On the optimization principle in phylogenetic analysis and the minimum- evolution criterion

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 401-405

  Gascuel, Olivier ^a  

^a LIRMM   (France)

Author keywords

Agglomerative approach; Criterion to be optimized; Model of the data; Optimal and heuristic algorithms; Phylogenetic reconstruction

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; DNA HYBRIDIZATION; NONHUMAN; NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCE; PHYLOGENY; TAXONOMY;

EID: 0034003343     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a026319     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. ATTESON, K. 1997. The performance of the NJ method of phylogeny reconstruction. Pp. 133-148 in B. MIRKIN, F. R. MCMORRIS, F. S. ROBERTS, and A. RZHETSKY, eds. Mathematical hierarchies and biology. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I.
2. BULMER, M. 1991. Use of the method of generalized least squares in reconstructing phylogenies from sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 8:868-883.
3. DEGENS, P. O. 1983. Hierarchical cluster methods as maximum likelihood estimators. Pp. 249-253 in J. FELSENSTEIN, ed. Numerical taxonomy. Springer, Berlin.
4. ERDÖS, P. L., M. A. STEEL, L. A. SZÉKELY, and T. WARNOW. 1997. Constructing big trees from short sequences. Automata Lang. Programming 24th Int. Colloquium Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 1256:827-837.
5. FELSENSTEIN, J. 1984. Distance methods for inferring phylogenies: a justification. Evolution 38:16-24.
6. _. 1985. Confidence limits on phylogenies: an approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39:783-791.
7. _. 1987. Estimation of hominoid phylogeny from a DNA hybridization data set. J. Mol. Evol. 26:123-131.
8. _. 1993. PHYLIP (phylogeny inference package). Distributed by the author, Department of Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle.
9. _. 1997. An alternating least-squares approach to inferring phylogenies from pairwise distances. Syst. Biol. 46: 101-111.
10. GASCUEL, O. 1994. A note on Sattath and Tversky's, Saittou and Nei's and Studier and Keppler's algorithms for inferring phylogenies from evolutionary distances. Mol. Biol. Evol. 11:961-963.
11. _. 1996. Algorithmes efficaces pour la construction d'arbres d'évolution minimum. Rapport de recherche LIRMM-96019.
12. _. 1997a. BIONJ: an improved version of the NJ algorithm based on a simple model of sequence data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 14:685-695.
13. _. 1997b. Concerning the NJ algorithm and its unweighted version, UNJ. Pp. 149-170 in B. MIRKIN, F. R. MCMORRIS, F. S. ROBERTS, and A. RZHETSKY, eds. Mathematical hierarchies and biology. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I.
14. _. 2000. Data model and classification by trees: the minimum variance reduction (MVR) method, J. Classif. (in press).
15. JIN, L., and M. NEI. 1990. Limitations of the evolutionary parsimony method of phylogenetic analysis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 7:82-102.
16. KIMURA, M. 1980. A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 16:111-120.
17. KUMAR, S. 1996. A stepwise algorithm for finding minimum evolution trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:584-593.
18. MCQUITTY, L. L. 1966. Similarity analysis by reciprocal pairs for discrete and continuous data. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 26: 825-831.
19. NEI, M., and L. JIN. 1989. Variances of the average numbers of nucleotide substitutions within and between populations. Mol. Biol. Evol. 6:290-300.
20. NEI, M., S. KUMAR, and K. TAKAHASHI, 1998. The optimization principle in phylogsnetic analysis tends to give incorrect topologies when the number of nucleotides or amino acids used is small. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:12390-12397.
21. ROBINSON, D. F., and L. R. FOULDS. 1981. Comparison of phylogenetic trees. Math. Biosci. 53:131-147.
22. RZHETSKY, A., and M. NEI. 1993. Theoretical foundation of the minimum-evolution method of phylogenetic inference. Mol. Biol. Evol. 10:1073-1095.
23. SAITOU, N., and M. IMANISHI. 1989. Relative efficiencies of the Fitch-Margoliash, maximum-parsimony, maximum-likelihood, minimum-evolution, and neighbor-joining methods of phylogenetic reconstructions in obtaining the correct tree. Mol. Biol. Evol. 6:514-525.
24. SAITOU, N., and M. NEI. 1987. The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstruction of phylogenetic trees. Mol. Biol. Evol. 4:406-425.
25. SATTATH, S., and A. TVERSKY. 1977. Additive similarity trees. Psychometrika 42:319-345.
26. SNEATH, P. H. A., and R. R. SOKAL 1973. Numerical taxonomy. Freeman, San Francisco.
27. SOKAL, R. R., and C. D. MICHENER. 1958. A statistical method for evaluating systematic relationships. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 38:1409-1438.
28. STUDIER, J. A., and K. J. KEPPLER. 1988. A note on the neighbor-joining method of Saitou and Nei. Mol. Biol. Evol. 5: 729-731.