Computational performance and statistical accuracy of∗BEAST and comparisons with other methods

Systematic Biology

Volumn 65, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 381-396

  Ogilvie, Huw A ^a   Heled, Joseph ^b   Xie, Dong ^b   Drummond, Alexei J ^b  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Bayesian phylogenetics; Concatenation; Gene tree; Multispecies coalescent; Phylogenomics; Species tree; Supermatrix

Indexed keywords

BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CLASSIFICATION; EVOLUTION; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; PHYLOGENY; PROCEDURES; SOFTWARE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

BAYES THEOREM; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; CLASSIFICATION; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY; SOFTWARE;

EID: 84978880252     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: 1076836X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syv118     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Baird N.A., Etter P.D., Atwood T.S., Currey M.C., Shiver A.L., Lewis Z.A., Selker E.U., Cresko W.A., Johnson E.A. 2008. Rapid SNP discovery and genetic mapping using sequenced RAD markers. PLoS One 3:e3376.
2. Bayzid M.S., Warnow T. 2013. Naive binning improves phylogenomic analyses. Bioinformatics 29:2277-2284.
3. Benjamini Y., Hochberg Y. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. Royal Stat. Soci. Ser. B Methodol. 57:289-300.
4. Berv J.S., Prum R.O. 2014. A comprehensive multilocus phylogeny of the Neotropical cotingas (Cotingidae, Aves) with a comparative evolutionary analysis of breeding systemand plumage dimorphism and a revised phylogenetic classification. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 81:120-136.
5. Bi K., Vanderpool D., Singhal S., Linderoth T., Moritz C., Good J. 2012. Transcriptome-based exon capture enables highly cost-effective comparative genomic data collection at moderate evolutionary scales. BMC Genomics 13:403.
6. Bouckaert R., Heled J., Köhnert D., Vaughan T., Wu C.H., Xie D., Suchard M.A., Rambaut A., Drummond A.J. 2014. BEAST 2: A software platform for Bayesian evolutionary analysis. PLOS Comput. Biol. 10:e1003537.
7. Bryant D., Bouckaert R., Felsenstein J., RosenbergN.A., RoyChoudhury A. 2012. Inferring species trees directly from biallelic genetic markers: bypassing gene trees in a full coalescent analysis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29:1917-1932.
8. Cadotte M.W., Cardinale B.J., Oakley T.H. 2008. Evolutionary history and the effect of biodiversity on plant productivity. Proc.NatlAcad. Sci. USA 105:17012-17017.
9. Camargo A., Avila L.J., Morando M., Sites J.W. 2012. Accuracy and precision of species trees: effects of locus, individual, and base pair sampling on inference of species trees in lizards of the Liolaemus darwinii group (Squamata, Liolaemidae). Syst. Biol. 61:272-288.
10. Chifman J., Kubatko L. 2014. Quartet inference from SNP data under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics 30:3317-3324.
11. Chung Y., Ané C. 2011. Comparing two Bayesian methods for gene tree/species tree reconstruction: simulations with incomplete lineage sorting and horizontal gene transfer. Syst. Biol. 60:261-275.
12. Davey J.W., Hohenlohe P.A., Etter P.D., Boone J.Q., Catchen J.M., Blaxter M.L. 2011. Genome-wide genetic marker discovery and genotyping using next-generation sequencing. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12:499-510.
13. DeGiorgio M., Degnan J.H. 2010. Fast and consistent estimation of species trees using supermatrix rooted triples. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:552-569.
14. Eaton D.A.R., Ree R.H. 2013. Inferring phylogeny and introgression using RADseq data: An example from flowering plants (Pedicularis: Orobanchaceae). Syst. Biol. 62:689-706.
15. Edwards S.V., Liu L., Pearl D.K. 2007. High-resolution species trees without concatenation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104:5936-5941.
16. Faircloth B.C., McCormack J.E., Crawford N.G., Harvey M.G., Brumfield R.T., Glenn T.C. 2012. Ultraconserved elements anchor thousands of genetic markers spanning multiple evolutionary timescales. Syst. Biol. 61:717-726.
17. Gascuel O. 1997. BIONJ:Animproved version of theNJalgorithmbased on a simple model of sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:685-695.
18. Gatesy J., Springer M.S. 2013. Concatenation versus coalescence versus "concatalescence". Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110:E1179.
19. Gatesy J., Springer M.S. 2014. Phylogenetic analysis at deep timescales: unreliable gene trees, bypassed hidden support, and the coalescence/concatalescence conundrum. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 80:231-266.
20. Gernhard T. 2008. The conditioned reconstructed process. J. Theoret. Biol. 253:769-778.
21. Hasegawa M., Kishino H., YanoT. 1985. Dating the human-Ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrialDNA. J. Mol. Evol. 22:160-174.
22. Heled J., Bouckaert R. 2013. Looking for trees in the forest: Summary tree from posterior samples. BMC Evol. Biol. 13:221.
23. Heled J., Bryant D., Drummond A.J. 2013. Simulating gene trees under the multispecies coalescent and time-dependent migration. BMC Evol. Biol. 13:44.
24. Heled J., Drummond A. 2010. Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27:570-580.
25. Höhna S., Drummond A.J. 2012. Guided tree topology proposals for Bayesian phylogenetic inference. Syst. Biol. 61:1-11.
26. Joly S., McLenachan P.A., Lockhart P.J. 2009. A statistical approach for distinguishing hybridization and incomplete lineage sorting. Am. Naturalist 174:E54-E70.
27. Jukes T., Cantor C. 1969. Evolution of protein molecules. In: Munro H. editor.Mammalian protein Metabolism.NewYork:Academic Press, p. 21-132.
28. Kainer D., Lanfear R. 2015. The effects of partitioning on phylogenetic inference. Mol. Biol. Evol. 32:1611-1627.
29. Kendall D.G. 1948.Onthe generalized "birth-And-death" process. Ann. Math. Stat. 19:1-15.
30. Kirkpatrick M., Slatkin M. 1993. Searching for evolutionary patterns in the shape of a phylogenetic tree. Evolution 47:1171-1181.
31. 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.
32. Kubatko L.S. 2009. Identifying hybridization events in the presence of coalescence via model selection. Syst. Biol. 58:478-488.
33. Lanier H.C., Huang H., Knowles L.L. 2014. How low can you go? The effects of mutation rate on the accuracy of species-Tree estimation. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 70:112-119.
34. 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.
35. 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.
36. Leaché A.D., Rannala B. 2011. The accuracy of species tree estimation under simulation: A comparison of methods. Syst. Biol. 60:126-137.
37. Lemmon A.R., Emme S.A., Lemmon E.M. 2012. Anchored hybrid enrichment for massively high-Throughput phylogenomics. Syst. Biol. 61:727-744.
38. Liu L., Pearl D.K., Brumfield R.T., Edwards S.V. 2008. Estimating species trees using multiple-Allele DNA sequence data. Evolution 62:2080-2091.
39. Liu L., Yu L., Edwards S. 2010. A maximum pseudo-likelihood approach for estimating species trees under the coalescent model. BMC Evol. Biol. 10:302.
40. Liu L., Yu L., Pearl D.K., Edwards S.V. 2009. Estimating species phylogenies using coalescence times among sequences. Syst. Biol. 58:468-477.
41. Liu L. 2008. BEST: Bayesian estimation of species trees under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics 24:2542-2543.
42. Maddison W.P., Midford P.E., Otto S.P. 2007. Estimating a binary characters effect on speciation and extinction. Syst. Biol. 56:701-710.
43. MaddisonW.P. 1997. Gene trees in species trees. Syst. Biol. 46:523-536.
44. Mamanova L., Coffey A.J., Scott C.E., Kozarewa I., Turner E.H., Kumar A., Howard E., Shendure J., Turner D.J. 2010. Target-enrichment strategies for next-generation sequencing. Nat. Methods 7:111-118.
45. McCormack J.E., Hird S.M., Zellmer A.J., Carstens B.C., Brumfield R.T. 2013. Applications of next-generation sequencing to phylogeography and phylogenetics. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 66:526-538.
46. Mirarab S., Bayzid M.S., Warnow T. 2014a. Evaluating summary methods for multilocus species tree estimation in the presence of incomplete lineage sorting. Syst. Biol.
47. Mirarab S., Reaz R., Bayzid M.S., Zimmermann T., Swenson M.S., Warnow T. 2014b. ASTRAL: genome-scale coalescent-based species tree estimation. Bioinformatics 30:i541-i548.
48. Mirarab S., Warnow T. 2015. ASTRAL-II: coalescent-based species tree estimation with many hundreds of taxa and thousands of genes. Bioinformatics 31:i44-i52.
49. Nee S., Holmes E.C., May R.M., Harvey P.H. 1994. Extinction rates can be estimated from molecular phylogenies. Philos. Transact. R. Soci. B Biol. Sci. 344:77-82.
50. Page R.D.M., Charleston M.A. 1997. From gene to organismal phylogeny:Reconciled trees and the gene tree/species tree problem. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 7:231-240.
51. Pamilo P., Nei M. 1988. Relationships between gene trees and species trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5:568-583.
52. Perry G.H., Melsted P., Marioni J.C., Wang Y., Bainer R., Pickrell J.K., Michelini K., Zehr S., Yoder A.D., Stephens M., Pritchard J.K., Gilad Y. 2012. Comparative RNA sequencing reveals substantial genetic variation in endangered primates. Genome Res. 22: 602-610.
53. Rambaut A., Grass N.C. 1997. Seq-Gen: An application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Computer Appl. Biosci. 13:235-238.
54. Rannala B., Yang Z. 2003. Bayes estimation of species divergence times and ancestral population sizes usingDNA sequences from multiple loci. Genetics 164:1645-1656.
55. Roch S., Steel M. 2015. Likelihood-based tree reconstruction on a concatenation of aligned sequence data sets can be statistically inconsistent. Theoret. Popul. Biol. 100:56-62.
56. Slowinski J.B., Page R.D.M. 1999. How should species phylogenies be inferred from sequence data? Syst. Biol. 48:814-825.
57. Springer M.S., Gatesy J. 2016. The gene tree delusion. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 94, Part A:1-33.
58. Stamatakis A. 2014. RAxML version 8: A tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-Analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30:1312-1313.
59. Steel M., Mooers A. 2010. The expected length of pendant and interior edges of a Yule tree. Appl. Math. Lett. 23:1315-1319.
60. Steiper M.E., Young N.M. 2006. Primate molecular divergence dates. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 41:384-394.
61. Sukumaran J., Holder M.T. 2010. DendroPy: A Python library for phylogenetic computing. Bioinformatics 26:1569-1571.
62. Tavaré S., Marshall C.R., Will O., Soligo C., Martin R.D. 2002. Using the fossil record to estimate the age of the last common ancestor of extant primates. Nature 416:726-729.
63. Wiens J.J., Morrill M.C. 2011. Missing data in phylogenetic analysis: Reconciling results from simulations and empirical data. Syst. Biol. 60:719-731.
64. Wilkinson R.D., Steiper M.E., Soligo C., Martin R.D., Yang Z., Tavaré S. 2011. primate divergences through an integrated analysis of palaeontological and molecular data. Syst. Biol. 60:16-31.
65. Yang F.S., Wang X.Q. 2007. Extensive length variation in the cpDNA trnT-TrnF region of hemiparasitic Pedicularis and its phylogenetic implications. Plant Syst. Evol. 264:251-264.
66. Yang Z., Goldman N., Friday A. 1994. Comparison of models for nucleotide substitution used in maximum-likelihood phylogenetic estimation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:316-324.
67. Yule G.U. 1924. A mathematical theory of evolution based on the conclusions of Dr. J.C. Willis. Philos. Transact. R. Soci. B Biol. Sci. 213:21-87.
68. Yu Y., Than C., Degnan J.H., Nakhleh L. 2011. Coalescent histories on phylogenetic networks and detection of hybridization despite incomplete lineage sorting. Syst. Biol. 60:138-149.