Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T18:43:50.776Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The imbalance of paleontological trees

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

Katherine G. Harcourt-Brown ,
Paul. N. Pearson  and
Mark Wilkinson
Katherine G. Harcourt-Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Wills Memorial Building, Queens Road, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]
Paul. N. Pearson
Affiliation:
Department of Earth Sciences, Wills Memorial Building, Queens Road, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]
Mark Wilkinson
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

One of the most extensively studied aspects of phylogenetic tree shape is balance, which is the extent to which nodes divide a tree into clades of equal size. Several authors have stressed the importance of tree balance for understanding patterns of evolution. It has been remarked that paleontological studies commonly produce very unbalanced trees (also called pectinate cladograms or “Hennigian combs”). This claim is tested here by comparing the balance of 50 paleontological trees and 50 neontological trees, all taken from the recent literature. Each tree was reanalyzed from the published data matrix to ensure its accuracy. The results confirm that paleontological trees tend to be more imbalanced than neontological trees.

That paleontological trees are more imbalanced has been represented as a shortcoming of fossil data sets, but here it is argued that this is the expected result. Even under a simple Markovian model in which all speciations and extinctions occur randomly and with equal probability in all parts of the tree, trees based on taxa from a single time period (e.g., the present day) are generally more balanced than trees based on all taxa that ever existed within the clade. Computer simulation is used to calculate the expected balance and standard deviation of trees for up to 40 terminal taxa over the entire history of a model clade. The balance is measured using Colless's index, Ic, and the expected balance conforms well with published paleontological trees. The study underlines the difficulty of applying neontological tree statistics in paleontology.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , Spring 2001 , pp. 188 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Ahlberg, P. E. 1993. Therapsids and transformation series. Nature 361:596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benton, M. J. 1987. Progress and competition in macroevolution. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 62:305–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. 1982. Review of “Phylogenetics: the theory and practice of phylogenetic systematics.” Systematic Zoology 31:100–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colless, D. H. 1996. A further note on symmetry of taxonomic trees. Systematic Biology 45:385–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gee, H. 1992. By their teeth shall ye know them. Nature 360:529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J., Raup, D. M., Sepkoski, J. J. Jr., Schopf, T. J. M., and Simberloff, D. S. 1977. The shape of evolution: a comparison of real and random clades. Paleobiology 3:23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guyer, C., and Slowinski, J. B. 1991. Comparisons of observed phylogenetic topologies with null expectations among three monophyletic lineages. Evolution 45:340–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Guyer, C. 1993. Adaptive radiation and the topology of large phylogenies. Evolution 47:253–263.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heard, S. B. 1992. Patterns in tree balance among cladistic, phenetic and randomly generated phylogenetic trees. Evolution 46:1818–1826.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heard, S. B. 1996. Patterns in phylogenetic tree balance with variable and evolving speciation rates. Evolution 50:2141–2148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heard, S. B., and Mooers, A. Ø. 1996. Imperfect information and the balance of cladograms and phenograms. Systematic Biology 45:115–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, E. C., Zhang, L. P., Simmonds, P., Ludlam, C. A. and Brown, A. J. Leigh 1992. Convergent and divergent sequence evolution in the surface envelope glycoprotein of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 within a single infected patient. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 89:4835–4839.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huelsenbeck, J. P. 1994. Comparing the stratigraphic record to estimates of phylogeny. Paleobiology 20:470–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huelsenbeck, J. P., and Kirkpatrick, M. 1996. Do phylogenetic methods produce trees with biased shapes? Evolution 50:1418–1424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, J. 1993. Improving the accuracy of phylogenetic estimation by combining different methods. Systematic Biology 42:331–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkpatrick, M., and Slatkin, M. 1993. Searching for evolutionary patterns in the shape of a phylogenetic tree. Evolution 47:1171–1181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mooers, A. Ø. 1995. Tree balance and tree completeness. Evolution 49:379–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mooers, A. Ø., and Heard, S. B. 1997. Inferring evolutionary processes from phylogenetic tree shape. Quarterly Review of Biology 72:31–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mooers, A. Ø., Page, R. D. M., Purvis, A., and Harvey, P. H. 1995. Phylogenetic noise leads to unbalanced cladistic tree reconstructions. Systematic Biology 44:332–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Padian, K., and Chiappe, L. M. 1998. The origin and early evolution of birds. Biological Reviews 73:1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panchen, A. L. 1982. The use of parsimony in testing phylogenetic hypotheses. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 74:305–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panchen, A. L., and Smithson, T. R. 1987. Character diagnosis, fossils and the origin of tetrapods. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 62:341–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, P. N. 1998. Speciation and extinction asymmetries in paleontological phylogenies: evidence for evolutionary progress? Paleobiology 24:305–335.Google Scholar
Pearson, P. N. 1999. Apomorphy distribution is an important aspect of cladogram symmetry. Systematic Biology 48:399–406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raup, D. M., Gould, S. J., Schopf, T. J. M., and Simberloff, D. S. 1973. Stochastic models of phylogeny and the evolution of diversity. Journal of Geology 81:525–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, J. S. 1994. Central moments and probability distribution of Colless's coefficient of tree imbalance. Evolution 48:2026–2036.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, J. S. 1996. Central moments and probability distributions of three measures of phylogenetic tree imbalance. Systematic Biology 45:99–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, D. E. 1978. Vicariant pattern and historical explanation in biogeography. Systematic Zoology 27:159–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sackin, M. J. 1972. “Good” and “Bad” phenograms. Systematic Zoology 21:225–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savage, H. M. 1983. The shape of evolution: systematic tree topology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 20:225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shao, K., and Sokal, R. R. 1990. Tree balance. Systematic Zoology 39:266–276.Google Scholar
Simberloff, D., Heck, K. L., McCoy, E. D., and Connor, E. F. 1981. There have been no statistical tests of cladistic biogeographic hypotheses. Pp. 40–63in Nelson, G. and Rosen, D. E., eds. Vicariance biogeography: a critique. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Simpson, G. G. 1953. The major features of evolution. Columbia University Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slowinski, J. B., and Guyer, C. 1989. Testing the stochasticity of patterns of organismal diversity: an improved null model. American Naturalist 142:1019–1024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swofford, D. L. 1993. PAUP: Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony, Version 3.1.1. Computer program distributed by the Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign.Google Scholar
Webster, R. G., Bean, W. S., and Gorman, O. T. 1995. Evolution of influenza viruses: rapid evolution and stasis. Pp. 531–543in Gibbs, A., Calisher, C. M., and Garcia, F., eds. Molecular basis of virus evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar