A guide through a family of phylogenetic dissimilarity measures among sites
Sandrine Pavoine

TL;DR
This paper reviews and compares various phylogenetic dissimilarity measures among sites, highlighting their potential for ecological analysis and providing guidance on index selection based on properties and sensitivity.
Contribution
It introduces and evaluates a family of PD-dissimilarity indices, adapting traditional dissimilarity measures to phylogenetic data for ecological applications.
Findings
PD-dissimilarity indices depend on weighting by abundance.
Choice of index affects the measured dissimilarity.
Indices vary in sensitivity to ecological factors.
Abstract
Ecological studies have now gone beyond measures of species turnover towards measures of phylogenetic and functional dissimilarity with a main objective: disentangling the processes that drive species distributions from local to broad scales. A fundamental difference between phylogenetic and functional analyses is that phylogeny is intrinsically dependent on a tree-like structure. When the branches of a phylogenetic tree have lengths, then each evolutionary unit on these branches can be considered as a basic entity on which dissimilarities among sites should be measured. Several of the recent measures of phylogenetic dissimilarities among sites thus are traditional dissimilarity indices where species are replaced by evolutionary units. The resulting indices were named PD-dissimilarity indices. Here I review and compare indices and ordination approaches that, although first developed to…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
