ReviewInsect systematics and diversity2019
A Systematist's Guide to Estimating Bayesian Phylogenies From Morphological Data.
Review in Insect systematics and diversity, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.
- Re-evaluating the phylogenetic relationships of zosterophylls with a comprehensively sampled dataset and a combination of traditional and new alternative methods.Annals of botany · 2026Article
- Practical Guide and Review of Fossil Tip-Dating in Phylogenetics.Systematic biology · 2026Review
- Integrating Deep Learning Derived Morphological Traits and Molecular Data for Total-Evidence Phylogenetics: Lessons from Digitized Collections.Systematic biology · 2025Article
- Patagomaia could be a gondwanatherian.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A macroevolutionary analysis of European Late Upper Palaeolithic stone tool shape using a Bayesian phylodynamic framework.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- The Occurrence Birth-Death Process for Combined-Evidence Analysis in Macroevolution and Epidemiology.Systematic biology · 2022Article
- Developing a bioinformatics pipeline for comparative protein classification analysis.BMC genomic data · 2022Article
- Article
- New opabiniid diversifies the weirdest wonders of the euarthropod stem group.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
- Investigating Morphological Complexes Using Informational Dissonance and Bayes Factors: A Case Study in Corbiculate Bees.Systematic biology · 2021Article
- Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Phylogenetic trees are crucial to many aspects of taxonomic and comparative biology. Many researchers have adopted Bayesian methods to estimate their phylogenetic trees. In this family of methods, a model of morphological evolution is assumed to have generated the data observed by the researcher. These models make a variety of assumptions about the evolution of morphological characters, and these assumptions are translated into mathematics as parameters. The incorporation of prior distributions further allows researchers to quantify their prior beliefs about the value any one parameter can take. How to translate biological knowledge into mathematical language is difficult, and can be confusing to many biologists. This review aims to help systematics researchers understand the biological meaning of common models and assumptions. Using examples from the insect fossil record, I will demonstrate empirically what assumptions mean in concrete terms, and discuss how researchers can use and understand Bayesian methods for phylogenetic estimation.
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.