z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Nothing Wrong with the Analysis of Clades in Comparative Evolutionary Studies: A Reply to Poe et al
Author(s) -
Joanna Baker,
Andrew Meade,
Mark Pagel,
Chris Venditti
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
systematic biology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 7.128
H-Index - 182
eISSN - 1076-836X
pISSN - 1063-5157
DOI - 10.1093/sysbio/syaa067
Subject(s) - clade , phylogenetic tree , biology , phylogenetics , evolutionary biology , taxonomy (biology) , selection (genetic algorithm) , phylogenetic comparative methods , zoology , artificial intelligence , computer science , genetics , gene
In a recent paper, Poe et al. assert that scientists should abandon clade-based approaches, particularly those using named taxonomic ranks. Poe et al. attempt to demonstrate that clade selection can have effects on the results of evolutionary analyses but unfortunately fall short of making any robust conclusions. Here, we demonstrate that the assertions made by Poe et al. have two important flaws: (i) an erroneous view of modern phylogenetic comparative methods; and (ii) a lack of statistical rigor in their analyses. We repeat Poe et al.’s analysis but using appropriate phylogenetic comparative approaches. We demonstrate that results remain consistent regardless of the clade definition. We go on to discuss the value of taxonomic groupings and how they can provide meaningful units of comparison in evolutionary study. Unlike the disheartening suggestion to abandon the use of clades, scientists can instead continue to use phylogenetic “ corrections” that are already the standard for most comparative evolutionary analyses. [Comparative methods; evolution; phylogeny; taxonomy.]

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here