IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0042925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Highly Incomplete Taxa Can Rescue Phylogenetic Analyses from the Negative Impacts of Limited Taxon Sampling

Author

Listed:
  • John J Wiens
  • Jonathan Tiu

Abstract

Background: Phylogenies are essential to many areas of biology, but phylogenetic methods may give incorrect estimates under some conditions. A potentially common scenario of this type is when few taxa are sampled and terminal branches for the sampled taxa are relatively long. However, the best solution in such cases (i.e., sampling more taxa versus more characters) has been highly controversial. A widespread assumption in this debate is that added taxa must be complete (no missing data) in order to save analyses from the negative impacts of limited taxon sampling. Here, we evaluate whether incomplete taxa can also rescue analyses under these conditions (empirically testing predictions from an earlier simulation study). Methodology/Principal Findings: We utilize DNA sequence data from 16 vertebrate species with well-established phylogenetic relationships. In each replicate, we randomly sample 4 species, estimate their phylogeny (using Bayesian, likelihood, and parsimony methods), and then evaluate whether adding in the remaining 12 species (which have 50, 75, or 90% of their data replaced with missing data cells) can improve phylogenetic accuracy relative to analyzing the 4 complete taxa alone. We find that in those cases where sampling few taxa yields an incorrect estimate, adding taxa with 50% or 75% missing data can frequently (>75% of relevant replicates) rescue Bayesian and likelihood analyses, recovering accurate phylogenies for the original 4 taxa. Even taxa with 90% missing data can sometimes be beneficial. Conclusions: We show that adding taxa that are highly incomplete can improve phylogenetic accuracy in cases where analyses are misled by limited taxon sampling. These surprising empirical results confirm those from simulations, and show that the benefits of adding taxa may be obtained with unexpectedly small amounts of data. These findings have important implications for the debate on sampling taxa versus characters, and for studies attempting to resolve difficult phylogenetic problems.

Suggested Citation

  • John J Wiens & Jonathan Tiu, 2012. "Highly Incomplete Taxa Can Rescue Phylogenetic Analyses from the Negative Impacts of Limited Taxon Sampling," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-8, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0042925
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0042925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042925
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042925&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0042925?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Poe & David L. Swofford, 1999. "Taxon sampling revisited," Nature, Nature, vol. 398(6725), pages 299-300, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0042925. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.