The effect of heterotachy in multigene analysis using the neighbor joining method

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution

Volumn 52, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 846-851

  Som, Anup ^a,b,c   Fuellen, Georg ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ROSTOCK   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GREIFSWALD   (Germany)

^c University of Houston   (United States)

Author keywords

Concatenation approach; Heterotachy; Neighbor joining method; Phylogenetic inference; Weighted distance approach

Indexed keywords

CONCATENATED DNA;

ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BIOLOGY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETICS; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT;

COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DNA, CONCATENATED; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT;

EID: 67649649922     PISSN: 10557903     EISSN: 10959513     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2009.05.025     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bapteste E., Susko E., Leigh J., Ruiz-Trillo I., Bucknam J., and Doolittle W.F. Alternative methods for concatenation of core genes indicate a lack of resolution in deep nodes of the prokaryotic phylogeny. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25 (2008) 83-91
2. Bapteste E., Brinkmann H., Lee A.J., Moore D.V., Sensen C.W., Gordon P., Durufle L., Gaasterland T., Lopez P.M., Muller, and Philippe H. The analysis of 100 genes supports the grouping of three highly divergent amoebae: Dictyostelium, Entamoeba, and Mastigamoeba. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99 (2002) 1414-1419
3. Buneman P. The recovery of trees from measurements of dissimilarity. In: Hodson F.R., Kendall D.G., and Tautu P. (Eds). Mathematica in the Archeological and Historical Sciences (1971), Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh 387-395
4. Ciccarelli F.D., Doerks T., Von Mering C., Creevey C.J., Snel B., and Bork P. Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of life. Science 311 5765 (2006) 1283-1287
5. Fitch W.M., and Markowitz E. An improved method for determining codon variability in a gene and its application to the rate of fixation of mutations in evolution. Biochem. Genet. 4 (1970) 579-593
6. Fitch W.M. The nonidentity of invariable positions in the cytochromes c of different species. Biochem. Genet. 5 (1971) 231-241
7. Gadagkar S., and Kumar S. Maximum likelihood outperforms maximum parsimony even when evolutionary rates are heterotachous. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22 (2005) 2139-2141
8. Gaucher E.A., and Miyamoto M.M. A call for likelihood phylogenetics even when the process of sequence evolution is heterogeneous. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 37 (2005) 928-931
9. Jeffroy O., Brinkmann H., Delsuc F., and Philippe H. Phylogenomics: the beginning of incongruence?. Trends Genet. 22 (2006) 225-231
10. Jukes T.H., and Cantor C.R. Evolution of protein molecules. In: Munro H.N. (Ed). Mammalian Protein Metabolism (1969), Academic Press, New York 21-132
11. Krajewski C., Blacket M., Buckley L., and Westerman M. A multigene assessment of phylogenetic relationships in the dasyurid marsupial subfamily Sminthopsinae. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 8 (1997) 236-248
12. Kolaczkowski B., and Thornton J.W. Performance of maximum parsimony and likelihood phylogenetics when evolution is heterogeneous. Nature 431 (2004) 980-984
13. Lopez P., Casane D., and Philippe H. Heterotachy, an important process of protein evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 19 (2002) 1-7
14. Murphy W.J., Eizirik E., Johnson W.E., Zhang Y.P., Ryder O.A., and O'Brien S.J. Molecular phylogenetics and the origins of placental mammals. Nature 409 (2001) 614-618
15. Nei M., Takezaki N., and Sitnikova T. Assessing molecular phylogenies. Science 267 (1995) 253-255
16. Philippe H., and Lopez P. On the conservation of protein sequences in evolution. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26 (2001) 414-416
17. Philippe H., Zhou Y., Brinkmann H., Rodrigue N., and Delsuc F. Heterotachy and long-branch attraction in phylogenetics. BMC Evol. Biol. 5 (2005) 50
18. Rokas A., Williams B.L., King N., and Carroll S.B. Genome-scale approaches to resolving incongruence in molecular phylogenies. Nature 425 (2003) 798-804
19. Rokas A., and Chatzimanolis S. From gene-scale to genome-scale phylogenetics: the data flood in but the challenges remain. In: Murphy W.J. (Ed). Phylogenomics (2008), Humana Press Inc., Totowa, NJ 1-12
20. Saitou N., and Nei M. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4 (1987) 406-425
21. Sanderson M.J., Driskell A.C., Ree R.H., Eulenstein O., and Langley S. Obtaining maximal concatenated phylogenetic data sets from large sequence databases. Mol. Biol. Evol. 20 (2003) 1036-1042
22. Seo T.-K., Kishino H., and Thorne J.L. Incorporating gene-specific variation when inferring and evaluating optimal evolutionary tree topologies from multilocus sequence data. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102 12 (2005) 4436-4441
23. Springer M.S., Murphy W.J., Eizirik E., and O'Brien S.J. Placental mammal diversification and the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100 3 (2003) 1056-1061
24. Spencer M., Susko E., and Roger A.J. Likelihood, parsimony and heterogeneous evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22 (2005) 1161-1164
25. Soltis P.S., Soltis D.E., and Chase M.W. Angiosperm phylogeny inferred from multiple genes as a tool for comparative biology. Nature 402 (1999) 402-404
26. Taylor M.S., Kai C., Kawai J., Carninci P., Hayashizaki Y., and Semple C.A. Heterotachy in mammalian promoter evolution. PLoS Genet. 2 (2006) 0627-0639
27. Queiroz A.D. For consensus (Sometimes). Syst. Biol. 42 (1993) 368-372
28. Uzzell T., and Corbin K. Fitting discrete probability distributions to evolutionary events. Science 172 (1971) 1089-1096
29. Yang Z. Maximum likelihood estimation of phylogeny from DNA sequences when substitution rates differ over sites. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10 (1993) 1396-1401