The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bayesian Phylogenetic Analysis of Combined Data
Abstract
The recent development of Bayesian phylogenetic inference using Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques has facilitated the exploration of parameter-rich evolutionary models. At the same time, stochastic models have become more realistic (and complex) and have been extended to new types of data, such as morphology. Based on this foundation, we developed a Bayesian MCMC approach to the analysis of combined data sets and explored its utility in inferring relationships among gall wasps based on data from morphology and four genes (nuclear and mitochondrial, ribosomal and protein coding). Examined models range in complexity from those recognizing only a morphological and a molecular partition to those having complex substitution models with independent parameters for each gene. Bayesian MCMC analysis deals efficiently with complex models: convergence occurs faster and more predictably for complex models, mixing is adequate for all parameters even under very complex models, and the parameter update cycle is virtually unaffected by model partitioning across sites. Morphology contributed only 5% of the characters in the data set but nevertheless influenced the combined-data tree, supporting the utility of morphological data in multigene analyses. We used Bayesian criteria (Bayes factors) to show that process heterogeneity across data partitions is a significant model component, although not as important as among-site rate variation. More complex evolutionary models are associated with more topological uncertainty and less conflict between morphology and molecules. Bayes factors sometimes favor simpler models over considerably more parameter-rich models, but the best model overall is also the most complex and Bayes factors do not support exclusion of apparently weak parameters from this model. Thus, Bayes factors appear to be useful for selecting among complex models, but it is still unclear whether their use strikes a reasonable balance between model complexity and error in parameter estimates.
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
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines
Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A. W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A. H., & Teller, E. (1953) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.1699114 · Cited by 37,192
Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications.
Hastings, W. K. (1970) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/57.1.97 · Cited by 15,195
Evolution of Protein Molecules
JUKES, T. H., & CANTOR, C. R. (1969) · Mammalian Protein Metabolism · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-3211-9.50009-7 · Cited by 11,032
Dating of the human–ape splitting by a molecular clock of mitochondrial DNA.
Hasegawa, M., Kishino, H., & Yano, T.-A. (1985) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf02101694 · Cited by 8,687
Yang, Z. (1994) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf00160154 · Cited by 2,960
A likelihood approach to estimating phylogeny from discrete morphological character data
Lewis, P. O. (2001) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/106351501753462876 · Cited by 2,929
Divergence time and evolutionary rate estimation with multilocus data.
Thorne, J. L., & Kishino, H. (2002) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150290102456 · Cited by 962
Bayesian Selection of Continuous-Time Markov Chain Evolutionary Models
Suchard, M. A., Weiss, R. E., & Sinsheimer, J. S. (2001) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003872 · Cited by 791
Aris-Brosou, S., & Yang, Z. (2002) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150290102375 · Cited by 230 · cited 2×
“Thus far, model selection in statistical phylogenetics has usually been based on criteria comparing ML estimates (for exceptions, see Suchard et al., 2001; Aris-Brosou and Yang, 2002; Bollback, 2002).”
Method
Cited by
PAML 4: Phylogenetic Analysis by Maximum Likelihood
Yang, Z. (2007) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msm088 · Cited by 13,879
Lanfear, R., Calcott, B., Ho, S. Y. W., & Guindon, S. (2012) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mss020 · Cited by 5,732
Posada, D., & Buckley, T. R. (2004) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150490522304 · Cited by 3,927
A review of long-branch attraction
Bergsten, J. (2005) · Cladistics · doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.2005.00059.x · Cited by 1,162
Improving Marginal Likelihood Estimation for Bayesian Phylogenetic Model Selection
Xie, W., Lewis, P. O., Fan, Y., Kuo, L., & Chen, M.-H. (2011) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syq085 · Cited by 1,050
Metadata
- Authors
- Nylander, J. A. A., Ronquist, F., Huelsenbeck, J. P., & Nieves-Aldrey, J.
- Venue
- Systematic Biology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-02-01
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 47-67
- ISSN
- 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
- 1076-836X
- OpenAlex
- W2108087670
- Cited by
- 1,845
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 34.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Bayesian Phylogenetic Analysis of Combined Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10635150490264699
- The paper
- Nylander, J. A. A., Ronquist, F., Huelsenbeck, J. P., & Nieves-Aldrey, J. (2004). Bayesian Phylogenetic Analysis of Combined Data. Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150490264699
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.