Back

Accuracy of phylogenetic reconstructions from continuous characters analyzed under parsimony and its parametric correlates

Tagliacollo, V.; de Pinna, M.; Chuctaya, J.; Datovo, A.

2024-01-04 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2024.01.03.574081 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Quantitative traits are a source of evolutionary information often difficult to handle in cladistics. Tools exist to analyze this kind of data without subjective discretization, avoiding biases in the delimitation of categorical states. Nonetheless, the ability of continuous characters to accurately infer relationships is incompletely understood, particularly under parsimony analysis. This study evaluates the accuracy of phylogenetic reconstructions from simulated matrices of continuous characters evolving under alternative evolutionary processes and analyzed by parsimony. We generated 100 trees to simulate 9,000 matrices containing 26 terminals and 100 continuous characters evolving under: Brownian-Motion (BM), Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (OU) and Early-Burst (EB) processes assuming variable parametrizations. Our comparisons of cladograms revealed that matrices analyzed by parsimony carry phylogenetic signals to infer relationships, but the accuracy is higher for matrices simulated under BM, regardless of the parameterization schemes. Implementation of equal or implied weighting with multiple penalization strengths against homoplasies did not affect cladogram inferences. Accuracy of continuous characters in resolving relationships is skewed toward apical nodes of the trees. Our simulations provide controlled tests of the usefulness of quantitative traits in phylogenetics, specifically under neutral evolution, and demonstrate their effectiveness in estimating shallower nodes among recently diverged species, regardless of parameters and weighting schemes.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Systematic Biology
121 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.2%
2
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
61 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.3%
3
BMC Ecology and Evolution
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.4%
4
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 16%
6.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.7%
6
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.2%
7
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.0%
8
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
9
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
10
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.7%
11
Journal of Evolutionary Biology
98 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
12
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 17%
1.5%
13
Evolution
199 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
14
Journal of Systematics and Evolution
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
15
Journal of Molecular Evolution
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
16
Infection, Genetics and Evolution
43 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
17
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
18
Systematic Entomology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
19
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
20
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
21
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 20%
0.7%
23
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
24
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 46%
0.7%
25
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 63%
0.5%
26
Genome Biology and Evolution
280 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
27
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
28
Journal of Computational Biology
37 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%