ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2015
Probabilistic models of eukaryotic evolution: time for integration.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simultaneous Bayesian inference of phylogeny and molecular coevolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019Article
- The prevalence of terraced treescapes in analyses of phylogenetic data sets.BMC evolutionary biology · 2018Article
- Molecular evolution of type II MAGE genes from ancestral MAGED2 gene and their phylogenetic resolution of basal mammalian clades.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2017Article
- Causes of evolutionary rate variation among protein sites.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2016Review
- Genomic data do not support comb jellies as the sister group to all other animals.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015Article
- Changing ideas about eukaryotic origins.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2015Article
- Rooting the tree of life: the phylogenetic jury is still out.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In spite of substantial work and recent progress, a global and fully resolved picture of the macroevolutionary history of eukaryotes is still under construction. This concerns not only the phylogenetic relations among major groups, but also the general characteristics of the underlying macroevolutionary processes, including the patterns of gene family evolution associated with endosymbioses, as well as their impact on the sequence evolutionary process. All these questions raise formidable methodological challenges, calling for a more powerful statistical paradigm. In this direction, model-based probabilistic approaches have played an increasingly important role. In particular, improved models of sequence evolution accounting for heterogeneities across sites and across lineages have led to significant, although insufficient, improvement in phylogenetic accuracy. More recently, one main trend has been to move away from simple parametric models and stepwise approaches, towards integrative models explicitly considering the intricate interplay between multiple levels of macroevolutionary processes. Such integrative models are in their infancy, and their application to the phylogeny of eukaryotes still requires substantial improvement of the underlying models, as well as additional computational developments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.