Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29914372›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2018

Inferring demographic parameters in bacterial genomic data using Bayesian and hybrid phylogenetic methods.

Sebastian Duchene, David A Duchene, Jemma L Geoghegan, Zoe A Dyson, Jane Hawkey, Kathryn E Holt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A scalable analytical approach from bacterial genomes to epidemiology.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  8. Forensic genomics of a novelMicrobial genomics · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Sebastian DucheneDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3020, Australia. sebastian.duchene@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-2863-0907
David A DucheneSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Jemma L GeogheganDepartment of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia.
Zoe A DysonDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3020, Australia.
Jane HawkeyDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3020, Australia.
Kathryn E HoltDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Bio21 Molecular Science and Biotechnology Institute, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3020, Australia.

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1061409University of Melbourne (AU) McKenzieWellcome TrustWellcome Trust (GB) 106158
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent developments in sequencing technologies make it possible to obtain genome sequences from a large number of isolates in a very short time. Bayesian phylogenetic approaches can take advantage of these data by simultaneously inferring the phylogenetic tree, evolutionary timescale, and demographic parameters (such as population growth rates), while naturally integrating uncertainty in all parameters. Despite their desirable properties, Bayesian approaches can be computationally intensive, hindering their use for outbreak investigations involving genome data for a large numbers of pathogen isolates. An alternative to using full Bayesian inference is to use a hybrid approach, where the phylogenetic tree and evolutionary timescale are estimated first using maximum likelihood. Under this hybrid approach, demographic parameters are inferred from estimated trees instead of the sequence data, using maximum likelihood, Bayesian inference, or approximate Bayesian computation. This can vastly reduce the computational burden, but has the disadvantage of ignoring the uncertainty in the phylogenetic tree and evolutionary timescale.

resultsWe compared the performance of a fully Bayesian and a hybrid method by analysing six whole-genome SNP data sets from a range of bacteria and simulations. The estimates from the two methods were very similar, suggesting that the hybrid method is a valid alternative for very large datasets. However, we also found that congruence between these methods is contingent on the presence of strong temporal structure in the data (i.e. clocklike behaviour), which is typically verified using a date-randomisation test in a Bayesian framework. To reduce the computational burden of this Bayesian test we implemented a date-randomisation test using a rapid maximum likelihood method, which has similar performance to its Bayesian counterpart.

conclusionsHybrid approaches can produce reliable inferences of evolutionary timescales and phylodynamic parameters in a fraction of the time required for fully Bayesian analyses. As such, they are a valuable alternative in outbreak studies involving a large number of isolates.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialGenomicsPhylogenyStatistics as TopicBase SequenceBayes TheoremComputer SimulationModels, GeneticReproducibility of ResultsTime FactorsBacterial evolutionBayesian phylogeneticsMolecular clockPhylodynamics

Identifiers

PMID29914372
PMCPMC6006949

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.