The Fossilised Birth-Death Model is Identifiable

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.
Log in to save this article

Abstract

Time-dependent birth-death sampling models have been used in numerous studies for inferring past evolutionary dynamics in different areas, e.g. speciation and extinction rates in macroevolutionary studies, or effective reproductive number in epidemiological studies. These models are branching processes where lineages can bifurcate, die, or be sampled with time-dependent birth, death, and sampling rates and generate phylogenetic trees. It has recently been shown that in some subclasses of such models, different sets of rates can result in the same distributions of reconstructed phylogenetic trees, and therefore the rates become unidentifiable from the trees regardless of their size. Here we show that widely used time-dependent fossilised birth-death (FBD) models are identifiable. This subclass of models makes more realistic assumptions about the fossilisation process and certain infectious disease transmission processes than the unidentifiable birth-death sampling models. Namely, FBD models assume that sampled lineages stay in the process rather than being immediately removed upon sampling. Identifiability of the time-dependent FBD model ensures that statistical methods that implement this model infer the true underlying temporal diversification or epidemiological dynamics from phylogenetic trees or directly from molecular or other comparative data. We further show that the time-dependent birth-death model with an extra parameter, the removal after sampling probability, is unidentifiable. This implies that in scenarios where we do not know how sampling affects lineages we are unable to infer this extra parameter together with birth, death, and sampling rates solely from trees.

Significance Statement

Identifiability of a statistical model is crucial for consistent inference which guarantees that parameters can be estimated close to their true values with sufficient amount of data. Recent results on unidentifiability of birth-death sampling models have put into question many macroevolutionary and epidemiological studies and caused considerable concern among researchers using these models. A related class of models, fossilised birth-death (FBD) models, has recently become a major tool for inferring past speciation or infectious disease transmission dynamics and dated evolutionary (phylogenetic) trees. Our result showing identifiability of FBD models enables researchers to confidently use these models and ensures the large body of research in palaeontology, ecology, and epidemiology reliant on the previously estimated parameters remains valid.

Article activity feed