Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10261/217174
COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
SHARE CORE BASE | |
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE | |
Título: | Parsimony and maximum-likelihood phylogenetic analyses of morphology do not generally integrate uncertainty in inferring evolutionary history: a response to Brown et al. |
Autor: | Puttick, Mark N.; O'Reilly, Joseph E.; Oakley, Derek; Tanner, Alistair R.; Fleming, James F.; Clark, James; Holloway, Lucy; Lozano Fernández, Jesús CSIC ORCID ; Parry, Luke A.; Tarver, James E.; Pisani, Davide; Donoghue, Philip C. J. | Palabras clave: | Taxonomy and systematics Evolution Palaeontology |
Fecha de publicación: | 11-oct-2017 | Editor: | Royal Society (Great Britain) | Citación: | Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 284(1864): 20171636 (2017) | Resumen: | Our recent study evaluated the performance of parsimony and probabilistic models of phylogenetic inference based on categorical data [1]. We found that a Bayesian implementation of a probabilistic Markov model produced more accurate results than either of the competing parsimony approaches (the main method currently employed), and the maximum-likelihood implementation of the same model. This occurs principally because the results of Bayesian analyses are less resolved (less precise) as a measure of topological uncertainty is intrinsically recovered in this MCMC-based approach and can be used to construct a majority-rule consensus tree that reflects this. Of the three main methods, maximum likelihood performed theworst of all as a single exclusively bifurcating tree is estimated in this framework which does not integrate an intrinsic measure of support. | Versión del editor: | https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.1636 | URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/217174 | DOI: | 10.1098/rspb.2017.1636 | ISSN: | 0962-8452 | E-ISSN: | 1471-2954 |
Aparece en las colecciones: | (IBE) Artículos |
Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero | Descripción | Tamaño | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Puttick_etal_2017b_PREPRINT_ProcB.pdf | 192,41 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizar/Abrir |
CORE Recommender
PubMed Central
Citations
8
checked on 12-mar-2024
SCOPUSTM
Citations
23
checked on 02-may-2024
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
6
checked on 28-feb-2024
Page view(s)
120
checked on 06-may-2024
Download(s)
125
checked on 06-may-2024
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Altmetric
Artículos relacionados:
NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.