↓ 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

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
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

Matthew W. Pennell, Brice A. J. Sarver, Luke J. Harmon

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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Brazil 2 2%
Sweden 2 2%
Switzerland 1 1%
Chile 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
Unknown 75 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 36%
Researcher 20 23%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 6 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 68%
Environmental Science 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 9%
Mathematics 2 2%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 2%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 6 7%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,856,450
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#70,186
of 193,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,953
of 169,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,207
of 4,380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,796 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 169,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,380 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.