Likelihood and Inconsistency
- 1 June 1999
- journal article
- Published by Wiley in Cladistics
- Vol. 15 (2) , 199-204
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.1999.tb00262.x
Abstract
Parsimony can be inconsistent, but not maximum likelihood—likelihood advocates often say. This difference and conclusions drawn from it have provided the main reasons advanced by likelihoodists against the use of parsimony. Recent statistical research, however, shows that maximum likelihood estimation of phylogenetic trees can become inconsistent in all but the simplest cases, so that under realistic conditions the consistency of maximum likelihood cannot be assured. If likelihoodists wish to dispose of parsimony, they will have to find another argument.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Unveiling fungal zooflagellates as members of freshwater picoeukaryotes: evidence from a molecular diversity study in a deep meromictic lakeEnvironmental Microbiology, 2006
- Success of Parsimony in the Four‐Taxon Case: Long‐Branch Repulsion by Likelihood in the Farris ZoneCladistics, 1998
- Phylogeny Estimation and Hypothesis Testing Using Maximum LikelihoodAnnual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1997
- Links between maximum likelihood and maximum parsimony under a simple model of site substitutionBulletin of Mathematical Biology, 1997
- Inconsistency of evolutionary tree topology reconstruction methods when substitution rates vary across charactersMathematical Biosciences, 1996
- The origins of the neutral theory of molecular evolutionJournal of the History of Biology, 1994
- Reconstructing Trees When Sequence Sites Evolve at Variable RatesJournal of Computational Biology, 1994
- ON THE BOUNDARIES OF PHYLOGENETIC SYSTEMATICSCladistics, 1986
- DISTANCES AND STATISTICSCladistics, 1986
- Cases in which Parsimony or Compatibility Methods Will be Positively MisleadingSystematic Zoology, 1978