Back

Comparison of directional random walk and weighted least squares modeling of sparse fossil data

Ergon, R.

2026-07-01 evolutionary biology
10.64898/2026.06.26.734751 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The general random walk model (GRW) of Hunt (2006) is used to infer directional evolution in mean trait values from sparse fossil data by modeling phenotypic change as the accumulated result of small steps with mean step sizes and step variances. Using simulations and real data cases, Ergon (2026) showed that the step variances can be estimated reasonably well only when the mean trait values have small measurement errors, while for fossil data with realistic measurement errors they appear to be extremely difficult to find, and they are often found to be negative. In the simulations Ergon (2026) assumed that the true phenotypic mean values were known. Here, I essentially repeat these simulations under the assumption that only mean trait values with large measurement errors are known, and based on weighted mean squared error (WMSE) comparisons the conclusion is that weighted least squares (WLS) is a better method than GRW. A second conclusion is that WLS is a better method also in the possibly rare cases with large measurement errors where the GRW parameters are estimated well. The GRW method is simply not flexible enough to handle such cases. A third conclusion is that Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) results for GRW models with large measurement errors relative to the step variance may be overly optimistic.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.5%
2
Evolutionary Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.4%
3
Evolution
225 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
9.4%
4
GENETICS
483 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.3%
5
Ecology and Evolution
267 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.7%
6
Journal of Theoretical Biology
162 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.7%
7
The American Naturalist
125 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
4.2%
8
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
252 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
9
Journal of Evolutionary Biology
110 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.3%
10
Methods in Ecology and Evolution
176 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.1%
11
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.1%
12
Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution
69 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.7%
13
Systematic Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
14
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
15
Journal of Molecular Evolution
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
16
Heredity
64 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.6%
17
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
92 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.5%
18
Theoretical Population Biology
50 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
19
Evolutionary Ecology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
20
Ecological Informatics
33 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
21
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.1%
22
Biological Journal of the Linnean Society
24 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
23
Genome Biology and Evolution
338 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
24
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
25
Journal of Animal Ecology
75 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
26
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 76%
0.8%
27
Ecosphere
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
28
BMC Evolutionary Biology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.8%
29
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
72 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
30
Journal of Heredity
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%