The influence of taxon sampling on Bayesian divergence time inference under scenarios of rate heterogeneity among lineages

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 364, Issue , 2015, Pages 31-39

  Soares, André E R ^a,b   Schrago, Carlos G ^a  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian molecular dating; Molecular clock; Molecular dating; Relaxed molecular clock; Simulation

Indexed keywords

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; DIVERGENCE; GENOME; MITOCHONDRION; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; PHYLOGENETICS;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC HETEROGENEITY; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOME; MITOCHONDRIAL GENE; MOLECULAR CLOCK; MOLECULAR GENETICS; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENY; SIMULATION; TAXON; ANIMAL; CALIBRATION; CLASSIFICATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENETICS; HUMAN; MAMMAL; MITOCHONDRIAL GENOME; TIME;

ANIMALS; BAYES THEOREM; CALIBRATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENOME, MITOCHONDRIAL; HUMANS; MAMMALS; PHYLOGENY; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84907709247     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: 10958541     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2014.09.004     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Benton M.J., Donoghue P.C. Paleontological evidence to date the tree of life. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2007, 24:26-53. 10.1093/molbev/msl150.
2. Delsuc F., Brinkmann H., Philippe H. Phylogenomics and the reconstruction of the tree of life. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2005, 6:361-375. 10.1038/nrg1603.
3. Drummond A.J., Ho S.Y.W., Phillips M.J., Rambaut A. Relaxed phylogenetics and dating with confidence. PLoS Biol. 2006, 4(5):e88. 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040088.
4. Fay J.C., Wyckoff G.J., Wu C.I. Positive and negative selection on the human genome. Genetics 2001, 158(3):1227-1234.
5. Grievink L.S., Penny D., Hendy M.D., Holland B.R. Phylogenetic tree reconstruction accuracy and model fit when proportions of variable sites change across the tree. Syst. Biol. 2010, 59:288-297. 10.1093/sysbio/syq003.
6. Guindon S., Delsuc F., Dufayard J.F., Gascuel O. Estimating maximum likelihood phylogenies with PhyML. Methods Mol. Biol. 2009, 537:113-137. 10.1007/978-1-59745-251-9_6.
7. Hedtke S.M., Townsend T.M., Hillis D.M. Resolution of phylogenetic conflict in large data sets by increased taxon sampling. Syst. Biol. 2006, 55:522-529. 10.1080/10635150600697358.
8. Heidelberger P., Welch P.D. Simulation run length control in the presence of an initial transient. Oper. Res. 1983, 31:1109-1144.
9. Heled J., Drummond A.J. Calibrated tree priors for relaxed phylogenetics anddivergence time estimation. Syst. Biol. 2012, 61:138-149. 10.1093/sysbio/syr087.
10. Hug L.A., Roger A.J. The impact of fossils and taxon sampling on ancient molecular dating analyses. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2007, 24:1889-1897. 10.1093/molbev/msm115.
11. Lartillot N., Brinkmann H., Philippe H. Suppression of long-branch attraction artefacts in the animal phylogeny using a site-heterogeneous model. BMC Evol. Biol. 2007, 7. 10.1186/1471-2148-7-S1-S4.
12. Linder H.P., Hardy C.R., Rutschmann F. Taxon sampling effects in molecular clock dating: an example from the african restionaceae. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2005, 35:569-582. 10.1016/j.ympev.2004.12.006.
13. Loss-Oliveira L., Aguiar B.O., Schrago C.G. Testing synchrony in historical biogeography: the case of new world primates and hystricognathi rodents. Evol. Bioinf. 2012, 8:127-137. 10.4137/EBO.S9008.
14. Lyons-Weiler J., Hoelzer G.A. Escaping from the Felsenstein zone by detecting long branches in phylogenetic data. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1997, 8(3):375-384. 10.1006/mpev.1997.0450.
15. Pagel M., Meade A. Modelling heterotachy in phylogenetic inference by reversible-jump markov chain monte carlo. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B 2008, 363:3955-3964. 10.1098/rstb.2008.0178.
16. Philippe H., Brinkmann H., Lavrov D.V., Littlewood D.T.J., Manuel M., Wörheide G., Baurain D. Resolving difficult phylogenetic questions: why more sequences are not enough. PLoS Biol. 2011, 9(3):e1000602. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000602.
17. Plummer M., Best N., Cowles K., Vines K. CODA: convergence diagnosis and output analysis for MCMC. R News 2006, 6:7-11. (ISSN 1609-3631).
18. Pollock D.D., Zwickl D.J., McGuire J.A., Hillis D.M. Increased taxon sampling is advantageous for phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 2002, 51:664-671. 10.1080/10635150290102357.
19. Posada D., Buckley T. Model selection and model averaging in phylogenetics: advantages of Akaike information criterion and Bayesian approaches over likelihood ratio tests. Syst. Biol. 2004, 53(5):793-808. 10.1080/10635150490522304.
20. Poux C., Madsen O., Glos J., de Jong W.W., Vences M. Molecular phylogeny and divergence times of malagasy tenrecs: influence of data partitioning and taxon sampling on dating analyses. BMC Evol. Biol. 2008, 8. 10.1186/1471-2148-8-102.
21. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2011, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, (URL).
22. Rannala B., Yang Z.H. Inferring speciation times under an episodic molecular clock. Syst. Biol. 2007, 56:453-466. 10.1080/10635150701420643.
23. Rosenberg M.S., Kumar S. Heterogeneity of nucleotide frequencies among evolutionary lineages and phylogenetic inference. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2003, 20:610-621. 10.1093/molbev/msg067.
24. Roure B., Philippe H. Site-specific time heterogeneity of the substitution process and its impact on phylogenetic inference. BMC Evol. Biol. 2011, 11:17. 10.1186/1471-2148-11-17.
25. Shapiro B., Drummond A.J., Rambaut A., et al. Rise and fall of the Beringian steppe bison. Science 2004, 306(5701):1561-1565. 10.1126/science.1101074.
26. Soares A.E.R., Schrago C.G. The influence of taxon sampling and tree shape on molecular dating: an empirical example from mammalian mitochondrial genomes. Bioinf. Biol. Insights 2012, 6:129-143. 10.4137/BBI.S9677.
27. Thompson J.D., Higgins D.G., Gibson T.J. CLUSTAL-W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res. 1994, 22:4673-4680. 10.1093/nar/22.22.4673.
28. Thorne J.L., Kishino H. Divergence time estimation and rate evolution with multilocus data sets. Syst. Biol. 2002, 51(5):689-702. 10.1080/10635150290102456, 10.1080/10635150290102456.
29. Thorne J.L., Kishino H., Painter I.S. Estimating the rate of evolution of the rate of molecular evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 1998, 15(12):1647-1657.
30. Warnock R.C.M., Yang Z.H., Donoghue P.C.J. Exploring uncertainty in the calibration of the molecular clock. Biol. Lett. 2012, 8:156-159. 10.1098/rsbl.2011.0710.
31. Wong W.S.W. Accuracy and power of statistical methods for detecting adaptive evolution in protein coding sequences and for identifying positively selected sites. Genetics 2004, 168(2):1041-1051. 10.1534/genetics.104.031153.
32. Xiang Q.Y., Thomas D.T., Xiang Q.P. Resolving and dating the phylogeny of cornales-effects of taxon sampling, data partitions, and fossil calibrations. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2011, 59:123-138. 10.1016/j.ympev.2011.01.016.
33. Yang Z., Bielawski J. Statistical methods for detecting molecular adaptation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2000, 15(12):496-503. 10.1016/s0169-5347(00)01994-7.
34. Yang Z., Rannala B. Bayesian estimation of species divergence times under a molecular clock using multiple fossil calibrations with soft bounds. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2006, 23:212-226. (2006).
35. Yang Z.H. Paml 4: phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2007, 24:1586-1591. 10.1093/molbev/msm088.
36. Zhou Y., Rodrigue N., Lartillot N., Philippe H. Evaluation of the models handling heterotachy in phylogenetic inference. BMC Evol. Biol. 2007, 7:206. 10.1186/1471-2148-7-206.
37. Zwickl D.J., Hillis D.M. Increased taxon sampling greatly reduces phylogenetic error. Syst. Biol. 2002, 51:588-598. 10.1080/10635150290102339.