How low can you go? The effects of mutation rate on the accuracy of species-tree estimation

Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution

Volumn 70, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 112-119

  Lanier, Hayley C ^a,b   Huang, Huateng ^a   Knowles, L Lacey ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING   (United States)

Author keywords

BEAST; Locus variability; Multispecies coalescent; Phylogenetic accuracy; Sampling effort; STEM

Indexed keywords

(*)BEAST; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; DNA SEQUENCE; GENE LOCUS; LOCUS VARIABILITY; MULTISPECIES COALESCENT; MUTATION RATE; PHYLOGENETIC ACCURACY; PHYLOGENY; SAMPLING EFFORT; STATISTICAL MODEL; STEM; UNCERTAINTY;

(*)BEAST; LOCUS VARIABILITY; MULTISPECIES COALESCENT; PHYLOGENETIC ACCURACY; SAMPLING EFFORT; STEM;

BAYES THEOREM; GENETIC LOCI; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, GENETIC; MUTATION RATE; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 84888140829     PISSN: 10557903     EISSN: 10959513     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2013.09.006     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aguileta G., Marthey S., Chiapello H., Lebrun M.-H., Rodolphe F., Fournier E., Gendrault-Jacquemard A., Giraud T. Assessing the performance of single-copy genes for recovering robust phylogenies. Syst. Biol. 2008, 57:613-627.
2. Alfaro M.E., Zoller S., François L. Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confindence. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2003, 20:255-266.
3. Althoff D.M., Althoff M.A., Gitzendanner M.A., Segraves K.A. The utility of amplified fragment length polymorphisms in phylogenetics: a comparison of homology within and between genomes. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:477-484.
4. Amaral A.R., Jackson J.A., Möller L.M., Beheregaray L.B., Coelho M.M. Species tree of a recent radiation: the subfamily Delphininae (Cetacea, Mammalia). Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2012, 64:243-253.
5. Brumfield R.T., Liu L., Lum D.E., Edwards S.V. Comparison of species tree methods for reconstructing the phylogeny of Bearded Manakins (Aves: Pipridae, Manacus) from multilocus sequence data. Syst. Biol. 2008, 57:719-731.
6. Buckley T.R. Model misspecification and probabilistic tests of topology: evidence from empirical data sets. Syst. Biol. 2002, 51:509-523.
7. Carstens B.C., Knowles L.L. Estimating species phylogeny from gene-tree probabilities despite incomplete lineage sorting: an example from Melanoplus grasshoppers. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:400-411.
8. Cranston K.A., Hurwitz B., Ware D., Stein L., Wing R.A. Species trees from highly incongruent gene trees in rice. Syst. Biol. 2009, 58:489-500.
9. Degnan J.H., Rosenberg N.A. Gene tree discordance, phylogenetic inference and the multispecies coalescent. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2009, 24:332-340.
10. Degnan J., Salter L. Gene tree distributions under the coalescent process. Evolution 2005, 59:24-37.
11. Edwards S.V., Liu L., Pearl D.K. High-resolution species trees without concatenation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., USA 2007, 104:5936-5941.
12. Faircloth B.C., McCormack J.E., Crawford N.G., Harvey M.G., Brumfield R.T., Glenn T.C. Ultraconserved elements anchor thousands of genetic markers spanning multiple evolutionary timescales. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61:717-726.
13. Heled J., Drummond A.J. Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2010, 27:570-580.
14. Holder M., Sukumaran J., Lewis P. A justification for reporting the majority-rule consensus tree in Bayesian phylogenetics. Syst. Biol. 2008, 57:814-821.
15. Huang H., Knowles L.L. What is the danger of the anomaly zone for empirical phylogenetics?. Syst. Biol. 2009, 58:527-536.
16. Huang H., He Q., Kubatko L.S., Knowles L.L. Sources of error inherent in species-tree estimation: impact of mutational and coalescent effects on accuracy and implications for choosing among different methods. Syst. Biol. 2010, 59:573-583.
17. Hudson R.R. Generating samples under a Wright-Fisher neutral model of genetic variation. Bioinformatics 2002, 18:247-264.
18. Huelsenbeck J.P., Ronquist F. MrBayes: Bayesian inference of phylogenetic trees. Bioinformatics 2001, 17:754-755.
19. Kimball R.T., Braun E.L., Barker K., Bowie R.C.K., Braun M.J., Chojnowski J.L., Hackett S.J., Han K.-L., Harshman J., Heimer-Torres V., Holznagel W., Huddleston C.J., Marks B.D.M., Kathleen J., Moore W.S., Reddy S., Sheldon F.H., Smith J.V., Witt C.C., Yuri T. A well-tested set of primers to amplify regions spread across the avian genome. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2009, 50:654-660.
20. Knowles L.L. Sampling strategies for species tree estimation. Estimating Species Trees: Pract. Theoret. Asp. 2010, 10:163-173.
21. Knowles L.L., Carstens B.C. Delimiting species without monophyletic gene trees. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:887-895.
22. Estimating Species Trees: Practical and Theoretical Aspects 2010, Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey. L.L. Knowles, L.S. Kubatko (Eds.).
23. Knowles L.L., Lanier H.C., Kilmov P., He Q. Full modeling versus summarizing phylogenetic uncertainty: method choice and species-tree accuracy. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2012, 65:501-509.
24. Kubatko L.S., Degnan J.H. Inconsistency of phylogenetic estimates from concatenated data under coalescence. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:17-24.
25. Kubatko L.S., Carstens B.C., Knowles L.L. STEM: species tree estimation using maximum likelihood for gene trees under coalescence. Bioinformatics 2009, 25:971-973.
26. Lanier H.C., Knowles L.L. Is recombination a problem for species-tree analyses?. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61:691-701.
27. Leache A.D., Rannala B. The accuracy of species tree estimation under simulation: a comparison of methods. Syst. Biol. 2010, 60:126-137.
28. Lewis P.O., Holder M.T., Holsinger K.E. Polytomies and Bayesian phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 2005, 54:241-253.
29. Liu L., Yu L., Kubatko L.S., Pearl D.K., Edwards S.V. Coalescent methods for estimating phylogenetic trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2009, 53:320-328.
30. López-Giráldez F., Townsend J.P. PhyDesign: an online application for profiling phylogenetic informativeness. BMC Evol. Biol. 2011, 11:152.
31. Maddison W.P., Knowles L.L. Inferring phylogeny despite incomplete lineage sorting. Syst. Biol. 2006, 55:21-30.
32. McCormack J.E., Huang H., Knowles L.L. Maximum likelihood estimates of species trees: how accuracy of phylogenetic inference depends upon the divergence history and sampling design. Syst. Biol. 2009, 58:501-508.
33. McCormack J.E., Maley J.M., Hird S.M., Derryberry E.P., Graves G.R., Brumfield R.T. Next-generation sequencing reveals phylogeographic structure and a species tree for recent bird divergences. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2012, 62:397-406.
34. Melo-Ferreira J., Boursot P., Carneiro M., Esteves P.J., Farelo L., Alves P.C. Recurrent introgression of mitochondrial DNA among hares (Lepus spp.) revealed by species-tree inference and coalescent simulations. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61:367-381.
35. Moeller A.H., Townsend J.P. Phylogenetic informativeness profiling of 12 genes for 28 vertebrate taxa without divergence dates. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2011, 60:271-272.
36. Mossel E., Vigoda E. Phylogenetic MCMC algorithms are misleading on mixtures of trees. Science 2005, 309:2207-2209.
37. Nyári Á.S., Joseph L. Evolution in Australasian mangrove forests: Multilocus phylogenetic analysis of the Gerygone Warblers (Aves: Acanthizidae). PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e31840.
38. Oneal E., Otte D., Knowles L.L. Testing for biogeographic mechanisms promoting divergence in Caribbean crickets (genus Amphiacusta). J. Biogeogr. 2010, 37:530-540.
39. Peters J.L., Roberts T.E., Winker K., McCracken K.G. Heterogeneity in genetic diversity among non-coding loci fails to fit neutral coalescent models of population history. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e31972.
40. Rambaut A., Grassly N.C. SEQ-GEN: an application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequences along phylogenetic trees. Comput. Appl. Biosci. 1997, 13:235-238.
41. Ranwez V., Delsuc F., Ranwez S., Belkhir K., Tilak M.-K., Douzery E.J. OrthoMaM: a database of orthologous genomic markers for placental mammal phylogenetics. BMC Evol. Biol. 2007, 7:241.
42. Robinson D.F., Foulds L.R. Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 1981, 53:131-147.
43. Suzuki Y., Glazko G.V., Nei M. Overcredibility of molecular phylogenies obtained by Bayesian phylogenetics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., USA 2002, 99:16138-16143.
44. Townsend J.P. Profiling phylogenetic informativeness. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:222-231.
45. Townsend J.P., Leuenberger C. Taxon sampling and the optimal rates of evolution for phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 2011, 60:358-365.
46. Townsend J.P., Lopez-Giraldez F. Optimal selection of gene and ingroup taxon sampling for resolving phylogenetic relationships. Syst. Biol. 2010, 59:446-457.
47. Townsend J.P., López-Giráldez F., Friedman R. The phylogenetic informativeness of nucleotide and amino acid sequences for reconstructing the vertebrate tree. J. Mol. Evol. 2008, 67:437-447.
48. Townsend T.M., Mulcahy D.G., Noonan B.P., Sites J.W., Kuczynski C.A., Wiens J.J., Reeder T.W. Phylogeny of iguanian lizards inferred from 29 nuclear loci, and a comparison of concatenated and species-tree approaches for an ancient, rapid radiation. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2011, 61:363-380.