Back to results
Bibliographic record · Consultation and access
Artículo

Bias in tree searches and its consequences for measuring groups supports

Goloboff, Pablo Augusto et al · Oxford University Press · 2014

Open-access full text
Quick overview. Review the resource’s basic details, then access the content using the main button. This page shows only the information needed to identify, cite, and open the work.

Resource access

Open the content from the main option or choose another available source.

CONICET Digital CONICET Digital OAI-PMH
Entrar por CONICET Digital
Main access

Open-access full text

Texto completo identificado como acceso abierto.
Open text

Summary

Descripción general del contenido del recurso.

When doing a bootstrap analysis with a single tree saved per pseudoreplicate, biased search algorithms may influence support values more than actual properties of the data set. Two methods commonly used for finding phylogenetic trees consist of randomizing the input order of species in multiple addition sequences followed by branch swapping, or using random trees as the starting point for branch swapping. The randomness inherent to such methods is assumed to eliminate<br />any consistent preferences for some trees or unsupported groups of taxa, but both methods can be significantly biased. In the case of trees created by sequentially adding taxa, a bias may occur even if every addition sequence is equiprobable, and if one of the equally optimal positions for each terminal to add to the tree is selected equiprobably. In the case of branch swapping, the bias can happen even when branch swapping equiprobably selects any of the trees of better score in the<br />subtree-pruning-regrafting-neighborhood or tree-bisection-reconnection-neighborhood. Consequently, when the data set is ambiguous, both random-addition sequences and branch swapping from random trees may (i) find some of the optimal trees much more frequently than others and (ii) find some groups with a frequency that differs from their frequency among all optimal trees. When the data set defines a single optimal tree, the groups present in that tree may have a different probability of being found by a search, even if supported by equal amounts of evidence. This may happen in both parsimony and maximum-likelihood analyses, and even in small data sets without incongruence. Fil: Goloboff, Pablo Augusto. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales e Instituto Miguel Lillo. Instituto Superior de Entomología; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Tucumán; Argentina Fil: Simmons, Mark P.. State University Of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados Unidos

How to cite

Elegí el formato que necesitás y copiá la referencia al portapapeles.

APA 7

Goloboff, P. A. E. A. (2014). Bias in tree searches and its consequences for measuring groups supports. http://hdl.handle.net/11336/7264

MLA

Goloboff, Pablo Augusto et al. "Bias in tree searches and its consequences for measuring groups supports." 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/11336/7264.

Chicago

Goloboff, Pablo Augusto et al. 2014. "Bias in tree searches and its consequences for measuring groups supports.". http://hdl.handle.net/11336/7264.

Harvard

Goloboff, P. A. E. A. 2014, Bias in tree searches and its consequences for measuring groups supports, Oxford University Press, available at: http://hdl.handle.net/11336/7264 [Accessed 6 Aug. 2026].

Share and print

Save the record, copy its permanent link, or print it as a PDF.

Export reference

You can export the record in common formats for use in a reference manager.

Resource details

Bibliographic information to help confirm that this is the correct material.

Title
Bias in tree searches and its consequences for measuring groups supports
Author / contributors
Goloboff, Pablo Augusto et al
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Publication year
2014
ISSN
1063-5157
ISSN
1063-5157
Language
English

Subjects

Explore related resources through these subjects.

Copied