解决昆虫系统发生组学中的不一致问题:回复 Boudinot 等人 (2023)

Chenyang Cai, Erik Tihelka, D. Pisani, P. Donoghue
{"title":"解决昆虫系统发生组学中的不一致问题:回复 Boudinot 等人 (2023)","authors":"Chenyang Cai, Erik Tihelka, D. Pisani, P. Donoghue","doi":"10.11646/palaeoentomology.7.2.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the last two decades, advances in molecular phylogenetics have established a new understanding of beetle phylogeny. However, some historically contentious relationships, particularly among early-diverging beetle clades, remain to be resolved. In a recent paper (Cai et al., 2022), we identified model-dependent signals in beetle phylogeny and showed how the removal of the most compositionally heterogeneous sites, in combination with the use of across-site compositionally heterogeneous models leads to results that are more congruent with the distribution of morphological characters and the beetle fossil record. In their reply, Boudinot et al. (2023) suggested that our analyses are affected by a range of shortcomings, encompassing almost every aspect of our study. Unfortunately, the arguments presented by Boudinot et al. (2023) are based on misinterpretation of the results of statistical tests, as well as misconceptions concerning substitution models, model testing and its role in phylogenomics. Here we clarify these misconceptions and show that the critiques raised by Boudinot et al. (2023) have no merit.","PeriodicalId":509429,"journal":{"name":"Palaeoentomology","volume":" 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Resolving incongruences in insect phylogenomics: A reply to Boudinot et al. (2023)\",\"authors\":\"Chenyang Cai, Erik Tihelka, D. Pisani, P. Donoghue\",\"doi\":\"10.11646/palaeoentomology.7.2.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Over the last two decades, advances in molecular phylogenetics have established a new understanding of beetle phylogeny. However, some historically contentious relationships, particularly among early-diverging beetle clades, remain to be resolved. In a recent paper (Cai et al., 2022), we identified model-dependent signals in beetle phylogeny and showed how the removal of the most compositionally heterogeneous sites, in combination with the use of across-site compositionally heterogeneous models leads to results that are more congruent with the distribution of morphological characters and the beetle fossil record. In their reply, Boudinot et al. (2023) suggested that our analyses are affected by a range of shortcomings, encompassing almost every aspect of our study. Unfortunately, the arguments presented by Boudinot et al. (2023) are based on misinterpretation of the results of statistical tests, as well as misconceptions concerning substitution models, model testing and its role in phylogenomics. Here we clarify these misconceptions and show that the critiques raised by Boudinot et al. (2023) have no merit.\",\"PeriodicalId\":509429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Palaeoentomology\",\"volume\":\" 14\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Palaeoentomology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11646/palaeoentomology.7.2.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palaeoentomology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11646/palaeoentomology.7.2.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在过去二十年中,分子系统学的进步使人们对甲虫的系统发育有了新的认识。然而,一些历史上有争议的关系,尤其是早期分化的甲虫支系之间的关系,仍有待解决。在最近的一篇论文(Cai 等,2022 年)中,我们发现了甲虫系统发育中依赖于模型的信号,并展示了如何去除组成异质性最强的位点,结合使用跨位点组成异质性模型,从而得出更符合形态特征分布和甲虫化石记录的结果。Boudinot 等人(2023 年)在回复中指出,我们的分析受到一系列缺陷的影响,几乎涵盖了我们研究的方方面面。遗憾的是,Boudinot 等人(2023 年)提出的论点是基于对统计检验结果的误读,以及对替换模型、模型检验及其在系统发生组学中的作用的误解。在此,我们将澄清这些误解,并说明 Boudinot 等人(2023 年)提出的批评没有任何道理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Resolving incongruences in insect phylogenomics: A reply to Boudinot et al. (2023)
Over the last two decades, advances in molecular phylogenetics have established a new understanding of beetle phylogeny. However, some historically contentious relationships, particularly among early-diverging beetle clades, remain to be resolved. In a recent paper (Cai et al., 2022), we identified model-dependent signals in beetle phylogeny and showed how the removal of the most compositionally heterogeneous sites, in combination with the use of across-site compositionally heterogeneous models leads to results that are more congruent with the distribution of morphological characters and the beetle fossil record. In their reply, Boudinot et al. (2023) suggested that our analyses are affected by a range of shortcomings, encompassing almost every aspect of our study. Unfortunately, the arguments presented by Boudinot et al. (2023) are based on misinterpretation of the results of statistical tests, as well as misconceptions concerning substitution models, model testing and its role in phylogenomics. Here we clarify these misconceptions and show that the critiques raised by Boudinot et al. (2023) have no merit.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信