Test environment running 7.6.6

Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

The Meaning and Measure of Concordance Factors in Phylogenomics

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Abstract

As phylogenomic datasets have grown in size, researchers have developed new ways to measure biological variation and to assess statistical support for specific branches. Larger datasets have more sites and loci and therefore less sampling variance. While we can more accurately measure the mean signal in these datasets, lower sampling variance is often reflected in uniformly high measures of branch support—such as the bootstrap and posterior probability—limiting their utility. Larger datasets have also revealed substantial biological variation in the topologies found across individual loci, such that the single species tree inferred by most phylogenetic methods represents a limited summary of the data for many purposes. In contrast to measures of statistical support, the degree of underlying topological variation among loci should be approximately constant regardless of the size of the dataset. “Concordance factors” (CFs) and similar statistics have therefore become increasingly important tools in phylogenetics. In this review, we explain why CFs should be thought of as descriptors of topological variation rather than as measures of statistical support, and argue that they provide important information about the predictive power of the species tree not contained in measures of support. We review a growing suite of statistics for measuring concordance, compare them in a common framework that reveals their interrelationships, and demonstrate how to calculate them using an example from birds. We also discuss how measures of topological variation might change in the future as we move beyond estimating a single “tree of life” toward estimating the myriad evolutionary histories underlying genomic variation.

Description

Citation

Source

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Book Title

Entity type

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until