IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/thpobi/v166y2025icp56-69.html

Inconsistency of parsimony under the multispecies coalescent

Author

Listed:
  • Rickert, Daniel A.
  • Fan, Louis Wai-Tong
  • Hahn, Matthew W.

Abstract

While it is known that parsimony can be statistically inconsistent under certain models of evolution due to high levels of homoplasy, the consistency of parsimony under the multispecies coalescent (MSC) is less well studied. Previous studies have shown the consistency of concatenated parsimony (parsimony applied to concatenated alignments) under the MSC for the rooted 4-taxa case under an infinite-sites model of mutation; on the other hand, other work has also established the inconsistency of concatenated parsimony for the unrooted 6-taxa case. These seemingly contradictory results suggest that concatenated parsimony may fail to be consistent for trees with more than 5 taxa, for all unrooted trees, or for some combination of the two. Here, we present a technique for computing the expected internal branch lengths of gene trees under the MSC. This technique allows us to determine the regions of the parameter space of the species tree under which concatenated parsimony fails for different numbers of taxa, for rooted or unrooted trees. We use our new approach to demonstrate that while parsimony succeeds in the unrooted 5-taxa case, there are regions of statistical inconsistency for concatenated parsimony for rooted 5+-taxa cases and unrooted 6+-taxa cases. Our results therefore suggest that parsimony is not generally dependable under the MSC.

Suggested Citation

  • Rickert, Daniel A. & Fan, Louis Wai-Tong & Hahn, Matthew W., 2025. "Inconsistency of parsimony under the multispecies coalescent," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 56-69.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:thpobi:v:166:y:2025:i:c:p:56-69
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tpb.2025.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040580925000620
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tpb.2025.09.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mehta, Rohan S. & Rosenberg, Noah A., 2019. "The probability of reciprocal monophyly of gene lineages in three and four species," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 133-147.
    2. Roch, Sebastien & Steel, Mike, 2015. "Likelihood-based tree reconstruction on a concatenation of aligned sequence data sets can be statistically inconsistent," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 56-62.
    3. Efromovich Sam & Salter Kubatko Laura, 2008. "Coalescent Time Distributions in Trees of Arbitrary Size," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-30, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Di Nunzio, Antonio & Disanto, Filippo, 2024. "Clade size distribution under neutral evolutionary models," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 93-102.
    2. Degnan, James H. & Rhodes, John A., 2015. "There are no caterpillars in a wicked forest," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 17-23.
    3. Wang Yuancheng & Degnan James H, 2011. "Performance of Matrix Representation with Parsimony for Inferring Species from Gene Trees," Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-39, May.
    4. Ruriko Yoshida & Kenji Fukumizu & Chrysafis Vogiatzis, 2019. "Multilocus phylogenetic analysis with gene tree clustering," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 276(1), pages 293-313, May.
    5. Jewett, Ethan M. & Rosenberg, Noah A., 2014. "Theory and applications of a deterministic approximation to the coalescent model," Theoretical Population Biology, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 14-29.
    6. Nazifa Ahmed Moumi & Badhan Das & Zarin Tasnim Promi & Nishat Anjum Bristy & Md Shamsuzzoha Bayzid, 2019. "Quartet-based inference of cell differentiation trees from ChIP-Seq histone modification data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-25, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:thpobi:v:166:y:2025:i:c:p:56-69. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/theoretical-population-biology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.