schliessen

Filtern

 

Bibliotheken

Distances that Perfectly Mislead

Given a collection of discrete characters (e.g., aligned DNA sites, gene adjacencies), a common measure of distance between taxa is the proportion of characters for which taxa have different character states. Tree reconstruction based on these (uncorrected) distances can be statistically inconsisten... Full description

Journal Title: Systematic biology 2004-04, Vol.53 (2), p.327-332
Main Author: Huson, Daniel H
Other Authors: Steel, Mike , Kim, Junhyong
Format: Electronic Article Electronic Article
Language: English
Subjects:
DNA
Quelle: Alma/SFX Local Collection
Publisher: England: Society of Systematic Zoology
ID: ISSN: 1063-5157
Link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15205056
Zum Text:
SendSend as email Add to Book BagAdd to Book Bag
Staff View
recordid: cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66648850
title: Distances that Perfectly Mislead
format: Article
creator:
  • Huson, Daniel H
  • Steel, Mike
  • Kim, Junhyong
subjects:
  • Additive metric
  • Additivity
  • Biological taxonomies
  • Classification
  • Classification - methods
  • Data Interpretation, Statistical
  • Datasets
  • Deoxyribonucleic acid
  • distance-based phylogeny reconstruction
  • DNA
  • Evolution, Molecular
  • Evolutionary biology
  • Heredity
  • inconsistency
  • Markov Chains
  • Models, Genetic
  • Molecular evolution
  • Parametric models
  • Parsimony
  • Phylogenetics
  • Phylogeny
  • Steels
  • Taxa
  • Topology
ispartof: Systematic biology, 2004-04, Vol.53 (2), p.327-332
description: Given a collection of discrete characters (e.g., aligned DNA sites, gene adjacencies), a common measure of distance between taxa is the proportion of characters for which taxa have different character states. Tree reconstruction based on these (uncorrected) distances can be statistically inconsistent and can lead to trees different from those obtained using character-based methods such as maximum likelihood or maximum parsimony. However, in these cases the distance data often reveal their unreliability by some deviation from additivity, as indicated by conflicting support for more than one tree. We describe two results that show how uncorrected (and miscorrected) distance data can be simultaneously perfectly additive and misleading. First, multistate character data can be perfectly compatible and define one tree, and yet the uncorrected distances derived from these characters are perfectly treelike (and obey a molecular clock), only for a completely different tree. Second, under a Markov model of character evolution a similar phenomenon can occur; not only is there statistical inconsistency using uncorrected distances, but there is no evidence of this inconsistency because the distances look perfectly treelike (this does not occur in the classic two-parameter Felsenstein zone). We characterize precisely when uncorrected distances are additive on the true (and on a false) tree for four taxa. We also extend this result to a more general setting that applies to distances corrected according to an incorrect model.
language: eng
source: Alma/SFX Local Collection
identifier: ISSN: 1063-5157
fulltext: fulltext
issn:
  • 1063-5157
  • 1076-836X
url: Link


@attributes
NO1
SEARCH_ENGINEprimo_central_multiple_fe
SEARCH_ENGINE_TYPEPrimo Central Search Engine
RANK2.0296803
LOCALfalse
PrimoNMBib
record
control
sourceidjstor_proqu
recordidTN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_66648850
sourceformatXML
sourcesystemPC
jstor_id4135415
oup_id10.1080/10635150490423809
sourcerecordid4135415
originalsourceidFETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-15762f2693dcf06d92087a89a255b464344264036f512be6ac1154d9006aaf223
addsrcrecordideNqNkd1rFDEUxYNU3LX6BwgiSx98cvTefNxkHkv9aKWiVUuLLyE7k8HZzu6sSQba_74ps2xhhdKnBM7vnHs5l7FXCO8RDHxAIKFQgSxBcmGgfMKmCJoKI-hy7-5PosiAnrDnMS4AEEnhMzZBxUGBoimbfWxjcqvKx1n669Lshw-Nr1J3M_vWxs67-gV72rgu-pebd5-df_70--i4OP3-5eTo8LRASSYVeQjxhlMp6qoBqksORjtTOq7UXJIUUnKSIKhRyOeeXIWoZF0CkHMN52KfvR1z16H_N_iY7LKNle86t_L9EC0RSWMUZPBgB1z0Q1jl3SyWUus8AzOEI1SFPsbgG7sO7dKFG4tg77qz_3WXPW82wcN86et7x6asDOid0KpNLrX9KgXXdg9Gvxud_bB-1CavR3wRUx-2BolCSVRZLkY5n85fb2UXrixpoZU9vvxj8eLs19lX89NqcQtFAJrF
sourcetypeAggregation Database
isCDItrue
recordtypearticle
pqid194770361
display
typearticle
titleDistances that Perfectly Mislead
sourceAlma/SFX Local Collection
creatorHuson, Daniel H ; Steel, Mike ; Kim, Junhyong
contributorKim, Junhyong
creatorcontribHuson, Daniel H ; Steel, Mike ; Kim, Junhyong ; Kim, Junhyong
descriptionGiven a collection of discrete characters (e.g., aligned DNA sites, gene adjacencies), a common measure of distance between taxa is the proportion of characters for which taxa have different character states. Tree reconstruction based on these (uncorrected) distances can be statistically inconsistent and can lead to trees different from those obtained using character-based methods such as maximum likelihood or maximum parsimony. However, in these cases the distance data often reveal their unreliability by some deviation from additivity, as indicated by conflicting support for more than one tree. We describe two results that show how uncorrected (and miscorrected) distance data can be simultaneously perfectly additive and misleading. First, multistate character data can be perfectly compatible and define one tree, and yet the uncorrected distances derived from these characters are perfectly treelike (and obey a molecular clock), only for a completely different tree. Second, under a Markov model of character evolution a similar phenomenon can occur; not only is there statistical inconsistency using uncorrected distances, but there is no evidence of this inconsistency because the distances look perfectly treelike (this does not occur in the classic two-parameter Felsenstein zone). We characterize precisely when uncorrected distances are additive on the true (and on a false) tree for four taxa. We also extend this result to a more general setting that applies to distances corrected according to an incorrect model.
identifier
0ISSN: 1063-5157
1EISSN: 1076-836X
2DOI: 10.1080/10635150490423809
3PMID: 15205056
languageeng
publisherEngland: Society of Systematic Zoology
subjectAdditive metric ; Additivity ; Biological taxonomies ; Classification ; Classification - methods ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; Datasets ; Deoxyribonucleic acid ; distance-based phylogeny reconstruction ; DNA ; Evolution, Molecular ; Evolutionary biology ; Heredity ; inconsistency ; Markov Chains ; Models, Genetic ; Molecular evolution ; Parametric models ; Parsimony ; Phylogenetics ; Phylogeny ; Steels ; Taxa ; Topology
ispartofSystematic biology, 2004-04, Vol.53 (2), p.327-332
rights
0Copyright 2004 Society of Systematic Biologists
12004 Society of Systematic Biologists 2004
lds50peer_reviewed
oafree_for_read
citedbyFETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-15762f2693dcf06d92087a89a255b464344264036f512be6ac1154d9006aaf223
citesFETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-15762f2693dcf06d92087a89a255b464344264036f512be6ac1154d9006aaf223
links
openurl$$Topenurl_article
openurlfulltext$$Topenurlfull_article
thumbnail$$Usyndetics_thumb_exl
backlink$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15205056$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
search
contributorKim, Junhyong
creatorcontrib
0Huson, Daniel H
1Steel, Mike
2Kim, Junhyong
title
0Distances that Perfectly Mislead
1Systematic biology
addtitleSyst Biol
descriptionGiven a collection of discrete characters (e.g., aligned DNA sites, gene adjacencies), a common measure of distance between taxa is the proportion of characters for which taxa have different character states. Tree reconstruction based on these (uncorrected) distances can be statistically inconsistent and can lead to trees different from those obtained using character-based methods such as maximum likelihood or maximum parsimony. However, in these cases the distance data often reveal their unreliability by some deviation from additivity, as indicated by conflicting support for more than one tree. We describe two results that show how uncorrected (and miscorrected) distance data can be simultaneously perfectly additive and misleading. First, multistate character data can be perfectly compatible and define one tree, and yet the uncorrected distances derived from these characters are perfectly treelike (and obey a molecular clock), only for a completely different tree. Second, under a Markov model of character evolution a similar phenomenon can occur; not only is there statistical inconsistency using uncorrected distances, but there is no evidence of this inconsistency because the distances look perfectly treelike (this does not occur in the classic two-parameter Felsenstein zone). We characterize precisely when uncorrected distances are additive on the true (and on a false) tree for four taxa. We also extend this result to a more general setting that applies to distances corrected according to an incorrect model.
subject
0Additive metric
1Additivity
2Biological taxonomies
3Classification
4Classification - methods
5Data Interpretation, Statistical
6Datasets
7Deoxyribonucleic acid
8distance-based phylogeny reconstruction
9DNA
10Evolution, Molecular
11Evolutionary biology
12Heredity
13inconsistency
14Markov Chains
15Models, Genetic
16Molecular evolution
17Parametric models
18Parsimony
19Phylogenetics
20Phylogeny
21Steels
22Taxa
23Topology
issn
01063-5157
11076-836X
fulltexttrue
rsrctypearticle
creationdate2004
recordtypearticle
recordideNqNkd1rFDEUxYNU3LX6BwgiSx98cvTefNxkHkv9aKWiVUuLLyE7k8HZzu6sSQba_74ps2xhhdKnBM7vnHs5l7FXCO8RDHxAIKFQgSxBcmGgfMKmCJoKI-hy7-5PosiAnrDnMS4AEEnhMzZBxUGBoimbfWxjcqvKx1n669Lshw-Nr1J3M_vWxs67-gV72rgu-pebd5-df_70--i4OP3-5eTo8LRASSYVeQjxhlMp6qoBqksORjtTOq7UXJIUUnKSIKhRyOeeXIWoZF0CkHMN52KfvR1z16H_N_iY7LKNle86t_L9EC0RSWMUZPBgB1z0Q1jl3SyWUus8AzOEI1SFPsbgG7sO7dKFG4tg77qz_3WXPW82wcN86et7x6asDOid0KpNLrX9KgXXdg9Gvxud_bB-1CavR3wRUx-2BolCSVRZLkY5n85fb2UXrixpoZU9vvxj8eLs19lX89NqcQtFAJrF
startdate200404
enddate200404
creator
0Huson, Daniel H
1Steel, Mike
2Kim, Junhyong
general
0Society of Systematic Zoology
1Taylor and Francis
2Oxford University Press
scope
0BSCLL
1CGR
2CUY
3CVF
4ECM
5EIF
6NPM
7AAYXX
8CITATION
93V.
107X7
117XB
1288A
1388E
1488I
158AF
168AO
178CJ
188FE
198FH
208FI
218FJ
228FK
238FU
248G5
25ABUWG
26AZQEC
27BBNVY
28BENPR
29BHPHI
30BKSAR
31D1J
32DWQXO
33FYUFA
34GHDGH
35GNUQQ
36GUQSH
37HCIFZ
38K9.
39LK8
40M0L
41M0S
42M1P
43M2O
44M2P
45M7P
46MBDVC
47PADUT
48PCBAR
49PQEST
50PQQKQ
51PQUKI
52PRINS
53Q9U
54S0X
557X8
sort
creationdate200404
titleDistances that Perfectly Mislead
authorHuson, Daniel H ; Steel, Mike ; Kim, Junhyong
facets
frbrtype5
frbrgroupidcdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-1468t-15762f2693dcf06d92087a89a255b464344264036f512be6ac1154d9006aaf223
rsrctypearticles
prefilterarticles
languageeng
creationdate2004
topic
0Additive metric
1Additivity
2Biological taxonomies
3Classification
4Classification - methods
5Data Interpretation, Statistical
6Datasets
7Deoxyribonucleic acid
8distance-based phylogeny reconstruction
9DNA
10Evolution, Molecular
11Evolutionary biology
12Heredity
13inconsistency
14Markov Chains
15Models, Genetic
16Molecular evolution
17Parametric models
18Parsimony
19Phylogenetics
20Phylogeny
21Steels
22Taxa
23Topology
toplevel
0peer_reviewed
1online_resources
creatorcontrib
0Huson, Daniel H
1Steel, Mike
2Kim, Junhyong
collection
0Istex
1Medline
2MEDLINE
3MEDLINE (Ovid)
4MEDLINE
5MEDLINE
6PubMed
7CrossRef
8ProQuest Central (Corporate)
9Health & Medical Collection
10ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)
11Biology Database (Alumni Edition)
12Medical Database (Alumni Edition)
13Science Database (Alumni Edition)
14STEM Database
15ProQuest Pharma Collection
16ProQuest Aquatic Science Journals
17ProQuest SciTech Collection
18ProQuest Natural Science Collection
19Hospital Premium Collection
20Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)
21ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)
22ProQuest Discovery
23Research Library (Alumni Edition)
24ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)
25ProQuest Central Essentials
26Biological Science Collection
27ProQuest Central
28Natural Science Collection
29Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Collection
30ProQuest Aquatic Science Collection
31ProQuest Central Korea
32Health Research Premium Collection
33Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)
34ProQuest Central Student
35Research Library Prep
36SciTech Premium Collection
37ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)
38ProQuest Biological Science Collection
39Biology Database
40Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)
41Medical Database
42Research Library
43Science Database
44Biological Science Database
45Research Library (Corporate)
46Research Library China
47Earth, Atmospheric & Aquatic Science Database
48ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition
49ProQuest One Academic
50ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition
51ProQuest Central China
52ProQuest Central Basic
53SIRS Editorial
54MEDLINE - Academic
jtitleSystematic biology
delivery
delcategoryRemote Search Resource
fulltextfulltext
addata
au
0Huson, Daniel H
1Steel, Mike
2Kim, Junhyong
formatjournal
genrearticle
ristypeJOUR
atitleDistances that Perfectly Mislead
jtitleSystematic biology
addtitleSyst Biol
date2004-04
risdate2004
volume53
issue2
spage327
epage332
pages327-332
issn1063-5157
eissn1076-836X
abstractGiven a collection of discrete characters (e.g., aligned DNA sites, gene adjacencies), a common measure of distance between taxa is the proportion of characters for which taxa have different character states. Tree reconstruction based on these (uncorrected) distances can be statistically inconsistent and can lead to trees different from those obtained using character-based methods such as maximum likelihood or maximum parsimony. However, in these cases the distance data often reveal their unreliability by some deviation from additivity, as indicated by conflicting support for more than one tree. We describe two results that show how uncorrected (and miscorrected) distance data can be simultaneously perfectly additive and misleading. First, multistate character data can be perfectly compatible and define one tree, and yet the uncorrected distances derived from these characters are perfectly treelike (and obey a molecular clock), only for a completely different tree. Second, under a Markov model of character evolution a similar phenomenon can occur; not only is there statistical inconsistency using uncorrected distances, but there is no evidence of this inconsistency because the distances look perfectly treelike (this does not occur in the classic two-parameter Felsenstein zone). We characterize precisely when uncorrected distances are additive on the true (and on a false) tree for four taxa. We also extend this result to a more general setting that applies to distances corrected according to an incorrect model.
copEngland
pubSociety of Systematic Zoology
pmid15205056
doi10.1080/10635150490423809
oafree_for_read