Dear R-Sig-Phylo Mailing List,
I ran into a rather unusual problem. I was doing an analysis using the
mammal trees from Upham et al. (2019) downloaded off of the VertLife site.
The model statistics for my data initially suggested that the OLS model was
better supported than a PGLS model based on
Hi Russell and all:
I’ll respond here since the answer is related to the intended purpose of the
VertLife mammal trees — i.e, capturing full uncertainty in node ages and
phylogenetic relationships was one of the motivators for building the mammal
trees in the way we did. This approach
Dear Dr. Upham (and All),
Please don't take my initial message the wrong way, this is not meant to be
a dig at your 2019 study. I don’t think this is due to the birth-death tree
specifically but would be present in any study where there are multiple
phylogenetic trees to choose from or some
