These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8572158)

  • 1. A simulation test of Smith's "Degrees of freedom" correction for comparative studies.
    Nunn CL
    Am J Phys Anthropol; 1995 Nov; 98(3):355-67. PubMed ID: 8572158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Statistical validity of the Haseman-Elston sib-pair test in small samples.
    Wilson AF; Elston RC
    Genet Epidemiol; 1993; 10(6):593-8. PubMed ID: 8314066
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Phylogenetic logistic regression for binary dependent variables.
    Ives AR; Garland T
    Syst Biol; 2010 Jan; 59(1):9-26. PubMed ID: 20525617
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Degrees of freedom in interspecific allometry: an adjustment for the effects of phylogenetic constraint.
    Smith RJ
    Am J Phys Anthropol; 1994 Jan; 93(1):95-107. PubMed ID: 8141245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The effects of topological inaccuracy in evolutionary trees on the phylogenetic comparative method of independent contrasts.
    Symonds MR
    Syst Biol; 2002 Aug; 51(4):541-53. PubMed ID: 12227998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Assessment of the relative merits of a few methods to detect evolutionary trends.
    Laurin M
    Syst Biol; 2010 Dec; 59(6):689-704. PubMed ID: 20937759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of intraspecific sample size on type I and type II error rates in comparative studies.
    Harmon LJ; Losos JB
    Evolution; 2005 Dec; 59(12):2705-10. PubMed ID: 16526516
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Phylogenetic approaches in comparative physiology.
    Garland T; Bennett AF; Rezende EL
    J Exp Biol; 2005 Aug; 208(Pt 16):3015-35. PubMed ID: 16081601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The ancestral distance test: what relatedness can reveal about correlated evolution in large lineages with missing character data and incomplete phylogenies.
    Hearn D; Huber M
    Syst Biol; 2006 Oct; 55(5):803-17. PubMed ID: 17060201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. When being "most likely" is not enough: examining the performance of three uses of the parametric bootstrap in phylogenetics.
    Antezana M
    J Mol Evol; 2003 Feb; 56(2):198-222. PubMed ID: 12574867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Poor statistical performance of the Mantel test in phylogenetic comparative analyses.
    Harmon LJ; Glor RE
    Evolution; 2010 Jul; 64(7):2173-8. PubMed ID: 20163450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evolution of ossification sequences in salamanders and urodele origins assessed through event-pairing and new methods.
    Germain D; Laurin M
    Evol Dev; 2009; 11(2):170-90. PubMed ID: 19245549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Calculating the evolutionary rates of different genes: a fast, accurate estimator with applications to maximum likelihood phylogenetic analysis.
    Bevan RB; Lang BF; Bryant D
    Syst Biol; 2005 Dec; 54(6):900-15. PubMed ID: 16282169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Foundations of the new phylogenetics].
    Pavlinov IIa
    Zh Obshch Biol; 2004; 65(4):334-66. PubMed ID: 15490579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Improving the calculation of statistical significance in genome-wide scans.
    Angquist L; Hössjer O
    Biostatistics; 2005 Oct; 6(4):520-38. PubMed ID: 15831574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. SIMPROT: using an empirically determined indel distribution in simulations of protein evolution.
    Pang A; Smith AD; Nuin PA; Tillier ER
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2005 Sep; 6():236. PubMed ID: 16188037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Testing the genetic constraint hypothesis in a phylogenetic context: a simulation study.
    Revell LJ
    Evolution; 2007 Nov; 61(11):2720-7. PubMed ID: 17927779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Euclidean nature of phylogenetic distance matrices.
    de Vienne DM; Aguileta G; Ollier S
    Syst Biol; 2011 Dec; 60(6):826-32. PubMed ID: 21804094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Meta-analysis and the comparative phylogenetic method.
    Lajeunesse MJ
    Am Nat; 2009 Sep; 174(3):369-81. PubMed ID: 19637963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Within-species variation and measurement error in phylogenetic comparative methods.
    Ives AR; Midford PE; Garland T
    Syst Biol; 2007 Apr; 56(2):252-70. PubMed ID: 17464881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.