Evaluating summarymethods for multilocus species tree estimation in the presence of incomplete lineage sorting

Systematic Biology

Volumn 65, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 366-380

  Mirarab, Siavash ^a   Bayzid, Md Shamsuzzoha ^a   Warnow, Tandy ^a,b  

^a University of Texas at Austin   (United States)

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

Author keywords

Concatenation; Consensus Methods; Gene Tree Discordance; Incomplete Lineage Sorting; MP EST; MRL; MRP; Multilocus Bootstrapping; Species Tree Estimation; Supertree Methods

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENE DUPLICATION; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY; PROCEDURES;

CLASSIFICATION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; GENE DUPLICATION; PHYLOGENY; PROBABILITY;

EID: 84978808477     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: 1076836X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syu063     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Allman E., Degnan J., Rhodes J. 2011. Identifying the rooted species tree from the distribution of unrooted gene trees under the coalescent. J. Math. Biol. 62:833-862.
2. Bauer D.F. 1972. Constructing confidence sets using rank statistics. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 67:687-690.
3. Bayzid M.S., Warnow T. 2012. Estimating optimal species trees from incomplete gene trees under deep coalescence. J. Comput. Biol. 19:591-605.
4. Bayzid M.S., Warnow T. 2013. Naive binning improves phylogenomic analyses. Bioinformatics 29:2277-2284.
5. Boussau B., Szöllsi G., Duret L. 2013. Genome-scale coestimation of species and gene trees. Genome Res. 23:323-330.
6. Brandley M.C., Schmitz A., Reeder T.W. 2005. Partitioned Bayesian analyses, partition choice, and the phylogenetic relationships of scincid lizards. Syst. Biol. 54:373-390.
7. Chiari Y., Cahais V., Galtier N., Delsuc F. 2012. Phylogenomic analyses support the position of turtles as the sister group of birds and crocodiles (archosauria). BMC Biol. 10:65.
8. DeGiorgio M., Degnan J.H. 2010. Fast and consistent estimation of species trees using supermatrix rooted triples. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:552-569.
9. DeGiorgio M., Degnan J.H. 2013. Robustness to divergence time underestimation when inferring species trees from estimated gene trees. Syst. Biol. 63:66-82.
10. Degnan J., DeGiorgio M., Bryant D., Rosenberg N. 2009. Properties of consensus methods for inferring species trees from gene trees. Syst. Biol. 58:35-54.
11. Degnan J.H., Rosenberg N.A. 2009. Gene tree discordance, phylogenetic inference and the multispecies coalescent. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24:332-340.
12. Edwards S.V. 2009. Is a new and general theory of molecular systematics emerging? Evolution 63:1-19.
13. Edwards S.V., Liu L., Pearl D.K. 2007. High-resolution species trees without concatenation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104:5936-5941.
14. Felsenstein J. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783-791.
15. Heled J., DrummondA.J. 2010. Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:570-580.
16. Hu J., Zhang Y., Yu L. 2012. Summary of laurasiatheria (mammalia) phylogeny. Zool. Res. 33:65-74.
17. Hugall A.F., Foster R., Lee M.S. 2007. Calibration choice, rate smoothing, and the pattern of tetrapod diversification according to the long nuclear gene rag-1. Syst. Biol. 56:543-563.
18. Iwabe N., Hara Y., Kumazawa Y., Shibamoto K., Saito Y., Miyata T., Katoh K. 2005. Sister group relationship of turtles to the birdcrocodilian clade revealed by nuclear DNA-coded proteins. Mol. Biol. Evol. 22:810-813.
19. Janecka J.E., Miller W., Pringle T.H., Wiens F., Zitzmann A., Helgen K.M., Springer M.S., MurphyW.J. 2007. Molecular and genomic data identify the closest living relative of primates. Science 318:792-794.
20. Kimball R.T., Wang N., Heimer-McGinn V., Ferguson C., Braun E.L. 2013. Identifying localized biases in large datasets: A case study using the avian tree of life. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 69:1021-1032.
21. Knowles L.L., Lanier H.C., Klimov P.B., He Q. 2012. Full modeling versus summarizing gene-Tree uncertainty: method choice and species-Tree accuracy. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 65:501-509.
22. Kubatko L.S., Carstens B.C., Knowles L.L. 2009. STEM: species tree estimation using maximum likelihood for gene trees under coalescence. Bioinformatics 25:971-973.
23. Kubatko L.S., Degnan J. 2007. Inconsistency of phylogenetic estimates from concatenated data under coalescence. Syst. Biol. 56:17-24.
24. Kuhner M.K., Felsenstein J. 1994. A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:459-468.
25. Kumar V., Hallström B.M., Janke A. 2013. Coalescent-based genome analyses resolve the early branches of the euarchontoglires. PLoS ONE 8:e60019.
26. Lanier H.C., Knowles L.L. 2012. Is recombination a problem for speciestree analyses? Syst. Biol. 61:691-701.
27. Larget B.R., Kotha S.K., Dewey C.N., Ané C. 2010. BUCKy: gene tree/species tree reconciliation with Bayesian concordance analysis. Bioinformatics 26:2910-2911.
28. Leaché A.D., Harris R.B., Rannala B., Yang Z. 2014. The influence of gene flow on species tree estimation: A simulation study. Syst. Biol. 63:17-30.
29. Leaché A.D., Rannala B. 2011. The accuracy of species tree estimation under simulation: A comparison of methods. Syst. Biol. 60:126-37.
30. Lemmon A.R., Brown J.M., Stanger-Hall K., Lemmon E.M. 2009. The effect of ambiguous data on phylogenetic estimates obtained by maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference. Syst. Biol. 58:130-45.
31. Liu L. 2008. BEST: Bayesian estimation of species trees under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics 24:2542-2543.
32. Liu L., Yu L., Edwards S.V. 2010. A maximum pseudo-likelihood approach for estimating species trees under the coalescent model. BMC Evol. Biol. 10:302.
33. Liu L., Yu L., Pearl D.K., Edwards S.V. 2009. Estimating species phylogenies using coalescence times among sequences. Syst. Biol. 58:468-477.
34. Maddison W., Knowles L. 2006. Inferring phylogeny despite incomplete lineage sorting. Syst. Biol. 55:21-30.
35. MaddisonW.P. 1997. Gene trees in species trees. Syst. Biol. 46:523-536.
36. McCormack J.E., Harvey M.G., Faircloth B.C., Crawford N.G., Glenn T.C., Brumfield R.T. 2013. A phylogeny of birds based on over 1, 500 loci collected by target enrichment and high-Throughput sequencing. PLoS ONE 8:e54848.
37. Mirarab S., Reaz R., Bayzid M., Zimmermann T., Swenson M., Warnow T. Forthcoming 2014. ASTRAL: genome-scale coalescent-based species tree estimation. Bioinformatics 30:i541-i548.
38. Mossel E., Roch S. 2010. Incomplete lineage sorting: consistent phylogeny estimation from multiple loci. IEEE/ACM Trans. Comput. Biol. Bioinf. 7:166-171.
39. Nakhleh L. 2013. Computational approaches to species phylogeny inference and gene tree reconciliation. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28:719-728.
40. Nguyen N., Mirarab S., Warnow T. 2012. MRL and SuperFine+ MRL: new supertree methods. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 7:3.
41. Patel S., Kimball R.T., Braun E.L. 2013. Error in phylogenetic estimation for bushes in the tree of life. J. Phylogenet. Evol. Biol. 1:110.
42. Ragan M.A. 1992. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1:53-58.
43. Rannala B., Yang Z. 2003. Bayes estimation of species divergence times and ancestral population sizes usingDNA sequences from multiple loci. Genetics 164:1645-1656.
44. Robinson D., Foulds L. 1981. Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53:131-147.
45. Rokas A., Williams B.L., King N., Carroll S.B. 2003. Genome-scale approaches to resolving incongruence in molecular phylogenies. Nature 425:798-804.
46. RosenbergN.A. 2013. Discordance of species trees withtheirmost likely gene trees: A unifying principle. Mol. Biol. Evol. 30:2709-2713.
47. Salichos L., RokasA. 2013. Inferring ancient divergences requires genes with strong phylogenetic signals. Nature 497:327-331.
48. Seo T.K. 2008. Calculating bootstrap probabilities of phylogeny using multilocus sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25:960-971.
49. Smith B.T., Harvey M.G., Faircloth B.C., Glenn T.C., Brumfield R.T. 2014. Target capture and massively parallel sequencing of ultraconserved elements for comparative studies at shallow evolutionary time scales. Syst. Biol. 63:83-95.
50. Song S., Liu L., Edwards S.V., WuS. 2012.Resolving conflict in eutherian mammal phylogeny using phylogenomics and the multispecies coalescent model. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 109:14942-14947.
51. Springer M.S.M., Gatesy J. 2014. Land plant origins and coalescence confusion. Trends Plant Sci. 19:267-269.
52. Sukumaran J., Holder M. 2010. Dendropy: A Python library for phylogenetic computing. Bioinformatics 26:1569-1571.
53. Swofford D. 2003. PAUP. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (and other methods). Version 4. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates.
54. Than C., Nakhleh L. 2009. Species tree inference by minimizing deep coalescences. PLoS Comput. Biol. 5:e1000501.
55. Than C., Rosenberg N.A. 2011. Consistency Properties of Species Tree Inference by Minimizing Deep Coalescences. J. Comput. Biol. 18:1-15.
56. Wang Y., Degnan J. 2011. Performance of matrix representation with parsimony for inferring species from gene trees. Stat. Appl. Genet. Mol. Biol. 10:1-39.
57. Whitfield J., Lockhart P. 2007. Deciphering ancient rapid radiations. Trends in Ecol. Evol. 22:258-265.
58. Wolf Y., Rogozin I., Grishin N., Koonin E. 2002. Genome trees and the tree of life. Trends in Genet. 18:472-479.
59. Yang J., Warnow T. 2011. Fast and accurate methods for phylogenomic analyses. BMC Bioinformatics 12:S4.
60. Yu Y., Warnow T., Nakhleh L. 2011. Algorithms for MDC-based multilocus phylogeny inference: beyond rooted binary gene trees on single alleles. J. Comput. Biol. 18:1543-1559.
61. Zardoya R., Meyer A. 1998. Complete mitochondrial genome suggests diapsid affinities of turtles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 95:14226-14231.
62. Zhong B., Liu L., Yan Z., Penny D. 2013. Origin of land plants using the multispecies coalescent model. Trends Plant Sci. 18:492-495.