisimova M, Gascuel O. 2006. Approximate likelihood ratio test for branches: a fast, accurate and powerful alternative. Syst Biol. 55(4):539-552. (Pubitemid 43922340)
4. Berger JO, Strawderman W, Tang D. 2005. Posterior propriety and admissibility of hyperpriors in normal hierarchical models. Ann Stat. 33(2):606-646. (Pubitemid 41053717)
5. Buckley TR. 2002. Model misspecification and probabilistic tests of topology: evidence from empirical data sets. Syst Biol. 51(3):509-523. (Pubitemid 35180701)
6. Carlin BP, Gelfand AE. 1990. Approaches for empirical Bayesian confidence intervals. J Am Stat Assoc. 85(409):105-114.
7. Cummings MP, Handley SA, Myers DS, Reed DL, Rokas A, Winka K. 2003. Comparing bootstrap and posterior probability values in the four-taxon case. Syst Biol. 52(4):477-487. (Pubitemid 36990376)
8. Douady CJ, Delsuc F, Boucher Y, Doolittle WF, Douzery EJP. 2003. Comparison of Bayesian and maximum likelihood bootstrap measures of phylogenetic reliability. Mol Biol Evol. 20(2):248-254. (Pubitemid 36237383)
9. Edwards AWF. 1992. Likelihood. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University Press.
10. Erixon P, Svennbald B, Britton T, Oxelman B. 2003. Reliability of Bayesian posterior probabilities and bootstrap frequencies in phylogenetics. Syst Biol. 52(5):665-673. (Pubitemid 37365047)
11. Felsenstein J. 2004. Inferring Phylogenies. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
12. Hillis DM, Bull JJ. 1993. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst Biol. 42(2):182-192.
13. Huelsenbeck JP, Larget B, Miller RE, Ronquist F. 2002. Potential applications and pitfalls of Bayesian inference of phylogeny. Syst Biol. 51(5):673-688. (Pubitemid 35294801)
14. Huelsenbeck JP, Rannala B. 2004. Frequentist properties of Bayesian posterior probabilities of phylogenetic trees under simple and complex substitution models. Syst Biol. 53(6):904-913. (Pubitemid 40141314)
15. Huelsenbeck JP, Ronquist F, Nielsen R, Bollback JP. 2001. Bayesian inference of phylogeny and its impact on evolutionary biology. Science. 294:2310-2314. (Pubitemid 33140548)
16. Karol KG, McCourt RM, Cimino MT, Delwiche CF. 2001. The closest living relatives of land plants. Science. 294(5550): 2351-2353. (Pubitemid 33140558)
17. Lemmon AR, Moriarty EC. 2004. The importance of proper model assumption in Bayesian phylogenetics. Syst Biol. 53(2):265-277. (Pubitemid 38611183)
18. Lewis PO, Holder MT, Holsinger KE. 2005. Polytomies and Bayesian phylogenetic inference. Syst Biol. 54(2):241-253. (Pubitemid 40707806)
19. Mar JC, Harlow TJ, Ragan MA. 2005. Bayesian and maximum likelihood phylogenetic analyses of protein sequence data under relative branch length differences and model violation. BMC Evol Biol. 5(1):8.
20. Misawa K, Nei M. 2003. Reanalysis of Murphy et al.'s data gives various mammalian phylogenies and suggests overcredibility of Bayesian trees. J Mol Evol. 57:S290-S296. (Pubitemid 37544019)
21. Murphy WJ, Eizirik E, O'Brien SJ, et al. (11 co-authors). 2001. Resolution of the early placental mammal radiation using Bayesian phylogenetics. Science. 294(5550):2348-2351. (Pubitemid 33140557)
22. Rannala B, Yang Z. 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: a new method of phylogenetic inference. J Mol Evol. 43:304-311. (Pubitemid 26315133)
23. Rogers JS. 2001. Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogenetic trees is consistent when substitution rates vary according to the invariable sites plus gamma distribution. Syst Biol. 50(5):713-722.
24. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. 2003. Mrbayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics. 19(12):1572-1574. (Pubitemid 37038874)
25. Simmons MP, Pickett KM, Miya M. 2004. How meaningful are Bayesian support values? Mol Biol Evol. 21(1):188-199. (Pubitemid 38233532)
26. Sitnikova T,Rzhetsky A,NeiM. 1995. Interior-branch and bootstrap tests of phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol. 12(2):319-333.
27. Suzuki Y, Glazko GV, Nei M. 2002. Overcredibility of molecular phylogenies obtained by Bayesian phylogenetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 99(25):16138-16143. (Pubitemid 35462762)
28. Swofford DL. 2002. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
29. Taylor DJ, Piel WH. 2004. An assessment of accuracy, error, and conflict with support values from genome-scale phylogenetic data. Mol Biol Evol. 21(8):1534-1537. (Pubitemid 38971763)
30. Wilcox TP, Zwickl DJ, Heath TA, Hillis DM. 2002. Phylogenetic relationships of the dwarf boas and a comparison of Bayesian and bootstrap measures of phylogenetic support. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 25:361-371. (Pubitemid 35343620)
31. Yang Z, Goldman N, Friday AE. 1995. Maximum likelihood trees from DNA sequences: a peculiar statistical estimation problem. Syst Biol. 44(3):384-399. (Pubitemid 126005885)
32. Yang Z, Rannala B. 2005. Branch-length prior influences Bayesian posterior probability of phylogeny. Syst Biol. 54(3):455-470. (Pubitemid 41040444)