Cited by 173Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesProtist diversity and phylogenyPlant Diversity and Evolution

Pitfalls in supermatrix phylogenomics

Open access
Philippe, Hervé, Vienne, Damien M. de, Ranwez, Vincent, Roure, Béatrice, Baurain, Denis, Delsuc, Frédéric·2017·European Journal of Taxonomy

Abstract

In the mid-2000s, molecular phylogenetics turned into phylogenomics, a development that improved the resolution of phylogenetic trees through a dramatic reduction in stochastic error. While some then predicted “the end of incongruence”, it soon appeared that analysing large amounts of sequence data without an adequate model of sequence evolution amplifies systematic error and leads to phylogenetic artefacts. With the increasing flood of (sometimes low-quality) genomic data resulting from the rise of high-throughput sequencing, a new type of error has emerged. Termed here “data errors”, it lumps together several kinds of issues affecting the construction of phylogenomic supermatrices (e.g., sequencing and annotation errors, contaminant sequences). While easy to deal with at a single-gene scale, such errors become very difficult to avoid at the genomic scale, both because hand curating thousands of sequences is prohibitively time-consuming and because the suitable automated bioinformatics tools are still in their infancy. In this paper, we first review the pitfalls affecting the construction of supermatrices and the strategies to limit their adverse effects on phylogenomic inference. Then, after discussing the relative non-issue of missing data in supermatrices, we briefly present the approaches commonly used to reduce systematic error.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5852/ejt.2017.283

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Commonly applied phylogenetic models do not account for a wide array of factors that are known to cause positively misleading phylogenetic estimates when overlooked.

    “While phylogenomics has revolutionized our understanding of the tree of life, commonly applied phylogenetic models do not account for a wide array of factors that are known to cause positively misleading phylogenetic estimates when overlooked18,19.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Philippe, H., Vienne, D. M. D., Ranwez, V., Roure, B., Baurain, D., & Delsuc, F.
Affiliations
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
  • Lyon 1 Université (FR)
  • Institut Agro Montpellier (FR)
  • University of Liège (BE)
Venue
European Journal of Taxonomy
Published
2017-02-21
Volume
283
Issue
283
Pages
1-25
ISSN
2118-9773 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2590646912
Cited by
173
References
119
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 11 · 2015: 1
FWCI
10.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Taxonomy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-10-LABX-0041, ANR-10-LABX- 41, ANR-10-LABX-0025, ANR-10, 10-LABX-41)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Diversity and Evolution
Keywords
phylogenetic incongruence, data errors, sequencing errors, annotation errors, systematic errors, missing data, high-throughput sequencing data

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