2001
DOI: 10.2307/3558433
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Iridaceae are one of the largest families of Lilianae and probably also among the best studied of monocotyledons. To further evaluate generic, tribal, and subfamilial relationships we have produced four plastid DNA data sets for 57 genera of Iridaceae plus outgroups: rps4, rbcL (both protein-coding genes), the trnL intron, and the trnL-F intergenic spacer. All four matrices produce similar although not identical trees, and we thus analyzed them in a combined analysis, which produced a highly resolved and well-… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
87
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

4
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 177 publications
(94 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
6
87
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, we found that the three datasets were still significantly incongruent when ILD tests were run excluding these four species. Although traditionally used to check congruence of phylogenies from different regions, the ILD test has been shown to be highly inaccurate even when the topologies of trees are congruent (Reeves et al 2001;Yoder et al 2001) and may continue to indicate conflict even after the incongruent sequences are removed (Manos et al 1999). Thus, analyses were carried out using the concatenated dataset because the individual tree topologies were not vastly different, there were no highly supported clades that were incongruent with each other, and there was low support for the placement of the conflicting species in the ITS and coxI trees.…”
Section: Dataset Statisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we found that the three datasets were still significantly incongruent when ILD tests were run excluding these four species. Although traditionally used to check congruence of phylogenies from different regions, the ILD test has been shown to be highly inaccurate even when the topologies of trees are congruent (Reeves et al 2001;Yoder et al 2001) and may continue to indicate conflict even after the incongruent sequences are removed (Manos et al 1999). Thus, analyses were carried out using the concatenated dataset because the individual tree topologies were not vastly different, there were no highly supported clades that were incongruent with each other, and there was low support for the placement of the conflicting species in the ITS and coxI trees.…”
Section: Dataset Statisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tree statistics for these analyses are shown in Table 2 No hard incongruence (i.e., incongruence with high BP) was observed in the bootstrap consensus trees obtained for the two genes, so the datasets were combined. This approach is the same as that followed in, for example, Whitten et al (2000), Reeves et al (2001) and Simpson et al (2003). One tree from the combined plastid gene analysis is presented in Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This method has been criticized recently (Siddall, 1997;Dolphin et al, 2000;Reeves et al, 2001;Yoder et al, 2001;Norup et al, 2006). Siddall (1997) points out that the ILD test does not actually reveal the amount of incongruence, and can be insensitive to small but significant topological differences suggested by the different data sets.…”
Section: Sequence Alignment and Phylogenetic Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%