Error, Bias, and Long-Branch Attraction in Data for Two Chloroplast Photosystem Genes in Seed Plants

Sequences of two chloroplast photosystem genes, psaA and psbB, together comprising about 3,500 bp, were obtained for all five major groups of extant seed plants and several outgroups among other vascular plants. Strongly supported, but significantly conflicting, phylogenetic signals were obtained in parsimony analyses from partitions of the data into first and second codon positions versus third positions. In the former, both genes agreed on a monophyletic gymnosperms, with Gnetales closely related to certain conifers. In the latter, Gnetales are inferred to be the sister group of all other seed plants, with gymnosperms paraphyletic. None of the data supported the modern ‘‘anthophyte hypothesis,’’ which places Gnetales as the sister group of flowering plants. A series of simulation studies were undertaken to examine the error rate for parsimony inference. Three kinds of errors were examined: random error, systematic bias (both properties of finite data sets), and statistical inconsistency owing to long-branch attraction (an asymptotic property). Parsimony reconstructions were extremely biased for third-position data for psbB. Regardless of the true underlying tree, a tree in which Gnetales are sister to all other seed plants was likely to be reconstructed for these data. None of the combinations of genes or partitions permits the anthophyte tree to be reconstructed with high probability. Simulations of progressively larger data sets indicate the existence of long-branch attraction (statistical inconsistency) for third-position psbB data if either the anthophyte tree or the gymnosperm tree is correct. This is also true for the anthophyte tree using either psaA third positions or psbB first and second positions. A factor contributing to bias and inconsistency is extremely short branches at the base of the seed plant radiation, coupled with extremely high rates in Gnetales and nonseed plant outgroups. M. J. Sanderson,* M. F. Wojciechowski,*† J.-M. Hu,* T. Sher Khan,* and S. G. Brady

Sunglasses, traffic signals, and color vision deficiencies

Purpose: To determine (a) the effect of different sunglass tint colorations on traffic signal detection and recognition for color normal and color deficient observers, and (b) the adequacy of coloration requirements in current sunglass standards. Methods: Twenty color-normals and 49 color-deficient males performed a tracking task while wearing sunglasses of different colorations (clear, gray, green, yellow-green, yellow-brown, red-brown). At random intervals, simulated traffic light signals were presented against a white background at 5° to the right or left and observers were instructed to identify signal color (red/yellow/green) by pressing a response button as quickly as possible; response times and response errors were recorded. Results: Signal color and sunglass tint had significant effects on response times and error rates (p < 0.05), with significant between-color group differences and interaction effects. Response times for color deficient people were considerably slower than color normals for both red and yellow signals for all sunglass tints, but for green signals they were only noticeably slower with the green and yellow-green lenses. For most of the color deficient groups, there were recognition errors for yellow signals combined with the yellow-green and green tints. In addition, deuteranopes had problems for red signals combined with red-brown and yellow-brown tints, and protanopes had problems for green signals combined with the green tint and for red signals combined with the red-brown tint. Conclusions: Many sunglass tints currently permitted for drivers and riders cause a measurable decrement in the ability of color deficient observers to detect and recognize traffic signals. In general, combinations of signals and sunglasses of similar colors are of particular concern. This is prima facie evidence of a risk in the use of these tints for driving and cautions against the relaxation of coloration limits in sunglasses beyond those represented in the study.