
Bayesian total-evidence dating involves the simultaneous analysis of morphological data from the fossil record and morphological and sequence data from recent organisms, and it accommodates the uncertainty in the placement of fossils while dating the phylogenetic tree. Due to the flexibility of the Bayesian approach, total-evidence dating can also incorporate additional sources of information. Here, we take advantage of this and expand the analysis to include information about fossilization and sampling processes. Our work is based on the recently described fossilized birth–death (FBD) process, which has been used to model speciation, extinction, and fossilization rates that can vary over time in a piecewise manner. So far, sampling of extant and fossil taxa has been assumed to be either complete or uniformly at random, an assumption which is only valid for a minority of data sets. We therefore extend the FBD process to accommodate diversified sampling of extant taxa, which is standard practice in studies of higher-level taxa. We verify the implementation using simulations and apply it to the early radiation of Hymenoptera (wasps, ants, and bees). Previous total-evidence dating analyses of this data set were based on a simple uniform tree prior and dated the initial radiation of extant Hymenoptera to the late Carboniferous (309 Ma). The analyses using the FBD prior under diversified sampling, however, date the radiation to the Triassic and Permian (252 Ma), slightly older than the age of the oldest hymenopteran fossils. By exploring a variety of FBD model assumptions, we show that it is mainly the accommodation of diversified sampling that causes the push toward more recent divergence times. Accounting for diversified sampling thus has the potential to close the long-discussed gap between rocks and clocks. We conclude that the explicit modeling of fossilization and sampling processes can improve divergence time estimates, but only if all important model aspects, including sampling biases, are adequately addressed.
Systematic Biology, 65 (2)
ISSN:1063-5157
ISSN:1076-836X
570, 550, MCMC, Bioinformatics, Evolution, Genetic Speciation, total-evidence dating, Tree prior, 580 Plants (Botany), birth–death process, Total-evidence dating, Models, Biological, Time, Bayesian phylogenetic inference, Animals, Phylogeny, Birth-death process, Relaxed clock, relaxed clock, Fossils, Systems Biology, Bayesian phylogenetic inference; Birth-death process; MCMC; Relaxed clock; Total-evidence dating; Tree prior, Biodiversity, Classification, Hymenoptera, tree prior, birth-death process, 570 Life sciences; biology, 590 Animals (Zoology), Regular Articles
570, 550, MCMC, Bioinformatics, Evolution, Genetic Speciation, total-evidence dating, Tree prior, 580 Plants (Botany), birth–death process, Total-evidence dating, Models, Biological, Time, Bayesian phylogenetic inference, Animals, Phylogeny, Birth-death process, Relaxed clock, relaxed clock, Fossils, Systems Biology, Bayesian phylogenetic inference; Birth-death process; MCMC; Relaxed clock; Total-evidence dating; Tree prior, Biodiversity, Classification, Hymenoptera, tree prior, birth-death process, 570 Life sciences; biology, 590 Animals (Zoology), Regular Articles
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 334 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 0.1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
