RESUMO
Simultaneous molecular dating of population and species divergences is essential in many biological investigations, including phylogeography, phylodynamics and species delimitation studies. In these investigations, multiple sequence alignments consist of both intra- and interspecies samples (mixed samples). As a result, the phylogenetic trees contain interspecies, interpopulation and within-population divergences. Bayesian relaxed clock methods are often employed in these analyses, but they assume the same tree prior for both inter- and intraspecies branching processes and require specification of a clock model for branch rates (independent vs. autocorrelated rates models). We evaluated the impact of a single tree prior on Bayesian divergence time estimates by analysing computer-simulated data sets. We also examined the effect of the assumption of independence of evolutionary rate variation among branches when the branch rates are autocorrelated. Bayesian approach with coalescent tree priors generally produced excellent molecular dates and highest posterior densities with high coverage probabilities. We also evaluated the performance of a non-Bayesian method, RelTime, which does not require the specification of a tree prior or a clock model. RelTime's performance was similar to that of the Bayesian approach, suggesting that it is also suitable to analyse data sets containing both populations and species variation when its computational efficiency is needed.
Assuntos
Evolução Molecular , Mamíferos , Modelos Genéticos , Filogenia , Animais , Teorema de Bayes , Simulação por Computador , Reprodutibilidade dos TestesRESUMO
The conventional wisdom in molecular evolution is to apply parameter-rich models of nucleotide and amino acid substitutions for estimating divergence times. However, the actual extent of the difference between time estimates produced by highly complex models compared with those from simple models is yet to be quantified for contemporary data sets that frequently contain sequences from many species and genes. In a reanalysis of many large multispecies alignments from diverse groups of taxa, we found that the use of the simplest models can produce divergence time estimates and credibility intervals similar to those obtained from the complex models applied in the original studies. This result is surprising because the use of simple models underestimates sequence divergence for all the data sets analyzed. We found three fundamental reasons for the observed robustness of time estimates to model complexity in many practical data sets. First, the estimates of branch lengths and node-to-tip distances under the simplest model show an approximately linear relationship with those produced by using the most complex models applied on data sets with many sequences. Second, relaxed clock methods automatically adjust rates on branches that experience considerable underestimation of sequence divergences, resulting in time estimates that are similar to those from complex models. And, third, the inclusion of even a few good calibrations in an analysis can reduce the difference in time estimates from simple and complex models. The robustness of time estimates to model complexity in these empirical data analyses is encouraging, because all phylogenomics studies use statistical models that are oversimplified descriptions of actual evolutionary substitution processes.