Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31225900›Full record

ArticleEcology2019

For common community phylogenetic analyses, go ahead and use synthesis phylogenies.

Daijiang Li, Lauren Trotta, Hannah E Marx, Julie M Allen, Miao Sun, Douglas E Soltis, Pamela S Soltis, Robert P Guralnick, Benjamin Baiser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Informing spatial conservation prioritization with species' traits.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

9 authors.

Daijiang LiDepartment of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611 , USA.
Lauren TrottaDepartment of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611 , USA.
Hannah E MarxDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48109, USA.
Julie M AllenBiology Department, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, Nevada, 89557, USA.
Miao SunFlorida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611, USA.
Douglas E SoltisFlorida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611, USA.
Pamela S SoltisFlorida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611, USA.
Robert P GuralnickFlorida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611, USA.
Benjamin BaiserDepartment of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611 , USA.

Funding

National Science Foundation ABI-458034National Science Foundation DBI-1458640National Science Foundation DBI-1547229National Science Foundation DEB-1442280National Science Foundation EF-1115210National Science Foundation EF-1550838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Should we build our own phylogenetic trees based on gene sequence data, or can we simply use available synthesis phylogenies? This is a fundamental question that any study involving a phylogenetic framework must face at the beginning of the project. Building a phylogeny from gene sequence data (purpose-built phylogeny) requires more effort, expertise, and cost than subsetting an already available phylogeny (synthesis-based phylogeny). However, we still lack a comparison of how these two approaches to building phylogenetic trees influence common community phylogenetic analyses such as comparing community phylogenetic diversity and estimating trait phylogenetic signal. Here, we generated three purpose-built phylogenies and their corresponding synthesis-based trees (two from Phylomatic and one from the Open Tree of Life, OTL). We simulated 1,000 communities and 12,000 continuous traits along each purpose-built phylogeny. We then compared the effects of different trees on estimates of phylogenetic diversity (alpha and beta) and phylogenetic signal (Pagel's λ and Blomberg's K). Synthesis-based phylogenies generally yielded higher estimates of phylogenetic diversity when compared to purpose-built phylogenies. However, resulting measures of phylogenetic diversity from both types of phylogenies were highly correlated (Spearman's

Indexed as

Phylogenyalpha diversitybeta diversitycommunity phylogenetic structureopen tree of lifephylogenetic diversityphylogenetic signaltrait

Identifiers

PMID31225900
PMCPMC7079099

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.