The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Is It Better to Add Taxa or Characters to a Difficult Phylogenetic Problem?
Abstract
The effects on phylogenetic accuracy of adding characters and/or taxa were explored using data generated by computer simulation. The conditions of this study were constrained but allowed for systematic investigation of certain parameters. The starting point for the study was a four-taxon tree in the "Felsenstein zone," representing a difficult phylogenetic problem with an extreme situation of long branch attraction. Taxa were added sequentially to this tree in a manner specifically designed to break up the long branches, and for each tree data matrices of different sizes were simulated. Phylogenetic trees were reconstructed from these data using the criteria of parsimony and maximum likelihood. Phylogenetic accuracy was measured in three ways: (1) proportion of trees that are completely correct, (2) proportion of correctly reconstructed branches in all trees, and (3) proportion of trees in which the original four-taxon statement is correctly reconstructed. Accuracy improved dramatically with the addition of taxa and much more slowly with the addition of characters. If taxa can be added to break up long branches, it is much more preferable to add taxa than characters.
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
Cited by
A comprehensive phylogeny of birds (Aves) using targeted next-generation DNA sequencing
Prum, R. O., Berv, J. S., Dornburg, A., Field, D. J., Townsend, J. P., Lemmon, E. M., & Lemmon, A. R. (2015) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature15697 · Cited by 1,668
A phylogeny and revised classification of Squamata, including 4161 species of lizards and snakes
Pyron, R., Burbrink, F. T., & Wiens, J. J. (2013) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-13-93 · Cited by 1,641
Genome-scale approaches to resolving incongruence in molecular phylogenies.
Rokas, A., Williams, B. L., King, N., & Carroll, S. B. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02053 · Cited by 1,512
Eleven grand challenges in single-cell data science
Lähnemann, D., Köster, J., Szczurek, E., McCarthy, D. J., Hicks, S. C., Robinson, M. D., Vallejos, C. A., Campbell, K. R., Beerenwinkel, N., Mahfouz, A., et al. (2020) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-020-1926-6 · Cited by 1,327
A review of long-branch attraction
Bergsten, J. (2005) · Cladistics · doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.2005.00059.x · Cited by 1,162
Metadata
- Authors
- Graybeal, A.
- Venue
- Systematic Biology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-03-01
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 9-17
- ISSN
- 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
- 1076-836X
- OpenAlex
- W2119033868
- Cited by
- 728
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 14.41
- 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: Is It Better to Add Taxa or Characters to a Difficult Phylogenetic Problem? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/106351598260996
- The paper
- Graybeal, A. (1998). Is It Better to Add Taxa or Characters to a Difficult Phylogenetic Problem? Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1080/106351598260996
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.