↓ Skip to main content

Model Selection in Historical Biogeography Reveals that Founder-Event Speciation Is a Crucial Process in Island Clades

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Biology, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#29 of 1,886)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
17 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
975 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
729 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Model Selection in Historical Biogeography Reveals that Founder-Event Speciation Is a Crucial Process in Island Clades
Published in
Systematic Biology, August 2014
DOI 10.1093/sysbio/syu056
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicholas J. Matzke

Abstract

Founder-event speciation, where a rare jump dispersal event founds a new genetically isolated lineage, has long been considered crucial by many historical biogeographers, but its importance is disputed within the vicariance school. Probabilistic modeling of geographic range evolution creates the potential to test different biogeographical models against data using standard statistical model choice procedures, as long as multiple models are available. I re-implement the Dispersal-Extinction-Cladogenesis (DEC) model of LAGRANGE in the R package BioGeoBEARS, and modify it to create a new model, DEC+J, which adds founder-event speciation, the importance of which is governed by a new free parameter, j. The identifiability of DEC and DEC+J is tested on datasets simulated under a wide range of macroevolutionary models where geography evolves jointly with lineage birth/death events. The results confirm that DEC and DEC+J are identifiable even though these models ignore the fact that molecular phylogenies are missing many cladogenesis and extinction events. The simulations also indicate that DEC will have substantially increased errors in ancestral range estimation and parameter inference when the true model includes +J. DEC and DEC+J are compared on 13 empirical datasets drawn from studies of island clades. Likelihood ratio tests indicate that all clades reject DEC, and AICc model weights show large to overwhelming support for DEC+J, for the first time verifying the importance of founder-event speciation in island clades via statistical model choice. Under DEC+J, ancestral nodes are usually estimated to have ranges occupying only one island, rather than the widespread ancestors often favored by DEC. These results indicate that the assumptions of historical biogeography models can have large impacts on inference and require testing and comparison with statistical methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 729 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 2%
Brazil 4 <1%
Mexico 3 <1%
Colombia 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Cameroon 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 698 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 166 23%
Researcher 106 15%
Student > Master 92 13%
Student > Bachelor 78 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 56 8%
Other 121 17%
Unknown 110 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 409 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 78 11%
Environmental Science 45 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 29 4%
Computer Science 6 <1%
Other 29 4%
Unknown 133 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 86. 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 14 November 2017.
All research outputs
#508,148
of 25,782,229 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Biology
#29
of 1,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,511
of 244,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Biology
#2
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,782,229 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,886 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 244,618 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.