comparative methods: using trees to study evolution

41
Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Upload: marjory-bishop

Post on 26-Dec-2015

220 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Page 2: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Some uses for phylogenies

• Character evolution– Ancestral states– Trends and biases– Correlations among characters

• Molecular evolution– Evidence of selection

• “Key innovations”– Diversification rate

Page 3: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Why reconstruct character evolution?

• Can evaluate homology

Page 4: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

How do we know that bat and bird wings are not homologous?

Page 5: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Why reconstruct character evolution?

• Can evaluate homology• Can determine character-state polarity

Page 6: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution
Page 7: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Why reconstruct character evolution?

• Can evaluate homology• Can determine character-state polarity• Can evaluate the “selective regime” when a

character evolved

Page 8: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Was the ancestor bird pollinated when red flowers evolved?

Look at pollinators

Bee to bird poll.

Adaptation supported

Page 9: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Alternative result

Bee to bird poll.

Not an adaptation

Page 10: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

A third possibility

Bee to bird poll.

Consistent with adaptation

Page 11: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Why reconstruct character evolution?

• Can evaluate homology• Can determine character-state polarity• Can evaluate the “selective regime” when a

character evolved• Can recreate ancestral genes/proteins

Page 12: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Dinosaur Rhodopsin

• Chang et al. (MBE 2002)

Page 13: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Character optimization using parsimony

• Pick the reconstruction that minimizes the “cost”

• What do you do if more than one most-parsimonious reconstruction– ACCTRAN/DELTRAN– Consider all

• What character-state weights should you use?

Page 14: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution
Page 15: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Cost-change graph(Ree and Donoghue 1998: Syst. Biol. 47:582-588)

Page 16: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Stability to gain:loss weights

Page 17: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

What gain:loss weight to use?

• If you believe gains are more common (hence weighted less) you will find more gains (and vice versa)

• So how can you use a tree to establish if there is a gain:loss bias?

Page 18: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Wing loss and re-evolution?• Whiting et al.

(Nature 2003)

Page 19: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

A likelihood approach

• Developed (in parallel) by Mark Pagel and Brent Milligan in 1994

• Continuous time Markov model• Select the rate of gains (0->1) and rate of

losses (1->0) that maximizes the likelihood of the data given a sample tree (and branch lengths)

Page 20: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Transition rate matrix

0 1

0 1-q1 q1

1 q2 1-q2

From

To

Page 21: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Logic

• Calculate the likelihood of the data for a given value of q1 and q2

• Modify q1 and q2 to find a pair of values that maximizes the probability of the data

Page 22: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Probabilities summed across all possible ancestral states

1 1 01 0 0 0 1 1 0

00

00

0

00

00

Page 23: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

How much of the likelihood contributed by each state at

each node

Page 24: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

How much of the likelihood contributed by each state at

each node

Page 25: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Are gain and loss rates different?

• Likelihood ratio test– Model 1: gains and losses free to vary

independently– Model 2: gains and losses equal

• How many degrees of freedom?

Page 26: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Ree and Donoghue, 1999

Page 27: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

The likelihood method

• Provides a method for using the data to evaluate gain:loss bias

• Takes account of branch lengths• Still sensitive to taxon sampling

Page 28: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

1 1 01 0 0 0 1 1 0

Suppose this taxon contains 5000 species

Suggests that the rate of losses is low

Page 29: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

1 1 01 0 0 0 1 1 0

Suppose this taxon contains 5000 species

Suggests that the rate of gains is low

Page 30: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

After equalizing the number of species of each type

Page 31: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Correlated evolution

• Look at pairs of traits (where one trait can be an environment)– Body size and range size– Warning coloration and gregariousness– Fleshy fruit and dioecy

• Do these traits evolve non-independently?

Page 32: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Causes of non-independence

• Developmental “connectedness”• Adaptation (Correlated evolution has been

claimed to be the best evidence for evolution by natural selection)

Page 33: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Non-phylogenetic (“tip”) method

• Count species• Do a chi-square test

Green eyes Blue eyes

Pale fur 2 100

Dark fur 150 2

Page 34: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Hypothetical tree

Eyes g b g g b bFur d d p p d p

150 100

Page 35: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Proposed solutions for discrete characters

• Do a chi-square test of changes rather than tip-states (various approaches) - Ridley; Sillen-Tullberg

• Use a Monte Carlo approach to ask if changes of the dependent variable are biased relative to expectations from changes placed on the tree at random - W. Maddison

Page 36: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Non-phylogenetic (“tip”) method

Fleshy Dry

One 10 34

Many 23 62

Page 37: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Maddison test

FleshyBranches

DryBranches

One->Many 3 7

Many.>One 6 2

Probability that this pattern or a more extreme pattern could arise without fruit type affecting seed number is ca. 8%.

Page 38: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Problems with the Maddison test

• Requires one to define dependent and independent characters

• Does not take account of branch-length• Very sensitive to inclusion/exclusion of

species

Page 39: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Maximum likelihood approach(Pagel and Milligan)

0,0 0,1 1,0 1,1

0,0 q12 q13 0

0,1 q21 0 q24

1,0 q31 0 q34

1,1 0 q42 q43

Page 40: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Procedure

• Estimate the set of rates in the q-matrix that maximize the likelihood of the data and calculate that likelihood

• Constrain the matrix so that it represents independence (q12 = q34; q13 = q24; q21 = q43; q31 = q42) and repeat the calculation

• Use a likelihood ratio test to evaluate significance

Page 41: Comparative methods: Using trees to study evolution

Issues to consider

• Rejection of independence does not tell you what kind of non-independence you have

• You need reasonable branch lengths• Sampling matters (if perhaps less than

parsimony)