Cargando…

Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics

1. The amount and patterns of phylodiversity in a community are often used to draw inferences about the local and historical factors affecting community assembly and can be used to prioritize communities and locations for conservation. Because measures of phylodiversity are based on the topology and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jantzen, Johanna R., Whitten, William M., Neubig, Kurt M., Majure, Lucas C., Soltis, Douglas E., Soltis, Pamela S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6745870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31534670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5425
_version_ 1783451609373605888
author Jantzen, Johanna R.
Whitten, William M.
Neubig, Kurt M.
Majure, Lucas C.
Soltis, Douglas E.
Soltis, Pamela S.
author_facet Jantzen, Johanna R.
Whitten, William M.
Neubig, Kurt M.
Majure, Lucas C.
Soltis, Douglas E.
Soltis, Pamela S.
author_sort Jantzen, Johanna R.
collection PubMed
description 1. The amount and patterns of phylodiversity in a community are often used to draw inferences about the local and historical factors affecting community assembly and can be used to prioritize communities and locations for conservation. Because measures of phylodiversity are based on the topology and branch lengths of phylogenetic trees, which are affected by the number and diversity of taxa in the tree, these analyses may be sensitive to changes in taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods. 2. To investigate the effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on measures of phylodiversity, we investigated the community phylogenetics of the Ordway‐Swisher Biological Station (Florida), which is home to over 600 species of vascular plants. We studied the effects of (a) the number of taxa included in the regional phylogeny; (b) random versus targeted sampling of species to assemble the regional species pool; (c) including only species from specific clades rather than broad sampling; (d) using trees reconstructed directly for the taxa under study compared to trees pruned from a larger reconstructed tree; and (e) using phylograms compared to chronograms. 3. We found that including more taxa in a study increases the likelihood of observing significantly nonrandom phylogenetic patterns. However, there were no consistent trends in the phylodiversity patterns based on random taxon sampling compared to targeted sampling, or within individual clades compared to the complete dataset. Using pruned and reconstructed phylogenies resulted in similar patterns of phylodiversity, while chronograms in some cases led to significantly different results from phylograms. 4. The methods commonly used in community phylogenetic studies can significantly impact the results, potentially influencing both inferences of community assembly and conservation decisions. We highlight the need for both careful selection of methods in community phylogenetic studies and appropriate interpretation of results, depending on the specific questions to be addressed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6745870
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67458702019-09-18 Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics Jantzen, Johanna R. Whitten, William M. Neubig, Kurt M. Majure, Lucas C. Soltis, Douglas E. Soltis, Pamela S. Ecol Evol Original Research 1. The amount and patterns of phylodiversity in a community are often used to draw inferences about the local and historical factors affecting community assembly and can be used to prioritize communities and locations for conservation. Because measures of phylodiversity are based on the topology and branch lengths of phylogenetic trees, which are affected by the number and diversity of taxa in the tree, these analyses may be sensitive to changes in taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods. 2. To investigate the effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on measures of phylodiversity, we investigated the community phylogenetics of the Ordway‐Swisher Biological Station (Florida), which is home to over 600 species of vascular plants. We studied the effects of (a) the number of taxa included in the regional phylogeny; (b) random versus targeted sampling of species to assemble the regional species pool; (c) including only species from specific clades rather than broad sampling; (d) using trees reconstructed directly for the taxa under study compared to trees pruned from a larger reconstructed tree; and (e) using phylograms compared to chronograms. 3. We found that including more taxa in a study increases the likelihood of observing significantly nonrandom phylogenetic patterns. However, there were no consistent trends in the phylodiversity patterns based on random taxon sampling compared to targeted sampling, or within individual clades compared to the complete dataset. Using pruned and reconstructed phylogenies resulted in similar patterns of phylodiversity, while chronograms in some cases led to significantly different results from phylograms. 4. The methods commonly used in community phylogenetic studies can significantly impact the results, potentially influencing both inferences of community assembly and conservation decisions. We highlight the need for both careful selection of methods in community phylogenetic studies and appropriate interpretation of results, depending on the specific questions to be addressed. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-08-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6745870/ /pubmed/31534670 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5425 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Ecology and Evolution published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Jantzen, Johanna R.
Whitten, William M.
Neubig, Kurt M.
Majure, Lucas C.
Soltis, Douglas E.
Soltis, Pamela S.
Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics
title Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics
title_full Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics
title_fullStr Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics
title_full_unstemmed Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics
title_short Effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics
title_sort effects of taxon sampling and tree reconstruction methods on phylodiversity metrics
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6745870/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31534670
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5425
work_keys_str_mv AT jantzenjohannar effectsoftaxonsamplingandtreereconstructionmethodsonphylodiversitymetrics
AT whittenwilliamm effectsoftaxonsamplingandtreereconstructionmethodsonphylodiversitymetrics
AT neubigkurtm effectsoftaxonsamplingandtreereconstructionmethodsonphylodiversitymetrics
AT majurelucasc effectsoftaxonsamplingandtreereconstructionmethodsonphylodiversitymetrics
AT soltisdouglase effectsoftaxonsamplingandtreereconstructionmethodsonphylodiversitymetrics
AT soltispamelas effectsoftaxonsamplingandtreereconstructionmethodsonphylodiversitymetrics