Rooting Phylogenies and the Tree of Life While Minimizing Ad Hoc and Auxiliary Assumptions

Gustavo Caetano-Anolles, Arshan Nasir, Kyung Mo Kim, Derek Caetano-Anollés

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Phylogenetic methods unearth evolutionary history when supported by three starting points of reason: (1) the continuity axiom begs the existence of a “model” of evolutionary change, (2) the singularity axiom defines the historical ground plan (phylogeny) in which biological entities (taxa) evolve, and (3) the memory axiom demands identification of biological attributes (characters) with historical information. Axiom consequences are interlinked, making the retrodiction enterprise an endeavor of reciprocal fulfillment. In particular, establishing direction of evolutionary change (character polarization) roots phylogenies and enables testing the existence of historical memory (homology). Unfortunately, rooting phylogenies, especially the “tree of life,” generally follow narratives instead of integrating empirical and theoretical knowledge of retrodictive exploration. This stems mostly from a focus on molecular sequence analysis and uncertainties about rooting methods. Here, we review available rooting criteria, highlighting the need to minimize both ad hoc and auxiliary assumptions, especially argumentative ad hocness. We show that while the outgroup comparison method has been widely adopted, the generality criterion of nesting and additive phylogenetic change embodied in Weston rule offers the most powerful rooting approach. We also propose a change of focus, from phylogenies that describe the evolution of biological systems to those that describe the evolution of parts of those systems. This weakens violation of character independence, helps formalize the generality criterion of rooting, and provides new ways to study the problem of evolution.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEvolutionary Bioinformatics
Volume14
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2018

Fingerprint

Phylogeny
rooting
phylogeny
Biological Evolution
Data storage equipment
phylogenetics
Biological systems
Uncertainty
Sequence Analysis
homology
History
Polarization
polarization
Testing
uncertainty
sequence analysis
methodology
Industry
history
stems

Keywords

  • Character polarization
  • Weston rule
  • ontogenetic criterion
  • outgroup comparison
  • phylogenetic analysis
  • protein structure
  • proteomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Genetics
  • Computer Science Applications

Cite this

Rooting Phylogenies and the Tree of Life While Minimizing Ad Hoc and Auxiliary Assumptions. / Caetano-Anolles, Gustavo; Nasir, Arshan; Kim, Kyung Mo; Caetano-Anollés, Derek.

In: Evolutionary Bioinformatics, Vol. 14, 01.10.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{6795eb1f217d479f9db4c43e3f119df1,
title = "Rooting Phylogenies and the Tree of Life While Minimizing Ad Hoc and Auxiliary Assumptions",
abstract = "Phylogenetic methods unearth evolutionary history when supported by three starting points of reason: (1) the continuity axiom begs the existence of a “model” of evolutionary change, (2) the singularity axiom defines the historical ground plan (phylogeny) in which biological entities (taxa) evolve, and (3) the memory axiom demands identification of biological attributes (characters) with historical information. Axiom consequences are interlinked, making the retrodiction enterprise an endeavor of reciprocal fulfillment. In particular, establishing direction of evolutionary change (character polarization) roots phylogenies and enables testing the existence of historical memory (homology). Unfortunately, rooting phylogenies, especially the “tree of life,” generally follow narratives instead of integrating empirical and theoretical knowledge of retrodictive exploration. This stems mostly from a focus on molecular sequence analysis and uncertainties about rooting methods. Here, we review available rooting criteria, highlighting the need to minimize both ad hoc and auxiliary assumptions, especially argumentative ad hocness. We show that while the outgroup comparison method has been widely adopted, the generality criterion of nesting and additive phylogenetic change embodied in Weston rule offers the most powerful rooting approach. We also propose a change of focus, from phylogenies that describe the evolution of biological systems to those that describe the evolution of parts of those systems. This weakens violation of character independence, helps formalize the generality criterion of rooting, and provides new ways to study the problem of evolution.",
keywords = "Character polarization, Weston rule, ontogenetic criterion, outgroup comparison, phylogenetic analysis, protein structure, proteomes",
author = "Gustavo Caetano-Anolles and Arshan Nasir and Kim, {Kyung Mo} and Derek Caetano-Anoll{\'e}s",
year = "2018",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1176934318805101",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
journal = "Evolutionary Bioinformatics",
issn = "1176-9343",
publisher = "Libertas Academica Ltd.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rooting Phylogenies and the Tree of Life While Minimizing Ad Hoc and Auxiliary Assumptions

AU - Caetano-Anolles, Gustavo

AU - Nasir, Arshan

AU - Kim, Kyung Mo

AU - Caetano-Anollés, Derek

PY - 2018/10/1

Y1 - 2018/10/1

N2 - Phylogenetic methods unearth evolutionary history when supported by three starting points of reason: (1) the continuity axiom begs the existence of a “model” of evolutionary change, (2) the singularity axiom defines the historical ground plan (phylogeny) in which biological entities (taxa) evolve, and (3) the memory axiom demands identification of biological attributes (characters) with historical information. Axiom consequences are interlinked, making the retrodiction enterprise an endeavor of reciprocal fulfillment. In particular, establishing direction of evolutionary change (character polarization) roots phylogenies and enables testing the existence of historical memory (homology). Unfortunately, rooting phylogenies, especially the “tree of life,” generally follow narratives instead of integrating empirical and theoretical knowledge of retrodictive exploration. This stems mostly from a focus on molecular sequence analysis and uncertainties about rooting methods. Here, we review available rooting criteria, highlighting the need to minimize both ad hoc and auxiliary assumptions, especially argumentative ad hocness. We show that while the outgroup comparison method has been widely adopted, the generality criterion of nesting and additive phylogenetic change embodied in Weston rule offers the most powerful rooting approach. We also propose a change of focus, from phylogenies that describe the evolution of biological systems to those that describe the evolution of parts of those systems. This weakens violation of character independence, helps formalize the generality criterion of rooting, and provides new ways to study the problem of evolution.

AB - Phylogenetic methods unearth evolutionary history when supported by three starting points of reason: (1) the continuity axiom begs the existence of a “model” of evolutionary change, (2) the singularity axiom defines the historical ground plan (phylogeny) in which biological entities (taxa) evolve, and (3) the memory axiom demands identification of biological attributes (characters) with historical information. Axiom consequences are interlinked, making the retrodiction enterprise an endeavor of reciprocal fulfillment. In particular, establishing direction of evolutionary change (character polarization) roots phylogenies and enables testing the existence of historical memory (homology). Unfortunately, rooting phylogenies, especially the “tree of life,” generally follow narratives instead of integrating empirical and theoretical knowledge of retrodictive exploration. This stems mostly from a focus on molecular sequence analysis and uncertainties about rooting methods. Here, we review available rooting criteria, highlighting the need to minimize both ad hoc and auxiliary assumptions, especially argumentative ad hocness. We show that while the outgroup comparison method has been widely adopted, the generality criterion of nesting and additive phylogenetic change embodied in Weston rule offers the most powerful rooting approach. We also propose a change of focus, from phylogenies that describe the evolution of biological systems to those that describe the evolution of parts of those systems. This weakens violation of character independence, helps formalize the generality criterion of rooting, and provides new ways to study the problem of evolution.

KW - Character polarization

KW - Weston rule

KW - ontogenetic criterion

KW - outgroup comparison

KW - phylogenetic analysis

KW - protein structure

KW - proteomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060297414&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060297414&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1176934318805101

DO - 10.1177/1176934318805101

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85060297414

VL - 14

JO - Evolutionary Bioinformatics

JF - Evolutionary Bioinformatics

SN - 1176-9343

ER -