No abstract

No abstract

Brachycephaloidea is a monophyletic group of frogs with more than 1000 species distributed throughout the New World tropics, subtropics, and Andean regions. Recently, the group has been the target of multiple molecular phylogenetic analyses, resulting in extensive changes in its taxonomy. Here, we test previous hypotheses of phylogenetic relationships for the group by combining available molecular evidence (sequences of 22 genes representing 431 ingroup and 25 outgroup terminals) and performing a tree-alignment analysis under the parsimony optimality criterion using the program POY. To elucidate the effects of alignment and optimality criterion on phylogenetic inferences, we also used the program MAFFT to obtain a similarity-alignment for analysis under both parsimony and maximum likelihood using the programs TNT and GARLI, respectively. Although all three analytical approaches agreed on numerous points, there was also extensive disagreement. Tree-alignment under parsimony supported the monophyly of the ingroup and the sister group relationship of the monophyletic marsupial frogs (Hemiphractidae), while maximum likelihood and parsimony analyses of the MAFFT similarity-alignment did not. All three methods differed with respect to the position of Ceuthomantis smaragdinus (Ceuthomantidae), with tree-alignment using parsimony recovering this species as the sister of Pristimantis + Yunganastes. All analyses rejected the monophyly of Strabomantidae and Strabomantinae as originally defined, and the tree-alignment analysis under parsimony further rejected the recently redefined Craugastoridae and Pristimantinae. Despite the greater emphasis in the systematics literature placed on the choice of optimality criterion for evaluating trees than on the choice of method for aligning DNA sequences, we found that the topological differences attributable to the alignment method were as great as those caused by the optimality criterion. Further, the optimal tree-alignment indicates that insertions and deletions occurred in twice as many aligned positions as implied by the optimal similarity-alignment, confirming previous findings that sequence turnover through insertion and deletion events plays a greater role in molecular evolution than indicated by similarity-alignments. Our results also provide a clear empirical demonstration of the different effects of wildcard taxa produced by missing data in parsimony and maximum likelihood analyses. Specifically, maximum likelihood analyses consistently (81% bootstrap frequency) provided spurious resolution despite a lack of evidence, whereas parsimony correctly depicted the ambiguity due to missing data by collapsing unsupported nodes. We provide a new taxonomy for the group that retains previously recognized Linnaean taxa except for Ceuthomantidae, Strabomantidae, and Strabomantinae. A phenotypically diagnosable superfamily is recognized formally as Brachycephaloidea, with the informal, unranked name terrarana retained as the standard common name for these frogs. We recognize three familie...

No abstract

An ideographic concept of character is indispensable to phylogenetic inference. Hennig proposed that characters be conceptualized as ''transformation series'', a proposal that is firmly grounded in evolutionary theory and consistent with the method of inferring transformation events as evidence of phylogenetic propinquity. Nevertheless, that concept is usually overlooked or rejected in favor of others based on similarity. Here we explicate Hennig's definition of character as an ideographic concept in the science of phylogenetic systematics. As transformation series, characters are historical individuals akin to species and clades. As such, the related concept of homology refers to a historical identity relation and is not equivalent to or synonymous with synapomorphy. The distinction between primary and secondary homology is dismissed on the grounds that it conflates the concept of homology with the discovery operations used to detect instances of that concept. Although concern for character dependence is generally valid, it is often misplaced, focusing on functional or developmental correlation (both of which are irrelevant in phylogenetic systematics but may be valid in other fields) instead of the historical ⁄ transformational independence relevant to phylogenetic inference. As an ideographic science concerned with concrete objects and events (i.e. individuals), intensionally and extensionally defined properties are inconsistent with the individuation of characters for phylogenetic analysis, the utility of properties being limited to communicating results and facilitating future rounds of testing.

No abstract

The methods of data exploration have become the centerpiece of phylogenetic inference, but without the scientific importance of those methods having been identified. We examine in some detail the procedures and justifications of WheelerÕs sensitivity analysis and relative rate comparison (saturation analysis). In addition, we review methods designed to explore evidential decisiveness, clade stability, transformation series additivity, methodological concordance, sensitivity to prior probabilities (Bayesian analysis), skewness, computer-intensive tests, long-branch attraction, model assumptions (likelihood ratio test), sensitivity to amount of data, polymorphism, clade concordance index, character compatibility, partitioned analysis, spectral analysis, relative apparent synapomorphy analysis, and congruence with a ''known'' phylogeny. In our review, we consider a method to be scientific if it performs empirical tests, i.e., if it applies empirical data that could potentially refute the hypothesis of interest. Methods that do not perform tests, and therefore are not scientific, may nonetheless be heuristic in the scientific enterprise if they point to more weakly or ambiguously corroborated hypotheses, such propositions being more easily refuted than those that have been more severely tested and are more strongly corroborated. Based on common usage, data exploration in phylogenetics is accomplished by any method that performs sensitivity or quality analysis. Sensitivity analysis evaluates the responsiveness of results to variation or errors in parameter values and assumptions. Sensitivity analysis is generally interpreted as providing a measure of support, where conclusions that are insensitive (robust, stable) to perturbations are judged to be accurate, probable, or reliable. As an alternative to that verificationist concept, we define support objectively as the degree to which critical evidence refutes competing hypotheses. As such, degree of support is secondary to the scientific optimality criterion of maximizing explanatory power. Quality analyses purport to distinguish good, reliable, accurate data from bad, misleading, erroneous data, thereby assessing the ability of data to indicate the true phylogeny. Only the quality analysis of character compatibility can be judged scientific-and a weak test at that compared to character congruence. Methods judged to be heuristic include Bremer support, long-branch extraction, and safe taxonomic reduction, and we underscore the great heuristic potential of a posteriori analysis of patterns of transformations on the total-evidence cladogram. However, of the more than 20 kinds of data exploration methods evaluated, the vast majority is neither scientific nor heuristic. Given so little demonstrated cognitive worth, we conclude that undue emphasis has been placed on data exploration in phylogenetic inference, and we urge phylogeneticists to consider more carefully the relevance of the methods that they employ.[T]he cult of impressive technicalities or the cult of precision m...

Traditional justifications of parsimony in phylogenetic inference assume a correspondence between character-state similarity and steps (character transformation events). In addition to similarity, justifying arguments appeal to conviction, descriptive efficiency, ad hoc hypotheses of homoplasy and frequentist probability. Each of these rationales fails in so far as the arguments are incoherent or logically inconsistent with the ontological status of what is assumed and being explained historically. An ideographic justification of parsimony, where character-states constitute transformation events, does, however, allow for a rational preference of most parsimonious phylogenetic hypotheses by invoking the anti-superfluity principle (ASP). According to ASP, explanatory power is maximized by minimizing the number of transformation events required to explain the character-states of the terminal taxa as hypotheses of homology, where the concept homology is restricted to just those inherited ''things'' shared by species. The empirical significance of this rationale is exemplified with the method of direct optimization, which can identify more parsimonious hypotheses than can be confirmed with an analysis of character-state similarities.