David Welch

Dr. David Welch


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

22Years (2005-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
9 July 2008 in Journal of The Royal Society Interface
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TTTina Toni
Tina Toni
DWDavid Welch
David Welch
NSNatalja Strelkowa
Natalja Strelkowa
AIAndreas Ipsen
Andreas Ipsen
MSMichael P.H Stumpf
Michael P.H Stumpf
Approximate Bayesian computation (ABC) methods can be used to evaluate posterior distributions without having to calculate likelihoods. In this paper, we discuss and apply an ABC method based on sequential Monte Carlo (SMC) to estimate parameters of dynamical models. We show that ABC SMC provides information about the inferability of parameters and model sensitivity to changes in parameters, and tends to perform better than other ABC approaches. The algorithm is applied to several well-known biological systems, for which parameters and their credible intervals are inferred. Moreover, we develop ABC SMC as a tool for model selection; given a range of different mathematical descriptions, ABC SMC is able to choose the best model using the standard Bayesian model selection apparatus.

4 December 2014 in PLOS Computational Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AGAlexandra Gavryushkina
Alexandra Gavryushkina
DWDavid Welch
David Welch
TSTanja Stadler
Tanja Stadler
ADAlexei J. Drummond
Alexei J. Drummond
Phylogenetic analyses which include fossils or molecular sequences that are sampled through time require models that allow one sample to be a direct ancestor of another sample. As previously available phylogenetic inference tools assume that all samples are tips, they do not allow for this possibility. We have developed and implemented a Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm to infer what we call sampled ancestor trees, that is, trees in which sampled individuals can be direct ancestors of other sampled individuals. We use a family of birth-death models where individuals may remain in the tree process after sampling, in particular we extend the birth-death skyline model [Stadler et al., 2013] to sampled ancestor trees. This method allows the detection of sampled ancestors as well as estimation of the probability that an individual will be removed from the process when it is sampled. We show that even if sampled ancestors are not of specific interest in an analysis, failing to account for them leads to significant bias in parameter estimates. We also show that sampled ancestor birth-death models where every sample comes from a different time point are non-identifiable and thus require one parameter to be known in order to infer other parameters. We apply our phylogenetic inference accounting for sampled ancestors to epidemiological data, where the possibility of sampled ancestors enables us to identify individuals that infected other individuals after being sampled and to infer fundamental epidemiological parameters. We also apply the method to infer divergence times and diversification rates when fossils are included along with extant species samples, so that fossilisation events are modelled as a part of the tree branching process. Such modelling has many advantages as argued in the literature. The sampler is available as an open-source BEAST2 package (https://github.com/CompEvol/sampled-ancestors). A central goal of phylogenetic analysis is to estimate evolutionary relationships and the dynamical parameters underlying the evolutionary branching process (e.g. macroevolutionary or epidemiological parameters) from molecular data. The statistical methods used in these analyses require that the underlying tree branching process is specified. Standard models for the branching process which were originally designed to describe the evolutionary past of present day species do not allow one sampled taxon to be the ancestor of another. However the probability of sampling a direct ancestor is not negligible for many types of data. For example, when fossil and living species are analysed together to infer species divergence times, fossil species may or may not be direct ancestors of living species. In epidemiology, a sampled individual (a host from which a pathogen sequence was obtained) can infect other individuals after sampling, which then go on to be sampled themselves. The models that account for direct ancestors produce phylogenetic trees with a different structure from classic phylogenetic trees and so using these models in inference requires new computational methods. Here we developed a method for phylogenetic analysis that accounts for the possibility of direct ancestors.

1 August 2016 in Systematic Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AGAlexandra Gavryushkina
Alexandra Gavryushkina
THTracy A. Heath
Tracy A. Heath
DKDaniel T. Ksepka
Daniel T. Ksepka
TSTanja Stadler
Tanja Stadler
DWDavid Welch
David Welch
ADAlexei J. Drummond
Alexei J. Drummond
The total-evidence approach to divergence time dating uses molecular and morphological data from extant and fossil species to infer phylogenetic relationships, species divergence times, and macroevolutionary parameters in a single coherent framework. Current model-based implementations of this approach lack an appropriate model for the tree describing the diversification and fossilization process and can produce estimates that lead to erroneous conclusions. We address this shortcoming by providing a total-evidence method implemented in a Bayesian framework. This approach uses a mechanistic tree prior to describe the underlying diversification process that generated the tree of extant and fossil taxa. Previous attempts to apply the total-evidence approach have used tree priors that do not account for the possibility that fossil samples may be direct ancestors of other samples, that is, ancestors of fossil or extant species or of clades. The fossilized birth–death (FBD) process explicitly models the diversification, fossilization, and sampling processes and naturally allows for sampled ancestors. This model was recently applied to estimate divergence times based on molecular data and fossil occurrence dates. We incorporate the FBD model and a model of morphological trait evolution into a Bayesian total-evidence approach to dating species phylogenies. We apply this method to extant and fossil penguins and show that the modern penguins radiated much more recently than has been previously estimated, with the basal divergence in the crown clade occurring at |${\sim}12.7$| Ma and most splits leading to extant species occurring in the last 2 myr. Our results demonstrate that including stem-fossil diversity can greatly improve the estimates of the divergence times of crown taxa. The method is available in BEAST2 (version 2.4) software www.beast2.org with packages SA (version at least 1.1.4) and morph-models (version at least 1.0.4) installed. [Birth–death process; calibration; divergence times; MCMC; phylogenetics.]

20 April 2014 in Bioinformatics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TVTimothy Vaughan
Timothy Vaughan
DKDenise Kühnert
Denise Kühnert
APAlex Popinga
Alex Popinga
DWDavid Welch
David Welch
ADAlexei J. Drummond
Alexei J. Drummond
Motivation: Population structure significantly affects evolutionary dynamics. Such structure may be due to spatial segregation, but may also reflect any other gene-flow-limiting aspect of a model. In combination with the structured coalescent, this fact can be used to inform phylogenetic tree reconstruction, as well as to infer parameters such as migration rates and subpopulation sizes from annotated sequence data. However, conducting Bayesian inference under the structured coalescent is impeded by the difficulty of constructing Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling algorithms (samplers) capable of efficiently exploring the state space. Results: In this article, we present a new MCMC sampler capable of sampling from posterior distributions over structured trees: timed phylogenetic trees in which lineages are associated with the distinct subpopulation in which they lie. The sampler includes a set of MCMC proposal functions that offer significant mixing improvements over a previously published method. Furthermore, its implementation as a BEAST 2 package ensures maximum flexibility with respect to model and prior specification. We demonstrate the usefulness of this new sampler by using it to infer migration rates and effective population sizes of H3N2 influenza between New Zealand, New York and Hong Kong from publicly available hemagglutinin (HA) gene sequences under the structured coalescent. Availability and implementation: The sampler has been implemented as a publicly available BEAST 2 package that is distributed under version 3 of the GNU General Public License at http://compevol.github.io/MultiTypeTree. Contact:tgvaughan@gmail.com Supplementary information: Supplementary Data are available at Bioinformatics online.

22 December 2010 in Scandinavian Journal of Statistics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CGChris Groendyke
Chris Groendyke
DWDavid Welch
David Welch
DHDavid R. Hunter
David R. Hunter

1 March 2011 in Epidemics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DWDavid Welch
David Welch
SBShweta Bansal
Shweta Bansal
DHDavid R. Hunter
David R. Hunter
Contact networks are playing an increasingly important role in the study of epidemiology. Most of the existing work in this area has focused on considering the effect of underlying network structure on epidemic dynamics by using tools from probability theory and computer simulation. This work has provided much insight on the role that heterogeneity in host contact patterns plays on infectious disease dynamics. Despite the important understanding afforded by the probability and simulation paradigm, this approach does not directly address important questions about the structure of contact networks such as what is the best network model for a particular mode of disease transmission, how parameter values of a given model should be estimated, or how precisely the data allow us to estimate these parameter values. We argue that these questions are best answered within a statistical framework and discuss the role of statistical inference in estimating contact networks from epidemiological data.