Cited by 920Evolution and Paleontology StudiesAnimal Behavior and ReproductionGenetic diversity and population structure

Bayesian Analysis of Correlated Evolution of Discrete Characters by Reversible‐Jump Markov Chain Monte Carlo

Pagel, Mark, Meade, Andrew·2006·The American Naturalist

Abstract

We describe a Bayesian method for investigating correlated evolution of discrete binary traits on phylogenetic trees. The method fits a continuous-time Markov model to a pair of traits, seeking the best fitting models that describe their joint evolution on a phylogeny. We employ the methodology of reversible-jump (RJ) Markov chain Monte Carlo to search among the large number of possible models, some of which conform to independent evolution of the two traits, others to correlated evolution. The RJ Markov chain visits these models in proportion to their posterior probabilities, thereby directly estimating the support for the hypothesis of correlated evolution. In addition, the RJ Markov chain simultaneously estimates the posterior distributions of the rate parameters of the model of trait evolution. These posterior distributions can be used to test among alternative evolutionary scenarios to explain the observed data. All results are integrated over a sample of phylogenetic trees to account for phylogenetic uncertainty. We implement the method in a program called RJ Discrete and illustrate it by analyzing the question of whether mating system and advertisement of estrus by females have coevolved in the Old World monkeys and great apes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/503444

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Testing whether an ancestral change in one trait consistently leads to the same change in the other trait would suggest the co-evolution is due to a causal link.

    “To distinguish which scenario is more likely, we could test whether an ancestral change in one trait consistently leads to the same change in the other trait, which would suggest the co-evolution is due to a causal link42,43,51,85–87 (Fig. 3).”

    From A phylogenetic approach to comparative genomics (2025) · cites this paper as [51]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pagel, M., & Meade, A.
Affiliations
University of Reading (GB)
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
2006-06
Volume
167
Issue
6
Pages
808-825
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2042220296
Cited by
920
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 59 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 48 · 2016: 58 · 2015: 62 · 2014: 71 · 2013: 53 · 2012: 70
FWCI
23.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Naturalist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  • Natural Environment Research Council (NE/C51992X/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
Keywords
correlated evolution, reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo, continuous-time Markov model, phylogenetic tree, model selection, trait evolution rates, phylogenetic uncertainty, mating systems, Old World monkeys, great apes, coevolution
MeSH terms
Animals, Bayes Theorem, Biological Evolution, Female, Male, Markov Chains, Models, Genetic, Monte Carlo Method, Primates, Sexual Behavior, Animal

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