1999
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026201
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multiple Comparisons of Log-Likelihoods with Applications to Phylogenetic Inference

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

20
2,594
4
12

Year Published

2003
2003
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3,876 publications
(2,671 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
20
2,594
4
12
Order By: Relevance
“…This result illustrates that, in this particular case, NNI-based heuristic is trapped in a local maximum because of insufficient tree space exploration conditioned by the BioNJ or MP starting topologies. Note however that the NNI-based and SPR-based ML phylogenetic models are not statistically different according to a SH test (9). Hence, while simultaneous NNIs get trapped in a local maximum, the estimated ML solution is not different from the one found by SPRs from a statistical point of view.…”
Section: Spr Heuristic Searchmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…This result illustrates that, in this particular case, NNI-based heuristic is trapped in a local maximum because of insufficient tree space exploration conditioned by the BioNJ or MP starting topologies. Note however that the NNI-based and SPR-based ML phylogenetic models are not statistically different according to a SH test (9). Hence, while simultaneous NNIs get trapped in a local maximum, the estimated ML solution is not different from the one found by SPRs from a statistical point of view.…”
Section: Spr Heuristic Searchmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…To investigate the support for a relationship between the Lipophrys -Coryphoblennius species pair and Salaria, we compared topologies obtained from unconstrained trees with results from phylogenetic inference where Lipophrys -Coryphoblennius and all the species of Salaria were constrained to form a monophyletic group, under the parsimony criterion -using a Wilcoxon signedrank (Templeton, 1983) and Kishino-Hasegawa (K-H; Kishino and Hasegawa, 1989) tests -and, under the likelihood criterion-using Shimodaira-Hasegawa (S-H; Shimodaira and Hasegawa, 1999) and K-H tests to compare constrained and unconstrained ME topologies -as implemented in PAUP * . Tests were performed on the combined mitochondrial and nuclear data set.…”
Section: Dna Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternative phylogenetic topologies were tested using the Templeton Test (Templeton, 1983) and the Shimodaira and Hasegawa (SH) test using 1000 RELL bootstrap replicates (Goldman et al, 2000;Shimodaira and Hasegawa, 1999), both implemented in PAUP* v4.0. To perform the SH tests, a maximum-likelihood tree was found in an unconstrained analysis treating the entire data set as a single partition and using the best-Wt model of evolution.…”
Section: Phylogenetic Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%