LisBeth: New cladistics for phylogenetics and biogeography

Comptes Rendus - Palevol

Volumn 11, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 563-566

  Bagils, René Zaragüeta ^a,b   Ung, Visotheary ^a,b   Grand, Anaïs ^a,b   Vignes Lebbe, Régine ^a,b   Cao, Nathanaël ^a,b   Ducasse, Jacques ^a,b  

^a Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique   (France)

^b SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

Cladistics; Evolution; Historical biogeography; Phylogenetics

Indexed keywords

BIOGEOGRAPHY; CLADISTICS; PARSIMONY ANALYSIS; PHYLOGENETICS; TAXONOMY; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 84870574840     PISSN: 16310683     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.crpv.2012.07.002     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Archie J.W. Homoplasy excess ratios: new indices for measuring levels of homoplasy in phylogenetic systematics and a critique of the consistency index. Syst. Zool. 1989, 38:253-269.
2. Cao N., Zaragüeta Bagils R., Vignes-Lebbe R. A hierarchical representation of the hypothesis of homology. Geodiversitas 2007, 29(1):5-15.
3. Cao N., El Azawi M., Zaragüeta Bagils R. Three-item analysis and parsimony, intersection tree and strict consensus: a biogeographical example. Bull. Soc. geol. France 2009, 180(1):13-15.
4. Ebach M.C., Humphries C.J., Newman R.A., Williams D.W., Walsh S.A. Assumption 2: opaque to intuition?. J. Biogeogr. 2005, 32:781-787.
5. Escalante T., Rodríguez G., Cao N., Ebach M.C., Morrone J.J. Cladistic biogeographic analysis suggests an Early Caribbean diversification in Mexico. Naturwissenschaften 2007, 94:561-565.
6. Estabrook G.F., Johnson C.S., McMorris F.R. A mathematical foundation for the analysis of cladistic character compatibility. Math. Biosci. 1976, 29(1-2):181-187.
7. Farris J.S. The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis. Advances in cladistics II 1983, 7-36. Columbia University Press, New York. N.I. Platnick, V.A. Funk (Eds.).
8. Farris J.S. The retention index and the rescaled consistency index. Cladistics 1989, 5:417-419.
9. Hendy M.D., Penny D. Branch and bound algorithms to determine minimal evolutionary trees. Math. Biosci. 1982, 59(2):277-290.
10. Hennig W. Phylogenetic systematics 1966, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, Illinois, 264 p.
11. Huelsenbeck J.P. Performance of phylogenetic methods in simulation. Syst. Biol. 1995, 44:17-48.
12. Kitching I.J., Forey P.L., Humphries C.J., Williams D.W. Cladistics: the theory and practice of parsimony analysis 1998, 11. The Oxford University Press, Oxford, 228 p. 2nd ed.
13. Laurin M., Germain D. Developmental characters in phylogenetic inference and their absolute timing information. Syst. Biol. 2011, 60:630-644.
14. Nelson G., Ladiges P.Y. Three-area statements: standard assumptions for biogeographic analysis. Syst. Zool. 1991, 40(4):470-485.
15. Nelson G., Ladiges P.Y. Information content and fractional weight of three-item statements. Syst. Biol. 1992, 41(4):490-494.
16. Nelson G., Ladiges P.Y. Paralogy in cladistic biogeography and analysis of paralogy-free subtrees. American Museum Novitates 1996, 3167:1-58.
17. Nelson G., Platnick N.I. Systematics and Biogeography. Cladistics and Vicariance 1981, Columbia University Press, New York, 567 p.
18. Nelson G., Platnick N.I. Three-taxon statements: amore precise use of parsimony?. Cladistics 1991, 7:351-366.
19. Parenti L.R., Ebach M.C. Comparative biogeography: discovering and classifying biogeographical patterns of a dynamic Earth 2009, University of California Press, Berkeley, 295 p.
20. 2: introducing e-Taxonomy. Bioinformatics 2010, 26(5):703-704.
21. Wilkinson M. Three-taxon statements: when is a parsimony analysis also a clique analysis?. Cladistics 1994, 10:221-223.
22. Wilkinson M. Common cladistic information and its consensus representation: reduced Adams and reduced cladistic consensus trees and profiles. Syst. Biol. 1994, 43(3):343-368.