CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 155

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phylogenetics is the New Genetics (for Most of Biodiversity)

Smith, Stacey D., Pennell, Matthew W., Dunn, Casey W., Edwards, Scott V.·2020·Trends in Ecology & Evolution
DOI 10.1016/j.tree.2020.01.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Despite substantial progress in understanding the genetic basis for differences in morphology, physiology, and behavior, many phenotypes of interest are difficult to study with traditional genetic approaches because their origin traces to deep nodes in the tree of life. Moreover, many species are not amenable to either large-scale sampling or laboratory crosses. We argue that phylogenetic methods and theory provide tremendous power to identify the functional genetic variation underlying trait evolution. We anticipate that existing statistical comparative approaches will be more commonly applied to studying the genetic basis for phenotypic evolution as whole genomes continue to populate the tree of life. Nevertheless, new methods and approaches will be needed to fully capitalize on the power of clade-scale genomic datasets.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tree.2020.01.005

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • PhyloG2P methods use reconstructed evolutionary relationships to link genotypic variation between lineages to their variation in phenotype.

    “PhyloG2P methods use reconstructed evolutionary relationships to link genotypic variation between lineages to their variation in phenotype.”

    From From Trees to Traits: A Review of Advances in PhyloG2P Methods and Future Directions (2025) · cites this paper as Smith et al. 2020

  • Both PhyloG2P approaches facilitate mapping genotype to phenotype for traits that only vary between species, which is not possible with existing methods that depend upon the ability to cross individuals with contrasting phenotypes.

    “Both of these approaches facilitate the mapping of genotype to phenotype for traits that only vary between species, which is not possible with existing methods that depend upon the ability to cross individuals with contrasting phenotypes (Smith et al. 2020).”

    From From Trees to Traits: A Review of Advances in PhyloG2P Methods and Future Directions (2025) · cites this paper as Smith et al. 2020

  • The evolutionary perspective of PhyloG2P enables genotype to phenotype mapping in situations where typical population genetics approaches would be challenging, if not impossible to implement.

    “This evolutionary perspective enables genotype to phenotype mapping in situations where typical population genetics approaches would be challenging, if not impossible to implement (Nagy et al. 2020; Smith et al. 2020).”

    From From Trees to Traits: A Review of Advances in PhyloG2P Methods and Future Directions (2025) · cites this paper as Smith et al. 2020

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 61

  1. Amrad, 2016, Gain and loss of floral scent production through changes in structural genes during pollinator-mediated speciation, Curr. Biol., 26, 3303, 10.1016/j.cub.2016.10.023 · DOI
  2. Kocher, 2018, The genetic basis of a social polymorphism in halictid bees, Nat. Commun., 9, 4338, 10.1038/s41467-018-06824-8 · DOI
  3. Nallu, 2018, The molecular genetic basis of herbivory between butterflies and their host plants, Nat. Ecol. Evol., 2, 1418, 10.1038/s41559-018-0629-9 · DOI
  4. Chakraborty, 1988, Admixture as a tool for finding linked genes and detecting that difference from allelic association between loci, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 85, 9119, 10.1073/pnas.85.23.9119 · DOI
  5. Tanksley, 1993, Mapping polygenes, Annu. Rev. Genet., 27, 205, 10.1146/annurev.ge.27.120193.001225 · DOI
  6. Marigorta, 2018, Replicability and prediction: lessons and challenges from GWAS, Trends Genet., 34, 504, 10.1016/j.tig.2018.03.005 · DOI
  7. Gallagher, 2018, The post-GWAS era: from association to function, Am. J. Hum. Genet., 102, 717, 10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.04.002 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Borevitz, 2004, Genomics tools for QTL analysis and gene discovery, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol., 7, 132, 10.1016/j.pbi.2004.01.011 · DOI
  9. Preston, 2011, Gradual disintegration of the floral symmetry gene network is implicated in the evolution of a wind-pollination syndrome, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 108, 2343, 10.1073/pnas.1011361108 · DOI
  10. Yang, 2007, PAML 4: phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood, Mol. Biol. Evol., 24, 1586, 10.1093/molbev/msm088 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Smith, 2013, Sequencing of the sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) genome provides insights into vertebrate evolution, Nat. Genet., 45, 415, 10.1038/ng.2568 · DOI
  12. Kim, 2014, Genome sequence of the hot pepper provides insights into the evolution of pungency in Capsicum species, Nat. Genet., 46, 270, 10.1038/ng.2877 · DOI
  13. Dunn, 2018, Pairwise comparisons across species are problematic when analyzing functional genomic data, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 115, E409, 10.1073/pnas.1707515115 · DOI
  14. Lewis, 2018, We are not so special, Elife, 7, 10.7554/eLife.38726 · DOI
  15. Nagy, 2017, Genetic bases of fungal white rot wood decay predicted by phylogenomic analysis of correlated gene-phenotype evolution, Mol. Biol. Evol., 34, 35, 10.1093/molbev/msw238 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Losos, 2011, Convergence, adaptation, and constraint, Evolution, 65, 1827, 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01289.x · DOI
  17. Heyduk, 2019, The genetics of convergent evolution: insights from plant photosynthesis, Nat. Rev. Genet., 20, 485, 10.1038/s41576-019-0107-5 · DOI
  18. Pagel, 1999, Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution, Nature, 401, 877, 10.1038/44766 · DOI · Paper page
  19. Maddison, 2015, The unsolved challenge to phylogenetic correlation tests for categorical characters, Syst. Biol., 64, 127, 10.1093/sysbio/syu070 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Ciezarek, 2019, Phylotranscriptomic insights into the diversification of endothermic Thunnus tunas, Mol. Biol. Evol., 36, 84, 10.1093/molbev/msy198 · DOI
  21. Collins, 2018, A phylogenetic method to perform genome-wide association studies in microbes that accounts for population structure and recombination, PLoS Comput. Biol., 14, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005958 · DOI
  22. Hejase, 2016, Mapping the genomic architecture of adaptive traits with interspecific introgressive origin: a coalescent-based approach, BMC Genomics, 17, 8, 10.1186/s12864-015-2298-2 · DOI
  23. Karin, 2017, An integrated model of phenotypic trait changes and site-specific sequence evolution, Syst. Biol., 66, 917, 10.1093/sysbio/syx032 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Mayrose, 2011, A likelihood method for detecting trait-dependent shifts in the rate of molecular evolution, Mol. Biol. Evol., 28, 759, 10.1093/molbev/msq263 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Partha, 2019, Robust method for detecting convergent shifts in evolutionary rates, Mol. Biol. Evol., 36, 1817, 10.1093/molbev/msz107 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Rey, 2018, Accurate detection of convergent amino-acid evolution with PCOC, Mol. Biol. Evol., 35, 2296, 10.1093/molbev/msy114 · DOI · Paper page
  27. Lartillot, 2011, A phylogenetic model for investigating correlated evolution of substitution rates and continuous phenotypic characters, Mol. Biol. Evol., 28, 729, 10.1093/molbev/msq244 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Prudent, 2016, Controlling for phylogenetic relatedness and evolutionary rates improves the discovery of associations between species’ phenotypic and genomic differences, Mol. Biol. Evol., 33, 2135, 10.1093/molbev/msw098 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Landis, 2013, Phylogenetic analysis using Levy processes: finding jumps in the evolution of continuous traits, Syst. Biol., 62, 193, 10.1093/sysbio/sys086 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Hansen, 1997, Stabilizing selection and the comparative analysis of adaptation, Evolution, 51, 1341, 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1997.tb01457.x · DOI · Paper page
  31. Harmon, 2010, Early bursts of body size and shape evolution are rare in comparative data, Evolution, 64, 2385
  32. Hiller, 2012, A ‘forward genomics’ approach links genotype to phenotype using independent phenotypic losses among related species, Cell Rep., 2, 817, 10.1016/j.celrep.2012.08.032 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Kiefer, 2019, Interspecies association mapping links reduced CG to TG substitution rates to the loss of gene-body methylation, Nat. Plants, 5, 846, 10.1038/s41477-019-0486-9 · DOI
  34. Marcovitz, 2019, A functional enrichment test for molecular convergent evolution finds a clear protein-coding signal in echolocating bats and whales, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 116, 21094, 10.1073/pnas.1818532116 · DOI
  35. Marcovitz, 2016, ‘Reverse genomics’ predicts function of human conserved noncoding elements, Mol. Biol. Evol., 33, 1358, 10.1093/molbev/msw001 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Lamichhaney, 2019, Integrating natural history collections and comparative genomics to study the genetic architecture of convergent evolution, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B Biol. Sci., 374, 20180248
  37. Adams, 2019, Phylogenetic comparative methods and the evolution of multivariate phenotypes, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 50, 405, 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110218-024555 · DOI
  38. Tarasov, 2019, Integration of anatomy ontologies and evo–devo using structured Markov models suggests a new framework for modeling discrete phenotypic traits, Syst. Biol., 68, 698, 10.1093/sysbio/syz005 · DOI
  39. Ives, 2010, Phylogenetic logistic regression for binary dependent variables, Syst. Biol., 59, 9, 10.1093/sysbio/syp074 · DOI
  40. Felsenstein, 2012, A comparative method for both discrete and continuous characters using the threshold model, Am. Nat., 179, 145, 10.1086/663681 · DOI
  41. Hadfield, 2010, General quantitative genetic methods for comparative biology: phylogenies, taxonomies and multi-trait models for continuous and categorical characters, J. Evol. Biol., 23, 494, 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01915.x · DOI
  42. Zanne, 2018, Functional biogeography of angiosperms: life at the extremes, New Phytol., 218, 1697, 10.1111/nph.15114 · DOI
  43. O’Meara, 2006, Testing for different rates of continuous trait evolution using likelihood, Evolution, 60, 922, 10.1111/j.0014-3820.2006.tb01171.x · DOI
  44. Beaulieu, 2012, Modeling stabilizing selection: expanding the Ornstein–Uhlenbeck model of adaptive evolution, Evolution, 66, 2369, 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01619.x · DOI
  45. Uyeda, 2014, A novel Bayesian method for inferring and interpreting the dynamics of adaptive landscapes from phylogenetic comparative data, Syst. Biol., 63, 902, 10.1093/sysbio/syu057 · DOI
  46. Dunn, 2016, Comparative genomics and the diversity of life, Zool. Scr., 45, 5, 10.1111/zsc.12211 · DOI
  47. Sackton, 2019, Convergent regulatory evolution and loss of flight in paleognathous birds, Science, 364, 74, 10.1126/science.aat7244 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Edwards, 2009, Is a new and general theory of molecular systematics emerging?, Evolution, 63, 1, 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2008.00549.x · DOI · Paper page
  49. Stern, 2013, The genetic causes of convergent evolution, Nat. Rev. Genet., 14, 751, 10.1038/nrg3483 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Martin, 2013, The loci of repeated evolution: a catalog of genetic hotspots of phenotypic variation, Evolution, 67, 1235
  51. O’Leary, 2011, MorphoBank: phylophenomics in the “cloud”, Cladistics, 27, 529, 10.1111/j.1096-0031.2011.00355.x · DOI
  52. Eliason, 2019, phenotools: an R package for visualizing and analyzing phenomic datasets, Methods Ecol. Evol., 10, 1393, 10.1111/2041-210X.13217 · DOI
  53. Peters, 2014, A machine reading system for assembling synthetic paleontological databases, PLoS One, 9, 10.1371/journal.pone.0113523 · DOI
  54. Mabee, 2018, Phenoscape: semantic analysis of organismal traits and genes yields insights in evolutionary biology, PeerJ, 6
  55. Nagy, 2014, Latent homology and convergent regulatory evolution underlies the repeated emergence of yeasts, Nat. Commun., 5, 4471, 10.1038/ncomms5471 · DOI
  56. von Hardenberg, 2013, Disentangling evolutionary cause–effect relationships with phylogenetic confirmatory path analysis, Evolution, 67, 378, 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2012.01790.x · DOI · Paper page
  57. Muntane, 2018, Biological processes modulating longevity across primates: a phylogenetic genome–phenome analysis, Mol. Biol. Evol., 35, 1990, 10.1093/molbev/msy105 · DOI · Paper page
  58. Avise, 2008, Hemiplasy: a new term in the lexicon of phylogenetics, Syst. Biol., 57, 503, 10.1080/10635150802164587 · DOI
  59. Maddison, 1997, Gene trees in species trees, Syst. Biol., 46, 523, 10.1093/sysbio/46.3.523 · DOI
  60. Suh, 2015, The dynamics of incomplete lineage sorting across the ancient adaptive radiation of neoavian birds, PLoS Biol., 13, 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002224 · DOI
  61. Guerrero, 2018, Quantifying the risk of hemiplasy in phylogenetic inference, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 115, 12787, 10.1073/pnas.1811268115 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Smith, S. D., Pennell, M. W., Dunn, C. W., & Edwards, S. V.
Venue
Trends in Ecology & Evolution
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
35
Issue
5
Pages
415-425
ISSN
0169-5347
DOI
10.1016/j.tree.2020.01.005
Cited by
155
References
8
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • Society of Systematic Biologists
  • National Science Foundation (1553114, DEB-1355343, NSF-DEB-1355343)

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