. 2017 Jan 19;17:23. doi: 10.1186/s12862-017-0883-5

Table 2.

Statistical comparisons between the best ML tree and alternative phylogenetic hypotheses within podopean copepods

Hypothetical Affinities^a	References claiming the hypothesis	-lnL^b	P-values
Hypothetical Affinities^a	References claiming the hypothesis	-lnL^b	KH^c	SH^d	AU^e
((SI, HA), CY)	Huys and Boxshall (1991) [5], Ho (1994) [12], Huys et al. (2006) [19], Minxiao et al. (2011) [23], and Tung et al. (2014) [21]	177,619.7	0.109	0.479	0.085*
((SI, CY), HA)	Kabata (1979) [68], Ho (1990) [11], and Dahms (2004) [14]	177,399.7	0.377	0.750	0.445
((HA, CY), SI)	none	177,631	<0.001***	<0.001***	<0.001***

^aSI = Siphonostomatoida, CY = Cyclopoida, and HA = Harpacticoida

^blnL = Log-likelihood scores

^c P-value of the Kishino-Hasegawa (KH) test [51]

^d P-value of the Shimodaira-Hasegawa (SH) test [52]

^e P-value of the Approximately Unbiased (AU) test [53]

One (*) and triple (***) asterisks denoted statistical significance at the 0.10 and 0.001 level, respectively