Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 273

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phylogenetic discovery bias in Bacillus anthracis using single-nucleotide polymorphisms from whole-genome sequencing

Open access
Pearson, Talima, Busch, Joseph D., Ravel, Jacques, Read, Timothy D., Rhoton, Shane D., U'Ren, Jana M., Simonson, Tatum S., Kachur, Sergey M., Leadem, Rebecca R., Cardon, Michelle L., Van Ert, Matthew N., Huynh, Lynn Y., Fraser, Claire M., Keim, Paul·2004·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Phylogenetic reconstruction using molecular data is often subject to homoplasy, leading to inaccurate conclusions about phylogenetic relationships among operational taxonomic units. Compared with other molecular markers, single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) exhibit extremely low mutation rates, making them rare in recently emerged pathogens, but they are less prone to homoplasy and thus extremely valuable for phylogenetic analyses. Despite their phylogenetic potential, ascertainment bias occurs when SNP characters are discovered through biased taxonomic sampling; by using whole-genome comparisons of five diverse strains of Bacillus anthracis to facilitate SNP discovery, we show that only polymorphisms lying along the evolutionary pathway between reference strains will be observed. We illustrate this in theoretical and simulated data sets in which complex phylogenetic topologies are reduced to linear evolutionary models. Using a set of 990 SNP markers, we also show how divergent branches in our topologies collapse to single points but provide accurate information on internodal distances and points of origin for ancestral clades. These data allowed us to determine the ancestral root of B . anthracis , showing that it lies closer to a newly described “C” branch than to either of two previously described “A” or “B” branches. In addition, subclade rooting of the C branch revealed unequal evolutionary rates that seem to be correlated with ecological parameters and strain attributes. Our use of nonhomoplastic whole-genome SNP characters allows branch points and clade membership to be estimated with great precision, providing greater insight into epidemiological, ecological, and forensic questions.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0403844101

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 273

Metadata

Authors
Pearson, T., Busch, J. D., Ravel, J., Read, T. D., Rhoton, S. D., U'Ren, J. M., Simonson, T. S., Kachur, S. M., Leadem, R. R., Cardon, M. L., Van Ert, M. N., Huynh, L. Y., Fraser, C. M., & Keim, P.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2004-09-03
Volume
101
Issue
37
Pages
13536-13541
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2104332925
Cited by
273
References
1
FWCI
5.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Phylogenetic discovery bias in Bacillus anthracis using single-nucleotide polymorphisms from whole-genome sequencing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0403844101
The paper
Pearson, T., Busch, J. D., Ravel, J., Read, T. D., Rhoton, S. D., U'Ren, J. M., Simonson, T. S., Kachur, S. M., Leadem, R. R., Cardon, M. L., Van Ert, M. N., Huynh, L. Y., Fraser, C. M., & Keim, P. (2004). Phylogenetic discovery bias in Bacillus anthracis using single-nucleotide polymorphisms from whole-genome sequencing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0403844101

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.