War and peace in phylogenetics: a rejoinder on total evidence and consensus.

For more than 10 years, systematists have been debating the superiority of character or taxonomic congruence in phylogenetic analysis. In this paper, we demonstrate that the competing approaches can converge to the same solution when a consensus method that accounts for branch lengths is selected. Thus, we propose to use both methods in combination, as a way to corroborate the results of combined and separate analyses. This so-called "global congruence" approach is tested with a wide variety of examples sampled from the literature, and the results are compared with those obtained by standard consensus methods. Our analyses show that when the total evidence and consensus trees differ topologically, collapsing weakly supported nodes with low bootstrap support usually improves "global congruence".