首页> 外文期刊>Molecular biology and evolution >Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confidence
【24h】

Bayes or bootstrap? A simulation study comparing the performance of Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling and bootstrapping in assessing phylogenetic confidence

机译:贝叶斯还是自举?模拟研究比较贝叶斯马尔可夫链蒙特卡洛采样法和自举法在评估系统发育信心中的性能

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling has become increasingly popular in phylogenetics as a method for both estimating the maximum likelihood topology and for assessing nodal confidence. Despite the growing use of posterior probabilities, the relationship between the Bayesian measure of confidence and the most commonly used confidence measure in phylogenetics, the nonparametric bootstrap proportion, is poorly understood. We used computer simulation to investigate the behavior of three phylogenetic confidence methods: Bayesian posterior probabilities calculated via Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling (BMCMC-PP), maximum likelihood bootstrap proportion (ML-BP), and maximum parsimony bootstrap proportion (MP-BP). We simulated the evolution of DNA sequence on 17-taxon topologies under 18 evolutionary scenarios and examined the performance of these methods in assigning confidence to correct monophyletic and incorrect monophyletic groups, and we examined the effects of increasing character number on support value. BMCMC-PP and ML-BP were often strongly correlated with one another but could provide substantially different estimates of support on short internodes. In contrast, BMCMC-PP correlated poorly with MP-BP across most of the simulation conditions that we examined. For a given threshold value, more correct monophyletic groups were supported by BMCMC-PP than by either ML-BP or MP-BP. When threshold values were chosen that fixed the rate of accepting incorrect monophyletic relationship as true at 5%, all three methods recovered most of the correct relationships on the simulated topologies, although BMCMC-PP and ML-BP performed better than MP-BP. BMCMC-PP was usually a less biased predictor of phylogenetic accuracy than either bootstrapping method. BMCMC-PP provided high support values for correct topological bipartitions with fewer characters than was needed for nonparametric bootstrap.
机译:贝叶斯马尔可夫链蒙特卡洛采样在系统发育学中已越来越流行,它既是估计最大似然拓扑结构又用于评估节点置信度的方法。尽管后验概率的使用越来越多,但人们对贝叶斯置信度度量与系统发育中最常用的置信度度量(非参数自举比例)之间的关系了解甚少。我们使用计算机仿真来研究三种系统发育置信度方法的行为:通过马尔可夫链蒙特卡洛采样(BMCMC-PP)计算的贝叶斯后验概率,最大似然自举比例(ML-BP)和最大简约自举比例(MP-BP) 。我们模拟了18种进化场景下17个分类群拓扑结构上DNA序列的进化,并研究了这些方法在分配置信度以纠正单系和不正确的单系群体方面的性能,并研究了增加字符数对支持价值的影响。 BMCMC-PP和ML-BP通常彼此之间密切相关,但可以提供对短节间支撑的明显不同的估计。相反,在我们研究的大多数模拟条件下,BMCMC-PP与MP-BP的相关性很差。对于给定的阈值,BMCMC-PP比ML-BP或MP-BP支持更正确的单系统群体。当选择的阈值将不正确的单亲关系的接受率固定为5%时,尽管BMCMC-PP和ML-BP的性能优于MP-BP,但所有三种方法都恢复了模拟拓扑上的大多数正确关系。与任何一种自举方法相比,BMCMC-PP通常是系统发生准确度的偏向预测指标。 BMCMC-PP为正确的拓扑划分提供了高支持值,其字符数少于非参数引导程序。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号