Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 257

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 67 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fitting and comparing models of phyletic evolution: random walks and beyond

Hunt, Gene·2006·Paleobiology

Abstract

For almost 30 years, paleontologists have analyzed evolutionary sequences in terms of simple null models, most commonly random walks. Despite this long history, there has been little discussion of how model parameters may be estimated from real paleontological data. In this paper, I outline a likelihood-based framework for fitting and comparing models of phyletic evolution. Because of its usefulness and historical importance, I focus on a general form of the random walk model. The long-term dynamics of this model depend on just two parameters: the mean (μ step ) and variance (σ 2 step ) of the distribution of evolutionary transitions (or “steps”). The value of μ step determines the directionality of a sequence, and σ 2 step governs its volatility. Simulations show that these two parameters can be inferred reliably from paleontological data regardless of how completely the evolving lineage is sampled. In addition to random walk models, suitable modification of the likelihood function permits consideration of a wide range of alternative evolutionary models. Candidate evolutionary models may be compared on equal footing using information statistics such as the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). Two extensions to this method are developed: modeling stasis as an evolutionary mode, and assessing the homogeneity of dynamics across multiple evolutionary sequences. Within this framework, I reanalyze two well-known published data sets: tooth measurements from the Eocene mammal Cantius , and shell shape in the planktonic foraminifera Contusotruncana . These analyses support previous interpretations about evolutionary mode in size and shape variables in Cantius , and confirm the significantly directional nature of shell shape evolution in Contusotruncana . In addition, this model-fitting approach leads to a further insight about the geographic structure of evolutionary change in this foraminiferan lineage.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1666/05070.1

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 67 references

Cited by

See all 257

Metadata

Authors
Hunt, G.
Venue
Paleobiology
Published
2006
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
578-601
ISSN
  • 0094-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-5331
OpenAlex
W2940953300
Cited by
257
References
67
FWCI
7.47
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: Fitting and comparing models of phyletic evolution: random walks and beyond. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1666/05070.1
The paper
Hunt, G. (2006). Fitting and comparing models of phyletic evolution: random walks and beyond. Paleobiology. https://doi.org/10.1666/05070.1

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.