Skip Navigation

Systematic Biology 2007 56(4):609-622; doi:10.1080/10635150701499563
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Geuten, K.
Right arrow Articles by Goldman, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Geuten, K.
Right arrow Articles by Goldman, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 2007 Society of Systematic Biologists

Experimental Design Criteria in Phylogenetics: Where to Add Taxa

Koen Geuten1,5, Tim Massingham2, Paul Darius3, Erik Smets1,4 and Nick Goldman2

1 Laboratory of Plant Systematics K. U. Leuven, Belgium
2 EMBL-European Bioinformatics Institute Hinxton, United Kingdom
3 Department of Biosystems K. U. Leuven, Belgium
4 Nationaal Herbarium Nederland, Universiteit Leiden Branch Leiden, The Netherlands

Edited by Olivier Gascuel: Associate Editor


   Abstract

Accurate phylogenetic inference is a topic of intensive research and debate and has been studied in response to many different factors: for example, differences in the method of reconstruction, the shape of the underlying tree, the substitution model, and varying quantities and types of data. Investigating whether the conditions used might lead to inaccurate inference has been attempted through elaborate data exploration but less attention has been given to creating a unified methodology to enable experimental designs in phylogenetic analysis to be improved and so avoid suboptimal conditions. Experimental design has been part of the field of statistics since the seminal work of Fisher in the early 20th century and a large body of literature exists on how to design optimum experiments. Here we investigate the use of the Fisher information matrix to decide between candidate positions for adding a taxon to a fixed topology, and introduce a parameter transformation that permits comparison of these different designs. This extension to Goldman (1998. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 265: 1779–1786) thus allows investigation of "where to add taxa" in a phylogeny. We compare three different measures of the total information for selecting the position to add a taxon to a tree. Our methods are illustrated by investigating the behavior of the three criteria when adding a branch to model trees, and by applying the different criteria to two biological examples: a simplified taxon-sampling problem in the balsaminoid Ericales and the phylogeny of seed plants.

Keywords: A-optimality; D-optimality; E-optimality; experimental design; Fisher information; phylogenetics; taxon sampling

Received October 12, 2006; Revised January 29, 2007; Accepted April 8, 2007


5 Present Address: Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New Haven, USA; E-mail: koen.geuten{at}yale.edu


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Syst BiolHome page
D. San Mauro, D. J. Gower, T. Massingham, M. Wilkinson, R. Zardoya, and J. A. Cotton
Experimental Design in Caecilian Systematics: Phylogenetic Information of Mitochondrial Genomes and Nuclear rag1
Syst Biol, August 18, 2009; (2009) syp043v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol Biol EvolHome page
A. Schneider and G. M. Cannarozzi
Support Patterns from Different Outgroups Provide a Strong Phylogenetic Signal
Mol. Biol. Evol., June 1, 2009; 26(6): 1259 - 1272.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.