Statistical binning enables an accurate coalescent-based estimation of the avian tree

Science

Volumn 346, Issue 6215, 2014, Pages

  Mirarab, Siavash ^a   Bayzid, Md Shamsuzzoha ^a   Boussau, Bastien ^b   Warnow, Tandy ^a,c  

^a University of Texas at Austin   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LYON 1   (France)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY ASSESSMENT; AVIFAUNA; BOOTSTRAPPING; COALESCENCE; ESTIMATION METHOD; GENE EXPRESSION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TREE;

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; BIRD; BOOTSTRAPPING; EXON; GENE SEQUENCE; INTRON; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENETIC TREE; PHYLOGENOMICS; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL BINNING; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; THEORETICAL STUDY; TREE OF LIFE; ANIMAL; BIOLOGY; CLASSIFICATION; GENETICS; GENOME; MAMMAL; STATISTICAL MODEL; VERTEBRATE; YEAST;

AVES;

ANIMALS; BIRDS; COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY; GENOME; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MAMMALS; PHYLOGENY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; VERTEBRATES; YEASTS;

EID: 84917708481     PISSN: 00368075     EISSN: 10959203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1126/science.1250463     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. A. Rokas, B. L. Williams, N. King, S. B. Carroll, Genome-scale approaches to resolving incongruence in molecular phylogenies. Nature 425, 798-804 (2003). doi: 10.1038/nature02053; pmid: 14574403
2. W. P. Maddison, Gene trees in species trees. Syst. Biol. 46, 523-536 (1997). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/46.3.523
3. S. V. Edwards, Is a new and general theory of molecular systematics emerging? Evolution 63, 1-19 (2009). doi: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00549.x; pmid: 19146594
4. L. L. Knowles, Estimating species trees: Methods of phylogenetic analysis when there is incongruence across genes. Syst. Biol. 58, 463-467 (2009). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syp061; pmid: 20525600
5. S. J. Hackett et al., A phylogenomic study of birds reveals their evolutionary history. Science 320, 1763-1768 (2008). doi: 10.1126/science.1157704; pmid: 18583609
6. S. Song, L. Liu, S. V. Edwards, S. Wu, Resolving conflict in eutherian mammal phylogeny using phylogenomics and the multispecies coalescent model. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 109, 14942-14947 (2012). doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211733109; pmid: 22930817
7. R. W. Meredith et al., Impacts of the Cretaceous Terrestrial Revolution and KPg extinction on mammal diversification. Science 334, 521-524 (2011). doi: 10.1126/science.1211028; pmid: 21940861
8. J. H. Degnan, N. A. Rosenberg, Gene tree discordance, phylogenetic inference and the multispecies coalescent. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 332-340 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2009.01.009; pmid: 19307040
9. N. A. Rosenberg, Discordance of species trees with their most likely gene trees: A unifying principle. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 2709-2713 (2013). doi: 10.1093/molbev/mst160; pmid: 24030555
10. S. V. Edwards, L. Liu, D. K. Pearl, High-resolution species trees without concatenation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 104, 5936-5941 (2007). doi: 10.1073/pnas.0607004104; pmid: 17392434
11. L. S. Kubatko, J. H. Degnan, Inconsistency of phylogenetic estimates from concatenated data under coalescence. Syst. Biol. 56, 17-24 (2007). doi: 10.1080/10635150601146041; pmid: 17366134
12. B. R. Larget, S. K. Kotha, C. N. Dewey, C. Ané, BUCKy: Gene tree/species tree reconciliation with Bayesian concordance analysis. Bioinformatics 26, 2910-2911 (2010). doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq539; pmid: 20861028
13. L. Liu, L. Yu, S. V. Edwards, A maximum pseudo-likelihood approach for estimating species trees under the coalescent model. BMC Evol. Biol. 10, 302 (2010). doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-10-302; pmid: 20937096
14. L. Liu, D. K. Pearl, Species trees from gene trees: Reconstructing Bayesian posterior distributions of a species phylogeny using estimated gene tree distributions. Syst. Biol. 56, 504-514 (2007). doi: 10.1080/10635150701429982; pmid: 17562474
15. L. Liu, BEST: Bayesian estimation of species trees under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics 24, 2542-2543 (2008). doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn484; pmid: 18799483
16. L. Liu, L. Yu, D. K. Pearl, S. V. Edwards, Estimating species phylogenies using coalescence times among sequences. Syst. Biol. 58, 468-477 (2009). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syp031; pmid: 20525601
17. E. Mossel, S. Roch, Incomplete lineage sorting: Consistent phylogeny estimation from multiple loci. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comp. Biol. Bioinform. 7, 166-171 (2010). doi: 10.1109/TCBB.2008.66; pmid: 20150678
18. J. Heled, A. J. Drummond, Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27, 570-580 (2010). doi: 10.1093/molbev/msp274; pmid: 19906793
19. Y. Yu, T. Warnow, L. Nakhleh, Algorithms for MDC-based multi-locus phylogeny inference: Beyond rooted binary gene trees on single alleles. J. Comput. Biol. 18, 1543-1559 (2011). doi: 10.1089/cmb.2011.0174; pmid: 22035329
20. B. Rannala, Z. Yang, Bayes estimation of species divergence times and ancestral population sizes using DNA sequences from multiple loci. Genetics 164, 1645-1656 (2003). pmid: 12930768
21. D. Bryant, R. Bouckae J. Felsenstein, N. A. Rosenberg, A. RoyChoudhury, Infe ng species trees directly from biallelic genetic markers: Bypa ing gene trees in a full coalescent analysis. Mol. Biol. Evo 29, 1917-1932 (2012). doi: 10.1093/molbev/mss086; pmid 22422763
22. N. De Maio, C. Schlött er, C. Kosiol, Linking great apes genome evolution acr s time scales using polymorphism-aware phylogenetic m els. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30, 2249-2262 (2013). doi: 10.1093/m lbev/mst131; pmid: 23906727
23. J. Chifman, L. Kubatk Quartet inference from SNP data under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics (2014). doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu530
24. B. T. Smith, M. G. Harvey, B. C. Faircloth, T. C. Glenn, R. T. Brumfield, Target capture and massively parallel sequencing of ultraconserved elements for comparative studies at shallow evolutionary time scales. Syst. Biol. 63, 83-95 (2014). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syt061; pmid: 24021724
25. R. T. Kimball, N. Wang, V. Heimer-McGinn, C. Ferguson, E. L. Braun, Identifying localized biases in large datasets: A case study using the avian tree of life. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 69, 1021-1032 (2013). doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2013.05.029; pmid: 23791948
26. J. E. McCormack et al., A phylogeny of birds based on over 1, 500 loci collected by target enrichment and high-throughput sequencing. PLOS ONE 8, e54848 (2013). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054848; pmid: 23382987
27. M. DeGiorgio, J. H. Degnan, Fast and consistent estimation of species trees using supermatrix rooted triples. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27, 552-569 (2010). doi: 10.1093/molbev/msp250; pmid: 19833741
28. M. S. Bayzid, T. Warnow, Naive binning improves phylogenomic analyses. Bioinformatics 29, 2277-2284 (2013). doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt394; pmid: 23842808
29. S. Patel, R. Kimball, E. Braun, Error in phylogenetic estimation for bushes in the Tree of Life. J. Phylogenet. Evol. Biol. 1, 2 (2013). doi: 10.4172/2329-9002.1000110
30. L. Nakhleh, U. Roshan, K. St. John, J. Sun, T. Warnow, Designing fast converging phylogenetic methods. Bioinformatics 17 (suppl. 1), S190-S198 (2001). doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/17.suppl-1.S190; pmid: 11473009
31. E. D. Jarvis et al., Whole-genome analyses resolve early branches in the tree of life of modern birds. Science 346, 1320-1331 (2014).
32. L. Salichos, A. Rokas, Inferring ancient divergences requires genes with strong phylogenetic signals. Nature 497, 327-331 (2013). doi: 10.1038/nature12130; pmid: 23657258
33. A. Stamatakis, RAxML-VI-HPC: Maximum likelihood-based phylogenetic analyses with thousands of taxa and mixed models. Bioinformatics 22, 2688-2690 (2006). doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl446; pmid: 16928733
34. M. A. Ragan, Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1, 53-58 (1992). doi: 10.1016/1055-7903(92)90035-F; pmid: 1342924
35. T.-K. Seo, Calculating bootstrap probabilities of phylogeny using multilocus sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25, 960-971 (2008). doi: 10.1093/molbev/msn043; pmid: 18281270
36. A. D. Leaché, R. B. Harris, B. Rannala, Z. Yang, The influence of gene flow on species tree estimation: A simulation study. Syst. Biol. 63, 17-30 (2013). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syt049; pmid: 23939193
37. L. Zhao et al., Phylogenomic analyses of nuclear genes reveal the evolutionary relationships within the BEP clade and the evidence of positive selection in Poaceae. PLOS ONE 8, e64642 (2013). doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0064642; pmid: 23734211
38. B. Zhong, L. Liu, Z. Yan, D. Penny, Origin of land plants using the multispecies coalescent model. Trends Plant Sci. 18, 492-495 (2013). doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2013.04.009;pmid: 23707196
39. J. H. Degnan, M. DeGiorgio, D. Bryant, N. A. Rosenberg, Properties of consensus methods for inferring species trees from gene trees. Syst. Biol. 58, 35-54 (2009). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syp008; pmid: 20525567
40. A. Suh et al., Mesozoic retroposons reveal parrots as the closest living relatives of passerine birds. Nat. Commun. 2, 443 (2011). doi: 10.1038/ncomms1448; pmid: 21863010
41. N. Wang, E. L. Braun, R. T. Kimball, Testing hypotheses about the sister group of the passeriformes using an independent 30-locus data set. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29, 737-750 (2012). doi: 10.1093/molbev/msr230; pmid: 21940640
42. C. Nielsen, Animal Evolution: Interrelationships of the Living Phyla (Oxford Univer Press, Oxford, 2012).
43. F. Delsuc, H. Brinkmann, D. Chourrout, H. Philippe, Tunicates and not cephalochordates are the closest living relatives of vertebrates. Nature 439, 965-968 (2006). doi: 10.1038/nature04336; pmid: 16495997
44. S. J. Bourlat et al., Deuterostome phylogeny reveals monophyletic chordates and the new phylum Xenoturbellida. Nature 444, 85-88 (2006). doi: 10.1038/nature05241; pmid: 17051155
45. T. R. Singh et al., Tunicate mitogenomics and phylogenetics: Peculiarities of the Herdmania momus mitochondrial genome and support for the new chordate phylogeny. BMC Genomics 10, 534 (2009). doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-10-534; pmid: 19922605
46. J. E. Janecka et al., Molecular and genomic data identify the closest living relative of primates. Science 318, 792-794 (2007). doi: 10.1126/science.1147555; pmid: 17975064
47. B. Boussau et al., Genome-scale coestimation of species and gene trees. Genome Res. 23, 323-330 (2013). doi: 10.1101/gr.141978.112; pmid: 23132911
48. H. C. Lanier, L. L. Knowles, Is recombination a problem for species-tree analyses? Syst. Biol. 61, 691-701 (2012). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syr128; pmid: 22215721
49. K. Liu, S. Raghavan, S. Nelesen, C. R. Linder, T. Warnow, Rapid and accurate large-scale coestimation of sequence alignments and phylogenetic trees. Science 324, 1561-1564 (2009). doi: 10.1126/science.1171243; pmid: 19541996
50. J. Felsenstein, Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27, 401 (1978). doi: 10.2307/2412923
51. W. G. Weisburg, S. J. Giovannoni, C. R. Woese, The Deinococcus-Thermus phylum and the effect of rRNA composition on phylogenetic tree construction. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 11, 128-134 (1989). doi: 10.1016/S0723-2020(89)80051-7; pmid: 11542160
52. M. DeGiorgio, J. H. Degnan, Robustness to divergence time underestimation when inferring species trees from estimated gene trees. Syst. Biol. 63, 66-82 (2014). doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syt059; pmid: 23988674
53. J. W. Leigh, E. Susko, M. Baumgartner, A. J. Roger, Testing congruence in phylogenomic analysis. Syst. Biol. 57, 104-115 (2008).doi: 10.1080/10635150801910436; pmid: 18288620
54. T. Warnow, Tree compatibility and inferring evolutionary history. J. Algorithms 16, 388-407 (1994). doi: 10.1006/jagm.1994.1018
55. D. Brélaz, New methods to color the vertices of a graph. Commun. ACM 22, 251-256 (1979). doi: 10.1145/359094.359101
56. T. P. Wilcox, D. J. Zwickl, T. A. Heath, D. M. Hillis, Phylogenetic relationships of the dwarf boas and a comparison of Bayesian and bootstrap measures of phylogenetic support. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 25, 361-371 (2002). doi: 10.1016/S1055-7903(02)00244-0; pmid: 12414316