Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Derrick J Zwickl

Publications and source records attributed to Derrick J Zwickl.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2002

Phylogenetic relationships of the dwarf boas and a comparison of Bayesian and bootstrap measures of phylogenetic support.

Four New World genera of dwarf boas (Exiliboa, Trachyboa, Tropidophis, and Ungaliophis) have been placed by many systematists in a single group (traditionally called Tropidophiidae). However, the monophyly of this group has been questioned in several studies. Moreover, the overall relationships among basal snake lineages, including the placement of the dwarf boas, are poorly understood. We obtained mtDNA sequence data for 12S, 16S, and intervening tRNA-val genes from 23 species of snakes representing most major snake lineages, including all four genera of New World dwarf boas. We then examined the phylogenetic position of these species by estimating the phylogeny of the basal snakes. Our phylogenetic analysis suggests that New World dwarf boas are not monophyletic. Instead, we find Exiliboa and Ungaliophis to be most closely related to sand boas (Erycinae), boas (Boinae), and advanced snakes (Caenophidea), whereas Tropidophis and Trachyboa form an independent clade that separated relatively early in snake radiation. Our estimate of snake phylogeny differs significantly in other ways from some previous estimates of snake phylogeny. For instance, pythons do not cluster with boas and sand boas, but instead show a strong relationship with Loxocemus and Xenopeltis. Additionally, uropeltids cluster strongly with Cylindrophis, and together are embedded in what has previously been considered the macrostomatan radiation. These relationships are supported by both bootstrapping (parametric and nonparametric approaches) and Bayesian analysis, although Bayesian support values are consistently higher than those obtained from nonparametric bootstrapping. Simulations show that Bayesian support values represent much better estimates of phylogenetic accuracy than do nonparametric bootstrap support values, at least under the conditions of our study.

Animals↗
PubMed2002

Increased taxon sampling greatly reduces phylogenetic error.

Several authors have argued recently that extensive taxon sampling has a positive and important effect on the accuracy of phylogenetic estimates. However, other authors have argued that there is little benefit of extensive taxon sampling, and so phylogenetic problems can or should be reduced to a few exemplar taxa as a means of reducing the computational complexity of the phylogenetic analysis. In this paper we examined five aspects of study design that may have led to these different perspectives. First, we considered the measurement of phylogenetic error across a wide range of taxon sample sizes, and conclude that the expected error based on randomly selecting trees (which varies by taxon sample size) must be considered in evaluating error in studies of the effects of taxon sampling. Second, we addressed the scope of the phylogenetic problems defined by different samples of taxa, and argue that phylogenetic scope needs to be considered in evaluating the importance of taxon-sampling strategies. Third, we examined the claim that fast and simple tree searches are as effective as more thorough searches at finding near-optimal trees that minimize error. We show that a more complete search of tree space reduces phylogenetic error, especially as the taxon sample size increases. Fourth, we examined the effects of simple versus complex simulation models on taxonomic sampling studies. Although benefits of taxon sampling are apparent for all models, data generated under more complex models of evolution produce higher overall levels of error and show greater positive effects of increased taxon sampling. Fifth, we asked if different phylogenetic optimality criteria show different effects of taxon sampling. Although we found strong differences in effectiveness of different optimality criteria as a function of taxon sample size, increased taxon sampling improved the results from all the common optimality criteria. Nonetheless, the method that showed the lowest overall performance (minimum evolution) also showed the least improvement from increased taxon sampling. Taking each of these results into account re-enforces the conclusion that increased sampling of taxa is one of the most important ways to increase overall phylogenetic accuracy.

Likelihood Functions↗
PubMed2002

Genetic algorithms and parallel processing in maximum-likelihood phylogeny inference.

We investigated the usefulness of a parallel genetic algorithm for phylogenetic inference under the maximum-likelihood (ML) optimality criterion. Parallelization was accomplished by assigning each "individual" in the genetic algorithm "population" to a separate processor so that the number of processors used was equal to the size of the evolving population (plus one additional processor for the control of operations). The genetic algorithm incorporated branch-length and topological mutation, recombination, selection on the ML score, and (in some cases) migration and recombination among subpopulations. We tested this parallel genetic algorithm with large (228 taxa) data sets of both empirically observed DNA sequence data (for angiosperms) as well as simulated DNA sequence data. For both observed and simulated data, search-time improvement was nearly linear with respect to the number of processors, so the parallelization strategy appears to be highly effective at improving computation time for large phylogenetic problems using the genetic algorithm. We also explored various ways of optimizing and tuning the parameters of the genetic algorithm. Under the conditions of our analyses, we did not find the best-known solution using the genetic algorithm approach before terminating each run. We discuss some possible limitations of the current implementation of this genetic algorithm as well as of avenues for its future improvement.

Algorithms↗