Table 3

Ancestral character states of nodes 3, 4 and 5 using different transition rates and methods.

node 3

node 4

node 5




method

model

state1

state0

state1

state0

state1

state0


ML1

AsymmMK

estimated3

0.88

0.12

0.91

0.08

0.95

0.05

F1

0.96

0.04

0.98

0.02

0.99

0.01

F2

0.87

0.12

0.91

0.09

0.94

0.06

F3

1.00

0.00

1.00

0.00

1.00

0.00

F4

0.88

0.12

0.92

0.08

0.95

0.05


MK1

estimated3

0.79

0.21

0.83

0.17

0.90

0.10

F5

0.88

0.12

0.90

0.10

0.93

0.07

F6

0.79

0.21

0.83

0.17

0.90

0.10


MP2

0.6805

0.0013

0.6799

0.0014

0.6871

0.0014


BA3

rjhp

0.915

0.0851

0.817

0.183

0.902

0.0980


1Maximum likelihood: Average frequencies across trees were calculated

2Maximum parsimony: Uniquely best states across trees were counted

3Bayesian analysis: model parameters estimated based on the data

Schirrmeister et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2011 11:45   doi:10.1186/1471-2148-11-45

Open Data