Ho, S. Y. W. and Duchêne, S. “Molecular-Clock Methods for Estimating Evolutionary Rates and Timescales” Molecular Ecology (2014): n/a–n/a. doi:10.1111/mec.12953,
Obtaining reliable calibrated phylogenetic trees is a fundamental step to understanding the timing of evolution of the organisms we like and performing a variety of comparative analyses. Yet, we usually don't even think about this important step and simply do the uncorrelated lognormal molecular clock in BEAST. Why did BEAST programmers bother including all those other options? What are the assumptions and effects of estimating calibrated trees using different methods? I found this recent review that might give us some ideas for discussion!
Obtaining reliable calibrated phylogenetic trees is a fundamental step to understanding the timing of evolution of the organisms we like and performing a variety of comparative analyses. Yet, we usually don't even think about this important step and simply do the uncorrelated lognormal molecular clock in BEAST. Why did BEAST programmers bother including all those other options? What are the assumptions and effects of estimating calibrated trees using different methods? I found this recent review that might give us some ideas for discussion!
ho_duchne_-_2014_-_molecular_ecology_-_molecular-clock_methods_for_estimating_evolutionary_rates_and_timescales.pdf |