The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Slowdowns in Diversification Rates from Real Phylogenies May Not be Real
Abstract
Studies of diversification patterns often find a slowing in lineage accumulation toward the present. This seemingly pervasive pattern of rate downturns has been taken as evidence for adaptive radiations, density-dependent regulation, and metacommunity species interactions. The significance of rate downturns is evaluated with statistical tests (the gamma statistic and Monte Carlo constant rates (MCCR) test; birth-death likelihood models and Akaike Information Criterion [AIC] scores) that rely on null distributions, which assume that the included species are a random sample of the entire clade. Sampling in real phylogenies, however, often is nonrandom because systematists try to include early-diverging species or representatives of previous intrataxon classifications. We studied the effects of biased sampling, structured sampling, and random sampling by experimentally pruning simulated trees (60 and 150 species) as well as a completely sampled empirical tree (58 species) and then applying the gamma statistic/MCCR test and birth-death likelihood models/AIC scores to assess rate changes. For trees with random species sampling, the true model (i.e., the one fitting the complete phylogenies) could be inferred in most cases. Oversampling deep nodes, however, strongly biases inferences toward downturns, with simulations of structured and biased sampling suggesting that this occurs when sampling percentages drop below 80%. The magnitude of the effect and the sensitivity of diversification rate models is such that a useful rule of thumb may be not to infer rate downturns from real trees unless they have >80% species sampling.
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
The global diversity of birds in space and time
Jetz, W., Thomas, G. H., Joy, J. B., Hartmann, K., & Mooers, A. O. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11631 · Cited by 3,934
Rabosky, D. L., Santini, F., Eastman, J., Smith, S. A., Sidlauskas, B., Chang, J., & Alfaro, M. E. (2013) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms2958 · Cited by 685
Derryberry, E. P., Claramunt, S., Derryberry, G., Chesser, R. T., Cracraft, J., Aleixo, A., Pérez-Emán, J., Remsen Jr., J. V., & Brumfield, R. T. (2011) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.2011.01374.x · Cited by 377
Why does diversification slow down?
Moen, D., & Morlon, H. (2014) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2014.01.010 · Cited by 317
Species Richness at Continental Scales Is Dominated by Ecological Limits
Rabosky, D. L., & Hurlbert, A. H. (2015) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/680850 · Cited by 310
Metadata
- Authors
- Cusimano, N., & Renner, S. S.
- Venue
- Systematic Biology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-06-03
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 458-464
- ISSN
- 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
- 1076-836X
- OpenAlex
- W2122673094
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.45
- 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: Slowdowns in Diversification Rates from Real Phylogenies May Not be Real. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/sysbio/syq032
- The paper
- Cusimano, N., & Renner, S. S. (2010). Slowdowns in Diversification Rates from Real Phylogenies May Not be Real. Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syq032
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.