Strongest Evidence Revisited

In response to comments by J. S. Farris (2000, Cladistics 16, 403–410) on the strongest evidence (SE) approach to phylogenetic analysis, I examine the concepts on which it is founded and reevaluate its merits. SE's null model of signal absence in characters is not treated as background knowledge, but as a reference point for evaluating a data set's phylogenetic signal in a tree-specific manner. In simulation tests, the SE methods perform reasonably well; although parsimony is generally more accurate and less biased than SE, SE is distinctly more accurate in some circumstances. Simulations further indicate that jackknifing is often beneficial in both SE and parsimony analyses. Iterative fixation of splits shows promise as an auxiliary procedure for SE and other methods that weight according to apparent homoplasy.