Cited by 469Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesGenetic diversity and population structureEvolution and Paleontology Studies

StarBEAST2 brings faster species tree inference and accurate estimates of substitution rates

Open access
Ogilvie, Huw A., Bouckaert, Remco R., Drummond, Alexei J.·2017·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Fully Bayesian multispecies coalescent (MSC) methods like *BEAST estimate species trees from multiple sequence alignments. Today thousands of genes can be sequenced for a given study, but using that many genes with *BEAST is intractably slow. An alternative is to use heuristic methods which compromise accuracy or completeness in return for speed. A common heuristic is concatenation, which assumes that the evolutionary history of each gene tree is identical to the species tree. This is an inconsistent estimator of species tree topology, a worse estimator of divergence times, and induces spurious substitution rate variation when incomplete lineage sorting is present. Another class of heuristics directly motivated by the MSC avoids many of the pitfalls of concatenation but cannot be used to estimate divergence times. To enable fuller use of available data and more accurate inference of species tree topologies, divergence times, and substitution rates, we have developed a new version of *BEAST called StarBEAST2. To improve convergence rates we add analytical integration of population sizes, novel MCMC operators and other optimizations. Computational performance improved by 13.5× and 13.8× respectively when analyzing two empirical data sets, and an average of 33.1× across 30 simulated data sets. To enable accurate estimates of per-species substitution rates, we introduce species tree relaxed clocks, and show that StarBEAST2 is a more powerful and robust estimator of rate variation than concatenation. StarBEAST2 is available through the BEAUTi package manager in BEAST 2.4 and above.

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 · 10.1093/molbev/msx126

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Bayesian multispecies coalescent models like *BEAST and starBEAST2 consider gene tree variations and can give more accurate estimate of per-species substitution rates.

    “Bayesian multispecies coalescent models like *BEAST and starBEAST2 consider gene tree variations and can give more accurate estimate of per-species substitution rates (Heled and Drummond 2010; Ogilvie et al. 2017).”

    From Bayesian Detection of Convergent Rate Changes of Conserved Noncoding Elements on Phylogenetic Trees (2019) · cites this paper as Ogilvie et al. 2017

    The Introduction identifies *BEAST and StarBEAST2 as Bayesian multispecies coalescent methods, and the Conclusions say StarBEAST2’s new species-tree relaxed clock enables accurate inference of per-species branch rates despite incomplete lineage sorting. But the Species Tree Relaxed Clocks section says *BEAST’s gene-tree relaxed clocks do not produce species-branch-rate estimates. The claim therefore overextends the rate-estimation finding to *BEAST. Page numbers are not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. Aberer AJ, Kobert K, Stamatakis A. 2014 ExaBayes: massively parallel Bayesian tree inference for the whole-genome era. Mol Biol Evol. 31 10: 2553– 2556. 25135941 PMC4166930
  2. Baer CF, Miyamoto MM, Denver DR. 2007 Mutation rate variation in multicellular eukaryotes: causes and consequences. Nat Rev Genet. 8 8: 619– 631. 17637734
  3. Barrow LN, Ralicki HF, Emme SA, Lemmon EM. 2014 Species tree estimation of North American chorus frogs (Hylidae: Pseudacris) with parallel tagged amplicon sequencing. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 75: 78– 90. 24583020
  4. Berv JS, Prum RO. 2014 A comprehensive multilocus phylogeny of the Neotropical cotingas (Cotingidae, Aves) with a comparative evolutionary analysis of breeding system and plumage dimorphism and a revised phylogenetic classification. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 81: 120– 136. 25234241
  5. Blom MPK, Horner P, Moritz C. 2016 Convergence across a continent: adaptive diversification in a recent radiation of Australian lizards. Proc. Roy Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 283 1832:pii: 20160181. PMC4920308 27306048
  6. Bromham L. 2011 The genome as a life-history character: why rate of molecular evolution varies between mammal species. Philos Trans Roy Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 366 1577: 2503– 2513. 21807731 PMC3138607
  7. Chifman J, Kubatko L. 2014 Quartet inference from snp data under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics 30 23: 3317. 25104814 PMC4296144
  8. Degnan JH, Rosenberg NA. 2006 Discordance of species trees with their most likely gene trees. PLoS Genet. 2 5: e68. 16733550 PMC1464820
  9. Degnan JH, Rosenberg NA. 2009 Gene tree discordance, phylogenetic inference and the multispecies coalescent. Trends Ecol Evol. 24 6: 332– 340. 19307040
  10. Drummond AJ, Rambaut A. 2007 BEAST: Bayesian evolutionary analysis by sampling trees. BMC Evol Biol. 7: 214. 17996036 PMC2247476
  11. Drummond AJ, Suchard MA. 2010 Bayesian random local clocks, or one rate to rule them all. BMC Biol. 8: 114. 20807414 PMC2949620
  12. Faircloth BC, McCormack JE, Crawford NG, Harvey MG, Brumfield RT, Glenn TC. 2012 Ultraconserved elements anchor thousands of genetic markers spanning multiple evolutionary timescales. Syst Biol. 61 5: 717– 726. 22232343
  13. Gatesy J, Springer MS. 2013 Concatenation versus coalescence versus “concatalescence”. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 110 13: E1179. 23460702 PMC3612616
  14. Gernhard T. 2008 The conditioned reconstructed process. J Theor Biol. 253 4: 769– 778. 18538793
  15. Giarla TC, Esselstyn JA. 2015 The challenges of resolving a rapid, recent radiation: empirical and simulated phylogenomics of Philippine shrews. Syst Biol. 64 5: 727– 740. 25979143
  16. Gossmann TI, Schmid MW, Grossniklaus U, Schmid KJ. 2014 Selection-driven evolution of sex-biased genes is consistent with sexual selection in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol Biol Evol. 31 3: 574– 583. 24273323
  17. Heled J, Bouckaert RR. 2013 Looking for trees in the forest: summary tree from posterior samples. BMC Evol Biol. 13: 221. 24093883 PMC3853548
  18. Heled J, Drummond AJ. 2010 Bayesian inference of species trees from multilocus data. Mol Biol Evol. 27 3: 570– 580. 19906793 PMC2822290
  19. Jones G. 2017 Algorithmic improvements to species delimitation and phylogeny estimation under the multispecies coalescent. J Math Biol. 74 1: 447– 467. 27287395
  20. Jukes TH, Cantor CR. 1969 Evolution of protein molecules In: Munro HN, editor. Mammalian protein metabolism. New York: Academic Press p. 21– 132.
  21. Kubatko LS, Degnan JH. 2007 Inconsistency of phylogenetic estimates from concatenated data under coalescence. Syst Biol. 56 1: 17– 24. 17366134
  22. Lambert SM, Reeder TW, Wiens JJ. 2015 When do species-tree and concatenated estimates disagree? An empirical analysis with higher-level scincid lizard phylogeny. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 82: 146– 155. 25315885
  23. Liu L. 2008 BEST: Bayesian estimation of species trees under the coalescent model. Bioinformatics 24 21: 2542– 2543. 18799483
  24. Liu L, Edwards SV. 2015 Comment on “Statistical binning enables an accurate coalescent-based estimation of the avian tree.” Science 350 6257: 171. 26450203
  25. Liu L, Pearl DK, Brumfield RT, Edwards SV. 2008 Estimating species trees using multiple-allele DNA sequence data. Evolution 62 8: 2080– 2091. 18462214
  26. Liu L, Yu L, Edwards SV. 2010 A maximum pseudo-likelihood approach for estimating species trees under the coalescent model. BMC Evol Biol. 10: 302. 20937096 PMC2976751
  27. Liu L, Xi Z, Wu S, Davis CC, Edwards SV. 2015 Estimating phylogenetic trees from genome-scale data. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1360 1: 36– 53. 25873435
  28. Mendes FK, Hahn MW. 2016 Gene tree discordance causes apparent substitution rate variation. Syst Biol. 65 4: 711– 721. 26927960
  29. Mirarab S, Warnow T. 2015 ASTRAL-II: coalescent-based species tree estimation with many hundreds of taxa and thousands of genes. Bioinformatics 31 12: i44– i52. 26072508 PMC4765870
  30. Mirarab S, Reaz R, Bayzid MS, Zimmermann T, Swenson MS, Warnow T. 2014a ASTRAL: genome-scale coalescent-based species tree estimation. Bioinformatics 30 17: i541– i548. 25161245 PMC4147915
  31. Moen D, Morlon H. 2014 Why does diversification slow down?. Trends Ecol Evol. 29 4: 190– 197. 24612774
  32. Ogilvie HA, Heled J, Xie D, Drummond AJ. 2016 Computational performance and statistical accuracy of *BEAST and comparisons with other methods. Syst Biol. 65 3: 381– 396. 26821913 PMC4851174
  33. Phillips MJ, Bennett TH, Lee MSY. 2009 Molecules, morphology, and ecology indicate a recent, amphibious ancestry for echidnas. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 106 40: 17089– 17094. 19805098 PMC2761324
  34. Rambaut A, Grassly NC. 1997 Seq-Gen: an application for the Monte Carlo simulation of DNA sequence evolution along phylogenetic trees. Comput Appl Biosci. 13 3: 235– 238. 9183526
  35. Rannala B, Yang Z. 2017 Efficient Bayesian species tree inference under the multispecies coalescent. Syst Biol. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syw119. PMC8562347 28053140 · DOI
  36. Rasmussen MD, Kellis M. 2007 Accurate gene-tree reconstruction by learning gene- and species-specific substitution rates across multiple complete genomes. Genome Res. 17 12: 1932– 1942. 17989260 PMC2099600
  37. Springer MS, Gatesy J. 2016 The gene tree delusion. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 94: 1– 33. 26238460
  38. Stamatakis A. 2014 RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies. Bioinformatics 30 9: 1312– 1313. 24451623 PMC3998144
  39. Szöllősi GJ, Tannier E, Daubin V, Boussau B. 2015 The inference of gene trees with species trees. Syst Biol. 64 1: e42– e62. 25070970 PMC4265139
  40. Tavaré S. 1986 Some probabilistic and statistical problems in the analysis of DNA sequences In Miura R, editor. Some mathematical questions in biology: DNA sequence analysis, Vol. 17, Lectures on mathematics in the life sciences. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island p. 57– 86.
  41. Xi Z, Liu L, Davis CC. 2015 Genes with minimal phylogenetic information are problematic for coalescent analyses when gene tree estimation is biased. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 92: 63– 71. 26115844
  42. Xu B, Yang Z. 2016 Challenges in species tree estimation under the multispecies coalescent model. Genetics 204 4: 1353– 1368. 27927902 PMC5161269
  43. Yang Z. 1994 Maximum likelihood phylogenetic estimation from DNA sequences with variable rates over sites: approximate methods. J Mol Evol. 39 3: 306– 314. 7932792
  44. Yang Z. 2007 PAML 4: Phylogenetic analysis by maximum likelihood. Mol Biol Evol. 24 8: 1586– 1591. 17483113
  45. Yang Z, Rannala B. 2014 Unguided species delimitation using DNA sequence data from multiple loci. Mol Biol Evol. 31 12: 3125– 3135. 25274273 PMC4245825
  46. Zimmermann T, Mirarab S, Warnow T. 2014 BBCA: improving the scalability of *BEAST using random binning. BMC Genomics 15(Suppl 6): S11. PMC4239591 25572469

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ogilvie, H. A., Bouckaert, R. R., & Drummond, A. J.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
Ogilvie, Huw A.
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Published
2017-04-14
Volume
34
Issue
8
Pages
2101-2114
ISSN
  • 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-1719
OpenAlex
W2950847777
Cited by
469
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 76 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 62 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 41 · 2017: 12
FWCI
18.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Australian Research Council (FL110100104)
  • National Computational Infrastructure
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
Keywords
species tree inference, multispecies coalescent, Bayesian phylogenetics, substitution rate estimation, relaxed molecular clock, incomplete lineage sorting, divergence time estimation, population size estimation, MCMC convergence, concatenation, BEAST
MeSH terms
Base Sequence, Bayes Theorem, Computer Simulation, Biological Evolution, Models, Genetic, Phylogeny, Software, Sequence Alignment, Genetic Speciation, Mutation Rate

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