Calculating bootstrap probabilities of phylogeny using multilocus sequence data

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 960-971

  Seo, Tae Kun ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

Author keywords

2 stage bootstrap; Bootstrap probability; Distance method; Phylogeny

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BOOTSTRAPPING; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOMICS; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MOLECULAR PHYLOGENY; MULTILOCUS SEQUENCE TYPING; PHYLOGENETIC TREE; PHYLOGENETIC TREE CONSTRUCTION METHOD; SIMULATION; ANIMAL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EVALUATION; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; GENETICS; MAMMAL; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; MAMMALS; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY; VARIATION (GENETICS);

EID: 50949129519     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: 15371719     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msn043     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adachi J, Waddell PJ, Martin W, Hasegawa M. 2000. Plastid genome phylogeny and a model of amino acid substitution for proteins encoded by chloroplast. J Mol Evol. 50:348-358.
2. Anderson TW. 1984. Introduction to multivariate statistical analysis, 2nd ed. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley & Sons, Inc. p. 596.
3. Cao Y, Fujiwara M, Nikaido M, Okada N, Hasegawa M. 2000. Interordinal relationships and timescale of eutherian evolution as inferred from mitochondrial genome data. Gene. 259:149-158.
4. Cao Y, Sorenson MD, Kumazawa Y, Mindell DP, Hasegawa M. 2000. Phylogenetic position of turtles among amniotes: evidence from mitochondrial and nuclear genes. Gene. 259:139-148.
5. Degnan JH, Rosenberg NA. 2006. Discordance of species trees with their most likely gene trees. PLoS Genet. 2:762-768.
6. Edwards SV, Liu L, Pearl DK. 2007. High-resolution species trees without concatenation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 102:4436-4441.
7. Efron B, Halloran E, Holmes S. 1996. Bootstrap confidence levels for phylogenetic trees. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 93:13429-13434.
8. Felsenstein J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution. 39:783-791.
9. Hall P, Wilson SR. 1991. Two guidelines for bootstrap hypothesis testing. Biometrics. 47:757-762.
10. Hallstrom BM, Kullberg M, Nilsson MA, Janke A. 2007. Phylogenomic data analyses provide evidence that Xenarthra and Afrotheria are sister groups. Mol Biol Evol. 24:2059-2068.
11. Jukes TH, Cantor CR. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. In: Munro HN, editor. Mammalian protein metabolism. New York: Academic Press. p. 21-132.
12. Kishino H, Hasegawa M. 1989. Evaluation of the maximum likelihood estimate of the evolutionary tree topologies from DNA sequence data, and the branching order in hominoidea. J Mol Evol. 29:170-179.
13. Kolaczkowski B, Thornton JW. 2004. Performance of maximum parsimony and likelihood phylogenetics when evolution is heterogeneous. Nature. 431:980-984.
14. Lewis PO, Holder MT, Holsinger KE. 2005. Polytomies and Bayesian phylogenetic inference. Syst Biol. 54:241-253.
15. Nei M, Kumar S. 2000. Molecular evolution and phylogenetics. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Nikaido M, Cao Y, Harada M, Okada N, Hasegawa M. 2003. Mitochondrial phylogeny of hedgehogs and monophyly of Eulipotyphla. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 28:276-284.
17. Nishihara H, Okada N, Hasegawa M. 2007. Rooting the eutherian tree: the power and pitfalls of phylogenomics. Genome Biol. 8:R199.1-R199.10.
18. Queiroz AD, Gatesy J. 2006. The supermatrix approach to systematics. Trends Ecol Evol. 22:34-41.
19. Rannala B, Yang Z. 1996. Probability distribution of molecular evolutionary trees: a new method of phylogenetic inference. J Mol Evol. 43:304-311.
20. Ronquist F, Huelsenbeck JP. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics. 19:1572-1574.
21. Saitou N, Nei N. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol. 4:406-425.
22. Seo T-K, Kishino H, Thorne JL. 2005. Incorporating gene-specific variation when inferring and evaluating optimal evolutionary tree topologies from multilocus sequence data. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 102:4436-4441.
23. Shimodaira H, Hasegawa M. 1999. Multiple comparisons of log-likelihoods with applications to phylogenetic inference. Mol Biol Evol. 16:1114-1116.
24. Suzuki Y, Glazko GV, Nei N. 2002. Overcredibility of molecular phylogenies obtained by Bayesian phylogenetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 99:16138-16143.
25. Tamura K, Nei M. 1993. Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA in humans and chimpanzees. Mol Biol Evol. 10:512-526.
26. Yang Z. 1993. Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogeny from DNA sequences when substitution rates differ over sites. Mol Biol Evol. 10:1396-1401.
27. Yang Z. 1994a. Estimating the pattern of nucleotide substitution. J Mol Evol. 39:105-111.
28. Yang Z. 1994b. Maximum likelihood phylogenetic estimation from DNA sequences with variable rates over sites: approximate methods. J Mol Evol. 39:306-314.
29. Yang Z. 1995. Evaluation of several methods for estimating phylogenetic trees when substitution rates differ over nucleotide sites. J Mol Evol. 40:689-697.
30. Yang Z. 2007. PAML 4: phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Mol Biol Evol. 24:1586-1591.
31. Yoder AD, Yang Z. 2000. Estimation of primate speciation dates using local molecular clocks. Mol Biol Evol. 17:1081-1090.