Extended implied weighting

Cladistics

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 260-272

  Goloboff, Pablo A ^a  

^a Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto M Lillo   (Argentina)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLADISTICS; CONVERGENT EVOLUTION; DATA SET; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; MORPHOLOGY; PALEONTOLOGY; WEIGHT;

EID: 84900541377     PISSN: 07483007     EISSN: 10960031     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cla.12047     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Anisimova, M., Gil, M., Dufayrad, J.-F., Dessimoz, C., Gascuel, O., 2011. Survey of branch support methods demonstrates accuracy, power, and robustness of fast likelihood-based approximation schemes. Syst. Biol. 60, 685-699.
2. Farris, J., 1969. A successive approximations approach to character weighting. Syst. Zool. 18, 374-385.
3. Farris, J., 2002. RASA attributes highly significant structure to randomized data. Cladistics 18, 334-353.
4. Farris, J., Albert, V., Källersjö, M., Lipscomb, D., Kluge, A., 1996. Parsimony jackknifing outperforms neighbor-joining. Cladistics 12, 99-124.
5. Goloboff, P., 1993. Estimating character weights during tree search. Cladistics 9, 83-91.
6. Goloboff, P., 1996. Methods for faster parsimony analysis. Cladistics 12, 199-220.
7. Goloboff, P., 1997. Self-weighted optimization: tree searches and character state reconstructions under implied transformation costs. Cladistics 13, 225-245.
8. Goloboff, P., 1999. Analyzing large data sets in reasonable times: solutions for composite optima. Cladistics 15, 415-428.
9. Goloboff, P., 2005. Minority rule supertrees? MRP, compatibility, and minimum flip may display the least frequent groups Cladistics 21, 282-294.
10. Goloboff, P., Catalano, S., 2012. GB-to-TNT: facilitating creation of matrices from GenBank and diagnosis of results in TNT. Cladistics 28, 503-513.
11. Goloboff, P., Pol, D., 2002. Semi-strict supertrees. Cladistics 18, 514-525.
12. Goloboff, P., Farris, J., Källersjö, M., Oxelman, B., Ramírez, M., Szumik, C., 2003. Improvements to resampling measures of group support. Cladistics 19, 324-332.
13. Goloboff, P., Carpenter, J., Arias, S., Miranda, D., 2008a. Weighting against homoplasy improves phylogenetic analysis of morphological data sets. Cladistics 24, 758-773.
14. Goloboff, P., Farris, J., Nixon, K., 2008b. TNT, a free program for phylogenetic analysis. Cladistics 24, 774-786.
15. Goloboff, P., Catalano, S., Mirande, M., Szumik, C., Arias, S., Källersjö, M., Farris, J., 2009. Phylogenetic analysis of 73, 060 taxa corroborates major eukaryotic groups. Cladistics 25, 211-230.
16. Källersjö, M., Albert, V.A., Farris, J., 1999. Homoplasy increases phylogenetic structure. Cladistics 15, 91-93.
17. Kluge, A. 2005. What is the rationale for "Ockham's Razor" (a.k.a. parsimony) in phylogenetic inference? In: Albert, V. (Ed.), Parsimony, Phylogeny, and Genomics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 15-42.
18. Mirande, M., 2009. Weighted parsimony phylogeny of the family Characidae (Teleostei: Characiformes). Cladistics 25, 574-613.
19. Nguyen, N., Mirarab, S., Warnow, T., 2012. MRL and SuperFine+MRL: new supertree methods. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 7, 1-13.
20. Stamatakis, A., 2006. RAxML-VI HPC: maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics 22, 2688-2690.
21. Swofford, D., 2002. PAUP*: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony (* and other methods), ver. 4. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, MA.
22. Wheeler, W., Aagesen, L., Arango, C., Faivovich, J., Grant, T., D'Haese, C., Janies, D., Smith, W., Varón, A., Giribet, G. 2006. Dynamic Homology and Phylogenetic Systematics: A Unified Approach Using POY. The American Museum of Natural History, New York, NY.