Phylogenetic tests of ecological and evolutionary hypotheses: checking for phylogenetic independence

By R. Freckleton. 2000

118 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation, Paleontology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/52e76c10c388b196621cf151f3a25b89f9a7f1fb

How researchers see this paper

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

In Ecology

1. N. Dulvy
2. J. Reynolds
3. D. Clayton
4. B. Walther
5. J. H. C. Cornelissen
6. Rien Aerts
7. David Hodgson
8. Stuart Townley

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. N. Dulvy
2. J. Reynolds
3. A. Franco
4. J. H. C. Cornelissen
5. Rien Aerts
6. B. Walther
7. D. Clayton
8. David Hodgson

In Paleontology

1. N. Dulvy
2. J. Reynolds
3. D. Clayton
4. B. Walther
5. David Hodgson
6. M. Franco
7. Stuart Townley
8. I. Stott

Citations in the corpus

• Functional traits of woody plants: correspondence of species rankings between field adults and laboratory-grown seedlings? (2003, methodology): “…phenotypical overall differences in traits and trait rankings of the two woody floras involved and (2) the two woody floras, differing greatly in their lower and higher level taxonomy, served as one large and powerful independent phylogenetic contrast (sensu Harvey & Pagel 1991; Freckleton 2000).”
• Boom or bust? A comparative analysis of transient population dynamics in plants (2010, methodology): “However, previous statistical analyses that were conducted on the raw transient indices employed both TIPS and phylogenetically independent contrasts (PICs), where the degree of relatedness between species is controlled for (Felsenstein 1985; Freckleton 2000).”
• Comparative growth analysis of tropical forest and savanna woody plants using phylogenetically independent contrasts (2003, background): “This can occur systematically because large mean values for a trait can often be associated with large differences within a pair, resulting in non-independence in species differences ( Freckleton 2000 ).”
• Comparative tests of reproductive skew in male primates: the roles of demographic factors and incomplete control (2006, unknown): “We ran diagnostic tests to ensure that the contrasts were properly standardized (Garland et al. 1992; Purvis and Rambaut 1995; Freckleton 2000).”
• The seven deadly sins of comparative analysis (2009, methodology): “Accordingly a series of diagnostics designed for interpreting the results of phylogenetic analysis have been developed (Garland et al., 1992; Purvis & Rambaut, 1995; Freckleton, 2000).”
• Elaborate ornaments are costly to maintain: evidence for high maintenance handicaps (2005, methodology): “…the absolute values of the standardized contrasts against (1) their standard deviations and (2) the ages of the corresponding nodes (for a detailed description of the use of standardized contrasts see Freckleton, 2000; Garland et al., 1992; Harvey and Pagel, 1991; Purvis and Rambaut, 1994).”
• Predicting Extinction Vulnerability in Skates (2002, methodology): “Data were log 10 -transformed to achieve normality, and the raw contrasts were standardized by the square root of their expected variance to meet the assumptions of regression analysis (Purvis & Rambaut 1995; Freckleton 2000).”