Cited by 5Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesEvolution and Genetic DynamicsGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 98 of the 104 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 12 of the 112 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

From Trees to Traits: A Review of Advances in PhyloG2P Methods and Future Directions

Open access
Macdonald, Arlie R, James, Maddie E, Mitchell, Jonathan D, Holland, Barbara R·2025·Genome Biology and Evolution

Abstract

Mapping genotypes to phenotypes is a fundamental goal in biology. Phylogenetic Genotype to Phenotype mapping methods are a relatively new set of tools that aim to identify genomic regions associated with trait variation between species. Here, we review recent developments in Phylogenetic Genotype to Phenotype mapping methods, focusing on three key areas: methods based on replicated substitutions at individual amino acid sites; methods detecting changes in evolutionary rates; and methods analyzing gene duplication and loss. We discuss how trait definition and measurement can impact these methods, as well as the genetic mechanisms that can give rise to trait variation between lineages. We examine the strengths and limitations of different approaches, highlighting the importance of explicit modeling of evolutionary processes. Finally, we outline promising future directions, including the integration of within-species variation, as well as epigenetic and environmental information. Since no single method is likely to identify all genomic regions of interest, we encourage users to apply a representative range of methods that are capable of detecting different types of associations. Overall, this review provides practitioners a roadmap for understanding and applying Phylogenetic Genotype to Phenotype mapping approaches.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes recent Phylogenetic Genotype-to-Phenotype (PhyloG2P) methods that use replicated evolution across lineages to link genomic changes to trait variation between species. It groups methods into three categories—replicated amino acid substitutions, evolutionary-rate changes, and gene duplication/loss—and argues that no single method will capture all relevant genomic regions, so users should apply a representative range across coding and noncoding elements.

Key findings

  • PhyloG2P methods fall into three broad categories: replicated amino acid substitutions, changes in evolutionary rates, and duplication/loss of genetic elements; Table 1 lists current methods and example applications across these categories.
  • Replicated evolution provides statistical power to distinguish phenotype-associated genetic changes from background variation, but trait definition matters: binary presence/absence can oversimplify biology, while continuous traits can increase power and reveal what aspect of a trait is controlled.
  • The review highlights that complex traits may show limited genetic repeatability: Eastment et al. (2024) studied 17 independent transitions to viviparity across vertebrate genomes spanning over 400 million years and found no gene family changed significantly in more than six lineages.
  • Zhang et al. (2023) used methods from all three categories across seven independent alpine transitions in angiosperms, identifying replicated gene-family expansions related to hypoxia tolerance and contractions in immune-response families; Okuyama et al. (2025) identified three substitutions in a gene across all three independent transitions studied and confirmed they were necessary and sufficient to cause the phenotypic change.

Methods

  • Design: narrative review of PhyloG2P methods, building on earlier reviews by Rey et al. (2019), Smith et al. (2020), Nagy et al. (2020), and Pereira and Kohlsdorf (2023), with emphasis on recent developments.
  • Data or sample: no primary data; the paper synthesizes published methods and example applications, organized in Table 1 by method category, noncoding-region applicability, relaxed matching, continuous-trait applicability, and duplication/loss detection.
  • Main analysis: qualitative synthesis of evolutionary mechanisms, method assumptions, trait measurement, ancestral state reconstruction, tree topology issues, and future directions including within-species variation, epigenetic/environmental information, and machine learning approaches.

Limitations

  • The paper states that most PhyloG2P methods rely on accurate ancestral state reconstruction, which can be inaccurate when traits evolve non-neutrally; methods also depend on orthologous alignments and may fail when replication involves lineage-specific paralogues or deep divergence.
  • The paper states that current methods often rely on a single representative trait value and consensus genome per lineage, ignoring within-lineage phenotypic and genotypic variation, and that few PhyloG2P applications are followed up with transgenic or knockout experiments.
  • Evident from the text: as a narrative review, it does not perform a systematic quantitative meta-analysis, and its conclusions about method performance draw on selected example applications rather than a standardized comparative benchmark.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/gbe/evaf150

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

12 of 112 cited sources checked · 9 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisereasoning

    The need for genome-wide statistical analysis methods with low error rates prompted the development of several new and updated phylogenetic methods that could be applied to genomic data.

    “This need prompted the development of several new and updated phylogenetic methods that could be applied to this genomic data (Zou and Zhang 2015; Prudent et al. 2016; Rey et al. 2018; Hu et al. 2019; Kowalczyk et al. 2019; Treaster et al. 2021; Duchemin et al. 2022; Fukushima and Pollock 2023; Morel et al. 2024)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Zou and Zhang 2015 source
    • cites Prudent et al. 2016 source
    • cites Rey et al. 2018 source
  • Premisecitation

    Several recent studies have applied multiple complementary PhyloG2P methods.

    “This diversity has been actively embraced with several recent studies applying multiple complementary PhyloG2P methods (Eliason et al. 2023; Zhang et al. 2023; Eastment et al. 2024; Matsuda and Makino 2024)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Eliason et al. 2023 source
    • cites Zhang et al. 2023

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Eastment et al. 2024 source
  • Premisecitation

    Eastment et al. (2024) constructed a set of gene alignments from vertebrate genomes spanning over 400 million years of evolution that included 17 independent transitions to viviparity, a far larger number than earlier PhyloG2P studies.

    “Eastment et al. constructed a set of gene alignments from vertebrate genomes spanning over 400 million years of evolution that included 17 independent transitions to viviparity, a far larger number than earlier PhyloG2P studies (Yusuf et al. 2023).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Eastment et al. 2024 source

      The Background states that the study used vertebrate whole-genome data spanning more than 400 million years and accounting for 17 independent transitions to viviparity. But the Methods (Whole genome alignments) say the default alignment used for substitution-rate analysis accounted for 14 transitions; the 17-transition figure describes the broader dataset, not specifically its coding-gene alignments. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Yusuf et al. 2023 source
    • Rests on an assumption: Viviparity has independently evolved many times in vertebrates such as squamate reptiles and fish, as well as once in mammals.
    • Rests on an assumption: Few previous studies had used genome-wide approaches to explore whether the same genes were involved in independent transitions to viviparity across deep evolutionary time scales.
  • Premisecitation

    Gene ontology enrichment tests have often identified significant enrichment in functions related to the trait of interest.

    “This verification can be done through gene ontology enrichment tests, which have often identified significant enrichment in functions related to the trait of interest (Chikina et al. 2016; Prudent et al. 2016; Nagy et al. 2017; Hu et al. 2019; Zhang et al. 2023; Redlich et al. 2024).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Chikina et al. 2016 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

    • cites Prudent et al. 2016 source
    • cites Nagy et al. 2017 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Interpretationcitation

    Expanding the phylogenetic breadth of a study may reveal additional biological variation, such as more phenotypic categories or intermediate phenotypes between presence and absence.

    “For example, expanding the phylogenetic breadth of a study may reveal additional biological variation, such as more phenotypic categories or intermediate phenotypes between “presence” and “absence” (Redlich et al. 2024).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Redlich et al. 2024 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 31
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 26
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Trait loss may occur when a change in the environment of a lineage makes a trait redundant, or when a change in development has the side effect of causing a trait to no longer form.

    “Trait loss may occur when a change in the environment of a lineage makes a trait redundant (Partha et al. 2019), or when a change in development has the side effect of causing a trait to no longer form (Womack et al. 2018; Pereira and Kohlsdorf 2023; Womack and Hoke 2023).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Partha et al. 2019 source
    • cites Womack et al. 2018 source
    • cites Pereira and Kohlsdorf 2023 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    Together, findings of Yusuf et al. (2023) and Eastment et al. (2024) suggest that complex traits evolving over large timescales show limited genetic repeatability, likely reflecting redundancy in the genetic routes that can lead to viviparity.

    “Together, the findings of Yusuf et al. (2023) and Eastment et al. (2024) suggests that complex traits evolving over large timescales show limited genetic repeatability, likely reflecting redundancy in the genetic routes that can lead to viviparity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Yusuf et al. 2023 source

      The Discussion and Conclusions (pages unavailable) report no strong genome-wide signal of molecular convergence across the sampled transitions to viviparity, while also identifying a few repeatedly involved genes. That supports limited genetic repeatability in this system, but the paper does not establish the broader claim about complex traits over large timescales or show that redundant genetic routes explain the pattern. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Eastment et al. 2024 source

      Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Eastment et al. identified diverse molecular changes associated with viviparity, but only some were replicated, and even then only across a subset of lineages.

    “In addition, they identified diverse molecular changes associated with viviparity, but only some of these genetic changes were replicated, and even then only across a subset of lineages.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Eastment et al. 2024 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    An increase in the number of copies of a genetic element can lead to increased expression levels, which in turn can produce a substantial change in a trait.

    “For example, an increase in the number of copies of a genetic element can lead to increased expression levels, which in turn can produce a substantial change in a trait (Klure et al. 2025) (Fig. 2c).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Klure et al. 2025 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisenone given

    The second PhyloG2P approach focuses on phenotypic changes that have evolved independently in multiple lineages, known as replicated evolution.

    “The second approach to PhyloG2P research focuses on phenotypic changes that have evolved independently in multiple lineages (known as replicated evolution, see Box 1).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisenone given

    The first PhyloG2P approach identifies phenotypes that have arisen only once in the evolutionary history of a group of lineages.

    “The first approach identifies phenotypes that have arisen only once in the evolutionary history of a group of lineages.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Traits controlled by pleiotropically constrained networks are ideal for PhyloG2P research, as there is a greater chance that changes in the trait will have been caused by the same genetic change in multiple lineages, improving power to identify them.

    “Traits controlled by pleiotropically constrained networks are ideal for PhyloG2P research, as there is a greater chance that changes in the trait will have been caused by the same genetic change in multiple lineages, improving our power to identify them.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    PhyloG2P methods fall into three broad categories based on the type of genetic changes they identify: individual amino acid sites, changes in evolutionary rates, and duplication/loss of genetic elements.

    “We argue that PhyloG2P methods fall into three broad categories based on the type of genetic changes they identify.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    PhyloG2P methods use reconstructed evolutionary relationships to link genotypic variation between lineages to their variation in phenotype.

    “PhyloG2P methods use reconstructed evolutionary relationships to link genotypic variation between lineages to their variation in phenotype.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Smith et al. 2020 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Replicated phenotypic changes in independent lineages can be caused by genetic changes which may be replicated at different levels of organization.

    “Replicated phenotypic changes in independent lineages can be caused by genetic changes which may be replicated at different levels of organization (Fig. 2) (Losos 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Losos 2011 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisereasoning

    Either environmental redundancy or developmental side effect can lead to a decrease in selective pressure on the genetic elements controlling the trait, provided they are not pleiotropically linked to other traits.

    “Either of these phenomena can lead to a decrease in selective pressure on the genetic elements controlling the trait, provided they are not pleiotropically linked to other traits.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisenone given

    Trait definition and measurement in PhyloG2P are constrained by data availability and sample size, and are further informed by prior knowledge of the genetic pathways associated with the trait.

    “Practically, trait definition and measurement are constrained by data availability and sample size, and they are further informed by prior knowledge of the genetic pathways associated with the trait.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Trait definition and measurement are constrained by data availability and sample size.
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    Most of the recently developed PhyloG2P methods identify correlations between replicated phenotypic transitions and replicated genetic changes.

    “Most of the recently developed PhyloG2P methods identify correlations between replicated phenotypic transitions and replicated genetic changes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Both PhyloG2P approaches facilitate mapping genotype to phenotype for traits that only vary between species, which is not possible with existing methods that depend upon the ability to cross individuals with contrasting phenotypes.

    “Both of these approaches facilitate the mapping of genotype to phenotype for traits that only vary between species, which is not possible with existing methods that depend upon the ability to cross individuals with contrasting phenotypes (Smith et al. 2020).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Smith et al. 2020 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    In any group of lineages that have independently achieved similar phenotypic changes, some may have undergone similar or identical genetic changes, whereas others may have achieved the same phenotype through unique genetic changes.

    “In any group of lineages that have independently achieved similar phenotypic changes, some of them may have undergone similar or identical genetic changes, where as others may have achieved the same phenotype through unique genetic changes (Yusuf et al. 2023).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Yusuf et al. 2023 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisenone given

    Decreases in evolutionary rate can be associated with novel constraints on genetic elements, while increases in rate can be indicative of directional or relaxed selection.

    “Decreases in rate can be associated with novel constraints on genetic elements, while increases in rate can be indicative of directional or relaxed selection.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Interpretationnone given

    PhyloG2P research follows two main approaches.

    “PhyloG2P research follows two main approaches.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Through analysis of gene duplication and loss, Zhang et al. identified expansions of gene families related to hypoxia tolerance, which are likely required to survive in low oxygen alpine environments.

    “Through analysis of gene duplication and loss, they identified expansions of gene families related to hypoxia tolerance, which are likely required to survive in low oxygen alpine environments.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zhang et al. 2023

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Interpretationreasoning

    It may be most appropriate to combine applications of ESL with other methods that use explicit models of evolution.

    “As a result, it may be most appropriate to combine applications of ESL with other methods that use explicit models of evolution.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The machine learning approach of ESL provides a first step into modeling a broader range of biological features that may impact phenotypes, and also provides a more computationally accessible option for PhyloG2P adjacent analysis.

    “As such, the machine learning approach of ESL provides a first step into modeling a broader range of biological features that may impact phenotypes, and also provides a more computationally accessible option for PhyloG2P adjacent analysis.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    Computational accessibility can also be provided through publicly available web applications.

    “Computational accessibility can also be provided through publicly available web applications (Ribeiro et al. 2023; Dong et al. 2024; Morel et al. 2024).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Ribeiro et al. 2023 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

    • cites Dong et al. 2024 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

    • cites Morel et al. 2024 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    This combined approach may prove beneficial, as the more computationally intensive models will only need to be applied to the subset of genetic elements identified by the computationally efficient ESL, provided ESL is not overly inaccurate in its initial identification of candidate genetic elements.

    “This approach may prove beneficial, as the more computationally intensive models will only need to be applied to the subset of genetic elements identified by the computationally efficient ESL (provided ESL is not overly inaccurate in its initial identification of candidate genetic elements) (Allard et al. 2025).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Allard et al. 2025 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    The finding of gene family contraction in yolk-related genes highlights the potential for gene family contraction associated with trait loss and the importance of detailed understanding of trait variation in PhyloG2P studies.

    “This finding highlights the potential for gene family contraction associated with trait loss, as well as the importance of having a detailed understanding of trait variation in PhyloG2P studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    Genes related to basic biological process were found to be under positive selection in Zhang et al.

    “Genes related to basic biological process were found to be under positive selection”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zhang et al. 2023

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Okuyama et al. chose CSUBST because the gene was highly conserved between species and they wanted to identify any identical substitutions driving the replicated phenotypic change.

    “Okuyama et al. (2025) chose CSUBST because the gene was highly conserved between species and they wanted to identify any identical substitutions driving the replicated phenotypic change.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Okuyama et al. 2025 source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Eastment et al. found that replicated expansion and contraction of gene family size was the most widespread form of replication, although no family changed significantly in more than six lineages.

    “They found that replicated expansion and contraction of gene family size was the most widespread form of replication, although no family changed significantly in more than six lineages.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Eastment et al. 2024 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Trait changes do not necessarily occur at the point of speciation, and models that assign whole branches as having a particular trait can cause erroneous inference of selective pressures.

    “Another motivation for more complex models of selective pressure is that trait changes do not necessarily occur at the point of speciation. The models discussed above all implicitly make this assumption as they assign whole branches as having a particular trait, which can cause erroneous inference of the selective pressures acting on a genetic element (Halabi et al. 2021).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Halabi et al. 2021 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    PCOC is available as a container and RERconverge is available as an R package.

    “such as PCOC being available as a container (Rey et al. 2018) or RERconverge being available as an R package Kowalczyk et al. 2019”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Rey et al. 2018 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

    • cites Kowalczyk et al. 2019 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Ensuring that PhyloG2P methods are accessible will enhance the capacity for researchers to apply comprehensive sets of methods in their analyses, improving the capacity for PhyloG2P research to uncover novel genotype to phenotype maps.

    “Ensuring that PhyloG2P methods are accessible will enhance the capacity for researchers to apply comprehensive sets of methods in their analyses, improving the capacity for PhyloG2P research to uncover novel genotype to phenotype maps.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationnone given

    A detailed understanding of both phenotypic and genotypic replication will reveal a largely untapped wealth of potential applications of these methods, further enabled by the development of PhyloG2P methods that can be applied to continuously valued traits.

    “A detailed understanding of both phenotypic and genotypic replication will reveal a largely untapped wealth of potential applications of these methods, further enabled by the development of PhyloG2P methods that can be applied to continuously valued traits.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Extending PhyloG2P methods to account for within-lineage variance, such as by modeling changes in trait distributions, may improve their accuracy.

    “Extending PhyloG2P methods to account for within-lineage variance, such as by modeling changes in trait distributions, may improve their accuracy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisenone given

    PhyloG2P methods identify a set of genetic elements correlated with a trait of interest, and follow-up studies are required to determine the nature of that relationship.

    “PhyloG2P methods identify a set of genetic elements correlated with a trait of interest, and follow up studies are required to determine the nature of that relationship.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    Zhang et al. found plant immune response gene families had repeatedly contracted, potentially as a result of reduced microorganism presence.

    “Additionally, they found plant immune response gene families had repeatedly contracted, potentially as a result of reduced microorganism presence.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zhang et al. 2023

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    While some challenges remain for the integration of epigenetic information and within population trait variation in these studies, recent developments provide promising approaches to addressing them.

    “While some challenges remain for the integration of epigenetic information and within population trait variation in these studies, recent developments provide promising approaches to addressing them.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    This limitation restricts researchers' ability to apply PhyloG2P methods and inhibits the capacity for reproduction and verification of previous findings, eroding an important component of rigorous scientific research.

    “This limitation not only restricts researchers’ ability to apply PhyloG2P methods, it also inhibits the capacity for reproduction and verification of previous findings, eroding an important component of rigorous scientific research (Kumar 2022).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kumar 2022 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Finding ways to include this information in PhyloG2P analysis may improve the capacity to identify genetic elements associated with trait variation between species.

    “Finding ways to include this information in PhyloG2P analysis may improve the capacity to identify genetic elements associated with trait variation between species.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationnone given

    There are many potential next steps that the PhyloG2P research program could take, and all of them are likely to reveal exciting new opportunities for expanding the mapping of genotype to phenotype.

    “There are many potential next steps that the PhyloG2P research program could take, and all of them are likely to reveal exciting new opportunities for expanding the mapping of genotype to phenotype.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Methods lacking neat software implementation or basic documentation may prove inaccessible for researchers without the required background knowledge and skills, limiting their potential usage.

    “Methods which lack neat software implementation or basic documentation may prove inaccessible for researchers without the required background knowledge and skills, limiting their potential usage.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    Including variation in epigenetic and transcriptomic features can improve phenotype to genotype maps, and incorporating them into PhyloG2P analysis may prove fruitful.

    “Including variation in these features can improve phenotype to genotype maps (Ritchie et al. 2015), and incorporating them into PhyloG2P analysis may prove fruitful.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Ritchie et al. 2015 source
  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Interpretationnone given

    A model that unifies both population genetics and PhyloG2P analysis will pave the way for understanding the connection between evolution on short and long timescales.

    “More broadly, a model that unifies both population genetics and PhyloG2P analysis will pave the way for understanding the connection between evolution on short and long timescales.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    One approach to including other forms of molecular variation is to use machine learning models, such as the Evolutionary Sparse Learning (ESL) model of Kumar and Sharma (2021).

    “One approach to including these other forms of molecular variation is to use machine learning models, such as the Evolutionary Sparse Learning (ESL) model of Kumar and Sharma (2021).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kumar and Sharma 2021 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Follow-up investigations using RELAX and PCOC revealed the presence of both relaxed selection and a small number of replicated amino acid profile changes, likely due to the low abundance of pollinators.

    “Follow up investigations using RELAX and PCOC revealed the presence of both relaxed selection and a small number of replicated amino acid profile changes, likely due to the low abundance of pollinators.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Zhang et al. 2023

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    Recent years have seen many developments in the PhyloG2P research program.

    “In summary, recent years have seen many developments in the PhyloG2P research program.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Most PhyloG2P methods rely on accurate ancestral state reconstruction, but most reconstruction methods assume neutral trait evolution, which can lead to inaccuracies when this assumption does not hold.

    “A major caveat that applies to most PhyloG2P methods is that they rely, explicitly or implicitly, on accurate ancestral state reconstruction of the trait of interest to differentiate foreground and background lineages. However, most reconstruction methods assume that the trait of interest is evolving neutrally, which can lead to inaccuracies when this assumption does not hold (Holland et al. 2020”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Holland et al. 2020 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Premisenone given

    The PhyloG2P methods discussed in this review either focus on changes in molecular sequences, or gene duplication and loss.

    “The PhyloG2P methods discussed in this review either focus on changes in molecular sequences, or gene duplication and loss.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    REforge performed better than rates-based methods at identifying regulatory elements associated with trait loss, but requires prior knowledge of transcription factors and their binding motifs.

    “REforge was demonstrated to perform better at identifying regulatory elements associated with trait loss than methods based on evolutionary rates. However, it also requires prior knowledge of transcription factors and their binding motifs, which makes it challenging to apply REforge to traits that have not been studied previously.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Langer et al. 2018 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

    Interpretationreasoning

    With the growing abundance of genomic sequences, well-resolved phylogenies, and detailed trait databases, PhyloG2P methods are well positioned to expand genotype to phenotype mapping to include variation between species.

    “With the growing abundance of genomic sequences, well-resolved phylogenies, and detailed trait databases, PhyloG2P methods are well positioned to expand genotype to phenotype mapping to include variation between species.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Yan et al. 2023 found that tuning model complexity on a gene by gene basis reduced computation time while not impacting statistical performance.

    “Yan et al. 2023 found that tuning model complexity on a gene by gene basis reduced computation time while no impacting statistical performance”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Yan et al. 2023 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    Studies using only a single PhyloG2P method limit the scope of conclusions they can draw and risk missing important genetic elements associated with the trait.

    “Such studies limit the scope of the conclusions they can draw, and risk missing important genetic elements associated with the trait (Wheeler et al. 2022).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wheeler et al. 2022 source

      Checked before — its earlier verdict is held back until a new check runs.

49 of 49
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most lineages have a substantial number of unique phenotypic features.

    “since most lineages will have a substantial number of unique phenotypic features”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    It is not always clear where the boundaries between parallel and convergent evolution lie.

    “However, it is not always clear where the boundaries between these categories of close/similar and distant/distinct lie.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Trait definition and measurement are constrained by data availability and sample size.

    “Practically, trait definition and measurement are constrained by data availability and sample size”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Viviparity has independently evolved many times in vertebrates such as squamate reptiles and fish, as well as once in mammals.

    “Viviparity (giving birth to live young) has independently evolved many times in vertebrates such as squamate reptiles and fish, as well as once in mammals.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Few previous studies had used genome-wide approaches to explore whether the same genes were involved in independent transitions to viviparity across deep evolutionary time scales.

    “Few previous studies had used genome-wide approaches to explore whether the same genes were involved in independent transitions to viviparity across deep evolutionary time scales.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Many lineages of angiosperm plants have independently adapted to harsh alpine environments.

    “Many lineages of angiosperm plants have independently adapted to harsh alpine environments.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most PhyloG2P studies use existing genetic annotations to verify the relevance of the candidate genetic elements they identify.

    “Although infeasible for many species, most PhyloG2P studies use existing genetic annotations to verify the relevance of the candidate genetic elements they identify.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Trait values can vary widely within lineages, and this variance will likely not be consistent through time or between lineages.

    “Trait values can vary widely within lineages, and this variance will likely not be consistent through time or between lineages.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Allelic variation between individuals may contribute to significantly different values of continuous traits.

    “as allelic variation between individuals may contribute to significantly different values of the trait (such as height or lifespan)”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    High computational demands are common in genomic analysis.

    “While high computational demands are common in genomic analysis”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Machine learning does not explicitly model evolutionary processes.

    “one shortcoming of using machine learning is that it does not explicitly model evolutionary processes”
11 of 11

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • PAML substitution ratio is reversed between the table and text

    Minor

    Table 1 describes PAML as comparing the ratio of synonymous to nonsynonymous substitutions, but the methods section defines its ω ratio as nonsynonymous to synonymous substitutions. These are reciprocal ratios.

1 of 1

Cited works that were retracted

Works this paper cites that were later retracted, from the retraction notices publishers deposit. Major when the notice came out before this paper was published.

  • Cites a retracted work: 10.1093/molbev/msac258

    Info

    The cited work was retracted; the date of the notice is not on record.

    Cited work 10.1093/molbev/msac258 · retraction date not known · this paper published 2025-09

1 of 1

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 104 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Cerca, 2023, Understanding natural selection and similarity: convergent, parallel and repeated evolution, Mol Ecol, 32, 5451, 10.1111/mec.v32.20 · DOI
  2. Chabrol, 2018, Detecting the molecular basis of phenotypic convergence, Methods Ecol Evol, 9, 2170, 10.1111/mee3.2018.9.issue-11 · DOI
  3. James, 2023, Replicated evolution in plants, Annu Rev Plant Biol, 74, 697, 10.1146/arplant.2023.74.issue-1 · DOI
  4. Speed, 2017, Quantification provides a conceptual basis for convergent evolution, Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc, 92, 815, 10.1111/brv.2017.92.issue-2 · DOI
  5. Zhang, 2023, Patterns and evolutionary consequences of pleiotropy, Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst, 54, 1, 10.1146/ecolsys.2023.54.issue-1 · DOI
  6. Zhang, 2023, Genomic convergence underlying high-altitude adaptation in alpine plants, J Integr Plant Biol, 65, 1620, 10.1111/jipb.v65.7 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Macdonald, A. R., James, M. E., Mitchell, J. D., & Holland, B. R.
Affiliations
  • School of Natural Sciences, University of Tasmania , Hobart, TS ,
  • University of Tasmania (AU)
Venue
Genome Biology and Evolution
Published
2025-09
Volume
17
Issue
9
ISSN
1759-6653 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4414035720
Cited by
5
References
104
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3
FWCI
0.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Plant Success in Nature and Agriculture (CE200100015)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
Keywords
genotype-phenotype mapping, character evolution, amino acid substitutions, evolutionary rate shifts, gene duplication, gene loss, trait measurement, intraspecific variation, phylogenetic comparative analysis
MeSH terms
Animals, Chromosome Mapping, Genotype, Phenotype, Phylogeny, Evolution, Molecular, Genomics

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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