Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Systematic Biologyarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
Systematic Biology
Article
Data sources: UnpayWall
Systematic Biology
Article . 2016 . Peer-reviewed
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Species Delimitation with Gene Flow

Authors: Ariadna E. Morales; Nathan D. Jackson; Brian C. O'Meara; Bryan C. Carstens;

Species Delimitation with Gene Flow

Abstract

Species are commonly thought to be evolutionarily independent in a way that populations within a species are not. In recent years, studies that seek to identify evolutionarily independent lineages (i.e., to delimit species) using genetic data have typically adopted multispecies coalescent approaches that assume that evolutionary independence is formed by the differential sorting of ancestral alleles due to genetic drift. However, gene flow appears to be common among populations and nascent species, and while this process may inhibit lineage divergence (and thus independence), it is usually not explicitly considered when delimiting species. In this article, we apply Phylogeographic Inference using Approximate Likelihoods (PHRAPL), a recently described method for phylogeographic model selection, to species delimitation. We describe an approach to delimiting species using PHRAPL that attempts to account for both genetic drift and gene flow, and we compare the method's performance to that of a popular delimitation approach (BPP) using both simulated and empirical datasets. PHRAPL generally infers the correct demographic-delimitation model when the generating model includes gene flow between taxa, given a sufficient amount of data. When the generating model includes only isolation in the recent past, PHRAPL will in some cases fail to differentiate between gene flow and divergence, leading to model misspecification. Nevertheless, the explicit consideration of gene flow by PHRAPL is an important complement to existing delimitation approaches, particularly in systems where gene flow is likely important. [approximate likelihoods; coalescent simulations; genealogical divergence index; Homo sapiens; isolation-with-migration; multispecies coalescent; Sarracenia; Scincella.].

Related Organizations
Keywords

Gene Flow, Phylogeography, Species Specificity, Genetic Speciation, Bayes Theorem, Computer Simulation, Classification, Models, Biological, Phylogeny

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    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).
    157
    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 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 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
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).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
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.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
157
Top 1%
Top 10%
Top 1%
bronze