Cited by 616Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesProtist diversity and phylogenyEvolution and Paleontology Studies

Inferring ancient divergences requires genes with strong phylogenetic signals

Salichos, Leonidas, Rokas, Antonis·2013·Nature

Abstract

To tackle incongruence, the topological conflict between different gene trees, phylogenomic studies couple concatenation with practices such as rogue taxon removal or the use of slowly evolving genes. Phylogenomic analysis of 1,070 orthologues from 23 yeast genomes identified 1,070 distinct gene trees, which were all incongruent with the phylogeny inferred from concatenation. Incongruence severity increased for shorter internodes located deeper in the phylogeny. Notably, whereas most practices had little or negative impact on the yeast phylogeny, the use of genes or internodes with high average internode support significantly improved the robustness of inference. We obtained similar results in analyses of vertebrate and metazoan phylogenomic data sets. These results question the exclusive reliance on concatenation and associated practices, and argue that selecting genes with strong phylogenetic signals and demonstrating the absence of significant incongruence are essential for accurately reconstructing ancient divergences.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nature12130

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • In an analysis of 1030 gene trees of one-to-one orthologs from 23 fungi species, all 1030 gene trees were topologically distinct from each other and from the species tree.

    “For example, in an analysis of 1030 gene trees of one-to-one orthologs from 23 fungi species, all 1030 gene trees were topologically distinct from each other and from the species tree [40].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Salichos, L., & Rokas, A.
Affiliations
Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
Rokas, Antonis
Venue
Nature
Published
2013-05
Volume
497
Issue
7449
Pages
327-331
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2012220164
Cited by
616
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 68 · 2016: 58 · 2015: 65 · 2014: 56 · 2013: 21
FWCI
25.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
Keywords
gene tree discordance, phylogenetic signal strength, gene tree reconciliation, yeast phylogeny, orthologs, phylogenetic robustness
MeSH terms
Candida, Genes, Fungal, Models, Genetic, Phylogeny, Saccharomyces, Time Factors, Sequence Alignment, Genome, Fungal, Evolution, Molecular, Databases, Genetic

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