Large-Scale Phylogenies and Measuring the Performance of Phylogenetic Estimators

Systematic Biology

Volumn 47, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 43-60

  Kim, Junhyong ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Accuracy; Consistency; Efficiency; Large scale phylogeny; performance

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CLASSIFICATION; MEDLINE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHYLOGENY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 0032028996     PISSN: 10635157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/106351598261021     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. BOURQUE, M. 1978. Arbres de Steiner et reseaux dont varie l'emplagement de certains sommets. Ph. D. Thesis, Department d'Informatique et de Recherche Operationnelle, Univ. Montréal, Montréal, Canada.
2. BROWN, J. K. M. 1994. Probabilities of evolutionary trees. Syst. Biol. 43:78-91.
3. CHANG, J. T. 1996. Full reconstruction of Markov models on evolutionary trees: Identifiability and consistency. Math. Biosci. 137:51-73.
4. CHASE, M. W., D. E. SOLTIS, R. G. OLMSTEAD, D. MORGAN, D. H. LES, B. D. MISHLER, M. R. DUVALL, R. A. PRICE, H. G. HILLS, Y.-L. QIU, K. A. KRON, J. H. RETTIG, E. CONTI, J. D. PALMER, J. R. MANHART, K. J. SYTSMA, H. J. MICHAELS, W. J. KRESS, K. G. KAROL, W. D. CLARK, M. HEDREN, B. S. GAUT, R. K. JANSEN, K.-J. KIM, C. F. WIMPEE, J. F. SMITH, G. R. FURNIER, S. H. STRAUSS, Q.-Y. XIANG, G. M. PLUNKETT, P. S. SOLTIS, S. M. SWENSEN, S. E. WILLIAMS, P. A. GADEK, C. J. QUINN, L. E. EGULARTE, E. GOLENBERG, G. H. LEARN, JR., S. W. GRAHAM, S. C. H. BARRETT, S. DAYANANDAN, AND V. A. ALBERT. 1993. Phylogenetics of seed plants: An analysis of nucleotide sequences from the plastid gene rbcL. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 80: 528-580.
5. CRACRAFT, J. 1982. A nonequilibrium theory for the rate-control of speciation and extinction and the origin of macroevolutionary patterns. Syst. Zool. 31: 348-365.
6. DAY, W. H. E. 1983. Computationally difficult parsimony problems in phylogenetic systematics. J. Theor. Biol. 103:429-438.
7. ERDÖS, P. L., M. STEEL, L. SZEKELEY, AND T. WARNOW. 1997. Inferring big trees from short sequences. Proceedings of International Congress on Automata, Languages, and Programming.
8. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1978a. The number of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 27:27-33.
9. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1978b. Cases in which parsimony and compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst. Zool. 27:401-410.
10. FOULDS, R. R., AND R. L. GRAHAM. 1982. The Steiner problem in phylogeny is NP-complete. Adv. Appl. Math. 3:43-49.
11. GAREY, M. R., AND D. S. JOHNSON. 1979. Computers and intracability. W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.
12. HENDY, M. D., AND D. PENNY. 1989. A framework for the quantitative study of evolutionary trees. Syst. Zool. 38:297-309.
13. HEY, J. 1992. Using phylogenetic trees to study speciation and extinction. Evolution 46:627-640.
14. HILLIS, D. M. 1996. Infering complex phylogenies. Nature 383:130-131.
15. HILLIS, D. M. 1995. Approaches for assessing phylogenetic accuracy. Syst. Biol. 44:3-16.
16. HUELSENBECK, J. P. 1995. Performance of phylogenetic methods in simulation. Syst. Biol. 44:17-48.
17. HUELSENBECK, J. P., AND D. M. HILLIS. 1993. Success of phylogenetic methods in the four-taxon case. Syst. Biol. 42:247-264.
18. KARP, R. M. 1972. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. Pages 85-104 in Complexity of computer computations (R. E. Miller and J. W. Thacher, eds.). Plenum, New York.
19. KIM, J. 1993. Improving accuracy of phylogenetic estimations: combining different methods. Syst. Biol. 42:331-340.
20. KIM, J. 1996. General inconsistency conditions for maximum parsimony: Effects of branch lengths and increasing numbers of taxa. Syst. Biol. 45:363-374.
21. LEHMANN, E. L. 1983. Theory of point estimation. Chapman and Hall, New York.
22. LYNCH, J. D. 1989. The gauge of speciation: On the frequencies of modes of speciation. Pages 527-553 in Speciation and its consequences (D. Otte and J. A. Endler, eds.). Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
23. MAIDAK, B. L., G. J. OLSEN, N. LARSEN, R. OVERBEEK, M. J. MCCAUGHEY, AND C. R. WOESE. 1996. The ribosomal database project (RDP). Nucleic Acids Res. 24:82-85.
24. NELSON, G., AND K. I. PLATNICK. 1991. Three-taxon statements: A more precise use of parsimony? Cladistics 7:351-366.
25. ODEN, N. L., AND K.-T. SHAO. 1984. An algorithm to equiprobably generate all directed trees with k labeled terminal nodes and unlabeled interior nodes. Bull. Math. Biol. 6:379-387.
26. PENNY, D., AND M. D. HENDY. 1985. The use of tree comparison metrics. Syst. Zool. 34:75-82.
27. ROBINSON, D. F., AND L. R. FOULDS. 1981. Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53:131-147.
28. ROHLF, F. J. 1982. Consensus indices for comparing classifications. Math. Biosci. 59:313-144.
29. ROHLF, F. J. 1983. Numbering binary trees with labeled terminal vertices. Bull. Math. Biol. 45:33-40.
30. ROHLF, F. J., W. S. CHANG, R. R. SOKAL, AND J. KIM. 1990. Accuracy of estimated phylogenies: Effects of tree topology and evolutionary model. Evolution 44: 1671-1684.
31. SANDERSON, M. J. 1990. Estimating rates of speciation and evolution: A bias due to homoplasy. Cladistics 6:387-391.
32. SOKAL, R. R., F. J. ROHLF, AND J. KIM. 1992. Character and OTU stability in five taxonomic groups. J. Classif. 9:117-140.
33. STEEL, M. A., M. D. HENDY, AND D. PENNY. 1993. Parsimony can be consistent! Syst. Biol. 42:581-587.
34. STEEL, M. A., AND D. PENNY. 1993. Distributions of tree comparison metrics - some new results. Syst. Biol. 42:126-141.
35. STEEL, M. A., L. A. SZEKELY, AND M. D. HENDY. 1994. Reconstructing trees when sequence sites evolve at variable rates. J. Comp. Biol. 1:153-163.
36. STRIMMER, K., AND A. VON HAESELER. 1996. Accuracy of neighbor joining for n-taxon trees. Syst. Biol. 45: 516-532.
37. SWOFFORD, D. L., AND G. J. OLSEN. 1990. Phylogeny reconstruction. Pages 411-501 in Molecular systematics, 1st edition (D. M. Hillis and C. Moritz, eds.). Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts.
38. TAKEZAKI, N., AND M. NEI. 1994. Inconsistency of the maximum parsimony method when the rate of nucleotide substitution is constant. J. Mol. Evol. 39: 210-218.
39. WATERMAN, M. S., AND T. F. SMITH. 1978. On the similarity of dendrograms. J. Theor. Biol. 73:789-800.
40. YANG, Z. 1996. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony and likelihood methods. J. Mol. Evol. 42:294-307.
41. YANG, Z. 1997. How often do wrong models produce better phylogenies? Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:105-108.
42. ZHARKIKH, A., AND W. H. LI. 1993. Inconsistency of the maximum-parsimony method: The case of five taxa with a molecular clock. Syst. Biol. 42:113-125.