4.8 Article

PartitionFinder: Combined Selection of Partitioning Schemes and Substitution Models for Phylogenetic Analyses

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 29, 期 6, 页码 1695-1701

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/mss020

关键词

partitioning; AIC; BIC; AICc; model selection; molecular evolution

资金

  1. Australian Research Council
  2. Marsden Fund [08-UOA-068]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In phylogenetic analyses of molecular sequence data, partitioning involves estimating independent models of molecular evolution for different sets of sites in a sequence alignment. Choosing an appropriate partitioning scheme is an important step in most analyses because it can affect the accuracy of phylogenetic reconstruction. Despite this, partitioning schemes are often chosen without explicit statistical justification. Here, we describe two new objective methods for the combined selection of best-fit partitioning schemes and nucleotide substitution models. These methods allow millions of partitioning schemes to be compared in realistic time frames and so permit the objective selection of partitioning schemes even for large multilocus DNA data sets. We demonstrate that these methods significantly outperform previous approaches, including both the ad hoc selection of partitioning schemes (e.g., partitioning by gene or codon position) and a recently proposed hierarchical clustering method. We have implemented these methods in an open-source program, PartitionFinder. This program allows users to select partitioning schemes and substitution models using a range of information-theoretic metrics (e.g., the Bayesian information criterion, akaike information criterion [AIC], and corrected AIC). We hope that PartitionFinder will encourage the objective selection of partitioning schemes and thus lead to improvements in phylogenetic analyses. PartitionFinder is written in Python and runs under Mac OSX 10.4 and above. The program, source code, and a detailed manual are freely available from www.robertlanfear.com/partitionfinder.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据