PuMA: Bayesian analysis of partitioned (and unpartitioned) model adequacy

Bioinformatics

Volumn 25, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 537-538

  Brown, Jeremy M ^a   Eldabaje, Robert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DNA SEQUENCE; GENETIC VARIABILITY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; MOLECULAR MODEL; PHYLOGENY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

BASE SEQUENCE; BAYES THEOREM; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; INTERNET; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SOFTWARE;

EID: 60149104693     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 14602059     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn651     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bollback,J.P. (2002) Bayesian model adequacy and choice in phylogenetics. Mol. Biol. Evol., 19, 1171-1180.
2. Gamerman,D. (1997) Markov Chain Monte Carlo: Stochastic Simulation for Bayesian Inference. Chapman and Hall, New York.
3. Gelman,A. et al. (1995) Bayesian Data Analysis. Chapman and Hall, New York.
4. Goldman,N. (1993) Statistical tests of models of DNA substitution. J. Mol. Evol., 36, 182-198.
5. Huelsenbeck,J.P. and Ronquist,F. (2001) MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics, 17, 754-755.
6. Hugall,A.F. et al. (2007) Calibration choice, rate smoothing, and the pattern of tetrapod diversification according to the long nuclear gene RAG-1. Syst. Biol., 56, 543-563.
7. Lemmon,A.R. and Moriarty,E.C. (2004) The importance of proper model assumption in Bayesian phylogenetics. Syst. Biol., 53, 265-277.
8. Li,C. et al. (2008) Optimal data partitioning and a test case for ray-finned fishes (Actinopterygii) based on ten nuclear loci. Syst. Biol., 57, 519-539.
9. Minin,V. et al. (2003) Performance-based selection of likelihood models for phylogeny estimation. Syst. Biol., 52, 674-683.
10. Nylander,J.A.A. et al. (2004) Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of combined data. Syst. Biol., 53, 47-67.
11. Pagel,M. and Meade,A. (2004) A phylogenetic mixture model for detecting patternheterogeneity in gene sequence or character-state data. Syst. Biol., 53, 571-581.
12. Posada,D. and Buckley,T.R. (2004) Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: Advantages of Akaike information criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Syst. Biol., 53, 793-808.
13. Rabeling,C. et al. (2008) Newly discovered sister lineage sheds light on early ant evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 105 14913-14917.
14. Rambaut,A. and Grassly,N.C. (1997) Seq-Gen: An application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Comput. Appl. Biosci., 13, 235-238.
15. Rubin,D.B. (1984) Bayesianly justifiable and relevant frequency calculations for the applied statistician. Ann. Stat., 12, 1151-1172.
16. Sullivan,J. and Joyce,P. (2005) Model selection in phylogenetics. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 36, 445-466.
17. Swofford,D.L. et al. (1996) Phylogenetic inference. In Hillis,D.M. et al. (eds) Molecular Systematics. 2nd edn. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA, USA, pp. 407-514.
18. Swofford,D.L. et al. (2001) Bias in phylogenetic estimation and its relevance to the choice between parsimony and likelihood methods. Syst. Biol., 50, 525-539.
19. Yang,Z. et al. (1994) Comparison of models for nucleotide substitution used in maximum-likelihood phylogenetic estimation. Mol. Biol. Evol., 11, 316-324.