Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25281847›Full record

ArticleSystematic biology2016

A Bayesian Supertree Model for Genome-Wide Species Tree Reconstruction.

Leonardo De Oliveira Martins, Diego Mallo, David Posada

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Variational Supertrees for Bayesian Phylogenetics.Bulletin of mathematical biology · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Microbial sequence typing in the genomic era.Infection, genetics and evolution : journal of molecular epidemiology and evolutionary genetics in infectious diseases · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Multilocus inference of species trees and DNA barcoding.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Leonardo De Oliveira MartinsDepartment of Biochemistry, Genetics and Immunology, University of Vigo, Vigo, 36310, Spain leomrtns@uvigo.es.
Diego MalloDepartment of Biochemistry, Genetics and Immunology, University of Vigo, Vigo, 36310, Spain.
David PosadaDepartment of Biochemistry, Genetics and Immunology, University of Vigo, Vigo, 36310, Spain.

Funding

European Research Council 203161
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current phylogenomic data sets highlight the need for species tree methods able to deal with several sources of gene tree/species tree incongruence. At the same time, we need to make most use of all available data. Most species tree methods deal with single processes of phylogenetic discordance, namely, gene duplication and loss, incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) or horizontal gene transfer. In this manuscript, we address the problem of species tree inference from multilocus, genome-wide data sets regardless of the presence of gene duplication and loss and ILS therefore without the need to identify orthologs or to use a single individual per species. We do this by extending the idea of Maximum Likelihood (ML) supertrees to a hierarchical Bayesian model where several sources of gene tree/species tree disagreement can be accounted for in a modular manner. We implemented this model in a computer program called guenomu whose inputs are posterior distributions of unrooted gene tree topologies for multiple gene families, and whose output is the posterior distribution of rooted species tree topologies. We conducted extensive simulations to evaluate the performance of our approach in comparison with other species tree approaches able to deal with more than one leaf from the same species. Our method ranked best under simulated data sets, in spite of ignoring branch lengths, and performed well on empirical data, as well as being fast enough to analyze relatively large data sets. Our Bayesian supertree method was also very successful in obtaining better estimates of gene trees, by reducing the uncertainty in their distributions. In addition, our results show that under complex simulation scenarios, gene tree parsimony is also a competitive approach once we consider its speed, in contrast to more sophisticated models.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticPhylogenyBayes TheoremClassificationComputer SimulationGenomeSoftwarehierarchical Bayesian modelphylogenomicsreconciliationsupertreetree distance

Identifiers

PMID25281847
PMCPMC4851173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.