Phylogenies in yeast species descriptions: In defense of neighbor-joining

The neighbor-joining (NJ) method of tree inference is examined, with special attention to its use in yeast species descriptions. How the often-vilified method works is often misunderstood. More importantly, given the right kind of data, its output is a phylogram that illustrates a hypothetical phylogeny that is just as credible as that obtained by any other method. And as with any other method, the result is greatly affected by sampling intensity, particularly the number of aligned positions used for analysis. I address various allegations, including the claim that the method is phenetic, and, therefore, not phylogenetic. I argue that NJ is the most suitable tree inference method to use in yeast species descriptions, primarily because it is best at visually preserving the extent of sequence divergence between close relatives, which continues to be the primary criterion for yeast species delineation. The relevance of bootstraps in the application of the phylogenetic species concept is discussed.

Automated summary

This study examines the usage of the neighbor-joining (NJ) method for tree inference, particularly in yeast species descriptions. The often-misunderstood NJ method is argued to be the most suitable for yeast species descriptions due to its ability to visually preserve sequence divergence between close relatives.