Literature DB >> 12270903

Rooting phylogenetic trees with distant outgroups: a case study from the commelinoid monocots.

Sean W Graham1, Richard G Olmstead, Spencer C H Barrett.   

Abstract

Phylogenetic rooting experiments demonstrate that two chloroplast genes from commelinoid monocot taxa that represent the closest living relatives of the pickerelweed family, Pontederiaceae, retain measurable signals regarding the position of that family's root. The rooting preferences of the chloroplast sequences were compared with those for artificial sequences that correspond to outgroups so divergent that their signal has been lost completely. These random sequences prefer the three longest branches in the unrooted ingroup topology and do not preferentially root on the branches favored by real outgroup sequences. However, the rooting behavior of the artificial sequences is not a simple function of branch length. The random outgroups preferentially root on long terminal ingroup branches, but many ingroup branches comparable in length to those favored by random sequences attract no or few hits. Nonterminal ingroup branches are generally avoided, regardless of their length. Comparisons of the ease of forcing sequences onto suboptimal roots indicate that real outgroups require a substantially greater rooting penalty than random outgroups for around half of the least-parsimonious candidate roots. Although this supports the existence of nonrandomized signal in the real outgroups, it also indicates that there is little power to choose among the optimal and nearly optimal rooting possibilities. A likelihood-based test rejects the hypothesis that all rootings of the subtree using real outgroup sequences are equally good explanations of the data and also eliminates around half of the least optimal candidate roots. Adding genes or outgroups can improve the ability to discriminate among different root locations. Rooting discriminatory power is shown to be stronger, in general, for more closely related outgroups and is highly correlated among different real outgroups, genes, and optimality criteria.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12270903     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a003999

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Biol Evol        ISSN: 0737-4038            Impact factor:   16.240


  31 in total

1.  Identifying the rooted species tree from the distribution of unrooted gene trees under the coalescent.

Authors:  Elizabeth S Allman; James H Degnan; John A Rhodes
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2010-07-23       Impact factor: 2.259

2.  An approach to revealing blood fluke life cycles, taxonomy, and diversity: provision of key reference data including DNA sequence from single life cycle stages.

Authors:  Sara V Brant; Jess A T Morgan; Gerald M Mkoji; Scott D Snyder; R P V Jayanthe Rajapakse; Eric S Loker
Journal:  J Parasitol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.276

3.  Evaluating alternative hypotheses for the early evolution and diversification of ants.

Authors:  Seán G Brady; Ted R Schultz; Brian L Fisher; Philip S Ward
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-11-01       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Phylogenomic analyses of malaria parasites and evolution of their exported proteins.

Authors:  Christian Pick; Ingo Ebersberger; Tobias Spielmann; Iris Bruchhaus; Thorsten Burmester
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 3.260

5.  A 250 plastome phylogeny of the grass family (Poaceae): topological support under different data partitions.

Authors:  Jeffery M Saarela; Sean V Burke; William P Wysocki; Matthew D Barrett; Lynn G Clark; Joseph M Craine; Paul M Peterson; Robert J Soreng; Maria S Vorontsova; Melvin R Duvall
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  Maximum Likelihood Analyses of 3,490 rbcL Sequences: Scalability of Comprehensive Inference versus Group-Specific Taxon Sampling.

Authors:  Alexandros Stamatakis; Markus Göker; Guido W Grimm
Journal:  Evol Bioinform Online       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 1.625

7.  A differentiation-based phylogeny of cancer subtypes.

Authors:  Markus Riester; Camille Stephan-Otto Attolini; Robert J Downey; Samuel Singer; Franziska Michor
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 4.475

8.  At least 23 genera instead of one: the case of Iris L. s.l. (Iridaceae).

Authors:  Evgeny V Mavrodiev; Mario Martínez-Azorín; Peter Dranishnikov; Manuel B Crespo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-29       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  PhyloOncology: Understanding cancer through phylogenetic analysis.

Authors:  Jason A Somarelli; Kathryn E Ware; Rumen Kostadinov; Jeffrey M Robinson; Hakima Amri; Mones Abu-Asab; Nicolaas Fourie; Rui Diogo; David Swofford; Jeffrey P Townsend
Journal:  Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 11.414

10.  Mind the Outgroup and Bare Branches in Total-Evidence Dating: a Case Study of Pimpliform Darwin Wasps (Hymenoptera, Ichneumonidae).

Authors:  Tamara Spasojevic; Gavin R Broad; Ilari E Sääksjärvi; Martin Schwarz; Masato Ito; Stanislav Korenko; Seraina Klopfstein
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 15.683

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.