Table 2 |
|||||
|
Rejection rates of H0 for CADM comparing data sets simulated on identical trees and with identical evolutionary parameters (GTR+ Γ + I), M = 5. |
|||||
|
CMI |
|||||
|
|
|||||
|
n |
L |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
|
|||||
|
10 |
1000 |
0.308 |
0.928 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
(0.279-0.337) |
(0.912-0.944) |
- |
- |
||
|
5000 |
0.363 |
0.973 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.333-0.393 |
(0.963-0.983) |
- |
- |
||
|
10 000 |
0.383 |
0.966 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.353-0.413) |
(0.955-0.977) |
- |
- |
||
|
20 000 |
0.380 |
0.974 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.350-0.410) |
(0.964-0.984) |
- |
- |
||
|
|
|||||
|
25 |
1000 |
0.569 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
(0.538-0.600) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
5000 |
0.662 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.633-0.691) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
10 000 |
0.675 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.646-0.704) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
20 000 |
0.682 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.653-0.711) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
|
|||||
|
50 |
1000 |
0.740 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
(0.715-0.769) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
5000 |
0.851 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.829-0.873) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
10 000 |
0.869 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.848-0.890) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
20 000 |
0.898 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
|
(0.880-0.917) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
|
|||||
|
100 |
1000 |
0.890* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
|
(0.828-0.952) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
5000 |
0.970* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
|
|
(0.936-1.000) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
10 000 |
0.970* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
|
|
(0.936-1.000) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
20 000 |
0.970* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
1.000* |
|
|
(0.936-1.000) |
- |
- |
- |
||
|
|
|||||
|
A false H0 was constructed by including a different number of completely congruent matrices (CMI) together with a different number of incongruent matrices (IM), for a total of five distance matrices (M = 5). When CMI = 5, all matrices included in the test are congruent. Rejection rates are given at a significance level of 0.05, with 95% confidence intervals in parentheses. Calculated from 1000 replicates, except for cells with * (100 replicates). Dashes (-) correspond to a CI of 1.000 - 1.000. |
|||||
|
Campbell et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2011 11:64 doi:10.1186/1471-2148-11-64 |
|||||