Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

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

Species Trees from Gene Trees: Reconstructing Bayesian Posterior Distributions of a Species Phylogeny Using Estimated Gene Tree Distributions

Liu, Liang, Pearl, Dennis K.·2007·Systematic Biology

Abstract

The desire to infer the evolutionary history of a group of species should be more viable now that a considerable amount of multilocus molecular data is available. However, the current molecular phylogenetic paradigm still reconstructs gene trees to represent the species tree. Further, commonly used methods of combining data, such as the concatenation method, are known to be inconsistent in some circumstances. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate the phylogeny of a group of species using multiple estimated gene tree distributions, such as those that arise in a Bayesian analysis of DNA sequence data. Our model employs substitution models used in traditional phylogenetics but also uses coalescent theory to explain genealogical signals from species trees to gene trees and from gene trees to sequence data, thereby forming a complete stochastic model to estimate gene trees, species trees, ancestral population sizes, and species divergence times simultaneously. Our model is founded on the assumption that gene trees, even of unlinked loci, are correlated due to being derived from a single species tree and therefore should be estimated jointly. We apply the method to two multilocus data sets of DNA sequences. The estimates of the species tree topology and divergence times appear to be robust to the prior of the population size, whereas the estimates of effective population sizes are sensitive to the prior used in the analysis. These analyses also suggest that the model is superior to the concatenation method in fitting these data sets and thus provides a more realistic assessment of the variability in the distribution of the species tree that may have produced the molecular information at hand. Future improvements of our model and algorithm should include consideration of other factors that can cause discordance of gene trees and species trees, such as horizontal transfer or gene duplication.

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 · 10.1080/10635150701429982

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

Metadata

Authors
Liu, L., & Pearl, D. K.
Venue
Systematic Biology
Published
2007-06-01
Volume
56
Issue
3
Pages
504-514
ISSN
  • 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1076-836X
OpenAlex
W2130549894
Cited by
481
References
1
FWCI
17.12
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

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.