The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluating alternative hypotheses for the early evolution and diversification of ants
Open accessAbstract
Ants are the world's most diverse and ecologically dominant eusocial organisms. Resolving the phylogeny and timescale for major ant lineages is vital to understanding how they achieved this success. Morphological, molecular, and paleontological studies, however, have presented conflicting views on early ant evolution. To address these issues, we generated the largest ant molecular phylogenetic data set published to date, containing ≈6 kb of DNA sequence from 162 species representing all 20 ant subfamilies and 10 aculeate outgroup families. When these data were analyzed with and without outgroups, which are all distantly related to ants and hence long-branched, we obtained conflicting ingroup topologies for some early ant lineages. This result casts strong doubt on the existence of a poneroid clade as currently defined. We compare alternate attachments of the outgroups to the ingroup tree by using likelihood tests, and find that several alternative rootings cannot be rejected by the data. These alternatives imply fundamentally different scenarios for the early evolution of ant morphology and behavior. Our data strongly support several notable relationships within the more derived formicoid ants, including placement of the enigmatic subfamily Aenictogitoninae as sister to Dorylus army ants. We use the molecular data to estimate divergence times, employing a strategy distinct from previous work by incorporating the extensive fossil record of other aculeate Hymenoptera as well as that of ants. Our age estimates for the most recent common ancestor of extant ants range from ≈115 to 135 million years ago, indicating that a Jurassic origin is highly unlikely.
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
Multiple Comparisons of Log-Likelihoods with Applications to Phylogenetic Inference
Shimodaira, H., & Hasegawa, M. (1999) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026201 · Cited by 4,237
Sanderson, M. J. (2002) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003974 · Cited by 1,977
Sanderson, M. J. (2003) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/19.2.301 · Cited by 1,906
A review of long-branch attraction
Bergsten, J. (2005) · Cladistics · doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.2005.00059.x · Cited by 1,162
Cited by
FASconCAT: Convenient handling of data matrices
Kück, P., & Meusemann, K. (2010) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2010.04.024 · Cited by 538
Toro, I. D., Ribbons, R. R., & Pelini, S. L. (2023) · Österreichische Gesellschaft für Entomofaunistik (OEGEF) · doi:10.25849/myrmecol.news_017:133 · Cited by 384
Faircloth, B. C., Branstetter, M. G., White, N. D., & Brady, S. G. (2015) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/1755-0998.12328 · Cited by 334
Self-citationBranstetter, M. G., Longino, J. T., Ward, P. S., & Faircloth, B. C. (2017) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12742 · Cited by 308
Self-citationTermites (Isoptera): Their Phylogeny, Classification, and Rise to Ecological Dominance
(2009) · American Museum Novitates · doi:10.1206/651.1 · Cited by 299
Metadata
- Authors
- Brady, S. G., Schultz, T. R., Fisher, B. L., & Ward, P. S.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2006-11-28
- Volume
- 103
- Issue
- 48
- Pages
- 18172-18177
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2133964953
- Cited by
- 545
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 13.08
- 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: Evaluating alternative hypotheses for the early evolution and diversification of ants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0605858103
- The paper
- Brady, S. G., Schultz, T. R., Fisher, B. L., & Ward, P. S. (2006). Evaluating alternative hypotheses for the early evolution and diversification of ants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0605858103
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.