Treemap Versus BPA (Again): A Response to Dowling

  • Page R
  • Charleston M
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
57Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

TreeMap is a computer program for analysing host-parasite cospeciation. We respond to Dowling’s (Cladistics, 18: 416-435) recent comparison of TreeMap and Brooks Parsimony Analysis (BPA) by showing that Dowling’s comparison suffers from several mistakes and flaws. We discuss the problems with both BPA and TreeMap, and show that BPA incorrectly counts the true number coevolutionary events more often than TreeMap 1. We also discuss the two main limitations of TreeMap 1 correctly identified by Dowling, namely its inability to handle widespread parasites, and its coarse optimality criterion (the number of cospeciation events). We suggest a simple fix for widespread parasites. The newly released TreeMap 2 uses a more sensitive optimality criterion than TreeMap 1, addressing Dowling’s second concern.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Page, R., & Charleston, M. (2007). Treemap Versus BPA (Again): A Response to Dowling. Nature Precedings. https://doi.org/10.1038/npre.2007.1030.1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free