ArticlePloS one2021
Statistical inconsistency of the unrooted minimize deep coalescence criterion.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Species trees, which describe the evolutionary relationships between species, are often inferred from gene trees, which describe the ancestral relationships between sequences sampled at different loci from the species of interest. A common approach to inferring species trees from gene trees is motivated by supposing that gene tree variation is due to incomplete lineage sorting, also known as deep coalescence. One of the earliest methods motivated by deep coalescence is to find the species tree that minimizes the number of deep coalescent events needed to explain discrepancies between the species tree and input gene trees. This minimize deep coalescence (MDC) criterion can be applied in both rooted and unrooted settings. where either rooted or unrooted gene trees can be used to infer a rooted species tree. Previous work has shown that MDC is statistically inconsistent in the rooted setting, meaning that under a probabilistic model for deep coalescence, the multispecies coalescent, for some species trees, increasing the number of input gene trees does not make the method more likely to return a correct species tree. Here, we obtain analogous results in the unrooted setting, showing conditions leading to inconsistency of the MDC criterion using the multispecies coalescent model with unrooted gene trees for four taxa and five taxa.
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.