Skip to main content
Powered by ShareScore

Find research datasets worth reusing

Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.

7

datasets available to search

ShareScore release 0.7.1

Reset

Dataset results

7 results for “cophylogenetics”

Learn how ShareScore rates datasets ↗
dryad40/100

Distinguishing cophylogenetic signal from phylogenetic congruence clarifies the interplay between evolutionary history and species interactions

<p>Interspecific interactions, including host-symbiont associations, can profoundly affect the evolution of the interacting species. Given the phylogenies of host and symbiont clades and knowledge of which host species interact with which symbiont, two questions are often asked: "Do closely related hosts interact with closely related symbionts?" and "Do host and symbiont phylogenies mirror one another?". These questions are intertwined and can even collapse under specific situations, such that they are often confused one with the other. However, in most situations, a positive answer to the first question, hereafter referred to as "cophylogenetic signal", does not imply a close match between the host and symbiont phylogenies. It suggests only that past evolutionary history has contributed to shaping present-day interactions, which can arise, for example, through present-day trait matching, or from a single ancient vicariance event that increases the probability that closely related species overlap geographically. A positive answer to the second, referred to as "phylogenetic congruence", is more restrictive as it suggests a close match between the two phylogenies, which may happen, for example, if symbiont diversification tracks host diversification or if the diversifications of the two clades were subject to the same succession of vicariance events. Here we apply a set of methods (ParaFit, PACo, and eMPRess), which significance is often interpreted as evidence for phylogenetic congruence, to simulations under three biologically realistic scenarios of trait matching, a single ancient vicariance event, and phylogenetic tracking. The latter is the only scenario that generates phylogenetic congruence, whereas the first two generate a cophylogenetic signal in the absence of phylogenetic congruence. We find that tests of global-fit methods (ParaFit and PACo) are significant under the three scenarios, whereas tests of event-based methods (eMPRess) are only significant under the scenario of phylogenetic tracking. Therefore, significant results from global-fit methods should be interpreted in terms of cophylogenetic signal and not phylogenetic congruence; such significant results can arise under scenarios when hosts and symbionts had independent evolutionary histories. Conversely, significant results from event-based methods suggest a strong form of dependency between hosts and symbionts evolutionary histories. Clarifying the patterns detected by different cophylogenetic methods is key to understanding how interspecific interactions shape and are shaped by evolution.</p>

opencc-zeroMar 2024View details →
dryad40/100

Data from: Rtapas: An R package to assess cophylogenetic signal between two evolutionary histories

<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Cophylogeny represents a framework to understand how ecological and evolutionary process influence lineage diversification. The recently developed algorithm Random Tanglegram Partitions provides a directly interpretable statistic to quantify the strength of cophylogenetic signal and incorporates phylogenetic uncertainty into its estimation, and maps onto a tanglegram the contribution to cophylogenetic signal of individual host-symbiont associations. We introduce </span><span>Rtapas</span><span>, an R package to perform Random Tanglegram Partitions. </span><span>Rtapas</span><span> </span><span>applies a given global-fit method to random partial tanglegrams of a fixed size to identify the associations, terminals, and internal nodes that maximize phylogenetic congruence. This new package extends the original implementation with a new algorithm that examines the contribution to phylogenetic incongruence of each host-symbiont association and adds ParaFit, a method designed to test for topological congruence between two phylogenies, to the list of global-fit methods than can be applied. </span><span>Rtapas</span><span> </span><span>facilitates and speeds up cophylogenetic analysis, as it can handle large phylogenies (100+ terminals) in affordable computational time as illustrated with two real-world examples. </span><span>Rtapas</span><span> </span><span>can particularly cater for the need for causal inference in cophylogeny in two domains: (i) Analysis of complex and intricate host-symbiont evolutionary histories and (ii) assessment of topological (in)congruence between phylogenies produced with different DNA markers and specifically identify subsets of loci for phylogenetic analysis that are most likely to reflect gene-tree evolutionary histories.</span></p>

opencc-zeroMay 2023View details →
dryad40/100

Distinguishing cophylogenetic signal from phylogenetic congruence clarifies the interplay between evolutionary history and species interactions

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicMar 2024View details →
dryad40/100

Data from: Rtapas: An R package to assess cophylogenetic signal between two evolutionary histories

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicMay 2023View details →
dryad32/100

Data from: Random Tanglegram Partitions (Random TaPas): an Alexandrian approach to the Cophylogenetic Gordian Knot

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicApr 2020View details →
dryad24/100

Data from: Cophylogenetic signal is detectable in pollination interactions across ecological scales

That evolutionary history can influence the way that species interact is a basic tenet of evolutionary ecology. However, when the role of evolution in determining ecological interactions is investigated, focus typically centers on just one side of the interaction. A cophylogenetic signal, the congruence of evolutionary history across both sides of an ecological interaction, extends these previous explorations and provides a more complete picture of how evolutionary patterns influence the way species interact. To date, cophylogenetic signal has most typically been studied in interactions that occur between fine taxonomic clades that show high intimacy. In this study, we took an alternative approach and made an exhaustive assessment of cophylogeny in pollination interactions. To do so, we assessed the strength of cophylogenetic signal at four distinct scales of pollination interaction: (1) across plant–pollinator associations globally, (2) in local pollination communities, (3) within the modular structure of those communities, and (4) in individual modules. We did so using a globally distributed dataset comprised of 54 pollination networks, over 4000 species, and over 12,000 interactions. Within these data, we detected cophylogenetic signal at all four scales. Cophylogenetic signal was found at the level of plant–pollinator interactions on a global scale and in the majority of pollination communities. At the scale defined by the modular structure within those communities, however, we observed a much weaker cophylogenetic signal. Cophylogenetic signal was detectable in a significant proportion of individual modules and most typically when within-module phylogenetic diversity was low. In sum, the detection of cophylogenetic signal in pollination interactions across scales provides a new dimension to the story of how past evolution shapes extant pollinator–angiosperm interactions.

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →
dryad24/100

Data from: Cophylogenetic signal is detectable in pollination interactions across ecological scales

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicOct 2017View details →

ScienceDex guides

Understand access before you commit

These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.

Compare curated datasets

Allen Brain Atlas

Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.

allen-brain-atlas
neuroscienceopenDocumentation, web resources, and API references are available online.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)

ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.

abode-home-cage
behavioral-neuroscienceopenThe DataShare record exposes download links for annotations, documentation, license text, and the zipped per-snippet data directory.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

DANDI Archive for NWB datasets

DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.

dandi-nwb
electrophysiologyopenPublished Dandiset metadata and archive endpoints are available through the production DANDI API.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

International Brain Laboratory public data

The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.

ibl
behavioral-neuroscienceopenPublic sessions can be searched and loaded from the IBL public data server through ONE.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

OpenNeuro

OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.

openneuro
neuroscienceopenPublished datasets are available on demand over the internet.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record