Cited by 218

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

RECONSTRUCTING CHARACTER EVOLUTION ON POLYTOMOUS CLADOGRAMS

Maddison, Wayne·1989·Cladistics

Abstract

Abstract— Algorithms to reconstruct character evolution on polytomous cladograms or phylogenetic trees have to date interpreted each polytomy literally, as if it were an event of multiple speciation, with multiple daughter species descending independently from a mother species, thus requiring any similarities shared by only some of these daughters to be accounted for by convergence. These algorithms are not appropriate when the polytomy is interpreted in the usual way, namely as representing uncertainty in the cladogram's resolution. New algorithms for both ordered and unordered characters are presented to reconstruct character evolution under the uncertain‐resolution interpretation of polytomies. These algorithms allow the cladogram to resolve itself so as to be favourable for the character whose evolution is being reconstructed. Because different characters may have different favourable resolutions, it is not possible in general to use these algorithms to determine the total parsimony of a polytomous cladogram (the number of evolutionary steps required over all characters by the cladogram), for which the only adequate approach is to find a most parsimonious dichotomous resolution of the cladogram.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1096-0031.1989.tb00569.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Previous RERconverge ancestral trait reconstruction functionality was only available for binary or continuous traits and used an approximate maximum parsimony approach for binary traits and estimation of maximum likelihood states for continuous traits.

    “Previous RERconverge ancestral trait reconstruction functionality was only available for binary or continuous traits and used an approximate maximum parsimony approach for binary traits and estimation of maximum likelihood states for continuous traits (Maddison 1989; Kowalczyk et al. 2019; Revell 2024).”

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 20

  1. 10.2307/2412432 · DOI
  2. 10.2307/2413289 · DOI
  3. 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1989.tb02565.x · DOI
  4. 10.2307/2412028 · DOI
  5. 10.2307/2412867 · DOI
  6. Farris J. S., 1988, Hennig86. A computer program distributed by the author
  7. 10.2307/2412116 · DOI
  8. 10.2307/2529676 · DOI
  9. Maddison W. P., 1987, MacClade, version 2.1
  10. 10.2307/2413134 · DOI
  11. 10.1016/0022-5193(73)90252-X · DOI
  12. Platnick N. I.1980.Multiple branching in cladograms: two interpretations.Syst. Zool.86–91. · DOI
  13. 10.1137/0128004 · DOI
  14. 10.1007/BF01681346 · DOI
  15. Sankoff D., 1983, Time warps, string and macromolecules: the theory and practice of sequence comparison, 253
  16. 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1987.tb02463.x · DOI
  17. 10.2307/2413252 · DOI
  18. 10.2307/2413068 · DOI
  19. 10.1016/0025-5564(87)90074-5 · DOI
  20. 10.1016/0022-5193(81)90214-9 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Maddison, W.
Venue
Cladistics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1989-12
Volume
5
Issue
4
Pages
365-377
ISSN
  • 0748-3007
  • 1096-0031
Cited by
218
References
0
Language
en

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