Dental data perform relatively poorly in reconstructing mammal phylogenies: Morphological partitions evaluated with molecular benchmarks

Robert S Sansom, Matthew A Wills, Tamara Williams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)
73 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Phylogenetic trees underpin reconstructions of evolutionary history and tests of evolutionary hypotheses. They are inferred from both molecular and morphological data, yet the relative value of morphology has been questioned in this context due to perceived homoplasy, developmental linkage, and nonindependence of characters. Nevertheless, fossil data are limited to incomplete subsets of preserved morphology, and different regions are treated as equivalent. Through meta-analysis of 40 data sets, we show here that the dental and osteological characters of mammals convey significantly different phylogenetic signals, and that osteological characters are significantly more compatible with molecular trees. Furthermore, the application of simplified paleontological filters (retaining only dental data) results in significantly greater loss of phylogenetic signal than random character ablation. Although the mammal fossil record is largely comprised of teeth, dental data alone are generally found to be less reliable for phylogenetic reconstruction given their incongruence with osteological and molecular data. These findings highlight the need for rigorous meta-analyses of distributions of homoplasy in morphological data. These tests, and consequent refinements to phylogenetic analyses that they permit, promise to improve the quality of all macroevolutionary studies that hinge on accurate trees.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)813-822
Number of pages10
JournalSystematic Biology
Volume66
Issue number5
Early online date14 Mar 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2017

Fingerprint

Benchmarking
Phylogeny
Mammals
Tooth
teeth
phylogeny
mammal
mammals
phylogenetics
Meta-Analysis
fossils
meta-analysis
History
fossil record
ablation
tooth
testing
history
fossil
filter

Cite this

Dental data perform relatively poorly in reconstructing mammal phylogenies: Morphological partitions evaluated with molecular benchmarks. / Sansom, Robert S; Wills, Matthew A; Williams, Tamara.

In: Systematic Biology, Vol. 66, No. 5, 09.2017, p. 813-822.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{85c539be4908442d81bd52b621d23b7f,
title = "Dental data perform relatively poorly in reconstructing mammal phylogenies: Morphological partitions evaluated with molecular benchmarks",
abstract = "Phylogenetic trees underpin reconstructions of evolutionary history and tests of evolutionary hypotheses. They are inferred from both molecular and morphological data, yet the relative value of morphology has been questioned in this context due to perceived homoplasy, developmental linkage, and nonindependence of characters. Nevertheless, fossil data are limited to incomplete subsets of preserved morphology, and different regions are treated as equivalent. Through meta-analysis of 40 data sets, we show here that the dental and osteological characters of mammals convey significantly different phylogenetic signals, and that osteological characters are significantly more compatible with molecular trees. Furthermore, the application of simplified paleontological filters (retaining only dental data) results in significantly greater loss of phylogenetic signal than random character ablation. Although the mammal fossil record is largely comprised of teeth, dental data alone are generally found to be less reliable for phylogenetic reconstruction given their incongruence with osteological and molecular data. These findings highlight the need for rigorous meta-analyses of distributions of homoplasy in morphological data. These tests, and consequent refinements to phylogenetic analyses that they permit, promise to improve the quality of all macroevolutionary studies that hinge on accurate trees.",
author = "Sansom, {Robert S} and Wills, {Matthew A} and Tamara Williams",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1093/sysbio/syw116",
language = "English",
volume = "66",
pages = "813--822",
journal = "Systematic Biology",
issn = "1063-5157",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dental data perform relatively poorly in reconstructing mammal phylogenies: Morphological partitions evaluated with molecular benchmarks

AU - Sansom, Robert S

AU - Wills, Matthew A

AU - Williams, Tamara

PY - 2017/9

Y1 - 2017/9

N2 - Phylogenetic trees underpin reconstructions of evolutionary history and tests of evolutionary hypotheses. They are inferred from both molecular and morphological data, yet the relative value of morphology has been questioned in this context due to perceived homoplasy, developmental linkage, and nonindependence of characters. Nevertheless, fossil data are limited to incomplete subsets of preserved morphology, and different regions are treated as equivalent. Through meta-analysis of 40 data sets, we show here that the dental and osteological characters of mammals convey significantly different phylogenetic signals, and that osteological characters are significantly more compatible with molecular trees. Furthermore, the application of simplified paleontological filters (retaining only dental data) results in significantly greater loss of phylogenetic signal than random character ablation. Although the mammal fossil record is largely comprised of teeth, dental data alone are generally found to be less reliable for phylogenetic reconstruction given their incongruence with osteological and molecular data. These findings highlight the need for rigorous meta-analyses of distributions of homoplasy in morphological data. These tests, and consequent refinements to phylogenetic analyses that they permit, promise to improve the quality of all macroevolutionary studies that hinge on accurate trees.

AB - Phylogenetic trees underpin reconstructions of evolutionary history and tests of evolutionary hypotheses. They are inferred from both molecular and morphological data, yet the relative value of morphology has been questioned in this context due to perceived homoplasy, developmental linkage, and nonindependence of characters. Nevertheless, fossil data are limited to incomplete subsets of preserved morphology, and different regions are treated as equivalent. Through meta-analysis of 40 data sets, we show here that the dental and osteological characters of mammals convey significantly different phylogenetic signals, and that osteological characters are significantly more compatible with molecular trees. Furthermore, the application of simplified paleontological filters (retaining only dental data) results in significantly greater loss of phylogenetic signal than random character ablation. Although the mammal fossil record is largely comprised of teeth, dental data alone are generally found to be less reliable for phylogenetic reconstruction given their incongruence with osteological and molecular data. These findings highlight the need for rigorous meta-analyses of distributions of homoplasy in morphological data. These tests, and consequent refinements to phylogenetic analyses that they permit, promise to improve the quality of all macroevolutionary studies that hinge on accurate trees.

UR - https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syw116

U2 - 10.1093/sysbio/syw116

DO - 10.1093/sysbio/syw116

M3 - Article

VL - 66

SP - 813

EP - 822

JO - Systematic Biology

JF - Systematic Biology

SN - 1063-5157

IS - 5

ER -