Inferring node dates from tip dates in fossil Canidae: The importance of tree priors

Nicholas J. Matzke*, April Wright

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    71 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Tip-dating methods are becoming popular alternativesto traditional node calibration approaches for building time-scaled phylogenetic trees, but questions remain about their application to empirical datasets. We compared the performance of the most popular methods against a dated tree of fossil Canidae derived from previously published monographs. Using a canid morphology dataset, we performed tip-dating using BEAST v. 2.1.3 and MRBAYES v. 3.2.5. We find that for key nodes (Canis, approx. 3.2 Ma, Caninae approx. 11.7 Ma) a non-mechanistic model using a uniform tree prior produces estimates that are unrealistically old (27.5, 38.9 Ma). Mechanistic models (incorporating lineage birth, death and sampling rates) estimate ages that are closely in line with prior research. We provide a discussion of these two families of models (mechanistic versus non-mechanistic) and their applicability to fossil datasets.

    Original languageEnglish
    Article number20160328
    JournalBiology Letters
    Volume12
    Issue number8
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2016

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Inferring node dates from tip dates in fossil Canidae: The importance of tree priors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this