Cargando…

The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping

Eigenfunction analyses have been widely used to model patterns of autocorrelation in time, space and phylogeny. In a phylogenetic context, Diniz-Filho et al. (1998) proposed what they called Phylogenetic Eigenvector Regression (PVR), in which pairwise phylogenetic distances among species are submitt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Diniz, José Alexandre Felizola, Villalobos, Fabricio, Bini, Luis Mauricio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sociedade Brasileira de Genética 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4612606/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26500445
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1415-475738320140391
_version_ 1782396193909768192
author Diniz, José Alexandre Felizola
Villalobos, Fabricio
Bini, Luis Mauricio
author_facet Diniz, José Alexandre Felizola
Villalobos, Fabricio
Bini, Luis Mauricio
author_sort Diniz, José Alexandre Felizola
collection PubMed
description Eigenfunction analyses have been widely used to model patterns of autocorrelation in time, space and phylogeny. In a phylogenetic context, Diniz-Filho et al. (1998) proposed what they called Phylogenetic Eigenvector Regression (PVR), in which pairwise phylogenetic distances among species are submitted to a Principal Coordinate Analysis, and eigenvectors are then used as explanatory variables in regression, correlation or ANOVAs. More recently, a new approach called Phylogenetic Eigenvector Mapping (PEM) was proposed, with the main advantage of explicitly incorporating a model-based warping in phylogenetic distance in which an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (O-U) process is fitted to data before eigenvector extraction. Here we compared PVR and PEM in respect to estimated phylogenetic signal, correlated evolution under alternative evolutionary models and phylogenetic imputation, using simulated data. Despite similarity between the two approaches, PEM has a slightly higher prediction ability and is more general than the original PVR. Even so, in a conceptual sense, PEM may provide a technique in the best of both worlds, combining the flexibility of data-driven and empirical eigenfunction analyses and the sounding insights provided by evolutionary models well known in comparative analyses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4612606
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Genética
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46126062015-10-23 The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping Diniz, José Alexandre Felizola Villalobos, Fabricio Bini, Luis Mauricio Genet Mol Biol Evolutionary Genetics Eigenfunction analyses have been widely used to model patterns of autocorrelation in time, space and phylogeny. In a phylogenetic context, Diniz-Filho et al. (1998) proposed what they called Phylogenetic Eigenvector Regression (PVR), in which pairwise phylogenetic distances among species are submitted to a Principal Coordinate Analysis, and eigenvectors are then used as explanatory variables in regression, correlation or ANOVAs. More recently, a new approach called Phylogenetic Eigenvector Mapping (PEM) was proposed, with the main advantage of explicitly incorporating a model-based warping in phylogenetic distance in which an Ornstein-Uhlenbeck (O-U) process is fitted to data before eigenvector extraction. Here we compared PVR and PEM in respect to estimated phylogenetic signal, correlated evolution under alternative evolutionary models and phylogenetic imputation, using simulated data. Despite similarity between the two approaches, PEM has a slightly higher prediction ability and is more general than the original PVR. Even so, in a conceptual sense, PEM may provide a technique in the best of both worlds, combining the flexibility of data-driven and empirical eigenfunction analyses and the sounding insights provided by evolutionary models well known in comparative analyses. Sociedade Brasileira de Genética 2015-08-21 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4612606/ /pubmed/26500445 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1415-475738320140391 Text en Copyright © 2015, Sociedade Brasileira de Genética. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ License information: This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Evolutionary Genetics
Diniz, José Alexandre Felizola
Villalobos, Fabricio
Bini, Luis Mauricio
The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping
title The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping
title_full The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping
title_fullStr The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping
title_full_unstemmed The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping
title_short The best of both worlds: Phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping
title_sort best of both worlds: phylogenetic eigenvector regression and mapping
topic Evolutionary Genetics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4612606/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26500445
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1415-475738320140391
work_keys_str_mv AT dinizjosealexandrefelizola thebestofbothworldsphylogeneticeigenvectorregressionandmapping
AT villalobosfabricio thebestofbothworldsphylogeneticeigenvectorregressionandmapping
AT biniluismauricio thebestofbothworldsphylogeneticeigenvectorregressionandmapping
AT dinizjosealexandrefelizola bestofbothworldsphylogeneticeigenvectorregressionandmapping
AT villalobosfabricio bestofbothworldsphylogeneticeigenvectorregressionandmapping
AT biniluismauricio bestofbothworldsphylogeneticeigenvectorregressionandmapping