Six-state amino acid recoding is not an effective strategy to offset the effects of compositional heterogeneity and saturation in phylogenetic analyses
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1093/sysbio/syab027 · Paper page
Abstract
Six-state amino acid recoding strategies are commonly applied to combat the effects of compositional heterogeneity and substitution saturation in phylogenetic analyses. While these methods have been endorsed from a theoretical perspective, their performance has never been extensively tested. Here, we test the effectiveness of 6-state recoding approaches by comparing the performance of analyses on recoded and non-recoded datasets that have been simulated under gradients of compositional heterogeneity or saturation. In all of our simulation analyses, non-recoding approaches greatly outperformed 6-state recoding approaches. Our results suggest that 6-state recoding strategies are not effective in the face of high saturation. Further, while recoding strategies do buffer the effects of compositional heterogeneity, the loss of information that accompanies 6-state recoding outweighs its benefits, even in the most compositionally heterogeneous datasets. In addition, we evaluate recoding schemes with 9, 12, 15, and 18 states and show that these all outperform 6-state recoding. Our results have important implications for the more than 70 published papers that have incorporated 6-state recoding, many of which have significant bearing on relationships across the tree of life.
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Six-state amino acid recoding is commonly used to counter compositional heterogeneity and saturation, but simulations show it generally performs worse than non-recoding for phylogenetic reconstruction. Recoding with more states (9–18) can outperform six-state recoding, yet benefits are limited and recoding should be justified rather than applied routinely.
Key findings
- Across simulated gradients of compositional heterogeneity and saturation, non-recoded analyses consistently produced more accurate trees than six-state recoded analyses; for saturation, Robinson-Foulds distances were significantly higher for recoded data sets (P < 2.2e-16).
- Six-state recoding buffered the effects of compositional heterogeneity, but the loss of information outweighed its benefits; non-recoding performed significantly better in all tested cases except under the highest compositional heterogeneity and shortest stem branch.
- Dayhoff 9-, 12-, 15-, and 18-state recoding generally outperformed six-state recoding; Dayhoff 18-state recoding outperformed all strategies including non-recoding in one analysis, but its difference from non-recoding was significant only under the highest compositional heterogeneity (P = 6.622e-06; other P-values 0.4314 and 0.2183).
- At least 91 published phylogenetic studies have used six-state amino acid recoding; simulated data with inflation parameter 0.9 had a median RCFV of 0.088 versus 0.036 for real data from the surveyed papers, and RCFV ≥ 0.1 occurred in 6 out of 25 sampled publications.
Methods
- The study used empirical data from Chang et al. (2015) and Feuda et al. (2017), comprising 51,940 amino acid positions from 78 taxa plus 9 non-animal outgroups, alongside simulated data under gradients of compositional heterogeneity or saturation.
- Compositional heterogeneity was simulated in P4 on four hypothetical 20-taxon balanced trees with 1000-amino-acid sequences and inflation parameters 0.1, 0.5, and 0.9; data were recoded with Dayhoff and S&R six-state schemes, analyzed in RAxML, and evaluated with Robinson-Foulds distances and a deep-splits metric using chi-squared tests with Bonferroni correction at α = 0.002.
- Saturation was simulated in Seq-Gen on the Chang and Feuda trees with branch-length scaling factors 1–20 and Dayhoff/JTT models, producing 80,000 data sets plus 5,000 GTR data sets (85,000 total) and 180,000 phylogenies; Robinson-Foulds distances were compared with t-tests and Bonferroni correction at α = 0.0009. Alternative Dayhoff 9-, 12-, 15-, and 18-state binning schemes were also developed and tested under compositional heterogeneity.
Limitations
- Stated: the authors caution against blindly applying Dayhoff 18-state recoding because significant improvement over non-recoding occurred only under the most extreme compositional heterogeneity setting (0.9), which they show is uncommon in real data; they also state that applying any recoding should include sufficient justification and that more analyses are needed to understand alternative recoding methods.
- Stated/evident: alternative binning schemes were not identified exhaustively because the number of possible bins is computationally intractable; the authors instead chose best-scoring schemes from subsets of Dayhoff six-state bins and compared them to Susko and Roger’s schemes.
- Evident: the conclusions are based on simulations using specific models, trees, and empirical data sets from Chang and Feuda, so performance may not generalize to all real data sets or to recoding schemes not tested here.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
0 of 19 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
- Findingnone given
Recoding strategies buffer the effects of compositional heterogeneity.
“while recoding strategies do buffer the effects of compositional heterogeneity”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In simulation analyses, non-recoding approaches consistently outperform six-state recoding approaches.
“In our simulation analyses, non-recoding approaches consistently outperform six-state recoding approaches.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Recoding schemes with 9, 12, 15, and 18 states consistently outperform six-state recoding.
“In addition, we evaluate recoding schemes with 9, 12, 15, and 18 states and show that these consistently outperform six-state recoding.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Despite changes to stem branch length and level of compositional heterogeneity, non-recoding methods produced more accurate trees.
“non-recoding methods produced more accurate trees”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Significant improvement only occurs under the most extreme compositional heterogeneity setting (0.9).
“significant improvement only occurs under the most extreme compositional heterogeneity setting (0.9)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- Findingown data
Non-recoding performed significantly better than recoding in all cases tested, except under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity and shortest stem branch.
“non-recoding performed significantly better than recoding in all cases tested, except under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity and shortest stem branch”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Dayhoff 9-, 12-, 15-, and 18-state recoding strategies performed better than the standard Dayhoff 6-state recoding approach for all tested levels of compositional heterogeneity.
“our Dayhoff 9-, 12-, 15-, and 18-state recoding strategies performed better than the standard Dayhoff 6-state recoding approach for all tested levels of compositional heterogeneity”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The performance of recoding approaches diminished at a slower rate than non-recoding approaches under increasing compositional heterogeneity.
“the performance of the recoding approaches diminished at a slower rate than non-recoding approaches”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The level of compositional heterogeneity (as measured by RCFV) in data sets simulated with the inflation parameter set to 0.9 was substantially higher than the majority of real data sets.
“the level of compositional heterogeneity (as measured by RCFV) in data sets simulated with the inflation parameter set to 0.9 was substantially higher than the majority of real data sets”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
In phylogenetic analyses of 1000 data sets lacking compositional heterogeneity, recoded data sets performed consistently worse than non-recoded data sets.
“recoded data sets performed consistently worse than non-recoded data sets”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Phylogenetic analyses of data simulated under GTR resulted in fewer errors on average when reconstructed with non-recoded Dayhoff matrices compared to reconstructions with the Dayhoff 6-state recoded matrices.
“Phylogenetic analyses of data simulated under GTR resulted in fewer errors on average when reconstructed with non-recoded Dayhoff matrices compared to reconstructions with the Dayhoff 6-state recoded matrices”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Non-recoding outperformed all other recoding strategies except Dayhoff 12- and 15-state recoding under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity (inflation parameter 0.9).
“Non-recoding outperformed all other recoding strategies except Dayhoff 12- and 15-state recoding under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Non-recoding methods outperformed recoding under all levels of compositional heterogeneity tested.
“non-recoding methods outperformed recoding under all levels of compositional heterogeneity tested”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The sum of branch lengths in the recoded Feuda tree was 2.6 times shorter than the sum of branch lengths in the non-recoded Chang tree.
“we multiplied each branch length on the Feuda tree by 2.6 (based on our calculation that the sum of branch lengths in the recoded tree was 2.6 times shorter than the sum of branch lengths in the non-recoded Chang tree).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
As sequence length increased, phylogenetic analyses of non-recoded data sets outperformed analyses of recoded data sets, except under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity.
“As sequence length increased, phylogenetic analyses of non-recoded data sets outperformed analyses of recoded data sets, except under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
For data simulated under the JTT model, trees reconstructed with the JTT and LG models on non-recoded data matrices contained fewer errors on average across all tested levels of saturation compared to reconstructions with the S&R 6-state recoded matrix.
“trees reconstructed with the JTT and LG models on non-recoded data matrices contained fewer errors on average across all tested levels of saturation compared to reconstructions with the S&R 6-state recoded matrix”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
T-tests carried out for each branch length scaling factor parameter indicated that recoded approaches performed significantly worse than non-recoded approaches (P-value < 2.2e-16).
“recoded approaches performed significantly worse than non-recoded approaches (P-value < 2.2e–16)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
As saturation increased, the performance of recoding approaches decreased at a faster rate than non-recoding approaches.
“As saturation increased, the performance of recoding approaches decreased at a faster rate than non-recoding approaches”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
RCFV scores >= 0.1 occurred in 6 out of 25 sampled publications.
“occurred in 6 out of 25 sampled publications”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Under all tested levels of saturation, phylogenetic reconstructions using the Dayhoff and LG models on non-recoded data matrices simulated under the Dayhoff model produced trees with fewer errors on average than those that used the Dayhoff 6-state recoded matrix.
“phylogenetic reconstructions using the Dayhoff and LG models on non-recoded data matrices that were simulated under the Dayhoff model produced trees with fewer errors on average”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Dayhoff 18-state recoding performed the best under all gradients of compositional heterogeneity.
“Dayhoff 18-state recoding performed the best under all gradients of compositional heterogeneity”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Under conditions of very high compositional heterogeneity, it may be advantageous to apply recoding using more than six states.
“Our analyses of other recoding schemes suggest that under conditions of very high compositional heterogeneity, it may be advantageous to apply recoding using more than six states”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Six-state recoding strategies are not effective in the face of high saturation.
“Our results suggest that six-state recoding strategies are not effective in the face of high saturation.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The loss of information that accompanies six-state recoding outweighs its benefits.
“the loss of information that accompanies six-state recoding outweighs its benefits.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductown data
The pairing strategy used to introduce compositional heterogeneity does not bias the results in favor of non-recoding.
“See Supplementary materials available on dryad for comparisons of results using 1000 random pairing strategies that show that the paring strategy described in the previous paragraph does not bias the results in favor of non-recoding.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
Dayhoff 18-state recoding may comprise the optimum balance of minimizing compositional heterogeneity while maximizing information retention.
“may comprise the optimum balance of minimizing compositional heterogeneity while maximizing information retention”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The costs of information loss associated with the six-state recoding schemes are too great to justify applying these strategies.
“the costs of information loss associated with the six-state recoding schemes are too great to justify applying these strategies”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Dayhoff 6-state recoding is inappropriate for phylogenetic inference.
“Dayhoff 6-state recoding is inappropriate for phylogenetic inference”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Six-state recoding performs poorly when applied to highly saturated data sets.
“six-state recoding performs poorly when applied to highly saturated data sets”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Study design and conductown data
Increasing the branch length scaling factor parameter in Seq-Gen linearly increased levels of saturation.
“We confirmed that increasing the branch length scaling factor parameter in Seq-Gen linearly increased levels of saturation (Supplementary Fig. S1 available on dryad) using the script seq-gen_saturation_test.pl (available in the accompanying GitHub repository).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- The quote only partly states this claim. 5
- Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 15
- May combine two claims. 12
The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataT-tests performed for each branch length scaling factor parameter showed that Robinson-Foulds distances were significantly higher for recoded data sets compared to non-recoded data sets (P-value < 2.2e-16).
“Robinson–Foulds distances were significantly higher for recoded data sets compared to non-recoded data sets (P-value < 2.2e-16)”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.
Findingnone givenThere are at least 91 publications that use six-state amino acid recoding, with 2019 seeing more than any year to date.
“There are at least 91 publications that use six-state amino acid recoding, with 2019 seeing more than any year to date”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataAt least 91 phylogenetic studies have implemented six-state amino acid recoding strategies.
“To date, there are at least 91 phylogenetic studies that have implemented six-state amino acid recoding strategies, with the highest number of studies published in 2019 (Table 1).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe median RCFV score was 0.088 for all data sets simulated under the inflation parameter of 0.9, while the median RCFV score for data from papers in Table 1 was 0.036.
“The median RCFV score was 0.088 for all data sets simulated under the inflation parameter of 0.9, while the median RCFV score for data from papers in Table 1 was 0.036”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataThe percentage of trees that passed the deep splits criteria increased as the number of Dayhoff states increased, with Dayhoff 18-state recoding outperforming all other strategies including the non-recoding approach.
“The percentage of trees that passed these criteria increased as the number of Dayhoff states increased with Dayhoff 18-state recoding outperforming all other strategies including the non-recoding approach”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataIncreases in sequence length minimized the impact of saturation and reduced errors in phylogenetic reconstruction for both recoding and non-recoding methods.
“Increases in sequence length minimized the impact of saturation and reduced errors in phylogenetic reconstruction for both recoding and non-recoding methods”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimThe quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataAnalyses of non-recoded data sets consistently produced trees that were more accurate than those produced on recoded data sets using both deep splits metric and Robinson-Foulds distances.
“Analyses of non-recoded data sets consistently produced trees that were more accurate than those produced on recoded data sets”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
Findingown dataNon-recoding methods performed significantly better on all sequence lengths and levels of saturation, except for on the largest simulated data set with the lowest level of saturation where results from recoded and non-recoded analyses were equivocal.
“non-recoding methods performed significantly better on all sequence lengths and levels of saturation, except for on the largest simulated data set with the lowest level of saturation where results from recoded and non-recoded analyses were equivocal”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataThe results were consistent regardless of which tree (Chang or Feuda) was used for data simulations.
“The results were consistent regardless of which tree (i.e., Chang or Feuda) was used for data simulations”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Findingown dataIn all cases, the intra-bin substitution scores generated by the authors' best binning strategies were higher than those proposed by Susko and Roger (2007), except for one which had an equal score.
“in all cases, the scores we generated were higher, except for one which had an equal score”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Susko and Roger (2007) source
Not checked in the free run.
The quote only partly states this claim.
Findingown dataThe difference in numbers of incorrect trees between analyses run with Dayhoff 18-state recoding and those run without recoding was significant only under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity (P-values for inflation parameters 0.1, 0.5, and 0.9: 0.4314, 0.2183, and 6.622e-06, respectively).
“The difference was significant only under the highest level of compositional heterogeneity”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationSix-state recoding methods have been endorsed from a theoretical perspective, but their performance has never been extensively tested.
“While these methods have been endorsed from a theoretical perspective, their performance has never been extensively tested.”
- Also stated in: another passage · plain
“While amino acid recoding has been considered from a theoretical perspective (Davidson et al. 2002; Embley et al. 2003a; Hrdy et al. 2004), and there have been comparisons between different recoding strategies (Susko and Roger 2007), there has not been extensive empirical testing of the widely applied six-state recoding approaches.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Davidson et al. 2002
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Embley et al. 2003a
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Hrdy et al. 2004 source
Not checked in the free run.
- Also stated in: another passage · plain
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationThere is a large body of research on the conditions for state aggregation (or lumpability) in modeling character data such as DNA or amino acids.
“There is a large body of research on the conditions for state aggregation (or lumpability) in modeling character data such as DNA or amino acids (Kemeny and Snell 1976; Courtois 1977).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Kemeny and Snell 1976
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Courtois 1977
Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Interpretationnone givenSix-state amino acid recoding strategies are commonly applied to combat the effects of compositional heterogeneity and substitution saturation in phylogenetic analyses.
“Six-state amino acid recoding strategies are commonly applied to combat the effects of compositional heterogeneity and substitution saturation in phylogenetic analyses.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimMay combine two claims.
PremisecitationCompositional heterogeneity and substitution saturation are major challenges to phylogenetic inference.
“Compositional heterogeneity and substitution saturation are major challenges to phylogenetic inference.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Collins et al. 1994
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Foster and Hickey 1999
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Ho and Jermiin 2004
Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
PremisecitationMatrix recoding has been proposed as a solution for both compositional heterogeneity and substitution saturation.
“Based on this foundation, matrix recoding has been proposed as a solution for both compositional heterogeneity and substitution saturation (Blanquart and Lartillot 2006; Susko and Roger 2007).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites Blanquart and Lartillot 2006
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Susko and Roger 2007 source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenTo correct for multiple t-tests, the authors applied a Bonferroni correction with alpha = 0.0009.
“we applied the Bonferroni correction at which”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimThe quote only partly states this claim.
InterpretationreasoningThe authors' simulated data sets are substantially compositionally heterogeneous because published data sets, many of which used compositional heterogeneity as justification for recoding, are likely enriched for compositional heterogeneity.
“We reason that our simulated data sets therefore are substantially compositionally heterogeneous”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim- Rests on an assumption: The published data sets in Table 1 are enriched for compositional heterogeneity.
May combine two claims.
PremisecitationThe number of possible amino acid binning schemes for a given number of states is very large, making an exhaustive search computationally intractable.
“the number of possible bins is very large”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Susko and Roger (2007) source
Not checked in the free run.
Classified as probably not a substantial claim.
Study design and conductreasoningThe deep splits metric focuses on errors most likely due to convergent amino acid compositions.
“The rationale for this metric rather than Robinson–Foulds distances is that it focused on errors that were most likely due to convergent amino acid compositions (i.e., the pulling together of compositionally homogeneous but unrelated clades or tips).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.
Study design and conductcitationAll analyses were pre-planned using phylotocol and pre-registered using the Center for Open Science's pre-registration platform.
“To maximize transparency and minimize confirmation bias, all analyses were pre-planned using phylotocol (DeBiasse and Ryan 2019) and pre-registered using the Center for Open Science’s pre-registration platform (https://osf.io/smj6k/ and https://osf.io/6ubgj/).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites DeBiasse and Ryan 2019
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Study design and conductnone givenPrior to initial submission, four changes were made to the original phylotocol plan.
“Prior to the initial submission of this manuscript, we made four changes to the original plan outlined in our phylotocol.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationFeuda extensively applied six-state amino acid recoding to the Chang data set in a reanalysis.
“Feuda extensively applied six-state amino acid recoding to this data set in a reanalysis of the Chang study, which did not use recoding.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites Feuda et al. 2017 source
Not checked in the free run.
Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
Premisenone givenThe topologies from Chang and Feuda are based on the same data set made up of 51,940 amino acid positions from 78 taxa representing a wide range of animals and 9 non-animal outgroups.
“The topologies from Chang and Feuda are based on the same data set which is made up of 51,940 amino acid positions from 78 taxa representing a wide range of animals and 9 non-animal outgroups.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checkedMay combine two claims.
InterpretationreasoningSix-state recoding greatly reduces information content and therefore often results in suboptimal phylogenetic reconstructions.
“six-state recoding greatly reduces information content and therefore often results in suboptimal phylogenetic reconstructions”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). The quote only partly states this claim.
Study design and conductnone givenTo correct for multiple chi-squared tests, the authors applied a Bonferroni correction with alpha = 0.017.
“we applied the Bonferroni correction at which”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimMay combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataLimitations extend beyond Dayhoff matrices, as six-states likely are too few for reliable phylogenetic analysis.
“limitations extend beyond Dayhoff matrices, as six-states likely are too few for reliable phylogenetic analysis”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).
PremisecitationHistorically, simulation has been an effective strategy for empirically testing the performance of phylogenetic approaches.
“Historically, simulation has been an effective strategy for empirically testing the performance of phylogenetic approaches (Kuhner and Felsenstein 1994; Swofford et al. 2001; Zwickl et al. 2002; Kubatko and Degnan 2007; Huang and Knowles 2016).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked- cites Kuhner and Felsenstein 1994
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Swofford et al. 2001
Not checked in the free run.
- cites Zwickl et al. 2002 source
Not checked in the free run.
May combine two claims.
Interpretationown dataWhile six-state recoding seems to be less affected by increases in compositional heterogeneity, it does not overcome the penalty of information loss even under the highest levels of compositional heterogeneity.
“while six-state recoding seems to be less affected by increases in compositional heterogeneity, it does not overcome the penalty of information loss even under the highest levels of compositional heterogeneity”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The paper relies on this without support.
The tree topologies and branch lengths used in the simulations are representative of real phylogenetic data sets.
“We simulated data sets on the Chang and Feuda trees under the Dayhoff and JTT models with increasing levels of saturation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The published data sets in Table 1 are enriched for compositional heterogeneity.
“many of which used compositional heterogeneity as justification for the application of recoding, are likely enriched for compositional heterogeneity”
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?
Our results, and those of many previous empirical studies, conflict with simulations by Hernandez and Ryan that suggest recoding is outperformed by amino acid analyses even when data are saturated or compositionally heterogeneous.
“Our results, and those of many previous empirical studies, also conflict with simulations by Hernandez and Ryan35 that suggest recoding is outperformed by amino acid analyses even when data are saturated or compositionally heterogeneous.”
From Evidence for sponges as sister to all other animals from partitioned phylogenomics with mixture models and recoding (2021) · cites this paper as [35]
Hernandez and Ryan robustly tested amino acid recoding in simulation.
“Hernandez and Ryan 5 robustly tested amino acid recoding in simulation”
From Available data do not rule out Ctenophora as the sister group to all other Metazoa (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Dismissing Hernandez and Ryan and preferring results with SR4 recoding, even when recoding caused non-monophyly of accepted clades, is problematic.
“dismissing Hernandez and Ryan 5 and preferring results with SR4 recoding, even when recoding caused non-monophyly of accepted clades, is problematic.”
From Available data do not rule out Ctenophora as the sister group to all other Metazoa (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
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.
Reported amino-acid pairing repeats F and omits C
MinorThe stated procedure pairs the first ten amino acids with the second ten. The reported pairs instead use F twice, omit C, and place F on both sides of the pairing.
“(A, L), (R, K), (N, M) (D, F), (F, P), (Q, S), (E, T), (G, W), (H, Y), (I, V)”
“divided them in half (i.e., [A-I] and [L-V]), and paired the two groups”
One Luo et al. (2014) citation has two organismal scopes
MinorTable 1 lists the same citation once for bivalves and again for Roseobacter. The reference list identifies Luo et al. (2014) as the Roseobacter study, leaving the bivalve entry inconsistent.
“| (Luo et al., 2014) | Yes | Bivalves |”
“| (Luo et al., 2014) | Yes | Roseobacter |”
Cites
RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies
Stamatakis, A. (2014) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 · Cited by 32,291 · see citing works
The rapid generation of mutation data matrices from protein sequences
Jones, D. T., Taylor, W. R., & Thornton, J. M. (1992) · Computer applications in the biosciences · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/8.3.275 · Cited by 6,916 · see citing works
Cases in which Parsimony or Compatibility Methods Will be Positively Misleading
Felsenstein, J. (1978) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/27.4.401 · Cited by 3,221 · see citing works
Kemeny, J. G., & Snell, J. L. (1976) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 2,813 · see citing works
Comparison of phylogenetic trees
Robinson, D. F., & Foulds, L. R. (1981) · Mathematical Biosciences · doi:10.1016/0025-5564(81)90043-2 · Cited by 2,647 · see citing works
Broad phylogenomic sampling improves resolution of the animal tree of life
Dunn, C. W., Hejnol, A., Matus, D. Q., Pang, K., Browne, W. E., Smith, S. A., Seaver, E., Rouse, G. W., Obst, M., Edgecombe, G. D., et al. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06614 · Cited by 1,921 · see citing works
Tunicates and not cephalochordates are the closest living relatives of vertebrates
Delsuc, F., Brinkmann, H., Chourrout, D., & Philippe, H. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04336 · Cited by 1,651 · see citing works
Rambaut, A., & Grass, N. C. (1997) · Computer applications in the biosciences · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/13.3.235 · Cited by 1,545 · see citing works
Inconsistency of Phylogenetic Estimates from Concatenated Data under Coalescence
Kubatko, L. S., & Degnan, J. H. (2007) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150601146041 · Cited by 1,041 · see citing works
Increased Taxon Sampling Greatly Reduces Phylogenetic Error
Zwickl, D. J., & Hillis, D. M. (2002) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150290102339 · Cited by 939 · see citing works
A Framework for the Quantitative Study of Evolutionary Trees
Hendy, M. D., & Penny, D. (1989) · Systematic Zoology · doi:10.2307/2992396 · Cited by 842 · see citing works
A simulation comparison of phylogeny algorithms under equal and unequal evolutionary rates.
Kuhner, M. K., & Felsenstein, J. (1994) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040126 · Cited by 835 · see citing works
Assessing the root of bilaterian animals with scalable phylogenomic methods
Hejnol, A., Obst, M., Stamatakis, A., Ott, M., Rouse, G. W., Edgecombe, G. D., Martinez, P., Baguñà, J., Bailly, X., Jondelius, U., et al. (2009) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.0896 · Cited by 747 · see citing works
The ctenophore genome and the evolutionary origins of neural systems
Moroz, L. L., Kocot, K. M., Citarella, M. R., Dosung, S., Norekian, T. P., Povolotskaya, I. S., Grigorenko, A. P., Dailey, C., Berezikov, E., Buckley, K. M., et al. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13400 · Cited by 716 · see citing works
The Genome of the Ctenophore <i>Mnemiopsis leidyi</i> and Its Implications for Cell Type Evolution
Ryan, J. F., Pang, K., Schnitzler, C. E., Nguyen, A.-D., Moreland, R. T., Simmons, D. K., Koch, B. J., Francis, W. R., Havlak, P., Program, N. C. S., et al. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1242592 · Cited by 702 · see citing works
Self-citationPhylogenomics Revives Traditional Views on Deep Animal Relationships
Philippe, H., Derelle, R., Lopez, P., Pick, K., Borchiellini, C., Boury-Esnault, N., Vacelet, J., Renard, E., Houliston, E., Quéinnec, E., et al. (2009) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.02.052 · Cited by 695 · see citing works
Genomes of Subaerial Zygnematophyceae Provide Insights into Land Plant Evolution
Cheng, S., Xian, W., Fu, Y., Marin, B., Keller, J., Wu, T., Sun, W., Li, X., Xu, Y., Zhang, Y., et al. (2019) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.10.019 · Cited by 529 · see citing works
Contentious relationships in phylogenomic studies can be driven by a handful of genes
Shen, X.-X., Hittinger, C. T., & Rokas, A. (2017) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-017-0126 · Cited by 520 · see citing works
Simion, P., Philippe, H., Baurain, D., Jager, M., Richter, D. J., Di Franco, A., Roure, B., Satoh, N., Quéinnec, É., Ereskovsky, A., et al. (2017) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2017.02.031 · Cited by 518 · see citing works
Decomposability: Queueing and Computer System Applications
Courtois, P. (1977) · Cited by 483 · see citing works
A fungal phylogeny based on 42 complete genomes derived from supertree and combined gene analysis.
(2006) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-6-99 · Cited by 475 · see citing works
Modeling compositional heterogeneity
Foster, P. G. (2004) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150490445779 · Cited by 474 · see citing works
Knight, R. D., Freeland, S. J., & Landweber, L. F. (2001) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2001-2-4-research0010 · Cited by 439 · see citing works
Acoelomorph flatworms are deuterostomes related to Xenoturbella
Philippe, H., Brinkmann, H., Copley, R. R., Moroz, L. L., Nakano, H., Poustka, A. J., Wållberg, A., Peterson, K. J., & Telford, M. J. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09676 · Cited by 432 · see citing works
The Interrelationships of Land Plants and the Nature of the Ancestral Embryophyte.
Puttick, M., Morris, J. L., Williams, T., Cox, C., Edwards, D., Kenrick, P., Pressel, S., Wellman, C., Schneider, H., Pisani, D., et al. (2018) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2018.01.063 · Cited by 423 · see citing works
Swofford, D. L., Waddell, P. J., Huelsenbeck, J. P., Foster, P. G., Lewis, P. O., & Rogers, J. S. (2001) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150117959 · Cited by 421 · see citing works
The archaebacterial origin of eukaryotes
Cox, C. J., Foster, P. G., Hirt, R. P., Harris, S. R., & Embley, T. M. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0810647105 · Cited by 381 · see citing works
Revisiting metazoan phylogeny with genomic sampling of all phyla
Laumer, C. E., Fernández, R., Lemer, S., Combosch, D., Kocot, K. M., Riesgo, A., Andrade, S. C. S., Sterrer, W., Sørensen, M. V., & Giribet, G. (2019) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2019.0831 · Cited by 360 · see citing works
Compositional Bias May Affect Both DNA-Based and Protein-Based Phylogenetic Reconstructions
Foster, P. G., & Hickey, D. A. (1999) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/pl00006471 · Cited by 337 · see citing works
Improved phylogenomic taxon sampling noticeably affects nonbilaterian relationships
Pick, K. S., Philippe, H., Schreiber, F., Erpenbeck, D., Jackson, D. J., Wrede, P., Wiens, M., Alie, A., Morgenstern, B., Manuel, M., et al. (2010) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msq089 · Cited by 334 · see citing works
Error, signal, and the placement of Ctenophora sister to all other animals
Whelan, N. V., Kocot, K. M., Moroz, L. L., & Halanych, K. M. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1503453112 · Cited by 331 · see citing works
Origin of land plants: Do conjugating green algae hold the key?
Wodniok, S., Brinkmann, H., Glöckner, G., Heidel, A. J., Philippe, H., Melkonian, M., & Becker, B. (2011) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-11-104 · Cited by 326 · see citing works
Huang, H., & Knowles, L. L. (2014) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syu046 · Cited by 321 · see citing works
Genomic data do not support comb jellies as the sister group to all other animals
Pisani, D., Pett, W., Dohrmann, M., Feuda, R., Rota-Stabelli, O., Philippe, H., Lartillot, N., & Wörheide, G. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1518127112 · Cited by 319 · see citing works
Improved Modeling of Compositional Heterogeneity Supports Sponges as Sister to All Other Animals
Feuda, R., Dohrmann, M., Pett, W., Philippe, H., Rota-Stabelli, O., Lartillot, N., Wörheide, G., & Pisani, D. (2017) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2017.11.008 · Cited by 291 · see citing works
Nucleotide Bias Causes a Genomewide Bias in the Amino Acid Composition of Proteins
Singer, G. A. C., & Hickey, D. A. (2000) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026257 · Cited by 273 · see citing works
A New Spiralian Phylogeny Places the Enigmatic Arrow Worms among Gnathiferans
Marlétaz, F., Peijnenburg, K. T. C. A., Goto, T., Satoh, N., & Rokhsar, D. S. (2019) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2018.11.042 · Cited by 268 · see citing works
Trichomonas hydrogenosomes contain the NADH dehydrogenase module of mitochondrial complex I
Hrdy, I., Hirt, R. P., Dolezal, P., Bardonová, L., Foster, P. G., Tachezy, J., & Martin Embley, T. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03149 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Genomic insights into the evolutionary origin of Myxozoa within Cnidaria
Chang, E. S., Neuhof, M., Rubinstein, N. D., Diamant, A., Philippe, H., Huchon, D., & Cartwright, P. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1511468112 · Cited by 262 · see citing works
Swofford, D. L., Waddell, P. J., Huelsenbeck, J. P., et al. (2001) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/106351501750435086 · Cited by 248 · see citing works
Cnidarian phylogenetic relationships as revealed by mitogenomics
Kayal, E., Roure, B., Philippe, H., Collins, A. G., & Lavrov, D. V. (2013) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-13-5 · Cited by 240 · see citing works
The evolutionary history of haptophytes and cryptophytes: phylogenomic evidence for separate origins
Burki, F., Okamoto, N., Pombert, J.-F., & Keeling, P. J. (2012) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.2301 · Cited by 240 · see citing works
Atlas of protein sequence and structure 1969 vol 4
Dayhoff, M. O. (1969) · Cited by 235 · see citing works
Integrative modeling of gene and genome evolution roots the archaeal tree of life
Williams, T. A., Szöllősi, G. J., Spang, A., Foster, P. G., Heaps, S. E., Boussau, B., Ettema, T. J. G., & Embley, T. M. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1618463114 · Cited by 233 · see citing works
Broadly Sampled Multigene Analyses Yield a Well-Resolved Eukaryotic Tree of Life
Parfrey, L. W., Grant, J. R., Tekle, Y. I., Lasek‐Nesselquist, E., Morrison, H. G., Sogin, M. L., Patterson, D. J., & Katz, L. A. (2010) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syq037 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Wolfe, J. M., Breinholt, J. W., Crandall, K. A., Lemmon, A. R., Lemmon, E. M., Timm, L. E., Siddall, M. E., & Bracken‐Grissom, H. D. (2019) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2019.0079 · Cited by 232 · see citing works
Phylogeny and evolution of the Archaea: one hundred genomes later
Brochier‐Armanet, C., Forterre, P., & Gribaldo, S. (2011) · Current Opinion in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.mib.2011.04.015 · Cited by 229 · see citing works
Translational selection and molecular evolution
Akashi, H. D., & Eyre‐Walker, A. (1998) · Current Opinion in Genetics & Development · doi:10.1016/s0959-437x(98)80038-5 · Cited by 220 · see citing works
Phylogenomic Insights into Animal Evolution
Telford, M. J., Budd, G. E., & Philippe, H. (2015) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.07.060 · Cited by 213 · see citing works
A Phylogenomic Solution to the Origin of Insects by Resolving Crustacean-Hexapod Relationships
Schwentner, M., Combosch, D. J., Pakes Nelson, J., & Giribet, G. (2017) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2017.05.040 · Cited by 211 · see citing works
Comparative genomics of the tardigrades Hypsibius dujardini and Ramazzottius varieornatus
Yoshida, Y., Koutsovoulos, G., Laetsch, D., Stevens, L., Kumar, S., Horikawa, D., Ishino, K., Komine, S., Kunieda, T., Tomita, M., et al. (2017) · bioRxiv · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2002266 · Cited by 210 · see citing works
Woese, C. R., Achenbach, L. A., Rouvière, P. E., & Mandelco, L. (1991) · Systematic and Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1016/s0723-2020(11)80311-5 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Bacterial proteins pinpoint a single eukaryotic root
Derelle, R., Torruella, G., Klimeš, V., Brinkmann, H., Kim, E., Vlček, Č., Lang, B. F., & Eliáš, M. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1420657112 · Cited by 187 · see citing works
On Reduced Amino Acid Alphabets for Phylogenetic Inference
Susko, E., & Roger, A. J. (2007) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msm144 · Cited by 177 · see citing works
Borowiec, M. L., Lee, E. K., Chiu, J. C., & Plachetzki, D. C. (2015) · doi:10.1101/013946 · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Mitochondria and hydrogenosomes are two forms of the same fundamental organelle
Embley, T. M., van der Giezen, M., Horner, D. S., Dyal, P. L., & Foster, P. G. (2003) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1190 · Cited by 170 · see citing works
Philip, G. K., Creevey, C. J., & McInerney, J. O. (2005) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msi102 · Cited by 170 · see citing works
Torruella, G., Derelle, R., Paps, J., Lang, B. F., Roger, A. J., Shalchian-Tabrizi, K., & Ruiz-Trillo, I. (2012) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msr185 · Cited by 169 · see citing works
Nucleotide substitution rates for the full set of mitochondrial protein-coding genes in Coleoptera
Pons, J., Ribera, I., Bertranpetit, J., & Balke, M. (2010) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2010.02.007 · Cited by 167 · see citing works
An integrated phylogenomic approach toward pinpointing the origin of mitochondria
Wang, Z., & Wu, M. (2015) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep07949 · Cited by 165 · see citing works
Compositional Bias, Character-State Bias, and Character-State Reconstruction Using Parsimony
Collins, T., Wimberger, P., & Naylor, G. J. P. (1994) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/43.4.482 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Serine Codon-Usage Bias in Deep Phylogenomics: Pancrustacean Relationships as a Case Study
Rota-Stabelli, O., Lartillot, N., Philippe, H., & Pisani, D. (2013) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/sys077 · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Heinz, E., Williams, T. A., Nakjang, S., Noël, C. J., Swan, D., Goldberg, A. V., Harris, S. R., Weinmaier, T., Markert, S., Becher, D., et al. (2012) · PLoS Pathogens · doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1002979 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Hydrogenosomes, Mitochondria and Early Eukaryotic Evolution
Embley, T. M., van der Giezen, M., Horner, D. S., Dyal, P. L., Bell, S., & Foster, P. G. (2003) · IUBMB Life · doi:10.1080/15216540310001592834 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Tracing the Decay of the Historical Signal in Biological Sequence Data
Ho, S. Y. W., & Jermiin, L. S. (2004) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1080/10635150490503035 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Philippe, H., Poustka, A. J., Chiodin, M., Hoff, K. J., Dessimoz, C., Tomiczek, B., Schiffer, P. H., Müller, S., Domman, D., Horn, M., et al. (2019) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2019.04.009 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Linking Genomics and Ecology to Investigate the Complex Evolution of an Invasive Drosophila Pest
Ometto, L., Cestaro, A., Ramasamy, S., Grassi, A., Revadi, S., Siozios, S., Moretto, M., Fontana, P., Varotto, C., Pisani, D., et al. (2013) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evt034 · Cited by 147 · see citing works
Fitzpatrick, D. A., Creevey, C. J., & McInerney, J. O. (2005) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msj009 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Hill, M. S., Hill, A., Lopez, J. V., Peterson, K. J., Pomponi, S. A., Díaz, M. C., THACKER, R. W., Adamska, M., Boury‐Esnault, N., Cárdenas, P., et al. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050437 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Lozano-Fernández, J., Tanner, A. R., Giacomelli, M., Carton, R., Vinther, J., Edgecombe, G. D., & Pisani, D. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-10244-7 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
Blanquart, S. (2006) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msl091 · Cited by 136 · see citing works
Lemieux, C., Otis, C., & Turmel, M. (2014) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/s12862-014-0211-2 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
Rooting the Eukaryotic Tree with Mitochondrial and Bacterial Proteins
Derelle, R., & Lang, B. F. (2011) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msr295 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Phylogenomic Data Yield New and Robust Insights into the Phylogeny and Evolution of Weevils
Shin, S., Clarke, D., Lemmon, A. R., Lemmon, E. M., Aitken, A. L., Haddad, S., Farrell, B. D., Marvaldi, A. E., Oberprieler, R. G., & McKenna, D. D. (2017) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msx324 · Cited by 133 · see citing works
TOPD/FMTS: a new software to compare phylogenetic trees
Puigbò, P., Garcı́a-Vallvé, S., & McInerney, J. O. (2007) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm135 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
Heterogeneous Models Place the Root of the Placental Mammal Phylogeny
Morgan, C. C., Foster, P. G., Webb, A. E., Pisani, D., McInerney, J. O., & O’Connell, M. J. (2013) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mst117 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Kutty, S. N., Meusemann, K., Bayless, K. M., Marinho, M. A. T., Pont, A. C., Zhou, X. Y., Misof, B. Y., Wiegmann, B. M., Yeates, D. K., Cerretti, P., et al. (2019) · Cladistics · doi:10.1111/cla.12375 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
The primary divisions of life: a phylogenomic approach employing composition-heterogeneous methods
Foster, P. G., Cox, C. J., & Embley, T. M. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0034 · Cited by 120 · see citing works
Nuclear protein phylogenies support the monophyly of the three bryophyte groups (Bryophyta Schimp.)
Sousa, F., Foster, P. G., Donoghue, P. C. J., Schneider, H., & Cox, C. J. (2018) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/nph.15587 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Leliaert, F., Tronholm, A., Lemieux, C., Turmel, M., DePriest, M. S., Bhattacharya, D., Karol, K. G., Fredericq, S., Zechman, F. W., & Lopez-Bautista, J. M. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep25367 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Support for a clade of Placozoa and Cnidaria in genes with minimal compositional bias
Laumer, C. E., Gruber-Vodicka, H., Hadfield, M. G., Pearse, V. B., Riesgo, A., Marioni, J. C., & Giribet, G. (2018) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.36278 · Cited by 112 · see citing works
Evolution of Divergent Life History Strategies in Marine Alphaproteobacteria
Luo, H., Csürös, M., Hughes, A. L., & Moran, M. A. (2013) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.00373-13 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Schwentner, M., Richter, S., Rogers, D. C., & Giribet, G. (2018) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.1524 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
A congruent topology for deep gastropod relationships
Cunha, T. J., & Giribet, G. (2019) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.2776 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Chloroplast genome phylogenetics: why we need independent approaches to plant molecular evolution
Martin, W. F., Deusch, O., Stawski, N., Gruenheit, N., & Goremykin, V. V. (2005) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2005.03.007 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Andersson, J. O., Hirt, R. P., Foster, P. G., & Roger, A. J. (2006) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-6-27 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Tarrı́o, R., Rodrı́guez-Trelles, F., & Ayala, F. J. (2001) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003932 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Comparative genomics and the nature of placozoan species
Eitel, M., Francis, W. R., Varoqueaux, F., Daraspe, J., Osigus, H., Krebs, S., Vargas, S., Blum, H., Williams, G. A., Schierwater, B., et al. (2018) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2005359 · Cited by 92 · see citing works
Phylogenomic interrogation resolves the backbone of the Pseudoscorpiones tree of life
Benavides, L. R., Cosgrove, J. G., Harvey, M. S., & Giribet, G. (2019) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2019.05.023 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Raymann, K., Forterre, P., Brochier‐Armanet, C., & Gribaldo, S. (2014) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evu004 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Lemer, S., Bieler, R., & Giribet, G. (2019) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2018.2684 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Masta, S. E., Longhorn, S. J., & Boore, J. L. (2008) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2008.10.010 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Compositional Heterogeneity and Phylogenomic Inference of Metazoan Relationships
Nesnidal, M. P., Helmkampf, M., Bruchhaus, I., & Hausdorf, B. (2010) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msq097 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Klinges, J. G., Rosales, S., McMinds, R., Shaver, E. C., Shantz, A. A., Peters, E. C., Eitel, M., Wörheide, G., Sharp, K. H., Burkepile, D. E., et al. (2019) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/s41396-019-0482-0 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
Williams, T. A., Embley, T. M., & Heinz, E. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0021080 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Wang, X., & Lavrov, D. V. (2006) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msl167 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
The SAR11 Group of Alpha-Proteobacteria Is Not Related to the Origin of Mitochondria
Rodríguez‐Ezpeleta, N., & Embley, T. M. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0030520 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Petitjean, C., Deschamps, P., López‐García, P., Moreira, D., & Brochier‐Armanet, C. (2015) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msv015 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Engineering multiple species-like genetic incompatibilities in insects
Maselko, M., Feltman, N. R., Upadhyay, A., Hayward, A. N., Das, S. R., Myslicki, N., Peterson, A. J., O’Connor, M. B., & Smanski, M. J. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18348-1 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Uribe, J. E., Irisarri, I., Templado, J., & Zardoya, R. (2018) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2018.12.019 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
An Expanded Ribosomal Phylogeny of Cyanobacteria Supports a Deep Placement of Plastids
Moore, K. R., Magnabosco, C., Momper, L., Gold, D. A., Bosak, T., & Fournier, G. P. (2019) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2019.01612 · Cited by 71 · see citing works
A new criterion and method for amino acid classification
Kosiol, C., Goldman, N., & H. Buttimore, N. (2004) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2003.12.010 · Cited by 70 · see citing works
Haen, K. M., Lang, B. F., Pomponi, S. A., & Lavrov, D. V. (2007) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msm070 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Green-colored Plastids in the Dinoflagellate Genus Lepidodinium are of Core Chlorophyte Origin
Matsumoto, T., Shinozaki, F., Chikuni, T., Yabuki, A., Takishita, K., Kawachi, M., Nakayama, T., Inouye, I., Hashimoto, T., & Inagaki, Y. (2010) · Protist · doi:10.1016/j.protis.2010.07.001 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
Dicyemida and Orthonectida: Two Stories of Body Plan Simplification
Zverkov, O. A., Mikhailov, K. V., Isaev, S. V., Rusin, L. Y., Popova, O. V., Logacheva, M. D., Penin, A. A., Moroz, L. L., Panchin, Y. V., Lyubetsky, V., et al. (2019) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2019.00443 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
The effects of model choice and mitigating bias on the ribosomal tree of life
Lasek‐Nesselquist, E., & Gogarten, J. P. (2013) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2013.05.006 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Phillips, M. J., Lin, Y.-H., Harrison, G., & Penny, D. (2001) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1677 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Extreme halophilic archaea derive from two distinct methanogen Class II lineages.
Aouad, M., Taib, N., Oudart, A., Lecocq, M., Gouy, M., & Brochier-Armanet, C. (2018) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2018.04.011 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Ballesteros, J. A., Santibáñez‐López, C. E., Kováč, Ľ., Gavish‐Regev, E., & Sharma, P. P. (2019) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2019.2426 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Evolutionary analysis of a streamlined lineage of surface ocean Roseobacters
Luo, H., Swan, B. K., Stepanauskas, R., Hughes, A. L., & Moran, M. A. (2014) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2013.248 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
The Role of Homology and Orthology in the Phylogenomic Analysis of Metazoan Gene Content
Pett, W., Adamski, M., Adamska, M., Francis, W. R., Eitel, M., Pisani, D., & Wörheide, G. (2019) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msz013 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Plastid establishment did not require a chlamydial partner
Domman, D., Horn, M., Embley, T. M., & Williams, T. A. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms7421 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Signal Conflicts in the Phylogeny of the Primary Photosynthetic Eukaryotes
Deschamps, P., & Moreira, D. (2009) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msp189 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Szabó, G., Schulz, F., Toenshoff, E. R., Volland, J., Finkel, O. M., Belkin, S., & Horn, M. (2016) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2016.148 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Ecological Genomics of the Uncultivated Marine Roseobacter Lineage CHAB-I-5
Zhang, Y., Sun, Y., Jiao, N., Stepanauskas, R., & Luo, H. (2016) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.03678-15 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Tikhonenkov, D. V., Mikhailov, K. V., Hehenberger, E., Karpov, S. A., Prokina, K. I., Сергеевич, Е. А., Belyakova, O. I., Mazei, Y., Mylnikov, A. P., Aleoshin, V. V., et al. (2020) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2020.08.061 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
A phylotranscriptomic framework for flesh fly evolution (Diptera, Calyptratae, Sarcophagidae)
Yan, L., Buenaventura, E., Pape, T., Kutty, S. N., Bayless, K. M., & Zhang, D. (2020) · Cladistics · doi:10.1111/cla.12449 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Bennett, G. M., & Mao, M. (2018) · Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1111/1462-2920.14367 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Neumann, J. S., DeSalle, R., Narechania, A., Schierwater, B., & Tessler, M. (2020) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syaa038 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
The Phylogeny and Evolution of the Flashiest of the Armored Harvestmen (Arachnida: Opiliones)
Benavides, L. R., Pinto‐da‐Rocha, R., & Giribet, G. (2020) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syaa080 · Cited by 37 · see citing works
An [Fe] hydrogenase from the anaerobic hydrogenosome-containing fungus Neocallimastix frontalis L2
Davidson, E. A., van der Giezen, M., Horner, D. S., Embley, T. M., & Howe, C. J. (2002) · Gene · doi:10.1016/s0378-1119(02)00873-9 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Evolutionary origin of a streamlined marine bacterioplankton lineage
Luo, H. (2014) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2014.227 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Fu, C.-J., Sheikh, S., Miao, W., Andersson, S. G. E., & Baldauf, S. L. (2014) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evu180 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Pandey, A., & Braun, E. L. (2020) · Biology · doi:10.3390/biology9040064 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Manzano-Marı́n, A., d’Acier, A. C., Clamens, A., Orvain, C., Cruaud, C., Barbe, V., & Jousselin, E. (2018) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evy173 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
He, D., Sierra, R., Pawłowski, J., & Baldauf, S. (2016) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2016.04.033 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Li, J., Lemer, S., Kirkendale, L., Bieler, R., Cavanaugh, C. M., & Giribet, G. (2020) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/s12862-020-01614-7 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Cladogenesis and Genomic Streamlining in Extracellular Endosymbionts of Tropical Stink Bugs
Otero-Bravo, A., Goffredi, S. K., & Sabree, Z. L. (2018) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evy033 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
A Mitogenomic Re-Evaluation of the Bdelloid Phylogeny and Relationships among the Syndermata
Lasek‐Nesselquist, E. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0043554 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
The Molecular Phylogeny of a Nematode-Specific Clade of Heterotrimeric G-Protein α-Subunit Genes
O’Halloran, D. M., Fitzpatrick, D. A., McCormack, G. P., McInerney, J. O., & Burnell, A. M. (2006) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/s00239-005-0215-z · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Phylotocol: Promoting Transparency and Overcoming Bias in Phylogenetics
DeBiasse, M. B., & Ryan, J. F. (2018) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syy090 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Self-citationA distinct lineage of Caudovirales that encodes a deeply branching multi-subunit RNA polymerase
Weinheimer, A., & Aylward, F. O. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18281-3 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Insufficient resolving power of mitogenome data in deciphering deep phylogeny of Holometabola
Song, N., An, S., Yin, X., Zhao, T., & Wang, X. (2016) · Journal of Systematics and Evolution · doi:10.1111/jse.12214 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Nishimura, Y., Kamikawa, R., Hashimoto, T., & Inagaki, Y. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0037307 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
tRNA functional signatures classify plastids as late-branching cyanobacteria
Lawrence, T. J., Amrine, K. C. H., Swingley, W. D., & Ardell, D. H. (2019) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/s12862-019-1552-7 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Incongruence in the phylogenomics era
Steenwyk, J. L., Li, Y., Zhou, X., Shen, X., & Rokas, A. (2023) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41576-023-00620-x · Cited by 267 · see citing works
Rooting the Animal Tree of Life
Li, Y., Shen, X.-X., Evans, B., Dunn, C. W., & Rokas, A. (2021) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msab170 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
Redmond, A. K., & McLysaght, A. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-22074-7 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Ballesteros, J. A., Santibáñez‐López, C. E., Baker, C. M., Benavides, L. R., Cunha, T. J., Gainett, G., Ontano, A. Z., Setton, E. V. W., Arango, C. P., Gavish‐Regev, E., et al. (2022) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msac021 · Cited by 110 · see citing works
Major Revisions in Pancrustacean Phylogeny and Evidence of Sensitivity to Taxon Sampling
Bernot, J. P., Owen, C. L., Wolfe, J. M., Meland, K., Olesen, J., & Crandall, K. A. (2023) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msad175 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
A Practical Guide to Design and Assess a Phylogenomic Study
Lozano-Fernández, J. (2022) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evac129 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Recent progress in reconstructing lophotrochozoan (spiralian) phylogeny
Bleidorn, C. (2019) · Organisms Diversity & Evolution · doi:10.1007/s13127-019-00412-4 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
The promise and pitfalls of synteny in phylogenomics
Steenwyk, J. L., & King, N. (2024) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3002632 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Martín-Durán, J. M., & Marlétaz, F. (2020) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.181081 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Resolving tricky nodes in the tree of life through amino acid recoding
Giacomelli, M., Rossi, M. E., Lozano-Fernández, J., Feuda, R., & Pisani, D. (2022) · iScience · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2022.105594 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Identifying and addressing methodological incongruence in phylogenomics: A review
Fleming, J. F., Valero‐Gracia, A., & Struck, T. H. (2023) · Evolutionary Applications · doi:10.1111/eva.13565 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
BioKIT: a versatile toolkit for processing and analyzing diverse types of sequence data
Steenwyk, J. L., Buida, T. J., Gonçalves, C., Goltz, D., Morales, G. H., Mead, M. E., LaBella, A. L., Chavez, C. M., Schmitz, J. E., Hadjifrangiskou, M., et al. (2022) · Genetics · doi:10.1093/genetics/iyac079 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Pandey, A., & Braun, E. L. (2020) · Biology · doi:10.3390/biology9040064 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Polyzoa is back: The effect of complete gene sets on the placement of Ectoprocta and Entoprocta
Khalturin, K., Shunatova, N., Shchenkov, S. V., Sasakura, Y., Kawamitsu, M., & Satoh, N. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abo4400 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
A Phylogenomic Backbone for Gastropod Molluscs
Uribe, J. E., González, V. L., Irisarri, I., Kano, Y., Herbert, D. G., Strong, E. E., & Harasewych, M. G. (2022) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syac045 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Zhang, D., Niu, Z., Luo, A., Orr, M. C., Ferrari, R. R., Jin, J., Wu, Q., Zhang, F., & Zhu, C. (2022) · Insect Science · doi:10.1111/1744-7917.13034 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
The Last Universal Common Ancestor of Ribosome-Encoding Organisms: Portrait of LUCA
Forterre, P. (2024) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/s00239-024-10186-9 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Recoding Amino Acids to a Reduced Alphabet may Increase or Decrease Phylogenetic Accuracy
Foster, P. G., Schrempf, D., Szöllősi, G. J., Williams, T. A., Cox, C. J., & Embley, T. M. (2022) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syac042 · Cited by 24 · see citing works
The expanding Asgard archaea and their elusive relationships with Eukarya
Cunha, V. D., Gaïa, M., & Forterre, P. (2022) · mLife · doi:10.1002/mlf2.12012 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Fleming, J. F., & Struck, T. H. (2023) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/s12859-023-05270-8 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
DeBiasse, M. B., Colgan, W. N., Harris, L., Davidson, B., & Ryan, J. F. (2020) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evaa060 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Self-citationMolluscan systematics: historical perspectives and the way ahead
Xu, B., Kong, L., Sun, J., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Song, H., Li, Q., Uribe, J. E., Halanych, K. M., Cai, C., et al. (2024) · Biological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · doi:10.1111/brv.13157 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Improving Orthologous Signal and Model Fit in Datasets Addressing the Root of the Animal Phylogeny
McCarthy, C. G. P., Mulhair, P. O., Siu-Ting, K., Creevey, C. J., & O’Connell, M. J. (2022) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msac276 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
RETRACTED: Integrative phylogenomics positions sponges at the root of the animal tree
Steenwyk, J. L., & King, N. (2025) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.adw9456 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
RetractedSantagata, S. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B Molecular and Developmental Evolution · doi:10.1002/jez.b.22975 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Cho, A., Tikhonenkov, D., Lax, G., Prokina, K., & Keeling, P. (2023) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2023.107964 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Assembling animals: trees, genomes, cells, and contrast to plants
Paps, J., Rossi, M. E., Bowles, A. M. C., & Álvarez‐Presas, M. (2023) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2023.1185566 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Modeling Site-and-Branch-Heterogeneity with GFmix
McCarthy, C. G. P., Susko, E., Harada, R., & Roger, A. J. (2026) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syag040 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Redmond, A. K. (2024) · Proceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspb.2024.0329 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
PhyKIT: A Multitool for Phylogenomics
Steenwyk, J. L., Redondo, G. I. M., Buida, T. J., Gluck‐Thaler, E., Shen, X., Gabaldón, T., Rokas, A., & Fernández, R. (2024) · Current Protocols · doi:10.1002/cpz1.70016 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Novel genomic approaches support Xenacoelomorpha as sister to all BilateriaPreprint
Álvarez‐Presas, M., Ruiz‐Trillo, I., & Paps, J. (2024) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-5529390/v1 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Modeling compositional heterogeneity resolves deep phylogeny of flowering plants
Wang, Y., Li, Y., Wang, S., Tihelka, E., Engel, M. S., & Cai, C. (2024) · Acta Botanica Yunnanica · doi:10.1016/j.pld.2024.07.007 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Zhang, R., Wang, L., Tian, S., Liu, Y., Jiang, Y., Zhou, X., Yang, D., Liu, X., & Wang, Y. (2025) · Systematic Entomology · doi:10.1111/syen.12684 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Vera-Ruiz, V. A., Robinson, J., & Jermiin, L. S. (2021) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syab074 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Copepod phylogenomics supports Canuelloida as a valid order separate from Harpacticoida
Bernot, J. P., Khodami, S., Boyen, J., Troch, M. D., Boxshall, G. A., & Arbizu, P. M. (2025) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2025.108311 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Pappachan, P., Rahaman, M., Sreerakuvandana, S., Bansal, S., & Arya, V. (2024) · Advances in information security, privacy, and ethics book series · doi:10.4018/979-8-3693-5330-1.ch001 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Phylogenomic diversity of archigregarine apicomplexans
Lax, G., Park, E., Na, I., Jacko-Reynolds, V. K. L., Kwong, W., House, C. S. E., Trznadel, M., Wakeman, K. C., Leander, B., & Keeling, P. (2024) · Open Biology · doi:10.1098/rsob.240141 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Martindale, M. Q. (2022) · Current topics in developmental biology/Current Topics in Developmental Biology · doi:10.1016/bs.ctdb.2022.02.002 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Reply to: Available data do not rule out Ctenophora as the sister group to all other Metazoa
Redmond, A. K., & McLysaght, A. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36152-5 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Lu, X., Lu, J., Wu, Y., Guo, M. H., Smagghe, G. J., & Dai, R. (2025) · Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny · doi:10.3897/asp.83.e142332 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Toward a genomic understanding of the tree of life
Spang, A., & Pisani, D. (2026) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msag043 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Early Divergence and Gene Exchange Highways in the Evolutionary History of Mesoaciditogales
Farrell, A. A., Nesbø, C. L., & Zhaxybayeva, O. (2023) · Genome Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/gbe/evad156 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Fleming, J. F., & Struck, T. H. (2026) · Systematic Biology · doi:10.1093/sysbio/syag009 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
A comprehensive workflow for resolving Gryllidea phylogeny using universal single-copy orthologs
Zheng, Y., Ma, L.-B., & Huang, Y. (2026) · Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2026.108580 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Ma, B., Gong, H., Xu, Q., Gao, Y., Guan, A., Wang, H., Hua, K., Luo, R., & Jin, H. (2024) · Virus Evolution · doi:10.1093/ve/veae005 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Mitogenomic phylogeny and timetree of Trematoda: overcoming topological instability
Xiang, C., Hu, Y., Ye, T., Song, R., Zou, H., Wang, G.-T., Zhang, D., Li, W.-X., & Jakovlić, I. (2026) · Current Zoology · doi:10.1093/cz/zoag014 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Forterre, P. (2025) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781394351848.ch3 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Dissecting Factors Underlying Phylogenetic Uncertainty Using Machine Learning ModelsPreprint
Rosas‐Puchuri, U., Duarte-Ribeiro, E., Khanmohammadi, S., Arcila, D., Ortı́, G., & Betancur‐R, R. (2023) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2023.09.20.558635
Hsiao, J., Deng, L. C., Moroz, L. L., Chalasani, S. H., & Edsinger, E. (2024) · Methods in molecular biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-3642-8_19
Sponges or Ctenophores? A Synthesis of Evidence on the Root of the Animal PhylogenyPreprint
Yue, W.-X. (2026) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202601.1072.v1
Clarifying Xenacoelomorpha phylogeny: A polarized quartet-based analysis with SeaLion
Kück, P., & Wilkinson, M. (2026) · Gene · doi:10.1016/j.gene.2026.150072
Forterre, P., Schmitt, E., & Cunha, V. D. (2026) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.64898/2026.06.17.729505
- Authors
- Hernandez, A. M., & Ryan, J. F.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ryan, Joseph F.
- ORCID
- Ryan, Joseph F.
- Venue
- Systematic Biology
- Publisher
- openRxiv
- Published
- 2019-08-08
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1200-1212
- ISSN
- 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC8513762
- OpenAlex
- W3143686523
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 134
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 2.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Systematic Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DRYAD (public-domain)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1542597)
- McKnight Foundation
- Florida Education Fund
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
- Keywords
- compositional heterogeneity, substitution saturation, phylogenetic analysis, information loss, simulation study, protein sequence data
- MeSH terms
- Amino Acids, Phylogeny
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.
Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.
Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.
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