Skip to main content
. 2009 Aug 23;9:211. doi: 10.1186/1471-2148-9-211

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Pairwise comparison of inference methods when gapsare coded as distinct evolutionary events. Inline graphic values are compared, in a pairwise fashion, for the inference methods: MP, Bayesian analysis, and the MLε analysis, when the gaps were treated as binary characters or by the DNAMLε method. As in Figure 4 and 5, the average phylogenetic accuracy, Inline graphic, for one method is plotted against that of another in each panel. For each pairwise comparison between the inference methods, the left panel shows the results for the insertion-deletion rate ratio is 1:1 and the right panel when it is 1:3. The dots in each graph are color coded to reflect the gap percentage (G/S) against which the Inline graphic values have been measured, ranging from light blue (for the lowest G/S values) to red (for the highest G/S values). Each Inline graphic value reflects one of all possible combinations of values of substitution rate, r and indel rate, λ, (see Additional file 1), sequence length, l = 500, transition-transversion rate ratio, κ = 2, and the gamma among-site rate variation shape parameter, α = 0.5, averaged over 100 replicates, for a total of 110 data points in each graph. The paired t-test (p < 0.05) results are shown with a letter (within the dot) that signifies if a particular method is statistically better than the other in a given comparison (B – Bayesian analysis, L -MLε, and M – Maximum Parsimony) for the parameter combination. The paired t-test results that were not significant are presented as dot with no symbol. The results of the Z test (p < 0.001) over 110 data points for each method-method comparison is shown with a letter followed by an asterisk (B* – Bayesian analysis, L* – MLε, and M* – Maximum Parsimony).