The accuracy of species tree estimation under simulation: A comparison of methods

Systematic Biology

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 126-137

  Leaché, Adam D ^a   Rannala, Bruce ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Coalescence; gene trees; incomplete lineage sorting; multilocus data; phylogeny reconstruction; simulation; tree shape

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETICS; METHODOLOGY; PHYLOGENY; PLANT; SPECIES DIFFERENTIATION;

BAYES THEOREM; CLASSIFICATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETIC SPECIATION; PHYLOGENY; PLANTS;

EID: 79951561454     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: 1076836X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syq073     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Ané C., Larget B., Baum D.A., Smith S.D., Rokas A. 2007. Bayesian estimation of concordance among gene trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24:412-426. (Pubitemid 46204374)
2. Baum D.A. 2007. Concordance trees, concordance factors, and the exploration of reticulate genealogy. Taxon. 56:417-426. (Pubitemid 47025837)
3. Belfore N.M., Liu L., Moritz C. 2008. Multilocus phylogenetics of a rapid radiation in the genus Thomomys (Rodentia: Geomyidae). Syst. Biol. 57:294-310.
4. Burgess R., Yang Z. 2008. Estimation of hominoid ancestral population sizes under Bayesian coalescent models incorporating mutation rate variation and sequencing error. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25: 1979-1994.
5. Degnan J.H., Rosenberg N.A. 2006. Discordance of species trees with their most likely gene trees. PLoS Genetics. 2:762-768. (Pubitemid 43794324)
6. Degnan J.H., Rosenberg N.A. 2009. Gene tree discordance, phyloge-netic inference, and the multispecies coalescent. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24:332-340.
7. Eckert, A.J., Carstens B.C. 2008. Does gene fow destroy phylogenetic signal? The performance of three methods for estimating species phylogenies in the presence of gene fow. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 49:832-842.
8. Edwards S.V. 2009. Is a new and general theory of molecular system-atics emerging? Evolution. 63(1):1-19.
9. Edwards S.V., Liu L., Pearl D.K. 2007. High-resolution species trees without concatenation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 104:5936-5941. (Pubitemid 47175637)
10. Felsenstein J. 1978. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27:401-410.
11. Heled J., Drummond A.J. 2010. Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:570-580.
12. Hey J., Nielsen R. 2004. Multilocus methods for estimating population sizes, migration rates and divergence time, with applications to the divergence of Drosophila pseudoobscura and D. persimilis. Genetics. 167:747-760. (Pubitemid 38931862)
13. Hillis D.M. 1995. Approaches for assessing phylogenetic accuracy. Syst. Biol. 44:2-16.
14. Hillis D.M., Huelsenbeck J.P., Swofford D.L. 1994. Hobgoblin of phy-logenetics. Nature. 369:363-364.
15. Huelsenbeck J.P., Rannala B. 2004. Frequentist properties of Bayesian posterior probabilities of phylogenetic trees under simple and complex substitution models. Syst. Biol. 53: 904-913. (Pubitemid 40141314)
16. Huang H., Knowles L.L. 2009. What is the danger of the anomaly zone for empirical phylogenetics? Syst. Biol. 58:527-536.
17. Jennings W.B., Edwards S.V. 2005. Speciational history of Australian grass fnches (Poephila) inferred from thirty gene trees. Evolution. 59:2033-2047. (Pubitemid 41384386)
18. Jukes T.H., Cantor C.R. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. In: Munro H.N., editor. Mammalian protein metabolism. New York: Academic Press. p. 21-123.
19. Kingman J.F.C. 1982. On the genealogy of large populations. Stoch. Proc. Appl. 13:235-248.
20. Kingman J.F.C. 2000. Origins of the coalescent: 1974-1982. Genetics. 156:1461-1463.
21. Kubatko L.S., Carstens B.C., Knowles L.L. 2009. STEM: species tree estimation using maximum likelihood for gene trees under coalescence. Bioinformatics. 25:971-973.
22. Kubatko L.S., Degnan J.H. 2007. Inconsistency of phylogenetic estimates from concatenated data under coalescence. Syst. Biol. 56: 17-24.
23. Leaché A.D. 2009. Species tree discordance traces to phylogeographic clade boundaries in North American fence lizards (Sceloporus). Syst. Biol. 58:547-559.
24. Liu L. 2008. BEST: Bayesian estimation of species trees under the coa-lescent model. Bioinformatics. 24:2542-2543.
25. Liu L., Pearl D.K. 2007. Species trees from gene trees: reconstructing Bayesian posterior distributions of a species phylogeny using estimated gene tree distributions. Syst. Biol. 56:504-514.
26. Liu L., Pearl D.K., Brumfeld R.T., Edwards S.V. 2008. Estimating species trees using multiple-allele DNA sequence data. Evolution. 62:2080-2091. (Pubitemid 352033253)
27. Liu L., Yu L., Kubatko L., Pearl D.K., Edwards S.V. 2009. Coalescent methods for estimating phylogenetic trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 53:320-328.
28. Liu L., Yu L., Pearl D.K., Edwards S.V. 2009. Estimating species phy-logenies using coalescence times among sequences. Syst. Biol. 58: 468-477.
29. Maddison W.P. 1997. Gene trees in species trees. Syst. Biol. 46: 523-536.
30. Maddison W.P., Knowles L.L. 2006. Inferring phylogeny despite incomplete lineage sorting. Syst. Biol. 55:21-30.
31. McCormack J.E., Huang H., Knowles L.L. 2009. Maximum likelihood estimates of species trees: how accuracy of phylogenetic inference depends upon the divergence history and sampling design. Syst. Biol. 58:501-508.
32. Nylander J.A.A., Wilgenbusch J.C., Warren D.L., Swofford D.L. 2008. AWTY (are we there yet?): a system for graphical exploration of MCMC convergence in Bayesian phylogenetics. Bioinformatics. 24(4):581-583. (Pubitemid 351256305)
33. O'Meara B.C. 2010. New heuristic methods for joint species delimitation and species tree inference. Syst. Biol. 59:59-73.
34. Pamilo P., Nei M. 1988. Relationships between gene trees and species trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5:568-583.
35. Rannala B., Yang Z. 2003. Bayes estimation of species divergence times and ancestral population sizes using DNA sequences from multiple loci. Genetics. 164:1645-1656. (Pubitemid 37102224)
36. Rannala B., Yang Z. 2008. Phylogenetic inference using whole genomes. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 9:217-231.
37. Rokas A., Williams B.L., King N., Carroll S.B. 2003. Genome-scale approaches to resolving incongruence in molecular phylogenies. Nature. 425:798-804. (Pubitemid 37355944)
38. Ronquist F., Huelsenbeck J.P. 2003. MrBayes 3: Bayesian phy-logenetic inference under mixed models. Bioinformatics. 19: 1572-1574. (Pubitemid 37038874)
39. Rosenberg N.A., Tao R. 2008. Discordance of species trees with their most likely gene trees: the case of fve taxa. Syst. Biol. 57: 131-140.
40. Swofford D L. 2001. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Version 4. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
41. Tajima R. 1983. Evolutionary relationships of DNA sequences in fnite populations. Genetics. 105:437-460.
42. Yang Z. 2007. PAML 4: Phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:1586-1591. (Pubitemid 47236688)
43. Yang Z. 2009. MCMCcoal version 1.2. Available from: http://abacus. gene.ucl.ac.uk/software/MCMCcoal.html.
44. Yang Z., Rannala B. 1997. Bayesian phylogenetic inference using DNA sequences: a Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:717-724. (Pubitemid 27287292)