The DOI matches its Crossref record; 120 of the 120 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quartet Sampling distinguishes lack of support from conflicting support in the green plant tree of life
Open accessAbstract
Premise of the Study: Phylogenetic support has been difficult to evaluate within the green plant tree of life partly due to a lack of specificity between conflicted versus poorly informed branches. As data sets continue to expand in both breadth and depth, new support measures are needed that are more efficient and informative. Methods: We describe the Quartet Sampling ( QS ) method, a quartet‐based evaluation system that synthesizes several phylogenetic and genomic analytical approaches. QS characterizes discordance in large‐sparse and genome‐wide data sets, overcoming issues of alignment sparsity and distinguishing strong conflict from weak support. We tested QS with simulations and recent plant phylogenies inferred from variously sized data sets. Key Results: QS scores demonstrated convergence with increasing replicates and were not strongly affected by branch depth. Patterns of QS support from different phylogenies led to a coherent understanding of ancestral branches defining key disagreements, including the relationships of Ginkgo to cycads, magnoliids to monocots and eudicots, and mosses to liverworts. The relationships of ANA ‐grade angiosperms ( Amborella , Nymphaeales, Austrobaileyales), major monocot groups, bryophytes, and fern families are likely highly discordant in their evolutionary histories, rather than poorly informed. QS can also detect discordance due to introgression in phylogenomic data. Conclusions: Quartet Sampling is an efficient synthesis of phylogenetic tests that offers more comprehensive and specific information on branch support than conventional measures. The QS method corroborates growing evidence that phylogenomic investigations that incorporate discordance testing are warranted when reconstructing complex evolutionary histories, in particular those surrounding ANA ‐grade, monocots, and nonvascular plants.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
CONFIDENCE LIMITS ON PHYLOGENIES: AN APPROACH USING THE BOOTSTRAP
Felsenstein, J. (1985) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb00420.x · Cited by 44,647
RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies
Stamatakis, A. (2014) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 · Cited by 32,291
MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference and Model Choice Across a Large Model Space
Ronquist, F., Teslenko, M., van der Mark, P., Ayres, D. L., Darling, A., Höhna, S., Larget, B., Liu, L., Suchard, M. A., & Huelsenbeck, J. P. (2012) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/sys029 · Cited by 27,843
Guindon, S., Dufayard, J.-F., Lefort, V., Anisimova, M., Hordijk, W., & Gascuel, O. (2010) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syq010 · Cited by 18,376
FastTree 2 – Approximately Maximum-Likelihood Trees for Large Alignments
Price, M. N., Dehal, P. S., & Arkin, A. P. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009490 · Cited by 14,894
BEAST: Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees
Drummond, A. J., & Rambaut, A. (2007) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-7-214 · Cited by 12,919
A Rapid Bootstrap Algorithm for the RAxML Web Servers
Stamatakis, A., Hoover, P., & Rougemont, J. (2008) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150802429642 · Cited by 7,028
Ultrafast Approximation for Phylogenetic Bootstrap
Minh, B. Q., Nguyen, M. A. T., & von Haeseler, A. (2013) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mst024 · Cited by 4,844
A draft sequence of the Neandertal genome
Green, R. E., Krause, J., Briggs, A. W., Maricic, T., Stenzel, U., Kircher, M., Patterson, N., Li, H., Zhai, W., Fritz, M. H.-Y., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1188021 · Cited by 4,318
An Empirical Test of Bootstrapping as a Method for Assessing Confidence in Phylogenetic Analysis
Hillis, D. M., & Bull, J. J. (1993) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/42.2.182 · Cited by 3,631
Cited by
Cicconardi, F., Milanetti, E., Pinheiro de Castro, E. C., Mazo-Vargas, A., Van Belleghem, S. M., Ruggieri, A. A., Rastas, P., Hanly, J., Evans, E., Jiggins, C. D., et al. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-41412-5 · Cited by 81
Metadata
- Authors
- Pease, J. B., Brown, J. W., Walker, J. F., Hinchliff, C. E., & Smith, S. A.
- Venue
- American Journal of Botany
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-02-14
- Volume
- 105
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 385-403
- ISSN
- 0002-9122 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2197
- OpenAlex
- W2950241310
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 120
- FWCI
- 22.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Quartet Sampling distinguishes lack of support from conflicting support in the green plant tree of life. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ajb2.1016
- The paper
- Pease, J. B., Brown, J. W., Walker, J. F., Hinchliff, C. E., & Smith, S. A. (2018). Quartet Sampling distinguishes lack of support from conflicting support in the green plant tree of life. American Journal of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajb2.1016
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.