A review of long‐branch attraction

By J. Bergsten. Cladistics, 2005

1,080 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Molecular Biology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/298f0b0dc0c0c2d961379d9c990cc885c252660a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

1. N. Wahlberg
2. S. Nylin
3. L. Bohs
4. Terri L. Weese
5. Jonas J. Astrin
6. D. Hillis
7. Tracy A. Heath
8. Richard H. Ree

In Molecular Biology

1. Terri L. Weese
2. L. Bohs
3. Jonas J. Astrin
4. C. Moreau
5. André Victor Lucci Freitas
6. B. E. Rubin
7. D. Hillis
8. N. Wahlberg

Citations in the corpus

• Phylogeny in cryptic weevils: molecules, morphology and new genera of western Palaearctic Cryptorhynchinae (Coleoptera : Curculionidae) (2008, background): “…not recovered as outgroups: Eurhoptus LeConte, 1876 and the ‘Acalles’ sp. showed an affinity with Torneumatini and Tylodinus is associated with Acallocrates, although the phenomenon of long-branch attraction (cf. Bergsten 2005) between the genetically highly divergent samples cannot be excluded.”
• Biogeographic history of the butterfly subtribe Euptychiina (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae, Satyrinae) (2010, background): “It is possible that the results of Murray & Prowell (2005) were affected by long-branch attraction artefacts (Bergsten 2005).”
• A Three-Gene Phylogeny of the Genus Solanum (Solanaceae) (2007, background): “These species appear to represent divergent and isolated lineages within Solanum and adequate taxon sampling is crucial to eliminate the spurious results of long-branch attraction (Felsenstein 1978; Hendy and Penny 1989; Hillis 1996, 1998; Graybeal 1998; Bergsten 2005).”
• Inferring Phylogenies from RAD Sequence Data (2012, background): “In that case, how much confidence should one have in a tree inferred from RAD sequences? Our results show that, while correct nodes are more likely in general to be strongly supported, incorrect nodes can also have high bootstrap values, although this is not unique to RAD phylogenetics [34–36].”
• The phylogeny and limits of Elateridae (Insecta, Coleoptera): is there a common tendency of click beetles to soft‐bodiedness and neoteny? (2011, background): “1), we took the lack of support from morphology as a potential indication of the long branches attraction (Bergsten 2005) or a random artefact of the analyses.”
• The radiation of Satyrini butterflies (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae): a challenge for phylogenetic methods (2011, background): “Bergsten (2005) suggested that the LBA between the out-group and long-terminal in-group branches can be broken by having a more intensive sampling of out-groups.”
• Taxon sampling and the accuracy of phylogenetic analyses (2008, methodology): “and observe whether the topology changes (Bergsten, 2005).”