Fitting and comparing models of phyletic evolution: random walks and beyond

By G. Hunt. Paleobiology, 2006

248 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Combining Geometric Morphometrics and Finite Element Analysis with Evolutionary Modeling: Towards a Synthesis (2016, methodology): “…be estimated from data on a phylogeny or within a single lineage by finding the values that maximize the likelihood under each mode and then selecting the best mode using the Akaike information criterion or similar model selection criteria (Butler and King, 2004; Hunt, 2006; Slater et al., 2011).”
EARLY BURSTS OF BODY SIZE AND SHAPE EVOLUTION ARE RARE IN COMPARATIVE DATA (2010, background): “…information could increase statistical power, and might reveal more details about the dynamics of trait evolution in these clades (Polly 2001; Hunt 2006; Ruta et al. 2006). our analyses, we also ignored phylogenetic uncertainty in calculating evolutionary rates (O’Meara et al. 2006), a…”
Measuring rates of phenotypic evolution and the inseparability of tempo and mode (2012, methodology): “For example, maximum likelihood estimates for the random walk and directional evolution models were previously shown to be unbiased, or nearly so, regardless of temporal resolution or the strength of the directional trend (Hunt 2006).”
Cope's rule and the adaptive landscape of dinosaur body size evolution (2018, background): “A stasis or ‘white noise’ model, in which trait values are drawn from a normal distribution with mean h and a stable variance, independent of the phylogeny (Sheets & Mitchell 2001; Hunt 2006).”