4.7 Article

Effect of genetic convergence on phylogenetic inference

期刊

MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETICS AND EVOLUTION
卷 62, 期 3, 页码 921-927

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ympev.2011.12.002

关键词

Phylogeny; Bias; Evolutionary convergence; Amino acids; Codons; Simulations

资金

  1. Vital-IT facilities from the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics
  2. Marie Curie fellowship [IOF 252568]
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation [3100AO-116412]
  4. Office Of The Director
  5. Office of Integrative Activities [1004057] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phylogenetic reconstructions are a major component of many studies in evolutionary biology, but their accuracy can be reduced under certain conditions. Recent studies showed that the convergent evolution of some phenotypes resulted from recurrent amino acid substitutions in genes belonging to distant lineages. It has been suggested that these convergent substitutions could bias phylogenetic reconstruction toward grouping convergent phenotypes together, but such an effect has never been appropriately tested. We used computer simulations to determine the effect of convergent substitutions on the accuracy of phylogenetic inference. We show that, in some realistic conditions, even a relatively small proportion of convergent codons can strongly bias phylogenetic reconstruction, especially when amino acid sequences are used as characters. The strength of this bias does not depend on the reconstruction method but varies as a function of how much divergence had occurred among the lineages prior to any episodes of convergent substitutions. While the occurrence of this bias is difficult to predict, the risk of spurious groupings is strongly decreased by considering only 3rd codon positions, which are less subject to selection, as long as saturation problems are not present. Therefore, we recommend that, whenever possible, topologies obtained with amino acid sequences and 3rd codon positions be compared to identify potential phylogenetic biases and avoid evolutionarily misleading conclusions. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据