Lower Statistical Support with Larger Data Sets: Insights from the Ochrophyta Radiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is commonly assumed that increasing the number of characters has the potential to resolve evolutionary radiations. Here, we studied photosynthetic stramenopiles (Ochrophyta) using alignments of heterogeneous origin mitochondrion, plastid, and nucleus. Surprisingly while statistical support for the relationships between the six major Ochrophyta lineages increases when comparing the mitochondrion (6,762 sites) and plastid (21,692 sites) trees, it decreases in the nuclear (209,105 sites) tree. Statistical support is not simply related to the data set size but also to the quantity of phylogenetic signal available at each position and our ability to extract it. Here, we show that this ability for current phylogenetic methods is limited, because conflicting results were obtained when varying taxon sampling. Even though the use of a better fitting model improved signal extraction and reduced the observed conflicts, the plastid data set provided higher statistical support for the ochrophyte radiation than the larger nucleus data set. We propose that the higher support observed in the plastid tree is due to an acceleration of the evolutionary rate in one short deep internal branch, implying that more phylogenetic signal per position is available to resolve the Ochrophyta radiation in the plastid than in the nuclear data set. Our work therefore suggests that, in order to resolve radiations, beyond the obvious use of data sets with more positions, we need to continue developing models of sequence evolution that better extract the phylogenetic signal and design methods to search for genes/characters that contain more signal specifically for short internal branches.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".