Understanding Phylogenetic Diversity and Dispersion in Communities
Author Information
Author(s): Nathan G. Swenson
Primary Institution: Center for Tropical Forest Science–Asia Program, Arnold Arboretum, Harvard University
Hypothesis
How does the use of a phylogeny with multiple polytomies bias commonly used metrics of phylogenetic diversity and dispersion?
Conclusion
The study found that phylogenetic diversity and dispersion metrics are sensitive to phylogenetic resolution, particularly when the phylogeny is large and lacks resolution at basal nodes.
Supporting Evidence
- Phylogenetic diversity metrics were highly correlated with known values when using fully bifurcating phylogenies.
- The study showed that phylogenetic diversity tends to be underestimated as phylogenies become less resolved.
- The loss of statistical power is greater when using phylogenies with unresolved nodes compared to those with only terminal nodes unresolved.
Takeaway
This study looks at how not having a clear family tree for species can make it hard to measure their diversity accurately. It shows that when trees are messy, we might think there are fewer or more species than there really are.
Methodology
The study generated fully resolved phylogenies and compared them to phylogenies with varying degrees of unresolved nodes to assess the impact on phylogenetic diversity and dispersion metrics.
Potential Biases
Using phylogenies with unresolved nodes may lead to underestimating or overestimating phylogenetic diversity and dispersion.
Limitations
The study primarily focused on specific metrics of phylogenetic diversity and dispersion, and the results may not apply to other metrics not analyzed.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website