↓ Skip to main content

Trees of Unusual Size: Biased Inference of Early Bursts from Large Molecular Phylogenies

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
89 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.
Article details
Title
Trees of Unusual Size: Biased Inference of Early Bursts from Large Molecular Phylogenies
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0043348
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

An early burst of speciation followed by a subsequent slowdown in the rate of diversification is commonly inferred from molecular phylogenies. This pattern is consistent with some verbal theory of ecological opportunity and adaptive radiations. One often-overlooked source of bias in these studies is that of sampling at the level of whole clades, as researchers tend to choose large, speciose clades to study. In this paper, we investigate the performance of common methods across the distribution of clade sizes that can be generated by a constant-rate birth-death process. Clades which are larger than expected for a given constant-rate branching process tend to show a pattern of an early burst even when both speciation and extinction rates are constant through time. All methods evaluated were susceptible to detecting this false signature when extinction was low. Under moderate extinction, both the [Formula: see text]-statistic and diversity-dependent models did not detect such a slowdown but only because the signature of a slowdown was masked by subsequent extinction. Some models which estimate time-varying speciation rates are able to detect early bursts under higher extinction rates, but are extremely prone to sampling bias. We suggest that examining clades in isolation may result in spurious inferences that rates of diversification have changed through time.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Sweden 2 2%
Brazil 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 77 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 35%
Researcher 20 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 8 9%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 66%
Environmental Science 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 9%
Mathematics 2 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 8 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 September 2012.
All research outputs
#12,436,628
of 34,546,575 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#108,660
of 225,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,015
of 224,868 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,414
of 4,687 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,546,575 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.2. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 224,868 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,687 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.