Skip main navigationJournal menuClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Skip main navigationJournal menuClose Drawer MenuOpen Drawer Menu
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Restricted accessResearch articles

Does horizontal transmission invalidate cultural phylogenies?

Published:18 March 2009https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2008.1944

    Abstract

    Phylogenetic methods have recently been applied to studies of cultural evolution. However, it has been claimed that the large amount of horizontal transmission that sometimes occurs between cultural groups invalidates the use of these methods. Here, we use a natural model of linguistic evolution to simulate borrowing between languages. The results show that tree topologies constructed with Bayesian phylogenetic methods are robust to realistic levels of borrowing. Inferences about divergence dates are slightly less robust and show a tendency to underestimate dates. Our results demonstrate that realistic levels of reticulation between cultures do not invalidate a phylogenetic approach to cultural and linguistic evolution.

    References

    • Atkinson Q.D.& Gray R.D.. 2005Curious parallels and curious connections: phylogenetic thinking in biology and historical linguistics?. Syst. Biol. 54, 513–526.doi:10.1080/10635150590950317. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Atkinson Q.D.& Gray R.D.Are accurate dates an intractable problem for historical linguistics. Mapping our ancestors: phylogenetic approaches in anthropology and prehistory, Lipo C., O'Brien M.J., Collard M.& Shennan S.. 2006pp. 269–298. Eds. New Brunswick, NJ:Aldine Transactions. Google Scholar
    • Atkinson Q.D., Meade A., Venditti C., Greenhill S.J.& Pagel M.. 2008Languages evolve in punctuational bursts. Science. 319, 588doi:10.1126/science.320.5875.446a. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Aunger R.Darwinizing culture: the status of memetics as a science. 2000Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Bateman R., Goddard I., O'Grady R., Funk V.A., Mooi R., Kress W.J.& Cannell P.. 1990Speaking of forked tongues: the feasibility of reconciling human phylogeny and the history of language. Curr. Anthropol. 31, 1–24.doi:10.1086/203800. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Bellwood P.. 1996Phylogeny vs reticulation in prehistory. Antiquity. 70, 881–890. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Bloomfield L.Language. 1933London, UK:Allen & Unwin. Google Scholar
    • Blust R.. 1996Some remarks on the linguistic position of Thao. Oceanic Linguist. 35, 272–294.doi:10.2307/3623175. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Blust, R. 2000 Why lexicostatistics doesn't work: the ‘universal constant’ hypothesis and the Austronesian languages. In Time depth in historical linguistics, vol. 2 (eds C. Renfrew, A. McMahon & L. Trask), pp. 311–332. Cambridge, UK: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Google Scholar
    • Borgerhoff Mulder M.. 2001Using phylogenetically based comparative methods in anthropology: more questions than answers. Evol. Anthropol. 10, 99–111.doi:10.1002/evan.1020. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Bryant D.& Moulton V.. 2004Neighbor-Net: an agglomerative method for the construction of phylogenetic networks. Mol. Biol. Evol. 21, 255–265.doi:10.1093/molbev/msh018. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Bryant D., Filimon F.& Gray R.D.Untangling our past: languages, trees, splits and networks. The evolution of cultural diversity: phylogenetic approaches, Mace R., Holden C.J.& Shennan S.. 2005pp. 67–84. Eds. London, UK:UCL Press. Google Scholar
    • Carneiro R.Evolutionism in cultural anthropology: a critical history. 2003Boulder, CO:Westview Press. Google Scholar
    • Charleston M.A.. 2003Recent results in cophylogenetic mapping. Adv. Parasitol. 54, 303–330.doi:10.1016/S0065-308X(03)54007-6. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Christiansen C., Mailund T., Pedersen C.N.S., Randers M.& Stissing M.S.. 2006Fast calculation of the quartet distance between trees of arbitrary degrees. Algorithms Mol. Biol. 1, 1–16.doi:10.1186/1748-7188-1-16. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Coward F., Shennan S., Colledge S., Conolly J.& Collard M.. 2008The spread of Neolithic plant economies from the near east to northwest Europe: a phylogenetic analysis. J. Archaeol. Sci. 35, 42–56.doi:10.1016/j.jas.2007.02.022. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Darwent J.& O'Brien M.J.Using cladistics to construct lineages of projectile points from northeastern Missouri. Mapping our ancestors: phylogenetic approaches in anthropology and prehistory, Lipo C., O'Brien M.J., Collard M.& Shennan S.. 2006pp. 185–208. Eds. New Brunswick, NJ:Aldine Transactions. Google Scholar
    • Darwin C.On the origin of species. 1859London, UK:Murray. Google Scholar
    • Day W.H.E.. 1986Analysis of quartet dissimilarity measures between unidirected phylogenetic trees. Syst. Zool. 35, 325–333.doi:10.2307/2413385. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Dunn M., Terrill A., Reesink G., Foley R.A.& Levinson S.C.. 2005Structural phylogenetics and the reconstruction of ancient language history. Science. 309, 2072–2075.doi:10.1126/science.1114615. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Dutton T.Language contact and change in Melanesia. The Austronesians: historical and comparative perspectives, Bellwood P., Fox J.J.& Tryon D.T.. 1995pp. 207–228. Eds. Canberra, Australia:Australian National University. Google Scholar
    • Embleton S.M.Statistics in historical linguistics. 1986Bochum, Germany:Studienverlag Brockmeyer. Google Scholar
    • Fortunato L., Holden C.J.& Mace R.. 2006From bridewealth to dowry? A Bayesian estimation of ancestral states of marriage transfers in Indo-European groups. Hum. Nat. 17, 355–376.doi:10.1007/s12110-006-1000-4. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Goodenough W.H.. 1997Comment on social life in the Pacific. Curr. Anthropol. 38, 177–178. Google Scholar
    • Gould S.J.An urchin in the storm. 1987New York, NY:Norton. Google Scholar
    • Gould S.J.Bully for brontosaurus. 1991New York, NY:Norton. Google Scholar
    • Gray R.D.& Atkinson Q.D.. 2003Language-tree divergence times support the Anatolian theory of Indo-European origin. Nature. 426, 435–439.doi:10.1038/nature02029. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Gray R.D.& Jordan F.M.. 2000Language trees support the express-train sequence of Austronesian expansion. Nature. 405, 1052–1055.doi:10.1038/35016575. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Gray R.D., Greenhill S.J.& Ross R.M.. 2007The pleasures and perils of Darwinizing culture (with phylogenies). Biol. Theory. 2, 360–375.doi:10.1162/biot.2007.2.4.360. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Gray R.D., Drummond A.J.& Greenhill S.J.. 2009Language phylogenies reveal expansion pulses and pauses in Pacific settlement. Science. 323, 479–483.doi:10.1126/science.1166858. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Greenhill S.J.& Gray R.D.Testing population dispersal hypotheses: Pacific settlement, phylogenetic trees and Austronesian languages. The evolution of cultural diversity: phylogenetic approaches, Mace R., Holden C.J.& Shennan S.. 2005pp. 31–52. Eds. London, UK:UCL Press. Google Scholar
    • Harmon M.J., VanPool T.L., Leonard R.D., VanPool C.S.& Salter L.A.Reconstructing the flow of information across time and space: a phylogenetic analysis of ceramic traditions from prehispanic western and northern Mexico and the American southwest. Mapping our ancestors: phylogenetic approaches in anthropology and prehistory, Lipo C., O'Brien M.J., Collard M.& Shennan S.. 2006pp. 209–230. Eds. New Brunswick, NJ:Aldine Transactions. Google Scholar
    • Harvey P.H.& Pagel M.The comparative method in evolutionary biology. 1991Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Hoijer H.. 1956Lexicostatistics: a critique. Language. 32, 49–60.doi:10.2307/410652. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Holden C.J.. 2002Bantu language trees reflect the spread of farming across sub-Saharan Africa: a maximum-parsimony approach. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 269, 793–799.doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.1955. . Link, Google Scholar
    • Holden C.J.& Gray R.D.Rapid radiation, borrowing and dialect continua in the Bantu languages. Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages, Forster P.& Renfrew C.. 2006pp. 19–31. Eds. Cambridge, UK:McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Google Scholar
    • Holden C.J.& Mace R.The cow is the enemy of matriliny: using phylogenetic methods to investigate cultural evolution in Africa. The evolution of cultural diversity: phylogenetic approaches, Mace R., Holden C.J.& Shennan S.. 2005pp. 217–234. Eds. London, UK:UCL Press. Google Scholar
    • Holden C.J.& Shennan S.How tree-like is cultural evolution?. In The evolution of cultural diversity: phylogenetic approaches, Mace R., Holden C.J.& Shennan S.. 2005pp. 13–29. Eds. London, UK:UCL Press. Google Scholar
    • Huelsenbeck J.P.. 1995Performance of phylogenetic methods in simulation. Syst. Biol. 44, 17–48.doi:10.2307/2413481. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Huelsenbeck J.P.& Rannala B.. 1997Phylogenetic methods come of age: testing hypotheses in an evolutionary context. Science. 276, 227–232.doi:10.1126/science.276.5310.227. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Jordan P.& Shennan S.J.. 2003Cultural transmission, language and basketry traditions amongst the California Indians. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 22, 42–74.doi:10.1016/S0278-4165(03)00004-7. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Jordan, F. M., Gray, R. D., Greenhill, S. J. & Mace, R. In press. Matrilocal residence is ancestral in Austronesian societies. Proc. R. Soc. B. (doi:10.1098/rspb.2009.0088). Google Scholar
    • Laland K.N.& Brown G.R.Sense and nonsense. 2002Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • Mace R.& Holden C.J.. 2005A phylogenetic approach to cultural evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 20, 116–121.doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.12.002. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Mace R.& Jordan F.The evolution of human sex ratio at birth: a bio-cultural analysis. The evolution of cultural diversity: phylogenetic approaches, Mace R., Holden C.J.& Shennan S.. 2005pp. 207–216. Eds. London, UK:UCL Press. Google Scholar
    • Mace R.& Pagel M.. 1994The comparative method in anthropology. Curr. Anthropol. 35, 549–564.doi:10.1086/204317. . Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • McMahon A.& McMahon R.Language classification by numbers. 2005Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
    • McMahon A.& McMahon R.Why linguists don't do dates: evidence from Indo-European and Australian languages. Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages, Forster P.& Renfrew C.. 2006pp. 153–160. Eds. Cambridge, UK:McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Google Scholar
    • Mooers A.O.& Heard S.B.. 1997Inferring evolutionary processes from phylogenetic tree shape. Q. Rev. Biol. 72, 31–54.doi:10.1086/419657. . Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Moore J.H.. 1994Putting anthropology back together again: the ethnogenetic critique of cladistic theory. Am. Anthropol. 96, 925–948.doi:10.1525/aa.1994.96.4.02a00110. . Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Moylan J.W., Graham C.M., Borgerhoff Mulder M., Nunn C.L.& Håkansson N.T.Cultural traits and linguistic trees: phylogenetic signal in east Africa. Mapping our ancestors: phylogenetic approaches in anthropology and prehistory, Lipo C., O'Brien M.J., Collard M.& Shennan S.. 2006pp. 33–52. Eds. New Brunswick, NJ:Aldine Transactions. Google Scholar
    • Neff H.Archaeological-materials characterization as phylogenetic method: the case of copador pottery from Southeastern Mesoamerica. Mapping our ancestors: phylogenetic approaches in anthropology and prehistory, Lipo C., O'Brien M.J., Collard M.& Shennan S.. 2006pp. 231–248. Eds. New Brunswick, NJ:Aldine Transactions. Google Scholar
    • Nicholls G.K.& Gray R.D.Quantifying uncertainty in a stochastic model of vocabulary evolution. Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages, Forster P.& Renfrew C.. 2006pp. 161–171. Eds. Cambridge, UK:McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Google Scholar
    • Nicholls G.K.& Gray R.D.. 2008Dated ancestral trees from binary trait data and its application to the diversification of languages. J. R. Stat. Soc. B. 70, 545–566.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9868.2007.00648.x. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Nichols J.. 1997Modeling ancient population structures and movement in linguistics. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 26, 359–384.doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.26.1.359. . Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • O'Hara R.J.. 1988Homage to Clio, or, toward an historical philosophy for evolutionary biology. Syst. Zool. 37, 142–155.doi:10.2307/2992272. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Page R.D.M.& Charleston M.A.. 1998Trees within trees: phylogeny and historical associations. Trends Ecol. Evol. 13, 356–359.doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(98)01438-4. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Pagel M.. 1999Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature. 401, 877–884.doi:10.1038/44766. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Pagel M.& Meade A.. 2004A phylogenetic mixture model for detecting pattern-heterogeneity in gene sequence or character-state data. Syst. Biol. 53, 571–581.10.1080/10635150490468675. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Pagel M.& Meade A.Estimating rates of lexical replacement on phylogenetic trees of languages. Phylogenetic methods and the prehistory of languages, Forster P.& Renfrew C.. 2006pp. 173–182. Eds. Cambridge, UK:McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research. Google Scholar
    • Pagel M., Atkinson Q.D.& Meade A.. 2007Frequency of word-use predicts rates of lexical evolution throughout Indo-European history. Nature. 449, 717–720.doi:10.1038/nature06176. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Penny D., Hendy M.D.& Steel M.A.. 1992Progress with methods for constructing evolutionary trees. Trends Ecol. Evol. 7, 73–79.doi:10.1016/0169-5347(92)90244-6. . Crossref, PubMed, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Rexovà K., Frynta D.& Zrzavy J.. 2003Cladistic analysis of languages: Indo-European classification based on lexicostatistical data. Cladistics. 19, 120–127.doi:10.1111/j.1096-0031.2003.tb00299.x. . Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Rexovà K., Bastin Y.& Frynta D.. 2006Cladistic analysis of Bantu languages: a new tree based on combined lexical and grammatical data. Naturwissenschaften. 93, 189–194.doi:10.1007/s00114-006-0088-z. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Ross M.Is Yapese Oceanic?. In Reconstruction, classification, description: festschrift in honor of Isidore Dyen& Nothofer B.. 1996pp. 122–168. Eds. Hamburg, Germany:Abera. Google Scholar
    • Ross, M. 1997 Social networks and kinds of speech-community events. In Archaeology and language, vol. 1 (eds R. Blench & M. Spriggs), pp. 209–261. London, UK: Routledge. Google Scholar
    • Steel M.& Penny D.. 1993Distribution of tree comparison metrics—some new results. Syst. Biol. 42, 126–141.doi:10.2307/2992536. . Google Scholar
    • Steel M., Hendy M.D.& Penny D.. 1988Loss of information in genetic distances. Nature. 336, 118doi:10.1038/336118a0. . Crossref, PubMed, Google Scholar
    • Swadesh M.. 1952Lexico-statistic dating of prehistoric ethnic contacts. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 96, 452–463. Google Scholar
    • Tehrani J.& Collard M.. 2002Investigating cultural evolution through biological phylogenetic analyses of Turkmen textiles. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 21, 443–463.doi:10.1016/S0278-4165(02)00002-8. . Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Tëmkin I.& Eldredge N.. 2007Phylogenetics and material cultural evolution. Curr. Anthropol. 48, 146–153.doi:10.1086/510463. . Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
    • Terrell J.E.. 1988History as a family tree, history as an entangled bank: constructing images and interpretations of prehistory in the South Pacific. Antiquity. 62, 642–657. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Terrell J.E., Kelly K.M.& Rainbird R.. 2001Foregone conclusions? In search of ‘Papuans’ and ‘Austronesians’. Curr. Anthropol. 42, 97–124.doi:10.1086/318436. . Google Scholar
    Previous Article
    Next Article