Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 18, 2026

A Practical Guide to Phylogenetics for Nonexperts
Published on: February 5, 2014
Permutation tests for phylogenetic comparative analyses of high-dimensional shape data: what you shuffle matters
Dean C Adams1, Michael L Collyer
1Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 50011; Department of Statistics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, 50011. dcadams@iastate.edu.
Permuting phylogenetic independent contrasts (PICs) inflates statistical error rates in comparative biology. Shuffling original data before calculating contrasts provides accurate significance levels, ensuring reliable biological inferences.
Area of Science:
- Comparative Biology
- Phylogenetic Statistics
- Evolutionary Biology
Background:
- High-dimensional phenotypes present statistical challenges in comparative biology due to the ratio of traits to species.
- Existing methods like permuting phylogenetic independent contrasts (PICs) and distance-based phylogenetic generalized least squares (D-PGLS) attempt to address these challenges.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the statistical validity of permuting PICs versus permuting original data in phylogenetic comparative analyses.
- To identify and explain the reasons for discrepancies in statistical outcomes between these two permutation approaches.
Main Methods:
- Comparison of statistical outcomes between permuting phylogenetic independent contrasts (PICs) and permuting original data within a phylogenetic generalized least squares (PGLS) framework.
- Analysis of the theoretical underpinnings of exchangeable units under the null hypothesis for each permutation method.
- Simulation or re-analysis demonstrating the impact of different permutation strategies on Type I error rates.
Main Results:
- Permuting PICs is not statistically equivalent to permuting the original data as performed in D-PGLS.
- Phylogenetic independent contrasts (PICs) are not the correct exchangeable units under the null hypothesis, leading to inflated Type I error rates.
- Shuffling original data and recalculating contrasts yields significance levels consistent with D-PGLS, validating this approach.
Conclusions:
- The method of permuting phylogenetic independent contrasts (PICs) can produce misleading statistical and biological inferences due to inflated Type I error rates.
- Permuting the original data, either directly or by recalculating contrasts iteratively, is a statistically sound approach for hypothesis testing in high-dimensional phylogenetic comparative studies.
- Researchers should carefully consider the permutation strategy employed in phylogenetic comparative analyses to ensure the reliability of their findings.
Related Concept Videos
Evolutionary Relationships through Genome Comparisons
Microbial Phylogeny
Test for Homogeneity
Phylogenetic Trees
Phylogenetic Trees
Gene Evolution - Fast or Slow?
In contrast, regions which code...

