Literature DB >> 17348942

Statistical tests for taxonomic distinctiveness from observations of monophyly.

Noah A Rosenberg1.   

Abstract

The observation of monophyly for a specified set of genealogical lineages is often used to place the lineages into a distinctive taxonomic entity. However, it is sometimes possible that monophyly of the lineages can occur by chance as an outcome of the random branching of lineages within a single taxon. Thus, especially for small samples, an observation of monophyly for a set of lineages--even if strongly supported statistically--does not necessarily indicate that the lineages are from a distinctive group. Here I develop a test of the null hypothesis that monophyly is a chance outcome of random branching. I also compute the sample size required so that the probability of chance occurrence of monophyly of a specified set of lineages lies below a prescribed tolerance. Under the null model of random branching, the probability that monophyly of the lineages in an index group occurs by chance is substantial if the sample is highly asymmetric, that is, if only a few of the sampled lineages are from the index group, or if only a few lineages are external to the group. If sample sizes are similar inside and outside the group of interest, however, chance occurrence of monophyly can be rejected at stringent significance levels (P < 10(-5)) even for quite small samples (approximately 20 total lineages). For a fixed total sample size, rejection of the null hypothesis of random branching in a single taxon occurs at the most stringent level if samples of nearly equal size inside and outside the index group--with a slightly greater size within the index group--are used. Similar results apply, with smaller sample sizes needed, when reciprocal monophyly of two groups, rather than monophyly of a single group, is of interest. The results suggest minimal sample sizes required for inferences to be made about taxonomic distinctiveness from observations of monophyly.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17348942     DOI: 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00023.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evolution        ISSN: 0014-3820            Impact factor:   3.694


  48 in total

1.  The perils of plenty: what are we going to do with all these genes?

Authors:  Allen Rodrigo; Frederic Bertels; Joseph Heled; Raphael Noder; Helen Shearman; Peter Tsai
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2008-12-27       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Species notions that combine phylogenetic trees and phenotypic partitions.

Authors:  Anica Hoppe; Sonja Türpitz; Mike Steel
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 2.259

3.  Clades and clans: a comparison study of two evolutionary models.

Authors:  Sha Zhu; Cuong Than; Taoyang Wu
Journal:  J Math Biol       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 2.259

4.  The probability of monophyly of a sample of gene lineages on a species tree.

Authors:  Rohan S Mehta; David Bryant; Noah A Rosenberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Evidence of cryptic species in the genus Tinaminyssus (Acari: Rhinonyssidae) based on morphometrical and molecular data.

Authors:  Manuel de Rojas; Jorge Doña; Roger Jovani; Ivan Dimov; Antonio Zurita; Rocío Callejón; María Rodríguez-Plá
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 2.132

6.  Within a sample from a population, the distribution of the number of descendants of a subsample's most recent common ancestor.

Authors:  John L Spouge
Journal:  Theor Popul Biol       Date:  2013-12-07       Impact factor: 1.570

7.  Filling the gap - COI barcode resolution in eastern Palearctic birds.

Authors:  Kevin Cr Kerr; Sharon M Birks; Mikhail V Kalyakin; Yaroslav A Red'kin; Eugeny A Koblik; Paul Dn Hebert
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2009-12-09       Impact factor: 3.172

8.  Phylogenetic and coalescent analysis of three loci suggest that the Water Rail is divisible into two species, Rallus aquaticus and R. indicus.

Authors:  Erika S Tavares; Gerard H J de Kroon; Allan J Baker
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2010-07-23       Impact factor: 3.260

9.  Utility of DNA barcoding for Tellinoidea: a comparison of distance, coalescent and character-based methods on multiple genes.

Authors:  Zhenzhen Yu; Qi Li; Lingfeng Kong; Hong Yu
Journal:  Mar Biotechnol (NY)       Date:  2014-08-09       Impact factor: 3.619

10.  Molecular operational taxonomic units of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) collected in high Andean mountain ecosystems of Antioquia, Colombia.

Authors:  Doris Rosero-garcÍa; Sara A Bickersmith; Juan David Suaza-Vasco; Charles Porter; Margarita M Correa; Jan E Conn; Sandra Uribe-Soto
Journal:  Zootaxa       Date:  2017-06-19       Impact factor: 1.091

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.