Quick
Search: 
 
advanced search
 GSW Home    GeoRef Home    My GSW Alerts    Contact GSW    About GSW    Journals List    Help 
Paleobiology Signup for GSW Email News
JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paleobiology; June 2001; v. 27; no. 2; p. 188-204; DOI: 10.1666/0094-8373(2001)027<0188:TIOPT>2.0.CO;2
© 2001 Paleontological Society
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (7)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Harcourt-Brown, K. G.
Right arrow Articles by Wilkinson, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
GeoRef
Right arrow GeoRef Citation

The imbalance of paleontological trees

Katherine G. Harcourt-Brown1, Paul N. Pearson1 and Mark Wilkinson2

1 Katherine G. Harcourt-Brown and Paul N. Pearson. Department of Earth Sciences, Wills Memorial Building, Queens Road, Bristol, BS8 1RJ, United Kingdom. K.G.Harcourt-Brown{at}bristol.ac.uk and Paul.Pearson@ bris.ac.uk
2 Mark Wilkinson. Department of Zoology, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, United Kingdom. m.wilkinson{at}bris.ac.uk

One of the most extensively studied aspects of phylogenetic tree shape is balance, which is the extent to which nodes divide a tree into clades of equal size. Several authors have stressed the importance of tree balance for understanding patterns of evolution. It has been remarked that paleontological studies commonly produce very unbalanced trees (also called pectinate cladograms or "Hennigian combs"). This claim is tested here by comparing the balance of 50 paleontological trees and 50 neontological trees, all taken from the recent literature. Each tree was reanalyzed from the published data matrix to ensure its accuracy. The results confirm that paleontological trees tend to be more imbalanced than neontological trees.

That paleontological trees are more imbalanced has been represented as a shortcoming of fossil data sets, but here it is argued that this is the expected result. Even under a simple Markovian model in which all speciations and extinctions occur randomly and with equal probability in all parts of the tree, trees based on taxa from a single time period (e.g., the present day) are generally more balanced than trees based on all taxa that ever existed within the clade. Computer simulation is used to calculate the expected balance and standard deviation of trees for up to 40 terminal taxa over the entire history of a model clade. The balance is measured using Colless's index, Ic, and the expected balance conforms well with published paleontological trees. The study underlines the difficulty of applying neontological tree statistics in paleontology.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Syst BiolHome page
T. H. Ogden and M. S. Rosenberg
Multiple Sequence Alignment Accuracy and Phylogenetic Inference
Syst Biol, April 1, 2006; 55(2): 314 - 328.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT PUBLISHER SUBSCRIBE ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2009 by Paleontological Society