The average consensus procedure: Combination of weighted trees containing identical or overlapping sets of taxa

Systematic Biology

Volumn 46, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 306-311

  Lapointe, François Joseph ^a   Cucumel, Guy ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Consensus method; Kangaroo; Macropodidae; Phylogeny; Supertree; Weighted trees

Indexed keywords

MACROPODIDAE; MACROPUS SP.;

EID: 0031513152     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/2413625     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. ADAMS, E. N., III. 1972. Consensus techniques and the comparison of taxonomic trees. Syst. Zool. 21:390-397.
2. BARTHÉLEMY, J.-P., B. LECLERC, AND B. MONJARDET. 1986. On the use of ordered sets in problems of comparison and consensus classifications. J. Classif. 3:187-224.
3. BARTHÉLEMY, J.-P., AND F. R. MCMORRIS. 1986. The median procedure for n-trees. J. Classif. 3:329-334.
4. BAUM, B. R. 1992. Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon 41:1-10.
5. BAVERSTOCK, P. R., B. J. RICHARDSON, J. BIRRELL, AND M. KRIEG. 1989. Albumin immunologic relationships of the Macropodidae (Marsupialia). Syst. Zool. 38:38-50.
6. BREMER, K. 1990. Combinable component consensus. Cladistics 6:369-372.
7. BROSSIER, G. 1990. Piecewise hierarchical clustering. J. Classif. 7:197-216.
8. BUNEMAN, P. 1971. The recovery of trees from measures of dissimilarity. Pages 387-395 in Mathematics in archeological and historical sciences (F. R. Hudson, D. G. Kendall, and P. Tautu, eds.). Edinburgh Univ. Press, Edinburgh.
9. CAVALLI-SFORZA, L. L., AND A. W. F. EDWARDS. 1967. Phylogenetic analysis: Models and estimation procedures. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 19:233-257.
10. CUCUMEL, G. 1990. Construction d'une hiérarchie consensus à l'aide d'une ultramétrique centrale. Pages 235-243 in Recueil des textes des présentations du colloque sur les méthodes et domaines d'application de la statistique 1990. Bureau de la Statistique du Québec, Québec.
11. DE SOETE, G. 1983. A least squares algorithm for fitting additive trees to proximity data. Psychometrika 48:621-626.
12. DE SOETE, G. 1984. Additive tree representations of incomplete dissimilarity data. Qual. Quant. 18:387-393.
13. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1993. PHYLIP: Phylogeny inference package, version 3.5c. Univ. Washington, Seattle.
14. FITCH, W. M., AND E. MARGOLIASH. 1967. Construction of phylogenetic trees. Science 155:279-284.
15. GORDON, A. D. 1986. Consensus supertrees: The synthesis of rooted trees containing overlapping sets of labeled leaves. J. Classif 3:335-348.
16. HARTIGAN, J. A. 1967. Representation of similarity matrices by trees. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 62:1140-1158.
17. KIRSCH, J. A. W., F.-J. LAPOINTE, AND A. FOESTE. 1995. Resolution of portions of the kangaroo phylogeny (Marsupialia: Macropodidae) using DNA hybridization. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 55:309-328.
18. LANDRY, P.-A., F.-J. LAPOINTE, AND J. A. W. KIRSCH. 1996. Estimating phylogenies from lacunose distance matrices: Additive is superior to ultrametric estimation. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13: 818-823.
19. LAPOINTE, F.-J., AND G. CUCUMEL. 1991. Le super-dendrogramme ou la combinaison de matrices ultramétriques partiellement disjointes. Pages 145-151 in Recueil des textes des présentations du colloque sur les méthodes et domaines d'application de la statistique 1991. Bureau de la Statistique du Québec, Québec.
20. LAPOINTE, F.-J., AND J. A. W. KIRSCH. 1995. Estimating phylogenies from lacunose distance matrices, with special reference to DNA hybridization data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:266-284.
21. LAPOINTE, F.-J., AND P. LEGENDRE. 1990. A statistical framework to test the consensus of two nested classifications. Syst. Zool. 39:1-13.
22. LEFKOVITCH, L. P. 1985. Euclidean consensus dendrograms and other classification structures. Math. Biosci. 74:1-15.
23. MARGUSH, T., AND F. R. MCMORRIS. 1981. Consensus n-trees. Bull. Math. Biol. 43:239-244.
24. PURVIS, A. 1995. A modification to Baum and Ragan's method for combining phylogenetic trees. Syst. Biol. 44:251-255.
25. RAGAN, M. A. 1992. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol. Phylogenet. Evol. 1:53-58.
26. SOKAL, R. R., AND F. J. ROHLF. 1981. Taxonomic congruence in the Leptopodomorpha re-examined. Syst. Zool. 30:309-325.
27. STEEL, M. 1992. The complexity of reconstructing trees from qualitative characters and subtrees. J. Classif. 9:91-116.
28. STINEBRICKNER, R. 1984. An extension of intersection methods from trees to dendrograms. Syst. Zool. 33: 381-386.