Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Universityof Manchester, Williamson Building, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.
School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Life Sciences Building, Tyndall Avenue, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK.
Syst Biol. 2020 Sep 1;69(5):897-912. doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syaa012.
Evolutionary inferences require reliable phylogenies. Morphological data have traditionally been analyzed using maximum parsimony, but recent simulation studies have suggested that Bayesian analyses yield more accurate trees. This debate is ongoing, in part, because of ambiguity over modes of morphological evolution and a lack of appropriate models. Here, we investigate phylogenetic methods using two novel simulation models-one in which morphological characters evolve stochastically along lineages and another in which individuals undergo selection. Both models generate character data and lineage splitting simultaneously: the resulting trees are an emergent property, rather than a fixed parameter. Standard consensus methods for Bayesian searches (Mki) yield fewer incorrect nodes and quartets than the standard consensus trees recovered using equal weighting and implied weighting parsimony searches. Distances between the pool of derived trees (most parsimonious or posterior distribution) and the true trees-measured using Robinson-Foulds (RF), subtree prune and regraft (SPR), and tree bisection reconnection (TBR) metrics-demonstrate that this is related to the search strategy and consensus method of each technique. The amount and structure of homoplasy in character data differ between models. Morphological coherence, which has previously not been considered in this context, proves to be a more important factor for phylogenetic accuracy than homoplasy. Selection-based models exhibit relatively lower homoplasy, lower morphological coherence, and higher inaccuracy in inferred trees. Selection is a dominant driver of morphological evolution, but we demonstrate that it has a confounding effect on numerous character properties which are fundamental to phylogenetic inference. We suggest that the current debate should move beyond considerations of parsimony versus Bayesian, toward identifying modes of morphological evolution and using these to build models for probabilistic search methods. [Bayesian; evolution; morphology; parsimony; phylogenetics; selection; simulation.].
进化推理需要可靠的系统发育关系。传统上,形态数据是通过最大简约法进行分析的,但最近的模拟研究表明,贝叶斯分析产生的树更准确。这种争论仍在继续,部分原因是形态进化模式存在模糊性,以及缺乏合适的模型。在这里,我们使用两个新的模拟模型来研究系统发育方法:一个模型中,形态特征沿着谱系随机进化,另一个模型中,个体经历选择。这两个模型同时生成特征数据和谱系分裂:生成的树是一个突现的属性,而不是一个固定的参数。贝叶斯搜索的标准共识方法(Mki)比使用等权重和隐含权重简约搜索恢复的标准共识树产生更少的错误节点和四分体。从衍生树的池(最简约或后验分布)到真实树之间的距离(使用罗宾逊-福尔德(RF)、子树修剪和重新连接(SPR)和树二分重新连接(TBR)测量)表明,这与每种技术的搜索策略和共识方法有关。特征数据中同源性的数量和结构在模型之间存在差异。形态一致性,以前在这种情况下没有被考虑到,被证明是系统发育准确性比同源性更重要的因素。基于选择的模型表现出相对较低的同源性、较低的形态一致性和推断树中较高的不准确性。选择是形态进化的主要驱动因素,但我们证明,它对许多对系统发育推断至关重要的特征性质具有混淆效应。我们建议,当前的争论应该超越简约与贝叶斯的考虑,转向识别形态进化模式,并利用这些模式为概率搜索方法构建模型。