Difference between revisions of "Systematics Seminar"
(→Nov. 27 (next meeting))
|Line 88:||Line 88:|
Let's discuss this one on Monday:
Let's discuss this one on Monday:
O'Leary, MA, et al. 2017. Crowds replicate performance of scientific experts scoring phylogenetic matrices of phenotypes. Systematic Biology (advance access). ]
phenotypes. Systematic Biology (advance access).]
=== Dec. 4 ===
=== Dec. 4 ===
Revision as of 01:58, 26 November 2017
This is the home page of the UConn EEB department's Systematics Seminar (EEB 6486). This is a graduate seminar devoted to issues of interest to graduate students and faculty who make up the systematics program at the University of Connecticut.
Meeting time and place
Every Monday (except Labor Day, Sep. 4) at 3pm in the Bamford Room (TLS 171b).
Schedule for Fall 2017
Labor day holiday (no meeting)
Paul and Suman will lead the discussion of the paper:
Brown, J. M., and R. C. Thomson. 2017. Bayes factors unmask highly variable information content, bias, and extreme influence in phylogenomic analyses. Systematic Biology 66(4): 517-530. doi:10.1093/sysbio/syw101
Noah Reid will lead discussion on this paper today:
Shen, Xing-Xing, Chris Todd Hittinger, and Antonis Rokas. "Contentious relationships in phylogenomic studies can be driven by a handful of genes." Nature Ecology & Evolution 1 (2017): 0126.
We’ll be particularly interested in comparing it to this past Monday’s paper:
Brown, Jeremy M., and Robert C. Thomson. "Bayes factors unmask highly variable information content, bias, and extreme influence in phylogenomic analyses." Systematic biology 66.4 (2016): 517-530.
Katie Taylor will lead a discussion of this (very) recent species delimitation paper in Systematic Biology:
Cadena, C. D., Zapata, F., & Jiménez, I. (2017). Issues and Perspectives in Species Delimitation using Phenotypic Data—Atlantean Evolution in Darwin’s Finches. Systematic Biology. DOI 10.1093/sysbio/syx071
Charlie Delavoi will lead a discussion on the BPP process for species delimitation: http://abacus.gene.ucl.ac.uk/ziheng/pdf/2015YangCZv61p854.pdf
Ziheng Yang; The BPP program for species tree estimation and species delimitation, Current Zoology, Volume 61, Issue 5, 1 October 2015, Pages 854–865, https://doi.org/10.1093/czoolo/61.5.854
Seminar canceled for today
Bernard Goffinet will lead the discussion using a study led by Nicholas Magain as part of his Ph.D. at Duke, which deals with species complexes in lichenized fungi. He compares multiple species delimitations in two complexes.
Magain, N., et al. In press. Conserved genomic collinearity as a source of broadly applicable, fast evolving, markers to resolve species complexes: A case study using the lichen-forming genus Peltigera section Polydactylon. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. DOI:10.1016/j.ympev.2017.08.013
Also, for those interested, here is a review of species delimitation methods (in 2015). Note: those on the Systematics-L list received a PDF of this paper (see instructions at the top of this page if you are not currently enrolled in this list and would like to be). Leavitt, SD, CS Moreau, and HT Lumbsch. 2015. The Dynamic Discipline of Species 2 Delimitation: Progress Toward Effectively Recognizing Species Boundaries in Natural Populations. Chapter 2 in DK Upreti et al. (eds.), Recent Advances in Lichenology, Springer India. DOI:10.1007/978-81-322-2235-4_2
Diler Haji will lead us in a discussion of the paper below:
Ferla, MP, J Cameron Thrash, SJ Giovannoni, and WM Patrick. 2013. New rRNA Gene-Based Phylogenies of the Alphaproteobacteria Provide Perspective on Major Groups, Mitochondrial Ancestry and Phylogenetic Instability. PLoS One 8(12): e83383. doi 10.1371/journal.pone.0083383
The central question for this week is: What exactly is a species of Hodgkinia? Hodgkinia is a cicada-specific alphaproteobacterial endosymbiont within the Rhizobiales that can be more than 20% divergent across its genome and still be considered Hodgkinia. This is a paper looking at alphaproteobacterial phylogeny and the placement of a rhizobiales bacterium.
Kevin Keegan will lead discussion of:
Beaulieu, Jeremy M., and Brian C. O’Meara 2016 Detecting Hidden Diversification Shifts in Models of Trait-Dependent Speciation and Extinction. Systematic Biology 65(4): 583–601. doi:10.1093/sysbio/syw022
Paul Lewis will lead discussion of:
Lee Deininger will lead discussion of:
Hadfield, JD, BR Krasnov, R Poulin, and S Nakagawa. 2014. A tale of two phylogenies: comparative analyses of ecological interactions. The American Naturalist 183(2):174-187. doi: 10.1086/674445 (supplementary material at doi: 10.5061/dryad.jf3tj)
Everyone should contemplate:
Guan X, Silva P, Gyenai KB, Xu J, Geng T, Tu Z, Samuels DC, Smith EJ. 2009. The mitochondrial genome sequence and molecular phylogeny of the turkey, Meleagris gallopavo. Anim Genet. 2009 Apr;40(2):134-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2052.2008.01810.x
Nov. 27 (next meeting)
Let's discuss this one on Monday:
O'Leary, MA, et al. 2017. Crowds replicate performance of scientific experts scoring phylogenetic matrices of phenotypes. Systematic Biology (advance access). DOI:10.1093/sysbio/syx052
Information for discussion leaders
Seminar Format: Registered students be prepared to lead discussions, perhaps more than once depending on the number of participants.
The leader(s) will be responsible both for (1) selection of readings, (2) announcing the selection, (3) an introductory presentation, (4) driving discussion and (5) setting up and putting away the projector.
Readings: In consultation with the instructors, each leader should assign one primary paper for discussion and up to two other ancillary papers or resources. The readings should be posted to EEBedia at least 5 days in advance.
Announcing the reading: The leader should add an entry to the schedule (see below) by editing this page. There are two ways to create a link to the paper:
1. If the paper is available online through our library, it is sufficient to create a link to the DOI:
:[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syv041 Doyle et al. 2015. Syst. Biol. 64:824-837.]
In this case, you need not give all the citation details because the DOI should always be sufficient to find the paper. The colon (:) at the beginning of the link causes the link to be indented an placed on a separate line. Note that the DOI is in the form of a URL, starting with
http://dx.doi.org/. Here is how the above link looks embedded in this EEBedia page:
2. If the paper is not available through the library, upload a PDF of the paper to the UConn dropbox, being sure to use the secure version so that it can be password protected. Copy the URL provided by dropbox, and create a link to it as follows (see the Dropbox Test page for other examples):
:[https://dropbox.uconn.edu/dropbox?n=SystBiol-2015-Doyle-824-37.pdf&p=ELPFIc5NtO3c4V44Ls Doyle et al. 2015.]
In this case, you should provide a full citation to the paper for the benefit of those that visit the site long after the dropbox link has expired; however, the full details need not be part of the link text. Here is what this kind of link looks like embedded in this EEBedia page:
- Doyle et al. 2015. Full citation: Vinson P. Doyle, Randee E. Young, Gavin J. P. Naylor, and Jeremy M. Brown. 2015. Can We Identify Genes with Increased Phylogenetic Reliability? Systematic Biology 64 (5): 824-837. doi:10.1093/sysbio/syv041
If you have ancillary papers, upload those to the dropbox individually and create separate links.
Finally, send a note to the Systematics Listserv letting everyone know that a paper is available.
Introductory PowerPoint/KeyNote Presentation: Introduce your topic with a 10- to 15-minute PowerPoint or KeyNote presentation. Dedicate at least 2/3 of that time to placing the subject into the broader context of the subject areas/themes and at most 1/3 of it introducing paper, special definitions, taxa, methods, etc. Never exceed 15 minutes. (For example, for a reading on figs and fig-wasps, broaden the scope to plant-herbivore co-evolution.). Add images, include short movie clips, visit web resources, etc. to keep the presentation engaging. Although your presentation should not be a review of the primary reading, showing key figures from the readings may be helpful (and appreciated). You may also want to provide more detail and background about ancillary readings which likely have not been read by all.
Discussion: You are responsible for driving the discussion. Assume everyone in attendance has read the main paper. There are excellent suggestions for generating class discussions on Chris Elphick’s Current Topics in Conservation Biology course site. See section under expectations.
Prepare 3-5 questions that you expect will spur discussion. Ideally, you would distribute questions a day or two before our class meeting.
Projector: The Bamford room has joined the modern world--you should just need to plug in your computer or USB key to project.