The size of the character state space affects the occurrence and detection of homoplasy: Modelling the probability of incompatibility for unordered phylogenetic characters

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Volumn 366, Issue , 2015, Pages 24-32

  Hoyal Cuthill, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Compatibility; Convergence; Morphology; Parsimony; Phylogenetics

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; MODELING; MORPHOLOGY; PARSIMONY ANALYSIS; PHYLOGENETICS; PROBABILITY;

ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CONSISTENCY INDEX; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVERGENT EVOLUTION; EVOLUTIONARY RATE; GENETIC INCOMPATIBILITY; GENETIC PARAMETERS; HOMOPLASY; HOMOPLASY EXCESS RATIO; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; PHYLOGENETIC TREE; PROBABILITY; RETENTION INDEX; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL MODEL; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; PHYLOGENY;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY;

EID: 84919904014     PISSN: 00225193     EISSN: 10958541     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2014.10.033     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Archie J.W. A randomization test for phylogenetic information in systematic data. Syst. Zool. 1989, 38:239-345.
2. Archie J.W. Homoplasy excess ratios: new indices for measuring levels of homoplasy. Syst. Biol. 1989, 38:253-269.
3. Archie J.W., Felsenstein J. The number of evolutionary steps on random and minimum length trees for random evolutionary data. Theor. Popul. Biol. 1993, 43:52-79.
4. Brandley M.C., Warren D.L., Leache A.D., McGuire J.A. Homoplasy and clade support. Syst. Biol. 2009, 58:184-198.
5. Broughton R.E., Stanley S.C.E., Durrett R.T. Quantification of homoplasy for transitions and transversions and a re-examination of assumptions in weighted phylogenetic analysis. Syst. Biol. 2000, 49:617-627.
6. Brown W.M., Prager E.M., Wang A., Wilson A.C. Mitochondrial DNA sequences of primates: tempo and mode of evolution. J. Mol. Evol. 1982, 18:225-239.
7. Camin J.H., Sokal R.R. A method for deducing branching sequences in phylogeny. Evolution 1965, 19:311-326.
8. De Pinna M.G.G. Concepts and tests of homology in the cladistic paradigm. Cladistics 1991, 7:367-394.
9. Donoghue M.J., Ree R.H. Homoplasy and developmental constraint: a model and example from plants. Am. Zool 2000, 40:759-769.
10. Farris J.S. The retention index and rescaled consistency index. Cladistics 1989, 5:417-419.
11. Farris J.S. Excess homoplasy ratios. Cladistics 1991, 7:81-91.
12. Feller W. An Introduction to Probability Theory and its Applications 1968, vol. 1. John Wiley and Sons, New York. third ed.
13. Felsenstein J. Cases in which parsimony or compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Biol. 1978, 27:401-410.
14. Felsenstein J. Compatibility. Pages 87-96 in Inferring Phylogenies 2004, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts. J. Felsenstein (Ed.).
15. Fischer M., Thatte B. Revisiting an equivalence between maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood methods in phylogenetics. Bull. Math. Biol 2010, 72:208-220.
16. Goloboff P.A. Homoplasy and the choice among cladograms. Cladistics 1991, 7:215-232.
17. Hawkins J.A. Primary homology assessment, characters and character states. Cladistics 1997, 13:275-283.
18. Hoyal Cuthill J.F., Braddy S.J., Donoghue P.C.J. A formula for maximum possible steps in multistate characters: isolating matrix parameter effects on measures of evolutionary convergence. Cladistics 2010, 26:98-102.
19. Huelsenbeck J.P., Nielsen R., Bollback J.P. Stochastic mapping of morphological characters. Syst. Biol. 2003, 52:131-158.
20. Klassen G.J., Mooi R.D., Locke A. Consistency indices and random data. Syst. Zool. 1991, 40:446-457.
21. Kluge A., Farris J.S. Quantitative phyletics and the evolution of anurans. Syst. Zool. 1969, 18:1-32.
22. Le Quesne W.J. A method of selection of characters in numerical taxonomy. Syst. Zool. 1969, 18:201-205.
23. Le Quesne W.J. Compatibility analysis and its applications. Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 1982, 74:267-275.
24. Meacham C. A probability measure for character compatibility. Math. Biosci. 1981, 57:1-18.
25. Meacham C. A manual method for character compatibility analysis. Taxon 1981, 30:591-600.
26. Meacham C. Phylogenetic relationships at the basal radiation of angiosperms: further study by probability of character compatibility. Syst. Bot. 1994, 19:506-522.
27. Naylor G., Kraus F. The relationship between s and m and the retention index. Syst. Biol. 1995, 44:559-562.
28. Ogburn R.M., Edwards E.J. Anatomical variation in Cactaceae and relatives: trait lability and evolutionary innovation. Am. J. Bot. 2009, 96:391-408.
29. O'Keefe F.F., Wagner P.J. Inferring and testing hypotheses of cladistic character dependence by using character compatibility. Syst. Biol. 2001, 50:657-675.
30. Ruta M., Wagner P.J., Coates M.I. Evolutionary patterns in early tetrapods. I. Rapid initial diversification followed by decrease in rates of character change. Proc. R. Soc. B 2006, 273:2107-2111.
31. Rzhetsky A., Morozov P. Markov chain Monte Carlo computation of confidence intervals for substitution-rate variation in proteins. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 2001, 6:203-214.
32. Sanderson M.J., Donoghue M.J. Patterns of variation in levels of homoplasy. Evolution 1989, 43:1781-1795.
33. Sanderson M.J., Donoghue M.J. The relationship between homoplasy and confidence in a phylogenetic tree. Pages 67-90 in Homoplasy: the Recurrence of Similarity in Evolution 1996, Academic Press, London and New York. M.J. Sanderson, L. Hufford (Eds.).
34. Simmons M.P., Carr T.G., O'Neill K. Relative character-state space, amount of evolvable phylogenetic information, and heterogeneity of nucleotide and amino acid characters. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 2004, 32:913-926.
35. Simmons M.P., Reeves A., Davis J.I. Character-state space versus rate of evolution in phylogenetic inference. Cladistics 2004, 20:191-204.
36. Steel M. The complexity of reconstructing trees from qualitative characters and subtrees. J. Classif. 1992, 9:91-116.
37. Steel M., Penny D. Parsimony, likelihood, and the role of models in molecular phylogenetics. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2000, 17:839-850.
38. Steel M., Penny D. Two further links between MP and ML under the Poisson model. Appl. Math. Lett. 2004, 17:785-799.
39. Steel M., Penny D. Maximum parsimony and the phylogenetic information in multistate characters. Pages 163-180 in Parsimony, Phylogeny, and Genomics 2005, Oxford University Press, Oxford. V.A. Albert (Ed.).
40. Strong E.E., Lipscomb D. Character coding and inapplicable data. Cladistics 1999, 15:363-371.
41. Swofford, D.L., PAUP* Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony(* and Other Methods). Version 4, 2003, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
42. Wagner P.J. Exhaustion of morphologic character states among fossil taxa. Evolution 2000, 54:365-386.
43. Wagner P.J. Evolutionary patterns in early tetrapods. II. Differing constraints on available character space among clades. Proc. R. Soc. B 2006, 273:2113-2118.
44. Wiens J.J. Character analysis in morphological phylogenetics: problems and solutions. Syst. Biol. 2001, 50:689-699.
45. Wilhelm T., Nikolajewa S. A new classification system of the genetic code. J. Mol. Evol. 2004, 59:598-605.