Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36575879›Full record

ArticleSystematic biology2023

Model Selection Performance in Phylogenetic Comparative Methods Under Multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck Models of Trait Evolution.

Krzysztof Bartoszek, Jesualdo Fuentes-González, Venelin Mitov, Jason Pienaar, Marcin Piwczyński, Radosław Puchałka, Krzysztof Spalik, Kjetil Lysne Voje

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Discriminating models of trait evolution.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Multi-response phylogenetic mixed models: concepts and application.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2025
    Review
  4. Leveraging graphical model techniques to study evolution on phylogenetic networks.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Krzysztof BartoszekDepartment of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Linköping, Östergötland, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-5816-4345
Jesualdo Fuentes-GonzálezDepartment of Biological Sciences, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
Venelin MitovIntiQuan GmbH, Basel, Switzerland.
Jason PienaarDepartment of Biological Sciences and the Institute of Environment, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA.
Marcin PiwczyńskiDepartment of Ecology and Biogeography, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Toruń, Kujawsko-Pomorskie, Poland.
Radosław PuchałkaDepartment of Ecology and Biogeography, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, Toruń, Kujawsko-Pomorskie, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-4764-0705
Krzysztof SpalikInstitute of Evolutionary Biology, Faculty of Biology, Biological and Chemical Research Centre, University of Warsaw, Warszawa, Poland.
Kjetil Lysne VojeNatural History Museum, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

Vetenskapsrådet
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advent of fast computational algorithms for phylogenetic comparative methods allows for considering multiple hypotheses concerning the co-adaptation of traits and also for studying if it is possible to distinguish between such models based on contemporary species measurements. Here we demonstrate how one can perform a study with multiple competing hypotheses using mvSLOUCH by analyzing two data sets, one concerning feeding styles and oral morphology in ungulates, and the other concerning fruit evolution in Ferula (Apiaceae). We also perform simulations to determine if it is possible to distinguish between various adaptive hypotheses. We find that Akaike's information criterion corrected for small sample size has the ability to distinguish between most pairs of considered models. However, in some cases there seems to be bias towards Brownian motion or simpler Ornstein-Uhlenbeck models. We also find that measurement error and forcing the sign of the diagonal of the drift matrix for an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process influences identifiability capabilities. It is a cliché that some models, despite being imperfect, are more useful than others. Nonetheless, having a much larger repertoire of models will surely lead to a better understanding of the natural world, as it will allow for dissecting in what ways they are wrong. [Adaptation; AICc; model selection; multivariate Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process; multivariate phylogenetic comparative methods; mvSLOUCH.].

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalAlgorithmsBiological EvolutionPhenotypePhylogenySample Size

Identifiers

PMID36575879
PMCPMC11302515

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.