Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37140129›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2023

Redefining Possible: Combining Phylogenomic and Supersparse Data in Frogs.

Daniel M Portik, Jeffrey W Streicher, David C Blackburn, Daniel S Moen, Carl R Hutter, John J Wiens

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2023. 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
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Global phylogeny and taxonomy of Artemisia.Nature communications · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel M PortikDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.ORCID 0000-0003-3518-7277
Jeffrey W StreicherDepartment of Life Sciences, The Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3738-4162
David C BlackburnDepartment of Natural History, Florida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.ORCID 0000-0002-1810-9886
Daniel S MoenDepartment of Integrative Biology, 501 Life Sciences West, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK.ORCID 0000-0003-1120-0043
Carl R HutterMuseum of Natural Science and Department of Biological Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA.ORCID 0000-0001-6381-6339
John J WiensDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.ORCID 0000-0003-4243-1127
University of Arizona · USFlorida Museum of Natural History · USLouisiana State University · USNatural History Museum · GBOklahoma State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The data available for reconstructing molecular phylogenies have become wildly disparate. Phylogenomic studies can generate data for thousands of genetic markers for dozens of species, but for hundreds of other taxa, data may be available from only a few genes. Can these two types of data be integrated to combine the advantages of both, addressing the relationships of hundreds of species with thousands of genes? Here, we show that this is possible, using data from frogs. We generated a phylogenomic data set for 138 ingroup species and 3,784 nuclear markers (ultraconserved elements [UCEs]), including new UCE data from 70 species. We also assembled a supermatrix data set, including data from 97% of frog genera (441 total), with 1-307 genes per taxon. We then produced a combined phylogenomic-supermatrix data set (a "gigamatrix") containing 441 ingroup taxa and 4,091 markers but with 86% missing data overall. Likelihood analysis of the gigamatrix yielded a generally well-supported tree among families, largely consistent with trees from the phylogenomic data alone. All terminal taxa were placed in the expected families, even though 42.5% of these taxa each had >99.5% missing data and 70.2% had >90% missing data. Our results show that missing data need not be an impediment to successfully combining very large phylogenomic and supermatrix data sets, and they open the door to new studies that simultaneously maximize sampling of genes and taxa.

Indexed as

AnuraAnimalsPhylogenyProbabilitySequence Analysis, DNAamphibiansmissing dataphylogenomicsphylogenysupermatrix

Identifiers

PMID37140129
PMCPMC10202597
OpenAlexW4368359299

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.