Is recombination a problem for species-tree analyses?

Systematic Biology

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 691-701

  Lanier, Hayley C ^a   Knowles, L Lacey ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CLASSIFICATION; GENETIC RECOMBINATION; METHODOLOGY; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; REVIEW;

ALGORITHMS; CLASSIFICATION; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; RECOMBINATION, GENETIC;

EID: 84860552871     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: 1076836X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syr128     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. An C. 2010. Reconstructing concordance trees and testing the coalescent models from genome-wide data sets. In: Knowles L.L., Kubatko L.S. editors. Estimating species trees: practical and theoretical aspects. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley-Blackwell. p. 35-52.
2. Becquet C., Przeworski M. 2007. A new approach to estimate parameters of speciation models with application to apes. Genome Res. 17:1505.
3. Benavides E., Baum R., Snell H.M., Snell H.L., Sites J.W. 2009. Island biogeography of Galapagos lava lizards (Tropiduridae: Microlophus): species diversity and colonization of the archipelago. Evolution. 63:1606-1626.
4. Brown J., Hedtke S., Lemmon A., Lemmon E. 2010. When trees grow too long: investigating the causes of highly inaccurate Bayesian branch-length estimates. Syst. Biol. 59:145-161.
5. Burnham K.P., Anderson D.R. 2002. Model selection and inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. 2nd ed. New York: Springer.
6. Carstens B.C., Knowles L.L. 2007. Estimating species phylogeny from gene-tree probabilities despite incomplete lineage sorting: an example from Melanoplus grasshoppers. Syst. Biol. 56:400-411. (Pubitemid 46826903)
7. Castillo-Ramez S., Liu L., Pearl D.K., Edwards S.V. 2010. Bayesian estimation of species trees: a practical guide to optimal sampling and analyses. In: Knowles L.L., Kubatko L.S. editors. Estimating species trees: practical and theoretical aspects. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley-Blackwell. p. 15-34.
8. Cranston K.A. 2010. Summarizing gene tree incongruence at multiple phylogenetic depths. In: Knowles L.L., Kubatko L.S., editors. Estimating species trees: practical and theoretical aspects. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley-Blackwell. p. 129-143.
9. Cutler D.R., Edwards T.C., Beard K.H., Cutler A., Hess K.T. 2007. Random forests for classification in ecology. Ecology. 88:2783-2792. (Pubitemid 351345081)
10. Douglas N.A., Wall W.A., Xiang Q.Y., Hoffmann W.A., Wentworth T.R., Gray J.B., Hohmann M.G. 2011. Recent vicariance and the origin of the rare, edaphically specialized Sandhills lily, Lilium pyrophilum (Liliaceae): evidence from phylogenetic and coalescent analyses. Mol. Ecol. 20:2901-2915.
11. Eckert A.J., Carstens B.C. 2008. Does gene flow destroy phylogenetic signal The performance of three methods for estimating species phylogenies in the presence of gene flow. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 49:142-152.
12. Edwards S.V. 2009. Is a new and general theory of molecular systematics emerging Evolution. 63:1-19.
13. 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)
14. Felsenstein J. 2004. Inferring phylogenies. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
15. Felsenstein J. 2005. PHYLIP (phylogeny inference package). Distributed by the author. Seattle (WA): Department of Genome Sciences, University ofWashington.
16. Harmon L.J., Weir J.T., Brock C.D., Glor R.E., Challenger W. 2008. GEIGER: investigating evolutionary radiations. Bioinformatics. 24:129-131.
17. Hein J., Schierup M.H.,Wiuf C. 2005. Gene genealogies, variation, and evolution: a primer in coalescent theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
18. Heled J., Drummond A.J. 2010. Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:570-580.
19. Huang H., He Q., Kubatko L., Knowles L.L. 2010. Sources of error for species-tree estimation: impact of mutational and coalescent effects on accuracy and implications for choosing among different methods. Syst. Biol. 59:573-583.
20. Hudson R.R. 1983. Properties of a neutral allele model with intragenic recombination. Theor. Popul. Biol. 23:183-201.
21. Hudson R.R. 2002. Generating samples under a Wright-Fisher neutral model of genetic variation. Bioinformatics. 18:247-264.
22. Janko K., Marshall C., Musilova Z., Van Houdt J., Couloux A., Cruaud C., Lecointre G. 2011. Multilocus analyses of an Antarctic fish species flock (Teleostei, Notothenioidei, Trematominae): phylogenetic approach and test of the early-radiation event. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 60:305-316.
23. Knowles L. 2000. Tests of Pleistocene speciation in montane grasshoppers (genus Melanoplus) from the sky islands of western North America. Evolution. 54:1337-1348.
24. Knowles L., Carstens B. 2007. Delimiting species without monophyletic gene trees. Syst. Biol. 56:887-895. (Pubitemid 350129639)
25. Knowles L.L., Kubatko L.S. 2010. Estimating species trees: practical and theoretical aspects. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley and Sons. p. 215.
26. Kubatko L., Carstens B., Knowles L. 2009. STEM: species tree estimation using maximum likelihood for gene trees under coalescence. Bioinformatics. 25:971-973.
27. Kubatko L., Degnan J. 2007. Inconsistency of phylogenetic estimates from concatenated data under coalescence. Syst. Biol. 56:17.
28. Kubatko L.S. 2009. Identifying hybridization events in the presence of coalescence via model selection. Syst. Biol. 58:478-488.
29. Kuhner M. 2006. LAMARC 2.0: maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation of population parameters. Bioinformatics. 22:768-770.
30. Kuhner M.K., Felsenstein J. 1994. A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:459-468.
31. Linnen C.R. 2010. Species tree estimation for complex divergence histories. In: Knowles L.L., Kubatko L.S., editors. Estimating species trees: practical and theoretical aspects. Hoboken (NJ): Wiley-Blackwell. p. 145-173.
32. Liu L. 2008. BEST: Bayesian estimation of species trees under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics. 24:2542-2543.
33. Liu L., Pearl D.K., Brumfield R.T., Edwards S.V. 2008. Estimating species trees using multiple-allele DNA sequence data. Evolution. 62:2080-2091. (Pubitemid 352033253)
34. Liu L., Yu L., Pearl D.K., Edwards S.V. 2009. Estimating species phylogenies using coalescence times among sequences. Syst. Biol. 58: 468-477.
35. Maddison W.P., Knowles L.L. 2006. Inferring phylogeny despite incomplete lineage sorting. Syst. Biol. 55:21-30.
36. Maddison W.P., Maddison D.R. 2009. MESQUITE: a modular system for evolutionary analysis., version 2.6. Available from: http://mesquiteproject.org.
37. Martin D.P., Lemey P., Lott M., Moulton V., Posada D., Lefeuvre P. 2010. RDP3: a flexible and fast computer program for analyzing recombination. Bioinformatics. 26:2462-2463.
38. McCormack J., 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.
39. Oneal E., Otte D., Knowles L.L. 2010. Testing for biogeographic mechanisms promoting divergence in Caribbean crickets (genus Amphiacusta). J. Biogeogr. 37:530-540.
40. Posada D., Crandall K.A., Holmes E.C. 2002. Recombination in evolutionary genomics. Annu. Rev. Genet. 36:75-97. (Pubitemid 36109184)
41. Rabosky D., Donnellan S., Talaba A., Lovette I. 2007. Exceptional among-lineage variation in diversification rates during the radiation of Australia's most diverse vertebrate clade. Proc. R. Soc. B. Biol. Sci. 274:2915-2923. (Pubitemid 350178491)
42. Rambaut A., Grassly N.C. 1997. SEQ-GEN: an application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequences along phylogenetic trees. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 13:235-238. (Pubitemid 27249927)
43. Robinson D.F., Foulds L.R. 1981. Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53:131-147. (Pubitemid 11129084)
44. Stumpf M.P.H., McVean G.A.T. 2003. Estimating recombination rates from population-genetic data. Nat. Rev. Genet. 4:959-968. (Pubitemid 37474643)
45. Sturmbauer C., Salzburger W., Duftner N., Schelly R., Koblmuller S. 2010. Evolutionary history of the Lake Tanganyika cichlid tribe Lamprologini (Teleostei: Perciformes) derived from mitochondrial and nuclear DNA data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 57: 266-284.
46. Swofford D.L. 2003. PAUP*: phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
47. Wakeley J. 2009. Coalescent theory: an introduction. Greenwood Village (CO): Roberts and Company Publishers.
48. Wall J.D. 2000. A comparison of estimators of the population recombination rate. Mol. Biol. Evol. 17:156-163. (Pubitemid 30057001)
49. Wiens J.J., Kuczynski C.A., Stephens P.R. 2010. Discordant mitochondrial and nuclear gene phylogenies in emydid turtles: implications for speciation and conservation. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 99:445-461.
50. Yu Y., Than C., Degnan J.H., Nakhleh L. 2011. Coalescent histories on phylogenetic networks and detection of hybridization despite incomplete lineage sorting. Syst. Biol. 60:138-149.
51. Zwickl D.L. 2006. Genetic algorithm approaches for the phylogenetic analysis of large biological sequence datasets under the maximum likelihood criterion. [Ph.D. thesis], Austin (TX): The University of Texas at Austin. Available at http://code.google.com/p/garli/.