Lachance MA. Phylogenies in yeast species descriptions: in defense of neighbor-joining.
Yeast 2022;
39:513-520. [PMID:
36065479 DOI:
10.1002/yea.3812]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/15/2022] [Revised: 08/08/2022] [Accepted: 08/23/2022] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
The neighbor-joining (NJ) method of tree inference is examined, with special attention to its use in yeast species descriptions. How the often-vilified method works is often misunderstood. More importantly, given the right kind of data, its output is a phylogram that illustrates a hypothetical phylogeny that is just as credible as that obtained by any other method. And as with any other method, the result is greatly affected by sampling intensity, particularly the number of aligned positions used for analysis. I address various allegations, including the claim that the method is phenetic, and therefore not phylogenetic. I argue that NJ is the most suitable tree inference method to use in yeast species descriptions, primarily because it is best at visually preserving the extent of sequence divergence between close relatives, which continues to be the primary criterion for yeast species delineation. The relevance of bootstraps in application of the phylogenetic species concept is discussed. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Collapse