» Articles » PMID: 38107485

Simulation Tests of Methods in Evolution, Ecology, and Systematics: Pitfalls, Progress, and Principles

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2023 Dec 18
PMID 38107485
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Complex statistical methods are continuously developed across the fields of ecology, evolution, and systematics (EES). These fields, however, lack standardized principles for evaluating methods, which has led to high variability in the rigor with which methods are tested, a lack of clarity regarding their limitations, and the potential for misapplication. In this review, we illustrate the common pitfalls of method evaluations in EES, the advantages of testing methods with simulated data, and best practices for method evaluations. We highlight the difference between method evaluation and validation and review how simulations, when appropriately designed, can refine the domain in which a method can be reliably applied. We also discuss the strengths and limitations of different evaluation metrics. The potential for misapplication of methods would be greatly reduced if funding agencies, reviewers, and journals required principled method evaluation.

Citing Articles

Drift drives the evolution of chromosome number II: The impact of range size on genome evolution in Carnivora.

Jonika M, Wilhoit K, Chin M, Arekere A, Blackmon H J Hered. 2024; 115(5):524-531.

PMID: 38712909 PMC: 11334210. DOI: 10.1093/jhered/esae025.


Using Computational Simulations to Model Deleterious Variation and Genetic Load in Natural Populations.

Kyriazis C, Robinson J, Lohmueller K Am Nat. 2023; 202(6):737-752.

PMID: 38033186 PMC: 10897732. DOI: 10.1086/726736.


Evaluating the Accuracy of Methods for Detecting Correlated Rates of Molecular and Morphological Evolution.

Asar Y, Sauquet H, Ho S Syst Biol. 2023; 72(6):1337-1356.

PMID: 37695237 PMC: 10924723. DOI: 10.1093/sysbio/syad055.


The paradox of adaptive trait clines with nonclinal patterns in the underlying genes.

Lotterhos K Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023; 120(12):e2220313120.

PMID: 36917658 PMC: 10041142. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2220313120.

References
1.
Lotterhos K, Whitlock M . Evaluation of demographic history and neutral parameterization on the performance of FST outlier tests. Mol Ecol. 2014; 23(9):2178-92. PMC: 4228763. DOI: 10.1111/mec.12725. View

2.
Holzer M, Marz M . De novo transcriptome assembly: A comprehensive cross-species comparison of short-read RNA-Seq assemblers. Gigascience. 2019; 8(5). PMC: 6511074. DOI: 10.1093/gigascience/giz039. View

3.
Boulesteix A, Binder H, Abrahamowicz M, Sauerbrei W . On the necessity and design of studies comparing statistical methods. Biom J. 2017; 60(1):216-218. DOI: 10.1002/bimj.201700129. View

4.
Pennell M, FitzJohn R, Cornwell W, Harmon L . Model Adequacy and the Macroevolution of Angiosperm Functional Traits. Am Nat. 2015; 186(2):E33-50. DOI: 10.1086/682022. View

5.
Saito T, Rehmsmeier M . The precision-recall plot is more informative than the ROC plot when evaluating binary classifiers on imbalanced datasets. PLoS One. 2015; 10(3):e0118432. PMC: 4349800. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118432. View