Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27798407›Full record

ArticleSystematic biology2017

Construction of a Species-Level Tree of Life for the Insects and Utility in Taxonomic Profiling.

Douglas Chesters

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Haplodiploidy and the evolution of eusociality: A long-standing question is finally resolved.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. No evidence that haplodiploidy favors the evolution of eusociality.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Global gradients in the distribution of animal polyploids.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Douglas ChestersKey Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China.
Chinese Academy of Sciences · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although comprehensive phylogenies have proven an invaluable tool in ecology and evolution, their construction is made increasingly challenging both by the scale and structure of publically available sequences. The distinct partition between gene-rich (genomic) and species-rich (DNA barcode) data is a feature of data that has been largely overlooked, yet presents a key obstacle to scaling supermatrix analysis. I present a phyloinformatics framework for draft construction of a species-level phylogeny of insects (Class Insecta). Matrix-building requires separately optimized pipelines for nuclear transcriptomic, mitochondrial genomic, and species-rich markers, whereas tree-building requires hierarchical inference in order to capture species-breadth while retaining deep-level resolution. The phylogeny of insects contains 49,358 species, 13,865 genera, 760 families. Deep-level splits largely reflected previous findings for sections of the tree that are data rich or unambiguous, such as inter-ordinal Endopterygota and Dictyoptera, the recently evolved and relatively homogeneous Lepidoptera, Hymenoptera, Brachycera (Diptera), and Cucujiformia (Coleoptera). However, analysis of bias, matrix construction and gene-tree variation suggests confidence in some relationships (such as in Polyneoptera) is less than has been indicated by the matrix bootstrap method. To assess the utility of the insect tree as a tool in query profiling several tree-based taxonomic assignment methods are compared. Using test data sets with existing taxonomic annotations, a tendency is observed for greater accuracy of species-level assignments where using a fixed comprehensive tree of life in contrast to methods generating smaller de novo reference trees. Described herein is a solution to the discrepancy in the way data are fit into supermatrices. The resulting tree facilitates wider studies of insect diversification and application of advanced descriptions of diversity in community studies, among other presumed applications. [Data integration; data mining; insects; phylogenomics; phyloinformatics; tree of life.].

Indexed as

PhylogenyAnimalsClassificationInsecta

Identifiers

PMID27798407
PMCPMC5837528
OpenAlexW2544330939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.