↓ Skip to main content

Bayes Factors Unmask Highly Variable Information Content, Bias, and Extreme Influence in Phylogenomic Analyses

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Biology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
42 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
147 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bayes Factors Unmask Highly Variable Information Content, Bias, and Extreme Influence in Phylogenomic Analyses
Published in
Systematic Biology, December 2016
DOI 10.1093/sysbio/syw101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeremy M. Brown, Robert C. Thomson

Abstract

As the application of genomic data in phylogenetics has become routine, a number of cases have arisen where alternative datasets strongly support conflicting conclusions. This sensitivity to analytical decisions has prevented firm resolution of some of the most recalcitrant nodes in the tree of life. To better understand the causes and nature of this sensitivity, we analyzed several phylogenomic datasets using an alternative measure of topological support (the Bayes factor) that both demonstrates and averts several limitations of more frequently employed support measures (such as Markov chain Monte Carlo estimates of posterior probabilities). Bayes factors reveal important, previously hidden, differences across six "phylogenomic" datasets collected to resolve the phylogenetic placement of turtles within Amniota. These datasets vary substantially in their support for well-established amniote relationships, particularly in the proportion of genes that contain extreme amounts of information as well as the proportion that strongly reject these uncontroversial relationships. All six datasets contain little information to resolve the phylogenetic placement of turtles relative to other amniotes. Bayes factors also reveal that a very small number of extremely influential genes (less than one percent of genes in a dataset) can fundamentally change significant phylogenetic conclusions. In one example, these genes are shown to contain previously unrecognized paralogs. This study demonstrates both that the resolution of difficult phylogenomic problems remains sensitive to seemingly minor analysis details, and that Bayes factors are a valuable tool for identifying and solving these challenges.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 42 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 158 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 27%
Researcher 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Student > Master 16 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 23 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 90 55%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 16%
Environmental Science 7 4%
Computer Science 6 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 2%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 26 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,248,201
of 25,712,965 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Biology
#135
of 1,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,110
of 425,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Biology
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,712,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,885 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 425,066 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.