Is ACCTRAN better than DELTRAN?

When parsimony ancestral character reconstruction is ambiguous, it is often resolved in favour of the more complex character state. Hence, secondary loss (secondary "absence") of a complex feature is favoured over parallel gains of that feature as this preserves the stronger hypothesis of homology. We believe that such asymmetry in character state complexity is important information for understanding character evolution in general. However, we here point out an inappropriate link that is commonly made between this approach and the accelerated transformation (ACCTRAN) algorithm. In ACCTRAN, changes are assigned along branches of a phylogenetic tree as close to the root as possible. This has been taken to imply that ACCTRAN will minimize hypotheses of parallel origins of complex traits and thus that ACCTRAN is philosophically better justified than the alternatives, such as delayed transformation (DELTRAN), where changes are assigned along branches as close to the tips as possible. We provide simple examples to show that such views are mistaken and that neither ACCTRAN nor DELTRAN consistently minimize parallel gain of complex traits. We therefore do not see theoretical grounds for favouring the popular ACCTRAN algorithm. © The Willi Hennig Society 2008. © The Willi Hennig Society 2008.