Disparity analyses are robust to ancestral state estimation uncertainty
Caleb ScuttiD, Natalie CooperiD, Gavin Huw ThomasiD, Thomas GuillermeiD
Abstract
Morphological trait datasets and phylogenies are routinely paired to investigate macroevolutionary patterns during disparity analyses. However, incomplete fossil sampling can distort disparity estimates, obscuring true evolutionary signals. Ancestral state estimation can be used for both continuous and discrete traits to extend these analyses beyond incomplete fossil data, such as investigations into disparity through time. However, when ancestral state estimation occurs in the disparity pipeline, and the inevitable uncertainty in these estimates, complicate their integration. Determining the most robust workflow for integrating ancestral state estimation in disparity analyses remains a critical methodological challenge. Using simulations to attain a ground-truth disparity value, we evaluated different approaches to performing ancestral state estimation and incorporating uncertainty across varying continuous and discrete trait models, fossil sampling densities and disparity metrics. Ancestral state estimation generally improved recovery of true disparity relative to tip-only analyses, though the optimal approach depended on the interaction between trait model and fossil sampling density. For continuous traits, probabilistic approaches were most accurate, but were sensitive to model misspecification under low fossil sampling density. For discrete traits, pre-ordination methods were most reliable and probabilistic approaches outperformed point estimates under low sampling, while point estimates became increasingly accurate as sampling density increased. Fossil sampling density was a stronger predictor of disparity accuracy than estimation method choice, underscoring that methodologies are only as powerful as the data provided. Our findings offer a practical decision framework for selecting the most appropriate workflow given the sampling density and trait characteristics of a dataset.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- What is the best method for estimating ancestral states from discrete characters?
J. N. Keating·bioRxiv·Aug 31, 2023
- Phylogenetic reconstruction of trait summary statistics and disparity dynamics
Gilles Didier·bioRxiv·Aug 20, 2026
- Fossils improve phylogenetic analyses of morphological characters
N. Mongiardino Koch, R. J. Garwood, L. A. Parry·bioRxiv·Dec 3, 2020
- A fossilized birth-death model for fossil records lacking sampled ancestors
Jeremy M. Beaulieu, Brian C. O’Meara·bioRxiv·Aug 19, 2026
- Bayesian placement of fossils on phylogenies from quantitative morphometric data
C. Parins-Fukuchi·bioRxiv·May 16, 2018
- Combining fossil taxa with and without morphological data improves dated phylogenetic analyses
Mark C. Nikolic, Rachel C. M. Warnock, Melanie Jane Hopkins·Biology LettersPeer-reviewed·Aug 1, 2025