ReviewSystematic biology2026
Practical Guide and Review of Fossil Tip-Dating in Phylogenetics.
Review in Systematic biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Competing methods of divergence time estimation recover diverse evolutionary timescales.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2026Article
- Total-evidence phylogeny reveals recent crown group radiation and biogeographical history of hamsters.BMC biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phylogenetic tip-dating has been and still is revolutionizing evolutionary biology in several ways. Fossil tip-dating, where fossils are placed into a phylogeny as tips based on morphological and/or molecular character information, provides a more principled approach to infer time-calibrated phylogenies compared with node-dating. Additionally, phylogenetic trees with fossils as tips become more and more important to elucidate evolutionary processes in macroevolutionary studies (e.g., deciphering diversification patterns and directional phenotypic evolution). Fossil tip-dating is slowly gathering popularity in empirical applications and has progressed substantially since its first demonstration in 2011, with respect to improved statistical models, software, and data sets. Nevertheless, executing a phylogenetic fossil tip-dating analysis is complicated and comes with many challenges. Here, we provide an extensive review and overview of methods and models for phylogenetic tip-dating analyses with fossils. We focus both on data collection and preparation and on modeling choices. We start with a survey of all published phylogenetic tip-dating studies to date, showing common data and modeling choices as well as trends toward new approaches. Then, we walk readers through sections of molecular evolution, morphological evolution (both for discrete and continuous data), and lineage evolution (the fossilized birth-death process). In each section, we describe the data and standard models with their underlying assumptions, and provide an outlook and practical recommendations.
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.