Parallel recognition of idealised line characters

Summary The aim is to design a machine which is able to learn a number of idealised characters and to recognise them, irrespective of their size, position and context on an infinite retina. If the number of characters which such a machine can possibly learn to recognise is astronomical, it is not practical to use separate templates for every possible character. It is more economical to use, instead, templates for various parts, called features, of characters. In recognising a number of characters simultaneously, without scanning, the question arises of how to tell which feature belongs to which character of figure on the retina. In particular, if a given character is not present but all its features are included in nonsense figures simultaneously present on the retina then the machine must not indicate the presence of the given character. The technique which overcomes this difficulty employs overlapping features which must be mutually consistent for recognition. This consistency technique is assessed by comparison with a more conventional technique, and the work is restricted to closed line characters which are not subject to deformations or mutilations.     

Are Polyphaga (Coleoptera) really a basal neopteran lineage – a reply to Kazantsev

In a study on the mandible and mandibular articulation of larvae of the lycid genus Platerodrilus Kazantsev proposes a phylogenetic scheme with Polyphaga as a basal group of Neoptera and Lycidae as a basal group within Polyphaga. Here we point out different problems with his interpretation. The taxon sampling was not sufficient. The characters of endopterygote larvae cannot be compared to characters of adults in a phylogenetic context. The neotenic characters of female and adult male Lycidae are not sufficiently taken into account. A phylogenetic hypothesis should be based on multiple character systems and all available data must be considered. Kazantsev based his conclusions on a single isolated character complex. His hypothesis is in deep conflict with a phylogeny based on the molecular data, which clearly show that Lycidae are nested within Elateroidea. The molecular and morphological evidence also implies that females are aberrant neotenic forms and by no means ‘primitive’. Kazantsev's hypothesis is problematic because the presented data are insufficient and the character evaluation is not based on a numerical analysis.     

A general approach to proving the minimality of phylogenetic trees illustrated by an example with a set of 23 vertebrates

Summary We have recently described a method of building phylogenetic trees and have outlined an approach for proving whether a particular tree is optimal for the data used. In this paper we describe in detail the method of establishing lower bounds on the length of a minimal tree by partitioning the data set into subsets. All characters that could be involved in duplications in the data are paired with all other such characters. A matching algorithm is then used to obtain the pairing of characters that reveals the most duplications in the data. This matching may still not account for all nucleotide substitutions on the tree. The structure of the tree is then used to help select subsets of three or more. characters until the lower bound found by partitioning is equal to the length of the tree. The tree must then be a minimal tree since no tree can exist with a length less than that of the lower bound.The method is demonstrated using a set of 23 vertebrate cytochrome c sequences with the criterion of minimizing the total number of nucleotide substitutions. There are 131130 7045768798 9603440625 topologically distinct trees that can be constructed from this data set. The method described in this paper does identify 144 minimal tree variants. The method is general in the sense that it can be used for other data and other criteria of length. It need not however always be possible to prove a tree minimal but the method will give an upper and lower bound on the length of minimal trees.     

Evolutionary theory and systematics: relationships between process and patterns

The relevance of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis to the foundations of taxonomy (the construction of groups, both taxa and phyla) is reexamined. The nondimensional biological species concept, and not the multidimensional, taxonomic, species notion which is based on it, represents a culmination of an evolutionary understanding. It demonstrates how established evolutionary mechanisms acting on populations of sexually reproducing organisms provide the testable ontological basis of the species category. We question the ontology and epistemology of the phylogenetic or evolutionary species concept, and find it to be a fundamentally untenable one. We argue that at best, the phylogenetic species is a taxonomic species notion which is not a theoretical concept, and therefore should not serve as foundation for taxonomic theory in general, phylogenetics, and macroevolutionary reconstruction in particular. Although both evolutionary systematists and cladists are phylogeneticists, the reconstruction of the history of life is fundamentally different in these two approaches. We maintain that all method, including taxonomic ones, must fall out of well corroborated theory. In the case of taxonomic methodology the theoretical base must be evolutionary. The axiomatic assumptions that all phena, living and fossil, must be holophyletic taxa (species, and above), resulting from splitting events, and subsequently that evaluation of evolutionary change must be based on a taxic perspective codified by the Hennig ian taxonomic species notion, are not testable premises. We discuss the relationship between some biologically, and therefore taxonomically, significant patterns in nature, and the process dependence of these patterns. Process-free establishment of deductively tested “genealogies” is a contradiction in terms; it is impossible to “recover” phylogenetic patterns without the investment of causal and processual explanations of characters to establish well tested taxonomic properties of these (such as homologies, apomorphies, synapomorphies, or transformation series). Phylogenies of either characters or of taxa are historical-narrative explanations (H-N Es), based on both inductively formulated hypotheses and tested against objective, empirical evidence. We further discuss why construction of a “genealogy”, the alleged framework for “evolutionary reconstruction”, based on a taxic, cladistic outgroup comparison and a posteriori weighting of characters is circular. We define how the procedure called null-group comparison leads to the noncircular testing of the taxonomic properties of characters against which the group phylogenies must be tested. This is the only valid rooting procedure for either character or taxon evolution. While the Hennig -principle is obviously a sound deduction from the theory of descent, cladistic reconstruction of evolutionary history itself lacks a valid methodology for testing transformation hypotheses of both characters and species. We discuss why the paleontological method is part of comparative biology with a critical time dimension ana why we believe that an “ontogenetic method” is not valid. In our view, a merger of exclusive (causal and interactive, but best described as levels of organization) and inclusive (classificatory) hierarchies has not been accomplished by a taxic scheme of evolution advocated by some. Transformational change by its very nature is not classifiable in an inclusive hierarchy, and therefore no classification can fully reflect the causal and interactive chains of events constituting phylogeny, without ignoring and contradicting large areas of corroborated evolutionary theory. Attempts to equate progressive evolutionary change with taxic schemes by Haeckel were fundamentally flawed. His ideas found 19th century expression in a taxic perception of the evolutionary process (“phylogenesis”), a merger of typology, hierarchic and taxic notions of progress, all rooted in an ontogenetic view of phylogeny. The modern schemes of genealogical hierarchies, based on punctuation and a notion of “species” individuality, have yet to demonstrate that they hold promise beyond the Haeckel ian view of progressive evolution.     

CHARACTER REMOVAL AS A MEANS FOR ASSESSING STABILITY OF CLADES

Abstract— The stability of each clade resolved by a data set can be assessed as the minimum number of characters that, when removed, cause resolution of the clade to be lost; a clade is regarded as having been lost when it does occur in the strict consensus tree. The clade stability index (CSI) is the ratio of this minimum number of characters to the number of informative characters in the data set. The CSI of a clade can range from 0 (absence from the consensus tree of the complete data set) to 1 (all informative characters must be removed for the clade to fail to be resolved). Minimum character removal scores are discoverable by a procedure known as successive character removal, in which separate cladistic analyses are conducted of all possible data sets derived by the removal of individual characters and character combinations of successively increasing number.     

GENETIC ANALYSIS OF DEVELOPMENTAL MECHANISMS IN HYDRA VII. STATISTICAL ANALYSES OF DEVELOPMENTAL-MORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERS AND CELLULAR COMPOSITIONS

Various strains belonging to Hydra magnipapillata are examined for their developmental-morphological characters and relative abundance of the six basic types of cells, and the results are statistically analysed.
Significant correlations are found between various (including seeming unrelated) characters. For example, budding rate, bud developmental rate and polyp size, which in theory can be all regulated by independent mechanisms, show strong correlations with each other. This suggests that the underlying mechanisms regulating these characters must be closely related to each other.
Similar significant coerelations are also found between the relative abundance of various cell types, but not between the developmental-morphological characters and the cellular composition. The significance of these findings are discussed.     

TAXIMETRICS AS APPLIED TO THE GENUS LITHOPHRAGMA (SAXIFRAGACEAE)

A taximetric analysis of Lithophragma, a genus endemic to North America containing 10 taxa, reveals a close similarity to the taxonomy proposed by the author in a recent monograph using the traditional intuitive approach. The taximetric method is based on a neo-Adansonian approach utilizing the same characters used in the intuitive study, but arbitrarily giving equal weight to all unit characters. A total of 29 unit characters was employed and although this is fewer than is considered necessary by most taximetrists to ensure reproducible results, the analysis is restricted to but a single small genus. The number of unit characters could be greatly increased by the inclusion of generic characters; however, such characters would be merely redundant and positive. A rearranged similarity matrix and dendogram are included. The conclusion is reached that taximetrics may help place plant taxonomy on an objective basis as is classification in such disciplines as physics and chemistry. Its application, however, must await extensive documentation of plant taxa on a broad basis.     

Comparative osteology and phylogenetic systematics of fossil and living bony-tongue fishes (Actinopterygii, Teleostei, Osteoglossomorpha)

Several recent studies using analyses of morphological characters have addressed the interrelationships of Osteoglossomorpha, a group that sometimes is considered the living sister group of all other living teleosts. Many characters used in these studies were found to be poorly defined, to be coded incorrectly or illogically, or to display more variation than was described. The goal of this study is to address these concerns and contribute generally to knowledge of the morphology and systematic relationships of osteoglossomorphs. Analysis of 72 characters (65 informative) scored for 20 genera resulted in two most parsimonious cladograms (171 steps, CI = 0.6433, CI = 0.6139 excluding uninformative characters, HI = 0.3977, HI = 0.3861 excluding uninformative characters; RI = 0.7782; RC = 0.5006). Osteoglossomorpha is supported by both synapomorphies and homoplasies, although its monophyly was not truly tested in this analysis (only a single outgroup, Elops , was included in the analysis). The only difference in the topologies of these cladograms is in the position of ?Lycoptera (recovered as either the sister group of all other osteoglossomorphs sampled or of ?Eohiodon +Hiodon ). ?Ostariostoma is recovered as the sister group of all non‐hiodontiform osteoglossomorphs. Mormyrids are the sister group of notopterids + osteoglossids. This clade has not been found in other recent analyses. Mormyrids and notopterids usually are considered more closely related to each other than to any other group; characters not included here support this relationship and future consideration of these characters must be made. Although almost completely dichotomous, many nodes of the resulting trees lack rigorous support. For example, ?Palaeonotopterus is interpreted as the sister group of all mormyrids sampled, although for this taxon only 22% of characters could be scored. © 2003 The Linnean Society of London. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society , 2003, 137 , 1?100.     

Evolution of the Vertebrate Central Nervous System: Patterns and Processes

AS brains do not fossilize, most proposed phylogenetic sequencesfor central nervous system characters must be based on the patternsof variation of those characters in living organisms. Similarly,hypotheses regarding how brains change through time, and theevolutionary processes that produce these changes, are ultimatelybased on the character patterns recognized. It is critical inthese analyses to distinguish between homologous and homoplasouscharacters if errors in the reconstruction and interpretationof phylogenies are to be minimized. Definitions of homologyand homoplasy are reviewed, as are the concepts that bear ontheir application. Cladistic definitions are adopted, and criteriafor distinguishing homologous from homoplasous characters arediscussed. Analysis of a number of CNS characters that are usuallyassumed to be homologous reveals that homoplasous charactersappear among them. As in other organ systems, homoplasous charactersare actually common. A number of previous hypotheses regardingCNS evolution are reviewed in the context of new data on neuralconnections and their cladistic analysis. Some of these hypothesesmay be falsified by a cladistic treatment of CNS characters,whereas sufficient data do not exist to evaluate others.     

Radical instability and spurious branch support by likelihood when applied to matrices with non-random distributions of missing data

Non-random distributions of missing data are a general problem for likelihood-based statistical analyses, including those in a phylogenetic context. Extensive non-randomly distributed missing data are particularly problematic in supermatrix analyses that include many terminals and/or loci. It has been widely reported that missing data can lead to loss of resolution, but only very rarely create misleading or otherwise unsupported results in a parsimony context. Yet this does not hold for all parametric-based analyses because of their assumption of homogeneity across characters and lineages, which can lead to both long-branch attraction and long-branch repulsion. Contrived examples were used to demonstrate that non-random distributions of missing data, even without rate heterogeneity among characters and a well fitting model, can provide misleading likelihood-based topologies and branch-support values that are radically unstable based on slight modifications to character sampling. The same can occur despite complete absence of parsimony-informative characters. Otherwise unsupported resolution and high branch support for these clades were found to occur frequently in 22 empirical examples derived from a published supermatrix. Partitioning characters based on the distribution of missing data helped to decrease, but did not eliminate, these artifacts. These artifacts were exacerbated by low quality tree searches, particularly when holding only a single optimal tree that must be fully resolved.     

THE NATURE OF CLADISTIC DATA

Abstract— Cladistic data are the characters of organisms. Character is defined as a feature that can be evaluated as a variable with two or more mutually exclusive and ordered states. Cladistic characters must be treated as multistate variables, and coded as sequential numbers or in additive binary fashion. Any other interpretation and handling of cladistic data will introduce error into analysis. Character states cannot be treated independently as present or absent, i.e., as nominal variables, because redundancy is introduced into the data and information content is sacrificed. Non-additive binary coding demonstrates that treating cladistic variables as nominal data will lead to multiple, equally parsimonious solutions. Defining characters found universally in a group of organisms, but unknown outside those organisms have no alternative state that can be designated as absent. Absence, however, is valid as a character state if it can be shown to be apomorphic. When two or more character states occur within a taxon, that taxon must be coded as having an unknown state for that character, or the taxon must be split in two or more taxa. Continuously varying quantitative data are not suitable for cladistic analysis because there is no justifiable basis for recognizing discrete states among them. Quantitative data are questionable even when they exhibit mutually exclusive states because the states can be interpreted only in reference to an archetype, i.e., as implied homologies not subject to test.     

Phylogenetics and Ecology: As Many Characters as Possible Should Be Included in the Cladistic Analysis1

As many data as possible must be included in any scientific analysis, provided that they follow the logical principles on which this analysis is based. Phylogenetic analysis is based on the basic principle of evolution, i.e., descent with modification. Consequently, ecological characters or any other nontraditional characters must be included in phylogenetic analyses, provided that they can plausibly be postulated heritable. The claim of Zrzavý (1997, Oikos 80, 186–192) or Luckow and Bruneau (1997, Cladistics 13, 145–151) that any character of interest should be included in the analysis is thus inaccurate. Many characters, broadly defined or extrinsic (such as distribution areas), cannot be considered as actually heritable. It is argued that we should better care for the precise definition and properties of characters of interest than decide a priori to include them in any case in the analysis. The symmetrical claim of de Queiroz (1996, Am. Nat. 148, 700–708) that some characters of interest should better be excluded from analyses to reconstruct their history is similarly inaccurate. If they match the logical principles of phylogenetic analysis, there is no acceptable reason to exclude them. The different statistical testing strategies of Zrzavý (1997) and de Queiroz (1996) aimed at justifying inclusion versus exclusion of characters are ill‐conceived, leading respectively to Type II and Type I errors. It is argued that phylogenetic analyses should not be constrained by testing strategies that are downstream of the logical principles of phylogenetics. Excluding characters and mapping them on an independent phylogeny produces a particular and suboptimal kind of secondary homology, the use of which can be justified only for preliminary studies dealing with broadly defined characters.     

The role of parsimony,outgroup analysis,and theory of evolution in phylogenetic systematics

It is argued that both the principle of parsimony and the theory of evolution, especially that of natural selection, are essential analytical tools in phylogenetic systematics, whereas the widely used outgroup analysis is completely useless and may even be misleading. In any systematic analysis, two types of patterns of characters and character states must be discriminated which are referred to as completely and incompletely resolved. In the former, all known species are presented in which the characters and their states studied occur, whereas in the latter this is not the case. Dependent on its structure, a pattern of characters and their states may be explained by either a unique or by various conflicting, equally most parsimonious hypotheses of relationships. The so-called permutation method is introduced which facilitates finding the conflicting, equally most parsimonious hypotheses of relationships. The utility of the principle of parsimony is limited by the uncertainty as to whether its application in systematics must refer to the minimum number of steps needed to explain a pattern of characterts and their states most parsimoniously or to the minimum number of evolutionary events assumed to have caused these steps. Although these numbers may differ, the former is usually preferred for simplicity. The types of outgroup analysis are shown to exist which are termed parsimony analysis based on test samples and cladistic type of outgroup analysis. Essentially, the former is used for analysing incompletely resolved patterns of characters and their states, the latter for analysing completely resolved ones. Both types are shown to be completely useless for rejecting even one of various conflicting, equally most parsimonious hypotheses of relationships. According to contemporary knowledge, this task can be accomplished only by employing the theory of evolution (including the theory of natural selection). But even then, many phylogenetic-systematic problems will remain unsolved. In such cases, arbitrary algorithms like those offered by phenetics can at best offer pseudosolutions to open problems. Despite its limitations, phylogenetic systematics is superior to any kind of aphylogenetic systematics (transformed cladistics included) in approaching a (not: the) “general reference system” of organisms.     

Integration, phylogeny, and the hominid cranial base

Basicranial features were examined in catarrhine primates and early hominids in order to demonstrate how information about morphological integration can be incorporated into phylogenetic analysis. Hypotheses purporting to explain the functional and structural relationships of basicranial characters were tested using factor analysis. Characters found to be functionally or structurally related to each other were then further examined in order to determine whether there was evidence that they were phylogenetically independent. If phylogenetic independence could not be demonstrated, then the characters were presumed to be integrated and were grouped into a complex. That complex was then treated as if it were a single character for the purposes of cladistic analysis. Factor analysis revealed that five basicranial features may be structurally related to relative brain size in hominoids. Depending on how one defines phylogenetic independence, as few as two, or as many as all of those characters might be morphologically integrated. A cladistic analysis of early hominids based on basicranial features revealed that the use of integrated complexes had a substantial effect on the phylogenetic position of Australopithecus africanus, a species whose relationships are poorly resolved. Moreover, the use of complexes also had an effect on reanalyses of certain published cladistic data sets, implying that those studies might have been biased by patterns of basicranial integration. These results demonstrate that patterns of morphological integration need to be considered carefully in all morphology-based cladistic analyses, regardless of taxon or anatomical focus. However, an important caveat is that the functional and structural hypotheses tested here predicted much higher degrees of integration than were observed. This result warns strongly that hypotheses of integration must be tested before they can be adequately employed in phylogenetic analysis. The uncritical acceptance of an untested hypothesis of integration is likely to be as disruptive to a cladistic analysis as when integration is ignored.     

Artifacts of Coding Amino Acids and Other Composite Characters for Phylogenetic Analysis

A phylogenetic analysis can be no better than the characters on which it is based. Just as it is inappropriate to code character states of individual characters as separate presence/absence characters, it is inappropriate to combine independent characters because not all information in the data is being utilized. Composite characters link otherwise discernible states from different characters together to form new character states. There are two related problems with this coding. First, there is a loss of hierarchic information between the reductive and composite characters when unordered states are used. Second, the linking of separate characters that occurs during the construction of composite character states can create putative synapomorphies that were not present in the separate characters. For amino acid characters, the problem may occur whenever more than one position of a codon is variable among the terminals sampled. Groups that are resolved as paraphyletic with reductive coding may be resolved as monophyletic with composite coding. The artificial character states indicated by the amino acid characters are unlikely to be congruent with the true gene tree.     

A Fundamental Problem with Amino-Acid-Sequence Characters for Phylogenetic Analyses

Protein-coding genes may be analyzed in phylogenetic analyses using nucleotide-sequence characters and/or amino-acid-sequence characters. Although amino-acid-sequence characters "correct" for saturation (parallelism), amino-acid-sequence characters are subject to convergence and ignore phylogenetically informative variation. When all nucleotide-sequence characters have a consistency index of 1, characters coded using the amino acid sequence may have a consistency index of less than 1. The reason for this is that most amino acids are specified by more than one codon. If two different codons that both code for the same amino acid are derived independent of one another in divergent lineages, nucleotide-sequence characters may not be homoplasious when amino-acid-sequence characters may be homoplasious. Not only may amino-acid-sequence characters support groupings that are not supported by nucleotide-sequence characters, they may support contradictory groupings. Because this convergence is a problem of character delimitation, it affects the results of all tree-construction methods (maximum likelihood, neighbor joining, parsimony, etc.). In effect, coding amino-acid-sequence characters instead of nucleotide-sequence characters putatively corrects for saturation and definitely causes a convergence problem. An empirical example from the Mhc locus is given.     

Phylogeny,natural groups and nemertean classification

Contemporary practice in the classification of nemerteans (phylum Nemertea) is critically discussed. It is argued that basing higher taxa on the existence of a unique combination of characters in a species (or genus) is unlikely to lead to monophyletic taxa, and that this approach should be abandoned in favour of a classification based on explicit hypotheses of phylogeny. These hypotheses should be based on all available characters and characters should not be excluded before the analysis. The classification should be based on a reconstruction of the phylogeny and reflect this phylogeny in an unambiquous way.     

THE EFFECT OF ORDERED CHARACTERS ON PHYLOGENETIC RECONSTRUCTION

Abstract Morphological structures are likely to undergo more than a single change during the course of evolution. As a result, multistate characters are common in systematic studies and must be dealt with. Particularly interesting is the question of whether or not multistate characters should be treated as ordered (additive) or unordered (non-additive). In accepting a particular hypothesis of order, numerous others are necessarily rejected. We review some of the criteria often used to order character states and the underlying assumptions inherent in these criteria.
The effects that ordered multistate characters can have on phylogenetic reconstruction are examined using 27 data sets. It has been suggested that hypotheses of character state order are more informative then hypotheses of unorder and may restrict the number of equally parsimonious trees as well as increase tree resolution. Our results indicate that ordered characters can produce more, equal or less equally parsimonious trees and can increase, decrease or have no effect on tree resolution. The effect on tree resolution can be a simple gain in resolution or a dramatic change in sister-taxa relationships. In cases where several outgroups are included in the data matrix, hypotheses of order can change character polarities by altering outgroup topology. Ordered characters result in a different topology from unordered characters only when the hierarchy of the cladogram disagrees with the investigator's a priori hypothesis of order. If the best criterion for assessing character evolution is congruence with other characters, the practice of ordering multistate characters is inappropriate.     

THE FIDELITY OF THE FOSSIL RECORD: THE IMPROBABILITY OF PRESERVATION

Abstract:  The fidelity of the fossil record reflects how accurately it preserves the history of life. Since Darwin's time any mismatch between our theories and the fossil record has been attributed to the imperfections of the record. For over a century scarcity of gradual evolutionary trends was explained in this way until the punctuated equilibrium model was proposed. A null hypothesis that all morphological patterns in the fossil record are unbiased random walks can be rejected because it predicts far more apparent trends than exist. Current best estimates suggest that trends occur in at most 5% of characters. When an organism dies either it becomes fossilized or it doesn't. To be confident a species has not been preserved the probability against preservation must be significantly larger than the total number of individuals of that species that ever existed. For skeletized species preservation was the norm not the exception. Nevertheless, fossils must then avoid subsequent destruction and be discovered to be useful.     

Distinguishing heat from light in debate over controversial fossils

Fossil organisms offer our only direct insight into how the distinctive body plans of extant organisms were assembled. However, realizing the potential evolutionary significance of fossils can be hampered by controversy over their interpretation. Here, as a guide to evaluating palaeontological debates, we outline the process and pitfalls of fossil interpretation. The physical remains of controversial fossils should be reconstructed before interpreting homologies, and choice of interpretative model should be explicit and justified. Extinct taxa lack characters diagnostic of extant clades because the characters had not yet evolved, because of secondary loss, or because they have rotted away. The latter, if not taken into account, will lead to the spurious assignment of fossils to basally branching clades. Conflicting interpretations of fossils can often be resolved by considering all the steps in the process of anatomical analysis and phylogenetic placement, although we must accept that some fossil organisms are simply too incompletely preserved for their evolutionary significance to be realized.