skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Integrating Fossil Observations Into Phylogenetics Using the Fossilized Birth–Death Model
Over the past decade, a new set of methods for estimating dated trees has emerged. Originally referred to as the fossilized birth–death (FBD) process, this single model has expanded to a family of models that allows researchers to coestimate evolutionary parameters (e.g., diversification, sampling) and patterns alongside divergence times for a variety of applications from paleobiology to real-time epidemiology. We provide an overview of this family of models. We explore the ways in which these models correspond to methods in quantitative paleobiology, as the FBD process provides a framework through which neontological and paleontological approaches to phylogenetics and macroevolution can be unified. We also provide an overview of challenges associated with applying FBD models, particularly with an eye toward the fossil record. We conclude this review by discussing several exciting avenues for the inclusion of fossil data in phylogenetic analyses.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2045842
PAR ID:
10428438
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics
Volume:
53
Issue:
1
ISSN:
1543-592X
Page Range / eLocation ID:
251 to 273
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; (, Paleobiology)
    Abstract Estimating speciation and extinction rates is essential for understanding past and present biodiversity, but is challenging given the incompleteness of the rock and fossil records. Interest in this topic has led to a divergent suite of independent methods—paleontological estimates based on sampled stratigraphic ranges and phylogenetic estimates based on the observed branching times in a given phylogeny of living species. The fossilized birth–death (FBD) process is a model that explicitly recognizes that the branching events in a phylogenetic tree and sampled fossils were generated by the same underlying diversification process. A crucial advantage of this model is that it incorporates the possibility that some species may never be sampled. Here, we present an FBD model that estimates tree-wide diversification rates from stratigraphic range data when the underlying phylogeny of the fossil taxa may be unknown. The model can be applied when only occurrence data for taxonomically identified fossils are available, but still accounts for the incomplete phylogenetic structure of the data. We tested this new model using simulations and focused on how inferences are impacted by incomplete fossil recovery. We compared our approach with a phylogenetic model that does not incorporate incomplete species sampling and to three fossil-based alternatives for estimating diversification rates, including the widely implemented boundary-crosser and three-timer methods. The results of our simulations demonstrate that estimates under the FBD model are robust and more accurate than the alternative methods, particularly when fossil data are sparse, as the FBD model incorporates incomplete species sampling explicitly. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; (, Palaeontology)
    Abstract The fossilized birth–death (FBD) process provides an ideal model for inferring phylogenies from both extant and fossil taxa. Using this approach, fossils are directly integrated into the tree, leading to a statistically coherent prior on divergence times. Since fossils are typically not associated with molecular sequences, additional information is required to place fossils in the tree. We use simulations to evaluate two different approaches to handling fossil placement in FBD analyses: using topological constraints, where the user specifies monophyletic clades based on established taxonomy, or using total‐evidence analyses, which use a morphological data matrix in addition to the molecular alignment. We also explore how rate variation in fossil recovery or diversification rates impacts these approaches. We find that the extant topology is well recovered under all methods of fossil placement. Divergence times are similarly well recovered across all methods, with the exception of constraints which contain errors. We see similar patterns in datasets which include rate variation, however, relative errors in extant divergence times increase when more variation is included in the dataset, for all approaches using topological constraints, and particularly for constraints with errors. Finally, we show that trees recovered under the FBD model are more accurate than those estimated using non‐time calibrated inference. Overall, we show that both fossil placement approaches are reliable even when including uncertainty. Our results underscore the importance of core taxonomic research, including morphological data collection and species descriptions, irrespective of the approach to handling phylogenetic uncertainty using the FBD process. 
    more » « less
  3. ; (, Systematic Biology)
    Paleontological and neontological systematics seek to answer evolutionary questions with different datasets. Phylogenies inferred for combined extant and extinct taxa provide novel insights into the evolutionary history of life. Primates have an extensive, diverse fossil record and molecular data for living and extinct taxa are rapidly becoming available. We used two models to infer the phylogeny and divergence times for living and fossil primates, the tip-dating (TD) and fossilized birth-death process (FBD). We collected new morphological data, especially on the living and extinct endemic lemurs of Madagascar. We combined the morphological data with published DNA sequences to infer near-complete (88% of lemurs) time-calibrated phylogenies. The results suggest that primates originated around the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary, slightly earlier than indicated by the fossil record and later than previously inferred from molecular data alone. We infer novel relationships among extinct lemurs, and strong support for relationships that were previously unresolved. Dates inferred with TD were significantly older than those inferred with FBD, most likely related to an assumption of a uniform branching process in the TD compared to a birth-death process assumed in the FBD. This is the first study to combine morphological and DNA sequence data from extinct and extant primates to infer evolutionary relationships and divergence times, and our results shed new light on the tempo of lemur evolution and the efficacy of combined phylogenetic analyses. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; (, Open research Europe)
    Phylogenetic estimation is, and has always been, a complex endeavor. Estimating a phylogenetic tree involves evaluating many possible solutions and possible evolutionary histories that could explain a set of observed data, typically by using a model of evolution. Modern statistical methods involve not just the estimation of a tree, but also solutions to more complex models involving fossil record information and other data sources. Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) is a leading method for approximating the posterior distribution of parameters in a mathematical model. It is deployed in all Bayesian phylogenetic tree estimation software. While many researchers use MCMC in phylogenetic analyses, interpreting results and diagnosing problems with MCMC remain vexing issues to many biologists. In this manuscript, we will offer an overview of how MCMC is used in Bayesian phylogenetic inference, with a particular emphasis on complex hierarchical models, such as the fossilized birth-death (FBD) model. We will discuss strategies to diagnose common MCMC problems and troubleshoot difficult analyses, in particular convergence issues. We will show how the study design, the choice of models and priors, but also technical features of the inference tools themselves can all be adjusted to obtain the best results. Finally, we will also discuss the unique challenges created by the incorporation of fossil information in phylogenetic inference, and present tips to address them. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; (, Open Research Europe)
    Phylogenetic estimation is, and has always been, a complex endeavor. Estimating a phylogenetic tree involves evaluating many possible solutions and possible evolutionary histories that could explain a set of observed data, typically by using a model of evolution. Values for all model parameters need to be evaluated as well. Modern statistical methods involve not just the estimation of a tree, but also solutions to more complex models involving fossil record information and other data sources. Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) is a leading method for approximating the posterior distribution of parameters in a mathematical model. It is deployed in all Bayesian phylogenetic tree estimation software. While many researchers use MCMC in phylogenetic analyses, interpreting results and diagnosing problems with MCMC remain vexing issues to many biologists. In this manuscript, we will offer an overview of how MCMC is used in Bayesian phylogenetic inference, with a particular emphasis on complex hierarchical models, such as the fossilized birth-death (FBD) model. We will discuss strategies to diagnose common MCMC problems and troubleshoot difficult analyses, in particular convergence issues. We will show how the study design, the choice of models and priors, but also technical features of the inference tools themselves can all be adjusted to obtain the best results. Finally, we will also discuss the unique challenges created by the incorporation of fossil information in phylogenetic inference, and present tips to address them. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email