Literature DB >> 24415681

Detection of implausible phylogenetic inferences using posterior predictive assessment of model fit.

Jeremy M Brown1.   

Abstract

Systematic phylogenetic error caused by the simplifying assumptions made in models of molecular evolution may be impossible to avoid entirely when attempting to model evolution across massive, diverse data sets. However, not all deficiencies of inference models result in unreliable phylogenetic estimates. The field of phylogenetics lacks a direct method to identify cases where model specification adversely affects inferences. Posterior predictive simulation is a flexible and intuitive approach for assessing goodness-of-fit of the assumed model and priors in a Bayesian phylogenetic analysis. Here, I propose new test statistics for use in posterior predictive assessment of model fit. These test statistics compare phylogenetic inferences from posterior predictive data sets to inferences from the original data. A simulation study demonstrates the utility of these new statistics. The new tests reject the plausibility of inferred tree lengths or topologies more often when data/model combinations produce biased inferences. I also apply this approach to exemplar empirical data sets, highlighting the value of the novel assessments.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24415681     DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syu002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Syst Biol        ISSN: 1063-5157            Impact factor:   15.683


  15 in total

1.  Model-Based Detection of Whole-Genome Duplications in a Phylogeny.

Authors:  Arthur Zwaenepoel; Yves Van de Peer
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2020-09-01       Impact factor: 16.240

2.  Phylodynamic Model Adequacy Using Posterior Predictive Simulations.

Authors:  Sebastian Duchene; Remco Bouckaert; David A Duchene; Tanja Stadler; Alexei J Drummond
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 15.683

3.  Multigene phylogenetic analysis redefines dung beetles relationships and classification (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Scarabaeinae).

Authors:  Sergei Tarasov; Dimitar Dimitrov
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2016-11-29       Impact factor: 3.260

4.  Estimating Bayesian Phylogenetic Information Content.

Authors:  Paul O Lewis; Ming-Hui Chen; Lynn Kuo; Louise A Lewis; Karolina Fučíková; Suman Neupane; Yu-Bo Wang; Daoyuan Shi
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2016-05-06       Impact factor: 15.683

5.  Model Choice, Missing Data, and Taxon Sampling Impact Phylogenomic Inference of Deep Basidiomycota Relationships.

Authors:  Arun N Prasanna; Daniel Gerber; Teeratas Kijpornyongpan; M Catherine Aime; Vinson P Doyle; Laszlo G Nagy
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 15.683

6.  Excluding Loci With Substitution Saturation Improves Inferences From Phylogenomic Data.

Authors:  David A Duchêne; Niklas Mather; Cara Van Der Wal; Simon Y W Ho
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 9.160

7.  On the Need for New Measures of Phylogenomic Support.

Authors:  Robert C Thomson; Jeremy M Brown
Journal:  Syst Biol       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 9.160

8.  Differences in Performance among Test Statistics for Assessing Phylogenomic Model Adequacy.

Authors:  David A Duchêne; Sebastian Duchêne; Simon Y W Ho
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 3.416

9.  The deep(er) roots of Eukaryotes and Akaryotes.

Authors:  Ajith Harish; David Morrison
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2020-02-13

10.  Impact of the tree prior on estimating clock rates during epidemic outbreaks.

Authors:  Simon Möller; Louis du Plessis; Tanja Stadler
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-04-02       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.