Cited by 127Evolution and Paleontology StudiesMorphological variations and asymmetryEvolution and Genetic Dynamics

Phylogenetic analysis using lévy processes: finding jumps in the evolution of continuous traits

Open access
Landis, Michael J., Schraiber, Joshua G., Liang, Mason·2013·Systematic Biology

Abstract

Gaussian processes, a class of stochastic processes including Brownian motion and the Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process, are widely used to model continuous trait evolution in statistical phylogenetics. Under such processes, observations at the tips of a phylogenetic tree have a multivariate Gaussian distribution, which may lead to suboptimal model specification under certain evolutionary conditions, as supposed in models of punctuated equilibrium or adaptive radiation. To consider non-normally distributed continuous trait evolution, we introduce a method to compute posterior probabilities when modeling continuous trait evolution as a Lévy process. Through data simulation and model testing, we establish that single-rate Brownian motion (BM) and Lévy processes with jumps generate distinct patterns in comparative data. We then analyzed body mass and endocranial volume measurements for 126 primates. We rejected single-rate BM in favor of a Lévy process with jumps for each trait, with the lineage leading to most recent common ancestor of great apes showing particularly strong evidence against single-rate BM.

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/sysbio/sys086

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Modeling the errors using fat-tailed distributions may mitigate the impact of singular evolutionary events on the estimation of the slope in PGLS and other linear modeling approaches.

    “For PGLS and other linear modeling approaches, modeling the errors using fat-tailed distributions (Blomberg et al. 2012;Landis et al. 2012;Elliot and Mooers 2014;Duchen et al. 2017) may mitigate the impact of singular evolutionary events on the estimation of the slope (also see Slater and Pennell 2013, for an alternative approach using robust regression).”

    From Rethinking phylogenetic comparative methods (2018) · cites this paper as Landis et al. 2012

    The paper’s introduction (page not available in our copy) says that Lévy-process jumps give trait-change distributions fat tails and account for abrupt evolutionary shifts. Its Discussion addresses detecting such jumps, but the paper does not show that fat-tailed errors mitigate their effect on slope estimates in PGLS or other linear models. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    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: 5

  1. Abramowitz M. Stegun I. 1964. Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables, Vol. 55. New York: Dover Publications.
  2. Kallenberg O. 2010. Foundations of modern probability. New York: Springer.
  3. Mattila T., Bokma F. 2008. Extant mammal body masses suggest punctuated equilibrium. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 275:2195-2199.
  4. Stanley S. 1975. A theory of evolution above the species level. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 72:646.
  5. Uyeda J., Hansen T., Arnold S., Pienaar J. 2011. The million-year wait for macroevolutionary bursts. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108: 15908-15913.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Landis, M. J., Schraiber, J. G., & Liang, M.
Affiliations
University of California, Berkeley (US)
Corresponding author
Schraiber, Joshua G.
Venue
Systematic Biology
Published
2012-12-03
Volume
62
Issue
2
Pages
193-204
ISSN
  • 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1076-836X
OpenAlex
W2107110596
Cited by
127
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6
FWCI
5.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Systematic Biology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01gm069801-09)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (T32HG000047)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01 GM-069801, R01GM040282, R01GM086887)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Geometry and Topology › Morphological variations and asymmetry
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
Keywords
Lévy processes, continuous trait evolution, phylogenetic comparative analysis, Brownian motion, punctuated equilibrium, adaptive radiation, posterior probability, body mass, endocranial volume, primates, great apes, model testing
MeSH terms
Animals, Computer Simulation, Models, Biological, Phenotype, Phylogeny, Primates, Body Mass Index

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