ArticleSystematic biology2026
The Comparative Analysis of Lineage-Pair Traits.
Article in Systematic biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptive molecular convergence is pervasive across deep time and largely decoupled from phenotypic convergence.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Species-rich and genomically diverse: comparative genomics reveals how fusions, fissions, and sex chromosomes have shaped beetle evolution.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Genomic analyses inEvolution letters · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
For many questions in ecology and evolution, the most relevant data to consider are attributes of lineage pairs. Comparative tests for causal relationships among such lineage-pair traits as "diet niche overlap," "divergence time," and "strength of reproductive isolation (RI)"-measured for pairwise combinations of related species or populations-have led to several groundbreaking insights, but the correct statistical approach for these analyses has never been clear. Lineage-pair traits are non-independent, but unlike the expected covariance among species' traits, which is captured by a phylogenetic covariance matrix arising from a given model, the expected covariance among lineage-pair traits has not been explicitly formulated. Analyses of pairwise-defined data have thus employed untested workarounds for non-independence rather than direct models of lineage-pair covariance, with consequences that are unexplored. Here, we consider how evolutionary relatedness among taxa translates into non-independence among taxonomic pairs. We develop models by which phylogenetic signal in an underlying character generates covariance among pairs in a lineage-pair trait. We incorporate the resulting lineage-pair covariance matrices into modified versions of phylogenetic generalized least squares and a new phylogenetic beta regression for bounded response variables. Both outperform previous approaches in simulation tests. We find that a common heuristic method, node averaging, imparts a greater cost to model performance than does the non-independence it was designed to correct. We re-analyze two empirical datasets to find dramatic improvements in model fit and, in the case of avian hybridization data, an even stronger relationship between pair age and RI than is revealed from uncorrected analysis. We finally present a new tool, the R package phylopairs, that allows empiricists to test relationships among pairwise-defined variables in a way that is statistically robust and more straightforward to implement.
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.