{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015646258503401362, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.154811715481172, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Phylogenetic uncertainty can bias the number of evolutionary transitions estimated from ancestral state reconstruction methods.

Ancestral state reconstruction (ASR) is a popular method for exploring the evolutionary history of traits that leave little or no trace in the fossil record. For example, it has been used to test hypotheses about the number of evolutionary origins of key life-history traits such as oviparity, or key morphological structures such as wings. Many studies that use ASR have suggested that the number of evolutionary origins of such traits is higher than was previously thought. The scope of such inferences is increasing rapidly, facilitated by the construction of very large phylogenies and life-history databases. In this paper, we use simulations to show that the number of evolutionary origins of a trait tends to be overestimated when the phylogeny is not perfect. In some cases, the estimated number of transitions can be several fold higher than the true value. Furthermore, we show that the bias is not always corrected by standard approaches to account for phylogenetic uncertainty, such as repeating the analysis on a large collection of possible trees. These findings have important implications for studies that seek to estimate the number of origins of a trait, particularly those that use large phylogenies that are associated with considerable uncertainty. We discuss the implications of this bias, and methods to ameliorate it.