Back

Disparity analyses are robust to ancestral state estimation uncertainty

Scutt, C. N.; Cooper, N.; Thomas, G. H.; Guillerme, T.

2026-04-22 evolutionary biology
10.64898/2026.04.21.719166 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Morphological trait datasets and phylogenies are routinely paired to investigate macroevolutionary patterns during disparity analyses. However, incomplete fossil sampling can distort disparity estimates, obscuring true evolutionary signals. Ancestral state estimation can be used for both continuous and discrete traits to extend these analyses beyond incomplete fossil data, such as investigations into disparity through time. However, when ancestral state estimation occur in the disparity pipeline, and the inevitable uncertainty in these estimates, complicate their integration. Determining the most robust workflow for integrating ancestral state estimation in disparity analyses remains a critical methodological challenge. Using simulations to attain a ground-truth disparity value, we evaluated different approaches to performing ancestral state estimation and incorporating uncertainty across varying continuous and discrete trait models, fossil sampling densities and disparity metrics. Ancestral state estimation generally improved recovery of true disparity relative to tip-only analyses, though the optimal approach depended on the interaction between trait model and fossil sampling density. For continuous traits, probabilistic approaches were most accurate, but were sensitive to model misspecification under low fossil sampling density. For discrete traits, pre-ordination methods were most reliable and probabilistic approaches outperformed point estimates under low sampling, while point estimates became increasingly accurate as sampling density increased. Fossil sampling density was a stronger predictor of disparity accuracy than estimation method choice, underscoring that methodologies are only as powerful as the data provided. Our findings offer a practical decision framework for selecting the most appropriate workflow given the sampling density and trait characteristics of a dataset.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Systematic Biology
121 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.9%
2
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
160 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
11.9%
3
BMC Ecology and Evolution
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.1%
4
Evolution
199 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
6.1%
5
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 21%
4.1%
6
Molecular Ecology Resources
161 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.8%
50% of probability mass above
7
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 41%
3.4%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.4%
9
Molecular Biology and Evolution
488 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.0%
10
Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution
61 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.6%
11
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.3%
12
New Phytologist
309 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
13
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 34%
1.6%
14
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.6%
15
Ecography
50 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.4%
16
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.4%
17
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.4%
18
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
19
Applications in Plant Sciences
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
20
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.2%
21
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 22%
0.9%
22
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.9%
23
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 60%
0.9%
24
Molecular Ecology
304 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
25
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
26
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.7%
27
Journal of Molecular Evolution
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
28
Journal of Systematics and Evolution
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
29
Journal of Evolutionary Biology
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
30
Systematic Entomology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.6%